"Larry" wrote:
Floyd,

I think it all boils down to this, if you want to limit the frequency range
of your radio to whatever, because you believe that you like it best (or
whatever) great! It is your privelege to do that. As for me, I think that a
little wider is nicer and that's OK for me too. You may believe strongly in
your justification but the rules give very wide lattitude in making this
call to the amateur. Some may think this is about to change but I don't
think so. So good luck and have fun. The hobby is great, isn't it!

I did not suggest that there should be a regulatory limit. That
came from elsewhere. My argument is purely one of technical
aspects that have to be considered.

However, if you and others insist on ignoring the appropriate technical
aspects, we *will* see regulatory action to curtail it.

By the way, in the discussion of bandwidths, your hyperbole is totally
without meaning if you are not specifying attenuation at the given limits of
bandwidth. 100 to 3500 hz is a very different spec if those are 3 db points
than if they are 26 or 60 db points. Also specifying that the limits refer
to peak or average would be helpful in making your comments meaningful.

Yes, and I could write a ****ing book too. What's your point?
The only time any specs that I meantioned deviated from the
standard ones, I mentioned not only that it did but what the
effect was.

Besides not even a moose would take his call at being real with those kinds
of limits. You're up there, go ask one!

If you want your audio to attract moose, please get a bullhorn
and head for the woods. But stay off the ham bands with it.


While you are at it... Learn not to top post and learn to trim
unnecessary quoted text. Bandwidth is important in places other
than a ham rig too.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)