[AMRadio] Source Broadcast Xmtrs

Mon Jun 13 11:31:45 EDT 2011

It seems to me there has been a major change in ham activity. I do remember 
AM in the 50's and 60's. And the heterodyne problem did encourage the 
conversion to SSB.

But in the last ten years I have seen a steady decline in all ham activity 
here in the PNW. People get on for a 1/2 hour net a couple of times a week 
and that seems to be it. No late night roundtables like we used to have.

The thing I really like about using AM for a roundtable is everyone does not 
have to really be on frequency. A few hundred cycles of error does not hurt 
like it does on SSB. You don't have to tweak the receiver every time the 
turn changes.

The only time I see the bands crowded is during contests. I use them to 
check to see if my receivers are still working.

I have one local friend who's antenna came down in a windstorm a few years 
ago and says it not worth the effort to put it back up.

Ham radio has changed as us OLD BUZZARDS die off it will continue to change.

 Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Todd, KA1KAQ" <ka1kaq at gmail.com>
To: <jtml at vla.com>; "Discussion of AM Radio in the Amateur Service" 
<amradio at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] Source Broadcast Xmtrs

> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 2:19 AM, John Lyles <jtml at losalamos.com> wrote:
>> I've been reading this thread for a few days now, and my only comment so
>> far is that we hams don't need to be defending ourselves for wanting to
>> resurrect old AM BC rigs as long as we are respectful with them, don't
>> intend to QRM.
>
> Excellent point John. AMers have no more or less responsibility for
> proper operation than someone using CW, SSB, or whatever the preferred
> mode is. AM is not an exception, merely one of a number of approved
> and accepted modes available to amateurs. And as others have pointed
> out, amateur radio isn't a business where absolute efficiency is the
> goal. Otherwise we'd all be operating CW or some digital mode taking
> up minimal space.
>
> Though I wasn't on the air then, I understand an appreciate Ron's
> perspective of the heterodynes and associated interference back in the
> days when AM was the primary mode. I've heard this from others as
> well. No different really than the days of spark. But times have
> changed and those days are gone. True, AM has gained favor and more
> participation in the last decade, but it's still nowhere near as
> crowded on the bands as it was then - despite the listed number of
> licensees. Anyone who doesn't believe it need only check the bands on
> a given night. Most portions are a vast, unused wasteland with few
> signals heard. Weekends and holidays see more activity, but aside from
> the corntesters, even weekends aren't what they used to be.
>
> So IMO the argument or reasoning shouldn't be based on a now-dated
> talking point from decades ago. It should be based on the reality of
> today and the prospects for amateur radio's future. This seems to
> dictate that more folks getting on the air - regardless of mode - is
> what is required. AMers are a big part of that since AM appeals to
> many who have tired of the typical SSB or other contact and crave a
> more natural sounding signal and/or the opportunity to enjoy the mode
> through historic equipment, or perhaps building their own rig. No one
> is above the rules of course, but the rules intentionally provide
> enough latitude to allow for the operation of old broadcast
> transmitters just as they do for homebrew or commercial gear. Without
> a legal precedent, one's personal interpretation is nothing more than
> a personal opinion with respect to such rules. I've heard SSB ops
> running store-bought rigs with amps and processors cranked to the
> point of being 40khz wide, so occupied bandwidth isn't specific to
> full AM only. I've also listened to many AM stations with excellent
> fidelity who were 10 khz wide or less. In fact, the vast majority I
> listen to fall into that category, with a couple Class E stations
> occupying more.
>
> Hopefully the 300G and 21E here will both make it back to the airwaves
> by winter. Two more broadcast transmitters that will continue to sing
> for their supper instead of being recycled into some cheap, disposable
> consumer product. And while my attraction to such gear may put me in
> the minority compared to the plug-n-play crowd, I don't mind. I'm sure
> I enjoy my fascination with the technology at least as much as they
> do. I just don't get bored with it as fast or regulalry as so many of
> them seem to.
>
> ~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4
> ______________________________________________________________
> Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net
> AMRadio mailing list
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
> List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
> Post: AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
> To unsubscribe, send an email to amradio-request at mailman.qth.net with
> the word unsubscribe in the message body.
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 