"Brenda Ann" wrote:


"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. com...

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

Fractured? WBBM's IBOC (QRM) signal renders 790 unlistenable here.

Most likely the 790 signal is not supposed to cover your area with a
listenable (and thus protected) signal. If you are referring to the 790 in
Saginaw, it is not protected to Grand Rapids.

That's reality, no matter which way you decide to slice, dice, or spin
it.

Yep, radio is moving on. You aren't.

That's where you're wrong. We are moving on. But not to your QRM generating
three channel wide garbage that it takes a $300 radio to hear at all (and
that's only if you have a large antenna or are within sight of the towers).
We're moving on to Ogg-Vorbis, mp3, etc., where we can provide our own
selections of music for hours on end, and without your 15 minutes plus of
commercials per hour, and without paying $13 a month for a sketchy satellite
signal. Radio is dying, it's commiting slow suicide. Sad to see it
happening, when I was growing up, radio served it's audience.. now it only
serves itself, and does a **** poor job of even that.


....the audience is leaving. Will the last one out please turn off the
noise generators?

Good post. Good luck convincing Peter...


--
Eric F. Richards,
"It's the Din of iBiquity." -- Frank Dresser

"David Eduardo" wrote:


Sure it does. How many electronic devices that are 12 years old are
currently being used in the average household? R-390's don't count, btw.


My microwave, my main TV, my small portable TVs, my Rotel reciver, my
speakers, my video source switch, my audio source switch, my VCR, my
laserdisk player. My DVD player is approaching that age. My clocks,
my last car (and its AM-stereo receiver)... hell, even my CF light
bulbs are coming up on 10 years!

Not everyone buys something new every year. Not everyone *can*. Some
things are also so good that they really aren't improved upon -- I'd
like to see a receiver/tuner that's better than my Rotel. Good
freakin' luck.


--
Eric F. Richards,
"It's the Din of iBiquity." -- Frank Dresser

"David Eduardo" wrote:


"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...

That's true, but there was always someone to break the model. When
DJs were forced to use boring playlists after the Payola scandal,
Wolfman Jack did just fine with his border blaster clear up to L.A.
He also made a ton of money doing so.

Radio stations used rudimentary research and tightly controlled playlists
from the time the first Top 40 station debuted in August of 1952. The reason
they were called Top 40 was that they played the top 40 selling / requested
/ jukebox played songs. The jocks could not change the songs, and those
stations, often with numbers like a 40 share, prospered enormously.

Except that they weren't Top 40 at that time. They did the scandalous
thing of playing black artists for white audiences, and played the new
artists.


The payola incidents were hardly a scandal. Most of the nation knew nothing
about them.

Nice revisionism.

The Miami scandal, congressional hearings, Alan Freed, no one noticed.


Today... well, the model may not be broken. We'll see what the
classical and jazz stations do.

The only jazz stations are non-cpommercial,

*snork*
and there are very few
commercial classicals left, either. Neither format generates ratings. I have
worked at a jazz station, and both managed and owned a classical one, so I
am not against the format... it is just not viable today.

I'll remember that next time I see one on the dial.


I've stated my position and have staked it out. See Brenda-Ann's post
in this thread for another dissenting opinion.

And one which is based on a total refusal to look at facts about radio
listening.


If your above statements are based on "facts," I'll stick with
Brenda-Ann's view any time. Brenda-Ann talked about engineering
standards and physics... but we know marketing is the ultimate law in
the universe, not the laws of nature.

Idiot.


--
Eric F. Richards,
"It's the Din of iBiquity." -- Frank Dresser

"David Eduardo" wrote:


"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...

...the audience is leaving. Will the last one out please turn off the
noise generators?

Good post. Good luck convincing Peter...

You can convince neither of us,

I have no interest in convincing you. I respect Peter, even though I
disagree with him often.


--
Eric F. Richards,
"It's the Din of iBiquity." -- Frank Dresser

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"David Eduardo" wrote:


"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...

That's true, but there was always someone to break the model. When
DJs were forced to use boring playlists after the Payola scandal,
Wolfman Jack did just fine with his border blaster clear up to L.A.
He also made a ton of money doing so.

Radio stations used rudimentary research and tightly controlled playlists
from the time the first Top 40 station debuted in August of 1952. The
reason
they were called Top 40 was that they played the top 40 selling /
requested
/ jukebox played songs. The jocks could not change the songs, and those
stations, often with numbers like a 40 share, prospered enormously.

Except that they weren't Top 40 at that time. They did the scandalous
thing of playing black artists for white audiences, and played the new
artists.

The first top 40 station was KOWH in Omaha in 8/52. It played pop hits of
the day. It was not until the mid-50's that Top 40 stations added rock 'n'
roll, and they were nearly 100% consistent with playing 40 researched songs.
Period. There was nothing scandalous, as the target young demos accepted the
new music trends and no station that got a 30 or 40 share was "scndalous."


The payola incidents were hardly a scandal. Most of the nation knew
nothing
about them.

Nice revisionism.

They affected Lana Freed and NY. Most of hte nation had no idea who he was.
Most of the nation had no interest in payola.

The Miami scandal, congressional hearings, Alan Freed, no one noticed.

Very few noticed, as it was not relevant. It did not affect everyday life,
and was limited in interest.

and there are very few
commercial classicals left, either. Neither format generates ratings. I
have
worked at a jazz station, and both managed and owned a classical one, so
I
am not against the format... it is just not viable today.

I'll remember that next time I see one on the dial.

There are very few commercail classicals left. Period.


I've stated my position and have staked it out. See Brenda-Ann's post
in this thread for another dissenting opinion.

And one which is based on a total refusal to look at facts about radio
listening.


If your above statements are based on "facts," I'll stick with
Brenda-Ann's view any time. Brenda-Ann talked about engineering
standards and physics... but we know marketing is the ultimate law in
the universe, not the laws of nature.

No, Brenda Ann spoke about engineering standards that are outdated and
arcane. Interference on first adjacents is irrelevant if nobody in the
interference zone listens to first adjacents. The principles of physics do
not change. It is the way radio is used that has changed, and there are more
than a few Luddites here trying to bring back things that died decades ago.

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 10:25:40 -0500, "Michael Lawson"
wrote:


"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
.. .
Telamon wrote:


The situation would be much better if the band was split up
between
analog and digital.

The situation would be far better if they had a separate band for
digital-only broadcasts, perhaps high in UHF where the radio waves
behave more like Edwardo's myopic view of the world.

I have to agree. It's one thing to add a band,
like FM when it came along, but quite another
to simply replace one mode with another within
a band.

It's no accident that the time limit for the television
stations to stop broadcasting the old analog
methods got extended; people simply weren't
lining up for the digital televisions.

--Mike L.


The NAB didn't want a new band for DAB because everyone would have had
an equal signal and the entrenched powerhouses would have lost their
signal advantage. So instead, they get 300 new SDARS stations to
compete with in every market. Brilliant.

David Eduardo wrote:

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"David Eduardo" wrote:


"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...

That's true, but there was always someone to break the model. When
DJs were forced to use boring playlists after the Payola scandal,
Wolfman Jack did just fine with his border blaster clear up to L.A.
He also made a ton of money doing so.

Radio stations used rudimentary research and tightly controlled playlists
from the time the first Top 40 station debuted in August of 1952. The
reason
they were called Top 40 was that they played the top 40 selling /
requested
/ jukebox played songs. The jocks could not change the songs, and those
stations, often with numbers like a 40 share, prospered enormously.

Except that they weren't Top 40 at that time. They did the scandalous
thing of playing black artists for white audiences, and played the new
artists.

The first top 40 station was KOWH in Omaha in 8/52. It played pop hits of
the day. It was not until the mid-50's that Top 40 stations added rock 'n'
roll, and they were nearly 100% consistent with playing 40 researched songs.
Period. There was nothing scandalous, as the target young demos accepted the
new music trends and no station that got a 30 or 40 share was "scndalous."


The payola incidents were hardly a scandal. Most of the nation knew
nothing
about them.

Nice revisionism.

They affected Lana Freed and NY. Most of hte nation had no idea who he was.
Most of the nation had no interest in payola.

The Miami scandal, congressional hearings, Alan Freed, no one noticed.

Very few noticed, as it was not relevant. It did not affect everyday life,
and was limited in interest.

and there are very few
commercial classicals left, either. Neither format generates ratings. I
have
worked at a jazz station, and both managed and owned a classical one, so
I
am not against the format... it is just not viable today.

I'll remember that next time I see one on the dial.

There are very few commercail classicals left. Period.


I've stated my position and have staked it out. See Brenda-Ann's post
in this thread for another dissenting opinion.

And one which is based on a total refusal to look at facts about radio
listening.


If your above statements are based on "facts," I'll stick with
Brenda-Ann's view any time. Brenda-Ann talked about engineering
standards and physics... but we know marketing is the ultimate law in
the universe, not the laws of nature.

No, Brenda Ann spoke about engineering standards that are outdated and
arcane. Interference on first adjacents is irrelevant if nobody in the
interference zone listens to first adjacents. The principles of physics do
not change. It is the way radio is used that has changed, and there are more
than a few Luddites here trying to bring back things that died decades ago.

When did it die, gringa? Please tell us.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. com...

Good post. Good luck convincing Peter...

You can convince neither of us, as the listening figures show only minute
erosion over historical levels. Today, average individual listening is 20
hours 15 minutes a week. In 1950, during the freeze, listening was 21
hours.
In 1970, about 94.5% of Americans listened to radio. today, the figure is
between 93% and 94% in every US market.

Wow. That's impressive. Just about a statistical "everybody". So how many
more people will be listening after IBOC is fully rolled out?



the audience is not leaving. Some demos (teens and over-55) are listening
less, but that is because stations do not program for those ages.
Otherwise,
radio is far better off than you think it is. facing problems and
challenges? Sure. Dying rapidly? Nope.

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. com...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...
So, please reassure us. Tell us Bob Struble was misquoted by the New
York
Times. Tell us analog radio will remain for HD radio receivers to be
compatible with.

I took the context of the post I replied to te be "today" and not 12 years
in the future. By tha6t time, most of today's analog receivers will be
gone,
irrespective of the nature of broadcasting over a decade from now.

The cheap radios will be gone and replaced with other cheap radios. Most of
the better radios will still be around.

Just saying HD radio is currently compatible with analog doesn't really
address the point, does it?

Sure it does. How many electronic devices that are 12 years old are
currently being used in the average household? R-390's don't count, btw.



In my case, aside from a VCR, a DVD player, an electronic camera and a DX
440, nearly all of my electronic devices are over 12 years old. But I'm
just one person, and as we've learned from these discussions, any one person
means nothing. Well, one person means nothing unless he can put something
after his name like "President and CEO" or "Chairman of the FCC".

Anyway, R-390s count more in considering the lifecycle of radios than other
electronic devices such as cellphones, personal computers and MP3 players.
Although all the other electronic devices may have a bright future in audio
entertainment.

What the hell is wrong with those Luddites, anyway? Thanks to digital
technology, people will be listening to what they want when they want!
Can't the Luddites see the newfangled digital threat poised at good 'ol Big
Radio? Why, the profits of our favorite networks may be diluted!!

Damn Luddites. They're never there when you need them.

Frank Dresser

In article ,
David Eduardo wrote:
The receivers are getting cheaper and better. I have a newer Boston
Acoustics HD, and it gets all the HD2 channels inside a building that faces
away fromt he transmitters. By the time there is more content, there will be
many more recievers out, and the price point will move down. My first VHS
was $800. My first CD player was $1500. My first DVD player was over $300. A
year or so later, prices were down by more than half. Now you can get a DVD
player for $19 after a rebate.

And pretty soon, somebody will have a radio with Tivo like features for
$39.95 that records several (or all of the available) stations and has
fast forward buttons so that no one will ever need to listen to a
commercial. And then what happens to your business?

Mark Zenier
Googleproofaddress(account:mzenier provider:eskimo domain:com)