ArtisanRadio
Well said .. I have stopped looking at the other site as it just looks to me to be a place where the people who don't like deep thinking hang out at.
Ego is part of the problem with everything on Planet earth and the so called transmitter challenge is no different .
Another detail that was sketched over was the length of the copper ground rod used in the test. 8 or 10-foot length would perform dramatically better than a 3-footer.
According to the text of the Challenge report, all of those transmit systems tested used the same ground rod, the same installation geometry, the same carrier frequency, the same d-c input power to the final r-f amplifier, the same propagation path, and the same calibrated meter/setup/personnel to measure those (relative) fields.
The only variables left among all of these systems are personal bias, and the r-f powers existing at the bases of their ~ 3-m radiators -- which are dependent on the designs of those r-f amplifiers, the output adjustments provided for them, and the understanding/skill of their operator(s) in maximizing the power that those systems can radiate while not exceeding FCC §15.219.
Such variables in the DeFelice Challenge have not been quantified, so far.
Respectfully submitted,
Rich, a.k.a. "Sparky"
Thanks for your post, John, and the supportive posts of others here.
Mr Artisan, Please see a quote from the Rangemaster site concerning your comment that the Rangemaster does not ship with an antenna:
"Important! Normally we will ship you the standard 102" whip antenna, however we have 102" telescoping antennas in stock. Let us know if you would rather have the Telescoping antenna."
The information that I saw was as follows: "You can order the mounting bracket for it that will mount the unit on a 2 or 1.25 inch mast. Radio Shack is a good source for these products. Radio Shack sells the 1.25 inch mast. Also you need to buy the antenna for the unit which does not normally come with it (because of cost of shipping) at Radio Shack or a CB shop. (Part No 21-903 102 inch whip antenna)."
Obviously their documentation (on the website) is in error, and who knows if the antenna was obtained from the manufacturer or purchased separately. Gee, reminds one of the AMT5000 case, does it not?
Again, my point here is that you can interpret the documentation any which way you want. The documentation isn't, obviously, the be all and end all. I would have thought that obtaining the CORRECT results from the Challenge from ALL the transmitters would have been top priority. The testers decided to go ahead with the AMT5000 testing even though they had self-admitted problems with the documentation, and with the knowledge that they likely were not getting the best results. Then they defend that rather tenuous position, stating that a newbie would treat the documentation as 'gospel'.
That's really an insult to newbies from a rather self-righteous superior position. From my experience, newbies are more likely to investigate and get as much information as possible before proceeding. They don't think they know everything. It seems it's only those with decades of broadcast engineering experience that will just forge ahead blindly, and then say they're right, no matter what. Even if the results contradict other's real-world experience.
It's the tester's attitudes that are the problem. From my real world experience, I have no issues with the other results (although I've never used the Grain transmitter, and even if no Talking House I've ever owned, even with an ATU/whip, has ever beaten the range of any ProCaster - I can come up with theories to explain that). It's just that the AMT5000 results are so off - any inquiring and open mind should have seen that and done further testing before putting all the chips into the pot of the Challenge, so to speak.
@Carl the Blare
YOU SAID:"What this seems to say is that 100 milli-Watts works best if it's expensive and well built. That would mean that a hundred milli-Watts badly built just won't be the same."
I said: Actually there may be some truth to this observation. Poor lead dressing, long lead dressing particullarly on capacitors in the RF section can have an adverse affect on performance.
I see your point WDCX, the more professional design of a serious part 15 transmitter is already trimmed to a degree of perfection, while the hobby pack from Shack Hut would be left to the inexperienced clumsiness of a "lay" person.
Still, the problem isn't with the hobby pack, but with the range of possible results from the builder.
As Artisan suggested, the opinion expressed by Challenge Man came across as righteous and condescending.
ArtisanRadio is 100% spot on !
I know from my own testing the 5000 kicks but .
I am not willing to spend the money for a rangemaster unless it's used.
Way down below the sink and the toilet is stuff so vile we hope it never backs-up into the basement.
Take a look-see
http://www.radio-talk.net/index.php?board=72.0
I was lucky I guess. Have had the ability to own 2 Rangemasters, 2 Talking Mouses and 2 AMT3000's. Out of the box (no pun) the AMT3000's sounded the best. The Rangemaster with external sounded OK. The Talking Mouses even with StereoTool did not come close to the the other two models. I think I read/heard that the Rangemaster was also Class E?
Still, the problem isn't with the hobby pack, but with the range of possible results from the builder.
Yes Carl, that was my point.
We agree about the point you made regarding hobby pack builders, i.e., depends on their skill, and I only meant to reinforce what you said by what I added.
What a field day awaits doing a psychological profile of the posts linked avove under "Sewage," where a poster named FROSTER shreds many of us by name, showing no fear of a defamation back-lash.
FROSTER writes that DaFleece recently provided emperical data showing that the tuning scheme of the AMT5000 transmitter does not work, but no link is provided to such data. Anyway FROSTER contradicts the claim shortly thereafter by saying, "As for DaFleece, he also does not know Class E, but he acted like an ordinary customer would have, relying on the published instructions." Obviously an "ordinary customer" would be unable to produce "emperical data."
Now over to me for my psychological take on all the anti-sstran posting launched since "The Challenge," which has "school" and "juvenile" written all over it.
Indeed at his home site DaFleece has a "secret chamber" known as "The Principal's Office" where undisclosed chatter takes place. DaFleece speaks proudly of "working with juveniles to teach radio," and indeed posters like FROSTER come across like a juvenile with as yet undeveloped logic or social skills. It's all about "challenge" and name calling from a safe distance.
FROSTER showed a keen awareness of the "Bandwidth Exceeded" website outage here at part15.us, and credited Jon, the site owner, with recovering rather quickly. Sounds like veiled bragging.
You know, I have no problems with anyone disagreeing with me, as long as they get what I'm saying right, and they don't resort to the last bastion of the weak minded - insults and/or snide remarks. They also need to get their facts straight.
First, I notice that this Foster guy isn't posting here. In fact, a lot of the people supporting the Challenge don't post here, probably due to the backlash they'd receive. They can give it out, but obviously can't take it. wdcx is the exception, of course, and I respect him for it (I may not agree with him, but I respect him).
Next, if he's going to talk about Canadian unlicensed broadcasting rules, Foster needs to understand the difference between BETS and RSS210. All of the Canadian certified AM transmitters are certified under RSS210, which makes them OK for experimentation, but not OK for broadcasting (that's BETS - which imposes a strict field strength rule for AM, there's no 100mw to the final stage in there). The manufacturers tend to ignore that particular detail. And under RSS210, it is legal to build and use a kit transmitter, as long as it conforms to those rules. You just can't broadcast with it. And in fact, there is no certification process for transmitters that are to be used for broadcasting under BETS - you just have to show that you comply with the rules if you get a visit. If you're using FM, that's easy if you have an FM transmitter certified under RSS210 (such as the Decade MS-100 that I use), as the technical requirements are identical. I've posted a lengthy discussion about this topic back at Radio Discussions.
Foster and others, while being critical of my comments, have NEVER, ever, discredited them with facts. Bill D. posted himself in Radio Discussions that the Challenge testers did not fully understand how to tune the AMT5000, and admitted that it likely would have performed better if they had. But he seems more intent on assigning blame on the documentation rather than accepting responsibility that they didn't get the best results out of that transmitter, and dismissing those who are criticizing that part of the testing (generally with personal attacks and/or sarcastic remarks, hardly scientific and hardly flattering to someone who claims a great deal of broadcast engineering experience).
Finally, I have stated that I was going to test a Rangemaster and an AMT5000 side by side (no other transmitters) in identical installations. I didn't say I was going to test other transmitters, nor did I say where I was going to conduct the test. I don't have a FIM, so I will have to establish some repeatable listening criteria to estimate ranges correctly.
Pretty much the only thing that Foster got right was that I have experimented with other AM transmitters, some on Bowen Island, and some elsewhere. But as I've posted many times, and as I mentioned in this post a bit earlier, I broadcast with a Decade MS-100 in mono mode. The Decade complies with the BETS regulations, and I am also fully licensed under SOCAN (Canada's copyright licensing organization).
I'll end this by saying that I don't see a Phil cabal, as has been claimed. I do see a possible anti-Phil group, starting with the Challenge guys (and ending with some of their supporters), particularly with their insistance on forging ahead with the testing of the AMT5000, even though they knew they were getting incorrect results, and then, adding insult to injury, blaming SSTran for WHAT THEY DID! What I also see is a group of individuals who are asking uncomfortable questions as to why the AMT5000 results in the Challenge don't match up with those obtained by many in the real world (and not getting any decent answers).
What Foster also fails to mention, when he talks about this website, is that the Hobby Boradcaster Forum (home of the Challenge) is effectively private. I've had mixed results attempting to access it. I used to be able to - then when I started to be critical of the Challenge, I appeared to be locked out (I speculated IP blocking, but I really don't know - it just seemed like an interesting coincidence). After a while (about a week), I was able to get back in (why, I don't know), and now I'm blocked as the discussions heat up again. I don't particularly care - I was just going there primarily to see what silly justifications they were giving for the Challenge at that particular moment. But that, combined with a VERY restrictive registration process (you have to pretty much write an essay in some detail about why you want to join), certainly disputes anyone's claim that it is a public Forum.