|[AMRadio] AM Broadcast Quality|
nbcblue at hotmail.com
Tue Dec 17 01:48:34 EST 2013
Not propaganda at all Don. It seems that some have completely missed the
point. Comments like, "then why even run phone at all just stick to CW
and digital modes". That is a dumb statement. If only CW and digital
modes were allowed, those modes certainly do take less and width and you
certainly could crowd a lot more signals on the bands, but we don't
just run CW and digital modes, we run voice modes as well. The point I
have tried to make is to not take any more band width than necessary FOR
THE MODE being used, that includes all voice modes like AM, SSB, and
FM. To obtain "broadcast quality" only increases the bandwidth of the AM
signal beyond what is necessary for good clear communications. A lot of
hams now process their audio through audio mixers for more "hi-fi"
quality on SSB, which only increased the bandwidth and is absolutely
unnecessary and a waste on SSB. We don't need 10 kHz wide signals on the
Bill - K5MIL
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:12:53 -0600
> From: "Donald Chester" <k4kyv at charter.net>
> To: <amradio at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: Re: [AMRadio] AMRadio Digest, Vol 119, Issue 55
> Message-ID: <email@example.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >>On Monday, December 16, 2013 1:04 PM, W. Harris <nbcblue at hotmail.com>
> I keep hearing people talk about broadcast quality in regards to ham radio
> AM transmissions. Why should anyone strive for such quality when the object
> is to communicate using no more band width than necessary?
> Bill - K5MIL
> ??? ??? ??? ? ??? ??? ? >>
> That sounds like SSB propaganda from the 1950s.
More information about the AMRadio mailing list
This page last updated 22 Feb 2018.