Fwd: WWZN and Kinstar antennas
markwa1ion@aol.com
markwa1ion@aol.com
Tue May 9 22:05:04 EDT 2006
-----Original Message-----
From: MarkWA1ION
To: wollman@csail.mit.edu
Sent: Tue, 9 May 2006 22:03:11 -0400
Subject: Re: WWZN and Kinstar antennas
Hi Garrett. The difference between IBOC splatter and regular splatter
is that the IBOC splatter is always on, like a Husqvarna buzz-saw or an
annoying mosquito an inch from your ear. Regular AM splash, even the
notorious slop from "Theme from Shaft" (Isaac Hayes, 1971), is much
more intermittent.
Mark Connelly, WA1ION - Billerica, MA
-----Original Message-----
From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@csail.mit.edu>
To: markwa1ion@aol.com
Cc: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org
Sent: Tue, 9 May 2006 21:43:42 -0400
Subject: Re: WWZN and Kinstar antennas
<<On Tue, 09 May 2006 20:57:57 -0400, markwa1ion@aol.com said:
> What happens to WWZN's NIF if night IBOC (HD) is authorized for
> WTWP-1500 or WWKB-1520 ?
I don't think anything happens -- at least officially. The IBOC
sideband splat is 20 dB down from the carrier, so from basic physics
one would predict that the received interference would likewise be
lower (enough so as not to figure in the NIF computation). That
doesn't mean it won't screw things up in real life.
-GAWollman
More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest
mailing list