"flipper" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 3 May 2008 08:59:52 -0500, "Dave" wrote:


"Andy Cap" wrote in message
. ..
flipper wrote in
:
On 02 May 2008 08:02:15 GMT, Andy Cap wrote:
No source references.

There's a source reference for each and every one in the "Source"
section.

Quite right. I never read that far. My apologies then to the book-maker,
I thought it was just the Nazir Matni guy that pasted toghether this
stuff.

Andy.

Well, I for one thank you very much for posting this stuff, whoever put it
together. It's wonderful.

Dave


Btw, I did a google on those books and looked at some (reader)
reviews. Most of them commented on the lack of circuit descriptions,,
missing part values, "full of (circuit) errors" and (some) "circuits
didn't work."

The first two are not really fair complaints, because that's not what
the books are for, but keep it in mind. (In fact, he explains the lack
of text is to leave more room for circuits)

Who knows about the last two. After all, he didn't create the
circuits, just reprinted them from other sources. Write a letter to
National Semiconductor.

They're not 'circuit cookbooks'. They're more a collection of 'circuit
ideas'.

Hey Flipper,

The "circuit ideas" works for me. That is in fact what I am using them for.
The first thing I ever built was a transistor tester from an article in
(June? 1976?) Popular Electronics that was full of errors which I sat down
and figured out how to fix. Since then, I don't trust or expect perfection
from any schematic or article. Hell, half the time you can't get some of
the parts they call for, and the rest of the time you want the circuit to do
something slightly different anyway.

BTW, any ideas on what all that stuff is following the files for Volume 6?
(Files 7/14 through 14/14.) Someone mentioned recovery files, but the six
volumes came through just fine with nothing more than a few half-hours worth
of point and click, followed by the Combine and Decode function under the
Message menu. And I was honestly wondering if the Combine and Decode
function was what I needed to somehow use when you pointed me in that
direction. Thanks again for that. Once you explained it it made perfect
sense.

Dave