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.
The Feb 2025 Radioddity Giveaway Results are In! Click Here to see who won!

Reply to thread

Message

Some ill-informed people at the ARRL and FCC have repeatedly tried to push explicit bandwidth regulations down amateurs' throats -- but, so far, thank God, they have failed. Amateur radio is an experimental service and people have the absolute right to experiment with wider-bandwidth audio and wider-bandwidth modes.

Contrary to the first-grader-type understanding ("nobody needs more than 3 kHz!!! Narrower is always the way to go!!") of some amateurs (even some influential ones), wider bandwidth can actually increase effectiveness, and some wider modes can actually increase spectral efficiency. "Poisson, Shannon, and the Radio Amateur" was published in Proceedings of the IRE in 1957, for God's sake. It scientifically debunks the "narrower is always better" claims that have plagued amateur radio since the 30s. People should read it.

There should NEVER be any bandwidth limitations in amateur radio. It is an EXPERIMENTAL service. It is NOT a "channelized communications system" where everyone must sound like a telephone so that channels don't overlap. The day it turns into that is the day it dies.

<blockquote data-quote="Ovid" data-source="post: 417424" data-attributes="member: 18799">Some ill-informed people at the ARRL and FCC have repeatedly tried to push explicit bandwidth regulations down amateurs&#039; throats -- but, so far, thank God, they have failed. Amateur radio is an experimental service and people have the absolute right to experiment with wider-bandwidth audio and wider-bandwidth modes.Contrary to the first-grader-type understanding (&quot;nobody needs more than 3 kHz!!! Narrower is always the way to go!!&quot;) of some amateurs (even some influential ones), wider bandwidth can actually increase effectiveness, and some wider modes can actually increase spectral efficiency. &quot;Poisson, Shannon, and the Radio Amateur&quot; was published in Proceedings of the IRE in 1957, for God&#039;s sake. It scientifically debunks the &quot;narrower is always better&quot; claims that have plagued amateur radio since the 30s. People should read it.There should NEVER be any bandwidth limitations in amateur radio. It is an EXPERIMENTAL service. It is NOT a &quot;channelized communications system&quot; where everyone must sound like a telephone so that channels don&#039;t overlap. The day it turns into that is the day it dies.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovid, post: 417424, member: 18799"] Some ill-informed people at the ARRL and FCC have repeatedly tried to push explicit bandwidth regulations down amateurs' throats -- but, so far, thank God, they have failed. Amateur radio is an experimental service and people have the absolute right to experiment with wider-bandwidth audio and wider-bandwidth modes. Contrary to the first-grader-type understanding ("nobody needs more than 3 kHz!!! Narrower is always the way to go!!") of some amateurs (even some influential ones), wider bandwidth can actually increase effectiveness, and some wider modes can actually increase spectral efficiency. "Poisson, Shannon, and the Radio Amateur" was published in Proceedings of the IRE in 1957, for God's sake. It scientifically debunks the "narrower is always better" claims that have plagued amateur radio since the 30s. People should read it. There should NEVER be any bandwidth limitations in amateur radio. It is an EXPERIMENTAL service. It is NOT a "channelized communications system" where everyone must sound like a telephone so that channels don't overlap. The day it turns into that is the day it dies. [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom