• 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

one simple reason HD subs won't make it

Gunsmoke

Banned
Signal, if you can't receive them, you cannot support them. For some reason they will not obtain full power status. When I am as close as Marlton, most signals are spotty at best. That is why I think the FCC doesn't want HD to catch on, the way they pushed HD TV down our throats, its just a play toy for them.
 
The FCC has allowed HD stations to increase their power, and allowed HD stations to feed translators. The latter is the best way for stations to succeed, because they can be received on standard FM radio stations. Otherwise you need to own a radio that can receive HD radio. However, translators are by definition low power signals.

BTW HD radio and HDTV are not the same thing. One of the issues with HD radio is there really is no perceptible audio difference between HD and FM. Very different with standard and HDTV. That's why consumers haven't felt motivated to buy HD radios as they were with HDTV. Also the fact that consumers simply aren't buying table radios anymore.
 
The FCC has allowed HD stations to increase their power, and allowed HD stations to feed translators. The latter is the best way for stations to succeed, because they can be received on standard FM radio stations. Otherwise you need to own a radio that can receive HD radio. However, translators are by definition low power signals.

BTW HD radio and HDTV are not the same thing. One of the issues with HD radio is there really is no perceptible audio difference between HD and FM. Very different with standard and HDTV. That's why consumers haven't felt motivated to buy HD radios as they were with HDTV. Also the fact that consumers simply aren't buying table radios anymore.

I recently bought a new alarm clock. It has FM, and Bluetooth. So I can listen to analog FM, or whatever I want to stream through my phone.

At the same time, in how many new car models is HD radio a standard option? I got HD radio in my car for the first time in 2015. Plus, people aren't forced to retrofit their old analog radios to keep receiving the stations they always have, like when for your OTA TV, you had to buy a DTV Converter box.

There's a lot of things in the way to keep HD radio from fully succeeding. The FCC isn't one of them.
 
There's a lot of things in the way to keep HD radio from fully succeeding. The FCC isn't one of them.

Depends. The FCC hasn't mandated the inclusion of HD in all radios sold in the US. Thus, the clock radio you bought didn't have HD. That's one thing they could do. But the FCC has been consistent in its opposition to mandate anything like that on manufacturers, including the mandating of an activated FM chip in phones.
 
Then why aren't stations boosting their HD subs, I thought they were only allowed one percent of the main signal, which is why JBR and STW have better HD reception, were talking 500w HD subs which isnt bad for those two. Are their any stations using full power subs and why does the Atlanta market have many HD subs with ratings including a HD 3?
 
HD subs or HD hoagies? :) (Remember, this is the Philly board)

A more serious question: What's Canada's and other countries' regs on HD radio?

ixnay
 
Depends. The FCC hasn't mandated the inclusion of HD in all radios sold in the US. Thus, the clock radio you bought didn't have HD. That's one thing they could do. But the FCC has been consistent in its opposition to mandate anything like that on manufacturers, including the mandating of an activated FM chip in phones.

When the FCC mandated things, like FM, TV UHF, etc, it caught on eventually. The forced FM to split the simulcast with AM and it helped FM. But when they refused to pick an FM Quad and AM Stereo standard, nothing ever happened. "Let the market decide" was the mantra. HD will never make it for radio because it's not required. Think about it. What if the FCC didn't REQUIRE TV stations to go digital? Think we'd have what we have today? No way.
 
What if the FCC didn't REQUIRE TV stations to go digital? Think we'd have what we have today? No way.

Once again, the difference with HDTV was obvious. Plus flat screen technology was simply cheaper and lighter than a big picture tube.

Even if the FCC mandated HD in all radios, that wouldn't cause consumers to buy them. The bigger problem is consumers aren't buying free-standing radios of any kind, including internet or satellite radios.
 
When the FCC mandated things, like FM, TV UHF, etc, it caught on eventually. The forced FM to split the simulcast with AM and it helped FM. But when they refused to pick an FM Quad and AM Stereo standard, nothing ever happened. "Let the market decide" was the mantra. HD will never make it for radio because it's not required. Think about it. What if the FCC didn't REQUIRE TV stations to go digital? Think we'd have what we have today? No way.

The FCC never mandated FM or FM stereo. The only mandate affecting FM was the 1967 prohibition for fulltime AMs to simulcast 100% on same market FMs, creating a variety of new programming offerings.

The inclusion of UHF tuners was a mandate, but there have been no others.
 
One of the issues with HD radio is there really is no perceptible audio difference between HD and FM.

For what it's worth, in the early days of HD when signals were super-poor and stations would constantly jump between FM and HD, I could definitely tell the difference. Hearing it flip back and forth (regardless of the station I was tuned to) made me hear how low and muddy FM can sound. Those were fun days. Something interesting was happening with radio! But yeah, after the tech was sold to radio companies, it was rolled out and marketed poorly. Didn't stand a chance.
 
There *was* other FCC requirement. They required all auto radios to include FM, starting around 1974. At the time, time, AM was king. But by 1980, FM listening overtook AM. The car requirement was a game-changer.
 
There *was* other FCC requirement. They required all auto radios to include FM, starting around 1974. At the time, time, AM was king. But by 1980, FM listening overtook AM. The car requirement was a game-changer.

There was a proposal, but my information says it was never implemented. I was GM of an FM at that time, so I was obviously interested in the subject.

FM tied AM in national averages in 1977.

And back then, 70% of radio listening was in the home or at work, not in the car.

Even if FM had been mandated in 1974, it would have taken a decade and a half back then to get FM in half the cars in the US (average car age was about 7 years). Car makers started putting FM in cars because buyers wanted them, not due to a mandate.

As an example, look at the Dallas ratings in 1974 and 1975. Half the top 10 was made up of FM stations.

http://www.dfwradioarchives.info/
 
Last edited:
In 1981, I was driving a 1977 Chevy Nova. Its original-equipment radio was AM only. I remember riding around with an FM portable in the passenger seat to listen to FM.
 
There *was* other FCC requirement. They required all auto radios to include FM, starting around 1974. At the time, time, AM was king. But by 1980, FM listening overtook AM. The car requirement was a game-changer.

David is correct, government mandating that FM was included in radios never happened. Most consumer electronics manufacturers in the day just decided to do so, especially when the tuners could be miniaturized.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom