"Bob Stein" wrote in message
...
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
There are lots of folks running the 'rice boxes'. I can attest by using
the
following rigs to got results.

Yaesu FT-101 series.
Kenwood Twins

Newer rigs such as the FT-1000MP does fine also, and the new Kenwood
TS-2000
sound good.

Running AM is fun, but you don't get the 'full effect' unless it smells
funny and once in a while catches fire.

"Real radios glow in the dark"

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...

Do any of the solid state rigs from the mid-80s to present put out a
good AM signal? If so, which ones? Is the conventional wisdom true
that only by resurrecting a boatanchor tube transmitter can an operator
get a nice sounding AM signal?

Thanks!





It may be fun, but it is also inconsiderate unless on a little used
band. It takes up at least twice the spectrum of an SSB signal, and
possibly more - hardly necessary given crowded band conditions. Not to
mention the off-frequency heterodynes.

Just two cents worth from an old timer (licensed for nearly 65 years)
and brought up on AM.

Bob, W6NBI

--
Remove spam-suppression X from my address

Your arguement is invalid. Considering modern day receivers with DSP, notch
filters, and crystal/DSP IF filters. You don't hear the other sideband, or
the carrier.....if you know how to use them that is.

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...
Bob Stein wrote:

Running AM is fun, but you don't get the 'full effect' unless it
smells
funny and once in a while catches fire.

"Real radios glow in the dark"

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...

Do any of the solid state rigs from the mid-80s to present put out a
good AM signal? If so, which ones? Is the conventional wisdom true
that only by resurrecting a boatanchor tube transmitter can an
operator
get a nice sounding AM signal?

Thanks!





It may be fun, but it is also inconsiderate unless on a little used
band. It takes up at least twice the spectrum of an SSB signal, and
possibly more - hardly necessary given crowded band conditions. Not to
mention the off-frequency heterodynes.

Just two cents worth from an old timer (licensed for nearly 65 years)
and brought up on AM.

Bob, W6NBI


I agree that it's important to be considerate, Bob. But even today, I
think
there's still room for playing around with AM, especially if one is
carefull
about the time of operation, the amount of power used (I'm planning on
using 40
watts output or so) and radiating a good signal. No question that SSB
uses less
spectrum for voice communications, but, if one is willing to forgo the
enjoyment
(dare I say fun) of operating phone, one could conserve even more spectrum
by
operating CW exclusively. Obviously there's a trade-off involved (between
the
extra "utility", broadly defined, of higher fidelity signals and the
extra,
double as you say, bandwidth consumed), but, so long as operators exhibit
good
judgment and courtesy, I think the community's enjoyment of the hobby is
maximized by giving people the choice of operating AM.

- Paul, N6LQ





Exactly correct. I operate AM on a limited basis. I also run less than
the legal limit for AM all the time.

I do not operate on 20 meters, nor do I operate on 75 after dark in the AM
mode. I can't speak for others.'

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...
Bob Stein wrote:

Running AM is fun, but you don't get the 'full effect' unless it
smells
funny and once in a while catches fire.

"Real radios glow in the dark"

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...

Do any of the solid state rigs from the mid-80s to present put out a
good AM signal? If so, which ones? Is the conventional wisdom true
that only by resurrecting a boatanchor tube transmitter can an
operator
get a nice sounding AM signal?

Thanks!





It may be fun, but it is also inconsiderate unless on a little used
band. It takes up at least twice the spectrum of an SSB signal, and
possibly more - hardly necessary given crowded band conditions. Not to
mention the off-frequency heterodynes.

Just two cents worth from an old timer (licensed for nearly 65 years)
and brought up on AM.

Bob, W6NBI


I agree that it's important to be considerate, Bob. But even today, I
think
there's still room for playing around with AM, especially if one is
carefull
about the time of operation, the amount of power used (I'm planning on
using 40
watts output or so) and radiating a good signal. No question that SSB
uses less
spectrum for voice communications, but, if one is willing to forgo the
enjoyment
(dare I say fun) of operating phone, one could conserve even more spectrum
by
operating CW exclusively. Obviously there's a trade-off involved (between
the
extra "utility", broadly defined, of higher fidelity signals and the
extra,
double as you say, bandwidth consumed), but, so long as operators exhibit
good
judgment and courtesy, I think the community's enjoyment of the hobby is
maximized by giving people the choice of operating AM.

- Paul, N6LQ





Exactly correct. I operate AM on a limited basis. I also run less than
the legal limit for AM all the time.

I do not operate on 20 meters, nor do I operate on 75 after dark in the AM
mode. I can't speak for others.'

Dan/W4NTI

Paul Clay wrote:
Bob Stein wrote:


Running AM is fun, but you don't get the 'full effect' unless it smells
funny and once in a while catches fire.

"Real radios glow in the dark"

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...


Do any of the solid state rigs from the mid-80s to present put out a
good AM signal? If so, which ones? Is the conventional wisdom true
that only by resurrecting a boatanchor tube transmitter can an operator
get a nice sounding AM signal?

Thanks!




It may be fun, but it is also inconsiderate unless on a little used
band. It takes up at least twice the spectrum of an SSB signal, and
possibly more - hardly necessary given crowded band conditions. Not to
mention the off-frequency heterodynes.

Just two cents worth from an old timer (licensed for nearly 65 years)
and brought up on AM.

Bob, W6NBI



I agree that it's important to be considerate, Bob. But even today, I think
there's still room for playing around with AM, especially if one is carefull
about the time of operation, the amount of power used (I'm planning on using 40
watts output or so) and radiating a good signal. No question that SSB uses less
spectrum for voice communications, but, if one is willing to forgo the enjoyment
(dare I say fun) of operating phone, one could conserve even more spectrum by
operating CW exclusively. Obviously there's a trade-off involved (between the
extra "utility", broadly defined, of higher fidelity signals and the extra,
double as you say, bandwidth consumed), but, so long as operators exhibit good
judgment and courtesy, I think the community's enjoyment of the hobby is
maximized by giving people the choice of operating AM.

- Paul, N6LQ





Paul, I don't understand this "higher fidelity" hype. Amateur radio is
about communications, not high fidelity. Of course, AM is not the only
mode that is using excess spectrum. I understand that there are
sidebanders who are cluttering up the bands with their wideband signals,
although I have to admit that I have never heard them because I do not
listen much. But apparently Riley Hollingsworth has and has issued
warnings about such operation.

CW obviously takes less spectrum, but let's face it, CW is dead. The
times, they are a'changin'.

Frankly, at the risk of incurring flames, I would like to see AM
outlawed on the HF bands, just as spark was outlawed even before my
time. On the other hand, I firmly believe that ham radio is a dying
hobby, vis-a-vis computers, so it won't make any difference in the long run.

Nice to have a civilized discussion.

Bob, W6NBI

--
Remove spam-suppression X from my address

Paul Clay wrote:
Bob Stein wrote:


Running AM is fun, but you don't get the 'full effect' unless it smells
funny and once in a while catches fire.

"Real radios glow in the dark"

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...


Do any of the solid state rigs from the mid-80s to present put out a
good AM signal? If so, which ones? Is the conventional wisdom true
that only by resurrecting a boatanchor tube transmitter can an operator
get a nice sounding AM signal?

Thanks!




It may be fun, but it is also inconsiderate unless on a little used
band. It takes up at least twice the spectrum of an SSB signal, and
possibly more - hardly necessary given crowded band conditions. Not to
mention the off-frequency heterodynes.

Just two cents worth from an old timer (licensed for nearly 65 years)
and brought up on AM.

Bob, W6NBI



I agree that it's important to be considerate, Bob. But even today, I think
there's still room for playing around with AM, especially if one is carefull
about the time of operation, the amount of power used (I'm planning on using 40
watts output or so) and radiating a good signal. No question that SSB uses less
spectrum for voice communications, but, if one is willing to forgo the enjoyment
(dare I say fun) of operating phone, one could conserve even more spectrum by
operating CW exclusively. Obviously there's a trade-off involved (between the
extra "utility", broadly defined, of higher fidelity signals and the extra,
double as you say, bandwidth consumed), but, so long as operators exhibit good
judgment and courtesy, I think the community's enjoyment of the hobby is
maximized by giving people the choice of operating AM.

- Paul, N6LQ





Paul, I don't understand this "higher fidelity" hype. Amateur radio is
about communications, not high fidelity. Of course, AM is not the only
mode that is using excess spectrum. I understand that there are
sidebanders who are cluttering up the bands with their wideband signals,
although I have to admit that I have never heard them because I do not
listen much. But apparently Riley Hollingsworth has and has issued
warnings about such operation.

CW obviously takes less spectrum, but let's face it, CW is dead. The
times, they are a'changin'.

Frankly, at the risk of incurring flames, I would like to see AM
outlawed on the HF bands, just as spark was outlawed even before my
time. On the other hand, I firmly believe that ham radio is a dying
hobby, vis-a-vis computers, so it won't make any difference in the long run.

Nice to have a civilized discussion.

Bob, W6NBI

--
Remove spam-suppression X from my address

Bob: I think you are wrong here. AM at the top of 10m hurts nobody. AM on
160 hurts nobody. proper AM operation on 80 and even 40 does not interfere
with many (time of day, power and other considerations are important
obviously.) Your CW comment has very little do with this issue. If it makes
you feel better, substitute PSK for CW -- low power, very narrow bandwidth.
Shall we outlaw SSB, AM, RTTY, and CW?

Is there a good reason why we must use the highest and newest technology at
all times?

I admit that I am prejudiced -- I still make palladium prints and think hypo
smells excellent.. I guess the same applies to my radio activities, too.

Paul


"Bob Stein" wrote in message
...
Paul Clay wrote:
Bob Stein wrote:


Running AM is fun, but you don't get the 'full effect' unless it
smells
funny and once in a while catches fire.

"Real radios glow in the dark"

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...


Do any of the solid state rigs from the mid-80s to present put out a
good AM signal? If so, which ones? Is the conventional wisdom true
that only by resurrecting a boatanchor tube transmitter can an
operator
get a nice sounding AM signal?

Thanks!




It may be fun, but it is also inconsiderate unless on a little used
band. It takes up at least twice the spectrum of an SSB signal, and
possibly more - hardly necessary given crowded band conditions. Not to
mention the off-frequency heterodynes.

Just two cents worth from an old timer (licensed for nearly 65 years)
and brought up on AM.

Bob, W6NBI



I agree that it's important to be considerate, Bob. But even today, I
think
there's still room for playing around with AM, especially if one is
carefull
about the time of operation, the amount of power used (I'm planning on
using 40
watts output or so) and radiating a good signal. No question that SSB
uses less
spectrum for voice communications, but, if one is willing to forgo the
enjoyment
(dare I say fun) of operating phone, one could conserve even more
spectrum by
operating CW exclusively. Obviously there's a trade-off involved
(between the
extra "utility", broadly defined, of higher fidelity signals and the
extra,
double as you say, bandwidth consumed), but, so long as operators
exhibit good
judgment and courtesy, I think the community's enjoyment of the hobby is
maximized by giving people the choice of operating AM.

- Paul, N6LQ





Paul, I don't understand this "higher fidelity" hype. Amateur radio is
about communications, not high fidelity. Of course, AM is not the only
mode that is using excess spectrum. I understand that there are
sidebanders who are cluttering up the bands with their wideband signals,
although I have to admit that I have never heard them because I do not
listen much. But apparently Riley Hollingsworth has and has issued
warnings about such operation.

CW obviously takes less spectrum, but let's face it, CW is dead. The
times, they are a'changin'.

Frankly, at the risk of incurring flames, I would like to see AM
outlawed on the HF bands, just as spark was outlawed even before my
time. On the other hand, I firmly believe that ham radio is a dying
hobby, vis-a-vis computers, so it won't make any difference in the long
run.

Nice to have a civilized discussion.

Bob, W6NBI

--
Remove spam-suppression X from my address

Bob: I think you are wrong here. AM at the top of 10m hurts nobody. AM on
160 hurts nobody. proper AM operation on 80 and even 40 does not interfere
with many (time of day, power and other considerations are important
obviously.) Your CW comment has very little do with this issue. If it makes
you feel better, substitute PSK for CW -- low power, very narrow bandwidth.
Shall we outlaw SSB, AM, RTTY, and CW?

Is there a good reason why we must use the highest and newest technology at
all times?

I admit that I am prejudiced -- I still make palladium prints and think hypo
smells excellent.. I guess the same applies to my radio activities, too.

Paul


"Bob Stein" wrote in message
...
Paul Clay wrote:
Bob Stein wrote:


Running AM is fun, but you don't get the 'full effect' unless it
smells
funny and once in a while catches fire.

"Real radios glow in the dark"

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...


Do any of the solid state rigs from the mid-80s to present put out a
good AM signal? If so, which ones? Is the conventional wisdom true
that only by resurrecting a boatanchor tube transmitter can an
operator
get a nice sounding AM signal?

Thanks!




It may be fun, but it is also inconsiderate unless on a little used
band. It takes up at least twice the spectrum of an SSB signal, and
possibly more - hardly necessary given crowded band conditions. Not to
mention the off-frequency heterodynes.

Just two cents worth from an old timer (licensed for nearly 65 years)
and brought up on AM.

Bob, W6NBI



I agree that it's important to be considerate, Bob. But even today, I
think
there's still room for playing around with AM, especially if one is
carefull
about the time of operation, the amount of power used (I'm planning on
using 40
watts output or so) and radiating a good signal. No question that SSB
uses less
spectrum for voice communications, but, if one is willing to forgo the
enjoyment
(dare I say fun) of operating phone, one could conserve even more
spectrum by
operating CW exclusively. Obviously there's a trade-off involved
(between the
extra "utility", broadly defined, of higher fidelity signals and the
extra,
double as you say, bandwidth consumed), but, so long as operators
exhibit good
judgment and courtesy, I think the community's enjoyment of the hobby is
maximized by giving people the choice of operating AM.

- Paul, N6LQ





Paul, I don't understand this "higher fidelity" hype. Amateur radio is
about communications, not high fidelity. Of course, AM is not the only
mode that is using excess spectrum. I understand that there are
sidebanders who are cluttering up the bands with their wideband signals,
although I have to admit that I have never heard them because I do not
listen much. But apparently Riley Hollingsworth has and has issued
warnings about such operation.

CW obviously takes less spectrum, but let's face it, CW is dead. The
times, they are a'changin'.

Frankly, at the risk of incurring flames, I would like to see AM
outlawed on the HF bands, just as spark was outlawed even before my
time. On the other hand, I firmly believe that ham radio is a dying
hobby, vis-a-vis computers, so it won't make any difference in the long
run.

Nice to have a civilized discussion.

Bob, W6NBI

--
Remove spam-suppression X from my address

An inexpensive solid state rig for "AM" use
is the Yaesu FT-757GX or GX II. There
are a number of them around for about
$300.00 without the power supply (FD-700/757
heavy duty power supply). Any 13.5 VDC 20amp
power supply will work with this rig and the power
supplies, FD-700/757, are cheap as well. If you
don't mind the size and weight there are a number
of other trasmitters, ie Hallicrafter HT-32/A,
HT-37, Heathkit DX-40, DX-60, DX-100
etc that will give you excellent "AM" results. The latter
rigs would need an outboard receiver capable of "AM",
not zero beating an "AM" signal although that
can be done. The HT-32A is an excellent "AM"
transmitter, I used one for years before selling it
because of shipping weight and desk space.

As for "Crowded bands", well that's been around
for years and a few stations using "AM" won't
be a problem. After all, "AM" was the original
mode of voice long before "SSB" ever came around.
That was not to mean that "SSB" is no more important
that "AM", just to say "AM" still works and a lot of
folks still use it.

I have no problem with stations that want to operate
"AM". So if you are looking for "AM" gear than
charge on my friend, there's tons of it out there for the
picking.

73's

Mike
DA1TNJ / WB8TNJ

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...
Bob Stein wrote:

Running AM is fun, but you don't get the 'full effect' unless it
smells
funny and once in a while catches fire.

"Real radios glow in the dark"

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...

Do any of the solid state rigs from the mid-80s to present put out a
good AM signal? If so, which ones? Is the conventional wisdom true
that only by resurrecting a boatanchor tube transmitter can an
operator
get a nice sounding AM signal?

Thanks!





It may be fun, but it is also inconsiderate unless on a little used
band. It takes up at least twice the spectrum of an SSB signal, and
possibly more - hardly necessary given crowded band conditions. Not to
mention the off-frequency heterodynes.

Just two cents worth from an old timer (licensed for nearly 65 years)
and brought up on AM.

Bob, W6NBI


I agree that it's important to be considerate, Bob. But even today, I
think
there's still room for playing around with AM, especially if one is
carefull
about the time of operation, the amount of power used (I'm planning on
using 40
watts output or so) and radiating a good signal. No question that SSB
uses less
spectrum for voice communications, but, if one is willing to forgo the
enjoyment
(dare I say fun) of operating phone, one could conserve even more spectrum
by
operating CW exclusively. Obviously there's a trade-off involved (between
the
extra "utility", broadly defined, of higher fidelity signals and the
extra,
double as you say, bandwidth consumed), but, so long as operators exhibit
good
judgment and courtesy, I think the community's enjoyment of the hobby is
maximized by giving people the choice of operating AM.

- Paul, N6LQ

An inexpensive solid state rig for "AM" use
is the Yaesu FT-757GX or GX II. There
are a number of them around for about
$300.00 without the power supply (FD-700/757
heavy duty power supply). Any 13.5 VDC 20amp
power supply will work with this rig and the power
supplies, FD-700/757, are cheap as well. If you
don't mind the size and weight there are a number
of other trasmitters, ie Hallicrafter HT-32/A,
HT-37, Heathkit DX-40, DX-60, DX-100
etc that will give you excellent "AM" results. The latter
rigs would need an outboard receiver capable of "AM",
not zero beating an "AM" signal although that
can be done. The HT-32A is an excellent "AM"
transmitter, I used one for years before selling it
because of shipping weight and desk space.

As for "Crowded bands", well that's been around
for years and a few stations using "AM" won't
be a problem. After all, "AM" was the original
mode of voice long before "SSB" ever came around.
That was not to mean that "SSB" is no more important
that "AM", just to say "AM" still works and a lot of
folks still use it.

I have no problem with stations that want to operate
"AM". So if you are looking for "AM" gear than
charge on my friend, there's tons of it out there for the
picking.

73's

Mike
DA1TNJ / WB8TNJ

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...
Bob Stein wrote:

Running AM is fun, but you don't get the 'full effect' unless it
smells
funny and once in a while catches fire.

"Real radios glow in the dark"

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...

Do any of the solid state rigs from the mid-80s to present put out a
good AM signal? If so, which ones? Is the conventional wisdom true
that only by resurrecting a boatanchor tube transmitter can an
operator
get a nice sounding AM signal?

Thanks!





It may be fun, but it is also inconsiderate unless on a little used
band. It takes up at least twice the spectrum of an SSB signal, and
possibly more - hardly necessary given crowded band conditions. Not to
mention the off-frequency heterodynes.

Just two cents worth from an old timer (licensed for nearly 65 years)
and brought up on AM.

Bob, W6NBI


I agree that it's important to be considerate, Bob. But even today, I
think
there's still room for playing around with AM, especially if one is
carefull
about the time of operation, the amount of power used (I'm planning on
using 40
watts output or so) and radiating a good signal. No question that SSB
uses less
spectrum for voice communications, but, if one is willing to forgo the
enjoyment
(dare I say fun) of operating phone, one could conserve even more spectrum
by
operating CW exclusively. Obviously there's a trade-off involved (between
the
extra "utility", broadly defined, of higher fidelity signals and the
extra,
double as you say, bandwidth consumed), but, so long as operators exhibit
good
judgment and courtesy, I think the community's enjoyment of the hobby is
maximized by giving people the choice of operating AM.

- Paul, N6LQ

I agree. Bob, you are wrong about "AM".
There is absolutely nothing wrong with using
"AM". It is an authorized mode within the
amateur radio rules and regulations! In addition,
Bob, "AM" is not "Inconsiderate". "Inconsiderate"
is about "Operators", not a "Mode", who intentionally
interfere with amateur communications and who ignore
others.

As for your comment on "CW", I agree that
has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of
"AM" other than spectrum space.

I've been in the amateur radio community for over
35 years and enjoy "ALL" the modes the
FCC has authorized us to use.

Bob, there is more to amateur radio than "SSB".
"AM" is "F U N", as amateur radio is so why not
give it a try? You have nothing, absolutely nothing,
to loose. Who knows, you might even enjoy it
from time to time.

73's

Michael
DA1TNJ / WB8TNJ

" wrote in message
news:0XXrb.121532$ao4.378226@attbi_s51...
Bob: I think you are wrong here. AM at the top of 10m hurts nobody. AM on
160 hurts nobody. proper AM operation on 80 and even 40 does not interfere
with many (time of day, power and other considerations are important
obviously.) Your CW comment has very little do with this issue. If it
makes
you feel better, substitute PSK for CW -- low power, very narrow
bandwidth.
Shall we outlaw SSB, AM, RTTY, and CW?

Is there a good reason why we must use the highest and newest technology
at
all times?

I admit that I am prejudiced -- I still make palladium prints and think
hypo
smells excellent.. I guess the same applies to my radio activities, too.

Paul


"Bob Stein" wrote in message
...
Paul Clay wrote:
Bob Stein wrote:


Running AM is fun, but you don't get the 'full effect' unless it
smells
funny and once in a while catches fire.

"Real radios glow in the dark"

Dan/W4NTI

"Paul Clay" wrote in message
...


Do any of the solid state rigs from the mid-80s to present put out a
good AM signal? If so, which ones? Is the conventional wisdom true
that only by resurrecting a boatanchor tube transmitter can an
operator
get a nice sounding AM signal?

Thanks!




It may be fun, but it is also inconsiderate unless on a little used
band. It takes up at least twice the spectrum of an SSB signal, and
possibly more - hardly necessary given crowded band conditions. Not
to
mention the off-frequency heterodynes.

Just two cents worth from an old timer (licensed for nearly 65 years)
and brought up on AM.

Bob, W6NBI



I agree that it's important to be considerate, Bob. But even today, I
think
there's still room for playing around with AM, especially if one is
carefull
about the time of operation, the amount of power used (I'm planning on
using 40
watts output or so) and radiating a good signal. No question that SSB
uses less
spectrum for voice communications, but, if one is willing to forgo the
enjoyment
(dare I say fun) of operating phone, one could conserve even more
spectrum by
operating CW exclusively. Obviously there's a trade-off involved
(between the
extra "utility", broadly defined, of higher fidelity signals and the
extra,
double as you say, bandwidth consumed), but, so long as operators
exhibit good
judgment and courtesy, I think the community's enjoyment of the hobby
is
maximized by giving people the choice of operating AM.

- Paul, N6LQ





Paul, I don't understand this "higher fidelity" hype. Amateur radio is
about communications, not high fidelity. Of course, AM is not the only
mode that is using excess spectrum. I understand that there are
sidebanders who are cluttering up the bands with their wideband signals,
although I have to admit that I have never heard them because I do not
listen much. But apparently Riley Hollingsworth has and has issued
warnings about such operation.

CW obviously takes less spectrum, but let's face it, CW is dead. The
times, they are a'changin'.

Frankly, at the risk of incurring flames, I would like to see AM
outlawed on the HF bands, just as spark was outlawed even before my
time. On the other hand, I firmly believe that ham radio is a dying
hobby, vis-a-vis computers, so it won't make any difference in the long
run.

Nice to have a civilized discussion.

Bob, W6NBI

--
Remove spam-suppression X from my address