• 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

Radio All Digital Receiver Act

R

rapking

Guest
Rep. Ed Markey ( D-MA ) has introduced the "Radio all digital channel receiver Act" that,if passed, will require satellite and terrestrial radio receiver manufacturers to include in all receivers sold in the U.S.A. the ability to receive HD radio signals.
 
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i32e9c3e84ea86c79b9c7cbe9c6eb9dfd?imw=Y
Good info rapking !
The N.A.B. is for this, so I will be against this.
It is unclear whether the pending legislation would force manufacturers of Sirius XM receivers to include HD Radio technology on aftermarket satellite receivers plug and play units that traditionally include only satellite reception intended to be used in tandem with already installed AM/FM receivers
Click to expand...
Whatever !
They don't care. They just want to force their useless product on us.
 
I think they ought to work on getting the bugs out of the system first. When I hear callers mention them on the radio, they state that they are very fussy systems, either you have a signal or you don't. Which means no "fringe" listening. In weak areas, that would really limit the stations you could receive.

I'm not all that turned on with the newfangled stuff, they can keep it, along with HDTV. ::)
 
katzradio said:
I think they ought to work on getting the bugs out of the system first. When I hear callers mention them on the radio, they state that they are very fussy systems, either you have a signal or you don't. Which means no "fringe" listening. In weak areas, that would really limit the stations you could receive.
Click to expand...

The proposed legislation doesn't say that it would eliminate analog reception, does it? It just says that it would require digital capability on all receivers along with it.

In that case, unlike HDTV, it wouldn't limit the amount of stations you could receive. The receiver just reverts to conventional analog reception if the digital signal isn't strong enough.
 
rapking said:
Rep. Ed Markey ( D-MA ) has introduced the "Radio all digital channel receiver Act" that,if passed, will require satellite and terrestrial radio receiver manufacturers to include in all receivers sold in the U.S.A. the ability to receive HD radio signals.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear on the wording, this would only affect radios designed to receive both satellite and terrestrial radio. I at first misinterpreted the post as saying that it would affect all terrestrial radio receivers.

http://markey.house.gov/docs/telecomm/hr7157_final_text.pdf
 
>>this would only affect radios designed to receive both satellite and terrestrial radio

Yes, when I rented a car a few months back it had one that had AM, FM, and Sirius. (My own car stereo
is AM/FM and I added XM Xpress EZ with a Sure Connect attached to the back antenna)
 
I say ... keep the government out of it. :mad: If I want to buy a receiver that only covers certain frequencies, that should be MY business. Let the *free* market determine whether a given technology takes off or not.
 
Ed101 said:
I say ... keep the government out of it. :mad: If I want to buy a receiver that only covers certain frequencies, that should be MY business. Let the *free* market determine whether a given technology takes off or not.
Click to expand...

Sometimes the government is useful in 'getting things going'. Had it not been for the government requiring all radios to be AM & FM, back in the late 1960's, FM would probably not have come into its own until maybe around NOW.

HOWEVER, there is one VERY disturbing thing about this bill, and it may very well be challenged in court.... Now, Markey's bill is doing something NEW..... having the government REQUIRING the sales on a MONOPOLY product.... FORCING manufacturers (and untimately the consumers paying for it) to buy an overpriced technology-license from a sole source, iBiquity).

----jibguy (happily broadcasting in good ol' analog)
 
JIBGUY said:
Sometimes the government is useful in 'getting things going'. Had it not been for the government requiring all radios to be AM & FM, back in the late 1960's, FM would probably not have come into its own until maybe around NOW.
Click to expand...
There is a part of me that says "so what?" (Must be the libertarian in me ;D) So FM is in fact better than AM... Let the consumer decide what kind of radio he/she wants to buy.

JIBGUY said:
HOWEVER, there is one VERY disturbing thing about this bill, and it may very well be challenged in court.... Now, Markey's bill is doing something NEW..... having the government REQUIRING the sales on a MONOPOLY product.... FORCING manufacturers (and untimately the consumers paying for it) to buy an overpriced technology-license from a sole source, iBiquity).
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
From ED101:
There is a part of me that says "so what?" (Must be the libertarian in me ) So FM is in fact better than AM... Let the consumer decide what kind of radio he/she wants to buy.

-----------------------------------------------------------
My point is, without government mandating AM/FM in all radios, the customer wouldn't today HAVE that choice of AM or FM, but rather just AM, becasue FM may have died, just like AM stereo did.
 
JIBGUY said:
My point is, without government mandating AM/FM in all radios, the customer wouldn't today HAVE that choice of AM or FM, but rather just AM, becasue FM may have died, just like AM stereo did.
Click to expand...

Are there plans to restore AM stereo on WJIB eventually? There are a few of us out here that still have AM Stereo radios.
 
Don't forget about the all-channel act for TV back in the 1960's,
that required both UHF and VHF tuners available on all new TV sets...
If they had not passed it, the TV landscape would be much more limited today...

As for digital transmission, in general - they can keep it, as far as I am concerned.
I'll choose analog ANY DAY! I would much rather have a signal with a little noise (video snow)
in it that is present, as opposed to a signal that disappears entirely...
 
JIBGUY said:
Ed101 said:
I say ... keep the government out of it. :mad: If I want to buy a receiver that only covers certain frequencies, that should be MY business. Let the *free* market determine whether a given technology takes off or not.
Click to expand...

Sometimes the government is useful in 'getting things going'. Had it not been for the government requiring all radios to be AM & FM, back in the late 1960's, FM would probably not have come into its own until maybe around NOW.

HOWEVER, there is one VERY disturbing thing about this bill, and it may very well be challenged in court.... Now, Markey's bill is doing something NEW..... having the government REQUIRING the sales on a MONOPOLY product.... FORCING manufacturers (and untimately the consumers paying for it) to buy an overpriced technology-license from a sole source, iBiquity).

----jibguy (happily broadcasting in good ol' analog)
Click to expand...
It`s great that you are still analog.

I just wish that you would internet stream so I could listen to ya!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
My guess is this is really aimed at the Car manufactures. Many have been including factory radios with one of the satellite services. With the merger they will soon be forced to add both. My guess is Markey's idea is to have HD included so that consumers have a third digital choice. Don't get me wrong I think all three may be doomed but I'm not so sure there is really anything that sinister in this bill.
 
Johnster said:
My guess is this is really aimed at the Car manufactures. Many have been including factory radios with one of the satellite services. With the merger they will soon be forced to add both. My guess is Markey's idea is to have HD included so that consumers have a third digital choice. Don't get me wrong I think all three may be doomed but I'm not so sure there is really anything that sinister in this bill.
Click to expand...

Give us a choice? Fine. MAKE US PAY FOR IT IF WE DON'T WANT IT? No.

HD radio is, so far, a dismal failure. A tiny minority of the radio stations in the US (less than 10%) have added HD transmission capability (because most of the remaining 90+% can't afford it), and receiver sales are so far under the radar as to be essentially non-existent. The technology has all sorts of problems, including the creation of interference that didn't exist before, and in the case of HD on AM horrible audio quality. All begging the question: Why is government involved in pushing this tech on consumers who are already rejecting it? With all the problems the radio business has to take on, including lame, boring programming on its analog channels (i.e., where they make their money), HD is an answer to a non-existent question.
 
This makes me sick. And not because I am trying to be a smug purist when it comes to my radio reception...

But because shouldn't the U.S. government be focusing on more important things right now? Like say, oh I don't know... seeing to it that half of today's "middle class" doesn't end up on the poverty line in the not-so-distant-future.

I find it incredible, really, that the government is so invested lately in radio and television reception (not to mention steriods in baseball), when there are so many things much more important.

Not to mention the HD television that they have already forced on the nation! What of the low-income families who will be struggling to heat their homes this winter? Now you are telling them they have to shell out $80-$120 (is that how much they cost?) for a converter just so that they can continue to watch the 5'oclock news on Channel 7.

Get our soldiers home, fix this economy, make it so that it doesn't take me half my paycheck to fill my gastank every week, and THEN you can tell me how I am going to watch my favorite television show or listen to my favorite radio station.

Getting off my soap-box now... ;)
 
"As for digital transmission, in general - they can keep it, as far as I am concerned.
I'll choose analog ANY DAY! I would much rather have a signal with a little noise (video snow)
in it that is present, as opposed to a signal that disappears entirely..."

ABSOLUTELY!!

I myself have an old boom box with a turn dial and I love to just scroll through the stations like I did when I was a kid with an AM transistor. It's fun when you can't quite get a station, just enough to know it's something you'd like to listen to, and you're moving around the wire you attached after the antenna broke off (don't they always break off?) but then you give up on it and keep moving down the dial.

And while I LOVE the FM sound of WTKK, I have to be able to hear AM talk on a regular basis too....that sound quality is like Bill Monroe (famous early bluegrass pioneer and mandolin player.) Bluegrass today is cleaner and more sophisticated, but there's nothing like the rawness achy-ness of the music when it was developing.

I think that's why I like to listen to analog stuff....listening to the different stations' "sounds" is like a music devotee listening to different songs.

I am such a radio nerd. Errrr, it's so fun!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom