HD Radio fails miserably

[clouseau]

This is all pretty simple. You guys can justify all you like. When it comes down to it, HDTV's are flying off the shelves in droves because people want them...

C'mon, Kyle. You're smarter than that.

HDTVs are flying off the shelves because analog TVs won't work 13 months from now. You almost can't BUY an analog TV now. Major retailers hae gotten significant fines for not having a "full analog TV sunset disclosure" from the FCC. If you basically PROHIBITED the sale of analog radios and put forth a compelling reason (End of service) for WHY you needed to buy an HD radio, things would be REALLY different. Surely your not short sighted enough to not see this.

Just because there are a bunch of myopians who hate HD is no reason to come to crazy conclusions...

The two situations are VERY different.

Clouseau

 

[Radioman100]

As for Atlanta, digital coverage is probably OK for the handful of stations with sites near the city, but what about all those rimshotters?

What about the rimshots in Dallas or Houston? They're here to be sure, and most of them don't really have much of an impact. I guess I just don't believe in dragging everyone else down to the level of the lowest common denominator. People with rimshot signals know there will be limitations to what they can do going in.

So let's get this straight: you say things are fine in Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston, but how can we expect similar results everywhere else?

What I'm saying is it works great here. I don't have any experience with it in the other markets. Some friends of mine in LA say it works well there, and the experimental station operating with much higher HD power than normal works really well.

 

[John Waywoods]

It works great in Tampa. I can't wait to buy my 2009 Escape with a factory radio.

 

[Kyle D]

Man, you guys will reach for anything and defend until the death!

HDTV's have been selling at a high level for YEARS. Of course the fact that DTV starts in 13 months has increased the volume now. Even at the beginning when they were expensive they were moving better than HD Radios.

The two situations are VERY different.

But should they be? Maybe if radio had marketed HD differently it would have been more successful. HDTV gives people a better picture, which they want. HD Radio is supposed to deliver better sound and more options, but it doesn't.

If HD Radio had come along 10-15 years ago it would have had a much better chance of surviving, but as the Poni Tails would sing, I feel it was "Born to Late".

Guess again. I pick up all the local stations over the air using rabbit ears. HDTV is compressed digital data. You get pixelation and other compression artifacts during fast motion just like you do with a DVD.

I'll take pixelation and compression artifacts over an analog broadcast anyday.

I still say it's pretty clear. People want HDTV, they don't want HD Radio. The sales numbers are pretty clear, DTV deadline or not.

 

[clouseau]

Man, you guys will reach for anything and defend until the death!

Ok, Kyle. It appears you don't weant to "Discuss" the issue. You're here on an evangelical mission to convert me and others. We live this stuff. Good luck on that...
Check this out...

http://www.tvb.org/pdf/multiplatform/HD-Hit-36-percent-Penetration.pdf

HDTV Penetration Will Hit 36% In 2007
Source: Media Daily News, 6/27/07
BY THE END OF 2007, 16 million high-definition TVs will be sold, bringing the total to 52.5 million in the U.S. That's
36% penetration of households, according to new figures from the Consumer Electronics Association.

It shows 36% DTV penetration with a government MANDATE, A drop dead "end of service" date and $10K fines for not revealing this info to retail receiver consumers. No way they are even in the same ballpark.

The two situations are VERY different.

But should they be?

Would/should doesn't matter. THEY ARE DIFFERENT as night and day. To claim otherwise doesn't make sense.

Of course the fact that DTV starts in 13 months has increased the volume now.

Ya think? How many analog radios do you think would be in cars if we got fined $10.000 to NOT disclose your analog radio would not work AT ALL in 12 months and 26 days. C'mon, dude. Be honest here. It's not apples and oranges. It's the P&W and shoes.

Even at the beginning when they were expensive they were moving better than HD Radios.

HD radio offers better Sound on AM and more choices on FM. HDTV offers TV beyond next Feburary. HDTVs analog counterpart is DEAD. Not the anti-HD RADIO myopic "Radio is dead" junk.

More like the "HOLY COW, How come every TV station on the air is off the air" dead.

Maybe if radio had marketed HD differently it would have been more successful.

Maybe. And you're charactarizing whether or not HD radio is a good idea or not is some kind of marketing popularity contest? I don't think that's a very good way to define spectrum policy...

HDTV gives people a better picture, which they want. HD Radio is supposed to deliver better sound and more options, but it doesn't.

I guess I'm gonna get out that "OTHER" DVD of "Sliders" because where I live, I have "2" HD FM's. Both of them sound brighter and cleaner with their HD1's and both of them offer somethig different and not in the market on HD2.

When I travel to Houston, the AM sounds a LOT better in HD. Glad I don't live in Philly anymore if what you say is true.

Now I will give you that perhaps you are NOT getting the benefits you list. I know George is. He's in Upper Merion. I've tested HD furthur out the Main Line in Strafford. Don't tell me "HE" doesn't get more choices...That's BS.

If HD Radio had come along 10-15 years ago it would have had a much better chance of surviving, but as the Poni Tails would sing, I feel it was "Born to Late".

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. However, why would HD have been better in 1992-1997, though?

When did "More Choices" become a bad idea? Or was it "When did better AM fidelity become a bad idea"

I'm sure there is a great answer to these quandries, but as of now no one has revealed it here. Do YOU know the Secret of the "Trips"?

( Sorry I know that's a term the Anti Mob has coined for "My Kind", but I just used it here as a placeholder because us woefully lost, "Cranium in posterior" corporate types haven't bothered to "Brand" those with your opinions.)

How come HD radio is a bad idea in Upper Merion?

Clouseau

 

[Play Freebird]

What I'm saying is it works great here. I don't have any experience with it in the other markets. Some friends of mine in LA say it works well there, and the experimental station operating with much higher HD power than normal works really well.

Can you tell us the identity of this LA station?

I assume they were granted an STA or experimental authorization from the FCC, so it should be public information.

 

[Radioman100]

What I'm saying is it works great here. I don't have any experience with it in the other markets. Some friends of mine in LA say it works well there, and the experimental station operating with much higher HD power than normal works really well.

Can you tell us the identity of this LA station?

I assume they were granted an STA or experimental authorization from the FCC, so it should be public information.

Happy hunting! If anyone does figure it out, I'll be curious to see if complaints of interference start popping up. They haven't for the last two years.

 

[Play Freebird]

Happy hunting! If anyone does figure it out, I'll be curious to see if complaints of interference start popping up. They haven't for the last two years.

It's a long haul from here to Los Angeles, so I'm not available to do the detective work. However, if any lurkers living in the market have access to a spectrum analyzer, this should easily show a digital sideband increase of 10 dB.

I'm mainly interested to know if the FCC gave formal permission for this experiment.

Recently, I read that an application for a low-power experimental license to test Digital Radio Mondiale in the vacant 26 MHz band near San Francisco (using Family Radio's transmitter facility) was flat-out denied by the FCC. Isn't it interesting that iBiquity proponents are allowed to run tests at ten times legal injection for extended periods of time, but competing digital technologies are denied similar opportunities. Congress, are you paying attention?

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Happy hunting! If anyone does figure it out, I'll be curious to see if complaints of interference start popping up. They haven't for the last two years.

It's a long haul from here to Los Angeles, so I'm not available to do the detective work. However, if any lurkers living in the market have access to a spectrum analyzer, this should easily show a digital sideband increase of 10 dB.

I'm mainly interested to know if the FCC gave formal permission for this experiment.

Recently, I read that an application for a low-power experimental license to test Digital Radio Mondiale in the vacant 26 MHz band near San Francisco (using Family Radio's transmitter facility) was flat-out denied by the FCC. Isn't it interesting that iBiquity proponents are allowed to run tests at ten times legal injection for extended periods of time, but competing digital technologies are denied similar opportunities. Congress, are you paying attention?

Have you tried contacting the FCC yet?
Perhaps they have granted the overpowered HD radio experimental authorization but are just "slow" making the public disclosure. We all know how busy they are partying with lobbyists. :

 

[R.F. Burns]

Happy hunting! If anyone does figure it out, I'll be curious to see if complaints of interference start popping up. They haven't for the last two years.

It's a long haul from here to Los Angeles, so I'm not available to do the detective work. However, if any lurkers living in the market have access to a spectrum analyzer, this should easily show a digital sideband increase of 10 dB.

I'm mainly interested to know if the FCC gave formal permission for this experiment.

Recently, I read that an application for a low-power experimental license to test Digital Radio Mondiale in the vacant 26 MHz band near San Francisco (using Family Radio's transmitter facility) was flat-out denied by the FCC. Isn't it interesting that iBiquity proponents are allowed to run tests at ten times legal injection for extended periods of time, but competing digital technologies are denied similar opportunities. Congress, are you paying attention?

Have you tried contacting the FCC yet?
Perhaps they have granted the overpowered HD radio experimental authorization but are just "slow" making the public disclosure. We all know how busy they are partying with lobbyists. :

Do you always slander those you disagree with?

 

[clouseau]

Perhaps they have granted the overpowered HD radio experimental authorization but are just "slow" making the public disclosure. We all know how busy they are partying with lobbyists. :

Do you always slander those you disagree with?

Folks on that side of the fence have to. Actually engaging in a civil discussion is WAY beyond their reach and pretty much shows they have no take.

Clouseau

 

[clouseau]

..if any lurkers living in the market have access to a spectrum analyzer, this should easily show a digital sideband increase of 10 dB.

That would cause a big problem too. Especially for those people in the audience who utilize radio with a spectrum analyzer.

I'm mainly interested to know if the FCC gave formal permission for this experiment.

Got it. Kinda more a "I'm looking screw people" as opposed to "I wonder if this would work better." Great attitude.

Recently, I read that an application for a low-power experimental license to test Digital Radio Mondiale in the vacant 26 MHz band near San Francisco (using Family Radio's transmitter facility) was flat-out denied by the FCC. Isn't it interesting that iBiquity proponents are allowed to run tests at ten times legal injection for extended periods of time, but competing digital technologies are denied similar opportunities.

The R&D period for Digital radio is over. I would suspect this denial has far more to do with bandplan considerations than DRM. Would you expect the FCC to experimentally authorize analog broadasting in the 26 MHz band? Not really.

Congress, are you paying attention?

Good idea. You complain the FCC doesn't have a clue, so you think whackos in congress can help. Now we ALL need to be afraid.

Clouseau

 

[Dighton Rockhead]

Recently, I read that an application for a low-power experimental license to test Digital Radio Mondiale in the vacant 26 MHz band near San Francisco (using Family Radio's transmitter facility) was flat-out denied by the FCC. Isn't it interesting that iBiquity proponents are allowed to run tests at ten times legal injection for extended periods of time, but competing digital technologies are denied similar opportunities. Congress, are you paying attention?

It's been speculated that the FCC denied Family Radio's experimental DRM license in the 26MHz band on the basis that the real intention was to use it to broadcast to the general public, as opposed to doing any legitimate 'testing'.

Sorry, but I just don't see any kind of deep dark Ibiquity led 'conspiracy' to this. Besides, the same FCC already gave its blessings for the use of DRM in the SW spectrum.

 

[Play Freebird]

It's been speculated that the FCC denied Family Radio's experimental DRM license in the 26MHz band on the basis that the real intention was to use it to broadcast to the general public, as opposed to doing any legitimate 'testing'.

Sorry, but I just don't see any kind of deep dark Ibiquity led 'conspiracy' to this. Besides, the same FCC already gave its blessings for the use of DRM in the SW spectrum.

I did some more research on this case and found the following reports:

http://klixie.textdriven.com/26mhz/index.php?id=6

http://klixie.textdriven.com/26mhz/index.php?id=26

The experimental license applicant probably made a mistake in mentioning "worthwhile content for listeners" in his application. That raised the red flag at the FCC.

Sorry if I'm coming on a bit too strong against iBiquity, but it seems we have reached a stage in IBOC's development where many of its deficiencies are coming to light. Broadcasters who have made large investments in equipment are discovering problems that may have been played down during the FCC approval process; the nighttime AM situation is a prime example.

FM broadcasters were told to expect reliable digital coverage to the 60 dBu contour, but now it appears this is possible only in areas of flat terrain with Class C stations transmitting from 1500 foot towers. According to Radioman, iBiquity is trying the logical solution; a 10 dB increase in digital power. However, this does increase the possibility of interference to first-adjacent stations. I haven't been able to find anything in the public record showing that FCC experimental approval for the Los Angeles test was granted, so I'm just curious to know if these tests are being conducted in an open manner, as they should be.

If the 10 dB increase is approved across the board, there are a handful of existing stations that will be able to take advantage of it without much trouble or great expense. But how about stations with 25 or 30 kW analog transmitters using high-level combining? On the digital side, they must substitute a linear amplifier ten times more powerful and waste 90 percent of that increase in a dummy load. Something tells me most corporate CFOs aren't going to be pleased, after having spent so much on this IBOC "experiment" already.

 

[Savage]

Having been in radio for more than half the time the FCC has been in existence - this April, 41 years - I would opine that the current crew is the worst Commission we've had in five decades. Talk about clueless political hacks. Everything is driven by politics and pandering to special interest groups, and engineering and public interest, convenience and necessity are tossed under the bus. For example: the 24-7 staffing proposal, which is crafted to supposedly improve "localism" but will in reality produce precisely the opposite effect.

How can anyone rationally reconcile the adjacent-channel nighttime AM IBOC mess with the Commission's strict stance on EAS operations and procedure?

I've been in touch with Congressman Dingell's office, and have brought the iBiquity-lobbying IBOC situation to his attention as his office probes how the Commission conducts its business. I have further offered to testify before his Subcommittee if they have interest in pursuing how HD Radio was allowed to find the light of day.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

How can anyone rationally reconcile the adjacent-channel nighttime AM IBOC mess with the Commission's strict stance on EAS operations and procedure?

Never mind that. Let them explain the confiscatory $10,000 fines to college radio stations for the unpardonable sin of missing one piece of paper out of the local public file which no one looks at (except, of course, FCC inspectors). Let them explain the multi-million dollar fines against a TV network for a bared breast, on screen less than two seconds, which the vast majority of the viewing public didn't see and whose harm to the general public has not and never will be proven. Let them explain how complaints from THREE people (that's right, THREE people) led to a $6-million-plus fine to CBS for something Howard Stern said on the radio.

It's not that their crooked, although that by itself would be enough to blow up the agency and start over. It's that their priorities are bass-ackwards.