• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Part15

Part15

License Free, legal, low-power radio broadcasting

  • About Us
  • Forums
  • Resources
  • Members
  • Contact Us
  • Log In
Forums
Main Category
temp
A Comment to the FC...
 
Notifications
Clear all

A Comment to the FCC About Noise

 
temp
Last Post by Anonymous 10 years ago
7 Posts
2 Users
0 Reactions
492 Views
RSS
 wdcx
(@wdcx)
Posts: 444
Noble Member
Topic starter
 

Very well written:

http://www.radioworld.com/Portals/0/Vobbe%20Impact%20of%20Manmade%20Interference%208102016.pdf


 
Posted : 10/08/2016 12:43 pm
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Posts: 0
 

It is so well written that I endorse it 100% and cannot think of anything else to say.

This line is one example of a very important point:

Individual bulbs meet F.C.C. RFI limits, but when bulbs
 are clustered together for traffic signaling,
marquees, signage, or grow lights, the additive
noise far exceeds the limits and radiates for great
distances.

 
Posted : 10/08/2016 1:04 pm
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Posts: 0
 

This is the reason for the demise of AM radio, have ranted about this on posts in the past.

The commercial stations can't get their signals to the coverage they should be able to. And they pay so much to the FCC for a license.

They just don't care about the AM band.

Haven't noticed this on FM though and since most noise is amplitude modulated and the FM audio is frequency modulated the "AM" is removed at the detector stage of a radio. Very little noise is frequency modulated. If you try to remove the noise from AM you also remove the audio also.

That's the big problem for hobby radio going AM because of this....you won't get your small signal into homes because the noise will drown it out completely.

The 50k watt commercial stations have a hard time getting through it even in their prime broadcasting area.

Yup, before the mid eighties it was never like this. I grew up with AM radio(50s 60s 70s)

 

Mark

 

 

 


 
Posted : 10/08/2016 1:55 pm
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Posts: 0
 

No doubt noise today is at a historic high because of so many interfering devices, but I remember back in the 50s while the AM radio age was still happening there would be massive buzz whenever someone used an electric shaver.

My favorite memory of AM vs. the noise was from the 1980s when a major storm was hitting the area while I was in the car. I was tuned to an all news station which was providing live weather information, but I couldn't hear much because of static, then I stopped under an overpass to wait for a red light and the reception dropped to nothing. Meanwhile the same station's FM outlet was sending wall-to-wall music. I thought they were just plain stupid.


 
Posted : 10/08/2016 2:06 pm
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Posts: 0
 

A lot of manufacturers cheat the system to cut costs. The products they submit to the FCC and UL for testing and certification do contain proper RF shielding and interference suppression, but once they get approval and enter production, they "Muntz" the circuit to shave a few cents per unit in manufacturing cost -- you see the space on the circuit board for proper RF chokes and extra filter capacitors, but they aren't actually installed.

And sites like eBay and Amazon are flooded with products sold directly from Chinese manufacturers that don't even try to meet FCC Part 15 or UL standards, and are often counterfeits of name-brand items, especially fake Apple battery chargers and fake Dell/HP/etc. laptop power supplies -- not to mention fake USB flash drives and SD cards that are only a fraction of their advertised storage capacity. These sites do prohibit counterfeit items from being sold, but it's a game of whack-a-mole to catch them all.


 
Posted : 11/08/2016 6:14 am
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Posts: 0
 

I agree with you with the exception of UL and CSA. Both agencies routinly perform audits at manufacturing facilities to compare the approvals to the drawings.


 
Posted : 11/08/2016 7:15 am
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Posts: 0
 

http://www.radioworld.com/article/nab-places-noise-responsibility-first-at-foot-of-fcc/279411

 

Mark


 
Posted : 11/08/2016 2:35 pm
Forum Jump:
  Previous Topic
Next Topic  
Share:
Forum Information
Recent Posts
Unread Posts
Tags
  • 13 Forums
  • 7,613 Topics
  • 62.8 K Posts
  • 14 Online
  • 2,243 Members
Our newest member: RaphaelKal
Latest Post: Jelly Roll Blues
Forum Icons: Forum contains no unread posts Forum contains unread posts
Topic Icons: Not Replied Replied Active Hot Sticky Unapproved Solved Private Closed

Primary Sidebar

Online Members

 No online members at the moment

Recent Posts

  • RichPowers

    RE: Public Domain Radio

    Sounds good.

    By RichPowers , 5 months ago

  • ArtisanRadio

    RE: Public Domain Radio

    I'd also like at some point to do a show, hosted by mys...

    By ArtisanRadio , 5 months ago

  • ArtisanRadio

    RE: Public Domain Radio

    When I played music that was not in the public domain, ...

    By ArtisanRadio , 5 months ago

  • RichPowers

    RE: Public Domain Radio

    The core concept of Part 15 AM has always been to provi...

    By RichPowers , 5 months ago

  • RichPowers

    RE: Public Domain Radio

    √1 - I guess there's not, but the potential exist, so f...

    By RichPowers , 5 months ago

Recent Topics

  • RichPowers

    Innovative "Syth-a-Sette" Turns Objects Into Music

    By RichPowers 5 months ago

  • Mark

    Neil Sedaka dies.

    By Mark 5 months ago

  • RichPowers

    Elvis AI?

    By RichPowers 5 months ago

  • RichPowers

    CB RADIO: Illinois CBer cited for 'broadcasting' on Channel 19

    By RichPowers 5 months ago

  • RichPowers

    Stamped pits vs organic dyes: CDs vs CD-R

    By RichPowers 5 months ago

Topic Tags

  • Carl Blare3
  • KDX RADIO3
  • WINDOZE3
  • Transmitter2
  • Radio Phvern2
  • station upgrade2
  • archive.org2
  • playlist2
  • Zara Radio2
  • Carrier Current1
View all tags (74)

Copyright © 2026 · Part15.org · Log in

‹›×

    ‹›×