"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 12, 10:17?am, "RHF" wrote:

Why Not a 15KW, 20KW or 25KW "HD" Digital AM/MW
Radio Signal which should be as effective as a 50KW Analog
Radio Signal for a Radio Station that is Broadcasting on an
'closed' Clear Channel.

If the current 1/100th of analog power works fine in the useful / usable
signal range of the analog signal, just a slight increase will make HD
more
usable than the analog signal.


"Only 175 or so AM stations have even licensed AM-HD. For a number of
reasons, quite a few have tried it and taken it off the air, or so the
anecdotal evidence suggests. Ibiquity no longer reports in its public
summaries whether a station is on the air."

And those 175 represent about 90% of the viable AMs in the top 100
markets.

You can keep spouting this crap until the cows come home but nobody but
you believes it.

It's very simple to verify. Look at the geography of the metro in each top
100 market. Then look at the day and night "usable" coverage of the AM
stations in each market. You will find that there are very few markets with
more than a couple of signals that fully cover the market they are in; all
the rest are partial in coverage and, by virtue of being AM and having
defective coverage, are not going to be much of a factor.

For example, Washington DC does not have one viable AM station. Phoenix has
two. Boston has, maybe, 3. Philadelphia has 3. Miami has one, and that is a
stretch. Denver has 2. Chicago has 5, San Francisco has 4, San Diego has 2,
Dallas / Ft Worth has 3, Houston has, barely, 1, Pittsburgh has 1, Atlanta
has 1, Nashville has 1, Detroit has 2, etc., etc. As markets grow more and
more to the suburbs, fewer and fewer stations are going to be viable.