In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:
No, I have the proof, as does any other subscriber to Arbitron, that
people will not listen to weak signals that are subject to noise,
interference or difficult to tune in.

That's not proof. That's just advertising marketing BS.

If you don't believe the results of millions and millions of radio listener
7-day diaries of listening over the last decade in market after market, then
you are simply a fool. All the while I thought you were stubborn and
obstinate, but I was wrong.

Yes, I don't believe your story.

That Arbitron data is good enough for advertisers to use it as a base to
invest tens of billions of dollars a year, but you think it is BS.

Yes, I believe your take on it is confused at best and deliberately
wrong at worst.

I take the "fool" thing back. You are really a "silly fool."

You are a lying fool.

Anyway, you are obfuscating. I clearly said that AM stations with any
appreciable ratings are not playing music. You went off on an
unrelated and irrelevant tangent.

I'm not obfuscating. You have a one note point to make and this is just
your way to obscure it.

My point in this thread is that general market AM music stations exist in
limited numbers, and those that do all behave like KVEN... near dead last in
ratings and revenue.

Your only point is to get what you want by any means possible including
lying to people.

I get around 13 stations over S9 where I live 60 miles north of LA
and of course there are another dozen that put in a decent
relatively noise fee signal on a portable most places.

But most of the ones that have a good signal TO YOU do not get
listening by anyone else that is measurable.

Yeah, and you see that you fall back to that marketing crap. It doesn't
get enough market share so it does not exist.

This is the "if a tree falls in a forrest..." argument.

The fact is, while those stations are hearable, they are not listenable to
most radio listeners. For a variety of reasons, including signal strength,
listeners who might be able to hear a station do not listen to those that do
not have very good signals (in the range of 10 mv/m and above in metro
areas) simply do not tune those stations in. For whatever the reason, AMs
don't generate measurable listenership outside their strong signal areas.

Name me ONE non-ethnic AM that plays only music and has salable
ratings (meaning under age 55 listening).

I don't prove the existence of radio stations by what ratings they get.
That's your scam.

I never said any station did not exist. I said stations, outside certain
strong signal areas do not get any significant listening. And, in this
thread, I said that AMs playing music for the general market don't get any,
either.


But nobody else listens to them, even in your specific ZIP code area,
as I explained to you before.

Again, all of this is to divert attention from the fact that you
cited a music AM in your metro area and I gave you the facts that it
is rated poorly (39th in 25-54 in the Ventura / Ornard MSA) and has
plummeting revenue and almost no billing now. That's typical for
music AMs unless they are ones like KIRN that are the only service to
an unserved community... in this case, Persians.

Nope. That is just a part of the fantasy marketing world you live in.
This is just a part of the marketing fantasy you relive every day. Wake
up the reader of this news group know you game.

$20 billion invested in radio advertising based on measurements that are
statistically accurate enough for that purpose yet you are in denial. As I
said, "silly fool."

Your take on the numbers is your invention and a pack of lies.

First it's "The station does not exist."

Next "The station does not have enough signal to be noise free so people
will listen."

Then the final fall back position " The station does not get ratings so
it might as well not exist."

I never said stations do not exist. I said AM music stations get practically
no listening, just as I said stations outside an easily definable signal
strength area similarly don't get listening.

You have in the past. I know where you are going with the argument and
I'm not falling for it.

So now that we are down to 2 stations in a market we can implement HD
with no problems right? What BS!

HD will likely not help AM, since broadcasters are moving the only viable
mass market formats to FM. The band will be reduced to infomercials and
religion and service to small ethnic groups. Mexico has the right idea: they
plan to move nearly all AMs to FM over the next few years, starting with the
states in the Yucatan peninsula! Canada already deleted half or more of it's
AMs, allowing them to move to FM. Even the 50 kw clear channel CBC stations
in Montreal and Toronto were closed in favor of FM because the signals of
the 4 stations in the two metros was not good enough in significant parts of
each metro to give good service in this day of high noise levels and big
buildings and such.

Many people have posted that HD is one of two things depending on the
individual and that is either drive them away from AM or be of no
consequence.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
What a revelation coming from you that the music is compressed. I don't
think all stations do this to the extent that you supposedly do it.



The average station appears to compress everything to within a very small
dynamic range. Many as little as 6dB.

In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
What a revelation coming from you that the music is compressed. I don't
think all stations do this to the extent that you supposedly do it.



The average station appears to compress everything to within a very small
dynamic range. Many as little as 6dB.

Wow, that's not much! I don't think I would want to listen to that. It
would wear me down in short order.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

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

You do not have the same noise floor in a car as you do in a quiet living
room. Because of this, and that fact that just under a third of radio
listening is in the car. we adjust processing so that low level momets
are
brought up by AGC / leveling action so they will not be below the normal
or
average noise floor in a moving car.

What a revelation coming from you that the music is compressed. I don't
think all stations do this to the extent that you supposedly do it.

The music comes pre-compressed. Look at most any commercial CD's waveforms
and you can see what is done to the music.

But stations don't "compress... the music." We process the audio for
consistency. We do AGC where required to tighten the dynamic range, we have
peak limiting to stay legal and we have multi-band processing to make sure
there is song-to-song-to-commercial-to-DJ consistency.

Most do more processing than I like. If you really want to hear processing,
try the New York FMs. They are all B's, and at the ESB, only around 6 kw...
so there has been a loudness war there for 4 decades. Every station buys
every new model of the Optimod or the Omnia, and pushes them very close to
the point that they generate square waves.

Again, every station processes. It's a de facto legal requirement, in fact:
overmodulation is against the FCC rules, and not having processing or not
setting it up right as some stations have proved, is not an excuse. The FCC
is not int he dynamic range protection business.

The HD radio in my vehicle is a module added to the base BMW computer /
radio / GPS / vehicle control system. It does not affect the very good
design of both the car and the radio.

Sounds like you are having car receiving problems. Maybe you have a
defective radio and a defective car. I'd take it back to the dealer and
get it fixed.

I am not having reception problems, and you know it. Like most listeners, I
don't put up with noisy signals if I even listen to AM.

Most radio listening is done on that kind of radio.

I doubt it. Other than the cubical radio all my listening has been and
is stereo.

The radio is a perfect square? Or you have it in your cubicle?

Many research companies have done over the last few decades studies on what
kind of radio people use most of the time. It's the kitchen radio from Bed,
Bath and Beyond or WalMart or Target, picked often more to match the color
of the countertops than for any audio quality concerns. And it's mono. It's
the clock radio... similarly mono, or with two speakers 3 inches apart,
which is still mono. It's the radio in the payment booth at the car park, or
the one in the office or the AC station on the overhead speakers in the
insurance office. It's mostly mono.

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
What a revelation coming from you that the music is compressed. I don't
think all stations do this to the extent that you supposedly do it.



The average station appears to compress everything to within a very small
dynamic range. Many as little as 6dB.

Wow, that's not much! I don't think I would want to listen to that. It
would wear me down in short order.


Most people don't even notice it, such is the way of today's music (most any
format). It's all part of the 'volume wars'. Stations clamoring to get
noticed in a sea of other stations, so they want their signal to be as loud
as possible.

Eduardo talks about how stations have been using compression for many
decades. This may well be true, but not the vast majority of them. Small
market stations were using no compression at all well into the 80's. One
public station I worked at never had it until their newest studios were
built in the early 90's. Until the late 80's, we didn't even have stereo
(management didn't want to cut our usable range, as we were only running
about 1.8 KW), and until the mid '80's, we were still using Korean war
surplus mixers and 50's era monaural professional recording equipment.
And you know what? We sounded great. Real radio. The only 'feeds' we used
were BBC radio off a shortwave receiver for 30 minutes a day and a feed from
city hall for the city council meetings. Most of the air people (including
myself) brought in their own record collections for use on the air. Format
was all over the road (oldies, jazz, classical, ethnic (we had a 15 year old
kid that played Chinese mantras and such, we used to kid him that they
sounded like a Congressional session) and whatever else anybody could come
up with.)

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
What a revelation coming from you that the music is compressed. I don't
think all stations do this to the extent that you supposedly do it.



The average station appears to compress everything to within a very small
dynamic range. Many as little as 6dB.

Wow, that's not much! I don't think I would want to listen to that. It
would wear me down in short order.

Brenda Anne is correct on this. Event he talk stations you listen to are
processed to about the same standard.

When you look at ANY station's modulation monitor, the excursion range
seldom goes below 80% to 85% and is clipped hard at 100%.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

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

You do not have the same noise floor in a car as you do in a quiet living
room. Because of this, and that fact that just under a third of radio
listening is in the car. we adjust processing so that low level momets
are
brought up by AGC / leveling action so they will not be below the normal
or
average noise floor in a moving car.

What a revelation coming from you that the music is compressed. I don't
think all stations do this to the extent that you supposedly do it.

The music comes pre-compressed. Look at most any commercial CD's waveforms
and you can see what is done to the music.

But stations don't "compress... the music." We process the audio for
consistency. We do AGC where required to tighten the dynamic range, we have
peak limiting to stay legal and we have multi-band processing to make sure
there is song-to-song-to-commercial-to-DJ consistency.

Most do more processing than I like. If you really want to hear processing,
try the New York FMs. They are all B's, and at the ESB, only around 6 kw...
so there has been a loudness war there for 4 decades. Every station buys
every new model of the Optimod or the Omnia, and pushes them very close to
the point that they generate square waves.

Again, every station processes. It's a de facto legal requirement, in fact:
overmodulation is against the FCC rules, and not having processing or not
setting it up right as some stations have proved, is not an excuse. The FCC
is not int he dynamic range protection business.

The HD radio in my vehicle is a module added to the base BMW computer /
radio / GPS / vehicle control system. It does not affect the very good
design of both the car and the radio.

Sounds like you are having car receiving problems. Maybe you have a
defective radio and a defective car. I'd take it back to the dealer and
get it fixed.

I am not having reception problems, and you know it. Like most listeners, I
don't put up with noisy signals if I even listen to AM.

Most radio listening is done on that kind of radio.

I doubt it. Other than the cubical radio all my listening has been and
is stereo.

The radio is a perfect square? Or you have it in your cubicle?

Actually rectangular. There is a Tivoli One in my work cubical. Try and
get your reading comprehension up to speed.

Previously I wrote:
I've owned one radio that was FM mono for the work cubicle where I
wanted it small and simple as possible. I didn't want to use earphones
so I kept the volume down to where it was indiscernible the next cube
over.
End quote.

Many research companies have done over the last few decades studies on what
kind of radio people use most of the time. It's the kitchen radio from Bed,
Bath and Beyond or WalMart or Target, picked often more to match the color
of the countertops than for any audio quality concerns. And it's mono. It's
the clock radio... similarly mono, or with two speakers 3 inches apart,
which is still mono. It's the radio in the payment booth at the car park, or
the one in the office or the AC station on the overhead speakers in the
insurance office. It's mostly mono.

The FM radios I use "most of the time" are the car or home receiver with
speaker far enough apart for good stereo. You sure use whacked surveys
to shape your views or maybe you just misconstrue them.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
.
..
In article ,
What a revelation coming from you that the music is compressed. I don't
think all stations do this to the extent that you supposedly do it.



The average station appears to compress everything to within a very small
dynamic range. Many as little as 6dB.

Wow, that's not much! I don't think I would want to listen to that. It
would wear me down in short order.

Brenda Anne is correct on this. Event he talk stations you listen to are
processed to about the same standard.

When you look at ANY station's modulation monitor, the excursion range
seldom goes below 80% to 85% and is clipped hard at 100%.

Talk radio does not need a large dynamic range but 6 dB seems to small.
It seems to me that the sound levels vary more than 4 X.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

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

If you don't believe the results of millions and millions of radio
listener
7-day diaries of listening over the last decade in market after market,
then
you are simply a fool. All the while I thought you were stubborn and
obstinate, but I was wrong.

Yes, I don't believe your story.

Arbitron data from the diary system used for the last 43 years has been
available electronically for close to 15 years. In that data, for every
rated market, is embedded information on the ZIP code identified for
respondents for their at work and in home listening.

Together, in home and at work listening constitute about 70% of all the time
spent listening, irrespective of maket size.

With an additional Arbitron program, called MapMaker, a station can plot the
distribution of diaries by ZIP code for all their listeners. You can then
take the contours of the station as an overlay, and see at which point the
incidence of listening dwindles to a point of being insignificant.

Anyone subscribed to the Arbitron services has the data, in an application
called Maximi$er, and if they have MapMaker and their own contours, they can
see where listenership can be obtained and where it is pretty much
impossible. And many stations have MapMaker, as its main purpose is to show
retailers a station or cluster's listenership within the sales zone of a
store or business.

Nearly everyone I know in other companies has done this type of analysis.
It's used to determine things like billboard locations, areas where to send
and not to send direct mail, locations that will work for client remotes or
for station van hits, etc., etc. Nobody wants to do a remote in an area
where there is no listenership, since the station will look bad... and that
is just one example of why all of the industry looks at what is often called
the "useful" coverage area.

OK, I'll give this a shot. You substitute marketing statical bull-crap
for reality. That's where you go wrong.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

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


When you look at ANY station's modulation monitor, the excursion range
seldom goes below 80% to 85% and is clipped hard at 100%.

Talk radio does not need a large dynamic range but 6 dB seems to small.
It seems to me that the sound levels vary more than 4 X.


"It seems to you." That must be the IEEE "ISTY" standard for modulation
density, right?

6 db is not much. Good audio is more like 80 to 100 dB.

And you criticize me for using widely accepted and broadly syndicated
Arbitron data used by all significant top 300 market stations in the US, but
you have taken on the job of being the standard for modulation all by your
lonesome.

You are nuts.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California