-
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
Strubel Responds to Tom Ray
- Thread starter TheBigA
- Start date
"We have an active, productive dialog with Tom on these matters." Does this involve water-boarding?
Struble, while lamenting Tom Ray's experience trying to get HD Radio in his new Ford, has the ability to say with a straight face:
"We believe they reflect the growing pains which often occur when companies launch new technologies."
Grow pains? New technology? Give me a break here. In consumer electronics years, HD Radio should already be collecting Social Security and reading AARP Magazine.
The way Struble has been spinning this whole embarrassment of Tom's RW article (and the lead article at that) he should be throwing up from dizziness.
Struble, while lamenting Tom Ray's experience trying to get HD Radio in his new Ford, has the ability to say with a straight face:
"We believe they reflect the growing pains which often occur when companies launch new technologies."
Grow pains? New technology? Give me a break here. In consumer electronics years, HD Radio should already be collecting Social Security and reading AARP Magazine.
The way Struble has been spinning this whole embarrassment of Tom's RW article (and the lead article at that) he should be throwing up from dizziness.
All the posturing and hand-wringing in the world isn't going to impress the laws of physics.
Hard to believe Bob Strubel still sounds so upbeat when it's it's becoming clear that AM iboc is
all downside. When Tom Ray wishes he could lock out HD mode by choice, it's over.
Someone cue the Fat Lady.
Hard to believe Bob Strubel still sounds so upbeat when it's it's becoming clear that AM iboc is
all downside. When Tom Ray wishes he could lock out HD mode by choice, it's over.
Someone cue the Fat Lady.
WOW! Clearly, the truth hurts and it hurts a lot - which is why Struble hastily contacted RBR to file a response to Tom Ray's article. In reading the response, all that Struble offered the reader was spin and the regurgitation of the same ol' talking points.
Basically, reading between the lines, it's obvious that Struble knows that he's selling us a lemon. However, in knowing this, he also knows that he needs to sell ice cubes to eskimos (on Inuit or whatever PC thing they're called now). It's all pure BS. But it's also amusing to see how Ray clearly landed a body blow right to HDR's solar plexus; perhaps unintentionally.
Basically, reading between the lines, it's obvious that Struble knows that he's selling us a lemon. However, in knowing this, he also knows that he needs to sell ice cubes to eskimos (on Inuit or whatever PC thing they're called now). It's all pure BS. But it's also amusing to see how Ray clearly landed a body blow right to HDR's solar plexus; perhaps unintentionally.
Carmine5 gets the Kewpie Doll this morning for an out-loud laugh from "best line on the board" with his "waterboarding" comment!!! 
"Growing pains from new technology?"
No doubt: much like the "growing pains" suffered by Elvis as they repeatedly applied the paddles to him at Baptist Hospital in August 1977.
I fully expected iBiquity would be beating a path to RW with light-bars flashing and sirens screaming when the Tom Ray article hit. As I said, for AM-HD flogging Tom Ray to come out of the IBOC closet like that is a major embarassment. (Is that a hearse parked in front of iBiquity this morning?)
"Growing pains from new technology?"
No doubt: much like the "growing pains" suffered by Elvis as they repeatedly applied the paddles to him at Baptist Hospital in August 1977.
I fully expected iBiquity would be beating a path to RW with light-bars flashing and sirens screaming when the Tom Ray article hit. As I said, for AM-HD flogging Tom Ray to come out of the IBOC closet like that is a major embarassment. (Is that a hearse parked in front of iBiquity this morning?)
Savage said:Carmine5 gets the Kewpie Doll this morning for an out-loud laugh from "best line on the board" with his "waterboarding" comment!!!
"Growing pains from new technology?"
No doubt: much like the "growing pains" suffered by Elvis as they repeatedly applied the paddles to him at Baptist Hospital in August 1977.
I fully expected iBiquity would be beating a path to RW with light-bars flashing and sirens screaming when the Tom Ray article hit. As I said, for AM-HD flogging Tom Ray to come out of the IBOC closet like that is a major embarassment. (Is that a hearse parked in front of iBiquity this morning?)
This post deserves an award too!!!!!
Savage said:Carmine5 gets the Kewpie Doll this morning for an out-loud laugh from "best line on the board" with his "waterboarding" comment!!!
"Growing pains from new technology?"
No doubt: much like the "growing pains" suffered by Elvis as they repeatedly applied the paddles to him at Baptist Hospital in August 1977.
I fully expected iBiquity would be beating a path to RW with light-bars flashing and sirens screaming when the Tom Ray article hit. As I said, for AM-HD flogging Tom Ray to come out of the IBOC closet like that is a major embarassment. (Is that a hearse parked in front of iBiquity this morning?)
When you mentioned Elvis and the paddles (sounds like a group) I had to go back and make sure Struble said 'growing pains' and not "groaning pains."
Even if he was talking about Ford's recent implementation of HDR you have to wonder. As we all know, Ford was an early investor in HD Radio and the only carmaker. If anything they should have been first out of the gate with the system years ago (2007 according to HD Radio Farce).
Indirectly Mr. Ray's article also casts doubt on the whole idea of HD on the AM band. Spin doctor Struble would have had the perfect opportunity in his RBR rebuttal to defend and extol the virtues of HD-AM. But he is surprisingly silent about it. To me that silence says a great deal.
Yes, kudos goes to Radio World for bravely putting Tom Ray's article out there for all to read. No doubt we will see a rebuttal from "Bagdad" Bob Struble in the next issue.
Carmine5 said:
That would be off the subject. Never in his criticism does Tom Ray say anything is wrong with HD-AM. So why defend something when it's not being attacked?
Carmine5 said:
That's what this thread is about. The rebuttal has been printed. Nothing "brave" about it. No real risk, since iBiquity doesn't advertise in RW or RBR. And controversy breeds readership, which is good for them.
TheBigA said:
Uh, OK.
I said he "indirectly" casts doubt on AM-HD. I'm referring to Tom Ray's statements in which he mentions AM stations that are shutting off HD, of WOR seeing no ROI from their HDR gear so that if one piece of it quit, like the exciter, it might not get replaced and his news director not being able to receive the WOR signal in HD even though he was in a location where he should have been able to comfortably pick it up.
This isn't the first time Bob Struble has dodged the bullet on AM-HD. The system has been criticized in print many times and yet Struble has issued no statement defending it. WOR is undoubtedly the iBiquity poster child for HD-AM and it would have been totally logical for Struble to make a defense for their AM system. So, no, it would not be off subject at all. Part of Struble's job, obviously, is to defend and promote every aspect HD Radio in the press.
Radio World is well known for its support of HD in part because many of their advertisers manufacture HD Radio equipment. So, yes, it is brave of them to publish Tom's article. No doubt we will see a rebuttal from Bob in the next issue--meaning the next issue of Radio World--not RBR. As it turns out RW just published Struble's response online. It's the same statement he gave to RBR. Obviously a press release.
It would be nice, Big A, if once, just once, before you take BB shots at someone else's post, you would actually take the time to read it or attempt to understand what is meant.
Of course "iBiquity doesn't advertise in RW or RBR." iBiquity generally doesn't advertise, period. Manufacturers who are licensed to produce HD junk by iBiquity are the advertisers. That doesn't mean that publications aren't subject to pressures to tailor their coverage to support IBOC.
Cap-ex projects for radio are down significantly in the bad economy. Stations are delaying new construction and have pared back to minimum maintenance to save money, so equipment manufacturers are desperate for business. Consequently they have cut back on advertising in industry publications to cut costs. I don't get RW any more, but the last issues I received were pretty slim and notably light on display ads.
RW has a "department" actually called HD Radio News; their publisher has come out editorially in support of HD Radio. So, yes, there is risk involved in publishing Tom Ray's opinion. It could tick off BE, Harris or Nautel, who are all major RW advertisers.
I've certainly had my issues with RW in the past, notably over the notorious Guy Wire attack on my station, but I do have to give Paul McLane credit where credit's due. As far as "controversy breeding readership," I will further disagree with BigA. IBOC has been a hugely divisive issue and I know several people who have either stopped reading Radio World or have cancelled their subscriptions, because the supportive coverage makes them mad. Unfortunately for Paul and Leslie, for all the balance they have tried to strike in HD coverage, I think the overall pro-IBOC flavor has alienated many readers. HD Radio infuriates many engineers, and that's RW's core constituency.
Cap-ex projects for radio are down significantly in the bad economy. Stations are delaying new construction and have pared back to minimum maintenance to save money, so equipment manufacturers are desperate for business. Consequently they have cut back on advertising in industry publications to cut costs. I don't get RW any more, but the last issues I received were pretty slim and notably light on display ads.
RW has a "department" actually called HD Radio News; their publisher has come out editorially in support of HD Radio. So, yes, there is risk involved in publishing Tom Ray's opinion. It could tick off BE, Harris or Nautel, who are all major RW advertisers.
I've certainly had my issues with RW in the past, notably over the notorious Guy Wire attack on my station, but I do have to give Paul McLane credit where credit's due. As far as "controversy breeding readership," I will further disagree with BigA. IBOC has been a hugely divisive issue and I know several people who have either stopped reading Radio World or have cancelled their subscriptions, because the supportive coverage makes them mad. Unfortunately for Paul and Leslie, for all the balance they have tried to strike in HD coverage, I think the overall pro-IBOC flavor has alienated many readers. HD Radio infuriates many engineers, and that's RW's core constituency.
Savage said:
I've never worked at a trade publication. My news background was strictly in radio. But we never allowed advertisers to affect our reporting. We saw some broadcasters take some heat for accepting BP advertising during the oil leak. Some assumed the advertising influenced their reporting. I don't think it did, and I believe if you're a professional, you don't let advertising influence reporting.
Savage said:
That's their loss. Most trade publications I read have been unbiased in their reporting. When they present opinion, they state it as such. It's fine for editors to have a position on controversial issues. It's bad journalism to ignore stories because they don't support that position.
I agree with you that in a perfect world, with perfectly pure motives and plenty of courage, that commercial pressures shouldn't influence reporting. But the smaller and more specialized the reader pool, the smaller the pool is for potential advertisers. Radio World and similar trade-pubs have a relatively tiny and specialized audience. Like it or not, this tends to increase the editorial sensitivity to advertiser interests. Newsweek and USA Today can, in practical terms, afford to be more detached than much smaller and more specialized publications.
This isn't a shot at anybody. It's just reality. It's the way the world works.
You are correct that it's the right of Radio World or any other publication to take the editorial stances they choose. It's my view, however, that RW would have been well-advised to tread more lightly when it comes to IBOC. There are many, many members of the radio engineering community who agree that HD Radio is a resource-hogging, expensive maintenance-hog PITA that continually makes their already-harried lives more difficult. May also think that the interference to other broadcasters is irresponsible, and management diktats to install and maintain the HD gear against their judgment represents a violation of their professional ethics. So the resentment about HD runs deep, touching a raw nerve. To read HD being constantly endorsed by a trade publication has an immediate, and negative, impact on that magazine's credibility in the engineering community comprising much of the readership.
I think that history will prove that the few remaining who have supported IBOC have picked the wrong horse.
This isn't a shot at anybody. It's just reality. It's the way the world works.
You are correct that it's the right of Radio World or any other publication to take the editorial stances they choose. It's my view, however, that RW would have been well-advised to tread more lightly when it comes to IBOC. There are many, many members of the radio engineering community who agree that HD Radio is a resource-hogging, expensive maintenance-hog PITA that continually makes their already-harried lives more difficult. May also think that the interference to other broadcasters is irresponsible, and management diktats to install and maintain the HD gear against their judgment represents a violation of their professional ethics. So the resentment about HD runs deep, touching a raw nerve. To read HD being constantly endorsed by a trade publication has an immediate, and negative, impact on that magazine's credibility in the engineering community comprising much of the readership.
I think that history will prove that the few remaining who have supported IBOC have picked the wrong horse.
Tom Ray is not criticizing HD. He's criticizing the marketing.
I find it interesting that no one seems to find it a problem that Sirius has basically bribed the car companies to give their radios preference over any other devices. I guess bribery is OK. The HD folks don't have enough cash to compete. Tom Ray finds that annoying. Ford is supposed to be a partner. They're now doing what the contract calls for. That's what the story is here.
I find it interesting that no one seems to find it a problem that Sirius has basically bribed the car companies to give their radios preference over any other devices. I guess bribery is OK. The HD folks don't have enough cash to compete. Tom Ray finds that annoying. Ford is supposed to be a partner. They're now doing what the contract calls for. That's what the story is here.
Give me a break. When Tom Ray's WOR news director came in complaining, he didn't say, "HD Radio marketing sucks!" He said, quote, "HD Radio Sucks!" because he couldn't get reliable decode on an expensive imported-car OEM HD unit seeking a 50kw local daytime signal. That's hardly a criticism of "marketing." It's a confirmation of stories heard throughout the industry for years that HD doesn't work reliably. It's common to both AM and FM.
When Tom Ray had to rebuild the interior of a new Ford Focus just to get an aftermarket HD radio in and Ford dealers and factory support either couldn't help him, had "never heard of HD Radio" or sent him to a worthless generic website, that's not a criticism of marketing either. It's an exposition that the system is a train-wreck from concept to execution to market.
Tom wouldn't be publicly ruminating about turning off his HD exciter if he wasn't having serious second thoughts about IBOC's viability, at least on AM. The gist of the story, contrary to your suggestion, is that HD's prospects are rapidly dimming. It's obvious.
And I for one am not interesting in hearing more people attempt to blame HD's disastrous serial failures on "marketing." By its own estimates the radio industry has spent the equivalent of over a billion dollars trying to put this hoax over on people. They've tinkered with the message and with the positioning endlessly. The public is just too smart to fall for it - as are about 85% of broadcasters. HD is a total flop except for pubcaster subchannels, a tiny and irrelevant market in terms of establishing a new transmitting standard.
When Tom Ray had to rebuild the interior of a new Ford Focus just to get an aftermarket HD radio in and Ford dealers and factory support either couldn't help him, had "never heard of HD Radio" or sent him to a worthless generic website, that's not a criticism of marketing either. It's an exposition that the system is a train-wreck from concept to execution to market.
Tom wouldn't be publicly ruminating about turning off his HD exciter if he wasn't having serious second thoughts about IBOC's viability, at least on AM. The gist of the story, contrary to your suggestion, is that HD's prospects are rapidly dimming. It's obvious.
And I for one am not interesting in hearing more people attempt to blame HD's disastrous serial failures on "marketing." By its own estimates the radio industry has spent the equivalent of over a billion dollars trying to put this hoax over on people. They've tinkered with the message and with the positioning endlessly. The public is just too smart to fall for it - as are about 85% of broadcasters. HD is a total flop except for pubcaster subchannels, a tiny and irrelevant market in terms of establishing a new transmitting standard.
Savage said:
That's your spin. You have a dog in the fight. You're viewing this as a statement about HD. The fact is, and if you stand back and look at it, it's really a statement about broadcast radio. No one at the Ford dealership is going to push a fancy Alpine AM/FM/CD player upgrade on you. But they will push Sirius, because there's a spiff in it for them. They're going to push Pandora for the same reason. At some point that is going to take a chunk out of AM/FM listenership, regardless of the technology, regardless of any advantages AM/FM has.
Well....this IS the "HD Radio board....." :
Of course I "have a dog in this fight." I'm in radio. Most people posting here "have a dog in this fight." We all care about the industry, which is why we post here. And the reason why most broadcasters hate HD is, it isn't a good thing for radio overall. It tries to fix nonexistent "problems," it creates serious REAL new problems, and constitutes both a major distraction and a divisive force, pitting broadcasters against each other. That's why we got an FCC in 1934: radio operators were engaging in interference wars to the detriment of everyone. HD sets back spectrum management 80 years.
I'm not interested in hearing predictions of doom because of emerging new entertainment technologies. Those Cassandras have been braying for 60 years about everything from TV to Color TV to 8-tracks to cassettes to CDs to satellite and now, wireless devices - yet somehow radio survives and thrives, year after year. Neither am I interested in hearing about how it's over for AM. We could stand to turn off marginal facilities, and most major groups are doing lousy jobs with their AMs, and we've dropped the regulatory ball on mitigation of interference and receiver standards. But what do the "AM is dead" types posting here propose? Turning off 4700 AM stations tomorrow? How would that benefit anyone?
People get annoyed hearing their livelihood constantly derided - you know, like "AM Radio?" Just because a technology has been superseded doesn't make it worthless. I have a good friend who owns part of a company that makes typewriter ribbons and carbon paper, believe it or not. He makes a profit every year and knows his market. I wouldn't keep him as a friend if I constantly lectured him about how "nobody wants the products" he makes.
It happens every time: when the undeniable truths about the debacle called HD Radio are persuasively expressed, HD's few remaining believers change the subject. "It's over for AM anyway." "The AM (of FM) bands are overpopulated anyway." "The radio industry overall is in trouble anyway." Et cetera. I'm not buying it. Nobody's buying it.
We believe in our industry. That's why we hate HD.
Of course I "have a dog in this fight." I'm in radio. Most people posting here "have a dog in this fight." We all care about the industry, which is why we post here. And the reason why most broadcasters hate HD is, it isn't a good thing for radio overall. It tries to fix nonexistent "problems," it creates serious REAL new problems, and constitutes both a major distraction and a divisive force, pitting broadcasters against each other. That's why we got an FCC in 1934: radio operators were engaging in interference wars to the detriment of everyone. HD sets back spectrum management 80 years.
I'm not interested in hearing predictions of doom because of emerging new entertainment technologies. Those Cassandras have been braying for 60 years about everything from TV to Color TV to 8-tracks to cassettes to CDs to satellite and now, wireless devices - yet somehow radio survives and thrives, year after year. Neither am I interested in hearing about how it's over for AM. We could stand to turn off marginal facilities, and most major groups are doing lousy jobs with their AMs, and we've dropped the regulatory ball on mitigation of interference and receiver standards. But what do the "AM is dead" types posting here propose? Turning off 4700 AM stations tomorrow? How would that benefit anyone?
People get annoyed hearing their livelihood constantly derided - you know, like "AM Radio?" Just because a technology has been superseded doesn't make it worthless. I have a good friend who owns part of a company that makes typewriter ribbons and carbon paper, believe it or not. He makes a profit every year and knows his market. I wouldn't keep him as a friend if I constantly lectured him about how "nobody wants the products" he makes.
It happens every time: when the undeniable truths about the debacle called HD Radio are persuasively expressed, HD's few remaining believers change the subject. "It's over for AM anyway." "The AM (of FM) bands are overpopulated anyway." "The radio industry overall is in trouble anyway." Et cetera. I'm not buying it. Nobody's buying it.
We believe in our industry. That's why we hate HD.
Savage said:
Not to the degree that you do. I would also question whether "most people posting here" are actually in radio.
I'd like to see the poll that says "most broadcasters hate HD." Unless you're going to place a qualification on who you will accept as "broadcasters."
Savage said:
Just as you turn people into "believers" because they don't hate it. Typical talk radio approach of turning people who don't agree into enemies. That doesn't work with me.
I wasn't referring to you. Unless, of course, the shoe fits.
You want a poll about how "broadcasters" feel about HD? No problem. How about "people who own and operate radio stations?" Would they qualify as "broadcasters" to you?
98% of licensed AM stations do not broadcast in HD. Of the 2% who do, two-thirds broadcast in digital mode daylight hours only. The number of operating HD stations has dropped by almost a third from its high-water mark in 2008.
85% of licensed FM stations do not broadcast in HD. While a handful of stations owned by those with ownership stakes in iBiquity (and therefore not reliable indicators of HD adoption because of any technical merit alleged for IBOC) have increased digital power, every reliable source (which would exclude iBiquity) notes the actual number of FMs operating in HD is....dropping.
And this stellar performance is the paltry result of almost eight years of relentless hype, shadowy manipulations of a hapless FCC, and criminally large amounts of money blown on trying to force HD on skeptical broadcasters. There are a number of angry interference complaints currently being ignored by the Enforcement Bureau. (They're not from listeners - they're from stations being victimized by IBOC interferors.)
I've been in radio for 43 1/2 years, and have a wide circle of friends and colleagues in the industry. Several of them are GMs, some are engineering execs, some are consulting engineers with decades of experience, and a number of them work for HD Alliance-member group clusters. Not a single one supports HD. ZERO. They run their IBOC facilities with great reluctance and resentment, the HD curse having been imposed on them.
I have been asked by the publisher of a leading radio-industry trade to write an ongoing series addressing the ongoing HD problems because he's concerned about long-term adverse effects on the industry. I was recently visited by an FM operator from another state, whose station commands a leading audience share in a lucrative market. He was once a member of the NAB Digital Radio Committee, but quit when he started to appreciate the facts. He is now a vocal HD opponent and author of numerous complaints about IBOC filed with the FCC.
I could go on, but you'll just dismiss it all anyway.
Believe what you will, but the evidence is overwhelming: unless you're attached to the teat of some corporate perpetrator of HD, you hate it. Unless you're delusional.
In that department, you'll find several in every crowd. Know what I mean?
You want a poll about how "broadcasters" feel about HD? No problem. How about "people who own and operate radio stations?" Would they qualify as "broadcasters" to you?
98% of licensed AM stations do not broadcast in HD. Of the 2% who do, two-thirds broadcast in digital mode daylight hours only. The number of operating HD stations has dropped by almost a third from its high-water mark in 2008.
85% of licensed FM stations do not broadcast in HD. While a handful of stations owned by those with ownership stakes in iBiquity (and therefore not reliable indicators of HD adoption because of any technical merit alleged for IBOC) have increased digital power, every reliable source (which would exclude iBiquity) notes the actual number of FMs operating in HD is....dropping.
And this stellar performance is the paltry result of almost eight years of relentless hype, shadowy manipulations of a hapless FCC, and criminally large amounts of money blown on trying to force HD on skeptical broadcasters. There are a number of angry interference complaints currently being ignored by the Enforcement Bureau. (They're not from listeners - they're from stations being victimized by IBOC interferors.)
I've been in radio for 43 1/2 years, and have a wide circle of friends and colleagues in the industry. Several of them are GMs, some are engineering execs, some are consulting engineers with decades of experience, and a number of them work for HD Alliance-member group clusters. Not a single one supports HD. ZERO. They run their IBOC facilities with great reluctance and resentment, the HD curse having been imposed on them.
I have been asked by the publisher of a leading radio-industry trade to write an ongoing series addressing the ongoing HD problems because he's concerned about long-term adverse effects on the industry. I was recently visited by an FM operator from another state, whose station commands a leading audience share in a lucrative market. He was once a member of the NAB Digital Radio Committee, but quit when he started to appreciate the facts. He is now a vocal HD opponent and author of numerous complaints about IBOC filed with the FCC.
I could go on, but you'll just dismiss it all anyway.
Believe what you will, but the evidence is overwhelming: unless you're attached to the teat of some corporate perpetrator of HD, you hate it. Unless you're delusional.
In that department, you'll find several in every crowd. Know what I mean?
- Status