Patrick Turner wrote:
Jon Noring wrote:

Is it because you plan to market the design? Or that you simply don't
want anyone else to "profit" from your design?

In today's world there *is no* market for a tubed AM radio, and a
kit would sell in such tiny numbers, that I was led to think there
is no market, and I would never profit.

I agree with you the market is small, and not profitable. But people
do things for reasons beyond just monetary profit.


Whether anyone else would make a profit is a moot point. They
wouldn't need my design though. And if they did use my design,
they'd still have to work hard at making a prototype free of bugs on
their own.

O.k. Thanks for clarifying.


Have you ever run a business?

laugh/

I am very aware of business, thank you, having co-founded several
startup companies and non-profit ventures the last few years, plus
three sole proprieterships, one of which is still active in the ebook
publishing industry.


I already have described my radio design in full in numerous
postings.

O.k., I'll dig through Google and see what you've said on your tuner.
Love to hear it. Have you made any recordings of received stations?


The living better get busy if they want to build a decent AM tuner,
and stop dithering about, if they want one by then end of next
month!

Well, maybe I seem impatient, but... smile/


And about the so-called "kit", I myself know that it is not a money
maker -- I'm sure you will agree with that.

Well then just design and build your own.

I just might, or as part of a team of like-minded individuals.

Even though the current focus I am taking is the channel TRF, I am not
wedded to it even though it appears that way. John Byrns approach for
an improved TRF is *very* intriguing. Maybe it's the rebel in me...


But nobody does anything for nothing.

This is very true, but there are rewards that go beyond strictly
monetary.


If you want a kit for diyers then *you* better get busy.

Definitely!


I am far to busy with projects that earn money to take the time to
get a kitset prototype done for people like you who will not work it
all out for themselves.

So I should not embrace a classic design from the past, but to
design it all from scratch?


A 15 channel AM BCB radio is as useful as tits on a bull, imho.

Your comment is noted. You definitely will not be interested in a
15 channel TRF kit, then, if it ever came out. smile/


switching 120 sets of LCs to allow only 2 RF amp tubes to be used
presents huge wiring problems, and is, unless *you* prove otherwise,
a complete waste of time.

Agreed about the huge wiring problems, and agreed about having to
prove it, or someone having to prove it. One reason for mentioning it
as I have is to engage the collective creativity of the many people
here in the newsgroups -- to think positive, and to think of a clever
way to make it work. Or, it may catalyze some other idea leading to
some improvement somewhere.

Before going into the workshop, it is good to maybe run thoughts and
ideas off of other experts. One doesn't build a bridge by going out to
the site and start building. Rather, it is carefully planned to meet
the specific requirements. Experts in bridge design are consulted,
etc. And this includes for new bridge designs which have not ever been
built before (there are new bridges now being built which push the
limits, and doing it in unorthodox ways.)

(I'm of the view that all ideas, even silly ones, may have value in
unforeseen and unpredictable ways. I'm also of the view that one can
think of a hundred ways why something will not work, while all one
has to do is to think of one way to make it work. That's why I have
no difficulty in proposing what may end up being silly ideas.)

Of course, contingent on the whole channel TRF concept is that the RF
bandpass filters can exactly be tailored for each frequency. One thing
which has not been established is how important is this really? Will
accomplishing this result in a noticeable improvement in audio and
general performance over the better superhet or tunable TRF designs
(and maybe allow a simplification of the rest of the circuitry)? Or,
will it only result in a marginal improvement, maybe only measurable
with equipment? If the latter is the case, then the channel TRF
concept becomes less attractive, except maybe for some unusual
circumstances.


The Turner AM tuner only exists in my kitchen.

Ah, the kitchen radio. smile/ I'm sure it is a great performer.


Continuing to type at the computer and at other hobbyists won't
produce anymore fresh ideas about AM radio than the last
80 years has produced, and I suggest you spend time in your workshop
rather than clutter the airwaves with petulant requests for more info.
Nobody knows anymore than what they have said.

I am wondering if something like the channel TRF for BCB reception
was ever proposed in times past, or used in some unusual application
where it was called for? Anyone?

Thanks, Patrick, for your frank feedback. It is welcome.

Jon Noring