Re: [IRCA] Two Thoughts About IBOC
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [IRCA] Two Thoughts About IBOC



Yes, I must have wiped out my electrical engineering background in digital audio and digital transmission systems and then confused radio and TV.

 

Why just last week I went to Casablanca for the waters and confused my wife with a hat.

 

And apparently you haven’t read my FCC submission that is anti-IBOC or my anti-IBOC comments in the broadcast industry media. Perhaps you confuse non-acceptance of your ideas with being pro-IBOC? A bit of a stretch there…..

 

 

Chuck

 


From: irca-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:irca-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of N0UIHEric@xxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 7:20 PM
To: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IRCA] Two Thoughts About IBOC

 

Chuck,

 

You're obviously confusing digital radio with digital television. All the figures you're spewing out is a PACK OF LIES. Digital radio on AM and FM is SPECTRALLY INEFFICIENT; I don't need to repeat this again. Even with the analog signal removed, the power needed to equal analog coverage is 1000% that of analog only, not the percentage you're brainwashed into believing. It's obvious you've been brainwashed by the supporters of terrestrial digital radio. It JUST DOESN'T WORK!

 

It's obvious you've been brainwashed by the anti-American, anti-marketplace and anti-consumer people at iBiquity and the National Association of Brainwashers.

 

AM and FM radio MUST REMAIN ANALOG ONLY. Ladies and gentlemen of IRCA, CHUCK HUTTON IS WRONG!

 

73, Eric (N0UIH)

_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx