N
neanderpol
Guest
Has anyone considered what will happen with cume erosion once stations start broadcasting multiple signals in HD?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
S
spilot113
Guest
> Has anyone considered what will happen with cume erosion
> once stations start broadcasting multiple signals in HD?
Why would there be "cume erosion"?
If I am listening to WAAF (channel A *or* channel B), I am still listening to WAAF, right? I would think it's a zero sum game...no?
> once stations start broadcasting multiple signals in HD?
Why would there be "cume erosion"?
If I am listening to WAAF (channel A *or* channel B), I am still listening to WAAF, right? I would think it's a zero sum game...no?
> > Has anyone considered what will happen with cume erosion
> > once stations start broadcasting multiple signals in HD?
>
> Why would there be "cume erosion"?
>
> If I am listening to WAAF (channel A *or* channel B), I am
> still listening to WAAF, right? I would think it's a zero
> sum game...no?
It depends.
If someone is listening to 107.3 and switches from traditional analog to the primary HD signal, they will simply hear a simulcast of WAAF. No change in cume or quarter-hour there.
However, with multicasting, two or three ADDITIONAL HD-only channels can be squeezed in ALONG WITH the main HD simulcast. These channels will carry completely seperate programming, so, yes, these independent feeds will impact WAAF's ratings.
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by HHH on 11/09/05 04:01 AM.</FONT></P>
> > once stations start broadcasting multiple signals in HD?
>
> Why would there be "cume erosion"?
>
> If I am listening to WAAF (channel A *or* channel B), I am
> still listening to WAAF, right? I would think it's a zero
> sum game...no?
It depends.
If someone is listening to 107.3 and switches from traditional analog to the primary HD signal, they will simply hear a simulcast of WAAF. No change in cume or quarter-hour there.
However, with multicasting, two or three ADDITIONAL HD-only channels can be squeezed in ALONG WITH the main HD simulcast. These channels will carry completely seperate programming, so, yes, these independent feeds will impact WAAF's ratings.
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by HHH on 11/09/05 04:01 AM.</FONT></P>
N
neanderpol
Guest
> If someone is listening to 107.3 and switches from
> traditional analog to the primary HD signal, they will
> simply hear a simulcast of WAAF. No change in cume or
> quarter-hour there.
>
> However, with multicasting, two or three ADDITIONAL HD-only
> channels can be squeezed in ALONG WITH the main HD
> simulcast. These channels will carry completely seperate
> programming, so, yes, these independent feeds will impact
> WAAF's ratings.
Not just AAF. Anyone who multicasts. How will that be sold as advertising? Who's job gets lost when you lose 40% of your audience to the secondary signal?
These are real questions that might have to be answered pretty quickly.
> traditional analog to the primary HD signal, they will
> simply hear a simulcast of WAAF. No change in cume or
> quarter-hour there.
>
> However, with multicasting, two or three ADDITIONAL HD-only
> channels can be squeezed in ALONG WITH the main HD
> simulcast. These channels will carry completely seperate
> programming, so, yes, these independent feeds will impact
> WAAF's ratings.
Not just AAF. Anyone who multicasts. How will that be sold as advertising? Who's job gets lost when you lose 40% of your audience to the secondary signal?
These are real questions that might have to be answered pretty quickly.
S
spilot113
Guest
> If someone is listening to 107.3 and switches from
> traditional analog to the primary HD signal, they will
> simply hear a simulcast of WAAF. No change in cume or
> quarter-hour there.
>
> However, with multicasting, two or three ADDITIONAL HD-only
> channels can be squeezed in ALONG WITH the main HD
> simulcast. These channels will carry completely seperate
> programming, so, yes, these independent feeds will impact
> WAAF's ratings.
There is no "main" distinction among the HD channels....only the fact that one of them will probably carry the same audio as the traditional analog signal.
A station is not required to rebroadcast the analog audio on one of the HD channels. So, is that case, there is no 'main' channel...even in the listeners mind.
I don't think arbitron has made any announcement about how they plan to handle this.
I can see stations making the case that they are still listening to the "same station" (which is what the diary asks them to list) regardless of which 'stream' they are actually deriving the audio from.
As of now, even when people write in an ARB diary that they listen to a station "on the computer" (i.e..streaming audio), there is no place to distinguish this...only AM-FM or SAT
In any event, stations who are embracing the whole "HD Radio" thing....aren't expecting it to show up as a cume erosion.
But then again, who knows......this is still a couple of years from the public even knowing about it.
> traditional analog to the primary HD signal, they will
> simply hear a simulcast of WAAF. No change in cume or
> quarter-hour there.
>
> However, with multicasting, two or three ADDITIONAL HD-only
> channels can be squeezed in ALONG WITH the main HD
> simulcast. These channels will carry completely seperate
> programming, so, yes, these independent feeds will impact
> WAAF's ratings.
There is no "main" distinction among the HD channels....only the fact that one of them will probably carry the same audio as the traditional analog signal.
A station is not required to rebroadcast the analog audio on one of the HD channels. So, is that case, there is no 'main' channel...even in the listeners mind.
I don't think arbitron has made any announcement about how they plan to handle this.
I can see stations making the case that they are still listening to the "same station" (which is what the diary asks them to list) regardless of which 'stream' they are actually deriving the audio from.
As of now, even when people write in an ARB diary that they listen to a station "on the computer" (i.e..streaming audio), there is no place to distinguish this...only AM-FM or SAT
In any event, stations who are embracing the whole "HD Radio" thing....aren't expecting it to show up as a cume erosion.
But then again, who knows......this is still a couple of years from the public even knowing about it.
> A station is not required to rebroadcast the analog audio on
> one of the HD channels. So, is that case, there is no
> 'main' channel...even in the listeners mind.
Not true.
When you go "HD" you MUST at least run a mirror image of your analog service in HD....no seperate service allowed on this one. This is because the car radios will automatically switch from digital back to analog in fringe areas or in pockets where the digital signal is unreliable. This is, from what I understand, defined as the "primary HD service".
Now, some stations may opt to multicast IN ADDITION. These are seperate feeds which run at a lower bitrate using the leftover spectrum. These are manually accessed (from what I understand) on the tuner.
I don't understand how anyone could make the case that if you are listening to one of the Multicast streams, the main station gets the rating. The spots on the main station were not heard, so the ad guys are not going to accept this.
The multicast stations will probably have to be treated as seperate stations by the Arbitron.
Maybe Dan or Eli can elaborate on the tech.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by HHH on 11/09/05 01:31 PM.</FONT></P>
> one of the HD channels. So, is that case, there is no
> 'main' channel...even in the listeners mind.
Not true.
When you go "HD" you MUST at least run a mirror image of your analog service in HD....no seperate service allowed on this one. This is because the car radios will automatically switch from digital back to analog in fringe areas or in pockets where the digital signal is unreliable. This is, from what I understand, defined as the "primary HD service".
Now, some stations may opt to multicast IN ADDITION. These are seperate feeds which run at a lower bitrate using the leftover spectrum. These are manually accessed (from what I understand) on the tuner.
I don't understand how anyone could make the case that if you are listening to one of the Multicast streams, the main station gets the rating. The spots on the main station were not heard, so the ad guys are not going to accept this.
The multicast stations will probably have to be treated as seperate stations by the Arbitron.
Maybe Dan or Eli can elaborate on the tech.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by HHH on 11/09/05 01:31 PM.</FONT></P>
W
webcastboy
Guest
> > If someone is listening to 107.3 and switches from
> > traditional analog to the primary HD signal, they will
> > simply hear a simulcast of WAAF. No change in cume or
> > quarter-hour there.
> >
> > However, with multicasting, two or three ADDITIONAL
> HD-only
> > channels can be squeezed in ALONG WITH the main HD
> > simulcast. These channels will carry completely seperate
> > programming, so, yes, these independent feeds will impact
> > WAAF's ratings.
>
>
> Not just AAF. Anyone who multicasts. How will that be sold
> as advertising? Who's job gets lost when you lose 40% of
> your audience to the secondary signal?
>
> These are real questions that might have to be answered
> pretty quickly.
>
They are real questions, yes, but they're not going to be answered anytime soon. There will be a long, ugly battle over it first.
For example, some advertisers are going to insist that since their ad value is diminished by the pool of "WAAF listeners" (I'm oversimplifying, but bear with me) being split three ways: the main analog/HD signal, and two additional HD-only "multicast" signals.
As such, they're going to demand that either their ad gets played on all multicast channels, or that their ads cost less. I smell blood in the water.
Exactly how that breaks down will no doubt be a long and drawn out battle. The existing "value" of advertising is really a gentleman's arrangement based on quasi-scientific (at best) Arbitron measuring. Really it's more that "we've done it this way for 40 years" than anything else. Spots in the world of HD Multicasting doesn't have that history to fall back on.
Of course, HD Radios themselves are few and far between at the moment, and the early models are not Multicast-capable (unless you got an cheaper-than-new upgrade, which last I checked Kenwood stopped doing that over the summer). There's new reports that the release of the majority of the HD Radios promised at NAB last April will not make it to market until January at the soonest. And I think that's being optimistic given how many questions about the "almost-a-standard" the NRSC set in April, too.
So that's a Christmas season down the toliet. Ergo, another year before any sort of real sales of HD Radios start. Precious few auto manufacturers have committed to putting HD Radios in their vehicles, too. And while maybe a quarter to a third of non-translator stations out there have installed HD or committed to doing so (and that's probably being optimistic) a far smaller number have Multicast-capable systems...much less any sort of real programming on those extra channels.
HD Radio has a lot of promise (admittedly more for FM than AM) but it's very much a work in progress. I do worry that by the time it gets figured out the iPod generation will have already forgotten about AM/FM; making it very hard to ever get them back no matter how many technological advances HD gives us.
> > traditional analog to the primary HD signal, they will
> > simply hear a simulcast of WAAF. No change in cume or
> > quarter-hour there.
> >
> > However, with multicasting, two or three ADDITIONAL
> HD-only
> > channels can be squeezed in ALONG WITH the main HD
> > simulcast. These channels will carry completely seperate
> > programming, so, yes, these independent feeds will impact
> > WAAF's ratings.
>
>
> Not just AAF. Anyone who multicasts. How will that be sold
> as advertising? Who's job gets lost when you lose 40% of
> your audience to the secondary signal?
>
> These are real questions that might have to be answered
> pretty quickly.
>
They are real questions, yes, but they're not going to be answered anytime soon. There will be a long, ugly battle over it first.
For example, some advertisers are going to insist that since their ad value is diminished by the pool of "WAAF listeners" (I'm oversimplifying, but bear with me) being split three ways: the main analog/HD signal, and two additional HD-only "multicast" signals.
As such, they're going to demand that either their ad gets played on all multicast channels, or that their ads cost less. I smell blood in the water.
Exactly how that breaks down will no doubt be a long and drawn out battle. The existing "value" of advertising is really a gentleman's arrangement based on quasi-scientific (at best) Arbitron measuring. Really it's more that "we've done it this way for 40 years" than anything else. Spots in the world of HD Multicasting doesn't have that history to fall back on.
Of course, HD Radios themselves are few and far between at the moment, and the early models are not Multicast-capable (unless you got an cheaper-than-new upgrade, which last I checked Kenwood stopped doing that over the summer). There's new reports that the release of the majority of the HD Radios promised at NAB last April will not make it to market until January at the soonest. And I think that's being optimistic given how many questions about the "almost-a-standard" the NRSC set in April, too.
So that's a Christmas season down the toliet. Ergo, another year before any sort of real sales of HD Radios start. Precious few auto manufacturers have committed to putting HD Radios in their vehicles, too. And while maybe a quarter to a third of non-translator stations out there have installed HD or committed to doing so (and that's probably being optimistic) a far smaller number have Multicast-capable systems...much less any sort of real programming on those extra channels.
HD Radio has a lot of promise (admittedly more for FM than AM) but it's very much a work in progress. I do worry that by the time it gets figured out the iPod generation will have already forgotten about AM/FM; making it very hard to ever get them back no matter how many technological advances HD gives us.
S
spilot113
Guest
> When you go "HD" you MUST at least run a mirror image of
> your analog service in HD....no seperate service allowed on
> this one.
And where is this specified?
I don't believe there are any FCC rules to that effect.
> I don't understand how anyone could make the case that if
> you are listening to one of the Multicast streams, the main
> station gets the rating.
Becuase the Arbitron diary (only) asks you to list what "station" you are listening to. ...not which 'stream', etc.
> The spots on the main station were
> not heard, so the ad guys are not going to accept this.
Until Arbitron makes some policy decisions, (which they will do soon, no doubt), that is the way the current system is set up.
> your analog service in HD....no seperate service allowed on
> this one.
And where is this specified?
I don't believe there are any FCC rules to that effect.
> I don't understand how anyone could make the case that if
> you are listening to one of the Multicast streams, the main
> station gets the rating.
Becuase the Arbitron diary (only) asks you to list what "station" you are listening to. ...not which 'stream', etc.
> The spots on the main station were
> not heard, so the ad guys are not going to accept this.
Until Arbitron makes some policy decisions, (which they will do soon, no doubt), that is the way the current system is set up.
- Status