[BC] Power efficiency vs transmission quality

[Milton R. Holladay Jr.]

According to J. Fred, the B and C had about the same overall efficiency, but
I've never looked it up to check....And modulation was no problem with good
tubes. A mod to bypass the input xfmr would have made it free of audio iron.
  Of course, the 317C-3 was as good as it got in tube 50s.
The main consideration about tube boxes is whether it was a GOOD xmtr, or a
POS. Some of the 50 year old tube xmtrs were a lot better than the 30 year
old tube transmitters.
M
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Meuser" <Robertm at broadcast.net>
To: "Broadcasters' Mailing List" <broadcast at radiolists.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: [BC] Re:1 5/8 foam coax


 > That being said, in the specific case given in the thread a  317B was
 > installed in 1992.   That design was replaced in 1966 but a much more
 > efficient design. Since that time newer technologies have replaced that.
 > So more than even age, we are talking about something that is three
 > design cycles old at the time of install. We are talking about something
 > that takes up much more space, uses much more power and requires much
 > more cooling than newer designs. Then after all that it does not
 > modulate nearly as well as newer designs.  Power consumption is a
 > significant cost factor at 50 kw.
 >
 >
 > Age of a TX is not always important as an absolute number. For example a
 > 27 year old Amphet TX would be reasonable to keep on air if you can
 > still find the transistors. It is not the newest design but it is
 > reasonably close if you really need to save the money, that is if it has
 > been reasonably maintained over the years.
 >