There is an underground building in Minneapolis, part of a University or
College, there is a mirrored pipeing system which sends the Sunlight all
around through the halls and rooms down there.
cuhulin

On Jun 7, 7:18*am, bpnjensen wrote:
On Jun 7, 1:10*am, RHF wrote:



On Jun 6, 11:16*pm, bpnjensen wrote:

On Jun 6, 11:05*pm, RHF wrote:

On Jun 6, 7:10*pm, bpnjensen wrote:

On Jun 6, 7:06*pm, Bill Baka wrote:

On 06/06/2010 06:59 PM, bpnjensen wrote:

On Jun 6, 5:48 pm, Bill *wrote:

I don't know about you guys, but I like my filament bulbs in the winter.
The lack of efficiency just helps heat the room I am in, so no big deal.
My summer bulbs are CFL's, soon to be LED's when the price comes down to
something a mere mortal can afford.

In the winter, this is probably true - what you lose on light
efficiency you save on heating. *Then, the question becomes - per unit
of tangible heat energy, what costs less - the electricity to light
the bulb or the "other" source?

I am sure this can be calculated, but not by this guy! :-)

I have a big reason to not want the CFL's in the winter, radio noise.
DX sucks in the summer and the noise level goes up in the evenings when
everybody turns on their energy saving noise makers.

Understood, the older ones were terrible - but the new ones I have
purchased are RF quiet as a mouse. *If there is any noise, it's much
lower than the background. *I can have all these new CFLs in the house
off or on and the radio S/N is the same.

Don't ask me which brand just now - I'd have to run and get the
package from the garage; but if you shy away from CFLs, this is one
less reason to do so.

Bruce

BpnJ - Try un-screwing the CFLs when not in-use
and you may find that the RFI is even lower ~ RHF
*.

- HI - I'd have to unscrew 30 bulbs - and even at that, these new ones
- make no difference at all. *The noise of the bulbs are below the
noise
- floor of the radio and the atmosphere, even on quiet days.

BpnJ,

That's a whole lot of un-screw-ing to do
in just one night * much simpler *
Run the Radio on Batteries and Kill the House's Mains

Honestly if you do this and can not hear a
difference : Then the background RFI/EMF
Noise in your neighborhood is so high that
CFLs are in-fact relatively 'noise free' as far
as your home rf environment is concerned.

and that is cfl'ing good for you ) ~ RHF
*.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I won't deny that - I have said about a hundred times that the RFI
here is intense at times. *However, even when it is RF quiet - and
that does happen late at night - the bulbs are quiet.

I know this is hard for you to accept, so I won't try any longer, but
you need to understand that the world progresses even if you don't.

Bruce Jensen

BpnJ,

Have a SW Radio with Batteries installed
at-the-ready.

Wait for the 'next' Rolling Brown-Out or local
Power Failure in your neighborhood.

That will give you a real good idea of the true
atmospheric background noise floor -versus-
The Environmental RFI/EMF Noise Level of
a modern urban environment.

You have several Circles-of-Noise all around you :
1 - Your 8 or so next-door neighbors and all
that RFI/EMF generated and emanating from
their homes within 50~200 feet of your home.
2 - The 8 or so adjacent blooks nearest you
and all that RFI/EMF generated and emanating
from those homes within 200~800 feet of your
home.
3 - The rest of your neighborhood, town, or city
from 1000 Feet out to a Mile filled with RFI/EMF
generating devices.
4 - Beyond that the World at large and every
man made device in it.

it's a noisy noisy noisy world we live in : ~ RHF

On Jun 7, 6:25*am, dave wrote:
RHF wrote:

BpnJ - Try un-screwing the CFLs when not in-use
and you may find that the RFI is even lower ~ RHF
* .

Are you crazy or merely malnourished?

Dave not all the household wiring throughout a
home is installed correctly and that leaves a
'potential' for problems from devices that are
plugged-in and screw-in to them.

Use a modern Lighted On/Off Switch with LED
Lights and you just might notice a presistant
After-Glow in the LED Lights in the Off position.

Dust-to-Dawn Photo-Cell controlled Light Circuits
are another source of Lights not being 100% Off.

old inspectors never die . . .
the simply check-out ~ RHF

On Jun 7, 6:24*pm, m II wrote:
dave wrote:
RHF wrote:

BpnJ - Try un-screwing the CFLs when not in-use
and you may find that the RFI is even lower ~ RHF
* .

Are you crazy or merely malnourished?

You'd think that with the money he saved by not installing light
switches, he could eat rather well.

- I now wonder how his ten megawatts of solar panels
- are connected.

Actually only about 10 KW and installed by Solar
Professionals and Inspected by the County's
Solar 'expert'.

- Probably switched by a photo cell.....

Only in Canada . . .
-
- mike

On 06/06/2010 07:32 PM, Brenda Ann wrote:
"Bill wrote in message
...
On 06/06/2010 06:59 PM, bpnjensen wrote:
On Jun 6, 5:48 pm, Bill wrote:

I don't know about you guys, but I like my filament bulbs in the winter.
The lack of efficiency just helps heat the room I am in, so no big deal.
My summer bulbs are CFL's, soon to be LED's when the price comes down to
something a mere mortal can afford.

In the winter, this is probably true - what you lose on light
efficiency you save on heating. Then, the question becomes - per unit
of tangible heat energy, what costs less - the electricity to light
the bulb or the "other" source?

I am sure this can be calculated, but not by this guy! :-)

I have a big reason to not want the CFL's in the winter, radio noise.
DX sucks in the summer and the noise level goes up in the evenings when
everybody turns on their energy saving noise makers.

Imagine how much MORE efficient those lamps would be if they DIDN'T eminate
energy in totally useless RF ranges...


Heh,
A lot. I think some of mine were the older or first generation and
burned out and got replaced with the newer ones. My main source of noise
in my bedroom/listening room is an SCR controlled touch lamp.
Even if it is not on it still makes noise. HUH?
Bill Baka

On Jun 7, 2:21*pm, Bob Dobbs wrote:
RHF wrote:

-ps- Wondering . . . did any of you 'know' Cuhulin
to put an (OT) at the start of the Subject-Line ? ? ?

- The name (Cuhu) in the author field is ample warning
- of any posting's irrelevance to topic or intellectual concept.
- Almost as the (RHF) tag is indicative of a slew of URLs.
-
- --
-
Operator Bob
- Echo Charlie 42

OB url...right !
url...right !
url...right !
url...right !
url...right !
url...right !
url...right !
url...right !
url...right !
url...right !
url...right !
url...right !
url...right !

slewing right along ;-) ~ RHF

On Jun 7, 7:49*pm, Bill Baka wrote:
On 06/06/2010 07:32 PM, Brenda Ann wrote:

"Bill *wrote in message
...
On 06/06/2010 06:59 PM, bpnjensen wrote:
On Jun 6, 5:48 pm, Bill * wrote:

I don't know about you guys, but I like my filament bulbs in the winter.
The lack of efficiency just helps heat the room I am in, so no big deal.
My summer bulbs are CFL's, soon to be LED's when the price comes down to
something a mere mortal can afford.

In the winter, this is probably true - what you lose on light
efficiency you save on heating. *Then, the question becomes - per unit
of tangible heat energy, what costs less - the electricity to light
the bulb or the "other" source?

I am sure this can be calculated, but not by this guy! :-)

I have a big reason to not want the CFL's in the winter, radio noise.
DX sucks in the summer and the noise level goes up in the evenings when
everybody turns on their energy saving noise makers.

Imagine how much MORE efficient those lamps would be if they DIDN'T eminate
energy in totally useless RF ranges...

Heh,
A lot. I think some of mine were the older or first generation and
burned out and got replaced with the newer ones.
- My main source of noise in my bedroom/listening
- room is an SCR controlled touch lamp.
- Even if it is not on it still makes noise. HUH?
- Bill Baka

BB - So un-plug it - idtars ~ RHF

On Jun 6, 8:24*pm, "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
wrote:
Gregg wrote:
I asked them and never received a response which was kind of
surprising in how good they usually are in answering emails. Are you
familiar enough with what I'm asking - is it even possible? I know it
can't be for the lack of room because the 909 is a portable and the
394 is a desktop. Can't hurt to ask you - no one else knows
apparently. :-)

I had to go find a service manual for it to answer this one. There is a
row of surface mount LEDs soldered to the logic board. On top of this is
an LCD screen. The manual goes into no detail, so I have no idea of how
it is mounted or connected.

If, and I say if, the LCD is just stuck on there with some tape or glue, and is
connected to the circuit board with a cable, then you could probably remove
it without damage, and replace the LED's with another color. or put an
opaque strip over them and a new strip with a different color. That may be a
little more difficult because you have to find a place to draw power from..

Then you just stick the LCD back in place and it works. :-)

More likely the LCD is instead soldered to the board. It may be surrounded
by a metal shield as LCD's are very noisy electricaly and it could interfere
with your reception. The shield may be soldered to the board too.

Removing soldered on shields is difficult and removing soldered on LCD's is
time consuming, which translates to expensive.

By my count, there are at least 28 pins or connections on the bottom of the
LCD.

So I expect that the cost of replacing the LEDs is very high, far more
than the radio is worth. When the radio was relatively new, if you needed
to replace the LCD or an LED, you would just get a new logic board
from Radio Shack.

Now you would have to find a dead radio with a working logic board, such
as one that had the front end destroyed by lightening and use that.

I hope that answers your question.


It did Geoff and I appreciate that. I copied your response and when I
get a chance to talk to the radio repair guy I will bring this up.
Thanks again.

On Jun 6, 8:24*pm, "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
wrote:
By my count, there are at least 28 pins or connections on the bottom of the
LCD.

So I expect that the cost of replacing the LEDs is very high, far more
than the radio is worth. When the radio was relatively new, if you needed
to replace the LCD or an LED, you would just get a new logic board
from Radio Shack.

Now you would have to find a dead radio with a working logic board, such
as one that had the front end destroyed by lightening and use that.

I hope that answers your question.

Geoff - one more thing. :-) If a repairman had what you said or I
could get one, what do you think would be the price? Just curious.

On Jun 6, 8:52*pm, Bill Baka wrote:
On 06/06/2010 04:29 PM, Gregg wrote:





On Jun 6, 8:54 am, "Geoffrey S.
wrote:
Gregg wrote:
I think both lights have its niche. I have two of the newer expensive
ones. They definitely don't produce the same amount of light, though
I'm sure their data says otherwise. I just use the simply "common
sense" test. Pretty simple IMO, hold up an open book and look. Which
type of light makes it easier to read? Until they come up with an even
better type of lite that emits more lite, my majority of bulbs will be
the usual.

The problem is that incadesecnt lights are truely a full spectrum device.
They emit waves from far infrared (heat) to near ultra-violet over a
continuous spectrum.

Most of their output is far infrared, about 90% of the total, and by the
time they get to ultra violet, it's negligable.

Floursecent bulbs emit only ultraviolet light inside, and use that to excite
phospors on the outside of the bulb. They absorb most of the UV light, and
emit single color light. Household bulbs use a combination of the 3
primary colors of light (red, green and blue) to produce what looks like
(but really is not) full spectrum light.

Good explanantion, that made it make sense even too me.

LED's also work the same way, combining but they emit the colors directly.

Both are combined in such a way as to look white. The problem is that the
colors are generally set up to mimic daylight, (the light of the sky
on a clear day), not sunlight. The human eye is used to seeing sunlight, and
is more comfortable reading with it.

OK, copy that too. Can you explain this for me, with the combination
of your radio knowledge and these different bulbs etc. Why in your
opinion won't anyone replace my LED (am I saying that right?) on my
modded 394. I want that crap green gondo and replaced with the indiglo
blue like RadioLabs do with their 398/909.

I asked them and never received a response which was kind of
surprising in how good they usually are in answering emails. Are you
familiar enough with what I'm asking - is it even possible? I know it
can't be for the lack of room because the 909 is a portable and the
394 is a desktop. Can't hurt to ask you - no one else knows
apparently. :-)

Incadescent light is the most comfortable for reading, being more like
sunlight (actually it is even more red).

Ok, would that explain this then? I used to have a reading lite that
was red, it wasn't a hot red or anything - but at least "for me" for
some reason that was the best reading light I had.

As far as efficency goes, incadescent light is about 10% efficent, although
there are more efficent and longer lasting bulbs around, they have never
really been markted effectivley.

LED lights are about 25-30% efficent due to problems with heat dissipation,
the fact they are DC devices in a world with AC power and so on. There have
been claims of almsot 50% efficency in the future, but so far they are just
claims.

Flourescent lights are around 35% efficent, which currently makes them the
leader in lighting.

It's IMHO actually a false claim because due to the difference in spectrum
output, I find that I (and my family) all need higher power lights to read
if they are flouresent. That's why although I've been using CFL's for 13
years or so, we still have reading lamps with incadescent bulbs in them.

Exactly. I tried the newer ones for reading, it just wasn't going to
work for me unfortunately. My hope was to use two of them in front of
the house with each light encased in its own housing. I guess because
of the differences of temperature throughout the day into night/ cold/
humidity etc. they didn't last five months (I think) and they're too
expensive to use them if they're not going to last longer than that.

What I am hoping to see is a varation of the 360 degree LED with improved
efficency. These are similar in design to flourescent lights. The LEDs are
encased in a block of plastic, which instead of clear like traditional
ones flouresceses (glows).

The ones I have been using to replace radio dial lamps glow brightly in
a daylight white color in all directions, I'm hoping to be able to
buy them in "warm" (redder lights for reading) in the near future.

Yep, refer to earlier on my post about the red for reading. I've also
noticed on CB's nowadays. It seems to be the fad of using all
different kinds of LEDS on the radio and Nitro Knobs, from what I hear
they are pretty expensive. There are all kinds of youtube vids of
these radio modded out, I must say they are somewhat eye catching if
anything else. :-)

Until then, IMHO you are wise to replace all of your incadescent lights
for general illumination with flourescent ones, the "regular" kind being
cheaper to maintain than CFL's, but to make sure you have a large supply
of replacement bulbs for your reading lights.

Copy that. Thanks Geoff. I learned a little about lights.

Are any of you guys old enough to remember the 70's when black light
psychedelic art was a big deal. There was a place in LA called His
place, a bit religious, but they had some outstanding works of black
light art. I really wish I had bought some of those.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ha!!! Yeah, I remember those days when my Cincinnati Reds posters came
down and were replaced by all the coolest looking black light posters
made. My room was upstairs in a loft setting. My folks bought two very
long black like tubes that I screwed into the top of my wall. Looked
incredible....lol. Then of course the two big strobe lights and two
big ole beanbags that I would hide "the good stuff" in ;-) I have to
say, my friends thought I had the coolest room.