RadioBanter - This Really Sucks

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)

- Shortwave (https://www.radiobanter.com/shortwave/)

- - This Really Sucks (https://www.radiobanter.com/shortwave/98438-really-sucks.html)

David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...
David Eduardo wrote:
The greater good is trying to preserve the existing free terrestrial
broadcast system, which will not endure unless a digital alternative
is
offered.
We got that through numerous posts you have made.
You may have. DXass certainly hasn't, nor has Steve and the now-absent
"IBOC_Sucks" guy.
And yet, you're the one who wrote, in post 173, that AM will never
become primarily digital and, in fact, you say you "have never heard it
discussed."

I think that most listening in the future will be to the digital signal, not
the analog. I have never heard anyone talk about turning analog off.

I've spoken with two GM's, now, who've said they can't wait to shut
the analog off, and save the cost of power. Especially with energy costs
about to skyrocket here, that can be quite a difference in the bottom line.

I know they talk amongst each other, and I know it's been discussed
for some future date. Nothing official, of course. And nothing from the
Commission. But it's being discussed. And like analog TV, when the
digital audience reaches a certain saturation, it would be fiscally
silly to continue to support a mode that's not being listened to.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...
David Eduardo wrote:
The greater good is trying to preserve the existing free terrestrial
broadcast system, which will not endure unless a digital alternative
is
offered.
We got that through numerous posts you have made.
You may have. DXass certainly hasn't, nor has Steve and the now-absent
"IBOC_Sucks" guy.
And yet, you're the one who wrote, in post 173, that AM will never
become primarily digital and, in fact, you say you "have never heard it
discussed."

I think that most listening in the future will be to the digital signal,
not the analog. I have never heard anyone talk about turning analog off.

I've spoken with two GM's, now, who've said they can't wait to shut the
analog off, and save the cost of power. Especially with energy costs about
to skyrocket here, that can be quite a difference in the bottom line.

That is an interesting reason... spend $100 k at least to go HD, and then
shut off analog to save a couple of thousand.

I just do not think that there would be a win for at least a decade by being
only digital.

I know they talk amongst each other, and I know it's been discussed for
some future date. Nothing official, of course. And nothing from the
Commission. But it's being discussed. And like analog TV, when the digital
audience reaches a certain saturation, it would be fiscally silly to
continue to support a mode that's not being listened to.

This sounds more like the FCC, which is responsible for the sunset law on
analog TV. Hopefully, this was a lesson learned that you can not force
consumers to buy things they do not yet want.

On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 20:06:09 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:

"David" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 18:09:28 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:

The only difference is in the improved audio quality. There is no such
thing
as "serious" radio listening... it is almost all done to accompany other
things, like working, driving, etc.

Aside from being quieter, it really doesn't sound any better.

It is much better fidelity and quality

I don't hear it. Just cleaner. MPEG4 sounds crappy to me.

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...
David Eduardo wrote:
The greater good is trying to preserve the existing free terrestrial
broadcast system, which will not endure unless a digital alternative
is
offered.
We got that through numerous posts you have made.
You may have. DXass certainly hasn't, nor has Steve and the now-absent
"IBOC_Sucks" guy.
And yet, you're the one who wrote, in post 173, that AM will never
become primarily digital and, in fact, you say you "have never heard it
discussed."
I think that most listening in the future will be to the digital signal,
not the analog. I have never heard anyone talk about turning analog off.

I've spoken with two GM's, now, who've said they can't wait to shut the
analog off, and save the cost of power. Especially with energy costs about
to skyrocket here, that can be quite a difference in the bottom line.

That is an interesting reason... spend $100 k at least to go HD, and then
shut off analog to save a couple of thousand.

$100k is a Cap item. The couple of thousand is recurring. When we
bought into the new combiner on the top of the Hancock and upgraded our
antenna, we dropped more than $1.3M and no one batted an eye. But we
were still reusing the toner in the copy machine, and bitching about the
airconditioning bill in the summer. No one blinks at the Cap item when
it can result in recurring savings.

Especially when use of the analog stream falls below the use of the
HD stream, and with as many distribution outlets many stations are
investigating, a GM will get a real itch to shut down the analog stream,
and save that outflow for something more profitable.

I just do not think that there would be a win for at least a decade by being
only digital.

I think that may be a bit optimistic. Given the rate at which radio
use in general is declining, (and this has been a fairly recently
documented phenomenon...even as late as last year, the numbers suggested
that things were only off slightly...Bridge has been reporting sizeable
erosion for the last two quarters, now) and given the difficulty, at
least from where I sit, in listening to AM signals, and the lack of
options for retrieving some content once the IBOC hash blots out the
available signals, I don't expect things to remain viable for analog AM
for anything near a decade.

Let me give you an example...where I am, far north suburbs of
Chicago, about a 3 wood from Waukegan...I've got two AM's, one
Milwaukee, one in Chicago, that carry Rush Limbaugh. If I want to
consume that content, those are my choices. There is no local station
offering that content. As the IBOC rash spreads, those stations, WISN
and WLS will become closed to me. They're nearly impossible to catch
some days, anyway, due to noise. The Din of iBiquity would close them
entirely, as it has a number of other stations formerly available here.
And you know I'm no slouch when I want a signal. But even I can't pull
content out of the noise where IBOC is concerned.

Now, I'm part of Chicago metro. So is Pete Gianakopoulos. But we're
going to be under served when the IBOC rash spreads to the rest of the
dial. And there is no alternative, no local frequency, offering what's
available from the Chicago and Milwaukee AM's. Rush isn't on FM around
here. And he's not on XM or Sirius.

Air America, where I am, is no longer listenable.

So, there's content put off limits by the laws of physics, where the
FCC's model says we should be enjoying AM reception from the market to
which we belong.

In that light, keeping the analog stream alive for a decade is more
or less, just silly.

Now, I realize that my mileage may vary...but I can't be the only one
experiencing this. Nor can this be the only area it's happening.

Eventually, the conversation about terminating analog AM will extend
beyond the coffee bars between GM's and into much higher places where
things get decided in earnest.

I know they talk amongst each other, and I know it's been discussed for
some future date. Nothing official, of course. And nothing from the
Commission. But it's being discussed. And like analog TV, when the digital
audience reaches a certain saturation, it would be fiscally silly to
continue to support a mode that's not being listened to.

This sounds more like the FCC, which is responsible for the sunset law on
analog TV. Hopefully, this was a lesson learned that you can not force
consumers to buy things they do not yet want.

Apparently, a lesson not yet learned. At least not judging by this
newsgroup.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

$100k is a Cap item. The couple of thousand is recurring.

But the cap item depreciation hits each year and quarter. Granted, it does
not impact EBITDA, but if you are a non-public corporation, that would not
matter... it is money out of pocket.

When we bought into the new combiner on the top of the Hancock and
upgraded our antenna, we dropped more than $1.3M and no one batted an eye.
But we were still reusing the toner in the copy machine, and bitching
about the airconditioning bill in the summer. No one blinks at the Cap
item when it can result in recurring savings.

I guess some companies look at it that way. I wish I had a huge capex budget
like that!

Especially when use of the analog stream falls below the use of the HD
stream, and with as many distribution outlets many stations are
investigating, a GM will get a real itch to shut down the analog stream,
and save that outflow for something more profitable.

I am an HD supporter, but I can nrealistically see this tipping point int he
next 5 to 7 years. Can you? I don't even know if AM will survive.

I think that may be a bit optimistic. Given the rate at which radio use
in general is declining, (and this has been a fairly recently documented
phenomenon...even as late as last year, the numbers suggested that things
were only off slightly..

The decline in cume is very small. 2% since '65. The listening time is off 2
hours off a base of 21 for the average listener, and that is since 1988. So
we have nearly 10% or a rate of nearly a percent a year. However, the
erosion is mostly in non-servable demos, teens and 55+ with some 18-24, but
far less. There are so many reasons for all this that it is not easily
analyzed.

.Bridge has been reporting sizeable erosion for the last two quarters, now)
and given the difficulty, at least from where I sit, in listening to AM
signals, and the lack of options for retrieving some content once the IBOC
hash blots out the available signals, I don't expect things to remain
viable for analog AM for anything near a decade.

Bridge really lacks credibility to me. They use a marketing model of
Awareness - Trial _ Usage and not a broad sample nor much ethnic sample
(they apparently have no Hisanic interviewers, as far as I know) and the
data is suspect. Arbittron has a lot of data on the website, with immense
samples over a million a year.

Let me give you an example...where I am, far north suburbs of Chicago,
about a 3 wood from Waukegan...I've got two AM's, one Milwaukee, one in
Chicago, that carry Rush Limbaugh. If I want to consume that content,
those are my choices. There is no local station offering that content. As
the IBOC rash spreads, those stations, WISN and WLS will become closed to
me. They're nearly impossible to catch some days, anyway, due to noise.
The Din of iBiquity would close them entirely, as it has a number of other
stations formerly available here. And you know I'm no slouch when I want a
signal. But even I can't pull content out of the noise where IBOC is
concerned.

This is more an AM probem in current noise level environments. we find we
can not get diaries in LA with under 15 mv/m, and 20 is better.

Agfian, Am may not make it. News talk is migrating to FM now, including DC,
tallahassee, Phoenix, Salt Lake, etc. This may be inevitable. AM analog
sucks.

Eventually, the conversation about terminating analog AM will extend
beyond the coffee bars between GM's and into much higher places where
things get decided in earnest.

Maybe if nobody is making money, we will go all digital. I see this as a
beyond 5 year issue.

David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...

David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...

David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...
The digital alternative may well be the doom of AM radio. No one
will
pay to listen to a slightly inferior version of FM.

Pay? there is no fee.

Buy the radio, no further fee. Get the radio, get far improved
quality.

I will bet you have not listened to HD AM either ever or recently,
especially with codec ver. 2.2.5.

No one will be attracted to it under any circumstances if its chief
selling point is that it's "almost as good as the alternatives"

FM HD is better than any other current distribution system, plus it is
free.

AM HD is as good as any alternative system, and is free. It is much
better
than Analog AM.

"as good as" isn't what you've said previously, but it's also not good
enough to cut the mustard.

AM HD compares favorably to most online streams, to iPod audio, and the that
available currently from satellite. It is vastly better than analog AM.

Unfortunately, that's completely irrelevant.

"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...

AM HD compares favorably to most online streams, to iPod audio, and the
that
available currently from satellite. It is vastly better than analog AM.

Unfortunately, that's completely irrelevant.

Nope. It is relevant since the issue with radio usage has to do wtith usage
of other entertainment and audio sources.

David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...

AM HD compares favorably to most online streams, to iPod audio, and the
that
available currently from satellite. It is vastly better than analog AM.

Unfortunately, that's completely irrelevant.

Nope. It is relevant since the issue with radio usage has to do wtith usage
of other entertainment and audio sources.

Nope. We are discussing no such issue.

"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...

David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...

AM HD compares favorably to most online streams, to iPod audio,
and the
that
available currently from satellite. It is vastly better than
analog AM.

Unfortunately, that's completely irrelevant.

Nope. It is relevant since the issue with radio usage has to do
wtith usage
of other entertainment and audio sources.

Nope. We are discussing no such issue.

It has to do with how people use radio now. If
other things are displacing radio in areas that
radio has traditionally dominated, maybe it has
something to do with what is put on the radio,
rather than the reception of the radio or the
quality of sound of the radio. For pete's sake,
128 MB MP3s are no better than cassette quality
(or from what I can judge), but because people
can mix their own playlists that they believe are
better than what you find on the radio (with less
commercials or inane chatter or bathroom jokes),
people will continue to use those 128 MB MP3's.

There are people (I am one) who used to mix
tapes for friends just because I liked doing it
(also did a stint at a college radio station as
a DJ, so I'm also well aware of how little input
I had in the playlist). It was usually a PITA,
and it would take a couple of hours to get a
tape together. Fast forward 15 years, and
right before we went on vacation this summer,
I spent 1/2 hour putting 3-4 CDs together of
a mix of music off of my personal collection
that I've ripped. I know I could have chosen
to listen to the radio on the trip (it was a two
day trip to a certain location in Orlando, FL),
but the kids outvoted me and wanted to listen
to their stuff.

--Mike L.

David "The Shill" Eduardo

In article ,
David Eduardo wrote:
It has about 7 to 10 years of life as it is, since the remaining salable
demos in 35-54 will be over 55 in that time period, and there will be no
advertisers. Just paid religion, infomecials and stuff like that.

Or non-commercial. KUOW (Seattle, NPR) just started up an AM simulcast
60 miles to the south, in Tumwater. 1340 kHz?

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

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

I think that may be a bit optimistic. Given the rate at which radio
use in general is declining, (and this has been a fairly recently
documented phenomenon...even as late as last year, the numbers suggested
that things were only off slightly..

The decline in cume is very small. 2% since '65. The listening time is
off 2 hours off a base of 21 for the average listener, and that is since
1988. So we have nearly 10% or a rate of nearly a percent a year.
However, the erosion is mostly in non-servable demos, teens and 55+ with
some 18-24, but far less. There are so many reasons for all this that it
is not easily analyzed.

When you and I began these discussions, what 5 years ago, now, your
contention was that Radio usage was and had been essentially constant for
the last 30 years, with only slight losses in share. A definite shift in
the balance between AM and FM, to be sure, but overall, Radio was stable,
with a very bright future. IIRC, you said something like, Radio has never
been more profitable. I recall my comment was to be guardedly
optimistic....that just about the time you think things are good, someone
comes along with something new, something unexpected, and steals the food
off your table. Which comment has been met with varying skepticism, not
only from yourself, but others here and on other USENet newsgroups.

And here we are talking about AM's survivability, and the stemming of
FM erosion in the face of the rising number of alternative choices.

But the lack of probable surviability of AM is not based on new technology.
It is based on an ageing listener base and the reality of radi time buys.
What will kill AM is not its technical issues per se, but the fact that AM
is no longer acceptable to most anyone under 40 and that cutoff point is
rising each year.

AM may survive if it enters the digital world. I wonder if this is like AM
steeo which could have helped AM a lot in 1978, but by the time it arrived,
years later, it was too late.

WGN revenues are off again, according to a figures released by Tribune:

This is because in 25-54, WGN is 15th in the market. It is near-death as a
viable money machine, and sustained mostly by sports play by play. It's not
the technology, it is the fact that it has no salable listener base.

This is yet AGAIN, another such report by Tribune, with particular
interest in WGN-A shortfalls in revenue. Suggesting that the future is not
so bright for WGN. And by extension as one of the nation's most successful
AM radio stations, AM Radio in general.

Yet KFI in LA, which tries to get more 25-54 appeal, and is the #5 25-54 (#2
in English in this 42% Hispanic market). The problem is WGN which has aged
with its listeners.

Note that revenues are off. Last trends for WGN are up. How is it,
then, that the industry's most respected army of trained assassins are
unable to convert share at a stable rate?

The salable ratings are down, horribly. Since the kind of rates WGN charges
are not accessable to most direct advertisers, and agency accounts seldom go
55+, here is the reason.

It would have to do with the people who are calling the shots, the
advertisers, and their ability to spend money more efficiently in both
local media, and it's alternatives.

They get the demos they are after in more quantity on 14 other stations. #1
25-54 is WOJO, by the way. And WOJO's sales have doubled in two years.

Loss in revenue does horrible things to well established radio
stations. In fact, a heritage radio station can be blown off the dial by
an upstart with no budget, simply by bleeding off a fraction of the
heritage station's share. Especially in today's over leveraged radio
ownership environment, a minor loss in share, means numbers don't get
hit....And a well established radio station has a pretty heavy budget in
order to hit the numbers expected by the home office.

I have mentioned this in the past, but most broadcasters are minimally
leveraged in the category of 30 station or more owners. The consolidation of
the post 1996 radio world was mostly equity and merger financed.

Once revenues begin to fall, focus becomes intensified on the revenues.
To the degree that everything else suffers through neglect. Radio in the
US is ALWAYS about the money, but when things are good, at the very least,
lip service is paid to content, public service and programming effort. Let
revenues fall, and the sales ducks start selling everything that's not
nailed down, and many times things that are. Clutter spikes. Units go up.
And everything on the air has a sales/promotional angle to it.

For the first time, as revenues have been flat or off, there has been an
inventory tightening, mostly lead by Clear Channel. Average spot loads are
below 11 minutes now, a new low.

Clear Channel's Less is More program, where :60s are discouraged and
:30's encouraged, with over all fewer units, took a cruel twist when two
quarters into the program, in house said that the audience was responding,
while external perceptuals showed that the audience thought there were
more spots on the air than ever.

I have not seen this. In fact, I have seen a very good "less commercials"
from the listeners to CCU's Spanish and Hispanic tageted stations.

My point is, that though share appears to be slightly off, revenues are
starting to fall, and when revenues start to fall, the balance of focus
and effort shifts to revenue from programming. Now, you yourself have
said on a number of occasions that the sharp GM's and owners realize that
the big win goes to the stations that present the best content. Or at
least the most popular content. But good content costs. And when revenues
are off, the first thing that's sacrificed is the content.

I've not noticed this, either. What I see is a more critical analysis of
whether high priced talent is deliveing good revenue... with the Mancow
decision in Chicago an example of a costly show that did not deliver a good
margin. I think we will see more networked radio... the same model that
allows Rush to be in Tallahassee.

Yes, most stations were not profitable before consolidation. I got
that. And I actually understand that. And I actually see and understand
that since consolidation many of those unprofitable stations are now
viable with a black bottom line. I've seen it for myself at several
stations I have regular contact with. But with consolidation also came
enormous debt load.

See the above. The Cleaar Channel debt to equity ratio is better than that
of General Electric!

And advertisers follow the trends into their buys. Radio revenues are
declining. And the burden is on Radio to withstand the shrinking revenue
share.

Right now, all traditional media are in a flat or declining revenue postion,
with newspapers and local TV staitions the worst off. Radio is up in some
markets, off in ohters. This may, in part, be a reaction to severzal big
growth years, where radio finally broke into getting over 8% of ad
expenditures... something it never did.

CBS Radio just cut loose how many of it's well established and
historically significant staff? Because of declining revenue.

Not really. They are bvieng punished on the street for lackluster
performance, and did a housecleaning. Revenues are pretty much flat, with
the real mistakes in NY and Chicago offset by huge growth in places like LA.

Here in the Windy, the HD-2 staff at WJMK, the legends of Chicago radio
were severed at once, this week. Because of revenue short falls.

How many halls at CBS stations ran red this week?

ClearChannel is talking about staff cuts. Spinning off properties.
Because of declining revenues.

And Disney is cutting several thousand employees and cutting back form 22 to
8 features a year. This is more about the ongoing demands of investors than
the actual businesses.

Now, we're trying to do the same thing with IBOC/HD, and in the
process, doing what would never have been considered befo trashing the
bands with noise, in the interest of boosting listening.

You're way too close to the bull, David. Take a step back and see who
the horns have really gored.

Fortunately, I am in a sector that is growing hugely, even this year.
Listening is not down, we are spending more on programming than before, and
sales are up. the model of investment in programming still works. Those who
do not follow it are the ones with problems.

Erich "Mancow" Muller Seeks New Chicago Station

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

I think that may be a bit optimistic. Given the rate at which radio
use in general is declining, (and this has been a fairly recently
documented phenomenon...even as late as last year, the numbers suggested
that things were only off slightly..

The decline in cume is very small. 2% since '65. The listening time is
off 2 hours off a base of 21 for the average listener, and that is since
1988. So we have nearly 10% or a rate of nearly a percent a year.
However, the erosion is mostly in non-servable demos, teens and 55+ with
some 18-24, but far less. There are so many reasons for all this that it
is not easily analyzed.

When you and I began these discussions, what 5 years ago, now, your
contention was that Radio usage was and had been essentially constant for
the last 30 years, with only slight losses in share. A definite shift in
the balance between AM and FM, to be sure, but overall, Radio was stable,
with a very bright future. IIRC, you said something like, Radio has never
been more profitable. I recall my comment was to be guardedly
optimistic....that just about the time you think things are good, someone
comes along with something new, something unexpected, and steals the food
off your table. Which comment has been met with varying skepticism, not
only from yourself, but others here and on other USENet newsgroups.

And here we are talking about AM's survivability, and the stemming of
FM erosion in the face of the rising number of alternative choices.

But the lack of probable surviability of AM is not based on new technology.
It is based on an ageing listener base and the reality of radi time buys.
What will kill AM is not its technical issues per se, but the fact that AM
is no longer acceptable to most anyone under 40 and that cutoff point is
rising each year.

AM may survive if it enters the digital world. I wonder if this is like AM
steeo which could have helped AM a lot in 1978, but by the time it arrived,
years later, it was too late.

WGN revenues are off again, according to a figures released by Tribune:

This is because in 25-54, WGN is 15th in the market. It is near-death as a
viable money machine, and sustained mostly by sports play by play. It's not
the technology, it is the fact that it has no salable listener base.

This is yet AGAIN, another such report by Tribune, with particular
interest in WGN-A shortfalls in revenue. Suggesting that the future is not
so bright for WGN. And by extension as one of the nation's most successful
AM radio stations, AM Radio in general.

Yet KFI in LA, which tries to get more 25-54 appeal, and is the #5 25-54 (#2
in English in this 42% Hispanic market). The problem is WGN which has aged
with its listeners.

Note that revenues are off. Last trends for WGN are up. How is it,
then, that the industry's most respected army of trained assassins are
unable to convert share at a stable rate?

The salable ratings are down, horribly. Since the kind of rates WGN charges
are not accessable to most direct advertisers, and agency accounts seldom go
55+, here is the reason.

It would have to do with the people who are calling the shots, the
advertisers, and their ability to spend money more efficiently in both
local media, and it's alternatives.

They get the demos they are after in more quantity on 14 other stations. #1
25-54 is WOJO, by the way. And WOJO's sales have doubled in two years.

Loss in revenue does horrible things to well established radio
stations. In fact, a heritage radio station can be blown off the dial by
an upstart with no budget, simply by bleeding off a fraction of the
heritage station's share. Especially in today's over leveraged radio
ownership environment, a minor loss in share, means numbers don't get
hit....And a well established radio station has a pretty heavy budget in
order to hit the numbers expected by the home office.

I have mentioned this in the past, but most broadcasters are minimally
leveraged in the category of 30 station or more owners. The consolidation of
the post 1996 radio world was mostly equity and merger financed.

Once revenues begin to fall, focus becomes intensified on the revenues.
To the degree that everything else suffers through neglect. Radio in the
US is ALWAYS about the money, but when things are good, at the very least,
lip service is paid to content, public service and programming effort. Let
revenues fall, and the sales ducks start selling everything that's not
nailed down, and many times things that are. Clutter spikes. Units go up.
And everything on the air has a sales/promotional angle to it.

For the first time, as revenues have been flat or off, there has been an
inventory tightening, mostly lead by Clear Channel. Average spot loads are
below 11 minutes now, a new low.

Clear Channel's Less is More program, where :60s are discouraged and
:30's encouraged, with over all fewer units, took a cruel twist when two
quarters into the program, in house said that the audience was responding,
while external perceptuals showed that the audience thought there were
more spots on the air than ever.

I have not seen this. In fact, I have seen a very good "less commercials"
from the listeners to CCU's Spanish and Hispanic tageted stations.

My point is, that though share appears to be slightly off, revenues are
starting to fall, and when revenues start to fall, the balance of focus
and effort shifts to revenue from programming. Now, you yourself have
said on a number of occasions that the sharp GM's and owners realize that
the big win goes to the stations that present the best content. Or at
least the most popular content. But good content costs. And when revenues
are off, the first thing that's sacrificed is the content.

- I've not noticed this, either. What I see is a more critical
analysis of
- whether high priced talent is deliveing good revenue... with the
Mancow
- decision in Chicago an example of a costly show that did not deliver
a good
- margin. I think we will see more networked radio... the same model
that
- allows Rush to be in Tallahassee.

DE,

Erich "Mancow" Muller Seeks New Chicago Station
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2...443.shtml?s=sp

~ RHF

Erich "Mancow" Muller Seeks New Chicago Station

On 15 Jul 2006 00:59:28 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

The program sucks. The guy is a blowhard.

"Michael Lawson" wrote:

[...] For pete's sake,
128 MB MP3s are no better than cassette quality
(or from what I can judge), [...]

You can do a helluva lot better than cassette quality with 128 kBPS
MP3s, but it requires that you spend some effort in adjusting your MP3
ripper AND that you are willing to let it take some time to do the rip
instead of doing it quick (and dirty). My personal MP3 collection,
ripped from my own CDs, is something of an audio history of learning
how to do it properly.

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

This Really Sucks

Everything doesn't suck.It is like that wonderfull married (with some
grown married offspring) black Christian woman (Pam Roberts) at the
Goodwill store told me yesterday afternoon,,,, (she said) Larry,there is
good news,,,,, we are here and seeing another day.
cuhulin

This Really Sucks

I was thinking about ''saying something'',,, nahhhhh,,, I won't say that
one either.But I just know y'all good folks get me driff.cuhulin
.................................................. ............
I was lookinnnnn back to see if you was lookin back to see if I was
lookin back to see if you was lookin back at me,,,,,,, you was cute as
you could beeee,,,,,, standin there lookin back to see if I was lookin
back at youuuu,,,,,, oooo weeeeee,,,,,,,,

Oklahoma, www.drudgereport.com

Retarn to senderrrrrr,,,,,,, adress unknown,,,,,,, no such
numberrrrrrr,,,,,,,, no such phone,,,,,,,,,
cuhulin

This Really Sucks

www.hometownfreepress.com OKLAHOMA

Ohhhhhh,I Love youuuuuu,,,,,,, OKLAHOMA,,,,,,,,,,,
cuhulin

Dr ace and his fount of hate

Watching www.wlbt.news on tv.A lot of prolifers are in Jackson
right now.The Scumbag socalled ''cops'' are arresting them and putting
them on buses and hauling them off,also,the socalled cops (I Literally
Hate most ''cops'',are you a ''cop''? I Hate your guts!!!!!!! DAMN YOU
TO HELL!!!!!!!!!!!) (F..K YOU!!!!!!!!) are taking away their Bibles from
them.I am PRO LIFE.
cuhulin

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 14:56:00 GMT, D Peter Maus
wrote:

DAT was another. A digital solution for high quality recordists, that
was shot in the face by the record industry. And while they wrangled out
solutions to their concerns, some stunningly boneheaded alternatives
that actually made it onto the ratification table, rose alternative
solutions that made DAT virtually obsolete before the first approved
decks made it to retail.

The trouble with DAT was that it didn't really sound any better than
VHS HiFi which cost a fraction as much. MiniDisc at least offered
some economy and portability.

This Really Sucks

Give me www.wlbt.com contact us link.I want to tell them what a
bunch of phoney fed govt kissups they are.I want to tell them I like
that cuitie pie (but I am too old to cut the mustard) weather
girl,Joanna Hancock.
cuhulin

"David" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 14:56:00 GMT, D Peter Maus
wrote:

DAT was another. A digital solution for high quality recordists, that
was shot in the face by the record industry. And while they wrangled out
solutions to their concerns, some stunningly boneheaded alternatives
that actually made it onto the ratification table, rose alternative
solutions that made DAT virtually obsolete before the first approved
decks made it to retail.

The trouble with DAT was that it didn't really sound any better than
VHS HiFi which cost a fraction as much. MiniDisc at least offered
some economy and portability.

DAT was far better than the MiniDisk (which is actually the standard storage
in much of the Third World in radio), but it is very unreliable. One
engineer said, "A DAT machine is a midget VHS with an attitude."

The reason DAT had a passing popularity was its portability. For radio ENG,
it was the standard for a while. Darned things kept breaking, though.

I am eating a ham and cheese sandwich right now and a bunch of back to
back old James Cagney movies are on the TCM tv channel.Of course I
always have to save back something for my little doggy (and let her lick
the plate) if I don't,she will whup me arse.
cuhulin

She used to poop on my hard wood floor when she was an eight weeks old
puppy.Only took me a few days to house break her.Nowdays,she slurps out
me right ear (you ever had a little dog's tonge smooch out your ear? you
dont know what you are missing!) I dont know how she thought up that
''signal'',it was all her own idea.
cuhulin