Receiver Section Questions

[secret squirrel]

I am going to try to word this question and observations as simple as I can. I may not even be asking the correct question. I prefer the sound of the receive of the older CBs. I have a good many 23 channels with Cybernet main board: Midlands, a Pearce Simpson Pussycat 23 base. Some GEs and Kracos have come and went out of the collection. Just got a Johnson 4140 back from a local shop. I have one Cobra 29 23 channel. What is it about the receiver section of an older CB from the late 1970 or 1980s that the voice audio just seems plainer to me. I run the baby Stryker in my car as my primary mobile radio Stryker 89MC v2. I know that the baby Stryker is a poor example. I like it, but the voice audio does not seem as clear as a Midland 13-822C or a Cobra 29 23 channel for example. I have a Cobra 29 NW from 2005 hooked up to my base antenna right now. I swear the receive on my 1976 Cobra 29 23 channel kills the newer on on clarity. They are all properly aligned. It it the filtering on the older radios that make the voice clearer, or is the quality of the components better? Or maybe that voice from the older radios is the sound I associate it my head the why the radio is supposed to sound?

 

[Handy Andy]

You're not alone in your thoughts over this.

I've complained about the newer radio "fidelity" and noise levels for a long time - ever since Cobra 148F-GTL and Galaxy started using newer overseas parts and designs to save costs - quality seem to be worse than ever - and to compare the older radio designs to the newer ones is a little like Old School - versus - New School.

The Old School taught "Stability - Class -Quiescent - Clean" while the New School - "Stability - Cost - Class - Operation" - two different ways of looking at outputs.

You mentioned filtering - and when you go back in time to the older Push-Pull Audio Amp designs - their tradeoff was power - but the tone was excellent compared to the "telephony" results you get thru todays "self biasing" Audio Amp designs - seems they work more Power than Quality - Punch versus Quiescent - so the filters used in the older styles let alone the parts - are gone - they've been replaced with newer "sharper" (read more bandwidth) but they do not review their Quiescent current notes they once used for the older radios - a separate but valid - emission issue (tone of audio versus band width of audio passed).

The older Xtal based sets did have several things going against them, one mostly being the power levels of drive in Reception as well as Transmission - but between the older to newer lest parts count and less costly designs - the older ones have an upper hand when it comes to reproduction fidelity - not just in reception - but in performance.

Ask a engineer these days about "Quiescent current" and they look at like you're from Mars - they look more at operation and class to set the output - they weren't born when Class A was "the standard" but now they look more towards Class D and E or above output drives and designs as their "The Standard" - which shows up in moments of reception like you have - the clarity is outstanding compared to the scrunched up compressed results they have when they set for operation curve versus the older Quiescent current levels they used from a different book, from years ago.

 

[Slowmover]

It’s nothing more than greed as cover for America’s destruction.

“Winners” exist in every category of goods as domestic competition is impossible.

Leave aside “CB” as category and you’ll see it everywhere. All products.

Cause if it ain’t Chinesium it’s WalMart diarrhea. Limited outlets also prevails. Drives quality down just as surely.

The combination has killed quality in almost everything.

Electronics are seen as disposable.

So, since America no longer makes anything it’s become a country of poor people able to buy on credit. They ain’t worth the effort quality takes. And, can’t afford it.

Real quality (aesthetic) ends in November 1963.
Just look at what “music” Americans listen to since then. Rock & Roll = Ghetto Rap for White Folk. Identical quality. Exact same effects.

Objective standards became sublimated to ignorant craving.

All else goes downhill from then.

Objectivity and “merit” have been eliminated. Everywhere. Every single institution.

Enjoy the radios you have. Adapt otherwise. Don’t be thirteen and stupid anymore.

.

 

[Handy Andy]

Don’t be thirteen and stupid anymore.

Can I quote you on that?

 

[Slowmover]

Can I quote you on that?

I’m poster boy, so why not?

 

[Handy Andy]

​

 

[Crawdad]

Mr. Squirrel and Mr. Andy,

I am but a layman (spelled i-d-i-o-t) inside radios, but isn't this a large-ish part of the issue?

 

[Wire Weasel]

Quality Of Overall Performance can also be summed up this way: With any classes of devices which are manufactured in a wide range for relative price --- you're always going to get what you pay for. With radios we CB'ers have available to us > Ham Gear. Stop using cb's and get ham radios. With what some cb'ers sink into cb stations .... you could get ham gear instead for the same money even if you have to buy used stuff. After you experience the performance and features of ham rigs .... you'll never go back.

 

[Handy Andy]

I am but a layman (spelled i-d-i-o-t) inside radios, but isn't this a large-ish part of the issue?

When you go back in time, you will see where the Radio Maker's reputation was more important than the ability to out talk other radios'. That's' where Palomar, Outcomm, Texas/Star - to name a few - took over that part of the market. You paid the price to play the game.

You wanted a good platform - good receive and Transmit that seems to get the point across along with the needed features to handle the locals as you see fit (Mic, Noise Blaker ANL, Elements, Echo - Toys - TVI Filters - ad nauseum)

The "Costs" today are too prohibitive to make a tech sit at a bench and look over every radio and "Tailor" the audio path to meet standards we ONCE had to base that radios reputation on.

Classical way to respond to the techs saying what part was this again?

But I only have 44 pages total in the OWNERS MANUAL!​

That is now gone, and gone - completely - not just overseas, but non-existent. Sadly to see how Mike produced the video and he himself - has moved on.

Nice to see he gives a shout out to Ranger AR-3300/3500 Clear Channel - then we know how RCI got a hold of them and how that all turned out...

 

[secret squirrel]

Thanks all for contributions. I just needed a hand there that I wasn’t overthinking. I in no way have a tuned ear or a tuned bench. Lol. The thought crossed my mind that I was being nostalgic. I can still remember my dad and locals talking about what radios they had in their trucks. My uncle was always the “what’s new at Radio Shack guy.” I remember the Cobra commercials. I remember asking my dad why he didn’t buy a Cobra. He had a Robyn at the time. His answer was you had to be rich to afford a Cobra, lol, it was 1978 dollars. He had picked up two 23 channels radios at the time of the 40 channel intro. Thanks again all. Happy Sunday. I still think the Beatles sound best a 33 rpms. And the Eagles and Meat Loaf sound best on 8-track. Just thinking about it way things used to be , I could not resist, I got the big boy out to walk the dog, with the old Motorola stainless spring it looks appropriate, because size matters.
I had replaced the mounting screws with heavier SS screws and lock washers. It’s a Firestik Door Jam adjustable mount. The stud was replaced with a Drivers Extreme SS mount. 18 feet Browning RG8X. SWR 1,3 on 40, 1.4 on 1. The mount is only rated for a 4 foot antenna. “ I know engineers are conservative on paper,• Lt. Montgomery Scott, StarFleet. I upgraded the mounting screws and supporting stud mount. My concern is the mount will flex from the torque. I supported my Hustler HQ27 without problems.

 

[Rwb]

modern junk radios from the land of ALMOST right

 

[Handy Andy]

because size matters.

I just wish more Campaigns were based upon this...

 

[Slowmover]

— Nothing stops the installation from being as good or better than 1978 (though it’ll be harder).

— Nothing stops testing to be as good or better than 1978 as we “may” have better tools.

— Nothing stops the use of advanced circuitry versus 1978 to help cut noise (ferrites, DSP, baluns, etc).

— Nothing stops the use of a national interest group (WWDX; other Net as found) not available in 1978.

— Nothing stops asking a stranger about his rig, on-air or in-person just like 1978.

.

 

[Handy Andy]

​

​

​

​

And we'll just interrupt and cut to the Chase Scene here...



​

 

[secret squirrel]

Shame on me, for forgetting the most important part of the 102 inch whip. I dug the tennis out of my antenna parts box. I should know better, it slipped my mind that you tune the 102 inch whip by moving the tennis ball up and down. I had to be different I had a red tennis ball left from prior install. We are now positive one tennis ball.