On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 23:49:54 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

In , wrote:


And every word is absolutely true as long as you fail to provide facts to back
up your bull****. Got math?

You want math...........Troll + Fiction = Frank


Oh, I get it. You want the last word, as if that will somehow substantiate your
claims in the absence of facts. Go for it, Tnom.

No. I just stated the facts. You and your fellow anti-CBer's, don't
even suggest that you promote the hobby, have no purpose in this
group other than to cause as much disruption as you can. You have
proven this time and time again.

wrote:

Evidently, he's one of those guys who believes in running the
compression up to the point where a mouse fart in the next room will
move the power meter, and average voice peaks disappear into an almost
carrier steady power which rarely drops below 75% of peak......

In that case, the amp will be drawing more power that a capacitor can
make up for.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

Even though you don't know it, you are agreeing with me.

I wan't trying to disagree with you.


Take a listen to SSB voice on any amateur band or CB if
you like. The preferred SSB signal is one which enhances its
intelligibility. This is done with some sort of compression which
will be a point in between your example and no compression at
all.

Sure, I do it all the time, just not to the extreme. But as long as
there is some sort of correlation between audio peaks, and current draw,
there will be peaks and nulls which can be filled in to some (however
small) degree by a filter cap.

Recovery time is reduced with compression, and simply put the $50
spent on a capacitor can be better spent.

I can use it to buy a deep cycle battery. I'm sure that would do a
better job.....

Dave
"Sandbagger"

In , Dave Hall wrote:

snip
..... and simply put the $50
spent on a capacitor can be better spent.

I can use it to buy a deep cycle battery. I'm sure that would do a
better job.....


You can pick up a small boxfull of old computer caps from the local scrapyard
for just a few bucks (at least you can around here), and if you do I think you
will find that they work better than both the monster cap and the deep-cycle. It
certainly won't hurt your wallet to try.







=============

"...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM
have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and
are both too small to admit it."
---- Twistedhed ----

=============


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

snip
Even though you don't know it, you are agreeing with me.

I wan't trying to disagree with you.


Take a listen to SSB voice on any amateur band or CB if
you like. The preferred SSB signal is one which enhances its
intelligibility. This is done with some sort of compression which
will be a point in between your example and no compression at
all.

Sure, I do it all the time, just not to the extreme. But as long as
there is some sort of correlation between audio peaks, and current draw,
there will be peaks and nulls which can be filled in to some (however
small) degree by a filter cap.

Well, I have no problem with the theory behind stiffening caps. They
do work, but the crux of the issue is to what extent they work in the
original example (1 farad, dx1600, SSB)

If you were listening to the above example you would not be able to
tell if the set up was capped or not.

Recovery time is reduced with compression, and simply put the $50
spent on a capacitor can be better spent.

I can use it to buy a deep cycle battery. I'm sure that would do a
better job.....

If I had the extra $50 I would make better use of it on a echo mike.
Just kidding.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

In , wrote:

snip
Even though you don't know it, you are agreeing with me.

I wan't trying to disagree with you.


Take a listen to SSB voice on any amateur band or CB if
you like. The preferred SSB signal is one which enhances its
intelligibility. This is done with some sort of compression which
will be a point in between your example and no compression at
all.

Sure, I do it all the time, just not to the extreme. But as long as
there is some sort of correlation between audio peaks, and current draw,
there will be peaks and nulls which can be filled in to some (however
small) degree by a filter cap.

Well, I have no problem with the theory behind stiffening caps. They
do work, but the crux of the issue is to what extent they work in the
original example (1 farad, dx1600, SSB)

If you were listening to the above example you would not be able to
tell if the set up was capped or not.


Do it yourself. Rig up a box-o-caps through a switch. Then have someone do some
talking with and without the caps. I think you will notice a difference, even if
you are just running barefoot.


Recovery time is reduced with compression, and simply put the $50
spent on a capacitor can be better spent.

I can use it to buy a deep cycle battery. I'm sure that would do a
better job.....

If I had the extra $50 I would make better use of it on a echo mike.
Just kidding.


You can get a MidiVerb for that much.







=============

"...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM
have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and
are both too small to admit it."
---- Twistedhed ----

=============


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

snip
Well, I have no problem with the theory behind stiffening caps. They
do work, but the crux of the issue is to what extent they work in the
original example (1 farad, dx1600, SSB)

If you were listening to the above example you would not be able to
tell if the set up was capped or not.


Do it yourself. Rig up a box-o-caps through a switch. Then have someone do some
talking with and without the caps. I think you will notice a difference, even if
you are just running barefoot.

Frank, you are asking me to participate in something illegal.

Maybe you should retract your suggestion. After all, you
wouldn't want to spoil your reputation.

I'll add to that those wonderful "Monster caps" that are those High farad
values of 5, 15, and 50 Farads (Thanks alot Alumapro, and Pheonix Gold) are
junk. Even if the measured or stated (ESR) is low. The other problem is ESL,
equivlent series inductance. The ESL is kind of like a the responsecurve of
a VSWR curver through the frequency rage of a Antenna.

The ESL changes with freq. Now that may be low with a DC circuit. But the
minute you start fluctuating that current and voltage, the ESL Will start to
rear it ugly head. Remember L = Inductace is the Opposition to current flow.

If you really want some good imput on this hit up Carsound.com Forums and
look up under Richard Clarks Archived topis for Capacitors.

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
In , "Dr. Death"
wrote:

I noticed that a lot of high end auto audio systems use a capacitor in
series with the main power lead to the amplifies so the amp hits harder.
Could this same principle be applied to ssb, I think it can.
place a 1 farad audio cap inline with the power lead to say a Texas star
dx1600 and you run the rig on ssb the cap will discharge under peak load
giving you a higher average output.

Any comments? (and I mean REAL comments)



Even though you are a troll, you actually raise a good point here. Now I'm
assuming you meant that the capacitor is connected in parallel with the
power
supply leads, because if it were connected in series you would get no
power.

In an SSB amp the RF power follows the audio, and will therefore have a
current
draw that varies at audio frequencies. A capacitor placed across the power
leads
of the amp, when combined with the inherent resistance of the wires from
the
battery, creates a simple low-pass filter which will help smooth out those
'audio' peaks. The bigger the amp, the bigger the cap. And keep the leads
from
the amp to the cap as short as possible.

BTW, this type of filter won't do much in AM service since the current
drawn by
the amp in AM is fairly steady (at least it -should- be, i.e, it's not
amplifying a signal loaded with overmodulation and 'swang'). But it -will-
filter out noise from the power supply.

A word about those 'moster caps' for audio amps: Most of them have a high
equivalent series resistance (ESR) which defeats the purpose of using
them. They
behave more like a rechargeable battery than a capacitor. Locate your
local
computer junkyard and get some of those big electrolytics from the
mainframe
power supplies. Typically, just one 100,000 uFd aluminum electrolytic has
a
lower ESR than a 1.0 farad 'monster' cap. Also remember that you can
reduce the
ESR by putting capacitors in parallel. Ten 10,000 uFd caps in parallel
will have
a much better ESR, and therefore much better filtering ability, than one
100,000
uFd capacitor of the same type, even though the total mFd value is the
same.





=============

"...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM
have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and
are both too small to admit it."
---- Twistedhed ----

=============


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

I think what you stated below is what we in the Car Audio world Call "The
point of diminishing returns"
wrote in message
...
On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 16:07:37 -0600, 'Doc wrote:

The point being, if the power supply is not capable of
supplying the current required on SSB voice peaks, then the
power supply is too small to start with. The logical 'cure'
for a 'too small' power supply is a larger power supply. Any
thing else is a 'kloodge', a crutch to prop up a cripple.
A capacitor does supply some additional current to the
system if it's large enough, but even with very large capacitors
the supplied current is going to be very, very tiny in relation
to the total current draw. Something else you should remember
is that the power supply is also going to have to charge or
re-charge that capacitor when it is drained. That means that
there is no increase in total current in the system, in fact,
there is a decrease since capacitors are not 100% efficient
(they do have loss). This means that the current demand on the
power supply has increased and the 'hole' is just getting
deeper.
Capacitors 'work' in audio systems because they 'rob' current
from one part of the audio signal and 'deposit' it in another
part of the audio signal. If the purpose is to accentuate the
high frequencies, then the 'extra' power is robbed from the
lower frequencies (or visa-versa). The total average power of
the audio signal is not changed (increased), it's only re-
ditributed.
Some things with audio system do carry over in to RF power
amplification systems, but the use of capacitors in the way you
want to use them, isn't one of them...
'Doc

Another point is you can't equate SSB voice to music program
audio. There is the difference in compression. A direct ratio of the
capacitance needed applies to the peak to average ratio of the
power output. If your peak to average ratio in amplifier "A" is one
half of amplifier "B" then the capacitance needed for amplifier "A" is
twice as much as amplifier"B".

Music programming by default is suppose to be a true representation
of the audio. It requires a large dynamic range. The way this is done
is to not use much compression. Music programming has a very large
peak to average power ratio.


SSB voice is just the opposite. The preferred way to communicate with
SSB is to create a high order of intelligibility. This is done with
some sort of compression. Compression is desirable with a SSB voice
signal. A minimum of 6db of compression over music programming is
used.
The compression is normally quite a bit higher than 6db.

This all means that a SSB voice signal requires (6db) 4 times the
capacitance that a HI-FI audio signal requires. It is common practice
with audio amps to suggest a minimum of one farad for ever 1000 watts
of HI-FI audio, therefore a SSB voice signal would require four farads
for 1000 watts or in our case 6 farads for a 1500 watt dx1600.

1 farad cost $50, so we need $300 worth of capacitors in order to see
a difference. $300 dollars can better be spent on another battery or
two, or better yet a higher capacity alternator.

Bottom line on capacitors for SSB............Not worth the money.

Thats great if we all talked ina single sinusoidal wave form voice. I think
what is trying to be explained here is taking the Crest factor of the Output
of the amplifier. Seeing that Audio output is still dynamic, there is a
averaging or Crest factor involved.

Hey but what do I know, I am a retard Audio head, that has kind plays with
RF as a hobby.

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
In , wrote:


I would tell you to go back to school but I'm afraid that wouldn't
help. What you actually need is common sense. You actually believe
that a SSB voice amplifier operation can be directly compared to a
music audio amplifier operation.


The envelope of an SSB signal is nothing more than pure audio. That's
what makes
it so much more efficient than AM -- no overhead from a continuous
carrier, and
no redundancy due to an extra sideband. Got a public library nearby?
Need a
reference?


I see you are ignoring compression again.

We all no the truth now. Your SSB signal has no compression, therefore
you sound like a mouse. No wonder no one pays any attention to what
you say.

COMPRESSION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT, YOU IMBECILE!!!
No audio = no RF = quiescient power drain! Good God, man, don't you have
ANY
reference handy? An ARRL handbook maybe? If you have an SSB amp that is
50%
efficient and you input a single-tone audio sine wave for an output of 100
watts, what's the power input? 200 watts + quiescient power. For an output
of
200 watts the input is 400 watts + quiescient power. Are you getting it?
Or do I
need to draw you a picture for when you aren't stoned?






=============

"...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM
have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and
are both too small to admit it."
---- Twistedhed ----

=============


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In , wrote:



snip
Well, I have no problem with the theory behind stiffening caps. They
do work, but the crux of the issue is to what extent they work in the
original example (1 farad, dx1600, SSB)

If you were listening to the above example you would not be able to
tell if the set up was capped or not.


Do it yourself. Rig up a box-o-caps through a switch. Then have someone do some
talking with and without the caps. I think you will notice a difference, even if
you are just running barefoot.

Frank, you are asking me to participate in something illegal.

Since when is illegal to run barefoot (legal power)?

Maybe you should retract your suggestion. After all, you
wouldn't want to spoil your reputation.

I retract nothing, -especially- after listening to the Powell interview on
Screensavers. It's clear that he has no interest in anything analog, and is
basically leaving the users of the license-free services to fend for themselves.
He ducked the hard questions, like why the FCC is kissing the collective ass of
industry while ignoring the public interest, then passes the buck by claiming it
is the responsibility of -industry- to listen and respond to what the public
wants. Talk about dancing around the issue -- it was almost like Twisty himself
was answering the questions!

Until we get a new FCC Chairman, one that has some balls and isn't on the take,
you won't hear any more legalese out of me. But I will -still- be speaking my
mind when it comes to RF mythology and half-educated 'techs'. Hell, I might even
build an amp or two just to show y'all how it's done!






=============

"...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM
have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and
are both too small to admit it."
---- Twistedhed ----

=============


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----