|
Post by thelegacy on Feb 17, 2017 15:57:29 GMT
You would have to use two narrow band signals for Stereo. Still far less than Wide band FM. Still just tightening the requirements for receivers will help AM. It use to be acceptable to many in the late 60s and early 70s when the noise floor was not so high and back then you had those tube TV's that would put out that AM tone on many stations for quite a few feet away.
Neon signs did exist and still the noise is nowhere as bad as it is Today.
13.560 Mhz and the proposed 6.9 to 7Mhz for Hobby Radio broadcasting does have a lot of potential as plenty of Shortwave receivers are still sold and one could convience neighbors to buy one if their station was really good. How far locally you'd go is unknown but even at 4 Watts you can skip. I would imagine the range would be similar to CB and that was 2-3 miles from Walkie-Talkie to Walkie-Talkie and 10-20 miles with a good outside antenna. Still nothing to sneeze at as far as I'm concerned.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2017 16:29:46 GMT
FM Stereo On Medium Wave
Mighty 1650 says: "Narrow FM might work but the fidelity wouldn't be as good nor do I think stereo would be possible."
That is true. The pilot tone and subcarrier required for stereo on the FM band (88 - 108 MHz) would not work on narrow band FM on the medium wave band (520 - 1710 kHz).
But what about AM stereo done FM style? Would that work?
|
|
|
Post by mighty1650 on Feb 20, 2017 15:57:27 GMT
FM Stereo On Medium WaveMighty 1650 says: " Narrow FM might work but the fidelity wouldn't be as good nor do I think stereo would be possible." That is true. The pilot tone and subcarrier required for stereo on the FM band (88 - 108 MHz) would not work on narrow band FM on the medium wave band (520 - 1710 kHz). But what about AM stereo done FM style? Would that work? Supposedly AM Stereo is technically superior since it was created with more modern technology. (I THINK FM stereo dates back to the 50s) I'd be curious to know the answer to this as well Carl.
|
|
|
Post by radiodugger on Mar 21, 2017 19:47:25 GMT
Hi guys! Doug here.
For the record, I started the Music On CB Radio thread at Part15.us. To see it continue here is a pleasant surprise! Interesting...Part 15 on CB...
Doug
|
|
|
Post by thelegacy on Mar 21, 2017 23:02:37 GMT
Those part 15 CB Walkie Talkies and children's Base Stations. I could talk to a CB 1/4 to a mile away. Sometimes 2 if the noise floor was low. In 1976 I was 13 yrs old (Too Young to have my own CB license). I did use plenty of Walkie Talkies from Midland, Cobra, Archer, Realistic, Ross (From Best Buy). The Ross and the Midlands were the favorites of mine. They had excellent receivers in them. Those were the ones I talked 1 mile with.
The Ross and Midland Walkie Talkies came with Channel 11 as did Realistic ones as well. The Sears 2 channel units came with channel 11 and 14. There was another variety of Sears Walkie Talkies that were cheaper and went 1/4 mile (Gray Pair).
Lets not forget the GE 100 mW units that came with channel 14 and you could buy a crystal for another channel. I had a friend that wired up a SO-239 connector to it actually it was a mini jack to SO-239. When testing that on a SWR/Watt meter I found it put out 1 Watt. It did do almost as good as the license required 2 Watt unit I finally got my hands on cuz a dude sold that to me as well as the 1 Watt (supposed to be 100 mW).
This is why I keep saying 100mW can get you range. My Walkie Talkie years lasted till 1977-78 when CB was no longer enforced to have a license. Now their 5 Watt Walkie Talkie from Midland Rocked as well.
|
|
|
Post by Druid Hills Radio on Mar 22, 2017 12:38:20 GMT
"Don't know why AM was chosen for CB, but guess it had something to do with the same reasons that most broadcast stations were primary AM until the later 70's when FM started becoming predominate."
DHR: It is cheap to make.
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Mar 22, 2017 23:57:47 GMT
I think it was just because the CB band was founded so long ago that AM was the best. They could have had FM at the beginning in base stations at least, but that would leave out inexpensive handi-talkies, though the super-regenerative receivers could pick up FM. AM was probably fine in the early days with little congestion on the band too.
I like the idea of AM stereo too, I think it's the least destructive enhancement that can be made to the AM band and still give an improvement in service. If a station takes it seriously, and you have a good receiver, it sounds great to have the stereo effect! With a good tuner and local strength signal, AM stereo sounds good.
It would mean a lot for album rock, which was specifically recorded with stereo sound systems in mind.
Boomer
|
|