Hear it, See it-Digital Radio, Audio, and Video

Corel's WinDVD 9 Plus--is more really better?

2009-05-22T22:05:00.000-07:00

"G.I.G.O." is a pearl of wisdom I've heard from engineers my entire three and a half decades in radio. In other words..."garbage in, garbage out".

In audiophile circles, this sentiment is expressed something like this: information that's not picked up at the source can't be reproduced at the speakers. If it's not picked up by the microphone (phono pickup, tape head, recording device), then it's lost...forever.

In motion pictures and television, this could be extrapolated to something like "if the camera doesn't capture it, you can't see it on the screen!" It seems obvious enough. But no more! A fascinating area of perceptual science has suddenly, over the last couple of years, yielded startling fruit. We CAN now see more detail than was captured on the original film (or tape, or disc), and even more startling, we CAN see moving images with greater MOTION resolution that was captured by the camera. Don't believe me? I DON'T BLAME YOU! But I challenge you to try a trial version of "WinDVD 9 Plus" from Corel on your favorite film-based, standard definition dvd, with "All2HD" enabled, and "Digital Natural Motion" set to "Best Quality". Suddenly detail that you didn't think was there "SNAPS" into sharp relief...the "magic" of truly excellent "upscaling" (converting the 720 x 480 lines of a DVD into up to 1920 x 1080, or "1080p" resolution") YES it works, and makes standard "def" material look damn close to that shot in "High Def".

But amazing as the increased apparent resolution is, it's the extra resolution of MOTION made possible by the "Digital Natural Motion" that will likely make your jaw drop, as it did mine. We're all used to the "look" of film...and it can be quite glamorous in it's beauty. But the film "look" also includes artifact-ridden motion "judder" caused by the low frame-rate of only 24 frames per second. Live TV, or programming originating on videotape has always had smoother-looking motion, because the frame-rate for video sources is 30 frames per second (actually 29.970, but 30 is close enough for our sake). So why not just run film cameras at 30 frames per second? Well, there's the installed base of projection equipment that runs only at 24 fps. But more than that, people are used to the look of film, and many think the motion artifacts give film extra "character".

So what does WinDVD's "Digital Natural Motion" do? It takes the 24 frames of film-based material, and creates EXTRA frames, up to the refresh-rate of your monitor. If your monitor is set at 60hz (as most are these days), that's an extra 36 frames-per-second. These extra frames are generated "on-the-fly". WinDVD looks at where objects are in one "real" film frame, and the next "real" frame, then creates extra frames at evenly-spaced distances between the two. In other words, you actually see increased motion resolution that WAS NOT captured by the camera. The startling thing is, IT LOOKS REAL! ALL motion on-screen looks SO MUCH SMOOTHER! Is it accurate? HELL NO! And as a purist, you'll have to wrestle with this, as I did. Somehow the "judder" of 24fps film contributes to our distance from what we see onscreen...it reminds the brain "this is not real, it's a movie". Remove this restruction, let motion flow (apparently) as freely as in real life, and "HOLY SHIT BATMAN", the results are, well, STARTLING!

Is there a price to be paid for tinkering with our movies in this way? As Sarah Palin might say, "YOU BETCHA!" Sometimes there are artifacts. Somteimes the smooth motion will "stutter" for a fraction of a second (this is rare). And the technology is REALLY "caught with it's pants down" on material that's SUPPOSED to be "jumpy"...such as sudden slow-motion scenes in films, where the frame rate drops to just a couple of frames per second. "Digital Natural Motion" can go quite insane trying to make what essentially is intended to look like a series of stills look "smooth". Usually these artifacts are obvious only in direct comparison, but they're certainly there. Big deal. It's not perfect!

Using these enhancements in WinDVD will result in your looking at films in an entirely new way. Cinematographers will likely be outrated, as will film purists. But I'll bet even they would find this technology addictive in the long-run. It brings the viewer closer to what was in front of the lens, though not necessarily closer to what was intended to be captured on film. I know in my heart that what I'm seeing on my screen doesn't look at all like what the director and cinematographer saw on theirs. And usually I just don't care.

RadioTime Red Button

2009-05-05T09:47:00.000-07:00

I am a radio addict. I've worked in radio for 35 years, but I've listened my whole life. There are certain programs I JUST CAN'T MISS! And for the last couple of years, I've never had to. Because I leave Radiotime's "Red Button" running in the background all the time.

Radiotime's "Red Button" knows when my favorite shows are on, and captures them to my computer's hard drive. So I NEVER miss "A Prarie Home Companions", "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me", "Mountain Stage", "Whadya' know?", "The Tech Guy" with Leo Laporte, or other tech shows by people like Kim Komando and Dave Graveline.

I've tried other recording programs like "Replay AV" from Applian Technologies and "Total Recorder". Both are excellent at certain tasks, but both are far more complicated to set up than "Red Button". Which increases the likelihood that I'll miss my shows. And both are much bigger "resource hogs", so I wouldn't dare leave them running all the time...which also increases the likelihood that I WILL MISS MY SHOWS! Or I would. But with "Red Button" running, I NEVER miss a show. It's the best 29.95 I ever spent. If you're a dedicated program listener, you simply must try this software! There's even a free trial. http://www.radiotime.com/

Overclock your EEEPC

2009-01-27T07:34:00.000-08:00

I have just successfully "hacked" my Asus EEEPC 4G. Actually it's the latest of several "hacks"...I've managed to install XP Service Pack 3, despite the fact that it doesn't officially "fit" the 4GB internal memory. I did this by (another hack) moving Windows Temp files to the 8GB SDHC card that's permanently installed in the card slot.

Wishing to watch Netflix movies on my EEE, I also moved the temp files for Internet Explorer to my SDHC card (Netflix streaming movies require GIGABYTES of temp room for "buffering").

One of my complaints about the EEE has been that, as delivered, it really doesn't have enough power for flash-based video sites like Hulu...which makes "videos" look more like a slide show (it can, however, play most any video FILE...avi, wmv, mov). Which explains my latest "hack". I downloaded a utility called "EEECTL" from http://www.cpp.in/dev/eeectl/

NOTE: OVERCLOCKING IS POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS...especially if overdone and without the precautions discussed, and VOIDS YOUR WARRANTY! OVERCLOCKING CAN TURN YOUR COMPUTER INTO A PAPERWEIGHT! The faint of heart should stop reading NOW!

EEECTL is an executable program, which will need to be started every time you use it. A good thing, as you don't want to overclock your "little buddy" when reading e-mail, or "surfing"...that's just running the battery down quickly for no good reason. Once started, right-clicking the icon in the task bar allows you to adjust the clock speed to "stock" (601mhz), "medium" (828mhz), and "Full" (900mhz...the actual rated speed of the EEE's Celeron processor). Other adjustments are "FAN" (set to "100 percent" when overclocking!), and "Screen Brightness" (this can REALLY brighten the screen...at the cost of lots more battery drain!)

To verify that EEECTL was actually doing what it claimed, I downloaded CPU-Z from Download.com http://www.download.com/ This is a great utility, allowing you to read clock speed, and MANY OTHER parameters of your system! First I measured the clock speed without EEECTL, and it measured exactly 601mhz. With EEECTL set to "FULL" the clock speed was 900mnz, as claimed! (Allow your system a few seconds for changes to take effect).

At the 900mhz speed, Flash video was "smooth as buttery on hot toast"! Everything else was snappier as well. But the bottom of my EEE ran noticably warmer, so I turned the fan up to 100 percent, and recommend you NEVER overclock without taking this precaution.

This "hack" gives such a performance advantage, that I can't imagine why any technically-minded EEE user wouldn't keep EEECTL handy on their system to use when you need that little extra "kick-in-the-pants" that only "more power" can provide!

Got any other useful "hacks" for your EEE? TELL ME PLEASE!

Fiio E5 portable headphone amplifier

2009-01-12T11:36:00.000-08:00

A music lover who's also a gadget lover will eventually stumble onto the substantial niche market of headphone amplifiers. YES, the observant among us will note that your receiver, mp3 player, and even laptop already have headphone amps built in, so what's the point? The point is that the headphone amps in these devices are often either of dubious quality, or inadequate for driving high impedance headphones (more than 100 ohms), or difficult to drive ones (lower than 85db sensitivity). There's one other benefit. Relieved of the chore of driving headphones, the battery in your portable device will last longer.

Companies like Headroom ( http://www.headroom.com ), Antique Sound Lab ( http://www.divertech.com/antiquesl.html ), and Musical Fidelity ( http://www.musicalfidelity.com/products/smlx/xcanv8.html ), Grado Labs ( http://www.gradolabs.com/frameset_main.htm ) and others have created and nurtured a cottage industry manufacturing headphone amplifiers for some time now. Headroom can be credited with more or less creating the PORTABLE headphone amplifier market. I have their first portable amp, the Airhead, and it's a great little product. Koss also makes an inexpensive model with a built-in equalizer, the EQ 50 ( http://www.koss.com/koss/kossweb.nsf/p?openform&pc^ac^EQ50 ). While not without faults, one wouldn't expect it to be for the (about) twenty bucks it sells for. It sounds good, and can add "oomph" to, for instance, my portable cd player which has a headphone output that's quite anemic.

Then there's Fiio, a Chinese company that specializes in portable audio devices with tons of value for the money. Their first headphone amp, the E3 didn't have a volume control! The one under review here DOES ( http://www.fiio.com.cn/en/ ) have a volume control. It also has a defeatable bass boost (NON-defeatable in the E3...you either love all that bass, or you don't!), very nice feeling controls...three of them: power, bass boost on and off, as well as the volume control, which is "stepped" via an up/down rocker, NOT adjusted with a rotary potentiomete. The headphone output completes the top panel. On the bottom, there's a line input (connect to the line or headphone output on your device), and a miniature USB connector for recharging the built-in Lithium-Ion battery. On the side there's a permanently attached "belt clip". And other than the company logo, that's it.

The package contains the amplifier, two input cables (long and short), the USB cable (for battery charging), and the instructions. That's it. So let's get to it...how does this thing sound? Well, it does what an amplifier SHOULD do. At low volumes, and with efficient headphones, very little. If your 'phones need some extra bottom, then the bass-boost adds it, without lots of mid-bass "boom". But if you have difficult-to-drive 'phones, like my Sennheiser HD-580s, then things get interesting. These 300 ohm phones are among the most difficult to drive on the market. Most portable devices can't get them above a whisper. The Fiio E5 CAN drive them to a decent level (!), and the bass bosst gives some much-needed "slam" in the bottom two octaves (not THAT much...these ain't "rock 'n roll" cans!) A real improvement for portable listening. Bravo! Still, this wouldn't be MY choice for portable listening...I'd like a little bit more "slam" on the bottom, and the ability to go just prehaps another three to five db louder. Still this makes these phones quite usable with portable devices...which surprised me!

Next up was my much easier to drive Bose on-ear headphones. While these are so sensitive that my Sansa View can drive them to uncomfortable levels on it's own, I was interested to see if the Fiio did anything useful. It did! The highs seemed a tad "smoother" (if the Bose 'phones have a fult, it's perhaps a tad bit too much "sizzle" in the upper mids, which the Fiio smoothed out). Cool! The difference was subtle, but there. The bass boost added more low-end "slam" as well, but since this isn't an area where the Bose 'phones need help, I quickly switched it back off. The ultimate volume available was quite a bit higher with the Fiio than straight out of my Sansa...which I tested by VERY QUICKLY advancing the volume WAY TOO HIGH! Still, with the Bose at least, this is of little importance to anyone not desiring premature hearing loss!

Finally out came the V-Moda "Bass Freq" earbuds. These were the most sensitive of the bunch, and hence needed extra amplification the least. The Fiio didn't really add anything useful...these phones are already a little "over-cooked" in the bass, they definitely didn't benefit from the bass boost! Again I noted a slight "softening" or "smoothing" of the upper mids and highs, but since the V-Modas are a bit recessed in this range anyway, I sure wouldn't buy the amp just for this (if these are your "buds" of choice). My conclusion: if you use very sensitive earbuds (and most fall into that category), you really can do without a headphone amp!

Conclusion: the E5 DOES what it claims! It has the surprising ability to drive even difficult 'phones to useful levels, it DOES add extra available volume (though often not needed0, and it DOES smooth-over the rough edges if your 'phones are a tad too aggressive "on top". Think "tube sweetness". That's right...this thing reminds me of a tube amp. And I mean that in a gOOD WAY!

And did I mention this thing is TINY (see pictures at the Fiio web site). It almost gets lost in a shirt pocket!

Recommendation: JUST BUY IT! I've saved the best for last...this baby is less than 30 (US) dollars INCLUDING SHIPPING! It adds no noise, distortion, or other "nasties" to the audio, and can be quite useful in the situations cited above. Again, JUST BUY THE THING! You won't regret it!

Who says great vocal sound has to be expensive?

2008-12-31T09:13:00.000-08:00

Great vocal sound needn't be expensive. In fact, it's shocking how inexpensive it's getting. Take microphones, for instance. Quality large-diaphragm condenser mics used to cost hundreds, or even thousands of dollars. Today there are truly excellent models for under 150 dollars...sometimes well under.

Take my new favorite, the NADY SCM-960. It has a 1" gold-sputtered diaphragm, switchable polar patterns (omni and cardioid), and a built-in 10db pad. That's the "nuts and bolts". The bottom line is, this thing sounds GREAT! It's warm and full on the bottom, with no "boom" on male voices, and crisp and present in the midrange and highs. This one really "cuts" through a dense mix...just what I need for voiceover work, and producing my radio show "Saving the 70s" http://www.savingthe70s.com

Next in my vocal chain is the ART Studio MP tube microphone preamp. It has a built-in limiter. Tweaked judiciously, this thing gives your voice that extra "something"...fullness, body, and 'punch'. Don't take my word for it, go to the above website and hear how my voice sounds through it! These are dynamite products, priced VERY affordably!

Are their problems? OF COURSE! Judicious adjustment of mic gain is necessary to avoid noise. The mic itself doesn't come with ANY attachment to mount it to a stand...UNFORGIVABLE with a mic that's designed EXCLUSIVELY for stand mounting. And spider shock-mount costs about 20 bucks (I got mine from Musicians Friend, where I bought the mic and preamp). And you'll need a good windscreen. That's it. THOSE ARE THE ONLY RESTRICTIONS TO THESE INCREDIBLY AFFORDABLE PRODUCTS! So if you have a studio for music, a radio broadcast, podcast, whatever, you simply must check these products out! YOU'RE WELCOME!

New favorite headphones/Bose hater no more!

2008-09-04T06:23:00.000-07:00

To say I've been a Bose hater for a long time is a slight exaggeration. I don't "hate" Bose. I just hate the direct/reflecting principle as applied to speakers. The goal of speaker systems SHOULD BE to present what's on the recording, in as linear and phase-coherent a manner as possible. Any "ambience" heard should be that of the original recording venue (or in the case of pop music, that chosen by the producer and artist(s)), NOT added randomly by the room! Bouncing sounds randomly off walls may sound pleasant. But it is the antithesis of HIGH FIDELITY! That pleasant "warm glow", that pleasing homogenous sound IS AN INACCURACY, and not being on the original recording, IS NOT TRUE TO THE ARTISTIC VISION OF THOSE WHO MADE THE RECORDING!

Alright, that's my case against Bose. Now why I've fallen in love with one of their products. For my 50th(!!!) birthday, I received a pair of the Bose on-ear headphones. Now I've been a headphone junkie since about the age of 12, when I first patched a set of (very cheap) 'phones to my parents' Magnavox console stereo, and heard that amazing, engulfing panorama of sound for the first time. It still makes me smile! It's why, I'm embarrassed to admit, I became an early addict of "easy listening" music...the best sound on early FM stereo radio came from those "elevator music" stations, and it was magnificent!

At age 15 I got my first radio job, and have spent hours a day with headphones ever since. And I've been through a ton of them...from Koss to Sennheiser, moving coil to electrostatic, closed back to "open aire". There are many that I've enjoyed (many more that I've despised), but NEVER have I heard anything as startling as the clarity of these Bose headphones. With most headphones, there's an adjustment period. It takes time to get used to the particular colorations of each new design, until I train myself to listen through the flaws, and simply enjoy the music. Not so with the Bose headphones.

The first time I heard them, they simply sounded RIGHT. No adjustment period was necessary. The bass is FULLY extended (down to the very "bassment"...a 20hz tone will rattle your grey matter!). The midrange is delightfully smooth, and uncolored. Highs are crisp, clear, and without undue emphasis to any sliver of the spectrum. THAT is why they sounded "right" to begin with. No strange "cupped hands" (around ears) coloration in the midrange, typical of so many closed-back headphones. No low bass rolloff, as typical of most lightweight, open-back headphones. EVERYTHING IS THERE, and in proper proportion.

That's what struck me in the beginning, but not what keeps me grinning. THAT (stupid grin on my face) comes from the ability of these 'phones to lay bare hidden details in recordings I've heard dozens, or even hundreds of times...resulting in new listening pleasure from even VERY familiar recordings! THAT makes the 160+ dollar investment seem like a steal! These things are simply marvelous.

So now for the first time in my adult life, when I visit an electronics store, I walk right past the display of headphones. I AM NOT INTERESTED IN OWNING ANY OTHER 'PHONES! For a headphone junkie like me, with shelves and drawers full of Sonys, Beyerdynamics, Sennheisers, and Koss'es, that is quite a statement! Thank you Robin (my lovely wife!) Your love is the greatest gift of all. But second, is those freakin' Bose headphones!

Now, that Bose Wave Music system looks like a pretty damn nice audio system for a small room, like a bedroom! ;)

Asus EeePC--what a great gadget!

2008-04-30T06:26:00.000-07:00

A couple of weeks ago I bought an Asus EeePC http://www.eeepc.asus.com

What a great gadget! I wanted one when they first came out with a custom version of Linux last fall, but I held off. However, when a version with XP pre-installed became available, the EeePC went from an amazingly cute "geek toy", to a useful tool. Yes it's under-powered by the standards of today's full size/full price "fire breathing" dual-core monsters. It's STARVED for storage space, as well. A 28 dollar 8GB SDHC card from New Egg fixed that. So there are limitations. But it can do more than 90 percent of what I ask of a computer. It even works well at capturing video (from the built-in webcam) at 30fps (using Windows Movie Maker).

More on my experiences later with this wonderful gadget, er...useful tool.

Welcome back, old friend!

2008-01-09T06:07:00.000-08:00

I love headphones. Conventional wisdom is that studios should NEVER use headphones for mixing and mastering, because mixes created on headphones don't sound right on speakers. Bullshit! If you know what you're doing, understand the differences between how we hear headphones and speakers, and finally USE THE RIGHT HEADPHONES, there's no damn reason why you can't mix on headphones. It's my FAVORITE way to mix, because I can hear more clearly how every piece fits in the final puzzle that is my MIX! Each individual strand is clearly audible.

I write, voice, and produce for radio. The most important questions during the "process are:

1)-Is your music bed overpowering the voice?

2)-Does the voice sound both full, AND crisp?

3)-Is everything in the mix clearly audible, and in proper proportion?

4)-Is the audio spectrum well filled-out. Is there something going on "down there", and if so is it balanced with the rest of the mix? Is the octave to octave balance in proper proportion? Too damn many radio and tv commercials are PIERCINGLY bright! IT'S ABOUT BALANCE!

5)-Does everything CONGEAL into a mix that's greater than the "sum of it's parts"?

ALL OF THE ABOVE IS EASIER TO HEAR WITH HEADPHONES! Especially a truly revealing pair, like the Sony MDR-7506 (also known in consumer circles as the MDR-V6), LONG MY REFERENCE! Mixes done on these things sound immaculate, and hold together on far less revealing speaker systems! YES they're a little "clinical" sounding (on the "brightly lit" side of neutral). That'll keep you from making things painfully bright! They have FULLY extended bass (down to the "bassment") without any "bloat" or bass emphasis. And they're supremely comfortable! You can wear them for MANY hours (and I have, for a long, LONG time!) My 13 year-old MDR-7506 has been out of service a while because both earcups were split. I just ordered replacements from B&H Photo ( http://www.bhphotovideo.com ), and after much prodding, the THIRD PAIR OF EARPADS IS IN PLACE! Welcome back old friend!

Recording with Vista

2008-01-07T13:45:00.000-08:00

On Dec 21 my new computer arrived...a Dell Inspiron 531 (Athlon 64x2 5000+, 2GB RAM, 500GB hard drive), The operating system? Vista Home Premium! I decided I'd evetually have to make my peace with the new OS, so I went for sooner.

WELL, Adobe Audition can only be coaxed to work if you right click on the icon and choose "run as administrator". Otherwise, you're unable to save files. I can deal with that. What's REALLY strange is the way Vista deals with audio. My old HP system had a mute control. When I turned on my mic, I muted the speakers to avoid feedback. Well try to get feedback with Vista. It doesn't seem possible. First of all, when you plug in a board or mic preamp, NOTHING COMES OUT OF THE SPEAKERS UNLESS YOU'RE IN PLAYBACK. NOTHING! You can record, but NOTHING emerges from the speakers during recording.Then there's the record mixer in Vista. Actually there isn't (a recording mixer in Vista). Vista attempts to set levels on it's own. I can turn the input, and output on my mic preamp all the way down, and for most of the pots' travel Vista turns the level up...like an aggressive AGC! But I still had to experiment before I found an input level that yielded clean audio. I CANNOT make Adobe Audition's meters reach 0dbfs, but I can sure as hell make the incoming audio sound distorted. WEIRD!

Update: A program from a small company called "Actual Solution" fixes Vista's mixer issues, by adding back all the control available in XP (and then some). "Power Mixer for Vista" is 18 bucks, and money well spent! My computer is stable now, no BSOD (Blue Screen of Death) in many days. I'm beginning to think I will actually be able to tolerate working on a Vista PC!

Winston-Salem Journal article

2007-12-03T16:41:00.001-08:00

Welcome readers of the article in today's (Dec 3) Winston-Salem Journal. The Journal did get one thing wrong. This blog isn't JUST about HD Radio. It's about radio, audio, video, and digital multimedia, INCLUDING HD RADIO!

Another point on the article...the comments about interference refer primarily to AM HD. And there isn't any AM HD in the Triad yet, so it really doesn't apply. FM HD works beautifully! Buy an HD Radio, and see for yourself. There are lots of great models. Read more at http://www.hdradio.com

Radios are available from MANY locations, including

Best Buy http://www.bestbuy.com
Circuit City http://www.circuitcity.com
Crutchfield http://www.crutchfield.com
C Crane http://www.ccrane.com
Universal Radio http://www.universalradio.com
J&R Music World http://www.jr.com
The NPR Shop http://www.npr.org/shop

Later I'll modify this post, and add direct links to radios. In earlier posts you can read more info about HD Radio.

Here's what HD Radio sounds like at my home, in Wilkes County (Boomer) NC

http://www.theproductionroom.net/hd.wma
http://www.theproductionroom.net/shuffle.wma

By the way, virtually all HD Radios also receive analog AM Stereo. Here's a sample of what WNMB in North Myrtle Beach sounds like in AM Stereo, as received on an Accurian HD Radio
http://www.theproductionroom.net/wnmb.mp3

The least expensive HD Radio now is the HD100/HD101 from Radiosophy, an American company (GO USA!) http://www.radiosophy.com

This article isn't finished, but it's bedtime, so I'll sign off for now. Thanks for your interest in my blog, and HD Radio!

HD Radio in the Winston-Salem Journal

2007-11-09T09:45:00.001-08:00

The Winston-Salem Journal is preparing an article about HD Radio to appear "late in November", and this morning they interviewed me about the technology, at the suggestion of Denise Franklin, General Manager of my favorite public radio station, and one my wife and I support...WFDD/Winston Salem (88.5FM).

I pointed out the many advantages of HD Radio, including vastly improved sound quality for people like me in "deep fringe" areas, where my choices formerly were "noisy stereo or mono".

I also told him that my first impression of HD Radio was to be stunned by the utter clarity. Individual instruments in an orchestra can be clearly heard. It's the audio equivalent of "cleaning the window". EVERYTHING is crisper and clearer. The background is dead silent. You can hear EVERYTHING in the room when an announcer speaks...papers rustling, chair squeaking, coffee slurping. It's like being IN THE STUDIO.

But more important for people who aren't audiophiles or "radio geeks" is the added variety in programming. HD made it possible for WFDD to continue with the news and talk programming which are so popular, AND return 24/7/365 classical music to the Triad (Winston-Salem/Greensboro/High Point) area. I pointed out the "extra channels" that I enjoyed on other local stations as well.

I'll let you know how the article turns out. I told the reporter that "there are some people saying nasty things about HD, but if you dig a little you'll find it's VERY FEW PEOPLE who speak in VERY LOUD VOICES", and most of them are owners of small-market stations which can't afford to stay up with the latest technology. Either that or they're owners of AM stations. And to be fair, I pointed out that "while FM HD works just great, I have yet to be convinced that AM HD is an equally wonderful idea". I made him aware that there are some LEGITIMATE concerns about interference, reduced sound quality to existing listeners, and reduced coverage for AM stations.

I know "HD Radio SUCKS", the technology is "DEFECTIVE", I'm a "SHILL", and it's all "A FARCE". That should keep the ONE PERSON who consistently tries to get this crap on my blog satisfied. No need to post your "well-informed" opinions, I've already done it for you.

Skullcandy "Smokin' Buds" Ink'd

2007-10-29T03:52:00.000-07:00

What a terrible name for a consumer electronics company..."Skullcandy". What a horrid company logo...a SKULL! What ugly products...pink, blue, green headphones! I didn't expect much when I saw the "Ink'd" earbuds on sale at Staples yesterday (10/28/07) for 12.99! But I love earphones, and love finding a bargain, so I thought "what the hell".

The first thing I discovered was that the rubber tips that come fitted were perfect for my ears...no reason to try the two other sizes which were supplied. So I inserted the plug into my Sandisk Sansa E250 mp3 player, running a customized version of the Rockbox operating system (this version allowing "bookmarking" of MPEG video files, and allowing starting video files at any point simply by entering the time...other than that, it's pretty comparable to the current build of Rockbox. More coming on this player, and Rockbox firmware).

The first thing I noticed was that isolation is near total. It would be hard to hear someone standing next to you, even if they were SCREAMING! Time to listen to some music! First up, "Forget about it" from Alison Krauss....featuring her whisper-quiet voice at it's sweetest. I immediately noticed something quite different from the vast majority of earbuds...the midrange and highs sounded RIGHT! Voices didn't sound hollow, bloated, nasal, or any of those other nasty things that earbuds usually do to them. The timbre was pretty much spot-on! Highs were also clean and extended, without obvious emphasis or peaks! Then the song reached the chorus, Alison's voice soared, the bassline sank, and my jaw dropped. These 'phones are unbelievably full, and extended on the bottom-end...going clean to the "bass-ment". Yes they're on the "warm" side of neutral "down there", but not bloated or "one-note" in any way. Everything was clean as a whistle. WOW! I suddenly came to realize that these were among the best headphones or earphones I'd ever heard at ANY price...and that includes multi-megabuck Stax electrostatics, high-end Sennheisers, BeyerDynamics and others. I just heard more detail! A case in point was a tune from "Windham Hill Sampler '86" that I bought new during the Reagan Administration. I've listened to this disc countless times, but never noticed accents on snare drum on this one particular track ("Dolphins" by Mike Marshall). WOW! That's the very definition of high-end gear...allowing you to hear deeper into a recording, bringing you closer to the music. And this extra clarity wasn't the result of an over-accentuated, soon-to-be-fatiguing high end. Not on your life!

Are there faults? Of course...in this, and every other audio product. But they're too few, and too small to mention. Ok...I'll mention one...left and right channels are not labeled. I labeled them by wrapping a piece of freezer tape around the cord of each channel at the dividing poing of the "Y", and color coding the one for right red, and left black with "Sharpie" pens. That's it. Buy the damn things! Hell, buy two pairs of 'em. I'm going back for a spare!

I'm full of shit!

2007-10-25T05:54:00.000-07:00

On at least one topic (others too, no doubt), I'm full of shit! The topic is the "best source of legal downloads". Earlier I enthused that it was "E Music", hands down. A month later I did as I always do...dropped my E-Music account, and moved on...this time to Yahoo Music Unlimited. They simply offered more of the artists I was interested in, and were a great fit for my Sandisk Sansa E250 and Archos GMini402 players.

Besides...with a little bit of software, ANY of these formats can be easily converted to unencrypted mp3. Not that I'd know from personal experience. Breaking DRM is against the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and a crime. Even if I paid for the content! What a great law! God bless the (recently departed) republican congress! ;)

HD Entering the mainstream

2007-10-20T03:13:00.000-07:00

Finally HD Radio is becoming more than just something for radio geeks, as it begins to be included in mainstream devices, at prices that people would pay for the device anyway, with or without HD Radio. A few examples below.

Insignia (Best Buy) shelf system with AM/FM, CD, MP3, WMA, AND HD Radio...just 150 bucks (a bargain with or without HD) http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8464663&st=HD+Radio&type=product&id=1184768163934

Sony High Quality Stereo Table Radio WITH HD (High end table radios are already established bestsellers for companies like Bose, Cambridge Soundworks, Tivoli, and PolkAudio). http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8383554&st=HD+Radio&type=product&id=1179165802720

Dual car stereo with HD for 89.99 (also plays cd, mp3, and wma...again, a great buy with or without HD) http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8384394&st=Dual+Radio&type=product&id=1179531591062

These are MAINSTREAM products, at prices that people routinely pay for such devices. With more products like these, HD can't help but become mainstream, as more and more Americans discover they actually "already have it".

"Honey, this light that says "HD Radio" is on. I think it sounds better. What does that mean?"

HD Radio at Best Buy

2007-10-15T05:19:00.001-07:00

Last week I was at Best Buy in Winston-Salem, NC, and they were playing a long message over the PA system extolling the virtues of HD Radio...cd quality audio (their term, not mine), new "hidden" channels that you can only get with an HD Radio (new music formats, more news, etc...the things we listen to radio for), and NO MONTHLY FEES, EVER!

It's about time they started promoting HD Radio like they mean it. The technology (for FM stations, I still have no experience with AM HD) works great. The sound is fantastic. And it truly has brought me programming I can't get anywhere else, even with a 5mbps broadband connection, and an XM subscription.

As for AM HD, I have yet to have anything "lock on" with my Accurian (Radio Shack) HD Radio, including WBT Charlotte (about 80 miles from my home). But when near Charlotte (Statesville, Hickory), I HAVE heard some low level noise on adjacent channels (to two Charlotte stations...1110AM, and 610AM). A friend says the 610AM signal in Charlotte is damaging reception of his analog-only 630AM licensed to Hickory, and I believe him. It's always been a challenge fitting a gallon (high quality audio) in a quart container (a 10khz AM channel). A challenge that stations HAVE been able to meet for many decades. But the extra bandwidth occupied by HD isn't "a gallon", but more like "ten gallons". And the little 10khz-wide AM channel just can't contain it, so it's "spilling over" onto 1st and 2nd adjacent channels. Drip, drip!

So AM HD causes interference to adjacent channels (apparently). And when it works correctly, digital coverage is a lot more restricted than analog (I have no trouble receiving WBT's analog signal!). How badly do we want digital to work in the mediumwave band? And are we allowing that desire to cloud our judgement? I'm a huge believer in digital technology, and that in the future all media (most of it, anyway...I still enjoy print on paper!) will be delivered as packets of data...binary code. What I'm questioning is whether THIS (AM HD) is the best way for AM stations to deliver those packets!

Vizio VX32L

2007-10-15T05:09:00.001-07:00

In July my wife and I bought our first HDTV...a Vizio VX32L...599 at Sears. It's a 32" 720p panel (no need for more resolution in this size range...you simply wouldn't see it). At first I had trouble getting decent black level. Finally, against my better judgement, I started experimenting with the automatic doo-dads under the "Advanced" menu. A combination of "black level extender", and "auto-luma" did the trick. Now there's plenty of contrast, and plenty of detail in dark scenes. Plus images really "pop" on over-the-air high-def material (we also put up a new Antennacraft antenna, with Winegard pre-amp, and Channelmaster rotor).

Reception in our deep-fringe location (80 miles from Charlotte NC, about 60 from Greensboro, 100 miles from Asheville and Greenville/Spartanburg) is great. I do wish the damn thing had a signal strength meter for aligning the antenna, however.

Now a couple of gripes. There are plenty of inputs, including two composite/S-Video, two component, one VGA, and two HDMI. I hooked up my new dvd recorder to HDMI, and was surprised at two findings. 1)-There is no aspect ratio control through HDMI. If the content is 4:3, and coming through HDMI, it gets "stretched"...period. Bummer. Still most feature films and primetime shows are widescreen. Then there's the BIG blow...images are just too damn dark through HDMI. Black level ("brightness") can't be raised enough to bring out detail in dark sequences. BIG F###ING BUMMER! Fortunately images through component inputs look great. I wish I could send 720p in through component, but my DVD recorder only allows 480p through this output. Not really a deal-breaker, as the TV seems to "upscale" just as well.

All in all, a great tv at a great price. Soon, more on my new DVD recorder...a Philips with ATSC digital tuner!

My confession

2007-08-22T07:57:00.000-07:00

I love audio equipment. I have my entire life. I have a radio studio/recording facility that I use to produce for clients. I have a very nice audio system...as nice as I can afford. But I must confess that these days I find the most enjoyment listening through headphones to inexpensive, often portable devices. Like my Accurian HD Radio. And various mp3 players through a Koss headphone amplifier http://www.koss.com/koss/kossweb.nsf/p?openform&pc^ac^EQ50 into Sennheiser HD-435s http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/all-headphones/sennheiser-hd-435.php (yeah I'd giggle too if I were you. But you'd stop giggling when you actually heard it!) By the way, ignore the specs for the Koss. The bass is flat to 20hz at least...verified with swept test tones I generated in Adobe Audition 2.0).

I actually hear more detail, more musicality from this rig (usually with a very cheap Philips mp3 player http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2744476&cp=2032054.2032113&allCount=52&fbn=Brand%2FPhilips&f=Brand%2F1000167%2F&fbc=1&parentPage=family or Archos Gmini 402 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16855501135&Tpk=Archos%2bGmini ) than from most any system through conventional speakers. Even high end systems, with exotic electronics and speakers don't provide the relaxed musicality as this cheap system. Sorry, but it's true. I ENJOY IT MORE, and end up listening lots longer. I tell you that because this blog isn't about bullshit. If I believe something to be true, I'll shout it from the rafters, no matter what anyone thinks...and no matter how contrary it is to "conventional wisdom". And I believe the following to be true...inexpensive, headphone-based equipment these days FREQUENTLY provides more real-world musical enjoyment than expensive, speaker-based systems...even VERY high-end ones. And when bang-for-the-buck is factored in, it's no contest.

Best online resource for LEGAL music downloads? Unless you're into mainstream stuff like Britney or Toby Keith...if you actually go for musical merit over chart position, then it's E-Music hands down! http://www.emusic.com

EXCELLENT sound quality, enormous variety, and forty free songs for joining! NO they're not paying me. But I wouldn't recommend them any higher if they did! No DRM, no weird formats, no bullshit...just VERY high quality mp3s you can play on ANYTHING! Now go listen...TO THE MUSIC, not the audio system!

Recording Digital TV part II

2007-08-22T07:56:00.001-07:00

Just talked with J&R. Today is Wednesday. I ordered my Toshiba and HDMI cable on Saturday. It still hasn't shipped. I told them they can get it here by Friday, or they can keep it (life is short, and consumers have options. Retailers should be reminded of that, FORCEFULLY!) We'll see.

Recording Digital TV

2007-08-21T05:11:00.000-07:00

About a month ago, I bought a new Vizio HDTV (VX32L...more on it in the future), along with a new big-ass over the air tv antenna, preamp, and rotor. I now get just about every digital station in Charlotte (the exception being channel 42, WTVI), a couple from Winston Salem, and Greenville/Spartanburg. The antenna is also great for pulling in HD Radio...with solid reception up to 100 miles away.At any rate, after watching glorious digital tv in 16:9 widescreen for a while, I have become increasingly intolerant of the 4:3 aspect ratio of most content I can record on my DirecTV DVR. DirecTV says I can't have a HD rig from them yet, because large trees behind my house block the line-of-sight to their HD satellites, which are lower on the horizon than the standard-definition satellites. So I have turned to another method of capturing digital tv in all it's 16:9 glory...one of the new standalone DVD recorders with a built-in ATSC digital tuner. It's a Toshiba DR550. (And yes I'm aware that you can't capture the full resolution of HDTV with a DVD recorder, but you CAN record a damn nice picture, with the original aspect ratio). I had J&R Music World toss in an inexpensive HDMI cable (no reason to spring for an expensive one for a short run (6 feet). After all, we're talking binary code here...ones and zeroes. You can either re-assemble the bitstream at the other end, or you can't. There's no "magic" at work...just simple math.) I haven't received the unit yet (August 21). I'll probably be here on the 22, or 23. When I have some practical experience, I'll write more.

By the way, that's exactly how I plan on doing things at this blog. I'll write from practical experience. There will be no "this technology sucks", or "this technology is wonderful" without actually investigating. For that reason, there will be some times when I don't blog for a while. I haven't forgotten you, Dear reader! I'm doing the research necessary to hopefully write something meaningful, that's all!Do YOU have any experience with capturing digital (over the air ATSC, or cable QAM) tv in 16:9 to DVD? If so, please post a response to this, and I WILL publish it.

Pandora on Pocket PC

2007-07-30T06:27:00.000-07:00

I probably shouldn't tell you this, but if you're a Pandora (customizable internet radio...lets you design personal "stations" that ONLY play songs you like), and are frustrated at the lack of support for Pandora on portable devices, there IS a way to listen on your PocketPC, Smart Phone, or "internet pad" (whatever those things from Nokia are called). In fact, it's possible to re-encode ANY audio playing on your home computer in a format that will play on a portable device. Yes, I'm aware of services like Orb. These DO NOT allow you to reformat streaming audio from stations that are incompatible with portable devices. But YOU can do it. Here's how.

Download the free Windows Media Encoder from Microsoft available here http://www.download.com/Windows-Media-Encoder/3000-2140_4-10211788.html?tag=lst-0-2

In XP double-click on the speaker icon in the system tray (or go to "programs/accessories/entertainment/volume control", couble click, and open the system mixer...er, volume control. Click "options", "properties", and "recording". Under "show the following volume controls", choose "stereo mix". A second box will open with "stereo mix". Click the box in it as well. Then click "properties", and "exit".

Now open the Windows Media Encoder. Under "New Session" choose "broadcast a live event". Click "ok". In the next screen, choose "audio" only, no video. By your audio device, select "configure", and in the next screen, under "pin line" select "stereo mix". Click "next".

In the next screen choose "pull from encoder". and click "next".

Open your word processor. Copy and paste the URL for "internet connection", and "lan connection" too if you want to also connect just on your lan, but not on the internet. Save these urls into a word document (or whatever word processor you use. The "notepad" in Windows will work fine).

Back in Windows Media Encoder, choose "next". By "audio" choose "cd quality audio", which will show "70kbps". Make sure that's checked (these settings can be changed later if you want to bump up the bitrate). Click "finish".

You can now simply click "start encoding", or if you want to adjust bitrate you can click on "properties", then "compression". Click "edit".

In the next screen, click the "70kbps" tab, and in the drop-down by "audio format", select the bitrate and sample rate you want. Bump it up for better quality, down if you have trouble streaming on your device (some supposedly "broadband" connections on portable devices can't support a sutatined bitrate of 70 kbps (64kbps actually). 48kbps still sounds good with Windows Media, and 32kbps isn't terrible. Hint...if dropping down to a lower bitrate, also choose a lower sample rate. This will prevent the codec from wasting precious bits encoding the least audible octave...the one between 10khz and 20khz. For slower connections, I'd recommend 32kbps, 22khz (22.05khz, actually). With lossy codecs, especially at really low bitrates (below 48kbps), every time you drop the bitrate, also drop the sample rate, and you'll help minimize audible artifacts. Click "ok", then "apply", then click the "x" on the top of the "system properties" box, to go to the main screen.

Click "start encoding". Stat the source you wish to stream to your portable device (such as Pandora). Nothing much will happen. Relax, remember you chose "pull from encoder"? Nothing is happening, because no devices are connected. Open "Windows Media Player", and copy and paste the internet URL you saved in your word processor under "open" and "open URL". BANG! You're streaming. Now save that stream as a "playlist" file. Choose the "m3u" extension, because it's more widely supported than the "wpl" extension. Save the playlist in a place that's easy to find...like your desktop.

Close Windows Media Player, but leave everything else running. Open the Volume control in Windows again, and adjust the "wave" slider until the meters in Windows Media Encoder aren't going into the red. This will give you clean audio, with no distortion.

Now transfer that playlist file to your portable device (PDA, Smartphone, etc). Use whatever removable media is available. If your device has no removable media slots, e-mail the playlist file to an account you can open on the portable device (it's a tiny file, don't worry), and download it to your device. Open your media player on the device (connected to the 'net, of course), and open the playlist file. SHE-BAM! You're streaming Pandora (or your chosen audio from your home 'puter) to your portable device, anywhere in the world. You can even share the URL with a friend or two, but not MANY friends. Broadband download speeds may be as high as several megabits per second, but UPLOAD speeds are usually on the order of 256kbps, or 512kbps. Not a big problem, as the free version of the Windows Media Encoder will only allow five simultaneous connections anyway.

When finished, SAVE THE "session" before exiting Windows Media Encoder. Then you won't have to to through all those setup setps next time.

I know, it sounds complex, but once you've done it a couple of times, it'll be as easy as tying your shoes, and YOU get to decide what you want to hear (or see with a tuner card) on your portable device!

By the way, you can also use this method to stream ANY audio (or video, with tuner card) device connected to your computer. Perhaps there's an FM, AM, or HD radio channel you can't receive where you'll be traveling. Connect it to your computer's "line in" jack (with appropriate adapter cable), and select the "line input" in the Windows Mixer (Volume Control). Follow the above instructions for level adjustment, etc. ANY audio source you can get into your computer can be streamed. Like to listen to a scanner or shortwave? STREAM IT from home!

Something to listen to

2007-07-23T05:38:00.000-07:00

HD Radio is great. Vastly improved sound quality (on fm, anyway), and more important...more VARIETY (with "multicasting"...allowing a single station to simultaneously broadcast multiple programs...known as "channels", or "streams"). But if none of those extra channels interest you, it's just so much background noise.

I often tell my wife that there's not much on radio that I enjoy listening to (despite 33 years in the business). I enjoy soft music, primarily instrumental. Go ahead, use the "New Age" label if you like. That's cool, as Windham Hill has stayed in business the last few decades largly due to my contributions "to the cause". Last night I discovered something on the radio in my area that I really love. WFAE Charlotte (90.7 FM) has a Sunday evening show called "Nightscapes"...three hours of instrumental, "new age" music. I freakin' love it! Perfect music to soothe the soul! It's even in HD, and sounds very good. Not perfect, because WFAE has THREE HD streams, and consequently divides their data-stream three ways. Still it was bright, crisp, "full" soundinding...clearly better than analog fm, and the music was GREAT. I'll be listening next Sunday, and on the Sundays that follow! If you're ever in Charlotte (or HIckory...where it's simulcast on 90.3 WFHE), check it out!

This joins "The Shuffle Channel" on WLYT (Charlotte, 102.9) as my co-favorite HD offering to-date.

A processing artifact that puzzles me

2007-06-30T04:52:00.001-07:00

I was listening to WLYT (Charlotte) HD2 this morning ("The Shuffle Channel" http://www.theproductionroom.net/shuffle.wma), and heard something that truly puzzled me.

If you're familiar with the Bangles song "Eternal Flame", you know it's a lovely ballad in 4/4 time. At the first of the song, and at various points throughout, the fourth beat in each measure is punctuated with a "ding" on a bell. "Close your eyes...'ding'...give me your hand, (ding on the start of the word) Darlin', can you feel my (ding on first of word) heart beating....."

I've heard that song a million times. So imagine my shock and confusion when, listening this morning through headphones to this 48kbps HD2 stream, the "dings" were completely gone. THEY WERE NOT THERE! They were replaced with a very slight high frequency transient, which I wouldn't have noticed if I didn't know what belonged there.

Now I have commented earlier that the processing (audio compression and limiting) are too damn aggressive on "The Shuffle Channel". What I wonder is if this is the work of a Neural pre-processor, or similar device, tweaking the signal to minimize (data) compression artifacts. I know that all limiting softens transients. Cymbal crashes never have the SPLASH after going through the old Optimod (insert favorite processor here). But I have NEVER, in 33 years in radio, heard instruments DISAPPEAR from a mix. Anybody else ever noticed anything like this?

Headphone followup

2007-06-30T04:45:00.000-07:00

Thanks for the comments so far, first of all. I've owned many headphones through the years. I have the Sony MDR-V6, and MDR-7506 (consumer and pro versions of the same damn thing). I've owned many Sennheisers...some I loved (HD-400s I owned in the 70s), some I came to be lukewarm about (HD-580). I've also owned Grado SR-60s, and SR-80s.

I came to tire of the overly aggressive "brightly lit" sound of the Sonys and Grados. Great for production and mixing (I know you're not supposed to mix through headphones. It's just that I produce much better mixes when I do!), but for just listening to music, I don't want to be beaten over the head with detail. I just want everything there, in it's place. So I've moved to a preference for a much "warmer" sound than what used to be the norm for me.

By the way...just because you've tried more expensive Sennheisers, don't think that means you have a handle on what the HD-435 sounds like. Sennheiser's "family sound" is turned on it's ear in these (and many of their newer 'phones). Bass is FULL, and very extended. Mids and highs are BACK WHERE THEY BELONG, not up front and 'in your face". If the MRD-7506 and Grado are "solid state" sounding, the HD-435 sounds more "like tubes". I know that's a lame analogy, but there's some truth to it. Though perhaps not as strictly accurate, the 435, to these tired old ears, is quite a bit more "musical".

I'm a junkie, Man (Sennheiser HD435 review)

2007-06-27T09:07:00.000-07:00

Many of us have addictive personalities. I'm one of them, I'm afraid. Some are addicted to drugs, others to alcohol, still others to sex. For me it's none of these. I'm a junkie alright, but the drug of choice is HEADPHONES!

When I was about 10 years old, my parents bought a huge Zenith console stereo. It was glorious! 12" 3 way speakers, three speed record changer, auxiliary input for a tape deck, external speaker outputs (more on that later), and AM/FM STEREO!

By my 12th birthday, the audio and radio bugs had bitten, and I bought an adapter cable at Radio Shack so I could plug headphones into the RCA speaker jacks. A pair of el-cheapo headphones from Brendles in Elkin NC later, and I had a near-religious experience. Stereo through headphones was MAGNIFICENT! EZ-104 (WEZC Charlotte...104.1) and WBT-FM (107.9 also of Charlotte) broadcast beautiful music in glorious stereo. Then WKBC FM (97.3 in North Wilkesboro NC) went stereo. WOW! I listened through headphones for HOURS. I was hooked. And I still am.

Through the years I've bought MANY pairs of headphones (I'd be embarrassed to tell you how many I own). My collection includes some of the "big guns"...Sennheiser HD580, Sony MDR-7506, Beyerdynamic DT-990 PRO, Koss A250, among others. But they mostly sit unused, because these days my favorite "cans" are the cheap (about 60 bucks...cheaper if you shop around) and outrageously good Sennheiser HD-435 http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/all-headphones/sennheiser-hd-435.php

Their bass is solid to the "bassment" (20hz and below), the response is smooth octave to octave, and the deviate from neutral on the "warm, full" side. The bass is slightly elevated in level, but this is perfect for the way I listen...mostly at night to soft music (cd, mp3, HD Radio, XM, internet radio). They're comfortable...and I'm talking about more than just their fit. The SOUND is comfortable...you can slip it on like an old pair of slippers. And unlike "analytical" 'phones such as the MDR-7506/MDR-V6, they don't emphasize what's wrong with a signal. You may hear things like artifacts in low bitrate digital streams, or slight distortion in recordings or broadcasts. But when there are problems, the 435s just make you aware of it, rather than BEATING YOU OVER THE FREAKIN' HEAD WITH' EM!

They're great 'phones for the real world, if not for "audiophools" (those who care more about gear than music). REAL recordings, those with musical merit are enjoyable, even if the recordings aren't perfect. What more can one ask?

Buy them. They're FANTASTIC!

A Prarie Home Comanion AT LAST!

2007-06-27T06:55:00.001-07:00

At last my favorite radio program on Earth is available noise-free at my rural locale. XM has added "A Prarie Home Companion" to their "XM Public Radio" channel. I know XM can sometimes suffer from audible artifacts, but NOT THIS CHANNEL. The engineering is excellent, and the audio quality superb. If you're an XM subscriber, check it out...Saturdays at 6pm EDT. Garrison has never sounded better!

Now if he'd just write a sequel to "WLT...A Radio Romance"! THAT was a fun read!

NO BS, just the facts, and my views on digital radio, audio, video, and multimedia

2007-06-27T05:34:00.000-07:00

Welcome to my new blog. On it, I will bring you the latest news about radio...particularly digital radio (HD, satellite, and internet), audio, video, and multimedia (as in computer-based entertainment).

I look forward to this opportunity. But a word to the wise (and not so wise). This is MY blog...it's about my opinions, not a place to air your own. FRIENDLY dissent is welcome, but unreasonable, even hostile dissent will be edited and/or deleted at MY discretion. After all...you can assault, er...bless us with YOUR views on your own blog!

I've been in radio since August of 1974...33 years and counting. Read more about me in my bio, but I'll assert time and again that I LOVE RADIO. Voices through the air at the speed of light...it's MAGIC. And the new digital modes, the improved audio quality and extra services they provide, ARE THE FUTURE. If you disagree, you won't feel very welcome here. And if you disagree in terms I find offensive, you'll be edited and/or deleted.

Ok...there's a brief summary of what to expect. First out of the gate...I am very excited by HD Radio (read more at http://www.hdradio.com the official HD Radio website). In November of '06 I purchased what was the least expensive HD radio available...the Accurian table radio from Radio Shack (http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2460834&cp). I have quite literally never used it as a table radio. The headphone output is actually ideal as a line output, and I have used it as a component tuner in my bedroom system, pulling in a great number of HD stations from Charlotte, Greensboro, Hickory, and Black Mountain (Asheville) NC...up to 100 miles away, with an INDOOR antenna (the Magnum Dynalab SR-100 (http://70.47.97.204/prodinfo.asp?number=MDSR100). While it has served me shockingly well for an indoor antenna (mounted on the top shelf of my closet, in my home in Boomer NC...Wilkes County, in the foothills of the beautiful Blue Ridge Mountains), today I step up to the "big leagues". Today my "new baby" is being installed...a top of the line Antennacraft roof antenna with Channelmaster rotor, and Winegard preamp. It will serve not only my HD Radio needs, but also HDTV (when my Vizio 32" tv arrives on July 7th), and analog radio and tv on my Media Center PC.

Here are some recordings I've made with my rig...examples of what HD Radio sounds like from great distances, with an INDOOR antenna
http://www.theproductionroom.net/hd.wma
http://www.theproductionroom.net/shuffle.wma

The second is the "Shuffle Channel" an HD2 stream from WLYT (102.9) in Charlotte NC.

Here's a link to a recording of WFAN (660 AM) in New York, demonstrating the quality of AM HD Radio
http://www.theproductionroom.net/wfanhd.wma

And here are some examples of analog reception...some of it pretty impressive in it's own right. First a recording I made with my Grundig S350 (Wide Bandwidth, Center-tuned) of WKSK (580AM) West Jefferson NC...about 35 miles from my home. WKSK has a brand spankin' new transmitter and tower, and state of the art (all digital) studio gear...a real 'class act' of a small market station still SERVING THEIR COMMUNITY. They even feature performances from live musicians on Saturday mornings...sometimes from the station, sometimes from the Ashe Civic Center, so listeners can participate.
http://www.theproductionroom.net/wksk.wma

Finally, a demo of analog AM stereo...which most new HD Radios support. This is WNMB AM in North Myrtle Beach South Carolina...also recorded from an Accurian HD Radio
http://www.theproductionroom.net/wnmb.mp3

I'd LOVE to receive other recordings of HD radio reception. PLEASE send them to me at RadioGiant@aol.com and I'll gladly host them at my site. If you have REAL recordings of interference caused by HD stations, I'd welcome those as well.

Thanks, and enjoy! Your opinions are welcome. Mine, of course, are the undisputed truth (KIDDING!)