"gareth" wrote in message
...
I wonder if some more experienced and senior (in the literal sense) amateur
could explain to me one difficulty that I have in understanding single
signal
reception with the crystal phasing control?
AIUI, the phasing control is adjusted so that the frequency that would
give
the audio image is phased out by being in the notch.
If that is true, how is it then possible to adjust the BFO to a
pleasant-for-you tone,
because such adjustment will alter the CIO frequency?
Surely the BFO has to be set in advance to be halfway between the serial
resonant
frequency and the notchable parallel resonant frequency?
This is a query stimulated by my current project which is to build a
boatanchor style
RX, with a flywheel-loaded slide rule dial like that of the Eddystone EA12



This subject matter illustrates a saying of Mrs.Nugatory, "For those who
know the
subject matter, no explanation is necessary, but for those who don't, no
explanation
is possible".

And what a pity that Mrs.Nugatory has not blessed us with her opinion, for I
feel
sure that she is the one person who would have the answer at her fingertips,
resulting
from her experiences with the HRO series of receivers.

But what I don't understand is the allegation of abuse laid at my door (in
many cases
by people who used it as an excuse to heap abuse in my direction;
particularly the Baying
Mob from ura most of whom have joined the thread, not to contribute to it,
but merely
as a vehicle to express their own infantile habituation) because I have
informed those who
have gone off at a tangent, but otherwise thanked them for their
contributions.

How is that abusive? Would it not have been ruder to ignore irrelevant
contributions without
acknowledging them?

But the fact remains that for those who understand the use of a crystal
phasing control in pre-1950
receivers that the questions as posed above are as completely informative as
is necessary.

In article ,
"gareth" wrote:



But the fact remains that for those who understand the use of a crystal
phasing control in pre-1950
receivers that the questions as posed above are as completely informative as
is necessary.

And you have had your answer - the tuning of the BFO has no effect on
the phasing control and vice versa. Do you not believe the answer?

--

Percy Picacity

"Percy Picacity" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"gareth" wrote:

But the fact remains that for those who understand the use of a crystal
phasing control in pre-1950
receivers that the questions as posed above are as completely informative
as
is necessary.
And you have had your answer - the tuning of the BFO has no effect on
the phasing control and vice versa. Do you not believe the answer?

Stating the bleeding obvious which we all knew any way is about as useful
and as relevant as quoting Newton's laws of motion; for neither are an
appropriate
response to the query as originally put.

I refer you page 79 of the previously mentioned book.

"gareth" wrote in message
...

I refer you page 79 of the previously mentioned book.

What book? The FT101 manual or your £350 law book?

"FranK Turner-Smith G3VKI" wrote:
"gareth" wrote in message ...

I refer you page 79 of the previously mentioned book.

What book? The FT101 manual or your £350 law book?

The FT101's a pretty simple rig, Frank. I doubt the manual would be that
long. When Gareth finally sources a copy, perhaps he'd be kind enough to
confirm.

--
If the above message is full of spelling mistakes or the snipping is duff,
it's probably because it was sent from my iPhone, likely whilst walking.
Apologies!

In article ,
"gareth" wrote:

"Percy Picacity" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"gareth" wrote:

But the fact remains that for those who understand the use of a crystal
phasing control in pre-1950
receivers that the questions as posed above are as completely informative
as
is necessary.
And you have had your answer - the tuning of the BFO has no effect on
the phasing control and vice versa. Do you not believe the answer?

Stating the bleeding obvious which we all knew any way is about as useful
and as relevant as quoting Newton's laws of motion; for neither are an
appropriate
response to the query as originally put.

I refer you page 79 of the previously mentioned book.

Sorry, perhaps you could tell us what the question was again. I thought
you were asking if there was an advantage to tuning the BFO half way
between the wanted and unwanted signals. There isn't.

--

Percy Picacity

Percy Picacity wrote:
In article ,
"gareth" wrote:

"Percy Picacity" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"gareth" wrote:

But the fact remains that for those who understand the use of a crystal
phasing control in pre-1950
receivers that the questions as posed above are as completely informative
as
is necessary.
And you have had your answer - the tuning of the BFO has no effect on
the phasing control and vice versa. Do you not believe the answer?

Stating the bleeding obvious which we all knew any way is about as useful
and as relevant as quoting Newton's laws of motion; for neither are an
appropriate
response to the query as originally put.

I refer you page 79 of the previously mentioned book.

Sorry, perhaps you could tell us what the question was again. I thought
you were asking if there was an advantage to tuning the BFO half way
between the wanted and unwanted signals. There isn't.

I don't think Gareth knew what the question was even as he was asking it.

--
If the above message is full of spelling mistakes or the snipping is duff,
it's probably because it was sent from my iPhone, likely whilst walking.
Apologies!

"Percy Picacity" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"gareth" wrote:
"Percy Picacity" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"gareth" wrote:
But the fact remains that for those who understand the use of a
crystal
phasing control in pre-1950
receivers that the questions as posed above are as completely
informative
as
is necessary.
And you have had your answer - the tuning of the BFO has no effect on
the phasing control and vice versa. Do you not believe the answer?
Stating the bleeding obvious which we all knew any way is about as useful
and as relevant as quoting Newton's laws of motion; for neither are an
appropriate
response to the query as originally put.
I refer you page 79 of the previously mentioned book.

Sorry, perhaps you could tell us what the question was again. I thought
you were asking if there was an advantage to tuning the BFO half way
between the wanted and unwanted signals. There isn't.


There is. You get single signal reception for CW despite the wide bandwidth
of
a trnasformer-only IF strip.

On Tue, 27 Aug 2013, gareth wrote:

"Percy Picacity" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"gareth" wrote:

But the fact remains that for those who understand the use of a crystal
phasing control in pre-1950
receivers that the questions as posed above are as completely informative
as
is necessary.
And you have had your answer - the tuning of the BFO has no effect on
the phasing control and vice versa. Do you not believe the answer?

Stating the bleeding obvious which we all knew any way is about as useful
and as relevant as quoting Newton's laws of motion; for neither are an
appropriate
response to the query as originally put.

I refer you page 79 of the previously mentioned book.

I don't remember a book being mentioned.

Do a search on lamb "crystal filter" and you'll find at least one
article from the thirties where he describes the filter in depth. II
doubt the famous QST article from around that time covers the filter in
the same depth.

Michael

"Michael Black" wrote in message
ample.org...
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013, gareth wrote:

I refer you page 79 of the previously mentioned book.

I don't remember a book being mentioned.


11th edition of "Radio Handbook", 1947 edition (with endpaper adverts
for 1948) pub, Editos and Engineers Ltd, of Santa Barbara, Cal.

Those who claim that single-signal reception is due solely to the series
resonant peak
of the Xtal are quite wrong, because otherwies there'd be no need whatsoever
for
a notch facility.

This is what you should end up with ...

Wanted signal in the peak of series resonance.

Bfo adjusted on the HF side to give a pleasant tone.

Notch moved using the phasing control to be at the IF frequency that would
produce
the audio image from the current BFO setting.

What I was after was the procedure to set the notch frequency, because
unless you have a narrow
CW filter in the AF strip, how would you judge that you'd created the same
AF heterodyne whistle?

TKS FER heads-up on Lamb, I'll follow that.