• 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

Synchronized Part 15 AM Txs

R

rfry

Earlier
> Just a thought--you could judiciously locate a few
> RangeMaster Part 15 AM transmitters in your station's
> desired night-time coverage areas and synchronize them with
> your 50 watt AM night-time transmitter. The RangeMaster has
> built-in provision for synchronizing several of them on the
> same frequency so that there is no 'beat' in the audio.
_____________

This may or may not be recognized by Part 15-ers...

Nearby AM txs using a single, synchronized frequency will not produce an audio beat in receivers, but also some listening areas may then receive little or no total signal. This happens when the signals from the two txs arrive with opposite RF phase from each other (or nearly so).

Synchronizing two txs has been done in commercial radio (example WBZ, Boston), but elaborate means were used to be sure that the interference zones generated by the two phase-locked carriers were directed away from areas with high population.

Trying to do that with more than two txs would be very problematic.
 
The RangeMaster has the phase-lock circuitry to do this with one 'master' transmitter and up to four 'slave' transmitters, if I recall correctly. I've never done this myself, but I have read of others who did and were pleased with the results. -- Jason

> Earlier
> > Just a thought--you could judiciously locate a few
> > RangeMaster Part 15 AM transmitters in your station's
> > desired night-time coverage areas and synchronize them
> with
> > your 50 watt AM night-time transmitter. The RangeMaster
> has
> > built-in provision for synchronizing several of them on
> the
> > same frequency so that there is no 'beat' in the audio.
> _____________
>
> This may or may not be recognized by Part 15-ers...
>
> Nearby AM txs using a single, synchronized frequency will
> not produce an audio beat in receivers, but also some
> listening areas may then receive little or no total signal.
> This happens when the signals from the two txs arrive with
> opposite RF phase from each other (or nearly so).
>
> Synchronizing two txs has been done in commercial radio
> (example WBZ, Boston), but elaborate means were used to be
> sure that the interference zones generated by the two
> phase-locked carriers were directed away from areas with
> high population.
>
> Trying to do that with more than two txs would be very
> problematic.
>
 
ahh yes! it is recognized as part15 buddy to syncro TXs "again verified by the FCC" I will add this part 15.219 including subpart "H" will even allow you to cluster radiators.

With your level of engineering even that's on FM, you can have a great change of helping the part15 community instead just writting stuff that rains on people parade.




Also TIS TXs are are synchronized using 6 Txs using a GPS system similar to the rangemaster's GPS clock that keith sales.










> Earlier
> > Just a thought--you could judiciously locate a few
> > RangeMaster Part 15 AM transmitters in your station's
> > desired night-time coverage areas and synchronize them
> with
> > your 50 watt AM night-time transmitter. The RangeMaster
> has
> > built-in provision for synchronizing several of them on
> the
> > same frequency so that there is no 'beat' in the audio.
> _____________
>
> This may or may not be recognized by Part 15-ers...
>
> Nearby AM txs using a single, synchronized frequency will
> not produce an audio beat in receivers, but also some
> listening areas may then receive little or no total signal.
> This happens when the signals from the two txs arrive with
> opposite RF phase from each other (or nearly so).
>
> Synchronizing two txs has been done in commercial radio
> (example WBZ, Boston), but elaborate means were used to be
> sure that the interference zones generated by the two
> phase-locked carriers were directed away from areas with
> high population.
>
> Trying to do that with more than two txs would be very
> problematic.
>
 
> ahh yes! it is recognized as part15 buddy to syncro TXs
> "again verified by the FCC"

Please supply the FCC reference for your statement. If the FCC "verified" that a single frequency network ("syncro TXs") was authorized for Part 15 AM operations in the broadcast band, certainly this would have been documented in writing in a Public Notice or Rulemaking. I'd like to learn more about this.

> I will add this part 15.219
> including subpart "H" will even
> allow you to cluster radiators.

Same as my comment above, but for clustered radiators. The current text for 15.219 (dated Oct 1 2004) is shown at http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/...ccess.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/octqtr/47cfr15.219.htm -- and does not even HAVE a subpart "H."

> With your level of engineering even that's on FM,
> you can have a great change of helping the part15 community
> instead just writting stuff that rains on people parade.
> Also TIS TXs are are synchronized using 6 Txs using a GPS
> system similar to the rangemaster's GPS clock that keith
> sales.

Please note that I did not post or infer anything about the legality of setting up a network of synchronized Part 15 AM transmitters. I only posted a technical reality about such systems, which is true whether or not they are legal.
If that constitutes a rain on anyone's parade, they will have to blame Mother Nature.
 
Yes it does cause a part 15 operator was told to turn off the cluster due to the fact that the rangemaster at time certification was not tested as a cluster which is subpart H which states that to use intentional radiators as a cluster they have to be certified as a cluster.

NOW on the synchronizing it is allowed due to the fact that it is NOT a cluster and it is considered a single unit with the same programming.

Again I have to say! try to use your engineering skill to help out part15 community or commercial broadcasters.

I have spoken to broadcast lawers and FCC officials not the phone operators, I have their private cell numbers and I speak to them on regular basis about this part15 thing.

Now my question is to you is, Why do you just come here to put down part15 instead of maybe just maybe helping it out? Also you as an engineer know that there are alot of licensees that use bad practices and the engineers know about it, I personally believe that radio groups are worse than even pirates cause they hide under their licenses to break rules. That's like a crooked cop, uses the uniform to hide his/her crime or rule breaking. Now as a society who is looked upon worse? hmmmmm....








> > ahh yes! it is recognized as part15 buddy to syncro TXs
> > "again verified by the FCC"
>
> Please supply the FCC reference for your statement. If the
> FCC "verified" that a single frequency network ("syncro
> TXs") was authorized for Part 15 AM operations in the
> broadcast band, certainly this would have been documented in
> writing in a Public Notice or Rulemaking. I'd like to learn
> more about this.
>
> > I will add this part 15.219
> > including subpart "H" will even
> > allow you to cluster radiators.
>
> Same as my comment above, but for clustered radiators. The
> current text for 15.219 (dated Oct 1 2004) is shown at
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/12feb200> 41500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/octqtr/47cfr15.219.htm
> -- and does not even HAVE a subpart "H."
>
> > With your level of engineering even that's on FM,
> > you can have a great change of helping the part15
> community
> > instead just writting stuff that rains on people parade.
> > Also TIS TXs are are synchronized using 6 Txs using a GPS
> > system similar to the rangemaster's GPS clock that keith
> > sales.
>
> Please note that I did not post or infer anything about the
> legality of setting up a network of synchronized Part 15 AM
> transmitters. I only posted a technical reality about such
> systems, which is true whether or not they are legal.
> If that constitutes a rain on anyone's parade, they will
> have to blame Mother Nature.
>
 
> Earlier
> > Just a thought--you could judiciously locate a few
> > RangeMaster Part 15 AM transmitters in your station's
> > desired night-time coverage areas and synchronize them
> with
> > your 50 watt AM night-time transmitter. The RangeMaster
> has
> > built-in provision for synchronizing several of them on
> the
> > same frequency so that there is no 'beat' in the audio.
> _____________
>
> This may or may not be recognized by Part 15-ers...
>
> Nearby AM txs using a single, synchronized frequency will
> not produce an audio beat in receivers, but also some
> listening areas may then receive little or no total signal.
> This happens when the signals from the two txs arrive with
> opposite RF phase from each other (or nearly so).
>
> Synchronizing two txs has been done in commercial radio
> (example WBZ, Boston), but elaborate means were used to be
> sure that the interference zones generated by the two
> phase-locked carriers were directed away from areas with
> high population.
>
> Trying to do that with more than two txs would be very
> problematic.
>

Problematic, yes. Accomplished by Rangemaster, yes.

Please stop contributing stuff you don't know about and go back to pimping for the NAB.

- Dick
 
If synchronizing Part 15 AM transmitters was illegal, Keith Hamilton's RangeMaster (which has provision for it) wouldn't have been granted FCC certification.

I've read somewhere in the FCC regulations (and I'm not inclined to look it up--if you're that concerned about it, you can do it yourself) that operating multiple Part 15 AM (and Part 15 FM) transmitters on the same frequency is permitted as long as the transmitters are some specified distance apart from each other. -- Jason

> > ahh yes! it is recognized as part15 buddy to syncro TXs
> > "again verified by the FCC"
>
> Please supply the FCC reference for your statement. If the
> FCC "verified" that a single frequency network ("syncro
> TXs") was authorized for Part 15 AM operations in the
> broadcast band, certainly this would have been documented in
> writing in a Public Notice or Rulemaking. I'd like to learn
> more about this.
>
> > I will add this part 15.219
> > including subpart "H" will even
> > allow you to cluster radiators.
>
> Same as my comment above, but for clustered radiators. The
> current text for 15.219 (dated Oct 1 2004) is shown at
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/12feb200> 41500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/octqtr/47cfr15.219.htm
> -- and does not even HAVE a subpart "H."
>
> > With your level of engineering even that's on FM,
> > you can have a great change of helping the part15
> community
> > instead just writting stuff that rains on people parade.
> > Also TIS TXs are are synchronized using 6 Txs using a GPS
> > system similar to the rangemaster's GPS clock that keith
> > sales.
>
> Please note that I did not post or infer anything about the
> legality of setting up a network of synchronized Part 15 AM
> transmitters. I only posted a technical reality about such
> systems, which is true whether or not they are legal.
> If that constitutes a rain on anyone's parade, they will
> have to blame Mother Nature.
>
 
> Now my question is to you is, Why do you just come here to
> put down part15 instead of maybe just maybe helping it out?

Why do think that the statement of provable engineering realities "puts down" Part 15?
 
> If synchronizing Part 15 AM transmitters was illegal, Keith
> Hamilton's RangeMaster (which has provision for it) wouldn't
> have been granted FCC certification.
> I've read somewhere in the FCC regulations (and I'm not
> inclined to look it up--if you're that concerned about it,
> you can do it yourself) that operating multiple Part 15 AM
> (and Part 15 FM) transmitters on the same frequency is
> permitted as long as the transmitters are some specified
> distance apart from each other. -- Jason
___________

And I did not write that they were illegal. Here is what I said (again)...

> > Please note that I did not post or infer anything about
> the
> > legality of setting up a network of synchronized Part 15
> AM
> > transmitters. I only posted a technical reality about
> such
> > systems, which is true whether or not they are legal.
> > If that constitutes a rain on anyone's parade, they will
> > have to blame Mother Nature.
> >
>
 
> > Now my question is to you is, Why do you just come here to
>
> > put down part15 instead of maybe just maybe helping it
> out?
>
> Why do think that the statement of provable engineering
> realities "puts down" Part 15?
>

Regret to say I am with you on this one. I am all for community radio, but synchronising AM transmitters (at least if we are talking 3 or more) is never going to be very successful.

We have a national radio network here in the UK that uses several high power synchronised transmitters (Virgin Radio, 1215 AM). It sounds appalling everywhere except close to the individual transmitters.
 
> Yes it does cause a part 15 operator was told to turn off
> the cluster due to the fact that the rangemaster at time
> certification was not tested as a cluster which is subpart H
> which states that to use intentional radiators as a cluster
> they have to be certified as a cluster.
>
> NOW on the synchronizing it is allowed due to the fact that
> it is NOT a cluster and it is considered a single unit with
> the same programming.
>
> Again I have to say! try to use your engineering skill to
> help out part15 community or commercial broadcasters.
>
> I have spoken to broadcast lawers and FCC officials not the
> phone operators, I have their private cell numbers and I
> speak to them on regular basis about this part15 thing.
>
> Now my question is to you is, Why do you just come here to
> put down part15 instead of maybe just maybe helping it out?
> Also you as an engineer know that there are alot of
> licensees that use bad practices and the engineers know
> about it, I personally believe that radio groups are worse
> than even pirates cause they hide under their licenses to
> break rules. That's like a crooked cop, uses the uniform to
> hide his/her crime or rule breaking. Now as a society who is
> looked upon worse? hmmmmm....
>
>
> A good example of this would be those Bible Beaters over at K-Love, They seriously have a bunch of Ramseys Linked together. And those Law breakers have a license,,,,,,Yep....
>
>
>
>
>
> > > ahh yes! it is recognized as part15 buddy to syncro TXs
> > > "again verified by the FCC"
> >
> > Please supply the FCC reference for your statement. If
> the
> > FCC "verified" that a single frequency network ("syncro
> > TXs") was authorized for Part 15 AM operations in the
> > broadcast band, certainly this would have been documented
> in
> > writing in a Public Notice or Rulemaking. I'd like to
> learn
> > more about this.
> >
> > > I will add this part 15.219
> > > including subpart "H" will even
> > > allow you to cluster radiators.
> >
> > Same as my comment above, but for clustered radiators.
> The
> > current text for 15.219 (dated Oct 1 2004) is shown at
> http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/12feb200>
> 41500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/octqtr/47cfr15.219.htm
>
> > -- and does not even HAVE a subpart "H."
> >
> > > With your level of engineering even that's on FM,
> > > you can have a great change of helping the part15
> > community
> > > instead just writting stuff that rains on people parade.
>
> > > Also TIS TXs are are synchronized using 6 Txs using a
> GPS
> > > system similar to the rangemaster's GPS clock that keith
>
> > > sales.
> >
> > Please note that I did not post or infer anything about
> the
> > legality of setting up a network of synchronized Part 15
> AM
> > transmitters. I only posted a technical reality about
> such
> > systems, which is true whether or not they are legal.
> > If that constitutes a rain on anyone's parade, they will
> > have to blame Mother Nature.
> >
>
 
> > > Now my question is to you is, Why do you just come here
> to
> >
> > > put down part15 instead of maybe just maybe helping it
> > out?
> >
> > Why do think that the statement of provable engineering
> > realities "puts down" Part 15?
> >
>
> Regret to say I am with you on this one. I am all for
> community radio, but synchronising AM transmitters (at least
> if we are talking 3 or more) is never going to be very
> successful.
>
> We have a national radio network here in the UK that uses
> several high power synchronised transmitters (Virgin Radio,
> 1215 AM). It sounds appalling everywhere except close to the
> individual transmitters.
>
Good God this board is total peace of crap, and waste of time. It has become overun with a bunch of Idiots who dont know JACK about what they are talking about. All these so called engineers come in here and ruffle everyones feathers, and keep arguing and telling everbody this wont work and that wont work, and this is legal, and that isnt legal, and to top that off, its the same Damn posts, with the same damn questions, and the same arguments and drama. And you guys just keep on and on and on and on and on and on about it. This Community radio board is a waste of time. IM OUT>>>>>>
 
I've done some syncing of transmitters, I make the RangeMaster unit, I saw this string going but frankly just haven't had time to keep up with it. Our web site does some explaining about syncing our unit.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom