Audio Processing (Was: WHCN)

["Kaimbridge M. GoldChild" <kaimbridge@programmer.net>]

Steve Ordinetz wrote,

> Howard Glazer wrote:

>> I do agree about the modulation, though. CC puts the same kind of
>> compression on country WWYZ. The difference is quite noticeable
>> when you switch from either CC signal to WDRC-FM, which is much
>> less punchy. I prefer DRC's cleaner sound, but I'm sure the CC
>> folks have research numbers to back up their approach.
>
>
> I wonder if XM (haven't heard Sirius yet) will change attitudes
> toward compression.  While I think XM sounds a little flat &
> lifeless, especially in a car--isteners may come to associate this
> with "better fidelity".  Processing is more art than science, and
> perception is everything.

And--ahem--some think "the more the merrier" in terms of processing.
Locally, the station with the best processing (and being wasted on, I
might add, since it mostly only shows through on the oldies as the
current studio crap lacks any atmospheric depth, whatsoever) is
Star-93.7, with WUMB-91.9 runner-up and Oldies-103.3 coming in third
(the NH SeaCoast's 97.5, 100.3 and 101.1 are notably better than
average, too).
Ideally, with multiple channels available, the satcasters (and
terrestrials, once--if?--IBOC takes hold) will offer different feeds of
the same program, with minimal, "average" and heavy processing.

     ~Kaimbridge~

--
Note:  E-Mail address has changed to kaimbridge@programmer.net,
as Google's @my-deja.com service was terminated on 2001-DEC-12.