Future of HD Radio?

[x]

Just wondering what you all think. This isn't a poll about what you hope will happen (though we can do that too if anyone's interested), but rather a poll about what you think will actually happen.

[SamSpade]

As much as we dislike it now... if the money keeps flowing from these prominent investors, I think it will be around to stay (but maybe end up being just one program feed like current radio... not many).

[Sailor]

The demise of radio (both AM & FM) has been predicted for many years. And while the marketplace continues to offer new twists, formats, and technology, the staying power for Radio continues to be the ability to rapidly respond to LOCAL events and issues. It isn't the quality of the signal that matters, but rather the quality of the content. I think HD radio has (in theory) some interesting features, and I agree with Sam that as long as there is money funding the development, it will be around. The problem is that the money won't keep flowing unless the investors can see some benefit, and I frankly don't see a big benefit to HD radio in the Metro areas. Stations live and die based on their METRO ratings numbers. HD does little in my opinion to change the metro ratings.

[admin]

I feel that the sheer fact of radio will kill HD since no one except those in large markets will get it

[Sailor]

Boy, I am really dating myself now, but I remember when AM was all the radio there was. There was this new service called FM, but it pretty much was a joke. You bought the contract on the AM station, and they threw in a few spots on the FM station for free... I think FM might have just died right then and there, or be relegated to being a background muzak service for home entertainment consoles. BUT...along came the Government, and dictated that EVERY radio manufactured (including CAR radios) had to have both bands.. AM and FM, in my mind that was the thing that saved FM radio... they had a better signal quality, and people were given the choice by virtue of having it on their radio.

Now, fast forward 50 years. Unless Government REQUIRES every radio to be HD capable, it isn't going to happen. I am not going to pay extra for a HD capable radio. So the HD concept will be in a chicken/egg problem and will eventually die.

[x]

The government is already planning on that with TV, though I'm pretty sure that's going to be changed before it's implemented. The difference is that with TV, automatically 70% of the public (roughly) will continue ot use their existing equipment with no change (those using cable or satellite). For the others, you can buy a box that will translate the signals. I don't see how that could possibly work on radio.

Plus, with TV there are two different frequencies that are both available and which are not interfering with each other. The equivalent with radio would be if the government had done the logical thing and assigned a new band for digital broadcasting while keeping the old band as-is. Then we could do what Sailor suggested and add the digital band to AM & FM and transition over correctly. This hybrid nonsense is just dumb and destructive.

[Sailor]

I would also like to add, that FM had a clear signal improvement over AM, at least if you were in a direct line to the tower, and wern't behind a building... With HD TV, there is a noticable improvement in picture quality. But with AM-HD there isn't a quality difference in the primary listening area of the station. There is no real incentive (In my opinion) to run out and buy a new HD radio. Sure there will be some technology freaks who buy them because they are something new, but for the service to really catch on, you need a wholesale adoption by the public.... Sorry, don't see that happening.

[wohogoodguy]

right now it's only good for promotional efforts. Ride the HD wave and give the image of high tech. Doesn't matter that there might be 3 people listening in HD.

[Sailor]

Too may times, especially in high tech, people get swept along in doing something because we "can" not because there is a good business reason for doing it. The technology priests will always spin their tales of magical gains by being an early adopter of the latest, greatest technological advancement. Rarely, however, is it a good business idea and it almost always costs a lot more to be 'first'. This extra money lost in rushing to be first is never recovered in promotional spin. (In my humble opinion).

[wohogoodguy]

ksl in hi def lets you hear scott segar make mistakes in reading oh, so clearly. he seems to bumble his way through most stories. probably a nice guy-he just can't deliver a story and make me believe he knows what he's talking about.

[Sailor]

Back when dirt was new, I worked for a program director who encouraged (insisted) us to PRE-Read the copy, spots, news stories before we opened the mic and went on the air. But now with all the copy on computers, and the digital age, professionalism seems to have been 'dumbed down' and bumbling your way through a commercial, with sloppy board work and joining a program 'in progress' because you were late on the time seems to be the norm.

[bigcityguygorural]

:'(Its a disaster for AM radio in big markets ...give a listen to KSL and then tune down or up (left or right) of 1160...1170...etc and listen to the hash spilling over. Bad news on a crowded am band...and bad news for the little guys.
Anyone check out the KAHN system?

[wohogoodguy]

bigcityguy--maybe it's your radio. I can't understand why anyone would have the desire to hear TALK radio in hi def. There's only so much of a frequency range on voice that it really doesn't matter if it's a digital signal or not.

I actually had one group consultant advise adjusting the Orban to give talk radio the old "tube radio" sound. What an idiot. I sharpened it up gave it some good compression and ran it all in mono. HA! **** him.

[x]

wohogoodguy said:

bigcityguy--maybe it's your radio.

No, the hash is definitely there on both sides of the analog carrier.