LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  October 2008

ARSCLIST October 2008

Subject:

Re: FM reception way back when

From:

"Charles A. Richardson" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 8 Oct 2008 13:02:04 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (118 lines)

Hi George;  A little history.  There were two competing stereo  
systems, Crosby and GE Zenith.  Crosby was much better than the GE  
Zenith with stereo specs almost as good as mono FM.  But Crosby was  
not as good in mono compatibility and also it may not have allowed for  
SCA service, then a money revenue for the stations.  Lots of mono, and  
no stereo receivers at the time.  GE Zenith also had big money and  
political connections so it won out over the technically better Crosby  
stereo system.  GE Zenith did have the pilot tone issues you mention,  
along with more multipath distortions   There had to be an audio  
bandwidth filter used to cut the audio off above 16K HZ to protect the  
19 K Hz pilot.  Mono FM had wider bandwidth up to 20 KHZ, and a  
simpler signal with no audio phase summing issues either acoustic or  
the L + R and L - R stuff to mess it up.  Also the 75 micro second  
audio emphasis curve in broadcast and 75 de-emphasis curve in  
receivers helped  signal to noise a lot too.  But when there were hot  
high level high frequencies, over modulation was a concern.  So we now  
have a FM stereo degraded signal to noise situation due to the GE  
Zenith compromise with the old FM mono receivers calling the technical  
tune. Likewise when TV transitioned  from Black and White to NTSC  
Color.   Black and White, when done with a live broadcast of a wide  
bandwidth single tube camera, seen on a wide bandwidth B & W monitor  
or off air monitor was stunning in its detail.  When compromised NTSC  
color came in we got dot crawl,  scan line crosstalk, reduced  
bandwidth, gray scale and color problems in dealing with three color  
signals when seen on both black and white as well as standard color  
TVs.   When TV audio went from mono to stereo, it too was degraded in  
signal to noise, but saved somewhat by the CBS CX stereo audio noise  
reduction system, that was also used on 12 inch Laserdiscs.

Back to FM.   Stereo FM signal to noise was not very good because of  
the issues mentioned.  In the early 1970s Dolby came on the scene with  
their noise reduction systems. These were used in studio audio,  
consumer B formats, and Dolby film improvements.  Dolby also wanted to  
improve FM stereo and came out with their model 334 Dolby B FM encoder  
to clean up FM stereo noise issues.  I was involved in getting the  
first NPR FM station converted over to Dolby B FM.  When everything  
was done right it worked very well.  We measured about 94 DB SN in  
Stereo and 104 DB SN in mono FM.  Rather impressive improved  
performance, which could be made even better if one later switched  
over to the newer and better Dolby C and Dolby S systems, that would  
have made the SN about 10 DB better.  Dolby FM failed in the  
marketplace and the Dolby  FM 334 system had to be taken out.  Why the  
failure?  On the transmission side, there was more audible noise found  
in the Modulator, STL Link, Audio Console, and music program sources  
that compromised Dolby FM performance as the Dolby would show up their  
noise shortcomings.   Many stations would not change their other  
equipment or level practices, but had to engage in the loudness wars  
to keep listeners.  The Dolby FM Encoder also changed the transmitter  
pre-emphasis from 75 microseconds down to 25  microseconds which  
technically was a good improvement to allow more high level high  
frequency signals without over modulation violations.  But  FM  
receivers also needed a switch to change their de-emphasis back and  
forth from 75 microseconds for non Dolby stations to 25 microseconds  
for Dolby Stations.  One also had to line up signal levels to Dolby  
standards and have a Dolby B decoder at the audio line output of the  
tuner or the receiver.  All this was all just too much for the general  
public.  Listeners did not usually hear programs of master tapes of  
wide range classical music. Their taste was for other music types with  
little dynamic range.  Most did not have wide range hi-fi stereo  
systems either, but instead listened on car radios and table top  
radios.  Dolby FM sounded worse to them with its lower modulation  
levels and changed pre-emphasis.  It sounded duller to them as a  
result. There were no radio or tuners that would automatically and  
simultaneously do three things.  1. Change the De-emphasis between 75  
and 25 microseconds.  2. Turn the Dolby B decoder on and off,  and 3.  
align the signal levels for proper tracking of the tuner's Dolby  
decoder to the Dolby FM station.  When tuning to a non dolby station,  
the above had to revert to the old standard FM settings.    Many  
listeners also thought loud was good and powerful.  Some did have  
reception problems that chronic high modulation levels and various  
processing helped solve.  Thus Dolby B FM stations lost listeners with  
Dolby B FM, so they pulled the plug on it. Accordingly, it is hard to  
actually improve FM on air broadcasting unless one can address and fix  
all issues at the same time in a systematic way. The marketplace, bad  
technical compromises, government, and consumers were just not willing  
to do what it took to make things better for the long term good of FM  
Broadcasting in a comprehensive rational orderly way.    A familiar  
story.    Anyone want to go back to Crosby stereo or Dolby B or Dolby  
S FM today?   With new low noise  quiet analog and digital radio  
station program sources it would sound fantastic, but no one will  
fight all the battles to do the job right as it must be done.  Adding  
Surround Sound would cause other headaches and problems.  So over the  
air FM is, by its
market place, standards, technicalities, and FCC rules, limited and  
stuck where it is as to its sonic performance.  Satellite, cable,  
fiber, internet, etc get around FM broadcast's old obsolete standards  
and limitations, so they largely take the market.

Hope this helps you.    Charlie Richardson


On Oct 7, 2008, at 2:03 AM, George Brock-Nannestad wrote:

> From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad
>
> Hi Folks,  Bob Cham wrote:
>
> ............
>>
>> The problem lies with the multiplex system that we use.  When FM went
>> STEREO, the FCC didn't want to obsolete all the mono receivers, as
>> they had when the band changed frequency.  Thus we broadcast L+R
>> (mono), and L-R, which are combined to make stereo.  It doesn't
>> exactly make for a robust stereo signal, but it is compatible.
>>
>
> .......................
>
> Isn't the problem that in stereo, the pilot tone (multiplied by two)  
> is AM
> modulated by the L-R and not FM at all? This was the system that won  
> out.
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> George

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager