🚀 go-pugleaf

Frank Dresser wrote:
> "SFTV_troy" <SFTV_troy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >
> > Wouldn't it be cool to have 5.1 surround from your radio?
>
> Neither AM nor FM are currently broadcast close to thier technical fidelity
> limits.  Plenty of people are happy with the current mid-fi radio and
> perfect audio reproduction, even if it were possible, would not bring in
> more listeners.

I agree with that.  What would attract people to HD Radio is seeing
their favorite stations (like mine: FM97) multiply into 3 or 4
channels..... thus giving more choices to the listener.


> 5.1 surround would drive listeners away.  People use the radio for
> backround sound.  People listen in the car.  A wide dynamic
> range would go from lost in the ambient noise to the jarring.  ...

Just because you have 5.1, doesn't mean you'd have a large dynamic
range.  One does not imply the other.

> And broadcast high fidelity has been tried several times.  Wideband AM was
> first tried in the 30s.  FM radio took a generation to get going, despite
> it's noise immunity.  AM stereo failed after a good sincere attempt.


I would hardly call having 4 incompatible methods a "good attempt".
More like a "bass backwards" attempt.  Had the FCC selected a single
standard, AM stereo would be as popular in the U.S., as it currently
is in Canada, Japan, and Australia.  In those nations, virtually every
station is broadcast in AM Stereo.

As for FM, it was stifled by the AM corporations trying to crush it.
First they delayed its introduction by twenty years via regulatory
roadblocks (else we'd have it in the late 30s), and then they tried to
kill it by giving it inferior programs while saving the best stuff for
AM.

Point: FM and AM Stereo were stifled NOT by disinterest in high
fidelity, but because of poor handling.



> > your FM station suddenly multiply from 1 to 4
>
> So?  In most markets, most listeners are listening to a
> few stations.  The bulk of the stations get by with less.

Got a citation to back-up this opinion?  You stated it as a fact, so
I'd like to see what study you are using to back up that fact.

Thank you.