BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Steve Dresser <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 7 Dec 2011 13:59:30 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (85 lines)
Lou,

Most of the noise blankers I've seen seem to be designed to deal with pulse 
noise, like the ignition noise you get sometimes on the higher bands.  Some 
of the ones on older receivers got rid of fluorescent light static, but they 
introduced so many other artifacts that it was hardly worth turning them on. 
Sometimes, I've had better luck with using DSP noise reduction, but there 
are trade-offs there as well.

Steve

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lou Kolb" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 12:47
Subject: Re: TS590 noise fighting question


> Steve is quite right, they almost always introduce artifacts of their own.
> How well they work or if they even work at all depends on the type of 
> noise
> you're trying to get rid of.  i've had instances with power line noise 
> where
> the K3 noise blanker eliminates it completely.  I've had other noises it
> barely touched.  Often it's a question of finding the best compromise
> between reduced noise and introduced distortion.  lou
> Lou kolb
> Voice-over Artist:
> Radio/TV Adds, Video narrations
> Messages On-hold:
> www.loukolb.com
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Steve Dresser" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 12:37 PM
> Subject: Re: TS590 noise fighting question
>
>
>> Tom,
>>
>> What you describe is typical of the way noise blankers behave, and I 
>> don't
>> know of any way to fix it.  You may also notice that running the noise
>> blanker at that high a setting also introduces distortion.  I have not
>> found
>> noise blankers to be particularly useful, although others may disagree. 
>> I
>> have heard that they work well on the very high-end radios, but I'd have
>> to
>> see it to believe it.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Tom Behler" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 11:18
>> Subject: TS590 noise fighting question
>>
>>
>>> Hi, all.
>>>
>>> Well, since interference seems to have re-surfaced as a discussion topic
>>> today, I have a quick question for my fellow TS590 users.
>>>
>>> As I think I pointed out in a previous post, I can eliminate most of the
>>> interference noise I'm having on 10 meters via the noise blanker II.
>>> function on the TS590, if I crank it all the way up to level ten.
>>>
>>> However, I notice that if there is a strong signal on 10 meters, it
>>> brings
>>> the noise back in with it.
>>>
>>> Obviously, my best solution will be to get rid of the noise source
>>> itself,
>>> but perhaps there is a way to counteract this problem with the TS590.
>>>
>>> I'd be interested in any thoughts anyone has.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, the noise war continues here, especially on 10 meters.
>>>
>>> 73 from Tom Behler:  KB8TYJ
>>>
> 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2