Broadcasters are upbeat about HD

[Mike Walker]

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...1-BCB2-80F6CBCA2249}&print=true&dist=printTop

 

[700WLW]

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...1-BCB2-80F6CBCA2249}&print=true&dist=printTop

Of course they are - many of these stations are owned by the HD Radio Alliance ! Too bad, because consumers are apathetic towards HD Radio:

http://www.google.com/trends?q="hd+radio",+podcast,+xm,+sirius

 

[Mike Walker]

No positive news, or opinion allowed, huh 700? Well every week there are new HD stations. There are now more than 40 HD products...radios, tuners, adapters, monitors (a year ago there were NONE). HD is available in cars as a factory installed option (BMW), or as an add-on (many). And the hits just keep on comin'!

By the way, MUCH of the wind in HD's sales is from public radio stations. It was NPR that came up with the concept of multicasting (their "Tomorrow Radio Project"). And none of them (public radio stations)...not a single one is 'owned by the alliance'.

 

[700WLW]

No positive news, or opinion allowed, huh 700? Well every week there are new HD stations. There are now more than 40 HD products...radios, tuners, adapters, monitors (a year ago there were NONE). HD is available in cars as a factory installed option (BMW), or as an add-on (many). And the hits just keep on comin'!

By the way, MUCH of the wind in HD's sales is from public radio stations. It was NPR that came up with the concept of multicasting (their "Tomorrow Radio Project"). And none of them (public radio stations)...not a single one is 'owned by the alliance'.

Ibiquity HD Radio Station List

http://www.ibiquity.com/stationlist_hdradio.php?state=CA&sortBy=StnOwner

HD Radio Alliance Members

"ABC Radio, CBS Radio, Bonneville, Clear Channel, Entercom, Cumulus, Emmis, Citadel"

http://www.hdradio.com/press_room.php#alliancemembers

All of the HD Radio products have very few consumer votes/reviews, and/or poor sales rankings ! 90% of the HD broadcast stations, in the list, are owned by the HD Radio Alliance - Ra ! Ra !

 

[MotoMuzak]

"It was NPR that came up with the concept of multicasting (their "Tomorrow Radio Project")."

They did???

I thought Major Armstrong got that credit (his "Subsidiary Communications Project", which I think he re-named something like, SCA, or something like that anyways.........)

Bell Labs??

 

[Mike Walker]

You see a conspiracy, I see the reality of broadcasting in 2007. The vast majority of large market radio stations in the US are owned by the large groups (Clear Channel, CBS, etc.). The majority of radio listening is done to their statiions. It's the nature of the beast.

Of course the early adopters are radio geeks. Others will buy HD WHEN THEY REPLACE THEIR RADIOS. Just like HDTV. Only "geeks" ran out and bought one. The rest of us waited until our tvs needed replacing. I still haven't bought one. I'm not convinced 'The King of Queens' if funnier if I can see every pore on Kevin James' face! Besides, I am legally blind. But I HEAR just fine. Lovin' my HD radio! Got a Google Trend for that? It's true, even if you can't find a link to it!

Hey...I have NEVER bought a tv online. So I guess Amazon and Google wouldn't have any info about me buyin' 'em. But somehow I seem to have a few. How is that possible? Wait, I've got it...NOT ALL ELEMENTS OF LIFE ARE TETHERED TO COMPUTERS!

 

[Mike Walker]

Ok Einstein, it was NPR through their Tomorrow Radio Project who came up with the concept of indoor plumbing. I mean...splitting an HD stream into multiple "channels"...in other words, MULTICASTING.

At any rate, "multicasting" as you define it ain't the same thing, because the SCA channel info was for SUBSCRIBERS, not for consumption by the general public for free.

 

[MotoMuzak]

I wasn't trying to be a smartass, I was speaking/typing figuratively, not necessarily literally.

I woulda almost thought multicasting, as a mainstream technology (in a digital sense, in terms of technology) would have originated as a DVB (Digital Video Broadcast) or DSS thing, how else would they be able to cram so many channels on one single satellite transponder?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVB

DVB multicasts, and does so *very* well!!

(Didn't mention it in the article, but wasn't the DAB audio system, in some remote way or other, derived from DVB?)

EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT

Never mind, answering my own query:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_audio_broadcasting

(It's in the "See Also" table at the bottom of the article. God, I wish I'd learn to look a bit more carefully for these things.........)

 

[700WLW]

Of course the early adopters are radio geeks. Others will buy HD WHEN THEY REPLACE THEIR RADIOS. Just like HDTV. Only "geeks" ran out and bought one..

So far, nothing about HD Radio has generated interest, and there is nothing to suggest, after a year's $200,000,000 ad campaign, where 75% of consumers are now aware of HD Radio, that will change:

1) http://www.google.com/trends?q="hd+radio",+sirius,+xm,+podcast

2) http://www.alexaholic.com/sirius.com+hdradio.com+ibiquity.com+xmradio.com

No one is going to replace $10 - $25 analog portable and clock radios, with expensive HD radios - there is absolutely no incentive !

...NOT ALL ELEMENTS OF LIFE ARE TETHERED TO COMPUTERS!

Sorry, but these days almost everything/everybody is connected to the Internet/computers (55% of households have broadband, plus a percentage have dialup). Like it, or not, Wireless Internet/Internet Radio is the wave of the future.

 

[Mike Walker]

Thousands of radios are being sold, there are new models all the time, and new stations...including AM ones (not necessarily a good thing!) Plus people argue endlessly on boards like this. Hell, YOU have a lot of interest in HD, even if it's negative. "No interest". I'd wager it's one of the most debated things on the web now, short of sex and politics.

 

[700WLW]

Thousands of radios are being sold, there are new models all the time, and new stations...including AM ones (not necessarily a good thing!) Plus people argue endlessly on boards like this. Hell, YOU have a lot of interest in HD, even if it's negative. "No interest". I'd wager it's one of the most debated things on the web now, short of sex and politics.

Only a few tens-of-thousands HD radios have been sold (not counting the number returned), compared to the 100 million analog radios sold every year. Doesn't matter how many new models of HD Radios are being produced, or the number of HD stations broadcasting, because consumers are not interested:

1) http://www.google.com/trends?q="hd+radio",+xm,+sirius,+podcast

2) http://www.alexaholic.com/sirius.com+hdradio.com+ibiquity.com+xmradio.com

Even HD on AM has been almost a total failure:

"Rethinking AM's Future"

"Only 175 or so AM stations have even licensed AM-HD. For a number of reasons, quite a few have tried it and taken it off the air, or so the anecdotal evidence suggests. Ibiquity no longer reports in its public summaries whether a station is on the air."

http://www.rwonline.com/pages/s.0044/t.557.html

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Thousands of radios are being sold, there are new models all the time, and new stations...including AM ones (not necessarily a good thing!) Plus people argue endlessly on boards like this. Hell, YOU have a lot of interest in HD, even if it's negative. "No interest". I'd wager it's one of the most debated things on the web now, short of sex and politics.

First you say hardly anyone is aware of or knows anything about HD radio, now you say

I'd wager it's one of the most debated things on the web now, short of sex and politics.

Which is it?
Prove it.
Perhaps someone will post the appropriate Google Trends?
Oh, you say Google Trends are not perfect, but neither is Arbitron or any other survey. Google trends uses a much larger sample size then any survey, and therefore is likely to be more accurate.
You also claim that Google Trends and similar, just measure searches, and not interest. But you never explain why anyone would search for something, if they have no interest.

The fact is, that excessively greedy, and controlling broadcasters may have an interest in HD Radio, but the public, and listeners do not. There is little public benefit to HD radio, just more station jamming and interference. While for broadcasters, it (legally?) gives them a chance to jam their neighbors, and control or dominate signals into their radio markets.
No. There is already excessive market concentration. Broadcast conglomerates do not need more stations or market domination. Additional HD "stations between the stations" should be counted toward market limits. Chairman Martin, in his opening remarks at the Harrisburg, PA meeting proposed HD channels will have the same rules as main channels. If so, then will HD channels be counted toward market limits of the major broadcast conglomerates?
Let's see if Chairmen Martin will keep his word, or buckle under to the industry he is appointed to regulate for the public good.

In your opening post to this thread, you refer to an article:

Broadcasters are upbeat about HD
« on: Yesterday at 01:09:36 pm » Quote

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/hd-radio-has-broadcasters-feeling/story.aspx?guid=%7b6C84825A-EB0D-4CA1-BCB2-80F6CBCA2249%7d&print=true&dist=printTop

Let me quote for you from the article, you posted:

However, digital radio has a hurdle to overcome, in that few people seem to truly understand what it is, despite a relentless advertising campaign by the radio industry's biggest players.

The lack of commercials may present a problem, says radio consultant and historian Donna Halper. "Several GMs I've talked to say they would like to put some new and innovative formats on HD," she said, "but they're running a business, and if they can't make money on HD, why would they bother?"
Ferrara stresses the temporary nature of HD's commercial-free era. "The time will come sooner rather than later that the HD2 multicast channels will be monetized," he said in an e-mail.

"While overall awareness of the term 'HD Radio' has increased in the last year, there is considerable confusion, misinformation or total lack of understanding as to what HD Radio is or what its benefits are to the consumer," the Bridge Ratings study said in summary.
Perhaps not surprisingly, given these findings, the survey also noted that interest in purchasing an HD Radio seemed low. Only 8% of those 12 and over said they were very interested or somewhat interested, down from 11% in June 2006. For adults 25-54, the percentage dropped to 14% from 17%.

That is because, there is little, if any, benefit from HD radio for the typical consumer. Just to HD DXers, hobbyists, and early adopters, and there are not enough of those to keep HD radio afloat. Probably far fewer of them then subscribe to the often maligned satellite radio services.
Mike,
I'm glad you are happy with your HD radio, that's nice. But to misinform the public, and huckster HD radios, is not.

 

[dbdigital]

Thousands of radios are being sold, there are new models all the time, and new stations...including AM ones (not necessarily a good thing!) Plus people argue endlessly on boards like this. Hell, YOU have a lot of interest in HD, even if it's negative. "No interest". I'd wager it's one of the most debated things on the web now, short of sex and politics.

First you say hardly anyone is aware of or knows anything about HD radio, now you say

I'd wager it's one of the most debated things on the web now, short of sex and politics.

Which is it?
Prove it.
Perhaps someone will post the appropriate Google Trends?
Oh, you say Google Trends are not perfect, but neither is Arbitron or any other survey. Google trends uses a much larger sample size then any survey, and therefore is likely to be more accurate.
You also claim that Google Trends and similar, just measure searches, and not interest. But you never explain why anyone would search for something, if they have no interest.

The fact is, that excessively greedy, and controlling broadcasters may have an interest in HD Radio, but the public, and listeners do not. There is little public benefit to HD radio, just more station jamming and interference. While for broadcasters, it (legally?) gives them a chance to jam their neighbors, and control or dominate signals into their radio markets.
No. There is already excessive market concentration. Broadcast conglomerates do not need more stations or market domination. Additional HD "stations between the stations" should be counted toward market limits. Chairman Martin, in his opening remarks at the Harrisburg, PA meeting proposed HD channels will have the same rules as main channels. If so, then will HD channels be counted toward market limits of the major broadcast conglomerates?
Let's see if Chairmen Martin will keep his word, or buckle under to the industry he is appointed to regulate for the public good.

In your opening post to this thread, you refer to an article:

Broadcasters are upbeat about HD
« on: Yesterday at 01:09:36 pm » Quote

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/hd-radio-has-broadcasters-feeling/story.aspx?guid=%7b6C84825A-EB0D-4CA1-BCB2-80F6CBCA2249%7d&print=true&dist=printTop

Let me quote for you from the article, you posted:

However, digital radio has a hurdle to overcome, in that few people seem to truly understand what it is, despite a relentless advertising campaign by the radio industry's biggest players.

The lack of commercials may present a problem, says radio consultant and historian Donna Halper. "Several GMs I've talked to say they would like to put some new and innovative formats on HD," she said, "but they're running a business, and if they can't make money on HD, why would they bother?"
Ferrara stresses the temporary nature of HD's commercial-free era. "The time will come sooner rather than later that the HD2 multicast channels will be monetized," he said in an e-mail.

"While overall awareness of the term 'HD Radio' has increased in the last year, there is considerable confusion, misinformation or total lack of understanding as to what HD Radio is or what its benefits are to the consumer," the Bridge Ratings study said in summary.
Perhaps not surprisingly, given these findings, the survey also noted that interest in purchasing an HD Radio seemed low. Only 8% of those 12 and over said they were very interested or somewhat interested, down from 11% in June 2006. For adults 25-54, the percentage dropped to 14% from 17%.

That is because, there is little, if any, benefit from HD radio for the typical consumer. Just to HD DXers, hobbyists, and early adopters, and there are not enough of those to keep HD radio afloat. Probably far fewer of them then subscribe to the often maligned satellite radio services.
Mike,
I'm glad you are happy with your HD radio, that's nice. But to misinform the public, and huckster HD radios, is not.

Funny you should mention the idea of HD2 and 3 streams being counted against the maximum total of stations allowed by one media conglomerate in one market. I actually wrote an e-mail to Commissioners Copps and Adelstein and suggested the same thing a couple of years ago. Of course, I got no reply but I also suggested it in my comments to the FCC when they were taking comments on the media ownership issue.

Representative Slaughter in her LPFM bill wants to tax commercial FM stations for their extra HD-R channels. Obviously, many feel that HD-Radio's "stations between stations" is little more than a virtual spectrum giveaway with zero input from the public as to how those extra channels should be utilized.

On a different topic, since you seem to know the folks at DRE, any word from them on a digital AM scheme similar to FMeXtra?

db

 

[SUPERCASTER]

DB said:

On a different topic, since you seem to know the folks at DRE, any word from them on a digital AM scheme similar to FMeXtra?

db

I have no inside track, or relationship with DRE or FMeXtra. My main interest was to counter the many, often repeated, false claims from HD radio supporters that iBiquity/HD radio is the only digital or hybrid system available for FM, and that the adjacent channel buzz, and interfering digital "saddle bags" on each side of the analog FM carrier were a necessary evil to transmit digital FM.
Clearly this was always totally false. FMeXtra has been available for about as long as iBiquity/HD radio. It is just unfortunate that they are smaller, have limited resources, superior technology, but little backing from the HD cartel.
It has taken DRE Inc., Armstrong, Energy-Onyx, and Bext, a while to get mass produced FMeXtra receivers on the market in any large quantity. But the future is bright, as most of the newest digital radios include a compatible, programmable, Digital Signal Processor so FMeXtra is likely to be available in all new digital DSP FM radios, worldwide. Remember, FMeXtra is not proprietary, so it would be foolish for any digital FM radio maker not to include FMeXtra.
As for AM, I suspect that DRE Inc. probably has their hands full with marketing FMeXtra right now.
Perhaps AM improvement will come from another source such as DRM or Kahn. Time will tell.

 

[midwestwanderer]

CAM-D it is for AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAM-D

 

[SUPERCASTER]

CAM-D it is for AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAM-D

I believe that is what I said.
Here is a quote from my post, Supercaster (above).

Perhaps AM improvement will come from another source such as DRM or Kahn. Time will tell.

 

[Mike Walker]

HD Radio isn't the only technology. It may well not be the best technology. But it IS the only technology that most anyone can walk into a store NOW, and leave with a real working product, on which they can hear multiple digital broadcasts most anywhere in America. And that's a pretty important distinction.

 

[700WLW]

HD Radio isn't the only technology. It may well not be the best technology. But it IS the only technology that most anyone can walk into a store NOW, and leave with a real working product, on which they can hear multiple digital broadcasts most anywhere in America. And that's a pretty important distinction.

HD radios are expensive, have only 60% the coverage of analog, and don't work as advertised - the effective coverage of HD, is no where near that of analog.

 

[Mike Walker]

If 80 miles with an indoor set of rabbit ears is 'only 60 percent of analog coverage', then I think most stations would say "that's just fine!"

First of all, probably 90 percent of LISTENERS are withing that 60 percent of signal area. The rest probably aren't even in metro area measured by Arbitron, so even if it's true (it isn't), SO WHAT! It's not like HD is compromising coverage. Beyond the HD's reach, you can still get good, clean, analog FM (though it'll be mono, or stereo blended to mono, because you're too freakin' far away for clean analog stereo if you can't get HD!)

At my home there literally isn't a single situation where I can get analog fm stereo cleanly, but can't get HD. This is, in my opinion, how stations should answer this (silly) argument. If you get analog fm stereo cleanly, you'll get HD. Go beyond where you can get HD, and there's still analog. Since nobody's turning off analog, talk about a non-issue! Geez!

 

[700WLW]

If 80 miles with an indoor set of rabbit ears is 'only 60 percent of analog coverage', then I think most stations would say "that's just fine!"

First of all, probably 90 percent of LISTENERS are withing that 60 percent of signal area. The rest probably aren't even in metro area measured by Arbitron, so even if it's true (it isn't), SO WHAT! It's not like HD is compromising coverage. Beyond the HD's reach, you can still get good, clean, analog FM (though it'll be mono, or stereo blended to mono, because you're too freakin' far away for clean analog stereo if you can't get HD!)

At my home there literally isn't a single situation where I can get analog fm stereo cleanly, but can't get HD. This is, in my opinion, how stations should answer this (silly) argument. If you get analog fm stereo cleanly, you'll get HD. Go beyond where you can get HD, and there's still analog. Since nobody's turning off analog, talk about a non-issue! Geez!

"HD radio Receiver Sensitivity"

http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,51315.0.html

There are too many personal examples of poor reception, that refute your claims !