Thread: r8 vs. r8a
View Single Post
  #7   Report Post  
Old January 21st 07, 08:41 AM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
Geoffrey S. Mendelson Geoffrey S. Mendelson is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 487
Default r8 vs. r8a

Michael Black wrote:
And one reality is that "sync detectors" came into common use in relatively
low end receivers. Before the Sony 2010, I can't think of any receiver
that had a built in sync detector. The advantage in that and other low
end receivers is that it does allow "narrowing" the selectivity without
the cost of a filter. It is cheaper to use some passive components and
an IC than to add a good IF filter.


The "sync" detector of the ICF-2010 was originaly a gimmick. Sony took the old,
tired, IFC-2001 design, clean it up, improved the reception and microprocessor,
added air band, but still needed something to really make the radio different
than the other 2001 derived radios which were coming onto the market.

By the time they were designing it, AM stereo was a commercial failure in
the U.S. Sony had a warehouse full of custom AM decoder chips and no where
to put them. One of their engineers figured out how to convert them to
a sync detector and put it in the 2010.

It was a great success.

Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 Fax ONLY: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
Visit my 'blog at
http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/