------------------------------
The Old-Time Radio Digest!
Volume 2003 : Issue 257
A Part of the [removed]!
ISSN: 1533-9289
Today's Topics:
June 30th birthdays [ Ron Sayles <bogusotr@[removed]; ]
Pranks [ "Randall F. Miller Jr." <rfmillerjr ]
Converting RealAudio [ "Doug Leary" <doug@[removed]; ]
Radio DX [ Gerald Serrino <gserr@[removed]; ]
tubes vs. transistors, [removed] [ "Mark Kinsler" <kinsler33@[removed] ]
Re Queen For A Day [ "Thomas Mason" <batz34@[removed] ]
AM Reception [ "George Tirebiter" <tirebiter2@hotm ]
RealAudio and MP3 [ "Doug Leary" <doug@[removed]; ]
radio stations [ "Kurt E. Yount" <blsmass@[removed]; ]
Kin Shriner [ "Kurt E. Yount" <blsmass@[removed]; ]
Re: Radio DX [ "Joe Cline" <[removed]@[removed] ]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 15:37:05 -0400
From: Ron Sayles <bogusotr@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: June 30th birthdays
June 30th births
06-30-1894 - Phillips Carlin - NYC - d. 8-27-1971
announcer: "Palmolive Hour"; "Atwater Kent Hour"
06-30-1896 - Wilfred Pelletier - Montreal, Canada - d. 4-9-1982
conductor: "Roses and Drums"; "Metropolitan Opera Auditions of the Air"
06-30-1898 - George Chandler - Waukegan, IL - d. 6-10-1985
actor: "Lux Radio Theatre"
06-30-1899 - Santos Ortega - NYC - d. 4-10-1976
actor: Nero Wolfe "Adv. of Nero Wolfe"; Richard Queen "Adv. of Ellery Queen"
06-30-1904 - Glenda Farrell - Enid, Oklahoma Territory - d. 5-1-1971
opposing pitcher: "Quizzer"s Baseball"
06-30-1910 - Frank Gallop - Boston, MA - d. 5-1998
announcer: :Milton Berle Show"; "Gangbusters"; "Stella Dallas"
06-30-1913 - Harry Wismer - Port Huron, MI - d. 1967
sportscaster: "Harry Wismer Sports Show"; "Champion Roll Call"
06-30-1917 - Lena Horne - Brooklyn, NY
singer: "Chamber Music Society of Lower Basin Street"
06-30-1918 - Stewart Foster - Binghamten, NY - d. 2-7-1968
singer: "Stewart Foster Show"; "Galen Drake"; "On a Sunday Afternoon"
06-30-1919 - Susan Hayward - Brooklyn, NY - d. 3-14-1975
actress: "Radio Almanac"; "Lux Radio Theatre"
June 30th deaths
02-02-1906 - Gale Gordon - NYC - d. 6-30-1995
actor: Mayor LaTrivia "Fibber McGee and Molly"; Osgood Conklin "Our Miss
Brooks"
06-20-1924 - Chet Atkins - Luttrell, TN - d. 6-30-2001
guitarist: "Boone County Neighbors"; "Grand Ole Opry"
07-26-1907 - Galen Drake - Kokomo, IN - d. 6-30-1989
commentator: "Galen Drake"
08-26-1873 - Lee de Forest - Council Bluffs, IA - d. 6-30-1961
inventor: Audion tube
11-27-1908 - Mary Livingston - Seattle, WA - d. 6-30-1983
comedienne: (wife of Jack Benny) "The Jack Benny Program"
Ron Sayles
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Hometown of [removed] Kaltenborn and Spencer Tracy
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 15:37:25 -0400
From: "Randall F. Miller Jr." <rfmillerjr1@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Pranks
>From a recent posting:
I have no idea if any of this is true, but knowing the general mentality of
radio station people in general and technicians in particular (Mr Murtough
doubtless knows whereof I speak) I wouldn't be surprised if it was.
As a 30 year veteran of Radio and Television the pranks were and are
abundant.
Circles of flame and exploding firecrackers in addition to CO2 fire
extinguishers going off unexpectedly are only the highlights (or lowlights)
depending on your point of view. I have often been asked the reason for
these pranks, and the only reasonable one is that broadcasting is and was a
very high stress job. Every button you pressed, every switch you threw did
something, usually what you wanted, but not always. There was always the
dreaded "hot line phone" that only management knew the number of, and you
really hated to hear it ring. Obviously when it rang you had done something
VERY WRONG.
The practical jokes we had played on us, and we played were a way to relieve
that pressure
Randy Miller, Senior Engineer WITF-TV/FM Radio Pennsylvania
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 18:35:45 -0400
From: "Doug Leary" <doug@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: Converting RealAudio
I'm putting together a page on my website and will post a note here when
it's done, but for now here are quick details for two RealAudio solutions:
----
1) A very simple, free program to save RealAudio as WAV files is available
here:
[removed]
The file is in .zip format. Once you unzip it there is no install, you just
run the .exe by double-clicking. It will record from either a file on your
computer or streaming audio from a web location (just type in the
http://...). This program has very few options so it's easy to use. If your
goal is to make audio CDs then all you have to do is record to WAV files and
burn them to CD. However, you cannot make mp3 files with this program. To do
that you can use EasyCDCreator or other popular mp3 encoders.
----
2) With somewhat greater effort you can convert directly from realaudio to
mp3 using Winamp. All you need is a RealAudio input plugin and an mp3 output
plugin. Here are the ones I am using:
realaudio input: [removed]
mp3 output: [removed]
Download these and double-click the .exe to install each.
Start Winamp and click Control-P for options.
On the Plug-Ins menu click Input and select "innover's RealAudio plugin".
Click Output and select "Chun Yu's MP3 Writer plugin". Then click the
Configure button and select the file directory where you want the mp3 files
to be written. You can also configure the bitrate and other properties.
- To convert realaudio files: drag them onto Winamp and click Play. You
won't hear the output, but you will see the time display tick along as the
file is converted. On my computer it converts at about 3x normal speed. The
output mp3 file will be saved file in the directory you specified. The
filename will be the entire realaudio filename plus ".mp3". If you play
multiple realaudio files you will get multiple mp3 files.
- To convert a stream from the web: click the Add button at the bottom of
Winamp and click Add URL, then enter the http:// address of the stream.
Click Play and the stream will be saved as mp3.
NOTE: In order to play mp3 files again, you have to switch Winamp back to
normal. Click Control-P then click Input and make sure either "Nullsoft MPEG
Audio decoder" (or nothing) is selected; for Output select "DirectSound
output" or "waveOut output".
----
Additional articles online:
"How to Convert Anything" -- a little overstated, but it does have various
links to conversion software, either free or cheap:
[removed]
A larger download page of various format converters -- I have not explored
these yet.
[removed]
Doug Leary
Seattle
[removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 18:37:40 -0400
From: Gerald Serrino <gserr@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Radio DX
I might add to the tube radio vs. transistor radio
controversy. Most radios today are bult for sound
quality. In order to achieve that sensitivity - the
ability to pull in distant stations- is sacrificed for
selectivity - the ability to separate radio
frequencies. There are exceptions and ways to get
around it. First, there are some transistor radios
made that have good sensitivity and good selectivity.
The GE Super Radio that is no longer made for one, but
still can be picked up used, the Sony ICF2010 and the
Drake R8 and SW-8 radios made primarily for shortwave
enthusiasts but are excellent for AM radio DX. I know
the 2010 is still made and have one. However, even
with an old stereo or good table radio you can still
DX. You can purchase or build a preselector and
directional antennas. I live in Pittsburgh and with my
Sony 2010 have no problem receiving both the Chicago
and New York big stations on the same night. It also
allows me to get KMOX in St. Louis and a Philadelphia
station which are in close proximity on the dial to
KDKA our bog one. I get Dallas, Detroit, and New
Orleans too. If you are interested in DXing AM radio,
I would suggest you visit the following sites to name
a few.
[removed] Radio sponsors it but there are
some excellent articles. Frankenhausers Whamlog &
Mediumwave DX Radio Links- A good place to go if you
are looking for information and how to build projects.
Finally, there are radio clubs devoted to DXing AM
radio - The National Radio Club. Hope this helps.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 18:38:04 -0400
From: "Mark Kinsler" <kinsler33@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: tubes vs. transistors, [removed]
I was wrong about the number of new AM radio stations. The medium had been
hurting for so long that I'd assumed that nobody was building any of them.
FM, of course, was another story.
When transistors first came out, they couldn't be used for radio frequency
signals (that is, anything above about 500,000 cycles per second) at all.
Improvements in low-capacitance semiconductors quickly followed in the
1950's, and practical transistor receivers were marketed by the late 1950's.
It's quite probable that high-frequency transistors were available for
defense work earlier than this.
The competition was pretty ferocious between tubes and transistors, and for
radio work it looked like tubes would hold the upper hand for many years.
One improvement in tube technology was a tiny, all-steel tube called the
"Nuvistor." These had tremendous performance at high radio frequencies,
were very durable, and didn't look like tubes. I learned this when I first
burned my hand on one whilst fixing an old Pioneer receiver that was
otherwise transistorized. But steady progress was being made in
semiconductors, and the Nuvistor couldn't compete with the new
high-frequency silicon transistors. These ultimately settled the AM
transistor receiver problem, as well as most of the difficulties in adapting
transistors for television use.
For FM and TV tuner use, tubes still held the edge in the tuned radio
frequency amplifier circuits that the signal meets immediately after being
captured by the receiver's antenna. The weakness in high-frequency
amplifier transistors was a low input impedance, which tended to load down
any resonant circuit that drove them, reducing selectivity and general
performance. But when the insulated-gate field-effect transistor, which has
a very high input impedance, was successfully adapted for radio work in the
'70's, the battle was over.
Note that the problem had been settled for AM receivers early on: 2 million
cycles per second (1605kc +455kc) wasn't very difficult to achieve, even
with germanium transistors. It's important to recall that, in the 1960's,
AM radio was in serious decline and no research had been done on its
receivers for years. That's remained true, except for the ill-advised
experiments in AM stereo.
Guitar amplifiers are another story altogether: an electric guitar is a
musical instrument. Musical instruments have distinctive sounds, like
different pianos or violins or horns. The guitar's amplifier is part of the
instrument, so that any 'distortion' that the amplifier adds to the guitar's
signal simply becomes part of the distinctive sound of the instrument. It
is this 'sound' that musicians are interested in.
An amplifier for general audio use must, by contrast, appear perfectly
transparent to the audio signal. This means that the output signal must be
exactly like the input signal, only louder. In this case, distortion of the
signal is unacceptable and should be reduced to the lowest level possible.
This is a rather tricky distinction and I've noticed that even intelligent,
experienced musicians have a tough time with it. The same explanation
applies to speakers.
Though a good many transistor guitar amplifiers have high levels of
distortion, it's far easier to make a relatively distortion-free amplifier
with transistors than with tubes. Fender guitar amplifiers (with built-in
speakers,) for example, are made pretty much as they were in the 1940's.
Everyone got used to the sound of the amplifier, and as a result the sound
that these amplifiers add to that of an electric guitar is quite desireable
(and can be duplicated for far less cost by use of a special fuzz box.) By
contrast, a musical or voice recording sent through this same Fender
amplifier/speaker unit will often sound just horrible, sort of like a school
marching band sent through a stadium's public address system.
To top things off, there was a rather large human toll taken when tube
equipment fell to transistors. Because nobody really understood how to
teach the subject, technicians who'd had long, successful careers in the
repair of tube-type radios and TV sets found themselves utterly lost when
confronted with their first transistorized equipment.
It was truly painful to watch: many of these guys wound up working behind
the counters of electronics distributors. Some were able to change with the
times: my own electronics course (from National Radio Institute, bless them)
covered tubes and transistors side by side, and I was able to bridge the gap
reasonably well.
Thus, you'll still find a certain amount of bitterness and prejudice
directed toward transistorized equipment, and I can't say that I blame the
people. Technological obsolescence is one of the worst misfortunes that can
befall anyone who takes pride in his or her work. But the improved
performance of transistorized (and now digital!!) equipment is really not
subject to scientific debate.
Mark Kinsler
512 E Mulberry St. Lancaster, Ohio USA 43130 740-687-6368
[removed]~mkinsler1
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 18:38:17 -0400
From: "Thomas Mason" <batz34@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: Re Queen For A Day
Up until the mid [removed] Queen For A Day was telecast on the ABC TV
network.
Before entering Engineering, I started out as a page at ABC-Hlywd. and was
assigned to the show a few times. It was not done at our main studios, but
at the old Earl Carroll Vanities nightclub located on Sunset Blvd. It had
been converted into a TV studio of sorts with seating at tables. The ladies
would line up outside and once in, they were permitted to buy
[removed] one of the cruelest things inflicted on them.
Everyone who lined up thought they would be selected as a contestant and
when final selections were made, we had instructions to watch those in the
audience so they would not charge the stage. The ladies forgot that it was
an entertainment show, and you could only have so many miserable people who
had experienced deaths in the family.
I remember one time when a family was in line after just coming from a
funeral. Their house had burned down with a couple of their family members
burnt to death. The woman of the family was bragging to everyone in line
that she was a shoo-in to be Queen because of her recent misfortunes. When
the time came for selection, she was not picked and ran for the stage and
had to be restrained and escorted from the theater. I was happy to go back
to taking care of children on Chucko the Clown after that.
Tom Mason
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 18:38:51 -0400
From: "George Tirebiter" <tirebiter2@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: AM Reception
Mark Kinsler wrote:
If you used to be able to receive distant AM radio stations and are now
unable to do so, the great likelihood is that your present radio is an
especially rotten one, or that something is wrong with its antenna, or that
you are now living in a location that's particularly disadvantageous
All that is true, but I notice that a lot of low power stations that were
daytime-only stations years ago, or would have been daytime-only if they had
existed then, now operate around the clock (or at least they operate after
dark) and they interfere with the signals of more distant stations that used
to be easily receivable. Blame the FCC. By the way, ARE there any daytime
only stations anymore? The 2 that used to be in this market now go 24 hours
with reduced power at night. One is located just a few miles from where I
live, but the after dark reception of this station is incredibly poor here.
It makes you wonder how it can be worthwhile for them to broadcast after
dark.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 18:39:04 -0400
From: "Doug Leary" <doug@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: RealAudio and MP3
Regarding my most recent verbose posting, which contained some erroneous
information. I have put up a how-to web page with working details of
converting RealAudio to MP3 here:
[removed]
Apologies for the confusion.
Doug Leary
Seattle
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 19:06:32 -0400
From: "Kurt E. Yount" <blsmass@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: radio stations
One of the reasons for poorer radio reception can be summed up in two
words, clear channel. Once the clear channel stations disappeared, (not
the company) you lost the opportunity of hearing those stations from far
away. I am in Southern California and I have gotten WWL in New Orleans
and WLS in Chicago, but since whatever the call letters of the station on
870 are you can't get WWL anymore. That has ended the possibility of
getting far away stations, since closer stations are broadcasting on what
used to be clear channel frequencies. KFI 640 AM used to be one of
those, but not now. Kurt
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 19:06:41 -0400
From: "Kurt E. Yount" <blsmass@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Kin Shriner
Yes he is, and raising as much dust as ever. Kurt
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 23:46:59 -0400
From: "Joe Cline" <[removed]@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: Re: Radio DX
Arte sez:
Vacuum tube radios have a much better signal-to-noise ratio than
transistors
enabling reception of much weaker stations.
Not so; in fact, the hiss originating in the filament of a single vacuum
tube is much greater than the thermal noise of a decent transistor
amplifier array.
As Chris opined, most of the "improvement" of tube amps over transistor
ones is mostly placebo effect; plus, many people who *can* hear a
difference have trained themselves to believe that the inherent distortion
in tube amps is "better sounding" than the clean, undistorted sound of
solid-state models.
The problem with DXing today is a combination of factors, already
mentioned: bad design of AM receivers, due to lack of interest by the
general public; greatly increased numbers of AM stations, even if ratings
numbers show decreased listener numbers; and, most especially, crappy (or
even missing) antennas. Sony makes a portable model, however, designed for
DX listening; with a good longwire antenna (with the necessary safety
precautions) and some patience, you can pick up stations from, literally,
around the world.
Joe Cline
Charlotte
--------------------------------
End of [removed] Digest V2003 Issue #257
*********************************************
Copyright [removed] Communications, York, PA; All Rights Reserved,
including republication in any form.
If you enjoy this list, please consider financially supporting it:
[removed]
For Help: [removed]@[removed]
To Unsubscribe: [removed]@[removed]
To Subscribe: [removed]@[removed]
or see [removed]
For Help with the Archive Server, send the command ARCHIVE HELP
in the SUBJECT of a message to [removed]@[removed]
To contact the listmaster, mail to listmaster@[removed]
To Send Mail to the list, simply send to [removed]@[removed]