| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Can Digital AM ever sound this good?
Take a listen to the AM Stereo airchecks on this site:
http://www.1240keva.com/airchecks/ KEVA is an 880-watt Class C station in Evanston, Wyoming, using a vintage McMartin vacuum tube (valve) transmitter and a complete 1983-era audio chain: a CRL AM Stereo Preparation Processor, a CRL AM Stereo Maxtrix Processor, and a Motorola C-Quam AM Stereo Exciter. The audio in the MP3 clips was recorded from KEVA's Motorola AM Stereo Modulation Monitor, so you are hearing KEVA exactly as they sound on the air -- not from a direct feed from their audio board. Now, for those of you who have heard IBOC or DRM... can digital AM ever sound this good? I don't think so... there's only so much quality you can squeeze out of a 20 to 36 kbps data stream. At this point, neither IBOC nor DRM have managed to eliminate the swishy, gritty, phasey, heavily artifacted "28.8K RealAudio Web-Cast" type of sound from their digital audio. And except for a MAJOR revolution in the science of "lossy" audio compression, I don't think they ever will. Digital does have its advantages... but not in AM audio quality! |
Salutations:
WBRW wrote: Take a listen to the AM Stereo airchecks on this site: http://www.1240keva.com/airchecks/ KEVA is an 880-watt Class C station in Evanston, Wyoming, using a vintage McMartin vacuum tube (valve) transmitter and a complete 1983-era audio chain: a CRL AM Stereo Preparation Processor, a CRL AM Stereo Maxtrix Processor, and a Motorola C-Quam AM Stereo Exciter. The audio in the MP3 clips was recorded from KEVA's Motorola AM Stereo Modulation Monitor, so you are hearing KEVA exactly as they sound on the air -- not from a direct feed from their audio board. Now, for those of you who have heard IBOC or DRM... can digital AM ever sound this good? I don't think so... there's only so much quality you can squeeze out of a 20 to 36 kbps data stream. At this point, neither IBOC nor DRM have managed to eliminate the swishy, gritty, phasey, heavily artifacted "28.8K RealAudio Web-Cast" type of sound from their digital audio. And except for a MAJOR revolution in the science of "lossy" audio compression, I don't think they ever will. Digital does have its advantages... but not in AM audio quality! I agree broadly with your conclusions regarding IBOC/DRM - however - you are incorrect in labelling low kbps RealAudio as being completely awful.. It depends on the site specification regarding the codex and how carefully the site administrator works on the sound objects/transaction model prior to conversion.. I'm generating very close to AM stereo quality RealAudio at fixed 20kbs without that 'bottom of the well' sound or any buffer problems on low speed connections world-wide - have a poke around the site below.. I run 40-45 streams per 1mbs of outbound pipe and still feed a general site through the same server head.. I have picked up a number of wireless/mobile users over the past year given that my feed doesn't overload their available bandwidth at the CPU while still providing a pretty sound quality at G2+ and I have been suggesting on and off that WiFi may provide for a better over all software based receiver model.. I can do the same with video feeds - but that limits the feeds to about 20 streams per 1mbs or pipe and advanced Flash/SMIL falls somewhere around 30 feeds per 1mbs outbound.. I apologize and say again that I'm not really a RealAudio zealot or anything - I can't even get them to list my little bitcaster on their site.. But credit where it is due - it's a pretty good codex and multi-media streaming solution overall.. Broadly ported to *many* operating systems and codex too.. I wonder now if the same model applies to IBOC/DRM.. Can you force minimum kbps before accepting transmission as viable? If so - does it improve the quality at the receiver head while limiting some of the problems you have outlined? A LOT of the complaints related to RealAudio have MUCH more to do with bitcasters cheaping out, not really understanding the details at the server/codex or trying to mess around client side for the marketing bulls rather than anything particularly wrong with the particular multi-media solution itself.. -- J Dexter - webmaster - http://www.dexterdyne.org/ all tunes - no cookies no subscription no weather no ads no news no phone in - RealAudio 8+ Required - all the Time Radio Free Dexterdyne Top Tune o'be-do-da-day Sinatra Martin Davis - Ain't That A Kick in the Head http://www.dexterdyne.org/888/036.RAM |
Can Digital AM ever sound good?
Not as good as analog. Analog cell phones sound better than digital cell phones. Analog Laser Discs look better than digital DVDs. Analog cable looks and sounds better than digital cable. Why would digital AM sound better than analog AM? |
|
WBRW wrote:
The audio in the MP3 clips was recorded from KEVA's Motorola AM Stereo Modulation Monitor, so you are hearing KEVA exactly as they sound on the air -- not from a direct feed from their audio board. plug If you're looking for the guy who made the recordings, he hangs out at utahradionews.com /plug |
"Jake Brodsky" wrote in message ...
The beauty of digital broadcasting is that it works better overall in a wider variety of conditions and the radio doesn't have to be outrageously large, heavy, expensive, or high maintenance. TRANSLATION: You will learn to like digital broadcasting because we can provide it very cheaply, and we're looking for numbers, not quality. |
But (and I can't believe this hasn't been argued before....but then I've been gone
for a while)....IBOC is the WRONG way to do this, on AM or FM. Frankly, given the way the broadcast industry has handled audio processing and programming, it really won't make a damn bit of difference whether it;s IBOC or in a new service - it'll still sound like crap. I've said for a long time now that current owners of any broadcast operation shouldn't be permitted to apply for, let alone be granted, a new digital license. Of course, it may just be this concern that U-S broadacasters have opted for IBOC in the first place, since they already "own" the allocation. Less competition. AM is dead, FM is dying, and they can have their IBOC in its dying days. In the end the only broadcasting left will be the satellite-subscription services, and you'll need to pay for that, just like everything else worth watching or listening to. -- For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!- "Jake Brodsky" wrote in message ... On 14 Aug 2003 14:20:24 GMT, (WBRW) wrote: Digital does have its advantages... but not in AM audio quality! Sigh. There are those who can show better performance using vinyl records than a CD recording, and there are those who can show really good performance with a tube amplifier. --BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT. Unless you're really close to this broadcast station and your AM receiver is of unquestionable quality, you'll never know the difference. The beauty of digital broadcasting is that it works better overall in a wider variety of conditions and the radio doesn't have to be outrageously large, heavy, expensive, or high maintenance. Don't misunderstand me, this station probably is quite an achievement. Unfortunately its an achievement that will hardly get noticed but for maybe a handful of listeners. That's the unfortunate fact of life. The halls of technological progress are littered with high performance efforts like these... Jake Brodsky "Never mind the Turing Test, what about the Turing Graduates?" |
Joe Blow wrote:
Analog cable looks and sounds better than digital cable. And both look terrible compared to over-the-air DTV, which can far exceed the quality of analog cable or analog broadcast. As for digital cable -- as overcompressed as it typically is, it should hardly be used as an example of what digital is capable of. |
"Jake Brodsky" wrote in message ... The beauty of digital broadcasting is that it works better overall in a wider variety of conditions and the radio doesn't have to be outrageously large, heavy, expensive, or high maintenance. Weird claims. Digital broadcasting does not affect the size, weight, or maintenance of a radio. It may increase the price. The digital signal is certainly is more fragile than AM. Analog AM smoothly fades into the interference and noise - digital quits. In fact digital may increase the weight of a battery-powered radio because of the current drain of the digital processing chips - at least in early versions. The size of a radio is determined largely by how good you want it to sound. |
In article , Tom Desmond
writes Joe Blow wrote: Analog cable looks and sounds better than digital cable. And both look terrible compared to over-the-air DTV, which can far exceed the quality of analog cable or analog broadcast. Well you must have some terrible analogue signals where you are if you reckon that DTV is better!.. Our off air analogue from Sandy Heath out does DTV all the time and the NICAM sound is better that the MPEG equivalent.. As for digital cable -- as overcompressed as it typically is, it should hardly be used as an example of what digital is capable of. -- Tony Sayer |
The concern of analog supporter is not what digital is capable of but what
it invariably devolves into, a mechanism for adding saleable minutes at the expense of audio or video fidelity. Jerome "Tom Desmond" wrote in message ... Joe Blow wrote: Analog cable looks and sounds better than digital cable. And both look terrible compared to over-the-air DTV, which can far exceed the quality of analog cable or analog broadcast. As for digital cable -- as overcompressed as it typically is, it should hardly be used as an example of what digital is capable of. |
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Tom Desmond writes Joe Blow wrote: Analog cable looks and sounds better than digital cable. And both look terrible compared to over-the-air DTV, which can far exceed the quality of analog cable or analog broadcast. Well you must have some terrible analogue signals where you are if you reckon that DTV is better!.. Our off air analogue from Sandy Heath out does DTV all the time and the NICAM sound is better that the MPEG equivalent.. As for digital cable -- as overcompressed as it typically is, it should hardly be used as an example of what digital is capable of. -- Tony Sayer It think that I may have written "And both look terrible compared to over-the-air DTV, which can far exceed the quality of analog cable or analog broadcast." And that is true ... OTA DTV looks astoundingly better than analog cable or broadcast. Really. There is simply no quibble possible. Of course I was referring to the situation in the United States (or Australia) where we have HDTV, not in backward places like Europe. Doug McDonald |
On 18 Aug 2003 14:23:26 GMT, "Bob Haberkost"
wrote: AM is dead, FM is dying, and they can have their IBOC in its dying days. In the end the only broadcasting left will be the satellite-subscription services, and you'll need to pay for that, just like everything else worth watching or listening to. How will the satellite services find the space to serve every community with the news and local information they need? Virtually every community has a relatively local station. Whether they actually provide service is another matter. Rural areas, I doubt, have repeaters, so localization can't be done that way even if the FCC allows it. Then the repeater becomes a radio station (as cookie cutter as you could ever imagine) at a diffferent frequency. During the recent blackout I listened to WINS. Once WINS is gone, will the satellite providers provide an identical service to me? I didn't go to CNN (though WINS carries CNN among other networks). CNN or the satellites can tell me what's happening across the country but couldn't possibly support the cost of all the local news departments (yes, they're dwindling) for every market. Who is going to tell me which subway lines are running or where there might be food. Please don't tell me wireless Internet because the cell site UPSs ran out of power a couple of hours into the blackout. No cell service. My phone switched to analog, then the dreaded "no service" message appeared. Here the outage lasted 29 hours. Does every translator have a generator capable of that fuel duty cycle and where will the fuel be stored. Gas stations had fuel but no pumps working. As you can imagine, New York has extrememly strict rules about fuel storage and handling. I can't even bring a camp stove propane tank through a tunnel. It's a felony if you're caught, according to the NYFD. If I'm renting cell site space to Verizon I don't want a gas tank in the building. Clearly, the weren't running on natural gas. I believe all the news services on both satellite services are pass-throughs. I found it funny that TV stations stayed on the air with virtually no operating receivers. They were talking to themselves. Rich |
In article , Doug McDonald
writes tony sayer wrote: In article , Tom Desmond writes Joe Blow wrote: Analog cable looks and sounds better than digital cable. And both look terrible compared to over-the-air DTV, which can far exceed the quality of analog cable or analog broadcast. Well you must have some terrible analogue signals where you are if you reckon that DTV is better!.. Our off air analogue from Sandy Heath out does DTV all the time and the NICAM sound is better that the MPEG equivalent.. As for digital cable -- as overcompressed as it typically is, it should hardly be used as an example of what digital is capable of. -- Tony Sayer It think that I may have written "And both look terrible compared to over-the-air DTV, which can far exceed the quality of analog cable or analog broadcast." And that is true ... OTA DTV looks astoundingly better than analog cable or broadcast. Really. There is simply no quibble possible. Of course I was referring to the situation in the United States (or Australia) where we have HDTV, not in backward places like Europe. Doug McDonald Well he would say that, wouldn't he!.. -- Tony Sayer |
On 19 Aug 2003 14:21:25 GMT, "R J Carpenter"
wrote: "Jake Brodsky" wrote in message ... The beauty of digital broadcasting is that it works better overall in a wider variety of conditions and the radio doesn't have to be outrageously large, heavy, expensive, or high maintenance. Weird claims. No. Market forces will make this happen. Digital broadcasting does not affect the size, weight, or maintenance of a radio. It may increase the price. The digital signal is certainly is more fragile than AM. Analog AM smoothly fades into the interference and noise - digital quits. Initially a digital radio will cost more. I don't disagree with that. Digital signals may or may not be more fragile than AM. They can certainly ride much closer to the noise floor than an AM signal can. They don't suffer from background skip causing the carrier to flutter. They don't put crap out of the speaker when selective fading hits --they squelch instead. Most people would see those features as acceptable tradeoffs. In fact digital may increase the weight of a battery-powered radio because of the current drain of the digital processing chips - at least in early versions. In early versions, you'd be right. Have you looked at the size and performance of PCS phones lately? No, they don't sound as good as analog cellular phones. But they're close enough that nobody cares about the difference. The size of a radio is determined largely by how good you want it to sound. ....And the program's desirability will directly determine if anyone will bother turning this thing on in the first place. If you want a CD of your brother in law's band, you're not going to hear it on the radio anyway. The bottom line: just because a certain degree of performance is possible doesn't mean it is desirable by the general public. Dare I say it: Mediocrity rules. If it didn't, do you think Bill Gates would be a multi-billionare? Jake Brodsky "Never mind the Turing Test, what about the Turing Graduates?" |
Jake Brodsky wrote:
On 19 Aug 2003 14:21:25 GMT, "R J Carpenter" wrote: "Jake Brodsky" wrote in message ... The beauty of digital broadcasting is that it works better overall in a wider variety of conditions and the radio doesn't have to be outrageously large, heavy, expensive, or high maintenance. Weird claims. No. Market forces will make this happen. No, you mean advertising by the broadcasters will produce expectations in the minds of the consumers that digital = better, which will lead to the highly suggestible general public believing these claims whether they're true or not (certainly untrue if you take the UK's experience), this advertising creates demand, which allows manufacturing batch sizes to increase which leads to lower prices, which goes on until the prices are low and demand carries on going up as the prices fall. This isn't market forces, this is manipulation of the market by broadcasters and consumer electronics companies to ship new products to make extra profit. In fact digital may increase the weight of a battery-powered radio because of the current drain of the digital processing chips - at least in early versions. In early versions, you'd be right. Have you looked at the size and performance of PCS phones lately? No, they don't sound as good as analog cellular phones. But they're close enough that nobody cares about the difference. That's mobile phones, not broadcast quality audio. Who gives a **** about the absolute audio quality of a mobile phone call so long as it is intelligible? This is very different for broadcast quality audio. And BTW, I'm not supporting analogue AM because in the UK analogue AM is ****e. The bottom line: just because a certain degree of performance is possible doesn't mean it is desirable by the general public. The bottom line is that the broadcasters are abusing their relationship with their listeners in that their listeners trust them to provide as good a service as they think is possible, when in reality in the UK we have sub-FM audio quality on DAB when there is spare capacity on nearly all DAB multiplexes left unused and going to waste, but the broadcasters just don't want to increase the bit rates to improve the audio quality (96% of stereo radio stations on DAB in the UK use 128kbps MPEG Layer 2, and Layer 2 was supposed to be used at 192kbps for stereo audio streams). The bottom line is that CD-quality on the radio is possible, and given the choice between CD-quality or lower quality then the general public would not turn down CD-quality. But again the reality is so far away from CD-quality it is just a bad joke. On DAB in the UK the audio quality is sub-FM, yet we hear adverts day in day out saying crap like "superb digital quality sound" and such like. This is an abuse of trust and the broadcasters should be ashamed of themselves that they're conning the general public to earn extra profit (for the commercial radio groups) or to try to hang on to market share and be seen to be more politically correct (for the BBC). Dare I say it: Mediocrity rules. You've just said it. If it didn't, do you think Bill Gates would be a multi-billionare? So basically because companies can get away with mediorcity then that should be accepted and applauded? Basically this is all to make a very small number of people a lot richer, while the masses have to put up with crap audio quality passed off as entertainment. The bottom line is that we'll all be dead one day and the only actual trade-off going on is people's enjoyment against fking profit for a very small number of people. But hey, that's capitalism for ya. Think Enron and Worldcom. And it seems one of the main purveyors of medicority in the US is getting a bit of a backlash isn't it? Or are the reports about Clear Channel and a load of unhappy listeners just bull****? -- DAB sounds worse than FM, Freeview, Digital Satellite and Cable -- http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/ BBC DAB is a national disgrace Subscribe for free to the Digital Radio Listeners' Group Newsletter |
Jake Brodsky wrote:
They don't suffer from background skip causing the carrier to flutter. I'd like to see that in actual use. They don't put crap out of the speaker when selective fading hits --they squelch instead. Most people would see those features as acceptable tradeoffs. I don't for one minute believe that people who wouldn't accept signal fading will find complete muting an acceptable alternative. |
Rich Wood writes:
Here the outage lasted 29 hours. Does every translator have a generator capable of that fuel duty cycle and where will the fuel be stored. Gas stations had fuel but no pumps working. As you can imagine, New York has extrememly strict rules about fuel storage and handling. I can't even bring a camp stove propane tank through a tunnel. It's a felony if you're caught, according to the NYFD. If I'm renting cell site space to Verizon I don't want a gas tank in the building. Clearly, the weren't running on natural gas. I visited a cell site recently where the back-up power was a stack of gell cell batteries that, according to the AT&T guy, could power the site for four days. umar |
On 20 Aug 2003 14:37:40 GMT, "DAB sounds worse than FM"
wrote: This isn't market forces, this is manipulation of the market by broadcasters and consumer electronics companies to ship new products to make extra profit. Call it manipulation if you want. Most go in to business dreaming of becoming the proverbial 400 pound Gorilla of their market. It's still a legitimate market force. That's mobile phones, not broadcast quality audio. Who gives a **** about the absolute audio quality of a mobile phone call so long as it is intelligible? This is very different for broadcast quality audio. And BTW, I'm not supporting analogue AM because in the UK analogue AM is ****e. Look, the fact that I read news groups proves that I'll venture through an awful lot of noise to read an intelligent thread. Likewise, listeners will endure a lot to listen to views or music they find interesting. The bottom line is that the broadcasters are abusing their relationship with their listeners in that their listeners trust them to provide as good a service as they think is possible, when in reality in the UK we have sub-FM audio quality on DAB when there is spare capacity on nearly all DAB multiplexes left unused and going to waste, but the broadcasters just don't want to increase the bit rates to improve the audio quality (96% of stereo radio stations on DAB in the UK use 128kbps MPEG Layer 2, and Layer 2 was supposed to be used at 192kbps for stereo audio streams). Then turn off your radio. Find your own music and listen to it. The bottom line is that CD-quality on the radio is possible, and given the choice between CD-quality or lower quality then the general public would not turn down CD-quality. Possible? Yes. Would the public choose it? That's the question. It largely depends on what choices they have. But again the reality is so far away from CD-quality it is just a bad joke. On DAB in the UK the audio quality is sub-FM, yet we hear adverts day in day out saying crap like "superb digital quality sound" and such like. This is an abuse of trust and the broadcasters should be ashamed of themselves that they're conning the general public to earn extra profit (for the commercial radio groups) or to try to hang on to market share and be seen to be more politically correct (for the BBC). Look, even plain FM stereo could sound much better if the dynamic range weren't so terribly compressed all the time. But most broadcasters are aiming for the middle of the market. So basically because companies can get away with mediorcity then that should be accepted and applauded? I say you need to accept it, because it's a fact. I don't applaud it. Basically this is all to make a very small number of people a lot richer, while the masses have to put up with crap audio quality passed off as entertainment. Well, if you can convince the proletariat that this is the case, and you win enough of their support to your side, you can do something about it. But hey, that's capitalism for ya. Think Enron and Worldcom. Enron and Worldcom pale in comparison to the graft, mediocrity, and pointless wastes of most governments. It's not about capitalism. It's not about corporations. It's about making a living. As you pointed out, better audio is possible. So, what's stopping you? And it seems one of the main purveyors of medicority in the US is getting a bit of a backlash isn't it? Or are the reports about Clear Channel and a load of unhappy listeners just bull****? It doesn't matter what sells. Some in this group have said they'd play the sounds of roaring chain saws all day long if they could make a good profit from it. Jake Brodsky "Never mind the Turing Test, what about the Turing Graduates?" |
"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message ... And it seems one of the main purveyors of medicority in the US is getting a bit of a backlash isn't it? Or are the reports about Clear Channel and a load of unhappy listeners just bull****? Yes. They are bull****. Now, substitute " couple" for " load" and you would be very near the truth. |
On 20 Aug 2003 14:37:05 GMT, "CAndersen (Kimba)"
wrote: Rich Wood wrote: I found it funny that TV stations stayed on the air with virtually no operating receivers. They were talking to themselves. Battery-operated color TVs sell for well under $100. I figure if _I've_ got one, lots of other folks must, too. Battery operated TV's are not in common use (and yes, I have one, too, but just because I have something, it doesn't mean everyone else does). Even the TV people admit they were broadcasting to almost no one. Mark Howell |
On 20 Aug 2003 14:38:27 GMT, umarc wrote:
I visited a cell site recently where the back-up power was a stack of gell cell batteries that, according to the AT&T guy, could power the site for four days. Then something went wrong because cell service faded away within a few hours As soon as the electricity went back on , so did the cell service. I spent a lot of time walking through the city that night and my cell phone had no signal indicator and that handset with the slash through it. The display said "no service." When my cell phone tells me I have no service I believe it. The bill has been paid in full. Rich |
On 21 Aug 2003 14:32:45 GMT, "DAB sounds worse than FM"
wrote: "People are flocking from radio in droves," says Michael Bracy, director of government relations at the lobby group the Future of Music Coalition. Will someone post some research that supports this? What makes Mr. Bracy an expert on the status of radio? It would seem to me that, if they're "flocking from radio in droves," it should be in his best interest. Now they'll have to buy the product either on CD or MP3. The rest will either not listen or steal it. I think it would be more appropriate to say new generations aren't being attracted to radio because of the vast number of alternatives. "So many people have become disenfranchised that they simply don't listen anymore. Smaller local artists are being freezed out by centralised programming. Smaller groups have been squeezed out of the business in all of the 43 years I've been in it. That's long before Clear Channel owned much more than a station in San Antonio. Some college stations had local talent programming but very few commercial stations ever did it. They played the hits. And ... did you know that all the hit artists were local at one time? It didn't seem to hurt them. It's very damaging to the culture. You mean I'm culture-starved because I can't hear the latest manufactured boy band? There is a climate of fear surrounding Clear Channel. People will say in private, 'They did this or they did that,' but they won't speak out because they have to do business with them. As long as they say it in private, no improvement will come. Of course, they'd better have proof that will stand up in court. Do it the good ol' American way. Sue them. I've heard local promoters complain that Clear Channel pays more. I can't fault the artist for going where the money is. Let's see Mr. Bracy get all the big artists together to boycott Clear Channel. If no one will perform for them, the problem is solved. Then the only problem left is how to harvest the green cheese on the moon. The bad publicity has made Clear Channel a political pariah. While other parts of the media industry are enjoying the relaxation of ownership laws, in radio, they were tightened up last week, despite the company hiring well-connected Washington lobbyists and appointing a former US congressman to the board." Radio ownership rules were tightened? I was under the impression that TV was returned to 35%. There have been many instances where Clear Channel was prevented from buying because of the rules. This isn't new. "According to the US ratings service Arbitron, Americans are spending 10% less time listening to radio per annum. Radio listenership in the US is at a 27-year low." I seriously doubt the increase in population over 27 years and the explosion of alternative sources of music were included. 27 years ago I didn't have a minidisc player, a CD player, an MP3 player, a DVD portable, or even low quality Internet streaming competing for attention. "It's creative death, it's standardisation - McDonaldisation. Creativity requires diversity. Mr. Bracy needs to look at the dirt in his own house. Where does all this sameness come from? Instead of blaming radio he should look at the quality of the stuff oozing from the record companies, big and small. If you introduce free markets without regulation, you are prescribing monopoly. The only upside to all of this is that it gets so bad that things start to develop underground on the internet or satellite radio. That's what happened with the Floyd." Satellite radio isn't going to lead the way in local artists. They aren't local. Satellite radio should be Mr. Bracy's vision of Hell. "Mr Dyke [Director General of the BBC] directed much of his ammunition against the global media giant Clear Channel, which owns 1,225 radio stations in the US, many of which took a staunchly pro-war line. "We are genuinely shocked when we discover that the largest radio group in the United States was using its airwaves to organise pro-war rallies," said Mr Dyke, who is also the BBC's editor-in-chief. "We are even more shocked to discover that the same group wants to become a big radio player in the UK." Mr. Dyke is in the dark. Individual stations made those decisions, not the company. I realize it's not in his best interest to accept that, but it's true. If it were a company directive there would have been 1225 rallies - one for each station even in markets with multiple stations. They still compete. Of course, the BBC has no interest in American audiences. I would be "genuinely shocked" to discover that the BBC wanted to exploit Americans when they don't even speak our language. Who ever heard of a bonnet on a car? My home has a john, not a loo. and there's been a load more stories about Clear Channel in the UK press. I realise that being American that you don't take any interest in non-American issues, but, shock-horror, we do actually look at issues beyond our shores, and especially when Mr Mays might buy a UK radio group in the not too distant future. I think the UK said something similar when Rupert Murdoch launched Sky TV and the sky fell again when he bought British newspapers. If we don't look beyond our shores we should be able to stop all those humanitarian aid programs that cost us so much. I'm sorry we have such little interest in the goings on with the Royal Family. I guess Mr. Dyke doesn't read the New York Times. It appears to me that the first section of the paper is heavily International. The evening news and PBS' newscasts seem to cover a lot of "foreign" news. Mr. Dyke also doesn't seem to realize that covering 50 states is probably more difficult than covering 50 countries. After all, those of us in the 50 states have more in common than his 50 countries. We all speak a similar language. After a while, even war isn't news when it's been going on for decades, or centuries. Maybe he's feeling bad because the UK used to own most of those countries. Let's get the Middle East fixed before he complains about how uncaring we Americans are. Maybe we're just too damned tired of watching those "across the pond" fight each other endlessly.They've been taking over each other's countries for centuries and dressing their men in ridiculous looking costumes. Isn't there something more productive they could be doing? Rich |
"Rich Wood" wrote in message ... On 22 Aug 2003 18:50:31 GMT, "R J Carpenter" wrote: You children don't seem to remember the "Fitch Bandwagon" from the late 30s / early 40s. Songs were "sung so clearly you can understand every word". You're joking! Every word? That would mean the lyricist would actually have to write something meaningful. This is too hard to comprehend. You're too young to remember when skilled people wrote lyrics - Ira Gershwin, Cole Porter. Irving Berlin and the whole lot. For your musical education of that period I'd suggesting listening to XM-4 ;-)) On rethought - maybe the slogan was "hear" ever word. The idea being that you could listen to the program and then start singing the songs yourself - no need to buy records or sheet music. Remember that 78 records were VERY expensive. Two songs for 50 cents or more, Bluebird was RCA's cheapo label at 35 cents. Multiply by about 14 to get the equivalent in today's dollars - very roughly the equivalent of $5 for a Bluebird 78 with two songs.. |
In article , R J Carpenter wrote:
expensive. Two songs for 50 cents or more, Bluebird was RCA's cheapo label at 35 cents. Multiply by about 14 to get the equivalent in today's dollars - very roughly the equivalent of $5 for a Bluebird 78 with two songs.. That's about how much a modern-day 45rpm 7" single costs..... A 12" club single (they call them extended mixes) now goes for anywhere from U$7.00 to $20.00 depending on the artist..... I've seen full-length LPs -- nowadays a lot of them are two-record sets go for $30 if they're "imported" *eyeroll* -- Sven Weil New York City, U.S.A. |
Salutations:
R J Carpenter wrote: "Rich Wood" wrote in message You're joking! Every word? That would mean the lyricist would actually have to write something meaningful. This is too hard to comprehend. On rethought - maybe the slogan was "hear" ever word. The idea being that you could listen to the program and then start singing the songs yourself - no need to buy records or sheet music. Remember that 78 records were VERY expensive. Two songs for 50 cents or more, Bluebird was RCA's cheapo label at 35 cents. Multiply by about 14 to get the equivalent in today's dollars - very roughly the equivalent of $5 for a Bluebird 78 with two songs.. 'Tunes' I think is what you are talking about there brother R J and I would agree with you largely even though I was brought up on 60/70's AM and the good old CBC.. What - you're - talking about the increasing roll over of western culture into the dark rule of the synthetic, data modelled, vertically integrated 'popular' corporate artist.. All part of the fall of Rome brother.. Not that both Berlin and Porter didn't cough up some pretty ugly stuff to pay the bills too - but it has gotten pretty bad lately on the racks I will agree.. And I think the kids are on to it - see what happened to Justin Timberlake at that Toronto shindig?. Run the search term - 30's - or - 40's - on my hobby bitcaster below.. When I put the search engine together for the site, I built it so you could search by lyric fragment because that is about the only way I remember a 'tune' and it really puts a load on the server model for testing purposes.. Consequently - most of the playlist is populated by lyrically memorable tunes from several eras right up to now.. Stuff I can croak and waddle (privately) along with - which in turn attracts a very interesting group of fans who, like us, like 'tunes'. I have a number of big band covers in there from the Setzer Orchestra (which were interesting enough to push the originals off my play bank) - but - you'll probably get a bigger kick out of the some of the OEM Andrew sisters stuff - particularly with Danny Kaye.. Now I would put it squarely at the doors of the Video media, except that some of the very best 'tunes' came out of vegas/movie/stage song writing of any given time.. Well except for my main man Bill Monroe - his stuff came out of back or a 32 ford with a 'spare' tank as near as I can figure.. Anyway - it isn't being forced to dance as well as sing that is making it all run wrong.. My take is the published financial 'decline' of the music business is more the result of bad reactive A&R calls regarding taking risks that don't match up with the sample generated demographic models that big station advertisers will support (with all due respect to brother Eduardo) - rather than - outright downloading itself.. Although I bet it's easier to get an industry fight together against it as opposed to a campaign around 'we suck - we have mostly crappy tunes right now - sorry that's what everyone's numbers tell us you want'.. Every so often however - someone sneaks a darned good 'tune' out the back door and I quickly hand over my $20 for the CD.. Check out: En Vogue - Giving Him Everything He Can Feel http://www.dexterdyne.org/888/118.RAM What do you do about it? I don't know.. I'm just a propeller head.. Nobody seems to reward being a talent much anymore - well except to point out what a talent someone is between the softcore pepsi porn.. The system isn't broken at all according to most of the professionals here - it's the thieving public out downloading and sharing out their old collections that's to blame apparently.. Now I don't support downloading myself - don't use cacheable audio dataforms specifically to not support it - but I can sure see how folks are unwilling to fork over the money for most of the popular albums out there right now.. With the interesting proviso that while it's still a crummy way to make a living - most of the small Jazz and Traditional labels are doing as well as ever - better than ever actually.. -- J Dexter - webmaster - http://www.dexterdyne.org/ all tunes - no cookies no subscription no weather no ads no news no phone in - RealAudio 8+ Required - all the Time Radio Free Dexterdyne Top Tune o'be-do-da-day Davis - Oo Shoo Be Doo Be http://www.dexterdyne.org/888/065.RAM |
"Songs sung so clearly that you can understand every word and sing right
along." Actually Manhatton Merry-Go-Round sponsored by Dr. Lyon's tooth paste and Dr. Lyon's tooth powder. Norm Lehfeldt "R J Carpenter" wrotf: "Rich Wood" wrote in message ... On 22 Aug 2003 18:50:31 GMT, "R J Carpenter" wrote: You children don't seem to remember the "Fitch Bandwagon" from the late 30s / early 40s. Songs were "sung so clearly you can understand every word". |
"R J Carpenter" wrote in message ...
"David Eduardo" wrote in message ... Anyone here remember the "Your Hit Parade" TV show of the late 50's with Snooky Lanson, Dorothy Collins, etc? The four staff singers of this national show did their versions of the week's top songs "all across America." You children don't seem to remember the "Fitch Bandwagon" from the late 30s / early 40s. Songs were "sung so clearly you can understand every word". Wasn't Larry Clinton the band leader and Bea Wain one of the vocalists? Clearly hits were thought to be national back then. I wasn't around back then, but in all my readings of OTR and listening to Chuck Schaden in Chicago, I would've sworn that it was "Manhattan Merry-Go-Round" where the announcer said that the songs were sung so clearly that you could understand every word. And people complained about rock music fifteen years later... Along those same lines, I have to chortle when I see someone giving a tribute to Bob Hope saying how clean his comedy was instead of today's "depravity." According to the Library of Congress' extremely impressive web site on Hope's career, more than once at the height of his radio popularity in the 40s NBC execs wanted to drop him because they felt his show was too *off-color* (but obviously didn't). Plus ca change... Are people sixty years from now going to be reminiscing about how family-friendly Howard Stern was? |
"Mark Jeffries" wrote in message ... "R J Carpenter" wrote in message ... "David Eduardo" wrote in message ... Anyone here remember the "Your Hit Parade" TV show of the late 50's with Snooky Lanson, Dorothy Collins, etc? The four staff singers of this national show did their versions of the week's top songs "all across America." You children don't seem to remember the "Fitch Bandwagon" from the late 30s / early 40s. Songs were "sung so clearly you can understand every word". Wasn't Larry Clinton the band leader and Bea Wain one of the vocalists? Clearly hits were thought to be national back then. I wasn't around back then, but in all my readings of OTR and listening to Chuck Schaden in Chicago, I would've sworn that it was "Manhattan Merry-Go-Round" where the announcer said that the songs were sung so clearly that you could understand every word. And you are 100% correct. My memory haze is catching up with me.... Sorry. |
wrote in message ... "Songs sung so clearly that you can understand every word and sing right along." Actually Manhatton Merry-Go-Round sponsored by Dr. Lyon's tooth paste and Dr. Lyon's tooth powder. Norm Lehfeldt Correct - I'm getting memory-haze, I fear. "R J Carpenter" wrotf: "Rich Wood" wrote in message ... On 22 Aug 2003 18:50:31 GMT, "R J Carpenter" wrote: You children don't seem to remember the "Fitch Bandwagon" from the late 30s / early 40s. Songs were "sung so clearly you can understand every word". |
Yes, Dr. Lyons it was as sponsor of the "Manhattan Merry-Go-Round" where the
"songs were sung so clearly you can understand every word and sing them yourself." The show ended in 1949. The "Fitch Bandwagon" show ran for ten years on NBC (ending in 1948) sort of morphing into a situation comedy show by the end. The theme, however, was always-- Laugh a-while, Let a Song be your style, Use Fitch Shampoo! Don't despair, Use your head, save your hair, Use Fitch Shampoo! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Don Forsling "Iowa--Gateway to Those Big Rectangular States" wrote in message ... "Songs sung so clearly that you can understand every word and sing right along." Actually Manhatton Merry-Go-Round sponsored by Dr. Lyon's tooth paste and Dr. Lyon's tooth powder. Norm Lehfeldt "R J Carpenter" wrotf: "Rich Wood" wrote in message ... On 22 Aug 2003 18:50:31 GMT, "R J Carpenter" wrote: You children don't seem to remember the "Fitch Bandwagon" from the late 30s / early 40s. Songs were "sung so clearly you can understand every word". |
On 24 Aug 2003 00:43:52 GMT, "R J Carpenter"
wrote: You're too young to remember when skilled people wrote lyrics - Ira Gershwin, Cole Porter. Irving Berlin and the whole lot. For your musical education of that period I'd suggesting listening to XM-4 ;-)) Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I love being called too young. However, I have to confess that I spent many early years of my career programming Easy Listening both on the station level and in syndication. I was creative Chairman of the International Beautiful Music Association. We recorded Easy Listening material when the supply started to dry up. I wasn't alive when they were writing it, but made a good living spreading it around. Rich |
"Rich Wood" wrote in message ... On 24 Aug 2003 00:43:52 GMT, "R J Carpenter" wrote: You're too young to remember when skilled people wrote lyrics - Ira Gershwin, Cole Porter. Irving Berlin and the whole lot. For your musical education of that period I'd suggesting listening to XM-4 ;-)) Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I love being called too young. However, I have to confess that I spent many early years of my career programming Easy Listening both on the station level and in syndication. I was creative Chairman of the International Beautiful Music Association. We recorded Easy Listening material when the supply started to dry up. I wasn't alive when they were writing it, but made a good living spreading it around. But wasn't that mostly done without the vocals?? You see, I'm too old to remember and you're to young..... :-(( |
In article , Rich Wood wrote:
Initially, it was entirely instrumental. One day I got a call from Jim Schulke of Schulke Radio Productions asking me to recommend 100 vocals I'd LOVE to get me some of those tapes. I've always been a big fan of the BM/E-Z format. What happened to all that music and those companies? Wish that stuff were for sale somewhere. -- Sven Weil New York City, U.S.A. |
Simple Just use C-QUAM AM Stereo and everybody benefits -no new radios
required,better sound quality on existing analogue radios and of course high quality stereo on AMS radios and more cost effective to implement. Michael |
|
In article , David Eduardo wrote:
Muzak and similar providers of ambient music continue to program Beautiful Music for controlled environments. Any radio stations doing Correct. I don't have access to Muzak ever since they discontinued FM-Subcarrier service shortly after the beginning of 2003. I have Music Choice on home via the cable TV. The BM/EZ channel does have some new stuff - I think the latest I've heard is light 80s pop done instrumental. It's not bad at all... I guess I'll have to stick with the cassette player hooked up to the cable box. I was just wondering if there was something commercially available besides 101 Strings.... :-) -- Sven Weil New York City, U.S.A. |
Muzak and similar providers of ambient music continue to program Beautiful
Music for controlled environments. There's a fast food restaurant in my area that plays Muzak as the background music. It is all instrumental versions (absolutely no vocals) of pop music hits, with somewhat of a "rocky" feel, with guitars, keyboards, and drums -- unlike what I consider to be traditional Beautiful Music, which predominantly features lush orchestral arrangements, heavy on the strings. Anyway, Muzak has conquered and instrumentalized all sorts of pop music -- I've even heard them do songs like No Doubt's "Don't Speak", and they're probably done most of the Backstreet Boys and 'N Sync hits. The market share for Muzak has to be dropping, though; it used to be commonplace in supermarkets, department stores, and restaurants, but now all but the most "snooty" establishments (where vocal music would be seen as "inappropriate") have replaced it with a generic AC-type format -- which in itself is a whole other discussion, because I've heard this background-music form of AC play a *much* wider variety of songs than what you hear on the radio, including many songs which didn't even make the Top 40 chart, as well as many album tracks which were never released for radio airplay. |
"WBRW" wrote in message ... Muzak and similar providers of ambient music continue to program Beautiful Music for controlled environments. There's a fast food restaurant in my area that plays Muzak as the background music. It is all instrumental versions (absolutely no vocals) of pop music hits, with somewhat of a "rocky" feel, with guitars, keyboards, and drums -- unlike what I consider to be traditional Beautiful Music, which predominantly features lush orchestral arrangements, heavy on the strings. Anyway, Muzak has conquered and instrumentalized all sorts of pop music -- I've even heard them do songs like No Doubt's "Don't Speak", and they're probably done most of the Backstreet Boys and 'N Sync hits. The market share for Muzak has to be dropping, though; it used to be commonplace in supermarkets, department stores, and restaurants, but now all but the most "snooty" establishments (where vocal music would be seen as "inappropriate") have replaced it with a generic AC-type format -- which in itself is a whole other discussion, because I've heard this background-music form of AC play a *much* wider variety of songs than what you hear on the radio, including many songs which didn't even make the Top 40 chart, as well as many album tracks which were never released for radio airplay. Muzak, now delivered mostly by satellite, has many, many choices, ranging form oldies to thematic (Spanish, Mexican, etc.). |
In article , David Eduardo wrote:
Muzak, now delivered mostly by satellite, has many, many choices, ranging form oldies to thematic (Spanish, Mexican, etc.). Muzak also delivers some of their formats in disk form. Don't know if they're standard CDs or MP-3 disks. But knowing Muzak it's probably MP-3 disks...there's a note on the disks that say something to the effect of "for use only on Muzak equipment." I saw a couple of them lying around on the counter of a Popeye's Fried Chicken store once. I'm sure someone with a combi MP3-disk and CD player might be able to take them for a spin.... :) -- Sven Weil New York City, U.S.A. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:58 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com