I have tried several (far from all) and so far not found any that I find particularly good. Where are the John Peels, Kenny Everetts, Emperor Roscoes, Bob Harrises etc.?
2 Likes
The beauty is there are some internet stations - e.g. Paradise - with no unnecessary prattling. But at least from what I have heard radiowave broadcast radio for other than classical music has been abysmal since the demise of the pirate radio stations and the likes of Radio Luxembourg on long wave.
@ beachcomber, If you are referring to âpersonalitiesâ on the radio, then perhaps yes.
But with streaming and the new John Peel AIâs sending music suggestions, the younger generations are not used to real John Peels on the radio.
Actually, there is quite a good radio station here in Norway called P13, which is post punk, indie and all round Rock orientated where there are some interesting historical assessments about music, kind of modelled on the John Peel approach.
To me, iRadio certainly fills a gap, especially now that there are lossless FLAC stations available. The lossy streams never really drew me into the music and seemed to be good only for background listening.
I think the BBC has always been a mixed bag. I find daytime Radio 2 particularly awful, sometimes it seems like a radio version of the Jeremy Kyle show and I avoid it like the plague. The more music oriented slots can be OK though. Cerys Matthews, for example, comes up with some excellent music and her knowledge and enthusiasm for it really shows.
And with the rise of podcasts that deal in all kinds of subject matter, including music, if anybody wanted to hear something contextually relevant, thatâs certainly an option at times.
Really, I find internet radio a cultural marvel, if you get beyond the BBC and the often low streaming quality of many stations, itâs fabulous.
I also wouldnât put internet radio in the HiFi category as it can be streamed on pretty much any device.
I would put the recent crop of lossless FLAC iRadio stations firmly in the HiFi category (and Naim have been instrumental in driving this behind the scenes - thanks @Stevesky )
Itâs a shame the BBC have apparently abandoned all this despite their unparalleled history of innovation.
That sounds interesting. John Peel, Bob Harris, Annie Nightingale etc. provided intelligent, interesting information, and curated their shows. Thatâs what I miss. Kenny Everett, of course, was a different kettle of fish, and would have been worth listening to even without the (usually good) music he played.
1 Like
A long time ago i had a vinyl copy of Kenny Everettâs Worldâs Worst Record Show which was a serous violation of the trade description act, it was actually quite good 
3 Likes
Back in the 60s when I was a youngster, I could get perfect (within the limits of my transistor radio) reception of Radio Luxembourg in the far north of Scotland on medium wave (I think), when all other radio stations were plagued by interference.
I listened almost every night. My life in those days revolved around (playing) football and music.
I lived in Ashby de la Zouche in those days, and Luxembourg faded in and out. But still, it was one of the few stations worth listening to.
Interesting subject. I found the 1958 Hartley book on internet, the man who allegedly invented the term:
I invented the phrase âhigh fidelityâ in 1927 to denote a type of sound reproduction that might be taken rather seriously by a music lover. In those days the average radio or phonograph equipment sounded pretty horrible but, as I was really interested in music, it occurred to me that something might be done about it.
In the same book, different chapter, he also wrote the following :
If the imitation bears a close resemblance to the original sound it is said to be
âhigh fidelity.â This is a purely subjective definition, for what is high fidelity to one person is an irritating noise to another
Most people in who went through their teens (I read somewhere that in your late teens music leaves the biggest impression on you) in the eighties or before remember it a very social event. Me too. In these days of invidivualism in western culture, I think itâs become less social. But that doesnât mean people listen less. Technology has made music accessible everywhere through multiple channels, with less thresholds, with -if you want- higher quality than before. The amount of people I see roaming the streets in my city with the Sony WM wireless headphones is huge, these are big step up from the ones I owned when I was their age. So the new generations donât see your stack of seperates any longer as a means to an end.
Then would I agree with the threadâs statement? I fear not. But thatâs not on the amount of listeners, but the recorders. I donât have the numbers to back up my gut feeling, but in this age it seems like compression is the standard. Every pop song has to literally scream for attention, or has to be fully audible in heavy traffic. Surely that canât be seen as a âclose resemblance to the original soundâ - as it was performed in the studio. But if itâs to represent only the recording itself, Iâd have to agree that even listening to a compressed song over good portable equipment falls under âhi-fiâ
3 Likes
Isnât that that due to the nature of its funding mechanism? Universal payment (yes tv not radio licence butâŠ) requires the BBC to appeal to as wide an audience as possible, which is why we have 1Xtra, 6Music, The Asian Network etc over & above the core services of R1 - 5L. Itâs also why tv output contains something that everyone in the UK can point to and say âI hate that programmeâ. Universal funding means it must appeal to as wide a base as possible.
There are no limits on who can listen to each network but itâs noticeable that the most popular is R2. What should the BBC do? Reposition R2 to play awful music that appeals to no-one, and employ presenters specifically to drive audiences away?
Where you find it awful, I find Ken, Vine to smaller degree, and Steve Wright very good company. But then Iâm listening to the presenters, not waiting to be spoon fed unusual and innovative music. Thatâs not what R2 is for. 6 Music, 1Xtra & R3 fulfil that need to some extent and allow the BBC to progress towards the impossible task of being all things to all men. Conversely much as Radio Paradise, JBR2 (when it works) and the various Naim stations are fine to listen to, after a while the lack of presentation leads me to the off button. Radio is more than just playing music, good or bad.
As for the deification of John Peel, much as I liked him in small bursts there was a reason he was shunted away to the late hours - even the man himself once admitted that it was necessary to sit through a lot of dross to hear the really good stuff. A work colleague back then was regularly apoplectic that R2âs stereo VHF was âwasted on that awful ⊠music that Peel playsâ, and he had a point. Letâs not forget too that Peelâs time of drum & bass wasnât his best, and as late as October 1977 when punk was well established, his was the show that gave Queen a BBC session to rework tracks from their new News Of The World album, and that Alan Freemanâs Last Show in August 1978 included a trail for Peel on the Monday night having Thin Lizzy in session. Hardly cutting edge.
Regarding Peel, I agree that in his later days he was not as appealing to me as in the early days (late 1960s to early 70s). His championing of punk and later music was not to my taste. But his earlier days were really good, and introduced me to many groups that I would otherwise not have heard.
2 Likes
Golden age? Good question and I think this is different for everyone. Amongst my collection Iâve kept my first âhi-fiâ system which was owned by by father - a Pioneer PL112D, Texan T20+20 amplifier and Nelson-Jones Tuner (both built from kits) with the Kef Cresta II, all from around 1972 - I took it over in the mid 1980âs when my dad had decided to upgrade. I added an Akai CD-D1 in 1987 which I bought secondhand so I can therefore go back and have a listen to hear what things sounded like back then on that equipment and I have to say its remarkably good. Remembering of course that as a teenager I couldnât afford the Naim gear, so I got the soldering iron our and modified - especially the amplifier. For me as an engineer the âgolden ageâ will probably always be the 1970s and 80s when you could still buy kits, components, sub assemblies (anyone remember Ambit/Cirkit?), read articles from various electronics mags and hear directly from the likes of Stan Curtis, Bob Stuart, Raymond Cooke, Peter Walker and even Ray Dolby, understand what was going on under the hood and translate the theory into what you were hearing. It is still possible to experiment, both in a software and hardware sense, but this has added layers of complexity both in the hardware and coding skills required, although the DSP developer kits available today are great!
On a more general note, my sense is that the average level of quality in most domestic (an especially in-car) audio gear is sufficient that most folk do not find it objectionable and do not feel the need to look for anything better, whereas years ago the difference between the average and the very best was stark.
1 Like
I had a PL12D, Texan T20+20 and Nelson Jones Tuner, the latter two also built from kits. Youâre not my son, are you?
I think they sold about 40000 T20+20 kits so a slim chance
1 Like
For me the hifi will continue to evolve but separates will become a very niche segment because of the evolution of the global world : people are less sedentary then before, the economic instability implies less assured works positions, the gentrification of the big cities around the world implies that lot of people have to leave in smaller spaces and that increases the promiscuity, so people have to be more careful with noise pollution. The evolution of sociability (lot of mobility and less space to receive people at home, the numerical interaction instead of real meetings, an ultra-individualistic consomption of goods, the rhythm of obsolescence increased by digitalisation) make the acquisition of a big expensive equipment less suitable.
For music, young people are drugged to fast consommation (not an entire album), very spectacular and immediate effects are the norm (a V shaped sound signature is the king) make the exigence of honest restitution less attractive.
For me, traditional Hifi will evolve into a an expensive niches and the audio world will be more focused in Headphones, Dap, and integrated.
Will? They are already!
4 Likes
Hi,
Sure it is, but new comers will be fewer than now. I think the market is essentially sustained by persons who felt into audiophilia long time ago (or young people who contracted this « virus » from their parents). Maybe itâs the main reason why lot of manufacturers are continually increasing their prices : they abandoned the idea of expanding the market.