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

[Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft]

>>>>  willful
use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a
violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly
interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc. <<<< 

NOW!!!!! 
You have just Describe 98% of those who proclaim their love of Contesting! 

[particularly!
interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc.]

BTW. 
Aggressive use of Compression (PUNCH) 
Overly active ALC. 
And! Last but not the least, chronic twisting of the mic gain knob 
to the right is tantamount of the above mention.

Maybe, we should just include the Contester in this tantivy as well. 



((((73)))) Milverton. / W9MMS


On Sunday, April 27, 2014 8:09 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists at subich.com> wrote:
 

>On the other hand, Title 47 which includes more than Part 97 regularly
>defines SSB as 2K80J3E (2.8 KHz bandwidth) and specifies a maximum
>modulating frequency of 2.8 KHz for various FM voice "communications"
>services.
>
>Given that standard, and the fact that RM-10740 was dismissed without
>modifying the rule that requires the use of minimum bandwidth, without
>modifying the rules against intentional interference, and without
>modifying the rule that requires "good engineering practice," willful
>use of a bandwidth in excess of 2.8 KHz can *still* be considered a
>violation in conjunction with other conditions - particularly
>interference, splatter, distortion, IMD, etc.
>
>73,
>
>    ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
>
>On 4/27/2014 8:42 PM, Milverton M. Swire via Elecraft wrote:
>>>>>> This issue is not just about "...other hams having fun doing what they
>> want to do with their K3s", there really are some good engineering
>> reasons for not using ESSB below 100 MHz.  Joe has articulated a few.
>> Beyond the "...other hams having fun..." argument, is there really any
>> other reason to do ESSB? <<<<
>>
>> David, et al.
>>
>> The question of " Legality " and Engineering reasoning has been bantered around
>> on numerous different occasions.
>> There are many in their zeal to defend their ideals will make frivolous statements on
>> what should or should not be the accepted TBW.
>> Irrespective of what some of us may think, there are no set number on TBW for SSB.
>>
>> For those who are about to get their under wears in a wad, here are the FCC view on the
>> subject a define bandwidth on Phone.
>>
>> http://www.nu9n.com/images/FCC-DA-04-3661A1-final.pdf
>>
>> There are many of us who often times forget that this is a HOBBY for Amateurs.
>>
>> ((((73)))) Milverton.
>>
>>
>______________________________________________________________
>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 tnnyswy at yahoo.com
>
>
>