"David Eduardo" wrote in message
t...

"RHF" wrote in message
ups.com...

Phasing in and Increase of the Digital Signal over
Time would ease the Transition to HD Radio.
First Year 1% Digital
Second Year 2% Digital
Third Year 4% Digital
Fourth Year 8% Digital
Fifth Year 16% Digital
A 16% Digital Signal should give a HD Radio
Station a Signal Coverage Area far better then
their present Analog Signal Coverage Area.


Based on actually working with 40 or so HD stations, the current HD
signal, on AM, covers to at least the same usable and used coverage area
the analog signal reaches, sometimes more. On FM, it also reaches the same
area where nearly all actual listening happens.

There you go again saying that only those inside your precious city grade
contours count as listeners. Probably 40-50 million people in the US would
beg to differ.

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
t...

"RHF" wrote in message
ups.com...

Phasing in and Increase of the Digital Signal over
Time would ease the Transition to HD Radio.
First Year 1% Digital
Second Year 2% Digital
Third Year 4% Digital
Fourth Year 8% Digital
Fifth Year 16% Digital
A 16% Digital Signal should give a HD Radio
Station a Signal Coverage Area far better then
their present Analog Signal Coverage Area.


Based on actually working with 40 or so HD stations, the current HD
signal, on AM, covers to at least the same usable and used coverage area
the analog signal reaches, sometimes more. On FM, it also reaches the
same area where nearly all actual listening happens.

There you go again saying that only those inside your precious city grade
contours count as listeners. Probably 40-50 million people in the US would
beg to differ.

First, we are talking about AM, which now has, nationally, only about 19% of
radio listening. Second, most of that percentage is in upper end demos, as
under age 45, listenership is very small.

What we have is a band that has serious issues about survival.

In big cities, small cities and rural areas, there is very little use of AM
outside the very strong signal contours.

In fact, the national coverage by FM is far more dense than the AM coverage.
If HD can help AM survive, it is a fair tradeoff.

On Jun 22, 10:18 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message

...







"David Eduardo" wrote in message
et...

"RHF" wrote in message
roups.com...

Phasing in and Increase of the Digital Signal over
Time would ease the Transition to HD Radio.
First Year 1% Digital
Second Year 2% Digital
Third Year 4% Digital
Fourth Year 8% Digital
Fifth Year 16% Digital
A 16% Digital Signal should give a HD Radio
Station a Signal Coverage Area far better then
their present Analog Signal Coverage Area.

Based on actually working with 40 or so HD stations, the current HD
signal, on AM, covers to at least the same usable and used coverage area
the analog signal reaches, sometimes more. On FM, it also reaches the
same area where nearly all actual listening happens.

There you go again saying that only those inside your precious city grade
contours count as listeners. Probably 40-50 million people in the US would
beg to differ.

First, we are talking about AM, which now has, nationally, only about 19% of
radio listening. Second, most of that percentage is in upper end demos, as
under age 45, listenership is very small.

What we have is a band that has serious issues about survival.

In big cities, small cities and rural areas, there is very little use of AM
outside the very strong signal contours.

In fact, the national coverage by FM is far more dense than the AM coverage.
If HD can help AM survive, it is a fair tradeoff.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

DE,

Then start writting the Obituary for AM/MW Radio
in a good part of Rural America right now [.]

-cause- The Digital Noise Level {Background Hash}
from IBOC has made and impact on the Listenability
of several California Central Valley AM/MW Radio
Strations that I could pick-up and hear reasonably well
580 kHz - KMJ and 1530 kHz - KFBK come to mind.

The Digital Noise Level {Background Hash} from IBOC
seems to be increasing Week-by-Week :
Which Will Kill Analog AM/MW Radio for sure within
Three to Five Years.

The "Only Two Alternatives for AM/MW Radio Are :
1 - Stop All "HD" Radio Digital {IBOC} Broadcasts - Now !
2- Expedite the Transistion* to All "HD" Radio Digital
{IBOC} Broadcasts -ASAP-

* NOTE - Phase-Up Higher Powered AM/MW "HD"
Radio Digital {IBOC} Broadcasts -and- Phase-Down
Lower Powered AM/MW 'Analog' Radio Broadcasts.

that's the way i hear it - with my own two ears ~ RHF

"RHF" wrote in message
ups.com...

Then start writting the Obituary for AM/MW Radio
in a good part of Rural America right now [.]

The owners of stations in metro areas don't care about listening outside the
metro. They can not make any money from those listeners. On the other hand,
if there is a chance to make AM more viable in the future and the only
sacrifice is a handful of listeners outside the metro, that mean no income,
then the trade is very one-sided. The FCC agrees.

-cause- The Digital Noise Level {Background Hash}
from IBOC has made and impact on the Listenability
of several California Central Valley AM/MW Radio
Strations that I could pick-up and hear reasonably well
580 kHz - KMJ and 1530 kHz - KFBK come to mind.

Where are you? If you are not in the metro area of the station, the station
really does not care. They do care about surviving, though.

On Jun 22, 10:18 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message

...







"David Eduardo" wrote in message
et...

"RHF" wrote in message
roups.com...

Phasing in and Increase of the Digital Signal over
Time would ease the Transition to HD Radio.
First Year 1% Digital
Second Year 2% Digital
Third Year 4% Digital
Fourth Year 8% Digital
Fifth Year 16% Digital
A 16% Digital Signal should give a HD Radio
Station a Signal Coverage Area far better then
their present Analog Signal Coverage Area.

Based on actually working with 40 or so HD stations, the current HD
signal, on AM, covers to at least the same usable and used coverage area
the analog signal reaches, sometimes more. On FM, it also reaches the
same area where nearly all actual listening happens.

There you go again saying that only those inside your precious city grade
contours count as listeners. Probably 40-50 million people in the US would
beg to differ.

First, we are talking about AM, which now has, nationally, only about 19% of
radio listening. Second, most of that percentage is in upper end demos, as
under age 45, listenership is very small.

What we have is a band that has serious issues about survival.

In big cities, small cities and rural areas, there is very little use of AM
outside the very strong signal contours.

In fact, the national coverage by FM is far more dense than the AM coverage.
If HD can help AM survive, it is a fair tradeoff.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

DE - yes, Yes. YES - We Know - We Don't Count ~ RHF

- - - and the Art {Hobby} of AM/MW Radio DXing
is Obsolite due to Technological Advancement
-ie- IBOC Broadcasting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-band_on-channel

"RHF" wrote in message
ups.com...

- - - and the Art {Hobby} of AM/MW Radio DXing
is Obsolite due to Technological Advancement
-ie- IBOC Broadcasting.

Considering that the total membership in AM DX clubs over the last decade is
less than 1000 persons, I think the whole point is moot.

On Jun 22, 7:27 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"RHF" wrote in message

ups.com...



- - - and the Art {Hobby} of AM/MW Radio DXing
is Obsolite due to Technological Advancement
-ie- IBOC Broadcasting.


- Considering that the total membership in AM DX clubs
- over the last decade is less than 1000 persons,
- I think the whole point is moot.

Once Again "DE" - yes, Yes. YES ! - DXers Know
- We Don't Count In The Grand Scheme of HD Radio

But Think Of This DE : DXer's are a 'minority' -but-
Then in your Quantified {and Qualified} Business
World - DXers are a 'minority' that does not Count
- All the while your Personal Business Life has been
based on Serving a "Minority" of Radio Listeners.

-interesting- such hypocrisy ~ RHF

RHF wrote:


- Show quoted text -

DE - yes, Yes. YES - We Know - We Don't Count ~ RHF

- - - and the Art {Hobby} of AM/MW Radio DXing
is Obsolite due to Technological Advancement
-ie- IBOC Broadcasting.


We haven't counted since long before IBOC. Truth is, Radio has been
disregarding us for decades. At least by degrees. Now, they don't even
hear our voice.

David isn't the one who makes these policies, or decides which
numbers are to be excluded, he's only telling you what the reality is in
the Radio biz. It sucks. And I"m not saying that it's right. Or even
that it needs to be that way. Everything that you, and Ace, and Brenda
Ann have said are legitimate concerns from the listener's perspective.
I'm right there with you.

But the industry just doesn't care. They don't have to. They churn
out their sausages, their sausages sell. They take their money and go
buy expensive toys. They don't care.

They don't have to.

And like the ever declining level of customer service in every line
of business, these days, this thinking is so commonplace and so
prevalent, that the public has simply come to accept it as the norm. In
some cases, they even accept it as the right way.

Look at Microsoft. And the huge number of people who will defend them
and their contemptuous business practices to the last drop of their own
blood. They don't care. They're simply too big to need to. So, people
who have had it, exit the Microsoft world for Linux. Or Solaris. Or
FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and in some cases, UNIX itself. Or the blossoming Mac
world. And like Microsoft, Radio is seeing an ever increasing number of
dissatisfied listeners who exit to their iPods. Or CD players. Or
satellite radio. I put a Peripheral iPod Interface in my car. I may go
two, three weeks without tuning in. I have one colleague who took the
radio out of his Highlander entirely. We don't listen to the radio when
we go to hamfests. He's the one who took my job, when I left CBS.

And we are not alone in our circles.

It's only dinosaurs like us who understand the shortsightedness of
the thinking, and the waste of potential that radio reflects, today, and
the hazards of limiting communications availability and choice, that
care anymore. It's only dinosaurs like us who understand the
shortsightedness of putting all of it in the hands of one single company
who can make decisions about the entire communications business,
exclusively toward profit, with only token resistance from the stewards
of the public trust that care the primary focus of the broadcasting
companies, today is their stock price. Nothing else is as important.

And we are in short supply.

The business has done its research. And is convinced that what it's
doing is the only way. Now, the reality of this research is that
questionaires can be designed to produce exactly the desired outcome. I
was involved in this kind of directed research at CBS. And I've been
involved in focus group sessions that were also subtly directed to a
desired outcome. And for a time, they worked. And the station flourished
despite the chicanery. But then, again, we didn't have a head-on
competitor. When one came along, the shortcomings of the research were
apparent in the extreme, and they kicked the **** out of us with minimum
wage disc jockeys and the lamest promotion department in the business.
But they did what we wouldn't, and the listeners migrated in droves.

They didn't last. Mel Karmazin opened up the treasury and we simply
outspent them. And locked up every venue in the region for live
concerts. And locked up demographic specific sponsors into exclusivity.
Like Survivor, we outspent, out played and out lasted them. And when
they were gone, only we remained. Haggard, and battle worn, but
literally, within minutes of the announcement that they had spun the
Wheel, we were back to our old ways. The corner office didn't care.

It didn't have to.

And most stations, today, are positioned so they don't have to face a
head-on competitor.

They can make just as much money doing things the way it's doing them
as they can doing things the way that would include us in the service
commitment. It's just less expensive and more risky to do things our
way. And every analyst on Wall Street will tell you stockholders don't
like risk, or expense.

And no advertiser wants to roll the dice with their money on content
that may be contrary to its interest. As Howard Stern learned, again,
this past week on Sirius.

The hard pill to swallow, here, is that Radio, in the US, has always
been about the money. Always. Since the first grain elevator operators
built amateur licensed transmitters to report their market prices,
programming has only been there to hold listener attention between
commercial messages. The public service commitment written into the
rules came late. And from the outset was seen as an unfair burden to
broadcasters who could make much more money without it. Today, the
public service commitment is barely a token, and Radio is STILL
listening to the advertisers...the ones with the money. And everything
you hear on the radio is geared to that end. If public service could be
made profitable, things would change. But it's not. And in that light,
yes, Roy, we don't count.

It's not right. But it is reality.

They don't care. They don't have to.

On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:10:18 -0700, RHF
wrote:

...FM is far more dense than the AM...

Truer words were never spoken.

A brokered station in hi-fi is still a brokered station. I'd rather
be able to listen to competent flamethrowers at night than local
incompetence with more bandwidth.

On Jun 22, 1:53 am, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
"David Eduardo" wrote in message

t...







"RHF" wrote in message
oups.com...

Phasing in and Increase of the Digital Signal over
Time would ease the Transition to HD Radio.
First Year 1% Digital
Second Year 2% Digital
Third Year 4% Digital
Fourth Year 8% Digital
Fifth Year 16% Digital
A 16% Digital Signal should give a HD Radio
Station a Signal Coverage Area far better then
their present Analog Signal Coverage Area.

Based on actually working with 40 or so HD stations, the current HD
signal, on AM, covers to at least the same usable and used coverage area
the analog signal reaches, sometimes more. On FM, it also reaches the same
area where nearly all actual listening happens.

There you go again saying that only those inside your precious city grade
contours count as listeners. Probably 40-50 million people in the US would
beg to differ.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

BAD,

Clearly this Thread is positive proof that the 'magical'
10mv/m Contour does not serve this Rural Area of the
State of California very well -and- a Blinking Blue Light
says that the Digital Signal is not strong enough to
effectively reach the same areas where an Analog
Signal seems to make it in fairly well - be it AM or FM.

Again a gradual increase in the Digital Signal Level
from one year to the next would have all areas served
and produce a steady transistion from Analog to Digital
as new HD Radio Listeners and Equipment replaces the
old Analog Radio Listeners and Equipment.

* Digital Output Power Level wrt Analog ERP
First Year 1% Digital
Second Year 2% Digital
Third Year 4% Digital
Fourth Year 8% Digital
Fifth Year 16% Digital

* Analog Output Power Level Reduction
Sixth Year -10% Analog
Seventh Year -20% Analog
Eighth Year -30% Analog
Ninth Year -40% Analog
Tenth Year -50% Analog

What HD Radio will do for AM/MW Radio is debatable.

What HD Radio will do for FM Radio can be clearly heard.

imho -de- hd radio needs more power output to serve
the whole country which includes rural areas
-or- will rural areas be forced to pay for XM or Sirius
Satellite Radio to get digital quality sound ? ? ? ~ RHF