"Tony Meloche" wrote in message
...

Horse hockey. I'm not saying Leonard's suit didn't hamper the
reality of AM stereo, but if it had become a mainstream thing, "stereo
lo-fi" would have never held it's own against "stereo hi-fi" (FM).
Especially when the FM stations went to virtually ALL types of
programming during the seventies. Prior to that, FM was classical,
alternative (including what was known as "AOR") and as a vanguard,
country.

Nobody loves good old AM radio like I do, but there is no accident
to the fact that AM radio today is very largely 24 hour news, sports,
and talk radio formats. That had a whole lot more to do with changing
technology than it did with Leonard Kahn. Classical music will always
sound tremendously better on FM than AM because of the frequency
bandwith. Classical music (as one example) in AM stereo will sound like
stereo AM radio broadcast of classical music. A pale imitation of
stereo FM broadcast of classical music.

Tony


There is absolutely no reason why AM stereo could not be just as high a
fidelity as FM stereo, and in fact was in many cases. What gives AM
broadcasting the characteristic 'telephone quality' sound it has is mostly
the receiver. There is some pre-transmitter processing to limit the
bandwidth used, but it doesn't need to be there for purposes of transmitting
the signal, only for purposes of limiting said bandwidth. In Portland, we
had several AMS stations with full frequency response (50-15K) just as FM.
And AMS signals didn't degrade the way FM does when in the downtown area or
on the 'dark side' of hills. Admittedly, AM signals can be noisier than FM
on the fringes, but they are better in hilly terrain for the most part than
FM.

Regarding audio for computers,pick up a PC Magazine www.pcmag.com I
subscribe to the snail mail issues of that magazine and also Smart
Computing magazine. www.smartcomputing.com (I have the magazine
right here on the end table by my couch) for April 26,2005.Bill Machrone
has a good article on page 45 in the magazine about audio for computers
and he provides a website in the magazine to check out.
http://machrone.home.comcast.net/pla...distortion.htm

Comcast originated right here in Jackson,Mississippi.I bet y'all didn't
know that.Enjoy my webtv toy,you say? I do enjoy useing my webtv "toy"
but it is not a toy.I can learn and do all of those computer thingys you
listed in your post,but the thing about that is,those thingys just do
not interest me at all.Did I mention before I bought a new Velocity
Micro,ProMagix tower computer last year from www.velocitymicro.com
and I have broad band internet access? Do you think I am lieing about
that? I never lie about anything.email me and I will forward information
about my computer to you if you want to check it out.I bought my
computer for $1,290.00 and I bought it for one thing and one thing
only,World War Two gaming.My money and my computer and my decision.
cuhulin

In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote:

"Tony Meloche" wrote in message
...

Horse hockey. I'm not saying Leonard's suit didn't hamper the
reality of AM stereo, but if it had become a mainstream thing, "stereo
lo-fi" would have never held it's own against "stereo hi-fi" (FM).
Especially when the FM stations went to virtually ALL types of
programming during the seventies. Prior to that, FM was classical,
alternative (including what was known as "AOR") and as a vanguard,
country.

Nobody loves good old AM radio like I do, but there is no accident
to the fact that AM radio today is very largely 24 hour news, sports,
and talk radio formats. That had a whole lot more to do with changing
technology than it did with Leonard Kahn. Classical music will always
sound tremendously better on FM than AM because of the frequency
bandwith. Classical music (as one example) in AM stereo will sound like
stereo AM radio broadcast of classical music. A pale imitation of
stereo FM broadcast of classical music.

Tony


There is absolutely no reason why AM stereo could not be just as high a
fidelity as FM stereo, and in fact was in many cases. What gives AM
broadcasting the characteristic 'telephone quality' sound it has is mostly
the receiver. There is some pre-transmitter processing to limit the
bandwidth used, but it doesn't need to be there for purposes of transmitting
the signal, only for purposes of limiting said bandwidth. In Portland, we
had several AMS stations with full frequency response (50-15K) just as FM.
And AMS signals didn't degrade the way FM does when in the downtown area or
on the 'dark side' of hills. Admittedly, AM signals can be noisier than FM
on the fringes, but they are better in hilly terrain for the most part than
FM.

This is not an AM or FM characteristic but a frequency and polarity one
when it comes down to downtown and hilly environment reception
differences you made in your post.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote:

"Tony Meloche" wrote in message
...

Horse hockey. I'm not saying Leonard's suit didn't hamper the
reality of AM stereo, but if it had become a mainstream thing, "stereo
lo-fi" would have never held it's own against "stereo hi-fi" (FM).
Especially when the FM stations went to virtually ALL types of
programming during the seventies. Prior to that, FM was classical,
alternative (including what was known as "AOR") and as a vanguard,
country.

Nobody loves good old AM radio like I do, but there is no accident
to the fact that AM radio today is very largely 24 hour news, sports,
and talk radio formats. That had a whole lot more to do with changing
technology than it did with Leonard Kahn. Classical music will always
sound tremendously better on FM than AM because of the frequency
bandwith. Classical music (as one example) in AM stereo will sound
like
stereo AM radio broadcast of classical music. A pale imitation of
stereo FM broadcast of classical music.

Tony


There is absolutely no reason why AM stereo could not be just as high a
fidelity as FM stereo, and in fact was in many cases. What gives AM
broadcasting the characteristic 'telephone quality' sound it has is
mostly
the receiver. There is some pre-transmitter processing to limit the
bandwidth used, but it doesn't need to be there for purposes of
transmitting
the signal, only for purposes of limiting said bandwidth. In Portland,
we
had several AMS stations with full frequency response (50-15K) just as
FM.
And AMS signals didn't degrade the way FM does when in the downtown area
or
on the 'dark side' of hills. Admittedly, AM signals can be noisier than
FM
on the fringes, but they are better in hilly terrain for the most part
than
FM.

This is not an AM or FM characteristic but a frequency and polarity one
when it comes down to downtown and hilly environment reception
differences you made in your post.


That was sort of my point. The lack of fidelity has nothing at all to do
with the mode of modulation, and everything to do with artificially
restricting factors.

"Brenda Ann" wrote:


"Tony Meloche" wrote in message
...

Horse hockey. I'm not saying Leonard's suit didn't hamper the
reality of AM stereo, but if it had become a mainstream thing, "stereo
lo-fi" would have never held it's own against "stereo hi-fi" (FM).
[...]

Tony


There is absolutely no reason why AM stereo could not be just as high a
fidelity as FM stereo, and in fact was in many cases. What gives AM
broadcasting the characteristic 'telephone quality' sound it has is mostly
the receiver. There is some pre-transmitter processing to limit the
bandwidth used, but it doesn't need to be there for purposes of transmitting
the signal, only for purposes of limiting said bandwidth. In Portland, we
had several AMS stations with full frequency response (50-15K) just as FM.
And AMS signals didn't degrade the way FM does when in the downtown area or
on the 'dark side' of hills. Admittedly, AM signals can be noisier than FM
on the fringes, but they are better in hilly terrain for the most part than
FM.


In the brief period of broadcast stereo before FM multiplex stereo,
often one channel is carried on AM and the other on FM. I borrowed
one of those receivers in my college days and the AM performance was
astounding. Brenda Ann is right: Most AM receiver designs today
simply ignore fidelity as an issue.

--
Eric F. Richards

"Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass,
often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 07:28:07 -0600, Eric F. Richards
In the brief period of broadcast stereo before FM multiplex stereo,
often one channel is carried on AM and the other on FM. I borrowed
one of those receivers in my college days and the AM performance was
astounding. Brenda Ann is right: Most AM receiver designs today
simply ignore fidelity as an issue.
That's the FCC's fault. There are too many stations and the
bandwidths (both transmit and receive) have to be narrow or the
splatter would drive the few remaining nut jobs that still listen to
AM away.

Eric F. Richards wrote:



In the brief period of broadcast stereo before FM multiplex stereo,
often one channel is carried on AM and the other on FM. I borrowed
one of those receivers in my college days and the AM performance was
astounding. Brenda Ann is right: Most AM receiver designs today
simply ignore fidelity as an issue.



True enough - any "American Five" of the 1950's gave better AM
performance than the AM tuner in any modern stereo receiver, for
example. But the industry as a whole just didn't invest the time or
effort in making AM as good a broadcast medium as FM, and there was
certainly no consumer demand for it, either - or at least not enough to
make a difference. When CD's came in, I was astonished at how quickly
they swept away vinyl - even quicker than the most optimistic
projections. The consumer market loved them, and that was that. AM
stereo was one of those things that simply didn't "catch on", and as I
said, largely (if not completely) because it was seen, understandably as
"reinventing the wheel".

Tony

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

When CD's came in, I was astonished at how quickly
they swept away vinyl -

As a matter of fact, when CDs came in, it was cassette tapes that they
swept away. Cassettes had been out-selling LPs for several years before
the arrival of CDs. AM stereo sounded as good as, or better than, your
typical cassette tape, to my ears. There's no accounting for popular
tastes!

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 17:28:53 -0400, Tony Meloche
wrote:

Eric F. Richards wrote:



In the brief period of broadcast stereo before FM multiplex stereo,
often one channel is carried on AM and the other on FM. I borrowed
one of those receivers in my college days and the AM performance was
astounding. Brenda Ann is right: Most AM receiver designs today
simply ignore fidelity as an issue.



True enough - any "American Five" of the 1950's gave better AM
performance than the AM tuner in any modern stereo receiver, for
example. But the industry as a whole just didn't invest the time or
effort in making AM as good a broadcast medium as FM, and there was
certainly no consumer demand for it, either - or at least not enough to
make a difference. When CD's came in, I was astonished at how quickly
they swept away vinyl - even quicker than the most optimistic
projections. The consumer market loved them, and that was that. AM
stereo was one of those things that simply didn't "catch on", and as I
said, largely (if not completely) because it was seen, understandably as
"reinventing the wheel".

Tony

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

CD's are popular because they don't get scratched. The average person
can't tell the difference between a phone call and FM.

CD's and DVD's can and often do get scratches.I see them all the time in
the thrift stores here.There are clear flexible plastic covers available
at stores which sell electronics.I use them on my Scotch and Irish music
CD's and my computer CD's.
cuhulin