Broadcasters’ news bulletin (Jan-May 1931)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

2 Chief Examiner Yost rapped the hearing in order at 10 a.m. and called upon Duke M. Patrick, assistant general counsel of the Commission, to outline the purpose of the hearing and the procedure to he followed. Mr. Patrick pointed out that the hearing was being held under Section 1, subtitle E of General Or¬ der 93 and that the proposal under consideration was whether or not after one year from the date of the adoption of the order all stations shall maintain the assigned frequency between the limits of 50 cycles per second above to 50 cycles per second below the assigned frequency. He suggested that Government witnesses be first called to be followed by proponents and later by opponents of the pro¬ posal. Dr. C. B. JOLLIFFE, chief engineer of the Commission, was the first wit¬ ness. The international need of constant frequency stability was recognized as early as the Washington Conference in 1927, he said, adding that it is in the general public interest that all stations operate at the highest possible efficiency. Heterodyne, he said, was the limiting factor in operation of local and regional stations. The chief engineer read a report prepared by a special committee of engineers and published in the IRE Proceedings (Vol. 18, No. 1, Page 24. January, 1930) in which it was stated that "fifty cycle devia¬ tion is not a complete solution of the difficulties that present themselves in broadcasting, but it is a decided improvement since it would reduce the beat note in modern receivers below audibility." The report from which the chief engineer read was summarized as follows: 1. On the cleared channels the existing plus or minus 500 cycle limit, if adhered to, will practically eliminate beatnote interference to the extent that this is possible with 10 kilocycle channel spacings, 2. On the regional and local channels there is no worthwhile advantage to be gained by setting up more rigorous requirements unless a maximum devia¬ tion of plus or minus 50 cycles or lees can be attained. ' 3. It is probable that if frequencies assigned to regional and local services were maintained to plus or minus 50 cycles , a noteworthy improvement in beatnote conditions would be broiight about. 4. It is essential in all broadcasting to suppress frequency modulation effects and other short period deviations. A requirement that all stations hold their frequency plus or minus 50 cycles would be helpful in bringing this about . 5. A plus or minus 50 cycle limit is feasible with automatic frequency control devices available today, but a period of at least one year should be allowed to enable all broadcasting stations to become equipped. Dr. Jolliffe then outlined the questions in issue at the hearing as fol¬ lows : 1. The necessity for greater adherence to assigned frequency. 2. The feasibility of this proposal in view of the present state of the art.