Even that misses the point, I'm afraid. Remember that the original
comment referred to the receive capability of an antenna.
The only thing that matching or "tuning to resonance" does is improve
the amplitude of the combined signal and noise feeding the rig ... it
does not improve the signal to noise ratio. A good receiving antenna,
however, has some pattern to it that captures the desired signal while
discriminating against unwanted noise, whether the noise is man made or
atmospheric. A Beverage antenna, for example, has quite a strong
pattern in one direction so it has a good signal to noise ratio feeding
the rig. A Beverage is pretty inefficient, though, and the desired
signal is pretty weak, so typically a matching transformer (9:1 or so)
is used to optimize the signal transfer and a low noise preamp (either
in the rig or external) is also used ... but the signal to noise ratio
is determined by the antenna independent of whether it is matched or
not. I guarantee that an unmatched Beverage with enough low noise gain
after it will outperform any practical resonant or matched ("tuned to
resonance") antenna available to hams.
73,
Dave AB7E
On 11/13/2012 4:29 PM, Don Wilhelm wrote:
> Yes, I agree.
>
> Given a bit of "benefit of doubt", I would think the poster would have
> better said, an antenna "tuned to resonance" rather than a resonant antenna.
> Many very good antennas are not inherently resonant, but resonance (and
> therefore good power transfer) is achieved by means of some kind of
> tuning mechanism.
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
> On 11/13/2012 6:21 PM, David Gilbert wrote:
>> Particularly as far as receiving goes, that's a totally erroneous
>> statement that has been dispelled many, many times. There is nothing
>> magical or beneficial about a resonant antenna short of the fact that it
>> sometimes makes it easier to match. Check out how (and how well) a
>> Beverage antenna or one of the flag/pennant antennas work for receiving
>> to see the fallacy of your comment.
>>
>> The key to a good receive antenna is having a pattern that discriminates
>> against QRM or QRN as the case may be. As long as there is enough low
>> noise gain after the antenna all else is misconception.
>>
>> Dave AB7E
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/13/2012 12:13 PM, Richard Fjeld wrote:
>>> In summary, even a good radio needs a resonant antenna.
>>>
>>> Rich, n0ce
>>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
