Quote:
Originally Posted by tubesrule
The only interference problems due to the design of the reciever I am aware of is from an anecdotal tale of the local oscillators in nearby sets interfering with each other. Other external interference sources would have been the same before and after the war. (ICE ignitions, diathermy, brushed motors, etc.) This in no way inferrers a lack of understanding on the part of the pre-war engineers or a limitation of the technology available to them. Most pre-war receivers lack an RF amp in front of the tuner, just like many post-war sets, as this was deemed unnecessary given most sets would be sold and used in a major metropolitan area.
There were really no technologies developed during the war that advanced the basic operation or performance of the receivers immediately post-war. The advances came in the form of miniaturization and cost reductions. While a 630TS is probably the pinnacle of immediate post-war design, it contains no technology that was not known, or could have been built pre-war for the right amount of money. Mass production and building to a certain price/performance target is what drove the technology. For instance, having a flyback power supply while technologically advanced and known before the war, provides no tangible operational advantage to the user over a mains derived supply. It does provide a cost and size advantage.
All this is to say a pre-war receiver like the TRK12, while not as technically advanced as a 630TS, will perform as good or better than many immediate post-war sets from the users point of view. Take for instance the ubiquitous VT71. These represent probably the most common design of post-war sets and their performance pales to many pre-war sets.
|
I disagree with your point. One example I can give is intercarrier audio IF. It was a WWII invention that reduced the tube count greatly, and stabilized relative fine tuning of sound and picture...So they would drift together and in the same direction as the set warmed up.