Beware - Receptor HD Radio Requires 7 foot Dipole Antenna !

[IBOCRocks]

I have heard nothing about this - you will need to post a link/facts, before your rebuttal will become acceptable ! Your explaination sounds highly dubious !

Our engineers found this to be true, based on a comment at the local LA SBE meeting. If you turn the display off while the receiver is on and set on a station, you will find the noise level goes way down and the sensitivity increases.

We are not sure what kind of solution there is, except trying to put our own shielding on the display board, but it appears that BA knows about this.

So, you are saying the Boston Acoustics HD Receptor has a manufacturing defect?
Perhaps that is why www.npr.org (National Public Radio) is not carrying BA HD Receptors in their store, and recomends the Acoustic Energy WI-FI internet radio for listening to HD streams. Probably a wise choice, and the listener gets the additional benefit of thousands of other new stations and formats to listen to as a bonus that HD Radio can not provide.

It doesn't look like that's what he's saying.

And sure, you can listen to low quality internet streams, if you're paying big money for broadband. And don't plan on using your computers (which will cause that streaming audio to stall and stutter) for anything. Oh, and oh yeah, good luck taking it anywhere.

Wise choice, indeed.

Laptops, multimedia enabled cell phones, and a multitude of multimedia pocket devices are already here. The BA HD Receptor is less portable then any of these and limited to the primary coverage area of the station you want to listen to.
So good luck taking your BA HD receptor on a long vacation and picking up your favorite hometown station, you claim is so vital. Only the internet can do this worldwide, and you don't even have to shield or turn off the time display!
The inernet streams from HD stations are usually the same or higher quality then the HD over the air streams. Why would they want to show how bad their HD stream is over the internet, to potential HD buyers?

The streams are of higher quality? Care to prove it?

 

[SUPERCASTER]

I have heard nothing about this - you will need to post a link/facts, before your rebuttal will become acceptable ! Your explaination sounds highly dubious !

Our engineers found this to be true, based on a comment at the local LA SBE meeting. If you turn the display off while the receiver is on and set on a station, you will find the noise level goes way down and the sensitivity increases.

We are not sure what kind of solution there is, except trying to put our own shielding on the display board, but it appears that BA knows about this.

So, you are saying the Boston Acoustics HD Receptor has a manufacturing defect?
Perhaps that is why www.npr.org (National Public Radio) is not carrying BA HD Receptors in their store, and recomends the Acoustic Energy WI-FI internet radio for listening to HD streams. Probably a wise choice, and the listener gets the additional benefit of thousands of other new stations and formats to listen to as a bonus that HD Radio can not provide.

It doesn't look like that's what he's saying.

And sure, you can listen to low quality internet streams, if you're paying big money for broadband. And don't plan on using your computers (which will cause that streaming audio to stall and stutter) for anything. Oh, and oh yeah, good luck taking it anywhere.

Wise choice, indeed.

Laptops, multimedia enabled cell phones, and a multitude of multimedia pocket devices are already here. The BA HD Receptor is less portable then any of these and limited to the primary coverage area of the station you want to listen to.
So good luck taking your BA HD receptor on a long vacation and picking up your favorite hometown station, you claim is so vital. Only the internet can do this worldwide, and you don't even have to shield or turn off the time display!
The inernet streams from HD stations are usually the same or higher quality then the HD over the air streams. Why would they want to show how bad their HD stream is over the internet, to potential HD buyers?

The streams are of higher quality? Care to prove it?

That's not my job, but yours. You were the one that first claimed inferior quality from internet HD streams, remember?

 

[IBOCRocks]

That's not my job, but yours. You were the one that first claimed inferior quality from internet HD streams, remember?

I see, it's not true and you can't prove it. That's what I thought.

 

[autopaint-1]

"Laptops, multimedia enabled cell phones, and a multitude of multimedia pocket devices are already here"


But where are the car radios? We're talking radios not cell phones and by the way in NY at least it's illegal to use a cell phone without a hands free device. Here are some HD car radios.

JVC KD-HDR1, Kenwood KTC-HR100TR, and BMW offer HD car radios. Let's see what next year brings and the ARRL amongst others are working on stopping BPL from growing and causing more interference to our RF spectrum.

 

[Chuck]

Let's see what next year brings and the ARRL amongst others are working on stopping BPL from growing and causing more interference to our RF spectrum.

I'm no fan of BPL, but I think ARRL has pretty well already lost that battle. The good news is all reports I've heard indicate that BPL doesn't work as well as its developer’s claim, so it may fail on its own merits (or lack thereof).

But I’ve got to tell you that while at the TAB convention in Austin, I had no problem with listening to my own radio stations audio stream. I did this wirelessly using free wi-fi connections. I could walk allover the convention facility. It also worked (for free) at the Austin Airport as well as while I was stuck for several hours at DFW Airport. I have no idea whose Internet service I’d logged on to, but nobody asked me for my credit card number. (There were some pay services, but I didn’t use them.) I predict it is going to be a big deal one of these days.