David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


They'd better get some HD listeners before they do that, elsewise their
listeners will abandon them.

A low power, 9mm HD single chip decoder that uses 10% of the power of the
current chipsets headlines Radio World this week. Using this chip,
portables
are now possible with long battery life and the price point comes way
down
due to component materials. This is the evolutionary development we were
waiting for that will make receivers better and cheaper.

I'm waiting for the evolutionary development that ends QRM.

When nearly nobody is listening, there is no QRN.

QRN is natural interference, Edweenie. Like lightning.

QRM is manmade intereference. Like IBOC.

HD is the only longshot
for saving AM in the US.

Keep shilling, boy.

On Mar 5, 5:35�pm, "Guerite�" wrote:
Propaganda Ejaculate Castrated
snip

How does this affect terrestrial broadcasters who stream?

The principles are exactly *the same, but at the individual radio station
level, the dollar amounts are of course are smaller. Clear Channel's total
corporate obligation for November 2006 based on comScore Arbitron ratings
and assuming 13 songs per hour, *would be about $500,000... but if that's
for streaming, let's say, 500 stations, it would only be a royalty
obligation of about $1,000 per station per month in 2006. Are those stations
selling enough online spots and website banners and sponsorships to make
that affordable? *I'm not sure. *(The decision has no impact on news and
talk stations who stream.)

Is this the end of Internet radio?

Although this is undeniably a huge victory for the legal departments of
record labels (or at least for the lawyers at their industry trade
association, the RIAA), I doubt that the heads of the record labels and
their marketing executives actually want to see Internet radio driven out of
business. (This may be a case of "Be careful what you wish for, you may get
it.")

http://www.kurthanson.com/archive/ne...07/index.shtml
__________________________________________________ ________

Is this the end of HD radio?

LOL - Hardly. *Maybe the second on air HD-"2" stream will have to be turned
off since the small local radio operator would essentially have to pay
royalties for two radio stations. *On the other hand this extra available
bandwidth of a former HD-"2" stream can then be used for full CD like HD
fidelity. *Stations broadcasting HD-2 signals don't sound as good as
stations utilizing the full bandwidth on a single "HD-1" stream.

In any case, HD sounds far better than any analog signal. *HD radio stations
will abandon analog and redirect the full station power of their amplifiers
towards the HD digital stream.

Any Internet Radio station, that is acting as a non-interactive
station, has to pay royalties, and this includes the HD channels - the
HD channels are addressed here. Internet Radio stations will have to
pay a royalty for every HD song that is streamed PER LISTENER, and
there is no revenue coming in for the HD channels. Now, with HD
radios not selling, this just gives new stations more reason not to
sign up for HD Radio !

To quote:

The ruling is on a "per play" basis - so Internet radio stations will
have to pay the cost of one song to one listener - effective
retroactively for 2006. There's also an additional fee of $500 per
channel per year - but there's no clear definition of what a "channel"
is (which could mean big problems for a service like Pandora which
creates custom playlists for listeners).

The rates to be paid a

2006 - $.0008 per performance
2007 - $.0011 per performance
2008 - $.0014 per performance
2009 - $.0018 per performance
2010 - $.0019 per performance

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/in...good-news.html

"SUNUNU: FCC TECH MANDATES MUST BE BANNED"

"The bill, which would be based on a Sununu amendment approved during
Senate Commerce Committee action last year, would prevent the FCC from
requiring or imposing a specific technology, technological standard,
solution, or product on industry."

http://sununu.senate.gov/pressapp/record.cfm?id=267281

Now, Congress is going after the FCC temporarily authorizing HD
Radio ! There is no consumer interest in HD Radio:

http://www.google.com/trends?q=%22hd...o=all&date=all

http://www.alexaholic.com/ibiquity.c...om+xmradio.com

LOL ! :-)

On Mar 5, 5:35�pm, "Guerite�" wrote:
Propaganda Ejaculate Castrated
snip

How does this affect terrestrial broadcasters who stream?

The principles are exactly *the same, but at the individual radio station
level, the dollar amounts are of course are smaller. Clear Channel's total
corporate obligation for November 2006 based on comScore Arbitron ratings
and assuming 13 songs per hour, *would be about $500,000... but if that's
for streaming, let's say, 500 stations, it would only be a royalty
obligation of about $1,000 per station per month in 2006. Are those stations
selling enough online spots and website banners and sponsorships to make
that affordable? *I'm not sure. *(The decision has no impact on news and
talk stations who stream.)

Is this the end of Internet radio?

Although this is undeniably a huge victory for the legal departments of
record labels (or at least for the lawyers at their industry trade
association, the RIAA), I doubt that the heads of the record labels and
their marketing executives actually want to see Internet radio driven out of
business. (This may be a case of "Be careful what you wish for, you may get
it.")

http://www.kurthanson.com/archive/ne...07/index.shtml
__________________________________________________ ________

Is this the end of HD radio?

LOL - Hardly. *Maybe the second on air HD-"2" stream will have to be turned
off since the small local radio operator would essentially have to pay
royalties for two radio stations. *On the other hand this extra available
bandwidth of a former HD-"2" stream can then be used for full CD like HD
fidelity. *Stations broadcasting HD-2 signals don't sound as good as
stations utilizing the full bandwidth on a single "HD-1" stream.

In any case, HD sounds far better than any analog signal. *HD radio stations
will abandon analog and redirect the full station power of their amplifiers
towards the HD digital stream.

HD's channels are low-bitrate streams of the same repetitive
programming, causing adjacent-channel interference and with only 60%
the coverage of analog.

On Mar 5, 5:54�pm, "Guerite�" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...







"Guerite©" wrote:

Propaganda Ejaculate Castrated
snip

How does this affect terrestrial broadcasters who stream?

The principles are exactly *the same, but at the individual radio
station
level, the dollar amounts are of course are smaller. Clear Channel's
total
corporate obligation for November 2006 based on comScore Arbitron
ratings
and assuming 13 songs per hour, *would be about $500,000... but if
that's
for streaming, let's say, 500 stations, it would only be a royalty
obligation of about $1,000 per station per month in 2006. Are those
stations
selling enough online spots and website banners and sponsorships to make
that affordable? *I'm not sure. *(The decision has no impact on news and
talk stations who stream.)

Is this the end of Internet radio?

Although this is undeniably a huge victory for the legal departments of
record labels (or at least for the lawyers at their industry trade
association, the RIAA), I doubt that the heads of the record labels and
their marketing executives actually want to see Internet radio driven
out of
business. (This may be a case of "Be careful what you wish for, you may
get
it.")

http://www.kurthanson.com/archive/ne...07/index.shtml
__________________________________________________ ________

Is this the end of HD radio?

LOL - Hardly. *Maybe the second on air HD-"2" stream will have to be
turned
off since the small local radio operator would essentially have to pay
royalties for two radio stations. *On the other hand this extra
available
bandwidth of a former HD-"2" stream can then be used for full CD like HD
fidelity. *Stations broadcasting HD-2 signals don't sound as good as
stations utilizing the full bandwidth on a single "HD-1" stream.

In any case, HD sounds far better than any analog signal. *HD radio
stations
will abandon analog and redirect the full station power of their
amplifiers
towards the HD digital stream.

They'd better get some HD listeners before they do that, elsewise their
listeners will abandon them.

They already are abandoning analog radio - to DIGITAL delivery systems such
as the internet, XM & Sirius.

Every young person I know has an MP3 player/iPod which is used to listen to
songs, in DIGITAL format, downloaded for free from the internet. *They DO
NOT listen to ANALOG AM or FM radio stations like the youth of your
generation used to do.

The only means open for analog FM radio stations have to compete is to offer
CD quality for FREE = HD! *The only means open for analog AM radio's
survival is HD!

Once you have experienced HD you will never go back to analog.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Slight problem - consumers are not interested in HD Radio.

On Mar 5, 6:11?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...



They'd better get some HD listeners before they do that, elsewise their
listeners will abandon them.

A low power, 9mm HD single chip decoder that uses 10% of the power of the
current chipsets headlines Radio World this week. Using this chip, portables
are now possible with long battery life and the price point comes way down
due to component materials. This is the evolutionary development we were
waiting for that will make receivers better and cheaper.

HD Radios will never sell.

On Mar 5, 6:29?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...







David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

They'd better get some HD listeners before they do that, elsewise their
listeners will abandon them.

A low power, 9mm HD single chip decoder that uses 10% of the power of the
current chipsets headlines Radio World this week. Using this chip,
portables
are now possible with long battery life and the price point comes way
down
due to component materials. This is the evolutionary development we were
waiting for that will make receivers better and cheaper.

I'm waiting for the evolutionary development that ends QRM.

When nearly nobody is listening, there is no QRN. HD is the only longshot
for saving AM in the US. Other countries, like Canada, South Africa,
Austria, etc., have basically given up on it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

AM is alive-and-well, especially news/talk/sports:

http://www.northpine.com/broadcast/50kwam.html

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


They'd better get some HD listeners before they do that, elsewise
their
listeners will abandon them.

A low power, 9mm HD single chip decoder that uses 10% of the power of
the
current chipsets headlines Radio World this week. Using this chip,
portables
are now possible with long battery life and the price point comes way
down
due to component materials. This is the evolutionary development we
were
waiting for that will make receivers better and cheaper.

I'm waiting for the evolutionary development that ends QRM.

When nearly nobody is listening, there is no QRN.

QRN is natural interference, Edweenie. Like lightning.

Although that was a typo, it still applies. Interference is not interference
if nobody listens and perceives that there is inteference.

QRM is manmade intereference. Like IBOC.

Funny, my sailboat in the early 60's was named QRM.

HD is the only longshot
for saving AM in the US.

Keep shilling, boy.

Ain't shilling if it is the truth.

wrote in message
ups.com...

Any Internet Radio station, that is acting as a non-interactive
station, has to pay royalties, and this includes the HD channels - the
HD channels are addressed here. Internet Radio stations will have to
pay a royalty for every HD song that is streamed PER LISTENER, and
there is no revenue coming in for the HD channels. Now, with HD
radios not selling, this just gives new stations more reason not to
sign up for HD Radio !

HD is not broadcast via the internet.

HD rates are separate, and DRM rates apply for digital radio broadcast, not
Internet streams.

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Mar 5, 6:11?pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...



They'd better get some HD listeners before they do that, elsewise their
listeners will abandon them.

A low power, 9mm HD single chip decoder that uses 10% of the power of the
current chipsets headlines Radio World this week. Using this chip,
portables
are now possible with long battery life and the price point comes way
down
due to component materials. This is the evolutionary development we were
waiting for that will make receivers better and cheaper.

HD Radios will never sell.

Ah, Wal-Mart put the first HD radio on sale this week. The momentum is
building, and will continue over the next several years.

wrote in message
oups.com...

AM is alive-and-well, especially news/talk/sports:


No, it's not. And news/talk is moving to FM and proving that the format is
still viable on that band, while it is moving out of the sales demos on AM
(as the recent Tribune Broadcasting problems show clearly).