• 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

Most radio listening is in mono. Discuss.

Z

zumahans

Guest
This topic has to be broken out and discussed:

Much more than half of all FM listening TODAY is mono.

Car listening is 30% of all listening. Most office and home listening is on table-top receivers, like clock radios and shower and kitchen radios, few of which are stereo. And "office" listening is not measured by Arbitron. At work listening is. And at work, like in the Jiffy lube, the receiver is either mono, piped on mono speakers in the shop, or off a boom box which looses the stereo separation about 3 feet from its speakers.

So, the listening in its majority is mono or, due to distance from the radio, functionally mono.

Anyone disagree?
 
And it's worse. With the "blend" function built in to the radio and windshield antennas on new cars, the stereo seperation is close to mono anyway.

John
 
K6JHU said:
And it's worse. With the "blend" function built in to the radio and windshield antennas on new cars, the stereo seperation is close to mono anyway.
Click to expand...

I also wonder how many have looked at the waveforms of CDs of the last few years in Audition or ProTools or any other audio editing software. The "finalize" function used in recording is pretty much a hard digital clipper, and the audio is ultra compressed and then clipped, and the stereo separation is harmed pretty badly. Alternative seems to be the worst, as they strive for the proverbial "11" on the amp settings.
 
I have noticed that even though a CD has 95 Db dynamic range, much of it is never used. A synthesizer has no dynamic range nor does a drum machine. And then to put dynamic compression on top of that. There is no dynamic range. The same goes for stereo seperation. No seperation on a synthesizer, or a drum machine.

I get better seperation and dynamic range out of my old LP's then a new pop CD :)

John
 
K6JHU said:
I have noticed that even though a CD has 95 Db dynamic range, much of it is never used. A synthesizer has no dynamic range nor does a drum machine. And then to put dynamic compression on top of that. There is no dynamic range. The same goes for stereo seperation. No seperation on a synthesizer, or a drum machine.

I get better seperation and dynamic range out of my old LP's then a new pop CD :)

John
Click to expand...

But if you listen to them across the room, are you listening in mono?
 
Stereo is over-rated. I've gone mono at several stations so management could hear the benefits.
One weekend in 1985 I ran KLOS in mono.
The impact was phenominal.
The lack of picket-fencing sounded like I was parked.
I'm about to do the same test here in the Phoenix market.
 
RL said:
Stereo is over-rated. I've gone mono at several stations so management could hear the benefits.
One weekend in 1985 I ran KLOS in mono.
The impact was phenominal.
The lack of picket-fencing sounded like I was parked.
I'm about to do the same test here in the Phoenix market.
Click to expand...

Interesting you mention this. KSTN-FM in Stockton, CA does the same thing. They DO have nice coverage because they are on top of Mt. Diablo, but they shoot even further because they broadcast in mono. They target, and boom into, Stockton-Modesto markets, but can be heard very well in the Sacramento and San Francisco markets as well. It's really an amazing signal, all because they broadcast it in mono.*

*This is according to an engineer in the market who is familiar with the station's operation due to back-up engineering work.

Just thought I'd share.
 
RL said:
Stereo is over-rated. I've gone mono at several stations so management could hear the benefits.
One weekend in 1985 I ran KLOS in mono.
The impact was phenominal.
The lack of picket-fencing sounded like I was parked.
I'm about to do the same test here in the Phoenix market.
Click to expand...

They can't do that on KLOS now. Jim Ladd would play "Dark Side Of The Moon" and it would freak people out in mono.
 
How many people listen in mono rather than stereo? Who cares as long as listeners (a) have a choice and (b) are satisfied with what they're hearing.

I'm not saying this thread is useless or boring. If I thought that I wouldn't be reading the posts much less posting myself. I'm just saying most lisetners aren't as interested in the technical aspects of transmission, including mono vs stereo, as those in the industry. I think sometimes business operators, including broadcasters, forget that consumers, including radio listeners, are only interested in value compared to invetment. In radio that means do I like what I hear well enough to tune in.

I'm sure there are a lot listeners are so much into their music and their audio equipment that they aren't happy unless everything is the epitomy of perfection and on the cutting edge of techonlogy. And those listeners are probably fairly well concentrated in certain music genres. But overall they aren't the majority.
 
I have proved that listeners do care. The majority are not aware that broadcasters can transmit in mono if we want to.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom