On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 08:01:11 -0600, D. Peter Maus wrote:

On 11/15/11 19:05 , flipper wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 10:45:09 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

On 11/11/11 08:42 , Lord Valve wrote:
If the **** hits the fan, most hi-mu triodes will work well enough to
build a regen set. Where to get the B+ is the problem.

On Tue, 15 Nov 2011, wrote:

Wow, I lit a loaded fart off here, didn't I?

First, I said use a Hallicrafters band switch and an Eddystone dial
because there's probably a market for those with old Hallicrafterses
with bad bandswitches and with regen builders respectively. The
problem with the Hallicrafters band switch replacement market is that
there are so many DIFFERENT ones, if they were all the same they'd be
reproduced. Remember rotary switches are modular, to a degree, the
company that makes them builds them out of mostly off the shelf parts,
and in fact you CAN get new ones built, but the problem is that they
cost more than the value of most hallicrafters radios, since they have
to put them together as one offs. 500 units takes the price from $400
to $25-50 each. At twenty five bucks a shot you could sell a couple
hundred in six months....IF you had a unit that went into enough
popular radios.

You're making too much of an assumption. The cheap receivers used off the
shelf parts. But better ones used custom parts. Design is a tradeoff,
and using off the shelf bandswitch meant layout was determined by the
switch. Making their own, they could do what was needed for best design,
the cost might be higher but it's offset by ease in the rest of the
layout. Which is why you can't make a bandswitch that will fit all the
receivers from even one manufacturer.

There were Eddystone dials because the company made them for their
receivers and then happened to sell them as parts. Hammarlund made parts,
they were well known for their capacitors. National sort of, but then
they had Millen as a sort of manufacturing arm.

But if you wanted to use the bandswitch from the Hammarlund SP-600, you'd
have to follow the layout and design very carefully, since the turret
bandswitch was a key part of the receiver.

You're stuck with how many bands the receiver had, you're stuck with their
layout, you're stuck with using the same sort of design as the original
receiver.

A bandswitch is troublesome, and bulky, and in good receivers, expensive.
Which is why when solid state came along, there was a trend to do as much
bandswitching through DC as possible so the switch just had to control DC
and didn't have to be near the circuitry. Hence diodes were used as
switches. Relays sometimes. People saw that the cost of an active device
was so low, it was cheaper to duplicate oscillators than use a bandswitch
to switch coils and crystals. There again, it looks like a bad move cost
wise, but if the benefits are sufficient, then it's a good move. The
bandswitch becomes simpler (so no special part needed), the layout becomes
simpler.

Ray Moore once had an article in Ham Radio about receiver design. It was
nominally a description of a mostly AM broadcast band receiver he'd built.
But he made the point that a commercial receiver has to cut costs, since
each component is multiplied by however large the run is. For someone
making their own receiver, the cost of an extra bypass capacitor is only
five cents, or whatever, and no overhead on that extra capacitor. It's
simpler to add components if it makes the design simpler, rather than cut
components and deal with the issues. So having three IF stages rather
than two is not that big a deal cost wise for the home builder, but having
those three stages running at less gain than if there were two makes
layout simpler.




As far as power in such a situation....In the old days they used car
batteries for heater voltages and a stack of dry cells, a dynamotor or
a vibra-pack for B+..

Look carefully at the old Collins and National sets. They developed
it to something of a fine art.

Those are horrible models for the homebuilder.

They were exceptional receivers, but they are also built like tanks. The
more expensive the receiver, the more shielding there is inside (in part
because it's good design, but likely also a reflection of their more
complicated design). Some of those receivers are awful to repair, since
you have to pull out layers and layers of pieces to get to the section you
need to deal with. Some of that is fallout from the need for a central
bandswitch.

You can't duplicate them unless you are willing to make copies, which are
beyond what most are capable of.

Michael

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011, dave wrote:

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 08:01:11 -0600, D. Peter Maus wrote:

On 11/15/11 19:05 , flipper wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 10:45:09 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

On 11/11/11 08:42 , Lord Valve wrote:
If the **** hits the fan, most hi-mu triodes will work well enough to
build a regen set. Where to get the B+ is the problem.

That simple, since there's only a few tubes.

9v "transistor" batteries in series. It doesn't take that many to get
reasonable B+ and since tubes are low current, it's reasonable.

Of course, towards the end of the life of tubes, one could get some that
ran off 12v, intended for use in car radios. Not so useful now since they
were produced in a limited time span as transistors were taking over, so
quantity is relatively limited.

The R392 ran off 24 or 28 volts, using those low plate voltage tubes. Of
course, it had a lot of tubes so the filament drain was large.

Of course, some people experimented with low voltage on regular tubes. A
loss of gain, but sometimes that was a good thing.

Michael

On 11/16/11 15:21 , flipper wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 08:01:11 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

On 11/15/11 19:05 , flipper wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 10:45:09 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

On 11/11/11 08:42 , Lord Valve wrote:

If you are paranoid, you an even find stores in many places where you can buy
a refurbished radio for cash and leave a fake name and address.

Huh?

Where are you posting from? Why would anyone need to
leave his name and address - fake or otherwise - when
purchasing a radio?


Because cash transactions are coming under the scrutiny of
authority, today. Louisiana just became the most recent state to
require identity of purchaser in a cash transaction or a ban on the
cash transaction. Even a used purchase from a flea market or a
garage sale.

You need to be more cautious and critical of Internet and media hype.



And you need to make sure you're not talking to someone getting
his information first hand from the legislators voting on the bill.

I don't ever blindly take anyone's characterization of something. I
read the text of the bill.

http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdat...asp?did=760886

Which, as it explicitly says, amends and reenacts (among other
sections) RS 37:1861

http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=93498

However, to your implied innuendo, one would hope the author of a bill
understands it better than a web blog.


The broad definitions of 'second hand retailer' virtually expands
the limits of interpretation to include flea markets, garage sales,
and one on one cash transactions.



http://www.agcrowe.com/pg-51-15-pres...px?pressid=526

That doesn't mean I 'take his word' for it either but, I'll tell you
one thing, I can find HIS claims in the actual text of the law.

It does not apply to non profits, flea markets, garage sales, persons
solely engaged in the business of buying, selling, trading in, or
otherwise acquiring or disposing of motor vehicles and used parts of
motor vehicles, or wreckers or dismantlers of motor vehicles, dealers
in coins and currency, dealers in antiques, gun and knife shows or
other trade and hobby shows, and, well, anyone who isn't a "secondhand
dealer"

Actually, these are specifically what the law is intended to
address.

Says WHO?

As I said, one of the legislators voting for the bill. I'm in
media. I frequently interview legislators about their intents, and
their actions. I've been attempting to get the Attorney General on
the line to explain how this law affects street level commerce.
Louisiana has been attempting to get control of cash transactions
since I lived there in the 80's.

They also attempted to ban owners' self repair of their own cars
through similar legislation.

It's an interesting state. More a foreign country than a State.
Where the limits of the Constitution appear not to apply. And with
this bill, 'legal tender' of the United States becomes illegal to
use within the State of Louisiana.

A court test is being prepared on this matter. Expect significant
debate locally on this. If not resistance.






My compendium of who it did not apply to is a collection of quotes
from enacted law prefaced by "B.... the provisions of this Part shall
not apply to." For example, the text beginning with "persons solely
engaged in" comes from page 2 of 8 of Act 389 (amending RS 37:1861).
The remainder comes from the unamended portion of RS 37:1861. I.E. The
text beginning with "dealers in coins.. " is item B (1).

Actually, the "persons solely engaged in" could have been quoted from
RS 37:1861 because the only change was [licensed under the provisions
of] "32:783."

They're simply trying to disrupt the sale of stolen goods through
secondhand dealers by requiring said dealers to use traceable payments
in their purchases and keep records identifying the seller; and even
if there were no 'exemptions' it applies only to secondhand dealers
and has nothing to do with 'consumers' because they are NOT
"secondhand dealers."


Agreed on that point.

But the language of the bill is sufficiently broad to allow
interpretation beyond commercial interests alone, to include persons
conducting flea markets, garage sales, or one on one transactions.
To the degree that it's had a chilling effect on flea markets on the
local level, in areas where economic distress has made flea markets
a significant segment of the shopping culture.

You're making too much of an assumption. *The cheap receivers used off the
shelf parts. *But better ones used custom parts. *Design is a tradeoff,
and *using off the shelf bandswitch meant layout was determined by the
switch. *Making their own, they could do what was needed for best design,
the cost might be higher but it's offset by ease in the rest of the
layout. *Which is why you can't make a bandswitch that will fit all the
receivers from even one manufacturer.

There were Eddystone dials because the company made them for their
receivers and then happened to sell them as parts. *Hammarlund made parts,
they were well known for their capacitors. *National sort of, but then
they had Millen as a sort of manufacturing arm.

But if you wanted to use the bandswitch from the Hammarlund SP-600, you'd
have to follow the layout and design very carefully, since the turret
bandswitch was a key part of the receiver.

You're stuck with how many bands the receiver had, you're stuck with their
layout, you're stuck with *using the same sort of design as the original
receiver.

Which was good, basically. Hallicrafters was profitable-see Ed
Romney's discussion in his book. We want 500 kHz to 30 MHz in four or
five bands, which was de rigeur for general coverage receivers.


A bandswitch is troublesome, and bulky, and in good receivers, expensive.
Which is why when solid state came along, there was a trend to do as much
bandswitching through DC as possible so the switch just had to control DC
and didn't have to be near the circuitry. *Hence diodes were used as
switches. *Relays sometimes. *People saw that the cost of an active device
was so low, it was cheaper to duplicate oscillators than use a bandswitch
to switch coils and crystals. *There again, it looks like a bad move cost
wise, but if the benefits are sufficient, then it's a good move. *The
bandswitch becomes simpler (so no special part needed), the layout becomes
simpler.

Ray Moore once had an article in Ham Radio about receiver design. *It was
nominally a description of a mostly AM broadcast band receiver he'd built..
But he made the point that a commercial receiver has to cut costs, since
each component is multiplied by however large the run is. *For someone
making their own receiver, the cost of an extra bypass capacitor is only
five cents, or whatever, and no overhead on that extra capacitor. *It's
simpler to add components if it makes the design simpler, rather than cut
components and deal with the issues. *So having three IF stages rather
than two is not that big a deal cost wise for the home builder, but having
those three stages running at less gain than if there were two makes
layout simpler.

Can you cite the article? It'd be informative. I can get it from the
library.


As far as power in such a situation....In the old days they used car
batteries for heater voltages and a stack of dry cells, a dynamotor or
a vibra-pack for B+..

Look carefully at the old Collins and National sets. They developed
it to something of a fine art.

Those are horrible models for the homebuilder.

They were exceptional receivers, but they are also built like tanks. *The
more expensive the receiver, the more shielding there is inside (in part
because it's good design, but likely also a reflection of their more
complicated design). *Some of those receivers are awful to repair, since
you have to pull out layers and layers of pieces to get to the section you
need to deal with. *Some of that is fallout from the need for a central
bandswitch.

You can't duplicate them unless you are willing to make copies, which are
beyond what most are capable of.

* * Michael

The S/Line was not "built like a tank", but it was innovative and of
good quality. The R-390s and the A-line approach that designation much
more closely, as do Stoddart RI-FI measuring receivers and certain
Mackay Marine and Racal sets. S/Line was inspired by Art Collins'
purchase of a M series Leica camera, well built but also stylish and
compact. There was in fact a company that DID clone S/Line, except the
cabinetwork was kludgy by comparison. This is analogous to the Hickok
and Jetronix clones of Tek tube scopes-they weren't quite as good but
still way better than service grade scopes.

On 11/16/11 18:14 , flipper wrote:

virtually expands
the limits of interpretation to include flea markets, garage sales,
and one on one cash transactions.

You're way late to the game, then, because there's nothing in the bill
that "expands the limits" to "flea markets, garage sales, and one on
one cash transactions" more than the already existing law.


Your selective attention is interesting.

It's the broadness of the language that expands the limits. Because
the broadness of the language does nothing to limit the definition of
the terms. And, one more time, the legislators voting for the bill
specifically intend for the law to include garage sales, flea markets
and one on one cash transactions. This by their own admission.



As I said, one of the legislators voting for the bill. I'm in
media. I frequently interview legislators about their intents, and
their actions. I've been attempting to get the Attorney General on
the line to explain how this law affects street level commerce.

No offense intended but none of that means anything. What legislator,
what did he say, and why would I presume he knows better than the
author? And why should I take 'your word' or 'opinions'?

Well, that IS the crux of the argument, then, isn't it.



Louisiana has been attempting to get control of cash transactions
since I lived there in the 80's.

What in the world does that mean? Just 'who' is "Louisiana?" Maybe
they shouldn't vote for "Louisiana" next time if Mr. "Louisiana"
supports wacky things.

Wow. Obfuscation 101. This discussion has suddenly become a waste of
bandwidth.

Bottom line...I've lived there, you haven't. I deal with the
legislators in Louisiana every week, you don't.

You're entitled to your skepticism. Enjoy it.

Have a good evening.

On 11/16/2011 4:30 PM, D. Peter Maus wrote:
On 11/16/11 18:14 , flipper wrote:

virtually expands
the limits of interpretation to include flea markets, garage sales,
and one on one cash transactions.

You're way late to the game, then, because there's nothing in the bill
that "expands the limits" to "flea markets, garage sales, and one on
one cash transactions" more than the already existing law.


Your selective attention is interesting.

It's the broadness of the language that expands the limits. Because the
broadness of the language does nothing to limit the definition of the
terms. And, one more time, the legislators voting for the bill
specifically intend for the law to include garage sales, flea markets
and one on one cash transactions. This by their own admission.



As I said, one of the legislators voting for the bill. I'm in
media. I frequently interview legislators about their intents, and
their actions. I've been attempting to get the Attorney General on
the line to explain how this law affects street level commerce.

No offense intended but none of that means anything. What legislator,
what did he say, and why would I presume he knows better than the
author? And why should I take 'your word' or 'opinions'?

Well, that IS the crux of the argument, then, isn't it.



Louisiana has been attempting to get control of cash transactions
since I lived there in the 80's.

What in the world does that mean? Just 'who' is "Louisiana?" Maybe
they shouldn't vote for "Louisiana" next time if Mr. "Louisiana"
supports wacky things.

Wow. Obfuscation 101. This discussion has suddenly become a waste of
bandwidth.

Bottom line...I've lived there, you haven't. I deal with the legislators
in Louisiana every week, you don't.

You're entitled to your skepticism. Enjoy it.

Have a good evening.


Only an imbecile would support the law in the first place ... why screw
around with imbeciles?

He just needs to be told what an ignorant fooker he is and blown off ...
that is the problem today, people get confused and think they should be
"nice" to nuts, nuts need to be protected from hurting themselves and
those around them ...

Regards,
JS

On 11/16/2011 4:45 PM, D. Peter Maus wrote:
[...]

But the language of the bill is sufficiently broad to allow
interpretation beyond commercial interests alone, to include persons
conducting flea markets, garage sales, or one on one transactions.
To the degree that it's had a chilling effect on flea markets on the
local level, in areas where economic distress has made flea markets
a significant segment of the shopping culture.





What we need is a whole new culture of privacy.

A climate in which not only can corporations, banks, and governments
not restrict or tax or control our private transactions in any way
-- but a climate in which it is universally acknowledged that they
also have _no_ right to even _know_ what those transactions are.

They are here to serve us, not the other way round. They are the
peons, and we are the rulers -- not the reverse. They have no right
to know ANYTHING about our transactions.

We, on the other hand, have the absolute right to know everything
about theirs, and restrict them if we so choose.

A whole new mindset, of unalterable and immovable steel and will, is
needed.

I doubt, however, that a generation of cowed and bowed dependents
and yes-men can produce such a thing.



With every good wish,



Kevin Alfred Strom.
--
http://nationalvanguard.org/
http://kevinalfredstrom.com/

On 11/16/2011 4:59 PM, Kevin Alfred Strom wrote:
On 11/16/2011 4:45 PM, D. Peter Maus wrote:
[...]

But the language of the bill is sufficiently broad to allow
interpretation beyond commercial interests alone, to include persons
conducting flea markets, garage sales, or one on one transactions.
To the degree that it's had a chilling effect on flea markets on the
local level, in areas where economic distress has made flea markets
a significant segment of the shopping culture.





What we need is a whole new culture of privacy.

A climate in which not only can corporations, banks, and governments not
restrict or tax or control our private transactions in any way -- but a
climate in which it is universally acknowledged that they also have _no_
right to even _know_ what those transactions are.

They are here to serve us, not the other way round. They are the peons,
and we are the rulers -- not the reverse. They have no right to know
ANYTHING about our transactions.

We, on the other hand, have the absolute right to know everything about
theirs, and restrict them if we so choose.

A whole new mindset, of unalterable and immovable steel and will, is
needed.

I doubt, however, that a generation of cowed and bowed dependents and
yes-men can produce such a thing.



With every good wish,



Kevin Alfred Strom.

I have agreed with you before, but this time makes the others appear
insignificant ...

Regards,
JS

On 11/16/11 18:59 , Kevin Alfred Strom wrote:
On 11/16/2011 4:45 PM, D. Peter Maus wrote:
[...]

But the language of the bill is sufficiently broad to allow
interpretation beyond commercial interests alone, to include persons
conducting flea markets, garage sales, or one on one transactions.
To the degree that it's had a chilling effect on flea markets on the
local level, in areas where economic distress has made flea markets
a significant segment of the shopping culture.





What we need is a whole new culture of privacy.

A climate in which not only can corporations, banks, and governments
not restrict or tax or control our private transactions in any way
-- but a climate in which it is universally acknowledged that they
also have _no_ right to even _know_ what those transactions are.

They are here to serve us, not the other way round. They are the
peons, and we are the rulers -- not the reverse. They have no right
to know ANYTHING about our transactions.

We, on the other hand, have the absolute right to know everything
about theirs, and restrict them if we so choose.

A whole new mindset, of unalterable and immovable steel and will, is
needed.

I doubt, however, that a generation of cowed and bowed dependents
and yes-men can produce such a thing.



With every good wish,



Kevin Alfred Strom.



You'll get no argument from me. On any of these points.