Timinbovey found in his testing that adding audio wires to any transmitter greatly increased its signal.
And I found in my EDM testing (low power setting) that while shortening the antenna did have some affect on the strength of the signal, it still was more powerful than the MS-100, achieving a lot more range. It could be that the audio cables took over and acted as a radiator with the shorter antenna.
Remember that the MS-100 was operating at BETS-1 levels, which themselves are far higher than Part 15.
I also note that the EDM that is being tested over at HB is an evaluation unit that comes from the manufacturer. It would be far more appropriate to test one that came from the general distribution channel, as Tim did in his testing of other transmitters. That way you're assured that you're not getting a 'special' one that has been tweaked by the manufacturer.
Don't know as didn't get that specific in my talking to Decade the MS-100 settings to BETS-1 are done with audio cables connected or not.
But it had to have the adaptor cable attached which would have been taken into consideration.
At least with this transmitter there's a guidline to go by to be in the "ball park" as to the correct setting as I was told when they set it for correct field strength.
With the EDM you don't know as the user can just adjust the output anyway and there's no preset setting of power and knowm antenna from manufacturer.
Really this is no different than the other Chinese ones or Veronica's except making it a kit it is OK to import and sell here( USA) but in Canada it doesn't matter because kit or not it needs the certification from IC.
Going strictly by the rules this where the USA has an advantage over us.
But that being said I notice on the "toys" that get your MP3 to your car radio that go 10 to 20 feet here in Canada just have the FCC ID and not IC ID also.
Mark
Mark
... Really this is no different than the other Chinese ones or Veronica's except making it a kit it is OK to import and sell here (USA) but in Canada it doesn't matter because kit or not it needs the certification from IC.
Kindly re-read FCC §15.23(a) shown in an earlier post of this thread (repeated below):
§15.23 Home-built devices.
(a) Equipment authorization is not required for devices that are not marketed, are not constructed from a kit, and are built in quantities of five or less for personal use.
According to web pages active as of today,* the EDM FM transmitter IS marketed for sale, and IS defined by its manufacturer to be a kit.
Both of those facts clearly appear to be non-compliant with FCC §15.23(a) for the legal sale and use of such items in the U.S.A.
This should be of interest to anyone in the U.S. ordering such for any purpose, including "testing."
* links to such will be provided on request
As per my previous post, the FCC has stated that kits do not need to be authorized, but must still comply with all regulations.
Whether the FCC would consider the EDM a kit is still open to debate.
Which Transmitter is more pure the Whole House 3.0 or EDM?
So, What you are saying is the EDM isn't legal in the US?....I stand corrected!
So the same there as here ...have to get FCC authorization?
What about domestic kits, like the Ramsey or SStran?
Are these legal to use in the USA without getting it approved first?
So really no difference in Canada or the USA in this regard as thought?
So if you get inspected and you are meeting the rules with an EDM you can be told to stop because it hasn't been approved?
Mark
ccrane are overpowered as tim has proven with his testing. with that said the Decade and Broadcast visions appear to be the cleanest spectrally.
If we get more LEGAL Power the MS-100 should be easy to turn up. It may be a TX of interest to me in case.
The next option MOVE TO CANADA in a nice rural area and start an Album Rock under BETS-1 or RSS123.
Actually, the C. Crane transmitters were the ONLY ones I have tested that were legal right out of the box. In fact they were well below the legal limit.
EVERY other certified Part 15 transmitter I've tested was way above the legal limit.
For reference I did make a very basic text only web page that contains all my transmitter tests, as well as links to the various test equipment I use. It may be not be the prettiest or most organized web page, but it takes you to a lot of information:
http://www.ironrangecountry.com/masterpt15.html
Unlike other tests posted on the net all the transmitters I test are purchased at retail. it's my belief that when you get one gratis from the manufacturer you've compromised your tests. You don't know that you didn't get one that was hand picked or even tweaked for the test. Plus, as the company has already provided you with something, you're now a "friend of the subject" which may tend to skew the tests. It's hard to write a bad review when someone has been helping you out completing and facilitating the test. In addition, my tests include all the acutal numbers. The concept of not publishing real field strength numbers because it may hurt someones sales is ridiculous. Could you even imagine reading a Consumer Reports article on cars that said "Car D got the best mileage, closely followed by car A and Car E. Cars B, C and F came in last". What the heck kind of test report would THAT be?
A good example --- look at how the Volkswagon thing turned out. The the cars tested for legal compliance had rigged software to get them past the screening, while the actual sold cars, in some cases, put out hundreds times over the legal limits in pollutants. You don't think for a second that a small transmitter company, asked for a sample for testing for a published review, wouldn't do the best they could to send out a legal one?
TIB
Mark, if the EDM is determined by the FCC to indeed be a kit, then it's OK to sell it and use it. Read my previous posts on the subject.
If it is determined NOT to be a kit (i.e., an assembled transmitter with a few parts removed to get around the authorization rules), then it would NOT be.
I agree with Tim in regards to sourcing the transmitter, as I've also stated previously. Purchase a transmitter from the retail chain, and test that. Better yet, do as Tim has done, and test multiples.
If you're testing a kit, purchase the actual kit from retail, assemble it yourself, and then test it. It's the only way to duplicate the actual user experience. That's one of the basic problems with the testing of the AMT5000 in the AM Shootout, done elsewhere. An already assembled transmitter from an unknown source was used. It's also one of the problems with the upcoming EDM tests - it's in the best interests of the manufacturer to ensure, however it's done, that you get a transmitter that is as close to being compliant as possible. You're already compromised, before you even begin the testing.
Between Rich and Artisan.
I seem to have read in the FCC document that in the USA kits can be used as long as the rules are met as Artisan is saying but Rich is saying, as I am understanding, and if I am understanding right, that it's like in Canada...it has to be approved first.
And yes Tim has a good point about testing....there's some bias if donated by a manufacturer.
And to Thelegacy....if you could move to Canada I, we, welcome you! and Part15Engineer too!
But a rural area isn't nessessarily better then the GTA(Toronto).
If you go north of here to cottage country it's worse for space because stations come from everywhere Toronto, Barrie, Oshawa, even Buffalo, some local ones, from Muskoka etc. BUT....there's always space even if it's one or two spots. We don't have this translator thing like you do and in every area some space has to be available for RSS-123 and getting your MP3 player to your car etc. Even in the greater Toronto area there has to be SOME place to go.
To get to an area where you'd have half the dial to choose from you'd have to get out of civilization....go far away from having residences around you to get listeners.
In that case even BETS-1 wouldn't be good if no one will hear you!...it would just be for your own use.
Although most cities outside Southern Ontario in the rest of the country will not have the band crowded like in Southern Ontario.
Mark
From reply 40 in this thread: ... if the EDM is determined by the FCC to indeed be a kit, then it's OK to sell and use it. ...
Below is a collection of quotes from various parts of U.S. 47CFR, applying to this subject (text attributes added by me).
_____________
§15.3 Definitions.
(o) Intentional radiator. A device that intentionally generates and emits radio frequency energy by radiation or induction.
(p) Kit. Any number of electronic parts, usually provided with a schematic diagram or printed circuit board, which, when assembled in accordance with instructions, results in a device subject to the regulations in this part, even if additional parts of any type are required to complete assembly.
§15.201 Equipment authorization requirement.
(b) Except as otherwise exempted in paragraph (c) of this section and in §15.23 of this part, ALL intentional radiators operating under the provisions of this part shall be certificated by the Commission pursuant to the procedures in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter prior to marketing.
PART 2 SUBPART J - §2.907 Certification.
(a) Certification is an equipment authorization approved by the Commission or issued by a Telecommunication Certification Body (TCB) and authorized under the authority of the Commission, based on representations and test data submitted by the applicant.
§ 15.23 Home-built devices.
(a) Equipment authorization is not required for devices that are not marketed, are not constructed from a kit, and are built in quantities of five or less for personal use.
______________
The EDM unit IS marketed/sold, it IS a kit, and apparently it IS NOT FCC certificated.
Suggest that this does not support a belief that such equipment is "OK to sell and use in the U.S." if supplied in kit form.
I'll take the FCC's interpretation of the rules (as published on the Rangemaster's website) over anyone else's. Plus the lack of enforcement on those using kit built transmitters (for that reason alone), and those selling kits.
Mark, all transmitters used for BROADCASTING purposes in Canada require a TAC or Technical Acceptance Certificate. However, RSS210 (for non broadcasting applications) is virtually identical to Part 15, and I believe that, similar to Part 15, you are allowed to build and use transmitters that do not have that TAC (as long as they meet RSS210 requirements).
Broadcasting is defined in Canada as any transmission that is aimed at the general public - and BETS-1 defines the rules for unlicensed broadcasting. For anything else (such as transmitting music around the house or in the immediate vicinity for your personal use) you can use RSS210.
So you could build an AMT5000 and use it for your own purposes. If the EDM was considered a kit (and I don't know how Industry Canada would feel about it), you could build and use it as well, as long as you weren't broadcasting (by Industry Canada's definition). It should be noted, however, that RSS210 FM rules are identical to those of Part15.239, so you're going to get less range than BETS-1. You'd be better off to buy an assembled, Industry Canada certified BETS-1 transmitter, as you could use that for both broadcasting and non broadcasting applications.
carrier current / leaky coaxial cable rules like? similar to here and can be used for broadcasting?
my dad is canadian born my mom was american and i have family in canada.
i'm thinking of vacating "Trump land" before he goes full tilt hitler and relocating to Canada