The problem with HD detractors here (and elsewhere)

[Mike Walker]

The problem with HD detractors here and elsewhere is that they aren't content to say that HD provides no real advantage to THEM, considering their situation, and priorities. That's fine. It's sure as hell how I make my buying decisions!

But when they go on to call the technology "defective" (which means that it doesn't work! CLEARLY it does! Hear for yourself at my website http://www.theproductionroom.net/hd.wma ), they cheapen their audience...and perhaps put themselves in legal trouble. Claiming a technology "defective" when it can clearly be shown to perform as claimed (on FM, anyhow) could conceivably put one in legal jeopardy, if financial damage can be shown to have been done. Just a friendly reminder that words aren't said in a vacuum! People DO get sued for things they say online!

The worst sin of all is to say that "nobody wants this technology", or "there is no demand", or "there is no interest in this technology". CLEARLY there is a great deal of interest, including on the part of those who publish negative comments here multiple times daily.

Let's all be a little more considerate, shall we? Say what YOU FEEL. If you feel that the technology has no value to you, then I welcome and support your right to say so. But if you say it has no value TO ME, or is "defective", when it works fine for me hours a day every day, then that's just not nice, or a logically defensible position. In fact, it could put one in a legal position which could cost legal expenses, at the very least (and a substantial fine at the most).

I'm no lawyer. I don't even play one on tv. But if I had invested MY money in a technology, and you said publically that you don't like it, or it has no value to you, or serves no public need that you can see, then fine. But if you called the fruit of my work and money "defective", or "flawed technology", you should be prepared to defend those words in public, because I certainly would sue!

 

[Mike Walker]

It has to do with the way HD Radio is discussed on this board. I still have hope that people can disagree in a civil manner. MOST can. Can you?

 

[700WLW]

It has to do with the way HD Radio is discussed on this board. I still have hope that people can disagree in a civil manner. MOST can. Can you?

This is just another HD Radio shill-spot, bashing HD Radio bashers - we've seen, this type of tactic before !

 

[PhilJSmith67]

Claiming a technology "defective" when it can clearly be shown to perform as claimed (on FM, anyhow) could conceivably put one in legal jeopardy, if financial damage can be shown to have been done. Just a friendly reminder that words aren't said in a vacuum! People DO get sued for things they say online!

Excellent Post!

Now, when I SHOW people that HD Radio does NOT work, IN PERSON, it could actually be used as evidence for a libel suit for your bullying, threatful post! Awesome!

Oh I know... It just me. Or maybe it's just the JVC receiver that works so poorly in Beecher, IL. Yeah. Looks like you're safe.

 

[vsa]

It appears the latest tactic is one of trying to make all HD radio critics appear that they are traitors to "radio". HD Digital Radio Alliance President and CEO Peter Ferrara says in R&R (2007: Time To Talk Up HD Radio): "We have to make sure that we don't allow the self-appointed radio critics and otherwise media naysayers to hold us back. We need to take whatever negative attitude and energy that may be out there and convert it into genuine enthusiasm...we have to believe -- in radio and in ourselves."

http://www.radioandrecords.com/RRWebSite/Archives.aspx#

[Originally posted at R&R on Jan 09, 2007]

 

[radioskeptic]

What's this, Mike? "The worst sin of all is to say that 'nobody wants this technology,' or 'there is no demand,' or 'there is no interest in this technology,'" you say.

Well, let me tel you, as civilly as possible, about a conversation I had last Saturday afternoon at a Radio Shack store. (I'm not going to say where, bcause I don't want to get some poor kid in trouble. (Maybe I shouldn't dsay "kid," since he was probably in his mid-20's.)

After I had ben browsing for about ten minutes while a couple of other customers came and went, this guy asked if he could help me. So instead of saying I was just looking, I decided to ask about "HD."

No, he told me, they didn't have any, and they hadn't had any for the Christmas shopping season either. I said they must have had some disappointed custoers.

No, he said, nobody had even asked about it. Everybody seemed to be interested in Sirius, not HD!

Wow! It looks like you guys need some team discipline! Or maybe it's just that the guys in the trenches at Radio Shack know where the real action is. (And no, I'm not a sat radio enthusiast!)

 

[texasradio]

This is just silly.

When people start brandishing threats of fines and legal action, it's just a sign of frustration.

Mercury Research published a study (presented at the NAB) which confirmed the absence of consumer awareness and demand for HD radio. In fact, their study concluced that for HD to succeed in the marketplace, it would be necessary for HD receivers to be given away at no cost.

Just weigh the opions on HD radio, pro and con, carefully. Many pro-HD statements that come from the Alliance and others (other than message board yahoos) are directed to Wall Street and not the consumer. They have an investment in the technology that they are attempting to preserve. The detractors don't have a similar financial interest. That makes me take their comments a bit more seriously.

 

[700WLW]

The problem with HD detractors here and elsewhere is that they aren't content to say that HD provides no real advantage to THEM, considering their situation, and priorities. That's fine. It's sure as hell how I make my buying decisions!

But when they go on to call the technology "defective" (which means that it doesn't work! CLEARLY it does! Hear for yourself at my website http://www.theproductionroom.net/hd.wma ), they cheapen their audience...and perhaps put themselves in legal trouble. Claiming a technology "defective" when it can clearly be shown to perform as claimed (on FM, anyhow) could conceivably put one in legal jeopardy, if financial damage can be shown to have been done. Just a friendly reminder that words aren't said in a vacuum! People DO get sued for things they say online!

The worst sin of all is to say that "nobody wants this technology", or "there is no demand", or "there is no interest in this technology". CLEARLY there is a great deal of interest, including on the part of those who publish negative comments here multiple times daily.

Let's all be a little more considerate, shall we? Say what YOU FEEL. If you feel that the technology has no value to you, then I welcome and support your right to say so. But if you say it has no value TO ME, or is "defective", when it works fine for me hours a day every day, then that's just not nice, or a logically defensible position. In fact, it could put one in a legal position which could cost legal expenses, at the very least (and a substantial fine at the most).

I'm no lawyer. I don't even play one on tv. But if I had invested MY money in a technology, and you said publically that you don't like it, or it has no value to you, or serves no public need that you can see, then fine. But if you called the fruit of my work and money "defective", or "flawed technology", you should be prepared to defend those words in public, because I certainly would sue!

What a bunch of garbage - when, is this off-topic thread going to get moved ? So, there there is CLEARLY a great deal of interest in HD Radio ?

http://www.google.com/trends?q="hd+radio",+ipod,+mp3&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all

Want to tell us, what that blue smudge is on the graph ? And yes, this defective technology, HD Radio, causes adjacent-channel interference, has only 60% the coverage of analog, and offers just more of the same lousy programming - sue me !

 

[SUPERCASTER]

The real problem here is that Mike Walker and other HD proponents make up their own definitions, and and expect everyone else to accept them.

Main Entry: 1de·fec·tive
Pronunciation: di-'fek-tiv
Function: adjective
1 a : imperfect in form or function : FAULTY <a defective pane of glass> b : falling below the norm in structure or in mental or physical function <defective eyesight>

Link:
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/defective

Main Entry: faulty
Pronunciation: 'fol-tE
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): fault·i·er; -est
: marked by fault or defect : IMPERFECT

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/faulty

When you come here to live in our country, at least learn the language, before you start threatening lawsuits.

Yes, HD Radio is defective, faulty, and there is virtually no interest. It appears HD radio internet inquiries are "flatlined" near zero. (Dead, deceased, kaput.)

http://www.google.com/trends?q=%22hd+radio%22%2C+internet+radio%2C+podcast&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/dead

Main Entry: ka·put
Variant(s): also ka·putt /k&-'put, kä-, -'püt/
Function: adjective
Etymology: German kaputt, from French capot not having made a trick at piquet
1 : utterly finished, defeated, or destroyed
2 : unable to function : USELESS <my battery went kaput -- Henry James Jr.>
3 : hopelessly outmoded

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/kaput

If Mike Walker has any use or gets some enjoyment from having an HD radio has nothing to do with the posts he objects to, or modifying the English language to suite Mike Walker, and the HD radio proponents. If they don't like English, then stop trying to use it.


There Mike. I have defended the words in public, as you requested. I doubt that you will sue.

 

[700WLW]

[EDIT-response to deleted post]


"It's Just Media"

"This should also send a message to those of us in radio, as well as other businesses trying to interface with new technology. Moving in baby steps, whether it's with our Web sites, HD Radio, or anything else, hardly makes sense in this fast moving environment. Consumers seem to be adjusting very nicely to new technology advances, and Apple's moves today - the iPhone, Apple TV, and even a new name for the company - Apple, Inc. (no more "Computer") - should signal us that change is coming at a more tsunami-like pace."

http://jacobsmedia.typepad.com/jacobs/

http://www.google.com/trends?q="hd+radio",+iPod,+MP3,+sirius,+xm&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all

 

[dbdigital]

The problem with HD detractors here and elsewhere is that they aren't content to say that HD provides no real advantage to THEM, considering their situation, and priorities. That's fine. It's sure as hell how I make my buying decisions!

But when they go on to call the technology "defective" (which means that it doesn't work! CLEARLY it does! Hear for yourself at my website http://www.theproductionroom.net/hd.wma ), they cheapen their audience...and perhaps put themselves in legal trouble. Claiming a technology "defective" when it can clearly be shown to perform as claimed (on FM, anyhow) could conceivably put one in legal jeopardy, if financial damage can be shown to have been done. Just a friendly reminder that words aren't said in a vacuum! People DO get sued for things they say online!

The worst sin of all is to say that "nobody wants this technology", or "there is no demand", or "there is no interest in this technology". CLEARLY there is a great deal of interest, including on the part of those who publish negative comments here multiple times daily.

Let's all be a little more considerate, shall we? Say what YOU FEEL. If you feel that the technology has no value to you, then I welcome and support your right to say so. But if you say it has no value TO ME, or is "defective", when it works fine for me hours a day every day, then that's just not nice, or a logically defensible position. In fact, it could put one in a legal position which could cost legal expenses, at the very least (and a substantial fine at the most).

I'm no lawyer. I don't even play one on tv. But if I had invested MY money in a technology, and you said publically that you don't like it, or it has no value to you, or serves no public need that you can see, then fine. But if you called the fruit of my work and money "defective", or "flawed technology", you should be prepared to defend those words in public, because I certainly would sue!

Any "legal trouble" would be on the part of iBiquity for claiming that HD Radio is In-Band-On-Channel which is false. It's been proven that it isn't.

As for stating that 'nobody wants it', well let me ask you; before HD Radio made its debut did the public complain that there were too few radio stations to choose from or that FM audio was bad? I haven't found any such complaints. Complaints about programming, yes, but that's a management problem not a technical one.

The thing is that those of us who are HD Radio detracters (and believe me we're a voice in the wilderness compared to the high-rolling HD Cartel who have been on a shrill marketing campaign for this technology) see the many issues and problems surrounding IBOC and refuse to buy into the party line.

No sane person wants a technology shoved down their throats, as the FCC is doing with IBOC, without any discussion as to the problems and consequences of it or a consideration of the alternatives.

db

 

[Mike Walker]

First of all, "shoving technology down our throat", by which I think you mean "choosing technical standads" is exactly what the FCC is for. I'm in favor of it doing that, and little else. I'm a registered democrat, but I'm really "conservative" in terms of government control over content. Programming which "doesn't belong on the air" will go away. The public will not listen (or watch). If there is enough of an audience for a station or network to make money, then by definition it "belongs on the air". Do we believe in the free market or not? Sorry...I know that's off topic, but it does speak to what I think should (and shouldn't) be the role of the FCC.

Good point about "In Band, on Channel". Especially the AM system is all over your neighbor's channel(s). What a mess.

Nationally Radio Shack reports STRONG sales of the Accurian over the holidays. Again, at this point people won't be lined up for it. They don't know what it (HD Radio) is, or offers. Radio hobbyists are aware that there have been some hd stations out there a couple of years. They weren't saying anything about it, however, waiting for the market by market rollout, which has JUST begun. Wide acceptance will take years. It always does. Calling HD a failure now would be like calling broadband a failure in 1994. People may well have heard of the term, but weren't exactly begging for it. It took years for broadband (and HDTV more recently) to reach critical mass in the public psyche. That's always how it is.

And I threatened no one with legal action. How could I? I don't work for Ibiquity! I don't "have a horse in this race" (dog in this fight?) My point was that making specific claims that HD can't do specific things that it obviously CAN (and does for hours a day at my house) might be legally actionable. But I'm not a lawyer, I just play oneon tv.

 

[700WLW]

First of all, "shoving technology down our throat", by which I think you mean "choosing technical standads" is exactly what the FCC is for. I'm in favor of it doing that, and little else. I'm a registered democrat, but I'm really "conservative" in terms of government control over content. Programming which "doesn't belong on the air" will go away. The public will not listen (or watch). If there is enough of an audience for a station or network to make money, then by definition it "belongs on the air". Do we believe in the free market or not? Sorry...I know that's off topic, but it does speak to what I think should (and shouldn't) be the role of the FCC.

Good point about "In Band, on Channel". Especially the AM system is all over your neighbor's channel(s). What a mess.

Nationally Radio Shack reports STRONG sales of the Accurian over the holidays. Again, at this point people won't be lined up for it. They don't know what it (HD Radio) is, or offers. Radio hobbyists are aware that there have been some hd stations out there a couple of years. They weren't saying anything about it, however, waiting for the market by market rollout, which has JUST begun. Wide acceptance will take years. It always does. Calling HD a failure now would be like calling broadband a failure in 1994. People may well have heard of the term, but weren't exactly begging for it. It took years for broadband (and HDTV more recently) to reach critical mass in the public psyche. That's always how it is.

And I threatened no one with legal action. How could I? I don't work for Ibiquity! I don't "have a horse in this race" (dog in this fight?) My point was that making specific claims that HD can't do specific things that it obviously CAN (and does for hours a day at my house) might be legally actionable. But I'm not a lawyer, I just play oneon tv.

First of all, I do not believe the HD Radio Cartel, when they claim RS sold out of HD radios, especially, when they have not talked about the number of HD radios sold (from what I heard, RS was just stocking a few, and they sold out of some stores, over a number of days). Yes, so far, HD Radio has been a complete failure, with only 35,000 sold at of end of 2006, as consumer trends indicates:

The Receptor HD is ranked 7,632, in Amazon's Electonics sales rankings:

http://www.amazon.com/Boston-Acoust...r_1/102-5363086-7456118?ie=UTF8&s=electronics

My little beloved Sony is ranked 516th:

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-ICF-S10M...363086-7456118?ie=UTF8&n=172282&s=electronics

And, compared to other technologies, consumer interest in HD Radio is nonexistent:

http://www.google.com/trends?q=+"hd+radio",+mp3,+ipod,+podcast,+sirius

Anyway, Sununu will put an end to all this fraud, waste, and abuse !

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

First of all, "shoving technology down our throat", by which I think you mean "choosing technical standads" is exactly what the FCC is for.

Yes, it is. However, the FCC has NOT "chosen" a technical standard in this case. Unlike in the past, they did not consider any alternatives and did not do their own engineering studies. What advice they did receive from their engineering people was ignored. Instead, at the behest of radio industry lobbyists, they handed the standard over to a private concern who started charging extortionate licensing fees in the thousands of dollars to any licensee wishing to use the tech. Since when is this in the public interest? People have been half-jokingly saying for years that we have the best FCC money can buy, and this "done deal" is just proof of that statement. The FCC's charter from Congress (the Communications Act) directs the FCC to operate in the public interest, as the steward of the electromagnetic spectrum, acting in the name of the people. Yet, in this case, the people lose...big time. Broadcasters must pay to license this new tech, unlike any previous standard set by the FCC, and listeners must buy a new receiver in order to receive it. The AM version of this tech interferes with other stations, and will end up burying small station operators who can't afford to add it to their stations, if AM-HD manages to gain any traction at all. Or, to put it another way, the cure will end up killing the patient, who wasn't even sick to begin with.

Do we believe in the free market or not? Sorry...I know that's off topic, but it does speak to what I think should (and shouldn't) be the role of the FCC.

Sorry, but you can't have it both ways. Either the FCC sets a standard or it doesn't...and the last time it decided not to (AM stereo), chaos reigned, and AM stereo faded into irrelevance. But again, in this case, the FCC hasn't set a standard. They've sold out to private interests for private gain.

 

[Tom Wells]

At this point, when we see the AM version of HD likely to be fzzd out by the FCC, it would be a fine time to petition for reassessment of
establishment of standards suited to favor the nature of MW AM.

AMAX, CQuam, Kahn, and other modes should be standardized, as well as DSP implemented in receivers.
The "super-modulation" audio giving greater fullness in AM stereo is amazing.
Outboard amplified tuned loops will be necessary to get best signals in otherwise digital-operated receivers.

When we see we are struggling with a newfangled tool that's not working, we should consider the old reliable ones.

I see a lot of silly implementation of "technology misapplied" for sake of newness, and have to repair all manner of
failure modes.

And keeping it simple reduces the number of modes for failure. This is analog mode.
Digital complicates the whole thing to having more reasons to not work than to work.
Literally several order more in magnitude of failure modes, at both ends.
Keep it simple.
Omit needless words.


The silliest upgrade of all is the one that's not worth the trouble.

I will leave others to criticize aspects about HD that they feel informed enough about.
I hope I am a reasonable voice, as I passionately wish ibiquity had hatched this thing all digital MW in a new band,
just don't muck my AM, which was fine, thank you.

I appreciate the work other detractors do.

The trouble with detractors here, is that they find no actual ibquity reps here to discuss these concerns with.
This leads to "advertising style" threads, with decided slants.
It is nature, I guess.

So where's the true technical rep from ibquity to defend what seems a serious case of out-of-spec operation?

 

[hipporadio]

The problem with HD detractors here and elsewhere is that they aren't content to say that HD provides no real advantage to THEM, considering their situation, and priorities. That's fine. It's sure as hell how I make my buying decisions!

FINE MIKE!... I’m happy that you like your Radio Shack Accurian HD on WTQR-FM-HD-2 or the Davidson NPR Classical FM station (They DO SOUND VERY GOOD IN HD)... NOT enough mind you to cause me to return my new Apple Laptop and join the “HD Radio Revolution” with a different consumer purchase. As I type this response, I’m listening to a small AM station playing Oldies (“Don’t Let Me Be Misunderstood”—Animals is playing... they just segued to Sam Cooke “Cupid”... Now “Expressway to Your Heart”, “Jenny Take A Ride”, “Cry Like A Baby”, and “Wild One” by Bobby Rydell). The audio is exceptional on my little analog-tuned Tivoli “table” AM receiver. Satisfied with “the small things”—I Guess I join the whopping .5-share that enjoys this small station on a Saturday night—they ARE airing commercials though (THANK GOD). My point IS—they are transmitting their demure little oldies format free from I-Buzz for us few “50-Somethings” who choose to keep this little station in the ‘burbs alive.

They ARE operating WITHIN their nighttime license—we CAN expect service from within their small contour and reward them accordingly at the local lumber company Monday morning if we wish. I’ll happily tolerate the “superhet”... Actually, it’s rather refreshing on a modern AM receiver—I-Block is a completely different matter though! They SHOULD NOT be amputated above the knees because an adjacent talk station airing Sean Hannity reruns in IBOC consumes FIVE CHANNELS (instead of one). I apologize to all the “Kool-Aide consumers”, but I think my thoughts are logical... Don’t you agree Mike?

Despite my purchase of that Apple “brick”—I completely FAIL to see the need for the addition of yet ANOTHER over-priced under-performing “HD Radio”—the “marketplace” is “working it’s magic” I guess!

I'm no lawyer. I don't even play one on tv...

GREAT MIKE... You don’t HAVE TO... Just know that I’m enjoying “Until You Come Back to Me” by the very classy Mrs. Franklin and "'Like To Get to Know You" by Spankey 'n Our Gang—and I’d very much enjoy keeping it that way (PLEASE allow us this VERY SMALL remaining favor)—at least until this little station decides to join the gang and starts airing “Tuba Music”—which they surly WILL if IBOC carriers impede upon their local service contour!

 

[MotoMuzak]

I know I inject a lot of my stuff on here with (sometimes irretrievably far-fetched) engineering theories as to how failed IBAC truly is. I do also try to stick to a consumer perspective whenever I can. I am one, and specifically I am one of the younger, early-20-something consumers who is allegedly being brainwashed by pop culture [i.e. the media and advertising] to accept all digital tech no matter how defective, restrictive, mind-numbing etc. said tech is.

But now from a somewhat rebellious young early-20-something who won't be brainwashed consumer standpoint let me issue this one statement: why would I want to shell out $200+ for a fancy new digital radio to listen to "Prairie Home Companion", "Loveline" and the local hip-hop/altrock/emo stations when my little $30 analogue Grundig does a perfectly fine job as it stands??

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Mike Walker said:

If there is enough of an audience for a station or network to make money, then by definition it "belongs on the air".

HD radio is an ongoing liability (expense) that makes no money, and has virtually no audience. Even the most optimistic projections for HD radio, see that continuing for the foreseeable future.
So, you agree that HD radio does not belong on the air?
HD radio certainly does more harm then any possible good that could come of it, decades down the road. By then we will all be steeped in other, newer, media, (some yet to be invented).

Mike also said:

My point was that making specific claims that HD can't do specific things that it obviously CAN (and does for hours a day at my house) might be legally actionable.

Where are these absolute claims from HD radio detractors that HD radio can't do specific things at your house?
I don't know what you are doing with your HD radio, at your house, nor do I care. But I do not recall seeing such specific claims, by others, about your reception posted here.
The most damning problems come from links to dissatisfied HD radio owners, with their own severe HD reception problems, and interference to analog radios that people already own. Analog radio owners and listeners were led to believe, and were given assurances, that their listening would be protected and not be impaired by additional, deliberate, interference. This covenant has now been broken, by both the FCC and broadcast interests, and the public betrayed by those entrusted with protecting the public airwaves. Some large broadcast conglomerates have even stated clear ownership of the public's airwaves. (The same dial assignments they are only licensed to use, in the public interest).

Mike, your statements that iBiquity and the HD cartel are somehow injured parties, and should sue others, just does not have any rational basis. They have promised much, and delivered little, except an expensive, interfering, problematic, incompatible, delivery system and radios. It is the public, small stations, and listeners, that are the injured parties, and likely to be the plaintiffs, not the other way around.

Let me remind everyone that iBiquity hybrid HD radio still has not gotten FCC final approval, and requires duplication of the analog audio on the HD1 channel (no additional revenue). Multicasting HD2, 3 etc. has only experimental authorization from the FCC, and experimental authorizations are restricted from commercial operation. There may have already been violations of these rules. I'll leave that for the lawyers and judges to sort out.

 

[Mike Walker]

I haven't said that Ibiquity SHOULD sue anyone. I'm saying that making specific charges (and calling the technology "defective" is a specific charge. Defective technology DOESN'T WORK. I can easily demonstrate, and have on this board with recordings made at my house, that HD on fm at least DOES work) COULD be actionable legally. If you claim that it has no value, well that's entirely subjective. Claim that it's not making money. Well duh! NO commercials have been sold on ANY hd outlets yet (other than those duplicated on the main program channel). The same could be said of satellite and internet radio, neither of which are profitable, and both of which have been around and "struggling' a lot longer! If you say that it's not worth the cost, then again...that's your opinion, and there is no legal problem there. If you claim that it occupies too much bandwidth, well there is certainly scientific evidence to back you up (although it can be measured on fm, I have yet to HEAR any interference as a result). But if you claim it doesn't work...which has a specific meaning...doesn't deliver a solid digital signal with the claimed audio fidelity from point a to point b, then you are (in my opinion, and again I'm not a lawyer) on shaky legal ground SHOULD IBIQUITY or a station specifically mentioned choose to persue it. That's my ONLY point.

The number of new technologies introduced in the past few years that have failed to produce any unique profits (which wouldn't have been available otherwise), includes HDTV, internet radio, satellite radio, video services via the 'net and cellular networks, etc. In fact some of these new technologies (digital tv, and HD Radio for example) weren't even envisioned as being "profit centers" in the near term...at least not from advertising (Ibiquity apparently has a license to ROB local stations forever...the reason no small market stations are going HD. There...now I can be sued!). They were designed to "modernize" the delivery of content, provide a superior viewing/listening experience, and eventually perhaps turn a buck or two.

I don't think you guys want to "go there" about HD not generating profit, THEN point to satellite, internet, and other technologies as being "way ahead". THEY HAVE BEEN AROUND MUCH LONGER, HAVE COST FAR MORE, and are also not profitable...in the case of internet radio after more than a decade. HDTV is GREAT for viewers, but for stations has been nothing but a HUGE expense. They sure as hell don't get more advertising revenue when the commercial run is HD! But production of HD content does cost much more. It's really a lose/lose situation for TV stations and networks when considered only from a "bottom line" perspective. HD Radio is far less expensive to implement as the audio chains at many (perhaps most) stations are very nearly "cd quality" already...up to the point where they enter the stations audio processor and transmitter. NO tv stations were generating content at HD level prior to their conversion!

As for the buy who asked why he should spend 200 dollars or more for a radio, well perhaps YOU shouldn't. It depends upon whether there's something in your local market that you value which can't be received on an analog radio, or which sounds (to you), much better on HD. If not, then you SHOULDN'T purchase it. The point everyone seems to miss, and which I make again and again, is that the rollout of HD has JUST BEGUN! First the infrastructure (stations broadcasting in HD) was put in place, then (the second half of 2006) the first radios trickled into the marketplace, and only now has the public "rollout" begun. Mistakes have already been made in the way the technology is being sold/explained (or NOT explained!) to the public. Many people didn't "get" stereo (understand the benefits) until many years after the first stereo recordings were released in teh 50s, until a decade or more after the introduction of fm stereo in the early 60s, or until DECADES after stereo was first introduced in the movies (Fantasia in teh 40s).

When first introduced to the public in the 70s surround sound was a HUGE flop (then called "quadraphonic"). But AFTER it had all but disappeared from the consumer marketplace, "Dolby Stere" movies...using a matrix similar to what had been used on most quadraphonic lps, was introduced in movies like American Graffitti, and Star Wars. People finally heard surround properly demonstrated (in theaters), and little by little over the last three decades surround has taken over millions of living rooms. This stuff ALWAYS takes time. I literally can't remember consumer audio or video technology EVER taking off overnight. It just doesn't happen that way. The logic behind my last point...HD may fail. It sure hasn't succeeded yet. But it sure as hell hasn't failed yet, either! I expect to be a good deal older, and greyer before the verdict is in on this (hell...if it takes as long as fm stereo took to achieve real success, I may not even live that long!)

Enjoy your weekend...what's left of it!

 

[700WLW]

... and which I make again and again, is that the rollout of HD has JUST BEGUN!

Because of the $200,000,000 HD Radio ad campaign in 2006, 75% of consumers are aware of HD Radio, at some level:

"In-Stat: Digital Radio Set to Take Off"

"In 2006, 73 percent of respondents to an In-Stat U.S. consumer survey were aware of HD Radio on some level. "

http://beradio.com/eyeoniboc/instat-digital-radio-set/

And, we now know, that only 33,000 HD radios, have been sold to consumers through 2006.

Now, with that in mind, here is the graph of consumer trends, as it relates to HD Radio, over the past two years:

http://www.google.com/trends?q="hd+radio"

As on would expect, there was an up-swing in interest in 2006, but that interest is now waining.

To put that graph into perspective, as it relates to other competing technologies, that interest is flat-lined:

http://www.google.com/trends?q="hd+radio",+ipod,+mp3

The obvious conclusion, is that the general public heard about HD Radio, checked it out, and now, is waining interest. Now, you are going to have to wait a second, while I cut-and-paste this into a file, so I will be able to use it over-and-over-again !