- Joined
- May 7, 2004
- Messages
- 4,012
- Reaction score
- 132
E-SSB
- Thread starter poltergeisty
- Start date
- Status
djeplett
Member
This is cool stuff. Now I have to save some more money for the HF
station of my dreams. I wonder how much better ESSB would sound
on my little HF portable. The author's website said it wouldn't sound
that much different on standard setup equipment, but I've heard some
big differences between many of the amateurs I've been listening to.
Hmmm. Maybe I've already heard ESSB... It sounded like they were
only trying it on 20M. I listen mostly to 80M and 40M now.
I'll have to spend some time reading the website more thuroughly.
Thanks for the interesting link.
station of my dreams. I wonder how much better ESSB would sound
on my little HF portable. The author's website said it wouldn't sound
that much different on standard setup equipment, but I've heard some
big differences between many of the amateurs I've been listening to.
Hmmm. Maybe I've already heard ESSB... It sounded like they were
only trying it on 20M. I listen mostly to 80M and 40M now.
I'll have to spend some time reading the website more thuroughly.
Thanks for the interesting link.
nd5y
Member
Unless the filters in your receiver have 6 kHz or more bandwidth in SSB mode (some only do on AM), you won't be able to tell much difference.
- Joined
- May 7, 2004
- Messages
- 4,012
- Reaction score
- 132
djeplett said:
Your welcome. I thought it was interesting as well and figured that it should be posted here. :wink:
Al42
Member
Those who want to broadcast hi-fi audio should get jobs with broadcast stations. 2.5 KHz is all that's needed for realistic-sounding communications which is, after all, what amateur radio is all about.
djeplett
Member
And don't you dare experiment with amateur radio because that's not what it's for. It's for rag chewing, dammit. :wink:
ESSB
Hi all,
I totally agree, if they want hi-fi they should work for the broadcast stations. So very few can master the theory and fewer still can afford proper equipment and end up exceeding the bandwidth limit. This leads to QRM complaints at best and more often these days what is known as a "Rileygram", the "PC" replacement for the old "pink slip", a citation from the FCC. The whole idea why Art Collins pushed the military toward SSB was because of it's narrow bandwidth and communications effectiveness, both lost with this so-called "enhanced" SSB.
Here's a little hint, everybody including the FCC tends to look the other way for the AM crowd, those using modded out "boat anchors" and AM broadcast transmitters sound superb. For best results use broadcast equipment and engineering practices, nothing sounds better on any band. Oh, they out perform the SW broadcasters by a WIDE margin. Due to their severe bandwidth restrictions the broadcasters pump up the compression to the point of causing ear bleed.
The bottom line here is be it AM or SSB if you want hi-fi all you may expect is a local rag chew under ideal propagation conditions. If you want to work DX or be heard under adverse conditions all too common especially at the bottom of the sunspot cycle now you need all the punch you can get. Narrow audio passband with just a hint of presence rise and a light touch of processing will get you heard over the noise.
If all else fails, use a D-104. (;->)
Hi all,
I totally agree, if they want hi-fi they should work for the broadcast stations. So very few can master the theory and fewer still can afford proper equipment and end up exceeding the bandwidth limit. This leads to QRM complaints at best and more often these days what is known as a "Rileygram", the "PC" replacement for the old "pink slip", a citation from the FCC. The whole idea why Art Collins pushed the military toward SSB was because of it's narrow bandwidth and communications effectiveness, both lost with this so-called "enhanced" SSB.
Here's a little hint, everybody including the FCC tends to look the other way for the AM crowd, those using modded out "boat anchors" and AM broadcast transmitters sound superb. For best results use broadcast equipment and engineering practices, nothing sounds better on any band. Oh, they out perform the SW broadcasters by a WIDE margin. Due to their severe bandwidth restrictions the broadcasters pump up the compression to the point of causing ear bleed.
The bottom line here is be it AM or SSB if you want hi-fi all you may expect is a local rag chew under ideal propagation conditions. If you want to work DX or be heard under adverse conditions all too common especially at the bottom of the sunspot cycle now you need all the punch you can get. Narrow audio passband with just a hint of presence rise and a light touch of processing will get you heard over the noise.
If all else fails, use a D-104. (;->)
D
DaveNF2G
Guest
That reminds me - I used to listen to AM chats on 10 meters in my early SWL days. I thought they sounded phenomenal. Now I have a portable radio that can receive 10/6/2/70c in AM mode and I'm wondering what the currently active AM frequencies are.
Don't worry - I know a rubber duckie is not good on HF. I have a much better antenna mounted on the car. :wink:
Don't worry - I know a rubber duckie is not good on HF. I have a much better antenna mounted on the car. :wink:
djeplett
Member
My thoughts are if this guy actually wants to replace all SSB transmissions
on HF with ESSB then he's totally wrong since ESSB will be a waste of
bandwidth.
However, I like that he's actually trying to do something different. Most
great inventions started out with someone doing something different with
current technology. You never know what new technology could come out
of his ideas. And THAT is what amateur radio is all about.
Do I think his ideas could/should be directly put into use? No! I applaud
him for experimenting. Some of these old "Elmers" on HF should try it
instead of the usual complaining about the weather or gas prices. Too
much rag chewing and not enough exploration. Oh, and talking about
your newest purchased antenna or radio is not exploration.
A better question would be how legal this mode would be in HF as it may
be too wide for obvious reasons. I need to read his whole website, but
I've been too busy as of late.
To answer DaveNF2G: According to the ARRL band plan 29.0 to 29.2 is AM
for 10M. 50.3 to 50.6 is "All modes" for 6M. I'd start there, but I doubt you
may hear much at this time due to the current sunspot cycle being low.
on HF with ESSB then he's totally wrong since ESSB will be a waste of
bandwidth.
However, I like that he's actually trying to do something different. Most
great inventions started out with someone doing something different with
current technology. You never know what new technology could come out
of his ideas. And THAT is what amateur radio is all about.
Do I think his ideas could/should be directly put into use? No! I applaud
him for experimenting. Some of these old "Elmers" on HF should try it
instead of the usual complaining about the weather or gas prices. Too
much rag chewing and not enough exploration. Oh, and talking about
your newest purchased antenna or radio is not exploration.
A better question would be how legal this mode would be in HF as it may
be too wide for obvious reasons. I need to read his whole website, but
I've been too busy as of late.
To answer DaveNF2G: According to the ARRL band plan 29.0 to 29.2 is AM
for 10M. 50.3 to 50.6 is "All modes" for 6M. I'd start there, but I doubt you
may hear much at this time due to the current sunspot cycle being low.
N
N_Jay
Guest
djeplett said:
I only skimmed it, but I don't see where it is anything new or experimental. SSB is well understood, and bandwidth is bandwidth.
More bandwidth usualy sounds better.
djeplett
Member
Per an FCC notice on the website in question ESSB is not allowed lower
than 28.8 MHz. So that answers my legality question. It definitely would
be a band hog and would only exacerbate crowding so the FCC made the
right decision.
I define experimental as trying something new. This is something I've
never heard of someone doing, so therefore it is experimental in my eyes.
I am well aware that more bandwidth equals higher fidelity. I still applaud
NU9N for simply trying something new (or at least different).
Now we can all go back to our regularily scheduled rag-chews.
than 28.8 MHz. So that answers my legality question. It definitely would
be a band hog and would only exacerbate crowding so the FCC made the
right decision.
I define experimental as trying something new. This is something I've
never heard of someone doing, so therefore it is experimental in my eyes.
I am well aware that more bandwidth equals higher fidelity. I still applaud
NU9N for simply trying something new (or at least different).
Now we can all go back to our regularily scheduled rag-chews.
N
N_Jay
Guest
djeplett said:
I guess I define experimental as trying something new with unknown or unproven results. :wink:
djeplett
Member
I've been reading NU9N's website more thuroughly and I can see a huge
problem if this mode catches on. He keeps saying that 6kHz is legal and
I don't agree. He qoutes the FCC rules:
FCC Part 97.307(a)
"No amateur station transmission shall occupy more bandwidth than
necessary for the information rate and emission type being
transmitted, in accordance with good amateur practice." (Emphasis NU9N)
I think if you are transmitting voice it's obvious 3kHz tops is necessary.
I still think this is interesting and something could come of it. Perhaps
analog modems could be augmented with this added bandwidth for more
speed? Could you transmit more information simultaneously?
I just thought of something, how much bandwidth does P25 use? I thought
it was less than 2.5kHz... what if you digitized your SSB signal... hmmm.
Could there be such a thing then as NSSB? :lol:
problem if this mode catches on. He keeps saying that 6kHz is legal and
I don't agree. He qoutes the FCC rules:
FCC Part 97.307(a)
"No amateur station transmission shall occupy more bandwidth than
necessary for the information rate and emission type being
transmitted, in accordance with good amateur practice." (Emphasis NU9N)
I think if you are transmitting voice it's obvious 3kHz tops is necessary.
I still think this is interesting and something could come of it. Perhaps
analog modems could be augmented with this added bandwidth for more
speed? Could you transmit more information simultaneously?
I just thought of something, how much bandwidth does P25 use? I thought
it was less than 2.5kHz... what if you digitized your SSB signal... hmmm.
Could there be such a thing then as NSSB? :lol:
N
N_Jay
Guest
djeplett said:
Think you need to do some reading up on modulation and information theory.
djeplett
Member
N_Jay said:
Never said I was an expert. Is it that obvious? Alright, I'll shut up then.
N
N_Jay
Guest
djeplett said:
Hey, don't take it the wrong way. :roll:
You are obviously curious about this stuff.
Just sugesting you channel your curiosity into some study. :wink:
djeplett
Member
I'm obviously way off by comparing P25 (phase modulated, right?) with
SSB which is amplitude modulated.
Because of my limited understanding, I don't understand yet why you
couldn't modulate a signal using less than 2.8kHz by utilizing the same
digital circuitry found in a P25 transciever. That circuitry must take the
human voice (analog) and convert it to a digital signal before it is then
modulated. So why couldn't you put this circuitry before the modulation
stage in a SSB transciever?
And I also must be way off when I'm comparing bandwidth between
modes.
This is why I'm studying to become a ham. I am curious and if my
questions don't get answered here then I'll find a book or a website so I
don't have to feel stupid when I ask a question.
After all, there are no stupid questions. Just stupid people who ask questions. :lol:
SSB which is amplitude modulated.
Because of my limited understanding, I don't understand yet why you
couldn't modulate a signal using less than 2.8kHz by utilizing the same
digital circuitry found in a P25 transciever. That circuitry must take the
human voice (analog) and convert it to a digital signal before it is then
modulated. So why couldn't you put this circuitry before the modulation
stage in a SSB transciever?
And I also must be way off when I'm comparing bandwidth between
modes.
This is why I'm studying to become a ham. I am curious and if my
questions don't get answered here then I'll find a book or a website so I
don't have to feel stupid when I ask a question.
After all, there are no stupid questions. Just stupid people who ask questions. :lol:
N
N_Jay
Guest
djeplett said:
Actually now you are into some good questions, but It will take a while to explain he answer.
Right now I am pressed for time.
So real quick, P25 is not just modulation. It is also digital Vocoding (Voice Encoding)
You could use P25 Vocoding and channel coding and get a 9600 BPS digitla stream, but to send that with SSB would take about 3kHZ of bandwidth (using a traditional 9600 BPS modem. (you ave to get to analog to modulate SSB.
djeplett
Member
I am happy to know I'm at least asking good questions now. :lol:
Some questions posed here simply shouldn't be answered since this is for
short (couple of paragraph) messages. So don't worry about not giving an
answer to anything. I will find a way to learn and after I have I will
consider myself dangerous. :wink:
Getting back to the original topic, I think ESSB would be neat to play
around with on uncrowded bands like maybe 1.25M. The problem is there
wouldn't be enough hams within listening distance who could care less
about ESSB so I can see why NU9N would want to use it on HF. I think
there is a place for experimental modes like this, just not at the expense
of others who are happy with 3kHz and the fidelity it has.
After reading his site more I know I wouldn't use this mode below 6M.
Just too wide.
Some questions posed here simply shouldn't be answered since this is for
short (couple of paragraph) messages. So don't worry about not giving an
answer to anything. I will find a way to learn and after I have I will
consider myself dangerous. :wink:
Getting back to the original topic, I think ESSB would be neat to play
around with on uncrowded bands like maybe 1.25M. The problem is there
wouldn't be enough hams within listening distance who could care less
about ESSB so I can see why NU9N would want to use it on HF. I think
there is a place for experimental modes like this, just not at the expense
of others who are happy with 3kHz and the fidelity it has.
After reading his site more I know I wouldn't use this mode below 6M.
Just too wide.
Buckskinner33
Member
It sure is funny that this subject comes up here and the same delimas and argument have not changed...
First off Hi-Fi SSB or E-SSB is one of the newest and most controvercial subject around.
Let look at what new products are using the technology from ESSB...
Yaesu newest rig FTDX-9000
www.yaesu.com
A very nice but pricey rig
Now Im not going to pull no bones on the issue of how wide they are and can get but I much rather hear the audio from a ESSB rig then the standard SSB.
Face it the Amature band is small as it is. Maybe with this technology we could ask for more bandwidth on the HF side? (Yeah right) But you cant deny the fact that this has helped SSB operation which has not occured in over 40 years!
I think its time for the amature radio community to fight for more band width before we loose it to NEXTEL!!!
As far as HAM experimenting... Where would we be with out people like Bob Heil?
How many of you guys own a tape recorder or a VCR?
How many of you guys are now listening to APCO 25 systems?
I know you have a computer!
If you answered yes to at least one of those, you better thank a HAM for
for experimenting!
First off Hi-Fi SSB or E-SSB is one of the newest and most controvercial subject around.
Let look at what new products are using the technology from ESSB...
Yaesu newest rig FTDX-9000
www.yaesu.com
A very nice but pricey rig
Now Im not going to pull no bones on the issue of how wide they are and can get but I much rather hear the audio from a ESSB rig then the standard SSB.
Face it the Amature band is small as it is. Maybe with this technology we could ask for more bandwidth on the HF side? (Yeah right) But you cant deny the fact that this has helped SSB operation which has not occured in over 40 years!
I think its time for the amature radio community to fight for more band width before we loose it to NEXTEL!!!
As far as HAM experimenting... Where would we be with out people like Bob Heil?
How many of you guys own a tape recorder or a VCR?
How many of you guys are now listening to APCO 25 systems?
I know you have a computer!
If you answered yes to at least one of those, you better thank a HAM for
for experimenting!
- Status
