Re: QUANTAR VHF Audio Interface...
|
Kevin, I do agree with you?that this group can be about going outside of what is normally done with repeaters and improving on them - so in that respect maybe my comment was a bit off the mark.?? I will disagree with your inference that Quantar has "substandard frequency response".? Which standard are you comparing it to?? I would suggest that Quantar and other repeaters of similar performance ARE the industry standard.? I believe what the goal of this post was - and what you prefer - would be considered a "superior frequency response" while Quantar would match or exceed "Standard frequency response".? I understand the goal here - the question is what has to be given up to achieve it and is it worth it.? I worked in pro audio (install/recording/touring) for many years so I also appreciate quality audio - but it also has to be practical and not cause other technical and functional issues in the process. If I get some time this week, since I have the test equipment to do it, I might setup a Quantar on the bench and do some tests to see what the actual frequency response is through the internal repeat audio path - and then change some of the settings to see how they impact it.? I will use Pink Noise as a baseline, below the deviation limiter threshold -? then I can play some high-quality/wide range voice through to see the actual impact on the intelligibility and quality.? I will probably use my HP 8924C and Ivie IE-30A/IE-20P to perform the testing.? The HP 8924C has the ability to turn off the pre-emphasis/de-emphasis and both low and high-pass filters so it is ideal for the task and will likely?outperform any available transceiver in regards to modulating a "flat" response.? I am curious how the Quantar will perform. Thanks, Daniel Woodie, CETsr KC8ZUM M: +1.513.478.9844 H: +1.513.231.1101 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?   On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 11:07 PM Kevin Custer <kuggie@...> wrote:
|
