-
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
I'm curious....
- Thread starter rageradio
- Start date
C
cc-hou-sucks
Guest
your just listening to another pc that is playing back voicetracked audio from its soundcard and is pulling the music off of a server. no studio needed. just needed more space in the racks for the additional 8 pc's to handle the 8 stations.
> Where are all these secondary HD channels originating from?
> Is there actually another studio running all of this for
> each channel. How does this work?
>
<P ID="signature">______________
http://clearchannelsucks.org</P>
> Where are all these secondary HD channels originating from?
> Is there actually another studio running all of this for
> each channel. How does this work?
>
<P ID="signature">______________
http://clearchannelsucks.org</P>
C
cc-hou-sucks
Guest
Re: The future?
clear channel + HD + free = no way.
the future of radio and fcc's vision is (i am talking long term here) is dump the analog signal and go digital only with multiple streams. on the hd board they say 6 streams will fit @ 16 kbs i believe. the goal is to do the same as hd tv and reduce the # of frequencies and my opinion the only way the stream will stay commercial free will be when they scramble the streams and require a subscription to listen just like DirectTV or XM or Sirius does currently.
> Certainly the HD channels are not going to stay commercial
> free - are they? If they sell commercials, how will they
> tell advertisers how many are listening? Will the HD2
> stations show up in the ratings at some point, or be
> included in the analog station's ratings?
>
<P ID="signature">______________
http://clearchannelsucks.org</P>
clear channel + HD + free = no way.
the future of radio and fcc's vision is (i am talking long term here) is dump the analog signal and go digital only with multiple streams. on the hd board they say 6 streams will fit @ 16 kbs i believe. the goal is to do the same as hd tv and reduce the # of frequencies and my opinion the only way the stream will stay commercial free will be when they scramble the streams and require a subscription to listen just like DirectTV or XM or Sirius does currently.
> Certainly the HD channels are not going to stay commercial
> free - are they? If they sell commercials, how will they
> tell advertisers how many are listening? Will the HD2
> stations show up in the ratings at some point, or be
> included in the analog station's ratings?
>
<P ID="signature">______________
http://clearchannelsucks.org</P>
M
Mediafrog
Guest
Re: The future?
> the future of radio and fcc's vision is (i am talking long
> term here) is dump the analog signal and go digital only
> with multiple streams.
Correct. But we're talking 20-30 years from now. The current IBOC scheme has to have near universal access and acceptance before the FCC takes the next move. Big question is: will future wireless internet technology make the FM transmission model irrelevant or obsolete before this happens?
> the goal is to do the same as hd tv and reduce the # of frequencies
I'd be surprised if they chop the 88-108 MHz FM band. Too many entities interested in getting a broadcast service on the air. Pure digital would allow hundreds of program streams in a market, and probably kill satellite radio, much to the delight of terrestrial broadcasters. But we're still talking several decades away, and who knows how technology will evolve.
> only way the stream will stay commercial free will be when
> they scramble the streams and require a subscription to
> listen just like DirectTV or XM or Sirius does currently.
More likely it might be a mix of "free and fee"...basic services available at no cost, but enhanced or niche formats available by subscription.
> the future of radio and fcc's vision is (i am talking long
> term here) is dump the analog signal and go digital only
> with multiple streams.
Correct. But we're talking 20-30 years from now. The current IBOC scheme has to have near universal access and acceptance before the FCC takes the next move. Big question is: will future wireless internet technology make the FM transmission model irrelevant or obsolete before this happens?
> the goal is to do the same as hd tv and reduce the # of frequencies
I'd be surprised if they chop the 88-108 MHz FM band. Too many entities interested in getting a broadcast service on the air. Pure digital would allow hundreds of program streams in a market, and probably kill satellite radio, much to the delight of terrestrial broadcasters. But we're still talking several decades away, and who knows how technology will evolve.
> only way the stream will stay commercial free will be when
> they scramble the streams and require a subscription to
> listen just like DirectTV or XM or Sirius does currently.
More likely it might be a mix of "free and fee"...basic services available at no cost, but enhanced or niche formats available by subscription.
Re: The future?
> the future of radio and fcc's vision is (i am talking long
> term here) is dump the analog signal and go digital only
> with multiple streams. on the hd board they say 6 streams
> will fit @ 16 kbs i believe. the goal is to do the same as
> hd tv and reduce the # of frequencies and my opinion the
> only way the stream will stay commercial free will be when
> they scramble the streams and require a subscription to
> listen just like DirectTV or XM or Sirius does currently.
Put on the tinfoil hat if you must, but there's nothing in the Ibiquity spec that allows for "scrambling" the signals and turning radio into a pay service.
Just as there's nothing in HDTV that turns over the air TV into a pay service.
If going digital allows you to program more than one service in the same spectrum, how is that going to reduce the number of frequencies, and how is that the "the same as hd tv"?
Put down the pipe before you post.<P ID="signature">______________
...co-moderator of the Satellite Radio, Phoenix, and San Diego boards...</P>
> the future of radio and fcc's vision is (i am talking long
> term here) is dump the analog signal and go digital only
> with multiple streams. on the hd board they say 6 streams
> will fit @ 16 kbs i believe. the goal is to do the same as
> hd tv and reduce the # of frequencies and my opinion the
> only way the stream will stay commercial free will be when
> they scramble the streams and require a subscription to
> listen just like DirectTV or XM or Sirius does currently.
Put on the tinfoil hat if you must, but there's nothing in the Ibiquity spec that allows for "scrambling" the signals and turning radio into a pay service.
Just as there's nothing in HDTV that turns over the air TV into a pay service.
If going digital allows you to program more than one service in the same spectrum, how is that going to reduce the number of frequencies, and how is that the "the same as hd tv"?
Put down the pipe before you post.<P ID="signature">______________
...co-moderator of the Satellite Radio, Phoenix, and San Diego boards...</P>
C
cc-hou-sucks
Guest
Re: The future?
> Put on the tinfoil hat if you must, but there's nothing in
> the Ibiquity spec that allows for "scrambling" the signals
> and turning radio into a pay service.
i said long long term not today nor tomorrow
maybe to put in in computer terms remember when 300 baud modems came out
they played with the specs and improved the designs and today you have 56,000 baud as the standard. if we stayed with the spec we would still be at 300 baud.
we are just at the very start of the digital road for radio there will be improvements made and speeds increased
> Just as there's nothing in HDTV that turns over the air TV
> into a pay service.
again long long term are you sitting at home watch free tv over rabbit ears? is everyone else doing the same? no they are paying for cable service or satellite tv. once it is digital it can be scrambled just like hbo stars cinemax showtime in the long long term you will have pay just like you pay extra to view hbo now.
their is technology being created so you as a listerer / viewer are going to be targeted just like the cookies your browser collects and broadcasters will direct specific ads just to you based on the cookies collected.
> If going digital allows you to program more than one service
> in the same spectrum, how is that going to reduce the number
> of frequencies, and how is that the "the same as hd tv"?
if today we can put 6 digital streams up and in 10 years put 60 streams on that frequency there will be little need for that 20mhz of space just like tv is being relocated to their new spectrum the same will happen one day to am & fm
again i am saying long term
remember when satellite tv became available the C band days you had originally 12 transponders per satellite. then they came up with vertical and horizontal polizaration to double the transponders to 24 you had to move your dish from sat to sat. then came the ku band 32 transponders per sat then today direct tv can push 200+ video streams to you on the ku band sat. the only reason you see the 3 feed horn dish is because of all the local's they carry with just 3 sats
they cover the whole usa. i am saying in the long long term with 3 frequencies and each frequency could carry 200+ streams and just like direct tv it will be intigrated into the box that it will switch frequency to the stream you select.
<P ID="signature">______________
http://clearchannelsucks.org</P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by http://clearchannelsucks.org on 01/27/06 10:30 PM.</FONT></P>
> Put on the tinfoil hat if you must, but there's nothing in
> the Ibiquity spec that allows for "scrambling" the signals
> and turning radio into a pay service.
i said long long term not today nor tomorrow
maybe to put in in computer terms remember when 300 baud modems came out
they played with the specs and improved the designs and today you have 56,000 baud as the standard. if we stayed with the spec we would still be at 300 baud.
we are just at the very start of the digital road for radio there will be improvements made and speeds increased
> Just as there's nothing in HDTV that turns over the air TV
> into a pay service.
again long long term are you sitting at home watch free tv over rabbit ears? is everyone else doing the same? no they are paying for cable service or satellite tv. once it is digital it can be scrambled just like hbo stars cinemax showtime in the long long term you will have pay just like you pay extra to view hbo now.
their is technology being created so you as a listerer / viewer are going to be targeted just like the cookies your browser collects and broadcasters will direct specific ads just to you based on the cookies collected.
> If going digital allows you to program more than one service
> in the same spectrum, how is that going to reduce the number
> of frequencies, and how is that the "the same as hd tv"?
if today we can put 6 digital streams up and in 10 years put 60 streams on that frequency there will be little need for that 20mhz of space just like tv is being relocated to their new spectrum the same will happen one day to am & fm
again i am saying long term
remember when satellite tv became available the C band days you had originally 12 transponders per satellite. then they came up with vertical and horizontal polizaration to double the transponders to 24 you had to move your dish from sat to sat. then came the ku band 32 transponders per sat then today direct tv can push 200+ video streams to you on the ku band sat. the only reason you see the 3 feed horn dish is because of all the local's they carry with just 3 sats
they cover the whole usa. i am saying in the long long term with 3 frequencies and each frequency could carry 200+ streams and just like direct tv it will be intigrated into the box that it will switch frequency to the stream you select.
<P ID="signature">______________
http://clearchannelsucks.org</P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by http://clearchannelsucks.org on 01/27/06 10:30 PM.</FONT></P>
C
cc-hou-sucks
Guest
Re: The future?
> Correct. But we're talking 20-30 years from now.
thank you for being open to looking into the future without your eyes closed
> I'd be surprised if they chop the 88-108 MHz FM band. Too
> many entities interested in getting a broadcast service on
> the air. Pure digital would allow hundreds of program
> streams in a market, and probably kill satellite radio, much
> to the delight of terrestrial broadcasters. But we're still
> talking several decades away, and who knows how technology
> will evolve.
as i said in my post to johndavis just like tv must stop all analog broadcasts and move off their current spectrum by 2008 the same will happen way down the road for radio
> More likely it might be a mix of "free and fee"...basic
> services available at no cost, but enhanced or niche formats
> available by subscription.
>
radio is in the business to make $$$ if there are no ads on that stream they are going to be sure to scramble it and demand a subscription from you to listen. just like xm does now
you can put xm in you car not subscribe and you will get free channels
channel 0 the radio id - no audio
channel 1 the preview channel - just pushes the phone number to activate
channel 247 the emergency channel - probably goverment mandated to be free
now once you pay you get access to 150 more channels and if you pay more you get premium channels just the playboy channel channel for now but i'm sure they will add more premium channels later<P ID="signature">______________
http://clearchannelsucks.org</P>
> Correct. But we're talking 20-30 years from now.
thank you for being open to looking into the future without your eyes closed
> I'd be surprised if they chop the 88-108 MHz FM band. Too
> many entities interested in getting a broadcast service on
> the air. Pure digital would allow hundreds of program
> streams in a market, and probably kill satellite radio, much
> to the delight of terrestrial broadcasters. But we're still
> talking several decades away, and who knows how technology
> will evolve.
as i said in my post to johndavis just like tv must stop all analog broadcasts and move off their current spectrum by 2008 the same will happen way down the road for radio
> More likely it might be a mix of "free and fee"...basic
> services available at no cost, but enhanced or niche formats
> available by subscription.
>
radio is in the business to make $$$ if there are no ads on that stream they are going to be sure to scramble it and demand a subscription from you to listen. just like xm does now
you can put xm in you car not subscribe and you will get free channels
channel 0 the radio id - no audio
channel 1 the preview channel - just pushes the phone number to activate
channel 247 the emergency channel - probably goverment mandated to be free
now once you pay you get access to 150 more channels and if you pay more you get premium channels just the playboy channel channel for now but i'm sure they will add more premium channels later<P ID="signature">______________
http://clearchannelsucks.org</P>
C
CinnamonRoll
Guest
Re: The future?
I get and can follow the theories you pose, but I'm hung on one thing.
In order to get the extra TV channels, you either have to go through a cable or satellite provider.
Even when television goes all digital, people without cable or satellite will still be able to watch over the air broadcasts.
What they will need is a digital to analog converter box for thier existing set or a new set with a digital converter built in.
They won't get all the extra channels, but they will still be able to get local broadcast stations without having to pay for a cable or satellite subscription.
If I understand you correctly, in order for these HD2 stations to remain free, they will have to become one of these "extra" stations that would only be available through some sort of subscription service.
My question is who would that be?
Who would sell the subscription services to these HD2 stations?
Unless XM or Siruis integrates these stations into their subscription services market by market, I don't see how this would be pulled off.
Would there be "cable radio" providers in each market like we have for cable tv?
I don't really see how this will work out.
My guess is that this HD Radio thing will either see two scenarios.
The first scenario is that it takes off and eventually everyone will have it like they do with regular radio.
Broadcasters would find a way to track listenership and these stations would have ratings just like all the others and they will start to sell advertising based on that.
The other scenario is that it's too late and the public is so oblivious and uninterested in it that it goes nowhere because anyone who might be interested in it is more interested in satellite and will go with that and these stations start to disappear.
> > Correct. But we're talking 20-30 years from now.
>
> thank you for being open to looking into the future without
> your eyes closed
>
> > I'd be surprised if they chop the 88-108 MHz FM band. Too
>
> > many entities interested in getting a broadcast service on
>
> > the air. Pure digital would allow hundreds of program
> > streams in a market, and probably kill satellite radio,
> much
> > to the delight of terrestrial broadcasters. But we're
> still
> > talking several decades away, and who knows how technology
>
> > will evolve.
>
> as i said in my post to johndavis just like tv must stop all
> analog broadcasts and move off their current spectrum by
> 2008 the same will happen way down the road for radio
>
> > More likely it might be a mix of "free and fee"...basic
> > services available at no cost, but enhanced or niche
> formats
> > available by subscription.
> >
>
> radio is in the business to make $$$ if there are no ads on
> that stream they are going to be sure to scramble it and
> demand a subscription from you to listen. just like xm does
> now
>
> you can put xm in you car not subscribe and you will get
> free channels
>
> channel 0 the radio id - no audio
> channel 1 the preview channel - just pushes the phone number
> to activate
> channel 247 the emergency channel - probably goverment
> mandated to be free
>
> now once you pay you get access to 150 more channels and if
> you pay more you get premium channels just the playboy
> channel channel for now but i'm sure they will add more
> premium channels later
>
<P ID="signature">______________
Because you dance to disco but you still like rock.</P>
I get and can follow the theories you pose, but I'm hung on one thing.
In order to get the extra TV channels, you either have to go through a cable or satellite provider.
Even when television goes all digital, people without cable or satellite will still be able to watch over the air broadcasts.
What they will need is a digital to analog converter box for thier existing set or a new set with a digital converter built in.
They won't get all the extra channels, but they will still be able to get local broadcast stations without having to pay for a cable or satellite subscription.
If I understand you correctly, in order for these HD2 stations to remain free, they will have to become one of these "extra" stations that would only be available through some sort of subscription service.
My question is who would that be?
Who would sell the subscription services to these HD2 stations?
Unless XM or Siruis integrates these stations into their subscription services market by market, I don't see how this would be pulled off.
Would there be "cable radio" providers in each market like we have for cable tv?
I don't really see how this will work out.
My guess is that this HD Radio thing will either see two scenarios.
The first scenario is that it takes off and eventually everyone will have it like they do with regular radio.
Broadcasters would find a way to track listenership and these stations would have ratings just like all the others and they will start to sell advertising based on that.
The other scenario is that it's too late and the public is so oblivious and uninterested in it that it goes nowhere because anyone who might be interested in it is more interested in satellite and will go with that and these stations start to disappear.
> > Correct. But we're talking 20-30 years from now.
>
> thank you for being open to looking into the future without
> your eyes closed
>
> > I'd be surprised if they chop the 88-108 MHz FM band. Too
>
> > many entities interested in getting a broadcast service on
>
> > the air. Pure digital would allow hundreds of program
> > streams in a market, and probably kill satellite radio,
> much
> > to the delight of terrestrial broadcasters. But we're
> still
> > talking several decades away, and who knows how technology
>
> > will evolve.
>
> as i said in my post to johndavis just like tv must stop all
> analog broadcasts and move off their current spectrum by
> 2008 the same will happen way down the road for radio
>
> > More likely it might be a mix of "free and fee"...basic
> > services available at no cost, but enhanced or niche
> formats
> > available by subscription.
> >
>
> radio is in the business to make $$$ if there are no ads on
> that stream they are going to be sure to scramble it and
> demand a subscription from you to listen. just like xm does
> now
>
> you can put xm in you car not subscribe and you will get
> free channels
>
> channel 0 the radio id - no audio
> channel 1 the preview channel - just pushes the phone number
> to activate
> channel 247 the emergency channel - probably goverment
> mandated to be free
>
> now once you pay you get access to 150 more channels and if
> you pay more you get premium channels just the playboy
> channel channel for now but i'm sure they will add more
> premium channels later
>
<P ID="signature">______________
Because you dance to disco but you still like rock.</P>
M
Mike_O
Guest
Re: The future?
I read in either All Access or FMBQ that many of the HD2 Channels will become a subscription service. The technology is already there, you can be sure of that. Just as the RIAA wants the stations to encrypt the signal so you can not copy the music from the stations that are broadcasting in digital. The technology already exists to encrypt the signals, the radio stations are dead set against "flaging" the music on their stations and the two sides are trying to work out a compremise.
As Stephen pointed out his radio can not receive the HD2 Channels, this is one of the problems facing you when purchase an HD Receiver. It may be outdated in a very short time as the push for digital continues and changes. One solution that the manufacturers have come up with is a USB port where you would down load the "enhancements" to your receiver from your computer. Free? Who knows.
A concern I have is that the chips used will have to evolve, and we are talking short term, not long term. Just as has been mentioned about the number of channels that can be used for HD Radio on FM, this too will change and likely in a matter of a few years, not 10 or 20. AM HD Radio is a dismal failure at best at this point and until Ibiquity comes up with a system that is truely ON CHANNEL, it will not be a workable system on many stations in a great many cities. The stations that will be able to use it will still be limited to daytime status until the station is broadcasting On Channel. It will likely take new chips to accomplish both of the above. Your radio is obsolete or you might possibly be able to purchase the chip(s) and install them yourself. The latter I find unlikely.
There is a huge interest in HD by those that are on radio boards, but the general public likely does not give a rats ass about HD1, HD2, etc or is not even familiar about HD Radio and is certainly not going to replace the radio in their vehicle for HD Radio and will only have HD Radio in the home if HD comes with a new receiver that they purchase. If radio A cost $150 more than radio B because it has HD Radio, the general public will likely buy radio B.
The vast majority of people are not happy with what is on the radio today and are not going to spend extra money for HD capability for a service they are not happy with now. Internet Radio which offers thousands of stations and options is right around the corner. It also is digital and will be afordable and much more of the public is aware of Internet Radio and will buy an Internet Radio capable receiver long before a HD radio for the FM / AM band.
Why do you think Ibiquity is pushing HD Radio so hard so fast, they know that Internet Radio will be available in a short time on boomboxes, OEM vehicle radios and your large home systems. In fact you can buy a boombox that receives Internet Radio and as more cities go WIFI citywide, you will be able to use the boombox anyplace. Likely low power transmitters will go up on all the cell phone towers and nearly blanket the country with Internet Radio. HD Radio may well go down as a very expensive version of AM Stereo. At best HD Radio will be just another method of delivery of music and news/talk/sports. Ibiquity has been nearly begging the auto manufacturers to add HD Radio to receivers that currently are for the Satellite services. Nearly all the commercial and non-comm stations are on the internet now so they have a place on Internet Radio.
It is all very exciting now, but in six months to a year when the HD2 Channel you love becomes a subscription service, what are you going to do? Pay Ibiquity/Clear Channel Subscription services $5.95 a month for each HD2 channel you want to listen to or go back to whatever free station you can tolerate? It is really no different than when the cable company offers their extra tier subscription services for free for a month to try and hook as many people as possible and hope a percentage decide to pay for the channel(s) after the free month is up.
Someone on this board stated not very long ago that nothing is free and HD Radio will definitly fall into that category. You can be sure that Clear Channel and the other company's and ultimately Ibiquity hope that you find the HD2 channel preferable and you will pay for the priviledge to listen to "Energy Radio" and "Pure Jazz", etc in about a year.
The technology is already in the receiver if you buy one. You want HD2 of 95.7 and 104.1, you will have to push a few buttons and then enter in a code(s) to enable your radio to decode the signal, after you pay your subscription fee of course.
The FCC has already given approval for subscription services on HD Radio. The restraints were services such as reading to the blind must be free.
Mike O
I read in either All Access or FMBQ that many of the HD2 Channels will become a subscription service. The technology is already there, you can be sure of that. Just as the RIAA wants the stations to encrypt the signal so you can not copy the music from the stations that are broadcasting in digital. The technology already exists to encrypt the signals, the radio stations are dead set against "flaging" the music on their stations and the two sides are trying to work out a compremise.
As Stephen pointed out his radio can not receive the HD2 Channels, this is one of the problems facing you when purchase an HD Receiver. It may be outdated in a very short time as the push for digital continues and changes. One solution that the manufacturers have come up with is a USB port where you would down load the "enhancements" to your receiver from your computer. Free? Who knows.
A concern I have is that the chips used will have to evolve, and we are talking short term, not long term. Just as has been mentioned about the number of channels that can be used for HD Radio on FM, this too will change and likely in a matter of a few years, not 10 or 20. AM HD Radio is a dismal failure at best at this point and until Ibiquity comes up with a system that is truely ON CHANNEL, it will not be a workable system on many stations in a great many cities. The stations that will be able to use it will still be limited to daytime status until the station is broadcasting On Channel. It will likely take new chips to accomplish both of the above. Your radio is obsolete or you might possibly be able to purchase the chip(s) and install them yourself. The latter I find unlikely.
There is a huge interest in HD by those that are on radio boards, but the general public likely does not give a rats ass about HD1, HD2, etc or is not even familiar about HD Radio and is certainly not going to replace the radio in their vehicle for HD Radio and will only have HD Radio in the home if HD comes with a new receiver that they purchase. If radio A cost $150 more than radio B because it has HD Radio, the general public will likely buy radio B.
The vast majority of people are not happy with what is on the radio today and are not going to spend extra money for HD capability for a service they are not happy with now. Internet Radio which offers thousands of stations and options is right around the corner. It also is digital and will be afordable and much more of the public is aware of Internet Radio and will buy an Internet Radio capable receiver long before a HD radio for the FM / AM band.
Why do you think Ibiquity is pushing HD Radio so hard so fast, they know that Internet Radio will be available in a short time on boomboxes, OEM vehicle radios and your large home systems. In fact you can buy a boombox that receives Internet Radio and as more cities go WIFI citywide, you will be able to use the boombox anyplace. Likely low power transmitters will go up on all the cell phone towers and nearly blanket the country with Internet Radio. HD Radio may well go down as a very expensive version of AM Stereo. At best HD Radio will be just another method of delivery of music and news/talk/sports. Ibiquity has been nearly begging the auto manufacturers to add HD Radio to receivers that currently are for the Satellite services. Nearly all the commercial and non-comm stations are on the internet now so they have a place on Internet Radio.
It is all very exciting now, but in six months to a year when the HD2 Channel you love becomes a subscription service, what are you going to do? Pay Ibiquity/Clear Channel Subscription services $5.95 a month for each HD2 channel you want to listen to or go back to whatever free station you can tolerate? It is really no different than when the cable company offers their extra tier subscription services for free for a month to try and hook as many people as possible and hope a percentage decide to pay for the channel(s) after the free month is up.
Someone on this board stated not very long ago that nothing is free and HD Radio will definitly fall into that category. You can be sure that Clear Channel and the other company's and ultimately Ibiquity hope that you find the HD2 channel preferable and you will pay for the priviledge to listen to "Energy Radio" and "Pure Jazz", etc in about a year.
The technology is already in the receiver if you buy one. You want HD2 of 95.7 and 104.1, you will have to push a few buttons and then enter in a code(s) to enable your radio to decode the signal, after you pay your subscription fee of course.
The FCC has already given approval for subscription services on HD Radio. The restraints were services such as reading to the blind must be free.
Mike O
D
dabomb
Guest
Re: The future?
Seems like an incredible waste of time. Why not just get a damn satellite radio? Why would anyone spend money on something that won't sound as good as satellite? The vast majority of terrestrial radio's audience has an income of under $50,000. Not to mention that most of the major companies seem to have a hard time programming one channel, let alone mulitple. Do you really think people will spend the money on the luxury of having an extra handful of channels, when they can get a hundred channels for the same price? Even if it were able to catch up, do you not think satellite will eventually competetive price?
Seems like an incredible waste of time. Why not just get a damn satellite radio? Why would anyone spend money on something that won't sound as good as satellite? The vast majority of terrestrial radio's audience has an income of under $50,000. Not to mention that most of the major companies seem to have a hard time programming one channel, let alone mulitple. Do you really think people will spend the money on the luxury of having an extra handful of channels, when they can get a hundred channels for the same price? Even if it were able to catch up, do you not think satellite will eventually competetive price?
Re: The future?
>> you can put xm in you car not subscribe and you will get
> free channels
>
I think they fixed that from last year, because I cancelled my XM about 2 years ago and I cant get any channels but the preview and the Alert channel. I wasnt that impressed with XM just wasnt for me.<P ID="signature">______________
jras20</P>
>> you can put xm in you car not subscribe and you will get
> free channels
>
I think they fixed that from last year, because I cancelled my XM about 2 years ago and I cant get any channels but the preview and the Alert channel. I wasnt that impressed with XM just wasnt for me.<P ID="signature">______________
jras20</P>
Re: The future?
> I read in either All Access or FMBQ that many of the HD2
> Channels will become a subscription service. The technology
> is already there, you can be sure of that.
The technology is there... but the plan is to NOT go subscription.
In forming the alliance, broadcasters considered a subscription-based HD2 business model but concluded that consumers don’t see the value in paying for a radio service. HD2 channels will ultimately be ad-supported but not until a commercial-free rollout stimulates enough consumer interest.
<a target="_blank" href=http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/search/article_display.jsp?schema=&vnu_content_id=1001659271>http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/search/article_display.jsp?schema=&vnu_content_id=1001659271</a>
If terrestrial radio starts charging for content, that pretty much kills the whole "radio should be free" campaign that the NAB just started.<P ID="signature">______________
...co-moderator of the Satellite Radio, Phoenix, and San Diego boards...</P>
> I read in either All Access or FMBQ that many of the HD2
> Channels will become a subscription service. The technology
> is already there, you can be sure of that.
The technology is there... but the plan is to NOT go subscription.
In forming the alliance, broadcasters considered a subscription-based HD2 business model but concluded that consumers don’t see the value in paying for a radio service. HD2 channels will ultimately be ad-supported but not until a commercial-free rollout stimulates enough consumer interest.
<a target="_blank" href=http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/search/article_display.jsp?schema=&vnu_content_id=1001659271>http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/search/article_display.jsp?schema=&vnu_content_id=1001659271</a>
If terrestrial radio starts charging for content, that pretty much kills the whole "radio should be free" campaign that the NAB just started.<P ID="signature">______________
...co-moderator of the Satellite Radio, Phoenix, and San Diego boards...</P>
Re: The future?
> The technology is there... but the plan is to NOT go
> subscription.
>
Absolutely right, John. Thank you, as I was not going to comment. However, I am compelled. Many on this board are not privy to the inside of this business. Meetings on this subject started well over a year ago. It will be commercial free for quite awhile. Then, perhaps you will hear something like this, "KXXX, Houston. This hour of music is brought to you by___________, where you can save on a brand new___________ for just $___________. Now, another hour of the biggest variety of music you've ever heard, and it's free on KXXX."
Voice tracked? Oh yeah. It would have to be. A staff would be not feasible at this time. Later? Perhaps. It's still new. I imagine the present staff of a station would voice track their counterpart, but not as intensive as on the main station. It may give partimers some voice track money as well. It could open up new possibilities.
Right now, it has just been born. Infancy is right around the corner.
> The technology is there... but the plan is to NOT go
> subscription.
>
Absolutely right, John. Thank you, as I was not going to comment. However, I am compelled. Many on this board are not privy to the inside of this business. Meetings on this subject started well over a year ago. It will be commercial free for quite awhile. Then, perhaps you will hear something like this, "KXXX, Houston. This hour of music is brought to you by___________, where you can save on a brand new___________ for just $___________. Now, another hour of the biggest variety of music you've ever heard, and it's free on KXXX."
Voice tracked? Oh yeah. It would have to be. A staff would be not feasible at this time. Later? Perhaps. It's still new. I imagine the present staff of a station would voice track their counterpart, but not as intensive as on the main station. It may give partimers some voice track money as well. It could open up new possibilities.
Right now, it has just been born. Infancy is right around the corner.
Re: The future?
Thanks for the clear ups, there is one question, will they get rid of the analog signal down the road? I wouldnt think they really could do that, I can recieve the digtial signals out at Lavaca county very good, I just need to find me a good radio, I like that new top 40 station mix has out. I'm listening on the web right now. I'd like to see a dance // top 40 station pop up on one of these channels
<P ID="signature">______________
jras20</P>
Thanks for the clear ups, there is one question, will they get rid of the analog signal down the road? I wouldnt think they really could do that, I can recieve the digtial signals out at Lavaca county very good, I just need to find me a good radio, I like that new top 40 station mix has out. I'm listening on the web right now. I'd like to see a dance // top 40 station pop up on one of these channels
<P ID="signature">______________
jras20</P>
T
Theo_Huxtable
Guest
Re: The future?
First, the HD side channels that I have heard so far on an HD radio sound as good (or in my case) better than a hard wired Sirius radio. Plus, it's free! Sure the radio was a few hundred, but when you look at things. Say a city has 40 frequencies. Now, it'll have at least 80 music channels and even more talk channels. Not bad for a one time investment.
> Seems like an incredible waste of time. Why not just get a
> damn satellite radio? Why would anyone spend money on
> something that won't sound as good as satellite? The vast
> majority of terrestrial radio's audience has an income of
> under $50,000. Not to mention that most of the major
> companies seem to have a hard time programming one channel,
> let alone mulitple. Do you really think people will spend
> the money on the luxury of having an extra handful of
> channels, when they can get a hundred channels for the same
> price? Even if it were able to catch up, do you not think
> satellite will eventually competetive price?
>
First, the HD side channels that I have heard so far on an HD radio sound as good (or in my case) better than a hard wired Sirius radio. Plus, it's free! Sure the radio was a few hundred, but when you look at things. Say a city has 40 frequencies. Now, it'll have at least 80 music channels and even more talk channels. Not bad for a one time investment.
> Seems like an incredible waste of time. Why not just get a
> damn satellite radio? Why would anyone spend money on
> something that won't sound as good as satellite? The vast
> majority of terrestrial radio's audience has an income of
> under $50,000. Not to mention that most of the major
> companies seem to have a hard time programming one channel,
> let alone mulitple. Do you really think people will spend
> the money on the luxury of having an extra handful of
> channels, when they can get a hundred channels for the same
> price? Even if it were able to catch up, do you not think
> satellite will eventually competetive price?
>
Re: The future?
the HD "Liquid Buzz" sounds like what the Buzz is suppose to sound like. the current format of the Buzz chased me to XM.
what about the news/talk options on Sirius /XM? ESPN, CNN, FOX, Take 5, CNBC.
available in Houston?? nope.
there are 4 alternative stations on XM. I listen to 3 non-stop. plus 2 classic rock, plus 3 adult alternative. I heard an interview with Paul McCartney from the XM studios. on HD??? nope.
> First, the HD side channels that I have heard so far on an
> HD radio sound as good (or in my case) better than a hard
> wired Sirius radio. Plus, it's free! Sure the radio was a
> few hundred, but when you look at things. Say a city has 40
> frequencies. Now, it'll have at least 80 music channels and
> even more talk channels. Not bad for a one time investment.
>
>
>
> > Seems like an incredible waste of time. Why not just get
> a
> > damn satellite radio? Why would anyone spend money on
> > something that won't sound as good as satellite? The vast
>
> > majority of terrestrial radio's audience has an income of
> > under $50,000. Not to mention that most of the major
> > companies seem to have a hard time programming one
> channel,
> > let alone mulitple. Do you really think people will spend
>
> > the money on the luxury of having an extra handful of
> > channels, when they can get a hundred channels for the
> same
> > price? Even if it were able to catch up, do you not think
>
> > satellite will eventually competetive price?
> >
> <P ID="signature">______________
"we are the sons of no one
Bastards of Young!"</P>
the HD "Liquid Buzz" sounds like what the Buzz is suppose to sound like. the current format of the Buzz chased me to XM.
what about the news/talk options on Sirius /XM? ESPN, CNN, FOX, Take 5, CNBC.
available in Houston?? nope.
there are 4 alternative stations on XM. I listen to 3 non-stop. plus 2 classic rock, plus 3 adult alternative. I heard an interview with Paul McCartney from the XM studios. on HD??? nope.
> First, the HD side channels that I have heard so far on an
> HD radio sound as good (or in my case) better than a hard
> wired Sirius radio. Plus, it's free! Sure the radio was a
> few hundred, but when you look at things. Say a city has 40
> frequencies. Now, it'll have at least 80 music channels and
> even more talk channels. Not bad for a one time investment.
>
>
>
> > Seems like an incredible waste of time. Why not just get
> a
> > damn satellite radio? Why would anyone spend money on
> > something that won't sound as good as satellite? The vast
>
> > majority of terrestrial radio's audience has an income of
> > under $50,000. Not to mention that most of the major
> > companies seem to have a hard time programming one
> channel,
> > let alone mulitple. Do you really think people will spend
>
> > the money on the luxury of having an extra handful of
> > channels, when they can get a hundred channels for the
> same
> > price? Even if it were able to catch up, do you not think
>
> > satellite will eventually competetive price?
> >
> <P ID="signature">______________
"we are the sons of no one
Bastards of Young!"</P>
T
Theo_Huxtable
Guest
Re: The future?
Who knows what the future hold for HD side channel formats? I don't. But then again, I sold my Sirius and my XM stocks awhile back because their future is as uncertain as anything these days.
> the HD "Liquid Buzz" sounds like what the Buzz is suppose to
> sound like. the current format of the Buzz chased me to XM.
>
>
> what about the news/talk options on Sirius /XM? ESPN, CNN,
> FOX, Take 5, CNBC.
> available in Houston?? nope.
>
> there are 4 alternative stations on XM. I listen to 3
> non-stop. plus 2 classic rock, plus 3 adult alternative. I
> heard an interview with Paul McCartney from the XM studios.
> on HD??? nope.
>
>
> > First, the HD side channels that I have heard so far on an
>
> > HD radio sound as good (or in my case) better than a hard
> > wired Sirius radio. Plus, it's free! Sure the radio was a
> > few hundred, but when you look at things. Say a city has
> 40
> > frequencies. Now, it'll have at least 80 music channels
> and
> > even more talk channels. Not bad for a one time
> investment.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Seems like an incredible waste of time. Why not just
> get
> > a
> > > damn satellite radio? Why would anyone spend money on
> > > something that won't sound as good as satellite? The
> vast
> >
> > > majority of terrestrial radio's audience has an income
> of
> > > under $50,000. Not to mention that most of the major
> > > companies seem to have a hard time programming one
> > channel,
> > > let alone mulitple. Do you really think people will
> spend
> >
> > > the money on the luxury of having an extra handful of
> > > channels, when they can get a hundred channels for the
> > same
> > > price? Even if it were able to catch up, do you not
> think
> >
> > > satellite will eventually competetive price?
> > >
> >
>
Who knows what the future hold for HD side channel formats? I don't. But then again, I sold my Sirius and my XM stocks awhile back because their future is as uncertain as anything these days.
> the HD "Liquid Buzz" sounds like what the Buzz is suppose to
> sound like. the current format of the Buzz chased me to XM.
>
>
> what about the news/talk options on Sirius /XM? ESPN, CNN,
> FOX, Take 5, CNBC.
> available in Houston?? nope.
>
> there are 4 alternative stations on XM. I listen to 3
> non-stop. plus 2 classic rock, plus 3 adult alternative. I
> heard an interview with Paul McCartney from the XM studios.
> on HD??? nope.
>
>
> > First, the HD side channels that I have heard so far on an
>
> > HD radio sound as good (or in my case) better than a hard
> > wired Sirius radio. Plus, it's free! Sure the radio was a
> > few hundred, but when you look at things. Say a city has
> 40
> > frequencies. Now, it'll have at least 80 music channels
> and
> > even more talk channels. Not bad for a one time
> investment.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Seems like an incredible waste of time. Why not just
> get
> > a
> > > damn satellite radio? Why would anyone spend money on
> > > something that won't sound as good as satellite? The
> vast
> >
> > > majority of terrestrial radio's audience has an income
> of
> > > under $50,000. Not to mention that most of the major
> > > companies seem to have a hard time programming one
> > channel,
> > > let alone mulitple. Do you really think people will
> spend
> >
> > > the money on the luxury of having an extra handful of
> > > channels, when they can get a hundred channels for the
> > same
> > > price? Even if it were able to catch up, do you not
> think
> >
> > > satellite will eventually competetive price?
> > >
> >
>
Re: The future?
> Thanks for the clear ups, there is one question, will they
> get rid of the analog signal down the road?
In theory, yes. There's nothing pushing them to do so (it's not like TV where they're going to repurpose part of the band and auction it off; it uses the same spectrum).
Will they do it? Depends upon how many people bother to buy a new radio.<P ID="signature">______________
...co-moderator of the Satellite Radio, Phoenix, and San Diego boards...</P>
> Thanks for the clear ups, there is one question, will they
> get rid of the analog signal down the road?
In theory, yes. There's nothing pushing them to do so (it's not like TV where they're going to repurpose part of the band and auction it off; it uses the same spectrum).
Will they do it? Depends upon how many people bother to buy a new radio.<P ID="signature">______________
...co-moderator of the Satellite Radio, Phoenix, and San Diego boards...</P>
- Status