HD Radio opponents-Not ignorant, just unbiased.

[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?"

That is the bottom line. HD radio is just starting to be advertised. Let's see what heppens by this holiday season, until then you'll need Ms Cleo to give you the answer.


"How many even care about HD radio or really know what it is?"

Same question as above and same answer.



"What is the quality, information and entertainment value of the HD Radio programming compared with all other available audio sources competing for their ears?"


Alternate programing professionally delivered and no monthly charge and it sounds better than the satellites. Next question? Oh yea no monthly charge!


"I suspect the answer to all these questions is less then 1 percent."

I suspect you are wrong as to how many have heard about HD radio. Don't make assumptions because in this case unless you are doing more than guessing you are making an a** of yourself.


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

Thank you Jacoby & Myers. Talk about financial problems look up in the sky.

"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!"

Who cowboy , what stampede are you talking about? Maybe you should re-read what you just wrote. Radios are just coming on the market. Unless there are radios no one will know what HD is. You obviously have issues with HD I sure wish you were honest enough to tell us what it is. It's more than just not being able to DX. You obviously have major issues with this technology. As you talk about stations turning off their exciters more are turning their's on. A few stations have turned off their AM IBOC'S because further modifications are required. What will you do when HD starts taking off? I guess you'll have to find another windmill to fight. Right now there are over 20 HD stations. There were maybe 4 Am stereo stations when that technology was at its peak and even they used two different systems to broadcast. Oh and I think you overloooked the fact that satellite radio won't work without an antenna either. Somehow people adapt and make due.

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

Again, selective responses. HD/IBOC does not propagate well on the AM band, as been pointed out, previously. HD/IBOC is already doomed to fail, with litte consumer interest and with satellite radio, iPods, CDs, Internet, etc. on the forefront of the entertainment industry. Again, you have only responded to a portion of my posts, which is typical of HD/IBOC supporters.

 

[autopaint-1]

"Again, selective responses. HD/IBOC does not propagate well on the AM band, as been pointed out, previously."

By whom? I live in the NY market and receive every NY area IBOC station with my Receptor. Come the fall Tivoli is coming out with an HD radio based on Ibiquities second generation chip.


"HD/IBOC is already doomed to fail, with little consumer interest and with satellite radio, I-Pods, CDs, Internet, etc. on the forefront of the entertainment industry. Again, you have only responded to a portion of my posts, which is typical of HD/IBOC supporters."

HD is new technology. Radio is evolving. If you believe that radio should just give up and go out of business because of tough competition from other sources might I suggest you realize that radio is more them just an entertainment vehicle. Radio is a source for News, and sports (The sats get their sports feeds from radio network distributors, in other words, no radio, no sports. The sats only act as transmitters, not producers, they don't have the money or facilities to produce sports programming on a large scale and they rebroadcast news reports they don't have news departments. I-pods, CDs and Internet broadcasters (not those internet streams from existing news radio stations, because running a ness operation is very expensive. So what do we have left, music feeds. That's a pretty narrow view of what radio is used for. You talk about IBOC supporters but face facts, it's the few of you in here who are anti-Iboc who are fooling themselves and convincing no one. By the ay, do you work in the industry? If so, what type of work do you do? I am an engineer with nearly 30 years of experience in NY radio. I guess that disqualifies me from making a knowledgeable comment on the subject.

 

[davideduardo]

Again, selective responses. HD/IBOC does not propagate well on the AM band, as been pointed out, previously. HD/IBOC is already doomed to fail, with litte consumer interest and with satellite radio, iPods, CDs, Internet, etc. on the forefront of the entertainment industry. Again, you have only responded to a portion of my posts, which is typical of HD/IBOC supporters.

The real rollout to the consumer of HD just began in thelast couple of months. HD had several pre-launch phases, starting with getting basic HD on, getting further stations committed, using this to aproach manufacturers to show content, and then launching HD-2 stations to further enhance HD.

This is like CDs or DVDs or even cassettes... all of which took several years to reach critical mass. Satellite has hit a brick wall, and the Street has punished XM for very slow growth with a 60% drop in the stock price. Sirius has an enourmous cost per subscriber, and neither is profitable. CDs have been around since the early 80's and cassettes before them and 45's and juke boxes even before that. There has halways been competition for radio since TV arrived after the War... and radio adapts. The current adaptation is HD.

Don't call it a defeat when we are just at the very begfinning of HD.

 

[arnoldevns]

This is new technology that has yet to be made readily available in most retail outlets. CDs, DVDs, Cassettes, and HDTV all had similar experiences. Give it time. Several years from now IBOC (or HD) could be huge - or could be nothing. We won't know until the consumer has had a chance to make a judgement.

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

David and Tested,

Thank you for keeping this a civil debate/discussion. David, I have seen your posts on rec.radio.shortwave, and I know you have been met with great hostiliy, from dxAce, and others. It would be refreshing, to be able to find a board that is not full of Internet lunatics - even the "sister" board to this site, had an HD moderator, of all people, that would get very emotional, post a final insult, then lock the thread.

Yes, in all fairness, this is new technology, but there seems little to be gained; I have not heard HD radio, but can only respond from other peoples' experiences. In the following link, again, Dr. Conrad states that he does not see much improvement with the audio quality (I assume on the FM band) and with 40% less coverage than with analog, he does not see any reason to implement this technology (his credentials are impeccable):

http://www.audiographics.com/agd/061206-1.htm

I fail to see, how his comments can be discounted. I have also read countless articles on RWOnline and still come to the same conclusion - implementing HD/IBOC on the AM band, especially at night, with adjacent-channel interference, would be a disaster. My only concern, with this technology, would be its effects on AM DXing, otherwise, if people are enthused by HD/IBOC, then go for it.

I believe that HD/IBOC is fighting a losing battle, with it being stalled by the FCC and, especially, with the RIAA convincing Congress to introduce legislation to add HD radio to the PERFORM ACT - this may further stall the availability of HD/IOBC radios. Also, I just don't see any consumer demand for this technology, especially, with iPods, the Internet, cellular phones, and satellite radio (but, that is already in trouble). I think HD/IBOC is only trying to improve on old technology, not really coming up with something new - what AM/FM needs is quality programming. The AM/FM bands definately work well enough, and probably, the majority of people are satisfied with the audio quality - I certainly wouldn't be unhappy enough to drop a few hundred bucks on an HD/IBOC radio; instead if I were to do something, it would be to purchase a portable satellite radio, such as, the Sirius S50, that can be used at home, in the car, or on the go.

 

[1q2w3e]

David and Tested,

Thank you for keeping this a civil debate/discussion. David, I have seen your posts on rec.radio.shortwave, and I know you have been met with great hostiliy, from dxAce, and others. It would be refreshing, to be able to find a board that is not full of Internet lunatics - even the "sister" board to this site, had an HD moderator, of all people, that would get very emotional, post a final insult, then lock the thread.

Yes, in all fairness, this is new technology, but there seems little to be gained; I have not heard HD radio, but can only respond from other peoples' experiences. In the following link, again, Dr. Conrad states that he does not see much improvement with the audio quality (I assume on the FM band) and with 40% less coverage than with analog, he does not see any reason to implement this technology (his credentials are impeccable):

http://www.audiographics.com/agd/061206-1.htm

I fail to see, how his comments can be discounted. I have also read countless articles on RWOnline and still come to the same conclusion - implementing HD/IBOC on the AM band, especially at night, with adjacent-channel interference, would be a disaster. My only concern, with this technology, would be its effects on AM DXing, otherwise, if people are enthused by HD/IBOC, then go for it.

I believe that HD/IBOC is fighting a losing battle, with it being stalled by the FCC and, especially, with the RIAA convincing Congress to introduce legislation to add HD radio to the PERFORM ACT - this may further stall the availability of HD/IOBC radios. Also, I just don't see any consumer demand for this technology, especially, with iPods, the Internet, cellular phones, and satellite radio (but, that is already in trouble). I think HD/IBOC is only trying to improve on old technology, not really coming up with something new - what AM/FM needs is quality programming. The AM/FM bands definately work well enough, and probably, the majority of people are satisfied with the audio quality - I certainly wouldn't be unhappy enough to drop a few hundred bucks on an HD/IBOC radio; instead if I were to do something, it would be to purchase a portable satellite radio, such as, the Sirius S50, that can be used at home, in the car, or on the go.

I silently montiored your ramblings at the insight board. The moderator did not get emotional. It is just that YOU didnt like the answers! IMHO it is YOU that has the emotion! Not the other way around.

As the other moderator asked.... what is your experience with HD Radio? What are YOUR credentials? You say you have no experience with HD Radio, yet you feel you are an expert in HD Radio? Hello? In fairness to you, you are of course entitled to your opinion.

You dont see any demand yet due to the ANSWER GIVEN YOU ABOVE. But your emotions seem to block your ability to HEAR THEM.

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

The moderator got very emotional, responded with personal insults, then locked the thread. And you are getting emotional, and not responding to the facts/opinions, I have posted - so, until you can , "stay on topic", your replies, too, shall be met with silence. BTW, I never asked one question on the other board, so any, "answers", that were given, were a moot point...

 

[1q2w3e]

The moderator got very emotional, responded with personal insults, then locked the thread. And you are getting emotional, and not responding to the facts/opinions, I have posted - so, until you can , "stay on topic", your replies, too, shall be met with silence. BTW, I never asked one question on the other board, so any, "answers", that were given, were a moot point...

Are you familiar with the term HYPOCRITE? You claim the other perosn is not responding ot YOUR needs, then say you will not respond. Now who is the emotional one?

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

Just as I said before, what is the point of responding to someone, who is trying to make an emotional issue of posts, when they have no response, otherwise.

 

[Kelly]

SayNo Said..." HD/IBOC does not propagate well on the AM band, as been pointed out, previously. HD/IBOC is already doomed to fail, with litte consumer interest and with satellite radio, iPods, CDs, Internet, etc. on the forefront of the entertainment industry. Again, you have only responded to a portion of my posts, which is typical of HD/IBOC supporters."

I'm sorry to say Mr. No, that you are completely wrong with the aforementioned statement. The tested fact of the matter is IBOC on AM propapgates better than analog. As a matter of fact, the debate at the FCC is not about adjacent channel interference as detractors are concerned, but the fact that at night atmospheric conditions, the IBOC digital sidebands increase the coverage well outside of the protection contour.

I for one have completed several tests on a AM-IBOC sytem for a station, and have found superior coverage and increased solid listening ability in fringe conditions than analog. In fact, turning off the analog modulation and running full digital makes the out-of-channel interference go away, and the ability to listen with a digital receiver increases even further away.

You may be thinking of HD for FM. A reliable HD-FM modulated signal only covers the 70dBu contour with any reliability.

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

Sorry Kelly,

AM IBOC is a complete failure, here's why:

http://www.wbdhradio.com/html/say_no_to_iboc.html

HD/IBOC is, "dead before it left the gate", here's why:

http://www.rwonline.com/reference-room/iboc/03_rw_hd_guest_ramsey.shtml

You are the one totally confused - nighttime AM IBOC causes much adjacent-channel interference, and that is much of the FCC'c concern. As the following articles state, IBOC, whether AM or FM, has much less coverage than analog and causes adjacent-channel interference:

http://www.audiographics.com/agd/061206-1.htm
http://beradio.com/features/radio_running_interference/

Please, read the articles under RWOnline.com, before you post, especially this recent one:

http://rwonline.com/reference-room/commentary/2006.07.19-03_rw_hd_guest_barry_2.shtml

Also, with the FCC pulling HD/IBOC off its agenda on 7/13/06, and with the RIAA convincing Congress to include HD radio in the PERFORM ACT, HD/IBOC is already stalled, plus there is no consumer demand for this technology, as the above article states.

 

[autopaint-1]

Hey guys what are you going to believe your own eyes or what Say no has read. How is it that we have all these people who have actual HD experience and a few who haven't even heard it and yet those are the people telling us that we are wrong? I guess what make this entire debate bearable is that no matter what the Say No people say IBOC is a reality. I guess there are people in this world who don't really believe that we landed on the moon either.

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

A response, as typical, with no technical merit - try, "staying on topic", and respond, with some technical merit, to the articles I posted. What a joke..

 

[autopaint-1]

Technical merit? I passed my Extra Class amateur exam on Varrick street years ago and have had my technical merrit badge for years. Here's an answer to you and it's on topic. I live 25 miles from NYC. I have worked in the industry in the number one market in the country as an engineer for nearly 30 years and my Receptor HD workd perfectly and I rceeive no interference on any station in my market that I listen to. Now what do you want to discuss? Maybe just walk about from the computer and turn on the television as a distraction for awhile. You might consider this off topic comment for a moment. [EDIT]

[EDIT-namecalling]

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

I am not talking about your technical merits, although they certainly don't compare with Dr. Conrad's qualifications, but countering my posts with any technical discussions/merit, but you all can't, because you know the problems with HD/IBOC. Funny thing, that the long-wire antenna isn't good enough to use with the HD Raptor; you have to use a dipole antenna - just my point, about coverage/reception problems with HD/IBOC ! You still have not addressed the points made, in the articles that I referred to. My digital PLL, and all other AM/FM analog radios, easily get by on the internal ferrite-bar antennas ! Imagine that ! I get WWL New Orleans (1000 miles) and WHO Des Moines (900 miles), from Maryland, easily at night, but with all the issues on the AM band, at night with HD/IBOC, that will never be approved by the FCC - and no way would HD/IBOC propagate that far, anyway. Like the general public, is going to tolerate having to hook up, and have a dipole antenna laying around. And with the power consumption requirements with HD radios, they can never be portable - but, this is a portable society ! Gosh, I wonder why, a dipole antenna has to be used to receive HD/IBOC !

 

[davideduardo]

I am not talking about your technical merits, although they certainly don't compare with Dr. Conrad's qualifications, but countering my posts with any technical discussions/merit, but you all can't, because you know the problems with HD/IBOC. Funny thing, that the long-wire antenna isn't good enough to use with the HD Raptor; you have to use a dipole antenna - just my point, about coverage/reception problems with HD/IBOC ! You still have not addressed the points made, in the articles that I referred to. My digital PLL, and all other AM/FM analog radios, easily get by on the internal ferrite-bar antennas ! Imagine that ! I get WWL New Orleans (1000 miles) and WHO Des Moines (900 miles), from Maryland, easily at night, but with all the issues on the AM band, at night with HD/IBOC, that will never be approved by the FCC - and no way would HD/IBOC propagate that far, anyway. Like the general public, is going to tolerate having to hook up, and have a dipole antenna laying around. And with the power consumption requirements with HD radios, they can never be portable - but, this is a portable society ! Gosh, I wonder why, a dipole antenna has to be used to receive HD/IBOC !

You are missing a couple of important points.

1. The Intel-iBiquity alliance has a stated purpose of developin an AM & FM HD chip that is much lower in power consumtion and has a smaller form factor and costs less to fabricate.
2. We are at the very beginning of the HD process, with the first phases limited to getting stations on and programming on HD 2 channels.
3. HD FM sounds considerably better. It does not require the degree of limiting FM does to overcome noise, and it doe snot have the nasty HF preemphasis.
4. HD-2 channels will offer double the number of programming options, a very definite advantage when the use of the channels is free.
5. HD AM, despite its defects and the whole night issue shounds very much better than analog AM.
6. Broadcasters make no money and get no benefit from skywave listening. They get no benefit from listening outside the local market, in fact.
7. Sacrificing out of market coverage for improved in market performance is a huge gain.
8. THe BA HD receiver is not a good design. Judging HD based on one bad radio is less than objective.

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

Hey David,

Have you visited rec.radio.shortwave, lately ? At least, you are one HD/IBOC supporter, that is civil and knows what they are talking about - I know you do, I was part of rec.radio.shortwave, for a while. What a shame, there are so many lunatics here, its "sister" site, and rec.radio.shortwave. At least, you are on who can, "agree to disagree", so don't let me down.

I have heard diferent opinions on the audio quality of HD/IBOC (Dr. Conrad would disagree with you), but in all reality, I bet a majority of people are satisfied with AM/FM, or just don't care - I really can't tell the difference between a CD and FM stereo, but remember that an analog signal cannot be fully duplicated in a digital stream (as I remember from college calculus, taking the limit/integral, of a curve, or analog signal, is only approximate, as one reaches the limit of the curve).

Also, I have heard differing opinions, on whether broadcasters are interested outside their core areas - again, Dr. Conrad would disagreee with you, and shows such as, Air America, Coast to Coast AM, and most other talk shows, such as Lionel and Scott Sloan WLW depend on skywave propagation.

But, I believe the whole HD/IBOC issue comes down to:

1) Public interest, which isn't there.
2) Getting HD/IBOC radios into retail stores - again, Best Buy is a good example.
3) HD/IBOC is already a, "dead horse", due to the popularity of iPods, Internet streaming, cellular phone downloads, and certainly, satellite radio. These are exciting technologies, but HD/IBOC just deals with old technology - who cares ?
4) HD/IBOC won't save terrestrial radio, but maybe new programming might help.
5) The quality of AM/FM is very good - "don't fix it, if it isn't broke".
6) Too many technical issues, with implementing HD/IBOC, especially on the AM band.
7) The FCC and RIAA have already stalled HD/IBOC.
8 There are bound to be formal protests and class-action lawsuits, by the interfered stations, to the FCC.

I could be repost a bunch of articles to back my opinions, but that shouldn't be necessary.

 

[davideduardo]

I have heard diferent opinions on the audio quality of HD/IBOC (Dr. Conrad would disagree with you), but in all reality, I bet a majority of people are satisfied with AM/FM, or just don't care - I really can't tell the difference between a CD and FM stereo, but remember that an analog signal cannot be fully duplicated in a digital stream (as I remember from college calculus, taking the limit/integral, of a curve, or analog signal, is only approximate, as one reaches the limit of the curve).

Also, I have heard differing opinions, on whether broadcasters are interested outside their core areas - again, Dr. Conrad would disagreee with you, and shows such as, Air America, Coast to Coast AM, and most other talk shows, such as Lionel and Scott Sloan WLW depend on skywave propagation.

But, I believe the whole HD/IBOC issue comes down to:

1) Public interest, which isn't there.
2) Getting HD/IBOC radios into retail stores - again, Best Buy is a good example.
3) HD/IBOC is already a, "dead horse", due to the popularity of iPods, Internet streaming, cellular phone downloads, and certainly, satellite radio. These are exciting technologies, but HD/IBOC just deals with old technology - who cares ?
4) HD/IBOC won't save terrestrial radio, but maybe new programming might help.
5) The quality of AM/FM is very good - "don't fix it, if it isn't broke".
6) Too many technical issues, with implementing HD/IBOC, especially on the AM band.
7) The FCC and RIAA have already stalled HD/IBOC.
8 There are bound to be formal protests and class-action lawsuits, by the interfered stations, to the FCC.

I could be repost a bunch of articles to back my opinions, but that shouldn't be necessary.

Experts usually disagree with users as to the quality of things. Experts pan McDonalds, mass apeal movies, youth fashion, hiip-hop and lots of other things using criteria that is seemingly not important to those who are just consumers. AM HD with this month's 2.2.5 upgrade of the firmware is even better sounding. There were many of us who heard it two years ago who thought it was truly dreadful. Now, it is, to me and the folks I work with, much better than analog. What damages it is any instance of cascading codecs, so many stations will have to provide audio in new manners to the transmitter and HD equipment.

There are practically no stations left that cater to or care about listening outside the local groundwave coverage on AM and the primary FM contours. Even the truckers have moved to satellite, since it offers uninterrupted reception while on the move. For example, the Lionel affiliiates are local stations with nearly no exceptions... stations that do not get any usable skywave reception due to many co-channel and adjacent channel stations. WLW, which has a mighty groundwave signal, is all but out of the skywave business. There is very little nightime radio revenue to start with.

The HD rollout of receivers is just starting. The first moves were to get adequate station counts up, and then to add HD2. Thiss has taken longer than expected... but the receiver manufacturers were stung by AM Stereo in the 80's and want to see lots of larger market stations making a commitment.

As to public interest, and speaking of AM, where is the public interest in allowing the band do die? It is now a mostly 45+ band, and is getting older in compositions each year. Unless some gutsy moves are made, we will just lose the whole proposition. There is certainly public interest in adding more free choices on HD2, and improving the quality significantly.

Satellie is the only viable competitive technology. It has hit a brick wall in sales, and XM blew up its management structure today ahead of the earnings call. iPod use is no different than cassetttes or portable CDs. It has a different use. Radio has already shown in multiple iterations its ability to exist side by side with music playback systems. Streaming and phone audio depend on paid for connections, so there is an ongoing cost and, still, bandwidth issues. I would settle for a cell hone that did not drop out as I drive. Not my idea of a music delivery system. When a decent system for delivery comes, such as the much touted WiMax which will work once the infrastructure is adequate, radio will use such systems for the its content delivery.

Programming on radio is designed to attract listeners who are attractive to advertisers. And it is well researched with consumers to give what is desired by such gorups. Were there "new" formats or alternatives, we would be doing them. In fact, nearly every company I know spends money researching unsatisfied demands to find new formats or approaches.

AM HD has no technical issues. The only impediment is at the FCC level. Radio does not care about skywave listening, so we would be pleased to go 24/7 instantly. The FCC is being more cautious, as is its duty.

The FCC has not stopped or stalled FM HD at all. More stations are coming each week. AM is waiting on the night issue. And the RIAA is just being the RIAA; they have not caused any staitons to cease HD broadcasts and a deal will be worked out just as for streaming. Nothing different.

The FCc does not guarantee fringe coverage to any station. They have well defined protected night contours, and anything anyoen gets beyond that is not protected, nor is it an acquired right.

 

[autopaint-1]

Thank you David. I have passed the frustration point with 'Sayno', pages ago and on other sites (where he uses different names) as well and because of frustration have even resorted to name calling, even though what I said wasn't all that terrible or off base. Anyway, thank you for chiming in.