[PhattyMo[_2_]]

Theo wrote:
"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
In message , Chris Siz
writes
I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV aerial coax. It
came from a discount store as a TV coax extension cable. I measure the
cable diameter as 4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone? I don't want
an impaired audio signal. The length I need to use is 3 to 4 metres.

(2) Is it ok for UHF TV or is it actually quite low grade coax and
prone to interference or mess up the aerial signal?


While you might get away with using your cable, good screening/shielding
becomes increasing important at the lower frequencies, as the
interfering signals (on the outside of the coax) penetrate more easily
through the outer shield. Well-screened audio would be better. In many
cases, 'flimsy' screening may be adequate at UHF (and the cable may have
low loss) but, again, well-screened cable will be better for preventing
interference. Maybe it's a case of try it and see what happens?

I would have thought the converse to be true, surely the "holes" in the
screening
braid would be less of a problem at audio frequencies than at UHF?
I am thinking in terms of wavelength.



Same here. *shrug* ?

[Arny Krueger]

"Chris Siz" wrote in message


I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV
aerial coax. It came from a discount store as a TV coax
extension cable. I measure the cable diameter as 4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone?

What kind of microphone?

I don't want an impaired audio signal. The length I need
to use is 3 to 4 metres.

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable. Most coax has only
one conductor, plus shield.

(2) Is it ok for UHF TV or is it actually quite low grade coax and prone
to interference or mess up the aerial
signal?

There are two kinds of coax, 50 ohm and 72 ohm. What is the impedance of the
coax, and what is the required impedance for your application? In short
lengths it won't matter, but for like 30' or more, it might.

[Phil Allison]

"Arny Krueger"

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable.


** Bull****.

Here is some space for YOU to post the proof of that:

-------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------



Most coax has only one conductor, plus shield.


** Most ????????????

Do tell of other kinds .............




........ Phil

[John Fields]

On Tue, 6 May 2008 08:00:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Chris Siz" wrote in message


I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV
aerial coax. It came from a discount store as a TV coax
extension cable. I measure the cable diameter as 4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone?

What kind of microphone?

I don't want an impaired audio signal. The length I need
to use is 3 to 4 metres.

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable. Most coax has only
one conductor, plus shield.

(2) Is it ok for UHF TV or is it actually quite low grade coax and prone
to interference or mess up the aerial
signal?

There are two kinds of coax, 50 ohm and 72 ohm.

---
I believe coax for TV is universally 75 ohms, but there are certainly
more than two impedances available.

I see 32, 50, 51, 51.5, 52, 53.5, 73, 75, 80, 93, 95, and 125 ohm
cable at:

http://www.belden.com/pdfs/Cable101/coaxrefc.pdf

JF

[GregS[_3_]]

In article , John Fields wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2008 08:00:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Chris Siz" wrote in message


I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV
aerial coax. It came from a discount store as a TV coax
extension cable. I measure the cable diameter as 4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone?

What kind of microphone?

I don't want an impaired audio signal. The length I need
to use is 3 to 4 metres.

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable. Most coax has only
one conductor, plus shield.

(2) Is it ok for UHF TV or is it actually quite low grade coax and prone
to interference or mess up the aerial
signal?

There are two kinds of coax, 50 ohm and 72 ohm.

---
I believe coax for TV is universally 75 ohms, but there are certainly
more than two impedances available.

I see 32, 50, 51, 51.5, 52, 53.5, 73, 75, 80, 93, 95, and 125 ohm
cable at:

http://www.belden.com/pdfs/Cable101/coaxrefc.pdf



On an old TV antenna I used 300 ohm Shielded Permaohm. Shielded twin lead. I don't see it
being made now.

greg

[Richard Henry]

On May 3, 2:58*am, Chris Siz wrote:
I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV aerial coax. *It
came from a discount store as a TV coax extension cable. *I measure the
cable diameter as 4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone? *I don't want
an impaired audio signal. *The length I need to use is 3 to 4 metres.

(2) Is it ok for UHF TV or is it actually quite low grade coax and
prone to interference or mess up the aerial signal?

For htZt length of coax the connectors probably would be of more
concern. Are they alerady fitted, or ary you going to attempt that
yourself? Are they of the proper type (diameter, keying, impedance)
to match your equipment?

[Michael A. Terrell]

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Chris Siz" wrote in message


I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV
aerial coax. It came from a discount store as a TV coax
extension cable. I measure the cable diameter as 4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone?

What kind of microphone?

I don't want an impaired audio signal. The length I need
to use is 3 to 4 metres.

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable. Most coax has only
one conductor, plus shield.


Twinax has two conductors + shield. IBM used it on mainframes,
decades ago.


(2) Is it ok for UHF TV or is it actually quite low grade coax and prone
to interference or mess up the aerial
signal?

There are two kinds of coax, 50 ohm and 72 ohm. What is the impedance of the
coax, and what is the required impedance for your application? In short
lengths it won't matter, but for like 30' or more, it might.


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html


Use any search engine other than Google till they stop polluting USENET
with porn and junk commercial SPAM

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

[Arny Krueger]

"Phil Allison" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger"

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable.


** Bull****.

Here is some space for YOU to post the proof of that:

-------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.sennheiserusa.com/newsite...?transid=cat30

http://www.shure.com/ProAudio/Produc...ones/index.htm

http://www.neumannusa.com/

etc.

Most coax has only one conductor, plus shield.


** Most ????????????

Do tell of other kinds .............

Twinax, for example.

http://www.markertek.com/SearchProdu...&pagesize =20

[Richard Crowley]

"Arny Krueger" wrote ...
"Phil Allison" wrote in
"Arny Krueger"

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable.


** Bull****.

Here is some space for YOU to post the proof of that:

-------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.sennheiserusa.com/newsite...?transid=cat30
http://www.shure.com/ProAudio/Produc...ones/index.htm
http://www.neumannusa.com/

Yo, Arny, please don't feed the trolls.
Nobody believes that tripe from Allison,
it isn't worth even responding to him.

[John Fields]

On Tue, 06 May 2008 13:35:40 GMT, (GregS)
wrote:

In article , John Fields wrote:

I see 32, 50, 51, 51.5, 52, 53.5, 73, 75, 80, 93, 95, and 125 ohm
cable at:

http://www.belden.com/pdfs/Cable101/coaxrefc.pdf



On an old TV antenna I used 300 ohm Shielded Permaohm. Shielded twin lead. I don't see it
being made now.

---
I vaguely remember seeing something like that. I don't know how far
back, but I never used it.

The last time I did TV stuff of any consequence I'd just gotten
married and we were living in an apartment in New York, in the Bronx,
and our TV reception was a mess (rabbit ears on top of the TV) of
ghosts because of multipath reflections from the buildings around us.

I'd just read about log periodic antennas and how nicely broadband and
directional they were, so I decided to build one for the TV band from
the instructions in Popular Electronics (or one of the other hobby
mags), and after scaring the **** out of my wife with this not
inconsiderable structure growing and coming to life in our living
room, eventually got it installed on the roof of our building with the
blessings of our landlord.

Varnished wood and wire and, as I recall, 300 ohm twinlead leading
down to our TV.

Then I had to build an intercom so that as I adjusted the antenna in
azimuth and elevation, my wife would say "better" or "worse" as I
pointed the antenna. Eventually we zeroed in on the best picture we
could get and got rid of most of the ghosts.

Thanks for bringing back those memories. :-)

JF

[Phil Allison]

"Arny Krueger"
"Phil Allison"

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable.

** Bull****.

Here is some space for YOU to post the proof of that:

-------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.sennheiserusa.com/newsite...?transid=cat30
http://www.shure.com/ProAudio/Produc...ones/index.htm
http://www.neumannusa.com/


** ROTFL !!

- that is proof only that there are folk who sell microphones !!

IMBECILE


Most coax has only one conductor, plus shield.


** Most ????????????

Do tell of other kinds .............

Twinax, for example.

http://www.markertek.com/SearchProdu...&pagesize =20


** Err - that is a shielded twisted, pair cable.

Not co-axial cable at all.

IMBECILE


...... Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Richard Arse Licker Crowley"


** God Almighty -

what a low life, autistic scumbag this human turd is.




..... Phil

[krw[_3_]]

In article ,
says...

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Chris Siz" wrote in message


I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV
aerial coax. It came from a discount store as a TV coax
extension cable. I measure the cable diameter as 4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone?

What kind of microphone?

I don't want an impaired audio signal. The length I need
to use is 3 to 4 metres.

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable. Most coax has only
one conductor, plus shield.


Twinax has two conductors + shield. IBM used it on mainframes,
decades ago.

Never saw any twinax in the mainframes. The standard was "trilead"
(signal with two grounds connected to a "tuning fork" connector that
slipped over the signal pin and ground rail) and later high-speed
trilead (Gore-Tex insulation) and sometimes micro-dot coax for
clocks. They used both 50ohm and 90ohm varieties. ...and piles of
it!


--
Keith

[Michael A. Terrell]

krw wrote:

In article ,
says...

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Chris Siz" wrote in message


I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV
aerial coax. It came from a discount store as a TV coax
extension cable. I measure the cable diameter as 4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone?

What kind of microphone?

I don't want an impaired audio signal. The length I need
to use is 3 to 4 metres.

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable. Most coax has only
one conductor, plus shield.


Twinax has two conductors + shield. IBM used it on mainframes,
decades ago.

Never saw any twinax in the mainframes. The standard was "trilead"
(signal with two grounds connected to a "tuning fork" connector that
slipped over the signal pin and ground rail) and later high-speed
trilead (Gore-Tex insulation) and sometimes micro-dot coax for
clocks. They used both 50ohm and 90ohm varieties. ...and piles of
it!

--
Keith


http://www.networking.ibm.com/nhd/webnav.nsf/pages/729:7299book:7299book.html


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html


Use any search engine other than Google till they stop polluting USENET
with porn and junk commercial SPAM

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

[krw[_3_]]

In article ,
says...

krw wrote:

In article ,
says...

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Chris Siz" wrote in message


I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV
aerial coax. It came from a discount store as a TV coax
extension cable. I measure the cable diameter as 4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone?

What kind of microphone?

I don't want an impaired audio signal. The length I need
to use is 3 to 4 metres.

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable. Most coax has only
one conductor, plus shield.


Twinax has two conductors + shield. IBM used it on mainframes,
decades ago.

Never saw any twinax in the mainframes. The standard was "trilead"
(signal with two grounds connected to a "tuning fork" connector that
slipped over the signal pin and ground rail) and later high-speed
trilead (Gore-Tex insulation) and sometimes micro-dot coax for
clocks. They used both 50ohm and 90ohm varieties. ...and piles of
it!

--
Keith


http://www.networking.ibm.com/nhd/webnav.nsf/pages/729:7299book:7299book.html


AS400 ain't a mainframe. ;-) It's made by those wheat farmers on
the tundra; never seen one.

--
Keith

[Michael A. Terrell]

krw wrote:

AS400 ain't a mainframe. ;-) It's made by those wheat farmers on
the tundra; never seen one.


I scrapped a trailer load of data concentrators from the state of
Florida Dept. of Education, when they updated their system about 20
years ago, and some used twinax. They were connected to an old 370
system in Tallahassee. I got the crappy tape drives, as well. I still
have a new twinax connector, somewhere in the shop, along with some 'HN'
connectors.


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html


Use any search engine other than Google till they stop polluting USENET
with porn and junk commercial SPAM

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

[John Fields]

On Tue, 6 May 2008 22:52:14 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote:


Most coax has only one conductor, plus shield.


** Most ????????????

Do tell of other kinds .............

---
You're right, of course, since only the single center conductor of
_coaxial_ cable can be congruent with the axis normal to the cross
section of the shield.

But I'm interested...

It's not like you're stupid, you know,

Far from it, sometimes you come up with perfect solutions for posted
problems, so why do you find it necessary to abuse your lessors?

JF

[Phil Allison]

"John Fields"
"Phil Allison"

Most coax has only one conductor, plus shield.

** Most ????????????

Do tell of other kinds .............

---
You're right, of course, since only the single center conductor of
_coaxial_ cable can be congruent with the axis normal to the cross
section of the shield.

But I'm interested...

It's not like you're stupid, you know,


** Such flattery will get you no-where.


Far from it, sometimes you come up with perfect solutions for posted
problems,


** I very often do - regardless of what the idiot, trolling OPs think.


so why do you find it necessary to abuse your lessors?


** Have you stopped beating your wife?


BTW

have you seen the complete trash "Arny " put in his reply to my points ?

Why don't YOU inform the several NGs how wrong it is ?

Your silence = approval.



....... Phil

[Joel Koltner]

"krw" wrote in message
t...
AS400 ain't a mainframe. ;-) It's made by those wheat farmers on
the tundra; never seen one.

I've seen several... inside of IBM buildings. :-)

It's actually a pretty neat machine in many ways with one of the most "modern"
operating systems available: Linux and the Mac OS trace their roots to UNIX,
and Windows comes from Dave Cutler who also did VMS -- both back in the '70s,
whereas OS/400 was written from scratch in the late '80s and benefitted from
everything that had been learned in UNIX and VMS. Of course, UNIX and VMS
have evolved as well, but there are certain fundamental aspects that will
always remain, such as the UNIX "everything is a file" design decision.

---Joel

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Tue, 06 May 2008 20:18:36 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

You're right, of course, since only the single center conductor of
_coaxial_ cable can be congruent with the axis normal to the cross
section of the shield.

Shielded twisted pair (with centered conductor pair, yada, yada)
is also coaxial in that the signal conductors average to a line.

The advantage of a pair over a single signal conductor is that
the receiving differential amplifier can discriminate against
common-mode noise.

The advantage of twisting a pair of signal conductors over an
untwisted pair is that non-planar noises are also averaged (more
or less) equally into both conductors. A receiving differential
amplifier is still required to discriminate against the noise.

All the best fortune,

Chris Hornbeck
"It's for compatibility with 8-Track."
-scott

[JosephKK[_2_]]

On Sun, 4 May 2008 11:35:25 -0700, (Dave Platt)
wrote:

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

You can slap RG- numbers on anything. It stopped being a military
standard a long time ago. Belden, Alpha, Times wire websites should
have some good white papers. RG meant 'Radio Guide', and all early coax
was braided copper shielding. Their is still some RF coax made this way,
but it uses teflon and silver plated copper and is VERY expensive.

http://www.belden.com/pdfs/Cable101/Shielding.pdf page 32 states 'Braid
is for low frequency, foil for high frequency'.

The RF-type foil-with-some-braid coax (LMR400 is one type) is quite
popular, and does seem to provide good shielding. However, there are
high-frequency (UHF/VHF) applications in which it has a rather evil
reputation. In particular, most repeater operators I know avoid it
like the plague when it comes time to run their primary feedlines.

Practical experience seems to suggest that this sort of construction
is prone to broadband-noise problems when used for duplex
applications... e.g. in a repeater where you're transmitting 25 - 100
watts up the cable in one direction, and also trying to receive a
microvolt-level signal on a nearby frequency at the same time in the
other direction.

The culprit seems to be the fact that the foil and braid don't make
perfect contact throughout the cable - they're not (and cannot be)
soldered together, and the contact between them is simply a
mechanical-pressure contact which is imperfect. There seems to be an
irregular make-and-break effect - I've heard it called "micro-arcing" -
which causes some small amount of the transmitted energy being
rectified and spread around the spectrum as broadband noise. Some of
this noise ends up on the repeater's receiver frequency, and cannot be
filtered out at the receiver... and this competes with the incoming
signal and can swamp it out (a form of receiver desensitization).

It doesn't take much of this noise to be a problem... I figured out
last year that in our repeater application (35 watt transmitter on
145.27 MHz) the transmitter is putting out literally a quadrillion
times more power than the receiver is picking up from a hand-held
radio out at the edge of our service area. Even a tiny fraction of
the transmitter power, rectified into noise, can wipe out the desired
signal.

The remedy for this, in practice, is to use a different type of
cable... one without the foil-and-braid shield construction. One
choice is a good "double braid" shield (which as Michael indicates,
tends to use a silver-plated braid). An even better choice is heliax,
which uses a seamless corrugated-copper shield.

Both are expensive - Andrew 1/2" heliax is edging up towards $3/foot
these days... and both are too stiff to use as microphone cable :-)

The foil-and-braid cables seem to be fine in simplex RF applications,
where you aren't trying to receive and transmit through the same cable
at the same time - the amount of broadband noise being generated is
inconsequential in simplex use.

Thank you for adding to my store of knowledge.

[JosephKK[_2_]]

On Sun, 04 May 2008 12:41:01 +0100, Chris Siz
wrote:

On Sat 03 May 2008 19:05:41, Kevin McMurtrie wrote:

In article ,
Chris Siz wrote:

I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV aerial
coax. It came from a discount store as a TV coax extension
cable. I measure the cable diameter as 4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone? I don't
want an impaired audio signal. The length I need to use is 3 to
4 metres.

(2) Is it ok for UHF TV or is it actually quite low grade coax
and prone to interference or mess up the aerial signal?

There are a few differences. TV coax will work in some conditions
but not generally.

TV coax is very brittle. The inner wire is copper-plated steel
and the outer shield is aluminum wire and aluminum foil. It will
quickly crack where it meets the connectors.

TV coax may not pass small audio signals well because of its
aluminum shield. Aluminum is extremely reactive so it is always
coated with a thin oxide layer. Higher voltages can spark through
it and TV RF can capacitively couple through it. Microphone
signals might become distorted. Cable for lower frequencies uses
copper shielding.

Good microphone and instrument cable has an insulation that drains
away static electrical charges. RF coax can contain electrical
charges in the insulation that causes it to act like condenser
microphone.


I am the OP and as you can probably tell I am no electronics or
radio expert. However even my limited knowledge struggles to
believe some of the points you have made.

Forgive me if it's more obvious to others but your's is not some
sort of funny posting is it?

He thinks he is earnest. Most of these effects do occur in some
applications. If you have read the whole thread you will have seen
even more other use case issues. Not all of which apply to your use.
Kevin's biggest problem is that he does not know what the boundaries
of applicability are of the various things he thinks he understands.

In general, it will work OK for low fidelity / casual use. It will
not work well, and it may be a reliability problem. Forget about it
for good amateur or serious use.

[JosephKK[_2_]]

On Sun, 04 May 2008 17:16:19 GMT, (Don Pearce)
wrote:

On Sun, 4 May 2008 10:09:34 -0700, "Richard Crowley"
wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote ...
"Richard Crowley"
wrote:

RF coax made for cable TV use have foil shields plus
a few strands of wire braid around the foil. In fact many
of them even have a double foil shield.

Don't mistake the wire braid (which may, indeed be only
10% coverage) for the actual outer shield of the coax
which is the active portion.

Yup, but the stuff we are discussing here has just a very loose braid.
Have a look at the second pic on this page - low loss TV coax.

http://www.megalithia.com/elect/cable/index.html

What is that stuff good for?!
I've never seen anything like that over here. It can't be
useful for low-level signals (receiving, audio, etc.) any
place where there is any RFI.

It is good for absolutely nothing, and nowadays resides only in cut
price electrical stores and old boxes in attics.

OTOH, they make an intentionally "lossy" coaxial cable
(one brand name is "Radiax") which is used for distributed
Tx/Rx (such as running a cable through a tunnel to provide
cell service underground, etc.) That stuff has holes all along
the length to deliberately leak RF along the way.

I know Andrew's Radiax very well - I've specified it for distributing
VHF in tunnels.

d

Now if there were more that only one minor competitor.

[John Fields]

On Wed, 7 May 2008 11:26:08 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote:


"John Fields"
"Phil Allison"

Most coax has only one conductor, plus shield.

** Most ????????????

Do tell of other kinds .............

---
You're right, of course, since only the single center conductor of
_coaxial_ cable can be congruent with the axis normal to the cross
section of the shield.

But I'm interested...

It's not like you're stupid, you know,


** Such flattery will get you no-where.

---
Not at all flattery, just a simple statement of fact meant to
underscore that your anti-social antics aren't due to stupidity.
---

Far from it, sometimes you come up with perfect solutions for posted
problems,


** I very often do - regardless of what the idiot, trolling OPs think.

---
But sometimes you don't, or you make a small blunder, and when that
happens and you're apprised of it you go into attack mode instead of
just admitting that you made a mistake, learning from it, and getting
on with your life.
---


so why do you find it necessary to abuse your lessors?


** Have you stopped beating your wife?

---
Hardly a parallel since your propensity toward abuse is public
knowledge and your claim that I have ever beaten my wife is imaginary.

Interesting, though, that you equate 'lessor' with 'wife'...
---

BTW

have you seen the complete trash "Arny " put in his reply to my points ?

Why don't YOU inform the several NGs how wrong it is ?

---
Because, if _you_ think it's wrong, then it's your job to show Arny
where he went wrong, not mine.
---

Your silence = approval.

---
Wrong again.

As far as I can tell, most of the folks on these newsgroups disapprove
of your antics, but won't engage you because of the shenanigans you
pull and the ugliness you create when you're forced to consider the
fact that you're less than perfect.

JF

[Arny Krueger]

"John Fields" wrote in
message


have you seen the complete trash "Arny " put in his
reply to my points ?

Why don't YOU inform the several NGs how wrong it is ?

Because, if _you_ think it's wrong, then it's your job to
show Arny where he went wrong, not mine.

Phil seems to live in an alternative universe where pedantry is the rule.

Your silence = approval.
--
Wrong again.

As far as I can tell, most of the folks on these
newsgroups disapprove of your antics, but won't engage
you because of the shenanigans you pull and the ugliness
you create when you're forced to consider the fact that
you're less than perfect.

...and everybody else isn't.

[Arny Krueger]

"krw" wrote in message
t
In article
,
says...

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Chris Siz" wrote in message


I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV
aerial coax. It came from a discount store as a TV
coax extension cable. I measure the cable diameter as
4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone?

What kind of microphone?

I don't want an impaired audio signal. The length I
need to use is 3 to 4 metres.

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield
cable. Most coax has only one conductor, plus shield.


Twinax has two conductors + shield. IBM used it on
mainframes, decades ago.

Never saw any twinax in the mainframes.

It was not a common usage.

In the 80s IBM tried to popularize a technology called "Token ring", which
worked over twinax. Token ring hardware was made for use with mainframes,
but it didn't gain much acceptance in the marketplace.

The 8100 series of minicomputers, and the sequel System 3 and 36 systems
relied more heavily on token ring, so people who worked with these smaller
computers were more familar with twinax. Been there, done that.

Eventually, the larger system 3 computers were upgraded to the point where
there was not a lot that would distinguish them from mainframes.

[Arny Krueger]

"krw" wrote in message

AS400 ain't a mainframe. ;-)

Joke.

It's made by those wheat farmers

Actually, most farmers around the Rochester MN plant where most AS 400s were
made farmed corn and vegetables. I lived there for a while.

on the tundra;

South-central Minnesota is too hilly, too wet, and too warm to be good
tundra.

never seen one.

They were very popular for a while. Admittedly, they were System 38s on
steroids. In terms of common measures like processing power and address
space size, they were at least mainframes.

[Phil Allison]

" John Fields = Criminal Psychopath "


It's not like you're stupid, you know,


** Such flattery will get you no-where.

Not at all flattery,


** You missed the obvious irony - ****wit

( snip gratuitous abuse)


** Have you stopped beating your wife?

Hardly a parallel ...


** You missed the obvious allusion to the unproven assertion

- you asinine, criminal ****wit.



have you seen the complete trash "Arny " put in his reply to my points ?

Why don't YOU inform the several NGs how wrong it is ?

---
Because, if _you_ think it's wrong,


** So you think it is all just fine - eh ??

That is not what you just posted - then snipped.

Typical.



Your silence = approval.

Wrong again.


** Silence in the face of wrong doing = tacit approval.

Basic fact about human behaviour.

Forever obscure to criminal psychopaths like you.


BTW:

I am clearly wasting precious time dealing with idiotic, HOSTILE questions
one of the VERY worst, criminal, autistic psychopaths on all of usenet.

You are piece of vile, sub human scum - Mr Fields.

I hope you die very soon in the most agonising way imaginable.

Same goes for all your genetic relatives - young and old.

BTW 2:


If ever come to visit Austin Texas - be most assured

I will buy a cheap hand gun, track YOU down like a dog a shoot you full
of holes.

Cheers.



....... Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Arny Krueger has LOST it "



** What ever sanity he once had.

Bloody obvious really.

Usual demise of all such autistic, mental defectives.






....... Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Arny Krueger has LOST it "


** What ever sanity he once had.

Bloody obvious really.

Usual demise of all such autistic, mental defectives.




....... Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Arny Krueger"
"Phil Allison"

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable.

** Bull****.

Here is some space for YOU to post the proof of that:

-------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.sennheiserusa.com/newsite...?transid=cat30
http://www.shure.com/ProAudio/Produc...ones/index.htm
http://www.neumannusa.com/


** ROTFL !!

- that is proof only that there are folk who sell microphones !!

IMBECILE


Most coax has only one conductor, plus shield.


** Most ????????????

Do tell of other kinds .............

Twinax, for example.

http://www.markertek.com/SearchProdu...&pagesize =20


** Err - that is a shielded twisted, pair cable.

Not co-axial cable at all.

IMBECILE


...... Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Arny Krueger"
"Phil Allison"

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield cable.

** Bull****.

Here is some space for YOU to post the proof of that:

-------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.sennheiserusa.com/newsite...?transid=cat30
http://www.shure.com/ProAudio/Produc...ones/index.htm
http://www.neumannusa.com/


** ROTFL !!

- that is proof only that there are folk who sell microphones !!

IMBECILE


Most coax has only one conductor, plus shield.


** Most ????????????

Do tell of other kinds .............

Twinax, for example.

http://www.markertek.com/SearchProdu...&pagesize =20


** Err - that is a shielded twisted, pair cable.

Not co-axial cable at all.

IMBECILE


...... Phil

[John Fields]

On Thu, 8 May 2008 01:40:30 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote:


" John Fields = Criminal Psychopath "


It's not like you're stupid, you know,


** Such flattery will get you no-where.

Not at all flattery,


** You missed the obvious irony - ****wit

( snip gratuitous abuse)


** Have you stopped beating your wife?

Hardly a parallel ...


** You missed the obvious allusion to the unproven assertion

- you asinine, criminal ****wit.



have you seen the complete trash "Arny " put in his reply to my points ?

Why don't YOU inform the several NGs how wrong it is ?

---
Because, if _you_ think it's wrong,


** So you think it is all just fine - eh ??

That is not what you just posted - then snipped.

Typical.



Your silence = approval.

Wrong again.


** Silence in the face of wrong doing = tacit approval.

Basic fact about human behaviour.

Forever obscure to criminal psychopaths like you.


BTW:

I am clearly wasting precious time dealing with idiotic, HOSTILE questions
one of the VERY worst, criminal, autistic psychopaths on all of usenet.

You are piece of vile, sub human scum - Mr Fields.

I hope you die very soon in the most agonising way imaginable.

Same goes for all your genetic relatives - young and old.

BTW 2:


If ever come to visit Austin Texas - be most assured

I will buy a cheap hand gun, track YOU down like a dog a shoot you full
of holes.

---
Hmmm...

http://web.acma.gov.au/AimsWeb/newscontent.jsp

What do you think?

Should I fill it out and send it off to them?

JF

[Earl Kiosterud]

--
Earl
"Joel Koltner" wrote in message
...
"krw" wrote in message
t...
AS400 ain't a mainframe. ;-) It's made by those wheat farmers on
the tundra; never seen one.

I've seen several... inside of IBM buildings. :-)

It's actually a pretty neat machine in many ways with one of the most "modern" operating
systems available: Linux and the Mac OS trace their roots to UNIX, and Windows comes from
Dave Cutler who also did VMS -- both back in the '70s, whereas OS/400 was written from
scratch in the late '80s and benefitted from everything that had been learned in UNIX and
VMS. Of course, UNIX and VMS have evolved as well, but there are certain fundamental
aspects that will always remain, such as the UNIX "everything is a file" design decision.

---Joel


It's a damn neat machine. I've not kept up with it, but in the 80's it was considered a
"minicomputer," which meant it is a mainframe, just smaller. It's operating system, OS/400,
was very solid -- crashes, data loss, etc. were virtually unheard of. It had separate
subsystems for everything (communications, LAN, terminals, print spooling, etc.), which can
be shut down, reconfigured, and restarted without re-booting the entire system, something
I've seen mainframe people stare at in wide-eyed awe. It had built-in relational data base
functionality in the microcode, not up in the applications machine-language layer. It used
a huge virtual memory model, where everything (programs, data files, etc.) were considered
to be in memory at all times -- any time one was needed, it just got swapped in by the
virtual memory paging system. The more RAM it had, the better it ran.

Earl

[Earl Kiosterud]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"krw" wrote in message
t
In article
,
says...

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Chris Siz" wrote in message


I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV
aerial coax. It came from a discount store as a TV
coax extension cable. I measure the cable diameter as
4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone?

What kind of microphone?

I don't want an impaired audio signal. The length I
need to use is 3 to 4 metres.

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield
cable. Most coax has only one conductor, plus shield.


Twinax has two conductors + shield. IBM used it on
mainframes, decades ago.

Never saw any twinax in the mainframes.

It was not a common usage.

In the 80s IBM tried to popularize a technology called "Token ring", which worked over
twinax. Token ring hardware was made for use with mainframes, but it didn't gain much
acceptance in the marketplace.

The 8100 series of minicomputers, and the sequel System 3 and 36 systems relied more
heavily on token ring, so people who worked with these smaller computers were more
familar with twinax. Been there, done that.

Eventually, the larger system 3 computers were upgraded to the point where there was not a
lot that would distinguish them from mainframes.


Yeah. The Token-Ring Network actually natively used the IBM Cabling system, a star-based
cabling system with 110-Ohm two-shielded-pairs cable and its own two-pair connectors. It
ran at 4 Mb/sec, and got upgraded to 16. Ethernet those days was 10 Mb. The Token-Ring
Network ran better than Ethernet when heavily utilized, but was just too damned expensive,
and never caught on. It was marketed mostly at large corporations, and was intended for PC
LANs, PC-to-mainframe connectivity, and anything else that would come along that needed
local connectivity.

Twinax cabling was used for the 5250 family of terminals and printers used in IBM's
minicomputers (System/36, System/38 (which evolved to the AS-400)). It used a screw-in
twinaxial connector, and 150 Ohm two-conductor shielded cable. It could be adapted for the
IBM cabling system (separate from a Token-Ring Network that would also be using it), as
could the coax (RG-62, 92-Ohm) 3270 family of terminals used by the IBM mainframes.

Man, now THERE'S some trivia. Thought you might be interested.
--
Earl

[Michael A. Terrell]

John Fields wrote:

On Thu, 8 May 2008 01:40:30 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote:


" John Fields = Criminal Psychopath "


It's not like you're stupid, you know,


** Such flattery will get you no-where.

Not at all flattery,


** You missed the obvious irony - ****wit

( snip gratuitous abuse)


** Have you stopped beating your wife?

Hardly a parallel ...


** You missed the obvious allusion to the unproven assertion

- you asinine, criminal ****wit.



have you seen the complete trash "Arny " put in his reply to my points ?

Why don't YOU inform the several NGs how wrong it is ?

---
Because, if _you_ think it's wrong,


** So you think it is all just fine - eh ??

That is not what you just posted - then snipped.

Typical.



Your silence = approval.

Wrong again.


** Silence in the face of wrong doing = tacit approval.

Basic fact about human behaviour.

Forever obscure to criminal psychopaths like you.


BTW:

I am clearly wasting precious time dealing with idiotic, HOSTILE questions
one of the VERY worst, criminal, autistic psychopaths on all of usenet.

You are piece of vile, sub human scum - Mr Fields.

I hope you die very soon in the most agonising way imaginable.

Same goes for all your genetic relatives - young and old.

BTW 2:


If ever come to visit Austin Texas - be most assured

I will buy a cheap hand gun, track YOU down like a dog a shoot you full
of holes.

---
Hmmm...

http://web.acma.gov.au/AimsWeb/newscontent.jsp

What do you think?

Should I fill it out and send it off to them?


Go for it. Maybe they will kick the door down in the middle of the
night and waterboard him.


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html


Use any search engine other than Google till they stop polluting USENET
with porn and junk commercial SPAM

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

[Michael A. Terrell]

Earl Kiosterud wrote:

Yeah. The Token-Ring Network actually natively used the IBM Cabling system, a star-based
cabling system with 110-Ohm two-shielded-pairs cable and its own two-pair connectors. It
ran at 4 Mb/sec, and got upgraded to 16. Ethernet those days was 10 Mb. The Token-Ring
Network ran better than Ethernet when heavily utilized, but was just too damned expensive,
and never caught on. It was marketed mostly at large corporations, and was intended for PC
LANs, PC-to-mainframe connectivity, and anything else that would come along that needed
local connectivity.

Twinax cabling was used for the 5250 family of terminals and printers used in IBM's
minicomputers (System/36, System/38 (which evolved to the AS-400)). It used a screw-in
twinaxial connector, and 150 Ohm two-conductor shielded cable. It could be adapted for the
IBM cabling system (separate from a Token-Ring Network that would also be using it), as
could the coax (RG-62, 92-Ohm) 3270 family of terminals used by the IBM mainframes.

Man, now THERE'S some trivia. Thought you might be interested.


The equipment I scrapped was used to connect 3270, and the Telex
clones to the IBM system. The most usable salvage from the terminals
were the long three round pin power cords, and a few muffin fans.


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html


Use any search engine other than Google till they stop polluting USENET
with porn and junk commercial SPAM

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

[ehsjr[_2_]]

John Fields wrote:
On Thu, 8 May 2008 01:40:30 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote:


" John Fields = Criminal Psychopath "



It's not like you're stupid, you know,


** Such flattery will get you no-where.

Not at all flattery,


** You missed the obvious irony - ****wit

( snip gratuitous abuse)



** Have you stopped beating your wife?

Hardly a parallel ...


** You missed the obvious allusion to the unproven assertion

- you asinine, criminal ****wit.




have you seen the complete trash "Arny " put in his reply to my points ?

Why don't YOU inform the several NGs how wrong it is ?

---
Because, if _you_ think it's wrong,


** So you think it is all just fine - eh ??

That is not what you just posted - then snipped.

Typical.




Your silence = approval.

Wrong again.


** Silence in the face of wrong doing = tacit approval.

Basic fact about human behaviour.

Forever obscure to criminal psychopaths like you.


BTW:

I am clearly wasting precious time dealing with idiotic, HOSTILE questions
one of the VERY worst, criminal, autistic psychopaths on all of usenet.

You are piece of vile, sub human scum - Mr Fields.

I hope you die very soon in the most agonising way imaginable.

Same goes for all your genetic relatives - young and old.

BTW 2:


If ever come to visit Austin Texas - be most assured

I will buy a cheap hand gun, track YOU down like a dog a shoot you full
of holes.


---
Hmmm...

http://web.acma.gov.au/AimsWeb/newscontent.jsp

What do you think?

Should I fill it out and send it off to them?

JF

Yes.

Ed

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Wed, 07 May 2008 07:54:21 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Wed, 7 May 2008 11:26:08 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote:

"John Fields"


so why do you find it necessary to abuse your lessors?


** Have you stopped beating your wife?

---
Hardly a parallel since your propensity toward abuse is public
knowledge and your claim that I have ever beaten my wife is imaginary.

Interesting, though, that you equate 'lessor' with 'wife'...

Maybe his wife is also his landlady-- or did you mean "lessers"?

;-)

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

[krw[_3_]]

In article ,
says...
"krw" wrote in message
t
In article
,
says...

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Chris Siz" wrote in message


I am in the UK and have a 10m length of some cheap TV
aerial coax. It came from a discount store as a TV
coax extension cable. I measure the cable diameter as
4.8mm.

(1) Is it ok to use this sort of coax for a microphone?

What kind of microphone?

I don't want an impaired audio signal. The length I
need to use is 3 to 4 metres.

Most good microphones need 2-conductor plus shield
cable. Most coax has only one conductor, plus shield.


Twinax has two conductors + shield. IBM used it on
mainframes, decades ago.

Never saw any twinax in the mainframes.

It was not a common usage.

In the 80s IBM tried to popularize a technology called "Token ring", which
worked over twinax. Token ring hardware was made for use with mainframes,
but it didn't gain much acceptance in the marketplace.

I'd forgotten about TR, but it wasn't used *in* mainframes. It was
a networking technology.

The 8100 series of minicomputers, and the sequel System 3 and 36 systems
relied more heavily on token ring, so people who worked with these smaller
computers were more familar with twinax. Been there, done that.

PCs.

Eventually, the larger system 3 computers were upgraded to the point where
there was not a lot that would distinguish them from mainframes.

Nonsense.

--
Keith