EMRFD Message Archive 11027

Message Date From Subject
11027 2015-04-30 09:53:01 w7zoi JAN Crystals

Hi all,


A recent post suggested that JAN crystals was still going.   But their web site had nothing more than an email address.   I wrote and got a reply from Monique Whan stating that they no longer manufacture crystals.  She then suggested we contact International.    


Nothing stays the same....   Perhaps we will have to try either India or Germany.


73, Wes

w7zoi

11028 2015-04-30 10:17:46 Lasse Moell Re: JAN Crystals
40+ years ago got my first crystal, FT-243 at 3523 kHz made by JAN...
Brought many many hours of fun!
Wish I could bring back the excitement of each new QSO!

Dang, I'm getting old :)

73
Lasse SM5GLC

30 april 2015, wesw7zoi@gmail.com [emrfd] skrev:

 

Hi all,


A recent post suggested that JAN crystals was still going.   But their web site had nothing more than an email address.   I wrote and got a reply from Monique Whan stating that they no longer manufacture crystals.  She then suggested we contact International.    


Nothing stays the same....   Perhaps we will have to try either India or Germany.


73, Wes

w7zoi

11029 2015-04-30 10:18:23 Murray, Conard Re: JAN Crystals

I would love to find an affordable source for custom crystals as well. JAN was the last of the economical sources I knew of … but you never knew what you might get from them. Some orders were better than perfect and others were all out of spec. Once a bunch of us ordered several rocks for 2M and 6M FM. JAN managed to get the rocks cut right, but soldered the wrong tops on the cans. The 146.52 was really 147.21 … and the 52.525 was 146.52 and so on.

There was a company called Crystek that was supposedly across the street from JAN, but I never had a chance to deal with them.

73,

Conard, WS4S

11030 2015-04-30 10:21:07 Dana Myers Re: JAN Crystals

Hello Wes,

Thanks for doing the obvious thing and contacting them :-) There's nothing like real information.

Sorry to hear that JAN is out of business - there were my go-to for 20 years,
though I admit I have not ordered from them in 15 years.

73,
Dana  K6JQ


11031 2015-04-30 12:06:34 cwfingertalker Re: JAN Crystals
Hello to the Group,

International Crystal is the only crystal manufacturer I found that was willing to make crystals for ham projects.  However they charge a pretty penny for crystals.  I explored buying crystals for an HF converter project.  The price of the crystals scaled down that project.  The avenue I am choosing in the future is to use a "crystal replacement" DDS oscillator.  I found that solution to be a more econcomical pathway.  

Bill N7EU
11033 2015-04-30 12:27:06 Garey Barrell Re: JAN Crystals
I guess I don't understand why we would look in 'India or Germany' when we have a perfectly
good, ham family owned manufacturer right here in the USA!!!

If you need a GOOD crystal, go to International Crystal Manufacturers. Your crystal
will arrive on time, (or sooner,) be ON frequency, and have a lifetime guarantee. I have ICM
crystals that are 40+ years old that are still working just fine, and well within reasonable
(better) aging limits.

If you need a hundred 'computer grade' crystals to select for a filter, yeah then eBay makes sense.

As they say about oats, it's all about the grade you want. If you don't care if they've already
been through the horse, they get real cheap! :-)

73, Garey - K4OAH
Rome, GA

Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line
and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs


wesw7zoi@gmail.com [emrfd] wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> A recent post suggested that JAN crystals was still going. But their web site had nothing
> more than an email address. I wrote and got a reply from Monique Whan stating that they no
> longer manufacture crystals. She then suggested we contact International.
>
>
> Nothing stays the same.... Perhaps we will have to try either India or Germany.
>
>
> 73, Wes
>
> w7zoi
>
>
11034 2015-04-30 13:09:36 Dana Myers DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
11035 2015-04-30 13:21:28 David J Nushardt Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)

Hi, I would be interested in the Ad 9850 modules , if you still have them, and be happy to pay the postage.73's
Dave
N9ooq



11036 2015-04-30 13:25:32 Dana Myers Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
11037 2015-04-30 17:37:41 billw77aaz Re: JAN Crystals
Crystek is alive and well. They make low phase noise crystal oscillators,
UHF VCOs, voltage-tweekable xtal oscillators at 1 GHz. I do not think they
make individual crystals. A book on crystal oscillators written by their
Chief Engineer was released recently.

W7AAZ


> There was a company called Crystek that was supposedly across the street
> from JAN, but I never had a chance to deal with them.
> 73,
> Conard, WS4S
>
11038 2015-04-30 17:51:55 Russell Shaw Re: JAN Crystals
11039 2015-04-30 17:58:00 billw77aaz Re: JAN Crystals
Same here Lasse, except it was 7154 KHz and 57 years ago.
W7AAZ


> 40+ years ago got my first crystal, FT-243 at 3523 kHz made by JAN...
> Brought many many hours of fun!
> Wish I could bring back the excitement of each new QSO!
>
> Dang, I'm getting old :)
>
> 73
> Lasse SM5GLC
11040 2015-04-30 20:03:35 augustinetez Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
I did a project for Pic-a-Star rigs using an Si5351 to replace the 10.710MHz xtal as many were finding it hard to get xtals at a reasonable price. You can see it here (pcb is 20 x 30 mm):


This was used to produce one frequency. At the request of a ham from Italy, I have done a modified version that will allow up to 16 switched frequencies which can be changed on the fly.
This one is here (bottom quarter of the page):


One point to note about the Si5351, is that all the output drivers share a common power rail and there is crosstalk between outputs. It will introduce unwanted products into the signal chain. 

Terry VK5TM

 


 



11041 2015-04-30 20:15:40 Dana Myers Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
11042 2015-04-30 20:35:30 Ashhar Farhan Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
The Si570 and the Si5351 can never match up the phase noise of a well designed, simple crystal oscillator. Though a number of 'high end' rigs are using these as the local oscillators, for the best clarity in your receiver, nothing beats a free running oscillator at my shack. I am saying this as someone who has routinely applied Si570 everywhere (I have a bag of 25 of them). The Si570 LVDS version is much better (and costlier). 
The Si5351 is cheap and modest in terms of phase noise. I have a crystal notch filter in the works. I will post the noise figures soon. The Si5351 boards use the cheap 27 or 25 MHz microprocessor crystals as reference. One shouldn't expect very good performance from them unless an outboard, low noise crystal oscillator is used to drive them. The cross talk between the three channels is substantial (a quick scan on the specan showed this). They are best used a a single frequency devices.
- f 

11043 2015-04-30 20:44:13 Dana Myers Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
11044 2015-05-01 04:14:15 Jim Strohm Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
It occurs to me that the cost of an Si5351 (or similar), a PIC, and the supporting circuitry is rapidly approaching the cost of a custom-cut crystal.  Does this spell the end of crystal oscillators?

73
Jim N6OTQ

11229 2015-06-22 15:37:56 K5ESS Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)

Well there is a cheaper and less complex alternative.  Has anyone tried these and is there any comment on their merits?

http://www.digikey.com/catalog/en/partgroup/sg-8002-series-with-ordering-guide/5056?WT.srch=1&mkwid=s45Djk1tp&pcrid=62954647875&pkw=_cat:crystals+oscillators&pmt=b&pdv=c

 

Mike K5ESS

 

11230 2015-06-22 15:44:09 Cecil Bayona Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
The jitter on that part is huge, not so good for radios.

11231 2015-06-22 15:55:04 Dana Myers Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
11232 2015-06-22 16:34:24 winston376 Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
Tried a special order Cardinal version in a high performance receiver design and then checked it out and also a bunch of KDS   programmable oscillators. Test results on an SA were uniformally disappointing when comparing to a xtal based pierce oscillator.

Alex
11233 2015-06-22 19:31:07 w7zoi Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
Hello Mike, and gang,

I was also very excited when I first saw the SG-8002 programmable sources appear on the market.   This was probably in 2000, if not earlier.    So I was excited when I got one and measured it.   The result is shown in the photos in the upper left corner of EMRFD page 4.13.   Clearly, the simple crystal oscillator is a far superior.    Generally, if phase noise of any sort can be seen at all with a traditional spectrum analyzer, the oscillator producing it is never suitable for wide dynamic range communications applications.  

I later encountered one of these parts being used as the clock for a DDS.   The phase noise of the DDS was terrible, far from what was expected.   The noise was so bad that the expected spurs could not be observed.  The clock module was replaced with a low jitter oscillator and the phase noise immediately improved, allowing the DDS spurs to be observed.   The oscillator noise measurement methods were described in the July/August 2008 issue of QEX, p6.

73, Wes
w7zoi

11236 2015-06-23 09:31:24 K5ESS Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)

Thanks for all the informative replies RE the Epson SG-8002.  Can I assume there are no issues using this device for transmitters?

Mike K5ESS

 

11237 2015-06-23 09:44:28 w7zoi Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
Hi Mike,

Not a good assumption.    You should not use one of these things for any application where it will process signals that you hear with a receiver or signals that you might transmit on the air.    The part might be OK for a frequency counter, for that does not impact any signal processing.   

Good luck.

73, Wes
w7zoi

11238 2015-06-26 09:59:57 kb1gmx Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
I've also tried the Abracon MEMS based devices as they are programable.  Fine for 
digital work as in CPU clocks and non critical time bases. but really not good for radio
or critital timebase use (DDS or PLL).  The ASFLM series are about 95pS where the 
SI570 is about or under 1.0pS for comparison.   A solution wa sto use the part at VHF
and divide it down to low HF, more parts, more power but it was workable for RF.

However they also have the ASEMP series that is far better for phase jitter and good 
enough for radio work (on par with SI5351).  This part works for RF work.

The downer for those is the programmer is not cheap though handy.  The good part is 
a handful of them are cheap and once a programmer is available any frequency in a 
wide range is available.


Allison
11239 2015-06-26 12:04:57 Ashhar Farhan Re: DDS vs SiLabs PLLs (was Re: [emrfd] Re: JAN Crystals)
my experience with Si570 has been quite good. if u can put up with the glitch each time the frequency changes, then it is almost as good as a regular VFO. though not the same class as a good VFO. I make that distinction very carefully.  making a good VFO is a craft and art more than designing it on a computer. Everything counts. From the noise on the power line to how stiff the connection to the variable capacitor is.

With the Si570, the power supply noise does result in amplitude sidebands as I found while building a spectrum analyzer. I had to double bypass the power supply at VHF as well as use RG174 for the I2C singals going to the Arduino. 

These chips need all the precaution of a regular oscillator to get the best performance out.

- f 


11252 2015-06-28 19:49:16 kerrypwr Re: JAN Crystals
Farhan; from your experience with the Si570, can you clarify something for me please?

I'm about to build the kit from Kees K5BCQ for use as a VFO; the Si570 is the CMOS version.

The IF that it will be used with will be 12 MHz.  I intend to enter a frequency offset of 12 MHz to enable the digital display to show the correct RF frequency.

The Si570 data sheet (page 8) refers to the maximum offset for frequencies between 10 & 50 MHz as 2 MHz; I'm not certain if this is the absolute maximum offset possible or if it is just the offset range for test purposes.

How should the data sheet be interpreted?  Can an offset of 12 MHz be obtained?

Kerry VK2TIL.
11255 2015-06-28 22:08:38 Ashhar Farhan Re: JAN Crystals
Kerry,

I have used the Si570 with 12 MHz IF. it works very well. i haven't used Keef's kits. Instead, I have used Arduino with a 16x2 LCD display. If you use Si570 CMOS version be prepared for a little more noise than with the LVDS version. The LVDS version needs about 10db of amplification before it drive a diode mixer.

- f


11256 2015-06-28 23:43:24 kerrypwr Re: JAN Crystals
Thanks Farhan.

I think that I have misread the data sheet; I think that the "offset" it mentions is offset for the purpose of phase-noise measurement.

After I posted here I did some searching and found several Si570 applications that didn't mention any offset limit.

Thanks for the re-assurance.

Kerry VK2TIL.
11257 2015-06-29 08:29:01 Lonnie Ferrell Re: JAN Crystals
I am currently using the si5351 for both VFO and BFO on V3 with great success.


11258 2015-06-29 10:21:31 winston376 Re: JAN Crystals
I've got the Kees version and use a 10.7 MHz IF and works well. Also used it for a 29.9 MHz IF. 
11260 2015-06-29 14:09:10 kerrypwr Re: JAN Crystals
Thanks Winston; I will proceed with the project.

Kerry VK2TIL..
11261 2015-06-29 14:26:03 atlantaswl Re: JAN Crystals
I am using the AD9851 for both VFO and heterodyne oscillator in building the progressive communications receiver of W7ZOI and K5IRK.  I will let you know the results.  Fifteen bands (amateur and shortwave broadcast bands), and almost impossible to locate the crystals needed for all the het. oscillators, so decided to go the DDS route.

Fred KK4VEP