Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
In article ,
dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message .. . The only thing Eduardo knows how to engineer is BS. Amusing coming from someone who never could distinguish between a receivable and a listenable signal. Say, Edweena, could you possibly fill in the folks here on that bathroom tapping code? Many might be familiar with Morse and some of its variations, but this one seems to be fairly new. And, did you ever meet Larry? Edweena does not know fact from fiction. In his mind they are one in the same. Either way I'm sure he enjoyed the encounter. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message ... The only thing Eduardo knows how to engineer is BS. Amusing coming from someone who never could distinguish between a receivable and a listenable signal. Say, Edweena, could you possibly fill in the folks here on that bathroom tapping code? Many might be familiar with Morse and some of its variations, but this one seems to be fairly new. I really find it strange that once you run out of ethnic insults (Canadians, Hispanics, etc.) you focus in on all things anal better than a paparazzi with a telephoto lens. I suppose this lends support to the general belief that the greatest homophobes are closeted gays. Al que le caiga el sayo, que se lo ponga. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message .. . The only thing Eduardo knows how to engineer is BS. Amusing coming from someone who never could distinguish between a receivable and a listenable signal. Say, Edweena, could you possibly fill in the folks here on that bathroom tapping code? Many might be familiar with Morse and some of its variations, but this one seems to be fairly new. And, did you ever meet Larry? Edweena does not know fact from fiction. In his mind they are one in the same. Either way I'm sure he enjoyed the encounter. You and dxAss make a nice couple. Neither of you is able to distinguish real world radio listening from DX and both believe the bearer of sad tidings... is crazy. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
"Telamon" wrote in message ... You have no credibility in the news group. A well known Troll is all that you are. Your own posts O' crap have marginalized you and since you have proven you are full of BS beyond a reasonable doubt, nobody cares what you post. Credibility is determined by stating the facts, whether these be popular or not. If DXers to some extent do not want to believe the current reality of MW radio in the US and the world because it changes the expectations for DX reception, that is not the fault of the messenger. The simple facts are that HD is being widely deployed, and on AM will be on most of the viable AMs in the top 100 markets... about 200 to 250 stations. "Viable" is defined by industry authorities like BIA as having a day and night signal that covers the entire metro with a usable signal. There are very few of these stations. The DXer considers a station based on being able to receive it. An average listener only tunes in very good signals... ones that are pretty much impervious to interference and other distractions. In metros, that means a signal of about 10 mv/m is needed to get any audience, and in some metros, over 12 mv/m and up to 15 mv/m are needed to get listenership... all this is proven by extensive studies of the listening locations of US radio stations for at-home and at-work listening in Arbitron. The conclusion is very obvious: stations that sacrifice any potential out-of-metro listening to go HD are really sacrificing nothing, as such listenership is close to non-existent. When we get to skywave reception, and look at the ratings in every county of the US, there is not enough skywave listening for stations to show up in the ratings on this night-signal skip anywhere. AM listening is less than 20% of all radio listening, and AM listening is even a lower percentage at night (because most signal areas contract). In general, night radio listening is about 25% of daytime levels, so low-use AM and general listening at night make the interest in reaching outside one's own market just about zero. DXing as a hobby depends on having stations to DX. If AM is dying to begin with (75% of listeners are over 55, the rest are approaching that age where no advertiser will tread), and few AMs actually can compete with FM and new media (based on having a decent enough signal), objecting to a plan that might just help AM... and is the only idea around that might do this... seems absurd. As I have said before, I really wonder about the fact that nearly no poster has reflected on the DX opportunities of HD signals... but many are busy criticising HD... to the extent that one poster fabricated the "gag order" (which does not exist) out of old development-era nondisclosure agreements. Now that certainly enhances on the DX side of the argument the credibility you so desparately seem to value; having failed to invalidate HD with the truth, totally groundless claims are now being invented and the lie and the out of context quote are the stock in trade of these posters. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
David "I checked that box on the Census Form, but this gig posing as 'Eduardo' just isn't working for me", wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message ... You have no credibility in the news group. A well known Troll is all that you are. Your own posts O' crap have marginalized you and since you have proven you are full of BS beyond a reasonable doubt, nobody cares what you post. Credibility is determined by stating the facts, whether these be popular or not. If DXers to some extent do not want to believe the current reality of MW radio in the US and the world because it changes the expectations for DX reception, that is not the fault of the messenger. The simple facts are that HD is being widely deployed, and on AM will be on most of the viable AMs in the top 100 markets... about 200 to 250 stations. "Viable" is defined by industry authorities like BIA as having a day and night signal that covers the entire metro with a usable signal. There are very few of these stations. The DXer considers a station based on being able to receive it. An average listener only tunes in very good signals... ones that are pretty much impervious to interference and other distractions. In metros, that means a signal of about 10 mv/m is needed to get any audience, and in some metros, over 12 mv/m and up to 15 mv/m are needed to get listenership... all this is proven by extensive studies of the listening locations of US radio stations for at-home and at-work listening in Arbitron. The conclusion is very obvious: stations that sacrifice any potential out-of-metro listening to go HD are really sacrificing nothing, as such listenership is close to non-existent. When we get to skywave reception, and look at the ratings in every county of the US, there is not enough skywave listening for stations to show up in the ratings on this night-signal skip anywhere. AM listening is less than 20% of all radio listening, and AM listening is even a lower percentage at night (because most signal areas contract). In general, night radio listening is about 25% of daytime levels, so low-use AM and general listening at night make the interest in reaching outside one's own market just about zero. DXing as a hobby depends on having stations to DX. If AM is dying to begin with (75% of listeners are over 55, the rest are approaching that age where no advertiser will tread), and few AMs actually can compete with FM and new media (based on having a decent enough signal), objecting to a plan that might just help AM... and is the only idea around that might do this... seems absurd. As I have said before, I really wonder about the fact that nearly no poster has reflected on the DX opportunities of HD signals... but many are busy criticising HD... to the extent that one poster fabricated the "gag order" (which does not exist) out of old development-era nondisclosure agreements. Now that certainly enhances on the DX side of the argument the credibility you so desparately seem to value; having failed to invalidate HD with the truth, totally groundless claims are now being invented and the lie and the out of context quote are the stock in trade of these posters. Speaking of viability... you just aren't making it as a Hispanic, but you're doing well as a IBOC/HD shill. You may now return to tapping your feet... dxAce Michigan USA |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
David Eduardo wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message ... You have no credibility in the news group. A well known Troll is all that you are. Your own posts O' crap have marginalized you and since you have proven you are full of BS beyond a reasonable doubt, nobody cares what you post. Credibility is determined by stating the facts, whether these be popular or not. If DXers to some extent do not want to believe the current reality of MW radio in the US and the world because it changes the expectations for DX reception, that is not the fault of the messenger. The simple facts are that HD is being widely deployed, and on AM will be on most of the viable AMs in the top 100 markets... about 200 to 250 stations. "Viable" is defined by industry authorities like BIA as having a day and night signal that covers the entire metro with a usable signal. There are very few of these stations. The DXer considers a station based on being able to receive it. An average listener only tunes in very good signals... ones that are pretty much impervious to interference and other distractions. In metros, that means a signal of about 10 mv/m is needed to get any audience, and in some metros, over 12 mv/m and up to 15 mv/m are needed to get listenership... all this is proven by extensive studies of the listening locations of US radio stations for at-home and at-work listening in Arbitron. The conclusion is very obvious: stations that sacrifice any potential out-of-metro listening to go HD are really sacrificing nothing, as such listenership is close to non-existent. When we get to skywave reception, and look at the ratings in every county of the US, there is not enough skywave listening for stations to show up in the ratings on this night-signal skip anywhere. AM listening is less than 20% of all radio listening, and AM listening is even a lower percentage at night (because most signal areas contract). In general, night radio listening is about 25% of daytime levels, so low-use AM and general listening at night make the interest in reaching outside one's own market just about zero. DXing as a hobby depends on having stations to DX. If AM is dying to begin with (75% of listeners are over 55, the rest are approaching that age where no advertiser will tread), and few AMs actually can compete with FM and new media (based on having a decent enough signal), objecting to a plan that might just help AM... and is the only idea around that might do this... seems absurd. As I have said before, I really wonder about the fact that nearly no poster has reflected on the DX opportunities of HD signals... but many are busy criticising HD... to the extent that one poster fabricated the "gag order" (which does not exist) out of old development-era nondisclosure agreements. Now that certainly enhances on the DX side of the argument the credibility you so desparately seem to value; having failed to invalidate HD with the truth, totally groundless claims are now being invented and the lie and the out of context quote are the stock in trade of these posters. Oh yeah, you are the MASTER of inventing groundless claims and LIES! |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 2, 10:20?am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message ... You have no credibility in the news group. A well known Troll is all that you are. Your own posts O' crap have marginalized you and since you have proven you are full of BS beyond a reasonable doubt, nobody cares what you post. Credibility is determined by stating the facts, whether these be popular or not. If DXers to some extent do not want to believe the current reality of MW radio in the US and the world because it changes the expectations for DX reception, that is not the fault of the messenger. The simple facts are that HD is being widely deployed, and on AM will be on most of the viable AMs in the top 100 markets... about 200 to 250 stations. "Viable" is defined by industry authorities like BIA as having a day and night signal that covers the entire metro with a usable signal. There are very few of these stations. The DXer considers a station based on being able to receive it. An average listener only tunes in very good signals... ones that are pretty much impervious to interference and other distractions. In metros, that means a signal of about 10 mv/m is needed to get any audience, and in some metros, over 12 mv/m and up to 15 mv/m are needed to get listenership... all this is proven by extensive studies of the listening locations of US radio stations for at-home and at-work listening in Arbitron. The conclusion is very obvious: stations that sacrifice any potential out-of-metro listening to go HD are really sacrificing nothing, as such listenership is close to non-existent. When we get to skywave reception, and look at the ratings in every county of the US, there is not enough skywave listening for stations to show up in the ratings on this night-signal skip anywhere. AM listening is less than 20% of all radio listening, and AM listening is even a lower percentage at night (because most signal areas contract). In general, night radio listening is about 25% of daytime levels, so low-use AM and general listening at night make the interest in reaching outside one's own market just about zero. DXing as a hobby depends on having stations to DX. If AM is dying to begin with (75% of listeners are over 55, the rest are approaching that age where no advertiser will tread), and few AMs actually can compete with FM and new media (based on having a decent enough signal), objecting to a plan that might just help AM... and is the only idea around that might do this... seems absurd. As I have said before, I really wonder about the fact that nearly no poster has reflected on the DX opportunities of HD signals... but many are busy criticising HD... to the extent that one poster fabricated the "gag order" (which does not exist) out of old development-era nondisclosure agreements. Now that certainly enhances on the DX side of the argument the credibility you so desparately seem to value; having failed to invalidate HD with the truth, totally groundless claims are now being invented and the lie and the out of context quote are the stock in trade of these posters. "The simple facts are that HD is being widely deployed, and on AM will be on most of the viable AMs in the top 100 markets... about 200 to 250 stations. "Viable" is defined by industry authorities like BIA as having a day and night signal that covers the entire metro with a usable signal. There are very few of these stations." And, a number of AM-HD's are turing off the hash generators (to include WSB), due to listener complaints. At any rate, interest in HD Radio has reminded flat since the first HD radio was sold January 2004 and stations started broadcsating in at least 2002: http://hdradiofarce.blogspot.com/200...ains-flat.html |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
Bart Bailey wrote: In t posted on Sun, 02 Sep 2007 14:20:06 GMT, David Eduardo wrote: Begin As I have said before, I really wonder about the fact that nearly no poster has reflected on the DX opportunities of HD signals... The "opportunity" to lose the two adjacent slots of any HD blasters for potential reception of DX signals, is like putting outriggers on either side of your vehicle to stabilize the load, and the subsequent effect on traffic carrying capacity of any roadway. I don't understand why KNX 1070 and KOGO 600 feel a need to go HD when they're both AM Talkers. Maybe it's so psychological voice stress analyzers can better detect the constant stream of lies from the right wing hosts? Put one of those analyzers on NPR or AirAmerica and they fry within minutes. dxAce Michigan USA |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
On Sep 2, 10:20 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message ... You have no credibility in the news group. A well known Troll is all that you are. Your own posts O' crap have marginalized you and since you have proven you are full of BS beyond a reasonable doubt, nobody cares what you post. Credibility is determined by stating the facts, whether these be popular or not. Umm...I think this was his point. If DXers to some extent do not want to believe the current reality of MW radio in the US and the world because it changes the expectations for DX reception, that is not the fault of the messenger. Don't accuse DXers of not having a grip on reality. You're the one putting bandaids on headless corpses. The simple facts are that HD is being widely deployed, and on AM will be on most of the viable AMs in the top 100 markets... about 200 to 250 stations. "Viable" is defined by industry authorities like BIA as having a day and night signal that covers the entire metro with a usable signal. There are very few of these stations. This would be nice if it were relevant to anything. The DXer considers a station based on being able to receive it. An average listener only tunes in very good signals... ones that are pretty much impervious to interference and other distractions. In metros, that means a signal of about 10 mv/m is needed to get any audience, and in some metros, over 12 mv/m and up to 15 mv/m are needed to get listenership... all this is proven by extensive studies of the listening locations of US radio stations for at-home and at-work listening in Arbitron. The conclusion is very obvious: stations that sacrifice any potential out-of-metro listening to go HD are really sacrificing nothing, as such listenership is close to non-existent. This isn't relevant to anything. When we get to skywave reception, and look at the ratings in every county of the US, there is not enough skywave listening for stations to show up in the ratings on this night-signal skip anywhere. AM listening is less than 20% of all radio listening, and AM listening is even a lower percentage at night (because most signal areas contract). In general, night radio listening is about 25% of daytime levels, so low-use AM and general listening at night make the interest in reaching outside one's own market just about zero. Not relevant. DXing as a hobby depends on having stations to DX. If AM is dying to begin with (75% of listeners are over 55, the rest are approaching that age where no advertiser will tread), and few AMs actually can compete with FM and new media (based on having a decent enough signal), objecting to a plan that might just help AM... and is the only idea around that might do this... seems absurd. Not relevant. As I have said before, I really wonder about the fact that nearly no poster has reflected on the DX opportunities of HD signals... but many are busy criticising HD... to the extent that one poster fabricated the "gag order" (which does not exist) out of old development-era nondisclosure agreements. Now that certainly enhances on the DX side of the argument the credibility you so desparately seem to value; having failed to invalidate HD with the truth, totally groundless claims are now being invented and the lie and the out of context quote are the stock in trade of these posters. If MW is indeed dying, HD will only hasten its demise. So, why should anyone care about DXing HD signals? |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message ... You have no credibility in the news group. A well known Troll is all that you are. Your own posts O' crap have marginalized you and since you have proven you are full of BS beyond a reasonable doubt, nobody cares what you post. Credibility is determined by stating the facts, whether these be popular or not. Snip You skipped a few steps. 1. First you have to have a grip on reality in order to ascertain the facts. You desperately need to get a grip. 2. Then you determine what is relevant. You don't seem to have that ability. 3. Then if you are going to communicate your thinking on the subject you have to consider your audience. You either can't or won't do this either. You are a waste of time to read in this news group. Based on your posting behavior I'm sure knowing you would not be a pleasure. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|