Wednesday, August 31, 2005
MEN'S RULES - Insight
1. You have enough clothes.
1. You have too many shoes.1. I am in shape. Round IS a shape!1. Thank you for reading this.Yes, I know, I have to sleep on the couch tonight;But did you know men really don't mind that? It'slike camping.Pass this to as many men as you can - to give them alaugh.Pass this to as many women as you can - to give thema bigger laugh!
Sunday, August 28, 2005
HD RADIO-FALSE OR DECEPTIVE ADVERTISING?
Basics In False Advertising
The FTC Act states that false advertising is a form of unfair and deceptive commerce. The term "false advertising" has been broadly construed. As you might expect, the term includes advertisements that are in fact untrue. However, the term false advertising extends well beyond untrue advertisements. It also includes advertisements that make representations that the advertiser has no reasonable basis to believe, even if the representations turn out to be true. An example would be an advertisement for a photocopier machine which stated that the machine used less toner than any comparable machine. The advertiser would have committed false advertising if it had no reasonable basis to believe the truth of this claim (such as through comparative tests), even if it turned out to be true.
The FTC Act gives the FTC broad authority to regulate advertising. Under this broad mandate, the FTC has issued regulations barring advertisements that could be misleading even if they are true. A famous example involves Anacin, a brand of aspirin. The maker of Anacin ran ads claiming that clinical tests showed that Anacin delivered the same headache relief as the leading pain relief prescription. The ad did not mention that aspirin itself is the leading pain medicine. The FTC determined that the ad was misleading. The ad implied that Anacin was more effective than aspirin, when in fact, Anacin is really just aspirin.
(Here is more)-
Actual loss is not required to show an injury. All that is needed is a reasonable basis for the belief that the plaintiff is likely to be damaged as a result of the advertising. An example of such damage would include ads that deceive consumers who are the target population of both the advertiser and the plaintiff. The penalties for a Lanham Act violation include the plaintiff's lost profits, the additional profits to the advertiser resulting from the deceptive ad, treble damages, and attorneys' fees.
Here is the link to the full article:
New York Times Article Lies About HD Radio!
COMPLAINT TO NEW YORK TIMES ABOUT ACCURACY-(ARTICLE ATTACHED AT BOTTOM)
This article is full of inaccuracies, omissions, half truths, and misinformation. It is biased propaganda spread by an interested party.
The In Band On channel IBOC now called HD (High Distortion?) iBiquity NRSC-5 system proposal has NOT yet been approved by the FCC, except for limited testing and experimentation. It may never be approved in the form now under consideration by the FCC. The $1900 Yamaha HD radio mentioned in the attached article, might be trash soon.
Most of the comments solicited by the FCC for consideration and posted on their website, are STRONGLY AGAINST ACCEPTING THE PROPOSED NRSC-5 HD DIGITAL SYSTEM.
All that hissing he hears from his HD radio is caused by the HD signal itself, and not the analog FM signal! Tune in to a non HD station with a regular analog stereo FM radio that most of us have, and except for unusual circumstances, you will get nice, clear, analog stereo sound that audiophiles worldwide have declared is much more musical and pleasant to listen to then any digital audio.
The system being proposed, and now under consideration by the FCC is a HOAX TO SELL EXPENSIVE HIGH DISTORTION RADIOS!
HD radio is NOT free, each listener has to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on new HD radios, while the HD broadcasters are peddling and profiteering from the sales of the HD radios.
The proposed HD signal severely interferes with current analog AM and FM stereo broadcasting, and blocks adjacent channel stations that you now enjoy. HD creates a loud hiss several channels wide on either side of any HD station. You get fewer stations with HD, not more stations, because adjacent channel stations you can now clearly enjoy on your present analog radios, are jammed by digital hiss spread up and down the radio dial on either side of the transmitting HD station.
The claim that the HD signal can more easily penetrate tunnels and has more coverage than current AM and FM stations is untrue. In fact, the experiments show HD stations cover less then half of the area their current analog station signals are now covering, and the severe HD interference will create "hiss zones" between cities that are now clearly served by the larger analog signals and popular local stations that will be jammed by HD.
The public already owns over 1 Billion AM and FM radios in North America that will be hissed into obsolescence by the new system.
Most radio stations serve up a playlist limited to a few of the most popular tunes. I can get even better listening quality, with worldwide coverage (even in tunnels), from a less expensive iPod or similar player, without a radio station, commercials, obnoxious DJs, and I can pick and listen to my tunes and programs whenever I want to hear them, anywhere in the world! No HD stations cover the entire globe like an iPod, podcasting, internet steaming stations, WIFI, WiMax, and even the newest cell phones with built in, wireless delivery, high quality stereo iPod type music players.
Radio with pictures and text information has been around for more than 60 years. It is called TELEVISION, and is already available everywhere in the world, by satellite, cable and over the air TV stations. Who needs HD radio with pictures and text when there is already television?
HD radio is a sham.
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 10:14:15 -0400From: Steve Martin
Difference Between FM & HD Getting NoticedJuly 28, 2005
Revolution on the RadioBy GLENN FLEISHMAN
Plug a set of headphones into a radio tuned to an FM jazz station.Hear the hiss at the bottom of the range and the fuzz at the top.Remember why you like compact discs.But don't be impatient: wait eight seconds. An "HD" light appears onthe tuner. And now the bottom drops out. The hiss turns to silence.The stereo channels separate, opening a cramped room into aperformance hall. And the high fuzz is now crisp high notes from atrumpet or Ella Fitzgerald.You have just heard terrestrial digital radio. Or you would have - ifyou could get your hands on a receiver.Satellite digital radio has captured the attention of consumers andinvestors with its billions spent and millions of paying subscribers.But a quiet digital revolution has hit the AM and FM dials as well:more than 450 stations in the United States now broadcast one or twodigital channels alongside analog ones. At least 2,000 of the morethan 12,000 stations in the country are committed to adding theformat.The technology to make this happen - called in-band on-channel, orIBOC - hides digital signals at low power in the spaces betweenstations. Only one company's technology has been approved by theFederal Communications Commission: HD Radio from iBiquity Digital.(IBiquity says HD does not stand for high definition - or anythingelse.)Digital AM sounds like present-day stereo analog FM. Digital FM notonly improves fidelity and stereo reception, providing a dynamic audiorange approaching that of a compact disc, but also makes use of enoughbandwidth to allow multiple channels.An HD Radio tuner takes eight seconds to lock onto and start playing adigital stream; the analog broadcast seamlessly switches into richeraudio, providing a demonstration of its improved quality.Unlike satellite radio, digital AM and FM are free to listeners. Butonly a few tens of thousands of car tuners equipped to decode thesignals have been sold in the 18 months since the first product wasshipped, according to Dan Benjamin, a senior analyst at ABI Researchin Oyster Bay, N.Y. Home tuners are just reaching the market.How Digital Radio WorksIBOC uses a part of the spectrum just outside the frequency used for aradio station's conventional signals.HD Radio is capable of great range with a small fraction of the powerof analog radio. In a test by National Public Radio and WNYC-FM, a57-watt transmitter on the Empire State Building reached almost all ofWNYC's coverage area, with a population of 16 million, according toMike Starling, NPR's vice president for engineering.The technology sends multiple streams of data over very narrowfrequencies to solve the problems of analog AM and FM reception. Thestreams are separately received, synchronized and assembled by theradio tuner.In AM, this avoids having signals fade in short tunnels and willprevent noise from electrical motors. "It gets rid of the majority ofproblems with AM radio," said Thomas R. Ray III, director ofengineering for Buckley Broadcasting and WOR-AM, a commercialtalk-radio station in New York that has added digital transmissions.With FM stations, multipath reflection can be controlled with HDRadio, avoiding audible echoes from signals bouncing off buildings."You don't get that sort of 'fumth-th-th-fumth' sound," said StephenShenefield, director of product development at Boston Acoustics, anaudio equipment manufacturer.FM radio has a larger spread of unused spectrum, and National PublicRadio and public radio stations successfully pushed the F.C.C. toallow multicasting, or multiple digital channels of different qualityfor existing stations. The F.C.C. allows a second digital channel witha waiver; up to five channels may be permitted in the future.What's OnPublic radio produces much more programming than its member stationscan broadcast: 300 hours a week, Mr. Starling of NPR said. NPR is nowoffering five full-time music streams to stations for HD Radiomulticasting as well. "If we had more shelf space, we could do moreformat focusing," Mr. Starling said.KUOW-FM in Seattle broadcasts what it calls KUOW2, a full slate ofreruns of local and network programs with a dedicated host.Commercial broadcasters, too, are taking note. Clear Channel, whichowns 1,200 stations, says it is committed to taking 95 percent of itsstations in the top 100 markets digital within three years. Among theattractions is HD Radio's ability to deliver data streams alongsideaudio. The system can already carry program-associated data, like asong title, artist and album name. But the capacity exists for muchmore.Robert J. Struble, chairman and chief executive of iBiquity, notedthat the text of advertising messages could be synchronized to displayon a radio's readout as a related commercial was broadcast. Other usesinclude traffic updates for car navigation systems and privatecommercial data transmissions.A future version of the technology will feature a data uplink thatcould let stations have a "buy now" button for songs. "There's nobetter place to make an impulse purchase than when I'm sitting intraffic," Mr. Struble said.HD Radio has the potential to limit access to certain channels byreceiver serial number, much as with satellite digital radio, so thatspecific programming could be delivered for a fee.Mr. Starling mused that the "buy now" button might read "pledge now"for public radio stations, and that a station could allow onlylisteners who donate funds to tune to a digital channel free offund-raising during pledge drives.How to ListenHD Radio was limited to car receivers from its retail introduction inJanuary 2004 until June 2005. The earliest HD Radio manufacturer,Kenwood (kenwoodusa.com), now has 40 models compatible with a $399 HDRadio adapter; other makers have a few products released, but a floodis in the pipeline. A representative of Visteon, a major automotivesystems supplier, said automakers could offer HD Radio as an option inthe 2006 model year.Yamaha (www.yamaha.com) released the first home radio in June, itsRX-V4600 ($1,900), a home entertainment centerpiece. In tests of allSeattle-area FM HD Radio stations using the Yamaha unit, the resultswere breathtaking. Tuning in secondary multicast channels, however,required use of the remote control and was awkward.Three companies plan simpler tabletop tables, each of which will addmulticast digital stations sequentially: turning the dial will tunethrough those secondary stations.The Radiosophy receiver docks in a speaker unit; together, the twoparts cost $259 direct from the company, including shipping.Radiosophy expects to offer a car adapter kit later. The receiverincludes analog and digital optical outputs. The company(www.radiosophy.com) expects to ship the product in September.The Recepter Radio HD ($499) made by Boston Acoustics (www.bostonacoustics.com) has a single built-in speaker and a satellitespeaker to produce stereo audio. It is also a clock radio, and hasstereo input and multiple outputs. The radio should be available inlate August.Polk Audio has built HD Radio into a more elaborate all-in-oneentertainment system that includes a CD and DVD player and speakers,and multiple inputs and outputs. The $599 unit, called the I-Sonic, isalso equipped for satellite XM Radio through a plug-in module. PolkAudio has delayed shipping until late in the year (www.polkaudio.com).No one in the industry expects to replace a billion analog radiosovernight. Even Mr. Struble of iBiquity put the most optimistic datefor an analog shutdown as 12 years from now, though he thought thatwas unlikely.Still, there are already listeners, however few. "The last time we hadto shut down the HD - off for any reason - we had eight phone calls,"Mr. Ray of WOR said. "People wanted to know why."Steve MartinSFM Consulting 2579 John Milton DriveSuite 105-206Oak Hill, VA 20171-2527703.715.0827
HD RADIO-EVEN MORE COMMENTS!
Posted by: T Oad
Posted on: May 27, 2005, 9:07 AM PDT
Story: High-definition radio gears up for reality
Who are the morons that run the entertainment business? I'd like to know because these people have to be the most clueless jokers in the history of the planet.Here's what will fix radio: better content. No more stupid "Morning Zoo Crew." No more stations that play the same ten songs over and over and over and over. No more stations that broadcast yet another conservative talk show.I have news for you: it's all BORING. It's all stale. People are tired of it which is why many have stopped listening. I'd rather have my iPod playing what I want to hear than to listen to the same old tired stuff on the radio.It doesn't matter if you broadcast radio in HD Surround 3D Holograms. If the programming remains narrow and boring, no one will listen.
Suck you in, then bury you in ads.
Posted by: Nathan Boyle
Posted on: May 27, 2005, 8:30 AM PDT
Story: High-definition radio gears up for reality
So Clear Channel can have up to 30 stations in the area that play nothing anybody wants to hear? Hot darn, sounds like a winner to me.NPR fears losing money if XM and Sirius drain local pledge drive listeners away. But in the end, if nobody wants to listen to local stations, I think that is there right, and the Government has to get out of the way. I'd give anything not to be forced to watch news from the local TV stations in this area, they are horrible beyond words. NWLB****http://www.nwlb.net
The absolute lack of...
Posted by: Earl Benser
Posted on: May 27, 2005, 4:58 AM PDT
Story: High-definition radio gears up for reality
... quality free radio stations now does not bode well for any technique to expand the number of such free radio stations. We will just wind up with that many times more audio garbage. Sirius and X-M work because people will pay to get the programming they want. No advertisers are involved (or so I think - I don't care for satellitle radio), and ratings are simply measured by subscritptions.My personal preference is MP3 music and audio book files via my super iPod. So I do my own programming the way I like it.
HD radio? Hardly!
Posted by: Paul Higgins
Posted on: May 28, 2005, 6:13 AM PDT
Story: High-definition radio gears up for reality
Given the audio quality that the proposed digital radio services will be offering, based on the testing up to now, calling it HD is a joke!And most of the ancillary services in purports to offer as something new, exciting and incredible, such as titles of songs being played, breaking news, traffic reports etc have all been possible in the analog realm on FM for years. But stations never bothered investing in the relatively inexpensive equipment to provide them. Why should digital radio (or, ahem, HD radio) be any more of an incentive.It's also about trying to hype up a medium that should merely be seen as utilitarian within the plethora of media out there. Broadcast radio is no longer an "exciting" medium. To try to artificially boost its fortunes now with something as lame as this is like throwing money down the toilet. Remember "return on investment", hmmm?!
HD RADIO-MORE COMMENTS
In all honesty I don't even listen to the radio much. Most radio stations out there have the same top 40 rotation (XRT Chicago is an exception with a great play list). I remember this place i used to work at piped in a local radio station and I swear I must have heard the same 5 songs rotated within 3 hrs. Not only that, the FCC fines shows like the Stern show for being "indecent". No thanks, I'll stick to mp3s for music & Sirius for my car.
Gee!, now I can hear all of the same great commercials, commercials and commercials in higher quality! Most of my broadcast radio stations are at least 50% talk and commercials, who cares about the quality of that. That's what drove me to XM in the first place. Let's work on making ad-free radio higher quality.
Who gives a crap? Anyone who is serious about music turned off their radios a long, long time ago (like...1982). We've got cassettes and CD players, satellite radio, iPods and other digital music appliances - we can burn new music from new artists from around the world to CDs or aforementioned digital music appliances...who the hell needs broadcast radio - HD or otherwise. Does Clear Channel own stock in this fiasco? They and the what - one or two other megacorporations who control broadcast radio - must be rolling in their collective graves - and they ain't even dead.....yet.
NAB ORDERS FCC-LEARN TO LIKE IT!
NAB to FCC: Don't Re-Think HD Standards Aug. 18, 2005 By Tony SandersThe NAB yesterday (Aug. 17) said in written comments that the current rules and technical standards governing HD Radio are more than adequate for the current nationwide rollout of digital AM and FM radio, and attempts to change or downgrade the status of those standards are, effectively, moot.
Late last month, Microsoft and two other joint commenters said in a filing that the FCC should amend the standard it has laid out for digital audio broadcasting because there are “critical omissions” in the standard.
The NAB said the current standards are “competent, sufficient” and “useful” and said that the FCC has already made its decisions about using those standards. Since those decisions have been made, says the NAB, the FCC should dismiss comments that urge the Commission to reconsider using the HD standards or that urge using other spectrum options.
The FCC’s deadline for filing comments and reply comment on this proceeding is now past. If the FCC decides that it has enough information on the record to render a decision, the next step would be for the FCC’s commissioners and staff to study the record and to draw their conclusions. There is no fixed deadline as to when those decisions might be made, or released to the public.
If the FCC decides, instead, to ask for even more comments on this issue, the Commission would do so by issuing a “Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making.”The proceeding on HD Radio is FCC Docket 99-325 and the standards involved are the “In-Band/On-Channel Digital Radio Broadcasting Standard NRSC-5.”
HD RADIO MULTICASTING-IRRELEVANT?
SEATTLE - August 19, 2005 -Beginning today consumers can use Melodeo software, called Mobilcast™, to find and download Podcasts on a mobile phone. The addition of Podcasts is a significant step in establishing the mobile phone as a singular device for finding, acquiring, and using digital media. During the past year Podcasting has grown exponentially, yet access is confined to the PC. By enabling Podcast downloads to a mobile phone Melodeo hopes to expand the reach of Podcasts to millions of new users. More information about Podcast downloads can be found at www.melodeo.com/mobilcast.
download the full press release in pdf
Thursday, August 25, 2005
Digital radio-A High Distortion Iniquity
Most people are perfectly satisfied with analog FM stereo just the way it is, and has been for over 40 years. Analog FM occasionally has a problem with multi-path but that is much worse with the iBiquity HD radio system. When 2 digital signals combine (as in the case of multi-path) they wreck havoc. Multi-path doesn't disappear just because the signals are digital, in fact, the results are worse!
This article is a regurgitation of the New York Times article you sent me a couple of weeks ago (that was later retracted for inaccuracy).
The crackles and hisses are caused by the HD radio iBiquity digital FM signal interfering with the analog signal. The power lines associated with the stoplight re-radiate the digital HD radio interference causing more static, hissing, and jamming. Shut off the HD iBiquity digital signal and the interference will disappear! To avoid the interference just avoid broadcasting an iBiquity HD radio signal. iBiquity generated HD radio noise is a GUARANTEED TUNE OUT FOR ANALOG LISTENERS!
The solution is simple:
BAN INIQUITY HIGH DISTORTION RADIO!
THEN ALL THOSE NOISY PROBLEMS WILL DISAPPEAR, AND YOUR BROADCAST NEIGHBORS WON'T SUE!
NOW FOR THE GOOD NEWS:
THERE IS A BETTER SYSTEM! 100% in band and ON CHANNEL with 5.1 surround sound as a bonus!
Digital Radio Express - fmeXtra
cc: USA TODAY
Iniquity propaganda included below:
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 12:57:49 -0400From: Art Cohen
o Arthur Cohen o Whole Station Solutionso firstname.lastname@example.org 315-750-0419
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
HD RADIO-AN "EVIL THING"
So here comes Ibiquity with IBOC. According to the trades if you signed on last year it was $5,000 but if you wait a couple of years it will be $25,000. Then they said you would have to pay a license fee just like your ASCAP and BMI at the prevailing rate to “reup” or whatever you want to call it. The trades said Ibiquity gave Clear Channel unnamed incentives and the head engineer at Clear Channel is on the NRSC board. I don't know all the details but this doesn't pass the smell test. As my grandmother would say, "There's something rotten in Denmark."
So Clear Channel is pushing for 6kHz music audio to diminish sidebands but I personally can hear IBOC hash when I tune my car radio to 1380 in Columbia, SC, which is five or six miles away from Clear Channel's WCOS-AM 1400. Why 1380? Because I own a simple country station doing live radio with real people (imagine that) not that far away broadcasting on 1380 AM in Bishopville, SC.
So the technicals look doubtful, and the money trail? It will make your head spin. Is this pathetic drama going to have the same sad conclusion as Braveheart? Mel Gibson playing William Wallace got pulled apart on the rack in the end. Are you with me? We've got to stop this evil thing.
James D. Jenkins,owner/GM
HD RADIO CONSPIRACY-RUIN THE COMPETITION!
This is a technology that will financially ruin small town stations such as mine. We are unable to pay the $5,000 licensing per station now, much less the higher fees later. Then we are faced with the upgrade in equipment to broadcast IBOC. Again the financials do not work.
Overall, we estimate that if we licensed today that the cost would be in the range of $125,000. In a market that barely breaks even, how could we possibly handle this financially?
I posed this question to the IBOC people at NAB. The ultimate answer was, "we do not expect the small market to make this move." What then do we tell listeners who have ordered cars with IBOC radio and want to listen to IBOC? The simple answer is, "we lose!" No more listener.
Then there is the engineering and maintenance issue. How do we perform these functions when there are no qualified engineers available?
These are legitimate concerns for small operators. The entire IBOC thing appears to be driven by the large multi-station groups.
Saturday, August 20, 2005
HD RADIO-A REAL "LISTENER LOOSER!"
Sony Ericsson W550 Walkman Phone @ PhoneMag.com
RADIO FACES COMPETITION!
MIKE WENDLAND: Michigan broadcasters don't fear satellite radio competition -- yet
BY MIKE WENDLAND FREE PRESS COLUMNIST
July 22, 2005
Satellite radio is all the buzz these days. But the Michigan Association of Broadcasters says that buzz just may be literal.
According to a Michigan State University report commissioned by the association and to be released at the association's annual meeting at the Soaring Eagle Resort in Mt. Pleasant today, only about 8% of the Michigan public has access to satellite radio and of them, fully 50% say they do not receive good reception when driving.
That's perhaps the most controversial finding to come from the report, which, considering the outfit that commissioned it, not surprisingly finds that the public is not being lured away from local radio by emerging technologies.
In fact, 70% of the 300 Michigan residents surveyed in April and May by MSU researchers said they listen to local radio stations as much now as they ever did and 95% said they expected to listen as much or more during the coming year.
"The facts show that the hype being put forth by emerging technologies doesn't align with the reality that local radio is uniquely positioned to provide the local touch listeners value," said Karole White, president and chief executive officer of the association, which represents 300 radio and television stations across the state.
The association did find one high tech trend that has surprisingly strong legs.
According to the Communications Research Institute at MSU, 20% of Michigan residents said they listen regularly to personal music players like Apple's iPod, typically 45 minutes a day.
The MAB will unleash an advertising campaign over the next few weeks that highlights the findings and promotes the strength of local radio, said White.
But for now, broadcasters say they're not worried about high tech gizmos stealing their audience.
They can also take solace in a study issued Wednesday by the Pew Internet & American Life Project that also pooh-poohed the impact of all the geek speak high-tech terms bandied about by computer types and tech writers.
It found that the public often hasn't a clue what the geeks are gushing about.
Pew says only 13% of the public knows what the term "podcasting" means, 9% have heard of "RSS feeds" and 19% know the word "phishing."
I confess. Like many of my peers, I bandy those words around like they're on the tips of everyone's tongues.
So, just to be clear:
•Podcasting is a means of publishing audio files and do-it-yourself radio-like programs over the Internet that can be downloaded and played through computers or personal music players.
•RSS feeds are Web-based notifications of updates of Internet stories or blog reports or even podcasts sent out to people who use software that seeks out and flags or somehow marks new material for them.
•Phishing is the act of fraudulently trying to trick someone into giving up sensitive financial information or personal identification data by masquerading as a legitimate outfit like eBay or your bank. Usually the scam involves a real-looking e-mail that directs you to a forged Web site that the identity thieves set up to capture any information you unwittingly provide.
There. I feel better. Do we understand each other?
Three more surveys that came out this week show that some high-tech trends are getting traction.
According to the Needham & Co. high-tech consulting outfit, the so-called iPod halo effect that has spotlighted consumer interest in Apple may have attracted up to 400,000 Windows users to the Mac computer platform so far this year.
If true, that is a tremendously significant number for Apple, which over recent years has only had about 3% of the personal computer market share. New sales this year have seen the company increase that now to 4.5%, says the tech firm IDC.
And it comes on the heels of an estimate by TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence that more than 32 million adult Americans plan to buy an iPod within the next 12 months.
Somebody is pretty excited by all this technology. Which takes us back to the Michigan broadcasters.
The fact that they're planning a big advertising campaign on why radio is so cool tells me that, while they may not be worried about audience erosion today, they see where the trend lines are heading.
Contact MIKE WENDLAND at 313-222-8861 or email@example.com.
Copyright © 2005 Detroit Free Press Inc.
RADIO LISTENERSHIP SHRINKING!
ORADELL, N.J., June 7 /PRNewswire/ -- Music radio stations are facing
increasingly powerful competition from the modern music culture says a newly
published study by TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence. And what's more,
listener bases are changing, and not for the better.
"Listener bases appear to be shrinking," says Constantine Kambanis, an
analyst at TechnoMetrica. "Moreover, they may be losing some of their
financial value, with perhaps the most economically important listeners
leaving radio for the modern music experience."
According to Kambanis, the synergy between digital music formats, portable
digital music players, personal computers and the Internet has created better
and more alluring alternatives to traditional radio, forcing music radio to
either adapt or die.
"Part of the appeal of things like the Apple iPod and online music
services like iTunes and Napster is that the listener's music experience can
be completely customized. You just can't do that with traditional radio."
Comparing what he dubs the "modern music experience" to traditional music
radio programming, Kambanis says that downloading gives such music a certain
degree of ownership and permanence not found in radio. Beyond that, the
quickness and ease of downloading music and the absence of time-consuming and
irrelevant commercials diminishes the value proposition of music radio
According to the report, music radio will have to come to grips with the
fact that technology is fracturing the overarching listener base while
simultaneously personalizing consumer's interaction with pop culture.
"Technology is having a profound impact on music radio's mission
statement. It's forcing the advent of greater specialization and more
genre-specific content. The future of music radio probably lies in highly
targeted entertainment and in introducing new artists and music products into
highly specialized markets."
About the Report
This study surveyed a random sample of 1,002 adult American consumers on
their perceptions of various products and services as well as buying habits.
Beyond looking at the overarching modern music experience and its impact on
the music radio industry, the report examines ownership rates, demand for
portable digital music players, online music service subscriptions, trends in
PC usage for downloading music, downloading vs. buying music CDs, music
piracy, consumer familiarity with Sony's Walkman Phone, its market viability
and how it stacks up against Apple's iPod.
To request a Table of Contents and Abstract or to purchase the report,
please contact firstname.lastname@example.org or call 800-328-8324.
SOURCE TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence
Friday, August 19, 2005
Why HD radio won't save broadcasters.
Format for Printing
E-Mail This Article
Subscribe to B2Can HD Rescue Radio?
The last, best hope for saving terrestrial radio may not be enough.By Om Malik, June 10, 2005
Terrestrial radio is under assault. The attacks are coming from all sides -- satellite radio, iPods, subscription music services, broadband radio, and podcasting. Given all that, the $20 billion a year radio industry has to reinvent itself. Fast.
So what's a radio executive to do? Industry insiders are excited about high-definition radio, which marries analog and digital signals and sends out a hybrid data stream. HD radios then decode the two types of signal and play them back as separate channels.
What makes this possible is that radio broadcasters actually own the frequencies around their stations. An operator whose station sits at 96.7 FM has control over the frequencies that spread from 96.5 to 96.9 megahertz. In HD radio, the analog signal travels over 96.7, and as many as eight additional digital signals can be sent using the 96.6- and 96.8-MHz bands.
HD technology addresses the biggest problem with modern radio: Its homogenized formats simply aren't serving the increasingly niche-ified audience. By offering more specialized formats, radio can bring back some of the listeners. A classical radio station with HD capability can promptly start offering an opera-only channel, which may attract a smaller but more lucrative listenership. Or a pop music station can launch a channel devoted exclusively to indie music. Or world music -- you get the idea. In addition, HD radio stations can dispatch real-time traffic reports, paging alerts, and even e-mails, which show up on the tiny LCD screens on HD radios. HD also sounds better than traditional analog radio and can be recorded TiVo-like for later playback.
Even with all those advantages, though, HD radio may be too late to help the industry. A recent study by TechnoMetrica Market suggests that the coveted youth audience has already abandoned traditional radio and is tuning in elsewhere. While one in nine U.S. adults listens to music online, an astonishing one in three 18- to 24-year-olds is doing it. "Listener bases appear to be shrinking," says Constantine Kambanis, an analyst at TechnoMetrica. And there's little reason to expect that trend to stop.
Audio Content is KING-whether digital or analog!
"Include Radio in iPods, Phones, Home Media"
That's the title of this Radio World article, in which Steve Church recognizes the degree to which new media has displaced radio as the centerpiece of audio entertainment. Unfortunately, he misdiagnoses the cause and possible solutions.
Like many other terrestrial broadcasters, Steve seems to think the attraction of iPods, etc., to consumers is that "they are digital. " As Steve writes, ". . . . the technology world is finding nothing much compelling in today's radio broadcasting. All these new digital machines need to eat digital food." And, of course, he feels IBOC/HD is the "digital food" that will magically save terrestrial radio.
I feel like I'm whipping a dead horse here, but I'll say it again: radio is a content business, not a technology business. People don't listen to iPods or satellite radio because "it's digital" but because iPods and satellite radio offer options and content they can't get from terrestrial radio. It's irrelevant that IBOC/HD is "digital" and"sounds great" if the content from terrestrial broadcasters is more cookie-cutter formats like "Jack FM" or syndicated talk shows like Rush, Dr. Laura, Jim Rome, etc., and listeners have to spend 15% or more each hour sitting through spots. Listeners are moving to new media to escape the same old same old on terrestrial radio, not because they want a "digital listening experience." They want an entertaining listening experience most of all.
HD radio-No portable radios will be available for YEARS said CEO!
Q&A With Ibiquity's Bob Struble
Bob Struble is CEO of Ibiquity, the company behind IBOC/HD radio, and this interview with him is enlightening, often in ways he may not have intended. I got a good laugh out of this quote:
Right now we could probably make a portable HD radio but it would take a car battery to make it work.
Struble also admits the original selling points for IBOC/HD----improved audio and no interference----are turning out to be non-starters with consumers.
Radio Listenership Declining-Streaming Media the WINNER!!!
HD digital radio will jam the airwaves and make them useless as thousands of stations sign on to jam each other with hiss. AM and FM, digital or analog, will be useless because of the noise!
Here are some links to the projections and data.
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
HD Radio-LESS CHOICE MORE NOISE!
When More (bandwidth) is Less (choice)
Another way to think of this is to compare an analog photograph with a digital fax ... the fax picture is a series of dots that are "on" (black) or "off" (white space).What is "Digital Audio Broadcasting"?
Digital is a new way of using electricity to store music, voice, and information. Digital information is "binary" (either on or off, one or a zero) using pits (or no pits) to code the music on compact discs or bursts of energy for computer communication, instead of smoothly varied signals taken from vinyl records, for example.
If you look very very closely, you will see that a facsimile printout is a digital "binary" (on or off) format of information. Look closely and you will see a series of squares that are either white (off) or black (on). There is no grey in-between, its either black or white. Contrast that digital storage and transmission with a photograph. Look very closely at the photo, on the other hand, and you will see greys and colors, in nearly infinite shades.
Currently radio stations transmit in analog, but take the music from a digital storage format.
Please don't confuse the digital display of your analog tuner's controller with DAB.Just as the fax machine screeches into the phone line to transmit those blocks of binary information that makes up a picture, so will "Digital Audio Broadcasting" make sounds very like a fax machine into your radio reciever!
Several years ago most of the rest of the nations of planet Earth created a third separate broadcast band to create Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB) radio stations.
Large american broadcasters represented by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) wanted to do the same in the United States. Unfortunately the US military wanted to continue using those bands of frequencies to transmit and recieve information for testing of military machinery. Modern technology makes this utterly unecessary, since now there are much higher frequencies available with much greater security with the current state-of-the-art available to the military. The retention of the 1400mHz "L-Band" by the US Military is especially ironic since now Europe and Canada are filling those frequencies with broadcasts thus making them largely useless to the US Military. Additionally, regular citizens can now easily build and modify equipment to transmit and recieve in the "L-Band" and thus these frequencies are not secure! The military should go ahead and move on to the higher more secure frequencies!
There's no point in testing your missile only to have Elvis on the "L-Band" take over control of it!
Example: from Richmond, Va., WHRV89.5FM and WAUQ89.7FM are "first adjacent" stations, that is they are on each other's first frequency channel adjacent to each other. Currently a good receiver can separate these two weak and distant stations right next to each other on the richmond radio dial. When they double in bandwidth, we will hear neither station ever again, nor will the rural people in between of Jamestown or Tidewater, Va. At least if these were NEW stations there would be new programming sources ... but instead we just lose two sources. They are not replaced with new programming outlets. But in 1992, the military would not yield and so the NAB thought they would instead place these DAB signals In the AM and FM Broadcast Band, centered On the existing radio station Channels (hence the acronym IBOC-DAB)
This is where this particular way of employing Digital became a threat to your favorite radio station. The NAB proposed to place the DAB "audio fax machines" just immediately (in radio-speak, "adjacent") above and below each analog radio station. The idea is that they will transmit both in analog and in digital for a few years, and eventually turn off the analog broadcast transmitter and end up with a fully pure DAB band that will completely replace the existing current analog AM and FM Broadcast bands.
Sounds great, eh? The problem is that a side-effect of doubling the width of a radio station is that if your favorite radio station happens to be a weak little independent college, religious or community mom&pop radio station right next to a high-powered blow-torch of a radio on the broadcast dial ... you very likely will not be able to recieve your favorite station again.
In other words, your favorite station's signal is jammed by the big stations digital signal!
Some will tell you that FM technology will reject the IBOC noise, but when WJFK ran an actual test IBOC signal, we went up to Northern Virginia to test their proposition that it would not affect our radios.
We made an actual recording of the IBOC signal jamming the next station down on the dial!! Then we testified to Congress regarding IBOC and gave Congress the actual sounds of test IBOC stations destroying another station's signal as well as more discussion of the misleading nature of the NAB testimony.
In this image here to the right of this text you can see a rough graphic representation of the proposed IBOC-DAB signal distribution and the graphic shows how this would destroy your access to recieve a neigboring signal if you are living in-between the two stations.
The current "In-Band On-Channel, Digital Audio Broadcasting" (IBOC-DAB) proposal would force mandatory "sunsetting" or prohibition of existing affordable analog FM stations, making them broadcast in digital.
Adding insult to injury, it would allow big stations to more than double their bandwidth. This would reduce the "buffer space" between many stations to a negative number ... station's signals would overlap and your receiver would "hear" both simultaneously ... utter gibberish would result. (See examples)
To see for yourself how this works, tune to a nearby powerful FM station and click once in either direction, notice that the signal is still there. Click twice, it vanishes. Under the proposed rules, two clicks in either direction would be taken and the powerful station would literally jam other signals nearby on the dial but geographically distant or weak.
The effect is like the Nazi radio giveaway because it destroys by law our ability to receive weaker or more distant signals but does not allow local competition to replace that loss with new programming sources. All Germans, whether they liked it or not, heard Hitler 's latest speech and no counterpoint.
Technology Investor magazine affirms the economic viability of subscription Satellite radio services citing research that shows that "30% of CD sales are in music genres rarely heard on the radio dial." What is especially galling is that the NAB, SONY etc. argue that they need IBOC-DAB in order to "compete" with satellite and the Internet ... sidestepping the fact that it is not the digital sound that drives interest in expensive and inferior technology such as Satellite and Internet audio ... it is the variety that Sony even admits in their official statements are not available on the FM dial.
Under IBOC-DAB, spreadsheet driven robots playing repetitive programming, blaring ads, and irritating call-in schemes broadcast at 40,000 watts would dominate even more mercilessly than they do now.
Commercial radio content has little to do with Nazism, unless the latest bleating teen idol brings you to a murderous rage. But IBOC-DAB would knock out what many (about 20%) listeners prefer; the smaller noncommercial college, community, and religious stations.
HD Radio-Jams your favorite stations!
A radio station slot is a "channel" encompassing a RANGE of frequencies. A legal FM radio station is currently 200kHz [0.2mHz] of that dial.
Due to the lack of regulation requiring a minimum level of performance for FM receivers ... a large buffer was established in 1963 of three "channels" (also known as "third adjacent channel prohibition") to each side of a station in a local area.
So Q94.5FM uses a range of frequencies centered at 94.5mHz (m="mega" Hz="Hertz", which means "million vibrations a second) on the electromagnetic spectrum of frequencies available to current technology.
Q94.5FM encompasses a 200kHz bandwidth centered at 94.5FM, therefore half (100kHz or 0.1mHz) is updial and half is downdial. So the range is 94.5-0.1=94.4mHz and 94.5+0.1mHz=94.6mHz thus the range is 94.4--94.6mHz.
The DAB-IBOC proposal plans to expand that bandwidth from 200kHz to 430kHz.
Thus Q94.5FM would under IBOC-DAB encompass on the FM dial a range from 94.285--to-- 94.715mHz on the FM dial.
Similarly, (several miles to the East) WTPE 94.9FM's new signal encompasses 94.685--to-- 95.115mHz on the FM dial
Graphically: (ascii charted) Q94.5 94.285 94.715mHz iiiiiiii <0.3mHz of mixed signal! iiiiiiii 94.685 95.115mHz 94.9 Losing the competition provided by 94.9FM for Richmonders with a good radio is bad enough ... but the rural listeners between Richmond and Norfolk will likely lose access to both stations! And unlike with LPFM, there will be no replacement service.
HD Radio-Advocates exposed as conspirators!
You are one of the few independent radio stations left.
You have worked long and hard to prevent Clear Channel Inc. from buying up your radio station.
You are of course concerned about alternatives such as tapes, CDs, stationary satellite digital audio such as Music Choice and now mobile direct satellite digital service such as XM and Sirius as well as Internet digital audio such as MP3 and streaming audio stations.
And you have survived anyway. You have invested years of effort and sacrifice to be a resource to the community, you are not in this for "the money" ... you love broadcasting!
In the 1930s Hitler gave away 9 million AM radios to the German public, all calibrated to one channel. People who listened to forbidden stations such as the BBC were sent to concentration camps. Every single radio blared the Nazi party line, you could not escape it anywhere.
The Effect of the current proposed version of a mandatory Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB) format conversion is like the Nazi radio giveaway because it destroys by regulation our ability to receive weaker or more distant signals without replacing that with local competition ... further concentrating power to edit our perceptions of reality (via the media) into the hands of the few.
Perhaps you are one of the NonCommercial Educational (college, community and religious) radio stations that over 20% of Americans rely on for the programming that speaks to their souls and values their culture and music.
You know that the reason that these new digital services have not stolen that much of your audience is that you provide locally relevant music, news and cultural programming in a superior, robust analog broadcast format that is much more easily and cheaply available to the listener.
There are forces who would prefer to increase profits by reducing staff rather than compete fairly by producing compelling programming. These forces would like to have all programming automated and brought in from thousands of miles away. They would prefer that they not have to work very hard to gain listenership. In order for them to do that ... they need to get rid of the competition (you).
Its not just about money either. Those forces are frightened by alternatives to the mainstream Modernist American culture. Like the fictional Borg of the TV show, Startrek Voyager, since they have failed to absorb and assimilate you they instead will seek to destroy you!
A coalition headed by the "Washington Beltway" lobbyists for the largest broadcasters, the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB),would eliminate choice (you) on the airwaves just as effectively as any dictatorship by legally jamming weaker signals so your listener's receivers can no longer hear you.
The plan: NAB coalition lobbyists are pressuring the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for approval of a two-part proposed regulatory standard called "In-Band, On-Channel, Digital Audio Broadcasting" typically abbreviated as "IBOC-DAB".
The new proposed regulation for IBOC-DAB would force:
An end to affordable analog broadcasting (end of your favorite small-budget community, college or religious radio station as well as small commercial stations) Mandatory conversion is estimated to cost between $60,000 and $200,000 per transmitter. Do you have a spare quarter million? (don't forget murphy's law of upgrades).
Coalition cohort, Consumer Electronics Manufacturers Association (CEMA) is also standing to gain mightily from the forced obsolescence of half a BILLION receivers when that happens! Your favorite weaker nonmainstream radio signals will sound like a lone man calling out for help in a sea of screeching fax machine sounds.
Doubling the width of radio stations, causing overlapping signals where the larger more powerful signal would simply overwhelm (jam) the weaker signal.
The irony: In a very Orwellian twist, the NAB coalition claims that they must "go digital" in order to "be competitive."
Especially Ironic ... the NAB claims to oppose Low Power FM because LPFM would allegedly harm broadcasters fringe listenership ... meanwhile proposing IBOC-DAB that will destroy nearly all the listenership for smaller broadcasters! Doublespeak Award: The NAB themselves supported third adjacent frequency full power broadcasting in 1996 ... then opposed LPFM doing the exact same thing in 1999 and 2000 because ... because LPFM specifically prohibits large institutions from consolidating those outlets as well. (see our official Congressional Testimony on this issue)
Additional Irony Point: LPFM will create outlets for a wider array of formats and interest groups and cultures programming that would otherwise only be available on satellite or the Internet.
IBOC-DAB on the other hand will not only not add new outlets for new formats, it will destroy all smaller outlets that cater to niche audiences such as yourself instead!
By having an LPFM station play niche programming next to you on the FM dial instead of that niche only being available OFF the FM dial ... that LPFM station is literally bringing listeners to you and slows the rush to the Internet and Satellite audio services!!
In other words, LPFM is the best thing to ever happen to FM Broadcasters!It is ironic because the reason that FM faces competition from other medium is because these other medium provide a wider array of programming choices.
Sony admits DAB is not what people want, saying in the official record,
"Sony has seen a very slow market penetration in Europe with DAB, which employs the Eureka-147 standard. The disappointing ramp-up is attributable to a service that offers little more than improved audio."
Source: Sony Comments to FCC regarding DABbecause ...
..."[The Internet sources of audio are] increasingly becoming a more desirable alternative, in some cases, to the limited variety of music offered on the radio. ..."
That is why Sony demands an artificial regulatory "encouragement" of the DAB market with "mandatory sunsetting" of affordable analog broadcasting.
Sony even as much as admits that LPFM will save the FM dial, not DAB when they note,
"...[there] needs to be more of an impetus for the average consumer to adopt DAB. This impetus is either derived from a variety of new channels [like LPFM can provide for new formats] or new value-added services. S-DARS in the U.S. has chosen both methods. A value-added service offered by S-DARS, as an example, is commercial free radio broadcasting.[Like LPFM can provide]"
Source: Sony Comments to FCC regarding DAB
Not only will gadgets not solve a marketing problem (providing the product people want) the way the NAB coalition proposes to "go digital" will destroy what little alternative choice remains on the dial now ... thus pushing people even faster off the FM dial into demonstrably inferior technology (digital satellite and Internet) !!
Not only will the NAB DAB plan not save the FM dial from Satellite/Internet ... it will so destroy the FM dial for variety that their plan will hasten the death of FM broadcasting! Your years of effort and sacrifice could go down the drain.
If listeners cannot get what they want on the FM dial ... and there are alternatives available ... what do you think will happen?
When those listeners start surfing ... will they return to the FM dial, or will they surf the satellite channels on their satellite receiver, or click around the bookmarks in their RealAudio Player? Once listeners have gotten used to getting what they want from other medium, will they ever listen to you again??
Analysis of the situation shows that the NAB argment is akin to saying that what Hollywood needs to save a bad script is more special effects! This is true only for the people who would have gone to that movie regardless of the bad script. For those of us who actually expect more out of a movie, nothing short of a desperation born of a monopoly destroying access to alternative movies would have us go to such a movie.
Duncan American Radio has cited a "historically huge" decrease in listenership of 12% during the 1990s. Duncan cited increased ads and "lack of programming innovation" (like the new formats that LPFM could bring to your market).
In other words, the FM dial has a programming format crisis ... not a technical delivery crisis.
The competition for the FM dial is expensive and buggy as a case of oranges from Florida. And yet listeners are struggling with their thousand dollar PCs, reloading and rebooting and re-installing to deal with glitches constantly. Why? Because Internet audio sounds so good? No.
Do listeners pester themselves with constant calls to technical support because the audio on the internet is delivered in a digital format?
Are they buying MP3 players for $90+ because a 63kbps file sounds so much better than your FM station? Or because (gee whiz!!) its digital !?!?!
Obviously not. Sony themselves admitted in their official comments to the FCC that the sales of Digital Audio Broadcast (DAB) receivers in Europe were "flat" because the programming was not compelling. It was the same programming available on the big ubiquitous analog broadcasters. Sony argued that the only way to "encourage" the DAB market was to force the end of the analog broadcasting with the same old uncompelling programming. Sony admitted that what drove interest in Internet audio was not the sound ... it was the variety of programming choices.
In other words, the NAB coalition admits that DAB toys alone are worthless to the population with the same old content that the big stations normally put out ... and somehow twist the fact that the new competition uses a digital medium to conclude that programming is not the problem! That they must have the digital audio medium if they are to survive!
Normally we could just laugh at them and figure it was their problem.
But they are making it our problem because they know that they cannot get away with the same old uncompelling programming on mandatory $400 receivers as long as there is any competition from alternative programming providers ... that's you.
And so they have cooked up a particular version and suggested implementation of Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB) called "In Band On Channel" (IBOC-DAB) that is designed to destroy their programming competition (you) by literally jamming your signal!!
More detail, charts, graphs, examples on RADIOCITIZEN ...
SOLUTION, Support the free market choice, let people freely decide if digital is worth the money or if a variety of programming choices on their affordable AM/FM analog radios is what they want
Next: How would Corporations be able to force OUR government to force US to allow all our radios to be turned into paperweights??
HD Radio-A FRAUD and conspiracy!
Digital Broadcasting is designed to destroy the smaller broadcasters that have resisted consolidation ...
Over one out of every five (>20%) Americans rely on the smaller radio stations for the programming that speaks to their soul, culture and values.
You are the mom&pop stations, the independents, the NonCommercial College, community and religious radio stations.
You manage to hang on in spite of comptition from tapes, CDs, Music Choice and now the advent of Internet streaming audio, MP3s and now upcoming mobile Direct Audio Radio Satellite services such as XM and Sirius Inc.
You are concerned that you might lose listeners to these alternatives to the FM dial in the future. If people can't get what they want on the FM dial, perhaps they will $pend hundred$ of dollar$ and monthly $ub$cription$ and deal with inferior technology and its glitches to get what you cannot provide.
If they get used to RealAudio and XM/Sirius ... will they ever hear you again as they surf their newfound medium?
As if that wasn't enough, vigorous attempts by Clear Channel Communications Inc. (CCC) and the National Association Of Broadcasters (NAB) are milking the 1996 Telecom Act for every bit that they bought off Congress for.
Previous to the 1996 Telecom Act, the largest radio chain owner had 38 radio stations. Now the new Clear Channel monster will control over 800 radio stations, most billboards and most significant live music venues.
They want your station, your listeners, and if they cannot consolidate you ... they will jam your signal instead!!
We don't have to take this sitting down!!
HD radio-Digital Disaster!
You are incorrectly assuming I am against digital radio. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Your assumptions and statements about me and about digital radio are also mixed up.
I will support a rational digital radio system, even one that is in band and if it is truly compatible with analog. The adjacent channel system proposed in NRSC-5 HD iBiquity radio will destroy most of what is left of analog radio long before the estimated 10 to 20 year transition period has transpired. When the numbers of HD radio stations start to climb from hundreds to thousands, both the AM and FM bands will be filled with digital noise, and virtually useless for either analog or digital transmission.
You completely missed the point that, in Europe, 10 years was not enough time for the transition. In spite of what you claim, we have learned nothing from the worldwide digital radio experience. The fact is the HD radio system has all the same flaws and false assumptions as the European systems, plus a whole new set of severe interference problems resulting from trying to overlay triple wide digital signals on top of previously allotted analog stations. The European systems had none of these additional problems.
You kept mentioning an "end goal" but made no clear statement about what you consider the "end goal" to be. So it would be hard for anyone to interfere with that kind of an undefined "end goal."
You claim advocates of a better, less expensive, less complex, and perhaps non-proprietary digital transmission system are "short sighted" "doomsayers".
You neglect to mention that we already have 2 functional, and modestly successful digital radio systems in the USA, Sirius and XM. Both have pretty much continuous national coverage and don't interfere with existing analog stations.
In Europe they had no existing competing systems, no severe interference problems, and still popular acceptance of digital radio is very slow.
The next generation of cell phones will contain an iPod type, digital quality stereo player, with high fidelity stereo headphones, and be capable of receiving, streaming, and downloading digital quality video, podcasts and MP3 files, via the existing and modified cell phone transmission sites. No radio or TV stations needed for that. Serious (not Sirius) new competition.
Most radio AM and FM stations broadcast splintered sub-genres of a few hundred to a few thousand of what some program director or survey company considers to be the most popular tunes, or nationally syndicated talk programming of one kind or another. iPod type MP3 players do better then that worldwide, are listener preference specific, and audio is available on demand, even thru tunnels, and in caves, without annoying commercials or DJ's.
Local radio is dieing, and yet could be the salvation of the current limited coverage area broadcasting stations. (No AM or FM broadcast station covers the entire country, so as far as this point, I am considering all AM or FM stations local.) Local stations can provide news, information, traffic, weather, and other services that are not easy to target to the various regions of the nation or to duplicate on a national system like Sirius or XM. Unfortunately, local programming is expensive, so why pay that money to iBiquity for a defective digital system that will only accelerate the demise of AM and FM broadcasting?
All are invited to share a more detailed descriptions and a recap of my comments on my new blog site:
For better broadcasting,
HD radio-Europe has a better system!
You ignored the fact that it took at least 8 years (until sometime after 2002) for the public to start accepting terrestrial digital radio, and claim it is insignificant?
The British Islanders still seem to consider themselves part of Europe in spite of their close ties to the USA.
How does this relate to your arguments in support of blind acceptance of a flawed digital broadcasting system like NRSC-5, HD, iBiquity radio, when other, better, cheaper, less destructive, digital broadcasting systems are available?
HD radio - Reply to advocate
Check out sales of Sirius and XM radios with national coverage right here in the good old USA. Their satisfied customers might not be willing to spend more money for expensive additional proprietary NRSC-5 HD radios where the stations have constant commercials, or pledge pleading, and only cover a relatively few miles.
It must be the "Pied Piper" or "Lemming" effect that causes so many to blindly follow a misrepresented, flawed system like adjacent channel NRSC-5 HD iBiquity radio to oblivion without hearing "the rest of the story".
HD Radio-Seriously Flawed
My point was that it took Britain 8 to 10 years to start accepting digital radio in large numbers.
The proposed NRSC-5 HD iBiquity radio system now before the FCC for approval, is a seriously flawed system that proposes to lay triple wide digital signals on top of existing analog AM and FM stations, thereby causing interference.
Proponents say we must accept the interference, along with this expensive, complex system, and no other, regardless of the resulting jamming of the analog AM and FM bands.
Opponents claim there are simpler, better, less expensive, non proprietary, more compatible systems that will provide high quality 5.1 digital surround sound for FM without all the jamming of the of the analog FM stereo signals, special new transmitters and antennas, and buying expensive, proprietary new radios.
Why refuse to examine alternative systems before we spend billions of dollars replacing all of our radios?
Who stands to benefit if we accept an expensive flawed system that jams existing stations?
For better broadcasting,
HD radio-My viewpoint
Thank you for keeping me up to date on the technical discussion posting my replies to your forum discussion about the prospects, pros and cons of HD radio. I realize your sites are primarily about music, secondarily about broadcasting, and only peripherally about weighty technical matters. I have tried to shift some the heavy discussion of technical matters over to my new blog:
If you have a better suggestion, or another viewpoint, I would appreciate hearing your thoughts.
Regarding my sensational (sensationalistic?) headlines and the assertive style I have adopted in my discussions and replies, these are meant to catch attention on an internet swarming with information and often misinformation. I want to strongly point out that the IBOC-5 HD radio iBiquity proposal is seriously flawed, interferes with existing service, and should not become the standard digital broadcasting method for AM and FM. In short, "The Emperor Has No Clothes".
There are other, better, more compatible, existing techniques for accommodating digital broadcasting here in the USA that deserve more consideration. We should not leap to accept a defective standard, because, once adopted, we will be stuck with all those expensive new deficient proprietary radios.
Thanks, again for all your help
Take a break! FUNTIME.
HD radio - 5 comments from others
Radio isnâ€™t dying because its programming isnâ€™t sufficiently focused into musical niches; itâ€™s failing because the product is irrelevant and unlistenable. Short playlists, especially in formats playing music from earlier decades, burn out classic tunes and ignore much of what the audience wants to hear. If they want an audience to listen to music-oriented programming, they need to relearn how to present it. Fortunately, some are trying.
Radio was supposed to be local. The technologyâ€“and the policyâ€“initially demanded a local element to radio that is endangered now. If HD radio, with its niche formats, becomes the functional equipment of a juke box or iPod, what will differentiate it from satellite (or an iPod, for that matter)? If local stations pipe in nationally syndicated shows, whatâ€™s the difference? The only content that is truly local on far too many stations is the advertising. If thatâ€™s all they can do, then we wonâ€™t lose much by having them replaced by the satellite companies.
Nathan Tuesday, June 14, 2005 at 1:44 PM PT
Om Malik has written an article for Business 2.0 where he wonders if HD can save the traditional radio industry. This question is important, as terrestrial broadcasters are engadged in a fierce battle with satellite radio and podcasting.
One of theâ€¦
Backdrifter.com Tuesday, June 14, 2005 at 3:09 PM PT
HD Radio â€” Too Little, Too Late
I had been meaning to write about HD Radio for a while but Omâ€™s article in B2.0 just reminded me to do so.
Rags' Soapbox Tuesday, June 14, 2005 at 10:47 PM PT
The ugly truth is: HD radio doesnâ€™t sound very good. The receivers are insanely expensive (Kenwood sells a $400 add on tuner to a $400 head unit. So $800 to get HD radio in your car.)
Ibiquity is so worried about making money off licensing the technology itâ€™s been developing over the last 10 years that HD radio will probably end up being priced out of the market.
And given all the adjacent channel interference weâ€™re starting to see from stations switching on their HD radio, it make be yet another nail in the coffin of traditional over the air radio!
Rusty Hodge Wednesday, June 15, 2005 at 1:33 AM PT
If radio were still local, HD radio might work. The problem is that one company (Clear Channel) controls too many stations, and that company has claimed more than once that they are only in business to sell ads. They donâ€™t care at all about local programming.
So all HD radio is going to do is give us 8 versions of the same crap on one frequency. Yeah, thatâ€™ll work.
Plus, itâ€™s been established that most listeners donâ€™t care that much about sound quality, because theyâ€™re buying iPods and encoding their music at 128 Kbps, so even if HD radio has better quality audio, itâ€™s practically irrelevant.
The only thing thatâ€™s going to â€œsaveâ€ radio is a fundamental shift toward local ownership of all stations. Iâ€™m not holding my breathâ€¦
Permanent4 Wednesday, June 15, 2005 at
HD radio-another viewpoint
HD Radio -- Too Little, Too Late
I had been meaning to write about HD Radio for a while but Om's article in B2.0 just reminded me to do so. As the title of this post suggests, my opinion on HD Radio can be summed up in 4 words: Too little, too late. I'm sure it will be able to carve out a niche for itself in radio value chain, but it will not be Radio's great savior.
Radio is already fragmenting. Tens of millions listen to thousands of streaming internet radio stations, millions listen to hundreds of satellite radio stations, and hundreds of thousands access tens of thousands of podcasts. (I don't buy Pew's numbers, though they will be realized after Apple adds native support for podcasting into iTunes). Worse, as the article references, radio is losing relevance to the younger generations as they have many other media options.
HD's issue is the cost and availability of receivers compounded by an utter lack of excitement or awareness with consumers. It will be a while before HD radio receivers will hit the price points necessary for mass adoption. iBiquity, the main company behind HD Radio in the States, plans on selling a measly 100 K HD Radios this year. By the time they're at a price point to sell, say, 10 Million units, the other technologies will have had another 1 to 3 generations of innovation on their products. The broadcasters will also need to spend a lot of airtime & money educating the market on the benefits of HD Radio. I believe HD is much more successful in the UK, but that is probably because the cost of the receivers is relatively low.
June 15, 2005 in Digital Music Permalink
HD radio-Other viewpoints
In the UK they have DAB, not HD radio. Very different, not on the same frequencies, and the radios are a lot less expensive than the HD radios here are... that's why I think DAB is much more successful in Europe than HD will ever be here.
(Kenwood's much talked about HD radio for cars lists around $1000 once you get all the parts you need. $400 for just the HD module! What's the point in making that 4x more expensive than a satellite tuner!?!?!?
Posted by: Rusty Hodge June 15, 2005
Friday, August 12, 2005
HD RADIO A FRAUD! INTERFERENCE COMPAINTS DENYED OR IGNORED!
the same conclusion; the iBiquity System clearly violates FCC Rules and causes severe destructive interference. And, most importantly, the FCC has now received a number of
reports from Engineers and Station Owners reporting that the theoretical determined interference is REAL and is being suffered wherever the iBiquity IBOC system is on-the-air.
Leonard R. Kahn, PE, FIEEE
767 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10017
HD RADIO NRSC-5 IBOC IBiquity VIOLATES INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS!
Increases the occupied bandwith by 2400% (24 times) on AM!
Violates international agreements.
Increases adjacent channel interferance power by 16 db on FM. The resulting jamming interferance is as if a 1000 watt FM station illegally increased it's transmitting power to 50,000 watts!
Here is the link to the independent engineering report filed with the FCC:
HD Radio NRSC-5 COMPLAINTS AND NEGATIVE COMMENTS!
The FCC has recived hundreds of negative comments!
Below is the link:
DIGITAL RADIO ON DEMAND-PODCASTING ON CELLPHONES IN STEREO!
The strategic partners join an industry-wide push by handset suppliers and wireless network operators to transform higher wireless bandwidths and advanced audio and video integration into personal media functionality including real time, downloadable video and music--all within a single platform already a part of everyday life among most consumers.
Don't be in a rush to declare millions of embedded Ipods and Walkmans obsolete, however. Most media analysts and consultants believe that consumers will be slow to abandon familiar, specialized media platforms in favor of the equivalent of a media Swiss army knife. Instead, the experts say, consumers are more likely to tap the strengths of both technologies, using them concurrently.
HD Radio NRSC-5 FCC Comments
Specifically, the Commission is seeking a full range of comments on the NRSC-5 standard, along with ex parte presentations by interested individuals and organizations. The current deadline for filing comments is July 18, with replies due no later than Aug. 17.
Once the filing window for comments and replies closes, work on a Digital Radio Broadcasting Report and Order is likely to begin in earnest. Opinions among industry observers differ on how long the rulemaking process will take, with some expecting no action from the FCC before the end of the year.
Contentious issues that remain for the Commission to resolve include nighttime AM IBOC operation and interference resolution, use of IBOC on "superpowered" FM signals, and acceptable parameters for the use of separate analog and digital FM antennas.
Those interested in reviewing the complete NRSC-5 document can retrieve it on the Web at gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi
The FCC's public notice can be viewed on the Web at hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1661A1.doc