WKSE HD-2

[Radio_bored-Op]

WKSE-HD 2 was included in the ID
for the sabres game tonight ( as I heard this
on 'gr 55)..
is this done, (for additional advertising?)
Or is the motivate: similiar to 930 on 107.7
(just to have an FM signal ) for something worth while..

 

[DJ Hukhers Roll Call]

Does anyone actually own an HD radio? It doesn't seem like that technology has taken off. When it first debuted, I remember the ads to promote it were ragging on satellite radio as a pay service and HD radio was a free alternative, but I haven't heard anything promoting it in a few years now.

 

[Bob1370]

HD radio today is like FM was in 1950. It's a service with some technical advantages, but the installed receiver base is now too small to generate independent revenue even as a niche service.

One day it may become something significant in the broadcast realm, but this will probably have to wait for an influx of new, unique and appealing programming content aimed at a significant number of listeners not served by conventional radio.

It took 25 years from the dawn of FM, to the advent of stereo service and the almost simultaneous FCC rule requiring FM stations to air separate content from their fulltime AM sisters for a significant part of the day, for FM to come into its own. Something similar in the realm of either technical advance, new mandates for separate programming services, or both, will be what jumpstarts HD just like similar developments jumpstarted FM in the 1960s and 1970s.

 

[average_listener]

I have one. (I didn't buy it though, I won it at a trade show.) Almost worthless. Few HD services and even fewer alternate programming sources.

 

[Savage]

Here we go again with the revisionist history stuff about the advent of FM, comparing it to HD Radio. It's like trying to predict the success of the Chevy Volt by going back to 1909-1928 and pointing out the millions of Model Ts that were sold by Ford. After all: they're both cars!

Of course the media landscape of 2012 bears no resemblance to that of 1950. And there is another critical difference: FM radio worked, and offered a market improvement over AM. HD Radio accomplishes neither objective.

 

[Philip_Airtime]

I will say, Radio Bored Op, that I do have an HD radio, and I listened to WKSE-HD2 to hear Schopp, Bulldog and Jerry Sullivan on Monday afternoon. It was a much nicer listening experience than hearing them on my static-filled AM radio. But as others have pointed out here, HD is not much of a factor. Still, Entercom has nothing to lose by putting WGR on WKSE's HD2 channel. They may get a few dozen people like me (if that) tuning in 98.5-2.

 

[therealjm12]

HD radio will never be successful until it becomes standard equipment in cars. If that became a reality today, it would take about five years until it became a factor.

Personally, I like the idea of HD radio and more choices on the radio dial (& maybe more jobs). I find it similar to sub channels on TV. An alternative to cable. HD radio an alternative to satellite. The boys upstairs are trying to make you pay for you used to get for free.

I'm talking FM here. From everything I have heard HD on AM just does not work. They would have to eliminate at least 50% of the stations on the air now to make it feasible. I have a feeling Mr. Savage and may others wouldn't care for that idea.

 

[Savage]

I'd be fine with eliminating 50% of the stations on the air. So long, that is, as I get to pick which 50% go and which 50% remain. Which is, of course, the problem with the "thin the herd" mentality. Also I will respectfully dissent from the conclusion that reducing the AM pop-count to 2000 or so stations would make HD feasible. You'd probably have to "thin" the stations to around 100 or 200 operations and eliminate all directional systems to make HD reliable at night. Nothing of the sort is ever going to happen, so it's not worth discussing.

As far as HD-FM goes, it works okay with high-powered stations and flat terrain such as we have in most Upstate markets. But the wheels come off in densely-populated regions with short-spaced stations and rugged landscape. Sorry: HD is a non-starter. There just are too many interference problems and not enough advantages. Not to mention: nobody cares outside of 20 people commenting on this and other sites.

 

[Savage]

I forgot, jim - you really think HD Radio = "more radio jobs?" I think you'd find something more akin to HD Radio really = more work for less money, because the existing resources are getting stretched across more products. Voila! More pressure, less reward. Tastes awful. Way more filling. For engineering, programming AND sales.

 

[JustPastBuffalo]

^ What Savage said about the tech side of HD on AM and FM. ^ As to the potential of additional jobs? It hasn't happened as far as I can hear, read or see and I don't expect companies like Entercom, Clear Channel or Cumulus to hire additional people to staff their HD channels. Maybe a body to run Selector, merge logs and tend garden over a four station cluster, but in all likelihood, not even that. Why would they? It's more efficient and synergistic to add that daily responsibility to the PDs or MDs. Other operators air syndicated programming such as blues and comedy or the programming of the cluster's AM news-talk or sports stations on their HD channels. I'd rather hear "live 'n local" on the main channels.

 

[bmcglynn]

Not to mention: nobody cares outside of 20 people commenting on this and other sites.

I was at RadioInk a few years back, and Eric Rhoads tried to give away an HD radio. He first asked "Who Owns and HD Radio".... I handful of people put their hands up (these are broadcasters by the way). Next, he asked "Who wants one". Even fewer people raised their hands.

HD IBOC has several issues impeding its adoption.
1. Technical Coverage - The AM IBOC technology just doesn't work. It has poor coverage and does little but generate interference for adjacent channels. For my thoughts on FM, see Savage's comment.
2. Lack of coverage and listeners. Try to buy an HD radio. There are very few out there. I do see the auto manufacturers starting to introduce HD radio to their fleets. Once 100% of all new cars have HD radio, we can look at 5 years when HD radio has a sizable audience.
3. Price. This is the killer. To implement HD radio, a station is looking at a hefty $25,000 licensing fee for the technology coupled with $70-100K worth of equipment upgrades. To add an HD-2 and HD-3 channel, a station needs to pay $1,000 per year licensing plus 2 or 3 percent of your incremental revenue from the HD-2 and HD-3 stream.

If the revenue truly is there, then it may make sense. Such may be the case to use HD radio as a means to add a translator for a secondary programming stream.

 

[Penrod Rightout]

WKSE-HD 2 was included in the ID
for the sabres game tonight ( as I heard this
on 'gr 55)..
is this done, (for additional advertising?)
Or is the motivate: similiar to 930 on 107.7
(just to have an FM signal ) for something worth while..

Just keeping it legal - 'GR began simulcasting on 98.5-2 soon after WBEN's simulcast on 107.7-FM / HD-1. Prior to that, WKSE-HD 2 had been carrying a comedy format.

 

[therealjm12]

I guess my remarks about HD channels opening up new job opportunities have been misunderstood. I'm thinking way down the line.
If & when the receivers become common place, HD could become a factor. At this point, I am thinking FM HD sub channels could become the alternative stations out of the mainstream of their main channels. I can see the possibility of a full power FM signal station in Rochester, for instance, running a full time Hispanic format. I could, also, see a classic R&B format. And as AM declines, the programing could be transferred over to a FM sub channel.

No matter what, it is up to the "big boys" that own the stations to promote HD radio. Will they just give up and drop the ball, and 20 years from now will we all be paying for radio?

 

[ThePickleReport]

I have one. (I didn't buy it though, I won it at a trade show.) Almost worthless. Few HD services and even fewer alternate programming sources.

I bought one cheap. Not many reasons to use it. Simulcasting a stations main channel in HD, while I get that, really doesn't sell the advantage of HD.

 

[Paul_Warren]

The Clear Channel stations out west here still run HD Radio promos heavily in unsold avails. But the basic premise that I'm missing a bunch of "exciting new stations, plus all your current favorites" isn't particularly credible when the programming comes from the same people who have been bringing me the voicetracked, homogenized, soulless stuff I'm already hearing. If that's what's on the main channel, how much excitement could possible be on the 21st equivalent of an SCA channel?

I realize I'm overthinking this because I know too much about the industry. But I do believe it's become a stretch to sell most listeners under 45 on the idea that radio could be exciting.

 

[Bob1370]

"Here we go again with the revisionist history stuff about the advent of FM, comparing it to HD Radio. It's like trying to predict the success of the Chevy Volt by going back to 1909-1928 and pointing out the millions of Model Ts that were sold by Ford. After all: they're both cars! Of course the media landscape of 2012 bears no resemblance to that of 1950. And there is another critical difference: FM radio worked, and offered a market improvement over AM. HD Radio accomplishes neither objective."

The Volt's not a bad analogy because it represents technology Detroit will need when fuel economy requirements go through the roof, as they will in the next decade. HD on FM will represent the only way broadcasters will be able to meet demand for additional niche programming to supplement what's being offered by all the mega-chains now, and which is stifling radio's growth.

At the same time, Bob Savage is absolutely right in calling it a non-starter on AM because it degrades both analog and digital services. We'd be way better off, and AM wouold be better off, if the FCC just scrapped AM-HD AND the NRSC 10 kHz rolloff standard, tell existing stations to run 50 hZ to 15 kHz audio (like FM and FM-HD stations do now...most of them have transmitters that can do it) and issue type-acceptance standards for receivers that make AM and FM tuners equal in terms of what audio they'll pass.

 

[Element9]

We'd be way better off, and AM wouold be better off, if the FCC just scrapped AM-HD AND the NRSC 10 kHz rolloff standard, tell existing stations to run 50 hZ to 15 kHz audio (like FM and FM-HD stations do now...most of them have transmitters that can do it) and issue type-acceptance standards for receivers that make AM and FM tuners equal in terms of what audio they'll pass.

If ever there was a bigger non-event that HD-FM, it's HD-AM. But even if AM-HD were scrapped tomorrow, it would take a monumental effort to un-ring the bell that brought about the NRSC 10k rolloff standard. If, by some quirk, the FCC revised/upgraded/expanded its AM standards, there's a generation of narrow band AM receivers that roll off around 3.8kHz and make AM sound particularly harsh and a generation that doesn't know or care what AM is. Tough sell.

 

[bmcglynn]

At the same time, Bob Savage is absolutely right in calling it a non-starter on AM because it degrades both analog and digital services. We'd be way better off, and AM wouold be better off, if the FCC just scrapped AM-HD AND the NRSC 10 kHz rolloff standard, tell existing stations to run 50 hZ to 15 kHz audio (like FM and FM-HD stations do now...most of them have transmitters that can do it) and issue type-acceptance standards for receivers that make AM and FM tuners equal in terms of what audio they'll pass.

With DSP technology today, analog AM could sound fantastic. DSP can practically remove most noise from a signal - especially when synchronously detecting AM. With two sidebands of identical information, there is enough error correction information to remove noise spikes since the noise and retrieve high-quality audio.

If you wanted true HD-AM, you could encode error correction information in quadrature to allow for re-assembly of the analog envelope. Look at Khan's CAM-D innovation for an approach to make AM sound fantastic.

Instead of maximizing the band, we have produced less than sub standard AM receivers over the last decade with bandwidth not greater than an analogue telephone line. Is it any wonder why the AM band is being abandoned?