Everything for Electronics

Reader Feedback (03.2019)

   View In Digital Edition  

Radio Fan #1

I got a kick out of the “Radio that Bridge Built” article in Issue-2. For a while, I collected early radios. Here’s a photo of my Crosley 51, although mine is an earlier model than the one illustrated on page 48. This company made many small changes to its models.

Theron Wierenga

Radio Fan #2

Regarding the “Radio Station that Bridge Built” article in Issue-2, for some info from the WLW side of the story, see the booklet “Simplicity of Radio” put out by Crosley Corp in 1929.

It should be easy to find; my copy is edition 20. Enjoyed this article very much. I lived in Cincinnati during WW2.

Harry Noble N8CYS

Strikes a Chord

Just letting you know that I really like the new article that you guys are doing in your magazine about DIY modular synthesis. I’m really interested in that topic. I hope that you continue to do articles about that and about building different modules.

Reece Beck

Making Waves

The article on radio waves in Issue-1 by George Steber was very interesting. I am a retired physicist, but was unaware of Heaviside’s role, and that Maxwell originally formulated the theory using the vector potential.

Although Heaviside simplified the equations by dropping the vector potential, it has come back in the 20th century as the “gauge theory” of all forces except gravitational.

George Bertsch

Thanks George for the nice feedback. Many are unaware of the role of Heaviside in Maxwell’s equations.

As I said in the article, he was a “first rate oddity” and the forgotten genius behind the acceptance of Maxwell’s theory.

Dr. Steber

Thumbs Up for CW

I enjoyed and identified with Bryan Bergeron’s editorial on “How To Learn CW” in the 2019 Issue-2 of Nuts & Volts. His examples of how and why to learn CW (Continuous Wave/Morse Code) were helpful in that he provided multiple sources for sending and receiving equipment.

To add to his examples, allow me to suggest a website that I recently found and use for CW practice: www.LCWO.net (Learn CW Online). As they say, “At LCWO, you can learn Morse telegraphy (CW) online in your browser. You don’t need to install a program on your computer, and you always have your personal settings available from any computer on the globe with an Internet connection. You can also easily track your progress by means of different statistical functions.” Try it! It’s FREE and can certainly allow one to learn (or re-learn) CW at their own pace.

In terms of my personal feelings about the subject, learning CW is a two-fold skill: sending and receiving. Sending CW is a tactile skill much like riding a bike; once you learn to do it, it becomes a natural activity and stays with you (even though you may forget the code if you don’t practice it).

On the other hand, receiving CW is like learning a foreign language; i.e., it’s a skill that requires constant practice or else it’s totally forgotten. So, to repeat, learning CW is really two skills (at least I feel it is).

As a ham (WA6ZOK; Amateur Extra Class with 20 wpm code), I think of CW as “old school texting.” That is, while it’s easier to communicate with someone using “phone” (voice), CW is a lot more fun and exciting, and gets to the root of communications. Like Bergeron, perhaps I look forward to just tuning around the dial to listen to and practice receiving CW.

Again, thanks for the nice article on CW and also for having Nuts & Volts include more amateur radio articles.

John Gavlik WA6ZOK

Glad you liked it! And thanks for the website reference. It’s on my list of favorites as well, but had to limit my editorial at some point.

And I’m with you on CW. Old school, but fun!

Bryan NU1N

NESCAF Corrections

Just thought I’d correct a few errors in the recent “Discovering the NESCAF” article:

  1. Filter schematic. Standard three-pin voltage regulator circuit but you’d never use such a large cap on the output side; 1 MFD max.
  2. Figure 3 is not “dead bug” style. Author should look up what that term means.
  3. QRM is not an acronym. Again look up the definition!


Regarding Jeff’s comments:

  1. I built the filter, tested it, and used it in my shack. Perhaps the gentleman can do better, but it worked to my satisfaction.
  2. He is correct. The circuit is not “dead bug.” I rebuilt the circuit and failed to update the text accordingly.
  3. He is correct. QRM is not an acronym, it’s a Q-signal.

Please accept my apology for these mistakes. I certainly should have been more careful.

Steve Jackson