What's a "Bird Watt"?
Sparky
>From: Chris Johnson <cmjo...@cfl.rr.com>
>Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap
>Subject: Re: CB amps are legal to sell
>NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 20:12:32 EDT
>
>A bird watt is a unit of power. It is measured with a bird of a
>certain type and representative impedance (one of several "Standard
>Loading Birds" perched on a voltage node on the antenna.
>
>One bird watt is enough to make a sparrow ("Standard Loading Bird no.1")
>jump suddenly off the tip of an antenna upon keydown.
>
>Ten bird watts is enough to make it fly off rapidly and make funny
>screeching noises. 100 bird watts will freeze a #1 Standard Bird to the antenna
>by muscle lock and cause it to die by fry.
>
>1000 bird watts is enough to cause a medium sized crow ("Standard
>Loading Bird #2") to catch fire in thirty seconds.
>
>10,000 bird watts is enough to cause a bald eagle or osprey
>(Standard Loading Birds #3 and #3A, respectively) to explode
>instantly upon keydown. This is also the level at which the radio
>operator's voice can be heard coming from your refrigerator.
>
>That's what bird watts are all about.
>
>:)CJ
middlefanger
"Sparky" <spa...@cet.com> wrote in message
news:3c3cdc14...@news.cet.com...
greg
middlefanger <middlf...@home.comspam> wrote in message
news:dL4%7.365509$5A3.13...@news1.rdc2.pa.home.com...
> It is Like a henway
>
--
Help fight mailbots with these in your tagline:
tos...@aol.com ab...@aol.com ab...@yahoo.com ab...@hotmail.com
ab...@msn.com ab...@sprintmail.com ab...@earthlink.net u...@ftc.gov
ab...@info.cep.cniba-u.ac.jp webm...@envy.nu
Dave or Debby
meter watt. Measured on the Bird Watt Meter.
Dave!
"Sparky" <spa...@cet.com> wrote in message
news:3c3cdc14...@news.cet.com...
Sparky
wrote:
>It is an RMS (average power) AM watt, as compared to a sideband, or peak
>meter watt. Measured on the Bird Watt Meter.
>Dave!
My Bird does both, but Bird isn't the only company that makes a peak
reading wattmeter. I should point out that if you want to include all
the harmonics and splatter in with the output power, a peak reading
wattmeter is the way to go. If you want an accurate measure of carrier
power, however, an RMS meter is what to use for AM. A lot of keyclowns
don't like RMS meters because the little needle doesn't move and they
can't figure out how to use a modulation meter. Gotta have that swang!
Jerry Oxendine
I am sitting here snickering over your original post. I can't help it, I've
always giggled at this
"bird" watt stuff. There are lots of Peak Reading Wattmeters--like my Swan
WM2000A I've
had for nearly 20 years. Hehe! What's a "sideband" watt, or a "peak meter"
watt, or an AM
watt? LOL! A watt is a watt is a watt is a
watt............................... It's just TOO funny.
Trying to tell "some" folks that a properly modulated AM carrier won't
"swang" all that much
is useless--it's all what you measure it with! <g>
OH, I gotta go take my "pill" (Loud GUFFAW) Sorry, Sparky. I couldn't
resist that.
Jerry
Sparky <spa...@cet.com> wrote in message
news:3c3d01a0...@news.cet.com...
Landshark
thing some months back, but was told
different, oh well.
Stay warm,
Landshark
--
Please note that any post that is from
S3Buell_SB...@hotmail.com
is a FORGE. My Addy is always going to
be from SBCGlobal.Net This person has
been a troll on Rec.Radio.CB for a long
time now. If you want to send a complaint,
forward each message complete with headers
to TOSU...@AOL.COM. ab...@hotmail.com,
groups...@google.com
Beware of George WA3MO^
"Jerry Oxendine" <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:V_7%7.456663$er5.17...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
Sparky
<jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>Sparky,
>
>I am sitting here snickering over your original post. I can't help it, I've
>always giggled at this
>"bird" watt stuff. There are lots of Peak Reading Wattmeters--like my Swan
>WM2000A I've
>had for nearly 20 years. Hehe! What's a "sideband" watt, or a "peak meter"
>watt, or an AM
>watt? LOL! A watt is a watt is a watt is a
>watt............................... It's just TOO funny.
>Trying to tell "some" folks that a properly modulated AM carrier won't
>"swang" all that much
>is useless--it's all what you measure it with! <g>
A properly modulated AM carrier won't "swang" at all, it will stay
steady as a rock. And if the S-meter dips when you are listening to
someone else, that person is either overmodulated or his voltage is
dropping on the peaks.
Dave Hall
Actually, the term "bird watt" came about as a sort of "my meter is
better than yours" mentality.
One of the most competative aspects of the power hungry set, is getting
the most power out of their setups. In the beginning there were people
getting wild and crazy wattage readings (See: "Dosy watts") from their
less than commercial grade wattmeters. Pandamonium ensued as every
different person tried to defend their wattage readings from their Radio
Shack, Dosy, and the plethora of other CB-type wattmeters. Soon people
discovered that the Bird meter was a commercial grade meter and
calibrated for better accuracy than the typical "CB meter". The guy with
the bird meter was often called upon to settle the dispute in wattage
readings, between rival's other wattmeters. So when someone says that
they are putting out 1000 "Bird" watts, it's their way of saying that
this is an accurate 1000 watts, as opposed to 1000 "Dosy" watts (Which
could be anything from 500 to 1500 watts).
Of course, for a bird meter to operate accurately, certain conditions
have to be met. SWR, and spectral purity are the biggest factors. So it
is possible for even a Bird meter to be grossly inaccurate, if not used
properly.
Dave
"Sandbagger"
Dave Hall
>
> On Wed, 9 Jan 2002 22:33:43 -0500, "Jerry Oxendine"
> <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >Sparky,
> >
> >I am sitting here snickering over your original post. I can't help it, I've
> >always giggled at this
> >"bird" watt stuff. There are lots of Peak Reading Wattmeters--like my Swan
> >WM2000A I've
> >had for nearly 20 years. Hehe! What's a "sideband" watt, or a "peak meter"
> >watt, or an AM
> >watt? LOL! A watt is a watt is a watt is a
> >watt............................... It's just TOO funny.
> >Trying to tell "some" folks that a properly modulated AM carrier won't
> >"swang" all that much
> >is useless--it's all what you measure it with! <g>
>
> A properly modulated AM carrier won't "swang" at all, it will stay
> steady as a rock.
The key term here is "properly". Someone who has modified his radio with
a "swing kit" will have an asymetrically modulated waveform, and will
show some forward "swing" even on an RMS meter, although not nearly the
same ego pumping amount that a peak meter will show.
> And if the S-meter dips when you are listening to
> someone else, that person is either overmodulated or his voltage is
> dropping on the peaks.
Not always. Many receiver's S-meter circuits will show forward or
reverse movement with modulation regardless of how proper the
transmitted signal is. Case in point: SBE Console II. That radio's
S-meter would always show a major backswing with modulation. The nature
of the beast. I guess it depends of where they tap the receiver for the
S-meter voltage.
Dave
"Sandbagger"
Sparky
may gain because of calibration tolerance can be easily lost by coax
losses, antenna height, vehicle ground clearance, or any one of a
myriad of other insignificant variables. This RF stuff must seem like
"magic" to them...
Sparky
<nojunkma...@worldlynx.net> wrote:
<snip>
>> And if the S-meter dips when you are listening to
>> someone else, that person is either overmodulated or his voltage is
>> dropping on the peaks.
>
>Not always. Many receiver's S-meter circuits will show forward or
>reverse movement with modulation regardless of how proper the
>transmitted signal is. Case in point: SBE Console II. That radio's
>S-meter would always show a major backswing with modulation. The nature
>of the beast. I guess it depends of where they tap the receiver for the
>S-meter voltage.
That must be an SBE problem, I have a Trinidad III that does the same
thing.
Train
electronics end of a setup allows you to get to the hardware end. All
outputs being the same relatively speaking, it always comes down to SETUP of
the installation! Even the crappiest meter on a mobile is still better than
none at all.
Train
"Jerry Oxendine" <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:V_7%7.456663$er5.17...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
Toll Free
> On Wed, 9 Jan 2002 20:23:15 -0500, "Dave or Debby" <tr...@planetc.com>
> wrote:
>
> >It is an RMS (average power) AM watt, as compared to a sideband, or peak
> >meter watt. Measured on the Bird Watt Meter.
> >Dave!
>
> My Bird does both, but Bird isn't the only company that makes a peak
> reading wattmeter. I should point out that if you want to include all
> the harmonics and splatter in with the output power, a peak reading
> wattmeter is the way to go.
Adding a capacitor and resistor to the metering function of a wattmeter does
ABSOLUTELY nothing to WHAT it measures, only what MEASUREMENT
it takes.
So, you will read harmonics, splatter, etc. with ANY non-descriminatory type
wattmeter (thats the word you where looking for)
If you want an accurate measure of carrier
> power, however, an RMS meter is what to use for AM.
Get a PEP reading meter. Measure a carrier (Use FM for this, as
it has NO "swing", unless its PM FM).
Now, DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING, but move your Bird from PEP
back to AVG (or put your other meter in line).
Oh look. They are the same. So, it would seem, if you want to measure rms
carrier power, ANY wattmeter will work.
Just using a lot of words doesn't make you look smart. Using a lot of words
for you made you look ignorant, as a matter of fact.
A lot of keyclowns
> don't like RMS meters because the little needle doesn't move and they
> can't figure out how to use a modulation meter. Gotta have that swang!
A. Most "keyclowns" as you call them don't use a PEP meter because the Bird
isn't a pep meter (or it's incarnations). It has nothing to do with
"swing". Proof positive
that you have no clue as to WHO you are talking about, just making
generalizations.
B. Most of the people on the line have negative carrier shift, which can be
seen on a Bird
type meter, but usually NOT on a PEP meter, further negating your claims.
Why not just admit you DON'T know the people your talking about, DON'T have
a clue
as to what really goes on, and learn from it. You don't have to comment on
everything, we
still will realize that you are learning.
Hell, we gave Griffey slack because he was learning, the world will do the
same for you.
Toll_Free
Toll Free
increase 4X's.
If that isn't AM swing (from 4 to 16 watts), I dunno what is.
I suggest you check the accuracy of the Swan meter. They have a problem
with falling out over the years. Good meters, as long as you keep them
calibrated.
Toll_Free
"Jerry Oxendine" <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:V_7%7.456663$er5.17...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
Toll Free
An improperly modulated carrier won't swing, either.
The only way you get the carrier to swing is with Suppressed Carrier
Amplitude Modulation.
Griffey experimented with it before.
Carriers are just that, a fixed reference used in the demodulation of the
sidebands.
Sidebands carry the intelligence, and as such as the only thing that are
SUPPOSED to
increase or decrease in power in a properly working am system.
I suggest you learn the fundementals of AM first.
it will stay
> steady as a rock.
On a AVG type meter, yes. On a PEP reading meter, it should increase 4X the
carrier power
when modulated 100 percent.
And if the S-meter dips when you are listening to
> someone else, that person is either overmodulated or his voltage is
> dropping on the peaks.
Or, his transmitter is out of alignment. Or he has no headroom because
something is being overdriven. Or his antenna is out of wack, causing an
improper load on the final, which can cause the same problem.
Toll_Free
Toll Free
No, it depends on the type of AGC used in the receiver.
Most SBE radios where made by Cybernet, the PLL02A people. Almost all of
them showed the
same thing.
Guess your theories are already being shot to hell, huh? Hell, you can't
even keep them straight nemore.
Toll_Free
Toll Free
after the amp... As do most GOOD tech's.
Toll_Free
"Dave Hall" <nojunkma...@worldlynx.net> wrote in message
news:3C3D7C...@worldlynx.net...
Toll Free
the people who haven't done it, and continue to badmouth it.
If all else is equal, who will be heard. The person running 1550 watts, or
the person running 1500 watts.
Toll_Free
"Sparky" <spa...@cet.com> wrote in message
news:3c3db1a6...@news.cet.com...
Sparky
wrote:
>Hence the reasoning Sean and Dennis use low pass filters before the meter,
>after the amp... As do most GOOD tech's.
Most GOOD techs don't usually mess with filters because they are
interested in a clean signal out of the transmitter. And before they
mess with a filter, most GOOD techs will run it past the spectrum
analyzer to see just what needs to be filtered, if anything. And most
GOOD techs are aware that RF harmonics are only part of what gets read
by a power meter, because splatter goes right on through the filter!
Sparky
wrote:
>Actually, it is all noticed. The only person who DOESN'T seem to get it is
>the people who haven't done it, and continue to badmouth it.
Walk a mile in MY shoes, sometime.
>If all else is equal, who will be heard. The person running 1550 watts, or
>the person running 1500 watts.
All else is NEVER equal, and if you had any experience you would know
that.
And the fact of the matter is that you will hear BOTH signals. Only
with FM will one signal cover the other, and even THEN a fraction of a
percentage in signal strength isn't going to make any difference: Have
you ever studied the mechanics of oscillation? Do you know that once
an oscillator starts, it takes quite a bit to pull it off freq or
phase? When the signal strength is insignificant, the (FM) radio that
will be heard is the one that keys up first.
Sparky
wrote:
>You have PROVEN you don't know what your talking about this time.
>"Sparky" <spa...@cet.com> wrote in message
>news:3c3d01a0...@news.cet.com...
>> On Wed, 9 Jan 2002 20:23:15 -0500, "Dave or Debby" <tr...@planetc.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >It is an RMS (average power) AM watt, as compared to a sideband, or peak
>> >meter watt. Measured on the Bird Watt Meter.
>> >Dave!
>>
>> My Bird does both, but Bird isn't the only company that makes a peak
>> reading wattmeter. I should point out that if you want to include all
>> the harmonics and splatter in with the output power, a peak reading
>> wattmeter is the way to go.
>
>
>Adding a capacitor and resistor to the metering function of a wattmeter does
>ABSOLUTELY nothing to WHAT it measures, only what MEASUREMENT
>it takes.
Where did I say anything like that? I said that a peak-reading
wattmeter measures harmonics and splatter BETTER than an RMS meter.
Which they do. An RMS meter won't move much for a spike, but a peak
meter will pick it up and hold it for you to gawk at.
>So, you will read harmonics, splatter, etc. with ANY non-descriminatory type
>wattmeter (thats the word you where looking for)
I found all the words I was looking for, you just didn't read them
properly. You will NOT read harmonics, splatter, spikes, etc AS WELL
with a RMS meter, as explained before.
>If you want an accurate measure of carrier
>> power, however, an RMS meter is what to use for AM.
>
>
>
>Get a PEP reading meter. Measure a carrier (Use FM for this, as
>it has NO "swing", unless its PM FM).
WTF is PM FM? F3 is frequency OR phase modulation, and they are pretty
much the same thing -- constant amplitude. So what is PM FM and how do
you get "swing" out of it?
>Now, DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING, but move your Bird from PEP
>back to AVG (or put your other meter in line).
>
>Oh look. They are the same. So, it would seem, if you want to measure rms
>carrier power, ANY wattmeter will work.
No shit. But a peak meter won't show if your power is dropping on
amplitude peaks, which is an indication of... brace yourself...
OVERMODULATION! The only thing a peak meter is good for on AM is to
get your jollies watching the little needle move.
>Just using a lot of words doesn't make you look smart. Using a lot of words
>for you made you look ignorant, as a matter of fact.
I really don't care how I look or how many words I use, it's what I am
saying that matters. But if you don't use the CORRECT words (PM FM?
"Bird" watts?) it can sure make YOU look ignorant, "as a matter of
fact".
>A lot of keyclowns
>> don't like RMS meters because the little needle doesn't move and they
>> can't figure out how to use a modulation meter. Gotta have that swang!
>
>
>A. Most "keyclowns" as you call them don't use a PEP meter because the Bird
>isn't a pep meter (or it's incarnations). It has nothing to do with
>"swing". Proof positive
>that you have no clue as to WHO you are talking about, just making
>generalizations.
It proves squat because I never made such a claim, except to say that
my Bird does read peak (which, by the way, is NOT the same as PEP,
because PEP can only be measured using a two-tone test; not audio, and
not carrier-only (dead-key)). Bird has indeed made peak-reading
wattmeters. I own one.
>B. Most of the people on the line have negative carrier shift, which can be
>seen on a Bird
>type meter, but usually NOT on a PEP meter, further negating your claims.
Which is exactly what I stated above.
>Why not just admit you DON'T know the people your talking about, DON'T have
>a clue
>as to what really goes on, and learn from it. You don't have to comment on
>everything, we
>still will realize that you are learning.
I earned my degree (BTW twistie, electronics engineering is a
specialized degree), and I have been working with RF professionally
for over 20 years, in both the military and commercial sectors. I came
to this newsgroup because I enjoy CB radio and I thought I could share
a bit of my knowledge and experience, as well as learn some things
about the hobby. But it's obvious that you want a flame war to prove
yourself, so I will oblige.
Life is a learning process, and you need to get past puberty.
Sparky
wrote:
>> A properly modulated AM carrier won't "swang" at all,
>
>
>An improperly modulated carrier won't swing, either.
>
>The only way you get the carrier to swing is with Suppressed Carrier
>Amplitude Modulation.
Wrong again, Toll. A carrier is unbalanced by overmodulation. When
that happens it will drop the carrier on the valleys and swing the
average power down.
>Griffey experimented with it before.
That doesn't mean shit. Griffey doesn't even know what AM is.
>Carriers are just that, a fixed reference used in the demodulation of the
>sidebands.
It's obvious that you have never seen an overmodulated signal on a
scope.
>Sidebands carry the intelligence, and as such as the only thing that are
>SUPPOSED to
>increase or decrease in power in a properly working am system.
Sidebands are a function of frequency, Toll. They are created because
as the amplitude of the carrier changes the sine cannot remain pure.
If you filter an amplitude modulated signal down to the carrier,
that's all you are going to get because you are filtering off
FREQUENCIES.
>I suggest you learn the fundementals of AM first.
Speak for yourself.
>it will stay
>> steady as a rock.
>
>
>
>On a AVG type meter, yes. On a PEP reading meter, it should increase 4X the
>carrier power
>when modulated 100 percent.
That's what a peak-reading wattmeter will show. That doesn't mean you
are putting out 16 watts. At 100% modulation of a 4W carrier, the
audio is only 2W average, and even THAT won't show up on an RMS meter
because it's being MODULATED into the CARRIER!
>And if the S-meter dips when you are listening to
>> someone else, that person is either overmodulated or his voltage is
>> dropping on the peaks.
>
>
>
>Or, his transmitter is out of alignment.
Which will cause either overmodulation or a voltage decrease on the
peaks, like I said before.
> Or he has no headroom because
>something is being overdriven.
Which will cause either overmodulation or a voltage decrease on the
peaks, like I said before.
> Or his antenna is out of wack, causing an
>improper load on the final, which can cause the same problem.
Which will cause either overmodulation or a voltage decrease on the
peaks, like I said before.
Maybe you don't understand cause and effect. Or maybe you are just
nitpicking...
Sparky
wrote:
>
>"Sparky" <spa...@cet.com> wrote in message
>news:3c3db3d8...@news.cet.com...
>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2002 06:58:39 -0500, Dave Hall
>> <nojunkma...@worldlynx.net> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>> >> And if the S-meter dips when you are listening to
>> >> someone else, that person is either overmodulated or his voltage is
>> >> dropping on the peaks.
>> >
>> >Not always. Many receiver's S-meter circuits will show forward or
>> >reverse movement with modulation regardless of how proper the
>> >transmitted signal is. Case in point: SBE Console II. That radio's
>> >S-meter would always show a major backswing with modulation. The nature
>> >of the beast. I guess it depends of where they tap the receiver for the
>> >S-meter voltage.
>>
>> That must be an SBE problem, I have a Trinidad III that does the same
>> thing.
>
>
>
>
>No, it depends on the type of AGC used in the receiver.
>
>Most SBE radios where made by Cybernet, the PLL02A people. Almost all of
>them showed the
>same thing.
It could also be due to the non-linear response of the 1N60 used to
rectify the input to the ANL circuit, which is a line that bypasses
the AGC rectifier/filter circuit completely. In fact, that's exactly
what happens in both radios.
>Guess your theories are already being shot to hell, huh? Hell, you can't
>even keep them straight nemore.
Guess -your- theories are based more on vindication than on fact.
Jerry Oxendine
No harm meant, Train. I just find some of the terminology amusing, eh
"watt", old chap!
LOL! (Sorry, I'm just in a "punny" mood today!)
Jerry
Train <cbm...@optonlineNOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:nej%7.20062$rs1.3...@news02.optonline.net...
Richard McCollum
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2002 16:37:02 GMT, "Toll Free" <toll...@bigradios.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> A properly modulated AM carrier won't "swang" at all,
>
> are putting out 16 watts. At 100% modulation of a 4W carrier, the
> audio is only 2W average, and even THAT won't show up on an RMS meter
> because it's being MODULATED into the CARRIER!
It is time for the Monty Python big foot. We have one each transmitter 4
watt carrier which can be modulated 100% by a tone. On it is a collector
current meter - average, a hot wire (RMS) output meter, and a PEP-reading
meter.
1. Dead key. Collector current about 500 ma, hot wire at 4, PEP should be
about 6-8.
2. Modulated. Collector current 750 ma, hot wire at 6, PEP at 16
A Plate modulated tube using the conventional transformer would be the
same except that plate current would not appear to vary. This is because
plate voltage also varies and the current variations under modulation
average to zero in a perfectly matched system. Transistors don't give a
hoot about voltage so long as it is somewhere between breakover and
incineration so they have to be solely current modulated more than likely
in several stages. Modulating consecutive stages may well give a bit of
swang as a by-product but not a whole lot.
The carrier, given that you have sufficient drive to support the peaks,
does not vary or change one whit in the modulation process; nothing is
modulated into the carrier. The carrier is simply asked to sit and look
stupid while audio is mixed with it producing sidebands. It performs
another 'sit and look stupid' while the sidebands are mixed with it to
produce audio in a diode detector. It is then shorted to ground via a
bypass cap never to be seen or heard of again.
S-meters in audio-derived or partially audio-derived circuits might well
show an AGC increase. Given that SBE was SideBand Engineers, this would
not be a major shock but other things might do it as well.
Do I hear an Amen?
Dick NØBK
middlefanger
"Toll Free" <toll...@bigradios.com> wrote in message news:Oqj%7.20022>
> On a PEP reading meter, it should increase 4X the
> carrier power when modulated 100 percent.
I am sorry I have yet to see that, I have seen about a 2.82 increase from
Bird and coaxial dynamics.
Lets say you have a 100 watt rms reading on a bird under modulation, The
deadkey can be any number lets use 50 watts and when you talk the bird holds
100 watts rms, on a bird peak meter you will see about 280 -300 watts peak
this is with a transmitter that does over 100% modulation.
Sparky
<rmcco...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
<snip>
>The carrier, given that you have sufficient drive to support the peaks,
>does not vary or change one whit in the modulation process; nothing is
>modulated into the carrier.
Sometimes I try to over-simplify and some important things get lost in
translation. However, you explained it much better than I ever did.
The point was that it takes 2W audio to 100% modulate a 4W carrier,
and a peak measurement on AM is just a deception.
>S-meters in audio-derived or partially audio-derived circuits might well
>show an AGC increase. Given that SBE was SideBand Engineers, this would
>not be a major shock but other things might do it as well.
Agreed, but in that case the meter would behave the same regardless of
the station transmitting. Few radios behave in that manner. In the
case of the SBE, the meter circuit is referenced to AGC line, so audio
shouldn't affect it. But the meter circuit uses an unbiased shunting
diode. Pulling the anode off ground and up by Vf should solve the
problem.
Toll Free
> >does not vary or change one whit in the modulation process; nothing is
> >modulated into the carrier.
>
> Sometimes I try to over-simplify and some important things get lost in
> translation. However, you explained it much better than I ever did.
>
Yes, sometimes you do... Or you end up changing things to fit your story.
Although you do sometimes know what your talking about, you have a real
tendency to
really stretch things when called out on the mat.
> The point was that it takes 2W audio to 100% modulate a 4W carrier,
> and a peak measurement on AM is just a deception.
Laws of Physics are a deception now.
It takes 2 watts of AVG audio power to modulate a 4 watt carrier.
Check the peak to peak voltage, and do the math.
Does that not kinda blow away your theory that Peak Envelope Power
in an AM rig is a useful measurement? The fact that it actually IS
measuring
the max signal?
Toll Free
below 100 percent, you will actually lose power output.
Case in point. Cobra 148, limiter removed. Give it a steady state tone
(ahhh, if you will), and slowly back the dynamic down.
On an average reading meter, especially, you will see the rf power go UP as
the dynamic goes DOWN.
Get a good compression style or negative peak clipper in line, and this
phenomenon isn't the case.
Toll_Free
"middlefanger" <middlf...@home.comspam> wrote in message
news:9iq%7.366947$5A3.13...@news1.rdc2.pa.home.com...
Toll Free
> >> reading wattmeter. I should point out that if you want to include all
> >> the harmonics and splatter in with the output power, a peak reading
> >> wattmeter is the way to go.
> >
> >
> >Adding a capacitor and resistor to the metering function of a wattmeter
does
> >ABSOLUTELY nothing to WHAT it measures, only what MEASUREMENT
> >it takes.
>
> Where did I say anything like that? I said that a peak-reading
> wattmeter measures harmonics and splatter BETTER than an RMS meter.
> Which they do. An RMS meter won't move much for a spike, but a peak
> meter will pick it up and hold it for you to gawk at.
With a true rms reading meter, you get no needle flicker at all when 100
percent modulated
or less, on a true am signal.
So, I guess, a needle that did no movement would be better? So you couldn't
see if you had a problem
with modulation, etc?
>
> >So, you will read harmonics, splatter, etc. with ANY non-descriminatory
type
> >wattmeter (thats the word you where looking for)
>
> I found all the words I was looking for, you just didn't read them
> properly. You will NOT read harmonics, splatter, spikes, etc AS WELL
> with a RMS meter, as explained before.
And you don't read the amplitude modulated signal as well, either.
>
> >If you want an accurate measure of carrier
> >> power, however, an RMS meter is what to use for AM.
> >
> >
> >
> >Get a PEP reading meter. Measure a carrier (Use FM for this, as
> >it has NO "swing", unless its PM FM).
>
> WTF is PM FM? F3 is frequency OR phase modulation, and they are pretty
> much the same thing -- constant amplitude. So what is PM FM and how do
> you get "swing" out of it?
You know exactly what I referenced. Just as you knew exactly what a Bird
watt
was when I used the term earlier.
However, in phase modulation, you can see a downward pulling effect,
following
modulation peaks. Reference early Galaxy chassis.
>
> >Now, DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING, but move your Bird from PEP
> >back to AVG (or put your other meter in line).
> >
> >Oh look. They are the same. So, it would seem, if you want to measure
rms
> >carrier power, ANY wattmeter will work.
>
> No shit. But a peak meter won't show if your power is dropping on
> amplitude peaks, which is an indication of... brace yourself...
> OVERMODULATION! The only thing a peak meter is good for on AM is to
> get your jollies watching the little needle move.
And an RMS meter will show you nothing up to and including 100 percent
modulated
signal.
An AVG type meter will. It will show you similiar to the Bird meter.
>
> >Just using a lot of words doesn't make you look smart. Using a lot of
words
> >for you made you look ignorant, as a matter of fact.
>
> I really don't care how I look or how many words I use, it's what I am
> saying that matters. But if you don't use the CORRECT words (PM FM?
> "Bird" watts?) it can sure make YOU look ignorant, "as a matter of
> fact".
lol
I'll end the tirade of insults here.
>
> >A lot of keyclowns
> >> don't like RMS meters because the little needle doesn't move and they
> >> can't figure out how to use a modulation meter. Gotta have that swang!
> >
> >
> >A. Most "keyclowns" as you call them don't use a PEP meter because the
Bird
> >isn't a pep meter (or it's incarnations). It has nothing to do with
> >"swing". Proof positive
> >that you have no clue as to WHO you are talking about, just making
> >generalizations.
>
> It proves squat because I never made such a claim, except to say that
> my Bird does read peak (which, by the way, is NOT the same as PEP,
> because PEP can only be measured using a two-tone test; not audio, and
> not carrier-only (dead-key)). Bird has indeed made peak-reading
> wattmeters. I own one.
They have made a few. The Bird models most CBers use are not PEP
reading, and most of the operators that have installed the peak reading
kit either sell the meter, or take it out because of battery consumption or
reliability problems.
The 4314 was pep reading from the factory.
PEP is a measurement of power, yes. It is also the label put on a front of
quite a few wattmeters.
And the argument was never brought up as to nomenclature of meters and
their labels until now... Why?
it. You don't have to comment on
> >everything, we
> >still will realize that you are learning.
>
> I earned my degree
Ahh, here is one point. Degreed. I am impressed by your staying in school
long enough to get the degree. Anything else, impresses me not.
(BTW twistie, electronics engineering is a
> specialized degree), and I have been working with RF professionally
> for over 20 years, in both the military and commercial sectors.
Great. When is the last time you ran a 2SC2879 at 22 volts?
Unless you have experience in the world in which the keydown people
operate, you have little experience. A lot of people here argued the points
your arguing, including me, until they actually sat down, and tried some of
the things being mentioned and talked about in here.
Textbooks don't always follow true when you break from the textbook
designs and rules.
I came
> to this newsgroup because I enjoy CB radio and I thought I could share
> a bit of my knowledge and experience, as well as learn some things
> about the hobby.
Good. But your not learning a damn thing when you tell us we can't
possibly be doing what we are doing. Have metered. Have watched.
Your engineering degree means little to nothing in the world of overvolted,
negative shift having world of cb radio. Your engineering degree means
little
to me regardless. I let the way a person presents themself, proves their
theories / statements and the way they consistently tell the same thing.
When someone starts to nitpick acronyms, back up and tell someone
they oversimplified and thats why their statement was wrong, it all adds
up against that person.
But it's obvious that you want a flame war to prove
> yourself, so I will oblige.
>
Actually, I came back on this newsgroup with the intent of not having any
flame wars, since it seemed vooby and most of his croonies left after being
uncovered.
You started a flame war with the incessant "WHAT IS A BIRD WATT",
when you knew damn well what the reference was to.
Get off your "I am an EE, and that means I'm right" attitude, and people
will
like you a lot more. And, as you said you wanted, you just might learn
something.
Toll_Free
Toll Free
equipment you talk of, and CAN'T do what you say they should.
Now what?
They make do with what they have, ensuring they get the best sample and
most accurate readings they can.
Sorry if we aren't good enough for you. I mean, we ARE just lowly CBers.
Toll_Free
"Sparky" <spa...@cet.com> wrote in message
news:3c3e0142...@news.cet.com...
Richard McCollum
> Most good techs in the CB community Don't have a spec-an, Don't have the
> equipment you talk of, and CAN'T do what you say they should.
>
> Now what?
>
>
> They make do with what they have, ensuring they get the best sample and
> most accurate readings they can.
>
> Sorry if we aren't good enough for you. I mean, we ARE just lowly
CBers.
>
>
> Toll_Free
>
>
Three rules of Technicianing:
1. Know when to quit
2. Know when never to get started
3. Don't try to outdesign the guy that built it armed only with a parts
catalog, some vague advice, and two fanzines
Sparky
wrote:
<snip>
>> The point was that it takes 2W audio to 100% modulate a 4W carrier,
>> and a peak measurement on AM is just a deception.
>
>
>Laws of Physics are a deception now.
>
>It takes 2 watts of AVG audio power to modulate a 4 watt carrier.
That's what I said.
>Check the peak to peak voltage, and do the math.
>
>Does that not kinda blow away your theory that Peak Envelope Power
>in an AM rig is a useful measurement? The fact that it actually IS
>measuring
>the max signal?
That doesn't make any sense. You measure AM with an RMS meter and
modulation with a -modulation- meter. Works pretty good, don'tcha
think?
Sparky
wrote:
>> Where did I say anything like that? I said that a peak-reading
>> wattmeter measures harmonics and splatter BETTER than an RMS meter.
>> Which they do. An RMS meter won't move much for a spike, but a peak
>> meter will pick it up and hold it for you to gawk at.
>
>
>With a true rms reading meter, you get no needle flicker at all when 100
>percent modulated
>or less, on a true am signal.
Very good.
>So, I guess, a needle that did no movement would be better? So you couldn't
>see if you had a problem
>with modulation, etc?
It helps. It also doesn't lead a perspective buyer to believe that the
radio is actually putting out 16 watts. RMS is the standard by which
AM power has been measured since it was first measured.
>> >So, you will read harmonics, splatter, etc. with ANY non-descriminatory
>type
>> >wattmeter (thats the word you where looking for)
>>
>> I found all the words I was looking for, you just didn't read them
>> properly. You will NOT read harmonics, splatter, spikes, etc AS WELL
>> with a RMS meter, as explained before.
>
>
>And you don't read the amplitude modulated signal as well, either.
You read it just fine, just like radio operators been doing for almost
a century.
>> >If you want an accurate measure of carrier
>> >> power, however, an RMS meter is what to use for AM.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Get a PEP reading meter. Measure a carrier (Use FM for this, as
>> >it has NO "swing", unless its PM FM).
>>
>> WTF is PM FM? F3 is frequency OR phase modulation, and they are pretty
>> much the same thing -- constant amplitude. So what is PM FM and how do
>> you get "swing" out of it?
>
>
>You know exactly what I referenced. Just as you knew exactly what a Bird
>watt
>was when I used the term earlier.
I have no idea what you mean by PM FM, but it looks like you are
avoiding the question (hmmm... that's getting to be a habit with you).
And I still don't know what a "bird watt" is because the term has been
used to describe both RMS and peak readings.
>However, in phase modulation, you can see a downward pulling effect,
>following
>modulation peaks. Reference early Galaxy chassis.
If you see an amplitude change in PM, then the amplitude limiter isn't
doing it's job. Same with FM.
>> >Now, DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING, but move your Bird from PEP
>> >back to AVG (or put your other meter in line).
>> >
>> >Oh look. They are the same. So, it would seem, if you want to measure
>rms
>> >carrier power, ANY wattmeter will work.
>>
>> No shit. But a peak meter won't show if your power is dropping on
>> amplitude peaks, which is an indication of... brace yourself...
>> OVERMODULATION! The only thing a peak meter is good for on AM is to
>> get your jollies watching the little needle move.
>
>
>And an RMS meter will show you nothing up to and including 100 percent
>modulated
>signal.
That's the point. I think you're catching on...
>An AVG type meter will. It will show you similiar to the Bird meter.
...oops, I spoke too soon. For all practical purposes, 'average' =
'RMS'; however, a true RMS meter will show you things that you
wouldn't understand.
>> >A lot of keyclowns
>> >> don't like RMS meters because the little needle doesn't move and they
>> >> can't figure out how to use a modulation meter. Gotta have that swang!
>> >
>> >
>> >A. Most "keyclowns" as you call them don't use a PEP meter because the
>Bird
>> >isn't a pep meter (or it's incarnations). It has nothing to do with
>> >"swing". Proof positive
>> >that you have no clue as to WHO you are talking about, just making
>> >generalizations.
>>
>> It proves squat because I never made such a claim, except to say that
>> my Bird does read peak (which, by the way, is NOT the same as PEP,
>> because PEP can only be measured using a two-tone test; not audio, and
>> not carrier-only (dead-key)). Bird has indeed made peak-reading
>> wattmeters. I own one.
>
>They have made a few. The Bird models most CBers use are not PEP
>reading, and most of the operators that have installed the peak reading
>kit either sell the meter, or take it out because of battery consumption or
>reliability problems.
>
>The 4314 was pep reading from the factory.
>
>PEP is a measurement of power, yes. It is also the label put on a front of
>quite a few wattmeters.
You are still confused about PEP and peak-reading meters. PEP is a
measurement of power at max modulation. A transmitter or amp has only
one PEP value. If a 4W transmitter is capable of 100% modulation, the
PEP will be 16W, no less, no more. OTOH, a peak-reading meter will
measure power at the modulation peaks (yes, that may be nitpicking,
but if you want to avoid arguments you need to get your terminology
correct. Like PM FM, and pills, and "bird watts"...)
Regardless, with AM, peak means nothing except that you are
modulating, and a modulation meter is better to use because it
seperates the modulation from the RF. It also reads it differently and
more accurately. If you want "swang", watch the modulation meter.
>And the argument was never brought up as to nomenclature of meters and
>their labels until now... Why?
Because you said this:
>> >A. Most "keyclowns" as you call them don't use a PEP meter because the
>Bird
>> >isn't a pep meter (or it's incarnations).
I have several wattmeters, but I don't think I have a wattmeter that
is labeled "PEP". Even the Bird is marked "Peak".
>it. You don't have to comment on
>> >everything, we
>> >still will realize that you are learning.
>>
>> I earned my degree
>
>Ahh, here is one point. Degreed. I am impressed by your staying in school
>long enough to get the degree. Anything else, impresses me not.
I don't care what impresses you or not. You seem to be under the
impression that I haven't been down this road before. I have.
>(BTW twistie, electronics engineering is a
>> specialized degree), and I have been working with RF professionally
>> for over 20 years, in both the military and commercial sectors.
>
>
>Great. When is the last time you ran a 2SC2879 at 22 volts?
Never. But I have overdriven quite a few MRF-450s and 2SC2290s a long
time ago. From that experience I learned (contrary to your
assumptions) that it doesn't make any sense. If you want more power,
use a device rated for a higher power. It's much better to
-underdrive- those things (power RF semiconductors) than overdrive
them because overdriving them increases the harmonics almost
logarithmically. Tubes, on the other hand, usually need to be driven
near max plate voltage for proper operation. But again, overdriving a
tube on the input can distort your signal because of excessive or
changing grid current (Dick can probably explain that better than I
can).
>Unless you have experience in the world in which the keydown people
>operate, you have little experience. A lot of people here argued the points
>your arguing, including me, until they actually sat down, and tried some of
>the things being mentioned and talked about in here.
>
>Textbooks don't always follow true when you break from the textbook
>designs and rules.
No they don't. But your argument is typical of someone that doesn't
have the patience or self-discipline to learn things the right way. In
case you hadn't noticed, textbooks are written for a reason: that
reason being that the information included in them is generally
accepted as factual, and can be proven time and time again. A lot of
people I know have argued the point -you- are arguing, until they
actually sat down and studied the subject in the proper venue -- not
in the CB keyclown arena. Myself included.
>I came
>> to this newsgroup because I enjoy CB radio and I thought I could share
>> a bit of my knowledge and experience, as well as learn some things
>> about the hobby.
>
>
>Good. But your not learning a damn thing when you tell us we can't
>possibly be doing what we are doing. Have metered. Have watched.
JHFC! When are you going to learn to read? I am POSITIVE you do what
you say you do! Now go back and find out what I said!
>Your engineering degree means little to nothing in the world of overvolted,
>negative shift having world of cb radio.
That's obvious. Tell me something I haven't already figured out for
myself.
> Your engineering degree means
>little
>to me regardless. I let the way a person presents themself, proves their
>theories / statements and the way they consistently tell the same thing.
--- Don't stand THERE, you BRAINLESS DOLT, a PIANO is going to fall on
your IGNORANT ASS!!! ---
Would you move? Probably not. Do you care? Probably not. Do I care?
Not in the least. In fact you are behaving just the way I would expect
you to behave. (I'm sure there are quite a few sandbaggers that know
what I just said).
>When someone starts to nitpick acronyms, back up and tell someone
>they oversimplified and thats why their statement was wrong, it all adds
>up against that person.
Hmmm... Well, I could write several pages on how an AM signal is
-really- created, calculus and all, but I didn't think you really
wanted to read all that. If you did, you would have done so already
and we wouldn't be having this pleasant little discussion.
>But it's obvious that you want a flame war to prove
>> yourself, so I will oblige.
>>
>
>
>Actually, I came back on this newsgroup with the intent of not having any
>flame wars, since it seemed vooby and most of his croonies left after being
>uncovered.
>
>You started a flame war with the incessant "WHAT IS A BIRD WATT",
>when you knew damn well what the reference was to.
Quite right that I started it. However, I am still at a loss as to the
generally accepted standard for a "bird watt".
>Get off your "I am an EE, and that means I'm right" attitude, and people
>will
>like you a lot more. And, as you said you wanted, you just might learn
>something.
Get off your "I am a big-time amp builder and I know everything about
RF power amps and I couldn't care less what the book says or how it's
really done I'm gonna do it my way and I don't care what comes out the
antenna I'm just in it for the raw power and that's why I'm so much
better than any EE because I can tweak more bird watts out of a pill
in PM FM mode and those professionals don't know what they are doing
if they can't do what I do so they can't teach me anything and blah,
blah, blah" attitude. If you want to be an RF tech, fine. Get up off
your lazy mental ass and do it right.
Sparky
wrote:
>Most good techs in the CB community Don't have a spec-an, Don't have the
>equipment you talk of, and CAN'T do what you say they should.
>
>Now what?
>
>
>They make do with what they have, ensuring they get the best sample and
>most accurate readings they can.
>
>Sorry if we aren't good enough for you. I mean, we ARE just lowly CBers.
Hey bud, YOU were the one bragging about how you calibrate your gear
and how it's so friggin accurate! Pull that attitude on someone else,
not me!
middlefanger
reader... Ask him yourself...
"Toll Free" <toll...@bigradios.com> wrote in message
news:8Gv%7.21247$dG.11...@news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com...
middlefanger
> With a true rms reading meter, you get no needle flicker at all when 100
> percent modulated or less, on a true am signal.
Can you explain what you are talking about with no needle flicker on a 100%
modulated or less signal whilest using a bird meter on AM.
example 50 watt deadkey un modulated of course, when audio is introduced
bird swings from 50 to 100 watts RMS. am i missing something or is this like
new stuff?
middlefanger
> flame wars, since it seemed vooby and most of his croonies left after
being
> uncovered.
Who uncovered them and if so who are they?
> Get off your "I am an EE, and that means I'm right" attitude, and people
> will like you a lot more.
Who cares about anyone in this NG likeing them this is not a popularity
contest, although you may find this a way to make friend since you think
your shit don't stink attitude you sound like Eitner more and more everyday.
> Toll_Free
>
>
>
>
middlefanger
> Hey bud, YOU were the one bragging about how you calibrate your gear
> and how it's so friggin accurate! Pull that attitude on someone else,
> not me!
He sounds more and more like Eitner every day. What is your claim to CB Fame
Toll free?
Please explain to the peons of the group. What have you done that makes you
the King
Scott (Unit-69)
>
> example 50 watt deadkey un modulated of course, when audio is introduced
> bird swings from 50 to 100 watts RMS. am i missing something or is this like
> new stuff?
Huh? A 50 watt carrier modulated 100% with a 1000 Hz tone will
still have the AVERAGE power of 50 watts. 50% of the time the
power will be above 50 watts, and 50% of the time the power will
be below 50 watts. The meter can't move 1000 times a second, so
you read 50 watts, modulated or not.
Sparky
He built a big amp.
middlefanger
"Scott (Unit-69)" <upp...@hotSPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:3C3F77B7...@hotSPAMmail.com...
Maybe I am missing something or my Bird meter is broke, or someone is in
left field. Into a dummy load I hooked up a radio I set the deadkey level
to lets say 50 watts for an arbitrary figure when I talk the meter swings up
to 100 watts rms max on voice peaks. So what you are saying is that it
should not move from the 50 watt level when I talk. Someone had better
explain this a little better, how can I have power below 50 watts 50% of the
time.
Richard McCollum
"Scott (Unit-69)" <upp...@hotSPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:3C3F77B7...@hotSPAMmail.com...
No Scott, the carrier sits there looking stupid and sidebands are added so
a 100% modulated AM signal with 50 watts quiet will get up to 75 average
under steady tone modulation. Our buddy here has managed to either use
some audio to power an increased carrier (swang) or has successfully built
an amp that produces more, not just louder, crap under modulation. More
than likely he is simply badly overmodulated.
Bill Nelson
>> With a true rms reading meter, you get no needle flicker at all when 100
>> percent modulated or less, on a true am signal.
> Can you explain what you are talking about with no needle flicker on a 100%
> modulated or less signal whilest using a bird meter on AM.
> example 50 watt deadkey un modulated of course, when audio is introduced
> bird swings from 50 to 100 watts RMS. am i missing something or is this like
> new stuff?
You are missing something, and it is not new. A 100% modulated signal will
barely cause needle flicker. Why? Because the modulation causes the power
to both increase and decrease equally around the un-modulated reference
carrier level.
--
Bill Nelson (bi...@peak.org)
Bill Nelson
>> Huh? A 50 watt carrier modulated 100% with a 1000 Hz tone will
>> still have the AVERAGE power of 50 watts. 50% of the time the
>> power will be above 50 watts, and 50% of the time the power will
>> be below 50 watts. The meter can't move 1000 times a second, so
>> you read 50 watts, modulated or not.
> Maybe I am missing something or my Bird meter is broke, or someone is in
> left field. Into a dummy load I hooked up a radio I set the deadkey level
> to lets say 50 watts for an arbitrary figure when I talk the meter swings up
> to 100 watts rms max on voice peaks. So what you are saying is that it
> should not move from the 50 watt level when I talk. Someone had better
> explain this a little better, how can I have power below 50 watts 50% of the
> time.
Nope. In this case, when you modulate the signal, the carrier level is
also increased. In reality, this "swing" gains you nothing but it impresses
your friends when they see it on their signal strength meters.
This is not the same as modulating a steady carrier - which is what we
were discussing.
--
Bill Nelson (bi...@peak.org)
Bill Nelson
>> Huh? A 50 watt carrier modulated 100% with a 1000 Hz tone will
>> still have the AVERAGE power of 50 watts. 50% of the time the
>> power will be above 50 watts, and 50% of the time the power will
>> be below 50 watts. The meter can't move 1000 times a second, so
>> you read 50 watts, modulated or not.
> No Scott, the carrier sits there looking stupid and sidebands are added so
> a 100% modulated AM signal with 50 watts quiet will get up to 75 average
> under steady tone modulation. Our buddy here has managed to either use
> some audio to power an increased carrier (swang) or has successfully built
> an amp that produces more, not just louder, crap under modulation. More
> than likely he is simply badly overmodulated.
To expand on this a bit - that 50% increase is for a modulating signal
that is a sine wave. The human voice is far less efficient - usually
only 1/6th to 1/3rd as good. This means that the average will increase
only about 8% to 17%. So that 56 watt reading will go to 54-58 or so
watts. That is why I stated there will only be a slight flicker.
There are ways to improve this, and keep a clean signal. Peak clipping
will not do it - it creates all sorts of splatter. Audio compressors
are useful, as are methods to reduce the range of audio frequencies in
the audio modulation.
--
Bill Nelson (bi...@peak.org)
Richard McCollum
"Bill Nelson" <bi...@spock.peak.org> wrote in message
news:a1o3al$2bo$4...@quark.scn.rain.com...
Amen.
Toll Free
> That doesn't make any sense. You measure AM with an RMS meter and
> modulation with a -modulation- meter. Works pretty good, don'tcha
> think?
>
No.
A modulation meter can't move fast enough to measure peaks, so you use
an oscilliscope or a spec-an.
You knew that, though.
Toll_Free
Toll Free
proof behind it.
The electronics don't follow along perfectly, and you don't use a 100
percent modulated radio.
You use a radio with the limiter removed.
Get a stock radio, with no removed limiter, etc. Or simply just do the
requested experiment below
Or wait. Bill Eitner, Sean and Dennis will all tell you the PEP kit isn't a
true PEP measurement kit.
You want true PEP, that reads correctly, get the Yeasu YS-60. It is a PEP
reading meter, that
has AVG thrown in through a correction circuit.
Toll_Free
"middlefanger" <middlf...@home.comspam> wrote in message
news:9iI%7.368849$5A3.14...@news1.rdc2.pa.home.com...
Toll Free
> radio is actually putting out 16 watts. RMS is the standard by which
> AM power has been measured since it was first measured.
The only thing that would lead the perspective buyer to believe a radio is
doing
16 watts AVG power output would be his own ignorance or the person selling
it lying to him. Period.
> >
> >And you don't read the amplitude modulated signal as well, either.
>
> You read it just fine, just like radio operators been doing for almost
> a century.
If your needle doesn't move, how do you register modulation with it, since
industry practice states that a "mod meter" is worthless?
I also tend to wonder why Bird tells people that the AVG meter is for FM and
CW
measurement, and the PEP is for AM?
Doesn't make sense, since you say the AVG type meter is the only good way to
see
am.
>
> >> >If you want an accurate measure of carrier
> >> >> power, however, an RMS meter is what to use for AM.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Get a PEP reading meter. Measure a carrier (Use FM for this, as
> >> >it has NO "swing", unless its PM FM).
> >>
> >> WTF is PM FM? F3 is frequency OR phase modulation, and they are pretty
> >> much the same thing -- constant amplitude. So what is PM FM and how do
> >> you get "swing" out of it?
> >
> >
> >You know exactly what I referenced. Just as you knew exactly what a Bird
> >watt
> >was when I used the term earlier.
>
> I have no idea what you mean by PM FM, but it looks like you are
> avoiding the question (hmmm... that's getting to be a habit with you).
> And I still don't know what a "bird watt" is because the term has been
> used to describe both RMS and peak readings.
lol.
A "Bird watt" is a measurement of reference, against the Bird wattmeter. We
have
been over this. It would be no difference than calling it a drake watt, if
I used my
Drake meter to reference.
In engineering text, it is NOT uncommon to give a reference to what you use
to make
the measurement if it is an unknown.
If I say my radio does 1000 watts, what am I referencing it against to
potential buyers.
NOTHING.
Kinda like antenna db gain figures.
>
> >However, in phase modulation, you can see a downward pulling effect,
> >following
> >modulation peaks. Reference early Galaxy chassis.
>
> If you see an amplitude change in PM, then the amplitude limiter isn't
> doing it's job. Same with FM.
>
> >> >Now, DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING, but move your Bird from PEP
> >> >back to AVG (or put your other meter in line).
> >> >
> >> >Oh look. They are the same. So, it would seem, if you want to
measure
> >rms
> >> >carrier power, ANY wattmeter will work.
> >>
> >> No shit. But a peak meter won't show if your power is dropping on
> >> amplitude peaks, which is an indication of... brace yourself...
> >> OVERMODULATION! The only thing a peak meter is good for on AM is to
> >> get your jollies watching the little needle move.
> >
> >
> >And an RMS meter will show you nothing up to and including 100 percent
> >modulated
> >signal.
>
> That's the point. I think you're catching on...
>
> >An AVG type meter will. It will show you similiar to the Bird meter.
>
> ...oops, I spoke too soon. For all practical purposes, 'average' =
> 'RMS'; however, a true RMS meter will show you things that you
> wouldn't understand.
No, thats where you are wrong.
Their are PEP reading, Peak reading, AVG reading and RMS reading meters.
Your oversimplification still shows that either you don't know what your
talking about,
just talking to hear yourself, or don't want to take the time to explain to
the layman...
Kinda like just saying your radio does 1000 watts, without giving ANY type
of reference
as to what you measured it with.
> You are still confused about PEP and peak-reading meters. PEP is a
> measurement of power at max modulation. A transmitter or amp has only
> one PEP value. If a 4W transmitter is capable of 100% modulation, the
> PEP will be 16W, no less, no more.
So, if you employ negative peak clipping to keep the RF waveform
on, rather than clipped off on neg peaks, then you can run over 100
percent modulation, right? Without clipping off the RF?
Or are you stating that the broadcast engineers are running all these
commercial am stations wrong now?
They employ overmodulation... On positive peaks only.
OTOH, a peak-reading meter will
> measure power at the modulation peaks (yes, that may be nitpicking,
> but if you want to avoid arguments you need to get your terminology
> correct. Like PM FM, and pills, and "bird watts"...)
No, I am talking with people that understand what htey are saying, and to
most people
but you, they understand fine. You seem to be the person having a hard time
understanding.
Take a poll.
See who is backpeddling more, "oversimplifying", restating his comments and
having a hard time
getting his point across. It ain't me.
>
> Regardless, with AM, peak means nothing except that you are
> modulating, and a modulation meter is better to use because it
> seperates the modulation from the RF. It also reads it differently and
> more accurately. If you want "swang", watch the modulation meter.
No, PEP is the way it is measured with the FCC for max output.
So I guess they are wrong as well?
>
> >And the argument was never brought up as to nomenclature of meters and
> >their labels until now... Why?
>
> Because you said this:
>
> >> >A. Most "keyclowns" as you call them don't use a PEP meter because
the
> >Bird
> >> >isn't a pep meter (or it's incarnations).
>
> I have several wattmeters, but I don't think I have a wattmeter that
> is labeled "PEP". Even the Bird is marked "Peak".
No?
"Want a FAST reading, accurate, PEP wattmeter to follow voice or digital
characteristics?
Get the 43-400 peak reading kit for your BIRD 43!
"
Taken from radiodan's website. He probably doesn't know what he is talking
about.
http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/shakproj.html
ARRL doesn't, either.
http://www.autekresearch.com/wm1.htm
I think autek must be on drugs, cuz they use PEP, and like all others, tell
you to use a PEP reading meter for AM measurement.
http://www.bird-electronics.com/Documents/pdf/generalCatalog.pdf
Bird refers to their PEP reading 4314, not a PEAK reading, but PEP reading.
I think I have cited enough references... 4 to your none.
>
> >it. You don't have to comment on
> >> >everything, we
> >> >still will realize that you are learning.
> >>
> >> I earned my degree
> >
> >Ahh, here is one point. Degreed. I am impressed by your staying in
school
> >long enough to get the degree. Anything else, impresses me not.
>
> I don't care what impresses you or not. You seem to be under the
> impression that I haven't been down this road before. I have.
No, I asked you what you have set up, in the high power CB arena. You
answered
with not answering, ignoring the question, whatever... Bottom line is you
haven't done
it.
Do you thing that every amateur operator could walk into a commercial
station, dead in the
water, and get the station up and running?
Doubtful, but they have the credentials to do so, since they are "SUPPOSED"
to be radio
operators.
>
> >(BTW twistie, electronics engineering is a
> >> specialized degree), and I have been working with RF professionally
> >> for over 20 years, in both the military and commercial sectors.
> >
> >
> >Great. When is the last time you ran a 2SC2879 at 22 volts?
>
> Never. But I have overdriven quite a few MRF-450s and 2SC2290s a long
> time ago. From that experience I learned (contrary to your
> assumptions) that it doesn't make any sense. If you want more power,
> use a device rated for a higher power. It's much better to
> -underdrive- those things (power RF semiconductors) than overdrive
> them because overdriving them increases the harmonics almost
> logarithmically.
That's why we overvolt. It increases output
Tubes, on the other hand, usually need to be driven
> near max plate voltage for proper operation. But again, overdriving a
> tube on the input can distort your signal because of excessive or
> changing grid current (Dick can probably explain that better than I
> can).
>
> >Unless you have experience in the world in which the keydown people
> >operate, you have little experience. A lot of people here argued the
points
> >your arguing, including me, until they actually sat down, and tried some
of
> >the things being mentioned and talked about in here.
> >
> >Textbooks don't always follow true when you break from the textbook
> >designs and rules.
>
> No they don't. But your argument is typical of someone that doesn't
> have the patience or self-discipline to learn things the right way.
lol.
I operate my amateur station the way you want me to. I operate my CB
differently.
THAT is a MAJOR bone of contention with you it seems. You can't operate a
radio
in one service one way, and operate another in a different service.
In
> case you hadn't noticed, textbooks are written for a reason: that
> reason being that the information included in them is generally
> accepted as factual, and can be proven time and time again. A lot of
> people I know have argued the point -you- are arguing, until they
> actually sat down and studied the subject in the proper venue -- not
> in the CB keyclown arena. Myself included.
And I have done the same.
Bottom line is this.
Bird watts is a reference to wattage power output, as measured with a Bird
wattmeter.
Pill is a commonly accepted term for RF power transistor in the CB world
(this is rec.radio.CB, right)
So, all your problems seem to be nitpicking, double standards, or just not
having done something
and claiming it is impossible, doesn't happen, or won't happen, although
most of the high power
operators in here agree with what I have found.
Wonder why that is?
And it would be more drivel brought into the newsgroup that has nothing to
do with
the topic
Notice topic: What is a bird watt... A measurement made with a Bird
wattmeter.
>
> >But it's obvious that you want a flame war to prove
> >> yourself, so I will oblige.
> >>
> >
> >
> >Actually, I came back on this newsgroup with the intent of not having any
> >flame wars, since it seemed vooby and most of his croonies left after
being
> >uncovered.
> >
> >You started a flame war with the incessant "WHAT IS A BIRD WATT",
> >when you knew damn well what the reference was to.
>
> Quite right that I started it. However, I am still at a loss as to the
> generally accepted standard for a "bird watt".
Unit of measurement = Watt
Brand of product making measurement = Bird
Bird watt would be a watt, as measured on a Bird wattmeter.
What is so hard to see about giving a reference to your measuring equipment?
>
> >Get off your "I am an EE, and that means I'm right" attitude, and people
> >will
> >like you a lot more. And, as you said you wanted, you just might learn
> >something.
>
> Get off your "I am a big-time amp builder and I know everything about
> RF power amps
I never said that. Your inferring it.
and I couldn't care less what the book says or how it's
> really done
How it's really done? Are you saying that I CAN'T get what I claim out of
boxes?
Or that I don't understand how an amplifier works?
Stop with the generalizations, and start showing something to back up YOUR
claims.
I'm gonna do it my way and I don't care what comes out the
> antenna
Did I state that? No. I also stated that I do spec-an and scope my
amplifiers.
More lies coming from Sparky. Anyone notice that he starts making different
generalizations when he is on the losing end of a conversation or debate?
I'm just in it for the raw power and that's why I'm so much
> better than any EE because I can tweak more bird watts out of a pill
Never said that
> in PM FM mode
Never said that I use the mode. Phase modulation is a way to get FM out of
a transmitter..
Thats all.
I never said it would get you more watts from an amplifier.. That's your
doing.
and those professionals don't know what they are doing
> if they can't do what I do so they can't teach me anything
Never said that, either.
and blah,
> blah, blah" attitude. If you want to be an RF tech, fine. Get up off
> your lazy mental ass and do it right.
Ilol.
I suggest you stop with the lies now Sparky. Your looking more and more
like someone on
a sinking ship as the days go by. You claim you don't know what a Bird Watt
is, but yet
I have been telling you it is a measurement of wattage output as made with a
Bird meter. You
don't get that?
The rest of your entire paragraph was you paraphrasing things, and untruths,
just to make yourself
look better. I never made the statements above, and I suggest you stick with
facts, and truth.
Makes you a LOT more credible in the future.
Toll_Free
Toll Free
"middlefanger" <middlf...@home.comspam> wrote in message
>
> "Toll Free" <toll...@bigradios.com> wrote in message
> news:NVv%7.21250$dG.11...@news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com...
> > With a true rms reading meter, you get no needle flicker at all when 100
> > percent modulated or less, on a true am signal.
>
> Can you explain what you are talking about with no needle flicker on a
100%
> modulated or less signal whilest using a bird meter on AM.
Yes. When modulating a carrier, you will have 25 percent of the power in
positive
peaks, and 25 percent in negative.
When you add +25 and -25, what do you get?
0
So the net increase in RMS power is 0, so the power level stays the same.
>
> example 50 watt deadkey un modulated of course, when audio is introduced
> bird swings from 50 to 100 watts RMS.
No, it wouldn't, unless your using one of your peaked up, non-linear radios
and amplifiers
to do these tests with.
am i missing something or is this like
> new stuff?
No, your missing basic textbook am theory.
Toll_Free
>
>
>
>
>
Toll Free
symettrically modulated signal when it is at or below 100 percent, and is
being modulated by a symettrical signal. (not sure if symettrical is
spelled right, little early in the am)
Go read Googles archive of Bill E and Dennis O when they where discussing
it. It went on for a few days, and I don't
feel like retyping it all here.
Toll_Free
"Bill Nelson" <bi...@spock.peak.org> wrote in message
news:a1o2aq$2bo$3...@quark.scn.rain.com...
Toll Free
> Who uncovered them and if so who are they?
>
Go read the archives.
>
>
>
>
> > Get off your "I am an EE, and that means I'm right" attitude, and people
> > will like you a lot more.
>
> Who cares about anyone in this NG likeing them this is not a popularity
> contest, although you may find this a way to make friend since you think
> your shit don't stink attitude you sound like Eitner more and more
everyday.
>
Ahh yes, another person who believes nobody should like them, and they
shouldn't have
to have an attitude of "I think I'll think of other people".
Do I sound more and more like Eitner? Maybe because he usually knows what
he
is talking about, too.
Toll_Free
Toll Free
Ima print this out and put it on the wall :)
Toll_Free
"Richard McCollum" <rmcco...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:ZLA%7.245367$WW.13...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Toll Free
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2002 06:51:22 GMT, "Toll Free" <toll...@bigradios.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Most good techs in the CB community Don't have a spec-an, Don't have the
> >equipment you talk of, and CAN'T do what you say they should.
> >
> >Now what?
> >
> >
> >They make do with what they have, ensuring they get the best sample and
> >most accurate readings they can.
> >
> >Sorry if we aren't good enough for you. I mean, we ARE just lowly CBers.
>
> Hey bud, YOU were the one bragging about how you calibrate your gear
Where?
> and how it's so friggin accurate! Pull that attitude on someone else,
> not me!
Where?
Please cite my comments.
Toll_Free
Toll Free
Please show me where I sound like Eitner...
Please show me where I should care that someone who doesn't understand
fundemental AM
and their attitudes should bother me.
Toll_Free
"middlefanger" <middlf...@home.comspam> wrote in message
news:EwI%7.368864$5A3.14...@news1.rdc2.pa.home.com...
Sparky
wrote:
>>
>> That doesn't make any sense. You measure AM with an RMS meter and
>> modulation with a -modulation- meter. Works pretty good, don'tcha
>> think?
>>
>
>
>No.
>
>A modulation meter can't move fast enough to measure peaks, so you use
>an oscilliscope or a spec-an.
It doesn't move as fast as a scope, granted, but then neither does a
peak-reading wattmeter since the limitation for both is in the meter
movement. The modulation meter is just fine for what it was intended
to do. And yes, you can get a peak-reading modulation meter. The best
ones have peak memory so you can keep track of your signal over the
long-term.
Sparky
wrote:
>
>"Sparky" <spa...@cet.com> wrote in message
>news:3c3f0bdd...@news.cet.com...
>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2002 06:51:22 GMT, "Toll Free" <toll...@bigradios.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Most good techs in the CB community Don't have a spec-an, Don't have the
>> >equipment you talk of, and CAN'T do what you say they should.
>> >
>> >Now what?
>> >
>> >
>> >They make do with what they have, ensuring they get the best sample and
>> >most accurate readings they can.
>> >
>> >Sorry if we aren't good enough for you. I mean, we ARE just lowly CBers.
>>
>> Hey bud, YOU were the one bragging about how you calibrate your gear
>
>
>Where?
>
>
>
>> and how it's so friggin accurate! Pull that attitude on someone else,
>> not me!
>
>Where?
>
>Please cite my comments.
>
>
>Toll_Free
You sure do have a short memory, Toll....
On Wed, 09 Jan 2002 20:55:03 GMT, "Toll Free" <toll...@bigradios.com>
wrote:
>Actually, the Bird, as a standard is Mil-Spec.
>
>I use a non-inductive load and a ammeter to calibrate.
>
>It is more accurate than most.
>
>And you don't use this at home, you use it at work.
>
>And ALL your slugs will be advertised tolerance if properly taken care of...
>Which few people do.
>
>
>Toll_Free
>
Sparky
wrote:
>> It helps. It also doesn't lead a perspective buyer to believe that the
>> radio is actually putting out 16 watts. RMS is the standard by which
>> AM power has been measured since it was first measured.
>
>
>The only thing that would lead the perspective buyer to believe a radio is
>doing
>16 watts AVG power output would be his own ignorance or the person selling
>it lying to him. Period.
Welcome to the free-enterprise system.
>> >
>> >And you don't read the amplitude modulated signal as well, either.
>>
>> You read it just fine, just like radio operators been doing for almost
>> a century.
>
>
>If your needle doesn't move, how do you register modulation with it, since
>industry practice states that a "mod meter" is worthless?
Then why does the 'industry' still make modulation meters? And why do
they work? Care to back up that statement with some fact?
>I also tend to wonder why Bird tells people that the AVG meter is for FM and
>CW
>measurement, and the PEP is for AM?
>
>Doesn't make sense, since you say the AVG type meter is the only good way to
>see
>am.
Funny, that's not what -my- Bird manual says. Care to provide a
citation or reference?
Then why do so many CBers refer to 'Bird watts' as peak? And you are
still ignoring the FCC standard -- haven't you found the FCC website
yet?
The "average" of a sine wave is so close to RMS (AVG = 0.9 * RMS) it's
not significant, so the two terms are used interchangeably where the
difference can be ignored. But you can't measure audio (SSB) with RMS
because it's not a sine wave, so you have to use peak values, or PEP.
As far as "PEP" and "peak", I'll give you that one because I think I
might be nitpicking a bit too far there. Just like those people that
say, "two hundred and forty two", which isn't 242, but 200 and 42. Or
those people that like to measure weight in grams. It may not be
proper, but it's not that important.
>> You are still confused about PEP and peak-reading meters. PEP is a
>> measurement of power at max modulation. A transmitter or amp has only
>> one PEP value. If a 4W transmitter is capable of 100% modulation, the
>> PEP will be 16W, no less, no more.
>
>
>So, if you employ negative peak clipping to keep the RF waveform
>on, rather than clipped off on neg peaks, then you can run over 100
>percent modulation, right? Without clipping off the RF?
huh?
>Or are you stating that the broadcast engineers are running all these
>commercial am stations wrong now?
>
>They employ overmodulation... On positive peaks only.
I don't think so, Toll. Like you say to me all the time, don't talk
about stuff when you have no idea what you are talking about.
>OTOH, a peak-reading meter will
>> measure power at the modulation peaks (yes, that may be nitpicking,
>> but if you want to avoid arguments you need to get your terminology
>> correct. Like PM FM, and pills, and "bird watts"...)
>
>
>No, I am talking with people that understand what htey are saying, and to
>most people
>but you, they understand fine. You seem to be the person having a hard time
>understanding.
>
>Take a poll.
Ok.
Q1: How many people here know what PM FM is?
Q2: What's the definition of a "Bird watt"?
Q3: What's a "pill"?
>See who is backpeddling more, "oversimplifying", restating his comments and
>having a hard time
>getting his point across. It ain't me.
No you don't, you just keep forgetting what you already posted.
>> Regardless, with AM, peak means nothing except that you are
>> modulating, and a modulation meter is better to use because it
>> seperates the modulation from the RF. It also reads it differently and
>> more accurately. If you want "swang", watch the modulation meter.
>
>
>No, PEP is the way it is measured with the FCC for max output.
On SSB, not on AM. And what do they use for their standard to measure
those power levels? A Bird?
>So I guess they are wrong as well?
No, you are.
>> >And the argument was never brought up as to nomenclature of meters and
>> >their labels until now... Why?
>>
>> Because you said this:
>>
>> >> >A. Most "keyclowns" as you call them don't use a PEP meter because
>the
>> >Bird
>> >> >isn't a pep meter (or it's incarnations).
>>
>> I have several wattmeters, but I don't think I have a wattmeter that
>> is labeled "PEP". Even the Bird is marked "Peak".
>
>
>No?
>
>"Want a FAST reading, accurate, PEP wattmeter to follow voice or digital
>characteristics?
>Get the 43-400 peak reading kit for your BIRD 43!
>"
>
>Taken from radiodan's website. He probably doesn't know what he is talking
>about.
He probably does. Did you ask him what is better for measuring AM
power? It doesn't say one way or another on his site. (BTW, did you
notice he uses the term 'peak reading'? Doesn't matter tho, I conceded
the issue.)
>http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/shakproj.html
>
>ARRL doesn't, either.
Sorry, I'm not a member, so I can't access the articles. Maybe you
could just quote a line or two where it says measuring AM should be
done with a PEP meter.
>http://www.autekresearch.com/wm1.htm
>
>I think autek must be on drugs, cuz they use PEP, and like all others, tell
>you to use a PEP reading meter for AM measurement.
No they don't. The page says that many leave their meters in peak
(PEP) mode. Nowhere does it suggest PEP be used for AM. On the
contrary, it suggests that the 5 watt range be used for CB, which
would go well above that value in PEP mode.
>http://www.bird-electronics.com/Documents/pdf/generalCatalog.pdf
>
>Bird refers to their PEP reading 4314, not a PEAK reading, but PEP reading.
So where on the Bird site does it say that you should use a PEP meter
instead of an average meter for measuring AM? Is that page on a hidden
link or something?
>I think I have cited enough references... 4 to your none.
Your references just show that peak-reading wattmeters are frequently
called 'PEP' meters, and you failed to prove that -my- meter says
anything other than 'peak'.
Now pay attention, Toll: Power is measured by using RMS voltage and
current values, not peak. Your peak readings are not an indication of
power. Even a 12 watt PEP SSB signal will dissipate only 3 watts in a
50 ohm resistor.
Measuring AM with a peak reading meter is only a deception, Toll.
>> >it. You don't have to comment on
>> >> >everything, we
>> >> >still will realize that you are learning.
>> >>
>> >> I earned my degree
>> >
>> >Ahh, here is one point. Degreed. I am impressed by your staying in
>school
>> >long enough to get the degree. Anything else, impresses me not.
>>
>> I don't care what impresses you or not. You seem to be under the
>> impression that I haven't been down this road before. I have.
>
>
>
>
>No, I asked you what you have set up, in the high power CB arena. You
>answered
>with not answering, ignoring the question, whatever... Bottom line is you
>haven't done
>it.
I answered, you just didn't read it.
>Do you thing that every amateur operator could walk into a commercial
>station, dead in the
>water, and get the station up and running?
>
>Doubtful, but they have the credentials to do so, since they are "SUPPOSED"
>to be radio
>operators.
Not doubtful at all. They can recognize what goes where and how it
works. It all runs on the same basic concepts, but a broadcast station
just uses a bit larger equipment. Any ham that has the fundamental
understanding of how a transmitter works could probably find his way
around a broadcast transmitter.
>> >(BTW twistie, electronics engineering is a
>> >> specialized degree), and I have been working with RF professionally
>> >> for over 20 years, in both the military and commercial sectors.
>> >
>> >
>> >Great. When is the last time you ran a 2SC2879 at 22 volts?
>>
>> Never. But I have overdriven quite a few MRF-450s and 2SC2290s a long
>> time ago. From that experience I learned (contrary to your
>> assumptions) that it doesn't make any sense. If you want more power,
>> use a device rated for a higher power. It's much better to
>> -underdrive- those things (power RF semiconductors) than overdrive
>> them because overdriving them increases the harmonics almost
>> logarithmically.
>
>
>That's why we overvolt. It increases output
A lot of that power is in harmonics. One of the tricks I use to get a
super-clean AM signal out of those power tetrodes is to run AB1; i.e,
underdriven. The tubes are bigger but the signal is cleaner, the drive
amp is simpler and the entire system is more reliable. Overall, it
performs better for less maintenance and less expense. You can't do
that on the semiconductors, but at least you can keep it in the linear
region by not overdriving it. And if you are trying to swamp someone
else's signal, wouldn't it be better to get all your power on one
frequency instead of spread out all over the spectrum? Overvolting
isn't too smart, Toll.
>Tubes, on the other hand, usually need to be driven
>> near max plate voltage for proper operation. But again, overdriving a
>> tube on the input can distort your signal because of excessive or
>> changing grid current (Dick can probably explain that better than I
>> can).
>>
>> >Unless you have experience in the world in which the keydown people
>> >operate, you have little experience. A lot of people here argued the
>points
>> >your arguing, including me, until they actually sat down, and tried some
>of
>> >the things being mentioned and talked about in here.
>> >
>> >Textbooks don't always follow true when you break from the textbook
>> >designs and rules.
>>
>> No they don't. But your argument is typical of someone that doesn't
>> have the patience or self-discipline to learn things the right way.
>
>
>lol.
>
>I operate my amateur station the way you want me to. I operate my CB
>differently.
>
>THAT is a MAJOR bone of contention with you it seems. You can't operate a
>radio
>in one service one way, and operate another in a different service.
Because you operate your CB with total disregard for anybody else
that's using the band? Without the consideration to potential hazards?
Bragging about power when you don't even know where your power is
going? Adding to the ruin of what could be a great radio service?
Claiming to be some super-tech but don't even understand the proper
terminology? Yeah, Toll, whatever you say.
>In
>> case you hadn't noticed, textbooks are written for a reason: that
>> reason being that the information included in them is generally
>> accepted as factual, and can be proven time and time again. A lot of
>> people I know have argued the point -you- are arguing, until they
>> actually sat down and studied the subject in the proper venue -- not
>> in the CB keyclown arena. Myself included.
>
>
>And I have done the same.
oh, really?
>Bottom line is this.
>
>Bird watts is a reference to wattage power output, as measured with a Bird
>wattmeter.
Ok, so what do your amps do in 'Drake watts'? How about 'Radio Shack
watts'? Or whatever the FCC uses for their standard?
>Pill is a commonly accepted term for RF power transistor in the CB world
>(this is rec.radio.CB, right)
I thought it was slang for the transistors that bear the shape and
color of aspirin, silly me. I guess that 2sc799 is also a 'pill', huh?
>So, all your problems seem to be nitpicking, double standards, or just not
>having done something
>and claiming it is impossible, doesn't happen, or won't happen, although
>most of the high power
>operators in here agree with what I have found.
>
>Wonder why that is?
Although I would have to take issue with your use of the word "most",
I can only guess. Does "Birds of a feather..." ring a bell? Actually,
I think most that agree with you do so not because they understand the
conversation, but because they don't like me, as tnom pointed out.
That's not very good logic to be running down the coax and past your
balls...
Which isn't any more significant than a watt read with any other
meter.
>> >But it's obvious that you want a flame war to prove
>> >> yourself, so I will oblige.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >Actually, I came back on this newsgroup with the intent of not having any
>> >flame wars, since it seemed vooby and most of his croonies left after
>being
>> >uncovered.
>> >
>> >You started a flame war with the incessant "WHAT IS A BIRD WATT",
>> >when you knew damn well what the reference was to.
>>
>> Quite right that I started it. However, I am still at a loss as to the
>> generally accepted standard for a "bird watt".
>
>
>Unit of measurement = Watt
>
>Brand of product making measurement = Bird
>
>Bird watt would be a watt, as measured on a Bird wattmeter.
>
>What is so hard to see about giving a reference to your measuring equipment?
Well you were making claims that it was the ultimate standard by which
to measure a CB radio, when in fact just about any wattmeter will show
the same thing. Yeah, not just 'watts' but 'Bird watts'! Oooh, that's
impressive for sure! A watt is a watt is a watt, Toll. Try looking up
'Bird watt' in the old Van Nostrands, or maybe CRC's HCP. Or even
Oxford's latest dictionary. I don't think you will find it because it
ISN'T a technical STANDARD, as you are so willing to convince.
>> >Get off your "I am an EE, and that means I'm right" attitude, and people
>> >will
>> >like you a lot more. And, as you said you wanted, you just might learn
>> >something.
>>
>> Get off your "I am a big-time amp builder and I know everything about
>> RF power amps
>
>
>I never said that. Your inferring it.
And you provided plenty of premises.
>and I couldn't care less what the book says or how it's
>> really done
>
>
>
>How it's really done? Are you saying that I CAN'T get what I claim out of
>boxes?
The problem is that you don't claim much, except that they will suck
up lots of gasoline and airspace. Which I'm sure they do.
>Or that I don't understand how an amplifier works?
>
>Stop with the generalizations, and start showing something to back up YOUR
>claims.
I'm sure you understand some of the basics, just enough to get you or
someone else in trouble. Nothing more.
>I'm gonna do it my way and I don't care what comes out the
>> antenna
>
>
>Did I state that? No. I also stated that I do spec-an and scope my
>amplifiers.
But you have never made any claims as to how clean they are. Do you
have any numbers? Any third-party verification? Save it, Toll, we all
know you are not interested in communicating with those things, just
the "raw power" out the antenna.
>More lies coming from Sparky. Anyone notice that he starts making different
>generalizations when he is on the losing end of a conversation or debate?
Ever notice how people stop making and start complaining about
'generalizations' only when they can no longer address the specifics?
Ever notice how you change the subject when you lose your point? Or
how you totally ignore it?
>I'm just in it for the raw power and that's why I'm so much
>> better than any EE because I can tweak more bird watts out of a pill
>
>Never said that
Close enough. That was your attitude, and that's what I'm describing.
>> in PM FM mode
>
>Never said that I use the mode. Phase modulation is a way to get FM out of
>a transmitter..
>
>Thats all.
Phase and frequency modulation are similar, but seperate. Try reading
up on the differences. Oh, that's right, you did -- PM will dip a
fixed-amplitude carrier when FM won't!
>I never said it would get you more watts from an amplifier.. That's your
>doing.
I was lumping your terminology into one phrase, in case you couldn't
tell.
>and those professionals don't know what they are doing
>> if they can't do what I do so they can't teach me anything
>
>
>Never said that, either.
Again, that's your attitude. YOU were going to teach ME some things
about amps and RF, remember? YOU were the one that claimed I never
went to a keydown so I didn't know what I was talking about. YOU were
the one that thought I didn't even know anything about power RF. It
all adds up, Toll. Flip through enough pages and you can usually
understand the plotline.
>and blah,
>> blah, blah" attitude. If you want to be an RF tech, fine. Get up off
>> your lazy mental ass and do it right.
>
>
>Ilol.
>
>I suggest you stop with the lies now Sparky. Your looking more and more
>like someone on
>a sinking ship as the days go by. You claim you don't know what a Bird Watt
>is, but yet
>I have been telling you it is a measurement of wattage output as made with a
>Bird meter. You
>don't get that?
No, you said it was some super-standard for CB amps, like a 'Bird
watt' is a better thing than any other watt. It's -your- ship that's
sinking, Toll, and it's sinking fast. Not only do you NOT know half of
what you are talking about, but you want to continue your charade in
order to get yourself killfiled by most of the people on the group. I
don't care, I'm already in lots of killfiles, and anybody that hasn't
plonked me and reads my technical posts knows that you should be
looking for a life preserver right about now.
>The rest of your entire paragraph was you paraphrasing things, and untruths,
>just to make yourself
>look better. I never made the statements above, and I suggest you stick with
>facts, and truth.
Paraphrasing, yes. Untruths, hardly. All my conclusions are based on
what you have said.
>Makes you a LOT more credible in the future.
My credibility is not your concern, but maybe it should be. I don't
care what people think about my attitude, just as long as I get the
facts straight. When I'm wrong I admit it, like with the PEP meters,
and the co-phased antennas. You have pushed this whole thing so far
that you don't even remember what the issue was. So let me refresh:
You poked your nose into a conversation comparing 50 volt transistors
to 12 volt 'pills', claiming the 12 volt devices could be overpowered
so much better while retaining spectral purity, and implying that PEP
'Bird watts' was prima-facie proof of quality. I called you on both
issues, and so far you have proven nothing, except that you really
don't know as much about RF as you claim. Care to continue?
Aaron H. Voobner
arbitrary measurement made by "that real expensive meter a tech used
when he peaked my radio out"?
-Aaron-
Sparky
wrote:
>> Can you explain what you are talking about with no needle flicker on a
>100%
>> modulated or less signal whilest using a bird meter on AM.
>
>
>
>Yes. When modulating a carrier, you will have 25 percent of the power in
>positive
>peaks, and 25 percent in negative.
Wrong again, Toll. A 4 watt carrier with 100% modulation has 1 watt in
each sideband, but those 2 watts don't come out of the carrier. Total
signal power is actually 6 watts.
>> example 50 watt deadkey un modulated of course, when audio is introduced
>> bird swings from 50 to 100 watts RMS.
>
>
>No, it wouldn't, unless your using one of your peaked up, non-linear radios
>and amplifiers
>to do these tests with.
>
>am i missing something or is this like
>> new stuff?
>
>
>No, your missing basic textbook am theory.
Since you are so well-versed in AM theory, maybe you can explain why
those 2 watts on the sidebands don't show up on an RMS meter.
Sparky
wrote:
>A properly working RMS meter (which the Bird isn't)...
Bird never made an RMS meter?
Toll Free
In medical, when you make a measurement, you also site your reference.
In physics, same thing.
When I worked at an oil and gas exploration firm, we HAD to give ALL
references
to measurement equipment.
Bottom line is, Sparky knew what I was referencing when I cited a "Bird
Watt",
it was on topic (since most high power operators use the same term), and
he just trolled it.
Kinda like you do
Toll_Free
"Aaron H. Voobner" <voo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fbc7a2.020112...@posting.google.com...
Sparky
wrote:
>Because it isn't.
>
>In medical, when you make a measurement, you also site your reference.
>
>In physics, same thing.
>
>When I worked at an oil and gas exploration firm, we HAD to give ALL
>references
>to measurement equipment.
>
>Bottom line is, Sparky knew what I was referencing when I cited a "Bird
>Watt",
>it was on topic (since most high power operators use the same term), and
>he just trolled it.
Wrong again, Toll. If you are going to properly reference a
measurement, you need to provide the make AND model of the test
equipment, the conditions of the test, etc. All you said was "Bird
watts". Try again, Toll.
Tim
the standard, some things go without being said and you trying to find every
little flaw is really showing your defeat in the technical arguement
>
>Wrong again, Toll. If you are going to properly reference a
>measurement, you need to provide the make AND model of the test
>equipment, the conditions of the test, etc. All you said was "Bird
>watts". Try again, Toll.
>
73 de Tim
http://www.TimNebo.com
Sparky
>sorry sparky, if you were a cb'er you'd already know that its a bird43 that is
>the standard, some things go without being said and you trying to find every
>little flaw is really showing your defeat in the technical arguement
My my, Nebout speaks! And when did you finally decide to come defend
Toll? When you finally understood something?
Maybe you should read the first post in this thread. I didn't write
it, somebody else did. I thought it was funny so I posted it. But
considering all the hype about "Bird watts" being some jaw-dropping
pinnacle of technical prowness to which every CBer should bow down and
kiss the ground in reverent admiration, maybe it's about time to slap
a few faces:
A watt is a watt is a watt. You can measure it with whatever you want,
you can pray to it before you go beddy-bye, you can curse it until
your face turns blue, but it's still just a WATT. A measure of power.
Check this out:
1 BTU/sec = 1054.8 watts
1 ft.lbs./sec = 1.3558 watts
1 hp = 746 watts
1 Kcal/min = 4186 watts
1 Lumen = 0.001496 watt
Now how do you convert all those into "Bird watts"? You don't, they
are the same!
How reliable is a Bird wattmeter? Very. How accurate is it? Depends on
the tolerance of the slug. And just like ANY OTHER wattmeter, it could
be dead-on. Or it could be off. It could also be off beyond the
accepted tolerance, while that el-cheapo meter could be dead-on: I've
had to throw away a few slugs over the years.
But here's the big question: What do they measure? They don't measure
the power going out the antenna, they don't discriminate between the
fundamental and the harmonics, they don't know how efficient your
equipment is. The truth is, they only measure what the operator using
it wants to measure! Which, in keyclown circles, doesn't mean squat!
And do you know why? Because the wattmeter is only a tool that
provides a -guideline- to RF power, that's all.
Look at the posts in this thread. Do you see how often I ask Toll what
the standard is for RF power by the FCC? Do you know why he couldn't
answer it? Because he was too lazy to find out that the FCC measures
RF power with a FIELD STRENGTH METER that measures microvolts/meter at
a given distance, NOT WATTS! And THAT'S how RF power is properly
measured!
So now you can quit taking that Bird wattmeter to bed with you every
night, because it isn't the end-all-beat-all of human existance!
Snot Rag
modulated rf signals. They consider there readings as average power they do
not call it rms.
Accuracy: +/- 5% of full scale.
The Apm-16 is for measuring Am, FM says also where pseudu random waveforms
and high or arbitrary peak to average ratios can complicate accurate average
power measurements with conventional CW type watt meters.
Peak/Avg Ratio: greater than 10 db
Sparky
<middle...@home.comspam> wrote:
>Bird says the 43 Model is for measuring single carrier, CW, FM and phase
>modulated rf signals. They consider there readings as average power they do
>not call it rms.
True RMS meters are kind of expensive, but they can measure RMS with
any signal, sinusoidal or not.
Tim
watt, right? why cant you understand that the term "bird watt" is a very
nontechnical phrase used by cb'ers and its just reffering to RMS output of a
transmitter. you keep asking for a text book description when you know very
well its a slang phrase and there isnt one available. do you think all of this
is making you look good? to me it just seems your a crochety old man that nit
picks every word and phrase when its really not needed. we've told you 100
times at least in this thread and others what the term bird watts refers too,
its a adjective not a noun.
Tim
downs?
>The truth is, they only measure what the operator using
>it wants to measure! Which, in keyclown circles, doesn't mean squat!
Snot Rag
"Tim" <tim...@aol.comLOL> wrote in message
news:20020113153111...@mb-fd.aol.com...
Tim
the rest of it is guys like yourself and sparky making unfounded claims about
keydowns and those that enjoy them while all the while never actually
participating in them. i see sparks has backed off his claim that huge numbers
are not possible in mobiles and he's taken after the whole "bird watt" thing
since he was totally wrong about the mobiles and feels he might get at toll
free with this one. very petty and clearer than ice
>Just read the NG Tim come on that wasnt' hard.
Toll Free
> >> radio is actually putting out 16 watts. RMS is the standard by which
> >> AM power has been measured since it was first measured.
> >
> >
> >The only thing that would lead the perspective buyer to believe a radio
is
> >doing
> >16 watts AVG power output would be his own ignorance or the person
selling
> >it lying to him. Period.
>
Yup.. It sucks when people have to shyster others to make a living.
Luckily, those are usually the ones working out of a garage or shed in the
backyard.
>
> >> >
> >> >And you don't read the amplitude modulated signal as well, either.
> >>
> >> You read it just fine, just like radio operators been doing for almost
> >> a century.
> >
> >
> >If your needle doesn't move, how do you register modulation with it,
since
> >industry practice states that a "mod meter" is worthless?
>
> Then why does the 'industry' still make modulation meters? And why do
> they work? Care to back up that statement with some fact?
They are accurate when driven with a sinewave, not voice modulation, and it
has to be steady state.
I made my statement based on ARRL Handbook about modulation meters and
their worthlessness to the average amatuer or other radio operators.
Most shops only use them to set the output level of their signal generators,
anyway,
not measure final output. I don't see many, if any boonton mod meters that
are rated
for 100 thousand watts of output anyway.
>
> >I also tend to wonder why Bird tells people that the AVG meter is for FM
and
> >CW
> >measurement, and the PEP is for AM?
> >
> >Doesn't make sense, since you say the AVG type meter is the only good way
to
> >see
> >am.
>
> Funny, that's not what -my- Bird manual says. Care to provide a
> citation or reference?
>
What does your Bird manual say?
http://www.bird-electronics.com/Documents/pdf/Model_5000_and_5010_Users%20Gu
ide.pdf
Says at the graph at the bottom of the page that the only meter usable for
AM Its a PEP reading meter.
Amazingly, the avg / rms meters aren't rated for AM measurement. Hrm.
Nobody is ignoring anything. I said that the Bird is a standard. It is a
standard,
is used as a standard, and will be used as a standard, as others have
pointed out.
In the CB community, it is about the best thing you can get. Some people
are more fortunate to have better, but for them / us, it is what we use.
I hate to nitpick, but in mathematics, the word AND signifys a decimal.
So two hundred and forty two would actually be 200.42
>
> >> You are still confused about PEP and peak-reading meters. PEP is a
> >> measurement of power at max modulation. A transmitter or amp has only
> >> one PEP value. If a 4W transmitter is capable of 100% modulation, the
> >> PEP will be 16W, no less, no more.
> >
> >
> >So, if you employ negative peak clipping to keep the RF waveform
> >on, rather than clipped off on neg peaks, then you can run over 100
> >percent modulation, right? Without clipping off the RF?
>
> huh?
Its called logarythmic (sp) speech processing. It keeps the negative going
portion of the modulating signal from completely cutting off the RF carrier.
Commercial stations have been doing it for years.
>
> >Or are you stating that the broadcast engineers are running all these
> >commercial am stations wrong now?
> >
> >They employ overmodulation... On positive peaks only.
>
> I don't think so, Toll. Like you say to me all the time, don't talk
> about stuff when you have no idea what you are talking about.
lol.
That has been common knowledge for years, and some of the CB shysters have
actually
employed it to sell clipper, etc. type kits.
It is common to find a AM station going to 125 percent modulation on the
positive peaks
of the modulated rf waveform, but still keeping the negative going peaks at
or near 100 percent.
http://www.broadcast.harris.com/transmission/radio/dx-destiny.pdf
http://www.broadcast.harris.com/transmission/radio/gates-brochure.pdf
(designed for 130% positive peak)
http://www.broadcast.harris.com/transmission/radio/dxlw-brochure.pdf (peak
modulation at 145 %)
And to put it in real perspective.....
http://wmbr.mit.edu/tech/CFR73_1580.pdf
AM Stations (73.1580)
1. In no case shall the amplitude modulation of the carrier wave exceed 100%
on negative peaks of frequent recurrence, or 125% on positive peaks at any
time.
Anyway, people get the idea. Limit the negative going component, and you
can raise the positive going component to 125 percent.
Look above. I have listed a bird page that shows you use their PEP reading
meter (and only one)
to measure AM power output.
Hrm.
>
> So where on the Bird site does it say that you should use a PEP meter
> instead of an average meter for measuring AM? Is that page on a hidden
> link or something?
>
> >I think I have cited enough references... 4 to your none.
>
> Your references just show that peak-reading wattmeters are frequently
> called 'PEP' meters, and you failed to prove that -my- meter says
> anything other than 'peak'.
Your meter saying peak is of no concern to anyone on this group.
And this has what to do with someone in a CB newsgroup referencing a bird
wattmeter in relationship to
a power measurement?
Your tangents are getting old.
>
> >> >(BTW twistie, electronics engineering is a
> >> >> specialized degree), and I have been working with RF professionally
> >> >> for over 20 years, in both the military and commercial sectors.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Great. When is the last time you ran a 2SC2879 at 22 volts?
> >>
> >> Never. But I have overdriven quite a few MRF-450s and 2SC2290s a long
> >> time ago. From that experience I learned (contrary to your
> >> assumptions) that it doesn't make any sense. If you want more power,
> >> use a device rated for a higher power. It's much better to
> >> -underdrive- those things (power RF semiconductors) than overdrive
> >> them because overdriving them increases the harmonics almost
> >> logarithmically.
> >
> >
> >That's why we overvolt. It increases output
>
> A lot of that power is in harmonics. One of the tricks I use to get a
> super-clean AM signal out of those power tetrodes is to run AB1; i.e,
> underdriven.
It isn't being underdriven, it is being driven correctly for the class of
service.
I have tubes here that have 0 watts of grid dissipation. By me putting them
in AB1, I am
underdriving them?
Yet another case....
The tubes are bigger but the signal is cleaner, the drive
> amp is simpler and the entire system is more reliable. Overall, it
> performs better for less maintenance and less expense. You can't do
> that on the semiconductors, but at least you can keep it in the linear
> region by not overdriving it. And if you are trying to swamp someone
> else's signal, wouldn't it be better to get all your power on one
> frequency instead of spread out all over the spectrum? Overvolting
> isn't too smart, Toll.
Overvolting has nothing to do with the class of service on a grounded base
amplifier.
Please stick to the topics in which we where originally discussing.
>
> >Tubes, on the other hand, usually need to be driven
> >> near max plate voltage for proper operation. But again, overdriving a
> >> tube on the input can distort your signal because of excessive or
> >> changing grid current (Dick can probably explain that better than I
> >> can).
> >>
> >> >Unless you have experience in the world in which the keydown people
> >> >operate, you have little experience. A lot of people here argued the
> >points
> >> >your arguing, including me, until they actually sat down, and tried
some
> >of
> >> >the things being mentioned and talked about in here.
> >> >
> >> >Textbooks don't always follow true when you break from the textbook
> >> >designs and rules.
> >>
> >> No they don't. But your argument is typical of someone that doesn't
> >> have the patience or self-discipline to learn things the right way.
> >
> >
> >lol.
> >
> >I operate my amateur station the way you want me to. I operate my CB
> >differently.
> >
> >THAT is a MAJOR bone of contention with you it seems. You can't operate a
> >radio
> >in one service one way, and operate another in a different service.
>
> Because you operate your CB with total disregard for anybody else
> that's using the band?
lol.
I run my amateur equipment on the 11 meter band.
Ask any of the people that have talked to me on the newsgroup about my
operating procedures,
station, cleanliness in power, etc.
Your talking about something you know absolutely NOTHING about now. You
have never worked me,
never heard me, and never will, I imagine, so how the HELL can you comment
on how my station is run?
Without the consideration to potential hazards?
> Bragging about power when you don't even know where your power is
> going?
I run a spectrum analyzer on the output of my base station. I don't know
where my power is?
Again, you have never seen my station, never operated it, and never heard
it. What qualifications
do you have to tell me how it operates or where, or how it is endangering
other people?
Are you God? Genie? Have psychic powers? What?
Adding to the ruin of what could be a great radio service?
> Claiming to be some super-tech but don't even understand the proper
> terminology? Yeah, Toll, whatever you say.
So far, everyone in this group knew what I was talking about but you. And
that means I don't know
what I'm talking about.
> >Bird watts is a reference to wattage power output, as measured with a
Bird
> >wattmeter.
>
> Ok, so what do your amps do in 'Drake watts'? How about 'Radio Shack
> watts'? Or whatever the FCC uses for their standard?
If I was using a Dosy meter to make a power measurements, I would add that
it was
done with a Dosy meter.
You just stating that you get 10 watts out of your station is meaningless to
rec.radio.cb
You don't have a leg to stand on, your entire argument is based on
half-truths, outright lies (how my
station operates) and psychic abilities that I for one doubt.
>
> >Pill is a commonly accepted term for RF power transistor in the CB world
> >(this is rec.radio.CB, right)
>
> I thought it was slang for the transistors that bear the shape and
> color of aspirin, silly me. I guess that 2sc799 is also a 'pill', huh?
So when a customer brought me a dual MRF 477 amplifier and said it wasn't
working, and
he thought a pill was out in it, he was wrong, right? It was a bad 477, but
he obviously knew NOTHING,
since he didn't know the transistor was in a different package than the
common (as you put it) aspirin package
(and I suggest YOU get it right. Toshiba has their 0WN sizing, and
designator. The CORRECT way
to reference the TOSHIBA devices is a 2-13B1A package).
After all, THIS IS REAL WORLD, not some sitting behind a desk. THE
customer referenced it as a
pill. Others on here have done the same.
Whats your point? That you like to argue semantics?
>
> >So, all your problems seem to be nitpicking, double standards, or just
not
> >having done something
> >and claiming it is impossible, doesn't happen, or won't happen, although
> >most of the high power
> >operators in here agree with what I have found.
> >
> >Wonder why that is?
>
> Although I would have to take issue with your use of the word "most",
> I can only guess. Does "Birds of a feather..." ring a bell?
Duhh.. ..... Hang in a CB radio newsgroup, that already has acknowledged,
acceptable verbage,
and then when you argue, and someone else steps to the plate to tell you
that it is accepted, they
are subjected to a week of your diatribes of psychic abilities, half-truths
and holier than thou
I am a degreed RF Engineer that hasn't operated a competition station ever
attitude.
Nice.
Actually,
> I think most that agree with you do so not because they understand the
> conversation, but because they don't like me, as tnom pointed out.
> That's not very good logic to be running down the coax and past your
> balls...
lol.
People here don't like me either. However, when someone is right, they are
right.
Unfortunately, this time, YOUR WRONG.
> >Notice topic: What is a bird watt... A measurement made with a Bird
> >wattmeter.
>
> Which isn't any more significant than a watt read with any other
> meter.
>
Never said it was. Just citing my measurement tool used.
>> >> Quite right that I started it. However, I am still at a loss as to the
> >> generally accepted standard for a "bird watt".
> >
> >
> >Unit of measurement = Watt
> >
> >Brand of product making measurement = Bird
> >
> >Bird watt would be a watt, as measured on a Bird wattmeter.
> >
> >What is so hard to see about giving a reference to your measuring
equipment?
>
> Well you were making claims that it was the ultimate standard by which
> to measure a CB radio, when in fact just about any wattmeter will show
> the same thing.
No, not really.
Dosy reads REMARKABLY high.. That means so do the JB wattmeters of old,
since they where a direct rip off.
Diawa is OK, but not in the cb arena.
GC electronics.. Alas, they are all but gone.
CB is left mostly with the Pyramid companies, TEnna, etc... And their
equipment is HORRENDOUSLY inaccurate
As proven by putting a Bird inline with them as well.
So yes, it does tend to add credibilty in THIS forum for you to cite the
meter you made the reference with.
After all, would you want me to set up your stuff with a meter that COULD be
50 percent inaccurate? Or read that way on YOUR meter?
Mine could be 25 percent off one way, yours the other way.
However, most people that take care of thier bird meters can stick within
tolerance, and that is why it has become the standard which others are
guaged against in the CB community. It is the best available to the masses.
> >
> >How it's really done? Are you saying that I CAN'T get what I claim out
of
> >boxes?
>
> The problem is that you don't claim much, except that they will suck
> up lots of gasoline and airspace. Which I'm sure they do.
I did make a claim. You can't even remember what this is about, can you.
Your nitpicking that their is no such thing as a "Bird Watt".. I was citing
measurements of power.
lol
THAT, my friend, is a claim.
> >Did I state that? No. I also stated that I do spec-an and scope my
> >amplifiers.
>
> But you have never made any claims as to how clean they are. Do you
> have any numbers?
The point of posting anything here, dragging everything out and hooking up a
dummy load
(since station is down because of move) just to ingratiate you, isn't very
appealing.
Any third-party verification? Save it, Toll, we all
> know you are not interested in communicating with those things, just
> the "raw power" out the antenna.
Third party verification.. Yes, my roommate
Most, if not ALL of the Texas based stations, and a lot of the west coast
stations.
>
> >More lies coming from Sparky. Anyone notice that he starts making
different
> >generalizations when he is on the losing end of a conversation or debate?
>
> Ever notice how people stop making and start complaining about
> 'generalizations' only when they can no longer address the specifics?
> Ever notice how you change the subject when you lose your point? Or
> how you totally ignore it?
I haven't yet. The point is that we where talking about a refrenced
measurement, and yo ucan't handle it,
because it isn't in one of the books that control your world.
Or maybe its those psychic powers again... I dunno.
>
> >I'm just in it for the raw power and that's why I'm so much
> >> better than any EE because I can tweak more bird watts out of a pill
> >
> >Never said that
>
> Close enough. That was your attitude, and that's what I'm describing.
lol.
More generalizations that Sparky JUST claimed a few paragraphs ago he didn't
do.
>
> >> in PM FM mode
> >
> >Never said that I use the mode. Phase modulation is a way to get FM out
of
> >a transmitter..
> >
> >Thats all.
>
> Phase and frequency modulation are similar, but seperate. Try reading
> up on the differences. Oh, that's right, you did -- PM will dip a
> fixed-amplitude carrier when FM won't!
Not always. Just in poorly designed transmitters.
>
> >I never said it would get you more watts from an amplifier.. That's your
> >doing.
>
> I was lumping your terminology into one phrase, in case you couldn't
> tell.
You where lumping about 3 different subjects into one sentence. Trying to
make someone
else look stupid, because yoru on the losing end of the debate.
>
> >and those professionals don't know what they are doing
> >> if they can't do what I do so they can't teach me anything
> >
> >
> >Never said that, either.
>
> Again, that's your attitude. YOU were going to teach ME some things
> about amps and RF, remember? YOU were the one that claimed I never
> went to a keydown so I didn't know what I was talking about. YOU were
> the one that thought I didn't even know anything about power RF. It
> all adds up, Toll. Flip through enough pages and you can usually
> understand the plotline.
I didn't say you didn't know anything about rf, I said that you had no idea
what you where talking about
in the world of overvolted, overdriven, balls to the wall rf that we play
with.
And you don't.. You admitted that. Please don't try to paraphrase by
interjection of comments I didn't make, or bending them to fit your wants
and needs at that particular moment in time.
> No, you said it was some super-standard for CB amps,
It is. Its a meter that I can trust that if the other person takes care of
their slugs, they will get a near duplicate power reading.
I can't do that with a Dosy meter. Its too different from production bath
to production batch.
like a 'Bird
> watt' is a better thing than any other watt.
That has nothing to do with what I am saying, thats something YOU added
AGAIN.
The only thing a Bird Watt tells someone is that I am getting X amount of
watts,
as measured on my Bird wattmeter.
Bird tolerances are close enough to where someone else will get identical,
or near identical, readings
with the same equpment.
What DON'T you get about that?
>
> Paraphrasing, yes. Untruths, hardly. All my conclusions are based on
> what you have said.
>
No, none of them are.... And other people, in other forums are laughing at
you about it.
> >Makes you a LOT more credible in the future.
>
> My credibility is not your concern, but maybe it should be. I don't
> care what people think about my attitude, just as long as I get the
> facts straight.
Well, when you start, the credibility follows.
When I'm wrong I admit it, like with the PEP meters,
> and the co-phased antennas. You have pushed this whole thing so far
> that you don't even remember what the issue was. So let me refresh:
>
> You poked your nose into a conversation comparing 50 volt transistors
> to 12 volt 'pills', claiming the 12 volt devices could be overpowered
> so much better while retaining spectral purity,
Spectral purity?
and implying that PEP
> 'Bird watts' was prima-facie proof of quality.
No, I never made that statement either.
If your going to quote me asshole, quote me. Your paraphrasing is BS.
I called you on both
> issues, and so far you have proven nothing, except that you really
> don't know as much about RF as you claim. Care to continue?
Yeah.
Quote me, and stop paraphrasing me, and this conversation will continue.
Until then, your a liar. Live with it.
Toll_Free
>
Toll Free
The bird meters used in CB radio all use interchangable elements.
Therefore, they are all interchangable.
This was just more of your arguing semantics.
Sorry Sparky, until you stop arguing semantics, I refuse to answer your
posts anylonger.
Quote me, and quote me correctly, and stop with the paraphrasing. You make
it impossible to
debate a point, because you never make a point. You paraphrase someone
elses paragraphs, posts
relating to posts, relating to posts, and then try to entagle them with
something never said.
Again. Quote ME, and we can continue. Until then, your a liar.
Toll_Free
"Sparky" <spa...@cet.com> wrote in message
news:3c41eb4...@news.cet.com...
Toll Free
The 43 is the meter used in Cb circles.
If you didn't know that, its your own fault.
Toll_Free
"Sparky" <spa...@cet.com> wrote in message
news:3c416ae6...@news.cet.com...
Sparky
>right, and we can call a watt whatever we like to since a watt is a watt is a
>watt, right? why cant you understand that the term "bird watt" is a very
>nontechnical phrase used by cb'ers and its just reffering to RMS output of a
>transmitter. you keep asking for a text book description when you know very
>well its a slang phrase and there isnt one available. do you think all of this
>is making you look good? to me it just seems your a crochety old man that nit
>picks every word and phrase when its really not needed. we've told you 100
>times at least in this thread and others what the term bird watts refers too,
>its a adjective not a noun.
Uh huh. Just RMS? Just an adjective? Lets see just what the term "Bird
watts" really means:
>Subject: Re: >>NEW SLUG/SELEMENTS FOR BIRD METERS<<
>From: rh3...@aol.com (RH3333)
>Date: 12 Nov 2001 14:48:37 GMT>
>
>Sorry but I have no meter movements for Bird meters...I have NEW Coaxial
>Dynamics Meters which are as good as Bird meters, they will read both PEP as
>well as RMS/Average/Bird watts.
So that meter reads FOUR different kinds of watts, huh?
>From: Lowrider667 (lowri...@aol.com)
>Subject: Re: CB Shop in PA, Lehigh Valley
>Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
>Date: 2001-08-10 14:17:37 PST
>
>
>from a 2 watt dead key to 5 bird watts and 25 to 32 peak bird
Now HE is ALL confused...
>From: SeanH378 (sean...@aol.com)
>Subject: Stuff for sale
>Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
>Date: 2001-08-08 08:39:54 PST
>
>
>For Sale:
>
>CONNEX 3300HP: $200+ Shipping
>
>Has dual finals, upgraded components in RX section (panther DX-EXTRA KIT) like
>higher gain low noise front end transistor, better detector and noise blanker
>diodes, all am modulators have also been upgraded the unit will swing 45 peak
>bird watts from a 3 watt dead key.
From 3 to 45? Sounds like A3A read with a PEP meter to me.
>From: LoTTA RpM17 (lotta...@aol.com)
>Subject: Re: Sweet 16 hook-up ???/
>Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
>Date: 2000/06/25
>
>
>
>obviously you have never ran a MAUL DROPPING 1600, I have keyed 200 watts dead
>key into them, at 18 volts, and seen 2000 "BIRD WATTS"....
WOW!!!
>From: Toll Free (toll...@bigradios.com)
>Subject: Re: Texas Star Modulator V-Plus
>Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
>Date: 1999/09/20
>
>
>The Modulator line from Texas Star originally came with MRF-455s. They did
>about 50 watts PEP.
>
>Then, I saw a few with the SRF equivelant... These could have been swapped
>in, but they did about 75 to 80 PEP.
>
>The new ones run the 2SC2290 (and have for quite a while). They should do
>about 120 watts, or 30-40 Bird watts.
It looks like even Toll is a little confused on the issue...
>From: Toll Free (toll...@bigradios.com)
>Subject: Re: Backswing...
>Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
>Date: 1998/05/28
>
>
>My Messenger will deadkey 400 and swing over 1000 Bird watts. 16 pills,
>Messenger 2KW
Yep, he's confused alright. So much for your hero.
Sparky
>george, there are very very few actual key down participants posting in here.
>the rest of it is guys like yourself and sparky making unfounded claims about
>keydowns and those that enjoy them while all the while never actually
>participating in them. i see sparks has backed off his claim that huge numbers
>are not possible in mobiles...
Now where did I say that, Tim? Toll keeps saying I said that but I
can't find the post. Maybe you can help him out.
Sparky
wrote:
>lol
>
>
>The bird meters used in CB radio all use interchangable elements.
>
>Therefore, they are all interchangable.
>
>
>This was just more of your arguing semantics.
>
>Sorry Sparky, until you stop arguing semantics, I refuse to answer your
>posts anylonger.
Now who's running away, Toll?
Snot Rag
"Tim" <tim...@aol.comLOL> wrote in message
news:20020113153848...@mb-fd.aol.com...
Toll Free
> >100%
> >> modulated or less signal whilest using a bird meter on AM.
> >
> >
> >
> >Yes. When modulating a carrier, you will have 25 percent of the power in
> >positive
> >peaks, and 25 percent in negative.
>
> Wrong again, Toll. A 4 watt carrier with 100% modulation has 1 watt in
> each sideband, but those 2 watts don't come out of the carrier. Total
> signal power is actually 6 watts.
I never said it didn't. I was referring to the modulating signal you dolt.
>
> >> example 50 watt deadkey un modulated of course, when audio is
introduced
> >> bird swings from 50 to 100 watts RMS.
> >
> >
> >No, it wouldn't, unless your using one of your peaked up, non-linear
radios
> >and amplifiers
> >to do these tests with.
> >
> >am i missing something or is this like
> >> new stuff?
> >
> >
> >No, your missing basic textbook am theory.
>
> Since you are so well-versed in AM theory, maybe you can explain why
> those 2 watts on the sidebands don't show up on an RMS meter.
I already did.
However, for the Aged amongst us...
When dealing with the average heating power, you have a carrier (at 4
watts), and 2 sidebands at a watt each (this assumes 100 percent symmetrical
modulation).
One of them is negative going, and the other positive (speaking relatively
to the spec-an), or one of them is positive half, and the other negative
half of the modulating waveform.
Since they are symettrical, they cancel themselves out of the heating
equation, leaving the carrier again.
4 watts, + 1 watt - 1 watt = 4 watts.
Toll_Free
Toll Free
We told you, the RMS (as you call it) or AVG (as Bird calls it) meters DON'T
measure AM power effectively.
YOU wanted to know WHERE BIRD stated that. I provided the url.
Toll_Free
"Sparky" <spa...@cet.com> wrote in message
news:3c41fe42...@news.cet.com...
Tim
>
>Now where did I say that, Tim? Toll keeps saying I said that but I
>can't find the post. Maybe you can help him out.
>
Toll Free
the
> >> >equipment you talk of, and CAN'T do what you say they should.
> >> >
> >> >Now what?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >They make do with what they have, ensuring they get the best sample
and
> >> >most accurate readings they can.
> >> >
> >> >Sorry if we aren't good enough for you. I mean, we ARE just lowly
CBers.
> >>
> >> Hey bud, YOU were the one bragging about how you calibrate your gear
> >
OK, your right. I did.
Sorry if memory failed me. At least I have the decency to not twist words,
misquote, etc.
Glad to see you finally did quote correctly, though.
This has nothing to do with the REST of the conversation, though, as I only
reference to my own equipment..
The Bird gives SOMEONE ELSE a reference, as well.
Lets not forget the point of the entire conversation :)
Toll_Free
Tim
>Tim, who is george?
Snot Rag
"Toll Free" <toll...@bigradios.com> wrote in message
news:5Em08.23406$dG.12...@news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com...
Snot Rag
use the term RMS Toll?
I assume you are talking to sparky?
"Toll Free" <toll...@bigradios.com> wrote in message
news:NKm08.23409$dG.12...@news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com...
Snot Rag
george and what proof do you have of any of your accusations?
"Tim" <tim...@aol.comLOL> wrote in message
news:20020113161603...@mb-fd.aol.com...
Sparky
wrote:
<major snipola throughout>
>What does your Bird manual say?
>
>
>http://www.bird-electronics.com/Documents/pdf/Model_5000_and_5010_Users%20Gu
>ide.pdf
>I hate to nitpick, but in mathematics, the word AND signifys a decimal.
>
>So two hundred and forty two would actually be 200.42
That number is two hundred and forty-two one-hundreths. Two hundred
and forty-two are two seperate numbers.
>Its called logarythmic (sp) speech processing. It keeps the negative going
>portion of the modulating signal from completely cutting off the RF carrier.
>
>Commercial stations have been doing it for years.
Not in the RF circuits. That's all part of the audio processing done
-before- it hits the modulator. In broadcasting, the modulators are
not clipped. Audio is passed through a delay line so the limiter's
feedback stays ahead of modulation, and the audio isn't distorted by
soft or hard clipping. But AVC is rarely used, and compression only on
the vocal mics, well ahead of the modulator. Like I said Toll (and you
did too), don't talk about something you don't know anything about.
>Anyway, people get the idea. Limit the negative going component, and you
>can raise the positive going component to 125 percent.
There's a reason for that, you know. It's called "transient
suppression", and it's not intended to allow overmodulation. If some
do that, that's how they operate, not me. But it's not the way they
should be operating.
>I have tubes here that have 0 watts of grid dissipation. By me putting them
>in AB1, I am
>underdriving them?
Compared to what the tubes are capable of providing when you draw grid
current, and not even coming close to the maximum anode dissipation,
yes, they are underdriven.
>Yet another case....
>
>
>The tubes are bigger but the signal is cleaner, the drive
>> amp is simpler and the entire system is more reliable. Overall, it
>> performs better for less maintenance and less expense. You can't do
>> that on the semiconductors, but at least you can keep it in the linear
>> region by not overdriving it. And if you are trying to swamp someone
>> else's signal, wouldn't it be better to get all your power on one
>> frequency instead of spread out all over the spectrum? Overvolting
>> isn't too smart, Toll.
>
>
>Overvolting has nothing to do with the class of service on a grounded base
>amplifier.
>
>Please stick to the topics in which we where originally discussing.
Not the class of service, the linear operating region of the
transistor.
>(and I suggest YOU get it right. Toshiba has their 0WN sizing, and
>designator. The CORRECT way
>to reference the TOSHIBA devices is a 2-13B1A package).
The 2sc799 is in a TO-39 case.
>> >Notice topic: What is a bird watt... A measurement made with a Bird
>> >wattmeter.
>>
>> Which isn't any more significant than a watt read with any other
>> meter.
>>
>
>
>Never said it was. Just citing my measurement tool used.
Now we are getting to the crux, and I deleted most of the post just to
focus on this: If you cite the measurement tool as a Bird, why don't
you cite any other wattmeters you might use? Or any other measurement
tools you use? Does your battery put out Fluke volts? Are your
frequencies measured in Schulmberger MHz? Do you even see what I am
getting at here, Toll?
Now that was direct, concise, and comprehensive answer! And well
stated, too! Now maybe you can explain all the inconsistancies with
the use of the term.
Sparky
wrote:
>> >> Can you explain what you are talking about with no needle flicker on a
>> >100%
>> >> modulated or less signal whilest using a bird meter on AM.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Yes. When modulating a carrier, you will have 25 percent of the power in
>> >positive
>> >peaks, and 25 percent in negative.
>>
>> Wrong again, Toll. A 4 watt carrier with 100% modulation has 1 watt in
>> each sideband, but those 2 watts don't come out of the carrier. Total
>> signal power is actually 6 watts.
>
>
>I never said it didn't. I was referring to the modulating signal you dolt.
Well a 'modulating' signal would have 50% of the power on top and 50%
below, ideally. How do you seperate the power in the peaks?
>> >> example 50 watt deadkey un modulated of course, when audio is
>introduced
>> >> bird swings from 50 to 100 watts RMS.
>> >
>> >
>> >No, it wouldn't, unless your using one of your peaked up, non-linear
>radios
>> >and amplifiers
>> >to do these tests with.
>> >
>> >am i missing something or is this like
>> >> new stuff?
>> >
>> >
>> >No, your missing basic textbook am theory.
>>
>> Since you are so well-versed in AM theory, maybe you can explain why
>> those 2 watts on the sidebands don't show up on an RMS meter.
>
>
>I already did.
>
>However, for the Aged amongst us...
>
>When dealing with the average heating power, you have a carrier (at 4
>watts), and 2 sidebands at a watt each (this assumes 100 percent symmetrical
>modulation).
>
>One of them is negative going, and the other positive (speaking relatively
>to the spec-an), or one of them is positive half, and the other negative
>half of the modulating waveform.
>
>Since they are symettrical, they cancel themselves out of the heating
>equation, leaving the carrier again.
>
>4 watts, + 1 watt - 1 watt = 4 watts.
>
>
>Toll_Free
Wonderful!
Sparky
wrote:
>Don't start backpeddling.
Who's backpeddling? I said "true RMS". If you have been around test
equipment long enough you should know what that means.
>We told you, the RMS (as you call it) or AVG (as Bird calls it) meters DON'T
>measure AM power effectively.
>
>
>
>YOU wanted to know WHERE BIRD stated that. I provided the url.
I can't find that anywhere. What page are you looking at?
Sparky
wrote:
>YOU wanted to know WHERE BIRD stated that. I provided the url.
Better yet, post the quote.
Aaron H. Voobner
> Because it isn't.
>
> In medical, when you make a measurement, you also site your reference.
>
> In physics, same thing.
>
> When I worked at an oil and gas exploration firm, we HAD to give ALL
> references
> to measurement equipment.
>
> Bottom line is, Sparky knew what I was referencing when I cited a "Bird
> Watt",
> it was on topic (since most high power operators use the same term), and
> he just trolled it.
OK, so you are saying that the stupid made-up terms (i.e. "bird
watts") used by "high power operators" (i.e. keyclowns) are also valid
among the engineering community? Gee Toll, sorry to say but I don't
think the IEEE journal or even a clerk at Radio Shack is going to back
you up on that one : )
-Aaron-
Tim
148 lol
>Not in the RF circuits.
Sparky
wrote:
Of course not. But Tim and tnom will.
Sparky
>sorry but your wrong. better ask eitner and he'll tell you how to do it on your
>148 lol
Hehe, yeah, use "Eitner" modulation -- 150% and it's just getting
started!
Snot Rag
a answer.
"Tim" <tim...@aol.comLOL> wrote in message
news:20020113161603...@mb-fd.aol.com...
snipped::
> >Tim, who is george?
Dave Hall
>
> "Scott (Unit-69)" <upp...@hotSPAMmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3C3F77B7...@hotSPAMmail.com...
> > middlefanger wrote:
> > >
> > > example 50 watt deadkey un modulated of course, when audio is introduced
> like
> > > new stuff?
> >
> > Huh? A 50 watt carrier modulated 100% with a 1000 Hz tone will
> > still have the AVERAGE power of 50 watts. 50% of the time the
> > power will be above 50 watts, and 50% of the time the power will
> > be below 50 watts. The meter can't move 1000 times a second, so
> > you read 50 watts, modulated or not.
>
> Maybe I am missing something or my Bird meter is broke, or someone is in
> left field. Into a dummy load I hooked up a radio I set the deadkey level
> to lets say 50 watts for an arbitrary figure when I talk the meter swings up
> to 100 watts rms max on voice peaks. So what you are saying is that it
> should not move from the 50 watt level when I talk. Someone had better
> explain this a little better, how can I have power below 50 watts 50% of the
> time.
A properly modulated, symmetrical 100% modulated signal will show little
or no change in reading on a true average reading or RMS wattmeter. The
reason for this is that although the power of the carrier will increase
4 times the dead key power on peaks (in your case 200 watts), there is
an equal dip that drops to near zero power. The two will average out
(assuming a sine wave), and that is the reason you don't see any change
in wattage.
If you have an average reading meter that does increase (like in your
example), there are usually three common causes for this:
1. The modulation is exceeding 100% by a great margin. A 200% modulating
signal (assuming enough modulator power or amplifier headroom) will
allow the PEAK power of the sinewave to rise above the normal 4X peak of
a 100% modulation waveform (8x in this case). The negative side of the
sinewave cannot go below zero power, and is cutoff there, so the duty
cycle of peak to trough power is changed and is no longer balanced, and
will show an increase in power on the RMS meter. Since the negative
(trough) side of the sinewave is clipped, it will cause splatter and
distortion, and is not a recommended method of modulation, unless there
are sophisticated filters and processors that shape the waveform before
the modulator, but that level of sophistication is normally not cost
effective for the average CBer. This is the type of modulation that is
usually associated with "swing kits" (without the filtering and
processing).
2. The second cause is merely an asymmetrical modulation waveform, in
which the positive side is greater than the negative side (The wave is
offset). This is also difficult for the average CBer to reproduce.
3. The third method is called controlled carrier. Special circuitry
inside the radio is fed with a rectified portion of the modulating
waveform. As the modulation increases, the rectified voltage increases,
and is applied to a power regulator which varies carrier power to
increase in proportion to the modulation peak. This gives the overall
effect of greater peak power, but the modulation power is no greater
than normal, it's just being boosted by a higher peak reference carrier.
The greatest advantage to controlled carrier, is lower current
consumption. When you are not talking, the carrier returns to a "rest"
state, at a lower level, thereby saving batteries, or dissipating less
heat in the final amp. When you speak, the carrier rises to the designed
level, for the duration of the modulation.
My guess is that you are seeing the effects of a "swing kit" which is
why your meter is showing forward wattage gain with modulation.
Dave
"Sandbagger"
Tim
>I see Tim is still unable to deal with my question so he just avoids giving
>a answer
Snot Rag
"Tim" <tim...@aol.comLOL> wrote in message
news:20020114090426...@mb-fj.aol.com...