Magic

[LibertyNT]

What a silly and foolish argument. If AM radio is "where this music belongs," then why did the musicians put so much effort into adding rich and intricate instrumental backings with high frequency percussion, etc...when the frequency range and bandwidth of AM make it impossible to hear these things? Just because this type of music received more airplay on the AM band (due to radio's stupidity) does not mean that AM is the optimal band for it. Of course many people willingly listen to it on AM because they have no other choice, as is the case with Magic today.

Hardly silly, hardly foolish, and hardly stupid.

They did that because thats what makes music good. (What a silly and foolish statement : ) The Frequency range and Bandwidth do not make it impossible to hear, lousy modern day receivers cause that. You seem to forget that once upon a time AM actually sounded good (obviously 15 khz Audio helped that, along with better radios). Sure AM by no means sounds as good as FM, it can easily sound close however.
AM is not necessarily where this music belongs, nor did I say that it did, I merely said that music during the 30's 40's 50's 60's and most of the 70's was made to sound good on AM radio, in fact several versions of songs differ on the mono mix versus the stereo mix.

 

[vinyltapecd]

The Frequency range and Bandwidth do not make it impossible to hear, lousy modern day receivers cause that. You seem to forget that once upon a time AM actually sounded good (obviously 15 khz Audio helped that, along with better radios). Sure AM by no means sounds as good as FM, it can easily sound close however.

Oh really??? So tell me, what percentage of today's listeners have AM receivers that are not "lousy". Correct me if I am wrong, but probably 95% of receivers made in the last 30 years would be "lousy" according to your definition. But most of these same "lousy" receivers can get very good sound out of FM stations. Therefore, I would refrain from blaming the receivers and blame the source (AM radio) quality instead. For all intents and purposes, today AM radio cannot sound anywhere "close" to FM.

You seem to forget that once upon a time AM actually sounded good (obviously 15 khz Audio helped that, along with better radios).

I am talking about the present...regarding AM radio as we've known it over the last few decades, it generally hasn't even supported 10 khz frequencies or stereo audio. Thus, AM radio does not do justice to the easy listening genre. That is more of a FACT than an opinion, considering the musically rich sound of most easy listening songs. In other words, the musicians might as well have not bothered with the musical intricacies if people are going to listen on AM, where you can't hear them anyway. On the other hand, I personally think easy listening music sounds better on a good FM station than on CD, because the dynamic range compression gives it a nice "fullness" that isn't there otherwise.

AM is not necessarily where this music belongs, nor did I say that it did, I merely said that music during the 30's 40's 50's 60's and most of the 70's was made to sound good on AM radio, in fact several versions of songs differ on the mono mix versus the stereo mix.

This I agree with 100%.

 

[LibertyNT]

The Frequency range and Bandwidth do not make it impossible to hear, lousy modern day receivers cause that. You seem to forget that once upon a time AM actually sounded good (obviously 15 khz Audio helped that, along with better radios). Sure AM by no means sounds as good as FM, it can easily sound close however.

Oh really??? So tell me, what percentage of today's listeners have AM receivers that are not "lousy". Correct me if I am wrong, but probably 95% of receivers made in the last 30 years would be "lousy" according to your definition. But most of these same "lousy" receivers can get very good sound out of FM stations. Therefore, I would refrain from blaming the receivers and blame the source (AM radio) quality instead. For all intents and purposes, today AM radio cannot sound anywhere "close" to FM.

I'd say your pretty spot on with that guess.
You know that is one question I've never been able to figure out, why have the FM side of the radio sound so excellent, yet skimp out on the AM side.
Modern day receivers crap out on the AM band passing about 5 to 7khz of audio if your lucky.
I was always under the impression they did this to make it cheaper, but then again it can't be too expensive to make a receiver sound good on AM.
I have a few wideband radios that sound quite excellent on AM, why they don't allow cars or other receivers do this is beyond me.

I am talking about the present...regarding AM radio as we've known it over the last few decades, it generally hasn't even supported 10 khz frequencies or stereo audio. Thus, AM radio does not do justice to the easy listening genre. That is more of a FACT than an opinion, considering the musically rich sound of most easy listening songs. In other words, the musicians might as well have not bothered with the musical intricacies if people are going to listen on AM, where you can't hear them anyway. On the other hand, I personally think easy listening music sounds better on a good FM station than on CD, because the dynamic range compression gives it a nice "fullness" that isn't there otherwise.

Your correct on this point too, AM radio in the past decade or more has slowly been getting more stomped out. 10khz of audio is the bandwidth now, not as good as 15 khz but a good wideband capable receiver will fix that.
Easy Listening historically was on FM stations back in the 60's and early 70's, probably because it was on one of those Drake formats, and cheap.

I won't disagree with you that music does sound better on FM, it's a known fact, but AM does not do any injustice to the music. An AM equipped with C-QuAM Stereo would do the music just fine, unfortunately that's about as popular as HD radio, at least as far as stations are concerned.

 

[RBW]

why have the FM side of the radio sound so excellent, yet skimp out on the AM side.
Modern day receivers crap out on the AM band passing about 5 to 7khz of audio if your lucky.
I was always under the impression they did this to make it cheaper, but then again it can't be too expensive to make a receiver sound good on AM.
I have a few wideband radios that sound quite excellent on AM, why they don't allow cars or other receivers do this is beyond me.

Do you have a CCRadio? (C Crane) Just curious (as to your opinion) since they were always advertised for exceptional AM reception and audio. I have one, as well as their 2nd generation receiver which featured shortwave. I've never had any issues listening to ANYthing on AM with those units...including music. FM clarity on the CC's (or Sangean's) is very good as well, but of course stereo can only be heard when using external speakers or headphones. I don't think a radio purist (or someone with an interest in DX -- like myself) would buy one of those with the intent of listening only to FM. Their main purpose is for AM listening. "VINYL" certainly wouldn't have a use for one!

And as far as making the AM portion of a radio useless; I've watched that happen over the years, especially when "boom-boxes" were becoming more popular. I've always considered it being like any type of audio equipment when they include a tape, with a radio, and or a CD player etc. Most of the manufacturing money usually goes for ONE of the components. That ONE works great, where the other components are sub-par and subject to malfunctions. Obviously they feel (and have for some time) that AM isn't what the consumer bought the unit for, so why make it useful?

 

[LibertyNT]

That Makes sense RBW, someone isn't buying a high end stereo system for AM.

Actually I don't own a CCRadio, but I have heard excellent things about them.
C Crane makes good radios. (Transmitters too!)
I actually own an Eton S350 DL, a Grundig Sattelit 750 and an old
Hallicrafters S-120 all of which sport wideband reception.

All of them have good FM sound as well (Excluding The S-120, which is AM only).

Obviously these radios are centered around AM and Shortwave listening, which explains the better AM quality.
I'd venture to guess Vinyl isn't a DXer, so I would agree he likely wouldn't own a decent AM radio. Something tells me he would have a great Turntable though.

 

[danikayser84]

I have a Grundig S350 and a Tecsun PL-390... also a cheap Coby AM/FM/Weather radio (which is rather wideband for AM, surprisingly), and Magic 59 WROW actually sounds great on all of these! Anyone know if they transmit in C-QUAM or not? They probably transmit at around 10kHz or 12kHz audio