Saturday, August 05, 2006
HD Radio-COMMENTS
HD Radio is DOA (Dead On Arrival)
Posted by: George June 16, 2006 at 08:17 AM
HD is DOA. I'm a bit of a radio geek and early adopter, and buying an HD radio doesn't interest me in the least.
Looks to me like the friut is dead on the vine based on the lack of progress with product rollout and "content".
Posted by: tim wallick June 16, 2006 at 01:51 PM
I think it is fair to say that the audiophile community, those people who take their FM seriously, is dead set AGAINST HDRadio.
Not only do most people never intend to buy a radio, unless as a plaything for early adopters and collectors, but are aghast at the FCC for even allowing IBOC to thrash up the FM bandwidth.
Plus, people with enough technical savvy to read the specs are insulted by the false claims of "CD sound quality" or even "near-CD sound quality." These are transparent marketing hype, beyond mean puffery.
Sorry, but HDRadio has sworn enemies. This goes beyond just business but has political reprecussions for FCC and for Congress. This has the whiff of political scandal - and I'm a rock-ribbed Republican! The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is especially vulnerable.
My advice for any businessman is to avoid any association with HDRadio.
There are a couple of other benefits for HDRadio: it effective blocks listeners from tuning in suburban stations on adjacent frequencies (an HD station on 92.9 can occupy 92.7 and 93.1 with its digital hash), and it basically locks out LPFMs, programmed translators, and other threats to the FM spectrum.
Posted by: MattS June 18, 2006 at 05:49 AM
Here is the rest of the story:
http://www.hear2.com/2006/06/hd_radio_fun_wi.html
At times, tuning in digital radio reminded me of trying to lock in digital TV broadcasts. The signals were weaker than their analog counterparts, as mandated by Federal Communications Commission regulations, and could drop out, then resume for no apparent reason. The HD signals of classical WGMS (104.1 FM) and smooth-jazz WJZW (105.9 FM) never got past that shakiness -- and The Post's WTWP (107.7 FM) was complete static the whole time.
HD radio on AM delivers a much bigger improvement in sound -- but only if you can get the signal, something the Recepter had serious trouble doing. Whether I used its internal AM antenna or the external one included in the box, it pulled in only one HD AM signal, "SportsTalk" WTEM (980 AM). It detected an HD signal on two others, WKDL (730 AM) and WTWP (1500 AM), but never tuned it in; all-talk WTNT (570 AM) never even showed one.
Here is the link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/29/AR2006042900245.html
Posted by: George June 16, 2006 at 08:17 AM
HD is DOA. I'm a bit of a radio geek and early adopter, and buying an HD radio doesn't interest me in the least.
Looks to me like the friut is dead on the vine based on the lack of progress with product rollout and "content".
Posted by: tim wallick June 16, 2006 at 01:51 PM
I think it is fair to say that the audiophile community, those people who take their FM seriously, is dead set AGAINST HDRadio.
Not only do most people never intend to buy a radio, unless as a plaything for early adopters and collectors, but are aghast at the FCC for even allowing IBOC to thrash up the FM bandwidth.
Plus, people with enough technical savvy to read the specs are insulted by the false claims of "CD sound quality" or even "near-CD sound quality." These are transparent marketing hype, beyond mean puffery.
Sorry, but HDRadio has sworn enemies. This goes beyond just business but has political reprecussions for FCC and for Congress. This has the whiff of political scandal - and I'm a rock-ribbed Republican! The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is especially vulnerable.
My advice for any businessman is to avoid any association with HDRadio.
There are a couple of other benefits for HDRadio: it effective blocks listeners from tuning in suburban stations on adjacent frequencies (an HD station on 92.9 can occupy 92.7 and 93.1 with its digital hash), and it basically locks out LPFMs, programmed translators, and other threats to the FM spectrum.
Posted by: MattS June 18, 2006 at 05:49 AM
Here is the rest of the story:
http://www.hear2.com/2006/06/hd_radio_fun_wi.html
At times, tuning in digital radio reminded me of trying to lock in digital TV broadcasts. The signals were weaker than their analog counterparts, as mandated by Federal Communications Commission regulations, and could drop out, then resume for no apparent reason. The HD signals of classical WGMS (104.1 FM) and smooth-jazz WJZW (105.9 FM) never got past that shakiness -- and The Post's WTWP (107.7 FM) was complete static the whole time.
HD radio on AM delivers a much bigger improvement in sound -- but only if you can get the signal, something the Recepter had serious trouble doing. Whether I used its internal AM antenna or the external one included in the box, it pulled in only one HD AM signal, "SportsTalk" WTEM (980 AM). It detected an HD signal on two others, WKDL (730 AM) and WTWP (1500 AM), but never tuned it in; all-talk WTNT (570 AM) never even showed one.
Here is the link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/29/AR2006042900245.html
