- September 27, 2018 at 2:45 pm #106687
It was suggested by Marc some time ago to leave the FCC a comment when they asked for some. Yet when I clicked the link I didn’t see a way to do it.
I’m legally Blind and didn’t see anywhere on the page to leave a comment or to make a thread. This was the only reason I didn’t leave one. It was not because I didn’t want to as believe me I would have done this a while back.
I guess I didn’t make myself clear that I didn’t see the line where I could click and enter my name and type away.
So if this happens ever again where they open a comment page I’ll need to know how exactly you left a comment. It may have really been helpful.
Goals more realistic like C-Quam reason Why!
The only REAL way to revitalize AM is to have the SAME SOUND QUALITY AS FM this we can agree on. Plus it has been said not every average joe should have a transmitter for this new service right? Well C-Quam AM Stereo stamps out non serious broadcasters who would broadcast without an audio processor like a Sean Cuthbert AM Stereo Processor meant just for this purpose.
The next reason is for the niche generas that are stiffly requiring Stereo as part of the euphoric musical experience. Jazz, Album Rock, Blues Rock, Classical, Adult contemporary, Gospel, Meditation music (example Enya, Krishna Das, Deva Premal (Hindu Sanskrit Music) absolutely STEREO intense music).
Any serious AM revitalization effort MUST use C-Quam and this would allow citizens of any race and culture to achieve this goal and give forth a service to an otherwise dying and otherwise soon to be a wasteland of a band called medium wave or AM Radio which would be sad to see happen.
Even Mono AM Radio’s have the capability to still listen to a station transmitting in C-Quam and by making this a requirement makes AM workable and may sway FM Pirates to sign up for this new service legally. If you truly want to rid the Pirate problem the ONLY way is C-Quam AM Stereo. The writing is on the wall just ask any FM Pirate or ex FM Pirate.
Name issues for the service
One name could be the Citizens C-Quam AM Stereo Broadcast Service as it would then separate this service from part 15 and no one would have any issue with the difference. The name could be abbreaviated as CCABS for short. Now you have a name that tells you that it must be C-Quam AM Stereo. Its Low Power and Citizens can use it without being a corporation. And again the frequencies would be set for Low Power C-Quam transmitters as priority leaving plenty for Lisensed for profit stations to be not tainted with interference of any kind by a citizen wishing to broadcast to a small town, village, or small cluster of neighbors.
It took 10 years in the USA for a video disk format to catch on and so too will C-Quam AM Stereo so every station will be identified with a CQAM before their call like CQAMWAQM The Legacy, CQAMKDX, CQAMWOCR and so on.
This tells listeners your not the same as a big licensed station and also will tell listeners your a Citizens Broadcasting Station using analog C-Quam AM Stereo technology. This again solves a problem of Pirate FM Radio operators wanting to get their niche genres on air as I’ve explained.
Hope this explains why things didn’t suddenly get posted. But now that I have a sighted broadcast engineer to help me maybe the next time you’ll see the petition. I’m sure however someone will have an issue with CCABS as a name for the service. The service should have a catchy name and we must stick with it.
I say lets move this to The-Initiatie site and ask me for Elite Access if your a Ride-Or-Die. We can’t legally use FM as citizens so lets revitalize AM to act like FM.
- September 27, 2018 at 3:25 pm #106690
Vanilla For Me Please
TheLegacy makes his vision the flavor for everybody: “I’m sure however someone will have an issue with CCABS as a name for the service.”
Your CCABS band would exclude me as I stay with mono because of my all-talk format.
Asking for a large change in the rules that would only suit you doesn’t leave options for other potential users of a special band.
- September 27, 2018 at 4:23 pm #106691
More Thoughts On All This
No single format nor technical gimmick (CQUAM) will successfully “revitalize” the AM band.
Whether album rock in stereo would succeed in one place doesn’t mean it will succeed anywhere else.
Also, there are vast differences between what licensed commercial stations can do to prosper and what a small low-watt station can do.
For example most cities have dedicated news-talk stations that become the voice of the city because they have their finger on the pulse of what’s going on. A strong news-talk station might be able to make itself even more attractive by staging itself in stereophonic sound, with well composed musical themes and bridges and careful panning between voices so that the L+R (mono) channel isn’t weakened by too much far-right or far-left mixing (not referring to political polarity). On the other hand the cost of that extra step might not be worth the effort.
My local city does not have a dedicated news-talk station and invests entirely in sports and church, making it a terrible radio market.
Getting back to the principle subject of this thread, the “General Broadcast Service”, the name doesn’t fit what TheLegacy’s main objective, a “Album Rock Broadcasting Service”.
A true general broadcasting service would be open to anything according to the definition of the word “general”.
- September 27, 2018 at 7:32 pm #106692
As for the article that the FCC was wanting public input it was the newly appointed chairman that wanted to hear from the public. If the article wasn’t clear as to how to get your input to the FCC as to what you want to see happen you could have called and found out the procedure for the public’s input. That was a great opportunity to tell them about the change you want.
They may still want your input. Call them, see if they are still interested in hearing what you want to happen and how and who to contact.
Those two agents you befriended, ask them how you get your message to the right people there.
- September 27, 2018 at 10:41 pm #106694
Maybe I should call and talk to David D or if the agent that came to my House is not busy with FM Pirates as reagon one has had even more issues with some very hard headed repeat offenders it may work.
Carl Blare under my vision though tailored for niche genres since your a Citizen legally in the US you can broadcast a high quality FM sounding News Talk station using a Sean Cuthbert or Optimod AM Stereo processor connected to a transmitter meeting the Motorola C-quam specs and having a clean non spurring emitting transmitter.
The goal is to construct a place for local amateur broadcasters to gain experience in Radio while fixing the infection that is killing AM even FM too.
- September 28, 2018 at 1:57 am #106695
TheLegacy sums it up: “The goal is to construct a place for local amateur broadcasters to gain experience in Radio while fixing the infection that is killing AM even FM too.”
That is absolutely a worthwhile goal and one that would gave all small-radio participants improved security and opportunity.
Don’t give up.
- September 28, 2018 at 5:34 am #106697
Sean Cuthbert is the New King of Kits
TheLegacy believes in the Cuthbert CQUAM: “…you can broadcast a high quality FM sounding News Talk station using a Sean Cuthbert.”
Recently Sean Cuthbert had 2-CQUAM Transmitter kits on eBay that he hoped to sell in time for his upcoming move, and he must have sold them because today I could find no trace of him on eBay.
He notified me by Email that his Mono Transmitter Kit will become available in 2019 after he completes the move, and I am on the list to purchase one from him.
I fully understand that the CQUAM unit can be run as a mono transmitter, but there’s no advantage compared to a good mono transmitter.
- September 28, 2018 at 9:52 am #106698
A talk show will sound better in C-Quam as I’ve heard one on a NJ station that broadcasts mostly talk/News but uses C-Quam AM Stereo instead of the conventional Mono AM. For one thing it forces Radio’s that have the ability to decode C-Quam to open up Wide Band AM as apposed to the narrow mode making it sound more lifelike and FMish instead of AMish LoFi sound which is not desirable and often annoying.
C-Quam AM Stereo Does cut through static better too as I’ve compared. Why? Because it uses the sidebands of the carrier to decode into an analog sound which we can listen. It don’t cut all of the static but I’ve noticed a noticeable change. So again it will help.
But in the meantime I am sure you’ll enjoy his high quality Mono transmitter. However maybe later in the future you’ll want to experience what I have with C-Quam AM Stereo and then you can check out the results for yourself.
I only hope he will soon he may have enough profit and get a certification for his transmitters to make them available for everyone and then Talking House users will finally have a transmitter clean and great sounding.
- September 28, 2018 at 12:04 pm #106699
It Does Sound Interesting
TheLegacy finds that: “C-Quam AM Stereo Does cut through static better too as I’ve compared. Why? Because it uses the sidebands of the carrier to decode into an analog sound which we can listen.”
That is a good promotional pitch and makes me wonder about getting one of them.
If there’s a future that might be a good time to take action.
- September 28, 2018 at 1:11 pm #106701
Today there is still a Radio made that decodes C-Quam
The Sparc SHD-TX2 and their other more expensive radio with 2 speakers built in will decode it. The Radio that looks mono only in fact is Stereo when plugged into headphones or a 1/8th inch jack and then to a pair of computer speakers, Sound bar, or other Stereo component. However I’d save for the one with the two speakers if you can.
Point is that when I promote C-Quam and tell my listeners about the available SPARC Radio’s they are all set to hear The Legacy without that nasal or lo fi sound of AM. Its absolutely worth every penny to have a C-Qum AM transmitter and a Radio capable to decode it. Low on money? Get the SPARC SHD-TX2 and listen through your headphones or computer speakers. Hear what your missing. Don’t get caught with AM Radio that sounds like your talking through your nose. Go C-Qum Today at a very affordable price and enjoy Hobby Broadcasting the way it should be heard.
- September 28, 2018 at 3:20 pm #106702
Left Behind in the Dust
Maybe I’m misunderstanding what’s being said.
At first I thought I was being told that my mono news-talk would sound like better mono by using a CQUAM transmitter.
But now there’s a catch.
It won’t sound better unless I listen on a special radio?
Will it sound better to the listeners if I have a special radio?
My head is getting dizzy.
- September 29, 2018 at 7:25 am #106707
Carl, this is not worth getting dizzy over.
CQuam didn’t take off back in the late 70s when it first came out so what makes anyone think it will now?
It’s a dead horse and it’s deader now!
Even car radios didn’t have it unless you got a cadillac. Very few radios were ever made to have this capability and no on has even heard of the one that Thelegacy mentions. How many stations actually broadcast in this?
I listened to album rock on a nice Marconi tube radio with one speaker and on portables with one speaker…..listened to 45s records on a Seabreeze record player with one speaker.
Tim’s post on stereo a little while ago was a good read tells it like it really is.
If I were to get a Sean Cuthbert CQuam transmitter and tell people I am on AM and it’s in CQuam AM stereo it would make no difference and wouldn’t get any more listeners.
I repeat….it is and was a dead horse!
- September 29, 2018 at 11:45 am #106708
Most Part 15 stations have one major listener – ourself (i.e., the operator).
There are exceptions, of course, such as Thelegacy, who seems to have gotten other listeners through pure hard work, timinbovey who runs his station as a business, myself when I was on Bowen Island, etc.
Regardless, doesn’t it make sense to distinguish our sound from others? Whether it’s a unique genre, or hard hitting news, local community oriented or just stuff that we like? Or something like AM stereo?
If we’re just transmitting to ourselves, then what does it matter if it’s CQUAM, or HD or anything else for that matter.
I personally have no problem using CQUAM (and in fact I recently purchased a receiver just for that purpose).
If others in our limited listening area really want to tune in, then they’ll just have to purchase the right type of radio to get the full benefits. The nice thing about CQUAM is that you can listen with any ordinary mono AM radio, if you want to.
I personally would have no problem telling wannabe listeners that they have to buy a new radio. If they don’t want to, well, then, it’s too bad. They’re the ones missing out.
I sold several Internet radios from my Bowen Island storefront to people who couldn’t receive my BETS FM signal, but still wanted to listen in. There, the Internet stream was the only alternative (although to this day I’m convinced that some were really disappointed that I refused to go ‘pirate’). I also sold some retro FM tube radios. It was fun while it lasted.
And if no one else in the broadcasting world picks up CQUAM, so what? We, as Part 15 broadcasters, will truly be unique by using it.
- September 29, 2018 at 3:26 pm #106710
Trouble is here(Canada) there’s no CQuam transmitter to use(to broadcast legally) And the other AM transmitters…the best…. Procaster, Rangemaster, are not CQuam.
- September 29, 2018 at 3:46 pm #106711
Artisan is Right part of this NEW service idea is to NOT copy what others are doing!!
By using C-Quam we are providing a unique service that is not in competition with other entities. This way no one cay say “What a copycat your stealing our listeners I’m gonna complain to uncle Charlie!!” If an AM station says that to me I’ll tell them Go C-Quam AM Stereo then!!”
Will a Mono signal sound Better In C-Quam? Do I Need A Special Radio?
Yes a Mono source WILL sound better in C-Quam!! It has a wider frequency response than conventional AM Radio signals. But to get the FULL benefit you need that C-Quam Radio or your stuck with crappy Lo-Fi AM until you cave and buy one.
The Legacy is a station in retaliation against LoFi sound and this means stations NOT using C-Quam AM Stereo. It’s why WION 1430 in Iona, Michigan insists on using it and won’t stop using it. My broadcast engineer friend is Pushing HARD to Bring It Back and to scrap HD AM for many HD Radio’s are still sold Today and not that expensive like that SPARC SHD TX2 and SHD T750 I tell you all about which has the stereo speakers built in unlike the SHD TX2 the entry level model. Behind the scene broadcast engineers like my friend are pushing for its return.
Unfair and false rumors is why C-Quam is having a hard sell
The Buick modles up to 2002 did have it. Nisson cars still have it and the PT Cruiser still has it. Yes there are fewer Radio’s plastered in the USA on store shelves but plenty still exist right at Wal Mart but you don’t know because it don’t have a big sticker like the Sony SRF-A100 did. The SPARC does not even advertise that it does unless you research C-Quam groups and join them like I have. And here is a thought…can’t find a Radio sold in the USA that is C-Quam? Why not order from Australia? Their Radio’s are sold with C-Quam in them. One could order lots of 20+ and sell them to your listeners. Maybe bump up the price $10 and make some money for your station.
After promoting C-Quam I had a listener buy a Clarion Car Stereo that was known to have C-Quam AM Stereo so he could listen to The Legacy in FULL high quality Stereo while in Deltaville, VA. He was so excited to learn that I was transmitting in C-Quam in order to preserve the demanding Stereo effect of Album Rock. That in and of itself says a lot.
Garage sales and promo’s in our complex was a great time for me to show off how good C-Quam sounded. Many listeners could not believe it when I said my station was on AM and what they were hearing was AM but in a technology that makes it HQ like FM. They wanted to know what that technology was and why stations didn’t broadcast in it. I told them it was an old school technology that was overshadowed by a non workable technology called HDAM or IBOC and that the big wigs were too worried about getting paid by HD Radio manufacturing companies for using their faulty technology instead of one that truly works and is cheap to receive. I had a few that liked my station and ordered the SPARC Radio I suggested along with computer speakers (one found a Bluetooth speaker that also did the 1/8th inch jack). So it can be done and you will get listeners if you plug it alongside good programming on your part as a broadcaster.
By making the NEW Radio service C-Quam mandatory your making a good selling point for the FCC to show why citizens who are Radio enthusiasts should have the right for the use of more power than a standard part 15 operation. In the proposal we can honestly say “C-Quam AM Stereo did not have a fair public exhibit therefore it was unjustly terminated when receiving the signal will revitalize AM Radio and once again help all stations not just the citizens who are Radio enthusiasts by re marketing it but in a HIGE WAY!!”
So I hope more will be enlightened enough to try this old school technology because sometimes the best technology is the one that worked in the first place.
- September 29, 2018 at 3:52 pm #106712
Took a look at this radio Thelegacy mentioned….a little boom box like thing that costs $250US($300 CAD) and sound would be typical of a little thing like that.
For half that price you can get a new Grundig field radio 450 that will have way better performance and WAY better sound. So will any Sangean, GE super, CCrane EP Pro etc.
- September 29, 2018 at 4:14 pm #106713
As Artisan and I know that here(Canada) with Bets-1 FM is the better way to go and that is already hi-fi and stereo(in mono you get even better range and better hi-fi) so why would we go AM and try to get people to listen and have to get a special $$ radio to get the CCquam? That is if a CQuam transmitter was usable here.
- September 29, 2018 at 8:02 pm #106714
I guess what I was trying to say was that, in the U.S. at least, having a CQUAM transmitter doesn’t hurt. It adds to your station’s uniqueness. People can still listen in mono with regular AM radios. And if you want to hear the full benefits of AM stereo, you can go out and buy a special radio. Part 15 broadcasting as it was meant to be. Not a cookie cutter imitation of a licensed station.
Canada is a whole different ball of wax. You can build an RSS210 or BETS compliant transmitter from scratch, and that transmitter could be CQUAM if you wanted. That is allowed in the rules. FM is still the better choice here, though.
And while I fully support a Part 15 broadcaster going CQUAM, you’re not going to be able to make that requirement mandatory – at least, in my opinion.
- September 29, 2018 at 8:46 pm #106715
Artisan said….And while I fully support a Part 15 broadcaster going CQUAM, you’re not going to be able to make that requirement mandatory – at least, in my opinion.
And even if you designed your own here, you still need the broadcast certificate or get it certified to use it. Quite awhile back I asked about this.
Getting the Sean Cuthbert one for example even though it’s a kit wasn’t designed by you(general term). It would have to get approved and if not you would have to get a broadcast certificate or worse $3000 lab fee to use it IF it passes the tests. One of the drawbacks here.
Maybe it could be suggested to Procaster to make a CQuam version? Certified BETS-1 as well as RSS-210 to get around the broadcasting thing.
- September 29, 2018 at 10:18 pm #106716
Maybe someone in Canada should write Chez Radio with that request.
- September 30, 2018 at 7:34 am #106718
Emailed Chezradio and when I get a reply I will post the answer.
- September 30, 2018 at 1:37 pm #106722
Mark said “And even if you designed your own here, you still need the broadcast certificate or get it certified to use it. ”
I knew that I had researched this previously. Mark, that is not correct. Section 7.1.7 of RSS Gen states:
7.1.7 Home‑Built Devices
Except scanner receivers, home built devices (not from a kit) in quantities of five or less, for personal use and not to be marketed, are not required to be certified or labelled by Industry Canada. Home‑built devices must conform to all the technical requirements set out in the applicable standard(s).
So, in Canada, you CAN build your own transmitter, for RSS210 at least, as long as it meets all technical requirements. Currently, that does mean that if you want CQUAM, you would have to build one yourself, but maybe ChezRadio will come through.
I have not found a corresponding exception for BETS, so you may not be able to build your own, license exempt, transmitter for broadcasting use, unless you get it certified for that use after the fact.
- September 30, 2018 at 2:37 pm #106726
Clearly states that it can’t be from a kit so the Sean Cuthbert one is out and since we aren’t electronic engineers that means nothing to us as we can’t homegrow our own.
But BETS-1 says clearly that this wouldn’t apply there but like I said for us it doesn’t matter.
I would only go AM if, like in the USA, it was the ONLY option. And I don’t really care about CQuam.
Tried to post the email I sent to Chezradio but for some reason you can’t copy and paste an email here…..that I sent at least. It comes out all scrambled with DIV all over the place but I have posted replies in the past and it worked OK.
- October 1, 2018 at 9:25 am #106731
There’s nothing to stop someone in Canada from using an existing circuit found somewhere else, gathering together the components, and building a CQUAM transmitter. You don’t have to be an engineer to do it.
The reason that exception is there in the RSS rules for unlicensed devices is to encourage experimentation.
Of course, it would be nice if an existing manufacturer, such as ChezRadio, offered a CQUAM option. The thing to remember, however, is that even the ProCaster is certified under RSS210, so that, theoretically, you’re not supposed to use it for broadcasting. You can use it in the many applications that Industry Canada and the CRTC define as non broadcasting (such as transmitting to an area with fixed property boundaries).
I like the idea of CQUAM. It makes your radio station somewhat unique, and that’s good for a micro broadcaster. At the end of the day, though, it’s programming that will make or break any radio station, licensed or not.
- October 1, 2018 at 11:28 am #106733
Logic & Reason Has Limitations
Artisan Radio comes so close to being right about this: “There’s nothing to stop someone in Canada from using an existing circuit found somewhere else, gathering together the components, and building a CQUAM transmitter.”
Unfortunately, yes there is something that would stop someone from using an existing circuit found somewhere else if that “somewhere else” is a kit.
And the same is true in the World’s Largest Empire under the FCC.
Which brings us to a gripe I’ve had for a long time… I believe that building a kit is exactly homebuilding, rendering the exclusion of kits by the regulatory agencies foolish, silly, ridiculous, absurd, dumb, nonsensical, stupid, outrageous and goofy.
- October 1, 2018 at 1:06 pm #106739
OK here is the answer I got from Chezradio(procaster) This may come out all scrabled but it can still be read.
I asked about the BETS-1 VS RSS-210……broadcasting and not broadcasting and here’s my answer. Mentioned CQuam for Thelegacy but no comment on that.
<span style=”font-size: large;”>Hi Mark,</span>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”> </span></div>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”>When we had the Procaster certified under FCC Part 15.219 (for the US), we simultaneously filed for RSS-210 (Canada’s equivalent) it was the same test with parallel paperwork.</span></div>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”> </span></div>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”>The Procaster was approved for unlicensed use for <u>any purpose including broadcasting</u> in North America so I don’t understand the purpose of BETS-1 or why it would exist for this application.</span></div>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”> </span></div>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”>https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf01062.html</span></div>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”> </span></div>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”><br clear=”all” /></span>
<div class=”yiv8680076501gmail-m_6066716531696852771gmail_signature” dir=”ltr”>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”>Gerry Herlinger<br clear=”none” /></span></div>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”>Chezradio Inc.</span></div>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”>chezradio.com<br clear=”none” /></span></div>
<div><span style=”font-size: large;”>416-278-0467</span></div>
Personally I don’t think that he has read carefully RSS-210 and where it says for “non broadcasting” and broadcasting is defined. But he brings up a good point, about this grey area of broadcasting.
- October 1, 2018 at 1:16 pm #106742
Reply to Carl about kits…..AGREE fully.
- October 1, 2018 at 2:52 pm #106748
As long as your not running a station for profit and clearly announce the word Hobby it should not draw any unwanted attention!!
Apparently some FCC agents have the same sentiment as the agents who came and visited me clearly expressed when I was talking to them of using AM instead of FM due to the limited legal range I’m allowed to use. Believe me I talked to the two agents at the house and then when I called David Dombrowski after I got two more copies of the same NOUO one hand delivered from UPS and the other in first class mail telling me I had 10 days I didn’t even wait 10 seconds after it was in my hand to pick up the telephone and call the FCC and David said he has the recording on voice mail saying I’d never use FM ever again for anything more than going 10 feet from a smartphone to a Radio in the house or car Radio.
Getting back to AM the agent said I could legally broadcast my Album Rock station on AM so long as I didn’t do anything stupid such as attempt to run a transmitter 24 stories with a long ground to earth (Apparently they’ve been paying attention to what I write on social media). But here is where the agent told me he has been listening to my Internet station which had ads and clearly commended me for omitting them from the transmissions I maid. If I had done so on FM I may have been writing to you from a prison library somewhere. There is a grey law about sending solicitations to a mass audience without a business license and could get me not only in state trouble but Federal according to the electronics engineer from the region one office of the enforcement office in Columbia, MD. As stated they have tapes of my programming and thought it sounded good.
So possibly Canada is in the same sentiment here and as long as your not advertising with out a business license to do so you should be fine. But I suggest you call or write to the spectrum management team for your country and ask. I’ve heard of no busts in Canada for someone running a Radio station following the field strength rules.
- October 1, 2018 at 3:22 pm #106749
I haven’t either, and “busts” are so rare here that if their is a “pirate” or someone gets shut down it makes the papers….it’s news!
I think that if I was on AM using the Procaster which is certified, and use it according to set up instructions as it is certified to be used I don’t think the technicality of whether I am broadcasting or not would get me shut down by industry Canada. They may say I need a broadcast certificate if the public is my intention but there’s to grey an area here and Artisan knew someone where he was cited for that technicality and when the person informed the agent there is no BETS-1 AM transmitter they backed down.
Non-broadcasting is defined as to the public but to a defined space indoors or out.
Broadcasting is to a non defined space where the general public will hear.
The Procaster is RSS-210 which is for non broadcasting
The MS-100(Decade) is BETS-1 for broadcasting
Crazy! huh! But when I looked up broadcasting in the dictionary it says a signal via radio waves to the general public.
As Gerry from Procaster said, he doesn’t understand the purpose of BETS-1 as this was certified for ANY purpose!
All I know is that BETS-1 allowed field strength with the Decade gives me enough to be good enough on FM and if for some reason I can’t do FM I will get a procaster and do the same thing I’m doing now.
At least now I am comfortable as I am compliant with all rules here….even with the broadcasting thing.
- October 2, 2018 at 6:46 am #106754
Total posts : 268
OK. Reality Check Time. CQUAM NOT necessary for quality AM broadcasting. Restore transmit audio back to >5KHZ. Restore receiver capability to listen to 10 KHZ audio. MONO with wide audio sounds great. Find an old AM receiver and listen to AM even with the 5KHZ. You will be impressed.
- October 2, 2018 at 7:08 am #106755
The word “quality” is a jello word that wiggles, bounces, and cannot be nailed to the wall.
To one person a “quality” sound has thumpy bass.
The next guy thinks plenty of stereo spread (incoherence) amounts to “quality” sound.
To me the best AM quality has razor-sharp voices (coherence).
Quality women are an entirely different subject.
- October 2, 2018 at 10:48 am #106756
I agree about voice presence and yes you can have a nice sounding experience in mono for example big band music.
I remember years ago listening to an old AM radio such as a tube clock radio or my uncle Wilbert’s german-made radio call day Blaupunkt. Indeed that radio could blow away many solid-state radio of today. Even the FM reception was unbelievably select and sensitive. From Pontiac Michigan I could pick up stations in Cleveland Ohio on FM that only a car radio could pick up. Fact was I could pick up stations that weren’t even coming in on a car radio right in the driveway I was blown away.
Let’s get back to another reason for this General citizens broadcast service. This news just came from another forum on Facebook.
Another license down the drain. #14 this year is
WDCD 1540 kHz, Albany, NY voluntarily surrendered and canceled as of Sept. 28.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.