iBiquity's BIG mistake

[Chuck]

Now once you've heard a technology, and like it, that's different. My wife and I actually made a buying decision this year based partly on two pieces of technology we both agreed HAD to be in any vehicle we considered...mp3 playback, and XM radio. We found both in our Chevy Equinox. GREAT STEREO...and it has weels, too!

It does have a great stereo. I have a Tahoe with a similar GM Bose system. There is no HD radio though and probably won't be one available very soon.

By the way, both the Beatles "Love" album and the Cat Stevens (Yusuf Islam) "An Other Cup" CD's sound fabulous on these GM stereos. I don't think HD will make them sound as good. At least, what I've heard so far does not match that kind of "CD quality." Maybe it will improve.

 

[Mike Walker]

When HD doesn't match up to "cd quality", it's almost always the PROCESSING BEING USED (they're compressing and limiting the hell out of the audio, just like on the analog channel), NOT the codec, or HD itself. Hearing one channel where the audio sucks, and deciding "HD doesn't sound good" isn't very logical. If it was, FM (and AM) would have been disqualified long ago!

You're right...of course my Equinox had no HD. But it has a damn nice sounding analog FM/AM radio, with RDS.

 

[Mike Walker]

700 should ask a car dealer if people consider radios "just a convenience". The radio options are ALWAYS requested to be in advertising for cars for a reason!

Why in the hell is such an obvious radio hater tolerated here anyhow?

 

[700WLW]

700 should ask a car dealer if people consider radios "just a convenience". The radio options are ALWAYS requested to be in advertising for cars for a reason!

Why in the hell is such an obvious radio hater tolerated here anyhow?

I never stated, that I hated radio - actually, I listen to out-of-state (I can no longer claim to be a DX'er, since I only listen to the clear-channels) nighttime AM every night, but there is a lot of junk - partly, what makes it tolerable, is that the news/talk/sports in not local, so one gets a different perspective. Back in the 60s/70s, when I grew up, in-dash radio was all we had, so it was considered entertainment (and, classic-rock never sounded so good on analog AM), but now with cell phones, gaming-systems, iPods, MP3s, CDs, etc, radio is just a convenience. Why, do you think that more-and-more new cars are becoming iPod compatible, have CD players, and all the excitement over Sync and Bluetooth technologies - given a choice, do ya think consumers would pick in-dash HD Radio over Sync !

 

[Chuck]

When HD doesn't match up to "cd quality", it's almost always the PROCESSING BEING USED (they're compressing and limiting the hell out of the audio, just like on the analog channel), NOT the codec, or HD itself. Hearing one channel where the audio sucks, and deciding "HD doesn't sound good" isn't very logical. If it was, FM (and AM) would have been disqualified long ago!

Nobody has accused the proponents of HD for having a "fabulous marketing plan." The fact that the stations do not sound as good as the systems potential speaks volumes.

So far the only HD I've heard that was noticeably better than the analog version was Public Radio or Classical Music WRR in Dallas. Not to discount the importance of either service, but neither represent the bulk of American radio listneneship.

Even though I’ve made a very good living in audio related ventures, I have a low opinion of the sophistication level of your average listener. Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public.