Blogging Nick Piggott

Singapore Airlines 9V-SKA Airbus 380 by fox2mike@ flickr

I’m feeling rather euphoric, and I’m not sure if it’s because I’m watching a glorious sunrise across Australia’s Eastern seaboard, or because I’m enjoying a quite lovely cup of tea and croissant, or because I’ve got Ultimate Kylie belting out of my noise cancelling headphones, or because I’m on board Singapore Airline’s A380, which is a quite extraordinary aircraft.

First impressions are very positive. The boarding gate at SIN is well organised, and surprisingly small security and boarding queues for a plane carrying 471 people. There are handy boards explaining to people how the split level boarding for economy will work, and the gate manages to board on both levels without actually making it feel like you’re boarding either “upstairs” or “downstairs”.

First step onto the plane, and it actually has that “new plane” smell to it (no, it really does). It’s also big – you can feel the extra space when you walk in. On the top deck, there’s no centrally slung luggage bins, which immediately makes the ceiling higher.

Anyone who flys, even a bit, knows that there are some inequalities in a plane; first, business and economy. On SQ’s A380, the gap between the First Suites and Economy is huge, but that’s more a reflection of sumptuousness of the First Suites rather than a shoddy economy class. You can’t really do a lot about where you fly in the plane – you’re either rich, lucky, or some mix of the two.

So here’s the big thing that I’ve enjoyed from my first A380 flight, and something everyone on the plane will enjoy. It’s humid.

By that I mean that the air feels comfortably damp, as opposed to bone dry as it is in many aircraft. I felt far less dried out than I normally do, and I did a little test by spilling a bit of water on to my napkin. On the worst offenders (yes, hello A340-600 – I mean you), it would be dry in a few minutes, the moisture sucked out of it. On the A380 it was still damp 10-15 minutes later. Bad news if your neighbour spills wine all over you, good news if you don’t appreciate having to down 2 litres of water an hour and then still feeling like a sheet of dessicated sandpaper.

SQ have also seriously upped the game for inflight entertainment. Microsoft should take notes on how good their User Interface to the inflight entertainment is – really clean, clear, and visually attractive. The functionality is good (but is basically a soup-up of the  system which has been in SQ planes for a while). Brilliantly, in C and A, you can use StarOffice applications with a USB key and a little keyboard. Not sure if I’d want to edit Powerpoint on a keyboard the size of a mobile phone, but hey, for those last minute panic edits – why not?

Other nice things. It’s big (did I mention that?), it’s unbelievable quiet and the take off from Singapore was frankly breathtaking by being almost unnoticable. The aircraft appeared to amble down the runway, taking its time, then just gently rotated and went into the air. It simply wasn’t possible to hear the 4 RR engines roar, or feel the point where the wheels lost contact with the ground. Smooth is not even close to describing it.

The amenities are great; I mean, airline toilets are always going to be small for many reasons (you work it out), but these ones are bright and the one with the child-changing area is big enough to have a small party in. (For the amorous; top deck, far front toilet, left hand side).

The touch that I really loved, but wasn’t in use, was the front staircase between the two decks. It’s been inspired by the sweeping staircases from ocean liners, but scaled to fit a commercial aircraft. It’s glamour, 2007 airline style. I liked it. I hope to be able to use it one day.

Overall the A380 really is a wonderous aircraft; the commitment to building “a bloody big plane” could have led to all sorts of horrid things happening in the cabin. In fact, it’s curiously understated (maybe that’s a European thing), and subtly glamorous. It’s so classy, it doesn’t need to shout about it. I’m keen to fly A380 again.

Elizabeth, Gabrielle and I by thejulietfiles@ flickr

I don’t think there was much surprise today at the announcement that Virgin Radio Viva will not be launching on the second national multiplex. Certainly far less surprise than there was when it was announced that Virgin was going to launch a station called “Viva” aimed at 30-something females (someone didn’t realise that the name Viva is jinxed).

The justification is that Virgin will focus on guitar driven rock, which makes sense. It’s what listeners understand Virgin to stand for, and why on earth would you want to build the Virgin brand up even more for Richard Branson?

Virgin Radio Groove will also be disappearing, although its carriage on DAB was pretty limited. At least they’ll get some money from auctioning off the EPG slots on Sky.

Viva not appearing is, broadly speaking, good news. DAB didn’t need another service  targeting the eponymous “30-something female”. Clearing that space might allow C4 to do something really interesting that would never have made it through the application stage. It does also highlight the relatively slow-movement of the licensing regime against an increasingly fluid and fast moving radio industry that is beginning to synchronise against Internet time rather than late 1970’s BBC time.

2008 could be a fascinating time for national DAB. C4 could do marvellous things, and DigitalOne (eventually freed from the shackles of BT Movio) could actually compete with new services. I am optomistic that the competition between C4D and D1 will be based not just on new audio services, but on finally making some exciting data services too.

Fridge Top by Kill Pop @ flickr (CC)

There’s a BBC kids TV show which includes an animated sequence featuring a blue cow having the most incredulous imaginary adventures. The verbal cue for this segment is for one cow to turn to another and say, in a bored, drawn-out drawl “Oh.. She’s at it again…”.

Anyway, Jack Schofield’s written another article about DAB/DAB+ etc. in the Guardian today. It’s here, although you’ll probably either have seen it already or have a fair idea of what it says.

Basically, Jack’s postulation (and I know you’ll be shocked to hear this) is that there’s no point to DAB Digital Radio. It’s low sound quality, and you can get the same (in his opinion, mediocre) range of channels from Freeview or a WiFi Radio.

Done the sound quality thing. Jack has a gourmet view, the vast majority of people appear to have Tesco/Asda view. There will be quality platforms for audio, but they’ll appeal to, and have to be funded by, the diminishingly small number of people with sufficient passion for it. So I’m not going to reheat that debate again.

But let’s look at Jack’s view on how you’ll get radio, range of choice and quality of content.

I’m bemused that Jack thinks that the absence or presence of DAB will change the quality of radio programming. If quality is an inverse product of quantity, and technologies like broadband, digital satellite, direct satellite, cable, 3G (… continue at your leisure) allow an unending amount of radio stations to be formed and distributed, how would having or not having DAB make a difference? In a way, by establishing a platform that does have some genuine cost to entry there is an investment threshold that needs to be cleared and that generally means having “a plan”. Think back to the early days of satellite TV and how the “quality press” used to lay into the quality of programming then. Don’t journalists learn from the past? Now that digital TV is squarely established as the primary delivery platform, guess what – there’s more quality programming there.

Last point. DAB as a delivery platform. Jack encourages people to buy a WiFi radio or a Freeview box, because that’s a better investment than DAB. Well, don’t expect to pick your Freeview box and move it around the house, or have it on the kitchen windowsill, as it’s going to need one of those big “aerial” things on top of your house to work properly. So if you are going to use Freeview for radio, be sure to carry a length of RG75 coaxial cable round with you, a 8mm drill bit, some cable clips and a tube of waterproof filler for all the holes you’re going to drill in your window frames. And don’t be disappointed if radio is dropped from the Freeview platform to make way for more TV.

WiFi Radios are certainly fine. I have one, in my kitchen. There’s a specific, unusual, reason for that which certainly (and I can prove this statistically if required) puts me in less than 4% of the population. My kitchen WiFi radio is on for 5-10 minutes a day. But WiFi radio is predicated on a future of unlimited, unmetered, internet bandwidth, which certainly isn’t a given. And it requires a certain Quality of Service to operate correctly, which also isn’t guaranteed. If Internet streaming radio ever made anyone serious money, you can bet that the ISPs in the middle would want to find a way of worming their way into the business plan.

Referring back to my representative British Radio Listener, when presented with a choice of over 6,500 radio stations to listen to, what are they going to do? Yes, they’re going to listen to the ones they know. There is a point where increased choice goes beyond what’s viable for people to understand.

It does appear that Jack lives his life within the confines of his home. I wonder how he envisages people listening to radio on the move in the future? Car? Handheld radio? Travelling away from home? Your WiFi radio will work, apparently for free once you’ve paid for your broadband, within the radius of your WiFi router. But no further.

DAB is not the platform for a high quality audiophilic listening experience. DAB is not the platform to provide over 6,500+ channels of radio stations. It’s not positioned to do that, it’s not marketed to do that, so don’t compare it against those expectations and claim it’s a failure.

DAB is the most pragmatic, cost-effective, universally available technology for radio’s digital future. It’s not the only technology – IP, 3G, Satellite etc. will all have their place – but DAB is the best all rounder for the medium that’s all around us.

 [Bootnote] Happy Birthday to DigitalOne, which launched at 11am on the 15th November 1999, and is widely credited with catalysing the growth of DAB Digital Radio in the UK. DAB is still growing in popularity, which might not be said of “Sporty Spice” who performed the switch-on.

No Msg Zone by Quiet Nights of Gotham @ flickr

I’ll have to admit I was both appalled and amused by Mark Ramsey’s latest blog item, “Text Messaging – New Revenue for Radio”. Mark, quite rightly, challenges radio stations to go out and investigate the opportunities that SMS Text Messaging can bring to radio stations, and the revenues it can create.

I’m amused because it’s a very symbolic reminder of how great the chasm is between radio in the US, and radio in pretty much the whole of the rest of the world. I can’t think of a country in Europe, Asia or Australasia where the radio stations aren’t using SMS as a primary component of audience interaction, and raising some revenue as a result. Indeed, so great and enthusiastic has been the engagement of radio and TV broadcasters in the UK to embrace revenue generating SMS activity, that it’s provoked a rather nasty backlash from consumers and regulators. Wouldn’t Mark’s blog have been even more effective if he’d Googled on the subject a bit, and appended a warning along the lines of “hey, but check out what happened in the UK when they tried to push it too far, and learn from them”?

Assuming that SMS has been part of the UK broadcasting landscape since 2001 (and I can say with some authority that the DAB station “Core” in the UK was using SMS as its primary listener contact from 15th November 1999), we’re at least 5-6 years ahead of the US. Come learn from us, but start by understanding that you’re not forging ahead into unknown territory.

When I get the opportunity to talk at conferences or with broadcasters who are at different phases in their development of new technology, I always try and highlight the things we have seen go wrong. Knowing what can go wrong and how to avoid it, in my opinion, at least as valuable as knowing what went right.

What appalled me about Mark’s post is, in fact, not really about Mark’s post. What worries me is the widely held assumption that the US radio industry is leading the global development of radio, and that US commentators are more informed and astute than their European counterparts. Not only does this apply to things like SMS messaging, but also subjects like “Why WiMax is the perfect platform for radio” (wrong…) and in programming areas too – witness the flocking to the “Jack” music format.

I consciously decided not to attend NAB Europe in Barcelona this year after some disappointing and frustrating experiences at the last two events. It’s marvellous to bring speakers from the US over to NAB Europe, but could someone please tell them to adjust their attitudes before engaging mouth? Europe may not speak English, but we’re miles and miles ahead of the US industry, which has got stuck in the turgidity of consolidation and insular thinking. From the feedback I received from colleagues at the event, my decision to stay home and work on other projects  looked to be a good one.

This is not a diatribe against the US radio industry and US commentators. They are where they are, and in a lot of cases their landscape is dramatically different to the one the rest of the world lives in. Europe’s infatuation with PSBs will never be understood outside of Europe (and even those of us who live here do wonder sometimes), and I’ll never understand the popularity of Country and Western as a music format. Celebrate the differences rather than trying to iron them out. If anything, my concern is that people in the industry don’t look outside their comfort zones when looking for innovation and future thinking. There are great things happening in radio in Europe, Asia and Australasia and just because those great things are being done in German, Italian, Swedish, Malay, Chinese, or Thai doesn’t lessen their value to a global radio industry.

Radio of dash of 58 Eldorado – cadmanof50s @ flickr (CC)

Since the inception of DAB, much has been talked about the platform’s data capabilities. Indeed, quite a lot of the justification for commercial radio engaging so convincingly was that it allowed broadcasters to provide more than just audio services and provided a path to genuinely new revenue streams outside of airtime advertising.

What actually happened of course is that everyone piled into making new radio stations, and the available capacity was quickly used up by existing stations, new stations from existing operators and a handful of new entrants. Landgrab meant that muxes were full, and there was no space left for the data services. The critical upside of muxes full of radio stations was to create an absolutely compelling and simple to understand reason for consumers to go and buy a DAB Digital Radio; something that improved audio quality had totally failed to do (understood by consumers, but not compelling).

As some of those landgrab stations have fallen by the wayside, and capacity has begun to reappear, some interesting new ideas are slowly beginning to surface (awkward transmission problems notwithstanding).

Traffic Radio is a brilliant service. All it does is non-stop rolling travel. Dip in for 5 minutes, and you get the regional travel for your area. Job done. Small, neat but unbelievable effective, and exactly the kind of service that DAB should be enabling.

Stations have started experimenting with Slideshow to add visuals to radio, which in my opinion is exactly the kind of innovation that listeners and clients have been expecting from radio for a while.

And some receivers are doing really excellent implementations of EPG (Electronic Programme Guide) that allow true Tivo type functionality, which goes a long way towards justifying capacity allocated to that service.

Content downloading (or “broadcast podcasting” – em, “brodcasting?”) has been promised by 4 Digital Group (operators of the second national multiplex) as a way of broadening choice of listening and bringing services to listeners that couldn’t otherwise justify a traditional time-linear streaming channel. Similarly, UBC’s Cliq service aims to encourage music purchasing by DAB listeners.

Most significant is the arrival of TTI – Traffic and Travel Information – data services. TTI is the information that can keep SatNavs up to date with actual road conditions and events, and other geo-located information. As the ownership of SatNav devices has burgeoned, so has the demand for accurate TTI information, and DAB is (surprise surprise) turning out to be an ideal platform to keep hundreds of thousands of cars updated at the same time. If we see TTI services launches in 2008, expect to see a wave of SatNav devices incorporating DAB. In a way, it’s a very Zen like approach to fixing the problem of getting DAB in the car; we’re going to get where we want to be, but not down the route we thought we’d travel.

So the apparent razing of some of the DAB landscape has actually been catalytic, allowing some new green shoots of ideas to popup where once they would have been smothered by big fat old radio stations. Radio is still vitally important, but it doesn’t have the be the only thing that drives DAB on.