AmateurRadio.com

Change has pulls and tugs toward the past and forward into the future

We hear the word culture bandied about all the time. It means different things to different people. Social scientists define it as follows:

As a sociologist and statistician, one thing I’ve observed about amateur radio in the U.S. is that culture has a strong pull towards the past. We often hear this coming out when hams begin some comment with their “tenure” in the hobby: “Well, I’ve been licensed X years and I know…” Substitute your own number of years for X in this sentence. The listener is supposed to genuflect toward this tenure in the hobby as containing superior knowledge and wisdom. Social linguists call this “indexicality” to indicate what reference is being used in the argument. (For bench testers, think “reference plane” in VNA calibration.) So many amateurs “index” their understanding of the hobby relative to when they were first licensed, especially if it was during their teen years. That understanding “indexes” everything that comes afterwards and results in much of the verbal conflict on the air and on social media. Or, in person, to the astute observer at hamfests, lol.

The power that such indexicality has on the hobby is related to the demographic composition of amateur radio at this time. The demographer Ron Lesethage documented how the age composition of a population is related to the values for having children, a predicate for population replacement. In most all developed countries, child-bearing age women no longer see giving birth as an important part of their future. This is a clear historical change with respect to how they define what is important in their lives as women, unlike their mothers and women in most previous age cohorts. This “index” by women in developed countries is an example of the power that these belief benchmarks have on society. With the dominance of Baby Boomers in the hobby, is it any wonder why so the view of many hams in terms of technology is much closer to the Spark Gap than it is, say, using digital modes like FT8?

What does this have to do with a Spark Gap transmitter?

It is a metaphorical reference point to the technological origins of the wireless which, by definition, was amateur in nature. If we consider an automobile as the ham collectivity passing through time, at what point should the Spark Gap transmitter leave our rearview mirror as a guidepost? Is that vision a stifling tug against our speed toward what is visible through our front windshield? Many historians and innovators say yes it is. Here’s an AI-assisted image to illustrate what I mean.

So many new innovations are before us. But so many index our progress against the earlier periods more adjacent to the ancient Spark Gap transmitter. This is a continuum, of course, but listen to the naysayer commentaries on recent innovation. Why are they “bad” for the hobby? Are they “killing” amateur radio? I’ve noted previously that change is often labeled as pending death to those whose indexed standards are in decline. Right now, it’s those of the Baby Boomers as they hold positions of power and influence in the hobby while they progress toward Silent Key status.

Remembering the cultural origins of an activity like ham radio should become history at some point. That is, every new initiate shouldn’t be held to norms of beginning at the beginning. It is thought that an overemphasis on history can stifle innovation. This doesn’t mean that history should be forgotten. This is not a binary argument. Quite the contrary, there is a balance and a place for history. New initiates into the hobby shouldn’t be pushed toward the historical beginning but acquire it as part of the present and immediate future’s innovation. The latter is often what draws newcomers to the hobby space.

What does an emphasis on the past do for progress?

There are several elements to the detriment of an over-reliance of early history as a main part of the culture of a group like amateur radio. An article on this by the Thought Lab says the following about it.

How an overemphasis on history reduces innovation

• Risk aversion: When experienced professionals rely too heavily on “how we’ve always done it,” they become hesitant to venture into the unknown. The fear of failure can stop the pursuit of unconventional, and potentially groundbreaking, ideas.
• Limiting frames of reference: Extensive experience and historical precedent can create a mental model of what is possible, making it difficult to conceive of entirely new possibilities. In this environment, alternatives and fresh perspectives are often overlooked.
• False confidence in expertise: A deep knowledge of the past can create an “illusion of expertise” that leads to overconfidence. This mindset can close people off to new information and different approaches, stunting creative growth.
• Subconscious bias against novelty: Research has shown that many leaders have an unconscious bias toward familiar, established solutions, especially when motivated to reduce uncertainty. This bias can cause them to reject new ideas, even if they outwardly claim to want creative thinking.
• Misguided strategic choices: As seen in Soviet technology policy, an incorrect assumption about the historical trajectory of innovation can lead to big, irreversible bets on the wrong path. Instead of building on existing strengths, leaders may shift their focus toward an ineffective strategy, weakening their own sector. 

How a balanced understanding of history promotes innovation

• Learning from past successes and failures: By studying the history of an industry, innovators can see what has worked and what has not. This prevents the repetition of past mistakes and allows for the identification of successful strategies that can be applied in new contexts.
• Understanding complex origins: History reveals that modern innovations are often built upon a long lineage of prior technologies and discoveries. This understanding gives innovators context for where to focus their efforts and avoids a simplistic or misleading view of progress.
• Questioning assumptions: Historical perspective allows innovators to question entrenched narratives and conventional wisdom. It helps them re-evaluate their beliefs by comparing them to a wide range of past scenarios, which can lead to new insights.
• Gaining resilience: Studying how past innovators and companies overcame challenges can inspire a more resilient approach to obstacles. Instead of seeing setbacks as reasons to give up, they are viewed as a necessary part of the journey.
• Revealing long-term impacts: History helps put the ethical ambiguities of new technologies into perspective. By observing the unintended consequences of past innovations, creators can better consider the potential long-term risks and societal impacts of their work. 

Readers can identify these issues within the hobby by just reading and listening for a bit. National and local organizations are legion for this “we have always done it this way.” Witness the ARRL Sections which arose when one of the Founders (Maxim) was organizing regional bodies to pass messages. Is this not a Spark Gap in the rearview mirror today? This geography to serve amateur radio in the United States is almost ludicrous. See also Onno’s article on changing the current culture in amateur radio. I could go on but this is a family-rated blog, lol.

What can we do about this demographic transition in our culture?

How can amateur radio more effectively deal with the shackles of a fossilized culture where tradition rules innovation? Do we need the Spark Gap in our rearview mirror as a guidepost? Let’s just acknowledge that no amateur could sit down at a workbench and design and build a modern transceiver! Take a Kenwood TS-590SG. It’s far from the leading edge. But could you design one? Then build that design? I couldn’t. Why would we? As Rob Sherwood has written (and I have analyzed), we have the best receivers that we have ever had in the current market. Even though purchasing semi-homebrew radios, like the BitX variety (and I have), push hams toward tinkering, they are not “production” quality for many ham radio activities—like contesting, DXing, and so forth. Yes, some do spend most of their time in tinker-mode rather than production-mode. What we know from Canada is that we have strong segments in “production mode” activities as well as segments in experimentation where homebrew radios have a better use-case for the population. Should we pressure all newbies toward the past when getting them interested in the present and future? My friend, Dan KB6NU, just wrote about this same topic.

Yes, I built a crystal radio as a young teen, using the Fox Hole model with a pencil lead, razor, toilet paper roll for the coil, and so forth. Led the building of an FM and AM station as well. Learned a lot. I still build a lot of things. These activities are highly useful as educational tools. But we must face that we are appliance operators today due to the sophistication of the technology. At best, we are appliance enhancers by homebrewing accessories, modifying “appliance” radios, and so forth. Yes, some do build and operate fully homebrew rigs. Bill Meara N2CQR of Solder Smoke comes quickly to mind. Nothing detrimental with that per se but should we have a norm that every ham should follow suit? When we get the Spark Gap out of our rearview mirror as a guidepost for the future, we will make much more progress with post-Baby Boomers for reasons I’ve outlined above.

In the January 2023 issue of CQ Magazine, there is an article I wrote introducing my Sherwood Tools page over at FoxMikeHotel.com. Didn’t make the cover but it is on page 50! It will introduce the reader to these new tools to further utilize Rob Sherwood NC0B’s test suite of bench measurements on over 50 years of radios. I appreciate Rich Moseson (CQ Editor) for wanting to further publicize these online tools that I’ve created with the significant assistance of Rob Sherwood NC0B. He is an international treasure to the amateur radio community!

I update this webpage as I’m able to digest and process new data from Rob’s Table. It does take some time for me to reanalyze these data segments, as even one new entry alters the patterns and analysis from the previous dataset. If I am in the midst of other matters, it can take me a month or more to get to this update. (Amateur radio is a hobby, not a lifestyle, for me, lol.)

This work on price, performance and satisfaction with HF radios has been very popular over the past couple of years as I’ve given many talks to groups via Zoom on the studies and results. The first results from this line of research was published by (then) Editor Scott Wright K0MD at the National Contesting Journal. I’ll be adding the latest Yaesu HF radios (FTDX10 and FT-710) to the mix soon.

Stay tuned because I’m completing the analysis of a subset of these modern transceivers that includes composite transmit noise base upon data from a group of European amateurs complemented with measurements by Rob Sherwood NC0B. I’m completing that work and associated manuscript in the coming weeks.

Something that has made me drift into periods of wonder for a long time now is to look through the websites or other historical sources of radios and transceivers manufactured for amateur radio. By just perusing radios over a lengthy period of time, one can gauge how and when the hobby made changes in the technology. As the author William Faulkner has said, “The past is never dead. It’s not even past.” If coverage of the 2022 Xenia Hamvention bone yard is any indication, Faulkner is indeed right about the technological past not even being past!

Anthropologists of technology tell us that:

Our technological change in transceiver technology lends itself to the social change in how we practice amateur radio. I’ll focus on just one element that has emerged in the last decade, the panadapter effect, in a later post. But for now, let’s just get a grasp of the bigger picture. For it may not be what you thought, if you’re a long-time amateur radio operator. The pending demographic changes that I’ve written about unmercifully suggest that some won’t see the changes that tech imposes on cultural shifts.

But technology moves onward. The changes that improvements and revolutionary creations do begat collective change, even if the past still is among us in terms of usage or just in our hearts and minds. Those images and feelings are demographically rooted, however, in the time in which our early years are imprinted in our memories.

It’s quite an amazing walk to just browse through the dates that radios in Rob Sherwood’s table of receiver tests were released to the market. I’ve put a simple time line page in the portfolio of Sherwood Tools for the viewer to easily do that. I’ve added links to pictures and details of each radio for a richer experience.

Return to the year you were licensed or got seriously interested in amateur radio. What’s the nearest year in Rob’s Table? What was the technology of that radio? What was your first transceiver? Locate your amateur radio life course regarding transceivers through Rob’s bench test list. Then, check out the other Sherwood Tools to see how it fits into the latest rigs.

After this new page was circulated by Twitter, I received this kind note from a popular SOTA award winner, Ed Durrant DD5LP in Germany:

While it did take a minute, the results are hopefully well worth it. But just taking the Sherwood Table and placing each radio into the year of market-entry, there is a look at over a half-century of technological advancement in this time line. How has it made us change our behavior in operating? How has it changed the organized hobby itself? And what will tomorrow bring? Go take a stroll through transceiver time here.

The old quote attributed to the iron man of baseball, Satchel Paige, about not looking back is what I thought of as I posted my latest page in my new Sherwood Tools section of the FoxMikeHotel.com website. The emergence of the premium HF transceiver is the focus of much discussion, rants and downright fistfights in the kitchen to paraphrase a research methods text. Such a topic is ripe for statistical analysis using best-available data. I’ve tried to do that in this new page of tools to use to shape your thinking about pulling the trigger on a premium HF transceiver. In this market? How could you not use all the evidence available to you?

The Sherwood Tables are the basis of that data with the addition of the market-entry price and year. The focus is: who invented the premium transceiver? Well, it wasn’t Hilberling although at $20,000 in 2021 US Dollars that might be a good guess. Head over to this page to see by clicking here.

If you’re heading to Hamvention, it might be a good time to check the graphics out before making a decision. If you’re sitting this one out, it’s a great time to review what I have posted there. I understand Rob NC0B will feature these tools at his talk—Transceiver Performance for the HF Contest and DX Operator— for Contest University.

The work that Rob Sherwood NC0B has contributed to the public over the past decade is unique and an amazing service to hams worldwide. I’m talking about, of course, his summary Table of receive bench tests published at this Sherwood Engineering website. He is independent so no one can think that advertising dollars could skew his assessments or how he presents them. As a CW contest operator, he is very clear that he sorts his table on the basis of what his experience and training has shown him to be the single most important measurement in his table: the narrow dynamic range.

I am not a CW operator or accomplished contester (lol) but enjoy the latter with my small team of fellow hams. But I am a statistician who likes to focus on problems where analytic tools can help foster a wider understanding of the data surrounding the problem area. So, working with Rob NC0B, I’ve created a set of “Sherwood Tools” to visualize his data as well as link them to a couple of other critical aspects of a rig purchase: market-entry price, consumer satisfaction, and the year the radio entered the market. These four vectors of data drive all of these tools, now available over at foxmikehotel.com.

The tools include a sortable Sherwood list where you can sort on any of the nine tests he publishes as well as the composite index of them that I created and included in my two-part NCJ articles in 2021. A set of 3D data visualizations are available to simultaneously view radios on four data elements (that does make it 4D, technically). Several graphs illustrate key aspects of the data, including how to not get tripped-up in the “ranking” of radios where the bench measurements are just not appreciably different. Seeing how the past 50 years of radios appearing in Rob’s Table have made a remarkable and clear progression toward the best receiver performance that modern test equipment can detect is in another tool. In addition, how the trend in getting a receive bang-for-the-buck has progressed over this 50 year period is there, too. Finally, I’ve used the industry-standard tool by Gartner, the Magic Quadrant, to help isolate radios in Rob’s Table that perform and are rated above average at various price points. I call these the Golden Quadrant Lists.

Rob NC0B has not endorsed these tools and neither have Scott K0MD or Bob K0NR. But all three have given advice and suggestions for how I’ve designed them for which I am very grateful. None should be held accountable for any mistake or result that the viewer may find there. I hope these Sherwood Tools are of use to viewers who are evaluating rigs. (They have been to me over the past two years of doing this research during which I’ve purchased two new HF rigs.) Making a written set of must-have features is a critical complement to these tools. Just like Smokey the Bear says: only you can put out forest fires. Only you can determine the feature-set and ergonomics to satisfy your use-case for a new radio!

I’m outlining a talk on the use of these tools should clubs wish me to visit with them via Zoom. See my contact tab above. I’m good on QRZed.

Due to questions I’ve received during club talks to visualize all three dimensions of price, performance and satisfaction in HF rigs, I’ve assembled a 3D data cube (scatter plot) with these three measures together. This includes the composite Sherwood Receive Tests (SPI), price at market entry, and the eHam rating. The data cube points are color-shaded to reflect year-of-entry into the marketplace. These data are updated with Rob NC0B’s March 5, 2022 test data. A few (older) rigs without eHam ratings were removed.

Go to this link over at FoxMikeHotel.com to take a look. I may do some additional analyses in the near future so stay tuned if you’re interested in Rob’s work and related data.

One of the most valuable tools for amateurs worldwide to use when evaluating HF rigs is the set of bench tests that Rob Sherwood NC0B has provided for quite a number of years now. He ranks the receive tests by his favorite metric: narrow dynamic range in dB. It’s a key for CW contest operators (pun intended) which he is in spades. But it is a frequent question from readers of Rob’s table: why can’t I sort it on another criterion? Especially if I’m not a CW contest operator?

Well, now you can! Working directly with Rob NC0B, I’ve taken his latest receive test data and made a sortable table for the Sherwood Test Results. They are circa March 5, 2022. It’s at my companion site, foxmikehotel.com at this link. I plan to update it when Rob adds new radios to his Table.

I’ve also added sub-pages to illustrate some facets of the data. Based on my work over the past couple of years with adding price and consumer satisfaction data for each rig in his Table, I’ve learned that it’s important for readers to better understand both Rob’s tests and his ranking metric. In that research published in the ARRL’s National Contesting Journal, I created a composite of all nine of Rob’s bench tests which I called the Sherwood Performance Index (SPI). It is a broader assessment of receive performance than the narrow dynamic range. But it is not intended to be a replacement for Rob’s preferred metric, only a complement.

Thus far, I’ve added two interactive charts that will help the viewer better understand Rob’s table results. More may come.

One chart shows how the reader can “out-rank” themselves by ONLY focusing on how a rig is ranked on the narrow dynamic range measurement. Rob tells readers not to take the exact ranking as the only aspect of a rig for the top ten rigs are all very good on receive. This interactive graphic will allow the viewer to see how some rigs “bunch” together with almost identical narrow dynamic range but are, indeed, sequential ranked because of numerical differences that simply do not make much difference as realized in the rig’s actual performance. But, ever hear an athletic team cheer this after a game? We’re Number 10! We’re Number 10! I didn’t think so. But Number 10 might be just as good as Number 1 on the metric determining the ranking. You have to look at the data behind the ranking. This chart makes it easy.

A second chart demonstrates how Rob’s ranking variable, narrow dynamic range, relates to the composite SPI. You’ll find some interesting results from that chart, seeing how narrow dynamic range is important but there is more to some rigs than that. Especially if you’re not a contest operator, CW or otherwise.

As he has stated in various podcast interviews (including mine on the ICQ Podcast and recently on the Ham Radio Workbench), he started these bench tests for his own use as a CW contest operator. Rob disagreed with the ARRL’s tests as published in a review of the classic Drake R-4C receiver. So he created what he thought was a suite of appropriate bench tests. And the rest is history. For transceivers and receivers (“rigs”) over a 50 year period!

Here’s a trend line for the SPI by year over the horizon of rigs in his Table, circa November 2019. We are in the best period yet for receive performance in terms of Rob’s test suite. But now you can sort the Sherwood Table on any of his tests including the composite SPI that I added to asses your rig of choice.

Rob codes his website in conventional HTML. He recently had to suddenly change hosting providers. So he’s had enough on his plate with all of the other engineering contributions he makes almost daily to various email lists and groups. So while he could alter the HTML code to provide the ability to sort his table, I appreciate his spending his retirement time continuing to assist the amateur radio community as he does now. I hope that this offering of a Sortable Sherwood Table on my companion website will help the reader better understand this terrific tool as well as help Rob, too.