receiving a carrier

Michael and all others whom are adament about top vs bottom posting.

It seems that if you can not complain about top posting, then please do not respond at all.

The clarity of the OPs question was doing fine until this issue came up (again).

If this means so much to you, then just don't respond at all.

Your in-ability to keep track of the discussion at hand will not diminsh the discussion.

Those whom can keep track of what happening will respond and those whom are lost should not respond at all.

Just don't get on your high horse and say its the way it should be done.

It does not matter, except to you ( the proverbal you ).

donald

You posted incomprehensible gibberish.

Pissssssss Orrrffffffffffff WANKER !!

..... Phil

So I shouldn't respond unless I'm complaining about top posting? You might want to look at that sentence a second time.

No, there is nothing clear about the original post, or even the poster's subsequent replies.

We are still guessing at what his intentions are for this project, and until we know that, how he's going to accomplish it isn't on the menu.

And I should point out, that I have replied a number of times in this thread, and yes, they were about getting the original poster to clarify what it is he wants to do. This is not about receiving a signal, it's about what he wants to receive the signal for. One thing is clear, he's not well versed in electronics, and hence until we get the real details we can't really help him. If you actually think that you can divine what he actually needs from his posts, then you are taking his questions too literally.

And I should also point out that whether or not I don't like top posting, I actually did refrain from saying anything until you took someone to task for taking issue with it. If you can do that, I can take issue with your complaint.

Michael

I agree... his "modulation" is apparently so slow (some handful bits per second?) that he isn't considering it as such.

My guess has been he's scared of trying to use or build a mixer... :-)

Do you think he got his tongue caught in the beaters the last time he tried to use a mixer?

You could modulate the 100MHz clock onto fiber optics/laser beam, plenty of bandwidth there. check ebay for used fiber-optics modules.

Maybe you should re-read his more recent posts. He wants to transmit a

Don

problem is, at 100MHz, in most countries, that's in side the Fm broadcast band, so there usually are regulations limiting the amount of power you can use. Plus there are 100KW stations broadcasting in that range, messing up your attempts to receive a signal. You're unlikely to be able to reeive your signal, even with a good superhet, not much farther than 100 meters.

It's hard to keep the original carrier frequency-- you can't just cascade Rf amplifier stages-- somewhere around three stages it becomes very difficult to impossible to keep the amplified signal from feeding back to the input and causing oscillations. That's the beauty of the superhet-- you can amplify a bit at RF, then mix it down or up to another frequency where you can start applying gain again without fear of feedback.

How about a 100Mhz crystal ?

Bye. Jasen

A 100 MHz fundamental cut? Which edition of Digikey catalog lists that? Do you have any idea of the ringing problems with crystal filters?

It doesnt have to be a fundamental cut.

Ringing is not a "problem", it's one way to describe a filter with a very narrow bandpass and very high Q.

Ringing is only a problem if there is modulation.

In this very special application, the guy just wants the carrier, so a very narrow and "ringy" crystal filter is EXACTLY what he needs.

That said, it's likely to be quite hard to build and align a tuned Rf receiver and xtal filter at 100MHz.

I have worked with custom made 125 MHz fundamental cut crystals in TO-5 cans that were multiplied up into the microwave region for the LO in Telemetry equipment.