R
rbrucecarter5
Guest
I tried it at a friend's house 70 miles from local towers, good HD lock on virtually all stations using just a dipole. Tell me again why FM needs a power increase?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
There is a proposal being pushed by iBiquity to increase digital injection levels for HD-FM from 1% of analog power to 10%. The NAB is split internally (see 4/9 RW) with the engineering section enthusiastically saying the idea is a swell one, with the predictable "and the interference shouldn't be bad!" chorus of reality-denying hyperbole - and the legal section saying the engineers should slow down and be more certain, pointing to the current unsustainable interference situation with HD-AM. Obviously the lawyers know something the NAB engineers don't: the whole shebang could come crashing down in class-action and RICO lawsuits if they're not careful.
(What else would you expect from an NAB which thinks it was a great idea to invite lefty-loon Tim Robbins to be a keynote speaker - as if this Hollywood-type has anything valid to say to broadcasters? Tom Taylor reports Robbins had little to say other than four-letter words and the coy suggestion that radio needs more sex and bad taste to improve business. But I digress.)
It may be moot. Few stations will be able to financially justify tearing down and rebuilding their entire FM plants to accomodate the tenfold increase in digital, which is what most installations would in effect be forced to do.
(What else would you expect from an NAB which thinks it was a great idea to invite lefty-loon Tim Robbins to be a keynote speaker - as if this Hollywood-type has anything valid to say to broadcasters? Tom Taylor reports Robbins had little to say other than four-letter words and the coy suggestion that radio needs more sex and bad taste to improve business. But I digress.)
It may be moot. Few stations will be able to financially justify tearing down and rebuilding their entire FM plants to accomodate the tenfold increase in digital, which is what most installations would in effect be forced to do.
Well I quit using HD before my Surgery, I can get a good clean fm stereo with a dipole antenna at my home that is 60miles-San antonio, and a good FM stereo signal at my place that is 84 miles to Houston. I did try one time with a dipole out in my place near Houston, I did get the call letters of KRBE one time but that was it. I can get RDS FM stereo and AM great on analog. HD, nothing without using my outdoor antenna, I have that going to Victoria to DX down to Corpus.
Savage said:There is a proposal being pushed by iBiquity to increase digital injection levels for HD-FM from 1% of analog power to 10%. The NAB is split internally (see 4/9 RW) with the engineering section enthusiastically saying the idea is a swell one, with the predictable "and the interference shouldn't be bad!" chorus of reality-denying hyperbole - and the legal section saying the engineers should slow down and be more certain, pointing to the current unsustainable interference situation with HD-AM. Obviously the lawyers know something the NAB engineers don't: the whole shebang could come crashing down in class-action and RICO lawsuits if they're not careful.
I see NRSC just decided to adopt an updated standard which includes revisions to the FM IBOC RF Mask, although full details won't be made available to the public for four weeks. Smitty says "... It changes the maximum allowable level that the waveform would be permitted to reach at a particular distance away from the [analog] carrier." Maybe someone here can decode that message, but it sure sounds to me like it authorizes the 10 dB digital increase:
http://www.rbr.com/radio/nrsc_hd_radio_standard_milford_smith.html
http://www.radioink.com/HeadlineEntry.asp?hid=141745&pt=todaysnews
Then, I guess this "economic stimulus package" for iBiquity, the transmitter manufacturers, the HVAC dealers, electric utilities, and antenna site landlords will be sent off to the FCC to be "rubber stamped" -- and the fun begins.
Considering that every New York and Philadelphia commercial FM station has at least one first- or second-adjacent short spacing, this increases the potential for mutually-assured destruction in the Jersey suburbs.
Yep, and here we go! Once again, the NAB and the How-Dumb Alliance indulge in "drawing the curve, and then plotting the data," by the simple expedient of just revising the NRSC mask! Presto!
"I don't hear any adjacent-channel interference? Do YOU, Glynn Walden? No?? Here, FCC, enact this!"
Here it comes: "Son Of The AM-IBOC Debacle," coming soon to the FM dial in the Northeast.
God willing, this will finally sound the death knell of IBOC. The only reason AM-IBOC hasn't brought it down is because most operators either don't care about AM any more, or major players like CBS are willing to rationalize disastrous interference (like WBZ vs. KDKA) because the revenues are smaller. When the first-adjacent problems hit on FM, THAT's not gonna be funny.
"I don't hear any adjacent-channel interference? Do YOU, Glynn Walden? No?? Here, FCC, enact this!"
Here it comes: "Son Of The AM-IBOC Debacle," coming soon to the FM dial in the Northeast.
God willing, this will finally sound the death knell of IBOC. The only reason AM-IBOC hasn't brought it down is because most operators either don't care about AM any more, or major players like CBS are willing to rationalize disastrous interference (like WBZ vs. KDKA) because the revenues are smaller. When the first-adjacent problems hit on FM, THAT's not gonna be funny.
rbrucecarter5 said:I tried it at a friend's house 70 miles from local towers, good HD lock on virtually all stations using just a dipole. Tell me again why FM needs a power increase?
Not sure where you are Bruce, but if you're in an area with 100 kw class C blowtorches - then reception is probably not an issue. I can assure you that on the east coast, the HD technology doesn't work for a damn.
That being said, I'm not on board with the power increase idea because I'm not sold on the technology. However, this is their unimaginative way of trying to work around their biggest problem - which is that you need a lot of signal to get HD lock. The problem will still exist even at 10%. My personal experience with FM HD is that strong local signals (that overload some radios) seem to provide just enough signal for digital lock. Anything less than perfection and you get nothing. The technology is too finicky - yet it mows over adjacent signals without difficulty.
I don't believe that the benefits of such a power increase will improve the service enough to make it worth destroying the FM band with hiss. And still, nobody is buying HD radios. There are almost no products on the shelves and what is there is poorly promoted - aside from the most intelligence insulting ad campaign I've ever heard ("...hi, your radio here, we're buddies right? heh, heh, heh...."). Gawd awful!
Nobody's buying it folks. That's because it's not worth the trouble.
rbrucecarter5 said:I tried it at a friend's house 70 miles from local towers, good HD lock on virtually all stations using just a dipole. Tell me again why FM needs a power increase?
Is that the dipole you have mounted on top of that 200' tower on your roof I've heard about? ;D
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.