Yes Artisan Radio it said part 73 as well as mentioning part 15 certification. But it allows you to plug it into your iPod or computer via a 1/8th inch hack. Never saw a part 73 transmitter that could be use this way. So is this new? is the future of part 73 going to be where as a individual could run a station with a $200-300 transmitter? This is way to good to be true. I think something is missing here the picture is way too vague here.
Some of that functionality is probably intended for non U.S. (or Canada) customers.
Yes, Rich, all of us realize that if you are operating a Part 15 (or BETS-1) transmitter and not adhering to the rules, you will get cited.
It's interesting, however, that it appears that these transmitters are certified using carrier only, no modulation, and apparently with no other cables attached. That is NOT the way the ordinary person would use it - they would attach audio cables and actually broadcast something (with modulation). How do the regulating bodies expect that user to know if/when they are operating outside the rules?
I think an argument could be made by someone using a certified transmitter that that transmitter should be measured by the FCC in exactly the same manner that it is certified in the lab, before issuing an NOUO.
One solution would be to raise the field strength limits for Part 15 FM, but then certify the transmitter in exactly the manner as it would be used.
I can now see why certification is done without audio cables....thelegacy had a very good point. There are too many variables...the cable can be long, short, each different cable constructed differently, coiled, out straight, etc. Even the A/C power cord can be different depending on length etc. so it makes sense that tests are done without attachments which is more accurate and consistant. I guess with transmitters that work on A/C and a power supply only the certification has to be done taking that into consideration.
So maybe it's known that the signal may get stronger with the addition of cables and that's all considered.
Mark
Which proves my theory of a Fudge Factor and thus we need to know what that Fudge Factor is. That way we don't put audio cables on these transmitters that are Too Long. I had fun reading iAM transmitter's home page why they won't get into FM Transmitters. This could also be a reason that Hobby Broadcaster really does not promote the purchase and use of an FM transmitter other than the little ones you buy at the dollar store for your car. Not knowing all the details makes us look like the ones that are foolish. Tim's tests made us more aware and now when we learn we don't make mindless blanket statements out of ignorance. Me starting off as a Pro fm person has learned a lot in the last 4 months. So much tht I'm starting my station soon on AM because of all the troubles with part 15 FM and the way these transmitters are made. I still want to see what the Decade one does. Somehow I am sure there will be an eye opener with that one too.
These may have been posted before along the way, but anyway....
Somewhere I have a link to an FCC document that details quite a bit of the certification process. It's written as if it were meant for an FCC employee to read. It made it pretty clear that for certification the test report would be issued from an acceptable lab and the FCC would only ask for the actual unit to have a look at it/test it if they had questions or concerns about details in the test report. So it would be very likely that an import transmitter would be tested by a foreign lab, submitted and certified. e.g. Chinese build it, Chinese test it and submit their report, FCC certifies it.
When I test the Decade CM-10 (hopefully later this week) naturally it will have to be tested with power cable going to it, as it has no provision for battery power, so I assume that anyone elst doing the testing for certification would have had to do so as well.
When I was first putting up my Procaster I did test for the difference with and without a ground lead. It is my theory that the audio/power cable at best creates a counterpoise but not a ground connection. When setting it up (and following the manual) and long before I was aware of the "long ground lead rule" I tested field strength with and without the ground attached -- connecting the ground made a HUGE difference in signal strength. Keep in mind my transmitter is about 30 feet above ground. The ground lead went straight down and into the basement to a cold water pipe. But once I did my tests and read about the rule I didn't use it. I still cover my city easily and get out to 7100 feet during the day. It got much further with the ground lead. So, to get that coverage the audio/power must be helping. Although I tested NO continuity between the ground lug on the transitter and any of the leads in the audio/power cable. so they're not grounding it per se', but I suspect a counter poise. Got me. I didn't test beyond that at the time.
TIB
OK not to get too off topic here since we're talking about FM. I'm looking at two antenna designs that could work indoors. The TASH and the DXR 500 which is a virtical SW, AM antenna. Looks like two 1/4 waves into one. The base actually is part of the loading coil. Its less than 9 Ft in length so its not gonna be too tall that it breaks the rules and not to mention in the house you can only get an antenna but so big. The Tapered Helix (Tash) is another one of interest to me as it could again easily fit on my desk and stand close to the window in my room. I have a window right next to my desk and another window maybe 3-6 feet away. This would allow for some of the waves to travel outside. Since I rent the house I am sue the Landlord won't want me drilling holes and putting up an outside antenna so something like this for my New AM Transmitter would have to do. Station8 is testing these antenna's for me and we're trying for a mile or more. The DXer 500 by Golddar receives well and since it is not amplified and has a clip at the end could connect to the wire antenna terminal of the Talking House or iAM transmitter. Remember the transmitter has a tuner so it should work.
Back to FM: Are you saying the FCC takes cables as a possibility for a raise in field strength? If not I could see a lot of operators into trouble if an agent wants to thump the rule book at the operator and hand out a citation.
Up in Post#11 surprised to see Rich say: "Added to this is the possibility that the FCC may not fully have understood/vetted the test data submitted to them before issuing a Part 15 compliance certificate for a given device."
This marks the first time I have ever seen Rich allow the possibility the FCC is not biblically correct at all times.
Perhaps the occasional NOUO contains jotting errors/meter mis-readings?
I have seen errors in NOUO's. For example citing the wong limits for Part 15 in the 88-108 mHz band.