>
>Rich, Tom and Don,
>
>Thank you Don for this balancing message.
>
>I would like to repectfully request that Rich quit
>smearing Tom with snide-isms and Tom quit smearing
>Rich with whatever - so that it will stop compromising
>the value of your comments. I don't want you to stop
>because it is annoying - quite the contrary - this is
>a very informative thread sprinkled with
>entertainment! And I don't want you to stop poking
>each other! Just don't go overboard.
>
>So please keep it up but please don't say things that
>cheapen or blur your basic points or give people cause
>to dismiss either one of you out of hand.
>
>We see clearly that both Rich and Tom have reputations
>that they care about and both are in business. But
>neither of these motivations necessarily cast any
>doubt on any of their claims.
>
You check what I say in Wil's archive.
>I'm a EE with a dozen or so patents and three
>successful companies to my credit: yet I have learned
>more in a shorter time span from this thread than from
>any one thing that I can recall (realize, or course,
>that since I am now retired there may be a lot that I
>can't recall). So I really appreciate it.
>
>This mano a mano format has caused more good info to
>flow than one would have imagined. Keep it up guys!
>Just don't let the emotions get so out of hand that it
>drives us (or you) away!
>
>Thanks for all the good stuff! And go get 'em!
>
>Mike wy6k
>
>PS. Sometimes it gets hard to keep who-said-what-when
>straight. Is there any way to make the attributions a
>bit more clear?
It's all in the archive, Don
>>
>> Tom wrote,
>>
>> "Sounds like you have outgassed. You need to take
>> more nichrome...
>>
>> The tank is typically a virtual short for VHF and
>> UHF energy,
>> because it has a capacitor shunting the input. All
>> your claims
>> about VHF parasitics damaging components are just
>> "arm-waving"
>> to sell kits and slam manufacturers...
>>
>> Mr. Measures fails to understand series resonances
>> have lowest
>> impedance, and less impedance than either
>> "component" alone, to
>> support his nichrome sales..."
>>
>> You can say what you will, but in the last couple of
>> years, Rich has been
>> the only one here who has been able to explain the
>> fundamental problem with
>> the TL-922 -- lack of parasitic suppression. I can
>> also tell you from
>> first-hand experience with well over a dozen
>> formerly unruly TL-922s sent
>> to me for repair and modification, plus two of my
>> own TL-922s that used to
>> eat bandswitches, that his suppressers have "tamed
>> the beast." My judgment
>> as a BSEE, MSEE, and soon-to-be Ph.D., is that his
>> analysis is sound and
>> well thought-out. Additionally, the implementation
>> of his "solution" on
>> the 14+ TL-922s that I have worked on would further
>> attest to the validity
>> of his analysis.
>>
>> I have never met Mr. Measures, but I have spoken
>> with him several times on
>> the phone, and he has always been very helpful. As
>> a happy owner of two
>> modified TL-922s, I am fortunate to have stumbled
>> upon his website and
>> found his in-depth analysis of the design flaws in
>> the stock '922 and his
>> FREE instructions for modifying these amps.
>>
>> As for the snide comment regarding his "nichrome
>> sales", his prices are far
>> too low for him to be netting much money there.
>> Also, I'm very
>> hard-pressed to find a local source for this wire
>> that will match his
>> prices -- especially in such small quantities...
>> Likewise his parts kits
>> are very, very inexpensive -- definately a very
>> small profit margin
>> there...
>>
>> So, if it is not parasitics that plague the stock
>> TL-922, I would
>> graciously request that Mr. Rauch and any of the
>> other experts explain why
>> less than 30 cents worth of nichrome wire (yup - $1
>> will get you about 5'
>> of nichrome wire from Rich) stops the TL-922 from
>> self-destructing? How
>> about it? Why not disprove his theory with a better
>> theory of your own?
>> I'll be glad to implement "your" retrofit into a
>> TL-922 and see what your
>> success rate is. It better be good, so far Rich's
>> analysis is 14-0.
>>
>> 73 de Don (ki6sz)
>>
>> --
>> FAQ on WWW:
>> http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
>> Submissions: amps@contesting.com
>> Administrative requests:
>> amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
>> Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
>>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
>http://mail.yahoo.com/
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
>Submissions: amps@contesting.com
>Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
>
>
- 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
|