"Consumers expect radio, they expect digital.."

[tomservo]

I bought a brandy new Sony flat screen HD TV 4 or 5 years ago, hooked it up as I already had satellite and the picture didn't look any different to me so I called them and found out I had to pay extra for HD, I thought forget it. I waited a few years until it was mandatory called again and again was told that I had to pay extra for it even though it was now forced on us. I laughed in their face and gave the TV to my ex-wife. I have seen HD at my father's house and had to ask him if the show was in HD or not, it was, I did not see much difference at all. I have come to see that HD TV is pretty much the same as HD radio: not much of a difference and a huge waste of time, they are both money makers for the industry (although the only people really making money from HD radio is ibiquity) and not much more, there is no benefit for the consumer at all. Here I am, I don't watch TV or very rarely and it's not on my own TV and my HD tuner is gathering dust in a storage space, so much for the ballyhooed digital revolution!

No offense, but you either had a defective TV, tuner or eyes if you didn't notice the difference between a true HD picture and basic analog or 480i. The difference is not just night and day, it's night and Jupiter.

I can even tell with 100% accuracy when I'm watching an HD program downconverted to be viewable on my old analog-only tube TV and when it's coming off cable, it's such a humongous difference.

Unfortunately I too have stopped watching a lot of TV. I became a total HD snob until I moved back to Alabama and into a home with no view of the southern sky. I can say with no uncertainty our local city-run cable company's 25 downrezzed and fuzzy HD channels are a pale comparison to that offered by my beloved DirecTV, for practically the same amount of money. No sky view = no DirecTV. And the PQ is so bad I don't even bother anymore.

But this isn't an HDTV forum, it's a radio forum.

To keep it sort of on topic, my fanaticism about HDTV is not all that uncommon (you can tell who has HDTV and who doesn't: if they say their new HDTV looks poor or no different, they're not smart enough to subscribe to HD service.) Digital radio, of whatever form in whatever country, simply does not have that kind of attraction or attract that sort of snobbery.

No one is clamoring to sample XM or Sirius or DAB+ in Australia against traditional FM broadcasts. The few who buy for the niche programming either complain about sound quality (satellite radio) or lack of coverage (HD). The only way digital broadcasts are really gonna take off is either a) by being mandated or b) developing that "oh wow" cache. And it ain't gonna happen with iBiquity's scheme.

 

[tomservo]

I bought a brandy new Sony flat screen HD TV 4 or 5 years ago, hooked it up as I already had satellite and the picture didn't look any different to me so I called them and found out I had to pay extra for HD, I thought forget it. I waited a few years until it was mandatory called again and again was told that I had to pay extra for it even though it was now forced on us. I laughed in their face and gave the TV to my ex-wife. I have seen HD at my father's house and had to ask him if the show was in HD or not, it was, I did not see much difference at all. I have come to see that HD TV is pretty much the same as HD radio: not much of a difference and a huge waste of time, they are both money makers for the industry (although the only people really making money from HD radio is ibiquity) and not much more, there is no benefit for the consumer at all. Here I am, I don't watch TV or very rarely and it's not on my own TV and my HD tuner is gathering dust in a storage space, so much for the ballyhooed digital revolution!

No offense, but you either had a defective TV, tuner or eyes if you didn't notice the difference between a true HD picture and basic analog or 480i. The difference is not just night and day, it's night and Jupiter.

I can even tell with 100% accuracy when I'm watching an HD program downconverted to be viewable on my old analog-only tube TV and when it's coming off cable, it's such a humongous difference.

Unfortunately I too have stopped watching a lot of TV. I became a total HD snob until I moved back to Alabama and into a home with no view of the southern sky. I can say with no uncertainty our local city-run cable company's 25 downrezzed and fuzzy HD channels are a pale comparison to that offered by my beloved DirecTV, for practically the same amount of money. No sky view = no DirecTV. And the PQ is so bad I don't even bother anymore.

But this isn't an HDTV forum, it's a radio forum.

To keep it sort of on topic, my fanaticism about HDTV is not all that uncommon (you can tell who has HDTV and who doesn't: if they say their new HDTV looks poor or no different, they're not smart enough to subscribe to HD service.) Digital radio, of whatever form in whatever country, simply does not have that kind of attraction or attract that sort of snobbery.

No one is clamoring to sample XM or Sirius or DAB+ in Australia against traditional FM broadcasts. The few who buy for the niche programming either complain about sound quality (satellite radio) or lack of coverage (HD). The only way digital broadcasts are really gonna take off is either a) by being mandated or b) developing that "oh wow" cache. And it ain't gonna happen with iBiquity's scheme.

 

[Savage]

Yes, guru. I know you'll shake your head in disbelief, but "AM audio CAN sound perfectly good." In other words, not the way it typically sounds today.

25 years ago we had AM audio (well, it was 'possible' and practiced at AM stations who cared about their audio) which went out - in many cases - to 14 kHz, which is essentially indistinguishable from today's FM. My Nautel AMPFET-25kw transmitter came with an audio proof showing it's flat to 15 kHz. Even the old standby-standby RCA BTA-1R can do 14 kHz. The phasing systems and antennas will pass it too.

Unfortunately the NRSC filter and pre-emphasis curve mandated in 1990 strangled bandpass to 10 khz, then along came IBOC, where its perpetrators rationalize 5 khz audio to accomodate the universally-ignored digital carriers (which still can't be constrained to the assigned channel, even with the destruction of the analog signal listened to be literally everyone.)

Yep: AM now is about ONE-THIRD of its capable (and former) bandpass. And noisier, at night largely due to IBOC skywave interference. It's a totally self-inflicted debacle, and unnecessary.

 

[Carmine5]

As an owner, I can tell you that I don't really care if folks buy new radios or not, as long as they have them and use the hell out of them -- which they do! My listeners want to be entertained and informed and my clients want their messages to be heard, and every day analog FM makes that a reality in spades because it works. It doesn't matter if our programming comes out of old car radios, boomboxes, walkmans, table models, consoles, component systems, or the latest Droid device. There are a billion of them out there, and they are being used. Satellite radio, internet radio, and HD Radio have all had the better part of a decade to improve on the analog model. Their results? Tiny, tiny, and non-existent listening rates. The inertia and equity that analog FM has will be hard to derail. I'm not saying that it can't happen someday, but it won't be by the likes of its three current "challengers."

LO, when consider that more and more ISPs and internet radio services like Pandora are resorting to data usage caps, terrestrial radio is looking better and better as a go-to source for entertainment and information. I like the option of having (low energy consumption, low heat) analog FM radio on my Droid X.

 

[Carmine5]

Yes, guru. I know you'll shake your head in disbelief, but "AM audio CAN sound perfectly good." In other words, not the way it typically sounds today.

25 years ago we had AM audio (well, it was 'possible' and practiced at AM stations who cared about their audio) which went out - in many cases - to 14 kHz, which is essentially indistinguishable from today's FM. My Nautel AMPFET-25kw transmitter came with an audio proof showing it's flat to 15 kHz. Even the old standby-standby RCA BTA-1R can do 14 kHz. The phasing systems and antennas will pass it too.

Unfortunately the NRSC filter and pre-emphasis curve mandated in 1990 strangled bandpass to 10 khz, then along came IBOC, where its perpetrators rationalize 5 khz audio to accomodate the universally-ignored digital carriers (which still can't be constrained to the assigned channel, even with the destruction of the analog signal listened to be literally everyone.)

Yep: AM now is about ONE-THIRD of its capable (and former) bandpass. And noisier, at night largely due to IBOC skywave interference. It's a totally self-inflicted debacle, and unnecessary.

I have a little Chris Cuff C-QuAM transmitter which is designed to be flat to 14 kHz. No filtering, no pre-emphasis. The signal from it sounds every bit as good as FM on my Sony AM stereo radios. So, yes, if the tourniquet is released from AM, it has the potential of sounding terrific.

 

[tomservo]

Unfortunately the NRSC filter and pre-emphasis curve mandated in 1990 strangled bandpass to 10 khz, then along came IBOC, where its perpetrators rationalize 5 khz audio to accomodate the universally-ignored digital carriers (which still can't be constrained to the assigned channel, even with the destruction of the analog signal listened to be literally everyone.)

OK totally off topic outsider question here, but what happens if a station chooses to ignore the NRSC mask and let 'er fly to 14-15 kHz? Is that a spec enforceable by the FCC?

I ask because I have a little Sony AM stereo Walkman and I've traveled with it a lot and once in a blue moon a station will pop up that's clearly crisp and full sounding compared to their competitors, and I wonder if they're not running 10 kHz.

 

[DaveBayArea]

I ask because I have a little Sony AM stereo Walkman and I've traveled with it a lot and once in a blue moon a station will pop up that's clearly crisp and full sounding compared to their competitors, and I wonder if they're not running 10 kHz.

Or maybe even 8 KHz. There are a few stations that take pride in their audio and while they won't be running 15 KHz they pay attention to bandwidth and quality. The other thing that's not mentioned a lot but it is a factor is the fact that a non-IBOC AM can run higher peak-to-peak modulation. So besides having the freedom to use the entire 10 KHz of spectrum they also sound louder.

Dave B.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

OK totally off topic outsider question here, but what happens if a station chooses to ignore the NRSC mask and let 'er fly to 14-15 kHz? Is that a spec enforceable by the FCC?

Sure is. 47 CFR §73.44(b) states that emissions between 10.2kHz and 20kHz removed from the carrier must be at least 25 db below the unmodulated carrier level, and it rolls off steadily from there. Also, per 47 CFR §73.1590, AM stations are still required to perform annual "equipment performance measurements," to check compliance with the emissions mask in 73.44.

 

[MarkW]

It's all in the pitch. "New & improved" sells.

Yeah, that concept worked really well for "New Coke."