On Nov 30, 11:14�pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article ,

wrote:
I found this very interesting regarding HD radio.

On Thursday the 22nd of March, 2007 the Federal Communications Commission
approved all facets of digital broadcasting in the USA. In particular, AM
stations will soon be authorized to begin 24/7 use of their first adjacent
frequencies for digital sidebands.

What this does is open the door to significant interference to all AM
stations. A 50kw clear channel station can run a digital transmitter at far
more power than would be authorized for any conventional station in that
location on those two adjacent frequencies. It will be interesting from a
rather perverse sense to see what happens at night..

Snip

The way HD is being implemented on the AMBCB band is a deliberate
attempt to disrupt talk radio, which is, besides the Internet the only
counter to the liberal controlled media.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Agreed - HD/IBOC is an attempt to destroy AM radio in order to move
the highly-successful news/talk/sports formats to FM because the FMs
are losing listeners to iPods, etc...

On Dec 2, 6:17Â*pm, IBOCcrock wrote:
On Nov 30, 11:14�pm, Telamon





wrote:
In article ,

wrote:
I found this very interesting regarding HD radio.

On Thursday the 22nd of March, 2007 the Federal Communications Commission
approved all facets of digital broadcasting in the USA. In particular, AM
stations will soon be authorized to begin 24/7 use of their first adjacent
frequencies for digital sidebands.

What this does is open the door to significant interference to all AM
stations. A 50kw clear channel station can run a digital transmitter at far
more power than would be authorized for any conventional station in that
location on those two adjacent frequencies. It will be interesting from a
rather perverse sense to see what happens at night..

Snip

The way HD is being implemented on the AMBCB band is a deliberate
attempt to disrupt talk radio, which is, besides the Internet the only
counter to the liberal controlled media.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Agreed - HD/IBOC is an attempt to destroy AM radio in order to move
the highly-successful news/talk/sports formats to FM because the FMs
are losing listeners to iPods, etc...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I B OC'd and Half-Crocked - Your Mind Is An iPod !

and that is something to think about ~ RHF

On Dec 2, 8:17Â*pm, IBOCcrock wrote:
On Nov 30, 11:14�pm, Telamon





wrote:
In article ,

wrote:
I found this very interesting regarding HD radio.

On Thursday the 22nd of March, 2007 the Federal Communications Commission
approved all facets of digital broadcasting in the USA. In particular, AM
stations will soon be authorized to begin 24/7 use of their first adjacent
frequencies for digital sidebands.

What this does is open the door to significant interference to all AM
stations. A 50kw clear channel station can run a digital transmitter at far
more power than would be authorized for any conventional station in that
location on those two adjacent frequencies. It will be interesting from a
rather perverse sense to see what happens at night..

Snip

The way HD is being implemented on the AMBCB band is a deliberate
attempt to disrupt talk radio, which is, besides the Internet the only
counter to the liberal controlled media.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Agreed - HD/IBOC is an attempt to destroy AM radio in order to move
the highly-successful news/talk/sports formats to FM because the FMs
are losing listeners to iPods, etc...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Interesting prespective - but how did FM radio get so much pull?? Why
aren't we trying to save dying AM radio.?? Which radio gods decided
that AM was to die and FM was to live. I'm just a little confused
here -- if you are saying that AM is being scarificied to save FM,
then I have to wonder why AM was choosen to die. And I'm not even
being a smart ass here -- I just continue to be baffled by the whole
HD radio thing. I haven't personally listened to an HD station - so I
can't even attest to the better quality - but seems to me - the FCC
should want to keep all forms of communciation viable -- more tax
revenue, yada yada. Can you help me understand all this please??

In article
,
candy rosa wrote:

On Dec 2, 8:17Â*pm, IBOCcrock wrote:
On Nov 30, 11:14?pm, Telamon

wrote:
In article ,

wrote:
I found this very interesting regarding HD radio.

On Thursday the 22nd of March, 2007 the Federal Communications
Commission approved all facets of digital broadcasting in the
USA. In particular, AM stations will soon be authorized to
begin 24/7 use of their first adjacent frequencies for digital
sidebands.

What this does is open the door to significant interference to
all AM stations. A 50kw clear channel station can run a digital
transmitter at far more power than would be authorized for any
conventional station in that location on those two adjacent
frequencies. It will be interesting from a rather perverse
sense to see what happens at night..

Snip

The way HD is being implemented on the AMBCB band is a deliberate
attempt to disrupt talk radio, which is, besides the Internet the
only counter to the liberal controlled media.


Agreed - HD/IBOC is an attempt to destroy AM radio in order to move
the highly-successful news/talk/sports formats to FM because the
FMs are losing listeners to iPods, etc...- Hide quoted text -


Interesting prespective - but how did FM radio get so much pull??
Why aren't we trying to save dying AM radio.?? Which radio gods
decided that AM was to die and FM was to live. I'm just a little
confused here -- if you are saying that AM is being scarificied to
save FM, then I have to wonder why AM was choosen to die.

No. It's that news/talk is mostly on AM so it is the band being
disrupted. I can't make any sense of the approach taken implemented HD
on the AM band so I'm grasping for a reason.

And I'm not even being a smart ass here -- I just continue to be
baffled by the whole HD radio thing.

I'm with you on that.

I haven't personally listened to an HD station - so I can't even
attest to the better quality - but seems to me - the FCC should want
to keep all forms of communciation viable -- more tax revenue, yada
yada. Can you help me understand all this please??

HD quality is no better than analog.

I don't understand why things are this way so I can't help.

HD on AMBCB is one screwed up system.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
No. It's that news/talk is mostly on AM so it is the band being
disrupted. I can't make any sense of the approach taken implemented HD
on the AM band so I'm grasping for a reason.


1. AM audiences are declining rapidly
2. AM listener age is increasing each year.
3. AM formats like news / talk, when put on FM, increase younger demos
almost instantly.
4. This shows the main reason (as does all kinds of research) for the
decline of AM is that it sounds just so bad. HD is an attempt to make it
sound better and make it viable again.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
No. It's that news/talk is mostly on AM so it is the band being
disrupted. I can't make any sense of the approach taken implemented HD
on the AM band so I'm grasping for a reason.


1. AM audiences are declining rapidly
2. AM listener age is increasing each year.
3. AM formats like news / talk, when put on FM, increase younger demos
almost instantly.

I don't see this happening.

4. This shows the main reason (as does all kinds of research) for the
decline of AM is that it sounds just so bad. HD is an attempt to make it
sound better and make it viable again.

Problem is HD doesn't sound any better.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

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

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
No. It's that news/talk is mostly on AM so it is the band being
disrupted. I can't make any sense of the approach taken implemented HD
on the AM band so I'm grasping for a reason.


1. AM audiences are declining rapidly
2. AM listener age is increasing each year.
3. AM formats like news / talk, when put on FM, increase younger demos
almost instantly.

I don't see this happening.

All three items can be documented, market by market.

In the case of AM formats moving to FM, there is an ever increasing number
from Charleston, SC, to Tallahassee to Orlando to Panama City to New Orleans
to Pittsburgh to Akron to Phoenix and Salt Lake and DC and Detroit and
Indianapolis and many other markets.

The reason this happens is partly #1 and #2 which force managers of good
formats to realize they are on the wrong band with them, and then the
evidence of #3 from other markets finishes the analysis.

4. This shows the main reason (as does all kinds of research) for the
decline of AM is that it sounds just so bad. HD is an attempt to make it
sound better and make it viable again.

Problem is HD doesn't sound any better.

On my third generation car radio, it sounds much better than analog, and the
signal reach is interference free beyond the analog range.

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
news

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
No. It's that news/talk is mostly on AM so it is the band being
disrupted. I can't make any sense of the approach taken implemented HD
on the AM band so I'm grasping for a reason.


1. AM audiences are declining rapidly
2. AM listener age is increasing each year.
3. AM formats like news / talk, when put on FM, increase younger demos
almost instantly.
4. This shows the main reason (as does all kinds of research) for the
decline of AM is that it sounds just so bad. HD is an attempt to make it
sound better and make it viable again.


It's the fault of the INDUSTRY (both broadcast and receiver manufacturers)
that AM sounds so bad.

Hindsight is wonderful. The fact is that the licencing of too many AMs
caused the need for the NRSC 10 kHz wall, and receiver manufacturers will do
whatever it takes to cut costs. Since nearly nobody buys a radio for its AM
band capabilities, they cut corners there. The result is that there are 800
million lousy sounding radios out there insofar as AM is concerned.

Add to that fhe fact that less than one in every 7 AMs in the top 100
markets is "economically viable" because the rest do not fully cover today's
big geograpical markets, and you have a nearly dead band.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

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

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
No. It's that news/talk is mostly on AM so it is the band being
disrupted. I can't make any sense of the approach taken implemented HD
on the AM band so I'm grasping for a reason.


1. AM audiences are declining rapidly
2. AM listener age is increasing each year.
3. AM formats like news / talk, when put on FM, increase younger demos
almost instantly.

I don't see this happening.

All three items can be documented, market by market.

In the case of AM formats moving to FM, there is an ever increasing number
from Charleston, SC, to Tallahassee to Orlando to Panama City to New Orleans
to Pittsburgh to Akron to Phoenix and Salt Lake and DC and Detroit and
Indianapolis and many other markets.

The reason this happens is partly #1 and #2 which force managers of good
formats to realize they are on the wrong band with them, and then the
evidence of #3 from other markets finishes the analysis.

I don't see happening in my market, which is southern California. I
don't see this happening in the south west part of the country to which
I listen to at night.

4. This shows the main reason (as does all kinds of research) for the
decline of AM is that it sounds just so bad. HD is an attempt to make it
sound better and make it viable again.

Problem is HD doesn't sound any better.

On my third generation car radio, it sounds much better than analog, and the
signal reach is interference free beyond the analog range.

No way you can convince me HD sounds good. I've heard it and it sounds
terrible.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

On Dec 11, 6:28 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message

...







"David Eduardo" wrote in message
news

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
No. It's that news/talk is mostly on AM so it is the band being
disrupted. I can't make any sense of the approach taken implemented HD
on the AM band so I'm grasping for a reason.

1. AM audiences are declining rapidly
2. AM listener age is increasing each year.
3. AM formats like news / talk, when put on FM, increase younger demos
almost instantly.
4. This shows the main reason (as does all kinds of research) for the
decline of AM is that it sounds just so bad. HD is an attempt to make it
sound better and make it viable again.

It's the fault of the INDUSTRY (both broadcast and receiver manufacturers)
that AM sounds so bad.

Hindsight is wonderful. The fact is that the licencing of too many AMs
caused the need for the NRSC 10 kHz wall, and receiver manufacturers will do
whatever it takes to cut costs. Since nearly nobody buys a radio for its AM
band capabilities, they cut corners there. The result is that there are 800
million lousy sounding radios out there insofar as AM is concerned.

Add to that fhe fact that less than one in every 7 AMs in the top 100
markets is "economically viable" because the rest do not fully cover today's
big geograpical markets, and you have a nearly dead band.



- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hence - It Is Time To Redefine The AM/MW Band Plan
In The USA. And IBOC Will Be The Agent Of Change. ~ RHF