Why HD Radio is Doomed to Failure

[rbrucecarter5]

http://technologizer.com/2012/02/06/whatever-happened-to-radios/

Stores stock items that sell. If something doesn't sell, it won't be stocked. People aren't buying radios - let alone HD radios. Unless HD radio can make inroads into devices that still include AM and FM reception - HD radio, if not radio itself, is doomed. There is no compelling reason for anybody to buy a radio these days. The market is saturated with old ones, new devices that include radios use the cheapest possible implementation of radio, throwing away the AM band, most of the IF filters, or using IC's with internal IF like those from Silabs. License fees drive up the cost of including a radio, so HD isn't included.

A crucial move by the HD folks would have been to not charge license fees for receiving equipment and IC's. That window of opportunity, though, was years ago. It is too late, now.

 

[hubcity]

Radio, I think, needs to reimagine itself along its only significant benefit: immediacy. In fact, given the rise of talk radio, I think it has already begun to do so.

Eventually, Radio will consist of a vestigial transmitter that still transmits because it's important to its brand that it does so, but will first and foremost be a supplier of short-shelf-life content along whatever transport method is available. This will be a smaller audience, and its budgetary expectations will need to shrink to follow suit. They even may, one day, decide it's in their best interest to drop the transmitter, but that's a lonnnnng way off.

 

[iyiyi]

HD radio is related to analog radio as much as an iPhone is to an analog "bag phone".

Receiver manufacturing techniques and quality difference between AM and FM radios is now moot.

Silicon Labs Si476x spec sheet shows that modern HD receiver design utilizes the same circuitry for FM and MW. The only difference is in separate front end mixers for MW and FM, and DSP algorithms to optimize reception for each band. Both MW and "FM" HD utilize the same QAM, again optimized for the respective bands.

I normally am a P1 of an analog Alternative station. When they are off the air I have about three or four other stations; all HD 2s! The other weekend I was "stuck" with a car that had no HD. That was (to me) like an FM afficionado taking a trip in a car with only an AM radio. I had this beautiful radio stupidly sitting in the dashboard, its' only real use to me was the CD player.

New bottles for new wine. HD radio is spiffing itself for a new generation to discover and properly exploit it's use.

Maybe we can bring back Guy Lombardo for New Year's Eve.


-

 

[Savage]

Well, Guy Lombardo should sound just fine on that HD-3 channel with its AM quality, iy! 7 kHz, mono in most applications - now THAT's progress in the digital age!

"HD Radio is spiffing itself for discovery for a new generation to discover?" Which generation is that? The generation that wants to string antennas (or, as my parents referred to them, "aerials") to get dependable reception? Maybe the generation who wants to pay ludicrous prices for lackluster low-benefit consumer audio products?

Where's your "new generation" been for the last ten years? Or is it they just haven't they been born yet?? ;D

 

[spunker88]

The article makes a good point. It is getting pretty hard to find just a radio, not an ipod dock with a radio in brick and mortar stores. Luckily online stores like Amazon carry a good selection of radios. You can get the Sony ICF-S10MK2 for $10, which is a little AM/FM battery powered unit with a speaker similar to the Radioshack one in the article. These little radios are nice and easy to operate and batteries last a long time.

Analog FM still is the best way to broadcast high quality audio to a large area. Internet radio will have a hard time challenging FM since cell carriers charge an arm and a leg for metered data, and the quality of mobile quality online streams is poor. Its tolerable with earbuds or small speakers, but hook it up to a decent sound system or car radio and it sounds terrible for music. HD radio's audio quality is only slightly better sometimes just as bad as mobile streaming, and HD radio drops out a lot more.

 

[local oscillator]

There are indeed several legitimate questions being asked about the future of our industry, but HD Radio's place in that future shouldn't be one of them. HD Radio doesn't work, period. Enough said. Now, let's dismiss this unfortunate distraction as soon as possible and get on with the serious business at hand.

 

[tomservo]

Of course, whether HD works better or worse than streaming depends on whose network you're on and in what part of the country you're in. As I'm fond of saying, streaming isn't going to be the savior people think it will, with metered internet and a slowed build out of faster networks capping the potential for coast-to-coast listening. The carrier I'm with no has no 3G east of Pensacola along I-10 unless you're on the beach, so analog and HD radio were my only options on a recent trip back from the Fort Walton Beach area.

The HDs (except pubcaster WUWF, whose stick is in Navarre) all came back in around Milton, FL, and they're more or less solid from there west on I-10 to well past Mobile, a good 85 air miles across, with a good radio. WUWF should have done even better and it usually the most reliable HD in NW FL but I was having dropouts while looking at the tower so I dunno if they were having issues or not.

If HD is doomed to failure it's because it's too little, too late. It isn't a big enough improvement to really draw new listeners and the digital buffering and dropouts are a problem for 99% of listeners. The formats that *are* on the air aren't compelling enough to attract new listeners to buy into it. And the destructive nature of AM HD is causing problems nationwide.

 

[KB1OKL]

HD radio was doomed from the time it was first broadcast, most engineers knew it didn't work and so did consumers and most electronic reviewers. It may seem like too little too late now but it never stood a chance, the reason it is moribund and has been is because consumers couldn't care less that it exists and most reasonable radio people are waiting for it to pass like a three day old Taco.

 

[Barry]

The use of HD2 and HD3 subchannels to provide signals to translators, effectively providing additional FM stations, is helping to keep HD radio viable. Some of these translators are starting to garner decent ratings in various markets.

 

[Ken Tucky]

"You can get the Sony ICF-S10MK2 for $10, which is a little AM/FM battery powered unit..."





Outstanding little radio that you can still find at K-Mart (if you can still find a K-Mart!)

 

[ajc_trw]

The use of HD2 and HD3 subchannels to provide signals to translators, effectively providing additional FM stations, is helping to keep HD radio viable. Some of these translators are starting to garner decent ratings in various markets.

When a translator is used for an HD2 or HD3 do the get the audio from the HD broadcast or does it come directly from the station?

The reason I'm asking is when an FM translator runs an AM station (Dover DE WAMS for example) they don't take the OTA AM audio but audio from the station which allows it to be HiFi Stereo. Otherwise running AM audio on an FM broadcast would sound terrible.

Which is why I'm asking are they getting the sound from the HD2 or HD3 transmissions or HiFi from the station.

 

[tomservo]

The ones on in Birmingham are not fed via the HD. The translator audio is several seconds ahead of the HD audio.

 

[Savage]

Whoopsy! Kind of a dead giveaway, no??

Seriously, I think I can guess the reason for that, Zach. The audio path feeding the translator probably comes direct from the automation, not the HD air. The HD encoding imposes several seconds' delay so the primary winds up several seconds behind the translator. Is the translator really "translating" the HD-2? I guess "it all depends" on your definition of how it's done.

 

[iyiyi]

You have it right. The translator is not actually "translating" an HD. It is fed directly from the same source as the HD, although the processing might be different for each signal. Main point is that they are transmitting the exact same programming. Also, HD is still in beta with various kinks being worked out. Since the analog translator is a proven commodity AND currently has most of the audience compared to the intermittent HD, it is counter productive to deprive the analog listeners of programming anytime the HD goes down.


-

 

[Savage]

Somewhat startling in the ol' candor department, no?? HD Radio "is in beta?" And precisely when can we expect a complete, functional ready-for-prime-time version? Maybe 2024 or so??

I just checked my watch and note that HD stumbled onto the scene almost TEN years ago. It may startle folks to know I was a very early - and enthusiastic - supporter of the concept. But then I started delving into the details. Then I started checking out early interference reports, especially on AM. I went from chuckling about how "jeez, there's no way this thing will ever see the light of day" to the horror of realizing it was indeed going to be unleashed in all of its half-baked, destructive, self-defeating stupidity.

Most rational engineers and owners have lined up in the "no thanks" column. Typical consumers fall into the "huh?" and the "what, are you kidding?" categories. And that's about where we've been since around 2006.

I note the for record that the tiny and stubborn IBOC lobby has gone into full retreat on even making any claims on receiver sales (because there aren't any.) Now they're reduced into crowing about how iBiquity is simply maneuvering to get the radios into cars, even when consumers aren't even aware of it and in spite of reports how many driver simply drive around with the unwanted HD turned off. And THAT, in today's HD Radio world, is what passes for a victory. :

 

[tomservo]

You know, I'm surprised iBiquity hasn't called this a "public beta". It would take a little heat off them for putting out such a shoddy product.

After all, Google has had products "in beta" for years, so it wouldn't be unusual to have a 10 year test, lol.

 

[Groove1670]

If HD is doomed to failure it's because it's too little, too late. It isn't a big enough improvement to really draw new listeners and the digital buffering and dropouts are a problem for 99% of listeners.

Most small broadcasters can't afford the price of the transmitter/antenna upgrade. Plus the license fee involved. I heard it was in the $10,000+ range.

 

[iyiyi]

Analog TV has been sunset for 3 years. There is still a bunch of activity on many fronts attempting to resolve OTA issues. TV had 10 years, with separate analog and digital plants. HD hasn't had such luxury. Also, iBiquity is an amalgam of many companies. Obviously, lockstep operation is extremely difficult in these situations. Who hasn't been in a spot where salesmen promise clients the sun, moon and stars -- by some unrealistic deadline -- without consulting those responsible for producing them first? I don't believe HD per se is the problem here. I've stated before that iBiquity must get their affairs together and communicate til all aspects of that entity is on the same page. THEN you shall see HD radio start producing!

 

[Tom Wells]

When is a translator not a translator?

When actually being a translator would prove embarassing.

This happens sometimes for political reasons too, when an accurate translation might be viewed as
"overly honest" and so become counterproductive to the "stated" diplomatic goals.

Translators sometimes "fudge" a bit here and there, don't they?

 

[diymedia]

When is a translator not a translator?

That's the million dollar question. When they originate programming is the simple answer. Are translators that relay HD in analog originating programming? It's new programming on the analog band, and since 99.3% of the receivers in circulation are analog...and an HD-translator can keep broadcasting even when its "parent" signal is off the air...the loophole is glaring.