FM Radio compression / EQ question

Hi,

this question probably belongs into the "hardware" forum, but compression and EQ have been discussed a lot here, so I think it's OK to post it in this section. On to the question:

I've taped a lot of live shows from either TV or FM radio to my Sony PCM M-1 DAT recorder and I'd now like to transfer some of them to CD-R. While the overall sound quality is very good to excellent, the dynamics are not - so the listening experience is sometimes quite disappointing on my stereo system. My question is: Has anyone thorough experience with expanding dynamics in Cool Edit? Will there be any improvements or should I stay with what is on the tape? I'd be willing to experiment, but I have absolutely no idea in which way any of the parameters will affect the sound. Any presets someone would like to share?

Best, Arne

 

I think it would depend on how new the material is. Knowing the technology used with 6 band and now all digital multi-band compression used by radio and TV, it would be like trying to take grass that has been run over by dozens of cars in the mud and trying to make it stand back up again from having no dynamic range to having some. I know that the old DBX 3BX Dynamic Range expanders sell on Ebay still, but you're trying to undo 6 bands or more of compression with only 3. Doubt you'll like the sound you achieve-- but hey, that's what experimentation is all about!

 

dough1981,

the concerts I'd like to transfer from DAT to CD-R have all been taped in the last two years. Some MTV stuff, but mostly german radio stations. It's about time to get a DAB tuner, I think.

Arne

 

Arne,

Once programs have been squashed by a broadcast compressor/limiter, in my opinion, you are out of luck in any attempt to try to recapture lost dynamic range. They are what they are.

Bob

 

I had a First Class FCC Radio/Tel license in the 60's and helped out at various NYC FM stations. All one needs is a limiter to prevent overmodulation. But the FCC, in response to complaints about loud commercials, ordered that stations control the average volume of programs and commercials. Thus some form of modest compression is required. If used in moderation, and with correct mastering of commercial inserts, it is possible to maintain excellent dynamic range (close to 70dB) and observe the FCC mandate.

But nooooo. The guys from AM learned to compress the piss out of everything to make everything sound loud. This overcomes static and can give a station a personality. As a kid driving with my parents around the east coast, I could always pick out WABC AM because it would literally pop out of the dial. It had a very loud, distinctive sound.

When FM gained listners in the late 60's these guys and AM radio managers came over to FM and wanted everything loud. They have killed FM as a source of decent sound, in my opinion. You don't hear this level of compression in Europe or even Canada. Studies show people find this hard to listen to very long and turn off the station, but the manager's don't care, they want it loud. Combine this with overcompressed CD's and records and you have a sonic mess. Most people would be shocked to hear how good mono FM can sound. And the first FM system used in the States likely equaled CD's in frequency range and close to CD's in dynamic range, but RCA feared it would kill AM so it was killed off and the replacement FM system is much harder to transmit and receive and our Zenith FM Stereo system is a disaster (thanks to Musak who wanted FM to carry its background music service along with consumer mono and stereo audio. The industry had picked an alternative technology that did not lose signal to noise and retained frequency response out to 20,000 Hz but the FCC got in bed with Musak because the Senator controlling their budget was from the state where Musak was based. Sad but true.
In the States our college and listner based stations are the only ones without excessive compression.

 

Richard,

Great post!

Bob

 

Wonderful post.
I was under the impression that RCA (David Sarnoff, really) kept FM down at first because he was afraid it would compete with Television?
The inventor of FM (can't remember his name. Armstrong was it?) killed himself after years of fighting with RCA. I'm trying to remember this off the top of my head. I think it was covered in the Burns documentary "Empire of the Air".
Dan C

 

Mr. Sarnoff was a friend of Mr. Armstrong. RCA had a reward out for an inventer to solve the AM noise problem. RCA gave Mr. Armstrong room in its Empire State Building broadcast room to install his new invention FM. It worked so well that Sarnoff was afraid it could kill off NBC's AM radio network; so he kicked Armstrong off the Empire State Building, and stole the invention for the audio portion of TV being invented at the time, in part by RCA.

Then Armstrong went to NJ and set up a string of FM stations in a network from NYC to DC. These were below channel 2, a very low frequency, that required low powered transmitters. The stations had great range and superb potential fidelity. Lots of radios were sold, but behind his back Sarnoff went to the Feds and had the FCC pull all those FM frequencies and moved FM up the spectrum to a much higher frequency that rendered the current radios useless and required much more expensive transmitters. That transmission site set up my Armstrong is still in use in NJ and many of the stations from the WTC were able to use it to get back on the air quickly. Not enough room for everyone however. How ironic. Armstrong killed himself, and his widow won the suit against Sarnoff after his death. Armstrong also invented the basic circuits that made AM radios work, and those designs are still in use! Armstrong good - Sarnoff bad.