FCC Allows Stealth 10db HD Power Boosts

[KB1OKL]

If your favorite FM station suddenly becomes buried in noise soon, this may be why: it looks like Kevy Martin is completely ignoring the Congressional mandate for the FCC to stand-down and concentrate on the digital TV changover:

"Although the Federal Communications Commission has deferred (for now) any formal action on its inquiry into whether or not to allow broadcast radio stations to increase the power of their digital ("HD") sidebands by a factor of ten, the agency's employing the tried and true method of "creating facts on the ground" by allowing individual stations (or station clusters) to individually apply for special temporary authority to hike their HD power levels.
This is taking place even though radio's engineering community is deeply divided on the issue of an HD sideband power increase. Comments filed by the Prometheus Radio Project and Media Access Project (disclaimer: on which I informally consulted) succinctly summarize the dispute. The main question is: is it realistically possible use HD Radio as a tool to improve the existing medium, or will HD intentionally degrade it so that the spectrum's repurposement becomes inevitable - or, at the very least, make its ownership more consolidated?"

http://www.diymedia.net/archive/1208.htm#122408

This is the congressional order which Kevy is ignoring and which was previously posted here:

"Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) today called on FCC Chairman Kevin Martin to put the agency's actions on hold unless they are urgent or required by law.

Rockefeller's and Waxman's committees both have jurisdiction over the FCC.
The two lawmakers said the FCC should focus on completing the broadcast digital TV transition next February, but not on unrelated matters - particularly any controversial issues that the Obama administration will want to review."

more at:

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/fcc-ordered-to-stand-down-and-put-actions-on-hold.html#more

 

[clouseau]

It's a darned shame you don't read the links you post, KB. There's some good stuff in there. Read the Mistitled "fcc-ordered....Blah blah blah" article in Orbitcast. It's riddled with phrases like "AsKed" "Called for" & "should focus on"... I missed the part where it says "The FCC has been ordered to...". Kinda odd they left that line out.

Perhaps the "If the FCC must stand down..." is more like what they mean towards the end of the piece. Nothing in the article seems to suggest there is anything more than "Advice" given. But that aside...

You then go on to quote the DIYmedia.net guy and his opinion. Not like he's got an axe to grind. He admits to researching his dissertation on " a problem of FCC staff not being independent-minded enough of the industry interests they purport to regulate not paying f*cking attention. ". We could only be so lucky as to have this "pointy headed" psudo-academic use the F-Bomb in his dissertation. .

This is not news. You know it. (If you read it) We know it. There have been STA's for higher digital power for a while in isolated instances for testing purposes. Attested to by people like RF Burns on this board long ago. Now apparently they are going to allow VIA STA, a few more tests. It's like using a wire ball on the floor for an antenna. More data might actually help understand the reality of the situation. The uninformed don't KNOW what this increase will do. Right now at the -20db most say it does nothing. Digital Disaster.org says it will jam all stations off the dial. They were wrong. We should now assume -10 will jam all the stations off the dial? We're doing some of these -10db tests now I hear. I don't see the hiuge complaints in any one area over the increase. And it's out there somewhere already. Maybe we could use some more info.

Since you claim to be so vehamently against "AM"HD, might I suggest that if there had been a little more STA testing at night, the outcome of that proceeding might have been different. Whatever. I see our friend at DIY actually contacted a source for comment on the HD increase, though. Prometheus. Well at least he got a neutral party.

I hate to keep bringing this up, but this is the kind of quackery that ultimately gets lumped in with the legit claims of HD interference. And IMHO, provide the cover peopl need to allow legit claims to be ignored. And apparently they are.

When the school teacher says "Just say no to alcohol and other durgs" and then the kid goes home and watches an ad for Budweiser, what does the confused kid think.

Budweiser = Drugs
Dad drinks Budweiser.
Dad is a good Guy
If Budweiser is OK then drugs must be OK.

How do problems happen?

Clouseau

 

[SUPERCASTER]

The original iBiquity plan was that all AM and FM stations would transition from analog to digital with a period of hybrid analog/digital operation. With so many stations already on the air on the over crowded broadcast bands, the blanket use of 3 channels instead of 1 by all stations was correctly predicted to be a digital disaster. Since iBiquity HD radio is still very far from universally used by all broadcast stations (and now seems very unlikely) how can you claim that "They were wrong". Or did you mean that iBiquity was wrong and not the HD radio opponents?

Now, a further proposed 10 times power increase of the adjacent channel digital HD noise will prove even more problematic.

 

[Savage]

Inspector: hope you had a good Christmas or Hanukkah.

I note your lament above to the effect that if there had been more STA testing of AM-HD at night, we may have averted the current adjacent-channel interference mess that is afflicting what's left of the AM nighttime audience.

I believe that the record reflects that the Alliance and NAB insisted that nighttime AM-HD testing be limited to WOR vs. WLW for a laughably brief period - IIRC it was either a few hours on a single night, or a few hours on a handful of successive nights. All suggestions that more extensive field testing be done were rejected. Everyone who wasn't a totally self-deluding dunce knew what was going to happen. The HD-pushers didn't want an adverse record amassed which could form the basis for denial of nighttime HD-AM if the true facts ever were brought to the attention of the Commission.

The lack of anything even crudely resembling real-world testing of AM-HD at night, was part of the frantic lobbying push to get HD forced on the marketplace.

The previous AM experience forms the basis of a lot of the skepticism about HD's long-term viability. First, we had the AM issue. Then there were three years of official lying about how "FM-HD digital coverage is essentially the equivalent of the analog." When that ridiculously false assertion finally became impossible to defend, the talking point shifted to "we MUST have -10db for better HD penetration" (a familiar-sounding corollary to "radio must be digital in order to survive.")

How's that "three strikes" thing go again? :-\

 

[Savage]

BTW: while I certainly do not support the proposed 10x increase in digital power for FM-HD, I respectfully dissent from Supercaster's prediction of widespread disaster - for a somewhat counterintuitive reason.

I think that the reality is you'll see very few of these up-powered FM-HD stations. While it is certainly likely that the increase will cause self- and adjacent-channel problems, they will be few and far between - for economic reasons. Only a handful of operators will be willing to rebuild entire TX sites or to install just-plain-stupid massive reject loads to dump thousands of watts of energy in waste heat, every hour, every day. Those capital projects are likely to approach a million bucks in full B or C facilities - for the sake of fifteen HD listeners...?? The vaunted digital increase is much ado about something that, for the most part, will never happen anyway.

Wanna talk about a REAL "digital disaster" that's bearing down on the witless FCC like a speeding train? In seven weeks or so analog TV goes buh-bye. I predict a massive flap about the abrupt loss of OTA TV service, which IMO has been underestimated. Whatever political clout Mr. Martin and his Bushite Commission have is about to vaporize.

They'll be too busy with fire extinguishers to worry about a digital power increase for FM-HD. The irrelevancy of HD Radio will continue to grow - increase or no.

 

[KB1OKL]

It's a darned shame you don't read the links you post, KB. There's some good stuff in there. Read the Mistitled "fcc-ordered....Blah blah blah" article in Orbitcast. It's riddled with phrases like "AsKed" "Called for" & "should focus on"... I missed the part where it says "The FCC has been ordered to...". Kinda odd they left that line out.

Don't shoot the messenger inspector, i didn't say order, I just put the link up and DID read the post.

Perhaps the "If the FCC must stand down..." is more like what they mean towards the end of the piece. Nothing in the article seems to suggest there is anything more than "Advice" given. But that aside...

Whether it is "advice" or an "order", their respective committees both have jurisdiction over the FCC, when my "boss" gives me advice I usually take it whether I like it or not

You then go on to quote the DIYmedia.net guy and his opinion. Not like he's got an axe to grind. He admits to researching his dissertation on " a problem of FCC staff not being independent-minded enough of the industry interests they purport to regulate not paying f*cking attention. ". We could only be so lucky as to have this "pointy headed" psudo-academic use the F-Bomb in his dissertation. .

This is not news. You know it. (If you read it) We know it. There have been STA's for higher digital power for a while in isolated instances for testing purposes. Attested to by people like RF Burns on this board long ago. Now apparently they are going to allow VIA STA, a few more tests. It's like using a wire ball on the floor for an antenna. More data might actually help understand the reality of the situation. The uninformed don't KNOW what this increase will do. Right now at the -20db most say it does nothing. Digital Disaster.org says it will jam all stations off the dial. They were wrong. We should now assume -10 will jam all the stations off the dial? We're doing some of these -10db tests now I hear. I don't see the hiuge complaints in any one area over the increase. And it's out there somewhere already. Maybe we could use some more info.

Since you claim to be so vehamently against "AM"HD, might I suggest that if there had been a little more STA testing at night, the outcome of that proceeding might have been different. Whatever. I see our friend at DIY actually contacted a source for comment on the HD increase, though. Prometheus. Well at least he got a neutral party.

Yeah perhaps they would have seen it for the bomb that it is instead in inflcting it on our public airwaves making parts of the AM band unusable, is this next for FM? It seems radio is determined to shoot itself in the foot, it is blatantly obvious to everyone that HD is an abject failure, how long are they going to beat this dead horse anyway?

hate to keep bringing this up, but this is the kind of quackery that ultimately gets lumped in with the legit claims of HD interference. And IMHO, provide the cover peopl need to allow legit claims to be ignored. And apparently they are.

How do problems happen?

Clouseau

Inspector, methinks doth protest too much

 

[jhardis]

Although the Federal Communications Commission has deferred (for now) any formal action on its inquiry into whether or not to allow broadcast radio stations to increase the power of their digital ("HD") sidebands by a factor of ten...

Huh? The public comment period (for reply comments) doesn't close until January 12, 2009.

- Jonathan

 

[clouseau]

Since iBiquity HD radio is still very far from universally used by all broadcast stations (and now seems very unlikely) how can you claim that "They were wrong".

I can REPORT (Not "Claim", there is no doubt) that all reception of second adjacent stations in Richmond was not wiped out. This is contrary to the predictions made by the former digital-disaster.org . HD "HAS" been implemented on the vast majority of stations they used as an example. It's not a claim. It's a fact. I would suspect that even a "Clear-cutter" such as yourself will not claim that 2nd adjacent locals are now "Jammed" off the air by HD. Has your Philadelphia reception of WJBR or WSTW gone away because of HD?

The predictions made about 2nd adjacent stations not being able to use HD or they will destroy each other's analog were wrong. No amount of your twisting facts changes that.

Or did you mean that iBiquity was wrong and not the HD radio opponents?

If iBiquity was wrong about 2nd adjacent FM HD wiping out analog, I would say so. It doesn't. I'm Not.

Now, a further proposed 10 times power increase of the adjacent channel digital HD noise will prove even more problematic.

I would agree it will tend to be more problematic. However since it basically is not problematic AT ALL on FM now, it almost couldn't help but be. We have co channel stations 200 miles away down here that interfere with each other sometimes. Did 80-90 aggravate interference? YES. Did it create a technical problem? Not really.

Everything is a trade off. A crummy radio on the Main Line can't seperate 93.7 from 94.1 where you are. I'll bet 7th adjacent channel separation would improve that. Nope. I don't think that's a needed protection either. But I will argue from a purist standpoint it would TECHNICALLY be better.

Clouseau

 

[SUPERCASTER]

I never said anything in my previous post about 2nd adjacent analog to analog jamming. Your frequent, contrived "straw man" arguments are obviously deceptive, boring, and irrelevant to my post.

 

[TheBigA]

There are two important points being overlooked here:

1) The FCC is only permitting TESTING of this power increase. I know everyone has already formed their opinions on this issue, but testing can be a useful thing. Nothing wrong with testing. There is a difference between testing and permanent authority. Perhaps DIYmedia doesn't understand.

2) There is only one station (according to the Radio World article) that is even interested in doing the test. This is not a widespread thing, and should not be interpretted as part of the consolidation conspiracy that DIYmedia loves to perpetuate.

Clearly DIYmedia doesn't like big radio. That is obvious. But as I've stated before, these attempts to create a big radio conspiracy between HD and more consolidation are absolutely ridiculous. If anything, all big radio companies are looking to sell stations, especially in medium and small markets. The era of radio consolidation is over. Find a new enemy.

 

[KB1OKL]

I think the point of the post is that the FCC in it's arrogance is allowing testing contrary to two committees' directives which both hold sway over the FCC. I think a strong question should be why is the testing being done on the sly? Trying to sneak another one past the public? See it's been on now for two months with no complaints?

And I apologize Inspector, I did use the word order which seems to be too strong of a word at this point.


"Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) today called on FCC Chairman Kevin Martin to put the agency's actions on hold unless they are urgent or required by law.

Rockefeller's and Waxman's committees both have jurisdiction over the FCC.
The two lawmakers said the FCC should focus on completing the broadcast digital TV transition next February, but not on unrelated matters - particularly any controversial issues that the Obama administration will want to review."

 

[TheBigA]

I think the point of the post is that the FCC in it's arrogance is allowing testing contrary to two committees' directives which both hold sway over the FCC. I think a strong question should be why is the testing being done on the sly? Trying to sneak another one past the public? See it's been on now for two months with no complaints?

A couple of Representatives don't have the power to cause all work at the FCC to come to a halt. No laws have been passed, and no changes in policy have been made. Just because you agree with them doesn't mean they're right and everyone else is wrong. I'd suggest their directive was arrogant, in that no other agency received such a directive, and it stands outside traditional transition policies.

Testing isn't being done "on the sly." It has been reported, it is permitted, and nothing is being snuck by the public. Everything is being done in the open. As pointed out, these tests were permitted before the so-called directive.

Business should continue during transition. We are paying our government to function during this time. The incoming administration has a team of people observing all actions taking place at the FCC. If they chose to reverse all policies on Jan 20, it's their right to do so. I have no reason to believe they'll do that, given the names of people being considered for FCC posts.

 

[clouseau]

I never said anything in my previous post about 2nd adjacent analog to analog jamming.

Neither did I. Specifically I have been referring all along to the incorrect allegation that 2nd adjacent HD will jam analog off the air. I have no idea where your "Analog to analog" interference mumbo jumbo came from. I've rerear the entire thread and your reference to it appears to be the first... But that aside, 2nd adjacent HD to analog interference is what I stated when I posted "Digital Disaster.org says it will jam all stations off the dial. They were wrong. "

ALL of their contentions were about HD and 2nd adjacent analog "jamming".

You then proceeded to go off on your "Clearcutting" tirade about how "Since iBiquity HD radio is still very far from universally used by all broadcast stations (and now seems very unlikely) how can you claim that "They were wrong"."

It's pretty clear you aren't familiar with Digital-disaster.org or their "Now deleted" foolishness. That's what they said. Second adjacent jammed off the dial by HD IN RICHMOND. HD is pretty well implemented in Richmond. They were dead wrong. That's why I made that statement.

Now, apparently, when confronted with actual references and facts, you turn your wisdom to THIS kind of foolishness.

Your frequent, contrived "straw man" arguments are obviously deceptive, boring, and irrelevant to my post.

It's amazing how, when confronted with an absolute like the Richmond situation, suddenly I'm "Deceptive" or "Contrived". There's plenty of things not to like about AMHD or FMHD. I'm constantly amazed how some "Clearcutters" feel the need to just make stuff up.

Oh Well..

Clouseau

 

[KB1OKL]

I think the point of the post is that the FCC in it's arrogance is allowing testing contrary to two committees' directives which both hold sway over the FCC. I think a strong question should be why is the testing being done on the sly? Trying to sneak another one past the public? See it's been on now for two months with no complaints?

A couple of Representatives don't have the power to cause all work at the FCC to come to a halt. No laws have been passed, and no changes in policy have been made. Just because you agree with them doesn't mean they're right and everyone else is wrong. I'd suggest their directive was arrogant, in that no other agency received such a directive, and it stands outside traditional transition policies.

Testing isn't being done "on the sly." It has been reported, it is permitted, and nothing is being snuck by the public. Everything is being done in the open. As pointed out, these tests were permitted before the so-called directive.

Business should continue during transition. We are paying our government to function during this time. The incoming administration has a team of people observing all actions taking place at the FCC. If they chose to reverse all policies on Jan 20, it's their right to do so. I have no reason to believe they'll do that, given the names of people being considered for FCC posts.

I can see your absence hasn't changed you much unfortunately. I stand by my statements and posts.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

TheBigA said:

Testing isn't being done "on the sly." It has been reported, it is permitted, and nothing is being snuck by the public. Everything is being done in the open.

False.

The FCC approved, and stations were on the air with the 10x power increase in HD radio testing without notice, in secret, and when word leaked out the FCC refused to confirm the testing to the press and public. Further, the FCC refused to disclose the identity of any and all stations conducting the higher powered digital HD radio tests.

I think that fully qualifies as an FCC action being done "on the sly." and being snuck by the public.
None of the increased power testing was initially being done in the open until the public and press discovered it independently.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

I never said anything in my previous post about 2nd adjacent analog to analog jamming.

Neither did I. Specifically I have been referring all along to the incorrect allegation that 2nd adjacent HD will jam analog off the air. But that aside, 2nd adjacent HD to analog interference is what I stated when I posted "Digital Disaster.I have no idea where your "Analog to analog" interference mumbo jumbo came from. I've rerear the entire thread and your reference to it appears to be the first...

Clouseau

Then what's this doing in your previous post Clouseau?

We have co channel stations 200 miles away down here that interfere with each other sometimes. Did 80-90 aggravate interference? YES. Did it create a technical problem? Not really.

Everything is a trade off. A crummy radio on the Main Line can't seperate 93.7 from 94.1 where you are. I'll bet 7th adjacent channel separation would improve that. Nope. I don't think that's a needed protection either. But I will argue from a purist standpoint it would TECHNICALLY be better.

Clouseau

HD radio proponents are always playing "liars poker".

 

[Play Freebird]

Testing isn't being done "on the sly." It has been reported, it is permitted, and nothing is being snuck by the public. Everything is being done in the open. As pointed out, these tests were permitted before the so-called directive.

Let's examine the online CDBS application records of the three stations discussed in the digital power increase request and let me know if you find any documents showing that they were authorized to operate at above -20 dB injection. Unlike most everything else filed since 2002, they chose to submit paper applications, so it won't be easy for you (or any another member of the general public who might have a concern about this.)

WKCI:
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_list.pl?Facility_id=11930

WCSX:
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_list.pl?Facility_id=25084

KOST:
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_list.pl?Facility_id=34424

 

[TheBigA]

None of the increased power testing was initially being done in the open until the public and press discovered it independently.

Not true. Since the FCC asked for comments on this issue, radio stations have been openly discussing their tests. It would seem silly to make comments on an issue without documented tests, don't you think?

Once again, this is a TEST, not a permanent authority. It's simply testing to acquire information. This information will create more fodder for the anti-IBOC brigade, who should welcome all this new material.

 

[fybush]

Let's examine the online CDBS application records of the three stations discussed in the digital power increase request and let me know if you find any documents showing that they were authorized to operate at above -20 dB injection. Unlike most everything else filed since 2002, they chose to submit paper applications, so it won't be easy for you (or any another member of the general public who might have a concern about this.)

I see experimental STA grants right there in the file from 2005-06 for each of those stations (and for KROQ, as well, which was also involved in the testing) - and unless I'm mistaken, there were no electronic STA filings in CDBS for anyone until sometime just this year.

 

[clouseau]

I never said anything in my previous post about 2nd adjacent analog to analog jamming.

Neither did I. Specifically I have been referring all along to the incorrect allegation that 2nd adjacent HD will jam analog off the air. But that aside, 2nd adjacent HD to analog interference is what I stated when I posted "Digital Disaster.I have no idea where your "Analog to analog" interference mumbo jumbo came from. I've rerear the entire thread and your reference to it appears to be the first...

Clouseau

Then what's this doing in your previous post Clouseau?

We have co channel stations 200 miles away down here that interfere with each other sometimes. Did 80-90 aggravate interference? YES. Did it create a technical problem? Not really.

Everything is a trade off. A crummy radio on the Main Line can't seperate 93.7 from 94.1 where you are. I'll bet 7th adjacent channel separation would improve that. Nope. I don't think that's a needed protection either. But I will argue from a purist standpoint it would TECHNICALLY be better.

Clouseau

HD radio proponents are always playing "liars poker".

I get it. Sorry. I honestly didn't see that.

I confess guilt. An obscure illustration of how every signal added to the mix causes interference, even within 200 miles apparently is proof to you of HD's problems. Or how somehow "I am wring".

Opinions vary, Rich. I'll conceed to you, that you apparently have found the proof you were looking for. Some of us look for other things.

Best of luck to you.

Clouseau