Best sounding AM audio ... informal poll and discussion

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Roger that! Here's INR from a few years ago.

http://www.amwindow.org/misc/mp3/w2inr6jan080406z3721.mp3

The artist known as W2INR...smooooooth room filling audio at it's finest.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

K3ZRF.

http://www.amwindow.org/misc/mp3/k3zrf28dec072230z3733.mp3

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

WA3JBT on 160 meters in 2008.

http://www.amwindow.org/misc/mp3/wa3jbt16nov082226z1885.mp3

[W2INR]

another rig was W2INR's old 4-1000 rig modulated by a pair of 833's. Someone who shares the title of the "Buffalo Book Ends" owns it. His name is Bill and that rig with his voice wins my vote as the all time best sounding tube rig

Actually Terry, the rig was sold to Tom (KBW) and he sold it to Dudley W5DUD.That is where the rig is today out west. I don't recall Bill using the rig so I don't know how he sounds on it.

Thanks for the honorable mention Jay

G

[W2PFY]

the rig was sold to Tom (KBW)

I can't remember Bill's call. It's not the infamous other Bill that we all know.

There is a net that runs in the winter and starts on the east cost and goes out west. I think it's called First Wednesday. Bill?? was over at KBW's QTH and ran the net along with Tom. I think they did it twice and now it's hosted with someone in NC. This was back in 2003-04? It used to be that the host would change from time to time and it was nice when it was run by someone up here where I could heard them much better. No indifference meant toward the present host is intended 

[W2INR]

Bill, K2LNU

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Bill's station, circa early 90's.

[W2PFY]

G what happen to the 833 rig mod with 250Th's that you said you were going to build in a 1996 recording by W1UJR?

[John Holotko]

Matters more to me the content of the discussion and how interesting the other people in the QSO are.  I'm pleased to work guys using riceboxes or old mil rigs with carbon mikes.  It's all good to me.

Low distortion audio, regardless of the audio bandwidth, is undeniably MUCH more pleasant, and less tiring, to listen to.  The SE-3 stink detector is a big plus here.  And no matter what the other guy is running, if your receiver sounds like hell, even the best audio won't make much difference.

I agree. It's all good to me, as long as its clean and not distorted. Although, on a good night it's always a pleasure to open up the filters wide, switch to the big speaker and enjoy that wide freq response.

[WA3VJB]

A couple recent threads have touched on this subject so an informal poll might be interesting.            

I add to the list:

Bill W3DUQ

Herb, K2JVM (what's his new call ? )  ^K2VH

Keri, KC2UFU

Jay, N3WWL -- he's got the LOWEST

Chris, W2JBL (the artist formerly known as WA2OMH)

Mike, W8BAC (on the 20V, whew !)

Buddly, WD8BIL (on the Viking Bud)

And must include "Cue Ball" Bob, W2ZM, here, as heard in Arizona:

http://www.arizona-am.net/OUTOFSTATE/W2ZM/w2zm_d.mp3

Notice how the S/N ratio isn't that great, but his AUDIO makes it ? Just what several here have mentioned.

Source:
http://www.arizona-am.net/OUTOFSTATE/W2ZM/index.html

This is the transmitter Bob used in one of the early Heavy Metal Rallies, holding fort for more than 10 hours, moving stations into the frequency throughout the night ...

[W1VD]

I'd like to add Ken, W2DTC to the list. Very clean signal with lots of modulation, a good voice, interesting to listen to and a full strap carrier that brings the frequency to it's knees. All the elements of success in one signal.   

[W9GT]

We heard many of those mentioned and, perhaps several others that really sounded great during the recent AM Xmtr Rally and Heavy Metal Rally activities.  So-called "bass-rich" broadcast audio that many stations are well known for, is great to listen to under decent band conditions.  Unfortunately, during noisey or marginal conditions, that bassy sound is hard to copy.  It is during such band conditions that some of the stations with restricted and tinny sounding audio actually cut thru and are more copyable.  We are dealing with propagation which is not a constant and can vary all over the place.

I guess it all boils down to whether you are just trying to get thru or whether you are after quality that is pleasant to listen to.  Hmmm...most of the military gear used carbon mikes and restricted audio quality is/was the norm.  Maybe they were just trying to get the message thru, not too concerned with faithful reproduction of the operator's voice. 

I think, however, that for the most part, we can all agree that AM sure sounds better than SSB.

73,  Jack, W9GT

[W2PFY]

I guess it all boils down to whether you are just trying to get thru or whether you are after quality that is pleasant to listen to

For awhile I was trying to create the worst sounding audio with hi end audio components. It not that easy to do.

[k4kyv]

We heard many of those mentioned and, perhaps several others that really sounded great during the recent AM Xmtr Rally and Heavy Metal Rally activities.  So-called "bass-rich" broadcast audio that many stations are well known for, is great to listen to under decent band conditions.  Unfortunately, during noisey or marginal conditions, that bassy sound is hard to copy.  It is during such band conditions that some of the stations with restricted and tinny sounding audio actually cut thru and are more copyable.  We are dealing with propagation which is not a constant and can vary all over the place.

You don't hafta cut out the bass or sound tinny to cut through the noise and QRM.  Just boost the highs with a strong, broad peak from about 2000~ to 3000~.  That will balance out the bass and make the signal more intelligible, plus it will get rid of the muddy sound of a signal that runs flat response all the way down to below 100~.

Most of the time, a "bassy" sound is not the result of too much bass, but the result of a lack of highs, and vice-versa.

You don't want any frequency range to grossly dominate in your response curve.  The energy content of the voice spectrum should be uniform, within a few dB, throughout the range with maybe a little emphasis on the upper mid-range.  That's the basic theory behind W2WLR's "Enhanced AM" and the peak in the frequency response of the D-104 and Heil microphones.

Some interesting discussion of frequency response and human hearing can be found at:

Fletcher Munson Equal Loudness Curves.

Psychoacoustics

[K1JJ]

The particular final audio gear settings to obtain optimized response will depend much on a person's voice characteristics.  A few of us (like me) have natural mid-bassy voices which require the "S" EQ curve to suck out the ~110-300hz area. Into a stock, flat mike I sound muddy. Just like a custom fitting a suit, everyone needs a different matrix of audio (EQ/compressor-processor, etc) settings to have optimized audio for local hi-fi and quasi-DX AM use.  

How do we know we're there?  Recordings made from Flex-type radios sent to your computer is an excellent method of evaluation. Also, contrary to popular belief, I like to get a range of opinions from AMers I know have good ears. After a while, you will find that most will agree the audio is as good as it can be - they will all more or less feel it is a good compromise and say to leave it alone.  In the beginning of getting opinions, it is difficult due to the wild swings of opinion, but eventually you CAN please most ears. That's hard to believe , I know.

Then, as I mentioned before, there are a few who can use an off-air monitor to set their own audio curves precisely. This is a very difficult feat for many reasons, but it should always be followed up with recordings and opinions to be sure.

As an acid test, I usually axe a distant AMer (out 2,000 miles or more on 75M) if my audio is easy to copy for DX use. This works very well and has influenced my settings from time to time.

T

[ka3zlr]

I dunno Listenen to some of the Flexy Sidbanders you'd think you were operating AM.

Hows my audio now, a little wider just a li'll maybe 5 Kcs  

Woof Woof.

73

Jack.

[w1vtp]

<snip>
How do we know we're there?  Recordings made from Flex-type radios sent to your computer is an excellent method of evaluation. Also, contrary to popular belief, I like to get a range of opinions from AMers I know have good ears. <snip>

As an acid test, I usually axe a distant AMer (out 2,000 miles or more on 75M) if my audio is easy to copy for DX use. This works very well and has influenced my settings from time to time.

T

Tom

I try really hard to resist the temptation to give what my ears like - that's why I use the recording approach.  A few gifted listeners can give good on-air reports as you indicate.

Punch is equally important, I agree.  Last night, Bill, W1MPY had really punchy audio with no discernible distortion (I was using sync det).  Whatever he had -- it was on the money.  I like the balance between HIFI and punch

Al

[K1JJ]

Al -

I wish I listened in to you guys. Yep, punchy audio while still maintaining a clean, hi-fi sound is no easy task, but it can be done.  The bitch of it all is that our voices often change from day to day based on congestion, tension, etc. Compare a voice in the early morning vs: later in the day. Or, listen after mowing the lawn without a face air filter.

Because of these voice variations, I've had guys tell me I sounded different to the point of needing more bass - and then the next day my voice changed and I had to back the EQ lows down again...     That's when you're on the ragged edge of having an average voice - the guys with the great BC voices can run anything and sound good all the time... sigh.


T

[K5UJ]

<<<I think, however, that for the most part, we can all agree that AM sure sounds better than SSB.>>>

No doubt about it.  Like I've said before, an AM station with wx radio audio sounds better to me than a SSB station doing the ESSB thing.  It all has to do with AM transmitting the actual base band audio intact.

The problem with balancing low frequencies with high boost is that then to get all of it you have to have a fairly wide rx passband.  Well, on 75 in the evenings there is so much slopbucket QRM that is just not viable here.  I get the rx down to 5 KHz passband then tune off about 1 kc from carrier zero beat and that works fairly well, but if condx are rough, then anything audio below 100 Hz is a waste to me. 

I've looked at sw bc stations mod. envelopes on my IF tap.  Even with poor propagation and weak carrier they have detectable audio.  On the scope I can see that they run a hell of a lot of audio.  I can't tell how much pos. modulation they have but it is definitely asymmetric and probably very compressed.

I wish I had my wake up voice at night    When I get out of bed I sound like one of those late night DJs, like Venus Flytrap on WKRP.  By the end of they day I sound like Mayor Daley, all squeaky.  I like da Maer, but he doesn't have a radio voice.

Someone sent me an audio clip maybe late last year, someone on the East coast.  That was cool.  It might have been you Tom--thanks.   Wait, you don't record do you?  Must have been someone else.   Maybe it was VJB.

[WA3VJB]

Someone sent me an audio clip maybe late last year, someone on the East coast.  That was cool.  It might have been you Tom--thanks.   Wait, you don't record do you?  Must have been someone else.   Maybe it was VJB.

I roll a lot of tape, and I remember when we finally had a QSO, so maybe so. It is so easy these days to get an aircheck, make it an email attachment, and send it off. I still have some 3" "Mission Impossible" open reels that the TimTron sent me of my station about 30 years ago, 3.75 ips, 2T mono.  You want a high thin voice? There I was.

[W2PFY]

Like I've said before, an AM station with wx radio audio sounds better to me than a SSB station doing the ESSB thing.

They can sound real good on a R390A.

[W1VD]

The particular final audio gear settings to obtain optimized response will depend much on a person's voice characteristics.  A few of us (like me) have natural mid-bassy voices which require the "S" EQ curve to suck out the ~110-300hz area. Into a stock, flat mike I sound muddy. Just like a custom fitting a suit, everyone needs a different matrix of audio (EQ/compressor-processor, etc) settings to have optimized audio for local hi-fi and quasi-DX AM use. 

Find it interesting that some folks run a flat EQ curve while others run the 'smiley face'. Like Tom, if I were to run a flat EQ (using my PR40) I'd be the 'Mudman' for sure. While some of the difference can be chalked up to individual voices there's also the microphone frequency response ... and the combination of the two. For s&g here are plots of four mics commonly used on AM.

http://www.w1vd.com/miccomparison.jpg

note: graphs not to scale with each other

The differences are pretty dramatic when one considers that a couple dB change in certain bands of the 31 band EQ can make all the difference.       

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

full strap carrier that brings the frequency to it's knees.

What a great description! Ken sure does that.

[ka3zlr]

I liked the performance B-1 Excellent Mic. very warm

73

Zed.L.R.

[K1JJ]

full strap carrier that brings the frequency to it's knees.

What a great description! Ken sure does that.

Knees are people too....