Issue 14: Collecting the Classics

This was an article about equipment, and not about modes.

 

Back in the 70's, when I was 13 years old, I couldn't mow enough lawns every week to afford the rigs I dreamed of using with my new Novice license. An elmer helped me put together a 6L6 from old TV parts and lent me a Hallicrafter receiver. Neither worked well.

In the past couple of years, now having some time and some resources, I went through a handful of boat anchors. Had *the* dream rig of my young teenage years: A Drake 2NT/2C/2CQ. Logged many with it for SKCC and NRR. But it takes up a lot of space and the receiver wasn't all that great.

About a year ago, I said I'm done with tubes. Sure, they're fun. But they're expensive and they can't even come close to competing with today's modern rig. Got a couple more sitting on my shelf right now I'm going to put a $20 price tag on at the next nearby hamfest and I'll finally be done with them.

I immediately spotted a problem in your second paragraph: "...the very large number of hams who enjoy collecting and restoring old classics." Very large? I can't find any others around me other than maybe about a half dozen or so within the forums of this web site. (and most of them were telling me I was doing it wrong.) A few more years and they'll all be gone.

#2. Restoring the old boat anchors is becoming almost impossible these days (because the parts you need to replace no longer exist or because the parts you need are very expensive. Case in point: I recently restored a Heathkit DX-40/VF1. Why did I restore it? Nostalgia. Final cost: ~$600 and about 40 hours of labor. Used it for a while, got tired of it, sold it at a hamfest for $100. Did I enjoy restoring it? YES. Did I think the enjoyment I got out of it was worth $600? (plus buying it initially for $150...) No.

I still enjoy old boat anchors. (...as long as someone else owns them.)

Today, my solid state radios are nothing more than just another RF interface for my computer. When something goes wrong with them, I scrap 'em.

Those who are hoarding boat anchors today are making sure their estate is going to be a real hassle to deal with.

Only the boat anchors that "look" good (not necessarily work) that can be displayed behind glass on a museum shelf will be the only boat anchors that are saved from here on out.

 

Thanks Guy, as I've discovered here, there is no subject in ham radio that everyone feels the same way about. There will be discrepancies of opinions, there will be arguments, there will be people who come in and offer snotty "come backs" and so on, no matter what I discuss . . . All of it is a part of ham radio. For me, I have friends here locally who just love their old Collins gear, their Drake, the old Henry floor standing amplifiers and so on. So, I thought, I've never been interested in that stuff. What is it that these folks find about their experience with boat anchors that can be interesting to write about? Your experience is probably not unique. The old, really old stuff, could go away at some point. But what do you think, Guy (or anyone else) -- do you think there will ever be NEW "old classics" produced by Flex, ICOM, Yaesu and so on? Or was it just a phenomenon that has a finite end to it? Dave

 

Excellent article about collecting, repairing and operating classic radios. My shack is a collection of radios that provided me the basis of a career in broadcasting. Yes, nostalgia plays a role but the joy of bringing these classic radios back to life is special. Your comments about digital modes that amount to computers communicating, not people, is spot on analysis.
Vern Wirka
W0VMP

 

Thank you Vern. I very much appreciate you joining in, and being a reader. Dave

 

I think the perspective will vary depending on how someone engages in ham radio. "Back in the day" we had CW, SSB, and some lingering AM -- and not much else. There were no computers. Some did RTTY. Phone patches saved many dollars in long distance phone call charges. It was a different universe from a ham radio point of view -- radio was magic. Before I offer a potentially controversial opinion, let me temper my thoughts with this: my modern rig is an ICOM IC-7610. It has every ding-dong, gee-whiz bell and whistle you could think of -- built in everything. It is, however, quite sterile compared to the boat anchors that I adore. The ICOM works well, consumes little space, and yet is rather dull from an aesthetic and operational point of view. To operate it, you don't have to know anything about plate and grid currents. Honestly, you could line up an ICOM next to a Yaesu, next to an Elecraft, and they all come down to the same thing: a series of buttons that take you from one sub-menu to another, and the display changes as you push the buttons. The modern rigs work marvelously, but they lack the character and style of the vintage gear. So, here's how I look at it: when I fire up my HW-101, I'm riding in a '65 Mustang that I know has no air conditioning and I have to roll the windows down. The "classics" are done, but we can keep some of them alive for the fun of it - and to help people remember how we got to where we're at.

73 - Steve, KW4H

 

Love, love, love this post STEVE. Thank you! Dave

 

@KW4H - ya, communicating long distance was "magic" for me, too, "back in the day." I was going to make a "muscle car" analogy, too, but you beat me to it. I'll go ahead and do it anyway.

You spend a *LOT* of money restoring that Mustang GT350, and then you take it out for a few miles every once in a while when the conditions are just right. Other people go, "oooh! aaah!" as you drive by as they see that perfect paint job and the sound of that performance tweaked 350 windsor through a FlowMaster exhaust system. You drive a Toyota across the country because you know it can make it reliably and nobody notices.

You spend a *LOT* of money restoring that Collins KWM-2, and then you turn it on and make one CW contact with it every once in a while when the conditions are just right. Usually in front of somebody as they go, "oooh!, aaah!" as they see the glow of the tubes and the clicking/clacking of the relays. You set up your IC7610 under a canopy and leave it outside in the rain over the weekend for 24 hours of Field Day because you know it can make it reliably and nobody notices anything other than, "you only logged 600 uniques?"

Electronics has evolved from tubes to transistors to chips. Now we have more than a billion PN junctions inside a thumb nail sized plastic container. There's a reason we'll never go back to the old. The new stuff works better and is cheaper.

"Back in the day" just communicating long distance was magic. Today, communicating long distance is no longer magic. The BOX used to communicate long distance is magic to most. But nobody cares about that any more; they just want it to work. When it quits working, you throw it away and buy a new one. Why? Because it's cheap.

 

Hey Guy, thanks for coming back to comment. I like your last paragraph and agree! But I think there might be too much emphasis on showing stuff off to other people in the two analogies you gave. I agree you wouldn't drive that Mustang across country, but not so much that they only reason I'd have it would be to be a show off with it. Same with the Collins. No one hangs around my shack (or my garage). Old classics area for me to enjoy, not as a "show off." Dave

 

As a general comment -- vintage gear isn't everyone's cup of tea -- and IMO, that's perfectly fine. There are lots of diverse interests in our hobby. People like me restore old stuff for the sheer pleasure of bringing the dead back to life. And yes -- as I've pointed out in most of my presentations -- some old stuff BELONGS in the dump. There's little value in restoring a boat anchor that was poorly designed and unpopular to begin with -- you just propagate the pain and end up with a working pile of nuts and bolts. That's where research comes in. Oh, and don't restore boat anchors to turn a buck -- you'll go broke if you try. It's impossible to account for, or get paid for, the hours involved and often the parts.

73 - Steve, KW4H

 

Sure. But understand that some metrics matter more than others. For instance in the lower HF bands, and on 160, modern radios cannot improve on sensitivity because achieving sensitivity good enough to get down to the noise floor of one's antenna system on those bands was easily achievable -- with a regenerative detector and one stage of audio amplification -- by 1930. Which means that no more-recent tech can improve on the achievement of that particular functionality.

Ability to render a signal usefully distinct from its own internal noise is Job 1 for a radio receiver. If it's doing that, throwing millions of transistors at that solved problem won't make a dent. Which is just one reason why some realize when experimenting with "obsolete" gear that it's actually not obsolete depending on the functionality needed/compared.

The foregoing is preface to this statement: The problem of radio reception -- and the larger problem of radiocommunication -- is not generic because one's application(s) for radio technology are specific. If one's need for radio technology is satisfied by technology far simpler/earlier than that afforded by the latest tech, the latest tech is may be inappropriate technology. (The breakage of which inappropriately complex technology, BTW, will have its users twiddling their thumbs awaiting factory service while users of malfunctioning but simpler technology may well have already put away their soldering irons after having done the necessary troubleshooting and repair themselves.)

I've had the privilege of using some of the best MF/HF receiving technology available on the planet at the time I experienced it -- one particular receiver costing more than I made in a year at the time. Its excellence did not involve MF/HF sensitivity better than what a good receiver of 1935 could achieve because its excellence had to do with use cases far outside of everyday ham-radio use -- like not overloading when used with nearby collocated transmitters running multiple kilowatts. So I don't pine for that receiver in the slightest, because in my case it was a half-of-six-figures nonimprovement over my relaxed, hobby applications.

 

Terrific post David, well stated. Dave

 

Yesterday I decided to do some spring cleaning that involved taking the stereo apart, cleaning and dusting all the gear, rerouting all the power and audio cabling and adding some filters to the new noisy digital stuff.

And I couldn't help noticing how differently the equipment in my stereo has evolved compared to my ham radio station. After dusting off my amps and preamp I did a tube count. 24 KT-88's, 6 12AT7's, and 12 12AX7A's. All in gear made in Binghamton NY in the last decade. All reliable, quiet as can be, with new circuit topologies to minimize distortion. Vinyl sounds fantastic and so does digital. The warm glow of the tubes, the big knobs, the thick glass faceplates and the harmonically rich sound are all part of the experience.

Contrast that to my FTdx-10. Super capable, high performance, truly state of the art and ultimately without much soul. I like it, don't get me wrong, but it is a different experience than using my old Drake C-Line.

Is it nostalgia? I don't know.

I do remember a lot of maintenance and fiddling to keep my C-Line in top form.
The FTdx-10 has a better receiver. Do I want to restore a C-Line e or S-Line? Dunno.


I do love my Telarc CD's , records, and files!

 

It’s probably not entirely nostalgia. The newer rigs are superior in many technological ways but they lack the character of the vintage gear.

 

Reading my post again, I didn’t clearly make my point. My stereo gear is new production and has all the character of vintage gear. Big knobs, every control available and clearly labeled. Nothing superfluous. No menus, no hidden features. Fantastic sound quality.

In the amateur market, I can’t buy something like that today. It’s just not made.

Take my old R4-C for example. It’s long gone, but as I remember it was lousy receiver by today’s standards. My FTdx-10 runs circles around it. With new filters and other mods you can get an R4-C to be “just ok”. Good enough for me. But I’m jot sure I want another one.

What I’d really like is FTdx-10 performance in a classic package with good ergonomics and a straightforward layout.

Refurbishing classic gear is a great hobby onto itself. I’ve got a couple of old radios, a McIntosh FM tuner and a B&O turntable in line for restoration. They’ve been in que for 10 years now. Maybe I’ll start on them tomorrow.

Cheers,

Tom