Ken wrote:
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:09:45 -0700, SFTV_troy
wrote:

Frankly I'm a bit surprised at the reaction. There's currently a
transition from analog to digital broadcasting (both in American and
the European Union), and there will be some growing pains, but it's
only temporary. In the LONG TERM, the digital radio will provide
better sound than the current analog (like upgrading FM Stereo
to 300 kbps Surround).

No, they are going to increase quantity (more radio channels),
not sound quality. See how they done in UK.


I agree with you. Mostly. I think that most U.S. stations like Top
40 or Rock will try to squeeze as many programs as possible into their
200 kilohertz channel, but I think other stations like Classical will
go for higher-quality 300 kbps Surround sound, because their listeners
demand the best-possible.

BTW, the HD Radio uses HE-AAC and can achieve FM quality as low as 64
kbps.

On Sep 29, 3:58 pm, Steve wrote:

Wouldn't it be cool to have 5.1 surround from your radio?

Not if it's to listen to another informercial.



You're the second person to say something like that. But that's not
problem a with HD Radio, because U.S. radio doesn't air infomercials
(half-hour ads).

On Sep 30, 1:54 am, SFTV_troy wrote:
On Sep 29, 3:58 pm, Steve wrote:



Wouldn't it be cool to have 5.1 surround from your radio?

Not if it's to listen to another informercial.

You're the second person to say something like that. But that's not
problem a with HD Radio, because U.S. radio doesn't air infomercials
(half-hour ads).

Where the hell did you come up with that factoid?

Earl Kiosterud wrote:

Synchronous AM demodulation uses a locally regenerated carrier, fed along with the AM signal
(upper or lower set of sidebands) to a multiplier (modulator). The result is the audio. It
replaces the envelope (diode) detector usually used. You can think of it as another superhet
stage where the result, instead of another IF frequency, is the baseband audio. That's
because the local oscillator is the same frequency as the carrier of the (IF) signal, so the
difference is zero. The sidebands wind up translated to baseband audio instead of to
another IF frequency.

There are advantages. Since one set of sidebands or the other can be used, if there's a
distant station 10KHz away, causing that AM whistle, you just switch to the other set of
sidebands, whichever comes in the cleanest. Also, it doesn't depend on proper amplitude and
phase of both sets of sidebands to work properly, as does the regular envelope detector, so
it works better with impaired signals.



I only understood about 75% of what your wrote, but if I understand
your meaning, this new receiving technique would not improve the sound
(it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would only reduce
interference.

"SFTV_troy" wrote in message
ups.com...



Please list a couple stations that do "hours" of infomercials, and
then point me to some of the Station websites, so I can check it out
for myself. This is a whole new phenomenon to me, because I've never
heard anything like that locally (neither on FM Music, nor AM Talk).

Thanks.


Alot of the big time stations run infomertials before 5AM. On weekends,
they could show up at almost any time. The smaller brokered stations often
run the hours and hours of infomertials.

Radio infomertials aren't usually like the Ron Popiel sort of TV
informertial. They often masquerade as real call-in shows, but the fake
callers are talking about the benefits of a particular investment or hair
restorer or something like that.

I have no idea if these radio informertials are available on the net. After
all, downloading a fake call-in show would destroy the illusion, wouldn't
it?

Frank Dresser

On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 02:38:36 -0700, SFTV_troy
wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:

For a really good selection that lets you compare rates, try here
http://www.tuner2.com/



All right. How do I do an advanced search, so I can narrow my
selection to just 16 kbit/s stations? (As I routinately do on
shoutcast.com).

Dunno, sorry. Just browse the list and see what takes your fancy. I
don't think it is intended as a technical resource, but as
entertainment.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Frank Dresser wrote:
"SFTV_troy" wrote in message

Wouldn't it be cool to have 5.1 surround from your radio?

Neither AM nor FM are currently broadcast close to thier technical fidelity
limits. Plenty of people are happy with the current mid-fi radio and
perfect audio reproduction, even if it were possible, would not bring in
more listeners.

I agree with that. What would attract people to HD Radio is seeing
their favorite stations (like mine: FM97) multiply into 3 or 4
channels..... thus giving more choices to the listener.


5.1 surround would drive listeners away. People use the radio for
backround sound. People listen in the car. A wide dynamic
range would go from lost in the ambient noise to the jarring. ...

Just because you have 5.1, doesn't mean you'd have a large dynamic
range. One does not imply the other.

And broadcast high fidelity has been tried several times. Wideband AM was
first tried in the 30s. FM radio took a generation to get going, despite
it's noise immunity. AM stereo failed after a good sincere attempt.


I would hardly call having 4 incompatible methods a "good attempt".
More like a "bass backwards" attempt. Had the FCC selected a single
standard, AM stereo would be as popular in the U.S., as it currently
is in Canada, Japan, and Australia. In those nations, virtually every
station is broadcast in AM Stereo.

As for FM, it was stifled by the AM corporations trying to crush it.
First they delayed its introduction by twenty years via regulatory
roadblocks (else we'd have it in the late 30s), and then they tried to
kill it by giving it inferior programs while saving the best stuff for
AM.

Point: FM and AM Stereo were stifled NOT by disinterest in high
fidelity, but because of poor handling.



your FM station suddenly multiply from 1 to 4

So? In most markets, most listeners are listening to a
few stations. The bulk of the stations get by with less.

Got a citation to back-up this opinion? You stated it as a fact, so
I'd like to see what study you are using to back up that fact.

Thank you.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Frank Dresser wrote:
"SFTV_troy" wrote in message

Wouldn't it be cool to have 5.1 surround from your radio?

Neither AM nor FM are currently broadcast close to thier technical
fidelity
limits. Plenty of people are happy with the current mid-fi radio and
perfect audio reproduction, even if it were possible, would not bring in
more listeners.

I agree with that. What would attract people to HD Radio is seeing
their favorite stations (like mine: FM97) multiply into 3 or 4
channels..... thus giving more choices to the listener.

For every additional channel a station adds in IBOC, their main channel
bitrate MUST suffer, as bandwidth is taken away from it, so it of necessity
MUST cut back the bitrate. DAB in the UK suffers greatly from this. Back
when they first started broadcasting, reports are that the Eureka system
sounded quite good, but as more streams were added, and the bandwidth and
bitrate of all stations had to be throttled back, complaints of artifacting
and poor audio reproduction started coming in.

Don Pearce wrote:
On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 02:38:36 -0700, SFTV_troy
Don Pearce wrote:

For a really good selection that lets you compare rates, try here
http://www.tuner2.com/

All right. How do I do an advanced search, so I can narrow my
selection to just 16 kbit/s stations? (As I routinately do on
shoutcast.com).

Dunno, sorry. Just browse the list and see what takes your fancy. I
don't think it is intended as a technical resource, but as
entertainment.


Well yeah, but even shoutcast & live365 have advanced search
functions, and they are for entertainment too. It would be impossible
to scan through 10,000 stations just to find the ones you like.
(Which is why they have the advanced search.)

I don't think I'll be using tuner2 any time soon. Not user-friendly.

On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 03:54:04 -0700, wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:
On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 02:38:36 -0700, SFTV_troy
Don Pearce wrote:

For a really good selection that lets you compare rates, try here
http://www.tuner2.com/

All right. How do I do an advanced search, so I can narrow my
selection to just 16 kbit/s stations? (As I routinately do on
shoutcast.com).

Dunno, sorry. Just browse the list and see what takes your fancy. I
don't think it is intended as a technical resource, but as
entertainment.


Well yeah, but even shoutcast & live365 have advanced search
functions, and they are for entertainment too. It would be impossible
to scan through 10,000 stations just to find the ones you like.
(Which is why they have the advanced search.)

I don't think I'll be using tuner2 any time soon. Not user-friendly.

Let 'em know. I'm sure they are up for making things better. It is too
good a resource to just dismiss that way.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com