AM reception improvement

[bravoscan]

Please provide your opinion about the target parameters of the AM receiver:

- The Icom R3 has the following RF parameters for AM reception:
> 1 kHz/30% MOD.; 10 dB S/N
> 0.495-4.995 MHz 1.4 µV
> 5.0-29.995 MHz 1.0 µV
> 118-136.000 MHz 0.79 µV
> 222-329.995 MHz 1.0 µV.
> Selectivity :
> More than 12 kHz/-6 dB
> Less than 30 kHz/-50 dB
>
-The Maycom AR108 Air-band scanner has:
> Sensitivity: 1.0uV in AM 10dB S/N
> Selectivity: 50dB min

> -The Icom R20 has :
> Sensitivity on AM(10dB S/N)
> 0.495 - 4.999MHz 2.2µV -AM broadcast
> 5.000 - 29.999MHz 1.4µV
> 118.000 - 135.999MHz 1.4µV - this is the Air band
> Selectivity : More than 1.8kHz/-6dB
> More than 12kHz/-6dB, Less than 30kHz/-60dB
> More than 150kHz/-6dB
>
> To understand better what level of RF parameters should be targeted
> for a really good AM reception please comment those possible
numbers below:
> 1.Sensitivity: 0.8uV in AM 10dB S/N for 5kH voice;
> and 0.25uV for 2KHz voice
> 2. Selectivity: 80dB at 9kHz; 100dB ≥30kHz
> 3. Spurs selectivity 80dB (3rd order intermod 100-200 kHz off)

Would you pay additional $100 (or any other price - please suggest it) if your receiver gets better AM reception?
>
> Thank you.

 

[N_Jay]

Are they "typical" specifications,
or,
"Minimum" specifications,
or,
"Guaranteed" specifications.

If you don't define that, small differences really don't matter.

 

[bravoscan]

The proposed numbers below are guaranteed:
> 1.Sensitivity: 0.8uV in AM 10dB S/N for 5kH voice;
> and 0.25uV for 2KHz voice
> 2. Selectivity: 80dB at 9kHz; 100dB ≥30kHz
> 3. Spurs selectivity 80dB (3rd order intermod 100-200 kHz off)

Would you pay additional $100 (or any other price - please suggest it) if your receiver gets better AM reception?
Also, would you like to have the AM / FM broadcasting radio (not airband monitor) with those parameters? If yes, how much would you pay for this radio (as a reference, the c.crane Radio Plus costs around $170 today)

Thank you.

 

[Yokoshibu]

well of course the r3 is better why do you have to ask us?

 

[Turbo68]

The ICOM -R3/R20 are Excellent Receivers and the Maycom is not in the same league, the only complaint I would make on the ICOM-R3 is it does not have a keypad but when it comes to reception on the Airbands they can pull good signals and clean Audio, I use the DIAMOND-RH771 Antenna.

Regards Lino.

 

[jonny290]

There are many more factors involved than just 'sensitivity'.

Are you looking to buy, or are you doing market research? From a casual glance, it appears as though you're gathering information for a company.

 

[SAR923]

Heck, the RS Pro97's specs are 1.0 µV in the 108-136 MHz band. From just listening with my untrained ear, I'd guess that that's about right since I can get towers from 40 miles away. I don't think many of us would notice the a .2 µV dfference in sensitivity. I'd be willling to pay more money for a good airband antenna than worry about small differences in sensitivity.

 

[ab3ai]

I'll second what jonny290 and sar2401 said.
While the radio is important, the antenna will make or break the system.

 

[gcgrotz]

A good commercial grade rcvr would (I hope) have better selectivity. For instance, when I drive past the CHO tower facility, the ATIS transmitter tends to blow away the front end of all of my scanners and the signal comes in on whatever other airband freq I'm tuned to. When listening to approach on 132.850 from the parking lot maybe 200-250 yards away from the tower, the ATIS will overload and mix with the weak signals. It doesn't do this on my FT100 ham transceiver, so it stays on approach. The scanner (AOR, Uniden, RS all do it) will be on tower 124.5 with the attenuator on to eliminate the overload, or else instead of the mobile antenna I will put on the rubber duck.

So, it is not all about sensitivity.

 

[Declared_Hostile]

From a casual glance, it appears as though you're gathering information for a company.

That certainly appears to be the case. The question is right out of MR speak 101.

I don't know whether to find the little ploy of disguising marketing research (something they're getting paid for) as a legitimate question to people on this board as offensive or amusing. Maybe just distasteful. I mean, the subterfuge isn't needed. Just come right out and be direct with who you are and who you are working for and what you want to know know. I'm sure all sorts of people would be glad to give you all sorts of free market data.

 

[Don_Burke]

Actually, I would not consider it disguised at all.