Last edited:
I even got a couple of TX reports on this video and even the TX reports vary as to which antenna is doing the best job. The one in favor of the GM was about 41 miles. I got another report from a regular bud that is 55> miles away and he said the Sigma4 was better with signal and audio was about double the other antenna.
I just put the Sigma4 up yesterday after it warmed up above freezing. So I think a couple of days blowing around in the wind will season the antenna joints a bit and help it to improve. I've noticed this one has acted that way in the past. We'll see.
YouTube - Marconi testing his Sigma4 vs. Gain Master
I'm also doing my paper Signal Report and after a few more days I'll post the results. I will also check the beacon and maybe do a short one with that going on as well.
This is the last in this series of side by side test. Soon I'll begin doing one antenna at a time using a new 91' piece of LMR 400 coax and see if that makes in difference. Hopefully I can figure out how to make such a task interesting for a video, else it will be just like watching grass grow.
Are ya'll all up to getting that excited?
Marconi, you are putting alot of work into these test, but . . .
Make your efforts count with some meaningful data. I commend you on the effort, just not your methods of comparison.
HomerBB said:Compared them all,
'though some would doubt,
to his own satisfaction.
I can certainly see some difference at times. Not always sure which is which until you point it out.
I can certainly see some difference at times. Not always sure which is which until you point it out.
I can certainly see some difference at times. Not always sure which is which until you point it out.
Well Homer and MrSuburban, MrS is right to some extent.
I did a video that I haven't published yet showing the lack of traffic on all 40 channels. This happens most of the time when conditions are good and allow for less static and white noise, so I can't just call my own shots and pick the signals I want, but it would be nice though.
With video, I have to hope that when I start the video, I will get the chance to to see and event I might like as an example, with out affecting the results or the perceptions by the viewers. That just doesn't happen very often, while time and timing are fleeting. Plus I would like for the viewer to be able to hear, without hearing me describe the event. It's just not as easy as it appears. Planning helps, but I can't edit yet...so I have to take the event as it unfolds and that wastes time and what I see and often anticipate is lost to the viewer.
I've thought about making a little sign for each antenna and flashing it in front of the screen, so I don't have to cover the audio with my voice. You would be surprised at the time it takes just to describe the switch, not including mistakes. By the time I try to let the viewer know, the event is past or changed and I'm left there with my mouth wide open. Practice does help with the timing, but the simple act of videoing some event does not, in the act alone, create a clear and well defined perception for all viewers.
Soon, I'll be testing one antenna at a time, and that will be boring just sitting there and watching a meter. I don't know how I can make a video doing that. The field of view in presentations is not very good in the video equipment I have either, and that presents other problems in showing paper results. Words can be more descriptive on the Internet, if you're really trying to say something.
Marconi can you please make some test with guys who are barely readable then switching antennas and listening to the copy as well as s meter. Before you go to the one antenna test. Again the close in signal comparison on a S meter is starting to lose it's luster. Work a station that you have a hard time working switch antennas notice the difference with the ear and the eye.
The AGC of a S meter shouldnt have any effect
And to think so many wish they had a mountain to sit on. Problem is, they rarely come in singles.Well Homer, it's as flat as a flitter around here as you know, and I'm on higher ground than most, maybe even in a 100 mile radius South, East, and West and I live on a ridge on both sides of the big bayous just north and west of downtown. Maybe one of only two or three ridges in this area that is about 20' feet higher. I think it gives me some advantages with soil and height, and I can see about 5 miles of open area around the bayou going northwest along the 290 corridor, but if true is just a guess.
AGC has nothing to do with the S meter, its job is too level out the volume gain in the receiver, so that irrespective of received signal strength the audio output gain is relatively steady/unaffected within the range of the AGC.
if the AGC was linked to the S meter then all signals would read roughly the same on an S meter, irrespective of the actual signal strength being received at the antenna/radio front end.