[BC] Re: It's Eureka over IBOC down under

[RRSounds@aol.com]

It makes me feel so old to say this, BUT...

When I was young, Broadcast FM radio was the cleanest, most dynamic and 
spectrally broad, lowest distortion audio source most people had access too.?

Of course the engineering staff at any particular station had quite a bit of 
control over how seriously they took that capability, but nonetheless, 
technically FM could equal or beat any other consumer audio source!

And while one could listen to FM on inferior equipment and have an inferior 
but adequate listening experience, one could also spend more and ultimately 
have a more hi-fi experience. The 'adequate' experience was merely one subset of 
the bigger universe of radio listening.

The present paradigm doesn't allow for that. The better the receiving 
equipment you buy, the worse broadcast radio sounds, because all kinds of artifacts 
are revealed. And it's not just FM, which still CAN sound very very good. IBOC 
or any grossly data-reduced system plays to a rather low common denominator, 
welding into place a level of quality that no receiver, no matter how 
expensive, can improve upon because it is never transmitted in the first place.

I'm not talking about content, or what the other content providers are doing. 
That's a whole different discussion.?I'm talking about the relative technical 
status of OUR delivery system. We have long ago let slip any hold on the 
title "state of the art." How it happened, and who to blame is yet another 
discussion. I'll let someone else point the fingers.

Maybe, "adequate" or "entertainment-quality" audio is what we're destined to 
provide for the future. So be it. I have no illusions. I'll do the best I can 
within those confines, working to offer the best listening experience I can. I 
think most of us want to.

But I sure wish there was a way to work toward bringing at least some of the 
OLD paradigm to the listening experience, where, if you wanted to and could 
afford it, you could turn on a RADIO to hear the reference, the best quality 
audio available to the consumer.

Kind Regards!
David P. Reaves, III
TransLanTech Sound, LLC
Home of the Award-winning "Ariane Sequel" Digital Audio Leveler


On?Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:25:32 -0700,?"wfifeng at aol.com" <reader at oldradio.com>
?wrote:
<<
In a message dated 10/20/2005 9:33:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Robertm at broadcast.net writes:


Robert Orban wrote:

At this point in time, Eureka 147 is a 15-year-old, dated technology.
Bob Orban

?And has few listeners because the general public could care less about
digital radio.


Right... we keep coming back to that "What's in it for me?" thing, don't we?

Why should someone fork over $300 for the "digital" version, when the $30
analog will give them the same programming, news, weather, sports,?
music, talk,
etc... and wake them up (and/or go with them to work) in the morning?

Someone else mentioned how when we were kids, we loved out little $5
"Flavoradios" with their 2" speakers. Then we loved our little?
"Spark-o-Matic" stereo
systems with the pressboard speakers that had 3" drivers in them. This is the
age-group that's listening to the 64Kbps MP3's on their earbuds & ipods. This
is the marketplace that so many advertisers are fawning over... and these are
the consumers who are asking "What's in it for me?"

Willie...
>>