http://radioinsight.com/boards/ RadioInsight Discussion Boards en Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:37:09 +0000 http://radioinsight.com/boards/topic/18078#post-73529 Fri, 14 Aug 2009 19:02:39 +0000 GaryG_NJ 73529@http://radioinsight.com/boards/ <p>OK, so I picked up my new leased vehicle today and HD Radio is standard equipment. I fully understand that HD (Hybrid Digital) is not intended to be audiophile quality by any stretch of the imagination, but I was not prepared for the audio quality to sound similar to a 56k internet stream. I live about 20 miles SW of NYC and sampled the following stations:</p> <p>WNYC AM - actually not that bad<br /> WCBS AM - sounded digital<br /> WINS AM - sounded digital<br /> WABC - pretty bad</p> <p>The FM HD streams of WCBS, WINS and WABC also fared no better to my ears. Other than the additional content available on FM, I see no reason for me to listen in HD. I therefore switched it off.</p> <p>Sorry, if I&#39;ve been living under a rock for the last few years, but I&#39;ve never heard HD radio before today. But then again, my daily AM listener is a 75 year old Philco. I&#39;m sure this is nothing new to most here, but as soon as my wife and I first listened to the HD channels, my first words were, &quot;I need to post my reaction on the message board.&quot;</p> <p>Life goes on. Have a good weekend everyone! </p> http://radioinsight.com/boards/topic/18025#post-73419 Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:03:40 +0000 e gill cvi 73419@http://radioinsight.com/boards/ <p>This guy from AllAccess (I have no idea who he is) pretty much hits the nail on the head in his discussion of HD Radio. He talks about some other things too but the majority of what he&#39;s written is exactly the conclusion I&#39;ve come to regarding the execution of HD. </p> <p>The engineering is poor and the signal is weak. Of course, the marketing of it is horrible and has been since day one. And in a lot of cases, the people who decide the programming don&#39;t seem to care at all. I&#39;m thinking the Ting-Tings example the author provides has to do with Clear Channel&#39;s Top 40 HD channel because I&#39;ve heard it here in Philly (on 102.1 HD-2) and the repetition is amazing...plus for about two weeks, it was the same songs at the same times every single day!</p> <p>The majority of complaints I&#39;ve heard about HD radio are all about interference on other stations and how it&#39;s preventing DX-ers from grabbing four minutes of a station somewhere across the time zone. Personally, I don&#39;t care about any of that. I haven&#39;t heard any of the interference and, well, we&#39;re not <em>supposed</em> to be hearing stations from hundreds of miles away! (And what&#39;s the point of it, really?) Technology is always changing and that won&#39;t stop because a few people can&#39;t hear out-of-market stations. We gotta roll with the punches.</p> <p>Here&#39;s the guy&#39;s article. I&#39;m interested in hearing your comments!</p> <p><a href="http://www.allaccess.com/site/myallaccess/inbox/messages/bulletin/letter_073109.html">http://www.allaccess.com/site/myallaccess/inbox/messages/bulletin/letter_073109.html</a> </p> http://radioinsight.com/boards/topic/17957#post-73257 Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:47:22 +0000 am-fm 73257@http://radioinsight.com/boards/ <p><a href="http://www.fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=1410533">FMBQ Article</a></p> <p>&quot;Best Buy has announced the launch of the Insignia HD Radio Portable Player, a first-of-its-kind product, which is available exclusively at Best Buy for $49.99. The introduction of the NS-HD01 marks an important milestone for HD Radio technology as consumers are now able to take the extra multicast stations on the go. Features on the first-ever portable HD Radio include a rechargeable Lithium-ion battery that ensures up to 10 hours of playing time, a full-color LCD screen that displays the radio station, artist and song, a jack for headphones and car stereo, and 10 preset memory channels.&quot;</p> <p>The second my paycheck comes in, my **** is getting one of these from Best Buy. </p> http://radioinsight.com/boards/topic/17224#post-72290 Tue, 31 Mar 2009 06:59:41 +0000 e gill cvi 72290@http://radioinsight.com/boards/ Might be worth pointing out that there's another web site with message boards which they allege to be for radio discussion but which are actually nothing more than a bunch of haters who do and say anything to discredit HD radio. That site's management condones it and allows the haters to run the place. Traffic is traffic is traffic, after all. <br /> <br /> I'm not saying people shouldn't post here. I'm just saying there's a place that is much more welcoming to the anti-HD way of thinking so more people will agree with those types of thoughts. But beware: The place is seriously a joke: The haters often turn everything into a flamefest and if others object, the site moderators actually bother <i>them </i>instead of the haters! <br /> <br /> I don't use the place anymore because of how it's run but it can be found <a href="http://www.radio-info.com" target="_blank">by clicking here</a>. It's a haven for people who hate HD radio. <br /> <br /> Cheers! <img src="images/smiley_icons/icon_razz.gif" border=0 alt="Razz"> http://radioinsight.com/boards/topic/17224#post-72285 Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:49:26 +0000 KB1HWH 72285@http://radioinsight.com/boards/ <table border="0" align="center" width="90%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td class="SmallText"><b>Bill Charles wrote on Fri, 20 February 2009 23:18</b></td></tr><tr><td class="quote"><br />I am not looking to discredit anyone, but I would point out the "DXER" link at the bottom of the post. I don't point it out to point a finger. Just to show there is an analog bias.<br /> <br /> BC<br /></td></tr></table><br /> <br /> While I would agree with that statement in just about any other case. I must defend Peter George. Peter isn't part of the "it's causing Hash on my channels" crowd. He's got a background in Broadcasting and radio engineering. Both as a hobby and a professional. As someone who is "Pro" FM IBOC, I respect what Peter has to say, and , at least Peter had something to contribute to the conversation at hand and backed it up with a well thought out and thorough opinion. http://radioinsight.com/boards/topic/17224#post-71187 Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:54:18 +0000 e gill cvi 71187@http://radioinsight.com/boards/ Love it or hate it, IBOC is what we have. Thinking that it's going to be rolled back is wishful thinking at best. Maybe folks should start thinking of how to improve it (as opposed to how to replace it) since it's not going anywhere anytime soon. <br /> <br /> Of course, I've been listening to HD radio for, gosh, I don't even know how long now and I haven't heard any of the hissing and hashing everyone's always complaining about. Maybe someone can help me out with that. While driving around Philadelphia or Southern New Jersey, where should I tune to hear an example of the devastating signal-killer? http://radioinsight.com/boards/topic/17224#post-71174 Sun, 22 Feb 2009 17:40:56 +0000 pqgeorge 71174@http://radioinsight.com/boards/ <table border="0" align="center" width="90%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td class="SmallText"><b>Bill Charles wrote on Fri, 20 February 2009 23:18</b></td></tr><tr><td class="quote"><br />I am not looking to discredit anyone, but I would point out the "DXER" link at the bottom of the post. I don't point it out to point a finger. Just to show there is an analog bias.<br /> <br /> BC<br /></td></tr></table><br /> <br /> Hate to burst your bubble, my friend, but the "DXER" inference is only <b>part</b> the story here. I'm also a ham radio operator for nearly 25 years, but most importantly, I've been a broadcast engineer for over <b>30</b> years. And I'm <u>NOT</u> "anti-digital" as you so infer.<br /> <br /> I <b>AM</b> against IBOC for the wide band interference it causes to stations adjacent to an IBOC equipped station. I'm all for digital technology. I deal with it, every day. But IMHO, IBOC is not the way. <b>FMeXtra</b> would be a better choice for FM digital broadcasting. It provides all the capabilities of IBOC (multi-casting, digital quality Stereo audio..... all without the IBOC mess and not stepping on the "neighbors"). It provides digital signal coverage almost equal to that of FM Stereo. And it doesn't cost an arm and a leg to impliment either, unlike iBiquity's draconian price tags for their equipment (starting at $75,000 and up) AND the exorbitant cost of "getting a license" from iBiquity just to operate the **** thing ($25,000 for the first "stream", $5000 for every "stream" thereafter). Where would the remaining smaller or college or high school stations get <b>that</b> kind of money to go digital? In <b>this</b> economy?<br /> <br /> In terms of IBOC AM, Amplitude Modulation was <u>NEVER</u> designed for digital broadcasting. It's like trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. <b>It does not work.</b> The AM stations would be better off to turn off the IBOC, like so many have already turned it off (at least at night, as of late) and by using C-QUAM technology, not necessarily for Stereo use but to brighten up the audio and to improve overall frequency response. NO, it is not digital but it would improve overall "dial presence", even on mono receivers. Stations and receiver manufacturers should start re-enforcing the AMAX standards for AM broadcasting which have been all but ignored as of late. And most importantly, take those God-forsaken "brick-wall" filters off line for good. AM can sound a **** of a lot better than the way it is being used right now at 5 kHz (little better than a dial-up phone line). The hiss of IBOC on AM is unbearable.<br /> <br /> Digital <b><u>is</u></b> the wave of the future. But the IBOC version of it, leaves <b>a lot</b> to be desired. <br /> <br /> Have a nice day! <img src="images/smiley_icons/icon_smile.gif" border=0 alt="Smile"> http://radioinsight.com/boards/topic/17224#post-71116 Fri, 20 Feb 2009 19:18:36 +0000 Bill Charles 71116@http://radioinsight.com/boards/ I am not looking to discredit anyone, but I would point out the "DXER" link at the bottom of the post. I don't point it out to point a finger. Just to show there is an analog bias.<br /> <br /> BC http://radioinsight.com/boards/topic/17224#post-71109 Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:54:08 +0000 am-fm 71109@http://radioinsight.com/boards/ Dude, I live in Central NJ, so I am well aware of what a congested FM band is like. Aim the antenna one way hello CBS-FM, another and greetings B101. <br /> <br /> Anyways, what stations near you are showing this jamming effect? Back to the topic. Last year, 100.1 WJRZ began testing -10 power levels (Dec 07/Jan 08). From were I live in Central Jersey, I could get WJRZ in HD (no dropouts), then nudge the dial up and get Z100 in HD. This was with the BA Receptor HD and a omnidirectional antenna mounted in a tree.<br /> <br /> More recently, 95.9 WRAT has been testing -10 levels. Using the Sony XDR-F1HD & the supplied dipole I can get WRAT in HD, and get 95.7 WBEN in HD without adjusting the antenna.<br /> <br /> These are just anecdotal examples, but then again, I dont have thousands of dollars in equipment. Its possible that the HD installations were done improperly and are causing problems, but blame the engineers, not the technology. http://radioinsight.com/boards/topic/17224#post-71104 Fri, 20 Feb 2009 10:47:49 +0000 pqgeorge 71104@http://radioinsight.com/boards/ You <b>ARE</b> kidding..... aren't you? A 10 db. increase will reek havoc on an already congested FM band. I've seen some stations, only "allegedly" running the existing injection levels granted by the FCC causing wholesale jamming of stations, <u>three channels down</u>. One of these IBOC stations (a classical station at that) is so wideband you can't listen to another station three channels down within the other station's Grade B contour for nearly five miles from the IBOC station's transmitter site. <br /> <br /> IBOC technology is voodoo technology, plain and simple.