This is a wireless audio link operating on two separate channels out of 16 switchable pairs in the 863-865 MHz band. Phonic claims it's legal in the USA but they are being blown out for $300 ($800 MSRP) . Has anyone here ever used one or have a definitive answer as to it's legality?
Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
- Thread starter Ron Kimball
- Start date
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
If the system is in fact operating in the 863-865 range, it's not legal to sell or operate in the US. If they say it is, ask for the FCC ID number. If they don't have one, there's your answer.
If the system is in fact operating in the 863-865 range, it's not legal to sell or operate in the US. If they say it is, ask for the FCC ID number. If they don't have one, there's your answer.
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
Interesting that the receivers have FCC numbers on them but not the transmitter...
Interesting that the receivers have FCC numbers on them but not the transmitter...
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
A message on the Phonic Forum from two+ years ago:
"[...] the new 863 units are legal to use in the United States. They replace the older models that do use the old 700 MHz frequency range."
https://getsatisfaction.com/phonic/topics/wm_sys4_863
It was even sold through Sears at one time according to a Google search.
I'm confused :?~:-?~:???: .
A message on the Phonic Forum from two+ years ago:
"[...] the new 863 units are legal to use in the United States. They replace the older models that do use the old 700 MHz frequency range."
https://getsatisfaction.com/phonic/topics/wm_sys4_863
It was even sold through Sears at one time according to a Google search.
I'm confused :?~:-?~:???: .
Last edited:
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
It is legal to receive any broadcast signal. Transmitting one is a totally different story.
I had a teacher in college who got free cable. He just put an antenna up in his back yard and hooked it to his TV.
Now never mind the fact that the the cable going to his neighbors house was in the air right between the houses on the property line-and he "just happened" to put the antenna VERY close to the cable-on his side of the property line -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Without knowing any more information-here is my take.
It is legal to receive any broadcast signal. Transmitting one is a totally different story.
I had a teacher in college who got free cable. He just put an antenna up in his back yard and hooked it to his TV.
Now never mind the fact that the the cable going to his neighbors house was in the air right between the houses on the property line-and he "just happened" to put the antenna VERY close to the cable-on his side of the property line -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
Good luck getting any info from Phonic! After trying to help a friend with a blown up amp in a Phonic powered speaker I am convinced that Phonic has the worst customer service period! I could not get any direct phone contact info, after filling out the customer contact form on the website it was weeks later till I got a generic response. Told them what I was looking for, schematic, parts, replacement board, etc. another couple weeks passed, explained it all again in the next message that I received. Finally after about three months got the message that no replacement modules were available in the US but they would give me one if I paid the shipping via UPS from China. The UPS shipping cost for the amp module from China was going to be more than the entire speaker is worth.
So it does not surprise me that Phonic is trying to sell illegal RF equipment in the US, but really should anyone be surprised!
Good luck getting any info from Phonic! After trying to help a friend with a blown up amp in a Phonic powered speaker I am convinced that Phonic has the worst customer service period! I could not get any direct phone contact info, after filling out the customer contact form on the website it was weeks later till I got a generic response. Told them what I was looking for, schematic, parts, replacement board, etc. another couple weeks passed, explained it all again in the next message that I received. Finally after about three months got the message that no replacement modules were available in the US but they would give me one if I paid the shipping via UPS from China. The UPS shipping cost for the amp module from China was going to be more than the entire speaker is worth.
So it does not surprise me that Phonic is trying to sell illegal RF equipment in the US, but really should anyone be surprised!
Last edited:
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
BTW I have my General Radiotelephone Operator License (PG) so ought to know the answer to this :?~:-?~:???: .
Except for cell phone signals. It's illegal to even sell a receiver in the US that can pick them up.
BTW I have my General Radiotelephone Operator License (PG) so ought to know the answer to this :?~:-?~:???: .
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
.
Last I knew Phonic had changed distributors in the US and was looking to hire someone based here to work out of their house. Their present US rep is stationed in Taiwan (although I believe he is a US native) but has been MIA from their support forum for a couple months or so.. All their US support and repairs are done by their distributor. IMO the US is such a small part of their business that they can't justify having a US division. They do have some really nice higher end stuff such as their handheld audio analyzer and digital mixer (the latest model is due here any day now). I have one of their Summit/S16 digital mixers which has stellar audio quality but AFAIK there are about 3 in use in this country
.
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
Not to topic swerve too badly, but I was actually just wondering about what ever became of the Summit, especially with other digital mixer being offered up as of late. So it never did get a US release?
They do have some really nice higher end stuff such as their handheld audio analyzer and digital mixer (the latest model is due here any day now). I have one of their Summit/S16 digital mixers which has stellar audio quality but AFAIK there are about 3 in use in this country
Not to topic swerve too badly, but I was actually just wondering about what ever became of the Summit, especially with other digital mixer being offered up as of late. So it never did get a US release?
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
.
It is all mute now-since the FCC joined the 2 classes back in the early 80's.
Cell phones didn't even exit when I got my FCC license. I only got my 2nd class (because that was all that was required for employment)-and one of my biggest regrets was not after my 1st class license-not even bothering to take the test
.It is all mute now-since the FCC joined the 2 classes back in the early 80's.
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
. There was some confusion as Summit Audio made them change the name in this country to the S16. The new one due any day is the iS16.
Yes, it was released here about 2-3 years ago I think? Almost no promo here. About the same price as the MUCH better supported SL16. Over the SL the Summit has flying faders, real HPF's and studio quality FX. Only 16 A/D converters though
. There was some confusion as Summit Audio made them change the name in this country to the S16. The new one due any day is the iS16.Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
.
BTW as far as I can tell that 863 band was obsoleted by cell phones - it was used by base stations for the older carphones and channel shared dispatch of cabs and such. It was a weird service that required expensive full duplex(?) automatic switching multichannel "trunking" transceivers with the channels shared amongst multiple users just like cell phones but much higher power. Most dispatch uses single channels so can't legally use that band. I somewhat doubt there are many (any?) licensed active users left. In any case it does appear legal to use low power unlicensed devices in that band:
http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet63/oet63rev.pdf
Of course in the future the FCC could reallocate that band to public service or some other such non-obsolete service - since it is used for wireless mics in the EU and UK it would make sense to make it that here too but we know that will never happen .
Yah I had my 1st - all the same nowCell phones didn't even exit when I got my FCC license. I only got my 2nd class (because that was all that was required for employment)-and one of my biggest regrets was not after my 1st class license-not even bothering to take the test
.BTW as far as I can tell that 863 band was obsoleted by cell phones - it was used by base stations for the older carphones and channel shared dispatch of cabs and such. It was a weird service that required expensive full duplex(?) automatic switching multichannel "trunking" transceivers with the channels shared amongst multiple users just like cell phones but much higher power. Most dispatch uses single channels so can't legally use that band. I somewhat doubt there are many (any?) licensed active users left. In any case it does appear legal to use low power unlicensed devices in that band:
http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet63/oet63rev.pdf
Of course in the future the FCC could reallocate that band to public service or some other such non-obsolete service - since it is used for wireless mics in the EU and UK it would make sense to make it that here too but we know that will never happen
.
Last edited:
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
Receivers only have to meet Part 15 spurious emissions requirements (generally 15.107), and must state such on a standard format FCC label on the device, but it is not an FCC ID number; that is unique to a given tranmsmitter make and model.
Receivers only have to meet Part 15 spurious emissions requirements (generally 15.107), and must state such on a standard format FCC label on the device, but it is not an FCC ID number; that is unique to a given tranmsmitter make and model.
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
". . . Are legal to use in the United States" for what purpose? In other words, to what FCC classification of service are they referring?
". . . Are legal to use in the United States" for what purpose? In other words, to what FCC classification of service are they referring?
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
FCC ID: C5CWM400-L
FCC ID: C5CWM400-R
No FCC ID on the transmitter. Interestingly enough neither one of those is valid although C5CWM70 is (the transmitter is a WM70):
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Sum&calledFromFrame=N&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=703704&fcc_id=C5CWM70
EDIT> That's for the old version that had one transmitter operating in the 700 MHz band and one in the 600 MHz band - the FCC has no record of the new version so that would explain the lack of an FCC ID on it . I suspect it would fail as it has detachable antennas with standard connectors (not allowed on an unlicensed low power device) and possibly too much power.
The receivers say:
FCC ID: C5CWM400-L
FCC ID: C5CWM400-R
No FCC ID on the transmitter. Interestingly enough neither one of those is valid although C5CWM70 is (the transmitter is a WM70):
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Sum&calledFromFrame=N&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=703704&fcc_id=C5CWM70
EDIT> That's for the old version that had one transmitter operating in the 700 MHz band and one in the 600 MHz band - the FCC has no record of the new version so that would explain the lack of an FCC ID on it
. I suspect it would fail as it has detachable antennas with standard connectors (not allowed on an unlicensed low power device) and possibly too much power.
Last edited:
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
Having false FCC ID numbers on products is in itself a violation. Falsifying an ID number on a receiver is ignorance (and rather humourous).
Although one could argue that FCC classified "non-standard" connectors (reverse gender or thread) are so common and so readily available as both part and finished assembly, they have become a defacto standard. But I digress. Defintely too much power.
Having false FCC ID numbers on products is in itself a violation. Falsifying an ID number on a receiver is ignorance (and rather humourous).
Although one could argue that FCC classified "non-standard" connectors (reverse gender or thread) are so common and so readily available as both part and finished assembly, they have become a defacto standard. But I digress. Defintely too much power.
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
^Yup, poor show .
BTW anybody looking for a job in LA they are trying to establish an office in the US there:
News :: Phonic searches for qualified sales director and product specialist - Phonic | Manufacturing Quality Professional Audio Equipment since 1977
Dunno if they can get their act together but I guess they're trying?
^Yup, poor show
.BTW anybody looking for a job in LA they are trying to establish an office in the US there:
News :: Phonic searches for qualified sales director and product specialist - Phonic | Manufacturing Quality Professional Audio Equipment since 1977
Dunno if they can get their act together but I guess they're trying?
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
I think this quote pretty much says it all:
"Can you sell ice to an Inuit? Phonic’s US Sales Director position may just be for you."
^Yup, poor show
BTW anybody looking for a job in LA they are trying to establish an office in the US there:
News :: Phonic searches for qualified sales director and product specialist - Phonic | Manufacturing Quality Professional Audio Equipment since 1977
Dunno if they can get their act together but I guess they're trying?
I think this quote pretty much says it all:
"Can you sell ice to an Inuit? Phonic’s US Sales Director position may just be for you."
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
Part of this line is not bad either:
must have at least 10 years of sales experience and "at least a passing interest in the professional audio industry"
Part of this line is not bad either:
must have at least 10 years of sales experience and "at least a passing interest in the professional audio industry"
Re: Phonic WM-SYS4-863 legal?
.
I missed that - pretty funny! But I think they were just trying to appear "hip" (mis?)using a common American expression. Looking at their catalog most of their products are just "me too" and/or older designs. Who would buy an RMX clone these days when you can get a 7 lb IPR for less? How about a powered speaker that weighs more, costs more, and performs worse than a 'ringer B212D? As I said their handheld audio analyzer is pretty cool and their new digital mixer might get some interest but I suspect them hiring two employees in the US isn't going to buy them any momentum
.