• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

The Future of Terrestial Radio.

K

kevinsealy

There are approximately 10,000 radio stations AM & FM commercial and non-commercial putting out a signal in these 50 states of the US.

Now there's sattelite (spelling) radio XM and Sirius each having over 100 channels and these station can be heard nationwide.

This may sound far fetched. But if technology will permit it, could we see someday pick up all of the 10,000 broadcast stations on one receiver?

I know this may take years for this to be perfected,and it would be nice to pick up WABC in Seattle, Washington.



Thanks,
Kevin L. Sealy
<P ID="signature">______________
Kevin L. Sealy</P>
 
> There are approximately 10,000 radio stations AM & FM
> commercial and non-commercial putting out a signal in these
> 50 states of the US.
>
> Now there's sattelite (spelling) radio XM and Sirius each
> having over 100 channels and these station can be heard
> nationwide.
>
> This may sound far fetched. But if technology will permit
> it, could we see someday pick up all of the 10,000 broadcast
> stations on one receiver?
>
> I know this may take years for this to be perfected,and it
> would be nice to pick up WABC in Seattle, Washington.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin L. Sealy
>

It comes down to one word - bandwidth. Perhaps down the road, as cable and satellite TV has expanded, but you'd have to see every single station make an investment in the equipment to be a "part of the system" - and I'm guessing those stations will want a piece of the sub money that comes from being a part of satellite.

They'd lose on advertising. Just like AFTRA wants its cut for commericals on computer streams, they'd want their cut on satellite feeds too.

And besides, what's it worth to the small market stations that are just cookie cutters of each other? Are there worthwhile stations past market 200?
 
> There are approximately 10,000 radio stations AM & FM
> commercial and non-commercial putting out a signal in these
> 50 states of the US.
>
> Now there's sattelite (spelling) radio XM and Sirius each
> having over 100 channels and these station can be heard
> nationwide.
>
> This may sound far fetched. But if technology will permit
> it, could we see someday pick up all of the 10,000 broadcast
> stations on one receiver?
>
> I know this may take years for this to be perfected,and it
> would be nice to pick up WABC in Seattle, Washington.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin L. Sealy
>

It's interesting to speculate about the future of broadcast
radio, especially the terrestrial component of the industry.
I suspect the future will see the demise of satellite distribution
in favor of a more targetted approach through the various
broadband technologies now being rolled out. With cellular
advancing quickly toward 3G..the third generation of cell
technology..and broadband alternatives to wireless Internet
access, such as WiMAX, the days of "one size fits all" satellite
distribution probably are numbered.

Satellite distribution suits mobile listeners but not always.
It's not effective for use indoors without the facilities of
terrestrial repeaters. I suspect those repeaters will prove
increasingly valuable as satellite providers use them to
target Walkman-type digital receivers. Perhaps those repeaters
will be independently fed from a regional source to localize
the program content. In fact, the cellular-telephone model
would serve well for distribution of program content tailored
to very specific geographic areas. That would be very appealing
to cost-conscious advertisers who don't want to waste their
money sending a message to people who don't want to hear it.

Whatever happens, I hope that conventional broadcasters come
up with a better solution to higher quality audio that what
has been advanced by the IBOC folks. With various and sundry
noise generators in the environment it's often a challenge
just to hear a local AM over the aquarium heater or the
neighbor's electric hedge trimmer.
 
> It's interesting to speculate about the future of broadcast
> radio, especially the terrestrial component of the industry.
>
> I suspect the future will see the demise of satellite
> distribution
> in favor of a more targetted approach through the various
> broadband technologies now being rolled out. With cellular
> advancing quickly toward 3G..the third generation of cell
> technology..and broadband alternatives to wireless Internet
> access, such as WiMAX, the days of "one size fits all"
> satellite
> distribution probably are numbered.
>
> Satellite distribution suits mobile listeners but not
> always.
> It's not effective for use indoors without the facilities of
>
> terrestrial repeaters. I suspect those repeaters will prove
> increasingly valuable as satellite providers use them to
> target Walkman-type digital receivers. Perhaps those
> repeaters
> will be independently fed from a regional source to localize
>
> the program content. In fact, the cellular-telephone model
> would serve well for distribution of program content
> tailored
> to very specific geographic areas. That would be very
> appealing
> to cost-conscious advertisers who don't want to waste their
> money sending a message to people who don't want to hear it.
>
>
> Whatever happens, I hope that conventional broadcasters come
>
> up with a better solution to higher quality audio that what
> has been advanced by the IBOC folks. With various and sundry
>
> noise generators in the environment it's often a challenge
> just to hear a local AM over the aquarium heater or the
> neighbor's electric hedge trimmer.
>



We'll see how reliable and cost effective it can be in the future. I placing my bets that it will be too costly for a long time and unreliable streaming compared to Satellite radio. I.E. Constant buffering. limited range..

Content and Price are king though. I believe Satellite Radio will deliver in these areas over WiMax.
 
Kudos to Kevin! He hit the nail on the head when he named his post "The FUTURE Of Terrestrial Radio". The operative word is "future", and yes, terrestrial radio does indeed have one....if it gets back to it's roots and does it right.



> There are approximately 10,000 radio stations AM & FM
> commercial and non-commercial putting out a signal in these
> 50 states of the US.
>
> Now there's sattelite (spelling) radio XM and Sirius each
> having over 100 channels and these station can be heard
> nationwide.
>
> This may sound far fetched. But if technology will permit
> it, could we see someday pick up all of the 10,000 broadcast
> stations on one receiver?
>
> I know this may take years for this to be perfected,and it
> would be nice to pick up WABC in Seattle, Washington.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin L. Sealy
>
 
> This may sound far fetched. But if technology will permit
> it, could we see someday pick up all of the 10,000 broadcast
> stations on one receiver?

How would you "tune" this radio?

> I know this may take years for this to be perfected,and it
> would be nice to pick up WABC in Seattle, Washington.

Not likely to happen. The advertisers don't need it and the stations won't want the extra competition.

WABC's New York advertisers (to use your example) don't care if their ads are heard outside that market. If they want to advertise to a Chicago or Phoenix audience they'll advertise on Chicago or Phoenix stations. If they want to advertise nationally they'll buy time on a syndicated or network program.

The idea of listening to a NY station in Seattle or elsewhere is interesting to engineers and hobbyists, but it's a non-entity to probably 80% of radio listeners and 99.99% of radio advertisers.
 
> There are approximately 10,000 radio stations AM & FM
> commercial and non-commercial putting out a signal in these
> 50 states of the US.
>
> Now there's sattelite (spelling) radio XM and Sirius each
> having over 100 channels and these station can be heard
> nationwide.
>
> This may sound far fetched. But if technology will permit
> it, could we see someday pick up all of the 10,000 broadcast
> stations on one receiver?
>
> I know this may take years for this to be perfected,and it
> would be nice to pick up WABC in Seattle, Washington.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin L. Sealy
>
If every station has an Internet stream, it may be possible to pick up every station once there is wireless Internet available everywhere.<P ID="signature">______________
17-year-old radio geek
Location: Princeton Junction, NJ
AIM: KewlDude471</P>
 
> If every station has an Internet stream, it may be possible
> to pick up every station once there is wireless Internet
> available everywhere.

The only problem is, most stations don't even have websites, let alone webcasts. Doesn't hurt to dream, though.
 
> They'd lose on advertising. Just like AFTRA wants its cut
> for commericals on computer streams, they'd want their cut
> on satellite feeds too.
>
> And besides, what's it worth to the small market stations
> that are just cookie cutters of each other? Are there
> worthwhile stations past market 200?
>
There may in fact be more worthwhile stations past market 200 than within the top 200. In our small market I suspect we have more daily hours of LIVE and LOCAL programming than the average station in the rated markets. And we still broadcast the opening of the bridge and lost dogs!
 
> I suspect those repeaters will prove
> increasingly valuable as satellite providers use them to
> target Walkman-type digital receivers. Perhaps those
> repeaters
> will be independently fed from a regional source to localize
>
> the program content. In fact, the cellular-telephone model
> would serve well for distribution of program content
> tailored
> to very specific geographic areas.


First of all, I believe both XM & Sirius are barred from offering any local content. Secondly, cellular technology has to improve a LOT before it's gonna be a player. How reliable is your cell service? Mine's pretty iffy. We're not likely to see many new cell towers...the NIMBYs are making that more and more difficult.

> Whatever happens, I hope that conventional broadcasters come
>
> up with a better solution to higher quality audio that what
> has been advanced by the IBOC folks. With various and sundry
>
> noise generators in the environment it's often a challenge
> just to hear a local AM over the aquarium heater or the
> neighbor's electric hedge trimmer.


There is so much electrical noise that AM is fast becoming useless. I'm not sure about your comments on "higher audio quality"...I haven't heard Sirius, but XM sounds like an mp3...OK if you don't listen closely or are just listening in a noisy environment like a car but on a good sound system it can be a tough listen...too much of that metallic "digital" sound. I haven't heard many people complain about the audio quality on FM.
 
> Whatever happens, I hope that conventional broadcasters come
> up with a better solution to higher quality audio that what
> has been advanced by the IBOC folks. With various and sundry
> noise generators in the environment it's often a challenge
> just to hear a local AM over the aquarium heater or the
> neighbor's electric hedge trimmer.
>
<a target="_blank" href=http://www.worlddab.org/eureka.aspx>Eureka</a>, I have found it! And it is being implemented in most of the world today as you read this.<P ID="signature">______________
_____________________________________________
Proud 2 B a pioneering satellite radio subs¢riber
Ai4i is always on the trailing edge of technology</P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by ai4i on 07/14/05 06:24 AM.</FONT></P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom