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).

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.

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.

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



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.

In article om,
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.

Utter rubbish.

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.

And have poor sound quality.

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).

Compression algorithms generate poor quality sound voice or music.
Compression algorithms are no substitute for a higher bit rate.

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.

The answer is no because you don't understand what you are posting about.

The simple answer is you don't get something for nothing. Transmitting
intelligence has three basic parameters, distance, power, and bandwidth.
I suggest you read up on the theory of transmission of information and
then post back here after you are informed.

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.

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

None of what you mentioned above bears on the subject at hand. CD, DVD,
and the like are the media digital data is recorded on. Radio is
information transmission over distance. Not at all the same thing.

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.

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

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"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.

In article ,
"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.

Why should formats that are not stations now be added as additional HD
channels. Where is the logic in that?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 00:11:00 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

In article ,
"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.

Why should formats that are not stations now be added as additional HD
channels. Where is the logic in that?

to serve niche markets I would loved such choices when I staion out in
OK I got realy tired of C&W

"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

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

Why should formats that are not stations now be added as additional HD
channels. Where is the logic in that?

Because many formats are excluded because, with the finite number of FMs in
any market, there is not room for the second tier of formats. With HD 2
channels, there is.

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
t...
Why should formats that are not stations now be added as additional HD
channels. Where is the logic in that?

Because many formats are excluded because, with the finite number of FMs
in any market, there is not room for the second tier of formats. With HD 2
channels, there is.

Now, now, Eduardo... you know full well that the reason that a given format
is not available in a given market is because it's just not profitable to
program it. The only difference with IBOC-FM is that now they can use a
single plant to provide multiple formats.. I don't see a lot of stations
doing this, though, on a long-range model, since these formats will still
not be profitable.

Brenda Ann wrote:
"David Eduardo" wrote in message
t...
Why should formats that are not stations now be added as additional HD
channels. Where is the logic in that?
Because many formats are excluded because, with the finite number of FMs
in any market, there is not room for the second tier of formats. With HD 2
channels, there is.

Now, now, Eduardo... you know full well that the reason that a given format
is not available in a given market is because it's just not profitable to
program it. The only difference with IBOC-FM is that now they can use a
single plant to provide multiple formats.. I don't see a lot of stations
doing this, though, on a long-range model, since these formats will still
not be profitable.




Unless they are subscription based. Technology which is currently in
test.


Once that seal is broken, there will be no reason for broadcasters
to stop its spread, and given the ever widening range of options,
expanding costs, and mounting fees, royalties, and surcharges, every
reason to.

Under that scenario, anything can be made profitable.

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
t...
Why should formats that are not stations now be added as additional HD
channels. Where is the logic in that?

Because many formats are excluded because, with the finite number of FMs
in any market, there is not room for the second tier of formats. With HD
2 channels, there is.

Now, now, Eduardo... you know full well that the reason that a given
format is not available in a given market is because it's just not
profitable to program it.

That is absolutely untrue.

There are many profitable formats that could be done that are not being done
because there are even more profitable formats that "use up" all the
available FM channels in the market.

Depending on the market, there are probably a dozen or so profitable,
although less so than those on the air already, formats available.

Call them what you will, they are simply formats 13 to 24 in a market with
12 or so stations.... profitable, salable, listenable. But not as profitable
as other formats, so they don't get broadcast until HD comes along.

The only difference with IBOC-FM is that now they can use a single plant
to provide multiple formats.. I don't see a lot of stations doing this,
though, on a long-range model, since these formats will still not be
profitable.

Sure they will be. Our Tejano formats on HD in 5 markets in Texas are
getting excellent response, and should be generating respectable income
soon, even without that many receivers out there. Tejano, as an example, was
about a 0.8 to 1.1 share format in Dallas on a signal that now has about a 2
share... the Tejano format was lost to the market till we put it on HD, and
now, over time, it will be a respectable performer... just right under the
better performing formats we have on the main channels.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

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

Why should formats that are not stations now be added as additional HD
channels. Where is the logic in that?

Because many formats are excluded because, with the finite number of FMs in
any market, there is not room for the second tier of formats. With HD 2
channels, there is.

I'm sorry, I fail to see the logic of your argument. Try again.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California