"Rich Wood" wrote in message
...
On 5 Mar 2004 15:44:46 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:

I've heard IBOC. The last thing you want to connect it to is a high
end audio system. It's sort of like buying a Rolls Royce and using it
to haul manure.

I heard IBOC on the almost de facto Kenwood car radio today in Chicago on
all-music WIND. It sounded marvelous, with no noticeable artifacts and
very
nice resolution, clarity and feel on music. It is not FM, which I would
expect as the FM preemphasis curve really colors the high-frequency
content;
in some senses the IBOC AM is nicer than processed FM.

IBOC may sound fine on a car radio in a high ambient noise
environment, but the question was about high end audio.

Actually, it was a car radio in an office. Since there are no availble
tuners, one makes do..
When you have audiophiles refusing to play CDs because they don't
sound as good as vinyl you're not going to find them pleased with IBOC
on either AM or FM.

That I agree with. I refused to use CDs for my Música en Flor service in the
80's, even when many things were reissued in Japan on that medium; the cuts
did not sound right mixed with mostly-vinyl origin material. So I could
definitely understand a purist.

I don't find most conusmers to fall in that definition. Most will see the
"digital" label and _know_ it must be better.

On 7 Mar 2004 16:47:18 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:

That I agree with. I refused to use CDs for my Música en Flor service in the
80's, even when many things were reissued in Japan on that medium; the cuts
did not sound right mixed with mostly-vinyl origin material. So I could
definitely understand a purist.

Early CDs were terrible. The masters were equalized with vinyl in mind
and would shatter coffee mugs.

Most will see the "digital" label and _know_ it must be better.

That's why much of this discussion is really irrelevant. IBOC doesn't
have to be good. The majority of the market will be satisfied with
quality not much higher than MP3 at 64 kbps.

I was asked about the quality difference between XM's talk channels
vs. the music channels. I tuned in to the new traffic and weather
channels. The quality was awful, both technically and programatically.
It sounded (on every traffic channel) like the studio was a tiled
bathroom with awesomely bad artifacts. The announcers were among the
worst I've ever heard. This is clearly being done on the cheap with
kids who can barely read. Hide the expensive glassware until their
voices change.

I was extremely disappointed with what I heard. I think I'll keep my
AM/FM radio for when I travel between Boston, New York and Washington.
WINS, WCBS, WBZ and WTOP have nothing to fear. It's strange that
they're starting in major markets with small market talent.

Rich