even harris says traditional broadcast days are numbered

[700WLW]

"What are you babbling about ? Many consumers, would disagree with you on the supposed "CD quality" sound, which no one cares about, anyway. Well, you and other pro-IBOC'ers sure act, as if HD Radio will be the great savior - looks, as if the experts, including Ramsey, disagree with you. HD Radio, as the big savior, is exactly what the HD Radio Cartel is banking-on (remember, they are spending $500,000,000 to promote this junk technology)."


And again as so many others have pointed out, it's this kind of insulting language filled with invectives which causes the discussions to degrade and end up in shouting matches. Moving an otherwise worth discussion to another thread in the take it outside room isn't really the answer because it only gives those who seek to limit adult discussions what it is they want.

Oh, this is nothing, compared to what it used to be like. Most of his posts, contain this type of nonsense - it is called, obfuscating the original issue.

Most of my posts? Sir, please grow up. This is my third or fourth post on this board. The other thread I've participated in was about amplifiers to improve reception.

I was quoting Walker, not you (see, reply #16).

 

[R.F. Burns]

Then please next time address your Reponses naming the individual, that will help keep the rhetoric down in here.

 

[Mike Walker]

As for the cd quality sound, it can be proven in double-blind tests (96kbps aac+ vs uncompressed 16 bit 44.1kbps linear pcm). Anyone who is "absolutely certain" they could pass that test with flying colors might well be shocked! I'd wager a month's pay that for the vast majority of people, results on an a/b/x comparison would prove statistically to be nothing more than mere guesswork.

"Nobody cares" about the sound quality if HD Radio? More than eleven hundred radio stations care. More manufacturers care every month. Why would audio be less important in radio than television and cinema? Audio is literally the whole message on radio. Of course it's MORE important. Noise, harmonic distortion, "wow and flutter", multipath distortion, all are banished by digital audio. Not only that, digital audio allows you to hear deeper into the soundstage. You hear, for instance, not just the musicians and the notes being played, but subtle variations in timbre, pitch, and inflection that were obscured before by noise and distortion. Digital audio brings one closer to the performance. Music lovers care about such things. That which brings one closer to the performance IS BY DEFINITION BETTER. As long as people listen to music on radio, technology which makes music sound better is important.

As for the money being spent on promoting the "defective technology"...needn't you worry about that. It's virtually all being "spent" in RADIO ADVERTISING. Stations are using their own unsold inventory (and every station has some) to promote HD. HD is being "sold" directly to those who will benefit from it....RADIO LISTENERS! This technique works quite well, thank you. Ask a car dealer (ever wondered why there are so many car ads on radio? It's the most effective way to reach people IN THEIR CARS...where they are most succeptible to a pitch for a NEW CAR! Ditto radio...where more radio listening is done than anywhere else).

So don't worry about "our" (broadcasters) expenditures promoting this "defective technology". We can "spend" many millions on RADIO, and not feel any ill effects, Dude! Perhaps that is a point that detractors really miss. Radio advertising (any advertising, really) works through repetition. You literally hammer the message home until it PENETRATES the psyche of the consumer. Just as Alcoa wouldn't sweat an expendature of aluminum, or GE of lightbulbs, why the hell should radio stations worry about an "expendature" of advertising? Even that is a poor analogy because lightbulbs and aluminum cost SOMETHING to manufacturer. As the owner of a station I once worked at was fond of saying "What does airtime cost me? I've got PLENTY!"

 

[dbdigital]

I haven't heard ANYONE who's actually in radio claim that HD is a "savior". That's silly. Only programming can destroy, or save radio. Color didn't "save" movies, or (later) tv. Widescreen didn't "save" movies, nor did stereo sound...later surround sound, digital, and discrete surround, or any technical advancement. Windex doesn't "save" a sunny day. But properly applied, it can sure help you appreciate it more.

That's all technical improvements are...a "cleaner window" to the original sound (or picture). An augmentation. That's it. Radio is programming-driven. So claiming that HD isn't a "savior" is quite silly...as I've not heard anyone actually IN radio claim that it is!

Radio doesn't need saving. It DOES need IMPROVEMENT. HD is just that. But just as I'd rather watch, say, CSI Miami on a black and white portable than American Idol on a 1080p front projector (and anyone who watches CSI Miami knows how important color is!), I'd rather listen to great programming on a tabletop portable than crap on the finest component system. Of course, great programming AND great fidelity are the best combination!

You might as well claim in banner letters "TOAST ISN'T SAVIOR OF AMERICANS!" Who the hell said it was? But with butter and strawberry jelly, it's a pretty tasty "augmentation" to breakfast!

Perhaps no one has come out and directly referred to HD Radio as the saviour of terrestrial radio, but many have come close by overselling what HD Radio will offer while missing the larger issue of content.

Notice this quote from an NAB news release from April 2005 when the NRSC approved IBOC:

"Charles Morgan, NRSC Chairman, said "Today's action by the NRSC will expand the possibilities for FM broadcasters, providing improved quality signals plus multicasting and enhanced datacasting opportunities." Milford Smith, NRSC DAB Subcommittee co-chairman (and recipient of the 2005 NAB Engineering Achievement award for Radio) added, "AM broadcasters and their listeners will be amazed by the quality improvement. AM broadcasts minus the noise and static that typically plague the band is an astounding technological breakthrough for listeners." Mike Bergman, NRSC DAB Subcommittee co chairman said, "Consumers can look forward to exciting new products as a result of this industry milestone." Paul Feinberg, IBOC Standards Development Working Group Chair added, "In addition to new program streams, song title and artist information along with other text and visual data available on new products are sure to wow consumers.""

Nearly two years later and the public has yet to be 'wowed' by HD Radio. A yawn seems to be more the response, especially as the satcasters basically own the public awareness of digital radio.

db

 

[700WLW]

Then please next time address your Reponses naming the individual, that will help keep the rhetoric down in here.

When, you hit the "quote" key, it highlights the person, to whom one is responding to, in blue - naming the individual, is then, unnecessary, as I did. This, is ridiculous !

 

[700WLW]

As for the cd quality sound, it can be proven in double-blind tests (96kbps aac+ vs uncompressed 16 bit 44.1kbps linear pcm). Anyone who is "absolutely certain" they could pass that test with flying colors might well be shocked! I'd wager a month's pay that for the vast majority of people, results on an a/b/x comparison would prove statistically to be nothing more than mere guesswork.

"Nobody cares" about the sound quality if HD Radio? More than eleven hundred radio stations care. More manufacturers care every month. Why would audio be less important in radio than television and cinema? Audio is literally the whole message on radio. Of course it's MORE important. Noise, harmonic distortion, "wow and flutter", multipath distortion, all are banished by digital audio. Not only that, digital audio allows you to hear deeper into the soundstage. You hear, for instance, not just the musicians and the notes being played, but subtle variations in timbre, pitch, and inflection that were obscured before by noise and distortion. Digital audio brings one closer to the performance. Music lovers care about such things. That which brings one closer to the performance IS BY DEFINITION BETTER. As long as people listen to music on radio, technology which makes music sound better is important.

As for the money being spent on promoting the "defective technology"...needn't you worry about that. It's virtually all being "spent" in RADIO ADVERTISING. Stations are using their own unsold inventory (and every station has some) to promote HD. HD is being "sold" directly to those who will benefit from it....RADIO LISTENERS! This technique works quite well, thank you. Ask a car dealer (ever wondered why there are so many car ads on radio? It's the most effective way to reach people IN THEIR CARS...where they are most succeptible to a pitch for a NEW CAR! Ditto radio...where more radio listening is done than anywhere else).

So don't worry about "our" (broadcasters) expenditures promoting this "defective technology". We can "spend" many millions on RADIO, and not feel any ill effects, Dude! Perhaps that is a point that detractors really miss. Radio advertising (any advertising, really) works through repetition. You literally hammer the message home until it PENETRATES the psyche of the consumer. Just as Alcoa wouldn't sweat an expendature of aluminum, or GE of lightbulbs, why the hell should radio stations worry about an "expendature" of advertising? Even that is a poor analogy because lightbulbs and aluminum cost SOMETHING to manufacturer. As the owner of a station I once worked at was fond of saying "What does airtime cost me? I've got PLENTY!"

Do, I really need to go quoting consumer-after-consumer, or article-after-article again, about the false claims of "CD quality" sound ? As I just posted, a link to JERRY DEL COLLIANO's, Professor of Music Industry at USC Former TV and Radio Broadcaster Founder of Inside Radio, recent blog:

"How To Do An Intervention On Radio"

"And last, but not least (as the old trite phrase goes) the folly of HD Radio. I say folly because HD radio as a savior for the medium is a joke. As an engineering enhancement it's not a bad upgrade, but it won't save radio from itself. One reason is because few people care about it. Terrestrial radio dragged its feet on this for years and now its too late. But don't be guilty. Today's consumers like convenience, fresh innovative programming -- not fidelity. Just watch Gen Y listen to the Internet on their puny computer speakers or enjoy their highly-compressed iPods with low tech ear buds."

http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com/2007/01/how-to-do-intervention-on-radio.html

Jerry, has daily contact, with Gen Y, at USC. Consumers, sure have voted, with their wallets, concerning HD Radio ! Again, I have no idea, what you are ranting about - obfuscation rules !

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Mike Walker said:

It's illegal to use commercial radio as background music in a public place without paying ascap/bmi licensing. A subscription model would take care of that.

How so?
For public performance, ASCAP AND BMI (for authors), still have to be paid, plus Sound Exchange for artists.

 

[Mike Walker]

Supercaster I don't own a restaurant or business, so I'm a little fuzzy on the exact legalities (consult a lawyer). No radio station would discourage it (obviously). But apparently the law is that you may play a radio for entertainment (on a commercial station) for public entertainment ONLY if it's on a single speaker (two for stereo). You can't pipe it throughout a business on multiple speakers, for instance.

The ASCAP/BMI licensing is for personal performance only, not for entertainment in groups. Again I'm fuzzy on the legalities (not a lawyer). It's one of those things you learn in radio. I know it's illegal (Paul Harvey even did a show once on how stupid the law is), just as I know murder is illegal, but not being a lawyer It'd be difficult for me to put my hands on the exact wording of the law (it should be possible to google it).

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Serious question here. If radio days are numbered as has been stated, which would indicate that radio as a business must do something in an atttempt to survive and it must be done now, what is the reason that you are against the implimentation of Ibiquity's HD system? If you work in the industry, how will HD effect you? In other words is it you as a small station employee who feels that you will be edged out due to your stations already limited coverage? Are you an AM stereo fan who believes that analogue AM stereo is the best way to go and that under ideal conditions and with the right equipment analogue AM provides the best possible sound. Do you work for one of Ibiquity's competitors? Is it you the DXer, who feels that whether radio survives or not isn't the issue. The issue to you is whether you can pursue your hobby as you have in the past? Or are you working for one of radios other competitors, be it either satellite company or a internet broadcaster and you can't wait for radio to go off the air so that you'll finally be on an equal level with those station owners and you'll be more popular then what they broadcast, if given the chance. If you are pro HD the same goes for you. Do you work for Ibiquity or one of the major owners who are in bed with Ibiquity? Honesty would go a long way to resolve the friction that occurs in here when the two opposite sides (Anti HD Pro HD) come into contact.

Wrong, again, and again, etc.
None of the above.
Keep guessing.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Supercaster I don't own a restaurant or business, so I'm a little fuzzy on the exact legalities (consult a lawyer). No radio station would discourage it (obviously). But apparently the law is that you may play a radio for entertainment (on a commercial station) for public entertainment ONLY if it's on a single speaker (two for stereo). You can't pipe it throughout a business on multiple speakers, for instance.

The ASCAP/BMI licensing is for personal performance only, not for entertainment in groups. Again I'm fuzzy on the legalities (not a lawyer). It's one of those things you learn in radio. I know it's illegal (Paul Harvey even did a show once on how stupid the law is), just as I know murder is illegal, but not being a lawyer It'd be difficult for me to put my hands on the exact wording of the law (it should be possible to google it).

ASCAP and BMI licenses are also required for public performances of lyrics and music. Radio stations' agreements with rights organizations do not cover public performances, just broadcast to individuals. An additional fee and agreement are required by the person or organization responsible for the public performance.

 

[Mike Walker]

Exactly my point Supercaster, put more succinctly. Thanks.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Exactly my point Supercaster, put more succinctly. Thanks.

You are welcome, I'm sure.

 

[hipporadio]

Do, I really need to go quoting consumer-after-consumer, or article-after-article again, about the false claims of "CD quality" sound ? As I just posted, a link to JERRY DEL COLLIANO's, Professor of Music Industry at USC Former TV and Radio Broadcaster Founder of Inside Radio, recent blog:

"How To Do An Intervention On Radio"

"And last, but not least (as the old trite phrase goes) the folly of HD Radio. I say folly because HD radio as a savior for the medium is a joke. As an engineering enhancement it's not a bad upgrade, but it won't save radio from itself. One reason is because few people care about it. Terrestrial radio dragged its feet on this for years and now its too late. But don't be guilty. Today's consumers like convenience, fresh innovative programming -- not fidelity. Just watch Gen Y listen to the Internet on their puny computer speakers or enjoy their highly-compressed iPods with low tech ear buds."

http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com/2007/01/how-to-do-intervention-on-radio.html

Jerry, has daily contact, with Gen Y, at USC. Consumers, sure have voted, with their wallets, concerning HD Radio ! Again, I have no idea, what you are ranting about - obfuscation rules.

...And speaking of “rules”—I seem to remember that NUMBER ONE in the Raydeeo biz is “Choose your comrades (and their opinions) wisely”.

Among all your assorted blogs, trends, and Google searches—THIS source CANNOT be discounted in any sane fashion. Consider the FACTS...

* Mr. D-C has absolutely NO axe to grind with the current radio industry. He’s like the father who always steered you in the right direction—now turned Probation Officer any offender could hope to have. BTW—I can’t think of a better phrase to describe current-day radio... “They’re on heavily-monitored probation”.

* He has no reason to rehash his resume—anyone with a professional IQ above 100 in this business already has committed it to memory.

* He sold this industry’s “publication of record” to CCU—who must have missed reading many, many prior issues.

* Indeed, his most attentive current audience represents radio’s future—and bet your butt-side that he’s listening to them. Would he dare stand up and pull a classic Moody Blues on them with the “Listen—we think we have found you” lyric... VERY DOUBTFUL... He needs to be no terrestrial apologist.

* When he discloses folly, foot-dragging, and an industry fresh out of format innovation—he’s not trying to make offensive noise... IBOC is doing just fine in that department!

 

[R.F. Burns]

Then please next time address your Reponses naming the individual, that will help keep the rhetoric down in here.

When, you hit the "quote" key, it highlights the person, to whom one is responding to, in blue - naming the individual, is then, unnecessary, as I did. This, is ridiculous !

My my my, you do seem a bit on edge there. Not exactly a friendly greeting for a newcommer. I'm just happy that I don't have to work for you, talk about rediculous!! ???

 

[R.F. Burns]

Serious question here. If radio days are numbered as has been stated, which would indicate that radio as a business must do something in an atttempt to survive and it must be done now, what is the reason that you are against the implimentation of Ibiquity's HD system? If you work in the industry, how will HD effect you? In other words is it you as a small station employee who feels that you will be edged out due to your stations already limited coverage? Are you an AM stereo fan who believes that analogue AM stereo is the best way to go and that under ideal conditions and with the right equipment analogue AM provides the best possible sound. Do you work for one of Ibiquity's competitors? Is it you the DXer, who feels that whether radio survives or not isn't the issue. The issue to you is whether you can pursue your hobby as you have in the past? Or are you working for one of radios other competitors, be it either satellite company or a internet broadcaster and you can't wait for radio to go off the air so that you'll finally be on an equal level with those station owners and you'll be more popular then what they broadcast, if given the chance. If you are pro HD the same goes for you. Do you work for Ibiquity or one of the major owners who are in bed with Ibiquity? Honesty would go a long way to resolve the friction that occurs in here when the two opposite sides (Anti HD Pro HD) come into contact.

Wrong, again, and again, etc.
None of the above.
Keep guessing.

I'm not trying to guess anything here. I'm just looking for a little honesty from the people in here who after reading their posts one would have to conclude have serious personal issues with commercial broadcasting. I as an example am a extra class amateur radio operator and a DXer. Now how about a little honesty from my fellow posters.

 

[700WLW]

Then please next time address your Reponses naming the individual, that will help keep the rhetoric down in here.

When, you hit the "quote" key, it highlights the person, to whom one is responding to, in blue - naming the individual, is then, unnecessary, as I did. This, is ridiculous !

My my my, you do seem a bit on edge there. Not exactly a friendly greeting for a newcommer. I'm just happy that I don't have to work for you, talk about rediculous!! ???

My, my... you are the one, who jumped on me first, because you simply couldn't figure out the reply/quote buttons - see replies, 16 through 19.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Serious question here. If radio days are numbered as has been stated, which would indicate that radio as a business must do something in an atttempt to survive and it must be done now, what is the reason that you are against the implimentation of Ibiquity's HD system? If you work in the industry, how will HD effect you? In other words is it you as a small station employee who feels that you will be edged out due to your stations already limited coverage? Are you an AM stereo fan who believes that analogue AM stereo is the best way to go and that under ideal conditions and with the right equipment analogue AM provides the best possible sound. Do you work for one of Ibiquity's competitors? Is it you the DXer, who feels that whether radio survives or not isn't the issue. The issue to you is whether you can pursue your hobby as you have in the past? Or are you working for one of radios other competitors, be it either satellite company or a internet broadcaster and you can't wait for radio to go off the air so that you'll finally be on an equal level with those station owners and you'll be more popular then what they broadcast, if given the chance. If you are pro HD the same goes for you. Do you work for Ibiquity or one of the major owners who are in bed with Ibiquity? Honesty would go a long way to resolve the friction that occurs in here when the two opposite sides (Anti HD Pro HD) come into contact.

Wrong, again, and again, etc.
None of the above.
Keep guessing.

I'm not trying to guess anything here. I'm just looking for a little honesty from the people in here who after reading their posts one would have to conclude have serious personal issues with commercial broadcasting. I as an example am a extra class amateur radio operator and a DXer. Now how about a little honesty from my fellow posters.

No "personal issues" against HD Radio and the cartel, just plain honest engineering, marketing and promotion vs. a ruthless gang of habitual liars.
Honesty would be refreshing from the HD group who misrepresents and falsifies virtually everything.
In Band On Channel, NOT!

 

[R.F. Burns]

Serious question here. If radio days are numbered as has been stated, which would indicate that radio as a business must do something in an atttempt to survive and it must be done now, what is the reason that you are against the implimentation of Ibiquity's HD system? If you work in the industry, how will HD effect you? In other words is it you as a small station employee who feels that you will be edged out due to your stations already limited coverage? Are you an AM stereo fan who believes that analogue AM stereo is the best way to go and that under ideal conditions and with the right equipment analogue AM provides the best possible sound. Do you work for one of Ibiquity's competitors? Is it you the DXer, who feels that whether radio survives or not isn't the issue. The issue to you is whether you can pursue your hobby as you have in the past? Or are you working for one of radios other competitors, be it either satellite company or a internet broadcaster and you can't wait for radio to go off the air so that you'll finally be on an equal level with those station owners and you'll be more popular then what they broadcast, if given the chance. If you are pro HD the same goes for you. Do you work for Ibiquity or one of the major owners who are in bed with Ibiquity? Honesty would go a long way to resolve the friction that occurs in here when the two opposite sides (Anti HD Pro HD) come into contact.

Wrong, again, and again, etc.
None of the above.
Keep guessing.

I'm not trying to guess anything here. I'm just looking for a little honesty from the people in here who after reading their posts one would have to conclude have serious personal issues with commercial broadcasting. I as an example am a extra class amateur radio operator and a DXer. Now how about a little honesty from my fellow posters.

No "personal issues" against HD Radio and the cartel, just plain honest engineering, marketing and promotion vs. a ruthless gang of habitual liars.

OK , fair enough. Can you tell us in what ways this "ruthless gang of habitual liars" are not being honest with us? Also, any other thoughts on what might be a digital system available that we can move towards that is compatible with both AM & FM transmissions, and whose data we can read about? In other words, I've heard all kinds of claims and demos from other digital systems but their actual data, concerning what makes it work isn't available. I am aware of DRM but it isn't compatible with our current analogue system and considering the length of time it's been around I've not yet seen a plug and play DRM SWR on the market. As for Cam-D, I've heard a lot of claims made and while they may or may not be true, the anger and sarcasm surrounding those claims make for interesting reading but I don't know if I'd want to do business with a company which appears on the level to be a bit flakey. As for FM Extra, I'd like to know more about it. How does it work and who is behind it? I don't believe it's AM compatible, but my main concern isn't compatibilty on both AM & FM but for a legitimate digital system which is willing to explain it's system, show some data and provide some demos. You and others claim Ibiquity is a ruthless company. If so how did they get Harris, Nautel and others to back their technology by selling transmitters compatible with this system? Forgive my ignorance but it sounds as though you have had some negative experience with Ibiquity. Not wanting to pry into your personal business but what is it you know that you can share with us that will prove the Ibiquity is somehow operating on the fringes of the law by operating in a shady manner.

 

[700WLW]

Serious question here. If radio days are numbered as has been stated, which would indicate that radio as a business must do something in an atttempt to survive and it must be done now, what is the reason that you are against the implimentation of Ibiquity's HD system? If you work in the industry, how will HD effect you? In other words is it you as a small station employee who feels that you will be edged out due to your stations already limited coverage? Are you an AM stereo fan who believes that analogue AM stereo is the best way to go and that under ideal conditions and with the right equipment analogue AM provides the best possible sound. Do you work for one of Ibiquity's competitors? Is it you the DXer, who feels that whether radio survives or not isn't the issue. The issue to you is whether you can pursue your hobby as you have in the past? Or are you working for one of radios other competitors, be it either satellite company or a internet broadcaster and you can't wait for radio to go off the air so that you'll finally be on an equal level with those station owners and you'll be more popular then what they broadcast, if given the chance. If you are pro HD the same goes for you. Do you work for Ibiquity or one of the major owners who are in bed with Ibiquity? Honesty would go a long way to resolve the friction that occurs in here when the two opposite sides (Anti HD Pro HD) come into contact.

Wrong, again, and again, etc.
None of the above.
Keep guessing.

I'm not trying to guess anything here. I'm just looking for a little honesty from the people in here who after reading their posts one would have to conclude have serious personal issues with commercial broadcasting. I as an example am a extra class amateur radio operator and a DXer. Now how about a little honesty from my fellow posters.

No "personal issues" against HD Radio and the cartel, just plain honest engineering, marketing and promotion vs. a ruthless gang of habitual liars.

OK , fair enough. Can you tell us in what ways this "ruthless gang of habitual liars" are not being honest with us? Also, any other thoughts on what might be a digital system available that we can move towards that is compatible with both AM & FM transmissions, and whose data we can read about? In other words, I've heard all kinds of claims and demos from other digital systems but their actual data, concerning what makes it work isn't available. I am aware of DRM but it isn't compatible with our current analogue system and considering the length of time it's been around I've not yet seen a plug and play DRM SWR on the market. As for Cam-D, I've heard a lot of claims made and while they may or may not be true, the anger and sarcasm surrounding those claims make for interesting reading but I don't know if I'd want to do business with a company which appears on the level to be a bit flakey. As for FM Extra, I'd like to know more about it. How does it work and who is behind it? I don't believe it's AM compatible, but my main concern isn't compatibilty on both AM & FM but for a legitimate digital system which is willing to explain it's system, show some data and provide some demos. You and others claim Ibiquity is a ruthless company. If so how did they get Harris, Nautel and others to back their technology by selling transmitters compatible with this system? Forgive my ignorance but it sounds as though you have had some negative experience with Ibiquity. Not wanting to pry into your personal business but what is it you know that you can share with us that will prove the Ibiquity is somehow operating on the fringes of the law by operating in a shady manner.

There is no point, in going digital, with the broadcast bands - there is nothing to be gained, especially, with Wireless Internet coming in-dash (e.g., Ford, integrating Sync), and next-generation Satellite Radio. DAB has failed in Canada, and only 4.5 million digital receivers have been sold, in the UK, over 7 years (only, after they threatened to cut off analog). Unlike analog, digital is an all-or-nothing proposition (e.g., dropped calls, with digital cell phones, instead of just fading), and consumers do not care about any supposed improvement in audio quality, but do care about content - oh, what that $500,000,000 could have been spent on improved programming, instead of wasted HD Radio Cartel advertising; I still, hear those ridiculous "Discover It !" ads on radio, and laugh every time, because they mean nothing, except to "radio geeks", and by now, are probably just annoying consumers.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

R. F. Burns said:

OK , fair enough. Can you tell us in what ways this "ruthless gang of habitual liars" are not being honest with us?

Of course. There are 49 screen pages right here on this blog for you to read on that subject, just on this thread!
I wonder if you will bother.

IBiquity/HD radio is not compatible with current AM or FM FCC assignments. iBiquity/HD/NAB are requesting the adoption of a new standard, NRSC-5a.
On AM fidelity must be cut in half, HD buzzes the adjacent channels and stations, and causes severe interference past sunset. So AM is almost totally incompatible, and therefore irrelevant.
FM degrades the adjacent channels including licensed stations, translators, and potentially, LPFM stations, as well as creates noise on the analog stereo subcarrier. This has all been documented here, on this board thread.
Neither is HD Radio, In Band On Channel, or compatible with current assignments, as falsely represented to the FCC.
FMeXtra is compatible digital transmission for FM, uses the same codec, has equal fidelity, better coverage, and is simpler and cheaper as a bonus. www.dreinc.com
So iBiqity/HD radio both on AM and FM is unnecessary, incompatible, and destructive.

I believe that summarizes most, if not all, the points. The rest is all right here for you to read.

Don't take it personally, I'm not.