| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
WOWO 1190 rumble?
WOWO 1190 Fort Wayne IN seems to have a low-frequency rumble in the
stereo difference channel, up to about 240 Hz. It's audible if you listen to either sideband alone (with or without sync detection) but inaudible if you listen to both sidebands, say as normal AM or DSB sync detection. I noticed it a couple weeks ago and it's still there. They're 160 miles away, so maybe somebody closer can hear it better. -- Ron Hardin On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk. |
Ron Hardin wrote: WOWO 1190 Fort Wayne IN seems to have a low-frequency rumble in the stereo difference channel, up to about 240 Hz. It's audible if you listen to either sideband alone (with or without sync detection) but inaudible if you listen to both sidebands, say as normal AM or DSB sync detection. I noticed it a couple weeks ago and it's still there. They're 160 miles away, so maybe somebody closer can hear it better. Sounds OK here. Former WOWO transmitter site 'lawn boy' on Grandpa's tractor. dxAce Michigan USA |
Ron Hardin wrote:
WOWO 1190 Fort Wayne IN seems to have a low-frequency rumble in the stereo difference channel, up to about 240 Hz. It's audible if you listen to either sideband alone (with or without sync detection) but inaudible if you listen to both sidebands, say as normal AM or DSB sync detection. I noticed it a couple weeks ago and it's still there. They're 160 miles away, so maybe somebody closer can hear it better. Here's audio http://rhhardin.home.mindspring.com/wowo2.ram the sound of a diesel engine idling. Received sync detected LSB. It's _completely_ gone on AM or sync detected DSB. Sounds the same on USB as LSB. So, in other words, it's in the difference channel only. -- Ron Hardin On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk. |
In article ,
dxAce wrote: Ron Hardin wrote: WOWO 1190 Fort Wayne IN seems to have a low-frequency rumble in the stereo difference channel, up to about 240 Hz. It's audible if you listen to either sideband alone (with or without sync detection) but inaudible if you listen to both sidebands, say as normal AM or DSB sync detection. I noticed it a couple weeks ago and it's still there. They're 160 miles away, so maybe somebody closer can hear it better. Sounds OK here. Former WOWO transmitter site 'lawn boy' on Grandpa's tractor. All that RF must have made you into the DxAce you are today. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
In article ,
Ron Hardin wrote: Ron Hardin wrote: WOWO 1190 Fort Wayne IN seems to have a low-frequency rumble in the stereo difference channel, up to about 240 Hz. It's audible if you listen to either sideband alone (with or without sync detection) but inaudible if you listen to both sidebands, say as normal AM or DSB sync detection. I noticed it a couple weeks ago and it's still there. They're 160 miles away, so maybe somebody closer can hear it better. Here's audio http://rhhardin.home.mindspring.com/wowo2.ram the sound of a diesel engine idling. Received sync detected LSB. It's _completely_ gone on AM or sync detected DSB. Sounds the same on USB as LSB. So, in other words, it's in the difference channel only. You are describing a case of power supply switch noise or power line noise getting into the radio. DSB detection will have greater common mode rejection than USB or LSB. Try some chokes on the power cord or change the power supply. Find the thing in your house that is generating the pulse noise on the AC mains. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
I remember WOWO Fort Wayne,Indiana from when I lived in
Martinsville,Indiana in 1947,at least I think I do.Our school teacher's name was Mrs.Rulein,a real nasty ugly looking big old fat mean old hag,she was.I was in the second grade in school back then. cuhulin |
What is WOWO's frequency,is it on the AM/MW band? I think I will try to
tune in to WOWO tonight.I can sometimes pick up Evansville,Indiana at night. cuhulin |
wrote:
What is WOWO's frequency,is it on the AM/MW band? I think I will try to tune in to WOWO tonight.I can sometimes pick up Evansville,Indiana at night. cuhulin 1190 kHz. Tony ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
WOWO is 1190 on the AM/MW band? ok,thanks Tony,I will try to tune in
WOWO Fort Wayne,Indiana tonight.1190 is right next to 1180 AM in Jackson,Mississippi in my area so I probally won't be able to pick up WOWO tonight.Unless WOWO is a powerfull radio station.I often listen to some radio talk shows on 1180 on the AM band here in Jackson.KMOX St.Louis is coming in real good right now and I don't even have that old off the wall brand name AM/FM/SW1/SW2/MB/AIR/POLICE band radio aimed toward St.Louis,Missouri either.I am fixin to see if I can pick up WOWO on that beat up old radio that I bought at a Goodwill thrift store for only a few dollars years ago.I always prefer the old style analog radios than those stupid always givin trouble new fangled digital radios. cuhulin |
Is WOWO a talk show radio station or a music station?
cuhulin |
Ron, You are hearing the broadcasting disaster known as IBOC...brought to you by Ibiquity. There are about 70 stations now running IBOC. This creates a digital signal for the "wonderful" HD radio that no one wants. It wipes out the adjacent channels on both sides. The FCC is a big fan of IBOC and approved it last year (so we can have higher quality sounding signals on AM). So far, daytime only (except for tests). I can't imagine what it will be like when it gets approved for night use on MW. You can kiss at least +/- 10 khz goodbye for any station running IBOC. Let's hope the marketplace votes "no" on this and IBOC dies a swift death. Russ |
wavetrapper wrote:
Ron, You are hearing the broadcasting disaster known as IBOC...brought to you by Ibiquity. There are about 70 stations now running IBOC. This creates a digital signal for the "wonderful" HD radio that no one wants. It wipes out the adjacent channels on both sides. The FCC is a big fan of IBOC and approved it last year (so we can have higher quality sounding signals on AM). So far, daytime only (except for tests). I can't imagine what it will be like when it gets approved for night use on MW. You can kiss at least +/- 10 khz goodbye for any station running IBOC. Let's hope the marketplace votes "no" on this and IBOC dies a swift death. Russ I'm not familiar enough with IBOC at this point to have strong feelings about it one way or another, but I well remember a bit of idiocy making the rounds in the early to mid 70's called "stereo AM". Stereo lo-fi - sheesh. I thought it was an assinine idea then, and I think so now. Evidently, the marketplace agreed, and it died a quick death. Tony ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Russ,is there a website where I can vote NO to that IBOC and HD
nonsense? I think WOWO used to have a station break thingy that went something like,W OOOOOO W OOOOOO,in Fort Wayne,Indiana! cuhulin |
On 24 Apr 2005 18:36:25 -0700, "wavetrapper" wrote:
Ron, You are hearing the broadcasting disaster known as IBOC...brought to you by Ibiquity. There are about 70 stations now running IBOC. This creates a digital signal for the "wonderful" HD radio that no one wants. It wipes out the adjacent channels on both sides. The FCC is a big fan of IBOC and approved it last year (so we can have higher quality sounding signals on AM). So far, daytime only (except for tests). I can't imagine what it will be like when it gets approved for night use on MW. You can kiss at least +/- 10 khz goodbye for any station running IBOC. Let's hope the marketplace votes "no" on this and IBOC dies a swift death. Russ I thought AM IBOC sounded more like a vaccum cleaner. |
On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:43:47 -0400, Tony Meloche
wrote: wavetrapper wrote: Ron, You are hearing the broadcasting disaster known as IBOC...brought to you by Ibiquity. There are about 70 stations now running IBOC. This creates a digital signal for the "wonderful" HD radio that no one wants. It wipes out the adjacent channels on both sides. The FCC is a big fan of IBOC and approved it last year (so we can have higher quality sounding signals on AM). So far, daytime only (except for tests). I can't imagine what it will be like when it gets approved for night use on MW. You can kiss at least +/- 10 khz goodbye for any station running IBOC. Let's hope the marketplace votes "no" on this and IBOC dies a swift death. Russ I'm not familiar enough with IBOC at this point to have strong feelings about it one way or another, but I well remember a bit of idiocy making the rounds in the early to mid 70's called "stereo AM". Stereo lo-fi - sheesh. I thought it was an assinine idea then, and I think so now. Evidently, the marketplace agreed, and it died a quick death. Tony ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Stereo AM sounded really good until the NRSC mask and the complete-tuner-on-a-chip with the 2.7 kHz filter. |
I am listening to 1190 AM on my radio right now for a while and it isn't
a very strong signal,it is fading in and out and I do have my radio turned toward Fort Wayne,Indiana.Is the Art Bell radio show on WOWO right now? It is near the top of the hour now and I suppose the radio station will do a station ID of whatever City it is.I think I will do a www.dogpile.com for,Find Distance and see how far Fort Wayne is from Jackson. cuhulin |
Yep,,that is WOWO 1190 Fort Wayne's News,Talk and Weather I was
listening to,Depend on it! the guy in WOWO land said.Fort Wayne is 666 miles North of Jackson,according to www.indo.com/distance I am fixin to watch Escape From New York movie on telebision now and read some news updates on the telebision internet. cuhulin |
wrote: I am listening to 1190 AM on my radio right now for a while and it isn't a very strong signal,it is fading in and out and I do have my radio turned toward Fort Wayne,Indiana.Is the Art Bell radio show on WOWO right now? It is near the top of the hour now and I suppose the radio station will do a station ID of whatever City it is.I think I will do a www.dogpile.com for,Find Distance and see how far Fort Wayne is from Jackson. Currently has Art Bell Coast to Coast on. Guess it's a 'Best of' sort of program. dxAce Michigan USA |
Last night Art Bell said he is taking Sunday off,some sort of a meeting
or something he was going to in Southern California and I think he did say something about a pre-recorded radio talk show of his would be on tonight.I have to get my beauty sleep now.It's tough work holding this old couch down. cuhulin |
David wrote:
I thought AM IBOC sounded more like a vaccum cleaner. Right, it's not IBOC (and it's not power supply noise). It's actual low frequency modulation on 1190, complementary in each sideband (so you don't hear it unless you're receiving one sideband only). I'd doubt you could hear it at night since there are so many other stations competing for the frequency, unless you're really close. Whether it's WOWO or not I can't say, but it seems to be most likely, since it's the only 1190 station really in competition for Central Ohio in the daytime. WFAN 660 had the same sort of thing for a couple of months last winter, only it was a phase modulation introduced by their broken power supply, inaudible unless you were hearing only one sideband. This sounds more like a low bandwidth digital subcarrier. -- Ron Hardin On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk. |
Ok. There was a lot of discussion on some MW boards about the WOWO
IBOC this past week. Assumed it was IBOC going through some adjustments there. I have heard is described differently in terms of what it sounds like. I have listened to some clips and it is hard to describe. |
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 02:07:06 GMT, David wrote:
I thought AM IBOC sounded more like a vaccum cleaner. Are you suggesting it sucks? Rich |
Ron Hardin wrote:
David wrote: I thought AM IBOC sounded more like a vaccum cleaner. Right, it's not IBOC (and it's not power supply noise). It's actual low frequency modulation on 1190, complementary in each sideband (so you don't hear it unless you're receiving one sideband only). I'd doubt you could hear it at night since there are so many other stations competing for the frequency, unless you're really close. Whether it's WOWO or not I can't say, but it seems to be most likely, since it's the only 1190 station really in competition for Central Ohio in the daytime. WFAN 660 had the same sort of thing for a couple of months last winter, only it was a phase modulation introduced by their broken power supply, inaudible unless you were hearing only one sideband. This sounds more like a low bandwidth digital subcarrier. I take it back. It's an on-frequency artifact of IBOC after all. WCOL 1230 Columbus (or whatever they're calling it now) has the same deal, a diesel engine idling sound when received either LSB only or USB only but no sound when both sidebands are received. It has IBOC, and in fact I spend a fair amount of time nulling its splatter into 1240 away to hear Zanesville Ohio. That 10 kHz off-channel splatter is the obvious component of IBOC. I hadn't noticed this on-channel artifact before. So it's a way to tell who is the IBOC splatter source : who has the diesel engine sound when received LSB (or USB) only. -- Ron Hardin On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk. |
Zanesville,Ohio.Isn't that were they can go to the bridge and turn
right? cuhulin |
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 10:30:15 -0400, Rich Wood
wrote: On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 02:07:06 GMT, David wrote: I thought AM IBOC sounded more like a vaccum cleaner. Are you suggesting it sucks? Rich I'm a Leonard Kahn fan. |
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:08:22 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote: "David" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 10:30:15 -0400, Rich Wood wrote: On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 02:07:06 GMT, David wrote: I thought AM IBOC sounded more like a vaccum cleaner. Are you suggesting it sucks? Rich I'm a Leonard Kahn fan. Oh, the guy who killed AM radio? The phase-lock-loop digital tuner did in AM radio. It sounds like **** when perfectly tuned in. |
wrote: I remember WOWO Fort Wayne,Indiana from when I lived in Martinsville,Indiana in 1947,at least I think I do.Our school teacher's name was Mrs.Rulein,a real nasty ugly looking big old fat mean old hag,she was.I was in the second grade in school back then. cuhulin http://www.tolerance.org/news/article_hate.jsp?id=615 |
"David" wrote in message ... On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:08:22 GMT, "David Eduardo" wrote: "David" wrote in message . .. On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 10:30:15 -0400, Rich Wood wrote: On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 02:07:06 GMT, David wrote: I thought AM IBOC sounded more like a vaccum cleaner. Are you suggesting it sucks? Rich I'm a Leonard Kahn fan. Oh, the guy who killed AM radio? The phase-lock-loop digital tuner did in AM radio. It sounds like **** when perfectly tuned in. When Leonard sued and stopped AM stereo, AM still had over 50% of the audience. By the time the legal issues were solved, AM had half that and could never recover. Analog AM stereo, in the late 70's, could have helped keep the balance between AM and FM. The legal machinations stopped this. |
David Eduardo wrote:
"David" wrote in message ... On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:08:22 GMT, "David Eduardo" wrote: "David" wrote in message ... On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 10:30:15 -0400, Rich Wood wrote: On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 02:07:06 GMT, David wrote: I thought AM IBOC sounded more like a vaccum cleaner. Are you suggesting it sucks? Rich I'm a Leonard Kahn fan. Oh, the guy who killed AM radio? The phase-lock-loop digital tuner did in AM radio. It sounds like **** when perfectly tuned in. When Leonard sued and stopped AM stereo, AM still had over 50% of the audience. By the time the legal issues were solved, AM had half that and could never recover. Analog AM stereo, in the late 70's, could have helped keep the balance between AM and FM. The legal machinations stopped this. Horse hockey. I'm not saying Leonard's suit didn't hamper the reality of AM stereo, but if it had become a mainstream thing, "stereo lo-fi" would have never held it's own against "stereo hi-fi" (FM). Especially when the FM stations went to virtually ALL types of programming during the seventies. Prior to that, FM was classical, alternative (including what was known as "AOR") and as a vanguard, country. Nobody loves good old AM radio like I do, but there is no accident to the fact that AM radio today is very largely 24 hour news, sports, and talk radio formats. That had a whole lot more to do with changing technology than it did with Leonard Kahn. Classical music will always sound tremendously better on FM than AM because of the frequency bandwith. Classical music (as one example) in AM stereo will sound like stereo AM radio broadcast of classical music. A pale imitation of stereo FM broadcast of classical music. Tony ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
"Tony Meloche" wrote in message ... Horse hockey. I'm not saying Leonard's suit didn't hamper the reality of AM stereo, but if it had become a mainstream thing, "stereo lo-fi" would have never held it's own against "stereo hi-fi" (FM). Especially when the FM stations went to virtually ALL types of programming during the seventies. Prior to that, FM was classical, alternative (including what was known as "AOR") and as a vanguard, country. Nobody loves good old AM radio like I do, but there is no accident to the fact that AM radio today is very largely 24 hour news, sports, and talk radio formats. That had a whole lot more to do with changing technology than it did with Leonard Kahn. Classical music will always sound tremendously better on FM than AM because of the frequency bandwith. Classical music (as one example) in AM stereo will sound like stereo AM radio broadcast of classical music. A pale imitation of stereo FM broadcast of classical music. Tony There is absolutely no reason why AM stereo could not be just as high a fidelity as FM stereo, and in fact was in many cases. What gives AM broadcasting the characteristic 'telephone quality' sound it has is mostly the receiver. There is some pre-transmitter processing to limit the bandwidth used, but it doesn't need to be there for purposes of transmitting the signal, only for purposes of limiting said bandwidth. In Portland, we had several AMS stations with full frequency response (50-15K) just as FM. And AMS signals didn't degrade the way FM does when in the downtown area or on the 'dark side' of hills. Admittedly, AM signals can be noisier than FM on the fringes, but they are better in hilly terrain for the most part than FM. |
Regarding audio for computers,pick up a PC Magazine www.pcmag.com I
subscribe to the snail mail issues of that magazine and also Smart Computing magazine. www.smartcomputing.com (I have the magazine right here on the end table by my couch) for April 26,2005.Bill Machrone has a good article on page 45 in the magazine about audio for computers and he provides a website in the magazine to check out. http://machrone.home.comcast.net/pla...distortion.htm Comcast originated right here in Jackson,Mississippi.I bet y'all didn't know that.Enjoy my webtv toy,you say? I do enjoy useing my webtv "toy" but it is not a toy.I can learn and do all of those computer thingys you listed in your post,but the thing about that is,those thingys just do not interest me at all.Did I mention before I bought a new Velocity Micro,ProMagix tower computer last year from www.velocitymicro.com and I have broad band internet access? Do you think I am lieing about that? I never lie about anything.email me and I will forward information about my computer to you if you want to check it out.I bought my computer for $1,290.00 and I bought it for one thing and one thing only,World War Two gaming.My money and my computer and my decision. cuhulin |
In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote: "Tony Meloche" wrote in message ... Horse hockey. I'm not saying Leonard's suit didn't hamper the reality of AM stereo, but if it had become a mainstream thing, "stereo lo-fi" would have never held it's own against "stereo hi-fi" (FM). Especially when the FM stations went to virtually ALL types of programming during the seventies. Prior to that, FM was classical, alternative (including what was known as "AOR") and as a vanguard, country. Nobody loves good old AM radio like I do, but there is no accident to the fact that AM radio today is very largely 24 hour news, sports, and talk radio formats. That had a whole lot more to do with changing technology than it did with Leonard Kahn. Classical music will always sound tremendously better on FM than AM because of the frequency bandwith. Classical music (as one example) in AM stereo will sound like stereo AM radio broadcast of classical music. A pale imitation of stereo FM broadcast of classical music. Tony There is absolutely no reason why AM stereo could not be just as high a fidelity as FM stereo, and in fact was in many cases. What gives AM broadcasting the characteristic 'telephone quality' sound it has is mostly the receiver. There is some pre-transmitter processing to limit the bandwidth used, but it doesn't need to be there for purposes of transmitting the signal, only for purposes of limiting said bandwidth. In Portland, we had several AMS stations with full frequency response (50-15K) just as FM. And AMS signals didn't degrade the way FM does when in the downtown area or on the 'dark side' of hills. Admittedly, AM signals can be noisier than FM on the fringes, but they are better in hilly terrain for the most part than FM. This is not an AM or FM characteristic but a frequency and polarity one when it comes down to downtown and hilly environment reception differences you made in your post. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
"Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , "Brenda Ann" wrote: "Tony Meloche" wrote in message ... Horse hockey. I'm not saying Leonard's suit didn't hamper the reality of AM stereo, but if it had become a mainstream thing, "stereo lo-fi" would have never held it's own against "stereo hi-fi" (FM). Especially when the FM stations went to virtually ALL types of programming during the seventies. Prior to that, FM was classical, alternative (including what was known as "AOR") and as a vanguard, country. Nobody loves good old AM radio like I do, but there is no accident to the fact that AM radio today is very largely 24 hour news, sports, and talk radio formats. That had a whole lot more to do with changing technology than it did with Leonard Kahn. Classical music will always sound tremendously better on FM than AM because of the frequency bandwith. Classical music (as one example) in AM stereo will sound like stereo AM radio broadcast of classical music. A pale imitation of stereo FM broadcast of classical music. Tony There is absolutely no reason why AM stereo could not be just as high a fidelity as FM stereo, and in fact was in many cases. What gives AM broadcasting the characteristic 'telephone quality' sound it has is mostly the receiver. There is some pre-transmitter processing to limit the bandwidth used, but it doesn't need to be there for purposes of transmitting the signal, only for purposes of limiting said bandwidth. In Portland, we had several AMS stations with full frequency response (50-15K) just as FM. And AMS signals didn't degrade the way FM does when in the downtown area or on the 'dark side' of hills. Admittedly, AM signals can be noisier than FM on the fringes, but they are better in hilly terrain for the most part than FM. This is not an AM or FM characteristic but a frequency and polarity one when it comes down to downtown and hilly environment reception differences you made in your post. That was sort of my point. The lack of fidelity has nothing at all to do with the mode of modulation, and everything to do with artificially restricting factors. |
"Brenda Ann" wrote:
"Tony Meloche" wrote in message ... Horse hockey. I'm not saying Leonard's suit didn't hamper the reality of AM stereo, but if it had become a mainstream thing, "stereo lo-fi" would have never held it's own against "stereo hi-fi" (FM). [...] Tony There is absolutely no reason why AM stereo could not be just as high a fidelity as FM stereo, and in fact was in many cases. What gives AM broadcasting the characteristic 'telephone quality' sound it has is mostly the receiver. There is some pre-transmitter processing to limit the bandwidth used, but it doesn't need to be there for purposes of transmitting the signal, only for purposes of limiting said bandwidth. In Portland, we had several AMS stations with full frequency response (50-15K) just as FM. And AMS signals didn't degrade the way FM does when in the downtown area or on the 'dark side' of hills. Admittedly, AM signals can be noisier than FM on the fringes, but they are better in hilly terrain for the most part than FM. In the brief period of broadcast stereo before FM multiplex stereo, often one channel is carried on AM and the other on FM. I borrowed one of those receivers in my college days and the AM performance was astounding. Brenda Ann is right: Most AM receiver designs today simply ignore fidelity as an issue. -- Eric F. Richards "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass, often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940 |
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 07:28:07 -0600, Eric F. Richards
In the brief period of broadcast stereo before FM multiplex stereo, often one channel is carried on AM and the other on FM. I borrowed one of those receivers in my college days and the AM performance was astounding. Brenda Ann is right: Most AM receiver designs today simply ignore fidelity as an issue. That's the FCC's fault. There are too many stations and the bandwidths (both transmit and receive) have to be narrow or the splatter would drive the few remaining nut jobs that still listen to AM away. |
Eric F. Richards wrote:
In the brief period of broadcast stereo before FM multiplex stereo, often one channel is carried on AM and the other on FM. I borrowed one of those receivers in my college days and the AM performance was astounding. Brenda Ann is right: Most AM receiver designs today simply ignore fidelity as an issue. True enough - any "American Five" of the 1950's gave better AM performance than the AM tuner in any modern stereo receiver, for example. But the industry as a whole just didn't invest the time or effort in making AM as good a broadcast medium as FM, and there was certainly no consumer demand for it, either - or at least not enough to make a difference. When CD's came in, I was astonished at how quickly they swept away vinyl - even quicker than the most optimistic projections. The consumer market loved them, and that was that. AM stereo was one of those things that simply didn't "catch on", and as I said, largely (if not completely) because it was seen, understandably as "reinventing the wheel". Tony ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
When CD's came in, I was astonished at how quickly
they swept away vinyl - As a matter of fact, when CDs came in, it was cassette tapes that they swept away. Cassettes had been out-selling LPs for several years before the arrival of CDs. AM stereo sounded as good as, or better than, your typical cassette tape, to my ears. There's no accounting for popular tastes! |
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 17:28:53 -0400, Tony Meloche
wrote: Eric F. Richards wrote: In the brief period of broadcast stereo before FM multiplex stereo, often one channel is carried on AM and the other on FM. I borrowed one of those receivers in my college days and the AM performance was astounding. Brenda Ann is right: Most AM receiver designs today simply ignore fidelity as an issue. True enough - any "American Five" of the 1950's gave better AM performance than the AM tuner in any modern stereo receiver, for example. But the industry as a whole just didn't invest the time or effort in making AM as good a broadcast medium as FM, and there was certainly no consumer demand for it, either - or at least not enough to make a difference. When CD's came in, I was astonished at how quickly they swept away vinyl - even quicker than the most optimistic projections. The consumer market loved them, and that was that. AM stereo was one of those things that simply didn't "catch on", and as I said, largely (if not completely) because it was seen, understandably as "reinventing the wheel". Tony ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- CD's are popular because they don't get scratched. The average person can't tell the difference between a phone call and FM. |
CD's and DVD's can and often do get scratches.I see them all the time in
the thrift stores here.There are clear flexible plastic covers available at stores which sell electronics.I use them on my Scotch and Irish music CD's and my computer CD's. cuhulin |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:15 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com