FM alive and well here...curious question

For close to half a century I myself have always had a top quality fm tuner.  It really began when after I got out of the Army in 1970 I soon discovered the Maranta 20b FM Tuner.  Soon afterward the earlier 20 FM Tuner.  Years later I discovered the McIntosh MR78 and MR89 FM Tuners.  Presently I have a Mcintosh MR74 and a Day/Sequera FM Studio Tuner.  Actually the MR74 is a little better than even the Day/Sequerra but both are truly exceptional.  Anyway 35-40 years ago or so I learned that when, say a Stax electrostatic headphone system on a local live FM tation that when listening to a live FM broadcast, that the announcers themself would sound better over the air than they would actually sound in person.  That, first off, the live human voice sound better over FM radio than they actually sound right in front of you.  That is a fact.  Living now in Boulder, I ony have yo turn in 88.5 FM, KGNU, and that is what happens.  A few years ago I had a Naim 555 CD player, even today probably one of the finest CD players of all time.  Over a Stax tube headphone system played thru an Audio Research LS26 tune line stage, and directly comparing between the Naim and an McIntosh Mr80 FM tuner, it actually sounds better on FM Radio compared directly to some truly exceptional CD's at the time.  I am talking Neil Young at Massey Hall on HDCD, Jacintha on Autumn Leaves, the special Dire Straits Brother IN Arms Cd, various Mobile Fidelity both CD's as well as SACD's, overally FM radio sounds bettr overall.  Of course, a well recorded record is truly superior to digital and even FM radio-it is truly the supreme audio souce.  By the way, when I listen to KGNU, the differences between what they are playing at the time are easily discernable.  Thus whatever CD or record that they are playing at the time-how good the recording is at the time is almost as easy to discern as if I was playing that same cd or record myself on my own home audio system.  Thus I am contunially canging the volumn control on my Audio Research LS27 line stage depending to what music they are playing on KGNU at the time.  What they happen to be playing at the time-we one could actually do a review of the quality of what they happen to be playing at the time with little loss of audio fidelity compared to playing the same source material live on your own audio system.  That is what FM radio is all about.  By the way, a few years ago I tried out digital audio using a Bryston Dac.  Even though today I have an Oppo 105 player I do not even bother using it's Dac.  Internet radio, in comparison to FM radio truly sucks.  I do not even bother with it anymore.  And high resolution digital audio seems to be the audio source of the future, but records are still better.  Eventually I will get Tidal with MQA, but that will most likely be all that I will ever need.  Getting a huge selection of music on a hopefully better digital audio source should do it.  Anyway, FM Radio is, in my opinion, easily the best audio source for the money avaliable today.  Just as long as you live in Boulder.

I forgot to mention that living in a small apartment here in Boulder, still all I need is a decent indoor FM antenna.  I am using a Godar fm indoor antenna-actually hooked up to both my McIntosh MR74 and Day/Sequerra FM tuner.  It is right next to my chair and I only have to move it around a little to get 88.5 KGNU, 90.3 KUVO and rock ststions 103.5 and 106.7.  Actually I can get very good reception using a long video cable as an antenna.  So great FM radio reception is a necessity-it depends mainly where you live.  Much like TV reception before satellite and cable even were around.

tale jockey-                                                                                                         yes, although I require cable here in Boulder, I have heard that the reception on the latest high definition local tv broadcasts have truly super quality for both audio and picture as well.  Which, if true, means that cable tv quality sucks.  Pay more for inferior product.  But you get so much more.  Just like internet radio, in fact.  I could even go into the subject of quality of movies audio reproduction between the up to early 1950's mono, but tube driven, to today's surround, high definition and solid state driven electronics.  Yes, it is true.  At 73 years old, I remember how totally involving movies used to be.  With tube electronics and the high quality speakers that were used at the better theaters in those days, yes movies overall sounded better.  And more involving.