LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #22   Report Post  
Old June 19th 04, 07:29 PM
John Byrns
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Bill wrote:

John Byrns wrote:

In article , Bill wrote:

I wish that Jon could actually experience this and see that his
thinking 'outside the box' isn't going to be an automatic revelation
that 80 years of radio has simply overlooked.
Thirty minutes on the bench could save 'light-hours' of ramblings.


I don't follow your reasoning on this, what is Jon going to learn in
"Thirty minutes on the bench"? I would venture next to nothing? Thirty
weeks on the bench might be more like it, and even then there won't be
time to explore all avenues. As far as 80 years of radio go, Jon's
constraints are different than might have existed when tube radios were a
mass application, he may be able to make different tradeoffs than were
practical then.


Don't be silly just for the sake of being a 'devils advocate', John.


I'm not being the "devils advocate", I'm just saying that the problem is
more complex than you are making it out to be and a mere thirty minutes on
the bench is not going to resolve much.

If Jon can achieve his plug-in TRF boards with any semblance of a $1.95
flea-market AA5 selectivity then I would be pleased.


These threads have grown to a point where I have not been able to follow
them all. I have been following most of the discussions like the
superhet, TRF, and segmentation of the MW band posts, but I have not yet
read the ones related to channel based receivers, which I hope to read
through as time permits. Perhaps that explains my confusion with relation
to the "thirty minutes on the bench", if you are referring to a
channelized TRF approach to receive all 117 or so MW channels, then I
would think you wouldn't need to go to the bench at all to realize it
isn't practical. A smaller number of channels, say half a dozen or so
might be practical.

I think the best approach for the all out audiophile would be the one
suggested by Randy, or was it Sherry? Gutting out a National NC-100, and
rebuilding the band selection assembly with 5 sets of 3 optimized band
pass filters to segment the MW band into 5 parts.


Regards,

John Byrns


Surf my web pages at, http://users.rcn.com/jbyrns/
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Channel-based AM tube tuner (was Designs for a single frequency high performance AM-MW receiver?) Jon Noring Shortwave 103 June 30th 04 07:13 PM
Interested in high-performance tube-based AM tuner designs Jon Noring Shortwave 85 June 14th 04 01:36 AM
AM Tube Tuner Kit -- candidate models from yesteryear? Jon Noring Shortwave 5 June 11th 04 12:52 AM
MFJ969 Tuner Question Gene Vico Equipment 4 November 13th 03 12:27 AM
MFJ969 Tuner Question Gene Vico Equipment 0 November 12th 03 01:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:26 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017