🚀 go-pugleaf

Someone wrote:
> >Sorry, but this is wrong. The 'super' in superheterodyne is actually
> >a contraction of 'supersonic' referring to the fact that the
> >heterodyne produced is above the range of audible frequencies (i.e.
> >an RF heterodyne).

In article <17660105@hpfcdj.HP.COM>, myers@hpfcdj.HP.COM (Bob Myers) writes:
> An interesting theory, but I suspect that it's incorrect as far as the
> actual origin of the word is concerned.  When Armstrong invented the
> superheterodyne technique, the most "refined" receiver type available
> was called the "super-regenerative" (which, I assure you, had nothing to
> do with regenerating supersonic frequencies - although the "regeneration" *did*
> take place in the RF stages).  I suspect that he simply picked up the "super" 
> prefix from this as a Good Marketing Move.

Actually a super-regenerative receiver does have a bit to do with super-sonics.
A straight regenerative receiver uses +ve feedback to increase the gain of
the RF detector. A super-regenerative receiver (usually at VHF or higher), 
takes the detector in and out of regeneration at a super-sonic frequency. The
idea is to get more regeneration than the straight regenerative receiver, but
in way that you can't hear the "feedback". Super-regenerative detectors are
followed by a low pass filter to remove the super-sonic mess.
(I know...I've built one in an attempt to get more out of a "sniffer").
Whether this all has anything to do with the name "super" I have no idea !