Hey, guys! I'm trying to rewire my workbench area and I can't keep my mind on what I'm doing, thinking about this subject! Where were you guys when I had nothing else to do??? Nuts! Back to the workbench. Tom
--- In [email protected], "wb6dgn" <wb6...@...> wrote: > > Also, wouldn't Carson's rule mitigate that characteristic? > > --- In [email protected], MCH <mch@> wrote: > > > > I would agree with the quality issues, but does that really equate to > > unintelligibility on any significant scale? > > > > Joe M. > > > > Matthew Kaufman wrote: > > > On 8/27/2010 8:18 PM, wb6dgn wrote: > > >> If you reduce the modulation without reducing the receiver bandwidth, > > >> then, yes, the range will be reduced. You have reduced the signal > > >> without also reducing the noise. However, if you reduce the modulation > > >> and, at the same time, reduce the receiver bandwidth and audio recovery, > > >> by a like amount, then I do not see how the signal:noise ratio, and > > >> therefore range, would change appreciably. > > > Relationships aren't linear, or you'd be right. Reducing the modulation > > > index and simultaneously reducing the receiver bandwidth from 5 to 2.5 > > > kHz results in a situation which requires ~6 db more signal level for > > > the same demodulated quality (ex. 12db SINAD) > > > > > > Matthew Kaufman > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
