Using a Receiver with the West Mountain or AM-COMM DNR Speaker

[n8fvj]

These models are the same DNR speaker. Both have 4" internal speaker and a jack for an external speaker. This DNR is better than any modern transceiver DNR I heard. It keeps the audio about perfect without any watery sound and reduces static about 95%. It does remove some high frequency, but not excessive. This makes AM sound about like FM. It is so good it can be used on a 5 tube receiver and makes it sound like a 10 tube receiver.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

There were a number of multi-tube receivers over the years that were designed for communications quality reception. No DNR will get them sound "better". And "better" can really only be defined in each listener's ears and obviously, it depends on what is being received at the time of reception. Reception quality, depending on band conditions, can vary from minute to minute, hour to hour, etc.

[n8fvj]

The DNR will greatly improve any receivers audio. Noise is an issue Pete and this DNR speaker can raise a signal out of the noise for copy. You obviously never used the listed DNR speakers or your comment would have been different. I suggest you use an item before commenting on its performance.

I posted this as I am sure most here have never used this DNR speaker.

[Opcom]

I picked up an old radio Shack NDR box and it helps get rid of annoying power buzzes and man made city infrastructure noises. It does not improve fidelity but it's not supposed to.

By the time a signal's been through an R390 or SX-28, not much more fidelity can be had from it, but noises can be reduced by that box.

[n8fvj]

This is an example of the posted DNR speaker performance. I bought a $200 WWII TBX-8. Built a completely regulated power supply less the 550 volt for the transmit tube. New tubes throughout. 5 tube receiver could only hear about 1/2 the signals on 3885 DX60 net. With all regulated receiver voltages the radio was quite stabile frequency wise. They could hear me as I was using a 250 watt SS amp. Added the DNR speaker and copy was about 100%. Difference was night and day!
I sold it for $600 to another Ham with the DNR speaker of course. It was just a fun project.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

The DNR will greatly improve any receivers audio. Noise is an issue Pete and this DNR speaker can raise a signal out of the noise for copy. You obviously never used the listed DNR speakers or your comment would have been different. I suggest you use an item before commenting on its performance.

I posted this as I am sure most here have never used this DNR speaker.

Please don't make me laugh and make assumptions.

I actually won a local auction bid on the West Mountain DNR back around the beginning of the year. Paid $70 for it. It was OK but I didn't consider it great. My receiver analog noise reduction version that I built 30 plus years ago actually worked better for my on the air usage. I sold the West Mountain thing at a local hamfest in June. Don't miss it.

[n8fvj]

Oh, you are using noise reduction, but others should not Pete? Opcom uses a Radio Shack DNR and notes improvement but Radio Shack does not perform near as good as AM-COMM.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Oh, you are using noise reduction, but others should not Pete?

Duh! Where did I say that?

Opcom uses a Radio Shack DNR and notes improvement but Radio Shack does not perform near as good as AM-COMM.

Have you compare both units side-by-side and specs common to both? If not, your statement is meaningless.

[n8fvj]

Pete:
'No DNR will get them sound better'.
'I sold West Mountain thing. I do not miss it'.
'Where did I say that?' (referring to DNR is useless, but Pete uses a HB version).
'If not, your statement is meaningless'.

Growing tired of all the negative comments Pete.

Every modern transceiver has DNR because they work despite what Pete says.

Yes, I owned the Radio Shack DNR. I am finished defending the stellar AM COMM DNR you state does not work well. I know better and others reading this should try it vs that you are stating DNR is about worthless. It is just glaringly untrue.