Bob McAllan Is Not A Fan Of HD Radio

[TheBigA]

the best way for the Commission to encourage adoption would be to ENFORCE interference mitigation...STRICTLY.

I thought that's kind of what they did when they approved the power increase for FM.

You want enforcement? This is a government that doesn't enforce pollution laws with respect to deep sea oil drilling. They don't enforce copyright piracy. They don't enforce a bunch of laws. What do you want?

 

[Play Freebird]

But when reviewing applications for facility changes, the AM branch still examines critical hours protection of Class A stations (way out at the 0.1 mV/m contour) very carefully. You'd think people are actually listening that far out.

 

[Savage]

Except the "interference mitigation" prescribed for the digital FM power hike is identical in language to the "mitigation" promised in the First R&O on IBOC in 2002. And that enforcement has never been applied - regularly, occasionally, or even once - in spite of a reportedly large number of credible complaints. The Enforcement Bureau simply ignores the complaints. When pressed, the FCC blandly admonishes the parties to negotiate the issue, which of course gives the HD Radio interferors an incentive to stonewall. Or lie, hiding behind hireling "experts."

My offer stands of a steak dinner to the first person to report an actual case of FCC order of enforcement requiring an IBOC station to back down digital power or turn off the HD exciter because of interference to another station. :

 

[Savage]

It's revealing to look at our recent audience numbers for the WYSL web stream. Temporarily at least, let's just swallow the whopper claims for HD Radio receiver sales, the ones vaguely alleged by iBiquity and The Alliance and other IBOC dupes on an ongoing basis - to make an illustration.

Even if you accept the most absurdly optimistic claims for HD Radios actually sold, the number of our digital listeners far exceeds HD receiver sales.

For ONE talk radio station. Versus worldwide HD Radio sales.

And of course, who knows how many actual HD digital listeners there are. It's got to be a tiny number. I would bet advertisers would do better putting circulars under windshield wipers in mall parking lots, or stapling posters to telephone poles.

 

[TheBigA]

There are more computers than there are HD radios. That accounts for your streaming audience.

How many internet-only radios have been sold in the last five years? You know, those nice table top models?

 

[hubcity]

Interesting point, regarding table radios - the most useful way for me to use an HD radio is to slap an FM transmitter (C. Crane, specifically) into it. Then I've got my favorite HD Radio station (guess which one) on every radio in the house, and in the backyard.

In fact, I have an Internet table radio, but I use it to pull in the repeated HD station. Internet tuning on standalone units is lame.

 

[Savage]

"There are more computers than there are HD Radios. That accounts for your streaming audience."

Yes. Precisely.

That's why the web - and in some instances, satellite radio - are the vehicles of choice for distributing radio programming digitally. The infrastructure already exists, and it actually works, to distinguish it from HD.

There is also a lot of ad agency internet in the web, both in streaming and ad-website-radio synergies. As opposed to the golden retriever cocked-head response you get to any mention of HD Radio. Most advertisers assume they're already hearing radio in HD because of the wall-to-wall dopey promos (which is all the carpet-bombing HD ad programs have achieved.)

 

[Play Freebird]

As opposed to the golden retriever cocked-head response you get to any mention of HD Radio. Most advertisers assume they're already hearing radio in HD because of the wall-to-wall dopey promos (which is all the carpet-bombing HD ad programs have achieved.)

Well, I guess you haven't heard the news that HD Radio just attained "critical mass" with the introduction of two new Jensen aftermarket SKUs:

http://www.radioink.com/Article.asp?id=1872252&spid=24698

See, that's all it took -- some new $450 car radios -- and now we have a sustainable chain reaction! Just watch out for the inevitable meltdown and widespread release of harmful "radioactive" particles.

 

[TheBigA]

That's why the web - and in some instances, satellite radio - are the vehicles of choice for distributing radio programming digitally.

However, it's obvious that satellite radio's growth has stalled for one basic reason: Consumers don't want to buy new radios. They also don't want to pay for the service, but that's another issue. If they can get satellite radio standard with a new car, that's fine. But from what I see, sales of satellite receivers (those cute portable jobs that Elton John advertised a few years ago) have ground to a halt. Not because the technology sucks, not because the programming sucks (although people will complain about anything), but because they don't want to buy a new radio. Same issue with HD.

I understand your problem with interference, and I understand the technology sucks. But people have bought crappy technology before. Even if HD programmers would put the absolute most incredible, unique shows on the radio (and I can't imagine what that might be), it would not be enough to get people to replace their radios. That's just how it is. All those folks selling those lovely oak and brass internet table radios are discovering that they're selling something the public, for the most part, doesn't want.

 

[audioguy]

The problem with those lovely Internet radios is that they're lame. They either sound no better than a cheap pair of computer speakers, or they have a terrible user interface. I've been looking for a decent one, and have yet to find it. Therefore, I continue to limp along using my laptop as a "radio".

Once they get it right, I'll be buying... and money will not be a barrier.

 

[hubcity]

The problem with those lovely Internet radios is that they're lame. They either sound no better than a cheap pair of computer speakers, or they have a terrible user interface. I've been looking for a decent one, and have yet to find it. Therefore, I continue to limp along using my laptop as a "radio".

Once they get it right, I'll be buying... and money will not be a barrier.

Actually, if you've got an iPhone or iPod Touch, you've already got one. (Windows Media or Flash-based streaming need not apply, of course.)

 

[Savage]

The other problem with the Lovely Table Internet Radios is that they - like HD Radio, interestingly - try to fulfill a presumed "need" which the public has repeatedly indicated doesn't exist.

Of course the previous comments about provision of audio quality either equivalent to analog radio or slightly worse, are absolutely true. And the internet radios are indeed awkward to use. People are used to twisting an OFF-ON-VOL knob to the right, tuning for four or five seconds, and getting what they want. Any delay or fiddling beyond that frustrates people.

But the big fallacy is that people supposedly want more "choice in programming." Internet radio sellers brag that you can have "access to 22,000 stations all over the world." If that option were truly appealing internet radios would be flying out to consumers. They aren't because anyone other than an experimenter finds that range of choice daunting and befuddling.

When people want wide choices, they power up the iPod and instantly get THEIR choice. When they want the news, weather, ballgame, Rush, NPR, or "entertain me - I'm too busy to bother," they turn on the radio. We should make that experience as trouble-free and engaging as possible. That's our job - not jamming unwanted junk-technology into the marketplace.

Doing what HD Radio is attempting to do is Stupidity On Parade. It would be true even if the system worked. Which it doesn't - and it even threatens the status quo by adding objectionable interference to frustrate and erode the existing listener base.

 

[bigtom101]

The other problem with the Lovely Table Internet Radios is that they - like HD Radio, interestingly - try to fulfill a presumed "need" which the public has repeatedly indicated doesn't exist.

But the big fallacy is that people supposedly want more "choice in programming." Internet radio sellers brag that you can have "access to 22,000 stations all over the world." If that option were truly appealing internet radios would be flying out to consumers. They aren't because anyone other than an experimenter finds that range of choice daunting and befuddling.

When people want wide choices, they power up the iPod and instantly get THEIR choice. When they want the news, weather, ballgame, Rush, NPR, or "entertain me - I'm too busy to bother," they turn on the radio. We should make that experience as trouble-free and engaging as possible. That's our job - not jamming unwanted junk-technology into the marketplace.

Radio has been sucking as far as providing compelling content for years. Most members of the younger generations only tune in to catch news or sports - if that anymore, given the myriad of apps available on smartphones. My friends & I went up to Boston on a trip, and listened to pandora on a Droid with no problems whatsoever (no dropouts). Oh, aside from the fact that the FM modulator kept getting "interference" from legal stations. They tolerate FM radio only if the smartphone/iPod is dead, or they left the CD collection at home. AM? Fugheedaboutit. The sound quality of AM is garbage to them, and electrical interference is something that they bitch and moan about like no other. Radio to them is useless.

Are my friends & I tech savvy? Hell yes - but like everything else, innovation will make technology easier to use for everyone. Radio needs to innovate PROGRAMMING to be relevant, and put it on the platform that can get it the most ears. That means web streaming & FM for younger generations. AM, analog or digital, is dead to those under 30. Unless they are radio enthusiasts like me who have C-QUAM tuners ripped out of Chrysler's wired up for use, or have no other option.

 

[hubcity]

The funny thing is, while HD2s and HD3s present the illusion of choice, I believe it's not being fully utilized until the HD1s start actually promoting their sibling HD2 and HD3's existence. Otherwise, the "choice" is hidden beneath the familiar FM-band tuning paradigm, and it's not necessarily intuitive that one has an HD2 or an HD3 to go to.

I have this luxury - at WBJB, in addition to programming a specialty show on the HD1, the HD1 regularly promotes the HD2 and HD3. I don't know that my counterparts at Last.fm/Discover have such a luxury. Shore Alternative at 94.3 HD2 seem to; they get two hours on Sunday nights, though I don't know if they get any promotion during regular dayparts.

But that's as may be; it'd be nice if the HD *tuner* promoted the existence of multicast stations, or at least put them on an even footing with the primary station. Of course, I'm biased.

One thing the tuner could do is a faster job of HD signal discovery - just the discovery, not the recovery. If it can discover very quickly, it can at least throw placeholder HD2/HD3 "notches" in the "dial" that can be immediately tuned to, and the radio can turn the audio on for them as soon as it understands what audio should go there. It'd be nice if you could actually "preset" an HD2, too; I can't on my Insignia.

It's daunting to have to tune to the HD1 and have it train up just to get to the HD2 hidden underneath. You should be able to go there directly. I don't think, however, that the incumbent commercial broadcasters wanted it that way.

 

[davideduardo]

Radio has been sucking as far as providing compelling content for years. Most members of the younger generations only tune in to catch news or sports - if that anymore, given the myriad of apps available on smartphones. My friends & I went up to Boston on a trip, and listened to pandora on a Droid with no problems whatsoever (no dropouts).

While radio has many challenges based on the alternatives for entertainment that are available, let's not exaggerage.

I took some relatively recent data on persons 12 to 21 in LA. 67.1% of them listened to radio 4 hours or more a week... 36% listen more than 8 hours a week, and almost 91% listen an hour or more a week. In young adults 18-34, about 48% listen 8 hours a week or more, and 70% listen 4 hours or more.

Contrary to what you state about why "young generations" might tune in, the overwhelming choices in both age groups are music stations, since the interest in news is limited or non-existent among most of this group, and things like sports scores are easily obtained via Twitter, texting, or the internet.

As usual, I predict a response in which the messenger is blamed and promptly shot.

 

[jhardis]

The other problem with the Lovely Table Internet Radios is that they - like HD Radio, interestingly - try to fulfill a presumed "need" which the public has repeatedly indicated doesn't exist.
...
But the big fallacy is that people supposedly want more "choice in programming."

For me, it's not about the programming. It's about the clock. I want my table radio -- that is, my bedside clock radio -- to have the correct time regardless of: overnight power failures, shifts to daylight saving time, etc. The source of the audio is secondary. As long as the device also knows how to query NTP servers, I'm quite pleased.

- Jonathan

 

[tomservo]

I still say that compelling programming will drive people to any medium, even AM radio. If pop or classic rock is available no where else on the dial but on the standard band, people will still listen if view know to tune there.

Also, my Insignia radio, defective as it is, can preset HD2/3 channels, and can show HD subchannel content by pressing a button. I just wish more stations put song titles and artists on the display and not static call sign info (looks at every local public radio outlet)

 

[TheBigA]

I still say that compelling programming will drive people to any medium, even AM radio. If pop or classic rock is available no where else on the dial but on the standard band, people will still listen if view know to tune there.

That's the catch...how would they know to go there? People aren't limited or restricted to what's on the dial any more. If they don't find what they want, they play their own mp3s, or find another source. In one town, when a station changed formats from Oldies to something else, the Oldies format was picked up by another station. Even though the new station advertised everywhere, most folks didn't go to the new station.

 

[bigtom101]

Radio has been sucking as far as providing compelling content for years. Most members of the younger generations only tune in to catch news or sports - if that anymore, given the myriad of apps available on smartphones. My friends & I went up to Boston on a trip, and listened to pandora on a Droid with no problems whatsoever (no dropouts).

While radio has many challenges based on the alternatives for entertainment that are available, let's not exaggerage.

I took some relatively recent data on persons 12 to 21 in LA. 67.1% of them listened to radio 4 hours or more a week... 36% listen more than 8 hours a week, and almost 91% listen an hour or more a week. In young adults 18-34, about 48% listen 8 hours a week or more, and 70% listen 4 hours or more.

Contrary to what you state about why "young generations" might tune in, the overwhelming choices in both age groups are music stations, since the interest in news is limited or non-existent among most of this group, and things like sports scores are easily obtained via Twitter, texting, or the internet.

As usual, I predict a response in which the messenger is blamed and promptly shot.

Can't shoot you - I don't own any guns!

Empirical evidence counts for squat, it unfortunately is only thing that I have. A friend of mine did a study in our college senior seminar class recently, and much to my surprise, found out that young'ns still did listen to the radio. The ladies more so than the guys used it as a source of music discovery, but overall the people surveyed still liked radio and listened to it. Maybe not like me, but still.

Again, most of the people (non radio) I hang with allot treat radio like the plague - when I was on a AM station, it was endless jokes about power lines wiping out the signal. Maybe my exposure to them skewed my view of what youth thinks of (and how they use) radio. The antenna mag mounted on the top of my car with ground radials always got made fun of - again, they didn't care about radio reception.

And even with compelling content, getting people to buy a new radio is a hard sell. An ex of mine was complaining about K-Rock (WXRK-FM NYC) blowing up, and having to settle for Fresh 102.7 on her alarm clock. I told her to get a HD Radio to get K-Rock back for her alarm clock - and even then, still wouldn't budge. She lives in Brooklyn, would have gotten a fab signal, but didn't see the need to get a new radio even to get a station playing music she liked back.

 

[hubcity]

Radio has been sucking as far as providing compelling content for years. Most members of the younger generations only tune in to catch news or sports - if that anymore, given the myriad of apps available on smartphones. My friends & I went up to Boston on a trip, and listened to pandora on a Droid with no problems whatsoever (no dropouts).

While radio has many challenges based on the alternatives for entertainment that are available, let's not exaggerage.

I took some relatively recent data on persons 12 to 21 in LA. 67.1% of them listened to radio 4 hours or more a week... 36% listen more than 8 hours a week, and almost 91% listen an hour or more a week. In young adults 18-34, about 48% listen 8 hours a week or more, and 70% listen 4 hours or more.

Contrary to what you state about why "young generations" might tune in, the overwhelming choices in both age groups are music stations, since the interest in news is limited or non-existent among most of this group, and things like sports scores are easily obtained via Twitter, texting, or the internet.

As usual, I predict a response in which the messenger is blamed and promptly shot.

Well, there's still, in my opinion, a big barrier to entry for iPod listening: you must be a computer owner. How do the numbers of "households with computers" stack up against "households with radios"? I'd suspect radio's still dominant, even if everyone you know has a computer and and iPod.