[Repeater-Builder] Re: request for info on Sinadder Model CML-1

[skipp025]

C Weighting Filter, do a google search to find: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighting_filter 

It's an audio filter option... nice to have if 
you need it. 

s. 


> "ve1ii"  wrote:
> Hi, could anyone give me some information on what the C MSG feature is for on 
> a Sinadder Model CML-1.  There is an on off switch on the front panel for 
> this but I don't know what it is for.
> 
> Also, if anyone has a file for this particular Sinadder I would sure 
> appreciate obtaining a copy.
> I think it is basically a Sinadder 3 but am not sure of any differences in it.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Bruce, VE1II
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: request for info; "DV-200, Palomar Telecom"

[WA7ZZT]

The  DV-200 is a voice storage board made by Palomar Telecom, Inc. 
around 1992
They are no longer in business.
The DV-200, DV-64 and VS-100 were all Natural voice play back boards.
They were programmed using  the opitional SDS-1000 speach development 
system.

Dennis

web_magician wrote:
>
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
> , "kb4mdz"  
> wrote on
> Thu Feb 5, 2009 at 2:40 pm:
> >
> >
> > Graced with a Palomar Telecom DV-200 board; apparently it's a voice
> > storage board, but I have no docs; I guess Palomar Telecom went out
> of
> > business sometime after 1992.
> >
> > Anyone have a half a clue on this unit?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Chuk Gleason
> > Cary, NC
>
> If you still have it I'd be interested in playing with it.
>
> Mike WA6ILQ
> co-web-master at www.repeate-builder.com
>
>
>   

[Repeater-Builder] Re: request for info; "DV-200, Palomar Telecom"

[web_magician]

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "kb4mdz"  wrote on 
Thu Feb 5, 2009 at 2:40 pm:
>
> 
> Graced with a Palomar Telecom DV-200 board; apparently it's a voice 
> storage board, but I have no docs; I guess Palomar Telecom went out 
of 
> business sometime after 1992.
> 
> Anyone have a half a clue on this unit?
> 
> Thanks
> Chuk Gleason
> Cary, NC

If you still have it I'd be interested in playing with it.

Mike WA6ILQ
co-web-master at www.repeate-builder.com 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[wd8chl]

Paul Plack wrote:
> Nate,
> 
> Perhaps someone of your obvious intellect and condescension can tell me why 
> some messages won't let me delete extraneous text from the original after I 
> start the reply. (Yes, I'm using Outlook Express...I'm not going to use a 
> browser to go to Yahoo.)

There's your problem! Use Thunderbird! ;c}

> I was able to chop yours as seen below, but most only allow highlighting the 
> entire original message as if it was one character. Maybe this is why many 
> replies aren't snipped?

And you can see how I can do whatever I want with T-bird!
Including getting rid of any HTML, which should be banned from email 
altogether...but that's a different rant...

> At least I now know why so many messages come through the list with an 
> original message quoted, but no reply. Must be Yahoo is truncating the 
> messages above the replies.
> 


Heh-that would be Ya-phooey for ya

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[craigclarknh]

I found a great answer to those emails with spam and stuff I don't like. And it 
takes less time than commenting too. "DELETE!"

 -- Original message --
From: "moto_tech" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Amen!...
> 
> Actually it's where people quote every message before theirs and we 
> get to see all of them in each post. It's very hard to read the 
> replies now when you have to sort through several 'levels' to find 
> the newest post.
>  
> Please, just delete everything but maybe the post before yours before 
> you hit send.
>  
> Ben
> 
> 
> 
> 


--- Begin Message ---













Amen!...

Actually it's where people quote every message before theirs and we 
get to see all of them in each post. It's very hard to read the 
replies now when you have to sort through several 'levels' to find 
the newest post.
 
Please, just delete everything but maybe the post before yours before 
you hit send.
 
Ben


  


	
	
	

--- End Message ---

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[Nate Duehr]

On Sep 10, 2008, at 4:30 PM, Paul Plack wrote:

> Perhaps someone of your obvious intellect and condescension can tell  
> me why
> some messages won't let me delete extraneous text from the original  
> after I
> start the reply. (Yes, I'm using Outlook Express...I'm not going to  
> use a
> browser to go to Yahoo.)

Hmm, "obvious intellect and condescension"?  LOL... you've never met  
me, Paul.  I'm pretty much a dolt and condescention, nah.  Just a VERY  
fast typist.

I just said I don't like what bottom-posting does to the messages --  
if a "tone" to the message is read into it by the reader, it's not in  
the words that were typed.  I did read an article where researchers  
found that long e-mails were almost always seen as "negative" by the  
reader, no matter what their content was -- and I type fast -- so  
folks probably think everything I type is negative!  HA!

(For example, in person... you'd be able to see that my "bah!" at the  
beginning of the message wasn't a real "bah!" but a smiling joking  
"bah!" as in "humbug!" ... but of course, I made the mistake of not  
adding the customary smiley face to it.  E-mail just sucks as a way to  
really communicate, unfortunately.  Probably why I work for a  
videoconferencing and audioconferencing manufacturer, eh?  Much harder  
to do all this via e-mail!  But I haven't seen any videoconferences  
that are up 24/7 that talk about Repeater-Building!  Not yet anyway!   
Once in a while I can use the audioconferencing bridge at work for ham  
meetings... it's useful... but they'd get nervous if we wanted a 24/7  
meeting place for hams, I'm sure!  GRIN!  Too bad.  Would be  
interesting to hear all your voices!)

Here let me add some of these to THIS message...

:-) ;-)   etc... that's me.  Smilin' Nate.  It's just a hobby after  
all... this repeater stuff.  People seem to know me on-air by my  
laugh, which is distinctive, I hear.  I don't know... I just laugh.

Anyway... okay on to computer tech support!  (GRIN...)  Someone's  
gonna chase us off of the list with this off-topic stuff here soon, so  
we better make this quick!

As far as OE goes... as a long-time "computer guy" I *really* highly  
don't recommend it.  It's had some serious security issues over the  
years as someone else also pointed out, and it's kinda buggy.  But, I  
do understand the sentiment of wanting to use what you're used to, so  
no need to change -- just something to think about for a rainy day...  
try some of the alternatives.  I'm a mixture of a Mac and PC guy and  
use Apple's "Mail" program (Mail.App for the Apple tech geeks) and  
Thunderbird on the PC now for many years.  The feature set in T-bird  
plus the ability to load in plug-ins that do useful stuff, really  
sells it for me.

As far as WHY it won't let you select some things, that's odd.  Are  
you only trying with the mouse?  You might try holding down the SHIFT  
key after putting the cursor above the thing you're trying to dump  
off, and pushing the down-arrow key to see if it can

> I was able to chop yours as seen below, but most only allow  
> highlighting the
> entire original message as if it was one character. Maybe this is  
> why many
> replies aren't snipped?

Interesting idea.  Yahoo has lately been letting HTML mail through,  
and OE might be displaying some of the message as HTML/graphics or  
similar?  It's really hard to tell from here.  But it's really odd  
that it won't let you remove the text.  Hmm.

Don't know, really.  Very strange.  I see a lot of mixed HTML and text  
coming through a number of YahooGroups these days.  I also know  
there's a "classic" mode for YahooGroups and a new "Advanced" mode  
that didn't really seem to add a whole lot of useful things, but the  
two don't "look" quite the same on the receiving end.  I was playing  
with them, but didn't really analyze what it was... I didn't like the  
"look" of the Advanced setting, so I tried to turn all my groups back  
to the "Classic" setting, but missed a few...

> At least I now know why so many messages come through the list with an
> original message quoted, but no reply. Must be Yahoo is truncating the
> messages above the replies.

Interesting.  I'm not sure they do that in both modes.  Lately  
YahooGroups has been quite flakey -- as a moderator of some groups I  
get the complaints from folks when YahooGroups "forgets" to forward a  
message onto the list for days (and then it shows up) etc.   
Unfortunately, digging through the mail headers kindly sent by some  
folks to me hasn't really led to anything other than, "Yeah, one of  
their internal servers seems to have held onto the message for a  
while."  Trying to contact Yahoo to ask them what happened is  
virtually impossible.

YahooGroups is kinda a "you get what you pay for" proposition, and you  
do get quite a bit of "stuff" for free... having a "files" area for  
example, associated with a mailing list that all shares the same user  
login info and

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[Larry Wagoner]

At 05:30 PM 9/10/2008, you wrote:
>Perhaps someone of your obvious intellect and condescension can tell me why
>some messages won't let me delete extraneous text from the original after I
>start the reply. (Yes, I'm using Outlook Express...I'm not going to use a
>browser to go to Yahoo.)

Paul,
 Might I suggest taking a look at Eudora. It does not have 
the virus vulnerability that O.E. has, does have a spell-checker and 
other nice features.  I've used it for years.  It also makes it easy 
to edit down quoted messages.

Larry Wagoner

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[Paul Plack]

Nate,

Perhaps someone of your obvious intellect and condescension can tell me why 
some messages won't let me delete extraneous text from the original after I 
start the reply. (Yes, I'm using Outlook Express...I'm not going to use a 
browser to go to Yahoo.)

I was able to chop yours as seen below, but most only allow highlighting the 
entire original message as if it was one character. Maybe this is why many 
replies aren't snipped?

At least I now know why so many messages come through the list with an 
original message quoted, but no reply. Must be Yahoo is truncating the 
messages above the replies.

73,
Paul, AE4KR

- Original Message - 
From: "Nate Duehr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 3:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request


> If someone can't figure out how to SNIP the original message down to
> ONLY the parts they're replying to, they probably shouldn't be left
> unattended in public or allowed to play with sharp objects... 






Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[Chuck Kelsey]

I agree.

Chuck
WB2EDV

  - Original Message - 
  From: Richard 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:46 PM
  Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request


  I like top posting because I can read the new post without having to scroll 
down. If I need my memory refreshed due to CRS, I can then scroll down and read 
the remainder of the thread. Top posting saves a lot of time.

  Richard
  www.n7tgb.net

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[Richard]

I like top posting because I can read the new post without having to
scroll down. If I need my memory refreshed due to CRS, I can then
scroll down and read the remainder of the thread. Top posting saves a
lot of time.
 
Richard
 <http://www.n7tgb.net/> www.n7tgb.net

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security
of a free state, the right of the people to keep and
bear arms shall not be infringed."
 

 

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Ryan
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 2:14 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request



bs

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@ <mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com>
yahoogroups.com
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@ <mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com>
yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:07 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@ <mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com>
yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

Eric Lemmon wrote:
> Perhaps it's better to set your mail program to put your reply at
the 
> top, with all posts following in descending order. That is the
Outlook
> default setting, and it works for me!

backwards.
and
way
that
read
to
harder
It's

Bah. Uncivilized...

It's called top-posting, and it's always been silly, ever since
Outlook 
started it. Virtually no one did it, until Outlook brought it's
special 
brain-dead e-mail implementation to the world.

People don't read English bottom to top, they read top to bottom.
Prior 
to Outlook, the people online tended to type full sentences and knew
how 
to use their computers pretty well.

If someone can't figure out how to SNIP the original message down to 
ONLY the parts they're replying to, they probably shouldn't be left 
unattended in public or allowed to play with sharp objects.

Better yet, perhaps quoting the reply at all, is really the silly
part. 
A left over from when switching messages on a BBS to read the previous

would take a lot of time. Nowadays, just follow the thread backward
for 
context, maybe?

"When I feel inclined to read poetry I take down my Dictionary. The 
poetry of words is quite as beautiful as that of sentences. The author

may arrange the gems effectively, but their fhape and luftre have been

given by the attrition of ages. Bring me the fineft fimile from the 
whole range of imaginative writing, and I will fhow you a fingle word 
which conveys a more profound, a more accurate, and a more eloquent 
analogy." - Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

I'm sure someone will think I'm too "judgmental" for expecting someone

to at least TRY to learn how to use their computer, instead of 
butchering the English language with it. And I'm off-topic, so I'll 
shut up now. Just a pet peeve.

Top-posting is an annoying affliction of the computer age, to chop up 
our thoughts and words into useless backwards snippets.

(Want a better rant with good references? See what I think of 
PowerPoint for meetings: http://www.natetech
<http://www.natetech.com/?p=248> .com/?p=248

The Gettysburg Address parody sums that one up real well... (the link
is 
there above in the article). It definitely loses it's grandeur and 
beauty as a speech that saved a country -- when done via PowerPoint
slides!

Lovers of the language (even those of us who butcher it as I do), will

always bottom-post.

Nate WY0X



Yahoo! Groups Links

__ NOD32 3432 (20080910) Information __

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset. <http://www.eset.com> com



 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[MCH]

Many times, YahooGroups messages are delayed because the summary does 
not include the reply which is cut off (there is only so much of the 
message quoted via email). When that happens, there is no way to verify 
what is in the post that is new. Besides, I have yet to see any email 
client that automatically scrolls to the bottom of a message. Even if it 
did, the start of your reply is above the end, and so should the 
messages. We aren't in China where you write left to right, and we 
aren't on a planet that writes letters bottom to top. If we were, bottom 
posting would make sense.

Top posting let's you start at the beginning of the new post rather than 
the old posts which you're probably already read.

Joe M.

Nate Duehr wrote:
> Eric Lemmon wrote:
>  > Perhaps it's better to set your mail program to put your reply at the 
>  > top, with all posts following in descending order. That is the Outlook
>  > default setting, and it works for me!
> 
> 
> backwards.
> and
> way
> that
> read
> to
> harder
> It's
> 
> Bah.  Uncivilized...
> 
> It's called top-posting, and it's always been silly, ever since Outlook 
> started it.  Virtually no one did it, until Outlook brought it's special 
> brain-dead e-mail implementation to the world.
> 
> People don't read English bottom to top, they read top to bottom.  Prior 
> to Outlook, the people online tended to type full sentences and knew how 
> to use their computers pretty well.
> 
> If someone can't figure out how to SNIP the original message down to 
> ONLY the parts they're replying to, they probably shouldn't be left 
> unattended in public or allowed to play with sharp objects.
> 
> Better yet, perhaps quoting the reply at all, is really the silly part. 
>   A left over from when switching messages on a BBS to read the previous 
> would take a lot of time.  Nowadays, just follow the thread backward for 
> context, maybe?
> 
> “When I feel inclined to read poetry I take down my Dictionary.  The 
> poetry of words is quite as beautiful as that of sentences.  The author 
> may arrange the gems effectively, but their fhape and luftre have been 
> given by the attrition of ages.  Bring me the fineft fimile from the 
> whole range of imaginative writing, and I will fhow you a fingle word 
> which conveys a more profound, a more accurate, and a more eloquent 
> analogy.” - Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.
> 
> I'm sure someone will think I'm too "judgmental" for expecting someone 
> to at least TRY to learn how to use their computer, instead of 
> butchering the English language with it.  And I'm off-topic, so I'll 
> shut up now.  Just a pet peeve.
> 
> Top-posting is an annoying affliction of the computer age, to chop up 
> our thoughts and words into useless backwards snippets.
> 
> (Want a better rant with good references?  See what I think of 
> PowerPoint for meetings:  http://www.natetech.com/?p=248
> 
> The Gettysburg Address parody sums that one up real well... (the link is 
> there above in the article).  It definitely loses it's grandeur and 
> beauty as a speech that saved a country -- when done via PowerPoint slides!
> 
> Lovers of the language (even those of us who butcher it as I do), will 
> always bottom-post.
> 
> Nate WY0X
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[Michael Ryan]

bs

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:07 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

Eric Lemmon wrote:
 > Perhaps it's better to set your mail program to put your reply at the 
 > top, with all posts following in descending order. That is the Outlook
 > default setting, and it works for me!


backwards.
and
way
that
read
to
harder
It's

Bah.  Uncivilized...

It's called top-posting, and it's always been silly, ever since Outlook 
started it.  Virtually no one did it, until Outlook brought it's special 
brain-dead e-mail implementation to the world.

People don't read English bottom to top, they read top to bottom.  Prior 
to Outlook, the people online tended to type full sentences and knew how 
to use their computers pretty well.

If someone can't figure out how to SNIP the original message down to 
ONLY the parts they're replying to, they probably shouldn't be left 
unattended in public or allowed to play with sharp objects.

Better yet, perhaps quoting the reply at all, is really the silly part. 
  A left over from when switching messages on a BBS to read the previous 
would take a lot of time.  Nowadays, just follow the thread backward for 
context, maybe?

"When I feel inclined to read poetry I take down my Dictionary.  The 
poetry of words is quite as beautiful as that of sentences.  The author 
may arrange the gems effectively, but their fhape and luftre have been 
given by the attrition of ages.  Bring me the fineft fimile from the 
whole range of imaginative writing, and I will fhow you a fingle word 
which conveys a more profound, a more accurate, and a more eloquent 
analogy." - Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

I'm sure someone will think I'm too "judgmental" for expecting someone 
to at least TRY to learn how to use their computer, instead of 
butchering the English language with it.  And I'm off-topic, so I'll 
shut up now.  Just a pet peeve.

Top-posting is an annoying affliction of the computer age, to chop up 
our thoughts and words into useless backwards snippets.

(Want a better rant with good references?  See what I think of 
PowerPoint for meetings:  http://www.natetech.com/?p=248

The Gettysburg Address parody sums that one up real well... (the link is 
there above in the article).  It definitely loses it's grandeur and 
beauty as a speech that saved a country -- when done via PowerPoint slides!

Lovers of the language (even those of us who butcher it as I do), will 
always bottom-post.

Nate WY0X





Yahoo! Groups Links



__ NOD32 3432 (20080910) Information __

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[Nate Duehr]

Eric Lemmon wrote:
 > Perhaps it's better to set your mail program to put your reply at the 
 > top, with all posts following in descending order. That is the Outlook
 > default setting, and it works for me!


backwards.
and
way
that
read
to
harder
It's

Bah.  Uncivilized...

It's called top-posting, and it's always been silly, ever since Outlook 
started it.  Virtually no one did it, until Outlook brought it's special 
brain-dead e-mail implementation to the world.

People don't read English bottom to top, they read top to bottom.  Prior 
to Outlook, the people online tended to type full sentences and knew how 
to use their computers pretty well.

If someone can't figure out how to SNIP the original message down to 
ONLY the parts they're replying to, they probably shouldn't be left 
unattended in public or allowed to play with sharp objects.

Better yet, perhaps quoting the reply at all, is really the silly part. 
  A left over from when switching messages on a BBS to read the previous 
would take a lot of time.  Nowadays, just follow the thread backward for 
context, maybe?

“When I feel inclined to read poetry I take down my Dictionary.  The 
poetry of words is quite as beautiful as that of sentences.  The author 
may arrange the gems effectively, but their fhape and luftre have been 
given by the attrition of ages.  Bring me the fineft fimile from the 
whole range of imaginative writing, and I will fhow you a fingle word 
which conveys a more profound, a more accurate, and a more eloquent 
analogy.” - Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

I'm sure someone will think I'm too "judgmental" for expecting someone 
to at least TRY to learn how to use their computer, instead of 
butchering the English language with it.  And I'm off-topic, so I'll 
shut up now.  Just a pet peeve.

Top-posting is an annoying affliction of the computer age, to chop up 
our thoughts and words into useless backwards snippets.

(Want a better rant with good references?  See what I think of 
PowerPoint for meetings:  http://www.natetech.com/?p=248

The Gettysburg Address parody sums that one up real well... (the link is 
there above in the article).  It definitely loses it's grandeur and 
beauty as a speech that saved a country -- when done via PowerPoint slides!

Lovers of the language (even those of us who butcher it as I do), will 
always bottom-post.

Nate WY0X





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[moto_tech]

Amen!...

Actually it's where people quote every message before theirs and we 
get to see all of them in each post. It's very hard to read the 
replies now when you have to sort through several 'levels' to find 
the newest post.
 
Please, just delete everything but maybe the post before yours before 
you hit send.
 
Ben

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[Eric Lemmon]

Perhaps it's better to set your mail program to put your reply at the top,
with all posts following in descending order. That is the Outlook default
setting, and it works for me!

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY
 

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 6:41 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

Actually it's where people quote every message before theirs and we 
get to see all of them in each post. It's very hard to read the 
replies now when you have to sort through several 'levels' to find 
the newest post.

Please, just delete everything but maybe the post before yours before 
you hit send.

Ben

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Request

[Ben]

Actually it's where people quote every message before theirs and we 
get to see all of them in each post. It's very hard to read the 
replies now when you have to sort through several 'levels' to find 
the newest post.

Please, just delete everything but maybe the post before yours before 
you hit send.

Ben

[Repeater-Builder] Re: request for info; "DV-200, Palomar Telecom"

[kb4mdz]

Well, that's certainly a lot more than I knew this morning.  I dunno
about the PROM/EEPROM business; I'll take a look at it when I get
into work Monday; just tossed it in a drawer (with the radio it's
attached to.)

Hmm, maybe make it say "The White Zone is for loading and unloading
only.  If you have to load or unload, go to the White Zone.  You'll
love it.  It's a way of life."

Gosh, I miss Zappa.

Chuk

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Mike Morris WA6ILQ
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 02:44 PM 4/8/05, you wrote:
> 
> >Thanks, Mike.  Interesting thing is that it's joined with a Midian
> >UED1A encoder/decoder; my guess is it was set up to decode a DTMF
> >string, then respond back with it's pre-recorded message.
> 
> The card was basically fed with a binary number and a strobe
> pulse and answered back with audio and a busy lead.
> 
> The binary number told the card what word to say, and the
> strobe pulse stared the playback.  The busy lead was
> active while the card was talking - think of it as PTT.
> 
> >Maybe I could make it live again?
> 
> Dunno - I don't have docs on it.  The voice encoding
> is unique to that product, and a PC program took
> wav files and encoded them.  Palomar sold a
> software package that let folks encode their own
> files, unfortunately I don't know anyone who has it.
> 
> You might find out that your card has a made-for-the-
> application set of sound files
> I saw one that was set up for an airport somewhere:
> "The yellow painted curb area is for loading and
> unloading of passengers and baggage only.  Do not
> leave your vehicle, it will be towed immediately."
> Not of much use in the repeater controller world
> 
> Does the card have EEPROM or PROM chips?
> It will always have at lease one PROM chip for the
> on-board firmware, but the rest could be either.
> That will tell you if it is set up as a talker-only or
> as a record/playback card.
> 
> Mike WA6ILQ







 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: request for info; "DV-200, Palomar Telecom"

[Mike Morris WA6ILQ]

At 02:44 PM 4/8/05, you wrote:

>Thanks, Mike.  Interesting thing is that it's joined with a Midian
>UED1A encoder/decoder; my guess is it was set up to decode a DTMF
>string, then respond back with it's pre-recorded message.

The card was basically fed with a binary number and a strobe
pulse and answered back with audio and a busy lead.

The binary number told the card what word to say, and the
strobe pulse stared the playback.  The busy lead was
active while the card was talking - think of it as PTT.

>Maybe I could make it live again?

Dunno - I don't have docs on it.  The voice encoding
is unique to that product, and a PC program took
wav files and encoded them.  Palomar sold a
software package that let folks encode their own
files, unfortunately I don't know anyone who has it.

You might find out that your card has a made-for-the-
application set of sound files
I saw one that was set up for an airport somewhere:
"The yellow painted curb area is for loading and
unloading of passengers and baggage only.  Do not
leave your vehicle, it will be towed immediately."
Not of much use in the repeater controller world

Does the card have EEPROM or PROM chips?
It will always have at lease one PROM chip for the
on-board firmware, but the rest could be either.
That will tell you if it is set up as a talker-only or
as a record/playback card.

Mike WA6ILQ





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: request for info; "DV-200, Palomar Telecom"

[kb4mdz]

Thanks, Mike.  Interesting thing is that it's joined with a Midian
UED1A encoder/decoder; my guess is it was set up to decode a DTMF
string, then respond back with it's pre-recorded message.

Maybe I could make it live again?  

Chuk G.

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Mike Morris WA6ILQ
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 11:42 AM 4/7/05, you wrote:
> >Graced with a Palomar Telecom DV-200 board; apparently it's a voice
...
> 
> Palomar Telecom made a Z80 based repeater controller, and as
> you said they are out of business.  The system had a number of
> design shortcomings, but is used in a number of linked systems
> as a hub controller.
> The DV200 is the speech synthesizer card and the repeater
> controller firmware never took full advantage of it.  Most of the
> Palomars out there get by with the MCW telemetry.
> 
> The board is useless except to someone who has a Palomar,
> and the controller needs one of the last revisions of the firmware
> to use it.
> 
> Mike WA6ILQ







 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] re: request for spectrum repair help

[Ralph Mowery]

I came up in some of the eairly days of the repeaters on ham radio.  Around
1972 or so.  I have put together 2 of the VHF einginnering 2 meter repeaters
and one 220 version.  Used several 220 Clegg repeaters and still have a
Clegg 220 rig running .  Used it for RTTY.  Good little rig for the age and
price. it would stay keyed down for over 30 minuits while sending pix tapes.
I have not used the Hamtronics boards.One group I was involved  with had
an old military repeater .  They bought a Spectrum and three of us spent
over an hour on the phone with them trying to get a transmitter working on a
voltage low enough a 12 volt battery could be used for back up .  Never did.
We were in the telephone comapny shop where one worked and the other was
employed in the airlines in their radio ( or whatever the FAA has) shop.  We
never did get the Spectrum working on the battery .  Anything below about 13
volts and it would flake out on us.  Actually spent about 3 nights one week
with the Spectrum people.  It never did work as well as the old military
repeater that used tubes and hard telling how old it was.

>From all the above is how I rate the Spectrum.  It is sitll good for a door
stop at best.

- Original Message - 
From: "skipp025" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 11:41 PM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] re: request for spectrum repair help


It's very disappointing to me reading most
of the replies to Kevin's request for help
repairing his Spectrum Repeater.  Most of
you would rather fire off wise cracks about
Spectrum equipment than help him out.

While Spectrum seems to be very corneous
rectum about customer service, their products
do work for the most part, when properly set
up and cared for. It's not rocket science to
research and improve even the most basic
circuits.

Most of you appear to have never seen a VHF
Engineering Receiver, early repeater boards
from 60's and 70's. This would include the
famous Clegg 220 repeater made from a split
radio. Early repeater layouts are where many
of us "cut our teeth" and learned how to make
these less than perfect circuits perform as
best possible.

I've got quite a bit of Spectrum equipment;
their more recent receivers are pretty nice.
Their transmitters are a mixed bag, but every
one I have seems to work as expected for what
each circuit is.






 

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] re: request for spectrum repair help

[mch]

skipp025 wrote:
> 
> It's very disappointing to me reading most
> of the replies to Kevin's request for help
> repairing his Spectrum Repeater.  Most of
> you would rather fire off wise cracks about
> Spectrum equipment than help him out.

To you, wise cracks. To most, relating experience.

> While Spectrum seems to be very corneous
> rectum about customer service, their products
> do work for the most part, when properly set
> up and cared for. It's not rocket science to
> research and improve even the most basic
> circuits.

Your experience does not reflect that of most of us.

Yes, they can be made to work, but for how
long until they again cause problems to others?

Why do you think Spectrum's CS is so bad? Is it
because they can't put up with all the CS needs
without cutting into their profits too hard? Is
it due to the high cost of solving too many problems?
I'm not saying it is, but it is a worthy question.

Sure, even a WV can run like a Ferrari given enough 'tweaking' (replace
the engine, tranny, body, Etc.), but is it worth it?

> Most of you appear to have never seen a VHF
> Engineering Receiver, early repeater boards
> from 60's and 70's. This would include the
> famous Clegg 220 repeater made from a split
> radio. Early repeater layouts are where many
> of us "cut our teeth" and learned how to make
> these less than perfect circuits perform as
> best possible.

Hmmm... I think I have one around somewhere. Never
had any problems comparable to those with a Spectrum.
Why isn't it in use? Went with GE/Motorola units.
In fact, the only close problem unit I had was a
Hamtronics UHF Exciter/PA. (Yes, I know - a VHFE clone)
I would not put up with that POS either.

> I've got quite a bit of Spectrum equipment;
> their more recent receivers are pretty nice.
> Their transmitters are a mixed bag, but every
> one I have seems to work as expected for what
> each circuit is.

So, a mixed bag is good enough to not criticize a company?
Let me email you direct about some property I have
that is *mostly* HazMat-free. ;->

> The early 90's
> unit I have similar to yours has never moved
> more than 300 Hz since I bought it.

Probably true. Most of my repeaters
regularly move +/- 5 kHz. Heh heh.
(I know - another wise crack)
 
> There's probably no reason your unit can't be
> made to operate well.

Again, for how long? I had one that could be tuned to any five
frequencies you wanted. Or was that any one plus four more...

What you are seeing on the list is a lot of people who have had negative
experiences with Spectrum trying to not let another builder go through
the same. I have little doubt most would help if they thought that is
the best course of action.

Most of the people are sincere when they say to look for something else.
I was sincere when I suggested selling the Spectrum and buy something
else with the proceeds. In my opinion, that is the best course to take.

Joe M.




 

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Re: [[Repeater-Builder] re: request for spectrum repair help]

[JOHN MACKEY]

Skipp -  Sure you occasionally have someone
who has had good luck with Spectrum equipment.
But the VAST MAJORITY of us have had BAD experiences
with the equipment.  BTW - we're not all dumb techs!!
Many of us have several years experience
in amateur radio, or make our living professionally
in the technical side of radio (or both).

Myself, I've been a ham for over 20 years, have worked
in the two-way radio field, have done communications tech
work in the military (& still do as a reservist), and
currently am the Chief Engineer in an FM broadcast station.


"skipp025" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's very disappointing to me reading most 
> of the replies to Kevin's request for help 
> repairing his Spectrum Repeater.  Most of 
> you would rather fire off wise cracks about 
> Spectrum equipment than help him out. 
> 
> While Spectrum seems to be very corneous 
> rectum about customer service, their products 
> do work for the most part, when properly set 
> up and cared for. It's not rocket science to 
> research and improve even the most basic 
> circuits.  
> 
> Most of you appear to have never seen a VHF 
> Engineering Receiver, early repeater boards 
> from 60's and 70's. This would include the 
> famous Clegg 220 repeater made from a split 
> radio. Early repeater layouts are where many 
> of us "cut our teeth" and learned how to make 
> these less than perfect circuits perform as 
> best possible. 
> 
> I've got quite a bit of Spectrum equipment; 
> their more recent receivers are pretty nice. 
> Their transmitters are a mixed bag, but every 
> one I have seems to work as expected for what 
> each circuit is. 
> 
> So Kevin, first off… I probably have the manual 
> for the unit you have, would be willing to 
> work with you off the list to keep the "know 
> it all's" from laughing too hard. The temperature 
> problem you report is not that uncommon from 
> the type of layout installed in your unit, not 
> specific to the Spectrum Brand. The early 90's 
> unit I have similar to yours has never moved 
> more than 300 Hz since I bought it. 
> 
> There's probably no reason your unit can't be 
> made to operate well. 
>





 

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

[Repeater-Builder] re: request for spectrum repair help

[skipp025]

It's very disappointing to me reading most 
of the replies to Kevin's request for help 
repairing his Spectrum Repeater.  Most of 
you would rather fire off wise cracks about 
Spectrum equipment than help him out. 

While Spectrum seems to be very corneous 
rectum about customer service, their products 
do work for the most part, when properly set 
up and cared for. It's not rocket science to 
research and improve even the most basic 
circuits.  

Most of you appear to have never seen a VHF 
Engineering Receiver, early repeater boards 
from 60's and 70's. This would include the 
famous Clegg 220 repeater made from a split 
radio. Early repeater layouts are where many 
of us "cut our teeth" and learned how to make 
these less than perfect circuits perform as 
best possible. 

I've got quite a bit of Spectrum equipment; 
their more recent receivers are pretty nice. 
Their transmitters are a mixed bag, but every 
one I have seems to work as expected for what 
each circuit is. 

So Kevin, first off… I probably have the manual 
for the unit you have, would be willing to 
work with you off the list to keep the "know 
it all's" from laughing too hard. The temperature 
problem you report is not that uncommon from 
the type of layout installed in your unit, not 
specific to the Spectrum Brand. The early 90's 
unit I have similar to yours has never moved 
more than 300 Hz since I bought it. 

There's probably no reason your unit can't be 
made to operate well. 

Cheers

skipp

skipp025 at yahoo.com 





 

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/