Is this how we're going to spend 2009?

[fybush]

Look, I'm already regretting this as I'm typing it, because I'm pretty sure I already know the answer...but are we really going to spend 2009 having the exact same conversation, or lack thereof, that we've had on this board for the last 12 months?

I suspect most of us can pretty well guess the content of a post on this board just by looking at the poster's name. Pocket will post a list of links (duplicated as the first entry in the comment section of any blog or newspaper site that runs an HD-related article) about - and I quote - "what a farce" the system is. KB1OKL will agree, and note that the radio he bought (which - surprise! - was a disappointment) is collecting dust while he plays his LPs and listens to his tube radios. Clouseau will jump in with the observation that Pocket's links are out of date or irrelevant. Freebird will observe that there's a simple solution to all of this, which is to move digital radio from medium wave to channels 5 and 6. jras will note that he can't get Houston HD signals from 84 miles away in Victoria. Mike Walker (or am I thinking of Sheridan?) will note that HD works pretty well in North Carolina. And I'll come along with my usual observation that the FM multicasting is working OK as a niche for some noncommercial stations.

As for the subject of the post? It'll either be a report that HD has been turned off somewhere, which will cause one regular group of posters to predict the imminent demise of the entire system and another to say it's an isolated incident...or a clueless mainstream newspaper reporter buying into one piece of industry hype or another, and no doubt calling it "high-definition radio," which will prompt a half-dozen breathless posts informing us yet again that that's not what HD stands for, by golly. Or someone will go to the local Radio Shack or Target or Best Buy or Wal-Mart and find that the HD radio display is either nonexistent, or not plugged in, or covered in dust, or the minimum-wage sales drone pointed them to the TV section when they asked about it. That, in turn, will cause one regular group of posters to predict the imminent demise of the entire system and another to say it's an isolated incident.

I've omitted one regular poster from my litany, and for a reason...because out of all of us here, my good friend of more than two decades, Bob Savage, is the only one here (at least that I can identify) with a real financial stake in this whole mess. He's also brought some of the few new points of real information to this discussion in the past year - the outcome (or lack thereof) of his complaint against CBS, which he says (and I believe) has cost him at least $50,000 in lost revenue in 2008, and the possibility that the AM HD system interferes with PPM.

While I respect Bob immensely, and I feel the pain he's suffering every time I head south to meet him for a Wahlburger (which we need to do again sometime soon), I happen to disagree with that last conclusion, and I'd love to have a real discussion about it - starting with the question, "if it's true, why did the major New York City AMs, all of which have HD during the day and many of which use it at night, post strong showings in the most recent, PPM-enabled, trends?"

But if it's just going to slouch back into the same conversation we had over and over again last year, I'm not interested.

(And it's no better on some of the other forums out there - the same conversation, with many of the same participants, can be observed ad infinitum on the DX club mailing lists and on several professional engineering forums.)

Is it possible we could all come to agreement on a few basic points - the system is far from perfect, the promotional campaign behind it has been mediocre at best and inept at worse, it would work better on a different band, and KB1OKL and Pocket both hate it - and then move on to some more interesting discussions? Like, say, at a time when the radio industry is dying of a particularly nasty sort of slow-growing cancer, why we're obsessing over something that, to most of the industry, amounts to no more than a pesky hangnail?

No? OK...carry on, then... (and Happy New Year to all

 

[Mike Walker]

Hard to argue that this IS a major waste of times. The same people (and I'm guilty as charged) DO have the same arguments, er, discussions, making the same points over and over. I would simply point out the fact that this has all lingered into another year is actually a victory for HD. It AIN'T GOING AWAY! At least not on FM (thought on AM it may well be taking it's last curtain call!)

Still it IS a tremendous waste of time, BECAUSE it's not as if a persuasive, well-reasoned argument actually changes anyone's mind. Which is why I spend far less time here than I used to, and sometiems disappear for months. Even I get bored with this b.s.! HD has it's strengths (and weaknesses). But though I'm a supporter, it's far from the most important thing in my life. At most it's only one way of delivering pristine digital audio (and more important more programming variety), and should never be the ONLY way stations choose to do this! This internet thing (it's a series of tubes) can't be ignored, and devices like internet radios are JUST TOO COOL (I LOVE MINE!)

HD is a slice of the pie. It never was, nor will it ever be, the whole pie (or even most of it).

 

[clouseau]

Look, I'm already regretting this as I'm typing it, because I'm pretty sure I already know the answer...but are we really going to spend 2009 having the exact same conversation, or lack thereof, that we've had on this board for the last 12 months?

Funny, Scott, I was having the same thought for much of today. I, like you, approached this thread with a degree of trepidation.

Regretfully, there isn't a place to actually discuss the topic without an endless cavalcade of the merits of the system. At some point in time, that discussion becomes moot. At least to me. I've taken lengthy "Vacations" from this board for just that reason. Heaven forbid a discussion of promotion of stations or the like ever happen.

I will tell you that I believe the draw of this board "IS" that controversy. That's why, (Sorry Savage) most people who have anything to do with the system and it's implementation have long since left. I ask myself, "Why would TOM REY post here?". Answer? He wouldn't. And he no longer does. I have often suspected that most of the posters post here, because no one listens to them if they discuss it elsewhere. At our local SBE, it's a non starter. We have two area FM's with it. They both implement it well and are neither radbidly for or against it. It's like stereo. Who talks about it?

Fact is, as far as I can tell, the topic is a non starter EVERYWHERE except in "Radioland".

When you characterized the posters here, I had to laugh. You nailed it, self included. It's like everyone here talks about this topic here because no one else out there wants to talk about it. And frankly, oftimes the level of discussion is pretty bad.

Scott, I think you have been one of the more levelheaded posters on the forum, showing the positives and acknowledging the negatives. I try to do this as well. However I do tend to respond to numbskullery fairly directly. Guilty as charged. While I have publiclly said overall I like the system, you have publically claim to not be an advocate. Nonetheless, you have not met the "Anti" litmus test and have been repeated called a Kool-Aid drinker. I believe I even recall a shill.. Oh well.

As I watched the last few days, I see why people like Mike Walker are occasional visitors at best, now.

I enjoy the occasional Pro vs Con discussion as much as anyone, but there really is very little new happening here. That's because some believe HD must have a meteoric rise like the I-Phone. I don't. Never have. Digital will have a long slow increase in penetration at best. All Digital will happen at a certain time following good penetration (I believe). That clock has not started yet, BTW. And it possible never will. I too am frustrated by the never ending griping oabout out of area listening and RF interference. I have 3 dimmers in my living room, 2 of which were there when we bought the house. Anything but "All on" or "All Off" renders local AM reception worthless. My new Motorola cell charge puts a nice hum on all local AM as well. (Yep, it's across the room from the radio). A local liquor store just had their flourescents replaced. they have 5 rows of 'em and if they want to listen to the ball game on local AM, they need to shut off the middle row. This stuff is real and ending AM local reception TODAY, not stopping a Minneapolis station from being heard in Kentucky. Yet somehow long distance reception of AM signals is a big issue here. I tend to question the motives.

Many to most who post here are not radio owners or workers. They are radio enthusiasts who do not understand the reality of radio TODAY. They claim to miss the glory days of yesteryear, yet time and time again we see there is no audience for that type of programming. EVERYONE knows "Radio is broken" and "They know how to fix it". I have to laugh. Like somehow the radio industry never thought of that idea. Actually, I'm pretty impressed with radio's ability to retain audience and advertising dollars. Bad aggregation management has stock prices in the dumper, but EBDITA still looks fairly good overall. It's like Jerry DelColliano's rant about the problems with radio and why kids are turning to their I-POD for music. What's the point, that we need to play 20 in a row with a 30 second stopset? If you want to hear a certain song at a certain moment radio is not your best choice. Never has been. We had 45's when we grew up. Now we got I-Pods. The "Will a Satrad BK help radio" is a telling thread. The base of reference of many on this board is interesting to say the least.

But I digress. I have a problem with a lot of the misinformation on this forum because it is a place where consumers tend to end up when looking for info on HD. And when there is nothing but a cesspool of Boobie Stoobull, Iniquity, Titanic 2000 of broadcasting and I-Buzz, it does them a disservice. I think we would all agree "HD programming sucks" on a national message board doesn't really help amyone seeking advise. Maybe their's doesn't. most here probably don't know.

I suspect there will be a chorus of wisdom about this post to follow. But your point is well taken, Scott. Thanks for having the guts to post it.

Clouseau

 

[Mike Walker]

More "facts" from the fact-master. I don't remember ever saying I was leaving permanently. Just that I was (and am) bored with this. Fact: hits on Google don't seem to be helping the anti-hd cause, since HD continues to grow. More of everything, not less. Fact: facts mean nothing here, which is why I have, and will again (on my timetable, not someone elses!) leave for months at a time. I believe the FM HD system (NOT AM!), though it certainly isn't the center of my life. I neither am, nor desire to be "sitting on Google's home page". Sounds kind of like obsessive bahavior to me!

The transition to digital has taken a turn no "Google results" can roll back. HD is now incorporated in many dozens of products that people are buying for other reasons. The only two dominoes left to fall for a conversion that God himself can't roll back are affordable portables (THAT WORK WELL, at least out to the edge of the suburbs...those of us in rural areas never got reliable analog FM stereo on headphone radios! Digital can't be expected to work better than that, at least not in hybrid mode. Not for a while!), and the incorporation of HD in the majority of car radios. Both WILL happen (I thought there would have been more portables by this time, honestly, rather than just the one chunky Coby model).

Car manufacturers are always looking for value-added things to stick in the dash. Should satellite radio fail...not entirely unlikely as Sirus/XM stock now costs less per-share than a canned soda, HD will be in those dashes faster than lunch in Ruseanne Barr. Congress REQUIRING HD in satellite radios would help too. But better than that is the slow reduction in the cost of HD (for receiver manufacturers). THAT has already resulted in it's inclusion in some damn inexpensive devices. If it's cheap (a couple of bucks for the chipset), they of course they'll "toss it in".

 

[audioguy]

Scott,

As always, your observations are insightful and worthwhile. I, too, have observed the same things that you discussed. My comment is this: Most of the people on this board are technologists, to a greater or lesser degree, even beyond their involvement with the broadcast industry. If HD radio technology was all that we hoped for and expected it to be, you would not see all of these negative posts. Instead, people would be looking for ways to promote it, exploring new ways to use it, and sharing their (positive) experiences with it. The fact is, that hasn't happened, and that should be a telling indication that there are major problems here. Intelligent people have come to the realization that this technology is deeply flawed and is a drag on the industry and a disservice to the American public.

For 2009 we should be thinking about what we can do to fix the problem. It starts by admitting (which will be painful for some) that HD radio is not the right technology for bringing digital radio to the airwaves, and that something different and dramatically better will be needed. For starters, it must be affordable for all broadcasters (so licensing fees will need to be eliminated), and it will need to function without degrading or disrupting existing broadcast service in the interim. It will need to be affordable for receiver manufacturers as well, and it will have to work in portable radios for more than 5 hours on a set of batteries.

These are not insignificant problems, but they are not insurmountable either. The exodus of TV stations from the low VHF channels has opened up the possibility for creating an entirely new radio band for the first time in recent history. It is increasingly evident that we cannot pack any more potatoes into the proverbial 5 lb. bag, so why not consider the proposal by the BMC? There may be other possible solutions as well, such as broadcasting audio over unused DTV sub channels. Meanwhile, I just wish the adjacent channel hiss on my AM dial would go away... tomorrow, if not sooner. And I don't want any more on my FM dial either, thank you!

 

[Play Freebird]

You want to see what happens if "lively discussion" is discouraged, go visit the HD Radio board on radio insight. Please spare me that.

Although I never thought AM IBOC would provide acceptable performance (as it has turned out, it's causing more harm than good) I was initially a supporter of the FM IBOC system -- in fact, I've installed several FM HD transmitters for different clients so you might say I have a "pecuniary interest' in this scheme.

I also agree with Scott that public radio is doing very worthwhile things with their multicast capability. (Still wish the codec sounded better, but you can't have it all. Fortunately, the Internet allows much higher bitrate streams.)

However, as part-owner of a daytime AM station which stands to gain nothing of value from IBOC, I must admit I feel neglected (perhaps a better term would be screwed) by the approach taken to digital radio here in the US by NABquity/FCC. Fortunately, our company was able to acquire some FM translator licenses at a reasonable cost and move them to locations where they reach most of our audience. This network of low power analog stations has addressed the daytimer problem (not to mention most of the other limitations of small market medium-wave broadcasting) much more effectively than the IBOC alternative -- and really has "revitalized" the service we provide to our community.

Unlike Bob Savage over at WYSL, we haven't received much digital spillover into our AM channel during critical hours from IBOC, but thankfully, that's because the owner of our first-adjacent neighbor in New York (who also happens to be the city's mayor) hasn't seen fit to turn it on. And we hope he never does.

Now, we have the 10 dB FM power increase looming on the horizon and I have to ask "is this something I should support"? Frankly, I'm concerned that it increases the chance of interference to our translators, so I'm not too happy about it. Obviously, it could have a harmful impact on a lot of other FM broadcasters whose analog signals will be their "bread and butter" for the next 20 years. And I have very little confidence that the FCC will be able to address interference on a "case-by-case basis" - it's just going to be another mess.

But rather than taking the easy way out and declaring "digital sucks", I say let's give serious consideration to digital radio alternatives which might still be workable. The BMC plan makes a lot of sense, but we're not going to make any progress towards moving in a more sensible direction unless we admit the shortcomings of the IBOC system. As other posters have pointed out, this is mainly a matter of "saving face".

 

[Carmine5]

You want to see what happens if "lively discussion" is discouraged, go visit the HD Radio board on radio insight. Please spare me that.

I totally agree. I don't think it's a good idea to over-analyze this discussion on HD Radio. Sure there is a fair amount of detritus that floats by here. But out of it have been some very good nuggets of information.

As a potential station owner (I have a CP for an AM station that has yet to be built) I actually appreciate what has been written here. Most of the other sites, as Play Freebird notes, are ghost towns when it comes to discussion on HD.

If digital broadcasting is our future (in whatever form) then lively discussion needs to be encouraged.

And as much as I respect Tom Ray, I don't need his input for this board to be meaningful. I've already decided that HD-AM is out of the picture for my future station (but definitely C-QuAM will be installed).

C5

 

[clouseau]

As a potential station owner (I have a CP for an AM station that has yet to be built) ...

Way to go Carmine!

Clouseau

 

[KB1OKL]

Well, Scott, and Inspector Clouseau, you've finally convinced me to change my cynical ways. I have conferred with the real pocketradio (who as I've posted here about 50 times is not the same as the Pocket-Radio who NOW posts here) and a few others and we've all come to the conclusion that HD is a wonderful boon to mankind, akin to the Polio vaccine except it will be the savior of radio, radio will walk again!. In fact I'm going to open a store selling nothing but HD radio and HD accessories. In fact I'm going to apply for a government bailout and give them away, no, I'm going to PAY people to take them because radio will completely die off within two years of HD does not become the one and only radio mode. I'm going to lobby the ARRL to adopt HD only mode for all ham radio operators and all shortwave transmissions should also be in the HD format. HD FOREVER!!!!
Now we can return to our regularly schedulaed debate and REMEMBER: IF SOMEONE DOESN'T LIKE IT HERE THEY CAN GO THE THE EMPTY VACANT other HD forums where the few remaining members all talk about 5 mile receptions and rotating Roof Yagi antennas ad infinitum.
I am here to express my opinions and this is why I will continue to come here, this is a forum for opinion as it says down the bottom:

Postings on Radio-Info.com are the opinions of the people who post them. Views expressed do not necessarily represent the views of Radio-Info.com or its parent in3 media, inc. In fact many of the views expressed here are just plain wrong. But they are opinions and this site allows us all to discuss those opinions. Any reliance on information posted is done so at the user's own risk. For a detailed look at the rules, regulations and uses of Radio-Info.com please see our TERMS OF SERVICE.

 

[fybush]

So I gather the answer to the question I posed in the subject line is, "yes."

No great surprise there.

To be continued on 12/31/09, when I pose the exciting questions, "Is this how we're going to spend 2010," and, of course, "what about Naomi?"

Oh, and as for "empty vacant forums," it's instructive to note the view counts for the threads here. Divided by number of posts per thread, they suggest that we're cuming anywhere from 10 to (on a good day) 30 viewers per posting. Who'll be the first to compare that oh-so-impressive readership figure to typical HD listening levels - or to suggest that the issue, in both cases, comes down to repetitious and unoriginal content?

 

[Tom Wells]

As other posters have pointed out, this is mainly a matter of "saving face".

Saving face should be so very easy at this point. Kill the botched AM experiment, so the FM version has a fighting chance at being perfected.
I think there should be more redundancy, not side channels, but that's not the way it happened.
There is far more resolution (not bandwidth per se) available in a 100 Mhz signal than a 1 Mhz signal, that is one of the fundamental reasons the NAB should have listened a long time ago when they were told by engineers that it was a bad idea to drag AM MW into digital.

My own posting has dropped, because I can only beat a dead horse so long, and I do not wish to kick ibiquity if they are suffering.
They are real people with families and I cannot wish them misfortune. I do wish the AM hybrid digital experiment would end as soon as possible
and quickly become a footnote.

 

[Play Freebird]

There is far more resolution (not bandwidth per se) available in a 100 Mhz signal than a 1 Mhz signal, that is one of the fundamental reasons the NAB should have listened a long time ago when they were told by engineers that it was a bad idea to drag AM MW into digital.

Yes, this is where the laws of Physics kick in. For anyone interested, google "Shannon-Hartley theorem" and read about the tradeoffs between information, bandwidth, and noise. The reason NAB's leaders didn't pay enough attention to the engineers is that they paid more attention to the non-technical lawyers (who thought IBOC could simply exploit a loophole in 73.44 of the FCC rules) and to the Wall Street types who were afraid of upsetting the status quo but never realized the impact of the Internet. IMHO, of course.

My own posting has dropped, because I can only beat a dead horse so long, and I do not wish to kick ibiquity if they are suffering.
They are real people with families and I cannot wish them misfortune. I do wish the AM hybrid digital experiment would end as soon as possible and quickly become a footnote.

Another good point, Tom; let's remember to hate the sin, but love the sinners. I've known several of iBiquity's engineers since the early '80s and they're nice people. When they accepted positions with the company well over ten years ago, I'm sure they were excited about playing a role in the development of this technology, which was supposed to be a significant advancement. But today, I can't help but wonder if they're as disappointed as many of us on the "user" side of the fence or some of the transmitter vendors I've spoken with. Fact is, the engineers must answer to their superiors who have more political influence and earn fatter paychecks, but don't necessarily exercise better judgment.

This is why I try to avoid the "booble-Struble" kind of name calling and other personal attacks; I prefer to discuss alternative digital (or enhanced analog) approaches which would perform above and beyond the expectations of our listeners. Let's get past February 17 and see how the NTSC shutdown goes, and then perhaps we can revive the Channel 5/6 discussion again. Scott, I'll promise to stay off the BMC topic until then, if Oscar Kilo Lima refrains from calling Struble funny names.

 

[vsa]

I'll just chime in with this headline and link. This is the future of radio.

Blaupunkt and miRoamer Unveil Internet Radio for the Car

http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/12/blaupunkt-and-m.html

 

[clouseau]

Oh, and as for "empty vacant forums," it's instructive to note the view counts for the threads here. Divided by number of posts per thread, they suggest that we're cuming anywhere from 10 to (on a good day) 30 viewers per posting. Who'll be the first to compare that oh-so-impressive readership figure to typical HD listening levels - or to suggest that the issue, in both cases, comes down to repetitious and unoriginal content?

Epic, Scott. Your audience analysis is insightful. (As much audience anaylsis is).
KB's attempt at humor is truly insightful as well. I've always loved those who subscribe to the "I'm an ass and I'm allowed to be an ass!" mantra. Seriously, KB. Any chance of legit discussion? Or do we need the "I'm going to give out free HD radios" nonesense forever?

If your sense of rationality won't prevail, how about a little old time embarrassment?

Still, this appears to be a place where all kinds like to congregate. Heaven only knows the original pocket radio tries to get back in regularly enough. Based on 7 hours of non activity, I suspect he may have again been shown the door and outlived his newest 15 minutes of fame. It's interesting to note that his views are not disallowed, just his spamming and quoted material violations. I foolishily did that once. The outside is a lonely place.

Is anyone going away? Probably not forever. But often "Real Radio" takes precedence over the board. Some of us, like you, have a living to earn from (As Hy Lit Said) "That Queen called [Radio]".

2009 and still kickin'. Happy New Year!

Clouseau

 

[fybush]

Still, this appears to be a place where all kinds like to congregate. Heaven only knows the original pocket radio tries to get back in regularly enough. Based on 7 hours of non activity, I suspect he may have again been shown the door and outlived his newest 15 minutes of fame. It's interesting to note that his views are not disallowed, just his spamming and quoted material violations. I foolishily did that once. The outside is a lonely place.

Yup, I think Mr. Farce has been moved, er, outside again...indeed, his contributions to this thread would appear to have been scrubbed completely into the memory hole.

Is anyone going away? Probably not forever. But often "Real Radio" takes precedence over the board. Some of us, like you, have a living to earn from (As Hy Lit Said) "That Queen called [Radio]".

2009 and still kickin'. Happy New Year!

Right back at you - and at everyone who's chimed in here.

I guess this is what I don't get, and if this starts some conversation going, good:

I think I understand why some of us are here. Savage (who's been curiously missing from this thread, much to my disappointment) has his retirement on the line, and I completely get why he's as frustrated as he is. Freebird's a top-notch engineer (really, Clouseau - I know him well!) with some justified criticism of the system as implemented. Carmine's building a new AM (more power to you on that!) and figuring out whether or not HD is worth the trouble (and for the record, I wouldn't put it on a small AM signal if I were building one, either.) Clouseau's obviously in the business, and certainly enjoys the give-and-take with the "other side."

I get why guys like KB and Farce and Pocket are unhappy about HD. Hey, I'm a DXer, too (and have been for longer than I've been a broadcaster), and I'm not at all happy about what IBOC - on either band - has done to my hobby here. It hasn't been the Total Global DX Apocalypse some were predicting a few years back, but it ain't pretty, either. So, anger, yeah, I get that.

The part that I don't get is the level of obsession. It's not just here - as I alluded to at the start of this thread, it seems like any on-line discussion of IBOC, whether it be the comments section of a newspaper article, or a media-related blog, or a message board, or a product listing on Amazon, gets an almost immediate visit from Bob or Farce or the "other" Pocket (if I have that confusing doppelganger situation straight) with pretty much the same message (and/or long list of questionably relevant links) with which we're all intimately familiar.

To be clear: I'm not questioning their right to do so. I've got a pretty nice soapbox at my own disposal off in another corner of the net, and it would be pretty hypocritical of me to deny anyone else that same voice.

But what I don't quite understand, in a world that's full of annoyingly flawed technology (come visit my new site, My Time Warner HD Cable Box's HDMI Interface Is A Farce.blogspot.com, or its sister site, My Zune Just Turned Into An Expensive Brick.com!), is just what it is about this particular flawed technology that keeps a few diehards so very obsessed with rehashing a discussion that feels so very 2006, at a time when there's so much else going wrong with the industry in a very 2008-2009 way. (A partial catalog can be found in my Year-End Rant, http://www.fybush.com/yir-2008.html#rant, if anyone's looking for something new to get angry about...)

So, how about it? All 20 or 30 of us who regularly read this forum know what you think by now, probably word for word. But I'd still like to know more about the why. That level of passion certainly doesn't exist on the "other side" - if my bosses came to me tomorrow and said, "stop reading the IDs and promos for the HD2, because we're turning it off," I'd have a few questions about why, and how we'll replace that service for the members who were using it, but once those were answered, I'd shrug and move on to something else. (And on the flip side, if they told me they were putting HD on our AM, I'd offer a few arguments against it, but if it came to pass, I'd shrug and move on, too.)

 

[pocket-radio]

Scooter, I hope I’m totally wrong and HD brings to radio a much-needed facelift. When listening to radio, it saddens me and causes untold frustrations when tuning the dial only to hear commercial programming that’s homogenized, boring and predictable, with the exception being NPR, or an occasional broadcaster who’s a rebel at heart. I pine for pirate radio.

Like many here, I was a kid who grew up with radio. Spent many hours in bed with my battery-operated transistor radio. I think it had 5 transistors. Growing up outside of Boston, I was lucky enough to be exposed to great radio, like WRKO & WBZ or Albany’s WPTR. During the weekends Casey Cassim’s American top 40 played, as the radio was on all the time. As I grew older, RKO stopped spinning tunes and started talking. Again I grew into talk radio with the industry’s best talk masters, Jerry Williams, Gene Burns & Larry Glick, then Rush and Sean Hannity.

When Clear Channel and their clones moved into town, in my opinion FM Radio died. The last vestige of anything worth my time was Rush & Sean Hannity. After years of living and dying on every word of Rush, I began noticing these two dynamos evolved into repeaters for their party’s dogmas. I’m a news and information junkie and grew tired of Rush and Sean’s obvious manipulation of the facts and information. It took me awhile to finally catch on, as I was a real Kool-Aid drinker.

Lately I’ve been forced at times to completely turn my car radio off and ride in silence to work. My savior from the silence has been an MP3 player and occasionally the radio again. At 48 I’m amazed at how much free music is available on the net and how easy it is to program my own music. Don’t believe your research, at 48 I still like new music.

Growing up, radio is all I ever wanted to do and did for 25 years of my life on the sales side.

I don’t have issues with radio’s sound quality, as I grew up and into radio my whole life. And I suspect many in my demo feel the same way.

Radio today has many challenges just paying the bills, but is going to face problems very few are willing to admit. Adults who grew with radio during it’s glory days are drifting away, or dying. The 25-54’s are getting older too. The next generation of radio’s listeners, people 12-24 haven’t even plugged in. And unlike past generations, where radio is all we had to discovery new music, today technology provides more free new music options. Don’t get me wrong, the 12-24’s listen when nothing else is available.

When I was a youth my radio was on all the time. Kids today, their ipods and cell phones are on all the time. I’ve said this before, HD doesn’t have 10 or 15 years to find itself, like FM, simply because other technologies are moving and evolving much faster.

Unless HD programmers crank up the amps and start taking chances again, as I see it the future of HD will be a short lived experiment. And AM/HD should be shut off it doesn't work..

If it wasn’t for New Pocket-Radio, KB, Savage and others this group might just be a tad boring and we wouldn’t want that. javascript:void(0);

 

[Tom Wells]

Why? I guess because I stayed out of radio as a very gut-wrenching decision back in the 1980's.

I was there just in time to watch the door slam shut on good engineering jobs and a steady career in RF engineering.
I had my pirate fling long ago, I have a pt 15 AM, and along comes this ..white paper that basically tells me
I'm going to hear a high-pitched hiss in my AM listening. I was not on-line way back then, but knew somehow, I'd have to become an
activist for this somehow, as I had the knowledge to debunk the system on merits.

When I was finally online and found Radio Info, I knew I must use this site to influence those who can hear.
I have tempered my voice as I see the AM version of iboc fading, or failing to catch on.
I greatly appreciate the usefulness of the ether as it behaves in MW and when it was managed better as a scarce resource,
its value was better for the listeners.

When I registered here, I decided I would use my real name as I had no radio personna or employment to protect.
And under an assumed name my opinions would be worth less. So I put my name to these comments because I'm
trying to be as truthful as possible yet emphatic when appropriate.

I'm not an activist until someone's gore is aimed at my ox.

I'm very much a technologist, and deal daily with the many aspects from A to Z.
Radio being an art raised to such a high level as to permit people to actually make money from it,
I am alarmed and motivated when I see art in the realm of such a mysterious physics challenged by those who
do not fully understand the implications and world of digital vs analog and how these behave and inter-relate along the whole dang
spectrum of modulation, AF, IF, RF and on up. At least those who perfected analog radio used their ears to judge their advances.
That's why there's chrome on the old RCA AMs. It actually sounded better when there was chrome strip trim on the transmitter.

 

[Carmine5]

As a potential station owner (I have a CP for an AM station that has yet to be built) ...

Way to go Carmine!

Clouseau

Thanks, Inspector. Now if I can only get the banks as well as certain members of the COL's community and city council to be as enthusiastic about it.

And for what it's worth, Scott, I've always enjoyed your photos. I especially love those "lone towers on the open plains" shots you occasionally do.

And, yes, there are more pressing radio-related worries than HD, like copper theft and tower site vandalization as well as the future of AM as a whole.

And, for the record, I should state that, with the exception of a brief stint in radio in Kansas, my background is as a television news photographer and segment producer. So, actually, radio is a fairly new but related career move for me.

C5

 

[KB1OKL]

I am not anti-digital, I prefer analog sound as it sounds more natural to me, but I have CD's, bought an HD ready TV two years ago, I am using a computer right now, some of my clocks are digital. My satellite radio in my car is digital, Internet radio which I am listening to right now is digital. BUT....the reason I attack IBOC with passion is not only because it has impacted my DXing but because I believe IBOC is a scam and the reason I do is very simple and the reasons are the same now as they were in 2006. I try to refrain from insulting or putting anyone on the hot seat here, I will not stoop to that level. I will insult ibiquity as an entity and will insult the man who runs it because he is the spokesman and with that position comes responsibility and he has to take responsibility for the malarkey that comes out of that organization.
I believe it is a scam for several simple reasons: it doesn't sound any better than analog, the range is terrible and it stomps on it's neighbors. These are the same reasons people hated it in 2006 and are still the same reasons people hate it in 2009. I'm talking about people who know what it is and have experienced it, most people don't know it exists, you can bring up all the studies you want, most people still have no real idea of what it is. Their are always going to be two little camps (as long as it exists) with a great majority in the middle who couldn't care less and no matter how hard HD tries to make these people buy HD, it just ain't going to happen, there is no need, there are too many choices today which work much better than HD. I pay 20.00 every month for my Satellite and my Live 365 and can pick from more channels that I will ever listen to, why would I even want to turn on the toaster right next to me? I can get 4 maybe 5 HD stations with a grand total of maybe 12 (pushing it) channels. I have to turn it on, turn it to a station I know is in IBOC, then wait for it to maybe lock in and I dislike 75% of the junk I hear from those 4 or 5 stations. I have Classic Jazz corner on right now, it plays the kind of music I like 24 hours a day, with no drop outs and no waiting for it to lock back in, if I want 50's I turn on Satellite at home and listen to The 50's on 5 complete with DJ's. When I am in the car I have without satellite I usually listen to two different oldies stations on AM, they don't play that kind of stuff on FM anymore and it sounds better on AM anyway, it was made for AM radio. IBOC is a foreign entity trying to invade radio and it isn't working except in the minds of some radio executives who live in ivory towers.

 

[Savage]

I didn't jump in and respond to this provocative thread right away - because it deserved some rumination before the typing began. Also I didn't want my response to in any way sound disrespectful of my esteemed fellow broadcaster Scott.

For starters: "Is this how we're going to spend 2009?" My answer is, as the initial responses attest, "almost certainly." And I will add: that's a good thing.

For those who have spent a Rip Van Winkle five years under a rock in this industry, IBOC has easily been one of the most controversial and divisive issues during that period. And it's not just because of unfairly vilified "DXers" or "Luddites" who oppose HD Radio for very legitimate reasons. It's because....well, you know the issues. If I bother to list them one more time Clouseau will hork all over his shoes.

In the good ol' USA we have a long history of fighting productively over divisive issues. The Constitutional Convention was marked by occasional fistfights. President Andrew Jackson would "negotiate" with obstructive US Senators by summoning them over to the White House where Old Hickory would pull out a pistol and take potshots at stuff out in the yard, then wave it around the white-faced lawmakers with grimly pointed observations about how his aim wasn't so good any more. The Senators would retreat in confusion and fear. Then there was that little spat called the American Civil War. You get my point.

As has been succinctly observed here before, if IBOC was everything its fans claim it is, there wouldn't be any controversy. We would all be happily signing up for it and powering up our own Decepticons. Rightly or wrongly many people in radio, if not most (judging by levels of receiver sales and station installs) view it somewhere between "irrelevant" and "scam." As is generally the case, the majority generally holds the correct view - in the end. Which I happen to believe is approaching.

So, is debate - albeit repetitive and sometimes tiresome - a valid thing for us to do on the HD Radio board?
Until the legitimate concerns of those adversely impacted by IBOC are appropriately addressed, the answer must be a decisive "yes."

It is telling that many of HD's most ardent supporters are those who are either on the outer periphery of day-to-day involvement in radio or are only sideline observers. They're part-time on-air people, hobbyists, audio freaks, or educators. I say this not to disparage them, but to observe that their perspectives on HD Radio are starkly different than a couple of other examples I could list: say, an on-air person with two kids and 15 years in the biz, who was laid off "as an economy measure" by a company which has blown tens of millions on HD. Or: yours truly. If/when HD tanks, many a supporter here will simply shrug and say, oh well, a valiant attempt at providing another "content distribution conduit" didn't make the cut. But if on the way, HD takes out all of WYSL's nighttime paid sports programming because WBZ-HD makes the station impossible to receive, I lose my station. And my retirement. And maybe my house. You've got to admit, that gives the HD Radio issue a whole new urgency. After all, the interference goes on, night after night after night, during a time of year when our reduced-power night pattern is crucial to our continued existence.

I don't know about you guys but when I hear the suggestion that "the debate over HD is unproductive," I get the same amusingly queasy feeling I get when I hear Al (B)Gore declare that "it's time for the debate over global warming to end," or "we need to silence all this raucous political talk radio and reintroduce the Fairness Doctrine." It amounts to an attempt to shut down debate so the pro-HD gaggle can declare victory and go home. This is consistent with the HD promoters' continual attempts to marginalize the system's critics no matter how rational their arguments - the aforementioned namecalling of opponents as "Luddites" and "naysayers" by big-market engineers and executives who should have far more class and much more perspective. Want to isolate the major factor contributing to HD's divisiveness? Witness the dogmatic and ugly demeanor of its inventors.

This thread's subject line strongly implies that we need to once again put the butcher's thumb on the scale of the free market which is rejecting HD Radio. This has been consistent throughout IBOC's history. HD was imposed as an unprecedented monopoly on digital radio in the US. It was adopted without sufficient field testing for interference. Adversely affected stations are given utterly NO break, and no avenue for relief for loss of service - an Ibiquity and CBS-sanctioned "eminent domain" land-grab, except there is no compensation available under law. And now a similar brute-force lobbying effort is going after a digital power increase HD's proponents insisted just two years ago would never be necessary.

Anyone here who thinks that HD Radio amounts to "no more than a pesky hangnail" is kidding themselves - unless you're talking about the vast majority of radio listeners. I would say that in their view, HD represents quite a bit less.

Welcome to 2009. Let's hope it's a year when destructive forces like HD ebb so we can all shine again like the professionals we are.