Speakers

[KM1H]

One of my SX-62A's is hooked to a 1955 RCA AM/FM/Phono console audio system which has a pair of 12" plus a pair of 5" driven by PP 6V6's. Everything sounds great on it including ham AM but since it is in the FR it is mostly used for everything else for family and company. The other one up in the BR gets one of the R-42's.

They also like the Scott 800B with the 6550's (was 6L6G's) driving the stock 15" coaxial Jensen and thats in the DR.

[WB4AIO]

One of my SX-62A's is hooked to a 1955 RCA AM/FM/Phono console audio system which has a pair of 12" plus a pair of 5" driven by PP 6V6's. Everything sounds great on it including ham AM but since it is in the FR it is mostly used for everything else for family and company. The other one up in the BR gets one of the R-42's.

They also like the Scott 800B with the 6550's (was 6L6G's) driving the stock 15" coaxial Jensen and thats in the DR.

Bet that sounds sweet!

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Opening up the bandwidth a bit caused the weaker station to be peppered more by the prevailing evening atmospheric static making reception annoying and cumbersome to listen to.

This is the part that confuses me. The advantage to using SSB is its ability to transmit a signal more efficiently. Works great for DX and so on. So why would you want to bend over backward trying to make it sound like AM instead of just flipping the mode switch to AM?  

Probably the simple answer from "them" is because "I want to do it" although there might be some underlying reason(s) that drive them to try a mimic an AM broadcast quality station on SSB. Maybe the mind says, "I don't get no respect" operating regular SSB. Or, maybe it's, "I don't like carrier" or maybe it's "2 sidebands and carrier are hard to manage and confusing". Who knows; maybe it's an ego thing; say I sound good enough times and many in the fold will believe it.

Generally, when I'm working casual SSB, the filter is set at 2.4 or 2.8 KHz, so anything beyond that just gets crunched in the electrons. When I'm contesting on SSB, I generally run the filter at 2.1 or 1.8 KHz. Don't need much for contest info like 59-### or 59-USA.

[KM1H]

My first transceivers were TS-930's just as I was getting serious about contesting. The stock 2.7KHz filters were too wide for crowded bands and I installed a set of International 2.1's using sticky tape and some diodes rigged up so I could TX thru the stock filters and listen with either set. It kept those trying to squeeze in far enough away to be generally tolerable. and soon became a widely used method that was often whined about in contest rags

Another trick with stacks was to rotate the lower pair at the stateside QRM for  transmit on all 4 and listen with just the upper pair. It didnt take long to get a clear frequency and I doubt if most had a clue what I was doing and thought it was just propagation.

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

Probably the simple answer from "them" is because "I want to do it" although there might be some underlying reason(s) that drive them to try a mimic an AM broadcast quality station on SSB.

More power to 'em for trying things out and all that, it just seems like a more roundabout, difficult/expensive way to sound reasonably decent. Would be similar to adding 4 or 5 underpowered engines to a Yugo hatchback to go faster instead of just one larger engine or a different car actually built for speed.

Bet that sounds sweet!

It's tough to beat the old push-pull tube receivers for pleasant audio with minimal effort or complications like external amps, equalizers and so on. The SX-62B drives that big 15 inch Jensen JHP-52 like they were made for each other. Not CD-quality, just warm, full sound like an old console HiFi or floor model radio. The old Super Pros are my favorites. National made a few nice sets as well, like the NC-240 series. I think the HRO-60 was the last in the line.

[N6YW]

I use a pair of KRK Rockit 5 two way biamped studio monitors fed from an audio switch matrix that
I built and is sourced from all of my receivers mounted in the rack. I can simultaneously switch the
audio feeds to my monitors, and the antenna feeds to the receivers.
Mainly, I use the R-390 as it's my favorite receiver, but I also use the 51J-4 and SP-600 JX-17.
The KRK's are very great sounding inexpensive studio monitors and can fill the
room with distortion free audio. They can be fed with any source impedance and offer three types of
connections. TRS 1/4", RCA & XLR. Balanced and unbalanced @-10 or +4. Provision for High frequency
level and input level. While I may end up using larger format speakers at some point, I think these are
more than adequate and certainly kick the snot out of the old Jensen's, of which I have many.
Another important aspect of this choice is physical size. They are approximately 10" tall and 7" wide,
8" deep. Hook up a powered sup woofer and you're in for a real treat.

[WB4AIO]

Probably the simple answer from "them" is because "I want to do it" although there might be some underlying reason(s) that drive them to try a mimic an AM broadcast quality station on SSB.

More power to 'em for trying things out and all that, it just seems like a more roundabout, difficult/expensive way to sound reasonably decent. Would be similar to adding 4 or 5 underpowered engines to a Yugo hatchback to go faster instead of just one larger engine or a different car actually built for speed.

Some people like a challenge. And they like good-sounding audio, whatever the mode. (Myself, I have always loathed "communications quality audio" and I don't think the premises behind its promotion are valid, but that's a subject for another day.)

I had a Hell of a lot of fun back in 1987 modifying my TS-440 for good sound on both AM and SSB transmit and receive.

And the SDR-1000 I am using now can achieve even better quality in both modes. In fact, the mods I am doing to it involve mostly stabilizing the DDS reference, and using an external eq and limiter because they're (somewhat) superior to the internal processing.

But the rigs based on PowerSDR are basically broadcast quality right out of the box. That's an amazing thing to me -- and it means the 3885 hi-fi guys from 1968 have essentially won.

With my best,

Kevin, WB4AIO.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

But the rigs based on PowerSDR are basically broadcast quality right out of the box. That's an amazing thing to me -- and it means the 3885 hi-fi guys from 1968 have essentially won.

With my best,

Kevin, WB4AIO.

"hi-fi guys from 1968 have essentially won"
Won what?? I don't see the connection. SSB stations trying to achieve wide-body audio sounds more like an oxymoron.

[WB4AIO]

But the rigs based on PowerSDR are basically broadcast quality right out of the box. That's an amazing thing to me -- and it means the 3885 hi-fi guys from 1968 have essentially won.

With my best,

Kevin, WB4AIO.

"hi-fi guys from 1968 have essentially won"
Won what?? I don't see the connection. SSB stations trying to achieve wide-body audio sounds more like an oxymoron.

Hey, I think anybody on any voice mode trying to achieve good audio is great.

I think that nobody in 1968 -- or 1978 -- or 1988 -- or 1998 -- would have believed that amateur rigs would ever be developed and sold that could transmit and receive broadcast quality audio right out the box. That kind of audio was what the then-rebellious young guys wanted, treasured, and developed in '68. It looked like a losing battle. The League, and just about all the manufacturers and publishers, were against it and firmly in favor of narrow, restricted, clipped audio.

But the 3885 guys have won. I don't mean they've forced anyone to stop running or liking narrow audio. I mean they've won the right to exist, and their specialty is now an established, growing niche in the hobby as a whole. Better quality audio (both for AM and SSB) is now built in to the PowerSDR rigs, and other manufacturers have followed suit.

Bravo, I say. Some of the central figures in making this happen from the AM side are WA1HLR, K4KYV, and WA3VJB. From the SSB side, NU9N. There are others too.

All the best,


Kevin, WB4AIO.

[KM1H]

Close to BC quality out of the box on SSB goes back to the first phasing rig and those that followed which the SDR is based on. Aint nothing new about that and I get BC quality reports with a 1959 CE-100V.

[Steve - K4HX]

DUQ was hi-fi in the 50's.

[WB4AIO]

Close to BC quality out of the box on SSB goes back to the first phasing rig and those that followed which the SDR is based on. Aint nothing new about that and I get BC quality reports with a 1959 CE-100V.

True. They were excellent, the best of their day.

But by 1970, CE was gone and the powers in ham radio were totally opposed to good audio on the ham bands.

A few rebellious free-thinkers, most of them young AMers who operated on 3885 and environs, went against the trend. They believed in and practiced the art and science of achieving excellent quality sound on HF ham radio.

It seemed liked a lost cause to many.

But now they've won. Though still hated by a few, their niche is now respected by many amateur operators -- and even catered to by manufacturers. Let's hope the trend continues.

All the best,

Kevin, WB4AIO.

[WU2D]

I use the speaker that came with the TCS. It has a Jensen. Am I missing the timbre in some signals?

[KM1H]

Jensen is just a brand name, not all were created equal.

Carl

[Opcom]

For ham AM and SWL, which benefit from some audio fidelity, a small 2-way hi-fi speaker is my favorite.

They can be had for almost nothing when the receivers go bad - and be sure to check the high class neighborhood alleys after Christmas. Maybe someone got a new stereo. The bookshelf speakers thrown out will be nicely broken in!

A contender for the all time worst sounding receiver speaker is the LS-116?  - the weather resistant 4" mylar cone job in the cast aluminum green box. If the tinny sounding mylar isn't bad enough, the little 600:8 Ohm transformer inside is there to help.

The only excuse today for listening through a poor-sounding speaker is to experience the original "cone in a metal can" item or a restored one.

[KM1H]

The Hallicrafters SSB mobile speaker is no gem either. Its hard to believe but it was also listed as an option for the SX-115!