"Telstar Electronics" wrote...

lol


latwttb.


Regards,
Peter.

"cmdr buzz corey" wrote...

You can't change the average level without changing the waveform.

Bovine excrement.

An amplifier will increase the average level, but by increasing all
levels. As many references make clear (some listed below), an
amplifier does NOT change the waveform.

The perfect amplifier or audio processor, would create zero
distortion - no change to the waveform. However, the perfect
circuit does not exist so some distortion will occur in any active
circuit.
This includes circuits already in the radio.

A processor may be any circuit that carries out the process the
designer (or marketing person) has decided on. This could be as
simple as an amplifier... it is carrying out a process.

A processor which simply amplifies all signals and clips the higher
levels can produce much distortion. A well designed and adjusted
processor could produce little more distortion than a simple
amplifier.


The question is whether "Telstar" and "well designed" go together. I
would like to see an independent review from someone without
an axe to grind.


Regards,
Peter.
http://www.citizensband.radiouk.com/

Ref 1 - Electronics for engineers.
R. J. Maddock & D. M. Calcutt
Longman Scientific & Technical. (UK)
ISBN 0-582-21583-8

Ref 2 - Electronics servicing Vol 2
K. J. Bohlman.
Dickson Price Publishers Ltd. (UK)
ISBN 0 85380 191-6
(C&G 224 core studies reference)

Ref 3 - Electronic systems and techniques
K. F. Ibrahim
Longman Scientific & Technical. (UK)
ISBN 0 582 21427 0
John Wiley & Sons, inc. (USA)
ISBN 0 470 23371 0 (USA only)

"Transmitter Man" wrote...

The job of an audio processor is to increase the 'average level' level
of audio without changing the waveform.

With all due respect, equine droppings.

Processor is a general term... someone or something that
carries out a process.
For an audio or speech processor, as with any electronic
circuit, the process is whatever the designer decides it is.

A speech or audio processor may be no more than an amplifier... it
carries out a process on the audio you put in. It may be an
amplifier with clipping, which can cause real distortion.
A well known speech processor, sold in the UK and USA (maybe
even around the world), is exactly that - amplify, clip, amplify again.

It should be noted that a simple amplifier does increase the average
level - even if by increasing all levels. What a simple amp does not
do is to alter the dynamic range of the signal.


This can be done at both audio and RF frequencies (RF speech
processors are commonly found in many ham transceivers).

The problem here is that we may see the way things are done at
the top end, where equipment costs a friggin fortune, and
assume that is the standard or the requirement.
Cheaper versions may do the absolute minimum required for
the manufacturer to be able to legally defend the product.

As an example, what would you consider a "regulated" supply to be?
Personally, I would not call something "regulated" unless it has a
way of monitoring the output and compensating for errors. However,
manufacturers have sold "regulated" supplies which are no more than
a rectifier and smoothing.


However, even in the best processors a certain level of
distortion is generated.

Any active circuits will cause some distortion, including those
already built into the radio. Perfect circuits would produce zero
distortion, but there is no such thing as the perfect circuit.


It's down to the designer and the user to keep this to a
minimum.

Not quite.
It is up to the designer to meet the balance between quality and
price set by the company. Their job could range from the minimum
to avoid legal action, through to top of the range products at top
of the range prices.

In some cases, it may even be cheaper to risk legal action than to
correct a problem or recall products.
Which of these would have been better off playing by the rules...
Cadbury (did they get fined?), Channel 5 (fined £300,000 for game
show cheating) and West Ham (fined just a tiny portion of next
season's premiership money).


A *good quality* speech processor will be designed to reduce the dynamic
range of the signal, without overdriving the next stage, while producing
as little distortion as possible.
But do the terms "CB" and "quality" go together?


Yes, a scope is handy but I doubt your typical processor user would
know what to do with one.

Except those in Sheffield... they all have 'scopes on their submarines.
(I can joke about it, I had the sense to live on a hill).


Regards,
Peter.
http://www.citizensband.radiouk.com/

"Frank Gilliland" wrote...

BTW, when does full production begin? I'm still waiting to buy one so
I can run it through the bench.

Bench? Is that the American word for a shredder?

lol.

Peter.

"Steveo" wrote...

He has attempted everything from turn signals to splatter boxes, and
modulators.

No market for any of it.

No market for CB.

If his business is based purely on CB, then he must be
on to a loser from the start.


Regards,
Peter.

"Telstar Electronics" wrote...
Frank... I asked you this before and never got a response. Why would
you want to spend your hard-earned money on a device that you believe
doesn't work? That makes absolutely no sense. Obviously, you know it
does function as advertised. Believe me... I don't need your money. In
fact... if I were to see you ordering one... I wouldn't sell it to
you.

Really? With replies like that, you make the most gullible of people
start to doubt your honesty.

Do you think for one minute that Rushdie refused to sell his book
to Muslims? Who the hell do you think made his book a best seller
and made him rich?

If your critics offer you their money, so they can offend
themselves with your product... take it and lol all the way
to the bank.


Regards,

Peter.

"Transmitter Man" wrote...

Yes, a scope is handy but I doubt your typical processor user would
know what to do with one.

Hi Jay, long time no speak. I hope your antennas are selling well.

Phil
Transmitters 'R' Us
http://www.transmittersrus.com London, UK

Wow, Phil... where have you been hiding?


Regards,
Peter.
http://www.citizensband.radiouk.com/

On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 10:32:41 -0700, Telstar Electronics
wrote in
om:

On Jul 5, 11:51 am, Frank Gilliland
wrote:
That's interesting..... I've been on the air for 30 years and I don't
recall anyone having to repeat their transmissions.... except for a
few idiots with echo boxes or snipped limiters. Regardless, you still
haven't answered my question: When is it going into full production?

Well... all I can say is you must not have much "on air" time in those
30 years if you never heard anyone have to repeat their transmission.


Oh, sure, I've heard lots of people repeat their transmissions. But
very few that needed to.


And Frank... I answered your question regarding production a couple
posts ago.


No you didn't. You said you had eight pre-production units "in the
field". I asked -when-, not how many pre-production units you had "in
the field". So.... when?


Oh, and BTW, did you ever find the schematic for your amp?


I think you might have snipped that by mistake. Well?

On Thu, 5 Jul 2007 20:14:01 +0100, " Peter"
wrote in :

"Frank Gilliland" wrote...

BTW, when does full production begin? I'm still waiting to buy one so
I can run it through the bench.

Bench? Is that the American word for a shredder?


No, it's American for "lie detector".

On Jul 5, 2:14 pm, " Peter" wrote:
If your critics offer you their money, so they can offend
themselves with your product... take it and lol all the way
to the bank.
Regards,
Peter.

Peter,
You can bet Frank knows the device works if he's willing to shell out
his hard earned money for it... no matter what he says here.
I just find it comical that he blatently says one thing and then does
another. I guess he figures nobody will notice... lol
And the sad part is... they might not out here on this group!
www.telstar-electronics.com