Reception's a little scratcy...

[Cameron]

...but what do you expect from just one micron long and ten nanometers wide?

http://www.physics.berkeley.edu/research/zettl/projects/nanoradio/radio.html


...still sounds better than IBOC.

[genlock]

A little thin on the bass.

[Dave Loudin]

Resembles playing a record with an old-style steel nedle.

[Mike]

...but what do you expect from just one micron long and ten nanometers wide?

http://www.physics.berkeley.edu/research/zettl/projects/nanoradio/radio.html


...still sounds better than IBOC.

I've actually looked at buying an IBOC receiver. Don't see any point.

The only thing that really has me even interested in it is the concept of much improved AM fidelity, FM doesn't need improvement, analog FM is perfectly fine.

[Cameron]

The only thing that really has me even interested in it is the concept of much improved AM fidelity.

...say that when you hear it "blend" back-and-forth between that better-quality and 6-10KHz bandwidth...and then back...and then back...and then back...and then back...

It's THE BOMB!

[AmpedNow]

HD-AM has problems, but I'm a fan of HD-FM. The subchannel and other real-time data uses will make it worthwhile in the long term, IMO.

Plus, it does sound better, more often than not. But it's up to individual stations to have it processed correctly.

The rabid anti-HD crowd is a bunch of Kool Aid drinkers. Mostly old geezers who are mad about AM DX, and the interference it causes. However, I'm not saying they don't have a point, just that they lump FM in with it.

I would be willing to sacrifice HD on AM if they leave FM alone.

As for having a HD radio locally (meaning, WV), I have one in my car, and it's really not worth it at this point, unless you do some traveling to major markets. That's where the action is.

Speaking of, when are you Charleston stations gonna stream some text? All I ever see is " / / ".

[Cameron]

I think a HD-2 format in this terrain called, "We're here - We're gone - We're Back" would be a nice touch.