Ian:

[snip]
"Ian White, G3SEK" wrote in message
news
Roy Lewallen wrote::
:
Part of the confusion is that audio engineers talk about "mixing" where
they actually mean adding. Mixing - as RF engineers use the term - is
precisely what they don't want!
:
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
[snip]

Mixer, modulator, multiplier, demodulator, detector, switcher, balanced
modulator, adder, subtractor, heh, heh....

The term mixer is overused, or... "overloaded" as the computer scientists
like to say.

Yes indeed, too bad for beginners, but it's part of the mystique of our
trade as well, that there are plenty of examples of misuse,
misappropriation, and the outright abuse of terms and their meanings in our
trade! Keeps gurus in business and nosey outsiders out, as well. :-) Heh,
heh...

Even within the English speaking community, there is often no consistency of
terminology use, for example "tube" versus "valve", etc...

British and American use of the term "mixer" in the television production
equipment business has further confusing examples of overuse and overlapping
meanings. In television production technology the term "mixer" is also used
to describe switching and sepcial effects equipment and the terms are
applied differently on each side of the Atlantic. What you Brits call a
television "mixer" is called a television "switcher" in America, and what's
more... the same names are used for the operators of the said
mixing/switching equipment. [Grass Valley, Ross, Central Dynamics, etc...
are manufacturers of such.] You can often see the equipment operator's names
listed opposite the titles Mixer or Switcher on the TV screen when they roll
the credits at the end of television shows. And to make things worse, the
"function" of an audio "mixer" is again entirely different than a video
"mixer", whilst television video mixers often contain integrated audio
mixers. Impossible for beginners to figure out what experts are talking
about, go figure!

--
Peter K1PO
Indialantic By-the-Sea, FL