>
>> Tom- it does NOT take an EE to detect the bias. My professional specialty
>> was Rocket motors, with only enough electronics exposure to 'appliance
>> operate' good instruments, but my second specialty (used professionally,
>> too) was the detection and analysis of verbal BS. You and I both know of
>> another prime source, but he(they) change their tune, and use references
>> newer than 1935. There is diversity there
>
>But then why does nearly every current-day HF amplifier manufacturer use
>"1935 technology" with the inclusion of the classic coil turned around a
>carbon composition resistor for the purpose of serving as a parasitic
>suppressor?
>
>If parasitics are of little concern, who on this list (manufacturers
>included) is perfectly comfortable with running (or manufacturing) their
>multi-band HF amplifier without a parasitic suppressor? One manufacturer we
>know of uses an 8877 without the use of any suppressor, but other amplifiers
>in their product line do. Does this infer that some of their amp products
>are prone to potentially damaging parasitics while others are not?
>
>-Paul, W9AC
>
good question, Paul. During the Grate Parasitics Debate, six times, the
designer of the AL-1500 stonewalled my question about whether the 1500
uses a VHF parasitic-suppressor.
cheers
- Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures.
end
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
|