HD-fed translators

[local oscillator]

This is not good: http://www.insideradio.com/Article.asp?id=2642182&spid=32061#.UW8K1sp_TVI . First, the Feds allow the creation of megagroups which consolidated the best signals in most markets; and now, the Feds are allowing those same groups -- via HD-fed translators -- to launch bombs at their few remaining competitors.

Consolidation and HD Radio are the two worst things to happen to radio in a long, long time.

 

[iyiyi]

The inhumanity! They just go and let big bad CC slap a HD-2 on a 250 watt translator and administer a thumping to Cox's big class B? What are we going to do if they ever allow HD receiver market penetration to reach the point where a HD 2 can directly challenge a class B? Lordy Oh Lordy!

-

 

[local oscillator]

The inhumanity! They just go and let big bad CC slap a HD-2 on a 250 watt translator and administer a thumping to Cox's big class B? What are we going to do if they ever allow HD receiver market penetration to reach the point where a HD 2 can directly challenge a class B? Lordy Oh Lordy!

I'm guessing the quote you were reaching for is "Oh, the humanity!"

HD side-channels do not have the technical wherewithal to challenge analog Class B's, regardless of how many receivers "they ever allow." Without analog translators, the side-channels are next to nothing; with analog translators, they are the means to exceed market caps and the means by which our industry can --once again -- shoot itself in the foot.

 

[iyiyi]

The inhumanity! They just go and let big bad CC slap a HD-2 on a 250 watt translator and administer a thumping to Cox's big class B? What are we going to do if they ever allow HD receiver market penetration to reach the point where a HD 2 can directly challenge a class B? Lordy Oh Lordy!

I'm guessing the quote you were reaching for is "Oh, the humanity!"

HD side-channels do not have the technical wherewithal to challenge analog Class B's, regardless of how many receivers "they ever allow." Without analog translators, the side-channels are next to nothing; with analog translators, they are the means to exceed market caps and the means by which our industry can --once again -- shoot itself in the foot.

There are some AM stations that dominate their markets. There are many FM stations dominating many markets. I can think of no translators dominating anything. I believe someone would have great difficulty finding very many translators that can even pull a 1.0 anywhere.

-

 

[mmnassour]

(deleted)

 

[K6JHU]

"I believe someone would have great difficulty finding very many translators that can even pull a 1.0 anywhere."

You have never been in a place where translators are just about the only answer

 

[iyiyi]

"I believe someone would have great difficulty finding very many translators that can even pull a 1.0 anywhere."

You have never been in a place where translators are just about the only answer

Even in those instances I believe that a very low power, HD SFN would be cheaper, more effective and simpler to implement than a translator network. It is a good ROI because HD set penetrations (and listeners!) are only going to increase with time. These new audience will already have a digital infrastructure waiting for them long before the other guy ever pays off his analog translator mortgages!

-

 

[audioguy]

"It is a good ROI because HD set penetrations (and listeners!) are only going to increase with time."

This is wishful thinking. Ain't never gonna happen. I'm thinking you must be on the Ibiquity payroll.

 

[stevensonair]

It's already happening because they're in more cars.

Now, listeners can be debated. But by the numbers, there are more HD radios out there as time goes by.

 

[diymedia]

It's already happening because they're in more cars.

Now, listeners can be debated. But by the numbers, there are more HD radios out there as time goes by.

But are they in cars in enough numbers (relative to the number of cars sold without HD) that it's meaningful? Also, do we know if listeners are using the HD functionality in cars that are so equipped?

Making a statement like "HD receiver numbers are rising" means relatively little without any listener-engagement.

 

[Chuck]

Even in those instances I believe that a very low power, HD SFN would be cheaper, more effective and simpler to implement than a translator network. It is a good ROI because HD set penetrations (and listeners!) are only going to increase with time. These new audience will already have a digital infrastructure waiting for them long before the other guy ever pays off his analog translator mortgages!

Maybe, but I doubt it would be cheaper, and an analog translator would give you listeners now, not sometime in the future. Analog translators just aren't all that expensive. Getting the license is the big deal. If you are lucky, they are almost free, except for a small FCC filing fee and whatever engineering costs it took to apply. If you have to buy one, then the price depends on it's location. I'm sure that in New York, they are priceless, but out here the hinterland, they can be purchased for reasonable money.

The equipment for an analog translator is very inexpensive when compared to HD, and there are no ongoing or up front licensing fees to Ibiquity. There are plenty of 250-300 watt transmitters out there for way less than $5000. Of course, you can pay more, but even for a top of the line Nautel, it isn't crippling. A two bay antenna can be purchased for under $1000, but lets say you go for a good one, then it might be $2500. You are going to need some feed line, a rack and some kind of receiver to pick up the HD-2 signal. Call that $2000-2500. In either case, you will have the cost of rigging the antenna on a tower, tower rent and utilities to pay, but analog translators don't eat much.

Basically, an analog translator costs about the same as a good used car. That shouldn't put them in a "mortgaged" category. I'd hope that most viable stations could pay for them without having to go to the bank.

 

[Carmine5]

So are translators the only way those who invested in HD Radio can recoup their investment? It appears so according to this article:

http://www.insideradio.com/Article.asp?id=2643537&spid=32060#.UXV4dHBkI21

 

[Kent]

The article points out that there are some HD multicast channels not on translators that are making enough money to recoup the investment. However, it does look like the most successful are analog translators being fed by HD multicast channels.

 

[iyiyi]

The article points out that there are some HD multicast channels not on translators that are making enough money to recoup the investment. However, it does look like the most successful are analog translators being fed by HD multicast channels.

Birmingham, AL currently has three different, translatored, HDs all hanging around the 2s in the Book...

-

 

[andydallas]

In Jacksonville a HD/translator combo is tied for #1 18-34, in Decatur (small market) a HD/translator is pulling a 7.8 share, in Denver a 2.6 share, Austin a 2.2 share.

You will see more and more of this over the next year.

andy collins

 

[radioskeptic]

In Reply # 12, Kent said:

The article points out that there are some HD multicast channels not on translators that are making enough money to recoup the investment. However, it does look like the most successful are analog translators being fed by HD multicast channels.

But the only HD-2 mentioned by name as being financially viable without a translator is “Energy 95-7 HD-2: Houston’s Only Dance Station Powered By Bud Light Platinum — Every Night Has Potential.” The article notes that Anheuser-Busch wanted to “own something” in the market, so they’re willing to support the station just so that slogan appears whenever someone goes to the online simulcast.

The only other way to monetize a secondary “HD” channel without an analog translator is to lease it to someone who desperately wants to put something on the air, even if there are only an insignificant number of potential listeners. Do you suppose the people who are LMA-ing those subs are planning to buy their own analog translators when the get the chance?

(BTW, the link in Reply # 11 no longer takes you to the article cited, but rather to some other IR article. But I saved the original article, and that’s how I’m able to quote it here.)

 

[Kent]

While that article only mentions KKHH HD2, it's just mentioning it as one example. I've heard KSHE HD2 in St. Louis makes money, though, much like KKHH HD2, it does it primarily through one sponsor. KSHE HD2 has been successful enough that Emmis has one person dedicated to programming it full-time, and he's now rarely heard on KSHE or sister KIHT.

Probably most of the HD multicast channels that aren't either leased out or on analog translators make their money in less traditional ways. I know some NBC affiliates made money on Weather Plus by selling it for very little and offering a spot or two a day on the main channel as a bonus. I know one in particular was sad to see NBC pull the plug on it because it was pulling a profit, and they knew the advertisers on it couldn't afford the main channel. Radio stations should look at doing the same thing, especially if they can't sell all their avails.

 

[nd2023]

DTV subchannels have way more viewers than HD2s have listeners. Those subchannels are receivable with any DTV receiver, and are on cable. No one has HD radios.

 

[Tom Wells]

DTV subchannels have way more viewers than HD2s have listeners. Those subchannels are receivable with any DTV receiver, and are on cable. No one has HD radios.

I have 2, but one's a Kenwood in a car I don't drive, and the other ( an Accurian) is so cloddy with all its separate parts,
that I can't figure out where to use it. I simply don't. I have lots of better sounding radios.

The biggest obstacle for me is that any radio incorporating ibiquity's system makes AM analog sound so bad that it's worthless.
My 1930 Majestic Super-Screen Grid TRF 120 pound monster has better response on the upper end.
It's basically a dishonest representation on the part of ibiquity to make AM analog sound bad, so I simply let the Accurian gather dust.
The Kenwood gets some use, but almost never on AM. When I do try to use it, I am actually angered by the poor audio response.

IF ibiquity had authorized some sort of adapter which could have used the 455 khz IF output into their decoding system,
which then fed the audio back into the radio, I may have bought 3 or 4 such adapters.
A simple switch would permit the user to listen to the hissy analog or the HD decode, but would not then make every AM signal sound
like I'm listening to a cheap autodyne reciever from 1931.

Dishonesty and misrepresentation is the main reason AM HD will die, and I believe it is a willful intentional act.
If I were an FCC commisioner, I'd push for immediate de-authorization of ibquity's AM HD, based on their intentional misrepresentation.

 

[Kent]

DTV subchannels have way more viewers than HD2s have listeners. Those subchannels are receivable with any DTV receiver, and are on cable. No one has HD radios.

I agree. Of course, if I can buy a schedule on an HD2 on the cheap and get a few spots as a bonus on the main channel, it might be worth the investment, even if I got ROS'ed occasionally on the main channel. I know one of the businesses and the TV station that bought the Weather Plus schedule in exchange for one spot a day on the main station. Someone at the business knew I had radio experience and called me to help seal the deal. It didn't care about the Weather Plus spots. It was buying a spot on the NBC affiliate on the cheap and considered the Weather Plus spots to be a bonus!