H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of the
X-chapters out soon.
https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=books
It will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'm designing a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is still
analog!
On 2/21/26 10:43 AM, john larkin wrote:
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of the
X-chapters out soon.
https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=books
It will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'm
designing a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is still
analog!
The world will remain analog. Past a certain clock rate all digital
becomes analog again but the supply of analog engineers is drying up.
Which is why I am yanked back out of retirement a lot.
The next urgent
problem is supposed to arrive Monday before 10am.
Maybe I get a chance
to walk the dog before it's here.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid ><martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far. The current price is around
$85.
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid <martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far. The current price is around
$85.
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 11:00:44 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid >><martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
Yes.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far. The current price is around
$85.
A million copies? That's immense for such a deeply technical and
arcane book. Is there a breakdown available? Worldwide?
Joe
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:39:18 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 11:00:44 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid >>><martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
Yes.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far. The current price is around >>>$85.
A million copies? That's immense for such a deeply technical and
arcane book. Is there a breakdown available? Worldwide?
Joe
Google AI says over a million in 8 languages.
It's not arcane!
I've probably bought 20 copies of AoE. I give them to employees and
interns and recently gave away a couple as prizes to an ee class at
City College. They had me autograph them.
John Larkin--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center
Lunatic Fringe Electronics
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:25:58 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:39:18 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 11:00:44 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid >>>><martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the >>>>X-chapters.
Yes.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far. The current price is around >>>>$85.
A million copies? That's immense for such a deeply technical and
arcane book. Is there a breakdown available? Worldwide?
Joe
Google AI says over a million in 8 languages.
It's not arcane!
I've probably bought 20 copies of AoE. I give them to employees and
interns and recently gave away a couple as prizes to an ee class at
City College. They had me autograph them.
ROFL
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 22:42:11 +0000, JM
<sunaecoNoChoppedPork@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:25:58 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:39:18 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 11:00:44 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid >>>>><martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the >>>>>X-chapters.
Yes.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far. The current price is around >>>>>$85.
A million copies? That's immense for such a deeply technical and >>>>arcane book. Is there a breakdown available? Worldwide?
Joe
Google AI says over a million in 8 languages.
It's not arcane!
I've probably bought 20 copies of AoE. I give them to employees and >>>interns and recently gave away a couple as prizes to an ee class at
City College. They had me autograph them.
ROFL
rofl?
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:54:32 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 22:42:11 +0000, JM
<sunaecoNoChoppedPork@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:25:58 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:39:18 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 11:00:44 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid >>>>>><martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the >>>>>>X-chapters.
Yes.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far. The current price is around >>>>>>$85.
A million copies? That's immense for such a deeply technical and >>>>>arcane book. Is there a breakdown available? Worldwide?
Joe
Google AI says over a million in 8 languages.
It's not arcane!
I've probably bought 20 copies of AoE. I give them to employees and >>>>interns and recently gave away a couple as prizes to an ee class at >>>>City College. They had me autograph them.
ROFL
rofl?
Roll On the Floor Laughing
On 2/23/26 20:00, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far. The current price is around
$85.
I think Amazon has the Kindle version for ~3u
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 20:17:01 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:54:32 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 22:42:11 +0000, JM
<sunaecoNoChoppedPork@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:25:58 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:39:18 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 11:00:44 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
Yes.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far. The current price is around >>>>>>> $85.
A million copies? That's immense for such a deeply technical and
arcane book. Is there a breakdown available? Worldwide?
Joe
Google AI says over a million in 8 languages.
It's not arcane!
I've probably bought 20 copies of AoE. I give them to employees and
interns and recently gave away a couple as prizes to an ee class at
City College. They had me autograph them.
ROFL
rofl?
Roll On the Floor Laughing
Of course, but I didn't know that people still used that old
expression.
What I wonder is what he found amusing.
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 23:23:35 +0100, Lasse Langwadt <llc@fonz.dk>
wrote:
On 2/23/26 20:00, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far. The current price is around
$85.
I think Amazon has the Kindle version for ~3-u
Yeah. Kids don't read books any more.
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 20:17:01 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:54:32 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 22:42:11 +0000, JM
<sunaecoNoChoppedPork@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:25:58 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 14:39:18 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> >>>>>wrote:
On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 11:00:44 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>>wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid >>>>>>><martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the >>>>>>>X-chapters.
Yes.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far. The current price is around >>>>>>>$85.
A million copies? That's immense for such a deeply technical and >>>>>>arcane book. Is there a breakdown available? Worldwide?
Joe
Google AI says over a million in 8 languages.
It's not arcane!
I've probably bought 20 copies of AoE. I give them to employees and >>>>>interns and recently gave away a couple as prizes to an ee class at >>>>>City College. They had me autograph them.
ROFL
rofl?
Roll On the Floor Laughing
Of course, but I didn't know that people still used that old
expression.
What I wonder is what he found amusing.
On 2/21/2026 5:10 PM, Joerg wrote:
The next urgent problem is supposed to arrive Monday before 10am.
My next urgent (OT) problem is due this afternoon:
blizzard-a with 14 - 24 inches of that white global
warming predicted.
Maybe I get a chance to walk the dog before it's here.
Snowfall keeping me from going to the gym.
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid <martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far.
... The current price is around $85.
On 2/23/26 11:00 AM, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far.
Probably not counting all the counterfeit copies in countries where the
cost of the book would amount to a month's wages.
... The current price is around $85.
And worth every penny. Thousands of dollars in tuition at some
university won't even come close to what those $85 can do.
Back when I grew up there was no AoE. My main teaching material was the
ARRL Handbook. For anyone wanting to design RF stuff that is a must-read.
On 2/22/26 7:15 AM, ehsjr wrote:
On 2/21/2026 5:10 PM, Joerg wrote:
[...]
The next urgent problem is supposed to arrive Monday before 10am.
My next urgent (OT) problem is due this afternoon:
blizzarda with 14 - 24 inches of that white global
warming predicted.
I want my fair share of this global warming!
Maybe I get a chance to walk the dog before it's here.
Snowfall keeping me from going to the gym.
Shoveling lots of snow replaces the gym :-)
In my case it's splitting firewood so my gym visit are sparse now.
On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 14:53:34 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:
On 2/23/26 11:00 AM, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far.
Probably not counting all the counterfeit copies in countries where the
cost of the book would amount to a month's wages.
... The current price is around $85.
And worth every penny. Thousands of dollars in tuition at some
university won't even come close to what those $85 can do.
Back when I grew up there was no AoE. My main teaching material was the
ARRL Handbook. For anyone wanting to design RF stuff that is a must-read.
Popular Electronics mag was good too.
I had access to the Radiation Lab Series of books from the WWII radar
project at MIT. That was great.
I have the full set at home now.
One of my guys did a JLC proto board. It has edge-launch SMAs. TheSame here.
center pin is fat on the cheap connectors, so we have a big pad for soldering.
But that makes a capacitive glitch unless you cut away all the
interior PCB planes. He didn't.
I dremeled from the bottom all the way up to remove the layer 3 and 2
copper pours. Tricky. I was about 3 mils from punching through to the
other side.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/k1fd6i5upfjo7uucq2sx6/X126A_SMAs_Top.jpg?rlkey=871v8n1ng388yz11ibjr1sz2e&raw=1
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ubqushwcc19xww9hc5azf/X126A_Dremel_SMA.jpg?rlkey=610uod206u93z4x1iysvwp4n7&raw=1
Since I replaced the copper and the FR4 with air, the transition went
from very capacitive to slightly inductive.
On 2/23/26 11:00 AM, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far.
Probably not counting all the counterfeit copies in countries where the
cost of the book would amount to a month's wages.
... The current price is around $85.
And worth every penny. Thousands of dollars in tuition at some
university won't even come close to what those $85 can do.
Back when I grew up there was no AoE. My main teaching material was the
ARRL Handbook. For anyone wanting to design RF stuff that is a must-read.
On 2026-02-24 18:57, john larkin wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 14:53:34 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:
On 2/23/26 11:00 AM, john larkin wrote:Popular Electronics mag was good too.
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out
soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about
sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland
Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far.
Probably not counting all the counterfeit copies in countries where the
cost of the book would amount to a month's wages.
... The current price is around $85.
And worth every penny. Thousands of dollars in tuition at some
university won't even come close to what those $85 can do.
Back when I grew up there was no AoE. My main teaching material was the
ARRL Handbook. For anyone wanting to design RF stuff that is a must-read. >>
I had access to the Radiation Lab Series of books from the WWII radar
project at MIT. That was great.
I have the full set at home now.
My fave was Wireless World.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
"Phil Hobbs" <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote in message >news:7fb54d6b-2e35-c245-dcdc-8aa9109e8e10@electrooptical.net...
On 2026-02-24 18:57, john larkin wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 14:53:34 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:
On 2/23/26 11:00 AM, john larkin wrote:Popular Electronics mag was good too.
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out
soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about
sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland
Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far.
Probably not counting all the counterfeit copies in countries where the >>>> cost of the book would amount to a month's wages.
... The current price is around $85.
And worth every penny. Thousands of dollars in tuition at some
university won't even come close to what those $85 can do.
Back when I grew up there was no AoE. My main teaching material was the >>>> ARRL Handbook. For anyone wanting to design RF stuff that is a must-read. >>>
I had access to the Radiation Lab Series of books from the WWII radar
project at MIT. That was great.
I have the full set at home now.
My fave was Wireless World.
For some reason I was thinking about this today: >https://www.worldradiohistory.com/UK/Wireless-World/50s/Wireless-World-1952-10.pdf
Although it's before I was born there's a circuit on page 404 (pdf page 22) which was
subsequently used by anyone and everyone who needed one.
Another example of this might be Tobey Dinsdale audio amplifier.
Before that, designers would put driver and output transformers in transistor amplifiers,
even when driving only a single low impedance speaker.
After that, nearly all transistor audio amplifiers were based on it.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 21:04:09 -0500, "Edward Rawde"
<invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
"Phil Hobbs" <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote in message >>news:7fb54d6b-2e35-c245-dcdc-8aa9109e8e10@electrooptical.net...
On 2026-02-24 18:57, john larkin wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 14:53:34 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> >>>> wrote:
On 2/23/26 11:00 AM, john larkin wrote:Popular Electronics mag was good too.
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out
soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about
sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland
Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far.
Probably not counting all the counterfeit copies in countries where the >>>>> cost of the book would amount to a month's wages.
... The current price is around $85.
And worth every penny. Thousands of dollars in tuition at some
university won't even come close to what those $85 can do.
Back when I grew up there was no AoE. My main teaching material was the >>>>> ARRL Handbook. For anyone wanting to design RF stuff that is a must-read. >>>>
I had access to the Radiation Lab Series of books from the WWII radar
project at MIT. That was great.
I have the full set at home now.
My fave was Wireless World.
For some reason I was thinking about this today: >>https://www.worldradiohistory.com/UK/Wireless-World/50s/Wireless-World-1952-10.pdf
Although it's before I was born there's a circuit on page 404 (pdf page 22) which was
subsequently used by anyone and everyone who needed one.
Another example of this might be Tobey Dinsdale audio amplifier.
Before that, designers would put driver and output transformers in transistor amplifiers,
even when driving only a single low impedance speaker.
After that, nearly all transistor audio amplifiers were based on it.
You've probably seen the text below.
Am 25.02.26 um 01:12 schrieb john larkin:
One of my guys did a JLC proto board. It has edge-launch SMAs. TheSame here.
center pin is fat on the cheap connectors, so we have a big pad for
soldering.
But that makes a capacitive glitch unless you cut away all the
interior PCB planes. He didn't.
I dremeled from the bottom all the way up to remove the layer 3 and 2
copper pours. Tricky. I was about 3 mils from punching through to the
other side.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/k1fd6i5upfjo7uucq2sx6/X126A_SMAs_Top.jpg?rlkey=871v8n1ng388yz11ibjr1sz2e&raw=1
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ubqushwcc19xww9hc5azf/X126A_Dremel_SMA.jpg?rlkey=610uod206u93z4x1iysvwp4n7&raw=1
Since I replaced the copper and the FR4 with air, the transition went
from very capacitive to slightly inductive.
Solder-friendly pads:
< >https://www.flickr.com/photos/137684711@N07/51843174578/in/datetaken/lightbox/
>
Z-friendly pads:
<
https://www.flickr.com/photos/137684711@N07/52973542168/in/datetaken/ >
result is slightly overcompensated:
<
https://www.flickr.com/photos/137684711@N07/53780597885/in/datetaken/ >
the setup:
< >https://www.flickr.com/photos/137684711@N07/52973631607/in/datetaken/lightbox/
>
cheers, Gerhard
Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net>wrote:
My fave was Wireless World.
"JM" <sunaecoNoChoppedPork@gmail.com> wrote in message news:d7nspkdm7cc4t7u5shd91qcnib0pfgia9d@4ax.com...
On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 21:04:09 -0500, "Edward Rawde"
<invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
"Phil Hobbs" <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote in message
news:7fb54d6b-2e35-c245-dcdc-8aa9109e8e10@electrooptical.net...
On 2026-02-24 18:57, john larkin wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 14:53:34 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> >>>>> wrote:
On 2/23/26 11:00 AM, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out
soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about
sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland
Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far.
Probably not counting all the counterfeit copies in countries where the >>>>>> cost of the book would amount to a month's wages.
... The current price is around $85.
And worth every penny. Thousands of dollars in tuition at some
university won't even come close to what those $85 can do.
Back when I grew up there was no AoE. My main teaching material was the >>>>>> ARRL Handbook. For anyone wanting to design RF stuff that is a must-read.
Popular Electronics mag was good too.
I had access to the Radiation Lab Series of books from the WWII radar >>>>> project at MIT. That was great.
I have the full set at home now.
My fave was Wireless World.
For some reason I was thinking about this today:
https://www.worldradiohistory.com/UK/Wireless-World/50s/Wireless-World-1952-10.pdf
Although it's before I was born there's a circuit on page 404 (pdf page 22) which was
subsequently used by anyone and everyone who needed one.
Another example of this might be Tobey Dinsdale audio amplifier.
Before that, designers would put driver and output transformers in transistor amplifiers,
even when driving only a single low impedance speaker.
After that, nearly all transistor audio amplifiers were based on it.
You've probably seen the text below.
Wow. I hadn't seen and wasn't aware of most of that.
Thanks for posting it.
HJL then looked me straight in the eye and added 'I have far more
money than you, and if you rock my boat I will destroy you.'
You are using fancier connectors with tiny center pins. I'm using the
really cheap, under $2, ones with giant round center pins. An e/m sim
says that the pin alone, not on a board, is about 100 ohms.
Why do people make such a big deal over right-angle trace bends? I've
never seen one on my 30 ps TDR.
I cut away all the planes under the connector center pin and pave over
the bottom side with copper. That just about works.
Most of the JLCPCB 4 and 6-layer stacks have absurdly thin L1-L2 dielectrics. A couple have double prepreg, thicker dielectric, so let
you make fatter traces, like 20 mils for 50 ohms. Less loss.
Am 25.02.26 um 04:44 schrieb john larkin:
You are using fancier connectors with tiny center pins. I'm using the
really cheap, under $2, ones with giant round center pins. An e/m sim
says that the pin alone, not on a board, is about 100 ohms.
One can see the influence of the SMA center connector on the picture
of the solder-friendly board on the unpopulated side. The dip is by
far not as severe.
Why do people make such a big deal over right-angle trace bends? I've
never seen one on my 30 ps TDR.
I wanted to make sure that I don't ask for trouble if I meander
from a ball grid array.
I cut away all the planes under the connector center pin and pave over
the bottom side with copper. That just about works.
... but have enough gnd vias around. *ON* the board it's layer L2 that
counts for GND.
Most of the JLCPCB 4 and 6-layer stacks have absurdly thin L1-L2
dielectrics. A couple have double prepreg, thicker dielectric, so let
you make fatter traces, like 20 mils for 50 ohms. Less loss.
For a NMR project on 8 GHz, I had a mixed Rogers TMM-6 & FR4 board.
Not from JLCPCB but the customer's favourite shop around the corner.
The strip lines ended up on the FR-4 side, power supply on TMM_6.
Yes, we *had* talked about the stackup. It's clearly the best not to
expect people thinking or to deviate from their daily routine.
BTW, TMM-6 is a brittle, ugly material which feels much like an
eraser gum. I would not use it alone without FR4 for mechanical reasons.
We used to build oil/gaz pipeline pigs. FR4 may soak up hydrocarbons
and swell. That may crack the vias open. So we went to boards made
from Kapton.
Be alarmed when the factory offers short production times. Kapton
prepregs have a shelf live of only a few weeks. They may be tempted
sell you prepregs that are left over from a project half a year ago.
Your boards will de-laminate after two weeks in the field.
Been there, seen that, with luxury top notch FPGAs that cost 1000s. :-(
cheers, Gerhard
"Phil Hobbs" <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote in message >news:7fb54d6b-2e35-c245-dcdc-8aa9109e8e10@electrooptical.net...
On 2026-02-24 18:57, john larkin wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 14:53:34 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:
On 2/23/26 11:00 AM, john larkin wrote:Popular Electronics mag was good too.
On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 15:25:51 -0500 (EST), Martin Rid
<martin_riddle@verison.net> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Wrote in message:r
H&H are still publishing. There will be a new edition of theX-chapters out
soon.https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-x-Chapters-Paul-Horowitz/dp/1009632884?s=booksIt will have a lot of stuff about
sensors, which is cool because I'mdesigning a lot of sensor simulators lately. The world is stillanalog!John LarkinHighland
Tech Glen Canyon Design CenterLunatic Fringe Electronics
Will that make it the third edition?
Cherrs
AoE is at rev 3. I think this will be the 2nd edition of the
X-chapters.
AoE has sold over a million copies so far.
Probably not counting all the counterfeit copies in countries where the >>>> cost of the book would amount to a month's wages.
... The current price is around $85.
And worth every penny. Thousands of dollars in tuition at some
university won't even come close to what those $85 can do.
Back when I grew up there was no AoE. My main teaching material was the >>>> ARRL Handbook. For anyone wanting to design RF stuff that is a must-read. >>>
I had access to the Radiation Lab Series of books from the WWII radar
project at MIT. That was great.
I have the full set at home now.
My fave was Wireless World.
For some reason I was thinking about this today: >https://www.worldradiohistory.com/UK/Wireless-World/50s/Wireless-World-1952-10.pdf
Although it's before I was born there's a circuit on page 404 (pdf page 22) which was
subsequently used by anyone and everyone who needed one.
Another example of this might be Tobey Dinsdale audio amplifier.
Before that, designers would put driver and output transformers in transistor amplifiers,
even when driving only a single low impedance speaker.
After that, nearly all transistor audio amplifiers were based on it.
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net>wrote:
My fave was Wireless World.
Yes, good read.
Elector (Electuur in Dutch) :-)
Radio Electronica (Dutch)
Dr Dobb's
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Dobb%27s_Journal
And of course a bit earlier: >https://archive.org/details/radio-blan/Radio_Blan_01_juli_1960/
And many more, here in the Netherlands.
Books?
Not so much, that X chapter thing? Art of tronix? downloaded one free chapter >on my Pocketbook Aqua2 reader.
Have not really read it, nothing new...
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs transistors.
I recall someone making a tube audio power amp without transformers.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
Either of those is misleading.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs
transistors.
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means
of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were >mismatched.
I recall someone making a tube audio power amp without transformers.
Philips designed one using two power pentodes in a 'totem-pole' >configuration. The loudspeaker had to be specially wound to give a much >higher impedance than normal. There was also another variant which used
a centre-tapped loudspeaker.
The valves were television types that had been designed to handle high
peak currents at low H.T. voltages. They were heater-chain types with
high voltage heater-cathode insulation, which was necessary for the
upper valve of the pair.
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_amplifier
Transformers with a control winding, aka magnetic amplifiers, were used
for power gain in servo systems and a few other applications from 1904 >through at least mid 1980s. Very reliable but drift with temperature.
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
Either of those is misleading.
Do you avoid using passive matching networks, for amps or antennas,
because the concept of increasing power is misleading?
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs
transistors.
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means
of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were >mismatched.
Nice phrase, "duh".
It's very Slomanesque, taking something obvious in its most literal
and distant meaning and then whining about imprecision.
That wasn't the first time he employed similar tactics, he was a very >unpleasant character.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
Either of those is misleading.
Do you avoid using passive matching networks, for amps or antennas,
because the concept of increasing power is misleading?
Of course I try to match the source to the load with passive devices so
as to optimise the power delivered the load but they don't increase the >power.
"Power gain" has a specific meaning, "matching the source to the load"
has another meaning that is completely different. A matching device
does not increase the power, it transfers the power without adding to it
in any way.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs
transistors.
That's right, reducing wasted power is not the same thing as "power
gain".
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means
of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were
mismatched.
Nice phrase, "duh".
It's very Slomanesque, taking something obvious in its most literal
and distant meaning and then whining about imprecision.
I often have to explain to semi-technical people that things like
acoustic horns do not amplify the sound, they simply provide better
matching to the acoustic impedance of the air. It's not whining about >imprecision to use the correct terminology.
You appeared to me to have enough knowledge of the fundamentals to
understand the difference between the two concepts and I gave you the
credit for this but assumed you had simply expressed it badly.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 06:52:43 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>wrote:
Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net>wrote:
My fave was Wireless World.
Yes, good read.
Elector (Electuur in Dutch) :-)
Radio Electronica (Dutch)
Dr Dobb's
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Dobb%27s_Journal
And of course a bit earlier: >>https://archive.org/details/radio-blan/Radio_Blan_01_juli_1960/
And many more, here in the Netherlands.
Books?
Not so much, that X chapter thing? Art of tronix? downloaded one free chapter >>on my Pocketbook Aqua2 reader.
Have not really read it, nothing new...
AoE is worth reading cover to cover.
I'd never heard of impact ionization gate current in jfets, which
explained a problem I was having. It's full of goodies like that.
The X-chapters are great too.
Glen Walpert <nospam@null.void>wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_amplifier
Transformers with a control winding, aka magnetic amplifiers, were used
for power gain in servo systems and a few other applications from 1904 >through at least mid 1980s. Very reliable but drift with temperature.
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 22:51:52 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean? >> >>
Either of those is misleading.
Do you avoid using passive matching networks, for amps or antennas,
because the concept of increasing power is misleading?
Of course I try to match the source to the load with passive devices so
as to optimise the power delivered the load but they don't increase the >power.
"Power gain" has a specific meaning, "matching the source to the load"
has another meaning that is completely different. A matching device
does not increase the power, it transfers the power without adding to it
in any way.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs
transistors.
That's right, reducing wasted power is not the same thing as "power
gain".
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means
of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were >> >mismatched.
Nice phrase, "duh".
It's very Slomanesque, taking something obvious in its most literal
and distant meaning and then whining about imprecision.
I often have to explain to semi-technical people that things like
acoustic horns do not amplify the sound, they simply provide better >matching to the acoustic impedance of the air. It's not whining about >imprecision to use the correct terminology.
You appeared to me to have enough knowledge of the fundamentals to >understand the difference between the two concepts and I gave you the >credit for this but assumed you had simply expressed it badly.
You should be a lawyer when you grow up.
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs transistors.
I recall someone making a tube audio power amp without transformers.
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
Either of those is misleading.
Do you avoid using passive matching networks, for amps or antennas,
because the concept of increasing power is misleading?
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs
transistors.
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means
of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were
mismatched.
Nice phrase, "duh".
It's very Slomanesque, taking something obvious in its most literal
and distant meaning and then whining about imprecision.
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 22:51:52 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
You should be a lawyer when you grow up.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 22:51:52 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >> >> >> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
[...]
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean? >> >> >>
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than
transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain. >> >> >> >
Either of those is misleading.
Do you avoid using passive matching networks, for amps or antennas,
because the concept of increasing power is misleading?
Of course I try to match the source to the load with passive devices so
as to optimise the power delivered the load but they don't increase the
power.
"Power gain" has a specific meaning, "matching the source to the load"
has another meaning that is completely different. A matching device
does not increase the power, it transfers the power without adding to it
in any way.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs
transistors.
That's right, reducing wasted power is not the same thing as "power
gain".
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means >> >> >of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were >> >> >mismatched.
Nice phrase, "duh".
It's very Slomanesque, taking something obvious in its most literal
and distant meaning and then whining about imprecision.
I often have to explain to semi-technical people that things like
acoustic horns do not amplify the sound, they simply provide better
matching to the acoustic impedance of the air. It's not whining about
imprecision to use the correct terminology.
You appeared to me to have enough knowledge of the fundamentals to
understand the difference between the two concepts and I gave you the
credit for this but assumed you had simply expressed it badly.
You should be a lawyer when you grow up.
I'm not sure what that is suppoed to mean but I assumed the inaccuracy
of your original statement was due to a momentary slip on your part, not
an abysmal lack of knowledge. If you are now stating that my assumption
was wrong, I thank you for your frankness.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 06:52:43 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>wrote:
Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net>wrote:
My fave was Wireless World.
Yes, good read.
Elector (Electuur in Dutch) :-)
Radio Electronica (Dutch)
Dr Dobb's
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Dobb%27s_Journal
And of course a bit earlier: >>>https://archive.org/details/radio-blan/Radio_Blan_01_juli_1960/
And many more, here in the Netherlands.
Books?
Not so much, that X chapter thing? Art of tronix? downloaded one free chapter
on my Pocketbook Aqua2 reader.
Have not really read it, nothing new...
AoE is worth reading cover to cover.
I'd never heard of impact ionization gate current in jfets, which
explained a problem I was having. It's full of goodies like that.
The X-chapters are great too.
These days I just type in my chromium browser the question
and 'duck-duck shows me the answer.
The right answer?
Where will it go?
Oh wait:
where will it go asking questions in the browser?
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=where+will+it+go+asking+questions+in+the+browser%3F
Generate answer for where will it go asking questions in the browser?
N++Search Assist
Google Support
https://support.google.com rC| chrome rC| answer rC| 16704170?hl=en-CO&co=GENIE.Platform=Desktop
Ask questions through AI Mode in Chrome - Google Help
Ask questions through AI Mode in Chrome You can ask questions to get AI-powered answers,
ask follow-up questions and get helpful links with AI Mode in Chrome. When you use AI Mode,
it divides your questions into subtopics, then searches for each one simultaneously.
This way, AI Mode finds more relevant content that matches your query.
So... and lots more on that page
Lemme try:
Typing in Chrome:
N++design a simple AM transistor radio for me
gives:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=design+a+simple+AM+transistor+radio+for+me&t=raspberrypi&ia=web
many good links, circuit diagrams and projects
In a second!!
sooooo
intersting:
How do I become the next US president?
Na, 14 year US living required
How do I become a milionare? >https://duckduckgo.com/?q=how+do+I+become+a+milionare%3F&t=raspberrypi&ia=web
Protected
Netherlands
Safe search: moderate
Any time
N++
Forbes
https://www.forbes.com rC| sites rC| melissahouston rC| 2024 rC| 03 rC| 17 rC| 10-proven-ways-to-become-a-self-made-millionaire
10 Proven Ways To Become A Self-Made Millionaire - Forbes
Mar 17, 2024I believe that the best path to becoming a self-made millionaire is through business ownership. By building a profitable business you can fast track your way to wealth.
Author:Melissa Houston
N++
Ramsey Solutions
https://www.ramseysolutions.com rC| retirement rC| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How to Become a Millionaire - Ramsey
Apr 15, 2025We've got good news for you. You can become a millionairerCoand it has nothing to do with your family's money or your education. It has everything to do with you.
N++
N++
Investopedia
https://www.investopedia.com rC| financial-advisor rC| how-much-save-to-become-millionaire
6 Steps to Becoming a Millionaire - Investopedia
Dec 23, 2025Discover six proven steps to become a millionaire: Save consistently, avoid debt, automate savings, invest wisely, grow your income, and resist lifestyle inflation.
N++
N++
Bankrate
https://www.bankrate.com rC| investing rC| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How to become a millionaire: 7 steps to reach your goal
Jun 23, 2025With insights from financial experts, here are seven tips on how to become a millionaire. 1. Develop a written financial plan Saying you want to be wealthy won't get you there.
N++
N++
The Millennial Money Woman
https://themillennialmoneywoman.com rC| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How to Become a Millionaire [16 Proven Strategies]
4 days agoWant to become a millionaire? Then this is the guide for you! Discover how to become a millionaire with these proven strategies.
N++
N++
FinanceBuzz
https://financebuzz.com rC| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How To Become a Millionaire (If You Weren't Born Rich)
Jul 16, 2025How can you become a millionaire? Here are ten straight-forward ways you could do it by growing your income, reducing your expenses, and building your network.
N++
N++
Crediful
https://www.crediful.com rC| how-to-become-a-millionaire
8 Steps to Becoming a Millionaire (And Why They Work)
5 days agoWant to become a millionaire? Learn practical strategies for saving, investing, and boosting your incomerCono windfall or luck required.
N++
N++
Investguiding
https://investguiding.com rC| article rC| 9-steps-to-become-a-millionaire-in-5-years-or-less
9 Steps To Become a Millionaire in 5 Years (or Less) (2026)
5 days agoHere are nine steps to help you become a millionaire in five years or less. Step 1: Create a Wealth-Building Plan Having a wealth-building plan is vital to ensuring financial freedom. An effective one calculates liabilities and assets and is continually modified as you pass through various life stages.
N++
N++
Fidelity Investments
https://www.fidelity.com rC| learning-center rC| personal-finance rC| 6-steps-to-becoming-a-millionaire
6 steps to become a millionaire | Fidelity
Becoming a millionaire isn't out of the question, even in high-cost times. Proactive planning, informed choices, and consistent habits can help you reach your firstrCoor nextrComillion-dollar milestone.
N++
N++
Money Bliss
https://moneybliss.org rC| how-to-get-rich
How to Get Rich with 20 Hacks you'll Wish Knew Sooner - Money Bliss
7 days agoWant to know How to Get Rich faster? These 15 hacks can help you build a wealthy lifestyle and achieve financial freedom. Start making smart money moves today and create your Rich Life.
Searches related to how do I become a milionare?
guide to becoming a millionairerCi
how to become a millionaire in 1 yearrCi
how to become a multi millionaire in 5 yearsrCi
fastest way to make a million dollarsrCi
how to become millionaire in 5 yearsrCi
is becoming a millionaire easyrCi
how to make a million dollars yearrCi
fastest way to become millionairerCi
N++More Results
N++
Search Assist
N++
N++
To become a millionaire, consider investing in rental properties, starting your own business, or saving and investing in a 401(k) or the stock market. It often requires time, effort, and smart financial planning.
N++ thedankoe.comN++ Forbes
N++More
N++
Auto-generated based on listed sources. May contain inaccuracies.
N++
There you go, anybody goes!
Note that every question yuo ask is recorded and used for - and against you!
So WTF BUY books?????
Are we all redundant now?
What I do NOT understand is with millions without power in the US states due to snow
and trillions dollars for new nuclear plants needed for AI chips from AMD, >WHY NOT MAKE A BETTER INFRASTUCTURE FOR THE PEOPLE?
THE US SYSTEM IS EGOMANIAC ROTTEN FILLING THE POCKETS OF A FEW INDIVIDUALS AT THE COST OF THE PEOPLE.
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
Still reading? Likely not...
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 09:57:55 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 22:51:52 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
[...]
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean? >>>>>>>
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than >>>>>>>>> transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain. >>>>>>>>
Either of those is misleading.
Do you avoid using passive matching networks, for amps or antennas,
because the concept of increasing power is misleading?
Of course I try to match the source to the load with passive devices so >>>> as to optimise the power delivered the load but they don't increase the >>>> power.
"Power gain" has a specific meaning, "matching the source to the load" >>>> has another meaning that is completely different. A matching device
does not increase the power, it transfers the power without adding to it >>>> in any way.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs >>>>>>> transistors.
That's right, reducing wasted power is not the same thing as "power
gain".
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means >>>>>> of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were >>>>>> mismatched.
Nice phrase, "duh".
It's very Slomanesque, taking something obvious in its most literal
and distant meaning and then whining about imprecision.
I often have to explain to semi-technical people that things like
acoustic horns do not amplify the sound, they simply provide better
matching to the acoustic impedance of the air. It's not whining about >>>> imprecision to use the correct terminology.
You appeared to me to have enough knowledge of the fundamentals to
understand the difference between the two concepts and I gave you the
credit for this but assumed you had simply expressed it badly.
You should be a lawyer when you grow up.
I'm not sure what that is suppoed to mean but I assumed the inaccuracy
of your original statement was due to a momentary slip on your part, not
an abysmal lack of knowledge. If you are now stating that my assumption
was wrong, I thank you for your frankness.
I said that impedance-matching transformers can increase the power
gain of tube or transistor amps. That could have created some
discussion of electronic design.
It sure didn't. It inspired a lot of lexography.
Do you design with transistors?
On 27/02/2026 3:22 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 09:57:55 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 22:51:52 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
[...]
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean? >>>>>>>>
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than >>>>>>>>>> transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain. >>>>>>>>>
Either of those is misleading.
Do you avoid using passive matching networks, for amps or antennas, >>>>>> because the concept of increasing power is misleading?
Of course I try to match the source to the load with passive devices so >>>>> as to optimise the power delivered the load but they don't increase the >>>>> power.
"Power gain" has a specific meaning, "matching the source to the load" >>>>> has another meaning that is completely different. A matching device >>>>> does not increase the power, it transfers the power without adding to it >>>>> in any way.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs >>>>>>>> transistors.
That's right, reducing wasted power is not the same thing as "power
gain".
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means >>>>>>> of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were >>>>>>> mismatched.
Nice phrase, "duh".
It's very Slomanesque, taking something obvious in its most literal >>>>>> and distant meaning and then whining about imprecision.
I often have to explain to semi-technical people that things like
acoustic horns do not amplify the sound, they simply provide better
matching to the acoustic impedance of the air. It's not whining about >>>>> imprecision to use the correct terminology.
You appeared to me to have enough knowledge of the fundamentals to
understand the difference between the two concepts and I gave you the >>>>> credit for this but assumed you had simply expressed it badly.
You should be a lawyer when you grow up.
I'm not sure what that is suppoed to mean but I assumed the inaccuracy
of your original statement was due to a momentary slip on your part, not >>> an abysmal lack of knowledge. If you are now stating that my assumption >>> was wrong, I thank you for your frankness.
I said that impedance-matching transformers can increase the power
gain of tube or transistor amps. That could have created some
discussion of electronic design.
It sure didn't. It inspired a lot of lexography.
Presumably you meant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicography
which is about writing dictionaries.
We were commenting on a more basic problem, which is that you didn't
seem to understand the words you were using.
Impedance matching transformers can't change the power gain of anything. >They can be used with an amplifier designed to drive a low impedance
load to trade current swing for voltage swing to get more power into a
high impedance load but they happen to consume a little power in the
process - they are lossy devices.
Do you design with transistors?
I have, from time to time. My current mirror version of the Baxandall
class D-oscillator does rely on discrete transistor pairs to provide
exactly the power gain needed to keep the oscillator running at a fixed >amplitude even as the load (and the losses in the transformer) varies.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 06:52:43 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>wrote:
Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net>wrote:
My fave was Wireless World.
Yes, good read.
Elector (Electuur in Dutch) :-)
Radio Electronica (Dutch)
Dr Dobb's
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Dobb%27s_Journal
And of course a bit earlier: >>>>https://archive.org/details/radio-blan/Radio_Blan_01_juli_1960/
And many more, here in the Netherlands.
Books?
Not so much, that X chapter thing? Art of tronix? downloaded one free chapter
on my Pocketbook Aqua2 reader.
Have not really read it, nothing new...
AoE is worth reading cover to cover.
I'd never heard of impact ionization gate current in jfets, which >>>explained a problem I was having. It's full of goodies like that.
The X-chapters are great too.
These days I just type in my chromium browser the question
and 'duck-duck shows me the answer.
The right answer?
Where will it go?
Oh wait:
where will it go asking questions in the browser?
Google Supporthttps://duckduckgo.com/?q=where+will+it+go+asking+questions+in+the+browser%3F >> Generate answer for where will it go asking questions in the browser? >>N++Search Assist
https://support.google.com rC| chrome rC| answer rC| 16704170?hl=en-CO&co=GENIE.Platform=Desktop
Ask questions through AI Mode in Chrome - Google Help
Ask questions through AI Mode in Chrome You can ask questions to get AI-powered answers,
ask follow-up questions and get helpful links with AI Mode in Chrome. When you use AI Mode,
it divides your questions into subtopics, then searches for each one simultaneously.
This way, AI Mode finds more relevant content that matches your query.
So... and lots more on that page
Lemme try:
Typing in Chrome:
N++design a simple AM transistor radio for me
gives:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=design+a+simple+AM+transistor+radio+for+me&t=raspberrypi&ia=web
many good links, circuit diagrams and projects
In a second!!
sooooo
intersting:
How do I become the next US president?
Na, 14 year US living required
How do I become a milionare? >>https://duckduckgo.com/?q=how+do+I+become+a+milionare%3F&t=raspberrypi&ia=web >>
Protected
Netherlands
Safe search: moderate
Any time
N++
Forbes
https://www.forbes.com rC| sites rC| melissahouston rC| 2024 rC| 03 rC| 17 rC|
10-proven-ways-to-become-a-self-made-millionaire
10 Proven Ways To Become A Self-Made Millionaire - Forbes
Mar 17, 2024I believe that the best path to becoming a self-made millionaire is through business ownership. By building a
profitable business you can fast track your way to wealth.
Author:Melissa Houston
N++
Ramsey Solutions
https://www.ramseysolutions.com rC| retirement rC| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How to Become a Millionaire - Ramsey
Apr 15, 2025We've got good news for you. You can become a millionairerCoand it has nothing to do with your family's money or
your education. It has everything to do with you.
N++
N++
Investopedia
https://www.investopedia.com rC| financial-advisor rC| how-much-save-to-become-millionaire
6 Steps to Becoming a Millionaire - Investopedia
Dec 23, 2025Discover six proven steps to become a millionaire: Save consistently, avoid debt, automate savings, invest wisely,
grow your income, and resist lifestyle inflation.
N++
N++
Bankrate
https://www.bankrate.com rC| investing rC| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How to become a millionaire: 7 steps to reach your goal
Jun 23, 2025With insights from financial experts, here are seven tips on how to become a millionaire. 1. Develop a written
financial plan Saying you want to be wealthy won't get you there.
N++
N++
The Millennial Money Woman
https://themillennialmoneywoman.com rC| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How to Become a Millionaire [16 Proven Strategies]
4 days agoWant to become a millionaire? Then this is the guide for you! Discover how to become a millionaire with these proven
strategies.
N++
N++
FinanceBuzz
https://financebuzz.com rC| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How To Become a Millionaire (If You Weren't Born Rich)
Jul 16, 2025How can you become a millionaire? Here are ten straight-forward ways you could do it by growing your income,
reducing your expenses, and building your network.
N++
N++
Crediful
https://www.crediful.com rC| how-to-become-a-millionaire
8 Steps to Becoming a Millionaire (And Why They Work)
5 days agoWant to become a millionaire? Learn practical strategies for saving, investing, and boosting your incomerCono
windfall or luck required.
N++
N++
Investguiding
https://investguiding.com rC| article rC| 9-steps-to-become-a-millionaire-in-5-years-or-less
9 Steps To Become a Millionaire in 5 Years (or Less) (2026)
5 days agoHere are nine steps to help you become a millionaire in five years or less. Step 1: Create a Wealth-Building Plan
Having a wealth-building plan is vital to ensuring financial freedom. An effective one calculates liabilities and assets and is
continually modified as you pass through various life stages.
N++
N++
Fidelity Investments
https://www.fidelity.com rC| learning-center rC| personal-finance rC| 6-steps-to-becoming-a-millionaire
6 steps to become a millionaire | Fidelity
Becoming a millionaire isn't out of the question, even in high-cost times. Proactive planning, informed choices, and consistent
habits can help you reach your firstrCoor nextrComillion-dollar milestone. >>N++
N++
Money Bliss
https://moneybliss.org rC| how-to-get-rich
How to Get Rich with 20 Hacks you'll Wish Knew Sooner - Money Bliss
7 days agoWant to know How to Get Rich faster? These 15 hacks can help you build a wealthy lifestyle and achieve financial
freedom. Start making smart money moves today and create your Rich Life. >>Searches related to how do I become a milionare?
guide to becoming a millionairerCi
how to become a millionaire in 1 yearrCi
how to become a multi millionaire in 5 yearsrCi
fastest way to make a million dollarsrCi
how to become millionaire in 5 yearsrCi
is becoming a millionaire easyrCi
how to make a million dollars yearrCi
fastest way to become millionairerCi
N++More Results
N++
Search Assist
N++
N++
To become a millionaire, consider investing in rental properties, starting your own business, or saving and investing in a
401(k) or the stock market. It often requires time, effort, and smart financial planning.
N++ thedankoe.comN++ Forbes
N++More
N++
Auto-generated based on listed sources. May contain inaccuracies.
N++
There you go, anybody goes!
Note that every question yuo ask is recorded and used for - and against you! >>
So WTF BUY books?????
There are advantages to reading books. You might discover something >interesting that you'd never think to ask google about. Something that
might stick and be useful far in the future.
And you might read something that clicks with what you know already, >resulting in invention.
And many books are fun to read.
Are we all redundant now?
What I do NOT understand is with millions without power in the US states due to snow
and trillions dollars for new nuclear plants needed for AI chips from AMD, >>WHY NOT MAKE A BETTER INFRASTUCTURE FOR THE PEOPLE?
THE US SYSTEM IS EGOMANIAC ROTTEN FILLING THE POCKETS OF A FEW INDIVIDUALS AT THE COST OF THE PEOPLE.
Without rich capitalist exploiters, we'd still be mostly illiterate,
spinning and weaving our clothes by hand and going hungry regularly.
The luckiest people were born in a country with lots of (non Party
member) billionaires
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
Still reading? Likely not...
John Larkin
Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center
Lunatic Fringe Electronics
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 03:51:46 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/02/2026 3:22 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 09:57:55 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 22:51:52 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
[...]
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean? >>>>>>>>>
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than >>>>>>>>>>> transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain. >>>>>>>>>>
Either of those is misleading.
Do you avoid using passive matching networks, for amps or antennas, >>>>>>> because the concept of increasing power is misleading?
Of course I try to match the source to the load with passive devices so >>>>>> as to optimise the power delivered the load but they don't increase the >>>>>> power.
"Power gain" has a specific meaning, "matching the source to the load" >>>>>> has another meaning that is completely different. A matching device >>>>>> does not increase the power, it transfers the power without adding to it >>>>>> in any way.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs >>>>>>>>> transistors.
That's right, reducing wasted power is not the same thing as "power >>>>>> gain".
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means >>>>>>>> of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were
mismatched.
Nice phrase, "duh".
It's very Slomanesque, taking something obvious in its most literal >>>>>>> and distant meaning and then whining about imprecision.
I often have to explain to semi-technical people that things like
acoustic horns do not amplify the sound, they simply provide better >>>>>> matching to the acoustic impedance of the air. It's not whining about >>>>>> imprecision to use the correct terminology.
You appeared to me to have enough knowledge of the fundamentals to >>>>>> understand the difference between the two concepts and I gave you the >>>>>> credit for this but assumed you had simply expressed it badly.
You should be a lawyer when you grow up.
I'm not sure what that is suppoed to mean but I assumed the inaccuracy >>>> of your original statement was due to a momentary slip on your part, not >>>> an abysmal lack of knowledge. If you are now stating that my assumption >>>> was wrong, I thank you for your frankness.
I said that impedance-matching transformers can increase the power
gain of tube or transistor amps. That could have created some
discussion of electronic design.
It sure didn't. It inspired a lot of lexography.
Presumably you meant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicography
which is about writing dictionaries.
We were commenting on a more basic problem, which is that you didn't
seem to understand the words you were using.
Impedance matching transformers can't change the power gain of anything.
They can be used with an amplifier designed to drive a low impedance
load to trade current swing for voltage swing to get more power into a
high impedance load but they happen to consume a little power in the
process - they are lossy devices.
Do you design with transistors?
I have, from time to time. My current mirror version of the Baxandall
class D-oscillator does rely on discrete transistor pairs to provide
exactly the power gain needed to keep the oscillator running at a fixed
amplitude even as the load (and the losses in the transformer) varies.
Did you ever build it?
Imagine a monoblock audio amp with a pair of 833's standing up andWhy bother?
glowing, in plain sight.
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 06:52:43 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>wrote:
Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net>wrote:
My fave was Wireless World.
Yes, good read.
Elector (Electuur in Dutch) :-)
Radio Electronica (Dutch)
Dr Dobb's
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Dobb%27s_Journal
And of course a bit earlier:
https://archive.org/details/radio-blan/Radio_Blan_01_juli_1960/
And many more, here in the Netherlands.
Books?
Not so much, that X chapter thing? Art of tronix? downloaded one free chapter
on my Pocketbook Aqua2 reader.
Have not really read it, nothing new...
AoE is worth reading cover to cover.
I'd never heard of impact ionization gate current in jfets, which
explained a problem I was having. It's full of goodies like that.
The X-chapters are great too.
These days I just type in my chromium browser the question
and 'duck-duck shows me the answer.
The right answer?
Where will it go?
Oh wait:
where will it go asking questions in the browser?
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=where+will+it+go+asking+questions+in+the+browser%3F
Generate answer for where will it go asking questions in the browser?
-+-+Search AssistGoogle Support
https://support.google.com |ore4-| chrome |ore4-| answer |ore4-| 16704170?hl=en-CO&co=GENIE.Platform=Desktop
Ask questions through AI Mode in Chrome - Google Help
Ask questions through AI Mode in Chrome You can ask questions to get AI-powered answers,
ask follow-up questions and get helpful links with AI Mode in Chrome. When you use AI Mode,
it divides your questions into subtopics, then searches for each one simultaneously.
This way, AI Mode finds more relevant content that matches your query.
So... and lots more on that page
Lemme try:
Typing in Chrome:
-+-+design a simple AM transistor radio for megives:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=design+a+simple+AM+transistor+radio+for+me&t=raspberrypi&ia=web
many good links, circuit diagrams and projects
In a second!!
sooooo
intersting:
How do I become the next US president?
Na, 14 year US living required
How do I become a milionare?
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=how+do+I+become+a+milionare%3F&t=raspberrypi&ia=web
Protected
Netherlands
Safe search: moderate
Any time
-+-+Forbes
https://www.forbes.com |ore4-| sites |ore4-| melissahouston |ore4-| 2024 |ore4-| 03 |ore4-| 17 |ore4-| 10-proven-ways-to-become-a-self-made-millionaire
10 Proven Ways To Become A Self-Made Millionaire - Forbes
Mar 17, 2024I believe that the best path to becoming a self-made millionaire is through business ownership. By building a profitable business you can fast track your way to wealth.
Author:Melissa Houston
-+-+Ramsey Solutions
https://www.ramseysolutions.com |ore4-| retirement |ore4-| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How to Become a Millionaire - Ramsey
Apr 15, 2025We've got good news for you. You can become a millionaire|ore4rCYand it has nothing to do with your family's money or your education. It has everything to do with you.
-+-+Investopedia
-+-+
https://www.investopedia.com |ore4-| financial-advisor |ore4-| how-much-save-to-become-millionaire
6 Steps to Becoming a Millionaire - Investopedia
Dec 23, 2025Discover six proven steps to become a millionaire: Save consistently, avoid debt, automate savings, invest wisely, grow your income, and resist lifestyle inflation.
-+-+Bankrate
-+-+
https://www.bankrate.com |ore4-| investing |ore4-| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How to become a millionaire: 7 steps to reach your goal
Jun 23, 2025With insights from financial experts, here are seven tips on how to become a millionaire. 1. Develop a written financial plan Saying you want to be wealthy won't get you there.
-+-+The Millennial Money Woman
-+-+
https://themillennialmoneywoman.com |ore4-| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How to Become a Millionaire [16 Proven Strategies]
4 days agoWant to become a millionaire? Then this is the guide for you! Discover how to become a millionaire with these proven strategies.
-+-+FinanceBuzz
-+-+
https://financebuzz.com |ore4-| how-to-become-a-millionaire
How To Become a Millionaire (If You Weren't Born Rich)
Jul 16, 2025How can you become a millionaire? Here are ten straight-forward ways you could do it by growing your income, reducing your expenses, and building your network.
-+-+Crediful
-+-+
https://www.crediful.com |ore4-| how-to-become-a-millionaire
8 Steps to Becoming a Millionaire (And Why They Work)
5 days agoWant to become a millionaire? Learn practical strategies for saving, investing, and boosting your income|ore4rCYno windfall or luck required.
-+-+Investguiding
-+-+
https://investguiding.com |ore4-| article |ore4-| 9-steps-to-become-a-millionaire-in-5-years-or-less
9 Steps To Become a Millionaire in 5 Years (or Less) (2026)
5 days agoHere are nine steps to help you become a millionaire in five years or less. Step 1: Create a Wealth-Building Plan Having a wealth-building plan is vital to ensuring financial freedom. An effective one calculates liabilities and assets and is continually modified as you pass through various life stages.
-+-+Fidelity Investments
-+-+
https://www.fidelity.com |ore4-| learning-center |ore4-| personal-finance |ore4-| 6-steps-to-becoming-a-millionaire
6 steps to become a millionaire | Fidelity
Becoming a millionaire isn't out of the question, even in high-cost times. Proactive planning, informed choices, and consistent habits can help you reach your first|ore4rCYor next|ore4rCYmillion-dollar milestone.
-+-+Money Bliss
-+-+
https://moneybliss.org |ore4-| how-to-get-rich
How to Get Rich with 20 Hacks you'll Wish Knew Sooner - Money Bliss
7 days agoWant to know How to Get Rich faster? These 15 hacks can help you build a wealthy lifestyle and achieve financial freedom. Start making smart money moves today and create your Rich Life.
Searches related to how do I become a milionare?
guide to becoming a millionaire|ore4rC|
how to become a millionaire in 1 year|ore4rC|
how to become a multi millionaire in 5 years|ore4rC|
fastest way to make a million dollars|ore4rC|
how to become millionaire in 5 years|ore4rC|
is becoming a millionaire easy|ore4rC|
how to make a million dollars year|ore4rC|
fastest way to become millionaire|ore4rC|
-+-+More ResultsSearch Assist
-+-+
-+-+To become a millionaire, consider investing in rental properties, starting your own business, or saving and investing in a 401(k) or the stock market. It often requires time, effort, and smart financial planning.
-+-+
-+-+ thedankoe.com|>-+-+ ForbesAuto-generated based on listed sources. May contain inaccuracies.
-+-+More
-+-+
-+-+
There you go, anybody goes!
Note that every question yuo ask is recorded and used for - and against you!
So WTF BUY books?????
There are advantages to reading books. You might discover something interesting that you'd never think to ask google about. Something that
might stick and be useful far in the future.
And you might read something that clicks with what you know already, resulting in invention.
And many books are fun to read.
Are we all redundant now?
What I do NOT understand is with millions without power in the US states due to snow
and trillions dollars for new nuclear plants needed for AI chips from AMD, >> WHY NOT MAKE A BETTER INFRASTUCTURE FOR THE PEOPLE?
THE US SYSTEM IS EGOMANIAC ROTTEN FILLING THE POCKETS OF A FEW INDIVIDUALS AT THE COST OF THE PEOPLE.
Without rich capitalist exploiters, we'd still be mostly illiterate,
spinning and weaving our clothes by hand and going hungry regularly.
The luckiest people were born in a country with lots of (non Party
member) billionaires.
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
On 27/02/2026 4:03 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 03:51:46 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/02/2026 3:22 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 09:57:55 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 22:51:52 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than >>>>>>>>>>>> transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain. >>>>>>>>>>>
Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
Either of those is misleading.
Do you avoid using passive matching networks, for amps or antennas, >>>>>>>> because the concept of increasing power is misleading?
Of course I try to match the source to the load with passive devices so >>>>>>> as to optimise the power delivered the load but they don't increase the >>>>>>> power.
"Power gain" has a specific meaning, "matching the source to the load" >>>>>>> has another meaning that is completely different. A matching device >>>>>>> does not increase the power, it transfers the power without adding to it
in any way.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs >>>>>>>>>> transistors.
That's right, reducing wasted power is not the same thing as "power >>>>>>> gain".
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means
of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were
mismatched.
Nice phrase, "duh".
It's very Slomanesque, taking something obvious in its most literal >>>>>>>> and distant meaning and then whining about imprecision.
I often have to explain to semi-technical people that things like >>>>>>> acoustic horns do not amplify the sound, they simply provide better >>>>>>> matching to the acoustic impedance of the air. It's not whining about >>>>>>> imprecision to use the correct terminology.
You appeared to me to have enough knowledge of the fundamentals to >>>>>>> understand the difference between the two concepts and I gave you the >>>>>>> credit for this but assumed you had simply expressed it badly.
You should be a lawyer when you grow up.
I'm not sure what that is suppoed to mean but I assumed the inaccuracy >>>>> of your original statement was due to a momentary slip on your part, not >>>>> an abysmal lack of knowledge. If you are now stating that my assumption >>>>> was wrong, I thank you for your frankness.
I said that impedance-matching transformers can increase the power
gain of tube or transistor amps. That could have created some
discussion of electronic design.
It sure didn't. It inspired a lot of lexography.
Presumably you meant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicography
which is about writing dictionaries.
We were commenting on a more basic problem, which is that you didn't
seem to understand the words you were using.
Impedance matching transformers can't change the power gain of anything. >>> They can be used with an amplifier designed to drive a low impedance
load to trade current swing for voltage swing to get more power into a
high impedance load but they happen to consume a little power in the
process - they are lossy devices.
Do you design with transistors?
I have, from time to time. My current mirror version of the Baxandall
class D-oscillator does rely on discrete transistor pairs to provide
exactly the power gain needed to keep the oscillator running at a fixed
amplitude even as the load (and the losses in the transformer) varies.
Did you ever build it?
I invented it when Cambridge Instruments needed to upgrade the
electronics in the weight measuring head of the Metals Research GaAs >single-crystal puller, which pulled about 95% of the single crystal GaAs >made in the west at the time.
The original circuit had relied on a dual emitter transistor which had
gone obsolete, and I took the chance to improve the performance.
The improved circuit is the property of Metals Research which Cambridge >Instruments owned a the time, and I don't have access to it. They did >retrofit it to a number of machines, but I've no idea how many.
I do have a Spice model of a slightly simplified version of the circuit
on my web-site.
http://sophia-elektronica.com/BillsBaxandall.html
Imagine a monoblock audio amp with a pair of 833's standing up andWhy bother?
glowing, in plain sight.
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>wrote:
What I do NOT understand is with millions without power in the US states due to snow
and trillions dollars for new nuclear plants needed for AI chips from AMD, >>> WHY NOT MAKE A BETTER INFRASTUCTURE FOR THE PEOPLE?
THE US SYSTEM IS EGOMANIAC ROTTEN FILLING THE POCKETS OF A FEW INDIVIDUALS AT THE COST OF THE PEOPLE.
Without rich capitalist exploiters, we'd still be mostly illiterate,
spinning and weaving our clothes by hand and going hungry regularly.
That is the myth that American businesses spend a lot of money on spreading.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Myth
It's not remotely true.
The luckiest people were born in a country with lots of (non Party
member) billionaires.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report
They put Finland first, Australia 11th and the US as 24th, and Donald
Trump seems to be doing his best to make the US an even less desirable
place to live.
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
It wasn't. George Washington made an obscene amount of money buying up >Indian land that the UK legal system wouldn't have let him keep.
Revolutions are bad way to get regime change. Reforming the electoral
system works a lot better. If you've got a multiparty coalition
government, you've probably got a sensible electoral system. No >English-speaking country seems to have got there yet. The Netherlands
has, and it worked pretty well during the 19 years I lived there, and
still seems to be doing fine, though Geert Wilders is more a bug than a >feature.
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 17:04:05 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/02/2026 4:03 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 03:51:46 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/02/2026 3:22 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 09:57:55 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 22:51:52 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than >>>>>>>>>>>>> transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
Either of those is misleading.
Do you avoid using passive matching networks, for amps or antennas, >>>>>>>>> because the concept of increasing power is misleading?
Of course I try to match the source to the load with passive devices so
as to optimise the power delivered the load but they don't increase the
power.
"Power gain" has a specific meaning, "matching the source to the load" >>>>>>>> has another meaning that is completely different. A matching device >>>>>>>> does not increase the power, it transfers the power without adding to it
in any way.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs >>>>>>>>>>> transistors.
That's right, reducing wasted power is not the same thing as "power >>>>>>>> gain".
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means
of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were
mismatched.
Nice phrase, "duh".
It's very Slomanesque, taking something obvious in its most literal >>>>>>>>> and distant meaning and then whining about imprecision.
I often have to explain to semi-technical people that things like >>>>>>>> acoustic horns do not amplify the sound, they simply provide better >>>>>>>> matching to the acoustic impedance of the air. It's not whining about >>>>>>>> imprecision to use the correct terminology.
You appeared to me to have enough knowledge of the fundamentals to >>>>>>>> understand the difference between the two concepts and I gave you the >>>>>>>> credit for this but assumed you had simply expressed it badly.
You should be a lawyer when you grow up.
I'm not sure what that is suppoed to mean but I assumed the inaccuracy >>>>>> of your original statement was due to a momentary slip on your part, not >>>>>> an abysmal lack of knowledge. If you are now stating that my assumption >>>>>> was wrong, I thank you for your frankness.
I said that impedance-matching transformers can increase the power
gain of tube or transistor amps. That could have created some
discussion of electronic design.
It sure didn't. It inspired a lot of lexography.
Presumably you meant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicography
which is about writing dictionaries.
We were commenting on a more basic problem, which is that you didn't
seem to understand the words you were using.
Impedance matching transformers can't change the power gain of anything. >>>> They can be used with an amplifier designed to drive a low impedance
load to trade current swing for voltage swing to get more power into a >>>> high impedance load but they happen to consume a little power in the
process - they are lossy devices.
Do you design with transistors?
I have, from time to time. My current mirror version of the Baxandall
class D-oscillator does rely on discrete transistor pairs to provide
exactly the power gain needed to keep the oscillator running at a fixed >>>> amplitude even as the load (and the losses in the transformer) varies.
Did you ever build it?
I invented it when Cambridge Instruments needed to upgrade the
electronics in the weight measuring head of the Metals Research GaAs
single-crystal puller, which pulled about 95% of the single crystal GaAs
made in the west at the time.
The original circuit had relied on a dual emitter transistor which had
gone obsolete, and I took the chance to improve the performance.
The improved circuit is the property of Metals Research which Cambridge
Instruments owned a the time, and I don't have access to it. They did
retrofit it to a number of machines, but I've no idea how many.
I do have a Spice model of a slightly simplified version of the circuit
on my web-site.
http://sophia-elektronica.com/BillsBaxandall.html
I recall that you had a custom transformer made for your circuit. Did
you ever make it work?
Imagine a monoblock audio amp with a pair of 833's standing up andWhy bother?
glowing, in plain sight.
I guess imagining things is too much stress for some people.
"Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
On 27/02/2026 10:45 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 17:04:05 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/02/2026 4:03 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 03:51:46 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>> wrote:
On 27/02/2026 3:22 am, john larkin wrote:Did you ever build it?
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 09:57:55 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 22:51:52 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:You should be a lawyer when you grow up.
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
[...]
Tubes, and initially transistors, used to be more expensive than >>>>>>>>>>>>>> transformers, so transformers gave cheap and reliable power gain.
Transformers have never given power gain. What did you really mean?
Don't be so fussy; I said give, not have.
Either of those is misleading.
Do you avoid using passive matching networks, for amps or antennas, >>>>>>>>>> because the concept of increasing power is misleading?
Of course I try to match the source to the load with passive devices so
as to optimise the power delivered the load but they don't increase the
power.
"Power gain" has a specific meaning, "matching the source to the load"
has another meaning that is completely different. A matching device >>>>>>>>> does not increase the power, it transfers the power without adding to it
in any way.
Impedance mismatches waste power. Different directions for tubes vs
transistors.
That's right, reducing wasted power is not the same thing as "power >>>>>>>>> gain".
I think you meant that matching a valve amplifier to its load by means
of a transformer allows it to deliver more power than if the load were
mismatched.
Nice phrase, "duh".
It's very Slomanesque, taking something obvious in its most literal >>>>>>>>>> and distant meaning and then whining about imprecision.
I often have to explain to semi-technical people that things like >>>>>>>>> acoustic horns do not amplify the sound, they simply provide better >>>>>>>>> matching to the acoustic impedance of the air. It's not whining about
imprecision to use the correct terminology.
You appeared to me to have enough knowledge of the fundamentals to >>>>>>>>> understand the difference between the two concepts and I gave you the >>>>>>>>> credit for this but assumed you had simply expressed it badly. >>>>>>>>
I'm not sure what that is suppoed to mean but I assumed the inaccuracy >>>>>>> of your original statement was due to a momentary slip on your part, not
an abysmal lack of knowledge. If you are now stating that my assumption
was wrong, I thank you for your frankness.
I said that impedance-matching transformers can increase the power >>>>>> gain of tube or transistor amps. That could have created some
discussion of electronic design.
It sure didn't. It inspired a lot of lexography.
Presumably you meant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicography
which is about writing dictionaries.
We were commenting on a more basic problem, which is that you didn't >>>>> seem to understand the words you were using.
Impedance matching transformers can't change the power gain of anything. >>>>> They can be used with an amplifier designed to drive a low impedance >>>>> load to trade current swing for voltage swing to get more power into a >>>>> high impedance load but they happen to consume a little power in the >>>>> process - they are lossy devices.
Do you design with transistors?
I have, from time to time. My current mirror version of the Baxandall >>>>> class D-oscillator does rely on discrete transistor pairs to provide >>>>> exactly the power gain needed to keep the oscillator running at a fixed >>>>> amplitude even as the load (and the losses in the transformer) varies. >>>>
I invented it when Cambridge Instruments needed to upgrade the
electronics in the weight measuring head of the Metals Research GaAs
single-crystal puller, which pulled about 95% of the single crystal GaAs >>> made in the west at the time.
The original circuit had relied on a dual emitter transistor which had
gone obsolete, and I took the chance to improve the performance.
The improved circuit is the property of Metals Research which Cambridge
Instruments owned a the time, and I don't have access to it. They did
retrofit it to a number of machines, but I've no idea how many.
I do have a Spice model of a slightly simplified version of the circuit
on my web-site.
http://sophia-elektronica.com/BillsBaxandall.html
I recall that you had a custom transformer made for your circuit. Did
you ever make it work?
It wasn't for that circuit. It was more than fifteen years ago, and the >point of that transformer was to let my Scottish friend test the device
for the distortion created by very low level hysterisis in the ferrite, >which produced harmonics about 95dB below the fundamental, as he had >suspected that it would, which made it useless for the very low
distortion oscillator I wanted.
The linear variable differential transformer in the GaAs crystal
puller's weighing circuit was much more tolerant of low level
distortion. Getting the distortion better than 60DB below the
fundamental was perfectly adequate, and probably an over-kill, but it
all fitted onto a pretty small board.
Imagine a monoblock audio amp with a pair of 833's standing up andWhy bother?
glowing, in plain sight.
I guess imagining things is too much stress for some people.
I didn't need to imagine that. I saw a few in people's homes in Cambridge.
"Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before
breakfast."
You believe climate change denial propaganda. You clearly haven't got a >brain worth training, which was what Lewis Carol was parodying in that line.
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
John Larkin
Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center
Lunatic Fringe Electronics
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of
his term as President.
On 2/27/26 19:15, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
John Larkin
Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center
Lunatic Fringe Electronics
Imagine that, the land of the free a dictatorship.
You're very close. I honestly hope you'll be able to turn
the tide. The mid-term elections will be interesting.
Jeroen Belleman
On Sat, 28 Feb 2026 03:56:24 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/02/2026 10:45 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 17:04:05 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/02/2026 4:03 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 03:51:46 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>> wrote:
On 27/02/2026 3:22 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 09:57:55 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 22:51:52 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:31:48 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:04:08 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
Imagine a monoblock audio amp with a pair of 833's standing up andWhy bother?
glowing, in plain sight.
I guess imagining things is too much stress for some people.
I didn't need to imagine that. I saw a few in people's homes in Cambridge. >>
"Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before
breakfast."
You believe climate change denial propaganda. You clearly haven't got a
brain worth training, which was what Lewis Carol was parodying in that line.
It wasn't parody.
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:02:17 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of
his term as President.
Who told you that?
On 28/02/2026 9:28 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:02:17 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>>[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American >>>>>> Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of
his term as President.
Who told you that?
Who needs to. When somebody is as obsessed with getting the Nobel Peace Prize as Trump is, you know he's going to be equally interested in a
whole bunch of other empty titles. At the moment he is still probably
sane enough to know how badly it would play with his supporters, but his senile dementia is rapidly getting more florid.
The people of California passed a constitutional amendment that
created a "jungle primary" for the Governor election. It's
non-partisan. The Dems hate it because they fear that they will have
20 candidates that split the vote and the R's might have three and we
might wind up with a Republican governor. What fun.
The Founders debated whether political parties should be allowed to
have official presence. They chose wrong.
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:02:17 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>> >[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of
his term as President.
Who told you that?
John Larkin--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center
Lunatic Fringe Electronics
On 2026-02-27, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:02:17 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>>[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American >>>>>> Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of
his term as President.
Who told you that?
FFS it was a JOKE!
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
Am 28.02.26 um 05:01 schrieb john larkin:
The people of California passed a constitutional amendment that
created a "jungle primary" for the Governor election. It's
non-partisan. The Dems hate it because they fear that they will have
20 candidates that split the vote and the R's might have three and we
might wind up with a Republican governor. What fun.
The Founders debated whether political parties should be allowed to
have official presence. They chose wrong.
Yeah! What do you expect from a bunch of slave owners
who wanted to be free? Consistency?
Am 28.02.26 um 05:01 schrieb john larkin:
The people of California passed a constitutional amendment that
created a "jungle primary" for the Governor election. It's
non-partisan. The Dems hate it because they fear that they will have
20 candidates that split the vote and the R's might have three and we
might wind up with a Republican governor. What fun.
The Founders debated whether political parties should be allowed to
have official presence. They chose wrong.
Yeah! What do you expect from a bunch of slave owners
who wanted to be free? Consistency?
Gerhard
On 28/02/2026 9:28 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:02:17 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>>[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American >>>>>> Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of
his term as President.
Who told you that?
Who needs to.
On 2026-02-27, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:02:17 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>> >[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American
Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you?
I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of
his term as President.
Who told you that?
FFS it was a JOKE!
Am 28.02.26 um 05:01 schrieb john larkin:
The people of California passed a constitutional amendment that
created a "jungle primary" for the Governor election. It's
non-partisan. The Dems hate it because they fear that they will have
20 candidates that split the vote and the R's might have three and we
might wind up with a Republican governor. What fun.
The Founders debated whether political parties should be allowed to
have official presence. They chose wrong.
Yeah! What do you expect from a bunch of slave owners
who wanted to be free? Consistency?
Gerhard
On 2026-02-28 04:22, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
Am 28.02.26 um 05:01 schrieb john larkin:One might usefully reflect also on the immediate origins of the Federal >Republic of Germany.
The people of California passed a constitutional amendment that
created a "jungle primary" for the Governor election. It's
non-partisan. The Dems hate it because they fear that they will have
20 candidates that split the vote and the R's might have three and we
might wind up with a Republican governor. What fun.
The Founders debated whether political parties should be allowed to
have official presence. They chose wrong.
Yeah! What do you expect from a bunch of slave owners
who wanted to be free? Consistency?
Gerhard
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
On Sat, 28 Feb 2026 17:38:54 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 28/02/2026 9:28 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:02:17 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>>>[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American >>>>>>> Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you? >>>>
his term as President.
Who told you that?
Who needs to.
OK, they made it up.
On Sat, 28 Feb 2026 12:30:21 -0000 (UTC), Jim Jackson
<jj@franjam.org.uk> wrote:
On 2026-02-27, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:02:17 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of >>>his term as President.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>> >[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American >>>> >> Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you? >>>
Who told you that?
FFS it was a JOKE!
Ah. Humor.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2026 12:30:21 -0000 (UTC), Jim Jackson
<jj@franjam.org.uk> wrote:
On 2026-02-27, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:02:17 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of >>>>> his term as President.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> >>>>>>>[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American >>>>>>>> Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you? >>>>>
Who told you that?
FFS it was a JOKE!
Ah. Humor.
No:"humour" - it was an English joke.
Liz Tuddenham <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2026 12:30:21 -0000 (UTC), Jim Jackson
<jj@franjam.org.uk> wrote:
On 2026-02-27, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:02:17 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of >>>>> his term as President.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American >>>>>>>> Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you? >>>>>
Who told you that?
FFS it was a JOKE!
Ah. Humor.
No:"humour" - it was an English joke.
Phlegm, blood, black bile, yellow bile.
Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
Liz Tuddenham <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2026 12:30:21 -0000 (UTC), Jim Jackson
<jj@franjam.org.uk> wrote:
On 2026-02-27, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:02:17 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:48:02 +0000, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >> >>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:I'm told Trump wanted to be declared an Emperor or King at the end of >> >>>>> his term as President.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:06:22 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
[...]
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.
That usually kills people and leaves thugs in charge. The American >> >>>>>>>> Revolution was a rare exception.
The thugs have caught up now, though.
Why allow people to vote, when more than half might vote against you? >> >>>>>
Who told you that?
FFS it was a JOKE!
Ah. Humor.
No:"humour" - it was an English joke.
Phlegm, blood, black bile, yellow bile.
You forgot the stuff that oozes from a punctured eyeball.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 59 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 19:51:24 |
| Calls: | 812 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 1,287 |
| D/L today: |
20 files (23,248K bytes) |
| Messages: | 210,075 |
