HD radio won't just go away.
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...


The only thing on my
website that has changed in the last 4 years is the addition of a bunch
of old Radex, Whites and Stevenson's magazines. The bio / history is
essentially unchanged from when I cut and pasted it from my resume, about
year 2000. It's even got the same spelling errors.


Actually, Steve pointed out that wasn't true about a year ago.

Steve is probably certifiably crazy. I take anything he says as being
automatically untrue; he has, as I recall, never posted anything of
substance and even mis-identifies the formats on his local Boise stations.



Your knowledge of radio sales is dated, stilted and inaccurate;



I was wondering when that would finally come out.

At least my knowledge is based on 45 years of active experience.

Mine on 48. And the last agency I visited was Friday, and its accounts
include McDonalds, among others.

Have a good evening, David. You've proven, by your own words, your own
obfuscations that just about everything said by Steve is true.

And to me, you're just another arrogant S.O.B who can't look beyond his
office to realize that everyone around him is thinking the same thing:

No, only the nutjobs like dxAss and Telamon and Steve refuse to realize how
radio is used today, and the changes the industry has to make to survive...
and that said survival will likely not include AM in the long run.

The fact is, I speak with real listeners every week, and have a pretty good
idea what they want today, based on tens of thousands of yearly interviews.
Here, there are some who seem to have an intimate relationship with their
TenTec and have no idea what real people do, and how stations today have to
serve them.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

You can't have it both ways, David. You can't insist that Radio is
healthier than ever, and then claim your worry is about the success of
terrestrial radio against alternatives.

But I do not claim that. Radio is in slow revenue growth mode, and this year
may be no-growth (although due to automotive and mortgage / housing crisis
situations) so it is critical to keep the existing audience base, which the
PPPM shows to be a 96% reach of all 6+ Americans.

You can't have it both ways, David. You can't claim that there are too
many signals to be profitable, and then solve the problem with more
options.

It is rational to offer more formats on the good facilities via HD2,
although the losers will be the rimshots and AMs. This will allow the
listeners to pick free, terrestrial radio with more options.

It's the same reason stores open branches... when I have to drive 15 miles
to Bed Bath and Beyond, I pick the Linens and Things that is 3 miles away,
but if there is a new BBB at equal distance, I will remain loyal to that
chain. The total market sales of BBB will be divided, but they keep my
dollars...

HD radio won't just go away.
 

In article ,
David wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:27:54 -0700, "David Eduardo"
wrote:



I suppose it was my idea to discontinue the R8B? There was not enough
market, you fool.

I think what happened was that they pretty much sold one to everybody
who wanted one over the series' extremely long run.

Probably not the case. My guess is the profit margin was to thin and
they wanted to spend their time on more profitable product. There are
many older technology type components that would continue to get more
expensive with time and they would need to redesign it just to keep
costs down. I noticed the price on a R8B kept going up the last few
years they made it. With the Asian competition and the engineering hours
needed probably tipped the scales in favor of dropping it. Drake would
probably be asking at $2K to $2.5K for an R8B if they were still making
it today.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

HD radio won't just go away.
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

I think he believes his own noise and no he can't provide the link
because what he claims doesn't exist. At least not yet.

The info provided to iBiquity's owners is not public, so I am not giving you
a link. You will simply have to hold your water until Samsung ships low
power, lower cost chips in 2008.

Most lies have a kernel of truth in them so they are believable. All I
know is every time a take a poke at what he posts the stick goes right
through the one layer of the "story" he tells. All that he posts seem
very illusionary in nature.

Nothing is like your insistence that listeners will put up with a bad AM
signal and listen, despite radio audience measurements that are universally
accepted showing no such thing occurs.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

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

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:27:54 -0700, "David Eduardo"
wrote:



I suppose it was my idea to discontinue the R8B? There was not enough
market, you fool.

I think what happened was that they pretty much sold one to everybody
who wanted one over the series' extremely long run.

Probably not the case. My guess is the profit margin was to thin and
they wanted to spend their time on more profitable product. There are
many older technology type components that would continue to get more
expensive with time and they would need to redesign it just to keep
costs down. I noticed the price on a R8B kept going up the last few
years they made it. With the Asian competition and the engineering hours
needed probably tipped the scales in favor of dropping it. Drake would
probably be asking at $2K to $2.5K for an R8B if they were still making
it today.

Or, the simple answer: there is a huge decline in the number of SW stations,
and also in SW listeners. Domestic SW, the nicest DX, is all but
disappearing and the quality broadcasters are reducing schedules or
suspending service.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
D Peter Maus wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
SFTV_troy wrote:
I don't really understand why people are upset about the loss of
DX'ing over AM (only temporarily; it will be restored when AM goes
pure digital). You can still do DX'ing via using services like
shoutcast.com. Just yesterday at work I was listening to an
Australian station. Another favorite of mine is located in England.
DX'ing is still alive and well on the internet.
Uh... that's NOT DX'ing.

It may well become the DXing of the 21st Century.
Edwina, you're an idiot.
It just looks that way to us DxAce because you and I don't share the
level of self delusion that Eduardo has attained.


I honestly believe this is not delusion. I honestly believe he
believes this noise.

His comments blaming DXers for abandoning broadcasters, while
delineating precisely how broadcasters have developed their disdain for
DXers is evidence that he's really looking at snapshots of this party,
but not attending the party, itself. Taking the Broadcaster/Dxer enmity
out of chronological order, as he did, suggests that he's seeing what he
needs to focus on in order to justify his position, but not seeing a
good deal of the out-of-frame that gives the snapshot context. This is
common among manglement in Radio.

It's what used to be called not seeing the forest for the trees.

It's what pilots call flying instruments in VFR conditions: Paying so
much attention to the minutiae that they fail to look up and actually
see how the plane is being flown.

One of my mentors in the Physics department at UMSL used to say, as
the textbook he taught from explained, formulae and numbers are only
shorthand for English sentences. If you can't explain your case without
resorting to formulae and numbers, you can't explain your case.

Corporately, that is the equivalent of: If you can't convince someone
without quoting a policy, you're hiding behind a firewall because you
actually can't function amongst your clients/customers.

And if you notice, he doesn't really answer your questions,
Telamon...but like Johnny Cochran, he gives you the answer he would like
you to hear, whether it addresses your question or not.

Has he posted the link you've asked for yet?

There are several inconsistencies in our most recent discussion about
demographics and agencies. The kind of inconsistencies that someone with
major market experience in both sales and Manglement wouldn't have made.

And in these last discussions, about DXers and this thread about HD,
he's begun speaking openly out of both sides of his mouth, not only
contradicting himself but doing it with a kind of indignation that's
also inconsistent with someone of his knowledge and experience.

Someone made the statement, here, that a person of his stature and
position doesn't need the ego piece that is his website.

Perhaps, that's true. Although I know people in the business who are
still trying to prove something after 30 years in the big city. But when
you read it, and as Ace has pointed out several times that the content
of his website has changed more than once when his credentials were
called into question, it does give one reason to wonder not so much what
it is that's false, but what it is that may be true.

I think he believes his own noise and no he can't provide the link
because what he claims doesn't exist. At least not yet.

He has written some weird stuff like he has people around him looking
over his shoulder laughing at peoples critical responses to his posts on
Usenet as an attempt to bully the people critical of him. Very strange
he would need this imaginary support.

I have noted the deception and misdirection. It's madding.

Most lies have a kernel of truth in them so they are believable. All I
know is every time a take a poke at what he posts the stick goes right
through the one layer of the "story" he tells. All that he posts seem
very illusionary in nature.

At one time it seemed to me you thought he is for real. You still think
that way?



Yeah, I do. But, over the last few weeks, I've noticed some serious
inconsistencies in his positions. And, I've watched him, when pressed,
back away from his arguments. Now, sometimes we say things in the heat
of a moment, or when time is short, that may require some clarification.
But, I've noticed a consistent pattern of argumentation, and when
pressed for specifics, a termination of the discussion, so he can move
on to other things. Direct questions asked, but never addressed.
Specifics requested but never supplied. Your link request that was never
provided. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get
his engineers out here to take signal strength measurements at my
location to determine why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but
immediately dropped all conversation about it.

To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception
issues, is me. :)

Again, not terribly surprising. Not any of it. Most broadcasters, in
fact, most people in any profession are particularly good at spouting a
company line, but woefully inadequate at following through. Or directly
addressing matters that they feel are inconsequential to them, beneath
them, or in the most insidious cases, may threaten their position. A
lot of people I know are like this. You probably know some, too.

But, here of late, I've seen more of it than in months past. And I've
seen more attempts at abject dismissal, in lieu of substantive
conversation. Which I have seen more out of consultants, than actual
working frontline broadcasters. And some blatant inconsistencies in his
claims about agencies/sales. And his experience. These things make me
suspect that, though, he's still the David we've all come to know and
love, that he's getting low on the calm, educational patience he's
showed a year ago, and is now running out of both patience, and
appreciation of the intercourse.

Like the parent who, when set with a barrage of questions he/she no
longer wants to deal with, because he/she can't make a compelling case,
retreats into 'because I said so.'

He speaks a corporate line. He speaks a policy statement. He
speaks...well, he speaks like he's reading out of a textbook. But he
doesn't speak with a level of personal intimacy that someone with his
experience would employ. You and I, for instance, barely know each
other. And have only corresponded once or twice within the group. But,
here, you've asked a direct question based on existing conversation, but
with a level of personal interaction that David does not employ. You ask
me about what I think and whether or not it's changed. And you phrased
it in a very personal way. Two people exchanging ideas....one to the other.

But when David speaks, he speaks like a policy statement. There's
only a level of personal interaction after it's been brought to his
attention that there is none. Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I
share no personal cordiality, will address a post as though he's talking
TO me, but not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent.
Overwhelming with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do.
Jumping into conversations with material that brings nothing to the
topic at hand, but definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on
display.

Like a textbook. Very much like a textbook. General practices,
expectations and limitatons. But no personal experiential variations on
the textbook case. And everyone, EVERYONE, has personal experiences
where the textbook doesn't tell the story.

Then there was the issue of his ham credentials. When pressed he
gave a credible story about corruption in the testing process in
Ecuador. Nothing out of the ordinary, actually. Nothing outside the
realm of possibility. Certainly, something we'd all believe based on the
politics of the region. But when pressed, he gave no clarification, with
any personal experiential content. Just something that sounds a likely
story.

Which is all, really, that he needs to present. If that. But all of
his stories sound like that. Textbook, obvious and not unexpected likely
stories, without any personal variations, or counterintuitive wrinkles.

Somewhere you'd expect some.

Colleagues, whether vocational or avocational, don't address each
other like that. He claims to be a DXer, but disdains DXers. He claims
to be an SWL, but contributes almost nothing to SW related
conversations. He keeps his content almost entirely on BC related
matters, and, again speaks not TO, but AT the topic. Like we're not
here. Or beneath him. Ignorant USENet savages, who could not be informed
if we could BUY a clue.

As I said, I've known people in the Radio business like that. But
then don't rise to the level of corporate oversight, or management. And
they are certainly not leaders. Usually they're middle manglement. And
consultants.

So, yeah, to answer your question, I think he's for real. I just
think he's not as good at keeping it real as he wants to believe.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

D Peter Maus wrote:


Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I
share no personal cordiality,

Laf.

That's YOUR choice, Peter, not mine. And, FWIW, it inspired some
interesting email from former participants in this group.

will address a post as though he's talking
TO me, but not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent.
Overwhelming with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do.

Actually, I disagree. He overwhemlms with statistical buzzwords
rather than statistics. It's easy to talk about normal distributions
if you have read about statistics, but what if you don't know where a
normal distribution simply doesn't apply?

Jumping into conversations with material that brings nothing to the
topic at hand, but definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on
display.

Just an ego trip. "Let me show you how much I know." Only it doesn't
work.

Generally a post I would agree with. It doesn't take a radio insider
to see it, though.


--
Eric F. Richards,
"It's the Din of iBiquity." -- Frank Dresser

HD radio won't just go away.
 

Steve wrote:


Sorry Tardo, but you'll never stop the internet or internet radio.

He (or those who think like him) can destroy conventional radio, and
where it is useful is in times of emergency, such as 9/11 or when a
major river-crossing bridge suddenly ceases to exist.

For a commuter, all that chit-chat between the musical pieces or the
news stories is very useful.

--
Eric F. Richards,
"It's the Din of iBiquity." -- Frank Dresser

HD radio won't just go away.
 

On Sep 29, 3:20 pm, SFTV_troy wrote:
Steve wrote:
On Sep 29, 12:56 pm, SFTV_troy wrote:
On Sep 29, 8:50 am, Steve wrote:

You're making the most elementary of mistakes here. More
channels does not equal more...

Yes it does. Each station gets split into 3 or even 4 sub-channels.
For example one of my local stations has split into (1) Christian
talk/ education programs (as they've done for the last 50 years). (2)
An all-music channel. (3) Another all-music channel, but teen-
oriented. ----- Thus giving more choice to the listener, in the same
way XM Radio has more channels and more choices.

Yes, on channel 1 you can hear the informercial about colloidal
silver, on channel 2 you have some ginseng supplement, on channel
three the amazing hgh and on channel four investing in gold.

Uh, no. Perhaps you misunderstood, so let me repeat it: Channels:
(1) Christian talk. (2) All-music. (3) Teen-oriented music. -----
And the other station I like to tune-in has these channels: (1) Adult
rock. (2) Soft rock (instrumental).

These are ACTUAL programs, not made-up fiction.

Better to (a) upgrade to digital and hope for
more variety/ better programming, than to (b)
Do nothing and keep the current crapfest.

True, but better programming would improve a lot. And it
wouldn't require new technology. And it wouldn't destroy MW.

New technology might not improve the programming, but it will triple
or even quadruple the number of choices. (See above.) And once the
analog is phased out, and the HD Radio is restricted to the standard
10 kilohertz width (mode 3), everything will be good again. No more
overlapping stations. (That is only a *temporary* situation, not a
permanent one.)

No one's saying do nothing. A lot of folks are just saying "don't
do something that's only going to make the situation worse."

Sounds reasonable, but if you want to transition from AM-analog to AM-
digital, you're going to have to make some sacrifices. Even the
European Union's DRM methodology spills-over into adjacent channels
(10 kHz AM + 5 kHz DRM). Plus it's only limited to ~10 kilobits per
second.... barely adequate.

But that's the price you have to pay when you upgrade.... like when
color TV arrived. Or the necessity to get new Digital TV receivers.
You phase-out the old, and phase-in the new.

BTW:

I don't really understand why people are upset about the loss of
DX'ing over AM (only temporarily; it will be restored when AM goes
pure digital). You can still do DX'ing via using services like
shoutcast.com. Just yesterday at work I was listening to an
Australian station. Another favorite of mine is located in England.
DX'ing is still alive and well on the internet.

No doubt that distant AM station you can no longer hear is still
available to you. Just visit their website & listen to their stream
(and you don't need to wait until night; you can do it during the day
too).- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

SFTV_troy,

So a Telephone Call to your Great Grand Ma
in the UK is DXing . . .

DOH I Think Not ! ~ RHF

HD radio won't just go away.
 

On Sep 29, 4:38 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...



SFTV_troy wrote:

I don't really understand why people are upset about the loss of
DX'ing over AM (only temporarily; it will be restored when AM goes
pure digital). You can still do DX'ing via using services like
shoutcast.com. Just yesterday at work I was listening to an
Australian station. Another favorite of mine is located in England.
DX'ing is still alive and well on the internet.

Uh... that's NOT DX'ing.

It may well become the DXing of the 21st Century.

d'Eduardo 'speaks' from beyond the 10mv/m Contour

- - - but can anyone hear him - NO ! ~ RHF

HD radio won't just go away.
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get his engineers
out here to take signal strength measurements at my location to determine
why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but immediately dropped all
conversation about it.

And that, whille none of your business, is due to the fact that Paul Easter,
an talented and wonderful engineer, moved to a corporate position at Salem,
and we are short handed in the middle of two transmitter moves.

To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception issues,
is me. :)

Good for you.

. And some blatant inconsistencies in his claims about agencies/sales.

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the current
situation, where interactive media is far more attractive to advertising
agencies than radio because there are more creative dollars to be made
there.

And his experience. These things make me suspect that, though, he's still
the David we've all come to know and love, that he's getting low on the
calm, educational patience he's showed a year ago, and is now running out
of both patience, and appreciation of the intercourse.

I'm out of patience with the people who insist that there is listening to
distant skywave signals, when there is no such thing documented and with
those who think AM is not on a horrible decline, with its main and majority
format, news talk, moving to FM. And I'm out of patience with you, who think
a radio station in 2007 can change the demos on a buy because he once saw a
station changed on a buy. I spoke with the head or our naitonal rep about
changing demos on a campaign, and she simply laughed.

But when David speaks, he speaks like a policy statement. There's only
a level of personal interaction after it's been brought to his attention
that there is none. Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I share no
personal cordiality, will address a post as though he's talking TO me, but
not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent. Overwhelming
with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do. Jumping into
conversations with material that brings nothing to the topic at hand, but
definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on display.

When the responses I get are idiotic, I react as one does to an idiot. At
some point, it came to me that DXers were now enemies of radio stations...
which is when I dropped my Northamerican radio club memberships... because
supporting one's enemies with money is hardly rational. The inability of the
DX community to realize that AM has changed from a music medium to a talk
one, and that shows like Noory are necessary, and that technical changes
have to come if there is any chace of AM survival make the DXer a Luddite of
the first order.

Then there was the issue of his ham credentials. When pressed he gave a
credible story about corruption in the testing process in Ecuador. Nothing
out of the ordinary, actually. Nothing outside the realm of possibility.
Certainly, something we'd all believe based on the politics of the region.
But when pressed, he gave no clarification, with any personal experiential
content. Just something that sounds a likely story.

Drivers licences, visas, import permits, bulding permits, licences, tax
audits, etc., were all facilitated in a way that is accepted outside the US,
and not called "corrupt" as you have called it. It's just a different
system. And while I was there, there was no exam for a ham license at all...
you had to be sponsored by the RCE (Radio Club del Ecuador) or other of the
ham associations, and you got a license. My sponsor was Ing. Fred Simon.

But, with about 30 years of living outside the US, and even more working
there, I am used to US gringo standards being applied to other cultures as a
metric. Other cultures do not work like the American system, and can not be
compared to it, either.

Colleagues, whether vocational or avocational, don't address each other
like that. He claims to be a DXer, but disdains DXers.

Anyone with over 2000 AM veries has, I think, earned the right to be called
a DXer. But I am not a club member of any of the DX orgainzations because
the hobby, which led me into radio, now pretty universally hates
broadcasters and the very stations they listen to.

As I said, I've known people in the Radio business like that. But then
don't rise to the level of corporate oversight, or management. And they
are certainly not leaders. Usually they're middle manglement. And
consultants.

Of which I am neither.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

On Sep 29, 4:57 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:





"dxAce" wrote in message
...

SFTV_troy wrote:

I don't really understand why people are upset about the loss of
DX'ing over AM (only temporarily; it will be restored when AM goes
pure digital). You can still do DX'ing via using services like
shoutcast.com. Just yesterday at work I was listening to an
Australian station. Another favorite of mine is located in England.
DX'ing is still alive and well on the internet.

Uh... that's NOT DX'ing.

It may well become the DXing of the 21st Century.

That may work out for you but most people do not have the self
delusional capacity you possess.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

d'Eduardo 'invents' 21st Century DXing
- - - and add's it to his Bio.

d'Eduardo Wins the Al Gore
"Hey I Invented That" Award.

~ RHF

HD radio won't just go away.
 

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
Steve wrote:


Sorry Tardo, but you'll never stop the internet or internet radio.

He (or those who think like him) can destroy conventional radio, and
where it is useful is in times of emergency, such as 9/11 or when a
major river-crossing bridge suddenly ceases to exist.

And an FM can not provide the needed service in the Minneapolis case? Or did
the bridge extend across the entire Great Plains.

WWL was one of the really lucky stations, as it had been hardened. Nearly
nowhere on the Gulf Coast or FL is there a station that sould survive what
WWL went through. The first to go in a hurricane are usually AMs, as the
sites tend to be low and damp. FMs with backups on buildings are the most
robust today. I have been through a bunch of big hurricanes while in PR, and
the AMs never stayed on.... the FMs did.

For a commuter, all that chit-chat between the musical pieces or the
news stories is very useful.

And an FM can not do that?

FMs are highly viable still; with few exceptions, AMs are not.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

On Sep 29, 4:38 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...



SFTV_troy wrote:

I don't really understand why people are upset about the loss of
DX'ing over AM (only temporarily; it will be restored when AM goes
pure digital). You can still do DX'ing via using services like
shoutcast.com. Just yesterday at work I was listening to an
Australian station. Another favorite of mine is located in England.
DX'ing is still alive and well on the internet.

Uh... that's NOT DX'ing.

It may well become the DXing of the 21st Century.

d'Eduardo is SFTV_troy on your Pay Roll ?

HD radio won't just go away.
 

Eric F. Richards wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:


Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I
share no personal cordiality,

Laf.

That's YOUR choice, Peter, not mine. And, FWIW, it inspired some
interesting email from former participants in this group.


No doubt. What doesn't.


will address a post as though he's talking
TO me, but not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent.
Overwhelming with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do.

Actually, I disagree. He overwhemlms with statistical buzzwords
rather than statistics. It's easy to talk about normal distributions
if you have read about statistics, but what if you don't know where a
normal distribution simply doesn't apply?


Both good points.



Jumping into conversations with material that brings nothing to the
topic at hand, but definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on
display.

Just an ego trip. "Let me show you how much I know." Only it doesn't
work.

Generally a post I would agree with. It doesn't take a radio insider
to see it, though.


And that's my point...a real conversation doesn't.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

On Sep 29, 6:21 am, SFTV_troy wrote:
Rfburns wrote:
Despite the fact that both the AM and FM versions of HD radio are a
good example of out-of -control technology that nobody really wants,
the FCC has mandated that all broadcasting will be digital.
Therefore, I see no turning back regardless of what the consumer does
or doesn't want or understand.

Switching to digital just makes sense. Digital makes better use of
the limited space available. With digital the FM band would
effectively triple or even quadruple the number of channels on the
dial. (Alternatively Classical FM stations could boost the sound from
2 channel stereo to 5.1 surround.)

That's good for the consumer, and something I'd like to see happen.

As for AM... well to be honest, I don't even care. AM is largely
ignored by myself, since there's little there worth hearing. (Rush
Limbaugh? Michael Medved? Some Liberal Nutjob? Pu-leeze. Not
thanks.) But as long as I'm upgrading my FM to digital, we might as
well bring AM along for the ride, too.

I want to see FM upgraded with three to four times more programs to
choose from.

SFTV_troy are you on d'Eduardo's Pay Roll ?
-or- Work for any of the Companies that Employ Him ?
-or- Work for a Radio Station using his Programming ?

HD radio won't just go away.
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get his engineers
out here to take signal strength measurements at my location to determine
why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but immediately dropped all
conversation about it.

And that, whille none of your business, is due to the fact that Paul Easter,
an talented and wonderful engineer, moved to a corporate position at Salem,
and we are short handed in the middle of two transmitter moves.
To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception issues,
is me. :)

Good for you.

. And some blatant inconsistencies in his claims about agencies/sales.

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the current
situation, where interactive media is far more attractive to advertising
agencies than radio because there are more creative dollars to be made
there.

And his experience. These things make me suspect that, though, he's still
the David we've all come to know and love, that he's getting low on the
calm, educational patience he's showed a year ago, and is now running out
of both patience, and appreciation of the intercourse.

I'm out of patience with the people who insist that there is listening to
distant skywave signals, when there is no such thing documented and with
those who think AM is not on a horrible decline, with its main and majority
format, news talk, moving to FM. And I'm out of patience with you, who think
a radio station in 2007 can change the demos on a buy because he once saw a
station changed on a buy. I spoke with the head or our naitonal rep about
changing demos on a campaign, and she simply laughed.

But when David speaks, he speaks like a policy statement. There's only
a level of personal interaction after it's been brought to his attention
that there is none. Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I share no
personal cordiality, will address a post as though he's talking TO me, but
not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent. Overwhelming
with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do. Jumping into
conversations with material that brings nothing to the topic at hand, but
definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on display.

When the responses I get are idiotic, I react as one does to an idiot. At
some point, it came to me that DXers were now enemies of radio stations...
which is when I dropped my Northamerican radio club memberships... because
supporting one's enemies with money is hardly rational. The inability of the
DX community to realize that AM has changed from a music medium to a talk
one, and that shows like Noory are necessary, and that technical changes
have to come if there is any chace of AM survival make the DXer a Luddite of
the first order.
Then there was the issue of his ham credentials. When pressed he gave a
credible story about corruption in the testing process in Ecuador. Nothing
out of the ordinary, actually. Nothing outside the realm of possibility.
Certainly, something we'd all believe based on the politics of the region.
But when pressed, he gave no clarification, with any personal experiential
content. Just something that sounds a likely story.

Drivers licences, visas, import permits, bulding permits, licences, tax
audits, etc., were all facilitated in a way that is accepted outside the US,
and not called "corrupt" as you have called it. It's just a different
system. And while I was there, there was no exam for a ham license at all...
you had to be sponsored by the RCE (Radio Club del Ecuador) or other of the
ham associations, and you got a license. My sponsor was Ing. Fred Simon.

But, with about 30 years of living outside the US, and even more working
there, I am used to US gringo standards being applied to other cultures as a
metric. Other cultures do not work like the American system, and can not be
compared to it, either.
Colleagues, whether vocational or avocational, don't address each other
like that. He claims to be a DXer, but disdains DXers.

Anyone with over 2000 AM veries has, I think, earned the right to be called
a DXer. But I am not a club member of any of the DX orgainzations because
the hobby, which led me into radio, now pretty universally hates
broadcasters and the very stations they listen to.

As I said, I've known people in the Radio business like that. But then
don't rise to the level of corporate oversight, or management. And they
are certainly not leaders. Usually they're middle manglement. And
consultants.

Of which I am neither.



You've underscored all my points. Thank you.

I may keep you around.


p

HD radio won't just go away.
 

On Sep 29, 8:48 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message

...





In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

I just do not believe your contention that the numbers of people that
listen to night time AMBCB are small. I think there is a great deal of
regional listening at night and non-local stations during the day where
reception is of good quality such as where I live on the coast. There
are plenty of people that listen to stations that are not local in
order
to hear a program not broadcast locally.

There are no facts to support your contention. Listening to out of market
stations is very small (by the way, Ventura, Riverside West and San
Bernardino West are all in the LA DMA... the metro definition that
matches
the TV metro area). Still, in your county, there is pretty limited
in-market
listening to out of market stations.

You have no facts to support your contention since all the waking hours
revolve around the commercial radio books. The statistics you look at
don't address the regional listening. Now don't go back on the word of
your previous posts.

You have a mistaken impression of radio audience measurement. The fact is,
ANY radio station listened to in an Arbitron diary is processed. It does not
matter if it is commercial, public, religious, local, internet, satellite,
or a rare DX catch.

If enough mentions for enough time to create statistical reliability are
made the station is considered "in the book" but the Arbitron software
stations use lets us look at stations that may have a share of 0.0% but did
get one mention....

A sign that out of market listening is insignificant to radio and
advertisers comes with the already started roll out of the electronic People
Meter, which senses encoding on each station. Most "out of market" stations
so far are not encoded as it will not be till the end of next year that the
top 10 markets are on PPM; none of us cares about the 0.3% of listening to
out of market signals, by the way.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

d'Eduardo,

Thank You Once Again For Reminding Us
That We Don't Count As Sellable Numbers.

we are just plain old radio listeners ~ RHF

HD radio won't just go away.
 

On Sep 29, 8:28 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message

...



"David Eduardo" wrote in message
et...
The other way to see this is from the perspective that there are not many
AM (MW) DXers left. The combined IRCA and NRC membership is around or
less than a thousand in North America... compare that to when RaDex was
sold at the news rack at the corner drugstore and DXing was engaged in by
millions.

You DO realize, don't you, that most AMBCB DX'ers (or SWL's for that
matter) do not belong to clubs?

If someone is using a station in its skywave protected contour, that is not
DXing. That is listening to the station in its coverage area.

That most are not even aware these clubs exist? Do you think that I cared
about clubs when I was lying in the grass when I was 14 listening to
Wolfman Jack (or the Grand Ol' Opry on weekends) on my pocket radio?

Wolfman is something of a different time and a different generation. He was
got audience on AM, at XERF and then XERB, because there was not much local
radio. It was pre-FM.

Where I spent some time, north of Traverse City, MI, at night we listened to
Chicago's WLS because there was no local station you could hear, at all.
Today, there are a dozen FMs and an AM putting primary signals over the
little town of Omena,
- and nobody listens to AM who is under about 50 there.


Since most 'folks' here are over 50 or around 50 :

No Body Here Listens To You - d'Eduardo ! ~ RHF


And the Opry can be heard on the web much better than WSM ever could be
picked up.

Do you think that those kids listening to a ball game from a distant
station when they should have been sleeping know or care about DX clubs?

I don't see a heck of a lot of kids going to or listening to baseball games
any more. Another sign of the times... baseball is a slow, oldeer person's
sport (or a ticket out of the Dominican Republic).

Or the trucker tuning across the dial to find something worth listening to
(hard to do these days when all you got at night is George Noory)?

Most truckers have Satellite now... an excellent solution for drivers who
move from market to market, too.

Only the hardcore DX nerds know or care about DX clubs. Most just listen
for fun or the excitement of hearing something from far away.

Static, fading and noise are fun? It may have been when there were no
alternatives, but between the web and the FM dial and other portable
devices, it is not 1966 any more..

HD radio won't just go away.
 

And, by the way.....


David Eduardo wrote:

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the current
situation,


Actually, I worked for CBS until December 20, 1999. The last contract
work I did for them was in 2001.

The last work I did for WLS was some production this spring.


Not exactly a decade or more ago, Brother David.






"But if it makes you more comfortable to think so, by all means...you
be comfortable."

-- John Newland.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

Snip

And to me, you're just another arrogant S.O.B who can't look beyond his
office to realize that everyone around him is thinking the same thing:

No, only the nutjobs like dxAss and Telamon and Steve refuse to realize how
radio is used today, and the changes the industry has to make to survive...
and that said survival will likely not include AM in the long run.

Oh I see I'm a nut job and not a listener. You don't get much right do
you. How do you expect to survive when you are so confused.

The fact is, I speak with real listeners every week, and have a pretty good
idea what they want today, based on tens of thousands of yearly interviews.
Here, there are some who seem to have an intimate relationship with their
TenTec and have no idea what real people do, and how stations today have to
serve them.

You seem to have a real problem with the fact that I have an RX340.
Sounds like jealousy to me.

And I'm not a real listener. Funny man.

Well Bozo. I am a listener and I know what I want and it's not a serving
of your BS.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

HD radio won't just go away.
 

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

Since most 'folks' here are over 50 or around 50 :

No Body Here Listens To You - d'Eduardo ! ~ RHF

You just pointed out something that the engineer who gave a radio club a
tour a few years ago mentioned.... there are no young DXers any more.

I'm sure some of it is that there is no appeal of AM at all to young people,
whether they be teens or young adults, so they would not discover AM skip in
any case, But there has to be more to this than just what is on the radio.

A parallel would be the number of people who in the mid to late 80's into
the 90's built their own computers. There were parts places all over,
magazines filled with ads for cases and fans.... now there is nearly
nothing.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
And, by the way.....


David Eduardo wrote:

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the
current situation,


Actually, I worked for CBS until December 20, 1999. The last contract
work I did for them was in 2001.

The last work I did for WLS was some production this spring.


Not exactly a decade or more ago, Brother David.

But your sales experience is very dated. The days when country was not
automatically on a 25-54 buy have been gone for some time.... even longer
than the "Black" dictates.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

"David Eduardo" wrote:


And an FM can not provide the needed service in the Minneapolis case? [...]

FMs are highly viable still; with few exceptions, AMs are not.


People listened for content. You and your buddies at iBiquity have
destroyed the quality -- what there was -- of the remaining content.
Most people are now listening to their digial audio players, not to
the FMs.

They won't get the news.

--
Eric F. Richards,
"It's the Din of iBiquity." -- Frank Dresser

HD radio won't just go away.
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-

No, only the nutjobs like dxAss and Telamon and Steve refuse to realize
how
radio is used today, and the changes the industry has to make to
survive...
and that said survival will likely not include AM in the long run.

Oh I see I'm a nut job and not a listener. You don't get much right do
you. How do you expect to survive when you are so confused.

You are not a "typical" listener by any means. The term "broad" in
broadcasting is there for a reason, and radio can not nor has it ever been
able to serve very tiny niche listener groups.

But I think you are off the deep end because of your denial of ratings,
inability to see that if there is no listening of conseuence beyond a
certain signal intensity, there must be a truth there, and your idea that
knowing wave and propagation theory is somehow necessary to understanding
that listeners don't tune to weak signals.

The fact is, I speak with real listeners every week, and have a pretty
good
idea what they want today, based on tens of thousands of yearly
interviews.
Here, there are some who seem to have an intimate relationship with their
TenTec and have no idea what real people do, and how stations today have
to
serve them.

You seem to have a real problem with the fact that I have an RX340.
Sounds like jealousy to me.

No, I think anything over the price of a Drake or AOR is the equivalent of
buying a Bentley. Nice if you can afford it, but not worth the extra $200 k
over a BMW or Benz. I am not saying it is a waste of money if you are very
rich, but I sure would not buy one.

My real point is that even in the DX community such a radio is rare. Among
listeners to commercial stations, so rare as to be freaky.

And I'm not a real listener. Funny man.

No, you are not. You are way to into the subject, albeit woefully
misinformed, to be a "real" listener. Real listeners seldom remember call
letters (unless they are over 50) and round dial positions and don't know
station locations or slogans half the time. Radio is an accompanyment to
other activities, and used like a utility.

Well Bozo. I am a listener and I know what I want and it's not a serving
of your BS.

You might as well give up, as you are not getting what you want from
terrestrial radio. I'm surprised you even engage in off air reception,
anyway.

Ratings wise, radio geeks are like contest pigs... very noisy, but they
contribute nothing to ratings or our livelihood.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"David Eduardo" wrote:


And an FM can not provide the needed service in the Minneapolis case?
[...]

FMs are highly viable still; with few exceptions, AMs are not.


People listened for content. You and your buddies at iBiquity have
destroyed the quality -- what there was -- of the remaining content.
Most people are now listening to their digial audio players, not to
the FMs.

They won't get the news.

How has iBiquity destroyed the quality of FM? There is no degradation of the
FM analog signal to add HD, and saying so is an exaggeration or a lie.

Most people, as in 96% of them, are listening to the radio each week....
same as 1965 when Arbiytron began.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
And, by the way.....


David Eduardo wrote:

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the
current situation,

Actually, I worked for CBS until December 20, 1999. The last contract
work I did for them was in 2001.

The last work I did for WLS was some production this spring.


Not exactly a decade or more ago, Brother David.

But your sales experience is very dated. The days when country was not
automatically on a 25-54 buy have been gone for some time.... even longer
than the "Black" dictates.



LOL!

I've been in the business since I was 6, some of my experiences are
going to be very old.

That certainly doesn't mean all of them are. I'm not working in the
50's, here.




"But if it makes you more comfortable to think so, by all means...you
be comfortable."

-- John Newland.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

On Sep 29, 3:31 pm, SFTV_troy wrote:
On Sep 29, 2:46 pm, Telamon





wrote:
In article om,

SFTV_troy wrote:
Rfburns wrote:
Despite the fact that both the AM and FM versions of HD radio are a
good example of out-of -control technology that nobody really wants,
the FCC has mandated that all broadcasting will be digital.
Therefore, I see no turning back regardless of what the consumer does
or doesn't want or understand.

Switching to digital just makes sense.

Really? And just how does that make sense?

Digital makes better use of the limited space available.

How does a digital mode do that?

Analog modes are inefficient, because they waste bandwidth sending
sounds you can not hear. Digital only removes that extraneous
information, and thus uses the space more efficiently. Which is why a
digital radio like HD can squeeze 5 channels into the same space as 2-
channel FM. ----- Or five FM-quality (64 kbps each) programs into
the space of 1 FM channel.

Digital psychoacoustic modeling is more efficient (sends only sounds
you can hear), than the older inefficient analog modulations (that
waste space sending sound you can't hear).

Digital Psychoacoustic Modeling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoacoustic_model



With digital the FM band would effectively triple or even quadruple
the number of channels on the dial. (Alternatively Classical FM
stations could boost the sound from 2 channel stereo to 5.1
surround.)

Do you understand the consequences of what you propose?
Apparently you do not.

- No, because I can not read your mind.
- Please explain the consequences.

That's An Evasive Answer - Please Answer The Question.


How do you know that going to a digital mode of transmission would be
good for the consumer? You don't think there is a down side?

Was there a downside to upgrading from Cassettes to CDs? No. Was
there a downside to upgrading from analog VHS to digital DVDs? No.
Was there a downside to upgrading from analog radio to Digital
satellite radio? No. (I could go on-and-on with other examples like
digital MP3s and Ipods and Internet radio and.....)

- To date, I've not seen a downside to abandoning Analog
- format and adopting new Digital ones.

Turn in an Analog AM/MW Radio and tune every 10 kHz
from 530 kHz to 1710 kHz and Listen to what you hear
on each and every 10 kHz Radio Station Channel :
That Buzz Noise Hash that was not there 1-2-3 Years
Ago is the IBOC Digital Signal either In-Channel -or-
from the Adjacent Channels.


But I'm sure you have some.
What are the downsides?

Listen to On-the-Air AM/MW Radio and Learn for Yourself.


I want to see FM upgraded with three to four times more programs to
choose from.

How wonderful. What a simply splendid idea. I just
have to ask why you think this is such a great idea?

Already answered in my previous post.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

HD radio won't just go away.
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

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

"Telamon" wrote in message
.
..

I just do not believe your contention that the numbers of people
that listen to night time AMBCB are small. I think there is a
great deal of regional listening at night and non-local stations
during the day where reception is of good quality such as where
I live on the coast. There are plenty of people that listen to
stations that are not local in order to hear a program not
broadcast locally.

There are no facts to support your contention. Listening to out of
market stations is very small (by the way, Ventura, Riverside West
and San Bernardino West are all in the LA DMA... the metro
definition that matches the TV metro area). Still, in your county,
there is pretty limited in-market listening to out of market
stations.

You have no facts to support your contention since all the waking
hours revolve around the commercial radio books. The statistics you
look at don't address the regional listening. Now don't go back on
the word of your previous posts.

You have a mistaken impression of radio audience measurement.

Snip

You misrepresent the facts to support your arguments as needed. You tell
me I don't hear the stations I listen to because they are so weak as to
be DX and nobody would spend time listening to them. You are full of it.

You don't seem to know what reception on the west coast is like so
either you don't listen to AM at all or you don't live on the west
coast. Which is it?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

HD radio won't just go away.
 

On Sep 29, 4:55 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message

...



Why should more channels of the same content be something people would
want?

That's just it! The HD 2 channels in most markets are totally
non-duplicative of the Analog/HD1 channel content. NY has, for example,
things like traditional jazz, country, classic hip hop, 50's and early 60's
oldies, standards, etc. that are not available on main channels.

IMHO - HD2 Channels should be TV Audio Sound.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

I think he believes his own noise and no he can't provide the link
because what he claims doesn't exist. At least not yet.

The info provided to iBiquity's owners is not public, so I am not giving you
a link. You will simply have to hold your water until Samsung ships low
power, lower cost chips in 2008.

You are full of it. The development was announced and then news about it
went to zero. That's not a good sign.

Most lies have a kernel of truth in them so they are believable. All I
know is every time a take a poke at what he posts the stick goes right
through the one layer of the "story" he tells. All that he posts seem
very illusionary in nature.

Nothing is like your insistence that listeners will put up with a bad AM
signal and listen, despite radio audience measurements that are universally
accepted showing no such thing occurs.

This shows you are a sham. You don't know what reception is like around
here AM or FM. You are full of it.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

HD radio won't just go away.
 

On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 07:27:45 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

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

"Telamon" wrote in message
.
..

I just do not believe your contention that the numbers of people
that listen to night time AMBCB are small. I think there is a
great deal of regional listening at night and non-local stations
during the day where reception is of good quality such as where
I live on the coast. There are plenty of people that listen to
stations that are not local in order to hear a program not
broadcast locally.

There are no facts to support your contention. Listening to out of
market stations is very small (by the way, Ventura, Riverside West
and San Bernardino West are all in the LA DMA... the metro
definition that matches the TV metro area). Still, in your county,
there is pretty limited in-market listening to out of market
stations.

You have no facts to support your contention since all the waking
hours revolve around the commercial radio books. The statistics you
look at don't address the regional listening. Now don't go back on
the word of your previous posts.

You have a mistaken impression of radio audience measurement.

Snip

You misrepresent the facts to support your arguments as needed. You tell
me I don't hear the stations I listen to because they are so weak as to
be DX and nobody would spend time listening to them. You are full of it.


his answer is mostly likely that counts and the station that is no one
in their market area

which leaves out DXers

"one useless man is disgrace 2 become a law firm 3 or more become a congress"
adams

woger you are a Congress all in your own head

http://kb9rqz.bravejournal.com/

and get ou the newly recovered KB9RQZ.blogspot.com as well

G

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

HD radio won't just go away.
 

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
t...

A parallel would be the number of people who in the mid to late 80's into
the 90's built their own computers. There were parts places all over,
magazines filled with ads for cases and fans.... now there is nearly
nothing.


You're kidding, right? Those ads are everywhere. There are probably at least
as many people building their own computers now as there are buying
pre-built ones. In our house, there are exactly three pre-built desktop
machines (old Gateway minisystems I bought for next to nothing to use as
streaming machines). The other 6 desktop machines (mostly towers) are built
from discrete parts chosen for their particular merits. This is done by most
anyone into serious computing. Those that buy machines off the shelf are
usually doing so just to access e-mail and do a bit of web surfing.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

On Sep 29, 9:30 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message

...



I don't think it likely that Anytown USA would support 24 different
formats. Anytown USA may be more diverse than in the past but not to
that extent.

In most cases, we can already quantify the interest in the second tier
formats, and every market has room to have double the FM formats that it
currently has, and all can, if properly done, enough audience to make money.

The losers will be the limited coverage or rimshot FMs, and the AMs trying
to do on of the viable FM formats on the dead band.... those will have to
find something even more niche or disappear.



So, a station puts one of the viable second tier of formats on and
eventually, as the number of radios increases, they start seeing sales
results. It took FM from about 1940 to the mid-70s to be broadly
profitable,
so the wait for HD radios to improve and sell is a small consideration;
many
of the formats themselves will sell HD, such as country in New York... a
format that got a mid-1's share when on a major FM some time ago.

I don't see any radio stations promoting itself in multi-formats.
Currently listeners identify a station with a format.

The HD 2 channels are not identified with the main channel except as "102..9
HD2 is Tejano in Houston" type of IDs.



In my own sector, I can see at least 5 if not 10 missing Hispanic formats
in
LA alone... most of which would be good use of an HD channel.

Good grief there is more then 10? How many Hispanic formats are there?

More than there are in English, as we have the individual music forms of
nearly 20 nations, many of which are viable formats in different markets. An
example would be the Colombian population of Miami, of about 250,000. That
means there is room for both a Vallenato station, a Cumbia station and maybe
a traditional bambuco / folkloric music station, too. In LA, there are
several formats that would appeal only, but strongly, to Central Americans,
as well as Caribbean tropical, Spanish language rock, standards, all
grupera, all-norteña, oldies, 70's ballads, etc. There are 10 for you right
off the top of my head... all have been researched and are known second tier
formats that could get a one to two share on a decent FM... and will grow to
that on HD2's-.

There are already about a dozen Hispanic formats on, including Mexican
tropical, sports, news / talk, adult hits, AC, regional oldies, regional
hardcore, regional Mexican, Spanish CHR, variety, Christian and reggaetón.

d'Eduardo - Do they got Rush Limbaugh, Dr. Laura,
and Sean Hanney in Span-Glish ? ~ RHF
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanglish
.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...
No, only the nutjobs like dxAss and Telamon and Steve refuse to realize
how radio is used today, and the changes the industry has to make to
survive... and that said survival will likely not include AM in the long
run.


Your vision of "radio" is not radio. It's a low power digital 'local'
service that forces everyone to buy new hardware to even make use of it.
Anyone can listen to "radio" on the same equipment they listened to it on
almost 90 years ago.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

In article ,
D Peter Maus wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
D Peter Maus wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
SFTV_troy wrote:
I don't really understand why people are upset about the loss of
DX'ing over AM (only temporarily; it will be restored when AM goes
pure digital). You can still do DX'ing via using services like
shoutcast.com. Just yesterday at work I was listening to an
Australian station. Another favorite of mine is located in England.
DX'ing is still alive and well on the internet.
Uh... that's NOT DX'ing.

It may well become the DXing of the 21st Century.
Edwina, you're an idiot.
It just looks that way to us DxAce because you and I don't share the
level of self delusion that Eduardo has attained.


I honestly believe this is not delusion. I honestly believe he
believes this noise.

His comments blaming DXers for abandoning broadcasters, while
delineating precisely how broadcasters have developed their disdain for
DXers is evidence that he's really looking at snapshots of this party,
but not attending the party, itself. Taking the Broadcaster/Dxer enmity
out of chronological order, as he did, suggests that he's seeing what he
needs to focus on in order to justify his position, but not seeing a
good deal of the out-of-frame that gives the snapshot context. This is
common among manglement in Radio.

It's what used to be called not seeing the forest for the trees.

It's what pilots call flying instruments in VFR conditions: Paying so
much attention to the minutiae that they fail to look up and actually
see how the plane is being flown.

One of my mentors in the Physics department at UMSL used to say, as
the textbook he taught from explained, formulae and numbers are only
shorthand for English sentences. If you can't explain your case without
resorting to formulae and numbers, you can't explain your case.

Corporately, that is the equivalent of: If you can't convince someone
without quoting a policy, you're hiding behind a firewall because you
actually can't function amongst your clients/customers.

And if you notice, he doesn't really answer your questions,
Telamon...but like Johnny Cochran, he gives you the answer he would like
you to hear, whether it addresses your question or not.

Has he posted the link you've asked for yet?

There are several inconsistencies in our most recent discussion about
demographics and agencies. The kind of inconsistencies that someone with
major market experience in both sales and Manglement wouldn't have made.

And in these last discussions, about DXers and this thread about HD,
he's begun speaking openly out of both sides of his mouth, not only
contradicting himself but doing it with a kind of indignation that's
also inconsistent with someone of his knowledge and experience.

Someone made the statement, here, that a person of his stature and
position doesn't need the ego piece that is his website.

Perhaps, that's true. Although I know people in the business who are
still trying to prove something after 30 years in the big city. But when
you read it, and as Ace has pointed out several times that the content
of his website has changed more than once when his credentials were
called into question, it does give one reason to wonder not so much what
it is that's false, but what it is that may be true.

I think he believes his own noise and no he can't provide the link
because what he claims doesn't exist. At least not yet.

He has written some weird stuff like he has people around him looking
over his shoulder laughing at peoples critical responses to his posts on
Usenet as an attempt to bully the people critical of him. Very strange
he would need this imaginary support.

I have noted the deception and misdirection. It's madding.

Most lies have a kernel of truth in them so they are believable. All I
know is every time a take a poke at what he posts the stick goes right
through the one layer of the "story" he tells. All that he posts seem
very illusionary in nature.

At one time it seemed to me you thought he is for real. You still think
that way?



Yeah, I do. But, over the last few weeks, I've noticed some serious
inconsistencies in his positions. And, I've watched him, when pressed,
back away from his arguments. Now, sometimes we say things in the heat
of a moment, or when time is short, that may require some clarification.
But, I've noticed a consistent pattern of argumentation, and when
pressed for specifics, a termination of the discussion, so he can move
on to other things. Direct questions asked, but never addressed.
Specifics requested but never supplied. Your link request that was never
provided. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get
his engineers out here to take signal strength measurements at my
location to determine why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but
immediately dropped all conversation about it.

To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception
issues, is me. :)

Again, not terribly surprising. Not any of it. Most broadcasters, in
fact, most people in any profession are particularly good at spouting a
company line, but woefully inadequate at following through. Or directly
addressing matters that they feel are inconsequential to them, beneath
them, or in the most insidious cases, may threaten their position. A
lot of people I know are like this. You probably know some, too.

Yeah, they are generally middle managers. People to be avoided if you
want to get something done.

But, here of late, I've seen more of it than in months past. And I've
seen more attempts at abject dismissal, in lieu of substantive
conversation. Which I have seen more out of consultants, than actual
working frontline broadcasters. And some blatant inconsistencies in his
claims about agencies/sales. And his experience. These things make me
suspect that, though, he's still the David we've all come to know and
love, that he's getting low on the calm, educational patience he's
showed a year ago, and is now running out of both patience, and
appreciation of the intercourse.

Like the parent who, when set with a barrage of questions he/she no
longer wants to deal with, because he/she can't make a compelling case,
retreats into 'because I said so.'

He speaks a corporate line. He speaks a policy statement. He
speaks...well, he speaks like he's reading out of a textbook. But he
doesn't speak with a level of personal intimacy that someone with his
experience would employ. You and I, for instance, barely know each
other. And have only corresponded once or twice within the group. But,
here, you've asked a direct question based on existing conversation, but
with a level of personal interaction that David does not employ. You ask
me about what I think and whether or not it's changed. And you phrased
it in a very personal way. Two people exchanging ideas....one to the other.

But when David speaks, he speaks like a policy statement. There's
only a level of personal interaction after it's been brought to his
attention that there is none. Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I
share no personal cordiality, will address a post as though he's talking
TO me, but not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent.
Overwhelming with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do.
Jumping into conversations with material that brings nothing to the
topic at hand, but definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on
display.

Like a textbook. Very much like a textbook. General practices,
expectations and limitatons. But no personal experiential variations on
the textbook case. And everyone, EVERYONE, has personal experiences
where the textbook doesn't tell the story.

Then there was the issue of his ham credentials. When pressed he
gave a credible story about corruption in the testing process in
Ecuador. Nothing out of the ordinary, actually. Nothing outside the
realm of possibility. Certainly, something we'd all believe based on the
politics of the region. But when pressed, he gave no clarification, with
any personal experiential content. Just something that sounds a likely
story.

Which is all, really, that he needs to present. If that. But all of
his stories sound like that. Textbook, obvious and not unexpected likely
stories, without any personal variations, or counterintuitive wrinkles.

Somewhere you'd expect some.

Colleagues, whether vocational or avocational, don't address each
other like that. He claims to be a DXer, but disdains DXers. He claims
to be an SWL, but contributes almost nothing to SW related
conversations. He keeps his content almost entirely on BC related
matters, and, again speaks not TO, but AT the topic. Like we're not
here. Or beneath him. Ignorant USENet savages, who could not be informed
if we could BUY a clue.

As I said, I've known people in the Radio business like that. But
then don't rise to the level of corporate oversight, or management. And
they are certainly not leaders. Usually they're middle manglement. And
consultants.

So, yeah, to answer your question, I think he's for real. I just
think he's not as good at keeping it real as he wants to believe.

Well he just made an important mistake posting about his area of
expertise that leads me to believe he is a faker just like some people
pretend to be a doctor or a cop. He may hold a position at Univision but
in reality does not belong there.

He knows some information but not enough to convince me he is who he
purports to be.

Then his arguments over my reception is so ignorant to the extent that I
just can't believe he lives or has visited LA for that matter. I mean
how much rope should I give him to hang himself anyway? The guy is full
of crap.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

HD radio won't just go away.
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get his engineers
out here to take signal strength measurements at my location to determine
why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but immediately dropped all
conversation about it.

And that, whille none of your business, is due to the fact that Paul Easter,
an talented and wonderful engineer, moved to a corporate position at Salem,
and we are short handed in the middle of two transmitter moves.

To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception issues,
is me. :)

Good for you.

. And some blatant inconsistencies in his claims about agencies/sales.

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the current
situation, where interactive media is far more attractive to advertising
agencies than radio because there are more creative dollars to be made
there.

And his experience. These things make me suspect that, though, he's still
the David we've all come to know and love, that he's getting low on the
calm, educational patience he's showed a year ago, and is now running out
of both patience, and appreciation of the intercourse.

I'm out of patience with the people who insist that there is listening to
distant skywave signals, when there is no such thing documented and with
those who think AM is not on a horrible decline, with its main and majority
format, news talk, moving to FM. And I'm out of patience with you, who think
a radio station in 2007 can change the demos on a buy because he once saw a
station changed on a buy. I spoke with the head or our naitonal rep about
changing demos on a campaign, and she simply laughed.

But when David speaks, he speaks like a policy statement. There's only
a level of personal interaction after it's been brought to his attention
that there is none. Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I share no
personal cordiality, will address a post as though he's talking TO me, but
not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent. Overwhelming
with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do. Jumping into
conversations with material that brings nothing to the topic at hand, but
definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on display.

When the responses I get are idiotic, I react as one does to an idiot. At
some point, it came to me that DXers were now enemies of radio stations...
which is when I dropped my Northamerican radio club memberships... because
supporting one's enemies with money is hardly rational. The inability of the
DX community to realize that AM has changed from a music medium to a talk
one, and that shows like Noory are necessary, and that technical changes
have to come if there is any chace of AM survival make the DXer a Luddite of
the first order.

Then there was the issue of his ham credentials. When pressed he gave a
credible story about corruption in the testing process in Ecuador. Nothing
out of the ordinary, actually. Nothing outside the realm of possibility.
Certainly, something we'd all believe based on the politics of the region.
But when pressed, he gave no clarification, with any personal experiential
content. Just something that sounds a likely story.

Drivers licences, visas, import permits, bulding permits, licences, tax
audits, etc., were all facilitated in a way that is accepted outside the US,
and not called "corrupt" as you have called it. It's just a different
system. And while I was there, there was no exam for a ham license at all...
you had to be sponsored by the RCE (Radio Club del Ecuador) or other of the
ham associations, and you got a license. My sponsor was Ing. Fred Simon.

But, with about 30 years of living outside the US, and even more working
there, I am used to US gringo standards being applied to other cultures as a
metric. Other cultures do not work like the American system, and can not be
compared to it, either.

Colleagues, whether vocational or avocational, don't address each other
like that. He claims to be a DXer, but disdains DXers.

Anyone with over 2000 AM veries has, I think, earned the right to be called
a DXer. But I am not a club member of any of the DX orgainzations because
the hobby, which led me into radio, now pretty universally hates
broadcasters and the very stations they listen to.

As I said, I've known people in the Radio business like that. But then
don't rise to the level of corporate oversight, or management. And they
are certainly not leaders. Usually they're middle manglement. And
consultants.

Of which I am neither.

Yeah, but we know you fake at least half of what you post.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

HD radio won't just go away.
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

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

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:27:54 -0700, "David Eduardo"
wrote:



I suppose it was my idea to discontinue the R8B? There was not enough
market, you fool.

I think what happened was that they pretty much sold one to everybody
who wanted one over the series' extremely long run.

Probably not the case. My guess is the profit margin was to thin and
they wanted to spend their time on more profitable product. There are
many older technology type components that would continue to get more
expensive with time and they would need to redesign it just to keep
costs down. I noticed the price on a R8B kept going up the last few
years they made it. With the Asian competition and the engineering hours
needed probably tipped the scales in favor of dropping it. Drake would
probably be asking at $2K to $2.5K for an R8B if they were still making
it today.

Or, the simple answer: there is a huge decline in the number of SW stations,
and also in SW listeners. Domestic SW, the nicest DX, is all but
disappearing and the quality broadcasters are reducing schedules or
suspending service.

Yeah like you would know.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

HD radio won't just go away.
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

Perhaps, that's true. Although I know people in the business who are
still trying to prove something after 30 years in the big city. But when
you read it, and as Ace has pointed out several times that the content of
his website has changed more than once when his credentials were called
into question, it does give one reason to wonder not so much what it is
that's false, but what it is that may be true.

You called me an SOB, so it is my turn to call you one. The only thing on my
website that has changed in the last 4 years is the addition of a bunch of
old Radex, Whites and Stevenson's magazines.

Hogwash! Edweenie, you're a pathological liar.

HD radio won't just go away.
 

David Eduardo wrote:

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

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:27:54 -0700, "David Eduardo"
wrote:



I suppose it was my idea to discontinue the R8B? There was not enough
market, you fool.

I think what happened was that they pretty much sold one to everybody
who wanted one over the series' extremely long run.

Probably not the case. My guess is the profit margin was to thin and
they wanted to spend their time on more profitable product. There are
many older technology type components that would continue to get more
expensive with time and they would need to redesign it just to keep
costs down. I noticed the price on a R8B kept going up the last few
years they made it. With the Asian competition and the engineering hours
needed probably tipped the scales in favor of dropping it. Drake would
probably be asking at $2K to $2.5K for an R8B if they were still making
it today.

Or, the simple answer: there is a huge decline in the number of SW stations,
and also in SW listeners. Domestic SW, the nicest DX, is all but
disappearing and the quality broadcasters are reducing schedules or
suspending service.

Or, maybe your 'simple' answer isn't true?