If Superheterodyne, why not Subheterodyne?

April 24th 09, 12:04 AM posted to sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew

Eeyore

external usenet poster

First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Sep 2006

Posts: 13

If Superheterodyne, why not Subheterodyne?

Bert Hyman wrote:

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?

My recollection is that Armstrong used the term "supersonic heterodyne"
to note the fact that the beat frequency between the signal and LO
was "supersonic."

Ultrasonic of course, so it's been the wrong name all along.

Graham

Reply With Quote

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Posting Rules
Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
superheterodyne in the future ?	Thierry	Equipment	14	March 13th 04 08:33 AM
superheterodyne in the future ?	Thierry	Equipment	0	March 11th 04 10:01 PM
Superheterodyne LO question	Liam Ness	Homebrew	4	July 22nd 03 05:18 AM
Superheterodyne LO question	Liam Ness	Homebrew	0	July 21st 03 11:12 PM
Superheterodyne AM to SW conversion info	Liam Ness	Homebrew	4	July 13th 03 06:31 AM

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:17 PM.

Menu

About Us