• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

New Legal Part 15 AM Transmitter Evaluation To Begin

[quote
It's been silent for decades. There are multiple applications for it, from new COLs, but NIMBY has kept it off.[/quote]

OK, I give...what's NIMBY?[/quote]

Not In My Back Yard...resistance of locals to construction of any visually unappealing structures, here referring to radio towers...
 
wkbam1690 said:
Not In My Back Yard...resistance of locals to construction of any visually unappealing structures, here referring to radio towers...

Ahhh...thanks.
 
RickRadio I'm down in the High Desert: during some times during the year we only have a few hours for daytime operations in the upper band. 1500 AM is dead here, and I'm sure David would agree; the odds of 1500 Burbank coming back are near zero, not to many people want four to six towers planted in their backyards, even if they are short as in the case of 1500.
The only hope would be for a COL change, and maybe come up to the desert, the towers would need not be much taller than a cell tower, or flag pole which have been used before. We have some open spots down the dial from AM stations that have been put to sleep, like 850 in Thousand Oaks.

Steve
Radio Brandy/XRQK
 
Just wondering what the final verdict of the review was.
We are just getting started with the review process! We still have to plant a ground system, and set up a new studio to feed the new signal. This is also an educatil process for the students, look for some results buy Friday if all goes as planned.
Here's something worth noting: A second box that will be made available will allow you to be able to plug in a programmed usb memory stick and program straight from it.

Steve
Radio Brandy
 
XRQKFM said:
We are just getting started with the review process! We still have to plant a ground system, and set up a new studio to feed the new signal. This is also an educatil process for the students, look for some results buy Friday if all goes as planned.
Here's something worth noting: A second box that will be made available will allow you to be able to plug in a programmed usb memory stick and program straight from it.

Steve
Radio Brandy

That is awesome! Thanks for the help. USB would be an amazing option for me, a technical newbie.

Neal
 
I wonder how Steve’s review could be unbiased, since he admits he doesn’t like me. Like I have said many times apparently Ryan was doing some unethical/illegal things & I just said something about it, I really don’t see what the problem is. I felt like I was doing the right thing. Steve keeps bringing up this (supposing horrible) thing again and again.
 
This is one reason why I would have loved to performed the review and and a real-world comparison between the Rangemaster and the Procaster. Personally I think I would be a better choice for a multitude of reasons:

1. Previously authored technical articles for such publications such as Radio World.
2. Over 35 years engineering AM & FM terrestrial broadcast stations.
3. Have an actual need for such a device and would need to actually compare "as installed" performance.
4. Ability to test in low-obstruction test field for "real world" field strength measurements.
5. Along with several colleagues, would be able to objectively critique audio performance on various receivers.

When I emailed Chezradio they "seemed" interested in the article I was authoring but didn't seem interested enough in supplying a test unit for evaluation. While the testing and evaluation would be performed in conjunction with the installation of a station as part of a school system, there wouldn't be anybody attempting to sway the opinion of the evaluation panel in any way. If Chezradio were to contact me that would be fine by me, but it seemed from my last email to them they were only casually interested. If I had the budget I would have purchased one for a side by side comparison but I'm already resorting to donations for studio equipment still needed to complete that part of the project.
 
I wonder how Steve’s review could be unbiased, since he admits he doesn’t like me. Like I have said many times apparently Ryan was doing some unethical/illegal things & I just said something about it, I really don’t see what the problem is. I felt like I was doing the right thing. Steve keeps bringing up this (supposing horrible) thing again and again.
It's not me you have to worry about, I still get request for transmitters today that have to be synced up, there is a hint about the review. It is your former customers you have to make it up to somehow, I can tell you from e-mails I get you have really pissed them off getting involved in Ryans business. Don't blame the messinger, I only report on information provided to me. Don't forget it was I who asked the folks here to back off you, after they nearly beat you to death in the woodshead.
I will dispel some myths and false information about the Procaster here and now

1. It is a product of Canada, according to the North American Free Trade Agreement Certificate Of Origin. and personal inspection.
2. The Procaster is FCC certified, FCC ID Number: VCJ-AMTX100.
3. It is not a copy of the Rangemaster.

It is not going to be a 100 percent replacement for the Rangemaster, each unit has their advantages and disadvantages. Rangemaster wil still have a nitch market, but only if you stop making comments like: "I wonder how Steve’s review could be unbiased, since he admits he doesn’t like me" that is an almost childish statement.
I remind you people looking for information about Rangemasters come here, like one of my clients who needed no less than 10 transmitters to start, that could be synced up to the same frequency, now after reading your rant here, it is going to be like pulling teeth bringing my client back in your direction.

Steve
Radio Brandy

Steve
Radio Brandy
 
This is one reason why I would have loved to performed the review and and a real-world comparison between the Rangemaster and the Procaster. Personally I think I would be a better choice for a multitude of reasons:
Shell out $700 dollars like we did and do your own review.
Has Hamilton given us one transmitter for review "NO"
Have we given Hamilton Rangemaster positive reviews "YES"
Does Rangemaster have links and positve information on our site "YES"
Has Hamilton even said thank you for the sales we sent his way "NO"
Does positive information about Rangemaster remain on our site "YES"
Google Search: Rangemaster AM transmitter "yeilds this"
Great Rangemaster review as well as valuable information on Part 15 AM broadcasting
From Google Search directed to www.radiobrandy.com/RBpart15am.html

1. Previously authored technical articles for such publications such as Radio World.
Previously authored technical reviews on Hamilton Rangemaster transmitter, EDM LED & LCD FM Transmitter, Sstran AM Transmitter,Carls AM Antenna on all major radio boards.
2. Over 35 years engineering AM & FM terrestrial broadcast stations.
Over 40 years in broadcasting including ownership, management and training in an educational non profit environment now hosting 65 students.
4. Ability to test in low-obstruction test field for "real world" field strength measurements.
We are located in a wide open desert, the nearest traffic signal "27 miles".
5. Along with several colleagues, would be able to objectively critique audio performance on various receivers.
Along with several colleagues we conduct real world test.
Radio Brandy has 15 Rangemaster AM transmitters in the field under our direct control, and maintain 10 others.
Radio Brandy has 10 Sstran AM transmitters on campus.

Our reviews have been very fair and un-bias and Hamilton knows it!
Hamilton should be allot nicer to someone who has sent him so much business.
Radio Brandy is ranked #4 on Google search: Part 15 AM
Radi Brandy has had over 5000 eyeball on the site since the last reset

Steve
www.radiobrandy.com
 
Let's put personal differences aside and focus on this Procaster.

From what I can see, the only means of syncing these transmitters together is by trimming the frequency for a close match.

But would this be reliable over long term use? I can envision having to frequently tune these transmitters so that they stay matched.

db
 
The Procaster is not designed to be synced together like the Rangemaster, like you said you would have to try to lock them via the trimmer. A future version may have the ability to be synced up, hopefully a cheaper method other than GPS syncing could be found!
Like I said each transmitter will have their own nitch markets, the Procaster will go to the stand alone market, and the Rangemaster will go to the multi-cell & synced market. The Procaster has internal audio processing and power is fed via an indoor interface, cat 3 cable is used for the interconnection. In the near future a second interface will allow you to play USB memory sticks, which would be perfect for those who extended audio loops.
The only thing from China on the Procaster is the wall wart, everything else is well made in Canada. You don't have to worry about trying to find a whip antenna from Radio Shack, which are no longer stocked locally in our High Desert stores. Radio Shack no longer stocks RF cable either, except TV, they have managed to take the radio out of Radio Shack.
At $700 dollars it is a good valuse, considering you can forgo the $700 external audio processor

Weather is preventing mounting it outside this week, where its rain and high winds here in the Desert the rest of the week.

Steve
www.radiobrandy.com
 
I could be wrong, but from outward appearances it does seem like Steve has some personal issues with Hamilton which are quite apparent by the content of his own past posts.

Has Hamilton even said thank you for the sales we sent his way "NO"

While you can read that statement in a number of ways, some of your past posts do lend themselves to having a chip on your shoulder, Steve. Do you get upset at McDonald's for all the business you've sent their way, too? :D

From the other past comments mentioned I personally would have questions regarding the validity of the test results without proper controls in place under real world conditions with peer review. That's why with any equipment test I've done in conjunction with the broadcast trade paper article, SBE chapter presentation or the like I always made certain that there was a cross section of qualified engineering talent around to be objective and point out any situation for a given test that may unfairly skew the test results one way or the other. Of course not everybody's approach is that detailed but then again, not everybody writes to be reviewed by their industry peers.

Shell out $700 dollars like we did and do your own review.

As a published author I never "shell out" to obtain anybody's product for review. Many manufacturers will approach me with products and provide them under "manufacturer's consideration" for the purpose of making them available for review, otherwise I am very judicious on what gear I write about.

Regardless, it will be interesting to see what the review entails and see how the Procaster compares to the frontrunner Hamilton.
 
Do you get upset at McDonald's for all the business you've sent their way,
Yes when they don't pay their bill for advertising that sent all the business their way.
Has Hamilton even said thank you for the sales we sent his way "NO"
That was in a reference about potential bias and not liking Hamilton, The point was have always provided fair reviews on all products we review, not just transmitters.
As a published author I never "shell out" to obtain anybody's product for review. Many manufacturers will approach me with products and provide them under "manufacturer's consideration" for the purpose of making them available for review, otherwise I am very judicious on what gear I write about.
Here at Radio Brandy, we are required to purchase every piece of equipment we review, even if we are offered a sample, we still have a member purchase the item and it’s that item that gets tested and reviewed not the sample.
Back when I worked as a senior technician for a major manufacturer or cable TV head end equipment, the sales department would always have me tweak out the sample before it went out for review; I knew the review was never fair or accurate, no did the reviewer ever mention he got a tweaked version from us.
As a user; I like to receive the product the same way everyone else does; by paying for it! The evaluation is just a little different when it’s my own hard earned money going into it, than when its handed to me on a silver platter.
We also take the intended user into account; we have a student read the instructions, and set up the item according to the instructions provided. With some items; they don’t function as intended because of errors in the directions as in the case of the transmitters from China. As techs, we can work our way around the instructions, and make the item perform but the intended user may not.
Radio Brandy also enjoys the services of broadcast engineers who volunteer around here; many work for major market broadcast groups; we don't have a peer problem.
Our reviews are more fair and unbiased because we don't use manufacturer samples.

As far as Keith Hamilton is concerned I definitely don’t have any personal problems with Keith, in fact we have many personal things in common. My advice is intended to protect Keith and his business, good public relations is very important to a company’s survival. Our operation still sends allot of business his way from the posted reviews on our site and our consultations with local governments who require transmitters that can be synced.

With 5000 new part 15 AM transmitters going on the air this year alone, there is plenty of business to go around. Each transmitter is going to find their own nitch markets and shared markets, and that includes Sstran for those who like to build their own transmitters from kits.

Steve
 
Bill DeFelice said:
This is one reason why I would have loved to performed the review and and a real-world comparison between the Rangemaster and the Procaster. Personally I think I would be a better choice for a multitude of reasons:

1. Previously authored technical articles for such publications such as Radio World.
2. Over 35 years engineering AM & FM terrestrial broadcast stations.
3. Have an actual need for such a device and would need to actually compare "as installed" performance.
4. Ability to test in low-obstruction test field for "real world" field strength measurements.
5. Along with several colleagues, would be able to objectively critique audio performance on various receivers.

When I emailed Chezradio they "seemed" interested in the article I was authoring but didn't seem interested enough in supplying a test unit for evaluation. While the testing and evaluation would be performed in conjunction with the installation of a station as part of a school system, there wouldn't be anybody attempting to sway the opinion of the evaluation panel in any way. If Chezradio were to contact me that would be fine by me, but it seemed from my last email to them they were only casually interested. If I had the budget I would have purchased one for a side by side comparison but I'm already resorting to donations for studio equipment still needed to complete that part of the project.

Part of the problem is lack of a reputation and lack of an outlet for a review.

A good friend of mine writes for nearly every automotive magazine in the English-speaking world. Every month he cranks out dozens of editorials and how-to articles and is well known among automotive enthusiasts and manufacturers. As a result he gets hundreds, and often thousands, of dollars of free products every month from manufacturers in the hopes of getting some column space from him.

But there is no magazine for the part 15 broadcaster and no one well known voice (or voices) for that community. So there is no incentive for a manufacturer to provide or even loan a product for a review.

Now if I had the money I'd start a bi-monthly magazine for the Part 15 broadcaster. I think the interest is there and there are certainly a wide number of topics to cover: how-to installations, profiles of successful stations, music licensing issues, antennas, alternatives to AM/FM part 15 broadcasting...and product reviews, to mention a few topics. I'd even try to recruit a retired FCC field agent for a regular column.

But a magazine, even an on-line version, is something that is needed for the part 15 broadcaster.

We need more than just a forum like this to discuss community broadcasting.

db
 
Bill DeFelice said:
When I emailed Chezradio they "seemed" interested in the article I was authoring but didn't seem interested enough in supplying a test unit for evaluation. While the testing and evaluation would be performed in conjunction with the installation of a station as part of a school system, there wouldn't be anybody attempting to sway the opinion of the evaluation panel in any way. If Chezradio were to contact me that would be fine by me, but it seemed from my last email to them they were only casually interested. If I had the budget I would have purchased one for a side by side comparison but I'm already resorting to donations for studio equipment still needed to complete that part of the project.

Sorry, we did not pick up that you wanted to review the Procaster. We would definitely appreciate another opinion especially given your experience. As well as Steve of Radiobrandy beginning his tests, we have also been reviewed by MLR at Part15.us. We can loan you a unit if you wish to do a comparison review with the Rangemaster - just let us know where to ship the unit and we will get one out to you ASAP. Email Gerry at [email protected] with the info.
 
db: That's a very good point. While I find it's quite easy to shop my articles around and get them published in the terrestrial broadcast journals, the fact that there's no exclusive Part 15 publication could be construed as a stumbling point. There are some publications that I would approach that would be a "good" fit due to the hobbyist following in both electronics and radio following, but obviously nothing like a niche publication targeted exclusively for the Part 15 hobby broadcaster. Perhaps once I migrate my webstream to the next level I may try to look into getting a group in interested folks to publish an e-publication. I know there's a growing interest in the hobby (I've been doing Part 15 stuff since the late 1960's).

Gerry: I'll drop you a line in a week or so. I hope for a little warmer weather here in the Northeast for the test install and eval.
 
Here is a review by MLR on the new Procaster AM transmitter http://part15.us/node/1622
Our review will be delayed due to weather. It's never a good ideal to try an install a transmitter like this with 40 MPH winds and rain. We want to do the installation right in order to give the Procaster a fair review.
For the record: You can use more than one Procaster transmitter by staggering the frequencies. Example: 1610-1620-1610 or 1610-1670-1610, depending on what's open in your area.
Like the RangeMaster; the Procaster is a serious contender in the ever growing part 15 AM community.
The old Hobby Broadcasting magazine was great for transmitter reviews back in its day, to bad it did not get more support, we could really use a magazine like that now!

Steve
www.radiobrandy.net
Now Hosted By Powweb
 
I saw that Hobby Broadcasting magazine a couple times at Barnes & Noble.
Right about the time I was figuring out some of the technical words and making more sense out of what it was saying (I ain't got that technical a brain), poof!, it was gone. ???
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom