I understand what you are saying but it does not hold up well.....
IF the poor receive problems were all caused by excessively tight receiver band pass in conjunction with transmitter slot, a better antenna would not have produced the performance increase evidenced even by users who wrapped a ball of aluminumi foil around the CM15 antenna......
Actually I think we are saying the same thing.
I agree we all are saying the same basic thing, but please know (as I am sure you do) that this statement is extreme and not so true.....
You know that more rf sig will make the 3db point of the selectivity look wider, so a better antenna of course does improve the poor too tight selectivity tuning of the original receiver.
Since both Dave's are backing their comments with commercial radio licenses, guess I should too
my 1rst class license is still proudly on my office wall - used to pay my way thru college from 1971 on repairing motorola HT220's for City of Dayton repairs
I turned down Motorola job offer in 1975 to work on the new fangled "cell" phone project. but more to the point, extra class ham from 1965.