"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...



Now there's someone who has hit the nail on the head. This is also the
reason (primary one anyway) why I won't bother buying a DTV.. no matter
how you dress up a pig, all you're gonna get out of it is pig ****.

Of course, don't let it bother your that Steve is simply unhappy that 95% of
the folks are being served nicely and for free, while he is waiting for some
station to serve him personally (although he does not say what is lacking...
he just strikes out at other formats)

Never mind that there are more different formats in every market than there
ever were. He says the opposite.
Never mind that less radio is automated or syndicated than 20 or 30 years
ago.
Never mind that the model for TV is national... yet Steve wants bad local
radio over the best talent America can offer done nationally.
Never mind that Steve says there is no local content. What he means is that
there is content he does not agree with, so it is all bad.

And if you have not watched "old" DVDs on a DTV monitor, you have no idea
what you are missing. Even analog cable looks stunning, and the amount of
HDTV production is increasing rapidly. I've bought 3 HDTV monitors already,
and will eventually replace all of the old ones with HDTV.

Brenda, you are sounding like a Luddite.

David Frackelton Gleason aka Eduardo once again tried to sell snake oil when he
wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...



Now there's someone who has hit the nail on the head. This is also the
reason (primary one anyway) why I won't bother buying a DTV.. no matter
how you dress up a pig, all you're gonna get out of it is pig ****.

Of course, don't let it bother your that Steve is simply unhappy that 95% of
the folks are being served nicely and for free, while he is waiting for some
station to serve him personally (although he does not say what is lacking...
he just strikes out at other formats)

Never mind that there are more different formats in every market than there
ever were. He says the opposite.
Never mind that less radio is automated or syndicated than 20 or 30 years
ago.
Never mind that the model for TV is national... yet Steve wants bad local
radio over the best talent America can offer done nationally.
Never mind that Steve says there is no local content. What he means is that
there is content he does not agree with, so it is all bad.

And if you have not watched "old" DVDs on a DTV monitor, you have no idea
what you are missing. Even analog cable looks stunning, and the amount of
HDTV production is increasing rapidly. I've bought 3 HDTV monitors already,
and will eventually replace all of the old ones with HDTV.

Brenda, you are sounding like a Luddite.

Actually, she sounds like someone who just isn't buying your bull****, no matter
how nicely you dress up the bull.

Perhaps you should pack up your stand and try to sell your wares in another
forum.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

iboc will kill Radio.y'all can thank them suckers at the fcc for that.
cuhulin

David Eduardo wrote:
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...


Now there's someone who has hit the nail on the head. This is also the
reason (primary one anyway) why I won't bother buying a DTV.. no matter
how you dress up a pig, all you're gonna get out of it is pig ****.

Of course, don't let it bother your that Steve is simply unhappy that 95% of
the folks are being served nicely and for free, while he is waiting for some
station to serve him personally (although he does not say what is lacking...
he just strikes out at other formats)

Never mind that there are more different formats in every market than there
ever were. He says the opposite.
Never mind that less radio is automated or syndicated than 20 or 30 years
ago.
Never mind that the model for TV is national... yet Steve wants bad local
radio over the best talent America can offer done nationally.
Never mind that Steve says there is no local content. What he means is that
there is content he does not agree with, so it is all bad.

And if you have not watched "old" DVDs on a DTV monitor, you have no idea
what you are missing. Even analog cable looks stunning, and the amount of
HDTV production is increasing rapidly. I've bought 3 HDTV monitors already,
and will eventually replace all of the old ones with HDTV.

Brenda, you are sounding like a Luddite.

David, people are sick and tired of radio for money's sake. I dream of
engaging and interesting programming. In other words, programming to
say something, make real art, or an original point of view without focus
groups, or polling data. Do that and the advertisers will start a
bidding war to get a spot on your station.

The most insipid example I can give you of "giving the people what they
want" is the American Idol show. Don't get me wrong, these artists are
talented. But they're highly unoriginal. In other words, they're "safe".

Would Louis Armstrong have a chance in today's radio market? Would Bix
Beiderbeck? How about Jimi Hendrix? Pete Seeger? George Gershwin? I
have to wonder. Many artists believe that they have hit the big time
despite the recording and broadcast industry, not because of it.

The problem is one I've outlined years ago. It's basically a version of
the Heisenberg uncertainty principle applied to marketing. When the
measuring technique affects the thing you measure, you really don't know
what you have. Using polling data and focus groups to determine your
music programming is a self fulfilling process that will guarantee
mediocrity.

As for whether IBOC is a good or a bad thing, I'll say this: AM could
sound good. However, nobody sees fit to purchase a quality receiver to
listen to a better sound. Thus it has been relegated to a secondary
status. And so you can walk away making the point that gosh, the noise
from IBOC doesn't make things that much worse because it already sounds
like crap to most people.

Broadcast AM wouldn't sound like crap if the programming was there to
support the demand for fidelity. It wouldn't sound like crap if people
actually complained about the crummy audio at night from all those lower
power stations. They don't complain, because station owners pay program
directors to generate bland mediocrity that will sell commercials, not
inspire and engage listeners. Nobody cares because there is nothing to
care about.

Having vented my spleen, let me say this to all you folk who think that
nothing can sound better than AM: Get over it. The biggest problem with
MW and SW AM broadcasting is that we don't have a capture effect of any
sort. AM can not have such an effect. But digital modes can clean up
the act considerably. Sorry, Telemon, some bright folks on a few
industry committees will find a reasonable suite of digital standards
some day, and when they do, AM will go the way of morse code. It can't
happen soon enough in my not so humble opinion. You will never convince
me that digital artifacts are worse than heterodyne whistles and
opposite sideband artifacts from a station 10 kHz away.

However, even if such digital standards take hold, nobody will give a
damn as long as the programming sucks. Is it any wonder that both XM
and Sirius are still having difficulties making a profit? Think about it...

Jake Brodsky
AB3A

In article ,
Jake Brodsky wrote:

Snip

Having vented my spleen, let me say this to all you folk who think that
nothing can sound better than AM: Get over it. The biggest problem with
MW and SW AM broadcasting is that we don't have a capture effect of any
sort. AM can not have such an effect. But digital modes can clean up
the act considerably. Sorry, Telemon, some bright folks on a few
industry committees will find a reasonable suite of digital standards
some day, and when they do, AM will go the way of morse code. It can't
happen soon enough in my not so humble opinion. You will never convince
me that digital artifacts are worse than heterodyne whistles and
opposite sideband artifacts from a station 10 kHz away.

Snip

There are two issues he
1. What is actually operating to the current DRM standards.
2. What can be engineered.

Regarding #1

I fail to see how replacing "heterodyne whistles" that I can normally
adjust my receiver to mitigate anyway and replace that with "digital
artifacts" as an improvement. In other words replacing one type of
noise with another. I rationally can not accept this trade of one type
of noise for another type of noise as "better."

The problem I have with DRM is that it currently is not an improvement
and just provides a different listening experience not better in
general.

They (the DRM consortium) claim the "possible" while providing the
"actual" like it is the same thing. This is a bait and switch tactic
and I'm not buying it.

Regarding #2

Can DRM be better than current analog? You bet it can!

Can you stuff more information into the same bandwidth? No!

So in order to offer "better" sound quality the signal will have to
occupy more bandwidth not the same. Compression algorithms trade an
increase in information rate for an amount of distortion or artifacts.
I don't see any research to change this trade where you can have your
cake and eat it too.

There is the theoretical rule that a numerical sized bandwidth can
support a numerical value of information rate. For a DRM signal to
"sound better" it would have to overcome this rule. Compression
algorithms can not violate this rule without other consequences such as
sound quality.

The result is that DRM will have to use larger bandwidth than the
current analog scheme to it to actually be "better." Where "better" is
defined as good sounding audio without the artifacts and manage this
with a weaker signal whether that weakness is due to propagation, the
transmitter using less power, or both.

If broadcasters and listeners want to accept fewer available channels
then this can be an eventuality but listeners must in addition accept
that broadcasters will have control over who can listen and that over
time broadcasters can change the rules.

*******************************

I take the long view. The long view is freedom of information, which is
a fundamental right in this country. If broadcasters are going to
implement a scheme where by they control who can receive the
information for whatever reason then we will have an information cast
system.

This debate is just starting and it will be an issue in every delivery
system be it Internet, AM/FM BCB or short wave. From the beginning to
now if you bought any kind of service from an ISP you got the whole
Internet. From the beginning until now if you bought a radio you got
the whole of all programming it was capable of receiving. This is going
to change in the future if we accept what the industries are pushing,
which is a subscription model in addition to the equipment cost.

The USA understands and accepts money for access to "premium" content
but there has to be a broader availability of the free content
guaranteed or we will lose a part of what we are as a nation.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California