HAHA,
WellPete, thanks for your thoughts. You sound a bit sour this morning. Cheer up, it's Terrific Thursday.
I've had great luck with reproduction from the Internet. Print and photo quality is beyond?ample and the price and delivery time is right!? It's nice to have a hard copy (mid-century habits die hard)? but life is a lot more fun when one can display the information on a 100" screen or whiteboard and draw a modified circuit over the original.?
73 dave wa3gin
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 4:02?AM Peter A Markavage via <pmarkavage= [email protected]> wrote:
Obviously, as the old saying goes, "you get what you pay for". A lot of the
manual stuff floating around the Internet is of poor quality, poor readability,
questionable completeness, and a wonder if the person scanning the document did
it with one or both eyes closed. And personally, I really don't care what you
do; some people?are happy with?expectations that are lower then
others. Been doing this stuff for roughly 30 years with customers in all 50
states and 150 countries,? so there are many that value the work. Plus, I
also do speciality manual replications for several amateur radio retailers for
resale. And if the demand ever goes to zero, we'll have a lot of fun at the
paper recycling center.
?
Life is good!
?
Pete, wa2cwa
?
?
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 18:39:38 -0500 "Dave Jordan via " < wa3gin@...>
writes:
Hmmmm, ?I¡¯ve never paid for a manual. They are free on the Internet.
I go to Walmart buy a ream of heavy bond paper which makes great manual
pages.?
73?
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 6:34?PM don Root via <drootofallevil= [email protected]>
wrote:
Hi
all, many of us are following along with the forum, trying to learn and/or
help, and certainly cannot afford to buy a manual for every rig, let alone
every version, so professional manuals are not an option for us; unless
maybe we happen to have the exact rig in question, in which case any proper
manual copy should do for me at least. If somebody is in the business of
turning rigs over for a profit, it would be good to have a good exact copy,
of an unmarked, archived manual. ??I have no idea as to who to go
to for the quality I might want.
Wrong
versions can be a problem, at least with Halligans stuff.? And PS, I am
just thinking out loud in my situation; others are free do likewise.
?
|
Pete,
As a loyal customer of yours, who has purchased numerous manuals from you,over the decades, I find your quality, pricing and delivery outstanding!
Keep up the good work and thanks for all the free advice you have provided,and continue to provide, to the amateur community regarding vintage gear!
73's
Pete
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 4:02 AM, Peter A Markavage via groups.io <pmarkavage@...> wrote:
Obviously, as the old saying goes, "you get what you pay for". A lot of the
manual stuff floating around the Internet is of poor quality, poor readability,
questionable completeness, and a wonder if the person scanning the document did
it with one or both eyes closed. And personally, I really don't care what you
do; some people?are happy with?expectations that are lower then
others. Been doing this stuff for roughly 30 years with customers in all 50
states and 150 countries,? so there are many that value the work. Plus, I
also do speciality manual replications for several amateur radio retailers for
resale. And if the demand ever goes to zero, we'll have a lot of fun at the
paper recycling center.
?
Life is good!
?
Pete, wa2cwa
?
?
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 18:39:38 -0500 "Dave Jordan via groups.io" < wa3gin@...>
writes:
Hmmmm, ?I¡¯ve never paid for a manual. They are free on the Internet.
I go to Walmart buy a ream of heavy bond paper which makes great manual
pages.?
73?
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 6:34?PM don Root via <drootofallevil= [email protected]>
wrote:
Hi
all, many of us are following along with the forum, trying to learn and/or
help, and certainly cannot afford to buy a manual for every rig, let alone
every version, so professional manuals are not an option for us; unless
maybe we happen to have the exact rig in question, in which case any proper
manual copy should do for me at least. If somebody is in the business of
turning rigs over for a profit, it would be good to have a good exact copy,
of an unmarked, archived manual. ??I have no idea as to who to go
to for the quality I might want.
Wrong
versions can be a problem, at least with Halligans stuff.? And PS, I am
just thinking out loud in my situation; others are free do likewise.
?
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Don,
here is my picture interpretation:
?
Richard:
- "So, what is this about .5Mhz and 370 and 220 Khz? ". Those are the delta values between peak and the desired frequency as reported by the Delta marker (rounded).
- The IF alignment has been remade from scratch by using the "visual" approach (first 3 pictures).
- "The position of the peaks on the RF will be affected somewhat by the dummy load". If you meant the "dummy antenna" I fully agree. I'm gonna try the same test removing the dummy antenna from the equation. I'll report as soon as I get time to work on that.
Correction to my previous post:
"...all signals (and the noise as well) tend to disappear below .5MHz" should read "... below 1MHz" that is in the lower half of the band.
?
Thank you guys!
Emanuele (IU1KNR).
?
|
?
Obviously, as the old saying goes, "you get what you pay for". A lot of the
manual stuff floating around the Internet is of poor quality, poor readability,
questionable completeness, and a wonder if the person scanning the document did
it with one or both eyes closed. And personally, I really don't care what you
do; some people?are happy with?expectations that are lower then
others. Been doing this stuff for roughly 30 years with customers in all 50
states and 150 countries,? so there are many that value the work. Plus, I
also do speciality manual replications for several amateur radio retailers for
resale. And if the demand ever goes to zero, we'll have a lot of fun at the
paper recycling center.
?
Life is good!
?
Pete, wa2cwa
?
?
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 18:39:38 -0500 "Dave Jordan via groups.io" < wa3gin@...>
writes:
Hmmmm, ?I¡¯ve never paid for a manual. They are free on the Internet.
I go to Walmart buy a ream of heavy bond paper which makes great manual
pages.?
73?
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 6:34?PM don Root via <drootofallevil= [email protected]>
wrote:
Hi
all, many of us are following along with the forum, trying to learn and/or
help, and certainly cannot afford to buy a manual for every rig, let alone
every version, so professional manuals are not an option for us; unless
maybe we happen to have the exact rig in question, in which case any proper
manual copy should do for me at least. If somebody is in the business of
turning rigs over for a profit, it would be good to have a good exact copy,
of an unmarked, archived manual. ??I have no idea as to who to go
to for the quality I might want.
Wrong
versions can be a problem, at least with Halligans stuff.? And PS, I am
just thinking out loud in my situation; others are free do likewise.
?
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Emanuele here is your suff edited a bunch ? Things get darker and darker. ???No.. just more interesting - - Coils are not open.??????????????? good
- TRIMCAPs are not shorted. good
- I confirm problem in band 1&2, bands 3&4 worked like a charm. ??
I then tried to isolate the problem stressing the ANT resonant circuit alone, with the following setup: ?ok The S-85 was turned OFF.
Band spread dial fully clockwise in all tests. NOTE: in these last tests the right marker is where the peak should be. On band 1, with the Main Tuning dial set to 1.4Mhz (as per service manual), i've got the following results: ??????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????TRIMCAP C4 fully released (lower C): my markups Do I read this correctly ?? ?if so? the First RF ?almost tunes to 1400? so as you said , not an image problem. And it is just a bit off. However is the 600 kc area is poor in sensitivity? we have to think harder.?? I am on overtime now, so will look tomorrow ? -- don??? va3drl
|
I had a glitch on my website today. 10 people downloaded the SR-2000 repair manual and got the old version.
If you your download does not have "ver 8.51" on the front cover, try again. The glitch has been fixed.
Sorry for any?inconvenience.
Walt Cates, WD0GOF
?
A majority of acceptance is not proof of correctness.
|
Hmmmm, ?I¡¯ve never paid for a manual. They are free on the Internet. I go to Walmart buy a ream of heavy bond paper which makes great manual pages.?
73?
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 6:34?PM don Root via <drootofallevil= [email protected]> wrote: Hi all, many of us are following along with the forum, trying to learn and/or help, and certainly cannot afford to buy a manual for every rig, let alone every version, so professional manuals are not an option for us; unless maybe we happen to have the exact rig in question, in which case any proper manual copy should do for me at least. If somebody is in the business of turning rigs over for a profit, it would be good to have a good exact copy, of an unmarked, archived manual. ??I have no idea as to who to go to for the quality I might want. Wrong versions can be a problem, at least with Halligans stuff.? And PS, I am just thinking out loud in my situation; others are free do likewise. ? ? ? Actually Walt I also have the complete manual. And actually, it's more?recent then the one on jptronics. The info in the addendum is already rolled into the manual along with the updated schematic. And no assembly or tape is required with my manuals.
--
don??? va3drl
|
Hi all, many of us are following along with the forum, trying to learn and/or help, and certainly cannot afford to buy a manual for every rig, let alone every version, so professional manuals are not an option for us; unless maybe we happen to have the exact rig in question, in which case any proper manual copy should do for me at least. If somebody is in the business of turning rigs over for a profit, it would be good to have a good exact copy, of an unmarked, archived manual. ??I have no idea as to who to go to for the quality I might want. Wrong versions can be a problem, at least with Halligans stuff. ?And PS, I am just thinking out loud in my situation; others are free do likewise. ? ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter A Markavage via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2025 2:44 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HallicraftersRadios] Missing page SR-2000? Actually Walt I also have the complete manual. And actually, it's more?recent then the one on jptronics. The info in the addendum is already rolled into the manual along with the updated schematic. And no assembly or tape is required with my manuals. -- don??? va3drl
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
We are talking about a Hallicrafters S-85 are we not? The S-85
tunes from 535 Khz to 34Mhz. So, what is this about .5Mhz and 370 and
220 Khz? typo maybe.
Since the higher bands work I assume you aligned the IF. Perhaps
worth just starting there. Feed in 455 Khz. You can feed the antenna
terminals. Adjust using 30% modulation at some reasonable frequency, say
500 Hz. Use the lowest signal strength that gives you noise free audio.
Tune for maximum output keeping the input level as low as possible. This
will prevent a resonant shift due to AVC.
When done go on to the RF alignment. Follow the instructions. The
S-85 starts with the high band and goes down.
I could not find a reference to which image is used on the high
bands but its important to be on the correct one. It is common on these
receivers to align the local oscillator "Below" the signal on the
highest band and "Above" it on the other bands. If you are on the wrong
side the RF will not track and the calibration of the oscillator will be
off. If you find this try the other side.
The position of the peaks on the RF will be affected somewhat by
the dummy load. Its worth using one if you can but reasonable alighment
can be gotten without one.
The IF symmetry depends on the coupling of the IF transformers and
for a fixed bandwidth IF should be close. If its way off you have a bad
transformer but I think more likely have a measurement error. Just peak
the transformers and go on to the RF.
It is amost impossible for you to be getting good signals on the
high bands and nothing on the broadcast band. I measurement error I think.
Start over from the beginning and keep it simple! I think its
possible your test frequencies are way off.
Please report what you find.
Note that on the high bands it may be necessary to rock the tuning
because the RF adjustments may pull the oscillator slightly. Not the
cause of your problem. Also a reason to keep the signal levels as low as
possible.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/5/2025 2:20 PM, Emanuele Girlando via groups.io wrote: Things get darker and darker.
* Coils are not open.
* TRIMCAPs are not shorted.
* I confirm problem in band 1&2, bands 3&4 worked like a charm.
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
SKCC 19998
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Things get darker and darker.
- Coils are not open.
- TRIMCAPs are not shorted.
- I confirm problem in band 1&2, bands 3&4 worked like a charm.
Started from scratch.
Test gears setup:
The Spectrum Analyzer is an Advantest 3361B (0.1-3600Mhz) driven by a 10MHz EXT REF coming from a rubidium reference oscillator. I performed the calibration procedures before using it.
The RF probe is an active probe able to reach 500Mhz. Its input is very high-Z. Loosely coupled (gimmick cap) to T3-pin2 (3rd IF output, just before the detector..).
Tracking generator output connected to V8-pin2 trough a 2000pF cap as per service manual.
NOTE: in all the following test the vertical measures a purely qualitative. Horizontal measures are quantitative measurements.
I performed a visual IF alignment using the SA tracking generator.
?
?
The IF cans peaked @452KHz, the BW is 5.9KHz.
The IF strip seems ok to me. Do you agree?
?
Local oscillator actual frequency test:
I relocated the probe input to loosely couple ?(gimmick cap) the local oscillator.
Sig-gen (HP 8640B) @1400KHz, AM modulated @30% connected to ANT by a RTMA dummy antenna. Used as a reference for dial setting.
Here is the plot of the local oscillator signal in the Band 1 tuned @1.4MHz. It seems ok to me (1400+452= 1852 KHZ):
?
Sig-gen (HP 8640B) @4000KHz, AM modulated @30% connected to ANT by a RTMA dummy antenna. Used as a reference for dial setting.
Here is the plot of the local oscillator signal in the Band 2 tuned @4MHz. It seems ok to me (4000+452=4452 KHZ):
?
I think these tests can get the "image" frequency topic out of discussion.
Do you agree?
I then tried to isolate the problem stressing the ANT resonant circuit alone, with the following setup:
The S-85 was turned OFF.
Band spread dial fully clockwise in all tests.
NOTE: in these last tests the right marker is where the peak should be.
?
On band 1, with the Main Tuning dial set to 1.4Mhz (as per service manual), i've got the following results:
??????????? TRIMCAP C4 fully engaged (higher C):?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? TRIMCAP C4 fully released (lower C):
?
The peak is lower then the test frequency between 370 and 220 KHz - not normal!
The steep left slope and the asymmetry in general are also suspect. In fact, listening on band 1, all signals (and the noise as well) tend to disappear below .5MHz.
?
On band 2, with the Main Tuning dial set to 4Mhz (as per service manual), I've got the following results:
??????????????????????? TRIMCAP C3 fully engaged (higher C):???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? TRIMCAP C3 fully released (lower C):
The peak is lower then the test frequency between 1MHz and .7MHz - not normal!
At least the slope is symmetric.
?
Removing V1 produced no significant change.
?
Conclusions:
- the tanks do resonate.. but at the wrong frequency. In both cases the peaks always stay far below the tuning frequencies.
- Band 1 also suffer strong slope asymmetry. Listening the radio it looses sensitivity below .5MHz. Why is that?
- The reasonable performances I get from the receiver are due to "partial" signal passing through even if the corresponding tank doesn't resonate correctly.
HELP!
Emanuele (IU1KNR).
?
|
Thanks Pete, don't know how I missed you.?
Walt Cates, WD0GOF
?
A majority of acceptance is not proof of correctness.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Actually Walt I also have the complete manual. And actually, it's more?recent then the one on jptronics. The info in the addendum is already rolled into the manual along with the updated schematic. And no assembly or tape is required
with my manuals.
?
Pete, wa2cwa
?
?
?
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 16:02:11 +0000 "waltcates via groups.io" < cateswa@...> writes:
I have had several people contact?me recently about a missing page in the online SR-2000 Operation and?
Service manual. Page 32 is missing from a most of online manuals. Very important, shows important alignment information.
For the record I have found only one source that provides a complete manual.
?jptronics.org ??
?
|
Actually Walt I also have the complete manual. And actually, it's
more?recent then the one on jptronics. The info in the addendum is already
rolled into the manual along with the updated schematic. And no assembly or tape
is required with my manuals.
?
Pete, wa2cwa
?
?
?
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 16:02:11 +0000 "waltcates via groups.io" < cateswa@...>
writes:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I
have had several people contact?me recently about a missing page in the
online SR-2000 Operation and?
Service manual. Page 32 is missing from
a most of online manuals. Very important, shows important alignment
information. For the record I have found only one source that provides
a complete manual.
?jptronics.org ??
?
|
I have had several people contact?me recently about a missing page in the online SR-2000 Operation and?
Service manual. Page 32 is missing from a most of online manuals. Very important, shows important alignment information.
For the record I have found only one source that provides a complete manual.
?jptronics.org ??
Walt Cates, WD0GOF
?
A majority of acceptance is not proof of correctness.
|
Re: SX-117 revision B to C
Dave - I have a late model, think it is a D but can't recall now.? My biggest complaint was that the AGC and S Meter responded strongly to off-frequency strong signals.? I made the change - think it was a one wire change - and that solved the problem.? There were no negative side effects and the change is easily reversible.
?
73, Floyd - K8AC
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
I am catching up on this one. The S-85 is a late version of a
receiver that goes back in Hallicrafters history to the S-20R, maybe
even before. It is about a second step up from the simplest receivers of
the 5 tube AC/DC variety. I have both an S-20R and S-40A, both work very
well. Now, these are simple single conversion receivers with the benefit
of an RF stage. You say you are having trouble on bands 1 and 2, those
are the lowest frequency bands, please confirm this. Mostly I would
expect alignment trouble on the two higher bands, 3 and 4. Perhaps we
have been chasing the wrong bands.
The S-85 has a calibrated band spread on all bands. It has one
additional band spread condenser compared to the earlier models. The
band spread capacitor is separate from the main tuning cap but is common
to all four bands.
If you were having trouble on the higher bands I would suspect you
are on the wrong side of the local oscillator, i.e. trying to tune on
the image rather than the fundamental response. Some multi band
receivers tune with the local oscillator higher than the signal
frequency for the low bands and with it below the signal for the highest
or two highest bands. If you are on the wrong side the RF will not track
the oscillator so you may get strong signals at one end but not the
other. I did not see in the S-85 handbook which side you are supposed to
use but in earlier receivers the LO is BELOW the signal on the highest
band but ABOVE it on the other bands.
If you are getting NO signal on the two lowest bands I would look at
the band switch. This is a pretty unusual problem.
The S-85 is pretty much an old, reliable design and should not have
many exotic problems.
Sorry if this is all asked and answered but I have not gone over the
entire thread.
Also, I don't know what you mean by "close to" images. There will be
ONE image, it will be separated by twice the IF frequency, for this
receiver. 910Khz.
More info please.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/4/2025 2:28 AM, Emanuele Girlando via groups.io wrote: Thank you for the advises guys.
The problem is not solved though.
*Bands 3 & 4 RF alignment* went very well, even if the trimcaps were
very touchy.
I went through the bands 1&2 alignment process again.
On bands 1 & 2 I am injecting a -90dBm signal from an HP 8640B sig-gen.
I don't expect to have any *close in image signal* under these
conditions. I looked for them tuning around the two alignment
frequencies and found none, nope.
The *band spread* dial was set to fully clockwise and it was not moved
during the process.
The *band switch* works ok, it has been cleaned carefully: it doesn't
even produce scratches sounds while operated.
I also replaced *V1* with a same type I have in hands (both measured
"good" on my tube tester).
*The radio works like a charm*: I spent the entire yesterday night
listening to broadcast and ham stations *on all bands*.
Now the questions are:
* *why* is this happening in the first place?
* how to try to further *reduce the trimcap capacitance* without
destroying them and avoiding to dismantle the relevant RF sections?
* Can it be *C7A and C7B went out of value*, enough to influence band
1&2 but not enough to influence bands 3&4?
How to test this?
* can it be my RTMA *dummy antenna*?
Thank you very much.
Emanuele (IU1KNR).
<>
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
SKCC 19998
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Emanuele People would love to have a single conversion receiver that has no images up at 28Mcs. ?signals that are too weak wont be heard, but stronger ones and the sig gen should come in 910Kc apart, one weaker than the other. ?I guess you turned the trimmers for 1,2 all in before doing the alignment again and they had to be shifted all out again? And still not good enough. Maybe you could pull the RF tube and inject after the tube so there is only one set of coils to do¡ as a test. Do you have ?scope so you can look at the RF close to the various coils? It is a mystery. ???? ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Emanuele Girlando via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2025 5:29 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HallicraftersRadios] S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!? Thank you for the advises guys. The problem is not solved though. Bands 3 & 4 RF alignment went very well, even if the trimcaps were very touchy. I went through the bands 1&2 alignment process again. On bands 1 & 2 I am injecting a -90dBm signal from an HP 8640B sig-gen. I don't expect to have any close in image signal under these conditions. I looked for them tuning around the two alignment frequencies and found none, nope.
The band spread dial was set to fully clockwise and it was not moved during the process.
The band switch works ok, it has been cleaned carefully: it doesn't even produce scratches sounds while operated.
I also replaced V1 with a same type I have in hands (both measured "good" on my tube tester).
The radio works like a charm: I spent the entire yesterday night listening to broadcast and ham stations on all bands.
¡¤?????? why is this happening in the first place? ¡¤?????? how to try to further reduce the trimcap capacitance without destroying them and avoiding to dismantle the relevant RF sections? ¡¤?????? Can it be C7A and C7B went out of value, enough to influence band 1&2 but not enough to influence bands 3&4?
How to test this? ¡¤?????? can it be my RTMA dummy antenna? ? Thank you very much.
Emanuele (IU1KNR).
-- don??? va3drl
|
Re: SX-117 revision B to C
I am also interested in making the same change.
?
73 Jack KZ5A
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Well those L/C networks are tuned circuits.? If you can't achieve proper resonance then either the signal is not getting to/from them or there is some fault with them.? Check the coil wiring.? Compare to the other band coils.? You should see similar construction.? Make sure the coils aren't open.? Make sure the caps aren't shorted (the mica or polymer dielectric isn't damaged).? You may have to electrically isolate (lift one side) of these components in order to measure but be careful.? It's interesting that you are getting at least reasonable performance under these conditions.
?
Maybe before unsoldering anything you could measure the RF signal at the input or output of V1.? As you adjust the appropriate cap you should see the signal there change quite a bit.?
Now this may sound silly, but make sure you are adjusting the correct cap(s) for the band!? Maybe there's a mistake in the manual?? Verify the caps you are adjusting are the ones in-circuit by looking at the band switch wafers.
?
Nick
|
Re: S-85 refurbish: I've got a problem during the RF alignment of bands 1 and 2 - trimcaps don't peak!
Thank you for the advises guys.
The problem is not solved though.
?
Bands 3 & 4 RF alignment went very well, even if the trimcaps were very touchy.
I went through the bands 1&2 alignment process again.
On bands 1 & 2 I am injecting a -90dBm signal from an HP 8640B sig-gen. I don't expect to have any close in image signal under these conditions. I looked for them tuning around the two alignment frequencies and found none, nope.
The band spread dial was set to fully clockwise and it was not moved during the process.
The band switch works ok, it has been cleaned carefully: it doesn't even produce scratches sounds while operated.
I also replaced V1 with a same type I have in hands (both measured "good" on my tube tester).
The radio works like a charm: I spent the entire yesterday night listening to broadcast and ham stations on all bands.
?
Now the questions are:
- why is this happening in the first place?
- how to try to further reduce the trimcap capacitance without destroying them and avoiding to dismantle the relevant RF sections?
- Can it be C7A and C7B went out of value, enough to influence band 1&2 but not enough to influence bands 3&4?
How to test this?
- can it be my RTMA dummy antenna?
?
Thank you very much.
Emanuele (IU1KNR).
?
|
All: I have read the very good explanation of the different revisions to the
SX-117. Mine is a post-B model, which means that the notch filter doesn't
affect the AGC response.
I am inclined to revert that part of the build back to Rev B so the notch
filter behaves "correctly", but before I look at this I'd like your opinions
on the wisdom of doing this. What do you folks think?
Thanks,
Dave Maples
|
Dave Jordan
Emanuele Girlando
Peter A Markavage
don Root
waltcates
Floyd - K8AC