Steven Swift wrote:

Patrick Turner writes:

Let me say a few words.

1. Many pages of RDH4 are devoted to AVC.
The time constant for AVC application is very long,
comprising of 1M and 0.047 uF, and measurement
of bass distortions resulting from well applied AVC is low
enough to be negligible.

To work properly for fading, the AVC needs to be about 100ms. This causes
significant distortion at bass audio. If a longer time constant is used
since only local (non-fading) stations will be tuned, then you are right.

You don't get fading on locals.
1M plus 0.047 uF typically used in AVC circuits has a TC = 47 ms
signifcant bass distortions do not occur.
The pole is at 3.37 Hz.



2. Nothing wrong with cathode bias, especially nowdays when cheap
large value elcaps are plentiful, and we have better plastic caps.
RDH4 speds a lot of time on cathode bias.

Cathode bias is great, but do not bypass the resistor. The degenerative
feedback will improve audio performance, but you lose gain.

If the Gm of the tube is like that of 6AU6, or 6BX6, the gain is high enough
to throw 6 dB away on current feedback from an unbypassed Rk.



3. Diode detectors are quite low distortion detectors even with
very low voltages of 100 mV if there is a constant current trickeled
through the crystal diode to keep them turned on with their
forward conducting voltage.
I gave details yesterday in another post of a detector which will change your
views about
diode detectors.
Diodes can be used with DC shunt feedback around an RF opamp,
and thd is negligible.

I agree that this can be made mostly true using active filters and such, but a
perfect diode, with perfect modulation has lots of distortion. I am willing
to take a look at your analysis, but if you use Volterra series expansion,
you simply can't prove that you'll get better than a few percent distortion.

Its obvious from my tests of my detector that ths is minimal,
and below the 1% level.



Somewhere in my old grad school notes, I have a derivation done by Prof.
Meyer (of Gray and Meyer, UC Berkeley) which shows the limits. I'll look for
your other post. Better than a few percent is NOT possible with just an RC
load (diagonal clipping) except for low modulation percentages.

There is no diagonal clipping in a well set up diode detector used
with a virtual CCS current flow from the C used to collect RF pulses.
If the ripple voltage does not vary with signal strength, the detection is linear.


4. AC coupling is fine from an RC load fed by a diode.
The impedance fed by the audio + RF ripple voltage should be high,
like a cathode follower grid.

5. I have tried my radio with various speakers, and no trouble
making full amplitude signals at 20 Hz.
The LF pole is determined by the audio amp in the radio, but at the detector, the

There is a discussion of speaker/cabinet resonances in RDH4 somewhere.
Lots of distortion when you approach resonance.

But that distortion isn't a problem due to the tuner.


On which pages are RDH4 and Terman "dont's" spelled out?

Each chapter has "crumbs" of knowledge in it. I have yet to find a nice
do/don't do list anywhere. I may also be "integrating" Terman and Henney.

I think the guy who started the thread should build his idea and try them
on a few "beta" testers. He'll be able to sell enough to pay off his costs.
Maybe pick a few channels in a few big markets (LA, New York, Chicago) to
keep the work load down.

Mr Noring has a huge backlog of R&D work ahead of him to
come up with his prototype tuner.

I'd rather build my own gear than wait for his solution.

Patrick Turner.



Steve.
--
Steven D. Swift, , http://www.novatech-instr.com
NOVATECH INSTRUMENTS, INC. P.O. Box 55997
206.301.8986, fax 206.363.4367 Seattle, Washington 98155 USA

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Steven Swift wrote:

Patrick Turner writes:

Let me say a few words.

Please delete rec.radio.shortwave from the news group header.

Thanks.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

John Byrns wrote:

In article , Patrick Turner
wrote:

Steven Swift wrote:

If you are willing to live with about 5-10% THD, then you can use more
common circuits.

True, but onje doesn't have to live with 5-10%.
linearize the IF amp and detector, and thd plummets.

However, there are dozens of "Hi Fi" AM circuits published

by the hobby magazines, tube vendors and kit makers. Have a look at them.

The RC-19 circuit uses a 6BA6 as an RF amp, followed by a 12AU7 used as a
detector and audio amplifier.

RDH4 has the circuit for the Selsted and Smith "infinite impedance "
detector, where a 12AU7 performs as credible detector, and as a diode,
but I think I'll stick with a germanium diode fet by a 12AU7 CF.

The "Selsted and Smith" detector is not the same thing as the so called
"infinite impedance" detector. The "infinite impedance" or "reflex"
detector was designed by RCA, while the "Selsted and Smith" detector was
designed by, well "Selsted and Smith", or at least "Selsted" who is still
around, or was a year or two ago.

The "Selsted and Smith" detector differs from the "infinite impedance"
detector in that it has a diode in series with the grid, and also a diode
load resistor.

Yes, you are right, and I should have checked my RDH4.
But the S&S detector pulls much less power from the tuned circuit....

There is no peak detection capacitor across the diode
load, so the diode does not act as an ordinary diode peak detector, and
the triode doesn't act as a cathode follower. The triode is the actual
detector operating in a fashion similar to the "infinite impedance"
detector, with the diode apparently serving to linearize the "infinite
impedance" detector. The input impedance of the "Selsted and Smith"
detector is not infinite due to the presence of the diode load resistor.

True, but its higher than most other detectors.


For that matter the input impedance of the so called "infinite impedance"
detector is also not infinite, and can even have a negative resistance
component which can cause stability problems. The negative resistance
effect can occur when circuit conditions are right, similar to the
conditions that can cause oscillation in cathode and emitter follower
circuits if you aren't careful.

I am happier with direct feed of the RF/IF signal to a CF, with following
crystal diode and C, with nearly constant current discharge from the C.



But does the RC-19 have enough tuned circuits to give over 70 dB rejection of
signals which are 50 kHz away from the wanted station at any place on
the band?

The 6BA6 is a variable U tube, with a non linear
transfer curve.

There is nothing wrong with the 6BA6, it was specifically designed for
this service and has very low odd order distortion which is all that
matters since the even order distortion products can't get through the
IFT. I hope I got that the right way around, if not it is explained in
some detail in some of the old texts, I think "Radio Receiver Design" by
Sturley is one that explains it. You only get in trouble if you try to
run the tube at a very high signal level, simultaneously with a high AGC
voltage applied for a large gain reduction. This is mainly a problem in
the stage driving the diode detector, so it is best to avoid AGC on that
stage, but in a minimal radio that is of course problematic. This is one
of the many topics that the RDH4 gives short shrift. The 6BA6 is even
usable as a gain control element in audio circuits where even order
distortion does matter. IIRC the peak limiter at a radio station where I
once worked used four 6BA6s in the audio path, where they were connected
in push pull, presumably to cancel the even order nonlinearities which are
inherent in the design of the tube.

Indeed the PP connection of two 6BA6 would lead to cancelation of 2H in the thd.
Not a bad idea for an RF/IF amp either.
All distortion is bad.

Patrick Turner.



Regards,

John Byrns

Surf my web pages at, http://users.rcn.com/jbyrns/

John Byrns wrote:

In article , (Steven
Swift) wrote:

Patrick Turner writes:

3. Diode detectors are quite low distortion detectors even with
very low voltages of 100 mV if there is a constant current trickeled
through the crystal diode to keep them turned on with their
forward conducting voltage.
I gave details yesterday in another post of a detector which will change your
views about
diode detectors.
Diodes can be used with DC shunt feedback around an RF opamp,
and thd is negligible.

I agree that this can be made mostly true using active filters and such, but a
perfect diode, with perfect modulation has lots of distortion. I am willing
to take a look at your analysis, but if you use Volterra series expansion,
you simply can't prove that you'll get better than a few percent distortion.
Somewhere in my old grad school notes, I have a derivation done by Prof.
Meyer (of Gray and Meyer, UC Berkeley) which shows the limits. I'll look for
your other post. Better than a few percent is NOT possible with just an RC
load (diagonal clipping) except for low modulation percentages.

It would be interesting to see the derivation you speak of! It was my
impression that if we had a "perfect diode" it could be used make a
perfect envelope detector, with the exception of the "tangential clipping"
problem that you mentioned. "Tangential clipping" is not just a function
of the modulation level, but is also a function of the modulating
frequency. As Patrick mentioned using a higher IF frequency will allow
using a smaller peak hold capacitor which will reduce "tangential
clipping". Also doubling the IF frequency by using a full wave detector
will reduce the "tangential clipping".

It is hard to believe that the distortion of a reasonably designed diode
detector is anywhere near "a few percent", as simple diode detectors were
used in the modulation monitors used by AM broadcast stations in times
gone by, and they had to have distortion low enough to measure the system
distortion at modulation percentages up to 100%. I will have to look up
the specifications of a few. Of course there is the issue that negative
peak clipping that is visible on a scope may represent only a small
fraction of a percent distortion on an RMS basis.

The "tangential clipping or diagonal clipping ocurs if the C value in
the RC circuit after the diode is of too large a value for the
voltage and frequency generated.
You see the phenomena best when the AF modulation F = 10 kHz or more,
and output voltage is a few volts.
So it becomes more likely as F of audio rises.
But the amount of audio declines with rising F.

Patrick Turner.


Regards,

John Byrns

Surf my web pages at, http://users.rcn.com/jbyrns/

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Please delete rec.radio.shortwave from the news group header.

Thanks.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(John Byrns) wrote:

Please delete rec.radio.shortwave from the news group header.

Thanks.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

What's the problem? This is a radio related discussion.

Frank Dresser

In article ,
"Frank Dresser" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(John Byrns) wrote:

Please delete rec.radio.shortwave from the news group header.

Thanks.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

What's the problem? This is a radio related discussion.

Frank Dresser

What does this have to do with listening to SW or BCB?

These guys are have their own conversation on radio design in another
group. More power to them. Why the need to cross post it?

If I or anyone else wants to they can subscribe to the other groups and
join in.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

What does this have to do with listening to SW or BCB?

Well, a hi-fi AM tuner would be a BCB radio.


These guys are have their own conversation on radio design in another
group. More power to them. Why the need to cross post it?

I posted in on this topic a couple of days ago. I was going to ask Steven
Swift about his AM detector distortion numbers, but John Byrns did it first.
I think it's an interesting thread, on-topic and polite. That's a rare
triple play on rrs!

If I or anyone else wants to they can subscribe to the other groups and
join in.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

I've been reading it from rec.radio.shortwave. I'm happy to see it here.

Frank Dresser

In article ,
"Frank Dresser" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

What does this have to do with listening to SW or BCB?

Well, a hi-fi AM tuner would be a BCB radio.


These guys are have their own conversation on radio design in another
group. More power to them. Why the need to cross post it?

I posted in on this topic a couple of days ago. I was going to ask Steven
Swift about his AM detector distortion numbers, but John Byrns did it first.
I think it's an interesting thread, on-topic and polite. That's a rare
triple play on rrs!

If I or anyone else wants to they can subscribe to the other groups and
join in.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

I've been reading it from rec.radio.shortwave. I'm happy to see it here.

I've been reading it from here to and I'm not happy.

I am not going argue about cross posting with you Frank.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Dan" wrote in message
...

Same here. This is a great thread, after weeks and weeks of
political crap, personal attacks and childish name calling.

As this thread is *clearly* on topic for rec.radio.shortwave,

[snip]

There's a couple of "Lloyd" threads for those who prefer rrs "classic".

Frank Dresser

Telamon wrote in message ...
In article ,
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:

Telamon wrote:
Please don't cross post to rec.radio.shortwave.

Perhaps you would be happier if you just learned to use your
delete key instead of expecting everyone else to conform to
your demands.

Oh I would be much happier if people did not cross post.

Thanks for your consideration.

It's not like anyone else in rec./sci. or alt.barium.enema cares...

PS If youy all get this gizmo consumer-ready, don't bother telling me.
I just filled up the "tube" section of my radio shelves and the SS
shelves aren't far behind. I must start in the bedroom and a stereo
tube radio-phono console is looking for a spot now. Hint-I must still
find a fuse cap for a H-K 330B. Tomorrow I go to get a fuse for my
Heathkit AR-14. There's a Sony 3" reel deck in that businesses
basement and I will scour it for tubes also.

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
"Frank Dresser" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(John Byrns) wrote:

Please delete rec.radio.shortwave from the news group header.

Thanks.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

What's the problem? This is a radio related discussion.

Frank Dresser

What does this have to do with listening to SW or BCB?

The discussion has everything to do with listening to the BCB,
and radio theory.

The subject you object to so strongly is neither political, religious,
commercial, or sexual, so why not just let the subject run out of steam
like all threads eventually do?

Patrick Turner.



These guys are have their own conversation on radio design in another
group. More power to them. Why the need to cross post it?

If I or anyone else wants to they can subscribe to the other groups and
join in.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In rec.antiques.radio+phono Telamon wrote:
I've been reading it from here to and I'm not happy.

Maybe you should not read it instead of trying to speak for people that
don't want you to speak for them.

Apologies to all others for this nowhere-near useful reply.

On topic: I noticed that European Philips all-transistor AM tuner
circuits from the seventies seem to give better quality reception than
some other European and Japanese mass-production receivers. I have no
idea about the designs used, but it could be usefull to study those.

---
Met vriendelijke groet,

Maarten Bakker.

In article ,
wrote:

In rec.antiques.radio+phono Telamon
wrote:
I've been reading it from here to and I'm not happy.

Maybe you should not read it instead of trying to speak for people that
don't want you to speak for them.

Oh come on now and be a good net citizen and not cross post.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Telamon wrote:

Snip

The discussion has everything to do with listening to the BCB,
and radio theory.

If you would spend time reading the group you would see the several
cross posted threads don't mesh well with rec.radio.shortwave. The group
is generally about listening to SW, BCB and sometimes long wave. There
is discussions about radios specifications, antennas and receiving
challenges. Other topics revolve around the programming or hearing
pirates and the like. Yes the group goes off topic a lot on what people
listen to on short wave.

There is no good reason to cross post these threads to three groups.

Don't cross post unless there is a good reason to do so is a good
general rule to follow.

Three threads were cross posted at nearly the same time from
rec.antiques.radio+phono, rec.audio.tubes. If I don't speak up why
should I expect it to stop?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In rec.antiques.radio+phono Telamon wrote:
In article ,
In rec.antiques.radio+phono Telamon
wrote:
I've been reading it from here to and I'm not happy.
Maybe you should not read it instead of trying to speak for people that
don't want you to speak for them.
Oh come on now and be a good net citizen and not cross post.

You must be some sort of newbie or troll, this subject is perfectly on
topic.

By the way, I could imagine that Grundig tuners of the mentioned era
also sound very good, but being Dutch, most receivers I hear are made by
Philips.

I don't have much more of relevance to add to the discussion, so I'll
return to just reading it now.

---
Met vriendelijke groet,

Maarten Bakker.

PT,

Fair Play is after all FAIR PLAY !

I guess we all at RRS should start posting Reception Reports to:

* rec.antiques.radio+phono

* rec.audio.tubes

Just for the Fun of It ~ RHF
..
..
= = = Patrick Turner wrote in message
= = = ...
Telamon wrote:

In article ,
"Frank Dresser" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(John Byrns) wrote:

Please delete rec.radio.shortwave from the news group header.

Thanks.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

What's the problem? This is a radio related discussion.

Frank Dresser

What does this have to do with listening to SW or BCB?

The discussion has everything to do with listening to the BCB,
and radio theory.

The subject you object to so strongly is neither political, religious,
commercial, or sexual, so why not just let the subject run out of steam
like all threads eventually do?

Patrick Turner.



These guys are have their own conversation on radio design in another
group. More power to them. Why the need to cross post it?

If I or anyone else wants to they can subscribe to the other groups and
join in.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Telamon wrote:

Snip

The discussion has everything to do with listening to the BCB,
and radio theory.

If you would spend time reading the group you would see the several
cross posted threads don't mesh well with rec.radio.shortwave. The group
is generally about listening to SW, BCB and sometimes long wave. There
is discussions about radios specifications, antennas and receiving
challenges. Other topics revolve around the programming or hearing
pirates and the like. Yes the group goes off topic a lot on what people
listen to on short wave.

There is no good reason to cross post these threads to three groups.

I think you are outnumbered.

Talks on BCB receiver designs cannot be bad for all three groups IMHO.



Don't cross post unless there is a good reason to do so is a good
general rule to follow.

Some think there *is* a good reason.



Three threads were cross posted at nearly the same time from
rec.antiques.radio+phono, rec.audio.tubes. If I don't speak up why
should I expect it to stop?

Just be happy you ain't got all these nitwits raving on about
politics, terrorists, etc, ad nausem.

Patrick Turner.



--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:
Patrick Turner wrote:

The discussion has everything to do with listening to the BCB,
and radio theory.

If you would spend time reading the group you would see the several
cross posted threads don't mesh well with rec.radio.shortwave. The
group is generally about listening to SW, BCB and sometimes long
wave. There is discussions about radios specifications, antennas and
receiving challenges. Other topics revolve around the programming or
hearing pirates and the like. Yes the group goes off topic a lot on
what people listen to on short wave.

There is no good reason to cross post these threads to three groups.

I'm the one who started and cross-posted the related topics (of
building a tube-based AM receiver) to the three newsgroups, including
rec.radio.shortwave. I have read r.r.s. for a long time, and the start
of the thread did cross over into r.r.s. land since I was interested
in the tube design also being suitable for MW DX use, thus reaching
out to MW DXers interested in this who otherwise don't read the other
two newsgroups (and indeed a few people from r.r.s. chimed in saying
they were quite interested in this general thread.)

It is clear the thread was suitably on-topic for r.r.s., as it was
on-topic for the other groups. It's definitely more on-topic to
r.r.s. than the political crap which pervades r.r.s. (I personally
think that the r.r.s. crowd should begin the long process to add
moderation to the group, to get rid of the garbage -- or simply
create a moderated YahooGroup and tell everyone we're moving there.)

Of course, like all threads, they evolve. And the last couple days the
focus has changed towards building a tube tuner most suitable for
local high-powered stations, which is of less interest to the r.r.s.
crowd.

Nevertheless, I believe the threads are sufficiently on-topic to
r.r.s. to not warrant some pro-active effort to try to stop. And as
Patrick noted, all threads die of old-age, to be replaced by new
threads. That's the dynamics of newsgroups (I've created and moderated
dozens of newsgroups in the last 15 years, so I am very aware of their
dynamics, which includes the birth and death of discussion threads.)

Now, back to our regularly scheduled discussion of the "channel TRF"
tube tuner (and spinoff topics)!

Jon Noring

In article
, Telamon
wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

In rec.antiques.radio+phono Telamon
wrote:
I've been reading it from here to and I'm not happy.

Maybe you should not read it instead of trying to speak for people that
don't want you to speak for them.

Oh come on now and be a good net citizen and not cross post.

If cross posting is bad net citizenship why is it a feature of usenet in
the first place?


Regards,

John Byrns


Surf my web pages at, http://users.rcn.com/jbyrns/

"RHF" wrote in message
om...
PT,

Fair Play is after all FAIR PLAY !

When you're right, you're right!


I guess we all at RRS should start posting Reception Reports to:

* rec.antiques.radio+phono

Sure, what are you hearing on your Scott? Is it sensitive? Selective?
How's the audio fidelity?


* rec.audio.tubes

Yes, just who is transmitting good wideband AM? I'm sure they want to know!


Just for the Fun of It ~ RHF
.
.

If you're hearing good wideband audio on your Collins R-390, don't forget to
share it with the rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors group.

Frank Dresser

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...
In article
, Telamon
wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

In rec.antiques.radio+phono Telamon
wrote:
I've been reading it from here to and I'm not happy.

Maybe you should not read it instead of trying to speak for people that
don't want you to speak for them.

Oh come on now and be a good net citizen and not cross post.

If cross posting is bad net citizenship why is it a feature of usenet in
the first place?

It also makes a lot more sense to crosspost the thread to related groups than to
try and carry on three seperate threads where all participants can't see what
the others have said.

jim menning

No highs.

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 01:50:04 +1000, Patrick Turner
wrote:



David wrote:

The fixed-step (10 kHz) tuner is what killed music on AM radio. You
can get a much more pleasant sound by detuning a few 100 Hz. This PLL
crap sounds like ****.

Howcome?

Patrick Turner



On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 00:36:21 GMT, Jon Noring wrote:

[Following up on a thread dating back to January, similar to one I
started recently. Responding to Patrick Turner's comments.]


Patrick Turner wrote in January 2004:
Jerry Wang wrote:

1. Even it is a single channel [AM] receiver, I would still suggest
the use of one or two intermediate frequency (IF) stages. Because
to achieve good sensitivity you need to have enough gain.

Since you only want one channel, there is no need for a frequency
converter or any IFTs or IF amps, and a TRF with four tuned circuits
in the form of two critically coupled RF trannies will do nicely.

Interesting.

As I noted in a recent message, it is very intriguing to build a
modernized, high-performance AM tube tuner using the "channel"
approach. This takes advantage of the fact that licensed broadcasters
today must broadcast on specific frequencies, every 10 khz in North
America and 9 khz in Europe and elsewhere. So, instead of trying to
be able to continuously tune across the BCB spectrum, we can think
outside the box for the moment and consider the alternative of
building reasonably optimized tuning circuits for each listened-to
frequency.

In article ,
(RHF) wrote:

= = = (John Byrns) wrote in message
= = = ...
In article
, Telamon
wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

In rec.antiques.radio+phono Telamon
wrote:
I've been reading it from here to and I'm not happy.

Maybe you should not read it instead of trying to speak for people that
don't want you to speak for them.

Oh come on now and be a good net citizen and not cross post.

If cross posting is bad net citizenship why is it a feature of usenet in
the first place?


Regards,

John Byrns


Surf my web pages at, http://users.rcn.com/jbyrns/

JB,

Cross-Posting is like the Coloring Book and Crayons "Test"
for 5 Year Old 'little' Boys.

The ones that can Color-within-the-Lines are consider "AT" Grade.
[ Normal Development. ]

The ones that 'scribble everywhere' are identified for special
attention and/or medication.

The "Test" is given again in various forms at 8, 11 and 14 Years
of Age to little Boys.

Many of the ones who still refuse to Color-within-the Lines by
Age 14 can be found in a Juvenile Custody Facility.
{Lack of Self-Control and/or Acting Out Anti-Social Behavior}

~ RHF


So what you are saying is that Usenet is some kind of giant testing
facility for boys past the age of 14, else why have the cross posting
facility in the first place? What about little girls, do they get a free
pass?


Regards,

John Byrns


Surf my web pages at, http://users.rcn.com/jbyrns/

(RHF) wrote:

Cross-Posting is like the Coloring Book and Crayons "Test"
for 5 Year Old 'little' Boys.

The ones that can Color-within-the-Lines are consider "AT" Grade.
[ Normal Development. ]

The ones that 'scribble everywhere' are identified for special
attention and/or medication.

The "Test" is given again in various forms at 8, 11 and 14 Years
of Age to little Boys.

Many of the ones who still refuse to Color-within-the Lines by
Age 14 can be found in a Juvenile Custody Facility.
{Lack of Self-Control and/or Acting Out Anti-Social Behavior}

~ RHF

The song "Flowers are Red" (Harry Chapin) expresses extremely well how I
- and many others -- feel about such "coloring-book" nonsense... the
terrible smothering of creativity by those blind to it... or worse -
jealous of it...

You might give it a listen...

Cross posting: Let's see - we have roughly 20 serious DX radios in the
house; several VERY good AM HiFi sets (& still trying to find my Fisher
TA-600); 50+ general radio sets that were manufacturerd in the 20's 30's
40's 50' 60's and 70's (what no radio newer? nope). Have tube
mono-blocks and tube stereo amps (some williamsons); JBLs from the 50's
60's & 70's; some vintage Sansui stuff; some decent R-R gear; Hammond
A-100 w/Leslie 122 (three decent power (tube) amps between the two -
just overhauled the leslie amp); Let's see - I've logged 80+ countries
(R-390; R390A; R391; NC-120 (RAO-6); Philco 37-640; Zenith 5F233;
Silvertone 7038; GE-P990); logged all 50 states on BCB; and play with a
5000W (AM) transmitter (daytime - a bit less after sundown ;-) which
just happens to be on the (drum roll please) AM / BCB dial...

So I'd say that's tube stuff, (listening, designing, just starring at
the glow); Shortwave (did I mention we've been listening to RTTY since
the early 70s? - yeah - and I wish I'd never sold my model 28); antique
radio-phono - and most of the radios in the house are 50+ years old -
and yes - there are several phonos here from a V-15III equipped SL-95 -
to a Signet equipped SL-1300 (with the usual broken cuing mech). are
appropriate groups... yet I tend to stay in only one. Point Jon was
making - he wanted to tap talent / opinions from a broad pool...

Seems to me - that talking about a HiFi AM receiver (last time I
listened there was still a lot of AM on 19M) using tubes covers the
above mentioned groups pretty well... esp. if one like to listen to OTR
through their personal broadcaster over their HiFi receiver... (yeah not
everyone gets to play with a 5KW Harris - but while I can tweak the crap
out of it - I seldom get to pick what goes out over the air - difference
in being the "engineer" and the "owner"... (though I do run some stuff
while performing "maintenance" on ocassion big grin!!!!!

Lighten up - ain't "your" group.
--
randy guttery

A Tender Tale - a page dedicated to those Ships and Crews
so vital to the United States Silent Service:
http://tendertale.com

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Telamon wrote:

Snip

The discussion has everything to do with listening to the BCB,
and radio theory.

If you would spend time reading the group you would see the several
cross posted threads don't mesh well with rec.radio.shortwave. The group
is generally about listening to SW, BCB and sometimes long wave. There
is discussions about radios specifications, antennas and receiving
challenges. Other topics revolve around the programming or hearing
pirates and the like. Yes the group goes off topic a lot on what people
listen to on short wave.

There is no good reason to cross post these threads to three groups.

I think you are outnumbered.

Talks on BCB receiver designs cannot be bad for all three groups IMHO.

I don't care about your opinion and did not ask for it. I don't care if
other people posting from the other rec.antiques.radio+phono or
rec.audio.tubes think as you do.

I'm not interested in a debate about cross posting.

I have made a repeated, polite requests for this to stop so are you guys
from rec.antiques.radio+phono or rec.audio.tubes going to behave or not?

Please respond as to whether you will stop or not that's all I want to
know.

This is it guys I'm not asking again.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

= = = (John Byrns) wrote in message
= = = ...
In article ,
(RHF) wrote:

= = = (John Byrns) wrote in message
= = = ...
In article
, Telamon
wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

In rec.antiques.radio+phono Telamon
wrote:
I've been reading it from here to and I'm not happy.

Maybe you should not read it instead of trying to speak for people that
don't want you to speak for them.

Oh come on now and be a good net citizen and not cross post.

If cross posting is bad net citizenship why is it a feature of usenet in
the first place?


Regards,

John Byrns


Surf my web pages at, http://users.rcn.com/jbyrns/

JB,

Cross-Posting is like the Coloring Book and Crayons "Test"
for 5 Year Old 'little' Boys.

The ones that can Color-within-the-Lines are consider "AT" Grade.
[ Normal Development. ]

The ones that 'scribble everywhere' are identified for special
attention and/or medication.

The "Test" is given again in various forms at 8, 11 and 14 Years
of Age to little Boys.

Many of the ones who still refuse to Color-within-the Lines by
Age 14 can be found in a Juvenile Custody Facility.
{Lack of Self-Control and/or Acting Out Anti-Social Behavior}

~ RHF


So what you are saying is that Usenet is some kind of giant testing
facility for boys past the age of 14, else why have the cross posting
facility in the first place? What about little girls, do they get a free
pass?


Regards,

John Byrns


Surf my web pages at, http://users.rcn.com/jbyrns/

JB,

Cross Posting is just one simple outlet for some to
'act-out' Non-Violent Anti-Social Behavior )

~ RHF

..

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:

Telamon wrote:

Snip

The discussion has everything to do with listening to the BCB,
and radio theory.

If you would spend time reading the group you would see the several
cross posted threads don't mesh well with rec.radio.shortwave. The group
is generally about listening to SW, BCB and sometimes long wave. There
is discussions about radios specifications, antennas and receiving
challenges. Other topics revolve around the programming or hearing
pirates and the like. Yes the group goes off topic a lot on what people
listen to on short wave.

There is no good reason to cross post these threads to three groups.

I think you are outnumbered.

Talks on BCB receiver designs cannot be bad for all three groups IMHO.

I don't care about your opinion and did not ask for it. I don't care if
other people posting from the other rec.antiques.radio+phono or
rec.audio.tubes think as you do.

I'm not interested in a debate about cross posting.

I have made a repeated, polite requests for this to stop so are you guys
from rec.antiques.radio+phono or rec.audio.tubes going to behave or not?

Please respond as to whether you will stop or not that's all I want to
know.

This is it guys I'm not asking again.

I hear your request but you are the only one to complain about what
many including myself is a trivial issue.

I for one don't think it is impolite to talk about radio construction
on a radio listeners disscussion group.

There are plenty of opinions I don't ask for, but which get hurled in my
direction
and as long as they are not downright insulting, obscene,
verbally violent, I tolerate them every day without complaint.
There are episodes of grossly OT threads, and the occasional spot of humour,
and that adds colour, even real weather to dull days of serious chit chat.

You are invited to consider a more tolerant position, and rather than complain
about the noisy party,
come over and join in!

Patrick Turner.



--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:

This is it guys I'm not asking again.


WHEW! I guess that means you'll stop being a pest.

In article , Bill
wrote:

Telamon wrote:

This is it guys I'm not asking again.


WHEW! I guess that means you'll stop being a pest.

Just the opposite Bill. How are things in PR?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:
I don't care about your opinion and did not ask for it. I don't care if
other people posting from the other rec.antiques.radio+phono or
rec.audio.tubes think as you do.

I'm not interested in a debate about cross posting.

I have made a repeated, polite requests for this to stop so are you guys
from rec.antiques.radio+phono or rec.audio.tubes going to behave or not?

Please respond as to whether you will stop or not that's all I want to
know.

This is it guys I'm not asking again.

Can we have that in writing?

'Cause the simple answer is we ain't going to stop cross posting
just because YOU have YOUR knickers in a knot.

Jeff

--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
"A life lived in fear is a life half lived."
Tara Morice as Fran, from the movie "Strictly Ballroom"

In article ,
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:

Telamon wrote:
I don't care about your opinion and did not ask for it. I don't care if
other people posting from the other rec.antiques.radio+phono or
rec.audio.tubes think as you do.

I'm not interested in a debate about cross posting.

I have made a repeated, polite requests for this to stop so are you guys
from rec.antiques.radio+phono or rec.audio.tubes going to behave or not?

Please respond as to whether you will stop or not that's all I want to
know.

This is it guys I'm not asking again.

Can we have that in writing?

'Cause the simple answer is we ain't going to stop cross posting
just because YOU have YOUR knickers in a knot.

You a moron or something? Did I speak to you or did you READ it.

What a bozo.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article
,
Telamon wrote:

In article ,
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:

Telamon wrote:
I don't care about your opinion and did not ask for it. I don't care if
other people posting from the other rec.antiques.radio+phono or
rec.audio.tubes think as you do.

I'm not interested in a debate about cross posting.

I have made a repeated, polite requests for this to stop so are you guys
from rec.antiques.radio+phono or rec.audio.tubes going to behave or not?

Please respond as to whether you will stop or not that's all I want to
know.

This is it guys I'm not asking again.

Can we have that in writing?

'Cause the simple answer is we ain't going to stop cross posting
just because YOU have YOUR knickers in a knot.

You a moron or something? Did I speak to you or did you READ it.

What a bozo.

Oh yeah I forgot to ask you what you smoke before you post jerk.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:

Telamon wrote:

I don't care about your opinion and did not ask for it. I don't care if
other people posting from the other rec.antiques.radio+phono or
rec.audio.tubes think as you do.

I'm not interested in a debate about cross posting.

I have made a repeated, polite requests for this to stop so are you guys
from rec.antiques.radio+phono or rec.audio.tubes going to behave or not?

Please respond as to whether you will stop or not that's all I want to
know.

This is it guys I'm not asking again.

Can we have that in writing?

'Cause the simple answer is we ain't going to stop cross posting
just because YOU have YOUR knickers in a knot.


You a moron or something? Did I speak to you or did you READ it.

What a bozo.

You posted to a public forum. As a matter of fact, you CROSS posted
the three groups, including the one I normally read. RAR+P.

You did not address your posting to anyone in particular, other than
the people in RAT and RAR+P.

However, you specifically asked if "we" were going to stop. The
answer is no.

The simple fact is that nobody really gives a damn what you think.

Flame all you want.

Jeff

--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
"A life lived in fear is a life half lived."
Tara Morice as Fran, from the movie "Strictly Ballroom"

Telamon wrote in message ...
In article
,
Telamon wrote:

pOOr a%%whole baby troll...

Doesn't know how to create a rule in Outlook Express to delete the
thread before he/she/hermaphrodite worm sees it! Won't block a poster.

I'm not changing yer diaper, bitch, and I DO KNOW and I DID. Be
thankful I don't find where you come from and stuff abuse@... where
the sun doesn't shine.

Putrid trollop. Shut up and crawl back in the ditch.

In article ,
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:

Telamon wrote:

I don't care about your opinion and did not ask for it. I don't
care if other people posting from the other
rec.antiques.radio+phono or rec.audio.tubes think as you do.

I'm not interested in a debate about cross posting.

I have made a repeated, polite requests for this to stop so are
you guys from rec.antiques.radio+phono or rec.audio.tubes going to
behave or not?

Please respond as to whether you will stop or not that's all I
want to know.

This is it guys I'm not asking again.

Can we have that in writing?

'Cause the simple answer is we ain't going to stop cross posting
just because YOU have YOUR knickers in a knot.


You a moron or something? Did I speak to you or did you READ it.

What a bozo.

You posted to a public forum. As a matter of fact, you CROSS posted
the three groups, including the one I normally read. RAR+P.

Yeah. Since you and the other bozos started cross posting I don't know
which group you post from or read. Sure I could subscribe to the other
groups and figure it out but why bother.

You did not address your posting to anyone in particular, other than
the people in RAT and RAR+P.

Yeah I did. I responded to you idiot. You must smoke up a large cloud
before posting.

However, you specifically asked if "we" were going to stop. The
answer is no.

I told you I'm through asking you to stop bozo. Got a reading
comprehension problem.

The simple fact is that nobody really gives a damn what you think.

Your disregard for anyone else's desire noted.

Nobody gives a damn about you either.

Although this is a public forum I doubt anyone cares what you think
either.

Flame all you want.

Thanks for your permission. If I had found the Trolling spoke person for
rec.antiques.radio+phono and rec.audio.tubes it would have saved some
time. What took you so long.

Oh well water over the dam and all that.

So what use does a pot smoking idiot with reading comprehension problems
have for tubes, phono's or antiques anyway? I think a person of your
caliber would have no use for any of it other than sniffing the varnish
or glue used to restore the stuff.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:

Telamon wrote:

I don't care about your opinion and did not ask for it. I don't
care if other people posting from the other
rec.antiques.radio+phono or rec.audio.tubes think as you do.

I'm not interested in a debate about cross posting.

I have made a repeated, polite requests for this to stop so are
you guys from rec.antiques.radio+phono or rec.audio.tubes going to
behave or not?

Please respond as to whether you will stop or not that's all I
want to know.

This is it guys I'm not asking again.

Can we have that in writing?

'Cause the simple answer is we ain't going to stop cross posting
just because YOU have YOUR knickers in a knot.


You a moron or something? Did I speak to you or did you READ it.

What a bozo.

You posted to a public forum. As a matter of fact, you CROSS posted
the three groups, including the one I normally read. RAR+P.

Yeah. Since you and the other bozos started cross posting I don't know
which group you post from or read. Sure I could subscribe to the other
groups and figure it out but why bother.

You did not address your posting to anyone in particular, other than
the people in RAT and RAR+P.

Yeah I did. I responded to you idiot. You must smoke up a large cloud
before posting.

However, you specifically asked if "we" were going to stop. The
answer is no.

I told you I'm through asking you to stop bozo. Got a reading
comprehension problem.

The simple fact is that nobody really gives a damn what you think.

Your disregard for anyone else's desire noted.

Nobody gives a damn about you either.

Although this is a public forum I doubt anyone cares what you think
either.

Flame all you want.

Thanks for your permission. If I had found the Trolling spoke person for
rec.antiques.radio+phono and rec.audio.tubes it would have saved some
time. What took you so long.

Oh well water over the dam and all that.

So what use does a pot smoking idiot with reading comprehension problems
have for tubes, phono's or antiques anyway? I think a person of your
caliber would have no use for any of it other than sniffing the varnish
or glue used to restore the stuff.

Amen.

Telamon wrote:
In article , Bill
wrote:


Telamon wrote:

This is it guys I'm not asking again.


WHEW! I guess that means you'll stop being a pest.


Just the opposite Bill. How are things in PR?


All's well. Lighten up, Telamon. This is a good topic for all three
groups and could use some input from the vantage point of the denizens
of each one.

Rgds,
Bill

In article ,
(Steven Dinius) wrote:

Telamon wrote in message
...
In article
,
Telamon wrote:

pOOr a%%whole baby troll...

Stop projecting.

Doesn't know how to create a rule in Outlook Express to delete the
thread before he/she/hermaphrodite worm sees it! Won't block a poster.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Rules? Blocking? What is
Outlook express?

Rules, you mean something like a body of principles governing a group?
Well I was under the impression people that subscribe from
rec.antiques.radio+phono and rec.audio.tubes would have none of that.

Blocking? Maybe you meant blockhead.

I'm not changing yer diaper, bitch, and I DO KNOW and I DID. Be
thankful I don't find where you come from and stuff abuse@... where
the sun doesn't shine.

Well thank god you changed yours. It was really starting to stink over
here. Sorry to hear you are still having problems in that regard. How
often do you need to change your diapers and why do you feel the need to
change them in the dark? I'd expect you could do a better job in the
light. I'll do my best to help.

Putrid trollop. Shut up and crawl back in the ditch.

We like to have fun with Trolls here. Thanks for identifying yourself.
I'll be looking forward to more exchanges like these.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article , Bill
wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article , Bill
wrote:


Telamon wrote:

This is it guys I'm not asking again.


WHEW! I guess that means you'll stop being a pest.


Just the opposite Bill. How are things in PR?


All's well. Lighten up, Telamon. This is a good topic for all
three groups and could use some input from the vantage point of the
denizens of each one.

We all have our limitations Bill.

I'm doing my best to endear myself to the fine people cross posting from
rec.antiques.radio+phono and rec.audio.tubes.

Sure hope I've made a good impression with them.

You used to have a web page with the radios you restored. Still have it?

I don't know why these threads don't get cross posted to several other
dozen newsgroups that have radio in the title. I think the amateur
groups would benefit from these threads. Those people are interested in
BS and radio design after all. Seems like a good fit to me.

Here I was all worried what was going to happen to rec.radio.shorwave
since the Bryant hiatus.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California