WLW HD Radio

[700WLW]

I hope Scott wouldn't mind this, but I sent him this:

Hey Scott,

Ever think about doing a show on HD Radio/IBOC - if this gets approved
by the FCC for nighttime, then I probably will not be able to listen to
you from Maryland anymore, due to poor coverage and adjacent-channel
interference. You will lose most of your fringe area listeners, if that
matters to broadcasters. If you go to Mark Ramsey's site,
http://www.hear2.com/ and do a search on "HD Radio" in his search box,
there are a bunch of excellent articles on HD Radio/IBOC. I think you
would generate major-interest, if you decided to do a show on this.
Please, let me know, if you can, if you decide to do this... Thanks

Then, I got this in reply:

I've followed the IBOC debate for sometime, although it's admittedly something that won't effect our revenue as we sell primarily local ads. As you know, it's not about service anymore, it's about $.

Plus, we're on XM. I do/will miss the days of DXing far away signals at night. I used to have a cheap SW tuner and could pull in BBC and the like. Now with SAT & the WWW, it's just a given. Good idea on the topic, I may use it in the future.

I appreciate the send & your listening!

Thanks,

Scott Sloan
700WLW
8044 Montgomery Road, Suite 650
Cincinnati, OH 45236
www.700wlw.com
700WLW on XM Channel 173

Does anyone care to decipher this - what exacly is the given ? Notice, how he pushes XM and the WWW, but not HD Radio, unless I am misreading his reply.

 

[ElCheapo]

I hope Scott wouldn't mind this, but I sent him this:

Hey Scott,

Ever think about doing a show on HD Radio/IBOC - if this gets approved
by the FCC for nighttime, then I probably will not be able to listen to
you from Maryland anymore, due to poor coverage and adjacent-channel
interference. You will lose most of your fringe area listeners, if that
matters to broadcasters. If you go to Mark Ramsey's site,
http://www.hear2.com/ and do a search on "HD Radio" in his search box,
there are a bunch of excellent articles on HD Radio/IBOC. I think you
would generate major-interest, if you decided to do a show on this.
Please, let me know, if you can, if you decide to do this... Thanks

Then, I got this in reply:

I've followed the IBOC debate for sometime, although it's admittedly something that won't effect our revenue as we sell primarily local ads. As you know, it's not about service anymore, it's about $.

Plus, we're on XM. I do/will miss the days of DXing far away signals at night. I used to have a cheap SW tuner and could pull in BBC and the like. Now with SAT & the WWW, it's just a given. Good idea on the topic, I may use it in the future.

I appreciate the send & your listening!

Thanks,

Scott Sloan
700WLW
8044 Montgomery Road, Suite 650
Cincinnati, OH 45236
www.700wlw.com
700WLW on XM Channel 173

Does anyone care to decipher this - what exacly is the given ? Notice, how he pushes XM and the WWW, but not HD Radio, unless I am misreading his reply.

He means there aren't many dorks with beverage antennas left - all the normal people out of the market that really want to hear WLW are doing it on XM or online.

 

[700WLW]

I hope Scott wouldn't mind this, but I sent him this:

Hey Scott,

Ever think about doing a show on HD Radio/IBOC - if this gets approved
by the FCC for nighttime, then I probably will not be able to listen to
you from Maryland anymore, due to poor coverage and adjacent-channel
interference. You will lose most of your fringe area listeners, if that
matters to broadcasters. If you go to Mark Ramsey's site,
http://www.hear2.com/ and do a search on "HD Radio" in his search box,
there are a bunch of excellent articles on HD Radio/IBOC. I think you
would generate major-interest, if you decided to do a show on this.
Please, let me know, if you can, if you decide to do this... Thanks

Then, I got this in reply:

I've followed the IBOC debate for sometime, although it's admittedly something that won't effect our revenue as we sell primarily local ads. As you know, it's not about service anymore, it's about $.

Plus, we're on XM. I do/will miss the days of DXing far away signals at night. I used to have a cheap SW tuner and could pull in BBC and the like. Now with SAT & the WWW, it's just a given. Good idea on the topic, I may use it in the future.

I appreciate the send & your listening!

Thanks,

Scott Sloan
700WLW
8044 Montgomery Road, Suite 650
Cincinnati, OH 45236
www.700wlw.com
700WLW on XM Channel 173

Does anyone care to decipher this - what exacly is the given ? Notice, how he pushes XM and the WWW, but not HD Radio, unless I am misreading his reply.

He means there aren't many dorks with beverage antennas left - all the normal people out of the market that really want to hear WLW are doing it on XM or online.

Oh, you mean dorks with HD radios that require dipole/beverage antennas ?

 

[ElCheapo]

Oh, you mean dorks with HD radios that require dipole/beverage antennas ?

Uh - no... You asked what he meant. I don't think it's that ambiguous.

Of course, I could e-mail Scott and find out for sure. I guess I could also ask him who you are and let him know how you're trying to twist his e-mail here.

Since he works for the "cartel" he might be surprised at your postings here.

 

[hipporadio]

WLW’s implementation of IBOC is somewhat belated, rather interesting, and invites several theories as to just “why”. The most popular supposition proposes that WLW’s recent decision to become a “buzz saw” has much more to with a stealthy desire on the part of its ownership and cartel companion (Clear Channel) to pull out all the stops and wheel out "The Big One" to serve only as an on-air example and push the fledgling HD Radio technology.

Let’s review a bit of history...

WLW has always been somewhat conservative in its engineering practices as they relate to trendy technology. In the 80s, WLW (while the largest station in Cincinnati) was one of the few sizable players there who passed on C-QUAM AM Stereo. It was said at the time that Randy Michaels “just said NO”. Fact is--WLW does not need superficial boutique technology to pursue and hold its leading position in the Cincy market. They simply do a great job of broadcasting!

IBOC is no stranger to Cincinnati--it actually was first tested on air there on experimental station WD2XAM 1660AM licensed to US Digital Radio, Inc. WLW had HD Radio capacity well before it recently became a consistent daytime feature in mid 2006. Many of the initial nighttime interference tests were conducted between 700 WLW and 710 WOR. HD Radio on AM actually debuted in that market as a regular feature in the first half of 2004--not on WLW--but on RealOldies 1530 (then WSAI).

In the Email response posted from WLW’s host, note his position: [quotation] “I've followed the IBOC debate for sometime. Although it's admittedly something that won't effect our revenue...”

Nor will buzz-casting HD Radio (effectively rendering WLW a digital-daytimer) have any effect on their revenue from local ad sales. Given that stations coverage, history, and position--there simply is no logical reason to substantiate any assertion that IBOC is buzzing away on “The Big One” to enhance local dollars... Not at this time... Or any time soon for that matter. So why?

WLW’s owner is heavily invested in the destructive and defective IBOC technology... HD Radio clearly is failing to meet even minimal and constantly-revised expectations in the marketplace... WLW is a “prestige station” with insiders and with the general public--"I heard it on WLW" carries weight... Aside from the parent’s accessory interest in IBOC--as a daily routine, WLW has no horse in the HD Radio race.

Now to the supposition: Could matters be so sad and stressful with the current condition of HD radio... That WLW becomes more important to the future of IBOC than HD Radio is to the future of WLW?

 

[700WLW]

Oh, you mean dorks with HD radios that require dipole/beverage antennas ?

Uh - no... You asked what he meant. I don't think it's that ambiguous.

Of course, I could e-mail Scott and find out for sure. I guess I could also ask him who you are and let him know how you're trying to twist his e-mail here.

Since he works for the "cartel" he might be surprised at your postings here.

Normally, most people would have defined, "that's a given" - that statement leaves one to guess. Go ahead and email Scott - trying to twist his email, I am just inviting other opinions. Just because he works for the Cartel, doesn't mean he supports IBOC - on the other hand, he seems to be pushing the WWW and XM. As far as my postings here, I doubt he would even be interested - he has more important worries, like explaining his supporting MSU over OSU for Saturday night's game.