On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 07:20:09 GMT, m II
wrote:


Is the Superheterodyne set over rated? It seems to me there were
certain advantages to the OLD ways. Ease of control perhaps not being
one of them.

Actually, superheterodyne is a pretty "OLD" way. It's just that it has
not been surpassed - till now, with the SDR - Software-Defined Radio
(of which superheterodyne is the front end anyway).

What was the WORST feature of the Regenerative sets?

Selectivity, dynamic range, tricky adjustment.

The BEST feature?

Simplicity, cost.

Would it be worthwhile to build a kit?

It is *always* worthwhile to tinker with radios... ;-)

Mike

Another best feature is that there is no bandwidth filter. If you get
a strong signal in the clear with good audio and run the rig thru an
amplifier you will be very surprised how good it can sound.
I recall doing that on a Radio Espania signal and being blown away
by the full frequency audio.
Bob


(Mike Cross) wrote in message news:4195dc10.33085750@news-server...
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 07:20:09 GMT, m II
wrote:


Is the Superheterodyne set over rated? It seems to me there were
certain advantages to the OLD ways. Ease of control perhaps not being
one of them.

Actually, superheterodyne is a pretty "OLD" way. It's just that it has
not been surpassed - till now, with the SDR - Software-Defined Radio
(of which superheterodyne is the front end anyway).

What was the WORST feature of the Regenerative sets?

Selectivity, dynamic range, tricky adjustment.

The BEST feature?

Simplicity, cost.

Would it be worthwhile to build a kit?

It is *always* worthwhile to tinker with radios... ;-)

Mike