Who needs Hi-Fi and equalizers, when you got something like this? This President Lincoln is only 6K wide but sounds very natural with the stock microphone.
-
You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
Audio Equalizers
- Thread starter riverrat373
- Start date
When you say 6k wide do you mean total AM bandwidth or the transmitter is passing 6khz of audio?
I think someone hit the nail on the head earlier. If you like wide audio and also like to DX then all it takes is a tweak of the EQ. You get the best of both worlds.
It's set up to pass 6000 Hertz of audio with a 2khz cushion on either side, but you're noticing the limitation of the stock microphone and narrow banded receiver. The Contour of the roll-offs is set internally similar to what you would do with an equalizer except it's set it and forget it and totally idiot-proof so the customer never needs to touch anything.
Whoever that Joe guy is he got a screaming deal on that radio and I'm sure the guy that sold it to Joe is probably kicking himself in the butt wishing he hadn't gotten rid of it.
Last edited:
That's what happens when you're listening on a narrow banded receiver. That receiver is getting sent back to Mike for the third time and hopefully he gets it right this time. I guess we'll find out sometime in the next week how it turned out.
The stock microphone sounds better than the palomar. The palomar sounds pinched.
Im not sure what you mean by 2khz of cushion on either side. I have one of those mfj speakers and its not the best one to be using for receiving wideband audio. The radio doesn't sound bad by any means but is nothing special. Passing 6khz of audio would be 12khz wide AM.
Look at what a property loaded D104 can sound like with less than 4khz of audio or 8khz total AM bandwidth.
This is all a particular type of B.S.
If a station sends 4KHZ and I can only hear 2,8 of it , 30% is missing.
Specifically the upper 30% .
If the voice energy is spread flat across 4Hz Then I'm only recovering 70% of the transmitted voice and energy.
So if a station wants to occupy 1.2KHz more bandwidth that I and many others can not hear it's a waste of bandwidth and transmitted energy.
Since I can't hear it I really don't give a rats ass.
However, when I can hear it as interference under crowded band conditions I hear it as the 30% of the voice energy that is specifically the highs of the voice range.
Instead of being 3KHz away to avoid interference I have to be 4 or more KHz away.
Now multiply that by how many ever transmitters are using ESSB and it only takes three stations to take up the space of 4, 6 stations to take up the space of 8...
The original purpose of SSB communications was to use less bandwidth and maintain intelligibility while using less energy to do it .
Now promoters of ESSB want to waste bandwidth and energy in the name of HiFi audio.
Buy an FM broadcast station
If a station sends 4KHZ and I can only hear 2,8 of it , 30% is missing.
Specifically the upper 30% .
If the voice energy is spread flat across 4Hz Then I'm only recovering 70% of the transmitted voice and energy.
So if a station wants to occupy 1.2KHz more bandwidth that I and many others can not hear it's a waste of bandwidth and transmitted energy.
Since I can't hear it I really don't give a rats ass.
However, when I can hear it as interference under crowded band conditions I hear it as the 30% of the voice energy that is specifically the highs of the voice range.
Instead of being 3KHz away to avoid interference I have to be 4 or more KHz away.
Now multiply that by how many ever transmitters are using ESSB and it only takes three stations to take up the space of 4, 6 stations to take up the space of 8...
The original purpose of SSB communications was to use less bandwidth and maintain intelligibility while using less energy to do it .
Now promoters of ESSB want to waste bandwidth and energy in the name of HiFi audio.
Buy an FM broadcast station
Last edited:
You are entitled to an opinion but something is not a waste just because it doesn't interest you. If you only want to listen 2.8khz wide that's your business. There are no specific laws about transmit bandwidth but a person does need to be considerate when the band is crowded. Don't think too badly of the guy in the video I posted. He doesn't even have a ssb transmitter...or coax.
Yeah actually there are. For CB it has to comply with FCC Rule 47 C.F.R, Part 95
When it comes to amateur radio, hams in the USA must rigorously follow the bandplan as set out by the FCC and that band plan specifies bandwidth for a set range of frequencies within each band. The SSB section is limited to 2.7kHz.
You may be right about cb. The debate about am and ssb bandwidth on amateur radio has been beaten to death, some people think operating AM outside the "am window" is illegal. Can you post a link to a law that states 2.7khz?
Yeah is that a bandplan or the law? For YEARS the USA has resisted going to a bandwidth based system and has stuck with mode restrictions on various band segmants. Here in Canada we adopted a bandwidth system and I can run any mode on any frequency as long as it stays within the bandwidth restrictions of 6KHz below 28.0 MHz except for 1 KHz on 30m. I can legally run SSB on 14.005 if I want too despite the bandplan saying otherwise.
As long as it ain't a splatterbox, who really gives a sh1t on CB??? Wider audio = Gooder audio.
All I can find is constant reference to "communications quality" A3E emissions without reference to just what communications quality is and some references to 3K00J3E emissions for SSB which is 3 KHz bandwidth but 8K00A3E for AM phone which is 8 KHz bandwidth.