View Single Post
  #27   Report Post  
Old April 21st 09, 02:23 PM posted to sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Tim Shoppa Tim Shoppa is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 263
Default If Superheterodyne, why not Subheterodyne?

On Apr 21, 2:02*am, Greegor wrote:
What specifically are your complaints with this Wiki ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheterodyne_receiver


A 180 Kbyte article about a technology developed in the 1910's, yet
the oldest reference is to a textbook from 1996 aimed at freshman or
sophomore EE students of the 90's. More original references would have
gone a long way, especially to the patents and journals of the 1910's
and 1920's.

Don't get me wrong, it's a kinda nice textbook that they reference, as
I realize that by the 90's many EE programs had been so entirely taken
over by VLSI and CAD techniques and the particular textbook fills a
very important niche in education. It isn't the textbook that I
learned about radio from but I see how it fits the modern times well.
(I prefer Terman or Clarke&Hess but those guys weren't around in 1918
either.).

A smaller point, is that the language sounds a lot like it was written
in a language other than English and then translated. In principle
this isn't fundamentally bad, it's just that a lot of the terminology
used sounds very awkward. I think that's fine if they reference 80
year old patents using the same language, but they don't.

Tim.