Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Pixel AM loop???

Expand Messages
  • Bill
    I have been considering a Wellbrook 1530+ for quite some time. Now I see an American made 38 loop called the Pixel RF Pro-1. Has anyone heard of this
    Message 1 of 13 , Jun 9, 2010
      I have been considering a Wellbrook 1530+ for quite some time. Now I see an American made 38" loop called the Pixel RF Pro-1. Has anyone heard of this antenna? Have any of you tried it?

      http://www.pixelsatradio.com/

      Thanks,

      Bill
    • Jonny Boy
      Well it s high time somebody did this, glad to see it. I have a Wellbrook loop, am not entirely pleased. All of these loop snake-oil hustlers always hype the
      Message 2 of 13 , Jun 10, 2010
        Well it's high time somebody did this, glad to see it. I have a Wellbrook loop, am not entirely pleased. All of these loop snake-oil hustlers always hype the figure-8 pattern and the nulls. Excuse me, if you don't have the loop on a rotator, what good are these nulls? Speaking from personal experience, mind you. And if you add a rotator, congratulations, now you've blown $500-$600 on a single lousy little antenna. You could have bought TWO active whips and put them on a phaser for less money. This is exactly what I intend to do next time, already have the phaser. This arrangement delivers 360 degrees of uniform coverage with a single HUGE sweepable null to play with, nice simple exterior setup (no rotors or rotor cable), maximum stealth... This is the smarter way to burn up 600 smackers for nulling and active antennas, I'm pretty sure.

        That said, these Pixel antennas are different from Wellbrooks in some promising ways. I like that the amp and loop are separable so you can filter the amp input if you want. I would opt for the Pixel product for this reason alone (if somebody held a gun to my head and said I had to pick one or the other). As for the whole "Moebius" thing (see http://www.ece.unm.edu/summa/notes/SSN/note7.pdf ) it's certainly intriguing. It means that this is a SHIELDED loop (sort of) which I understand do work better, i.e. somewhat less gain but more developed nulls. This "moebius" geometry is in a class all its own, like a hybrid of shielded and two-turn designs.

        note: Pixel's own copy does NOT state or otherwise document that their product actually uses shielded construction. They just try to hypnotize me by repeating the word "moebius" over and over. They state "the RF PRO-1 Moebius Loop Antenna consists of a rigid light-weight ¾" diameter anodized aluminum 1 meter loop..." That is all. No mention of any internal, shielded conductive elements inside the tubing. No pictures of any such thing. Building their antennas this way would complicate construction, i.e. would make them more expensive. In other words, I need to SEE that they're actually doing this, and HOW they're doing it, before I'll believe it or put any stock in it. Does it even matter? Yeah sure it's "neat-o" and all but does it actually matter? I HATE marketing. The worst thing about hell is that all the marketers will be there.


        --- In loopantennas@yahoogroups.com, "Bill" <willscarlett@...> wrote:
        >
        > I have been considering a Wellbrook 1530+ for quite some time. Now I see an American made 38" loop called the Pixel RF Pro-1. Has anyone heard of this antenna? Have any of you tried it?
        >
        > http://www.pixelsatradio.com/
        >
        > Thanks,
        >
        > Bill
        >
      • james
        yup, thats how i feel, 299 bucks for a three foot diameter loop? no way would i blow that kind of cabbage on an antenna, i would sooner go to the hardware
        Message 3 of 13 , Jun 11, 2010
          yup, thats how i feel, 299 bucks for a three foot diameter loop? no way would i blow that kind of cabbage on an antenna, i would sooner go to the hardware store and buy a 500 foot roll of #12 stranded copper wire (about 50 bucks) and make my own loop strung up in the trees, Disclaimer: you dont have to use all 500 feet, make it using a formula (i think 1005 divided by the desired frequency for a full wave loop)

          or...

          if you want to use copper pipe or tubing that would work fine too, slightly more expensive than wire but pipe is rigid and can be configured in a more self supporting antenna.

          i know some CBers that made half wave dipoles out of 3/4 inch diameter thin walled galvanized electrical conduit, they last about 5 years before the galvanized gives in to weathering and starts to rust.

          even cheaper than copper wire is that aluminum electric fence wire found in any farm & ranch/feed store, you can get a 1 mile long roll for about 25 bucks.
        • Dean Wayman
          ... And if you add a rotator, congratulations, now you ve blown $500-$600 on a single lousy little antenna. You could have bought TWO active whips and put them
          Message 4 of 13 , Jun 11, 2010
            --- In loopantennas@yahoogroups.com, "Jonny Boy" <ny911truth@...> wrote:
            >
            And if you add a rotator, congratulations, now you've blown $500-$600 on a single lousy little antenna. You could have bought TWO active whips and put them on a phaser for less money.
            >
            I think it's been a while since you looked at antenna prices? that set-up from the engineering place will cost about 1500 smackers $$

            As for the whole "Moebius" thing (see http://www.ece.unm.edu/summa/notes/SSN/note7.pdf ) it's certainly intriguing. It means that this is a SHIELDED loop (sort of) which I understand do work better, i.e. somewhat less gain but more developed nulls. This "moebius" geometry is in a class all its own, like a hybrid of shielded and two-turn designs.
            >
            I dunno but i suspect it's hype ,,a name that sounds cool?

            Anyway i would like to hear from anyone who has the Pixel loop? I am almost ready to pull the trigger and get the wellbrook ,but i think i like the pixel one better.

            I dont have trees ,or room for 500 feet of wire ,no place to string any length up so the loop looks like a good idea .

            Dean_0
          • Jonny Boy
            ... I guess you must mean DX Engineering s AAPS-1P Electronically Rotatable Receive Antenna System, which they offer as a package for, uh, 1200 smackers minus
            Message 5 of 13 , Jun 12, 2010
              Dean said:
              > I think it's been a while since you looked at antenna prices? that > set-up from the engineering place will cost about 1500 smackers $$

              I guess you must mean DX Engineering's AAPS-1P Electronically Rotatable Receive Antenna System, which they offer as a package for, uh, 1200 smackers minus a nickel.
              http://www.dxengineering.com/Parts.asp?ID=2474&PLID=215&SecID=114&DeptID=12&PartNo=DXE-AAPS-1P
              I'm sure this array is fantastic— the phaser is probably the nicest ever made— but that's not what I meant. In fact the ARAV2 active whips that go into this system are a lousy value, in my opinion (too expensive, limited bandwidth).

              The system I have in mind is two LF Engineering H-900 Gain Probes (bandwidth 10 KHz - 60 MHz; 189 smackers apiece)
              http://www.grove-ent.com/h900.html
              combined with Timewave's ANC-4 phaser (199 smackers)
              http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/1138
              which, while not equal to DX Engineering's NCC-1 (600 smackers all by itself), is both adequate and built like a tank.

              Now, I may not have "looked at antenna prices lately" and all, but even a mouth-breathing jackass like me can see that these parts come in at less than 600 smackers total.

              "Anyway i would like to hear from anyone who has the Pixel loop?"
              Actually, what you really seem to want is people who have purchased BOTH Wellbrooks AND Pixels. I mean, who else is "fully qualified" to give you meaningful advice? I've owned one of the two, and here's my sage hard-won advice: forget about the loopster's marketing mumbo-jumbo; untuned active loops as a class are not what they're cracked up to be. That is, there are better more cost-effective ways to actually experience the benefits the loop manufacturers only pretend they're selling you.

              TUNED loops are a different matter, but to get a manufactured one now you're really talking crazy money. For most hobbyists, the sensible place of loop technology is among hardcore geeks who love to build their own stuff and experiment. The further you stray from this, the more you're being a buck-toothed dork in Times Square buying the Brooklyn Bridge. This is bitter experience speaking. Screw me once, shame on you; screw me TWICE, shame on ME...

              The one possibility I still find tantalizing for Wellbrook-type loops is building a "loop-sense cardioid array" (LSCA) by combining an ALA1530-plus with an LF Engineering H-900. The LSCA radiation pattern is MUCH more useful / discriminative than that of a simple loop. In fact, if Pixel is really serious about offering the world a better loop, they should look into building an LSCA *package*. The PRO-1 would make a perfectly good foundation. No physical separation is needed between the loop and whip, so the e-probe vertical could be integrated into the vertical support they're already using. The resulting whip-loop array would be practically identical to the PRO-1 and should achieve yagi-like performance in a physically sturdier package. Such a "loop" would actually be worthy of all the hype.

              --- In loopantennas@yahoogroups.com, "Dean Wayman" <dean_0_way@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In loopantennas@yahoogroups.com, "Jonny Boy" <ny911truth@> wrote:
              > >
              > And if you add a rotator, congratulations, now you've blown $500-$600 on a single lousy little antenna. You could have bought TWO active whips and put them on a phaser for less money.
              > >
              > I think it's been a while since you looked at antenna prices? that set-up from the engineering place will cost about 1500 smackers $$
              >
              > As for the whole "Moebius" thing (see http://www.ece.unm.edu/summa/notes/SSN/note7.pdf ) it's certainly intriguing. It means that this is a SHIELDED loop (sort of) which I understand do work better, i.e. somewhat less gain but more developed nulls. This "moebius" geometry is in a class all its own, like a hybrid of shielded and two-turn designs.
              > >
              > I dunno but i suspect it's hype ,,a name that sounds cool?
              >
              > Anyway i would like to hear from anyone who has the Pixel loop? I am almost ready to pull the trigger and get the wellbrook ,but i think i like the pixel one better.
              >
              > I dont have trees ,or room for 500 feet of wire ,no place to string any length up so the loop looks like a good idea .
              >
              > Dean_0
              >
            • richard
              On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 18:11:21 -0000 ... Hi why not try a steerable array, using phasor software. Instead of verticals in a square pattern, use 4 loops. Google
              Message 6 of 13 , Jun 12, 2010
                On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 18:11:21 -0000
                "Jonny Boy" <ny911truth@...> wrote:

                > Dean said:
                > > I think it's been a while since you looked at antenna prices? that > set-up
                > > from the engineering place will cost about 1500 smackers $$
                >
                > I guess you must mean DX Engineering's AAPS-1P Electronically Rotatable
                > Receive Antenna System, which they offer as a package for, uh, 1200 smackers
                > minus a nickel.
                > http://www.dxengineering.com/Parts.asp?ID=2474&PLID=215&SecID=114&DeptID=12&PartNo=DXE-AAPS-1P
                > I'm sure this array is fantastic— the phaser is probably the nicest ever
                > made— but that's not what I meant. In fact the ARAV2 active whips that go
                > into this system are a lousy value, in my opinion (too expensive, limited
                > bandwidth).
                >
                > The system I have in mind is two LF Engineering H-900 Gain Probes (bandwidth
                > 10 KHz - 60 MHz; 189 smackers apiece) http://www.grove-ent.com/h900.html
                > combined with Timewave's ANC-4 phaser (199 smackers)
                > http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/1138
                > which, while not equal to DX Engineering's NCC-1 (600 smackers all by
                > itself), is both adequate and built like a tank.
                >
                > Now, I may not have "looked at antenna prices lately" and all, but even a
                > mouth-breathing jackass like me can see that these parts come in at less than
                > 600 smackers total.
                >
                > "Anyway i would like to hear from anyone who has the Pixel loop?"
                > Actually, what you really seem to want is people who have purchased BOTH
                > Wellbrooks AND Pixels. I mean, who else is "fully qualified" to give you
                > meaningful advice? I've owned one of the two, and here's my sage hard-won
                > advice: forget about the loopster's marketing mumbo-jumbo; untuned active
                > loops as a class are not what they're cracked up to be. That is, there are
                > better more cost-effective ways to actually experience the benefits the loop
                > manufacturers only pretend they're selling you.
                >
                > TUNED loops are a different matter, but to get a manufactured one now you're
                > really talking crazy money. For most hobbyists, the sensible place of loop
                > technology is among hardcore geeks who love to build their own stuff and
                > experiment. The further you stray from this, the more you're being a
                > buck-toothed dork in Times Square buying the Brooklyn Bridge. This is bitter
                > experience speaking. Screw me once, shame on you; screw me TWICE, shame on
                > ME...
                >
                > The one possibility I still find tantalizing for Wellbrook-type loops is
                > building a "loop-sense cardioid array" (LSCA) by combining an ALA1530-plus
                > with an LF Engineering H-900. The LSCA radiation pattern is MUCH more
                > useful / discriminative than that of a simple loop. In fact, if Pixel is
                > really serious about offering the world a better loop, they should look into
                > building an LSCA *package*. The PRO-1 would make a perfectly good foundation.
                > No physical separation is needed between the loop and whip, so the e-probe
                > vertical could be integrated into the vertical support they're already using.
                > The resulting whip-loop array would be practically identical to the PRO-1 and
                > should achieve yagi-like performance in a physically sturdier package. Such a
                > "loop" would actually be worthy of all the hype.
                >
                > --- In loopantennas@yahoogroups.com, "Dean Wayman" <dean_0_way@...> wrote:
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In loopantennas@yahoogroups.com, "Jonny Boy" <ny911truth@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > And if you add a rotator, congratulations, now you've blown $500-$600 on a
                > > single lousy little antenna. You could have bought TWO active whips and put
                > > them on a phaser for less money.
                > > >
                > > I think it's been a while since you looked at antenna prices? that set-up
                > > from the engineering place will cost about 1500 smackers $$
                > > As for the whole "Moebius" thing (see
                > > http://www.ece.unm.edu/summa/notes/SSN/note7.pdf ) it's certainly
                > > intriguing. It means that this is a SHIELDED loop (sort of) which I
                > > understand do work better, i.e. somewhat less gain but more developed
                > > nulls. This "moebius" geometry is in a class all its own, like a hybrid of
                > > shielded and two-turn designs.
                > > >
                > > I dunno but i suspect it's hype ,,a name that sounds cool?
                > >
                > > Anyway i would like to hear from anyone who has the Pixel loop? I am
                > > almost ready to pull the trigger and get the wellbrook ,but i think i like
                > > the pixel one better.
                > >
                > > I dont have trees ,or room for 500 feet of wire ,no place to string any
                > > length up so the loop looks like a good idea .
                > >
                > > Dean_0
                > >
                >
                >
                Hi
                why not try a steerable array, using phasor software.

                Instead of verticals in a square pattern, use 4 loops.
                Google on Phasor and you should find details of Victors software.
                You would need a sound card with a minimum of 8 inputs , and 4 softrock lite
                Rx's , one for each antenna, now I know that the software will cope with a
                concentric antenna pattern using another 4 antennas inside the 4 , but that
                requires more softrock lites and a second sound card.
                It works well, as I've helped a Ham in the UK get it all running.
                It is not a project for a novice with little knowledge of electronics.
                But I t would give you a steerable array, and I can't see any reason why you
                cant replace a large vertical with a loop. The radiation pattern needs to be as
                oval as possible, so close to the ground

                Phasor is not a project to jump into without giving it a lot thought.

                HTH
                --
                Best wishes

                Richard Bown G8JVM

                ###################################################################################
                Registered Linux User 36561
                OS: Mandriva 2010.0 Powerpack on an AMD Dual Athlon 64 +4400: 8 GB RAM DDR2
                Ham Call: G8JVM , QRA IO82SP, Interests Microwave 1.3 GHz,2.3 GHz & 5.7GHz & 10
                GHz
                ###################################################################################
              • Jonny Boy
                ... And this is for buck-toothed dorks in Times Square buying the Brooklyn Bridge who think they re Guglielmo Marconi.
                Message 7 of 13 , Jun 12, 2010
                  --- In loopantennas@yahoogroups.com, richard <richard.bown@...> wrote:

                  > Instead of verticals in a square pattern, use 4 loops.
                  > Google on Phasor and you should find details of Victors software.
                  > You would need a sound card with a minimum of 8 inputs , and 4 softrock lite
                  > Rx's , one for each antenna, now I know that the software will cope with a
                  > concentric antenna pattern using another 4 antennas inside the 4 , but that
                  > requires more softrock lites and a second sound card.
                  > It works well, as I've helped a Ham in the UK get it all running.
                  > It is not a project for a novice with little knowledge of electronics.
                  > But I t would give you a steerable array, and I can't see any reason why you
                  > cant replace a large vertical with a loop. The radiation pattern needs to be as
                  > oval as possible, so close to the ground
                  >
                  > Phasor is not a project to jump into without giving it a lot thought.
                  >
                  > HTH
                  > --
                  > Best wishes
                  >
                  > Richard Bown G8JVM

                  And this is for buck-toothed dorks in Times Square buying the Brooklyn Bridge who think they're Guglielmo Marconi.
                • richard
                  On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 19:06:06 -0000 ... Webster has a lot to answer for !, it obviously would require an IQ 100 times greater than yours to understand the
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jun 12, 2010
                    On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 19:06:06 -0000
                    "Jonny Boy" <ny911truth@...> wrote:

                    > --- In loopantennas@yahoogroups.com, richard <richard.bown@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > > Instead of verticals in a square pattern, use 4 loops.
                    > > Google on Phasor and you should find details of Victors software.
                    > > You would need a sound card with a minimum of 8 inputs , and 4 softrock lite
                    > > Rx's , one for each antenna, now I know that the software will cope with a
                    > > concentric antenna pattern using another 4 antennas inside the 4 , but that
                    > > requires more softrock lites and a second sound card.
                    > > It works well, as I've helped a Ham in the UK get it all running.
                    > > It is not a project for a novice with little knowledge of electronics.
                    > > But I t would give you a steerable array, and I can't see any reason why you
                    > > cant replace a large vertical with a loop. The radiation pattern needs to
                    > > be as oval as possible, so close to the ground
                    > >
                    > > Phasor is not a project to jump into without giving it a lot thought.
                    > >
                    > > HTH
                    > > --
                    > > Best wishes
                    > >
                    > > Richard Bown G8JVM
                    >
                    > And this is for buck-toothed dorks in Times Square buying the Brooklyn Bridge
                    > who think they're Guglielmo Marconi.
                    >
                    Webster has a lot to answer for !, it obviously would require an IQ 100 times
                    greater than yours to understand the software, written by someone your side of
                    the pond and a few hundred miles to the north, BTW north is the direction the
                    sun doesn't shine from.

                    --
                    Best wishes

                    Richard Bown G8JVM

                    ###################################################################################
                    Registered Linux User 36561
                    OS: Mandriva 2010.0 Powerpack on an AMD Dual Athlon 64 +4400: 8 GB RAM DDR2
                    Ham Call: G8JVM , QRA IO82SP, Interests Microwave 1.3 GHz,2.3 GHz & 5.7GHz & 10
                    GHz
                    ###################################################################################
                  • Jonny Boy
                    ... Am I to understand that you re offended now because your previous suggestion was actually ... serious?? I was sure you were being sarcastic. I take back
                    Message 9 of 13 , Jun 12, 2010
                      > Webster has a lot to answer for !, it obviously would require an IQ 100 times
                      > greater than yours to understand the software, written by someone your side of
                      > the pond and a few hundred miles to the north, BTW north is the direction the
                      > sun doesn't shine from.

                      Am I to understand that you're offended now because your previous "suggestion" was actually ... serious?? I was sure you were being sarcastic. I take back the Marconi jibe. Why don't you tell me more about these tiny Softrock SDRs. I've never heard of them before and I'm amazed.
                    • richard
                      On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 04:02:18 -0000 ... OK The softrock Rx is a small beast using an on board xtal oscillator running usually about X3 the receive frequency,
                      Message 10 of 13 , Jun 13, 2010
                        On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 04:02:18 -0000
                        "Jonny Boy" <ny911truth@...> wrote:

                        > > Webster has a lot to answer for !, it obviously would require an IQ 100
                        > > times greater than yours to understand the software, written by someone
                        > > your side of the pond and a few hundred miles to the north, BTW north is
                        > > the direction the sun doesn't shine from.
                        >
                        > Am I to understand that you're offended now because your previous
                        > "suggestion" was actually ... serious?? I was sure you were being sarcastic.
                        > I take back the Marconi jibe. Why don't you tell me more about these tiny
                        > Softrock SDRs. I've never heard of them before and I'm amazed.
                        >

                        OK
                        The softrock Rx is a small beast using an on board xtal oscillator running
                        usually about X3 the receive frequency, although a ratio of 3/4 can be used as
                        well, that is applied to a H mode mixer producing a I & Q output, Q being in
                        quadrature to I.
                        That feed into the sound card on you PC, the faster the sampling rate the
                        greater bandwidth you can see when using the core software and display software.

                        The receivers are about $20 ish in kit form, there are kits to cover most of
                        the Ham bands up to 6 mtrs there is also a transceive version which is shipping
                        now. For that price try one, there are several FREE programs to control your
                        sound card and produce a display as a sprectrgram, ie. a panoramic frequency
                        display. go to the main site and follow the links from there

                        www.softrockradio.org this link will take to to the main site

                        For a discretion of the phasor software and what it does goes to the ARRL QEX
                        archives, the acticle was printed last year.


                        Best wishes

                        Richard Bown G8JVM

                        ###################################################################################
                        Registered Linux User 36561
                        OS: Mandriva 2010.0 Powerpack on an AMD Dual Athlon 64 +4400: 8 GB RAM DDR2
                        Ham Call: G8JVM , QRA IO82SP, Interests Microwave 1.3 GHz,2.3 GHz & 5.7GHz & 10
                        GHz
                        ###################################################################################
                      • Jim
                        Dean, I m intrigued also by the Pixel antenna. But I ve had a Wellbrook 1530 loop about 5 years now, and I m very happy with it. I also have an Eavesdropper
                        Message 11 of 13 , Jun 13, 2010
                          Dean, I'm intrigued also by the Pixel antenna.
                          But I've had a Wellbrook 1530 loop about 5 years now, and I'm very happy with it. I also have an Eavesdropper Sloper, about 67 feet, sloping from a second floor window, 30 feet high, to a tree branch about 8 feet high, oriented NE to SW.
                          I can't honestly say that one is better than the other, because there are so many variables. But if I were forced to have only one antenna, it would be the Wellbrook. It's a very good product. Maybe the Pixel is as good or better, but I don't have the space or resources to buy it and conduct an antenna "shootout" !
                          If you get the Pixel, we'd all be interested in your comments.
                          --jim




                          As for the whole "Moebius" thing (see http://www.ece.unm.edu/summa/notes/SSN/note7.pdf ) it's certainly intriguing. It means that this is a SHIELDED loop (sort of) which I understand do work better, i.e. somewhat less gain but more developed nulls. This "moebius" geometry is in a class all its own, like a hybrid of shielded and two-turn designs.
                          I dunno but i suspect it's hype ,,a name that sounds cool?
                          Anyway i would like to hear from anyone who has the Pixel loop? I am almost ready to pull the trigger and get the wellbrook ,but i think i like the pixel one better.
                          I dont have trees ,or room for 500 feet of wire ,no place to string any length up so the loop looks like a good idea .
                          Dean_0




                          --
                          I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
                          We are a community of 7 million users fighting spam.
                          SPAMfighter has removed 2242 of my spam emails to date.
                          Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len

                          The Professional version does not have this message


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Dean Wayman
                          ... Finally ! A decent post ,without all the insult s and drama- A little more about my situation ,there are several local station s that i would like to get
                          Message 12 of 13 , Jun 13, 2010
                            --- In loopantennas@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jimbo304@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Dean, I'm intrigued also by the Pixel antenna.
                            > But I've had a Wellbrook 1530 loop about 5 years now, and I'm very happy with it. I also have an Eavesdropper Sloper, about 67 feet, sloping from a second floor window, 30 feet high, to a tree branch about 8 feet high, oriented NE to SW.
                            > I can't honestly say that one is better than the other, because there are so many variables. But if I were forced to have only one antenna, it would be the Wellbrook. It's a very good product. Maybe the Pixel is as good or better, but I don't have the space or resources to buy it and conduct an antenna "shootout" !
                            > If you get the Pixel, we'd all be interested in your comments.
                            > --jim
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >Thanks Jim;

                            Finally ! A decent post ,without all the insult's and drama-
                            A little more about my situation ,there are several local station's that i would like to get most of the time ,i get them in my vehicle's so i see no reason that i should'nt get them at home ,but first i think i need to get an antenna as from the house a possible,not easy to do with only feet, instead of yards or miles around the house :)
                            anyway i would prefer a cheaper home built wire etc. but it's not possible and i really want to be able to steer the reception pattern,one of the big probs with wire setups. I even entertained the thought of buying a quad vertical setup but i think that's too much dough too spend on an antenna.
                            I'm pretty sure the wellbrook is a good system from what i've heard .
                            I'm also sure that any antenna system isn't perfect,so some ppl could be very dissapointed for some reason or other with any one of them.
                            I already have a short tower and a rotator so a loop looks like a good idea .
                            I've deployed several types of wire antennas ,some where more of a success than others but always have the same problem of directionality ,again the loop seems a good alternative,sry for going on forever here .
                            I'd rather get the facts before i just throw money and time at some thing ,that's why i keep bringin it up .

                            Thanks Jim

                            Dean_0
                          • Jonny Boy
                            ... mm. Musta been this that did it: I HATE marketing. The worst thing about hell is that all the marketers will be there. I wonder why he took it
                            Message 13 of 13 , Jun 13, 2010
                              --- In loopantennas@yahoogroups.com, "Dean Wayman" <dean_0_way@...> wrote:
                              > Finally ! A decent post ,without all the insult's and drama-

                              mm. Musta been this that did it:
                              "I HATE marketing. The worst thing about hell is that all the marketers will be there."

                              I wonder why he took it personally?
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.