[BC] AM Stereo

[Mike McCarthy]

  The curve was also a noise reduction tool...ostensibly for the same 
reason as FM.

Let's not forget except for the few capable of AM stereo, the VAST 
majority of stationary and portable receiver manufacturing didn't do a 
damn thing to incorporate the NRSC curve and filter in their receivers. 
Carver and as I recall, one or two others implemented the curves in 
their stationary gear. Many manufacturers had one model as sampler to 
see how it would sell.  YAWN...  But the $20 table or boom box special 
at K-Mart didn't and it's om those radios where it was needed the most 
other than vehicles.

MM

On 11/25/2010 11:22 PM, Jerry Mathis wrote:
> I understand and I agree with what you say, but we were talking about sound quality, and not content.
>
> FWIW, I don't listen to Rush, and while I have nothing against it, I don't listen to Coast to Coast either.
>
> Perhaps age has affected my memory, but I DISTINCTLY remember that the advertised purpose of NRSC was not only to lessen interference between stations, but to bring back high fidelity AM broadcasting, with receivers again having close to 10 kHz bandwidth. Does anyone remember a campaign (albeit weakly pushed) called AMAX?
>
> What's gotten my tighty-whiteys in a knot is that I'm now being told that the whole purpose of NRSC was to benefit car manufacturers who didn't want to deal with auto radio complaints. IOW, the AM BROADCAST INDUSTRY bore the costs of benefitting the car makers--and we got NOT ONE DAMN THING in return. Sorry for the profanity here, but I think it's warranted.
>