Time to reconsider AM stereo?

[audioguy]

Awhile back someone posted here that the newer receiver chips did not have as much of a problem with platform motion on CQUAM. Cany anyone expand on this topic?

[HowardMBurgers]

Already widely available. It's called podcasting and internet radio. Most already have hundreds of thousands of listening choices available on their computers and can add wireless capability by WiFi, iPhone, or soon WiMax. The wireless internet radios are selling briskly with more and more new models being introduced. Strongly trending upward, frequent listeners are projected to soon be over 100 million. Wireless phones are adding high quality digital streaming, podcasting and on-demand stations. Corporations, AM and FM broadcasters as well as individual entrepreneurs can all join the party at minimal expense. What could be better!

[/quote]

Actually I'm talking about a mobile device that functions like an IPod with the same portability, but there is no cost to the consumer other than purchase of the device.  No music to download, no Wi-fi connection required except to upload your song/content list (which can be a small text file sent via a cell transmitter in the device).  This way one could use the current MW spectrum currently allocated to Antique Modulation stations within a market, to send content to the portable device.  The content is erased after it's played, so the amount of on-device storage is minimal. 

Live Internet streaming radio is fine, provided you are sitting at a computer or have one of those Net radios plugged into a broadband connection.  To most of the youth today don't consider Internet radio very interesting, mainly because it's not portable (nor small).  Mainly us oldsters find that amusing, but if the Tax Man and ASCAP, BMI, ect. keep flogging away for royalties and taxes, these Internet radio stations will come and go (quickly).  Most independant Internet radio stations without a terrestrial signal behind it, find it difficult to stay in business very long.

[Chuck]

Still the bandwidth just doesn't exist for internet radio to replace terrestrial. Not yet. As long as it's a one-connection-per-listener model, this will be difficult to ovecome. I refer you to the article on the obstacles of mobile internet radio in the current Radio World.

Right now, that is correct, but the article failed to mention the idea of a "mesh technology."  Instead, it assumes that Internet access must be transmitted from tower to user, just like radio, which is more or less how it is currently distributed.  It doesn't have to be that way. 

Using a mesh repeater system, every Internet user is an access point of another user (think of peer-to-peer file sharing).   You end up with a grid that looks something like a piece of chicken wire with signals relaying from user to user as well as to towers.  That greatly increases the mathematical probability of accommodating huge numbers of users.  The technology exists right now.  Most likely it isn't in wide-spread use, because it is easier to bill each user, when you (the service provider) have absolute control of the signal.  With a mesh system, the user actually becomes the provider. 

I'm pretty sure that if there is enough demand for Internet service, someone will figure out how to provide it and make money in the process.

[Mike Walker]

You may be right Chuck, but "pretty sure" someone will overcome the problem doesn't change the fact the problem exists now. There simply isn't enough bandwidth, particularly mobile bandwidth, for internet radio to replace terrestrial radio.

[Play Freebird]

These articles explain how cellular network bandwidth constraints may be overcome:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimedia_Broadcast_Multicast_Service

http://alturl.com/26i3

[Chuck]

You may be right Chuck, but "pretty sure" someone will overcome the problem doesn't change the fact the problem exists now. There simply isn't enough bandwidth, particularly mobile bandwidth, for internet radio to replace terrestrial radio.

I doubt that anything will replace terrestrial radio in my lifetime, and probably not in yours either.  I hope not, since I'm currently in the process of purchasing a small Class A FM.  I'm literally putting my money where my mouth is.   

On the other hand, I see no problem with the technologies coexisting.  We should embrace the Internet. 

"Broadcasters" are really just content providers.  How their programming gets to the end user is really irrelevant, as long as the ability to receive the "broadcast" is not compromised.  The problem with HD is, in many cases, it compromises that process. 

As I've said many times, I'm not at all opposed to digital radio, multicasting, itunes tagging, displaying the song playing, or any of the features we'd all like.  I just think there is a better way to do these things than what we currently have on the table. 

[TheRover]

I hold out the Hope that AM-Stereo Radio stations could be where Progressive Rock could finally have a home OTA.

[KB1OKL]

I hold out the Hope that AM-Stereo Radio stations could be where Progressive Rock could finally have a home OTA.

That would be great.

[Tom Wells]

I hold out the Hope that AM-Stereo Radio stations could be where Progressive Rock could finally have a home OTA.

That would be great.

Yes, it would.  AM would be a great place to hear a LOT of good music that doesn't get heard because consultants are so sure we only want to hear the hits.

[TheBigA]

Yes, it would.  AM would be a great place to hear a LOT of good music that doesn't get heard because consultants are so sure we only want to hear the hits.

Consultants are so sure because they ask actual radio listeners, and they track and chart radio listening habits. 

Lots of owners have tried to play music on AM, and it hasn't led to increased listenership, regardless of what they play.