HD Radio Web

5 Responses on If you’ve used both, do you prefer satellite radio or HD radio?

• 
  By The Cool Radio Man at December 27th, 2008

  HD is Nothing like XM Satellite radio. HD is still your crappy AM/FM Stations just in better quality…. and who’s to say you have “hidden” channels. Not worth it. XM Satellite radio is the best radio.

• 
  By Tony S at December 30th, 2008

  I have Sirius and an HD radio.

  And to echo on “TCRM”s comments, with satellite radio you have MANY stations that cater to your tastes, commercial free whereas HD radio, is pretty much the same terrestrial stuff. On AM, the sound quality matches FM and on FM, the sound quality matches CD. There are the side stations (HD-2, HD-3) within each band but for now they are just pretty much offering market voids (in NYC, like Country) or derivatives of the standard station’s format (such as Hot 97 WQHT is hip-hop whereas their HD-2 is “Throwback”…older hip-hop).

  The only advantage HD has over satellite is that it is free. But in times, if these HD-2 stations take off..they WILL have commercials. Satellite radio, you can either pay per month or for the year…but WELL worth it if you are a music lover.

• 
  By greentadpole at January 3rd, 2009

  For now, there are not as many HD radio signals, especially outside major metropolitan areas. You still have the terrestrial signal patterns, which means you have to find new stations when you travel outside the current stations signal. So for now, satellite would be a better choice.

  As to the comments about ‘crappy’ programmers, I would only say the same ‘crappy’ programmers are the same ones who program XM and Sirius. As for commercials, they are inevitable on satellite radio. XM is already airing commercials on their more popular stations. An example is with your current cable/satellite channels. With the exception of HBO, Showtime and other premium channels, you are still surfing through the mindless series of ads, while being charged a pretty penny for service. If the proposed XM/Sirius merger is approved by the DOJ, I am fearful of less programming choices in an effort to cut costs by the company.

  So I would say in the future, HD radio will be able to offer just as much program variety as satellite, but without the monthly fee. But that argument is for another day.

• 
  By gearbox1 at January 5th, 2009

  I’ve heard the online streams of HD and listen occasionally to Sat radio.

  Sat radio for me doesn’t have enough choices for me (when they merge, then I think it would be some good programming choices) (I stream radio stations I love from other markets and are rated tops by people in the radio business, as well as online music players such as Slacker.com for my variety that most people would want anyway such as mixing classic rock and new rock with Sat radio doesn’t do)

  HD is as both said, a digital signal of the main channel in near CD quality on FM or they so claim (actual is closer to 96k ) but is supposed to make Am better….
  But yeah, you still have the same channels as before and except for a few markets where the broadcasters are actually adding actual formats not on the air.. most will be stuff that people don’t really want anyway (I’ve seen some markets having Pride/Gay radio for instance or new country on a country station)

  XM has samples running all the time on AOL for non paying members and both XM and Sirius let you road test the services before you buy them.

  But If you want to see what HD has to offer in your market try here:

  And here is a sample(streaming) of stations that Clear Channel is playing in markets on their HD 2 signal (which is a lower quality signal than the main channel)

  So now you as an informed person can make a decision…

• 
  By Ebonique13 at January 7th, 2009

  To me it doesn’t matter.