• 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

Lack of consumer votes/reviews indicative of HD's failure

1. 9/11 doesn't happen every day. People have been listening to music for years, since 9/11.

2. I doubt that when 9/11 occurred people in NYC and Long Island were getting their news from WBZ Boston or from WTOP Washington DC. They were listening to their local powerhouses. Daytime HD wouldn't have changed that at all.

AM HD is a crappy technology, but let's not start throwing "9/11" around as an excuse for or against it. We already have senators and house reps throwing it around as both a pro-DTV and an anti-DTV argument at the same time, and like IBOC, it really has no sizeable significance either way.
 
Philip J. Smith said:
1. 9/11 doesn't happen every day. People have been listening to music for years, since 9/11.

2. I doubt that when 9/11 occurred people in NYC and Long Island were getting their news from WBZ Boston or from WTOP Washington DC. They were listening to their local powerhouses. Daytime HD wouldn't have changed that at all.

AM HD is a crappy technology, but let's not start throwing "9/11" around as an excuse for or against it. We already have senators and house reps throwing it around as both a pro-DTV and an anti-DTV argument at the same time, and like IBOC, it really has no sizeable significance either way.
Click to expand...


I can talk about 9/11 personally. I work in broadcasting and was in Manhattan a few miles north of the WTC when they went down. I spent the next 2 days in the city working to keep us on the air. I'm not someone from hundreds of miles away who only saw the reports on TV. Secondly, that is why radio and TV exist. They serve the public need in an emergency. No other technology is able to do what radio does. On that day we lost ISDN and internet connectivity becuse the infrastructure was destroyed. Many NY FM & TV stations lost thweir over the air capabilities because they had their transmitters in the WTC. All AM's stayed on the air. Today most FM and TV stations have auxilury sites because of what occured on that day. Don't want to talk 9/11, lets talk about the major power ooutage which occured a few years ago. NYC was without power for many hours. peole had to walk home in certain instances because the subways weren't running. Emergencies occur and in those times radio and television are the central means of distributing timely information. You and others can say who cares but when the day comes that yoou find yourself in need of some of that information, I think you will change your tune. I've been around long enough to have seen this happen more than one time.
 
I can't relate (personal) 9/11 experiences, but I do fondly recall our station's (WFMX Statesville NC) response when Hurricane Hugo cut through the Carolinas in '89. The AM tower fell. It also held the microwave antenna for the STL, so it took out the FM as well. The FM tower was in a very remote location, in the country. We set up a temporary studio in a panel truck outside the FM transmitter building (too loud inside), with cables running back and forth from building to truck carrying power and audio. We were back on the air in just a few hours, carrying emergency information relayed to us by ham radio operators from throughout the area (WFMX was also the EBS primary station for the McGuire Nuclear Station operated by Duke Power). I was on the air continuously for about eleven hours, and so many people told me what a comfort it was hearing local information while they sat in the dark, unable to leave their homes because fallen trees blocked all the roads.

THAT is why we have radio stations, and I've never been more proud of the career path I've chosen. We may well have saved lives that day. We certainly eased suffering (providing information about the availability of emergency services, food, and shelter). NOTHING functions in an emergency like radio.
 
Connecting 9/11 to this HD Radio argument is amazingly absurd. We might as well throw in a few more extraordinary connections. How about, "HD Radio doesn't help education for our children!" Or, maybe "HD Radio does NOTHING to address the issue of starving people in third-world countries!"

My wife spent over a month as a volunteer in the Red Cross unit stationed at the Marriott adjacent to the WTC after 9/11. Local radio and TV received via antennas were the only thing in the Red Cross center (BTW WCBS-TV was the only TV station on the air for a while). Nobody here is arguing that radio is not useful or vital in an emergency. The point is that HD Radio does not render local radio stations useless in such emergencies. And, if all of the locals were all out, then there would likewise be no local HD signals to interfere with these heavy-fringe stations on first-adjacent channels in an emergency. As for where the Marriott is located, you wouldn't even be able to get Star 99.1 out of NJ at ground level, regardless of the absence or presence of local stations.

There are plenty of reasons to argue for or against iBiquity's implementation of IBOC on AM and FM. 9/11 ain't one of them. Time to put a fork in this nowhere thread.
 
Mike Walker said:
I was on the air continuously for about eleven hours, and so many people told me what a comfort it was hearing local information while they sat in the dark, unable to leave their homes because fallen trees blocked all the roads.
Click to expand...

Mike, I applaud people in the industry who care about service as much as you do. If anything good came from this thread at all, it would have to be a reaffirmation that regardless of all the ways people get their entertainment today, they should remember that local broadcasters come through in times of crisis, like you did in the Hugo aftermath.
 
I fail to see any connection between 9/11 the WTC and HD radio.
I doubt there is one. This is just another rotten red herring.
Are you saying that 9/11 would have been avoided had there been HD Radio?
How about Katrina?
The San Francisco earthquake?
The Johnstown flood?
The Inquisition?
The Plague?
The Third Reich?
All, no connection with HD radio.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I THINK the point was that radio was largely irrelevant as a source of emergency information immediately after 9/11 because of the towers lost on the World Trade Center. Which is WRONG anyway, because there were NO AM TOWERS there! And it's mostly the big AM stations with the news staff(s) to cover such a huge story.
 
The point of my post was that radio can do things and provide emergency information which MP3players can not. Internet streamers can not and the satellites do not. There were many FM & TV sticks on the WTC. AM radio provided emergency coverage. Unless AM facilities do something to attract a younger audience which advertisers see as the most desirable, AM radios days are numbered. Young people will not listen to AM radio as it is now with the limited bandwidth mono audio and all the noise which today's noisy environments makes many AM stations almost unlistenable. Many of these stations will go under. HD radio is one method of trying to improve AM's typically marginal monophonic audio. If AM stations can attract younger listeners again, music formats might become an option for some of those stations.
 
You may be to young RF to remember the "dark days"...after AM had lost most of the music audience, but before talk radio had really caught on. There was a time when AMs were doing much worse than now.

But you're right...AM needs to win new listeners through PROGRAMMING! I'm a big fan of HD, and think the HDC codec sounds just fine at 48kbps, better at 64, and remarkably transparent at 96kbps. But at 32kbps or lower, AM ANALOG, properly engineered, SOUNDS BETTER. I fully agree that it's a digital world, and the future of all media is digital. But we ain't there yet. The audience for digital terrestrial radio is a tiny fraction of one percent. Let's get something that actually sounds better, and doesn't do damage, before we insist that everyone commit precious resources. In the real world (as opposed to the funding-rich corporate one in Manhattan), money is tight. And audiences are PRECIOUS. Many small market stations have served their communities, passed down through generations from family member to family member, for decades. They're not going to do ANYTHING to make the experience for current listeners worse, and they're going to give you big guys hell if YOU do! :-\
 
Mike Walker said:
You may be to young RF to remember the "dark days"...after AM had lost most of the music audience, but before talk radio had really caught on. There was a time when AMs were doing much worse than now.

But you're right...AM needs to win new listeners through PROGRAMMING! I'm a big fan of HD, and think the HDC codec sounds just fine at 48kbps, better at 64, and remarkably transparent at 96kbps. But at 32kbps or lower, AM ANALOG, properly engineered, SOUNDS BETTER. I fully agree that it's a digital world, and the future of all media is digital. But we ain't there yet. The audience for digital terrestrial radio is a tiny fraction of one percent. Let's get something that actually sounds better, and doesn't do damage, before we insist that everyone commit precious resources. In the real world (as opposed to the funding-rich corporate one in Manhattan), money is tight. And audiences are PRECIOUS. Many small market stations have served their communities, passed down through generations from family member to family member, for decades. They're not going to do ANYTHING to make the experience for current listeners worse, and they're going to give you big guys hell if YOU do! :-\
Click to expand...


Too young? I htink not. I am 51 and have worked in the industry for over 30 years. I remember those days and as bad as thinsg were they are much worse now. Let me ask you a question about AM radio. What kind of programming do you believe would make a limited bandwidth, prone to static and alll sorts of household and atmospheric noises AM band attractive to say an 18 year old, or a 25 year old. Say someone who grew up after stereo FM radio had become commonplace? An all metal formatted station was tried in NY in the 1980's. It did NOTHING! I keep hearing about compelling programing but would someone please tell me what they would do with a AM station in a major market which is competing with 30 or more FM stations and over 20 AM facilities, many of which are 50 KW stations?
 
What kind of programming? The cool, indie-rock stuff that corporate radio is too corrupt to even register on it's radar, but with which that 18 year old's Ipod is overflowing.

Yes there are audio issues on AM. But let's not overestimate the minimum sound quality expectations of young people, RF. You and I grew up (I'm 49...been in radio since age 15!) in an era when young people sacrificed to buy a decent sound system, and actually discussed the production values of recordings as well as the music. Today's young adult thinks earbuds are the ultimate in hi fi, that there's nothing better than mp3, and that the 40 dollar speakers connected to their desktop, or the 2" jobbies in their laptop are the BEST! My point? Clean analog AM sounds BETTER than the 128kbps mp3s that these young idiots, er...citizens love so much. Young people have demonstrated time and again that they will seek out, and latch onto CONTENT that meets their needs. Which is why internet radio was growing like crazy when the average home had a dialup connection, and 32kbps was WAY too high a bitrate to be reliable!

I actually think there was something to your argument in the 80s and 90s. There was a generation that wouldn't listen to AM if thier lives depended on it. They're in their 30s now. Today's young adult doesn't remember a time when AM HAD MUSIC, and would probably be pleasantly surprised to find something, ANYTHING interesting on terrestrial radio, AM or FM!
 
Mike Walker said:
What kind of programming?
<SNIP>
Today's young adult doesn't remember a time when AM HAD MUSIC, and would probably be pleasantly surprised to find something, ANYTHING interesting on terrestrial radio, AM or FM!
Click to expand...

Gee, doesn't Radio Disney do pretty well? Every one of those I've heard is on AM. I think there are lots of formats that could work well on AM. They may take some ingenuity, forethought and a bit of work to do, but that shouldn’t come as any surprise. You only get out what you put in. I won't kid anyone by saying that these formats will make the station Number 1 in the market, but they can earn a dedicated and loyal following that is sufficient enough to pay the bills.

The real reason most people don't listen to AM is because of content. Who wants to listen to a 30 minute infomercial on lower bowel cleansing? Or how about two minutes of dead air when the satellite feed switches for a nonexistent local insert.

A lot of AM's problems are self inflicted. Over the years, many of them have let their physical plant deteriorate to a point where a quality signal is no longer obtainable. The management has chosen to take the easy route and just milk the station for all it is worth. Eventually any well will run dry. That's pretty much the story of AM.

In my area, there are two AM's that have gone dark due to management neglect. In both cases, the licensee "forgot" to renew the license. Can you imagine that? One, a 10,000 watt ND day-timer used to put out a great signal. The other was a 24 hour directional located within the city limits of a town of about 100,000 people. It had a long, and at one time, noble past. Now it is nothing. It's very sad.

Another local AM simulcasts the programming of its sister station, a full power FM, which runs a Classic Rock format. There is nothing wrong with the FM’s format. It is well done, but simulcasting on AM is just a waste of electricity. Which of the two signals do you suppose people listen to?

With management decisions like these, it is no wonder that many AM's are in trouble. The problem is not the technology. Mostly, it's stupidity.
 
Mike Walker said:
What kind of programming? The cool, indie-rock stuff that corporate radio is too corrupt to even register on it's radar, but with which that 18 year old's Ipod is overflowing.

Yes there are audio issues on AM. But let's not overestimate the minimum sound quality expectations of young people, RF. You and I grew up (I'm 49...been in radio since age 15!) in an era when young people sacrificed to buy a decent sound system, and actually discussed the production values of recordings as well as the music. Today's young adult thinks earbuds are the ultimate in hi fi, that there's nothing better than mp3, and that the 40 dollar speakers connected to their desktop, or the 2" jobbies in their laptop are the BEST! My point? Clean analog AM sounds BETTER than the 128kbps mp3s that these young idiots, er...citizens love so much. Young people have demonstrated time and again that they will seek out, and latch onto CONTENT that meets their needs. Which is why internet radio was growing like crazy when the average home had a dialup connection, and 32kbps was WAY too high a bitrate to be reliable!

I actually think there was something to your argument in the 80s and 90s. There was a generation that wouldn't listen to AM if thier lives depended on it. They're in their 30s now. Today's young adult doesn't remember a time when AM HAD MUSIC, and would probably be pleasantly surprised to find something, ANYTHING interesting on terrestrial radio, AM or FM!
Click to expand...

Being the parent of two young ladies, onein her teens, the other early 20's I can state for as fact that neither they nor any of their friends listen to AM radio. Why do you think current automobile radios have 2 banks of FM presets and one bank for AM? In my area of the world there are plenty of places to hear indi rock. Just go below 92 Mhz. Why would someone who wants to hear that suff listen to it on AM in mono? If a person has a choice that person will always choose FM Vs AM as it exists now. FM audio is far superior to whatever AM can deliver and it's stereo. Late's look at what is instead of what could be. When you have multi millions tied up in a facility it isn't the place to experiment. Basically, in this region unless you want an older audience you'd never put a music format on an AM facility. There's way too much competition. Oh and as far as my daughters, they each have cars and neither one has programed any AM presets because they don't listen to that band and if they have a choice between AM and an alternate source, they'll play CD's in their car or listen to their I-Pods every time.
 
Exactly Chuck. I actually was thinking about Radio Disney, but didn't mention it because we were talking about young adults. But there's a generation of CHILDREN listening to AM. They'll be teenagers. Give 'em something to listen to!

The thinking behind programming on today's FMs is so dated that the "cool" formats that drew teens and young adults to FM in the first place are now so old-hat they have become the cliche's today's young adults are desperate to escape.

"If you build it, THEY WILL COME!"
 
You're missing my point, RF Burns. In your area Indie Rock may be well served by small college FM stations. Well there ARE NO student run college FMs in my area (with the exception of flea-powered WSIF Wilkesboro NC, with a signal that barely goes ten miles). What's missing around HERE may be something completely different than what's missing in your market. Here it's indie rock, classic country, traditional oldies, an all bluegrass station (that's right, the community that hosts Merlefest, one of the largest Bluegrass festivals in the US HAS NO BLUEGRASS STATION!), Contemporary Christian, etc...those are the ones that spring to mind. Want to cultivate young listeners to the band, so you have teenagers listening in a few years? THERE IS NO AUDIBLE RADIO DISNEY STATION HERE!

What is the "it" format will (of course) vary from market to market. But there are MANY audiences NOT BEING SERVED, including VERY LARGE ONES (the bluegrass audience around here is HUGE...tens of thousands flock to this little town...MORE THAN FREAKIN' LIVE HERE..for Merlefest). Stations need to actually hire ORIGINAL THINKERS for the programming dept, and LET THEM INNOVATE! Worst case...you end up with an AM nobody listens to. What a loss! LET'S ACTUALLY BE CREATIVE!
 
Mike Walker said:
What is the "it" format will (of course) vary from market to market. But there are MANY audiences NOT BEING SERVED, including VERY LARGE ONES (the bluegrass audience around here is HUGE...tens of thousands flock to this little town...MORE THAN FREAKIN' LIVE HERE..for Merlefest). Stations need to actually hire ORIGINAL THINKERS for the programming dept, and LET THEM INNOVATE! Worst case...you end up with an AM nobody listens to. What a loss! LET'S ACTUALLY BE CREATIVE!
Click to expand...

My God, what a concept! ;D

Actually, there is a guy near me that has a 5KW AM daytimer that plays a lot of bluegrass and gospel. He actually does a live remote every day at lunch time from "Hazel's Cafe." People seem to love it. He has turned the little station around 180 degrees. It had been dark for months. Now it has a following. Imagine that.
 
A couple of local stations around here have bluegrass shows...some once a week, some more often, but nobody has a bluegrass FORMAT. I'm kind of curious why not. Seems like a BIG untapped market!
 
Mike Walker said:
A couple of local stations around here have bluegrass shows...some once a week, some more often, but nobody has a bluegrass FORMAT. I'm kind of curious why not. Seems like a BIG untapped market!
Click to expand...

You'd think so in your neck of the woods. I think it would go over quite well here in East Texas as well. We really don't need another country station.
 
I don't know about your market but here in NY, Radio Disney doesn't even make the ratings. There are few people listening and it's on a 50 KW station. Also, if a person had a choice between listning to radio Disney on AM or Fm which do you think they'd chose if they had a choice?
 
Well RF TALK certainly could sound more realistic on FM if the few FM talk stations bothered with quality engineering, the way they do in the UK. Ever heard of STEREO? Just about all talk in the UK is stereo...and through headphones sounds like people are in the freakin' room with you. In the US, lots of FM talkers are in MONO! Why the hell BE on FM if you're going to toss away stereo? ARRRGH! (Frustrated with American engineering stupidity in general RF, not with you...I doubt you even engineer an FM talker).

My point is that in markets where there are AM and FM talkers, AM does quite well. In the mid 80s before the last AM rockers pulled the plug, many of them still had BIG ratings. Eroding, but still big...numbers any FM would be happy with today! I've always thought that the audience didn't leave AM in the 80s, AM left the audience. How soon we forget the "format of the month club" many post-top 40 AMs went through, guaranteeing that they pissed off EVERYBODY, and sent their entire market(s) kicking and screaming to the FM band. Ahhh, the good ole' days!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom