Tim Shoppa wrote:
On Apr 20, 3:44 pm, John Larkin
wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 12:23:53 -0700 (PDT), Tim Shoppa





wrote:
On Apr 20, 1:10 pm, John Larkin
wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:50:05 -0700 (PDT), Tim Shoppa
wrote:
A terminology question I suppose about the derivation of the term
"Superheterodyne" more than anything else:
Does the "Super" actually mean anything? Is there a Subheterodyne?
Traditionally superhets mix a higher radio frequency down to a lower
IF frequency, but certainly in the past few decades radios with IF's
above the RF frequency have become very common in broadband
applications, and those are still called superhets, not subhets :-).
Google turns up a couple hits on subheterodyne but other than one that
might mean "IF higher in frequency than RF" I don't recognize what
they mean..
I suspect that "Super" was more a marketing term than anything
else :-).
Tim N3QE
Supersonic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheterodyne_receiver
I saw that in Wikipedia too. I didn't believe it, it doesn't make
sense. Why not just call all radio frequencies and IF frequencies
above 20kHz "supersonic"? Then all radios (*) are supersonic, and
we're back to super meaning nothing at all.
Possibly because heterodyne receivers mixed to sonic frequencies.

I didn't really trust Wikipedia on this (it uses unusual language to
talk about perfectly conventional subjects) but I did find my December
1922 QST, and it says (page 11):


Wow! I didn't know you were this old.

[...]

--
SCNR, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:57:26 -0700 (PDT), Tim Shoppa
wrote:

On Apr 20, 3:44*pm, John Larkin
wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 12:23:53 -0700 (PDT), Tim Shoppa





wrote:
On Apr 20, 1:10*pm, John Larkin
wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:50:05 -0700 (PDT), Tim Shoppa

wrote:
A terminology question I suppose about the derivation of the term
"Superheterodyne" more than anything else:

Does the "Super" actually mean anything? Is there a Subheterodyne?

Traditionally superhets mix a higher radio frequency down to a lower
IF frequency, but certainly in the past few decades radios with IF's
above the RF frequency have become very common in broadband
applications, and those are still called superhets, not subhets :-).

Google turns up a couple hits on subheterodyne but other than one that
might mean "IF higher in frequency than RF" I don't recognize what
they mean..

I suspect that "Super" was more a marketing term than anything
else :-).

Tim N3QE

Supersonic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheterodyne_receiver

I saw that in Wikipedia too. I didn't believe it, it doesn't make
sense. Why not just call all radio frequencies and IF frequencies
above 20kHz "supersonic"? Then all radios (*) are supersonic, and
we're back to super meaning nothing at all.

Possibly because heterodyne receivers mixed to sonic frequencies.

I didn't really trust Wikipedia on this (it uses unusual language to
talk about perfectly conventional subjects) but I did find my December
1922 QST, and it says (page 11):

In December, 1919, Major E. H. Armstrong gave
publicity to an indirect method of obtaining
short-wave amplification, called the Super-
Heterodyne. The idea is to reduce the incoming
frequency which may be, say 1,500,000 cycles
(200 meters), to some suitable super-audible
frequency which can be amplified efficiently, then
passing this current through a radio frequency
amplifier and finally rectifying and carrying on
to one or two stages of audio frequency
amplification.

To me that sounds a little less awkward and more natural than the
derivation that Wikipedia tries to draw.

Tim N3QE

I did like the wiki bit about people using hundred-tube TRF receivers.

John

On Apr 20, 1:57�pm, Tim Shoppa wrote:
On Apr 20, 3:44�pm, John Larkin

didn't really trust Wikipedia on this (it uses unusual language to
talk about perfectly conventional subjects) but I did find my December
1922 QST, and it says (page 11):

In December, 1919, Major E. H. Armstrong gave
publicity to an indirect method of obtaining
short-wave amplification, called the Super-
Heterodyne. The idea is to reduce the incoming
frequency which may be, say 1,500,000 cycles
(200 meters), to some suitable super-audible
frequency which can be amplified efficiently, then
passing this current through a radio frequency
amplifier and finally rectifying and carrying on
to one or two stages of audio frequency
amplification.

To me that sounds a little less awkward and more natural than the
derivation that Wikipedia tries to draw.

Everyone ought to realize that "Wikipedia" data can be written by
ANYONE
and that the ARRL (who has always published QST) is NOT a technical-
expertise source. Ed Armstrong's original patent on the
superheterodyne
can be found on the 'web in digitized image form. Takes some
searching.

The word prefix 'super' generally refers to something 'better' than
the word
without that prefix. Armstrong got a patent for the regenerative
detector, He
also got a patent for a SUPER-Regenerative detector.

Think also SUPERman. 'Mercado' has already been mentioned, but folks
have neglected the MARKET...which expanded into SUPERmarket, generally
a chain of them under one label or another.

73, Len AF6AY
ex-ARRL member (for good reason)

Tim Shoppa wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
Tim Shoppa wrote:
A terminology question I suppose about the derivation of the term
"Superheterodyne" more than anything else:

Does the "Super" actually mean anything? Is there a Subheterodyne?

Traditionally superhets mix a higher radio frequency down to a lower
IF frequency, but certainly in the past few decades radios with IF's
above the RF frequency have become very common in broadband
applications, and those are still called superhets, not subhets :-).

Google turns up a couple hits on subheterodyne but other than one that
might mean "IF higher in frequency than RF" I don't recognize what
they mean..

I suspect that "Super" was more a marketing term than anything
else :-).

Tim N3QE

Supersonic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheterodyne_receiver

I saw that in Wikipedia too. I didn't believe it, it doesn't make
sense. Why not just call all radio frequencies and IF frequencies
above 20kHz "supersonic"? Then all radios (*) are supersonic, and
we're back to super meaning nothing at all.

Supersonic today means travelling faster than the speed of sound. The correct
word now would be ultrasonic.

So maybe they should be recalled ultraheterodyne receivers.

Graham

"Eeysore the ****ing LIAR "

Supersonic today means travelling faster than the speed of sound.


** Not when the context is frequency - you ****ing MORON.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/supersonic



....... Phil

Phil Allison wrote:
"Eeysore the ****ing LIAR "

Supersonic today means travelling faster than the speed of sound.


** Not when the context is frequency - you ****ing MORON.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/supersonic



....... Phil


=============================================
Phil ,It will be a relief to all (civilised) users of this NG ,if you
would discharge your life's frustrations onto another more appropriate
NG. It is clear ,to me at least ,that you need help.

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH

John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:50:05 -0700 (PDT), Tim Shoppa
wrote:

A terminology question I suppose about the derivation of the term
"Superheterodyne" more than anything else:

Does the "Super" actually mean anything? Is there a Subheterodyne?

Supersonic.

So, if a basketball player from a certain team in Seattle were flying
on the Concorde, and listening to a particular brand of antique radio,
it'd be a supersonic SuperSonic's Superdyne supersonic heterodyne?

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:50:05 -0700 (PDT), Tim Shoppa
wrote:

A terminology question I suppose about the derivation of the term
"Superheterodyne" more than anything else:

Does the "Super" actually mean anything? Is there a Subheterodyne?

Traditionally superhets mix a higher radio frequency down to a lower
IF frequency, but certainly in the past few decades radios with IF's
above the RF frequency have become very common in broadband
applications, and those are still called superhets, not subhets :-).

Google turns up a couple hits on subheterodyne but other than one that
might mean "IF higher in frequency than RF" I don't recognize what
they mean..

I suspect that "Super" was more a marketing term than anything
else :-).

Tim N3QE

Supersonic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheterodyne_receiver


John


Not a bad article, except that he seems to think that cascading multiple
stages at a single IF improves image rejection, and that very high IFs
are much less common than double conversion. (Does *anyone* use double
conversion anymore? Spur city.)

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058
hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:27:37 -0400, Phil Hobbs
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:50:05 -0700 (PDT), Tim Shoppa
wrote:

A terminology question I suppose about the derivation of the term
"Superheterodyne" more than anything else:

Does the "Super" actually mean anything? Is there a Subheterodyne?

Traditionally superhets mix a higher radio frequency down to a lower
IF frequency, but certainly in the past few decades radios with IF's
above the RF frequency have become very common in broadband
applications, and those are still called superhets, not subhets :-).

Google turns up a couple hits on subheterodyne but other than one that
might mean "IF higher in frequency than RF" I don't recognize what
they mean..

I suspect that "Super" was more a marketing term than anything
else :-).

Tim N3QE

Supersonic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheterodyne_receiver


John


Not a bad article, except that he seems to think that cascading multiple
stages at a single IF improves image rejection, and that very high IFs
are much less common than double conversion. (Does *anyone* use double
conversion anymore? Spur city.)

I did a double-conversion superhet FSK receiver for Reuters, umm,
maybe 20 years ago. I used state-of-the-art MF10 filter chips. Just
after I did it, they dumped all their wireline FSK newsfeeeds for the
Internet. Pity, it was a neat design.

We may do it again soon, for a scientific instrument, more digital
this time.

John

On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:27:37 -0400, Phil Hobbs
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:50:05 -0700 (PDT), Tim Shoppa
wrote:

A terminology question I suppose about the derivation of the term
"Superheterodyne" more than anything else:

Does the "Super" actually mean anything? Is there a Subheterodyne?

Traditionally superhets mix a higher radio frequency down to a lower
IF frequency, but certainly in the past few decades radios with IF's
above the RF frequency have become very common in broadband
applications, and those are still called superhets, not subhets :-).

Google turns up a couple hits on subheterodyne but other than one that
might mean "IF higher in frequency than RF" I don't recognize what
they mean..

I suspect that "Super" was more a marketing term than anything
else :-).

Tim N3QE

Supersonic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheterodyne_receiver


John


Not a bad article, except that he seems to think that cascading multiple
stages at a single IF improves image rejection, and that very high IFs
are much less common than double conversion. (Does *anyone* use double
conversion anymore? Spur city.)

Double conversion may be thought to be passe an awful lot of sattelite
TV receivers are double conversion or triple conversion. Think LNB.