• 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

Why HD has an uphill battle (IMO)

A

AllForADeuce

Guest
I am a very happy satellite subscriber who was driven away from terrestrial radio for a multitude of reasons. I feel HD has a big uphill battle at the moment. I am not talking about the marketing angle, but the angle that matters to everyone involved...the pocketbook. Until very recently, from what looking I did, the average HD unit hovered around $500. That is totally insane! Even though Boston Acoustics unit dropped in the $350 range, that is still crazy.
Here is my mentality on that & HD units:

First, I can go get an XM unit for $50 with car set up, spend another $50 for a home stereo unit. At 12.95 a month, it would take 18 months paying for XM to catch up to the initial cost of the cheaper HD unit. Why don't I jsut wait that 18 months and but an HD unit for much cheaper? If that is the mass mentality, then HD units will crawl at a snail's pace. I agree with the LA Times article saying that they need to try and get their prices down to around $150.

Second, I listen to XM everywhere. I paid the extra for a boombox, but now I can listen to XM EVERYWHERE! From the moment I get up to the moment I go to sleep, my XM unit is on me.

Thirdly, satellite researchers are cricifying HD in the technological development as of this moment. SIRIUS's S50 allows you to listen to MP3s while listening to the SIRIUS programs you record. XM is about to release a portable unit that allows you to listen to live satellite radio and play MP3s. HD units, on the other hand, currently are great paperweights while I am gone from the house. They are only good while I am home, and even then, when I am in the mood to listening to the radio. Why would I pay $500 for a unit that is only good for the few hours I am home when I can carry my XM unit and lsiten to it at home, in the car, at work, at the gym, etc etc etc. Again, agreeing with the LA Times article, I feel they won't make any kind of major impact until they get the HD in cars. And even at that it's only 1/2 the advancement against satellite.

Fourth, what is HD radio giving me that satellite isn't? Don't even begin by trying to say "a monthly bill" beacause like I began, to buy the cheaper HD unit it would take me the cost of a unit and two accessories plus 18 months sub cost UP FRONT to purchase the HD. Radio stations need HD to give me deeper programming selections? Well, if they did that in the first place, I would have been more resistant to purchase an XM unit. You can have the best sound in the world, but if your playlist is still crap, who really cares about the sound??? Sound quality IMO is the least of radio's problems. This is exactly like MTV...we have no room in our crappy reality-tv schedule for videos anymore, so we're going to launch another channel to play more videos...WHAT?? We can't be bothered to give you better talent, less commercials and a better music selection with a deeper rotation, so we want you to buy a $500 unit to hear it. Painful. Pitifully painful. Why do I want to listen to 15 minutes of commercials in HD when massive commercial blocks were yet another reason I was driven away from terrestrial radio???

HD is radio's answer to being unable or unwilling to improve their existing product. Satellite was the perfect answer to everything that was wrong with terrestrial radio. Terrestrial radio's answer is to make me listen to everything that is wrong with terrestrial radio in better quality sound. I'll wait the 18+ months listening to commercial free satellite radio before I even consider researching HD radio again
 
> Why do I want to listen
> to 15 minutes of commercials in HD when massive commercial
> blocks were yet another reason I was driven away from
> terrestrial radio???

You know, this is a very important point. No matter how good the tech is, the content is all that matters. No content = no listeners

> HD is radio's answer to being unable or unwilling to improve
> their existing product. Satellite was the perfect answer to
> everything that was wrong with terrestrial radio.
> Terrestrial radio's answer is to make me listen to
> everything that is wrong with terrestrial radio in better
> quality sound.

Better quality sound? OK, I'll leave that thrash to others.

As George Carlin once said, you have a couple of knobs on that thing. One to turn it off and on, and another to change the channel. I might add that the third knob is XM/Sirius. Many won't touch the first two knobs after trying satellite services.
Like I said above, we can make it work technically, but if there is nothing new or exciting to listen to, nobody is gonna want to listen.
 
I think the FCC content controls on terrestrial radio are also part of the problem. Subscription satellite radio has no such content limitations.

I'm not into frivolous swearing, but that's the way many people talk in stressful situations. When I can listen to live news coverage that doesn't bleep out vulgarities or hear an unexpurgated interview with George Carlin on HD radio, I *might* consider getting one. -- JasonW

> I am a very happy satellite subscriber who was driven away
> from terrestrial radio for a multitude of reasons. I feel
> HD has a big uphill battle at the moment. I am not talking
> about the marketing angle, but the angle that matters to
> everyone involved...the pocketbook. Until very recently,
> from what looking I did, the average HD unit hovered around
> $500. That is totally insane! Even though Boston Acoustics
> unit dropped in the $350 range, that is still crazy.
> Here is my mentality on that & HD units:
>
> First, I can go get an XM unit for $50 with car set up,
> spend another $50 for a home stereo unit. At 12.95 a month,
> it would take 18 months paying for XM to catch up to the
> initial cost of the cheaper HD unit. Why don't I jsut wait
> that 18 months and but an HD unit for much cheaper? If that
> is the mass mentality, then HD units will crawl at a snail's
> pace. I agree with the LA Times article saying that they
> need to try and get their prices down to around $150.
>
> Second, I listen to XM everywhere. I paid the extra for a
> boombox, but now I can listen to XM EVERYWHERE! From the
> moment I get up to the moment I go to sleep, my XM unit is
> on me.
>
> Thirdly, satellite researchers are cricifying HD in the
> technological development as of this moment. SIRIUS's S50
> allows you to listen to MP3s while listening to the SIRIUS
> programs you record. XM is about to release a portable unit
> that allows you to listen to live satellite radio and play
> MP3s. HD units, on the other hand, currently are great
> paperweights while I am gone from the house. They are only
> good while I am home, and even then, when I am in the mood
> to listening to the radio. Why would I pay $500 for a unit
> that is only good for the few hours I am home when I can
> carry my XM unit and lsiten to it at home, in the car, at
> work, at the gym, etc etc etc. Again, agreeing with the LA
> Times article, I feel they won't make any kind of major
> impact until they get the HD in cars. And even at that it's
> only 1/2 the advancement against satellite.
>
> Fourth, what is HD radio giving me that satellite isn't?
> Don't even begin by trying to say "a monthly bill" beacause
> like I began, to buy the cheaper HD unit it would take me
> the cost of a unit and two accessories plus 18 months sub
> cost UP FRONT to purchase the HD. Radio stations need HD to
> give me deeper programming selections? Well, if they did
> that in the first place, I would have been more resistant to
> purchase an XM unit. You can have the best sound in the
> world, but if your playlist is still crap, who really cares
> about the sound??? Sound quality IMO is the least of
> radio's problems. This is exactly like MTV...we have no
> room in our crappy reality-tv schedule for videos anymore,
> so we're going to launch another channel to play more
> videos...WHAT?? We can't be bothered to give you better
> talent, less commercials and a better music selection with a
> deeper rotation, so we want you to buy a $500 unit to hear
> it. Painful. Pitifully painful. Why do I want to listen
> to 15 minutes of commercials in HD when massive commercial
> blocks were yet another reason I was driven away from
> terrestrial radio???
>
> HD is radio's answer to being unable or unwilling to improve
> their existing product. Satellite was the perfect answer to
> everything that was wrong with terrestrial radio.
> Terrestrial radio's answer is to make me listen to
> everything that is wrong with terrestrial radio in better
> quality sound. I'll wait the 18+ months listening to
> commercial free satellite radio before I even consider
> researching HD radio again
>
 
Just like "Laverne and Shirley" is still "Laverne and Shirly" on HDTV, "Stairway to Heaven" is still just that on HD radio. It's content, not pretend technology that the terrestrial broadcasters better get concerned with quickly.
 
I thought I was going to get bashed...

> Just like "Laverne and Shirley" is still "Laverne and
> Shirly" on HDTV, "Stairway to Heaven" is still just that on
> HD radio. It's content, not pretend technology that the
> terrestrial broadcasters better get concerned with quickly.
>

Posting my opinion as an avid radio listener and not as an employee, I typically get bashed for my opinions. I thought I was going to get smashed here too, but it is good to see the few responses are WITH me not against me.

I never understood why when a fan opens up with their opinions that employees de3grade them and smack them down. Well, now that satellite is a hard cold FACT, maybe some of them should re-read fan posts on here and instead of laughing at them, maybe realize that without us fans, you have nothing. 10 million people laughed at, and 10 million regular listeners lost. Why some have to be so arrogant until the number had to hit 10 million.

Oh, another article on HD at:

www.orbitcast.com
 
Re: I thought I was going to get bashed...

> > Just like "Laverne and Shirley" is still "Laverne and
> > Shirly" on HDTV, "Stairway to Heaven" is still just that
> on
> > HD radio. It's content, not pretend technology that the
> > terrestrial broadcasters better get concerned with
> quickly.
> >
>
> Posting my opinion as an avid radio listener and not as an
> employee, I typically get bashed for my opinions. I thought
> I was going to get smashed here too, but it is good to see
> the few responses are WITH me not against me.
>
> I never understood why when a fan opens up with their
> opinions that employees de3grade them and smack them down.
> Well, now that satellite is a hard cold FACT, maybe some of
> them should re-read fan posts on here and instead of
> laughing at them, maybe realize that without us fans, you
> have nothing. 10 million people laughed at, and 10 million
> regular listeners lost. Why some have to be so arrogant
> until the number had to hit 10 million.
>
> Oh, another article on HD at:
>
> www.orbitcast.com
>
Man if that's directed at me I'm not bashing you in the least. I couldn't agree with you more. I think you made very cogent comments about the state of terretrails radio's trials, and I find the whole "HD" thing to be a major joke.
 
Re: I thought I was going to get bashed...

> > Just like "Laverne and Shirley" is still "Laverne and
> > Shirly" on HDTV, "Stairway to Heaven" is still just that
> on
> > HD radio. It's content, not pretend technology that the
> > terrestrial broadcasters better get concerned with
> quickly.
> >
>
> Posting my opinion as an avid radio listener and not as an
> employee, I typically get bashed for my opinions. I thought
> I was going to get smashed here too, but it is good to see
> the few responses are WITH me not against me.
>
> I never understood why when a fan opens up with their
> opinions that employees de3grade them and smack them down.
> Well, now that satellite is a hard cold FACT, maybe some of
> them should re-read fan posts on here and instead of
> laughing at them, maybe realize that without us fans, you
> have nothing. 10 million people laughed at, and 10 million
> regular listeners lost. Why some have to be so arrogant
> until the number had to hit 10 million.
>
> Oh, another article on HD at:
>
> www.orbitcast.com
>

While I absolutely do not agree with you, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and are welcome to share it here!

The only time we appear to bash is when someone comes here stating opinions as fact, with no real evidence to back it up.

You raise some good points. The only thing I'd like to add is that the 10 million people figure you quote can be misleading. While the satcasters have 10 million listeners, it does not mean that terrestrial lost 10 million listeners. There is certainly sharing between the two. It's like iPods, CD's, and tapes. We've lost TSL, but not necessarily cume.

Now, as for the orbitcast piece, it's about as objective as an article on satellite broadcasting on www.ibiquity.com! :)<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
 
Re: I thought I was going to get bashed...

> > > Just like "Laverne and Shirley" is still "Laverne and
> > > Shirly" on HDTV, "Stairway to Heaven" is still just that
>
> > on
> > > HD radio. It's content, not pretend technology that the
>
> > > terrestrial broadcasters better get concerned with
> > quickly.
> > >
> >
> > Posting my opinion as an avid radio listener and not as an
>
> > employee, I typically get bashed for my opinions. I
> thought
> > I was going to get smashed here too, but it is good to see
>
> > the few responses are WITH me not against me.
> >
> > I never understood why when a fan opens up with their
> > opinions that employees de3grade them and smack them down.
>
> > Well, now that satellite is a hard cold FACT, maybe some
> of
> > them should re-read fan posts on here and instead of
> > laughing at them, maybe realize that without us fans, you
> > have nothing. 10 million people laughed at, and 10
> million
> > regular listeners lost. Why some have to be so arrogant
> > until the number had to hit 10 million.
> >
> > Oh, another article on HD at:
> >
> > www.orbitcast.com
> >
> Man if that's directed at me I'm not bashing you in the
> least. I couldn't agree with you more. I think you made
> very cogent comments about the state of terretrails radio's
> trials, and I find the whole "HD" thing to be a major joke.
>


Hehe no no, it wasn't directed at anyoen at all.
 
Re: I thought I was going to get bashed...

> > Just like "Laverne and Shirley" is still "Laverne and
> > Shirly" on HDTV, "Stairway to Heaven" is still just that
> on
> > HD radio. It's content, not pretend technology that the
> > terrestrial broadcasters better get concerned with
> quickly.
> >
>
> Posting my opinion as an avid radio listener and not as an
> employee, I typically get bashed for my opinions. I thought
> I was going to get smashed here too, but it is good to see
> the few responses are WITH me not against me.
>
> I never understood why when a fan opens up with their
> opinions that employees de3grade them and smack them down.
> Well, now that satellite is a hard cold FACT, maybe some of
> them should re-read fan posts on here and instead of
> laughing at them, maybe realize that without us fans, you
> have nothing. 10 million people laughed at, and 10 million
> regular listeners lost. Why some have to be so arrogant
> until the number had to hit 10 million.
>
> Oh, another article on HD at:
>
> www.orbitcast.com
>

I think you laid out a good discussion for your opinion. You didnt come here and lay out some garbage and not support it.

Hey Sat radio is good for some people. More power to ya!

Glad you felt OK about expressing your opinions here. Some (including your truly) will hold feet to the fire if we see something that is absolutely not true.

Come back often, lets mix it up a little ;-)

HD is not prefect, neither is Sat Radio. They all have their good points and bad points.
 
First of all, HD radio does not sound anywhere near CD quality. Compare them side by side and you will quickly see that it doesnt. HD and satellite are about the same quality wise. Satellite aint no CD quality either. Analog FM could sound just like HD if they would just turn down the damn processor. Take HD will sound just as bad as analog when they process to match.
And they will have to do that so there isnt much difference when the radio switches back and forth from analog to digitall an back.



> Just like "Laverne and Shirley" is still "Laverne and
> Shirly" on HDTV, "Stairway to Heaven" is still just that on
> HD radio. It's content, not pretend technology that the
> terrestrial broadcasters better get concerned with quickly.
>
 
> First of all, HD radio does not sound anywhere near CD
> quality. Compare them side by side and you will quickly see
> that it doesnt. HD and satellite are about the same quality
> wise. Satellite aint no CD quality either. Analog FM could
> sound just like HD if they would just turn down the damn
> processor. Take HD will sound just as bad as analog when
> they process to match.
> And they will have to do that so there isnt much difference
> when the radio switches back and forth from analog to
> digitall an back.
>

Actually, I (big surprise here) don't agree. IMO, HD Radio sounds MUCH better audio quality-wise than Satellite. I have an XM Sky-Fi and a Kenwood Sirius/HD Radio head unit. Every single person who has heard them side-by-side has said the HD audio quality is MUCH better than the Satellite audio. And no, we will not have to process to match...it seems that lot of us are processing our HD audio a lot less than the analog. Of course some people do have the HD audio cranked to 11, but the lack of pre-emphasis and pilot protection make even that sound pretty good.<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom