HD Radio opponents-Not ignorant, just unbiased.

[SUPERCASTER]

Those who don't support HD Radio are not ignorant, just unbiased, and objective. The public cost, incompatibilites, and interference far outweigh any small imaginary benefits HD Radio cartel might fantasize. The public will not buy the continuing lies and deception of HD Radio supporters, and has moved on to better, more beneficial and advanced digital technologies, leaving HD Radio to the dustbin of yesteryear's technology.
The future of entertainment is clearly not HD Radio. Technology has moved well past HD Radio.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Regarding HD Radio supporters continuous ignorance to the defects, shortcomings, interference, inconvenience, and expense of their "wonderous new technology":

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
-Upton Sinclair

Reality will eventually win out over fantasy. HD Radio is doomed. Almost no one cares.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Study: HD Radio Awareness Has Miles to Go
Over a third of Americans recently polled say they are aware of something called HD Radio, according to a study conducted in May by strategic research firm Mark Kassof and Co. But while 38 percent of respondents say they have heard of the technology, the same poll suggests that only about 25 percent have even a limited grasp of its purpose or potential.

Lack of awareness is particularly acute in respect to multicasting, with only 1 percent of respondents indicating that HD Radio has the potential to offer listeners more programming choices. Three times as many respondents mistakenly believe that HD Radio is the same as or somehow associated with satellite radio.

http://beradio.com/digital_radio_update/Digital_radio_update_062106/#aware

 

[dbdigital]

Those who don't support HD Radio are not ignorant, just unbiased, and objective. The public cost, incompatibilites, and interference far outweigh any small imaginary benefits HD Radio cartel might fantasize. The public will not buy the continuing lies and deception of HD Radio supporters, and has moved on to better, more beneficial and advanced digital technologies, leaving HD Radio to the dustbin of yesteryear's technology.
The future of entertainment is clearly not HD Radio. Technology has moved well past HD Radio.

Well, here's a guy who was so thrilled by his experience with HD Radio that he couldn't wait to take his BA Recepter back to the store and write this piece for the Washington Post about it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/email/2005/03/30/EM2005033001399.html

db

 

[1q2w3e]

Those who don't support HD Radio are not ignorant, just unbiased, and objective. The public cost, incompatibilites, and interference far outweigh any small imaginary benefits HD Radio cartel might fantasize. The public will not buy the continuing lies and deception of HD Radio supporters, and has moved on to better, more beneficial and advanced digital technologies, leaving HD Radio to the dustbin of yesteryear's technology.
The future of entertainment is clearly not HD Radio. Technology has moved well past HD Radio.

Right. Why would I want to be unbiased? Good grief! I used to be the biggest Anti IBOC person out there. I used to write to stations and the like. Then I studied it and found out more about it. I realized what the potential is for HD Radio and then actually saw it in action.

So you are totally wrong. (again).

Of those that are against it, how many of you actually have an HD Radio? None I bet.

So stop your whining and go educate yourself, as it does show your ignorance!

BTW the public cost... HAHAHAHHAHAA. tkae a look at costs. An HD car Radio is no more expensive than a normal car stereo.

If technology has moved past HD Radio, what is that thecnology. And this time please support your statements. So far you are offering no support. You still have no idea about the data services that are PRESENTLY OFFERED.

Hvae a nice day.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Right. Why would I want to be unbiased? Good grief! I used to be the biggest Anti IBOC person out there. I used to write to stations and the like. Then I studied it and found out more about it. I realized what the potential is for HD Radio and then actually saw it in action.

So you are totally wrong. (again).

Of those that are against it, how many of you actually have an HD Radio? None I bet.

So stop your whining and go educate yourself, as it does show your ignorance!

BTW the public cost... HAHAHAHHAHAA. tkae a look at costs. An HD car Radio is no more expensive than a normal car stereo.

If technology has moved past HD Radio, what is that thecnology. And this time please support your statements. So far you are offering no support. You still have no idea about the data services that are PRESENTLY OFFERED.

Hvae a nice day.

What potential?
Unecessary digital interference with existing service?
I already have many radios, why would I waste money to buy an HD radio?
You say that buying an HD Radio is no extra expense?
The ignorance is all yours. Support all ours.
I have plenty of data services easily available on my computer that HD Radio can never match, as well as tens of thousands of digital radio streams and podcasts, no HD Radio is needed.
HD Radio-They built it, and almost no one cares.
Have a nice day.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Of those that are against it, how many of you actually have an HD Radio? None I bet.

So stop your whining and go educate yourself, as it does show your ignorance!

You remind me of the religious creationist NUTS. Go BUY their literature and it will explain everything about why you, too should believe in a 6000 year old earth.

Nice try - am I going to go pay $300 for a Receptor radio just to do research? Get real!!! I'm not going to waste my money like that. Even if it is a decent sounding analog radio, for $300 I could put a GE Superradio 3 in every room of the house - and I KNOW it is a decent sounding radio, not to mention the fact that it is the best AM DX portable ever made, and has decent FM fringe reception as well.

I don't care how good HD radio sounds, there are some very real problems with it, expecially on AM. NPR is conducting a study of coverage losses on FM, so I guess I really wasn't imagining things. NPR is especially vulnerable to loss of listeners, and they are concerned because of numerous complaints.

So - FIX the darn problems with IBOC, when the technology actually WORKS properly, doesn't self jam on AM, gets decent range on both AM and FM, and doesn't cost $300, then I'll consider a radio.

And about that car radio costing the same as an analog radio. Nice try again, but I live in the far Northeast suburbs of the DFW metroplex. Nothing short of a Pioneer supertuner 3 can bring in "locals" without dropouts. And, I listen to some first adjacents. I don't want a radio with wider IF bandwidth because I would lose those first adjacents!

 

[smashedcd]

Those who don't support HD Radio are not ignorant, just unbiased, and objective. The public cost, incompatibilites, and interference far outweigh any small imaginary benefits HD Radio cartel might fantasize. The public will not buy the continuing lies and deception of HD Radio supporters, and has moved on to better, more beneficial and advanced digital technologies, leaving HD Radio to the dustbin of yesteryear's technology.
The future of entertainment is clearly not HD Radio. Technology has moved well past HD Radio.

Right. Why would I want to be unbiased? Good grief! I used to be the biggest Anti IBOC person out there. I used to write to stations and the like. Then I studied it and found out more about it. I realized what the potential is for HD Radio and then actually saw it in action.

So you are totally wrong. (again).

Of those that are against it, how many of you actually have an HD Radio? None I bet.

So stop your whining and go educate yourself, as it does show your ignorance!

BTW the public cost... HAHAHAHHAHAA. tkae a look at costs. An HD car Radio is no more expensive than a normal car stereo.

If technology has moved past HD Radio, what is that thecnology. And this time please support your statements. So far you are offering no support. You still have no idea about the data services that are PRESENTLY OFFERED.

Hvae a nice day.

what good would it do me to get an hd radio. there are no hd stations here... ;D

 

[autopaint-1]

"what good would it do me to get an hd radio. there are no hd stations here"

My suggestion is that you save your money. For those of us (all 15 million plus) who live in the NYC region we have many AM & FM stations running an IBOC encoder. Our FM's are running over 12 formats otherwise not available in NYC (and that's because not all IBOC stations are running programing on thier 2nd and 3rd channnels at the moment.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

The real bottom line is how many of the 15 million people you mentioned currently own even 1 HD Radio?
How many plan to buy an HD Radio in the near future?
How many even care about HD radio or really know what it is?
What is the quality, information and entertainment value of the HD Radio programming compared with all other available audio sources competing for their ears?
I suspect the answer to all these questions is less then 1 percent.
That's not much of an audience when split between all the HD stations in the market, and is probably financially unsustainable.
iBiquity has been trying to promote HD Radio for over 3 years, and while they have been somewhat successful in pawning off this lemon on some large broadcasting conglomerates, it has been a huge failure with the public, who are useing their ears and wallets for other digital media. A literal stampede away from HD Radio!

 

[autopaint-1]

The real bottom line is how many of the 15 million people you mentioned currently own even 1 HD Radio?
"How many plan to buy an HD Radio in the near future?
How many even care about HD radio or really know what it is?
What is the quality, information and entertainment value of the HD Radio programming compared with all other available audio sources competing for their ears?
I suspect the answer to all these questions is less then 1 percent."

That's quite a assumption you're making. The guess you've made is based on the idea that we go from zero to 100% in the marketplace immediately. How many years did it take for color TV to become the standard for home televisions? How about FM radio? How about air conditioning in automobiles? I can go on and on, naming technological advancements which took time to catch on in the marketplace. You talk about IBOC as though it was already dead, like AM stereo. To this date there is a single home tabletop radio available on the market. I know quite a few people who own HD B.A.'s. Of course honesty would state that the people I know are either interested in technology or are in the industry. Why don't you contact WNYC and ask them how many people have contacted them about HD radio. They are the only ones who over the air ask for feedback from the audience. If we left it up to your type of thinking, we'd have no technological advancements because everything, including computers take time to refine. The PC's we use today are a far cry from those early TRS 40's and Vic 20's aren't they? In the early to mid 1980's how many home computers were floating around? Not many compared with today and most work environments that had computers used main frames. When I started working at the netowrk here in NY in the late 1970's we had NO computers as we know them today. Our switcher ran from punch cards and there weren't even electric typwriters here. Let's see what happens come the holiday season of this year. It took satelite radio years to become widely available. One of my bosses left to head engineering at XM in 1999. Can't you give HD radio at least a few years before you delare it dead?


"That's not much of an audience when split between all the HD stations in the market, and is probably financially unsustainable."

If they could get 1% of the audience at this point I'm sure the groups would be happy and that assuming a 1% share. 1% in NYC is a huge number in radio terms. If 5 years from now that number is stil 1% I'll admit that I was wrong. If it's not will you be willing to admit the same thing?

"iBiquity has been trying to promote HD Radio for over 3 years, and while they have been somewhat successful in pawning off this lemon on some large broadcasting conglomerates, it has been a huge failure with the public, who are useing their ears and wallets for other digital media. A literal stampede away from HD Radio!"


Time will tell, of course with no radios available to the market that might have something to do with limiting it's success. Meanwhile in cities such as NY the audience for AM radio gets older and older and the industry must do something to survive. Chosing digital systems which are less flexible (and especially those where no receivers are being manufactured) wouldn't be a good choice. In the 50's when NTSC came on the scene it might not have been the best color system but it was compatible and over time it improved and served us well into the 21st century. To the best of my knowledge Radio Mondial (which is the European digital system) has been around at least as long as IBOC (and probably longer) and yet there are no consumer receivers available yet, is not in any way compatible with existing radios. You're going to have to do better in your arguments, because unless you have facts and not just presumptions these debates are just time wasters and you're not convincing anyone. By the way, my posts are only to refute your mistaken comments not to try to convince anyone about HD radio's worth.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

autopaint-1
Your quote:

If we left it up to your type of thinking, we'd have no technological advancements because everything, including computers take time to refine.

Wrong again! I'm not against digital broadcasting or technology. Just more of your fantasies to try to primote the defective, incompatible iBiquity system.
FMeXtra = Spectral efficiency, cheap radios, low cost station conversion, non-proprietary system, equal coverage and fidelity, available now, does not need final FCC approval, compatable with analog FM. WOW!!!
See www.dreinc.com
I'll wait a few more months for the FMeXtra radios to make an appearance, in order to get a cheaper, better, more compatible, non-proprietary FM digital system, without adjacent channel interference. If not this Christmas then next Christmas! What's the big rush?
You already said the iBiquity system will take some time to get it's act together anyway. The iBiqity radios are too expensive, proprietary, and complex. FMeXtra is simpler, cheaper, more compatible with analog, and equal or better in coverage and fidelity.
It is much more important to get the digital conversion right, then to get it quick. ibiquity HD Radio has already taken 3 years, and the system is so complex and incompatible that they are having trouble getting it all together. The FCC still has not given final approval. With FM eXtra you can be on the air the day after you get the composite generator. No new transmitters, antennas, complex unstable adjustments, or awaiting final FCC approval for a new set of technical standards, and a new RF "mask", like NRSC-5a.

By the way, I would prefer if you would not try to claim your fantasies are my thinking or position. Your fantasies are strictly your own and not necesarily anyone elses.

If they could get 1% of the audience at this point I'm sure the groups would be happy and that assuming a 1% share. 1% in NYC is a huge number in radio terms. If 5 years from now that number is stil 1% I'll admit that I was wrong. If it's not will you be willing to admit the same thing?

A less then 1% audience shared between more then 20 stations does not give each station a 1% share.

Time will tell, of course with no radios available to the market that might have something to do with limiting it's success.

The same problem is holding up FMextra and CAM-D. But FMeXtra does not need to wait for FCC final approval. It is here today.
Leonard is keeping tight lipped about CAM-D so no one can be sure about when he will release enough information about it to make a proper technical assessment. I have no doubt he has something, but we'll have to wait to see exactly what CAM-D is, and how it performs.

 

[autopaint-1]

"Wrong again! I'm not against digital broadcasting or technology. Just more of your fantasies to try to primote the defective, incompatible iBiquity system.
FMeXtra = Spectral efficiency, cheap radios, low cost station conversion, non-proprietary system, equal coverage and fidelity, available now, does not need final FCC approval, compatable with analog FM. WOW!!!"

Again here is a great example of why a thinking person would take offense to the anti IBOC argument. I own a BA HD Receptor and have had good luck and a positive experience with it. I am an engineer who has worked for one of the major radio networks for nearly 30 years. I am honest and not trying to get over on anyone. I am writing of my experiences. So how do some of the anti IBOC people respond? They throw insults and cheap shots instead of presenting demos for us to compare systems. I don't mean AM strereo demos because in today's all digital world AM stereo is dead. The AM stereo encoders are being used as door stops at many stations who have turned them off due to lack of interest.

"It is much more important to get the digital conversion right, then to get it quick. ibiquity HD Radio has already taken 3 years, and the system is so complex and incompatible that they are having trouble getting it all together."

Complex? Well I know that WOR has been running IBOC for at least 2 or 3 years. I remember the SBE 15 meeting at their transmitter site when they were the only NY station running IBOC and hearing an early incarnation of the IBOC encoder at the transmitter site. The codec has come a long way and WOR has for years presented WAV recorded demos of their IBOC audio on their web site for anyone to download. Where are all the off air Cam D demos, or the other systems. I know Radio Mondial had some demos on their web site but again, it's not compatible and there is no hardware available yet.

Let's make this discussion more about the facts as opposed to rumours and accusations and personal attacks. It just lessens your arguments and makes you look childish and immature as well as suspect!

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Dear autopaint-1
AS PER YOUR REQUEST!
Here is the link to the FMeXtra airchecks. They are large wavefiles so you need a broadband coneection to download/listen:
http://www.dreinc.com/products/audio.html
I am not against IBOC like FMeXtra, but I am against Out of Band Adjacent Channel such as iBiquity/HD Radio.

Let's make this discussion more about the facts as opposed to rumours and accusations and personal attacks. It just lessens your arguments and makes you look childish and immature as well as suspect!

As for rumors, accusations, personal attacks, negative personal remarks, lack of facts, and name calling on this board, you are the champ. Anyone can see that just by looking at your posts.
The rest of what you claim has nothing to do with what I said, so no reply is necessary.

 

[autopaint-1]

"As for rumors, accusations, personal attacks, negative personal remarks, lack of facts, and name calling on this board, you are the champ. Anyone can see that just by looking at your posts."

What you consider personal attacks I call facts presented as well as real world demos. You are the one who's come onto this board making all sorts of unfounded accusations. Look in a mirror pal.

"The rest of what you claim has nothing to do with what I said, so no reply is necessary"

So I guess this means we have nothing left to discuss. Why does the thought of that please me?

 

[jim8230]

Here we go again......

Anyone that dares to hold a negative opinion of IBOC is subject to ridicule and scorn. Its clear that even common sense is a waste of time.

 

[autopaint-1]

"Here we go again......

Anyone that dares to hold a negative opinion of IBOC is subject to ridicule and scorn. Its clear that even common sense is a waste of time."

What's the difference? All your opinions won't change the inevitable that IBOC is coming to US radio. I've had discussions with collegues and others who are much more involved with IBOC than I am (although none have a financial interest in IBOC's success or failure) and they all tell me that it's their opinion that IBOC is the best chance for us to introduce digital radio to the US broadcast band under the present conditions. I'd much rather hear a real world demo of any of these other systems than download files to be played on my computer. Where are alll the radios and stations using these alternate methods? During the heyday of AM stereo we had stations in NY using many of the then current systems, such as C-Quam and Kahn. The only radios available currently for us listeners to digital terrestrial radio is IBOC. I hear constantly that all these other system are so great and that the radios will be cheap. Well, where are all these radios or stations to broadcast these other systems?

 

[1q2w3e]

Here we go again......

Anyone that dares to hold a negative opinion of IBOC is subject to ridicule and scorn. Its clear that even common sense is a waste of time.

You have got to be kidding. It goes both ways. The only difference is that IMHO it appears that the people that support IBOC seems to have actual data and information.

I used to be very anti IBOC. Even wrote to a number of stations. I have since installed and run a number of HD stations. Are there problems, Yes, but name one technology that doesnt.

Just because you want to DX radio (which I do as well) does nto mean that broadcasting shouldnt want to try new methods of delivering their product.

I suggest that you open your mind. Things change!

If you want to DX, try DXing some of the new HD stations. It is more of a challenge, and IMHO a lot more fun!

 

[calstymes]

On July 05, 2006, 10:02:28 pm Dave wrote:

All your opinions won't change the inevitable that IBOC is coming to US radio. I've had discussions with collegues and others who are much more involved with IBOC than I am (although none have a financial interest in IBOC's success or failure) and they all tell me that it's their opinion that IBOC is the best chance for us to introduce digital radio to the US broadcast band under the present conditions.

There are obviously many impassioned feelings about whether or not this IBOC technology as developed, marketed and sold by Ibiquity deserves to ultimately be successful and I assure you that I am not name calling and not making personal attacks against you or anyone else who is enamored with it.

However, I will tell you that this technology IS problematic, particularly for AM stations and if you (and/or your colleagues with whom you have had discussions about IBOC) think that FM-quality sounding AM stations are going to save AM from becoming obsolete it is my opinion that you (and they) are mistaking window dressing for quality programming. Yes yes, I know you work for a large network and that you know what you're talking about because of your many years of experience in the #1 market of the broadcasting biz. I also know that you have no problems whatsoever hearing all sorts of great IBOC audio on AM stations at your home in Rockland county which you take every opportunity to tell us about. You are therefore and obviously correct by virtue of your profession, the good luck you have had with your BA receiver in Rockland and the links to demos you have posted to the message boards, and I am therefore and obviously wrong about the bad luck I have had with my BA receiver in Manhattan. It's ok, I like being wrong.

But from my vantage point, which may or may not be as good as yours, Mr. Struble will have that public offering for Ibiquity no matter what you or I think about just how good this technology is, or isn't. It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever as to whether it will ultimately succeed or not. So you're right, my friend... "IBOC IS coming to US radio" and we'd better like it because we're going to be stuck with it for many years to come.

 

[autopaint-1]

I only speak of my experience in the industry to show that I'm not some radio wanna be. I do base my comments on some firm ground and not just hearsay. Nor do I hold a financial interest in Ibiquity and yes; I am a DXer and an extra class ham licensee. As to your BA vs. mine, I have a friend who works at WFAN and he told me that his BA would only open up at the WFAN transmitter site. That tells me there are quite a few bad, “misaligned" radios in the field. Having said that, the fact that there are some poor receivers sold doesn't reflect on the viability of the IBOC technology, does it? I brought mine into the city when I first got it and used it inside a shielded building. I had no trouble listening to WOR, WNYC and WADO in IBOC using the included wire loop antenna. What does that say to you? As I've stated over and over, if you have a problem Receptor, send it back to Boston Acoustics. The radio does work as I can attest to and have shown samples of. My major problem with the anti IBOC people is based on what I see as their dishonesty. They come here and don't include their credentials but make all sorts of comments based on hearsay or their interest in seeing the Iboquity system fail, be it for financial, ego or selfish reasons. That doesn't mean I am all for IBOC. I strongly disagree with the licensing aspect of it and we have yet to see what the implementation of this outside of major cities where stations are afforded less protection will do. Before anyone comments on what they think will occur. I am waiting for real world testing and not hypothetical answers. Since WOR and WABC are now running in IBOC I can hear some noise on my analogue radio at 740 KHz. Of course I am well outside of their protected contour and I feel it's fair to state that there are nearly no listeners to WNYH in my region. That said; on my Receptor I still receive 740 with no IBOC interference. By the way I can also hear stations at 690 and 730 when conditions permit with no interference from WOR's IBOC. I keep reading about how terrible it would be to implement this system causing problems for all those analogue radios in the field and at the same time many of those people ask that IBOC be assigned a new place in the spectrum. Funny thing is, if that were done within a few years (as many as 10) people would still have to buy a new radio and all those old analogue stations would be as useful as my old 40 MHz FM radio. You have to give something to get something and if the commission OK'd a new band the current AM assignments would have to be shut down. Can you imagine the expense an owner would have in that case? New transmitter, new antenna, new transmitting location and of course an IBOC encoder on top of it all. That wouldn't be just some stations that would mean every station. Over time as stations migrate away from the current Am broadcast band those owners trying to hold out will go under because younger listeners will not frequent the current BCB any more than they do now and those numbers few as they are will lessen over time. Am I bitter, no way, I consider myself a realist. When I took my amateur tests at the commission on Varick street I had to pass a 20 wpm CW test. Perspective hams are no longer required to pass a CW speed anywhere near that today. To many of us old timers a 5 WPM test is silly and many argue that any CW is antiquated and in some respects I can't disagree, much as I love CW. The same has to be said for the current analogue amplitude modulated broadcasting station.