RE: [drakelist] Microphone question
Ron Wagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- Rich, The radio is a 300 watt INPUT radio. At the best linear efficiency you could expect ~60% output on the radio, or 180 watts peak. I know there are those who say they get way more then that reading, but they are either running into an uncalibrated meter, or are putting more the 300 watts into to the rig. And I can see the hate mail coming on this :-) I would do the following: 1) you know you have an improper mic impedence, get that fixed. 2) see how many watts are coming out in CW mode. #2 will get you and idea how good your RF chain is in the TX. I would expect about 150 watts OUTPUT on CW. That should be easy to measure, but don't leave the rig in CW mode key down too long. The sweep tube finals are not made for key down duty. Seems to me that the TR3 did not need a key in the jack to be key down aka the key jack is closed by default. Was easy way to tune the rig as I recall. #1 will get good audio into the radio. Then see what your peak reading watt meter says. BTW, do both the CW and the SSB on peak reading mode of the meter. Peak reading modes are basically a hang amplifier. Charge a cap and use its voltage to driver the meter via a set of internal amps. The peak on CW, is *basically* what you would expect to see on peak of SSB if your meter is working correctly. Also, for CW on peak, you should see you meter go up quickly on keying the rig, and then slowly go back to 0 when you let off the CW carrier. If it does not, then your peak meter is not working as I would expect it to. 73, Ron WD8SBB On Sun, 20 Jan 2008, Rich Carter wrote: Rich Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- Ron I'm using a Daiwa HF wattmeter on the peak setting. While I realize the meter should show a low reading, I would expect that a I should need to reduce the RF gain from max to prevent overdriving the rig. Since the rig lacks speech compression, I don't know what I should measure, but I would expect a 300W rig to drive at least 10W or or more. What do others see on their meters? It seems to me that the collins mic I have is not matched properly. I have my hands full alignment issues. It may be best for me to replace the mic with something that is known to work with this rig. Rich - KE1EV -- Submissions:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - unsubscribe drakelist in body Hopelessly Lost:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - help in body of message Zerobeat Web Page: www.zerobeat.net - sponsored by www.tlchost.net --
Re: [drakelist] Microphone question
David Chris Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- Rich, Forget the mic for the time being. Do this first: Most of the three tube TR's with fresh finals will/should show between 180 and 200 watts out on 40m. Tune it up this way: ..Set the mic gain at 10:00. Set mode to the x-cw position and, watching the wattmeter (any will do), adjust the load and tune for maximum output, as well as the RF tune control (peak all three). Don't leave the rig in x-cw for more than a few seconds at a time. Again, using the wattmeter only, peak all three controls by placing the rig in the x-CW mode. This is the lock down/key down tune up position. Once you have peaked the rig here, key the mike and speak into the microphone in a normal voice and adjust the mic gain up or down from the 10:00 position previously set, until you see a small amount of movement upscale on the rigs meter. This should be about right for SSB work. It aslo means that the agc is in engaged. As an example, a D-104 or a Shure 444d, both high impedance mics, will be at the correct setting at about 10:00 +/-. A low impedance mic just won't work. Most any of the shure mics will work fine with a drake if they are high impedance. The rig does like impedances of upwards of 50k ohms, but generally, anything above 10k or so should work, just not sound as well as the others. Some of the Shure hand mics also work very good. I believe one was the 404?. But in the day of mobil operation with these jewels, that was the mic of choice. Another check to make, if the chosen mic does'nt seem to provide output on a peak reading meter, put the rig is x-cw and move the mic gain back and then advance it. At the point where no further ouput is seen, you are set about right. Normally, you want the gain control back just a tad for SSB to avoid overdriveing the audio. The AGC circuit should be in control, but with older rigs, it may not be up to par, so for best operation look at your rigs meter and adjust as previously stated. Once you have the rig tuned to max output as above and set the mic gain as indicated, you should see the output suggested above. If not you have another problem. If output is ok, move on to solve the mic question. Remember, if you have a rig problem, no mic is going to work right. So check the rig first. Good luck, David Wd9cmd - Original Message - From: Ron Wagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 5:34 AM Subject: RE: [drakelist] Microphone question Ron Wagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- Rich, The radio is a 300 watt INPUT radio. At the best linear efficiency you could expect ~60% output on the radio, or 180 watts peak. I know there are those who say they get way more then that reading, but they are either running into an uncalibrated meter, or are putting more the 300 watts into to the rig. And I can see the hate mail coming on this :-) I would do the following: 1) you know you have an improper mic impedence, get that fixed. 2) see how many watts are coming out in CW mode. #2 will get you and idea how good your RF chain is in the TX. I would expect about 150 watts OUTPUT on CW. That should be easy to measure, but don't leave the rig in CW mode key down too long. The sweep tube finals are not made for key down duty. Seems to me that the TR3 did not need a key in the jack to be key down aka the key jack is closed by default. Was easy way to tune the rig as I recall. #1 will get good audio into the radio. Then see what your peak reading watt meter says. BTW, do both the CW and the SSB on peak reading mode of the meter. Peak reading modes are basically a hang amplifier. Charge a cap and use its voltage to driver the meter via a set of internal amps. The peak on CW, is *basically* what you would expect to see on peak of SSB if your meter is working correctly. Also, for CW on peak, you should see you meter go up quickly on keying the rig, and then slowly go back to 0 when you let off the CW carrier. If it does not, then your peak meter is not working as I would expect it to. 73, Ron WD8SBB On Sun, 20 Jan 2008, Rich Carter wrote: Rich Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- Ron I'm using a Daiwa HF wattmeter on the peak setting. While I realize the meter should show a low reading, I would expect that a I should need to reduce the RF gain from max to prevent overdriving the rig. Since the rig lacks speech compression, I don't know what I should measure, but I would expect a 300W rig to drive at least 10W or or more. What do others see on their meters? It seems to me that the collins mic I have is not
Re: [drakelist] T4X Final RF Tubes
Garey Barrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- Eddy - Nope, no cigar... NO modifications are needed to either the T-4(any) or the TR-4(any) to use the 6GJ5s. Pin 3 in the Drake 4 Line transmitters is the cathode of the final tubes. Pin 8 in the transmitters is grounded at the socket. With 6JB6s, K is connected internally to Pin 3, and G3 is connected internally to Pin 8. With 6GJ5s, K AND G3 are connected internally to Pin 3, AND there is _NO_ connection to Pin 8. So everything works the same, except G3 is connected directly to K rather than via a 15 ohm and 3.3 ohm resistor. The only difference is the interelectrode capacitance, which is small enough (0.5 pF) that the neutralization circuit is able to take care of it. NOTE: RCA Tube Manual for Class A Operation states G3 connected to cathode at socket. 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 4-B C-Line Service Supplement CDs www.k4oah.com EP Swynar wrote: EP Swynar [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- On Sunday 20th January, Garey wrote... ...True, the G3 is brought out to Pin 8 in the 6JB6, and that socket pin IS grounded in the T-4... However, in the 6GJ5 G3 is brought internally to the cathode Pin _3_. There is NO connection to Pin 8 in the 6GJ5. Simple!... *** Hi Garey, I think I'm beginning to understand all this, at last...! What's been missing all along here, is the mandatory execution --- right from the get-go --- of TWO crucial operations, i.e.: (1) The wire from pin #8 to chassis ground at the final amplifier sockets in the T4X must first be snipped, and, (2) A new wire has to be added, jumpering pin #3 to pin #8 at both sockets. What will be accomplished thusly is the following: (1) The pin #3 cathode break-out of the 6GJ5 will now effectively be at the pin #8-cum-pin #3 of the T4X socket, and, (2) For better or worse, the suppressor grids of the 6GJ5 tubes will be at the exact same potential as the cathodes (NOTE: is that an especially good --- or bad --- thing?). Failure to first execute the ...nip tuck at the sockets will leave the current meter reading zero all the time, and the finals will be on constantly...correct? I wonder if it wouldn't be simpler to just re-wire the filaments for 12.6 VAC, a pair of 12JB6's, Hi Hi! ~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ -- Submissions:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - unsubscribe drakelist in body Hopelessly Lost:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - help in body of message Zerobeat Web Page: www.zerobeat.net - sponsored by www.tlchost.net --
Re: [drakelist] T4X Final RF Tubes
EP Swynar [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- Hi Garey, ...At long last, the clouds (in my mind) are beginning to part, I believe I can see the light, at long last...! You'd never know that I'm a college graduate, would you...?! Hi Hi Thanks for the info...I'll be watching for those bottles at the next Hamfest that I might attend here... ~73!~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ *** - Original Message - From: Garey Barrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 9:15 AM Subject: Re: [drakelist] T4X Final RF Tubes Garey Barrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- Eddy - Nope, no cigar... NO modifications are needed to either the T-4(any) or the TR-4(any) to use the 6GJ5s. Pin 3 in the Drake 4 Line transmitters is the cathode of the final tubes. Pin 8 in the transmitters is grounded at the socket. With 6JB6s, K is connected internally to Pin 3, and G3 is connected internally to Pin 8. With 6GJ5s, K AND G3 are connected internally to Pin 3, AND there is _NO_ connection to Pin 8. So everything works the same, except G3 is connected directly to K rather than via a 15 ohm and 3.3 ohm resistor. The only difference is the interelectrode capacitance, which is small enough (0.5 pF) that the neutralization circuit is able to take care of it. NOTE: RCA Tube Manual for Class A Operation states G3 connected to cathode at socket. 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 4-B C-Line Service Supplement CDs www.k4oah.com EP Swynar wrote: EP Swynar [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- On Sunday 20th January, Garey wrote... ...True, the G3 is brought out to Pin 8 in the 6JB6, and that socket pin IS grounded in the T-4... However, in the 6GJ5 G3 is brought internally to the cathode Pin _3_. There is NO connection to Pin 8 in the 6GJ5. Simple!... *** Hi Garey, I think I'm beginning to understand all this, at last...! What's been missing all along here, is the mandatory execution --- right from the get-go --- of TWO crucial operations, i.e.: (1) The wire from pin #8 to chassis ground at the final amplifier sockets in the T4X must first be snipped, and, (2) A new wire has to be added, jumpering pin #3 to pin #8 at both sockets. What will be accomplished thusly is the following: (1) The pin #3 cathode break-out of the 6GJ5 will now effectively be at the pin #8-cum-pin #3 of the T4X socket, and, (2) For better or worse, the suppressor grids of the 6GJ5 tubes will be at the exact same potential as the cathodes (NOTE: is that an especially good --- or bad --- thing?). Failure to first execute the ...nip tuck at the sockets will leave the current meter reading zero all the time, and the finals will be on constantly...correct? I wonder if it wouldn't be simpler to just re-wire the filaments for 12.6 VAC, a pair of 12JB6's, Hi Hi! ~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ -- Submissions:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - unsubscribe drakelist in body Hopelessly Lost:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - help in body of message Zerobeat Web Page: www.zerobeat.net - sponsored by www.tlchost.net -- -- Submissions:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - unsubscribe drakelist in body Hopelessly Lost:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - help in body of message Zerobeat Web Page: www.zerobeat.net - sponsored by www.tlchost.net --
Re: [drakelist] TR-3 crystals needed (was:TR-3 9 MHz osc alignment questions)
Mark Pilant [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- Hi Rich. Where did you measure? Pin 6 of V1b? The mV measurements I got were taken, using my scope, from pin 3 of V1b. I wanted to try and pick a spot as soon after the oscillator with the least likelihood of loading from the scope probe. I wasn't too concerned about the absolute amplitude of any particular band, but was more interested in the relative comparison. All three 10m crystals were quite a bit above the 40m and 15m crystals. I also took some additional measurements at the junction of R13, R15, and C24. R15 is connected to the grid (pin 9) of V3a and R13 is connected to the cathode (pin 8) of V3a. Again, looking at the relative amplitude the 40m and 15m oscillator output through the cathode follower it was obvious the 40m and 15m signals were down more than the 10m signals. 73 - Mark N1VQW -- Submissions:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - unsubscribe drakelist in body Hopelessly Lost:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - help in body of message Zerobeat Web Page: www.zerobeat.net - sponsored by www.tlchost.net --
[drakelist] Re: Drake Low Pass Filters
Steve Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- I bought a Drake low pass filter off of e-bay a while back, and discovered that it had shifted down and was apparently cutting off about at 15 meters. I think it is a model 3300. I have yet to figure out how to take it apart to see if there are damaged or decrepit components, so will probably have to get another filter. Any suggestions from the list members as to which models to look for would be appreciated. I doubt that I will ever be running more than 500 watts, and will probably stick at 100 watts or so due to problems here with crappy local television setups. 73, Steve WA9JML -- Submissions:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - unsubscribe drakelist in body Hopelessly Lost:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - help in body of message Zerobeat Web Page: www.zerobeat.net - sponsored by www.tlchost.net --
Re: [drakelist] Re: Drake Low Pass Filters
Steve, Spacing of turns in the air inductors and capacity of the disc or other capacitors affects the attenuation characteristics. High SWR combined with high power can affect the capacitors, as can lightening induced problems.? The filter might have been modified to give better attenuation at 10/11 meters. I'd recommend a Drake or Nye low pass filter, the legal limit models.? Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] who has a new Nye filter if you're interested. Enjoy those Drakes. 73, Evan -Original Message- From: Steve Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 2:49 pm Subject: [drakelist] Re: Drake Low Pass Filters Steve Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang? --? I bought a Drake low pass filter off of e-bay a while back, and discovered that it had shifted down and was apparently cutting off about at 15 meters. I think it is a model 3300. I have yet to figure out how to take it apart to see if there are damaged or decrepit components, so will probably have to get another filter. Any suggestions from the list members as to which models to look for would be appreciated. I doubt that I will ever be running more than 500 watts, and will probably stick at 100 watts or so due to problems here with crappy local television setups.? ? 73,? ? Steve WA9JML? ? --? Submissions: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - unsubscribe drakelist in body? Hopelessly Lost: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - help in body of message? Zerobeat Web Page: www.zerobeat.net - sponsored by www.tlchost.net? --? More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com
RE: [drakelist] Re: Drake Low Pass Filters
Steve Aronson [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- I have a Drake 3300 filter here, as well as a couple of 300's, that I would be willing to sell if you'd like to make an offer. It is untested by me and part of large group of equipment I recently inherited. 73 Steve Steve Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- I bought a Drake low pass filter off of e-bay a while back, and discovered that it had shifted down and was apparently cutting off about at 15 meters. I think it is a model 3300. I have yet to figure out how to take it apart to see if there are damaged or decrepit components, so will probably have to get another filter. Any suggestions from the list members as to which models to look for would be appreciated. I doubt that I will ever be running more than 500 watts, and will probably stick at 100 watts or so due to problems here with crappy local television setups. -- Submissions:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - unsubscribe drakelist in body Hopelessly Lost:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - help in body of message Zerobeat Web Page: www.zerobeat.net - sponsored by www.tlchost.net --
Re: [drakelist] TR-3 crystals needed (was:TR-3 9 MHz osc alignment questions)
Mark Pilant [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- Well, I think it may have been a bad user on device :-) :-) At Rich's (KE1EV) suggestion I measured the oscillator voltage and frequency at V1a. In particular, on the common crystal connection with only R3 and C2 between where I measured and the plate (pin 1) where Rich measured. Here is what I got: 80m 0.0v 40m 5.2v 21.496 MHz 20m 0.0v 15m 4.1v 35.496 MHz 10(1)m 4.1v 42.495 MHz 10(2)m 4.0v 42.994 MHz 10(3)m 3.6v 43.592 MHz Since there are no crystals for 80m and 20m, the 0V reading is understandable. These reading were taken after adjusting L1, L2 and L5 for the maximum negative voltage at the test point. I could get the frequencies closer to the specs but the T.P. voltage was not at the max. So it would seem the band crystals are, in fact, OK. I'm still puzzled why the readings are so strange looking at V1b pin 3. I'm going to have to think about this one for a while. I'm getting there, and learning/remembering a bunch along the way :-) 73 - Mark N1VQW -- Submissions:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - unsubscribe drakelist in body Hopelessly Lost:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - help in body of message Zerobeat Web Page: www.zerobeat.net - sponsored by www.tlchost.net --
Re: [drakelist] Microphone question
Jim Shorney [EMAIL PROTECTED] made an utterance to the drakelist gang -- On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:44:34 -0500, David Chris Drake wrote: Remember, if you have a rig problem, no mic is going to work right. So check the rig first. Agreed. I didn't see anything in the OP's description of the mic that told me for sure it wasn't high impedance. Ohmmeter readings are simply not reliable as a measure of impedance. Indeed, if the mic was included with the radio and had the proper plug on it, it is a reasonable (although not 100% assured) assumption that it worked correctly at some point. He has alignment issues which should be resolved first, then verify the output and audio chain as you desciribed. Once the radio is verified to be functioning correctly for the most part, then it is time to look at the microphone. An audio generator or known good Hi-Z mic can be used to verify the mic input of the radio. Mics tend to be very reliable, barring abused cord problems or poorly soldered plugs. The simplest part of the system is usually the least likely to fail. (This statement does not apply to mobile operation, where the cord will ALWAYS fail given enough time). 73 -Jim -- Ham Radio NU0C TR7/RV7, TR6/RV6, T4XC/R4C, L4B, NCL2000, SB104A, R390A, GT550A/RV550A, HyGain 3750, IBM PS/2 - all vintage, all the time! HyGain 3750 User's Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HyGain_3750/ -- Submissions:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - unsubscribe drakelist in body Hopelessly Lost:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - help in body of message Zerobeat Web Page: www.zerobeat.net - sponsored by www.tlchost.net --
[drakelist] FS: AC-3
I have an AC-3 power supply for sale that was used on a TR4 I recently sold. The buyer didn't need the power supply. It is untested and hasn't been powered up in a number of years so I can't vouch for it's working condition as I don't have a variac yet. FWIW, it was working before it went into storage, it belonged to my late father. Feel free to email with questions, requests for pics, or offers. Cosmetically, I would rate it's condition as average. 73 Steve
