Xref: utzoo rec.ham-radio:10334 rec.audio:12468 sci.electronics:5953
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bgsuvax!klopfens
From: klopfens@bgsuvax.UUCP (Bruce Klopfenstein)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.audio,sci.electronics
Subject: Multiple AM Stereo Receivers
Keywords: AM stereo, FCC, technical standard
Message-ID: <4058@bgsuvax.UUCP>
Date: 25 Apr 89 06:48:15 GMT
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Lines: 23

While it is true that an AM stereo radio was possible which would
receive any of the competing AM stereo systems, my understanding is 
that such receivers would have cost at least $200 (I can check the
NTIA report--one of them--to se for sure).  Since the general public
(especially audiophiles) are not into AM radio anyway, how realistic
would it be for them to spend that amount of money for an AM radio?

The FCC's decision *not* to set a standard set up the classic chicken-
and-egg scenario: radio stations were reluctant to install a system
that might be made obsolete and receiver manufacturers were unwilling
to market AM stereo receivers until there were some "critical mass"
of AM stereo stations operating.

I don't know how it can be argued that AM stereo wouldn't make a
difference.  We just don't know.  Too few people ever 1) had access to
AM stereo in their markets and 2) had a receiver that would pick up
the appropriate signal.

-- 
Dr. Bruce C. Klopfenstein      |  klopfens@andy.bgsu.edu
Radio-TV-Film Department       |  klopfenstein@bgsuopie.bitnet
Bowling Green $tate University |  klopfens@bgsuvax.UUCP
Bowling Green, OH  43403       |  (419) 372-2138; 352-4818