HD = 8 TRACK TAPE = QUADROPHONIC = AM STEREO

[kenglish]

That's why I floated some of my own ideas, a few posts back.

I don't think that HD Radio is "all That" yet. But, I think that one day we'll be going Digital, and I'd like to see some form of LOCAL RADIO survive. That's why I made some thoughts known, and am waiting to hear some more ideas. A long transition period would be welcomed on anything this major, so radios would not all be obsoleted overnight. And, channels that are not just broadcast from a local closet-mount computer, to a few Digital enthusiasts in one local market, won't be as apt to be dead, or humming.

 

[Carmine5]

I'm going on the record right now: in about a year, when the vaunted digital power increase isn't producing much of an improvement - and it won't - the new IBOC talking point will become something like this: well, it's a miracle IBOC works at all since the digital power is so limited. After all, the IBOC genius scientists were handed an almost impossible mandate to have digital and analog co-exist, etc. "Hybrid mode" was only meant to be temporary....etc., etc. And the squeeze for all-digital will begin which, if the industry and Commission leaders are insane enough to pursue, will spell the end of broadcast radio as we know it.

And should that fail, iBiquity can either play the "in the interests of national security" card or the "more efficient use of spectrum" with an oblique (but irrelevant) reference to broadband card or the "US is falling behind by staying analog" card.

They'll figure out some slick way to sell all digital radio to the FCC and Congress.

c5

 

[TheBigA]

They'll figure out some slick way to sell all digital radio to the FCC and Congress.

Sorry, but that's a huge stretch. Opinions seem pretty firm and unchanging on this subject in both places.

 

[Carmine5]

Yeah, yeah, OK. I was simply having fun with Mr. Savage's prediction.

Although, frankly, nothing this FCC does or proposes to do will surprise. After all, who would have thought a few short years ago that a venerable industry like broadcast television would now be fighting for its future existence thanks to the FCC--especially after all the happy horse manure surrounding the DTV transition and how it would preserve broadcast TV's future?

You think radio will remain forever safe from an all digital transition? I highly doubt it.

c5

 

[hubcity]

Yes, thank you. And to listen to your favorite hits, Rush, the ballgame, NPR or the news and weather - existing analog radio suits just about everyone just fine.

Especially when you consider the alternative: which is, to spend $100 or more to get your favorite hits, Rush, the ballgame, NPR or the news and weather - in digital sound for all practicable purposes indistinguishable from analog. But with mode-hopping, muting, annoying artifacts and less-satisfactory coverage added into the mix, just so you know you got something with your pricey, obscure purchase.

Yes, there is an insipid additional range of choice in the form of HD subs - offering the local AM talker, a handful of jukebox all-music channels, out-of-town country stations and - the apparent default fave of HD subchannel programmers - The Dead Carrier Channel. (And related popular HD-sub formats, The Low Modulation Channel, The All-Hum Channel, etc.)

Yep. I have to agree that the execution on HD2, with a few exceptions, has been abysmal. (And I hope to whip my little slice of a slice of spectrum into one of those exceptions. The spirit is willing, and all that...)

 

[TheBigA]

You think radio will remain forever safe from an all digital transition? I highly doubt it.

Based on what I know about the FCC, I'd say they think it already is all digital.

 

[kenglish]

I guess it's too late to make it part of the Census, but I'd like to see a couple of surveys....and, not just among folks like us (in the radio/TV biz):

What really is turning so many people off to broadcast radio, and on to things like satrad, iPods, etc?

What is turning people off about broadcast forms of digital, but not off to all those other digital gadgets and distractions?

 

[Play Freebird]

I guess it's too late to make it part of the Census, but I'd like to see a couple of surveys....and, not just among folks like us (in the radio/TV biz):

What really is turning so many people off to broadcast radio, and on to things like satrad, iPods, etc?

What is turning people off about broadcast forms of digital, but not off to all those other digital gadgets and distractions?

As I've said before, it really comes down to

1) necessity
2) interest
3) convenience

People will continue to use radio if the content not only fills their needs, but is interesting and convenient to use (or more convenient than alternatives.) The increase in use of gadgets has much to do with the convenience factor.

Why are iPods popular? 30 years ago, we had to mess around with motor-driven vinyl and magnetic tape to enjoy recorded music (and find a place to store all that plastic) so it was often a hassle to play your own tunes. Today, thousands of recordings fit on a memory chip in a small device that fits in a pocket, and new material can be downloaded without making a trip to the record store. The inconvenience problem has been solved.

Internet radio? Again, it's about convenience and a wide choice of interesting material. If you're already sitting in front of a computer, it's simply a matter of clicking on a web page and seconds later, the content plays. (Unfortunately, a radio receiver in the same room may not even work, due to RF interference from the monitor or microprocessors.)

Satellite radio was able to gain a foothold because XM/Sirius paid to get receivers factory-installed in new cars. Yes, the convenience factor again. With the receiver already in the dashboard and a trial plan thrown in, it was easier to attract subscribers. Also, keep in mind that satellite radio uses terrestrial transmitters to fill in dead spots and improve building penetration in large cities, which makes listening more convenient.

So there's a simple reason IBOC digital has been floundering: It offers little improvement in convenience over analog (many would argue that the switching between digital and analog makes it less convenient to use), not to mention much of the new HD-2 content evidently isn't interesting or necessary.

In particular, consider the AM situation. Those of us who operate daytimers or Class B and C facilities with reduced night coverage have wanted to eliminate this major inconvenience for years, but AM IBOC offers us no solution, just increased interference.

 

[LynnW]

Since I'm not a broadcast insider, but just a consumer with an interest in the business and politics of broadcasting, I'll answer your questions.

According to Mr. Gleason, people aren't really turning away from radio. But we are using other sources of programming more. And, that is exactly the reason. Programming. Or, call it narrowcasting. Satellite radio provides far, far more music formats than broadcast radio. It also has a wider choice of talk and news. Do you know of any comedy radio stations. And then there is sports. A local station might cover some of the games of local teams. For the NFL, a station probably covers all of them. With sat radio you can get every NFL, NBA, MLB and, I think, NHL game played.

iPods and other mp3 players allow the user total control over their programming. The user is not going to get stuck with songs they don't like, news they don't want, or 10 minute advertising sets. The mp3 players work inside large building where radios may not. The room in which I work contains 12 computers, 14 lcd monitors, 6 large lcd tv's and 20 fluorescent bulbs, and there is a bunch of communication equipment in the next room. No radios work in there.

Digital broadcasting doesn't turn me off. I was among the first to get DirecTV. But, digital broadcasting has to do something for me. I got DirecTV because cable wasn't available at my new home and I discovered that it delivers more benefits at lower cost than analog cable.

I do not perceive any benefits to IBOC. Here is St. Louis there is nothing compelling on the sub-channels. Most stations have a variation of their HD1 format on the HD2. Of the two country stations, one has new country and the other has country oldies on the HD2 channels. Same with the urban stations. HD1 is Hip Hop, HD2 is classic Hip Hop. Etc, Etc, Etc. AM IBOC is nothing but an interference generator. KMOX hashes up not only first and second adjacents but their own signal. Why does a news/talk format need to be in HD anyway? There are three other AM HD stations. Two are religious and one is Disney.

Other digital gadgets are desired because they have advantages, often huge, over the analog alternatives. Analog computers are large, slow power hogs. Analog computers are not practical. Digitally recorded music has a tremendous advantage over analog in terms of portability and and physical size. Not too may people have ever gone jogging with a vinyl LP.

People will adopt digital technology rapidly when there are benefits. They will ignore it when there are few or no benefits. The public does not see any advantages to digital radio. Because, there are none.

 

[kenglish]

So, if terrestrial Digital Radio did not cause interference, was pretty much reliable, and had a wide variety of channels and formats.....then, would it fly?

 

[hubcity]

Only if it played something people wanted to hear that they couldn't get anywhere else.

Think of the examples mentioned above: record players are mechanical, unwieldy and non-portable, cassette players jam (especially in-dash ones), etc. All were comparative bears to use over iPods and, even there, we're still loading stuff from our computers to our iPods (meaning if we don't have a computer, an iPod doesn't make much sense.)

Yet iPods are taking listeners away from more ubiquitous radio. Or so we're led to believe.

Perhaps the industry isn't focusing on making HD radio a success because they're having a hard enough time making *radio* a success?

 

[kenglish]

Is it ALL about portability of the iPods, or is much of it due to the fact that you can listen to virtually any "format" you want?

(Would you want a Digital Radio if it was tiny and portable, like an iPod or even a Bluetooth?
Would you go for Digital Radio, if it had hundreds of different channels of programming, even if it was pocket sized, or the size of a paperback book...maybe with a belt clip or shoulder strap?)

Does anyone carry a SatRad receiver, or do they just live in the car and on top of the home stereo?