What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

eHam.net Home | FAQ | Log In Help | Please Subscribe

Welcome Anonymous Become a member or Login

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

Charles P. Cohen (VA7CPC) on November 10, 2009
View comments about this article!

I own a Yaesu FT-450 transceiver, which is giving me good service. One thing some people complain about is its rather small tuning knob (it's about 1 3/8" diameter). The knob has 1 Hz resolution (if you want to set it that fine in the menu), and there's a "FAST" button to increase the rate, and there's another knob that changes frequency at 100 kHz per click.

That little knob is perfectly adequate in practice. So why does anyone care about how large it is?

I'm old enough to remember when a rig's tuning knob was geared down, and the gears turned a variable capacitor, and that capacitor controlled the frequency of an LC oscillator. And in those days, the size of the tuning knob did matter -- a larger knob allowed finer tuning increments, while still allowing a high change of frequency per knob rotation. And a weighted knob, with low-friction gears, was really nice -- you could use it to spin quickly across a band, and still have fine tuning increments when it stopped.

But that was then, and this is now. How many of my readers still use LC master oscillators? The tuning knob on a modern rig -- any synthesizer-controlled transceiver -- isn't "connected" to anything except digital circuits that count degrees of rotation!

Typical synthesized rigs -- like the FT-450 -- have several ways of changing frequency faster than the main tuning knob allows. With those "coarse tuning" options, the main tuning knob doesn't have to compromise to manage both fine tuning and coarse tuning, like a weighted, low-friction knob.

I know that some rigs have used "velocity-sensitive" tuning knobs. Turn the knob slowly, and the frequency changes in small increments. Turn the knob fast, and the increments increase -- sort of like a velocity-sensitive mouse or trackpad. I haven't tried one of them, but the idea sounds good.

But why should there be a tuning knob ?

What would be wrong with a tuning joystick ? Push the joystick up, the frequency rises. Push it up further, the frequency rises faster.

Or what about a pressure-sensitive tuning paddle ? Press down, and the frequency drops. Press down harder, and the frequency drops faster.

Or what about two pressure-sensitive tuning pads ? The bottom one lowers frequency, the top one raises it. And the rate of frequency change would be proportional to the pressure.

Or what about a tuning knob that doesn't move? Twist to the left, the frequency drops. Twist to the right, the frequency rises. The rate of frequency change would be torque-sensitive.

I haven't suggested "point-and-click" waterfall tuning, because I don't want to get into the battle between SDR's and conventional radios. But if a transceiver already has a bandscope display, perhaps it should have a touch-sensitive screen as well -- and we could "point and click" without involving a computer.

I haven't been around ham radio to know how many of these options have been tried. And it might be that each one would fail in the marketplace, because we all know that a transceiver front panel should be dominated by one really big knob, unique amid the crowded, as-small-as-possible buttons and switches.

Aren't we supposed to have a spirit of ingenuity and experimentation? Why are we tied to something that stopped making sense thirty years ago, when we switched from LC circuits to synthesizers?

Member Comments:

This article has expired. No more comments may be added.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WA7KGX on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

The tuning knob is part of the man/radio interface.

Other parts of this interface include the frequency display (or dial), a spectrum display, the radio's signal path, and the user's ears and eyes.

This interface has at least three functions, cruising a set of frequencies to see what's on, browsing frequencies, and selecting a station frequency.

With the computing power now available one can envision a radio that can listen to several SSB stations on different frequencies at once, with each station at the correct pitch with each station coming from a different direction.

Or a display that shows dozens of CW, RTTY, and/or PSK stations at once. Click on the desired line of text to set the transmit frequency.

That said, I still like a decent size tuning knob with a flywheel that can slew across the entire dial in seconds. The lack of a computer does not preclude the presence of a man machine interfae.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

VA7CPC asks: "How many of my readers still use LC master oscillators?"

I do. The VFO in my rig is built around the capacitot/dial drive from a BC-221 frequency meter. Has a big skirted knob and a slow tuning rate.

I built it that way out of personal preference.

VA7CPC:"The tuning knob on a modern rig -- any synthesizer-controlled transceiver -- isn't "connected" to anything except digital circuits that count degrees of rotation!"

That depends on how you define "modern"...

VA7CPC: "Typical synthesized rigs..have several ways of changing frequency faster than the main tuning knob allows."

Of course. But faster isn't always better. It's really a matter of personal preference.

VA7CPC: "But why should there be a tuning knob ?

What would be wrong with a tuning joystick ? Push the joystick up, the frequency rises. Push it up further, the frequency rises faster.

Or what about a pressure-sensitive tuning paddle ? Press down, and the frequency drops. Press down harder, and the frequency drops faster.

Or what about two pressure-sensitive tuning pads ? The bottom one lowers frequency, the top one raises it. And the rate of frequency change would be proportional to the pressure."

Sure - if that's what you like.

It's kind of like the steering wheel and gearshift in a car, or analog vs. digital speedometers and tachometers. Or the clock on the wall.

VA7CPC: "it might be that each one would fail in the marketplace, because we all know that a transceiver front panel should be dominated by one really big knob, unique amid the crowded, as-small-as-possible buttons and switches."

I think the buttons and switches should not be crowded, nor as small as possible.

VA7CPC: "Aren't we supposed to have a spirit of ingenuity and experimentation? Why are we tied to something that stopped making sense thirty years ago, when we switched from LC circuits to synthesizers?"

Newer isn't always better. Just because we can, doesn't mean we should.

What keyboard layout are you using? Does the top row of letters spell out QWERTYUIOP? If so, that layout dates back to 1874, when it was developed to reduce jamming in mechanical typewriters. Why is it still so popular?

Often there's a reason something new doesn't catch on. For example, digital speedometers in cars turned out to be unpopular because you can't just glance at them and get an approximate reading, you have to focus and read the actual number.

Remember light pens for computer interface? The mouse won that competition, probably because a light pen requires raising your arm and partially blocking view of the screen.

I'm not against hew human-machine interface ideas, but it's important not to knock the old ones just because they're old. Because often they've survived because they're good.

One more point:

A lot of stuff nowadays has been micro-miniaturized, computerized, menu'd, etc. The result is tiny buttons and inscrutable operation of common things.

One of the attractions of ham radio is that it can be different from all that. We have enormous choice over our rigs and setups.

It's a bit like the way people furnish and decorate their homes. All sorts of periods are represented, not just the latest 21st century stuff.

73 de Jim, N2EY

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N3QE on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

You know when synthesized ham radios came about in the 80's every option you suggested for tuning instead of a knob was used somewhere somehow. And they all SUCKED.

There were even worse approaches that sucked even more: ten position switches for each digit of the synthesizer. This was extremely common on military synthesized rigs from the 60's until, well, the 90's. Maybe it's OK for military channelized operation but it's the WORST thing imaginable for ham use.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W9OY on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

No need to worry about getting into a pissing contest with the SDR crowd:

We're not knob haters, we just don't care how big or small your knob is. We don't care if it accelerates or has gears, shifter buttons or 4 on the floor. To an SDR man (or woman) your knob is pointless. (pun intended)

73 W9OY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W8JI on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Using a joystick or step buttons for interface to the most constantly adjusted analog part of a system is about as smart for human interface as a joystick or push button steering wheel in a car. Both are very similar in how they are used no matter where or how you drive the device.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N4VNV on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

If there were no tuning knobs to turn, there would be even MORE Hams on here complaining. At least a tuning knob gives us something to do.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KB2DHG on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I am old school when it comes to radio... This being said, I will not knock new ideas, bottom line, what ever floats your boat just as long as we are keeping the hobby alive and there is someone to QSO with!
I do not have modern equipment, my most modern rig is an Icom 745 from 1987. so I will not knock todays rigs. I have seen and used some of the newer rigs and my only thing is that they, in my opinion can't compair to the sounds of tube rigs. there is something much better in the audio of a tube rig.
Nice article and for me, I just am happy that the hobby is alive no matter what rig or means we use.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KC8ZEV on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

What is so special about a tuning knob? Plain and simple.........amateur radio operators still want them.
Icom, Yaesu, Kenwood and Alinco, to name a few, have long had the technology to replace "the knob". But consumers still want them. It is a familiar interface to the old and yes, the new. Sure, the SDR crowd just shakes their head and perhaps even a few chuckles can be heard. But, in the end, more equipment sells that has a knob than doesn't. It doesn't mean knobs are better than buttons, paddles, joysticks and the like, just that consumers still prefer it. That is a fact. Sales numbers say it all.

73
KC8ZEV

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KI4OIU on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

There's just something special about relaxing at the desk, leafing through an old QST or Antenna Handbook, and lazily spinning the dial on the VFO.

Sometimes I find myself just spinning through the bands, listening to a piece of a conversation here, a piece there, while at the same time engrossed in a good tech article. I have been know to spend the entire evening just randomly spinning through the frequencies and never actually engaging in a QSO.

That's part of the mystic of the radio for me...never knowing where I might end up.

I had a Ten-Tec SDR receiver once, and while it was an excellent performer and I could really pull out those hard to hear stations with the dsp...I had to use the mouse or the keyboard arrow buttons to change the frequencies...in other words I had to actually concentrate on what I was doing - and that got old after a while.

KI4OIU - JC

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K5END on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Thoughtful article. Very nice. I think you are on to something.

I like the idea of a torque knob or a left-right tuning lever.

Thanks for writing this article. If someone doesn't like those new features, they can vote with their wallet.

One thing I have noticed about Hams...

They ARE willing to try new technology.

However, many of them do so at a rate similar to continental drift.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KB5ZXM on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

It gives me the 'feeling' of being 'in touch' with the signal going and coming from OUT THERE!!
even though I have up and down buttons on the mic.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WB4M on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

My ex-wife once told me she thought I'd like her much better if she had knobs and dials on her -- I suggested an on/off switch and volume control....sleeping on the sofa isn't that bad..

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K1BXI on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

"Or what about a tuning knob that doesn't move? Twist to the left, the frequency drops. Twist to the right, the frequency rises. The rate of frequency change would be torque-sensitive."

My 8 year old Yaesu Mark V has that exact thing, it's called a "shuttle jog" It's right behind the tuning knob and works exactly as you described. Give it a twist to the right and if you twist hard enough you can go from 80 to 10 in a a flash.

John

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K5END on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

W8JI Tom makes a good rebuttal.

If I'm trying to work--albeit 99% of what I do is just listen to--a weak station in the noise, I find that it helps to make micro adjustments often, say every 10 seconds or so. Maybe it is just nervous fiddling...maybe it is shift or drift. Hard to say.

Those constant micro adjustments are often important.

I think a large knob is more ergonomic for the continuous micro adjustments.

The best of both worlds is a fast knob/lever and a big wheel for the hairline adjustments, and the author mentioned that about his rig.

BTW, I think it is Mouser or Jameco that has weighted knobs for 1/4" shafts, with or without thumbwheel, in black or silver, knurled or smooth.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N9DG on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

"Using a joystick or step buttons for interface to the most constantly adjusted analog part of a system is about as smart for human interface as a joystick or push button steering wheel in a car. Both are very similar in how they are used no matter where or how you drive the device."

What about construction equipment? Or some categories of agricultural equipment? A good share of them do not have a steering wheels, and for good reasons... As it turns out a lot of those kinds of equipment need more directional control and agility than what a steering wheel can provide. I sometimes get the same sense when tuning around the bands with a traditional tuning knob.. It just doesn't allow me to get to a point 150 kHz up the band *instantly* if I want to.

I've often wondered about a joystick type controller for a radio. For example use a video game type of controller to "fly" the "receiver box" icon around on a panafall type display.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W8KQE on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

It's all about tradition and ergonomics. A large, weighty knob with 'flywheel effect' just looks and feels right for most Hams. It is one of the defining actions of using a rig, and most Hams still want that feature.

A good analogy would be that many sports cars now have a 'DSG' automatic transmission that quickly shifts gears for you with a finger activated paddle shifter mounted on your steering wheel. You still kind of get the feel of shifting gears, but it's not as satisfying to automotive 'purists' as actually clutching with the foot and using a gear shifting knob/stick with your whole hand to manually shift.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KX2S on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I like radios with big knobs. I also like larger radios. Us older folks have a hard time with them little tiny radios and their little tiny buttons. My IC765 is just fine.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W1XZ on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

W8KQE came close to the answer. The radios have tuning knobs because they work better and feel better than shuttle jog or joy sticks. And by better I mean it is faster and more precise for tuning a band. Flip in a good CW filter and tune through a crowded band with a tuning knob and an older Yaesu with shuttle jog, and tell me which one you like best. I have computer control on my 746 PRO and end up not using it because I reach over and grab the knob and turn it. Now if you just want to get from on frequency to another up the band...like you know you just have to check into that next weather net to tell your buddies it is 45 and sunny in Hamville then I guess hit that memory button or move your joystick and have a ball.
I guess we could get used to a game controller that plugs into the front of the radio, but it seems to be an answer in search of a solution. Now a better article would be to explain how to adapt a joystick to the new radios.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N3OX on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

"Aren't we supposed to have a spirit of ingenuity and experimentation? Why are we tied to something that stopped making sense thirty years ago, when we switched from LC circuits to synthesizers?"

OK. So experiment. Be ingenious. How can you lash up a new tuning object to your radio?

Not clear to me that getting the manufacturer to replace the knob (which I think is a great tuning interface) with a possibly unpopular alternative is pushing ham radio forward.

Most modern rigs allow you to tune them from the back panel CAT or CI/V port. SDR's allow you to tune them from software in any number of ways.

So... why is it the manufacturer's job to give you a joystick?

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K7ZOV on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I love nice tuning knobs and have had radios with large heavy weighted ones and tiny ones like my FT-817 (have a FT-450 coming in trade so this will be interesting). But lately I have found Ham Radio Deluxe connected to my radio(s) to be a fun way to get from point A to B. Then fine tune with either the keyboard or tuning knob. The benefits of jumping bands, or around a band has been open up a new way to ham radio. This is not in the same playing field as SDR radios, but it really does making getting around easy no matter how small or large your tuning knob is.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KB1GMX on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I am one that has tried the various combinations from
old radios like Tempo-One, HW101, Hallicrafters HT37
to modern including home brew using VFOs and digital techniques.

Generally I like the big knob, and nothing I've done digital says it can't exist there SDR or not. It's just a box with a knob then.

Having built a multitude of radios for 6M SSB alone I can say each approach suggested by the article author has merit and and liabilities. I've found for mobile work a set of selector switches for 1mhz/.1mhz/.01mhz and a vernier for 0-10khz was best as it could be tuned in the dark by feel if needed and tended to not suffer from being bumped. when mobile that worked very well as I tend to not tune much and drive! Works there but on the desk it was awkward and slow. There a plug in box with a bonafide knob and a digital dial was the solution for crusing the band.

Form and function are interrelated, also circuits used
may dictate approach used. When you ave a real VFO then you pretty much have a real knob as any other mechanical system is complex and you need some form
of dial system. With digital system useds in modern radio there are choices and with digital inputs
those choices are/could be changeable to suit preference and situation. For example can you have a FT857 using a computer cat interface to talk to it like SDR or you can use the knobs and buttons on the panel. Having that choice is nice.

when you need to go to a specific frequency or cruse the band that may dictate the need. Then again, there were more than a few radios with both.

Allison

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K1DA on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

The external "VFO" for the FT 102, built in 1984, provides an automatic switching two speed knob, up and down buttons also workable from the mike if desired, and a keyboard built into the VFO face. I use the knob, and occasionally the mike buttons. If there is a better mousetrap I haven't seen it. When there is, I am sure it will fly off the shelves.

With regard to construction equipment, being able to brake one side or the other helps handling in tight places. Tracked vehicles turn by braking and sometimes reversing side or another which is easier and less complicated to do with two levers and two footbrakes rather than a wheel connected to a proportional valve system, but harder to learn , in an effort to make military tracked vehicles compatable with other military vehicles,however, many come with a wheel.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W9OY on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I've thought about a heads up display and a joystick as a way to manage many receivers. Just fly between bands. As you fly the joystick that band becomes dominate and center focus while the other receivers occupy space somewhere on the periphery. There would be a way to accent 2 streams at once, such as the I/O across 2 bands on a satellite transponder for example

I've tried to manage the information in 3 audio streams using a multi channel stereo mixer, without any visual input, in the past just to see what it is like. Without some means of instant focus control it becomes very difficult. 2 streams like a DX station and the pile up is not too hard to do although being able to fade that instantly is useful, so maybe instead of just a tuning device you might want to make a joy stick a more comprehensive thing in terms of human/radio interface.

As far as simple tuning goes, for CW I have found the combination of CW skimmer and PSDR to be almost ideal. I can tune that using 25hz filters and I'm on freq every time with one click. Skimmer's ability to "read code" makes almost no difference to me, except for its ability to copy 599 or 5NN. It is the ability to get a 25hz filter exactly on the receive stations freq, or to drop my transmitter into a relatively quiet spot in the pileup that makes all the difference.

This morning I was listening to the XR0Y DX pileup on RTTY. In between his mark and space was a PU station with a bad chirp holding a QSO. All stations were about -110dBm, and I could copy the mark, the space, and the PU station in between as individual single source signals with a 25hz filter. 3 separate signals in the 170hz bandwidth, all the while there was a bunch of strong RTTY stations calling the DX just 1khz up the band

I made a blog entry with pictures if you want to see more about how this looked. I found it quite interesting. I'm not sure I would have figured this out with just a knob.

http://w9oy-sdr.blogspot.com/2009/11/xr0y-tx3a.html

73

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K5END on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Dan's point about computer interface is excellent.

Build your physical hardware interface however you want it, plug in the PC and you're in FB. There is no limit to the variations.

Related to the knob issue is the MENU issue.

I **hate** having to, for example, find the right button that may or may not be labled for a certain function, hold that button for one second and then scroll through a menu, then push another button and hold it down while turning the main knob. During the time it takes to do that I could have made several contest QSOs.

That is what I LOVE about my TS-830S. No menus. Not one. There is a knob and/or switch for everything.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by AB7E on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

There is an extremely good reason why a tuning knob remains a better choice as a human control interface. With the exception of point/click waterfall tuning, every single one of VA7CPC's suggestions replace POSITION with TIMING ... which is mcuh less accurate (especially when you're trying to do it quickly), even when both have a visual indicator.

You can prove this for yourself by comparing your ability to draw a triangle on a laptop via the little eraser joystick versus a mouse. The eraser joystick is timing dependent, while the mouse is position dependent. Or compare the precision of rolling a car window up/down with a lever and motor versus a hand crank.

A rotary knob very efficiently provides lots of positioned-based "travel" in a small space, and most modern rigs overcome the potential slowness of it by increasing the tuning rate as you spin the knob faster.

Progress is driven by first understanding what you are trying to accomplish before trying to do it differently.

Dave AB7E

They have products to sell.

by AI2IA on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Amateur transceivers are consumer products. Their external features are subject to the economic laws of marketing analysis. Whatever sells is just fine with the manufacturers. If there are enough hams who dislike the "big knob" for one reason or another, and they make their views known to the manufacturers suggesting that there might be a viable market for "big knob-less" ham transceivers, then maybe they might see one or more trial models available.

Simply because a feature has been around for a long time is not enough reason to get rid of it.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by OH5FAD on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Hello

My ranking list of tuning knobs in the web:

http://www.elisanet.fi/oh5fad/vfoknobs.html

So far the FT-450 has the worst ;)

Jukka K

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WA1RNE on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

What would be wrong with a tuning joystick ?

Or what about a pressure-sensitive tuning paddle ?

Or what about two pressure-sensitive tuning pads ?

Or what about a tuning knob that doesn't move? Twist to the left, the frequency drops. Twist to the right, the frequency rises. The rate of frequency change would be torque-sensitive.

>>> None of these suggested alternatives "meets spec" for the application, precise incremental control of frequency.

The "spec" might read:

"An ergonomic mechanical interface allowing precision incremental control of frequency, while occupying minimal front panel real estate."

A round knob set on a stationary shaft is really the only mechanical interface that naturally corrects for movement in opposite directions, a type of "ergonomic feedback".

When your fingers meet with a knob, they must space themselves around it in order to grasp it, effectively countering the forces from the another fingers.

With today's digital encoders, a shaft-coupled knob also allows infinite range and has no "stops".

None of the other devices suggested have these inherent properties. Instrumentation, audio equipment and automotive manufacturers - to name a few - have come to a similar conclusion and have yet to abandon knobs in most designs.

...WA1RNE

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WB2WIK on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I like a large tuning knob, it's easier to use and easier on the hand that turns it.

Just as a steering wheel in a car hasn't changed much in 100 years, the large tuning knob hasn't any reason to change either.

Neither has toilet paper, or Heinz ketchup or Lowenbrau beer or a lot of other things that were very good 100 years ago; hard to improve on these things.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N9GXA on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

> Or what about a tuning knob that doesn't move? Twist to the left, the frequency drops. Twist to the right, the frequency rises.
> The rate of frequency change would be torque-sensitive.

Yaesu FT-920 has what is called a Shuttle Jog Control right behind the main, weighted tuning knob that acts as you describe. Works great!

Nice article.

73 - Paul - N9GXA

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2GZ on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Knobs and their place in radio communications sure have been a hot topic lately.

The truth is, the knob is an intuitively simple device for tuning frequency. Few people would disagree. (notice I didnt say its the best, or the worst, or try to rank it at all, I just said its simple, and intuitive).

With the recent advent of PC controlled radios and especially SDR's. Many hams find themselves operating from a computer, and for most, the mouse is the prefered input device.

Non PC radios are tuned by ear, The brain connects the pitch of the signal to turning the knob. This is intuitive.

with computers, our mous is intuitive, and our brain has been exercised to connect mouse movements with a visual response. When using an SDR, we use visual cues to help us tune, in addition to audio cues. Our brain doesnt connect knob motion as well with visual cues, due to needing controll of multiple dimensions (think of the etch-a-sketch, knobs are not as intuitive as a mouse)

But is the mouse the best input device for a radio? probably not. Depending on the computer application, its not always the best input device.

I recently got a 15" touch screen monitor, and I have been using that with SDR. i can slide (or flick) my finger across the spectrum display, and tune in on a signal. or i can tap on a signal that I see and jump right to it. It feels pretty intuitive, more so than the mouse.

In the years to come, we have another technology that will bring even more to the table, Multi-touch touchscreens, like those in the iPod Touch / iPhone and many other cellular devices. The Windows 7 programming APIs support multi touch, so its only a matter of time. Hopefully the SDR developers embrace this technology, I feel its only a matter of time. Multi-touch has appeared in the linux world as well...

With multi touch, more natural (intuitive) gestures can be used to manipulate the program. Many of you probably have these devices, or no someone who has one, or atleast seen commercials showing the flicking and zooming gestures. By pinching your fingers together, you can zoom out, and by spredding two fingers apart you can zoom in. -- now apply this type of gesture to a SDR pan adapter. Pinching adjusts your filter bandwith, sliding your fingers side to side adjust the frequency... simple intuitive gestures (very similar to a knob, methinks) to enable you to tune your signal with the same effort you need to reach out and shake someones hand.

I find that a touch screen display is a happy compromise between the benefits of a knob, and the benefits of a SDR. Of course, such a peripheral adds to the equipment needed to establish a functinal station, but the level of functionality that it brings could be well worth it for some...

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KE5OK on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

If one is handicapped in the hands. Forget pushbuttons . You will hit the wrong one 50% of the time. Grabbing a knob and holding it in one direction or another is out of the question.
I find the large knob very handy. One can just lay the side of their little finger on it and change Frequency .
I realize that most of the hams are not handicapped . With that said , these new rigs do not have them in mind.

THIS is what....

by KL7AJ on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

From the Opus of Amateur Radio Knowledge and Lore:

.....Operating Your Station

I mentioned earlier that I have encountered actual people who have never turned a knob. Now I imagine, in the Big Picture of Everything, this may not be too shocking. Mankind’s pre-knob history is probably very long. What really surprises me is that we should ever have a post-knob era. Yet, we seem to have somehow arrived in this sad state of affairs.
A knob is crucially important because it gives you a direct connection between cause and effect. With a knob, you get a comforting sense that what you do has something to do with what gets done. Modern electronics design, with its proliferation of multifunction menus, touch pads, and such, effectively removes this simple relationship, and I’m not totally convinced that this is not entirely unintentional. Knobs allow us to immediately control inanimate objects. Menus, on the other hand, take a message which may or may not ever be delivered to the inanimate object in question.

Automobile makers learned this back in the 1960s. There were several ill-fated experiments with alternatives to steering wheels, because steering wheels were hard objects that you could bang your face on in case of an accident. I suppose they figured it was preferable to bang your face on the other guy’s hood ornament instead. So, they tried out little dash-mounted sliders, side-mounted joysticks, pedals, kneepads, even helmets that steered the car any direction you turned your head—a dazzling success, no doubt—all in the name of getting rid of that obsolete steering wheel. Obviously, as evidenced by the prevalence of steering wheel-less cars we see today, these experiments were a resounding hit with the American driver.
NOT!!!
You see, a steering wheel is intuitive. You know what to do with it the first time you slide into the front seat of a car. A nine-month-old toddler knows what to do with the steering wheel on her pink plastic push trike the first time she straddles the thing. A steering wheel is a no-brainer. As is a KNOB.
Radio manufacturers would do well to remember this. And there really is a lot more at stake than the mere simplicity of the thing, or lack thereof.

The Nature of the Thing

Anything other than a knob on a radio serves to mask the very nature of radio itself. I personally hold the absence of the knob in modern electronics primarily responsible for the scientific ignorance displayed by most modern hams. Again, it’s not their fault; it’s an evil conspiracy. Here’s why.
Radio is a continuum. There are an INFINITE number of radio frequencies in nature. Radio does not come in CHANNELS. It does not come in BITS. It does not come in discrete units of anything. It is a wave. It has an infinite number of possible wavelengths. It has an infinite number of possible power levels. It has an infinite number of possible directions of propagation. It has an infinite number of possible polarizations.
When you turn a knob, you are reminded of this. For decades, the prominent feature on all amateur radios (and commercial radios to some extent) was a LARGE main tuning dial. Sometimes an equally large fine tuning dial. The tuning knob was the steering wheel of the ether. In fact, the main tuning dial on some classic radios closely resembled a steering wheel or a ship’s helm. You knew what to do with it whether or not you had a clue what a radio even was. To eliminate the tuning knob is to eliminate the very essence of radio.

To use our previous terminology, the prominent tuning dial gave the radio amateur the proper parable of the ether. It reflected and translated the nature of the ether to the operator’s grubby mitts. It was the machine in which the ghost could take up residence. It served as the interface between wobbling meat and the singing vacuum of space.
A computer menu does no such thing.
Therefore...
Your number one priority as a new radio amateur is to acquire a radio with KNOBS on it. Beg, borrow or steal, but get a radio with KNOBS. Each knob should have ONE and ONLY ONE function. It should do the same thing every time.
Does the steering wheel on your car serve as a steering wheel on MONDAY, a brake on TUESDAY, and a left turn signal on WEDNESDAY? Of course not! Why should your radio controls be any different? This whole concept of context-based “controls” is anathema...an abomination of the first degree! I don’t usually take personal delight in the fact that there’s a flaming Hell and eternal damnation, but for whoever invented the context-based control, I make one joyful, blissful, ecstatic exception.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W8JI on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

The only reason certain types of construction equipment and special purpose vehicle have two-lever controls or something similar to a joystick is they have two independent systems of power transfer.

I can run one track forward and one backwards on a track driven device for example.

Ease of operation and ability to have fine constant adjustment or correction is sacrificed because the vehicle has to maneuver less precisely along a target path. It instead must be able to turn rapidly at wide angles, sometimes without much overall forward or backwards motion.

An automobile has a single point control because, like a radio, the operator smoothly searches out and homes in on a target.

If we think about a radio, it compares well to these examples. The shuttle jog or mic push button, and even an up-down button for fast steps, has been around a long time. They are never used for tuning or tracking signal, but rather for abrupt larger imprecise movements. The knob is nearly all of the use, except for the abrupt rapid moves.

The article actually suggests going backwards. it suggests removing the most often used frequency control system, the knob, and leaving only the thing that has already been around since the 80's (and probably earlier), the up-down buttons.

My FT1000MP rigs all have up-down frequency buttons and shuttle jobs. Why would anyone want to remove the knob and leave only the less ergonomic systems?

Perhaps the author has never owned a radio with both systems, and did not know such radios exist.

Tom

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by G0GQK on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I believe that 99.9% of radio amateurs in every country in the world are quite satisfied with a tranceiver having a tuner control on the facia of their tranceiver. However, there will always be a .1% who considers such an item as this as being not up to date, and would prefer some other means of changing frequencies.

You suggest a joystick. This is an irrational idea, perhaps you ought to take another of your pills, have a lie down and rest until it passes.

G0GQK

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W6AAJ on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I too am an older ham tied to old traditions while enjoying the benefits of new technology. I just like a big radio (with labels I can read) and a large tuning knob. It floats my boat!!!

I enjoyed reading all of you thoughts. TNX 73 Jim

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by G8HQP on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

A tuning knob, like a steering wheel, has a roughly linear effect on the received frequency. Most of the other devices suggested, such as joysticks, would have a roughly linear effect on the first derivative (i.e. rate of change) of frequency. This means that the frequency becomes the time integral of the control position - much harder for mere humans to control.

Its a bit like the difference between steering a car and steering a boat. A boat is more difficult because the main effect of the tiller is to affect the rate of change of turn. Similarly, I prefer a volume knob to the up/down buttons on most TV remotes.

I would hate to have to tune an SSB signal this way!

How's This For A Tuning System?

by N2EY on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/jiminfo.doc

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX1.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX2.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX3.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX4.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX5.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX6.jpg

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by AC5WO on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I step back to one higher level and ask what's special about tuning? I absolutely hate the fine tuning aspect of SSB. I don't have the time or the interest in sitting in front of a rig and babysitting a tuning knob so voices are at the correct pitch. I don't have a SDR, but I do appreciate the waterfall display of band activity and the ability to jump between frequencies with activity. Still has an annoying lack of AFC, but at least the waterfall view of band activity is something new and useful.

RE: How's This For A Tuning System?

by KE5KDT on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I'm not sure whether you posted this for the sheer enjoyment of watching the fire errupt or were serious. I'll assume you were serious. True some applications will lend themselves to various man machine interface types. However, in the case of radios it seems the consumer electronics industry, especially in automobiles has gone back to knobs for volume and tuning. Multi-use pushbuttons drove people crazy and having to hold the button down while it sped up to tune required you to spend time looking at the dial and usually going back and forth to finally get the freq. I believe complaints were the reason knobs appeared again on elecronics gear. Plenty of research out there to show folks don't like to look at millions of choices each time they do something . They want the basic controls for frequent use and they want them to be tactile. Knobs give finesse. Bob

RE: How's This For A Tuning System?

by G3LBS on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

At the entrance to a Hobbies exhibition in London, they put a large box with a front panel full of knobs and meters which served no function. The knobs were twiddled over a million times!
Why not sell ham radios with just the panels and knobs and panel lights, but no innards? That would drastically reduce the cost of ham radio and make little difference to it.
Buffalo Gil W2/G3LBS

RE: How's This For A Tuning System?

by N2RRA on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I for one do not have a problem with the knob in 20 years and won't In the net 20. I like to twiddle and turn and hate if we had to look a monitor and click on a waterfall to change frequency.

73!

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by NA4IT on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I believe if a poll were taken, we would find that DXers use the VFO the most. Most ragchewers stay locked on a couple of frequencies and that is. They could use a crystal controlled radio.

Me, I like knows, but I like computer control too.

If anyone would like to buy me a Christmas present, one of those laptop sized SDRs from Flex Radio will do... or c a s h ...

de NA4IT

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KI4SDY on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

A ham radio operator spends more time using the VFO knob than any other. It needs to be large, easy to find and gratifying in function. In addition, it needs to add, not detract, from the appearance of radio. Isn't appearance the first thing that attracted you to your wife or husband? Traditionally, VFO knobs have been large and we expect to see them visually balanced on the front of the radio.

I agree that the VFO knob on the Yaesu 450 is too small to look good. In contrast, the large VFO knob on the Yaesu 857 is too large and very ugly. To make things worse, it is ringed with controls that should be on the flat surface of the radio. Maybe they should swap the knobs on these two rigs and solve the aesthetics problem. I will probably end up with one of these two radios in the near future, so I hope they get their appearance improved soon. Otherwise, I may have to buy another brand.

What would it be like without a knob? Think CB

by HAMMYGUY on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Until ham frequencies are completely channelized the lowly knob will serve as the preferred method of tuning. Many hams don't transmit on multiples of 5.

No knob? Think of a CB with channels and a clarifier knob.

Yuk

RE: What would it be like without a knob? Think CB

by K4FX on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I agree with you on modem radios VFO knobs, size really doesn't matter these days, I rarely even touch the vfo knob on my IC-756 Pro II, I have my radio interfaced to my PC, and my logging software with DX cluster only needs a mouse click and it's on freq and mode as well. I can work an entire contest, make over 1000 QSO's and the only time I touch the VFO is the few times I tune to clear freq to run some stations. Search and pounce mode is a blast in contests that allow cluster, it's more like click and pounce these days....I turn my power output knob more than the VFO and I don't miss the old days at all!!!

73

Bill K4FX

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K9ZF on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

To me, it's just about the "feel" of the knob when tuning.

For example, there is no reason for a steering wheel in a car. A joy stick, or such, could do the same job, and likely better. However, I can't imagine driving a car without the tactile feedback from the steering wheel.

It's the same for radio. I guess I was spoiled. My first "real" ham rig was an FT101E that had a big, wonderful, gear reduction knob. It was a far cry from the best radio I have ever owned, but it had a great "feel" to it, and was a real joy to operate. Modern rigs just never seem to be able to duplicate this feel.

There is nothing wrong with any of the tuning methods you described, they just don't have the same "feel"...

73
Dan
--
Amateur Radio Emergency Service, Clark County Indiana. EM78el
K9ZF /R no budget Rover ***QRP-l #1269 Check out the Rover Resource Page at:
<http://www.qsl.net/n9rla> List Administrator for: InHam+grid-loc+ham-books
Ask me how to join the Indiana Ham Mailing list!

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WA1UFO on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

If any idiot decides to remove tuning knobs off dedicated radios I will quit ham radio and run off with a Russian ballerina!! 73s de Hans

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by G8KHS on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I find it most interesting that Flexradio sell a knob for their excellent products. ;)

73 de G8KHS

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by G8KHS on November 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

It seems that from his comments, AC5WO would be better off on cb, 2m fm or taking up fishing. On second thoughts maybe the latter is too technical and fiddly.

73 de G8KHS

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K4KRW on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

The conventional tuning knob is pretty hard to beat. I think back to equipment like Marantz stereo receivers and tuners. They oriented the tuning knob so it was horizontal. About 1/4 of the edge of the knob was exposed on the front of the receiver. It looked elegant. But, I always hated using it. It was much easier to use a conventional knob. Especially if you want to move a fair distance up or down the band.

I can envision one interface that might work for me. That would be a touch sensitive pad that you could slide your finger across horizontally. In a designated portion of the center of the pad, you could rest your finger and the frequency would not change at all. As you slid your finger right or left of center, the frequency would change at a speed proportional to your distance from center.
73,

Richard
K4KRW

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W6ZPC on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I cut my teeth as an SWL using my dad's National NC 183. I loved the linear dial that didn't crowd the high end of each band, thanks to the specially cut tuning capacitors. I loved the two big knobs on the front with the bandspread on one side and the main tuning knob on the other, especially at night with the only light coming from the big analog dials. (Sometimes I would open the lid on the National to let the filaments from the 16 tubes inside warm my bedroom on chilly winter nights (of course this was in Southern California, so it really didn't get that cold)). Just writing this brings back a flood of memories. Much later I picked up a Radio Shack branded Sangean, that had two buttons, one to move up frequency and the other to move down. I hated the lack of a tuning knob. Once I got my ticket I started out with an Kenwood hybrid with a big tuning knob and my current rig the Icom 718 has the big tuning knob. Like the others who commented before me, there is something magic about reading the latest Ham pub with my right hand tuning up and down the band (especially 40 meters, which has been pretty exciting lately). I know someday we will have voice recognition rigs which will respond to voice commands (they probably already have them, but I haven't seen any). I can remember my dad (ex-W6ZPC and W7LNN sk)once told me the biggest thing on the radio of the future would be the knobs and I will add the bigger the better.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W6ZPC on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I cut my teeth as an SWL using my dad's National NC 183. I loved the linear dial that didn't crowd the high end of each band, thanks to the specially cut tuning capacitors. I loved the two big knobs on the front with the bandspread on one side and the main tuning knob on the other, especially at night with the only light coming from the big analog dials. (Sometimes I would open the lid on the National to let the filaments from the 16 tubes inside warm my bedroom on chilly winter nights (of course this was in Southern California, so it really didn't get that cold)). Just writing this brings back a flood of memories. Much later I picked up a Radio Shack branded Sangean, that had two buttons, one to move up frequency and the other to move down. I hated the lack of a tuning knob. Once I got my ticket I started out with an Kenwood hybrid with a big tuning knob and my current rig the Icom 718 has the big tuning knob. Like the others who commented before me, there is something magic about reading the latest Ham pub with my right hand tuning up and down the band (especially 40 meters, which has been pretty exciting lately). I know someday we will have voice recognition rigs which will respond to voice commands (they probably already have them, but I haven't seen any). I can remember my dad (ex-W6ZPC and W7LNN sk)once told me the biggest thing on the radio of the future would be the knobs and I will add the bigger the better.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K5END on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Hans said,

"...and run off with a Russian ballerina!! "

Hans, why not do both?

do svidanya!

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W2MC on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Several years ago, I thought like you, and acquired a Ten Tec Pegasus. I thought I would drive it with the computer in the shack, and all would be great. I even had the external tuning 'pod', though I thought I would never use it.

I thought I'd enjoy the ability to change settings on the computer, to control the rig, set all sorts of things...and for awhile it was a novelty. The general coverage recevier was particularly good....and probably better than what I have currently.

But I didn't like it.

I find that I LIKE being able to independently set the controls, and to see where they are set at a glance, not via the computer.

I am currently running a Yaesu FT-1000MP MK V, and I love it. It does everything I want in a ham radio; dual independent receive/transmit (with independent knobs!), and more buttons and dials than I can easily count.

The only time I enjoy a computer-controlled rig is during contests, as they save a LOT of time. Otherwise, I am happier with the ability to run the rig without a computer.

(Oh, and is anyone interested in a Pegasus? Its still here, sitting in its box.....)

Jon
W2MC

RE: They have products to sell.

by AA5JG on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

AI2IA wrote:

"Simply because a feature has been around for a long time is not enough reason to get rid of it."

Exactly! Maybe it has been around for a long time because it works! I am getting tire of this "we need to change just to change things" attitude, or that anything new is better than anything older.

73s John AA5JG

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K1DA on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Can you buy a fishing reel without a knob?

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K1DA on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I have a 2/440 radio in my car which has a click type tuning knob on the control head and buttons and a keyboard on the mike. I find the knob easiest to use while keeping eyes on the road. Easy to recall how many nice positive clicks to get from here to there. Come to think of it I have several Kenwood TK series ex commercial radios, also with knobs. Change for change sake is not always a wonderful thing. As I have previously observed, when the equipment makers find the "perfect" alternative to the knob I am sure the gear will fly off the shelves. AS for the guy who "hates" tuning SSB with a knob, I suspect he might be one of the crew who will tell you that you are "OFF FREQUENCY" if HIS display doesn't have all zeros after the dot. Had one jump me on 10 one day - started right in on how I was "off frequency". When I finally figured out that he didn't mean I was out of the band (By quickly checking all my KNOBS) but failing to conform to his CB notion I suggested that the PTO in my S Line worked that way and if he really needed to see a lot of zeros he should look up how to use his RIT (knob?)
If you can't tune an SSB signal with a knob, 60 meters and 50 watts are there for ya.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K3YD on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I owned a car with a radio with only UP-DOWN buttons for frequency control. I owned an FM tuner with only UP-DOWN buttons for frequency control. I HATED both. Both are now gone from my life.

Each demonstrated a loss of control which limited my ability to tune to a particular frequency. Both had only two tuning speeds, r-e-a-l s-l-o-w or too FAST.

I would not purchase any amateur radio which limited my ability to hunt (tune) and select a specific frequency based on my experience with these consumer electronics, and in trying to tune using UP-DOWN microphone buttons on my 755Pro.

While technically possible, the knobless radio idea fails the ergonomics test for me.

Do not disrespect the Knob, capisce?

by KN8AW on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

You do not have permission to put the kibosh on The Knob. You need to have a sit-down with those that make Knobs. The Knob serves a very important role at the top of the Knob Families. You see, Tuning Knob is THE Knob. He is the Big Knob, the knobbo de tutti knobbi. Without the Big Knob, things would quickly become chaotic. Primo Knobbo is needed to ensure harmony amongst the subservient knob capos and their ranks. Once the Big Knob establishes the frequency to be worked, he sets his knob army upon said frequency to ensure everything coming in and going out flows smoothly through, without any interference from outsiders. So please, do not disrespect Mr. Knob, you need him more than he needs you.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W4VR on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

What do you do with the knobs on your better half...ignore them?

RE: Do not disrespect the Knob, capisce?

by K5END on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

"You do not have permission to put the kibosh on The Knob..."

That was a great post!

Many compliments.

RE: Do not disrespect the Knob, capisce?

by NB3O on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY wrote:
....It's kind of like the steering wheel and gearshift in a car.....

I had a neighbor who removed the steering wheel and used a Vise-grip......

RE: Do not disrespect the Knob, capisce?

by NB3O on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I'm going to replace the tuning knob on my 75A4 with a Plymouth Valiant push button shifter of similar vintage.......

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K0RGR on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

First, I've got carpal tunnel syndrome from over-using a mouse at work. I use a trackball wherever I can, though they aren't as easy to find these days as they used to be. I could easily get into the idea of a 'point and click' interface, and I'm really torn between an SDR and something else for my next rig.

But, I've trained my left hand to tune the radio with a knob while I do other things with the right hand. The SS this last weekend is the first time I've fully used a modern logging program that will send SS exchanges for me in a contest. This was confusing enough! I would go nuts trying to tune the rig with the computer, log, and all the other functions at the same time.

I do like using HRD to control my rigs. I'm having a problem with it right now, but when I figure that one out, I'll probably use HRD more and more. It's a great way to control my IC-7000, replacing most of the menus with 'real' controls. But I still prefer the tuning knob on my 746.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by G3LBS on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

In England, a 'big knob' is slang for an aristocrat, but there I go perhaps you don't have them over here?

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KB9CRY on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

So why does anyone care about how large it is?

If you have to ask, then you do not and can not understand.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

"So why does anyone care about how large it is?"

Anybody who says 'size doesn't matter' never had a really big one.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K5END on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

>
"n England, a 'big knob' is slang for an aristocrat, but there I go perhaps you don't have them over here?"

Didn't you know?

All Yanks are aristocrats. <clearing throat>

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K9MHZ on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Reminds me of when they first designed the F-16. All fly-by-wire, so the stick was rigid and sensed pressures applied to it from the pilot, through the use of strain gages. The test pilots pushed back, and said "we want the stick to move..." When they were asked "why?", they said essentially "because we want it to move, and other questions?"

Sounds good to me.

Brad
K9MHZ

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by G3LBS on November 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't it somebody in Guys and Dolls, perhaps Nicely-Nicely Jones, who got on OK with his life by not ever wanting anything, then one day he wanted more money so he robbed a bank, and somebody shot him in the back on his way out?
Do not want a knob you fools.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by VA7CPC on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I get a little rebuttal space:

Those people who said I didn't have much experience with "non-knob tuning" -- you're right! I don't know if that's because it's no good, or because the marketplace doesn't accept it. I haven't seen enough "no-knob" rigs. I agree that the commercial "one frequency digit at a time" arrangement is terrible for ham use.

Thank you for the "Knobbo de Tutti Knobbi" -- I enjoyed that!

To anyone who thinks a frequency knob is like a steering wheel, and steering wheels are "natural":

. . . Steering a car with a wheel is _hard_ !!!

The position of the wheel sets the radius of the car's turn -- "Wheel centered" sets it to "infinite radius".

In order to drive the car in a straight line, you must constantly watch how its position on the road is changing (or how its heading is changing), and turn the steering wheel to correct it. The amount of steering correction depends on the car's speed. It's a nasty, "hard real-time" negative feedback loop.

We're humans and very adaptable. Once we've learned how to steer, we do it without thinking about it, and it _seems_ "natural".

Yes, a joystick (or pressure-sensitive lever) gives 'time-derivative control' -- it controls the frequency slew rate. With my ears, or eyes, telling me when the tuning is getting better, that might be just fine. Just get the tuning close to "right", and slowly let the joystick move to its neutral position as it gets closer. I'll know if I like it when I try it.

A program like Ham Radio Deluxe has most of the software needed for controlling a VFO with a joystick. The "joystick read loop" is missing -- but it might be easy to add.

I retired from programming several years ago. This "joystick VFO control" is the first thing that's tempting me to go back to it.

Thanks for the discussion.

Charles

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WG8Z on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Menu's are for restaurants.
Joystick's are for video games.
Tin whiskers are not UR friend.
Long live the "Knob"
73
Greg/wg8z

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W9NZ on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Forget the joy Sticks. The generation gap has finally hit ham radio. Real radios glow. Sorry you could never have experienced the real thrill of ham radio. we oldies are just stuck in the past when "real radios" were used. Enjoy your computers, I feel sorry for you that you maybe have never experienced real ham radio. 73

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K4IQT on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

The steering wheel comparison is quite valid. I do a lot of computer "sim racing", using a steering wheel, pedals, a computer, and some very good simulation software to race cars over the Internet. When that hobby was in its infancy, many of us used joysticks for car control, and when you got used to that it worked very well. However, the only advantage over a wheel and pedals was the ability to make extremely rapid changes in direction, throttle, or braking - not a very smart thing to do most of the time. For frequency control the joystick is usable but prone to disaster - an accidental major bump will take you a long, long way from where you were.

Some used the keyboard or discrete buttons for control - some still try to do that today with those idiotic gaming console controllers. Like a set of tuning switches on a radio, that method is a disaster. Just watch the vehicle weave back and forth. Just watch your receiver frequency wobble around while you try to tune to a signal rather than a specific frequency. Same comment applies to mouse-driven graphic control switches.

But with a knob (sort of a little steering wheel) you have fine or coarse control of your frequency, using your built-in "hand-ear" coordination. If you bump it, it does not land you in the next MHz range. At the same time, if you try to use a graphic analog of a knob and try to control its turn rate with mouse positioning and buttons, you have the same dangers as you encounter with a joystick.

I've got radios that can use software control methods and also have little or big tuning knobs. Software methods are great for zipping to a preset frequency. The knob is the easiest way for most of us humans to coordinate our actions. At least, it works for me.

Do whatever floats your boat, though. But you can use a knob without thinking about it.

--Terry, K4IQT

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K4IQT on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

By the way, I am also an OT, licensed in 1960, and enjoy warming the shack with multiple thermionic emission devices quite regularly. So don't knock hams who are also computer users. It ain't a generation gap issue.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KF4HR on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Since most modern transceivers have tuning connection capabilities on the rear of the radio (typically for PC control), I would imagine it wouldn't be too difficult to develop an interface to use a joystick or rudder pedals or toggle switch for frequency control.

Using a joystick to tune a radio would probably be similar to using the UP/DOWN tuning buttons on some microphones. While using the UP/DOWN buttons may be convenient to use every once in awhile, I much prefer the good ol' tuning knob.

"Change" doesn't necessary mean, change for the good.

KF4HR

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N3WAK on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I guess you're right--technically speaking, there is no longer an absolute need for a knob to tune a transceiver.

However, by the same token, we could probably do away with tillers on sailboats, steering wheels on cars, and, with the invention of nutritious and satisfying baby formula, with other things as well.

But, I guess I'm just old-fashioned. To each his own. If you want a joystick, FB. However, I am glad my old Drakes have big knobs.

73, Tony N3WAK

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K5END on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I think the poster who said use software and build your own physical interface has the best idea.

Think of all the possibilites that would allow people with handicaps, neuromuscular control diseases or arthritis.

My own opinion is a knob is better for fine tuning, and a left-right paddle or torque knob is better for moving across the band quickly.

As far as stick vs. wheel ergonomics.

Look at aircraft.

Some have a joystick, some have a yoke.

Ask an experienced pilot which he thinks is better.

Better yet, look at what the fighter aircraft use.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N0AH on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

When I was shopping and deciding between a TS-2000 and a FT-847, it all came down to the turning of the main VFP knob- One felt cheap and the other felt solid-

I got that one-

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by AB7E on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

W9NZ: "The generation gap has finally hit ham radio. Real radios glow. Sorry you could never have experienced the real thrill of ham radio. we oldies are just stuck in the past when "real radios" were used. Enjoy your computers, I feel sorry for you that you maybe have never experienced real ham radio."

That's a silly generalization. The aesthetic value of glowing tubes is hard to dispute, but the "real thrill of ham radio" had nothing to do with staring at your rig ... it was the ability to communicate with someone in another state or another country, and to do so at a time when there were no other practical alternatives for the general public.

As for the use of computers, I feel sorry for anyone who has stopped embracing new technology in a fundamentally technological hobby. You belong back with the folks who refused to migrate from TRF rigs to superhets. It is NOT necessary to refute modern technology in order to retain your appreciation for older technology in its time.

The "generation gap" you refer to isn't physical and it has nothing to do with age ... it's purely mental. You've simply made a conscious choice to become intellectually stagnant. That's pretty sad. "Stuck" sounds like a pretty accurate term for you, but that doesn't mean it applies to everyone else of your age.

Dave AB7E
age 62

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WA4BRL on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Using push-buttons instead of a main tuning knob? Bah!
Next they'll talk about using buttons to dial your telephone. It'll never happen. ;-)

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K5END on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

When I was a kid we had a 1962 Dodge Lancer that had a push button automatic transmission on the dashboard.

Ahead of its time?

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W5HTW on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I still have wonderful dreams of the RME-45, with its HUGE, centered tuning knob, and concentric 'different rate' tuning ring. You could do anything with that radio, from huge leaps across the band, to find tuning down to a couple dozen cycles. It was one of the most ergonomic (before that word was invented) tuning radios ever.

But hey, the SP600 wasn't too bad either. You could spin the knob rapidly and go from 6 mhz to 13 mhz in a flash across the dial.

Today I'm using the FT897D. OK, I have it set for the one hertz (I loved cycles better) rate, but I can poke the button and go to whatever high speed rate that is, and zoom along the cycles/hertz.

Lots of boat anchors did not have weighted tuning knobs, so long excursions across many cycles was capable of causing carpals in the tunnel (before that phrase was invented, too.) But those with weighted knobs were a smooth delight to use.

I say bring back the weighted knob and the concentric (mechanical) tuning ring.

As to cars, there have been several models using joy sticks to be demonstrated to the public. None of them, as far as I know, have actually been marketed, but I think it is a matter of people not wanting them. The technology is in place.

I have flown a plane with a 'stick.' It is actually a LOT of fun, and not that difficult to get used to. Most of the planes I flew had a column, though. There is not as much feedback with a column as there is with a stick. I would never want to pilot a plane with a stick that used just pressure sensors and did not actually move.

I think there have been some boat models introduced with stick steering. I know some ocean liners use joy stick control. No more helm. Just a little stick poking up from the panel. Controls direction and speed, including reverse. It is the current typical use in modern ships.

I suspect there are joy stick controls on modern locomotives as well. No steering required, of course, but speed, brakes, and other factors may be included.

But those are things designed to 'do a job.' Ham radio is a thing designed to be fun! And FUN is a large, mechanical knob, preferably weighted!

Ed

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W9GB on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I am glad he did not ask about why we still use steering wheels for automobiles and trucks!

w9gb

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by AB7E on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

K5END: "When I was a kid we had a 1962 Dodge Lancer that had a push button automatic transmission on the dashboard. "

When I first started college my dad bought me a 1957 Chrysler for commuting. It was a huge boat of a vehicle with big fins on the back, a 460 cubic inch engine, an automatic transmission, and push button shift on the dashboard (just to the left of the steering wheel). All tuned up it got 4 miles per gallon around town if I drove it carefully ....

73,
Dave AB7E

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KB3LNM on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I have a modern portable radio with digital tuning that uses either direct keypad entry or +/- 5K or 10KHz buttons. I find the +/- 5K and 10K buttons awkward when searching for a signal. In most cases I do not know the exact frequency. I wish it had a knob.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by AD6KA on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

What's So Special About A Knob?"

Eham must be hard up for articles.
Stupid discussion.....

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N0AH on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I'm sober now....I know I was trying to say VFO-

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by NM2K on November 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Years ago, I bought an Azden 6 meter rig. No knob. It drove me so crazy that I eventually sold it, to a friend, who also missed the knob. I think he still has it.

The rig worked well in every way, but with weird programming and no large knob. I just didn't want to adapt to that type of operating. I still don't.

Ed Cregger
NM2K

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KASSY on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Good question. And while we're at it, what's special about a microphone? Or a key? Or a keyboard? I mean, what on earth would we want to put any emphasis on the ham/machine interface? Isn't this hobby all about ones and zeros? Why bother having any connection to the human at all? Robot stations can contact robot stations, and we can dispense with the expense of loudspeakers/headphones, microphones, Begali paddles.

OK, I'm being facetious. To me, the brain/hand is analog. I grew up with pushbutton radios. An up/down button were on the first AM/FM car radio I met. However...when I met my first car radio with a rotating knob for tuning, it seemed like an upgrade. As did the rotating knob for volume, instead of an up/down button.

I program for a living...and no way do I want "point and click" or up/down buttons for tuning. There is a massively intuitive feel to a knob. If I want it to go up in frequency a little faster, I spin it faster. Can you push the "up" button harder to get faster tuning? when that can happen, then I'm a Flex user. As long as they're using the regular cursor keys on a standard PC keyboard, I'm not part of it.

- k

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by SM5JAB on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

It is all about *control*. It is far more easy to control a twisting movement with your hands with millimetre precision than using two "up/down"-buttons.

The steering wheel in your car is one example. I imagine a joystick would work in a car but one accidental push and you're way off road in a jiffy. The wheel on the other hand takes several turns and has a longer perimeter than a joystick. And turning left/right with two buttons makes changing turning rate very difficult. With the wheel it is natural.

There is also the "principle of least surprise" involved. When you sit down behind the wheel you *see* if it is rotated or straight ahead. Easy. With the button approach you won't know until you start the car moving forwards. Ok, so this was a car analogy, insert "volume control" where appropriate.

This is almost a parallell discussion to whether to use a pen or a computer to take notes. Well, try writing a mathematical formula with some square roots, divisors and stuff and you are much, much, MUCH faster with a pen. AND you get a better *feel* for the equation at the same time (at least I feel it that way). You soon use more energy controlling the tool than actually achieving something.

No matter how you turn it, body and brain wants to work together in "perfect harmony" and using odd tools isn't getting us anywhere.

It is an interesting subject!

/Micke

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N3EVL on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

For radios that only have:

a) A simple numerical readout of the current frequency.
b) No means to 'preview' what might be up or down the band (and therefore)...
c) ...no capability to randomly jump to a 'new' location (rather than get there sequentially).
d) No capability to interact with other signal or bandwidth, other RX data or other information as presented...

...then a tuning knob, preferably nice and big, smooth, weighted, is a nice interface.

For radios that DO support the above mentioned features, a traditional tuning knob, while not redundant, and still somewhat useful, is not sufficient.

If the newer crop of radios have evolved to do more than before, it seems entirely reasonable that the mechanisms we use to interact with out radios should evolve also.

Pete, N3EVL

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N9DG on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

...
"For radios that DO support the above mentioned features, a traditional tuning knob, while not redundant, and still somewhat useful, is not sufficient."

Bingo. That sums it all up very nicely.

The thing that I would want for a radio in a mobile is one that can respond top voice commands. Have the memories preprogrammed with commands that it will recognize by voice. You program the the "voice memories" by training the radio ahead of time. So for example the radio has a "command" button on the mic, kinda like a PTT but instead it allows you to talk to the radio. Then you would simply say "five two" and the radio goes to 146.52. Or you say "eight eight" and the radio goes to your local 146.88 machine with proper offset and tone. Or you say "scan tones" and the radio scans a frequency for all the possible CTCSS tones.

This kind of control for a mobile radio would be far superior to fumbling around with tiny buttons or complicated menus like the typical V/UHF FM mobile radio today has..

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

"The thing that I would want for a radio in a mobile is one that can respond to voice commands."

Open the pod bay doors, Hal...

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K8QV on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

There seems to be a segment of the population that is keen to invent and use new technology even if it is impractical or affords no improvement over current methods. The move to digitize, computerize and complicate everything unnecessarily is gaining momentum and we're reaching the point where soon nothing we own will be repairable or simple and intuitive to operate. But by Jove, it will be cutting edge!

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W9OY on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Doug

Now you've gone and done it!! My car already has this voice command capability, as does my cheap 100 buck cell phone. Makes wayyy to much sense.

The situation I had on 160 today would completely drive the knob lovers crazy

see my blog entry

http://w9oy-sdr.blogspot.com/2009/11/interesting-conundrum.html

73 W9OY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N3EVL on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

K8QV: "There seems to be a segment of the population that is keen to invent and use new technology even if it is impractical or affords no improvement over current methods. The move to digitize, computerize and complicate everything unnecessarily is gaining momentum and we're reaching the point where soon nothing we own will be repairable or simple and intuitive to operate. But by Jove, it will be cutting edge!"

Can you cite examples of such "improvements" that you consider unnecessary?

The examples of computerized, digitized radios that sit on my desk (alongside my trusty old FT101EE) are certainly complex entities but not to the point that they cannot be understood, worked on, improved on, in ways that my old Yaesu can never be - and, their performance in terms of both signal path and user interface is far superior - so IMHO, the effort expended to come to grips with the complexity was worthwhile and continues to be a fun part of the overall Amateur Radio experience.

Pete, N3EVL

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by AB7E on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

K8QV: "There seems to be a segment of the population that is keen to invent and use new technology even if it is impractical or affords no improvement over current methods. The move to digitize, computerize and complicate everything unnecessarily is gaining momentum and we're reaching the point where soon nothing we own will be repairable or simple and intuitive to operate."

I fully agree that VA7CPC's article falls into that category, but I don't think I can agree with you in general. The problem with your statement is that you may be ignoring other relevant factors besides function. A great many electronic and digital mechanisms came about because in addition to facilitating new features, they were far more reliable than their simpler counterparts. Digital VHF TV tuners and electronic washing machine controls are classical examples.

In other cases, cost is the driving force, with electronic controls mostly being much cheaper than anything mechanical, and much, much cheaper to retool for the next model change.

Equally important is the migration to software-defined radios, cell phones, and appliances, where entirely new functions and capabilities can be added without having to swap out hardware, making things cheaper for both the manufacturer and the customer.

I used to own an Heathkit SB-101 that I could fix myself, and I had to do so regularly. I've owned several other rigs since, and now have an Elecraft K3. Each rig got more and more complex, offered more performance for the money, gave me fewer and fewer problems, and all moved further and further beyond what I was capable of fixing on it.

73,
Dave AB7E

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

One of the attractions of "vintage" rigs is their lack of menu-type controls, and the related displays.

If you want to know what band you're on, just look at the BAND knob and see where it's pointing.

Problem is, that takes a lot of panel space and a lot of hardware (knob/switch/control/wiring). Which translates to cost.

A story:

The first couple of generations of diesel-electric railroad locomotives all had similar cab layouts for the engineer. The throttle, reverser, and air brake
controls were all grouped a certain way on the control stand, and the various analog gauges and indicators were grouped together.

A lot of the choices were dictated by the available technology of the time. Conrols and indicators that
were not often used were usually positioned out of the way behind the engineer, to save space.

Then, in the 1980s, microprocessor control became all the rage. Control systems could be made smaller, and lots of wiring could be eliminated.

Some designs used CRTs, others various digital readouts. It was impressive to see the speed and air pressure in big square numbers instead of round dial gauges, and a lot more information could be displayed to the engineer.

But the engineers, who actually had to drive the dern things, hated the new designs. For one thing, in the old systems, if a particular gauge failed, it only affected that particular indication, and could usually be worked around until the train reached a point where it could be worked on. A CRT display failure disabled the locomotive entirely.

What they really disliked was the loss of analog readout. A good engineer is constantly scanning - the track ahead, the signals, the gauges, the rest of the train behind the locomotives when going around a right hand curve, etc.

With an analog gauge, a quick glance would tell that all was well because the red needle normally points
to 3 o'clock and the white needle to about 2:30. A rising or falling trend is immediately obvious without having to look straight at the gauge.

But with a digital readout, it took a serious look to get the actual indication. That took more time and effort than the old way.

Next design generation, analog-type displays returned. More than a few locos were retrofitted. Others found themselves as the second unit in many consists.

There's a lesson in all that.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by AA4PB on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Another thing that drives the "menu" system is "feature creep". Modern electronics makes it possible to add many more features to receivers and transmitters (and we all demand features). The problem is that the front panel would be massive, complex, and expensive if we had a separate knob for each of those features.

Mfgs could simplify the design and eliminate the menus by eliminating features. The problem is most people wouldn't buy it because with "brand Y" you get a bunch more features for the same price. Sometimes we are our own worst enemy :-)

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by AA4PB on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

How about a voice command radio? You know, "bandwidth 3 dot 8" or "band to 80" or "tune up 10" or "agc slow".

Now lets see - where did I put my cheat sheet of commands? :-)

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K5END on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

One hidden blessing I have not seen mentioned is this.

Can you imagine how EXPENSIVE rigs would be these days if they had no menus and each function had its own knob, pointer, switch or meter?

Come to think of it there are some rigs that come very near to that description.

Look at the price tags on those fine puppies.

Suddenly the menus on my IC and Yazoo rigs don't seem so bad after all.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K5END on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I said, " have not seen mentioned "

And by the time I posted my comment the other one showed up. Is that ESP or what?

Whoa. Cosmic.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WA3SKN on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Radio interfaces have both an objective and a subjective "feel" to them. And, the large tuning knob is subjective... but desired feature. This becomes part of the "Ergonomics" of design.
You cannot get a good feel for the size of the FT450 and it's knobs via most posted pictures. That is why I normally mention it in my posts... to make someone AWARE. There is a lot packed into that little box, though!
73s.

-Mike.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W1RKW on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

A tuning knob is as important as a volume knob. Certain functions are relegated to certain ergonomics.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K8QV on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Can you cite examples of such "improvements" that you consider unnecessary?

I think N2EY gave a representative example.

The point was that while technological advances in general are a very good thing, frequently people adopt a mindset that just because something CAN be done it SHOULD be done. That's clearly not the case.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

K5END asks: "Can you imagine how EXPENSIVE rigs would be these days if they had no menus and each function had its own knob, pointer, switch or meter?"

That depends on the rig, and what you want to do with it.

For a lot of kinds of operating, you don't need a lot of features. What you need is performance, which is a different thing completely.

I'm primarily interested in CW operation, and most of what's in "modern" rigs doesn't let me hear the other stations any better, nor does it let them hear me any better. But things I consider essential, like a nice big solid smooth slow tuning knob, AGC-off, sharp IF filter with lots of poles, RIT, low phase noise and excellent dynamic range are often lacking in "modern" rigs. What good are memories, keypads, etc. if the rig has clicks or can't hear very well?

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W7ETA on November 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

"Aren't we supposed to have a spirit of ingenuity and experimentation?"

Knock yer self out OM!

Make as many joy sticks, knobs that don't move and paddles as you like for your rig.

Let us know how your spirit of ingenuity and experimentation goes.

In the mean time, I'll enjoy playing with my rigs the way they are, and building xmitters with resistors, caps, inductor and tubes--no joy stick necessary.

I'm considering using some of those funny looking black diodes instead of 5u4s. What do you think?

Bob

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 14, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

AB7E wrote on November 12, 2009:

>W9NZ: "The generation gap has finally hit ham radio.
>Real radios glow. Sorry you could never have
>experienced the real thrill of ham radio. we oldies
>are just stuck in the past when "real radios" were
>used. Enjoy your computers, I feel sorry for you that
>you maybe have never experienced real ham radio."
>
>That's a silly generalization. The aesthetic value of
>glowing tubes is hard to dispute, but the "real
>thrill of ham radio" had nothing to do with staring
>at your rig

Yes and no. You forget the general attitude of Having
One's VERY OWN Own Radio Station! [muy importante!]:-)

But let me go back in time. Since around 1920 *ALL* radios tuned with variable capacitors...a few of post-WWII years tuned with variable inductors. There was no such thing as a Phase-Locked Loop, certainly not with Direct Digital Synthesis until about 1980 in US amateur radio. Both the PLL and DDS had to wait until digital ICs were established and more mature. So, the "tuning knob" had been around for roughly SIXTY Years before digital frequency synthesis became practical. Three generations. It had become so standardized, indeed so stuck in everyone's mind that it was close to religious heresy NOT to have a tuning knob for manual frequency control.

For EIGHT DECADES amateur radio has had KNOBS for HF
frequency control. But, for about the last 2 1/2 decades the frequency has been in STEPS of about 10 Hz. Steps so small that they appear to be continuously variable. End result of synthesizer frequency control is stability and EXACT frequency to a number of decimals far greater than is possible with mechanical tuning structures for L-C controlled variable analog circuitry.

I happen to prefer a knob tuning system on a radio. That is because I've been conditioned since age 8 in 1940 to such things...just like learning to tell time by hands of a clock because there were no 'digital' clocks then. Later on I learned about coarser steps of frequency in aircraft radios (two banks of switched crystals mixed), then the all-analog 'synthesizer' of the legendary R-390 receiver from Collins Radio (coolest thing ever for set-and-forget frequency control to my early-twenties mind back then).

>As for the use of computers, I feel sorry for anyone
>who has stopped embracing new technology in a
>fundamentally technological hobby.

I disagree slightly there, primarily what is
"fundamental." The way I've seen it, average HF radio
amateurs just USE radios. Such radios may be the top-of-the-line in technology but the average ham (say 9 out of 10) is simply ignorant of how their boxes work. They want to APPEAR smart and all-knowing but wind up just parroting the advertising claims of their radios or get their expertise in evaluation from reviews in ham publications...as if they were as smart as reviewers.

Yes, I'm being cruel, but I'm also being honest.

>You belong back with the folks who refused to migrate
>from TRF rigs to superhets.

...or from tubes/valves to transistors... :-)

>It is NOT necessary to refute modern technology in
>order to retain your appreciation for older
>technology in its time.

Disagreement again. I say many HAVE to dump on modern
technology in order to hide their basic insecurity about being
ignorant of what happens behind the front panels. It is just
rationalization.

>The "generation gap" you refer to isn't physical and
>it has nothing to do with age ... it's purely mental.
>You've simply made a conscious choice to become
>intellectually stagnant. That's pretty sad. "Stuck"
>sounds like a pretty accurate term for you, but that
>doesn't mean it applies to everyone else of your age.

STRONG agreement there. :-)

I've spent a career in electronics design, influenced
into that by my US Army experience of BEGINNING HF
communications in 1953 with no less than 36 high-power
HF transmitters. No license of any kind required, no
"CW" skill needed (none of the circuits were OOK CW).
Listen to what higher-ups said, then RTFM! Either
LEARN that or learn to love infantry operations. I
stayed in the Signal Corps. :-)

What I dislike intensely is the proclamations of "REAL
AMATEUR RADIO" by the self-styled gurus and "experts"
who got their amateur education from what the ARRL
thought hams should know. Yes, I'm sure DX-ing and
winning "contests" (and bragging up a storm) is lots
of fun for some, but League-style ham activity had
its roots in ham radio of at least a half century ago.
There is (to me) nothing "REAL" about being stuck in
the middle ages of radio as in HF-centric amateur radio.
Radio as a communications medium is only 113 years old.

Either technological smarts of HF-centric US hams
start approaching the 1980s or they should quit trying
to be so all-knowing about technology of radio.

>Dave AB7E, age 62

Len AF6AY, age 77 (older than the FCC) :-)

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KE7UXE on November 14, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Real radios have a knob. The fake ones that send CQ for you, tell your poor unfortunate victim your life story before you even touch your key, log your QSO and give you a picture of the whole bloody band on your computer screen are for gearheads or worse, contesters.

While we are at it, real radios have tubes, smell funny and glow in the dark. You know the ones; the kind that some guy somewhere actually knows how to fix. The kind some of us can actually fix ourselves if we get right down to it.

A radio without a tuning knob is not a r-a-d-i-o. It is a c-o-m-p-u-t-e-r. And while we are at it......those keys that look like....oh well.

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KB7AIL on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I use a IC746 connected to a computer and the Ham Radio Deluxe. I really like the use of the mouse wheel to tune at different rates. I guess that's a tuning knob, too.

Pretty amazing how some hams are falling back on the 'it's how we have always done it' argument.

It's a hobby, ya know?

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N3EVL on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KE7UXE: "...A radio without a tuning knob is not a r-a-d-i-o. It is a c-o-m-p-u-t-e-r...."

Even if this were true, what is your point?

If it's capable of delivering RF to the antenna it's a transmitter. If it decodes signals coming in from the antena, it's a receiver. If it does both, it's a transciever: end of story.

Question: Why do you even care if a computer plays no role, some role, a major role?

I'm totally unable to come up with any justification for the often repeated 'radio + computer is not a radio" mantra on this and similar eHam threads. Can somebody offer some rational explanation of how this view came into being?

Pete-totally-mind-boggled-N3EVL

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WW3QB on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Tuning knobs simply don't exist anymore on consumer electronics. Walk through a Best Buy store. Knobs are not on TV's or radios. If there is a knob, it's for volume, not tuning. There are tuning/scan up/down buttons, but not knobs. Knobs are even fading from car radios.

It does seem that ham radios have knobs to appeal those who are accustomed to tuning knobs. My children have never turned a tuning knob.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

WW3QB writes: "Tuning knobs simply don't exist anymore on consumer electronics."

That's because broadcasting is channelized.

WW3QB: "Walk through a Best Buy store. Knobs are not on TV's or radios."

Because the frequency of every station that those TVs and radios are intended to receive is known beforehand, and very accurately controlled at both the transmitting and receiving end. There is no need or option for any sort of user adjustment other than channel selection.

That's not usually the case in Amateur Radio. Except for repeaters, the 5 channels of 60 meters and a few other exceptions, amateur frequency selection is up to the operator. All we have to do is be inside the band and not stomping on another amateur; we can pick any unoccupied frequency.

That's why a tuning knob is so desired by so many hams.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N3EVL asks :"Why do you even care if a computer plays no role, some role, a major role?

I'm totally unable to come up with any justification for the often repeated 'radio + computer is not a radio" mantra on this and similar eHam threads. Can somebody offer some rational explanation of how this view came into being?"

Here's my theory: It's a rebellion against "microprocessor mania"

There was a time, not so long ago, when technological devices were what they appeared to be. There was a real effort to make things relatively simple and fixable.

For example, the first microwave oven I owned consisted of a power supply, magnetron, fan, light, rotating plate on the bottom, some safety interlocks and a wind-up timer with a knob on it. Put the food in, close the door, turn the timer knob to the desired number of minutes and the thing started cooking. When the timer ran out, it dinged a mechanical bell and shut off.

The microwave oven I have today has a panel of buttons and a digital display. Ten power levels, timing from zero to 99 minutes 99 seconds in 1 second intervals, programmable start delay, built in clock, ability to defeat the internal light and/or rotating plate, and a bunch of other features. But it doesn't microwave any better than the first one.

Everywhere you look, things require programming, setup, a computer connection, battery charger, etc. The actual function of a thing is becoming secondary to the bell-and-whistle features. *Everything* has a microprocessor or several in it!

In many cases of such devices you don't actually control anything. What you do, really, is to request that the microprocessor do various things, and it figures out how to do them - or not.

In the sci-fi parody series "Red Dwarf", the hero, Dave Lister, has a toaster with artificial intelligence. The dern thing drives him batty asking 24/7 if anyone wants anything toasted. It was funny when the show came out; it's getting closer to reality every day.

At least some folks want a place where a thing is what it is, and they are actually DOING something, not just asking a microprocessor to do it. I suspect that's one reason DIY and cooking shows are so popular nowadays, hammers and spoons don't have microprocessors - yet.

---

Another factor is what used to be called "planned obsolescence".

For a very long time, most ham rigs have had very long useful lives. This was because they could be repaired, and because they were stand-alone devices. A 50 year old S-line in good shape is perfectly usable on the air today - and there are a lot of them. This month's QST has an article on updating the 30L-1 amplifier - by replacing the old rectifiers, filter caps, and bleeder resistors. The 30L-1 first appeared in 1960 and is still an excellent amp for the power level and size.

But in recent times ham gear has become more and more disposable. Parts, particularly custom parts with house numbers, become unobtanium in a few years, and manufacturer support is long gone.

Computer technology changes even faster. Consider how quickly a PC or OS goes from being current to almost worthless. Just ten years ago, Windows 98 was the latest-and-greatest, today you can't give away a Win98SE machine.

How long before there are computer-controlled rigs which are almost useless not because they are broken but because there are no compatible computers left to control them?

Think about why we replace computers these days. Most of the time it's not because the old one wore out, but because it won't run a new software version, or it can't be upgraded any more, or support for the OS is gone.

Think how many computers less than 25 years old have been discarded not because they were broken but because they were more than a few years old. Think how many dollars they cost new, and how fast they wound up in dumpsters.

Not only does a new computer cost us $$, it costs us time and effort to set up, get all the old stuff onto the new machine, and learn all over again how to do the same things we've always done. Running faster and faster just to stay in the same place.

Some hams don't want that for their shacks.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KB7AIL writes: "Pretty amazing how some hams are falling back on the 'it's how we have always done it' argument."

I don't see anyone saying that. What I see are folks saying "I like this" or "I like that"

KB7AIL: "It's a hobby, ya know?"

What, exactly, does that mean? To you and others?

It seems to me that one of the best things about Amateur Radio is the enormous range of choices we have. All one needs is a license, some resources for a rig and antenna, and the skill and knowledge to stay within Part 97's very broad limits. What other radio service allows ordinary folks to do so much on their own, without certification, approval, type-acceptance, inspection, etc.?

It's perfectly possible for a ham with a 1929 homebrew rig to have a QSO with a ham running a 2009 SDR, and neither one can tell from the signal characteristics what the other is running. Pretty slick, huh?

But note the subtitle of this thread: it asks if ham radio is "stuck in the past" because some hams prefer a tuning knob for frequency selection. If it's really "a hobby", why does that matter? As long as the signal is of acceptable quality, why shouldn't the tuning method be whatever the operator prefers?

Most Americans, and probably most English-speaking people using computers, still use keyboards whose top row of letters starts QWERTY. That layout dates from 1874, when it was chosen as a way to avoid jamming mechanical typewriters. Are computers "stuck in the past" because that layout is still in wide use?

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N3EVL posted on November 15, 2009:

"KE7UXE: "...A radio without a tuning knob is not a r-a-d-i-o. It is a c-o-m-p-u-t-e-r...." "

"Even if this were true, what is your point?"

There isn't any. This is just a rant.
..........
"I'm totally unable to come up with any justification for the often repeated 'radio + computer is not a radio" mantra on this and similar eHam threads. Can somebody offer some rational explanation of how this view came into being?"

It is difficult to use rationality to explain an irrational rant...except as a rationalization of an attempt to hide ignorance of technology.

Another may be that of self-importance as in "what I define is How It Is." Most such types got brainwashed when they were rather young, became self-centered, and refused to accept (or even dare) try anything new. Ergo, "new" takes on a pejorative declaration flavor. Something "new" CANNOT be good unless it accomplishes some desired goal such as higher TX output, ultra-low noise, etc., etc.

There is also the ultra-conservatism of some as they age. Unable to accept new things, they cling to what THEY know, what THEY experienced and thus say something is "the best" because THEY used it. Such is their security blanket, a safe haven away from "hostile" newness. To preserve their own egos they rant against more adventuresome folks unafraid to try something new, something not personally experienced.

73, Len AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY wrote on 15 November 2009:

"Most Americans, and probably most English-speaking people using computers, still use keyboards whose top row of letters starts QWERTY. That layout dates from 1874, when it was chosen as a way to avoid jamming mechanical typewriters. Are computers "stuck in the past" because that layout is still in wide use?"

My keyboards all start with "Tab" not "Q." That is, with the Western convention of reading left to right, the "first" being the most left position. :-)

Wrong analogy on "computers." You are confusing what WE have NOW with some date in the 1800s. According to some archaeologists, the first "computer" was a sort of rotary mechanical one combining a sundial-like thing with information on where they were in north African deserts, the 'they' being nomads. Slide rules might be considered the first 'computers' for the sake of plain number-crunching. IBM expanded on that, as did MIT and Bell Labs with electro-mechanical machines, IBM with their punch-card based sorter-collator with plugboards for programming, MIT with their "Whirlwind computer" and AT&T with a form of time-shared computer using automatic telephone switchgear. The first working-hardware concept for electronic computing was done at Iowa State in 1940 by John Atanasoff. The Atanasoff-Berry Computer ('ABC' for short) has been acknowledged by a US Federal Court as being the FIRST electronic computer.

A keyboard is merely an INPUT device for a modern PC. In most instances the first keyboards were devised by Teletype Corporation for their teleprinting terminals, all electromechanical. Their keyboard layout varied some over the years. I've not personally used any Teletype terminals for about 29 years and didn't memorize the key layout.

Touch-typing is a psycho-motor skill, NOT an intellectual one. In my Junior High School typing class around 1946 our mechanical typewriters had NO key markings. We drilled and drilled, all rote practice until the 'home' position on a 'qwerty' key layout was second nature, firmly engraved in our synapses. I can still 'cruise' at about 50 WPM, burst rate about 70 WPM, long after those early years.

The only thing about a 'qwerty' layout is that it is STANDARDIZED. Early on, it seemed to fit MOST folks who used mechanical typewriters. The only modern contender for a new standard was the Dvorak key layout, something that has lapsed into obscurity now.
For all the silly arguments/rationalizations about the 1800s and the 'qwerty' layout, we can go into dozens of STANDARDS just about modern PCs...such as a USB port versus a serial port even though all new PCs come with serial ports. To me, USB is a far superior choice.

To get really ridiculous, one can go into the emotional reasons for keeping the morse-vail code test all the way to 2007 for an AMATEUR radio license exam. The REST OF THE RADIO WORLD had dropped international morse code for communications purposes before 1999, the year that GMDSS went into effect. Yes, I am very well versed on the Rationalization Litany of the coders and their insistence on keeping the test in the USA but they just couldn't keep up with the rest of the radio world.

To complete the rationalization of 'old' v. 'new,' don't forget that the Morse-Vail Telegraph system pioneered landline and underwater communications BEFORE the 'qwerty' typewrite was adopted. Are you saying that the Morse-Vail code is 'superior' to all others or that it is 'better' than voice telephone? Remember that the Morse-Vail system went world-wide quickly. Should we have morse code for PC communications now? Just think, we wouldn't have to get any DSL or high-speed lines. We wouldn't worry about porn pictures being distributed because those images would take way too long receive. Communications would slowwwww down all over and life would go on at a very leisurely pace, verrrry slow.

Now, we can set up STANDARDS based on what SOME folks think is 'good.' If they excel in some technique, then they can lobby for THEIR ability to be the standard to judge all others. That will please the self-centered folks no end. They will be CHAMPION by 'test' results.

Or, standards can EVOLVE in the market or by the most-used or most all-around efficiency or by what the majority likes best. Languages evolved that way as did their written forms. Over time things CHANGE. You can adapt or you can cling forlornly to the old and trumpet "my way is always best" until (literally) blue in the face. I try to adapt. I'm still here.

AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WW3QB on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY writes: That's because broadcasting is channelized.....Because the frequency of every station that those TVs and radios are intended to receive is known beforehand, and very accurately controlled at both the transmitting and receiving end. There is no need or option for any sort of user adjustment other than channel selection.

That was also true in the 1960's and 1970's, but FM stereo receivers had tuning knobs (as did the UHF tuners on TVs). One way to tell if it was a high-end receiver was if the tuning knob felt smooth and heavy but still stopped where you wanted it to.

Now knobs aren't connected to RF circuits, just an internal microprocessor.

Knobs are nice, but the next generation will be happy to slide a mouse around to tune. BTW, my most modern rig is a Drake C-line. No choice but to use knobs.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KD7YVV on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Being visually impaired, the one thing that stands out
on this old Kenwood TS-430S is the tuning knob.
I tried an IC-7000 and ended up sending the thing back.
Not only was the display hard to read, it was too small.
So much for that, I think they called it a TFT display.
The S meter on the 430 is analog and easy to read.
The TS430 also does NOT have an LCD display.
While radios like the IC2100 can change the LCD background
from amber to green, if you're not looking at the display
straight on, the digits fade and become hard to read.
Now, back to the 430, MUCH easier on the eyes....
The blue digits on black make it much easier to read
the frequency. While all the knobs etc. are not backlit
on the 430, it's still a good radio.

--KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA

RE: What's Special About Keeping Everything OLD?

by K6LHA on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY griped on November 15, 2009:

"There was a time, not so long ago, when technological devices were what they appeared to be. There was a real effort to make things relatively simple and fixable."

...such as a Hammer and a Nail? :-)

...........

"The microwave oven I have today has a panel of buttons and a digital display. Ten power levels, timing from zero to 99 minutes 99 seconds in 1 second intervals, programmable start delay, built in clock, ability to defeat the internal light and/or rotating plate, and a bunch of other features. But it doesn't microwave any better than the first one."

Our 1999 Amana has several features you omitted, all to make microwave heating BETTER than before. Other than using 2.4 GHz in the ISM band, I'm not sure this is a meaningful analogy...if an analogy at all.

...........

"Everywhere you look, things require programming, setup, a computer connection, battery charger, etc. The actual function of a thing is becoming secondary to the bell-and-whistle features. *Everything* has a microprocessor or several in it!"

Oh, boo hoo...

When I use a hammer to put a nail into a piece of wood, I "program" myself to use a tape measure to spot where the nail should enter. My motor nerve synapses have been "preprogrammed" to apply (servo action) the correct velocity of the hammer head to drive the nail. No microprocessor needed.

On the other hand, If I have a numeric frequency datum in BCD that must drive the binary format input of an AD9851 to get the synthesized frequency I want, I've got two choices: Use about two dozen standardized ICs to build a format converter for seven decimal digits to binary; Use one PIC with one standard logic interface IC for the AD9851 serial input to do all the format conversion. Which one to choose? The first choice takes at least two PC prototype boards and lots of (still) available digital logic chips. The second choice takes a small corner of ONE PCB with lots of room left for other circuitry.

There is little power supply demand courtesy of advanced CMOS with both choices. Both choices can accept the whole range of decimal digit frequency input, limited only by the AD9851 range capability.

..........

"In many cases of such devices you don't actually control anything. What you do, really, is to request that the microprocessor do various things, and it figures out how to do them - or not."

Not an argument. Your 'analogy' is that of saying a mechanical coupling to a VFO "does all the work" in setting a frequency. That is false. An operator decision does the work. Whether it is a mechanical coupling to a variable capacitor or a microprocessor control of a DDS, the COUPLING is just a coupling.

.............

"In the sci-fi parody series "Red Dwarf", the hero,"

You are dating yourself far in the past. Probably you don't have the Sci-Fi channel on TV (or 'SyFy' as they changed their cable name). Since "Red Dwarf" ended, "Dr.Who" came back. Before that it was "Stargate SG-1," then "Stargate Atlantis," and now the new lost-in-space series "Stargate Universe" and fantasy "Sanctuary." ABC network has started a series remake of "V." Please try to keep up with the times.

.........

"For a very long time, most ham rigs have had very long useful lives. This was because they could be repaired, and because they were stand-alone devices."

For a very long time US amateur radio technology was (compared to the rest of the radio world) quite SIMPLE and the parts for making one were (relatively) CHEAP.

Amateur radio is a HOBBY and amateurs don't have a lot of disposable income for a non-commercial radio station.

..........

"A 50 year old S-line in good shape is perfectly usable on the air today - and there are a lot of them. This month's QST has an article on updating the 30L-1 amplifier - by replacing the old rectifiers, filter caps, and bleeder resistors."

If it is still "perfectly usable," why does it need "updating?"

...........

"But in recent times ham gear has become more and more disposable. Parts, particularly custom parts with house numbers, become unobtanium in a few years, and manufacturer support is long gone."

My Icom IC-R70, purchased in 1982, was bench-tested to manufacturer's specs and found to be good four years ago. My Icom RC-746Pro is still working today. Yes, both have 'house number' parts but so did our family Zenith 1939 console BC+2SW band receiver. That Zenith had unobtanium motor drive in 1946 (high gearing for SW tuning, had a reversible motor to get from one end of a band to another quickly). Some parts in my 1948 purchase of a National NC-57 5-band receiver were not obtainable a dozen years later.

............

"Computer technology changes even faster."

No. Old PARTS that go into old computers are still available. Witness the dramatic evolution from TTL to advanced CMOS. By comparison, miniscule power demand, dependent solely on logic operating rate. Want a 74LS00 quad 2-input NAND now? Use a 74HC00 or a 74AC00 as replacement...same pinout, same supply voltage, but much less propagation delay and less supply current demand. One measures supply current demand with a little formula (supplied on data sheets) containing power 'capacitance.' A 74AC00 will follow a 100 MHz square wave whereas the 74LS00 couldn't be trusted over 15 MHz.

CHANGE has been in many areas such as mass memory, clock speed, RAM access speed. Ten years ago it would be unthinkable to have a Flash Drive of 2 GB capacity, even moreso that it cost less than $20 new! Ten years ago it wasn't possible to get a consumer-market PC with 2 GHz clock rate, 1 GB RAM (over 100 MHz access rate) and 260 GB hard disk and have it play DVDs as well as read/write CDs. That eMachines desktop was purchased in early 2008 for $350 across-the-counter at Office Depot.

...........

"Consider how quickly a PC or OS goes from being current to almost worthless. Just ten years ago, Windows 98 was the latest-and-greatest, today you can't give away a Win98SE machine."

Consider how quickly an automobile goes from being current to almost worthless in just ten years. :-)

Welcome to the world of Bill Gates and Operating System marketing to make billions in profits.

............

"How long before there are computer-controlled rigs which are almost useless not because they are broken but because there are no compatible computers left to control them?"

Is your early-1970 built-from-junk 40m rig broken? Why are you griping about PCs?

................

"Think how many computers less than 25 years old have been discarded not because they were broken but because they were more than a few years old. Think how many dollars they cost new, and how fast they wound up in dumpsters."

Think how many IBM Selectrics less than 30 years old have been discarded, not because they were broken, but because the PC replaced them. Think about how many dollars they cost new. [my IBM Model 60 is still unsold...:-) ]

...............

"Not only does a new computer cost us $$, it costs us time and effort to set up, get all the old stuff onto the new machine, and learn all over again how to do the same things we've always done. Running faster and faster just to stay in the same place."

Oh boo hoo. My first PC, bought in the 1980s had a fantastic 100 MB hard disk, a 20 MHz clock rate CPU and a fantastic 1 MB worth of RAM. No numeric processor, had to buy that extra. No CD capability when purchased but connecting cables provided if I wanted to add it. Power-hungry 15" CRT display that couldn't handle fine detail.

Computers don't MOVE. Only laptops are portable but don't move by themselves. My present PC is 100 times faster in calculations, can multi-task many windows and seldom slows because of complex programming. It stores all of my 100 GB of files which are backed up on CDs (a relatively slow manual task). USB ports to support a PIC development system and other things plus a standard parallel port and serial port and 56K modem. In the 1980s 2400 Baud was tops with BBSs and the Internet would not go public until 1991.

............

"Some hams don't want that for their shacks."

Well then, let's all reshape US amateur radio to fit what "some hams don't want for their shacks." Or isn't it really that James Miccolis doesn't want it for his shack?

AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY previously wrote: That's because broadcasting is channelized.....Because the frequency of every station that those TVs and radios are intended to receive is known beforehand, and very accurately controlled at both the transmitting and receiving end."

WW3QB replies: "That was also true in the 1960's and 1970's, but FM stereo receivers had tuning knobs (as did the UHF tuners on TVs)."

That's because, back then, it was too expensive to make consumer-level TV and FM receivers that were channelized. The added cost, size and power consumption of a channelized FM or UHF TV tuner was simply too great (in the opinion of the designers and marketers) to be practical in the consumer market.

Consider that the FM band is 100 channels spaced 200 kHz apart and the design problem becomes pretty obvious.

Synthesizer chips and similar technology changed all that.

WW3QB: "Now knobs aren't connected to RF circuits, just an internal microprocessor."

In most rigs, anyway. There are a few exceptions, of course.

Point is, the operator-interface needs of a broadcast receiver are completely different from those of an HF amateur transceiver, because the operating environment is so different.

OTOH, my HW-2036, built from a kit in 1977, has no tuning knobs. Just three lever switches and a toggle, because in the 2 meter FM environment, that was enough.

WW3QB: "Knobs are nice, but the next generation will be happy to slide a mouse around to tune."

Maybe.

Consider that the Kachina 505DSP appeared more than 10 years ago, and the TenTec Pegasus shortly after. They were given lots of ink and ballyhooed as the next-big thing.

Neither lasted long in the market.

The Flex rigs seem to be making more of a dent, and offer more in the way of a full product line.

---

Sometimes it takes a while for something new to catch on.

Consider that way back in the 1950s a company called Central Electronics offered rigs (100V and 200V) and a linear amplifier (600L) which required no tuneup. With the all-hollow-state technology of more than 50 years ago. Even earlier (late 1940s), homebrew rigs with bandpass interstage couplers were described in the amateur press that required no tuneup except for the final amplifier output circuit.

But neither idea really caught on in amateur HF rigs until the 1980s or so.

WW3QB: "BTW, my most modern rig is a Drake C-line. No choice but to use knobs."

"Modern" may need some defining, though. A good C-line will outperform many newer rigs (see Sherwood Engineering receiver-comparison website).

Which raises the question of whether performance or features are more important.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N4RJ on November 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I'm happy with my knob just the way it is.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KE7UXE on November 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

No. Not a rant. A joke. I fear that Hams are about the least humorous folks around. Imagine a bunch of grown-ups taking seriously and getting steam up about tuning knobs. Tuning knobs for God's sake.

What is so special about tuning knobs? I like 'em. If you don't like them then then get a SDR and mouse your way to nirvana. Sheesh.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KE7UXE: "I fear that Hams are about the least humorous folks around."

I think the opposite is true. Of course, there are a few outliers who have no sense of humour at all, and get all upset over all kinds of things. Particularly when someone disagrees with them or shows them to be mistaken about something.

But your "it's not a real r-a-d-i-o" bit was hilarious.

KE7UXE: "Imagine a bunch of grown-ups taking seriously and getting steam up about tuning knobs. Tuning knobs for God's sake."

Actually it's not about tuning knobs at all. It's about control.

KE7UXE: "What is so special about tuning knobs? I like 'em. If you don't like them then then get a SDR and mouse your way to nirvana. Sheesh."

The thing that bothers some folks is the put-downs from others. Phrases like "stuck in the past". And the fear that tuning knobs will be declared "obsolete" and not be available in newer rigs.

That doesn't seem very likely, but some folks are concerned about it nonetheless.

And some folks just can't take a joke.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N3EVL on November 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KE7UXE: :...No. Not a rant. A joke..."

Wow, that's a relief. I was beginning to wonder what the heck you were smokin';)

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY said on November 16, 2009:

"Actually it's not about tuning knobs at all. It's about control."

Tuning knobs, gain adjusts, power on-off switches are ALL ABOUT "control"! :-)
..........
"The thing that bothers some folks is the put-downs from others. Phrases like "stuck in the past". And the fear that tuning knobs will be declared "obsolete" and not be available in newer rigs."
..........
"Stuck in the past" was a very real attitude of the old-timer uber-conservative hams who wished to hold on to their youthful experiences...and then try to shove it down everyone else's desires. Now THAT was "control" on their part.

I never detected any "fear" from others about "tuning knobs disappearing." The original article kick-off was about the LACK OF INGENUITY in a technically-driven endeavor. From there it morphed into STRANGE analogues about automobiles, planes, microwave ovens, etc., etc... :-)

The unavoidable fact in modern amateur radio is that newer equipment doesn't use mechanical coupling to frequency-controlling variable capacitors. Frequency control (note the word CONTROL in the proper form) is now done almost universally in the form of DDS or PLL basic architecture with wired coupling to the control subsystem. That is now a ready-made gear application to BOTH the fine-tuning HF rigs and to the 'channelized' VHF-UHF transceivers. KNOBS apply themselves as the mechanical interface to humans because humans (especially the old-timers) want them, partly because a rotary digital encoder is more practical to apply to a design and can be made with many increments per revolution.

Many in here have gone off on RANTS by comparing ONLY the thing being controlled: Computers (hack, spit), games (barf, loogie time), and push-button selection replacing "long-experienced delicate knob control by seasoned 'experts' who are federally licensed in a hobby activity. Hardly anyone has gone INTO the subsystem that does the actual control of a frequency, nothing about the basic DDS or PLL that generates an accurate frequency, one of thousands of individual frequencies. The vast majority don't seem to want to know, they just want to play with their knobs and pretend to be 'expert' radiomen. That's truly being "stuck in the past" like far back into the 1930s or over 70 years ago.
................
"And some folks just can't take a joke."

Some folks just don't know how to TELL a joke. :-)

AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WB6DGN on November 20, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

An analogy might be, "why drive a V-12 Jaguar when you can go to the same places with a 3 cylinder Fiat? It's all about quality, smoothness and class (not necessarily in that order).
Tom DGN

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WB6DGN on November 20, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

"That's because, back then, it was too expensive to make consumer-level TV and FM receivers that were channelized. The added cost, size and power consumption of a channelized FM or UHF TV tuner was simply too great (in the opinion of the designers and marketers) to be practical in the consumer market."

Well, sorta. It was because the frequency stability that was attainable at a reasonable cost was not adequate for a channelized design. There would have still had to be a "fine tuning" adjustment, so most manufacturers just incorporated both into one knob. Size and power consumption had nothing to do with it as they would not have been significantly different.
Tom DGN

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

WB6DGN: "It was because the frequency stability that was attainable at a reasonable cost was not adequate for a channelized design. There would have still had to be a "fine tuning" adjustment, so most manufacturers just incorporated both into one knob. Size and power consumption had nothing to do with it as they would not have been significantly different."

I think we're saying the same thing two different ways.

What I was trying to say was that, with the technology available back-when, making a channelized FM tuner would have required either a bank of crystals and a complex switch (very expensive and bulky), a PLL synthesizer made of discrete components (lots of parts, expensive and bulky) or some combination of the two. Same for a channelized UHF TV tuner. It was possible, just not inexpensive or easy. (The designs I was thinking of would eliminate the fine tuning control because their stability and accuracy would be such that it wouldn't be needed.)_

I think size and power were concerns, at least in the tube era. because of the large number of channels to be selected, and the mechanical switching that would be needed.

For example, consider an FM receiver. ~100 channels from 88 to 108 MHz, spaced every 200 kHz. How to eliminate the tuning control with tube technology?

1) Have a bank of 100 crystals, one for each channel, and a motor-driven switching system to select them. Or a system of relays. Power wouldn't be much more than the usual tunable oscillator, but the size and cost would be considerable.

2) Have two (or more) crystal oscillators whose outputs were mixed together to produce the required 100 channels. Reduces the number of crystals needed from 100 to 20 or less, but increases the number of tubes and other parts and the power. The switching gets more complicated, and the system has to reject spurious products.

3) Have a PLL type synthesizer using tubes, which would require several tube sections, lots of parts and complex switching.

All possible, and all done in non-consumer equipment many years ago (including ham gear). But a high price to pay to eliminate the tuning knob!

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

WB6DGN writes: "why drive a V-12 Jaguar when you can go to the same places with a 3 cylinder Fiat? It's all about quality, smoothness and class (not necessarily in that order)."

IOW, both get you there by the same basic method, but the journey in one is quite different from the journey in the other.

Of course Quality includes many factors, such as cost, speed, environmental impact, reliability, etc., even down to factors such as how easy it is to find a parking spot and how safe the vehicle will be when left alone in a public place.

Smoothness I would include with Quality under "comfort for the rider" and/or "ease/fun for the driver"

But what do you mean by "class" with regard to cars? Or rigs?

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by AC7CW on November 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

The knob is simply superior as a man-machine interface... tuning faster or slower is very natural and if it's weighted it can be given a fast spin that will make a big freq. change easy... it provides tactile feedback when you are fine tuning, returning to where you started the fine-tune or part way back to where you started is doable without using your eyes...

When radios tuned with an LC oscillator, they could have used a sliding thing and gears to vary the capacitor or simply made the slider part of the capacitor but they never did that because it was stupid compared to a knob...

Clicking on a signature on the waterfall and having the DSP do the autotuning is also fine but for manual scanning, a knob is far superior. Digital scanning is nuts, the radio finds a signal, or finds noise depending on a tedious adjustment of a level KNOB typically.. then it scans and stops and scans and stops and you have to be paying a lot of attention to the what the radio is doing.. with a knob, a quick scan takes almost no attention at all, it's a radio, it's about hearing, if you hear something, fine, if not, fine...

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY replied to WB6DGN on November 21, 2009:

"What I was trying to say was that, with the technology available back-when, making a channelized FM tuner would have required either a bank of crystals and a complex switch (very expensive and bulky), a PLL synthesizer made of discrete components (lots of parts, expensive and bulky) or some combination of the two. Same for a channelized UHF TV tuner. It was possible, just not inexpensive or easy. (The designs I was thinking of would eliminate the fine tuning control because their stability and accuracy would be such that it wouldn't be needed.)"

"I think size and power were concerns, at least in the tube era. because of the large number of channels to be selected, and the mechanical switching that would be needed."

"For example, consider an FM receiver. ~100 channels from 88 to 108 MHz, spaced every 200 kHz. How to eliminate the tuning control with tube technology?"

I'm wondering WHY an FM broadcast receiver MUST have a
synthesizer-type LO to tune? Even in a dense broadcast area, there aren't more than about 40 stations. The Capture Effect and AFC will 'grab' the tuning and hold it solid.

I'd rather consider a civil aviation band 'comm' transceiver of the very early 1960s period, 118 to 136 MHz at the old 50 KHz spacing. Tube type with only two banks of crystals, one mixer for the sum to get the carrier. Airborne and for single-engine general aviation market, market more limited than amateur radio. A big step up from the single-crystal limited selector. Man-made quartz crystal production was beginning to ramp up at the time.

RCA Commercial Aviation had one such design in the mid-1970s, both Comm and Nav (108 to 118 MHz) AND a 75 MHz Marker Beacon receiver AND the VOR decoder AND the ILS cross-needle indicator AND the OBS (Omni Bearing Selector) AND all controls, all in a small 3 1/2" instrument case. It could mount right on the instrument panel, worked from +12 or +28 VDC power bus in the aircraft. That was 33 years ago. Had RCA kept the Commercial Aviation sub-division they could have come up with a better unit by now.
............
"1) Have a bank of 100 crystals, one for each channel, and a motor-driven switching system to select them. Or a system of relays. Power wouldn't be much more than the usual tunable oscillator, but the size and cost would be considerable."

"Motor-driven?" No, a simple Ledex cylindrical electromagnet drive (which could servo for one rotary direction). Not exactly a 'motor.' A later 1960s ARINC bulletin showed a simple diode switching system (by either Bendix or Sperry, no reference handy now) with a biased diode in series with a crystal, the bias driven by the ARINC-standard frequency control lines. No moving parts near the crystal oscillator. That worked with either tube or transistor oscillators.

ARINC had been the pre-WWII civil aeronautical communications corporation in the USA (still are but in more limited function) that evolved into an industry-user-government standards group that developed standards for USA and international air carrier electronics.
.............
"2) Have two (or more) crystal oscillators whose outputs were mixed together to produce the required 100 channels. Reduces the number of crystals needed from 100 to 20 or less, but increases the number of tubes and other parts and the power. The switching gets more complicated, and the system has to reject spurious products."

That was being done in the 1950s. Piece of cake. To be sure, 'spurious products' weren't considered much by designers, one reason why I made a corporate paper on the subject while at RCA Corporation.

Multiple-conversion receivers were being done by both Collins Radio and RCA and Hewlett-Packard (for an eclectic group). The R-390 was designed back then and the lower frequency bands made it a multiple-conversion type with each band using a quartz crystal for a per-band LO.
..............
"3) Have a PLL type synthesizer using tubes, which would require several tube sections, lots of parts and complex switching."

WHY use vacuum tubes? Its only use for PRE-1970s designs. The AN/PRC-25 that was used in the Vietnam War had all semiconductors except for the final amplifier, a battery-filament tube. Very much a "channelized" transceiver. Its architecture was based more on civil aviation transceivers than any amateur HF-confined designs. The PRC-77 replaced the PA with a transistor but was otherwise the same radio. The Vietnam War period was 1965 to 1973.
..............
"All possible, and all done in non-consumer equipment many years ago (including ham gear). But a high price to pay to eliminate the tuning knob!"

I'm not sure why this insistence of "eliminating the tuning knob" is being decried. The Wadley Loop system of HF tuning became a darling of both SWL listeners and hams for a relatively inexpensive double/triple conversion receiver. The first LO used a frequency in the range of one crystal oscillator's harmonics for a quasi-PLL locking system. It was used by a couple of ham equipment makers; search "Barlow-Wadley" for a listing, several fan groups of that system on the 'Net. Began in the 1960s. SAME main tuning rate for all bands on up to 30 MHz. With the 2nd LO at low HF it would have been relatively easy at the time to make that "channelized" down to 10 Hz increments for a non-variable-capacitor kind of main tuning system.

As to "high price," the mass consumer electronics market is rather cut-throat on sell prices. As an example, in 1975 at RCA EASD in Van Nuys, CA, a visitor from the RCA "TV factory" in Indianapolis talked to Jim Hall (KD6JG) on use of various new technologies in new TV receivers. I sat in on that talk. When I asked why SAW filters were not used in TV sets 34 years ago to replace the individual L-C tuning of the IF (fair amount of labor cost with that alignment), the answer (at the time) was it "raised the sell price by 25 cents, even factoring the alignment time of L-C tuned IFs." :-) True quote.

My group had just finished a successful collision-avoidance R&D project that used those "brick-wall" SAW filters for adjacent-channel filtering. Excellent results. SAW filters were new back then. Today just about every NTSC, PAL, and ATSC TV receiver has one...along with "channelized" selection of frequency (remote control optional). So, about 34 years after our project time, the SAW filter has become just another component in a TV receiver.

My old Icom R-70 receiver (old at about a quarter century after purchase) used a Triple nested PLL for the 1st LO and can tune in 1000, 100, or 10 Hz steps. All solid-state. It has a connector for computer control or any sort of digital tuning system done by logic chip arrangement. It acts like a nice, smooth L-C oscillator done with a precision gear drive on any 1 MHz-increment band. When I bought mine I'd asked three different licensed amateurs at HRO in Van Nuys, CA, "how do their tunings work?" I got a big fat "duhhh" for that Icom and for a comparable Yaesu or Kenwood. One did xerocopy a few pages from an Icom R-70 Manual so that I could "figure it out for myself." [I didn't like his tone of voice but there weren't many off-the-shelf dealers nearby in L.A. at the time] I did figure it out. It also caused me to buy the Icom. Even today there aren't any true technical experts at HRO (and probably at AES too), just those that have memorized those product company sales brochures. That isn't technical expertise, just ordinary salesmanship. The R-70 is still working to specifications nearly a quarter century later.

The market for FM broadcast receivers is NOT great in the consumer electronics group. It may have been four decades ago but now they are part of the expensive, over-priced "home theater" products. When my wife was scheduled for a few days in the hospital, she bought a little dongle FM receiver and MP3 player to use with her noise-reduction earphones. The FM part tunes via teeny push-button, frequency visible on a teeny LCD screen. Bulk size is about a cubic inch. Sound is excellent for FM and MP3. Cost less than $30. There's no ROOM on that little thing for a "tuning knob." :-)

I prefer a manual tuning knob. However, I'm NOT dead-set against any OTHER system to do manual tuning. I'm open to suggestions and demonstrations. I am of closed mind when someone demands holding fast to older technology on the (not) sage advice of "new is not necessarily good." The days of the "one-tube regenerative" (with plug-in coils) is OVER, performance-wise. NEW things CAN be better. I'd like to see some INNOVATION in amateur radio other than making complex copies of existing commercial designs that require 3 to 4 separate articles in QEX.

AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

AC7CW writes: "When radios tuned with an LC oscillator, they could have used a sliding thing and gears to vary the capacitor or simply made the slider part of the capacitor but they never did that because it was stupid compared to a knob..."

They could have done the slider thing and varied the inductance, too. Some very early receivers did just that with loose couplers and such.

There were other variations tried, such as early receivers with thumbwheel-type knobs, the Millen Vari-Arm VFO, and Ross Hull's receiver in a 1930s QST that had the tuning knob on the side of the cabinet rather than the front.

None of those alternatives caught on; they were simply not as user-friendly.

AC7CW: "Clicking on a signature on the waterfall and having the DSP do the autotuning is also fine but for manual scanning, a knob is far superior."

I think the major point is that a lot of the operating hams do, particularly on HF/MF, involves manually finding signals that are not on a preordained frequency. This is different from almost every other radio service.

"with a knob, a quick scan takes almost no attention at all, it's a radio, it's about hearing, if you hear something, fine, if not, fine."

Yup. One could say that the operator-rig feedback loop is a lot quicker to resolve.

Good points all. What's really great is that we have choices now. And yet, with all those choices, knobs for tuning continue to dominate most ham rigs because they're what hams want.

Hams who actually *operate*, anyway.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N3EVL on November 23, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY: "...What's really great is that we have choices now. And yet, with all those choices, knobs for tuning continue to dominate most ham rigs because they're what hams want...Hams who actually *operate*, anyway. "

That's funny - only one of my three HF rigs has a tuning knob (or any knobs for that matter), yet I *operate* all three of them. Maybe I'm just imagining I'm *operating* - yeah that must be it...;)

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 23, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Charles P. Cohen (VA7CPC) wrote on November 10, 2009:

"That little knob is perfectly adequate in practice. So why does anyone care about how large it is?"

It's probably a "male thing." :-)

[don't forget that the overwhelming majority of licensed USA amateur radio hobbyists are MALE]
..........
"I'm old enough to remember when a rig's tuning knob was geared down, and the gears turned a variable capacitor, and that capacitor controlled the frequency of an LC oscillator. And in those days, the size of the tuning knob did matter -- a larger knob allowed finer tuning increments,
while still allowing a high change of frequency per knob rotation. And a weighted knob, with low-friction gears, was really nice -- you could use it to spin quickly across a band, and still have fine tuning increments when it stopped. But that was then, and this is now."

Charles, I agree with the above. With a chronological experience going back rather far, plus a view of lots of different designs in many radio services, I'd like to add some points:

1. The first big break in tune-ability was the ganged variable capacitor, an advantage first for the TRF receiver, then the superheterodyne. Made tuning much, much easier compared to the separate-stage individual tuning that had to be done previously. [circa late 1920s]

2. First commercial receiver design using high gear-ratios for tuning was probably the National Radio "HRO" series, circa 1930s on into the 1960s. This did away with the bandswitch, replacing it with a "coil drawer" to make the tuning range of each band (one drawer per band) roughly the same. It had little interest but was stubbornly kept in production by National for a long time with several improvements. The coil-drawer thing wasn't a favorite, neither was having to read a chart to connect a frequency to the (nice) numeric-indicator dial NOT marked in frequency.

3. Beginnings of numerically-linear tuning was a third Big Break with the frequency-linear VFO from Collins Radio and their "PTO" thing (Permeability Tuning Oscillator). Using a variable inductor instead of a variable capacitor allowed a simpler lead-screw-moved powdered iron slug inside a variable-pitch-winding cylindrical coil form. Collins Radio tended to maximize their designs mechanically with variable-inductor tuning in as many stages as possible in the late 1940s up to 1970 for HF and below. The PTO went on to become the icon for all subsequent VFO designs in tuning span (500 KHz to 1 MHz) with Frequency Linearity relative to dial positioning. Compared to all-mechanical dials and non-precision, non-linear tuning rates, frequency-linearity was a natural for arousing wide interest in new ways to tune...and with more precision than before. Prior to the combination of crystal-controlled VFO and PTO, one would be lucky to get tuning indication accuracy of +/- 0.1 percent.

As a sidebar, it WAS possible to design and build linear-frequency tuning with variable capacitors at the time of the PTO. Publicity had made an almost mythological reverence for the "PTO" above all others. The sub-contracted variable-capacitance VFO (or "LMO" as Heath tried to make their own legend) in their SB series of HF receivers and transmitters was every bit as good as the PTO from Collins and probably cost less to produce. [Collins may have tried some patent protection or licensing on variable-inductor tuning...unknown] Going for a linear-frequency VFO requires a LARGE capital investment in labor in engineering that must be amortized through sell prices to turn a profit. Collins had numerous government contracts to do so, Heath did not and their sub-contracted LMO unit was an economic compromise. It was a technical equal to the Collins PTO.

4. After the end of WWII and the availability of man-grown quartz ingots, crystal-control of oscillators was a sort of "in-betweener" of VFOs and synthesizers. It promised greater frequency stability plus equal tuning rate on all selected bands.

5. Frequency synthesizers are, to me, the equivalent to the transistor in active device circuits...a quantum-leap in versatility as well as frequency stability. Other than mechanical coupling of manual-tuning device to a rotary encoder, there are NO other mechanical constraints on physical placement within a radio, just wires. Frequency display can be anything, no mechanical dial (and parts/labor costly mechanical structures) needed...and the accuracy is dependent solely on a single quartz crystal reference frequency for stability. Three decades ago the frequency synthesizer could be considered "the ultimate VFO."
...........
In general, middle-aged (and older) radio amateurs have an almost extraordinary technological conservatism. Oh, they will be all keen on techno "bling" and use advertising phrases as if they knew ALL about how something works. Most, unfortunately, don't.

A mechanical tuning system, or one relying mostly on mechanical construction can be easy to "learn." Everything is out in the open to see, touch, emulate. Up to (roughly) the 1960s, the homebrewer of radios HAD to be more machinist than electro-technologist. The "muscle-car" analogy held forth and the complex mechanical structures brewed up nicely were greatly admired. Not so with more arcane electronics of a newer age. Circuit nicety would be intangible since no human senses (without instruments) could examine something and intuitively understand "how it worked."

Take a simple PLL as an example, such as one used for the first LO of an HF receiver. Some major design considerations are:

1. Frequency change ratio is limited by the square-root of the VFO controlling variable-capacity diodes. For a 1.5:1 frequency change, lowest to highest, of the VFO, the varicaps have to have at least a 2.25:1 capacity change ratio. Since varicaps operate in reverse-bias mode, forward bias is limited by the VFO circuit voltage swing; there are ways around that such as back-to-back varicaps but the total capacitance change ratio must hold.

2. Loop filter time characteristics must be picked for the period of a Phase-Frequency Detector reference frequency input. That applies to both feedback voltage amplitude as well as time response characteristics. Exceed requirements and the frequency-control servo system either over-shoots too much or it never reaches the right frequency. Fortunately, there are free algebraic formulas available but few take advantage of those (formulas are just a tiny bit more complicated than the rocket-science of Ohm's Law of Resistance). :-)

3. Digital divider input rate versus number of integer divisions and reference frequency at the output. The divider must be variable for more than one frequency. Time response to the highest input frequency all the way through a divider applies and cannot operate properly unless the overall divider is faster than the input period. If the divider is too slow, it will skip some cycles and never hold frequency properly.

Even if the whole PLL lays out on a simple 2" x 3" PCB, nothing of its physical shape is intuitive. It is just a circuit board with some chips and parts on it. A mechanically-driven variable capacitor oscillator can be seen immediately with some understanding...similar systems have been published in old, old issues of ham periodicals. Mechanics of it are intuitive. Hidden microscopic connections of a solid-state PLL are not.

It boils down to the knowledge and understanding of the hobbyist. It is natural human reaction to shun the new. Strange things are anathema, especially to those who have been in a hobby a long time. They won't appreciate it unless they get INTO making one on their own, to try it out and compare it to the way they did it before.

Many years ago I tried out the first model of the Apple Computer "Macintosh." To me, as an Apple ][+ owner, programmer, and quite used to "command line input" on big and little computers, the GUI (Graphical User Interface) concept was intuitive to USE. Especially with the Xerox PARC "mouse." It was a natural, far better than the old command-line input system. Several in that store at the time were noted as being AGAINST the whole GUI-and-mouse concept, thought it somehow "violated" the "natural order" of computer use. Some of those offended individuals were younger than I and several used their credentialism to state how "good they were." :-) As an addendum, Xerox executives laughed at the mouse concept and rejected it along with the GUI. Apple used it to success and today the GUI-and-mouse system is very much a standard for ALL PCs, not just Apple.
............
"What would be wrong with a tuning joystick ? Push the joystick up, the frequency rises. Push it up further, the frequency rises faster.
Or what about a pressure-sensitive tuning paddle ? Press down, and the frequency drops. Press down harder, and the frequency drops faster.
Or what about two pressure-sensitive tuning pads ? The bottom one lowers frequency, the top one raises it. And the rate of frequency change would be proportional to the pressure.
Or what about a tuning knob that doesn't move? Twist to the left, the frequency drops. Twist to the right, the frequency rises. The rate of frequency change would be torque-sensitive."

Mention "joysticks" and too many will connect it to GAMES on computers. According to old CW (Conventional Wisdom), GAMES are for kids. You are talking to "professional amateurs" here who have used tuning knobs since the birth of radio. :-) The KNOW what is good for everyone else because what they do is the model for all others. <shrug>
.............
"But if a transceiver already has a bandscope display, perhaps it should have a touch sensitive
screen as well -- and we could "point and click" without involving a computer."

I've had "expert" radio men tell me that any sort of spectrum display is BAD. They don't like it, period. If they haven't used a good spectral display (or "bandscope") then nobody should. :-) I would think that would have possibilities, perhaps with a slightly different form. My IC-746Pro has one but the vertical amplitude scale is too small for my taste.
..............
"I haven't been around ham radio to know how many of these options have been tried. And it might be that each one would fail in the marketplace, because we all know that a transceiver front panel should be dominated by one really big knob, unique amid the crowded, as-small-as-possible
buttons and switches."

N2EY replied recently that "side-mounted tuning knobs" were used in a 1930s radio design and that "they never caught on in the marketplace." I say that is wrong based on seeing - and using a few - radios that had side-mounted tuning knobs in the 1960s and their use in modern radios as advertised in the latest HRO and AES catalogs (got both a couple weeks ago). I think a 70-year "trial period to catch on" is long enough. <shrug>
..............
"Aren't we supposed to have a spirit of ingenuity and experimentation? Why are we tied to something that stopped making sense thirty years ago, when we switched from LC circuits to synthesizers?"

That is a result of entrenched uber-conservatism about a radio hobby (that has a narrow focus to only HF operation). "You can't teach old dogs new tricks." Rather than improve their own knowledge these "old dogs" STAY with what is familiar and safe, secure. I look at it like a survival thing since they must realize they don't have that much time left. Those that couldn't be in the REAL radio pioneering time before WWII seem to want (overmuch) to BE there. They can't, but they seemingly WANT to.

The REAL amateur radio experimentation is going on largely OFF-shore. At that it is mostly done by manufacturers making some profit from ready-made goods bought ready-to-go. But, the market share for that target is slowly decreasing and has been for years...witness the demise of Ham Radio magazine, then 73, almost at CQ, all independent publishers dependent on advertisers. Designers and manufacturers are concentrating more on VHF and upwards. Newcomrs to USA amateur radio generally enter through the Technician class and STAY there, content with their (hack, spit) "channelized" handhelds on VHF and up. Too many old-timers (most of them younger than I - haaaaa!) decry these newcomers as not being the same as they were many years ago. Sigh. Kind of an old story. I'm tired of all those "old dogs" whining away at some moon only they can see.

Pity that, given the regulations and environment to actually experiment and innovate, so many are glued, cemented firmly into this extreme veneration of OLD things.

73, Len AF6AY (two years older than the FCC) :-)

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 23, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N3EVL: "only one of my three HF rigs has a tuning knob (or any knobs for that matter), yet I *operate* all three of them. Maybe I'm just imagining I'm *operating* - yeah that must be it...;)"

If you're on the amateur bands with the rig and making QSOs with it, and you're the control operator, you're operating, knobs or no knobs.

Sorry if I wasn't clear about that.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KL7IPV on November 23, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

One of the radios I really loved is the Hammarlund HQ receiver series with the big knobs. I felt more in control when I could turn a knob. It is like being connected to ham radio. Call me old fashioned and I am, but I also like the program, "Ham Radio Deluxe". I like it so much I bought a Griffin Power Mate knob to control some functions on my IC-706MkIIG. It works for me and I am happy. So? Is that bad?
73,
Frank

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KD0HVX on November 24, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

W2MC,

You serious about getting rid of your Pegasus? I am the president of a University Amateur Radio Club and we are looking for a SDR rig. Let me know if you want at KD0HVX@gmail.com.

Thanks!
73,
-Jerrad

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 24, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KL7IPV wrote on November 23, 2009:

"One of the radios I really loved is the Hammarlund HQ receiver series with the big knobs. I felt more in control when I could turn a knob. It is like being connected to ham radio. Call me old fashioned and I am, but I also like the program, "Ham Radio Deluxe". I like it so much I bought a Griffin Power Mate knob to control some functions on my IC-706MkIIG. It works for me and I am happy. So? Is that bad?"

I don't think it is "bad." I say, if it works for you, then it works for you. I'm glad you feel satisfied. I think individuals engaged in a hobby SHOULD be satisfied with what they, themselves do.

What irks me is some of these "experts" who imply they "know everything about operating" but are really only blabbing about what THEY like. Amateur radio activity is appeals to the individual, whether they are federally licensed or not. I don't say that with any implication that I "know everybody and what they do," just from a great summary of the different things people say in forums, newsgroups, and publications.

But, there are enough Raddio Kops who like to type and say we should all do what THEY say. They don't realize that they are actively stifling innovation by those self-appointed 'chieftan/boss' attitudes.

'Radio' started in 1896 with two separate public demonstrations (in Italy and Russia) that wireless communications is possible. So 'radio' is only 113 years in existance. The radios of today, a century ago, three centuries ago, etc., are a far cry from what they were in 1900. Invention, innovation, and increase in theory of electronics has enabled a huge increase in both technology and operating modes.

Some in here are content with "working DX on HF with CW." I say fine for them. Trouble is, so many of that interest genre want to get in our face and play dill-sergeant and tell us WE MUST DO THE SAME. "We" don't have to. Those folks aren't boss even though they want to boss others.

Your computer program (?) to run a transceiver from a common PC is one. If we HAD to act like these purists want to dictate, to insist that a radio MUST be "stand alone" is just plain stifling the opportunity to expand everyone's horizons in both technology and operating practices.

The same insistence to "do things the old way" can apply to the first mode in radio, OOK CW. If radios are to be stand-alone, then the morsemen MUST NOT use any electronic (especially solid-state) enhancements, memories, pre-recorded CW phrases or the alike. If radios are to be stand-alone then ALL the keys must be "straight" keys with ONLY mechanical mechanisms. :-)

That also reflects in USA radio regulations on the amateur radio service. The forceful keep-it-in-the-old-way-forever crowd has held innovation and inevention in amateur radio BACK for decades. PSK-31 may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it has a sizeable fan base. It was innovated in the UK and tested in a lot European countries before being published in the USA. Peter Martinez, G3PLX, came up with that mode specifically for amateur radio. It is clever and elegant in general simplicity.

That holds with my observation that NEW things, both in operating and technology are being tried OFF-shore.
With nearly three-quarters of a million amateur licenses granted in the USA and a supposed advanced technological base in electronics, all those 'experts' in the USA amateur community CAN'T come up with new things? Oh, they do, but NOT for amateur radio. I know because I worked in the far-larger OTHER radio fields for half a century.

We SHOULD have a wealth of NEW ways to do things, to try them out and personally see if they are better. That doesn't sit well with the self-appointed 'bosses' of USA amateur radio. Everything should be the way THEY do it they imply (if not overtly saying so).

I'm not intending to besmirch all those who personally WANT to do it like it was done before WWII. If they want to, fine. Me, I'll just be an individualist and try some new things...and adopt them if *I* like them.

I think that this general idea is what the kick-off was saying in this article. It was NOT some blast at just "tuning knobs are bad." That was used as an example. Me, I happen to LIKE tuning knobs. I'm just not going to scoff at some other means to control frequency as "stupid" or other nasty names.

73, Len AF6AY (who got his first amateur license at 74)

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by WN9V on November 24, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Sometimes an interface is better than we know. It is instructive to experience an alternative before we disparage the conventional knob.

Remember the Swan/Cubic Astro 150? A high quality HF transceiver with synthesizer frequency control. The knob was a control that caused frequency to go up or down at a rate proportional to the amount that the knob was turned off of a neutral point. The knob traveled only a quarter turn clockwise and counterclockwise from the neutral point.

What the system lacked was the ability to link together the knob position and the frequency. If you were tuning down the band and wanted reverse your tuning direction to hear a station that you passed up, Heaven help you.

In this situation here is what we are used to: With a conventional knob on a VFO or PTO, you could backtrack with some confidence and you knew where to stop, even if the signal had gone silent, you knew how and where to stop and wait for the signal to reappear.

Attempting the same backtracking on the Astro necessitated deceleration, reversing, acceleration and a keen sense of both speed and timing to find the passed-over station. If the designer had simply stuck with a constant Hertz per second tuning rate, operation would have been easier.

Fortunately the Astro's mobile microphone had an up and down button that stepped the frequency by (if I remember right) hundred Hertz jumps.

The equipment reviewer in QST was not enthusiastic about the Astro 150 tuning arrangement. The rig was marketed at about 900 bucks which was about the price of a top of the line Kenwood or Yaesu. I am convinced that the tuning arrangement killed the rig.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 25, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

WN9V: Good points! I'd forgotten about the Astro.

I think a big part of the problem is that some designs don't follow the way rigs are actually used.

For example, back in the 1950s/60s there began to appear HF rigs that used a row of selector knobs/switches rather than a single tuning knob. There was a knob for tens of MHz, MHz, hundreds of kHz, etc, down to kHz or even finer. The PRC-104 and other military radios had systems like that; as did ham gear like the B&W 6100 transmitter, and even homebrew such as W3QLV's synthesized VFO (QST Dec 1964).

That sort of tuning arrangement is great if you know the exact QRG you want. Just set the switches and there you are. But it's no fun and quite inferior for simply looking around a band. That high-priced commercial/military radios did it that way doesn't make it better if you don't use the set the same way.

The Astro had the same problem: Great if you know the frequency you want, terrible if you don't.

The big problem is that the designers have to understand how the rig will actually be used, and not let their egos get in the way.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KD7YVV on November 25, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Still though, when you get right down to it,
tuning with a physical knob does have its advantages.
Remember the older cars? You could fix them yourself.
Same with the older radios if you had the knowledge.
Nowadays, you need a computer to tell you what's wrong.
Case in point, my wife and I have a 2001 Chevy Malibu.
One time I was filling the thing with gas, and forgot
to put the gas cap back on. Needless to say, I did
discover it a few blocks later, but by then, the
trouble light came on. I took the car down to a local
auto shop, they let me use their diagnostic machine
to reset the trouble light. Meanwhile, I'm thinking
that it might be something serious. So, whatever happened
to SIMPLE? I remember my first stereo as a kid at 12.
Volume, Tuning, AM, FM, AFC, TONE (Bass--Treble).
Simple radio. Nowadays, just about everything is driven
by some form of software or firmware.
This is why I like this old Kenwood 430S, it's a simple
radio. Each knob, switch and button is clearly
labeled describing its function.
Sure, there are a lot more features etc. but do I
really need to tune a station so that I'm on its
exact frequency with an accuracy of 15 digits past
the decimal point? If you think about it, will it
REALLY make a difference? Sure, all the new stuff is
fun to play with, and a lot of innovation and
advancements have been made over the years but for
all the new stuff that's out there, there's something
heartwarming about firing up an old rig.
I watched a documentary on Cuba, and they still use
a lot of stuff from the 1950's. Is newer better?
At times it can be, but, whatever happened to SIMPLE?

--KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 25, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KD7YVV writes: "Still though, when you get right down to it, tuning with a physical knob does have its advantages."

Yes, it does.

KD7YVV: "Remember the older cars? You could fix them yourself. Same with the older radios if you had the knowledge. Nowadays, you need a computer to tell you what's wrong."

Sometimes. When the check-system light came on in my 2001 Honda Odyssey, I borrowed a system-code reader from a friend and discovered what it was. The error code was found on the internet, and the reader let me reset the code so I could see if it was a one-time thing or a continuing problem. The code-reader cost less than $60, which won't buy many good wrenches these days.

Of course fixing it is another matter if it's something complex, like the transmission. But the reader put me in a lot better position with the shop, because I could tell them the exact code.

There are inexpensive code-readers for lots of cars.

KD7YVV:"whatever happened to SIMPLE?"

Still around if you know where to look.

Check out the rigs and products by Elecraft:

www.elecraft.com

Relatively simple, you can build and fix them yourself, and American engineered and made. Manuals are free-for-the-download, too. High performance, low price for what you get, and full-featured.

KD7YVV: "This is why I like this old Kenwood 430S, it's a simple
radio. Each knob, switch and button is clearly
labeled describing its function.
Sure, there are a lot more features etc. but do I
really need to tune a station so that I'm on its
exact frequency with an accuracy of 15 digits past
the decimal point? If you think about it, will it
REALLY make a difference?"

Depends on what kind of operating you're doing. For most uses, the answer is no.

That's what's great about HF - and why some folks have such a hard time with it. The antenna system and operator skills are much more important than most of the technology used. A skilled operator with a decent antenna and rig will be able to do just fine.

KD7YVV: "Sure, all the new stuff is
fun to play with, and a lot of innovation and
advancements have been made over the years but for
all the new stuff that's out there, there's something
heartwarming about firing up an old rig."

In many cases a good older rig will outperform or match a newer one. Features can't replace a good antenna nor basic radio performance.

KD7YVV: "I watched a documentary on Cuba, and they still use a lot of stuff from the 1950's."

Usually because they have no choice. But their ingenuity is excellent. Google "islander transceiver" for an example.

KD7YVV: "Is newer better?
At times it can be, but, whatever happened to SIMPLE?"

Still around; you just have to know where to look. The Testimony of Simplicity is everywhere - but it doesn't stick out.

I think what bothers a lot of folks isn't new stuff, nor innovation, but the blind assumption/implication by some that older/simpler is automatically bad.

When you see phrases like "stuck in the past", for example.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KD7YVV on November 25, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Well, as for the phrase stuck in the past....
I look to the past for experience, but if I'm
stuck in the past, so be it. :)
Then again, I'm a curmudgeonly old fart (GET OFF MY LAWN!)
who likes things simple.
There's nothing wrong with the newer technology and I
have nothing against it, but I'm finding the older I
get, the more I prefer things that are familiar.

--KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 25, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

To KD7YVV:

Will I'm all for new technology, and have often invested in it, there's something to be said for the tried-and-true.

Part of the wisdom that comes with experience (not age - experience) is that not everything "new" is automatically better, particularly when all the costs are considered. Besides the dollar cost, there's the various learning curves.

For example, when Vista came out, I did some research and decided to stay with XP until they got the bugs worked out. Turned out Vista had so many bugs it's soon to be an orphan. So many users had problems with Vista that we began seeing systems that could be "downgraded" back to XP! At the local Microcenter, refurb XP systems have been the hot item for a long time.

Microsoft is now pushing Seven, which is a very good OS (I assembled a machine to run the free beta version of Seven some months back).

But Seven requires considerably more of everything than XP. Depending on what someone uses their computer for, it may not be worth all the hassle and cost of making the jump. Time and effort are costs, just like dollars.

There's also the fact that a lot of "new" things are really old things repackaged with new features, but which don't really do the basic function any better.

For example, a couple of years ago the SteppIr verticals made a bit of a splash. No traps, stubs, or other methods of changing the electrical length of the radiator. Instead, the SteppIr verticals mechanically change the length of the radiator, so the antenna will resonate anywhere in its design range. And it's remote controlled.

New? Innovative? Sure. Expensive? That too!

But a SteppIr vertical doesn't radiate or receive RF any better than any other quarter-wave vertical. My old made-from-scraps-of-tubing-wood-and-wire 20 meter vertical at the former QTH on RadioTelegraph Hill did just as good a job as a 20 meter antenna. Replacing it with a SteppIr would not get me even one more dB of RF, coming or going.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 25, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Posted By KD7YVV on 25 November 2007:

"Still though, when you get right down to it, tuning with a physical knob does have its advantages. Remember the older cars? You could fix them yourself. Same with the older radios if you had the knowledge. My ICOM IC-R70 was purchased in early 1980s, new, was still working to specifications four years ago. The only thing that has been 'fixed' on it was cleaning up hairball mess one of our cats did partially on the front panel."

I will go along on the simplicity factor, but that simplicity just fits my personal desires and has been so since 1949 and purchasing a new National NC-57 'communications receiver.' Looked and felt to me at the time as 'very professional.' Its performance can only be described as a POS for use. For $99 list price it was all I could afford as a teenager, splurging all of the cash portion of a prize won in a model airplane contest. Despite the professional-looking heavy steel case, it was just a standard 1 RF stage, 2 IF stages single conversion receiver.
............
"Case in point, my wife and I have a 2001 Chevy Malibu. One time I was filling the thing with gas, and forgot to put the gas cap back on. Needless to say, I did discover it a few blocks later, but by then, the trouble light came on. I took the car down to a local auto shop, they let me use their diagnostic machine to reset the trouble light. Meanwhile, I'm thinking that it might be something serious. So, whatever happened to SIMPLE?"

Since my wife and I have a 2005 Chevy Malibu MAXX (the hatch-back variant), I can get some form of commiseration. I can't understand how Chevy put some electrical connection to the gas tank cap. Ours doesn't. There's just a flexible plastic cap retainer in the 2005, long enough to be visible from the driver's position through the right side mirror if the cap isn't attached. I've never had such an experience since my 1982 personal Chevy Camaro, also designed with a designed-in automotive computer system.

That built-in computer system on the 2005 Malibu has some very nice bells and whistles through the 'DIC' or Driver Information Center display. Two separate mileage gas consumption sub-computations, great for long-distance driving. Gas tank gauge is surprisingly accurate, perhaps the first such gauge I've found in driving a 1939 Ford through our old car, a 1992 Chevy Cavalier wagon. On a trip from southern California to southern Wisconsin and back in the Fall of 2005, the manual gas consumption determined by receipts (printed automatically) was 28.6 MPG with most of the driving done by me. The on-board DIC said it was 28.4 MPG (it can sense a full tank filling by itself). It also does an approximation of when the oil should be changed...although that is not "accurate" it does serve as a good reminder.

The main purpose of the on-board computer is to make carburation the most efficient. At least on the highway. Since the 2005 MAXX "feels" like it wants to go fast, I tend to push the highway speed above posted maximums but manually avoid over-taking others who want to go faster. My "wife- computer" is a separate system to warns me repeatedly. :-) If she is driving, the "husband-computer" is the sensor although my wife loves using Cruise Control (I don't).

Once a good multiple-input computer is IN the car, it serves as a base for all the bells-and-whistles features, such as 'door ajar' warnings (includes the rear hatch), information on the AM-FM radio and CD player, etc., etc. All those extra features are nice to have but they don't NEED to be there, just the carburation control. But, they ARE and we take advantage of them.
..............
"I remember my first stereo as a kid at 12. Volume, Tuning, AM, FM, AFC, TONE (Bass--Treble).
Simple radio. Nowadays, just about everything is driven by some form of software or firmware.

When my wife and I were kids, we didn't have 'stereo.' The 'All-American Five' for AM BC band was good enough in our town. FM BC had started but the stereo broadcasting regulations were not yet firm. We had to have 'LP' records for stereo.

But, lets forget cars and broadcast radio. I'll compare my 'old' R-70 with my 'new' IC-746Pro, both designed and made by Icom. Both perform very well for reception on LF through all of HF using the same antenna. The early 1980s R-70 has a fair number of features, including "RIT" (which comes in only one color). Both can be tuned under PC control (or any other digital input from peripherals) even though the R-70 external tuning control was not to the modern convention. I don't know if the R-71 or R-75 follow-ons were/are so standardized.

The biggest difference between those two receivers is DSP of the final IF for demodulation. The R-70 uses conventional hardware crystal filters for selectivity. In addition, the audio lowpass filtering is run through a separate DSP. For transmitting the outgoing audio goes through a separate, selectable audio lowpass filter on the 746Pro. Modulation on the 746Pro is also done by DSP and there is an additional monitoring of the RF output with both control and indicator, plus monitoring of RF output connection VSWR to protect the finals. An annoying 'feature' to me is the 746Pro's RF output shut-down if one tries to tune outside the USA HF-VHF frequency limits. Users need not worry about operating out-of-band since the inboard computer won't let them. That inboard computer's ROM has to be changed if USA regulations change.

In reality, I don't personally need ALL those features in the 746Pro. To engage them requires the elaborate menu-submenu-subsubmenu which has become common on newer HF transceivers. To make controls "simple" would require a front panel probably four times the size of the present one. I use the frequency memory and menu section for a very few nets; I'm not a DX-chaser nor do I want to operate on every ham band from MF to light.
............
"This is why I like this old Kenwood 430S, it's a simple radio. Each knob, switch and button is clearly labeled describing its function. Sure, there are a lot more features etc. but do I
really need to tune a station so that I'm on its exact frequency with an accuracy of 15 digits past the decimal point?"

To answer the last question, only if your enter the annual contest of "guess our (official) carrier frequency" of the League. :-) [AS IF the ARRL can measure their own frequency that well and I doubt if anyone there has ever done an Allen Variance to keep it honest...:-) ]

"15 digits past the decimal point?"? :-) In a half century of being IN the electronics industry, I can't ever remember any accuracy to that order which would be 1 Part per Trillion. NIST/NBS yes, a few metrology industries, yes. :-)
...............
"Is newer better? At times it can be, but, whatever happened to SIMPLE?"

The All-American Five was around for about a half century. About as simple as can be for AM voice, a tuning control, a volume/on-off control. That was it. It couldn't do much in the way of performance, didn't need to with KW+ local transmitters and listeners wanting to tune in only one or two local favorites. <shrug> Pretty much the same with FM BC receivers, although some Left-Right audio controls might be added.

In the half century since the end of WWII we've all been exposed to ADVERTISING from a lot of makers of everything. In radios, the manufacturers paid for ads to get everyone to buy the "latest" of everything, the everything having subtle additions of various "features" to convince all of us that they are "better" than the other makers. Whether or not those features ARE "better" depends on how deep one has been brainwashed. I'm not kidding. Brainwashed. Constant, unremitting washing of our gray cells until enough will automatically select the brand we THINK we want. The whole purpose is To Move Product and MAKE A PROFIT. Businesses do that sort of thing. :-)

DZkit in Loveland, Colorado, tried to make a dent in the ham radio market some years ago with a kit that had to major, major operational mode of PSK-31. Came with a keyboard, internal computer, nice display screen and hardly any manual controls. Looked more like a boxy PC than any HF radio. I think it was marketed BEFORE the last NPRM on removing the code test was open for Comments. It was pretty much damned by old-timer critics who INSISTED that a ham radio thing was STAND-ALONE and should NOT look like a #$%#!! computer...and by Harry and St. George it MUST do the "primary" task of working DX on HF with CW! It was good for their Daddy and good for their Grand Daddy and it should be damn good for all the kiddies in the future ham radio life...endit. :-)

With so few sales and a snub by the elite in the "ham community" (apparently made up only of the "expert" elders), DZkit pulled it. For a while they had the manual available for free download. As I looked at that manual, it appeared to be a nice, useable design that would probably be easy to control. For PSK-31. The "experts" just didn't want any of this new-fangled stuff like PSK-31 and they were vocal about it.

DZkit makes a nice HF transceiver kit called the Sienna. It has a lot of features laid out in what appears to be a workable arrangement but without clutter. I would judge it to be a drastic compromise between what is already on the market from Asia and what 'DZ' really wanted. A compromise to keep a small company affloat in this economic sea dominated by Japanese designs. I'm sure DZ could do a superb design but there is intense competition in the tiny amateur radio market whose leaders are Yaesu, Kenwood, and Icom. New amateur HF transceivers MUST have all that 'features' bling because that is part of the new-product brainwashing already done...nobody should upset the bling things designed in Asia. [to me, bling can be nice, even lovely when in moderation]

I'm not denigrating the Big 3 in Japan. Those 3 have led the way in most of the ham radio design innovations for 2+ decades. But, by now, those same 3 are competing with each other. When that happens the "new features" are promoted AS IF they were the latest and greatest...even when they are, essentially, inconsequential re-hash of what they've already done. A result is those MENUS which need careful research into structure for easy operation/selection in a confined space.

73, Len AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 25, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY wrote on 25 Nov 09:

"I'd forgotten about the Astro."

I doubt if you ever used one or even laid hands on one. <shrug>
.........
"I think a big part of the problem is that some designs don't follow the way rigs are actually used."

Oh? You have some independent poll information on how the 'majority use their (HF) rigs?'

Rather than trying to play "expert" on forums, it would be more in line on "expertise" to state one's experience on radio equipments ACTUALLY used, with hands-on experience. Witness the following:
.........
"For example, back in the 1950s/60s there began to appear HF rigs that used a row of selector knobs/switches rather than a single tuning knob. There was a knob for tens of MHz, MHz, hundreds of kHz, etc, down to kHz or even finer."

Such frequency selection was WRITTEN in many different electronic publications.

"The PRC-104 and other military radios had systems like that; as did ham gear like the B&W 6100 transmitter, and even homebrew such as W3QLV's synthesized VFO (QST Dec 1964)."

Point of fact: James Miccolis never served in any military branch of the USA. The PRC-104 (designed by Hughes Aircraft Ground Systems Division) has yet to appear in surplus sales.

I've never operated any Barker & Williamson transmitters or synthesizers but I've been hands-on operating an AN/PRC-104 HF manpack transceiver...as a civilian. I got my START in HF comms at a military radio station just 56 1/2 years ago. NONE of the 36 high-power HF transmitters had tuning controls "optimized for operating." The little AN/GRC-9 kept for a while as last-ditch emergency transceiver wasn't so "optimized." On a reorganization of Signal Battalion duties at the end of my tour, we had responsibility for AN/GRC-26 'mobile' radio stations (not mobile in motion but with a hut on the bed of a deuce and a half truck with a tow-behind motor-generator trailer and antenna kit (poles, wires, leadline) in the box under the operator's bench seat (room for three). HF receivers were at the last of the 'Collins' line before the legendary R-390 came out. Our station receiver site got some of the early R-390s but production and distribution were just ramping up in 1956. Many consider the R-390 (and auto-tune R-391 and USMC-contract R-392) as being the first 'digital tuning' receivers before there were any synthesized-frequency rigs and certainly before transistors had achieved stable high frequency operation. In the USMC mobile transceiver by Collins the operating system of the R-392 and T-195 transmitter were very dissimilar and not inter-connected. I got to operate one loaned to the Army as an effort to get that mobile transmitter-receiver in part of the Army inventory. The T-195 had one of the first (if not THE first) automatic antenna tuner on any HF radio; spectacular to see in operation even on low-HF spectrum operation.

"That sort of tuning arrangement is great if you know the exact QRG you want. Just set the switches and there you are. But it's no fun and quite inferior for simply looking around a band."

In the land-forces military, 'radiomen' aren't twiddling knobs just to PLAY radioman. The objective is to communicate rather vital information, not to gather QSL cards for wallpaper. I would think that Life-Death situations are rather more important than making DXCC or other awards.
.............
"That high-priced commercial/military radios did it that way doesn't make it better if you don't use the set the same way."

As I just said, REAL military radio operators are NOT PLAYING with radios. Yes, those military radios are expensive. Given that they MUST operate in environments FAR tougher than any amateur radio environment, their cost is high. They aren't in the alleged "$49 HF transceiver" as recently published in an ARRL magazine.

In fact, smaller land forces (both USA and USMC) do NOT use HF in normal tactical operation. Low-VHF is it, such as with the almost-obsolete AN/PRC-119 SINGCARS family (over a quarter-million produced since first operational use in 1989). On top of that, they use frequency-hopping and digital modulation which can be set encrypted on-line. There is NO tuning knob on any of those, just a touch-screen to enter the "hopset" parameters (hopping mode and encryption code as well as net identification). Just think of it, NO frequency tuning knob at all! Good grief, the "experts" at the ARRL Review committee would turn thumbs-down on ANY such "preposterous" notion! :-)
.............
"The big problem is that the designers have to understand how the rig will actually be used, and not let their egos get in the way."

"Egos?!?" The bottom line is MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS on a DoD contract or they don't get paid.

For civil radio services, designer-manufacturers try to get a handle on their sales market. They aren't all working towards gold star ratings in ARRL "reveiw" articles. :-) They are only working for the gold income on SALES.

I don't consider myself an "expert" even if I've got a lot of varied radio experience in several radio services and as a designer. I haven't used - or even touched - ALL of the radios every made in any one radio service. If there is any "ego" around, I will say it belongs to those who profess to be "experts" when all they've done is read what other folks write. I think it belongs more to those who want to BOSS others, to make them use or design things that these self-styled "bosses" do and like for themselves. That destroys creativity in others...but it preserves your own EGO.

For me, one of the WORST reasons to do something is "we've always done it that way." That's a big, huge barrier to any sort of innovation or invention.

If you MUST do something because "we've always done it that way," then go back to crystal sets and spark transmitters. [oops, 'spark' is illegal, so, OK, use LF alternators...oops, wrong again, the USA doesn't have any LF amateur allocations...] OK, drive cross-country in the USA in a Model T (good roads to use now). Use a washboard in laundry with soap you've made from left-over fats. Cook food over a campfire (if local laws allow open fires). Grow every food item yourself. Get the picture?

AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KD7YVV on November 26, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Well, that's one good thing about being in America.
They only force you to pay taxes :) :) :).
Like I said, all the new bells and whistles are nice to
look at and mess around with, but I've always been a
simple person. My dad has an old candlestick phone that
has been in our family for decades. It's not set up
for today's phone system, but it's a lot simpler than
many of these multi-use cellphones that are available.
A phone is for making and receiving phone calls.
A camera is for taking pictures.
Nowadays, you have cellphones that can do everything
but cook you breakfast in bed. Granted, they can do
a lot of things,(surf the web etc.) but to me a cell
phone is for making and receiving phone calls.
As Scotty said... "The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain."

--KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 26, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KD7YVV: "My dad has an old candlestick phone that
has been in our family for decades. It's not set up
for today's phone system, but it's a lot simpler than
many of these multi-use cellphones that are available."

I don't know what sort of phone system you have, but many of those old phones can be made to work on modern systems.

KD7YVV: "As Scotty said... "The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain.""

Yup, but there's more to it than that.

In many cases, a device that can do many things can't do any of them as well as a dedicated device. In amateur radio, many all-band all-mode rigs sacrifice performance for features.

There's also the fact that if that one device goes on the fritz, is lost or damaged, you've lost a lot of functionality. With separate devices, you only lose the one function.

Most of all, there's a lot to be said for simplicity. It is too little valued today, which is the source of a lot of our problems.

The big reason for the multipurpose "smartphone" is that you only have to carry one device.

---

btw, you mentioned leaving the gas cap off and getting a check-engine light. For many cars, if you put the cap back on, the light will go off after a certain number of starts and a certain amount of driving.

The reason the light goes on is that modern cars' fuel systems are sealed. Pollution control and safety are involved.

That's why you hear a whooshing sound when you remove the cap, and why you should never remove the cap with the engine running.

If the engine is run with the cap off, pressure sensors in the fuel system will get really odd readings, and report them to the engine control computer. The computer can't tell the difference between a missing gas cap and a leak in the system, so it lights the check-engine light.

73 es HT de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 26, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KD7YVV wrote on November 26, 2009:

"Like I said, all the new bells and whistles are nice to look at and mess around with, but I've always been a simple person. My dad has an old candlestick phone that has been in our family for decades. It's not set up for today's phone system, but it's a lot simpler than many of these multi-use cellphones that are available."

Yes, a circa-1900s carbon microphone, electromagnetic earphone holding down the "hook" switch, no added semiconductors, IS "simple." No doubt about it. That "candlestick" telephone set probably doesn't have a rotary dial on it, either. In the late 1950s my southern California apartment had a telephone set also without any active devices in it which could direct-dial lots of places within the telephone infrastructure. Not ALL of them, just a few that had converted their central offices. Those would be complete in a few years time.

Then came tone dialing, an option to subscribers. That one needed a stable transistor oscillator to make the tone. Bell Labs came up with one. (horrors! "complication" setting in...) BTW, in my telephone exchange "pulse" dialing by a dial interrupter is still there today for OLD telephone users; we use tone dialing since it integrates nicely with the modem in our computers. (quantum leap to "complications!")

If you want ultimate simplicity, use two "tin" cans and a taught string. Won't communicate very far and not much good for long-distance. It worked for my childhood buddy Dennis and myself. :-)

Did you know that the first practical use for frequency-multiplexed telephony beginning in 1915 was the proof of performance of single sideband? It compressed 4 voice channels into a 12 KHz wide bandspace for "long-lines" better known as long-distance service. Nice, easy talking over circuits hundreds of miles in length, no shouting and careful listening required. Another sidebar is that the ubiquitous Smith Chart was devised by Phil Smith prior to WWII to better measure impedance, spot discontinuities, etc., on those long lines, most being about 600 Ohm impedance, not 50 Ohms. The Smith Chart was a boon to ALL who worked on RF systems...except maybe the radio amateurs who had "never heard of such a thing." They measure SWR by cross-needle meter thingies. :-)

Frequency-multiplexing found its ultimate use in the coast-to-coast microwave repeater system, the one by AT&T having those "sugar scoop" antennas. Hundreds of individual telephone circuits on each link. Lots of superb engineering in those microwave systems on everything from waveguide (mostly circular) and directional antennas to very low Noise Figure microwave triodes. Expanded frequency multiplexing could carry 6 MHz wide TV channels in addition to 3 KHz voice circuits. Subscribers didn't have to worry a bit about their "complicated" telephone sets in their homes. All they got was very nice telephone service, even direct dialing to foreign countries.

Time-multiplexing would replace wired copper and the FM multi-channel links with optical fiber using pulsed light wavelengths. Analog voice circuits would use A-to-D converters with companding to make digital signals between exchanges, use D-to-A converters and reverse companing to restore tham to analog at the other exchange. Back in pre-WWII times that was UNTHINKABLE. The transistor that started the electronic technology revolution was invented at Bell Labs of AT&T. Bell Labs didn't invent the electronic computer but they designed and made solid-state central offices that were, essentially, computer switchgear. Gone were the old Strowger 2-dimensional stepping switches (with the usual mechanical wear and tear), replaced by itty-bitty digital gates and flip-flops. Lots of advantages with that ESS or Electronic Switching System (computer in the central office), but that gets into the evil telephone infrastructure which is certainly NOT in the royal realm of mighty AMATEUR Radio.

Cellular telephony began in low VHF due to hardware and regulatory limits on useable frequency bands. It ended up on a low microwave frequency with an approximate 1 GHz center. Having been an Army Signalman and operation and repair of 1.8 GHz microwave repair back in late 1954, I have some experience with the early tube-architecture multi-voice-channel systems. The General Electric terminals I worked with were 24 voice channel, 6-rack-wide cabinet systems with over 200 vacuum tubes. Had someone said that, in less than 40 years there would be solid-state handsets the cubic size of a pack of cigarettes that could operate full-duples in a few-miles-across "cell" region, I would have thought they were on some kind of weird drug or just insane. UNTHINKABLE back then. "Can't be done!" many would echo. Yet here is the world with OVER a 100 million cell phone subscribers and climbing. Nokia in Finland has nearly half of that market...well, as I remember, closer to about 38 percent or so.

That evil infrastructure cellular telephony system has built-in features to automatically move a circuit in-use from one cell to another, ideal for mobiles in motion. Expanding on that, various existing wireless services allow full-motion video in addition to wideband audio for what passes for music nowadays (content is one thing, ability to communicate it is entirely separate). Besides the totally-high-frequency RF semiconductors, the boon to cell phones is the Integrated Circuit which can carry as much circuitry as was in one of the GE microwave terminals I supervised in 1954. Ain't NO human bean strong enough to hold one of those tubed terminals in two hands let alone in one!

My wife may become a "Kindle junkie" with her Kindle e-notebook, one that can download entire novels and literary works wirelessly (no need to get it through the evil telephone infrastructure which is supposed to FAIL during emergencies). If you don't know about the Kindle or other e-books, it it has the fit of a mid-size softcover thin printed book. Easy to hold and read anywhere there is light enough to read a printed page. It has electronic dog-ear capability to memorize a page and come back to it by the press of a button. It is wireless, using radio frequencies for download and subscription, ordering via a little keyboard of thin membrane keys. Oh, and it can hold photographs and many types of graphics as well as characters.

Now NONE of these more modern things are "simple" as in a turn-of-the-last-century "candlestick" telephones. Automobiles now have self-starters, had to be hand-cranked in 1900. Washing machines now use electric motors instead of "elbow grease." There's even Driers using electricity or gas for heat. Microwave ovens are almost indispensible for cooking nowadays, don't heat food directly.
Very "complicated," just select a time of cooking and press a button, wait for the timer to quit.
............
"A phone is for making and receiving phone calls."

Anywhere there is a cell site, no need to go wired now.

"A camera is for taking pictures."

It is ALSO for measuring/recording temperature, seeing interference fringes in an optical interferometer, and separating colors for lithography. If you are talking FILM photography, both my wife and I were into taking and developing FILM photography while in high school. A xerographic or inkjet computer printer is a "camera in reverse"; the latest from the remains of Polaroid is a printer which doesn't use ink at all, "developing" images by the length of electric pulsess across its imaging area. With modern digital cameras the image plane is all-electronic, can be scanned electronicslly and stored in semiconductor memory.
............
"Nowadays, you have cellphones that can do everything but cook you breakfast in bed. Granted, they can do a lot of things,(surf the web etc.) but to me a cell phone is for making and receiving phone calls."

That's reasonable. Just because a cell phone has lots of features, it is NOT imperative that an owner-subscriber USE all of them. We have a secondary cell phone, very simple, carried in our Chevy Malibu MAXX, its sole purpose for highway emergencies. Oh, and it can also connect to AOL voice messaging service and listen to incoming text messages that arrived while we were on the road. My wife used that from the parking lot of a restaurant in Iowa and elsewhere on a cross-country trip.
...........
"As Scotty said... "The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain.""

Coincidentally, we had the sink drain get plugged up in our master bath, called in a plumber last month. Our southern house waste line of cast iron were beginning to FAIL 47 years after it was built. The "uncomplicated" sink waste line just failed on its own. We got all the waste lines replaced with ABS plastic (Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene) which has a predicted life span longer than that of cast iron. Real "complicated." The material, that is. Cast iron can't be bent but ABS plastic can be bent to a limited extent. Plumbers did that to pass under the garage floor. Oh, and fresh water lines were repiped in copper over 17 years ago...made an excellent "ground" plane of sorts, even for low VHF.

In Roman Empire times, the "uncomplicated" lead plumbing lines were popular. Popular even later to naming the element lead as "Plumbium." Problem is, all that plumbing gave lots of those old Romans lead poisoning. <shrug>
............
But...I GET the picture. "Real radios" MUST have tuning knobs. Yessir. Copy that. "Real radios" (with knobs) are the ONLY superior radios on HF. Must be, 'cause everyone (here) seems to say so... :-)

73, Len AF6AY (who has never upgraded his amateur license)

Simplicity

by N2EY on November 27, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KD7YVV asked: "whatever happened to SIMPLE?"

One more point about the whole simplicity discussion:

It's important to remember that what is "simple" or "obvious" to one person may be "complex" or "obscure" to another. I've seen "candlestick" phones like yours with dials in the base, and ever since, people have gotten wrong numbers because they confused the numeral zero (0) with the letter O, and the numeral 1 with the letter I.

For example, in the past decade or so I've learned some things about Windows- and DOS-based PCs, both hardware and software. I can take a case, power supply, drives, cables, motherboard, memory and other hardware, plus a monitor, keyboard, mouse and OS, and assemble a working computer without much effort. Adding hardware, such as a DVD drive or memory, is downright simple to me, because of the knowledge and experience gained in the past 10-20 years, and because the OS's since WIn98SE have lived up to their claim of Plug and Play.

But to someone who doesn't know much about computers, even such a "simple" task can be far from simple, even if all goes well, and completely baffling if something doesn't work. Obvious things such as connector seating and BIOS settings may not be obvious to them at all. Basic troubleshooting methods such as trying the hardware in a different computer may never occur to them, because they haven't learned to think that way.

It all depends on the person, and Amateur Radio is no exception.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: Simplicity

by K6LHA on November 28, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY wrote on November 27, 2009:

"It's important to remember that what is "simple" or "obvious" to one person may be "complex" or "obscure" to another."

That's ambiguity and of such obvious observable fact that saying so is a waste of digital space.
............
"I've seen "candlestick" phones like yours with dials in the base, and ever since, people have gotten wrong numbers because they confused the numeral zero (0) with the letter O, and the numeral 1 with the letter I."

That is about wired telephony and telephone USE by non-technical folks and not really a subject for amateur RADIO, is it?

KD5YVV originally compared wired telephones to cellular telephones. Cell phones use RADIO to complete a connection to the telephone infrastructure.

The original kick-off article was about TUNING KNOBS and possible ways to do manual tuning. It also had some commentary on the uber-conservatism of so many radio amateurs insofar as overall design and use.

BTW, the very old wired telephone (sometimes called a 'pedestal' among other colloquial names) did NOT start out with "dials in the base" or anywhere else. They went for decades without any rotary interrupter dialing mechanism...because that was dependent on the telephone central office equipment. Manual telephone connections by human operators at telephone central offices existed AFTER WWII in the USA. Wired telephones predate the first public demonstration of 'radio' as a communications by decades. The first wireless telephones existed about four decades ago.
............
"For example, in the past decade or so I've learned some things about Windows- and DOS-based PCs, both hardware and software. I can take a case, power supply, drives, cables, motherboard, memory and other hardware, plus a monitor, keyboard, mouse and OS, and assemble a working computer without much effort. Adding hardware, such as a DVD drive or memory, is downright simple to me, because of the knowledge and experience gained in the past 10-20 years, and because the OS's since WIn98SE have lived up to their claim of Plug and Play."

Well, that's nice self-praise but really NOT about amateur radio nor about tuning knobs, certainly not about different possible ways to effect manual (or even automatic) tuning by something other than a "knob."

The PREDECESSOR to the modern PC is generally taken by "knowledgeable" personal computerists as with the open-source IBM PC first available in 1980. It was NOT "plug-and-play" by any means. It was rather limited in its available peripherals...but so were the CP/M OS microcomputers that were in use in business and for personal use before 1980. Since then there has been an explosion in information, publications, and peripherals, even software with details of all that available to anyone who bothered to look for it. The "IBM" PC of 1990 is a far cry from the PC of 2009...just as it was from its predecessor made in Boca Raton, FL, in 2008. Was there a WLAN available for PCs in 1990? That's using RADIO to link to another computer wirelessly. I haven't checked but memory says it might have been but it would have been rare indeed. Today one can go into any large electronics store and buy WLAN components to wirelessly interconnect computers in a residence. Just follow instructions and it will work.
...............
"But to someone who doesn't know much about computers, even such a "simple" task can be far from simple, even if all goes well, and completely baffling if something doesn't work. Obvious things such as connector seating and BIOS settings may not be obvious to them at all. Basic troubleshooting methods such as trying the hardware in a different computer may never occur to them, because they haven't learned to think that way."

Why waste space on stating the obvious? In 1970 there was nothing about personal computing to troubleshoot. There weren't any "personal computers." The first ICs that contained the basic parts of a personal computer to be were about to debut, such as the "microcomputer." The common dual-inline IC package had become the defacto physical standard due to its huge demand in the electronics industry. SMT already existed but industry hadn't "taken" it up for mass-production; it was generally known as "thick film" and "thin film" construction and rather costly. Today it is very common in low-cost consumer electronics. Time and technology keeps on advancing and changing, regardless of how "expert" one claims to be on certain things.

Today, if one can casually prognosticate on the US Census Bureau statement of 5 years ago that one in five US households had "computer access," it is possible to say that one in four households have one now. The Internet is a common thing in our lives NOW, even a social life to some. There was once NO Internet (as we know it) until 1991 when the Internet became public. That was only 18 years ago. The old desk set wired telephone with hook switch and earphone on a cord (but no rotary dial) existed from 1900, 119 years ago. 'Radio' itself is only 113 years old.
...............
"It all depends on the person, and Amateur Radio is no exception."

Yes, one can sit on the 40m HF band and "work DX with CW" just as amateurs did in 1930...and use only ARRL publications as their "IRE" substitute for "radio knowledge." One can extoll OOK CW as THE ONLY WAY to communicate and pretend to be "expert" on everything radio (even if it is only HF). Many amateurs DO that. Perhaps they light their "candlestick" wired telephones to read their "job-required" logbooks? :-)

AF6AY

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by W0GAC on November 28, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I use HRD to control many of my radios. But once in a while I touch the knobs including the VFO. I think it comes down to personal preference and tradition as well. Many of today popular and current consumer electronics still make use of knobs. Still a nice big VFO with a great feel to it can be very appealing to lots of people. The VFO knob on the new TS2000/D is great in this regard, and in my opinion much better feel than the ICOM VFOs.

73,

George.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on November 28, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

W0GAC writes: "Still a nice big VFO with a great feel to it can be very appealing to lots of people."

And that's what really counts, isn't it?

I don't see anyone in this thread saying that others "must" or even "should" use a tuning knob, only that they prefer one.

--

Another thought on simplicity....

In some ways, the "digital dial" has resulted in a simpler dial.

In the old days, amateur rigs had a wide variety of dials:

- The slide-rule dial, where the frequency ranges were lines and a pointer moved across them. Heathkit HR-10, Hallicrafters SX-101 are classic examples

- The circular dial with moving pointer, such as in RME receivers

- The moving circular dial with fixed pointer, such as in the National NC-183 and the Collins S-line

- The drum dial, such as in the HQ-215 and Southgate Type 4 receiver and Type 7 transceiver

- Special types such as the National PW and NPW dials. These are sometimes mistakenly called "HRO dials" because they were used in those receivers, but they were used in non-HRO products as well, and available for homebrewing.

- Hybrid dials that combined various elements, such as used in the Heathkit SB-line and Collins 75A-x receivers.

Such dials required a bit of mental flexibility to use. For example, to tune a Heathkit SB-310 to 3.726 MHz, you set the bandswitch to 3.5, turn the knob until the little slide-rule dial is between the third and fourth 100 kHz lines (as counted from the left), and then set the rotating circular dial to 26. 3.5 MHz plus 200 kHz plus 26 kHz equals 3.726 MHz.

With a digital dial, all that goes away. You just turn the tuning knob until the readout says 3.726.

Way back in the beginning of 1976 I designed and built a digital-dial adapter that would work with almost any HF receiver by counting the tunable oscillator. The counter section could be preset to any commonly-used offset, and could also be made to count down instead of up for rigs where the tunable oscillator tunes opposite the tuning direction. Could also be used as a straight frequency counter. Used TTL logic and was heavily shielded and filtered so the clock and other signals didn't leak out.

Pretty revolutionary for the spring of 1976. But after using it a while, I found I liked the old-style dials better.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N0SOY on November 29, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I have a radio I purchase about 2 years ago from radioshack that is a AM/Fm weather band radio that I kept by the bed. It is completely synthesized. I bought it because is a large cased large speaker radio. I hate clock radios because the sound is tinny.

The radio has a spring loaded tuning knob that is basically like a joystick or push button. I absolutely hate it. The radio has been put down the basement and replace with an old Hallicrafters s38e I had rebuilt.

I like to use a real knob to search for stations. All of the other gimmicks that have been created just do not work that well.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 30, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY wrote on November 28, 2009:

"In some ways, the "digital dial" has resulted in a simpler dial. In the old days, amateur rigs had a wide variety of dials:"

What are "the old days," senior? 'Radio' is only 113 years old.

A few of the boatanchor afficionados go for the R-390 which doesn't fit in your descriptions. The R-388 was a predecessor to the R-390. Both circa 1950s.

The Collins Radio PTO and a whole bunch of quartz crystals made both of them a sort of "digital dial" of its day for the '388, '390, '391, '392 out of Cedar Rapids, IA. One could easily resolve less than +/- 1 KHz at any frequency.
...............
"Such dials required a bit of mental flexibility to use. For example, to tune a Heathkit SB-310 to 3.726 MHz, you set the bandswitch to 3.5, turn the knob until the little slide-rule dial is between the third and fourth 100 kHz lines (as counted from the left), and then set the rotating circular dial to 26. 3.5 MHz plus 200 kHz plus 26 kHz equals 3.726 MHz."

Gollee, that sure is "complicated!" Not. :-)

Beats the #$%^!! compared to the separate-gang tuning receivers with the "bandspread" second knob. That bandspread knob couldn't be accurately used without a "crystal calibrator" to set the Main tuning knob. Been there, done that, way back in 1948.

The Heath SB-310 was a modified SB-300/SB-301, modded to tune both SW BC and amateur radio HF bands of that time, circa 1966-1972. Their sub-contracted "LMO" or "Linear Master Oscillator" felt and tweaked on another's SB-300 convinced me that the '310 would suit me just fine, so I bought that kit and assembled it. Worked right off. The bandswitch contacts corroded due to the pretty 'air cooling' cabinet, BTASE.

BUT...the SB-line receivers brought back that irritating "preselector." That was a THIRD knob for
tuning which required manual double-tuning of LMO and the RF input stages. My modification was to fix-tune the RF stages as a "staggered-pair" (making them a so-so bandpass filter), very fixed with each band, no more "preselector" tuning nonsense. A few of the Heath RF coils had to be changed since their economy variant used coils that didn't fit a staggered-pair for the 310 SW bands. Only ONE knob to turn for tuning, much nicer.

BTW, I wouldn't have tuned to 3726 KHz back in the '70s on my SW-ham variant. My staggered-pair modification inductive Q allowed only about 200 KHz bandwidth on 80m. I chose the upper portion of 80m to hear SSB and AM on that band. ALL the selected bands had the SAME sensitivity within +/- 2 db after that front-end modification.

See the "MIT RAD LAB" volume on "Amplifiers" by Valley and Wallman for stagger-tuning design data.

Now, I've never had any problem with "reading the dial" on any SB-line front panel. Was never "complicated" to me. <shrug>

"With a digital dial, all that goes away." You just turn the tuning knob until the readout says "3.726."

Duhhhhh. :-)
...........
"Way back in the beginning of 1976 I designed and built a digital-dial adapter that would work with almost any HF receiver by counting the tunable oscillator. The counter section could be preset to any commonly-used offset, and could also be made to count down instead of up for rigs where the tunable oscillator tunes opposite the tuning direction. Could also be used as a straight frequency counter. Used TTL logic and was heavily shielded and filtered so the clock and other signals didn't leak out."

Of COURSE you did. And several others beat you to it...if you did it. But, there's no record of any James Miccolis "digital dial adapter" that I can find. Perhaps you would fill us in on details? Is that like your fabulous Elecraft K2 dial (the K2 you claim to have but haven't taken a picture of yet)?

DIALS were not the subject in this article. KNOBS and Knob-substitutes for manual tuning were...

Gee, I tore your brag-tape, didn't I? <shrug>

Tell you what, why don't you contact Neil Heckt at AADE in Washington state and offer your design/invention services? Seems like Neil has done a fine job all by himself with his "DFD" series of counters for single, double, triple-conversion receivers and transceivers. He might not need any more technical advice. Probably could use another shipping clerk, though...

74HC192 Up/Down decade counters are still being produced and sold through distributors. If you need some speed, the 74AC192 is also available. HCMOS has only miniscule leakage current when idle and power demand is measured by toggle speed, not by a constant DC current value in many mA. If you want to "pioneer" try it with old, obsolete Fairchild RTL (resistor-transistor logic) as I did in the early 1960s running off +3.6 VDC. And drive a bi-quinary UK "nixie" work-alike for numeric display running off +120 VDC. NOT a good mix but it did work up to 20 MHz (when it felt like it). :-) It got replaced some time ago. G0UPL in the UK got the display tube assembly in trade for other things he had a few years ago. Worked for Hans Summers' non-counter project. <shrug>

74LS90 decade counters were better at +5 DC "standard" supply rails. Then the 74LS160 series debuted, followed by the 74LS190 series, up-down counting with presetting capability. AppNotes were all over the place on "how to use" them. Power hogs all of them until Advanced CMOS came out and pin-compatible, work-the-same 74HC replacements appeared with higher speed and the 74AC family with even higher speed. For a time base the 74HC390 DUAL decade is very good. It is bi-quinary or qui-binary depending on how it is wired (divide-by-2 plus divide-by-5 in each decade), duals all in one 16-pin DIP.

Me, I'd rather like to find a large spinner knob that costs (new) LESS than $20. Those are much scarcer. Actual cost of such an item might top out at $3 for plastic, assembly, shipping, and small profit margin by manufacturer and dealer. Any ungeared knob costing over $5 across-the-counter is usury.
.............
"Pretty revolutionary for the spring of 1976. But after using it a while, I found I liked the old-style dials better."

What, for being beaten by others? :-) BIG names, that is...

Hey, after physically designing and electronically proving nice little decade-plus-display modules for frequency/time counters, I was disheartened by price drops on TTL divide-by-16/10 ICs. RTL went into the dumpster in industry useage. I couldn't compete. My potential plans fell off a cliff. That's life. <shrug>

"Revolutionary" was Bill Hewlett's MS thesis on a Wein Bridge audio oscillator stabilized in amplitude by a simple low-wattage incandescent lamp. That was product #1 from test equipment giant Hewlett-Packard just before the USA got into WWII. Tuned a whole decade span on any audio frequency range. First sales of that #1 product were to Walt Disney Studios. Talk about a "Mickey Mouse product" being the first for an eventual international mult-BILLION-dollar electronics company! :-)

"Revolutionary for 1976?" What, for the USA Bicentenial? Errr...'radio' was only 80 years old in 1976. Not even a Centennial, let alone two of them. Italian Marconi and Russian Popov were not licensed amateurs in 1896. Well, there just wasn't any "ham radio" then either. Come to think of it, the word 'radio' itself wasn't commonplace back then. :-)

"Tall ships sailing grandly?" No, just tall tales drifting with low tide...<shrug>

If you want REVOLUTIONARY, it is using a microcontroller to read frequency, process the count, scan a display, add messages/legends, all in one IC. That was PIONEERED in the UK and *not* by a licensed radio amateur! How about that? :-)

Here's an idea for a SECOND REVOLUTION: ONE knob to tune EVERY HF band WITHOUT any bandwwitch knob and have a frequency readout exact to 10 Hz resolution. It is possible with today's PIC microcontrollers, can even have the display in LCD, driven by the same PIC. ONE KNOB tuning for all of MF to LF for USA radio amateurs. How about that?

You can natter and gromish all you want about what you DID, but that isn't looking FORWARD. If you got anything from Charles Cohen's kick-off article, revolutions in technology are done by looking FORWARD and thinking of NEW ways to do something, by using IMAGINATION and free thinking. Or you can sit in forums while morphing into Grumpy Old Men complaining about not being recognized as the grande "pioneer" of the olde dayes and how "old stuff is better." <shrug>

AF6AY

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by AA4ZZ on November 30, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

What's Special about a Steering Wheel?

All the suggested input devices could also be used to steer your car. Just because an existing input device can be replaced does not mean it should. I definitely felt the tuning knob option was a great addition to my Kachina 505DSP.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on November 30, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

Posted By AA4ZZ on 30 Nov 09:

"What's Special about a Steering Wheel?"

...it's the Loose Nut behind it that is the problem. :-)
..........
"All the suggested input devices could also be used to steer your car."

I didn't know this article was officially changed to Automobiles. <shrug>
..........
"Just because an existing input device can be replaced does not mean it should."

Nobody is saying that a knob "SHOULD" be replaced. Let's not get paranoid here.

Somehow I feel like the 'angry' respondents just don't want to even CONSIDER some new thing and want to dump on anyone who suggests something different.
..........
OK, if you insist on "steering" control analogies, let's consider modern aircraft. There are two major manual control systems in use now: The "stick" for changing angle of attack, nose up or nose down and wings right-down or left-down; "yoke" which has two subdivisions, the "wheel" and the "horn." Sticks are preferred by fighter jocks. Yokes are preferred by multi-engine carriers. The horn seems to be preferred by English and French pilots, wheels by most other countries. It has been that way for at least 70 years on up to present time. [a Boeing 707 has a wheel yoke, the Concorde has a horn yoke][many folks confuse both terms and refer only to the horn yoke as THE yoke]

The horn yoke is basically a wheel but has an unfamiliar feel in that its shape has the equivalent to
two (of four) radial spokes joining two circumferential pieces that more resemble handles as on a motorcycle. One holds a horn yoke much like a motorcycle, NOT the same as with a wheel yoke.

Neither a yoke or stick cause any turns. That is basically a job for rudder pedals in an aircraft. Yes, yes, I know that proper aircraft turns are done by COORDINATED movements of all controls, even the throttle. Been there, done that.

There have been several exceptions to aircraft controls, such as the "formation stick" used on some four-engine bombers in WWII. Connected to the aircraft autopilot control system, it was easier for either pilot to hold the "box" formation in the midst of four to ten dozen aircraft, all throwing propwash into airplanes behind them. B-17s and B-24s normally used wheels for elevator and aileron controls in ordinary flying. [I have a Sperry formation stick bought surplus many years ago, modified for R/C flying]

Ever mount a motorcycle? They all (normally) have HANDLEBARS, not quite a 'stick' but certainly not a 'wheel' either. These handlebars have throttle and brake controls at the ends, maybe a button or two for other functions. Motorcycles, motor scooters, bicycles all manuever in two-dimensional spaces the same as automobiles. They have done so since the turn of the last century. The very first automobile controls were sticks, didn't have any 'steering wheels.' The first
heavier-than-air manned aircraft ("Wright Flyer") used sticks also. Control wheels came LATER.

Which is to be 'champion?' Or are ALL just as good in controlling different vehicles?

Up to the first coordinated-tuning radios and on to about the 1950s, ALL radio tuning of multiple stages used VARIABLE CAPACITORS. Nearly all of those have been ROTARY devices. Those adapt readily to KNOB control, either direct or through some reduction drive. The only revision was permeability tuning popular in the later 1950s for "signal seeking" automobile broadcast receivers.

All that began to change roughly in the 1960s. Receivers used bandpass filters in front ends and a
SINGLE variable-frequency oscillator did the tuning, no 'ganged' variables needed. The Collins Radio PTO was a ROTARY-control device and the Heath sub-contracted LMO was a Rotary-control device. Rotary-control devices lend themselves to KNOB manual control as the easiest and cheapest solution in product design. By the 1970s, the frequency synthesizers were appearing and the control could be just about ANYTHING, manual or automatic, self-contained in a radio or done by computer control or whatever. VFOs got an order to three magnitudes of precision on top of it.

Leading up to all of this is the FACT that, for the first six decades of radio, ALL were tuned by ROTARY manual devices. Sixty years is a long time, three generations of human beans. Absolutely long enough to CONDITION THE THINKING of radio operators that *KNOBS* ARE ESSENTIAL tuning things. Problem is, for at least the last three decades, manually-tuned radios do not NEED knob control. But...conditioned thinking (colloquial name 'brainwashing') among so many demanded that knob control is ESSENTIAL. Many radio operators were just so stuck in a rut that they could not change. To their stuck-psychological conditioning, knobs were ESSENTIAL to them personally.

Those not liking my comments will try to "blame" me in various ways. Now I personally LIKE a knob for manual control. I am personally comfortable with it...but then I've been tuning radios by knobs since before I was a teen-ager. That's a mere 70 years or so. :-) Color me 'conditionally conditioned.' But, I consider myself broad-minded enough to at least TRY to use a new system. If I find myself comfortable with a new way, I will adopt that new thing. No problem.

In transportation, drivers like to use what they are comfortable with, be it sticks or yokes, or steering wheels or handlebars. They are moving large masses at relatively high speeds that can mean disasterous consequences if they do not control their vehicles properly. Radio operation doesn't come close to vehicular control in regards to personal safety.
............
"I definitely felt the tuning knob option was a great addition to my Kachina 505DSP."

If you are happy with your choice then most of us are happy for you. Everyone should be happy.

The makers of the Kachina can join with other companies like Hallicrafters, National Radio, RME,
Heathkit, etc., who are no longer in business here along with a number of European companies there. <shrug> Collins Radio got out of the amateur radio market long ago, concentrating on other radio service's needs (they are still in business). None could effectively compete in the amateur market. General Radio, a pioneer in electronic equipment and highly regarded back then, just couldn't compete with Hewlett-Packard (now the Agilent Division of H-P). Remember that H-P started with a single product, a Wein-bridge audio oscillator, produced in a small backyard garage in Palo Alto, CA, beginning about 1938. DuMont once built highly-regarded oscilloscopes in the eastern USA, lost to that upstart in Oregon, Tektronix. LeCroy is moving in on both Tektronix and Agilent in oscillography, but has a tough road ahead, all three are innovative and have great products.

Why did all those businesses fail? They couldn't change or move out of their conditioned-thinking ruts. Sure, GR made great products. Once. So did Philco in Philadelphia. Many of the solid-state device makers have either left that market, folded, or been merged with other companies and acquired a new identity. That's life in the capitalist lane...or, by gross extension, Darwinian evolution in a technological field of endeavor.

AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on December 1, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

AA4ZZ writes: "What's Special about a Steering Wheel?

All the suggested input devices could also be used to steer your car."

True enough!

In fact, some early cars used things like tillers for steering. But the steering wheel, probably borrowed from ships, quickly became standard.

Many hams today don't know that Hiram Percy Maxim, W1AW, founder of the ARRL, was also heavily involved in early motorcar development. He was an engineer by training, having graduated from MIT in 1886 at the ripe old age of 16. He won the first auto race held on a track in America.

Maxim was instrumental in adopting the current American standard of driver on the left side of the car, driving on the right side of the road. But his greatest contribution to automobiles was the muffler.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K8MN on December 1, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY wrote:

"Special types such as the National PW and NPW dials. These are sometimes mistakenly called 'HRO dials' because they were used in those receivers, but they were used in non-HRO products as well, and available for homebrewing."

I've got an pre-war HRO and a post-war RCP which was an NC-100 with band switching coil tray with a rack and pinion gearing system requiring a full revolution of the band switch knob. These receivers were modified with a carrier squelch by a third party for the FAA.

Both receivers used the PW dial, called an epicyclic dial by National.

73,

Dave K8MN

RE: Simplicity

by K8MN on December 1, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY wrote:

"For example, in the past decade or so I've learned some things about Windows- and DOS-based PCs, both hardware and software. I can take a case, power supply, drives, cables, motherboard, memory and other hardware, plus a monitor, keyboard, mouse and OS, and assemble a working computer without much effort. Adding hardware, such as a DVD drive or memory, is downright simple to me, because of the knowledge and experience gained in the past 10-20 years, and because the OS's since WIn98SE have lived up to their claim of Plug and Play."

"But to someone who doesn't know much about computers, even such a "simple" task can be far from simple, even if all goes well, and completely baffling if something doesn't work. Obvious things such as connector seating and BIOS settings may not be obvious to them at all. Basic troubleshooting methods such as trying the hardware in a different computer may never occur to them, because they haven't learned to think that way."

"It all depends on the person, and Amateur Radio is no exception."

I'd expect a radio amateur to be able to tend to everyday home computer housekeeping and problem solving with ease. No ham would have problems uninstalling and reinstalling a CD-ROM or DVD Drive or a SATA drive from any modern computer, no matter how basic or how much of a hot rod it happens to be.

73,

Dave K8MN

RE: Simplicity

by K8MN on December 1, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

I've been pondering the various ideas some fellows have for frequency selection apparatus and I'm giving consideration to adapting my old outboard tuning knob/selector switches for the Ten-Tec Orion.

It would be quite easy to rig up some old scraps of pine 1x4" stock, mount them on pivots, set up to activate microswitches for left knee/right knee up/down tuning.

RE: Simplicity

by N2EY on December 2, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

K8MN writes: "I'd expect a radio amateur to be able to tend to everyday home computer housekeeping and problem solving with ease. No ham would have problems uninstalling and reinstalling a CD-ROM or DVD Drive or a SATA drive from any modern computer, no matter how basic or how much of a hot rod it happens to be."

Well, Dave, it all depends on the person. While Windows versions since at least 98SE have been very good about being Plug and Play, they cannot do everything. Most of all they cannot compensate for all hardware problems and human errors.

Something as simple as not seating a connector properly, or a bad power cable, or having the BIOS settings wrong can cause all kinds of trouble. There's also the possibility of a new component being bad "out of the box", particularly low-end discount stuff.

Of course a person with basic knowledge of electronics and troubleshooting will know how to check for such things. But not all hams have that kind of knowledge.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on December 2, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

K8MN writes: "I've got an pre-war HRO and a post-war RCP which was an NC-100 with band switching coil tray with a rack and pinion gearing system requiring a full revolution of the band switch knob."

I think the sliding coil tray arrangement was called a "catacomb" by some folks.

Consider that, with a little work and some parts, those old receivers can be put into perfect operating condition and used today, despite being more than 60 years old. Yet some much more recent sets are almost unfixable due to the use of custom house-numbered parts. One wonders how many radios from the 1980s will still be usable when they are 60+ years old.

K8MN: "These receivers were modified with a carrier squelch by a third party for the FAA."

There were a *lot* of HRO and NC-100/101 variants!

btw, just for reference, the HRO family used PW dials and the NC-100 series used NPW dials. The names derive from whether the capacitor shaft is Parallel or Not Parallel to the front panel.

K8MN: "called an epicyclic dial by National."

"Epicyclic!" That's the word I was searching for!

I like the concept of an integrated dial/capacitor setup, and the PW/NPW have an excellent feel and readout, no backlash, and the whole thing is solid. Big difference over "consumer grade" plastic stuff like the Heath SB series or even the lower-priced Nationals.

Which is why, early on, the Southgate Radio series went to using dial/capacitor combos from ARC-5 transmitters and BC-221 frequency meters. Slow tuning rate, solid construction, and low cost. Plus the whole swords-into-plowshares thing.

For my taste the tuning rate of the PW/NPW is too fast; 50 or even 25 kc. per turn of the knob is just too much for serious amateur use. 5 is more like it.

Perhaps what's really special about amateur radio is that a skilled amateur can use both old and new technology. Whether it's an Orion, an Elecraft, a FlexRadio, a pre-war HRO or a Southgate Type 7, the ham with know-how can get them working and have lots of good QSOs with them.

Others just have to stand and watch.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: Simplicity

by K6LHA on December 2, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

K8MN wrote on December 1, 2009:

"I'd expect a radio amateur to be able to tend to everyday home computer housekeeping and problem solving with ease. No ham would have problems uninstalling and reinstalling a CD-ROM or DVD Drive or a SATA drive from any modern computer, no matter how basic or how much of a hot rod it happens to be."

Even if this departs greatly from the article subject, I would have no agreement with this.

Outside of the usual RFI or WLAN or Wii (etc.) emissions, personal computers DO NOT INVOLVE RADIO. Personal computers communicate, yes, but over INFRASTRUCTURE circuits; if 'radio' is involved, that 'radio' is PART of the infrastructure or (linked by infrastructure) over remote radios supplied by others. Neither the FCC nor the QPC consider personal computerism as any sort of USA amateur radio knowledge/skill.
----------
One has to take "modern computers" in the light of a rather short life. While a form of PERSONAL computerism existed back in 1976 (when I started in it), the genesis of MILLIONS of 'IBM'-clone PCs began in 1980, just 29 years ago...the Internet did not go public until 1991, just 18 years ago. Less than three decades ago there were NO Windows, not even a GUI (Graphical User Interface) until Apple used it in Xerox PARC version for their Macintosh 9" screen device with a PARC version of the mouse. Hard drives were extremely rare and expensive for personal computerists back then and very, very little was STANDARDIZED in the form of hardware...or even software. IBM made, perhaps mistakenly, their first PC as open-source. Open-sourcing is the revelation of formats, interconnections, and general technical data, WITHOUT much of Intellectual Property protection (very surprising considering IBM was extremely conservative in IP protection at the time). Three decades ago there were NO "CD-ROMs" much less "DVDs" since neither their standards nor hardware (shape, size, characteristics) had been formalized; while a general concept of them probably existed, NONE were there to install or uninstall. The only 'standard' operating system was CP/M
(Control Program - Microprocessor) by Gary Kildall, an outgrowth (and form of standardization) of several in-industry operating systems used in development systems, many of which used EIGHT-inch floppy disks and drives. Three decades ago only the 5 1/4 inch floppy had the first (of several) standards in size and format that could be installed (and uninstalled) by personal computerists.

What made it POSSIBLE for personal computerism was the DIGITAL INTERGRATED CIRCUIT. Not necessarily the 'CPU chip' but the hundreds of OTHER circuits necessary to complete a personal computer structure. Solid-state was the key. The ONLY vacuum tubes were found in the form of a CRT as the alphanumeric display or 'monitor' (name derived from TV broadcasting), almost always monochrome back in 1980 for economy. LCD was there but rare and none were available in even 15 inch diagonal sizes for personal computerists. The standard digital logic family was TTL orginated by Texas Instruments. The first clock rates were in the 1 to 20 MHz range, primary determiner for overall execution rate of programs. Compare that to the current clock rate of about 2600 MHz which is bumping up against "Moore's Law" of miniaturization and cramming MILLIONS of gates on one single IC with the NECESSITY of cooling systems to get rid of excess heat from losses in parasitic capacitance of that same complex IC running at MICROWAVE frequency speeds.

The average 'ham' hasn't worked IN the ham bands above 1 GHz, let alone random-access memory structures of 500 MHz access rates. The average RAM of 1980 was, at best about 4 KBytes by 8 in size for top of the line RAM ICs. Today it is easy to get 1 MegaByte by 8 static-flash RAM and ROMs of 1 MB x 16 off-the-shelf at distributers such as Jameco. The top-of-the-line ROM of 1980 was the "2716," a 2K x 8 EPROM. "Flash" memory structures had not yet been developed. The hard disk of 1980 was 100 KByte (economy) to 5 MByte (expensive). By comparison, an eMachines PC desktop of today has 260 GigaByte capacity with 260 MegaByte RAM, at least 2 GHz clock, retail price across the counter less than $500 including keyboard, mouse, speakers, with CD/DVD burner. All of the 'peripherals' (including a CRT or LCD or Plasma 'monitor') can interconnect with any PC of the last decades with the exception of a USB port. USB was a later development and now standardized (proof of its flexibility and universality as the 'port' for all external devices).

MILLIONS of PCs produced in the last twenty-plus years all over the world through primarily in Asia (for economy for buyers) has resulted in MASS STANDARDIZATIONS. Regulated DC power supplies are all standardized in connectors and voltages. "Drives" all have standardized shapes, sizes, mounting holes and electrical characteristics. Mouses are standardized, whether contact or optical types. Keyboards are standardized for both key layout (in some cases country-specific due to language variations) and connections and electrical characteristics. Parallel and serial ports are still the same as they were on the original IBM PC of 1980. Those "D" connectors used were new on the electronics market in 1956. The "printer port" is disappearing from new PCs since printers now use the USB port. The "main board" of a PC determined the spacing of peripheral-function plug-in cards with pin-outs essentially the same as for the 1980 original. The interconnect cabling for all the items within the "box" are all functionally-interchangeable. Even RAM extension connectors on the main board are standardized. "Sound cards" (not in the 1980 orginal) have been standardized for electrical and physical characteristics for both internal and external connections.

Holding all of it together is the OPERATING SYSTEM, a group of programs operating together to achieve all the basic functions through standardized DLL (Dynamic Link Library) access, primarily for GUI. Part of the OS now functions as the (much reviled by some) "plug-and-play" versatility of adding/subtracting programs/peripherals. The Operating Systems, or OS, have changed since 1980. The first OS from IBM (the opening door for Microsoft to eventually make Billions) did NOT have ANY "Windows." It was the "command line" type where all users had to LEARN all the arcane abbreviations of commands and how to structure them FOR THAT OS. It took a while for MS to catch up to Apple once the GUI versatility and ease was proven in the marketplace. It took Apple quite a long time to bring out a display larger than the teeny 9" diagonal B&W of their orginal Macintosh. By then the IBM Boca Raton, FL, division making PCs had gone kaput due to those western upstarts and Asian imports. Emphasis in personal computers changed to SOFTWARE...and with that the explosion of "amateur" developers (i.e., small independent software types who saw a chance to expand and try to be as big as the two in Redmond or Cupertino. Most didn't develop well enough and fell by the wayside. But, the developers had HELP from MS in software through special (and costly) development packages on disk, the most economical form of information dissemination to masses. Revile MS all you want, but MS DID make it possible for all those developers to BEGIN. That their products are now monopolistic and, to some, usurous, is quite another matter. No personal computerist can DO "plug-and-play" without the OS already programmed to enable it. NO
personal computerist can DO it without the peripheral's information characteristics (usually invisible to the user) that allows the OS to sense it is new or old.

In just the last decade there have been some extreme advances in personal computerism. Flash memory and the USB port enables portable, safe program storage in a tiny mobile package that can hold up to 16 GigaBytes. LCD displays (and a few plasmas) of up to 21 inch diagonal and maximum resolution good for HD TV) are now on the market for less than a comparable CRT display...and they have NO visual scan distortion that needed to be corrected in CRTs. The USB port, already mentioned. Disk reader-burners of greater versatility and flexibility. "Plug-and-play" ID standardization. Another quantum leap in CPU clock rates and RAM access times. A perhaps un-noticed paper thing from the larger PC makers: Printed instructions and illustrations which are understandable enough by NON-electronic humans to set one up, change internal units, and the like. Perhaps Hewlett-Packard led the way with their 'Pavilion' line but I haven't researched it enough to see if that was so. Sure, it's like "PCs for Dummies" in the sarcastic-named book series on so many things, but following instructions WILL allow anyone who can handle screwdrivers, even beginners, to accomplish things. Just think, UNLICENSED PC Users, ordinary folks WITHOUT electronic smarts, "putting together computers!" :-)

No problem. I seen for myself another taking two weeks to get a "Hello World!" routine working, finally being successful, then telling others afterwards he is a "computer programmer!" Gross exaggeration on his part and untrue.

In my viewpoint, anyone (licensed in anything or not) who changes a "drive" (of any type) or changes a plug-in card on a main board is doing the same level of skill AS A MOTORIST CHANGING A FLAT TIRE. Pretty much a no-brainer, skill-wise.

To possibly, just possibly, get BACK TO RADIO with a tie-in to 'computer things,' I would suggest investigating the RISC (Reduced Instruction Set) of the Microchip Inc. PIC microcontrollers. Those are now (and have been for a decade) the simplest IC to do frequency counting tasks to run an LCD. It takes some skull-sweat to get used to assembly-level programming and no one can exaggerate the results. If the routines are designed and organized properly, the results are there for anyone to see.

A microcontroller can be the heart of most any tuning knob/device for frequency control and, at the same time, drive most any output device whether up-down counter for a frequency synthesizer or the particular digital interface of an amateur radio transceiver. It is extremely versatile and flexible, but REQUIRES thinking in a different way than vacuum tube technology.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on December 2, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY wrote on 2 December 2009:

"Perhaps what's really special about amateur radio is that a skilled amateur can use both old and new technology. Whether it's an Orion, an Elecraft, a FlexRadio, a pre-war HRO or a Southgate Type 7, the ham with know-how can get them working and have lots of good QSOs with them. Others just have to stand and watch."

Gee, I'm glad you corrected things...was "kneel and worship" instead of "stand and watch" written in the original message? :-) <shrug>

AF6AY

RE: Simplicity

by K8MN on December 3, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

AF6AY wrote:

"In my viewpoint, anyone (licensed in anything or not) who changes a "drive" (of any type) or changes a plug-in card on a main board is doing the same level of skill AS A MOTORIST CHANGING A FLAT TIRE. Pretty much a no-brainer, skill-wise."

So someone who has a flat tire will likely not contact Goodyear for help in how to do it. Yet I'm sure there are some Extra Class radio amateurs who contact Microsoft because a CD or DVD drive isn't recognized by Vista or some similar occurrence. After all, you've said the two things are somehow equivalent.

Dave K8MN

RE: Simplicity

by K6LHA on December 3, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

K8MN wrote on December 3, 2009:

"AF6AY wrote: 'In my viewpoint, anyone (licensed in anything or not) who changes a "drive" (of any type) or changes a plug-in card on a main board is doing the same level of skill AS A MOTORIST CHANGING A FLAT TIRE. Pretty much a no-brainer, skill-wise.'"

"So someone who has a flat tire will likely not contact Goodyear for help in how to do it."

Highly, highly UN-likely, senior, for some of the following reasons:

1. Goodyear is not the only tire maker in the USA or the world.

2. One would need to contact the vehicle MANUFACTURER for exact details, not just the maker of the tire that is on the spare wheel. Hint: Tires mount on wheels. Wheels mount on a vehicle.

3. For decades automobiles have carried illustrated instructions for changing tires and come with jacks and structures to take those jacks.

4. Local police will not take kindly to a motorist who contacts a manufacturer FIRST by cell phone or fancy PDA or laptop computer for "advice" while traffic delays pile up.

5. Jack handles (that come with the jack assembly) can be used to loosen and tighten lug nuts. Not the optimum tool but NO other tools are needed in an emergency. Such tools are NOT complex.
.................
K8MN: "After all, you've said the two things are somehow equivalent."

NOT at all. I voiced a personal opinion about SKILL LEVELS involved, a comparison to very simple mechanical operations involving changing of tire and wheel in an automobile. All a tire-wheel changing requires is some physical exertion. Tire changing is NOT an intellectual exercise. Having had personal computers for a long time (for at least two decades with standardized "IBM" PCs), SOME "complexity" existed back when operating systems were built around the "command line." That complexity existed due to SOFTWARE structures and SOFTWARE-supplied "drivers," most of which were written by program developers NOT the operating system programmers.

With the "plug-and-play" concept in computers, peripherals carrying internal ID used by newer PC OSs, driver routines are automatically invoked on recognition. It is transparent to the user. Any user. No "computer license" or "computer test" required to pass.

But, the article subject is NOT about computers. The only link to Cohen's article on "Tuning Knobs" MIGHT be electrical with an emphasis on software involved in more complex things such as translating an optical encoder into signals useable by frequency-control circuits.

There COULD have been more discussion on the techiques involved in the technology of manual (or automatic) frequency tuning, but that is largely missing. Probable reason is that there isn't much expertise in such matters here, only the personal opinions on staying with something familiar (the ubiquitous tuning KNOB) rather than trying anything new. There seem to be very few responders here who have ventured INTO the technology other than the mechanical means of tuning existing for over half a century. Mechanical means is almost intuitive, easily grasped by sight and inspection. Electric means is NOT intuitive and takes some learning. Instead, towards this article span ending, some lug nuts mounted all those brag tapes about how good they are in things OTHER than frequency control/tuning techniques/technology.

AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on December 4, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

What's special is that a lot of hams prefer a tuning knob to other frequency-control methods.

Isn't that enough reason?

Looking back over the posts here, all the way to the original, I see significant verbiage about "experimenting" and "innovation" and other such buzz-words - and an implied disdain for old and established technology. The ironic thing is that so much of that verbiage comes from folks using factory-built store-bought rigs.

There's nothing wrong with trying something new, nor is there anything wrong with keeping the tried-and-true if it works well.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KF6QEX on December 4, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

There is nothing special about a large tuning knob.
It's just the way it was meant to be.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on December 4, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY attempted to rationalize on December 4, 2009 with:

"What's special is that a lot of hams prefer a tuning knob to other frequency-control methods. Isn't that enough reason?"

Not at all. The vast majority of licensed radio amateurs in the USA use "factory-built store-bought rigs." An OVERWHELMING MAJORITY judging by the "shack pictures" on e-ham pages.

WHY would they DO that? [something you haven't asked outright] Simple answer: CONVENIENCE.

Unless you haven't noticed, most of the licensed radio amateurs in the USA still have to work for a living. There isn't an infinite amount of time to play with radios on their free time. Further, the (snarl, as you seem to want to do) "factory-built store-bought rigs" offer MORE features than most homebrewers can stuff into their amateur radios. Further, manufacturers can use rather custom ICs (some preprogrammed) for those special features along with thousands of man-hours in design and developing the features found in those radios.

The HOBBY of amateur radio allows the working-for-a-living person just a few hours a week for that pursuit. There are 87,600 hours in a year of which about 18 hours a day are needed for sleep, work, feeding, transport to/from work, and minimal personal hygiene. A hobbyist might get 4 hours a day for a hobby or - maybe, at expense of family coherency - devote 28 hours per week or 1456 hours per year (not counting leap years). [this does not count legal time and expense when a spouse decides they've "had enough" and split a union] Getting a "factory-built store-bought rig" allows extreme convenience in the plug-in-and-play-expert-radio-operator experience. In addition
it supplies the "factory-built store-bought rig" with some profit to the seller as well as the manufacturer.

OF COURSE such "factory-built store-bought rigs" CO$T money. Anyone who doesn't have enough money to do that can sit on forums and denounce, denigrate, and defame all those who do. That's only personal pique by the denouncers (aka Jealousy). The denouncers can sing PRAISE to the heavens for the "simple things" who will leave forums and go play with some of the latest "factory-built store-bought rigs" or a collection of frankenboxes built 30 to 39 years ago with vacuum tubes.

Hey, I'm sure that one could do HF QSOs with a regenerative receiver and a two-tube MOPA transmitter having a handful of crystals TODAY. QRP afficionados love that sort of thing...but lately some have been using AD9851 DDS synthesizer ICs to use all possible frequencies. Heck and darn, try it with a crystal set receiver and see how much "DX" one could work, ey? [can't use "spark" because damped-oscillation modulation in the USA is forbidden...there goes the "pioneering ham radio!"...:-) ] It is difficult to "pioneer the radio waves" today, or even a half century ago. "Pioneering" is now in technology, the hardware, the information theory aspects.
..............
N2EY: "Looking back over the posts here, all the way to the original, I see significant verbiage about "experimenting" and "innovation" and other such buzz-words - and an implied disdain for old and established technology. The ironic thing is that so much of that verbiage comes from folks using factory-built store-bought rigs."

You mean like K8MN with his Ten-Tec Orion "factory-built store-bought rig?" :-) How about all the
others with their "factory-built store-bought rigs?" Oh, yes, WE are somehow on "the other side of the tracks" from the crowd with their frankenboxes built out of discard parts. Perhaps we are "stupid" as you've remarked about me elsewhere before I tested for my license?

Despite the self-promotion common to amateur forum websites, e-ham does NOT have a participating member group, possibly even a reader group, that approaches any poll-taking minimum. There are hundreds of thousands of us licensees and e-ham has only a tiny fraction of them. As of this morning's statistics derived from the FCC database of 3 Dec 09, there were a total of 716,606 amateur licenses granted with 681,577 of those still in their 10-year license period or 95.11%.

I specifically point out Technician class licensees because that seems to be a sore point with you...especially since that Techncian class had NO CODE TEST required for their license grants after 1991. :-) Number of NO CODE TEST Technicians in USA amateur licensing in 1990: ZERO. Number on 4 Dec 09: 344,047 or 48.01% of all other classes, easily over twice as many as just General class.

Technician class licensees tend to remain on VHF and above and - probably - a greater majority of them use "factory-built store-bought rigs." One reason for that is compactness as well as convenience, plus versatility in modes. They can operate with carrier frequencies right out to amateur band edges with the technical assurance that they won't violate Part 97 technical rules.
................
N2EY: "There's nothing wrong with trying something new, nor is there anything wrong with keeping the tried-and-true if it works well."

Try to get it straight: There was NEVER any issue of "RUGHT and WRONG" in Charles Cohen's article. You are sounding way to sensitive, even paranoid about DISCUSSIONS of technology. Charles was posing some (gasp) NEW IDEAS that MIGHT BE POSSIBLE in the future. If you had been paying attention to what I wrote you would have found that *I* personally prefer knobs for manual frequency control. But that is MY personal preferrence and I would NOT presume to expect others to follow MY preferences. Nope, that is for certain long-timers who presume THEY are some kind of role model, uber-guru, and paragon of radio virtue.

Had it not been for several people and firms ACTUALLY TRYING *NEW* things in amateur radio design technology, every transceiver would be on the 1960s era achitecture mode, say copies based on the general Collins KWM-2 transceiver (or even down to the Heath SB-300 family). Very nice all of them but not as advanced as the Asian-originated designs that came after.

The microprocessor allowed a LOT of internal receiver and transceiver functions to be handled, controlled, indicated by just wires. All those mechanically-wondrous-looking mechanical structures could be eliminated, bringing down the user price. It also ADDED a number of functions at very low cost that would have been prohibitive staying with all-mechanical couplings. Use of PLLs (first), then DDS (next) frequency synthesizers added the equivalent of quartz crystal control of thousands of frequencies down to 10 Hz and 1 Hz increments. It also enabled much easier MEMORY storage and retrieval of most-used frequencies and easier "split" operation on HF. Display screens showing both inputs and outputs (even S-meters) were in one package and readable without having to scan an entire front panel...plus all that data could be made to any external digital logging device for recording. From the first appearance of frequency synthesizers in HF radios, digital interfaces for external frequency control were supplied.

Note on the last: This was one whopping improvement over the Collins R-391 receiver (the "Autotune" version of the R-390). I've operated, maintained, and calibrated both the 390 and 391 in the distant past. A marvelous collection of gears, cams, and mechanical linkages that was fun to watch when the R-391 was "autotuning." Sort of high-tech "Rube Goldberg" machinery for real. :-)

I'm NOT including the refinement of special high-speed DSP to replace crystal filters in the IF, but those offer a SELECTION of bandwidths equivalent to dozens of separate component crystal filters. Those appeared in the last decade.

I'm NOT including the "Wadley Loop" that appeared first in the 1960s as a sort of quartz crystal substitute to enable frequency tuning at precise 1 MHz band beginnings. The "Wadley Loop" was used in several amateur receivers and transceivers plus three of the sub-contracted Radio Shack high-end SWL receivers. [exact model numbers and makers can be found by a Search of the 'Web] While innovative, useful, and overall price-reducing, the Wadley Loop was undone by more-flexible frequency synthesizer subsystems that came out just after the first Barlow-Wadley design.

With a total inclusion of "bells and whistles" to cover nearly every available mode and frequency in most country's amateur HF operations, that did NOT mean that buyers HAD to use ALL the features. Those were there to enable the purchaser to use them as THEY wanted. Amateur radio operation is totally optional in the USA and in most other countries. It isn't a JOB or a PROFESSION or even a GUILD or UNION. It is a HOBBY. Licensees can use them as licensees wish to do; they are NOT OBLIGATED in any way to use one particular mode or frequency other than what is stated in radio regulations pertaining to their license class.

A question could be "who innovated/invented" those new things? Before running off to your collection of ARRL publications, you will have to admit that, in the last two decades, those would have been largely the "Big 3" designer-manufacturers in Japan. They DARED try out thsee new things in production quantities with a lot of Yen at stake if they prognosticated wrong. PSK-31 wasn't innovated in North America. G3PLX got it going in the UK and had it air-tested with European amateurs before QST printed their first article on it. Star-D seems to be catching on but that originated in Japan with the help of Icom and the JARL. USA design-manufacturers were on the down-slide in innovation dominance by 1970, a time coincident with Collins Radio beginning to leave the amateur market. Hallicrafters had folded, National Radio was going down, RME was already gone. Drake would be an up-comer but just couldn't continue. Ten-Tec is hanging in there but there isn't much in the way of innovation there other than refinement of what the rest have already done. Kachina is gone. Heath is gone. I really don't know or care if MIL SPEC still exists (I wasn't
impressed with faux-militry bling).

Maybe the USA could have produced the ultimate TUBE radios into this new millennium? Those would be SAFE, COMFORTABLE areas, no real STRESS for designers. "Old is good" would have been the watchword. Sorry, that never happened...because tubes were OLD and inefficient in every area but CRTs and RF power amplifiers. The USA did pioneer a bit in MODULAR MF-HF high power transmitters for commercial use into the KiloWatt region but that was about it. Wasn't anything for amateur radio. LCD, Plasma, and DLP on FLAT
screens are taking over in ALL the display jobs. About all that is left for vacuum tubes anywhere right now is in TWTs used in commsat transponders...and their use is going to the scrap heap soon according to the microwave trades.

Despite all the ads in QST and a few in CQ, the amateur radio market has shrunk. Proof is the LOSS of advertisers in Ham Radio (first to go), then 73. CQ VHF spin-off spun out of control for a while. All of those periodicals were INDEPENDENTS, didn't have the money backing of the ARRL.

The steadfast refusal of the morseaholics on elimination of the code test in the USA did "win" in a Pyrric Victory for them. General interest in USA amateur radio for newcomers had dwindled. The
statistics show it. As of day-now the total license grant numbers are STILL DOWN going into the 7th year from the peak of all grants on 2 July 2003. Roughly 10K lower. Total license grants had NOT gone over that old peak even though USA population has increased. Technician class licensees are now 48% of all classes and still rising...and that class shows signs of STAYING in that class (General class has the greatest percentage in grace period).

If you cannot "connect the dots" on where USA amateur radio is headed, then maybe there's just too many "dots" to connect and you've become confused. Do you wish to still (weakly) trumpet any refrain that "old is better?" I think it would be foolish if you continue, but somehow I know you will keep that up until the Lord turns off your main switch.

Innovation-wise, USA amateur radio has become second-rate. That includes so many long-timers sitting around being judgemental (if not plain arrogant), but not innovating, expecting others to do THEIR work? <shrug>

AF6AY

RE: Simplicity

by N2EY on December 5, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

K8MN writes: "It would be quite easy to rig up some old scraps of pine 1x4" stock, mount them on pivots, set up to activate microswitches for left knee/right knee up/down tuning."

Quite innovative, really, I don't know of any similar application. Some might even call it "pine-eering"....

btw, if you need microswitches, I've got several I'll donate to the cause. Given to me by a mutual friend.

Speaking of 1x, note that 1x2 Amateur Extra K1VT has accumulated over 400 patents in his career. (Article over on ARRL.org IIRC). All sorts of pioneering innovation - from a long-time 20 wpm Extra.

---

Personally I go for simplicity, which is why I like your pine-board idea. Why use lots of parts - or words - when a few will do the same job?

For example, the VFO for the Type 6 is built in a cut-down ARC-5 transmitter chassis. (Cutting down the chassis idea is from the Cowan book "Command Sets".) A little work with hand tools, some ingenuity and a handful of parts and the result is a stable, smooth, slow-tuning-rate VFO that cost only a few hours of my time.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on December 5, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KF6QEX wrote on December 4, 2009:

"There is nothing special about a large tuning knob.
It's just the way it was meant to be."

FUNDAMENTALIST theology in AMATEUR radio? :-)

No, it was NOT "meant to be" anymore than morse code was "meant to be" in amateur radio (forever). :-)

That sort of fundamentalist BS was used during the long, protracted argument over elimination of the code test years ago. It didn't work then, it won't work on another subject now. <shrug>

AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on December 5, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KF6QEX writes: "It's just the way it was meant to be."

Well, I kinda disagree with that. It all depends on the application.

My Heathkit HW-2036, built in 1977, doesn't have a tuning knob at all. And it's a "real" ham rig!

OTOH, for many kinds of amateur operation, a nice tuning knob setup is very desirable. That's evident in all Southgate Radio products.

73 de Jim, N2EY

What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K2OWR on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

::::Isn't anyone editing these articles?

What's next, the no RF radio, maybe something with no actual audio that uses some sort of a probe you insert? Anybody remember the artcle on the infinite gain antenna from QST many years ago.....it was hilarious.

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

K2OWR asks: "What's next, the no RF radio"

Already exists:

http://www.eham.net/articles/21611

Note how the author writes as if "CQ100" is the same thing as being on the air.

It's no joke.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY replied to KF6QEX on 5 Dec 09:

KF6QEX writes: "It's just the way it was meant to be."

N2EY: "... OTOH, for many kinds of amateur operation, a nice tuning knob setup is very desirable. That's evident in all Southgate Radio products."

Sorry, but that is FAR from "evident." There's a problem there with the existance of this "Southgate Radio" alleged company that you've metioned many times on different forums in the past. A thorough search of the Internet via both Yahoo!! and Google, plus Masters, Thomas, EET annual directory in current printed forms, and many other lists of both radio manufacurers and amateur radio manufacturers found on the Internet shows NO evidence of the existance of any "Southgate Radio."

There IS the Southgate Amateur Radio Club in the UK, quite a large one judging by their website and different articles, plenty of international radio news, but there is no sign that the Southgate ARC ever MADE any products. Their archives don't contain much about vacuum tube designs. There IS the Southgate Radio and Television business in Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada but they don't appear to be MAKING any amateur radio equipment. There IS the suburb of Los Angeles called Southgate but it is large enough that it MIGHT have one or two companies making electronic products. Having been through it many times I would just put aside looking in detail. There are several other cities in the USA named "Southgate." There's even a small book publisher called "Southgate" but no evidence that this publisher ever made any radios.

On trying to search for "Southgate Type" (using just those words), I encounter only your newsgroup messages and some e-ham forums that you'e written in, stating such a radio type exists. A search of the ARRL website doesn't turn up any "Southgate radio" nor the CQ magazine archive done by Buckmaster. ARRL searches show "Southgate" only as a geographic location, as in addresses.

I've been involved in electronics so long that I've had three successive annual catalogs from Allied Radio (distributor) in Chicago by the time you were born. [they are now Allied Electronics and their 2009 catalog on the shelf above is about 2 1/2 inches thick] In fact, when you were born, I was already operating and maintaining HF transmitters in Tokyo as an Army signalman. I don't claim to be eidetic but I have a good memory and have NO recognition of ANY radio manufacturer with "Southgate" in its name, then or now. In the early part of WWII, the Lewyt Vacuum Cleaner company did make BC-339 and BC-340 HF transmitters because their metal labels (firmly affixed, not taped) were seen so many times.

I'm only human and could possibly make a mistake on memory but I doubt it. If I were given some tangible PROOF such as an advertisement or listing in an old catalog, I would acknowledge that this "Southgate Radio" exists. Therein is a problem: there's no evidence of its existance today. There's no evidence that it ever existed.

My own take on this "Southgate Radio" thing is that its a product of your imagination. None of us can discuss any subject with someone who uses imaginary references from their own mind. Personal opinions are one thing but sources of "design philosophy" about unknown "products" is bordering on delusional. Please don't bring that "Southgate Radio" thing up again until you have third-party PROOF that such a company exists or existed during your lifetime...and then show the evidence to others.

AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KF6QEX on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KF6QEX wrote on December 4, 2009:

"There is nothing special about a large tuning knob.
It's just the way it was meant to be."

AF6AY replied:
FUNDAMENTALIST theology in AMATEUR radio? :-)

No, it was NOT "meant to be" anymore than morse code was "meant to be" in amateur radio (forever). :-)

That sort of fundamentalist BS was used during the long, protracted argument over elimination of the code test years ago. It didn't work then, it won't work on another subject now. <shrug>

AF6AY

KF6QEX replies:
Fundamentalist theology? Calling something the way it was meant to be, is more of a Platonic idea that came long before organized religions and before the word theology was even invented.
It seems so far that most people like large tuning knobs, some lke 'me small, and some seem to be happy with flat puch buttons. I belive everything else with a rig being equal, most everyone will opt for a nice big hefty tuning knob.
As for your CW reference ...lets keep focused on tuning knobs....
How about this: Wheels are round. That's how they were meant to be. Hopefully you see no fundamentalist theology in that too!!!!!!!!

N2EY: I am not familiar with the HW-2036, I never said that only real ham rigs have a tuning knob. But I am glad to see you recognize that a "nice tuning knob setup is very desirable".

I know Ten Tec used to offer a tuning knob setup for "armchair tuning" and there are a lot of hams that have complained about having to use the mouse to tune SDR radios. On another thread it was even argued that just because an radio is Software Defined, it should still come with a "face" with knobs (just like "regular" radios)
All I know is that I like turning the tuning knob to find stations, and I really dislike the UP/DOWN hold-and-it-goes-faster on my alarm clock.
This can be argued forever and no one will agree since it seems the heels are dug pretty deep.
We have knob people on one side and the people that see the knob people as being stuck in the past/old/ancient/against progress/uwilling to try "new" things and new technology etc etc etc etc etc etc ....but I don't see anyone saying how they HATE tuning knobs.
Funny how that works. :)

As long as I don't have to turn (!) my tuning knobs in...I'll be happy :)
Dimitri

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KF6QEX:

The Heathkit HW-2036 is a 2 meter FM rig produced in the late 1970s. One of the first synthesized 2 meter rigs for the amateur market. It has three lever switches to set the frequency, rather than a tuning knob. Does the job for the specialized application.

When mobiling, I actually preferred that arrangement, because I could tune by counting clicks on the lever switches without looking at the rig at all.

But that's the exception that proves the rule.

---

You can see pictures of and some info on a CW receiver I built back in the 1970s here:

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX1.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX2.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX3.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX4.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX6.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/jiminfo.doc

That receiver was best known as part of the Southgate Type 4 system. Note the tuning and control knobs.

Remote tuning knobs are popular too - here's one example:

http://www.griffintechnology.com/products/powermate/

Although designed as a computer volume control (even computer folks like knobs!) it is popular with hams as a remote tuning knob. So a rig that doesn't have a tuning knob, or which has an inadequate one, can be improved.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KF6QEX on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY, yes.. BCD switches...
Cool tube rig, to bad about the re-roofing job :(
As for the Griffin knob... very nice !!! Just by looking at it makes you want to turn it !!!

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N2EY on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KF6QEX: The Southgate Type 4 was dismantled for the parts. Nothing goes to waste.

You can see a picture of the Southgate Type 7 (built in the 1990s, still in use today) on the QRZ site (look up my call).

There are several styles of the PowerMate; check 'em out.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KF6QEX posted on 7 Dec 09:

"AF6AY replied: FUNDAMENTALIST theology in AMATEUR radio? :-)"

"Fundamentalist theology? Calling something the way it was meant to be, is more of a Platonic idea that came long before organized religions and before the word theology was even invented."

Heh heh...thanks for the reply. My hopes of getting anyone to THINK (even if in terms of philosophy) farther than amateur radio advertising phrases isn't very high. I get surprised when anyone steps out of the "MY way is the best way" common refrain seen in here. :-)

Oh, and the 'radio' word was coined AFTER radio had been demonstrated publicly in 1896. :-)
..............
"It seems so far that most people like large tuning knobs, some lke 'me small, and some seem to be happy with flat puch buttons. I belive everything else with a rig being equal, most everyone will opt for a nice big hefty tuning knob."

I prefer a tuning knob. But that wasn't really what I think Charles Cohen had in mind. My take on that is that Charles was trying to point out the possibilities of NEW methods of tuning.

In the "old style" of (amateur) radios, all the kudos were heaped on MECHANICAL means to rotate those variable capacitors and couple that to nice big mechanical dials. [in the Collins PTO case, it was to rotate the lead screw that moved the follower that moved a powdered iron core into and out of a cylindrical inductor] MECHANICAL structures were used for decades, became "imprinted" in many minds as the "only" way to do it.

By the 1960s design philosophy began to change. First, it was with minimization of tuning, especially with elimination of "ganged" variable capacitors. The usually-discounted Wadley Loop provided double-conversion HF receivers with quartz crystal stability so that a single VFO could do the tuning for ALL bands...without using any frequency synthesizers. But, frequency synthesizers were made practical for lower-cost radios shortly after the Barlow-Wadley came on the market.

By the 1970s the design philosophies were refined and the frequency synthesizer that could do ALL the tuning, any conversion, and also adapt to transceivers for total frequency control...appeared. Those frequency synthesizers were controlled DIGITALLY, a concept very foreign (sometimes off-planet) to the uber-conservative long-timers who never fully adapted to solid-state technology.

Rotary encoders became the production design fashion for tuning in manufactured radios. Simple, relatively inexpensive, did NOT require a single mechanical coupling to anything behind the front panel. This was an adaptation for already-existing rotary position means that was used in more expensive commercial-industrial-military contract designs. A common interface was a dual flip-flop having inputs from a single optical track with two optical sensors positioned in quadrature, a means to detect separately both CW and CCW rotation movement. Despite variations on the theme circuit-wise, such 'encoder-decoders' needed a finer optical track on the decoder, raising the initial encoder cost. Dr. Robert Dennia published a design in 2004 on the Internet where the optical track could be minimized in resolution, yet achieve an up-count or down-count on ANY encoder state change. Maximum resolution of tuning possibility in an encoder-decoder subassembly, needing only three inexpensive gate DIPs with a couple of gates left over.

For the frequency synthesizer itself, there are probably about as many variations on it as there are circuit designers for it. A quantum jump was the appearance of the Analog Devices AD9851 single-IC DDS synthesizer capable of finer-than-1-Hz resolution anywhere from near-DC to 60 MHz output. Frequency control commands are entered ONLY digitally, either in serial or parallel form. It has been popular with some high-end amateur QRP designs. It is generally shunned by those who understand ONLY analog frequency generation.
.............
KF6QEX: "As for your CW reference ...lets keep focused on tuning knobs...."

My bad, but with N2EY in the audience, it is unavoidable. :-)
.............
"How about this: Wheels are round. That's how they were meant to be. Hopefully you see no fundamentalist theology in that too!!!!!!!!"

A wheel is considered one of the Basic Machines. Wheels were in-use MUCH BEFORE 'radio' was first demonstrated. Pre-Roman-Empire Egyptians used wheels on chariots and carts.
..............
KF6QEX: "We have knob people on one side and the people that see the knob people as being stuck in the past/old/ancient/against progress/uwilling to try "new" things and new technology etc etc etc etc etc etc ....but I don't see anyone saying how they HATE tuning knobs."

The 'arguments' seem to ONLY involve the mechanical side of any tuning system. There has been virtually NO arguments about the electronic side of control whether analog or digital is involved. All these guru-wannabe Extras spouting off in here don't seem to know much about the electronic technology behind their front panels. <shrug>

73, Len AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KF6QEX on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

AF6AY:The 'arguments' seem to ONLY involve the mechanical side of any tuning system. There has been virtually NO arguments about the electronic side of control whether analog or digital is involved. All these guru-wannabe Extras spouting off in here don't seem to know much about the electronic technology behind their front panels. <shrug>
----
Although I enjoyed your summarization of some of the methods by which a device can be caused to alter its frequency....."what" the knob does behind the panel is irrelevant.
It's all about what it feels like in your hand (or your finger tips) when you tune. And given the size of the average human hand there must be a knob size that is close to ideal ..and probably it is what most people here call "big". Whether it's moves the core of a PTO or sends serial or parallel data to a DDS or turning one or a gang of 32 variable capacitors....a knob is a knob and yes..."smaller ones" are "frowned upon" apparently :)
All this boils down to: Yes the Ft-450 has a small tuning knob, no one likes it, and some people don't mind it (usually the owners of the FT-450)
I'm sure if I loved everything else about the 450 I would tolerate the smaller knob too.
:)
Dimitri

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by N3EVL on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

The whole big knob/small knob debate becomes moot as the radios' capabilities (specifically wrt tuning options) expand beyond simple up/down sequential tuning.

If my radio presents information that frequency 'x' is worth moving to _and_ provides a variety of means to get from current frequency to 'x', then I expect the control interface to have enough degrees of freedom *at_hand* to allow me to get there. A tuning knob alone, no mater its size, weight, feel, smoothness, familiarity, etc, probably does not cut it!

What It's Really About

by N2EY on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KF6QEX writes: "....."what" the knob does behind the panel is irrelevant.

It's all about what it feels like in your hand (or your finger tips) when you tune."

Yep. That says it all. Thanks.

73 de Jim, N2EY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by K6LHA on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

KF6QEX wrote on December 8, 2009:

"AF6AY:The 'arguments' seem to ONLY involve the mechanical side of any tuning system. There has been virtually NO arguments about the electronic side of control whether analog or digital is involved. All these guru-wannabe Extras spouting off in here don't seem to know much about the electronic technology behind their front panels. <shrug>
----
Although I enjoyed your summarization of some of the methods by which a device can be caused to alter its frequency....."what" the knob does behind the panel is irrelevant."

We part ways on that alleged irrelevancy. The electronic industry came up with the buzzword "human factors" in the 1970s and, generally, that was a good thing in systems design. Started by the "defense industry," it applied to many areas of human-machine interfacing. Note: The 1970s era still used long-established controls going back to before WWII.

The "critics" of certain subject matters - none of which being of legal training - often cite the Part 97 Basis and Purpose definitions (when they have nothing else to offer in rebuttal), trying to emphasize "advancing the state of the art" in amateur radio. Such "state of the art" would INCLUDE what goes on behind the panel. The licensed radio amateur is totally responsible for everything about their station and it doesn't stop just at operating procedure, "proper formal jargon," etc. Its the whole magilla when it comes to technical operation.

NEWER ways to control frequency (among other controls) involve DIFFERENT circuits and technology than just mechanical couplings and fancy dial displays done mechanically. Indeed, the modern frequency synthesizer does NOT have any direct mechanical interface of control or display and REQUIRES an electronic interface to show its condition to a human user. There's nothing wrong with that - except when the user doesn't have the knowledge of how such interfaces work, let alone the frequency synthesizer subsystem itself. Most seem to try to shift responsibility to the manufacturer as being "at fault" when something doesn't go right. They might be at home with replacing a #47 pilot lamp for a dial in the old mechanical control-dial system, but that doesn't cut it with modern ready-made rigs. That incandescent pilot lamp was never PART of the frequency control system, only an addition for human visibility improvement (or for bling in advertising).

We can get back to "advancing the state of the art" by doing some catch-up to try to reach the 1970s-1980s level of "the art" in behind-the-panel cognizance or just remain locked-in to the technology before that time. In NO way will I accept those "expert gurus" in amateurism who refuse to increase their personal knowledge yet pretend to knowallaboutit today. The traditionalist who yearns for "simpler times" is someone I consider just too lazy to keep up. But, oddly, so many accuse us of "being lazy."

In a way, such traditionalist attitudes describe the laziest bunch of all, yet they PRETEND to be leaders.

AF6AY

RE: What's Special About a Tuning Knob?

by KF6QEX on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend!

N2EY: No, no, Thank you !!! :)

AF6Ay: "We part ways on that alleged irrelevancy"

Well...I am glad we parted ways...
I'm also flad I can focus my camera lens by turning a focus ring that controls the motor that moves the lenses, and I am also glad I still have a gas pedal in my car instead of a potensiomenter, and I am also glad I also have a steering wheel instead of a pot as well.
"Drive-by-wire" doesn't mean you take away the stering wheel.

The magic of designing interfaces and incorporating technology into everyday life is about keeping the wizard and the levers hidden behind the curtains.

Kenwood inderstands this and the fact that you can buy a TS-2000 with knobs and switches OR headless, computer controlled proves that.
Everyone else especially the SDR companies...are still trying to convince everyone that you don't need a face other than the (cheaper to produce) control software.

Dimitri

Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Other Recent Articles

VK5RJ Still Gracing the Airwaves at Age 101:

rec.radio.amateur.moderated -- 5 Yrs. Old:

Tune-In To The World -- Amateur Radio Gets People Talking:

Student Sends MIT Letter to Space:

Amateur Radio Club Talks to Hams Worldwide on Centennial: