[BC] extra channel naming

[Robert Meuser]

The stations can control what is displayed. Why not have them do whatever makes 
sense to them?

R

Rockwell Smith wrote:
> The solution to this is so simple it amazes me no one has suggested
> it yet in this thread.    If station KQQQ is on 100.9 they already
> have an assigned CHANNEL of 265.   So, 265.0 is the main, or existing,
> service and others can be 265.1   265.2   with whatever else prefix
> or suffix they want to hang on it along with the call sign.  That
> names it, connects  it to the actual frequency or channel it belongs to
> and it makes sense.    The fact that it makes sense dooms it, however.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>Bill
>>
>>Let's take this a step further.
>>
>>The technical reason for call letters was to literally identify stations
>>and  resolve interference.
>>
>>If a station is digital or runs RDBS the real identification can be in
>>the  digital domain and the station choose how it identifys itself to
>>the general public.
>>
>>R
>>
>>Bill Croghan wrote:
>>
>>>	The idea of calling the HD subchannels by numbers above 108, i.e.
>>>108.1, etc stinks.  The listener is going to try to tune his radio up
>>>there, then will go out to buy a new one that tunes that frequency and
>>>will get VOR navigation signals.  Let's not confuse frequency with
>>>channel names.  Surely there is a better way.  I suspect many stations
>>>will want to have some identification with their subchannels, and
>>>having a 92.9 station identifying it's HD2 as 108.5 won't do it.
>>>Bill
>>>Bill Croghan CPBE WB?KSW
>>>Chief Engineer,
>>>KOMP/KXPT/KENO/KBAD
>>>Lotus Broadcasting
>>>Las Vegas, NV
>>>Email to loteng (at) lvradio.com
>>>Phone 702-315-3030
>>>Fax      702-876-6685
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net [mailto:broadcast-
>>>>bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Rich Wood
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 9:54 AM
>>>>To: Broadcast Radio Mailing List
>>>>Subject: Re: [BC] extra channel naming
>>>>
>>>>------ At 11:07 AM 12/13/2005, Reader wrote: -------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Study: Nearly All Consumers Prefer 'Expanded' HD Band
>>>>>
>>>>>A new Bob Harper & Co. research funded by Cox Radio found that
>>>>>consumers overwhelmingly prefer to have HD Radio subchannels appear
>>>>>on receiver displays as an "expanded FM band," with "addresses" above
>>>>>107.9, such as 108.1, 108.3, etc.
>>>>
>>>>Not a surprise, at all. That's what I mean when I say "Unique
>>>>Identifier." It's important for rating purposes, especially since the
>>>>secondaries will be non-commercial (according to the HD Dominion) for
>>>>the first couple of years. There has to be some way to separate the
>>>>WXXX commercial channel from its non-commercial one. As it stands,
>>>>WXXX HD1 will get the credit for everything that shows up under WXXX.
>>>>The result will be a phony rating for WXXX. Agencies will question the
>>>>validity of the numbers.
>>>>
>>>>I used to work with Bob. His credibility is good.
>>>>
>>>>Rich
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Rich Wood
>>>>Rich Wood Multimedia
>>>>Phone: 413-303-9084
>>>>FAX: 413-480-0010
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>This is the BROADCAST mailing list
>>>>To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
>>>>For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists:
>>>>http://www.radiolists.net/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>This is the BROADCAST mailing list
>>>To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
>>>For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists:
>>>http://www.radiolists.net/
>>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>This is the BROADCAST mailing list
>>To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
>>For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists:
>>http://www.radiolists.net/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: http://www.radiolists.net/
>