Another failure for HD Radio

[rbrucecarter5]

I'll answer that question. AM can do a lot more than it is doing right now. Prior to NRSC filtering (prior to the mid 80's), AM showed a lot of promise with AM Stereo. The AM Stereo radios were beginning show up in the stores and music formats were widely available. The FCC made a BIG blunder by not choosing an AM Stereo standard, and KEEPING a standard (Magnavox) in the first place. By the time the FCC chose the "de facto" standard (C-QUAM), the damage had been done. The NRSC filtering destroyed any possiblity of AM being a high-fidelity medium. Knocking out any audio above 10 kHz and introducing a new "pre-emphasis" curve pretty much did it for AM. The AM radios out there right now are horrible in terms of frequency response and overall quality. And now with IBOC, the average IBOC AM station sounds no better than the best "POTS" line (4 kHz). I think they should can IBOC for AM once and for all, get rid of NRSC filtering, re-introduce C-QUAM for general use for Stereo and maybe AM would have a fighting chance to survive. Sure, AM will never truly sound like FM. But, it sure can sound a hell of a lot better than it is right now.

AM has a break - a big one right now. The vast majority of new AM radio designs are inherently broadband. This isn't due to any attempt by the radio manufacturers to make high fidelity radios, it is merely the desire to pare the AM radio down to the fewest possible parts. The resulting IF bandwidth makes an amazingly good sound on an AM station that cares about its audio train. Given that probably a thousand of these cheap wideband radios are sold for every one HD radio, if that, it makes more sense to program a good, wide, audio bandwidth on AM. Instead, all of these adopters of IBOC have done is make their audio fully of self jamming on these cheap radios. More than just the 10 to 15 kHz sideband is involved. Any phase shift at the antenna site, any asymmetry in the IF amplifier of the radio, and certainly any mis-tuning on the part of the listener will also convert the 5-10 kHz portion of the IBOC transmission from phase to amplitude modulation, making for a noisy experience on the part of the listener. All this noise is much more annoying than 10 kHz heterodynes ever were. People migrated from AM to FM because of noise issues, a reality sadly lost on any station owner foolish enough to adopt HD radio.

What will save AM radio is less noise, not more. If we can't go back to C-Quam, at least make the mono audio as clean as possible. If I were iBiquity, I would internally admit defeat and just make AM HD - attempt number 2 - into the C-Quam, the chipsets have proved to be programmable to the standard, it really works over long distances, doesn't jam adjacents, and sounds great! Sure - it is analog - but as long as it sounds good I don't think the consumer cares. Inflammatory terms like "Antique Modulation" or "Ancient Modulation" are only hastening AM's demise in the public eye, and doing nothing to silence the voice of well reasoned, seasoned broadcast engineers who know the shortcomings of AM IBOC and dare to speak out.

 

[calstymes]

Savage assured:

Cal, my friend, don't lose a lot of sleep about this. It's kind of like worrying that it's going to start raining $50 bills before lunch today.

But this sort of stuff keeps me awake at night! What if an iBiquity IPO actually becomes a reality? Stranger things have happened in this world. The thought of this just shivers me timbers!

And Peter Q. George (K1XRB) cautioned:

Inflammatory terms like "Antique Modulation" or "Ancient Modulation" are only hastening AM's demise in the public eye, and doing nothing to silence the voice of well reasoned, seasoned broadcast engineers who know the shortcomings of AM IBOC and dare to speak out.

Where are the seasoned broadcast engineers in the trenches who know the shortcomings of AM IBOC are daring to speak out against the corporate IBOC behemoths? We know they're out there, but their loyalties to their employers seem to get the better of them. Besides Mr. Savage (of legendary fame and who always speaks his mind) the only other engineer who was on here for a short interval was Tom Ray, and we all know how he feels about IBOC.

 

[HowardMBurgers]

But I believe that just as IBOC, AM stereo is, and probably would still be a non-starter with consumers. AM has poorer audio quality no matter how well one transmits it. Add to that little issue the fact that non-IBOC related interference from consumer products and electrical systems have increased the overall noise floor on the Medium Wave Band, making AM unlistenable in a mobile environment depending on the received field strength vs. noise floor.

Statistics show that pretty much nobody under 40 years old listens to AM, let alone knows it exists, plus that age trend seems to be shifting older by the year.

So how does AM turn the ship around and develop new listeners? By technology alone? Hardly. However I would argue that just remaining status quo relishing in memory of the good ol' days when AM was considered Hi-Fi, will do nothing more than have the medium go to the grave along with it's aging listeners.

As in the 1970's this is no longer just a competition between AM vs. FM for ears folks. Inexpensive portable devices with much higher quality of audio than radio in general are dominating the younger demos. Am I to assume that those of you who, to paraphrase, that AM is fine the way it is, don't believe any change or upgrading is needed? Really??

 

[Savage]

I assume that remark is aimed at me (for one) and no, of course I don't "think AM is fine the way it is and don't believe any change or upgrading is needed."

I've posted here on numerous occasions a relatively inexpensive, low-impact plan to improve AM which would require neither huge capital outlays at transmitting plants nor replacement of receivers - in other words, it would not obsolete hundreds of millions of perfectly serviceable radios. I doubt most of the regulars here want to read it yet again.

But before any improvement ideas can rationally be considered, the unnecessary and counterproductive noise must be stopped. That is largely IBOC interference.

 

[RadeoEngineer]

AM can sound just fine given the proper attention to transmission systems and bandwidth. I had a Kahn system running on a 1 kW AM in 1986 and on a Sony boombox it sounded darn close to the FM it was simulcasting. Put good content on a well engineered AM and you'll get an audience.

 

[pqgeorge]

AM can sound just fine given the proper attention to transmission systems and bandwidth. I had a Kahn system running on a 1 kW AM in 1986 and on a Sony boombox it sounded darn close to the FM it was simulcasting. Put good content on a well engineered AM and you'll get an audience.

AMEN! I had a similar situation back in the early 90's. My good friend and mentor Dana Puopolo and I installed a new C-QUAM exciter at Bob Bittner's WJIB (740 kHz/250 watts) Cambridge, MA back in around 1994. The new exciter, feeding a Nautel AMFET-400 transmitter, worked flawlessly the moment we put it in. Installation took 30 minutes. I adjusted the Optimod for peak Stereo operation. Almost immediately we got calls wondering if we had a power increase (or something). Not at all. In fact, even the mono radios really improved as well. The new exciter coupled with our Optimod processor really pounded the Boston area with beautiful music in Stereo. It might have been only 250 watts. But MAN what a 250 watt signal it is! I believe Bob still runs C-QUAM to this day.

 

[HowardMBurgers]

AM can sound just fine given the proper attention to transmission systems and bandwidth. I had a Kahn system running on a 1 kW AM in 1986 and on a Sony boombox it sounded darn close to the FM it was simulcasting. Put good content on a well engineered AM and you'll get an audience.

Got it.. AM can sound fine to you. And you're how old?

So with that in mind, is it that you're claiming that if we turned back the clock and the FCC went with a Kahn system instead of Magnavox (then Motorola), then AM listening wouldn't be appealing to only the 50+ demo by 2009? Interesting.. A sour grapes statement that will never be proven, but interesting.

Wait! Or is it that you're saying that if only stations ran AM stereo then the AM band would be secure in its future for generations to come? Hmm... That could be a stretch too..

Ah, maybe you're thinking that AM stereo can compete with and IPod or Zune for audio quality! No, one certainly can't make that claim.. Hmm..

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Wait! Or is it that you're saying that if only stations ran AM stereo then the AM band would be secure in its future for generations to come? Hmm... That could be a stretch too..

Ah, maybe you're thinking that AM stereo can compete with and IPod or Zune for audio quality! No, one certainly can't make that claim.. Hmm..

C-Quam AM stereo can sound as good, or better than FM stereo. This has been the subject of numerous reports both technical and listener. The problem was the advent of talk radio, combined with a do-nothing FCC. If the FCC had mandated AM stereo / Amax standards in all new radios, the way they did with teletext for the deaf - AM might be a completely different band today.

So where are we today? Both AM stereo and HD-AM non starters with the public, the AM band full of talkers, brokered ethnic, etc. And way too many stations. The FCC failed to act when new interference sources came on the market. Can the band be saved? It will probably persist for years and years, but I think the FCC doomed it to eventual irrelevancy by the actions and non-actions above. It will become as irrelevant to the public as shortwave is now. Just another curiosity enjoyed by a select few. Little local TIS stations hawking tourist traps on a forgotten band. Perhaps a few high power clears hanging on, desperately pleading with the FCC to continue mandating the AM band on receivers - lest their own survival be threatened. Splatter of foreign language stuff over the border until Mexico, Central, and South America also give up. Castro's successor and political propaganda from all over the world beamed in at high power levels, until they, too, realize that AM has had it.

The fault - the FCC. They abandoned their mandate of alleviating interference decades ago, in favor of irrelevancies like minority ownership levels, etc.

 

[RadeoEngineer]

AM can sound just fine given the proper attention to transmission systems and bandwidth. I had a Kahn system running on a 1 kW AM in 1986 and on a Sony boombox it sounded darn close to the FM it was simulcasting. Put good content on a well engineered AM and you'll get an audience.

Got it.. AM can sound fine to you. And you're how old?

I am 58, with 35 years of experience in on-air, production, operations, and mostly engineering. How 'bout you?

So with that in mind, is it that you're claiming that if we turned back the clock and the FCC went with a Kahn system instead of Magnavox (then Motorola), then AM listening wouldn't be appealing to only the 50+ demo by 2009? Interesting.. A sour grapes statement that will never be proven, but interesting.

No, I said I ran a Kahn system at one of my stations. Prior to that I was involved with another station (50 kW, DA) that also ran a Kahn system. I also consulted another AM that ran a Motorola system. I installed and maintained both systems, and they both worked and sounded fine. Hardly sour grapes. I'm not claiming anything other than that an AM radio station, properly engineered, can sound very good in mono and excellent in stereo on a quality receiver. You don't think 10 kHz audio would sound better than 4 kHz audio if you could hear it?

Wait! Or is it that you're saying that if only stations ran AM stereo then the AM band would be secure in its future for generations to come? Hmm... That could be a stretch too..

I don't think there's a lot of security into the future for either AM or FM stations. I think the more the quality of transmission and reception systems are decreased that it's likely a bad scenario for either band. The industry has seemed hell bent on destroying audio quality of its signals for the past twenty years and I submit that's not helping gain or hold listeners in any demographic.

Ah, maybe you're thinking that AM stereo can compete with and IPod or Zune for audio quality! No, one certainly can't make that claim.. Hmm..

So now you're psychic? No, I don't think that. In fact I know it to not be true. My iPod with high quality noise cancelling earbuds sounds better than any AM or FM possibly could. So what? I also don't listen to it exclusively and frankly it sounds awful on an outboard FM transmitter into my car radio. My car radio also happens to be crap, especially on AM. But sometimes I'd rather listen to NPR because of compelling content.

So Mr. Burgers, have you ever heard a broad band AM Stereo on a good receiver? I have.

 

[HowardMBurgers]

I would box your questions in quotes, but you've already taken care of that...

When you say you're 58, you made my point. Nobody under 40 listens to AM. I maintain that's a problem for AM, not an opportunity. I'm 51, but hardly listen to AM anymore mainly because there isn't anything worth listening to. I have been in the broadcasting business for over 32 years and am a registered PE, currently in a corporate role.

Yes I have heard several stations in the day running AMX, Kahn, Magnavox, Harris, and Motorola. Back in the day they sounded okay, certainly better than mono AM's running bearfoot DAP's, but in no way did it ever approach the audio specifications nor quality of a good FM stereo station, even at 10kHz. As I mentioned, consumers never cared about AM stereo. That's the problem, not the modulation technique.

 

[RadeoEngineer]

I would box your questions in quotes, but you've already taken care of that...

Sorry about that. Not sure what happened there.

you say you're 58, you made my point. Nobody under 40 listens to AM. I maintain that's a problem for AM, not an opportunity. I'm 51, but hardly listen to AM anymore mainly because there isn't anything worth listening to. I have been in the broadcasting business for over 32 years and am a registered PE, currently in a corporate role.

On the contrary, I think you've made my point in that there isn't anything worth listening to anymore on AM, particularly for younger audiences. My position has always been more content based, though I believe technical improvements in audio quality are certainly factors that come into play. That few people under the age of 40 listen to AM (your postulation) strikes me as an opportunity to program to the under 40 crowd. That would be a huge potential, untapped audience. No? Don't ask me to tell you what the attractive content would be to the under 40 crowd. I just screw the wires together.

Yes I have heard several stations in the day running AMX, Kahn, Magnavox, Harris, and Motorola. Back in the day they sounded okay, certainly better than mono AM's running bearfoot DAP's, but in no way did it ever approach the audio specifications nor quality of a good FM stereo station, even at 10kHz. As I mentioned, consumers never cared about AM stereo. That's the problem, not the modulation technique.

I never said an AM stereo approached the audio specs of an FM stereo station. I did say that on a particular Sony boombox there was very little difference between one of my FM stations and the AM Stereo station that was simulcasting programming. Sure the FM had better response in the high end with 6 kHz additional bandwidth (I was running the 9 kHZ NRSC at the time) but the audio quality of the AM was very listenable compared to just about anything you would hear today with bad transmission systems and cheap narrow band receivers. I don't advocate that AM Stereo is the solution to saving AM broadcasters, I'm simply saying that running a higher quality transmission system is going to improve your chances. It still comes down to content.

 

[ajc_trw]

you say you're 58, you made my point. Nobody under 40 listens to AM. I maintain that's a problem for AM, not an opportunity. I'm 51, but hardly listen to AM anymore mainly because there isn't anything worth listening to. I have been in the broadcasting business for over 32 years and am a registered PE, currently in a corporate role.

On the contrary, I think you've made my point in that there isn't anything worth listening to anymore on AM, particularly for younger audiences. My position has always been more content based, though I believe technical improvements in audio quality are certainly factors that come into play. That few people under the age of 40 listen to AM (your postulation) strikes me as an opportunity to program to the under 40 crowd. That would be a huge potential, untapped audience. No? Don't ask me to tell you what the attractive content would be to the under 40 crowd. I just screw the wires together.

Someone should tell the folks at Radio Disney young people don't listen to AM.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Disney

I've always thought Radio Disney brought AM radio back to what they were really doing years ago (Boss Radio, KFWB, etc.): playing the latest pop hits with a modern flavored DJ announcing the music. Oldies AM is a replay while Radio Disney is what they would have sounded like if they continued on to this day.

 

[HowardMBurgers]

Okay then I'll be the first (snicker) to tell Disney that young people don't listen to AM, because they don't.

In every market RD is in, it never even shows in the ratings and is a money black hole . Disney had tried to dump it quietly on more than one occasion, but the fact is nobody wants to buy a batch of less-than-mediocre AM properties who have been catering to the 6-14 year old demographic. RD is a promotional tool for Disney theme parks and singing stars. Be on the look for several RD properties to go dark in the next year.

Don't believe me? Then go outside your local elementary or middle school and ask a group of young folks if they listen to RD. My guess is they'll either laugh, puzzled look, or no.

 

[KeithE4]

Okay then I'll be the first (snicker) to tell Disney that young people don't listen to AM, because they don't.

In every market RD is in, it never even shows in the ratings and is a money black hole . Disney had tried to dump it quietly on more than one occasion, but the fact is nobody wants to buy a batch of less-than-mediocre AM properties who have been catering to the 6-14 year old demographic. RD is a promotional tool for Disney theme parks and singing stars. Be on the look for several RD properties to go dark in the next year.

Don't believe me? Then go outside your local elementary or middle school and ask a group of young folks if they listen to RD. My guess is they'll either laugh, puzzled look, or no.

And if they are listening, it's probably via iTunes, Sirius/XM, or online. Not on a 7th-tier AM station that is one or more of the following: Above 1230 on the dial, lower powered (OK, there are 50 kW exceptions in LA, Phoenix, and NYC), or so directional that they don't cover their entire market. Only 3 RD stations are on FM.

 

[audioguy]

Agreed that most of the RD stations are on miserable frequencies that are full of noise and interference-- formerly reserved for exciting foreign language programs. Disney copied a previous childrens' format that targeted AM to broadcast to kids.

Somewhere along the way, things went south. I think that the introduction of HD AM had a lot to do with it. The stations broadcast with tin can audio quality that sounds worse than a telephone line, due to the brutal low passs filtering imposed by the HD exciter-- absolutely the worst possible thing you could ever do to a music format. Plus, HD doesn't work on these low powered stations, and kids aren't listening on HD radios. So they are forced to suffer with horrid audio quality and huge amounts of hiss. Who would listen to that?

I used to listen to RD, and I used to enjoy it. In the pre-HD radio days. Yet another failure for HD radio!

 

[KeithE4]

Agreed that most of the RD stations are on miserable frequencies that are full of noise and interference-- formerly reserved for exciting foreign language programs. Disney copied a previous childrens' format that targeted AM to broadcast to kids.

That was Radio Aahs. It assumed room temperature in January 1998. There was no market for kids on AM in the '90s anymore than there is today. It might have worked in the 1960s, but it was a dinosaur the day it went on the air. So is Radio Disney on AM, and I seriously doubt that more than a small part of their audience listens on AM - maybe in Mom's SUV but that's about it.

Somewhere along the way, things went south. I think that the introduction of HD AM had a lot to do with it. The stations broadcast with tin can audio quality that sounds worse than a telephone line, due to the brutal low passs filtering imposed by the HD exciter-- absolutely the worst possible thing you could ever do to a music format. Plus, HD doesn't work on these low powered stations, and kids aren't listening on HD radios. So they are forced to suffer with horrid audio quality and huge amounts of hiss. Who would listen to that?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Analog and digital transmissions in the same frequency band do not work! Amplitude Modulation is incompatible with every other transmission method; I don't care if it's spark, CW, FM, SSB, or any kind of digital modulation. Also, the lower frequencies are just not good for digital transmissions in the first place. There is not enough room in a given channel to transmit enough data to make it sound good. Then, there's the ionosphere...

I used to listen to RD, and I used to enjoy it. In the pre-HD radio days. Yet another failure for HD radio!

Can anyone tell me a success for HD radio, at least on AM?

 

[KB1OKL]

Yes it has succeeded in raising the noise floor.

 

[Savage]

I was in my old stomping grounds in Philly over Labor Day weekend and listened to the Disney affiliate - it may be an O&O - from Cherry Hill, NJ. It's 50kw on 640. With that power and frequency it ought to bomb all over the metro region, but it sounded like a 1kw daytimer coming in on skywave from Whatchacallistan. The HD-strangled low bandwidth made the music sound like it was coming out of a Chatty Cathy Doll. When my radio scan first stopped on 640 the station was playing a familiar tune from Miley Cyrus but it was so unintelligible I had to listen for a full ten seconds before I could recognize it. The IM from the brute-force audio filtering was awful. I've heard shortwave stations with better audio.

Then - how about that little daytimer on 910 The Mouse upgraded and moved into suburban Detroit from Flint? WFDF was, I think 1kw, and Diz powered it up to 50kw with an 8-tower DA....all broadbanded for HD, of course! Kintronic Labs built about 40 feet of phasing cabinets for the two 8-tower patterns. The phasing alone cost more than a million bucks.

All that capital and the station probably has 14 listeners. Another HD success story!

 

[Play Freebird]

Can anyone tell me a success for HD radio, at least on AM?

Well, this small-market station in Tennessee is having success with a Hardly Dressed campaign:

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/strange/Racy-billboards-raise-eyebrows-1259084610378

 

[radioskeptic]

KeithE4 said (in Reply # 53):

And if they are listening [to Radio Disney], it's probably via iTunes, Sirius/XM, or online. Not on a 7th-tier AM station...

You’re absolutely right, Keith. A younger colleague of mine told me that her daughter was big RD fan a couple of years ago, but she didn’t like the way it sounded on a radio (that HD-mutilated analog sound). The kid always wanted to listen on the computer! But of course now that she’s 12, she thinks she’s too sophisticated for RD.

In # 54, audioguy said:

I used to listen to RD, and I used to enjoy it in the pre-HD radio days. Yet another failure for HD radio!

That’s not surprising. RD cherry-picks the best of AC and country crossovers, and Disney’s own musical acts aren’t exactly terrible. In fact, some of them are not bad at all. On the whole, they’re much better than the manufactured (sub)teen idol garbage Dick Clark was pushing to the same age group fifty years ago (remember Fabian?) It‘s palatable enough to most of the mothers of the RD target demo. Mark Ramsey credits the influence of RD with shifting the upcoming teens’ taste away from rap and toward more a more pop sound.
With decent signals, RD could be viable – even on AM (preferably in stereo – and sans “HD,” of course!), if only we could do something about all the electrical noise plaguing AM from sources that didn’t exist a generation ago.

In Reply # 57, Savage said:

I was in my old stomping grounds in Philly over Labor Day weekend and listened to the Disney affiliate - it may be an O&O - from Cherry Hill, NJ. It's 50kw on 640. With that power and frequency it ought to bomb all over the metro region, but it sounded like a 1kw daytimer coming in on skywave from Whatchacallistan. The HD-strangled low bandwidth made the music sound like it was coming out of a Chatty Cathy Doll. When my radio scan first stopped on 640 the station was playing a familiar tune from Miley Cyrus but it was so unintelligible I had to listen for a full ten seconds before I could recognize it. The IM from the brute-force audio filtering was awful. I've heard shortwave stations with better audio.

Actually, Bob, it’s an O&O in Mt. Holly, about 10 miles ENE of Cherry Hill, and closer to Fort Dix and McGuire Air Force Base than to Philly. And you’re right about the awful sound.

But here’s something else to consider. The transmitter site is within second-adjacent WFAN’s 60 dBu ground wave contour (for the analog carrier at 660), and they’re using I-BLOCK, too. That makes the hiss all the stronger right in RD’s own back yard.

One final observation: If you’re purposely screwing up your analog signal just to accommodate a system that nobody needs or wants, and the result is so grating to the ear that you’re driving your fans (like my colleague’s daughter) to listen on the computer – where they won’t hear whatever spots you manage to sell in spite of your marginal signals (because union rules forbid streaming the spots) – what kind of a business model is that?