AF6AY wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote on Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:23:05 EST:

Although I have a technical background, my post secondary "eddycaytion"
is actually in the art field, and In my job and life I cross between the
two.

So is mine...as an illustrator (an artist who draws/paints things as
they really are). I went for engineering after my Army service.

I work with Illustrators in my day job.


I stumbled upon this site, and was pleasantly introduced to "Steampunks"

I admire the heck out of the excellence of that website and its
gorgeous
photos. Really well-done craftsmanship on web page design. However,
it
begins to look a lot like 'eye candy' for those who love to do things
the old-fashioned way.

It is an aesthetic. The Steampunk aesthetic is coupling the throwaway
ideals of modern times, with the hand crafted "preciousness" of another
time. It is quite purposeful anachronism, and a large part of its charm
is that it isn't nihilistic, but it has a whimsical base to it. The
projects they work on are specifically on new or present technology.
Modifying Ipods, LCD panels, Fender Strats. It isn't even nostalgic,
much of the banter appears tongue in cheek.

In a unique (and a little bizarre) melding of technologies, one
practitioner has built and implemented a Telegraph sounder that reads
RSS feeds.

NO WAY can that sounder 'copy' digital data from any Internet.

Sorry, but there's just TOO MUCH MASS in that sounder to move
anything that fast...not even at 60 WPM speeds of old Teletypes.
Those who get all upset about my absolute statements should
open up and study any OLD Model 15 to 19 TTY from Teletype.
That Chicago firm KNEW how to make machinery work fast and long.

I do not know the exact mass of the the sounder arm, but the device
does not have to sound out at the RSS feed speed if it is too fast for
the mechanics. The software driving it can send out the Morse at a
comfortable speed.


Although the Amateur radio world does not have many examples of art -

Our 'art training' must have come from very different schools.

I believe that is true.

some snippage

though some folks come pretty close with some old time stations, I found
the method I'm going to use for my next shack redo. I'll have to share
the pictures of the same. Now to start scrounging brass....

Try not to forget that brass will oxidize from exposure to air.
Stock up on Glass Wax too, it works well on a continuing need
to make brass shiny again. And again. And again.

PLATE the brass with something to avoid all that dog-work
shine-up that you will need. Find a good electrochemical shop
and make some deals there. It will save appearances a lot
longer than all that necessary polishing later.

It is an aesthetic that is difficult for some to grasp, for sure, but
the brass is a big part of it. If future polishing is to be delayed,
there are coatings that can be added. Sometimes the weatherd look is
even desired in itself.


Certainly some will find this odd, but I like a little aesthetics in my
hobbies along with the technical.

So do I. Our difference is that I do an innate merging of
technical functionality with outward design and color. Icom
'basic black' (with white accents and sparse color in legends)
does it for me...who also is on intimate acquaintence what the
functions are.

snip

Sure, that is very nice. But it is also a style of the moment. 50 years
from now it will be old stuff, just as the Victorian aesthetic is for us
now.


A SOUNDER for amateur RADIO use? The ubiquitous BFO is what I
consider the first 'DSP' for morse cognition. That's why it
became so popular in radios way back before my time on earth.
Okay, so von Statt doesn't know much about electromagnets and
didn't put finer wire with more turns on his replica.

I don't recall a sounder for amateur radio use. The whole project was
just a fun thing to do with an rss feed, not a vindication of something.
Strictly speaking, it wasn't Victorian technology, it was from an even
earlier time. The guy was just having a little retro fun.


If we get too retro on 1890s 'aesthetics,' perhaps he could
make a lovely, shiny, brassy Tuning Fork as a frequency
standard? Musicians still use those. An HC-6 holder of a
quartz crystal can never look aesthetic by itself. But it
will be a thousand or more times more accurate in frequency
than an all-mechanical vibrating Tuning Fork. But, what the
Fork? A Tuning Fork can LOOK so interesting...and it can
make a noise! :-)

The tuning fork was invented in 1711. They are usually made of steel.
Most steampunks would not make a tuning fork. The idea is to take some
modern technology and make it look as if it was manufactured in another
time and place. So while a person might take an Ipod and etch an old
fashioned picture in it, or a guitar and modify it, they wouldn't likely
make an instrument like a tuning fork.

But to return to topic, The concept of making a station conform to an
aesthetic is not all that unusual. Our stations can be an expression of
ourselves, and we can either place the items on the desk and be done
with it, or we can embellish the room as we see fit. It is just another
way to have some fun.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Feb 29, 10:29 am, Michael Coslo wrote:

The concept of making a station conform to an
aesthetic is not all that unusual. Our stations can be an expression of
ourselves, and we can either place the items on the desk and be done
with it, or we can embellish the room as we see fit. It is just another
way to have some fun.

Well said, Mike!

I'm a member of the function-determines-form school of thought on
this. That sounder is an excellent example of that school - its form
is exactly what it needs to be to do the job it was intended to do.
Yet it is aesthetically pleasing without any added ornamentation.

I've tried to follow that aesthetic in my amateur radio activities. My
homebrew rig (google my call for the website) is built almost entirely
out of reused parts. Rather than trying to hide this, I decided to
celebrate it in the design. The shack furniture, while made mostly
from new wood, is designed to be as strong and functional as possible
while being constructed using simple woodworking tools and keeping the
cost as low as possible. The result is a shack that is comfortable and
functional, yet inexpensive and flexible for changes. When I worked
the CW SS this year, I was able to incorporate a logging computer
setup (homebrew-from-reused-components computer, too) in a short time,
because of the flexibility of the shelving system.

--

Part of the attraction to some of the products of certain eras is that
they were made of quality materials, and were intended to last a very
long time. I've tried to follow that rule in my homebrew designs as
well, and the result has been a very low parts failure rate. (I also
have a large stock of spare parts so that if something does fail, it
can be easily and quickly replaced).

--

Perhaps we hams are missing out on something by using words like
"shack", "shop", and "hobby". People who do art for its own sake,
without pecuniary interest, do not use those terms. Be it painting in
oil or watercolor, sculpture (in a variety of media), woodworking,
music, poetry, performing arts, etc., they use terms like "studio",
"gallery", "performance space", etc. There's a certain approach the
creative and performing artist have towards what they do, and I think
we could learn from it. We should not be apologetic for our activities
any more than an artist apologizes for his/hers. In amateur radio we
can be both creative (building equipment and stations) and performing
(operating our stations) artists!

There's also the factor of craftsmanship, which is evident in the
steampunk objects. Craftsmanship can't be bought or learned entirely
from a book; it's a matter of practice, too. Steampunk clearly has
lots of it!

I think we hams may have been selling ourselves short in some ways. We
have aesthetics that IMHO are just as valid as any other. For example,
antennas are not "ugly" in that aesthetic - they are a beautiful
expression of form-following-function if done right. To me, a house
does not become "home" unless there is a properly-designed-and-
installed amateur radio antenna present.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:40:11 -0500, N2EY wrote:

On Feb 29, 10:29 am, Michael Coslo wrote:

The concept of making a station conform to an aesthetic is not all tha
t
unusual. Our stations can be an expression of ourselves, and we can
either place the items on the desk and be done with it, or we can
embellish the room as we see fit. It is just another way to have some
fun.

Well said, Mike!

I'm a member of the function-determines-form school of thought on this.
That sounder is an excellent example of that school - its form is
exactly what it needs to be to do the job it was intended to do. Yet it
is aesthetically pleasing without any added ornamentation.

I've tried to follow that aesthetic in my amateur radio activities. My
homebrew rig (google my call for the website) is built almost entirely
out of reused parts. Rather than trying to hide this, I decided to
celebrate it in the design. The shack furniture, while made mostly from
new wood, is designed to be as strong and functional as possible while
being constructed using simple woodworking tools and keeping the cost a
s
low as possible. The result is a shack that is comfortable and
functional, yet inexpensive and flexible for changes. When I worked the
CW SS this year, I was able to incorporate a logging computer setup
(homebrew-from-reused-components computer, too) in a short time, becaus
e
of the flexibility of the shelving system.

You're just several pieces of brass and leather away from steampunkin'
it, Jim! The knobs and meters are already there. maybe brass up the
chassis (technical question: will the brass have an untoward effect on
inductors, ala diddle sticks?)

The speaker (red cone is a plus) can be covered with leather real
or faux. The shelves look a lot like the ones I made. Tubes glow, so they

are already there......


Part of the attraction to some of the products of certain eras is that
they were made of quality materials, and were intended to last a very
long time.

snip


Perhaps we hams are missing out on something by using words like
"shack", "shop", and "hobby". People who do art for its own sake,
without pecuniary interest, do not use those terms. Be it painting in
oil or watercolor, sculpture (in a variety of media), woodworking,
music, poetry, performing arts, etc., they use terms like "studio",
"gallery", "performance space", etc. There's a certain approach the
creative and performing artist have towards what they do, and I think w
e
could learn from it. We should not be apologetic for our activities any
more than an artist apologizes for his/hers. In amateur radio we can be
both creative (building equipment and stations) and performing
(operating our stations) artists!

Interesting insight Jim. When I built my telescopes, each one was
designed to be functional, yet beautiful. I was especially fond of the
12.5 inch reflector, which was done in art deco style. The form followed
the function, yet the aesthetic enhanced the form. On the urging of some
friends I entered it in the home made telescope contest, and it won.


There's also the factor of craftsmanship, which is evident in the
steampunk objects. Craftsmanship can't be bought or learned entirely
from a book; it's a matter of practice, too. Steampunk clearly has lots
of it!

They love to create. I'm hoping to bring some of that to amateur
radio. I also expect a certain amount of ridicule.


I think we hams may have been selling ourselves short in some ways. We
have aesthetics that IMHO are just as valid as any other. For example,
antennas are not "ugly" in that aesthetic - they are a beautiful
expression of form-following-function if done right. To me, a house doe
s
not become "home" unless there is a properly-designed-and- installed
amateur radio antenna present.

I think that many people have been told that antennas are ugly,
and that some industries are happy to promote that. Most antennas are not

ugly
--
-73 de Mike N3LI -

On Feb 29, 9:16�pm, Mike Coslo wrote:
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:40:11 -0500, N2EY wrote:
On Feb 29, 10:29 am, Michael Coslo wrote:

I'm a member of the function-determines-form
school of thought on this.
That sounder is an excellent example of that
school - its form is
exactly what it needs to be to do the job it was
intended to do. Yet it
is aesthetically pleasing without any added ornamentation.

You're just several pieces of brass and leather
away from steampunkin' it, Jim!

But I don't wanna be a steampunk!

The knobs and meters are already there. maybe brass up the
chassis (technical question: will the brass have an untoward
effect on inductors, ala diddle sticks?)

Not any more than aluminum.

The speaker (red cone is a plus) can be covered
with leather real
or faux. The shelves look a lot like the ones I made.

The table is homemade, too. The clock was assembled from the pieces of
several, each of which had a different problem. The result has been
functioning perfectly for at least 15 years.

Tubes glow, so they are already there......

Mercury vapor rectifiers and several different kinds of VR tubes.

But see above about "form follows function" and "aesthetically
pleasing without any added ornamentation". Would adding brass and
leather make any difference in rig performance? Or are they only for
looks?

IMHO, the form-follows-function aesthetic would brass- or nickle-plate
telegraph instruments to prevent corrosion. But it would not add brass
simply for a look. Same for leather - would the speaker sound better?

Perhaps we hams are missing out on something
by using words like
"shack", "shop", and "hobby". People who do
art for its own sake,
without pecuniary interest,

"Art for Art's sake"

Amateur radio is "Radio for it's own sake"

See the connection?

do not use those terms. Be it painting in
oil or watercolor, sculpture
(in a variety of media), woodworking,
music, poetry, performing arts, etc., they
use terms like "studio",
"gallery", "performance space", etc.
There's a certain approach the
creative and performing artist have towards
what they do, and I think we
could learn from it. We should not be apologetic
for our activities any
more than an artist apologizes for his/hers.
In amateur radio we can be
both creative (building equipment and stations)
and performing
(operating our stations) artists!

Interesting insight Jim.

TNX

When I built my telescopes, each one was
designed to be functional, yet beautiful.
I was especially fond of the
12.5 inch reflector, which was done in
art deco style. The form followed
the function, yet the aesthetic enhanced
the form. On the urging of some
friends I entered it in the home made
telescope contest, and it won.

EXCELLENT!

Now to homebrewing some rigs....

By sheer coincidence, last night I was at Eastern University's
telescope.

There's also the factor of craftsmanship,
which is evident in the
steampunk objects. Craftsmanship can't be
bought or learned entirely
from a book; it's a matter of practice, too.
Steampunk clearly has lots
of it!

They love to create.

Same here.

I'm hoping to bring some of that to amateur
radio. I also expect a certain amount of ridicule.

From whom?

I think we hams may have been selling
ourselves short in some ways. We
have aesthetics that IMHO are just as
valid as any other. For example,
antennas are not "ugly" in that aesthetic - they are a beautiful
expression of form-following-function if done right.
To me, a house does
not become "home" unless there is a
properly-designed-and- installed
amateur radio antenna present.

I think that many people have been told that antennas are ugly,
and that some industries are happy to promote that.

Agreed. In fact, some *amateurs* may even be happy to promote
it.

Most antennas are not ugly.

Agreed. And for those that are, the ugliness is usually
more a function of a lack of craftsmanship than it is
of the antenna itself.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
On Feb 29, 9:16�pm, Mike Coslo wrote:
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:40:11 -0500, N2EY wrote:
On Feb 29, 10:29 am, Michael Coslo wrote:

I'm a member of the function-determines-form
school of thought on this.
That sounder is an excellent example of that
school - its form is
exactly what it needs to be to do the job it was
intended to do. Yet it
is aesthetically pleasing without any added ornamentation.

You're just several pieces of brass and leather
away from steampunkin' it, Jim!

But I don't wanna be a steampunk!

Of course you can arrange your station to your own aesthetic 8^)



But see above about "form follows function" and "aesthetically
pleasing without any added ornamentation". Would adding brass and
leather make any difference in rig performance? Or are they only for
looks?

Well, now you open a interesting subsubject! The addition of brass to a
station is one of those choices that does not necessarily defeat
function. There needs to be a chassis to place components on or in. Is
aluminum or steel or plastic more functional than brass? there might be
some technical reasons fort one over the other, but in the end, they are
a support structure. An example is the copper plated chassis found in
some radios. Pretty cool. But I wonder how much "worse" they would
perform if they weren't plated?


IMHO, the form-follows-function aesthetic would brass- or nickle-plate
telegraph instruments to prevent corrosion. But it would not add brass
simply for a look.

Keeping in mind that fff could be used to not allow any embellishment,
such as staining, finishing, we have to make sure we don't minimalize
things out of existence.

side note: I once went to a classroom where a true minimalist had hung a
data projector from the ceiling from wires. Problem was, the fan would
push the projector, only as far as the wires would allow, and it made a
pendulum. People were getting seasick!

Same for leather - would the speaker sound better?

well, possibly could make for some vibration damping.


My thoughts are to make a setup that incorporates the aesthetic in a
fashion that is applicable to the situation. The equipment has to sit on
something, so it will be made in a fashion that involves natural
materials, and brass will be used where needed. I'm not going to remove
my radios from their cases and build wooden boxes around them. I don't
plan on overly embellishing the station, my goals are a warm feeling
with an antique look where practical

- 73 d eMike N3LI -

Michael Coslo wrote:

side note: I once went to a classroom where a true minimalist had hung a
data projector from the ceiling from wires. Problem was, the fan would
push the projector, only as far as the wires would allow, and it made a
pendulum. People were getting seasick!

All that for the lack of one, properly placed additional wire, heh.

My thoughts are to make a setup that incorporates the aesthetic in a
fashion that is applicable to the situation. The equipment has to sit on
something, so it will be made in a fashion that involves natural
materials, and brass will be used where needed. I'm not going to remove
my radios from their cases and build wooden boxes around them. I don't
plan on overly embellishing the station, my goals are a warm feeling
with an antique look where practical

That's easily and authentically achieved by obtaining an old wooden desk
and some genuine vintage equipment.

I have the castoff oak veneered desk from W8YX, the University of
Cincinnati ARC station. It is shown in a photo of the station which
appeared in a 1937 QST article about the Ohio River flood.

If I want a "thirties feel", I can fire up W4JBP's homebrew xtal
controlled 6L6 rig and pair it up with an HRO, SW-3, FB-7, an RME 69 or
a Hallicrafter Sky Challenger. If I want to move to the fifties, my
Johnson Valiant or Central 20-A might be paired with an HQ-70 or a
Collins 75A-3.

Dressing up modern technology to look as if it is powered by steam,
strikes me as more than a tad silly.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:

side note: I once went to a classroom where a true minimalist had hung
a data projector from the ceiling from wires. Problem was, the fan
would push the projector, only as far as the wires would allow, and it
made a pendulum. People were getting seasick!

All that for the lack of one, properly placed additional wire, heh.

Even with that, most buildings shake a little due to machinery, HVAC,
etc, and in the end, a projector mounted that way would be a problem.

My thoughts are to make a setup that incorporates the aesthetic in a
fashion that is applicable to the situation. The equipment has to sit
on something, so it will be made in a fashion that involves natural
materials, and brass will be used where needed. I'm not going to
remove my radios from their cases and build wooden boxes around them.
I don't plan on overly embellishing the station, my goals are a warm
feeling with an antique look where practical

That's easily and authentically achieved by obtaining an old wooden desk
and some genuine vintage equipment.

Oh yeah. I enjoy the look, and even went for it in a small way with some
tube equipment I bought a few years ago.

some snippage

Dressing up modern technology to look as if it is powered by steam,
strikes me as more than a tad silly.


Absolutely! This aesthetic is in no way saying "look at me! I'm serious
art!" I would go a little further to state that some examples of the
genre are downright ridiculous - by design. Interviews with the creators
usually show them to have a great sense of humor, and that they enjoy
pulling our legs at times. But they want everyone in on the joke.

That being said, there are examples of great beauty in there, on the
workshop page, the telegraph sounder was gorgeous, and the pick guard on
the Stratocaster is beautiful.

There is actually some of this aesthetic running about in Amateur
radio, even if we don't notice it.

Like keys for instance

Just look at say Begali keys. What workmanship and quality! These things
are true art. Other keys are gorgeous too. Even my modest Bencher has an
attractive look to it.

But most of that stuff isn't really needed. Certainly the Begali keys
are playfully experimental in nature, and the gold plating isn't really
needed, it's there for aesthetics.

And yet, I could go out to the garage, and make a serviceable paddle
with a piece of 2 by 4 and some springy metal.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Mar 3, 2:40�pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote:

You're just several pieces of brass and leather
away from steampunkin' it, Jim!

But I don't wanna be a steampunk!

Of course you can arrange your station to your own aesthetic 8^)

Actually, Steampunk is only a few pieces of brass and leather away
from my aesthetic...

But see above about "form follows function" and "aesthetically
pleasing without any added ornamentation". Would adding
brass and
leather make any difference in rig performance?
Or are they only for
looks?

�Well, now you open a interesting subsubject!

Actually I think it's the whole subject....

The addition of brass to a
station is one of those choices that does not necessarily defeat
function.

Agreed - but in the Triple-F aesthetic (hereafter referred to as
"The Southgate School" or TSS), not defeating function isn't enough.
All choices must enhance or support functionality.

TSS also involves the use of available materials and techniques,
usually from non-traditional sources. The rig pictured on my website
(known as the Southgate Type 7) was built almost entirely from reused/
recycled/recovered parts found at hamfests and in junkpiles. A few
crystals were bought new, as was the solder, but that's about it. The
main tuning capacitor is from a junked BC-221 frequency meter; the
dial drum is cut from a piece of Perspex tubing 6" in diameter that
came from a piece of industrial equipment, the VFO box was made (by
hand - hacksaw & flat file) from scraps of 3/32" thick aluminum plate,
etc., etc.

IOW, "found objects".

There needs to be a chassis to place components on or in. Is
aluminum or steel or plastic more functional than brass?

Depends on the application.

For things like power supplies, steel is preferred due to greater
strength and some level of magnetic shielding. But steel must be
painted, plated or otherwise finished to prevent rust, particularly in
a basement shack where humidity may be high.

For things like transmitters and receivers (TSS does not normally use
built-in power supplies because they usually decrease functionality),
aluminum is preferred because of its light weight, corrosion
resistance, higher conductivity and ease of working.

Brass has good conductivity and is easy to work, but it is heavy,
expensive, and rarer than aluminum or steel. There is some use of
brass in TSS, mostly for specialized applications where aluminum is
too soft and plating or painting steel is not practical. For example
in the Southgate Type 7, there is a shaft extender from the tuning
capacitor which I made from brass. You don't see it but it's there.

there might be
some technical reasons fort one over the other, but in the end,
they are a support structure.

Agreed. I have used wood as well, in applications where shielding
wasn't important, or could be obtained in other ways.

An example is the copper plated chassis found in
some radios. Pretty cool. But I wonder how much "worse" they
would
perform if they weren't plated?

Copper plating of steel chassis (Drake is a prime example) was done
for a couple of reasons. One was corrosion protection; since the steel
had to be coated with something to prevent rust. Unlike most paints,
copper plating is conductive, so shields and components mounted to the
copper-plated chassis would make a good chassis connection. Another
plus is the ability to solder directly to the chassis.

But copper plating has disadvantages too. One is that the copper
tarnishes over time. Another is that any break in the plating can set
up electrolytic corrosion. There's also the cost and relative
impracticality of copper-plating at home.

What Drake and others did was to plate the chassis after all the holes
were punched. That's fine for production-line manufactured rigs, but
if there's a possibility of future changes that require new holes, the
plating would be broken. So I stick with aluminum, steel, and
sometimes plastic and wood.

Keeping in mind that fff could be used to not allow any
embellishment,
such as staining, finishing, we have to make sure we don't
minimalize
things out of existence.

TSS is about simplicity and functionality, not minimalism. If staining
or finishing improves the functionality, it is done. For example, the
shack tabletop consists of a layer of oriented strandboard (for
strength) topped by a layer of masonite (for a smooth hard surface).
This combination (actually a composite) was chosen because it was the
least expensive at the time. The masonite was given a couple of coats
of varnish because doing so improved the functionality.

I once went to a classroom where a true minimalist had hung a
data projector from the ceiling from wires. Problem was, the fan
would
push the projector, only as far as the wires would allow, and it
made a
pendulum. People were getting seasick!

There's a textbook example of form *not* following function! The
purpose of the data projector support is to hold the projector at the
proper place so it can do its job, and if the image isn't rock-steady
the appearance doesn't matter.

� Same for leather - would the speaker sound better?

�well, possibly could make for some vibration damping.

Possibly. I've had some experience building speaker cabinets (clones
of the Altec A-7 "Voice of the Theater", JBL folded horns, for
example) and the trick is to build solid from the beginning.

My thoughts are to make a setup that incorporates the
aesthetic in a
fashion that is applicable to the situation.

Which is the basis of Triple-F. You're not far from joining TSS!

The equipment has to sit on
something, so it will be made in a fashion that involves natural
materials, and brass will be used where needed.

There's the key: "where needed".

I'm not going to remove
my radios from their cases and build wooden boxes around them.

OTOH, wood can be a good cabinet for a rig that doesn't have one.

I don't
plan on overly embellishing the station, my goals are
a warm feeling with an antique look where practical.

I've always wondered what the fascination with "antiques" is. I can
understand the fascination with craftsmanship, design, practicality
and materials, though.

The term I would use is "classic" or "timeless". Look at some Mission
or Shaker furniture - it does not appear "antique" or dated. That's
what TSS is all about, applied to Amateur Radio (and a limited
budget!)

For another example, look at the classic Hitchcock film "Rear Window".
Even though it is more than 50 years old, the overall look of James
Stewart's New York apartment, the clothes, the cameras, and all the
other details are so classic that you'd want to live there today.
(Having Grace Kelly stopping by doesn't hurt either!)

Yet "Vertigo", made just a few years later by mostly the same people
(Hitchcock, Stewart), looks very kitschy and dated by comparison.

---

Perhaps the biggest challenge is that our hamshacks are usually works
in progress, rather than fully complete, so flexibility has to be
designed in too.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
On Mar 3, 2:40�pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote:

Agreed - but in the Triple-F aesthetic (hereafter referred to as
"The Southgate School" or TSS), not defeating function isn't enough.
All choices must enhance or support functionality.

Gotcha, Jug!

TSS also involves the use of available materials and techniques,
usually from non-traditional sources. The rig pictured on my website
(known as the Southgate Type 7) was built almost entirely from reused/
recycled/recovered parts found at hamfests and in junkpiles. A few
crystals were bought new, as was the solder, but that's about it. The
main tuning capacitor is from a junked BC-221 frequency meter; the
dial drum is cut from a piece of Perspex tubing 6" in diameter that
came from a piece of industrial equipment, the VFO box was made (by
hand - hacksaw & flat file) from scraps of 3/32" thick aluminum plate,
etc., etc.

IOW, "found objects".

If you're willing to get dirty and are patient, it is possible to save a
bundle by using other people's castoffs.

There needs to be a chassis to place components on or in. Is
aluminum or steel or plastic more functional than brass?

Depends on the application.

For things like power supplies, steel is preferred due to greater
strength and some level of magnetic shielding. But steel must be
painted, plated or otherwise finished to prevent rust, particularly in
a basement shack where humidity may be high.

I'm going to use an old computer tower for a chassis/cabinet for a pair
of 4-400's I plan to build.

Brass has good conductivity and is easy to work, but it is heavy,
expensive, and rarer than aluminum or steel. There is some use of
brass in TSS, mostly for specialized applications where aluminum is
too soft and plating or painting steel is not practical. For example
in the Southgate Type 7, there is a shaft extender from the tuning
capacitor which I made from brass. You don't see it but it's there.

If you're building something small, try hobby shops. They often have
bins of both brass, copper and aluminum sheet in various thicknesses
along with round and square tubing and rod of the same materials.

there might be
some technical reasons fort one over the other, but in the end,
they are a support structure.

Agreed. I have used wood as well, in applications where shielding
wasn't important, or could be obtained in other ways.

Wood with a thin sheet of flashing aluminum is one way to get the shielding.

But copper plating has disadvantages too. One is that the copper
tarnishes over time. Another is that any break in the plating can set
up electrolytic corrosion. There's also the cost and relative
impracticality of copper-plating at home.

You can find a number of Heath and Drake units with really good looking
plating. I suspect that the problem units were stored in areas of high
humidity.

What Drake and others did was to plate the chassis after all the holes
were punched. That's fine for production-line manufactured rigs, but
if there's a possibility of future changes that require new holes, the
plating would be broken. So I stick with aluminum, steel, and
sometimes plastic and wood.

I think home plating of a large chassis would be so very time consuming
that not many would bother. It is also much easier to work aluminum
than steel. I wouldn't hesitate to break the copper plating for
modifying/repairing such equipment. A touch of lacquer on the edges
would keep air and humidity from getting to the steel.

TSS is about simplicity and functionality, not minimalism. If staining
or finishing improves the functionality, it is done. For example, the
shack tabletop consists of a layer of oriented strandboard (for
strength) topped by a layer of masonite (for a smooth hard surface).
This combination (actually a composite) was chosen because it was the
least expensive at the time. The masonite was given a couple of coats
of varnish because doing so improved the functionality.

The tempered Masonite, no doubt. The front panel of W4JBP's 1941
homebrew transmitter is of that stuff, painted black.

Possibly. I've had some experience building speaker cabinets (clones
of the Altec A-7 "Voice of the Theater", JBL folded horns, for
example) and the trick is to build solid from the beginning.

I've shared the experience and still remember all of the kerfing that
went into getting those curves right. Add a 15" Electrovoice SRO
speaker (which was about 3db better than anything else on the market at
the time), top is with some massive horn tweeters and you had something.

I've always wondered what the fascination with "antiques" is. I can
understand the fascination with craftsmanship, design, practicality
and materials, though.

I think there a couple of classes of antique furniture items. There are
those things which can only be viewed and those things which can be
used. A small, antique ladies chair might not be something you could
use, but an antique dining room suite or an antique sideboard can be
quite utilitarian.

The term I would use is "classic" or "timeless". Look at some Mission
or Shaker furniture - it does not appear "antique" or dated. That's
what TSS is all about, applied to Amateur Radio (and a limited
budget!)

I had to grin. I believe that 2x4's, 4x4's, plywood or hollow core
doors will never go out of style. There's no "Captain Nemo walking into
his cabin on the Nautilus" look here, but the place is attractive and
utilitarian.

Dave K8MN

AF6AY wrote:

... The idea is to take some
modern technology and make it look as if it was manufactured in another
time and place. So while a person might take an Ipod and etch an old
fashioned picture in it, or a guitar and modify it, they wouldn't likely
make an instrument like a tuning fork.

Yeah, you're right on what Steampunks advertise themselves as, but
that is also a small niche activity in home workshopping, not just
electronics. There's much more to be found in home wood-working
catalogs in regards to 'retro' design and home workshop construction.

A year or so ago, another sent me some links to old electronics,
especially metrology, such as a couple of old reproductions of
General Radio Company instrument catalogs. Interesting for the
moment to reflect on 'style' insofar as instrumentation designed
in the period of about 1880 to 1930. [the 'Victorian Era' is in the
beginning part of that mentioned half-century period]

In that half-century, the high (relative) cost of instruments was
coupled with a certain 'style' of 'craftsmanship' that involved
very-nice, but really non-functional, wood bases and lovely
'engraved' scales and rules (more useful to the instrument) plus
less useful all-purpose connector posts. To justify the high
labor cost (reflected in the product cost) of working with new-
fangled electrical things, the designers opted for that particular
'style' based on what could be made then but really from the
(guessed) customer's preferrence for 'looks.' Usually those
customers had to justify those new instruments to their funding
entities (managers, academic grant givers, etc.). 'Style' is a
subliminal kind of influence but any market is governed by it
to sell product.

General Radio is interesting in instrument company evolution.
In their beginnings there was no real 'style' and they depended
on the newness of any sort of electrical standards to sell their
products. It seems that GR was the first to market a ready-built
oscilloscope. At least in the USA. It had a tiny screen and was
built in three sections. That was in the early 1930s. In the later
1930s DuMont came out with a one-piece 'scope and larger face CRT.
That became the 'style' setter for many years, was even copied by
that post-WWII upstart company of Howard Vollum's called Tektronix.
Vollum's designs not only improved the innards but also exterior,
that which the majority classify as 'style.' With their plug-in
vertical function modules Tektronix now set the 'style' and
DuMont just couldn't keep up. Even HP got into competition and
used the same 'style' of physical form on those...but took many
years of catch-up to the clear leader of oscillography, Tektronix.
GR was left way behind in oscilloscopes, giving up on that market
after the end of WWII.

But, GR, now under new leadership at the end of the 1950s, got its
exterior 'style' together with a 'new look.' Much more intrinsic
visual appeal of form-fit-color in an instrument. They were aided
by new methods of metal and plastic forming and some imagination
applied realistically to that 'style.' Alas, they didn't get with
the new technology intensively enough and eventually dropped out,
despite the high accuracy using old technology and 'craftsmanship.'
GR had also opted to try a 'luddite' form of PR on their
instrument constructions, featuring ONE technician 'doing every-
thing' of an instrument, 'no production line methods.' Bad PR and
the wrong kind of style of advertising to a customer base that
was largely involved IN production. 'Style' is lots of things, not
just in its outward physical appearance.

Take Hallicrafters for radios. A Biggie among amateurs before WWII
and in the immediate post-WWII period. The pre-war 'style' peak
might have been the SX-28 HF receiver just from appearance. Their
post-war 'style' peak might have been the SX-62 Big Dial AM-FM and
'shortwave' band receiver. They, like National Radio, came out
with a consumer product TV receiver and (like National) failed to
penetrate the market with their 7" electro-static deflection design.
Hallicrafters had a better exterior 'style' than National's wooden
cabinet model but was doomed in not going towards bigger screens.
Collins Radio beat both out in commercial and military equipment
after WWII. Collins Radio established its own 'style' which
dominated lots of aesthetic sensibilities back then. RACAL in the
UK was a strong rival in that. Hallicrafters just couldn't get with
the program after around 1960 and just drooped, eventually
dropping out.

Market rivalry in the USA began to be taken over more and more
by off-shore designer-makers around 1960. WWII was over a long
time by then and off-shore production in electronics was ramping
up on all markets of electronics, including amateur radio. The
Big 3 (Icom-Yaesu-Kenwood) began their domination, establishing
their own exterior AND interior 'styles'. Lower labor costs (and
smarts) made the Japanese the leading Asian off-shore producer
first, quickly followed by Taiwan and China. Their 'style' of
electronics became THE style to copy, engraved in visual centers
of many minds for a quarter century.

But to return to topic, The concept of making a station conform to an
aesthetic is not all that unusual.

I'm NOT saying that nor ever implied it. But, let's take it in
context. Who or what determines a 'retro' look? And what is its
appeal to certain folks?

A half-century ago ought to qualify as 'retro' to most. But how
many were alive or experienced in such period radios? I was in my
twenties in the 1950s but nowhere would I consider 'going retro' to a
stark utilitarian environment kind of radio communications that I
got started in over a half century ago. Neither does the 'style'
of electronic things done in a period before 50 years ago appeal
to very many. There are SOME exceptions: The Zenith Transoceanic
line of portable receivers spans the pre-WWII and post-WII times
with its own unique 'style' that is unmistakable. It IS attractive
to so many that it has a large fan base on the Internet, several
URLs, all for one model line. It has a distinct STYLE to its design.

I'm not against 'having fun' with radios. With receivers (or
transceivers) one spends a LOT of time looking at front panels
whether or not a user realizes that. Subliminally, at least, the
appearance of a front panel, its control arrangement, colors,
indications, etc., enter the visual cortex and become memory.
Will added brass geegaws enter into the mind as adornement for
the memory just because they look pretty at first glance?.

Our stations can be an expression of
ourselves, and we can either place the items on the desk and be done
with it, or we can embellish the room as we see fit. It is just another
way to have some fun.

I don't agree with that entirely. First of all, an amateur radio
is a communications device, not an article of 'interior design.'
Secondly, today's ready-built amateur radios can stand on their
own as far as appearance and 'style' is concerned. That includes
most peripheral equipment. OTHER people did the styling of all
those, contemporaries, not some long-gone folks of another era a
century ago.

Thirdly, we have to be careful about 'style influencing.' No one
should dictate what or how we 'have fun' in radio other than technical
requirements of radio regulation. That includes 'style' matters
in my mind. Fashion styles exist to Sell More Clothes and Make
More Money for clothing makers...it was not really about aesthetic
appearance despite what the PR write-ups say (those write-ups are
crafted to help sell those clothes). Radio equipment isn't in such
a 'style' area. One either feels comfortable with a radio or not.
That covers its technical performance first, appearance a second.
The amateur operator will be looking at amateur radio equipment
the most at any home station. If other non-radio-interested members
of a household see it often, it should not (for their consideration)
appear too offensive to them.

All-mechanical things are fine fun for those who like to do that.
Old-time telegraphy equipment is one area well suited for such
reproduction. Many amateurs like to collect manual keys. Fewer
can make their own without ALSO having at least a small machine
shop at their disposal. The same holds true for electrochemical
treatment beyond simple PCB etching (which very few see once it
has been loaded, tested, and put into equipment). I've learned to
do simple tasks in all those areas but have found that working in
wood and plastic basic materials is easier for hobby construction.
It is simpler to do even if not flashy. I just don't have, or care to
have,
a small all-purpose factory on the premises for any sort of
manual construction hobby.

Now, MY likes or dislikes don't apply to others. I've been writing
(hopefully) in generalities. All of electronics is generally based
on FORWARD-LOOKING technologies and 'going retro' in any regard may
be of momentary aesthetic appeal. There ARE devotee of equipment
of a particular radio era. 'Mileage varies.'

73, Len AF6AY