Ahhhhh-Deeeee-Yoooooo!

[paws264]

http://www.w8ji.com/rm-11306.htm].....We[/url] have SSB and a few AM operators who want to hear every ssss and every low pitched growl they can produce, no matter how needless for communications.......

.......Several signals were 15kHz wide, occupying four or five normal SSB channel widths. The bulk of the wide signals had greatly enhanced bass and treble, although a few were normal communications audio through equipment that was obviously incorrectly(?) operated.........

I don't know how many of you have ever heard a BC-610 transmitter but, they are like music to the ear compared to modern ham AM signals and, the same goes for the "Enhanced SSB" signals.

I was on 20 meters and there were these guys whos' signals and audio sounded like they were sitting right next to you talking versus the SSB signals that were narrow and sounded like someone talking into a Tin can. Broadcast quality audio on SSB almost brings tears to my eyes because it sounds so good!

Yes, you have those "Haters" with signals sounding like pinched nosed "Nancy-boys" complaining about how much bandwidth is occupied by how many signal, this is due in part to high-end radios with built-in spectrum ANALyzers and guys with too much time on their hands (I think these are the same ones who police the Amplifier section over on eBay but, that's another Rant for a different day).

Nope, we don't need the ARRL involved to determine bandwith limits and modulation standards thank you.

.

 

[Peddler]

Agreed

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

I agree to a point.Yes wide bandwidth sounds good but it is also a bandwidth hog.The problem is when a wideband signal comes on the air only a few KHz away from an existing conversation and QRM's the snot out of it.Those operating wide bandwidth must operate it with responsibility.Actually doesn't the FCC specify max bandwidth anyway?? Having said that I am converting an RCA BTA-1S commercial AM broadcast transmitter for use on 80m.Up here the laws says max bandwidth is 6KHz but even still you can play with the freq response and sound great within that 6 KHz.I plan to run at a reduced carrier power of 750 watts to be legal up here in Canada. The tx will run 1000 watts carrier power but we are limited to 750 watts carrier here,twice what the FCC allows. Nothing quite like a pair of 4-400's in class C plate modulated by another pair of 4-400's.

 

[parkair]

I have heard those guys for years and can't stand the way they sound, sorry I just don't get it. SSB communications is what it is, it does not ned to be that wide.

 

[TonyV225]

LMAO it just never ends theres always someone or something

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

I have heard those guys for years and can't stand the way they sound, sorry I just don't get it. SSB communications is what it is, it does not ned to be that wide.

I actually agree with yopu about the "enhanced" SSB.If you want really nice audio switch to AM.Big signal AM is nice for a ragchew with the home builder crowd but normal bandwidth SSB is my choice for DX'ing and ragchews in general.

 

[Hamin' X]

If you are to enjoy the "better" sound of the wide band signals, then you have to open up your receive filters. When you do that, you throw away a lot of performance. I think that it is a poor trade to trash the many for the benefit of a few. That is why the bandwidth standards were adopted in the first place.

Rich

 

[C W Morse]

AH! The BC-610! Makes my back twinge at the mention of it! I remember the sound of those, and I also remember the time a friend and I were moving one into his old house under threat of mayhem from his wife. After struggling with this thing most of the morning to get it off the truck, we were finally onto the front porch with his wife still threatening to "kill" us . All was well, when suddenly, the thing FELL thru the porch floor! CRUNCH! Uh Oh! WE are now REALLY in deep doo doo with the wife!!!! I didn't know whether to haul buggy and leave Dink with it or or stand my ground. Luckily he had a small fork lift and had one of his employees come over and lift it up (which is what shoulda happened to start with). Dink's wife got a new porch, and he got a nice BC 610 in the radio shack! (Seems the rotten porch's getting fixed was enough to make "Lady" happy!)

(OUCH! Now don't say "BC -610" anymore! )

73

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

If you are to enjoy the "better" sound of the wide band signals, then you have to open up your receive filters. When you do that, you throw away a lot of performance. I think that it is a poor trade to trash the many for the benefit of a few. That is why the bandwidth standards were adopted in the first place.

Rich

Most of us true AM'ers use boat anchor receivers that had widebandwidth front ends to begin with.The old Hallicrafters and Hammurlands and many more had bandwidth switches to allow for AM or CW reception.

And Jerry,that little BC-610 is just a paperweight compared to my RCA that dad and I moved into my basement.It tips the scales at 1000 lbs. :shock:

 

[C W Morse]

I have a buddy that has a homebrew transmitter with 2 833's driven with 2 833's That thing takes a FORK LIFT! While it loafs along below legal limit, it is capable of some real power!
He calls it the Static Eliminator! And he is RIGHT! He has had some REAL transmitters in his day from a Collins KW1 (I had an email discussion with Joe Walsh [The Eagles] ) about that one), the Static Eliminator, and one he recently sold, a T-368.

73

CWM

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

Those 833's X 833's would make MUCH more than the legal limit of 375 watts carrier or 1500 watts pep.Something like 1000 watts carrier/4000 watts pep is more like it. I worked on many Gates BC-1 series AM transmitters and a pair of 833's would make 1000 watts continously 24/7 for a year until emmissions dropped too low for good sound quality.In amateur service at 375 watts that would last almost forever. I have a bucket of used 4-400's for my RCA so I should be good for a while.I intend to run it in the "night time" cutback mode for a carrier of 250 watts unless condx warrant the full gallon.....oooops I mean 750 watts.

 

[Sonwatcher]

This can be yours if the price is right !

http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST&f=1&t=133696

 

[C W Morse]

Those 833's X 833's would make MUCH more than the legal limit of 375 watts carrier or 1500 watts pep.Something like 1000 watts carrier/4000 watts pep is more like it. I worked on many Gates BC-1 series AM transmitters and a pair of 833's would make 1000 watts continously 24/7 for a year until emmissions dropped too low for good sound quality.In amateur service at 375 watts that would last almost forever. I have a bucket of used 4-400's for my RCA so I should be good for a while.I intend to run it in the "night time" cutback mode for a carrier of 250 watts unless condx warrant the full gallon.....oooops I mean 750 watts.

Oh, yes! The 833s certainly will do much more than the limit.
I SAW 4000+ little on the "Static Eliminator" using a military cantenna-style dummy load. Then we cut it back to the 375 and left it. (Talk about "bird watts" ) I don't think he has changed tubes in 20 years. Size-wise, it dwarfs the KWS-1 shown in a nearby link.

The owner of the 833 station used to have an "original" (meaning he bought it NEW in 1955) Collins KW1. Pristine condition in 1997 when he had to sell it to pay his wife's final expenses (cancer). I hated to see that as I used to operate it on AM and CW in his shack. Like a Hemi-------sweeeet! And he has a couple of Gates transmitters and a couple of homebrew ones he built up from scratch!

CWM