Agree - newer car radios have really bad AM. If you get near some power transformers, or some electric motors or pumps, you're in trouble. (Gas stations, car washes, water towers, power lines..)
Since the early 1970s, radio manufacturers have been putting less and less effort into the AM tuner sections of their radios, and this video demonstrates this quite well.
@jburgie True, though some models are targeted for people who value AM reception. I've found that car radios continued to have good AM reception until I bought my '05 Accord. It was just about useless at night; most stations faded out too often. But it's fine now that I replaced the 6" "John Holms Junior" rubber roof antenna with an 11" one. The reception is still good for FM and XM too. I guess the radio chassis was fine all along.
@lrd9999 I have used a radio in a 2010 Toyota RAV4 and it was really nice on AM and FM. There was little to no background noise on AM like on cheap radios. And of FM selectivity was great. I could pick up stations next to my local 100kw.
@jburgie I think the real decline in the quality and selectivity of radio tuners started in the late 1990s. The best high end stereo systems with radio tuners were made in the 1980s.
I thought HDradio FM would be easier to receive than the old FM. Now I find out that you have to be closer to the transmitter than before. What are they thinking??? Looks like the best way to go is on-line radio. I had XM radio but the commercials on some stations became VERY OBNOXIOUS.
I find that with older radios you can just turn the volume up to hear a weak am station. Newer electronics boost both noise along with the radio station you are listening to meaning the signal-to-noise ratio is poor. External antennas can only do so much.
For the record the Zenith used its internal antenna when I recorded this, while for the HD units I used the external wire loop AM antenna, which came with each of the three contemporary radios. Theoretically, the HD units had the slight advantage with regards to the use of external antennas, though I don't think much of those wire loops that came in their boxes.
I have had XM even "before" HD radio first came on the market. Nice try HD Radio, local stations already loss their listeners because of 30-minute commercials and poor to mediocre formats the BIG radio companies are coming out with. Not worth the switch, satellite radio ALL THE WAY!!!!!!!
The Accurian HD Radio - which I have and love! - does not have an internal AM antenna. It has those two little push down thingies that open a hole for an AM loop antenna.
Same thing with FM - you need to use an antenna with a COAX line.
Plus, the Accurian has something no 1940's radio does - a remote control for my lazy ass!
That's true. I guess I'm thinking more about tabletop or bookshelf units. They typically don't get very good AM reception, especially with no external antenna. My Accurian has terrible AM reception if the loop antenna is removed.
There is obvious noise on the HD radios which means they are not decoding an HD signal and we are hearing the analog AM audio. I don't see any loop antennas which could explain the poor reception. Any modern AM radio will have lousy reception without an external antenna connected to it.
What I'm saying is the HD signal does not interfere with the analog FM carrier at all. The biggest problem with HD is the FCC-imposed 1% power limit. If the FM station is operating at 1KW, that means the HD is only 10 Watts, which is going to make reception nearly impossible without an outdoor antenna. In my area I can receive HD signals from several stations located more than 20 miles away using just the indoor wire antenna, but those stations are 75KW and 100KW.
HD FM exists on either side of the analog signal. It does not reduce the coverage area of the analog FM station. However, since the HD power is only 1% of the corresponding analog ERP, the coverage of the HD signal may be less than that of its analog counterpart.
I own an Accurian HD Radio and have used a Boston Receptor at work. There are no HD AM stations in my area, but both of these radios pick up analog AM stations just as well as any modern AM receiver I've used as long as the wire loop antenna is connected and properly positioned. I can't tell from this video if the antenna is connected or not. IMHO no modern AM receiver, HD or not, is as good as radios made before FM.
I hate to say this, but the Zenith sounds the best. Probably because I have a 37 Zenith Console still playing in my basement. On AM it sounds better than my Bose.
I can easily believe the 1941 radio has better AM reception. Back then people had nothing else to listen to except AM and Shortwave. It was quite literally their only home entertainment (no tv, no fm, nothing except AM Dramas).
They demanded the best possible sound,
and 1940s-era manufacturers delivered it.
Today manufacturers don't care about the AM. They just toss-in the cheapest piece of tuner they can find, and that's the end.
I don't think that WCBS even has an HD signal yet, show us WABC 77 and see what happens. If you can pick up their HD signal it will blow away that old Zenith.
I have two HD radios, and the AM sensitivity is cr*p in both of them. My older analog radios sound better, and my 1985 Sony AM Stereo radio sounds much better than HD on AM does - at least so far. The HD radio manufacturers need to spend more money on the AM, and not the FM section, as HD on FM sounds about the same; the biggest improvement could be on AM.
Wow! Having no sophisticated electronics seems to help reduce interference resulting in better A.M. reception. Do these units require any sort of external A.M. antenna which wasn't connected or oriented well?
I wonder if manufacturing QA people just don't bother aligning the AM section of the RF/IF front end..
quality really went in "before" the name went on....
silverbird58 10 months ago
Agree - newer car radios have really bad AM. If you get near some power transformers, or some electric motors or pumps, you're in trouble. (Gas stations, car washes, water towers, power lines..)
balboapension 1 year ago 2
Zenith, a high quality American made radio, still kicking butt. They just don't make them like that any longer. What an American icon.
billace90 1 year ago 3
Since the early 1970s, radio manufacturers have been putting less and less effort into the AM tuner sections of their radios, and this video demonstrates this quite well.
jburgie 2 years ago 11
@jburgie True, though some models are targeted for people who value AM reception. I've found that car radios continued to have good AM reception until I bought my '05 Accord. It was just about useless at night; most stations faded out too often. But it's fine now that I replaced the 6" "John Holms Junior" rubber roof antenna with an 11" one. The reception is still good for FM and XM too. I guess the radio chassis was fine all along.
lrd9999 1 year ago
@lrd9999 I have used a radio in a 2010 Toyota RAV4 and it was really nice on AM and FM. There was little to no background noise on AM like on cheap radios. And of FM selectivity was great. I could pick up stations next to my local 100kw.
spunker88 1 year ago 3
@lrd9999 Right -- It's asking a lot for a teeny antenna like that to pull in a wave that's about 400 meters long.
jburgie 8 months ago
@jburgie I think the real decline in the quality and selectivity of radio tuners started in the late 1990s. The best high end stereo systems with radio tuners were made in the 1980s.
MIKON8ERISBACK 8 months ago 3
I thought HDradio FM would be easier to receive than the old FM. Now I find out that you have to be closer to the transmitter than before. What are they thinking??? Looks like the best way to go is on-line radio. I had XM radio but the commercials on some stations became VERY OBNOXIOUS.
bodryn 2 years ago 3
Old analog radios: Sound is alive, sound is powerful, sound is clear and fidelity is supreme.
New digital sound: S-T-E-R-I-L-E.
I'm sure Betojoven would rather listen to a computerized drum machine than a session drummer too. New isn't always better.
funktron4 2 years ago 2
I find that with older radios you can just turn the volume up to hear a weak am station. Newer electronics boost both noise along with the radio station you are listening to meaning the signal-to-noise ratio is poor. External antennas can only do so much.
marc1178 2 years ago 4
Hi,
For the record the Zenith used its internal antenna when I recorded this, while for the HD units I used the external wire loop AM antenna, which came with each of the three contemporary radios. Theoretically, the HD units had the slight advantage with regards to the use of external antennas, though I don't think much of those wire loops that came in their boxes.
MP3newswire 2 years ago
The sound from the '41 Zenith beats the other modern junk there.
crusher19860138 2 years ago 4
I have had XM even "before" HD radio first came on the market. Nice try HD Radio, local stations already loss their listeners because of 30-minute commercials and poor to mediocre formats the BIG radio companies are coming out with. Not worth the switch, satellite radio ALL THE WAY!!!!!!!
blockemall 3 years ago
The Accurian HD Radio - which I have and love! - does not have an internal AM antenna. It has those two little push down thingies that open a hole for an AM loop antenna.
Same thing with FM - you need to use an antenna with a COAX line.
Plus, the Accurian has something no 1940's radio does - a remote control for my lazy ass!
IBTLpwn3r 3 years ago
Keep it up! Your posts are most illuminating!
BTW: I'am a "professional" stock investor these days, haven't been a radio studio since I was a child...That would be 1966.
Kind of funny isn't it..a male nurse debating radio with a stock trader.
here's laughing at ya!
LinoNewyork 3 years ago
Very funny beavis.
Anyone interested can put your various alias' into a search engine and find what you are.
You want to heckle, get used to it in return.
LinoNewyork 3 years ago
Hello again mr bob young-betojovan-KB1OKL.
When you wrote this did you even -have- an HD radio?
Or is this just more of what you troll the net for.
pathetic.
LinoNewyork 3 years ago
The old one sounds far nicer.
odakueffect 3 years ago 9
That's true. I guess I'm thinking more about tabletop or bookshelf units. They typically don't get very good AM reception, especially with no external antenna. My Accurian has terrible AM reception if the loop antenna is removed.
jamesbooty 4 years ago
It doesn't interfere with the host station, but it does interfere with adjacent channels.
jamesbooty 4 years ago
There is obvious noise on the HD radios which means they are not decoding an HD signal and we are hearing the analog AM audio. I don't see any loop antennas which could explain the poor reception. Any modern AM radio will have lousy reception without an external antenna connected to it.
jamesbooty 4 years ago 2
What I'm saying is the HD signal does not interfere with the analog FM carrier at all. The biggest problem with HD is the FCC-imposed 1% power limit. If the FM station is operating at 1KW, that means the HD is only 10 Watts, which is going to make reception nearly impossible without an outdoor antenna. In my area I can receive HD signals from several stations located more than 20 miles away using just the indoor wire antenna, but those stations are 75KW and 100KW.
jamesbooty 4 years ago
HD FM exists on either side of the analog signal. It does not reduce the coverage area of the analog FM station. However, since the HD power is only 1% of the corresponding analog ERP, the coverage of the HD signal may be less than that of its analog counterpart.
jamesbooty 4 years ago 2
I own an Accurian HD Radio and have used a Boston Receptor at work. There are no HD AM stations in my area, but both of these radios pick up analog AM stations just as well as any modern AM receiver I've used as long as the wire loop antenna is connected and properly positioned. I can't tell from this video if the antenna is connected or not. IMHO no modern AM receiver, HD or not, is as good as radios made before FM.
jamesbooty 4 years ago
you cant beat OLD RADIOS!
rainbowbritekicksazz 4 years ago 2
I hate to say this, but the Zenith sounds the best. Probably because I have a 37 Zenith Console still playing in my basement. On AM it sounds better than my Bose.
EOGGasman 4 years ago 2
>>>I don't think that WCBS even has an HD signal yet, <<<
Instead of guessing, you could just look it up on wikipedia. (The answer is, yes, it has a digital signal.)
TeensAreNotChildren 4 years ago
P.S.
I can easily believe the 1941 radio has better AM reception. Back then people had nothing else to listen to except AM and Shortwave. It was quite literally their only home entertainment (no tv, no fm, nothing except AM Dramas).
They demanded the best possible sound,
and 1940s-era manufacturers delivered it.
Today manufacturers don't care about the AM. They just toss-in the cheapest piece of tuner they can find, and that's the end.
TeensAreNotChildren 4 years ago 2
You got a good there.
EOGGasman 4 years ago 2
I don't think that WCBS even has an HD signal yet, show us WABC 77 and see what happens. If you can pick up their HD signal it will blow away that old Zenith.
WinterWeatherII 4 years ago
I have two HD radios, and the AM sensitivity is cr*p in both of them. My older analog radios sound better, and my 1985 Sony AM Stereo radio sounds much better than HD on AM does - at least so far. The HD radio manufacturers need to spend more money on the AM, and not the FM section, as HD on FM sounds about the same; the biggest improvement could be on AM.
johnnyelectron 4 years ago
Wow! Having no sophisticated electronics seems to help reduce interference resulting in better A.M. reception. Do these units require any sort of external A.M. antenna which wasn't connected or oriented well?
I wonder if manufacturing QA people just don't bother aligning the AM section of the RF/IF front end..
brucemblue 4 years ago