Tag Archives: radio

From My Prediction Department: No More TVs

Posted in Uncategorized by

Generally, I steer clear of predictions. That said, this one feels different—I’m confident enough to stake my reputation on it. Here’s why: part of it is already unfolding. So let me walk you through the evidence backing my call.

For those unfamiliar with the industry, today’s radio broadcasters operate in an increasingly competitive landscape that spans nationally and globally. I can search for nearly any station online and stream it within moments, no matter where it’s located. With sufficient time and resources, many stations could conceivably dismantle their transmission towers and shift entirely to internet-based broadcasting.

I pause and consider television, wondering: why couldn’t the same approach apply? We could eliminate transmission towers across the nation, and potentially around the globe.

Consider this possibility: no more television sets, just a computer connected to the world through the internet—perhaps even via satellite. Imagine the freedom from cable bills and service contracts alike. Naturally, you would still have an internet bill.

Will there be a charge for this from the stations? Consider this carefully. Would you pay a dime to listen to station A when station B offers identical programming for a nickel? Perhaps station C provides it for two cents—or free of charge.

So nobody will buy a TV anymore—just a computer. With AI built in, you can simply talk to it and stream your shows right on the screen.

My TV recently malfunctioned—or more precisely, partially failed. Although I can still feed it an HDMI signal and enjoy regular viewing, streaming internet programs present a different experience altogether. Compared to traditional network and local station broadcasts, these offerings simply aren’t equivalent. While I haven’t fully investigated the reasons behind this disparity, I remain confident that this limitation won’t persist indefinitely.

I ordered a converter, and it performs excellently. I connect it to the antenna and then to the HDMI port. It brings back memories of the 1960s through 1990s, when dedicated audiophiles invested in component audio systems. We purchased a tuner, an amplifier, a turntable, and a tape deck. Enthusiasts often owned dual turntables for record playback. Premium speaker systems regularly commanded five or six hundred dollars.

After purchasing a tuner, I discovered an impressive upgrade for my TV setup. Originally, my television demanded an amplified antenna to operate effectively. Now, this compact device delivers pristine picture quality through a standard indoor antenna alone—eliminating the amplifier requirement entirely. Beyond that, the included remote proves far more intuitive than my previous one. For just $35, this tuner spared me from replacing my TV with a lower-quality picture.

Reflecting on my experience, I’ve concluded that I’ll never need another television. Should I start fresh, I’d pursue a component-based system instead—acquiring a tuner, monitor, and antenna separately. Not only would this setup outperform a smart TV, but it would also cost considerably less. Moreover, if any component requires replacement, I could simply swap out that individual piece rather than purchasing an entirely new television.

If I decide to get cable, the basic monitor should work even better. Most monitors don’t need remotes anyway, so there’s no risk of interference with cable remote controls.

My Prediction of the Year

Posted in Uncategorized by

I seldom predict things, mostly because I am not that good at telling the future. However, occasionally something will come along that is just almost obvious.

Ever since they went to digital broadcast TV, it has continued to drift that way ever more strongly. Today, few people in this country watch radio frequency transmissions. I perceive the only reason they Will continue to produce TVs that pick up RF is that there is likely some kind of rules requiring it. If a TV did not need the radio signal circuits, it would significantly decrease the cost of modern TVs.

If you observe, as I have, most TVs only begrudgingly include the radio signal circuits on their TVs that they sell. Give them the option to stop including them, and it would immediately happen. The TVs would cost less and they would still make more profit.

And so, it is only a matter of time, they gradually decrease the percentage of units that have tuners built into them. The tuners would be sold separately, as an option. Then as the number of tuners being sold decrease, they would stop offering them for sell at all. Then, with no tuners, why build, maintain or operate lesstransmitters.

I am predicting in fifteen years, the number of transmitters will begin decreasing. The number of broadcasters will continue to grow. They just won’t need the radio transmission. That decreases operation costs and likely a lot of government regulations as well.

Those frequencies currently reserved for TV can be relinquished to other things, maybe cell phones. That way, it makes it easier for people to watch our favorite tv show on our car phone while our self driven cars take us wherever we want to go.

The world of TV will be totally different. That part is easy to predict. What I’m not so sure about is, is it all going to be so good?

High Quality AM Reception

Posted in Uncategorized by

Now that I hardly watch TV, I listen to news on the radio much more. It does have a downside. The station I listen to is weak. Any kind of a storm, and I get very bad reception. As a last resort, I have taken to listening to the station on the internet. It is far better. The voices are far clearer and crisper. As a small side benefit, it’s stereo. It is a small point, given as it is news, it’s still a little nicer. I am sure there are some stations where that would make much more beneficial.

There is another advantage. Sometimes, for hours, the station is off the air but continues to transmit on the internet. It does make me wonder. Is the conventional radio station, AM & FM, going the way of the horse whip. It seems that I get more reliable internet than radio, an important factor in emergencies.

I don’t know. At one time, I was amazed at 3 minutes for a dollar over the AT&T long distance phones. Now, as long as I pay my cell phone bill, There is no extra charge at all if I should talk all day. We might be looking at a day when the TV stations disappear too. I really don’t think ABC, NBC, or CBS will much care for that. For decades, they have ruled what we watch on TV. Shortly, anyone who has the know-how and a little content will be competing with what little is left of the big networks. You notice that I left FOX out. They apparently saw it coming and are well on the way to the conversion. They already have 2 internet news channels that are doing very well. (Then that might have something to do with the content too.)

One more little thing. If I don’t like what is on the radio stations here around Memphis, I can just as easily listen to Milwaukee or Atlanta just as easily. It does broaden the competition, doesn’t it.