[R-390] "unwarranted overstatement"

[chacuff]

I have to agree on this one....

We have been rebuilding these old war horses with OD caps or their 
equilivents for decades and I can't remember one performing any worse after 
the application than before.  I've never found one with odd ball performance 
characterists, weird oscillations, degraded audio or degraded RF performance 
or any thing one might attribute to the wrong application of capacitor type. 
I think with the improved technology of the dipped film foil caps or the 
modern day ceramics the work to recap the radio is always an improvement.

I'm not trying to re-open the debate related to complete recap vs selective 
recap here.  If you do either with modern parts you have improved the radio.

Making the assertion that using ODs for bypass is the unpardonable sin would 
be no different that stating the use of ceramics for coupling caps in the 
SP-600 to be the same.  The factory did it and it still met performance 
specs.  Could the audio performance of the SP-600 be improved by the use of 
OD in the coupling role....Maybe so...I don't know.

At the end of the day one should ask....did the work I performed replaceing 
the caps, whatever modern parts were used, improve the radio, fix a problem, 
extend the useful life of the radio for years to come....did I gain 
memorable pleasure from the work performed and the resulting use of the 
radio afterwards?

If you can answer yes then you have accomplished all that is necessary of 
you, the temporary owner of this piece of history.  Hopefully from the 
experience you will be driven to rescue more of them and others like them 
such as the SP-600, Racal RA-17's and any number of tube related gear.

I mean heck...if i'm going to be committed to the nut house for the 
possession of way too much of this stuff I want to go with my buddies 
right...so we'll all have something to talk about when we get there....

No Foul detected here....

Cap on....(like Nike says)  Just do it!

:-)

Cecil


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "2002tii" <bmw2002tii at nerdshack.com>
To: <r-390 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 3:04 AM
Subject: Re: [R-390] "unwarranted overstatement"


> Perry wrote:
>
>>Just what does "unwarranted" mean?
>
> In the first dictionary I consulted, definitions 1 and 2 are:  (1)
> incapable of being justified or explained; (2) without a basis in
> reason or fact.  Take your pick.
>
>>Any member of the list has the perfect right to politely state a
>>technical opinion on this list, even if it turns out to be
>>inaccurate without being personally denigrated.
>
> Saying that something is an "unwarranted overstatement"  =  personal
> denigration?  You've GOT to be kidding.  Grow up.
>
> And, for the record, you did not simply "politely state" the
> inaccurate information -- you declaimed it as if it was
> uncontrovertible knowledge directly from the lips of god (complete
> with SHOUTING).
>
> Best regards,
>
> Don
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> R-390 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-390
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:R-390 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html