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

[KB1OKL]

The following is an excerpt form an article from yesterday in Rain, Radio and Internet Newsletter.

by Bob Bellin
Admit it. You’ve secretly wondered why the radio industry has invested so much in HD radio. You’ve secretly wondered what the big payoff is. Here’s some advice if you still have a job in radio: keep it secret and don’t wonder out loud. In fact, you probably want to be seen gulping as much HD Kool-Aid as you possibly can, lest your name appear on one of those increasingly numerous slips that are coloring the halls of radio stations in Pepto-Bismol pink.

http://textpattern.kurthanson.com/articles/266/guest-editorial-consumers-wall-street-not-buying-hd

 

[R.F. Burns]

Interesting, the comments to this fellows opinions were all made by the rogues gallery of HD haters. What is it about opinions and a**holes.

 

[KB1OKL]

Interesting, the comments to this fellows opinions were all made by the rogues gallery of HD haters. What is it about opinions and a**holes.

Then again, some would call them a distinguished gallery of enlightened HD critics.

 

[LinoNYC]

Interesting, the comments to this fellows opinions were all made by the rogues gallery of HD haters. What is it about opinions and a**holes.

Then again, some would call them a distinguished gallery of enlightened HD critics.

Those "distinguished...hd critics"...you mean the one that calls proponents "shill parrots" and the other who uses blogs and message board posts as validation for his claims?

That reveals plenty about your standards.

Lino

 

[KB1OKL]

My standards? Besides the fact that I consider both of them to be intelligent gentlemen, I also try to listen to the message whoever it comes from, I have learned things from almost everyone on this board whether I agree with the bulk of their message or not also. I'm even considering picking up an HD radio in the bargain bin at Rat Shack so I can more accurately assess them. (I don't know if my landlord will let me put up that 50 ft high Yagi on the roof though ;D)

 

[clouseau]

Besides the fact that I consider both of them to be intelligent gentlemen,

Oh GOD Bob, give us a break. As I post this, 50% of the comments on that blog are from Greg and DR. Z. These two have been known to be the most extreme and unhinged of ALL of the Anti mob. Are you really telling us you are in agreement with their style, content, integrity and message?

I've always assumed you to be a little out there, but are you actually telling us you think these folks are "intelligent gentlemen"?

I also try to listen to the message whoever it comes from, I have learned things from almost everyone on this board whether I agree with the bulk of their message or not also.

As have I. These two Bloviating Buffoons are clearly an exception. I guess your results varied.

I'm even considering picking up an HD radio in the bargain bin at Rat Shack so I can more accurately assess them. (I don't know if my landlord will let me put up that 50 ft high Yagi on the roof though ;D)

Nice to see that no matter how pointed the discussion can become, there's always room for baseless wisecracks. Earn a living in radio. When that happens, get back to me.

Clouseau.

 

[KB1OKL]

Actually reception is really bad at my apartment building anyway so it wouldn't be a fair assessment of HD and I'm serious about that.

 

[vsa]

Besides the fact that I consider both of them to be intelligent gentlemen,

...the most extreme and unhinged of ALL of the Anti mob...

...a little out there...

...two Bloviating Buffoons...

...baseless wisecracks...


Clouseau.

You have once again proven that you have lost the HD radio argument because you have essentially resorted to name calling and ridicule.

 

[KB1OKL]

Besides the fact that I consider both of them to be intelligent gentlemen,

Oh GOD Bob, give us a break. As I post this, 50% of the comments on that blog are from Greg and DR. Z. These two have been known to be the most extreme and unhinged of ALL of the Anti mob. Are you really telling us you are in agreement with their style, content, integrity and message?

Well like I said It's not how it's said, it's what's said that matters to me, I do happen to think that DR Z the master of the adjective is pretty funny sometimes though, in fact "bloviating buffoons" seems right out of his book

I've always assumed you to be a little out there, but are you actually telling us you think these folks are "intelligent gentlemen"?

Yes

I also try to listen to the message whoever it comes from, I have learned things from almost everyone on this board whether I agree with the bulk of their message or not also.

As have I. These two Bloviating Buffoons are clearly an exception. I guess your results varied.

I'm even considering picking up an HD radio in the bargain bin at Rat Shack so I can more accurately assess them. (I don't know if my landlord will let me put up that 50 ft high Yagi on the roof though ;D)

Nice to see that no matter how pointed the discussion can become, there's always room for baseless wisecracks. Earn a living in radio. When that happens, get back to me.

couldn't resist, but I like to keep humor in these exchanges, keeps people from getting too serious IMHO

Clouseau.

 

[Savage]

The "anti-mob" is, by definition, a "mob." Unhinged. A**holes. Buffoons who bloviate. Baseless.

Baseless? C'mon, Inspector, you can't credibly argue that HD interference accounts are "baseless." If this were true there wouldn't be a controversy. The interference, both to other stations and own-goal situations with HD operators, is a serious fault. This is beyond dispute and you know it. If HD fails, interference and analog incpompatibility will be a primary reason.

With a few exceptions (Dr. Z comes to mind) I think there is a critical difference on this board when comparing IBOC supporters and what has been called the "anti-MOB" (emphasis mine.)

HD critics disapprove of the SYSTEM. HD boosters attack the critics. Not in every case, but in most. Go back and re-read the thread.

 

[Savage]

Let me add something here. A reliable, long-time broadcast finance firm (with no dog in the fight) based in San Diego reports that ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the HD Radio products displayed at CES were iBiquity-financed. All 35 HD products or whatever the number was - I think it was 35.

The significance of this is, if the Alliance and its brainchild iBiquity hadn't gotten out the checkbook - there would have been ZERO HD products at CES. None.

Hardly evidence of a groundswell of interest in HD from the manufacturing side.

 

[R.F. Burns]

Sounds kinda like satellite radio. I'll have to ask the Sangean Rep who can help ill us in as to whether this is true or not.

Reading your comment a second time what was said is that all IBOC capable radios at the CES were Ibiquity funded. Does this mean all radios being manufcatured or just those appearing at the CES are funded by Ibiquity?

 

[Savage]

No, what I meant was that iBiquity paid to have the manufacturers display the products at CEA - e.g., subsidized the devices' appearances at the convention. I have no idea whether iBiquity similarly underwrote the products' actual development through licensing incentives or cash or prizes or hookers or whatever.

 

[clouseau]

The "anti-mob" is, by definition, a "mob." Unhinged. A**holes. Buffoons who bloviate. Baseless.

Baseless? C'mon, Inspector, you can't credibly argue that HD interference accounts are "baseless."

Bob, thanks for making illustrating my point EXACTLY. I could not have done a better job myself.

I used the word "Baseless" in response to a specific comment. The Use was...

(I don't know if my landlord will let me put up that 50 ft high Yagi on the roof though )

RESPONSE..."Nice to see that no matter how pointed the discussion can become, there's always room for baseless wisecracks"


Somehow, YOU have no problem applying that single word, in response to a single comment, to the entire issue.

THAT"S JUST OUTRIGHT DISTORTION, BOB. As is often the case, you're fast and loose with the facts when it benefits YOU. You're pretty quick to add the "A**holes", too. Your words, not mine. I have NEVER used that term, nor will I. Don't let me get in the way of your "When the Germans Bombed Pearl Harbor" speech, though. I think you're rollling.

If this were true there wouldn't be a controversy. The interference, both to other stations and own-goal situations with HD operators, is a serious fault.

I do not now, nor have I ever, claimed, that there are absolutely no problems in certain situations with the AM side. I would question how real the "Controversy" is. It's raging hot and heavy in "Certain" circles of the industry. I'm just not seing the public outrage. ACTUALLY, I'm a little surprised how little reaction there is from the public. As an AM guy it kinda scares me. But its not like there is an angry mob in the street.

This is beyond dispute and you know it. If HD fails, interference and analog incpompatibility will be a primary reason.

I think we could agree on either interpretation of what we wrote. It is beyond dispute there are some individual problems. I think you would also agree it's not a national story. The next time I see an ad telling me about Radio interference will be the first. Ditto a news story. Compare that to the DTV Conversion.

With a few exceptions (Dr. Z comes to mind) I think there is a critical difference on this board when comparing IBOC supporters and what has been called the "anti-MOB" (emphasis mine.)

I would agree. However as a lifelong branded HD Cheerleader, Advocate, TRIP, Shill, Parrot, Apologist, Drinking the Kool-Aid. HD Radio owner, I'd like to point out to you that the knife appears to cut both ways. Sorry if you feel you've been painted with a broad brush. Welcome to the club.

HD critics disapprove of the SYSTEM. HD boosters attack the critics. Not in every case, but in most.

I can see how, with a certain color of eyewear, a person could think they see that. Maybe you'd like some of my "Stooge #?" glasses to try and clear that up for you. I would be glad to see who can find the most number of derogatory terms used to describe the other side. I'm afraid you'll come up short there, amigo.

If you're saying you are gettting grouped with crazies because of your position, I might agree. If you saying you're not being treated fairly, I got a few miles of beach sand nearby. Feel free to pound 'em. It so goes both ways.

We now return you to your regularly schedule exaultation of internet radio and WiMax.

Clouseau

 

[Savage]

Holey moley. I thought this was a blog about HD radio. Instead once again the thread is deteriorating into endless parsing of the comments of posters with opposing viewpoints and microscopic dissection of certain individuals' motives.

Inspector, with all due respect - which I actually mean, as opposed to the pejorative way that phrase is sometimes used on this board - you're all over the road here.

I never stated or implied you used all those terms including "a**holes" which was posted earlier in this thread. The sentence in which I addressed you included the term "baseless," which you indeed repeated in your response to Bob Y. I think if you go back and read his comment about a 50-foot yagi mast and lighten up a little you'll see that he was kidding. Talk about "playing fast and loose with the facts" - you're including a quote from another poster in with my comments without identifying them as coming from another person! And you accuse me of "outright distortion?"

Inspector - reality check. You REALLY want to go on an HD discussion board and seriously argue that "HD interference is not a national story??" That it's not a "controversy?" Want to give a cursory scan to RW, Inside Radio, Radio Ink and any number of blogs over the past year and rethink that? Remember a little thing about Martin Stabbert and Citadel? Cox? Clear Channel?

I will let the other visitors to this thread draw their own conclusions about your suggestion I'm making statements the equivalent of "the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor," or alleging that there is "public outrage," or "angry mobs in the street," or that I am an advocate of WiMax or internet radio - and I am CERTAINLY not complaining that I am being "grouped with crazies" or not being treated fairly. I can defend my arguments on my own, without a cheering section, thanks. Group me any way you wish.

Your comment suggesting I should "go pound sand" is beneath you.

 

[clouseau]

Bob,

You stated "That's beneath me". I alway take a look at that and I think we are getting off the track here...

Perhaps "I" should put forth what I think is the case, as far as HD goes. I do this not to beat folks up, or get the better of you. I continually believe we agree far more than we disagree. That's not meant to dismiss or demean your position on THIS issue. Nor mine. Perhaps "ALL" involved should chose their words a little more carefully. In fact, I'll agree to a coin flip to see who starts to post what they really believe.... Loser starts. I'll call it. I call tails. Here's the flip and.... Crap it's heads. Looks like the same results as my Vegas Trips. I'll Start...

1) I believe HD radio was designed with the noble idea to move radio into the digital age. (That was the original intention)., I believe to think otherwise is tin foil hat foolishness.

2) I understand that it was adapted as a system which would continue the financial heirarchy in radio as we knew it in the mid 90's. It did NOT afford the signal equality in a market such as Cable TV or Eureka 147 does. That is... The big stayed big and the small stayed small. I would vote to rethink this part of it. I am a HUGE Eureka 147 guy. Always have been. However...

3) The FCC agreed to this methodology. They declined to mandate otherwise. If there was another idea, they rejected it. I don't particularly support it. I just ACCEPT it.

4) I am sensitive to legitimate complaints about HD interference in the service area. I listened (literally, I'm not making this up) to WHO tonight as I traveled the far reaches of Texas from Houston to Victoria. As a station 1000 miles away, I'm assuming you have no HDradio problems if this station got "Blocked" by 1050 XEG in Mexico? Or wouldl it only be OK if there was a 1040 in Port Lavaca, TX. (Yes folks, YOU can look this hypothetical up.) Is this a cheap shot? Maybe. But it IS a legitimate question...

I'll continue this Thursday. Comments from the gallery are encouraged.

Thanks for being a good sport and...

As Paul Harvey would say...

Good Day...

Clouseau

 

[Dighton Rockhead]

I understand that it was adapted as a system which would continue the financial heirarchy in radio as we knew it in the mid 90's. It did NOT afford the signal equality in a market such as Cable TV or Eureka 147 does. That is... The big stayed big and the small stayed small. I would vote to rethink this part of it. I am a HUGE Eureka 147 guy. Always have been. However...

Inspector:

You've just hit on one of the two bugaboos I have with Ibiquity's digital audio broadcasting system. For me, the other one is the proprietary nature of the system. financially speaking, the system really benefits only the big players. Who else would have the inclinaton (or the money) to keep paying royalty and licensing fees in perpetuity?

As someone who's always had a really soft spot for the mom & pops and stand-alones, this just offends my sense of fair play.

There!...I feel a bit better now, so I'll go out into the reception area, pay the office manager, and schedule another therapy session real soon...

 

[Savage]

Thanks, Clouseau - great post, although I miss your point in your last paragraph. Here's why I don't buy the "well, the FCC adopted IBOC, so HD is What We Have Now" argument.

The Commission has a proven track record of screwing up regulatory standards and having to backtrack. I would choose to watch the FCC down at the track and studiously avoid any horses they pick; they are indeed the regulatory anti-handicappers. Consider: they picked the crazy Rube Goldberg CBS color-wheel electromechanical, UHF-only color TV system in 1950 as "the USA color TV standard." The FCC's infamous 6th Report And Order in 1952 ignored Allen DuMont's famously correct recommendation that all TV markets be either all-V or all-U, resulting in a death sentence for about 150 operating UHF stations in mixed V/U markets, and permanently retarding the growth of UHF-TV until the cable era. Any UHF station trying to compete in mixed V/U market was at an enormous disadvantage in the era of tube-type UHF-blind/deaf receivers. The 6th Report And Order also delayed for more than 30 years the emergence of networks which could compete effectively with NBC and CBS.

Then we have the swell job the Commission has done with expanded-band AM and AM stereo. I could go on but you get the point.

The FCC's selection of IBOC as the digital radio standard is a condemnation of the system in my eyes, rather than a sign that HD is legitimate.

I also have a problem with the fundamental dishonesty of HD. It isn't IBOC. It's IBAC, essentially an RF version of the "butcher's thumb on the scale." In other words, we can't make our system do what it historically has claimed to do, so we'll fudge and lie and manipulate and hope nobody complains - after all the interference may not be TOO bad. (BTW - This is as true for HD-FM as it is for HD-AM.) The term 'IBOC" is intellectually and engineering-wise, as much a lie, as is the term "HD." Witness how the media have picked up the term "Hi-Def" as applied to HD Radio, which is just not true.

Then there's the proprietary greed-based licensing system referred to by Dighton, and the fact that IBOC's developers expect independent broadcasters to guarantee an ROI to benefit Big Radio, which funded iBiquity. The cynical, smash-and-grab posture of the HD Alliance, its members and scientists, is anticompetitive and anti-American. Looks more like a royal appointment from some European plutocracy than a true USA-style entrepreneurial venture to me.

 

[clouseau]

Interesting take, Bob.

I'm not a huge fan of FCC policy. That said, I would say both of us (As well as bunchs of other folks) have done OK by utilizing (Exploiting) their decisions. Some of these are not particularly good decisions, but none the less we have no problem availing ourselves of those benefits, right or wrong. I plead guilty. I suspect you will too.

You made a few good points. The DuMont decision or whatever it was is a great example of some thing I heard of and basically forgot. I would agree with your assessment of that. And I would have love to have seen a mechanical wheel TV work. What a bizarre idea.

They have goofed up a lot for sure. And they have pursued a bunch of bad ideas ie COL/Moving/Consolidation/etc. You could make a case for 80-90 and the like, as well. I'm not sure I can paint everything they do as bad, however. They've done nice things for me in the last year permit wise. You too I see. I'm not looking forward to giving them back the grants just on principle. You either I'll bet.

Perhaps the saddest thing is that the HD system we have is not so much an edict from the commish, but a system advocated by broadcasters via the NAB. You would have thought "Radio" could have done better.

Oh Well...

Clouseau

 

[Savage]

Well, Inspector, I'd love to venture that "at least everyone's heart was in the right place" when it came to IBOC - that it was a sincere attempt to make everyone's lot in radio broadcasting a better one. As much as I hate to say it, the evidence points to "otherwise." It just looks and smells and talks and walks like an attempt to cobble together something to benefit an elite group, while the powerless and unconnected watched helplessly from the sidelines. In this regard it's unfortunately a lot like much of what is going on in this country these days. But that's a "three-beer subject" for another time and another board.

A funny side tale about the CBS color-wheel UHF system. Because the color-wheel's radial segments had to correspond to the CRT's size, that meant the wheel itself had to be at least twice the size of the picture tube. The motor that drove the color wheel revolved at thousands of RPMs, so this contraption was quite an imposing thing to have in your living room.

In the brief "CBS color era" the typical home TV had a CRT of 10 inches or 12 inches so the color wheel wasn't too intrusive, but DuMont - the manufacturer with the "deluxe" reputation at the time - had a policy of producing larger-screen sets, arguing (correctly) that the future of mass-appeal TV was tied to having pictures you could actually watch comfortably. So DuMont, in cooperation with CBS, arranged to demonstrate a CBS-type color TV receiver with a 23-inch CRT. This necessitated a color wheel almost 4 feet in diameter.

When DuMont chief engineer Tom Goldsmith fired this thing up in the Commission's hearing chambers, it produced a result not unlike that of starting an aircraft engine in a closed room. Papers flew off desks and Commissioner's neckties were blown askew. The Commissioners flattened against the wall in fear, shouting for Goldsmith to turn the damn thing off. The DuMont/CBS color TV was banished permanently from the room.

At a Senate hearing on adoption of the CBS system, a Senator noticed the familiar "strobe" effect produced by relatively slow TV scanning. He demanded of CBS' Peter Goldmark, developer of the color-wheel system, "how come the color breaks up when I move my hand in front of my eyes?"

Goldmark responded: "Don't move your hand in front of your eyes."

(Kind of reminds me of IBOC.....)