-
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
Boston AM IBOC AIRCHECK
- Thread starter mgpt6
- Start date
P
PhilGalasso
Guest
LinoNYC said:
The skywave interference from IBOC is not only affecting other skywave-propagated stations. Here in eastern Pennsylvania, within the 0.5 mV/m contour of WABC, WABC is now almost totally obliterated by WJR at night. WABC is on 770 kHz and WJR, licensed to Detroit, is on 760 kHz. The I-BUZZ from WABC also interferes with WJR, of course. Both stations came in clearly at night here before they kept the IBOC sidebands on at night. While listening across the band at night, the segment from 690 to 790 kHz sounds a lot like the 40 meter ham band did at the height of the Cold War. Just as the Soviet white noise jammers made the upper part of that band useless at night, the IBOC interference makes this segment of the AM band useless at night in this area.
A local station, WARM on 590 kHz, is receiving nighttime interference from the IBOC digital carriers of WIP (610 kHz), whose transmitter is located 130 miles away, during the early evening when the skip is still quite short. The interference is in the form of an annoying, high-pitched hiss that fades up and down (as does the analog carrier of WIP) as propagation changes. It is not audible during the day, when WIP puts a weak groundwave signal into the area.
This is progress? Fact: 30 kHz signals DO NOT BELONG in a band where the channels are only 10 kHz wide and skywave propagation is a fact of life. This is what happens when we have an FCC that is dominated by lawyers and people beholden to lobbyists, rather than by engineers.
Yes, WSM streams. But if we can hear programming on the Internet, why bother with radio at all? Let's just kill the analog signals that are our bread and butter and sacrifice them on the altar of this ill-conceived, hair-brained digital system. Or just Webcast to the 1,500 or so people who can connect to the server at any one time rather than to serve thousands of people in the groundwave and skywave contours.
Savage said:
HD is on just about every viable AM in the top 100 markets.
No group invested "heavily" in HD. The CCU investment is the eqivalent of about one week's billing of their LA cluster.... or less.
Canada has eliminated nearly two thirds of its AMs, by moving them to FM. Major CBC stations in Toronto and Montreal have moved totally to AM. The Maritimes trasnsmitter at Moncton is gone, replaced by local FM. The Canadian LPRTs are almost all on FM now.
P.S. The HD Alliance did not exist until hundreds of HD stations were on the air. Ithad nothing to do with development.
L
LinoNYC
Guest
Question: How many ads does WABC sell against the Eastern Penn audience?
I'am not trying to be a smartass, I understands your frustration over the years I have lost many of the stations I enjoyed. Live local overnights replaced by coast to coast feeds that araen't worth listening to. Outside of the Saturday night oldies show, there is not anything on WABC that you can't find alot closer to home w/out the fading etc.
Back in the early to mid nineties I could hear WARM's morning show, it's been gone for atleast 8 years along with a much diminished WICC. L.I's WHLI was once weak but in the clear, gone for atleast 7 years now. Another favorite WOWO was bought by the owner of WLIB and it's signal truncated so the 'LIB could go 24hr at higher than daytime power! In the eighties I loved Joe Donovan's oldies show on WHAS, but that show was replaced with junk and the station covered with noise years ago.
Barely get WWKB no more WPTR, in the 1970s I could even get WAVZ in the daytime (a 1K from New Haven) here in Manhattan.
I could go on, most of the distant AMs disappeared under the noise floor or other circumstances, long before iboc. Most of these stations became unlistenable as the result of industry-induced policies that have been well documented by others in this forum.
The latest scheme, AM iboc was the result of Am broadcasters demanding to be included in any digital plans.
As I have said before, we got the reduced 10K mask as the result of years of heavy eq and compression-induced splashing
Well, the aforementioned offenses were committed while the industry was "dominated" by PDs, and engineers. I guess you can't win.
Lino
Ah, another glimpse into the doomsday-dream of this board's best-loved AM-radio hater! "I love the smell of napalm in the morning."
So let's posit the fervent wish of every IBOC-AM lover: it's that post-apocalyptic morning where every entrepreneurial AM operator is driven out of business by the iBiquity-bought FCC working hand-in-iron-glove with major radio groups David Gleason so adores. There are maybe 400 AMs left, all in major markets, the only place where IBOC-boosters think radio belongs anyway. And: it's that happy time when it's time to morph everything on AM to all-digital, so we can get rid of that antiquated analog signal that's mucking up pristine IBOC digital!
While you're booking the hall for the IBOC victory banquet, I'd recommend waiting to order the big sheet cake. At current sales levels of HD-AM radios, there won't be enough listeners to even support 400 stations until.....well, I'd estimate about 2075.
Unless, of course, iBiquity and the Commission buy the National Guard, have them deploy door-to-door, ordering everyone owning an AM radio to surrender it immediately or face internment without hearing - then have the IRS hold up tax refund checks until potential listeners produce, with their returns, a receipt from a store showing a recent HD-AM radio purchase.
Arbitron PPM technology could be revised to rat out members of the public who are NOT listening to HD-AM regularly so they could be subject to fines or possible imprisonment for failure to support IBOC with appropriate enthusiasm.
My view is this is about what it will take for HD-AM to succeed. At a minimum.
So let's posit the fervent wish of every IBOC-AM lover: it's that post-apocalyptic morning where every entrepreneurial AM operator is driven out of business by the iBiquity-bought FCC working hand-in-iron-glove with major radio groups David Gleason so adores. There are maybe 400 AMs left, all in major markets, the only place where IBOC-boosters think radio belongs anyway. And: it's that happy time when it's time to morph everything on AM to all-digital, so we can get rid of that antiquated analog signal that's mucking up pristine IBOC digital!
While you're booking the hall for the IBOC victory banquet, I'd recommend waiting to order the big sheet cake. At current sales levels of HD-AM radios, there won't be enough listeners to even support 400 stations until.....well, I'd estimate about 2075.
Unless, of course, iBiquity and the Commission buy the National Guard, have them deploy door-to-door, ordering everyone owning an AM radio to surrender it immediately or face internment without hearing - then have the IRS hold up tax refund checks until potential listeners produce, with their returns, a receipt from a store showing a recent HD-AM radio purchase.
Arbitron PPM technology could be revised to rat out members of the public who are NOT listening to HD-AM regularly so they could be subject to fines or possible imprisonment for failure to support IBOC with appropriate enthusiasm.
My view is this is about what it will take for HD-AM to succeed. At a minimum.
k2pg aptly queried:
Yes! Didn't you know? This is going to save the AM broadcast band from obscurity and it will become relevant again!
Gee, ya think?
The IPO isn't too far off now so keep watching this here space, but they're going to have to do a better marketing job before they can actually make it fly, don't you think?
Yes! Didn't you know? This is going to save the AM broadcast band from obscurity and it will become relevant again!
Gee, ya think?
The IPO isn't too far off now so keep watching this here space, but they're going to have to do a better marketing job before they can actually make it fly, don't you think?
Cal cleverly chortled:
They're going to have to do a better marketing job before they can make (HD-AM) fly, don't you think?
See: above post for what KIND of "marketing job" would be necessary. Probably, threats of imminent demise at gunpoint would be the only thing that would be effective.
("I'm headed to the fridge for another beer," he said coldly.)
They're going to have to do a better marketing job before they can make (HD-AM) fly, don't you think?
See: above post for what KIND of "marketing job" would be necessary. Probably, threats of imminent demise at gunpoint would be the only thing that would be effective.
("I'm headed to the fridge for another beer," he said coldly.)
As long as we're paying homage to Cal, Savage Slyly Suggested,
So if IBOC is doomed as some in here have repeated many times, why not just go about your business and ignore it. After all, if there's no future for IBOC, why waste your time posting anti IBOC comments, here and elswhere.
Savage said:
So if IBOC is doomed as some in here have repeated many times, why not just go about your business and ignore it. After all, if there's no future for IBOC, why waste your time posting anti IBOC comments, here and elswhere.
P
PhilGalasso
Guest
R.F. Burns said:
We cannot ignore it because of the harmful interference that it is causing to AM stations that were once perfectly listenable at night, including local stations that are getting IBOC interference from distant stations via skywave. Castro's ICRT couldn't do a better job of jamming American broadcasters! People, you can't fit a 30 kHz wide signal into a channel that is only 10 kHz wide without interfering with somebody.
There is no future for IBOC, at least on the AM band. But it will take lawsuits against iBiquity and the interfering stations by stations that are suffering audience loss due to this interference, as well as protests by Canada and Mexico over this interference, to kill AM IBOC once and for all.
FM IBOC can be compared to the 1959 Edsel. That model was not a bad car, but people just didn't want it. The IBOC receivers are not exactly flying off retailers' shelves...assuming, of course, that the retailer knows what "HD Radio" is and doesn't march you into the Sirius/XM aisle! FM IBOC's main disadvantage is the lousy coverage of the digital component, although the all-digital version of IBOC that may eventually be used on FM frequencies should overcome that. However, AM IBOC can be compared to the 1958 Edsel: A lousy product that nobody wants. iBiquity's AM system is like a high-performance automobile with square wheels, a rag stuffed into the carburetor, and a gallon of kerosene added to the fuel tank.
R. F. rudely ruminated:
Why waste time posting anti-IBOC comments here or elswhere (sic) ?
Hmm. Why WOULD I keep campaigning against HD-AM? Because it could cost me $100 grand this winter. Tell you what, Mr. Burns. I'll split it with you. Send me $50 grand cash today, and I promise not to say anything more negative about IBOC until spring.
Besides, stirring up David Gleason is fun. He's the anti-IBOC crowd's secret weapon.
Why waste time posting anti-IBOC comments here or elswhere (sic) ?
Hmm. Why WOULD I keep campaigning against HD-AM? Because it could cost me $100 grand this winter. Tell you what, Mr. Burns. I'll split it with you. Send me $50 grand cash today, and I promise not to say anything more negative about IBOC until spring.
Besides, stirring up David Gleason is fun. He's the anti-IBOC crowd's secret weapon.
vsa said:
Why? Why should we allow anti IBOC comments to go unanswered? I can understand your making comments about unsubstantiated IBOC claims, if you have information to counter any conclusion made by a pro IBOC individule, but for you to make anti IBOC comments and not expect us to counter is unrealistic. My comment was that, considering how many times we've been told that IBOC is dead and failing, you'd think that people would just go about their business and ignore what they believe to be the inevitable.
Savage said:
Then I guess IBOC isn't the non issue some would have you believe by what they post on this board. No one is trying to restrict your speech here. I asked a question which I felt was appropriate in an open forum.
Savage said:
Excuse me Bob, are you calling my comments "rude"? Can you explain what was rude about any comment I have made? I have always tried to be respectful of those who have shown me respect. Are you implying that anyone who disagrees with you is rude? That's pretty narrow thinking in my opinion, no disrespect intended. While you and I might have different takes on this particular subject, to say that I "rudely ruminated" would be a rather large overstatement. I sincerely hope you are not a 'my way or the highway' kind of person. That type of narrow-mindedness serves no purpose when discussing a contentious issue.
Sure, happy to oblige! In your post you have branded me (twice) as "narrow-minded" (presumably because I publicly oppose an FCC-santioned science project that is likely to cost me tens of thousands of dollars), "paranoid" (earlier in the thread) and suggesting it would be productive to "shut off my transmitter" and broadcast only on the Internet. I guess in the Land Of Burns this is what passes for "respect" for radio professionals with whom you disagree.
So: taking a little etymological stroll through Webster's definitions of "rude"....we find, the word means any and all of:
1. Primitive, uncivilized; 2. lowly, humble (we'll concede this count of the indictment) 3. Lacking the graces of civilized life; 4. Formed without skill or precision; 5. Lively, robust; 6. Sudden and jarring (as in "a rude surprise.")
Various synonyms also appear to resonate: DISCOURTEOUS, ILL-MANNERED, IMPOLITE.
Rude also is a very applicable root word such as RUDERAL (growing in rubbish or poor soil, as in, 'IBOC was desperately cooked up by semicompetent radio industry suits in tandem with a ruderal development team headed by a third-rate electronics firm') and RUDESBY, an archaic middle-English term describing an ill-bred or nasty-tempered person.
Hope this helps!
So: taking a little etymological stroll through Webster's definitions of "rude"....we find, the word means any and all of:
1. Primitive, uncivilized; 2. lowly, humble (we'll concede this count of the indictment) 3. Lacking the graces of civilized life; 4. Formed without skill or precision; 5. Lively, robust; 6. Sudden and jarring (as in "a rude surprise.")
Various synonyms also appear to resonate: DISCOURTEOUS, ILL-MANNERED, IMPOLITE.
Rude also is a very applicable root word such as RUDERAL (growing in rubbish or poor soil, as in, 'IBOC was desperately cooked up by semicompetent radio industry suits in tandem with a ruderal development team headed by a third-rate electronics firm') and RUDESBY, an archaic middle-English term describing an ill-bred or nasty-tempered person.
Hope this helps!
Savage said:
OK Bob, I remember making those statements. I'm sure there was a reason for the use of such strong language as opposed to arbitrary name calling, which seems to go on here quite often, when the subject of (speaking of name calling) "INIQUITY" arises. I wouldn't suggest you turn off your transmitter but what I would do is suggest that if you specifically suffer interference from another radio station that you prove that you are being interfered with within your protected licensed parameters and take your case to the commission. That seems like a reasonable request to me. Now let’s discuss context, as to why I would suggest you consider shutting your transmitter down. That was in direct response to your claim that the internet would soon be the preferred program delivery method as opposed to current methods such as AM, FM analog transmission or HD. In that context my response doesn't sound pejorative, now does it? Paranoid? Well a bit when without doing any testing to determine whether harmful interference would occur, you have already determined that an entire technology should be done away with because you have the feeling you will lose money due to its implementation. Maybe paranoid was a tad strong. I guess what I should have said was that to me there’s little logic drawing negative conclusions without any scientific data to back those conclusions us. Once more, if you can prove you are suffering interference within your protected contour, go for it. Contact the commission and file a complaint. By suggesting that people write the FCC without any real data is sure to have these filings seen as nothing more than nuisance complaints. Honestly, I’d love to see the broadcast bands go back to the way they were in the late 60’s and 70’s, prior to deregulation. That isn’t to say I go mine shut yours down. What I mean is that the broadcast bands are over crowded today in most populated areas and I am also a strong believer in the old 7,7 & 5 rules. No owner shall hold more than 7 AM’s 7 FM’s and 5 TV’s nationally. You want the broadcast bands to be cleaned up, that’s what should really be done. If the laws reverted to those standards I’d say open up the bandwidth and bring back daytime only stations on AM stations and really make AM radio listenable after sunset. That's not pro IBOC or anti IBOC but today's AM band is a disaster and only getting worse. IBOC is just the latest addition to an already overcrowded and interference laden broadcast band. If we're going to clean things up lets go all the way.
HD Radio creates excessive additional new interference using several times the bandwidth and channels previously occupied by each station. To support HD radio is to support massive, useless amounts of additional interference virtually without benefit.
To support HD radio and claim to support less interference is contradictory and hypocritical.
To support HD radio and claim to support less interference is contradictory and hypocritical.
SUPERCASTER said:
The same could be said for the broadcast bands since deregulation. I remember being able to routinely hear WCCO, in my car at night, KSL, WOAI, KXEL, WBAP, & KOA. In the late 70's I even heard KFI when I lived in an apartment near NYC. I used a 75 meter inverted vee as an antenna for medium wave DXing. I used to be able to hear a few transatantics, especially the Kvitsoy site from Norway on a regular basis in the colder months. Today there is so much noise on AM that IBOC adds little to the already noisy spectrum. As I told Bob in another posting, if you want to clean up the noise lets not do half the job, let's really clean things up.
So you agree that transmitting new additional signals (analog or digital) in the same and adjacent bandwidth (as HD radio does) greatly increases interference, and does not reduce jamming or increase clear reception as HD radio supporters claim.
- Status