[ARC5] AM on 40m?

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Mike Everette via ARC5 <
arc5 at mailman.qth.net> wrote:

> I hear a large amount of AM on 75 here in the East.  The 40 meter window
> is a bit narrower than the 75 meter window, and I haven't heard a lot
> there.  One reason may be, it'd be difficult to get some of the x-BC
> transmitters to function on 40.  The RF circuit leads are too long.
>

There are a number of guys who have 'tri-banded' old BC transmitters to
work on 160-40m with excellent results. But it's a lot of work for minimal
return.

As to the Window aka 'back of the bus' mentality, that went out years ago.
AM is allowed anywhere SSB is permitted on HF last I knew, and plenty of
folks take advantage of it to avoid the usual congested areas (which also
attract the nut job jammer types). 7.160 was a calling frequency and
watering hole for AM on 40m before the foreign BC stations became a
problem. They're pretty much gone below 7.200 now, but still use the area
between 7.280-7.295 which is probably why you hear less AM there. We've
used 7.220 and other frequencies in the evenings as well.


> Speaking of BC transmitters (and here, again, I risk annihilation)... what
> is the rationale behind "Hy-Fye" audio on the ham bands?


Annihilation seems a bit....dramatic, Mike. (o: How about explanation from
someone who enjoys 'Full Fidelity' AM as well as numerous other formats and
modes?

The rationale is, amplitude modulation, when used properly, is far less
fatiguing to listen to and (IMO) a lot more fun. By 'properly' I mean - AM
on the amateur bands is predominantly used for old-fashioned rag-chewing,
so a natural sounding signal is more enjoyable over hours of operating.


> When the QRM/QRN picks up, most of what the receiving op actually hears
> sounds a bit like Charlie Brown's teacher in "Peanuts" --
> "whp-WAMP-wump-wup-Wank-WHOP-whup..." etc etc.  The BAAAAAAASS washes
> everything else out.
>

Most likely you're listening to someone who doesn't know how to adjust and
operate the equipment they have correctly. It has *zero* to do with
whatever transmitter they're using. Plenty of guys running Flex rigs, Class
E transmitters, even Yaecomwoods on AM end up sounding poorly from being
over-process. Some attempt to make up for the lack of a "radio voice" by
trying to artificially boost bass and so on. I've even heard this with
*gasp* MILITARY transmitters like the BC-610, T-368 and others.

It's not limited to AM either. Check out some of the ESSB gang for real
noise.


> Some of these guys won't even talk with you if they find out you're
> running a lowly Command Set.
>

Much more prevalent in years past when some fools thought you had to be
running a plate modulated transmitter if you were on AM. Back then it was
mainly the FT-101s and other riceboxes capable of AM that got scorned.

I enjoy working different types of stations, especially the odd or unique
30s-40s-50s vintage stuff. Also milsurplus gear, so long as I don't have to
get up before the sun to do it. There is one drawback though: as cool as it
is to hear someone running a low power set with a carbon mic, it gets
tiring fast and downright impossible as the day turns into evening. So
while you/we sit in front of a cool old station with a T-17 stuck to our
face, it's not always pleasant, armchair copy for the other station. Not to
mention frustrating to see a strong carrier of a station but not be able to
work them due to being so poorly modulated.

In fact, you could just as easily ask your question with a few words
substituted:

"... what is the rationale behind [low-level "Military" carbon mic] audio
on the ham bands?"

I bet it's related to what you...enjoy?  What's the rationale behind
amateur radio on HF today?

Broadcast transmitters are definitely good for one thing.  They make Reddy
> Kilowatt's glow bright red and stretch his eee-ville grin from ear to
> ear.... No, I'm not one bit envious.
>

True enough. And in today's world, excessive power consumption might get
you a visit from anyone from the power company to the DEA (think Grow
Lights). As far as running *any* old transmitter, there are probably far
worse ways to spend your time and money. And I bet on average there's no
more ego involved than the folks who want to use old military radios to
play army or pretend they're in a B-17.

No need to be envious or negative about it, though. It's too reminiscent of
the SSBers pissing and moaning about AMers (yep - you can substitute AM in
your sentence above, too). Easier to take the approach of doing what you
enjoy and avoiding what you don't. Otherwise you risk sounding like those
HiHiFB fudds who we've all heard at some point, complaining about their
liver spots, new dentures that don't fit right, AMers, slopbucket ops, or
those young whippersnappers and their pho-netics.


> Hmm, getting a BC transmitter, however, might be a good incentive for
> getting a new house.  I'd have to knock down an exterior wall, where I live
> now, to get one indoors.  Or maybe I could design a house around it.
> (That's what was done, in many an AM BC station....)
>

Have I got a deal for you! Collins 21XS (21E converted to use glass instead
of ceramic tubes), three cabinets the size of a 20V2, approximately 4000
lbs. It can either getcha a new house or divorce really fast. It'll run a
bit more than the $12 Command transmitter I sold you at the Raleigh 'fest,
though.  :D

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4