KGIL 1260 Going HD

[DavidEduardo]

The inconsistent and implausible arguments of the few remaining HD proponents are revealing.

I'm not an AM HD proponent. I'm also not an AM proponent. I have not mentioned HD except as a sidebar in this entire thread. Why do you bring it up, suddenly? The issue is where AM is headed, with or without HD.

First, they endlessly chant the "AM is dead" mantra about the band, yet NEVER can point to a single example of how HD Radio is improving/has improved AM's lot. 

HD is not improving AM. Nothing can do that.

Even if HD AM had a chance, the economy, the problems with the auto companies, etc., have made it impossible on AM and improbable on FM.

And the reason is obvious: because HD isn't helping.

Yes, an I.V. in a cadaver won´t help, either.

Most curious among the pro-HD arguments is the assertion that simulcasts of AMs on HD-2 or HD-3 subs is somehow a harbinger of success for HD-AM. 

I've never heard it said that way. Some FMs, for lack of anything else, put an AM on an HD2 FM channel when the AM has deficient night coverage (a statement applying to about 95% of all US AMs). It' can't hurt, but right now it likely does not help, either.

 That's ridiculous.  If HD-AM was actually fixing the band's problems the simulcasts would be redundant and unnecessary.  If anything, the sub-simulcasts make the point that HD-AM should be discarded, and sooner rather than later.

So by any avenue it's not likely HD in any form is about to help AM appreciably.

Look, market by market, at 5 year intervals, at the percentage of AQH persons under 55 using AM. In some markets, it is now well below 10%... and dropping constantly as the audience for AM ages.

[R.F. Burns]

Believe it or not Bob you and I have a mutual friend (at least one) and while we have never met I do believe we have talked once (not under the best of circumstances) over the phone. While we may have disagreements on certain things, I do respect you and realize that the needs of your busines are different than the needs of stations in major markets. If other posters knew your credentials as someone who loves radio and has a background far beyond that of a money man (someone who would be just as happy owning a True Value hardware store franchise as a radio station) which most of today's station owners are. As we are all aware, radio is basically a dead medium following afternoon drive. The number of people listening to radio (especially AM stations) at night is minimal, compared with AM & PM drive. Most people are either watching TV or on their computers at night. I'm not saying that HD will save radio, but it won't kill it either. It hasn't been around long enough to have had much of an impact due in part to the way the FCC refused to allocate spectrum for the new technology. Let's look at FM stereo which had been around from the 1950's and didn't catch on until the 1970's and that was in an era where radio had much less competition than it now does.  It took many years for FM stereo to become commonplace. If radio as we know it is around in 20 years and if by that time we are still broadcating both analog and digital hybrid broadcasts on the same channel then even I will say it's time to give up and try something new.

[Savage]

No, David, the "reason I bring up HD suddenly" is.....check the SUBJECT of this board, which is "HD Radio" and the TOPIC of this thread, which is "KGIL 1260 going HD."  See....notwithstanding your declaration, the subject under discussion is NOT "where AM is headed."  In any case that's a massive generalization.  "Where AM is headed" really depends on which stations you're talking about.

The fact that you pose this question proves the obvious: you come here to pontificate, not to have a reasonable exchange of ideas. 

Maybe you should search out a message board for "Disaffected Broadcasters Who Like To Argue For The Sake Of Arguing" and select or start a thread you could title, "100 Reasons Why I Hate AM Radio And You're Wrong If You Disagree."

If HD's chances of helping radio are "impossible on AM and improbable on FM," I guess that leaves you and me in a curious sort of agreement.  Guess the most productive thing to do would be to order that all HD broadcasting cease at once, right?  It would save a lot of time and money and give a lot of people peace of mind.

[DavidEduardo]

No, David, the "reason I bring up HD suddenly" is.....check the SUBJECT of this board, which is "HD Radio" and the TOPIC of this thread, which is "KGIL 1260 going HD."

Yet the subject of my posts was, as the old Spanish proverb goes, "even if you dress a monkey in silk, it is still a monkey." HD on AM does not change the basic fact that AM is in decline. If you look at the "maturation curve" described in a lot of business books, you find AM "in decline" and the fairly standard metrics for decline are all met, particularly the one about "no new consumers comeing in to replace those that mature out of the market."
 

The fact that you pose this question proves the obvious: you come here to pontificate, not to have a reasonable exchange of ideas. 

I come to give my point of view. So far, I have seen no one dispute the basic facts that AM share of listening is and has been declining and the remaining AM listeners are more and more concentrated in over-55 and over-65 demos, which have less sales appeal. 

If HD's chances of helping radio are "impossible on AM and improbable on FM," I guess that leaves you and me in a curious sort of agreement. 

You see? Maybe it's only coincidence, like the "even a broken watch is right twice a day." Or maybe we are not so far apart, but maybe one of us sees things like Andrew Weyth and the other like Andy Warhol.

Guess the most productive thing to do would be to order that all HD broadcasting cease at once, right?  It would save a lot of time and money and give a lot of people peace of mind.

In this economy, that is not such a bad idea. I wonder about the investment of time in the system vs. allt he other  challenges that radio has today.