BVWS Winter Bulletin

[stevehertz]

David, your post there is clearly aimed - at least to some extent - at my comments that were about a very specific kind repetition, nothing to do with the magazine in general and certainly nothing to do with any other topic than restoration articles. But by proxy I've been dragged into a position of somehow sitting on the other side of the fence when it comes to how 'good' the magazine is. You mention lots of stats, excellent 'this and that', and so on, clearly bolstering the magazine against a perceived knocking of it. That would be fine - but I haven't knocked it?!

I have been an on/off member of the BVWS since the late 70s. I have seen the Bulletin grow from a stapled, typed, plain paper job to the excellent, glossy 'magazine' that it is today. I look forwards to receiving my copy and the breadth of articles contained therein.

Talk about repetition, let me explain myself a third time. Right, I find that in many of the restoration articles there is often a tendency to record each and every faulty component found. This can become repetitive, boring and predictable (oh, a faulty wax cap found after making loads of voltage checks...), making the article hard going and predictable to read. I don't think it needs a component by component account of every fault found. It can be condensed and still be informative and interesting, but particularly, snappier to read. It's not a service report, it's an informative and entertaining feature article about a restoration. I really don't mind people commenting on and disagreeing with that (it's an opinion thing) but I am not happy to be - by proxy or inference as it may be - positioned as a disliker, knocker of the magazine.

I'm a professional writer in the electronics industry so I've written hundreds of articles that have been accepted for publication in international electronics magazines. And trust me, if the editor doesn't like the way they're written, they tell you in no uncertain terms and refuse to publish the article. So in over 40 years of writing articles (not service manuals) I have learnt a few things, and on writing style and content, my view is valid.

[kalee20]

In fairness, I also read your first comment that you were knocking the Bulletin, or the style of some of the articles - but I think you've clarified your position now.

Regarding repetition - yes, there's a tendency after reading the first three DAC90a restorations - yeah, yeah, not again... till appreciating it's now 10 years since the first! And seeing yet another DAC90a article* - or thread on here - although it may be the 9th I've seen myself, for somebody recently joining, it could be their first. The 'standard' faults are always new to somebody. If they're not, then the BVWS has failed in attracting new members.

* Doing homework before posting this, according to a Bulletin online search there are only four DAC90a articles since 1989 (lots of threads on here, of course). Though the 4+1 superhet circuit appears in so many guises, it's bound to come up a lot, a newbie won't have long to wait before a variant comes up, which he/she can gain knowledge from, to read-across!

[stevehertz]

Originally Posted by kalee20

In fairness, I also read your first comment that you were knocking the Bulletin, or the style of some of the articles - but I think you've clarified your position now.

Regarding repetition - yes, there's a tendency after reading the first three DAC90a restorations - yeah, yeah, not again... till appreciating it's now 10 years since the first! And seeing yet another DAC90a article* - or thread on here - although it may be the 9th I've seen myself, for somebody recently joining, it could be their first. The 'standard' faults are always new to somebody. If they're not, then the BVWS has failed in attracting new members.

* Doing homework before posting this, according to a Bulletin online search there are only four DAC90a articles since 1989 (lots of threads on here, of course). Though the 4+1 superhet circuit appears in so many guises, it's bound to come up a lot, a newbie won't have long to wait before a variant comes up, which he/she can gain knowledge from, to read-across!

At no time have I ever mentioned repetition of articles?! I have spoken about there being a certain kind of repetition within restoration articles. I don't see a problem in there being more than one article covering the restoration of a certain radio so long as (obviously) they're a certain distance apart timewise and that they're not clones. Especially if it's a popular radio, as indeed the DAC90 is.

[dave walsh]

Hi Steve. I've been a BVWS member for a very long time but [alas] more full of windy comment than practise I do agree that there is always more to say but authors are perhaps encouraged to focus on what they are asked to do at the time and that's fair enough. Even without very much technical skill myself I do see the same issues cropping up at the time and think "don't they read up the threads etc" but most people just look at things from their own perspective [even me!]

You mentioned all the further possible background aspects of interest to a restoration and that is a useful reminder perhaps The repitition "within" articles is perhaps inevitable but it need not be a problem. If you are encouraging contributors to widen their horizons with more, non-technical, information, which is often quite fascinating in itself, so much the better and no harm done. clap: Even when there was a range of active, different and extraordinarily accomplished magazines in the past [sadly now gone] I thought then that the overall professional quality of the Bulletin and it's membership structure made it the most representative focus of our hobby interest as is now and so much more with the speed of technological development.

Dave W

[David G4EBT]

Originally Posted by stevehertz

David, your post there is clearly aimed - at least to some extent - at my comments that were about a very specific kind repetition, nothing to do with the magazine in general

My post wasn’t ‘aimed’ at you, (in the Shakespearean sense of 'slings and arrows') – it was a response to your comments.

Rather than re-quote the whole of the text of your posts, I’ll respond to the key points you have made:

“Y'know - and I'm probably going to get stick for saying this”

For the avoidance of doubt, I wasn’t ‘giving you stick’ and I'm not sure why anyone would. You invited comments saying: “Does anyone else at least partly share my view?’ I responded saying that no, I didn’t share your view, specifically the comment below. In disagreeing, I tried not to be disagreeable, but if you feel otherwise, then do accept my apologies.

“I sometimes get fed up with reading restoration articles that inevitably follow an oh so predictable route of, I then changed this capacitor, and that capacitor, a faulty valve cured that, this resistor was out of tolerance, I treated the pots and switches with switch cleaner and so on!”.

In my response, I stated: “I can't see a single article which I would class as repetitive or 'run of the mill'. Quite the contrary in fact. Many are really quite challenging, such as the final part of Gary Tempest's 3-part article on the total strip-down and rebuild of a Philips 753 motor-tuned radio”.

In looking back at the eclectic range of articles in the Bulletin in 2022, they’re mostly about the total restorations of wide range of complex radios, TVs, amplifiers and so on, by a wide range of authors. I truly can’t find any that follow an ‘oh so predictable pattern’, but if that’s your view, you are entitled to it. I just don’t share it.

“You mention lots of stats, excellent 'this and that', and so on, clearly bolstering the magazine against a perceived knocking of it. That would be fine - but I haven't knocked it?!”

I’m not saying that you or anyone else is ‘knocking it’. (You wouldn't be renewing your subs if you were).

I’m simply saying that my perspective differs from yours.

I see no repetitive evidence of ‘each and every faulty component found being recorded’. In a total restoration on a non-working set, of course a restorer will refer to components which have caused the equipment to not work or to have impaired performance and have thus been replaced, but only as part of the overall restoration. In addition to the electronics, most articles cover mechanical and cosmetic aspects as well – chassis, dials, speakers, cabinetry, knobs and so on.

“I really don't mind people commenting on and disagreeing with that (it's an opinion thing) but I am not happy to be - by proxy or inference as it may be - positioned as a disliker, knocker of the magazine”.

I’m not positioning you as such – I just don’t concur with your critique.

“I have been an on/off member of the BVWS since the late 70s. I have seen the Bulletin grow from a stapled, typed, plain paper job to the excellent, glossy 'magazine' that it is today. I look forwards to receiving my copy and the breadth of articles contained therein”.

On that, we’re both metaphorically ‘tuned to the same spot on the dial’.

I'm a professional writer in the electronics industry so I've written hundreds of articles that have been accepted for publication in international electronics magazines.

Then as a longstanding BVWS member, having written 'hundreds of articles in international electronics magazines', why not consider melding your professional skills as a ‘wordsmith’ to your restoration skills, to write a Bulletin article as a 'benchmark' for the style that you would like to read yourself Steve?

I don’t think there’s anything else I can usefully add, but hope that clarifies any misunderstandings.

[high_vacuum_house]

Good afternoon,
I did the article about the Philips projection television after a casual chat with Greg when I collected it prior to its restoration.

It was discussed that a projection set restoration hadn’t been done yet in the Bulletin, and the set is a bit more than just a standard television with cabinet with a tube sticking out the front and a chassis with the usual capacitor and LOPT issues found during most restorations. I enjoyed doing the write up for the Bulletin, this was my first article I have ever done for a magazine.

I am planning at some stage to do another article for the Bulletin on the German Tefifon sound reproduction system that I have a great interest in and have several working models and many TEFI cartridges.

Christopher Capener

[stevehertz]

Originally Posted by David G4EBT

My post wasn’t ‘aimed’ at you, (in the Shakespearean sense of 'slings and arrows') – it was a response to your comments.

Rather than re-quote the whole of the text of your posts, I’ll respond to the key points you have made:

For the avoidance of doubt, I wasn’t ‘giving you stick’ and I'm not sure why anyone would. You invited comments saying: “Does anyone else at least partly share my view?’ I responded saying that no, I didn’t share your view, specifically the comment below. In disagreeing, I tried not to be disagreeable, but if you feel otherwise, then do accept my apologies.



In my response, I stated: “I can't see a single article which I would class as repetitive or 'run of the mill'. Quite the contrary in fact. Many are really quite challenging, such as the final part of Gary Tempest's 3-part article on the total strip-down and rebuild of a Philips 753 motor-tuned radio”.

In looking back at the eclectic range of articles in the Bulletin in 2022, they’re mostly about the total restorations of wide range of complex radios, TVs, amplifiers and so on, by a wide range of authors. I truly can’t find any that follow an ‘oh so predictable pattern’, but if that’s your view, you are entitled to it. I just don’t share it.



I’m not saying that you or anyone else is ‘knocking it’. (You wouldn't be renewing your subs if you were).

I’m simply saying that my perspective differs from yours.

I see no repetitive evidence of ‘each and every faulty component found being recorded’. In a total restoration on a non-working set, of course a restorer will refer to components which have caused the equipment to not work or to have impaired performance and have thus been replaced, but only as part of the overall restoration. In addition to the electronics, most articles cover mechanical and cosmetic aspects as well – chassis, dials, speakers, cabinetry, knobs and so on.



I’m not positioning you as such – I just don’t concur with your critique.

On that, we’re both metaphorically ‘tuned to the same spot on the dial’.

Then as a longstanding BVWS member, having written 'hundreds of articles in international electronics magazines', why not consider melding your professional skills as a ‘wordsmith’ to your restoration skills, to write a Bulletin article as a 'benchmark' for the style that you would like to read yourself Steve?

I don’t think there’s anything else I can usefully add, but hope that clarifies any misunderstandings.

That's fine David, thanks for the clarification.

[slidertogrid]

I thoroughly enjoy the articles in the Bulletin. I appreciate the time writers have spent compiling the articles and am ashamed to say that so far I haven't contributed myself.
One slight frustration is that under chassis pictures before and after are sometimes not the same way around which makes it slightly more difficult to compare them to see what has been done and how much alteration if any has taken place.

I can't say I have noticed repetition to the point of boredom. I like to see the pictures of the replaced parts. - "Bugs removed" or "dud parts Bhaji".
On the subject of repetition it does occur on this forum. The same question in answered over and over again, sometimes it occurs a few posts later and you could argue the repeat poster has not read the previous posts but on some occasions it occurs again and again all the repeats after each other and yet with enough time elapsed for the posts not to have crossed.
The key here is to read the relevant posts and disregard the repeats. If I did find an article in the Bulletin boring I would simply skip to the next one...

I have particularly enjoyed the Television restoration articles. I think that is evidence that the BVWS members are moving with the times, its not all crystal sets and horn speakers.

I wouldn't want to feel under any obligation to write an article a certain way in case it was seen as not worth reading, boring or amateurish. The main reason I have not done so yet is that I have concerns my article would not come up to the standard required. I wonder how many other members feel the same?

[greenstar]

Difficult issue. In the end the editor must choose the content that members most like. Does this mean material that is state of the art, or that teaches the art? You need both if the less proficient are to learn. As a novice I like to see how a restoration proceeds. I see also articles way above my level, which is fine so long as there is something for me. I have little interest in TV's, computers or transistors, but accept the membership covers all this. I would like to see more early sets - pre broadcast, 20's and early 30's. You cannot please everybody, but perhaps aim to please everybody some of the time.

[Paul Stenning]

Some of these comments are assuming the editor has a large selection of articles to choose from. In reality that is not the case, and he needs to work with what he has.

There are times when he is starting on a bulletin and doesn't have enough articles to fill it, so he is hoping enough come in over those few weeks that don't need too much work (otherwise there may be a couple more pages of event photos etc). At best he will have enough for about 1.5 bulletins to pick and choose from, and the choice would mainly be to get a good mix of subjects and article lengths. This is why there is often an appeal for more articles and other content.

So don't worry that the article you are considering writing may not be good enough. It will almost certainly be used. A good mix of styles, lengths and experience levels etc make for a more interesting and balanced publication.

You could always message someone you know and trust here, or email one of the committee members, and ask them to read through it and give any suggestions, comments and amendments etc, whether technical or grammatical.

[HamishBoxer]

You can only print the material supplied or some of it. I consider it a good balance of various areas.

[Ian - G4JQT]

I understand that sometimes there may be hardly enough material to fill a bulletin. If/when that happens I see no problem occasionally filling a few pages headed: "Fom Our Archives". I doubt anyone will remember something from 10, 20 or 30 years ago!

[saddlestone-man]

I'd like to see an article in the Bulletin about this excellent Forum.

How did it come about?; what hardware and software is used?; how is it moderated?; how many members are there?; how many are active at any time; what's the thread with the most posts (I suspect the Sussex Valve Tester)?; etc, etc.

Not very fair to volunteer someone but Paul .... how about it?

best regards ... Stef

[HamishBoxer]

I of course cannot comment for Paul, normally though he is very busy.