• 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

iBiquity HD problems for adjacent signals?

> > Interesting. I've never gotten any off-list emails. You
> > must just come off as an honest guy or something. If any
> of
> > you lurkers are reading, let me hear from you. My email
> > address is easy to find. Heck, I'll give you my number
> and
> > you can call me!
>
> You don't seem to understand. I've dealt with thousands
> people at stations that were affiliated with my networks and
> syndication companies over many years. The off list emails
> are from people I've worked with in one capacity or another
> who are now captives of the HD Dominion and can't speak out.
> They know I won't betray their trust, so they share their
> thoughts. Seems logical to me.
>
> > As for you being a mouthpiece, can't argue with that one.
>
> I'll take that as a compliment even though I can't imagine
> it was intended as one. See above.
>
> Rich
>

TOTAL CRAP RICH! Now you are to the point of making things up???? NO ONE that I am aware of is being stiffled as to not be able to speak up about any HD Radio issues. If they are not speaking up it is THEIR issue, as they are sitting on their hands.

If they dont want to implement HD, then they can move on to a company that does not want to run HD.

I too have not had ANY off board emails for or against. I take that back. I had ONE, and we discussed how his receiver was reacting to the HD signal.

I invite anyone to feel free to email me. If you cannot find my email I will give it to you.

I am all for complete open discussion as long as we deal with FACTS and not made up crap or how we "FEEL".
 
>
> Since most installations use two transmitters with high
> level combiners into a single antenna, what would cause this
> signal loss? Would it be the same if separate antennas were
> used? I do know the digital loss in the combiner is
> tremendous. You simply crank up the analog power to
> compensate.
>
> Is it actual signal loss or some conflict in the sidebands
> that causes the receiver to be less sensitive to the signal?
>
>
> In the case of AM the adjacent channel interference is
> severe. to the point of blotting out stations. The classic
> example in the Northeast is WBZ/KDKA. Between about 4 and
> 6pm in Winter KDKA (1020) is wiped out in Western MA by
> WBZ's (1030) hash. On the dot at 6pm KDKA comes bombing in
> when WBZ shuts IBUZ off.
>

So how is KDKA doing in th ratings in Western MA? Are they selling any ads in Sprinfield? Hass it hurt their bottum line? How many people are truly effected by WBZ running HD Radio for 2 hours during one month?

> I realize I'm outside both stations' protected contours.
> However, it seems to be a real warning about what will
> happen when the majority of AMs light up. That's why I
> propose that the FCC allow AM IBUZ operation 24/7 right now,
> so stations can fix interference problems before they get
> unmanagable.
>
> Don't expect engineers whose companies have embraced IBUZ to
> have anything negative to say about it. Their jobs are at
> stake. All I see from them are glowing reports about how
> well both the AM and FM IBUZ systems perform.
>

AGAIN a number of engineers here have clearly stated they (inluding me) have issues with HD AM. My job is not at stake so STOP MAKING IT UP! Why do you need to stoop to this level Rich???


> I get many off list emails from managers, engineers and
> programmers who either can't participate or don't dare say
> anything publicly. Since I was one of the first to actually
> have a receiver to test, I seem to have become their
> mouthpiece with an absolute promise never to reveal their
> identities.
>

Well feel free to share them Rich. I am not getting any. Early on I had open discussion with a very high ranked engineer, adn had no issues with bringing up what I considered to be problems. Also why would engineers be bringing up engineering issues to you when you are clearly a programmer? Why are you on such a kick on an engineering issue?

> Contrary to all the hype and puffery the entire industry is
> not supportive of this system.
>

Um noooooo the industry in supportive of the HD Radio for FM. There are questions on AM yet.

This is feeling like a broken record....sigh...


> Rich
>
 
Re: WBZ/KDKA, and WOWO/WCHB

> However, later on it occured to me that WCBH was probably
> using 5khz to be compatible with IBOC.
_____________

Just to note that AM+HD/IBOC stations do not need to restrict their analog audio to 5 kHz. The digital carriers are placed in the r-f spectrum at about +/-10 kHz to +/-15 kHz from the analog carrier. So if analog modulation is limited to 5 kHz, ~5 kHz of audio bandwidth capability is unused.

But most commercial analog AM receivers don't have the r-f bandwidth needed to recover transmitted audio bandwidths much above 4-5 kHz in the first place. And the NRSC pre-emphasis used to transmit analog AM means that audio processing gets more complicated when higher modulating freqs are used, and/or "loudness" might suffer in order to have enough headroom to avoid overmodulation by those high freqs. AND transmitting the analog audio spectrum from 5-10 kHz can cause a lot of nighttime interference to stations on adjacent channels.

The AM band would be a lot cleaner at night if all analog AM stations limited their audio bandwidth to 5 kHz, and all analog receivers had ~9 kHz of r-f bandwidth. Of course, that wouldn't remove the nighttime interference that will be caused by AM+HD operations. Those digital carriers fall in the 0-5 kHz audio spectrum of an AM analog receiver tuned one channel away.
 
Re: WBZ/KDKA, and WOWO/WCHB

> > I'm using the analog version of the Boston Acoustics
> > receiver. It's (sic) selectivity is pretty good.
>
> Please, Rich... I thought you were smarter than to make this
> mistake. :-(

Absolutely correct. It's one of the there, they're, their and your, you're mistakes that are so common online. Though it's usually considered tacky to point such things out online, I accept the correction. It does help divert attention from the main topic. You must have studied law.

> The result is that a signal
> with sporadic impairments is still intelligible, but a
> signal with continuous impairments is not.

I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying continuous impairment (via IBUZ) that wipes a signal out completely is better than some adjacent chatter?

I think what surprises me most is the attitude of some engineers who, historically, had a "do no harm" attitude and tried their best to minimize interference to their neighbors. Now they're cheerleaders for destructive technology. That really disappoints me.

Rich
 
> So how is KDKA doing in th ratings in Western MA? Are they
> selling any ads in Sprinfield? Hass it hurt their bottum
> line? How many people are truly effected by WBZ running HD
> Radio for 2 hours during one month?

Their ratings are not the issue. I realize you have to be a cheerleader for the system, so I'll accept these little diversions. If we're seeing this kind of interference with fewer than 100 AM IBUZ stations on the air, doesn't that raise a flag for you that we might have a very serious problem down the road?

> AGAIN a number of engineers here have clearly stated they
> (inluding me) have issues with HD AM. My job is not at
> stake so STOP MAKING IT UP! Why do you need to stoop to
> this level Rich???

Because I believe that your job would be at stake if you veered from the company's position on the system. I notice no criticism of FM even when people comment on hearing interference. Just more cheerleading.

> Well feel free to share them Rich. I am not getting any.
> Early on I had open discussion with a very high ranked
> engineer, adn had no issues with bringing up what I
> considered to be problems. Also why would engineers be
> bringing up engineering issues to you when you are clearly a
> programmer? Why are you on such a kick on an engineering
> issue?

I have no intention of sharing them. I've promised not to. This is far more than an engineering issue. It's very much a programming and sales issue. Engineers who aren't cheerleaders usually offer moral support. Programmers and managers bring up serious issues about how this technology will affect TSL, listening fatique and how they're concerned about being told to promote the equivalent of vaporware in a deceptive manner on their own air. You know, CD Quality, the IBUZ revolution. We're the people who have actually seen the diaries and the confusion listeners have over virtually everything we do. Engineers rarely go to Arbitron to look at the survey material. Most are concerned with what damage it'll do to their analog. That's where the money will be during our and our children's lifetimes.

> Um noooooo the industry in supportive of the HD Radio for
> FM. There are questions on AM yet.

You're sure of that? Have you surveyed "the industry?" Even the HD Dominion is a small percentage of the 14,000 stations that comprise "the industry." Cheerleaders usually focus on their team. I wouldn't expect it to be any other way.

> This is feeling like a broken record....sigh...

Better get used to it. This thing won't be a done deal for a decade or more. Until the secondaries are run as real radio stations there's no reason for consumers to buy receivers. I do a monthly run through area installers and retailers. They barely know what HD Radio is, don't stock any receivers and express almost aggressive apathy towards it. Most of them think HD Radio means satellite and show you all the tiny receivers you can buy for SIRIUS and XM.

Best Buy stocks one IBUZ ready Kenwood headend but doesn't stock the tuner. They have more than a dozen "Sat Ready" headends and all the tuners for each model.

Give your wife an IBUZ receiver for her birthday. You'll probably get the same reaction as if you bought her a vacuum cleaner. Have both a divorce lawyer handy or a heavy duty supply of chocolates.

Rich
 
> TOTAL CRAP RICH! Now you are to the point of making things
> up???? NO ONE that I am aware of is being stiffled as to
> not be able to speak up about any HD Radio issues. If they
> are not speaking up it is THEIR issue, as they are sitting
> on their hands.

Believe what you like. I really don't care. You're a cheerleader for the system. Why would anyone who has any opposition to it email you. I've been vocal in my concerns. It's more logical to contact me. I probably also know more managers and programmers with their futures at stake than you do. They've dealt with me for years at GE, TM, XTRA, Bonneville, Schulke, ABC, WOR, IDT and self-syndicated shows.

> If they dont want to implement HD, then they can move on to
> a company that does not want to run HD.

I guess you haven't read about the Clear Channel bloodbath in California. I wonder how many jobs are available for them to move to.

> I am all for complete open discussion as long as we deal
> with FACTS and not made up crap or how we "FEEL".

I don't expect facts from cheerleaders. It's funny, you still haven't responded to my questions about your attack on someone else here who you accused of made up "facts" about the RIAA. I recall asking which part you disputed. Still waiting for an answer.

Rich
>
 
Re: GOOD GRIEF! The mis information continues.....

> > I didnt reaalize that translators sudden have protected
> > coverage now. When did that happen?
>
> Didn't say they did.
>
> Regardless, the station SHOULD and WOULD be coming in
> crystal clear without IBUZ (I'm going to steal that term.
> Very appropriate.)
>

No they shouldn't. Translators aren't protected from "IBUZ" (Go ahead and steal the term.).

So "Should" and "would" are not appropriate.<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
 
> > So how is KDKA doing in th ratings in Western MA? Are
> they
> > selling any ads in Sprinfield? Hass it hurt their bottum
> > line? How many people are truly effected by WBZ running
> HD
> > Radio for 2 hours during one month?
>
> Their ratings are not the issue. I realize you have to be a
> cheerleader for the system, so I'll accept these little
> diversions. If we're seeing this kind of interference with
> fewer than 100 AM IBUZ stations on the air, doesn't that
> raise a flag for you that we might have a very serious
> problem down the road?
>
> > AGAIN a number of engineers here have clearly stated they
> > (inluding me) have issues with HD AM. My job is not at
> > stake so STOP MAKING IT UP! Why do you need to stoop to
> > this level Rich???
>
> Because I believe that your job would be at stake if you
> veered from the company's position on the system. I notice
> no criticism of FM even when people comment on hearing
> interference. Just more cheerleading.
>
> > Well feel free to share them Rich. I am not getting any.
>
> > Early on I had open discussion with a very high ranked
> > engineer, adn had no issues with bringing up what I
> > considered to be problems. Also why would engineers be
> > bringing up engineering issues to you when you are clearly
> a
> > programmer? Why are you on such a kick on an engineering
> > issue?
>
> I have no intention of sharing them. I've promised not to.
> This is far more than an engineering issue. It's very much a
> programming and sales issue. Engineers who aren't
> cheerleaders usually offer moral support. Programmers and
> managers bring up serious issues about how this technology
> will affect TSL, listening fatique and how they're concerned
> about being told to promote the equivalent of vaporware in a
> deceptive manner on their own air. You know, CD Quality, the
> IBUZ revolution. We're the people who have actually seen the
> diaries and the confusion listeners have over virtually
> everything we do. Engineers rarely go to Arbitron to look at
> the survey material. Most are concerned with what damage
> it'll do to their analog. That's where the money will be
> during our and our children's lifetimes.
>
> > Um noooooo the industry in supportive of the HD Radio for
> > FM. There are questions on AM yet.
>
> You're sure of that? Have you surveyed "the industry?" Even
> the HD Dominion is a small percentage of the 14,000 stations
> that comprise "the industry." Cheerleaders usually focus on
> their team. I wouldn't expect it to be any other way.
>
> > This is feeling like a broken record....sigh...
>
> Better get used to it. This thing won't be a done deal for a
> decade or more. Until the secondaries are run as real radio
> stations there's no reason for consumers to buy receivers. I
> do a monthly run through area installers and retailers. They
> barely know what HD Radio is, don't stock any receivers and
> express almost aggressive apathy towards it. Most of them
> think HD Radio means satellite and show you all the tiny
> receivers you can buy for SIRIUS and XM.
>
> Best Buy stocks one IBUZ ready Kenwood headend but doesn't
> stock the tuner. They have more than a dozen "Sat Ready"
> headends and all the tuners for each model.
>
> Give your wife an IBUZ receiver for her birthday. You'll
> probably get the same reaction as if you bought her a vacuum
> cleaner. Have both a divorce lawyer handy or a heavy duty
> supply of chocolates.
>
> Rich
>


Based on your use of "IBUZ", it sounds like your mind is made up and will not be affected by what anyone says; therefore, arguing is a moot point.

With respect to AM stations running IBOC, the only one I've heard is WBYU Radio Disney in New Orleans. It is a 1000kw station. The analog sound is no different than any other AM station. The digital sounds great, but doesn't reach quite as far as I would like it to.
 
> Based on your use of "IBUZ", it sounds like your mind is
> made up and will not be affected by what anyone says;
> therefore, arguing is a moot point.
>
> With respect to AM stations running IBOC, the only one I've
> heard is WBYU Radio Disney in New Orleans. It is a 1000kw
> station. The analog sound is no different than any other AM
> station. The digital sounds great, but doesn't reach quite
> as far as I would like it to.

First, 1000Kw is a megawatt. As influential as Disney is I doubt they're able to get power in excess of 50Kw. I'm going to assume you mean 1Kw (1000 watts).

You've heard one station with IBUZ. Many of us have heard many more and have heard the adjacent channel interference it causes. Why do you think the FCC will not allow nighttime operation. There's a problem. Yes, my mind is made up until it's allowed 24/7 and the problems are fixed at the station level. I believe it can work, though the transmitter site modifications might be too much to bear for many small operators.

Look beyond your one station and try and comprehend what the band will sound like when every AM is running IBUZ 24 hours a day. Anything less is programming suicide once there are enough digital receivers to annoy listeners when muddy AM returns at 6pm every night.

For the next couple of decades our concern is going to have to be with the integrity of our analog signals. If a neighboring station wipes out your Radio Disney, they're dead or will need that 1000Kw.

Rich
 
Re: WBZ/KDKA, and WOWO/WCHB

> Absolutely correct. It's one of the there, they're, their
> and your, you're mistakes that are so common online. Though
> it's usually considered tacky to point such things out
> online, I accept the correction. It does help divert
> attention from the main topic. You must have studied law.

I work for a law firm, if that counts.

> I think what surprises me most is the attitude of some
> engineers who, historically, had a "do no harm" attitude and
> tried their best to minimize interference to their
> neighbors. Now they're cheerleaders for destructive
> technology. That really disappoints me.

Amen brutha! It seems like the same engineers who once crucified the C-Quam system because they claimed it produced excessive sideband splatter (thus leading to the creation of the NRSC bandwidth standards) are now all gung-ho for IBOC, despite the massive interference it causes to the adjacent channels, and despite the fact that IBOC interference is so much greater than what even the worst analog AM Stereo signal could ever generate. And the ironic thing is, many of these people were huge Leonard Kahn supporters in the '80s, but now they dismiss him as a crazed lunatic.
<P ID="signature">______________
It's a common mistake to not use punctuation in its proper form.
<a target="_blank" href=http://www.cgl.uwaterloo.ca/~csk/its.html>Be kind to your friend, the apostrophe.</a></P>
 
Re: WBZ/KDKA, and WOWO/WCHB

> But most commercial analog AM receivers don't have the r-f
> bandwidth needed to recover transmitted audio bandwidths
> much above 4-5 kHz in the first place. And the NRSC
> pre-emphasis used to transmit analog AM means that audio
> processing gets more complicated when higher modulating
> freqs are used, and/or "loudness" might suffer in order to
> have enough headroom to avoid overmodulation by those high
> freqs. AND transmitting the analog audio spectrum from 5-10
> kHz can cause a lot of nighttime interference to stations on
> adjacent channels.

This is exactly what was debated 20 years ago. Some stations wanted to keep hi-fi 15 kHz audio bandwidth on AM, so that AM Stereo could have a chance of equally competing with FM Stereo for music formats (and some AM Stereo receivers in the '80s actually did have a full 15 kHz audio response on AM, such as the Carver TX-11a)... while other stations wanted to cut the audio down to 5 kHz in order to reduce nighttime interference and clean up the band. In the end, the FCC ended up choosing a 10 kHz bandwidth as a compromise between these two extremes.

The theory behind 5 kHz AM audio is attractive with its result of eliminating adjacent-channel interference (at least between analog signals), but in reality, 5 kHz audio sounds like crap, pure and simple. Especially with today's aggressive audio processing, putting a "brick wall" filter at 5 kHz produces a lot of nasty distortions which are audible even on receivers whose audio response is less than 5 kHz. Even Clear Channel admits that 5 kHz audio is only suitable for talk formats, by specifying a bandwidth of 6 kHz for its AM music stations. Of course, 6 kHz audio still sounds like crap on good radios, but for most AM radios in use today it's the minimum audio bandwidth which produces audio quality that's acceptable for both talk and music formats.
<P ID="signature">______________
It's a common mistake to not use punctuation in its proper form.
<a target="_blank" href=http://www.cgl.uwaterloo.ca/~csk/its.html>Be kind to your friend, the apostrophe.</a></P>
 
Not even worth replying to (EOM)

> > So how is KDKA doing in th ratings in Western MA? Are
> they
> > selling any ads in Sprinfield? Hass it hurt their bottum
> > line? How many people are truly effected by WBZ running
> HD
> > Radio for 2 hours during one month?
>
> Their ratings are not the issue. I realize you have to be a
> cheerleader for the system, so I'll accept these little
> diversions. If we're seeing this kind of interference with
> fewer than 100 AM IBUZ stations on the air, doesn't that
> raise a flag for you that we might have a very serious
> problem down the road?
>
> > AGAIN a number of engineers here have clearly stated they
> > (inluding me) have issues with HD AM. My job is not at
> > stake so STOP MAKING IT UP! Why do you need to stoop to
> > this level Rich???
>
> Because I believe that your job would be at stake if you
> veered from the company's position on the system. I notice
> no criticism of FM even when people comment on hearing
> interference. Just more cheerleading.
>
> > Well feel free to share them Rich. I am not getting any.
>
> > Early on I had open discussion with a very high ranked
> > engineer, adn had no issues with bringing up what I
> > considered to be problems. Also why would engineers be
> > bringing up engineering issues to you when you are clearly
> a
> > programmer? Why are you on such a kick on an engineering
> > issue?
>
> I have no intention of sharing them. I've promised not to.
> This is far more than an engineering issue. It's very much a
> programming and sales issue. Engineers who aren't
> cheerleaders usually offer moral support. Programmers and
> managers bring up serious issues about how this technology
> will affect TSL, listening fatique and how they're concerned
> about being told to promote the equivalent of vaporware in a
> deceptive manner on their own air. You know, CD Quality, the
> IBUZ revolution. We're the people who have actually seen the
> diaries and the confusion listeners have over virtually
> everything we do. Engineers rarely go to Arbitron to look at
> the survey material. Most are concerned with what damage
> it'll do to their analog. That's where the money will be
> during our and our children's lifetimes.
>
> > Um noooooo the industry in supportive of the HD Radio for
> > FM. There are questions on AM yet.
>
> You're sure of that? Have you surveyed "the industry?" Even
> the HD Dominion is a small percentage of the 14,000 stations
> that comprise "the industry." Cheerleaders usually focus on
> their team. I wouldn't expect it to be any other way.
>
> > This is feeling like a broken record....sigh...
>
> Better get used to it. This thing won't be a done deal for a
> decade or more. Until the secondaries are run as real radio
> stations there's no reason for consumers to buy receivers. I
> do a monthly run through area installers and retailers. They
> barely know what HD Radio is, don't stock any receivers and
> express almost aggressive apathy towards it. Most of them
> think HD Radio means satellite and show you all the tiny
> receivers you can buy for SIRIUS and XM.
>
> Best Buy stocks one IBUZ ready Kenwood headend but doesn't
> stock the tuner. They have more than a dozen "Sat Ready"
> headends and all the tuners for each model.
>
> Give your wife an IBUZ receiver for her birthday. You'll
> probably get the same reaction as if you bought her a vacuum
> cleaner. Have both a divorce lawyer handy or a heavy duty
> supply of chocolates.
>
> Rich
>
 
> > TOTAL CRAP RICH! Now you are to the point of making
> things
> > up???? NO ONE that I am aware of is being stiffled as to
> > not be able to speak up about any HD Radio issues. If
> they
> > are not speaking up it is THEIR issue, as they are sitting
>
> > on their hands.
>
> Believe what you like. I really don't care. You're a
> cheerleader for the system. Why would anyone who has any
> opposition to it email you. I've been vocal in my concerns.
> It's more logical to contact me. I probably also know more
> managers and programmers with their futures at stake than
> you do. They've dealt with me for years at GE, TM, XTRA,
> Bonneville, Schulke, ABC, WOR, IDT and self-syndicated
> shows.
>


Believe waht YOU want Rich. You call me a cheerleader. I have done my homework as have many others here. If someone disagrees with YOU they are a cheerleader, or part of some Star Wars based dominion. I am not name calling like you are.

Why would anyone want to email me? Because I have answered questions with FACTS. I have met with DXer groups and explained to them what HD is about. I have also presonally talked to Leonard Kahn about his system (and I am not fired!!!)


> > If they dont want to implement HD, then they can move on
> to
> > a company that does not want to run HD.
>
> I guess you haven't read about the Clear Channel bloodbath
> in California. I wonder how many jobs are available for them
> to move to.
>
> > I am all for complete open discussion as long as we deal
> > with FACTS and not made up crap or how we "FEEL".
>
> I don't expect facts from cheerleaders. It's funny, you
> still haven't responded to my questions about your attack on
> someone else here who you accused of made up "facts" about
> the RIAA. I recall asking which part you disputed. Still
> waiting for an answer.
>
> Rich
> >
>

Rich I have been a tad busy WORKING. I dont have time to sit on these boards with the banter like you. Guess you have a lot of time on your hands. Sorry if I dont get back to you right away, I have an all nighter putting a new STL in.


And stop it with the childish "cheerleaders" et al. Cant someone disagree with you with being called names??? Or am I not allowed to disagree with you? Are you out to set up your own dominion of non-IBOCers? Do I have to goose step to YOUR thougths?
 
> With respect to AM stations running IBOC, the only one I've
> heard is WBYU Radio Disney in New Orleans. It is a 1000kw
> station. The analog sound is no different than any other AM
> station. The digital sounds great, but doesn't reach quite
> as far as I would like it to.

HD Radios purposely have an extremely narrow audio bandwidth on AM, to eliminate the very large difference in audio quality between stations transmitting IBUZ and those who transmit full-bandwidth analog audio.

Try using something like a GE Superadio III. Switching between an AM station which is transmitting IBUZ and one which is transmitting full 10 kHz audio is almost like switching between "AM" and "FM", because the difference in quality is so large. And that is exactly what I expect, because in order to sell AM IBUZ, iBiquity has to cripple analog AM first, but cutting the audio down to sub-telephone-quality and filling the band up with hiss and hash.
<P ID="signature">______________
It's a common mistake to not use punctuation in its proper form.
<a target="_blank" href=http://www.cgl.uwaterloo.ca/~csk/its.html>Be kind to your friend, the apostrophe.</a></P>
 
"Cheerleaders"

> Why would anyone want to email me? Because I have answered
> questions with FACTS. I have met with DXer groups and
> explained to them what HD is about. I have also presonally
> talked to Leonard Kahn about his system (and I am not
> fired!!!)

I'd like to stand up for you here. I've seen you make these demonstrations, and heard it in your own car. As I recall, you demoed a Radio Disney station on the AM side. :)

I've also talked with Rich online for years, and know where he's coming from. I respect his views on a number of issues, and have often agreed with him.

First of all, trying to be a moderate influence here, Rich... k9ez is not a "cheerleader". His company is using and has embraced HD, sure. Most big groups have. He could, if he did indeed feel that way, rail on and on about whatever he perceived were HD's problems, but it would get him nowhere...it'd be the equivalent of standing in front of a speeding train waving your arms. He's just one engineer in one market.

I truly believe he is open and honest about what he says, and is not just "trying to protect his job". He was just as open with us about HD's limitations, particularly on AM, as he has been here. I certainly never got the impression that he was saying what he was saying because he felt some sort of need to spread a company line.

I personally have quite a few problems with HD and how it's been implemented in the states. I don't believe IBOC should have been done as a digital implementation. I think it should have been done right, on a separate band with more bandwidth. But with the state of the U.S. radio industry, there was no other choice, and we have what we have.

The horse has left the barn. I don't waste time running down the path trying to chase after that long-gone horse, and I suspect k9ez feels the same way. I understand everything you're saying, Rich, as far as the problems involved, and even agree with much of it, but anyone who doesn't shout "IBUZ SUX!!" is not necessarily a cheerleader.

-OA<P ID="signature">______________
Ohio Media Watch - <a target="_blank" href=http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com>http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com</a></P>
 
> Believe waht YOU want Rich. You call me a cheerleader. I
> have done my homework as have many others here. If someone
> disagrees with YOU they are a cheerleader, or part of some
> Star Wars based dominion. I am not name calling like you
> are.

Amazing. Not a hint of a sense of humor.

> Why would anyone want to email me? Because I have answered
> questions with FACTS. I have met with DXer groups and
> explained to them what HD is about. I have also presonally
> talked to Leonard Kahn about his system (and I am not
> fired!!!)

Leonard has been a good friend since my days at XTRA. I'm not sure why you'd be fired for talking with Leonard. Unless, of course you said his system was better than IBUZ. Then you might have an employment problem. If people want free consulting I guess they'd email you. In my case, they're people who are concerned about the system and can't publicly express it. I realize it's tough to imagine anyone would have questions about something you believe in so strongly.

> Rich I have been a tad busy WORKING. I dont have time to
> sit on these boards with the banter like you. Guess you
> have a lot of time on your hands. Sorry if I dont get back
> to you right away, I have an all nighter putting a new STL
> in.

Hmm. Plenty of time to cheerlead but no time to answer questions, I'm still waiting for answers to your attack on the guy who mentioned the RIAA digital flag. You dismissed him with ridicule. See the C/Net web site. The RIAA flag has reached Congress and a bill is likely. What will that do to existing receivers?

> And stop it with the childish "cheerleaders" et al. Cant
> someone disagree with you with being called names???

> Or am
> I not allowed to disagree with you? Are you out to set up
> your own dominion of non-IBOCers?

Nope. Only large radio groups who invest in the company can set up Dominions. I'm just a voice of one.

> Do I have to goose step
> to YOUR thougths?

I suppose you could. I suspect it's uncomfortable to walk that way.

Rich
 
You say:

> Nope. Only large radio groups who invest in the company can
> set up Dominions. I'm just a voice of one.

Then you say:

> I get many off list emails from managers, engineers and
> programmers who either can't participate or don't dare say
> anything publicly. Since I was one of the first to actually
> have a receiver to test, I seem to have become their
> mouthpiece with an absolute promise never to reveal their
> identities.

So which one are you Rich? A voice of one, or a mouthpiece for many? Or do you pick and choose depending on when it's convenient?

Spoken like a true consultant.

Not that you'll believe it, but K9EZ was one of the most vocal anti-IBOC engineers I had ever met, until he learned how it worked, and experienced it first hand. I know for a fact that he is not a cheerleader.

Again, you'll believe what you want to believe, since the truth makes your argument fall apart.

It's OK, though. Looks like everyone is starting to see you for what you are. <P ID="signature">______________
</P>
 
Re: "Cheerleaders"

> > Why would anyone want to email me? Because I have
> answered
> > questions with FACTS. I have met with DXer groups and
> > explained to them what HD is about. I have also
> presonally
> > talked to Leonard Kahn about his system (and I am not
> > fired!!!)
>
> I'd like to stand up for you here. I've seen you make these
> demonstrations, and heard it in your own car. As I recall,
> you demoed a Radio Disney station on the AM side. :)
>
> I've also talked with Rich online for years, and know where
> he's coming from. I respect his views on a number of
> issues, and have often agreed with him.
>
> First of all, trying to be a moderate influence here,
> Rich... k9ez is not a "cheerleader". His company is using
> and has embraced HD, sure. Most big groups have. He could,
> if he did indeed feel that way, rail on and on about
> whatever he perceived were HD's problems, but it would get
> him nowhere...it'd be the equivalent of standing in front of
> a speeding train waving your arms. He's just one engineer
> in one market.
>
> I truly believe he is open and honest about what he says,
> and is not just "trying to protect his job". He was just as
> open with us about HD's limitations, particularly on AM, as
> he has been here. I certainly never got the impression that
> he was saying what he was saying because he felt some sort
> of need to spread a company line.
>
> I personally have quite a few problems with HD and how it's
> been implemented in the states. I don't believe IBOC should
> have been done as a digital implementation. I think it
> should have been done right, on a separate band with more
> bandwidth. But with the state of the U.S. radio industry,
> there was no other choice, and we have what we have.
>
> The horse has left the barn. I don't waste time running
> down the path trying to chase after that long-gone horse,
> and I suspect k9ez feels the same way. I understand
> everything you're saying, Rich, as far as the problems
> involved, and even agree with much of it, but anyone who
> doesn't shout "IBUZ SUX!!" is not necessarily a cheerleader.
>
>
> -OA
>
Excellent synopsis! Dat horse has done run......
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom