[[email protected]]

Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message

Yeah it's false. The ratings show there are at least 20 channels with
near-identical numbers of listeners. That's more than a "few"



I thought I've heard every possible claim about the Arbitron numbers here,
but this is the first time I've heard that a 5.8 share is nearly identical
to a 1.9 share.

That's not a big difference. 6 months ago the 5.8 station had dropped
to 4-something, and the 1.9 station had almost 3. There really is not
a huge different between ~5% and ~2% of an audience.

Now contrast that with:

YOU stated that "the top 2 stations have 90% of the listeners" (or
something like that) which is so wrong, it's a borderline lie.

[David Eduardo]

wrote in message
s.com...

Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message

Yeah it's false. The ratings show there are at least 20 channels with
near-identical numbers of listeners. That's more than a "few"



I thought I've heard every possible claim about the Arbitron numbers
here,
but this is the first time I've heard that a 5.8 share is nearly
identical
to a 1.9 share.

That's not a big difference. 6 months ago the 5.8 station had dropped
to 4-something, and the 1.9 station had almost 3. There really is not
a huge different between ~5% and ~2% of an audience.

A 5.8 that moves to a 4.0 has lost nearly a third of its audience. You
measure each station over time against itself, first. Like TV shows, some
radio stations go up, others bomb or go down.

In a market like Chicago, every share point is worth about $7 million on the
average. A 25-54 share is probably worth close to $9 million, so a
difference of a single share is huge.

YOU stated that "the top 2 stations have 90% of the listeners" (or
something like that) which is so wrong, it's a borderline lie.

He said the top two alone have 10%, which is absolutely true. Frank's point
here is totally valid.

[SFTV_troy]

Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message
Frank Dresser wrote:
And more expenses for the broadcaster.

They doesn't seem to be stopping them from adding second and third
channels Like WIYY in Baltimore, which has *voluntarily* added
Classic Rock and Indie Rock to their AOR primary station. Now
listeners of that style have three times as much content to enjoy.

But how is the extra programming being paid for?

Advertising of course. Plus the money they save because Digital does
not require as much power.



Plus: If a smaller station can't afford multiple program, then they
don't need to do anything. They can just limit themselves
to 1 high-quality channel (300 kbps).

Gee, maybe if some independant station can't afford multiple programming,
they'll have even have trouble justifying buying the IBOC hardware.

It's not that expensive. No more expensive than a mono to stereo
upgrade for an FM station.


5.1 would be compromised in similar ways.

And then the listeners of that Classic Music station would complain,
and the manager would have to decide between (a) increasing
bitrate or (b) losing customers.

Yeah, there's a few stations in which true high fidelity
sound would matter. Not many.

Agreed. But the advantage of the HE-AAC codec is you don't need a
high bitrate to get FM quality. Only 24 is sufficient. At 64kbit/s
you get near-CD quality. It's a VERY efficient compression standard.

So a station could divide itself into 300 / 4 channels == 64-96 kbit/s
per channel, and still have quality ranging from near-CD to CD.




People in Canada, Japan, and Australia bought AM Stereo radio in
droves. Why? Because there was a single standard, not the 4-way mess
the FCC left behind. (It's similar to today's HD DVD versus Blu-ray
battle; most people are just waiting to see who wins.)

Oh? A great many radios sold in the US are the same as the radios
sold in other countries and AM stereo still pretty rare here.

Because by the time the U.S. fixed on a standard (circa 1990), the AM
Stereo stations had largely disappeared. Thus there's no impetus for
customers to upgrade.

In contrast, Japan and Canada and Australia had a fixed standard in
the early 80s, thus giving consumers confidence that they were not
wasting money the next Betamax.


I already agreed with you that HQ is not going to motivate people to
upgrade. It will be seeing their favorite FM stations split into 3 or
4 programs, thus tripling their options, that will motive people.


Are they carrying commercials [on secondary channels]?
And I'm sure a fellow as clever and imaginative as you are can figure
how they might try to make money even if there aren't enough listeners
to sell commercial advertising. Hint: They won't call it "HD radio"

I have no idea what you have in mind as an alternative to commercial-
support.



In my markets (Lancaster, York, Harrisburg, Baltimore).....

Baltimore, huh? Got any friends at ibiquity?

Sorry. There are roughly 50 million people living in the Philly-
Wilmington-Baltimore-DC "megaopolis". The odds of me meeting someone
from iBiquity, by sheer random event, are about nil.





HD radio does little to aid the health of the radio industry in general, but
it may be harmful to those people who are trying to run a small time low
profit station.

My "smalltime" low-profit Christian station seems to be doing
alright. They happily embraced the new technology, streaming out 3
separate programs.

[Steve[_12_]]

On Oct 2, 4:37 pm, SFTV_troy wrote:


My "smalltime" low-profit Christian station seems to be doing
alright. They happily embraced the new technology, streaming out 3
separate programs.

It's a shame they've never heard about audio streaming on the
internet. Could have saved them a bundle and prepared them for the
future.

[Earl Kiosterud]

I read once that AM radio in the US was allowed up to 15 KHz, but the NRSC standard, adopted
by the FCC, calls for a limit of 10 KHz. THat's only about a half octave from the 15 KHz
limit of FM, and sounds pretty OK, certainly better than rendered by most AM radios.

--
Regards from Virginia Beach,

Earl Kiosterud
www.smokeylake.com

Note: Top-posting has been the norm here.
Some folks prefer bottom-posting.
But if you bottom-post to a reply that's
already top-posted, the thread gets messy.
When in Rome...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"SFTV_troy" wrote in message
ups.com...

Earl Kiosterud wrote:

I think the USB to which Tom refers is upper sideband. Converting AM stations would mean
they'd transmit only one set of sidebands, the upper set, reducing the bandwidth to
almost
half. More stations could be licensed in the same band. ...


But still have the same poor AM sound. Digital offers an upgrade to
near-FM quality.

As a side issue, the loss of fidelity for which AM is notorious is largely in the
receivers,
with their narrow bandwidths, resulting in audio that is rolling off pretty fast around
the
5 KHz point. (AM stations actually transmit a fairly high-fidelity signal.)

How high? 0-10000 hertz? That's not as good as the 0-15000 possible
with AAC+SBR.

[dizzy]

wrote:

SILENCE?

****WIT TROLL?

*PLONK*

[Telamon]

In article .com,
SFTV_troy wrote:

Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message
Frank Dresser wrote:
And more expenses for the broadcaster.

They doesn't seem to be stopping them from adding second and third
channels Like WIYY in Baltimore, which has *voluntarily* added
Classic Rock and Indie Rock to their AOR primary station. Now
listeners of that style have three times as much content to enjoy.

But how is the extra programming being paid for?

Advertising of course.

Of course, how obvious.

Plus the money they save because Digital does not require as much
power.

Mr. Digital engineer should know better than to post this.

Plus: If a smaller station can't afford multiple program, then they
don't need to do anything. They can just limit themselves
to 1 high-quality channel (300 kbps).

Gee, maybe if some independant station can't afford multiple programming,
they'll have even have trouble justifying buying the IBOC hardware.

It's not that expensive. No more expensive than a mono to stereo
upgrade for an FM station.

Really. Just how expensive is it?

5.1 would be compromised in similar ways.

And then the listeners of that Classic Music station would complain,
and the manager would have to decide between (a) increasing
bitrate or (b) losing customers.

Yeah, there's a few stations in which true high fidelity
sound would matter. Not many.

Agreed. But the advantage of the HE-AAC codec is you don't need a
high bitrate to get FM quality. Only 24 is sufficient. At 64kbit/s
you get near-CD quality. It's a VERY efficient compression standard.

64kbit/s is only just starting to sound good, it's not high quality.
Just because you love pixilated, compressed, and distorted in a way you
love does not mean other people like it.

So a station could divide itself into 300 / 4 channels == 64-96 kbit/s
per channel, and still have quality ranging from near-CD to CD.

Radio is not a wire connection. I know it hard but think that over.

People in Canada, Japan, and Australia bought AM Stereo radio in
droves. Why? Because there was a single standard, not the 4-way mess
the FCC left behind. (It's similar to today's HD DVD versus Blu-ray
battle; most people are just waiting to see who wins.)

Oh? A great many radios sold in the US are the same as the radios
sold in other countries and AM stereo still pretty rare here.

Because by the time the U.S. fixed on a standard (circa 1990), the AM
Stereo stations had largely disappeared. Thus there's no impetus for
customers to upgrade.

In contrast, Japan and Canada and Australia had a fixed standard in
the early 80s, thus giving consumers confidence that they were not
wasting money the next Betamax.


I already agreed with you that HQ is not going to motivate people to
upgrade. It will be seeing their favorite FM stations split into 3 or
4 programs, thus tripling their options, that will motive people.


Are they carrying commercials [on secondary channels]?
And I'm sure a fellow as clever and imaginative as you are can figure
how they might try to make money even if there aren't enough listeners
to sell commercial advertising. Hint: They won't call it "HD radio"

I have no idea what you have in mind as an alternative to commercial-
support.

There are alternatives.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

[Richard Crowley]

THIS DISCUSSION IS OFF-TOPIC FOR REC.AUDIO.TECH
(AND REC.AUDIO.CAR, FOR THAT MATTER)
PLEASE DROP REC.AUDIO.TECH FROM THIS DISCUSSION

[Steve[_12_]]

On Oct 3, 8:55 am, "Richard Crowley" wrote:
THIS DISCUSSION IS OFF-TOPIC FOR REC.AUDIO.TECH
(AND REC.AUDIO.CAR, FOR THAT MATTER)
PLEASE DROP REC.AUDIO.TECH FROM THIS DISCUSSION

Please drop rec.radio.shortwave as well.

[David Eduardo]

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
news

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
Plus: If a smaller station can't afford multiple program, then they
don't need to do anything. They can just limit themselves
to 1 high-quality channel (300 kbps).

Gee, maybe if some independant station can't afford multiple
programming,
they'll have even have trouble justifying buying the IBOC hardware.

It's not that expensive. No more expensive than a mono to stereo
upgrade for an FM station.

Really. Just how expensive is it?

I'm pretty sure that the IBOC hardware (and the license to use it) costs
considerably more than the $1000 it takes to buy a stereo encoder for a
commercial FM station.. For that matter, a pretty good quality stereo
encoder can be bought for $200 from some of the companies that supply
LPFM and (gasp!) pirate operators. Going stereo on FM doesn't take any
modification to the transmitter itself, just a piece of outboard gear in
the audio chain. IBOC requires modifications to the transmitter

Not necessarily. Some FM stations, like the ones on the Hancock in Chicago,
have separate HD transmitters and antennas, and the analog transmitters and
and common antenna are untouched.

Many individual stations have separate FM HD transmitters and a separately
hung antenna.

(plus the station loses all it's SCA's.. which are a good source of
additional INCOME, especially for small and/or public radio stations.)

No, they don't. KLVE in LA has HD, HD-2, SCA and FM Extra.

[Stephanie Weil]

On Oct 3, 11:12 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:

No, they don't. KLVE in LA has HD, HD-2, SCA and FM Extra.

Brenda I've explained this to you before.

We have stations in New York that are running two HD programs plus
audio SCA signals on BOTH 92 and 67 khz. And the SCA stations sound
just fine (for what they are).

WKTU 103 is one of those and ditto WNYC-FM 94. You don't lose your
subcarriers because you add HD.

Stephanie Weil
New York City, USA

[RHF]

On Oct 3, 8:33 am, Stephanie Weil wrote:
On Oct 3, 11:12 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:

No, they don't. KLVE in LA has HD, HD-2, SCA and FM Extra.

Brenda I've explained this to you before.

We have stations in New York that are running two HD programs plus
audio SCA signals on BOTH 92 and 67 khz. And the SCA stations sound
just fine (for what they are).

WKTU 103 is one of those and ditto WNYC-FM 94. You don't lose your
subcarriers because you add HD.

Stephanie Weil
New York City, USA

-IF- You go to the Expense of maintaining two 'separate'
Broadcast Transmission Systems. ~ RHF

[David Eduardo]

"RHF" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Oct 3, 8:33 am, Stephanie Weil wrote:
On Oct 3, 11:12 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:

No, they don't. KLVE in LA has HD, HD-2, SCA and FM Extra.

Brenda I've explained this to you before.

We have stations in New York that are running two HD programs plus
audio SCA signals on BOTH 92 and 67 khz. And the SCA stations sound
just fine (for what they are).

WKTU 103 is one of those and ditto WNYC-FM 94. You don't lose your
subcarriers because you add HD.

Stephanie Weil
New York City, USA

-IF- You go to the Expense of maintaining two 'separate'
Broadcast Transmission Systems. ~ RHF

The expense, once installed, is minimal.

[Steve[_13_]]

On Oct 3, 4:35 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"RHF" wrote in message

ps.com...





On Oct 3, 8:33 am, Stephanie Weil wrote:
On Oct 3, 11:12 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:

No, they don't. KLVE in LA has HD, HD-2, SCA and FM Extra.

Brenda I've explained this to you before.

We have stations in New York that are running two HD programs plus
audio SCA signals on BOTH 92 and 67 khz. And the SCA stations sound
just fine (for what they are).

WKTU 103 is one of those and ditto WNYC-FM 94. You don't lose your
subcarriers because you add HD.

Stephanie Weil
New York City, USA

-IF- You go to the Expense of maintaining two 'separate'
Broadcast Transmission Systems. ~ RHF

The expense, once installed, is minimal.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Vastly greater than the expense of streaming audio via the internet.

[Robert Orban]

In article ,
says...



"SFTV_troy" blabbed:
... this new receiving technique would not improve the sound
(it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would only reduce
interference.

At least in the States, AM & FM broadcasting is limited to 50 Hz to 15KHz.

There is no low frequency limit for either AM or FM; 50 Hz was the minimum
performance standard that would meet the now long-deleted FCC Proof of
Performance measurements.

The effective HF limit on FM is about 18.5 kHz; this leaves a +/- 500 Hz guard
band for the stereo pilot tone. Again, 15 kHz was the minimum spec that would
pass a Proof of Performance, not a limit on bandwidth.

Currently, the legal FCC-mandated HF limit on AM in the US is a hair less than
10 kHz, which almost completely protects second-adjacent stations from
interference. This was changed around 1990 as a result of work done by the
National Radio Systems Committee (NRSC). More recent work by the NRSC has
indicated that 7 kHz is probably the optimum compromise between causing
interference and loss of audio quality on typical AM radios (which are down 3
dB at about 2.6 kHz). However, limiting bandwidth to 7 kHz is voluntary.

[Robert Orban]

In article ,
says...



"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 30, 5:09 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:

Bob Orban, on the NRSC committee, found that consumer radios almost
without
exception, rolled off by at least 10 db by 4.2 kHz, and passed
practically
nothing over 5 kHz.

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.


The document was linked from one of Mr. Orban's posts on this ng, and is
searchable by Google.

Go to http://www.nrscstandards.org/ and click "AM Bandwidth Study." See
Figure 1 for the results. Note that this graph assumes NRSC preemphasis at
the signal generator. (Footnote 3)

This was the work of an NRSC working group that included me and many other
broadcast engineers.

Bob Orban

[Robert Orban]

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
lid says...


In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.


He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am only one
member) was done very carefully. See http://www.nrscstandards.org/ and click
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

Bob Orban

[Robert Orban]

In article .com,
says...



Steven wrote:

HD/IBOC does not employ AAC, although an earlier
version may have IIRC. It uses something called PAC(?)


You have it backwards. It used to be PAC, derived from MP3.

Early testing showed it didn't work very well, so the codec was
switched to MPEG4 AAC+SBR.

No, it wasn't. The codec was changed to something iBiquity calls "HDC."
It is known to use the Coding Technologies' Spectral Band Replication
technology (as does MPEG HE-AAC) but its technical details are otherwise
held secret by iBiquity. This secrecy has caused considerable
controversy in the broadcast industry.

Bob Orban

[Robert Orban]

In article . com,
says...


David Eduardo wrote:
wrote in message



There are millions of obsolete televisions which will stop working in
just over a year. Does it look like the advertisers care?
They won't care about obsolete radios either.


Radio stations are not ready to go all digital, and probably will not be
for
8 to 10 years.... if ever.



Both the UK and Germany have "tentatively" set 2015 as the shut-down
for FM. (They expect DAB to fill that role.) I figure the U.S.
transition will require a similar time period of fifteen years, so
sometime around 2020 will be the end of analog.

Although, I'd like to see AM die as early as 2010 since so few people
listen to it. Just make it pure digital, 10 kHz per channel.

FM can continue until 2020 (it has no interference problems).

FM can continue forever because, unlike the digital television transition in
the US, HD Radio required no new spectrum and there is no proposal to auction
off any of the current FM band (88-108 MHz in the US). I know of no serious
broadcaster who claims to have any real idea of when analog FM might be shut
down.

If this ever occurs, it will probably be because other transmission channels
finally provide a cheaper pipe to the listener and that pipe reaches enough
listeners to make the loss of analog-only listeners inconsequential. FM in the
US tends to use high powered transmitters with concurrent large electric
bills. Digital transmission can get equivalent reach with much lower power --
power efficiency is probably close to 100x in favor of state of the art
digital coding. Meanwhile, the cost of electricity is likely to continue to
increase, at least in the medium term. (If the world ever gets practical
fusion reactors, that trend could of course change :-).

Bob Orban

[Telamon]

In article ,
Robert Orban wrote:

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
lid says...


In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.


He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am only one
member) was done very carefully. See http://www.nrscstandards.org/ and click
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

The only suggestion I have for you Mr. Orban is to work on your reading
comprehension. The handle is Telamon.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

[RHF]

On Oct 4, 10:45 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article ,
Robert Orban wrote:





In article telamon_spamshield-
,
says...

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.

He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am only one
member) was done very carefully. Seehttp://www.nrscstandards.org/and click
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

The only suggestion I have for you Mr. Orban is to work on your reading
comprehension. The handle is Telamon.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now be nice Telamon,

Mister Orban has posted under his own name
and has asked you to reply to him : in kind.

FWIW - Robert {Bob} Orban
* A Short History of Transmission Audio Processing in the United
States
-by- Robert Orban, San Francisco, CA
http://www.bext.com/histproc.htm
http://www.261.gr/roberthistory.html
* Optimod "Ask Bob" - Orban/CRL Systems, Inc.
http://www.orban.com/support/orban/askbob/
http://www.261.gr/robert.html
* Orban Audio Codec - "Opticodec Line"
http://www.orban.com/products/codec/

it's nice to be nice ! RHF

[Randy Yates]

Robert Orban writes:

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
lid says...


In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.


He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am only one
member) was done very carefully. See http://www.nrscstandards.org/ and click
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

Bob Orban

Amen! Excellent point, Bob.
--
% Randy Yates % "...the answer lies within your soul
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % 'cause no one knows which side
%%% 919-577-9882 % the coin will fall."
%%%% % 'Big Wheels', *Out of the Blue*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[Telamon]

In article , Randy Yates
wrote:

Robert Orban writes:

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
lid says...


In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.


He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm
guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am only
one
member) was done very carefully. See http://www.nrscstandards.org/ and
click
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

Bob Orban

Amen! Excellent point, Bob.

Oh, I see he made an excellent point by misconstruing my post mocking a
known Troll and can't even get my handle right. I'd sure call that
excellence in posting.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

[Randy Yates]

Telamon writes:
[...]
In article , Randy Yates
wrote:
Amen! Excellent point, Bob.

Oh, I see he made an excellent point by misconstruing my post mocking a
known Troll and can't even get my handle right. I'd sure call that
excellence in posting.

What is excellent is his point that any person who makes
unsubstantiated accusations at a known, identifiable person or
organization while keeping their own identity hidden is, at a minimum,
unethical, and more pointedly, slanderous, spineless, and full of hot
air.
--
% Randy Yates % "Bird, on the wing,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % goes floating by
%%% 919-577-9882 % but there's a teardrop in his eye..."
%%%% % 'One Summer Dream', *Face The Music*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[Telamon]

In article , Randy Yates
wrote:

Telamon writes:
[...]
In article , Randy Yates
wrote:
Amen! Excellent point, Bob.

Oh, I see he made an excellent point by misconstruing my post mocking a
known Troll and can't even get my handle right. I'd sure call that
excellence in posting.

What is excellent is his point that any person who makes
unsubstantiated accusations at a known, identifiable person or
organization while keeping their own identity hidden is, at a minimum,
unethical, and more pointedly, slanderous, spineless, and full of hot
air.

That would make you pointless then.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

[Telamon]

In article , Randy Yates
wrote:

Telamon writes:
[...]
In article , Randy Yates
wrote:
Amen! Excellent point, Bob.

Oh, I see he made an excellent point by misconstruing my post mocking a
known Troll and can't even get my handle right. I'd sure call that
excellence in posting.

What is excellent is his point that any person who makes
unsubstantiated accusations at a known, identifiable person or
organization while keeping their own identity hidden is, at a minimum,
unethical, and more pointedly, slanderous, spineless, and full of hot
air.

I've been around a long time. Here's a link to a brief biography on me.

http://www.pantheon.org/articles/t/telamon.html

I would say I'm much better known and braver than you and Bob put
together.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

[Randy Yates]

Telamon writes:
[...]
I would say ...

I'm sure you would.
--
% Randy Yates % "My Shangri-la has gone away, fading like
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % the Beatles on 'Hey Jude'"
%%% 919-577-9882 %
%%%% % 'Shangri-La', *A New World Record*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[Steven]

I have naught of these contrivances nor would I move a muscle to cut
cheese over them. Hail Atlantis!

[Telamon]

In article , Randy Yates
wrote:

Telamon writes:
[...]
I would say ...

I'm sure you would.

What a spineless comeback.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

[Steven]

On Oct 5, 10:19 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article , Randy Yates
wrote:

Telamon writes:
[...]
I would say ...

I'm sure you would.

What a spineless comeback.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Eat me also, spinesucker!
-----
Better abuse through science

[Steve[_12_]]

On Oct 5, 3:54 am, RHF wrote:
On Oct 4, 10:45 pm, Telamon





wrote:
In article ,
Robert Orban wrote:

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
says...

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.

He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am only one
member) was done very carefully. Seehttp://www.nrscstandards.org/andclick
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

The only suggestion I have for you Mr. Orban is to work on your reading
comprehension. The handle is Telamon.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now be nice Telamon,

Mister Orban has posted under his own name
and has asked you to reply to him : in kind.

FWIW - Robert {Bob} Orban
* A Short History of Transmission Audio Processing in the United
States
-by- Robert Orban, San Francisco, CAhttp://www.bext.com/histproc.htmhttp://www.261.gr/roberthistory.html
* Optimod "Ask Bob" - Orban/CRL Systems, Inc.http://www.orban.com/support/orban/a...gr/robert.html
* Orban Audio Codec - "Opticodec Line"http://www.orban.com/products/codec/

it's nice to be nice ! RHF
.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The fact is, it's pretty well impossible to know when someone is
posting under "their own name" on the internet. The only thing you can
really conclude is that someone is posting under a name which they
intend for you to believe is their own!

[Randy Yates]

Steve writes:

On Oct 5, 3:54 am, RHF wrote:
On Oct 4, 10:45 pm, Telamon





wrote:
In article ,
Robert Orban wrote:

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
says...

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.

He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am only one
member) was done very carefully. Seehttp://www.nrscstandards.org/andclick
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

The only suggestion I have for you Mr. Orban is to work on your reading
comprehension. The handle is Telamon.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now be nice Telamon,

Mister Orban has posted under his own name
and has asked you to reply to him : in kind.

FWIW - Robert {Bob} Orban
* A Short History of Transmission Audio Processing in the United
States
-by- Robert Orban, San Francisco, CAhttp://www.bext.com/histproc.htmhttp://www.261.gr/roberthistory.html
* Optimod "Ask Bob" - Orban/CRL Systems, Inc.http://www.orban.com/support/orban/a...gr/robert.html
* Orban Audio Codec - "Opticodec Line"http://www.orban.com/products/codec/

it's nice to be nice ! RHF
.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The fact is, it's pretty well impossible to know when someone is
posting under "their own name" on the internet. The only thing you can
really conclude is that someone is posting under a name which they
intend for you to believe is their own!

There's an ancient device known as a telephone that can easily be used
to solve that problem.
--
% Randy Yates % "And all that I can do
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % is say I'm sorry,
%%% 919-577-9882 % that's the way it goes..."
%%%% % Getting To The Point', *Balance of Power*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[David Eduardo]

"Steve" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Oct 5, 3:54 am, RHF wrote:
On Oct 4, 10:45 pm, Telamon





wrote:
In article ,
Robert Orban wrote:

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
says...

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in
message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said
no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your
head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.

He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm
guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the
term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented
audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am
only one
member) was done very carefully.
Seehttp://www.nrscstandards.org/andclick
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are
implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you
would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and
what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

The only suggestion I have for you Mr. Orban is to work on your reading
comprehension. The handle is Telamon.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now be nice Telamon,

Mister Orban has posted under his own name
and has asked you to reply to him : in kind.

FWIW - Robert {Bob} Orban
* A Short History of Transmission Audio Processing in the United
States
-by- Robert Orban, San Francisco,
CAhttp://www.bext.com/histproc.htmhttp://www.261.gr/roberthistory.html
* Optimod "Ask Bob" - Orban/CRL Systems,
Inc.http://www.orban.com/support/orban/a...gr/robert.html
* Orban Audio Codec - "Opticodec
Line"http://www.orban.com/products/codec/

it's nice to be nice ! RHF
.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The fact is, it's pretty well impossible to know when someone is
posting under "their own name" on the internet. The only thing you can
really conclude is that someone is posting under a name which they
intend for you to believe is their own!


When it comes to content, nobody can duplicate one of Bob Orban's posts.

[Steve[_12_]]

On Oct 6, 11:48 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

ps.com...





On Oct 5, 3:54 am, RHF wrote:
On Oct 4, 10:45 pm, Telamon

wrote:
In article ,
Robert Orban wrote:

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
says...

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in
message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said
no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your
head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.

He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm
guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the
term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented
audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am
only one
member) was done very carefully.
Seehttp://www.nrscstandards.org/andclick
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are
implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you
would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and
what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

The only suggestion I have for you Mr. Orban is to work on your reading
comprehension. The handle is Telamon.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now be nice Telamon,

Mister Orban has posted under his own name
and has asked you to reply to him : in kind.

FWIW - Robert {Bob} Orban
* A Short History of Transmission Audio Processing in the United
States
-by- Robert Orban, San Francisco,
CAhttp://www.bext.com/histproc.htmhttp://www.261.gr/roberthistory.html
* Optimod "Ask Bob" - Orban/CRL Systems,
Inc.http://www.orban.com/support/orban/a...gr/robert.html
* Orban Audio Codec - "Opticodec
Line"http://www.orban.com/products/codec/

it's nice to be nice ! RHF
.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The fact is, it's pretty well impossible to know when someone is
posting under "their own name" on the internet. The only thing you can
really conclude is that someone is posting under a name which they
intend for you to believe is their own!

When it comes to content, nobody can duplicate one of Bob Orban's posts.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And do you have any evidence to back up this assertion?

[Steve[_12_]]

On Oct 6, 9:10 am, Randy Yates wrote:
Steve writes:
On Oct 5, 3:54 am, RHF wrote:
On Oct 4, 10:45 pm, Telamon

wrote:
In article ,
Robert Orban wrote:

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
says...

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.

He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am only one
member) was done very carefully. Seehttp://www.nrscstandards.org/andclick
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

The only suggestion I have for you Mr. Orban is to work on your reading
comprehension. The handle is Telamon.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now be nice Telamon,

Mister Orban has posted under his own name
and has asked you to reply to him : in kind.

FWIW - Robert {Bob} Orban
* A Short History of Transmission Audio Processing in the United
States
-by- Robert Orban, San Francisco, CAhttp://www.bext.com/histproc.htmhttp://www.261.gr/roberthistory.html
* Optimod "Ask Bob" - Orban/CRL Systems, Inc.http://www.orban.com/support/orban/a...gr/robert.html
* Orban Audio Codec - "Opticodec Line"http://www.orban.com/products/codec/

it's nice to be nice ! RHF
.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The fact is, it's pretty well impossible to know when someone is
posting under "their own name" on the internet. The only thing you can
really conclude is that someone is posting under a name which they
intend for you to believe is their own!

There's an ancient device known as a telephone that can easily be used
to solve that problem.
--
% Randy Yates % "And all that I can do
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % is say I'm sorry,
%%% 919-577-9882 % that's the way it goes..."
%%%% % Getting To The Point', *Balance of Power*, ELOhttp://www.digitalsignallabs.com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, why don't you make some calls and then report back.

[dxAce]

Steve wrote:

On Oct 6, 11:48 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

ps.com...





On Oct 5, 3:54 am, RHF wrote:
On Oct 4, 10:45 pm, Telamon

wrote:
In article ,
Robert Orban wrote:

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
says...

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in
message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said
no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your
head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.

He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm
guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the
term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented
audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am
only one
member) was done very carefully.
Seehttp://www.nrscstandards.org/andclick
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are
implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you
would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and
what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

The only suggestion I have for you Mr. Orban is to work on your reading
comprehension. The handle is Telamon.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now be nice Telamon,

Mister Orban has posted under his own name
and has asked you to reply to him : in kind.

FWIW - Robert {Bob} Orban
* A Short History of Transmission Audio Processing in the United
States
-by- Robert Orban, San Francisco,
CAhttp://www.bext.com/histproc.htmhttp://www.261.gr/roberthistory.html
* Optimod "Ask Bob" - Orban/CRL Systems,
Inc.http://www.orban.com/support/orban/a...gr/robert.html
* Orban Audio Codec - "Opticodec
Line"http://www.orban.com/products/codec/

it's nice to be nice ! RHF
.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The fact is, it's pretty well impossible to know when someone is
posting under "their own name" on the internet. The only thing you can
really conclude is that someone is posting under a name which they
intend for you to believe is their own!

When it comes to content, nobody can duplicate one of Bob Orban's posts.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And do you have any evidence to back up this assertion?

He probably doesn't. Heck, he can't even provide any evidence of his non-existent amateur license.

The one thing we know for su David Frackelton Gleason is a pathological liar.

[Telamon]

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Steve" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Oct 5, 3:54 am, RHF wrote:
On Oct 4, 10:45 pm, Telamon





wrote:
In article ,
Robert Orban wrote:

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
says...

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in
message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said
no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your
head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.

He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm
guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the
term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented
audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am
only one
member) was done very carefully.
Seehttp://www.nrscstandards.org/andclick
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are
implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you
would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and
what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

The only suggestion I have for you Mr. Orban is to work on your reading
comprehension. The handle is Telamon.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now be nice Telamon,

Mister Orban has posted under his own name
and has asked you to reply to him : in kind.

FWIW - Robert {Bob} Orban
* A Short History of Transmission Audio Processing in the United
States
-by- Robert Orban, San Francisco,
CAhttp://www.bext.com/histproc.htmhttp://www.261.gr/roberthistory.html
* Optimod "Ask Bob" - Orban/CRL Systems,
Inc.http://www.orban.com/support/orban/a...gr/robert.html
* Orban Audio Codec - "Opticodec
Line"http://www.orban.com/products/codec/

it's nice to be nice ! RHF
.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The fact is, it's pretty well impossible to know when someone is
posting under "their own name" on the internet. The only thing you can
really conclude is that someone is posting under a name which they
intend for you to believe is their own!


When it comes to content, nobody can duplicate one of Bob Orban's posts.

I'll just bet with your experience faking personalities and gall that
you have demonstrated that you could do it.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

[Telamon]

In article om,
Steve wrote:

On Oct 6, 11:48 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

ps.com...





On Oct 5, 3:54 am, RHF wrote:
On Oct 4, 10:45 pm, Telamon

wrote:
In article ,
Robert Orban wrote:

In article telamon_spamshield-
,
says...

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in
message
news:telamon_spamshield-
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said
no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your
head.

Bob didn't test all the different model radios.

He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm
guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the
term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who
reinvented
audio
processing.

Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

This study, which was done under auspices of the NRSC (of which I am
only one
member) was done very carefully.
Seehttp://www.nrscstandards.org/andclick
"AM Bandwidth Study."

Telamon
Ventura, California

By the way, "Telemon," to whom am I actually speaking? If you are
implying
that the above referenced study was corrupt, I would hope that you
would at
least back up your accusation by letting us know your real name and
what
evidence you have that the study was flawed.

The only suggestion I have for you Mr. Orban is to work on your
reading
comprehension. The handle is Telamon.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now be nice Telamon,

Mister Orban has posted under his own name
and has asked you to reply to him : in kind.

FWIW - Robert {Bob} Orban
* A Short History of Transmission Audio Processing in the United
States
-by- Robert Orban, San Francisco,
CAhttp://www.bext.com/histproc.htmhttp://www.261.gr/roberthistory.html
* Optimod "Ask Bob" - Orban/CRL Systems,
Inc.http://www.orban.com/support/orban/a...1.gr/robert.ht
ml
* Orban Audio Codec - "Opticodec
Line"http://www.orban.com/products/codec/

it's nice to be nice ! RHF
.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The fact is, it's pretty well impossible to know when someone is
posting under "their own name" on the internet. The only thing you can
really conclude is that someone is posting under a name which they
intend for you to believe is their own!

When it comes to content, nobody can duplicate one of Bob Orban's posts.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And do you have any evidence to back up this assertion?

I'm sure he can recite a number of Arbitron statistics to prove that
assertion.

See the problem with Eduardo is that all arguments begin and end with
Arbitron since he supposedly has access to that data and we don't so he
can't loose.

Well I just re-ran the Usenet reader stats and Eduardo came out on the
bottom of believability contour of all posters. The number of people
that believe him is below 10% in the 25 to 54 age group or in other
words his bombast signal level is not high enough for most to put up
with. People will just tune out in favor of a more rational poster on
Usenet.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

[David Eduardo]

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

I'm sure he can recite a number of Arbitron statistics to prove that
assertion.

See the problem with Eduardo is that all arguments begin and end with
Arbitron since he supposedly has access to that data and we don't so he
can't loose.

Nearly 100% of the viable radio stations in rated markets has access to the
data. However, Arbitron only releases the data on 12+ listeners in one
daypart,, which is 6 AM to midnight. The rest of the data is copyright and
protected for only sales and programming purposes.

Well I just re-ran the Usenet reader stats and Eduardo came out on the
bottom of believability contour of all posters. The number of people
that believe him is below 10% in the 25 to 54 age group or in other
words his bombast signal level is not high enough for most to put up
with. People will just tune out in favor of a more rational poster on
Usenet.

You just don't like what you hear, so you make up your own definition of
listening, of markets (today's post was a good example) and of the way radio
is used. You have no data other than what your megaradio can pick up, and
you are projecting your own misconceptions on all radio listeners and this
newsgroup. You have a classic "shoot the messenger" mentality about anything
you don't agree with.

[Telamon]

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

I'm sure he can recite a number of Arbitron statistics to prove that
assertion.

See the problem with Eduardo is that all arguments begin and end with
Arbitron since he supposedly has access to that data and we don't so he
can't loose.

Nearly 100% of the viable radio stations in rated markets has access to the
data. However, Arbitron only releases the data on 12+ listeners in one
daypart,, which is 6 AM to midnight. The rest of the data is copyright and
protected for only sales and programming purposes.

Hilarious! This is just to funny.

Well I just re-ran the Usenet reader stats and Eduardo came out on the
bottom of believability contour of all posters. The number of people
that believe him is below 10% in the 25 to 54 age group or in other
words his bombast signal level is not high enough for most to put up
with. People will just tune out in favor of a more rational poster on
Usenet.

You just don't like what you hear, so you make up your own definition of
listening, of markets (today's post was a good example) and of the way radio
is used. You have no data other than what your megaradio can pick up, and
you are projecting your own misconceptions on all radio listeners and this
newsgroup. You have a classic "shoot the messenger" mentality about anything
you don't agree with.

Oh no Eduardo! I have the statistics to backup what I say!

--
Telamon
Ventura, California