|
Tivoli Model 1
They are nice sounding radios, but a bit overpriced IMHO.
NOT an AM DX machine either. You obviously got a bad one, return it for a new one. Dan OK, a Tivoli Model 1 is not a shortwave receiver, but I do recall this radio being discussed in here a few years ago. Anyway, I decided to buy one today. I get home, open the box, plug in the radio, and turn it on in eager anticipation of soothing FM sounds. Click ... WWWWHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!! Nothing but incredibly loud feedback!!! I thought maybe Pete Townshend was in the room. Yes, I tried different outlets and locations, same result. Has anyone else had problems with their Tivoli, or am I just lucky? I was disappointed to see that, despite the name, it's apparently just another piece of Chinese junk. |
Keep returning it,keep returning it,,, you might rack up a lot of
shipping and handling charges too.If it was me,I would return it and buy a different brand name of radio.Ask them if they will cover all shipping and handling charges to and fro,if not,I would forget all about Tivoli radios. cuhulin |
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 03:17:49 GMT, Dan Conti wrote:
They are nice sounding radios, but a bit overpriced IMHO. NOT an AM DX machine either. You obviously got a bad one, return it for a new one. Dan OK, a Tivoli Model 1 is not a shortwave receiver, but I do recall this radio being discussed in here a few years ago. Anyway, I decided to buy one today. I get home, open the box, plug in the radio, and turn it on in eager anticipation of soothing FM sounds. Click ... WWWWHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!! Nothing but incredibly loud feedback!!! I thought maybe Pete Townshend was in the room. Yes, I tried different outlets and locations, same result. Has anyone else had problems with their Tivoli, or am I just lucky? I was disappointed to see that, despite the name, it's apparently just another piece of Chinese junk. They are killer for FMDX. My first one had a bad AUX IN jack that was making the audio cut out. Keep returning it until you get a good one. |
Somebody Somewhere wrote: OK, a Tivoli Model 1 is not a shortwave receiver, but I do recall this radio being discussed in here a few years ago. Anyway, I decided to buy one today. I get home, open the box, plug in the radio, and turn it on in eager anticipation of soothing FM sounds. Click ... WWWWHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!! Nothing but incredibly loud feedback!!! I thought maybe Pete Townshend was in the room. Yes, I tried different outlets and locations, same result. Has anyone else had problems with their Tivoli, or am I just lucky? I was disappointed to see that, despite the name, it's apparently just another piece of Chinese junk. Just get another one. They are nice sounding retro-cute looking radios that compete with offerings from Sangean and Boston Acoustics. Expect nice somewhat over-bassed FM sound in a small box. |
|
On 25 Sep 2005 07:16:49 -0700, "John S." wrote:
Somebody Somewhere wrote: OK, a Tivoli Model 1 is not a shortwave receiver, but I do recall this radio being discussed in here a few years ago. Anyway, I decided to buy one today. I get home, open the box, plug in the radio, and turn it on in eager anticipation of soothing FM sounds. Click ... WWWWHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!! Nothing but incredibly loud feedback!!! I thought maybe Pete Townshend was in the room. Yes, I tried different outlets and locations, same result. Has anyone else had problems with their Tivoli, or am I just lucky? I was disappointed to see that, despite the name, it's apparently just another piece of Chinese junk. Just get another one. They are nice sounding retro-cute looking radios that compete with offerings from Sangean and Boston Acoustics. Expect nice somewhat over-bassed FM sound in a small box. If you have too much bass move it away from wall, closer to edge of table. |
On 25 Sep 2005 07:56:42 -0700, "John S." wrote:
Even stand-alone on a table well away from a wall the little radio overemphasizes the bass. It borders on annoying with male voices on NPR and other talk programs. That sound is quite popular these days, witness the mega-bass buttons and rumbly-low speakers popular on home entertainment systems these days. Most radio studios are accoustic nightmares. That contributes to the boomy sound. |
I like a clean ordinary sound/voices from my radios,too much bass is too
much bass. www.thebuttkicker.com I want me one. cuhulin |
David wrote:
On 25 Sep 2005 07:56:42 -0700, "John S." wrote: Even stand-alone on a table well away from a wall the little radio overemphasizes the bass. It borders on annoying with male voices on NPR and other talk programs. That sound is quite popular these days, witness the mega-bass buttons and rumbly-low speakers popular on home entertainment systems these days. Most radio studios are accoustic nightmares. That contributes to the boomy sound. As does the atrocious mic technique of most broadcasters these days. I get tickled no end to see a mic that costs more than my car virtually in Howard Stern's mouth. Most jocks believe that eating a mic gives them bigger balls on the air. Many others believe that it's the only way to overcome bad acoustics. And then there's the third group that mics outside the pattern because they believe that it relieves them of plosives. All off which contribute to a boomy, as distinguished from bassy, sound. One of my mentors years ago, use to say, you can't overcome weak talent with poor technique. |
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 17:26:03 GMT, D Peter Maus
wrote: David wrote: On 25 Sep 2005 07:56:42 -0700, "John S." wrote: Even stand-alone on a table well away from a wall the little radio overemphasizes the bass. It borders on annoying with male voices on NPR and other talk programs. That sound is quite popular these days, witness the mega-bass buttons and rumbly-low speakers popular on home entertainment systems these days. Most radio studios are accoustic nightmares. That contributes to the boomy sound. As does the atrocious mic technique of most broadcasters these days. I get tickled no end to see a mic that costs more than my car virtually in Howard Stern's mouth. Most jocks believe that eating a mic gives them bigger balls on the air. Many others believe that it's the only way to overcome bad acoustics. And then there's the third group that mics outside the pattern because they believe that it relieves them of plosives. All off which contribute to a boomy, as distinguished from bassy, sound. One of my mentors years ago, use to say, you can't overcome weak talent with poor technique. He uses a Neuman TLM-170, doesn't he? Hardly the cost of any but the most humble used car. Nowadays, the Chinese equivalent can be had for the price of a Taxi ride to the Airport. http://www.mxlmics.com/condenser_mic...990/mxl990.htm |
David wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 17:26:03 GMT, D Peter Maus wrote: David wrote: On 25 Sep 2005 07:56:42 -0700, "John S." wrote: Even stand-alone on a table well away from a wall the little radio overemphasizes the bass. It borders on annoying with male voices on NPR and other talk programs. That sound is quite popular these days, witness the mega-bass buttons and rumbly-low speakers popular on home entertainment systems these days. Most radio studios are accoustic nightmares. That contributes to the boomy sound. As does the atrocious mic technique of most broadcasters these days. I get tickled no end to see a mic that costs more than my car virtually in Howard Stern's mouth. Most jocks believe that eating a mic gives them bigger balls on the air. Many others believe that it's the only way to overcome bad acoustics. And then there's the third group that mics outside the pattern because they believe that it relieves them of plosives. All off which contribute to a boomy, as distinguished from bassy, sound. One of my mentors years ago, use to say, you can't overcome weak talent with poor technique. He uses a Neuman TLM-170, doesn't he? Hardly the cost of any but the most humble used car. Nowadays, the Chinese equivalent can be had for the price of a Taxi ride to the Airport. He did for awhile. I've also seen him on a U-47. You've not taken a taxi around here. A ride to the airport can get a couple of decent mics. And a hooker for the Grand Opening party at the studio. http://www.mxlmics.com/condenser_mic...990/mxl990.htm |
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:36:48 GMT, D Peter Maus
wrote: David wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 17:26:03 GMT, D Peter Maus wrote: David wrote: On 25 Sep 2005 07:56:42 -0700, "John S." wrote: Even stand-alone on a table well away from a wall the little radio overemphasizes the bass. It borders on annoying with male voices on NPR and other talk programs. That sound is quite popular these days, witness the mega-bass buttons and rumbly-low speakers popular on home entertainment systems these days. Most radio studios are accoustic nightmares. That contributes to the boomy sound. As does the atrocious mic technique of most broadcasters these days. I get tickled no end to see a mic that costs more than my car virtually in Howard Stern's mouth. Most jocks believe that eating a mic gives them bigger balls on the air. Many others believe that it's the only way to overcome bad acoustics. And then there's the third group that mics outside the pattern because they believe that it relieves them of plosives. All off which contribute to a boomy, as distinguished from bassy, sound. One of my mentors years ago, use to say, you can't overcome weak talent with poor technique. He uses a Neuman TLM-170, doesn't he? Hardly the cost of any but the most humble used car. Nowadays, the Chinese equivalent can be had for the price of a Taxi ride to the Airport. He did for awhile. I've also seen him on a U-47. You've not taken a taxi around here. A ride to the airport can get a couple of decent mics. And a hooker for the Grand Opening party at the studio. Pete - are the taxi's that expensive or the hookers that cheap 8-} http://www.mxlmics.com/condenser_mic...990/mxl990.htm |
Ever seen the Rick and Bubba tv shows before doing their radio talk
shows on Turner South tv? Every two seconds they are readjusting their microphones. www.devilfinder.com Rick and Bubba TV Show cuhulin |
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:36:48 GMT, D Peter Maus
wrote: He did for awhile. I've also seen him on a U-47. You've not taken a taxi around here. A ride to the airport can get a couple of decent mics. And a hooker for the Grand Opening party at the studio. http://www.mxlmics.com/condenser_mic...990/mxl990.htm U-87. Never seen him with a U-47 which is pretty much used exclusively by vintage queens. |
David wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:36:48 GMT, D Peter Maus wrote: He did for awhile. I've also seen him on a U-47. You've not taken a taxi around here. A ride to the airport can get a couple of decent mics. And a hooker for the Grand Opening party at the studio. http://www.mxlmics.com/condenser_mic...990/mxl990.htm U-87. I said U-47, I meant U-47. Never seen him with a U-47 which is pretty much used exclusively by vintage queens. Pretty much, yes. And I've seen him eating one. One of my colleagues in the company, said they were so horrified at his mic technique and the terrible sound as a result, that they removed the U-47 and started cycling other mics in and out. Until they found one that would work on him. |
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 19:25:03 GMT, D Peter Maus
wrote: David wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:36:48 GMT, D Peter Maus wrote: He did for awhile. I've also seen him on a U-47. You've not taken a taxi around here. A ride to the airport can get a couple of decent mics. And a hooker for the Grand Opening party at the studio. http://www.mxlmics.com/condenser_mic...990/mxl990.htm U-87. I said U-47, I meant U-47. Never seen him with a U-47 which is pretty much used exclusively by vintage queens. Pretty much, yes. And I've seen him eating one. One of my colleagues in the company, said they were so horrified at his mic technique and the terrible sound as a result, that they removed the U-47 and started cycling other mics in and out. Until they found one that would work on him. I have never seen him with one of those. I prefer the Pearl/Milab series for Euro mics, but the MXLs sound really excellent. |
David wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 19:25:03 GMT, D Peter Maus wrote: David wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:36:48 GMT, D Peter Maus wrote: He did for awhile. I've also seen him on a U-47. You've not taken a taxi around here. A ride to the airport can get a couple of decent mics. And a hooker for the Grand Opening party at the studio. http://www.mxlmics.com/condenser_mic...990/mxl990.htm U-87. I said U-47, I meant U-47. Never seen him with a U-47 which is pretty much used exclusively by vintage queens. Pretty much, yes. And I've seen him eating one. One of my colleagues in the company, said they were so horrified at his mic technique and the terrible sound as a result, that they removed the U-47 and started cycling other mics in and out. Until they found one that would work on him. I have never seen him with one of those. I prefer the Pearl/Milab series for Euro mics, but the MXLs sound really excellent. You know my preferences are for the GT series in economy mics, but I do like a good German sound when it's practical. Germans like their audio the way they like their women: Big Bottom. But I've got to agree with you on the Milab products. Big bang for the buck. My first contact with Milab was when I set up my independent room in Texas in the early 80's. Cheaper than the AKG's at that point and far less picky about staging. Marshalls I can take or leave. Although I buy their shock mounts by the bucket for field work. They work and they're not expensive. When one or two walk away at the end of a show, it's not a great loss. And to at least pay lip service to the group topic, SW broadcasters, as a general rule, excluding Weiner and the spate of religious broadcasters out there, tend to have a better mic technique than domestic broadcasters. VOA, BBC, CBC, RA, RNZ, RNW, and especially DW work a discreet distance from the mic, in an acoustically smooth room. It's for small details like that that DRM would be of advantage: to finally get to receive and appreciate the effort they put into their audio. |
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 21:36:43 GMT, D Peter Maus
wrote: And to at least pay lip service to the group topic, SW broadcasters, as a general rule, excluding Weiner and the spate of religious broadcasters out there, tend to have a better mic technique than domestic broadcasters. VOA, BBC, CBC, RA, RNZ, RNW, and especially DW work a discreet distance from the mic, in an acoustically smooth room. It's for small details like that that DRM would be of advantage: to finally get to receive and appreciate the effort they put into their audio. Your typical USA radio studio is way too dead. An RT60 of around 600 ms makes a voice spring into life. And if there must be a desk it should be treated and trapped if necessary. A lot of rooms could be helped tremendously by ripping out the rug and adding a bass trap. |
How about tacking a lot of empty egg cartons all over the walls and
ceiling to quieten the room down? cuhulin |
www.devilfinder.com Sound deadning materials for radio broadcasting
rooms devilfinder.com says,What the H..! Don't you mean: Sound deadening materials for radio broadcasting rooms? If you say so,devilfinder.com,I reckon that's what I mean. cuhulin |
"Somebody Somewhere" wrote I bought a Terk Q amplified antenna for the Tivoli, but the Terk is a POS. No matter how much I tweak the Terk's knobs, I can't get satisfactory reception of DX stations. It tends to overload the receiver and stations pop up on frequencies they don't belong on. Backing off the gain helps, but then all I can hear are locals. The simple wire antenna provided with the Tivoli gives cleaner reception. The Terk AM Loop is not amplified - it is a passive antenna. It works very well with my Sony portables as well as the "Recepter". Avoid the Terk AM/FM loop as I heard it is not as good. Amplified antennas (pre-amps), like the Terk Q, in general are prone to overloading the front end of most receivers. I never use them unless I'm working OSCAR satellites :-) |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com