[BC] IBOC "secrets" and my opinions.

[Dana Puopolo]

Frank,

There's one BIG flaw in your logic here: TIME!

If we wait too long, AM IBOC WILL die! When it does, it just might be too late
for another digital system.
 
DRM is ready NOW and even better, it's almost FREE!

Or do you want a repeat of the AM stereo debacle? We waited too long there
too-in that case for a SINGLE good system (they basically ALL were decent
systems). In the meantime, interest in AM stereo dropped to zero, and english
music on AM virtually died!

I am not a naysayer...I'm a person who has an IBOC radio and can't pick up a
mid dial 5 kW AM station's IBOC less than ten miles away from their tower!
Their analog comes in like a ton of bricks!

IT DOESN'T FREAKING WORK!  Can I make this any clearer??

-D


------ Original Message ------
Received: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 09:24:33 PM EDT
From: "padrino" <padrino at telos-systems.com>
To: "Broadcasters' Mailing List" <broadcast at radiolists.net>Cc: "Broadcasters'
Mailing List" <broadcast at radiolists.net>
Subject: Re: [BC] IBOC "secrets" and my opinions.

Broadcasters' Mailing List <broadcast at radiolists.net> writes:
>Frank:
>
>
>    I am glad to see that you at least admit the possibility that this 
>technology may not work. I think the issue is when do we determine 
>enough is enough if it is not working. The problem with making effort to 
>make it work is that it may cause damage to what is already there.

Well, at least I'm honest enough to admit the possibilities of it going
either way. Too bad that the nay-sayers won't admit to the same. If, as
you say, the nay-sayers see something that others don't see, it would
behoove them to provide concrete, comprehensive information that was
acquired via realworld field testing. As of yet, this has not occurred
from them. To date, their position is based upon casual observations, as
compared to researched testing that was gathered to support their claims.
>
>    In order to find out if this will work or not, it should be treated 
>as an experimental technology.  I see too many people thinking that it 
>is going to happen no matter what. One thing that has not been 
>adequately tested is nighttime operation and its effects.  That needs to 
>be done first before we decide this is what needs to be done.

If so, then why would the FCC give its approval? This from a governing
body that is very sensitive to interference.
>
>
>    Perhaps the IBOC nay-sayers are seeing something that some others 
>don't see.

If so, then they need to provide credible information that the industry
can review.

-Frank Foti
>
>
>Bill Harms
>Elkridge, Marylan
>>
>> I've noticed that the IBOC nay-sayers seem to respond with these long
>> dissertations about all of the ills. I sense that as your 'pain.' OK,
>OK,
>> now what can we do to ease the pain, yet know that the tech that's
>causing
>> your pain is not going to go away? There's an answer out there. I do not
>> profess to have it, but will try to find it.
>>
>> If, in the end, it doesn't work, then we'll know that every effort
>> possible was put forth. Then, and only then, can we truthfully and
>> honestly judge the tech.
>>
>> -Frank Foti
>>
>>   
>_______________________________________________
>
>
>The BROADCAST [BC] list is sponsored by SystemsStore On-Line Sales
>Cable-Connectors-Blocks-Racks-Wire Management-Test Gear-Tools and More! 
>www.SystemsStore.com       Tel: 407-656-3719    Sales at SystemsStore.com
>
>


_______________________________________________

The BROADCAST [BC] list is sponsored by SystemsStore On-Line Sales
Cable-Connectors-Blocks-Racks-Wire Management-Test Gear-Tools and More! 
www.SystemsStore.com       Tel: 407-656-3719    Sales at SystemsStore.com