Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#24
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "-=jd=-" wrote in message ... [snip] The one thing I got to hear most of was the undecoded signal - As soothing as a bored 8-year old with a 100-foot length of bubble-wrap. But for 10 to 15 seconds at a time, the decoded signal quality was *scary* nice. I would have to say it was notably better than FM. I had the impression I was in the same room with the broadcaster. It would be nice to hear an uninterrupted stream for a half-hour to get a better sampling. I don't know if this is the same thing, but I was listening to one of the local 1000 watt AMers today, and it sounded really nice. There was a three dimensional sound from the studio that's not normally heard. I think the normal studio reverberations and such are supressed either deliberately or as a byproduct of the usual studio audio processing. Anyway, it sure sounded lifelike. I'm not so sure lifelike audio is much of a selling point, however. Hi-Fi radio has been around in one form or another since the thirties, and it's never been real popular. I figure people usually listen to the radio casually, and pull out the recordings when they want to listen intently. The only problem with standard AM as a high fidelity medium is it takes alot of signal to get a good signal to noise ratio. I really doubt DRM can better the fidelity potentially availiable from standard AM with a strong signal. But, even in very strong signal areas, there seems to be no interest in high fidelity AM anymore. Frank Dresser |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Comparing Four Great Communications Receivers | Shortwave | |||
a page of motorola 2way 2 way portable and mobile radio history | Policy | |||
Means of building low quality receivers | Homebrew | |||
Means of building low quality receivers | Homebrew |