In article
,
IBOCcrock wrote:

On Feb 4, 12:10?pm, Rfburns wrote:
Regardless of all the hype about improved audio quality and all the
other nonsense, this guy was unaware that this HD FM transmitter was
having problems (and for months I might add) and when confronted made
some lame excuse about a bad microphone.

Now I'm not an expert but it seems that if your going to tout the
benefits of HD radio why would you let a bad microphone spoil them for
you?

jw

"What Are We Doing to Ourselves, Exactly?"

"IBOC FM Interference Has Been Reported in Several Cases Where FCC
Contours Provide Inadequate Protection."

http://tinyurl.com/yt286v

"HD Interference: Not Just For AM Anymore"

"Radio World Engineering Extra dropped a bomb this month with a very
provocative cover story: 'What Are We Doing to Ourselves, Exactly?'
Written by Doug Vernier, the man who authored the technical
specifications for an ongoing Corporation for Public Broadcasting-
sponsored HD Radio interference analysis, the report is the first of
its kind to document interference between FM-HD stations around the
country. Using anecdotal reportage, some sophisticated contour-
mapping, and presumably 'early data' from the CPB study, Vernier's
article conclusively proves how stations running in hybrid HD/analog
mode can (and do) interfere somewhat significantly with not only
themselves, but their neighbors on the FM dial."

http://diymedia.net/archive/1207.htm#122307

Yup, HD Radio also jams itself and others on FM.

I don't understand why a study is necessary to come to obvious
conclusions. This not a discovery. This was known from the start. You
see, facts never get in the way of an agenda. Why the emperor has no
clothes. What a huge surprise. What an amazing discovery.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

On Feb 4, 6:39Â*pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
IBOCcrock wrote:
On Feb 4, 4:33�pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
IBOCcrock wrote:
Doubtful, that there would ever be a mandate:
� �Don't count it out. FCC also said there would no digital only mandate
for DTV, too. Have you heard about Feb 17th, 2009?

� �The ONE thing we've been able to count on from FCC for some years,
now, is that they will do whatever it takes to maximize the confusion,
inconvenience, and abandonment of the broadcast consuming public to the
benefit of special interests.

� �Sanity is no longer in FCC DNA and hasn't been since before they cut
the balls off the AM Stereo momentum.

� �"To serve in the public interest as a public trustee," isn't even
paid lip service anymore. It's about the broadcaster. Not the public
interest.

� �It has been the goal of iBiquity and broadcasters in general to make
this move to all digital service. There have been decades of
technological development. Billions in investment. If HD Radio does not
catch on with the listening public, there will be enormous pressures on
both the Congress and FCC to move forward with an all digital mandate.

� �Don't think it can't happen. Don't believe their denials. They've
denied before. And done it anyway. This is a political agency, beholden
to a Congress in turn beholden to very high dollar special interests. An
FCC promise is meaningless.

" Â* Don't count it out. FCC also said there would no digital only
mandate
for DTV, too. Have you heard about Feb 17th, 2009?"

Several reasons support this
decision. First, unlike television licensees, radio stations are
under
no statutory mandate to convert to a digital format. Second, a hard
deadline is unnecessary given that DAB uses an in-band technology
that
does not require the allocation of additional spectrum. Thus, the
spectrum reclamation needs that exist for DTV do not exist here.

Yea, I do count it out, Grim Reaper!

Â* Â*You're addressing everything but the point.

Â* Â*1) If there is no significant uptake in HD technology, only a mandate
from the Congress/FCC can save it.

Â* Â*2) The money behind HD has powerful lobbying efforts in Washington
that have made many of the decisions about HD deployment possible.

Â* Â*3) If there is no sigificant uptake in HD technology, the money
behind HD will have every reason to lobby Congress/FCC to a mandate.

Â* Â*4) There was also no mandate to update television to digital
technology. It was all to be 'voluntary' and market driven. Expectations
were that the public would suck up HD TV receivers at record rates, and
that analog would be turned off only at 85% of market penetration. And
that was to be market by market. There were no mandates. However, the
market didn't respond, in precisely the same way the market hasn't
responded to HD. A mandate was necessary to drive conversion and speed
the uptake of DTV technology. Â*It wasn't until the mandate...it wasn't
until the date was set and publicized...that DTV sales blossomed.

Â* Â*5) This hasn't been lost on the money behind HD radio. Â*The very same
people who have been talking about all-digital broadcasting since before
HD was implemented are the same people talking about mandates, today.

Â* Â*6) FCC said more than a decade ago, that all future modulation
schemes for broadcast be digital. They are committed to it. FCC, as much
as the money behind HD radio, is motivated to encourage HD technology
uptake. Which includes a mandate.

Â* Â*7) Broadcasters are salivating at the possibility of finally
achieving the holy grail of broadcasting since the industry began 80
years ago--subscription radio. Â*Conditional access with IBOC technology
is currently under test. Broadcasters now are highly motivated to
petition FCC for a mandate, as well. As well as the savings of shutting
off the analog transmitters.

Â* Â*And, 8) Take a look at the frequency allocations for DTV. You may be
surprised at where those frequencies fall.

Â* Â*Do not count out a mandate to save HD Radio. There is every
precedent, Â*and every reason to believe that FCC will reverse their
stated position on HD Radio. Too many people are too interested in
seeing this happen. The money behind HD radio, broadcasters, have
powerful lobbying efforts committed to just that. The FCC also has an
interest in HD Radio to meet its own goals. And FCC has reversed such a
position before. Ruling out this possibility is turning a blind eye to
reality.

Â* Â*You're committed to reminding everyone here that IBOC is failed
technology, and that HD Radio is dead. You may be right. But you may
close your blind spot to the reality that there's much too much money
invested here to let this go quietly. And since the HD Alliance can't
seem to get their head out of their ass long enough to begin to market
this product effectively, encourage sales at the local level, promote
product infusion into the marketplace or the creation of new programming
content to drive listeners to HD Radio, they must have an ace up their
sleeve to make this happen.

Â* Â*An FCC mandate would be the Ace of Spades for that card.

Â* Â*This is going to be a protracted fight. HD isn't happening in the
marketplace. But it's not going down without a fight, and won't be
disappearing anytime soon. There are just too many forces involved for
that to happen.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The UK has been threatening to turn off analog, yet look what
happened:

"Report: Future Of U.K. Digital Radio May Be Bleak"

"LONDON -- January 30, 2008: A report from Enders Analysis found that
digital audio broadcasting, or DAB, is in trouble due to the high cost
of transmission and slow revenue growth, U.K. newspaper the Guardian
reports."

http://www.radioink.com/HeadlineEntr...&pt=todaysnews

It's over for digital terrestrial radio:

"Germany flicks off-switch on DAB"

"Part of the problem is that analogue FM never went away and most
people didn't seem to care for the clear digital-quality sound, and
were left nonplussed by such benefits as easy tuning and message
displays with song names and titles. DAB is struggling almost
everywhere in Europe."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01...tches_dab_off/


"Digital Radio in Canada"

"The Commission is very concerned about the stalled DRB transition.
Roughly 15 of the 76 authorized stations (including the digital-only
operation in Toronto) are not on the air. Some stations that once
operated have since ceased operations. Few recievers have been sold,
and there is no interest in expanding DRB service beyond the six
cities where it exists."

http://americanbandscan.blogspot.com...in-canada.html

On Feb 4, 4:33�pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
IBOCcrock wrote:
Doubtful, that there would ever be a mandate:

� �Don't count it out. FCC also said there would no digital only mandate
for DTV, too. Have you heard about Feb 17th, 2009?

� �The ONE thing we've been able to count on from FCC for some years,
now, is that they will do whatever it takes to maximize the confusion,
inconvenience, and abandonment of the broadcast consuming public to the
benefit of special interests.

� �Sanity is no longer in FCC DNA and hasn't been since before they cut
the balls off the AM Stereo momentum.

� �"To serve in the public interest as a public trustee," isn't even
paid lip service anymore. It's about the broadcaster. Not the public
interest.

� �It has been the goal of iBiquity and broadcasters in general to make
this move to all digital service. There have been decades of
technological development. Billions in investment. If HD Radio does not
catch on with the listening public, there will be enormous pressures on
both the Congress and FCC to move forward with an all digital mandate.

� �Don't think it can't happen. Don't believe their denials. They've
denied before. And done it anyway. This is a political agency, beholden
to a Congress in turn beholden to very high dollar special interests. An
FCC promise is meaningless.

15. We will not establish a deadline for radio stations to convert to
digital broadcasting. Stations may decide if, and when, they will
provide digital service to the public. Several reasons support this
decision. First, unlike television licensees, radio stations are
under
no statutory mandate to convert to a digital format. Second, a hard
deadline is unnecessary given that DAB uses an in-band technology
that
does not require the allocation of additional spectrum. Thus, the
spectrum reclamation needs that exist for DTV do not exist here.
Moreover, there is no evidence in the record that marketplace forces
cannot propel the DAB conversion forward, and effective markets tend
to provide better solutions than regulatory schemes.

You really have a hard time comprehending - IBOC is in-band and
requires no additional spectrum to be allocated. A mandate would do no
good - no one will buy HD radios.

On Feb 4, 11:09Â*pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
IBOCcrock wrote:
On Feb 4, 4:33�pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
IBOCcrock wrote:
Doubtful, that there would ever be a mandate:
� �Don't count it out. FCC also said there would no digital only mandate
for DTV, too. Have you heard about Feb 17th, 2009?

� �The ONE thing we've been able to count on from FCC for some years,
now, is that they will do whatever it takes to maximize the confusion,
inconvenience, and abandonment of the broadcast consuming public to the
benefit of special interests.

� �Sanity is no longer in FCC DNA and hasn't been since before they cut
the balls off the AM Stereo momentum.

� �"To serve in the public interest as a public trustee," isn't even
paid lip service anymore. It's about the broadcaster. Not the public
interest.

� �It has been the goal of iBiquity and broadcasters in general to make
this move to all digital service. There have been decades of
technological development. Billions in investment. If HD Radio does not
catch on with the listening public, there will be enormous pressures on
both the Congress and FCC to move forward with an all digital mandate.

� �Don't think it can't happen. Don't believe their denials. They've
denied before. And done it anyway. This is a political agency, beholden
to a Congress in turn beholden to very high dollar special interests. An
FCC promise is meaningl

15. We will not establish a deadline for radio stations to convert to
digital broadcasting. Stations may decide if, and when, they will
provide digital service to the public. Several reasons support this
decision. First, unlike television licensees, radio stations are
under
no statutory mandate to convert to a digital format. Second, a hard
deadline is unnecessary given that DAB uses an in-band technology
that
does not require the allocation of additional spectrum. Thus, the
spectrum reclamation needs that exist for DTV do not exist here.
Moreover, there is no evidence in the record that marketplace forces
cannot propel the DAB conversion forward, and effective markets tend
to provide better solutions than regulatory schemes.

You really have a hard time comprehending - IBOC is in-band and
requires no additional spectrum to be allocated. A mandate would do no
good - no one will buy HD radios.

Â* Â*Have you actually looked at the spectra for digital TV? Be surprised.

Â* Â*Repeating the same meaningless promises, here, will not make them
anymore reliable.

Â* Â*There is too much money, too much motivation, too much at stake to
rule out a mandate. FCC has gone back on it's word before, over this
very type of thing. There's no reason to believe there would not be a
reversal here.

Â* Â*Consider also, that in less than a year, there will be a new
administration, and changes in the Congress. New faces, new lobbying
efforts.

Â* Â*Nothing is certain except the volatility of a political body.

Â* Â*Don't look now, but FCC is a political body. And politics runs on big
money.

Â* Â*A mandate is not out of the question.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do you have OCD? A mandate/threat UK made no difference, just like it
wouldn't here. Radio will be dead, before HD Radio ever has a chance
to take-off, mandate or not. NOW SHUT THE **** UP!

D Peter Maus wrote:
Rfburns wrote:
Just finished having a little chat with a general manager for several
radio stations here in West Virginia. A few of them are transmitting
HD. This poor fellow is still under the illusion that HD radio is set
to take off like a rocket. He sites Ford's decision to make HD radio
an option for '08 and thinks that other auto manufacturers are on the
verge of announcing their introduction of HD radio as an option. I
informed him that the local Best Buy has had the same two RCA HD-100
radios on the self for several months with no takers and that the
local Ford deal was unaware of the HD radio option. How detached can
these people be? It's no wonder listeners are dropping like flies.

The interesting thing about all this is that one of the HD FM stations
has a very annoying buzz on the analog transmission side that I
suspect is being cuased by poor implementation of the Hybrid Digital
equipment and it's been there for months. This poor fellow informed
me that it's a defective microphone in one of the studios. Funny
thing, it occurrs during music and remote network news. Who does he
think he's fooling. It's obvious to me that he nor anyone else is
listening close enought to discover the wonders of HD radio.

jw


Typical Radio response: Deny, Deny, Deny. But then, in all fairness,
that's a typical response throughout the culture, these days.

They're still running heavy HD promos here in the Windy. What's not
happening is promotion based on content. They're selling all the things
that are secondary to listeners: Audio quality, digital clarity. And
some listeners have noted that in higher noise listening environments,
the HD stream is definitely not as easily appreciated as the more highly
processes analog stream. Further, after decades of highly processed,
loudness war audio, many listeners are finding the less processed sound
of the HD stream less appealing. And finally, as you've suggested, HD
isn't being uniformly well implemented. Resulting in poor first time
listener experiences. It's very hard to come back from that kind of
first contact deficit.

And the one thing that's rarely discussed, is that the public, in the
main, doesn't really understand the concept of audio quality on the same
level as the engineers who built this stuff. Look at the number of
half-baked, 'drug-store electronics' stereo systems being sold today.
Less than $100, but all have 5 band graphic equalizers on the panel. And
speakers that would make the engineers at Ten-Tec laugh. Talking 'audio
quality' to owners of such hardware creates an entirely different
expectation of performance than it does to guys like me with more
invested in the speakers in his living room than he does the SUV in the
garage.

Selling audio quality is, at best, a hit or miss proposition...because
so much of the perception depends on experience exposure, and quite
frankly the interest in knowing what sounds good, or bad, and why. Most
users of radio simply don't know. Nor do they care to do the math to
find out.

Instead, HD should be selling content. But they can't, because the
thrust of the effort is in producing the baseband audio in "HD Quality"
on the digital stream. Supplementary content is spotty at best. And
usually poor, because there is little or no budget to support it.
Advertising on the HD supplementary streams is insufficient, at this
stage to make the supplementary audio streams self supporting. So, at
best, the efforts that I've heard, are half-assed.

Here in Chicago, they're never mentioned. To date, no one but Roe Conn
on WLS has mentioned that WLS is carried on the WZZN secondary HD
stream. For guys up here who have trouble receiving WLS AM due to the
noise, having WLS on an HD stream of a station we CAN receive is a big
plus. WZZN hasn't mentioned it once. This is just one example. There are
dozens of others representing a sizable missed opportunity to sell this
system on content...which is where listening is rooted.

Until stations begin to sell based on CONTENT, most of HD's marketing
efforts are self-defeating.

There are signs that HD isn't entirely dead. And getting it in the
hands of listeners in the car will certainly help. Controlled
environment listening, newfangled-ness...all will help secure exposure.
But if it doesn't work as expected...it can work as promised, but the
EXPECTATION is often different, even when the promise is clearly
defined...if it doesn't work as expected, HD will have signed it's own
death certificate.

The first stumbling attempts to get HD in the ears of the public were
staggeringly disappointing. And those were the Innovators and Early
Adoptors. Burn them once and they move on. And without them, and their
buzz....Belongers and Late Adoptors will not make the move.

As presented, so far, HD is a solution in search of a problem. And
short of an FCC mandate, there's not a lot of reason to suggest that the
rate of uptake will improve.


No killer app.

D Peter Maus wrote:
Rfburns wrote:
Regardless of all the hype about improved audio quality and all the
other nonsense, this guy was unaware that this HD FM transmitter was
having problems (and for months I might add) and when confronted made
some lame excuse about a bad microphone.

Now I'm not an expert but it seems that if your going to tout the
benefits of HD radio why would you let a bad microphone spoil them for
you?



Well, see, now there you go making sense, again. Stop it.

He's trying to tell you it's a small matter that's creating the issue
you've described. That it's not a problem with his radio station, that
it's a problem with a manufacturer's microphone. Not his fault.

I know, I know....it doesn't make sense in the real world. But I've
heard arguments like this at radio stations across the country. He
doesn't understand what's going on...so he's trying to insure that you
don't either.

It's one of the huge problems facing this new technology.




jw



Radio was better when they had engineers.

D Peter Maus wrote:

And, 8) Take a look at the frequency allocations for DTV. You may be
surprised at where those frequencies fall.


What do you mean, oh cryptic one?

IBOCcrock wrote:
On Feb 4, 11:09 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
IBOCcrock wrote:
On Feb 4, 4:33�pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
IBOCcrock wrote:
Doubtful, that there would ever be a mandate:
� �Don't count it out. FCC also said there would no digital only mandate
for DTV, too. Have you heard about Feb 17th, 2009?
� �The ONE thing we've been able to count on from FCC for some years,
now, is that they will do whatever it takes to maximize the confusion,
inconvenience, and abandonment of the broadcast consuming public to the
benefit of special interests.
� �Sanity is no longer in FCC DNA and hasn't been since before they cut
the balls off the AM Stereo momentum.
� �"To serve in the public interest as a public trustee," isn't even
paid lip service anymore. It's about the broadcaster. Not the public
interest.
� �It has been the goal of iBiquity and broadcasters in general to make
this move to all digital service. There have been decades of
technological development. Billions in investment. If HD Radio does not
catch on with the listening public, there will be enormous pressures on
both the Congress and FCC to move forward with an all digital mandate.
� �Don't think it can't happen. Don't believe their denials. They've
denied before. And done it anyway. This is a political agency, beholden
to a Congress in turn beholden to very high dollar special interests. An
FCC promise is meaningl
15. We will not establish a deadline for radio stations to convert to
digital broadcasting. Stations may decide if, and when, they will
provide digital service to the public. Several reasons support this
decision. First, unlike television licensees, radio stations are
under
no statutory mandate to convert to a digital format. Second, a hard
deadline is unnecessary given that DAB uses an in-band technology
that
does not require the allocation of additional spectrum. Thus, the
spectrum reclamation needs that exist for DTV do not exist here.
Moreover, there is no evidence in the record that marketplace forces
cannot propel the DAB conversion forward, and effective markets tend
to provide better solutions than regulatory schemes.
You really have a hard time comprehending - IBOC is in-band and
requires no additional spectrum to be allocated. A mandate would do no
good - no one will buy HD radios.
Have you actually looked at the spectra for digital TV? Be surprised.

Repeating the same meaningless promises, here, will not make them
anymore reliable.

There is too much money, too much motivation, too much at stake to
rule out a mandate. FCC has gone back on it's word before, over this
very type of thing. There's no reason to believe there would not be a
reversal here.

Consider also, that in less than a year, there will be a new
administration, and changes in the Congress. New faces, new lobbying
efforts.

Nothing is certain except the volatility of a political body.

Don't look now, but FCC is a political body. And politics runs on big
money.

A mandate is not out of the question.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do you have OCD? A mandate/threat UK made no difference, just like it
wouldn't here. Radio will be dead, before HD Radio ever has a chance
to take-off, mandate or not. NOW SHUT THE **** UP!


LOL! No. ROFLMAO!

That's the eloquence of your argument?

Impressive.

I am a crazy auld bastid.
cuhulin

Mark Zenier wrote:
In article ,
D Peter Maus wrote:
4) There was also no mandate to update television to digital
technology. It was all to be 'voluntary' and market driven. Expectations
were that the public would suck up HD TV receivers at record rates, and
that analog would be turned off only at 85% of market penetration. And
that was to be market by market. There were no mandates. However, the
market didn't respond, in precisely the same way the market hasn't
responded to HD.

Remember that the plot changed in there. Back when,in the early 1990s,
the idea was that the consumers would clamor for HD was before the
Internet hit big. Before the new Communications Act. Before there
were a zillion dot.com spawned Wireless ideas all grabbing for bandwidth,
and pumping up the prices in the spectrum auctions.

The mandate came because the Feds are impatient to get their hands on
the dollars they can get for all those kilohertz*square kilometers of
"protected area" caused by the poor interference rejection of analog
video. A demand that wasn't there when they first came up with this
DTV stuff.


The demand still isn't there. And wouldn't be there save for the
mandate. Which was my point. The technology is there, but there isn't as
much interest as there needs to be for the 'voluntary' conversion to
work. And while the spectrum auction is a big motivator, the amount of
spectrum being auctioned is not very large. A larger motivator, by far,
is the lobby pressure to force uptake of the DTV technology. Again, and
enormous investment in R&D, testing and broadcast installation wasn't
about to be left to the voluntary whims of the mass for return.
Broadcasters took a big lesson from the failure of AM Stereo and the
waffling by the FCC in that matter.

There was talk of mandating a conversion to DTV from well before the
implementation of the first HDTV installations.

Not that the Feds didn't smell money. They did. No question.


A mandate was necessary to drive conversion and speed
the uptake of DTV technology. It wasn't until the mandate...it wasn't
until the date was set and publicized...that DTV sales blossomed.

I disagree. ATSC is a gold plated monster, and they had to wait this
long for Moore's Law to catch up and the semiconductors get cheap
enough for a box somebody would buy. Europe just went with SD digital
telvison and they've already finished their conversion. Boxes there
are something like $25 and have been available for several years.
Ours are $50-$70 and are only becoming available NOW.

I wouldn't be so eager to compare European broadcast to our own. The
rules are different and have been since inception. Conversion in Germany
can take a fraction of the time due to the nature of the
broadcast/government relationship. And the quick adoption of new
technology that's a part of their culture.


Add in media consolidation, and penny pinching at the stations
(when a lot of their advertisers and audience went to new media)
that put them on the air only 3-5 years ago. (At least around here).

And the competition from cable and DBS at the retail outlets. Even
while ATSC has been on the air here for a few years, you had to really
search for something that could pick it up, and not get steered to
the Direct TV display at the local big box store. The local stations
would have trouble matching whatever "sale incentives" the subscription
services could provide.

It's going to be interesting when these cheap DTV converter boxes
start to get sold and a bunch of cable/satellite subscriptions get
dropped. (http://www.dtv2009.gov to see how to get up to two $40
coupons/gift cards from your government). What is going to
happen to the subscription services' stock prices.


All good points. I myself have been receiving ATSC for a while, now.
And I nearly had to build what I needed. There was nothing out there
that would meet my requirements. Still isn't much. I've made the
conversion without investment in a new receiver. At least not yet.

But I'm hearing a lot of conversation among pretty involved and
informed individuals who don't really understand the 2/17/09 deadline,
or what it really means. They just spent a kilobuck on a new TV a few
years ago, and have no intention of buying a new set. There's also been
a LOT of misinformation about DTV muddying those waters. Of 7 people at
the table, last night, only 2 of us understand that neither satellite,
nor cable are necessary for DTV reception.

ATSC is selling well. Now. But not so before the conversion deadline
became public fodder. Until that time, resistance was high. I'm even
hearing bitching at the local Best Buy that 'only these damned HDTV sets
are out here...I just want a TV for the
bedroom/office/kitchen/garage...I don't need a damned theatre.'

Many just do not understand.

Without the mandate, the uptake would have been much slower than it
is now.

Inertia is a part of our culture.

Which again, is my point about HD radio. The uptake of the technology
is slow. Virtually dead. There is no way, absent effective education
about the content possibilities to drive public interest, short of a
mandate.

And having the best Congress and FCC money can buy, I wouldn't rule
out a mandate to force the conversion.