A Brown wrote:
Pancho did say that he showed some of these discussions to some seminar
groups a couple of years ago. I'd expect them to start showing up now that
it's starting to look like his position on HD is on the wrong side of the
public's interest.

Then, again, there are those true believers who desperately want HD to
take off for all its promise.

Then again, there are those radio geeks who despareately want HD radio to
fail!

The public doesn't care what radio geeks think.




Nor, apparently, does the public care about HD radio.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
A Brown wrote:
Pancho did say that he showed some of these discussions to some
seminar groups a couple of years ago. I'd expect them to start showing
up now that it's starting to look like his position on HD is on the
wrong side of the public's interest.

Then, again, there are those true believers who desperately want HD to
take off for all its promise.

Then again, there are those radio geeks who despareately want HD radio to
fail!

The public doesn't care what radio geeks think.


Nor, apparently, does the public care about HD radio.

They don't care about the technology that brings them the content they want.

Only radio geeks care about the technology.

A Brown wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
A Brown wrote:
Pancho did say that he showed some of these discussions to some
seminar groups a couple of years ago. I'd expect them to start showing
up now that it's starting to look like his position on HD is on the
wrong side of the public's interest.

Then, again, there are those true believers who desperately want HD to
take off for all its promise.
Then again, there are those radio geeks who despareately want HD radio to
fail!

The public doesn't care what radio geeks think.


Nor, apparently, does the public care about HD radio.

They don't care about the technology that brings them the content they want.

Only radio geeks care about the technology.





Which is precisely the point. So far, only the technology has been
promoted. And the diverse 'out of the box' programming offerings have
not materialized as promised.

The public is not interested in the technology. And so far, HD has
only been about the technology.


Sales figures show no public interest. Both Radio Shaft and Best Buy
have pulled most of their HD offerings off the shelves.

There's no interest in the product.

Now, Radio being Radio, and iBiquity having have made the enormous
investment in HD hardware and licensing fees, it's not like HD will
simply go away. After all, AM stereo had a more publicly interested pre
launch. But, as discussed here, delays due to legal wrangling and FCC's
mishandling of the technology and implementation allowed public interest
to wane before a practical launch. Even so, it took more than 20 years
for AM Stereo to die. With some 100 or so stations still using their
C-Quam encoders, despite the fact that there hasn't been a new AM Stereo
receiver built in the last 5 years and AM Stereo came off the standard
equipment list of GM And Chrysler almost a decade ago.

There is no reason to believe Radio will be any quicker to give up HD.

But, right now, as it stands, HD is a solution in search of a problem.

They don't care about the technology that brings them the content they
want.

Only radio geeks care about the technology.

Which is precisely the point. So far, only the technology has been
promoted. And the diverse 'out of the box' programming offerings have not
materialized as promised.

Sure they have, there's Jazz, 70's Folk, Chorale, Ethnic, Dance...There are
lots of formats available that are not available on the regular broadcast
band.

There's no interest in the product.

Just like the public wasn't interested in 'stereo' for a long time.

"What good was stereo when I have a mono radio..."?

Now, you wouldn't build an FM receiver without it!

it's not like HD will simply go away.

You're right...it's not going away....even if it's a slow growth technology.

After all, AM stereo had a more publicly interested pre launch. But, as
discussed here, delays due to legal wrangling and FCC's mishandling of the
technology and implementation allowed public interest to wane before a
practical launch.

Not just that, the public had no interest in AM stereo...period. There was
very little on AM that could benefit from stereo. Slong with the
"marketplace approach" of allowing competing standards on the air. The HD
experience is much better in that the sstandard is established.

Even so, it took more than 20 years for AM Stereo to die.

It didn't die....newer technology replaced it.

But, right now, as it stands, HD is a solution in search of a problem.

No, it's not....

The "question" is...."Are there alternatives to traditional radio....cuz I
don't like the commercials or the format offerrings? Is the only
alternative that I pay satelite fees for the rest of my life..."

Answer: yes are alternatives and HD is one of them.

It gives more functionality to radio...so it's not going away.

A Brown wrote:
They don't care about the technology that brings them the content they
want.

Only radio geeks care about the technology.
Which is precisely the point. So far, only the technology has been
promoted. And the diverse 'out of the box' programming offerings have not
materialized as promised.

Sure they have, there's Jazz, 70's Folk, Chorale, Ethnic, Dance...There are
lots of formats available that are not available on the regular broadcast
band.


And not widely available on HD. Most HD channels I've heard, are
dupes of the baseband audio, with HD2 being a simulcast of an AM sister.
The off beat programming options simply haven't materialized as promised.


There's no interest in the product.

Just like the public wasn't interested in 'stereo' for a long time.

"What good was stereo when I have a mono radio..."?

Now, you wouldn't build an FM receiver without it!

it's not like HD will simply go away.

You're right...it's not going away....even if it's a slow growth technology.

After all, AM stereo had a more publicly interested pre launch. But, as
discussed here, delays due to legal wrangling and FCC's mishandling of the
technology and implementation allowed public interest to wane before a
practical launch.

Not just that, the public had no interest in AM stereo...period. There was
very little on AM that could benefit from stereo.

At the time AM stereo was proposed, that's not true. Most listening
was still AM, at that time. Most music listening. And there were a
couple of systems that were actually quite good. With a wideband signal
AM Stereo could be very pleasing to the ear. The revised Kahn standard,
for instance, removed a good number of excessive filtration, and made
for a clean, listenable stereo. With a wideband receiver, it could
compete with contemporary FM's.

By the time FCC had decided to go with the multi-standard approach
and let the market battle it out, it was already too late for stereo to
benefit AM. The shift had slid to FM dominance.




Slong with the
"marketplace approach" of allowing competing standards on the air. The HD
experience is much better in that the sstandard is established.

Even so, it took more than 20 years for AM Stereo to die.

It didn't die....newer technology replaced it.


No, actually it died. New AM Stereo receivers were no longer
available in the US before HD was in practical tests.



But, right now, as it stands, HD is a solution in search of a problem.

No, it's not....

The "question" is...."Are there alternatives to traditional radio....cuz I
don't like the commercials or the format offerrings? Is the only
alternative that I pay satelite fees for the rest of my life..."




Answer: yes are alternatives and HD is one of them.

A minor one. The real alternatives, today are on cell phones,
podcasts and live streaming. HD is in the same position DAT was in when
it was introduced...not a lot of home users understood what it was. And
the endless music industry meddling with absurd copyguard schemes
delayed DAT until it had been leapfrogged by newer technology: PC based
recording and CD-R. By the time HD takes off with the public, it will be
irrelevant. Web based radios, live streaming on cellphones, podcasts and
mass customizable music downloads, all on handheld devices with better
audio, and fewer real world limitations to performance will have
eclipsed any potential HD may have had.

Short of a digital only mandate, there is nothing to keep HD relevant
as newer technologies make listening options easier, and more practical,
and more portable than ever.


And, if you think HD channels will remain commercial free, you need
to rethink that. Cable was commercial free. Look at it now. Satellite TV
was commercial free. Hmmmm...yes, well...And Sat Radio was promised to
be ALL commercial free.

Um...not so much.

And right now one of the hottest ad buys is a podcast. Highly
targeted advertising on programs that are selected by active listener
activity. I've seen spots go on a podcast for 10 times what the same
program would bring on radio.

HD will be commercial free as long as there is no interest in it. If
public interest develops, and stores put the radios back on teh shelves
for consumption, you may rest assured that there will be commercials on
HD.



It gives more functionality to radio...so it's not going away.


Not anytime soon. But its future is far from assured.

Which is precisely the point. So far, only the technology has been
promoted. And the diverse 'out of the box' programming offerings have
not materialized as promised.

Sure they have, there's Jazz, 70's Folk, Chorale, Ethnic, Dance...There
are lots of formats available that are not available on the regular
broadcast band.

And not widely available on HD.

There are ALL available where I am.

Most HD channels I've heard, are dupes of the baseband audio,

That's the HD-1 channel. The HD-2 and HD-3, etc...channels can be anything
they want.

....with HD2 being a simulcast of an AM sister. The off beat programming
options simply haven't materialized as promised.

Sure they have. Wouldn't it be nice to be informed before making incorrect
statements?

If you live near a major city (and 85% of America lives within the top 15
markets) you have plenty of HD choices.

Jazz, 70's Folk, Chorale, Ethnic, Dance...There are lots of formats
available

At the time AM stereo was proposed, that's not true. Most listening was
still AM, at that time. Most music listening.

But the FCC decided to let the marketplace choose the standard.
Disasterous!

Radio stations, radio manufacturers and Carmakers would not move on it until
a market standard evolved. By the time that started happenning (mid 80's?)
most AM music stations were a thing of the past.

At least that's ONE thing that's different with HD.

It didn't die....newer technology replaced it.

No, actually it died.

No, AM stereo is now available with newer technology...IBOC.

But, right now, as it stands, HD is a solution in search of a problem.

No, it's not....

The "question" is...."Are there alternatives to traditional radio....cuz
I don't like the commercials or the format offerrings? Is the only
alternative that I pay satelite fees for the rest of my life..."

Answer: yes are alternatives and HD is one of them.

A minor one. The real alternatives, today are on cell phones, podcasts
and live streaming.

They are ALL alternatives...hence the word....alternatives.

All of the alternatives you mentioned are way below 1% listening.

Would you prefer radio sit it out and let phones, podcasts and internet
streaming emerge without radio at least attempting to play a role?

And, if you think HD channels will remain commercial free, you need to
rethink that. Cable was commercial free. Look at it now. Satellite TV was
commercial free.

FM radio was commercial free....look at it now!

No, I am under no illusions that commercial free will last forever, it will
last as long as it takes, though.

And right now one of the hottest ad buys is a podcast.

Podcasts are still less than .01% of listening. (I can't imagine there is
much money for ad rates.) Sattelite radio is less than 1% penetration. More
and more money IS going to web pages though....even on the local level.

HD will be commercial free as long as there is no interest in it.

Just like FM. Radio used a negative (lack of listeners/advertisers for FM)
as a PLUS!

It gives more functionality to radio...so it's not going away.

Not anytime soon. But its future is far from assured.

Nothing is assured....not even tomorrow.

A Brown wrote:
Which is precisely the point. So far, only the technology has been
promoted. And the diverse 'out of the box' programming offerings have
not materialized as promised.
Sure they have, there's Jazz, 70's Folk, Chorale, Ethnic, Dance...There
are lots of formats available that are not available on the regular
broadcast band.

And not widely available on HD.

There are ALL available where I am.


Not whare I am. Nor where I've been so far this year.



Most HD channels I've heard, are dupes of the baseband audio,

That's the HD-1 channel. The HD-2 and HD-3, etc...channels can be anything
they want.


Can. Doesn't mean they are.



....with HD2 being a simulcast of an AM sister. The off beat programming
options simply haven't materialized as promised.

Sure they have. Wouldn't it be nice to be informed before making incorrect
statements?

If you live near a major city (and 85% of America lives within the top 15
markets) you have plenty of HD choices.


I live in Chicago. Big enough for you?

"A Brown" wrote in message
...

If you live near a major city (and 85% of America lives within the top 15
markets) you have plenty of HD choices.

No, 50% of Americans live in a top 50 market.

In article ,
D Peter Maus wrote:

A Brown wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
A Brown wrote:
Pancho did say that he showed some of these discussions to some
seminar groups a couple of years ago. I'd expect them to start showing
up now that it's starting to look like his position on HD is on the
wrong side of the public's interest.

Then, again, there are those true believers who desperately want HD to
take off for all its promise.
Then again, there are those radio geeks who despareately want HD radio to
fail!

The public doesn't care what radio geeks think.


Nor, apparently, does the public care about HD radio.

They don't care about the technology that brings them the content they want.

Only radio geeks care about the technology.





Which is precisely the point. So far, only the technology has been
promoted.

SNIP

You mean the perversion of technology or maybe technology for sock
puppets.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
D Peter Maus wrote:

A Brown wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
A Brown wrote:
Pancho did say that he showed some of these discussions to some
seminar groups a couple of years ago. I'd expect them to start
showing
up now that it's starting to look like his position on HD is on the
wrong side of the public's interest.

Then, again, there are those true believers who desperately want
HD to
take off for all its promise.
Then again, there are those radio geeks who despareately want HD
radio to
fail!

The public doesn't care what radio geeks think.


Nor, apparently, does the public care about HD radio.

They don't care about the technology that brings them the content they
want.

Only radio geeks care about the technology.


Which is precisely the point. So far, only the technology has been
promoted.

SNIP

You mean the perversion of technology or maybe technology for sock
puppets.

More whiing from the weenie from Ventura.....who's afraid IBOC is taking
root and no one asked his opinion.