[Hallicrafters] Re: [Boatanchors] Replacingrecttubeswithdiodesquestion

[Dave Harmon]

I guess the admins are asleep or something so I'll say it......

Please......both of you guys stop cross posting and while you are at it,
take your arrogance to private email and don't include me.

Regards

Dave Harmon
K6XYZ[at]sbcglobal[dot]net
.

-----Original Message-----
From: hallicrafters-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:hallicrafters-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Bill
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 5:53 PM
To: 'jeremy-ca'; wq9e at dtnspeed.net; erastber at tampabay.rr.com
Cc: boatanchors at mailman.qth.net; hallicrafters at mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [Hallicrafters] Re: [Boatanchors]
Replacingrecttubeswithdiodesquestion

Unfortunately Carl I don't seem to have a copy of an earlier email from
you 
 discussing any exceptions or voltage reduction.  I only saw the email I
responsed to 
 which made quite blunt general statements.  What I've found lacking in
your responses 
 Carl is a lack of discussion of the engineering trade offs or a good
solid analytical
 analysis. Please pass it along.

e.g. Just because something is done, in one receiver, e.g. AC/DC radios
where
 B+ is applied, doesn't mean it was the best thing to do. They may well
 have made an engineering trade off, cost, performance, simplicity of
design for the
 sake of some tube life. Who knows, maybe it was intentional, keeps the
customer buying
 tubes.

As for National giving the ok, great but since I don't have access to
the engineering 
report I have no idea what the trade offs are.

As for receiver sensitivity, good to hear that it didn't change but what
other parameters
 have to measured, e.g. IP3, oscillator phase noise?

Instead of indicating such and such is a myth because "it worked for
me/others", I would
 rather see a good solid engineering/analytical discussion.

 It's good to have a great RF lab, unfortunately you didn't quote any
measured results.
 Maybe in a previous email thread? If not, posting them and maybe some
enterprising 
 individual could put it up in an html page. Reminds me, guess I should
do a google.

I merely pointed out the obvious differences between the tube rectifier
and the solid
state rectifier.  If you have some good analytical data, I would love to
see it and then
perhaps a good html page could be set up.

I guess in summary there are 4 groups, "best practices", "acceptable
practices", "bad practices" 
 and anything else.  It seems some of those that methods that might be
considered "best (better)practices" 
 get relegated to myth status.

______________________________________________________________