For those of you that think FM IBOC has no hash on the adjacents

[clouseau]

Just try listening to any of the NYC FM stations in Bridgewater, NJ. This is well within the coverage of the NYC stations, but as soon as you head West and cross over the hill, they all fade out to nothing.

Actually, It's not "Well within" at all. More like "On the edge". As you Head west and go over the hill, you're getting out of the contour and by your own statement Geographically challenged. While Bridgewater proper is just inside the contour, anything west more than a couple of miles is out. I looked at WKTU and WHTZ. They appear to be typical full powers from Empire. That's out of the 54bdu. Out here in fly over country we call that prime location for a translator.

Of course the NYC FM stations used to get staticky before in that area, but you could still hear them on an average car radio. Now, nothing but hash.

So the problem is the staticky reception outside the contour has been replaced with some other unlistenable condition? Meanwhile the people IN the contour get more choices.

Maybe I'm just not seeing the compelling problem here. However this might explain the relative lack of complaints about FM HD interference. I'm sure some others will see it differently.

Clouseau

 

[Chuck]

So the problem is the staticky reception outside the contour has been replaced with some other unlistenable condition? Meanwhile the people IN the contour get more choices.

Maybe I'm just not seeing the compelling problem here. However this might explain the relative lack of complaints about FM HD interference. I'm sure some others will see it differently.

Clouseau

Well, some people will listen to "staticky reception," but they won't listen to "no reception."

 

[clouseau]

Well, some people will listen to "staticky reception," but they won't listen to "no reception."

That would be me, but very few others. I think we would all agree that "Staticky reception" = basically No Listeners. (More or less).

Clouseau

 

[KB1OKL]

Just try listening to any of the NYC FM stations in Bridgewater, NJ. This is well within the coverage of the NYC stations, but as soon as you head West and cross over the hill, they all fade out to nothing.

Actually, It's not "Well within" at all. More like "On the edge". As you Head west and go over the hill, you're getting out of the contour and by your own statement Geographically challenged. While Bridgewater proper is just inside the contour, anything west more than a couple of miles is out. I looked at WKTU and WHTZ. They appear to be typical full powers from Empire. That's out of the 54bdu. Out here in fly over country we call that prime location for a translator.

Of course the NYC FM stations used to get staticky before in that area, but you could still hear them on an average car radio. Now, nothing but hash.

So the problem is the staticky reception outside the contour has been replaced with some other unlistenable condition? Meanwhile the people IN the contour get more choices.

Maybe I'm just not seeing the compelling problem here. However this might explain the relative lack of complaints about FM HD interference. I'm sure some others will see it differently.

Clouseau

I think with both AM and FM people don't realize that they are hearing IBOC sidebands instead of normal noise, fading, static, etc. This tells me the extent of the problem is really not known yet and we may never know as this may drive people to just think it's always been this way or is getting worse (the noise problem) and just drive them towards other types of technology quicker. I will not subscribe to Satellite, Wifi seems to be a PITA and radio is getting worse and worse, where does that leave me? I buy LP's and play them on my antiquated Marantz with double large advents.

 

[Chuck]

Well, some people will listen to "staticky reception," but they won't listen to "no reception."

That would be me, but very few others. I think we would all agree that "Staticky reception" = basically No Listeners. (More or less).

Clouseau

I tend to agree, but I think it also depends on what you are programming. As the manager of a station where "staticky reception" is a way of life for many listeners, I've had quite a few people tell me they would listen to our under almost any circumstance.

It may not be common among commercial stations, but in the land of NCE broadcasting, poor signals, short spacing and programming that attract a small but loyal following seem to be fairly normal. So far, NCE stations have been early adopters of HD, because they received grant money for the conversion. The attraction is multicasting. I can understabd why. If it works it is a great concept.

Some of those stations have been very happy with their decision. They tend to be the higher-powered stations. Some of the lower powered stations (and there are a lot of them) are a little less than enthused.

Did I say something about "diminishing returns" a while back? It seems to be a valid point about HD that haunts some smaller stations.

 

[Len14043]

Of course there is interference when listening to out-of-market first adjacients. But nobody except dxers will care.

That's not true, wait until the complaints start to roll in when the iBlock burden is heavier, especially when people start to realize the noise they are hearing is caused by IBOC (In Band Other Channels) rather than just random noise which I'm sure most people still think as of course we all know here that 99.999% of the US public has never even heard of IBOC and already think they are receiving in glorious HD as no station ever tells them otherwise.

In regards to AM, we are probably in agreement. For FM, I just don't see the sky falling. As I mentioned in prior posts, I live in the Cincinnati-Dayton area where the FM band is packed with most of the stations running IBOC. I am not aware of any complaints in my area, which is likely an area in which the scenario you describe would have the best chance of manifesting itself. The only interference noted is when you attempt to listen to an out-of-market first adjacient. Prior to IBOC, the out-of market first adjacient was receivable with much bleed-over from the local. With IBOC, the capture effect blankets the first adjacient. For the regular posters here, I apologize for repeating this again, but the issue keeps on resurfacing.

 

[Radioman100]

How would anyone know what the multicast channels provide?

The only info on HD2 formats that I've found is the HDRadio.com website and the menu looks pretty good: All 70s, All 80s, Dance, Tropical, Smooth Jazz, Classical, Classic Alternative, Classic Hip-Hop, and a simulcast of big AM news talker. That's one market. Wanna guess which one?

Do you think people might be interested in some of those formats if they actually knew they were available to them?

The problem is they are available on the main channels in any major city, so why would anyone go out and buy a new receiver to get them on a second channel? BTW isn't Classic and Hip Hop an oxymoron? ;D

Really? Feel free to point out the all 70s or all 80s stations in any major city. For that matter, how about the dance formats, smooth jazz, classic alternative, classic hip-hop, etc.

And in this particular metro (remember, we're talking about just one metro here) these formats DO NOT EXIST on analog terrestrial radio!

 

[orange434]

Really? Feel free to point out the all 70s or all 80s stations in any major city. For that matter, how about the dance formats, smooth jazz, classic alternative, classic hip-hop, etc.

And in this particular metro (remember, we're talking about just one metro here) these formats DO NOT EXIST on analog terrestrial radio!

but these HD2 channels you speak of are 300-song playlists with no imaging, no jocks, no imagination, basically the same amount of effort a random person could put into winamp. if you think that's incentive to go out and spend $300 for a box with knobs on it, well more power to you.

 

[fredcantu]

HD radio has had an adverse effect on the seek function on my car radio.
When I seek up it locks on the lower sideband of the next HD station.
Then I have to kick it up again to get to the main signal.
It sounds like a small thing. But it's irritating when you're trying to channel surf.
BTW-- my radio is not that old. It was standard issue in 2003 GM vans, SUVs and pickups.

 

[KB1OKL]

How would anyone know what the multicast channels provide?

The only info on HD2 formats that I've found is the HDRadio.com website and the menu looks pretty good: All 70s, All 80s, Dance, Tropical, Smooth Jazz, Classical, Classic Alternative, Classic Hip-Hop, and a simulcast of big AM news talker. That's one market. Wanna guess which one?

Do you think people might be interested in some of those formats if they actually knew they were available to them?

The problem is they are available on the main channels in any major city, so why would anyone go out and buy a new receiver to get them on a second channel? BTW isn't Classic and Hip Hop an oxymoron? ;D

Really? Feel free to point out the all 70s or all 80s stations in any major city. For that matter, how about the dance formats, smooth jazz, classic alternative, classic hip-hop, etc.

And in this particular metro (remember, we're talking about just one metro here) these formats DO NOT EXIST on analog terrestrial radio!

I live between Boston MA and Prov RI and all of those formats are available on main FM stations, most in Boston.

 

[Play Freebird]

Just try listening to any of the NYC FM stations in Bridgewater, NJ. This is well within the coverage of the NYC stations, but as soon as you head West and cross over the hill, they all fade out to nothing. Of course the NYC FM stations used to get staticky before in that area, but you could still hear them on an average car radio. Now, nothing but hash.

There are problems with reception of some of those stations closer to Empire than Bridgewater. On a recent return from New England, I took my usual route -- I-287 south around the west side of New York -- and was listening to WQXR on 96.3, as I've done many times in the past. However, IBOC interference from 96.5 in Philadelphia now starts to become noticeable north of Basking Ridge and increases further south. While driving down the long hill north of I-78, it got so bad that WQXR's signal (which has a predicted field strength of 60 dBu in that area) was useless.

Another severe problem can be found along I-95 south of Providence. Rhode Island Public Radio's FM station on 102.7 gets clobbered by IBOC spillover from 102.5 (WKLB, formerly WCRB) near Boston. This is an out-of-market signal interfering with an in-market station, the problem made worse by terrain. Not a good thing if you're a Rhode Island resident who wants access to NPR.

Those of you living in the flatlands of the south may not fully grasp the situation here in the northeast, where we have terrain and a large number of short-spaced FM stations. Expansion of the band into the 76-88 MHz range would offer a very convenient solution: rather than making matters worse by running hybrid digital, stations would be assigned a full-digital OFDM channel in the new segment. On-channel synchronous boosters would work fine with this system, finally providing a solution to terrain obstructions. IBOC chips are already capable of decoding this format, the only receiver design change required would be the extended tuning range.

Regarding the "faint white noise" observation, I've also noticed this problem while listening to local IBOC stations on my Technics ST-9030 tuner in wide IF mode. At reduced volume, the hiss isn't too apparent -- but when listening on headphones at a moderate level, it's annoying. Unfortunately, the ST-9030 can't be forced into narrow IF bandwidth -- the only options are "Wide" and "Auto", and the automatic bandwidth detector tends to chatter when tuned to an IBOC station. I guess I'll need to modify the circuit to defeat the auto circuit and force it to narrow. Anyone here have a schematic for the ST-9030?

 

[Radioman100]

but these HD2 channels you speak of are 300-song playlists with no imaging, no jocks, no imagination, basically the same amount of effort a random person could put into winamp. if you think that's incentive to go out and spend $300 for a box with knobs on it, well more power to you.

Really? No imaging? No imagination? I've read several reviews of HD2 stations that would disagree with you. I happen to know that's not the case with several stations, and pretty much all of the CC Format Lab channels.

And again, how would anyone know what the multicast channels provide? Or for that matter, how much effort is put into the channels prior to buying a radio?

 

[Radioman100]

How would anyone know what the multicast channels provide?

The only info on HD2 formats that I've found is the HDRadio.com website and the menu looks pretty good: All 70s, All 80s, Dance, Tropical, Smooth Jazz, Classical, Classic Alternative, Classic Hip-Hop, and a simulcast of big AM news talker. That's one market. Wanna guess which one?

Do you think people might be interested in some of those formats if they actually knew they were available to them?

The problem is they are available on the main channels in any major city, so why would anyone go out and buy a new receiver to get them on a second channel? BTW isn't Classic and Hip Hop an oxymoron? ;D

Really? Feel free to point out the all 70s or all 80s stations in any major city. For that matter, how about the dance formats, smooth jazz, classic alternative, classic hip-hop, etc.

And in this particular metro (remember, we're talking about just one metro here) these formats DO NOT EXIST on analog terrestrial radio!

I live between Boston MA and Prov RI and all of those formats are available on main FM stations, most in Boston.

Well, you're missing the point. The market I listed was Philadelphia. All of those formats are NOT available in Philadelphia on analog stations.

 

[Savage]

Apparently reasonable minds can differ, engineering-wise, as to the extent and severity of added interference from HD Radio to adjacent channels - as well as self-interference (white noise on FM and background hiss on a large percentage of AM receivers) caused on HD-originating stations. Plus there are the case-by-case variables.

I'm struck by the willingness of HD proponents to accept - not to say endorse - the addition of ANY degree of increased interference, all apparently in the interest of some unquantifiable future "greater good" from HD. Not ten years ago, any station who abruptly began receiving increased interference from another service's adjacent-channel emissions would have been all over the FCC Enforcement Bureau screaming bloody murder. As recently as the 1996 round of consolidation most operators felt their licensed contours were sacrosanct from this kind of thing. The sacrifice of even a single analog listener, in the hope that a new digital audience would at some indeterminate time help the industry, would have viewed as absolutely unacceptable.

I know the pro-IBOCers will likely disagree violently, but I theorize this attitude is a major factor in the widespread lack of enthusiasm across the industry for HD Radio. The threats to maintaining the existing audience, the ephemeral nature-at-best of promised benefits, increased costs, and industrywide marketing ineptitude - all arguably strong arguments that self-imposed reduction of quality of existing service is hardly an advisable proposition for an industry being compared with technologies that offer much more to consumers.

Outside the world of bloggers and HD enthusiasts, where's the real benefit to Joe Six-Pack? HD has to provide motivation to the typical listener. I personally think that's missing to a degree which renders all of these technical discussions, while interesting, genuinely moot out there in the real world of non-radio people.

 

[Radioman100]

Outside the world of bloggers and HD enthusiasts, where's the real benefit to Joe Six-Pack? HD has to provide motivation to the typical listener. I personally think that's missing to a degree which renders all of these technical discussions, while interesting, genuinely moot out there in the real world of non-radio people.

I agree with most of your points Bob. On this one, I disagree somewhat. I think HD has benefits to the average Joe, but the industry has done a horrible job of communicating those benefits.

I get the whole AM interference argument. On FM, perhaps it would be best if stations were evaluated first to see what degree of interference they would cause. It doesn't seem to be a problem here in Texas, but I can see where it might be in New York City.

 

[Len14043]

I'm struck by the willingness of HD proponents to accept - not to say endorse - the addition of ANY degree of increased interference .....

The sacrifice of even a single analog listener, in the hope that a new digital audience would at some indeterminate time help the industry, would have viewed as absolutely unacceptable.

While I sympathize with your situation regarding WBZ, caution should be used when using absolute phrases such as "ANY degree of increased interference" and "The sacrifice of even a single listener" being viewed as unacceptable. As another poster here pointed out, the addition of any kind of service causes additional interference. You are probably tired of hearing the issue of WYSL interfereing with WHO, but logic would dictate that at least one WHO listener was sacrificed when your station signed on. Is that interference acceptable? As a dxer living out west in the 1980's, my ability to hear WHAM, WLS, WJR was sacrificed because of the addition of new assignments on those frequencies in the western states. I had to see past my narrow interests for the greater good.

 

[Savage]

You missed my point. I'm talking about the attitude change which is purported by IBOC proponents, not reciting my opinion here, which has been well-documented before and which is beside the point for this discussion. I'm just saying that as recently as ten years ago most broadcasters would view trading a single listener now for an unquantifiable future benefit from digital, as unacceptable.

It's not valid to view the new-allocation 1040 groundwave service begun by WYSL as "interfering" with WHO. If indeed WYSL's nighttime service proposal, dating to 1994, created FCC-defined "interference" WHO had ample opportunity to file a petition opposing the 301. You can't validly compare that situation with IBOC adjacent-channel skywave from WBZ obliterating nighttime GROUNDWAVE service exceeding, on one recent occasion, WYSL's licensed NIF by a factor of two. WYSL was not permitted to submit any meaningful prior objections because of the legal principle of "ripeness" (you can't complain about interference which hasn't occurred yet.) Of course we have now filed two formal complaints, so we'll see what action the Commission takes on those. It should also be noted that WYSL's 1040 nighttime operation has generated zero complaints in 11 years about loss of WHO reception in Western New York. WBZ's IBOC night operation has generated no fewer than two dozen listener complaints and two formal FCC filings about interference to WYSL - in just three months.

I was program director of WNOX Knoxville and used to listen to my station when I came back here to see family circa 1978-1980. When local WNYR moved to 990 from 680 it never occurred to me to complain to the FCC because I couldn't near NOX's skywave any more. It was a justifiable, logical move of an existing service to a new frequency, as WYSL did in 1998, which is to be distinguished from "interference."

I didn't chime in on this thread to rehash the WYSL-WBZ situation which has been chewed up pretty well on prior occasions. I was commenting on the overall IBOC situation and how it relates to the dual markets of broadcasters and radio listeners, plus what the interference situations - AM and FM - portend for the future of HD Radio.

 

[Len14043]

It's not valid to view the new-allocation 1040 groundwave service begun by WYSL as "interfering" with WHO. If indeed WYSL's nighttime service proposal, dating to 1994, created FCC-defined "interference" WHO had ample opportunity to file a petition opposing the 301. You can't validly compare that situation with IBOC adjacent-channel skywave from WBZ obliterating nighttime GROUNDWAVE service exceeding, on one recent occasion, WYSL's licensed NIF by a factor of two. WYSL was not permitted to submit any meaningful prior objections because of the legal principle of "ripeness" (you can't complain about interference which hasn't occurred yet.) Of course we have now filed two formal complaints, so we'll see what action the Commission takes on those. It should also be noted that WYSL's 1040 nighttime operation has generated zero complaints in 11 years about loss of WHO reception in Western New York. WBZ's IBOC night operation has generated no fewer than two dozen listener complaints and two formal FCC filings about interference to WYSL - in just three months.

I don't live in Rochester, but I can only imagine the extent to which your signal is obliterted by WBZ. The interference you are experiencing is probably unacceptable. However, living in what some posters refer to as ground zero for IBOC, i.e. Cincinnati-Dayton, I don't see it as a problem on FM - unless you are a dxer who likes to listen to out-of-market first adjacients. Most people (myself included) would see the existance of WYSL serving the Rochester area as an acceptable tradeoff which outweights the interference it causes. Likewise, the benefits of FM IBOC far exceed the negative aspects. In a nutshell, I compare the lost ability to receive out-of-market first adjacients on FM with the loss of hearing stations such as WHO in Western NY. In both cases, only dxers are affected.

 

[Savage]

Well, Len, I'd agree with you - IF (note emphasis) the only issue were DXers. More on the "DX" controversy in a moment.

I can tell you that on nights when the skywave is really active, the first-adjacent noise from WBZ is unbelievable. It's hard to justify wasting electricity leaving WYSL's transmitter on; nobody could be listening unless they're within a mile of the array. I've recorded audio right off the FIM-41 0.9 sm from the transmitter site, looking at the code beacon winking away on Tower 1, and measuring WYSL signal strength of almost 20 mv/m - with roaring WBZ IBOC hash making WYSL unlistenable. In November I went into our main lobe and recorded IBOC crud from WBZ rendering a WYSL of 27.6 mv/m practically useless for average listeners; obnoxious enough that nobody would bother to listen for more than a few minutes. I got similar results on several streets in our COL, about 4 miles away, in the main lobe of our pattern.

It's not hard to figure why. WYSL's augmented field in our main lobe is 218 mv. On WBZ's 279-degree radial towards WYSL, their main lobe - aimed at us like a howitzer - contains about 4100 mv, or twenty times WYSL's main lobe. A massive signal like that combined with IBOC steady-state COFDM sidebands means - WBZ is running the equivalent of one of those old shortwave jammers on top of us.

Back to the "DX" matter. I, like others, would argue that distant AM reception is a unique advantage offered by the service, and ought to be endorsed instead of being disparaged. After all, it offers something other radio services don't.

 

[Dighton Rockhead]

Another severe problem can be found along I-95 south of Providence. Rhode Island Public Radio's FM station on 102.7 gets clobbered by IBOC spillover from 102.5 (WKLB, formerly WCRB) near Boston. This is an out-of-market signal interfering with an in-market station, the problem made worse by terrain. Not a good thing if you're a Rhode Island resident who wants access to NPR.

Those of you living in the flatlands of the south may not fully grasp the situation here in the northeast, where we have terrain and a large number of short-spaced FM stations. Expansion of the band into the 76-88 MHz range would offer a very convenient solution: rather than making matters worse by running hybrid digital, stations would be assigned a full-digital OFDM channel in the new segment. On-channel synchronous boosters would work fine with this system, finally providing a solution to terrain obstructions. IBOC chips are already capable of decoding this format, the only receiver design change required would be the extended tuning range.

Right On, Freebird!:

As a denizen of Arbitron Market 39, I can testify that the problems you describe occuring to the Class A repeater signal of RI Public Radio on 102.7 are indeed as you say they are.

As for your suggestions to helping fix problems like the one with 102.7/102.5, I'm in full 100 percent agreement. That 76 to 88 mhz spectrum space would be a godsend for such FM conflicts, and could also finally provide a practical solution for injured parties like Bob Savage/1040 WYSL, and the rest of the AM band, for that matter.

It makes so much sense that it'll never happen......too bad.