If anything, there's an age crisis facing the profession. Chris Tarr wrote this op-ed for Lance back in 2016:Lazy and underpaid? That's a combination I haven't heard of before....
radioinsight.com
And three, we see a response to something and don't even remember what the thread is about.
I won a cheap clock radio as a door prize.And it's the same way.Won't pick up an AM station when you can see the tower out the window
Way to many to list.
My last 6 AM where 50 KW, all turned off HD. Money is at analog, AM listeners unfortunately won't spend $$$ on HD radio receiver.
The NRSC measurements ensure AM stations stay within a particular mask, not to improve the quality by venturing out of the bandwidth limits. Just because someone may not do a measurement annually, has nothing, zero, zip, as to how the station sounds.
No, it isn't. The statement is uninformed B.S.
Really? So staying inside a 10kHz NRSC mask will eliminate terrestrial noise? Will staying inside the mask eliminate a Faraday Cage effect? Will staying inside an NRSC mask improve the distortion of asymmetrical modulation?
Sure there are many reasons, some of which I've already mentioned. AM is by far an inferior form of media when it comes to quality. Years ago Bob Carver and I worked together prior to rolling out his AM stereo tuner. After visiting many stations, he concluded that pursuing AM audio quality was a complete waste of time.
Most noise on the AM band is analog, just like the signal of an AM station. So there is no way to filter it out unless you sharpen the selectivity to avoid noise from the sidebands. With SDRs (software defined radios) you can imitate sharp mechanical filters and reduce that sideband noise. But "static" and the junk being emitted by your wall warts, dimmers and other electronic gear is analog too... and very broadband.
There is a huge percentage of stations that are not profitable. You expect generous salaries when total inflation-adjusted radio revenue is off by over 60% since 20 years ago?
No different than your general practitioner medical doctor: you do not have a checkup every week, but call them when you feel bad and something is not working right.
In many markets (my own market, Seattle, for example) there are no AM HD signals to tune into, removing the impetus to get an HD AM receiver.
That probably wouldn't be necessary as so many AM car radios already have such a limited IF bandpass, which I mentioned in my post, that cannot even pass 3 kHz let alone 4 kHz. My Kenwood is a prime example. There is virtually no adjacent channel interference in this receiver as the bandpass is so narrow.Facts about speech intelligibility
Spoken and sung words should be intelligible. Unfortunatley, it can be technically challenging to retain intelligibility, when recording or amplifying the voice. In this article, we present some facts on speech intelligibility and, most importantly, how to retain it.www.dpamicrophones.com
How about a 6 dB boost at 3kHz in the AM broadcast with a sharp cutoff at 4kHz (also would help to limit interference with nearby [frequency wise] AM signals)?
Kirk Bayne
You can tell a lot about how a station sounds by (gasp!) looking at the emitted RF spectum. Any engineer worth his salt will try to optimize the frequency reponse while staying within the NRSC mask.
I didn't say it would fix those external effects, but it would hold up our end of the audio quality bargan. The transmission. Many car radios have adaptive bandwidth DSP and AGC that works quite well. NRSC specifically added emphasis to address recievers with poor bandwidth, while allowing those with better bandwith to benefit.
I never said it was superior. I do not have rose colored glasses like some on this board and in this thread about the future of AM broadcast. But there is absolutely no reason why AM stations should be transmitting 3K telephone grade crap. I repeat again... ourselves as an industry are partially to blame. Either the management doesn't know any better, doesn't care, or can't cough up another hour or two of contract time to have this signal quality addressed. Every crappy AM station I hear on my radio, I just ask, "Please, let me fix you!"
Past 10kHz? (Actually closer to 8kHz) Then wouldn't that exceed the NRSC mask?
Are you talking about the preemphasis curve standard as determined by the NRSC?
But, wouldn't 3K be well within the NRSC mask?
The reality is, that AM is inherently inferior quality to every other form of media being consumed, especially when you consider streaming is now another competitor for ears. Sure, if stations stopped using asymmetrical modulation and tons of clipping it would sound better than it does on most stations, but would remain inferior. Plus doing so would reduce the beneficial coverage effects of running 125% positive peaks, considering the noise floor AM stations need to get over.
No thank you!
I know AM OTA is impossible on cell phones that is why I made the exception.
Absolutely. It is amazing that Armstrong was given the task of creating a "static free" system by Sarnoff. He came up with FM, but by then Sarnoff had realized that there was to be more money in TV; he did not want FM taking small dollars from consumers when he could get big bucks by selling TV sets. So FM was thwarted and it took Armstrong's brilliant creation about three decades to become useful and viable.
David: Do you know in what time period set manufacturers started including FM in their radios?. I seem to recall ,as a child, my Grandfather having this big console with AM, FM and Short Wave in it. And even in the 1950's it looked old and weathered.
