Re: meter survey

>
> On 8/28/07, Bill Bruno <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I cannot get into the archives, at least not at the moment.
> > Perhaps you can send me your survey...
>
> I have attached is as Excel file, in the hope you can edit it, just
> send it back to me with your additions. So far none has added up
> anything, all those are mine...;(
>
> Peace
>
> Tom
>
>

> so one must realize that the person holding it can act like an
> antenna at some frequencies and so a tripod is recommended for
> serious measurements.
>
> Bill
> On 8/28/07, Tom Unrelated <t.unrelated@...> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/28/07, Bill Bruno <wbruno@...> wrote:
> > > I cannot get into the archives, at least not at the moment.
> > > Perhaps you can send me your survey...
> >
> > I have attached is as Excel file, in the hope you can edit it,

> > send it back to me with your additions. So far none has added up
> > anything, all those are mine...;(
> >
> > Peace
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

>
> So, Bill, overall marks out of 10 for each meter?
>
>
> --- In [hidden email] <eSens%40yahoogroups.com>, "Bill Bruno"
> <wbruno@...> wrote:
> >
> > Regarding the $199 'electrosmog meter' versus the Gigahertz
> Solutions meter:
> >
> > I have not had a chance to fill out your spread sheet Tom, but let
> me say
> > that I've used both this meter and the GS one. The GS one is
> clearly
> > more useful because of the directionality and sound. But the
> > other one is virtually as sensitive and because you can use it
> > in mV/m mode maybe even more so (although the meter is not
> > reliable down there, one can see differences sometimes; the display
> > goes down to .1 mV/m but due to internal noise I've never seen it
> > below 9 mV/m.).
> > Also, the max feature is very helpful, and the alarm feature is
> great.
> >
> > For shielding work the directionality and the sound are a real
> > plus. For everyday monitoring the cheaper meter is actually
> > better because it can be carried in a pocket (though it will stick
> out).
> > I've also dropped it and it's fine. Note also it responds down to
> 50MHz
> > so one must realize that the person holding it can act like an
> > antenna at some frequencies and so a tripod is recommended for
> > serious measurements.
> >
> > Bill
> > On 8/28/07, Tom Unrelated <t.unrelated@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 8/28/07, Bill Bruno <wbruno@...> wrote:
> > > > I cannot get into the archives, at least not at the moment.
> > > > Perhaps you can send me your survey...
> > >
> > > I have attached is as Excel file, in the hope you can edit it,
> just
> > > send it back to me with your additions. So far none has added up
> > > anything, all those are mine...;(
> > >
> > > Peace
> > >
> > > Tom
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>  
>

> They both get thumbs up! I would also recommend the 'electrosmog
> detector'
> $85 at lessemf
> EXCEPT that mine only lasted a few months. First the speaker blew (and
> lessemf was not
> very helpful about it). So I used the external jack. But carrying it
> around a lot the jack input
> could not take the stress and hardly works now. Still a helpful tool, but
> if you can afford
> the $200 I'd go for the meter. And I think everyone should have the $200
> one. It's just
> so useful when you leave the house: choose a restaurant, choose which
> table,
> start
> conversations. Compare readings to the bioIniitiave proposed limit.
>
> The Gigahertz solution directional is more impressive looking, more
> useful,
> but less portable
> and more expensive. Almost essential for shielding projects. And the
> extended range one
> (which I have not tried) is probably even better.
>
> Of course a gauss meter or buzz stick is also a must.
>
> Bill
>
> On 9/8/07, asurisuk <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> So, Bill, overall marks out of 10 for each meter?
>>
>>
>> --- In [hidden email] <eSens%40yahoogroups.com>, "Bill Bruno"
>> <wbruno@...> wrote:
>> >
>> > Regarding the $199 'electrosmog meter' versus the Gigahertz
>> Solutions meter:
>> >
>> > I have not had a chance to fill out your spread sheet Tom, but let
>> me say
>> > that I've used both this meter and the GS one. The GS one is
>> clearly
>> > more useful because of the directionality and sound. But the
>> > other one is virtually as sensitive and because you can use it
>> > in mV/m mode maybe even more so (although the meter is not
>> > reliable down there, one can see differences sometimes; the display
>> > goes down to .1 mV/m but due to internal noise I've never seen it
>> > below 9 mV/m.).
>> > Also, the max feature is very helpful, and the alarm feature is
>> great.
>> >
>> > For shielding work the directionality and the sound are a real
>> > plus. For everyday monitoring the cheaper meter is actually
>> > better because it can be carried in a pocket (though it will stick
>> out).
>> > I've also dropped it and it's fine. Note also it responds down to
>> 50MHz
>> > so one must realize that the person holding it can act like an
>> > antenna at some frequencies and so a tripod is recommended for
>> > serious measurements.
>> >
>> > Bill
>> > On 8/28/07, Tom Unrelated <t.unrelated@...> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On 8/28/07, Bill Bruno <wbruno@...> wrote:
>> > > > I cannot get into the archives, at least not at the moment.
>> > > > Perhaps you can send me your survey...
>> > >
>> > > I have attached is as Excel file, in the hope you can edit it,
>> just
>> > > send it back to me with your additions. So far none has added up
>> > > anything, all those are mine...;(
>> > >
>> > > Peace
>> > >
>> > > Tom
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

>
> Your recommendations are not based on facts.
>
> There are much more meters available to choose from.
>
> And the choice should be based on what you expect to measure.
> So, first you should determine that.
> What exactly do you want to measure.?
> For what purpose?
>
> Many meters are described in detail in many issues of *het bitje*.
>
> Greetings,
> Charles Claessens
> member Verband Baubiologie
> www.milieuziektes.nl
> www.milieuziektes.be
> www.minderstraling.nl
> www.hetbitje.nl
> checked by Bitdefender
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Bruno" <[hidden email] <wbruno%40gmail.com>>
> To: <[hidden email] <eSens%40yahoogroups.com>>
> Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 05:30
> Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: meter survey
>
> > They both get thumbs up! I would also recommend the 'electrosmog
> > detector'
> > $85 at lessemf
> > EXCEPT that mine only lasted a few months. First the speaker blew (and
> > lessemf was not
> > very helpful about it). So I used the external jack. But carrying it
> > around a lot the jack input
> > could not take the stress and hardly works now. Still a helpful tool,
> but
> > if you can afford
> > the $200 I'd go for the meter. And I think everyone should have the $200
> > one. It's just
> > so useful when you leave the house: choose a restaurant, choose which
> > table,
> > start
> > conversations. Compare readings to the bioIniitiave proposed limit.
> >
> > The Gigahertz solution directional is more impressive looking, more
> > useful,
> > but less portable
> > and more expensive. Almost essential for shielding projects. And the
> > extended range one
> > (which I have not tried) is probably even better.
> >
> > Of course a gauss meter or buzz stick is also a must.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> > On 9/8/07, asurisuk <[hidden email] <asurisuk%40excite.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >> So, Bill, overall marks out of 10 for each meter?
> >>
> >>
> >> --- In [hidden email] <eSens%40yahoogroups.com><eSens%40yahoogroup
> s.com>, "Bill Bruno"
> >> <wbruno@...> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Regarding the $199 'electrosmog meter' versus the Gigahertz
> >> Solutions meter:
> >> >
> >> > I have not had a chance to fill out your spread sheet Tom, but let
> >> me say
> >> > that I've used both this meter and the GS one. The GS one is
> >> clearly
> >> > more useful because of the directionality and sound. But the
> >> > other one is virtually as sensitive and because you can use it
> >> > in mV/m mode maybe even more so (although the meter is not
> >> > reliable down there, one can see differences sometimes; the display
> >> > goes down to .1 mV/m but due to internal noise I've never seen it
> >> > below 9 mV/m.).
> >> > Also, the max feature is very helpful, and the alarm feature is
> >> great.
> >> >
> >> > For shielding work the directionality and the sound are a real
> >> > plus. For everyday monitoring the cheaper meter is actually
> >> > better because it can be carried in a pocket (though it will stick
> >> out).
> >> > I've also dropped it and it's fine. Note also it responds down to
> >> 50MHz
> >> > so one must realize that the person holding it can act like an
> >> > antenna at some frequencies and so a tripod is recommended for
> >> > serious measurements.
> >> >
> >> > Bill
> >> > On 8/28/07, Tom Unrelated <t.unrelated@...> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > On 8/28/07, Bill Bruno <wbruno@...> wrote:
> >> > > > I cannot get into the archives, at least not at the moment.
> >> > > > Perhaps you can send me your survey...
> >> > >
> >> > > I have attached is as Excel file, in the hope you can edit it,
> >> just
> >> > > send it back to me with your additions. So far none has added up
> >> > > anything, all those are mine...;(
> >> > >
> >> > > Peace
> >> > >
> >> > > Tom
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>  
>

> Agreed I've only tried a few... and these are ones that happen to
> easy to obtain here in the US. I should have also mentioned the "HF
> detector"
> which is very compact and perhaps a better choice than the "electrosmog
> detector".
>
> Bill
>
> On 9/9/07, charles <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Your recommendations are not based on facts.
>>
>> There are much more meters available to choose from.
>>
>> And the choice should be based on what you expect to measure.
>> So, first you should determine that.
>> What exactly do you want to measure.?
>> For what purpose?
>>
>> Many meters are described in detail in many issues of *het bitje*.
>>
>> Greetings,
>> Charles Claessens
>> member Verband Baubiologie
>> www.milieuziektes.nl
>> www.milieuziektes.be
>> www.minderstraling.nl
>> www.hetbitje.nl
>> checked by Bitdefender
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bill Bruno" <[hidden email] <wbruno%40gmail.com>>
>> To: <[hidden email] <eSens%40yahoogroups.com>>
>> Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 05:30
>> Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: meter survey
>>
>> > They both get thumbs up! I would also recommend the 'electrosmog
>> > detector'
>> > $85 at lessemf
>> > EXCEPT that mine only lasted a few months. First the speaker blew (and
>> > lessemf was not
>> > very helpful about it). So I used the external jack. But carrying it
>> > around a lot the jack input
>> > could not take the stress and hardly works now. Still a helpful tool,
>> but
>> > if you can afford
>> > the $200 I'd go for the meter. And I think everyone should have the
>> > $200
>> > one. It's just
>> > so useful when you leave the house: choose a restaurant, choose which
>> > table,
>> > start
>> > conversations. Compare readings to the bioIniitiave proposed limit.
>> >
>> > The Gigahertz solution directional is more impressive looking, more
>> > useful,
>> > but less portable
>> > and more expensive. Almost essential for shielding projects. And the
>> > extended range one
>> > (which I have not tried) is probably even better.
>> >
>> > Of course a gauss meter or buzz stick is also a must.
>> >
>> > Bill
>> >
>> > On 9/8/07, asurisuk <[hidden email] <asurisuk%40excite.com>>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So, Bill, overall marks out of 10 for each meter?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --- In [hidden email]
>> >> <eSens%40yahoogroups.com><eSens%40yahoogroup
>> s.com>, "Bill Bruno"
>> >> <wbruno@...> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Regarding the $199 'electrosmog meter' versus the Gigahertz
>> >> Solutions meter:
>> >> >
>> >> > I have not had a chance to fill out your spread sheet Tom, but let
>> >> me say
>> >> > that I've used both this meter and the GS one. The GS one is
>> >> clearly
>> >> > more useful because of the directionality and sound. But the
>> >> > other one is virtually as sensitive and because you can use it
>> >> > in mV/m mode maybe even more so (although the meter is not
>> >> > reliable down there, one can see differences sometimes; the display
>> >> > goes down to .1 mV/m but due to internal noise I've never seen it
>> >> > below 9 mV/m.).
>> >> > Also, the max feature is very helpful, and the alarm feature is
>> >> great.
>> >> >
>> >> > For shielding work the directionality and the sound are a real
>> >> > plus. For everyday monitoring the cheaper meter is actually
>> >> > better because it can be carried in a pocket (though it will stick
>> >> out).
>> >> > I've also dropped it and it's fine. Note also it responds down to
>> >> 50MHz
>> >> > so one must realize that the person holding it can act like an
>> >> > antenna at some frequencies and so a tripod is recommended for
>> >> > serious measurements.
>> >> >
>> >> > Bill
>> >> > On 8/28/07, Tom Unrelated <t.unrelated@...> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On 8/28/07, Bill Bruno <wbruno@...> wrote:
>> >> > > > I cannot get into the archives, at least not at the moment.
>> >> > > > Perhaps you can send me your survey...
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I have attached is as Excel file, in the hope you can edit it,
>> >> just
>> >> > > send it back to me with your additions. So far none has added up
>> >> > > anything, all those are mine...;(
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Peace
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Tom
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>