Maybe it's just me, but I don't see any benefit to HD radio. I can't discern any sound quality difference it and regular FM. It just seems to complicate station selection, what with HD-1, HD-2, HD-3, etc.

Anyone think this is an improvement, or it just a way to get more bandwidth into the radio spectrum?

.
.

 

The advantages were supposed to be digital vice analog so static and multipath should be reduced/eliminated. I'm not sure this is much of a problem with modern electronics in large cities anyway. Yes they can get more channels in the same bandwidth. You can also get more info on the songs like with satellite radio. I also think it is a little assault on XM/Sirius. It is also making its way into home AV receivers. It has potential but I think it is still in its infancy.

 

I've played with it a little and I notice a big difference in quality over standard fm and xm. I listened to cbsfm (a NY oldies station) and it has 3 hd stations all with different content..when i listened, one had music, one had sports and the other had news

 

I notice a big difference as well and it is way better in quality than XM

 

Well, for that matter, regular FM is better quality than XM, since XM's compression algorithms are pretty heavy.

Maybe it's the signal quality in my area, but I can switch between FM and HD and see no difference. There's even a station or two locally that broadcast in both AM and FM-HD, and switching back and forth sounds identical.

I guess I expected to hear more fullness and better fidelity, but meh. Ain't nothing like regular TV vs. HD-TV!

.
.

 

Yeah, I don't argue the content thing - it's like when TV went digital, and there were suddenly more sub-stations. I just don't hear a difference in sound quality.

.
.