FM HD Radio-"CD Quality"???

[SuperSound]

Here is information that questions the iBiquity claim of "CD quality".
http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com

[k9ez]

> Here is information that questions the iBiquity claim of "CD
> quality".
> http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
>

If I were a moderator this would be deleted.  This is constant SPAM of this web site.

I also find it interesting that they are taking posts off of this site and using them as fact.  No real research is done.  No testing, no measurements.

Hense the reason I never use blogs for any information.

[SuperSound]

Reject the European Broadcasting Union's test results if you wish. But it is worthy of discussion and not spam. This is real research by a recognised professional broadcast research organization. You are free to reject anything you choose, but not to limit other's access to information based on your "beliefs".
If this is a discussion board, lets discuss it. If you want to make this board an ad piece for iBiquity HD Radio and reject problem solving and discussion, then do so. Remember the Federal Trade Commisson rules regarding clear labeling of advertising.
Not everyone swallows all of HD Radio - iBiqity's advertising hype whole, and without question.

> > Here is information that questions the iBiquity claim of
> "CD
> > quality".
> > http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
> >
>
> If I were a moderator this would be deleted.  This is
> constant SPAM of this web site.
>
> I also find it interesting that they are taking posts off of
> this site and using them as fact.  No real research is done.
>  No testing, no measurements.
>
> Hense the reason I never use blogs for any information.
>

[k9ez]

Thats not the point.  You only use this web site for all of your siting.  Your Post:

CD Quality, then the link?  Thats it?  IMHO it smacks of SPAM to me, but I have been wrong in the past.


> Reject the European Broadcasting Union's test results if you
> wish. But it is worthy of discussion and not spam. This is
> real research by a recognised professional broadcast
> research organization. You are free to reject anything you
> choose, but not to limit other's access to information based
> on your "beliefs".
> If this is a discussion board, lets discuss it. If you want
> to make this board an ad piece for iBiquity HD Radio and
> reject problem solving and discussion, then do so. Remember
> the Federal Trade Commisson rules regarding clear labeling
> of advertising.
> Not everyone swallows all of HD Radio - iBiqity's
> advertising hype whole, and without question.
>
> > > Here is information that questions the iBiquity claim of
>
> > "CD
> > > quality".
> > > http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
> > >
> >
> > If I were a moderator this would be deleted.  This is
> > constant SPAM of this web site.
> >
> > I also find it interesting that they are taking posts off
> of
> > this site and using them as fact.  No real research is
> done.
> >  No testing, no measurements.
> >
> > Hense the reason I never use blogs for any information.
> >
>

[MiddleAgedRocker]

Clearly the author of the linked-to blog doesn't like HD Radio, but just becaause you disagree with SuperSound's opinion doesn't mean his post should be deleted.

I, for one, think smoke and mirrors are being utilized heavily to promote so-called HD Radio.  Even ancillary businesses are trying to get in on the hype.  I just read a press release from a company that makes surround-sound headphones, cliaming that HD Radio is driving demand for their products. HA!

Apparently, some PR person misinterpreted the meaning of "multiple channel broadcasts".

-- MAR


> > Here is information that questions the iBiquity claim of
> "CD
> > quality".
> > http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
> >
>
> If I were a moderator this would be deleted.  This is
> constant SPAM of this web site.
>
> I also find it interesting that they are taking posts off of
> this site and using them as fact.  No real research is done.
>  No testing, no measurements.
>
> Hense the reason I never use blogs for any information.
>

[RadioEngineer]

> Clearly the author of the linked-to blog doesn't like HD
> Radio, but just becaause you disagree with SuperSound's
> opinion doesn't mean his post should be deleted.
>
> I, for one, think smoke and mirrors are being utilized
> heavily to promote so-called HD Radio.  Even ancillary
> businesses are trying to get in on the hype.  I just read a
> press release from a company that makes surround-sound
> headphones, cliaming that HD Radio is driving demand for
> their products. HA!
>
> Apparently, some PR person misinterpreted the meaning of
> "multiple channel broadcasts".
>
> -- MAR
Actually Frank Foti, Bob Orban and others, have been working on surround sound technology associated with HD.  If I recall correctly however, surround sound in its present form would exclude the use of HD-2.  I'm struggling a little with the concept of surround sound headphones.  Maybe you could get some surround effect with multiple transducers in each ear cup.  Maybe I'm ignorant and these are already out there and working well.

[Rich Wood]

> Actually Frank Foti, Bob Orban and others, have been working
> on surround sound technology associated with HD.  If I
> recall correctly however, surround sound in its present form
> would exclude the use of HD-2.  I'm struggling a little with
> the concept of surround sound headphones.  Maybe you could
> get some surround effect with multiple transducers in each
> ear cup.  Maybe I'm ignorant and these are already out there
> and working well.

I believe there's one headphone that has multiple transducers for surround. I don't remember the manufacturer. Note that Bose is peddling a 2 speaker system for home systems it claims duplicates 5.1. Probably something like a boombox's "wide" stereo matrix.

I'd like to hear from Frank about the compatibility of 5.1 for IBUZ and secondary channels. The HD Dominion is pushing secondaries as the salvation of radio. If radio needs salvation beyond better content will stations drop secondaries to do 5.1? My bet is no.

Rich

[MiddleAgedRocker]

Exactly - when two channels become six (5+1), you have a bandwith issue, so something has to go.

These particular phones (company is LTB Audio Systems) do indeed have multiple discreet transducers in each cup for front-back spatiallity.  I've never put a pair on, so can't say for sure, but reviews I've read have been generally favorable.

-- MAR

> Actually Frank Foti, Bob Orban and others, have been working
> on surround sound technology associated with HD.  If I
> recall correctly however, surround sound in its present form
> would exclude the use of HD-2.  I'm struggling a little with
> the concept of surround sound headphones.  Maybe you could
> get some surround effect with multiple transducers in each
> ear cup.  Maybe I'm ignorant and these are already out there
> and working well.
>

[k9ez]

> > Actually Frank Foti, Bob Orban and others, have been
> working
> > on surround sound technology associated with HD.  If I
> > recall correctly however, surround sound in its present
> form
> > would exclude the use of HD-2.  I'm struggling a little
> with
> > the concept of surround sound headphones.  Maybe you could
>
> > get some surround effect with multiple transducers in each
>
> > ear cup.  Maybe I'm ignorant and these are already out
> there
> > and working well.
>
> I believe there's one headphone that has multiple
> transducers for surround. I don't remember the manufacturer.
> Note that Bose is peddling a 2 speaker system for home
> systems it claims duplicates 5.1. Probably something like a
> boombox's "wide" stereo matrix.
>
> I'd like to hear from Frank about the compatibility of 5.1
> for IBUZ and secondary channels. The HD Dominion is pushing
> secondaries as the salvation of radio. If radio needs
> salvation beyond better content will stations drop
> secondaries to do 5.1? My bet is no.
>
> Rich
>
I would agree.  Persoanlly I dont see how 5.1 would work in any situation other than headphones.  Yes you could wire up a car for 5.1, but then that leads to what programming is out there that could be offered?

[Rich Wood]

> I would agree.  Persoanlly I dont see how 5.1 would work in
> any situation other than headphones.  Yes you could wire up
> a car for 5.1, but then that leads to what programming is
> out there that could be offered?

Frank and I have had a number of discussions about remixing for 5.1. I've been involved with a number of syndicators that did oldies formats. Play one song that isn't what was originally played and PDs and listeners will complain like crazy.

Several groups are into 5.1 and are bringing the original recording engineers back to do the remixes. Unfortunately, for much of the catalog, the original players are gone. If 5.1 were available today there wouldn't be enough material to make a format. Synthesized 5.1 would anger far too many people to risk it.

While 5.1 is a great success in movies, most music stores have very few, if any, DVD-A or SACD discs. Even Virgin in Times Square (they claim they stock everything in print) has a tiny display downstairs in the back. Many of the discs are DVDs with Dolby Digital or DTS, requiring a decoder. Best Buy in my market no longer stocks 5.1 discs.

Rich