On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 10:42:53 -0700, Telstar Electronics
wrote:

+++On Jul 9, 12:03 pm, james wrote:
+++ the SSM2166 draws about 10mA of current. Four NiMH AA batteries have
+++ 1800mAhr capabilities. At full charge that delivers 5.6VDC to the
+++ chip. Well within the operating range. Should get about 150 hrs of
+++ operation. Add a charging circuit and you have no more issues.
+++
+++James, you are very similar to Frank... in that you have distinct
+++ideas. The problem you both have is one of conveyance. I have made
+++every effort to answer your questions in a civil manner... but you
+++continue to rant uncontrollably. I'm not sure by what authority you
+++speak... since you have no design of your own. Therefore, the
+++conversation with Frank and James is ended as far as I'm concerned. If
+++some others have questions, I'd be more than happy to attempt to
+++answer you. If you don't wish to use this forum... I fully understand.
+++Please email me anytime.
+++www.telstar-electronics.com
****************

I am not ranting and raving. I am pointing out facts. I have 23 yrs
experience in designing battery powered electronic devices. You stated
that a external unit is not practicle and I say it is. If that is
ranting and raving to you then so be it.

james

On Jul 10, 8:50 am, james wrote:
I am not ranting and raving. I am pointing out facts. I have 23 yrs
experience in designing battery powered electronic devices. You stated
that a external unit is not practicle and I say it is. If that is
ranting and raving to you then so be it.

Thanks for not responding like Frank...
I never said that being battery powered was impractical. I merely said
that there are certain problems with battery-powered type equipment
and we chose not to take that design route.
www.telstar-electronics.com

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 07:14:31 -0700, Telstar Electronics
wrote:

+++On Jul 10, 8:50 am, james wrote:
+++ I am not ranting and raving. I am pointing out facts. I have 23 yrs
+++ experience in designing battery powered electronic devices. You stated
+++ that a external unit is not practicle and I say it is. If that is
+++ ranting and raving to you then so be it.
+++
+++Thanks for not responding like Frank...
+++I never said that being battery powered was impractical. I merely said
+++that there are certain problems with battery-powered type equipment
+++and we chose not to take that design route.
+++www.telstar-electronics.com
**************

Outside changing batteries on a regular basis or a some charging
circuit that would be the only issues. Now if those are what you
considered as being impractical then that is your opinion, not mine.

james

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 04:21:39 -0700, Telspam Electronics
wrote in
. com:

Beisdes increasing modulation percentage from 85% to 100% gains little
in range or intelligability. Often not worth the effort. Adds about 7%
audio power into the each of the two sidebands. Even if the limiter
section of the modulator section is not disabled adding your
compressor is not going to increase the percentage of modulation. So
why waste the money to buy and install it unless you disable the
radio's internal limiter?

The original radio has the capability of getting to 85% modulation.


Unless it's an old tube-type radio, your original radio was broke.
Just about every solid-state radio built since the 1960's has the
modulation set for 95-98%. I mentioned this before, but like every
other fact I have stated that is easily verifiable, you ignored it.


This 85% is by no means the average modulation... which is really
around 40% with voice signals.


It varies as much as people have different voices and speaking styles,
but it is generally accepted to be in the 20 to 25% range (peak to
average ratio from 5:1 to 4:1).


The VoiceMax brings the average
modulation to 100%! That means that every voice... high or low... soft
or loud... will modulate the radio at a constant 100%.


Impossible, and you prove it yourself with your implementation of a
noise gate. You can push 40 to 50% with heavy filtering, and that's
about the best you can do, but it still causes moderate distortion.
Even if your "constant 100%" modulation applies only to unmuted voice,
it would be completely unintelligible. You can pick up almost any book
on radio communications and it will say the same thing.


I'm in full
agreement with your last statement... if your leave the radio's
limiter untouched... you will only be able to maintain a constant 85%
modulation. Granted, that is a great improvement from the original
radio modulation... but to get full advantage from VoiceMax (the
VoiceMax installation instructions are quite clear on this point)...
you need to adjust or disable the radio's limiter so you're able to
reach the 100% modualtion point. Once there... the VoiceMax has an on-
board adjustable limiter that will hold you precisely at the 100%
level. You can't do any better than that!


Assuming you set your processor's limiter to 100% mush, you still need
to set the output level to the radio so it doesn't overmodulate. Even
just 101% modulation means clipping; pump that with 100% average noise
and you have the potential for some serious bleedover. And there's no
way for the average user to determine the precise point at which his
radio is at 100% modulation. Radios are set at the factory for 95% to
98% modulation to allow for slight variations in tolerance that happen
during normal operation; for you to claim that your processor limits
modulation to 100% all of the time is not only absurd, it's impossible
because of the tolerance limitations of the radio.


These are the hard questions, Brian. And this is not a rant. I'll even
grant you clemency from your now broken promise not to reply to my
posts. You have no excuse not to reply.

On Jul 10, 12:28 pm, Frank Gilliland
wrote:
This 85% is by no means the average modulation... which is really
around 40% with voice signals.

It varies as much as people have different voices and speaking styles,
but it is generally accepted to be in the 20 to 25% range (peak to
average ratio from 5:1 to 4:1).

Since you have stopped your personal attack (for now), I will
certainly respond to your comments.
You are correct... I said "around 40%". You say 20-25%.
Either way... the number is far from the optimum 100% value the
VoiceMax can deliver.

The VoiceMax brings the average
modulation to 100%! That means that every voice... high or low... soft
or loud... will modulate the radio at a constant 100%.

Impossible, and you prove it yourself with your implementation of a
noise gate. You can push 40 to 50% with heavy filtering, and that's
about the best you can do, but it still causes moderate distortion.

Very possible... and the distortion is less than 1% THD.

Even if your "constant 100%" modulation applies only to unmuted voice,
it would be completely unintelligible. You can pick up almost any book
on radio communications and it will say the same thing.

You are correct that the 100% average applies to the unmuted signal...
Why would we be talking about anything else?
The audio signal is perfectly clear and has less than 1% THD.

www.telstar-electronics.com

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:08:42 -0700, Telstar Electronics
wrote in
. com:

........

I met your standards, now you meet mine: Try your response again
without selectively snipping issues that you choose to ignore.

Assuming you set your processor's limiter to 100%, you still need
to set the output level to the radio so it doesn't overmodulate. Even
just 101% modulation means clipping; pump that with 100% average noise
and you have the potential for some serious bleedover. And there's no
way for the average user to determine the precise point at which his
radio is at 100% modulation. Radios are set at the factory for 95% to
98% modulation to allow for slight variations in tolerance that happen
during normal operation; for you to claim that your processor limits
modulation to 100% all of the time is not only absurd, it's impossible
because of the tolerance limitations of the radio.

I think this is the last of your comments I didn't have time to
respond to before. You are certainly correct that you need to set the
radio so it doesn't overmodulate. In the VoiceMax installation
instructions it says that for a precise modulation level, you should
use a scope. While it's true there's no perfect way to do this without
a scope... you should be able to get reasonably close by having an
assistant monitor your transmission during the adjustment. This is
also covered in the VoiceMax installation instructions. Even levels up
to 110% modulation will not cause excessive bleedover. The people you
hear on the air bleeding 20+ channels are usally running a combination
of excessive power with perhaps upward of 130% modulation. That is a
deadly splattering condition all right.

However, I don't agree with your statement that factory radios are set
to 95-98% possible modulation. There is no way there is enough margin
here to assure they will not exceed the 100%. That's why they they
normally set to around 85%. Both my Cobra radios were in that
vicinity. I have never put a factory radio on the scope and seen more
than 90%!

On Jul 9, 12:03 pm, james wrote:
the SSM2166 draws about 10mA of current. Four NiMH AA batteries have
1800mAhr capabilities. At full charge that delivers 5.6VDC to the
chip. Well within the operating range. Should get about 150 hrs of
operation. Add a charging circuit and you have no more issues.

James,

As you and Frank seem to have problems understanding Brian,
please let me translate for you...


"Telstar Electronics" wrote...
James, you are very similar to Frank... in that you have
distinct ideas.

You, just like Frank, know too much,

The problem you both have is one of conveyance.

and I am not listening to you.

(with fingers in ears)
La la la la

I have made every effort to answer your questions in
a civil manner...

I have tried all the stuff that works on the usual CBers,

but you continue to rant uncontrollably.

and I sill ain't listening,

I'm not sure by what authority you speak...

and I don't know why I should,

since you have no design of your own.

unless you help me out by designing something so
I can make it, sell it and pocket all the money.

Therefore, the conversation with Frank and James is
ended as far as I'm concerned.

So I will keep my fingers in my ears,

If some others have questions, I'd be more than happy to
attempt to answer you. If you don't wish to use this
forum... I fully understand.
Please email me anytime.

until you secretly capitulate and send me a design.


www.telstar-electronics.com

Remember who will retain the rights to your design.

*****

Any help to you, James?


:~)
Peter.
http://www.citizensband.radiouk.com/

"Telstar Electronics" wrote...

I'm not trying to encourage or discourage you... just trying to
give you the facts.

But, by making it internal only, you ARE encouraging the hacking of
radios.
I don't know about America, but there are very few real radio techs in
this country willing to take on CB work. It simply doesn't pay what a
real tech is worth. If they try to charge what they are worth, the
CBer will simply find a cheap "rig doctor" who has no real training.
Alternatively, they will try to fit it themselves... they will ask in
some group, and most likely get help from one of those "rig doctors".

Either way, "rig doctor" or DIY, they are likely to end up with
a hatchet job. When the system sounds like crap, will they really
blame their work - or your product?

I agree that there are many people that don't have the
expertise to install such a device. These folks would have to seek the
help of a technically competent person... such as a CB shop as you
mention.

Some time back, a regular customer brought in their radio and a
speech processor, which they wanted fitting. The speech
processor was a well known type, and had been obtained from
a well known UK supplier.
I believe that that the shop purchased the processor in kit
form, putting it together, to allow for their profit margin... because
I simply refuse to believe that the manufacturer makes such a
hatchet job of their soldering and wiring.

Proving that, even if your product only goes to retailers or
is only fitted by retailers, it may still end up as a hatchet
job... and your product could get the blame.



As for your question about the Turner... sorry... I have no
knowledge regarding this unit.

You have no knowledge of the products you are competing with?
And no intention of providing what the customer desires?

I can understand you ignoring the rantings of a bitter, twisted
old man who may have a grudge... but someone interested in your
product?
This seems to suggest that YOU decided that YOU want to
make and sell a product based on YOUR desires... not on what
the consumer wants or needs.

It reminds me of a certain singer who said that he didn't care
that his latest stuff was not what the public wanted... he
liked it.
Last I heard, I believe he was cleaning streets somewhere in
America.


Regards,
Peter.
http://www.citizensband.radiouk.com/

"Telstar Electronics" wrote...

An external device as you describe was considered during the design
phase... but we decided that an external box (although easier to hook
up initially) was unsightly with all the wires hanging all over, had
mounting issues, and therefore was much less reliable in the long run.

Didn't seem to stop the sales of other devices, such as
echo boxes and so many other devices.


Regards,
Peter.
http://www.citizensband.radiouk.com/