[Elecraft] Is there a reason the receive is so Skinny

[David Cole]

OK...  It's not just me then...  It is refreshing to hear someone
actually mention pre/de emphasis in a discussion about reducing channel
noise...  THANK YOU JOE!

I thought I was loosing my mind for a while, hearing these ESSB
stations.  

I do mostly CW, so I almost never get into the SSB portion of the band.
Of late I have been running into these people, and the 4KC Plus splat
they create.  That was a surprise!

-- 
Thanks and 73's,
For equipment, and software setups and reviews see:
www.nk7z.net
for MixW support see;
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info
for Dopplergram information see:
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info
for MM-SSTV see:
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info


On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 12:43 -0400, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
> Absolutely!  In addition, overly "pumped" low end simply adds hum,
> rumble and IMD to the audio.  Professional audio engineers have
> learned to cut the low end on audio production/recording/broadcast
> for a very long time except where absolutely necessary and even
> then most pros use a low-cut set around 100 Hz unless they are
> trying to record a bass, tuba, piano, organ, etc. with significant
> program content below low C (~130 Hz) or deep C (~65 Hz).
> 
> Very few male voices are pitched below 100 Hz - it seems to me the
> lowest recorded was around 80 Hz - the fundamental range of a bass
> vocalist is typically E2 (~82 Hz) to E4 (~330 Hz).  Communications 
> quality (ITU: 2.8 KHz bandwidth) adequately covers 200 to 3000 Hz or
> 100 to 2900 Hz.  Even "toll grade" (2.1 to 2.4 KHz bandwidth) audio
> in the old days was more than adequate for reasonable communications.
> 
> It is particularly worth noting that the ratio of fundamental to
> harmonic content in speech is quite high and systems which do not
> substantially reduce the fundamental power typically sound muddy and
> distorted.  Broadcast systems typically use preemphasis (decreased
> lows/increased highs) in transmission with corresponding deemphasis
> (high frequency roll off) in reception to reduce channel noise and
> improve reception.
> 
> The infantile fascination with SSB flat from 50 Hz to 4000 Hz is
> nothing more than another childish, bandwidth wasting, QRM generating
> temper-tantrum from those who don't know better or don't care.
> 
> 73,
> 
>     ... Joe, W4TV
> 
> 
> On 4/27/2014 10:13 AM, David Cole wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Sorry to jump in on the thread, without an answer, but a question--  why
> > the need for a low end below 200 HZ?  We are not broadcast stations
> > after all...  Maybe I am missing something but I see zero reason for all
> > of this Extended SSB, all it seems to do is cause splatter...
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to dave at nk7z.net