w9lwa
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by w9lwa on May 1, 2019 4:54:33 GMT
Ok, so I'm finally getting that Rangemaster order together. I see the crystal controlled model now uses modules or I can get the agile model for a few extra bucks. I'd like to be able to change the frequency myself with the agile model, but there is some small chance I may someday get around to adding additional transmitters. Do I indeed need to get the the module version to network these things?
Also, from the experience of others here, is there anything else I should know about ordering a Rangemaster or any ancillary items? I think having the meter installed might be a good idea since I already have all the unattached meters and similar apparatus I'll ever need in this lifetime.
Any and all comments appreciated. I'd like to get this right the first time if I can.
Thanks,
John
W9LWA
|
|
|
|
Post by thelegacy on May 1, 2019 14:53:49 GMT
If I'm not mistaken your asking if you have to buy the agile module for each transmitter you want to network? If so the answer is yes if you want to be able to change the frequency if a licensed station should pop up on that frequency.
On the Facebook forum part 15 AM&FM Hobby Broadcasting a gentleman put his Rangemaster inside the church steeple and achieved a 2 mile range to a Car Radio (That may change depending on the Car Radio Kenwood, 1998-200 Delcio have been known to have super sensitive receivers). Some newer car Radios like a Sony will achieve a much lessor range (A Tecsun PL-380 held outside the car window will receive better than some newer Car Radios via my tests).
What I would suggest for networking is to use the super sensitive Radio and when your signal fades to black go 2 miles past that for your second transmitter. Why?: Because remember to a good Radio you'll achieve that range and you want to prevent that whistle when two signals collide into each other.
Good Luck!
|
|
w9lwa
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by w9lwa on May 1, 2019 18:44:40 GMT
Hi Legacy,
Well, what I was really wondering is if networking requires the crystal/module version since it sounds like that has the most stability frequency-wise. If the agile model is stable enough to use for networking, I'd rather have that so I could change the frequency anytime.
Thanks for your comments.
John
W9LWA
|
|
|
|
Post by mark on May 1, 2019 23:24:42 GMT
All electronic components have a tolerance. Whether you have a fixed crystal or frequency agile there will be a certain percentage of variance from one crystal to another and one agile transmitter to another. You could see this on a frequency counter. The difference should be very slight though. The agile model should be just as accurate from unit to unit as the fixed one from unit to unit. As posted get the agile one for convenience, in case you have to change frequencies.
As for stability the same goes. The variation with a quality PLL system should be minimal with temperature changes but still there would be SOME change but very small as capacitance, resistance, etc changes with temperature. The frequency agile one would be as accurate as the fixed crystal
|
|
w9lwa
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by w9lwa on May 1, 2019 23:46:28 GMT
Thank you for the helpful information, Mark.
I very much appreciate it.
John
W9LWA
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on May 4, 2019 9:17:20 GMT
From other posts here, the modules are apparently oscillator cans programmed for the frequency you want to broadcast at. I don't think the frequency can be trimmed by external control like a crystal oscillator can be.
PLL is the most flexible, the user can tune it to any frequency using a sequence of small binary switches, and a formula or table to program them.
The method used to get your frequency shouldn't affect the quality of the broadcast in any way. It would affect your use of advanced frequency control methods though. A PLL could be controlled by a GPS unit to be exactly on frequency, but the module version probably can't be.
GPS control can be used when you have transmitters pretty close to each other and you don't want the carriers to beat, so it's like one signal, transmitters every mile down a town's main street for example.
It would be hard for the hobbyist, but last year a member here, Part15 Engineer, was putting a GPS controlled system together and showing pictures. I haven't seen him around for a while and don't know if he got the system finished.
If the transmitters are to be pretty far apart, like a few miles or more from each other where there shouldn't be too much beat interference, then either PLL or module should work about the same, and with the same audio on both transmitters.
Does the Rangemaster have a tuning power meter in it now? It used to have an LED tuning system, getting a green light when you were tuned up.
Boomer
|
|
w9lwa
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by w9lwa on May 25, 2019 4:23:02 GMT
I have to admit that I still haven't ordered that Rangemaster and it's just for one reason. I'm waiting to see what kind of range people will get with the Range Extender for the Talking House transmitter that's supposed to ship in the next month or so. I'm intrigued with the design because putting only the tuner up the mast instead of the whole transmitter - like the RM does - allows for a lower point for attachment of the ground. As I recall, the TH is grounded through the power supply, anyway and I don't think legally grounding a high-mounted RM is quite that easy. I see the TH site now says to expect about 2500 feet as the range, which (obviously) is about one-half mile.
I guess what I'm wondering is if those with the Rangemaster are getting a pretty dependable half-mile while staying legal with the ground lead. If so, I'd still lean toward the Rangemaster in the event I'd some day get ambitious enough to network more than one transmitter. On the other hand, if the range-extended TH turns out to exceed expectations and have a dependable range of a mile, I'd likely never have to mess with a second remote transmitter. Decisions, decisions...
Although I still haven't bought a transmitter, I have acquired a few other items. These include a couple of Tascam CD players, one of which also records; a Tascam dual cassette deck and the ART Pro-VLA II 2-channel Opto Tube Leveling Amplifier I mentioned elsewhere in the forums. Feel free to tell me what you think of me for my equipment choices - except for that leveling amplifier. The guy didn't want much for it and he owed me money, anyway.
All comments appreciated. I need all the help I can get. I'm trying to balance the most range with the least possibility of going to jail.
John
W9LWA
|
|
|
|
Post by thelegacy on May 28, 2019 1:24:04 GMT
And always remember you can tell your listeners about the loop. I am curious though to find out what that range is going to be with the range extender 2.5. I don't think anyone's going to get in trouble with that.
I'd also like to hear what it does on the I AM because though the Audio was better some reported Less Range.
|
|
|
|
Post by station8 on Sept 11, 2019 14:12:31 GMT
Howdy all:
Have you guys looked at the rangemaster 1000 am tx site he's talking about the NEW HIFI unit!.
Just my opinion
1) Not much information like release date( specifications )
on his site about the HIFI unit when i looked on september 20, 2019?.
2) I know you can contact him for more information ,But its better to have all
the information on the site and do it all at once?.
3) Specially for a new item i notice the advertisment on this unit is not good!.
4) Also everyone should know is this unit a HIFI MONO or is it a real HIFI stereo unit ?.
5) When is the release date on this product, you should have several units built before releasing
so you dont get overwhelmed on orders.
These are only question i'm bringing up i'm not here to hurt the man.
good luck rangemaster on the new product
station8
|
|
|
|
Post by End80 on Sept 20, 2019 14:05:20 GMT
I doubt he'll get swamped with orders (due to the price), the Rangemaster has pretty damn good audio as it is already. No, it's not stereo, mono only. The upgrade provides an improved frequency response due to a more expensive component.
I personally don't think it's really worth it.. Not that I've tried it, but it's the same kind of offering which the Talking House 5 offers for an additional $100 upgrade to the iAM model... but when I listen to the sample comparison on their site - I actually think the cheaper Talking House 5 sounds better than their iAM model.
Of course there's nothing wrong spending a few hundred more for a better part if you've got the cash to throw around, but really, it already sounds fine as it is. |
|
|
|
Post by station8 on Sept 20, 2019 16:42:34 GMT
Howdy y'all:
Thanks for letting us know more about the rangemaster 1000 improvements.
I already had a clue what was going on with the rangemaster 1000
But it would of been nice to see a better write up with specification
On the rangemaster 1000 web site, and make the price
More affordable this is my opinion since I worked
In industrial electronic for 14 years!.
Wish him good luck on the new upgrade
Station8
|
|
|
|
Post by thelegacy on Sept 21, 2019 19:48:35 GMT
Beware Of This Fact according to many folks even on other forums!!
The Talking House's New iAM version though the audio sounds tons better you lose more than half your range. Even if you pull the illegal stunt and crank the power ALL THE WAY UP!! the output is far less than the original talking house 5.0.
My guess is this is done ON PURPOSE because of some entity that cried over the beyond 1/4 mile range. Stay Away from the iAM it a scam. Instead spend a few dollars more any buy the ASMAX2 and if you don't know how to make an ATU simply use the Talking House's ATU on it because its a 50 ohm transmitter and the ASMAX2 should work nicely with it as some sources have told me. Its an expensive way to go but your Range will be that of the Procaster or Rangemaster and at a fraction of the price.
There are antenna tuners made for a random wire that go down to 1 Mhz for Ham Radio too so you could use that ATU instead if you don't want to use the Talking House ATU on an ASMAX2 C-Quam AM Stereo transmitter. Why use a more costly Mono transmitter with lesser Audio and Harmonic filtration that the ASMAX2? I'd never ever go back to a more expensive Mono transmitter when I can have C-Quam AM Stereo for half the price.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Sept 25, 2019 2:26:45 GMT
Upgrades
Hi Station 8, Legacy and End8o, good to see that transmitter manufacturers are doing something to improve their products yet.
Using a transformer for modulation is old fashioned, but it's tried and true and it works. It has certain advantages, like DC and ground loop isolation between modulator and final RF amp, and adjusting the primary to secondary turns ratio for high modulation.
Frequency response can be a problem, small transformers would roll off or distort on the bass, and contemporary music and remasters are bass heavy these days, making things potentially worse. A bigger transformer would help, and let more bass through, and likely also improve modulation quality on stations using modern radio processing that needs a very flat audio bandpass.
Today's transmitters use DC coupling in the modulator, like the two SSTRAN kits did. My older Procaster model uses a transformer, but it's a line input transformer with no DC current going through it, so that's better. I don't know what the newer Procaster uses.
I heard the demo on the improved Talking House, and thought the voice on the improved unit was boomy and less distinct. I thought it was more a result of the audio sample or the processing used on it. I thought it was the demo that needed to be improved. I'll have to find that page again, if you have a link, share it if you can.
I wonder why people are saying that the Talking House I-AM version has reduced range? Are people feeling that's the case because of the extended bass response? Power wise, all transmitters should be at 100 milliwatts and be able to modulate fairly high, why would a manufacturer want to lose sales by operating at far less than the full allowance of power allowed by the rules?
I'd rather challenge the claims of the naysayers talking bad about the I-AM Talking House. Consider that there could be entities who feel that one more sale of a Talking House/I-AM transmitter means a lost sale for the transmitter model that they like or sponsor.
Please post a link to the discussion about the I-AM power reduction so we can all look into it, or if you want to keep it private, PM me the link.
I'm an AM stereo believer too, even if you aren't one to use it in stereo mode, for example if you don't have any stereo receivers or run a talk station, the quality of a transmitter that's able to do C-QUAM well is likely to be higher.
Boomer
|
|
|
|
Post by End80 on Sept 25, 2019 4:40:33 GMT
UpgradesI heard the demo on the improved Talking House, and thought the voice on the improved unit was boomy and less distinct. I thought it was more a result of the audio sample or the processing used on it. I thought it was the demo that needed to be improved. I'll have to find that page again, if you have a link, share it if you can. I wonder why people are saying that the Talking House I-AM version has reduced range? Are people feeling that's the case because of the extended bass response? Power wise, all transmitters should be at 100 milliwatts and be able to modulate fairly high, why would a manufacturer want to lose sales by operating at far less than the full allowance of power allowed by the rules? I'd rather challenge the claims of the naysayers talking bad about the I-AM Talking House. Consider that there could be entities who feel that one more sale of a Talking House/I-AM transmitter means a lost sale for the transmitter model that they like or sponsor. They used to have a chart on their site which graphically showed the difference in audio response between the TH and the iAM, but I don't see it there anymore. But they still have on their main page the MP3 download which lets you listen to the difference talkinghouse.com/TH-IAM-Side-by-Side-Demo-V4.mp3
Legacy post is the first and only time I've ever heard a claim that the iAM has less range than the standard Talking House. I certainly don't think it's some kind of scam, and definitely don't think ISS would ever do anything to cripple the capabilities of their transmitters. The notion sounds like total nonsense to me, and I'm quite sure it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by station8 on Sept 25, 2019 14:13:22 GMT
Howdy y'all:
The post here is for the rangemaster 1000
NOT the talkinghouse or IAM tx
I'll make comments elsewhere on them.
Pay attention to your topic please
And only write & comment about that please!,
Thank you
Station8
|
|
