[BC] A bit disappointed.

[Robert Meuser]

Willie:

I think it is way too premature to judge digital. The broadcast industry is 
doing an unprecedented roll out.  Think about it - AM radio and broadcasting as 
a whole was sort of an accident. A few hams fooling with a new technology that 
caught on with the public was the beginning of radio.

FM radio was more of a developed system but it took close to 30 years before it 
was widely accepted.

Quad didn't evolve at the time because not many people wanted 4 bulky speakers 
in their living room. Fast forward to today and 5.1 is doing well thanks to more 
modern technology and much more sophisticated speakers.

FMX was not the superior system you suggest. It had several serious problems - 
one was increased multipath and the other was that as the signal propagated, the 
FMX component did not always stay in quadrature with the main L-R.

Kahn AM stereo was not a better system and it was certainly the most 
complicated. Maxnavox was the most simple system and it sounded and worked 
great. The best system was Harris if older radios were allowed to not be fully 
compatible with stereo transmission. The incompatibility was fairly subtle if 
you did the right things. Am stereo would have succeeded IF the industry was not 
divided over 4 different systems. If the FCC had stuck with their original 
decision, it could have been a whole different story. Another problem was that 
wideband radios sounded horrible when introduced at a CES show and turned off 
some of the major players.

Broadcasters have learned from the stereo experience in varying ways. The Eureka 
roll out in Canada had broadcasters there saying it would not be another AM stereo.

Broadcasters here are thinking in a similar fashion. Regardless of what you 
think of the current system, everyone wanted to avoid the competing systems 
problem. The roll out is being done in a systematic way. There are still a lot 
of minor bugs being worked out, especially with multi cast. Broadcasters are 
finding these bugs, sharing the information and getting fixes from the hardware 
suppliers. There is a lot going on that I can not share but something big will 
happen soon. Bugs are being found in receivers as well. At this point it is 
better to have a few receivers in the hands of people who understand the system 
a report back to the manufacturers. This is probably the first time in broadcast 
history that there is such a coordinated roll out.

The only ugly part is the AM portion, which is my opinion is technically 
attempting to meet too high expectations. I personally think that there are much 
better ways to deal with the AM issue, maybe one day it will come to pass.

I think that in the end, there will be a lot to sell to the public and it will 
be much more than competing with Satellite radio. Rich's old programming models 
will become radically changed moving forward.

R



WFIFeng at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 01/14/2006 9:29:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> kwinrich at gmail.com writes:
> 
> 
>>Well the problem is that the general public is UNAWARE of HD Radio YET.  
>> Not that there is a lack of interest.
> 
> 
> When Rich Wood makes regular visits to the local retailers (and has many 
> connections in the automotive sales industry) and *all* of them are telling us 
> that these units are either totally unfamiliar, or are ignored by the customers, 
> then that speaks volumes. He has also asked if that "$200 million" figure is 
> bonafide money, or just inventory on the stations already running IBUZ.
> 
> Satellite Radio is most likely going to continue to grow, and IBUZ languish. 
> It's just too blooming expensive for *everyone* involved: Stations and 
> consumers. The FMX system, while superior, doesn't have enough proponents... so like 
> Khan's technically better/simpler AM system, it, too, will languish. Pity. It 
> would offer basically the same thing IBUZ does, at a tiny fraction of the 
> price, and without the interference and perpetual licensing fees.
> 
> Willie...
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: http://www.radiolists.net/
>