One of the reasons behind looking at real numbers is Tim's observation (assuming that you agree that 500 meters or so can cover a neighbourhood and is the most range you will likely get with an upgraded Part 15 FM service). Part 15 AM will give you a solid signal with that kind of range (or better) right now. That, of course, assumes an outdoor antenna installation.
And that observation, of course, can also be used by both the FCC and the NAB to shoot down any FM initiative, particularly because of interference concerns as translators move to the band.
So far, I haven't seen any compelling arguments that argue against Part 15 AM, especially if you can get a small part of the band allocated specifically for Part 15 use. When I was using my Rangemaster with an Inovonics 222 and outboard audio processing (a Symetrix 421 compressor/limiter/expander), the resulting sound was very good. Not as good as FM, of course, but very listenable, even for music. Much better than the Talking House or Talking Sign (although I don't know about the enhanced Talking House, as I've never used it), and slightly better than the ProCaster.
So why not consider a proposal for Part 15 AM to allocate dedicated frequencies only. No changes to power. No changes to antennas (except maybe to relax the long ground lead rule, or at the very least get it clarified as to what is allowed & what is not).
Now that may have a real chance of passing.
Honestly with the nature of the band I think we'd have a better shot at improving part 15 AM Service.
FM has always kind of been the holy grail as far as interference free service is concerned. For whatever reasons, likely dating back to the 60s when they were trying to get people to listen to FM, the FCC has protected FM more strictly than AM.
In comparing AM to FM Artisan added the statement... "assumes an outdoor antenna installation."
That gives me the foot in the door I've been looking for to make a comment about the FM Initiative, which seeks to boost field strength for 15.239...
The FCC will only laugh when they realize that the FM Initiative will apply to some radio stations that have their transmitter on the kitchen sink or pasted to a window with the antenna dangling out the window.
Setups that have no outdoor antenna real estate will be viewed as toy time and not granted the status of a public radio service.
There is a case to be made for developing effective indoor transmitting antennas, a challenge faced by some amateur HAM operators, but it is not simple science that will pass muster with the FCC engineering department when sought by untrained home hobbyists.
Mountain climbers don't wear flip-flops.
Timinbovey: I thought about the weather Radio idea wth a VOX box connected between my computer and patch cord splitter. As soon as the weather tone went off it would mute what I'm broadcasting and play the weather warning over the TX. I didn't want to even mention this because I was afraid tat the other site would start to say “We are breaking some sort of copyright or broadcast law!” but I saw no issue with that and actually thought of a similar install. I did hear of a Radio with a built in relay that allowed you to connect it between your computer and speakers to mute your media and warn you of bad weather. Can't remember the Radio and it had a Stereo input and output. Maybe you could remind me of that Radio. $30-$50 is well worth the price of public safety. Not to mention if I'm out in the yard or within range of my station I'll hear it too. So it is beneficial to everyone. If not how much would you charge for a relay box to go between my computer and transmitter and have the two jacks one label Weather Radio and the other labeled Computer/Media input? I could then get a simple Midland or other Weather Radio that is programmable.
Why AM won't work for me and many others unless Station8's antenna becomes a reality – Currently my Landlord will NOT allow more holes to be drilled and if I do have a satellite dish installed it would have had to be on the ground. But a 10 foot pole going all the way up near my bay Window is something I doubt the landlord will allow. If station8's antenna would give me 2 miles Indoors with a 6 foot copper pipe I could put it right next to the bay window which is inches away from the electrical box. This would give me a high gain antenna that would go 4 miles outside and since it is near a bay window I'm hoping for 2-3 and possibly a inductance carrier current effect that of what happened to a user on Hobby Broadcaster. This would be useful, but the signal would have to be STRONG to slam through the noise level. I did find that all the electrical lines are buried so the carrier current effect is less likely to happen as there is no way for cars to have to be close to power lines as they travel through Deltaville, VA. AM didn't work for me in Elizabeth City either as the noise floor was 10 times worse and my Talking house went a whopping 300 Ft to a Car Radio, and that was on a good say. Now carrier current could have worked for me in Elizabeth City as the lines were on a pole and cars went within inches from the power poles meaning I could have covered the town if I had a coupler for 110 instead of having to use a 220 volt AC coupler. This is where an external box connected to the 75 ohm out of the talking house would had been beneficial to my AM transmitter and would have allowed me the range I wanted and then some.
More power for AM would mean – users who live in apartment complexes could get at least 2 miles with a 1 Watt AM signal with a signal of an S20-S40 necessary to be listenable to most folks with home Radio's. This is something I'll add to the Initiative for AM, FM, and SW. I'd like to get a hold of one of those old AM baby monitors or cordless phones and modify it to allow me to transmit music. As was suggested at the ALPB meeting several weeks ago it could be heard 5 miles out. All I'd have to do is take the mic out of the baby monitor, replace it with a attenuating patch cord and plug it into my computer and away I go with a jamming AM station on carrier current traveling 5 miles. Yes if I could do this there would be no reason to change the rules. But I have no way of getting such a unit nor have I found a sighted person to modify and switch the frequency to 1630 AM and put in the 1 8th inch jack.
Any station may rebroadcast any NOAA station at any time, no copyright at all. This is a very common occurance in part 15 radio, also why would you care if "the other site" said anything? (They wouldn't)
During severe weather I used to monitor the local NOAA station. When the EAS tones would fire off I could flip a switch on my board and immediately put the message on the air.
I've been following this topic with interest and I am glad to see, it continues to spark member input.
AM in my personal opinion has it's advantages. I for one, would try AM if I can get this C-Quam AM stereo transmitter up to legal power and construct an outdoor AM antenna that will give me legal acceptable range. I have had this transmitter for about 2 years now and have yet to get anywhere with it, since I am not familiar with building amplifiers for this part of the RF spectrum.
I can use an outdoor antenna, I am not restricted by landlord rules, I do rent, but my landlord has allowed me an antenna structure on the roof, that is side mounted to the chimney.
I do have land that I can construct a reasonable sized AM antenna on, although ground based ground radials would be an issue because there is not a lot of land available to strectch those wires out far enough to give satisfactory results.
I think AM stereo might give AM broadcast the audience it deserves, I realize, AM is vulnerable to static and other atmospheric noise. If the listener is offered an audio quality that is close to FM they might be okay with listening to it.
Let's observe the equipment most people listen to music on in the present day. Not a lot of those devices provide 100% high quality music, but the general population listens to and finds that audio quality acceptable. I find it to be low quality, but if the vast majority of people are willing to listen to that quality level, I think AM stereo has a chance.
In the old days, people looked for ways to listen to music coming from opposite directions, that included two truntables playing the same copy of a record played out on both turntables at the same time. Each turntable was positioned to the right and left side of the listener. Hence, early stereophonic sound.
Then came the stereo turntable, stereo system receiver and the stereo pressed record.
It appears, that stereophonic sound, is the quality that the listener was looking for in the process of using the two turntables at the same time.
I think even though AM stereo has failed an initial testing, that it failed because the stereo broadcast standard was not etched in stone. I think C-Quam stereo should be the final standard adapted and all future AM radios should be manufactured with the AM C-Quam stereo decoder built into them.
Then I think AM has a good chance of attracting more listeners.
As for FM broadcast range, we can not always depend on other people's test results, because, not everyone's results are the same.
Fear is what keeps us blind, fear that admitting YOU tested an FM transmitter that puts out 1 watt means you broke the law, prevents you from posting accurate results based on YOUR OWN LOCAL TESTING. Reposting someone else's results who lives in another country or landscape does mean your results will also be the same. That person's equipment will no way give you the same results if it was moved to your location. While we are restricted from testing and just won't attempt to do a test for ourselves, because you will now be viewed as a blatant law lawbreaker for doing so, we will forever be stuck thinking inside another person's box and not be able to provide your own personal test results.
Bruce.
Damn time ran out to edit. My post should have said:
"Fear is what keeps us blind, fear that admitting YOU tested an FM transmitter that puts out 1 watt means you broke the law, prevents you from posting accurate results based on YOUR OWN LOCAL TESTING. Reposting someone else's results who lives in another country or landscape does NOT mean your results will also be the same."
Notice I added the word NOT.
Bruce.
I said to Mr. Bruce: Be careful or someone may come by and photograph your AM antenna and plaster it all over the web as an AM radio pirate. LOL!!!
would just retire already and fade away into the background and someone else steps in his place maybe with a smaller ego, more common sense and ermbrace the spirit of experimentation. not be so quick on the draw to label someone a pirate.
No offense to Rich 🙂 But the posts on HB are starting to look like Rich's with quotes verse and chapter from FCC Rules. LOL!!
i've come to change my opinion on Rich. sure he still spits out graphs and quotes of FCC rules but that is a good thing.
just wish he would forgive me for all the hell i gave him years ago. i'm not the same person i was even 5 years ago.
Rich is a very forgiving guy.
He has to be to stick around all these places which just a year ago were still tearing him to shreds.
@Artisan/#91
The FM translator windows for AMs are under the overarching goal of helping AM’s. Taking away a few channels currently available to commercial broadcasters for part 15 users would not ease the congestion of the MW band. On the other hand stations moving into the expanded band would ease the congestion in the traditional band. To me it seems like if helping the commercial AM’s is a priority of the FCC then part 15 users of the MW band are not going to get any help. (I do not think noise from a responsible 15.219 operator who is smart about picking a channel will hurt a commercial station.)
With that being said, 520 and 530 are covered by 15.219 and most radios tune 530. In my opinion it would be easier to ask the FCC for a longer antenna/ground lead/transmission line total length for 530kHz than to ask for any other AM/FM part 15 enhancements. (There are no US commercial 530 broadcasters. There are 302 TIS records for 530kHz.)
A good 2 Watt signal may cover 530 Khz at the same range we get at 100 mW on say 1630 Khz doe to the ever so high noise floor on those lower frequencies in the MW band.