Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3 MHz)
station.

Any ideas? Yes, I'm aware of the FM-2G-C. But that's an outdoor
alternative. Is the "FM Reflect" any good?

http://www.ccrane.com/fm-reflect-antenna.aspx

Thanks.

ric wrote:

Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3 MHz)
station.

Any ideas? Yes, I'm aware of the FM-2G-C. But that's an outdoor
alternative. Is the "FM Reflect" any good?

A big antenna in your attic or on the roof is best. Anything
other than a good antenna with a rotator on it might as well be
a big rod/collapsable antenna.(mind you, they make these up
to 3-4 ft in length)

There really isn't.
It is a common misconception that a station is not received due to
inadequate signal strength. This is actually quite rare.
The usual problem is a combination of:
1. multipath, meaning that the signal reaches the antenna via multiple
reflections. This causes complete cancellation at specific frequencies as
the modulated FM signal changes frequency. No antenna can restore a signal
from a null.

2. Adjacent channel interference. A station on a slightly different
frequency in a different reception area has enough presence to compete with
the local signal.

The solution to both of these problems is in a directive antenna, and
location. Depending upon where a nondirectional antenna is placed, it is
possible to get some directionality. A simple folded dipole, taped in the
right window at the right orientation, can easily outperform a
bells-and-whistles active antenna placed away from the window.

Commercial indoor antennas are packaged as room art. For the most part, they
all perform as well, or as badly, as each other. My personal favorite is the
no-longer-available Radio Shack "flying saucer". It had a tuning circuit
that gave it a real advantage over other antennas, but users didn't like to
work the knob. They preferred magic.


"ric" wrote in message ...
Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3 MHz)
station.

Any ideas? Yes, I'm aware of the FM-2G-C. But that's an outdoor
alternative. Is the "FM Reflect" any good?

http://www.ccrane.com/fm-reflect-antenna.aspx

Thanks.

"ric" wrote in message ...
Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3 MHz)
station.

Any ideas?

The most effective solution I've ever come across is the Dennesen Polaris.
It is cheap, simple and effective. OTOH it is somewhat unsightly and
extremely difficult to find these days. And you really need to learn to use
it to get the desired results but it is easy if you get the manual with it.

Yes, I'm aware of the FM-2G-C. But that's an outdoor
alternative.

You can use it indoors as well.

Is the "FM Reflect" any good?

http://www.ccrane.com/fm-reflect-antenna.aspx

I'd use the whip indoors.


Cheers,

Margaret

"ric" wrote in message ...
Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3 MHz)
station.

Any ideas? Yes, I'm aware of the FM-2G-C. But that's an outdoor
alternative. Is the "FM Reflect" any good?

http://www.ccrane.com/fm-reflect-antenna.aspx

Thanks.

Electrically, it's just a standard folded dipole. You can get them for
around four bucks.

Joseph Oberlander wrote:

Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3 MHz)
station.

Any ideas? Yes, I'm aware of the FM-2G-C. But that's an outdoor
alternative. Is the "FM Reflect" any good?

A big antenna in your attic or on the roof is best.

No attic, and the roof is not an option.

Anything
other than a good antenna with a rotator on it might as well be
a big rod/collapsable antenna.(mind you, they make these up
to 3-4 ft in length)

Thanks. Are you familiar with the FM-2G-C?

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

I am leaning toward trying it, indoors (next to a window) first.

Robert Morein wrote:

There really isn't.
It is a common misconception that a station is not received due to
inadequate signal strength. This is actually quite rare.

This appears to be the case here, though. This is a college station,
low in frequency (88.3 MHz), and only broadcasting at 2K watts about
40 miles to my south. The signal is very steady, but weak. Static
can be 99% eliminated by going into mono mode.

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

"Margaret von B." wrote:

Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3 MHz)
station.

Any ideas?

The most effective solution I've ever come across is the Dennesen Polaris.
It is cheap, simple and effective. OTOH it is somewhat unsightly and
extremely difficult to find these days. And you really need to learn to use
it to get the desired results but it is easy if you get the manual with it.

I will look for this. Thanks.

Yes, I'm aware of the FM-2G-C. But that's an outdoor
alternative.

You can use it indoors as well.

This is presently my leading candidate. Indoors next to a window at
first, and later outdoors if the opportunity presents itself.

Thanks.

Robert Morein wrote:

Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3 MHz)
station.

Any ideas? Yes, I'm aware of the FM-2G-C. But that's an outdoor
alternative. Is the "FM Reflect" any good?

http://www.ccrane.com/fm-reflect-antenna.aspx

Thanks.

Electrically, it's just a standard folded dipole. You can get them for
around four bucks.

That's what I'm using now (a cheap dipole.) But I've read that the
FM Reflect is better than the standard dipole. Hogwash?

"ric" wrote in message ...
Robert Morein wrote:

Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3
MHz)
station.

Any ideas? Yes, I'm aware of the FM-2G-C. But that's an outdoor
alternative. Is the "FM Reflect" any good?

http://www.ccrane.com/fm-reflect-antenna.aspx

Thanks.

Electrically, it's just a standard folded dipole. You can get them for
around four bucks.

That's what I'm using now (a cheap dipole.) But I've read that the
FM Reflect is better than the standard dipole. Hogwash?

Yes, hogwash. Do you remember the TV rabbit ears that looks like a Martian
communicator? A whole generation of stylists has gulled the American public
with respect to antennas.

There can be an advantage to an active antenna, in that it can compensate
for feedline loss. You can use that to put the antenna where you normally
would not, like in a particularly good window, or other room spot away from
your hifi. The chances that the best spot in the room is on top of your
tuner is virtually nil. If you are desperate, you might consider wasting $50
on an active antenna and a feedline extender cable of about 25 feet. Walk
the antenna around the room. Try every possible orientation. If you find a
"sweet spot", it is unlikely that it will with the antenna positioned as the
"interior designer" intended, ie., as some kind of purposeful super-powerful
device. It will probably be lying sadly on its side.

"ric" wrote in message ...
Robert Morein wrote:

There really isn't.
It is a common misconception that a station is not received due to
inadequate signal strength. This is actually quite rare.

This appears to be the case here, though. This is a college station,
low in frequency (88.3 MHz), and only broadcasting at 2K watts about
40 miles to my south. The signal is very steady, but weak. Static
can be 99% eliminated by going into mono mode.

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

This is an omnidirectional antenna, which means it will be very susceptible
to multipath. The fact that it is cut for the educational band gives it a
little more gain, but, as I said, gain is seldom the problem. The problem is
phase cancellation caused by reception of a signal that is reflected by two
or more different paths. This causes the signal to actually cancel 100% at
certain frequencies. More gain on nothing does not result in something. The
solution is a directional antenna, which attenuates all but one of the
reception paths, eliminating the phase cancellation.

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:06:08 -0700, ric wrote:

Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3 MHz)
station.

I use $4.00 Radio Shack dipole antennas. They work great. They may
not be beautiful, but using one will put you above 99% of the crowd in
terms of reception performance.

http://www.radioshack.com/product.as...uct_id=42-2385

"dizzy" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:06:08 -0700, ric wrote:

Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3 MHz)
station.

I use $4.00 Radio Shack dipole antennas. They work great. They may
not be beautiful, but using one will put you above 99% of the crowd in
terms of reception performance.


http://www.radioshack.com/product.as...uct_id=42-2385

A sensible choice.

Robert Morein wrote:

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

This is an omnidirectional antenna, which means it will be very susceptible
to multipath. The fact that it is cut for the educational band gives it a
little more gain, but, as I said, gain is seldom the problem. The problem is
phase cancellation caused by reception of a signal that is reflected by two
or more different paths. This causes the signal to actually cancel 100% at
certain frequencies. More gain on nothing does not result in something. The
solution is a directional antenna, which attenuates all but one of the
reception paths, eliminating the phase cancellation.

Hmmm...I'm getting a slew of opinions on this, and few of them reach
the same conclusion. Such as:

http://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/recep.htm

I've tried various dipole antennas, all with similar results. Best
results so far was an RCA powered indoor TV "rabbit ear" type antenna.

I'm tempted to have an antenna cut specifically for 88.3 MHz, as that is
the only FM I listen to. Oh well...

dizzy wrote:

Looking for recommendations for a *good* indoor FM antenna. Does
such a beast exist? Trying to improve reception of a college (88.3 MHz)
station.

I use $4.00 Radio Shack dipole antennas. They work great. They may
not be beautiful, but using one will put you above 99% of the crowd in
terms of reception performance.

http://www.radioshack.com/product.as...uct_id=42-2385

Similar to some dipoles that I have tried. Even optimum position
leaves too much noise when in stereo mode. But thanks.

"ric" wrote in message ...
Robert Morein wrote:

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

This is an omnidirectional antenna, which means it will be very
susceptible
to multipath. The fact that it is cut for the educational band gives it
a
little more gain, but, as I said, gain is seldom the problem. The
problem is
phase cancellation caused by reception of a signal that is reflected by
two
or more different paths. This causes the signal to actually cancel 100%
at
certain frequencies. More gain on nothing does not result in something.
The
solution is a directional antenna, which attenuates all but one of the
reception paths, eliminating the phase cancellation.

Hmmm...I'm getting a slew of opinions on this, and few of them reach
the same conclusion. Such as:

http://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/recep.htm

I've tried various dipole antennas, all with similar results. Best
results so far was an RCA powered indoor TV "rabbit ear" type antenna.

I'm tempted to have an antenna cut specifically for 88.3 MHz, as that is
the only FM I listen to. Oh well...

You can do it yourself. Take a look at
http://www.ycars.org/EFRA/Module%20C/AntDip.htm

The wavelength of 88.3 mHz is 66.88 inches. Your dipole should be 1/2 that
length: 33.5. All you need is a piece of twinlead, which is just junky
antenna lead-in wire. Cut it to 33.5 inches. At each end, twist the
conductors together. At the center, break one conductor. Connect the loose
ends to your feed wire. It is not essential, but nice, if you can have t the
connections soldered. Protect the wires from bending and breaking by
encasing the joints in some RTV (GE silicone goo).

I do not understand why the station engineer recommended the Fanfare. This
antenna has 0 dB gain. 0 is a very small number. The only advantage to the
Fanfare is for external use, since it is self-supporting. An indoor dipole,
which can be taped or tacked to any convenient surface, does not need
mechanical rigidity.

A properly cut dipole has twice the signal strength: 3 dB.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"ric" wrote in message
...
Robert Morein wrote:

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

This is an omnidirectional antenna, which means it will be very
susceptible
to multipath. The fact that it is cut for the educational band gives it
a
little more gain, but, as I said, gain is seldom the problem. The
problem is
phase cancellation caused by reception of a signal that is reflected by
two
or more different paths. This causes the signal to actually cancel 100%
at
certain frequencies. More gain on nothing does not result in something.
The
solution is a directional antenna, which attenuates all but one of the
reception paths, eliminating the phase cancellation.

Hmmm...I'm getting a slew of opinions on this, and few of them reach
the same conclusion. Such as:

http://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/recep.htm

I've tried various dipole antennas, all with similar results. Best
results so far was an RCA powered indoor TV "rabbit ear" type antenna.

I'm tempted to have an antenna cut specifically for 88.3 MHz, as that is
the only FM I listen to. Oh well...

You can do it yourself. Take a look at
http://www.ycars.org/EFRA/Module%20C/AntDip.htm

The wavelength of 88.3 mHz is 66.88 inches. Your dipole should be 1/2 that
length: 33.5. All you need is a piece of twinlead, which is just junky
antenna lead-in wire. Cut it to 33.5 inches. At each end, twist the
conductors together. At the center, break one conductor. Connect the loose
ends to your feed wire. It is not essential, but nice, if you can have t
the
connections soldered. Protect the wires from bending and breaking by
encasing the joints in some RTV (GE silicone goo).

I do not understand why the station engineer recommended the Fanfare.

I do. It worked in his location.

This
antenna has 0 dB gain. 0 is a very small number. The only advantage to the
Fanfare is for external use, since it is self-supporting. An indoor
dipole,
which can be taped or tacked to any convenient surface, does not need
mechanical rigidity.

A properly cut dipole has twice the signal strength: 3 dB.




There's more to antennas than theory, especially these "little ones". As I
stated before, I don't have any experience of this particular antenna but I
have plenty of experience of seemingly similar design, The Magnum Dynalab
ST-2.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_st2.htm

It has worked admirably well over the years in many urban locations except
one. NYC RF hell rendered it pretty much useless. However, at the time I did
not have the Signal Sleuth that greatly complements the whip albeit at a
considerable cost.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_sleuth.htm

Based on my "nontechnical" opinion I can say that the whip alone generally
outperforms the "grocerybagful" of dipoles I've accumulated over the years
by a comfortable margin. With the Sleuth, it is the ultimate quick and small
FM antenna solution. One of my favorite tuners has a scope that allows the
monitoring of multipath signals and contrary to what one might think, the
ST-2 is not all that easily bothered by it. That said, there are locations,
such as NYC, where the cheap but nearly unobtainable Dennesen dual whip
cannot be beat. I suspect that the Dennesen would be an easy DIY project for
those so inclined.

But no one should fool themselves into thinking that any of these products
will succesfully compete with a competent outdoor antenna such as those
made by APS.

Cheers,

Margaret

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"ric" wrote in message
...
Robert Morein wrote:

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

This is an omnidirectional antenna, which means it will be very
susceptible
to multipath. The fact that it is cut for the educational band gives
it
a
little more gain, but, as I said, gain is seldom the problem. The
problem is
phase cancellation caused by reception of a signal that is reflected
by
two
or more different paths. This causes the signal to actually cancel
100%
at
certain frequencies. More gain on nothing does not result in
something.
The
solution is a directional antenna, which attenuates all but one of
the
reception paths, eliminating the phase cancellation.

Hmmm...I'm getting a slew of opinions on this, and few of them reach
the same conclusion. Such as:

http://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/recep.htm

I've tried various dipole antennas, all with similar results. Best
results so far was an RCA powered indoor TV "rabbit ear" type antenna.

I'm tempted to have an antenna cut specifically for 88.3 MHz, as that
is
the only FM I listen to. Oh well...

You can do it yourself. Take a look at
http://www.ycars.org/EFRA/Module%20C/AntDip.htm

The wavelength of 88.3 mHz is 66.88 inches. Your dipole should be 1/2
that
length: 33.5. All you need is a piece of twinlead, which is just junky
antenna lead-in wire. Cut it to 33.5 inches. At each end, twist the
conductors together. At the center, break one conductor. Connect the
loose
ends to your feed wire. It is not essential, but nice, if you can have t
the
connections soldered. Protect the wires from bending and breaking by
encasing the joints in some RTV (GE silicone goo).

I do not understand why the station engineer recommended the Fanfare.

I do. It worked in his location.

This
antenna has 0 dB gain. 0 is a very small number. The only advantage to
the
Fanfare is for external use, since it is self-supporting. An indoor
dipole,
which can be taped or tacked to any convenient surface, does not need
mechanical rigidity.

A properly cut dipole has twice the signal strength: 3 dB.




There's more to antennas than theory, especially these "little ones". As I
stated before, I don't have any experience of this particular antenna but
I
have plenty of experience of seemingly similar design, The Magnum Dynalab
ST-2.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_st2.htm

It has worked admirably well over the years in many urban locations except
one. NYC RF hell rendered it pretty much useless. However, at the time I
did
not have the Signal Sleuth that greatly complements the whip albeit at a
considerable cost.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_sleuth.htm

Based on my "nontechnical" opinion I can say that the whip alone generally
outperforms the "grocerybagful" of dipoles I've accumulated over the years
by a comfortable margin. With the Sleuth, it is the ultimate quick and
small
FM antenna solution. One of my favorite tuners has a scope that allows the
monitoring of multipath signals and contrary to what one might think, the
ST-2 is not all that easily bothered by it. That said, there are
locations,
such as NYC, where the cheap but nearly unobtainable Dennesen dual whip
cannot be beat. I suspect that the Dennesen would be an easy DIY project
for
those so inclined.

But no one should fool themselves into thinking that any of these products
will succesfully compete with a competent outdoor antenna such as those
made by APS.

Cheers,

Margaret

Margaret, without contradicting your experience, I think that the difference
in sound has to do with the placement of the antenna. Perhaps the
freestanding whip was placeable in a way that the dipole was not.
The real solution comes from an antenna arrangement with some
directionality. If the multipath signal(s) can be reduced below one
particular strongest signal, then phase cancellation cannot occur. Two whips
separated by 1/2 wavelength can be directionally oriented by a combining
phase shift network, which is probably why your Dennesen worked so well.
A single vertical whip receives equally well from all directions. This means
that reduction in multipath can be accomplished only by moving the antenna
about the room. By contrast, a dipole can be rotated through 180 vertically,
and 180 degrees horizontally, while in the same location, provided one can
find a way to support the floppy wires. Taping it to a dowell stick would
work.

Robert Morein wrote:
There really isn't.
It is a common misconception that a station is not received due to
inadequate signal strength. This is actually quite rare.
The usual problem is a combination of:
1. multipath, meaning that the signal reaches the antenna via multiple
reflections. This causes complete cancellation at specific frequencies as
the modulated FM signal changes frequency. No antenna can restore a signal
from a null.

Funny that cell phones can but expensive FM receivers can't.

http://www.answers.com/topic/rake-receiver

ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com...


Robert Morein wrote:
There really isn't.
It is a common misconception that a station is not received due to
inadequate signal strength. This is actually quite rare.
The usual problem is a combination of:
1. multipath, meaning that the signal reaches the antenna via multiple
reflections. This causes complete cancellation at specific frequencies
as
the modulated FM signal changes frequency. No antenna can restore a
signal
from a null.

Funny that cell phones can but expensive FM receivers can't.

http://www.answers.com/topic/rake-receiver

ScottW

That is because cell is spread-spectrum:
http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm...te_number/1890
A broadband signal cannot experience complete phase cancellation. Only parts
of the signal will vanish. There are two newer methods that specifically aim
at reduction of multipath effects: OFDM, and time-space diversity reception.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"ric" wrote in message
...
Robert Morein wrote:

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

This is an omnidirectional antenna, which means it will be very
susceptible
to multipath. The fact that it is cut for the educational band gives
it
a
little more gain, but, as I said, gain is seldom the problem. The
problem is
phase cancellation caused by reception of a signal that is reflected
by
two
or more different paths. This causes the signal to actually cancel
100%
at
certain frequencies. More gain on nothing does not result in
something.
The
solution is a directional antenna, which attenuates all but one of
the
reception paths, eliminating the phase cancellation.

Hmmm...I'm getting a slew of opinions on this, and few of them reach
the same conclusion. Such as:

http://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/recep.htm

I've tried various dipole antennas, all with similar results. Best
results so far was an RCA powered indoor TV "rabbit ear" type antenna.

I'm tempted to have an antenna cut specifically for 88.3 MHz, as that
is
the only FM I listen to. Oh well...

You can do it yourself. Take a look at
http://www.ycars.org/EFRA/Module%20C/AntDip.htm

The wavelength of 88.3 mHz is 66.88 inches. Your dipole should be 1/2
that
length: 33.5. All you need is a piece of twinlead, which is just junky
antenna lead-in wire. Cut it to 33.5 inches. At each end, twist the
conductors together. At the center, break one conductor. Connect the
loose
ends to your feed wire. It is not essential, but nice, if you can have
t
the
connections soldered. Protect the wires from bending and breaking by
encasing the joints in some RTV (GE silicone goo).

I do not understand why the station engineer recommended the Fanfare.

I do. It worked in his location.

This
antenna has 0 dB gain. 0 is a very small number. The only advantage to
the
Fanfare is for external use, since it is self-supporting. An indoor
dipole,
which can be taped or tacked to any convenient surface, does not need
mechanical rigidity.

A properly cut dipole has twice the signal strength: 3 dB.




There's more to antennas than theory, especially these "little ones". As
I
stated before, I don't have any experience of this particular antenna but
I
have plenty of experience of seemingly similar design, The Magnum Dynalab
ST-2.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_st2.htm

It has worked admirably well over the years in many urban locations
except
one. NYC RF hell rendered it pretty much useless. However, at the time I
did
not have the Signal Sleuth that greatly complements the whip albeit at a
considerable cost.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_sleuth.htm

Based on my "nontechnical" opinion I can say that the whip alone
generally
outperforms the "grocerybagful" of dipoles I've accumulated over the
years
by a comfortable margin. With the Sleuth, it is the ultimate quick and
small
FM antenna solution. One of my favorite tuners has a scope that allows
the
monitoring of multipath signals and contrary to what one might think, the
ST-2 is not all that easily bothered by it. That said, there are
locations,
such as NYC, where the cheap but nearly unobtainable Dennesen dual whip
cannot be beat. I suspect that the Dennesen would be an easy DIY project
for
those so inclined.

But no one should fool themselves into thinking that any of these
products
will succesfully compete with a competent outdoor antenna such as those
made by APS.

Cheers,

Margaret

Margaret, without contradicting your experience, I think that the
difference
in sound has to do with the placement of the antenna.

That's probably most of it. As I said, "there's more than theory"...

Perhaps the
freestanding whip was placeable in a way that the dipole was not.
The real solution comes from an antenna arrangement with some
directionality. If the multipath signal(s) can be reduced below one
particular strongest signal, then phase cancellation cannot occur. Two
whips
separated by 1/2 wavelength can be directionally oriented by a combining
phase shift network, which is probably why your Dennesen worked so well.

It still works, if I can stand to look at it. :-) However, my primary
residence sports a Sniper these days with Yaesu rotor.

A single vertical whip receives equally well from all directions. This
means
that reduction in multipath can be accomplished only by moving the antenna
about the room. By contrast, a dipole can be rotated through 180
vertically,
and 180 degrees horizontally, while in the same location, provided one can
find a way to support the floppy wires. Taping it to a dowell stick would
work.



I hear you, but when using an A/B switch and watching the trace as you
switch antennas, any changes in multipath reception are easily detected.
Using such setup, I can only conclude that the ST-2, generally speaking, is
not impeded by multipath reception and will deliver a stronger, cleaner
signal to a tuner than a R/S dipole and its cousins.


Cheers,

Margaret

Robert Morein wrote:
"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com...


Robert Morein wrote:
There really isn't.
It is a common misconception that a station is not received due to
inadequate signal strength. This is actually quite rare.
The usual problem is a combination of:
1. multipath, meaning that the signal reaches the antenna via multiple
reflections. This causes complete cancellation at specific frequencies
as
the modulated FM signal changes frequency. No antenna can restore a
signal
from a null.

Funny that cell phones can but expensive FM receivers can't.

http://www.answers.com/topic/rake-receiver

ScottW

That is because cell is spread-spectrum:
http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm...te_number/1890
A broadband signal cannot experience complete phase cancellation. Only parts
of the signal will vanish. There are two newer methods that specifically aim
at reduction of multipath effects: OFDM, and time-space diversity reception.

I know... just kind of pointing out in a convoluted way how obsolete
FM is. We get trapped in these legacy technologies and until something
like the gov dicates a change (like digital television for example)
people will continue struggling with problems that have long been
solved.

ScottW

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
news

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"ric" wrote in message
...
Robert Morein wrote:

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly
considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

This is an omnidirectional antenna, which means it will be very
susceptible
to multipath. The fact that it is cut for the educational band
gives
it
a
little more gain, but, as I said, gain is seldom the problem. The
problem is
phase cancellation caused by reception of a signal that is
reflected
by
two
or more different paths. This causes the signal to actually cancel
100%
at
certain frequencies. More gain on nothing does not result in
something.
The
solution is a directional antenna, which attenuates all but one of
the
reception paths, eliminating the phase cancellation.

Hmmm...I'm getting a slew of opinions on this, and few of them reach
the same conclusion. Such as:

http://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/recep.htm

I've tried various dipole antennas, all with similar results. Best
results so far was an RCA powered indoor TV "rabbit ear" type
antenna.

I'm tempted to have an antenna cut specifically for 88.3 MHz, as
that
is
the only FM I listen to. Oh well...

You can do it yourself. Take a look at
http://www.ycars.org/EFRA/Module%20C/AntDip.htm

The wavelength of 88.3 mHz is 66.88 inches. Your dipole should be 1/2
that
length: 33.5. All you need is a piece of twinlead, which is just
junky
antenna lead-in wire. Cut it to 33.5 inches. At each end, twist the
conductors together. At the center, break one conductor. Connect the
loose
ends to your feed wire. It is not essential, but nice, if you can
have
t
the
connections soldered. Protect the wires from bending and breaking by
encasing the joints in some RTV (GE silicone goo).

I do not understand why the station engineer recommended the Fanfare.

I do. It worked in his location.

This
antenna has 0 dB gain. 0 is a very small number. The only advantage
to
the
Fanfare is for external use, since it is self-supporting. An indoor
dipole,
which can be taped or tacked to any convenient surface, does not need
mechanical rigidity.

A properly cut dipole has twice the signal strength: 3 dB.




There's more to antennas than theory, especially these "little ones".
As
I
stated before, I don't have any experience of this particular antenna
but
I
have plenty of experience of seemingly similar design, The Magnum
Dynalab
ST-2.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_st2.htm

It has worked admirably well over the years in many urban locations
except
one. NYC RF hell rendered it pretty much useless. However, at the time
I
did
not have the Signal Sleuth that greatly complements the whip albeit at
a
considerable cost.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_sleuth.htm

Based on my "nontechnical" opinion I can say that the whip alone
generally
outperforms the "grocerybagful" of dipoles I've accumulated over the
years
by a comfortable margin. With the Sleuth, it is the ultimate quick and
small
FM antenna solution. One of my favorite tuners has a scope that allows
the
monitoring of multipath signals and contrary to what one might think,
the
ST-2 is not all that easily bothered by it. That said, there are
locations,
such as NYC, where the cheap but nearly unobtainable Dennesen dual whip
cannot be beat. I suspect that the Dennesen would be an easy DIY
project
for
those so inclined.

But no one should fool themselves into thinking that any of these
products
will succesfully compete with a competent outdoor antenna such as
those
made by APS.

Cheers,

Margaret

Margaret, without contradicting your experience, I think that the
difference
in sound has to do with the placement of the antenna.

That's probably most of it. As I said, "there's more than theory"...

Perhaps the
freestanding whip was placeable in a way that the dipole was not.
The real solution comes from an antenna arrangement with some
directionality. If the multipath signal(s) can be reduced below one
particular strongest signal, then phase cancellation cannot occur. Two
whips
separated by 1/2 wavelength can be directionally oriented by a combining
phase shift network, which is probably why your Dennesen worked so well.

It still works, if I can stand to look at it. :-) However, my primary
residence sports a Sniper these days with Yaesu rotor.

A single vertical whip receives equally well from all directions. This
means
that reduction in multipath can be accomplished only by moving the
antenna
about the room. By contrast, a dipole can be rotated through 180
vertically,
and 180 degrees horizontally, while in the same location, provided one
can
find a way to support the floppy wires. Taping it to a dowell stick
would
work.



I hear you, but when using an A/B switch and watching the trace as you
switch antennas, any changes in multipath reception are easily detected.
Using such setup, I can only conclude that the ST-2, generally speaking,
is
not impeded by multipath reception and will deliver a stronger, cleaner
signal to a tuner than a R/S dipole and its cousins.


Cheers,

Margaret


I don't doubt the result. Your reply has forced me to additional thought:

1.Mere inches are significant to multipath.

2. The other thing which is signficant is this: the ST-2 connects to the
receiver by coax, which picks up negligible signal by itself. The twinlead
from a folded dipole is part of the antenna system itself. Therefore, it
picks up more signal, which can cancel with that received by the nominal
antenna. Back in the 60's, people would prewire their houses with twinlead
for a rooftop TV antenna, and the ghosting (visual multipath) was vicious.
Replacing it with coax eliminated the distribution system as a secondary
antenna.

I should append the following note to my original advice to "ric". After
constructing his custom 33.5" folded dipole, he should purchase a balun
transformer from Radio Shack or any other source. He should connect the
pigtails on the balun to the feed of the dipole, and he should run coaxial
cable to his receiver.

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com...


Robert Morein wrote:
"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com...


Robert Morein wrote:
There really isn't.
It is a common misconception that a station is not received due to
inadequate signal strength. This is actually quite rare.
The usual problem is a combination of:
1. multipath, meaning that the signal reaches the antenna via
multiple
reflections. This causes complete cancellation at specific
frequencies
as
the modulated FM signal changes frequency. No antenna can restore a
signal
from a null.

Funny that cell phones can but expensive FM receivers can't.

http://www.answers.com/topic/rake-receiver

ScottW

That is because cell is spread-spectrum:
http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm...te_number/1890
A broadband signal cannot experience complete phase cancellation. Only
parts
of the signal will vanish. There are two newer methods that specifically
aim
at reduction of multipath effects: OFDM, and time-space diversity
reception.

I know... just kind of pointing out in a convoluted way how obsolete
FM is. We get trapped in these legacy technologies and until something
like the gov dicates a change (like digital television for example)
people will continue struggling with problems that have long been
solved.

ScottW

But the programming is worse
Anyway, the codecs used by satellite and IBOC FM have been challenged as
having barely hifi fidelity. The claims of "CD quality" are the worst kind
of ad-speak. Although IBOC extends range and eliminates multipath
distortion, there are some people who feel the quality of the codec is not
up to analog FM at its best.
Another victory for analog?

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
news

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"ric" wrote in message
...
Robert Morein wrote:

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly
considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

This is an omnidirectional antenna, which means it will be very
susceptible
to multipath. The fact that it is cut for the educational band
gives
it
a
little more gain, but, as I said, gain is seldom the problem. The
problem is
phase cancellation caused by reception of a signal that is
reflected
by
two
or more different paths. This causes the signal to actually
cancel
100%
at
certain frequencies. More gain on nothing does not result in
something.
The
solution is a directional antenna, which attenuates all but one
of
the
reception paths, eliminating the phase cancellation.

Hmmm...I'm getting a slew of opinions on this, and few of them
reach
the same conclusion. Such as:

http://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/recep.htm

I've tried various dipole antennas, all with similar results. Best
results so far was an RCA powered indoor TV "rabbit ear" type
antenna.

I'm tempted to have an antenna cut specifically for 88.3 MHz, as
that
is
the only FM I listen to. Oh well...

You can do it yourself. Take a look at
http://www.ycars.org/EFRA/Module%20C/AntDip.htm

The wavelength of 88.3 mHz is 66.88 inches. Your dipole should be
1/2
that
length: 33.5. All you need is a piece of twinlead, which is just
junky
antenna lead-in wire. Cut it to 33.5 inches. At each end, twist the
conductors together. At the center, break one conductor. Connect the
loose
ends to your feed wire. It is not essential, but nice, if you can
have
t
the
connections soldered. Protect the wires from bending and breaking by
encasing the joints in some RTV (GE silicone goo).

I do not understand why the station engineer recommended the
Fanfare.

I do. It worked in his location.

This
antenna has 0 dB gain. 0 is a very small number. The only advantage
to
the
Fanfare is for external use, since it is self-supporting. An indoor
dipole,
which can be taped or tacked to any convenient surface, does not
need
mechanical rigidity.

A properly cut dipole has twice the signal strength: 3 dB.




There's more to antennas than theory, especially these "little ones".
As
I
stated before, I don't have any experience of this particular antenna
but
I
have plenty of experience of seemingly similar design, The Magnum
Dynalab
ST-2.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_st2.htm

It has worked admirably well over the years in many urban locations
except
one. NYC RF hell rendered it pretty much useless. However, at the time
I
did
not have the Signal Sleuth that greatly complements the whip albeit at
a
considerable cost.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_sleuth.htm

Based on my "nontechnical" opinion I can say that the whip alone
generally
outperforms the "grocerybagful" of dipoles I've accumulated over the
years
by a comfortable margin. With the Sleuth, it is the ultimate quick and
small
FM antenna solution. One of my favorite tuners has a scope that allows
the
monitoring of multipath signals and contrary to what one might think,
the
ST-2 is not all that easily bothered by it. That said, there are
locations,
such as NYC, where the cheap but nearly unobtainable Dennesen dual
whip
cannot be beat. I suspect that the Dennesen would be an easy DIY
project
for
those so inclined.

But no one should fool themselves into thinking that any of these
products
will succesfully compete with a competent outdoor antenna such as
those
made by APS.

Cheers,

Margaret

Margaret, without contradicting your experience, I think that the
difference
in sound has to do with the placement of the antenna.

That's probably most of it. As I said, "there's more than theory"...

Perhaps the
freestanding whip was placeable in a way that the dipole was not.
The real solution comes from an antenna arrangement with some
directionality. If the multipath signal(s) can be reduced below one
particular strongest signal, then phase cancellation cannot occur. Two
whips
separated by 1/2 wavelength can be directionally oriented by a
combining
phase shift network, which is probably why your Dennesen worked so
well.

It still works, if I can stand to look at it. :-) However, my primary
residence sports a Sniper these days with Yaesu rotor.

A single vertical whip receives equally well from all directions. This
means
that reduction in multipath can be accomplished only by moving the
antenna
about the room. By contrast, a dipole can be rotated through 180
vertically,
and 180 degrees horizontally, while in the same location, provided one
can
find a way to support the floppy wires. Taping it to a dowell stick
would
work.



I hear you, but when using an A/B switch and watching the trace as you
switch antennas, any changes in multipath reception are easily detected.
Using such setup, I can only conclude that the ST-2, generally speaking,
is
not impeded by multipath reception and will deliver a stronger, cleaner
signal to a tuner than a R/S dipole and its cousins.


Cheers,

Margaret


I don't doubt the result. Your reply has forced me to additional thought:

1.Mere inches are significant to multipath.

2. The other thing which is signficant is this: the ST-2 connects to the
receiver by coax, which picks up negligible signal by itself. The twinlead
from a folded dipole is part of the antenna system itself. Therefore, it
picks up more signal, which can cancel with that received by the nominal
antenna. Back in the 60's, people would prewire their houses with twinlead
for a rooftop TV antenna, and the ghosting (visual multipath) was vicious.
Replacing it with coax eliminated the distribution system as a secondary
antenna.

I should append the following note to my original advice to "ric". After
constructing his custom 33.5" folded dipole, he should purchase a balun
transformer from Radio Shack or any other source. He should connect the
pigtails on the balun to the feed of the dipole, and he should run coaxial
cable to his receiver.


That should do it. OTOH, the person who bought my old "nightmare reception"
loft in NYC simply ended up buying a Blaupunkt car stereo with a diversity
tuner and got better results than with any home units at a fraction of the
cost. Of course one still needs to optimize antenna location, but it is
pretty much set and forget. I was stunned how well it worked. In fact, I
should buy one of those Blaupunkts and compare it to my existind tuners for
the fun of it. I believe even the Audio Critic did an article on the
Blaupunkt tuners after they got a whiff of it...

Cheers,

Margaret

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
news

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Margaret von B." wrote in
message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"ric" wrote in message
...
Robert Morein wrote:

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly
considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

This is an omnidirectional antenna, which means it will be very
susceptible
to multipath. The fact that it is cut for the educational band
gives
it
a
little more gain, but, as I said, gain is seldom the problem.
The
problem is
phase cancellation caused by reception of a signal that is
reflected
by
two
or more different paths. This causes the signal to actually
cancel
100%
at
certain frequencies. More gain on nothing does not result in
something.
The
solution is a directional antenna, which attenuates all but one
of
the
reception paths, eliminating the phase cancellation.

Hmmm...I'm getting a slew of opinions on this, and few of them
reach
the same conclusion. Such as:

http://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/recep.htm

I've tried various dipole antennas, all with similar results.
Best
results so far was an RCA powered indoor TV "rabbit ear" type
antenna.

I'm tempted to have an antenna cut specifically for 88.3 MHz, as
that
is
the only FM I listen to. Oh well...

You can do it yourself. Take a look at
http://www.ycars.org/EFRA/Module%20C/AntDip.htm

The wavelength of 88.3 mHz is 66.88 inches. Your dipole should be
1/2
that
length: 33.5. All you need is a piece of twinlead, which is just
junky
antenna lead-in wire. Cut it to 33.5 inches. At each end, twist
the
conductors together. At the center, break one conductor. Connect
the
loose
ends to your feed wire. It is not essential, but nice, if you can
have
t
the
connections soldered. Protect the wires from bending and breaking
by
encasing the joints in some RTV (GE silicone goo).

I do not understand why the station engineer recommended the
Fanfare.

I do. It worked in his location.

This
antenna has 0 dB gain. 0 is a very small number. The only
advantage
to
the
Fanfare is for external use, since it is self-supporting. An
indoor
dipole,
which can be taped or tacked to any convenient surface, does not
need
mechanical rigidity.

A properly cut dipole has twice the signal strength: 3 dB.




There's more to antennas than theory, especially these "little
ones".
As
I
stated before, I don't have any experience of this particular
antenna
but
I
have plenty of experience of seemingly similar design, The Magnum
Dynalab
ST-2.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_st2.htm

It has worked admirably well over the years in many urban locations
except
one. NYC RF hell rendered it pretty much useless. However, at the
time
I
did
not have the Signal Sleuth that greatly complements the whip albeit
at
a
considerable cost.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_sleuth.htm

Based on my "nontechnical" opinion I can say that the whip alone
generally
outperforms the "grocerybagful" of dipoles I've accumulated over the
years
by a comfortable margin. With the Sleuth, it is the ultimate quick
and
small
FM antenna solution. One of my favorite tuners has a scope that
allows
the
monitoring of multipath signals and contrary to what one might
think,
the
ST-2 is not all that easily bothered by it. That said, there are
locations,
such as NYC, where the cheap but nearly unobtainable Dennesen dual
whip
cannot be beat. I suspect that the Dennesen would be an easy DIY
project
for
those so inclined.

But no one should fool themselves into thinking that any of these
products
will succesfully compete with a competent outdoor antenna such as
those
made by APS.

Cheers,

Margaret

Margaret, without contradicting your experience, I think that the
difference
in sound has to do with the placement of the antenna.

That's probably most of it. As I said, "there's more than theory"...

Perhaps the
freestanding whip was placeable in a way that the dipole was not.
The real solution comes from an antenna arrangement with some
directionality. If the multipath signal(s) can be reduced below one
particular strongest signal, then phase cancellation cannot occur.
Two
whips
separated by 1/2 wavelength can be directionally oriented by a
combining
phase shift network, which is probably why your Dennesen worked so
well.

It still works, if I can stand to look at it. :-) However, my primary
residence sports a Sniper these days with Yaesu rotor.

A single vertical whip receives equally well from all directions.
This
means
that reduction in multipath can be accomplished only by moving the
antenna
about the room. By contrast, a dipole can be rotated through 180
vertically,
and 180 degrees horizontally, while in the same location, provided
one
can
find a way to support the floppy wires. Taping it to a dowell stick
would
work.



I hear you, but when using an A/B switch and watching the trace as you
switch antennas, any changes in multipath reception are easily
detected.
Using such setup, I can only conclude that the ST-2, generally
speaking,
is
not impeded by multipath reception and will deliver a stronger, cleaner
signal to a tuner than a R/S dipole and its cousins.


Cheers,

Margaret


I don't doubt the result. Your reply has forced me to additional
thought:

1.Mere inches are significant to multipath.

2. The other thing which is signficant is this: the ST-2 connects to the
receiver by coax, which picks up negligible signal by itself. The
twinlead
from a folded dipole is part of the antenna system itself. Therefore, it
picks up more signal, which can cancel with that received by the nominal
antenna. Back in the 60's, people would prewire their houses with
twinlead
for a rooftop TV antenna, and the ghosting (visual multipath) was
vicious.
Replacing it with coax eliminated the distribution system as a secondary
antenna.

I should append the following note to my original advice to "ric".
After
constructing his custom 33.5" folded dipole, he should purchase a balun
transformer from Radio Shack or any other source. He should connect the
pigtails on the balun to the feed of the dipole, and he should run
coaxial
cable to his receiver.


That should do it. OTOH, the person who bought my old "nightmare
reception"
loft in NYC simply ended up buying a Blaupunkt car stereo with a diversity
tuner and got better results than with any home units at a fraction of the
cost. Of course one still needs to optimize antenna location, but it is
pretty much set and forget. I was stunned how well it worked. In fact, I
should buy one of those Blaupunkts and compare it to my existind tuners
for
the fun of it. I believe even the Audio Critic did an article on the
Blaupunkt tuners after they got a whiff of it...

Cheers,

Margaret

Is Blaupunkt still making it? Is it still called the "Berlin" ?
I lusted after one of those for years. I put two antennas on my car just in
anticipation.
Clarion also had one. Do they still?

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
news
"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Margaret von B." wrote in
message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"ric" wrote in message
...
Robert Morein wrote:

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly
considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

This is an omnidirectional antenna, which means it will be
very
susceptible
to multipath. The fact that it is cut for the educational band
gives
it
a
little more gain, but, as I said, gain is seldom the problem.
The
problem is
phase cancellation caused by reception of a signal that is
reflected
by
two
or more different paths. This causes the signal to actually
cancel
100%
at
certain frequencies. More gain on nothing does not result in
something.
The
solution is a directional antenna, which attenuates all but
one
of
the
reception paths, eliminating the phase cancellation.

Hmmm...I'm getting a slew of opinions on this, and few of them
reach
the same conclusion. Such as:

http://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/recep.htm

I've tried various dipole antennas, all with similar results.
Best
results so far was an RCA powered indoor TV "rabbit ear" type
antenna.

I'm tempted to have an antenna cut specifically for 88.3 MHz, as
that
is
the only FM I listen to. Oh well...

You can do it yourself. Take a look at
http://www.ycars.org/EFRA/Module%20C/AntDip.htm

The wavelength of 88.3 mHz is 66.88 inches. Your dipole should be
1/2
that
length: 33.5. All you need is a piece of twinlead, which is just
junky
antenna lead-in wire. Cut it to 33.5 inches. At each end, twist
the
conductors together. At the center, break one conductor. Connect
the
loose
ends to your feed wire. It is not essential, but nice, if you can
have
t
the
connections soldered. Protect the wires from bending and breaking
by
encasing the joints in some RTV (GE silicone goo).

I do not understand why the station engineer recommended the
Fanfare.

I do. It worked in his location.

This
antenna has 0 dB gain. 0 is a very small number. The only
advantage
to
the
Fanfare is for external use, since it is self-supporting. An
indoor
dipole,
which can be taped or tacked to any convenient surface, does not
need
mechanical rigidity.

A properly cut dipole has twice the signal strength: 3 dB.




There's more to antennas than theory, especially these "little
ones".
As
I
stated before, I don't have any experience of this particular
antenna
but
I
have plenty of experience of seemingly similar design, The Magnum
Dynalab
ST-2.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_st2.htm

It has worked admirably well over the years in many urban locations
except
one. NYC RF hell rendered it pretty much useless. However, at the
time
I
did
not have the Signal Sleuth that greatly complements the whip albeit
at
a
considerable cost.

http://www.magnumdynalab.com/x_sleuth.htm

Based on my "nontechnical" opinion I can say that the whip alone
generally
outperforms the "grocerybagful" of dipoles I've accumulated over
the
years
by a comfortable margin. With the Sleuth, it is the ultimate quick
and
small
FM antenna solution. One of my favorite tuners has a scope that
allows
the
monitoring of multipath signals and contrary to what one might
think,
the
ST-2 is not all that easily bothered by it. That said, there are
locations,
such as NYC, where the cheap but nearly unobtainable Dennesen dual
whip
cannot be beat. I suspect that the Dennesen would be an easy DIY
project
for
those so inclined.

But no one should fool themselves into thinking that any of these
products
will succesfully compete with a competent outdoor antenna such as
those
made by APS.

Cheers,

Margaret

Margaret, without contradicting your experience, I think that the
difference
in sound has to do with the placement of the antenna.

That's probably most of it. As I said, "there's more than theory"...

Perhaps the
freestanding whip was placeable in a way that the dipole was not.
The real solution comes from an antenna arrangement with some
directionality. If the multipath signal(s) can be reduced below one
particular strongest signal, then phase cancellation cannot occur.
Two
whips
separated by 1/2 wavelength can be directionally oriented by a
combining
phase shift network, which is probably why your Dennesen worked so
well.

It still works, if I can stand to look at it. :-) However, my primary
residence sports a Sniper these days with Yaesu rotor.

A single vertical whip receives equally well from all directions.
This
means
that reduction in multipath can be accomplished only by moving the
antenna
about the room. By contrast, a dipole can be rotated through 180
vertically,
and 180 degrees horizontally, while in the same location, provided
one
can
find a way to support the floppy wires. Taping it to a dowell stick
would
work.



I hear you, but when using an A/B switch and watching the trace as you
switch antennas, any changes in multipath reception are easily
detected.
Using such setup, I can only conclude that the ST-2, generally
speaking,
is
not impeded by multipath reception and will deliver a stronger,
cleaner
signal to a tuner than a R/S dipole and its cousins.


Cheers,

Margaret


I don't doubt the result. Your reply has forced me to additional
thought:

1.Mere inches are significant to multipath.

2. The other thing which is signficant is this: the ST-2 connects to
the
receiver by coax, which picks up negligible signal by itself. The
twinlead
from a folded dipole is part of the antenna system itself. Therefore,
it
picks up more signal, which can cancel with that received by the
nominal
antenna. Back in the 60's, people would prewire their houses with
twinlead
for a rooftop TV antenna, and the ghosting (visual multipath) was
vicious.
Replacing it with coax eliminated the distribution system as a
secondary
antenna.

I should append the following note to my original advice to "ric".
After
constructing his custom 33.5" folded dipole, he should purchase a balun
transformer from Radio Shack or any other source. He should connect the
pigtails on the balun to the feed of the dipole, and he should run
coaxial
cable to his receiver.


That should do it. OTOH, the person who bought my old "nightmare
reception"
loft in NYC simply ended up buying a Blaupunkt car stereo with a
diversity
tuner and got better results than with any home units at a fraction of
the
cost. Of course one still needs to optimize antenna location, but it is
pretty much set and forget. I was stunned how well it worked. In fact, I
should buy one of those Blaupunkts and compare it to my existind tuners
for
the fun of it. I believe even the Audio Critic did an article on the
Blaupunkt tuners after they got a whiff of it...

Cheers,

Margaret

Is Blaupunkt still making it? Is it still called the "Berlin" ?

Berlin was traditionally the very best Blaupunkt including an early 80's
edition with a gooseneck control unit. Daddy had one in an otherwise dreary
MB 300 !!!DIESEL!!! (yuch!), but at least there was no ignition noise. I
just e-mailed my friend and his current unit is the San Francisco and it is
a couple of years old. He thinks the latest -and more subtle looking-
version is named Bremen. He said it is "the one that has MSRP of $750 and
sells for $500, whatever it is called". He is extremely happy with it and
the only downsides are gaudy cosmetics and a remote with a relatively short
range.

I lusted after one of those for years. I put two antennas on my car just
in
anticipation.

The best I ever did was a model below it, I believe it was called
Washington, in my Jeep. That thing had Dolby B&C, stereo AM and two
bandwidths. In terms of pure RF performance, it was the best car tuner I've
ever had.

Clarion also had one. Do they still?


Don't know but I would think so since it seems to be increasingly popular,
even in factory units.

Cheers,

Margaret

Robert Morein wrote:
"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com...


Robert Morein wrote:
"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com...


Robert Morein wrote:
There really isn't.
It is a common misconception that a station is not received due to
inadequate signal strength. This is actually quite rare.
The usual problem is a combination of:
1. multipath, meaning that the signal reaches the antenna via
multiple
reflections. This causes complete cancellation at specific
frequencies
as
the modulated FM signal changes frequency. No antenna can restore a
signal
from a null.

Funny that cell phones can but expensive FM receivers can't.

http://www.answers.com/topic/rake-receiver

ScottW

That is because cell is spread-spectrum:
http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm...te_number/1890
A broadband signal cannot experience complete phase cancellation. Only
parts
of the signal will vanish. There are two newer methods that specifically
aim
at reduction of multipath effects: OFDM, and time-space diversity
reception.

I know... just kind of pointing out in a convoluted way how obsolete
FM is. We get trapped in these legacy technologies and until something
like the gov dicates a change (like digital television for example)
people will continue struggling with problems that have long been
solved.

ScottW

But the programming is worse
Anyway, the codecs used by satellite and IBOC FM have been challenged as
having barely hifi fidelity. The claims of "CD quality" are the worst kind
of ad-speak. Although IBOC extends range and eliminates multipath
distortion, there are some people who feel the quality of the codec is not
up to analog FM at its best.
Another victory for analog?

All of this is a function of bandwidth allocated. Eliminate the
legacy technology licenses and open that bandwidth to more efficient
technology and we wont have to excessivley compress.

ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com...

Robert Morein wrote:
"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com...


Robert Morein wrote:
"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com...


Robert Morein wrote:
There really isn't.
It is a common misconception that a station is not received due
to
inadequate signal strength. This is actually quite rare.
The usual problem is a combination of:
1. multipath, meaning that the signal reaches the antenna via
multiple
reflections. This causes complete cancellation at specific
frequencies
as
the modulated FM signal changes frequency. No antenna can
restore a
signal
from a null.

Funny that cell phones can but expensive FM receivers can't.

http://www.answers.com/topic/rake-receiver

ScottW

That is because cell is spread-spectrum:
http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm...te_number/1890
A broadband signal cannot experience complete phase cancellation.
Only
parts
of the signal will vanish. There are two newer methods that
specifically
aim
at reduction of multipath effects: OFDM, and time-space diversity
reception.

I know... just kind of pointing out in a convoluted way how obsolete
FM is. We get trapped in these legacy technologies and until something
like the gov dicates a change (like digital television for example)
people will continue struggling with problems that have long been
solved.

ScottW

But the programming is worse
Anyway, the codecs used by satellite and IBOC FM have been challenged as
having barely hifi fidelity. The claims of "CD quality" are the worst
kind
of ad-speak. Although IBOC extends range and eliminates multipath
distortion, there are some people who feel the quality of the codec is
not
up to analog FM at its best.
Another victory for analog?

All of this is a function of bandwidth allocated. Eliminate the
legacy technology licenses and open that bandwidth to more efficient
technology and we wont have to excessivley compress.

ScottW

The problem with IBOC is, there is just so much bandwidth in an FM channel.
In Europe, they have a better system: broadcasters pool to afew spread
spectrum signals. But they have fewer stations to pool.

Robert Morein wrote:

Is Blaupunkt still making it? Is it still called the "Berlin" ?
I lusted after one of those for years. I put two antennas on my car just in
anticipation.
Clarion also had one. Do they still?

I had the Clarion "Audia" car radio with the FM "diversity" FM tuner.
It worked great. My car even had two antennas already. Best FM tuner
I've ever had (in a car.) I know longer see this technology discussed
on their website http://www.clarion.com/usa/index.html

BTW, the FM-2G-C is fully refundable, minus a $5 "boxing" fee. So,
at least a failed experiment won't leave me out the full amount.
For a compact design and a minimum amount of effort on my part,
it's worth a try.

Margaret von B. wrote
Robert Morein wrote




huge snip



Is Blaupunkt still making it? Is it still called the "Berlin" ?

Berlin was traditionally the very best Blaupunkt including an early 80's
edition with a gooseneck control unit. Daddy had one in an otherwise dreary
MB 300 !!!DIESEL!!! (yuch!), but at least there was no ignition noise. I
just e-mailed my friend and his current unit is the San Francisco and it is
a couple of years old. He thinks the latest -and more subtle looking-
version is named Bremen. He said it is "the one that has MSRP of $750 and
sells for $500, whatever it is called". He is extremely happy with it and
the only downsides are gaudy cosmetics and a remote with a relatively short
range.


In the 80s, I had the Blaupunkt Tucson and IIRC the radio reception is
a little better than average. I guess it is the function of having the right
antenna to get a better reception and I didn't know anything about that
then -- as long as it has one. The Tucson sold for about $450 and it
sounded better than I ever heard HU up to that point when listening to
casettes tapes. Yes, I remember the Berlin. It was their best unit in
terms of sound, quality, and reception back then. Everybody wants one.


Sadly, Blaupunkt is no more. Most of them are now made of recycled
plastics from China. What sound quality do you expect from something
like that. Pyuk, pyuk, pyuk.


I lusted after one of those for years. I put two antennas on my car just in
anticipation.


I heard the Berlin through a friend's automobile.


The best I ever did was a model below it, I believe it was called
Washington, in my Jeep. That thing had Dolby B&C, stereo AM and two
bandwidths. In terms of pure RF performance, it was the best car tuner I've
ever had.

Clarion also had one. Do they still?


Don't know but I would think so since it seems to be increasingly popular,
even in factory units.

Mine does not have.

For Radio Operation it says:

"For enhance FM performance, the Magi-Tunes(TM) tuner includes signal
actuated stereo control, Enhanced Multi AGC, Impulse Noise Reduction
Circuits and Multipath reduction circuits."

It doesn't say anything about Dolby B&C or having two bandwidth.
But the radio get lotsa station that sounds clear, warm and quiet.

Cheers,

Margaret

ric wrote:

Joseph Oberlander wrote:

Thanks. Are you familiar with the FM-2G-C?

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

I am leaning toward trying it, indoors (next to a window) first.

Their marketing is rubbish, btw. Any standard "whip" type
antenna will work like that - just shorten it to the exact
frequency that you desire and aim it around until you get a
good signal.

Robert Morein wrote:

"ric" wrote in message ...

Robert Morein wrote:


There really isn't.
It is a common misconception that a station is not received due to
inadequate signal strength. This is actually quite rare.

This appears to be the case here, though. This is a college station,
low in frequency (88.3 MHz), and only broadcasting at 2K watts about
40 miles to my south. The signal is very steady, but weak. Static
can be 99% eliminated by going into mono mode.

Are you familiar with the FM2G-C? It is being strongly considered.

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html


This is an omnidirectional antenna, which means it will be very susceptible
to multipath. The fact that it is cut for the educational band gives it a
little more gain, but, as I said, gain is seldom the problem. The problem is
phase cancellation caused by reception of a signal that is reflected by two
or more different paths. This causes the signal to actually cancel 100% at
certain frequencies. More gain on nothing does not result in something. The
solution is a directional antenna, which attenuates all but one of the
reception paths, eliminating the phase cancellation.

A cheap way is also to use a pair of "rabbit ears". The two antennas
give a lot of interference to be sure, but they can be aimed to make it
pretty directional(note - it works best if the weaker one is a lot
shorter than the main one). It's not great, but it's effective
enough considering the nearly zero cost.

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
ink.net...


ric wrote:

Joseph Oberlander wrote:

Thanks. Are you familiar with the FM-2G-C?
http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

I am leaning toward trying it, indoors (next to a window) first.

Their marketing is rubbish, btw.


How many vacuum tubes did you find in it?


Any standard "whip" type
antenna will work like that - just shorten it to the exact
frequency that you desire and aim it around until you get a
good signal.



To call you an idiot would be an insult to idiots.


Margaret

Joseph Oberlander wrote:

Thanks. Are you familiar with the FM-2G-C?

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

I am leaning toward trying it, indoors (next to a window) first.

Their marketing is rubbish, btw. Any standard "whip" type
antenna will work like that - just shorten it to the exact
frequency that you desire and aim it around until you get a
good signal.

A lower frequency requires a *shorter* antenna?? I thought it would
have to be *longer*. Please explain.

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 08:56:42 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

One is disappointed in f'ing wannabee Usenet scientists. . .


The wavelength of 88.3 mHz

milli Hertz?



is 66.88 inches.

********!
Try twice that. (300e6 /88.3e6 x100/2.54) inches.

Your dipole should be 1/2 that
length: 33.5. All you need is a piece of twinlead, which is just junky
antenna lead-in wire. Cut it to 33.5 inches. At each end, twist the
conductors together. At the center, break one conductor. Connect the loose
ends to your feed wire. It is not essential, but nice, if you can have t the
connections soldered. Protect the wires from bending and breaking by
encasing the joints in some RTV (GE silicone goo).


I do not understand why the station engineer recommended the Fanfare. This
antenna has 0 dB gain. 0 is a very small number. The only advantage to the
Fanfare is for external use, since it is self-supporting. An indoor dipole,
which can be taped or tacked to any convenient surface, does not need
mechanical rigidity.

A properly cut dipole has twice the signal strength: 3 dB.

********!
Try 0dB (the gain of an antenna is specified wrt a dipole!)

"ric" wrote in message ...
Joseph Oberlander wrote:

Thanks. Are you familiar with the FM-2G-C?

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

I am leaning toward trying it, indoors (next to a window) first.

Their marketing is rubbish, btw. Any standard "whip" type
antenna will work like that - just shorten it to the exact
frequency that you desire and aim it around until you get a
good signal.

A lower frequency requires a *shorter* antenna?? I thought it would
have to be *longer*. Please explain.

I think what Margaret is referring to is that when making an antenna, one
may cut it a little longer, and trim it.
You are correct, in that length of the antenna is inversely proportional to
frequency.

Robert Morein wrote:

"ric" wrote in message ...
Joseph Oberlander wrote:

Thanks. Are you familiar with the FM-2G-C?

http://www.fanfare.com/fm-2g-c.html

I am leaning toward trying it, indoors (next to a window) first.

Their marketing is rubbish, btw. Any standard "whip" type
antenna will work like that - just shorten it to the exact
frequency that you desire and aim it around until you get a
good signal.

A lower frequency requires a *shorter* antenna?? I thought it would
have to be *longer*. Please explain.

I think what Margaret is referring to is that when making an antenna, one
may cut it a little longer, and trim it.

I was replying to what Mr. Oberlander wrote, above. Margaret's reply was
spot on.

You are correct, in that length of the antenna is inversely proportional to
frequency.

Or directly proportional to wavelength. Methinks Mr. Oberlander is
confused. No FM band whip would be shortened to improve its 88.3 MHz
performance.

Robert Morein wrote:

You can do it yourself. Take a look at
http://www.ycars.org/EFRA/Module%20C/AntDip.htm

The wavelength of 88.3 mHz is 66.88 inches. Your dipole should be 1/2 that
length: 33.5.

Hmmm...the website you give above contradicts that. It says:

1/2 WL dipole length = 468/f = 468/88.3 = 5.3 feet = 63.6 inches.

Since none of the existing FM dipoles I have are 63.6 inches long (the
longest being just under 5 feet), should I assume that is why they are
so poor in the "college" (88-90 MHz) FM band?

"ric" wrote in message ...
Robert Morein wrote:

You can do it yourself. Take a look at
http://www.ycars.org/EFRA/Module%20C/AntDip.htm

The wavelength of 88.3 mHz is 66.88 inches. Your dipole should be 1/2
that
length: 33.5.

Hmmm...the website you give above contradicts that. It says:

1/2 WL dipole length = 468/f = 468/88.3 = 5.3 feet = 63.6 inches.

Since none of the existing FM dipoles I have are 63.6 inches long (the
longest being just under 5 feet), should I assume that is why they are
so poor in the "college" (88-90 MHz) FM band?

I'm sorry, Ric. I made a mistake.
The folded dipole is cut to 1/4 wavelength, which is why it works out to
33.5 inches for your frequency of interest.