• 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

News "reports" on WBZ

nowradioguy said:
Agree, Eli. Music, and even, speech, sounds so compressed and frequency-limited on AM, more so now than ever. I don't mind the compression, for it makes for consistency, but bandlimiting to less than 5 KHz is a real buzz kill, even for speech.

Back in the 70s, didn't WGN 720 Chicago have permission to extend out to 15 KHz?
Click to expand...
Today’s AM receivers and radios are at least as high frequency limited as the stations themselves, often more.

In the ‘80s and ‘90s a few manufacturers (including Sony) made wideband AM stereo receivers that were not bandwidth limited, and the few AM stations with higher limits than 5k sounded excellent on them (if you were getting strong clean reception).

WJIB 740 (soon 720) here limits higher than 5k, I think their audio extends up to 10k, but you can only hear that difference on one of those old wideband AM receivers. I still have a wideband AM stereo Sony receiver from the late ‘80s, here in Somerville WJIB sounds at least as good as typical analog FM stereo on it.
 
Eli Polonsky said:
Today’s AM receivers and radios are at least as high frequency limited as the stations themselves, often more.

In the ‘80s and ‘90s a few manufacturers (including Sony) made wideband AM stereo receivers that were not bandwidth limited, and the few AM stations with higher limits than 5k sounded excellent on them (if you were getting strong clean reception).

WJIB 740 (soon 720) here limits higher than 5k, I think their audio extends up to 10k, but you can only hear that difference on one of those old wideband AM receivers. I still have a wideband AM stereo Sony receiver from the late ‘80s, here in Somerville WJIB sounds at least as good as typical analog FM stereo on it.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Eli. I can always count on you for being a voice of reason on this forum.
 
TheBigA said:
Westinghouse merged with CBS in 1995. That's 30 years ago. Then they changed their name to the CBS Corporation. Then sold to Viacom in 2000.
Click to expand...
I gave you a "Like" for your concise history of WBZ's ownership, but I should've elaborated.

I liked when 'BZ had TWO anchors per shift. During morning/afternoon drive, each anchor had about 15 minutes before switching. The off-air anchor would often conduct telephone interviews - which were not only intelligible (audio-wise) but meaningful - with newsmakers, whether local or distant. There were also live interactions between the 'BZ on-air anchor and either a CBS or an ABC news correspondent.

Sure, the single anchor / 4-hour shift may be more cost-effective, but the snippets we've been getting from a few 'BZ reporters are not on a par with the interviews conducted by Gary Lapierre, Deb Lawler, and others no longer there.

Bash and lecture all you want, but THAT's what I'm missing.
 
nowradioguy said:
Agree, Eli. Music, and even, speech, sounds so compressed and frequency-limited on AM, more so now than ever. I don't mind the compression, for it makes for consistency, but bandlimiting to less than 5 KHz is a real buzz kill, even for speech.

Back in the 70s, didn't WGN 720 Chicago have permission to extend out to 15 KHz?

Since HD hasn't caught fire as expected, maybe AM stereo for those few remaining music stations might be a somewhat reasonable alternative.
Click to expand...

Since some transmitters come with stereo capability and there is no licensing cost - why not turn it on if not running HD? Stereo studio equipment is pretty universal now and a past excuse of the cost for two channels between the studio and transmitter is moot with current connectivity options. If it comes with the transmitter, it's basically a free upgrade outside of maybe some tweaking to get the sound optimized at first.

I was listening to WMEX a lot but WJIB in stereo got me to switch and that's where I spend most of my time. Yeah, one listener, who cares, I know. I put a Sony AM Stereo car receiver in my truck feeding the aux in jacks and it sounds great. Actually, WMEX in mono sounds quite good on this receiver (and WRKO and WBZ......) in wideband mode.

Noise in stereo - yeah not so much noise but so much great stereo separation! I think people exaggerate the noise issues. 9 times out of 10 it is something local to the radio and a small change fixes it like swapping out a light bulb. I think one of AM's bigger problems is many of its owners gave up on it and just do the bare minimum. This problem goes back to the 1990's. Younger people don't listen to AM not due to sound quality but because they don't think there is any programming worth listening to. Companies like Audacy don't know what to do with their FM's so they simulcast their successful AMs on them (and then no longer mention the AM) - dumb. I'll give iHeart credit in this area they have worked to keep their AMs successful. It's amazing how much better 12+ WRKO has done under iHeart than under Audacy as an example.

Can't wait for WJIB on 720 with 5kw!!!! I very well may be able to pick it up from my house on my Denon TU-680NAB instead just while I'm driving to work.
 
spt87 said:
Noise in stereo - yeah not so much noise but so much great stereo separation!
Click to expand...

Depends on the radio. Receivers today are not what they were 50 years ago. Especially in cars.

My view is there's really no programming I can think of that would cause me to put up with the audio quality of AM. That's just me.
 
TheBigA said:
Depends on the radio. Receivers today are not what they were 50 years ago. Especially in cars.

My view is there's really no programming I can think of that would cause me to put up with the audio quality of AM. That's just me.
Click to expand...
I love listening to an interesting ham radio conversation in AM. Of course, AM is superior when the alternative is single sideband.
 
Haha. I think current radios are more limited bandwidth wise than what stations are transmitting based on what I hear with the Sony XR-A33 in wideband mode. They not but putting out 10khz but more than 5 anyway.

Depends on what you like to listen too. WJIB runs pretty big variety of music which is cool to hear again. Same with WMEX. Yes, you can stream both, but I'd rather listen on the radio.

My newish Ford receiver is decent, not noisy and not as bandwidth limited as some I've heard but the Sony is better on AM. HD capable receivers have to be somewhat decent or the HD won't decode.
 
spt87 said:
Haha. I think current radios are more limited bandwidth wise than what stations are transmitting based on what I hear with the Sony XR-A33 in wideband mode. They not but putting out 10khz but more than 5 anyway.They not but putting out 10khz but more than 5 anyway.
Click to expand...

How does one know how much bandwidth a radio is capable of?

How does one know which stations are limited to 5khz and which are open to 10khz or 15 khz?

Why would a station run ad the lower bandwidth and therefore (?) lower quality?
 
Last edited:
Wimmmex said:
How does one know how much bandwidth a radio is capable of?
How does one know which stations are limited to 5khz and which are open to 10khz or 15 khz?
Why would a station run ad the lower bandwidth and therefore (?) lower quality?
Click to expand...

Surprised no one has the answers (or opinions).
 
Wimmmex said:
How does one know how much bandwidth a radio is capable of?

How does one know which stations are limited to 5khz and which are open to 10khz or 15 khz?

Why would a station run ad the lower bandwidth and therefore (?) lower quality?
Click to expand...

My guesses:

#1: By listening (unless you can find manufacturer specifications). If everything, including static, sounds muddy or muffled, it's probably limited to 5k.

#2: You can only tell by listening on a wideband AM radio, hard to find nowadays.

#3: Maybe cheaper equipment and cheaper to maintain, and wide bandwidth not really necessary for talk programming.
 
TheBigA said:
Are they allowed to hire a couple of younger reporters who might have a different approach to the news? There are stations where the presentation is a lot more mundane, a lot more adult. But you've said that doesn't fit your taste either.

But hey, if it makes you feel better to rail away at people who might get fired in the next round of cuts, rail away.
Click to expand...
In iHeart's "next round of cuts", which occurred in March of this year, it was LAURIE KIRBY who was let go. Experienced news reporter and anchor with a wonderful voice, great delivery, didn't mumble, didn't talk fast, didn't cover fluff. iHeart sure fixed my a$$, didn't they?
 
nowradioguy said:
In iHeart's "next round of cuts", which occurred in March of this year, it was LAURIE KIRBY who was let go. Experienced news reporter and anchor with a wonderful voice, great delivery, didn't mumble, didn't talk fast, didn't cover fluff. iHeart sure fixed my a$$, didn't they?
Click to expand...
If she refused to cover "fluff," that would be insubordination. You're a reporter, you cover what the assignment editor tells you to cover. I assume, though, that this layoff was the result of the deepening depression in radio advertising.
 
I am sure Kirby's layoff was about her salary and not about a refusal to cover a particular type of story. On another note has anyone heard the new evening traffic reporter? I believe he goes by the name Zach Transport. He is god awful.
 
Zach Transport also does the traffic reports during PM drive at WTAG in Worcester. For my ears, I have to agree he’s a very tough listen.
 
vmorrison99 said:
I am sure Kirby's layoff was about her salary and not about a refusal to cover a particular type of story. On another note has anyone heard the new evening traffic reporter? I believe he goes by the name Zach Transport. He is god awful.
Click to expand...

DavidZ said:
Zach Transport also does the traffic reports during PM drive at WTAG in Worcester. For my ears, I have to agree he’s a very tough listen.
Click to expand...
What’s tough to listen to about him?
 
Zach seems so uninterested in doing the traffic reports for WTAG. Most days he just mentions 1 or 2 trouble spots while seeing how fast he can get through the report.

Meanwhile when Jack Harte fills in for him, the reports are thorough, concise, and covers all of the area roads. And best of all, he’s not speed reading.
 


Back
Top Bottom