M
Mike Walker
Guest
I've never been a fan of AM HD, but how wonderful is this news....700 WLW (the radio station) is now broadcasting IN HD! Can you spell i-r-o-n-y?
-
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
7
700WLW
Guest
Mike Walker said:
"Will Clear Channel's slump affect the HD rollout ?"
http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,65160.0.html
Get out your trumpets - this is old news ! What did you expect, they are part of Clear Channel ! Wait, until either Clear Channel goes under, or WLW has alienated so many listeners, with IBUZZ, that they turn it off !
I bet they'll pull IBUZ off WLW within 6 months. AM IBUZ in hybrid mode is a joke. It's the last big joke on the AM radio industry. It's so far from being the savior of AM it's pathetic.
For the most part IBAC for FM isn't a bad solution. At least it has some merit in that it doesn't interfere with MOST other stations on the band. It's signal is about half of the analog, but in many cases it's useful at least. AM IBUZ, in contrast, interferes with the station it's supposed to help, and requires a nearly perfect signal to be decoded. So much for the blue-sky promises of being a way to help AM get around noise. There IS very little noise when you have a nearly perfect signal like what is required to get AM IBUZ.
For the most part IBAC for FM isn't a bad solution. At least it has some merit in that it doesn't interfere with MOST other stations on the band. It's signal is about half of the analog, but in many cases it's useful at least. AM IBUZ, in contrast, interferes with the station it's supposed to help, and requires a nearly perfect signal to be decoded. So much for the blue-sky promises of being a way to help AM get around noise. There IS very little noise when you have a nearly perfect signal like what is required to get AM IBUZ.
OKCRadioGuy said:
That is the irony of the situation. IBOC on a full power FM works pretty well. On a lower power FM station, the verdict is still out. On AM, it works well if you have a great signal. In that case, analog still works pretty well, so why bother? My assessment of HD is that it is fine for flame-throwers, not very useful for Class A's. Class D's, Translators and LPFM. For AM's, I suggest early euthanasia. There has to be a better way to do this.
In case you have not followed my earlier posts, I am not against Digital Radio. I think it is our future. I just think there must be a better way. I'm willing to wait until that comes along. I just don't see a big hurry to convert to digital. What’s your hurry?
Mike Walker said:
WLW has been using IBOC for about 13 months. Their digital footprint is massive. I was amazed that they sounded like a local FM station - in Columbus. Their digital reception is reliable to about 100 miles from the tower, spotty up to about 140 miles and sporatic up to 180 miles.
7
700WLW
Guest
Mike Walker said:
Here is correspondence, that I just received from WLW:
******,
All techological advances come at the cost of some pain. The fact is we live in a digital world and 700WLW needs to continue to be at the front of these advances. Take it from me, someone that is very in tune with the sound of the station, we experimented with the IBOC system and I had them take it off. In fact 700WLW stayed off the IBOC for almost a year until corrections and advances were made so there was little affect to the analog signal.
700WLW from its beginning was at the front of technology and will continue to be so.
As always, thank you for listening. It is appreciated.
****** *****
700WLW
Politically correct - what fools !
700WLW said:Mike Walker said:
Here is correspondence, that I just received from WLW:
******,
All techological advances come at the cost of some pain. The fact is we live in a digital world and 700WLW needs to continue to be at the front of these advances. Take it from me, someone that is very in tune with the sound of the station, we experimented with the IBOC system and I had them take it off. In fact 700WLW stayed off the IBOC for almost a year until corrections and advances were made so there was little affect to the analog signal.
700WLW from its beginning was at the front of technology and will continue to be so.
As always, thank you for listening. It is appreciated.
****** *****
700WLW
Politically correct - what fools !
I want the Kleenex concession for this room. Each day the crying amongst some becomes louder and louder.
7
700WLW
Guest
R.F. Burns said:700WLW said:Mike Walker said:
Here is correspondence, that I just received from WLW:
******,
All techological advances come at the cost of some pain. The fact is we live in a digital world and 700WLW needs to continue to be at the front of these advances. Take it from me, someone that is very in tune with the sound of the station, we experimented with the IBOC system and I had them take it off. In fact 700WLW stayed off the IBOC for almost a year until corrections and advances were made so there was little affect to the analog signal.
700WLW from its beginning was at the front of technology and will continue to be so.
As always, thank you for listening. It is appreciated.
****** *****
700WLW
Politically correct - what fools !
I want the Kleenex concession for this room. Each day the crying amongst some becomes louder and louder.
Unfortunately, it is funny and sad, at the same time - for stations to believe that HD/IBOC is going to be the great savior of radio, when only, HD/IBOC antagonizes the majority of listeners, with IBUZZ and less coverage. Obviously, this was just a rote response to all the IBUZZ complainers - he didn't answer any of my questions, but I provided him, with a bunch of links. WLW, and the rest of the fools, are just broadcasting HD into thin-air. I am just glad, that I am not in the broadcast business. If you'de like, I'll give you all of my used Kleenex !
700WLW said:R.F. Burns said:700WLW said:Mike Walker said:
Here is correspondence, that I just received from WLW:
******,
All techological advances come at the cost of some pain. The fact is we live in a digital world and 700WLW needs to continue to be at the front of these advances. Take it from me, someone that is very in tune with the sound of the station, we experimented with the IBOC system and I had them take it off. In fact 700WLW stayed off the IBOC for almost a year until corrections and advances were made so there was little affect to the analog signal.
700WLW from its beginning was at the front of technology and will continue to be so.
As always, thank you for listening. It is appreciated.
****** *****
700WLW
Politically correct - what fools !
I want the Kleenex concession for this room. Each day the crying amongst some becomes louder and louder.
Unfortunately, it is funny and sad, at the same time - for stations to believe that HD/IBOC is going to be the great savior of radio, when only, HD/IBOC antagonizes the majority of listeners, with IBUZZ and less coverage. Obviously, this was just a rote response to all the IBUZZ complainers - he didn't answer any of my questions, but I provided him, with a bunch of links. WLW, and the rest of the fools, are just broadcasting HD into thin-air. I am just glad, that I am not in the broadcast business. If you'de like, I'll give you all of my used Kleenex !
And for those of us with more than 3 decades in major market radio I happily agree with you about your not being in broadcasting. We have enough problems. I guess we can throw out those QSL cards. I'm looking forward to 2010 when IBOC has taken hold and you guys will have to find something else to obsess over. Don't believe me, only time will tell.
7
700WLW
Guest
R.F. Burns said:700WLW said:R.F. Burns said:700WLW said:Mike Walker said:
Here is correspondence, that I just received from WLW:
******,
All techological advances come at the cost of some pain. The fact is we live in a digital world and 700WLW needs to continue to be at the front of these advances. Take it from me, someone that is very in tune with the sound of the station, we experimented with the IBOC system and I had them take it off. In fact 700WLW stayed off the IBOC for almost a year until corrections and advances were made so there was little affect to the analog signal.
700WLW from its beginning was at the front of technology and will continue to be so.
As always, thank you for listening. It is appreciated.
****** *****
700WLW
Politically correct - what fools !
I want the Kleenex concession for this room. Each day the crying amongst some becomes louder and louder.
Unfortunately, it is funny and sad, at the same time - for stations to believe that HD/IBOC is going to be the great savior of radio, when only, HD/IBOC antagonizes the majority of listeners, with IBUZZ and less coverage. Obviously, this was just a rote response to all the IBUZZ complainers - he didn't answer any of my questions, but I provided him, with a bunch of links. WLW, and the rest of the fools, are just broadcasting HD into thin-air. I am just glad, that I am not in the broadcast business. If you'de like, I'll give you all of my used Kleenex !
And for those of us with more than 3 decades in major market radio I happily agree with you about your not being in broadcasting. We have enough problems. I guess we can throw out those QSL cards. I'm looking forward to 2010 when IBOC has taken hold and you guys will have to find something else to obsess over. Don't believe me, only time will tell.
http://www.alexaholic.com/hdradio.com+ibiquity.com+hdradioalliance.com+sirius.com+xmradio.com
Not, at this rate - as Ramsey said, it's a slow race to the bottom !
700WLW said:R.F. Burns said:700WLW said:R.F. Burns said:700WLW said:Mike Walker said:
Here is correspondence, that I just received from WLW:
******,
All techological advances come at the cost of some pain. The fact is we live in a digital world and 700WLW needs to continue to be at the front of these advances. Take it from me, someone that is very in tune with the sound of the station, we experimented with the IBOC system and I had them take it off. In fact 700WLW stayed off the IBOC for almost a year until corrections and advances were made so there was little affect to the analog signal.
700WLW from its beginning was at the front of technology and will continue to be so.
As always, thank you for listening. It is appreciated.
****** *****
700WLW
Politically correct - what fools !
I want the Kleenex concession for this room. Each day the crying amongst some becomes louder and louder.
Unfortunately, it is funny and sad, at the same time - for stations to believe that HD/IBOC is going to be the great savior of radio, when only, HD/IBOC antagonizes the majority of listeners, with IBUZZ and less coverage. Obviously, this was just a rote response to all the IBUZZ complainers - he didn't answer any of my questions, but I provided him, with a bunch of links. WLW, and the rest of the fools, are just broadcasting HD into thin-air. I am just glad, that I am not in the broadcast business. If you'de like, I'll give you all of my used Kleenex !
And for those of us with more than 3 decades in major market radio I happily agree with you about your not being in broadcasting. We have enough problems. I guess we can throw out those QSL cards. I'm looking forward to 2010 when IBOC has taken hold and you guys will have to find something else to obsess over. Don't believe me, only time will tell.
http://www.alexaholic.com/hdradio.com+ibiquity.com+hdradioalliance.com+sirius.com+xmradio.com
Not, at this rate - as Ramsey said, it's a slow race to the bottom !
If Mr Ramsey is always so correct, why isn't he consulting anyone now? I'm working in the industry as I write this, he isn't. I wish him well but the industry isn't listening to his rants anymore than they are yours.
R.F. Burns said:700WLW said:R.F. Burns said:700WLW said:Mike Walker said:
Here is correspondence, that I just received from WLW:
******,
All techological advances come at the cost of some pain. The fact is we live in a digital world and 700WLW needs to continue to be at the front of these advances. Take it from me, someone that is very in tune with the sound of the station, we experimented with the IBOC system and I had them take it off. In fact 700WLW stayed off the IBOC for almost a year until corrections and advances were made so there was little affect to the analog signal.
700WLW from its beginning was at the front of technology and will continue to be so.
As always, thank you for listening. It is appreciated.
****** *****
700WLW
Politically correct - what fools !
I want the Kleenex concession for this room. Each day the crying amongst some becomes louder and louder.
Unfortunately, it is funny and sad, at the same time - for stations to believe that HD/IBOC is going to be the great savior of radio, when only, HD/IBOC antagonizes the majority of listeners, with IBUZZ and less coverage. Obviously, this was just a rote response to all the IBUZZ complainers - he didn't answer any of my questions, but I provided him, with a bunch of links. WLW, and the rest of the fools, are just broadcasting HD into thin-air. I am just glad, that I am not in the broadcast business. If you'de like, I'll give you all of my used Kleenex !
And for those of us with more than 3 decades in major market radio I happily agree with you about your not being in broadcasting. We have enough problems. I guess we can throw out those QSL cards. I'm looking forward to 2010 when IBOC has taken hold and you guys will have to find something else to obsess over. Don't believe me, only time will tell.
Time will tell? I need no more listening to definitively state every AM that goes HD sounds awful, RIGHT NOW, as soon as they
start, and every podunk rimshot into chicago now sounds better than the big ones currently running IBOC.
I am >this< close to making a trip downtown to leave some commentary in some public files.
This hare-brain scheme has broken about 10 radios in current usage, of a radio collection of about 40-50,
mostly working, but now all "ruint" by the Alliance's pig-headed insistance upon delivering data in a wavelength where phase distortion
will limit the coverage of HD decoding yet the destruction induced travels far beyond on 4 other AM channels.
I see the IBOC as causing little interference to the host "channel" analog-limited at 5kc, especially over 400-500 miles.
The flamethrowers really kick in above/below the host channel.
I worked liike mad to keep my RF environement pure, and now radio stations are going to hand me a signal that is
PRE-INTERFERED WITH? Not Acceptable.
How wonderful? WGN, WBBM, WLS currently operate as disemboweled zombies of the borg in daytime, rewarding listeners with muffled audio and continuous background hissing.
"Wonderful" doesn't break anyone's radios, regardless of how they choose to use it, and regardless of how you ( as a broadcaster) think
they ought to use it.
"Wonderful" doesn't pass noxious gas in your face while offering to sell you a clothes-pin.
M
Mike Walker
Guest
Tom reread what I said. I DON'T think AM HD is "wonderful". I think it's "wonderful" that the station someone as anti-hd, even to the point of near-religious obsession as 700WLW took for their namesake has gone HD is "wonderful". HD is spreading so fast that 700WLW's namesake IS NOW HD. I should have probably put "How ironic is this?" rather than "How wonderful is this?" But I hope now you understand what I meant.
The Marlboro man dying of Lung cancer is ironic. Jenna Bush writing a book, when her father's likely not read one since "My Pet Goat" is IRONIC! 700WLW's namesake going HD? COME ON, THAT is ironic too! OBVIOUSLY God has a (sometimes cruel) sense of humor!
The Marlboro man dying of Lung cancer is ironic. Jenna Bush writing a book, when her father's likely not read one since "My Pet Goat" is IRONIC! 700WLW's namesake going HD? COME ON, THAT is ironic too! OBVIOUSLY God has a (sometimes cruel) sense of humor!
7
700WLW
Guest
Mike Walker said:
Most of the HD Radio Alliance owned stations, especially the "clears", have gone HD - big surprise. Worst case, I can just DX to Canada, to get what I want, through simulcast talk shows - Canada has already stated that they will not approve IBOC for AM nighttime:
"Digital radio in Canada"
"The only comprehensive technical comments came from the CBC. They stated that AM-IBOC "...would create a serious degradation in sound quality for existing AM stations." (*all* AM stations, not just the ones adopting IBOC) They also state that due to interference concerns, "...IBOC transmission at night is not practical." As for FM-IBOC, implementation "...would require additional first and second adjacent channel coordination." and "...would make it difficult to coordinate the CBC's network operations. The Commission concurs with the CBC: "...digital IBOC signals will add a certain amount of noise to a station's analog signal, marginally reducing its effective service area." and "...IBOC signals can degrade the service areas of technically related stations located in the same or adjacent markets." (both of these premises have been presented by DXers in the U.S. and are generally denied by IBOC supporters. It is interesting to see them accepted, on the record, by the Canadian regulatory authorities.)"
http://americanbandscan.blogspot.com/2006/12/digital-radio-in-canada.html
"50,000-Watt AM stations"
http://www.northpine.com/broadcast/50kwam.html
Too bad !
E
EasyPeazy
Guest
700WLW said:Mike Walker said:
Most of the HD Radio Alliance owned stations, especially the "clears", have gone HD - big surprise. Worst case, I can just DX to Canada, to get what I want, through simulcast talk shows - Canada has already stated that they will not approve IBOC for AM nighttime:
"Digital radio in Canada"
"The only comprehensive technical comments came from the CBC. They stated that AM-IBOC "...would create a serious degradation in sound quality for existing AM stations." (*all* AM stations, not just the ones adopting IBOC) They also state that due to interference concerns, "...IBOC transmission at night is not practical." As for FM-IBOC, implementation "...would require additional first and second adjacent channel coordination." and "...would make it difficult to coordinate the CBC's network operations. The Commission concurs with the CBC: "...digital IBOC signals will add a certain amount of noise to a station's analog signal, marginally reducing its effective service area." and "...IBOC signals can degrade the service areas of technically related stations located in the same or adjacent markets." (both of these premises have been presented by DXers in the U.S. and are generally denied by IBOC supporters. It is interesting to see them accepted, on the record, by the Canadian regulatory authorities.)"
http://americanbandscan.blogspot.com/2006/12/digital-radio-in-canada.html
"50,000-Watt AM stations"
http://www.northpine.com/broadcast/50kwam.html
Too bad !
Off-topic (as usual.) How a discussion about HD operation on 700 WLW would lead anyone to think about Canada is beyond me.
7
700WLW
Guest
Canadian IBOC is part of HD Radio.
700WLW said:
In fact, the CRTC and Industry Canada just began about 60 days ago the first official study of HD, and has issued no finding at all.
Neither you nor I have any idea whether they will decide that the benefits, such as perhaps saving AM, will outweight the "purity" of the band and make it worthwhile.
Canada, as you fail to acknowledge, is recducing significantly the number ot total AM stations, having move dhundreds to FM in the last decade. Even the CBC has decided FM is better in most places, and turned in its AM licenses in Toronto, Montreal, etc.
M
Mike Walker
Guest
Of course the CBC, in it's infinite wisdom, has recently decided there's no value to shortwave transmissions. In an emergency, we're supposed to get our information from the internet. With the power, AND ALL INTERNET SERVICE off. STUPID! The internet is great, but it ain't radio, and can never do what radio can.
R.F. Burns predicted:
To which Tom Wells got angry enough to write:
Tom, I hope you DO put some commentary into some public files.
But with regard to Mr. Burns, you must remember, he is a person who works for a large broadcaster in Manhattan, as recently stated by him in "Lack of consumer votes/reviews indicative of HD's failure":
He also introduced us all to the concept of "IBOC competition". What is "IBOC competition" you ask?
R.F. Burns previously stated in "HD AM in NJ/NY":
To which I extrapolated from this very revealing statement in the same thread:
This indicates to me that perhaps at least some of the proponents of AM IBOC consider that it may used as a tool by larger stations in larger markets to blow smaller adjacent channel stations in neighboring markets away. Is this what some of the larger stations in larger markets are doing? Who knows?
Maybe the birthright of the larger broadcasters is enough to justify this kind of adjacent channel interference. What do you think the FCC thinks is the price the public should pay for an "acceptable" level of deliberate adjacent channel interference and do you think that it would be conceivable that the FCC could possibly approve a technology that does this?
Remember this! If you say nothing, then the FCC may very well give that approval. Please, if you disagree that this kind of adjacent channel interference is acceptable at any public price, do what Tom Wells is ">this< close" to doing and put some comments into a public file. Anything you can do is better than doing nothing at all.
To which Tom Wells got angry enough to write:
Tom, I hope you DO put some commentary into some public files.
But with regard to Mr. Burns, you must remember, he is a person who works for a large broadcaster in Manhattan, as recently stated by him in "Lack of consumer votes/reviews indicative of HD's failure":
He also introduced us all to the concept of "IBOC competition". What is "IBOC competition" you ask?
R.F. Burns previously stated in "HD AM in NJ/NY":
To which I extrapolated from this very revealing statement in the same thread:
This indicates to me that perhaps at least some of the proponents of AM IBOC consider that it may used as a tool by larger stations in larger markets to blow smaller adjacent channel stations in neighboring markets away. Is this what some of the larger stations in larger markets are doing? Who knows?
Maybe the birthright of the larger broadcasters is enough to justify this kind of adjacent channel interference. What do you think the FCC thinks is the price the public should pay for an "acceptable" level of deliberate adjacent channel interference and do you think that it would be conceivable that the FCC could possibly approve a technology that does this?
Remember this! If you say nothing, then the FCC may very well give that approval. Please, if you disagree that this kind of adjacent channel interference is acceptable at any public price, do what Tom Wells is ">this< close" to doing and put some comments into a public file. Anything you can do is better than doing nothing at all.
- Status