[Other Topic] FCC plans for AM include all-digital discussions, digital receiver mandate

bluegras

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 18, 2008
3,299
1,079
what do u think about this iceberg do you think FCC wheeler will mandate all AM stations to go digital if they can figure out to fix the dropout with the signal etc.
 

radio

"On the Air" in MI
Pub Member / Supporter
Oct 13, 2007
3,642
856
West Central Michigan
DXing doesn't pay the bills for stations. This luxury "sport" is not contributing one thing to ANY AM station's existence, not to mention, your catching a station 500 miles away doesn't mean you'll go shop their advertisers. It's like streaming with only one difference. With well done STREAMING, at least the station is put on the "radar" of many extra ears. DXing's slice of the pie is much smaller.

Signal droput at night cannot be fixed, it's physics. All the FCC can do is entertain reasonable requests by individual operators to "test" increase or change patterns and log any interference at the opposing stations' end. Sadly, this cannot be done as it would have to be made public, and the tests would have to be private so no opposing frequency would know the 'test' was going on and automatically nix the results.

Daytime: 0's and 1's just don't travel well through constructed buildings. Digital phones of today don't get through walls like the analog ones of years ago did!

The whole article was a piece of fluff to put AM in the headlines (again) without getting to the root of the problem. Owners not giving listeners something to listen TO....(poor programming) and poor ENGINEERING and UPKEEP by owners making the sound quality of many AM's sub-mp3.

The government cannot legislate back the sense of self-pride in one's work that a few generations ago had for their businesses, and, for work in general. It has to be something a person is taught by example. Radio operators need this, and I'll blatantly say, the big corporations don't give a rat's behind how their small AM's sound, as long as they're on the balance sheet, and have "something" on them. They're so worried about what's happening across town on the competing FM to their big FM that no thought is given to THE POTENTIAL their AM's have. Compare that to individual operators, who day to day must perform in their communities for the money to continue to flow, and you have an entirely different situation.

You see? It's not the medium. Change it all to digital. You'll find the same owners putting the same syndicated c-c-c-crap on their d-d-d-d-igit-t-tal signals, and then complaining that "oh, nobody at all listens to radio anymore!"....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim S. and Iceberg

bluegras

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 18, 2008
3,299
1,079
do you think radio that the fcc will mandate all am radio station to go digtal.i think they will and after that fm stations will go digital also.i know that nobody cant do anything about dropout i understand that also what you are talking about.
 

radio

"On the Air" in MI
Pub Member / Supporter
Oct 13, 2007
3,642
856
West Central Michigan
No, they won't. Not in our lifetime, not a worry, dead issue. In fact, "non issue."
There's no way for deployment to work, I respond only so "rumors" don't fester when people throw buzzzwords on the 'net like "digital mandate"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Iceberg

Tampa8

Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,887
7,312
Tampa/Eastern Ct
The floor noise has risen so much especially with higher voltage transmission lines in more places and the new style light bulbs/dimmers etc that DXing has become impossible sometimes. In the past I too would not be happy about the loss of it and still feel it is a way to hear other parts of the Country without relying on the Internet.
 

bluegras

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 18, 2008
3,299
1,079
do you think it the next one or two years all stations will go digital if they are mandated by the fcc
 

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
50,512
15,385
Northern VA
ABSOLUTELY -NOT-!
First, it ain't really digital.
Second, it certainly offers no increase in AQ.
Third, it's range is minimal.
Fourth, it offers nothing current stations can't provide, at no benefit whatsoever.
Fifth, get over the fixation that it is "digital" therefore better.
Sixth, it offers NOTHING WHATSOEVER!
Seventh, the FCC won't get away with it. The remaining FM listeners, and many that think they'd like to keep the option, AND THE GOVERNMENT ENTITIES THAT DEPEND UPON EAS AND OTHER USES BEING CURRENT ANALOG will tank it long before it gets anywhere.


The FCC will not mandate it, because as has been pointed out in other threads, it would destroy many stations. The result would be fewer, shorter range stations and the need for wholesale replacement of radios. To absolutely no benefit. Unless it is a stealth move to free up wireless cell/data spectrum.

Why do you think it would be a good idea?


Yes, I know, blue, that you are fixated upon this. And for no rational reason. But the post is for others that may be deluded into thinking "HD" radio has anything to offer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Iceberg

bluegras

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 18, 2008
3,299
1,079
i just wanted to know what was your opinion to my question the reason i am asking is because i am new to hd radio and i may ask the stupid questions but i sometime have questions that are appreciated asking.i know that hd radio is not hd why do they call it hd radio?maybe in a couple of years all the stations will be digital.i just relayed the article for you guys and take a look and let me know what you think of chairmens wheeler of all the am stations to go digital.
 

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
50,512
15,385
Northern VA
Nope. Nada. Zip point zero. Ain't gonna happen

WHY do you want such a massive degradation of radio to occur?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Iceberg

bluegras

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 18, 2008
3,299
1,079
i went up to lagrange yesterday and i took my hd radio with me i got over 67 channels and i listen to a variety of them i like it so much.but when i got home there was no hd radio channels all fm channels.maybe in the future we could see alot more added.i understand you guys do not want radio to go digital but i do it is something neat that is coming in the future be ready for it the fcc will mandate all radio stations to go digtal.
 

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
50,512
15,385
Northern VA
Grasp onto that with religious (no evidence needed) fervor. Meanwhile, WHY would they do that? To put stations under and reclaim the spectrum for cell use?

Don't pull a Bob. Listen to what we say and post and THINK IT OVER. It ain't true digital. It don't work well or go very far. It offers little to nothing. Don't be hoodwinked by marketers using "HD" to confuse and mislead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Iceberg

rsmithwi

On Vacation
May 14, 2014
206
46
Land of 10,000 taxes!
Television was mandated to go all digital, who says radio can't be?. It would sure help AM radio survive with better sound quality. Much better use of the spectrum IMHO.
 

radio

"On the Air" in MI
Pub Member / Supporter
Oct 13, 2007
3,642
856
West Central Michigan
There's no "spectrum" here to fight over by any entity. AM is already at it's highest and best use and is allowed a whole 10khz bandwidth, which is NOT going to change. If AM goes digital, there's no "extra" bandwidth leftover to sell off to another entity, the FCC won't gain any money, and it will COST the economy jobs and lack of local media. There is NO gain to the average listener, in fact it will cost them, and I guarantee you as an owner, the government is NOT going to buy you your new fancy schmancy radio, either, nor ANY kind of a converter box, nor me the means to convert to digital. Why? THEY don't gain a thing by this scenario. ($$)

Digital will only introduce the drawbacks that TV has shown the nation. Please explain what YOU think is wrong with AM, rs. Sound quality is NOT better with digital on AM. The few tests they made of "all digital" were no better than a properly processed AM analog signal, and you're going to find very few owners who wold want to convert at all. They're more likely to say, "Goodbye" to their stations and their towns, leaving people who NEED radio without coverage.

When will our general public realize the buzzword of "digital' is NOT the fix for everything? The only thing "digital" did in our nation was feed the money trail at the FCC.

So, let me get this straight in a recap. A "digital" broadcast of the same programming you have available now would entice YOU to listen more? Are you listening now TO AM? If so, to what kind of programming, and please tell me how digital will help YOU want to tune in more frequently, or for longer periods of time.
 

radio

"On the Air" in MI
Pub Member / Supporter
Oct 13, 2007
3,642
856
West Central Michigan
Bluegras, the current HD system and "all digital" in the rumors of the future are two different systems completely. To put things in perspective, your precious HD radio would be one of the ZILLIONS receiving absolutely nothing after a (digital) mandate. You're listening to a proprietary system, just like Beta vs. VHS of years gone by. HD is not a step toward anything, it's only a way for Clear Channel's investment in Ibiquity to make some money from broadcasters who pay big license fees to gain very little or nothing by dividing their existing bandwidth. By the way, chances are, if you scanned the "standard" FM band in the towns where you find HD, you'll also find that the programming you love has been thrown on a standard FM translator, receivable by a standard radio somewhere on the dial. It's one of the FEW reasons left for a broadcaster to use HD. Not for consumers, but to avoid ownership caps in their respective markets, since translators don't count!
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Top