[BC] Re: HD Receiver

[Scott Fybush]

Robert Orban wrote:

> I compared the Polk and BA with exactly the same antenna. The BA got 
> more HD FM stations than the Polk did. My BA is definitely not "deaf as 
> a post"; I get somewhere around 20 HD FM stations solidly with my BA, 
> albeit via a big rooftop antenna. OTOH, my BA is worthless on AM because 
> of the proximity of a 1550 kHz TX to my house, which overloads the BA. I 
> don't know if the rumored "BA v2.0" was ever released to fix this problem.
> 
> I am still waiting for the Cambridge Soundworks receiver to be 
> delivered; it is still backordered. Once I get it, I will compare its RF 
> performance with the BA and report to the list.

My (borrowed) BA went back, not because of any problems with the RF 
section or the HD, but because of a quirk that rendered RDS displays 
with the letter "x" as "y" instead. When you work for "WXXI" and it 
appears as "WYYI," that's an issue.

My Accurian seems to be about equally good on FM as the BA was. With the 
rooftop antenna, I get all my HD FM locals and semi-locals (about a 
dozen stations) without much trouble, including a pair of 
second-adjacent class A signals about 30 miles apart in opposite 
directions. Even with only the wire dipole, I can get the closer of that 
pair. With the rooftop antenna, I can also pick out the class B signal 
70 miles away in between those two stations. I'd compare its RF 
performance favorably with my Carver TX11b.

The Accurian does fine with my locals on AM, even with four 5 kW 
stations within two miles of me. I haven't done much DX with it yet.

I'm waiting for the Sangean, which seems to use the same chip as the 
Accurian, but with more features.

s