In article , Richard says...

http://www.home.earthlink.net/%7Esrw...rundig-100.htm

"FM? Whazzat?

After 25+ years in that business, we no longer listen to any FM
broadcasting. Why; when we have 9,000 classical CDs, an eight-foot grand
piano, a Yamaha Clavinova, and a harpsichord?! In order to be useful to
readers who might, however, want to know about the FM performance, we did
tune to the band and TRY to pick up a station. Surely the only one we would
ever want to hear, from our home in San Jose, would be classical KDFC,
102.1, in San Francisco. It was absolutely unreceivable. Ditto via the Radio
Shack DX-397; and there is almost no trace of it either using the Sony
7600GR.

But a late-60's Grundig Music-Boy germanium transistor radio (original
manual at left) picks it up quite clearly! This shows the sad deterioration
of FM radio design over the decades; the old discrete-component radio, with
excellent selectivity, could pull KDFC out of the hiss and mush; the new
ones, with their short whip aerials and IC cookbook designs, just did not
have the power and discrimination."

Apparently, there are several kinds of FM signals being used. Vertical,
horizontal, and circular polarized signals. Don't ask my for a technical
explanation. I'm wondering if an FM stations signal type can affect how well
you can get the station with a generic FM radio.




I'm wanting a pockety sized PLL radio that will, on FM performance, actually
equal, at least an, old Grundig radio for sensitivity, cross-modulation and
image rejection!


I have the same 'want' as you....pocket sized PLL FM that's designed from the
get-go as a good FM receiver. I just prefer FM to AM and don't consider myself
a DX'er in the traditional sense. I have a Sony ICF 2010, 7600GR, RS DX-396,
DX-402, Panasonic RF B300. They all PALE in comparison to my Superadio II for
FM performance. Not digital, no PLL, no memory presets but it brings in FM
stations that the others can't hear.

I guess when all is said and done, a "good" analog radio is hard to beat,
especially when it's an older model. Amazingly enough, my BEST FM receiver is
an AM/FM/stereo amplifier from Radio Shack that was made in 1985. It picks up
the hard to get FM stations WITHOUT AN ANTENNA. Zero...nada...zippo connected
to the FM antenna lugs. Before I got my Superadio, I stopped BARELY receiving
my favorite FM stations on my 2010. I actually thought the station had gone off
the air (I even sent an email to the station asking when they'd return to normal
broadcasting...never got a reply). I finally turned on that old Radioshack amp,
and the station came in like it was next door.

I've taken out of the attic an old car AM/FM/FM stereo cassette digital radio
from Panasonic that's at least 25 years old. My plan is to put it on batteries
to see how well it works as a desktop. Unfortunately, at 5 pounds (without
batteries and speaker), it won't be 'pocket sized'.

elfa

BTW, I'm also bay area....30 miles north of SF. Just tried your KDFC and got it
fairly good on the Sony 2010. Tried it on the Superadio and it boomed right in,
crystal clear. Try my favorite SF FM station....KKSF...103.7....light jazz.

"elfa" wrote in message
...

Apparently, there are several kinds of FM signals being used. Vertical,
horizontal, and circular polarized signals. Don't ask my for a technical
explanation. I'm wondering if an FM stations signal type can affect how
well
you can get the station with a generic FM radio.


Nearly all FM's now use circular polarization for their main antennas.
Circular polarization is less efficient, power wise, than a simple dipole,
but they do tend to penetrate better into crowded urban areas than either
horizontal or vertical polarization.

In article , Brenda Ann says...


"elfa" wrote in message
...

Apparently, there are several kinds of FM signals being used. Vertical,
horizontal, and circular polarized signals. Don't ask my for a technical
explanation. I'm wondering if an FM stations signal type can affect how
well
you can get the station with a generic FM radio.


Nearly all FM's now use circular polarization for their main antennas.
Circular polarization is less efficient, power wise, than a simple dipole,
but they do tend to penetrate better into crowded urban areas than either
horizontal or vertical polarization.



Thanks Brenda Ann....

I know I can rely on you to come up with an explanation that makes sense.

elfa

Another effect is from the quality and expertise of the broadcast engineers
for various radio stations.

A free-lance radio engineer named Fulgham used to tweak several of the
stations in the Jackson, Mississippi area (could be he still does -- I've
lost track of him).

He was the best I've ever seen. Driving up from the New Orleans area, the
difference in audio quality of some the Jackson stations was noticably
several notches above the stations I listened to in New Orleans. It would
have you thinking "I didn't know my car stereo could sound that good."

-- Stinger

"elfa" wrote in message
...
In article , Brenda Ann says...


"elfa" wrote in message
...

Apparently, there are several kinds of FM signals being used.
Vertical,
horizontal, and circular polarized signals. Don't ask my for a
technical
explanation. I'm wondering if an FM stations signal type can affect
how
well
you can get the station with a generic FM radio.


Nearly all FM's now use circular polarization for their main antennas.
Circular polarization is less efficient, power wise, than a simple
dipole,
but they do tend to penetrate better into crowded urban areas than either
horizontal or vertical polarization.



Thanks Brenda Ann....

I know I can rely on you to come up with an explanation that makes sense.

elfa