• 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

Could HD multicasts bring Standards to FM and even revive B/EZ?

R

Radiogeek500

It appears that standards may be getting new life on FM radio thanks to HD Radio's multicasting. Saul Levine here in LA has put KKGO on 105.1-2 and CC has debuted Real Oldies on 93.9-II in Chicago(real oldies basically plays the pre beatles stuff). But one must wonder if another format that has long been dead may actually see a whole new light, if at least temporary until the radios get mass distribution, B/EZ. I think it could be quite possible to see B/EZ in a few markets on the side channel. We shall see.<P ID="signature">______________
The old skool show@noon with Jeff G and DJ Rawn
Only on Power 106(KPWR Los Angeles)

JOSH, Moderating the whole Radio-Info radio state of California and Indiana too!</P>
 
> It appears that standards may be getting new life on FM
> radio thanks to HD Radio's multicasting.

A lot is going to depend on how "multicast channels" are
required to identify. If hourly ID's are all that's required
I'd expect to hear them really rushed and barely deviated
(some call it "modulated") so as not to dilute the brand
identity of the main channel. Even then, I would never
expect the #1 rocker in a market to put B/EZ or ANYTHING
too far removed from the primary channel's format on a
seconary channel. Of course a station doing standards
might be OK with B/EZ on a secondary channel.

Over 30 years ago I was PD at a B/EZ AM. Station had
the possibility of buying a struggling FM. I wanted to
program seriously hard rock on the FM but with totally
different call letters, different voices, even different
sales staff so as not to dilute the brand image of the
AM. Management couldn't see that FM would ever go anywhere
and putting anything other than classical or B/EZ on FM?
Heresey! One of the primary reasons I left radio for TV!
So you see why I feel what will ultimately happen is tied
to the ID rules. <P ID="signature">______________
So who investigates Special Prosecutors when
their work is done and second-guessing begins?</P>
 
> It appears that standards may be getting new life on FM
> radio thanks to HD Radio's multicasting. Saul Levine here in
> LA has put KKGO on 105.1-2 and CC has debuted Real Oldies on
> 93.9-II in Chicago(real oldies basically plays the pre
> beatles stuff). But one must wonder if another format that
> has long been dead may actually see a whole new light, if at
> least temporary until the radios get mass distribution,
> B/EZ. I think it could be quite possible to see B/EZ in a
> few markets on the side channel. We shall see.
>
I hope so but I don't really see that happening on hdradio.As long as corporations own a lot of stations over an area it probebly won't.Take for instance cumulus media.They own over 100 stations in GA and Fla.When they took over WJCL in Savannah it went from b/ez to country.The same happened with WGPC in Albany in WPCH in Atlanta except Wpch went to lite hits aka soft rock.If it does happen that hdradio starts sprouting up b/ez stations that would be cool because hdradio will list song and artist much like sat radio receivers.
 
> It appears that standards may be getting new life on FM
> radio thanks to HD Radio's multicasting. Saul Levine here in
> LA has put KKGO on 105.1-2 and CC has debuted Real Oldies on
> 93.9-II in Chicago(real oldies basically plays the pre
> beatles stuff). But one must wonder if another format that
> has long been dead may actually see a whole new light, if at
> least temporary until the radios get mass distribution,
> B/EZ. I think it could be quite possible to see B/EZ in a
> few markets on the side channel. We shall see.
>

I wouldn't hold my breath. AFAIK, there are NO receivers currently available and even if they were, the demographics who'd be drawn to either B/Ez or "real" oldies aren't usually the early adopters of new technology.
 
> I wouldn't hold my breath. AFAIK, there are NO receivers
> currently available and even if they were, the demographics
> who'd be drawn to either B/Ez or "real" oldies aren't
> usually the early adopters of new technology.

I suspect that HD may actually make things worse for standards stations. These days, most Standards / BEZ broadcasters are relegated to the AM band. If HD flourishes, and these stations elect to convert, they will have to limit their analog frequency response to a mere 5 KHz. That's not really adequate for music, so until such time as there are a significant number of HD radios that can enjoy decent fidelity, they will be very unappealing to listen to. Keep in mind, we are talking about stations whose entire focus is music.

Further, IBOC (HD) produces sideband interference on each adjacent channel. This manifests itself as a loud hiss on either side of the stations assigned frequency. In many instances will render smaller stations unreceivable except within their "protected contour" which is typically way less area then most stations normal coverage area. It is going to make things very difficult for small broadcasters.

Thirdly, as pointed out above, the demographics of the listeners who like these formats are not exactly what you'd call "Early Adopters." Unless they buy a new car with a radio that includes HD technology, they will be listening on their old fashioned tube type AM radio at home. As a group, they are unlikely to purchase new radios in any significant numbers. If the target audience can't (or won't) receive the signal, there is little point in broadcasting it.
 
All true. But the AARP crowd really wants to hear "their music" (Nostalgia, Adult Standards, EZ Listening, Big Band or Real Oldies) multi-channel HD radio could be their "killer app." People don't buy technology, they buy entertainment. 75 years ago, people bought radio to hear Amos n' Andy. 55 years ago they bought TV for Howdy Doody and Uncle Miltie. Then, older people were among the last hold-outs for TV, until Lawrence Welk came along. 30 years ago people bought FM radios for progressive rock, album oriented rock, and fewer commercials (classical fans bought FM radios even earlier). And people are buying satellite radio not for 100 music channels but for the handful of channels that play EXACTLY what they want to hear. HD radios will become standard and the prices will come down.

But the question is if radio station has four channels, will they want to program to demographically undesireable listeners any more than they do now with one channel per station?


>
> Thirdly, as pointed out above, the demographics of the
> listeners who like these formats are not exactly what you'd
> call "Early Adopters." Unless they buy a new car with a
> radio that includes HD technology, they will be listening on
> their old fashioned tube type AM radio at home. As a group,
> they are unlikely to purchase new radios in any significant
> numbers. If the target audience can't (or won't) receive the
> signal, there is little point in broadcasting it.
>
 
> People don't buy technology, they buy
> entertainment.

That's why satellite is making some inroads. That and the fact that a suitable receiver is coming as standard equipment on many new cars. If you follow the money, you'll note that GM owns a major stake in XM. Do they own part of Ibiquity too?
>
> But the question is if radio station has four channels, will
> they want to program to demographically undesireable
> listeners any more than they do now with one channel per
> station?

Good question. The Pubcasters are banking on broadcasting to niche markets using HD. They call it "Tomorrow Radio." That's why most NPR stations are making the digital transition right now. From their point of view, it makes a lot of sense, because they are not completely ratings driven. The only problem is, right now there are precious few radios that can receive these additional channels.

When it comes to commercial radio, will broadcasters be willing to divide their audience? Right now, most say yes, but will they really? Given that there is a finite number of people who listen to radio, you can only divide the pie into so many slices. The hope, of course that this new service will create new listeners, in which case, everyone wins.

More likely, the bean counters will figure out some creative accounting procedure to justify multiple streams, but more than likely they won't be thinking of quality or niche programming as part of the equation.
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by KZQX on 08/11/05 10:48 PM.</FONT></P>
 
> When it comes to commercial radio, will broadcasters be
> willing to divide their audience? Right now, most say yes,
> but will they really? Given that there is a finite number
> of people who listen to radio, you can only divide the pie
> into so many slices.

Interesting concept, division...

Even with the big number of "slices" there are still unserved
niches but I sincerely believe they're too small to warrant
any investment. Perhaps, in some markets, there'd be ethnic
groups that might be willing to, in effect, pay for carriage
of programs.

But this takes me back to another time in an east coast market
where two (AM) rockers had a deathgrip on #1 and #2. To try to
compete in that format would have been nuts without an immense
budget for talent and promotion. Even then, the cost would
have been so great that it couldn't have become profitable.

I had a scheme for the #3 AM, where I was PD with B/EZ...
popular at the time...to buy up a failed FM and program it
in direct opposition to #1 and #2. Not hoping to take their
audience; just to divide it. Since it would have been run
automated with very little effort at selling time, it would
have had a certain appeal to the demo that made up the big
numbers for #1 and #2. The hope was that it would divide
(or as I called it, dilute) their audience to the point where
#3 might cheat it's way into #2 and even, in certain dayparts,
#1. At least get in the picture for some agency bucks.

So, if the risk of screwing up one's brand identify (for the
primary station) were not too great, might a clever management
use multiple formats to each claim a portion of a competitor's
audience? I don't want to go into detailed speculation but
invite others to toy with this....<P ID="signature">______________
God save us from those who would save us from ourselves! P-l-e-a-s-e!!!!!</P>
 
> All true. But the AARP crowd really wants to hear "their
> music" (Nostalgia, Adult Standards, EZ Listening, Big Band
> or Real Oldies) multi-channel HD radio could be their
> "killer app." People don't buy technology, they buy
> entertainment. 75 years ago, people bought radio to hear
> Amos n' Andy. 55 years ago they bought TV for Howdy Doody
> and Uncle Miltie. Then, older people were among the last
> hold-outs for TV, until Lawrence Welk came along. 30 years
> ago people bought FM radios for progressive rock, album
> oriented rock, and fewer commercials (classical fans bought
> FM radios even earlier). And people are buying satellite
> radio not for 100 music channels but for the handful of
> channels that play EXACTLY what they want to hear. HD
> radios will become standard and the prices will come down.
>

But what kind of fidelity can we expect from these secondary channels? I'm led to believe that they'll be the equivalent of web streams, which sound dreadful to my ears...OK on el-cheapo computer speakers, but not on a decent sound system. Even XM which streams at a much higher bitrate seems to have audible artifacts at times.



> But the question is if radio station has four channels, will
> they want to program to demographically undesireable
> listeners any more than they do now with one channel per
> station?
>

I think it's safe to say that they'll be automated jukeboxes...even more so than the main (bread & butter) signal.
 
> > It appears that standards may be getting new life on FM
> > radio thanks to HD Radio's multicasting.
>
> A lot is going to depend on how "multicast channels" are
> required to identify. If hourly ID's are all that's
> required
> I'd expect to hear them really rushed and barely deviated
> (some call it "modulated") so as not to dilute the brand
> identity of the main channel. Even then, I would never
> expect the #1 rocker in a market to put B/EZ or ANYTHING
> too far removed from the primary channel's format on a
> seconary channel. Of course a station doing standards
> might be OK with B/EZ on a secondary channel.
>
> Over 30 years ago I was PD at a B/EZ AM. Station had
> the possibility of buying a struggling FM. I wanted to
> program seriously hard rock on the FM but with totally
> different call letters, different voices, even different
> sales staff so as not to dilute the brand image of the
> AM. Management couldn't see that FM would ever go anywhere
> and putting anything other than classical or B/EZ on FM?
> Heresey! One of the primary reasons I left radio for TV!
> So you see why I feel what will ultimately happen is tied
> to the ID rules.
>
If they bring back b/ez on hd I might buy it when the price comes down.Also Am is suppose to sound like Fm does today on HD.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom