My first radio cost £6 10s 6d, probably $150 in today's money. It had six transistors: RF oscillator/superhet mixer, two IF amplifiers, a diode detector followed by a phase splitter and push-pull amplifier driving the LS transformer.
The one thing wrong was that it had wheel tuning so you couldn't flip between stations.
My faithful Sony ICF-M750L 'wireless' has memory pushbuttons which work just fine, but it has a vicious synthesized 9Khz filter/tuner that prevents you detuning it a lttle to boost the audio HF; oh, and on FM you can't kill the stereo in weak signals areas, it just keeps on trying, with unlistenable results. Win some, lose some, eh?
(No, we can't get DAB reliably here).
Si484x has the flexibility to adjust the stereo/mono blend criteria--the criteria can be set to mono in weak signal areas. I also understand other Silabs products like Si47xx also have this flexibility for memory push buttons application.
Interesting article. The questions I had, while reading it, are (1) how are FM radios built into cell phones different from this (aside from the display, which I consider to be a tangential device), and more importantly, (2) why haven't all radio chips these days incorporated digital IBOC/HD Radio/Ibiquity, call it what you will? Or perhaps even the Euro DAB system?
I have a wonderful Sangean HD Radio AM/FM band tuner connected to my stereo. One of the very few such stereo tuners available. Why should HD Radio be such a rarity? It's great, it supports a lot of extra programming, there's no silly monthly fee involved, it could make the AM band useful again, as opposed to hopeless, and the chips are very cheap now. Every radio should incorporate one.
The IC can tune to MW/SW/FM bands with 2 to 3 volts their respective tuning coils connected.It needs a crystal and 2 capaciors connected externally. The stereo audio out put to be amplified for connecting the loud speakers. The IF selectivity shown is good. I just recall my first crystal radio receiver using one Ge OA79 diode antenna coil and variable capacitor and a wire antenna in the year 1968.
Good concept with the exception that AM band despite additional filtering, it is still susceptible to weather (for reach), and natural noise (lighting and other RF sources (engine sparks, electric motors, etc ).
So that leaves FM as a cleaner option, if the stability can be adjusted and corrected with weather (environment temp), it is a nice low-cost solution, and beats the monthly-fee base satelite radio.
I've been a ham and shortwave radio listener since childhood, and recently picked up a Tecsun PL390 pocket radio, based on the Si4734 digitally-tuned counterpart to this chip. Its performance is impressive, especially for the price.
In both the Si474x and Si484x devices tuning is kHz-stepped, not continuous or fine-stepped. At first I was disappointed, familiar as I am with classic continuous analog tuning in shortwave radios. Their Si57x oscillator has very fine tuning.
But the PL390 has an Easy Tuning Method (ETM) which scans the entire HF spectrum, memorizing the frequencies with any signal at all. Then the tuning dial selects these frequencies only. I like it now that I'm used to it. The Si4734 is sensitive enough that ETM gets the weakest stations. It's an interesting alternative way to listen to a radio, certainly easier for the average person.
If you're at all interested in these chips, you should try a Tecsun PL390.
I've pretty much stopped using SW, ever since important broadcasters like the BBC have dropped off the air(except in transmissions to Africa), preferring to stream over the Internet instead.
However, even SW could experience a decent revival, if it would start using something like DRM (digital radio mondiale) to improve its quality. DRM is already set up to operate over the SW band. HD Radio could easily be upgraded to do the same thing.
You would be astonished at the audio quality difference between analog AM and HD Radio transnmitted over the AM band. Even for voice programs. Like night and day.
I can no longer get interested in any radio that doesn't include digital reception. In fact, I can't figure out what's keeping analog-only radios on the market. Almost makes me think that the vendors are in bed with satellite radio providers, trying to get people hooked on yet another monthly fee, instead of introducing people to digital terrestrial radio the easy way. With the US system, which operates over the existing AM and FM bands, it's a complete no-brainer.
My "simple design" for an Internet radio was to dedicate a PC to my audio/TV system. I got a slim design, designed to be mounted vertically or horizontally, and it looks just like any other stereo system component when mounted horizontally.
Its monitor is the HDTV set (which has an RGB input, as well as HDMI, and I use RGB). PC audio, via mini-phone plug, goes to the stereo preamp, amp, speakers. Keyboard and mouse are wireless. Broadband Internet connection is 802.11n (wireless). There you go.
You can listen to any streaming radio or watch any streaming TV, sound is great, image is great, and you have complete flexibility.
Once you've set up your favorites, with the wireless keyboard, all the radio or TV "tuning" can be done with the mouse only. No more difficult than using a typical TV remote. Drag it on the couch next to you. Piece of cake.
My first radio, 40 years ago (I was 10) was a Reflex type 3 transistors. But the selectivity was very bad. So I made a superheterodyne a few months later with 4 transistors (2xBF194 + 2xBC148). Nothing fancy but very good working for MW and LW. The only trick was to adjust properly the padding and trimmers of the double variable varable capacitor.
These were good times when I became Ham Radio. I am still, having fun with high power tubes, but young guys do not even know what a tetrode is....
how do design a simple radio? This is just another article pushing a chip of course with no useful design content. Why not just title it with si-labs and say you can make a simple to design radio with the chip?
The problem with all these silicon radio chips is that the support is rubbish/zero if you are less than 500k units pa. So if you are not designing a mass market product you have little differentiation...everyone is the same.
And you can't do anything that is not obvious in the datasheet.
If you run into a problem (say sensitivity due to an interaction with your input circuit) you often have no clue what is in the chip and nobody will take the time to talk to you for your small 50k business.
So designing with discrete parts and multiple ICs will always be required for products that are not mass market and want to differentiate.
And what happens when you want to get hold of signal to do something other than AM in the MW band, or FM in the VHF band.....its all locked inside.
The radio described here is still a digitally tuned radio, except that an encoder input is used instead of up and down buttons. It still tunes in steps instead of continuous tuning, which renders it unsuitable for other than broadcast channel listening.
The comparisons to prior full analog radios are way off in the negative remarks, except they would apply to the minimum cost, bottom level radios. Many of the earlier generation linear circuit receivers delivered performance far exceeding anything that this IC could ever even possibly provide, all without a single digital component. From the description given, the primary benefit of using this particular device is that it is much cheaper than any other way of making a radio.
An article describing the benefits and capabilities of a device could be interesting and worthwhile, but disparaging previous technology, and comparing it's performance to cheap junk does not add to the value of this article at all.
I never got into amateur radio, it was radio control that interested me initially, then electronic music, then pro audio, then microprocessors.
Kids today might be interested in making remote-controlled gadgets, especially if they can connect to their phone or PC, and control from that wirelessly.
Everyone has wireless data with phones and wifi networks and wii, but local small-scale control of toys is pretty thrilling stuff when you have built it yourself!
As we all know, with a proper hobby, it is the journey as much as the arrival!
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.