• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

full digtial AM test proposed for IBOC

I would be interested in the results, especially at night assuming this allows for a station to transmit in HD while remaining inside its 10khz bandwidth allocation. Unless its on a clear channel frequency there may still be some issues at night from distant stations interfering via skywave. There is also the issue of lighting discharge which this will not fix using the same old HD Radio broadcasting method.

I am more interested with seeing how it does on FM which doesn't have the effects of skywave or lightning. If a station were to broadcast the equivalent of 50kw+ analog power in digital while remaining on its frequency, I'd like to see how it does.
 
This is nothing more than a wideband jammer with no pretense of still serving the listener,
and runs awfully close to the definition of willful, intentional, malicious interference.
Insisting that wideband hash in an analog service band is not malicious fools no one.

It cannot be any different than the existing "constellation", but its sound may be different for an analog listener.

It would be a much lower pitched whooshing, and it will only annoy the host channel and the immediate adjacents.

Second adjacents would be free of noise.

Still won't work any better, mostly because of the characteristics of the wavelength.

No matter how much they wish and pray it would.
 
Tom Wells said:
...a wideband jammer...willful, intentional, malicious interference...fools no one.
Click to expand...
Stop holding back, how do you really feel ;D
 
Thanks.

It'll actually work well in some more meaningful wavelength.
Perhaps the military will relinquish some?

I don't begrudge the existence of the digital scheme per se, it just needs its own playpen.

In a range where no one is "listening", there is no noise at all, except for a radio geek tuning by,

In a range where analog rf broadcast has been defined as a carrier every 10 khz, there's simply no place to hide anything.
 
Zach said:
It can't hurt to try.

Maybe we'll see the emergence of a new class of AMs, broadcasting digitally to stationary radios for niche audience use.
Click to expand...

You're right, it is worth a try. Assuming the goal is to get more public awareness of HD on AM, first thing is to choose a station that actually has a significant audience. Case in point, I live in Upstate NY where the hdradio.com website lists 7 AM'ers in HD; 4 in Albany and 3 in Rochester. I pass thru Albany one a month and know there are really only 2 in HD, that being WGY-NewsTalk 810 and WOFX-980 Sports. Don't believe Clear Channel would turn off analog 810, but they might do so on 980. Problem is likely a small listener base. In Rochester, its doubtful CC would sacrifice the analog signal on WHAM-1180. The Crawford station on 990 would be a good candidate, cuz Crawford has been an iBiquity poster child from early on.
 
W2JUV_AL said:
Problem is likely a small listener base.
Click to expand...

That's a pretty big problem... If you owned an AM station that was reasonably popular in analog, would you "throw it all away" for the next five or ten years to see if your loyal fans will follow?

I suppose if you had a nice FM translator, it might play out, but the whole idea of "Who goes first?" is similar to the bravery of the first person to eat a raw oyster.
 
RCI transmits in DRM on 9.8 mHz, there is hash from 9.790 mHz to 9.810 mHz on an analog radio. DRM is 20 kHz wide just like full digital HD.
 
spunker88 said:
I would be interested in the results, especially at night assuming this allows for a station to transmit in HD while remaining inside its 10khz bandwidth allocation. Unless its on a clear channel frequency there may still be some issues at night from distant stations interfering via skywave. There is also the issue of lighting discharge which this will not fix using the same old HD Radio broadcasting method.

I am more interested with seeing how it does on FM which doesn't have the effects of skywave or lightning. If a station were to broadcast the equivalent of 50kw+ analog power in digital while remaining on its frequency, I'd like to see how it does.
Click to expand...

You forgot fading, power lines, light dimmers, the myriad of badly designed consumer goods, wi-fi, the proliferation of CFL bulbs, etc. All will cause AM HD to lose lock. In a quiet RF environment, it has potential. But in the average home or apartment - doomed. Average highway with power lines - doomed.
 
I think it would be an EXCELLENT idea for WHAM to try all-digital! C'mon, WHAM, don't be chicken, bwAWWWK- buck-buck-buck! Do it! Be an innovator!! Leave those stupid fuddy-duddy analog listeners to us.

And while we're at it: thanks for Michael Savage and Kevin Meath!! ;D
 
No AM station with a big audience will want to commit suicide by going full digital. Yet, they will still murder their adjacents with IBUZ.
 
Nick said:
No AM station with a big audience will want to commit suicide by going full digital. Yet, they will still murder their adjacents with IBUZ.
Click to expand...

And their adjacents will murder them.

Think of KDKA/1020 and WBZ/1030 both being digital-only at 50,000 watts, with a 20 kHz channel width (1010-1030 and 1020-1040 kHz, respectively). Depending on receiving location and propagation, they'd clobber each other on 1020-1030. If the AM band were to go all-digital, the channel spacing would have to be 20 kHz instead of 10.

I could see all-digital on the FM band, as long as the channel width stayed below 200 kHz, but not on MW.
 
KeithE4 said:
K6JHU said:
To KB1OKL on DRM. This just in...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/story/2012/06/26/nb-rci-transmission-ends.html

I don't know if this affects the DRM broadcast.
Click to expand...

AFAIK, all shortwave broadcasting has ceased, or will do so very shortly, in Canada, the Netherlands, and the Vatican. That includes both Ancient Modulation and DRM transmissions.
Click to expand...

The DRM station on 9.8 mHz was on loud, rude and whooshy last night, it's off so far today.
 
The article says, "IBiquity has also said for years that the interference issues inherent with the AM band could potentially be improved with an all-digital system."

Huh? That doesn't sound right to me.
 
KB1OKL said:
The DRM station on 9.8 mHz was on loud, rude and whooshy last night, it's off so far today.
Click to expand...
DRM is supposed to offer full quieting audio with no noise of any kind.
I strongly suspect your receiver was not in the DRM mode?
 
You're right, it is worth a try. Assuming the goal is to get more public awareness of HD on AM
Click to expand...

You can't get public awareness of HD on FM.

It's has two purposes (on FM):

#1 to feed a analog translator.

#2 To send a format that has been dropped from the primary analog.

AM HD. Nothing to see here. Move on.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom