Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site druxy.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!floyd!harpo!ihnp4!drutx!druxy!phl
From: phl@druxy.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: DIGITAL TUNING
Message-ID: <917@druxy.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Jan-84 14:03:35 EST
Article-I.D.: druxy.917
Posted: Mon Jan 23 14:03:35 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 27-Jan-84 06:10:58 EST
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver
Lines: 33


Is there an "inacuracy" in the digital tuning dial or has technology given
the nit-pickers another field in which to gather and contemplate how many
fairies can dance on the head of a pin?  I suggest you consider:

1. Digital dial indications of 101.05 and 101.15 are only about 0.05% re-
   moved from an indicated base frequency of 101.10 mhz.

2. The station might be broadcasting slightly off frequency.

3. The receiver might not have stabilized.  My ICOM R70 requires several hours
   to settle down. Some people leave their receivers on continuously if they
   want true frequency stability.  Even then the tuner will drift a few khz/hr.

4. Some people unknowingly tune their receivers slightly off frequency
   because they perceive a "sharper" signal.

5. Analog dials indicate the tuned frequency with an error of several percent
   depending on the design of the cursor, position of the operator (parallax),
   size of the dial and a host of other factors. If this relatively gross 
   error never bothered you with an analog dial why sweat the digital?

If the hundredths digit bothers you why not have a competent repairman disable
it or cover it over with tape?  It is, after all, superfluous when you employ
your AFC circuitry.

I hope no one takes this as a flame at Kirk's sincere question.  What really 
gets my goat are the unscrupulous manufacturers who feed on the technophiles
need for an ever increasing dose of bells and whistles and pander to it at an
ever increasing price.

- Phil Lavette, druxy!phl