"Desperately Seeking Portable HD"

[awj223]

Let´s try this again. There has been extensive study of where metro radio ratings come from. 80% of FM listening is fromt he 70 dbu contour, and about 95% is from inside the 64 dbu contour. Whether the FCC protects a contour or not is immaterial. Listeners do not listen when the signal is bad.

Are you telling us that nobody listens to the radio in Frazier Park, CA?
http://radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/locate?select=city&city=Frazier+Park&state=CA&sid=&x=0&y=0
According to your claim, nobody should listen to any stations other than KJPG 1050 during the day there. When the sun goes down, all diary returns from Frazier Park, both AM and FM, should be empty.

 

[awj223]

Before IBOC, 10 khz bandwidth caused analog splatter to be present where the digital sidebands presently are. Basically, one form of interference was substituted for another. You may be surprised, but I don't like the hybrid mode either. I hope we transition to the all-digital mode in due time. The all-digital mode will work much better than the hybrid mode, and will open up interesting DXing possibilities. Remember, I am a DXer too.

Analog splatter steps on one sideband of an adjacent. Unless the station you're listening to is sandwiched between two strong local adjacents, you can filter that junk out by taking only the uncorrupted sideband. Hybrid IBOC spews hash over 1st adjacents that sounds like an analog TV tuned to an unoccupied channel, and hash over 2nd adjacents that sounds like a whistle.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

OLDGRINGO WROTE: "Let´s try this again. There has been extensive study of where metro radio ratings come from. 80% of FM listening is fromt he 70 dbu contour, and about 95% is from inside the 64 dbu contour. Whether the FCC protects a contour or not is immaterial. Listeners do not listen when the signal is bad."

Than sounds about right. I read an article a few years back where it discussed a study on the effectiveness of clear channel stations. Basically, the article states that Arbitron has a great deal of data supporting the claim that an AM station must have a signal strenght of 2.5 mv/m to show up on the Arbitron logs. I'll post the link if I can locate the article. I believe a graveyard station at night is only good to about 10-20 mv/m before it vanishes like a ------ in the wind.

Which AM stations are broadcasting HD Radio IBOC at night?

SUPERCASTER WROTE: "The rest of your comments are even more biased, inaccurate and irrelevant."
Please explain.

(See your statements above.)
HD supporters are totally lost in denial. "Are you deaf yet?"

From OldGringo:

Since nearly nobody is listening to larger market stations (top 200 or so) outside the very strong contours, this is immaterial and falls inthe category of "if a tree falls in a forest where there are no peple, does it make a sound?"

And if an HD Radio signal has no listeners because only a few thousand HD radios have been sold after 4 years and over $200 million spent on hype, false claims, promotion and pedaling, then it can't be causing interference to other stations, right?
Wrong.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Len 14043 wrote:

Before IBOC, 10 khz bandwidth caused analog splatter to be present where the digital sidebands presently are. Basically, one form of interference was substituted for another. You may be surprised, but I don't like the hybrid mode either. I hope we transition to the all-digital mode in due time. The all-digital mode will work much better than the hybrid mode, and will open up interesting DXing possibilities. Remember, I am a DXer too.

The occasional splatter when a high amplitude high frequency peak is present in AM analog audio is not as insidious, or destructive as incessant 2 channel wide high duty cycle digital HD buzz and whistles.
HD Radio works very poorly at night especially outside the city grade coverage area. Skip or DX HD Radio reception is almost impossible. The digital sidebands go out of balance and phase and are undecodeable (often) only a few miles from the transmitter, even in the daytime, when there is no skip or interference. When there is skip, interference, skywave, or weak signal you can forget about HD reception.

 

[audiophile.]

Len, you answered my question with a question, nevertheless I will answer it. WHIZ and WTPG are not fully protected AM stations. The history of how this came about is beyond the scope of HD radio thread.

What I do find disturbing is one of these goes IBOC the inteference increase will be very bad. The old special agreement between these stations certainly never anticipated IBOC.

If they were smart they would each install Powerside (one using left, one using right). In that case the interference would be very minimal between the two stations (read: win-win).

To the other poster who posted about Metro Ratings and the 64 dBu, maybe you should have a talk with the NAB when they screamed that Metro stations should have protection to the 54 dBu and rural stations should only have protection to 60 dBu. You and I know that the NAB got it bass ackwards. Once again it was all about money...

I can tell you the in rural enviroments the there is no problem listening to the 54 dBu in areas without major terrain shielding. In urban areas with tall bldgs 64 dBu is probably a good figure to shoot for to assure it works well inside office bldgs and factories.

May I remind you that according to the Census Bureau: 94.6 Percent of US Is Rural Open Space ... so the rural areas should be how FCC rules are based. The fact that high rise across the street causes 20 dB attenuation of your FM signal is of little importance to the rest of us.

 

[Chuck]

Since nearly nobody is listening to larger market stations (top 200 or so) outside the very strong contours, this is immaterial and falls inthe category of "if a tree falls in a forest where there are no peple, does it make a sound?"

I suspect that if it was your station (that you personally owned) you'd be of a different opinion.

 

[OldGringo]

Since nearly nobody is listening to larger market stations (top 200 or so) outside the very strong contours, this is immaterial and falls inthe category of "if a tree falls in a forest where there are no peple, does it make a sound?"

I suspect that if it was your station (that you personally owned) you'd be of a different opinion.

If WHAT was my station?

The fact is, inside metros, nobody listens to any station on an adjacent channel to a local.

There is no way to protect something that does not exist.

 

[OldGringo]

Are you telling us that nobody listens to the radio in Frazier Park, CA?
http://radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/locate?select=city&city=Frazier+Park&state=CA&sid=&x=0&y=0
According to your claim, nobody should listen to any stations other than KJPG 1050 during the day there. When the sun goes down, all diary returns from Frazier Park, both AM and FM, should be empty.

They listen to the Bakersfield FMs. It's in Kern County, and has a viable signal from most of the Bakersfield FMs, and a couple of the AMs in the daytime (like KUZZ). In a ZIP code break, there is virtually no AM listening at night there, and practically none in the daytime.

 

[vsa]

OLDGRINGO/DAVID WROTE: "Since nearly nobody is listening to larger market stations (top 200 or so) outside the very strong contours, this is immaterial and falls inthe category of "if a tree falls in a forest where there are no peple, does it make a sound?"

You have long argued for allowing HD-Radio-caused interference with this kind of Arbitron-based rationale. OK, lets have the FCC drop all protections and interference regulations and have them defer to Arbitron. If I should want to boost my station's signal, and if Arbitron says your station didn't show in certain zip codes in the last book, the FCC would have to grant me a CP to extend my signal into those zip codes even if my co-channel or adjacent signal would clobber yours. How would you like that?

Insanity!

 

[awj223]

They listen to the Bakersfield FMs. It's in Kern County, and has a viable signal from most of the Bakersfield FMs, and a couple of the AMs in the daytime (like KUZZ). In a ZIP code break, there is virtually no AM listening at night there, and practically none in the daytime.

<sarcasm>
Bakersfield FMs? That's impossible! By your own statement, 95% of FM listening is inside 64 dBu. Not a single Bakersfield FM even gets a 60 dBu signal into Frazier Park. How can those signals by "viable"? Either the diary returns are wrong, or you are exaggerating.
</sarcasm>

By the way, I can and do listen to FM stations in clear, full stereo outside the estimated 40 dBu contours. I'm not talking tropo or e-skip either.

 

[Len14043]

VSA WROTE: "You have long argued for allowing HD-Radio-caused interference with this kind of Arbitron-based rationale. OK, lets have the FCC drop all protections and interference regulations and have them defer to Arbitron. If I should want to boost my station's signal, and if Arbitron says your station didn't show in certain zip codes in the last book, the FCC would have to grant me a CP to extend my signal into those zip codes even if my co-channel or adjacent signal would clobber yours. How would you like that?"

Just because little of the listening is done near the edge of the coverage zone is not a reason to to abandon the spacing requirements. The spacing rules allow for a comfort zone to insure that stations do not interfere with each other. The spacing rules can even accomodate IBOC.

VSA WROTE: "Insanity!"
Agreed

 

[Chuck]

By the way, I can and do listen to FM stations in clear, full stereo outside the estimated 40 dBu contours. I'm not talking tropo or e-skip either.

That's true. In many areas, including DFW which David should be very familiar with, listening out to “the ragged edge” it is a way of life. Many people commute 50-75 miles every day. As I recall, a number of years ago, David (along with Rich Wood) said on a radio newsgroup that any loss if listeners was significant to them. Even just one. He was referring to the possibility of LPFM stations causing interference to his station.

Comparatively speaking LPFM’s are a drop in the interference bucket when you think of what IBOC does to its neighbors.

I guess my memory is longer than David's.

 

[Len14043]

CHUCK WROTE: "In many areas, including DFW which David should be very familiar with, listening out to “the ragged edge” it is a way of life. Many people commute 50-75 miles every day. As I recall, a number of years ago, David (along with Rich Wood) said on a radio newsgroup that any loss if listeners was significant to them. "

Thats true. But the reason people would have to listen out to the "ragged edge" is because there are typically no other strong signals to listen to. And because of the lack of strong signals, IBOC side bands wouldn't be treading on those ragged edge signals.

In a similar post by AWJ223, he wrote: "Are you telling us that nobody listens to the radio in Frazier Park, CA? "

Again, the people in Frazier Park, CA would be forced to listen to signals at or outside normal coverage areas. That means there are no strong signals in the area which could run IBOC and interfere with the stations that the Frazier residents listen to.

 

[OldGringo]

[<sarcasm>
Bakersfield FMs? That's impossible! By your own statement, 95% of FM listening is inside 64 dBu. Not a single Bakersfield FM even gets a 60 dBu signal into Frazier Park. How can those signals by "viable"? Either the diary returns are wrong, or you are exaggerating.
</sarcasm>

By the way, I can and do listen to FM stations in clear, full stereo outside the estimated 40 dBu contours. I'm not talking tropo or e-skip either.

Frazier Park is right at the edge of the 60 dbu of several Bakersfield stations. The problem is that it is obstructed at many angles, gets ratty signals all around.

HD is not going to affect any listening in that location, however, as there are no local signals to iinterfere, via adjacent channel sideband noise, with more distant signals. everything there is weak.

In general, nearly all listening to FMs is from inside the 60 dbu. There is some outside, but it is limited. In some markets, this is because the population thins before the signal does. In others, because listeners just won't put up with weak signals. 70% of listening is done at home or in the office, using radios that typically use the AC cord as an antenna. You just don't get good reception on this kind of radio in the under-64 dbu areas.

The fact that someone can pick up very weak signals does not mean the station in question will get any significant listening. And this is about getting listeners who become radio's product that is sold to advertisers.

 

[vsa]

OLDGRINGO/DAVID WROTE: "HD is not going to affect any listening in that location, however, as there are no local signals to iinterfere, via adjacent channel sideband noise."

You overlooked 10kw KJPG-AM 1050, licensed to Frazier Park, CA. If it chose to fire-up iBiquity's digital noise-maker. it would most certainly trash up KNX 1070, which is quite listenable in that area.

 

[awj223]

You overlooked 10kw KJPG-AM 1050, licensed to Frazier Park, CA. If it chose to fire-up iBiquity's digital noise-maker. it would most certainly trash up KNX 1070, which is quite listenable in that area.

Just like KNX 1070's noise-maker trashes XEPRS-AM 1090. I once could receive it cleanly right next to the KNX tower. Only within a 200' radius of the tower did KNX's sidebands become audible. Now it hurts the ears to listen to it as far away as Orange County. I am not a Padres fan and don't listen to that station, but don't tell me that there aren't p***ed off Padres fans in the area who can't hear their games clearly anymore.

KBRT-AM 740's noise-maker is trashing KFMB 760 as far south as Encinitas and Oceanside.

In general, nearly all listening to FMs is from inside the 60 dbu. There is some outside, but it is limited. In some markets, this is because the population thins before the signal does. In others, because listeners just won't put up with weak signals. 70% of listening is done at home or in the office, using radios that typically use the AC cord as an antenna. You just don't get good reception on this kind of radio in the under-64 dbu areas.

So get new radios. IMO, protection criteria should not be based on the assumption that everyone uses tin can receivers. Some listeners won't put up with crappy signals. I won't put up with crappy radios. All the receivers I use can get FM outside 40 dBu and AM outside 0.15 mV/m. Anything less and it either gets tossed or simply not used as a radio.

If protection criteria are based on listenable signals with good receivers, you'll have areas where adjacent stations are weaker but still very listenable on good radios. If you relax protection criteria to match the capabilities of clock radios with AC cord antennas to allow stations to trash the band, those with good radios will have a situation where NEITHER of those adjacent stations are listenable any longer.

The fact that someone can pick up very weak signals does not mean the station in question will get any significant listening. And this is about getting listeners who become radio's product that is sold to advertisers.

Radio is about serving the public, not about selling product to advertisers. The FCC was not formed on the basis that station owners should have the right to sell slots to advertisers.

 

[OldGringo]

OLDGRINGO/DAVID WROTE: "HD is not going to affect any listening in that location, however, as there are no local signals to iinterfere, via adjacent channel sideband noise."

You overlooked 10kw KJPG-AM 1050, licensed to Frazier Park, CA. If it chose to fire-up iBiquity's digital noise-maker. it would most certainly trash up KNX 1070, which is quite listenable in that area.

Which is worse, to have interference to a station that gives LA traffic reports that is of limited relevance out there, or to have the AM band die? It _is_ dying, and unless something gives it a boost, we will not have to worry about interference at all. It is a trade off, and a sensible one.

 

[OldGringo]

Radio is about serving the public, not about selling product to advertisers. The FCC was not formed on the basis that station owners should have the right to sell slots to advertisers.

The FCC knows that there is no service unless stations make money. Most early radio stations were built to sell radios, insurance, etc, as far back as the early 20's. And commercial staitns have the right by terms of the license to sell advertising. It is not a charity.

 

[vsa]

OLDGRINGO/DAVID WROTE: "Which is worse, to have interference to a station that gives LA traffic reports that is of limited relevance out there, or to have the AM band die? It _is_ dying, and unless something gives it a boost, we will not have to worry about interference at all. It is a trade off, and a sensible one."

In this case, you are arguing for the right of a Catholic radio station to broadcast the saying of the rosary in digital stereo (if it so chooses, but doesn't so far) over the ability of local area residents to hear the only all-news radio station within daytime earshot. I dare say, during the recent and historic 162,000 acre "Day Fire" most threatened residents there were relying on the fact that their radios were NOT being jammed by your selfish HD Radio sidebands.

As for AM needing to go digital, I am in complete agreement with you on that point.

You have chosen to ride HD-Radio, the first horse out of the corral, one based on broken promises, trespasses all over its neighbors' property, has a reduced coverage area, burdensome expenses, that cannot gallop, trot, walk or even crawl on its belly at night, and is laced with a variety of unintended consequences.

I prefer to ride CAM-D, a horse that keeps the promises it makes, almost doubles a station's coverage, does not trespass on its neighbors' property, rides like a champion 24-hours-a-day, does not require major additional new expenditures, has no time delay, and even sounds better than your horse.

I realize it's a tough choice between the two.

     

 

[OldGringo]

I prefer to ride CAM-D, a horse that keeps the promises it makes, almost doubles a station's coverage, does not trespass on its neighbors' property, rides like a champion 24-hours-a-day, does not require major additional new expenditures, has no time delay, and even sounds better than your horse.

The problem with Cam-D is that it is not a single chip solution. Manufacturers will not add a separate AM chip for this system if it even increases the cots by a quarter. In fact, most would like to eliminate AM entirely as they realize the reality that AM is not much used by the main purchasers of new technology. The SandDisk MP3 player has no AM, but has FM. The upcoming Microsoft player will have Fm, but no AM. The add-oin for the iPod is FM only. This is an easily spottable trend.

AMs biggest hope is that it can ride the HD bandwagon over the years, and people will find better quality AM via receivers they purchased for FM and HD-2 channels. THis is also aleap of faith, as there are so few viable AMs in the US that there is never going to be a perfect solution for keeping the band alive... as I have said, most markets only have one or two viable AMs and these are slowly suffering a loss in the sales demos because most persons under 45 have little if any use for AM.

No, it is not easy. But the best probablity of any success is with a system that is the same form both AM and FM.