Boston's WBZ in HD, and you have to wonder why?

[pocket-radio]

You have to wonder why Boston’s WBZ decided to jump into the world of HD broadcasting. Did the idea of being a pioneer in the industry drive their decision to invest or did they think new younger listeners would discover BZ because of their improved digital FM like sound quality.

Don’t get my wrong, BZ is a great radio station and they do many things right, except with one area of expertise and that would be HD.

We are told HD make AM radio sound like Fm. Now that feature makes some radio people salivate like Pavlov's dog and certainly in 1970 Am that sounds like Fm would have changed an entire industry. But today in 2008, users experience media over-choice and choose to take control of what they hear and see through on demand, downloaded, time shifted content. In 1970, users had none of these choices. The benefit a BZ listener receives is their content. New Englanders depend on BZ for in-depth news coverage, Boston Sports, Boston traffic updates and coverage of New England’s crazy weather. Plus some users hear some of the best news journalist and on air talent in the world. For radio aficionados who have a finely tuned ears HD is a great feature, but people buy benefits and not features.

For the average ears, AM analog radio sounds pretty good and the content is why users listen in the first place. I doubt hearing Rush or Hanity in HD with Fm like quality is a make or break proposition for anyone. And certainly won’t attract more 18-34’s to Am radio because of its content is broadcast in HD.

From a revenue standpoint advertisers and agencies buy ratings and BZ does an excellent job for CBS. An HD simulcast is an interesting experiment, but with NO ratings a media buyer won’t be motivated throw money at it, because they can’t justify the buy to clients. This business is about one thing, money! And if HD can’t pull deliver ratings/money broadcasters will pull the plug. And other broadcasters will take a wait and see attitude before investing another million.

To date radio revenues have declined 15 straight months in a row. Experts are predicting this downward trend won’t turn around until 2009 or 2010. With broadcasters struggling to stay afloat, don’t expect an increase of HD startups.

Broadcasters saw digital real estate/revenue to compete with Ipods and satellite radio. They failed to understand we live in an on demand, downloaded, time shifted new world order. Applying an old paradigm to a new order of thinking won’t work. The best solution would be if users could access content on demand because of HD technology through a two way wifi/ wimax internet connection. But with advances in Wimax technology, improved coverage and lower prices, who needs HD?

GM once believed more name plates meant more sales. Does anyone remember Oldsmobile?

 

[Tom Wells]

Why would WBZ want to provide higher definition audio anyway?
I can hear the raspy grittiness of the lossy codec used by satellite shows such as Rush Limbaugh's even on stations limited
to 5 khz in analog, on a GM/Delphi car radio that's brickwalled at 3 khz.

It could only sound worse with FM-quality audio from the local broadcast station.
As in low-resolution photographs, once the detail has been discarded, you can't restore it.
Attempts to do so show the glaring jaggy lines. Audio is exactly the same.

They'd have to get better input audio to appreciate any improvement in broadcast audio capability.

 

[Bill_W]

In Philadelphia, most (if not all) of the AM talk/sports/news broadcast in HD. Hannity & Rush sound pretty good in HD on WPHT. KYW, WBZ's sister staion is also in HD-AM but, they also simulcast on WYSP FM HD2. KYW has some null spots in the listening area that the FM signal help blanket. I am 39 and I like to listen to KYW without the static. I even bought my parents and HD radio so that my Dad can listen to KYW on FM with out the static. They live in one of those null areas where the AM signal is a little harder to get.

 

[KB1OKL]

You have to wonder why Boston’s WBZ decided to jump into the world of HD broadcasting. Did the idea of being a pioneer in the industry drive their decision to invest or did they think new younger listeners would discover BZ because of their improved digital FM like sound quality.

Don’t get my wrong, BZ is a great radio station and they do many things right, except with one area of expertise and that would be HD.

We are told HD make AM radio sound like Fm. Now that feature makes some radio people salivate like Pavlov's dog and certainly in 1970 Am that sounds like Fm would have changed an entire industry. But today in 2008, users experience media over-choice and choose to take control of what they hear and see through on demand, downloaded, time shifted content. In 1970, users had none of these choices. The benefit a BZ listener receives is their content. New Englanders depend on BZ for in-depth news coverage, Boston Sports, Boston traffic updates and coverage of New England’s crazy weather. Plus some users hear some of the best news journalist and on air talent in the world. For radio aficionados who have a finely tuned ears HD is a great feature, but people buy benefits and not features.

For the average ears, AM analog radio sounds pretty good and the content is why users listen in the first place. I doubt hearing Rush or Hanity in HD with Fm like quality is a make or break proposition for anyone. And certainly won’t attract more 18-34’s to Am radio because of its content is broadcast in HD.

From a revenue standpoint advertisers and agencies buy ratings and BZ does an excellent job for CBS. An HD simulcast is an interesting experiment, but with NO ratings a media buyer won’t be motivated throw money at it, because they can’t justify the buy to clients. This business is about one thing, money! And if HD can’t pull deliver ratings/money broadcasters will pull the plug. And other broadcasters will take a wait and see attitude before investing another million.

To date radio revenues have declined 15 straight months in a row. Experts are predicting this downward trend won’t turn around until 2009 or 2010. With broadcasters struggling to stay afloat, don’t expect an increase of HD startups.

Broadcasters saw digital real estate/revenue to compete with Ipods and satellite radio. They failed to understand we live in an on demand, downloaded, time shifted new world order. Applying an old paradigm to a new order of thinking won’t work. The best solution would be if users could access content on demand because of HD technology through a two way wifi/ wimax internet connection. But with advances in Wimax technology, improved coverage and lower prices, who needs HD?

GM once believed more name plates meant more sales. Does anyone remember Oldsmobile?

I guess you have never really listened to WBZ, not only is it a boring station for geezers (and I'm 55, it used to put my 79 YO father to sleep at night until it became hard to receive at his home less than 40 miles from Boston.), it just plain sounds lousy. I would imagine the average age of their listeners is somewhere in the 70's. We have much better news stations here in Boston. Since they've gotten the HD virus their sound has gotten very grainy and they don't come in as good as they used to. They are living on past glory IMHO.
People with fine ears eschew HD as it's a jagged digital composite of a waveform, analog recreates the real waveform and sounds smoother, don't confuse less noise with better sound if that makes any sense to anyone here. I had CHWO 740 Toronto on my Meduci receiver last night with a twin coil ferrite C Crane antenna and it sounded as good and clear (with a few fades) as an FM station but of course played better music and you're certainly not going to pick up any FM station especially in HD from 200 miles at least reliably.
WBZ is one of the stubborn big boys who will probably broadcast this junk for years unfortunately until they are either forced to shut it down either by economics or a revolt by broadcasters or maybe even the spineless FCC will consider Savage's case on it's own merits rather than politics.
Incidentally, It was unreceivable in HD less than 20 miles from it's towers in Boston on a highly rated Sangien receiver, the salesman told me that and wouldn't even hook up a provided loop for me to try it out..

 

[Savage]

My comments regarding WBZ and its HD interference-generator are posted in detail in the thread on this board, regarding WOR and its Cuban interference problem.

 

[sbe1]

I dont understand why WBZ uses IBOC because of the way WBZ trashes their co owned KDKA in Pittsburgh.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

You have to wonder why Boston’s WBZ decided to jump into the world of HD broadcasting. Did the idea of being a pioneer in the industry drive their decision to invest or did they think new younger

Bigger question - why do ANY of the talkers and sports stations bother? Unless you count musical beds and commercials - the program content fits nicely into a 5 kHz mask. 50 kHz of valuable radio spectrum jammed so they can broadcast 3 kHz of bandwidth in human speech. So - why do it? I can only think it is intentional - to jam the adjacents and force people onto their station. There is really no other reason that makes any sense at all. I've listened to AM HD, and speech sounds no different when HD kicks in. It is still limited to 3 kHz. The old argument about interference free doesn't make any sense, because any interference at all and HD lock goes away and you hear the interference anyway.

 

[pocket-radio]

My guess is core BZ listeners are 50-60 because of it’s content.
Nothing is wrong with adults 50-60 but ad agencies buy stations that target 25-54 18-34 and 35-54. BigA BZ has some younger listeners too. The present thinking with ad agencies is they want to target younger consumers who are making money and have the need to spend too. At 55 you’ve made most of your major purchases.. you have enough stuff and are viewed as not ad worthy.

I believe broadcasting in HD they’re attempting to reach young people who are attracted to new technology that otherwise wouldn’t listen to Am radio. Anyone under 34 doesn’t even know what an Am radio is. ..LOL. Just ask Savage.

I’m sure CBS cluster sells WBZ with their other stations to agencies. But their older demos raises the average age.. and that’s not good..

The trend with Am news talk stations is to simulcast with an FM to reach potential younger listeners who never listen to Am radio. Arbitron counts a simulcast as one station. In Boston CBS may have no other options than to try HD.

WBZ could use the bandwidth to spin music but like we need another classic rocker. Either way it’s just a big mess.

 

[Savage]

rbruce, I would tend to agree with your conspiracy theory about "forcing listeners off of adjacent channels" onto HD stations but for two factors:

1. In most cases, HD-AM stations self-interfere with their own analog signals, due to impedance non-linearity and asymmetrical pattern bandwidth for directional antennas. Look at KDKA, which had to chop their power to 35kw on an STA even though they're nondirectional.

2. Big groups, notably Clear Channel and CBS, are their OWN adjacent-channel interferers at night - like WBZ/KDKA/WINS for CBS and CCU's turning off WRVA at night because of problems with their three (count 'em) 9-tower jobs, all on 1130, in Detroit, Milwaukee and Minneapolis. At least Citadel had the sense not to indulge in self-immolation with WABC/WJR and WSB. The latter two cases emphatically give the lie to the oft-chanted HD talking point that "there are no significant adjacent-channel interference cases at night."

The mystifying thing about HD-AM's few remaining proponents is their willingness to indulge in self-destructive behavior like this. HD's three or four remaining fans keep stubbornly insisting that IBOC isn't causing any audience loss, but refuse to even conduct a real survey to see if it's causing THEMSELVES harm, let alone third parties.

It's the same denial behavior pattern with alcoholics and other substance abusers: ("I like a little now and then but I've got it under control. I can take it or leave it alone. HIC....")

 

[rbrucecarter5]

rbruce, I would tend to agree with your conspiracy theory about "forcing listeners off of adjacent channels" onto HD stations but for two factors:

I was being a bit sarcastic. They are putting themselves out of business.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

I believe broadcasting in HD they’re attempting to reach young people who are attracted to new technology that otherwise wouldn’t listen to Am radio. Anyone under 34 doesn’t even know what an Am radio is. ..LOL. Just ask Savage.

Yes - but the younger people are only attracted to new technologies that actually WORK. If iPods 6 years ago worked like HD radio, the few thousand that sold would be in landfills by now. NOBODY is more fickle than a young person when it comes to trends and technology - my 13 year old is on her third iPod, 4th cell phone, 3rd laptop, and fifth video game system.

I am a pretty saavy engineer, a really good DX'er, and own a very good HD radio. It takes an 8 foot box loop to get enough signal to decode a 10,000W HD AM station less than 10 miles away. Are young people going to construct an 8 foot box loop - much less use one while they jog? They need to FIX the system before marketing it to young people. It won't save AM - or even itself - in its present form.

 

[KB1OKL]

I believe broadcasting in HD they’re attempting to reach young people who are attracted to new technology that otherwise wouldn’t listen to Am radio. Anyone under 34 doesn’t even know what an Am radio is. ..LOL. Just ask Savage.

Yes - but the younger people are only attracted to new technologies that actually WORK. If iPods 6 years ago worked like HD radio, the few thousand that sold would be in landfills by now. NOBODY is more fickle than a young person when it comes to trends and technology - my 13 year old is on her third iPod, 4th cell phone, 3rd laptop, and fifth video game system.

I am a pretty saavy engineer, a really good DX'er, and own a very good HD radio. It takes an 8 foot box loop to get enough signal to decode a 10,000W HD AM station less than 10 miles away. Are young people going to construct an 8 foot box loop - much less use one while they jog? They need to FIX the system before marketing it to young people. It won't save AM - or even itself - in its present form.

I have a balanced 4 ft box loop, the NRC loop, never built the amplifier for it though. I also just bought a C Crane Twin coil Ferrite antenna, works great with the Meduci, you ought to try one of those rbruce. And no matter how much Strew-Bull doth protest, HD is dead as a door nail.

 

[TheBigA]

You have to wonder why Boston’s WBZ decided to jump into the world of HD broadcasting. Did the idea of being a pioneer in the industry drive their decision to invest or did they think new younger listeners would discover BZ because of their improved digital FM like sound quality.

I doubt very much this was a locally-made decision. WBZ is owned by CBS, CBS is part of the Alliance, so they broadcast in HD.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

I doubt very much this was a locally-made decision. WBZ is owned by CBS, CBS is part of the Alliance, so they broadcast in HD.

I wonder how much of their primary listening area they have lost because of HD? They used to boom into Dallas - no more after they started HD.

 

[TheBigA]

I wonder how much of their primary listening area they have lost because of HD? They used to boom into Dallas - no more after they started HD.

They don't sell Dallas. All they care about is Boston and the immediate 35 miles radius.

 

[Savage]

Okay, fair enough. If "they only care about Boston and the immediate 35 mile radius" WBZ should surrender its 50kw authorization and reduce to 5kw day, 2.5kw night, nondirectional, which should be more than enough to cover that limited service area. Then they could run their iBiquity hash-generator without injuring so many people.

The clear-channel stations operating IBOC shouldn't be able to have it both ways. Actually notwithstanding frequent posts on this board suggesting that locally owned, low-power stations are "polluting the band since the breakdown of the clear channels," the biggest interference-generators by far are the 50kw stations, especially those operating on former regional frequencies, like 950 kHz. It's ridiculous to argue that they need 50kw at night to cover Boston, or Detroit, or Philly. We could solve a lot of AM problems by establishing a maximum night power level of 2.5kw throughout the US. Now THAT would be a huge step in cutting down on AM interference.

Either skywave service is important or it is not. If we're done with skywave, as IBOC proponents tiresomely argue, then power down at night to the minimum necessary to cover your corporate limits.

 

[TheBigA]

Okay, fair enough. If "they only care about Boston and the immediate 35 mile radius" WBZ should surrender its 50kw authorization and reduce to 5kw day, 2.5kw night, nondirectional, which should be more than enough to cover that limited service area.

Their power level was set when they got the license. And the value of the license is partly based in the power. That's an ownership issue. But in terms of how they sell it, it's all about the local. It's just part of the never-ending tug of war between ownership and local management.

As for the rest of your post, that sounds like something Congress would love, since they feel we still don't have enough stations. If they could do away with 50Ks, they'd do it.

If I was a betting man, I'd say that there's a good chance BZ will be one of the stations CBS is selling. You should make them an offer, and shut it down. That would get some publicity.

 

[fybush]

Okay, fair enough. If "they only care about Boston and the immediate 35 mile radius" WBZ should surrender its 50kw authorization and reduce to 5kw day, 2.5kw night, nondirectional, which should be more than enough to cover that limited service area. Then they could run their iBiquity hash-generator without injuring so many people.

Let's explore that line of thinking a bit. Allow me to play devil's advocate here: WYSL's COL is Avon, and I'm quite certain that it doesn't need 20 kW to blanket the corporate limits of Avon. You'd argue, Bob (and I'd support you 100% on this) that in truth, WYSL serves the greater Rochester community - perhaps an area of, say, 35 miles from the transmitter/studio site in Lakeville?

Now, I remember vividly what WYSL's signal sounded like with 2.5 kw by day, and if that was really "more than enough" to cover the 35-mile service area WYSL targets, you'd never have spent the bucks to buy the 20 kW Nautel (and all the associated phasing, transmission and grounding gear) to bump the station up to its present "News Power 1040" status. Right?

It's a noisy world out there, filled with numb radios and buzzing LED traffic signals and WiFi routers and who knows what, and you know as well as I do that the 50 kW power levels are a necessity NOT for long-range skywave coverage but simply for the "oomph" (as a well-respected engineering VP of my acquaintance describes it) to get past all that noise and be heard locally.

The clear-channel stations operating IBOC shouldn't be able to have it both ways. Actually notwithstanding frequent posts on this board suggesting that locally owned, low-power stations are "polluting the band since the breakdown of the clear channels," the biggest interference-generators by far are the 50kw stations, especially those operating on former regional frequencies, like 950 kHz. It's ridiculous to argue that they need 50kw at night to cover Boston, or Detroit, or Philly. We could solve a lot of AM problems by establishing a maximum night power level of 2.5kw throughout the US. Now THAT would be a huge step in cutting down on AM interference.

It seems to me that what you're really looking for here isn't a power reduction for the clears, but the surrender of the skywave interference protection that class A signals enjoy. In theory, such a move wouldn't affect in-market reception of the big 50 kW boomers - but it WOULD allow a station like WYSL, which is now limited to 500 watts DA at night because of protection to class A WHO in Des Moines, to crank up the juice at night and overcome the incoming IBOC hash from WBZ. In fact, I'd bet that WYSL would be eligible for significantly more than the "more than enough" 2.5 kW at night under those circumstances, right?

But be careful what you wish for: if WHO's class A protection went away, it wouldn't just be WYSL that could get more night power. There's WNJE in New Jersey, WZSK in Pennsylvania, plus 1040s in Ohio and North Carolina and...well, you get where I'm going here, right? Let all of them fire up at night, too - even with that "more than enough" 2500 watts - and you may well be wishing that all you had to overcome at night was WBZ's IBOC and WHO's skywave.

 

[Savage]

No, you're putting words in my mouth. I'm not writing about daytime and I'm not talking about increasing WYSL's night power. I'm talking about HD and its contribution to nighttime skywave interference, juxtaposed against an apparent "new rule" unstated by the FCC (and of course adopted without requisite administrative comment and public input) but apparently bought into wholesale by IBOC proponents and their Commission supporters, to the effect that "skywave listening is obsolete and no station should expect ANY coverage beyond the most restricted limits at night." Unless, of course, you're an Alliance member running 50kw IBOC, in which case you have been made an honorary member of a secret elite society allowing you to interfere with other licensed facilities with impunity while simultaneously enjoying the most stringent protections and arguing, illogically, that "skywave listening is obsolete."

HD is un-American, anti-entrepreneurial and represents a land-grab by Alliance stations in the form of spectrum eminent domain. And worse still, it's irrelevant because it does not represent any meaningful technical advantage and is doing nothing but accelerating the decline of AM. You and I have discussed this many times. IBOC is doing nothing but injuring everyone - including WBZ which is still in decline notwithstanding the miracle of Glynn Walden's hash machine.

I today completed compiling over a year of e-mails and 200 requests for membership at stopiboc.com. These submissions include sympathetic statements of support from over a hundred industry professionals, including executives, owners, contract engineers, and CEs at major-market stations including two CEs at Alliance-owned 50 kw AMs (read: not just the "DXers" which Tom Ray and his ilk so hysterically revile.) A selection of quotes will soon be posted on the site, representing comments and supportive statements from every state in the nation and from posters in Mexico, Norway, Canada, Australia, Italy and Brazil. The sentiments are universal. HD isn't working from an engineering standpoint and is a marketplace disaster. In a year HD-AM will be history no matter how much pro-HD garbage the Alliance and the NAB crank out. So it's just a shame I have to endure more lying, interference and obstruction from your WBZ friends. And we will not allow ourselves to be lumped in as representing "part of the problem" merely because we wanted to increase our signal strength in a way which didn't harm any other broadcaster. Which is to be distinguished from WBZ's deliberate and arrogant interference with us.

 

[TheBigA]

I today completed compiling over a year of e-mails and 200 requests for membership at stopiboc.com.

As I've said many times, you don't affect change with emails and web pages. That simply does not work. It's a nice public relations stunt, and makes for nice press releases, but doesn't change policy.

The only thing that will work is to take your issue to court. Period. And don't bother to bring your membership list. This is not a popularity contest or some kind of reality TV show where the goal is to vote someone off the island or out of the house. It doesn't matter if IBOC is a marketing disaster, and it doesn't matter if you have 200 esteemed people who agree with you. What matters is the law, and what is permitted under it. From the way you've laid it out here, it sounds like you have a case. I'd make it soon, because they have more money than you, and it will take a long time to argue your case. But if you really want to get something done, that's the only way.