[morzh]

Using PCB even back then would cut the costs a lot by eliminating the poin-to-point wiring that was, I am sure, time-consuming. And you would in essence create a pre-wired module, that only had to be connected to the power, the sp[eaker and possibly (not always) to controls.

PCB became more valuable as the technology progressed as eventually any other way of wiring became impossible (then came the microchips which are micro-PCBs of a sort).

However in old radios PCB actually would add cost. If one uses a PCB strictly as a cluster of wires then what.....every component still has to have a wire going to it. So you have almost as many wires as you had before, PLUS the PCB that interconnects them, at the same time adding the cost of itself and taking space. PCB is only effective if most components are mounted on it, not away from it.

And also, as I noted in the topic about Philco Portable record player, when I was restoring it (same as when I was tinkering with phenolic PCBs as a kid, making radios from kits), I saw lots of PCB traces unglue and separate from the laminate. Soldering of a pad only could take so many solder-desolder cycles, but even in that player, where the traces were quite wide, and Germanium transistors were soldered to them (they did not use lead-forming back then), they would by their own weight tear the traces from the board, and them the fragments of the traces would eventually crack and separate from the rest, so the electronics would cease to function. It took time for the PCBs to become reliable, and for the assembly technology build up the experience knowing what worked and what did not.