Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The end of AM radio in your car?

boston.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 104 posts

Re: The end of AM radio in your car?

#91

Post by brewdad »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #53
sempron64 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All this requires to be true is that basically all Americans who are in a car weekly turn on the radio when driving, which is very believable. Some people also still have a radio in the kitchen of course.

Is it? It's been years since I, most of my family, or my coworkers have turned on the radio (for non-Bluetooth audio)...my aging FIL insisted on it during a trip back in August (to much good-natured ribbing from his kids) but that's the last time I remember.

Really? You go through the trouble of hooking up your phone and starting your favorite app on a 5 minute run to the grocery store rather than just letting the radio be background noise? I totally get doing that for longer trips but so many of my trips are short enough they could be done on foot or by bike if my area was more friendly to that sort of thing.

Radio does the job for the few minutes I'll be in the car.

Re: The end of AM radio in your car?

#92

Post by dredmorbius »

dctoedt wrote: post #9

AM radio broadcasts can reach somewhat farther than FM (and way farther at night on clear channels); that might matter in an emergency. As a middle-schooler living in the Washington DC area, I would regularly pick up WLS in Chicago, some 700 miles away, on my little crystal set at night.

This creates a problem, and even risk, where clear-channel (in the generic sense, not of the firm that appropriated the name, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear-channel_station>) stations whose signals may reach 1,000 miles or further at night will often report on local traffic and weather conditions using entirely generic terminology: "in the local area", "around town", "in the suburbs", "metro area", "twin cities", "tri-city area", "quad cities" (there are numerous of each), etc.

That might work if your station's reach is the typical 10--50 miles of an American FM broadcast (notable exception: San Francisco's KQED which can be picked up by direct line-of-sight at least 120 miles away as one approaches Yosemite on CA-120 near and east of Groveland, CA.

There's a similar issue I find with online news items from local broadcast (usually television) stations, which similarly utterly fail to note the city and state in which a story occurs, though at least in this case it's usually possible to punch the call signs into Wikipedia to find out where the station is located, something that's not always possible traveling remote regions by car at night. (Though to be fair, far more possible now than it was several decades ago.)

Re: The end of AM radio in your car?

#93

Post by dredmorbius »

quickthrower2 wrote: post #51
dctoedt wrote: post #9

AM radio broadcasts can reach somewhat farther than FM (and way farther at night on clear channels); that might matter in an emergency. As a middle-schooler living in the Washington DC area, I would regularly pick up WLS in Chicago, some 700 miles away, on my little crystal set at night.

A crystal set needs no battery power, the signal is enough to power the audio. I had fun making one with those 20 in 1 electronics toys as a kid. I think that one didn't tune so you heard multiple stations at once.

There are various kinds of crystal sets.

I don't know the theory, though I did make one as a child.

It was the non-tuning type, and would pull in only the strongest-broadcasting local AM channel.

It's also possible to create a tuner which can pull in a specific station (or more accurately: frequency). These can also operate without a battery, though battery-powered radio is of course more versatile.

Re: The end of AM radio in your car?

#94

Post by dieselgate »

Fatnino wrote: post #41
RF_Enthusiast wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those low power highway information stations are actually required to be low quality audio [1]. My understanding is that back in the day, broadcasters insisted that these stations were low quality so they would not compete with commercial broadcasters. In my opinion, those stations actually make AM seem much worse than it really is. That scheme backfired in the long run. [1] 47 CFR 90.242(b)(8) https://www.ecfr.gov/c…

There was (is?) a commercial station in the bay area that broadcasts simultaneously on AM and FM. I could tune the car radio to the correct frequency on each and then compare the sound quality by flipping the AM/FM switch. FM is WAY better sound quality. It's not even close.

I don’t live in the bay anymore but know for a fact sports radio knbr 680 also has an fm station, think it’s 104.5

I’ve actually taken a bit to AM lately to listen to different sporting events when outside of fm range

Not vouching for it and I wouldn’t care if am was deprecated as a vehicle radio feature (my vehicles are ‘88 and ‘02) but it still serves a purpose for sure

Re: The end of AM radio in your car?

#95

Post by kalleboo »

brewdad wrote: post #91
LeifCarrotson wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it? It's been years since I, most of my family, or my coworkers have turned on the radio (for non-Bluetooth audio)...my aging FIL insisted on it during a trip back in August (to much good-natured ribbing from his kids) but that's the last time I remember.

Really? You go through the trouble of hooking up your phone and starting your favorite app on a 5 minute run to the grocery store rather than just letting the radio be background noise? I totally get doing that for longer trips but so many of my trips are short enough they could be done on foot or by bike if my area was more friendly to that sort of thing. Radio does the job for the few minutes I'll be in the car.

The phone automatically connects to the car and all I have to do is press play on the car touchscreen. Don't even have to take the phone out of my pocket.

Re: The end of AM radio in your car?

#96

Post by bears-n-beets »

brewdad wrote: post #91
LeifCarrotson wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it? It's been years since I, most of my family, or my coworkers have turned on the radio (for non-Bluetooth audio)...my aging FIL insisted on it during a trip back in August (to much good-natured ribbing from his kids) but that's the last time I remember.

Really? You go through the trouble of hooking up your phone and starting your favorite app on a 5 minute run to the grocery store rather than just letting the radio be background noise? I totally get doing that for longer trips but so many of my trips are short enough they could be done on foot or by bike if my area was more friendly to that sort of thing. Radio does the job for the few minutes I'll be in the car.

I have to go more out of my way to turn on the radio in my car than I do to connect to Spotify. When I get in my car I plug my phone into the USB cable reflexively and Spotify starts up automatically. I’d have to fumble around with the settings on my infotainment system to even find the radio option (Mazda 3 2020).

Re: The end of AM radio in your car?

#97

Post by zzo38computer »

I still listen to AM radio (the CBC). (I mainly listen in the home, not in the car, because I do not have a car or a driving license; however, sometimes when going with someone else in the car, I can listen to radio.)

We need AM radio. AM radio is simple. It is better than having an overly complicated and badly made digital radio needing licensing and difficulty of implementation etc.

Re: The end of AM radio in your car?

#98

Post by mechanical_bear »

uni_rule wrote: post #74
andirk wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what "watch television" means these days. I don't know many people who have broadcast or cable TV.

I am still surprised how relatively few people have a set of rabbit ears wired to their "streaming" TVs for basic news or whatever in the current year considering how cheap they are.

My streaming box and smart tv have local channels on them, gratis.

Re: The end of AM radio in your car?

#99

Post by anderiv »

freedomben wrote: post #81
RF_Enthusiast wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As do many people. AM stations that run play-by-play sports programming do very well in the ratings, and do very well with the station's sales team.

The skill of the broadcast announcers is remarkable. They paint the scene with audio-only in an amazing way. My father (and my grandfather before him) takes a little battery-powered AM radio with him to games (football, baseball, etc) and listen to it while watching the game live. They've even muted the TV and used TV picture with radio sound to get a better experience. That makes it easy to take naps and close your…

Recently the Vikings posted this clip of their PxP announcer Paul Allen doing his thing. Even though I don’t care one lick about American football, I still found this clip to be great fun to watch. The skill, passion, and joy he has is infectious.

https://twitter.com/PatMcAfeeShow/status/1592980588608487424

Re: The end of AM radio in your car?

#100

Post by freedomben »

aidenn0 wrote: post #89
freedomben wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The skill of the broadcast announcers is remarkable. They paint the scene with audio-only in an amazing way. My father (and my grandfather before him) takes a little battery-powered AM radio with him to games (football, baseball, etc) and listen to it while watching the game live. They've even muted the TV and used TV picture with radio sound to get a better experience. That makes it easy to take naps and close your…

Hank Azaria (played the title character on Brockman) joked a few times that baseball announcers could say whatever they wanted as long as it ended in a pitch count. I think that adds to the effect of "being at the game" with the announcer; go to a ballgame with a friend you haven't seen in a few weeks and you'll end up talking about random stuff too.

Love it! Had he not been so wildly talented at voice-work, he could have been a damn good announcer himself (as evidenced by his work as announcers in the Simpson's), so that's extra great
Post reply on HN