Copper Talk » Ask The Tech » Radios BASE » Tubes versus solid state « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Teham
Junior Member
Username: Teham

Post Number: 18
Registered: 1-2004
Posted on Friday, July 09, 2004 - 10:13 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hmmmm. Real radios glow in the dark. I have both. I can only think of one draw back. Tubes do get hot. However, tubes don't care how hot or cold it is they always work. Hook up both side by side and compare. Tubes are more forgiving, have better cross channel rejection, filtered better, have better receive as hear less static, audio is crisp and clear. You can't beat the sound of glass. Parts. Try buying some older IC's and transistors. Haven't seen many parts that you can't find for tube equipment. I have several tube radios made in the 60's that still work very well. I wonder if there will be as many transistor stuff running at that age? Tony
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce

Post Number: 1349
Registered: 9-2003
Posted on Friday, July 09, 2004 - 3:09 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Teham ! PLEASE !

Tubes are NOISEGENERATORS god i can remember using a 417b ( W2AZL ) converter it was state of the art and it was good for about 3 db ( NF ). Today a CHEAP GASFET under a buck will do about .4! Now i cut my teeth on tubes my first station was a S-38 with a one tube CW transmitter ( 807 ) and a heath Q MULTIPLYER using it as a BFO. O it kinda worked only made one contact ...... it wasnt untill i bought a ARC-3 and BC-348 and amico 2 meter conveter that i got my first dx and that was on 2 meters..... and im not even talking about my he-15 or he-20 wich i still have one day ill RESTORE them. OK my Drake line (1970 ) R4B, T4XB and a bunch of excessors was a cool radio but against my FT-840 FORGETIT there is nothing that radio could do that the 840 can't do 10 times as well. As for SOUND ? well look at the speakers that came with radios like my HQ-140 12 inch speakers in closed box! You know i think tubes are cool but also a leftover from another time ..... and if current trends continue in 25 years most will be gone.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833

Post Number: 764
Registered: 8-2002
Posted on Friday, July 09, 2004 - 5:39 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I am partial to tube equipment for my hobby use. I am partial to solid state gear for professional use.

I am looking forward to using my restored tube radio on the AM net this Sunday.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Pig040
Intermediate Member
Username: Pig040

Post Number: 489
Registered: 7-2003


Posted on Saturday, July 10, 2004 - 10:36 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

What will cause the demise of tube equipment is not the performance, rather it will be the lack of techs to work on them. I finally gave up on My Yaesu, because of that reason. I still run two tube amps, but if there is ever a problem, I will probably go solid state on those too. I do think tube amps have a better sound, and bleed less, my opinion!
Rich
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833

Post Number: 767
Registered: 8-2002
Posted on Saturday, July 10, 2004 - 2:48 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Tube receivers have that smooooth tube sound. Mrs. 833 can listen to SW for hours when I am using one of my tube radios, but when I try to listen on a solid state SW radio, she tells me to put on headphones.

I am becomming a bit of an audiophile now as well. Just recently, I began to really dive in to hi-fi. I have owned tube hi-fi components ever since high school, but just recently began to really study the art of fine reproduction.

I have found that tube amps have more second order harmonics than solid state while solid state has much more 3rd. harmonic content. Second order harmonics are pleasing to the ear while 3rd. order is shrill and tiring to the ear. Also, tube amps can produce the rise side of instant peaks much faster than solid state amps. These reasons may explain some of the hi-fi crowd's facination with tubes.

As far as RF goes, I see no difference between the tube and solid state transmitters. Except for audio from tube transmitters typically is smoother. Not as loud though. Power supply tilt is the worst loudness-robbing factor in tube AM transmitters.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce

Post Number: 1352
Registered: 9-2003
Posted on Sunday, July 11, 2004 - 1:26 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

 tube station 1960's 19682.jpg
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce

Post Number: 1353
Registered: 9-2003
Posted on Sunday, July 11, 2004 - 2:17 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

 1960's tube station oops it didnt send it
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Galaxyraider
Junior Member
Username: Galaxyraider

Post Number: 45
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Sunday, July 18, 2004 - 12:19 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Most people don't realize that 80% of the radio stations AM and FM still use Tubes for their transmitters. They are superior to solid state for Audio quality. And Outright RF Power from a solid state transmitter doesn't reduce the size of the transmitters much at these stations. Take a tour of a local radio station some day ask to see the transmitter. Don't be surprised to see the finals are TUBES!


--- Let me add this ---


I spend about 80% of my life at radio and TV stations.

Most high power transmitters made today are tube type. However, solid state has taken over all low and medium power lines.

The truth is, as far as audio quality, on FM it makes no difference since the transmitter is basically a linear amplifier. The exciter determines the audio quality, and there has not been new tube type exciters on the air since the 60's.

As far as AM, Broadcast Electronics new class E design blows the doors off any tube transmitter in audio quality. Tube type AM transmitters suffer from power supply tilt which robs loudness or quality. You can EQ with tilt EQ adjustments, but you lose audio quality doing that too.

Tech 833
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833

Post Number: 771
Registered: 8-2002
Posted on Sunday, July 18, 2004 - 1:50 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Oh, let me add one more thing...

I have now installed a few of the B.E. 1 KW AM transmitters. They are rack mount and about the size of a microwave oven. And they don't break. Well, only a couple times.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce

Post Number: 1373
Registered: 9-2003
Posted on Sunday, July 18, 2004 - 2:27 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Tubes have one last outpost and thats high power finals. As far as receivers tubes are gone and will stay that way.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833

Post Number: 781
Registered: 8-2002
Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 11:19 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Yes Bruce. Except at my house.

BTW, I just found a big spool of wire with a note I was supposed to send it to you. I think I blew it! Did I drop the ball on you? Please email your address so I can get this to you if I am supposed to. Looks like about 60 feet of longwire material.

My shop was in disarray until this last weekend.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce

Post Number: 1387
Registered: 9-2003
Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 7:31 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I like tube recievers i OWN a classic one a R-390 as well as a HO-140 but as far as today my FT-840 will keep up with ANY tube rig.

PS you DO owe me that wire HE HE HE my address under my call listed at QRZ IS CORRECT

 1970
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833

Post Number: 785
Registered: 8-2002
Posted on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 2:50 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Got your email Bruce.

Thank you.

Having just completed a move and moving my shop for the first time in 11 years (and hopefully the last), things are unearthing themselves that I forgot I had. Projects too. Add to that, I am still swamped with projects for about 17 stations right now and personally building 2 from the ground up. My brain power is spread thin.

Thanks for the help.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce

Post Number: 1396
Registered: 9-2003
Posted on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 6:55 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

833

I know the brain drain well mine CLEARS when my sugar does a flip ..... Sunday my sugar hit 600 then droped to 68. Yep I was hurting but you know us radio types ...... give us a mike and a place to plug the coffin in and were set to go!
Well next here is to get my shack moved and tile that 25 foot floor....... and install a sound proof door between me and the rest of the house!
Ahh quite .......... HE HE HE
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Teham
Intermediate Member
Username: Teham

Post Number: 125
Registered: 1-2004
Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2011 - 2:59 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I have a kenwood ts 140s next to my swan 350c. Receive is better on the swan with less noise. receive audio is far less shrill and transmit audio is far superior. If transistors are bett then why are they using tubes in stereo applications again?? tony/n5jva/cef 259
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Radioreddz
Intermediate Member
Username: Radioreddz

Post Number: 100
Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Friday, May 06, 2011 - 12:41 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

on the subject of tubes what is the name of the Microphone that uses a tube for amplification. but i do love my tube radios much much better then mu solid state stuff, but just like finding a good tech to work on side band radios right it's even harder to find a good tube tech with out having to drive 3 hours or chance shipping it out.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tech237
Moderator
Username: Tech237

Post Number: 1432
Registered: 4-2004


Posted on Friday, May 06, 2011 - 11:03 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Anyone close enough to me, I'll happily work on their tube equqipment..
Tech237
N7AUS

God only made some many perfect head, on the rest he put hair.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Scrapiron63
Advanced Member
Username: Scrapiron63

Post Number: 877
Registered: 12-2001
Posted on Friday, May 06, 2011 - 2:14 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Speaking of tubes, I've got several old tube type receivers. One of them is a 1941 Philco console floor model radio. It has the AM standard band plus 3 shortwave bands.
It was one of the first sets that had a remote control. The remote is made of wood and is nearly a foot square. The radio has 14 tubes and even the remote has one tube.
Here's a picture of the old remote compared to a tv remote.remote
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833

Post Number: 1965
Registered: 8-2002
Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2011 - 8:22 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hey Scrap,

Interesting, your remote control (Philco called it the "Mystery Control") has labels from N. California. Primarily San Francisco area.

Out of all those call letters, the only station that has not changed calls since your remote was labeled (same calls on same signal) is KGO.
Your radio 'Mythbuster' since 1998
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Scrapiron63
Advanced Member
Username: Scrapiron63

Post Number: 877
Registered: 12-2001
Posted on Sunday, May 08, 2011 - 1:34 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Paul: When I got that radio I looked up those calls and was surprised at their location. I bought the Philco radio along with a 1937 Wards Airline floor model at an estate sale here in Arkansas. So they were a long way from their original home.
The Philco has 8 pushbottons that you set and then the remote goes to those presets. You turn the dial like an old telephone, hold down the stop and it sends a signal to the radio. IT would also work the volumn. I got the radio working but didn't mess with the remote very much. It has to have a weird voltage battery, can't rememeber what it is right now. I've seen the remotes sell on ebay for more than I gave for the radio and remote. I'll post a couple pictures of the Philco radio.
Scrapiron
philco
philco2
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Keithinatlanta
Advanced Member
Username: Keithinatlanta

Post Number: 916
Registered: 3-2003
Posted on Friday, May 27, 2011 - 6:38 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Scrapiron, what a great looking cabinet!!!!!!

I wish manufacturers would still put tv's in nice consoles again. Imagine a big screen tv in a beautiful wood cabinet with speakers on each end and out the back. Young people would not know how to handle something like that!

Keith in Atlanta
CEF 150
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833

Post Number: 1983
Registered: 8-2002
Posted on Friday, May 27, 2011 - 11:26 am:   Edit Post Delete Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Keith, The latest trend is for thinner, hang-it-on-the-wall style TV sets.

The downside is, as TVs get thinner and thinner, the speakers are smaller and smaller. The newest Sony thin screen (like 1/2 inch thick) has speakers found in cell phones. The sound is shreekingly horrible. Now, they recommend using a set of amplified computer speakers plugged into the TVs. That is reverse-progression!
Your radio 'Mythbuster' since 1998

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: