The debate may be a moot point

[arnoldevns]

I love radio. Although I have my reservations about the technology, I would like to own an HD radio that didn't cost me an arm and a leg to purchase. I've certainly posted plenty on my frustrating experiences in trying to find HD radios that work in various retailers. But more recently I've become aware that for most of the people I know this whole debate is pointless: They don't listen to radio anymore.

I got involved in a little chat at my office the other day and just asked folks what they listened to. A few said they tuned in to radio on a daily basis - primarily for traffic, news or talk shows. One was a huge fan of XM and mentioned about ten channels she listened to. But more than half of them said they had an IPOD or other MP3 player that had most of there attention. Some said they had quit listening to the radio in the car because they were now using their bluetooth hands free devices to talk on the phone.

Before you guys kill each other over HD radio or non-HD, you might try finding common ground to get people interested in ANY radio again.
I suspect my little office group isn't far off the mark for a lot of people these days. As a former radio guy, it scared the daylights out of me.

 

[Mike Walker]

If "most people you know don't listen to radio anymore", then don't assume that the people you associate with are typical. They're not.

Most of the people in my "inner circle" listen to public radio. If I were to extrapolate from that the behavior of everyone, NPR would have 150 million listeners.

 

[PocketRadio]

If "most people you know don't listen to radio anymore", then don't assume that the people you associate with are typical. They're not.

Most of the people in my "inner circle" listen to public radio. If I were to extrapolate from that the behavior of everyone, NPR would have 150 million listeners.

Unfortunately, "tested" is correct - radio is no longer "cool", and there are many sites devoted to hating radio:

http://tinyurl.com/2lyo93

And, here is one that stands out, in particular:

http://www.denverradiosucks.com/

Well Mike, the people in your "inner circle" are probably all radio-geeks.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

I got involved in a little chat at my office the other day and just asked folks what they listened to. A few said they tuned in to radio on a daily basis - primarily for traffic, news or talk shows. One was a huge fan of XM and mentioned about ten channels she listened to. But more than half of them said they had an IPOD or other MP3 player that had most of there attention. Some said they had quit listening to the radio in the car because they were now using their bluetooth hands free devices to talk on the phone.

Before you guys kill each other over HD radio or non-HD, you might try finding common ground to get people interested in ANY radio again.
I suspect my little office group isn't far off the mark for a lot of people these days. As a former radio guy, it scared the daylights out of me.

Coming to such a conclusion based on a "me and my friends/co-workers/acquaintances" survey is utterly meaningless. According to those in a position to know, who have surveyed millions of people about their listening habits, 94% of the US population uses radio on a regular basis. Radio as a medium is in no danger of extinction.

Unfortunately, "tested" is correct - radio is no longer "cool", and there are many sites devoted to hating radio:

http://tinyurl.com/2lyo93

And, here is one that stands out, in particular:

http://www.denverradiosucks.com/

Also meaningless, as is virtually everything you post.

 

[arnoldevns]

Coming to such a conclusion based on a "me and my friends/co-workers/acquaintances" survey is utterly meaningless. According to those in a position to know, who have surveyed millions of people about their listening habits, 94% of the US population uses radio on a regular basis. Radio as a medium is in no danger of extinction.

I have no doubt that 94% of the US population use radio on a regular basis, but I also have no doubt that they listen to it a lot less than they used to.
You may believe that a discussion in an office is "meaningless" - but it isn't. All of these folks would have spent more time listening to radio had they not had other options. While my particular office certainly does not represent a statistically accurate sample of what the country is doing, it does provide me with some idea of how unimportant radio is to other people.

I'm just saying that before you guys kill each other in a fight over HD, you should really look at improving programming and promotion first. There are a lot of people out there who have little interest in what you're offering right now, regardless of how it sounds.

 

[Mike Walker]

When people do more things, they spend less time doing individual things. Radio listening reflects this. While cume (the total number of people who listen in a week) is actually up, time spent listening is down...but not by that much. People are still stuck in traffic for hours a day, they still sit at their desks all day long, they still want to know the weather before getting out of bed, and they still want to know if the crooked mayor will be ousted, or if their local team won last night. People who live alone, or travel a lot still enjoy hearing a friendly voice. No medium fills those needs as simply, or as well, as radio.

 

[arnoldevns]

When people do more things, they spend less time doing individual things. Radio listening reflects this. While cume (the total number of people who listen in a week) is actually up, time spent listening is down...but not by that much. People are still stuck in traffic for hours a day, they still sit at their desks all day long, they still want to know the weather before getting out of bed, and they still want to know if the crooked mayor will be ousted, or if their local team won last night. People who live alone, or travel a lot still enjoy hearing a friendly voice. No medium fills those needs as simply, or as well, as radio.

What you described would be nice if it were an accurate representation of the radio industry today - but it isn't.
I'll freely admit that radio is great for folks stuck in traffic. Traffic reports are still available on radio. However, I would bet that most folks who care about the weather, sports scores or news will just log on to the internet to find out. Radio is not high on the list of sources for that type of information sunce most stations no longer do news. Those that do have cut way back. The "news / talk" stations are mostly talk with news headlines twice an hour. Even in very large markets like Dallas you won't find an all-news station around.

My plea to the folks here is to not get so wrapped up over the technological aspects of HD radio. Focus first on providing a local product that people feel they need to tune to. My experience has been that many of the folks I know simply don't have a reason to tune in to local radio - except maybe for traffic reports. It doesn't matter how great the program sounds if it's a program people simply don't want to listen to.

I think radio will survive for a long time regardless of what HD does, but the industry may be in for an enormous recession if it doesn't get its act together on providing the right kind of programming.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

When people do more things, they spend less time doing individual things. Radio listening reflects this. While cume (the total number of people who listen in a week) is actually up, time spent listening is down...but not by that much. People are still stuck in traffic for hours a day, they still sit at their desks all day long, they still want to know the weather before getting out of bed, and they still want to know if the crooked mayor will be ousted, or if their local team won last night. People who live alone, or travel a lot still enjoy hearing a friendly voice. No medium fills those needs as simply, or as well, as radio.

What you described would be nice if it were an accurate representation of the radio industry today - but it isn't.
I'll freely admit that radio is great for folks stuck in traffic. Traffic reports are still available on radio. However, I would bet that most folks who care about the weather, sports scores or news will just log on to the internet to find out. Radio is not high on the list of sources for that type of information sunce most stations no longer do news. Those that do have cut way back. The "news / talk" stations are mostly talk with news headlines twice an hour. Even in very large markets like Dallas you won't find an all-news station around.

My plea to the folks here is to not get so wrapped up over the technological aspects of HD radio. Focus first on providing a local product that people feel they need to tune to. My experience has been that many of the folks I know simply don't have a reason to tune in to local radio - except maybe for traffic reports. It doesn't matter how great the program sounds if it's a program people simply don't want to listen to.

I think radio will survive for a long time regardless of what HD does, but the industry may be in for an enormous recession if it doesn't get its act together on providing the right kind of programming.

I agree.

From what I hear, "road rage" (not HD radio) is fast overtaking radio as the top activity of those "stuck in traffic" and will probably spawn a new "road rage" format featuring violent behavior.

"ROAD RAGE RADIO, NOW IN HD!";D

 

[calstymes]

R.F. Burns reminded us:

I can only say that at 50 years of age and over 30 years in the industry working in major market radio I just call it as I see it.

You know SUPERCASTER, that makes the rest of us idiots because we can't possibly have any clue whatsoever about the things we say in our posts.

 

[R.F. Burns]

R.F. Burns reminded us:

I can only say that at 50 years of age and over 30 years in the industry working in major market radio I just call it as I see it.

You know SUPERCASTER, that makes the rest of us idiots because we can't possibly have any clue whatsoever about the things we say in our posts.

I guess my answer would be if I wanted information about a specific subject I'd be more likely to trust the opinion of a professional than someone who has no experience in a field. So far, for all of the sarcasm from the anti IBOC crowd, those of us who see IBOC as a viable digital system appear to be correct as far as our projections go concerning it's success. Let's see, so far the FCC has approved of IBOC's use (although the new rules have yet to be written) as the defacto digital radio system in this country. Larger dealers such as Walmart and Best Buy are now starting to sell HD radios. The latest news is that Sony has come on board as a manufacturer of IBOC radios. Sure it's early in the game but as of this date IBOC has gone from one success to another. Believe me, if IBOC was the dismal failure some here say it is Sony and Wallmart and the like wouldn't bother to become involved with this technology. Let's see where we are next year. As far as IBOC is concerned the sky isn't falling.

 

[vsa]

R.F. Burns reminded us:

I can only say that at 50 years of age and over 30 years in the industry working in major market radio I just call it as I see it.

You know SUPERCASTER, that makes the rest of us idiots because we can't possibly have any clue whatsoever about the things we say in our posts.

I guess my answer would be if I wanted information about a specific subject I'd be more likely to trust the opinion of a professional than someone who has no experience in a field. So far, for all of the sarcasm from the anti IBOC crowd, those of us who see IBOC as a viable digital system appear to be correct as far as our projections go concerning it's success. Let's see, so far the FCC has approved of IBOC's use (although the new rules have yet to be written) as the defacto digital radio system in this country. Larger dealers such as Walmart and Best Buy are now starting to sell HD radios. The latest news is that Sony has come on board as a manufacturer of IBOC radios. Sure it's early in the game but as of this date IBOC has gone from one success to another. Believe me, if IBOC was the dismal failure some here say it is Sony and Wallmart and the like wouldn't bother to become involved with this technology. Let's see where we are next year. As far as IBOC is concerned the sky isn't falling.

Writing as someone with more years in the business than Mr. Burns, working in the nation's biggest billing market, all of the pro-HD radio developments listed above prove absolutely nothing. AM stereo achieved those very same sign-posts, yet it unfortunately turned out to be a dismal failure. I continue to predict the same outcome for HD radio unless Congress passes a law mandating that all radios henceforth be fully HD-capable. It then would still take a decade to replace most analog-only radios. Ain't gonna happen.

 

[R.F. Burns]

R.F. Burns reminded us:

I can only say that at 50 years of age and over 30 years in the industry working in major market radio I just call it as I see it.

You know SUPERCASTER, that makes the rest of us idiots because we can't possibly have any clue whatsoever about the things we say in our posts.

I guess my answer would be if I wanted information about a specific subject I'd be more likely to trust the opinion of a professional than someone who has no experience in a field. So far, for all of the sarcasm from the anti IBOC crowd, those of us who see IBOC as a viable digital system appear to be correct as far as our projections go concerning it's success. Let's see, so far the FCC has approved of IBOC's use (although the new rules have yet to be written) as the defacto digital radio system in this country. Larger dealers such as Walmart and Best Buy are now starting to sell HD radios. The latest news is that Sony has come on board as a manufacturer of IBOC radios. Sure it's early in the game but as of this date IBOC has gone from one success to another. Believe me, if IBOC was the dismal failure some here say it is Sony and Wallmart and the like wouldn't bother to become involved with this technology. Let's see where we are next year. As far as IBOC is concerned the sky isn't falling.

Writing as someone with more years in the business than Mr. Burns, working in the nation's biggest billing market, all of the pro-HD radio developments listed above prove absolutely nothing. AM stereo achieved those very same sign-posts, yet it unfortunately turned out to be a dismal failure. I continue to predict the same outcome for HD radio unless Congress passes a law mandating that all radios henceforth be fully HD-capable. It then would still take a decade to replace most analog-only radios. Ain't gonna happen.

So you work in LA Huh? Congratulations. Do you do engineering? Just curious. I can't speak for LA. I can say something about what's happening in NYC, which is the number one market, not that it matters. Part of AM stereos problems stemmedd from the multiple systems used. Only Sony to the best of my knowledge made a multi system compatible radio. I still have two AM stereo radios left and both are Sony's. Of course the chip Sony developed for AM stereo was put to use in their 2010 SW radio. It's difficult making comparisons about the landscape of AM radio as it exists with its competitors in 2007 and the AM radio of 1979. With digital broadcasters saw Leonard Kahn coming this time and they will not allow him to do to digital radio what he did to AM stereo, when he wouldn't back off once C-Quam was declared the winner by the commision. I happened to read one of his filings recently and it struck me that if IBOC does become the defacto system for broadcasting on AM radio his equipment, like the powerside, the symmetra-peak and the Cam D will be worthless. His entire broadcast equipment business would become irrelivent. Years of work down the drain and so he'll do anything to make sure that doesn't happen. When I first read of Cam-D I called it to the attention of my bosses and their reaction was forget it. Like it or not IBOC is the digital system which is taking hold in this country. Whatever your thoughts doing nothing isn't the answer when new more varied competition looms on the horizon. Sticking with the current analog system is a receipe for disaster. My feeling all along hasn't been to make predictions but to sit back and see what occurs. My comments haven't been as much pro IBOC as anti those making casual angry predictions of impending doom. So far all of those predictions have been wrong.

 

[vsa]

R.F. Burns wrote: "...With digital broadcasters saw Leonard Kahn coming this time and they will not allow him to do to digital radio what he did to AM stereo..."

If you are speaking with any knowledge, maybe as a witness, perhaps Leonard Kahn should obtain your testimony in his attempt to prove in court that there has been and is a conspiracy against his company's products.

R.F. Burns wrote: "...Sticking with the current analog system is a receipe for disaster..."

I agree with you. That does not mean that HD radio is the answer. I contend that it is a diversion of money and other resources from the real threat - Internet delivery of radio.

CBS's announced aquisition of Last.fm is an indicator that CBS is now finally on the right track - as long as the company does not screw up Last.fm. Established players have a tendency to allow internal corporate pressures to bend disruptive technology to its detriment to suit the immediate needs of the existing business.

Let's see how many, if any, other broadcasters follow or even understand CBS's latest move.

HD radio is dead. Didn't you get the memo?

http://www.ibiquity.com/press_room/news_releases/2007/ibiquityadmitshdradioisaflop.htm

 

[R.F. Burns]

R.F. Burns wrote: "...Sticking with the current analog system is a receipe for disaster..."

"I agree with you. That does not mean that HD radio is the answer. I contend that it is a diversion of money and other resources from the real threat - Internet delivery of radio."



Who's money? Has it cost you anything? Is there anyone forcing you to employ IBOC at your facility? How is this a diversion of money? That would imply that something nepharious is taking place. Can you provide any proofto support your allengation?

CBS's announced aquisition of Last.fm is an indicator that CBS is now finally on the right track - as long as the company does not screw up Last.fm. Established players have a tendency to allow internal corporate pressures to bend disruptive technology to its detriment to suit the immediate needs of the existing business.

Let's see how many, if any, other broadcasters follow or even understand CBS's latest move.

"HD radio is dead. Didn't you get the memo?"


Dream on. So far Samsung, Sony, Kenwood, JVC, Sangean and others disagree. There are more varied brands of HD radios available today then there were in the days of AM stereo and I couldn't go into my local Radio Shack and purchase a AM stereo radio like I can an IBOC unit. Speaking of questions not answered, what type of work do you do in LA? Engineer? Operator, management? Owner? By the way, at the network where I am an engineer we are moving towards linear delivery systems to overcome the issues asociated with the negative effects caused by using multiple compression schemes when delivering audio to an IBOC affiliate. Yep, nothing will change. I guess at the network level I'm not the only one who hasn't received the memo yet.

http://www.ibiquity.com/press_room/news_releases/2007/ibiquityadmitshdradioisaflop.htm



[/quote]

 

[davideduardo]

Writing as someone with more years in the business than Mr. Burns, working in the nation's biggest billing market, all of the pro-HD radio developments listed above prove absolutely nothing. AM stereo achieved those very same sign-posts, yet it unfortunately turned out to be a dismal failure

I never saw an AM stereo radio in a store; today, I have an HD car radio, HD in my office and two units at home, and have seen them at many retailers.

Comparing to AM stereo is absurd.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

I never saw an AM stereo radio in a store; today, I have an HD car radio, HD in my office and two units at home, and have seen them at many retailers.

Radio Shack, any retailer that carried Sony all had AM stereo. My Radio Shack TM-152 still provides excellent audio on AM stations wise enough not to broadcast HD, and one station is still in AM stereo. It sounds great. And AM stereo worked over hundreds of miles in the car, unlike HD.

Like you, I have seen them at retailers, not one time have they received an actual HD signal, nor did the salesman have a clue that it wasn't in HD. To be fair, I doubt that yesteryears crop of electronics retail sales associates could demonstrate C-Quam either. At least the signal was more robust and penetrated the stores well enough that the radio didn't need to be hooked to a big antenna to decode.

My sympathies on your collection of future orphans - but like me, you may be able to sell them at a considerable profit to HD fanatics in 20 years. If there are any stations left broadcasting HD, that is. Unlike C-Quam, which forces the use of product detection in AM resulting in better audio, there is little in the HD decoding chips that makes analog signals sound better.

 

[davideduardo]

I never saw an AM stereo radio in a store; today, I have an HD car radio, HD in my office and two units at home, and have seen them at many retailers.

Radio Shack, any retailer that carried Sony all had AM stereo. My Radio Shack TM-152 still provides excellent audio on AM stations wise enough not to broadcast HD, and one station is still in AM stereo. It sounds great. And AM stereo worked over hundreds of miles in the car, unlike HD.

My sympathies on your collection of future orphans - but like me, you may be able to sell them at a considerable profit to HD fanatics in 20 years. If there are any stations left broadcasting HD, that is. Unlike C-Quam, which forces the use of product detection in AM resulting in better audio, there is little in the HD decoding chips that makes analog signals sound better.

As I said, I never saw an AM stereo receiver in stock at any store. That they were sold is not an issue... I just never saw one. Considering that I had order #1 for two of the competing systems (not the "winner" though) made me very aware of all things AM stereo.

Now that I see the industry giant Samsung plus smaller Sony jumping in with chip development and receivers, I realize that the mass market manufacturers were waiting for the FCC decision to begin development in earnest. There are already more receivers than there ever were for AM stereo... in part because it is driven by the band with 90% of under-45 listening, FM. And it is probably the last hope for dying AM.

 

[calstymes]

R.F. Burns suggested:

Let's see where we are next year. As far as IBOC is concerned the sky isn't falling.

That's true. Thank goodness for that, eh? Radio may yet have its salvation!

On April 14, 2006, autopaint-1 (remember him?) said on page 2 of http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,35427.0.html:

What makes you think IBOC won't be accepted? Give it time. Let's talk next year and see where we are.

Does this sound familiar?

 

[R.F. Burns]

R.F. Burns suggested:

Let's see where we are next year. As far as IBOC is concerned the sky isn't falling.

That's true. Thank goodness for that, eh? Radio may yet have its salvation!

On April 14, 2006, autopaint-1 (remember him?) said on page 2 of http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,35427.0.html:

What makes you think IBOC won't be accepted? Give it time. Let's talk next year and see where we are.

Does this sound familiar?

What can I say? Iboc has come far in the past year alone. Now with new radios rolling out and announcements of second gen radios on the horizon, I'd say that that guy was right. Iboc is far from dead.

 

[clouseau]

Writing as someone with more years in the business than Mr. Burns, working in the nation's biggest billing market, all of the pro-HD radio developments listed above prove absolutely nothing. AM stereo achieved those very same sign-posts, yet it unfortunately turned out to be a dismal failure.

AM stereo was a cool idea. But it had one problem. When it worked (and let's face it, it worked pretty well) it gave you two channels of distinctly stereo "AM" fidelity. Not better sound... Just stereo.

AM radio still didn't have the fidelity to play music. That's subjective, but it's pretty well a given today.While I don't mind AM music, it's pretty well non existant in competitive situations.

AM stereo did not address a problem. While I loved it, it just made AM... stereo.

That's not what HD does.

Clouseau