Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why)

Brandt, Ralph ralph.brandt at pateam.com
Thu May 3 19:04:54 UTC 2012

I wanted to mention one other thing here.  In addition to my day job I
am a ham radio operator and a IMT COML.  I deal with UNDERSTANDABILITY.
I sympathize with you on getting bamboozled by the family, have 3
sisters and two daughters.  

But in the real world of communications 2.3 - 2.5 Khz filters for SSB
are the norm, and some guys like it tighter.  

Let me be frank, spectrum space and hence bandwidth is finite.  There is
no silver bullet.  The FCC mandated narrow banding in VHF is costing
public service millions.  AT&T pronouncements aside, I have heard them,
there will be improvements but not quantum ones.  Right now the cell cos
are trying to desperately get more spectrum because they know they are
about to hit the wall.  They already do in places like unHappy Valley
(Penn State) at game time when everyone is on the cells.  

One recent merger/acquisition attempt that failed was for the larger co
to get the smaller one's spectrum space.  They are looking at some
public service spectrum to see if they can offer enough money to get it
- most of that money is spent lobbying. Once it goes to cell, it isn't
coming back no matter what.  The Digital TV was as much about freeing
spectrum space to sell it for government income as better TV signals
which we didn't need and have cost every person in the US at least
$1,000 (new TV's, increased ad costs which increase product prices to
pay for the broadcasting equipment) and we didn't get that back for the
spectrum space when it was sold.  We paid for the industry to upgrade!  


Ralph Brandt

-----Original Message-----
From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu [mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu] 
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea

On Thu, 03 May 2012 11:01:01 -0400, Jay Ashworth said:

> In general, though, intelligibility comes from the higher frequencies,
> and 3.4kHz is *usually* high enough.  What might be the case is that
> have more trouble *distinguishing* amongst women, or between women and
> children, because the tones necessary for that are more located above
> cutoff frequency.

I have had more than a few surreal conversations on the phone with my
daughter - once the 3.4kHz filter gets done, I can't distinguish her
voice from
her mom's (and yes, I've gotten social-engineered as a result).  Life
gotten simpler since she got old enough to have her own cell phone. ;)

More information about the NANOG mailing list