Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 03/27/2016 11:49 PM, Hank wrote:
In article , Scott Dorsey wrote: Though he invented the triode and recognized at once it's value, there was no where in the book where he gave a cogent explanation of how it actually worked. I think he had some basic idea of how amplification worked (with the grid attracting or repelling electrons passing by), but he clearly had absolutely no understanding of how the tube worked as an oscillator or how regeneration worked. And he certainly never got to the point of working out a transfer function as a characteristic curve. --scott I've always felt that deForest's history was another exercise in alchemical strangeness. It seems fairly clear that he did not have any real understanding of why or how his tubes worked, or what they might be capable of actually doing. Nor did he ever devise any practical circuitry for using them. A much larger contributor to circuitry was Armstrong, whose patents were overturned in favor of deForest later on---generally regarded as a travesty of justice. Development of the high-vacuum triode with a scientific understanding of what the control grid was doing to the electron stream---and development of a concomitant technology for series production of the devices was more an AT&T/Bell Labs effort. Also, the first major use of these devices was as telephony repeater amplifiers. Hank And of course superheterodyne and FM...he really knew what he was doing. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , philo wrote:
On 03/27/2016 11:49 PM, Hank wrote: I've always felt that deForest's history was another exercise in alchemical strangeness. It seems fairly clear that he did not have any real understanding of why or how his tubes worked, or what they might be capable of actually doing. Nor did he ever devise any practical circuitry for using them. A much larger contributor to circuitry was Armstrong, whose patents were overturned in favor of deForest later on---generally regarded as a travesty of justice. Development of the high-vacuum triode with a scientific understanding of what the control grid was doing to the electron stream---and development of a concomitant technology for series production of the devices was more an AT&T/Bell Labs effort. Also, the first major use of these devices was as telephony repeater amplifiers. Hank And of course superheterodyne and FM...he really knew what he was doing. Armstrong was a major contributor---but whether he actually "invented" the superhet seems to be in doubt, as there was considerable French work in frequency conversion during WWI. No question that Armstrong brought the superhet to the home entertainment market with the RCA Radiolas of the early 1920's. These were really strange beasts, as they used a reflex circuit to reduce tube count. Add to that the "catacombs" construction---a wax-filled can with V99 tube sockets. I had one of these (a "portable") from 1924 as a teenager, and really went through fits to get it to work, after melting all the wax out of the catacomb. That portable had a "loudspeaker" (a headhone-type driver into a horn) and an extra v99 to drive it. Armstrong's FM was really his baby. All the theoreticians said it wouldn't work, but it did. I once worked with an old-timer who'd been involved in setting up the original NTSC TV standard in 1941. They purposely put a hook into RCA's condemnation of FM by specifying FM for TV audio (said he). Hank Hank |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 03/30/2016 09:35 PM, Hank wrote:
And of course superheterodyne and FM...he really knew what he was doing. Armstrong was a major contributor---but whether he actually "invented" the superhet seems to be in doubt, as there was considerable French work in frequency conversion during WWI. No question that Armstrong brought the superhet to the home entertainment market with the RCA Radiolas of the early 1920's. These were really strange beasts, as they used a reflex circuit to reduce tube count. Add to that the "catacombs" construction---a wax-filled can with V99 tube sockets. I had one of these (a "portable") from 1924 as a teenager, and really went through fits to get it to work, after melting all the wax out of the catacomb. That portable had a "loudspeaker" (a headhone-type driver into a horn) and an extra v99 to drive it. Armstrong's FM was really his baby. All the theoreticians said it wouldn't work, but it did. I once worked with an old-timer who'd been involved in setting up the original NTSC TV standard in 1941. They purposely put a hook into RCA's condemnation of FM by specifying FM for TV audio (said he). Thanks for the info, I did not know that. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|