|
What makes it tick?
Frank Gilliland wrote:
Just as I suspected -- you got confused. ROTFLMMFAO!!!!! My confusion is understandable... due to your lack of consistant and accurate information. www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
Frank Gilliland wrote:
And here's that link again. Read it this time. ftp://bama.sbc.edu/downloads/comdel/csp11/ Now..... where's your schematic, Brian? I'm unable to read anything from that big file... www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
Frank Gilliland wrote:
Apparently it was "consistant and accurate" enough for Jimmy D. And you need to install the viewer for .djvu files. Can you find the homepage without someone holding your hand? or do I need to spoonfeed you that information, too? You are evasive at best... just post the document if you have the special viewer. www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
On 11 Jan 2007 07:25:17 -0800, "Telstar Electronics"
wrote in .com: Frank Gilliland wrote: Just as I suspected -- you got confused. ROTFLMMFAO!!!!! My confusion is understandable... due to your lack of consistant and accurate information. Apparently it was "consistant and accurate" enough for Jimmy D. And you need to install the viewer for .djvu files. Can you find the homepage without someone holding your hand? or do I need to spoonfeed you that information, too? |
What makes it tick?
On 11 Jan 2007 07:55:40 -0800, "Telstar Electronics"
wrote in . com: Frank Gilliland wrote: Apparently it was "consistant and accurate" enough for Jimmy D. And you need to install the viewer for .djvu files. Can you find the homepage without someone holding your hand? or do I need to spoonfeed you that information, too? You are evasive at best... just post the document if you have the special viewer. And deprive you not only of the huge amount of material available on the site, but also of the satisfaction of accomplishing something by yourself (for once)? Naw..... I'll let you snivel while everyone else reads the manual and are once again reminded of how much of a dumbass they already know you are. Besides, I gotta be heading to school. You do know what a school is, don't you? You know, a place where people learn things? Oh, forget it. Where's that amp schematic, Brian? |
What makes it tick?
Frank Gilliland wrote:
And deprive you not only of the huge amount of material available on the site, but also of the satisfaction of accomplishing something by yourself (for once)? Naw..... I'll let you snivel while everyone else reads the manual and are once again reminded of how much of a dumbass they already know you are. Besides, I gotta be heading to school. You do know what a school is, don't you? You know, a place where people learn things? Oh, forget it. Hang it up Frank... you're nothing but a bunch of wind. You never seem to produce anything but rhetoric. I guess I really knew that all along... just figured I give you a chance to prove me wrong. But, as things would have it... I'm right again! Another wasted conversation with you... www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
Frank Gilliland wrote:
DESCRIPTION: The Comdel Model CSP 11 is a speech processing device which provides instantaneous limiting without the distortion found in ordinary speech clippers. It is installed in microphone lead lines and does not require any modifications to the main equipment. When employed with public address systems and most radio transmitters, the CSP 11 will give greater average power output for any given peak level than conventional clippers due to the absence of distortion. With SSB systems, where conventional clippers are marginal in performance, the CSP 11 will give good quality output with an -average- power (talk power) gain of 10db or more, relative to the -peak- power output. =============== Hack away, Brian..... LOL!!! Hack away at what? I'm not sure what the big deal is here... so it's very similar to the unit I'm designing... So? And your point is? www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
On 11 Jan 2007 08:18:07 -0800, "Telstar Electronics"
wrote in .com: Frank Gilliland wrote: And deprive you not only of the huge amount of material available on the site, but also of the satisfaction of accomplishing something by yourself (for once)? Naw..... I'll let you snivel while everyone else reads the manual and are once again reminded of how much of a dumbass they already know you are. Besides, I gotta be heading to school. You do know what a school is, don't you? You know, a place where people learn things? Oh, forget it. Hang it up Frank... you're nothing but a bunch of wind. You never seem to produce anything but rhetoric. I guess I really knew that all along... just figured I give you a chance to prove me wrong. I've been doing that for the past ten years, and I'm about to do it again. And if you really want to give me yet another opportunity to prove you wrong then just post the schematic for your amp. But, as things would have it... I'm right again! Another wasted conversation with you... From the manual I cited earlier but you were too lazy to read: =============== DESCRIPTION: The Comdel Model CSP 11 is a speech processing device which provides instantaneous limiting without the distortion found in ordinary speech clippers. It is installed in microphone lead lines and does not require any modifications to the main equipment. When employed with public address systems and most radio transmitters, the CSP 11 will give greater average power output for any given peak level than conventional clippers due to the absence of distortion. With SSB systems, where conventional clippers are marginal in performance, the CSP 11 will give good quality output with an -average- power (talk power) gain of 10db or more, relative to the -peak- power output. =============== Hack away, Brian..... LOL!!! |
What makes it tick?
On 11 Jan 2007 13:03:06 -0800, "Telstar Electronics"
wrote in . com: Frank Gilliland wrote: DESCRIPTION: The Comdel Model CSP 11 is a speech processing device which provides instantaneous limiting without the distortion found in ordinary speech clippers. It is installed in microphone lead lines and does not require any modifications to the main equipment. When employed with public address systems and most radio transmitters, the CSP 11 will give greater average power output for any given peak level than conventional clippers due to the absence of distortion. With SSB systems, where conventional clippers are marginal in performance, the CSP 11 will give good quality output with an -average- power (talk power) gain of 10db or more, relative to the -peak- power output. =============== Hack away, Brian..... LOL!!! Hack away at what? I'm not sure what the big deal is here... so it's very similar to the unit I'm designing... Not even close. I can't believe that you -STILL- haven't read the manual. So? And your point is? I think my point is clear to everyone but you, Brian. And replying to my post within one minute? Have you been sitting on your fat, lazy ass waiting till I got back? You need help. And not with your amp or audio processor -- you need professional psychiatric help. My first guess would be that you have MPD from using all those different names on the group, but it could be something more serious. It certainly appears to be disabling. Is that why you are drawing welfare, Brian? Because you're a psycho? |
What makes it tick?
Frank Gilliland wrote:
I think my point is clear to everyone but you, Brian. And replying to my post within one minute? Have you been sitting on your fat, lazy ass waiting till I got back? You need help. And not with your amp or audio processor -- you need professional psychiatric help. My first guess would be that you have MPD from using all those different names on the group, but it could be something more serious. It certainly appears to be disabling. Is that why you are drawing welfare, Brian? Because you're a psycho? Frank, you are making absolutely no sense again. You better double-up on your lithium... www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 13:21:16 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote in : snip ...... My first guess would be that you have MPD..... I'm sorry, I forgot that you have problems with acronyms: MPD -- Multiple Personality Disorder |
What makes it tick?
On 11 Jan 2007 04:14:20 -0800, "Telstar Electronics"
wrote: +++Jimmie D wrote: +++ Put together a little rf speech processor last night on a bread board using +++ color burst crystals for IF filter and osc. Works great with 9db of +++ clipping, about $10 worth of parts off the shelf cost. Took about 2 hours to +++ bread board it up. I figure a one man production line could build one in +++ about 30 minutes.Its just stuffing a board and soldering. +++ +++9dB... are you saying you got a 9dB power increase in transmitter +++power? Please clarify. +++ +++www.telstar-electronics.com ************** Reread again. He stated 9 db of clipping. That does not correspond to power increase. james |
What makes it tick?
On 11 Jan 2007 05:03:29 -0800, "Telstar Electronics"
wrote: +++Frank Gilliland wrote: +++ I like it, too. It's slicker than a whore's leg on nickel-day. I used +++ a 100kHz crystal and LC filter for mine, but using colorburst crystals +++ would make it a lot smaller. +++ +++ I'm sure Brian will be pleased to hear that it doesn't require much +++ work. All he needs now is for someone to draw him a schematic!!! +++ +++The problem is that this type of RF clipping scheme only works on SSB +++signals. Back to the drawing board Frank. +++ +++www.telstar-electronics.com ************ SSB is AM james |
What makes it tick?
james wrote:
SSB is AM Nonsense... SSB is not AM(double-sideband). These are two distinct modes of AM type transmissions... and are very different. www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
On 12 Jan 2007 05:12:20 -0800, "Telstar Electronics"
wrote: +++james wrote: +++ SSB is AM +++ +++Nonsense... +++SSB is not AM(double-sideband). These are two distinct modes of AM type +++transmissions... and are very different. +++ +++www.telstar-electronics.com ********* You are correct in that they are two different modes. They are amplitude modulated signals and are derived from the same general equation. Look in any Communications Text book used in Electrical Engineering school. james |
What makes it tick?
james wrote:
You are correct in that they are two different modes. They are amplitude modulated signals and are derived from the same general equation. Look in any Communications Text book used in Electrical Engineering school. Like I said... they are very different. Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm |
What makes it tick?
"Jimmie D" wrote in message ... "Telstar Electronics" wrote in message ps.com... Anyone care to venture a guess what's inside this? http://www.survival-systems.com/yeticom/cp-1.html Put together a little rf speech processor last night on a bread board using color burst crystals for IF filter and osc. Works great with 9db of clipping, about $10 worth of parts off the shelf cost. Took about 2 hours to bread board it up. I figure a one man production line could build one in about 30 minutes.Its just stuffing a board and soldering. Got a nasty cold so I stayed away from work today and tinkered with my speech processor some. Replaced the transistor mic amp with an op amp and Put an FET in seies with the input to the amp. Feeding the gate of the amp with dc derived from the output of the processor giving it AGC. This thing is getting to be a knob twisters delite. One thing did get me thinking. I have a nice scope to look at the output of my TX and to lookat the output of the processor , for me its a piece of cake to setup. How can you do this without test equipment? |
What makes it tick?
Jimmie D wrote:
One thing did get me thinking. I have a nice scope to look at the output of my TX and to lookat the output of the processor , for me its a piece of cake to setup. How can you do this without test equipment? Absolutely, I have a nice Tektronix scope I use... Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm |
What makes it tick?
"Telstar Electronics" wrote in message ups.com... Jimmie D wrote: One thing did get me thinking. I have a nice scope to look at the output of my TX and to lookat the output of the processor , for me its a piece of cake to setup. How can you do this without test equipment? Absolutely, I have a nice Tektronix scope I use... Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm But how does most of the people who buy them do it? |
What makes it tick?
On 12 Jan 2007 16:33:42 -0800, "Telstar Electronics"
wrote: +++james wrote: +++ You are correct in that they are two different modes. They are +++ amplitude modulated signals and are derived from the same general +++ equation. Look in any Communications Text book used in Electrical +++ Engineering school. +++ +++Like I said... they are very different. +++ +++Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at +++http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm ********* No they aren't. They are more similar than different. SSB is an AM signal that has the carrier supressed and the opposite sideband filtered out. Then again I would expect a tech to not totally understand the subtle differences between AM and SSB. james |
What makes it tick?
"james" wrote in message ... On 12 Jan 2007 16:33:42 -0800, "Telstar Electronics" wrote: +++james wrote: +++ You are correct in that they are two different modes. They are +++ amplitude modulated signals and are derived from the same general +++ equation. Look in any Communications Text book used in Electrical +++ Engineering school. +++ +++Like I said... they are very different. +++ +++Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at +++http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm ********* No they aren't. They are more similar than different. SSB is an AM signal that has the carrier supressed and the opposite sideband filtered out. Then again I would expect a tech to not totally understand the subtle differences between AM and SSB. james SSB is AM with part of the spectrum reuced. Its still AM. |
What makes it tick?
"Jimmie D" wrote in message ... "Telstar Electronics" wrote in message ups.com... Jimmie D wrote: One thing did get me thinking. I have a nice scope to look at the output of my TX and to lookat the output of the processor , for me its a piece of cake to setup. How can you do this without test equipment? Absolutely, I have a nice Tektronix scope I use... Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm But how does most of the people who buy them do it? Even a good quality limiter/compressor is just anotheer splatter box if its not set up right. |
What makes it tick?
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:39:49 -0500, "Jimmie D"
wrote: +++ +++"james" wrote in message m... +++ On 12 Jan 2007 16:33:42 -0800, "Telstar Electronics" +++ wrote: +++ ++++++james wrote: ++++++ You are correct in that they are two different modes. They are ++++++ amplitude modulated signals and are derived from the same general ++++++ equation. Look in any Communications Text book used in Electrical ++++++ Engineering school. ++++++ ++++++Like I said... they are very different. ++++++ ++++++Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at ++++++http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm +++ ********* +++ +++ No they aren't. They are more similar than different. SSB is an AM +++ signal that has the carrier supressed and the opposite sideband +++ filtered out. +++ +++ Then again I would expect a tech to not totally understand the subtle +++ differences between AM and SSB. +++ +++ james +++ +++SSB is AM with part of the spectrum reuced. Its still AM. +++ ************** I believe I stated that earlier. Oh well. james |
What makes it tick?
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:43:52 -0500, "Jimmie D"
wrote: +++ +++"Jimmie D" wrote in message . .. +++ +++ "Telstar Electronics" wrote in message +++ ups.com... +++ Jimmie D wrote: +++One thing did get me thinking. I +++ have a nice scope to look at the output of my TX and to lookat the +++ output of +++ the processor , for me its a piece of cake to setup. How can you do this +++ without test equipment? +++ +++ Absolutely, I have a nice Tektronix scope I use... +++ +++ Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at +++ http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm +++ +++ But how does most of the people who buy them do it? +++ +++Even a good quality limiter/compressor is just anotheer splatter box if its +++not set up right. +++ ************ The theory behind a compressor amp is to provide a more constant power signal to the modulator. There have been many schemes in the past 70 yrs or so to do that. Even to the point of what was once called Super Modulation. A properly setup with compression will not have excessive compression and also not use the compression stage as the major gain stage. Where most compression schemes come into dislike is when the person using it feels he needs to get far more gain from the circuit than is really necessary and so much compression that you can hear a roach fart 20 feet away. The idea behind audio compression and other audio/rf processing schemes is to increase signal to noise ratios. When using AM and the carrier is already 30 dB above the ambient atmospheric noise then any processing is typically useless. The gain in signal to noise ratio is not worth the effort or even the cost of adding such a circuit. Audio compression is totally useless on FM unless you want a constant deviated signal. For what ever reason that one would want this is beyond all logic. Even when the AM signal is marginal to the atmospheric noise, audio compression alone yields between 1 and 2 dB improvement in the received signal to noise ratio. On AM, when you are at 6 to 8 dB signal to noise ratio, improving one to two dB is generally worthless improvement. james |
What makes it tick?
"james" wrote in message ... On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:43:52 -0500, "Jimmie D" wrote: +++ +++"Jimmie D" wrote in message .. . +++ +++ "Telstar Electronics" wrote in message +++ ups.com... +++ Jimmie D wrote: +++One thing did get me thinking. I +++ have a nice scope to look at the output of my TX and to lookat the +++ output of +++ the processor , for me its a piece of cake to setup. How can you do this +++ without test equipment? +++ +++ Absolutely, I have a nice Tektronix scope I use... +++ +++ Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at +++ http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm +++ +++ But how does most of the people who buy them do it? +++ +++Even a good quality limiter/compressor is just anotheer splatter box if its +++not set up right. +++ ************ The theory behind a compressor amp is to provide a more constant power signal to the modulator. There have been many schemes in the past 70 yrs or so to do that. Even to the point of what was once called Super Modulation. A properly setup with compression will not have excessive compression and also not use the compression stage as the major gain stage. Where most compression schemes come into dislike is when the person using it feels he needs to get far more gain from the circuit than is really necessary and so much compression that you can hear a roach fart 20 feet away. The idea behind audio compression and other audio/rf processing schemes is to increase signal to noise ratios. When using AM and the carrier is already 30 dB above the ambient atmospheric noise then any processing is typically useless. The gain in signal to noise ratio is not worth the effort or even the cost of adding such a circuit. Audio compression is totally useless on FM unless you want a constant deviated signal. For what ever reason that one would want this is beyond all logic. Even when the AM signal is marginal to the atmospheric noise, audio compression alone yields between 1 and 2 dB improvement in the received signal to noise ratio. On AM, when you are at 6 to 8 dB signal to noise ratio, improving one to two dB is generally worthless improvement. james Clippers are much more useful. Ususally you can clip off the top 8 or 9 db without substantial effecting intelligebility of the voice. This does make for a louder signal without overmoduation. Compression works best when used with an expander on the rx end. But how often are you going to see that.. |
What makes it tick?
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:13:25 -0500, "Jimmie D"
wrote: +++ +++"james" wrote in message m... +++ On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:43:52 -0500, "Jimmie D" +++ wrote: +++ ++++++ ++++++"Jimmie D" wrote in message et... ++++++ ++++++ "Telstar Electronics" wrote in message ++++++ ups.com... ++++++ Jimmie D wrote: ++++++One thing did get me thinking. I ++++++ have a nice scope to look at the output of my TX and to lookat the ++++++ output of ++++++ the processor , for me its a piece of cake to setup. How can you do +++this ++++++ without test equipment? ++++++ ++++++ Absolutely, I have a nice Tektronix scope I use... ++++++ ++++++ Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at ++++++ http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm ++++++ ++++++ But how does most of the people who buy them do it? ++++++ ++++++Even a good quality limiter/compressor is just anotheer splatter box if +++its ++++++not set up right. ++++++ +++ ************ +++ +++ The theory behind a compressor amp is to provide a more constant power +++ signal to the modulator. There have been many schemes in the past 70 +++ yrs or so to do that. Even to the point of what was once called Super +++ Modulation. +++ +++ A properly setup with compression will not have excessive compression +++ and also not use the compression stage as the major gain stage. Where +++ most compression schemes come into dislike is when the person using it +++ feels he needs to get far more gain from the circuit than is really +++ necessary and so much compression that you can hear a roach fart 20 +++ feet away. +++ +++ The idea behind audio compression and other audio/rf processing +++ schemes is to increase signal to noise ratios. When using AM and the +++ carrier is already 30 dB above the ambient atmospheric noise then any +++ processing is typically useless. The gain in signal to noise ratio is +++ not worth the effort or even the cost of adding such a circuit. Audio +++ compression is totally useless on FM unless you want a constant +++ deviated signal. For what ever reason that one would want this is +++ beyond all logic. +++ +++ Even when the AM signal is marginal to the atmospheric noise, audio +++ compression alone yields between 1 and 2 dB improvement in the +++ received signal to noise ratio. On AM, when you are at 6 to 8 dB +++ signal to noise ratio, improving one to two dB is generally worthless +++ improvement. +++ +++ james +++ +++ +++Clippers are much more useful. Ususally you can clip off the top 8 or 9 db +++without substantial effecting intelligebility of the voice. This does make +++for a louder signal without overmoduation. Compression works best when used +++with an expander on the rx end. But how often are you going to see that.. +++ ********** The goal of both compression and clipping of the audio signal is reduce the peak to average power of the human voice. Typical Human voice peak to average power range is about 3:1. Clipping can be as high as 30 dB as long as there is sufficient filtering after the clipping stage to restore the audio bandwidth to its original bandwidth. Otherwise you have splatter or increased modualted bandwidth. Compression is somewhat more effective in reducing the peak to averge power in the voice. It can be implemented with better results. A major drawback to compression over clipping is increased cost with a more complex circuit and more difficult adjustments. All to often in CB work the compression stage also doubles up to be mic amp and a large gain stage at the very low level stages of the audio stream. I personally don't like this as it requires to many adjustments for one stage. Audio compression is better done, in my opinion, in or near the final stage, high level, of the audio stream. This too is not without its drawbacks either. Neither circuit requires the receiver to have any special ciruitry to enhance intelligibility. james |
What makes it tick?
james wrote:
Then again I would expect a tech to not totally understand the subtle differences between AM and SSB. You fit this description well... www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
"james" wrote in message ... On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:13:25 -0500, "Jimmie D" wrote: +++ +++"james" wrote in message om... +++ On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:43:52 -0500, "Jimmie D" +++ wrote: +++ ++++++ ++++++"Jimmie D" wrote in message . net... ++++++ ++++++ "Telstar Electronics" wrote in message ++++++ ups.com... ++++++ Jimmie D wrote: ++++++One thing did get me thinking. I ++++++ have a nice scope to look at the output of my TX and to lookat the ++++++ output of ++++++ the processor , for me its a piece of cake to setup. How can you do +++this ++++++ without test equipment? ++++++ ++++++ Absolutely, I have a nice Tektronix scope I use... ++++++ ++++++ Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at ++++++ http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm ++++++ ++++++ But how does most of the people who buy them do it? ++++++ ++++++Even a good quality limiter/compressor is just anotheer splatter box if +++its ++++++not set up right. ++++++ +++ ************ +++ +++ The theory behind a compressor amp is to provide a more constant power +++ signal to the modulator. There have been many schemes in the past 70 +++ yrs or so to do that. Even to the point of what was once called Super +++ Modulation. +++ +++ A properly setup with compression will not have excessive compression +++ and also not use the compression stage as the major gain stage. Where +++ most compression schemes come into dislike is when the person using it +++ feels he needs to get far more gain from the circuit than is really +++ necessary and so much compression that you can hear a roach fart 20 +++ feet away. +++ +++ The idea behind audio compression and other audio/rf processing +++ schemes is to increase signal to noise ratios. When using AM and the +++ carrier is already 30 dB above the ambient atmospheric noise then any +++ processing is typically useless. The gain in signal to noise ratio is +++ not worth the effort or even the cost of adding such a circuit. Audio +++ compression is totally useless on FM unless you want a constant +++ deviated signal. For what ever reason that one would want this is +++ beyond all logic. +++ +++ Even when the AM signal is marginal to the atmospheric noise, audio +++ compression alone yields between 1 and 2 dB improvement in the +++ received signal to noise ratio. On AM, when you are at 6 to 8 dB +++ signal to noise ratio, improving one to two dB is generally worthless +++ improvement. +++ +++ james +++ +++ +++Clippers are much more useful. Ususally you can clip off the top 8 or 9 db +++without substantial effecting intelligebility of the voice. This does make +++for a louder signal without overmoduation. Compression works best when used +++with an expander on the rx end. But how often are you going to see that.. +++ ********** The goal of both compression and clipping of the audio signal is reduce the peak to average power of the human voice. Typical Human voice peak to average power range is about 3:1. More like 30 to 1 Clipping can be as high as 30 dB as long as there is sufficient filtering after the clipping stage to restore the audio bandwidth to its original bandwidth. Otherwise you have splatter or increased modualted bandwidth. My experience has been that 9 or 10 db is enough clipping. I cant imagine 30 db of clipping Compression is somewhat more effective in reducing the peak to averge power in the voice. It can be implemented with better results. A major drawback to compression over clipping is increased cost with a more complex circuit and more difficult adjustments. All to often in CB work the compression stage also doubles up to be mic amp and a large gain stage at the very low level stages of the audio stream. I personally don't like this as it requires to many adjustments for one stage. Audio compression is better done, in my opinion, in or near the final stage, high level, of the audio stream. This too is not without its drawbacks either. From my experience compression is more to allow consistent modulation when a change in voice, such as the difference when I talk on the radio and my wife talks. IF she tries without readjusting the mike gain she may not be heard. Clipping really removes audio not needed for effective modulation and amplifies that that contains the most intelligence. This often shows up on the rx S meter as less than an S unit change over an unclipped signal but sounds like 10db or more increase.I dont have a clipper except for this peice of junk I threw together the other day but when I did have one the reaction was usually" wow how big is that amp you just turned on." On SSB average power out of a 100 wat tx on voice may be only 12 watts average add a clipper and you can increase that to 80 My preference is a clipper with some AGC action to keep the average output level faily constant. Neither circuit requires the receiver to have any special ciruitry to enhance intelligibility. james |
What makes it tick?
Jimmie D wrote:
.I dont have a clipper except for this peice of junk I threw together the other day but when I did have one the reaction was usually" wow how big is that amp you just turned on." So I guess the inference here is that the audio output is grossly distorted? www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
"Telstar Electronics" wrote in message ups.com... Jimmie D wrote: .I dont have a clipper except for this peice of junk I threw together the other day but when I did have one the reaction was usually" wow how big is that amp you just turned on." So I guess the inference here is that the audio output is grossly distorted? No it works quite well, but it is not something you would want to show off and I dont ever infer anything. If I didecide to keep one it will be built a lot better than this one of better componets but even this thrown together piece of junk clipper will work a hell of a lot better than your compressor. www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
Jimmie D wrote:
No it works quite well, but it is not something you would want to show off and I dont ever infer anything. If I didecide to keep one it will be built a lot better than this one of better componets but even this thrown together piece of junk clipper will work a hell of a lot better than your compressor. Temper, temper. I merely thought that when you said it sounded like you turned on a big amp... that you were referring to how most people overdrive their amp... and sound distorted. I guess that's not what you meant. Don't be so sensitive... you're getting just like Frank. www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
"james" wrote in message ... On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:13:25 -0500, "Jimmie D" wrote: +++ +++"james" wrote in message om... +++ On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:43:52 -0500, "Jimmie D" +++ wrote: +++ ++++++ ++++++"Jimmie D" wrote in message . net... ++++++ ++++++ "Telstar Electronics" wrote in message ++++++ ups.com... ++++++ Jimmie D wrote: ++++++One thing did get me thinking. I ++++++ have a nice scope to look at the output of my TX and to lookat the ++++++ output of ++++++ the processor , for me its a piece of cake to setup. How can you do +++this ++++++ without test equipment? ++++++ ++++++ Absolutely, I have a nice Tektronix scope I use... ++++++ ++++++ Don't miss seeing the new CB Radio Speech Processor Prototype at ++++++ http://www.telstar-electronics.com/d...s/WhatsNew.htm ++++++ ++++++ But how does most of the people who buy them do it? ++++++ ++++++Even a good quality limiter/compressor is just anotheer splatter box if +++its ++++++not set up right. ++++++ +++ ************ +++ +++ The theory behind a compressor amp is to provide a more constant power +++ signal to the modulator. There have been many schemes in the past 70 +++ yrs or so to do that. Even to the point of what was once called Super +++ Modulation. +++ +++ A properly setup with compression will not have excessive compression +++ and also not use the compression stage as the major gain stage. Where +++ most compression schemes come into dislike is when the person using it +++ feels he needs to get far more gain from the circuit than is really +++ necessary and so much compression that you can hear a roach fart 20 +++ feet away. +++ +++ The idea behind audio compression and other audio/rf processing +++ schemes is to increase signal to noise ratios. When using AM and the +++ carrier is already 30 dB above the ambient atmospheric noise then any +++ processing is typically useless. The gain in signal to noise ratio is +++ not worth the effort or even the cost of adding such a circuit. Audio +++ compression is totally useless on FM unless you want a constant +++ deviated signal. For what ever reason that one would want this is +++ beyond all logic. +++ +++ Even when the AM signal is marginal to the atmospheric noise, audio +++ compression alone yields between 1 and 2 dB improvement in the +++ received signal to noise ratio. On AM, when you are at 6 to 8 dB +++ signal to noise ratio, improving one to two dB is generally worthless +++ improvement. +++ +++ james +++ +++ +++Clippers are much more useful. Ususally you can clip off the top 8 or 9 db +++without substantial effecting intelligebility of the voice. This does make +++for a louder signal without overmoduation. Compression works best when used +++with an expander on the rx end. But how often are you going to see that.. +++ ********** The goal of both compression and clipping of the audio signal is reduce the peak to average power of the human voice. Typical Human voice peak to average power range is about 3:1. Clipping can be as high as 30 dB as long as there is sufficient filtering after the clipping stage to restore the audio bandwidth to its original bandwidth. Otherwise you have splatter or increased modualted bandwidth. Compression is somewhat more effective in reducing the peak to averge power in the voice. It can be implemented with better results. A major drawback to compression over clipping is increased cost with a more complex circuit and more difficult adjustments. All to often in CB work the compression stage also doubles up to be mic amp and a large gain stage at the very low level stages of the audio stream. I personally don't like this as it requires to many adjustments for one stage. Audio compression is better done, in my opinion, in or near the final stage, high level, of the audio stream. This too is not without its drawbacks either. Oh my! Don't bring up high level modulation to Brian or he'll soon be trying to install one of his hacks in an old tube type transmitter! We don't want to get him killed! |
What makes it tick?
Yo Mamma wrote:
Oh my! Don't bring up high level modulation to Brian or he'll soon be trying to install one of his hacks in an old tube type transmitter! We don't want to get him killed! A college freshman who knows it all, and is ready to take on the world... LOL www.telstar-electronics.com |
What makes it tick?
On 14 Jan 2007 17:19:38 -0800, "Telstar Electronics"
wrote: +++james wrote: +++ Then again I would expect a tech to not totally understand the subtle +++ differences between AM and SSB. +++ +++You fit this description well... +++ +++www.telstar-electronics.com ******** You are entitled to your opinion. However small it may be. james |
What makes it tick?
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 22:28:56 -0500, "Jimmie D"
wrote: +++From my experience compression is more to allow consistent modulation when a +++change in voice, such as the difference when I talk on the radio and my wife +++talks. IF she tries without readjusting the mike gain she may not be heard. +++ +++Clipping really removes audio not needed for effective modulation and +++amplifies that that contains the most intelligence. This often shows up on +++the rx S meter as less than an S unit change over an unclipped signal but +++sounds like 10db or more increase.I dont have a clipper except for this +++peice of junk I threw together the other day but when I did have one the +++reaction was usually" wow how big is that amp you just turned on." +++ +++On SSB average power out of a 100 wat tx on voice may be only 12 watts +++average add a clipper and you can increase that to 80 +++ +++My preference is a clipper with some AGC action to keep the average output +++level faily constant. ************* Again I reiterate that both audio clipping and audio compression attempt to to the same thing, that is to reduce the peak to average power in an audio signal. Compression techniques are basically a variable gain stage in which the gain is contrtolled by the input signal power. Therefore as teh input is low the gain is high. As power increases the gain reduces. This raises the average audio power while maintianing the peak power. Compression suffers from attack time and decay time issues. Set the decay to slow and the gain does not return to higher levels fast enough to amplity lower power signals. Set the decay time to fast then the compressor becomes ineffective. The attack time issues are even more critical in their adjustments. A clipper works by removing the power above a certain threshold. That power does not just go into oblivion. Instead the power goes into harmonics of the audio frequencies that make up the power signal. Therefore with clipping the peak to average is reduced by moving the power in the peaks of the audio power signal into the harmonics of that signal. There filtering will attenuate the harmonics to restore the original bandwidth. You need sufficient filtering with clipping somewhere in the amplifier chain before that audio power signal reaches the modulated stage. The major issue of audio processing to decrease the peak to avergae power is not to do so much that you over stress the average characteristics of the modulated stage and any subsequent amplifier stage. Also do not confuse PEP (Peak Envelope Power) with Peak to average. They are two different identities. A clipper with some form of agc is eesentially a clipper/compressor combination. Another best unto itself. james |
What makes it tick?
On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 18:21:55 GMT, james wrote
in : snip A clipper with some form of agc is eesentially a clipper/compressor combination. Another best unto itself. Which brings us right back to what I had suggested very early in this discussion: Take Brian's hack-job and follow it with an RF-type clipper. The two could probably be combined but I suspect alignment would be a whore. |
What makes it tick?
"james" wrote in message ... On 14 Jan 2007 17:19:38 -0800, "Telstar Electronics" wrote: +++james wrote: +++ Then again I would expect a tech to not totally understand the subtle +++ differences between AM and SSB. +++ +++You fit this description well... +++ +++www.telstar-electronics.com ******** You are entitled to your opinion. However small it may be. james Be careful, he'll "LOL" you to death! Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services ---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY ** ---------------------------------------------------------- http://www.usenet.com |
What makes it tick?
"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message ... On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 18:21:55 GMT, james wrote in : snip A clipper with some form of agc is eesentially a clipper/compressor combination. Another best unto itself. Which brings us right back to what I had suggested very early in this discussion: Take Brian's hack-job and follow it with an RF-type clipper. The two could probably be combined but I suspect alignment would be a whore. Well the idea is good but the method of doing it is a little overdone if you use Brians compressor. |
What makes it tick?
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:45:51 -0500, "Jimmie D"
wrote in : "Frank Gilliland" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 18:21:55 GMT, james wrote in : snip A clipper with some form of agc is eesentially a clipper/compressor combination. Another best unto itself. Which brings us right back to what I had suggested very early in this discussion: Take Brian's hack-job and follow it with an RF-type clipper. The two could probably be combined but I suspect alignment would be a whore. Well the idea is good but the method of doing it is a little overdone if you use Brians compressor. True. And I try to avoid using ASIC's whenever possible. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:41 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com