..... Using a microprocessor or almost any thing else 'digital' as a first electronics project is not really learning electronics, it is learning to use appliances. How about building a basic audio amplifier using an actual transistor. Or how about a simple AM receiver or even a simple AM or FM transmitter?

I was just making a post about a "new" hobbyist magazine when I ran across this thread. I think you make a good point, but I sometimes struggle with where I stand on it, with specific regard to what I quoted of yours above.

On the one, yeah, it can be like "just" learning about appliances, but it doesn't have to be.

In response to "How about building a basic audio amplifier using an actual transistor." couldn't it also be true, in principle, to say "How about building an actual transistor?" You know what I mean? Where does it start and where is the line?

I hope this sounds more pointful than defensive, but I have never built any kind of substantial AM receiver (I mean beyond some child-toy simple crystal device long ago). I'm not certain I am capable. I mean, yes, I suppose I am if I were willing to go through a lot of time and effort to learn a great deal of specific subject matter that I don't know (and in a sense am not really itching to know).

On the other hand, I did "build" an AM/FM/SW receiver [a radio] several years ago and I am listening to it as I type. I am proud of it as a personal accomplishment, but not as some kind of great or creative work of electrical engineering. It was something I wanted to do and I met a whole host of challenges and I had to learn a great deal and it works.

I think that is the spirit of what you are talking about. Currently, I am immersing myself in PIC32 chips. There are a ton of new things to learn and it is great! No doubt having some experience with 8-bit PIC chips laid a foundation, but, I still don't know how to build an AM receiver for squat.

Maybe all I am saying is that as technology progresses, so too might be the road be from going from point A to point B. In any event, I want to let you know that I read your post and it was thought-provoking.

 

It's an unfortunate result of our technology and socially involved government. People don't have a basic over-all knowledge or over-all skills of the past generations. In today's society......even the unskilled.....do not require an over-all, skill-knowledge. We have safety nets. If no jobs are available for your skill......the government will support you. Liberal grace.

We used to have high schools for that.

Think about what would happen if we lost electricity. And think what would happen if a third world country lost electricity.

What would happen if a large city in India lost power for one week. Life would go on. Much work and everyone eating would continue. You will not see roving gangs. Or the army.

Now....what would happen if a large city in the states lost power for one week? Much death and destruction. The disorder will kill you.....not the lack of electricity. Too many people in the states have lost the ability to take care of themselves. An army of some sort will be needed. Probably a liberal army giving equal rights and hearings to the roving gangs.

Imagine Paris or London blacked out for a week......an army would be needed there too.

What about Toronto?

 

Curious schism: easier integrated systems to develop from, but less interest to pursue.
I'd have done Much to have the uCs of today when I was late 20s.(1975+).
It seems to have gone polar: large design houses with high development cost, or
finding and taking the chance on a small faction as can they do the job?
I'm part of the latter, we seem to be a dying breed, literally.
I'm 65 doing design & prototype, colleague is 75 does management and production.
Neither can find an apt apprentice to train up, and are Very apprehensive of the inevitable.
Busy as we both are, time to look isn't easy either.

 

I'm almost 67 and have been playing with electronics since a child.
My first electronics was to completely destroy a valve radio, unwrapping the caps and smashing open the valves to see what was in them ....
The first amp I built used a 12AX7, 2 x AF86 and 2 x 6V6 for a stereo of about 5 watts. I was so proud of it.
Then progressing to transistors, ICs and micros.
My opinion is you can learn electronics from micros, like Arduinos, and they are a great tool. The best thing is to get an interest going, then build on that. An Arduino is not of much use by itself, so you do have to learn electronics to add all the extra stuff to make it work. There is room to start with Arduinos or similar, as well as discreet parts too. It all depends on what the interest is. I would not make a stereo amp with an Arduino
But, it does look like there is nowhere near the interest now in young people to do with the workings of technology of any sort, not just electronics.
I feel basic technology should be a compulsory subject in schools. How many people nowadays have a clue what happens when they put their foot on the brake in a car?

 

An Arduino is not of much use by itself, so you do have to learn electronics to add all the extra stuff to make it work.

I couldn't agree more! This the key point I think most Arduino-haters are missing.

Sure, you may do a few experiments, or even a basic project or two with a raw Arduino and maybe a shield, but if you're doing anything interesting, you'll get drawn into learning electronics pretty quickly. I sure did!

 

ALL of the published arduino projects contain a very minimum of anything else, and the part that I am critical of is that there is no explanation of what the circuit is doing, no hint or clue. So if there is a power supply problem the poor constructor has no hint of how to trace it out or what to look at to see what to fix. Articles in that nuts and volts publication have been the very worst of them. Using a whole processor board instead of a comparator and a transistor and not much explanation of what the actual code is achieving. Thus no education in electronic theory, only instructions on how to buy modules and load code. And the fact that the arduino folks use different words than the rest of the world assures that understanding any other hardware is made more confusing yet.
One does not need to make their own transistors, but understanding that forward biasing a base-emitter junction will cause a larger increase in collector current is a basic fundamental thing. You will not find that sort of information in the arduino world.

 

How many people nowadays have a clue what happens when they put their foot on the brake in a car?

Judging by the numerous U-tube videos showing poor car driving, a lot of people don't even know their car has a brake pedal .

 

My guess is that the folks in those videos are not able to focus their attention long enough to consider that they need to step on the brake pedal. And just wait! With the new computer control scheme, hitting the brakes will only send the computer a message that you are requesting a braking action. WE already have that with those cars with the start-stop button. Pushing the button only sends a request for the computer to switch off the engine. So if the throttle controller sticks at full open and you hit the button the computer will not shut down the engine, because it has decided that you will need the power steering since you are going 80MPH. That is how it presently is programmed. Do you really want a vehicle like that on the same roads that you drive on?? NOT ME!!!

 

An Arduino is not of much use by itself, so you do have to learn electronics to add all the extra stuff to make it work.

I couldn't agree more! This the key point I think most Arduino-haters are missing.

I don't think it's the Arduino-haters that are missing that point: it's all the newbies who have been conned by the Arduino organization (and the rest of the "maker" movement, as well) into believing they don't have to learn all that "icky engineering stuff" in order to do wondrous things with electronics.

Sure, you may do a few experiments, or even a basic project or two with a raw Arduino and maybe a shield, but if you're doing anything interesting, you'll get drawn into learning electronics pretty quickly. I sure did!

I wonder how many people actually follow that path; I suspect that many, if not most, simply give up once they encounter anything approaching circuit theory, semiconductor device operation, or anything requiring even the simplest math.

 

or anything requiring even the simplest math.

Watch the panic when the checkout person enters the wrong amount tendered. They can't make change.

Or had someone $21.25 for something that costs $11.25 . They will give back the $1.25 and say you gave too much money, or they will act totally surprised when you get $10.00 in change.

 

I don't think it's the Arduino-haters that are missing that point: it's all the newbies who have been conned by the Arduino organization (and the rest of the "maker" movement, as well) into believing they don't have to learn all that "icky engineering stuff" in order to do wondrous things with electronics.


I wonder how many people actually follow that path; I suspect that many, if not most, simply give up once they encounter anything approaching circuit theory, semiconductor device operation, or anything requiring even the simplest math.

Hi,

As to that last statement, i cant agree more. It's just that some people dont like math at all. Maybe it's boring to them because it seems to have nothing to do with reality at first.
When i was in grammar school i was assured that math was necessary for a good education in any electrical/electronic field. That got me on the ball early on. Some time later i found that math is very good for describing not only electronic circuits but the entire universe! Who could ignore that.
But i always see this, where a lot of people like electronics and have some good knowledge in that area, but they hate and avoid the math. It appears very strange to me that they could love electronics yet hate math. Since they still have a decent knowledge of electronics though i have to wonder how much better they would be if they payed more attention to the math. Once you see how math and physics go together so elegantly i dont think you ever "go back" to just electronics alone with no math.

 

Math, penmanship and memorization go to together. You don't have time to derive expressions in an exam, Derivatives of SIN and COS, you have to REMEMBER. I'd often confuse X's and Y's just because of how I wrote them. I ow have a much easier way to "collect terms". No one taught me. I just collect coefficients e.g. (1+2-3+2)x doing the multiplying in my head of small expressions.

One guy (graduate student) solved an interesting problem which I don't have the solution now. It's basically the VCR tape problem.
Converting "turns" of the take-up real to linear movement. Initial diameter is known and thickness is known. A turns-counter is fitted to the take-up reel.

When starting the process, initial turns are known, thus initial diameter is known.

I had to move a transparent Teflon cover (about 5" of film) over a quartz window periodically with a synchonous motor. It did not have to be accurate.

Integration and s=rθ comes into play. So does thickness of the film and the initial diameter of the mandral. So, if you started with a 1/4" mandrel, that's 0 turns on the mechanical indicator.

The film was thrown out when the process was complete. The film prevented deposition on the window. The window let in UV light.
The system renewed the window about every 2.5 minutes.

The math determines how many turns you have to move the mandrel to expose say 5" of linear film.

Then you have to convert to how long you have to run the synchronous motor to expose that amount of film.

You have initial conditions. The "tape counter" is a turns counter.

Your computation and movement has to match the turns counter.

It's a cool problem.

Measuring a board in half without doing "math" using convienient numbers. The triangle trick.

Marking a board. Use arrows, not lines. They are more precise. e.g. ∧ ∨


The thickness may have been 0.005" with some slop there too.

 

When I first became interested in electronics back in the mid/late 1970s, there were half a dozen or so monthly hobby electronics magazines on sale at newsagents. They ranged from accommodating complete beginners to some quite advanced circuit designs.

I used to buy a selection after thumbing through their content and even subscribed to my favourite for over 10 years – one of my circuit designs was published within the reader’s circuits section. I used to look over each of the published circuits to gain a basic understanding of how they worked and even built a few of the projects.

Until recently, the only hobby magazine available within a well-known UK high street newsagents was Elektor – but that is no longer stocked by the outlet. So now there are no hobby electronics magazines available to the general public at newsagents in the UK.
And this despite a proliferation of magazines covering some very obscure topics.

For the most part, I suspect the reason for no longer stocking the magazine is the low demand. A magazine covering say farm tractors might interest a few people, but for most people in the UK, an electronics magazine might as well be written in a foreign language – having virtually zero readership.

I’d be interested to know what the situation re the availability of hobby electronics magazines in other countries around the world is – and whether the situation is as dire as that in the UK.

.I think Smiths have Everyday Practical Electronics in their larger outlets, and I still see Wireless World listed.

 

I built several electronic kits from Heathkit, Eico, and Dynakit, from which I learned a lot, and at that time the kits were generally cheaper than built electronics.
It was sad to see them all disappear.

Out of curiosity, I wonder how many Ham operators there are today compared with the past?

 

One does not need to make their own transistors, but understanding that forward biasing a base-emitter junction will cause a larger increase in collector current is a basic fundamental thing. You will not find that sort of information in the arduino world.

That may be true of some magazines or websites, but it's not a universal truth. A number of people here, including myself, started with Arduino projects and quickly learned basic, fundamental electronics concepts

I don't think it's the Arduino-haters that are missing that point: it's all the newbies who have been conned by the Arduino organization (and the rest of the "maker" movement, as well) into believing they don't have to learn all that "icky engineering stuff" in order to do wondrous things with electronics.


I wonder how many people actually follow that path; I suspect that many, if not most, simply give up once they encounter anything approaching circuit theory, semiconductor device operation, or anything requiring even the simplest math.

Interesting thoughts. Sad if they're true.

I've been a staunch defender of the Arduino world as a good stepping stone into electronics because it worked out so well for me. Don't get me wrong - I don't think I'm a master of anything. I have a loooooong way to go, but I feel like I'm on a productive path learning real electronics.

But I must confess I have little interaction with other novices and don't really know what the typical Arduino experience is like. I've, perhaps optimistically, believed that it's a great first step into deeper electronics learning, but maybe that's less common than I'd hoped.

 

Hello,

The lot of the electronics I have learned using the EE1000 series kits:
http://ee.old.no/1000/

Bertus

 

Having just come across this thread, I find it surprising that so many posts really think that the interest in electronics is declining here in the U.K.
I run a small club with around 22 regular members who's ages range from 10 to 85. At most meetings we usually have at least 10 turn up and sometimes twice that. I had to limit the numbers and currently have another 6 waiting to join.Our main constraint is the space we operate in, but thankfully a local business owned by a friend has offered us a larger venue for free as from Feb next year.
One thing that I have noticed, is that most of the members come from outside of the two large towns near me. It seems that in areas of large population there are either more alternative pass times, or they are happy to stagnate at home playing computer games etc. (or maybe participate in this and similar forums)
Out here in the sticks, they don't mind travelling a few miles for recreation, One older guy regularly rides his bicycle nearly 10 miles in all weathers to come.Some of the members had lacked social interaction skills or other problems, but seem to "come out of themselves" when working on projects.

When I retired, I sold my business but had accrued a large stock of new old stock components that the new owner did not want. These, along with many useful things things donated by this forums members, have provided the club members with nearly everything they need to enjoy what they and I think is a very rewarding hobby.
We often scour the data that Bertus lists on old books and magazines for projects, and whilst most of them use discrete components, we do have a group who are avid Rasberry Pi and Arduino fans. They have built and programmed a 3D type printer from old printer parts!
Now and again I power up my Yeasu FT950 Transceiver which always creates a lot of interest.
No, I don't think interest in the knowledge of electronics is dying here in the U.K, It has just changed in the way people interact with it, i.e via the internet etc.

 

I built several electronic kits from Heathkit, Eico, and Dynakit, from which I learned a lot, and at that time the kits were generally cheaper than built electronics.
It was sad to see them all disappear.

Out of curiosity, I wonder how many Ham operators there are today compared with the past?

The latest from the ARRL indicates that the number is growing at a healthy rate. Eliminating the morse code requirement certainly got rid of a big impediment, at least that is what I think. Some folks feel that was a terrible mistake, and continue to be unpleasant about it. But as long as those folks are allowed to use the code it is not clear why they should be so nasty about the whole thing. I passed the test for Extra about 2 weeks after the code requirement was dropped.

 

Eliminating the morse code requirement certainly got rid of a big impediment, at least that is what I think. Some folks feel that was a terrible mistake, and continue to be unpleasant about it.

It's sort of like doing away with part of an initiation to an exclusive club.
The old members, who had to learn code, are mad that you can now become a Ham without that particular (significant) initiation effort.

 

It's sort of like doing away with part of an initiation to an exclusive club.
The old members, who had to learn code, are mad that you can now become a Ham without that particular (significant) initiation effort.

YES!
I have been a HAM ("limited" license) for 46 years and am really pleased I don't have to learn Morse Code now. I tried to but was not able to get my mind around it.
Now I don't need to