So many homebrewed rigs look poorly, especially if Dymo tape
has been used to label the controls, so it seems to be appropriate
for effort to be expended to make my creations look professional
in appearance, especially now that we all have colour printers
at our disposal.

But what brand name to emblazon the exterior?

In my case, "Vapourware" sould seem to be a good choice, with
"OSN1" the model number on the rear panel.

"gareth" wrote in message
...
So many homebrewed rigs look poorly, especially if Dymo tape
has been used to label the controls, so it seems to be appropriate
for effort to be expended to make my creations look professional
in appearance, especially now that we all have colour printers
at our disposal.

But what brand name to emblazon the exterior?

In my case, "Vapourware" sould seem to be a good choice, with
"OSN1" the model number on the rear panel.

I'm sure Brian will be flattered to see you hold him in such high esteem.
--
;-)
..
73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint.
..
http://turner-smith.co.uk

"gareth" wrote:
So many homebrewed rigs look poorly, especially if Dymo tape
has been used to label the controls, so it seems to be appropriate
for effort to be expended to make my creations look professional
in appearance, especially now that we all have colour printers
at our disposal.

But what brand name to emblazon the exterior?

In my case, "Vapourware" sould seem to be a good choice, with
"OSN1" the model number on the rear panel.

I suggest that "Sold As Seen, No Returns" might be a more appropriate brand
name for your "builds", OM.

--
STC // M0TEY // twitter.com/ukradioamateur

On 14/03/15 10:27, gareth wrote:

But what brand name to emblazon the exterior?

"For display purposes only."?

On Sat, 14 Mar 2015, gareth wrote:

So many homebrewed rigs look poorly, especially if Dymo tape
has been used to label the controls, so it seems to be appropriate
for effort to be expended to make my creations look professional
in appearance, especially now that we all have colour printers
at our disposal.

But what brand name to emblazon the exterior?

In my case, "Vapourware" sould seem to be a good choice, with
"OSN1" the model number on the rear panel.

I remember when I started reading QST at age 11. Some of the projects
looked so well put together, then on top they were named, so it really
looked like something way beyond me.

It was only later that I realized the naming was just an affectation.

They needed more sloppy construction projects to get people to start
building. YOu can always hide a mess behind a panel, but if you don't
build in the first place because you fear you can't keep up with the
standards in the magazines, you'll have no projects at all.

Michael

"Michael Black" wrote in message
news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1503141946050.15447@darkstar. example.org...

They needed more sloppy construction projects to get people to start
building. YOu can always hide a mess behind a panel, but if you don't
build in the first place because you fear you can't keep up with the
standards in the magazines, you'll have no projects at all.

Which is where the Manhattan / Dead Bug technique scores highly,
as exemplified by the EI9GQ articles currently being run here in Brit.

"Michael Black" wrote in message
news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1503141946050.15447@darkstar. example.org...

I remember when I started reading QST at age 11. Some of the projects
looked so well put together, then on top they were named, so it really
looked like something way beyond me.

I think that that was especially true of the ARRL projects, for I believe
that
they had a whole fully-staffed laboratory and workshop.

My approach now is to build sub-projects in sealed metal boxes
(either diecast ally or soldered PCB), but then to make the final
cabinet from wood, as all the needed screening will be
in the sub-project boxes.

On Sun, 15 Mar 2015, gareth wrote:

"Michael Black" wrote in message
news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1503141946050.15447@darkstar. example.org...

They needed more sloppy construction projects to get people to start
building. YOu can always hide a mess behind a panel, but if you don't
build in the first place because you fear you can't keep up with the
standards in the magazines, you'll have no projects at all.

Which is where the Manhattan / Dead Bug technique scores highly,
as exemplified by the EI9GQ articles currently being run here in Brit.

Yes. Better to make it, and if it's messy, hide it behind a fancy panel.

"73" used to run endless articles by Bill Hoisington, who was much more
interested in trying things than the end results. So in the sixties and
seventies, he built an awful lot of stuff (and wrote about it) using
circuit board as the 'chassis".

Michael