HD or nothing sometimes

[Eli Polonsky]

Matthew Reed wrote:
> I remember reading about a survey that found 
> that most people don't extend the antenna on 
> a portable FM radio. Somewhat surprisingly, 
> most people still wouldn't extend the antenna 
> even after it was pointed out that the reception 
> would be improved. I believe it because I have 
> seen that happen many times myself.

Then again, anyone within about three miles of the
Prudential or FM-128 (even farther line-of-sight)
would find that most portable radios get better
reception with the antenna collapsed. Extending
the antenna in those areas only overloads their
terrible front ends, causing intermodulation from 
all the powerful Class B stations transmitting 
from those sites, which covers up weaker/farther
stations which may come in with the antenna down.

In those cases, collapsing the antenna simulates
the old "Local/DX" switches that radios used to
have, putting them on "local" to reduce overload
and intermodulation.

As well, I have also spoken with very many people
over the years who would buy a home receiver which
comes with no built-in or attached antenna (usually
a twin-lead wire dipole antenna is supplied in the 
box, to be attached) and never realize that they're
supposed to attach anything to the antenna terminals.

With no antenna, they listen to the powerful nearby
Class B stations, and they say they "just can't get"
farther stations, weaker stations, college stations,
etc... When asked if they have an antenna on their
receiver, most just say "huh??".

EP