J
jphan
Guest
What about hd radio is so great. Lately that's what I've been hearing.
-
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
Maybe you've been hearing the misleading ads by Ibiquity that air on national radio.
About the only advantage I see of HD radio is having multiple stations in one. The advantages end there.
Audio quality is better with analog FM, especially if the station runs multiple HD streams then the HD bandwidth must be divided. The end result is an HD stream that sounds like a low quality online stream full of compression artifacts.
HD can send text information and the call-sign to the receiver, but so can RDS which works perfectly well with analog.
HD gives off interference on the adjacent two channels, and if any other station is broadcasting on an adjacent channel to the station you want to listen to in HD, its going to make it much harder to receive.
About the only advantage I see of HD radio is having multiple stations in one. The advantages end there.
Audio quality is better with analog FM, especially if the station runs multiple HD streams then the HD bandwidth must be divided. The end result is an HD stream that sounds like a low quality online stream full of compression artifacts.
HD can send text information and the call-sign to the receiver, but so can RDS which works perfectly well with analog.
HD gives off interference on the adjacent two channels, and if any other station is broadcasting on an adjacent channel to the station you want to listen to in HD, its going to make it much harder to receive.
FM analog stations can already broadcast other programs on subchannels. Have we forgotten that? Yes, that also requires a special receiver, but they have been available for many years. The availability was limited because stations used them for subscription services like Muzak.
Schroedingers Cat said:
I don't think SCA receivers are high fidelity -or- publicly available. I've never seen one for sale anywhere.
You can't really compare that to HD subchannels, which, while not sounding great, are head and shoulders above the SCAs I've heard.
spunker's post hits the nail on the head, though. Subchannels are the only real selling point. AM HD is very limited in what it can do, or where it seems to work. Or when.
I would recommend finding a local car stereo, electronics store or Best Buy and fooling around with the HD radios in the car stereo section to see what's really available where you live.
When you get to be a certain age, formats that appeal to you tend to be relegated to AM stations and FM stations that don't have full market coverage. I'd much rather hear a station that is AM analog that has music I can listen to, even if it doesn't sound perfect to an audio engineer. So far, HD-2 formats are not well done. And I do have an HD radio. And if they make music formats more expensive, more music FMs will turn to talk. In fact, they already are. And younger listeners are listening to MP3 Players. All of this makes radio sound quality and audio frequency response requiring more bandwidth less critical.
Almost all of the problems of HD radio could be addressed if the stations had their own frequency band. None of us would complain if it was truly excellent sound, and didn't interfere with other stations. You have to have new receivers anyway.
Some would argue that moving FM from 42-50 MHz to 88-108 MHz is the best thing that could have happened. Maybe the same moving the band principle applies to HD.
Almost all of the problems of HD radio could be addressed if the stations had their own frequency band. None of us would complain if it was truly excellent sound, and didn't interfere with other stations. You have to have new receivers anyway.
Some would argue that moving FM from 42-50 MHz to 88-108 MHz is the best thing that could have happened. Maybe the same moving the band principle applies to HD.
D
Darth_vader
Guest
"I don't think SCA receivers are...publicly available. I've never seen one for sale anywhere."
http://metrosonix.com/
Haven't used any of these, so I can't comment on them.
http://radiosca.com/
Pretty good little rig, particularly on the VHF side, but the MW section is (unfortunately) just crap. I listen to the Evergreen Radio Reading Service on one of these when I am driving through Seattle, or en route to Pendleton.
Dr. Elving also used to have a bunch of modded off-the-shelf rigs available, with his own demodulators installed in them, available for purchase through his FM Atlas site. I bought my modded-out Sony ICF36 from him, and used to listen to the Golden Hours radio reading service (http://omnimedianetworks.org/) when they were still on KOPB's SAP track. (Pretty bitchin' setup, too. ;o) But I don't know if he's still doing that any more. He hasn't replied to any of my E Mail memos in quite a long time!
http://metrosonix.com/
Haven't used any of these, so I can't comment on them.
http://radiosca.com/
Pretty good little rig, particularly on the VHF side, but the MW section is (unfortunately) just crap. I listen to the Evergreen Radio Reading Service on one of these when I am driving through Seattle, or en route to Pendleton.
Dr. Elving also used to have a bunch of modded off-the-shelf rigs available, with his own demodulators installed in them, available for purchase through his FM Atlas site. I bought my modded-out Sony ICF36 from him, and used to listen to the Golden Hours radio reading service (http://omnimedianetworks.org/) when they were still on KOPB's SAP track. (Pretty bitchin' setup, too. ;o) But I don't know if he's still doing that any more. He hasn't replied to any of my E Mail memos in quite a long time!
D
Don Juannn
Guest
KB1OKL said:
So, adding numerous additional formats to any given market is "useless"?
From a "Business of Broadcasting" point of view, it is an exercise in futility, if it fragments your existing audience. I'm not saying it has to be that way, but most HD-2 channels seem to be an offshoot if the primary station's format. That is just plain stupid, even if it is easy.Don Juannn said:
If, on the other hand, you can take away from your competitor’s listeners, then I suppose it is a positive. Problem is, there are so few radios, it is more or less meaningless.
D
Don Juannn
Guest
Chuck said:
Well, it keeps them "in the fold"...instead of giving them reasons to go out of band.
So far keeping the HD2 as an "offshoot" is better because it can serve the edges of your demographic, and, again, keep them "in the fold.
Would you rather have them listening to your HD2 channel...or on Pandora or XM?
I recall Westinghouse had the same idea about FM. They didn't want to dilute their monster AM properties with FM...so their FM's were throwaways, automated with not much effort put into them. They even got to the point where they sold their FM's off, because "we're an AM company".
They ended up having to buy back their FM positions in most markets at much higher prices.
If listeners were migrating to FM signals...I would much rather they move to MY FM signal, etc.
Don Juannn said:
Problem is, they don't seem to be migrating to HD. Undoubtedly they are migrating to the Internet. If you, as a broadcaster, have a finite budget and a choice of where to invest, I'd pick the Internet at this stage of the game.
Comparing this to the advent of FM ignores the fact that there is no provision to "sell off" your HD channels. They are a part of your station's license. You could lease them to a third party, but ultimately, the license holder is responsible for all of his channels, even if he leases them to a third party. They are yours, and can’t be spun off.
Conversely, individual broadcasters can (and did) sell off their FM interest. As you point out, that was an expensive mistake.
If HD in its current form actually catches on (which I still think is doubtful, but I'll agree it is possible) broadcasters will still have the ability to utilize HD sub channels if and when that happens. Nothing is stopping them. By waiting on the sidelines, they will likely benefit from the experience of others, get improved and maybe cheaper technology, and not dilute their primary product which happens to be conventional analog radio.
Asking everyone to jump on the HD bandwagon at this point in time, is a bit like asking you to jump out of a perfectly good airplane.
Don Juannn said:
I don't know about other markets, but in the San Francisco Bay Area HD took away formats. My wife recently signed up for the "enhanced" version of Pandora. For years she was frustrated because the little kitchen radio with the drop-down TV no longer receives 107.5 FM, thanks to HD on 107.7. The format on 107.5 is not duplicated anywhere else - HD or otherwise - so she no longer listens to broadcast radio.
Yes, that's a sample of one. But she's not unique, and I have a lot of friends who used to listen to 107.5 and miss it. That's just one example, there are quite a few more in this area.
Dave B.
DaveBayArea said:
Unless you're in the very southernmost part of San Jose, I am seeing that you're well outside the protected contours of KPIG. In fact it doesn't seem to cover much of Santa Clara county at all. There is no guarantee that a translator or LPFM or some other facility change wouldn't have removed that signal from your choices, if it hadn't been for HD.
Zach said:
We live in Newark, and yes - it's out of the protected contour. But the fact remains that it used to work fine. In fact, Cindy says it still does on her new Subaru radio - sort of. But with lots of static. To find a radio that couldn't receive KPIG in Newark before the days of HD I would have to go to a yard sale and buy something that said "electrophonic" on it and had a built in 8-track.
Realistically this level of interference could never be caused by a translator or LPFM. Another facility on 107.5 could not be located this close under normal rules. The HD transmitter (assuming -20 db power level) is essentially 40 watts at 1,000 feet HAAT on Mt. San Bruno. A 40-watt FM transmitter on 107.5 at that location and elevation does not come close to meeting the minimal mileage separation requirements, and it would not be licensed.
Dave B.
- Status