On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 03:10:44 -0700, RHF wrote:
Wonder if any one is using a simply 14"-24" AM/MW "Box"
Loop Antenna with with one of these "HD" Radios and -if-
They are good enough to acquire a reliable "HD" Signal ?
-But- That requires Tuning the Radio and the Antenna every
time you change an AM/MW Radio Station.

That would be a decent option and would probably work. At least you
wouldn't have to rotate the loop, since you know where the main source of
interference is coming from regardless of frequency!

But as the other post says, nobody except us DXers is going to bother.

It's unfortunate for HD promoters that the BA was the first home HD
receiver generally available. (it was preceded by a number of car radios,
but most people aren't going to go to the trouble of having an aftermarket
car radio installed if they aren't sure they're going to like the results.
It's harder to undo than replacing a table radio!)

A lot of us "early adopters" based our opinions of HD on this set. I'm
coming to the belief that HD works a LOT better than I first believed.
From what I'm hearing the Sangean tuner works pretty well; if it had
beat the BA to market I think the early word on HD could have been quite a
bit better.

(which does NOT mean I think it was a good idea to adopt HD instead of
Eureka, nor that I've changed my mind about the interference issues HD
presents)

Sounds like the same problem that I have with the Analog version of the
BA Receptor up here In-them-there-Hills. Needs both an AM and FM Antenna
to be able to receive any signals reliabily -except- for KXSR which is
up the Hill about a Mile on 91.7 with 4 KW ERP. KXSR =
http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/fmq?list=0&facid=8328

Interesting. I wonder how long the analog version has been available?
I'd figured the self-interference problem was the result of inadequate
shielding/filtering of the HD chipset - maybe it's actually from the
radio's general CPU?