-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
An Affordable HD Radio
- Thread starter ronrob
- Start date
ronrob said:
Interesting, that I saw this exact post on another site - this radio was already covered over here:
"Low Cost HD Radio Announced"
http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,68692.0.html
Anyway, here is my response to this post on the other site:
"HD Radio Effort Undermined by Weak Tuners in Expensive Radios"
http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/7002/hd-radio2.html
"Reception is problematic with all HD radios - because of the low-power IBOC digital signals, external dipole and AM loop antennas are required. If consumers do not have a need for HD radios, price will make no difference. This freak'n radio doesn't even have a CD player ! There is no analog lock mechanism, as with all HD radios falling back to analog, when the weak HD channels cannot be locked - I bet that gets annoying ! Successful technologies do not need to be put on-sale in attempt to spur consumer interest, as with the $99 Radiosophy (after June it jumps to $120). Commercials will be added to the HD channels, after this year, if HD Radio ever becomes profitable, which is highly-doubtful, as consumers have not bought into this farce. LOL !!!"
Also, I put a comment on the slipperybrick.com site, but I bet it won't get published.
M
Mike Walker
Guest
And to paraphrase what others who actually know something about digital and rf technology said in response, BULL!
Yes that is an interesting radio. But I would caution that Radiosophy, despite good intentions, doesn't exactly have a great track record when it comes to delivering products when promised. It may well be available on time (if not, their reputation will really become cemented!) But even though I may eventually buy this radio, they're not getting my charge card number until this thing actually ships to SOMEBODY (other than me). In other words, when it ceases to be vaporware, and becomes a real product. But will it happen? It may well. It probably will. Chelsea Clinton may well be president some day, too. But today ain't that day. Neither is tomorrow
Yes that is an interesting radio. But I would caution that Radiosophy, despite good intentions, doesn't exactly have a great track record when it comes to delivering products when promised. It may well be available on time (if not, their reputation will really become cemented!) But even though I may eventually buy this radio, they're not getting my charge card number until this thing actually ships to SOMEBODY (other than me). In other words, when it ceases to be vaporware, and becomes a real product. But will it happen? It may well. It probably will. Chelsea Clinton may well be president some day, too. But today ain't that day. Neither is tomorrow
Have to agree with the above diagnosis. I had a chance to test fly the Boston Acoustics Receptor and while it's sound quality was great, it's sensitivity left much to be desired on both the AM and FM bands.
The FM reception using the provided wire dipole was pathetic and the AM reception in my office building using the provided AM loop was non-existant. Was able to pull in a little KIRO and KOMO and that was all she wrote for AM.
On FM I was able to pull in fairly solid KUOW, KRWM, and KUBE in HD. KING and KWJZ were so-so. My old reliable GE "Super radio" has far superior sensitivity on both AM and FM.
The average listener just isn't going to bother climbing the roof to string up an AM longwire or outdoor FM antenna. Maybe 30 years ago, but not in 2007. There are simply too many other easy ways to get my music fix. The "Alliance" had better get some decent radios into consumer's hands or consider HD DOA.
The FM reception using the provided wire dipole was pathetic and the AM reception in my office building using the provided AM loop was non-existant. Was able to pull in a little KIRO and KOMO and that was all she wrote for AM.
On FM I was able to pull in fairly solid KUOW, KRWM, and KUBE in HD. KING and KWJZ were so-so. My old reliable GE "Super radio" has far superior sensitivity on both AM and FM.
The average listener just isn't going to bother climbing the roof to string up an AM longwire or outdoor FM antenna. Maybe 30 years ago, but not in 2007. There are simply too many other easy ways to get my music fix. The "Alliance" had better get some decent radios into consumer's hands or consider HD DOA.
TowerLamp said:
Declare defective, destructive HD Radio DOA and BUZZ OFF!
Free the airwaves of all this additional new destructive interference.
I totally agree.
What a concept!
I give it five "towers up" out of five.
What an absolutely wonderful suggestion!
Declare defective, destructive HD Radio DOA and BUZZ OFF!
Free the airwaves of all this additional new destructive interference.
I totally agree.
What a concept!
I give it five "towers up" out of five.
Mike (Walker),
I ordered it yesterday. So let's see what happens in reference to the delivery. I am not in the radio field, just an average listener who wanted to check out HD for myself. This seemed to fit the bill. Now the other question that will need to be answered is reception, and audio quality. I live about 55 miles east of NYC (on LI), but actually do have at least 1 or 2 local HD stations. I also have an external antenna available for use, if necessary. I will update all once I have received it in mid-May, if they live up to their delivery timetable.
John E B
I ordered it yesterday. So let's see what happens in reference to the delivery. I am not in the radio field, just an average listener who wanted to check out HD for myself. This seemed to fit the bill. Now the other question that will need to be answered is reception, and audio quality. I live about 55 miles east of NYC (on LI), but actually do have at least 1 or 2 local HD stations. I also have an external antenna available for use, if necessary. I will update all once I have received it in mid-May, if they live up to their delivery timetable.
John E B
M
Mike Walker
Guest
Well Johneb2 I'll be VERY interested to read about your experiences. PLEASE let us know with a brand new thread when you get it, and relate your experiences. For me, please plug it into your best audio system (though the headphone jack) and lsiten that way, plus through the best headphones youve got. That's how I'll listen (if I buy one), not through the built-in speakers. I hope you actually get your radio! Good luck, and thanks for "taking one for the team"!
johneb2johneb2 said:
Are you on the north or south shore? I live 25 miles north of Manhattan and can receive not only all the NY HD stations but also WAWZ, which is 60 miles south of me. My antenna is in the attic and not on a rotor. If it was I'd be able to get the CT HD stations byt I chose this one direction.You might want to look at New Haven for some HD activity as well. If you have access to a decent extrenal antenna definately use it. It's a major help for not onmly HD radios but for analog as well.
I'm sorry, the radio looks like it was manufactured by Playskool/Hasbro.
noknownuser said:
So what difference does it make. I won't go into its physical appearence because anyone who knows anything would be more concerned with how well it operates. Can you from any personal experience tell us how well the radio works?
As with most electronics, if it looks cheap, it is cheap. I can't get past the radio's appearance to want to demo it.
R.F. Burns said:
I have to agree, with noknownuser - if a radio looks cheap, or is ugly, no way would I buy it. Also, I wonder how many consumers are going to be wise enough to check out the external antenna jacks on the back, since there is no FM whip antenna, but has an internal FM antenna. ??? At any rate, when they get the radio home, as with all HD radios, and realize that AM-loop and FM dipole antennas are required, back it goes !
R. F. Burns,
I live on the South Shore very close to the Great South Bay, central Suffolk County. I do pickup a number of Connecticut stations, as well as one or two from NJ (across the water). However, I don't think they will be in HD range at all; but I could be wrong. My primary purpose was for WALK's HD-2 country stream. Since I am only about 6 miles from their transmitter, that should not be a reception problem. If it is, then the radio is definitely going right back to them! For me though, the $100 was worth trying it out. I will update all, once I have received it & post the results under a separate thread. John E B
I live on the South Shore very close to the Great South Bay, central Suffolk County. I do pickup a number of Connecticut stations, as well as one or two from NJ (across the water). However, I don't think they will be in HD range at all; but I could be wrong. My primary purpose was for WALK's HD-2 country stream. Since I am only about 6 miles from their transmitter, that should not be a reception problem. If it is, then the radio is definitely going right back to them! For me though, the $100 was worth trying it out. I will update all, once I have received it & post the results under a separate thread. John E B
PocketRadio said:
I absolutely agree with the above statements...
How many on these boards can attest to having wires, dipoles, etc. on the clock radios by their nightstand besides the electrical plug for the wall? I'd bet that answer would be none... and if one were to buy this radio or the Accurian or BA Receptor as a kitchen tabletop radio, how many would want a dangling wire or dipole present for all to see? Would the dipole need to be removed each time the consumer wants the table radio moved from table to kitchen counter, from kitchen counter to bedroom, etc. You can see that the consumer would be at odds over this, therefore a consumer needing to install wires or dipoles to get good quality signals is going to be a challenge on these HD radios... GOOD LUCK!
Radiopilot
noknownuser said:
That's your opinion but the funny part is that all I hear from a certain group in here who have an obvious anti IBOC bias is that the radios, are too light, not attractive, and on and on. Nothing is 100% bad or good. That apparently doesn't fit into your agenda. Do you all realize that all of this back and forth is just mental mast**bation and not one thing written in here either pro or con has any impact on the real world. So far every prediction of IBOC doom has come to naught. Your anti IBOC track record so far has been pretty poor.
R.F. Burns said:
http://www.statsaholic.com/hdradio.com
http://www.statsaholic.com/radiosophy.com
Yea, there is a lot of consumer activity at these sites !
Pocket Radio,
I have a question, you say there is an internal antenna only, no whip antenna. When I downloaded the user guide, it says it has a telescoping antenna. Am I missing something, but isn't this a whip antenna. Go easy on me now, as I said previously, I am only an average radio listener, nothing more. I am familiar with electronics, and I understood it to mean I could use the telescoping (whip) antenna, or simply connect my external antenna. Did I misunderstand this?
John E B
I have a question, you say there is an internal antenna only, no whip antenna. When I downloaded the user guide, it says it has a telescoping antenna. Am I missing something, but isn't this a whip antenna. Go easy on me now, as I said previously, I am only an average radio listener, nothing more. I am familiar with electronics, and I understood it to mean I could use the telescoping (whip) antenna, or simply connect my external antenna. Did I misunderstand this?
John E B
johneb2johneb2 said:
No problem... take a look at this page:
"Antennas: Internal AM/FM antenna and external connections"
http://radiosophy.com/products/hd100.html
I thought, that having an internal FM antenna sounded strange, and I didn't see a whip antenna on the radio - maybe, my bad. I am just an average radio listener too, so I obviously know less than the broadcast engineers on this board. I am just an informed consumer !
M
Mike Walker
Guest
Radiopilot, we're talking about receiving more than mono fm, which is robust enough it works pretty well with just the power cord antenna. Try it for clean analog stereo outside of, say twenty miles, and it's "hiss city", or if there's no hiss, it's because your radio is BLENDING TO MONO. The power cord is adequate ONLY because the radio is mono.
BOTH stereo fm, AND HD require something a little better. A rotatable whip is usually sufficient for clean reception of analog stereo or HD to say 40 miles (your mileage may vary. Obviously in hilly terrain it'll be worse, in flat terrain better), say 'wabbit ears' for 60-70 miles, and an outdoor antenna and rotor can take it to perhaps 90-110 miles for either analog stereo or rabbit ears.
The idea that nobody will put up an outdoor antenna ignores one simple fact...the outdoor antenna market is BOOMING (the first time there's been growth in perhaps three decades) BECAUSE OF HDTV. Once the antenna is up, all that's required is also hooking it to your radio for superb reception. There is nothing exceptional about any of this. The requirements for clean analog fm stereo and hd are identical...something a little better than the power cord. But in city areas, where perhaps 60 percent of the population lives, even the power cord should do. The biggest limitation, and the primary reason for physically separating antenna from radio isn't that HD is somehow "defective" or "weak"...it's that HD radios are COMPUTERS, with CPUs and lots of RF floating around inside. The antenna, ANY antenna, needs to be separated from the unit by a couple of feet so that rf generated by the radio doesn't swamp the HD information. This is solvable (by manufacturers) simply by increasing internal rf shielding.
Even power cord antennas on mono clock radios NEED PROPER ALIGNMENT...they need to be run straight, no kinks or curls. EVERY radio needs proper antenna orientation. Clock radios perform quite poorly if the power cord antenna isn't run STRAIGHT. Often moving it makes a HUGE difference. HD really isn't any more fussy than that. Place the antenna, and orient it for best reception.
People aren't nearly as "antenna stupid" as you may believe. I grew up in an era, and at a location (rural NC) where ALL tv and radio reception was over the air. So did millions of people. We're used to twiddling with antennas to bring in a better signal. My 72 year old mother was listening to the radio in her hospital room the other day. It was noisy. She rotated the whip antenna until it sounded better. She is the LEAST technically knowledgable person I know, and this was a no-brainer to her. A NON ISSUE, and a waste of good time discussing it!
BOTH stereo fm, AND HD require something a little better. A rotatable whip is usually sufficient for clean reception of analog stereo or HD to say 40 miles (your mileage may vary. Obviously in hilly terrain it'll be worse, in flat terrain better), say 'wabbit ears' for 60-70 miles, and an outdoor antenna and rotor can take it to perhaps 90-110 miles for either analog stereo or rabbit ears.
The idea that nobody will put up an outdoor antenna ignores one simple fact...the outdoor antenna market is BOOMING (the first time there's been growth in perhaps three decades) BECAUSE OF HDTV. Once the antenna is up, all that's required is also hooking it to your radio for superb reception. There is nothing exceptional about any of this. The requirements for clean analog fm stereo and hd are identical...something a little better than the power cord. But in city areas, where perhaps 60 percent of the population lives, even the power cord should do. The biggest limitation, and the primary reason for physically separating antenna from radio isn't that HD is somehow "defective" or "weak"...it's that HD radios are COMPUTERS, with CPUs and lots of RF floating around inside. The antenna, ANY antenna, needs to be separated from the unit by a couple of feet so that rf generated by the radio doesn't swamp the HD information. This is solvable (by manufacturers) simply by increasing internal rf shielding.
Even power cord antennas on mono clock radios NEED PROPER ALIGNMENT...they need to be run straight, no kinks or curls. EVERY radio needs proper antenna orientation. Clock radios perform quite poorly if the power cord antenna isn't run STRAIGHT. Often moving it makes a HUGE difference. HD really isn't any more fussy than that. Place the antenna, and orient it for best reception.
People aren't nearly as "antenna stupid" as you may believe. I grew up in an era, and at a location (rural NC) where ALL tv and radio reception was over the air. So did millions of people. We're used to twiddling with antennas to bring in a better signal. My 72 year old mother was listening to the radio in her hospital room the other day. It was noisy. She rotated the whip antenna until it sounded better. She is the LEAST technically knowledgable person I know, and this was a no-brainer to her. A NON ISSUE, and a waste of good time discussing it!
M
Mike Walker
Guest
PocketRadio=an informed consumer. Who never consumes anything. Especially the technology he claims to evaluate.
Knowledge=experience + intellectual honesty + an open mind. Remove any element of the equation, and there is no knowledge. Only hot air.
Knowledge=experience + intellectual honesty + an open mind. Remove any element of the equation, and there is no knowledge. Only hot air.
- Status