So, who got or gave an HD Radio for Christmas?

[Savage]

Here we go again. Somebody points out how HD Radio, save for a few sharply-defined apps like public broadcasting, is slowly attaining room temperature (the AM flavor has been dead for two years but iBiquity and its developer-group operators just refuse to read the memo.) And the retort comes: "radio" is dead, not just HD. I don't buy it. (I will add that this comment comes from the same posters who strenously assert "I really don't care one way one way or the other about HD Radio" yet somehow invariably assail HD critics.)

FWIW, our local market of Rochester, NY is up this year after several consecutive years of declining radio revenues. We're finishing up another record year, best in our history. And this performance is in an Upstate NY economy which is moribund at best.

Sure, radio has challenges. But I heartily agree with gooroo that any problems radio has are due to lack of content and a dearth of interesting, engaging programming, and not with technical limitations. Actually HD is contributing to technical problems found objectionable by typical listeners, by increasing interference and noise and limiting effective coverage. It is achieving precisely the opposite of its declared purposes. HD is claimed to provide a quieter, more high-fidelity end product, but in the end it delivers an artifact-laden, noisy, mode-hopping, limited coverage facsimile of the analog product found perfectly acceptable by the existing audience.

But the worst thing about HD is that it divides radio broadcasters and pits them against one another, as this board bears eloquent witness. If you are a believer in "radio" and think it has potentially life-threatening problems, you should also believe that HD needs to be spiked ASAP, so we can work productively together to address the future with a unified and confident voice instead of quarreling about something almost nobody in the real world cares about.

As a footnote I will observe that continuing to flog a dead issue like HD Radio makes the whole industry look clueless to those outside the industry. Just imagine the spectacle of Ford Motor Company continuing to hype the Edsel seven years after its disastrous debut instead of introducing the game-changing Mustang in 1964.

 

[TVradioguru]

As a footnote I will observe that continuing to flog a dead issue like HD Radio makes the whole industry look clueless to those outside the industry. Just imagine the spectacle of Ford Motor Company continuing to hype the Edsel seven years after its disastrous debut instead of introducing the game-changing Mustang in 1964.

Interesting! So what in your view is the game-changer, or in your example; Mustang for radio worth promoting?

Radio owners have seldom worked as a cohesive industry. Most have chosen to go their own way and not share information in an effort to somehow put the competition at a disadvantage, whether actual or perceived in market or out. Getting broadcasters to agree to drop HD radio after a sizable capital investment by many is a pipe dream. Since there is no measurable loss of listeners for a station running HD and the investments have already been made, what would be the motivation of a station to stop using it? This holds true particularly with FM stations.

 

[KB1OKL]

As a footnote I will observe that continuing to flog a dead issue like HD Radio makes the whole industry look clueless to those outside the industry. Just imagine the spectacle of Ford Motor Company continuing to hype the Edsel seven years after its disastrous debut instead of introducing the game-changing Mustang in 1964.

Interesting! So what in your view is the game-changer, or in your example; Mustang for radio worth promoting?

Radio owners have seldom worked as a cohesive industry. Most have chosen to go their own way and not share information in an effort to somehow put the competition at a disadvantage, whether actual or perceived in market or out. Getting broadcasters to agree to drop HD radio after a sizable capital investment by many is a pipe dream. Since there is no measurable loss of listeners for a station running HD and the investments have already been made, what would be the motivation of a station to stop using it? This holds true particularly with FM stations.

Lower electricity bill?

 

[Savage]

It's one thing to "not work together as a cohesive industry." It's quite another for radio broadcasters to be squaring off in pitched battles against each other, in a "haves versus have-nots" pitting knowing interferors blasting other stations not a member of the HD Club, off the dial.
(And before anybody jumps in here and tries to argue that "there isn't any interference to adjacents because HD stations comply with "The Mask,"' don't bother. Everyone's heard that nonsense....both types, both the interference itself and the specious protestations that it doesn't exist.)

I'm under no illusions that HD investments, fully depreciated at this juncture, are likely to be discarded, guru. I happen to believe, however, that HD will continue a slow drift into oblivion as receivers become rarer (Radiosophy is OOB), conversions to HD stop (they mostly have already) and IBOC devolves into a kind of interference-spewing digital SCA primarily for pubcasters. Eventually even public stations will start dropping HD in favor of cheaper and more widely available distribution channels for alternative programming - chief among these will be the web, IMO.

What's the game-changer for radio at this point? If I knew that, I'd become the King Of All Consultants, make millions and retire. But I would suggest as a departure point - cleaning up our programming house. Returning to the basic programming tenets that made local radio indispensable a generation or two ago. Excelling at the basics. Stop trying to compete with portable devices as content-free jukeboxes. That kind of thing, I suppose.

 

[TVradioguru]

It is an interesting forward looking chicken-and-egg discussion. A few years back I was doing a study with TV viewers/consumers regarding essentially whether they wanted 'pretty pictures' in the form of HDTV, or more free programming options. Out of around 4,000 surveyed, 63% surveyed came back with more free programming options as being preferred. When you think about it, the response makes sense, more for the same for less money. CES did a similar consumer survey which came out with the same data. Yet even today, the .2 and .3 channels struggle with gaining in viewership even though a modern TV set can receive the new channels. True since the forced migration to digital, the new channels are beginning to slowly gain traction and even in spite of the fact pretty much anyone can see them, consumers are slow to warm to the additional choices. Now add to the mix having to purchase a special radio to receive the extra channels, and you've got a recipe for very slow growth.

It remains to be seen how long broadcasters will continue to hold out with the hope major automakers will include HD radios in their car brands, which even you would probably agree, would be a launching pad for faster adoption of HD radio. Until then, it really doesn't cost an FM broadcaster that much more to keep HD on the air. Sure HD on the AM band was a failure, but in reality was a political move more than a viable business option for broadcasters. They had to roll out an HD solution for both sides of radio to get it through the FCC. It just so happened that one dropped off, or is dropping off on it's own.

 

[Savage]

I completely agree about the nature of the debate and both the genesis and fate of AM-HD. I also concur that at this point, HD really isn't that much more of an expense for existing operators.

As I see it, where we are and where we're going: AM-HD, as already noted, is a complete failure and as such represents a serious black mark for the whole system. Actually, the longer its few remaining operators keep AM-HD on, the more damage it does to HD Radio's overall credibility. All you need are a handful of well-educated, well-heeled radio fans bringing their BMWs and Jags and Benzes back to the dealer with complaints about the HD Radio mode-hopping and muting, and you're in trouble. Detroit and Seoul and Yokohama are gonna say, who needs the ill will?? That's why it isn't going into cars. Carmakers are watching and they don't like what they see, plus iBiquity has no money, so all in all there's no interest.

The FM flavor still has, and will always have, the well-discussed problems. Most salient are: HD doesn't provide enough benefit to motivate purchasers. And it plain doesn't work well enough in practical application. I know there are some success stories, but there are too many markets where it flat doesn't work (those would be the non-flat, dial-congested markets.) And that's where the folks are. Add the interference, cost, complexity and inflexibility from iBiquity, and...

Sic transit HD Radio.

 

[Ai4i]

I feel this Email reply we received is worth posting:

"HD Radio isn't our priority. iBiquity has done a terrible job of promoting it and getting inexpensive radios in[to] the hands of consumers.
The future is on the internet, not hybrid digital and we will NOT sacrifice our signal efficacy for an HD boost"

Admittedly, this station has a rim-shot signal and would not produce solid digital coverage for much of its audience.

 

[tomservo]

All you need are a handful of well-educated, well-heeled radio fans bringing their BMWs and Jags and Benzes back to the dealer with complaints about the HD Radio mode-hopping and muting, and you're in trouble. Detroit and Seoul and Yokohama are gonna say, who needs the ill will?? That's why it isn't going into cars. Carmakers are watching and they don't like what they see, plus iBiquity has no money, so all in all there's no interest.

If they're well educated, it stands to reason they would deduce that it isn't the car's fault, but the radio station's, and direct their ire accordingly.

</wishful thinking>

 

[Savage]

The e-mail presents a telling point. Much is made of how, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of stations have NOT bothered with HD (84% of FMs and 98-99% of AMs) HD "reaches" or "is available" to 98% of the radio listening public.

My answer to this is to point to an advertising print piece from an early TV network claiming its programs "reached" 98% of the television set owners in America. The year was 1953, and the network was DuMont. Guess "reaching" receivers isn't all that accurate a predictor of success.

Mere coverage of landmass is irrelevant. It's like me claiming all of the population within my 5 mv/m daytime contour as "listeners." What's critical is: who's listening in digital? Answer: precious few, and in many cases, essentially none.

In order for HD to achieve critical mass and become a successful standard, it has to be universally adopted, along the lines of FM stereo. It hasn't and never will be for all the reasons exhaustively discussed here and elsewhere. You can diss all the Class A and small-market operators all you want, but without them, HD's nowhere - even if it didn't have all the other problems.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Look at the shadow markets in Arbitron. For example, the Inland Empire (Riverside / San Berdoo) in California, where about 70% of listening goes to LA market stations.

According to Arbitron's 12+ (yeah, I know), Riverside stations are 1(KOLA)-2(KLYY)-3(KGGI). KFI AM (LA) is #4 with talk because there's no local competition. KFRG (local) is 5th. KRQB (local) is 6th. KIIS (LA) is 7th. KLVE (LA) is 8th - and gets spanked by KLYY. KSCA (suburban LA) is 9th with regional Mexican - a format not available locally. 10th is KOST (LA), doing soft AC - another format not done locally.

IOW, where there's local competition, they beat the LA signals handily.

 

[davideduardo]

Look at the shadow markets in Arbitron. For example, the Inland Empire (Riverside / San Berdoo) in California, where about 70% of listening goes to LA market stations.

According to Arbitron's 12+ (yeah, I know), Riverside stations are 1(KOLA)-2(KLYY)-3(KGGI). KFI AM (LA) is #4 with talk because there's no local competition. KFRG (local) is 5th. KRQB (local) is 6th. KIIS (LA) is 7th. KLVE (LA) is 8th - and gets spanked by KLYY. KSCA (suburban LA) is 9th with regional Mexican - a format not available locally. 10th is KOST (LA), doing soft AC - another format not done locally.

IOW, where there's local competition, they beat the LA signals handily.

The only problem here is that your format assumptions are wrong.

And, keep in mind that most LA stations that do get into the IE have signals that are pretty marginal to the farter southeast areas of the market... so the bigger local signals, KFRG, KRQB, KGGI, KOLA have a real advantage.

#2 KLYY is home to LA, even if licensed in the IE. It's format, however, is Spanish Classic Hits, a format with no local competion.

#4 KFI has competition. KTIE (Salem) and KCAA are both talkers. They just don't do very well.

KRQB is regional Mexican, and has quite a good signal. KCAL, KAEH, KXRS, KXSB are all regional Mexican. Your statement that there is no local competition for KSCA is wrong, 5 times over. And I've never heard Glendale called suburban. In any case KSCA is the lowest powered Mt Wilson signal, and only is useful for home and work listening in a portion of the IE market.

KLVE is not "spanked" by KLYY because KLVE is AC, while KLYY is classic hits (oldies).

KATY is a local AC, although it has a very partial signal... yet it has achieved as high as a 3.1 in 12+ share in the IE ratings.

Additionally, KLOS beats KCAL, and there are many times when KIIS ties or even beats KGGI, despite having the same low power issue that KSCA has.

And, as I said, looking at the last 4 or 5 books, the local commercial station share in the IE is around 31. The rest goes to the LA stations except for a tiny amount that goes to local non-coms.

 

[tomservo]

I dunno, I think HD can be in the mainstream even though it's nearly useless on AM and doesn't work well in all markets. Stereo is universal and it's far from a robust system — IF you live in the mountains. Most people don't notice though because their stereo automatically blends to mono. When I lived in Mississippi, even the stations licensed to my own town were almost always full mono because the signals were behind a ridge.

Despite that, most all radios have stereo sound. And HD should be included as standard in as many radios as possible if the system is to survive. That doesn't mean any stations have to use it, if the market is incompatible with the system. But it should be there for the markets that can take advantage of it (like LA or NYC or other big metros).

A class A station shouldn't need HD unless they're playing some niche format that demands a full bandwidth HD channel (ie no subchannels). I say this because chances are a) the class A is in a small market and wouldn't benefit from diluting its own listening base or b) is a rimshot move-in trying to compete in a market that's much bigger than the signal. Neither are good candidates for HD.

But a big semi-regional class C, or a 50kw blowtorch on AM where the ground conductivity is good? There's no reason to let them blast away. (AM daytime only of course.)

 

[L. DeForest]

FM stereo radio doesn't cause interference and the cost to manufacturers and station owners is essentially zero. Big difference when you compare it to digital radio, especially the iBiquity type. The issue is one of demand and there is no consumer request for a terrestrial digital signal - as we so aptly see when you look at real sales figures. iBiquity is greed drive with the belief that if-you-transmit-it they will come which isn't the case. Also, they (or their investors) have a HUGE financial stake in the fiasco. They need a return which isn't coming anytime soon. So you see my friend you are just mistaken.

 

[Savage]

Well, I'm with Dr. DeForest here, Zach. FM Stereo is "far from robust?" Are you kidding?? I can get the tiniest out-of-market signals to decode in stereo, even on the most pedestrian car radios. It might be noisy, and the pilot may be flickering with some partial blend going on - but the basic image is intact even if imperfect. Compare that with the all-or-nothing nature of HD. And I'd much rather listen to a little picket-fencing than mode-hopping - even if the analog delay is in sync, which is often not the case.

I respectfully disagree that having HD available on select big-market signals, and forget everyone else, is the path to "mainstream" adoption. If it's not everywhere, it's nowhere.

At the end of the day: there's no demand for this thing. It's been around for eons in terms of consumer electronics "innovations" and has generated precisely zero marketplace interest. If HD hasn't "happened" by now, 7 years after rollout, it's not gonna happen.

 

[Savage]

Further to the current discussion: I refer to The Stroob's public declaration made in 2002 (and I'm paraphrasing.) The iBiquity CEO claimed that "in five years time, you won't have to ask for an HD Radio, because any radio sold by that time will simply have HD included."

Yeah. Now THERE'S an object lesson about the hazards inherent in playing corporate soothsayer.

It's SEVEN years later, and at retail, you're hard pressed to find any HD products. And forget about finding a retail sales assistant who has even heard of HD Radio, let alone understand it.

Actually, HD radios are scarcer than they were three years ago. And almost no current HD products are AM-FM. So much for HD offering resuscitation to an ailing AM band. All IBOC has done is dramatically ratchet up the noise.

 

[Chuck]

Perhaps more notable than the lack of HD radios is the seeming slow but steady growth of stand-alone Internet radio offerings. I saw several new ones in stores this Christmas, including one from Sony which they bill as a "Personal Internet Viewer." I think they called it the "Dash." It did a lot more than just let you listen to Internet radio. You can watch videos, chat on Facebook, collect emails, play your own stored audio or video files and also listen to streaming audio. It may do even more. I really didn’t have time to check it out, but it might be a cool toy to own. It was about $150 at my local Best Buy Store which also had several other Internet radios on display to choose from.

Although there are probably some car radios with it built in, the only HD radios I saw were a couple of well hidden Insignia portables and an "Open Box Special" Insignia stand-alone tuner that looks suspiciously like the original Sangean version. That one has been on their shelves for a very long time, at least since last summer, probably a lot longer.

 

[Play Freebird]

Further to the current discussion: I refer to The Stroob's public declaration made in 2002 (and I'm paraphrasing.) The iBiquity CEO claimed that "in five years time, you won't have to ask for an HD Radio, because any radio sold by that time will simply have HD included."

Yeah. Now THERE'S an object lesson about the hazards inherent in playing corporate soothsayer.

It's SEVEN years later, and at retail, you're hard pressed to find any HD products. And forget about finding a retail sales assistant who has even heard of HD Radio, let alone understand it.

The old saying "Live and Learn" comes to mind, doesn't it?

For anyone who cares to research this subject, you'll find much "corporate soothsaying" on web.archive.org by browsing the iBiquity web site as it appeared 7 or 8 years ago. For example, see this transcript of the official launch of IBOC at NAB in 2002:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030405102702/ibiquity.com/press/pr/040802.htm

Notable 2002 quotes from Mr. Struble:

"... in terms of robustness, what we define as performance against interference, the IBOC is much more durable than existing analog."

"In terms of coverage, the answer is it replicates the existing analog coverage, and that is all it can do. Not technically, but because of a regulatory reason. We could easily boost the IBOC power, but guess what, then that steps on the station next door."

In response to a question about nighttime AM IBOC operation: "What the NRSC did say though, and we think this was a great vote of confidence, is, rather than bog down the process and wait for those nighttime results, we know we love it in the daytime, we know it represents, I think their words, a revitalization of the AM band.... We believe we will have a nighttime system; we just need to do a little bit more testing. I would like to add though, even as we speak, this is the most thoroughly tested system in US broadcasting history."

On the broadcaster licensee fee: "Yes, there is a software license, which is paid to us for the use of the system. It's a small number, based essentially on the station's FCC fee, so the stations which will benefit more and which are most able to pay, will pay a little bit more. The stations which are non-commercial, or smaller stations will pay a little bit less."

Finally, Bob Stuble's 2002 prediction for near-total conversion of stations to IBOC: "You know, you've got 13,000 stations out there if my numbers are correct, I think we sell, guys in the industry, about 1,000 transmitters a year, 800 to 1,000, something like that. So, we have always assumed something like an eight to ten year transition period. If that were to get done in four to five years, instead of eight to ten, I would hazard a guess that these guys would be able to meet that need. Anything else?"

You can find more at: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://ibiquity.com

 

[davideduardo]

Further to the current discussion: I refer to The Stroob's public declaration made in 2002 (and I'm paraphrasing.) The iBiquity CEO claimed that "in five years time, you won't have to ask for an HD Radio, because any radio sold by that time will simply have HD included."

As I've said before, HD came to market just in time for a Perfect Storm: the Great Recession, the weakness of the dollar, and the ascent of the Internet and, particularly, pure plays. People don't buy single use radios, and certainly don't look for radios with new features. That's sort of like bringing out a cassette player with Dolby 5.1... nice idea, but no consumer demand because even all gussied up, it's still a cassette player with lipstick.

 

[tomservo]

I respectfully disagree that having HD available on select big-market signals, and forget everyone else, is the path to "mainstream" adoption. If it's not everywhere, it's nowhere.

By that logic, FM stereo is nowhere, because I can come up with a handful of stations that don't use it, from translators to class C blowtorches. Some of them even play music full or part time. Even talk stations benefit from stereo but for some reason most don't use it. Why would they use something that isn't at all detrimental to the signal? Oh that's right, because it is. (I might add WERC in Birmingham, with their crappy HD, is mono in analog but stereo in HD and all the local commercials are produced in stereo. So why not turn on the analog stereo?)

The point is, it doesn't have to be everywhere or it's nowhere. The iPhone is far from the most common "smart" phone, but it is everywhere. Hell, it's not even on that great of a wireless network in the US, if you listen to tech people. Computers are far from in every home, but they are this generation's end-all-be-all. HD doesn't have to be as common as analog radio, it just has to be in enough places to work for enough people to get by.

At the end of the day: there's no demand for this thing. It's been around for eons in terms of consumer electronics "innovations" and has generated precisely zero marketplace interest. If HD hasn't "happened" by now, 7 years after rollout, it's not gonna happen.

On this, we agree. But I put the blame as much with iBiquity as I do with lack of consumer enthusiasm. There was no consumer enthusiasm for, to beat a dead horse, the iPhone, before it was released. But it still went on to sell millions of units. There were already millions of smartphones out there, based on Palm and Windows CE and the like, but they didn't light a fire under everyone's belt. I'm saying iBiquity has to man-up and stop acting like a Palm Pilot and start acting like an Android device. Be free, be open, make deals with anyone and everyone to make the radios. Get them out there in real devices, not just expensive clock radios and portable unitaskers by third-tier fly by night makers. Stop looking at it as a way to line the coffers and more as a way to shore up failing radio until the move to online is complete (which I think will never happen, but that's another subject for another day.)

 

[satech]

People don't buy single use radios, and certainly don't look for radios with new features. That's sort of like bringing out a cassette player with Dolby 5.1... nice idea, but no consumer demand because even all gussied up, it's still a cassette player with lipstick.

DVD-Audio and Super Audio CD also crashed and burned in the consumer marketplace, along similar lines. Now, Best Buy stores have dropped these formats, and instead are selling vinyl LPs and turntables again!