The difference will be entirely due to the engineering approach of the station.

Posted by Timbo in Oz (A) on May 17, 2012 at 15:00:11

In Reply to: FM station frequency vs fidelity posted by hitsware on May 15, 2012 at 12:30:45:

Leaving aside

i)transmitted power - where the difference should be quite small #, depending on

ii) your 'radio reception system's' ability to reject multipath, and
iii) its ability to fully limit the 'tuner' on all stations being compared #.
iv) most of this is down to your antenna.

The wavelength/frequency differences are most unlikely to affect anything, band-II is very narrow, lambda ranges from 2.8 to just 3.4 metres.

A quality station uses little processing with as little dynamic range compression as possible, or just peak limiters. Such a station should sound very quiet most of the time.

If they do live direct broadcasts of simply-miked acoustic music you'll have one of the best sources possible for an audiophile, as there are no storage-medium losses. ???? Yes, despite the bandwidth limitation and IME.

Australia's national ABC Classic FM network used to transmit here in Canberra the nation's capital right down in the bottom of band II and now transmits on 102.3.

The only other local station of any quality is down at 92.7, previously on 103.1. Its power is below 1/6th the power of ABC Classics main (102.3) transmitter.

Yet both sound excellent and always have, making investment in best possible tuner and antenna combinations worthwhile. We can also compare live OBs at the capital's venues to our own experience of the venues.

Canberra is a very spread out 'city' of several townships, many 'down holes' / in separate valleys of the Great Dividing Range, so that multipath is a serious problem, as was ghosting on analogue TV. So bad indeed that there are two relay point hills with smaller transmitters to meet some of the problems.

To sum up, sound quality on FM - as a system working correctly to standard through to your part of it in your home - is unaffected by the transmitted frequency.

I believe that many low-power / low budget local stations were allocated frequencies down the bottom of band II in the USA, and given their low budget they often can't futz with the audio signal, nor do they need to compete by using compression. So, if your reception system is up to their low power (full limiting on each of them) they can sound very good.

Is that clear?

Warmest

Tim Bailey

Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - FM station frequency vs fidelity - hitsware 12:30:45 05/15/12 (13)

RE: FM station frequency vs fidelity - Maric 22:54:38 05/17/12 (0)

RE: FM station frequency vs fidelity - Neff 17:46:03 05/17/12 (0)

The difference will be entirely due to the engineering approach of the station. - Timbo in Oz 15:00:11 05/17/12 (1)

RE: The difference will be entirely due to the engineering approach of the station. - hitsware 12:14:33 05/18/12 (0)

RE: FM station frequency vs fidelity - Neff 16:08:16 05/16/12 (2)

"Quality of a FM station can exist anywhere on the dial" - hitsware 17:37:42 05/16/12 (1)

RE: "Quality of a FM station can exist anywhere on the dial" - Eli Duttman 18:27:47 05/16/12 (0)

RE: FM station frequency vs fidelity - 6bq5 16:59:51 05/15/12 (0)

RE: FM station frequency vs fidelity - Eli Duttman 12:35:49 05/15/12 (4)

RE: FM station frequency vs fidelity - FRG7SWL 08:05:35 05/16/12 (3)

RE: FM station frequency vs fidelity - Eli Duttman 17:30:48 05/16/12 (0)

Thanks for the (local) input ! - hitsware 11:02:20 05/16/12 (1)

RE: "I'm just south of Land Park." - 1973shovel 12:04:04 05/16/12 (0)

Follow Ups

The difference will be entirely due to the engineering approach of the station. - Timbo in Oz 15:00:11 05/17/12 (1)

RE: The difference will be entirely due to the engineering approach of the station. - hitsware 12:14:33 05/18/12 (0)

The difference will be entirely due to the engineering approach of the station.

Post a Message!