In addition to the adjacent channel interference, I just wish that HD-AM actually didn't sound so tinny, and sounded more like analog AM, like this: http://www.fanfarefm.com/soundbites.html
-
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
Can AM Be Saved from IBOC?
- Thread starter JohnnyElectron
- Start date
DavidEduardo said:StephanieNYC said:David, "nice Spanish language" format listeners? ??? You mean like us old fogies who want boleros and trios and other moldy oldies from the 40s/50s/60s?;D
Yes, the problem until we have a true national WiMAX service and all devices are converted to WiMAX, is that alternative distribution is either not portable, expensive, unreliable or all of these!
Interesting info on Batanga earlier. Thanks for the reply.
Good point, but Batanga has been building a brand and I'm sure they're building up to when Wimax becomes ubiquitous. Also, not every portable device will need to be Wimax-capable. Inside cars that will contain a Wimax receiver/router, a simple Wi-Fi device will do. Intel will have combo Wimax/Wi-Fi chips ready by 2009.
clouseau said:
Yes narrow band FM was tried on the AM broadcast band and failed, with the same results as HD radio. No advantages, many expensive disadvantages.
I'm delighted to see you have finally added accuracy and frank disclosure to your signature:
SUPERCASTER said:
As happens from time to time, your vitriol has outdistanced your grasp of what is written.
I was referring to FM. As in "FM" Radio. As in New Band 88-108. New radio. Before there was FM radio there was nothing called "AM" radio. It was just radio. And in order to get the FM Radio we have today, we implemented one of those "novel modulation schemes requiring new radios."
I would propose that, over time, a new modulation scheme can develop and flourish. To alledge it can not is less than honest.
Clouseau
clouseau said:
Your reply is just more of the continuous HD supporter's barrage of hype and deception in order to justify the deficient, incompatible HD radio scheme.
The discussion was about a new adjacent channel modulation scheme (HD Radio) for use in the AM band. If AM HD Radio was truly compatible with analog, or occupied a new band (as FM did) I'm sure few would object. It does not, and your post is clearly intended to confuse the issue and deceive. New modulation schemes for the AM band have been tried before, several times and failed.
Who is being less then honest?
Supercaster said:
How has analog FM in a new band been AM radio's salvation?
To further quote
said:
How has analog FM in a new band been AM radio's salvation?
To further quote
D
dbdigital
Guest
Today, I listened to a friend's fully restored 1937 AM/SW Philco radio. He had it hooked up to a Terk antenna. The sound was unbelievable. Although we were listening to talk radio (KABC 790) the voices were rich and full with great presence. Any music beds in the broadcast sounded equally good. Noise was surprisingly minimal.
But it really brought home to me how important a well designed, well made radio is for hearing AM and how the radio industry as a whole, not just the FCC, really screwed up by not insisting (through FCC regulation) that AM sections in consumer radios maintain a certain level of quality.
You can't blame Chinese manufacturers for this. Whatever they're contracted to build at whatever level of quality, is what they'll build. The Chinese can make good stuff (such as iPods and Mac Books).
But you can blame the radio industry, including the NAB, for not watching out for, what could be described as, the degradation of AM on the consumer side. HD is a too little, too late band-aid that will do nothing to reverse this degradation.
db
But it really brought home to me how important a well designed, well made radio is for hearing AM and how the radio industry as a whole, not just the FCC, really screwed up by not insisting (through FCC regulation) that AM sections in consumer radios maintain a certain level of quality.
You can't blame Chinese manufacturers for this. Whatever they're contracted to build at whatever level of quality, is what they'll build. The Chinese can make good stuff (such as iPods and Mac Books).
But you can blame the radio industry, including the NAB, for not watching out for, what could be described as, the degradation of AM on the consumer side. HD is a too little, too late band-aid that will do nothing to reverse this degradation.
db
dbdigital said:
True. The Chinese will make whatever you pay them to make. You may have to watch them to make sure they hold up their end of the bargain, but they can make some very good stuff. They can also build a lot of crap. It just depends on whatever the purchaser specifies. The sad part is our own countrymen are the ones telling them to make sub-standard products. Cheap wins 9 out of 10 times.
SUPERCASTER said:
I would contend, based on the general population that few object NOW. You are continuously posting as if there is a serious groundswell against AM HD. So far, despite DIRE predictions of the end of the world and radio listening, as far as the public is concerned, it appears not much has changed.
Where's the Beef?
I would suggest that you have no idea whether that statement is true or not. Even if my intent was to deceive (Which of course it was not) YOU have no direct knowledge of what the intent was. To claim you do is incorrect. You are wrong. Perhaps it's time to put on your tin foil hat again. The vast HD Conpiracy must be radiating those adjacent channel wave right at you. There is no intended deception or confusion with this issue. Radio in the past has utilized a different modulation system and required the purchase of a new radio and the new has basically replaced the old. It's FM and AM. Where in the spectrum the frequency is located is irrelavant.
If you think WHERE in the spectum HD is located matters, than so be it. It was proposed out of band and then proposed in band. It was developed. It was tested. It was reviewed. It was Temporarily authorized. It was marketed. It was widely tested and then ultimately finally adopted. It was made law. It is the way it is.
The consistant whining about it makes very little sense to me. There is, what looks like like to me, a very limited resistance to it. Frankly, as many including yourself have pointed out, the overall attitude is indifference.
The sky didn't fall.
Most of the FM stations in Richmond weren't "Jammed off the air".
In fact, the vast majority of sensationalistic nay sayers were just overreacting.
Now some may think this is Deceptive or dishonest. I just call it reality. No matter how bad you scream HD is - Basically no one cares about it.
And no, that doesn't thrill me either.
Clouseau
- Status