Steve Bender's Comments about Charlie Kittleson
Charlie Kittleson
"doghouse."
The article you submitted to VTV, regarding modifying a Dynaco ST120
into an SE stereo tube amp using EL84s, did not fit well with the
subject matter of recent VTV issues. We generally prefer to print
articles with innovative circuit designs, or other unusual design
features, and yours wasn't that innovative.
Also, the construction quality was not the best. Some more attention
to appearance or to wiring would have improved its odds of being
published. Remember, we do NOT make any promises or contracts
regarding the publication of an article from a non-staffer such as
yourself.
Dozens of articles are submitted to us every year, most of them
totally unsolicited. We try to keep high standards, unlike some other
magazines I could name.
Furthermore: our technical editor wanted to hear this amplifier
before we went out and published it as a construction article.
VTV may be held responsible for anything which does not actually
SOUND GOOD.....and your calling it an " expensive one-of-a-kind
amplifier " was a bit silly, wasn't it? The circuit was nothing
special, and the chassis was a junked Dynaco St-120! I mean, COME
ON!
Furthermore: nearly all magazines do NOT return materials or photos
to authors. They generally become the property of the magazine.
Our attitude was not helped by your numerous demands for a free
subscription, plus requests for other special favors.
I apologize for not getting back to you, but we have been very busy in
recent months....moving our office, etc. etc.......it's been chaos
here for more than a year now.
I don't appreciate you making a spectacle of this matter without even
contacting me personally.
Charlie Kittleson
Vacuum Tube Valley
Pete
Nothing wrong with an amp in a cake pan as long as the light is low,
your eyesight is bad or you just do not mind. Kitchen supplies have
numerous uses. Marble cutting boards make great bases for outboard
power supplies, at least until your significant other finds out. Food
for the body, music for the soul.
--
Pete
** Remove the first "p" in my E-Mail address if you wish to send E-Mail to me.**
André Jute
> Kitchen supplies have
> numerous uses. Marble cutting boards make great bases for outboard
> power supplies, at least until your significant other finds out. Food
> for the body, music for the soul.
Do not keep unshielded ESL if your significant other keeps kitchen pets
like cats, or you will be sleeping a guest room and eating takeaway for
a long time...
Andre
--
Andre Jute an...@indigo.ie COMMUNICATION JUTE
--see our pages for music lovers, writers and audiophiles at
http://indigo.ie/~andre/ComJuteF1.html
TubeGarden
they are there...
... and takeaway has its charms :-)
Happy Ears!
Al B^}
Al Marcy
TubeG...@aol.com
Tim Groives
like the sort of isolation platform you would get charged a £100 in
tottenham court road.
Haven't tried it though - my Mana's might get a bit upset.
regards
tim
Mr. Steven L. Bender
- Since the above message, while apparently replying to me, was NOT
Emailed to me, I came across it by chance... in this newsgroup...
guess I must reply in this newsgroup forum.
First - Charlie, you seemed to feel that the aformentioned amp was
of significant interest, when initially described to you, which was
months prior to you and John Atwood coming across country during the
summer of 1996, when you visited me, well after my inital contact.
While that initial contact seemed to go well, it was prior to my
expending 18 months of my time, work, labor, and expense, on what
is clearly the best sounding amplifier I have ever built, owned, or
compared to others... clearly a great, but low power amplifier.
As I recall, after my first submission of the completed article on
a deadline you requested, < the long article > it was many months
< 5 mo. ? 6 mo. ? > before you got back to me that you "couldn't
read my disk " and obviously two VTV issues went by and well, the
article simply didn't appear...
Then we spoke, at my expense as I recall, and you now wanted a
shorter article, yet detailed, and complete, for the V.T.V. issue
dealing with the EL-84 family of tubes. Again, little contact
from you after I submitted that re-work, again within the editorial
timeframe which you again specified, and again with photo's and
schematics and details....
Now Charlie said -
" We generally prefer to print articles with innovative circuit
designs, or other unusual design features, and yours wasn't that
innovative. "
- How innovative can you get ? So what's " innovative " about
anything you've published in VTV. Some specifics ? Well...
hmmmmm. I noticed Eric gave the really good tube article to
IEEE Spectrum... hmmmmm.
Charlie said -
" The circuit was nothing special... "
So while maybe there's nothing quite worthy of industrial espionage,
in my design - I'm calling you - flat out on that one. First, my
Single Ended Amp used a switching power supply. Also a special and
unique tube protecting thermister circuitry in the filamentary power
supply. It also has dual Cap Banks of photoflash style capacitors.
It had a separate linear voltage doubler HV supply, and separate bias
circuits. It also featured an output stage using NOS tubes that cost
around $2. each; instead of 2A3's costing like $150. each, and it was
getting the same performance. Its a zero loop feedback design, but
as well has an almost universal, versatile driver, which could without
rewiring or circuit changes accomodate over a half a dozen different
input tube types. So, one can make different sounding amps simply by
changing the driver tube, [ thereby changing the operating points... ].
And then again, its design also incorporated a pretty unique multi-
level output stage construction technique, if you bothered to look...
So guess it WAS just too-damn-ordinary, to consider, huh, Charlie ?
But still, the Bender-3v MK III Amp was way more than innovative,
in half a dozen ways, than say, Eric Barbour's SV-811 Amp - which
as I recall did appear in V.T.V.
Charlie said -
" ... the construction quality was not the best. ... the chassis
was a junked Dynaco St-120! I mean, COME ON! "
So... if this was something that any idiot could do in his sleep...
Why don't you scan and put the pictures of my amp that I sent in,
up on your web page, and let the people in the audio community VOTE
as to whether its construction looks to be " not the best " for a
DIY homebrew, or " Bitchin' - Like Kool Dude !!! " ... instead of
your "diss'n" it without actually "show'in" it. Hmmm. Charlie ???
Anyway, use of the Stereo 120 chassis was done, as a good engineering
design - since the Switching Power Supply needed to be encased in a
steel chassis. Of all the existing audio amps I know of, I can only
recall two built in a well-designed steel chassis with sufficient
space to hold a tube amp's guts [ that is - amps that were not tube
based to begin with ]. And the only one that would be generally
available - due to its production run being in excess of 100,000
units... was the Dynaco Stereo 120. And well, I happen to LIKE the
chuck-the-transistors-and-rebuild-it-with-tubes paradigm, so sorry
if it so offended you, Charlie ! Sheesh !
In addition... Recycling of Photoflash Caps and reuse of the old
Dynaco chassis and the original Dynaco power transformer go a long
way towards environmental conservation ! Also, its Cost Effective !
I think I lessened the cost, as opposed to buying a large new steel
chassis, cage, and new power transformer - which would have added
at least $200, maybe $300 to the basic construction costs [ and
also to MY OWN COSTS ].
And Charlie, lets simply not forget that all you offered to pay me
for the original article [ 6,000 words was requested ]... was $150.
[ As sent, I my first article was 8,000+ words ].
And the pair of John Atwoods output tranny's cost me $180. even
before I started in designing or building the amp. And remember,
you were not reimbursing me for any other construction costs, which
came to over $500 in parts costs, nor for the labor costs, and then
that article rate comes out to about 4 cents per hour according to
my Sharp calculator.
Charlie said -
"Remember, we do NOT make any promises or contracts regarding the
publication of an article from a non-staffer such as yourself. "
- As for my " non-staffer status ", well all that's relative isn't
it ? I mean, you are not exactly full time at this, now are you ?
To quote you - " I mean COME ON! " And so your friends get staffer
status, only cause you feel like it, and " staffer status ", it's
not something real, like a real Press Card, or something....
So why even bring it up ?
As for your lack of promises or contracts, that's your failing...
A written contract which specifies a dozen points and parameters
about the project is pretty much a "given" for Professional Writers,
Professional Editors, and I did so requested that early on. Your
lack of compliance to the National Writers Union set of Journalistic
Standards, when dealing with writers, only makes life more diffcult
for professional writers like myself. I also posted about the other
two worst " error of comedies " of a publisher, failures if you
will, also cited on my page - Editors who farm the same assignment
to multiple people; - And publications who don't pay as per the
contract after printing a work.
Both those failures, as well as, the holier-than-thou-amateur who
refuses to put an assignment down on paper as a properly defined
and binding contract [ as you have declared yourself to be ] lead
to annoyance, and one of the parties is bound to feel "cheated".
So who is at risk in this situation ???
Charlie said -
" Furthermore: our technical editor wanted to hear this amplifier
before we went out and published it as a construction article.
VTV may be held responsible for anything which does not actually
SOUND GOOD....
No, it does seem that VTV is doing a great job of NOT being held
responsible for anything, Charlie..
That is a problem for me, that your lack of communication back
to me, and the lack of a contract, means I supply the time, labor,
the unique intellectual properties... And you... you are under
no obligations what-so-ever. Since you declare that " we do NOT
make any promises or contracts regarding the publication of an
article " means that you DON'T hold to generally accepted legal
and industry definitions of: Copyright, First North American Rights,
Journalistic Standards or contracts... or you'd have put these
things down on paper for me [ which you refused ].
So now who is at risk in this situation ?
And I also have a sneaking suspicion that " ripping it apart " is
a more accurate description of what would happen to it.
What that also means to me, is that you haven't promised NOT to
usurp my well thought out, and what I consider to be proprietary
and innovative design ideas... for " The V.T.V. Tube School "
[ yet another of your "profit-is-the-motif" projects ] for which
you charge a goodly fee to attendees, or am I wrong there too ?
And is run at your whim with the more technical VTV " Staffers ".
So now who is at risk in this situation ?
Also a lack of promising to return my amp to me, if I were to send
it 3,000 miles across the country. And lack of a properly executed
contract also means I risked all my own proprietary ideas, which I
feel are unique, and which are tangeable, intellectual properties.
And so I submited that these items, having been sent out to you,
in terms of photos and schematics and written text, in a general
"good faith" way; which for all intents and purposes I find are
now available for your use, AT ZERO RENUMERATION to me.
Again, so who is at risk in this situation ???
Charlie said -
" Furthermore: nearly all magazines do NOT return materials or
photos to authors. They generally become the property of the
magazine. "
- Why Charlie, because you say so ? At least in New York State,
that sounds like a concept called: T-H-E-F-T.
Well, if I'm correct in my basic Law of Tort's - you would have
to give something in return [ Oops, there's that contract thing
again ] or those things, that were mine, and which we both have
to agree are-as-yet-unpublished-and-unrenumerated, would then
still-be-mine to ask, to be returned - which I did twice.
But, I guess if you had published either the original article
which was submitted in a timely fashion, as planned, or the
re-write as delivered to spec. again within your editorial
deadline timeframe, then I wouldn't have been asking for my
stuff back, then would I ???
Again, Charlie, you state in writing: ... do NOT return materials
or photo's to authors. And since I had so much trouble trying
to get you to return five photographs... Just how then could I
trust that you'd return my amp to me ? Maybe you'd take it apart
and be unable to put it back together. And so it would be trash
after UPS or Fed Ex got their hands on it. Given that I'm not
stupid, should I risk all my stuff ? My ideas, photos, schematics,
and also my one-of-a-kind amp that I worked so many long hours
on ? Again, so who would be at risk in this situation ???
Charlie said -
" Our attitude was not helped by your numerous demands for a
free subscription, plus requests for other special favors. "
- After sending in the first finished project article, and
emailing it again some months later, after you finally notified
me that you " couldn't read my disk ", and then months later
sending in the rewrite you requested, with photo's, schematics
and expending a good deal of my time, you purposely discontinued
sending me VTV issues. I figured you didn't want me to see that
it wasn't published, issue after issue, after " scheduled " by
you based on the dates of your prior " editorial deadlines "
given to me. Right ?
And I never made any " demands " for a free subscription, what
I did ask about was: whether I could provide reprints to people,
and if I could also provide a more detailed article < which would
be the 8,000+ word original article > after you said you required
that the original be cut by more than 80 percent, to 2,000 words
in the second incarnation. Right ? That is, when you finally
did get around to Emailing me about it.
And most magazines, when they publish a writers' work do send
them half a dozen copies of that issue of the magazine; some
magazines send them more. And usually published authors get
added to the subscriber list, too. Just so you "know".
And what were these " special favors " ? Favors; like what ?
Would you care to elaborate in this forum and provide specific
details, as to what you are referring to, I'm real curious ???
Charlie said -
" We try to keep high standards. "
- I do think that V.T.V. has been published with high editorial
standards, only seems those same high standards don't seem to
apply to keeping in contact with authors, or understanding that
it costs a whole lot of time and money to design an amplifier,
well beyond the cost of its parts. It also is a lot of late
night work to write up an 8,000+ word article. And to take that,
cut it by 80% and still provide useful information, make it
readable, and having it make sense, and to keep the reader from
getting all confused, well that's also a BIG job.
So Editors think they have it tough ? They basically get a
finished work that maybe took half-a-year of labor and nights
until 5:00 a.m. They and spend two or three hours with it in
Pagemaker, and think they did it all. Charlie, if you read it
- THE REASON I had you up on my web site was your not appreciating
all the work that I did, and that's also unprofessional. I
premised my web site piece, with a statement that I enjoyed the
Vacuum Tube Valley mag. immensely... and I do think it a decent
mag, but I simply don't like the way Charlie Kittleson treats
people, myself as a specific example, and I gave the dates and
details, I'm not repeating that stuff here.
Charlie said -
" I apologize for not getting back to you, but we have been very
busy in recent months....moving our office, etc. etc.......it's
been chaos here for more than a year now. "
- Apologizing for not getting back to me seems to be a case of
history repeating itself. Couple of Emails, of a year and more
ago... that was the basic theme too. If you're still in chaos,
for more than a year... well then you need to learn to delegate.
Charlie said -
" I don't appreciate you making a spectacle of this matter without
even contacting me personally. "
- I called and spoke to your girlfriend a few times, and never did
I get a return call from you, in what, almost a year ?
And I didn't post my entire gripe to any newsgroups, now did I ???
My web site had that info up since April, its had a very low
number of hits, so its neither a spectacle, nor is it alone, it is
just one matter among many that I cited. That it took four months
before someone brought it to your attention isn't all that surprising.
Still these items are of valid concern to me, and that web site is
MY Forum.
If anything you made more of a spectacle of it by posting it for
all to see on this Newsgroup, and you didn't email the same
message reprinted at top to me before doing that, now did you ?
Sorry Charlie, between what you said, and what you did, I think
you lost a few more brownie points here.
You should have done what Bill did, come clean about it, instead
of attacking and attempting to fault me, attempting to falsely fault
my project, my design, etc. when it was your repeated wrong doing...
in the first place.
Sincerely yours,
Steven L. Bender, Designer of Vintage Audio Equipment
Email: buq...@prodigy.com <or> SLBe...@juno.com
*** The BENDER-2pp. a Transistor to Tube Amplifier Rebuild -
Nuts&Volts Magazine. February / March / April 1997 ***
Web Page: http://pages.prodigy.com/BUQU35D <- use CAPS
" If we're not supposed to eat animals, how come they're made
out of meat " ??? -Tom Snyder
RonSonic
Heck Steve, you already have the package, submit to the other mags -
someone will pick up the article.
ROn
Mr. Steven L. Bender <BUQ...@prodigy.com> wrote
andrej....@siol.net
>snip<
> " If we're not supposed to eat animals, how come they're made
> out of meat " ??? -Tom Snyder
__________________________________________________________________
Oh, well...
"If we're not supposed to eat people, how come they're made out of meat ??"
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Sheldon D. Stokes
(Pete) wrote:
> Nothing wrong with an amp in a cake pan as long as the light is low,
> your eyesight is bad or you just do not mind. Kitchen supplies have
> numerous uses. Marble cutting boards make great bases for outboard
> power supplies, at least until your significant other finds out. Food
> for the body, music for the soul.
Sure, for personal use, you can kludge anything together. But for
publication, if a project has perf-board or other shoddy techniques, it's
a real red flag for me.
Sheldon
--
"...from Genghis Kahn to the Fuller brush man, they're just a bunch
of losers like me" -Dave VanRonk
Remove SPAM_BE_GONE from my address to reply to me.
Russ Sadd
<6rtfte$a84k$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>...
>But still, the Bender-3v MK III Amp was way more than innovative,
>in half a dozen ways, than say, Eric Barbour's SV-811 Amp - which
>as I recall did appear in V.T.V.
I've taken a look at your site, Steve, and I honestly can't see any
derogatory comments on it. Just lots of details on nice amps, and that MKIII
looks rather clever. It's a lovely irony to see someone turning something
mediocre-with-transistors into something special-with-valves. The
sub-assembly boards looked extremely professional - too many people go for
el-cheapo etched PCBs.
Perhaps there wasn't the interest since transmitting valves seem to be the
flavour of the month. Or is it the EL84? Or was that last year? Are we doing
feedback again? Or not? Is it SET, SEP, or push-pull? Is Class B on the
upswing? Dear me, so confusing!
Russ Sadd
ABS
Birmingham, UK
E-Mail: iced...@enterprise.net
Web Pages: http://homepages.enterprise.net/icedragon/new/index.htm
Sheldon D. Stokes
> >snip<
>
> > " If we're not supposed to eat animals, how come they're made
> > out of meat " ??? -Tom Snyder
> __________________________________________________________________
>
> Oh, well...
>
> "If we're not supposed to eat people, how come they're made out of meat ??"
>
Ask monica....
Sorry I really couldn't help myself
Sheldon
--
"...from Genghis Kahn to the Fuller brush man, they're just a bunch
of losers like me" -Dave VanRonk
Remove SPAM_BE_GONE from my e-mail to reply directly to me
Brian McAllister
made us of meat." Michael Flanders and Donald Swann-The Reluctant
Cannibal" from "At the Drop of a Hat, an after dinner farrago" on the
London and New York Stages, circa late 1950s.
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998 17:00:12 GMT, andrej....@siol.net wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>snip<
>
>> " If we're not supposed to eat animals, how come they're made
>> out of meat " ??? -Tom Snyder
Chris Hornbeck
McAllister) wrote:
>"If the Ju-ju had meant for us not to eat people, he wouldn't have
>made us of meat." Michael Flanders and Donald Swann-The Reluctant
>Cannibal" from "At the Drop of a Hat, an after dinner farrago" on the
>London and New York Stages, circa late 1950s.
Have you been listening to one of your mothers again? Next thing
you'll be telling me it's wrong to fight people.
Chris Hornbeck, Pet Photographer
"f/8 and Be There"
please note anti-spam measures in address
TubeGarden
I am considering putting some holes-in-the-air in a PAT-4.
Well respected cathode follower of fashions,
Mr. Steven L. Bender
>
> 811 was in GA.
Yes, Eric did write an SV811 Amp for GA.
And there was Uncle Eric's Deluxe SV811 Amp Project in VTV issue 5.
Basically he changed the output Tranny to an ElectraPrint and used ten
oil based Caps in the power supply < which are possibly illegal to own,
and are neigh impossible to get > and they added up to 100 uF total.
Sort of innovative... in that it probably hums a bit along with the
music...
Steven L. Bender, Designer of Vintage Audio Equipment
Email: buq...@prodigy.com <or> SLBe...@juno.com
*** The BENDER-2pp. a Transistor to Tube Amplifier Rebuild -
Nuts&Volts Magazine. February / March / April 1997 ***
Web Page: http://pages.prodigy.com/BUQU35D <- use CAPS
" If we're not supposed to eat animals, how come they're made
Bob C
Mr. Steven L. Bender wrote in message
>And there was Uncle Eric's Deluxe SV811 Amp Project in VTV issue 5.
>
>Basically he changed the output Tranny to an ElectraPrint and used ten
>oil based Caps in the power supply < which are possibly illegal to own,
>and are neigh impossible to get > and they added up to 100 uF total.
>Sort of innovative... in that it probably hums a bit along with the
>music...
>Steven L. Bender, Designer of Vintage Audio Equipment
>
Do you really feel it is necessary to make inaccurate statements? Although
getting harder to find, old oil caps are still out there. Leaking oil caps
would be considered unsafe, and a disposal problem due to PCBs, but illegal?
please... Are the oil cap police breaking down peoples doors as we speak?
I do believe they are illegal to sell in Japan, but since Eric is still in
sunny California, I think he is safe. I have listened to amps with 20uF of
capacitance that do not hum, your last statement is totally incorrect. BTW,
can you please give us some insight how one designs, Vintage Audio
Equipment. Is this a time travel thing?
Bob
TubeGarden
GE Oil Caps (no PCBs) are available here at Apache Electronics & Reclamation.
$3-$5 each.
I uses a parallel pair of 22uF 480Vac as my initial resevoir.
After the first choke, I use a 32uF 570 Vac as my "Central Lake Placid" before
the fanout to six chokes to the three stages on each channel, the 1635 VA gets
a 16 uF 280Vac,
The 5687 driver gets a 32 uF 570 Vac, and the 6AS7 output gets a parallel pair
of 32 uF 570 Vac.
Residual noise with inputs shorted and volume pots wide open is 16 - 18 uV,
which I generally just say is <0.02 mV.
Even with 93 dB speakers, the hum is tolerable.
I also use oil caps in the shunt load output stage, but that is another post...
Thanks to VTV and GA for giving me information and inspiration.
BTW, my SE 6AS7 amp clips at 2.5 watts. Distortion is 0.5% at 2 watts, 0.04% at
1 watt.
Sheldon D. Stokes
<bo...@mci2000.com> wrote:
> Do you really feel it is necessary to make inaccurate statements? Although
> getting harder to find, old oil caps are still out there. Leaking oil caps
> would be considered unsafe, and a disposal problem due to PCBs, but illegal?
> please... Are the oil cap police breaking down peoples doors as we speak?
> I do believe they are illegal to sell in Japan, but since Eric is still in
> sunny California, I think he is safe. I have listened to amps with 20uF of
> capacitance that do not hum, your last statement is totally incorrect. BTW,
> can you please give us some insight how one designs, Vintage Audio
> Equipment. Is this a time travel thing?
I was under the impression that it IS actually illegal to knowlingly sell
PCB laiden caps in the US. I don't think we have the infrastructure in
place to enforce that, and it would probably be inforced randomly and
unfairly if it was.
I heard it here or read it somewhere. I'll poke around in my cranium and
see if I can figure out where that came from.
dang...@earthlink.net
(Sheldon D. Stokes) wrote:
>In article <FCQF1.344$o62.2...@news.mci2000.com>, "Bob C"
><bo...@mci2000.com> wrote:
>
>> Do you really feel it is necessary to make inaccurate statements? Although
>> getting harder to find, old oil caps are still out there. Leaking oil caps
>> would be considered unsafe, and a disposal problem due to PCBs, but illegal?
>> please... Are the oil cap police breaking down peoples doors as we speak?
>> I do believe they are illegal to sell in Japan, but since Eric is still in
>> sunny California, I think he is safe. I have listened to amps with 20uF of
>> capacitance that do not hum, your last statement is totally incorrect. BTW,
>> can you please give us some insight how one designs, Vintage Audio
>> Equipment. Is this a time travel thing?
>
>
>I was under the impression that it IS actually illegal to knowlingly sell
>PCB laiden caps in the US. I don't think we have the infrastructure in
>place to enforce that, and it would probably be inforced randomly and
>unfairly if it was.
>
>I heard it here or read it somewhere. I'll poke around in my cranium and
>see if I can figure out where that came from.
>
>Sheldon
That's a good point, Sheldon. A lot of environmental protection law
is structured such that OEM's cannot incorporate harmful materials
into new product. But for old surplus product, traded or sold among
hobbyists, DIY'ers, the laws may not apply. As to distributors
selling to hobbyists, like AES or Ned, they are often in a gray zone.
It would be interesting to hear Ned's point of view.
Regards,
Dangerdave
Bob C
dang...@earthlink.net wrote in message
<39C63AD70A1CF707.2F39717A64DBA224.0E7869F67A3BC55A@library-
>That's a good point, Sheldon. A lot of environmental protection law
>is structured such that OEM's cannot incorporate harmful materials
>into new product. But for old surplus product, traded or sold among
>hobbyists, DIY'ers, the laws may not apply. As to distributors
>selling to hobbyists, like AES or Ned, they are often in a gray zone.
>
>It would be interesting to hear Ned's point of view.
>
>Regards,
>Dangerdave
I have been told that Ned uses oil from old leaky caps on his salad! :)
Bob
Sheldon D. Stokes
<bo...@mci2000.com> wrote:
> I have been told that Ned uses oil from old leaky caps on his salad! :)
PCB oil isn't the deadly VX of the electronics world. It's a cancer
causing agent (can't spell carcinogen), but so is gasoline and used motor
oil. I change my oil avery month or so, and I seem to be filling my gas
tank up every time I turn around. It's my understanding that it's not
really worse than getting gasoline on your hands, and I've repaired many a
small engine and motocycle, so I'm no stranger to gasoline.
In fast many of the labs at NASA langley where I work have PCB oils in the
trenches under the wind tunnels. Apparently lots of the old motors and
cap banks leaked over the years and god knows what else. It's a real
problem when they come through to renovate certain tunnels. If they ever
closed NASA langley down, it would be a huge superfund site.
They ripped out an entire room full of huge hight voltage oil caps in my
building. apparently they were doing some sort of lightning strike work.
The sign is still there about how many megajourles of capacity there was,
and how fast you could discharge that power. it was scarey. We're
talking somethng like an entire rail car full of high voltage caps.
Ned Carlson
>Do you really feel it is necessary to make inaccurate statements? Although
>getting harder to find, old oil caps are still out there. Leaking oil caps
>would be considered unsafe, and a disposal problem due to PCBs, but illegal?
Yup. PCB caps are illegal to sell or dispose of.
John Diamantis once posted a nice diatribe on the potential
hazards of having leaky PCB caps on your property..
for example, you could have your house demolished,
and your property dug up, and the whole mess sent
to a a hazardous waste dump.
IIRC, selling PCB caps carries a $10,000 per incident
maximum fine.
You might convince the feds that you're a complete dip, and
didn't know better, and walk with a reprimand..but they might
trash your house and give your landlord or mortgage holder fits,
anyway.
Best advice: if you aren't *sure* it's not PCB, avoid it.
>please... Are the oil cap police breaking down peoples doors as we speak?
I doubt it, but I sure wouldn't be out telling folks on Usenet
if I were a private user who had some...a lot of federal
employees read this NG, BTW.
AFAIK, you're safe if they don't leak & you don't sell them.
But one should read the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
to be sure.
Also, there are plenty of *NON* PCB oil caps out there...
anything you buy new will not have PCB's. Many recent
ones will be stamped "NON PCB".
I think PCB's weren't in common use until right after
WW2. So I think folks with Motiograph amps and
Hammond Model A's are safe.
BTW, the people I know in the capacitor industry think that
good old Shell dilectric mineral oil is just peachy keen
for oil caps...excellent voltage resistance and non-hydrophillic,
and very resistant to absorbing atmospheric contaminants.
Excerpt from page at http://www.epa.gov
Do search on "PCB" to find it..there's 2000+
documents on PCB's on the site.
>UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
>REGION III - OFFICE OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
>1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029
>EPA Environmental News
>June 17, 1998
>BUSINESSMEN CHARGED WITH PCB VIOLATIONS AT PHILADELPHIA SITE
>PHILADELPHIA - Rudolph Robinson of Long Port, Fla., and Ronald Taylor of
>Philadelphia, Pa., have been charged in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia
>with violating
>federal regulations which ensure the safe use, handling and disposal of
>polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
>In an Information filed June 15 by the U.S. attorney's office in
>Philadelphia,Rudolph Robinson and Ronald Taylor were charged with
>misdemeanor violations of the
>Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) at a site located in the city's
>Fishtown section. The government alleges that Mr. Robinson, owner of the
>2050 Richmond Street location
>hired R. Taylor & Sons, Inc., a company owned and operated by Mr. Taylor,
>to dispose of PCB-containing transformers from the former steel fabrication
>plant.
>Rudolph Robinson is charged with failing to prepare and keep a manifest to
>transport PCB waste from the site. He faces a maximum penalty of one year
>imprisonment and a $100,000 fine, or $25,000 per day of violation.
>Ronald Taylor is charged with accepting the PCB-containing waste without a
>manifest; failing to keep a copy of the manifest; and disposing of the PCBs
>and PCB transformers somewhere other than an approved incinerator or
>chemical waste landfill. Mr. Taylor faces a maximum penalty of two years
>imprisonment and a $100,000 fine, or $25,000 per day of violation.
Ned Carlson Triode Electronics "where da tubes are!"
2225 W Roscoe Chicago, IL, 60618 USA
ph 773-871-7459 fax 773-871-7938
12:30 to 8 PM CT, (1830-0200 UTC) 12:30-5 Sat, Closed Wed & Sun
http://www.triodeel.com
Your Start Page for Tube and Tube Amp info on the net...
http://www.triodeel.com/tlinks.htm
Ned Carlson
>I have been told that Ned uses oil from old leaky caps on his salad! :)
>
>Bob
Only if I'm constipated, which is something
that mineral oil will cure in a hurry.
John Diamantis
>
> On Sat, 29 Aug 1998 06:23:49 -0700, "Bob C" <bo...@mci2000.com> wrote:
>
> >Do you really feel it is necessary to make inaccurate statements? Although
> >getting harder to find, old oil caps are still out there. Leaking oil caps
> >would be considered unsafe, and a disposal problem due to PCBs, but illegal?
>
> Yup. PCB caps are illegal to sell or dispose of.
> John Diamantis once posted a nice diatribe on the potential
> hazards of having leaky PCB caps on your property..
> for example, you could have your house demolished,
> and your property dug up, and the whole mess sent
> to a a hazardous waste dump.
> IIRC, selling PCB caps carries a $10,000 per incident
> maximum fine.
> You might convince the feds that you're a complete dip, and
> didn't know better, and walk with a reprimand..but they might
> trash your house and give your landlord or mortgage holder fits,
> anyway.
>
> Best advice: if you aren't *sure* it's not PCB, avoid it.
I don't think there'd be a major problem if you had a couple of caps in
your posession, but, you'll have to pay a disposal company to get rid of
them if you ever decide to get rid of them or the equipment. Seems these
environment types get real pissed off when they find this stuff in
landfills and streams. Oh, a small point of law is, once you own them,
you are responsible for the caps and their contents for LIFE; unless of
course you have them destroyed (they burn 'em up in Pa), and that costs
$$k's
> >please... Are the oil cap police breaking down peoples doors as we speak?
>
> I doubt it, but I sure wouldn't be out telling folks on Usenet
> if I were a private user who had some...a lot of federal
> employees read this NG, BTW.
> AFAIK, you're safe if they don't leak & you don't sell them.
> But one should read the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
> to be sure.
>
True, but also, don't plan to have any fires (old tube hif-fi stuff
never flames up, does it). If you do and they find the suspect
material...who knows what will happen. If the fire department knows you
have Caps containing PCB's, they'll let the structure go up in flames
until your dwelling is just a cinder, and then call the hazmat folks in
who'll dig a huge crater around what used to be your house.
Also, there are plenty of *NON* PCB oil caps out there...
> anything you buy new will not have PCB's. Many recent
> ones will be stamped "NON PCB".
> I think PCB's weren't in common use until right after
> WW2. So I think folks with Motiograph amps and
> Hammond Model A's are safe.
>
But! Uncle Ned! Don't you know these new mineral oil caps just don't
image like one with Askerol!?!?!
Sheldon D. Stokes
> I don't think there'd be a major problem if you had a couple of caps in
> your posession, but, you'll have to pay a disposal company to get rid of
> them if you ever decide to get rid of them or the equipment. Seems these
> environment types get real pissed off when they find this stuff in
> landfills and streams. Oh, a small point of law is, once you own them,
> you are responsible for the caps and their contents for LIFE; unless of
> course you have them destroyed (they burn 'em up in Pa), and that costs
> $$k's
I don't think too many hobbiests pay disposal companies to get rid of old
caps. I'm going out on a limb here, but if I had some old moter start
caps I didn't want, they'd probably go out with the days fishheads and
scraps.
I certainly wouldn't go calling around and stirring up interest in me.
When you call the wrong person and ask the wrong questions, those wrong
people can be a real burr in your butt.
I pay my tire disposal fees, I recycle my oil, I generally try to be a
good person, but I'll be damned if I'm going to go through that red tape
hell to dispose a handful of old caps.
Sheldon
--
"...from Genghis Kahn to the Fuller brush man, they're just a bunch
of losers like me" -Dave VanRonk
Remove SPAM_BE_GONE from my address to reply to me.
John Diamantis
>
> In article <35EBF1...@erols.com>, wb...@erols.com wrote:
>
> > I don't think there'd be a major problem if you had a couple of caps in
> > your posession, but, you'll have to pay a disposal company to get rid of
> > them if you ever decide to get rid of them or the equipment. Seems these
> > environment types get real pissed off when they find this stuff in
> > landfills and streams. Oh, a small point of law is, once you own them,
> > you are responsible for the caps and their contents for LIFE; unless of
> > course you have them destroyed (they burn 'em up in Pa), and that costs
> > $$k's
>
> I don't think too many hobbiests pay disposal companies to get rid of old
> caps. I'm going out on a limb here, but if I had some old moter start
> caps I didn't want, they'd probably go out with the days fishheads and
> scraps.
>
> I certainly wouldn't go calling around and stirring up interest in me.
> When you call the wrong person and ask the wrong questions, those wrong
> people can be a real burr in your butt.
>
> I pay my tire disposal fees, I recycle my oil, I generally try to be a
> good person, but I'll be damned if I'm going to go through that red tape
> hell to dispose a handful of old caps.
Just don't get caught! I'm not being alarmist; when it comes to PCB's,
those involved get a little ott.
John D