View Single Post
  #57   Report Post  
Old April 24th 09, 05:38 PM posted to sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
[email protected] aj-smith@blueyonder.co.uk is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Apr 2009
Posts: 3
Default If Superheterodyne, why not Subheterodyne?

On Apr 20, 5:50*pm, Tim Shoppa wrote:
A terminology question I suppose about the derivation of the term
"Superheterodyne" more than anything else:

Does the "Super" actually mean anything? Is there a Subheterodyne?

Traditionally superhets mix a higher radio frequency down to a lower
IF frequency, but certainly in the past few decades radios with IF's
above the RF frequency have become very common in broadband
applications, and those are still called superhets, not subhets :-).

Google turns up a couple hits on subheterodyne but other than one that
might mean "IF higher in frequency than RF" I don't recognize what
they mean..

I suspect that "Super" was more a marketing term than anything
else :-).

Tim N3QE


I think that the way to answer a question like this is to try to find
written material which originated as close as possible in time to the
introduction of the term in question. Wikki entries should give
references to original material, but of course those are not always
easy for everyone to find, and to study.

The best that I can do in the way of original references with the
books on my shelves is to quote from the 'Admiralty Handbook of
Wireless Telegraphy 1931', HMSO, London, 1932. On page 721 is written
- '... This use of amplification at a frequency intermediate between
that of the incoming signal and an audible frequency gives this
circuit its name of super-heterodyne, or supersonic heterodyne
receiver'.

The discussion goes on to describe an Admiralty receiver having an IF
frequency of 30kHz, which is just what you would expect a supersonic
frequency to be. To my mind this settles the question. Andy G4OEP