AudioBanter.com - View Single Post - Audio processing techniques for Amateur Radio

Lines: 78
Message-ID:
X-Complaints-To:
X-Abuse-Info: Please forward a copy of all headers for proper handling
X-Trace: ofjmidbaofeaohdodbdpiflmbcekedmfhojhikkbagflhcboel negbdekjfkpfdkdillphahkfobdkeojiianakelnpamgpnhjom ieaacndcnijapjogimejokdcbfpcifnhanogllmcpbphbnjaed lfcngapkoc
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 10:47:24 EDT
Organization: BellSouth Internet Group
Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 14:47:24 GMT
Xref: number1.nntp.ash.giganews.com rec.audio.pro:1069100

On 2004-05-07 (ScottDorsey) said:
wrote:
i do a lot of work on hf, using a HEil mic with the stock ICom gear
and from recordings I've heard of my audio its acceptable. I work
with folks using gear for the hf maritime services etc. and you'll
notice their audio is not near as full range because of even more
severe bandwidth limitations.
In the case of SSB, some of the things that will help your signal
get out farther are directly contrary to better sound quality.
Restricting signal bandwidth means more power per unit bandwidth
getting out. Heavy limiting, possibly using something like the
Turner communication mike, brings more definition to consonants.
The voice sounds buzzy and unnatural but it's more understandable
on the radio. If your goal isn't maximum intelligibility like the
DXers, though, there's a lot of playing room. Talk to Addison Inge,
AA4AV, who is one of the crazy wideband SSB audio guys and who has
been trying out a bunch of my Oktava 219 mike mods this week.
I bought the Heil, about the size of an sm-58, a little larger barrel
however, because I destroy headset mics and I like the foot switch
because I do a lot of net control work as well as traffic handling.
THerefore I need my hands free to use the computer and read braille.
IF I want to kick back in the chair I put the mic on an Atlas boom
stand, otherwise it rests on a table stand directly behinc my computer
keyboard.

I thought about playing with a SEnn 421 and different processing a few
months ago but decided I wasn't going to gain that much for the type
of work I do on the radio.

watch your bandwidth with a scope and strive for maximum
intelligibility. That's the whole point of communications audio.
It isn't about high fidelity, it's about inteligibility in poor
conditions.
There is a weird sort of subculture, which can be found often on
40M AM, who seem obsessed with audio quality often at the expense
of intelligibility on the ham bands. I don't get it, personally.

I listen to those guys occasionally as well and I don't understand.
THere again its a horses for courses issue. SSB was not designed to
be a high fidelity mode, it was made to save bandwidth and increase
efficiency. NOw if you were one of the guys playing on am then I
could understand that.

I'm not quite as piercing as some of the dx hounds but have reached a
reasonable compromise from what I've heard of my audio. IT seems to
me that you don't try to move your residence using a compact car and
you don't drive the big moving van as a commuter vehicle. Same goes
with audio. cOmmunications audio especially on hf is a whole
different bucket of worms than studio quality audio for production
work.

MOst folks whom I hear that could improve their audio should first
look into improving their station grounding and other areas first.
YOu'd be amazed at the number of stations I hear handling traffic and
doing public service work that have rf feedback problems and other
nastiness.

I still maintain that some wide area link systems have some pretty
crappy audio by the time the guy with the ht or mobile gets his signal
fed through a two meter repeater, a uhf link then another two meter
repeater and its associated uhf links etc. A guy I know back in Iowa
was working with the sOutheast Iowa link system and some equalization
trying to improve things just a bit but ...

Richard Webb
Electric Spider Productions
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--