On 18/02/2014 10:58, gareth wrote:
There was a time, back inthe 1920s and 1930s, that any active device
(valves in them thar days, tubes for the leftpondians) would cost nearly
a week's wages for the average working man, and so it was good economical
sense to try and use it as many ways as possible simultaneously.

Times have changes, and active devices with performance into the tens
of MegaHertz are now ten-a-penny, so what is achieved by competitions
such as the "Two Transistor Challenge" where it is the costs of switching
(manual, relays) which would be the major outlay?

Not carping, just curious.

There is something challenging about restricting your resources.
My most memorable receiver I ever built was made from a toilet roll
tube, wire, a crystal earpiece, tinfoil and paper hand-rolled capacitor
and some galena crystal as a detector.
I think I got more satisfaction out of that that I ever did from a
digitally programmable oscillator based beast.

(but then I enjoy retro-tech like making Baird televisors)

If you only have 2 transistors then you have to make everything do
multiple duty; it pushes your technical ability. IME if you have
unrestricted resources then there is a tendency to think in functional
blocks and not an integrated system.

Good engineering is not achieved when you can add nothing more, it is
achieved when you can take away nothing else. You of all people should
appreciate that.

Andy