• 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

"Desperately Seeking Portable HD"

OldGringo said:
vsa said:
I prefer to ride CAM-D, a horse that keeps the promises it makes, almost doubles a station's coverage, does not trespass on its neighbors' property, rides like a champion 24-hours-a-day, does not require major additional new expenditures, has no time delay, and even sounds better than your horse.
Click to expand...

The problem with Cam-D is that it is not a single chip solution. Manufacturers will not add a separate AM chip for this system if it even increases the cots by a quarter. In fact, most would like to eliminate AM entirely as they realize the reality that AM is not much used by the main purchasers of new technology. The SandDisk MP3 player has no AM, but has FM. The upcoming Microsoft player will have Fm, but no AM. The add-oin for the iPod is FM only. This is an easily spottable trend.

AMs biggest hope is that it can ride the HD bandwagon over the years, and people will find better quality AM via receivers they purchased for FM and HD-2 channels. THis is also aleap of faith, as there are so few viable AMs in the US that there is never going to be a perfect solution for keeping the band alive... as I have said, most markets only have one or two viable AMs and these are slowly suffering a loss in the sales demos because most persons under 45 have little if any use for AM.

No, it is not easy. But the best probablity of any success is with a system that is the same form both AM and FM.
Click to expand...

Since, in your words, AM is dying, IBOC will not help the situation - IBOC will only serve to antagonize almost 50% of the listener base, due to poor propagation/coverage properties and penetration into structures. AM is suffering from lack of listeners of all ages. The lack of portable IBOC receivers, due to power supply requirements, for the forseeable future, has put "the nail in the coffin" for IBOC, along with Satellite Radio, Wireless Internet (the 3G network is now up and running and WiMax will be soon), Internet Radio, cell phone streaming, iPods, iRadio, etc...

OldGringo = David Eduardo Frackelton Gleason
 
OLDGRINGO/DAVID WROTE: "The SandDisk MP3 player has no AM, but has FM. The upcoming Microsoft player will have Fm, but no AM. The add-oin for the iPod is FM only. This is an easily spottable trend."

You are talking here about ANALOG tuners embedded in these device. FM frequencies are much more resistant than AM frequencies are to the inteference that eminates from these computerized devices. AM is left out for technical resaons, not for the reason you state. That's why AM must go digital.
 
OldGringo said:
vsa said:
I prefer to ride CAM-D, a horse that keeps the promises it makes, almost doubles a station's coverage, does not trespass on its neighbors' property, rides like a champion 24-hours-a-day, does not require major additional new expenditures, has no time delay, and even sounds better than your horse.
Click to expand...

The problem with Cam-D is that it is not a single chip solution. Manufacturers will not add a separate AM chip for this system if it even increases the cots by a quarter. In fact, most would like to eliminate AM entirely as they realize the reality that AM is not much used by the main purchasers of new technology. The SandDisk MP3 player has no AM, but has FM. The upcoming Microsoft player will have Fm, but no AM. The add-oin for the iPod is FM only. This is an easily spottable trend.

AMs biggest hope is that it can ride the HD bandwagon over the years, and people will find better quality AM via receivers they purchased for FM and HD-2 channels. THis is also aleap of faith, as there are so few viable AMs in the US that there is never going to be a perfect solution for keeping the band alive... as I have said, most markets only have one or two viable AMs and these are slowly suffering a loss in the sales demos because most persons under 45 have little if any use for AM.

No, it is not easy. But the best probablity of any success is with a system that is the same form both AM and FM.
Click to expand...

Chomp on this, for a while, Eduardo:

"Motorola Debuts Pre-Release Deal With Sony BMG"

"The growth in mobile services, from ringtones to Motorola's iRadio, is astounding and continues to provide groundbreaking opportunities that benefit our artists and super serve their fans... As previously reported, Motorola's iRadio service offers 600 channels of music and talk and it allows listeners to transfer downloadable, Internet radio programming from one location to the next via Bluetooth technology. Warner Music Group and Universal also have inked deals to provide music to iRadio."

http://fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=283544
 
OldGringo said:
The problem with Cam-D is that it is not a single chip solution.
Click to expand...

Oh puh-lease. The days of one technology per chip are long gone. A single chip in my cellphone supports two different air access technologies (GSM/GPRS/EDGE and WCDMA/UMTS/HSDPA) on four frequencies. There are also separate processor cores for each of the following: for audio codecs, camera processing, graphics, video codecs, and more, all on a single die.

Supporting the Ibiquity system because it's the only one at present to have an AM and FM solution on a single chip is one of the poorest reasons I can think of.
 
awj223 said:
OldGringo said:
The problem with Cam-D is that it is not a single chip solution.
Click to expand...

Oh puh-lease. The days of one technology per chip are long gone. A single chip in my cellphone supports two different air access technologies (GSM/GPRS/EDGE and WCDMA/UMTS/HSDPA) on four frequencies. There are also separate processor cores for each of the following: for audio codecs, camera processing, graphics, video codecs, and more, all on a single die.

Supporting the Ibiquity system because it's the only one at present to have an AM and FM solution on a single chip is one of the poorest reasons I can think of.
Click to expand...

Why would a manufacturer buy the iBiquity chip for HD, and also add some other technology on another, with the increase in ehat, power demands, etc? Manufacturers would not add any AM were it left in their hands.
 
OldGringo said:
Why would a manufacturer buy the iBiquity chip for HD, and also add some other technology on another, with the increase in ehat, power demands, etc? Manufacturers would not add any AM were it left in their hands.
Click to expand...

You misunderstand, it wouldn't be an iBiquity HD chip + another chip. It would be some digital FM technology + some digital AM technology on a single chip die. The two technologies could be intellectual property of two different companies (e.g. FMeXtra + Cam-D). For example, there are cellphone chips that include IP from Real (RealPlayer video), Microsoft (Windows Media Video), the OpenGL standard, etc., etc., with the chip designed by a third party (e.g. Qualcomm) and manufactured by a fourth (Qualcomm's foundry). The phone manufacturer then buys the chips from Qualcomm as a single solution and puts it in a phone. Sticking everything on a single die means that the chip designer can make all sorts of optimizations, and the manufacturer then buys the chip as a single solution.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom