• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

CBS Radio/LA announces their HD-2 lineup

R

Radiogeek500

And here ya go. Again, take what you will from it

KCBS-2: Variety CHR. Is this a "current based" version of Jack?
KTWV-2: Real Jazz. But I thought KJZZ 88.1 covered this base pretty well.
KSLX-2: Female Talk. MODERATOR QUIP: Does this mean Tom Leykis's Exs get to b**ch about how bad he treated them?(heh heh)
KRTH-2: 50/60s oldies. Well, someone should be happy they're getting that.
KROQ-2: Active Rock. Finally, someone in LA has some damn balls to put on a station that will play System of A down without sandwiching it between No Doubt and the Killers.
<P ID="signature">______________
Happy 20th Birthday Power 106

JOSH, Moderating the whole Radio-Info radio state of California and Indiana too!

www.myspace.com/radiogeek500</P>
 
Is this supposed to get anybody excited? If this is what the industry's vision of the future will be, they are in more trouble than I thought they were.

13 bucks a month is sooo reasonable in comparison.


> And here ya go. Again, take what you will from it
>
> KCBS-2: Variety CHR. Is this a "current based" version of
> Jack?
> KTWV-2: Real Jazz. But I thought KJZZ 88.1 covered this base
> pretty well.
> KSLX-2: Female Talk. MODERATOR QUIP: Does this mean Tom
> Leykis's Exs get to b**ch about how bad he treated them?(heh
> heh)
> KRTH-2: 50/60s oldies. Well, someone should be happy they're
> getting that.
> KROQ-2: Active Rock. Finally, someone in LA has some damn
> balls to put on a station that will play System of A down
> without sandwiching it between No Doubt and the Killers.
>
 
I find this interesting. What is the purpose of airing programing that no one can hear or listen to, and for most people, don't even know it exists?

> And here ya go. Again, take what you will from it
>
> KCBS-2: Variety CHR. Is this a "current based" version of
> Jack?
> KTWV-2: Real Jazz. But I thought KJZZ 88.1 covered this base
> pretty well.
> KSLX-2: Female Talk. MODERATOR QUIP: Does this mean Tom
> Leykis's Exs get to b**ch about how bad he treated them?(heh
> heh)
> KRTH-2: 50/60s oldies. Well, someone should be happy they're
> getting that.
> KROQ-2: Active Rock. Finally, someone in LA has some damn
> balls to put on a station that will play System of A down
> without sandwiching it between No Doubt and the Killers.<P ID="signature">______________

Member of the Los Angeles, Phoenix Radio, and California TV moderation team</P>
 
I think it's pretty cool, actually.
This roll out is happening in the biggest markets. With the number of stations going with HD, it gives incentive to build/sell more units of HD radios.

Also, I did a check on IBOC's web site, and there are plenty of radios available, and not that expensive (not much more than an Ipod).

Just like with FM Stereo in the late 60s, let the experiments begin. But I believe this thing does have some teeth, eh?

And how cool is it that CBS FM will be doing Hit music again, hm?

> I find this interesting. What is the purpose of airing
> programing that no one can hear or listen to, and for most
> people, don't even know it exists?
>
> > And here ya go. Again, take what you will from it
> >
> > KCBS-2: Variety CHR. Is this a "current based" version of
> > Jack?
> > KTWV-2: Real Jazz. But I thought KJZZ 88.1 covered this
> base
> > pretty well.
> > KSLX-2: Female Talk. MODERATOR QUIP: Does this mean Tom
> > Leykis's Exs get to b**ch about how bad he treated
> them?(heh
> > heh)
> > KRTH-2: 50/60s oldies. Well, someone should be happy
> they're
> > getting that.
> > KROQ-2: Active Rock. Finally, someone in LA has some damn
> > balls to put on a station that will play System of A down
> > without sandwiching it between No Doubt and the Killers.
>
 
Forget HD-2. Another Joke From So-Called Broadcast Execs

> Is this supposed to get anybody excited? If this is what the
> industry's vision of the future will be, they are in more
> trouble than I thought they were.
>
> 13 bucks a month is sooo reasonable in comparison.
>
>
> > And here ya go. Again, take what you will from it
> >
> > KCBS-2: Variety CHR. Is this a "current based" version of
> > Jack?
> > KTWV-2: Real Jazz. But I thought KJZZ 88.1 covered this
> base
> > pretty well.
> > KSLX-2: Female Talk. MODERATOR QUIP: Does this mean Tom
> > Leykis's Exs get to b**ch about how bad he treated
> them?(heh
> > heh)
> > KRTH-2: 50/60s oldies. Well, someone should be happy
> they're
> > getting that.
> > KROQ-2: Active Rock. Finally, someone in LA has some damn
> > balls to put on a station that will play System of A down
> > without sandwiching it between No Doubt and the Killers.
> >
>

No one outside of those in the industry knows about or will ever care about HD-2. They didn't learn their lesson from AM Stereo and they're about to be taught another even more devastating lesson.

Even if a deal was struck with car manufacturers today, in-dash radios would not appear on a significant amount of new car models until the 2011 cars would hit the showroom floor. In the meantime, an in-vehicle computer capable of surfing the internet - and playing internet broadcastings - has already been unveiled at the 2006 CES (at $6950). Another inferior model from MSN is coming out later this year for about $1000. But that is just the beginning.

Between the near future of receiving mobile internet broadcasts - via cell phones as well - and the current reality of easily nationally marketed satellite radio (I have XM and now listen to it for nearly 90% of my radio listening. I've even given up KABC to listen to two of their own talk show hosts simulcast at the same time with a better quality sound on XM), terrestrial broadcasters would be much better off developing something that could bring future profits rather than embracing something that will never get out of the gate and is going to be a complete failure.

Now where is my I-pod?...
 
You mean ...

> Just like with FM Stereo in the late 60s, let the
> experiments begin.

You mean just like AM Stereo. Or more apt: Quad.
 
Chicken or the egg my friend. Who would buy a radio that had no programming? Now that there is programming and the radios are starting to come in this can move forward.

FYI JVC just put out a multicast radio for $299. Now we are talking.



> I find this interesting. What is the purpose of airing
> programing that no one can hear or listen to, and for most
> people, don't even know it exists?
>
> > And here ya go. Again, take what you will from it
> >
> > KCBS-2: Variety CHR. Is this a "current based" version of
> > Jack?
> > KTWV-2: Real Jazz. But I thought KJZZ 88.1 covered this
> base
> > pretty well.
> > KSLX-2: Female Talk. MODERATOR QUIP: Does this mean Tom
> > Leykis's Exs get to b**ch about how bad he treated
> them?(heh
> > heh)
> > KRTH-2: 50/60s oldies. Well, someone should be happy
> they're
> > getting that.
> > KROQ-2: Active Rock. Finally, someone in LA has some damn
> > balls to put on a station that will play System of A down
> > without sandwiching it between No Doubt and the Killers.
>
 
Re: You mean ...

> > Just like with FM Stereo in the late 60s, let the
> > experiments begin.
>
> You mean just like AM Stereo. Or more apt: Quad.
>
I pity you that you cannot see the difference.
 
Re: Forget HD-2. Another Joke From So-Called Broadcast Execs

> > Is this supposed to get anybody excited? If this is what
> the
> > industry's vision of the future will be, they are in more
> > trouble than I thought they were.
> >
> > 13 bucks a month is sooo reasonable in comparison.
> >
> >
> > > And here ya go. Again, take what you will from it
> > >
> > > KCBS-2: Variety CHR. Is this a "current based" version
> of
> > > Jack?
> > > KTWV-2: Real Jazz. But I thought KJZZ 88.1 covered this
> > base
> > > pretty well.
> > > KSLX-2: Female Talk. MODERATOR QUIP: Does this mean Tom
> > > Leykis's Exs get to b**ch about how bad he treated
> > them?(heh
> > > heh)

> > > KRTH-2: 50/60s oldies. Well, someone should be happy
> > they're
> > > getting that.
> > > KROQ-2: Active Rock. Finally, someone in LA has some
> damn
> > > balls to put on a station that will play System of A
> down
> > > without sandwiching it between No Doubt and the Killers.
>
> > >
> >
>
> No one outside of those in the industry knows about or will
> ever care about HD-2. They didn't learn their lesson from AM
> Stereo and they're about to be taught another even more
> devastating lesson.
>
> Even if a deal was struck with car manufacturers today,
> in-dash radios would not appear on a significant amount of
> new car models until the 2011 cars would hit the showroom
> floor. In the meantime, an in-vehicle computer capable of
> surfing the internet - and playing internet broadcastings -
> has already been unveiled at the 2006 CES (at $6950).
> Another inferior model from MSN is coming out later this
> year for about $1000. But that is just the beginning.
>
> Between the near future of receiving mobile internet
> broadcasts - via cell phones as well - and the current
> reality of easily nationally marketed satellite radio (I
> have XM and now listen to it for nearly 90% of my radio
> listening. I've even given up KABC to listen to two of their
> own talk show hosts simulcast at the same time with a better
> quality sound on XM), terrestrial broadcasters would be much
> better off developing something that could bring future
> profits rather than embracing something that will never get
> out of the gate and is going to be a complete failure.
>
> Now where is my I-pod?...
>
As a listener I'm not sure I'm completely clear on the concept? Will the programming on the "2" stations be significantly different than the originals? Or, for example, will KRTH2 just play a different list of 50 songs over and over again (or the same content they play now)? What's the sell point for the listener?
 
Re: You mean ...

> > Just like with FM Stereo in the late 60s, let the
> > experiments begin.
>
> You mean just like AM Stereo. Or more apt: Quad.
>
I've still have my QTA-770 Quad receiver from Realistic sitting in my storage locker with my Realistic AM Stereo Receiver collecting dust! Get the picture?
 
The difference is...

> > > Just like with FM Stereo in the late 60s, let the
> > > experiments begin.
> >
> > You mean just like AM Stereo. Or more apt: Quad.
> >
> I pity you that you cannot see the difference.
>
Yes indeed, there is a DISTINCT difference!
Unlike those other fine products just mentioned, HD radio is the real deal.
Why? Because of the commitment of broadcasters to follow through with it.
If we were talking about KABC and WCBS and that was it, you'd be right.

But look at the rollout. Several different companies in major markets have all started broadcasting these channels. This means that there is already a huge selection available to the HD radio listener. This also mean, additional streams of revenue for these broadcaster.

This beast has legs, man!
 
Re: The difference is...

Is the programming worth the cost of a receiver? That is the question.<P ID="signature">______________
The radio business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side.</P>
 
Re: You mean ...

> > > Just like with FM Stereo in the late 60s, let the
> > > experiments begin.
> >
> > You mean just like AM Stereo. Or more apt: Quad.
> >
> I've still have my QTA-770 Quad receiver from Realistic
> sitting in my storage locker with my Realistic AM Stereo
> Receiver collecting dust! Get the picture?
>


Time to EBAY that baby.
 
Re: Forget HD-2. Another Joke From So-Called Broadcast Execs

> > > Is this supposed to get anybody excited? If this is what
>
> > the
> > > industry's vision of the future will be, they are in
> more
> > > trouble than I thought they were.
> > >
> > > 13 bucks a month is sooo reasonable in comparison.
> > >
> > >
> > > > And here ya go. Again, take what you will from it
> > > >
> > > > KCBS-2: Variety CHR. Is this a "current based" version
>
> > of
> > > > Jack?
> > > > KTWV-2: Real Jazz. But I thought KJZZ 88.1 covered
> this
> > > base
> > > > pretty well.
> > > > KSLX-2: Female Talk. MODERATOR QUIP: Does this mean
> Tom
> > > > Leykis's Exs get to b**ch about how bad he treated
> > > them?(heh
> > > > heh)
>
> > > > KRTH-2: 50/60s oldies. Well, someone should be happy
> > > they're
> > > > getting that.
> > > > KROQ-2: Active Rock. Finally, someone in LA has some
> > damn
> > > > balls to put on a station that will play System of A
> > down
> > > > without sandwiching it between No Doubt and the
> Killers.
> >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > No one outside of those in the industry knows about or
> will
> > ever care about HD-2. They didn't learn their lesson from
> AM
> > Stereo and they're about to be taught another even more
> > devastating lesson.
> >
> > Even if a deal was struck with car manufacturers today,
> > in-dash radios would not appear on a significant amount of
>
> > new car models until the 2011 cars would hit the showroom
> > floor. In the meantime, an in-vehicle computer capable of
> > surfing the internet - and playing internet broadcastings
> -
> > has already been unveiled at the 2006 CES (at $6950).
> > Another inferior model from MSN is coming out later this
> > year for about $1000. But that is just the beginning.
> >
> > Between the near future of receiving mobile internet
> > broadcasts - via cell phones as well - and the current
> > reality of easily nationally marketed satellite radio (I
> > have XM and now listen to it for nearly 90% of my radio
> > listening. I've even given up KABC to listen to two of
> their
> > own talk show hosts simulcast at the same time with a
> better
> > quality sound on XM), terrestrial broadcasters would be
> much
> > better off developing something that could bring future
> > profits rather than embracing something that will never
> get
> > out of the gate and is going to be a complete failure.
> >
> > Now where is my I-pod?...
> >
> As a listener I'm not sure I'm completely clear on the
> concept? Will the programming on the "2" stations be
> significantly different than the originals? Or, for example,
> will KRTH2 just play a different list of 50 songs over and
> over again (or the same content they play now)? What's the
> sell point for the listener?
>


The HD2 signal can be a completly different format. Go visit the HD Radio board here. There are lsits of what formats will be on what HD2 stations.
 
Re: The difference is...

> Is the programming worth the cost of a receiver? That is
> the question.
>
That is certainly an individual question.

But the price of an HD Multicast receiver is at $299 now. Down from over $600 just a few months ago.
 
Re: Forget HD-2. Another Joke From So-Called Broadcast Execs

> > > > Is this supposed to get anybody excited? If this is
> what
> >
> > > the
> > > > industry's vision of the future will be, they are in
> > more
> > > > trouble than I thought they were.
> > > >
> > > > 13 bucks a month is sooo reasonable in comparison.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > And here ya go. Again, take what you will from it
> > > > >
> > > > > KCBS-2: Variety CHR. Is this a "current based"
> version
> >
> > > of
> > > > > Jack?
> > > > > KTWV-2: Real Jazz. But I thought KJZZ 88.1 covered
> > this
> > > > base
> > > > > pretty well.
> > > > > KSLX-2: Female Talk. MODERATOR QUIP: Does this mean
> > Tom
> > > > > Leykis's Exs get to b**ch about how bad he treated
> > > > them?(heh
> > > > > heh)
> >
> > > > > KRTH-2: 50/60s oldies. Well, someone should be happy
>
> > > > they're
> > > > > getting that.
> > > > > KROQ-2: Active Rock. Finally, someone in LA has some
>
> > > damn
> > > > > balls to put on a station that will play System of A
>
> > > down
> > > > > without sandwiching it between No Doubt and the
> > Killers.
> > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > No one outside of those in the industry knows about or
> > will
> > > ever care about HD-2. They didn't learn their lesson
> from
> > AM
> > > Stereo and they're about to be taught another even more
> > > devastating lesson.
> > >
> > > Even if a deal was struck with car manufacturers today,
> > > in-dash radios would not appear on a significant amount
> of
> >
> > > new car models until the 2011 cars would hit the
> showroom
> > > floor. In the meantime, an in-vehicle computer capable
> of
> > > surfing the internet - and playing internet
> broadcastings
> > -
> > > has already been unveiled at the 2006 CES (at $6950).
> > > Another inferior model from MSN is coming out later this
>
> > > year for about $1000. But that is just the beginning.
> > >
> > > Between the near future of receiving mobile internet
> > > broadcasts - via cell phones as well - and the current
> > > reality of easily nationally marketed satellite radio (I
>
> > > have XM and now listen to it for nearly 90% of my radio
> > > listening. I've even given up KABC to listen to two of
> > their
> > > own talk show hosts simulcast at the same time with a
> > better
> > > quality sound on XM), terrestrial broadcasters would be
> > much
> > > better off developing something that could bring future
> > > profits rather than embracing something that will never
> > get
> > > out of the gate and is going to be a complete failure.
> > >
> > > Now where is my I-pod?...
> > >
> > As a listener I'm not sure I'm completely clear on the
> > concept? Will the programming on the "2" stations be
> > significantly different than the originals? Or, for
> example,
> > will KRTH2 just play a different list of 50 songs over and
>
> > over again (or the same content they play now)? What's the
>
> > sell point for the listener?
> >
>
>
> The HD2 signal can be a completly different format. Go
> visit the HD Radio board here. There are lsits of what
> formats will be on what HD2 stations.

Thanks. I'm pretty clear on the formats - just trying to understand how the actual programming content may or may not differ from the original.
>
 
Re: The difference is...

> > Is the programming worth the cost of a receiver? That is
> > the question.
> >
> That is certainly an individual question.
>
> But the price of an HD Multicast receiver is at $299 now.
> Down from over $600 just a few months ago.

And the new units conforming to the new design specs released in November will be coming in a few months. Look for prices to fall much faster than CD player or DVD player prices did.
 
Re: Forget HD-2. Another Joke From So-Called Broadcast Execs

> The HD2 signal can be a completly different format. Go
> visit the HD Radio board here. There are lsits of what
> formats will be on what HD2 stations.
>

Does anyone know the coverage for the secondary signals? My understanding of the system in hybrid mode is that the digital portion covers metro only. Does this mean suburban listeners won't be able to receive it without a strong antenna?
 
Re: The difference is...

Look for it not to matter until they start coming as standard equipment on cars.

Yeah, perhaps only 30% of radio listening is done in the car, but what % of radio **choosing** is done in the car? I'll bet a lot higher percentage, as people can choose in an instant.

And it is going to take a lot of selling to get someone to pay for a second helping of what they are complaining about now. The biggest question of this new format has already been asked above: Do I get a new 300 songs over and over again or is it just another 100 mixed in with the ones I know and hate to begin with?



> And the new units conforming to the new design specs
> released in November will be coming in a few months. Look
> for prices to fall much faster than CD player or DVD player
> prices did.
>
 
Re: The difference is...

> Look for it not to matter until they start coming as
> standard equipment on cars.
>
> Yeah, perhaps only 30% of radio listening is done in the
> car, but what % of radio **choosing** is done in the car?
> I'll bet a lot higher percentage, as people can choose in an
> instant.
>
>

How well does HD-2 work in a car? My understanding of HD is that the HD signal does not carry as far as the analog signal.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom