Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,ba.broadcast
dxAce dxAce is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio



Randy Yates wrote:

Steve writes:
[...]
This might seem pedantic, but please avoid the term "newsgroups".


Go play with your gee-haw whimmy diddle.


Best you go whack off with 'David Eduardo', everyones favourite faux Hispanic.


  #202   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,ba.broadcast
Randy Yates Randy Yates is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 839
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

dxAce writes:

Randy Yates wrote:

Steve writes:
[...]
This might seem pedantic, but please avoid the term "newsgroups".


Go play with your gee-haw whimmy diddle.


Best you go whack off with 'David Eduardo', everyones favourite faux Hispanic.


Why would I do that when I can have your vagina?
--
% Randy Yates % "So now it's getting late,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % and those who hesitate
%%% 919-577-9882 % got no one..."
%%%% % 'Waterfall', *Face The Music*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
  #203   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
SFTV_troy SFTV_troy is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 132
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


Telamon wrote:

You never finnish your sentences. You mean sounds good to tin ears.




Uh huh. On the day you learn manners...... well, that will never
happen, so why waste time discussing it. A man of your advanced age
has always acted like a childish ill-manned person, and probably
always will act like a childish ill-manned person.

  #204   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
SFTV_troy SFTV_troy is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 132
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


Steve wrote:
RHF writes:

A custom-created group in Google or Yahoo does not
a usenet newsgroup make.


Umm...this may also seem pedantic, but please don't refer
to true usenet groups as "newsgroups". Thanks.


Why not? Usenet does:
Newsgroups:
rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,b a.broadcast
Subject: HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio
Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2007 16:55:01 -0400




Oh well. I'm not surprised. Assholes usually are wrong. Ho suck a
cock you son of a bitch.

  #205   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Steve[_12_] Steve[_12_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 76
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Oct 9, 1:03 pm, SFTV_troy wrote:
Steve wrote:
RHF writes:


A custom-created group in Google or Yahoo does not
a usenet newsgroup make.


Umm...this may also seem pedantic, but please don't refer
to true usenet groups as "newsgroups". Thanks.


Why not? Usenet does:
Newsgroups:
rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,b a.broadcast
Subject: HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio
Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2007 16:55:01 -0400

Oh well. I'm not surprised. Assholes usually are wrong. Ho suck a
cock you son of a bitch.


Why not just ask them, nicely, to stop? There's no need to berate them
for their mistake.



  #206   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
RHF RHF is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 131
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Oct 9, 10:00 am, SFTV_troy wrote:
Telamon wrote:

- - You never finnish your sentences. You mean sounds good to tin
ears.
-
- Uh huh. On the day you learn manners...... well, that will never
- happen, so why waste time discussing it. A man of your advanced age
- has always acted like a childish ill-manned person, and probably
- always will act like a childish ill-manned person.

SFTV -aka- "Hybrid Digital" Man,

At best it could be say that 'you' Parrot everyone else's behavior
toward you : Which is a direct result of your actions to begin with.

* You seem to have a personal 'issue'
with those who are much older than you.

* Your Posts and Replies often have a
Mean Spirited 'Tone' to to them.

hopefully you will reflect on these comments ~ RHF
  #207   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Telamon Telamon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 116
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

In article . com,
SFTV_troy wrote:

Telamon wrote:

You never finnish your sentences. You mean sounds good to tin ears.




Uh huh. On the day you learn manners...... well, that will never
happen, so why waste time discussing it. A man of your advanced age
has always acted like a childish ill-manned person, and probably
always will act like a childish ill-manned person.


Are you a gay digital engineer Miss manners?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
  #208   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
RHF RHF is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 131
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Sep 29, 1:09 pm, SFTV_troy wrote:
I posted this at rec.audio. I'll crosspost it here, as my response is
still the same:

HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

I hear a LOT of people complaining about Hybrid Digital Radio, but
from what I've heard from European listeners, HDR is no worse than DAB
(poor quality audio;worse than FM), or DRB (both poor quality &
interference w/ existing AM stations).

Thoughts?

Opinions?

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).

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

Or have your FM station suddenly multiply from 1 station to 4
stations (offering, for example, 2000s-era music on the main channel)
(and 90s, 80s, 70s on the 3 sub-channels). Or maybe a Jazz station
dividing itself into Modern Jazz, Mid-Century Jazz, and Classic Big
Band-era Jazz. FM could effectively triple its number of channels.

Well the IDEA is sound, even if the analog-to-digital (HD, DAB, DRM)
transition has some growing pains to overcome.


Tech Survey III : "HD" Radio Findings - Jacobs Media
http://www.jacobsmedia.com/articles/tech3_hdradio.asp
-by- Fred Jacobs -Dated- 14 Mayo 2007

The Good News : Awareness and Knowledge are much Improved.

The Bad News : Major Barriers to Purchase an HD Radio remain.

"Jacobs Media's Third Annual Technology Web Poll,
conducted among more than 25,000 Rock Radio
Listeners around the U.S., paints a mixed picture
for the future of HD Radio."

Key Findings :
Graphic - HD Radio Familiarity
Graphic - Strength of Knowledge About HD Radio
Graphic - Likelihood of Buying an HD Radio
Graphic - HD Radio Most Important Feature
Graphic - Barriers to Puchasing an HD Radio
Graphic - Desirable Features - Next Car

COPYRIGHT © 2007 JACOBS MEDIA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

hy dee ray dee oh ~ RHF
Hello and Welcome to the "HD Radio" NewsGroup
HD RADIO = http://groups.google.com/group/hd-radio/
.

  #209   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Earl Kiosterud Earl Kiosterud is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 132
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio



"Robert Orban" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...



"SFTV_troy" blabbed:
... this new receiving technique would not improve the sound
(it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would only reduce
interference.

At least in the States, AM & FM broadcasting is limited to 50 Hz to 15KHz.


There is no low frequency limit for either AM or FM; 50 Hz was the minimum
performance standard that would meet the now long-deleted FCC Proof of
Performance measurements.

The effective HF limit on FM is about 18.5 kHz; this leaves a +/- 500 Hz guard
band for the stereo pilot tone. Again, 15 kHz was the minimum spec that would
pass a Proof of Performance, not a limit on bandwidth.

Currently, the legal FCC-mandated HF limit on AM in the US is a hair less than
10 kHz, which almost completely protects second-adjacent stations from
interference. This was changed around 1990 as a result of work done by the
National Radio Systems Committee (NRSC). More recent work by the NRSC has
indicated that 7 kHz is probably the optimum compromise between causing
interference and loss of audio quality on typical AM radios (which are down 3
dB at about 2.6 kHz). However, limiting bandwidth to 7 kHz is voluntary.


Robert,

Was AM radio ever allowed audio to 15 KHz? I read many years ago that it was, perhaps
before the NRSC recommendation was adopted by the FCC. I presumed that the stations either
were allowed to overlap 5 KHz (doubtful), or that stations in a given area were separated by
at least 30 KHz.
--
Regards from Virginia Beach,

Earl Kiosterud
www.smokeylake.com



  #210   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Don Pearce Don Pearce is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,726
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 15:59:17 GMT, "Earl Kiosterud"
wrote:

Was AM radio ever allowed audio to 15 KHz? I read many years ago that it was, perhaps
before the NRSC recommendation was adopted by the FCC. I presumed that the stations either
were allowed to overlap 5 KHz (doubtful), or that stations in a given area were separated by
at least 30 KHz.
--
Regards from Virginia Beach,

Earl Kiosterud
www.smokeylake.com



Years ago, here in London an interesting thing happened. Audio was fed
to our big AM transmitter by landline, which had a hopeless frequency
response, losing a great deal of HF. This was equalised in the channel
filter for the transmitter, resulting in flat AM out to about 5kHz.

Anyway, at some point the land line was replaced with a much better
one, but nobody thought to tweak the channel filter to suit the new
frequency response, resulting in audio which was flattish out to at
least 12 if not 15kHz. we had really good quality AM for quite a
while.

d

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


  #211   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Eric F. Richards Eric F. Richards is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

"Earl Kiosterud" wrote:



Robert,

Was AM radio ever allowed audio to 15 KHz? I read many years ago that it was, perhaps
before the NRSC recommendation was adopted by the FCC. I presumed that the stations either
were allowed to overlap 5 KHz (doubtful), or that stations in a given area were separated by
at least 30 KHz.



I'm not Robert, but...

Prior to FM multiplex stereo, there were some experimental stereo
broadcasters who transmitted one channel on FM and the other on AM. A
friend of mine has an old Lafayette tuner set up this way, along with
a plug-in jack for a multiplex adapter when they became available.

I think there was quite a large amount of effort to produce wideband
AM. Amplitude modulation itself certainly has no such limitations;
however it is possible that tuning the tower system to handle that
wide a bandwitdth within MW would be a problem. Don't know.


--
Eric F. Richards,
"It's the Din of iBiquity." -- Frank Dresser
  #212   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Chronic Philharmonic Chronic Philharmonic is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 90
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio



"Earl Kiosterud" wrote in message
newst%Yi.403$CI1.60@trnddc03...


"Robert Orban" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...



"SFTV_troy" blabbed:
... this new receiving technique would not improve the sound
(it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would only reduce
interference.

At least in the States, AM & FM broadcasting is limited to 50 Hz to
15KHz.


There is no low frequency limit for either AM or FM; 50 Hz was the
minimum
performance standard that would meet the now long-deleted FCC Proof of
Performance measurements.

The effective HF limit on FM is about 18.5 kHz; this leaves a +/- 500 Hz
guard
band for the stereo pilot tone. Again, 15 kHz was the minimum spec that
would
pass a Proof of Performance, not a limit on bandwidth.

Currently, the legal FCC-mandated HF limit on AM in the US is a hair less
than
10 kHz, which almost completely protects second-adjacent stations from
interference. This was changed around 1990 as a result of work done by
the
National Radio Systems Committee (NRSC). More recent work by the NRSC has
indicated that 7 kHz is probably the optimum compromise between causing
interference and loss of audio quality on typical AM radios (which are
down 3
dB at about 2.6 kHz). However, limiting bandwidth to 7 kHz is voluntary.


Robert,

Was AM radio ever allowed audio to 15 KHz? I read many years ago that it
was, perhaps before the NRSC recommendation was adopted by the FCC. I
presumed that the stations either were allowed to overlap 5 KHz
(doubtful), or that stations in a given area were separated by at least 30
KHz.
--
Regards from Virginia Beach,

Earl Kiosterud
www.smokeylake.com


I was a broadcast engineer in the late 1970s to the late 1980s. At that time
(before NRSC) AM was required to transmit a minimum 5KHz bandwidth, but the
maximum modulated bandwidth was not really defined. There were limits on
"spurious" emissions, caused by audio distortion products and carrier
harmonics. I don't recall the exact mask, but 15KHz was legal at that time.
Our studio transmitter link was a Mosely PCL-505, which was flat to 15KHz,
and we employed no artificial band limiting, so the station was flat to at
least 12KHz. Our tower was the limiting factor for bandwidth. It sounded
just like monophonic FM on the modulation monitor.

During the day there was no overlap, because stations were allocated on
second alternate channels in most markets. Local stations that did overlap
usually worked out a solution amongst themselves if the interference was
objectionable. At night it got quite a bit noisier as distant stations would
skip into the area, but it wasn't generally sidebands that caused the
problem, it was the carriers themselves, each whining away at 10KHz. That is
still a problem, even today.

The real problem was that in the late 1980s, AM stations began adding
proprietary "pre-emphasis" -- high frequency boost to make their station
sound brighter on typical pathetically band-limited AM receivers. This can
and did cause severe interference in some congested markets. Partially to
address this, and to standardize the pre-emphasis, NRSC limited AM sidebands
to 10KHz in the early 1990s. Since most AM radios do not even come close to
being flat to 5KHz, 10 KHz is still two or three times more bandwidth than
most listeners can use.



  #213   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Steven Steven is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 138
Default HD RADIO is NO!, and your mother will back me up so don't bother asking

On Sep 30, 3:48 pm, "Soundhaspriority" wrote:
"Steven" wrote in message

ups.com...



On Sep 30, 3:09 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"SoCal Tom" wrote in message


...


"SFTV_troy" blabbed:
... this new receiving technique would not improve the sound
(it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would only reduce
interference.


At least in the States, AM & FM broadcasting is limited to 50 Hz to
15KHz.


AM is restricted by the NRSC standard to a 10 kHz brick wall.


Digital broadcasting is limited to under 20 Hz to over 20KHz, or
basically, the extent of the normal human hearing range.


If you're listening to 100 to 6,000 Hz, you're listening to a poor
telephone connection.


Bob Orban, on the NRSC committee, found that consumer radios almost
without
exception, rolled off by at least 10 db by 4.2 kHz, and passed
practically
nothing over 5 kHz.


Bob Orban is the alien from the late Weekly World News.


god darn it, we've had EVERY TROLL in the group except the K-Man, the
Scott Lifshine/Wereo entity, and the RRAP brigade in this thread!


Morein/McCarty/66.6% of the world's asshole postings has chimed in
even.


Steven ?,
I haven't seen McCarty in this thread yet, though I'm sure he's reading
it. I sign my post with my phone number, and you can really reach me at it,
so please don't put me down with the anonymous asshole brigade.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Thought you could hide, asshole, but you're just an average asshole
and not very good.

  #215   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Doug McDonald Doug McDonald is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

Jason wrote:


A ham buddy of mine who was a transmitter engineer at WLWO, the VOA
station that shared the Mason site with WLW, built a high-tech crystal
set (multiple tuned RF stages) to see how good AM could sound. It was
remarkable.


I once tried a simple single-tuned crystal AM radio connected directly
to a guy wire of a 5 kW AM station, feeding a KEF 105 speaker. It sounded
wonderful.

Doug McDonald


  #216   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech, rec.audio.car, rec.radio.shortwave, ba.broadcast
Steven Steven is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 138
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Nov 21, 11:40 am, Doug McDonald
wrote:
Jason wrote:

A ham buddy of mine who was a transmitter engineer at WLWO, the VOA
station that shared the Mason site with WLW, built a high-tech crystal
set (multiple tuned RF stages) to see how good AM could sound. It was
remarkable.


I once tried a simple single-tuned crystal AM radio connected directly
to a guy wire of a 5 kW AM station, feeding a KEF 105 speaker. It sounded
wonderful.

Doug McDonald


I'm only half a mile away from the towers and I don't need a single
tuned crystal nor does my TV or computer bug it.

I'm not sure why IBOC means much to RRS but then again the IBOC
whiners' cabal/snake reproductive schemers that post these retarded
flaming marshmallows minus chocolate and graham crackers and their
hairdressers do.
  #217   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Billy Burpelson Billy Burpelson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

Doug McDonald wrote:
Jason wrote:


A ham buddy of mine who was a transmitter engineer at WLWO, the VOA
station that shared the Mason site with WLW, built a high-tech crystal
set (multiple tuned RF stages) to see how good AM could sound. It was
remarkable.


I once tried a simple single-tuned crystal AM radio connected directly
to a guy wire of a 5 kW AM station, feeding a KEF 105 speaker. It sounded
wonderful.

Doug McDonald


When I was restoring a ca. 1915 loose-coupler crystal set, I was
actually startled by how good it sounded. No pesky IF or AF stages to
add distortion or pass band limiting!
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio [email protected] Car Audio 207 November 22nd 07 04:44 AM
FA: New Delco GM Chevy OEM CD/Radio w/Nav TV Aux Connector (for IPod,DVD,Sat Radio etc.) dg Marketplace 0 February 20th 06 04:38 PM
FA 1953 Crosley radio D25CE "dashboard radio" AHoudini Vacuum Tubes 0 October 21st 04 02:02 AM
Radio reception worse than factory radio, antenna adapter? AC/DCdude17 Car Audio 3 December 24th 03 03:17 PM
HD Radio = mp3 radio, only worse. Dan Popp Pro Audio 25 October 9th 03 02:17 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:40 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"