Radio broadcast .. (1922-30)

914 Radio Broadcast articles, specifying particular parts when necessary, and wherever possible indicating the use of standard products. But, for the time being, we must remember that the market is pretty well flooded with useless and poorlydesigned parts which we hope to save our readers from buying. It is true that certain manufacturers subsidize writers to specify their units. Sometimes, perhaps, they are justified in doing so. Such articles are usually taken with a grain of salt by the reader and though they may make some temporary friends for the publication among those whose parts are specified, the usual result is unfavorable reaction on the part of other advertisers. In many instances the periodicals in question do not acquaint themselves with the performance of the receivers described and, as a result, many utterly useless purchases, and general dissatisfaction will result. As an instance of this: an experimenter sent us a very well written and very well 'illustrated article, describing a five-tube, single-control receiver some few months ago. The work was excellent. We asked for a demonstration. When the receiver came to our laboratory we were delighted with its appearance. Then we tried to make it work. Then we called for assistance from the designer. He tried to make it work. Then he began to make apologies. Imagine our surprise on seeing the description of this wonder appear on the front page of a certain newspaper radio section for which we had come to have a feeling of friendship because of the technical accuracy of the articles it published. There are occasions, when the subsidized writer — usually signing his articles with a self-imposed "Radio Engineer" — really does describe something worth while and, even if he does load his literary efforts describing it with publicity which is supplemented by price lists and space in the advertising section, the intelligent reader will take it for what it is worth. We are quite certain that advertising contracts, secured by the offer of a certain amount of editorial comment per dollar are hard to renew. We want none of them. On the other hand it is equally unfair to the reader, who, in the final analysis pays the piper, for any periodical to withhold a description of a valuable addition to the radio field because it is not to be accompanied by advertising. Our policy is governed by the value we believe the article under consideration will be to our readers. If it happens to stimulate the sale of reliable products, we believe it does the reader and the manufacturer a service, by bringing to the former a good product and the latter a customer. In doing this work, however, we try to maintain a perfectly fair stand in connection with products of a competing nature. It is only by such procedure we believe the industry will prosper. THE BLOOPERS ARE AT IT AGAIN IT IS rather significant that all of the letters considered here were received in the same mail. If we get many more, requiring such lengthy comment we may have to abandon the magazine and devote all our time to correspondence. Mr. Guy M. Chase of Elizabeth, N. J., is responsible for the letter which follows, which, with our reply, seems to require no further comment. Editor, RADIO BROADCAST, Doubleday, Page & Co., Garden City, L. I. DEAR SIR: On page 280 of the December issue of RADIO BROADCAST in an article by A. H. Lynch, there appear statements which are, to me, interesting. Speaking of the absence of "squealing receivers" at the Radio Fair, the article lists, "all manner of tuned radio frequency receivers, reflexes, and super-heterodynes," with the intimation that they do not squeal. I know of a certain factory-built five-tube tuned radio frequency receiver in this city, operated on a loo-foot outside antenna which is always tuned by the squeals, even on locals. With 90 volts on the plate, is not that a squealer? Super-heterodynes operated on outside antennas, with a constantly oscillating tube as a part of the working of the set, seem to me to fall in the squealer class, with a vengeance. I know of improperly tuned neutrodynes likewise tuned by the squeals. I read most of the radio magazines published and I set up and try out a great many circuits. There are few which will not squeal when improperly operated or improperly adjusted, at least, that is my experience. My point is this. I have been impressed with the fact that most radio magazines are obsessed with the idea that only regenerative circuits can squeal. I have often heard a salesman tell a buyer that a neutrodyne set or a tuned r.f. set could not squeal. 1 think that is sheer fraud. True, regenerative circuits can be so operated as to be a pest to all for miles around. Those who have recently listened for Europe can swear to that. But not all the squeals come from regenerative sets. (I except the single-circuit from any consideration, as it is, by all odds, the champion squealer.) Using two coupled regenerative sets, of the so