Intentionally Transmitting Non Flat SSB Audio ?

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by KA7NIQ, Apr 3, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-MFJ
ad: QSOToday-1
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
ad: abrind-2
  1. KG6MZS

    KG6MZS Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    It is interesting to note that it is the fashion in music now to favor the bottom end. Bass & drum over melody. Sounds bad ass. I am not a fan. But it is subjective analysis for the most part. I am also not a fan of that harsh sound some DX'ers feel compelled to use. Ideally, I want to sound like I am "standing on the room, next to you."
  2. KA7NIQ

    KA7NIQ Ham Member QRZ Page

    I recently heard a couple of them on 20 meters, one was splattering away! I checked, and he was almost as readable on LSB as he was on USB. I intentionally widened my receive filters, he still sounded bad. I broke in, they acknowledged me. I told him what was going on, he told me he was sorry, and to get a 'real radio' LOL
  3. KR2C

    KR2C Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    We are not the FAA. And the FAA isn't encouraged to experiment with their radio gear.

    For some guys, just making a contact, exchanging a 59 and moving on isn't what they want to do with amateur radio. Some guys like to play around with how well they can make themselves sound. Why stick with the equalization that the manufactures build into their radios? As a matter of fact, one can almost pick out what type a radio somebody else has by the EQ built into the radios.
  4. KA7NIQ

    KA7NIQ Ham Member QRZ Page

    Nothing wrong with it, as long as it does not cause interference to others. Heck, who hasn't said "Ok, here is mic A, 1234, now here is mic B, 1234, what one sounds better" Shoot, back in my days of foolin around, we would swap tubes, capacitors, mic cables, and yes, even "listen" to the "sound effects" of different types of solder. Heck, some of us even replaced the cables in our microphones with silver litz wire. We would acoustically treat our shacks with various sound absorbing/diffusing materials, and I even had a parachute hung from my ceiling to break up/absorb early reflections. I remember the fun we had like it was yesterday.
    We were very careful not to cause any grief to other operators.
  5. KG6MZS

    KG6MZS Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    That and good diction and enunciation probably adds more to the quality of the signal than a boatload of fancy gizmos. But shiny new gizmos are fun :)
  6. AG3Y

    AG3Y Guest

    No , No NOOOO!

    If all it took was a "decent ampifier and an equalizer" to sound like "Walter Cronkite", people such as the late Don LaFontain would NOT be making all the big bucks that they get, and deserve, for their audio wizardry !

    A really excellent voice has characteristics that are very narrow in their effects.

    I can remember John Doramius ( sp ? ) a night-time announcing icon in Chicago radio. His voice had a fullness to it that would sound like it was coming out of the basement on a big console radio, but a clarity that made it outstanding when heard through a little 4 inch table radio speaker.

    No amount of EQ would EVER have improved that voice, and everybody in the business nearly worshipped him. Don LaFontain's voice was the same, and he made millions doing voice-overs for movie trailers, and television promos for years. No one could come close to those voice artists.

    For years, the Metropolitan Opera Live broadcast featured Milton Cross. His voice was not terribly deep, but it DID have a unique clarity that was extremely pleasing to listen to, and made he and the Met Opera broadcast, world renowned and famous for many years.

    Using equalizers, and close-talking a bass heavy microphone will changed a "squeaky voiced" individual's sound into something different, but it WON'T be the same as Walter Cronkite, or any of those other famous voices that you might think about.
  7. KA4DPO

    KA4DPO Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Your right. How about experimenting with getting the maximum amount of voice intelligence in the narrowest possible bandwidth, or is that too hard.........
  8. AG6JU

    AG6JU Ham Member QRZ Page

    some people have very good sounding SSB, I guess DSP in radio help
  9. KR2C

    KR2C Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    No. Not hard at all. But it's not my goal. It may be yours. My goal would be to have the best sounding SSB signal in the less than 3Khz provided to me. if it was all about getting the best signal in the smallest bandwidth then why wouldn't they limit CW speed as the faster one sends, the more bandwidth it takes up. :) Maybe to superfast guys are just ECW and taking up too much bandwidth? Those damn bandwidth hogs. :)
  10. AC0H

    AC0H Ham Member QRZ Page

    And yet domestically they use AM.
    Ground control, tower, departure, approach etc..., all use AM.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page