So don't twist my meaning.

Not sure what it is.

No one expects hifi on AM, so it's not as
noticeable.

People's expectations are increasing all the time. It would be nice to
attempt meet them...instead of leaving the status quo.

The status quo is (or was) that cheap AM tuners kept lowering people's
expectations.

Wrong, everything is better quality now, from Ipods, cell phones, cable
tv,
FM, internet streaming.

Okay, let me be exactly precise. You mentioned most forms of reception
EXCEPT AM. And newer AM radios are generally not capable of revealing
the sound actually broadcast.

Nothing is capable of revealing the sound actually broadcast.

There are a multitude of limitations from point a to point b.

People expect more better quality...why keep things at the status quo?

I'm not arguing for the status quo, nor am I against digital per se.

Thats a good start.

Not that good ones weren't/aren't out there, but who's
spending a hundred dollars (or five hundred for the new Polk!) for a
table radio?

Who will spend $100 for a radio? people who want to find a favorite
format
that is not viable on the main channels.

Like folk music? A 1-time $100 purchase will get it for you for free.....

Like Jazz? $100 will get you the format endlessly. For that you get the
added benefit of increased AM fidelity and functionality.

... like right here. A decent AM tuner will equal or better an HD unit
for sound*. No, it won't receive the sidebands...

No secondary streams, no AM stereo, etc.

If you want to simply buy a "decent am tuner" without the functionality of
HD...then go ahead, no one is stopping you.

*I'm a fairly knowledgeable consumer. I've listened to HD and non-HD
radios, and my conclusion is HD doesn't offer better sound..

In multiple market studies, most consumers could tell the differnce between
a station's analog sound and their HD sound.

I also
don't get subchannels in my area compelling enough to keep me coming
back- yet.

Would you *like to have* some compelling formats offerred to you?

Maybe I will at some point.

And that's why they will buy HD radio's if they are made aware of the
formats available.

How's that workin' for ya? Selling many HD radios?

I don't know and don't care. Sales figures for HD aren't the indicator of
sucess.

Some radio's are being sold....some cars will come with them stock for 2009.

There has been no effort to make the public aware of any of the formats
available on HD-2's.

Things like FM and stereo took time. THis will as well, like digital
TV....most people aren't trashing one set and buying another. They are
waiting until the first one goes and then buying a replacement one...and
guess what...it's digital!

It also removes some (all?) of thecomp[ression that was necessary for AM
analog....and adress listener fatique that occurrs with too much
processing/compression, etc.

Name a station that doesn't use compression most of the time.

On their analog signal? They all use it almost all the time.

On their HD streams? Few do.

That's not my impression.

It's my experience. Most stations use little if any processing on the HD
feed. It can be anoying because sometimes levels are all over the map,
since the announcer/operator is used the the processor handling it.

XM/Sirius has channels that are virtually jukeboxes.

And a bunch of niche formats that don't make it to broadcasting
towers.

That's what HD is doing, bringing formats that could not survive on
their
own, back into the market.

Not so much, besides NPR. Confirm it for yourself.

I have. Folk, Gay Pride, Jazz, 70's, ethnic music, extended talk,
community
programming.....all available on HD.

I guess that would depend on the market.

And it's just goingto get better, as we move into the smaller markets.

It can, but it probably won't- largely because it hasn't worked in the
past.

Satelite radio hasn't "worked in the past"...does that mean it "probably
wont" work?

Niche formats on stations largely hasn't worked, HD or main channel...

Well, we know they haven't worked on main channels, because the are not
competitive. But HD-2 channels don't have that same competitive
environment...and it's too soon to tell if it will work on HD....becuase
there aren't enough radios out there to judge.


if you're talking about shareholder demands. They don't want a
low-performing investment.

How many markets have 20-25 FM stations in HD?

How many non-HDs are planning to convert?

80-85% have converted already....and the rest would like to.

#1.) Most stations in the major markets are making a profit. (Not as much
as
they'd like, but definitely a profit.)

I find that hard to believe, with many radio companies' stock sub-$1.
The layoffs CBS just made (which will probably be mimicked by everyone
else) suggest things aren't too rosy.

CBS is still posting dividends per share. While profits have
slipped...there are still profits.

The stock price is not reflective of the profits. It's reflective how wall
street is giving up on older technology...and believe it is in for slower
growth.

Layoffs are an attempt to bring back a astock price. Typically, investors
love layoffs.

HD FM tuners (under $5000) roll off the highs. The sound stage is
distorted. Maybe they'll straighten it out in time, but what
generation chip are we on now? Third? Fourth?

And getting better all the time.

You simply can't concede that HD tuners mess with the sound, can you?

Everything "messes with the sound", speakers, antennas, microphones,
recievers, room ambiance. Most of the public are not 'purists'.

Not even a nice straw man.

It's the truth.

But to see any financial return on it?

One "sponsor announcement" per hour will cover the cost...and in some
situations make money.