Question = High Definition Radio Capabilities


Boston Acoustic is releasing a radio in December (2005) that provides high definition capabilities. The product name is Recepter Radio HD and their web site is http://www.bostonacoustics.com/.

Does listening to FM via High Definition provide increased sound quality? I was told that “the performance of a radio station that now does NOT compress their signal is better today than it will be with HD radio. With HD radio, they will break down the bandwidth to accommodate other channels on the same frequency”,

Do you have any experiences or comments regarding high definition radio? Thanks
hgeifman
HD is a poor term for it. Does anyone really call it High Definition?

It is also known as IBOC (In Band On Channel) radio. It is a compressed digital transmission which allows the channel lessor to pack more channels/functions in his alloted bandwidth. Quality can be good but there's no guarantee.

Kal
You have to do some serious research. Most radio stations are sending out such garbage (compressed or worse)that it probably won't be worth it. Clear channel is a huge culpret-they put everything on a hard drive, compressed with heavy duty, low sound quality sources that will prevent the sound ever from coming even close to a redbook cd through a simple $150 cd player.
I have seen what is local in pittsburgh. WQED, for example, uses single bit sony 300 disc changers when they aren't using their massive hard drives with compressed music-SAD :(
I got rid of my MD101 when I couldn't find any more analogue stations.
Elevick-

I am sorry you have such horrible experiences with broadcast radio and I cannot offer contrary evidence, with only a rare exception or two. I have no experience with ClearChannel, I am happy to say.

However, my point was that the so-called HD-Radio is not an improvement and will likely lead to further corruption as more and more channels are packed into the fixed bandwidth.

Lately, I've been fooling with XM reception which is a good example of such. The broadcast quality is no better than it has to be to accommodate all the channels. By comparison, my reception from WQXR-FM in NYC is superior, as is what I get from digital DMX cable-radio in CT. I do not expect this to continue and I will have to rely even more on my music collection (and the internet).

Kal
Nice to see that you still get quality radio. Pittsburgh doesn't anymore.
Yes, I use xm on my computer. However, I would never bother running XM through my single ended triode gear. I would rather spin an album.
Happy Listening.
by default it can't be.
dynamic range as well as freequency bandwidth is very limited for the HD standards.