[BC] Documented harmful interference

[Robert Meuser]

Kent:

You can not improve things on this or any other list.  If you are on the 
hd radio list you will find people in the trenches helping each other 
solve technical implementation issues. That is as close as you will come 
to soltuions.

What you miss is that descriptions of the problems may cause those 
lurking to approach them at a level where things might be changed.

You stated in an earlier post about upgradable radios. A number of 
manufacturers have no plans for such. One stated so publically on one of 
these lists. Many 'solutions' that look good at first blink do not fly 
in the real world.

Discussing what the real world actually is in the case of this new 
technology is something that is of value but you may describe it as 
complaining.

R




Kent Winrich, K9EZ wrote:

> Fine I guess I have been out voted.
>
> If you folks consider Jabba The HD, IBUZ, et al to be a quality 
> discussion about how we can improve the situation, then I have not 
> much else to say.
>
> Guess I wont be spending as much time here and will spend more time on 
> the BE reflector.
>
> All I was trying to do folks is to generate quality discussion on 
> improvements.  But if you all want to rant ant rave how terrible it 
> is, be my guest.  Where will it get you in the long run?
>
> There is nothing really to learn here...... and that is why I was a 
> part of this.
>
> Dave Dunsmoor wrote:
>
>>> I won't lose any sleep but I'll miss you. Fire up the filter. If the
>>> rest of the list would like me to go, just let me know and I'll
>>>   
>>
>> unsubscribe.
>>  
>>
>>> Rich
>>>   
>>
>>
>>
>>    You stay put. I don't  always agree with everything you say or how 
>> you
>> say it, but in my view, yours is the voice of reason regarding IBOC 
>> and it's
>> negative effects on AM radio. I personally have heard very little 
>> IBOC, but
>> what I've heard I don't like. The infatuation that the powers that be 
>> seem
>> to have with "all things digital" has severely clouded their 
>> judgment. Had
>> they done this IBOC correctly, I'd be all over it, and would have 
>> bought one
>> (or more) of the receivers already. As it is, when my MANY analog 
>> radios in
>> the house, car and office go silent, (or buzzy, whichever the case 
>> may be),
>> I'll find something else to listen to, and as others have said, there 
>> are
>> MANY alternate options.
>>
>>    We just bought our son an IPOD for his birthday. What a neat 
>> gadget. I
>> would have never looked at one before, but I do see it's attraction 
>> for the
>> younger folks, and they're all over the place now. Shortwave radio will
>> certainly increase it's presence in my listening. I currently listen 
>> to AM
>> while on the road (40 - 50 k miles/year), FM in the office, and 
>> AM/shortwave
>> at home and in the shop.
>>
>>    But IBOC will not likely ever sell ads to my household. I won't 
>> pay $$$
>> for radio that doesn't provide me with something interesting/useful. 
>> If the
>> next car I buy has it installed, so be it, but not being able to 
>> listen to a
>> specific station a long way off for the content I want to hear as I 
>> drive
>> around the country will just cause me to eliminate AM from my selection
>> list. Currently, and in the past, AM radio has made $$$ by me buying 
>> based
>> on their ads. Won't likely happen in the future.
>>
>>    Just my humble opinions....take them or leave them as you see fit.
>>
>> Dave Dunsmoor
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>>
>>  
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>