John Byrns wrote:

Hi Patrick,

All your comments on text book references below are beside the point, what
I was asking for is a citation for a textbook that explains yours and
Phil's assertion that the rate of increase in the attenuation of a LC tank
circuit is greatest near the "nose", and decreases further from
resonance? Please note that I am not disputing yours and Phil's
viewpoint, I came to understand your perspective during the "Thick as a
Brick" thread back in January. You say this perspective is the one used
in old radio text books, but I have never seen it mentioned in an old
radio text book, hence I was hoping you could help me with a citation to a
text book that uses/explains your perspective? Just because I haven't
seen it doesn't mean it isn't there, since I never looked for it in the
past.

You seem to have forgotten that I changed the subject after you started
talking about the thickness of your skull, you acknowledged the change of
subject in a couple of posts, but now you have drifted back to an earlier
subject and assuming that is what I am asking for citations on.

I don't have the time to debate this any longer.
I don't want to repeat what I have already said.

I suggest yet again you satisfy your curiosity to inform yourself of the wonderments

we see with LC tuned circuits by reading whatever books exist on the subjects,
and I am sure there is a pile of material on the web.

My methods and perceptions have led to successfully building or modifying AM radios
to
a far better level of performance than the status quo, and I have thus prooved at
least to myself
the effectiveness of my education, which I promoted to be able to use it, and not
merely to be a
"knowledgeable do-little".

Patrick Turner.



Regards,

John Byrns

In article , Patrick Turner
wrote:

John Byrns wrote:

In article , Patrick Turner
wrote:

John Byrns wrote:

In article , Patrick Turner
wrote:

John Byrns wrote:

In article , Patrick Turner
wrote:

I have seen no reference of your interpretive methodology in any
text books, and the text book methods to which I adhere to explain
it all nicely, and I don't have any intention of going right
through
all that long and tortuous discussion again.

And I wouldn't ask you to, if you notice I am not disputing
your method,
I am simply disputing your apparent claim that my method is
invalid. I
would ask you for one favor though, could you cite some of the
textbooks
that explain your method so nicely?

I would have a dozen on my shelf which explain radio theory
sufficiently
well, including RDH4, and 11 others.

Ahh, the old weapons of mass destruction excuse, you have the RDH4
and 11
other text books, and yet you can't come up with a citation for your
method?

I won't have the same books as you have, but apart from RDH4,
I have Terman's Radio Engineering,
about 6 different dated copies of ARRL,
The british Communications Handbook, 5th Ed,
Phillips Radio Paractice, Essentials of Radio by Sluurzberb&Osterfield,
Applied Electronics by the staff of the Dept of Massacgusets insitute of
Technology,

Electrical and Electronic Engineering by John D Ryder,

Of those I have at least the RDH4, and Terman's Radio Engineering, plus
possibly one or two more, how about some page numbers where I can find an
explanation of your definition of the rate of increase of the attenuation
of a tank circuit around resonance?

Most of the radio books I have do have explicit graphs and explanations of the
response
of RF and IFTs, with varying amounts of mutual coupling.
You don't need the page numbers from me, the info is in there.
The attenuation rates are shown on the graphs
And also there is a statement in RDH4 about sideband cutting, with a
narrow bw RF /
IF response,
which underlines the importance of requiring a wide RF bw to get a wide audio
response.



and I am too lazy to copy out the titles of the other approximate 10 books
I have read on old fashioned electronics which all describe filters
the same
way, but not the way you do.

Well I guess that about says it all, you are simply one of those old
fashioned blokes who can't change his ways to adopt newer and better
methods.

Well in a later post I did take the trouble to name my sources.

And I am not a lazy old bugger who never gets off his arse to find out
by looking
into things.

I shouldn't have to do all this for you; your library should be
embellished with
enough old books about radio to make all of what I am saying perfectly clear.



If you wanna uphold your methods, go write a book.

I suppose I could, but why, I am not a textbook author, and my methods are
not original with me, I am not nearly that clever. As I have said before
I took them straight out of the modern filter design textbooks, the books
on this subject have already been written by others, many times over, the
field is way too crowded. You need to expand your reading list beyond
those smelly old radio textbooks, the old blokes didn't know everything,
you might learn something new from some more up to date reading, if you
can even call it that.

The smelly old textbooks say it all so well that there isn't any need to
re-invent the wheel.
The application of the theory contained didn't lead to great BCB AM
radios very
often because the
radio industry was infested with bean counters and charlatans.
This fact don't detract from the wisdom of the old books.

The technology of tube radios is ancient history which will never again be
the important techno mainstream thing it was, like steam engines.
But the old technology is still fascinating, and great sound can be had
with the
right circuits.



All the books backing up what I am saying are on the shelves for you
to read.

Page numbers please, if you can't cite page numbers it is nothing more
than BS! Don't worry, I'm not going to hold my breath waiting, or
anything like that.

You have to do your own study; I can't and I won't do it for you.

I was frustrated when I started to study the subject 10 years ago, and
nobody could
answer
1,001 questions I had, so I simply went to second hand bookstores and
snapped up
whatever was there,
which seems impossible now because the sharks and collectors seem to
have emptied
the stores,
and then I read and copied reams at the university libraries.

But I also built and re-built a few radios.
Including AM/FM types.

Without having done anything in the workshop, I'd know SFA.

Patrick Turner.



Regards,

John Byrns

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

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