Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mac Kerr]

with RF the higher the wavelength the shorter the distance of the signal coverage.

Actually, the shorter the wavelength, the higher the frequency, the greater the attenuation through walls and other RF attenuators like bags of warm water.

Mac

[jasonfinnigan]

Actually, the shorter the wavelength, the higher the frequency, the greater the attenuation through walls and other RF attenuators like bags of warm water.

Mac

It's true that higher frequencies can go through walls easier as they can penetrate more easily.

The problem is higher frequencies are more prone to being absorb/slowed down by molecules in the air. So in practice lower frequencies usually have a larger coverage area.

If you have a dual-band wireless AP you can likely even tell this in your house with the 2.4ghz coverage vs the 5Ghz coverage area which will be much smaller.
 

[Mac Kerr]

It's true that higher frequencies can go through walls easier as they can penetrate more easily.

The problem is higher frequencies are more prone to being absorb/slowed down by molecules in the air. So in practice lower frequencies usually have a larger coverage area.

If you have a dual-band wireless AP you can likely even tell this in your house with the 2.4ghz coverage vs the 5Ghz coverage area which will be much smaller.

Your first sentence is not true. The error in your previous post was the use of the phrase "higher wavelengths". It is not clear, since wavelengths are longer or shorter being a distance, and frequencies are higher or lower, being a count of a number of events per unit time. If "higher" wavelengths are bigger, then the frequency is lower.

Mac

[Rob Spence]

The 2.4Ghz specturm is already over crowded (at least it is in the US). Wifi, Cordless Phones (who still has them) Bluetooth and many other devices use 2.4ghz.

Also with RF the higher the wavelength the shorter the distance of the signal coverage. Which is why the 500-900mhz range is the normal range for wireless mics. Though the 700mhz(698-806mhz) band is now illegal for us inside the US.

In the US most operators do not have to have a license. TV Stations (under Part 74) do in for their mics but it's just a Ham radio operator license.

TV stations may NOT use HAM licenses! The FCC prohibits the use of Amateur Radio (Ham) licenses for any commercial use. Also, Ham licenses may not be used in the TV bands.

You really need to check your facts before posting blatantly incorrect information.

Rob Spence (n1icb)

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Ivan Beaver]

It's true that higher frequencies can go through walls easier as they can penetrate more easily.

What makes you say that? 

[jasonfinnigan]

TV stations may NOT use HAM licenses! The FCC prohibits the use of Amateur Radio (Ham) licenses for any commercial use. Also, Ham licenses may not be used in the TV bands.

You really need to check your facts before posting blatantly incorrect information.

Rob Spence (n1icb)

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

They just used the ham radio as a test, to allow each operator to to register for extra use of low power channels. It may not be done anymore. But, it is not for actual ham use, nor was it for the TV channels it was for normally unlicensed devices. At least that's the way we had to do it back when I worked for an NBC affiliate. 

[g'bye, Dick Rees]

It's true that higher frequencies can go through walls easier as they can penetrate more easily.

The problem is higher frequencies are more prone to being absorb/slowed down by molecules in the air.

What?

[jasonfinnigan]

What?

Oh yeah it's some new theoretical science.

[Rob Spence]

They just used the ham radio as a test, to allow each operator to to register for extra use of low power channels. It may not be done anymore. But, it is not for actual ham use, nor was it for the TV channels it was for normally unlicensed devices. At least that's the way we had to do it back when I worked for an NBC affiliate.

So, either a licensed operator was in violation of the law or the TV affiliate was illegaly using ham gear or frequencies. In either case, commercial use of the gear, frequencies or licenses is a federal crime.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Scott Holtzman]

Yeah wow,  as a licensed amateur at 12 years old and an engineer that has been in telecom/wireless for 30 years I can tell you that the suggestion an amateur license was obtained for using microphones is absurd.  In the day we use to hold first class commercial licenses to put our mitts on the transmitter.  Various things like STL's, ENG, translators, production FM repeaters all required spectrum coordination and an FCC license.  Frankly I have no experience with short haul video and audio for remote production buy I can assure you it is not coveted under part 22 (if memory serves me) that governs US amateur operations.  Also thw whole penetration/absorbsion/scintillation vs wavelength cant be simplified to this extent. Power and spectral width are also key coverage variables.

[ProSoundWeb Community]