An Open Letter to Leonard Kahn
Guy Wire Says If CAM-D Is to Show Itself As a Viable Alternative,
Kahn Must Win Over Industry Forces That Can Make It Happen
 By
Guy Wire
Dear Leonard,
Having
read over your recent proxy response sent to us in reply
to my Oct. 14 article about anti-HD Radio arguments, I got to thinking.
Here is one of the brilliant radio engineers of our time, having
appointed himself as perhaps the most public and outspoken critic
of HD-AM, blasting it from every angle as a deeply flawed technology.
Leonard, over two years ago you offered your own CAM-D technology
as a superior performer that should be taken seriously as a more
worthy digital replacement for AM analog.
The claims you have made for CAM-D are breathtaking. You've lined
up a few old Kahn AM stereo fans who are providing test stations
that will hopefully prove whether CAM-D is a real and enduring product
of your engineering genius or theoretical vaporware.
PAST EXCELLENCE
Let's lay out historical perspective. I personally have high regard
for your engineering ability and many of the products your company
has produced for broadcasting over 45 years. The Symetrapeak was
such a product. Almost every station that pursued engineering excellence
had one. The all-pass filter that restored full modulation power
to asymmetric voices was way ahead of its time.
Kahn AM stereo failed in the marketplace, but it certainly was
not a technical failure. To this day, many engineers who understood
its advantages over the competing systems still judge it the best
performer. As in the VHS vs. Beta controversy, the best-engineered
system didn't win. But unlike the outcome in video, none of the
AM stereo systems "won." The entire industry, as well
as the consuming public, lost an opportunity for improved AM. History
has ecorded the reasons this occurred.
I cannot tell you how many of my colleagues have lamented the "loss"
of AM stereo. Every AM owner and engineer who made the investment
and implemented it on his or her station wanted very much for it
to succeed. However, amid threats of litigation and under pressure
from the NAB, the FCC blinked and rescinded its pick of Magnavox.
They took the easy way out and let the marketplace decide.
When receiver companies and most stations realized how bogged down
the rollout of AM stereo would be without a clear transmission standard,
especially in the midst of lawsuits, few committed to the technology.
AM stereo never had a chance.
WRONG LESSONS
This brings us to CAM-D. It appears to me that you learned the
wrong lessons from the AM stereo experience. Instead of being part
of the testing and evaluation process as you were with AM stereo,
you have chosen to keep CAM-D veiled in secrecy. Unless you share
technical details with the industry and can prove it works, all
we can conclude is that it's mostly driven by a need to grab some
limelight in the saga of radio's conversion to digital.
If you have a real product, if you want to be part of the party,
come to the dance. You must have CAM-D patent applications pending
or filed by now. Bring the technical details of CAM-D to an IEEE
symposium for all to see. Let folks like Bob Orban and Dave Hershberger
see what's under the hood. Enlist some major receiver companies
in some open real-world testing. Without them on board, CAM-D will
most certainly lose before it can even get to the starting line.
The U.S. radio industry appears to be lining up solidly behind
Ibiquity and HD Radio. But it's no secret that HD-AM is still facing
a problematic deployment and will be challenged at night during
the hybrid phase. If CAM-D is to show itself as a viable alternative,
you need to win over the industry forces that can make this happen.
At a minimum, if CAM-D has anything of value that could be implemented
in HD technology, consider selling it to Ibiquity. Radio's digital
and economic future depends on the very best ideas and solutions
aligning to make its basic delivery technology the best it can be.
If you see the light and change your mind, Leonard, promise me
this: After you're ready to prove CAM-D to the world with a fair
and open evaluation by independent experts, let the chips fall where
they may and accept the outcome.
Time is running short, Leonard. Unless your over-the-air CAM-D
tests happen soon and independent experts are on hand to declare
it as wonderful as you say, we must conclude you have nothing to
offer radio's future. But if your claims pan out, CAM-D could in
fact be part of AM's digital future.
Guy Wire is the pseudonym of a well-known engineer in the radio
industry who prefers to remain anonymous. His opinions are his own
and do not necessarily reflect those of Radio World.
|
