Looking for honest answers on this

M.Casey map@mapinternet.com
Tue Jun 10 14:19:44 EDT 2014

Terrestrial receivers are still, by far, the most convenient for me. I 
bought a bunch of Super radios about 12 yrs ago (1 each for upstairs-front 
porch-basement-work desk-vacation-and a dedicated battery unit for when I'm 
working outside) and they mostly all still work and sound fine. The only 
challenged signals are distant ones on AM--ex: WBZ-AM has some fuzz out here 
near Springfield. And, car radios are better than ever.  The new car had 
free satellite service for 4 months---it was OK, but not worth the price to 
me because I don't spend enough time in the car. I listen online at work 
sometimes. But that is not nearly as reliable (with dsl) as the super 
radios. Many of the streams just shut off after a short period of time.

I really do like the FM section of the HD radio in the car. WBZ-AM goes in 
and out of HD out here, but the FM's have some worthwhile HD2's & 3's that 
work pretty good. But HD still has a long way to go to get a large amount of 
acceptance, and use, from the general public.

But--no need to feel guilty if online works for you!

Mark Casey

-----Original Message----- 
From: Kevin Vahey
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 3:39 AM
To: Boston Radio Group
Subject: Looking for honest answers on this

Here we are in the year 2014.

How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? When
you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what maybe a
challenged signal,

I am guilty of this and it bothers me.

Discuss please

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3955/7656 - Release Date: 06/10/14

More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list