Telamon wrote:

In article ,
(John Byrns) wrote:

In article , Patrick Turner
wrote:

John Byrns wrote:

You have still haven't enlightened us with some concrete
information about how much, if at all, your biased diode detector
really helps reduce the distortion of the diode peak envelope
detector.

It should be *obvious* from the circuit!

It's not, at least not to those among us, such as myself, who are not
so clever.

My circuit is as simple as it gets. Hve the cathode of the CF at
+50v, and have a 1M R to drain 0.05mA through the diode. Much more
current could be used.

This method means that detection of weak signal lower than the
forward voltage of the Ge diode of 0.27v peak approx are not
subject to the non linear turn on of the diode, ie, there is no
clipping by the diode.

Is what you are saying is that the diode in your circuit is always
"turned on"?

Snip

Congratulations for the continuation of one of the most retarded
threads I've yet read. Never heard of biasing a diode or being unable
to understand doing so is pretty pathetic. Electronics does not get any
simpler than this.

Why don't you cross post this to more news groups so more people can
have a laugh.

Are you implying that those involved in this thread are retarded?
or mentally deficient?

I don't care that you have a good laugh.

I know that many ppl in the groups to whom this thread is being posted
don't have much of a clue about how AM radios work, let alone an FM set,
or its MPX stereo decoder, or let alone a TV set, or VCR, or CD player.

Hell, I damn well can't understand the schematic for the Space Shuttle,
and I knows the laughter over this must be deafening, but heck, I don't
care.

To many folks the simplest of concepts are difficult to understand,
and they restore their radios and amps using age old circuits
which perform woefully most of the time.
I am happy if I bring some simple alternative techniques for them to apply
if they want, but most won't, because the idea of drilling more tube socket

holes in an existing set is butchery.
I care for more fidelity, and to get it, serious butchery is required,
sometimes totally banishing the original old fashioned ideas altogether,
removing all vestige of the old maker's design, and placing my own label on
the chassis.

The old maker may have been delighted that he got the thd down to 5%, audio
bandwidth
from 150 Hz to 2 kHz, with some hum, but I wasn't.

Patrick Turner.




--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
(John Byrns) wrote:

In article , Patrick Turner
wrote:

John Byrns wrote:

You have still haven't enlightened us with some concrete
information about how much, if at all, your biased diode detector
really helps reduce the distortion of the diode peak envelope
detector.

It should be *obvious* from the circuit!

It's not, at least not to those among us, such as myself, who are not
so clever.

My circuit is as simple as it gets. Hve the cathode of the CF at
+50v, and have a 1M R to drain 0.05mA through the diode. Much more
current could be used.

This method means that detection of weak signal lower than the
forward voltage of the Ge diode of 0.27v peak approx are not
subject to the non linear turn on of the diode, ie, there is no
clipping by the diode.

Is what you are saying is that the diode in your circuit is always
"turned on"?

Snip

Congratulations for the continuation of one of the most retarded
threads I've yet read. Never heard of biasing a diode or being unable
to understand doing so is pretty pathetic. Electronics does not get any
simpler than this.

Why don't you cross post this to more news groups so more people can
have a laugh.

Are you implying that those involved in this thread are retarded?
or mentally deficient?

Yes, are you having trouble comprehending that?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Are you implying that those involved in this thread are retarded?
or mentally deficient?

Yes, are you having trouble comprehending that?

I think you have a problem with basic human communication skills,
and the ability to define personal attributes in an appropriate manner.
I suspect nearly everyone here would agree.

It does not worry me in the least about whatever conclusions you have come to
over the issues I have just raised, or how you propose to remedy your
shortcomings.

But one thing seems certain, and its that you have not contributed much of
worth
which is relevant, helpful, interesting, informative or cheerful in the recent
discussions in this thread.

Patrick Turner.

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:


Telamon wrote:



Are you implying that those involved in this thread are retarded?
or mentally deficient?


Yes, are you having trouble comprehending that?


Well yeah. Some ideas simply don't float well in the face of r.r.s

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
(John Byrns) wrote:

In article , Patrick Turner
wrote:

John Byrns wrote:

You have still haven't enlightened us with some concrete
information about how much, if at all, your biased diode detector
really helps reduce the distortion of the diode peak envelope
detector.

It should be *obvious* from the circuit!

It's not, at least not to those among us, such as myself, who are not
so clever.

My circuit is as simple as it gets. Hve the cathode of the CF at
+50v, and have a 1M R to drain 0.05mA through the diode. Much more
current could be used.

This method means that detection of weak signal lower than the
forward voltage of the Ge diode of 0.27v peak approx are not
subject to the non linear turn on of the diode, ie, there is no
clipping by the diode.

Is what you are saying is that the diode in your circuit is always
"turned on"?

Snip

Congratulations for the continuation of one of the most retarded
threads I've yet read. Never heard of biasing a diode or being unable
to understand doing so is pretty pathetic. Electronics does not get any
simpler than this.

Why don't you cross post this to more news groups so more people can
have a laugh.

Are you implying that those involved in this thread are retarded?
or mentally deficient?

I don't care that you have a good laugh.

.... and I don't care if you and Byrns look like idiots. The threads at
100 now and I'll check back in when it hits 500.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

I un-retarded this technical thread as a favor to rrs's Twains of Today, the
Modern Menckens and our Real Time Roykos.

Others are invited to follow along. However, I may miss much of it. To
paraphrase General Stonewall Jackson, I've killfiled 'em. Killfiled 'em
all.

Frank Dresser

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message ...
I un-retarded this technical thread as a favor to rrs's Twains of Today, the
Modern Menckens and our Real Time Roykos.

Others are invited to follow along. However, I may miss much of it. To
paraphrase General Stonewall Jackson, I've killfiled 'em. Killfiled 'em
all.

Frank Dresser

Musta killfiled 'em all. Good work! (I think?)