|[AMRadio] "My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!"|
k4kyv at charter.net
Fri Apr 25 02:33:18 EDT 2008
> From: Peter Markavage <manualman at juno.com>
> Pick up a 50's QST and count the monthly ads. Pick up a current QST and
> count the ads. Most likely, you'll find that given the total number of
> magazine pages in each one, there will be a higher percentage of ads per
> month in the 50's mag.
But look at the content of those ads. Probably as many of those pages of
ads are for components and other material useful for building, experimenting
and modifying, as for finished products by major equipment manufacturers
like Collins and EF Johnson. National company used to run a full-page every
month in QST that was very informative, usually a technical description of
the workings and design of one of their products explaining why the company
built it as they did.
I sometimes find the ads in old QST's, CQ's and RADIO's just as interesting
as the articles.
> The in depth technical minutia was all moved over to QEX back in the
> 80's. No reason to keep it in QST.
That's one of my biggest gripes about the League. QST has been BASTARDIZED.
bas·tard·ize /'bæstər·daiz/ verb, -ized, iz·ing.
–verb (used with object)
1. to lower in condition or worth; debase (from Dictionary.com)
That definition describes PRECISELY what moving the in-depth technical
articles to a separate publication did to QST.
QST has been turned into an appliance operator's journal aimed primarily at
new licensees. I think it's a ripoff off that as a full member I would have
to pay $24 a year extra for QEX on top of the $39 for membership dues/QST
subscription in order to have access to articles on the facet of amateur
radio that interests me the most, while QST, which used to be filled with
plenty of good technical information and construction articles, is now
filled with nauseating "human interest" drivel crammed in between glossy
multi-page display ads. If it was practical to include in-depth technical
articles in QST 28 years ago, why would it not be practical to-day?
As for the reports on League organisational happenings, FCC and other
amateur radio news, and operating events that appear in QST, 99% of that
information is already stale news by the time it arrives in the mail with
the magazine, because I have already read it on the ARRL website, QRZ.com,
e-Ham, Newsline, This Week in Amateur Radio, or found out about it on the AM
Forum or this reflector, or one of the numerous other amateur radio websites
WEEKS before QST was even delivered to the post office by the printer.
Lacking any significant quantity of technical information that interest me,
or amateur radio related news that is useful to me, QST is wasted paper that
contributes to the clutter in my house, nearly indistinguishable from the
rest of the junk mail that piles up on my kitchen table
Since QEX is a much thinner magazine than QST and only comes out every two
months, it would not add to QST that much additional printing cost or
weight, to put half of the content that goes into QEX, into QST every
month. Who knows, some of the newbies just might be curious enough to READ
some of that technical content and actually learn something , and expand
their amateur radio horizon beyond buying the latest and greatest plastic
plug 'n play appliance.
I suspect there lies a profit motive behind having two separate
publications, each with its own paid subscribers, so it is unlikely that QST
would ever again be combined with QEX into one publication. Since nearly
all the League happenings and amateur radio news that it printed in QST is
freely and abundantly available over the internet, as a paid member I should
at least be given a choice between receiving QST or QEX as my membership
When my current membership expires, I am seriously considering letting it
lapse, and instead subscribing to QEX as a non-member, and I would urge
anyone else who is as disgusted as I am by what QST has become, to do the
More information about the AMRadio mailing list
This page last updated 17 Dec 2017.