PLEASE POST RECORDINGS OF HD, particularly AM

[R.F. Burns]

Ok RF, imagine the year was 1987, rather than 2007. How impressed would either of us be by noise-free reception of a 50kw station at 25 miles? I know...lightning crashes. Let's change EVERYTHING, and degrade EVERYTHING for the .0000002 percent of the time when we have thunderstorms!

OK we're in the year 2007 and in this part of the country, thunder storms and static crashes come at least once a week. We being close to large bodies of water, like the Atlantic and the Hudson river. You want static on a daily basis? Try Florida. Also, ground conductivity here is quite poor and that as well as having the front end of most receivers swamped by 10, 50 KW stations on AM alone as well as all the other RF which engulfs this region makes reception of most AM stations difficult at best. Try receiving WCBS or WFAN on the west side highway in Manhattan. There are areas where these 50 KW signals can't reach and the tower is no more than 10 to 15 miles from that location. I remember the days when WABC (another 50K non directional station) ran music and listening to them in wideband mono. They still didn't sound as clean as most FM stations do If we're going back in time, let's go back to 33's and 45's. Hey who needs Cd's? Whether it's real of not people want cleaner sound which these devices do provide even if a scope tells you otherwise.

 

[stevenNOLA]

RF, Speaking of ground conductivity...do you believe good conductivity will help the HD portion to travel further? WWL-870 in New Orleans has amazing ground conductivity...daytime signal from downtown Houston to Panama City, Florida with no holes. (over 600 miles of I-10)

 

[Mike Walker]

You didn't ask me, but I think the ground conductivity WOULD help stations like WWL, IF there were nothing on adjacent channels. But not in the real world! If anything, improved ground conductivity will mean that the interfering signals on adjacent channels will boom in louder, killing HD reception sooner. My guess would be that it'd be a wash...with HD in New Orleans going about as far as it does in less conductive parts of the country. Whattya' think RF?

By the way RF...it's weird that you had trouble getting WABC 10 miles from the tower "back in the day", but HUNDREDS of miles down the east coast I had no trouble at all getting it in North Carolina. Hell, I remember sitting in my driveway in Wilkesboro at 3 in the afternoon listening to Howard Stern on WNBC in the 80s. Ain't AM weird?

 

[stevenNOLA]

Thanks Mike. For the most part, WWL has clear adjacent frequencies.

The only 50kw I've ever heard in HD is WOAI 1200 San Antonio. The HD is reliable out to about 90 miles. I'd venture to say ground conductivity in San Antonio is pretty bad. I live about 35 miles west of Houston (170 miles east of San Antonio) and I can barely hear WOAI during the day.

 

[R.F. Burns]

You didn't ask me, but I think the ground conductivity WOULD help stations like WWL, IF there were nothing on adjacent channels. But not in the real world! If anything, improved ground conductivity will mean that the interfering signals on adjacent channels will boom in louder, killing HD reception sooner. My guess would be that it'd be a wash...with HD in New Orleans going about as far as it does in less conductive parts of the country. Whattya' think RF?

By the way RF...it's weird that you had trouble getting WABC 10 miles from the tower "back in the day", but HUNDREDS of miles down the east coast I had no trouble at all getting it in North Carolina. Hell, I remember sitting in my driveway in Wilkesboro at 3 in the afternoon listening to Howard Stern on WNBC in the 80s. Ain't AM weird?

Not WABC, but WCBS and WFAN (who diplex into the same stick) In NY you can't hear WTIC from Hartford, WBZ from Boston, WWJZ from Mt Holly NJ,or WPHT from Philadelphia. What all these stations have in common is that they are all 50Kw stations. Drive into Hartford during the day and the NY stations sound like locals. Drive into Philadelphia and tune in WLIE (back in the 80's when they were running 250 watts non d, day on 540 Khz from Islip NY) and they were loud and clear as are most of the NY big power stations which sometimes even show up in the ratings down there. It isn't all frequency related it's that there is no place in this country and I'd even say LA can't compare, with as much RF floating around. There are more 50 KW non directional stations in NY (3) than in any other city and we have 10, 50 KW stations in our market alone and that's just the AM's. On FM they're all class B's and every allocation is taken. There are no empy spots on the FM band in NY. It's a very competitive environment. When I have a day off I will try to remember to record some of the HD stations from my GE superradio. I won't use the wide filter because that wouldn't make sense. I'll use it's normal filtering and I can show you what we hear in the NY metro area. I'll also record some stations using the HD radio as a comparison.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Here's a link directly to the audio if you want to download it http://www.theproductionroom.net/wksk.wma

I just downloaded this file... and it's all hiss, if this is AM IBOC... or anything similar... forget it'!

Part 15 AM transmitters sound better that that... although they have less wattage....

The voice track sounds ok, but the music really sucks no high end, and it's tinny....

Just my take on it... of course perhaps on a $300.00 table top HD radio it may sound better... but 97% of radios out there are not HD.

Yes, very raspy, tinney, and hissy. Imagine how much worse they will sound when they go HD and cut their fidelity in half and add more hiss.
Here is a list of AM stations licensed by the FCC to transmit HD:
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/sta_list.pl
Is Mike claiming WKSK is illegally transmitting in HD?
Should WKSK be reported to the FCC for illegal HD operation?

Actually, he was suggesting how well analog AM can sound. This is a recording of an analog broadcast. You would notice this if you read the first post correctly. The poster has never heard AM on HD. Thanks for pointing out that you will seize the opportunity slam anything HD related, no matter what it is... Too bad this is a recording of your beloved analog AM.

I said the WKSK audio file was a poor quality mono recording of an analog station, not HD. Perhaps you misunderstood my meaning. I am not a big fan of analog AM as you falsely claim. But how is adding HD noise and interference, to AM or FM an improvement?
There is virtually no demand by the public to replace their radios with expensive new HD receivers, and there never will be the long lines around the block leading up to the HD radio display, that iBiquity, the cartel, and HD supporters dream about.
On balance, HD radio on AM or FM does far more harm then good, and will help drive listeners away.
At least FMeXtra is digital, simpler, cheaper, full power, and does no harm. A much better alternative for FM then problematic HD Radio.
On AM, HD radio is a disaster. Perhaps someone will popularize an alternative.

 

[Mike Walker]

If that's poor quality audio, you don't know what good audio sounds like. I've worked in radio 33 years. THAT is pretty much what audio sounds like coming straight off the output of the audio processor, before going through the transmitter, tower, reception path, antenna, and radio. The radio passes audio cleanly enough that you can hear tape hiss on the master! From more than 30 miles on a 5kw station, you can hear tape hiss! Since the transmitter is digitally modulated, there is NO audible distortion on bass (on the Harper Valley PTA song), even though modulation is obviously "cranked up to 11". If sound that's transparent enough the transmission and reception end of the system pretty much disappears, ON AM is "poor quality", then hopefully you'll forgive me for weighing that deciding how seriously to take your appraisals of quality.

I've heard people before proclaim that an original master tape was "inferior" to a vinyl lp MADE FROM THAT MASTER. I know exactly how much weight to give such opinions (yawn).

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Here's a link directly to the audio if you want to download it http://www.theproductionroom.net/wksk.wma

I just downloaded this file... and it's all hiss, if this is AM IBOC... or anything similar... forget it'!

Part 15 AM transmitters sound better that that... although they have less wattage....

The voice track sounds ok, but the music really sucks no high end, and it's tinny....

Just my take on it... of course perhaps on a $300.00 table top HD radio it may sound better... but 97% of radios out there are not HD.

Yes, very raspy, tinney, and hissy. Imagine how much worse they will sound when they go HD and cut their fidelity in half and add more hiss.
Here is a list of AM stations licensed by the FCC to transmit HD:
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/sta_list.pl
Is Mike claiming WKSK is illegally transmitting in HD?
Should WKSK be reported to the FCC for illegal HD operation?

Actually, he was suggesting how well analog AM can sound. This is a recording of an analog broadcast. You would notice this if you read the first post correctly. The poster has never heard AM on HD. Thanks for pointing out that you will seize the opportunity slam anything HD related, no matter what it is... Too bad this is a recording of your beloved analog AM.

I said the WKSK audio file was a poor quality mono recording of an analog station, not HD. Perhaps you misunderstood my meaning. I am not a big fan of analog AM as you falsely claim. But how is adding HD noise and interference, to AM or FM an improvement?
There is virtually no demand by the public to replace their radios with expensive new HD receivers, and there never will be the long lines around the block leading up to the HD radio display, that iBiquity, the cartel, and HD supporters dream about.
On balance, HD radio on AM or FM does far more harm then good, and will help drive listeners away.
At least FMeXtra is digital, simpler, cheaper, full power, and does no harm. A much better alternative for FM then problematic HD Radio.
On AM, HD radio is a disaster. Perhaps someone will popularize an alternative.

The heading for this section is " Re: PLEASE POST RECORDINGS OF HD, particularly AM" under which Mike posted the distorted, noisy, analog, mono, WKSK audio file. Not HD, not even good quality analog AM.
Mike seems to have posted this file as an example of "high quality" AM. Now Mike is making excuses for the poor quality, hiss, distortion, midrange dominance, and excessively high recording level. You claim this file of WKSK is a model for high quality AM, then you make many excuses for the poor quality of the recording you posted.
Mike, I am disappointed with your idea of "high quality". Even for a recording of an AM analog station, this recording is a poor example of quality. It is distorted!

Mike said:

If that's poor quality audio, you don't know what good audio sounds like. I've worked in radio 33 years. THAT is pretty much what audio sounds like coming straight off the output of the audio processor, before going through the transmitter, tower, reception path, antenna, and radio. The radio passes audio cleanly enough that you can hear tape hiss on the master! From more than 30 miles on a 5kw station, you can hear tape hiss! Since the transmitter is digitally modulated, there is NO audible distortion on bass (on the Harper Valley PTA song), even though modulation is obviously "cranked up to 11". If sound that's transparent enough the transmission and reception end of the system pretty much disappears, ON AM is "poor quality", then hopefully you'll forgive me for weighing that deciding how seriously to take your appraisals of quality.

No way Mike. Quality audio from the output of a good audio processor at the station sounds as good as, if not better then FM.
If the station has excessive tape hiss, and the recording is distorted, and has poor frequency response, why use it as an example of good quality, when it is not?

 

[Mike Walker]

HAVE YOU EVER HEARD AM AT 30 miles from the station transparent enough that you could hear tape hiss? Not pops and crackles, or adjacent channel interference, but TAPE HISS! I live in Boomer, NC...probably 35 or more air miles from WKSK's tower in West Jefferson NC. And the station doesn't have "excessive tape hiss"...the hiss is on the master tape from the commercial (obviously recorded on an analog reel to reel), and on the 30+ year old recording of Harper Valley PTA.

Are you a radio engineer Supercaster? You say the audio quality coming out of a process or is "as good as or better than FM". Based upon what experience? Do you know that AM audio is limited (today) to 9khz? So there is NO audio on the recording above 9khz. But GET THE HELL OVER it being in mono. WKSK's audio was stereo until January when they put in the new transmitter, (digital) processor and antenna. They didn't put C-Quam back in, because this station has been preparing for digital, or "HD" as it's now called for a decade, and they new AM stereo and HD aren't compatible. But they have a fully-functional AM stereo exciter sitting in the rack.

Why am I so hung up on WKSK? Because I have known the owners for more than 30 years. It's a station I have actually worked at parttime (after I decided to quit reporting for work daily at a radio station due to my poor vision...retinitis pigmentosa). I KNOW how quality conscious these people are, despite the fact that it's a tiny town. They are LIVE all day long...at a standalone AM in a tiny town. Obviously that's expensive, but they CARE ABOUT THEIR COMMUNITY! When they can afford it, and are convinced the technology is right, they will go digital. NOW, this is what today's best AM gear sounds like, because that's what's in the airchain at WKSK...today's VERY BEST AM GEAR. The transmitter, processor, and antenna are all about TWO MONTHS OLD! This is state of the art audio, received on a high quality wideband radio.

Perhaps it's the aggressive compression/limiting that you don't like. Seldom is an am raido transparent enough that you can really hear how the station "preps" their audio. Remember, AM stations are fighting a constant battle with background noise. The higher the average modulation level, the lower the background noise...and the higher the average power level. So if you modulate aggressively, your coverage is extended, AND you're listenable to a greater distance because you're so much LOUDER than the background noise. If you really are familiar with radio engineering, you know that most FM stations are aggressively processed as well. But if you can't hear that this processing comes with no distortion penalty, then you can't hear very well. Radio guys, tell him...THIS IS DAMN GOOD AM SOUND received on a consumer radio at 30+ miles!

You CAN get them in stereo, of you like over the internet. Here's a link http://www.live365.com/cgi-bin/mini...st&site=pro/caddellbroadcast&tm=1154139890859

I enjoy non-radio people lecturing me about broadcast sound quality about as much as Christian Conservatives lecturing me about science. And I take them about as seriously.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

HAVE YOU EVER HEARD AM AT 30 miles from the station transparent enough that you could hear tape hiss? Not pops and crackles, or adjacent channel interference, but TAPE HISS! I live in Boomer, NC...probably 35 or more air miles from WKSK's tower in West Jefferson NC. And the station doesn't have "excessive tape hiss"...the hiss is on the master tape from the commercial (obviously recorded on an analog reel to reel), and on the 30+ year old recording of Harper Valley PTA.

Are you a radio engineer Supercaster? You say the audio quality coming out of a process or is "as good as or better than FM". Based upon what experience? Do you know that AM audio is limited (today) to 9khz? So there is NO audio on the recording above 9khz. But GET THE HELL OVER it being in mono. WKSK's audio was stereo until January when they put in the new transmitter, (digital) processor and antenna. They didn't put C-Quam back in, because this station has been preparing for digital, or "HD" as it's now called for a decade, and they new AM stereo and HD aren't compatible. But they have a fully-functional AM stereo exciter sitting in the rack.

Why am I so hung up on WKSK? Because I have known the owners for more than 30 years. It's a station I have actually worked at parttime (after I decided to quit reporting for work daily at a radio station due to my poor vision...retinitis pigmentosa). I KNOW how quality conscious these people are, despite the fact that it's a tiny town. They are LIVE all day long...at a standalone AM in a tiny town. Obviously that's expensive, but they CARE ABOUT THEIR COMMUNITY! When they can afford it, and are convinced the technology is right, they will go digital. NOW, this is what today's best AM gear sounds like, because that's what's in the airchain at WKSK...today's VERY BEST AM GEAR. The transmitter, processor, and antenna are all about TWO MONTHS OLD! This is state of the art audio, received on a high quality wideband radio.

Perhaps it's the aggressive compression/limiting that you don't like. Seldom is an am raido transparent enough that you can really hear how the station "preps" their audio. Remember, AM stations are fighting a constant battle with background noise. The higher the average modulation level, the lower the background noise...and the higher the average power level. So if you modulate aggressively, your coverage is extended, AND you're listenable to a greater distance because you're so much LOUDER than the background noise. If you really are familiar with radio engineering, you know that most FM stations are aggressively processed as well. But if you can't hear that this processing comes with no distortion penalty, then you can't hear very well. Radio guys, tell him...THIS IS DAMN GOOD AM SOUND received on a consumer radio at 30+ miles!

You CAN get them in stereo, of you like over the internet. Here's a link http://www.live365.com/cgi-bin/mini...st&site=pro/caddellbroadcast&tm=1154139890859

I enjoy non-radio people lecturing me about broadcast sound quality about as much as Christian Conservatives lecturing me about science. And I take them about as seriously.

The recording you posted of WKSK, sounds like crap even for AM mono. No excuses are acceptable. You represented the recording as high quality. It isn't even close.
As for all your false accusations, misinformation, and personal attacks, anyone who has listened to the audio file can judge for themselves if this represents high quality audio.

 

[radiopilot]

Supercaster... You are so correct... they distort the AM recording to push their point of view...

I just recorded this snippet on my area AM radio station:

http://home.earthlink.net/~nrios/nikon/AM630_Savannah.mp3

The wav file sounds much better but too large to upload... notice how quiet the passages are between voice and music... this is not HD AM and yet it's high quality AM... Also the reciever is a simple SONY STR-D515 FM/AM with a 10 foot wire for the AM antenna... this is something anyone can do...

Why the need for HD on AM when all you need is good quality radio studios with decent equipment broadcasting decent quality content?

Radiopilot

 

[Tom Wells]

I critiqued the WKSK clip in a different thread, but I will summarize here, the highs just aren't there, but I beleive the radio's
IF passband is too narrow to let us really hear what WKSK sounds like (I hope).

I hope their new transmitter will be efficient and trouble free, but like most new-think engineering, it likely disregards the old tried and true
RF designs and uses some sort of pulse width modulation. It will never sound the same as the old iron core modulated beasts.
Semiconductor characteristics and natural byproducts of PWM are "unmusical" at best.

The "non-linearity" enforced by hysteresis in high-level modulation is a good deal of what gives perceived "punch".
I wish my Part 15 was high-level modulated, I know exactly how much punch I lack without it.

Regarding the Harper Valley PTA audio, because I don't "know" how the other stuff would/should/could sound, WKSK's audio sounds "overhandled". Think new vs old dollar bill. There is no telling how many remixes, storage modes, and compressions
have happened to that audio, but I can safely say that would have sounded better if they'd just played a dang 45 straight
into the audio in.

I think it was RF Burns who mentioned crystal sets and the sound off
pickup loops for monitoring...There is no substitute for LESS, when audio reproduction quality matters.


Thank you radiopilot for posting a clip where the station still runs audio to 10khz.
It certainly is a lot crisper and sounds well balanced. This station has no heavy woolens on their audio.
Was the radio tuned "spot on" or offset a few khz?

I am trying to decide whether to record straight off a detector, or at point after a -60db 10 khz notch filter.
After adding such notch filters to all my active radios, I discovered that some stations actually DO have audio happening
above 10kc but you can't hear it until the heterodyne is notched out.
The effect is dramatic if you are the kind of person who listens closely. It almost seems like it must be an active filter, since sibilants
sound so much purer when the squeal is gone.

And also, I think Mr Burns was going to record some files but set the bandwidth to narrow, because otherwise it wouldn't make any sense?
I don't get it. We want to demonstrate the highest possible quality. I won't hear the fildelity of a station OR sideband hiss if
the IF is set narrow. IF passband must be 20 KHZ wide to get 10 khz audio and cheapy bedside clock radios are this wide, too.

Otherwise, I might well use any communication receiver (and a Q multiplier!)to show how narrow a slice I can cut.
This was the "sleight of hand" ibiquity used in the inception of this all.
First, define a set of poorly engineered radios. Second, portray these as "typical" to the FCC.
Third, show how adding "white noise" between 5,000-25,000 audio will have neglible effect on these radios.
Fourth, start the promotional dept up.

But I still presume that AM (broadcast) should sound as clear as FM.
It is the standard I hold my AM Pt 15 to. When I rebroadcast from a local FM, the result is indistguishable on high-fidelity
AM/FM radios, properly tuned.

 

[Mike Walker]

Unfortunately Tom, it's not legal to broadcast audio beyond 9khz. THAT'S the conundrum for hi-fi AM. We can both remember a day when AM "sizzled". You should've (maybe you did) heard "13 Big WISE" in Asheville in the 70s or 80s, "61, Big Ways" Charlotte, "13 The Best Music 80 WTOB Winston Salem, or (insert your favorite local AM music station from "back in the day" here). Too bad those days are gone!

WKBC AM in North Wilkesboro has a GREAT sound, but their modulation is even hotter than 'KSK. It distorts on some (poor quality) radios...like the new one Radio Shack sells...supposedly a digital replacement for the SuperRadio III.

Now Part 15 radio, that's just FUN! How far do you go? Able to serve your neighborhood? Of course you could throw away those highs that only you can hear (with your broadband radio), pump up the mod, and double your coverage, whatever it is. TRASH RULES! (unfortunately!)

 

[radiopilot]

Tom... the radio was spot on 630 AM, digital tuner... and yes it does sound very good for AM.

My AMT3000 Part15 AM transmitter sounds this good or better when I happen to use it everynow and then, and the audio is fanstastic... if HD can live up to this audio quality they might have a fighting chance... but if the story is true of the hiss and annoying bandwidth limitations, who needs it?

I also listen to the station on a Grundig 350 portable.. it sounds even better.. here is a clip:

http://home.earthlink.net/~nrios/nikon/AM630_Grundig_350.mp3

As you can hear.. this is not bad for AM and once again... what is HD offering that can't be had now?

Radiopilot

 

[Mike Walker]

That does sound good, but my S350 sounds quite a bit brighter. Wonder if it's because my local stations are music. Believe it or not, the closest AM talk to me is about 40 miles. Music lives on AM around here!

How far do you get with your part 15, RadioPilot? I've been thinkng about cranking up a Part 15. Do you actually go far enough to serve a few families, or is it mostly around your property for fun?

 

[radiopilot]

That does sound good, but my S350 sounds quite a bit brighter. Wonder if it's because my local stations are music. Believe it or not, the closest AM talk to me is about 40 miles. Music lives on AM around here!

How far do you get with your part 15, RadioPilot? I've been thinkng about cranking up a Part 15. Do you actually go far enough to serve a few families, or is it mostly around your property for fun?

Mike

My S350 does a very good job of picking up some close AM's here in Savannah, also when I want to DX some stations close to Atlanta that play music I like, I plug an 150' wire aerial antenna plus ground and it picks them up very well... Atlanta is better than 250+ miles from Savannah. The FM here in Savannah comes in crisp and clean.. no artifacts.

As far as my Part15 AM .. I use the SStran AMT3000 and it's on top of my house about ten feet above my roof line with radials (96 radials each 65 +/- feet long from the center) and it's in salty soil (off an Island chain) so the conductivity is extremely excellent... it would have to be in saltwater to be better...

I have done some drive tests and get somewhere between 2-3 miles... don't know how well the 'indoor' reception is but the car reception on digital radios 'capture' and lock on the signal...

When it rains the signal is much stronger... My island is small... so it does not need to be more than Part 15.

Radiopilot

 

[Mike Walker]

There are those who claim that kind of coverage isn't possible on a Part 15, RadioPilot. I'm not one of 'em! I've heard some pretty miraculous things from "fleapower" statons. Today I'm battling a loud 'pop, pop, pop" repeated about every five seconds. My neighbor has turned on their electric fence. One of the AWFUL things about living in the country. I finally convinced the last people who owned the house not to use that damn thing, and my AM reception was great for years. NOW, the popping is back.

 

[radiopilot]

There are those who claim that kind of coverage isn't possible on a Part 15, RadioPilot. I'm not one of 'em! I've heard some pretty miraculous things from "fleapower" statons.

Well those that believe it does not go far are the ones that never have tried Part15 correctly, or they sit in front of computers 'modeling' waveforms and terrain coverage, etc.

Fact is most don't have very good grounds or soil conductivity.. in fact there was a Part15 broadcaster that operated his unit on top of a pavilion in Tybee Island and his ground was the actual 'seawater', a lightning stake for the pavilion and I could hear his station 6 miles away... granted this was over sea marsh but that's how far his little 100 mw transmitter (Rangemaster) could be heard!

I'm in that same situation except I'm in closer to more 'noise' and interference, but those are the true facts... if I could 'sync' more transmitter together say five or six, it would be a solid 4-5 miles of strong signal!

You could get that popping signal away by complaining to the FCC if it interferes with TV reception.

Radiopilot

 

[Mike Walker]

Radiopilot there was a time when the FCC would have dealt with things like the "popping" sound from my neighbor's fence. Trust me...those days are long-since past! The enforcement division of the FCC is a paper tiger, and has been for a decade and a half at least. It's probably bad luck to admit this, but in 33 years in radio, 24 of those reporting to work at a radio station every day, I have NEVER, EVER been present for an FCC inspection. Not once. The first station I worked at had been inspected a couple of months before I started, and fined because of some looney-tunes transmitter log entries...so they were anal about making sure everyone could read and UNDERSTAND the meters. We were even tested on it. But that's about as close as it ever got.

There were numerous "sightings" in various markets "Dude, the Feds just hit WXYZ in the next town over. We may be next!" But no such luck! When I first moved into this home, my neighbor had an illegal cb rig that not only screwed up tv and radio reception, I actually couldn't use my telephone. I tried to reason with him, but he was abusive. So I filed a complaint with the FCC. They asked him to respond. HE DIDN'T (BIG MISTAKE...guys when Uncle Sam requests a response, IT'S NOT OPTIONAL!) He was finally fined...FOR NOT RESPONDING. Hurricane Hugo took down his CB tower in 1989, and he never rebuilt. NOBODY EVER INSPECTED HIS STATION, despite over a year of back and forth with the FCC. But the fine for not responding effectively took the wind out of his sails.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Here are some actual off air recordings, not the faked crap we have been subjected to here before:
http://www.neilschubert.com/HDRadio/hdradio1.html