sound quality overall on fm

[smashedcd]

ok we know the processing on b97 sucks now but tonight i listened to wfmf. jesus what the heck is up over there? they sound awful! the processing is like over modulated and wayyyy tooo loud!!??? the stations i listened to that sounded good were klove, [email protected], tangi 96.5, 99.1 kxkc, 101 wnoe, majic 101.9, old school 102.9.country legends 107.3, and 104 the x (104.9)...and the absolute worst were..diva 92.3 and 103.3, wfmf, b97,wynk, and eagle 98.1...what has happened to radio? not just content. the sq overall. wayy back in the early to mid 80s all these stations sounded great. back in the vinyl days! now with digital jukeboxes they all sound awful..anyone else notice big diffrences in all these stations?

 

[Doctor_Technical]

Whoo... that's a big question.One with many answers, none of which fit every situation.Bona fides: I have been a broadcast engineer in Baton Rouge and New Orleans off-and-on since 1978. Last gig you'd recognize: Chief Engineer of CC/NOLA circa '97-'04. Been in the studios/transmitters of most every signal you mention, have known both engineers and programmers all over the area.And to the last one, the people I have met who make and execute audio/signal/processing decisions all deeply care about the stations they represent -- all subscribe to the truth that the only thing that matters is what comes out of the box -- and all are sincere in their belief that they are doing the right thing for their station and their listeners.But each station, and in turn the people who represent it, faces a different mix of internal and external metrics upon which the decision of what knob to turn, or not, is based.Some are obvious: as for Entercom (B97, 101.9, others), it is a wonder that they are on the air at all. Their office building has been abandoned since Katrina, and they are having to move to a new building with relatively short notice. Despite what large equipment vendors and post-Telcom96 license-consolidators would like to have management believe, you still cannot just buy a complete new studio or transmitter facility. In other words, radio (and TV) stations are still hand-built, and the process of moving a station -- without unduly breaking any ongoing operations -- can be compared to a game of "pick up sticks... then put them back together down the street in the exact same way you that found them".I've not listened to 'B with a critical ear recently, but it would not surprise me if the process of leapfrogging studios and STL equipment has them running on some form of temporary setup, and as such things may go kaflooey for a while. As for other stations that you perceive as over-processed or otherwise unpleasantly presented, all I can say is that "I feel your pain". 20+ years ago, when LSU's WPRG (KLSU) installed the first CD players in the South and all were marvelling at the sound, my letter published in Broadcasting magazine stated that this harbinger of the coming digital revolution would not mean better audio; but rather, due to all stations using the essentailly the same and equal equipment, the only differentiator would be how much and how loud each station would crank up its processing.There are external factors that cause a station to turn the knob to 11. By the luck of the draw, some have transmitters in unfortunate locations such that a wall-of-sound is required just to overcome the underlying multipath and general signal crud found in urban areas. Others face stupid-crazy competetive situations. I note that many on your "urk"-list have formats aimed to an older (non-teen) audience who merely use radio as background noise, and thus the stations require every bit of 'oomph' to just to rise above the other sounds of life. And I don't need to repeat what the looming dreadnaught of iPods/Streaming/etc. means to youth-oriented formats. Even as I write this, I am 100% satisfied to be listening to "What Would Willie Do?" segueyed into Marshall Crenshaw into Patty Griffin's "Blue Sky" on 2" laptop speakers, via the 28 kb/s stream of the greatest station on the planet (Austin's AAA KGSR, http://www.kgsr.com).Let's face it, we're radio fans -- we're here, right? -- and not representative of the normal (has a life) listener.But let me give you some good news: the people who populate radio still love it, still enjoy running out to their cars and cranking the volume. Just in the past few weeks, I have asked on-air staff at several of the stations on your list about the currently hot-and-new artists/songs in their respective formats, and was quite informed and entertained by their long answers. The MD of 104.9 is a good man, and a friend of mine, and I know that he cares about his music: the sound, the snap, the feel of every song.A note: we engineers / radio people often use the escape clause of "it's your radio", but sometimes it really is. There is a reason they call it FM: cause it's Freakin' Magic. OK, old and bad joke, but all sorts of obscure black-magic can happen to any part of the broadcast chain: from the studio, to the transmitter, to the weather, to your radio, to the environment and place in which you are listening. If you want to hear radio how the people who set up stations hear it, buy a pair of Sony MDR-V6 headphones and match it to a Sony Radio Walkman, preferably one that can drive the V6 cans such as an SRF-M35 (now superceeded by the M37V). Both the radio and cans can be found at Best Buy. Yes, they're loud, but we all a bit deaf from too many years of wearing headphones.And besides, it's fun when you crank it up.Enjoy.Paul E. Burt, VP of Broadcast OperationsGlobal Security Systems, an RDS-messaging company1230 Raymond Road, #600Jackson, MS 39204

 

[bayoublue2]

Great explaination Paul! Pretty much every aspect of how the sound gets lost between the source & the stereo. Aside from the technical end, don't you think the business end of radio today has their heads up their asses? How many people have RDS capabilities in their car or home stereos? Not many but an inventive idea because most stations don't backsell their music. Most websites have "now playing" features, which ties into you. You deal with the corporation end of things. They have but one thing in mind, the all mighty dollar. And when "time spent listening" goes down, they wonder why. It's the product they present. Maybe one day, when they pull their heads out and come up for air, they'll realize it's not their butts that stink but the programming.There's too many options for listeners to get their music. Corporate radio doesn't believe the listeners will spend the money for satellite radio or new head units and that is the fartherest thing from the truth. They want variety, which they aren't getting over the airways. I bought a Sony with a head that has an aux jack on the face plate. I plug my little 1GB player in and I listen to want the programmers insist I don't like. My next step will be Sirius. I'd rather pay than be force-feed.Hope you're enjoying Jackson. I guess Scott Simmons is still anchoring at WAPT-TV?

 

[sawtooth_mcmull]

personally, when a station is loud, it makes them sound like their one step above the competition. there are ways to make a station loud and ways they can give some decent amount of compression, while still keeping it listenable.the fact that entercom has made two or three changes in the past few months to the processing at b97, is getting wild. maybe their testing different settings?? who knows??they made it loud and punchy with a vivid presence. something that hasn't been done in quite a few years on b and it sounded pretty good. many of my friends noticed the change and like it...... said it made them sound different from others..... a different sound than just popping a cd in and pressing play. now, it seems they backed off the loudness (again), for a crisp sound that is way too sibilant and hardly any response from low frequencies. there's a very slow release time (or too much gating), so it takes forever for the gain to recover after loud passages. i know you used to have to sacrafice one for another....... clean & crisp OR loud & punchy. but with today's new processing equipment, there are ways to achieve both. i've heard quite a few stations like this in dallas, mobile, and even new york!maybe the changes coming to them post-katrina will allow them to buy new equipment that will make them "rise to the occasion." we'll see i guess.....i understand everyone has different opinions as to the way a station should sound. as stated before, there are ways to achieve both sounds with today's processing equipment. lets hope everyone could be better pleased down the road. in the meantime, we have to deal with mediocre processing adjustments at some our favorite stations, with no say-so whatsoever. sad, but true. sawtooth

 

[smashedcd]

the reason i am bringing this up is in my truck i have a cheap stereo with cheap speakers. the over modulated stations sound horrible! while others..wnoe, wrno, majic 102 all sound good. i have a boombox from 1981..i love the radio , it has a signal strength meter on it and it picks up stations very well. but the spreakers are 25 years old and on the stations mentioned..wfmf being the worst the speakers rattle and distort. but they dont on wnoe or wrno...thats the reason i even brought this up. lound and punchy sounds highly distorted!!btw the tape deck on the boombox sounds better than my cd boombox does