[AMRadio] AM Presentation

Tue Jun 18 15:48:20 EDT 2013

If you were a ham between 1955 and 1960 you could understand the push to 
convert to SSB. In that period AM was still the main HF mode. SSB was the 
new kid on the block.

Any night 75M was packed wall to wall with phone signals. AM and SSB. It was 
noisy. The spectrum was small compared to today. The same was true for 20M 
on weekends.

In those days there were few commercial SSB rigs and these were out of reach 
for the average ham. I believe it was probably the Heathkit HW-100/101 that 
gave more people the chance to convert to SSB.

Sometime after about 1960 the manufactures stopped producing AM transmitters 
and new stuff was all SSB.

In those days there was little interest in restoring old AM transmitters.

The problem I see today is the small amount of AM operation currently. The 
PNW group has gone dormant. The SoCal group does not reach the PNW.

How are things elsewhere? To get people interested in AM means there has to 
be AM activity they can listen to.

I wish there was 40M AM activity. I have used my DX-60 for local rag chew 
operation. But there is no one left here that wants to play.

Why is the 75M AM Window the only place AM seems to live. 75M used to be a 
good late night band. But the groups I know of only operate daytime or early 
evening. Then the propagation is limited.

I'm not even hearing late night SSB on 75M here anymore.

A 100W SSB RICEBOX can only produce about a 25W carrier in AM mode. But that 
is plenty for a club to use for local operation. And there is plenty of 
space between 7200 and 7300 to find a clear spot to work in.

All you need is people with an interest in playing with their radios.

AM is not a mode for just answering a CQ and giving a signal report. AM was 
made for roundtable BS sessions. I'd like to see that type of operation 
again.

SMOKING IS NOT REQUIRED! IT'S OPTIONAL!

Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Donald Chester" <k4kyv at charter.net>
To: <amradio at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] AM Presentation

>
>>>From: "Todd, KA1KAQ" <ka1kaq at gmail.com>
> I think more of what Pete is saying is not to promote AM as some type
> of 'specialty' mode. We had a somewhat known AMer who did that for years,
> calling it a 'Legacy' mode, or promoting it as a 'specialty', like we were
> some kind of fine wine with snob appeal. The problem with this approach is
> (and was proven with the bandwidth petition) that it makes it easier to
> start moving AM out. Once it becomes an exception, it's easier to get rid
> of. In that sense, we want to be seen as just another of the many approved
> and utilized modes.>>>
>
> Please don't confuse apples with oranges.
>
> AM **was** just another mode, along with CW, NBFM, RTTY as well SSB when 
> the
> latter first appeared on the scene following WWII. What made AM an
> "exception" was the orchestrated effort that began in the mid to late 50s 
> by
> ARRL, the other major amateur publications like CQ and 73 magazines, and
> even the FCC,  to pressure the amateur community to phase out AM 
> altogether
> and to coerce everyone to convert to slopbucket whether they wanted to or
> not. Within a few years, major amateur radio manufacturers and most 
> amateur
> radio clubs had joined in the chorus, and all this combined soon 
> translated
> to considerable peer pressure within the amateur community. Then, with the
> advent of Johnny Johnston's tenure at the FCC we were faced with a long
> series of petitions and rulemaking proposals stretching out over more than 
> a
> decade, to cripple AM if not phase it out altogether. From the early 1970s
> to the late 80s or early 90s, the AM community was forcibly pre-occupied
> with constantly defending our position and fighting for our very 
> existence.
> Had it not been for this high-pressure campaign to "stomp out carriers" 
> and
> FORCE everyone to convert to SSB, the latter would have gained ground
> naturally and with  less fanfare as more amateur phone operators chose to
> include the option of SSB, the use of which would have gradually increased
> while AM activity diminished, until the situation would have most likely
> ended up pretty much as it is now, SSB the predominant voice mode on HF, 
> but
> with a smaller yet healthy AM community continuing to exist without issue,
> AM and SSB co-existing with equal legal status amongst a wide variety of
> available modes. Minus that pressure and the resentment it caused within 
> the
> AM community of that era, the infamous AM vs SSB wars of the early 60s may
> not have occurred at all or at least would have been less traumatic and
> disruptive to the amateur community at large, and maybe wouldn't have
> spawned the widespread propensity to engage in deliberate/malicious
> on-the-air interference and jamming, a legacy that continues to this day.
>
> Agreed, what we don't want is for AM to be some kind of speciality mode 
> that
> is permitted to exist thanks only to a footnote or paragraph making it an
> exception to general rules that would otherwise preclude its use. That's
> exactly was what was proposed under the ARRL's ill-fated bandwidth 
> petition.
> A footnote or paragraph can be easily be struck  from the text, and AM
> eliminated with one stroke of a key. OTOH, I think what Rob was getting at
> is was the perception of AM from the perspective of those of us who 
> operate
> and love the mode. It is more than just another menu option or button on a
> plastic radio; it is the very essence, one of the last remnants of what 
> many
> of us think of as genuine amateur radio.  In what other facet of ham radio
> these days, particularly on HF, do you still find a significant number of
> people who, other than tinkering with antennas, actually design, build,
> repair and modify their own equipment and learn something in the process? 
> Do
> we want to promote AM by merely urging more hams to push the AM button,
> without attempting to instil  the special enthusiasm for the mode that 
> most
> of us enjoy?
>
> Unfortunately, CW, which would also be classified as a legacy mode, has
> largely fallen into  the "just another mode" syndrome, special only  in 
> that
> it is limited to those who have somehow managed or bothered to master 
> Morse
> code, unless they entered the hobby before dropping the requirement for 
> the
> FCC test.  In a recent flyer put out by a well-known CW club,  most
> of the topics had to do with plastic radios, keys, QRP, CW "operating
> events", and  data over the past six years suggesting that CW activity is
> increasing.  On the topic of vintage CW and operating his homebrew
> reproduction 1934 50 watt transmitter, one author laments, "discussing
> circuits and tube line-ups etc. has become a lost art" and that at times 
> he
> may actually bore people he works by rambling on about his rig.
>
> When I occasionally work CW I usually mention that I am running a homebrew
> transmitter using triode tubes in class C,  and only once in a great while
> someone will ask what tubes I am using. Probably the majority don't even
> know what "class C" means. I have found the CW stations I hear on the air 
> as
> much or more into the realm of plastic radio than slopbucketeers.  Most of
> the time when they rattle off the model number of their plastic radio: 
> "rig
> here is a TS9FTIC-2700-A running 100 watts", I don't have any more clue to
> what they are talking about than they do when I say something about my
> HF-300s. It used to be one of the highlights of a QSO regardless of mode 
> to
> swap information about station equipment and tube  line-up. Very often 
> these
> days when working CW my contact will  remark that I'm the first person he
> has worked in a long time who runs a homebrew rig.
>
> Sometimes I hear people deriding AMers as being "elitist". Maybe it WOULD 
> be
> appropriate to compare ourselves to fine wine. Think about what the word
> "elitist" means, per the Cambridge Dictionary Online. It does not have to 
> be
> disapproving:
> "elitist, adjective
> Definition > organized for the good of a few people who have special
> interests or abilities: Many remember sport at school as elitist, focusing
> only on those who were good at it."
>
> So, wouldn't  we  wish to possess special interests and abilities in
> something we are good at, or do we prefer mediocrity and  taking pride in
> our ignorance?
>
> Of course, CW would have to be  classified as "elitist" as well, since to
> operate it one has to master the Morse code, which was dropped in the 
> tests
> partly because so many would-be hams thought it was either too much 
> trouble
> to learn or so difficult that they could not achieve it.
>
> I would never wish to do or say anything  to discourage someone from 
> pushing
> the AM button, but I would hope they would find something there, that
> amounts to more than just another way to operate their radio. In a few 
> cases
> that I happen to know personally, the op decided that he liked AM 
> operation
> well enough  to become a regular, learning AM operating practices, and in 
> a
> couple of cases, ended up homebrewing something or acquiring vintage AM
> equipment.
>
> Don, k4kyv
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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 