Cumulus To Shutter HD on FM?

[travisl5678]

If Cumulus is turning of the HD2s, will this be the end of 99X and Funny 102.5

 

[JohnnyElectron]

What's bizzaro, is that Cumulus has the HD off on their two highest rated stations in their cluster, but it's on all the rest of the FM's. Never added it to their AMs. They don't even have RDS on their top station, which IS the highest rated station in the market the past 10 years straight!

I believe that they're in the "if it's broke, don't fix it. Don't reboot it. Leave it off. Costs too much on our 50KW to run".

 

[tomservo]

Which station is that, Johnny, with no RDS or HD?

 

[JohnnyElectron]

WKKO-FM; #1 for 14 years running, but no HD for several month, no RDS ever, nothing but plain vanilla analog.
At least Clear Channel runs HD on all their stations (AM's too) and the FM's all have an HD-2 PLUS dynamic PAD and RDS song/artist listings (except for brokered/AT40 shows). FWIW; the HD-1 audio goes from great to crap when the HD kicks in on the Clear Channel stations with HD2; stereo image is next to nothing, high end goes away, and no 'presence'. HD2 is almost better as there's no nice sounding analog to lose!

Neither CC AM runs stereo, which is too bad as one AM (WCWA) brokers-out a substantial amount of musical programming (smooth jazz daily AM drive), Weekends from 6AM-noon (and then some), and stereo there would be sweet - too bad that they don't do it.

 

[Barry]

In the New York metro, Cumulus' WEBE 108 in Bridgeport CT has not been broadcasting in HD for weeks. The website for the popular station, which has a potent signal, has absolutely no mention of HD radio, not even the tiny space customarily devoted to it.
Another local Cumulus station, WFAS 103.9 near White Plains NY, has not been heard in HD for about a week. Its website also does not say anything about HD radio.
But numerous stations in the area had stopped broadcasting in HD or shut down an HD2 for a while, only to bring it back once the unreliable equipment was repaired.

 

[davideduardo]

But numerous stations in the area had stopped broadcasting in HD or shut down an HD2 for a while, only to bring it back once the unreliable equipment was repaired.

I trust you know that the "unreliable" equipment is not made by iBiquity, but by various transmitter manufacturers like Nautel and Harris?

The main reason for HD to be off is the use of a transmitter that is not equipped for HD... an auxiliary, an alternate main, etc. HD's arrival was soon met by the recession, and I don't think too many stations spent on having a redundant HD system.

 

[Savage]

Recession or no, most management people aren't going to spend money on redundant transmitting systems to try to reach a nonexistent audience.

No audience now. And not much prospect of one in the forseeable future. If ever.

(Full disclosure: this post is partially a test. Pause....tick.....tick......tick...... )

 

[stacker]

I trust you know that the "unreliable" equipment is not made by iBiquity, but by various transmitter manufacturers like Nautel and Harris?

Huh? I've owned Nautel transmitters for 15 years. They never fail. Hardly ever, anyway. Who supplies the HD encoder/exciter?

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

I trust you know that the "unreliable" equipment is not made by iBiquity, but by various transmitter manufacturers like Nautel and Harris?

...and if Nautel and Harris can't make HD work reliably (and remember the circuitry and firmware/software have to meet iBiquity specs per the licensing agreement, even if iBiquity doesn't manufacture it), what hope is there?

The metaphor about lipstick on a pig comes to mind...

 

[tomservo]

I trust you know that the "unreliable" equipment is not made by iBiquity, but by various transmitter manufacturers like Nautel and Harris?

...and if Nautel and Harris can't make HD work reliably (and remember the circuitry and firmware/software have to meet iBiquity specs per the licensing agreement, even if iBiquity doesn't manufacture it), what hope is there?

The metaphor about lipstick on a pig comes to mind...

I dunno. How much computer software and programming are in modern transmitters? Being outside the industry I've never seen a spanking new one, but the ones I have seen didn't have anything resembling a modern computer inside (or even a rack mounted PC). Therefore it could be possible that these otherwise highly experienced transmitter manufacturers are having to contract out of fuddle their way through complex software programming, which may explain the unreliable nature of that aspect of the system.

The way I look at it the big weakness on that end of iBiquity's scheme is that nothing software based runs perfectly, not even the vaunted Linux. Bad programming can fell even the most robust of computer devices. Sometimes programs on my PC crash, often they crash on my "smart" phone. Even my mp3 player's overlaid Rockbox software sometimes hiccups and locks the device up. It's the nature of complex programming.

On the other hand if these same manufacturers can make a DTV transmitter with a low failure rate, then there's no excuse for an HD box to be so troublesome. It should be slightly simpler.

 

[DaveBayArea]

I dunno. How much computer software and programming are in modern transmitters?

Well, to the best of my knowledge the 1st microprocessor-controlled transmitter was the Harris SX series. Early '80s? The new Nautels are very much computer controlled. To the point where you run them with a web browser.

On the other hand if these same manufacturers can make a DTV transmitter with a low failure rate, then there's no excuse for an HD box to be so troublesome. It should be slightly simpler.

There are examples of highly reliable computers all over the place. Some time ago I had to replace batteries in a UPS. It broke my heart to take down the web server/file server it was running. That machine had over 1700 days of uptime. The thermostat in your house is probably a small computer. Simple software can be written without bugs. It's just a matter of how many scenarios the programmer has to allow for and which ones he didn't think of.

DTV transmitters (and the associated receivers) are surely not without fault. But I do have to agree that they seem to be much more stable. There was lots more effort put in to that standard than there was for HD Radio, however.

Dave B.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

How much computer software and programming are in modern transmitters?[\quote]

Lots. Microprocessor control of the transmitter has been around for years. However, HD is entirely software-dependent. The HD exciter is a PC running Linux.

 

[tomservo]

Lots. Microprocessor control of the transmitter has been around for years. However, HD is entirely software-dependent. The HD exciter is a PC running Linux.

Perhaps it's not so much that the software is fault so much as not using a dedicated closed system?

 

[SirRoxalot]

Do you use the Internet? If so, odds are that the majority of sites you visit are running on Linux servers, and uptime is 99.999.

The problem ain't with the computer, or the operating system...

 

[Savage]

Yeah, ditto that on the reliability of Nautel transmitters. Our AMPFET-25 is the most bulletproof, stone-reliable box I've ever put on the air. After all, consider Nautel's heritage, which is reason for the company's original name, Nautical Electronics. Long before they made broadcast transmitters they built radio-beacon navigation transmitters which were designed to sit unmanned out on lonely rocks in the north Atlantic as a replacement for lighthouses. Those early solid-state boxes were designed to sit for months and months without attention or maintenance.

Also - I'm missing where Barry made the claim that iBiquity made the HD exciters and gear.....??