FOLKS: Please read this before responding to any more of my posts!

[eGillCVI]

This is pasted from another one of my posts but I want to make sure everyone here understands where I'm coming from...

I'm here to discuss HD radio. Let's have a conversation. I understand that some people dislike it and I'm open to whatever people have to say in support of their points of view. I still have yet to see a legitimate reason why HD is so horrible.

I hear people talking about the "hash" and I think, Okay, let's hear what they have to say. But all anyone's saying is playground trash-talk and that doesn't help get their point across.

Here's how I think of it: AM radio is dying. The band is facing total irrelevancy. The industry sees HD as the only way to keep AM around. From my own experience, HD on AM sounds a hell of a lot better than AM analog. That must be what they're counting on. Personally, I have yet to experience this "hash" on any radio and I believe the industry knows that average listeners won't notice and don't care. Therefore, they feel it's worth the risk. I feel like they're banking on AM living on as an HD technology with the analog signal there for people who don't adapt. They're moving on and they must feel like losing analog-only listeners will be worth it in the long run.

And for those of you who can't come up with any good way to disagree so you resort to name calling or making fun of the way I post: I don't feel the need to be right on this topic (or any other topic, for that matter). I don't understand why people are simply bashing the technology as well as the people who they think disagree with them. You aren't going to "get my goat" by being a jackass. So what's the point of wasting your breath?

I'm taking the high road here, folks. I am simply not going to respond to people who are screeching nonsensically as opposed to discussing things constructively. I think there's actually an ignore function on this site, right? If there is, I am definitely going to start using it. And if you can't seem to respond to what I'm saying without name-calling and immaturity, I invite you to put me on ignore too. Some of you guys seem to have really great ideas. Let's discuss those!

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Cutting AM fidelity in half, and adding hiss and interference is not the way to improve AM radio. Almost no one (except for a very few early adopters, HD DXers, and industry personnel) is interested in buying new replacement radios to get "FM quality from AM". Who cares?
They already have stereo FM quality on the radios they already own. That is why AM stereo failed. To the average radio listener, there was no benefit to C-Quam AM stereo. They already have FM quality stereo, and are satisfied with it. That is why HD FM is failing with consumers, and listeners, as well.
The big broadcast conglomerates might want HD radio, but there are no benefits for consumers. The improvements of the low bitrate encoding are minimal, have encoding artifacts, and adding a few specialty HD2 automated jukeboxes, is hardly worth hundreds of dollars spent to buy replacement HD radios, when people are satisfied with the radios they already have.
The public sees much more benefit in spending their money on other, more useful new media technologies.

If you don't want a fight, then why come here and try to pick one?

You are the one who came here with the idea that HD radio is radio's savior, and started casting aspersions against those honestly opposed to HD radio, calling them "bashers" etc., and now you are claiming to be the injured party?
Your claims of first injury are dishonest and untrue.

You are not judge and jury as to why HD supporters are the only ones who are having "constructive" comments while you claim HD opponents are just "bashing" HD for no reason.
In fact, HD radio is a very destructive technology, by it's very nature.

Now that we know where we stand, let the discussions begin.

If you want HD AM, come up with a compatible non-destructive, on channel system. Almost no one here will object to it.
The same with HD FM. So far FMeXtra seems to be the only digital FM system that does no harm, does not use occupied adjacent channels, is fully compatible with current channel assignments, and FMeXtra already has full FCC approval. Why bother with expensive, problematic, incompatible, low power, proprietary, adjacent channel FM HD radio?
There is simply no need for HD AM or FM. Both do more harm then any possible good.

 

[Mike Walker]

Actually AM isn't "dying". From a low point in the 20 percent area in the late 80s, early 90s, talk and other specialty formats have helped AM battle back to the point where AMs several of the top ten slots (usually including number one or two) in MOST major markets. Has AM seen better days? SURE! But overall AM's fortunes have IMPROVED in the last decade and a half!

 

[kenhawk1160]

This is pasted from another one of my posts but I want to make sure everyone here understands where I'm coming from...

I'm here to discuss HD radio. Let's have a conversation. I understand that some people dislike it and I'm open to whatever people have to say in support of their points of view. I still have yet to see a legitimate reason why HD is so horrible.

I hear people talking about the "hash" and I think, Okay, let's hear what they have to say. But all anyone's saying is playground trash-talk and that doesn't help get their point across.

Here's how I think of it: AM radio is dying. The band is facing total irrelevancy. The industry sees HD as the only way to keep AM around. From my own experience, HD on AM sounds a hell of a lot better than AM analog. That must be what they're counting on. Personally, I have yet to experience this "hash" on any radio and I believe the industry knows that average listeners won't notice and don't care. Therefore, they feel it's worth the risk. I feel like they're banking on AM living on as an HD technology with the analog signal there for people who don't adapt. They're moving on and they must feel like losing analog-only listeners will be worth it in the long run.

And for those of you who can't come up with any good way to disagree so you resort to name calling or making fun of the way I post: I don't feel the need to be right on this topic (or any other topic, for that matter). I don't understand why people are simply bashing the technology as well as the people who they think disagree with them. You aren't going to "get my goat" by being a jackass. So what's the point of wasting your breath?

I'm taking the high road here, folks. I am simply not going to respond to people who are screeching nonsensically as opposed to discussing things constructively. I think there's actually an ignore function on this site, right? If there is, I am definitely going to start using it. And if you can't seem to respond to what I'm saying without name-calling and immaturity, I invite you to put me on ignore too. Some of you guys seem to have really great ideas. Let's discuss those!

AM Radio is not dying, contradictory to your beliefs. It's weaker now than it was in years past. I know some AM stations in small markets, with FM competition, that fare very well. The AM's that you purport are dying are likely to be daytimers, programmed by fools who think they have the 'next big innovative format', and are so detached from their cities of license. AM's in major markets are weak, but they can make a comeback if they're programmed and marketed like they matter. I don't see this trend happening with multiconglomerates who are putting news/talk and other informational programming on FM stations.

I have heard HD radio...and it does have limitations just like any other band, AM, FM, or PM . IT IS NOT PERFECT! Unfortunately, those close to the industry who support HD radio are treating it like it is.

AM Stereo in the early 80's was thought to be the saving grace for AM stations. I have heard it, and while it did sound very competitive with FM when heard over a compatible receiver, it too was imperfect. It never caught on because the FCC never adopted a standard for it. When the FCC gave up on AM stereo, so did those who invested thousands of dollars in new equipment.

Broadcasters who suffered these kinds of financial losses over the AM stereo fiasco have every right to be trepidatious over not just new technology, but a totally new band. If I had an AM station that I lost money in because of AM stereo, I would want to see more progress in HD's proliferation before I'd jump on the bandwagon. The big boys are doing it, but they're not abandoning their AM terrestrial signals. They must not have total faith in it, either. If HD fails, they can write off the equipment losses on their taxes at the end of the year. For the little guy, it could mean financial ruin.

 

[R.F. Burns]

Where is the ignore option located? I tried searching for it and so far haven't been able to find it. That would solve so many problems, if I could find an ignore option. By the way, I wouldn't say that there aren't some very successful AM's such as WBZ and WFAN, but most aren't successful and even with a descent audience size the demographic numbers make selling those stations difficult at best. Radio with its limited spectrum must do something to compete with the internets unlimited bandwidth and the sats 100 music channels.

 

[Mike Walker]

Internet's "unlimited" bandwidth? Ask Google. They recently concluded that the internet, as presently configured, doesn't have enough bandwidth for the widespread distribution of high definition video.

Try streaming a video at, say, 500kbps at 7pm, when everyone's home and checking their e-mail...no matter how fast your "nominal" internet connection is (mine's 5mbps). The internet frequently slows to a crawl, because bandwidth ISN'T "unlimited".

I'm sorry, but wideband analog AM, the kind we all (especially you engineers!) know is possible, can sound MUCH better than a freakin' digital stream at 20-32kbps! Here's what a station near me sounds like received on a Grundig S350...a WIDEBAND AM radio that's available pretty much everywhere...even in tiny towns like mine http://www.theproductionroom.net/wksk.wma

The sound is mono (until recently they were C-Quam AM Stereo...they dropped it when they put in the new transmitter/processor/tower in January. YES the sound is bright...the Grundig doesn't have NRSC de-emphasis...but it does have a treble control (I recorded off the line out...no tone controls available there). And this was recorded more than 30 miles out from a 5kw station. Why exactly are we considering HD for AM? Let's PROMOTE good radios and good engineering, and encourage programmers to take some freakin' chances! I agree that AM stations need young listeners more than a baby needs his mommy's...well you know. So let's get off our hineys and DO OUR JOBS! (Speaking to those in radio!)

 

[R.F. Burns]

Internet's "unlimited" bandwidth? Ask Google. They recently concluded that the internet, as presently configured, doesn't have enough bandwidth for the widespread distribution of high definition video.

Try streaming a video at, say, 500kbps at 7pm, when everyone's home and checking their e-mail...no matter how fast your "nominal" internet connection is (mine's 5mbps). The internet frequently slows to a crawl, because bandwidth ISN'T "unlimited".

I'm sorry, but wideband analog AM, the kind we all (especially you engineers!) know is possible, can sound MUCH better than a freakin' digital stream at 20-32kbps! Here's what a station near me sounds like received on a Grundig S350...a WIDEBAND AM radio that's available pretty much everywhere...even in tiny towns like mine http://www.theproductionroom.net/wksk.wma

The sound is mono (until recently they were C-Quam AM Stereo...they dropped it when they put in the new transmitter/processor/tower in January. YES the sound is bright...the Grundig doesn't have NRSC de-emphasis...but it does have a treble control (I recorded off the line out...no tone controls available there). And this was recorded more than 30 miles out from a 5kw station. Why exactly are we considering HD for AM? Let's PROMOTE good radios and good engineering, and encourage programmers to take some freakin' chances! I agree that AM stations need young listeners more than a baby needs his mommy's...well you know. So let's get off our hineys and DO OUR JOBS! (Speaking to those in radio!)

I agree that HD AM contains far too many artifacts at this time to make it a viable replacement for analog AM. If I were to try that in a large metropolitan the sounds of static and crowded bands would make that kind of reception impossible. Especially with all the computer devices now in use, noise is so prevelent that there's ewven a lot of noise heard on a standard narrow bandwidth radio and unlimited bandwidth is a relative term. You sure can access many more audio and video streams on the internet than you can on any over the air device.

 

[hitNrun]

Where is the ignore option located? I tried searching for it and so far haven't been able to find it. That would solve so many problems, if I could find an ignore option. By the way, I wouldn't say that there aren't some very successful AM's such as WBZ and WFAN, but most aren't successful and even with a descent audience size the demographic numbers make selling those stations difficult at best. Radio with its limited spectrum must do something to compete with the internets unlimited bandwidth and the sats 100 music channels.

WHO-AM News Talk Information 9.7 7.2 9.9 10.6
WLW-AM News Talk Information 8.9 9.9 11.2 9.8
WSB-AM News Talk Information 9.3 8.7 9.2 8.2
WGN-AM News Talk Information 5.3 5.5 5.8 5.4
WBBM-AM All News 4.2 4.1 4.4 4.6
WLS-AM News Talk Information 4.1 3.7 3.7 3.8
WTAM-AM News Talk Information 7.3 8.0 6.5 7.3
WJR-AM News Talk Information 4.8 4.9 5.3 5.3
KMOX-AM News Talk Information 8.4 7.7 8.2 8.4
KSL-AM News Talk Information 5.9 6.7 8.6 7.7

http://www.arbitron.com/radio_stations/home.htm

Here are just a few, in the major-markets - many of these are ranked #1, and all are in the top-five.

 

[SDRadio]

AM radio is dying? What's in your crack pipe?

KFI AM 640 LA
KABC AM 790
KFMB AM 760 (Sandy Eggo)
KOGO AM 600
KLSD AM 1360
XEPRS AM 1090
XETRA AM 690

and the list goes on and on ...

I'd have a conversation; still workin' that out with Hillary.

 

[schmave]

AM radio is dying? What's in your crack pipe?

KFI AM 640 LA
KABC AM 790
KFMB AM 760 (Sandy Eggo)
KOGO AM 600
KLSD AM 1360
XEPRS AM 1090
XETRA AM 690

and the list goes on and on ...

I'd have a conversation; still workin' that out with Hillary.

and from my part of the country ...
WLW in Cincinnati
WSCR in Chicago
WGN in Chicago
WTVN in Columbus
WJR in Detroit
KMOX in St. Louis

These are just the better-known stations that are highly-rated in their markets, not just sometimes but all the time. If I want to go elsewhere, I could list all the stations in NYC, Philly, Boston, Washington, etc. that rank highly on a consistent basis.
AM radio is NOT dying. Not by any stretch.

 

[R.F. Burns]

Ratings and income are two different things. A radio station doesn't sell 12+ ratings. They sell demographics. WABC consitantly is in the top 10 in NYC 12+. However, their numbers are highly skewed towards 54+ and so they don't bring in anywhere near the income of a lower rated FM facility. It's what type of numbers you have as opposed to how large you audience is. Agencies don't want to advertise on older demographic stations and radio being a business, wants to be a profitable as possible for its stock holders.

 

[Chuck]

Agencies don't want to advertise on older demographic stations and radio being a business, wants to be a profitable as possible for its stock holders.

So, if you have a station that appeals to an older age group, you shouldn't sit on your ass waiting for an agency to give you an order. You'll have to work for it. There are advertisers who do want to reach an older demo, but you do have to look for them. I guess the concept of actually doing something is off most people' radar screens...

 

[Mike Walker]

WFAN New York is always in the top tier, and often the top billing station in America. Their audience ain't exactly teeny-boppers.

 

[R.F. Burns]

WFAN New York is always in the top tier, and often the top billing station in America. Their audience ain't exactly teeny-boppers.

They are also an IBOC station and they do appeal to a mostly male middle to upper middle class audience. Also Imus bills very well thanks in part to his political interviews. I didn't say every AM billed poorly. I said 99% don't do as well as the FM's due to content restrictions due to the limited bandwidth and noise, all due to their being on AM radio

 

[davideduardo]

WFAN New York is always in the top tier, and often the top billing station in America. Their audience ain't exactly teeny-boppers.

WFAN is mostly males 25-54, not over 55+. And it has been in the top 10 to 15 billers nationally for a decade and a half.

 

[louisNatl]

I think that the original poster was implying that while there may be some successful AM stations in large markets, this is not the case for a majority of AM stations. In my area of Atlanta, GA, we had approximately 30 AM stations during the 60's. Now we have somewhere in the neighborhood of 10-15. Our heritage station, WSB-AM is the top rated station in the market. However, all of the other top rated stations are FM. The only other AM station, WGST, barely pulls in a 2 share. That is really bad since it broadcasts 50,000 watts during the day and is the flagship station for Braves games. The sports stations and a bottom feeder AM station will occasionally appear with a 0.5 or less. Many of the AM stations in the area have gone dark, switched to ethnic programming, or run 24-hour infomercial and religious programs. The few strong AM stations survive but many of the others don't.

I have never actually heard AM HD since I am too far from a station. However, many people who have heard it testify that it is a significant improvement. Here in Atlanta, WSB is simulcasted on a HD2 channel of an FM sister station. WSB (in stereo) is actually more popular than the exclusive HD2 music formats of other stations. I prefer the HD2 feed to AM simply to avoid dealing with static, fade-outs, and interference from planes, cell phones, etc.