[BC] AM Stereo On A Mono Radio-FM Loudness

[R A Meuser]

I have used occupied bandwidth measurements with good success. It is 
really not that difficult. I have done this in countries where 
modulation monitors were not in general use and also in North America. I 
have been able to set the mod to max occupied bandwidth and even though 
the mod monitor showed over modulation, I could get an official 
measurement and be told that the station was running 'fine'.

Mod monitors have their own personality and can be somewhat meaningless. 
Even on the metered part of the measurement, differing ballistics 
produce greatly varying results. One group I worked for specified the 
use of only one brand monitor because it made you 'work harder' to fully 
modulate the transmitter.



Mark Humphrey wrote:
> I also wonder if this could be interpreted to exclude the 19 kHz
> stereo pilot from measurement.
> 
> Consider that the pilot is added to the other components of a
> composite waveform, and the period of each cycle is less than 1
> millisecond.  If total modulation is set to 110% with a pilot
> injection of 10% and you examine the instantaneous deviation of the
> carrier on a scope, you'll see that the pilot "fuzz" (with these very
> short peaks) is responsible for the portion of the waveform above
> 100%, unless the pilot is being clipped.  Should we count them?
> 
> I personally favor the occupied bandwidth approach, but it's more even
> difficult to measure and interpret.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> On 10/5/07, Cowboy <curt at spam-o-matic.net> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Here's my problem with this approach.
>> The rules always had the qualifier "peaks of frequent recurrence" which
>> always seemed reasonable, and more than adequate to me.
>> Now, we need to know how many picoseconds a peak is, for it to be a peak,
>> or not a peak, and if a peak overlaps the window by a picosecond, does it
>> still count/not count ?
>> And, it sorta depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
>>
>> It's a bad thing ( IMHO ) to try and codify good judgment.