You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
The Feb 2025 Radioddity Giveaway Results are In! Click Here to see who won!

Reply to thread

Message

I was not interested in copying your modification, for I am happy with the results I already have. I was interested in a comparison. You made the claim that you can achieve hi fidelity with $10 in radio shack parts, implying that it would be comparable to to the Mauldulator. I am merely saying I would be interested in seeing the actual test in reality that you were discussing in words.

I have been modifying radios for years. I know my way around the coupling and bypass caps. We use the same concepts on the receiver end to improve their response, and I agree it is not rocket science. I am not critical of your work or your results, I am just responding to your comparison and I would like to see it happen. You mentioned having a flat response over a wider range than broadcast. I have no problem with that at all. The first night we got the Mauldulator functioning, we put in 30 KHz and saw the sidebands at the proper amplitudes on the spectrum analyzer. We can go as low as you like also. If you want to take out some filtering we intentionally put in, we can go to DC and you can use the audio in jack as a carrier control. You are not going to be able to do that very easily on most CBs by merely changing capacitors. Most of the audio stages are capacitively coupled and if you tried DC coupling, you would mess up the bias of the transistors something fierce.

I think it would be a fun test to compare the performance side by side. It looks like we are on opposite ends of the country, but if it could be worked out, I think it would be enjoyable.

Regards

Tink

<blockquote data-quote="Tink" data-source="post: 160340" data-attributes="member: 10881">I was not interested in copying your modification, for I am happy with the results I already have. I was interested in a comparison. You made the claim that you can achieve hi fidelity with $10 in radio shack parts, implying that it would be comparable to to the Mauldulator. I am merely saying I would be interested in seeing the actual test in reality that you were discussing in words.I have been modifying radios for years. I know my way around the coupling and bypass caps. We use the same concepts on the receiver end to improve their response, and I agree it is not rocket science. I am not critical of your work or your results, I am just responding to your comparison and I would like to see it happen. You mentioned having a flat response over a wider range than broadcast. I have no problem with that at all. The first night we got the Mauldulator functioning, we put in 30 KHz and saw the sidebands at the proper amplitudes on the spectrum analyzer. We can go as low as you like also. If you want to take out some filtering we intentionally put in, we can go to DC and you can use the audio in jack as a carrier control. You are not going to be able to do that very easily on most CBs by merely changing capacitors. Most of the audio stages are capacitively coupled and if you tried DC coupling, you would mess up the bias of the transistors something fierce.I think it would be a fun test to compare the performance side by side. It looks like we are on opposite ends of the country, but if it could be worked out, I think it would be enjoyable.RegardsTink</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tink, post: 160340, member: 10881"] I was not interested in copying your modification, for I am happy with the results I already have. I was interested in a comparison. You made the claim that you can achieve hi fidelity with $10 in radio shack parts, implying that it would be comparable to to the Mauldulator. I am merely saying I would be interested in seeing the actual test in reality that you were discussing in words. I have been modifying radios for years. I know my way around the coupling and bypass caps. We use the same concepts on the receiver end to improve their response, and I agree it is not rocket science. I am not critical of your work or your results, I am just responding to your comparison and I would like to see it happen. You mentioned having a flat response over a wider range than broadcast. I have no problem with that at all. The first night we got the Mauldulator functioning, we put in 30 KHz and saw the sidebands at the proper amplitudes on the spectrum analyzer. We can go as low as you like also. If you want to take out some filtering we intentionally put in, we can go to DC and you can use the audio in jack as a carrier control. You are not going to be able to do that very easily on most CBs by merely changing capacitors. Most of the audio stages are capacitively coupled and if you tried DC coupling, you would mess up the bias of the transistors something fierce. I think it would be a fun test to compare the performance side by side. It looks like we are on opposite ends of the country, but if it could be worked out, I think it would be enjoyable. Regards Tink [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom