No FM radio in the second-generation iPhone? No surprise.

[KB1OKL]

From Tom Taylor's "Taylor on Radio-Info" newsletter today:


No FM radio in the second-generation iPhone? No surprise.

iPhonePutting FM receivers in everything mobile is the goal of folks like Jeff Smulyan at Emmis – but Steve Jobs at Apple is really only interested in applications that can be used worldwide, and he’s pretty ruthless about applying that test. A U.S.-style FM radio wouldn’t do much good in places where they use different standards, as they do in Europe and Japan. And the current HD chip wouldn’t begin to fit in there. So the new 3G-capable phone that Jobs previewed yesterday may be a disappointment to Smulyan – but you look at Jobs’ history and you’re not surprised. [Emphasis supplied.]

http://www.radio-info.com/newsletter/pdf/TRI06102008.pdf

Scroll down for original article

 

[Play Freebird]

The standards for FM broadcasting really don't differ that much in Europe and Japan. Europe uses 100 kHz channel splits and Japan's band runs from 76-90 MHz, but the entire world has adopted the GE-Zenith FM stereo system (developed in Utica, NY by unsung hero Tony Csicsatka, a Hungarian immigrant). The receiver chips designed for mobile phones should have no problem handling these minor differences. Example:

http://www.silabs.com/tgwWebApp/public/web_content/products/Broadcast/Radio_Tuners/en/Si4700-01.htm

Well, OK... some countries have standardized on 50 microsecond pre-emphasis, rather than our 75, but I would argue that the defacto pre-emphasis in the US is really closer to 50 if heavy processing is employed. So it's no big deal if the receiver uses 50 us worldwide.

If Apple is hesistant to include FM because of these minor differences, what does that say about HD digital radio, which is completely incompatible with Eureka-147 and the Japanese system?

 

[Carmine5]

There's no point in putting an HD Radio chip in an iPhone or iPod Touch: they generate too much heat, use too much energy, take up precious space and do only one thing for which there is little public interest.

As long as an AM/FM station can stream on the web, they can be heard on an iPhone or iPod Touch.

C5

 

[KB1OKL]

There's no point in putting an HD Radio chip in an iPhone or iPod Touch: they generate too much heat, use too much energy, take up precious space and do only one thing for which there is little public interest.

As long as an AM/FM station can stream on the web, they can be heard on an iPhone or iPod Touch.

C5

Wasn't iBiquity pushing to get HD installed into the iPhone, iPods, washing machines, microwaves, dishwashers, etc? If so this is more bad news for them.

 

[Savage]

All bets are off after the IPO. The typically-hyped 10db FM power increase is HD's hail-Mary pass and a tacit admission that the system doesn't work acceptably in urban environments, despite years of repeated Alliance/Ibiquity lies insisting the opposite.

So: HD-FM doesn't work far away (need more signal) and doesn't work in close (won't penetrate buildings or withstand noise.) Even the most ardent IBOC fan must be disheartened when he sees patently ridiculous ideas for HD revenue being seriously argued such as "iTunes tagging" and "sales of receivers on station websites," another tacit admission from HD Radio that the battle for a retail presence has essentially ended in total defeat.

Radio, stop putting the paddles on the HD cadaver and pay attention to what's really plaguing the industry. Like no local programming of note. CCU has a group of stations in an Upstate market where all properties are completely unattended all weekend, without so much as a local weather forecast airing ANYwhere. Small wonder people care less about radio these days. Radio apparently doesn't care much about them. With that corporate culture an iffy digital signal, even if it sounds somewhat better, will make absolutely no difference.

 

[Carmine5]

There's no point in putting an HD Radio chip in an iPhone or iPod Touch: they generate too much heat, use too much energy, take up precious space and do only one thing for which there is little public interest.

As long as an AM/FM station can stream on the web, they can be heard on an iPhone or iPod Touch.

C5

Wasn't iBiquity pushing to get HD installed into the iPhone, iPods, washing machines, microwaves, dishwashers, etc? If so this is more bad news for them.

I think there was some mention of putting one of those new chips in a digital rectal thermometer.

But I do know that Apple has some ambitious plans for the iPhone product. Although not in this newest 3G phone their API and a patent filing show plans to add videoconferencing to a future iPhone. Obviously the technology for this capability is not quite there yet but soon will be.

The point is that unless Samsung or another manufacturer can build a tiny, energy efficient chip that will handle a number of DSP functions the iPhone needs and, by the way as an added plus here's HD Radio, I don't see HD-R appearing in any future iPhone.

C5

 

[clouseau]

...
Radio, stop putting the paddles on the HD cadaver and pay attention to what's really plaguing the industry. Like no local programming of note. CCU has a group of stations in an Upstate market where all properties are completely unattended all weekend, without so much as a local weather forecast airing ANYwhere.

Wow have we heard this before? I would agree. Almost anyone with a brain could agree localism is the key. Even the FCC agrees.

Could someone show me a ratings success on AM that has solid youth numbers and does music as opposed to basic spoken word? No kidding. Talk about the 400lb gorilla in the room...

We all know youth and AM don't go together. Is there EVEN ONE example of where it works in the US?

WHERE DOES MUSIC WORK ON AM?

Or will the audience just plain DIE in 15 years. There's a great business plan.

Just kinda wondering...

Clouseau

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Clouseau, I'm looking for a clue.

I have asked several people privately, and posted the question in pulic like this, but no one knows, no is willing to share.

What percentage of the population is "music centric, musical, attracted by music, etc"

We see some people swaying and staying in rhythm with the music as they work, as they play, as they job. Then some people couldn't carry a tune in a bucket as the old saying goes.

People who enjoy music, people who are music centric are the bread and butter of the iPod/mp3 market place. Much of radio focuses on this group. Before there were recordings available to the public, back in the late 1800's there were sheet music stores. Apparently it was quite a trend.

10%? 25%? 37% 52% 80%? I am confident it is less than 100%. It is hard to to assume, for example, that a deaf person would be part of The Music Crowd.

Anyone have a clue to share?

 

[hipporadio]

Seems the “good” Mr. Jobs isn’t interested in adding corporate radio to his “menu” – I wonder why? Could it be that for the first time since Fibber McGee and Mollie, they aren’t “hip” with the youth demo... I thought the Emmis intercourse was suppose to rectify that little problem ...’Guess not :'( Oh darn!

 

[Savage]

Clouseau, the argument that HD is going to pave the way for "youth" demographics to return to AM listening is based on multiple false premises, is illogical and proven false by five years' field experience with IBOC-AM.

a. "Youth" is not a saleable demo unless you're selling soft drinks, Miley Cyrus CDs and lip gloss. Most major agency buys are 25-54 and 35-54. And the local and/or network "spoken word" formats you so deride perennially outbill their audience share, e.g., the 50kw news-talkers cavalierly dismissed on this board as "neocon stations" routinely take bigger shares of market revenue than they really should. These demos, especially in the older ranges, represent the preponderance of buying power out there. As boomers graduate into the 54+ category this trend will continue. If advertisers want kids, they'll use the internet. No new radio modulation scheme is going to reverse the flow of Niagara Falls when it comes to media buys. Radio is smart (for once) to go where the available dollars are.

b. AM has evolved into a information and talk service because that's the most appropriate use for the band. Trying to morph AM radio back to a primary music medium is not likely to be a productive pursuit, HD or no.
It's like trying to promote bowling as a widely-accepted alternative to sex....just NOT gonna happen.

c. Of course the existing audience for AM is going to die off. The existing audience for FM is going to die off. The existing audiences for network TV, pro wrestling, major league baseball and MTV are going to die off. That's not a valid excuse for trashing those services with noise, making them less consumable in the near term with technical hurdles or herding away the existing audiences by trying to force new standards on them for which there is demonstrably NO consumer interest.

d. As has been noted here several times before: there is NO success story in the industry for HD-AM. NONE, even after well-financed pioneers (trying to force the system to work against the laws of nature, economics, common sense and human nature) numbering more than 200 stations on big-signals in major markets have employed HD-AM for almost five years. In fact, many of those big 50kw signals are playing music to younger demos in HD-AM - the Disney stations. There is not a single example anyone has cited here where those stations are attracting appreciably more listeners than they did when they were exclusively analog.

e. On the other hand there are numerous case histories of HD-AM being turned off to mitigate adjacent channel interference problems. There are numerous cases of bonehead moves like the CBS stations all interfering destructively with one another because "certain management types" have to save face and don't want to take responsibility for the abysmal failure which is HD-AM. So they trash historic signals and hurt existing successes rather than show some integrity and stand up like men and professionals - like Martin Stabbert did.

 

[clouseau]

Clouseau, the argument that HD is going to pave the way for "youth" demographics to return to AM listening is based on multiple false premises, is illogical and proven false by five years' field experience with IBOC-AM.

Made up nonsense, Bob. I never said it WOULD return youth to AM. I said now, based on analog AM DOESN'T deliver . Do you have evidence to the contrary?

a. "Youth" is not a saleable demo unless you're selling soft drinks, Miley Cyrus CDs and lip gloss. Most major agency buys are 25-54 and 35-54. And the local and/or network "spoken word" formats you so deride perennially outbill their audience share, e.g., the 50kw news-talkers cavalierly dismissed on this board as "neocon stations" routinely take bigger shares of market revenue than they really should. These demos, especially in the older ranges, represent the preponderance of buying power out there. As boomers graduate into the 54+ category this trend will continue. If advertisers want kids, they'll use the internet. No new radio modulation scheme is going to reverse the flow of Niagara Falls when it comes to media buys. Radio is smart (for once) to go where the available dollars are.

I'll not put words in YOUR mouth, but did I hear "Radio goes for the money, radio doesn't care about future audiences?" Maybe that's the NE to SW dialect translation, but it sounds like that's what you said to me.

b. AM has evolved into a information and talk service because that's the most appropriate use for the band.

I agree, but only because you and your ilk have made the decision that it MUST sound lousy. Have you seen the ratings for Wibbage of WWDJ lately? Don't tell me it CAN'T happen. History says it CAN. Your "New World Radio Order" MAKES it sounde lousy and a loser. History shows differently.

Trying to morph AM radio back to a primary music medium is not likely to be a productive pursuit, HD or no.

I see your point. However if you accept this, then you relegate AM stations to ratings where 1 station wins and most of the others lose. So have you. Ever see the recaps from All Access? Show me a "2 AM's in the top 5" market besides Boston and you'll have something. I've seen those numbers. Neither your or my station has any need to buy them. AM numbers (With a possible single exception per market) suck.

It's like trying to promote bowling as a widely-accepted alternative to sex....just NOT gonna happen.

I see your point. I hope you're wrong. Otherwise AM is TOTALLY screwed.

c. Of course the existing audience for AM is going to die off. The existing audience for FM is going to die off. The existing audiences for network TV, pro wrestling, major league baseball and MTV are going to die off. That's not a valid excuse for trashing those services with noise, making them less consumable in the near term with technical hurdles or herding away the existing audiences by trying to force new standards on them for which there is demonstrably NO consumer interest.

You're missing the point. The EXISTING audience for those things you mentioned WILL die off. But Unlike AM they are getting new fans. Again I ask... Where is there a single example of AM success with anything but talk? Better still, where is the 18-49 talk format REALLY working on AM?? Tha audience for AM is getting older. There do NOT appear to be younger replacement listeners.

d. As has been noted here several times before: there is NO success story in the industry for HD-AM. NONE, even after well-financed pioneers (trying to force the system to work against the laws of nature, economics, common sense and human nature) numbering more than 200 stations on big-signals in major markets have employed HD-AM for almost five years. In fact, many of those big 50kw signals are playing music to younger demos in HD-AM - the Disney stations. There is not a single example anyone has cited here where those stations are attracting appreciably more listeners than they did when they were exclusively analog.

And somehow you have morphed "PROVEN TO FAIL NOW" into "You haven't shown us a success yet." AM analog sound has bombed out of the music business for basically 40 years. It is a PROVEN failure. HD has yet to win (or lose) Not even 1000 days either way yet. Contrast that with "Got our ass kicked starting in the late '70's"..

e. On the other hand there are numerous case histories of HD-AM being turned off to mitigate adjacent channel interference problems. There are numerous cases of bonehead moves like the CBS stations all interfering destructively with one another because "certain management types" have to save face and don't want to take responsibility for the abysmal failure which is HD-AM. So they trash historic signals and hurt existing successes rather than show some integrity and stand up like men and professionals - like Martin Stabbert did.

Bob, we are NOT going to agree here. But the AM audience, YOUR AUDIENCE, is getting older. Older than yesterday. Not as old as tomorrow. If AM can't at least appeal to youth, then AM will soon be left off of radios altogether. We've already seen this, right?

Clouseau

 

[Savage]

"Me and my ilk" have made a decision to "make AM sound lousy?" Inspector, you've never even heard my station. It doesn't sound lousy; it sounds terrific, with brilliant highs and thunderous bass, even on 2 kHz-type car radios. Unlike IBOC stations its analog signal is 10 kHz wide. It makes the local 50kw NDA sound like it's coming in on a skywave from Whatchacallistan.

"AM is a proven failure?" That depends on how you look at the data. My station outperforms the market and its share with every book, and has turned increasing profits every year since 1998. We outbill several FMs. If you go to the Pittsburgh board here, you'll see much-maligned KDKA has just tied WDVE-FM for number 1. My old stomping grounds, 1320 WJAS, is hugely successful with its nostalgia format, even though doubters will denigrate the station's demos. There are many other examples of successes elsewhere. AM typically doesn't deliver top ratings in demo for a variety of complex reasons having to do with programming, marketing, management disinterest and signal patterns built in the 1940s and 1950s which no longer reach significant segments of their intended audiences. Trying to assign a single cause for AM's problems is a fallacy, like trying to identify a single cause of all the fatal car accidents last year in Arizona.

Much of what you say about HD-AM, and what is generally said about HD Radio, is both completely true and absolutely irrelevant. The arguments about how we got where we are, and why AM lost audience to FM, are not productive. The issue is: does HD Radio offer a realistic way to improve radio's prospects for the future?

I'm sure you disagree, but I would argue that an objective analysis of HD Radio - in particular the AM variety - emphatically establishes the answer as a big NO. The system has been tested and promoted with brute force, and is being rejected by all constituencies - broadcast stations, consumer electronics manufacturers and the listening public. There are many reasons which have been exhaustively aired here and elsewhere. Essentially they boil down to realities of the way people use radio, versus what HD offers.

It's bombing, particularly in the case of HD-AM. And I can't even applaud the efforts of HD's proponents because of the cynicism and dishonesty with which IBOC has been inflicted on the industry. One of HD's worse features is how it divides the radio industry in two groups, elites and untouchables, and pits them against each other. The ongoing dialogue on this board is a glaring symptom.

When I argue that it's time to cut loose HD as the failure which it has proven to be, and move on to more productive pursuits, I mean that resources in a challenging radio environment would be more wisely expended on things proven to have worth to our advertisers and listeners - namely, the programming. The industry is rapidly developing a dangerous ignorance of its own key functions. It's all getting lost in corporate politics.

"Radio is totally screwed?" Only if we forget why we're doing this in the first place. I think HD threatens to lead us further down that path.

 

[Savage]

Clouseau: your response to my earlier post contained the following declarations:

"Could someone show me a ratings success on AM that has solid youth numbers and does music as opposed to basic spoken word?"

And: "We all know youth and AM don't go together. Is there EVEN ONE EXAMPLE of where it works....?

And: "WHERE DOES IT WORK ON AM?

And: "Or will the audience just plain DIE in 15 years. That's a great business plan."

I then replied with an argument to the effect that HD-AM isn't going to help, even accepting your criticisms of analog AM's audience at face value.

Whereupon you retorted that my statement was "made up nonsense" and a claim that you "never said that (HD) would return youth to AM."

I'm missing something here. This is an HD Radio forum, right? Taking all of your statements (above) together, if you're not arguing that HD will help AM get the younger audience you claim it needs to survive, then exactly what ARE you arguing??

 

[JohnnyElectron]

Does the Microsoft ZUNE still include a radio tuner? FM only? FM stereo? FM-HD? AM anything?

 

[clouseau]

Clouseau: your response to my earlier post contained the following declarations:

"Could someone show me a ratings success on AM that has solid youth numbers and does music as opposed to basic spoken word?"

And: "We all know youth and AM don't go together. Is there EVEN ONE EXAMPLE of where it works....?

And: "WHERE DOES IT WORK ON AM?

And: "Or will the audience just plain DIE in 15 years. That's a great business plan."

I then replied with an argument to the effect that HD-AM isn't going to help, even accepting your criticisms of analog AM's audience at face value.

Whereupon you retorted that my statement was "made up nonsense" and a claim that you "never said that (HD) would return youth to AM."

I'm missing something here. This is an HD Radio forum, right? Taking all of your statements (above) together, if you're not arguing that HD will help AM get the younger audience you claim it needs to survive, then exactly what ARE you arguing??

I think AM-HD offers a CHANCE at getting more youthful numbers. We (You and I and others on this board of our advanced age.. ) don't have a problem with AM fidelity. We grew up with it. Clearly those younger than us DO. To deny that is just utter ostrich-like behaviour. AM has transitioned from an "Own it all" youth medium, to a 25-54 skews old talk medium. Why? BECAUSE IT SOUNDS BAD compared to FM. Because FM kicks it's fidelity butt every single time. There is no youth future for analog AM aside from Radio Disney. When a Radio Disney listener decides they'd like to grow up a little and listen to Nelly or Nickelback or Avril Lavigne they don't turn the tuning knob. They slide the band switch. AM youth listening after Radio Disney is GONE. How many are transitioning from "We're all Ears" to "Sean Hannity"? Ain't happening.

Based on that, we then have the rather daunting task of RE-recruiting them when they become adults. Without audio parity, AM WILL DIE. Top rated formats in New Orleans and Salt Lake City are adding (Or is it really MIGRATING) to FM. How About DC? Same thing. It's kinda like gasoline. The problem ain't coming. The problem is here.

So my point is...

AM now has a proven 30+ year track record of getting it's butt kicked based on technical limitations. Stereo didn't fix it. HD might not fix it. Or it might. But you don't have to get a whole lot younger than me before you run out of the "Grew up on AM" listeners. And I'm 52. 10 years from now, no one who grew up listening to AM is going to be in a demo that anyone cares about. And if current talk programming continues to perform well, it, TOO will migrate to FM.

That day will arrive. And I, as you, will be sad when it does. But to somehow believe AM fidelity is OK is just silly. 30 years of history doesn't sudenly reverse itself for no reason.

AM needs a chance. Absent another, HD is that chance.

Clouseau

 

[Savage]

Okay. Help me out here.

You just said that HD-AM offers the POTENTIAL of bringing younger listeners back to the band, not "that it would" or "will." I got that part. But then:

You relate how Radio Disney listeners, who are listening for the most part to HD-AM signals, when they want to graduate to Furtado or Avril, don't turn the dial - they slide the bandswitch.

How does this support your contention that HD-AM will help the band get younger listeners? You just stated that young, new, freshly-recruited AM listeners are deserting AM for other entertainment....irrespective of the presence of HD!

Huh??

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I read this same discussion in many forms, many sub-topics within Radio-Info and other discussion groups in other venues... some dominated by the broadcast engineers.

The general story when you merge then all together is: Ibiquity won a battle for the franchise to do something they don't know how to get done.

There was this dream of having MULTIPLE streams within what was previously ONE audio channel known as an A.M. radio station. There was this delusion there was need for, demand for may four times as many audio channels so they chose to design a system where even in digital, the audio was inferior to old-fashioned unadulterated A.M. radio as we knew it in previous decades, but you get multiples of this inferior audio in return.

In the 50's 60's and 70's there were a few operators, some with ego, some with pride, some with just nothing more that curiosity and smarts that put out A.M. audio that was top of the line.

So what did we get out of all this: AM HD that works fine if you are close to the transmitter so the digital mechanism can be received, or you have have old fashioned A.M. that works fine if your are close to the transmitter so the x-ray machines and traffic lights and electric welders and everything else don't put too much static in it.

And we have F.M. that works fine if you are close enough to the station because today's receivers are too cheap to use all of Mr. Armstrong's invention on the receiver side.

Second point:

Look around you. How many people are wearing glasses? Keep looking and you can also add to the count a number of people who blink that certain way, who reach up to touch their eyes that certain way.. we know they are wearing contacts. The number (glasses plus contacts) is HUGE!

Now, do we have any reason to believe that there are not as many hearing impaired people as there are vision impaired people?

What good does it do to have superior audio (in theory) if the intended victim... err, excuse me, intended listener can't hear the difference?

Maybe we are back to the 'content' question.

 

[Carmine5]

I don't buy the mantra that music on AM is dead. I know of several AM stations that are doing very well as revenue-generators using a music format. They either fill a format "hole" in their community that FM won't touch like Gospel, Standards/Jazz or Ethnic, or they promote themselves in a fun, engaging way. In every case, the stations are closely involved with their communities; sponsoring events or doing some kind of charity drive (and getting press coverage in the process).

In fact, I find this whole hand-wringing over whether or not AM is dying, a total waste of time. I know a couple of AM station owners and I can tell you that they don't spend much time thinking about that question. Instead, they take care of business, get involved in their community, study listener habits and trends and implement new technology where appropriate. And should the day come when AM is officially declared dead and these guys have to dismantle their towers, they will already be into the next broadcast "thing" and making money from it.

It's the pundants and bloggers and those on the sidelines who ask if AM is dead. The owners are too busy.

C5

 

[Savage]

Yes, Carmine5, the results you obtain from your AM facility are directly proportional to the amount of time and attention given to that facility. Isn't that a startling phenomenon? Who saw that coming??

One of the major problems plaguing AM these days is: within a given corporate-run cluster, the AM has been allowed to deteriorate to the low-performing, low-priority facility in the group. At the end of the day, if there is 15 cents and 15 minutes left over, it gets devoted to the AM facility, maintenance, development and promotion. It's part of the culture of corporate cluster-management. You can even see it in mixes of A & C FM facilities (or As and Bs in this part of the country.) The As routinely get a fraction of the attention and investment given to the bigger sticks.

So predictably, what's the fix prescribed for the AM? "Let's buy yet another box to rack-mount out at the transmitter - just like those which have gone before, the BL40 Modulimiter, the Optimod, the C-Quam exciter et al - which will MAGICALLY restore the audience and make the freakin' stupid old AM make some money."

Then: when it doesn't work, the modulation method gets blamed. Or the receiver manufacturers. Or Congress. Or the FCC. Or SatRadio. Or the previous GM or PD, or any other convenient scapegoat.

And as you have observed: when licensees pay attention and actually put some effort into their AMs, guess what? Miraculously they find ways to make them attact audiences and make money.

Actually, I think that, far more than receiver design and overallocation by the FCC, the worst thing that happened to AM in the past 25 years was lifting the restrictions on simulcasting co-owned FMs. That permitted licensees to start ignoring the AM facility, which operators have increasingly done ever since.

 

[Chuck]

Actually, I think that, far more than receiver design and overallocation by the FCC, the worst thing that happened to AM in the past 25 years was lifting the restrictions on simulcasting co-owned FMs. That permitted licensees to start ignoring the AM facility, which operators have increasingly done ever since.

That's very true. In my area, only a few AM's actually originate any unique programming. The rest simply simulcast what one of the group's FMs is doing. Which would you listen to, a 50,000 watt FM stereo signal with a large footprint, or a 1000 watt AM that is running a simulcast of exactly the same programming?

Basically, all the owners are doing is keeping the license valid. It is really a waste of electricity. No wonder nobody tunes in.

On the other hand, those AM's who are active in their respective communities and "do their own thing” programming wise, actually have listeners and sponsors. Imagine that. They may not be successful on a grand scale like a major market station, but they seem to do pretty well in their communities.