advertisement


VHF/FM radio ...

Oh bravo, just like the original ad. I like this idea, a lot.

Quad ESL57 1-1.jpg

Advertising is not what it once was! Best wishes from George:)
 
To be fair, its a fairly blatant potatoshop fake; both scale and shadows all wrong, for a start: e.g. the -model would need to under 4' 2" to make the '57' so tall ...

Here is the appropriate contemporary advertisement shot:
quad%20ad.jpg
 
Interesting... I also suspected it was getting worse and for the same reasons!

I have sometimes suspected some bass boost going on with the digital version of radio though...
The total lack of background hiss and (even more importantly) lack of multipath distortion is a revelation after a lifetime of FM... although I do feel at times that "it's not radio" as it hasn't arrived over the ether via radio waves:)

I also noticed a decline in Radio Three VHF/FM, albeit via headphones from a portable radio, but it seems to have recovered back to where it was in the 1980s again. Possibly even better.

Norway turned off its VHF National Radio broadcasts two years ago, though coastal VHF continues for shipping. In that case VHF was fairly hopeless without a mast for every valley, but the lack of enthusiasm for this shut down may well be the saviour for our own VHF/FM broadcasting. After all what good is another twenty low quality senders on DAB.

In the long term, no doubt that hi-def [Red-book quality at least] internet broadcasting could become the replacement, but in practice it is far less energy efficient ...

ATB from George
 
Apart from Radios Two, Three and Four, I am wondering what else is broadcast in high quality on UK VHF?

Classic FM, George. Much better and more eclectic than days of yore. Sure, a wee bit compressed (except live broadcasts?) but it's not obvious. R2 is a bit dubious for s.q. and has been for yonks; or maybe it's the content and I've moved on- dunno. Trouble with R3, good as it is, the output is a fair bit less than other channels.
 
I have never used a high quality R2R tape machine, but I have to believe that there is the potential for something of this quality.

I wonder whether there’s some kind of valve R2R in your future (a Revox G36 maybe) for capturing sone of that Troughline sound for a small proportion of eternity.
 
Dear MotelBlues,

Of course it is huge fun to get something with great replay quality working as it [probably] did when it was new, but R2R is a very expensive way to go. I did have a Revox 77 [is that the famous Revox?], which I looked after for its owner for a while. But I had no tape! I did manage to connect it up and listen through headphones to it just messing with the recording level and so forth.

It is years ago now, and I cannot remember the details except that it was incredibly heavy!

So the truth is that it was a Troughline 3 [only used in mono] that convinced me to return to mono as a main reply arrangement [probably ten years ago - where does the time go!], and which led me to run just one ESL with one Quad mono valve amp. Getting the archaic Troughline - first variant, nicely serviced and modified as little as possible - has proved to be the "keystone" in my replay.

But I also knew it would be my last "new" purchase of replay equipment. Only servicing of what I have from now on.

I have another piece of classic equipment from a past age. My Carlton road-bike. So I have a few classic items that are quite inexpensive to use and keep on the top-line, and most importantly are unfussy and reliable as well as being no embarrassment as to their actual performance.

I suppose an idler drive Garrard turntable would be nice as well, but there is zero chance of that either! I had about 600 LPs back in the early nineties, almost all bought new from just two record shops in Hereford. If I still had these then a TT would make sense, but I sold almost all [for what seems a pittance now] in 1993. The money went towards restoring a London made Double bass from circa 1770-1780. That was of course a superb instrument, though temperamental as to room heat and humidity. It was sometimes a night mare to play. But when firing on all cylinders it was the best double bass I have ever had the chance to play on.

I sold it [in error] for a price an order of magnitude less than it was worth. The Japanese collect these old English instruments, which are prized as much as their contemporary Italian sisters. If I had realised its true value, I would still have sold it, but bought a nice flat with the proceeds!

Best wishes from George
 
Dear Mike,

I really cannot enjoy classical music where just one section of a longer piece is played in isolation. Context is crucial in my view. It annoys me on Radio Three and on Classic FM.

The Troughline is is very revealing of compression. And the compression in daytime broadcasting on Classic FM is painful through it. In stead of getting louder with the music, it does not, and the timbre of the instruments changes. This does not seem to matter on a portable [with a less acute ability to convey instrumental timbre], but feeding the ESL, it is almost underlined by the Troughline. Radio Three no doubt also uses dynamic compression, but much less severe and better judged.

The old radio has a revealing quality that some might recognise as being a rather modern characteristic. Certainly the radio cannot be thought of as being at all forgiving of poor or dynamically compressed broadcasting.

Best wishes from George
 
I use a Yamaha CT1010. I like the bloom and warmth it produces. I sometimes use BBC 3 through Roon and observe that bit rates vary throughout the day. At one point it was 48 and sounded very compressed. Neither is perfect.
 
Dear Del monaco,

If the BBC would stick to a Radio Three stream at Red Book standard or higher, then there would be no contest apart from subjective personal preference with VHF, BUT ... That is not the way of the World. Ever since the BBC started its Third Programme service in the 1940s, there have been successive attempts to end the service, reduce its quality and breadth [and cost], sideline it to the long grass, and get rid of the orchestras etc. The argument runs that its audience is too small to justify its existence.

I don't see that we can hope for a better digital stream than currently, though we know already that it would be possible from the Hi-res experiments a few years ago now.

On the whole, my subjective view, is that VHF FM represents the best we shall ever get for R 3.

Best wishes from George
 
Dear Stunsworth,

What would it hurt to run that quality all the time. It is possible, so why not. I guess it would cost for a whole year less than one episode of some US series broadcast on TV.

Amazing really.

ATB from George
 
Last edited:
I wonder how they measured the interest?

Hi-fi buffs who knew about it were but a fraction of the audience that might have appreciated it... had they been told in straightforward terms what they needed to do to hear it.
 
I wonder how they measured the interest?

Hi-fi buffs who knew about it were but a fraction of the audience that might have appreciated it... had they been told in straightforward terms what they needed to do to hear it.
This is true.
 
I wonder how they measured the interest?

Hi-fi buffs who knew about it were but a fraction of the audience that might have appreciated it... had they been told in straightforward terms what they needed to do to hear it.

There was an online questionnaire that could be filled in. The stream was only available through a compatible web browser, which may have limited the audience.
 


advertisement


Back
Top