Hd Radio: A bad solution to a non-existant problem

[rbrucecarter5]

You tell me that you have 50's era antennas and amps. Do you have a 50's refrigerator? Stove? Automobile? TV set? Radio? Phonograph? Do you use these devices daily? Yet you have no compunction knocking a modern technology without attempting proper utilization first. Do you use rabbit ears to get satellite TV or radio? Load your iPod through RCA jacks?

I don't think those products are a fair comparison. Some of those products were not as well made as modern replacements.

I will say this about 50's radios - the "all American five" tube sets will outperform any modern equivalent whether it is reception or sound. They were amazing radios, and any time I can grab one at a garage sale or thrift shop, I do. I don't find them very often, because they are snatched up very quickly, or are still in use.

I use the headphone jack on my iPod to get into sound systems, it is more reliable. Use the iPod controls on the iPod.

If you consult the fmtunerinfo.com web site, you will soon find that classic FM tuners outperform almost every single modern tuner in every respect. It is only when HD radio forced innovation like adaptive IF that new tuners that equal classic tuners were produced.

I think you will find a lot of people are still using turntables and prefer their vinyl collections to CD's. And even "shudder" use tube amplifiers. Our top of the line Modia home theater store does a brisk business in overpriced tube amplifiers. They shine the chassis with chrome and the tubes are out in the open and glass shined. Tube enthusiasts will tell you it is not all for show. Soft clipping in tube amplifiers sounds much better than hard clipping in transistors.

There are "rabbit ear" enthusiasts who will tout them as the cure all for every reception problem, but I find when you are 300 miles out from the FM station you want to hear, only a very good FM antenna on a tower outdoors - coupled with a classic tuner that is up to the job (unlike the thousand dollar AV receivers sold for home theaters). I hooked one of them up to an outdoor antenna - miserable reception, same antenna on a vintage Kenwood receiver netted Dallas stations 250 miles away with ease.

Of course you also slammed 50's cars. I am sure there are car enthusiasts lined up to talk about that topic.

The bottom line - new technology is not necessarily better technology. Take apart any $100 radio today and you will find one IC dedicated to radio, one miserable AM ceramic filter, one not much better FM ceramic filter. Digital or analog tuned, even those ridiculously overpriced Bose Wave radios. Oh- I think they attempt a wideband RF amp on FM only and a second FM ceramic filter. But every one of the radios on sale today has a completely undersized AM ferrite bar, or one of those ridiculous little plastic loops. I can soup them up by putting a single turn three foot loop on AM - or sliding out the tiny ferrite bar, putting a bigger one inside. I can replace the ceramic filters to get the selectivity (and sensitivity up). The IC's are actually pretty good. Not up to classic stereo standards, but I can make a dollar store reject radio pretty darn good. But the overwhelming majority of people just don't care. If sound comes out on local stations that is all they want. So quality has long since been abandoned in favor of a big plastic panel, lots of lights, a prestigious name. Never mind the circuit board inside a huge unit is only 3 inches square.

Oh and another bad idea from Europe - solder without lead - has limited the useful life of consumer electronics to just a few years until tin whiskers short something out. But classic audio gear will go for decades if properly maintained. I've seen radios manufactured in the 20's and 30's that still work. It is laughable to think about a modern piece of gear lasting that long.

 

[Ai4i]

Another solution would be to use subchannel space of TV stations to broadcast audio only stations.

Ludwig Entertainment has great potential if they can stay under the NAB's Radar .

 

[iyiyi]

...It is only when HD radio forced innovation like adaptive IF that new tuners that equal classic tuners were produced...

QED.

-

 

[davideduardo]

QED.

I did not previously know that Bob Struble knew Latin.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[Darth_vader]

Or maybe s/he's suggesting Struble works/ed for the PBS stations in Pittsburgh or San Francisco?

■

 

[rbrucecarter5]

...It is only when HD radio forced innovation like adaptive IF that new tuners that equal classic tuners were produced...

QED.

-

Of course you do realize that the vast majority of those new tuners were sold to DX'ers for analog FM DX - not for HD reception?
Here are some reviews. There are many more touting their superb analog DX capabilities.

http://www.ham-radio.com/k6sti/xdr-f1hd.htm
http://www.ham-radio.com/k6sti/hdt-1x.htm

And - since local KSBJ HD-2 NGEN is off more than it is on, I am using the deep fringe capabilities of both for a weak translator that is MUCH more reliable.

 

[Kent]

DTV was technological fakery designed for the purpose of reclaiming radio bandwidth to use for emergency services post 9/11. It's so-called advantages of improved PQ and additional of sub-channels are only true if you can receive a quality signal in the first place and if there is something on the sub-channel you wish to watch. Three of four instances of TVland-like programming or non-stop infomercials is not what I consider valuable additional programming. Your interests may differ.

I'll agree with much of what you said, but I part company with you here. The DTV spectrum was determined long before 9/11 and was revised several times. It probably will be revised again in the next few years, but the current lineup of channels 2-51 was determined around '97. Before this revision, to allow channels 2-6 to be used for DTV, the spectrum was to start at channel 7 and go further up the UHF band.

The FCC moved the DTV spectrum to include 2-6 and stop at 51 (instead of 57 or 59) because it wanted to maximize its own revenue in terms of auctioning off part of the old TV spectrum as required under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The FCC didn't find much demand for channels 2-6. The potential buyers wanted the higher UHF frequencies, and channel 55, which was originally supposed to remain a DTV channel, was one of the first to be auctioned off.

Using the old TV spectrum for emergency services has never been a huge priority because the spectrum has to be auctioned, and the highest bidder gets to determine what to do with that spectrum. The latest push has been to constrict DTV further to auction that spectrum off to wireless providers so they can increase their bandwidth, though that probably wasn't an issue when the FCC decided it would count cable and satellite subscribers as already able to watch digital TV in order to get rid of analog earlier than originally expected. While it's possible the FCC decided to rush the digital transition by wrapping it up in patriotism and public safety, it was always just to increase the money flowing into government coffers.

 

[landtuna]

While it's possible the FCC decided to rush the digital transition by wrapping it up in patriotism and public safety, it was always just to increase the money flowing into government coffers.

From an outsider, i.e., "normal citizen", perspective the public understanding of the spectrum grab, as described by then-president G.W. Bush, was to provide coordinated operating frequencies to first responders as a direct result of incompatibilities discovered during the World Trade attacks.

From your description it appears that was just one more gigantic government lie. No surprise there.

 

[nd2023]

While it's possible the FCC decided to rush the digital transition by wrapping it up in patriotism and public safety, it was always just to increase the money flowing into government coffers.

From an outsider, i.e., "normal citizen", perspective the public understanding of the spectrum grab, as described by then-president G.W. Bush, was to provide coordinated operating frequencies to first responders as a direct result of incompatibilities discovered during the World Trade attacks.

From your description it appears that was just one more gigantic government lie. No surprise there.

There's an obvious reason there were incompatibilities: police/fire from other agencies besides the NYPD/NYFD use different frequencies to communicate so that the NYPD's communications don't hog the frequencies. That is by design. When the other agencies came to NYC to help the NYPD, they couldn't communicate with them.

 

[kenglish]

People keep saying that the people in condos and apartments are "victims" of the Digital TV switchover, being "forced" to use cable.
But, there is no reason that your apartment manager or condo association won't let you have an antenna, EXCEPT that THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO HAVE ONE. They WANT you to use Cable TV, and that's all they want.

They could easily allow you to put an antenna outside, even on the roof. But, THEY DON'T WANT TO.
They could easily install an MATV System so that you could receive all of your local TV and FM stations. But, THEY DON'T WANT TO.
How is that the fault of the stations or the ATSC system?

 

[TheBigA]

They WANT you to use Cable TV, and that's all they want.

And by the way, if you're the owner, you can challenge that rule in your association. Residents in my association did, and they won.

 

[Ai4i]

Residents of these buildings get a great deal: for much less than the cost of basic service, they get all their local stations plus a few that they can't get with their maintainence fee and if for some strange reason they really still want local radio, almost every station has a web presence.

 

[kenglish]

The landlords usually set up a Bulk Account for Cable TV service, then get to mark it up and pocket the difference.
And, why would you WANT to stream the audio from a radio station, when you have to pay the Cable company for the internet service?

 

[Ai4i]

Because in the third millennium, EVERYONE has WWW service...yes, EVERYONE, and those who don't have it really don't matter, do they?