https://www.radioworld.com/columns-and-views/public-okay-with-lower-am-bandwidth
Well untill now I've never heard of the AM Broadcasting Subcommittee of the National Radio Systems Communications, but I know none of the thumbnails show in the article and clicking their link returns a page not found, I guess their site is down .
Anyway their asking for input of potential changes from anyone interested, - except for the press, why is that?
"Meetings are held via telephone and are open to any interested parties except the press. "
Overall I'm a little puzzled, all this surrounds a summarization of a 2004 study and when it had been formed ... Why the sudden decisions 20 years later to limit AM bandwidth now? I'm not quite sure but think their proposing 7kHz? They say it will reduce interference and that most radios don't have the audio response anyway:
".. These objective measurements established that the majority of current analog AM receivers have audio bandwidths of less than 5 kHz. In fact, with only a few exceptions, the frequency response of individual receivers falls off above 1 or 2 kHz."
"In the majority of listening conditions, consumers preferred either 5 kHz or 7 kHz, and often reported that 7 kHz was equivalent to 10 kHz in unimpaired or moderately impaired conditions."
It was only about ten years ago they gave TIS more permissable bandwidth, now they want to take bandwidth from the Broadcast band. Essentially they're saying there's less interference in a lesser bandwidth, but is this really a good idea? Sounds more like a retreat in light of the AM for every vehicle act, which so happens car radios generally have (or had) wider bandwidth capabilities than the average radio (or so I've heard).
Somehow the whole notion of limiting bandwidth sounds troubling, and why no press?? -- Radio World is press, so what do they mean?
https://www.radioworld.com/columns-and-views/public-okay-with-lower-am-bandwidth
You know you really screwed me up. I didn't realize that was a March 27, 2007 article.