Timeline for Why do today's transceivers use LC filters rather than crystal filters?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 20, 2015 at 8:53 | answer | added | Clement Ronald | timeline score: 0 | |
| Nov 14, 2015 at 22:48 | answer | added | makomk | timeline score: 7 | |
| Sep 29, 2014 at 14:02 | answer | added | Gert-Jan Dam | timeline score: 4 | |
| Feb 14, 2014 at 14:32 | history | edited | user |
edited tags
|
|
| Feb 14, 2014 at 14:31 | comment | added | user | It's worth noting that the statement you quote is not cited. The only source cited in that paragraph is Horst Stader and Jack A. Hardcastle, "Crystal Ladder Filters for All", QEX, pp.14-18 Nov-Dec 2009, which even though I haven't checked it out in depth does not seem to provide a citation for the quoted statement. That said, interesting question. | |
| Feb 13, 2014 at 2:54 | answer | added | Phil Genera | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 1, 2014 at 10:35 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackHam/status/429563587221540864 | ||
| Jan 31, 2014 at 21:01 | comment | added | Adam Davis | That could be. I suspect size may have a role to play in some receivers as well. But since I'm at the beginning of the journey to understand the circuits I'm wondering if there's more to it than that. | |
| Jan 31, 2014 at 20:55 | comment | added | Phil Frost - W8II | Just a guess: cost. | |
| Jan 31, 2014 at 20:46 | history | asked | Adam Davis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |