TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio

To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Argonaut V Audio
From: joel hallas <jrhallas@optonline.net>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:57:01 -0500
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Stuart,

I certainly agree with you, all except for the words "optimum" and 
"proved". I have this vision that the Bell Labs folk who defined those 
limits were male folk with more grey hair than I have! 300-3000 is 
perfect for both their transmission and reception, but put a 7 year old 
granddaughter on the line and you will quickly decide they might have 
looked a bit wider!

OTOH for us old(ish) mostly male hams (who aren't allowed to play the 
flute on the air, anyhow) it is perfect!

73, Joel, W1ZR

Stuart Rohre wrote:

>Look at any good audio or radio handbook and you will see that for maximum 
>intelligibility on the radio, you DO NOT want response below 350 Hz.  That 
>detracts from hearing the maximum clarity of signal and as someone said 
>simply wastes power.
>
>Speech response for optimum communication extends from 300 to 3kHz.  Western 
>Electric and Bell Labs proved this decades ago, and it is still the better 
>way to set up a radio for audio response for ham communications.  Remember, 
>hams are to use the minimum power and bandwidth needed for a given mode, NOT 
>have "high fidelity".
>
>Stuart
>K5KVH 
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>TenTec mailing list
>TenTec@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>  
>


_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

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