iHeart Audio is Horrible - Page 3
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: iHeart Audio is Horrible

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Dry Ridge, Kentucky, United States
    Posts
    2,224
    Quote Originally Posted by wavo View Post
    Not so. Stations may choose what level of enhancement is used. If set at "4" it is not audible. If set at "13" you can clearly hear it affect certain voices and music. You CAN run Voltair with no degradation of the audio if run with moderate settings.
    Some companies have a policy on Voltair settings. The local PD/Engineer may have no choice in the matter.
    That's exactly what the IHeart station's are doing, setting the Voltair at the max making it audible. I don't notice it on the Cumulus or Hubbard cluster station's. Radio One has the same audible hollow effect on their 3 signals.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by microbob View Post
    That's exactly what the IHeart station's are doing, setting the Voltair at the max making it audible. I don't notice it on the Cumulus or Hubbard cluster station's. Radio One has the same audible hollow effect on their 3 signals.
    There is evidence that PPM enhancement helps. After the Voltair came out Nielsen modified their PPM generators firmware to populate the watermarks better. Many stations still run the Voltair and you can still see where the watermark population is better post Voltair.
    Nielsen claims you don't need Voltair...especially after their modifications. i forget the specific number of watermarks received to get quarter hour credit but it's low. Maybe David Eduardo/Big A will chime in here with the number. At any rate, it's not many. The Voltair folks argue their enhancement still helps in difficult listening environments i.e. in noisy places like airports, malls, ballparks, etc.
    You can make the argument that degrading the audio will affect TSL. These days it seems low bit rate MP3 audio is acceptable to most people so WTF...
    Last edited by wavo; 03-06-2017 at 04:17 PM.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by wavo View Post
    Big A makes an excellent point. You notice much less artifacts on 4 inch speakers in a noisy pickup truck than you do in a $5K audio system in a quiet Lexus.
    If you have setup audio processing you know how difficult it is to find the "magic" setting for ALL radios. It MUST sound good on the PD and GM's radios and then all the other millions of people who might listen on everything from table radios with 3 inch speakers to $50K audiophile systems. You can make it sound great on home stereo systems and it sounds anemic on car radios. Make it sound good on a boombox with 4 inch speakers and it sounds like crud on decent systems. If you've been there, done that, you know what I'm getting at.
    I agree and disagree. Something that sounds good on an expensive system/speakers or high quality headphones, will sound equally good on a table radio with 4" speakers. Good is good. Now that said, can audio processing make a table radio with 4" speakers sound better than it would normally sound? No, but you will still have the best quality sound for whatever listening device. When it comes to setting up processing, you need to start with the best reference reception device possible, and adjust for that.

    Back in the late 60's and 70's AM stations used to try and equalize the station for what they thought people were listening on. 4" speakers and being the loudest were usually the goal. That's why stations ran 50db of compression and 60db of clipping and ultra fast attack and release times, with anything below 100HZ and above 5KHZ rolled off. Fast forward to the 21st Century.. Now we compete with portable music players and headphones designed for enhanced bass and high frequency performance. Over-processing to make music that radio listeners probably hear in their un-processed form makes radio inferior sounding. Old-school thinking PD's and Engineers that think listeners believe that distorting or over-equalizing the station sounds good or plays better on certain radios, do so at their own peril.
    Last edited by Kelly A; 03-08-2017 at 02:00 PM.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Kelly A View Post
    I agree and disagree. Something that sounds good on an expensive system/speakers or high quality headphones, will sound equally good on a table radio with 4" speakers. Good is good. Now that said, can audio processing make a table radio with 4" speakers sound better than it would normally sound? No, but you will still have the best quality sound for whatever listening device. When it comes to setting up processing, you need to start with the best reference reception device possible, and adjust for that.

    Back in the late 60's and 70's AM stations used to try and equalize the station for what they thought people were listening on. 4" speakers and being the loudest were usually the goal. That's why stations ran 50db of compression and 60db of clipping and ultra fast attack and release times, with anything below 100HZ and above 5KHZ rolled off. Fast forward to the 21st Century.. Now we compete with portable music players and headphones designed for enhanced bass and high frequency performance. Over-processing to make music that radio listeners probably hear in their un-processed form makes radio inferior sounding. Old-school thinking PD's and Engineers that think listeners believe that distorting or over-equalizing the station sounds good or plays better on certain radios, do so at their own peril.
    I respectfully disagree.
    You can setup audio processing to make a table radio/boombox sound "terrific" and those same settings will sound awful on a decent system with cabinet speakers. You must use the processing to compensate for what is lacking with a small speaker enclosed in plastic. And the description "terrific" is relative/subjective...
    I agree that "good" sounds "good" on any radio...I understand your point. But in an imperfect listening environment audio processing can make "good" sound "better." As you well know, there are trade offs to be made because environments differ greatly. Example - In a noisy pickup truck dynamic range should be restricted so the quiet parts don't get masked by road noise. Sports compression increase crowd noise and add excitement to the broadcast and make it easier to hear if listening at the game. Restriction of dynamic range does NOT sound good on a good audio system...
    I hear what you're saying...especially on HD channels. Aim for high quality and forget the "proud it's loud" mentality. That may have made sense in the days of manual tuning but not today. I agree that compromising you audio quality will affect TSL - especially with women. We do, however, live in aa world with low quality MP3 audio considered "OK" by most kids...
    AM is a different conversation - loud is always good on AM unless you crossover into distortion by going past 95% negative modulation...most detectors don't like that.
    Last edited by wavo; 03-08-2017 at 04:10 PM.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




     
Our Conferences
Useful Contacts
Community


Contact Us