Lyndon does this work for you?
73, Jim VE1RB
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 6:37?PM Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM) < lyndon@...> wrote: Are the control voltages for a CS7 switch the same as for
the CS4?? I.e. could a C-4 console drive a CS7 switch?
And ... does anyone have a PDF copy of the CS7 manual
they could send me?
Thanks,
--lyndon
|
Re: Drake 7 Series Cabinet Paint
Believe it or not, I have used both methods.
Spray paint sprayed heavily enough stay wet long enough to texture it with a roller. I spray the roller first with the paint.
I work fast so nothing has time to dry.
Even so, there is nothing magical about Rustoleum. There are plenty of very good satin black paints in cans. WIth them you can work with less urgency.
Gary
W0DVN
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On May 21, 2023, at 10:38 AM, jerry-KF6VB <jerry@...> wrote:
On 2023-05-20 18:29, John N9FCA wrote:
Steve, I didn't see a reply to your query from Gary on this. I used
Krylon satin black spray initially but used Rustoleum satin black for
the final roll on finish.
-- *** Did you actually apply the paint with the roller? Or did you spray it,
and then use the roller to texture it?
- Jerry, KF6VB
|
Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM)
Are the control voltages for a CS7 switch the same as for
the CS4? I.e. could a C-4 console drive a CS7 switch?
And ... does anyone have a PDF copy of the CS7 manual
they could send me?
Thanks,
--lyndon
|
Re: Boosting Audio in T4XC
Your problem is not audio gain.? The T4 willoperate fine from low level mics.? A mic with built in amp will just overload it.? I suspect your processor is not set up right.??
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message -------- From: "Bill Losef via groups.io" <w.losefsky@...> Date: 5/21/23 5:57 AM (GMT-08:00) Subject: [DRAKE-RADIO] Boosting Audio in T4XC
I have a T4XC with a Astatic DN-500 mic as well as the DX Engineering speech processor add on. Is there any way to get any more gain out of the transmitted audio on this unit? Would a powered D 104 mic produce and further gain, or another mic? When I switch from the Icom 7300 to the Drake my audio reports are that the Drake sounds much weaker audio wise while the signal strength is about the same..
|
Re: Boosting Audio in T4XC
Your problem is not audio gain.? The T4 willoperate fine from low level mics.? A mic with built in amp will just overload it.? I suspect your processor is not set up right.??
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message -------- From: "Bill Losef via groups.io" <w.losefsky@...> Date: 5/21/23 5:57 AM (GMT-08:00) Subject: [DRAKE-RADIO] Boosting Audio in T4XC
I have a T4XC with a Astatic DN-500 mic as well as the DX Engineering speech processor add on. Is there any way to get any more gain out of the transmitted audio on this unit? Would a powered D 104 mic produce and further gain, or another mic? When I switch from the Icom 7300 to the Drake my audio reports are that the Drake sounds much weaker audio wise while the signal strength is about the same..
|
First of all.? The 2 tube t4 series gets about 120 to 140 w out depending on the loading,? tune and antenna selected and band.? While watts100 is low AND assuming it is correctly tuned might be an indicator of tube life, the difference between the 100 watts and the 120 watts on the other end is non noticeable so I would not worry about it unless it significantly drops off.? The suggested test of the driver? tube is a good one but output is dependent on many factors.? See theanual.? It is a designed normal for t4xc and above units to be low on 15 and 10 meters. David Assaf III
W5XU??? VP8RXU
On Sun, May 21, 2023, 11:59 AM Rick WA6III < myr748@...> wrote: On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 05:17 PM, Sean (KK6BEB) wrote:
I have a TR-4Cw and a T-4XB. Both max at about ~100 watts in cw/tune. Curious what others are seeing, I know the transmitters are rated for more but it¡¯s obviously old equipment.
?
I have some NOS finals for both and my intention was to not do any tube replacements until necessary, but I am curious what kind of performance others are seeing?
?
Sean
KK6BEB?
?
--
?
Howdy,
I have both a T-4XC and a TR-4C.? I've had the TR-4C for about 3 years and the T-4XC since I bought it new in 1975 or so.
The most I ever saw out of my T-4XC is about 130W and the least is about 100?? (lower on 10 m) and the 100W was measured with the original 40 year old tubes (before I killed them!!)
The TR-4C consistently does 180-200W PEP. (read with an Array Solutions Power Master II)
The above was also measured using a Bird 500-WT-MN load and a Bird 43 using a 250W slug.
Understand that watt-meters vary and if you're measuring into an antenna vs a 50 ohm non-inductive load, you will also get differing results if the antenna is more capacitive or inductive? (I.E. not tuned perfectly resistive)
100W is a little low for a T-4X depending on how you're transmitting (TUNE vs CW) ...? 100W for a TR-4 is quite low and it might need a new driver tube, new 6JB6's, both, and/or other tubes and possibly an alignment.
--
73/Rick
WA6III
*Every post is created using Linux
|
I have for sale a TR-4c In very good condition. With MS-4 PS-4 34-pnb It was a friend of mine rig for 30+ years works great has a very good tube set most are green line sylvania.ser#40xxx would prefer local pick up located in Northern New Jersey. Can supply more pictures asking $725 for entire package + shipping .Will sell for? $600 with out 34-pnb noise blanker. Serious buyers only please. Thanks Richard/N2AUG
|
I get between 120 to150 watts out with new final tubes depending on the band
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 12:59 PM, Rick WA6III <myr748@...> wrote: On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 05:17 PM, Sean (KK6BEB) wrote:
I have a TR-4Cw and a T-4XB. Both max at about ~100 watts in cw/tune. Curious what others are seeing, I know the transmitters are rated for more but it¡¯s obviously old equipment.
?
I have some NOS finals for both and my intention was to not do any tube replacements until necessary, but I am curious what kind of performance others are seeing?
?
Sean
KK6BEB?
?
--
?
Howdy, I have both a T-4XC and a TR-4C.? I've had the TR-4C for about 3 years and the T-4XC since I bought it new in 1975 or so. The most I ever saw out of my T-4XC is about 130W and the least is about 100?? (lower on 10 m) and the 100W was measured with the original 40 year old tubes (before I killed them!!) The TR-4C consistently does 180-200W PEP. (read with an Array Solutions Power Master II) The above was also measured using a Bird 500-WT-MN load and a Bird 43 using a 250W slug. Understand that watt-meters vary and if you're measuring into an antenna vs a 50 ohm non-inductive load, you will also get differing results if the antenna is more capacitive or inductive? (I.E. not tuned perfectly resistive) 100W is a little low for a T-4X depending on how you're transmitting (TUNE vs CW) ...? 100W for a TR-4 is quite low and it might need a new driver tube, new 6JB6's, both, and/or other tubes and possibly an alignment. --
73/Rick
WA6III
*Every post is created using Linux
|
Re: Boosting Audio in T4XC
On 2023-05-21 09:19, Bill Leonard N0CU wrote: That is the same approach that Ten Tec used. It seems like a good
approach in theory, but the devil is in the details. *** I wonder if it could be simulated in software? Mix the audio up in software - that's easy... just multiply these samples by those samples. Brick wall filters, also easy. Chopping the simulated RF? Trivial. Etc. A PJRC Teensy 4.x running at 600MHz would have plenty of horsepower for this task. - Jerry, KF6VB There are several potential problems. First, the filter only removes out-of-band
distortion products that were generated prior to the filter. It
doesn¡¯t do anything with the in band products, nor does it do
anything with the products generated after the filter. If I remember
correctly, the products generated by the 2nd (down conversion) mixer
were the biggest problem. --
Bill N0CU
Links:
------
[1] /g/DRAKE-RADIO/message/71365
[2] /mt/99045651/243852
[3] /g/DRAKE-RADIO/post
[4] /g/DRAKE-RADIO/editsub/243852
[5] /g/DRAKE-RADIO/leave/12260778/243852/767576506/xyzzy
|
On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 05:17 PM, Sean (KK6BEB) wrote:
I have a TR-4Cw and a T-4XB. Both max at about ~100 watts in cw/tune. Curious what others are seeing, I know the transmitters are rated for more but it¡¯s obviously old equipment.
?
I have some NOS finals for both and my intention was to not do any tube replacements until necessary, but I am curious what kind of performance others are seeing?
?
Sean
KK6BEB?
?
--
?
Howdy, I have both a T-4XC and a TR-4C.? I've had the TR-4C for about 3 years and the T-4XC since I bought it new in 1975 or so. The most I ever saw out of my T-4XC is about 130W and the least is about 100?? (lower on 10 m) and the 100W was measured with the original 40 year old tubes (before I killed them!!) The TR-4C consistently does 180-200W PEP. (read with an Array Solutions Power Master II) The above was also measured using a Bird 500-WT-MN load and a Bird 43 using a 250W slug. Understand that watt-meters vary and if you're measuring into an antenna vs a 50 ohm non-inductive load, you will also get differing results if the antenna is more capacitive or inductive? (I.E. not tuned perfectly resistive) 100W is a little low for a T-4X depending on how you're transmitting (TUNE vs CW) ...? 100W for a TR-4 is quite low and it might need a new driver tube, new 6JB6's, both, and/or other tubes and possibly an alignment. --
73/Rick
WA6III
*Every post is created using Linux
|
The K4OAH CD gives signal levels at various points in the RF path for the T-4XC. I don't know how similar your units are to the T-4XC, but it might be helpful if the designs are similar.
--
Bill N0CU
|
Roger that Peter, I will check the tube. Thank you Sir. KK6BEB?
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 2:02 AM Peter E < elekessy@...> wrote: Hi Sean,
My T4XB is doing nearly 160W on 40M in tune mode. Check your 12BY7 driver tube - my original one was a bit weak and it would only do about 100W before I changed it.
Cheers,
Peter - VK2AN
|
Re: Boosting Audio in T4XC
That is the same approach that Ten Tec used. It seems like a good approach in theory, but the devil is in the details. There are several potential problems. First, the filter only removes out-of-band distortion products that were generated prior to the filter. It doesn¡¯t do anything with the in band products, nor does it do anything with the products generated after the filter. If I remember correctly, the products generated by the 2nd (down conversion) mixer were the biggest problem.?
-- Bill N0CU
|
Re: Boosting Audio in T4XC
Not sure if a different microphone may produce different results? The speech processor does make a difference,? but a tad more boost is what I think Drake Nirvana would be like!
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 11:40 AM, Jim Shorney <jimNU0C@...> wrote: That wasn't uncommon. They call it "RF Speech Processing" as opposed to audio processing which is usually just compression. This is exactly how the Drake SP75 works. There were a number of manufacturers who successfully used this scheme. I've got a very old Comdel that actually uses L/C filters. Never had it on the air, but someday... 73 -Jim NU0C On Sun, 21 May 2023 08:26:55 -0700 "jerry-KF6VB" < jerry@...> wrote: > My old Kenwood TS830S had a great compressor.? It was basically an > embedded > SSB transceiver inside the transceiver.? Audio was mixed up to an IF > frequency - IIRC 455kHz.? Then passed through a ceramic filter.? Then > clipped.? Then filtered again and mixed down back to audio.
|
Re: Boosting Audio in T4XC
That wasn't uncommon. They call it "RF Speech Processing" as opposed to audio processing which is usually just compression. This is exactly how the Drake SP75 works. There were a number of manufacturers who successfully used this scheme. I've got a very old Comdel that actually uses L/C filters. Never had it on the air, but someday... 73 -Jim NU0C On Sun, 21 May 2023 08:26:55 -0700 "jerry-KF6VB" <jerry@...> wrote: My old Kenwood TS830S had a great compressor. It was basically an
embedded
SSB transceiver inside the transceiver. Audio was mixed up to an IF
frequency - IIRC 455kHz. Then passed through a ceramic filter. Then
clipped. Then filtered again and mixed down back to audio.
|
Re: Drake 7 Series Cabinet Paint
On 2023-05-20 18:29, John N9FCA wrote: Steve, I didn't see a reply to your query from Gary on this. I used
Krylon satin black spray initially but used Rustoleum satin black for
the final roll on finish.
-- *** Did you actually apply the paint with the roller? Or did you spray it, and then use the roller to texture it? - Jerry, KF6VB
|
Re: Drake 7 Series Cabinet Paint
On 2023-05-21 06:05, Karl du Roi, DK7AL wrote: Did someone mention in this thread general production steps, where 1st
degrease, 2nd chromate and 3rd varnish (e.g. powder coating) applied
on an aluminum sheet metal stands for a high quality paint process on
aluminum.
*** Actually first degrease, then acid-etch ( "Alumiprep" ). Then passivate "Alodyne". Then zinc chromate. Then color coat. That's the sequence used in painting aircraft. - Jerry, KF6VB
|
Re: Drake 7 Series Cabinet Paint
I have made extremely good experience with professional powder coating. It cost me 15 bucks for one 7-line cabinet and looks soooo good.
Would never play with rattle cans again on these cabinets. The paint probably costs more than the finished cabinet professionally coated.
Just my .02 $
73 Dieter DL5RDO
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Am 21.05.2023 um 15:05 schrieb Karl du Roi, DK7AL <dk7al@...>:
?Did someone mention in this thread general production steps, where 1st degrease, 2nd chromate and 3rd varnish (e.g. powder coating) applied on an aluminum sheet metal stands for a high quality paint process on aluminum.
Best regards.
Karl, DK7AL
On 21.05.23 14:00, Steve Wedge, W1ES/4 via groups.io wrote:
I forgot that Rustoleum is available in non-spray form. I was having visions of someone spraying the roller until it was saturated and I knew that was ridiculous.
TNX.
Steve Wedge, W1ES/4
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Sent from Proton Mail for iOS
On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 21:29, John N9FCA <[jmbeattie@...](mailto:On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 21:29, John N9FCA <<a href=)> wrote:
Steve, I didn¡¯t see a reply to your query from Gary on this. I used Krylon satin black spray initially but used Rustoleum satin black for the final roll on finish.
--
73
John N9FCA
|
Re: Boosting Audio in T4XC
On 2023-05-21 08:08, Bill Leonard N0CU wrote: I did a comparison test of several audio processors many years back and was surprised how much
they varied in performance. The biggest surprise was how bad the Ten
Tec unit was. Although it did do a good job with respect to
compression, it had terrible IMD distortion.
My old Kenwood TS830S had a great compressor. It was basically an embedded SSB transceiver inside the transceiver. Audio was mixed up to an IF frequency - IIRC 455kHz. Then passed through a ceramic filter. Then clipped. Then filtered again and mixed down back to audio. I'm a little fuzzy on the details - been a lot of years since the 80's, but mainly the compression was done at the IF frequency, so any IMD products were way up around & above 1 MHz, and easily filtered out. - Jerry, KF6VB
|
Re: Boosting Audio in T4XC
My first thought is that the audio processor in the 7300 is doing a much better job with regards to compression than the DX Engr processor. This is frequently referred to as ¡°talk power¡±. It doesn¡¯t surprise me that the 7300, with it¡¯s ability to adjust the compression level (ie. talk power), sounds louder than the Drake transmitter with the old DX engr processor. I did a comparison test of several audio processors many years back and was surprised how much they varied in performance. The biggest surprise was how bad the Ten Tec unit was. Although it did do a good job with respect to compression, it had terrible IMD distortion.
If what you are seeing is due to the difference in compression, then adding more audio gain may increase the ¡°talk power¡± somewhat, but the distortion due to clipping will likely increase to the point you start getting complaints from other stations.
Bill N0CU
-- Bill N0CU
|
David
Jim Shorney