• 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

Brazil: The place where they test tech before it is implemented

All of these tests afford the digital segments much less power than the analogue.
But, how would the two compare on level playing fields?
 
Digital wouldn't do well at all, even with the same power as analog, because digital doesn't work well in the VHF range at any power.

Those TV stations that relinquished their UHF digital channels and moved their digital signals to their original VHF channels when analog TV was discontinued a couple of years ago now regret it -- especially those in the low band. WPVI (ABC) in Philadelphia, for example, was allowed to quadruple its digital power on channel 6 within a few weeks of the analog turn-off because the FCC received so many complaints from viewers who couldn't get it over the air. Remember, channel 6 (82-88 mc) is just below the FM band. Even in the high band (chs. 7-13, 174-216 mc), digital is trouble prone, though not as much so as in the low band. But it seems to work reasonably well in the UHF band.

It would be madness for an FM station to use as much power for its digital signals as for its analog signal. The two digital signals are in the first adjacent channels, and at that level -- meaning half the analog signal power in a first-adjacent on each side -- reception of the analog signal would be significantly degraded on most conventional receivers, severely so on many of them.

Did you even read the linked blog post?
 
radioskeptic said:
Did you even read the linked blog post?
Yes, and my thought is that IF those two concentric circles represent signal differences of 20db and the digital power level is 20db below the analog, well, what if??

Having said that, I have always been and continue to be a fan of L-band (1.4GHz) for digital radio.
 
KB1OKL said:
They tested it the way it was implemented here.

Ah, the din of iBiquity, as someone here (I think) so well put it....

cd
 
WPVI stil has issues OTA signal for me.
I have a converter and antenna baught from radio shack that is indoors, and that is the one station that continues to give me the most trouble.
 
John Holcomb II said:
WPVI stil has issues OTA signal for me.
I have a converter and antenna baught from radio shack that is indoors, and that is the one station that continues to give me the most trouble.

Does your antenna have "ears", as in the old-fashioned "rabbit ears"?

Some don't, and I can guarantee you'll have trouble with WPVI if you have one of those.

(WPVI's low frequency means you may well have problems even if you do have a proper antenna, but it's a lost cause with the UHF-only antennas some stores sell...)
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom