Joined: Sat, Apr 4th 1998, 00:00 Roles: N/A Moderates: N/A

Latest Topics

Topic Created Posts Views Last Activity
Forums demoted? Aug 18th 2013, 18:36 10 637 on 28/8/13
Why isn't there more action on ARRL forum? Sep 13th 2012, 00:48 11 3,010 on 29/1/13
Forum avatars? Aug 17th 2011, 16:45 5 1,430 on 21/8/11
Operating Furniture Aug 17th 2011, 01:52 10 3,087 on 27/12/12
Radiolocation News Jul 27th 2011, 01:52 3 1,632 on 28/7/11
General Comments Jul 24th 2011, 21:46 22 6,908 on 29/7/11

Latest Posts

Topic Author Posted On
Broadcast quality headphones patterson725 1 day, 13 hours ago
Rick, I agree that headphones are often the best way to listen to ham communications. (And, a side benefit, it can help preserve the peace, domestically.)

When you say "broadcast quality", it seems that you're looking for high fidelity 'phones. They can work, but really most folks are probably better off with "communications quality" -- optimized for speech and CW signals, generally in the 200 - 3000 Hz range. Any super low bass or high frequency is just going to make things harder for you, since it will increase the noise level without adding any intelligibility.

Having said all that, headphones intended for stereo music are a lot easier to find at a reasonable price. I just would not go for "premium" products. There are a bunch of other issues, though:

Impedance: Headphones for stereo (hi fi) use may have low impedance, like 4-8 ohms. That's often too low for best work with communications receivers. Higher impedance is probably better. (Check what your receiver manual says.)

Comfort: This is a big one. You have to be able to tolerate your 'phones for hours at a time. Be sure they are adjustable to fit, etc.

Style: There are types that just fit (loosely) on your ear without much cushioning, and others that have large cushions. This will affect comfort, but another benefit of the ear-surrounding cushions is that it cuts down acoustical noise from your environment. That can be important.

I use Sennheiser headphones with over-ear cushions. They're very nice, and I'd tell you the model number, but they don't seem to have a label!

73 Martin AA6E
Experimental QRM triangulation tool. W7KKX 1 week, 2 days ago
Nice idea! Alas, my beamwidth on 20M is many degrees, so it would be hard to determine a target bearing very accurately. You need receivers located on a wide range of bearings, etc. Antenna arrays (4 squares?) that can be accurately nulled might give better results than simple beams. (But how do you calibrate them?)

It will be interesting to see what you can do with ordinary equipment -- and ordinary hams!

73 Martin AA6E
virtual radar WB4URP 4 weeks, 2 days ago
I agree it's not there. You would need to contact the author or the sdrsharp project.

73 Martin AA6E
What is an accepted range for a DX contact? WN6WJN on 17/4/14
For the HF bands (below 30 MHz), usually called "short wave", we have long-distance propagation thanks to bouncing signals off the ionosphere. On these frequencies, the usual idea of "DX" is contacting someone in another country. So US-Canada is "DX" by this measure, even if the distance can be very short. And Maine to California would not be DX.

ARRL has the concept of a "DXCC entity" and people try to contact as many of them as possible. They are generally countries, but some non-countries, like Alaska and Hawaii, are considered separate entities. Check out

73 Martin AA6E
WiFi Remote Control KS5KIP on 15/4/14
The "Internet" is just a bunch of connected networks, and each one is like your own local wi-fi network. Any remote control system that works over the Internet is presumably using TCP/IP (or UDP) protocols that would work equally well on your local network. So that shouldn't be a problem. The easiest remote arrangement for the radio would be to get a radio that directly supports Ethernet remote operation - for control and audio in/out. But that's only part of the problem. You may need other functions for antenna switching, rotators, etc.

Back to Top