Comments are moderated before they will appear on the website, this is a manual process and may take some time. Please be patient.
Author Name is a required field.
Email Address is optional, but without one I won't be able to contact you back. It is never shown or linked on the website. You can always just email me if you'd rather not post a public comment. I generally reply in-line with a comment rather than email you back, unless I want to discuss something in private or off topic. Please check back to see when I reply.
Website URL is optional, if supplied the Author Name will be hyperlinked to this URL.
You may use wikitext in the body, preview may be handy here. Don't worry if you can't figure them out, just give me a hint what you want linked to what and I'll do it during moderation. Wikitext is not BBcode!
Spammers: Please don't bother wasting your time scripting up posts to this form. Everything is moderated, your post will never be seen on the web even transiently, there is no way to even view it by its internal ID, it will never be indexed. I will simply delete your post in the moderation interface. If I'm your target audience you're really on the wrong track; I'll never click on a URL in your garbage. The post content is not emailed to me (and I don't use a Win32 mail client anyway), I view the posts in plain text in the moderation interface so no clever tricks of any kind will make anything you type be interpreted by anything other than me, a human. Just give up and go elsewhere please!
15th August 2013 06:12
Alan,
I know this is an old post but was reading it and cannot for the life of me (or with the all mighty power of Google) figure out what you meant by "blurt" tested OK. What is "blurt" tested?
Could you shed some light on this for me?
Thanks!
-- Newell
8th March 2013 02:39
I am wondering what kind of audio quality
have have schematic:
http://www.uploadarchief.net/files/download/fm-synchroontuner%281%29.gif
15th December 2012 02:26
Detection isn't done by slope detection, but by synchronising the oscillator frequency to the frequency swing of the incoming FM RF signal. The oscilator frequency follows the frequency swing of the incoming RF signal, the result is that the LF signal is detected by curent changes of the oscilator stage
25th October 2011 05:33
I have built an FM regenerative receiver with an RF preamp stage, oscillator with the same topology like the noisy regen. The oscillator is synchronised to the incoming signal. Detection is done by slope detection. The results are much better than with an FM regenerative receiver without any RF preamp stage.
Schematic:
http://www.uploadarchief.net/files/download/fm-synchroontuner%281%29.gif
8th August 2011 21:51
Norman,
Done. Give it a go mate, it is a very simple receiver you should be able to make it very small.
Regards,
Alan
8th August 2011 14:01
Alan,
I would greatly appreciate your comments or input on a post I put at:
http://www.theradioboard.com/rb/viewtopic.php?t=3445
about the Euro Set. Thanks in advance!!!!
Norman
KA1GUK
4th April 2008 03:59
Alan,
I had tried using 2SC1815 as the detecting stage but it did not work, probably because of its low ft (around 100 MHz).
I am quite surprised that your receiver doesn't need an antenna. With mine, no sound could be heard if there was no antenna.
Though this little receiver may not produce sound with quality matching commercial products, I am very satisfied with its performance given its simplicity. And I forgot to mention about its smooth feedback adjustment in the last post.
It is difficult to strike a balance between performance and circuit simplicity, but this receiver should be a very good attempt. I hear that pulse counting design, although more complicated than a regen, can perform much better. I probably will give it a try very soon.
Regards,
Ben
3rd April 2008 17:02
Ben,
I'm glad you had success building this receiver.
Yes it isn't exactly "hi-fi" quality. The slope detection has a lot to do with this, but the audio amplifiers aren't low-distortion either.
You could try substituting a "good" AF amplifier of similar input gain and do A/B comparisons to get an idea of how much comes from the AF amp and how much is inherent with the slope detection. To my ears it doesn't sound much different through a better amp, except intermod on audio peaks which is rather bad with the current simplistic amplifier. I now have the capability to measure distortion in a more scientific way, so it would be interesting to study it more closely.
It is a fun receiver though, I really enjoy mine with all its faults. I should rebuild it in a better arrangement.
Mine works "OK" without an antenna around town, but not so well in fringe areas. I've thought about adding a buffered front-end BPF, maybe using the headphone leads as the antenna. If I rebuild it I will likely do this and shield the entire device in a small metal tin.
I'm not completely sure why many of the devices I tried for the detector didn't oscillate. It shouldn't require excessively good Ft transistors. Did you try it will the humble 2SC1815 for the detector?
Regards,
Alan
3rd April 2008 03:51
I just built a similar circuit on a breadboard tonight. The first transistor was changed to 2SC1215 and the others to 2SC1815. Also I cut one of the intermediate AF stage. Of course, as what you mentioned, I adjusted the tuning tank to suit my practice.
When I connected the circuit to a battery, it worked at once. The result was surprisingly good and worth the mark as an excellent performer: high volume, good selectivity and reasonable sound quality.
I noted some points:
1. An antenna is needed. What I did was connecting a short wire via a 5 pF capacitor to a tap in the tuning coil.
2. 2SC1730 also functions normally as the first stage.
3. Although the sound quality is much better than my previous attempts on some superregenerative designs, I am quite aware of the presence of distortion regardless of the sound volume. Could the distortion be caused by slope detection and thus inherent to this design?
8th November 2013 05:29
Mast wrote...