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