OK here it is an honest review. First let me say that I wanted this new one as the benefits to me was the technical things not the performance things as legal is legal is legal! Every FM transmitter operating at BETS/FCC will be exactly the same. Comparing the Decade MS-100 to the Procaster FM never did I expect it to work any better rangewise. I was interested in this only for the technical differences....size and weight, non proprietary antenna, common 12 volts DC power, digital display of frequency and BETS certified. Not because it would be any better in audio or performance.
After trying it here's what I found. Audio quality was superb, coverage similar to the Decade. But only at the low end of the band. Most of what I saw power wise was done at the low end of the band with FIM readings, 88.1 to 89.9. I have a small hand held signal strength meter that can see a signal from the antenna. Choosing a frequency at the top half registered less. The signal strength gets weaker as you go up the band. At 105.3 for example will have less output than 89.9. At 89.9 with the meter touching the antenna it registered to 3 or 4 on the scale. Above 100.1 very little. That doesn't mean it wasn't working, just less output. That is the drawback I experienced. I had understood that this was power regulated evenly throughout. Actually went outside with radio/car to test. At 89.9 and a spot at the upper end of the band that was clean. On the car where adjacent frequencies are separated completely so a station beside wouldn't affect it. Only useful at the low end of the band. I hate to mention any negatives but I have to tell it honestly, or it's not valid review.
Now, as for AM vs FM...I get why most go for AM. FM even at BETS is still "puny". BETS on paper is 4X the FCC field strength but in the real world that doesn't mean 4X the range. It means maybe 2X as it's a logarithmic scale. In other words if FCC legal will get you 150 ft to a given receiver BETS will get you 200-300ft to the same exact receiver.
My little hand held signal strength meter may just move the meter pointer a bit, not even to 5 position with BETS.
Now I have the Procaster AM and I set it up. It gets a ground from the power supply that has 3 prongs grounded 12 volts. With a regular 2 prong 12 volts it is slightly less in signal output. I have a 104" wire that is electrically identical to the 3 section rod it comes with but the wire is more convenient for indoors. It is clipped on the antenna lug on the outside of the Procaster and taped to the wall across from the window. I can always use the 3 rod stock antenna.
Now, I look at this and it blows my mind! Compared to FM with my hand held meter and the Procaster peaked the pointer is pegging the end of the meter scale with it 6" away from the antenna! Have to turn the sensitivity control way down. That is the difference between AM and FM. Look how much signal strength 100mW is compared to what you get with FM coming off the antenna!. It just makes me see how useless FM really is. I have always been the advocate for FM as listeners is important to me and easier with FM. And there was this nonbroadcasting nonsense that made me afraid to go AM. But I've talked to Artisan and have worked this out. And here's the thing. FM is so puny that if you don't have an absolutely clean frequency it is no good. In the Toronto area and any major cities and surrounding area in N. America the band is full and even though a few clear spots it is right beside a moderate to strong station adjacent and that makes it unsuitable. Even on 89.9 here where I have been it is not ideal.
The AM band is half to two thirds empty. And just look at the map I posted with my coverage with the Talking Sign. That's from my basement with no ground but an electrical ground through the power supply. You can go back to see my range post with the Talking Sign. The Procaster will be the same. For FM even at BETS you need to go far from major areas(cities) to get to where some of the band is empty.
I think I am going AM with the Procaster and I will tell my listeners and why. And I will not look back. They will still listen and will get it loud and clear. A noise filter like the Tripplite Isobar cleans up the dirty power. I have my new jingles made up with 1630 ID's.
Gerry commented while doing the FM. It is useless, to quote. FCC power barely gets you out of the interstation hiss. It's too puny to be useful and that's why even most certified transmitters are sold over the limits.
Yes forum members, this week I plan on the switch to AM. We are on the same page here. AM is the way to go with hobby radio.
Here's a picture of the hand held signal meter. I can tune the Procaster using this instead of the internal meter. You can use this for the other transmitters too.
I have the control turned down in the picture so the meter pointer isn't "pegging" the end.
![DSCN1238[1]](https://part15.org/wp-content/uploads/wpforo/attachments/8363/462-DSCN12381.JPG "DSCN1238[1]")
![DSCN1239[1]](https://part15.org/wp-content/uploads/wpforo/attachments/8363/463-DSCN12391.JPG "DSCN1239[1]")
Good write up on the transmitter Mark, and of course I agree AM is the better option, but you probably are aware that Radio Saulsilito' was originally FM, with multiple transmitters scattered across the city. With that kind of setup than FM might be the better option.. except that FM is scrutinized much more, which is the very reason that Radio Saulsilito ultimately switch to AM 20 years ago. But yes, for the first 5 years it was a part 15 FM broadcast.
https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/marin-county-weaker-signals-create-stronger-2608728.php
The stations are proud of being small. Radio Sausalito boasts that it is the largest network of tiny FM transmitters in the United States,.. ...The word at Radio Sausalito is that many of its listeners live on houseboats or other vessels. Because of the way the signal is broadcast on repeater equipment, floating listeners get the best reception when the tide is at a certain level in Richardson Bay. "We don't come in too well at high tide," Westerling said.
No other radio station can make that claim.
AM is the only way to go for broadcasting legally without a license under part 15 or IC. FM is completely useless here where I live. Probably wouldn't make it out of my 20ft yard. AM can be made to sound fairly good with external processing. You had a Good review there Mark.
@wefr Right, I totally agree. My point though was that a network of part 15 FM transmitters can be just as effective in covering an area. The 5 year case history of Radio Sausalito beginnings confirms that fact. However the drawback is that it also draws extra undesired scrutiny than an AM operation would.
After trying it here's what I found. Audio quality was superb, coverage similar to the Decade. But only at the low end of the band...88.1 to 89.9...the top half didn't even register. The signal strength gets much weaker as you go up the band.. ..Only useful at the low end of the band. I hate to mention any negatives but I have to tell it honestly, or it's not valid review..
That kind of sucks, particularly for areas with no open lower frequency availability (My first thought was it's just the opposite of if using the AM band), but you point out that is not the case with the Decade, so.. Why do you think that is? I mean what theory you have for why the new Procaster only performs well on the lower frequencies?
..My little hand held signal strength meter may just move the meter pointer a bit, not even to 5 position with BETS.... ..Now, I look at this and it blows my mind! ....That is the difference between AM and FM. Look how much signal strength 100mW is compared to what you get with FM coming off the antenna!. It just makes me see how useless FM really is. I
I have the control turned down in the picture so the meter pointer isn't "pegging" the end.
I recall you talking about that meter before, and you got me curious about it again. The thing is in the past I've heard others suggest those little hobby feild strength gadgets aren't really particularly useful to a part 15 AM enthusiasts. I don't know one way or the other, but generally accepted the status quo of its usefullness.
So, have I misinterpreted the general status quo?
@richpowers As for why the power inconsistency the manufacturer would know this and maybe can design a fix. The Decade is mostly even power over the band and maybe a bit more output as you go higher. Not much though.
The meter isn't like an FIM in any way and it just shows you a signal coming from the antenna. You can see these on Amazon. Search field strength meter and it will be there.
@richpowers Those multiple transmitters all over the city, or even a town.....you know how much these cost!
And where do you put them all and how do you feed the audio from a single source to them...and what about power to them also? I can't understand how that's done even though I hear about it.
@mark I wonder if it maybe was designed specifically to work on the lower bands?.. no, I guess that don't make sense. Could it be you received a defective unit?
As for cost of putting FM transmitters all over town.. I don't know, maybe not with the new FM Procasters, or Decades, but it seems part 15 FM CMT's are not hard to find under $100 a piece (they probally cost a lot less 25 years ago when Sausalito was still doing it), so figure you could buy 10 FM transmitters for the price of one AM Rangemaster.
Has how you would feed them.. You would feed them milliwatts. But seriously, yeah, unlike most of us Radio Sausalito had, and has substantial backing and resources.
I think we all agree that a quality AM transmitter is the better choice all around than numerous FMs, for several reasons.
You know, I'm only commenting on it because it's the current topic.. I really have never had much interest in part 15 FM, so as of yet, the only reviews about it I've read is Mark's (I am going to check out HBs too), so it wasn't untill just now that I even bothered to check out Procasters website to see it.. https://www.chezradio.com/procaster-fm
All I can say is that it is an attractivene unit, but doesnt look suitable for outdoor use - but then again, I guess no other ones are either, huh?
I notice the mono/stereo switch. The range is better on mono, correct?
...I liked in the description where he says: "Car radios may increase range."
That's a great review, Mark. Shows you've actually used and tested the device.
The mono vs stereo debate has been ongoing for a while. It all depends on how you define range. You'll get greater 'listenable' range with mono. You'll still hear your stereo signal the same distance as the mono, but whether you can listen to it or not depends on your tolerance to distortion and noise. Unless you're just transmitting a tone (as has been suggested), range is highly subjective.
I too am leaning towards AM longer term.
Most of the FCC/BETS/RSS210 certified FM transmitters I've used have been tuned to specific portions of the FM band. The only exception has been the Decade, and that's likely because the antenna can be tuned to resonance for specific frequencies.
For example, the Decade CM-10 (basically a CZE detuned) performed best at the lower portions of the band, and range/field strength dropped significantly at the mid to upper portions. I verified this with the manufacturer. The antenna was short and telescopic, and had little overall effect on tuning.
The Landmark FM-350 that I used for quite a while advertised in its documentation that the standard model performed best under 98 Mhz (or around that, I can't remember exactly). You could, however, order a model that was tuned for the upper portion. This transmitter came with a fixed size wire antenna.
Both the Whole House 3 and the BVE AXS-FMT do better at the lower portion of the band as well. The Whole House 3 antenna is a 6 inch short wire hidden inside what looks like a rubber duck antenna - but isn't (to keep the field strength relatively legal). The BVE does have a telescopic antenna, shorter than resonance, and I played around with it a bit. Again, it appears to have little overall effect on output.
20 Mhz is a large amount of bandwidth to have peak tuning throughout.
Most of the FCC/BETS/RSS210 certified FM transmitters I've used have been tuned to specific portions of the FM band. The only exception has been the Decade, and that's likely because the antenna can be tuned to resonance for specific frequencies.
For example, the Decade CM-10 (basically a CZE detuned) performed best at the lower portions of the band, and range/field strength dropped significantly at the mid to upper portions. I verified this with the manufacturer. The antenna was short and telescopic, and had little overall effect on tuning..
So if I understand you correctl, the fact that the Procasters do not perform well on higher frequencies is not only not a con, but actually a common trait of part 15 FM transmitters. So, that makes it a kind of a non-issue. What counts is it sounds and perform well in the frequency range it was designed for.
@richpowers
The transmitters aren't specifically designed for a certain part of the band. It is a trait of FM transmitters that the output is not uniform across the whole band. It varies from one to the other. The Decade as I found actually gets more, not drastically, but more on the upper part of the band then the lower. That is with the antenna adjusted for the frequency. I asked about that and was told normal as it is not power regulated but the LX 75 which is now discontinued was power regulated across the band. So is the 850. Because of this that's why when the MS-100 is sent out it is at default 98.5 as that is the middle of the band and where the legal power is set at.
But when the Procaster FM was being tested it was tested at 3 different spots...low med and high. And to pass it couldn't be over on any frequencies across the band. The certification got stricter now then it was 20 years ago.
Problem is that if one area of the band, high or low is much less in output than another and your only spots are in that part it can mean not practical at all if the output is much less. Think, if you are at 1000uV@3 meters at 89.1 for example but only 550uV or less at 103.1 that's not good. It's not designed intentionally that way and can be made to be uniform over the whole band.
I sometimes read older posts and what I said then and compare it to now and things change as with this thread. What was said in the past may be different now. I gave here a review of the new Procaster FM and edited a couple of things I said that has changed since as it wasn't 100% accurate. I had thought that the Procaster FM had been designed with power regulation over the band to have output equal at all frequencies was told after the fact that no, as the Decade MS-100, output will vary over the band due to characteristics of electronics and antenna length. An FIM can see this. So the Decade MS-100 and the Procaster FM are similar in the fact that at different areas of the band output will vary. The lab tests that I had the pleasure to see did the field strength tests at 3 spots on the dial and it couldn't be over on any test frequency so of course that will affect real world operation in the fact that some spots will be better than others. With Decade MS-100 which is not power regulated it seemed that it had more of the power at the higher part of the band and with the Procaster FM it was the lower part of the band that had the better output. In manufacture after the fact performance will be based on what frequency the measurements are taken by the manufacturer for compliance and as I remember we(Gerry and I) were doing it at the lower end of the band with the FIM as that was the best as the FIM picks up all the commercial stations too(it's a radio also!) so it has to be clear space for measurement accuracy. There are jumpers to compensate which I have on mine for more power and Gerry was mentioning he would think of including that with new units as on mine.
In this thread AM also came up and what I said then has now changed as I have now gone back to FM on 89.9. Artisan said in the last post in this thread that that he would go AM in the longer term but with me the nonbroadcasting thing changed my mind from 10 months ago and I think Artisan's has changed also. AM may get you better range but if you have to keep it quiet like you are doing something wrong as you can't broadcast to the public with AM what good is it? Yes FM is puny but Canada's FM is not as puny. We have, on paper, 4X the FCC field strength, but in the real world it would take more than that to have 100uV at 30 meters and the Canadian measurements are taken at 30 meters not 3 meters.
I will be going to Gerry's place soon when the snow is gone and with an FIM and the Procaster FM transmitter measure 30 meters from the FIM on open land(park, school yard) with the transmitter on a little wooden table and adjust it for 100uV reading(BETS-1) and then without changing anything move the transmitter back to 3 meters and see what the reading is now. We can also do this at 3 different parts of the band to see how much the output varies. A long range laser measuring tool can be used for this.
I will report the findings here if/when we get around to doing that. Even at the lab when they did the tests they don't have a room 30 meters long so they did it at if I remember 7 meters or 10 was it, and did the math to get the 30 meter readings by a formula which in my mind is not accurate either. I also think Gerry purposefully adjusted it under so to get the pass as it doesn't have to be at the max and then adjust it at home for max but he was going by 3 meters as even his yard isn't 30 meters long and the 3 meter readings are most likely under if going by 1000uV. Well we'll find out. I told him to add 25 to 50 % or more to the 3 meter readings for 100uV at 30 meters but hopefully we'll finally see what actually is. That based on measurements by Timinbovey's tests several years ago.
But yes I go back to these older posts even from years ago and what was then and what I said then in a lot of cases is not the same now. I guess that's why politicians keep changing their minds! Things aren't the same all the time.