Has CBS taken a brave step on the AMs?

[R.F. Burns]

To paraphrase, Cal Stymes inquired;

R.F. Burns submitted:

By a wide majority, I'd say 99% of the available audience would choose any FM stereo source over mono, frequency response limited, static prone AM any day.

Mr. Burns, why do you hate AM so much? Do you not like News/Sports and Information formats? Every chance you get, you point out how bad AM is and how the FMs are walking away with all the awards in the broadcast radio popularity contest.

Can you get the same interesting and compelling formats on FM that you have on FM? No, you can't. So WHY do you feel that the AMs don't have a chance as we forge ahead into the 21st century?

Hey, you don't have to answer (after all, LinoNYC has established that I AM a crackpot!), but it has been awhile since I've needled you so I thought I'd take a poke.

I personally have nothing against AM radio. I don't see how you could have drawn this conclusion from my statements. I do think that AM IBOC is less than ideal, much as NTSC color was a technology that left alot to be desired but it was the best choice at the time. The quality of the NTSC system evolved over time. I had a chat today with an engineer at one of NY's major AM IBOC stations. They have far and away the best sounding AM IBOC audio I have ever heard. It is so much better than the others that if all stations were engineered in a similar manor I beleive AM IBOC's audio reputation would be completely different than it is now. I was told that this stations analog audio is at least 7.5 Khz as opposed to the typical 5 Khz restricted audio element which most stations currently are using. I ws told that this station is using two different proccessing systems, one of analog and one for digital. I won't go into details because they aren't important as relates to this discussion. I can't say what the long term outlook is for AM operators or AM IBOC. However, I do agree with Mike when it comes to FM IBOC. It is most definately an improvement over old style analog broadcasting in ways which have already been commented on in other threads.

 

[LinoNYC]

author=Savage
A recurring - and fallacious - theme on this board is that "AM has no future without an improvement in audio quality, that audio is the dominant factor holding AM back, and that the only solution is IBOC."

Hey, there's nothin' fellatio about this, Fifty years ago clasical music listeners discovered FM was superior to AM. By the late 60's AM lost much of the BM/EZ and MOR listeners, in the early 1970s the kids and AM future left.

You worked at WWDJ, you know why Pacific and Southern sold out, it wasn't just a problematic pattern, it was 99X.

These cascading fallacies are obvious. The AM transmission system suited listeners just fine for over 60 years, until another elitist group of self-appointed experts imposed the NRSC-2 squishathon on AM in 1990.

The 10K rolloff settled the splashing issue and didn't matter given that by 1990 the trend for AM was talk catering to older listeners.

You were a broadcaster, did you protest?

You can mark whatever "decline and fall of AM" which exists from that point and the end of simulcast restrictions in 1986. The two combined to accelerate management greed and disinterest in AM which have largely produced the current problems the band faces.

Blame the smarmy president (you good republicans elected) and his parsimonious approach toward government regulation. Heck, it wasn't all bad was it,,, around the same time he via the FCC lifted the 18 minute rule allowing stations to "program" full-length commercials.

Do you think anyone actually listens to that junk? I suspect you know the answer.

What AM needs is quality receivers with defensible bandwidth, anti-noise legislation with teeth affecting all RF-radiating devices, a new technical standard for AM broadcasting that has some relation to reality and better programming.

Finally something I agree with. But it's a shared fantasy. The noise producers that vex AM, permeate all aspects of consumer and commercial goods, if it were legislated yesterday it would still be atleast a decade before any real effect were noticed. Besides much noise is atmospheric, the only solution here is either a digital scheme or receiver-based noise blanking.

The "better programming" would mean no more hucksters and churches etc, it would probably entail alot more local orgination, a meaningful attempt at news coverage and alot of promotion.

You have to overcome 40 years of perception that AM is lo-fi/lo-brow.

Lino

 

[Savage]

The current discussion has nothing to do with WWDJ and why the station went away in 1974. Neither did P&S's divestiture of its radio portfolio in the 1970s have much, if anything, to do with FM. I was there and witnessed the drama from the inside.

In 1990 there was no "splashing issue." That was decreed a problem by a cadre of self-styled engineering experts. It is pretty much beyond dispute that AM radio sounded better pre-NRSC. If a complementary preemphasis/deemphasis transmit-receive standard had been enacted and enforced (AMax) things might have turned out better, but apparently this was not to be. This debacle has given rise to GM car radios with 2500 Hz AM bandpass these days and "TRF" clock-radios.

I disagree that the perception of AM is that it is "lo-fi/low-brow." I do think that radio in general has a relevance problem. But that's not audio or technical in nature. It has to do with the fact that the industry has lost touch with its listener base, and "leaders" seem to be at sea as to how to win people back.

And of course you're kidding about AM's ills being the fault of President Bush and Republicans. Aren't you??

 

[RadioFixerCLE]

And of course you're kidding about AM's ills being the fault of President Bush and Republicans. Aren't you??

Well, neither the Democrats OR the Republicans have helped matters. The FCC under both parties seems more concerned about Janet Jackson's nipple flash than about technical matters. The big radio chains know whose palms to grease.

 

[LinoNYC]

author=Savage
The current discussion has nothing to do with WWDJ and why the station went away in 1974. Neither did P&S's divestiture of its radio portfolio in the 1970s have much, if anything, to do with FM. I was there and witnessed the drama from the inside.


-But the stations they divested were mostly AM. In early 1974 it was reported that WWDJ was losing 10-20K/mo, bad programming/engineering decisions during it's last 6 months aside, it was a good station that simply couldn't compete for a youth audience that was steadily migrating to FM.


In 1990 there was no "splashing issue." That was decreed a problem by a cadre of self-styled engineering experts.

To the extent that the optimods and other "dullness boxes" had already loped-off most everything above 8K that's probably true.Nonetheless there wasn't any big objection, was there?

It is pretty much beyond dispute that AM radio sounded better pre-NRSC. If a complementary preemphasis/deemphasis transmit-receive standard had been enacted and enforced (AMax) things might have turned out better, but apparently this was not to be.

No argument here, but wouldn't this fly in the face of the republican philosophy of "less government regulation"?


I disagree that the perception of AM is that it is "lo-fi/low-brow." I do think that radio in general has a relevance problem. But that's not audio or technical in nature. It has to do with the fact that the industry has lost touch with its listener base, and "leaders" seem to be at sea as to how to win people back.

The fact that AM has become such a swamp of hucksters and etremists hasn't helped.

As I remember it, barely a year after Reagan allowed the Fairness Doctrine to die, up popped the Porcine Blabbermouth with an easy formula for angry old folks. Soon after everyone was looking to clone this creature, we got some real whacko's out of this era, but it nailed shut the door for any young listeners.



And of course you're kidding about AM's ills being the fault of President Bush and Republicans. Aren't you??

-See above responses. I'am "kidding" about as much as a station without a news dept. calling itself "newspower".

Lino

 

[Savage]

You know, Lee-know, I hit the stopwatch as I entered this thread to see how long it would take you to revert to your typical ad hominem pit-bull nastiness, leveling some personal comment at me instead of sticking to the subject under discussion.

Voila! I am pleased to announce that you've beaten your own record. Take a big ol' bow in front of the mirror.

 

[R.F. Burns]

Hey Lino, if you do take a bow, watch your back. You just never know.

 

[Savage]

Love it! Where's David "Eduardo" Gleason?? I want the trifecta.

 

[LinoNYC]

Hey Lino, if you do take a bow, watch your back. You just never know.

Oh, I worked in theater for over 20 years, i can take care of myself in that regard

And "Savage", I do apologise for that last line, it was impolite and uncalled-for.

Lino

 

[Savage]

Your apology is accepted.

 

[calstymes]

R.F. Burns dutifully mentioned:

I had a chat today with an engineer at one of NY's major AM IBOC stations.

And then much to my astonishment, he completely shocked us with:

I can't say what the long term outlook is for AM operators or AM IBOC.

Now that's a horse of a different outlook I have read coming from you that you have heretofore championed! I see that your opinion might be changing about AM IBOC? Was this before or after you talked with the engineer from the major AM IBOC station in NY?

I suspect you will tell us that you are independently arriving at this conclusion. However, I have been saying for awhile now that each day, another engineer at an AM station which broadcasts in HD is starting to doubt the prospects of its long-term success and viability.

When R.F. Burns starts to wonder aloud about the success of AM IBOC, the landscape must be changing!

 

[R.F. Burns]

R.F. Burns dutifully mentioned:

I had a chat today with an engineer at one of NY's major AM IBOC stations.

And then much to my astonishment, he completely shocked us with:

I can't say what the long term outlook is for AM operators or AM IBOC.

Now that's a horse of a different outlook I have read coming from you that you have heretofore championed! I see that your opinion might be changing about AM IBOC? Was this before or after you talked with the engineer from the major AM IBOC station in NY?

I suspect you will tell us that you are independently arriving at this conclusion. However, I have been saying for awhile now that each day, another engineer at an AM station which broadcasts in HD is starting to doubt the prospects of its long-term success and viability.

When R.F. Burns starts to wonder aloud about the success of AM IBOC, the landscape must be changing!

No, what it's called is having an open mind. I didn't say that AM IBOC won't succeed but I can honestly say that no one knows what the outcome will be. Read into it what you will. You are drawing conclusions which don't correlate to what I have said. I'd call that wishfull thinking.

 

[calstymes]

R. F. Burns clarified:

No, what it's called is having an open mind.

I have one of those open minds as well. My mind is open to the possibility that the AM IBOC system doesn't cut it.

I didn't say that AM IBOC won't succeed but I can honestly say that no one knows what the outcome will be.

Well of course you are right that nobody really knows what the outcome will be. But I have a pretty good idea of what ought to happen.

Read into it what you will. You are drawing conclusions which don't correlate to what I have said.

I am simply observing that the extremely positive outlook about the success of AM IBOC that you formerly had seems not to be quite as positive as it once was. I know that you are one of the most important individuals in the NY broadcast market and any time that an important broadcasting individual starts to see things the way I see them it becomes a cause for celebration.

I'd call that wishfull thinking.

Yeap. I wish I may, I wish i might, I wish that AM HD will go away tonight.

 

[LinoNYC]

I have one of those open minds as well. My mind is open to the possibility that the AM IBOC system doesn't cut it.

Like saying "you have a choice of colors: black".

Well of course you are right that nobody really knows what the outcome will be. But I have a pretty good idea of what ought to happen.

Let me guess what your "open mind" would say.......

I am simply observing that the extremely positive outlook about the success of AM IBOC that you formerly had seems not to be quite as positive as it once was. I know that you are one of the most important individuals in the NY broadcast market and any time that an important broadcasting individual starts to see things the way I see them it becomes a cause for celebration.

I've read "Mr Burns" remarks about the sonic qualities of AM iboc here and elsewhere, he has long commented on it's shortcomings he's not rabid about it, but we both have similar radios, and ears. The differece is that he is in a business which has a sector (AM) that has a major problem and iboc is at this point the only practical technology that presents real improvement in the audio of an 80+ year old medium.

Aside from the fact that the government has made it plain that no new-band solutions will be forthcoming, such methods haven't proven a sucess in Europe or Canada. For mature markets it's in-band or forget it.


Yeap. I wish I may, I wish i might, I wish that AM HD will go away tonight.

A bit childish, don't you think, and what would gain by that anyway.

Lino

 

[clouseau]

R.F. Burns dutifully mentioned:

I had a chat today with an engineer at one of NY's major AM IBOC stations.

And then much to my astonishment, he completely shocked us with:

I can't say what the long term outlook is for AM operators or AM IBOC.

Now that's a horse of a different outlook I have read coming from you that you have heretofore championed! I see that your opinion might be changing about AM IBOC? Was this before or after you talked with the engineer from the major AM IBOC station in NY?

I suspect you will tell us that you are independently arriving at this conclusion. However, I have been saying for awhile now that each day, another engineer at an AM station which broadcasts in HD is starting to doubt the prospects of its long-term success and viability.

When R.F. Burns starts to wonder aloud about the success of AM IBOC, the landscape must be changing!

This is one of my primariy beef's with many of the folks on this board. If you do not shout down and trash the technology, you are branded a cheerleader or even worse a myopian. If anyone ever took the time to read what is being said by the "Pro" group, I think you would see there is an optimism and hope for the HD radio future. Not blind zombiel-like addiction.

However anyone not lock step in line with FAILED, DEFECTIVE, etc.. EVERY STEP OF THE WAY, is portrayed as believing the system is PERFECT.

The "Anti" group has been shown time and time again that their dire predictions are exageratted. Is HD going to succeed? I don't know. NEITHER DO THEY. I will say that many of the crazies here have predicted "Night time HD will never be allowed", HD will never be available in cars, Free HD will go away quickly with conditional access. Sont will never do HD.... The list goes on and on. They've been wrong far more than right.

Has HD taken off like amny thought it would? No.

Has it bombed into oblivion? No either. A slow steady count of stations continue to add HD. Unlike a year ago, there are folks who stop by the board from time to time to give their HD experiences. They are pretty much divided by geographical proximity to the transmitters.

The reply av\bove speaks very well to a lot of this. RF has expressed many times that HD AM works well for him. He's basically been called a liar a few times. I have expressed I enjoy HD radio in many of the places I visit and have conveyed how well it works. Again, my experiences are discounted as untrue.

You have to be pretty negative and hateful to actually not be branded a myopic Cheerleader.

Clouseau

 

[mimo]

I'm going to steer this back to the original question in the thread. WBBM and WSCR (almost typed WMAQ) have their IBOC back on. It was noticable last night.

 

[Savage]

Tinkering is going on - no question. Last night around 8pm NYT I was pleasantly surprised to get, 1-2-3, KDKA, WBZ, WYSL clear as a bell, all three, and within our western null. All three signals delivering a nice, quiet listenable signal on the car radio. Went into the store and came out: IBOC obliterating 1020 and 1040, and WBZ sounding like a telephone coupler again.

Not-so-closed-circuit to Cal: careful, my friend, RF happens to be the world's leading authority on his own opinion - and judging from recent posts, others' as well on occasion!

Not-so-closed-circuit to Clouseau: easy, Inspector, back it down a notch - you sound like you're about to fry the fingerstock around the ol' cranial final cavity! I 've taken my share of abuse here, as have you, but I have yet to detect anything I could truly call "hateful." Strong opinions? Sure. Myopia? Plenty to go around. Cheerleading? Absolutely. "Spirited discussion?" Yes again, and I think that's a good thing. Namecalling? Regrettably true on occasion. But "hate?" I don't think so.

We all note for the record you are not a "cheerleader." You are a notable HD Radio supporter (with, I note, no plans to install HD at your own AM property, a position which you must fairly admit might arouse some skepticism.)

 

[Tom Wells]

When I returned from Fargo yesterday afternoon WBBM did have the HD on but WSCR did not.
They may have gotten it back on after 4 PM.

Why wouldn't ibiquity begin addressing the problem by having some hot-backups ready to ship so these
outages need not be more than 12-24 hours? Seems to me these outages are a bit longer than necessary.

 

[JohnnyElectron]

Is it possible that these 'outages' are to install a different AM version of HD that might pass the Cidatel test? Has anyone noticed less adjacent channel HD intereference when these stations come back online with HD?

 

[R.F. Burns]

Is it possible that these 'outages' are to install a different AM version of HD that might pass the Cidatel test? Has anyone noticed less adjacent channel HD intereference when these stations come back online with HD?

I have it first hand that WBBM's HD outage was due to equipment failure and nothing more.