• 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

Guest editorial: Consumers, Wall Street not buying HD, from Rain

The recent display of overwhelming support for AM translators in the FM band (endorsed by the NAB) is basically a vote of "no confidence" in AM IBOC. Think about it.

The FCC needs to put two and two together here. The majority of AM broadcasters see no benefit whatsoever in the current digital transition plan and would rather use an FM analog channel, because that will actually solve their problems.

We need an alternative plan which accomplishes the following:

1) Eliminates the nighttime skywave interference problem

2) Provides AM licensees adequate bandwidth to use a decent-sounding codec

3) Allows daytimers and limited-night-power stations fulltime service across the entire daytime 2 mV/m contour

4) Avoids unreasonable licensing fees and royalties.

Read Jack Mullaney's comments. He feels this may be as simple as getting the Audio Services Division and Video Services Division people in the same room to discuss a plan to coordinate shared use of 76-88.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom