Clear Channel's Pittman on Bloomberg

[Savage]

Well now! Thanks for so decisively settling everything, BigA.

In truth, nothing anyone posts on this board or anywhere else really "matters." We're just having a discussion. This is radio....not saving lives in the ER or keeping maniacs from deploying rogue nukes.

It must be tremendously burdensome walking among mere mortals, lugging the certainty that you've got all the freakin' answers. And the endless patrolling of message boards correcting everyone! My sympathies, Biggest of As.

 

[TheBigA]

Well now! Thanks for so decisively settling everything, BigA.

Anytime.

 

[Lee Rust]

CCU is also an investor in iBiquity and was instrumental in the onanistic revision of the "NRSC mask" to give legal-engineering cover to HD interferors.

\ˌō-nə-ˈnis-tik\ "Cuffing the camel. Dusting the donkey. Flogging the Pharisee." (Wikipedia)

We might also note that "Onan died prematurely by Yahweh for being wicked." (Wikipedia)

 

[davideduardo]

CCU is also an investor in iBiquity and was instrumental in the onanistic revision of the "NRSC mask" to give legal-engineering cover to HD interferors. So let's have a reality check here about the company's role. Maybe there isn't a completed corporate link or actual control but Clear Channel is and has always been a key player in HD. The record is clear.

File under "Helicopters, Black."

I believe that of the 12 largest broadcast groups existing when iBiquity was formed, 10 took put seed capital into the company. In all cases, the investment was small; it was intended to "get the ball rolling" and to attract venture capital to provide the money needed as well as burn capital.

The NRSC mask revision has little to do with HD... HD requires a 5 kHz audio bandwidth for AM (although it has experimentally been tried at 6 kHz to 7 KHz) while the NRSC mask is 10 kHz and was implemented mostly to reduce the 10 kHz heterodyning caused by the increase in US AM stations on the air.

 

[davideduardo]

We might also note that "Onan died prematurely by Yahweh for being wicked." (Wikipedia)

I had an Onan die from low oil levels right in the middle of a hurricane, which was truly rather wicked.

 

[Savage]

File under "Hairsplitting - using a scope and a spectrum analyzer." And confusing the original NRSC mask with the one revised to, ahem, "accomodate" IBOC.

The point here, which neither Eduardo nor TheBiggestA has refuted, is that of course Clear Channel helped develop HD Radio.

You guys sure know a lot about onanism. But then again, as Woody Allen said: "don't knock (it.) It's sex with someone I love."

 

[Savage]

David: to keep the Onan happy, be sure to check your dipstick. Frequently.

 

[Play Freebird]

The NRSC mask revision has little to do with HD... HD requires a 5 kHz audio bandwidth for AM (although it has experimentally been tried at 6 kHz to 7 KHz) while the NRSC mask is 10 kHz and was implemented mostly to reduce the 10 kHz heterodyning caused by the increase in US AM stations on the air.

I understand what you're trying to say here, but would like to make a correction. A 10 kHz heterodyne is heard when the analog carriers of two first-adjacent stations beat in a receiver that has sufficient bandwidth to pass both carriers at once. However, the NRSC mask doesn't require stations to attenuate their carriers, so it would have no effect on this "whistle", which is generated in the receiver.

Well-designed receivers with wide IF filters have a notch filter in the audio stage to reject 10 kHz. My 1957 Stromberg Carlson (with selectable IF bandwidths) has a series LC network for this purpose, but modern receivers would probably use DSP.

Primary benefits of the NRSC mask are:

1) Attenuation of sidebands beyond ~10 kHz from the carrier (aka "splatter"), which could cause second- and third-adjacent groundwave interference in congested areas. I think this is what you meant.

2) A standardized pre-emphasis curve, which recognizes the need for AM stations to boost high frequencies, but allows receivers to include complementary de-emphasis in an attempt to achieve flat response overall, out to about 8-9 kHz (the requirement for the 10 kHz notch prevents much more than that).

Sad to say it, but very few of the receivers sold in the past five years adhere to the NRSC de-emphasis standard; receiver designers have been pressured recently to chop at 3-4 kHz, largely due to complaints about HD self-interference. See this article from the 8/15/2007 Radio World:

http://www.rwonline.com/article/6534

Vicki Stearn, director of corporate communications at Ibiquity, told RW “a few” car radios, mainly in the Daimler-Chrysler family, were produced with “wide-band” receivers, which picked up a broader portion of the spectrum than standard analog radios.
“Unfortunately, that included some of the spectrum used by HD Radio broadcasts, therefore, the hum,” Stearn said. “To our knowledge, a few wide-band receivers were sold, and these radios are no longer being manufactured. Therefore, this is not a serious issue.”

Thanks, Vicki. So even though AM broadcasters have learned AM IBOC is a bad idea and have begun shutting off their digital exciters, we're stuck with these narrowband AM sections in car radios. What a big step backwards.

 

[pocket-radio]

There's not enough oxygen left on earth for this conversation.

Nice try at obfuscating the fact that you did not know who Pittman was, how recently he joined Clear and how successful a businessperson he is. Yours was a classic "ready, fire, aim" posting. We've all been guilty of not knowing the facts... and this is about fact, not opinion... and while it is embarassing at times to admit not knowing, it'a part of life.

Unfortunately, much of your post seems to point to the fact that you don't believe in free enterprise, popular taste and the marketplace's ability to eventually eliminate things people don't want.

Anyway, the internet does not run on oxygen... if anything, it runs on electrons.

You're right! "Hybrid Digital", is the trademark for iBiquity's in-band on-channel (IBOC) digital radio. They own it.

 

[KB1OKL]

I'll take splatter over steady IBOC whoosh any day of the week and miss wide band AM signals. I've been DXing for over 30 years and splatter was NEVER anyway near the problem IBOC whoosh is, it was never as wide either. I can still remember picking up nice strong AM signals on my RCA 811K console (which I still have) when I was a kid and it sounded great.
I have a two year old car with an excellent audio system in it except that the AM section sounds like there's a pillow over the speakers.

 

[davideduardo]

You're right! "Hybrid Digital", is the trademark for iBiquity's in-band on-channel (IBOC) digital radio. They own it.

You are again wrong. iBiquity does not own a trademark to the term "Hybrid Digital" because "HD" does not stand for those two words. From the iBiquity website:

"Note to editors: “HD Radio™” and the HD Radio logo are proprietary trademarks of iBiquity Digital Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. The “HD” in HD Radio™ is part of iBiquity Digital’s brand name for its advanced digital AM/FM system. It does not mean hybrid digital or high-definition digital; both of these are incorrect."

See for yourself at http://www.ibiquity.com/press_room

So... they don't own it after all.

 

[davideduardo]

I understand what you're trying to say here, but would like to make a correction. A 10 kHz heterodyne is heard when the analog carriers of two first-adjacent stations beat in a receiver that has sufficient bandwidth to pass both carriers at once. However, the NRSC mask doesn't require stations to attenuate their carriers, so it would have no effect on this "whistle", which is generated in the receiver.

Well, the idea was that receivers would also be improved to the extent of the mask, matching its characteristics in the way that FM preemphasis was implemente.

The NRSC was to some extent an idea to solve various problems with one solution. First, by limiting the audio bandwidth, interference (splatter) would be reduced. Then, if radios were compliant with the 10 kHz audio bandwidth, there would be a vast inprovement in AM reception since most consumer radios were down about 10 db well before 6 kHz. And at the same time, stations would limit to 10 kHz to avoid interference on wider bandwidth radios, which never, of course, materialized as manufacturers gained nothing from the extra expense. As part of this, the NRSC standard would eliminate, through implementation, hets, because all new receivers would not be capable of tuning them (at least they would be 40 or 50 db down in theory).

Abviously, 10 kHz audio does not heterodyne (it would be interesting to hear two stations running 10 kHz tone 10 kHz apart...) but the NRSC system was intended to deal with this at the same time as improving receivers... something I guess I did not explain precisely enough in my attempt to be brief.

 

[davideduardo]

File under "Hairsplitting - using a scope and a spectrum analyzer." And confusing the original NRSC mask with the one revised to, ahem, "accomodate" IBOC.

I reviewed all my copies of Bob Orban's NRSC papers on AM bandwidth and did not see anything about an NRSC mask for HD. Unless I missed something, the NRSC has no HD mask; iBiquity has an "imposed" mask under which HD will operate if you install it.

The point here, which neither Eduardo nor TheBiggestA has refuted, is that of course Clear Channel helped develop HD Radio.

Yeah, and I helped Harris develop its early automation. All that means is that someone participated in field tests, for mutual benefit. I had Harris engineers at the stations I ran off and on for months when they developed System 9000 Automation and in exchange I got the chance to get consideration for features I wanted.

This is very common, and does not indicate some conspiracy theory.

 

[TheBigA]

The point here, which neither Eduardo nor TheBiggestA has refuted, is that of course Clear Channel helped develop HD Radio.

But the thread here had to do with Bob Pittman, not some historical treatise on who developed HD. We already know your opinion on the subject, and it doesn't change any of the current facts to revive the past, or make some false connection (which pocket-radio did, not you) between a new employee and his company's role in HD Radio. It's just more of the same ditto heads preaching to the same choir about the same thing they don't like. My point is Pittman had no role in the development of HD, he has no role in his company's implimentation of it now, and as a result he didn't mention it at all in the original interview. That's why I said that in the context of this particular thread, it doesn't matter. So let's all move on and find some other reason to hate HD. Because the Bob Pittman angle is a dead end.

 

[davideduardo]

So let's all move on and find some other reason to hate HD. Because the Bob Pittman angle is a dead end.

I seldom reply to your posts, as I am usually in near-100% agreement with them. But here I disagree.

Pittman is not just a good and creative programmer and a good manager of businesses, but also a very good investor. He certainly might look at the costs of maintaining HD vs. future potential and make decision regarding all stations, or a subset such as AMs or FMs based on future revenue, ROI, and what that money might achieve if placed to work elsewhere.

 

[TheBigA]

Re: Clear Channel on Bloomberg

He certainly might look at the costs of maintaining HD vs. future potential and make decision regarding all stations, or a subset such as AMs or FMs based on future revenue, ROI, and what that money might achieve if placed to work elsewhere.

When and if he does, then it will be an appropriate topic to discuss under HD Radio. But until that time, his name simply doesn't need to be brought into this. He has never had anything to do with HD, he never worked at a radio station that has HD, and he isn't responsible for it at CC. I have removed his name from this thread, because it's irrelevent to it.

 

[Play Freebird]

Abviously, 10 kHz audio does not heterodyne (it would be interesting to hear two stations running 10 kHz tone 10 kHz apart...) but the NRSC system was intended to deal with this at the same time as improving receivers... something I guess I did not explain precisely enough in my attempt to be brief.

Understood... and by the way, thanks again for the remarkable job you've done with scanning and posting the old trade journals. This information has been very helpful in piecing together the history of TV and FM pioneers.

Would you mind if we excerpt some advertisements from these magazines and pass them along to other non-commercial broadcast history websites? I would be happy to credit you as the source. Also, if you have any plans to scan BM/E, I have a fairly good collection of issues dating from the mid-'60s which I can donate to the cause.

 

[davideduardo]

Understood... and by the way, thanks again for the remarkable job you've done with scanning and posting the old trade journals. This information has been very helpful in piecing together the history of TV and FM pioneers.

Thanks. I became concerned that more and more libraries are disposing of this material based on infrequency of access. The unfortunate thing is that we seem to be ending up with nearly no surviving copies save a few hard-to-get-into university libraries. Knowing you are finding the effort useful is really rewarding.

Would you mind if we excerpt some advertisements from these magazines and pass them along to other non-commercial broadcast history websites? I would be happy to credit you as the source. Also, if you have any plans to scan BM/E, I have a fairly good collection of issues dating from the mid-'60s which I can donate to the cause.

Can you e-mail me at the "contact" on the site? The publications are password protected (newest ones being uploaded in protected form) and I can get you anything you need...

I'm at the end point in the preparation of the things I have. I'd love to get the BM/E's as a next project. And I'll keep looking for an Audimax 400 manual...

 

[pocket-radio]

You're right! "Hybrid Digital", is the trademark for iBiquity's in-band on-channel (IBOC) digital radio. They own it.

You are again wrong. iBiquity does not own a trademark to the term "Hybrid Digital" because "HD" does not stand for those two words. From the iBiquity website:

"Note to editors: “HD Radio™” and the HD Radio logo are proprietary trademarks of iBiquity Digital Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. The “HD” in HD Radio™ is part of iBiquity Digital’s brand name for its advanced digital AM/FM system. It does not mean hybrid digital or high-definition digital; both of these are incorrect."

See for yourself at http://www.ibiquity.com/press_room

So... they don't own it after all.

Just play another song, thats what the research says. ;-)

 

[RadeoEngineer]

You're right! "Hybrid Digital", is the trademark for iBiquity's in-band on-channel (IBOC) digital radio. They own it.

You are again wrong. iBiquity does not own a trademark to the term "Hybrid Digital" because "HD" does not stand for those two words. From the iBiquity website:

"Note to editors: “HD Radio™” and the HD Radio logo are proprietary trademarks of iBiquity Digital Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. The “HD” in HD Radio™ is part of iBiquity Digital’s brand name for its advanced digital AM/FM system. It does not mean hybrid digital or high-definition digital; both of these are incorrect."

See for yourself at http://www.ibiquity.com/press_room

So... they don't own it after all.

Just play another song, thats what the research says. ;-)

And don't forget to tag it for key, tempo, spirit, and male/female transition compatability.