sowny.net | The Southern Ontario/WNY Radio-TV Forum


You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

June 8, 2021 10:51 am  #31


Re: CBC Music

Tomas Barlow wrote:

The argument you guys are making is that the delivery method is more important to you than the content.
That’s an odd point of view in my humble opinion. To me the announcers and the music are the reasons to listen... Not the receiver.

I'm a radio guy. I'm older than dirt and set in my ways. Radio is radio and nothing else is.


I started out with nothing and I still have most of it.
 

June 9, 2021 7:48 am  #32


Re: CBC Music

turkeytop wrote:

Tomas Barlow wrote:

The argument you guys are making is that the delivery method is more important to you than the content.
That’s an odd point of view in my humble opinion. To me the announcers and the music are the reasons to listen... Not the receiver.

I'm a radio guy. I'm older than dirt and set in my ways. Radio is radio and nothing else is.

 Came across this post on  on the apparent demise of "stereo Receivers" at the Steve Hoffman forum that applies here:

An integrated amp plus a media streaming box is the new receiver. The current state of FM is horrible, and getting worse. With a few notable exceptions, FM signal quality is the equivalent of MP3, and most stations are owned by large corporations with a very narrow view of programming.

I grew up in the NYC metro area, and was a teenager in the middle of the NY FM radio heyday. I reveled in the cornucopia of content variety available with just the turn of a dial knob. Multiple College, Local Access, Public, Rock, Pop, Jazz, Classical stations broadcasting 24/7 and competing for the listener's ears. A wonderful time indeed.

Internet radio reminds me of the FM radio I grew up with, only with a greater breadth of choice. I can skip from KJAZZ on the west coast, to WXPN in Philly, to BBC1, to whatever I want to hear by pressing an icon on a control screen. Audio quality is at least as good as contemporary commercial FM broadcasts.

A streaming box can be located in the same place as an integrated amp, or located remotely and connected by RCA cables. Most integrated amps were better than the jack of all trades Receiver. Most (vintage) integrated amps do not command the same CMV prices as comparable receivers from the big names. A restored TOTL Marantz receiver can be a 4 figure purchase. A comparable model integrated is several hundred dollars less.

 


Cool Airchecks and More:
http://www.lettheuniverseanswer.com/
 

July 27, 2021 1:15 pm  #33


Re: CBC Music

Fitz wrote:

You would have to search Hi and Lois to think that CBC FM's path down alternative rock was "rubes" driven. 
 

Of course it wasn't rubes driven. It was driven by Toronto elitists who believed we rubes weren't capable of appreciating real music.


I started out with nothing and I still have most of it.
     Thread Starter
 

July 27, 2021 2:46 pm  #34


Re: CBC Music

Fitz wrote:

turkeytop wrote:

Tomas Barlow wrote:

The argument you guys are making is that the delivery method is more important to you than the content.
That’s an odd point of view in my humble opinion. To me the announcers and the music are the reasons to listen... Not the receiver.

I'm a radio guy. I'm older than dirt and set in my ways. Radio is radio and nothing else is.

 Came across this post on  on the apparent demise of "stereo Receivers" at the Steve Hoffman forum that applies here:

An integrated amp plus a media streaming box is the new receiver. The current state of FM is horrible, and getting worse. With a few notable exceptions, FM signal quality is the equivalent of MP3, and most stations are owned by large corporations with a very narrow view of programming.

I grew up in the NYC metro area, and was a teenager in the middle of the NY FM radio heyday. I reveled in the cornucopia of content variety available with just the turn of a dial knob. Multiple College, Local Access, Public, Rock, Pop, Jazz, Classical stations broadcasting 24/7 and competing for the listener's ears. A wonderful time indeed.

Internet radio reminds me of the FM radio I grew up with, only with a greater breadth of choice. I can skip from KJAZZ on the west coast, to WXPN in Philly, to BBC1, to whatever I want to hear by pressing an icon on a control screen. Audio quality is at least as good as contemporary commercial FM broadcasts.

A streaming box can be located in the same place as an integrated amp, or located remotely and connected by RCA cables. Most integrated amps were better than the jack of all trades Receiver. Most (vintage) integrated amps do not command the same CMV prices as comparable receivers from the big names. A restored TOTL Marantz receiver can be a 4 figure purchase. A comparable model integrated is several hundred dollars less.

 

When it comes to Toronto Radio - id have to say once again CHUM and Virgin have the best "sound".  CHFI and Q107 the worst.  Boom is excellent also and Jazz FM.  

 

July 27, 2021 5:01 pm  #35


Re: CBC Music

markow202 wrote:

CHFI and Q107 the worst. 

I see someone else is not a fan of excessive midrange.

I have to wonder if CHFI's processing might have been focus-grouped on in-demo women. It's said that women and men find different sounds pleasing, and radio engineering is 99% male. I've done some a/b processing experiments with my wife, and she prefers the settings I couldn't stand to listen to.

 

July 27, 2021 5:45 pm  #36


Re: CBC Music

RadioAaron wrote:

markow202 wrote:

CHFI and Q107 the worst. 

I see someone else is not a fan of excessive midrange.

I have to wonder if CHFI's processing might have been focus-grouped on in-demo women. It's said that women and men find different sounds pleasing, and radio engineering is 99% male. I've done some a/b processing experiments with my wife, and she prefers the settings I couldn't stand to listen to.

I’m a big fan of night end, and have a Treble Charger in my Camaro.

 

July 28, 2021 10:57 am  #37


Re: CBC Music

RadioAaron wrote:

markow202 wrote:

CHFI and Q107 the worst. 

I see someone else is not a fan of excessive midrange.

I have to wonder if CHFI's processing might have been focus-grouped on in-demo women. It's said that women and men find different sounds pleasing, and radio engineering is 99% male. I've done some a/b processing experiments with my wife, and she prefers the settings I couldn't stand to listen to.

It sounds like an "unclear mess of sound" sometimes depends on what I play those stations on when I tried it.  CHFI was better on a clock radio than a full hi-fi.  No fidelity at all and sadly the HFI stands for Hi-Fidelity.