[BC] Re: Re: Monitoring IBUZ secondaries

[David Reaves]

On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 13:31:22 EST, Xmitters at aol.com wrote:
<snip>
>One more thing then I'll shut up. I see that theHDTV people are
>getting lazy;
>they are referring to their HDTV sevice as simply HD. Now, ain't
>this going
>to be an interesting situation for the consumer to sort out; HD
>promotions on
>TV and HD promotions on the radio. Wouldn't that be a kicker if our HD
>promotional campaigne to promote radio HD actually helped boost
>HDTV sales more than
>it will radio HD! This whole digital thing is getting too
>complicated for the
>consumer; maybe I don't give them enough credit.
>
>Jeff Glass


The REAL kicker is that our audio-only service (HDRadio) has a 
96kbit/ s data stream to work with, while the television counterpart (ATSC
and Digital cable HDTV standards) audio stream is a "measly" 448 kbit/s.

I realize that squeezing even 96kb/s into the FM signal wasn't easy
within the legal/physical constraints, but that's reality, isn't it?

Simply put, as long as the present standards are in force, HDTV will
be capable of MUCH better sound than HDRadio.

Over in Europe, German DTV stations can put digital audio-only
services on any unused portion of their spectrum, a whole new class
of audio service to the consumer. So far, you have to have a DTV
receiver to hear them. Since DAB went over like a lead balloon there,
it'll be interesting to see how this plays out. With at least some US
TV stations putting 'throwaway' programming on their secondary DTV
channels (static pictures or weather radar, etc.), I wonder if
there's any possibility of this happening within the US DTV standard?


Kind Regards,
David