-
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
Please rank top 5 transmitter brand names for LPFM
- Thread starter joshzz
- Start date
Nautel is the tops. Crown makes a solid box. Armstrong. Nicom also has some good stuff.
If I were you, I'd buy a BE FXi-250 exciter.
BE was the first company to come along with a really great exciter back in the 80s...a something-30. (What was that? It escapes me, but it was 30 watts.)
Continental followed with the 50 watt 802A that sounded about as good. (For it's time.) BE upped the ante with something a little better. Harris finally entered the nice sounding exciter realm with the Digit. Everybody was making 50-60 watt exciters that sounded great.
But then BE did something that I really hate- they started making transmitters that required a LOT of drive power from the exciter- over 100 watts. And that pretty much stuck you with their exciter.
But they came out with 2 exciters- the FXi-60, and the FXi-250, which was just a bigger version of the 60. I have two of those 60s, even though I have Harris transmitters everywhere. And I love them.
The FXi-250 would make a totally awesome 150-250 watt transmitter. It's remote controllable, has built in RDS, sounds great, HD ready, rock solid reliable, and made by a major transmitter manufacturer.
To me it's a no-brainer.
BE was the first company to come along with a really great exciter back in the 80s...a something-30. (What was that? It escapes me, but it was 30 watts.)
Continental followed with the 50 watt 802A that sounded about as good. (For it's time.) BE upped the ante with something a little better. Harris finally entered the nice sounding exciter realm with the Digit. Everybody was making 50-60 watt exciters that sounded great.
But then BE did something that I really hate- they started making transmitters that required a LOT of drive power from the exciter- over 100 watts. And that pretty much stuck you with their exciter.
But they came out with 2 exciters- the FXi-60, and the FXi-250, which was just a bigger version of the 60. I have two of those 60s, even though I have Harris transmitters everywhere. And I love them.
The FXi-250 would make a totally awesome 150-250 watt transmitter. It's remote controllable, has built in RDS, sounds great, HD ready, rock solid reliable, and made by a major transmitter manufacturer.
To me it's a no-brainer.
Greg, you are thinking of the FX-30. Had a silver front. bar graph meter for modulation and analog multi meter. It was good exciter except for one thing. A deep bass beat would knock the AFC off. I had one on an oldies station in Macon and we really had to watch the modulation.
Harris had an exciter before the Digit that was pretty good. It was the THE-1. I replaced a MX-15 with one and couldn't believe the difference.
Harris had an exciter before the Digit that was pretty good. It was the THE-1. I replaced a MX-15 with one and couldn't believe the difference.
LPFM, unlike Full Power FM, requires a CERTIFIED, rather than type-accepted transmitter.
Although some of the above suggestions are good, you must confirm with the manufacturer that it is certified (which is different than accepted or verified).
Crown, BW, and Bext provide certified units. I would also check with Nautel to see that their latest units are certified.
Although some of the above suggestions are good, you must confirm with the manufacturer that it is certified (which is different than accepted or verified).
Crown, BW, and Bext provide certified units. I would also check with Nautel to see that their latest units are certified.
Josh - It's a bit more involved than listing the top 5 LPFM transmitters. Not all manufactures make transmitters that are LPFM certified. I have put two LPFMs on the air and just did a major upgrade on another. The LPFM rules restrict you to having a transmitter specifically certified for LPFM. If you look at the FCC filed notices you will find that LPFM operators are being held accountable for running non-LPFM certified transmitters. You cannot run a Nautel on an LPFM as they are currently not certified for LPFM.
As for the FCC certification for LPFM transmitters, you really have to do your homework on this. Below is a link to the FCC's Equipment Authorization Search page. There are several different search fields - you can put in the manufacture's name as the applicant name and go from there.
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm
Many confuse type accepted or verified with being certified for LPFM. You would think that if you can use a Nautel in a full power facility you could certainly use it on an LPFM. This is not the case. It must have a separate certification for LPFM. Even the BE low power series and their exciters are not LPFM certified. Broadcast Warehouse's line of transmitters are fully certified for LPFM.
Certified LPFM transmitters will have a permanently attached label bearing the FCC identifier. [See 2.907, 2.925 and 73.1660(a)(2)] .
Back on topic: I have had great success with Broadcast Warehouse and Bext transmitters. I've had trouble with Nicom. This is just my take on this.
As for the FCC certification for LPFM transmitters, you really have to do your homework on this. Below is a link to the FCC's Equipment Authorization Search page. There are several different search fields - you can put in the manufacture's name as the applicant name and go from there.
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm
Many confuse type accepted or verified with being certified for LPFM. You would think that if you can use a Nautel in a full power facility you could certainly use it on an LPFM. This is not the case. It must have a separate certification for LPFM. Even the BE low power series and their exciters are not LPFM certified. Broadcast Warehouse's line of transmitters are fully certified for LPFM.
Certified LPFM transmitters will have a permanently attached label bearing the FCC identifier. [See 2.907, 2.925 and 73.1660(a)(2)] .
Back on topic: I have had great success with Broadcast Warehouse and Bext transmitters. I've had trouble with Nicom. This is just my take on this.
greg.hahn said:
Probably at the behest of the NAB who thought that LPFM stations would all be running Ramseys or other home-brewed junk. Instead, the LPFM can't legally use high-quality type-accepted exciters and has to choose from a small subset of off-brand products.
I too am not very impressed with Nicom. The manuals are all in broken English and the performance is a disappointment. It's stupid that stuff like that is "LPFM Certified" while a Nautel or BE exciter or low power transmitter that (as previously said) could be used to drive a 100kW monster isn't legal for a peashooter.
greg.hahn said:
As techie said, you can definitely blame NAB for this one. Remember all the nonsense about how LPFM interference would make a mess of the band? The lobbyists suggested that LPFM licesees (i.e. social outcast misfit liberals) would simply fire up their old homebrew pirate transmitters and destroy the reception of existing FM stations and aircraft communications, so the FCC (subordinates of the NAB) responded by imposing strict certification requirements.
It's the same kind of thought process that would lead the FCC to increase fines on public file violations as the "solution" to a decline in local programming content.
You all got it right as to the reasoning behind using "certified" transmitters.
I don't have any experience with Nicoms.
We've had tremendous results from the Bext units that we have (Main and Aux). Now only if the Commission would actually let us license an Aux facility. I don't think they anticipated that any LPFM would want to. Hence, to take the Main down for maintenance, its power down, uncouple teh transmission line, move and couple it to the Aux, then power it up. I guess one advantage to that is that we have the Aux physically isolated in the event there is a lightning hit.
I don't have any experience with Nicoms.
We've had tremendous results from the Bext units that we have (Main and Aux). Now only if the Commission would actually let us license an Aux facility. I don't think they anticipated that any LPFM would want to. Hence, to take the Main down for maintenance, its power down, uncouple teh transmission line, move and couple it to the Aux, then power it up. I guess one advantage to that is that we have the Aux physically isolated in the event there is a lightning hit.
While the "certified" issue is mostly nonsense, since you have two transmitters that are certified all you need is a coaxial switch:
http://www.radiodan.com/ted_stuff/tohtsu.htm
and some connecting cables; search "RG-213" on Amazon (or have someone make some jumpers).
An auxiliary facility is one with a different antenna system and height at the same site, or a different site. In other words, a facility with different transmission characteristics than the main site. Having two identical transmitters, where either one can be switched on line, does not change the characteristics of your licensed site. For example, if you have a cp antenna 100 feet above ground fed by 125 feet of 1/2" foam coax, and you are licensed for 100 watts ERP, then you need 243 watts to get the licensed output power which would then require a 250 watt transmitter. It then does not matter WHICH 250 watt transmitter is used to feed this antenna, the coverage of the station does not change.
http://www.radiodan.com/ted_stuff/tohtsu.htm
and some connecting cables; search "RG-213" on Amazon (or have someone make some jumpers).
An auxiliary facility is one with a different antenna system and height at the same site, or a different site. In other words, a facility with different transmission characteristics than the main site. Having two identical transmitters, where either one can be switched on line, does not change the characteristics of your licensed site. For example, if you have a cp antenna 100 feet above ground fed by 125 feet of 1/2" foam coax, and you are licensed for 100 watts ERP, then you need 243 watts to get the licensed output power which would then require a 250 watt transmitter. It then does not matter WHICH 250 watt transmitter is used to feed this antenna, the coverage of the station does not change.
OK, so this begs the question what makes a transmitter type accepted for LPFM? Nautel makes a 300 watt transmitter I could put on the air at one of my Class A stations, but cannot be used for an LPFM station. What's the difference?
The NAB has become nothing but an empty suit for the big consolidators. They are much more concerned about what happens in San Antonio than Muhlenberg County.
The NAB has become nothing but an empty suit for the big consolidators. They are much more concerned about what happens in San Antonio than Muhlenberg County.
I asked that very question last year from the FCC. The email response was fairly canned saying that in order to protect against spurious emissions, LPFM transmitters need to have the proper low pass filtering. I laughed out loud when I saw that. Most everything made has proper filtering. That's about as humorous as the third-adjacent channel spacing rule for LPFM.
I asked why a Crown TX could be used on a translator but not LPFM - I did not receive a response to that part of the question.
I asked why a Crown TX could be used on a translator but not LPFM - I did not receive a response to that part of the question.
TomT:
I didn't say it in my post, but we actually have a second antenna at a lower height than our main. We upgraded antennas and modified the license to a higher center of radiation. We did not dismount the prior antenna. I'd love to have the system automatically switch to the older antenna and aux transmitter upon failure, rather than manually connecting the aux to either antenna.
It's my understanding that without an aux license, I cannot have the aux transmitter connected to the older antenna.
I didn't say it in my post, but we actually have a second antenna at a lower height than our main. We upgraded antennas and modified the license to a higher center of radiation. We did not dismount the prior antenna. I'd love to have the system automatically switch to the older antenna and aux transmitter upon failure, rather than manually connecting the aux to either antenna.
It's my understanding that without an aux license, I cannot have the aux transmitter connected to the older antenna.
tjm_pro said:
I miss the days when the FCC had engineers on staff. When you start talking about full power stations, spurs are a major issue. At 50kW a spur 20 db down will cause all kinds of headaches. At 300 watts, a -20 db spur will hardly be noticeable.
DudeFan said:
My assumption would be that as long as it is not turned on, you can have it hooked up. What can get you in trouble is putting some coal in the boiler and actually using the aux transmitter and the aux antenna.
Try this scenario on for size: I sit there for 5 years with my aux t and aux a wired together. Then one day a storm comes along and maybe lightning coming through the power line fries your main transmitter. Here is what I am thinking I might do. I switch on the aux/aux combo. I immediately telegraph and/or e-mail the FCC advising them what has happened and what I am doing. I ask for expedited STA granting permission for continued use until the standard set-up is repaired. I further say to the FCC: If this an un-acceptable condition for which you cannot grant temporary operating permission, I will upon notice from you take the station silent until repairs are completed, depriving my community of the services of my station.
How badly are they likely to spank you under those conditions?
Have seen where the FCC RI discovered an antenna with coax attached and considered it an unauthorized facility. Station got fined for it.
- Status