I have to take issue with two earlier posts:
In Reply # 28, David Eduardo wrote:
1360 is not a viable signal, and 1530 is not either based on missing a good part of the market at night and not getting a good enough one in the outer counties daytime.
Thirteen-sixty is far from ideal; but on 1530, you're absolutely wrong, DE! Back in 2004, when 1530 was "real oldies" WSAI, I could hear it every night here in NJ! Just look at the contour maps:
http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/info?call=WCKY&service=AM
And in Reply # 31, LinoNYC wrote:
The CBS sequential scan color system was not compatible, was rejected and required everyone buy new TV sets in order to watch.
Partially wrong. The CBs system was rejected inpart because it mechanical scanning in both camera and receiver. It was also Iconoscope based and required an enormus 1200 fc for full video. I met serveral NBC engineers who had worked on this system and they told of how they, and floor managers, boom ops etc often wore sunglasses in the studio. The CBS system was crude, even for 1951.
The RCA system was not without it's compromises, receivers had to have their bandwidth restricted to no more than 3mhz to avoid seeing a fine pattern of dots due to the chroma stream. In practice this meant most tv's had to be trapped at no more than 2.5mhz and there were compatability problems with some older sets regarding the horizontal "back porch" which now contained the chroma sync burst.
.........
Do you know when color sets outsold B&W? 1972-nineteen years after the system was developed. The first color set (ctc100) isold for over $800 in 1954 dollars. It is foolish for you to portray any tech's introductory price as a case for failure.
It is simply a lie to state that iboc FM causes interference.
The CBS sequential scan color system was not compatible, was rejected and required everyone buy new TV sets in order to watch.
Partially wrong. The CBs system was rejected inpart because it mechanical scanning in both camera and receiver. It was also Iconoscope based and required an enormus 1200 fc for full video. I met serveral NBC engineers who had worked on this system and they told of how they, and floor managers, boom ops etc often wore sunglasses in the studio. The CBS system was crude, even for 1951.
The RCA system was not without it's compromises, receivers had to have their bandwidth restricted to no more than 3mhz to avoid seeing a fine pattern of dots due to the chroma stream. In practice this meant most tv's had to be trapped at no more than 2.5mhz and there were compatability problems with some older sets regarding the horizontal "back porch" which now contained the chroma sync burst.
.........
Do you know when color sets outsold B&W? 1972-nineteen years after the system was developed. The first color set (ctc100) isold for over $800 in 1954 dollars. It is foolish for you to portray any tech's introductory price as a case for failure.
It is simply a lie to state that iboc FM causes interference. [ absolutely sic!] [/quote]
First, I can well remember the color dots Lino mentios on our old 1952 Zenith b/w console -- a 24-inch with those rounded corners (equivalent in height and width to a 27-inch modern 4:3 square-cornered tube) so those dots were very visible to a little kid sitting close to it on the floor! But they never really bothered me, or anybody else.
Second, RCA's early color sets were outrageously expensive, and trouble-prone to boot. And the color was terrible -- grass, sky and sea looked good, but natural flesh tones were impossible to attain -- until the "rare-earth red" phosphor, discovered around 1960, finally made it into production receivers around 1964 (by which time the circuits were becoming more dependable, too). But Lino is missing the point. RCA never expected those early sets to sell to anybody but "early adopters." They were making them at a loss to position the company as an industry leader, in the vain hope that the public would associate color with RCA.
And finally, it is NOT a lie to state that iboc [sic] FM causes interference. As rbrucecarter5 noted in Reply #33, "Many people have been reporting first adjacent jamming in the crowded metro areas of the Eastern seaboard." Yes, I know. I'm one of them! And you're not rude enough to call me a liar, are you, Lino?
Could said consortium have manipulated radio’s digital future [taking advantage of an FCC still “smarting” from the AM-Stereo debacle] to preclude smaller broadcasters from attaining the very-slightest measure of parody out in lower-power AM and Class A FM territory? Simply-stated for those living in Rio Linda: The current flavor of “HD” Radio may never have been intended for “the small guy”! Before you scream Art Bell and conspiracy, reflect on the past conduct of the NAB—now there’s a Radio Shack with very-telling answers in the form of their continuous barrage of misadventure directed at smaller stations and proposed services!