• 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.
  • Click here to find out how to win free radios from Retevis!

Marconi testing the Sigma4 vs. Gain Master

Marconi

Honorary Member Silent Key
Oct 23, 2005
7,235
2,374
343
Houston
Here is my Sigma4 mounted on the top of my mast vs. the GM on top of a similar mast. Signal Report will follow, maybe tomorrow. This is my last antenna to compare to my Gain Master. I will recap my overall report and post the results for all. The GM, A99, Imax, I-10K, A/P, New Top One.

IMG_0902 (640x480).jpg
 
Last edited:

There was a man who
put them up and
down as quick as lightnin'

Compared them all,
'though some would doubt,
to his own satisfaction.
:LOL:


Waiting, Sir, with bated breath. ;)
 
Last edited:
Here is a video I cut this AM with a few of my local buddies.

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?
 
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 i think it would be nice to seek out weak signals and switch between antennas get a signal that is barely readable and switch antennas. If a Sigma 4 has 1 db more of gain which is alot, you will never see it on your S meter 6 db = 1 S unit 3 db = .5 s unit 1.5 db = .25 s Unit. Do you see where I am going with this. If you cant copy someone and switch antennas and they are now readable you will have provenm more than us watching your meter show the same S readings.

Make your efforts count with some meaningful data. I commend you on the effort, just not your methods of comparison.
 
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.

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.
 
;)

I can certainly see some difference at times. Not always sure which is which until you point it out.

Homer in the process of doing several things in rapid succession and trying to make sure the viewer is seeing what I'm describing, and anticipating the next step if it happens, I miss a lot of observations as well.

Boy the WWRF is grinding down slowly but surely, it took me almost a minute to open this edit window and in the process I forgot what I wanted to add, never mind!
 
;)

I can certainly see some difference at times. Not always sure which is which until you point it out.

If the GM is going to have any advantage it will be further away as the lower take off angle will come into play, and the difference in weak signals(not dx) from someone further away will be noticed. If you get a signal from someone who is barely readable and switch to antenna B and the signal goes up or you lose them this is some proof that one antenna is outperforming the other. Trying to see 1 db of gain in a relative close signal, probably isnt just going to happen. Get those fringe signals bring them out of the mud and you will know if the antenna works or not. The AGC of a S meter shouldnt have any effect
 
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 try to make some test with guys who are barely readable, then switch antennas and listen to the copy as well as s meter. Hopefully before you go to the one antenna test. I think the close in signal comparison on a S meter is starting to lose some of it's luster. If you can work a station that you have a hard time working, then perhaps switch antennas notice the difference with the ear and the eye. Then we can establish the merits of the antenna.
 
Last edited:
Ironically, if Marconi were in these Ozarks his 55 mile contact would be a fringe station. Even the 41 mile contact presents a challenge here. They are fringe stations.
 
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.

Of course I always try for those distant signals, but today there was only one over 50 miles and I forgot to click on the camera. We talked on both antennas however, neither disappeared as you note. Tim is on my list at 55> miles away and he said the Sigma4 showed him 1 peaking to 3 with audio seeming to double over the GM, at 0-1 peaking. BTW, he volunteered his comments and that was very unusual for him. The other guys on my list and my video, Larry, Russell, and Phillip are all noted as I recall on my written report still in progress. I think they all said the GM showed the best signal and they're all less than about 40 miles. Larry and Russell both show over 40, but I've been to their place and neither is over 40 miles from me, but that is what they claimed when asked.

I will be doing this Signal Report, side-by-side test over the next day or two, and we'll see if I can get some distance like Austin 120, and San Antonio 200 or closer even. We have several fairly regular 27.395 ssb talkers that are 60-90 miles out and they will be good to test, but I'm only 34' feet to the antenna and their signals are under about S5 and most of the time my big radio, in the vid's, shows S5 noise with the NB on full. It is probably a setting problem.

I can get on my Galaxy 2547 and hear them easy when the noise level is low, but then I have to run my amp and I've been doing these tests so far as RX signals only and don't run an amp just trying to keep the system lean and mean. Most of the time I don't even run a meter in line.

BTW, the + and - you may see on the Signal Reports mean I can't decide if a signal quite reached the number for the minus, and if it maybe went slightly over for the plus. When I add the numbers to make my averages when finished. For example I add .5 to a 7+ and minus .5 to a 7-. I try to avoid these, but at times I don't hear back so I can catch a signal from some of these guys. From day to day I might also update a signal here and there if I see a difference to try and keep the report a little current, but some guys are not there every day. That is also why I picked these 7-8 guys out of the group you see, and one has died, two are MIA, and one is on a vacation cruise.

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.
 
Last edited:
The AGC of a S meter shouldnt have any effect

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.
 
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.
And to think so many wish they had a mountain to sit on. Problem is, they rarely come in singles.
 
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.

Jazz I think your gonna have to change what you said about AGC having nothing to do with S Meter. A basic S meter works by measuring the agc voltage.



Automatic gain control - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Without AGC, an AM radio would have a linear relationship between the signal amplitude and the sound waveform — the sound amplitude, which correlates with loudness, is proportional to the radio signal amplitude, because the information content of the signal is carried by the changes of amplitude of the carrier wave. If the circuit were not fairly linear, the modulation could not be recovered with reasonable fidelity. However, the strength of the signal received will vary widely, depending on the power and distance of the transmitter, and signal path attenuation. The AGC circuit keeps the receiver's output level from fluctuating too much by detecting the overall strength of the signal and automatically adjusting the gain of the receiver to maintain an approximately constant average output level. For a very weak signal, the AGC has no effect, allowing the receiver to operate at its maximum gain; as the signal increases, the AGC reduces the gain.



S Meter

You know, I was kind of disappointed that the good folks at Yaesu didn't do a better job on the S-meter in such an expensive radio, and otherwise fabulous radio. Obviously the AGC-derived S-meter signal is digitized, since it can be read via the CAT port by the program S-Meter Lite.

W7AAZ's IF has an AGC threshold of -131 dBm, when referred to the RF input. That's about 23 dB below my FT1000MP's AGC threshold. So there just isn't anything available to drive my MP's S-meter below -108 dBm.



AGC and S-Mmeter


"Why have different AGC decay speeds? AGC attempts to preserve the dynamic range of the input signal without overloading the receiver. Consider an SSB signal--the maximum gain possible before receiver overload is determined by the strength of the voice peaks, so the AGC must adjust the overall gain based on the peak signal.



Elecraft K3 AGC and S-Meter


The various RF stages that comprise a receiver (RF amp, mixers and IF) act as a unit. Each stage acts as a signal conditioner as the desired and undesired signals are amplified and filtered prior to detection. With a properly designed receiver, increasing the gain in one unique area through modification ultimately affects the AGC'd stages since they are part of this entire loop. One typically mistakes a higher S meter reading after modification to mean 'more sensitivity'. This quite often is the receiver attempting to compensate through the AGC.


AGC Theory
Some commercial receivers either don't have an AGC (S) meter or their "M1" output will not properly drive a meter with a meaningfull scale. Most Amateur receivers do have an AGC meter, however typically give an "early" (generous) reading with weak signals. This is a waste of indication. FM receivers quite with signals, therefore, you can easily listen for these changes when checking performance. When the signal gets almost full-quiting is when you need a visual (meter) indication to observe signal strengh changes. This circuit will do just that in this version. U3 amplifies the receiver's AGC voltage, then with a strong signal will flaten out with no increase in output. This makes a handy logrimic voltage change, per RF input changes.




AGC Setup
Start by measuring the "M1" or AGC point of the receiver you are setting up. The circiut prefers to "see" around a tenth of a volt, DC, or less with no RF signal into the receiver. Adjust VR10 for this range. Then input a high RF signal into the receiver to cause a hard-limiting condition. Typically this would be in the -60 dbm range. Then adjust VR9 for a full scale meter reading. Then you can plot an AGC curve. If it's not a usable curve try different settings of the two adjustments just discribed.


It's a busy Saturday and 14070 +/- has over a dozen PSK signals on the waterfall. I select the TS-850's 500 Hz IF filter and now there's only 3 signals in the passband. I click on a faint one and begin to copy a partial exotic DX callsign when a strong domestic station comes on just 150 Hz away. The AGC kicks in and the DX signal disappears. So I turn off the AGC and cut back the RF gain a bit, and now I'm copying the DX again. If I make contact with him, what kind of "S" report should I give? My S-meter reads zero with the AGC off. It reads S-6 with the AGC on, but that's from the domestic station.
 
Last edited:

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • @ kopcicle:
    If you know you know. Anyone have Sam's current #? He hasn't been on since Oct 1st. Someone let him know I'm looking.
  • dxBot:
    535A has left the room.
  • @ AmericanEagle575:
    Just wanted to say Good Morning to all my Fellow WDX members out there!!!!!