In article ,
"Frank Dresser" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Frank Dresser" wrote:

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

[snip]


No, most people don't realize there is no stereo separation because
the
lit
stereo light convinces them it is stereo when it is not.

[snip]

Let's not forget about modern FM car radios. My car's radio blends from
stereo to mono quite seamlessly as signals become less than ideal. If I
pay
attention, I'll notice that the reception is in weak stereo or full mono
much of the time. That's preferable because there's practially no
distorted
audio, abrupt switches from stereo to mono and picket fencing that come
with
full time stereo car radios. All the while, the stereo light never
blinks
off.

The stereo indicator only lights when a 19KHz pilot carrier is present.
The program material could be monophonic or stereo.


Yes, but the stereo demodulator blends to mono as the signal weakens. Mono
demodulation needs far less signal to get a good signal to noise radio. And
this isn't the stereo to mono auto switching the older demodulators used,
it's a gradual blend without an abrupt shift. The system works quite well
and I'm sure much of the time it's working as a mono demodulator on weak
signal stereo programming. There isn't even a stereo-mono switch on the
radio. It doesn't need one.

I haven't kept up with developments. How is this blending accomplished?
Maybe you could point me toward someone's FM demodulator chip.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

It's called a concept. I understand music bands have been engaged in
the
same process trying to sound louder than the other bands.

Untrue. The "loudness" is done in mixdown and mastering. Most producers
of
contemporary music look for a heavy, dense sound.

It is true. Take the cotton out of your ears. Of course it is done with
track mixing. You think the musicians are compressing their physical
instruments? Hilarious!

You said the bands were responsible. They are not. And mixdown is a lot more
than combining tracks at different levels... often individual instruments
are processed individually to bring out a particular "sound" the producer is
after. Again, it's not the band that makes thise decision in 99% of the
cases.

I have never laughed so much over a post! You are outdoing yourself
today.

People resort to MP3 to save disk space not because it sounds good. MP3
is not all the same as you can determine the level of compression.

With terabyte HD's under $200 and 500 gig laptop drives at about $120 and
various memory plug ins at 8 gigs for around $20, there is no need for 128
kbs MP3s... it's simply the de facto standard for consumer audio.

MP3s are not overally intended always to save disk space. They are used at
the high end (256 kbs and 320 kbs) to be infinitely portable and
exchangable. A huge percentage of commercials come to stations now online
and in MP3 format, and most promotional music is in MP3 format... everyone
can play them, every system can use them.

You are funny today. I'm not putting a computer in my car. The CD player
plays CD's only so no MP3 in the car for me so i just burn my own CD's.

And
before you get all crazy dynamic range compression is not the same thing
as data compression.

I realize this. Dynamic range compression is the restriction of the audio
content to a specific range. In this instance, I was discussing MP3's, not
the air chain of a radio station.

Again, the limited dynamic range is necessary to keep al program content
above the noise level of the listening environment. Radio is not the same
as
listening to a CD.

The old record were capable of around 80 dB and CD's are around 90 dB. I
don't see why radio stations can't do 80 dB. The transmitters can handle
85% modulation.

AM can handle 100% negative peaks, and most transmitters of the last few
decades can do maybe 140% on positive peaks.

FM transmitters can do way over 100% modulation, as the standard in the US
is simply +/- 75 kHz deviation for the arbitrary 100% modulation. In fact,
one can go to about 130% before receiver bandwidth shape factors make it
start sounding ugly.

Dynamic range is limited to make radio listenable in the typical
environments radio is heard in. The dominant factor is in-car, where if you
go beyond about 8 to 10 db noise masks some of the audio. So all other
environments where radio is used are subject to the limits of the worst one,
which is mostly in-car.

And as for previous statements about table top radio with speakers only
a foot apart being worthless for stereo these can generate decent stereo
separation through electronic delay processing.

I said no such thing, and you are lying. I said that many so-called stereo
clock radios have speakers that are 3" to 4" apart, and unless you put your
head within a few inches of the radio, the stereo effect is lost.

Yeah whatever. Some have delay processing between the channels that can
pretty good however far apart the speakers are and you don't need to
stick your head up next to the radio for it to work.

Hey, I just heard a spot for HD radio. I can answer it this way,
American's are smart enough to stay away from it. Ha, ha.

And you know so little about consumer behaviour that you should be written
up as a case study.

You are defiantly a very special case 6 dB man.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
.
..
In article ,

Tom is clairying that the dynamic range of the FM system vs. the
dynamic
range of the program content broadcasters put into the system.

As Tom says, about 95% of the time the material on air is somewhere in
the
vicinity of a 6 db dynamic range.

Good thing he clarified that for you. You were looking pretty stupid.

No, he clarified for you that the system may be capable of much wider
dynamic range, but radio stations reduce the range of the content due to
the
requirements of the market.

I had been saying all along that Brenda Ann's assesment of a dynamic
range
of about 6 db is the norm for program content, not for the system.

A Porsche may be capable of 200 MPH, but the reality of the smoothness of
roads, other traffic and legal restrictions makes the average owner keep
it
to 60 to 80 MPH at the top. FM is capable of a very wide dynamic range.
Reality forces stations to limit the range of content.

Hey there 6 dB man, he saved your lying butt.


He saved your misinterpretation of the facts.

He gave you a way out of your dumb assertions 6 dB man.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

dxAce wrote:

David 'Eduardo' Frackelton Gleason wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:
6 db is not much. Good audio is more like 80 to 100 dB.
Not on the radio, where the ambient noise in most listening locations
does
not permit that degree of dynamic range.
Really? what is permissible then?
Brenda Ann already told you... about 6 db
And you criticize me for using widely accepted and broadly syndicated
Arbitron data used by all significant top 300 market stations in the
US,
but
you have taken on the job of being the standard for modulation all by
your
lonesome.
You are nuts.
As I said, if I am all you accuse me of, then everyone in the radio
industry
and even its suppliers is also nuts. I tend to think that you, the lone
doubter, are the one in need of attention.
Nope, just you. I don't think the industry stands behind you.
No, I stand with the industry, which is a very different condition. I've
been on so many NAB, RAB, NAFMB, AIR, NAB Europe, Billboard, R&R, PRBA and
other panels that I have lost track of them. I would not be there were my
opinions and interpretations not respected and welcome.

They simply may not be aware that you are a faux Hispanic and known pathological
liar!



The fake Miami speaks his words of non-wisdom - pot, kettle, black!

JB

John Barnard wrote:

dxAce wrote:

David 'Eduardo' Frackelton Gleason wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:
6 db is not much. Good audio is more like 80 to 100 dB.
Not on the radio, where the ambient noise in most listening locations
does
not permit that degree of dynamic range.
Really? what is permissible then?
Brenda Ann already told you... about 6 db
And you criticize me for using widely accepted and broadly syndicated
Arbitron data used by all significant top 300 market stations in the
US,
but
you have taken on the job of being the standard for modulation all by
your
lonesome.
You are nuts.
As I said, if I am all you accuse me of, then everyone in the radio
industry
and even its suppliers is also nuts. I tend to think that you, the lone
doubter, are the one in need of attention.
Nope, just you. I don't think the industry stands behind you.
No, I stand with the industry, which is a very different condition. I've
been on so many NAB, RAB, NAFMB, AIR, NAB Europe, Billboard, R&R, PRBA and
other panels that I have lost track of them. I would not be there were my
opinions and interpretations not respected and welcome.

They simply may not be aware that you are a faux Hispanic and known pathological
liar!



The fake Miami speaks his words of non-wisdom - pot, kettle, black!

Nothing fake about you, boy! You are indeed a dumbass Canuck!

Now go have mommy tune that radio for you.

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

I haven't kept up with developments. How is this blending accomplished?
Maybe you could point me toward someone's FM demodulator chip.


I believe the troublesome L-R signal is AGC controlled. Strong signal
reception gets full L-R which gets reduced with decreasing signal strength,
while the L+R signal remains at full strength with all signal levels.

Anyway, here's one chip:

http://eshop.engineering.uiowa.edu/N...9/DS007973.pdf


Frank Dresser

In article ,
"Frank Dresser" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

I haven't kept up with developments. How is this blending accomplished?
Maybe you could point me toward someone's FM demodulator chip.


I believe the troublesome L-R signal is AGC controlled. Strong signal
reception gets full L-R which gets reduced with decreasing signal strength,
while the L+R signal remains at full strength with all signal levels.

Anyway, here's one chip:

http://eshop.engineering.uiowa.edu/N...9/DS007973.pdf

I see page 7 has a curve showing 0 to just over 50 dB of separation.

The chip was released back in 1987, interesting.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California