• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Does anyone else like FM?

Magnum Dynalab MD106T Triode tuner image. I like it!
Screenshot 2025-01-11 190412.png
 
The other big issue with FM (here) is the compression used a) when they originally ripped/stored the files and b) the compressors used in the transmission. They suck the life out of the music. Their catalogue of music were often ripped and stored from CD back in the early days using heavy compression due to HDD space being expensive. Much of that has been migrated (and sometimes re-coded from the original compressed file) to other storage, but all the CDs were long disposed of.

The sound quality just isn't there as it once was back in the day when playing direct from CD when a DJ played a 'not for resale' disc he played for the first time to his listeners on a pro CD player live on a late night show.

I had a big chat with one of the broadcast engineers several years back for one of our biggest stations and he admitted they were actually in the process of gradually re-obtaining as much of the music as possible to store as lossless going forward.

The compression codecs they were using were audibly brutal due to the bandwidth capabilities of the links, particularly when doing OB (outside broadcast) "live" shows. I'd never really considered how such shows were done, say at an event, where the DJs/Personalities are live on air and playing/controlling content, links to the newsroom and all the music, reports etc. The music was making the trip from the studio storage servers, through the wireless link, to the OB location, sometimes 50km away, then back to the studio and then linked to the transmitter site which was on a mountain another 25km away. It was done in bursts with the ability to retransmit if packets got corrupted to ensure the content wasn't interrupted.

After listening to a few tracks I really knew well sounding like absolute trash, I realized none of it would get fixed as there was no appetite for quality FM anymore. I was the only person who had ever complained and taken the time to let their 'engineer' know how bad the off-air sound was. He didn't even have an off-air high quality tuner. They just listened to the studio feed on a laptop over the internet... I figured it was time to place flowers on the grave of FM at that point.
 
The other big issue with FM (here) is the compression used a) when they originally ripped/stored the files and b) the compressors used in the transmission. They suck the life out of the music. Their catalogue of music were often ripped and stored from CD back in the early days using heavy compression due to HDD space being expensive. Much of that has been migrated (and sometimes re-coded from the original compressed file) to other storage, but all the CDs were long disposed of.

The sound quality just isn't there as it once was back in the day when playing direct from CD when a DJ played a 'not for resale' disc he played for the first time to his listeners on a pro CD player live on a late night show.

I had a big chat with one of the broadcast engineers several years back for one of our biggest stations and he admitted they were actually in the process of gradually re-obtaining as much of the music as possible to store as lossless going forward.

The compression codecs they were using were audibly brutal due to the bandwidth capabilities of the links, particularly when doing OB (outside broadcast) "live" shows. I'd never really considered how such shows were done, say at an event, where the DJs/Personalities are live on air and playing/controlling content, links to the newsroom and all the music, reports etc. The music was making the trip from the studio storage servers, through the wireless link, to the OB location, sometimes 50km away, then back to the studio and then linked to the transmitter site which was on a mountain another 25km away. It was done in bursts with the ability to retransmit if packets got corrupted to ensure the content wasn't interrupted.

After listening to a few tracks I really knew well sounding like absolute trash, I realized none of it would get fixed as there was no appetite for quality FM anymore. I was the only person who had ever complained and taken the time to let their 'engineer' know how bad the off-air sound was. He didn't even have an off-air high quality tuner. They just listened to the studio feed on a laptop over the internet... I figured it was time to place flowers on the grave of FM at that point.
Why does FM sound mid-rangy. Like the midrange seems emphasized sometimes and it takes on special effects sort of tonality and musical instruments pop where they don't usually.
 
Why does FM sound mid-rangy. Like the midrange seems emphasized sometimes and it takes on special effects sort of tonality and musical instruments pop where they don't usually.
Multiband compression
 
I like it in a car, for the convenience. Start up the car and you have music for a short drive to the supermarket or whatever. But we have good radio stations here in seacoast NH. Other places I get sad how bad radio programming is.
 
I disagree with that - especially if talking about mobile/moving reception. It is not taking into account the consistency and interference of the FM signal - which is akin to the pops and clicks on vinyl. And when driving - the occasional-to-persistent collapsing to mono does not have an equivalent in the streaming world. A descent 1st generation 128kbps MP3 rip is a better overall experience IMNSHO, and any modern codec will pretty much beat that at even lower bitrates.
I listen to FM at home, SXM in the car. Whenever I stream free music, I just assume it is below 128Kbps and not the best codec, unless the provider states otherwise, and it never sounds better than FM to me. For example free Spotify which is one of the better sound quality free music streaming I know of allows up to 160Kbps not sure of the codec offhand and it sounds pretty good, but I think FM sounds better.
 
I like it in a car, for the convenience. Start up the car and you have music for a short drive to the supermarket or whatever. But we have good radio stations here in seacoast NH. Other places I get sad how bad radio programming is.
That's how I feel about SiriusXM in the car, but the sound quality is not very good. It's kind of like I want to bring that convenience or a car radio into my home, but there's really no easy way to do that besides FM.
 
I listen to FM at home, SXM in the car. Whenever I stream free music, I just assume it is below 128Kbps and not the best codec, unless the provider states otherwise, and it never sounds better than FM to me. For example free Spotify which is one of the better sound quality free music streaming I know of allows up to 160Kbps not sure of the codec offhand and it sounds pretty good, but I think FM sounds better.
FWIW https://support.spotify.com/us/article/audio-quality/
 
I listen to FM at home, SXM in the car. Whenever I stream free music, I just assume it is below 128Kbps and not the best codec, unless the provider states otherwise, and it never sounds better than FM to me. For example free Spotify which is one of the better sound quality free music streaming I know of allows up to 160Kbps not sure of the codec offhand and it sounds pretty good, but I think FM sounds better.
SXM (and basically any "live" streaming service) is also taking compressed streams and re-compressing them for their platform - correct? Recursive lossy compression? Like sending MP3 over Bluetooth :)

I'll agree FM is a better "experience" if NOT talking about mobile reception - as the un-avoidable collapsing-to-mono and static when multipath issues get too bad are simply unacceptable when streaming/HD-Radio will not ever do that.
 
I still listen via modern digital tuner-on-a-chip devices, which work remarkably well. Previously had a McIntosh MR71, but doubt it would fare nearly in my current locale, given the challenging reception conditions. My most "tech" radio is a Qodosen DX-286.
 
I listen to two local public FM stations (an NPR affiliate and a Classical station) through my DAC using their online apps. They both sound great. I do my best to avoid anything with advertising.
 
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that FM sounds better to some folks, in some circumstances, simply because of the compression applied to almost all FM broadcasts.

By compression I don't mean file compression like mp3 - I mean dynamic range compression. This has been used in FM for decades and it makes FM quite loud and punchy sounding, which can be uniquely engaging or pleasant in certain circumstances, especially in a car where the background noise is high and dynamics in the music are often more of a liability than a benefit to the listening experience.

To be clear, I personally do not find that FM sounds anywhere near as good as a "regular" signal with no added compression, I've got a decent number of live recordings in my music library that are sourced from high-quality FM recordings, and while they are very nice to listen to, their sonic flaws compared to shows taken from broadcast masters are quite obvious.
 
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that FM sounds better to some folks, in some circumstances, simply because of the compression applied to almost all FM broadcasts.

By compression I don't mean file compression like mp3 - I mean dynamic range compression. This has been used in FM for decades and it makes FM quite loud and punchy sounding, which can be uniquely engaging or pleasant in certain circumstances, especially in a car where the background noise is high and dynamics in the music are often more of a liability than a benefit to the listening experience.

To be clear, I personally do not find that FM sounds anywhere near as good as a "regular" signal with no added compression, I've got a decent number of live recordings in my music library that are sourced from high-quality FM recordings, and while they are very nice to listen to, their sonic flaws compared to shows taken from broadcast masters are quite obvious.
Yep - That's the heavy-handed multiband dynamic compression mentioned earlier - used to keep levels high and "make everything louder than everything else" (*note - that doesn't actually work :p ). The pre-cursor to the loudness war...

OT: I have a pair of vintage Innovonics 201 dual-stage limiters (but not multiband) that were used/targeted in broadcast - they smack things very nicely! Cleaned up a little by Jim Williams. Yummy snare drums...
 
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that FM sounds better to some folks, in some circumstances, simply because of the compression applied to almost all FM broadcasts.

By compression I don't mean file compression like mp3 - I mean dynamic range compression. This has been used in FM for decades and it makes FM quite loud and punchy sounding, which can be uniquely engaging or pleasant in certain circumstances, especially in a car where the background noise is high and dynamics in the music are often more of a liability than a benefit to the listening experience.

To be clear, I personally do not find that FM sounds anywhere near as good as a "regular" signal with no added compression, I've got a decent number of live recordings in my music library that are sourced from high-quality FM recordings, and while they are very nice to listen to, their sonic flaws compared to shows taken from broadcast masters are quite obvious.

You are absolutely correct. When added to the splashy/squashed sound of the storage compression codecs, Some stations sound too bad to listen to. Then you get some small stations with low cost units who dial back the compressors and they sound great, albeit with a bit more background noise.

A compressor:
1736660650263.png


1736660792335.png
 
Back
Top Bottom