Anyone ever play with one of those noise cancellers?

[W1GUH]

Like the the MFJ-1026? (http://www.mfjenterprises.com/Product.php?productid=MFJ-1026)

I've heard personally from two people that they can work, and I also read in th eHam reviews that they work. AND -- it soulds like it WILL help my urban noise problem. This is making wood -- like, I'll actually be able to hear HF? Yikes....how cool would that be?

Please...someone tell me they're crap and save me the price! No, not really....well worth the price if they do what it sounds they do.

[N8YX]

I have one in the shack. It needs more sense antenna to really perform. The supplied whip simply doesn't cut the mustard.

Given that I'm posting from a tablet at the moment, I can't easily get at some of the links regarding the -102x series or designs for such antennas. The ARRL carried a nice construction article for an amplified (active) antenna that I think would work very well with the MFJ units, especially where man-made, vertically polarized noise is concerned. I'll update this thread with more commentary and links tonight or tomorrow.

Tom, 'JI seems to like the MFJ unit a bit better than the ANC4.

[W1GUH]

Thanks. It's hard to tell so far which is better...MFJ or the ANC4...probably equivalent in the end. The MFJ has more controls, tho', for whatever that's worth. But I've gotten pretty much positive replies to my question on the 'zed (except for one...). But rats! Can't get to KJI (If he stocks them) for a week. He's doing a hamfest that's way too far to go this weekend.

One thing's for sure...I doubt if I'll have any problem at all trying to "hear" the noise.

Thanks again.

[N8YX]

As promised:

http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/tis/info/pdf/0109031.pdf

The key to making one of the cancelers work properly is to have an equal amount of unwanted signal on the sense and main (station) antennas. In the case of man-made noise, that signal is vertically polarized and could come from any direction. Ergo, an active vertical antenna such as the one in the article above is a very good choice for this application, especially when mounted as high as possible.

Commercially made active antennas are available, but IMO they're not worth $300+ - considering the AMRAD design can be build for a small fraction of that.

[W1GUH]

Finally found a round tuit and checked it out over the weekend. The answer is...it might help sometimes. I did have a situation where I had a carrier tuned in and could lower the background noise and not affect the signal, but couldn't reproduce it. But there were no discernable ham signals on 80 or 40 or 20. In the case of 80 and 40 where I've occasionally heard some ham signals I've deferred the test til I get a nighttime round tuit. In the case of 20 I think the situation is hopeless. The absorption of HF signals must peak somewhere near that band because I've never heard any ham signals on that band. And, of course, no matter how low the noise is...

I had the idea of using a 'scope to find the optimum settings until someone point out that that'd be a heluva 'scope -- there's no gain in the box so I'd be measuring tiny, tiny signals. Make me want to somehow mod the unit to allow 'scope monitoring.