On 8/13/07, Brett gazdzinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another thing that interests me is that I listen at night
and there are a bunch of the usual suspects talking
about nothing for the most part (80 meters).
Its so important to fit a few more appliance operators
on the band to talk with
In a message dated 8/12/07 9:52:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't understand why anyone would get upset or even care
about essb (or AM), if its done on a band that is not packed
with signals.
The problem is, it's not always done on a band with lots of room.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'll second that and add ANY HF band below 30MHz.
Ever notice nobody ever complains about the guys running real AM? It
always seems to be the ESSB Harry Cary wannabes getting in trouble with
splatter, QRMing ongoing QSO's, etc
Julian G4ILO
N2DTS
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Julian G4ILO
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 4:35 AM
To: elecraft
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Is the K3 capable of ESSB?
On 8/13/07, Brett gazdzinski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another thing
On 8/13/07, Brett gazdzinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Around here, 80 meters has about 3 qso's on the entire band
in the daytime, so what is the problem running essb or other modes?
Its bad and rude to operate in a wide mode when bands are
crowded, that's a given, but to say something is bad
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Brett gazdzinski wrote:
Around here, 80 meters has about 3 qso's on the entire band
in the daytime, so what is the problem running essb or other modes?
And you're quite sure that as evening approaches, and more folks come on the
air, that the essb stations will close up
These concerns about using excessive bandwidth are all certainly legitimate,
but history suggests that anyone seriously against using more
bandwidth/signal in crowded bands needs to take a different approach or
their concerns will not be heard.
The same sort of arguments I'm reading in this
Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:
These concerns about using excessive bandwidth are all
certainly legitimate, but history suggests that
anyone seriously against using more bandwidth/signal
in crowded bands needs to take a different approach or
their concerns will not be heard. . . . . .
Nonetheless, it
Guys - This is the official END the ESSB thread. We've exceeded our
threshold for an excessive number of postings on a topic in 24 hours by
a WIDE margin. ;-)
Please, no more arguments pro/con on this topic to the list.
Also, please let's avoid a protracted thread on the pros/cons of Pactor
No, I think if they would want to stay on the band,
they would narrow it down.
Its not a fixed thing, its all about audio bandwidth
(and low distortion). You just cut the high end and balance out
the lows.
Or, maybe they would occupy the ESSB window and chat about
it.
Often on 80 and 40 meters
Eric killed this thread. Please take the debate to email.
Brett gazdzinski wrote:
No, I think if they would want to stay on the band,
they would narrow it down.
Its not a fixed thing, its all about audio bandwidth
(and low distortion). You just cut the high end and balance out
the lows.
Or,
Scott Manthe wrote:
Eric killed this thread. Please take the debate to email.
Hey, I missed the part where he appointed you to the List Police. Sorry I didn't
see it, and congratulations.
--
John - W2AGN
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to:
In a recent message, Ron D'Eau Claire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote ...
One of the important activities we Hams participate in is experimenting with
various signal formats (or modes if you prefer). Fortunately, our licenses
in most countries give us a lot of latitude about what is legal. Certainly
the
Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:
Note that there are *NO* FCC rules about the bandwidth of an SSB (or other)
signal that say a certain bandwidth is illegal.
I would certainly agree with others that 6kHz SSB would be a
contravention of the UK licence, although it might only be a SHOULD
violation,
Note that there are *NO* FCC rules about the bandwidth of an SSB (or other)
signal that say a certain bandwidth is illegal.
Maybe not - I wouldn't know.
However, here in DL ESSB and classical AM are illegal below 28MHz.
The maximum allowed bandwidth between 1.81Mhz and 28MHz in the HAM bands
Interesting...
What is the definition of ESSB, anything greater than 2.7kHz? My
Orion2 can do up to 3000 I believe, so is this ESSB?
On 8/12/07, Toby Deinhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that there are *NO* FCC rules about the bandwidth of an SSB (or
other)
signal that say a certain
ESSB is just dreadful and like in Germany is probably not legal in EI
where our rules seem to define SSB as 2.7 Khz or less .
However is the k3 capable of ECW (enhanced CW)? I would like some nice
wide clicks and a 'phat' rough tone to help me keep some space around me
in a contest and stand out
In a message dated 8/12/07 8:39:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What is the definition of ESSB, anything greater than 2.7kHz? My
Orion2 can do up to 3000 I believe, so is this ESSB?
No.
THere's no hard-and-fast defintion of ESSB that I've seen. In practice, it
Fred (FL) wrote:
The SSB bandwidth 2007 realities, sound familiar.
Yes, this sort of false reasoning is common in marketing. They rely on
a perception that anything new to the market must be better, and that
the general public doesn't understand the true reasons for limitations.
In 1978
Hi Brandon:
I'm pretty sure we've managed to work out all of the T3 through T7 'qualities'
of the K3... right now, it's as clean as any rig I've ever heard.
73,
Tom N0SS
At 07:47 08/12/2007, Brendan Minish wrote:
ESSB is just dreadful and like in Germany is probably not legal in EI
where
Fred (FL) wrote:
In 1978 - max bandwith over telephonic modems,
and conditioned ATT lines was like 6250 baud.
A limit everyone agreed.
Shannon's classic paper on communications theory was published in 1948,
so, for 30 years before 1978, anyone who knew the signal to noise ratio
and did the
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why can't I run FM voice that's 15 or 20 kHz wide on 75 meters? I think it
would sound really, really good. Much better than even AM, and immune to summer
QRN. The transmitter would be very efficient, modulated at low level and
amplified in highly
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Dale Putnam wrote:
Can you see it now? Since all the bandwidth is used up on 75, and the
digital/cw crowd has
learned to live in a smaller space, and they don't make much noise, or take up
a lot of room, they can learn to live in less, this month, less next month, and
In a message dated 8/12/07 12:32:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why can't I run FM voice that's 15 or 20 kHz wide on 75 meters? I think it
would sound really, really good. Much better than even AM, and
immune to summer
In a message dated 8/12/07 8:47:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The SSB bandwidth 2007 realities, sound familiar.
In 1978 - max bandwith over telephonic modems,
and conditioned ATT lines was like 6250 baud.
A limit everyone agreed.
But was it a theoretical limit, or
As a CW op with no dog in this race, I wonder what makes splashing a 2.1 KHz
to 2.7 KHz wide voice signal across the band morally right but 6 KHz or more
morally wrong. Are those who are opposed to 6 KHz-wide SSB doing everything
they can to narrow their bandwidth down to as few hz as possible?
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Craig Rairdin wrote:
(Sorry, I argue religion for a living)
Although it's off topic, I wonder how many angels can operate QRP on the head of
a pin?
73 k3hrn
Thom,EIEIO
Email, Internet, Electronic Information Officer
www.baltimorehon.com/Home of
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marvelous idea...logical too...and flies in the face of operating
efficiently.
How so? The transmitter would be more efficient. If it's OK to use 6 to 9 kHz
for ESSB, why not 15 or 20 kHz for FM?
Ah good point...and once 20 kHz is established, we
I don't understand why anyone would get upset or even care
about essb (or AM), if its done on a band that is not packed
with signals.
If there is loads of space, what is wrong with making the audio
sound at least as good as a cheap cell phone?
On the AM side, on the east coast of the US, the AM
Oh my, I hope not
Shades of 14178 terrible amateur
practice, and ... at times ... patently illegal.
73! Ken Kopp - K0PP
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
The ESSB the K3 transmits is perfectly in keeping with normal Amateur
practice.
Note that there are
If you'd like to read one of many reasonably balanced views
of the use of ESSB, check this web site. I don't know the
fellow, but from what I've read of his site, I agree with him.
http://www.icycolors.com/nu9n/apologetics_2.html
But then, I tend to agree with most who speak in terms
31 matches
Mail list logo
