From: Chris Trayner <C.Trayner@leeds.ac.uk>
To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 08:02:16 +0000
Thread-Topic: LF: Re: BBC 198
Thread-Index: AcyeteX1YzVKZFCDSqWmPEGFtsMTsA==
Message-ID: <F0CA6CE8-C185-4692-A501-E5D8D2102435@leeds.ac.uk>
References: <D08B81F17418496AA545ABF36ABF9538@standard9dmup1>
 <009f01cc9e68$ed5d64d0$4001a8c0@lark>
In-Reply-To: <009f01cc9e68$ed5d64d0$4001a8c0@lark>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: LF: Re: BBC 198
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0  
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d608d4eba33c361cf
X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25
X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none


Hi Alan,

Thanks for your thoughts.

On 2011 Nov 8, at 22:39, Alan Melia wrote:

> Hi Walter we were too, but it was a "European" thing: :-)) the EBU define=
d a
> 9kHz grid. with no thought of history. of usage.

I seem to recall that both MF and LF stations had been at 9 kHz spacing lon=
g before that. The change was to shift the frequencies to integer multiples=
 of 9 kHz. The reason (if I remember aright) was to facilitate receivers wi=
th digital oscillators, though I forget the details.=20

At the same time there was a suggestion of 8 kHz spacing to allow more stat=
ions (given that you would hardly call MF or LF music quality anyway). Ther=
e was too much opposition to that.

I'm not sure it was a European thing - I think these frequencies are agreed=
 worldwide.

As for a sense of history, I imagine the feasibility of affordable radios m=
attered more than having to adjust the tuning dial a little. I'm not sure t=
he exact frequency is of as much cultural importance as, say, Britain going=
 over to decimal currency.

73,
Chris G4OKW