FCC To Vote On White Space Broadband > Sorry, but they're right

reply to DaDawgs

Re: Sorry, but they're right

Yeah, most of us HAVE, but not all microphones use the TV whitespace to operate. From what I have read, most high end places (such as national touring bands, tv shows, and sport events) own a license for the frequencies they use. So that mostly leaves the small people (like churches) on the list who use the unlicensed channels.

Why is your stuff more important than Internet, which is becoming a necessity to get through life? The reality is that you could put a TON of microphones into one white space channel. So rather than trying to kill this off, maybe you should be doing the responsible thing and asking for ONE white space channel in each market be dedicated to microphones. Or you could just get a license.

Wrong. Wireless microphone licenses are ONLY available to TV stations. Concerts, sporting events, etc DO NOT have licenses and they are not eligible to get them. Television programming may, and indeed I probably shouldn't have mentioned it.

ALMOST ALL professional wireless microphone systems DO use the television whitespace. The exceptions are few and far between. Toy-quality microphones are generally the only users of ISM bands due to the interference in them that white-space devices propose to add to the TV bands.

Sabine makes a 2.4GHz ISM system that functions EXTREMELY well even in the high-noise 2.4GHz band. However it is an extremely advanced digital wireless system, with a very high price tag, that still doesn't perform as well as standard white space microphones. It's mostly popular for worldwide touring where you KNOW it's legal everywhere.

I'm not saying wireless mics are more important than the Internet... but TV white spaces are not the place for the Internet. Licensed spectrum is - and it provides a better Internet experience to. What we need is more licensed spectrum to be GIVEN to non-profits with a public interest plan for it...