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

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
Jerk

I have built, managed and programmed AMs for the last 42 years.
The decline is technology based, and can be corrected... with
technology.

Nothing wrong with the technology, 'tard boy. AM (MW) comes in just
fine here. And it comes in even better without the HD/IBOC QRM.

There is everything wrong with the technology. It sounds so inferior
that nobody who "grew up" on FM will touch it, as it is irritating.
Two generations now have no use for AM. The only users, like you, are
old farts who do not look at the future or have lost most of their
hearing.

I don't know where you are coming from on this. I grew up listening to
FM and AM and I think AMBCB sounds just fine.

The fact that you are on this group means you are not an average listener.

I have posted data from a variety of US markets, as well as national
averages. Again: in 12-34 year old listeners, in LA, the total share for AM
is less than the indvidual station shares for the 6 highest rated FMs. 6%.
Nearly nobody. AM may sound good to you, but to nearly everyone under 45, it
is presently irrelevant and sucks.

AMBCB has good fidelity
and so does FM. AMBCB is not stereo but I don't care as I listen to
talk radio and news on that band. I don't spend much time with FM.
Generally I listen to AMBCB, short wave, and spend time on the Internet
for news.

The problem is just that. Only talk shows and such get on AM, because
anything else that requires fidelty will not work. Talk appeals to a very
old audience, and in many cases, it is getting harder and harder to sell.

This is what is bothering me about the move to HD. The move is supposed
to be an improvement but it does not seem that way to me. The move to HD
is just going to cost me money, not make an improvement, and change my
listening in ways I don't want. It's a lousy deal for me to spend money
I don't need to spend to keep getting what I already have. Same problem
for DRM on short wave.

DRM is an effort to make SW relevant, just as HD is for MW, to newer
generations that are looking for digital quality (in developed nations) and
at least FM quality in others.

David Frackelton Gleason, posing as 'Eduardo' and whoring for Univision
Radio/iBiquity wrote:

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

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
Jerk

I have built, managed and programmed AMs for the last 42 years.
The decline is technology based, and can be corrected... with
technology.

Nothing wrong with the technology, 'tard boy. AM (MW) comes in just
fine here. And it comes in even better without the HD/IBOC QRM.

There is everything wrong with the technology. It sounds so inferior
that nobody who "grew up" on FM will touch it, as it is irritating.
Two generations now have no use for AM. The only users, like you, are
old farts who do not look at the future or have lost most of their
hearing.

I don't know where you are coming from on this. I grew up listening to
FM and AM and I think AMBCB sounds just fine.

The fact that you are on this group means you are not an average listener.

I have posted data from a variety of US markets, as well as national
averages. Again: in 12-34 year old listeners, in LA, the total share for AM
is less than the indvidual station shares for the 6 highest rated FMs. 6%.
Nearly nobody. AM may sound good to you, but to nearly everyone under 45, it
is presently irrelevant and sucks.

AMBCB has good fidelity
and so does FM. AMBCB is not stereo but I don't care as I listen to
talk radio and news on that band. I don't spend much time with FM.
Generally I listen to AMBCB, short wave, and spend time on the Internet
for news.

The problem is just that. Only talk shows and such get on AM, because
anything else that requires fidelty will not work. Talk appeals to a very
old audience, and in many cases, it is getting harder and harder to sell.

This is what is bothering me about the move to HD. The move is supposed
to be an improvement but it does not seem that way to me. The move to HD
is just going to cost me money, not make an improvement, and change my
listening in ways I don't want. It's a lousy deal for me to spend money
I don't need to spend to keep getting what I already have. Same problem
for DRM on short wave.

DRM is an effort to make SW relevant, just as HD is for MW, to newer
generations that are looking for digital quality (in developed nations) and
at least FM quality in others.

Hey, Edweenie, stuff your panty hose in it, boy.

David Frackelton Gleason, posing as 'Eduardo' and shamelessly whoring for
Univision Radio/iBiquity wrote:

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

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
Jerk

I have built, managed and programmed AMs for the last 42 years.
The decline is technology based, and can be corrected... with
technology.

Nothing wrong with the technology, 'tard boy. AM (MW) comes in just
fine here. And it comes in even better without the HD/IBOC QRM.

There is everything wrong with the technology. It sounds so inferior
that nobody who "grew up" on FM will touch it, as it is irritating.
Two generations now have no use for AM. The only users, like you, are
old farts who do not look at the future or have lost most of their
hearing.

I don't know where you are coming from on this. I grew up listening to
FM and AM and I think AMBCB sounds just fine.

The fact that you are on this group means you are not an average listener.

The fact that YOU are on this group means YOU got lost somewhere along the way,
prancing boy.

Find your way back.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

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

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
Jerk

I have built, managed and programmed AMs for the last 42 years.
The decline is technology based, and can be corrected... with
technology.

Nothing wrong with the technology, 'tard boy. AM (MW) comes in just
fine here. And it comes in even better without the HD/IBOC QRM.

There is everything wrong with the technology. It sounds so inferior
that nobody who "grew up" on FM will touch it, as it is irritating.
Two generations now have no use for AM. The only users, like you, are
old farts who do not look at the future or have lost most of their
hearing.

I don't know where you are coming from on this. I grew up listening to
FM and AM and I think AMBCB sounds just fine.

The fact that you are on this group means you are not an average listener.

I don't see my being above average as important to this discussion.

I have posted data from a variety of US markets, as well as national
averages. Again: in 12-34 year old listeners, in LA, the total share for AM
is less than the indvidual station shares for the 6 highest rated FMs. 6%.
Nearly nobody. AM may sound good to you, but to nearly everyone under 45, it
is presently irrelevant and sucks.

AMBCB has good fidelity and so does FM. AMBCB is not stereo but I
don't care as I listen to talk radio and news on that band. I don't
spend much time with FM. Generally I listen to AMBCB, short wave,
and spend time on the Internet for news.

I don't think it is the sound as much as FM is in stereo.

The problem is just that. Only talk shows and such get on AM, because
anything else that requires fidelty will not work. Talk appeals to a very
old audience, and in many cases, it is getting harder and harder to sell.

There are a number of AM stations playing music but I don't listen to
them. There are news stations like KNS besides the talkers.

This is what is bothering me about the move to HD. The move is supposed
to be an improvement but it does not seem that way to me. The move to HD
is just going to cost me money, not make an improvement, and change my
listening in ways I don't want. It's a lousy deal for me to spend money
I don't need to spend to keep getting what I already have. Same problem
for DRM on short wave.

DRM is an effort to make SW relevant, just as HD is for MW, to newer
generations that are looking for digital quality (in developed nations) and
at least FM quality in others.

DRM is a way just like IBOC for the broadcasters to gain more control
over the listeners. I expect that digital modes on the AM and FM will
change to a subscription service. It will start with only some channels
being a premium service and the rest free advertiser supported but
eventually all will be subscription.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

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

The fact that you are on this group means you are not an average
listener.

I don't see my being above average as important to this discussion.

The average listener does not spend any time thinking about radio. It is
just "there."

AMBCB has good fidelity and so does FM. AMBCB is not stereo but I
don't care as I listen to talk radio and news on that band. I don't
spend much time with FM. Generally I listen to AMBCB, short wave,
and spend time on the Internet for news.

I don't think it is the sound as much as FM is in stereo.

FM stereo was permitted in 1960, and it took 3 years to get to 100 stations.
It had zero audience impact then.

What made FM work was when the FCC madated the end to simulcasting, and
suddenly a thousand or so new formats came on all over America, most with no
commercials... in an era when AM had 18 minutes an hour on nearly every
station.


There are a number of AM stations playing music but I don't listen to
them. There are news stations like KNS besides the talkers.

Those that play music play standards or ethnic fare for the majority of
cases. 65+ audience.

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

The fact that you are on this group means you are not an average
listener.

I don't see my being above average as important to this discussion.

The average listener does not spend any time thinking about radio. It is
just "there."

AMBCB has good fidelity and so does FM. AMBCB is not stereo but I
don't care as I listen to talk radio and news on that band. I don't
spend much time with FM. Generally I listen to AMBCB, short wave,
and spend time on the Internet for news.

I don't think it is the sound as much as FM is in stereo.

FM stereo was permitted in 1960, and it took 3 years to get to 100 stations.
It had zero audience impact then.

What made FM work was when the FCC madated the end to simulcasting, and
suddenly a thousand or so new formats came on all over America, most with no
commercials... in an era when AM had 18 minutes an hour on nearly every
station.


There are a number of AM stations playing music but I don't listen to
them. There are news stations like KNS besides the talkers.

Those that play music play standards or ethnic fare for the majority of
cases. 65+ audience.

Sorry, but you're still BUSTED.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:


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

The fact that you are on this group means you are not an average
listener.

I don't see my being above average as important to this discussion.

The average listener does not spend any time thinking about radio. It is
just "there."

Snip

I think plenty of people think about AM radio. What about all the people
that listen to talk radio? They don't think about it? What about all the
people that look to AM radio for news and weather and traffic reports?

Maybe this is an effort to kill talk radio where people can get the
political right point of view. The leftists have TV, newspapers, and FM
covered. It's only on AM band that Air America can't make it.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

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


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

The fact that you are on this group means you are not an average
listener.

I don't see my being above average as important to this discussion.

The average listener does not spend any time thinking about radio. It is
just "there."

Snip

I think plenty of people think about AM radio. What about all the people
that listen to talk radio? They don't think about it? What about all the
people that look to AM radio for news and weather and traffic reports?

They think about the shows or the content, not about "radio" per se.

Maybe this is an effort to kill talk radio where people can get the
political right point of view. The leftists have TV, newspapers, and FM
covered. It's only on AM band that Air America can't make it.

That is a political question.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

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


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

The fact that you are on this group means you are not an average
listener.

I don't see my being above average as important to this discussion.

The average listener does not spend any time thinking about radio. It is
just "there."

Snip

I think plenty of people think about AM radio. What about all the people
that listen to talk radio? They don't think about it? What about all the
people that look to AM radio for news and weather and traffic reports?

They think about the shows or the content, not about "radio" per se.

Well what do most people think then, that the voices are in their head?
Of course they think about radio. They have to take the time to tune the
stations in and program their favorites to memory.

Maybe this is an effort to kill talk radio where people can get the
political right point of view. The leftists have TV, newspapers, and FM
covered. It's only on AM band that Air America can't make it.

That is a political question.

Yeah, and one to think about. Maybe this is a deliberate destruction of
the AMBCB.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

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


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

The fact that you are on this group means you are not an average
listener.

I don't see my being above average as important to this discussion.

The average listener does not spend any time thinking about radio. It is
just "there."

Snip

I think plenty of people think about AM radio. What about all the people
that listen to talk radio? They don't think about it? What about all the
people that look to AM radio for news and weather and traffic reports?

They think about the shows or the content, not about "radio" per se.

Maybe this is an effort to kill talk radio where people can get the
political right point of view. The leftists have TV, newspapers, and FM
covered. It's only on AM band that Air America can't make it.

That is a political question.

Yes it is. Consequently, you'd better keep your mouth shut. You are
BUSTED, after all.