[BC] Re:monitoring IBUZ secondaries

[Rich Wood]

------ At 10:25 PM 2/18/2007, Xmitters at aol.com wrote: -------

>When I said there was one HD station in my market, that meant exactly that.
>One HD signal not one HD2 signal. In fact, I do not know if this one 
>HD station
>has an HD2 stream. Lack of signal is not going to be a big problem until
>there are receivers out there

Then it's a chicken and egg situation. Until there are signals there 
won't be any radios sold. If there are no radios there's no need for 
a signal. Remember, SIRIUS and XM had signals before there were 
receivers. Hundreds of channels ready to go.

>An outage on the HD2 is "inexcuseable" when my staff tells me that there is
>an Arbitron rating motivation to keep it up. We have talked about 
>HD2 a little
>and so far, HD2 is a toy. If it's on, ot's on, if it's not then we'll fix it.
>We have a lot of receivers to sell before the HD2 service is going to have
>much attention at my station, assuming we put it on at all. I would 
>rather use
>that HD2 bit stream to provide a nicer sounding HD signal, in my personal
>opinion. Time will tell where this all goes.

If you wait for an Arbitron book that includes rated HD-2 formats 
before you jump in you might as well get a jump on everyone else and 
use the exciter as a boat anchor. Your response is going to be very 
disappointing to the HD Dominion. They claim the secondaries are the 
future and the salvation of radio. I won't even mention the 
importance of Seedy Quality audio.

>BTW, if you heard an HD2 signal today and then did not hear it for two or
>three days, how would you know if the signal is gone because nobody at the
>station cares enough to notice, versus the station experimenting 
>with it and simply
>shut it down? I'll probably put my HD2 on for a while just to screw around
>with it, but it will not be on permanently, unless of course my boss 
>wants it on
>permanently.

If the HD-2 signal is there and it's not promoted I'll accept it as 
an experiment. When it's promoted on the analog I'll consider it a 
serious service of the radio station. At that point, good operating 
practice says it gets monitored and treated just like any other 
service the station provides.

I'm amazed at the attitude I see here. though I understand it's a 
practical one. Most engineers are one-armed paper hangers in today's 
clusters. Which technical failure gets priority? I would think, if 
IBUZ is our salvation, stations wouldn't get into it until they're 
capable of running it like a real radio station. That's how a 
listener who's been suckered into a high priced radio sees it. They 
assume the station cares.

Rich