[TowerTalk] two benefits of postings on Re: Resonance isoverrated

[Tod -ID]

> Yes, I agree that the original poster was probably referring 
> to the end result.


As the 'original poster' of the phrase "resonance is overrated" I have followed
the unexpected exchanges for the past week or so.

At the time I typed the statement I was commenting on the often strong desire by
many of us to have the antenna we are interested in be non-reactive at a
particular frequency we intend to transmit on. There certainly is nothing wrong
with that wish, but I feel it should not be viewed as a requirement in all
cases. Because I hold this view, I wrote the apparently magically stimulating
phrase, "..resonance is overrated" . My full intent was to suggest that one can
have a "successful" antenna even if it has some reactance on the frequency you
wish to use it to transmit. [Most antennas work the same slightly above and
slightly below the non-reactive frequency].

Many of those commenting on this thread understood what I was trying to convey,
some did not and I fear that may have been because I did not properly convey the
meaning I intended.

All in all, I thought there were many interesting and instructive comments that
were shared with us by those who wrote to comment on my original phrase.


Tod, K0TO