The article should not be taken as gospel. In fact at first look it appears have a lot of pontification plus potential smoke & mirrors.
[paste text] > "For a voter to be working properly, all of the receivers must sound > the same." This includes the audio level, and the overall sound. Not really... might be desired but it's not a must-have. > You do not want anyone to be able to say "that is the north > receiver" because it sounds different from the rest. Might be something desired but not always an easy do, nor is it actually a requirement. > The initial system lineup requires that all of the receivers be > perfectly matched to each other in every parameter. Don't know what planet this guy is from... I guess he's never had multiple brands of remote receivers through combinations of phone lines, microwave and/or radio links. > You will need high quality testing equipment to accomplish this. You mean I can't use low quality gear? shucks... There's good reason a "hot air" alarm probably went off for many of you when reading the article. cheers, skipp > While reading this article: > _http://mrtmag.com/mobile_voice/radio_big_signals_small/_ (http://mrtmag.com/mobile_voice/radio_big_signals_small/) I came > across the term "quasi-simulcast". Anybody heard of that term? How does it > differ from "normal" simulcast.
