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

Here is where I am with my "hypothesis":

I was surprised at the amount of unsquelchable noise picked up by the HT compared to the 710.

Since I have the 710 in my shack that I will be using most of the time with the antenna in the attic that receives without the unsquelchable noise (RF interference), I won't be using the HT there and don't need to do anything different with the HT for that application. (Note: At the time I tested both of these radios together, the 710 's antenna was in the room at the same level as the HT.)

My question was probably more theoretical than practical. I wasn't aware that a "better" antenna would selectively enhance the desired frequency without also increasing the reception of the RF interference. If a radios' image rejection is mediocre, intuitively I didn't think ANY radio mounted antenna would help - the noise will be enhanced along with the desired frequency. And I question why "image rejection" is not a standard spec with all radios.

My use of the HT will be primarily out in the garage (where there is less interference) hooked up to a long wire around the perimeter of the garage ceiling, to take advantage of the wide band coverage of the 6a. I understand I may have to switch on the 20db attenuation in the HT to prevent overload by strong signals using the wire. It will also be used in the car, hooked up to an external 2 meter antenna to pick up public safety transmissions. An SMA to BNC adapter will be used to reduce the wear on the SMC of the HT when antennae are exchanged. I don't think the image rejection problem will be a problem for the applications I will use this radio for in the lower noise environments, thank goodness. For example, I used this radio out in the car today and there was no ignition or other noise on this radio using just the rubber duck. I guess the excellent reception was helped by the fact that the car is a convertible.

<blockquote data-quote="Need2Know" data-source="post: 355501" data-attributes="member: 23916">Here is where I am with my &quot;hypothesis&quot;:I was surprised at the amount of unsquelchable noise picked up by the HT compared to the 710.Since I have the 710 in my shack that I will be using most of the time with the antenna in the attic that receives without the unsquelchable noise (RF interference), I won&#039;t be using the HT there and don&#039;t need to do anything different with the HT for that application.&nbsp; (Note:&nbsp; At the time I tested both of these radios together, the 710 &#039;s antenna was in the room at the same level as the HT.)My question was probably more theoretical than practical.&nbsp; I wasn&#039;t aware that a &quot;better&quot; antenna would selectively enhance the desired frequency without also increasing the reception of the RF interference.&nbsp; If a radios&#039; image rejection is mediocre, intuitively I didn&#039;t think ANY radio mounted antenna would help - the noise will be enhanced along with the desired frequency.&nbsp; And I question why &quot;image rejection&quot; is not a standard spec with all radios.My use of the HT will be primarily out in the garage (where there is less interference) hooked up to a long wire around the perimeter of the garage ceiling, to take advantage of the wide band coverage of the 6a.&nbsp; I understand I may have to switch on the 20db attenuation in the HT to prevent overload by strong signals using the wire.&nbsp; It will also be used in the car, hooked up to an external 2 meter antenna to pick up public safety transmissions.&nbsp; An SMA to BNC adapter will be used to reduce the wear on the SMC of the HT when antennae are exchanged.&nbsp; I don&#039;t think the image rejection problem will be a problem for the applications I will use this radio for in the lower noise environments, thank goodness.&nbsp; For example, I used this radio out in the car today and there was no ignition or other noise on this radio using just the rubber duck.&nbsp; I guess the excellent reception was helped by the fact that the car is a convertible.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool&nbsp; &nbsp; :cool:"&nbsp; data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Need2Know, post: 355501, member: 23916"] Here is where I am with my "hypothesis": I was surprised at the amount of unsquelchable noise picked up by the HT compared to the 710. Since I have the 710 in my shack that I will be using most of the time with the antenna in the attic that receives without the unsquelchable noise (RF interference), I won't be using the HT there and don't need to do anything different with the HT for that application. (Note: At the time I tested both of these radios together, the 710 's antenna was in the room at the same level as the HT.) My question was probably more theoretical than practical. I wasn't aware that a "better" antenna would selectively enhance the desired frequency without also increasing the reception of the RF interference. If a radios' image rejection is mediocre, intuitively I didn't think ANY radio mounted antenna would help - the noise will be enhanced along with the desired frequency. And I question why "image rejection" is not a standard spec with all radios. My use of the HT will be primarily out in the garage (where there is less interference) hooked up to a long wire around the perimeter of the garage ceiling, to take advantage of the wide band coverage of the 6a. I understand I may have to switch on the 20db attenuation in the HT to prevent overload by strong signals using the wire. It will also be used in the car, hooked up to an external 2 meter antenna to pick up public safety transmissions. An SMA to BNC adapter will be used to reduce the wear on the SMC of the HT when antennae are exchanged. I don't think the image rejection problem will be a problem for the applications I will use this radio for in the lower noise environments, thank goodness. For example, I used this radio out in the car today and there was no ignition or other noise on this radio using just the rubber duck. I guess the excellent reception was helped by the fact that the car is a convertible.:cool: [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom