QST Recognized Error on Sideband Inversion, But Continued to Make the Same Mistake

 

I don't really know if this is good news or bad news.  It's good that in November 1985 they recognized the error, but then they allowed the same error to be repeated by the same author in the 1989 article "A Four-Stage 75-Meter SSB Superhet," and again in 1990 in W1FB's Design Notebook.   It also made it into the 2002 ARRL Handbook.  

Thanks to Chuck WB9KZY for alerting us to this Feedback piece. 

QST Repeatedly Got Sideband Inversion Wrong

It kind of pains me to do this. These articles are from a long time ago, and the author is an esteemed  Silent Key,  but the myth about the origins of the USB/LSB convention is still out there, and as a homebrewer of SSB gear I feel obligated to point out these examples of the error that that myth is based on.   

Last Friday, Pete WB9FLW and I were talking about homebrewing SSB rigs.  I recommended a series of QST articles by Doug DeMaw.  "Beginner's Bench:  The Principles and Building of SSB Gear" started in QST in September 1985. There were at least five parts -- it continued until January 1986. (Links to the series appear below.) I hadn't looked at these articles in years, but when I did, a big mistake jumped right out at me:  In the first installment, on page 19, Doug  makes the same mistake that he made in his Design Notebook:

"Now comes the conversion section of our SSB generator.  We must move (heterodyne) the 9-MHz SSB signal to 3.75-4.0 MHz. Our balanced mixer works just as it does in a receiver. That is, we inject the mixer with two frequencies (9 MHz and 5 MHz) to produce a sum or a difference output frequency (9 - 5 = 4 MHz, or 9 +5 = 14 MHz) If we are to generate 75 meter SSB energy, we must chose the difference frequency. We could build an 20-meter SSB transmitter by selecting the sum of the mixer frequencies. The RF amplifiers and filter (FL2) that follow would then have to be designed for 14-MHz operation.  In fact, many early two-band homemade SSB transmitters were built for for 75 and 20 meters in order to use this convenient frequency arrangement.  The use of upper sideband on 20 meters and lower sideband on 75 meters may be the result of this frequency arrangement (the sidebands become inverted when switching from the difference to the sum frequency.) " 

Those last two sentences are incorrect.  They repeat the "Myth," or the "Urban Legend" about the origins of the LSB/USB convention.  Contrary to what many hams now believe, with 9 MHz filter and a 5.2 MHz BFO it takes more than just switching from sum frequency to difference frequency to invert one of the sidebands. 

There are two conditions needed for sideband inversion to take place:  

1) You have to be taking the difference product (DeMaw got that right) 

2) The unmodulated (VFO or LO) signal must be larger than the modulated signal. (DeMaw and the ARRL obviously missed that part.  Repeatedly.) 

This is another way of stating the simple, accurate and useful Hallas Rule:  Sideband inversion only occurs when you are subtracting the signal with modulation FROM the signal without modulation. 

For DeMaw's claim to be correct, one of the SSB signals going into the balanced mixer would have to invert, and the other would have to not invert.  Let's see if that happens: He has the sideband signal being generated at 9 MHz and the VFO running around 5 MHz. 

9 - 5 = 4  But we are not subtracting the modulated signal FROM the unmodulated signal.  SO NO INVERSION

9 + 5 = 14   We are not subtracting at all.  SO NO INVERSION.  

Doug's convenient frequency scheme WOULD work if he'd just switch the frequencies of the filter and the VFO.  With a sideband generator on 5.2 MHz and a VFO around 9 MHz you do get the happy 75  LSB, 20 USB arrangement without the need to switch the carrier oscillator/BFO frequency.   That is what happened in the Swan 240, and that is what I have in my Mythbuster rig. I am listening to both 75 LSB and 20 USB without changing the carrier oscillator/BFO frequency.  My filter/BFO/product detector is set up for USB.   With this arrangement the 75 meter LSB signals DO invert, and the 20 meter USB meter signals do not, so both are able to make use of my USB BFO/product detector without shifting the BFO frequency. 

This error shows up again in DeMaw's the May 1989 QST article "A Four Stage 75-meter SSB Superhet" (reprinted in the ARRL's QRP Classics book).  Here he writes: 

"Should you want to cover both the 75- and 20-meter bands you can build a 20-meter version of FL-1 and band switch the two filters. As with the 75 meter only version, an IF of 9.0 MHz (Y1) is required. With this arrangement the 20 meter band will tune backwards from the 75 meter band, but upper- and lower-sideband reception will occur, as required, without changing the BFO frequency (Y2). This two band scheme with a 5-MHz VFO is an old one!"   NOTE: FL1 is the bandpass filter, not the IF filter.  

Doug's mistakes in this area may simply be due to the fact that he was more of a CW guy.  And this is something that is quite easy to confuse:  9 and 5 will get you to 75 and 20, but you have to make sure the VFO is at 9 if you want to make use of sideband inversion and avoid having to shift the BFO/ carrier oscillator.   I've made this mistake myself: 

https://soldersmoke.blogspot.com/2012/05/usblsb-urban-legend-debunked.html

In October 1993 I wrote to DeMaw about his Four Stage 75 meter SSB Superhet.  I think I was looking for details on how to put it on 20 meters.  As I recall, Doug wrote back telling me to just pick 20 meter values for the input bandpass filter.  Had I done so, I would have discovered that  -- for the reasons cited above -- this just wouldn't have worked on 20.  His BFO and filter were set up to receive LSB signals. That's fine for the incoming 75 meter LSB signals.  But on 20 -- contrary to DeMaw's thinking -- there would be NO sideband inversion. I'd be trying to listen to 20 meter USB signals with a receiver set up for 20 meter LSB.  

Did anyone else notice these errors.  Were there ever errata notices in QST on this?  

This is a reminder that you should take all technical articles and schematics with a grain of salt.  Many contain errors. We are all human, and this is a complicated subject with lots of details. 

https://pe2bz.philpem.me.uk/Comm/-%20ARRL/Build-Service-Design/Receivers/PrincipleOfBuildingSSBgear/8509017.pdf

https://pe2bz.philpem.me.uk/Comm/-%20ARRL/Build-Service-Design/Receivers/PrincipleOfBuildingSSBgear/8510027.pdf

https://pe2bz.philpem.me.uk/Comm/-%20ARRL/Build-Service-Design/Receivers/PrincipleOfBuildingSSBgear/8511016.pdf

https://pe2bz.philpem.me.uk/Comm/-%20ARRL/Build-Service-Design/Receivers/PrincipleOfBuildingSSBgear/8512037.pdf

https://pe2bz.philpem.me.uk/Comm/-%20ARRL/Build-Service-Design/Receivers/PrincipleOfBuildingSSBgear/8601029.pdf

The Unicorn! A 75 LSB /20 USB Receiver (That Can't Work)

 

Don't get me wrong -- I'm a huge fan of Doug DeMaw.  His books and articles are a treasure trove for ham radio homebrewers.  Also, Doug was an honest guy who admitted in the preface to his QRP book that at times he did not fully understand the circuits he was building; that kind of honesty is rare,  and is very helpful to amateurs who struggle to understand the circuits we work on.  

But everyone makes mistakes, and Doug made one in his "W1FB Design Notebook."  I present it here not as a "gotcha" effort to nitpick or sharpshoot a giant of homebrew radio, but because this error illustrates well the depth of the 75 LSB/20 USB myth, where it comes from, and how important it is to really understand sideband inversion.     Here is the mistake: 

That's just wrong.  A receiver built like this will not allow you to listen to 75 LSB and 20 USB "without changing the BFO frequency." (Am I the first one to spot this error?  Didn't anyone build this thing, only to discover that it, uh, doesn't work?)

Here's a little drawing that I think illustrates why the mythical scheme will not work: 

All confusion about sideband inversion could be avoided with the simple application of what I think we should call "The Hallas Rule": 

"Sideband reversal occurs in mixing only  if the signal with the modulation is subtracted from the signal that isn't modulated."  

Be careful here:   I think some arithmetic carelessness is responsible for much of the myth. Taking the difference frequency is not enough to produce sideband inversion. Read the Hallas Rule carefully:   For sideband inversion to occur, the signal with the modulation must be subtracted FROM the signal without the modulation.

--------------------------------------------- 

About the Swan 240's SSB generation scheme: 

I first stumbled on this problem when building my first SSB transmitters in the Azores.  I was using a VXO,  and a filter pulled out of a Swan 240 (5.173 MHz).  I started with VXO crystals at around 12.94 MHz.  The rig worked,  but I couldn't pull the VXO crystals very far.  So I switched to crystals at around 23.3 MHz (you can pull higher frequency crystals farther).  But look what happened:  My Carrier Oscillator frequency had been set up to receive USB signals on 17 Meters.  With the 12.94 MHz rocks, that worked fine:   18.150-12.977 = NO INVERSION.  But it all changed when I went to the 23 MHz VXO rocks:  23.323-18.150 = INVERSION!   This had me scratching my head a while.  I had to draw myself little spectrum pictures (like the one above) before I realized what had happened.  To get it to work -- to get it to produce USB on 17 meters -- I had to move the Carrier Oscillator to the other side of the passband. Good thing that Swan 240 came with TWO BFO crystals (5.1768 MHz and 5.1735 MHz). I just had to change the crystal. 

For 75 and 20 meters, the Swan 240 uses the correct 5.173 MHz filter with a 9 MHz VFO to get the happy situation of 75 meter LSB and 20 Meter USB WITHOUT changing the BFO/Carrier Oscillator frequency.  This is the Mythbuster scheme.  Unlike Doug's receiver, it works.  The scheme also works in the Swan 240 on 40 meters because for 40 the Swan rig has the VFO running from 12.073 MHz to 12.513 MHz. Here too, no change in the BFO/Carrier Oscillator  frequency is needed. But the Swan recommended a modification that would allow operation on 20 LSB and 75/40 USB!  It used a BFO/Carrier Oscillator crystal of  5.1765 MHz and a switch mounted on the front panel.  Luckily,  my junker Swan (acquired from HI8P in the Dominican Republic) had the second crystal -- mine was 5.1768 MHz.  It was that crystal that allowed me to get my Azorean SSB transmitter to work using the 23.9 MHz VXO rocks.    

Michael Newton Hopkins, AB5L, Author of the FMLA series

Better than anyone else ever has, Michael Hopkins, in his fictional series about Frank Jones and the Five Meter Liberation Army, captures the spirit of homebrew radio.  There is just so much of us in those articles.  I read them some 20 years ago when they first came out; reading them again recently I appreciated them even more.  

Frank was a bit of a curmudgeon:  There are jabs at the appliance operators, Hiram Percy Maxim, hamfests, SSB, the Collins collectors, the QRP movement,  and even Electric Radio magazine.  Howard Armstrong makes an appearance, as do Carl and Jerry.  It all made me want to put a five pin SAW filter on my lapel.  

As I read, I thought about what a great writer Michael was.  When I Googled him, a few of the results led me back to  my own book.  I'd forgotten that Michael was in there, but he is.  On one page he advises me how to power my Mate for the Mighty Midget receiver without using a power transformer (a very Frank Jones approach).  On another page I note that Michael had sent me a kit for the Doug DeMaw "Barbados Receiver."  Wow, that was my first Superhet.  (I also have one that was built by Dale Parfitt.)  Most of the parts were put to use in other projects.  But I still have the board (see above).  Reminded that it came from Michael, I will now have to complete the construction.

Below is a nice article about Michael that appeared in the Flying Pigs newsletter. (Click on the images for an easier read.)   

The articles can be found here: 

http://soldersmoke.blogspot.com/2021/07/summer-reading-for-homebrewers-frank.html

Michael's 2005 Obituary:

https://obits.dallasnews.com/us/obituaries/dallasmorningnews/name/michael-hopkins-obituary?pid=14406223

Thank you Michael.  VIVA EL FMLA! 

Jack NG2E's Pebble Crusher

 Check out NG2E's Pebble Crusher homebrew transmitter.  Doug DeMaw would be enormously pleased.   

Jack will no-doubt have this 250 mW rig on the some peak along the Shenandoah Valley, handing out QSOs to SOTA fans.   

Jack's blog page has a really nice video on this project: 

https://jackhaefner.blogspot.com/2021/06/pebble-crusher-40m-xmtr.html

M0NTV's Latest FB SSB Transceiver

Wow, Nick has a really wonderful rig and has made this great video to explain it. 

Elements that I really liked: 

-- The simple mic and compression.   Very nice. 

-- Termination Insensitive Amps.  TIAs Rule! 

-- Grey Altoid-like boxes. 

-- Diplexers!  Yes! 

-- Doug DeMaw S-meter. 

-- No AGC.  

-- Pentium CPU cooling fan. 

-- References to EI9GQ (I must get his book!) 

-- Al Fresco!   Good luck with boxing it up Nick. 

Some Thoughts on Singly Balanced Mixers with Two Diodes and One Transformer

In 2001, out it in the Azores, I built a 17 meter version of Doug DeMaw's Double Sideband transmitter ("Go QRP with Double Sideband" CQ Magazine, February 1997).  I struggled to understand the balanced modulator -- how it mixed, balanced, and how it produced DSB.  I later presented my understanding of the circuit in my book "SolderSmoke -- Global Adventures in Wireless Electronics" pages 132-137.   In essence, I figured out that you had to think of the balancing and the mixing as two separate operations: The transformer provided the balance that eliminated the carrier (the LO signal) while the diodes presented the two signals (audio from the mic amp and LO from the VFO) with a highly non-linear path.  The LO was successively turning on both diodes then turning off both diodes. The audio signal was being "chopped" at the rate of the LO.  This produced a complex waveform that contained sum and difference frequencies -- the upper and lower sidebands.  The carrier was balanced out by the transformer because the two outputs of the transformer were always of opposite polarity, and they were joined together at the output of the mixer.    

Fast forward to 2013.  I built a 17 meter version of Farhan's famous BITX 20 rig.  Above you can see the balanced modulator stage, which also serves as the product detector. As you can see, it is essentially the same circuit as the one used by Doug DeMaw in his DSB rig. 

In 2018 I built a simple direct conversion receiver for my nephew.  For the mixer I used what I considered to be just a cut-down  version of the circuit used by DeMaw and Farhan.  I got the idea for this from Olivier F5LVG and his RX-20 receiver from SPRAT.    It had the RF signal coming in on L1 and the VFO signal coming in to the wiper of the 1 k pot.  But with this arrangement, the diodes were NOT both being turned off on half the VFO cycle, then both being turned on during the other half.  Instead, as the VFO signal swung positive, D2 would conduct and D1 would shut down.  When the VFO signal swung negative,  D1 would conduct and D2 would shut down.  It worked, but the diodes were being switched in a very different way than they had been in the DeMaw and Farhan circuits.  If you have the strong LO signal going in on L1, BOTH diodes conduct, then BOTH don't conduct.  But if you have the LO going in through the pot, one diode conducts while the other does not conduct. 

After I concluded that the BJT product detector circuit in the HA-600A was causing distorted SSB and CW reception, I tried the old DeMaw/Farhan circuit, this time in product detector mode.  See above. This worked better, but I realized that this configuration was balancing out the BFO signal, and not the IF signal.  My problem with the original product detector had been that IF signal was getting simultaneous envelope detection AND product detection.  So I decided to just switch the inputs and put the IF signal into L1 (where it would be balanced) and the BFO into  R1/R2 (the 100 ohm pot). 

This seemed like it would reduce the envelope detection problem, right?  I mean, L1 is the balanced input, right?  But I wonder if we need to consider how the diodes were being switched in this arrangement.  Instead of having both conducting and then both not conducting, in this arrangement one would be conducting during half the BFO's cycle, while the other was not.  That means that at any given moment, the two output sides of the transformer would be looking into very different loads -- hardly a condition conducive to balance. But I used LTSpice to look at the audio output under the two different port arrangements.  Sherwood advised looking at the output of the product detector with the BFO turned off --there should be no output with the BFO off.  And indeed, putting the IF signal into L1 and the BFO into the R1/R2 pot resulted in less of the distortion causing envelope detection.  The way the diodes were being switched didn't seem to adversely affect the balancing out of the IF signal.  I am not sure why this doesn't seem to cause trouble. 

There was, however, another problem with the use of this circuit in the Lafayette HA-600A:  port isolation.  The BFO signal was getting back into the IF signal input on L1.   I could see it on the S-meter.  This was worrisome not only because of the S-meter, but also because the same circuit was driving the receiver's AGC -- in effect, the BFO was turning the gain down.  Theoretically, this should not have been happening.  Look at the transformer.  the BFO currents going through L2 and L3 should be of opposite polarities and should be cancelling each other out in L1.  But obviously this was not happening.  Perhaps this was the result of the sequential way the diode are switching in this arrangement.   On the bench, if I put the BFO into L1, I saw very little BFO signal at the R1/R2 junction. If I put the BFO signal into the R1/R2 junction, I was a lot of BFO signal at the top of L1.  And that is what I saw on my S-meter when this circuit was used in the HA-600A. 

On the bench,  if I turned off the BFO and put an AM modulated signal into the junction of R1/R2, I can see audio getting through once the input signal reaches 1 volt peak.  I do NOT see that kind of "breakthrough" envelope detection when (with the BFO off) I put a modulated signal into L1.  So the singly balanced circuit is doing that it is supposed to do -- it is balancing out the the signal going into L1. 

So it seemed that with the singly balanced circuit I would have to choose: suffer from the poor port isolation or AM breakthrough.   Clearly it was time to go for a doubly balanced circuit.  And that is what I did. 

Finally, I took a look at another two diode detector, the Polyakov or "subharmonic" detector. This is a really interesting circuit that can teach us a lot about how mixers work.  Here you can run the local oscillator at 1/2 the signal frequency.  With two diodes back to back, the incoming signal is being sampled TWICE during each cycle of the local oscillator.  That is equivalent to having the signal sampled at twice the local oscillator frequency.   This circuit allows you to run the oscillator at a much lower frequency -- this could allow much greater oscillator stability.  In the circuit above, with both diodes connected, a 7 MHz incoming signal would produce a 2 kHz tone. 

Another big plus of this circuit comes if you take D1 out of the circuit (as shown).  In this configuration the circuit becomes a normal diode detector.  Here it will receive a signal at 3.5 MHz, converting that signal into a 1 kHz audio tone.  So you can get a direct conversion receiver for 40 and 80 meters fairly easily. 

So Many Wonderful Things on W7ZOI's Site

 

There he is.  Wes Hayward, W7ZOI in 1957.  I had never seen this picture before.  I found it on Wes's recently updated "shackviews" web page: http://w7zoi.net/shackviews.html . 

There are so  many treasures on that page, and on all the other portions of Wes's site.

Some highlights for me: 

-- Wes's description of the station in the above picture. 

-- On his page about Doug DeMaw, Wes mentions that after Doug edited Wes's 1968 article about direct conversion receivers, Doug built some himself, experimenting with different product detector circuits. Having used Doug's mixer circuit in many of my rigs, and having recently experimented with different product detectors for my HA-600A, I kind of felt like Doug was watching over my shoulder, guiding me along as I experimented. 

-- Wes's use of a digital Rigol oscilloscope.  Makes me feel better about giving up on my Tek 465. 

-- The page about Farhan's visit to Wes, and the awesome gathering of homebrew Titans that ensued... 

-- Wes's meeting with Chuck Adams.  

Thanks Wes.  Happy New Year and best of luck in 2021!  

Improving the Product Detector in the Lafayette HA-600A

Diode product detector on the left, BFO amp in the right

As noted in an earlier blog post, I didn't like the sound of SSB and CW when using the product detector in my Lafayette HA-600A.  It just did not sound right.  The receiver sounded fine on AM with the diode detector.  But when I switched in the product detector, it sounded bad.  The BFO was fine.  The problem was there even when I used an external BFO.  And SSB sounded great when I just coupled some BFO energy into the IF chain and used the diode detector to listen to SSB.  My suspicions were focusing on the very simple BJT product detector. 

Steve N8NM built the HA-600A product detector both in LTSpice and in the real world.  It worked fine in both versions.  Steve even put the product detector into his S-38 receiver -- he reported it worked well there.  

I too built the thing in LTSpice.  Then I went and rebuilt the circuit on a piece of PC board.  I connected the new circuit to the HA-600A, using my external FeelTech sig generator as the BFO.  IT STILL SOUNDED BAD ON SSB.  

At this point I started Googling through the literature.  I found a promising article by Robert Sherwood in December 1977 issue of Ham Radio magazine entitled "Present Day Receivers -- Problems and Cures." Sherwood wrote: 

"Another area that could use additional work is the product detector.  As the name implies, its output should be the product of the two input signals. If BFO injection is removed, output should go to zero. If this is not the case, as in the Heath HW series, envelope detection is also occurring, which causes audio distortion." 

I checked my circuit.  When I removed the BFO signal from the product detector, envelope detection continued.  In fact, with the receiver in SSB mode, and with the BFO disconnected, I could listen to the music of WRMI shortwave.  It seemed that Sherwood was explaining well the problem I was having: Simultaneous envelope and product detection was making SSB sound very bad in my receiver.   What I was hearing just seemed to SOUND like what you'd get with a mixture of product and envelope detection: "scratchy" sounding SSB.  This also seemed to explain why SSB would sound fine when using the diode detector with loosely coupled BFO energy -- in that case it would be envelope detection only, with no ugly mixture of both kinds of detection.

So I built a better detector.  I had had great luck with the two diode one trifilar transformer singly balanced design used by both Doug DeMaw and Ashhar Farhan. I built the circuit using one of the trifilar toroids given to me by Farhan, and connected it in place of the original BJT product detector.  With the FeelTech Sig Gen as BFO, I got good results -- most of the signal disappeared with I disconnected the BFO.  Looking at the circuit, I realized that I was balancing out not the IF signal but instead the BFO signal.  To minimize envelope detection I needed to put the IF signal on the balanced input of the product detector (to L1 in the diagram above).  When I did this, envelope detection seemed to disappear completely and the receiver went silent when I disconnected the BFO.  

Finally, I needed to find a way to use the BFO in the HA-600A with the new product detector.  Obviously I needed more BFO signal -- I needed about 7 dbm, enough to turn on the diodes.  I converted the outboard product detector board into a simple amplifier and put it between the HA-600A BFO and the BFO input port of the new product detector.   This works fine. 

A few issues remain: 

1) The output from the HA-600A BFO through the above BFO amp (and across the 50 ohm resistor) is NOT a pretty 455 kc sine wave.  But the peaks of the distorted wave appear to be enough to turn on the diodes, and when I look at the voltages across each diode (on my two channel 'scope) I see mirror images -- one is on when the other is off.   Is this good enough? 

2) Moving the BFO input from L1 to the junction of the two 50 ohm resistors (that is actually a 100 ohm pot) has big implications for how this mixer works.  With the BFO energy going through the toroid, BOTH diodes are being alternately turned on and turned off.  But both are on, and then BOTH are off.  With the BFO energy going in through the other side, one diode turns on when the other is off.  I think the mixing result is the same, with AF coming out of the output port, but the way the mixer works in this configuration is very different. Does this sound right? 

The Original Tuna Tin 2 (and the Mojo Transfer Ceremony with W1REX)

From the Amateur QRP Radio group on Facebook:‎

Brian Murrey‎to

 Amateur QRP Radio

The Original Tuna Tin II built by Doug DeMaw W1FB (SK)...Ed Hare W1RFI of the ARRL Lab, brought this to FDIM in 2001 and allowed us to borrow it for a night. It was so cool. The little guy was found at a hamfest somewhere on the east coast, and brought back to the ARRL. Bruce Muscolino W6TOY (SK) recieved it from the ARRL and he replaced missing parts and got the thing working again. It's in the museum at the ARRL HQ today. I think we made like 16 contacts using that for the transmitter, and a homebrew receiver from Diz W8DIZ that was part of the MultiPig Rig. Antenna was a dipole we had strung up out the window of the Ramada Inn (FDIM Central).
-----------------------------------
Here is my only encounter with the original Tuna Tin 2 -- In 2014 Rex W1REX conducted this solemn ceremony in which some of the TTT mojo was transferred to my homebrew BITX 17. 

Presence (Absence?) and Direct Conversion Receivers (with wise comments from Farhan)

Hello Bill,

    I was reading an online article by Wes Hayward, W7ZO  from 1968  about the history of direct conversion receivers (http://w7zoi.net/dcrx68a.pdf)  .  It was linked in an email in qrptech.    It recounts how he had first build a dc receiver with a single diode for the detector, and how microphonic it was, and dissatisfying an experience.   This was in the early days of solid state devices, and so they were hard to come by.   He describes meeting another ham engineer at work Dick Bingham, W7WKR who immediately recognized that what he needed was a diode ring mixer.    The story goes on to describe their experiments, and success at this design.   

  They decided to write up the design for QST.   I won't bore you with the details...the article is well worth reading about how Wes mailed the radio and the design to ARRL, and how it ended up in the hands of a new person on their staff there, Doug DeMaw, W1CER (later W1FB.).  Here is an excerpt from the article describing Doug's reaction to the receiver:

"This was the epiphany, the moment when Doug realized that solid-state technology had produce a new way to build a simple receiver. Doug tuned the receiver higher in the band and found some SSB. Again it was like nothing he had ever heard. It was as if the voice came from the same room. Doug used the term presence in his description."

Here I present the earliest use, that I know of, of presence being used to describe a receiver.    I have to say when I read it, I immediately thought of you guys, and decided to share.

Thanks for all you guys do.

   dave    /nt1u

----------------------------------------------------------

Bill replied:

Thanks Dave.   Yea, that's the 1968 article that launched the use of DC receivers.  I had forgotten about DeMaw's early use of "presence." 

Just to cause trouble, perhaps we should start commenting on "absence"  i.e.  "I dunno OM, I think your rig lacks a bit of absence in the mid-range... turn menu item 63b to ELEVEN!"  

:-)

73 Bill 

----------------------------------------------------------

 

Farhan wrote: 

Mon, Aug 3 at 3:22 PM

When I got my license, my friend Anil SM0MFC was living in Hyderabad. He lent me his HW-8.  I stringed up a 40 meter dipole with a lamp cord and worked with it. Somehow, the combination of the lamp cord length and the 40 meter inverted V made it resonate on 20 m as well. The HW-8 had a nominal antenna tuner and I worked pretty good DX.

Till date, it remains the best receiver that I have used for regular contacts. The only trouble it had was the the MC1496 was a nominal detector, it overloaded heavily with shortwave broadcast stations. There was an unnecessary RF amplifier in the front-end that they could have done without.

I made several direct conversion receivers, but never managed to hang on to any. This makes me want to build one, one of these evenings. I even have a KK7B R1 kit. but real men solder on without any PCBs or even circuit diagram!

A 7/14/21 direct conversion radio that puts out 3 watts of power is what my ideal setup would be. I am not too bothered with the images on CW. I just tune them out in my head. Real soon now, at the moment, i am trying to finish a radio that has been in the works for years.  Finally, I am making some headway.

-f

---------------------------------------------

Farhan of course is no slouch in the DC receiver area.  Years ago he wrote a wonderful post about building a DC receiver with his cousin for her class project: 

 https://web.archive.org/web/20171109081542/http://www.phonestack.com/farhan/dc40.html

Included in this post was a passage that I included in my book  SolderSmoke -- Global Adventures in Wireless Electonics: 

--------------------------

Why build a receiver?

    Why do you want to build it? These are available at the Dubai Duty Free asked Harish, an old friend, when he spotted us struggling over the DC40 one evening. I didn't have an answer to this question and considering the amount of work piled this quarter, it appeared to be a sensible thing to ask.

    I think this question is answered by us all in different ways. My personal answer would be because we human beings are fundamentally tool builders. We have an opposable thumb that allows us to grip the soldering iron.

    For an engineer (by the word ‘engineer', I don't just mean those who have a degree, but anyone who applies technical knowledge to build things) the act of building a receiver is a fundamental proof of her competence and capability. It is much easier to put out 1 watt signal than it is to receive a 1 watt signal.

    A simple definition of a good receiver is that a good receiver consistently, clearly receives only the intended signal, such a definition hides a wide range of requirements. The receiver has to be sensitive enough to pick up the weakest signal imaginable (note: clearly), it has to be selective enough to eliminate other signals (only), it has to be stable enough (consistently).

    For a ham or an engineer, building a usable receiver is a personal landmark. It establishes a personal competency to be able to understand the very fundamental operation of the radio and mastery over it.

--------------------

Bill:  OM Ryan Flowers did a 5 part series on building the DC40.  If you are want to build one, I suggest you use the schematics on Ryan's site.  There was an error in Farhan's original schematic -- Farhan corrected it but some of the incorrect schematics are still floating around the internet.  Here is part one of Ryan's series: 

 https://miscdotgeek.com/building-direct-conversion-receiver-part-1/ 

Farhan's DC40

Knack Story -- Tom WX2J

RTTY Model 15

Hello Bill,

Greetings from a fellow ham in Northern Virginia. I have enjoyed the SolderSmoke podcast for a few years now, and I just heard your recent presentation to the Vienna Wireless Society. We have a lot in common so it is about time I reach out to make your acquaintance.

I was born in NYC and grew up in Northern NJ. I was first licensed in 1969 as a high school student (51 years ago! Goodness!). My novice callsign was WN2JFX, and I progressed from Novice and then to General and Advanced as WB2JFX, and then eventually to Extra (in about 1990 -- while the 20 WPM code requirement still existed). At that point I put in for a 2X1 callsign and received WX2J, which is a nice twist on my original call.

I was fanatically active in my early years in ham radio. My Elmer (George, K2VVI, SK) set me up with a DX-40, and my parents provided a brand new Hallicrafters S-120 (you could copy the whole 40 meter band without changing the frequency!). I think I Worked all States as a Novice and learned that the human brain is the most amazing audio filter on the market. When I made General, George lent me an old Hallicrafters SX-25, and then I was really in good shape. Besides CW, I was also very interested in RTTY. I had my own Model 15 leaking oil in the basement and had a blast watching the magic of that thing printing messages out of thin air. I have always been a home-brewer, and one of the first serious things I built was a two- or three-tube RTTY demodulator from the Handbook. Aluminum chassis, chassis punches, tube sockets -- the whole works. I have no idea what the real inductance was of the inductors that went into the filters but somehow if the signals were strong enough, and on 850 Hz shift, it could actually demodulate signals. I probably still have that thing around here somewhere.

Another local ham bequeathed me his entire collection of 73 magazines - 10+ years starting with the first issue (~1960). I read them from cover to cover so many times I probably have them memorized. I became a real fan of Wayne Green, W2NSD, who was always ornery and controversial but a very interesting guy. I met him at a hamfest many years later and we had a great chat.

In any case I wanted to mention some other things that resonate with me as I listen to your podcast. As a kid growing up in the shadow of NYC in those years, you can bet that the Jean Shepherd broadcast was a regular part of our life. My dad used to listen to it every night -- 10:15 p.m. I believe, on WOR -- and we both used to greatly enjoy his stories of lighting up the fuse panel and nearly blowing up the house as he and his old man were playing with radios, etc. It was a common theme in our house too when my ham radio signal would blast into the TV set or I dangled new antenna wires off the house and out of the trees -- "You're going to blow this house up!" I studied electrical engineering in college and was commissioned in the Air Force upon graduation. I served a 20-year career in the Air Force and stayed somewhat active in ham radio. I was licensed and operated out of Okinawa (KA6TF) and England (G5ERE) during tours of duty in the early 1980s. Always an HF guy, in about 1982, in Japan, I bought myself a new Icom IC-720A, and this is still my primary rig. I was an early adopter of PK-232 and did some extensive building and experimenting with it. Sadly though, in the last 25+ years, my ham radio experience has mostly been vicarious as my work and family obligations have just not left much time for ham radio. I do have a G5RV wire antenna strung up but very rarely jump on the air -- sometimes during contests.

In high school we made a field trip to ARRL HQ in Newington, CT. While there we did all the things people do on such a visit, but one of the high points for me was meeting Doug DeMaw. I can just hear how Shepherd would describe it -- "I turned the corner and there he was! In person! The high priest of homebrewing! Doug DeMaw. In the flesh!" Cue the kazoo. I actually also met Shepherd at a book signing (Wanda Hickey's Night of Golden Memories?). I remember presenting him with a computer-printed banner of his callsign -- K2ORS -- produced by one of the few functioning computer programs I had written in high school. I also heard him on the HF bands one night -- I think he was in Florida -- and actually made contact with him, if barely being able to exchange callsigns can count as a contact.

Well, more than you wanted to know. I just wanted to let you know that I enjoy your podcast and can personally relate to very much of what you say. Although I am steeped in Hardware Defined Radio, I am also a software guy so I expect that my future includes SDR. I hope you and Pete are able to continue the podcast for a long time to come because I need the full HDR-SDR spectrum to be covered -- hi.

73,

Tom Fuhrman, WX2J

Walter's VFO

Main VFO board under plastic -- buffer board off to the right

There is a lot of tribal knowledge in this short article by Walter KA4KXX.  (The most recent issue of SPRAT has a picture of a SPRAT cover from more than 30 years ago, announcing an article by Walter.  OM has been at this for quite a while.)  Walter's advice is similar to that of Doug DeMaw, especially on the air-core coil.   FB Walter,  thanks for sharing.  

Regarding the last line in Walter's article, please direct any complaints about drifting analog VFOs to Peter Juliano.  He will be delighted to receive these complaints, and will promptly provide all correspondents with very succinct advice on how to overcome the instability.  

My Way to a Low-Drift Analog VFO, by Walter KA4KXX

I recently built a digital VFO (from a QRP Labs Kit) to see what everybody is talking about, and it has been quite handy for my first two-band homebrew transceiver, but by the time one adds the low pass filter, a low-level RF amplifier to boost the weak output, a 5 VDC regulator, and a hefty +12VDC power line filter to the beast to keep the digital noise out of the rest of the radio, for a single band project I still prefer a low-drift analog VFO.  

My approach to minimizing drift is very simple and works well for a VFO range of 3 – 7.3 MHz, which is all that is needed for the 20 to 80 Meter bands, either direct conversion (adding a doubler for 20M) or single conversion with approximately a 10 MHz IF.  

First, see my schematic (adapted from Small Wonder Labs 40+ transceiver, original BITX40 Analog VFO, and other sources) and wind an air core inductor with stout magnet wire such as 24 or 22 AWG.  Use a thick, rigid plastic form of a diameter so that you need about 12 turns, and single coat with water-based sanding sealer, Q-dope, or similar.  Use hot glue to mount the coil firmly to the single-sided circuit board, and build a cover of some type, especially if the radio is to ever be used outdoors.
   
Second, all the VFO capacitors (except power supply bypass) should initially be the modern C0G type, which can be obtained from Mouser (such as TDK FG28C0G1H681JNT06 or the like), which I trust more than those labeled NP0.

Then, power up the VFO and tweak the coil, tuning arrangement, and range capacitor to get the frequency range you desire.

Next, monitor the drift from a cold start to see how fast it is moving as it warms up, and whether it stabilizes nicely (my goal for SSB Phone use is less than 20 Hz drift during any 10 minute period) after 10 – 15 minutes maximum.  If it does not stabilize to your satisfaction, then start substituting polystyrene caps for the C0G units one at a time until you are happy with the performance.

[Also remember that a stable BFO is important as well, and if you use the BITX 40 crystal oscillator design, I recommend installing a dedicated 78L09 power line regulator.]

If you build this VFO at the higher (7 MHz) frequency end, just change the inductor value to about 0.5 uH, with everything else about the same, but expect to do more tweaking to get stability, and the warm-up time may be closer to 15 minutes.  After years of experimenting, this is what has worked for me.  If it works for you, please send me an email (see my QRZ page) of thanks.  If not, file a complaint with Soldersmoke. 

National Dial and Gearbox Problem Resolved

Thanks to all who offered advice and assistance.  With help from you guys -- and  especially from Pete Juliano N6QW -- I think I have this fixed.

Pete was right -- the problem was really with the variable capacitor.  The one I was using was kind of stiff and irregular in its motion.  I found another one in the junk box that was easier to turn (it has one set of ball bearings).  This fixed most of the problem.

I also spent more time making sure the shaft of the cap lined up perfectly with the shaft of the gear box.  This also helped a lot.

I realize now that some of the "stickiness" that I occasionally feel while tuning may be coming from the dial -- not from the gear box.  It looks like my dial took a hit that slightly bent one portion of it.  It seems that the numbers have a bit of trouble clicking over on that portion of the dial. Some lubricant may help there.  But I can live with it.

The receiver now tunes very smoothly and I can go right back to a frequency and find the signal exactly where I left it.  There does seem to be a very slight difference depending on whether I "approach from above" or "approach from below" -- but this is not a big deal.

Check out the pictures of the receiver and the VFO.  Note the "cardboard from a coat hanger" coil form.  The winding is held in place with nail polish varnish.  I had planned on having the variable cap, the coil , and the associated fixed caps all in a box for better thermal stability, but the VFO is very stable even without the box.  I have the VFO running 455 kc ABOVE the signal frequency.  It runs from about 7455 kc to about 7800 kc.  I could have set it up to run 455 kc BELOW the signal freq.   That would have made it a bit more stable (it is easier to attain VFO stability at lower frequencies) but VFO is so stable that I probably won't mess with it. I followed DeMaw's rules:  Physical stability, NP0 caps.  For the NP0 caps, put several of them in parallel to get the desired capacitance value. Keep heat-producing active components away from the coils and caps.   

Thanks again to Armand WA1UQO for giving me this amazing piece of radio history. And thanks to Tim Sutton for the big box that holds this receiver. 

James Millen knew what he was doing.  See: http://www.isquare.com/millen/millen-page.htm

W7ZOI: Direct Conversion Receivers -- Some Amateur Radio History

http://w7zoi.net/dcrx68.pdf

Farhan and Pete WB9FLW alerted me to this wonderful article by Wes Hayward, W7ZOI.  I guess my interest in DC receivers must have been noticed by the Google algorithm because I am bombarded by ads extolling the virtues of "Zero IF."   Hey Google -- I'm already a believer!  I was converted by W7ZOI's 1968 article in QST. And my belief in the technique has been greatly reinforced by his November 2018 50th anniversary article. 

There is so much good stuff in Wes's look-back piece.  The travails of trying to write for QST are presented very well.   And we learn that none-other-than Doug DeMaw himself is responsible for the use of the word "presence" in describing amateur radio audio.  

This article has inspired me to take a new look at the DC receiver I built last winter.  Mine needs some work. I think it is kind of deaf.   It could probably benefit from a diode ring  detector.   But it already has presence.   

http://w7zoi.net/dcrx68.pdf

Thanks Wes.  And thanks to Farhan and Pete for the heads up. 

Stockpiling Parts for Analog Oscillator STABILITY

Doug DeMaw taught us that a key contributor to analog oscillator stability is the use of NP0 capacitors.  As part of my effort to maintain the ability to produce analog, discrete component, coal-and-cap, chip-free oscillators, I recently went out onto the internet in search of an assortment of NP0 capacitors.  Nightfire Electronics had just what I needed.  I took their assortment and put it in a parts box for easy access.  

http://vakits.com/about-nightfire-electronics

Jeff Damm WA7MLH on QSO Today

Happy New Year!    

There was so much wisdom and tribal knowledge in Eric Guth's interview with Jeff Damm WA7MLH. It was almost overwhelming. 

You should all listen to it.  Twice. At least twice: 

https://www.qsotoday.com/podcasts/WA7MLH
  
My notes:

-- I sympathize with Jeff's decision to go solid state and give up on high voltage after an encounter with an undischarged 600 volt capacitor.  
-- I really like the 1700 kHz IF with a 5 MHz VFO for an 80 and 40 meter receiver. 
-- Interesting that EE degree didn't help much in his efforts to understand ham gear.  Better to read Wes's books and Doug's. 
-- Tek Spectrum Analyzers were specially made to fit down a submarine hatch.  
-- Building and measuring just as important as studying the theory.  Inked-up text books. 
-- Learned ugly from Wes as a teenager. 
--Searched for old commercial gear to gut and use as homes for homebrew solid state gear. The enclosures,  panels and controls are very useful.   Great way to avoid metal work.  These rigs are no longer boatanchors!  Again, I sympathize.  I've sacrificed many Heath Lunchboxes and QF-1s.  
-- Jeff Builds the VFO first.  My preference too. But he understands Pete's AF-first approach. 
-- Finger on the input of the AF amp!  Buzz!  Yea! Step your way back to the front end.
-- ALWAYS one stage at a time.  
-- Osh Park Boards for standard circuit modules.  Like Legos. 
-- Cubic Feet of air variables.   Jeff has a lifetime stash.   
--Thinking about what was and should have been his section of EMRFD. Go for it Jeff. PLEASE! 
-- Hesistant about chips. Analog guy.  Would have been a huge time sink.  Analog guy.  
-- Buying parts on e-bay.  Fewer and fewer RF parts at hamfests. 
-- People reading QST Tech Articles for entertainment. Editor apprach: "Nobody will build it anyway." Handbooks giving priority to entertainment and less to information and education.