Does What Happen in Norway, Stay in Norway?

[ve3jf]

I think as much as anything else, DAB was doomed in Canada by the decision of the U.S. to do it differently. They weren't going to get any DAB radios through the normal pipeline; the normal economy of scale wouldn't apply. I believe a contributing factor was the reluctance of the CRTC to authorize new program services on digital signals. ("subchannels" aren't allowed for digital TV either) You couldn't get any programs via DAB that you couldn't get with analog.

IBOC is now authorized there, but I only know of one station claiming to use it. (possibly three if the two CBC stations that were testing it in Toronto are still running digital) The one station that claims to use IBOC was claiming to do so before it was authorized, there is some skepticism as to whether this station really is running a digital signal.

I think Zach has a point: IBOC in full digital mode really has some potential, at least on FM. Really, the coverage we have with IBOC right now is pretty darned decent when you take the low power into account. If you could get rid of the need to protect analogs (your own and the adjacents) you'd stand a fair chance of replicating - or even exceeding - analog coverage.

But Zach also has a point in that there's no way to get to full digital mode. Any station doing so would have to "commit suicide", sacrificing the 99.9% of its audience that doesn't have a digital receiver.

(I wonder what the FCC would say if a booster licensee decided to operate their main transmitter -- which only serves jackrabbits -- in IBOC full-digital mode -- while running the booster in analog? It would be an interesting technical experiment...)

I don't think IBOC had a lot with the failure of DAB to get a foothold in Canada. Though economies of scale are obviously important, there were plenty of receivers made for the European market that could be used on this side of the pond with little or no modification. What really sank DAB here was public indifference. It's very difficult to convince people to buy new radio receivers unless there is a compelling reason to do so, and that means compelling content. DAB in Canada was launched as a simulcast service for existing AM and FM stations, so no new content (except for some multimedia tidbits like song titles and traffic info, most of which can also be provided by RDS). The fact that it also provides higher audio quality (at least for AM stations) and freedom from multipath distortion just isn't a big selling point for most folks. The only way to make something like this fly is to make receivers capable of receiving the new service the default choice - e.g., make them available as factory equipment in cars, at little or no extra cost. GM announced plans to do just that, but then they backed out. The reasons aren't clear, but they probably had a lot to do with concerns about the limited coverage provided by the initial DAB transmitters at L-band. At that point, DAB in Canada was doomed, and the IBOC rollout in the US hadn't even started yet.

As I mentioned in another thread, there are NO stations in Canada running IBOC. The only experimental licenses issued were for brief tests a few years back (including those in Toronto mentioned above), and those installations are long gone. After their bitter experience with DAB, and seeing IBOC growth stagnate south of the border, not to mention the meteoric growth of other delivery platforms, it's not too surprising that Canadian radio broadcasters are in no hurry to jump into the IBOC cesspool.

 

[Gerald Trent]

The Norwegian Ministry of Culture has announced that FM broadcasting will be shut off in January of 2017. They use the DMB/DAB/DAB+ digital standard and are requiring that the population either purchase a new DAB-capable radio or a converter that changes DAB signals into FM. They will have 6 years to make the switch.

I know we've touched on this before, but can it happen here--should it happen here?

2017 is too early for the U.S. to mandate a switch to HD Radio. The current digital conversion process has its downside, but the gradual addition of digital service, and gradual power increases, needs to continue for at least a few more years before the FCC mandates a date for all-digital. It's not ideal, it's a compromise, but it is what it is.

Now that a lot more automakers in the U.S. are offering HD Radio, the adoption rate will increase at a more rapid rate, spurring more stations to increase their HD power, and marginalizing the stations that are either too under-capitalized, or simply too stubborn, to add digital service. Those stations will begin to lose advertising revenue, and eventually go under or be taken over by other stations with the technological expertise and the marketing savvy necessary to move forward.

One big issue is what happens to all the LPFM stations. Their power levels are so low that even at 10% digital power they can't go digital. They could lease the HD2 channel of larger stations for a while (as many niche programmers are already doing), but eventually the larger stations are going to want to use their own sub-channels. Ironically, it's the LPFM stations that would benefit from a clean break to all-digital at full power.

It's too bad that we could not have a single world standard for digital radio, but I guess that's asking too much. The U.S. is not going to switch now, since more than half the urban radio stations have already added HD service, and so many automakers are offering HD receivers.

 

[Savage]

I think I smell marijuana.

 

[DaveBayArea]

Now that a lot more automakers in the U.S. are offering HD Radio, the adoption rate will increase at a more rapid rate, spurring more stations to increase their HD power, and marginalizing the stations that are either too under-capitalized, or simply too stubborn, to add digital service. Those stations will begin to lose advertising revenue, and eventually go under or be taken over by other stations with the technological expertise and the marketing savvy necessary to move forward.

But that can't happen until the technical issues are worked out. The present HD system has occupied bandwidth issues, and the other thing that would have to be done before any serious digital conversion or adaptation can take place would be a major re-allocation of the FM band - something similar to what happened to AM in 1941 under NARBA. That is, if we hope to actually have things work.

Today's allocations were based on 200 KHz wide channels. Digital (both hybrid and full digital) is a 400 KHz wide channel. That's why it works in places like Texas and doesn't work in places like New Jersey and California. Personally, I have my doubts that this sort of thing can actually happen, although we do have the tools to calculate coverage, spacings, and better allocate channels compared to what we had in 1940.

Dave B.

 

[Tom Wells]

The Norwegian Ministry of Culture has announced that FM broadcasting will be shut off in January of 2017. They use the DMB/DAB/DAB+ digital standard and are requiring that the population either purchase a new DAB-capable radio or a converter that changes DAB signals into FM. They will have 6 years to make the switch.

I know we've touched on this before, but can it happen here--should it happen here?

2017 is too early for the U.S. to mandate a switch to HD Radio. The current digital conversion process has its downside, but the gradual addition of digital service, and gradual power increases, needs to continue for at least a few more years before the FCC mandates a date for all-digital. It's not ideal, it's a compromise, but it is what it is.

Now that a lot more automakers in the U.S. are offering HD Radio, the adoption rate will increase at a more rapid rate, spurring more stations to increase their HD power, and marginalizing the stations that are either too under-capitalized, or simply too stubborn, to add digital service. Those stations will begin to lose advertising revenue, and eventually go under or be taken over by other stations with the technological expertise and the marketing savvy necessary to move forward.

One big issue is what happens to all the LPFM stations. Their power levels are so low that even at 10% digital power they can't go digital. They could lease the HD2 channel of larger stations for a while (as many niche programmers are already doing), but eventually the larger stations are going to want to use their own sub-channels. Ironically, it's the LPFM stations that would benefit from a clean break to all-digital at full power.

It's too bad that we could not have a single world standard for digital radio, but I guess that's asking too much. The U.S. is not going to switch now, since more than half the urban radio stations have already added HD service, and so many automakers are offering HD receivers.

Astounding logic....

It doesn't perform well or even AS well as the old system...

So we must discuss adopting this newer scheme as a standard?

Let's not ever "mandate" moving forward into broadcast communications that are less reliable by nature.

I'm really tired of new products where the "electrical/computer" brains are not intelligently integrated into safe new design.
At present I have to deal with a NEW printing press ( $30 million worth) that sometimes may turn without warning!
Why? Because the geniuses in design have gotten too far ahead of themselves without first respecting safety in design and the
nature and danger of the machine and the environment and opreators.
It's got all the newest latest smart drives, but it can do stupid, dangerous things the older models couldn't do.

I used to work for the manufacturer of that press, and one of the main reasons I left was because of idiotic unsafe standards being adopted that I did not want to take personal responsibilty in "accepting".

So I love hearing any stories about why change for the sake of change is necessary or desirable.

Do go on...

 

[Carmine5]

As an update to the original topic: given the criteria the Norwegian government has established for approving an analog switch off, it doesn't appear that they're going to meet that goal by 2017.

The government says that digital radio listenership must account for at least half of all radio listenership in the country by the mid-decade. According to the Norwegian Electronics Industry Association there are roughly between 12 and 15 million analog FM radios in regular use, compared to 290,000 digital radio receivers (a penetration rate of just 2%). As it is, the number of analog receivers sold in that country still outpaces digital radios by a factor of 8.

http://www.garfors.com/2011/02/norway-switches-off-fm.html

This coincides with similar trends in Europe where plans to end analog broadcasting have had to be postponed. According to The Register: "the appetite for digital radio is similarly depressed all over the continent".

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/03/eu_czar_digital_radio_do_something/


Digital radio listening is decreasing in England according to this article:

http://grantgoddardradioblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/does-nation-love-their-digital-radio.html

So England may not meet it's 2015 deadline. Germany was supposed to end analog by 2015 but has pushed the date back to 2020. France is supposed to end its analog radio service by 2013 but broadcasting trade unions oppose it and there are no concrete plans by the government to carry it out.

So if an analog cut-off does happen either in Europe or here it probably won't be for at least another decade...and maybe never.

 

[KB1OKL]

This analog to digital radio conversion farce reminds me of the fizzled out US conversion to the metric system 25 years ago.

 

[spunker88]

I can't see it happening in the US anytime soon. FM still has many advantages over HD Radio or other digital standards.

-FM radios are cheap to produce and reliable.
The battery life on cheap portable radios is great and even with quite a bit of voltage drop from old batteries an analog FM radio will still run. If you keep a battery powered radio around for emergencies like I do.
-The cost of upgrading
You think it was a pain to get the US to DTV, radio would be a lot worse. Car radios, portable radios, MP3 player radios all would have to be replaced.
-Coverage
FM radio does well with dead spots and multipath. Analog TV had ghosting problems, but with just audio you dont see any of that. And dead spots on FM will just have a brief instance of static, compared with digital which will have to rebuffer its signal.
-Sound Quality
It was easy to sell the general public on DTV since you can clearly see the difference between analog TV and HDTV. With FM radio its hard to tell the difference between analog and digital, and if too low a bitrate is used digital sounds worse. With a decent tuner and stereo system, FM as is sounds great.
-Interference from Tropo and E-Skip
With analog FM tropo and e-skip can cause listening issues but putting something digital only here will certainly cause issues. Imagine the frustration people would get when they find their radios not working during peak ES season in June. Part of the reason many DTVs left VHF-L could have been because of ES. DAB uses a higher frequency range so it doesn't have to worry about ES.

Technology will improve and someday it may be cheaper and easier to switch the US to digital only radio. But for now I think analog is the best thing for 88-108mhz.

 

[Ai4i]

I would much sooner buy a used digital radio from this guy than I would from that guy