On 1/23/12 13:26 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message
...
On 1/20/12 15:22 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
What's also not being addressed, is that stations are also
processing
the dynamics on the HD streams.

It's not being addressed because it's not true.

Even yet another case where you're denying a simple truth.
Stations ARE
processing their HD streams. Sometimes as heavily as their
baseband streams.

And many are not processing them at all.


Not nearly as many as your statement would imply.


But the truth is, that they are not processing it just like they
do on the
broadcast band.

Not with the same hardware. But in much the same way.

Software based processing is still processing.


There is seperate processing. SOme stations don't use
virtually any processing at all on their HD streams.

Most, however, do.

I would say that MOST do not. (As someone currently working in
the industry.)

And you would be wrong. (As someone currently working in the
industry.)




So, manglement calls for more processing on the HD Streams.

Yes, it does happen. It happens quite a lot, actually.


This is a vast generalization. No, it doesn't happen "quite a
lot".


Every station I (as someone currently working in the industry)
work with, running HD, processes their HD audio. Quite heavily, and
often to the same level as the baseband audio. this, so that there
isn't such a difference in the audio output when the receiver drops
the IBOC stream in favor of the analog audio. Which happens quite a bit.

On 1/23/12 13:27 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message
...
On 1/20/12 15:23 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message
...
On 1/17/12 01:03 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message
...
On 1/16/12 15:30 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in
message ...
On 1/16/12 11:35 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
"Phil
wrote in message
...


On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 01:55:32 -0500, "FarsWatch4"
wrote:

9 out of 10 doctors also recommended
cigarette
smoking to
aid and improve digestion.

Where is this study?

This was highly touted in advertising during
the 1940s.

It was an advertising ploy. Not a study, per
se.

I hope we can tell the difference.

Insult aside, it WAS indeed based on surveys.

A survey designed by an advertising company....again,
I hope
you can
tell the difference.



Insult aside, it was a survey designed by the Tobacco
Industry.

Yes it was.

It was a survey designed by the business its
conclusion
supported.

Yes it was.

The results were used to promote sales the industry's
products.

Yes it was.

Not unlike iBiquity designing and sponsoring surveys
the
results
of which supports sales of its products.

The surveys I have seen were not designed nor sponsored
by iBiquity...but were seperate research projects done by
stations themselves by
hiring
outside research companies with no stake in the outcome.


As someone who participated in the execution of several
such surveys,
that is simply not true.

You mean you couldn't tell when you were being snookered into
an advertising campain?


Ah, so you admit that the HD surveys are just an advertising
scheme....thank you for finally admitting the truth.

Nope. I'm saying I can tell the difference between an
advertising
campagn
and scientific research..

As someone who works on both,...I'd say, "yes."

Research is never released. But that's a strawman argument. Certainly no
station releases raw Arbitron data, for instance...

Of course we do. (an other thing you apparently know nothing about.)

We'll print out and hand over any arbitron info requested.

But interpreted results are always used in promotional and sales. There is
no reason otherwise to spend the money to do them.

There are plenty of reasons to do research that you don't release.

Mainly for strategic programming decisions. (Another thing you apparently
don't know much about.)

It is for internal strategic decision making.

Again, a strawman argument. Even material used for internal decision
making is eventually sold to the public.

Wrong.

Perceptuals find their results in promos stating "we asked and you
said..." "Playing YOUR favorites."

Again, can you tell the difference between an advertising campaign and
scientific research? Apparently not.

Perceptuals, and surveys find their way into sales pitches at ad
agencies.

If it's research into what agencies want...then yes.

But much reserach is never released to the public.

Your attempts to derail responses to a fictitious followup belie your
intent to have a reasonable discussion.

Your continued assumption and incorrect statements of fact have drailed a
reaonable discussion.

The truth has no need of such trickery. Nor does it have need for the
gratuitous insults. Nor debate tactics based on strawman arguments.

True...but you have stated little of truth. Maybe you have leanred thru
voiceovers that you can simply state something and people will accpt it as
fact. DOesn't happen in real life.

You've exposed yourself as a fanboi. Nothing more.

You've exposed yourself as a VO type...who makes authroitative statements an
d expects people to accept them.

"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
On 1/23/12 13:26 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message
...
On 1/20/12 15:22 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
What's also not being addressed, is that stations are also
processing
the dynamics on the HD streams.

It's not being addressed because it's not true.

Even yet another case where you're denying a simple truth.
Stations ARE
processing their HD streams. Sometimes as heavily as their
baseband streams.

And many are not processing them at all.


Not nearly as many as your statement would imply.

(And nowhere near the statement that they process them just like their
broadcast signals.)

If you have some authoritative statistics to back up your claim, let me
know!

But the truth is, that they are not processing it just like they
do on the
broadcast band.

Not with the same hardware. But in much the same way.

Incorrect.

There is seperate processing. SOme stations don't use
virtually any processing at all on their HD streams.

Most, however, do.

I would say that MOST do not. (As someone currently working in
the industry.)

And you would be wrong. (As someone currently working in the
industry.)

You are a VO guy....Whereas I run numerous stations.

So, manglement calls for more processing on the HD Streams.

Yes, it does happen. It happens quite a lot, actually.


This is a vast generalization. No, it doesn't happen "quite a
lot".


Every station I (as someone currently working in the industry)
work with, running HD, processes their HD audio.

Most of the stations I work with started with no processing but a limiter.
The Engineers I deal with are trying to maintain a clean sound....so, no,
management is not calling for more processing.

Quite heavily, and
often to the same level as the baseband audio.


Still not true...no matter how often you say it,.

On 1/23/12 13:30 , FarsWatch4 wrote:

If you were involved with EIGHT...maybe more? Then there was something
wrong with the mthodology of this survey


Not at all. 6 were in other markets. 2 were followup studies.

Then the methodology is flawed....and as a reesult, I would be suspect of
any conclusions.


The methodology is flawed? Because the survey was conducted in
multiple markets? Hardly. That's like saying Arbitron's PPM is flawed
because it's used in more than Chicago. Nonsense.

You're suspect of any conclusions because they don't agree with your
pre packaged claims.


You're not familiar with the way this kind of survey is done. Rarely
just one. Never in a single location. And about 1/3 of the time with a
current followup to note trends in response, or changes in perceptuals.

You're correct. In all my years in broadcasting, I have never heard of such
a silly way to do a "survey".

Which, then, says a lot about your experience.


You should do some, sometime. It's pretty fascinating stuff. At CBS,
we did perceptuals at least once a year. Sometimes twice. Just to keep
track of trends, and to see how tastes were evolving.


And music surveys are done with greater frequency. In different
locations. I worked at one station that did callout music research every
night.

My company prepares music clips for callout surveys almost constantly
for stations in markets across the country.

What's interesting is the variation is responses, by market, to a
given song.

When taken in context with the wider picture, the local snapshot
reveals even more about local tastes, public expectations, and public
perceptions based on cultural norms all of which are locally shaped.

In every market where 'HD radio listening test' surveys were
conducted in which I was involved, the tests were conducted according to
iBiquity's requirements, the participants selected according to
iBiquity's criteria, and the results tabulated and interpreted by
iBiquity's specifications.

As was posted here...the tests were rigged in iBiquity's favor,
sonically, and those with experience, trained ears, or musical abiltiy
were eliminated from participation, and the results weighted in favor of
HD radio.

There is a reason that engineers at HD stations are contractually
prohibited from criticizing HD radio, and HD radio performance. There is
a reason why stations who discontinue HD broadcasting are pursued by
iBiquity's legal department to force them to return to participating in
the HD radio scam.

And there is a reason why criticism of such an obviously flawed
system produces this blizzard of fanboi responses quoting iBiquity
pamphlets, memoes and newsletters.

The truth requires none of these things. Only a promotional scam
requires such tactics. In the same way only the Tobacco industry
required an industry run Tobacco Institute to protect industry interests
against the mountains of evidence against it.

IBiquity's tactics amount to a kind of strongarming for which Sarnoff
has been excoriated in this group for his treatment of inventions of
other men, like Armstrong and Farnsworth.

In time, there will be an accounting. Sadly, it will take too much
time. And both the broadcasting industry and the FCC has too much
invested here to see, or hear the truth about this system. But just like
even the Tobacco industry, the truth will out, and there will be an
accounting.

What damage is wrought in the interim, will remain to be seen.

But, as you, yourself have admitted, there is a waning of public
interest in all things Radio....not just shortwave, that has not rallied
even with DRM, but with AM and FM broadcasting...and the public has an
eery ability to find, or create alternatives to things that they don't
like, or things that they once loved, that have been screwed with until
they no longer serve the needs of the pubic, or things that they've lost
interest in. And Radio will be no different. Radio will find that it's
relevance is reduced, as lighter, more responsive, and more personally
customized sources for entertainment and information become available.

And, in time, Radio will find that it's no longer the dominant
medium. And that no one but Radio cares about that fact.

Even today station content is available from multiple sources, all
producing less than survivable revenue. Even as I write this, I'm
listening to a station in Louisiana, while my wife, at her office
listens to a station in Indianapolis. Neither of us are using radios.
And we both can take these stations with us on our cell phones. With
unlimited plans, or even the new larger data plans by AT&T and Verizon,
there's no reason to fear streaming your favorite stations, now. And the
stations themselves?

Well, they'd better find ways to either monetize their streams, OR
find a way to provide compelling listening content to draw listeners to
their terrestrial transmitters.

Or, like two stations here in Chicago....Radio will be moved to the
internet, or another alternative, as an interim step to being moved out
of the public ear entirely.

And in none of these scenarios does HD radio play a part. It's just
another one of all things Radio that even you agree, the public is
losing interest in.


D. Peter Maus.

On 1/23/12 14:55 , FarsWatch4 wrote:

True...but you have stated little of truth. Maybe you have leanred thru
voiceovers that you can simply state something and people will accpt it as
fact. DOesn't happen in real life.

You've exposed yourself as a fanboi. Nothing more.

You've exposed yourself as a VO type...who makes authroitative statements an
d expects people to accept them.



I do VO's as a part of my businesses. I'm also build studios, work
with Radio on audio, it's engineering, and one of my businesses is, in
fact, in providing the manpower for research efforts, and converting
those to real and useful results.

And you don't want to know my homeruns in advertising.

I do speak from experience, here. And the authorititative statements I
make are backed by decades of experience.

In markets starting with Chicago, and working my way outward.

But, I'm not the subject of this conversation. HD radio is, and the
fact that you have turned this into a discussion about me, underscores
my point that you really aren't interested in the discussion...only in
silencing dissent when your premises are flawed.

"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
On 1/23/12 14:55 , FarsWatch4 wrote:

True...but you have stated little of truth. Maybe you have leanred thru
voiceovers that you can simply state something and people will accpt it
as
fact. DOesn't happen in real life.

You've exposed yourself as a fanboi. Nothing more.

You've exposed yourself as a VO type...who makes authroitative statements
an
d expects people to accept them.



I do VO's as a part of my businesses. I'm also build studios, work with
Radio on audio, it's engineering, and one of my businesses is, in fact, in
providing the manpower for research efforts, and converting those to real
and useful results.

In other words...a jack of all trades and a master of none.

And you don't want to know my homeruns in advertising.

I could care less.

I do speak from experience, here. And the authorititative statements I
make are backed by decades of experience.

Meh!

But, I'm not the subject of this conversation. HD radio is, and the fact
that you have turned this into a discussion about me, underscores my point
that you really aren't interested in the discussion...only in silencing
dissent when your premises are flawed.

I've exposed the flawed source, and your mis-statements.

On 1/23/12 14:59 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message
...
On 1/23/12 13:26 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message
...
On 1/20/12 15:22 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
What's also not being addressed, is that stations are also
processing
the dynamics on the HD streams.

It's not being addressed because it's not true.

Even yet another case where you're denying a simple truth.
Stations ARE
processing their HD streams. Sometimes as heavily as their
baseband streams.

And many are not processing them at all.


Not nearly as many as your statement would imply.

(And nowhere near the statement that they process them just like their
broadcast signals.)

If you have some authoritative statistics to back up your claim, let me
know!

But the truth is, that they are not processing it just like they
do on the
broadcast band.

Not with the same hardware. But in much the same way.

Incorrect.

There is seperate processing. SOme stations don't use
virtually any processing at all on their HD streams.

Most, however, do.

I would say that MOST do not. (As someone currently working in
the industry.)

And you would be wrong. (As someone currently working in the
industry.)

You are a VO guy....Whereas I run numerous stations.


Ah...so this is discussion is now about me.

Yes, I do VO's. I'm also a photographer. And an engineer. And a
consultant drawing on more than 50 years of experience in Radio and TV.

And I have two businesses, one that supply manpower and coordinative
effort for the execution of research surveys, both focus group
perceptuals and street level research. And the other that conceives,
produces and excecutes advertising campaigns.

So, before you talk out of your ass again, you may wish to consider
what you don't know about your correspondent.

On 1/23/12 15:19 , FarsWatch4 wrote:
I could care less.


Yes. So it would appear.

"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
On 1/23/12 15:19 , FarsWatch4 wrote:

I could care less.


Yes. So it would appear.

Yet you aparrently keep coming back for more!

No VO jobs today?