RADIO SHACK Drops HD Radio Price Again

[dumber than a box of hair]

Besides the comical charactarizations... In the traditional radio business model, everyone has to buy a radio. It's actually interesting, for what you describe I'm sure is a fairly accurate description of radio in the very early days. Not so much with the short range, but those early AMers we only a couple of hundred watts at first. Nothing you say above has any bearing on "Traditional radio business model".,

That's what's known as "missing the point." Yes, everyone has to buy a radio, but with 800 million radios already in the hands of US consumers and analog radios still being sold at much lower cost and in much greater quantity than HD radios, the listening public will have to be convinced that HD offers a better product. They're clearly not convinced, and the marketing of HD so far doesn't bode well toward changing that attitude. When you have the majority of those responding to surveys believing that they're already receiving HD without buying a new radio, you know that the marketing types need to get their act together. When they start this year's marketing push in mid-November (many months after Christmas-season ad campaigns were planned and finalized), you can see that they haven't a clue what they're doing.

Funny how you ANTI HD guys are quick to HD a marketplace failure and compare it's roll out speed to satellite when it HASN'T Even received final approval yet.

"Final approval" is irrelevant to this discussion, since there are over 1000 stations on the air with HD, from all the major group owners and many stand-alones. None of them felt the need to wait for "final approval."

It has better audio specs on FM. Better Sound = More Money.

That has never happened in the history of radio...not in the past, not now, not ever. Since the advent of commercial programming in the 1920s, new tech has NEVER driven sales of radios. The only thing that even remotely resembles this is the move of most music programming from AM to FM...but there, most industry experts agree that it was a shift in programming, not the tech (which had already been around for 30 years at that point) that drove the move to FM. The "better sound=more money" argument is one that hasn't ever worked, and yet the radio business is latching onto it as though it has never failed in the past. They just don't learn.

Your assertion is just plain wrong. And clearly broadcasters think you're wrong or they wouldn't be doing it.

No, his assertion is just plain correct. It's supported by facts and history. The fact that broadcasters are "doing it" just shows how they are deluding themselves and failing to learn from their own history.

Look for it VERY soon. Count it in Months.

We who work in radio were told that at least three times before. I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Mike Walker]

New technology NEVER drives sales for anyone other than early adopters. It took about three decades from the introduction of the PC before the average household had one. It took a decade and a half before many people actually owned a stereo tv. It took about a decade for HDTV to get much traction. It took 15 years (at least) before VCRs were in more than a minority of homes. It took 40 years for FM to match AM's audience share. STILL most Americans don't have broadband internet access, despite it's wide availability for more than a decade. Cell phones took more than 20 years before most homes had one. Cars were still being made with AM only radios into the 90s. Need I go on? I could, ad infinitum. There are too many other examples to count (Microwave ovens didn't get much traction for 15 years or more, blah, blah, blah).

People don't immediately run out and buy something because it's new. It NEVER happens that way. They wait until their existing tv, radio, receiver, car, etc needs replacing. THEN they replace it with what's new. It has always been so! The only exception I can think of is RADIO, which "caught on" pretty darned quickly when it "broke the silence" for most families in the 20s and 30s. During the depression, no less. Oh well, there's an exception to every rule!

 

[clouseau]

Besides the comical charactarizations... In the traditional radio business model, everyone has to buy a radio. It's actually interesting, for what you describe I'm sure is a fairly accurate description of radio in the very early days. Not so much with the short range, but those early AMers we only a couple of hundred watts at first. Nothing you say above has any bearing on "Traditional radio business model".,

That's what's known as "missing the point." Yes, everyone has to buy a radio, but with 800 million radios already in the hands of US consumers and analog radios still being sold at much lower cost and in much greater quantity than HD radios, the listening public will have to be convinced that HD offers a better product. They're clearly not convinced, and the marketing of HD so far doesn't bode well toward changing that attitude.

This was a discussion of "Traditional radio business models." There's no missing the point at all, unless you just want to change the point after I responded to it. It IS the traditioanl radio business model. If you're making a point that that right now most people don't have HD radios you are correct. Very insightful.

When you have the majority of those responding to surveys believing that they're already receiving HD without buying a new radio, you know that the marketing types need to get their act together.

That's what's happens sometimes. HD WAS rushed out a little early. I don't think many would argue that. You're looking to get ahead of the rollout here. When people find out that their marginally popular sporting event or music format is available on and HD-2 or HD-3 they'll start to swing around. And for a long time the majority won't care. So what?

When they start this year's marketing push in mid-November (many months after Christmas-season ad campaigns were planned and finalized), you can see that they haven't a clue what they're doing.

I don't think it shows they don't know what their doing, I think it shows they might be trying to get it out there a little too fast. We'll see.

Quote from: clouseau on Yesterday at 11:49:57 am
Funny how you ANTI HD guys are quick to HD a marketplace failure and compare it's roll out speed to satellite when it HASN'T even received final approval yet.

"Final approval" is irrelevant to this discussion, since there are over 1000 stations on the air with HD, from all the major group owners and many stand-alones. None of them felt the need to wait for "final approval."

Actually final approval would allow HD to fully assume the traditional radio business model with independant programming AND commercials. It's totally relevent unless you want to change the subject. The continued proclaimations of a few on this board that HD radio is Dead just doesn't make it so. Don't forget to add in Fraud and Farse.

Quote from: clouseau on Yesterday at 11:49:57 am
It has better audio specs on FM. Better Sound = More Money.

That has never happened in the history of radio...not in the past, not now, not ever. Since the advent of commercial programming in the 1920s, new tech has NEVER driven sales of radios.

FM Stereo didn't sell more radios? Weird, I was there and I could have sworn people bought them. Must have been that "Cosmic conversion" thing that got us all these FM Stereo radios.

The only thing that even remotely resembles this is the move of most music programming from AM to FM...but there, most industry experts agree that it was a shift in programming, not the tech (which had already been around for 30 years at that point) that drove the move to FM. The "better sound=more money" argument is one that hasn't ever worked, and yet the radio business is latching onto it as though it has never failed in the past. They just don't learn.

I think you've missed my point. That is, there WILL be a small increase in revenue if there is an increase in quality. And that statement was made in response to as assertion that there is "NO VALUE" to HD-1. Actually I think one of the shortcomings of HD is the lack of a mandate to require an "Analog only /Digital only" switch. This would allow for 4 channels Analog, HD-1, HD-2 and HD-3. I think you'll see this in the future as I don't really believe the value of HD is better quality (For FM) but more capacity. While specwise, HD-1 is better than analog, I would suspect most people have no problem with Analog FM.

Quote from: clouseau on Yesterday at 11:49:57 am
Look for it VERY soon. Count it in Months.

We who work in radio were told that at least three times before. I'll believe it when I see it.

I see the delays. And because you work in radio does not give you any special insight on this. I am a licensee and auction registrant, and we all know the same info. I beleve the delays are primarily caused by the problems with the AM system. And I don't think they are going to get fixed under the Ibiquity System (my opinion there). I just don't see AM ever happening under this IBAC system. The Band just can't handle it, especially at night.

But the FM standard should be out soon.

Clouseau

 

[700WLW]

New technology NEVER drives sales for anyone other than early adopters. It took about three decades from the introduction of the PC before the average household had one. It took a decade and a half before many people actually owned a stereo tv. It took about a decade for HDTV to get much traction. It took 15 years (at least) before VCRs were in more than a minority of homes. It took 40 years for FM to match AM's audience share. STILL most Americans don't have broadband internet access, despite it's wide availability for more than a decade. Cell phones took more than 20 years before most homes had one. Cars were still being made with AM only radios into the 90s. Need I go on? I could, ad infinitum. There are too many other examples to count (Microwave ovens didn't get much traction for 15 years or more, blah, blah, blah).

People don't immediately run out and buy something because it's new. It NEVER happens that way. They wait until their existing tv, radio, receiver, car, etc needs replacing. THEN they replace it with what's new. It has always been so! The only exception I can think of is RADIO, which "caught on" pretty darned quickly when it "broke the silence" for most families in the 20s and 30s. During the depression, no less. Oh well, there's an exception to every rule!

HD Radio is a totally different situation - HD Radio/IBOC is just an inferior re-do of old technology. HD Radio is a boring technology that offers consumers absolutely nothing to get excited about - it is no wonder, or surprise, that sales of HD radios are anemic. HD Radio is popping out of its shell, at a time, that all these other technologies are emerging (e.g., Wireless Internet/Internet Radio, cell phone streaming, iRadio, WiFi, WiMAx, G3, etc.), which are exciting to consumers, and no wonder, sales of such devices are exploding. Unlike all these other technologies HD Radio is having to be pushed on consumers, which no doubt, will fail:

"The Premature Death of HD Radio"

http://www.hear2.com/2005/05/the_premature_d.html

I'm a shilln' for HD Radio/IBOC !

 

[Mike Walker]

If nobody is interested in HD 700WLW, why do you feel you must shout so loud, and so frequently in order for your point of view to be heard above the cheers of others here who have purchased, and love the technology? If you're that secure that your point of view will prevail, take a break. Come back in a month. Or a year. It won't make any difference.

Of course if you feel that every single positive comment must be shouted down, every single positive experience discounted, well...that says more about YOU than about those whose ideas you dismiss so freely.

This is, after all, a forum for those of us who have an interest in the technology...a place to share ideas and experiences. If you don't have an HD Radio, and have no experience with it to contribute, perhaps you (perhaps we all!) would be happier if you posted elsewhere...in a forum which actually interests you? After all...if this is such loser technology, is it REALLY necessary to shout it down over, and over?

If HD Radio is "nothing to get excited about" (and I so appreciate your advice on what should excite ME! I'm sure not smart enough to figure it out for myself!), then why the hell has it so excited YOU?????????? (In your opposition)

Just a thought!

 

[700WLW]

Just a thought - I am just, SHOUTING BACK !

 

[Tom Wells]

I believe the "done deal" aspect of the FCC "in cahoots with" Ibiquity justifies a chorus of paid mourners as is done at funerals in some countries.. The FCC should have been on the side of the public, instead of conspiring behind our backs..
Yes, I know there was a period for "public comment", but this was only window dressing.

I much prefer the supercaster-WLW method over what the FCC and Ibuity pulled off.
At least these guys are honestly trying to offer info, instead of pulling a fast one...

 

[clouseau]

I believe the "done deal" aspect of the FCC "in cahoots with" Ibiquity justifies a chorus of paid mourners as is done at funerals in some countries.. The FCC should have been on the side of the public, instead of conspiring behind our backs..
Yes, I know there was a period for "public comment", but this was only window dressing.

OK guys, pick a direction and run with it OK? Is it a done deal or is it experimental? There'd be ever so slightly more credibility to your point if it wasn't all over the place.

Didn't the FCC say they wanted ideas for Digital?? I think so... Remember...

http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/News_Releases/1999/nrmm9026.txt

I much prefer the supercaster-WLW method over what the FCC and Ibuity pulled off.

Just what IS the "supercaster-WLW method"?? Whine and cry about a technology they don't own? That aside...

Just what did the "FCC and Ibiquity" "Pull Off"? There was a lengthy period of comment and discussion. There were different ideas proposed. A less that optimal solution was selected and we went with it. Sounds like the NTSC decision to me. Or AM Stereo. Or HDTV. Same methodology. Nothing got "Pulled Off".

The FCC should have been on the side of the public, instead of conspiring behind our backs..

Did it ever occur to you that just maybe they ARE on the side of the public. They're moving on a system that offers 3 times the number of program choices offered by broadcasters now - and at a cost to the public in terms of new spectrum of zero. There is no subscription cost to the listener and in a reasonable time, radio prices should be comparable with their Analog FM counterparts. In terms of cost ratios, HD radios are as close in cost to their analog counterparts as HD TV's seem to be with THEIR analog Counterparts right now. I'm assuming HD TV is 3 times the cost of comparable Analog. (I made that number up, but it's my perception. I can buy a nice 26" NTSC for around $189 in Wally World. HDTV's are rarely less that $600 for a similar size. HD radios are running just a little inder $200. Comparable sound Analog radios like say a GE superradio III tend to run in the $60-$70 range. )

At least these guys are honestly trying to offer info, instead of pulling a fast one...

Again, WHAT IS THE FAST ONE? There was a request for proposals. There were several compainies involved in developement. There was developer consolidation. There was selection and there was release and hopfully there will be final approval. WHERE IS THE FAST ONE? Remember the service to the the public is FREE. Not a bad deal for the public, eh?

Clouseau

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

there WILL be a small increase in revenue if there is an increase in quality.

Explain how that will work. Tell us how higher quality (which is, by itself, questionable...digital does not necessarily equal better quality than analog) will cause advertisers to spend more money for their ads and/or will cut costs for broadcasters.

I don't really believe the value of HD is better quality (For FM) but more capacity.

More capacity without a larger universe of listeners is a recipe for an enormous economic displacement. The listeners have to come from somewhere, so any secondary stream that is even moderately successful will have to take listeners away from some other station, including possibly its own primary stream. The radio industry already went through this 30 years ago, and it spelled the end of the line for a lot of stations that ended up being the (x+1) station in an economy that could only support (x) stations. There is no evidence whatsoever that this won't happen again...but the industry seems perfectly willing to ignore its own past.

I am a licensee and auction registrant, and we all know the same info. I beleve the delays are primarily caused by the problems with the AM system. And I don't think they are going to get fixed under the Ibiquity System (my opinion there). I just don't see AM ever happening under this IBAC system. The Band just can't handle it, especially at night.

But the FM standard should be out soon.

The FCC had ample opportunity to approve the FM standard all by itself, and did not do so. The fact that the AM system will not work...will, in fact, destroy whatever usefulness the AM band has had up until now...is irrelevant. The FCC is not, and never has been, bound by any need to approve all of an NPRM or none of it.

It is appalling that the radio industry demonstrates its repeated inability to learn from its past mistakes. It's even more appalling that so many licensees demonstrate a lack of the most basic knowledge of economics, which might have kept them from making such a monumental mistake, and for all the wrong reasons. Further, it's appalling that the FCC is willing to ignore any benefits to the public for the sake of soaking broadcasters with a proprietary DAB scheme that will end up costing broadcasters billions in both hardware costs and licensing fees...all for the sake of the buzzword of the day, "digital." What the FCC is poised to do is to turn over a broadcasting standard to outside interests, and to permit those interests to put a huge "touch" on broadcasters. How precisely does that serve "the public interest, convenience and necessity?"

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

They're moving on a system that offers 3 times the number of program choices offered by broadcasters now - and at a cost to the public in terms of new spectrum of zero.

If you fail to see the economic joke this is going to play on broadcasters, your time as a licensee will be frighteningly short. Yes, there's no cost to the public, other than the cost of a new radio. But, there is a huge ongoing cost to broadcasters...both in terms of hardware and licensing costs to build the thing, annual license fees to a private company that will be forced upon you by the FCC once HD Radio is officially approved, and the fact that the listeners to two or three times the current number of FM-band signals have to come from somewhere. When the HD-2 and HD-3 listeners start eroding the audience base on your primary signal, you will start losing money...and as a licensee, that's what will matter to you the most. "3 times the number of program choices" isn't going to seem like such a benefit to broadcasters once this starts occurring.

 

[clouseau]

They're moving on a system that offers 3 times the number of program choices offered by broadcasters now - and at a cost to the public in terms of new spectrum of zero

If you fail to see the economic joke this is going to play on broadcasters, your time as a licensee will be frighteningly short..

Tell you what. You have no idea who I am or what I do, so if you'll stop worring about the length of time I'll be a licensee due to economics then I'll stop wondering how literal your screen name is.

Yes, there's no cost to the public, other than the cost of a new radio. But, there is a huge ongoing cost to broadcasters...both in terms of hardware and licensing costs to build the thing, annual license fees to a private company that will be forced upon you by the FCC once HD Radio is officially approved, and the fact that the listeners to two or three times the current number of FM-band signals have to come from somewhere. When the HD-2 and HD-3 listeners start eroding your audience base, you will start losing money...and as a licensee, that's what will matter to you the most.

I know this will sound crazy to you, but radio people hae actually thought of this.

Yep. They understand this. But here's what it appears YOU don't understand. We are all chasing a more or less finite size pie. Back in the good old days of TV there were basically 3 stations in a market. No cable and a finite amount of advertising dollars. You ran a more popular program and you made more money. Simple, right? Your slice got bigger.

Radio was the same. Before 80-90 there were 1/2 the number of stations there were now. AM daytimers made sense. The pie was big compared to the number of slices. Now in 2006 there's a LOT more entities looking for a piece of the pie. And the size of the slices is smaller.

So in 2006 if you want more revenue, you need more slices of pie. It's basically the only way. It's why ABC Bought Family channel and Fox started FX. It's why NBC has a spanish network and USA and Sci Fi. Clearly USA costs NBC network stations viewers and might even lower ad revenues on the NBC network proper. But the "Company" makes more money.

So goes HD radio with it's 3 times as many channels. The ratio of Slices of pie to the whole is higher. Which means that Classic Country listener might just tune in HD-2 instead of Sirius. After all, Classic Country HD-2 is FREE. No $12.95 a month. Radio is dumb at times, but they are smart enough here to realize that the primary reason for losing ad dollars isn't other radio. (And frankly if it is, then you find a better programming choice and move on.) The problem is not enough choice on radio and not GOOD ENOUGH choice compared to other options.

"3 times the number of program choices" isn't going to seem like such a benefit to broadcasters once this starts occurring.

You are right, but you are wrong. I'm sure radio would RATHER go back to no Sat radio and no Ipods or CD's.. But it ain't gonna happen. So the answer is more choices. That's more RADIO choices.

Clouseau

 

[700WLW]

Did it ever occur to you that just maybe they ARE on the side of the public. They're moving on a system that offers 3 times the number of program choices offered by broadcasters now - and at a cost to the public in terms of new spectrum of zero. There is no subscription cost to the listener and in a reasonable time, radio prices should be comparable with their Analog FM counterparts. In terms of cost ratios, HD radios are as close in cost to their analog counterparts as HD TV's seem to be with THEIR analog Counterparts right now. I'm assuming HD TV is 3 times the cost of comparable Analog. (I made that number up, but it's my perception. I can buy a nice 26" NTSC for around $189 in Wally World. HDTV's are rarely less that $600 for a similar size.

HD radios are running just a little inder $200. Comparable sound Analog radios like say a GE superradio III tend to run in the $60-$70 range. )

Again, WHAT IS THE FAST ONE? There was a request for proposals. There were several compainies involved in developement. There was developer consolidation. There was selection and there was release and hopfully there will be final approval. WHERE IS THE FAST ONE? Remember the service to the the public is FREE. Not a bad deal for the public, eh?

Clouseau

"GE SUPERADIO III High-Performance AM/FM Radio"

$44.99

http://www.radioshack.com/sm-ge-superadio-iii-high-performance-am-fm-radio--pi-2110900.html

And, my excellent Sony ICF-S10MK2 hand-held PORTABLE radio, for AM DXing, is just $10:

http://www.radiointel.com/review-sonys10mk2.htm

"Digital Radio: Small Guys' Ruin ?"

"The noise big radio conglomerates are making about digital radio is likely to drown out community radio stations -- dashing small broadcasters' hopes that the new technology would boost their signal... If the system had been designed with the public interest in mind, it would have been made with more channel space, said Pete Tridish, a media activist with the low-power radio group Prometheus Radio Project. Instead, we have another business that supports the status quo."

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,55757-0.html

HD Radio is not free - with the outrageous price of HD radios, the fees are paid up-front to iBiquity, etc.

 

[Tom Wells]

The "Fast one" is the FCC offering up a pie-in-sky digital salvation to the radio industry, as if ignorance of day, night and other real world
RF considerations was going to make this a good idea.

And then to let broadcasters, many of whom have no technical background, beleive that it's going to work is like
quack medicine in the old days. You can sell a lot of pills to the ignorant, misled, wishful, etc.

And the public never had any input into this issue. I was watching closely when I heard about this years ago.
Joe Blow still has very little knowledge that IBOC is happening.
The FCC gives little credence to the public opinion on engineering issues.
They disregard many of these comments with a "darn radio geek" dismissiveness.

As I citizen of Chicago, I assure you I can smell a "done deal" from a long way off.
They have to say it's experimental, 'cause done deals are supposedly illegal.
So were the methods of Enron, until such laws were dropped. "Nobody would be so brash as to manipulate the markets," we thought.
When, in fact, the laws were changed to permit this very thing expressly FOR Enron.
When big money sets something in motion, they do not take kindly to piss-ants such as a few crazy engineers
pointing out why this system is like the Emperor's New Clothes.

In Chicago, such p. a. are "convinced" of the error of their ways, and squelched, or worse.

 

[SDRadio]

Sir,

I truly am not trying to start a fight with you, but how could you know that the Accurian is a "piece of cheap junk" without trying it out (as I'm assuming--please correct me if I'm wrong)? I guess I shall see firsthand in a couple of hours...my Accurian should be arriving this evening!

It is a heaping pile of crap from Rat Shack. I went to a Rat Shack close to HDRadio radio transmitters and nuttin. No HDRadio. The RS sales weasels didn't know how to present it. HDRadio has failed to effectively have a product for consumers to buy. Hopefully that will change in 2007. I have the JVC HDR1 in dash and it's OK. Not outstanding.

 

[clouseau]

Did it ever occur to you that just maybe they ARE on the side of the public. They're moving on a system that offers 3 times the number of program choices offered by broadcasters now - and at a cost to the public in terms of new spectrum of zero. There is no subscription cost to the listener and in a reasonable time, radio prices should be comparable with their Analog FM counterparts. In terms of cost ratios, HD radios are as close in cost to their analog counterparts as HD TV's seem to be with THEIR analog Counterparts right now. I'm assuming HD TV is 3 times the cost of comparable Analog. (I made that number up, but it's my perception. I can buy a nice 26" NTSC for around $189 in Wally World. HDTV's are rarely less that $600 for a similar size.

HD radios are running just a little inder $200. Comparable sound Analog radios like say a GE superradio III tend to run in the $60-$70 range. )

Again, WHAT IS THE FAST ONE? There was a request for proposals. There were several compainies involved in developement. There was developer consolidation. There was selection and there was release and hopfully there will be final approval. WHERE IS THE FAST ONE? Remember the service to the the public is FREE. Not a bad deal for the public, eh?

Clouseau


"GE SUPERADIO III High-Performance AM/FM Radio"

$44.99

Great. A point taken for you. I can see you're into accuracy. Did you bother to point out that HD radios are available at Radio Shack for $174.99 after rebate? Or are you just looking to argue? The basic ratio stands as I stated. Try again...

"Digital Radio: Small Guys' Ruin ?"

"The noise big radio conglomerates are making about digital radio is likely to drown out community radio stations -- dashing small broadcasters' hopes that the new technology would boost their signal... If the system had been designed with the public interest in mind, it would have been made with more channel space, said Pete Tridish, a media activist with the low-power radio group Prometheus Radio Project. Instead, we have another business that supports the status quo."

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,55757-0.html

Thanks for that 4 year old propaganda piece that was written before multicasting was even thought of. Not to mention that Pete Tridish (Cute) or Prometheus are not exactly pro anything to do with commercial radio. They support totally non commercial radio. Period. They are totally opposed to any commercials whatsoever under any circuumstances. While they have worked hard for the advancement of LP radio, they're not even on rthe record as opposing pirates. Sorry, They're NOT mainstream. (I Do like 'em though).

It might be interesting to see what Those folks would think if an HD channel were made available to them.

HD Radio is not free - with the outrageous price of HD radios, the fees are paid up-front to iBiquity, etc.

Another falsehood. To the consumer, HD radio is free. No subscription required. No credit card, no coin slot, no continuing license fee. Just like HDTV. Sorry you are wrong. HD radio is free for the taking from a consumer's perspective. Your continuing to post the lie does not make it true anymore now than the first time. SQUAWK!! HD radio is not free. - Garbage!!

What do you think people think of your positions when you say things like that?

Clouseau

 

[MotoMuzak]

'Kay, couplea things I need to point out:

A while back in this thread someone was likening IBAC to SCA and Muzak, amongst others, making the point that in order to receive any of those services, as is the case with IBAC you need to purchase "special radios".

I have three FM radios which can receive SCA, and all do very well. You don't necessarily have to buy a special radio to receive SCA, in fact components to enable regular radios to tune SCA can be obtained for very cheaply from companies like FM Atlas which can be installed into regular FM radios. (One, in fact, *is* a pre-made radio which has 67 & 92 tuners built in already, so that doesn't count. On the other hand I have a modified Sony ICF36 and a early-1980s Panasonic boombox, the RX-5030, both of which I equipped with a demultiplexer curcuit board to receive SCA and in the case of the Sony, SAP channels on the TV band.)

Also since the SCA service band was de-regulated in the 1980s the "subscription law" also went with it, but there are still a few broadcasters apparently haven't caught on to that yet.

And regarding Muzak~ most free to air satellite receivers you can buy can readily receive transponders like Muzak and DMX free and in the clear, and it's no more evil or sinister to listen to them at home than terrestrial radio. Now while you are basically avoiding the fees the companies would charge you to play their music programming, that's only in terms of business, not for your personal and private listening on your stereo at home. (In fact I have a Fortec 1700 here at my apartment and I have been listening and Muzak for several years on it, even spoken freely in many Internet areas about it, and have yet to be assessed a bill or charged fees for doing so.) Someone once said there's no law that states "all must pay fees who listen to SCA or satellite"! (Thanks for the info, Dr. Elving!)

Ergo, specifically speaking you don't necessarily need to buy brand-new special radios or receivers for those applications. That's probably the major advantage those services have over a closed system like Ibiquity's.

Unfortunately, until Ibiquity gets on the ball (wishful thinking) and releases its source code and codecs to the public (definately wishful thinking) I don't see the ability to convert existing radios to receive IBAC like this happening for an incredibly long time, if ever.

And as it all boils down to, that's why I see analogue radio being the major "killer app" for Ibiquity......and that's why in the end IBAC *will* fail, it's just a question of "how long do we have until we see it fail"? Analogue is a technology already in possession of billions of people, and analogue sets are universally compatible (for the most part) and can easily be modified.

Just my $2.00 worth.

 

[clouseau]

The "Fast one" is the FCC offering up a pie-in-sky digital salvation to the radio industry, as if ignorance of day, night and other real world
RF considerations was going to make this a good idea.

And then to let broadcasters, many of whom have no technical background, beleive that it's going to work is like
quack medicine in the old days. You can sell a lot of pills to the ignorant, misled, wishful, etc.

And the public never had any input into this issue. I was watching closely when I heard about this years ago.
Joe Blow still has very little knowledge that IBOC is happening.
The FCC gives little credence to the public opinion on engineering issues.
They disregard many of these comments with a "darn radio geek" dismissiveness.

Wow, where to start on this. Let's go a little at a time...

The "Fast one" is the FCC offering up a pie-in-sky digital salvation to the radio industry, as if ignorance of day, night and other real world
RF considerations was going to make this a good idea.

By the day and night reference, I would suspect you are referring to the AM system. Sounds great but is afraid of the dark. A bad move. I don't think you'll ever see it allowed. Overall, there was no "Pie in the Sky." However on FM it really doesn't seem to cause a problem.

And then to let broadcasters, many of whom have no technical background, beleive that it's going to work is like
quack medicine in the old days. You can sell a lot of pills to the ignorant, misled, wishful, etc.

If you a broadcaster with no technical background then it sucks to be you. It's a technical business. You better know or have hired someone who knows or you're in a world of hurt, Digital or not. If you don't have enough knowledge to make good decisions, then you're in trouble. And frankly, many are. But that has nothing to do with HD Radio.

And the public never had any input into this issue. I was watching closely when I heard about this years ago.

Then if you really WERE watching this closely you saw the 988 comments letters and notices filed by people companies and others both for and against IBOC. You might have seen that by looking here...

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/websql/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.hts

Joe Blow still has very little knowledge that IBOC is happening.

And that's a problem how?? They recently changed the law requiring a footbrake instead of two handbrakes on larger size motorcycles and scooters. He doesn't know about that either. Big Deal...

The FCC gives little credence to the public opinion on engineering issues.

As well they should not overall. Try to get an antenna authorized at a city council meeting on an empty tower you built last month while Joe Average tells them how we should not be allow to add any MORE RF because his whole family already has headaches. The average person has no idea about real world physics.

They disregard many of these comments with a "darn radio geek" dismissiveness.

Depends on the point being made. If, as a commenter, you complain that you won't be able to hear a 1st adjacent DX station because of IBOC, they ignored it. Just like If I can't receive sat signals without a 2 degree complient dish anymore. Sucks to be me, there's more stuff on the band, now. Don't bother to complain about beam redirection that wiped out the ability to get directv in Bermuda. They don't care.

As I citizen of Chicago, I assure you I can smell a "done deal" from a long way off.

While humorous, I would question the validity of your claim. Maybe I should just dismiss your comment.

They have to say it's experimental, 'cause done deals are supposedly illegal.

No, they say it's experimental because they're developing it.

So were the methods of Enron, until such laws were dropped. "Nobody would be so brash as to manipulate the markets," we thought.

Tell it to the Hunt Brothers. Enron is nothing all that new. (Unfortunatly)

...they do not take kindly to piss-ants such as a few crazy engineers
pointing out why this system is like the Emperor's New Clothes.

Ok, take a deep breath. Ranting and raving about Chicago and Enron and The Emporer's new clothes is exactly WHY the FCC doesn't listen to the public a lot of the time. There ARE satisfied users you know.

In Chicago, such p. a. are "convinced" of the error of their ways, and squelched, or worse.

Well that must be it. Other people felt they shouldnt't comment because they would be "squelched, or worse."

I have to go put on my tin foil hat, now. Maybe you ought to do the same. DOn't let the "Ibiquity Police" get you.. Or the "Underpants Gnome"

Clouseau

 

[700WLW]

Thanks for that 4 year old propaganda piece that was written before multicasting was even thought of. Not to mention that Pete Tridish (Cute) or Prometheus are not exactly pro anything to do with commercial radio. They support totally non commercial radio. Period. They are totally opposed to any commercials whatsoever under any circuumstances. While they have worked hard for the advancement of LP radio, they're not even on rthe record as opposing pirates. Sorry, They're NOT mainstream. (I Do like 'em though). It might be interesting to see what Those folks would think if an HD channel were made available to them.

Another falsehood. To the consumer, HD radio is free. No subscription required. No credit card, no coin slot, no continuing license fee. Just like HDTV. Sorry you are wrong. HD radio is free for the taking from a consumer's perspective. Your continuing to post the lie does not make it true anymore now than the first time. SQUAWK!! HD radio is not free. - Garbage!!

What do you think people think of your positions when you say things like that?

Clouseau

"RWonline: Guy’s Split Personality"

"Guy needs to take a travel vacation. HD Radio itself will eliminate first-adjacent contours on FM. HD Radio on AM, using the proposed system owned by the 21 gunners pointed at the head, will eliminate any broadcaster within 20-30 kHz of each side of the HD blaster. Any new FM LPs offered to drop-dead AM guys would get killed by the nearby digital adjacencies. The cost of going digital for the LP guy would be higher than the cost of the LP basic analog gear alone. Perhaps Ibiquity could donate the royalty fees to the little guys."

http://www.rwonline.com/reference-room/guywire/mailbag/index.shtml

"How to Make HD Radio a Huge Success"

"While HD radio may be free to hear, the receiver is certainly not free to buy. And as Coburn notes dryly, “there is no market-clearing price for an ugly shirt.”

http://www.hear2.com/2006/05/how_to_make_hd_.html

"The Premature Death of HD Radio"

"And listeners end up paying a "royalty" for the priviledge of receiving HD Radio. The "royalty" is included in the price of the new HD Radio receiver."

http://www.hear2.com/2005/05/the_premature_d.html

As I said, HD Radio is not free - with the outrageous price of HD radios, the fees are paid up-front to iBiquity, etc.

 

[Tom Wells]

Inspector, keep in mind that I have admitted that the FM does work, and at least in near-city environments, where there ARE no clear adjacents, doesn't make any trouble for me.

As a trained RF engineer, I find the requirement for AM digital along with FM digital or no deal to be the silliest thing ever.

And there are a lot of stations who only hire an RF engineer when absolutely called for.
The owner knows only that his pie is shrinking, that's why he can't afford an engineer in the first place.
So these broadcasters are easy picking for someone who offers salvation.

Regarding the open comment period for IBOC,
Yes, I've read the comments, and know that a stack of papers is not going to stop a well-financed steamroller, no matter who wrote them.

Joe Blow never was told that all AM going digital would self-interfere with hiss and badly muffle the audio.
This is far more serious than any complaints one might make about dx issues, yet it was glossed over by Ibquity's white paper,
basically stating that the public's radios did not reproduce above 5kc anyway, so there would be no problem.
I know many people who never did, and/or never would buy those awful narrow-band IF AM receivers, unless it was for communications purposes.

I have been mad at the Hunt Brothers since 1974 or so, when the result was photo printing paper going up 2x in price while having the silver halide emulsion made thinner and weaker than ever. Then it cost 3 times as much to by a decent photo paper.

I only wish to point out that when common sense, real data and experience are insufficient to stop a bad idea, it would seem
someone has stacked the deck with "misiniformation".

We really do see plenty of "done deals" here in Chicago. There is always supression of data, and creative presentation of data favorable to those would like the big contract to fly.

I am trying to be fair, honest and balanced. I do not intend be one of those who automatically oppose new things.
But I am fed up with companies selling the public a new product when the public doesn't know what they are giving up..
Like 911 service when they subscribe to telephone Voice-over-Internet protocol.
Like phone service when they buy a wireless phone for the house, then the power goes out.

If the only goal of technology is to become more complicated, then we're right on track.
I prefer to see technology used in ways that do not increase our vulnerability.

I will try to keep my opinions down to a sub-ranting level.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

I know this will sound crazy to you, but radio people hae actually thought of this.

I know this will sound crazy to you, but no, they haven't. I work for one of the group broadcasters that's pushing HD Radio the hardest. When I talk to their management people about this, they appear not to have considered any of it. In fact, they haven't got a clue about any of this. They act as if HD is going to be their salvation. They think HD will reverse the audience loss to other media. They don't see the economic side of the picture...and in an industry driven by its economics, they don't see the huge mistake they're making. Having spent almost 40 years in radio, and having seen the same mistake being made before, based on the same mistaken beliefs, I can see it coming as clear as day.

So in 2006 if you want more revenue, you need more slices of pie.

You still don't get it. If you slice a pie that never gets bigger more ways (i.e., more competitors), the slices get smaller, and having more slices doesn't end up helping you make more money.

Which means that Classic Country listener might just tune in HD-2 instead of Sirius. After all, Classic Country HD-2 is FREE. No $12.95 a month. Radio is dumb at times, but they are smart enough here to realize that the primary reason for losing ad dollars isn't other radio. (And frankly if it is, then you find a better programming choice and move on.) The problem is not enough choice on radio and not GOOD ENOUGH choice compared to other options.

Satellite radio has a value to the customer beyond its subsciption price: No commercials. No restricted playlists. With few exceptions, no yammering jocks reading liner cards. And frankly, satellite radio is not what broadcasters should be worried about. 10.5 million satellite radio subscribers doesn't hold a candle to the 80-million-plus owners of personal music players, who have abandoned radio altogether...a number rapidly approaching 1/3 of the US population. Assuming that the same programming that drove them away in the first place will attract them back when done in digital is another one of those off-the-wall assumptions that won't fly.

So the answer is more choices. That's more RADIO choices.

See the pie explanation above. Further fragmentation of the audience is NOT the answer.