Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] Audio BW -- Please just let us operate!!

To: Joe Isabella <n3ji@yahoo.com>, Amps <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] Audio BW -- Please just let us operate!!
From: "Steven Grant, W4IIV" <stevengrant98@yahoo.com>
Reply-to: stevengrant98@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 05:36:27 -0700 (PDT)
List-post: <mailto:amps@contesting.com>
hey Joe
 
the issue is not the bassiness itself, the issue is that bass uses up so much 
power.
i cannot copy a bass boosted signal at S-9
the op has to boost his high end so his "audience" can copy him, so in this 
case we have 2 issues: 1) splatter caused by all that bass  2) increased hi 
frequency components that do make the signal wide
 
steven    W4IIV

Joe Isabella <n3ji@yahoo.com> wrote:
I decided to break this out separately because I've heard this same story over 
and over and over
again. Anyone running some extended low-end content is "wide". I already stated 
this before, but
"bassiness" does not = wide bandwidth. If any of you don't understand that the 
higher frequencies
(in a properly adjusted transmitter) are the only way that a signal is 
"wideband", and that highly
compressed, overdriven audio (often heard during contest periods or 
DX-peditions) can be twice as
wide a 6k SSB signal, then I suggest you go back and study radio theory. Don't 
make comments
without ID'ing, or make gross noises during my QSO -- I may very well be 
running 3k audio with
some enhanced low frequency content, not any wider than you. My EQ settings 
(which are stored in
memories) and my rig's TX BW setting compliment each other. I don't try to cram 
"10lbs. of audio
in a 5lb. radio", as many of you think. What can be accomplished with a little 
patience and some
experimentation is truly outstanding audio that's narrower than "overdriven 
contest audio", even
if you only run 3kHz. I typically run a little more than that (about 3.2), and 
I will continue to
do so (try and measure it over the air -- I think you'll find it difficult). I 
have spent less on
my audio gear (about $400) than many of you spent on a couple mics. I can mimic 
Heil's HC-4,
HC-5, or Goldline with a flick of an EQ setting, and still ends up sounding 
much better due to the
external adjustable compression, downward expander, and customized EQ'ing.

Oh and BTW, I haven't even TOUCHED my rig as far as modifications. The audio 
isn't going directly
to a "balanced modulator", it enters the rig and follows the same path it would 
if I just plugged
a mic into it (straight into the audio CODEC, via a couple audio pre-amps). So 
don't give me that
garbage about "hacked rigs" or "ripped out filters". That's another myth.

I'm on vacation in the Keys -- just got here today. Sorry to stir the pot like 
this, but I just
can't stand to see inaccurate information and obviously emotional opinions 
without substantiation
go unanswered. You got spectral plots (from a *REAL* spectrum analyzer, not 
these garbage
"bandscopes"), show me -- if not, you're trying to push up a rope. You won't 
hear from me for a
few days. Have a great weekend!! Now, where's my beer...

Buenos Nachos!! :-)
Joe,
N3JI




_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps


STEVEN GRANT    W4IIV
                
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>