PocketRadio said:
Hi Greg,
Thanks for checking in. Please try to keep it at 1000 words, or less, if you can, but I'd rather have an extra long commentary than an awkward, cut-off ending. In other words, write what you want to say. If it's more than 1000 words, so be it.
RE: deadline, if I can get the article by July 20 I can prepare it for Sept. 1
Thanks!
Kelly
Unless anyone is interested in making changes, or adding their name, here is what I plan on submitting (or close):
HD/IBOC is a thinly-veiled attempt to jam smaller broadcasters and rim-shots off the dial. HD is a "fix" to something that wasn't broken - HD only represents the interests of larger broadcasters and is not a technology that consumers have demanded. Broadcast radio is in trouble, due to competition from Satellite Radio, iPods, and cell phones. HD is just an attempt to please Wall Street by building the HD infrastructure, but investing in only repetitive, automated programming of the HD2 channels.
The HD propaganda sounds like high-pressure, brain-washing sales pitches - what's in that coffee the IBOC sales people are undoubtedly serving station owners and engineers ? Attempts to criticize the technology, based on sound-engineering, are met with anger, arrogance, and denial - this is a sure sign that iBiquity knew from the start that it was going to be an uphill-battle, as there was something inherently wrong with the technology (it jams adjacents and has poor coverage).
HD ignores existing AM listeners by making AM sound horrific on all existing radios - attempts to prove this are met by denial. Get used to it - all new AM radio designs are wideband because of their cheap IF design, and sound like a waterfall mixed with a million angry crickets, when you tune an AM-HD station.
HD ignores the interests of perhaps hundreds-of-thousands of NPR listeners on the East Coast, who are listening to first-adjacents in tightly packed metro areas. There are accounts of people being disenfranchised from listening to a public radio station, because of IBOC on a station slightly closer. Not everybody lives under a tower, and metro areas of the East Coast are often closely spaced, as people living in the suburbs are equidistant from two or more city centers. Arrogant IBOC advocates proclaim the nonsensical statement, "you were never supposed to listen to first adjacents". Yeah - with 1940's technology. And in their dreams, you ought to be listening to their glorious station(s) instead of a first-adjacent to them - legalized jamming is a good thing. The reality of the technology is that now, with adaptive IF, listening to first-adjacents is easy and commonplace.
HD-2 is going to become pay-per-listen - the technology is out there, it was demonstrated, and the chance to rake money in from niche-audiences is too tempting to pass up, especially when ad revenue is falling. Good luck with that - it may backfire and drive even more defections to Satellite Radio. But, why the pretense that HD radio will always be "free", when the technology to make it subscription is already being announced? We know its all about money, at least do us the favor of announcing it.
Some of us “outmoded” DX’ers are working over-time trying to help a next-generation of DX'ers, some only 12 to 15 miles from HD towers, get enough HD signals into radios to get reliable decode. We see the folly of a system that forces consumers to do something it has been proved they will NOT do - become antenna tinkerers. A percentage might tinker with antennas for a format, but the system is defective when it doesn't work with internal antennas, which for decades have been adequate for local analog stations.
Few HD radios have been sold, as consumers have moved onto other state-of-the-art technologies. The Big Three have rejected HD, and aside from a few luxury models that include HD Radio as a $500 option (Hyundai and Jaguar sales have stalled), HD has recently been relegated to a few used car dealerships. Satellite Radio is taking over in-dash, as eventually will WiMax-enabled devices. Sprint has enabled Pandora personalized music service on its cell phones and CBS has bought Last.fm. If there is any doubt, as to the popularity of personalized music services, versus HD’s much more restrictive service, go to statsaholic.com website traffic comparison engine and compare “hdradio.com” and “clearchannelmusic.com” versus “pandora.com” and “last.fm” (also, “sirius.com” and “xmradio.com”). If still not convinced, then go to google.com/trends and compare “HD Radio” against “Sirius”, “XM”, “Internet Radio”, and “podcast”. You will see that traffic to hdradio.com and clearchannelmusic.com is almost nonexistent, and that interest in HD Radio has been almost flat since the first HD radio was sold in January 2004 and HD stations started broadcasting in 2002.
While the AM band may be struggling, news/talk/sports on the 50KW’ers remain very popular. AM-HD should not be allowed to destroy this still valuable portion of the spectrum that reaches many thousands of listeners across many states (WLW boasts 38 states) - AM-HD is essentially turning AM stations into localized FM stations. Through this travesty, the FCC literally gave away our free airways to the HD Radio Alliance/iBiquity, but it is still up to the marketplace/consumers to determine the fate of HD Radio. Internet message boards and blogs are filled with negative comments, as HD is being viewed as a solution in search of a problem. To quote Jerry Del Colliano, Professor of Music Industry at USC and founder of Inside Radio, "So, the old consumers don't want HD. Young consumers think the concept is laughable. Big retailers can't sell it. And radio companies won't invest in it. Sounds like a winner to me".
