Leonard Khan goes to appeals court in effort to stop FCC and cartel.

[vsa]

Our friend Leonard Khan is inviting the help of non-HD radio broadcasters who have had to suffer the "inconvenience" of suffering through HD radio-generated interference. Khan has been granted the opportunity to make a challenge in a federal appeals court. He is also asking for help in Congressional investigations of FCC actions. Read about it at the link.

http://www.wrathofkahn.org/

 

[amfmhd]

What is that saying..."there's no fool like an old fool"

PS...I have had the privlage of sending two "Power Side" systems to the city dump.

 

[dbdigital]

If Lenny refrain from the "we're all doomed" hysteria and stay on message, namely, that the FCC-mandated exclusivity of iBiquity's digital system is a violation of anti-trust laws, then he might have a chance.

Although 65K is a lot of money for Cam-D. Used to be just 25K when he first introduced it. I guess those lawyer fees can really mount up.

db

 

[Radioman100]

Even if he had a point to make, you have to wade through a whole lot of crazy to arrive at it. Most people won't bother.

Does he remind anyone else of Howard Hughes?

 

[Dighton Rockhead]

Does he remind anyone else of Howard Hughes?

Howard Hughes?......No.

Poor old Don Quixote spending his declining days tilting at windmills?......OH YEAH !

While many of us had hoped for a better working system (especially for AM), it appears we're stuck with the defacto standard. About the best any of us can hope for is that old Leonard can come up with an idea or two to modify the Edsel...OOPS...IBOC AM system to get it to work a bit less terribly.

 

[Mike Walker]

Well put, Radioman100 "You have to wade through a whole lot of crazy..."

If his idea is so freakin' brilliant, why did he submit it so damn late in the game, with so little documentation, and so little honest-to-God evidence that it works?

In retrospect, his AM stereo system may have been the best choice. There, I said it...even though I was a C-Quam backer for a lot of years. C-Quam leaves the antenna in absolutely pristine, fully separated, stereo. But then mother nature beats the crap out of it, with resulting platform motion, etc. Kahn's system leaves the antenna much less "shiny and new", but often arrived at the receiver in much better shape, and with many fewer problems. Even crazy people can be brilliant, on occasion. Conversely, maybe MOST brilliance comes from crazy people!

 

[JohnnyElectron]

If Leonard could condense his proposals to two sentances, without emotion, maybe, just maybe, the FCC would realize that Uncle Lenny does have some good points - and he does for the most part.

Leonard Kahn really does care about the AM broadcast band in North America - too bad many of us lost the passion for radio that Uncle Lenny still has, even at his age.
Too bad he doesn't have a young protege that could smooth out the wrinkles for him and present 'the master's' ideas to the rest of us?

 

[KB1OKL]

The part about human lives may be a stretch, but the rest of it makes a lot of sense. It is true the IBOC boys' lobbyist's paid, er' I mean snuck IBOC through with no public input, in fact it was a done thing even before the time had passed for input, in fact it was barely even publicized. It is a monopoly and the miss the forest for the trees FCC allowed it in without even investigating what it would do in practice. If they had investigated it or if they had known what they were doing it would be even more of a distant memory than it already is. More power to him. IBOC AM is a complete mess. I wonder how many of the hack commissioners even know how to tune in a radio?

 

[Mike Walker]

Allow republicans, and democrats who cozy-up to big business just like the republicans, to run things for a couple o' decades, and this is what you get!

Still, anybody who claims that IBOC is broken beyond repair should submit THEIR system which works better, without eliminating existing services like sca, and can be broadcast simultaneously with analog, with no new channel allocations, preferably without degrading the existing service. Come on, I dare you! Over a decade and a half many companies tried, and failed. And these weren't/aren't stupid people!

 

[Savage]

The dIBOCle at the FCC is just another example of what's happening in all aspects of government these days: federal, state and local - because people aren't paying attention.

It's the will of elites - we're talking BOTH parties here, GOP/Dem - overriding the interests of the poor unwashed masses who pull the whole load (I would count myself as a member of that club, as well as most posters here.) IBOC got force-fed to us by an elite consisting of Big Group Radio working hand in hand with an apathetic, incompetent FCC and a cynical and corrupt NAB. By the time even the most perceptive of those outside the "circle of political favor and power" realized what was happening, it was too late.

Who gets rich? Lobbyists and iBiquity execs, plus (briefly) IBOC gear manufacturers.

Who gets screwed? Everyone else.

If God smiles upon this mess with justice, the whole rotten concept will just die an overdue and well-deserved death. Real radio people will gradually take the medium over again and we'll start to hear programming that's actually worthwhile. In the meantime, to prevent further corruption of our American way of life: vote! Get rid of incumbents! Bombard your Congressmen and Senators with e-mails and tell 'em you're gonna throw 'em out if they don't start representing you!

We need to print up bumper stickers: RE-ELECT NOBODY.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Allow republicans, and democrats who cozy-up to big business just like the republicans, to run things for a couple o' decades, and this is what you get!

Still, anybody who claims that IBOC is broken beyond repair should submit THEIR system which works better, without eliminating existing services like sca, and can be broadcast simultaneously with analog, with no new channel allocations, preferably without degrading the existing service. Come on, I dare you! Over a decade and a half many companies tried, and failed. And these weren't/aren't stupid people!

HD supporters still haven't proven their false assumptions about high fidelity analog transmission, the public necessity, need, benefit, or desire for Hybrid Digital, and why we must put up with all this additional interference, adjacent channel trespassing, limited HD coverage, additional antennas, and expensive purchase of complex, problematic new HD radios.

A handful of deep in denial HD radio promoters and apologists just keep making false claims for the flawed HD radio scheme, attacking critics, making totally unproven claims, false assumptions, weak excuses for a defective broadcasting system and clunky, complicated, unreliable new HD radios, that the public does not want or need.

HD Radio is a high school broadcaster's science project gone awry, and does far more harm then good.

It is not necessary for HD opponents to present some new digital alternative for tower owners especially since so many new digital broadcast technologies already exist, are popular, and can be equally utilized by anyone, including current AM/FM licensed broadcasters.

What tower owners most fear with content delivery is a level playing field, new competition, and loosing the stranglehold of market exclusivity.

If an additional (remember XM and Sirius) digital radio system or spectrum is made available why shouldn't it be equally available to all, and not just an additional benefit for an already over privileged few?

 

[LinoNYC]

HD Radio is a high school broadcaster's science project gone awry, and does far more harm then good.

Ahh, number 1 from the files. Good to see it again.

NOw..for a reality check:

It is not necessary for HD opponents to present some new digital alternative for tower owners especially since so many new digital broadcast technologies already exist, are popular, and can be equally utilized by anyone, including current AM/FM licensed broadcasters

I don't know about the rumors up there in Black Helicopter country but in the real world there are two alternative systems: Cam-D (AM) and FM Extra

CAm-D like HD is proprietary (costly) requires a new-er TX and has the dreaded sidebands. Supposedly those sidebands are less intense than HD but the system is a grafted-on half-assed kludge that requires analog for the bulk of the frequency range thus offering no noise immunity and in order to produce those less intense sideband, it, like HD requires the use of spectral replication.

The killers: No radios, Six stations nationwide on an experimental basis, No provision for an all-digtal mode.

FM-Extra: 4 Stations nationwide, No radios, full bandwidth digital requires the elimination of both SCA and stereo analog.

For a Coup De'gras, both are band exclusive...we know which band will get shortchanged by set makers.

Face it Ol'Sup, HD/iboc is the best and probably last chance for broadcasters to go digital.

Lino

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Of course you very conveniently neglected all the other new media digital broadcast program delivery systems. So your post is a completely false and deliberate deception.

Digital broadcasting or content delivery is not limited to stick owners, or the systems you mention, and there is no requirement that stick owners remain the privileged "anointed few" forever. Perhaps it is well past time to release stick owners stranglehold on what the public is allowed to hear and see.

As I said, there are plenty of other ways for the public to get audio and video broadcasts and content. Some new, some older. Some digital, some still not. That may not make "control freak" stick owners happy, but that's life in the new Millennium.

In case you haven't heard, many more broadcasters (including licensed AM and FM stations) are delivering content digitally on the internet then there are over problematic HD Radio. Many broadcasts are/were available digitally even without/before HD Radio. So most broadcaster's content is already available digitally, even without HD Radio.

 

[LinoNYC]

Of course you very conveniently neglected all the other new media digital broadcast program delivery systems. So your post is a completely false and deliberate deception.

Digital broadcasting or content delivery is not limited to stick owners, or the systems you mention, and there is no requirement that stick owners remain the privileged "anointed few" forever. Perhaps it is well past time to release stick owners stranglehold on what the public is allowed to hear and see.

As I said, there are plenty of other ways for the public to get audio and video broadcasts and content. Some new, some older. Some digital, some still not. That may not make "control freak" stick owners happy, but that's life in the new Millennium.

In case you haven't heard, many more broadcasters (including licensed AM and FM stations) are delivering content digitally on the internet then there are over problematic HD Radio.

We are writing about radio -the medium you have purported to be employed-in.

"deliberate deception" -Your entire posting history.

Digital broadcasting or content delivery is not limited to stick owners, or the systems you mention, and there is no requirement that stick owners remain the privileged "anointed few" forever. Perhaps it is well past time to release stick owners stranglehold on what the public is allowed to hear and see.

[EDIT]
get an old Dell and start "webcasting" -since that is "the future".

Lino


[EDIT-inflammatory]

 

[Mike Walker]

And yet "stick owners" have about 250 million listeners. There's "no reason" that after 40 years of cable (and satellite) tv, the big networks should still dominate primetime. And yet they do.

"Problematic" HD? AM, yeah. FM HD? DREAM THE HELL ON! I've never been refused access to an HD station because the "server is full", never had to install special software that only works on a single station, never gotten a "buffering, buffering, buffering" warning, never been unable to get terrestrial radio because there was no wi-fi access, never lost radio because of internet slowdowns, never risked a virus while listening to terrestrial analog or digital radio. GEEZ! Which technology is "PROBLEMATIC"?????????? Talk about the pot calling the kettle names!

 

[Radioman100]

And yet "stick owners" have about 250 million listeners. There's "no reason" that after 40 years of cable (and satellite) tv, the big networks should still dominate primetime. And yet they do.

"Problematic" HD? AM, yeah. FM HD? DREAM THE HELL ON! I've never been refused access to an HD station because the "server is full", never had to install special software that only works on a single station, never gotten a "buffering, buffering, buffering" warning, never been unable to get terrestrial radio because there was no wi-fi access, never lost radio because of internet slowdowns, never risked a virus while listening to terrestrial analog or digital radio. GEEZ! Which technology is "PROBLEMATIC"?????????? Talk about the pot calling the kettle names!

Terrestrial radio irritates the wannab...er...webcasters. It's that "stranglehold" we have on everything, keeping their unique brand of talent off the air.

 

[clouseau]

We are writing about radio -the medium you have purported to be employed-in.

Just a point, but I believe SUPERCASTER (<--all caps) has stated previously he is NOT employed in broadcasting.

Clouseau

 

[CW]

Well put, Radioman100 "You have to wade through a whole lot of crazy..."

If his idea is so freakin' brilliant, why did he submit it so damn late in the game, with so little documentation, and so little honest-to-God evidence that it works?

In retrospect, his AM stereo system may have been the best choice. There, I said it...even though I was a C-Quam backer for a lot of years. C-Quam leaves the antenna in absolutely pristine, fully separated, stereo. But then mother nature beats the crap out of it, with resulting platform motion, etc. Kahn's system leaves the antenna much less "shiny and new", but often arrived at the receiver in much better shape, and with many fewer problems. Even crazy people can be brilliant, on occasion. Conversely, maybe MOST brilliance comes from crazy people!

It is hard to really say WHICH AM stereo system was best. I listened to a couple of KAHN stations (WLS being one of them) with my SONY XRA-33 FM/AM Stereo cassette in the early 80s (still have it too!)....I liked the sound of a KAHN AM to a CQUAM (had more brillance but could have been just the processing). True the platform motion drove me batty at night; however, the AM array of most directional systems could NOT handle a KAHN system well.....the freq response of the L & R channels (being the upper and lower sidebands) depended on the antenna reactance of both side of center freq being equal...IF the array (or even a single stick!) was more reactive on one sideband than the other, one channel would have better (or worse) frequency response than the other...thus sucking on air....CQUAM, since its L-R was QAM/phase modulated and its mono (L+R) was on BOTH/EITHER sideband in conventional AM, had no such issue.

There was a statement made by several KAHN detractors that his system had no separation above 5 kHz....I certainly heard it on my SONY (the sep that is ....I think they were using the typical dual AM radio setup for that conclusion (which was a cheap way of getting AM Stereo reception back in the early days)...since most AM radios do not have decent audio frequency response above 4-5 anyway but the audio sure sounds better when its boosted past that instead of listening to an AM IBOC crippled station in analog mode (UGH!)...

I think some form of DSP reception coupled with AMAX quality of the receiver and transmitter would be the best overall solution of the AM band...I do not agree IBOC is the knight to save AM and has too many kinks in its shining armour...and those issues will never be gone as long as AM receivers are poorly made. IF they were produced to decent specs, we probably would not be having this discussion (but that will happen when pigs fly)

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Sorry to hear about all your computer problems, Mike. Perhaps after while you'll get the hang of it.

 

[clouseau]

Sorry to hear about all your computer problems, Mike. Perhaps after while you'll get the hang of it.

Hey SUP'...

Since you felt the need to continue this thought...

Without changing the topic can you honestly say you have not experienced the following?

1) Received a "server is full" message on internet radio,

2) Had to install special software that only works on a single station,

3) Gotten a "buffering, buffering, buffering" message,

4) Been unable to get internet radio because there was no wi-fi access,

5) Lost a feed because of internet slowdowns,

6) Risked getting a virus while on the internet.

How about some honesty, Sup'? You have a Weisenheimer answer to Mike, but are you saying you don't experience these things? Inquiring minds want to know.

Well?

Clouseau