RSSHD Radio to See Broader Availability
By Ed Oswald | Published April 10, 2006, 1:37 PM
A group of broadcasters unveiled their plans to further promote high-definition radio receivers by announcing new deals with retailers that would make it easier for consumers to access the service. Altogether, some $200 million in advertising and promotions is planned this year.
HD Radio promises to give FM broadcasts a free boost to near-CD quality, and gives AM near-FM quality sound. Also, radio stations are able to broadcast up to two digital sub-stations on top of the traditional frequency.
However, the format has so far been plagued by a lack of interest and availability of compatible receivers.
To remedy that problem, the HD Radio Alliance -- made up of broadcasters such as Beasley, Clear Channel, ABC and CBS Radio among others -- said Monday that equipment would be available in 100-plus stores nationwide including Tweeter and ABC Warehouse Detroit, with an expanded commitment from online and catalog retailer Crutchfield.
Tweeter would begin selling the units through its online store and in its 200 stores in the Northeast, South, Southwest and Illinois. ABC Warehouse stores are located in several markets in the Midwest.
"Consumer demand for HD Digital Radio receivers has increased significantly over the past few months as consumers see the incredible value HD Radio offers," HD Radio Alliance president and CEO Peter Ferrara claims.
Each of the retailers are now running HD Radio commercials, with the Alliance also providing additional advertising support. In-store and online education programs for customers will begin as well, alongside training for store employees.
But receivers capable of receiving the HD stations still remain quite expensive. Home receivers generally start around $300 USD with the boxes needed to use HD Radio on compatible in-car stereos costing around $200 USD.
However, the service itself is free, which the group says is an advantage over satellite radio services XM and Sirius that charge a monthly fee.
Is this the same as DAB that Europe has had for 5 years now?
Score: 0
|If one considers the receivers, starting at $300, quite an investment...you should should see what broadcasters have to pay. At one point the software license alone was around $11,000 with on-going percentages from ancillary services. Not the main program channel. Some incentives have been offered but it's still...for the time...beyond justification. The transmitter mods would be around $150,000. That doesn't include any studio audio improvements. If you have several stations and in our case, donor supported, it's going to be some time before we move in that direction. Granted, our newest (Broadcast Electronics) transmitter is modular and designed to accept IBOC/HD additions. The others aren't. Without getting into a discussion on low-level and high-level combining I'll just say the older transmitters are going to be the most expensive. Thing is, they aren't "that" old.
Since there is no time limit set by FCC, it will be market and listener demand that will most affect our decision.
Score: 0
|In case you didnt know broadcasters will run the digital channels on fm 2-4 commercial free for at least 2-3 years.
Score: 0
|"Free" radio is not free at all. When you spend over 20+ minutes every hour getting slammed by commercials. You pay for it by "spending" your precious time. Then when you do get music it's the same 4 songs repeated to death.
I dropped listening to regular radio a long time ago. It's Satellite radio or MP3's for me.
Score: 0
|I guess you don't watch TV either.
Score: 0
|satalite radio with comercials. what a joke
Score: 0
|If HD happens to be in the next deck, or next car that I buy, ok. It's the same repeated regurgitated radio, but a touch clearer.
So?
Score: 0
|Actually HD radio can offer multiple streams with different content from the same broadcaster. Live traffic data can be communicated to GPS nav systems and lots of other useful features. Your local PBS station could program both jazz and classical or news at the same time or offer different genres of the same style. There are lots of possibilities and there is something to be said for the localization abilities of regional broadcasters versus what national sat services can accomodate. Best part....it's free.
You can find out more information in general at:
http://ibiquity.com/
For more information about current multicasting see:
http://www.hdradio.com/h...l_radio_format_list.php
Score: 0
|Thanks for the ad.
By the way, I didn't see anything about making it better... why would anyone think that splitting their already thin content among just as many commercials is better?
I'm not sure where it gets better.
Score: 0
|I listen mainly to jazz music and public radio. No commercials, a few begathons and good programming.
As for the ad assertion, did you learn anything about HD radio from the Ibiquity links? Or do you prefer your comments to be based on ignorance about the technology? I mean, you don't have to like it, but it's certainly an improvement for OTA local radio over the aging radio system we've had. Let's see...better reception, more fidelity, no subscription. Why would anyone have anything negative to say about it?
Score: 0
|I appreciate your intent wasn't blatant fanboyism, but it doesn't say much. It says which stations have HD. 90% of those are stations that pump ads 22 minutes each hour.
As a jazz connoiseur, I can see your distinct liking for HD. However, it's a niche. If you like jazz or classical, and your favorite station is a public/noncommercial, then ya, it would totally kick ass.
Score: 0
|BECAUSE IT'S ALL BS AND NOT TRUE!
Here is what is wrong with HD Radio-
1-Worse reception (HD Radio goes about half as far as the host analog FM or AM station).
2-Jamms adjacent channel analog AM and FM stations with annoying modem style digital hiss. (Less stations, not more).
3-Fidelity is about the same as streaming internet stations (complete with some encoding artifacts) NOT CD QUALITY!
4-Whenever the digital stream misses an information packet it rebuffers (like internet streaming) or falls back to analog (the switching back and forth between analog and digital can drive you nuts on trips). The signal is not immune to multipath and interference - the reciever just mutes, rebuffers, or falls back to analog.
5-HD radio creates more problems, interference, and expense then any possible small benefit!
6-Most radio markets have less then a dozen HD Radio streams on the air - NOT THE HUNDREDS PROMISED! AND IT JAMS RECEPTION OF MORE STATIONS THEN IT PROVIDES.
7-Each HD Radio station uses 3 channels! (Fewer stations not more).
HD RADIO IS A DEFECTIVE UNECESSARY TECHNOLOGY THAT SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN FCC FINAL APPROVAL.
ALL HYPE, FEW BENEFITS.
HD RADIO - PET ROCK OF THE NEW MILLENIUM!
More details are here:
http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
An alternate digital FM system that does not jamm other stations- www.dreinc.com
Score: 0
|I don't care as much about the "near CD" quality as I do the lack of advertising and the uncensored programming that satellite offers. That's what I'm most interested in.
Score: 0
|I suppose that you don't see any value in HDTV either. Just keep watching the grainy 240 line stuff.
Score: 0
|HD Radio is the way to go!
Score: 0
|"HD Radio promises to give FM broadcasts a free boost to near-CD quality"
as soon as this happens every1 will just copy music from the radio...
I smell many lawsuits to come!
Score: 0
|As if people can't already do that with Analog Radio, Satellite Radio, Cable Radio, Internet Radio, MP3s and CDs. I don't think HD Radio is going to make much of a difference in the scheme of things.
Score: 0
|I think there are far too many subscription services around these days and when given a free alternative like HD radio and an MP3 or other car player people are going to tire quickly of sat radio.
Score: 0
|Hmmmmm....low monthly service for Sirius commercial free radio, or lay down money for new equipment to get the same commercial polluted clearcrap? I'll stick with Sirius.
Oh, and "too many" subscription services? I'm curious, wanna explain that?
Score: 0
|who cares. you already know the answer.
Score: 0
|Well let's see. I've got my Direct TV sub, Cable internet sub, newspaper sub, FTP site sub, my alarm system, my home phone, my cell phone, and the list goes on. I don't need another 10 or 12 bucks a month to listen to music in my car. Oh, and since when did Sirius start giving away free equipment? If Sat radio actually had a decent sounding signal without being so compressed and bandwidth limited as to sound like a 64kbs MP3 with the highs rolled off I might be more interested. I listen when I rent cars and it sucks.
Score: 0
|