full digtial AM test proposed for IBOC

[richllewis]

I think DRM was tried in an experimental way in Alaska on the Shortwave bands. I haven't heard the results since they announced. As for AM if you do not have the receiver for DRM you hear a lot of noise. DRM has been tried in Europe sucessfully but probably unless you were required to buy a new radio this would be unworkable. If DRM were tried in the US you would have to get the receivers from European based Companies. Or modify your IF on your radio and have a 12khz converter for the output to your audio board on your computer. This is workable for Shortwave but for the average joe who does not know anything about DRM it would be a nightmare and if you were the station owner in question it would be the fastest way to see your ratings drop fast.

As for WWL, they still are not IBOC on AM and probably do not intend to. I seem to remember WWL teaming up with Clear Channel and all the Entercom stations in New Orleans doing the United Broadcasters of New Orleans during the aftermath of Katrina and I think also Baton Rouge was part of this. They could have not done the job they did if it was not for WWL not having IBOC at night reaching the outlying areas of the country. None of the stations in Mississippi are IBOC on AM either except in the far north part of Mississippi where they can get WREC out of Memphis which is IBOC. Lets have no more radio stations doing IBOC on AM not even digital IBOC

 

[tomservo]

Maybe there's some merit to running a digital only stream on MW, maybe not. Even though I don't understand the workings of it, though, I am confident that an all-digital IBOC stream at night would be impossible to decode in all but the closest groundwave scenarios. So if the disaster happened at night, the digital only IBOC would still be fighting skywave from analogs in other parts of the country and probably be rendered useless. At least that's my feeling; maybe a test will prove otherwise.

As for putting AM in cell phones, I still don't understand how anyone could a) pack a ferrite antenna into the case of today's slim phones and b) mitigate self-interference from all the electronics of the phone itself. A board etching antenna might work for FM, but that would only likely provide reliable reception in VERY strong areas, like >100 dBu. I can't see it working at all for AM unless you're holding the phone in one hand and have the other on a live tower.

 

[iyiyi]

So anyway, what 4 MW stations are slated to broadcast full digital?

 

[TimeIsTight]

As for putting AM in cell phones, I still don't understand how anyone could a) pack a ferrite antenna into the case of today's slim phones and b) mitigate self-interference from all the electronics of the phone itself. A board etching antenna might work for FM, but that would only likely provide reliable reception in VERY strong areas, like >100 dBu.

Answers from earlier in the thread:

The Sony SRF-59 Walkman has a small ferrite bar and yet is noted for its sensitivity. Some AM chips now require only a single circular trace around the perimeter of the PC board to work.

Most cell phones already have FM capability - it just isn't turned on. If there needs to be an added chip, it will probably be analog radio, not digital. Sony and SiLabs have the best chips on the market, but it would almost have to be Silabs because it doesn't need inconvenient things like tuning capacitors and RF / IF coils, everything is inside. One chip, hookup up serial communication, audio, antenna - done.

We have to remember that we are talking about effective "emergency reception" not necessarily general day-to-day use.

If the phone-related circuits generate too much interference with AM reception, shut them down. Design the circuits so that when used as an emergency AM receiver the entire unit become just an AM radio. It may not be ideal, but something is always better than nothing.

So anyway, what 4 MW stations are slated to broadcast full digital?

Radio World reports:

Drive tests would be conducted in rural and city areas in several markets.
Committee members still need to identify test stations.

Full June 28, 2012 article:

http://radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-tests-on-the-table/214148

 

[KTN Corp]

If it only costs pennies a cell phone, why not have both AM and FM, just in case? AM just has those extra benefits that many people may need, depending on what happens. So why exclude it?

In the case of a solar flare EMP, those old simple AM transmitters might have the best chance of survival. The towers are well grounded, and some co-located block house studios were built inside Faraday cages to save the audio engineers from constantly fighting RF problems, from their own transmitters, in their studio audio equipment. All you need is a handful of 50-kw stations to cover the country should more complicated modern equipment become instant toast, especially those devices connected to the grid or other wired networks.

My personal view is that AM is a technology that is rapidly becoming outdated, and where it stands depends on the market, and the signal power. Let's not forget that this thread is about testing a digital MW replacement for Ancient Modulation. For emergency communications full power digital would have all the strengths of AM, remote transmitters with backup generators and the potential of lots of stored fuel, greater signal coverage in many markets, and skywave coverage of much larger areas at night.

Right now, when it comes to new generations of cell phones it doesn't have to be AM or FM, when for pennies it can be both. If MW goes full power digital, future phone generations can be made to receive those signals. The idea is to have as many options as you can, just in case. Because you won't know, until it's too late, which options will still work.

The most common occurrence of EMP in an emergency is during a nuclear bomb blast. AM would be useful if the towers and transmitters weren't blown up in the blast. Of course everyone would be dead.

It probably is a waste of researchers time and R&D budget money to find a way to overcome more problems to insert AM reception in a cell phone for emergency use when FM is already in cell phones. NOAA weather radio is more useful in both non-emergency and emergency situations; the SAME warning system is easily added to the phone.

My viewpoint is from an area that gets natural disasters at anytime, like flash flooding from pop-up thunderstorms. You probably view emergencies from the man-made 9/11 terrorist emergencies since it's more likely to happen there. But following your line of reasoning why not LW or SW also? Two LW stations can cover each half of the country and one SW can cover the whole continent.

SW is more likely to replace MW for long-distance broadcasting. Broadcasting is gradually moving higher and higher in the RF spectrum! Why stop progress?

 

[KeithE4]

My viewpoint is from an area that gets natural disasters at anytime, like flash flooding from pop-up thunderstorms. You probably view emergencies from the man-made 9/11 terrorist emergencies since it's more likely to happen there. But following your line of reasoning why not LW or SW also? Two LW stations can cover each half of the country and one SW can cover the whole continent.

Longwave broadcasting has never existed in the Western Hemisphere. Outside of a subset of hams and SWLs (not all general-coverage receivers cover LW, but most modern ones do), there are no LW receivers in the hands of the general public.

SW is more likely to replace MW for long-distance broadcasting.

SW broadcasting is even deader than AM. Governments worldwide are turning off their international broadcast services (Canada, the Netherlands, and the Vatican are the latest, but by no means the last). It's almost to the point where the only shortwave broadcast stations will be American bible-bangers, China, and Cuba. The ITU should just own up to the inevitable and give the entire 1.7-30 MHz spectrum to us hams. ;D

Broadcasting is gradually moving higher and higher in the RF spectrum! Why stop progress?

It's moving higher because digital transmissions require line-of-sight paths and can't tolerate the phase distortions of the ionosphere. And even UHF isn't immune to these problems (as noted by many DTV viewers when a plane flies overhead, it rains, the sun is between you and the tower, or other things that cause the signals to go away).

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

The most common occurrence of EMP in an emergency is during a nuclear bomb blast. AM would be useful if the towers and transmitters weren't blown up in the blast.

Only if they contain no...ZERO...solid-state devices, still have an available power source and were disconnected from the matching network or phasor and AC power at the time of detonation. These days even FEMA admits that hardening transmitter sites against EMP caused by nuclear and thermonuclear weapons is almost impossible, with most AM transmitters using solid-state devices and microprocessor control.

And, of course, that assumes there's anyone left to listen...

 

[MarioMania]

What AM Stations are going to do the Digital Only Test??

Also would All Digital AM Band Work??

 

[K6JHU]

Is the full digital test also going to be full power? Or are they just going to turn off the analog carrier?

 

[Ai4i]

...the sun is between you and the tower...

W ;D W

 

[TimeIsTight]

The most common occurrence of EMP in an emergency is during a nuclear bomb blast. AM would be useful if the towers and transmitters weren't blown up in the blast. Of course everyone would be dead.

Trying hard not to get into the technical weeds, IIRC it is possible to cause an EMP event by detonating a nuclear bomb in outer space, above the center of this country which wouldn't kill anything but delicate electronics and, mostly, transformers that make the grid work. And it might take a decade to replace all of those transformers.

But, what is much more likely to happen is another "Carrington Event." That was the big solar storm that occurred in September 1859 that, literally, shocked a lot of telegraph operators, started fires in some telegraph stations, and, reportedly, for days, allowed the telegraph system to work without batteries hooked in. There was another serious solar storm in May 1921, that shut down railroad signal systems, started telegraph and telephone system related fires etc. One can only imagine the impact a similar solar storm would have on today's society. And, that's the EMP situation we should worry more about, because it's not a matter of "if" it is really a matter of "when" and we may already be overdue.

Back to the main topic, this thread is about testing full power digital transmissions on the current AM band. The hope is that the new transmission system would give the slowly dying band a brand new product life cycle. In marketing terms it would be "new and improved." If digital doesn't work, the band is probably doomed. And AM radio stations will continue to be declining assets until the transmitter sites all have greater real estate value than the station licenses, and the last ones go dark.

One problem with going digital is the lack of receivers. Some have posted that the American public "won't buy new radios." My only reason for introducing the inclusion of Digital MW receivers into cell phones (in this thread) is that they are "ubiquitous." Almost everybody has a cell phone, carries it most of the time, and gets a new and improved model every few years.

That would solve the "receiver" problem for MW digital instantly, and then the only problem to be solved would be "attractive and compelling programming."

My cable company recently stopped its analog TV transmissions and I was forced to buy a new cable-ready digital TV for the bedroom last week, and it was a reminder that the American TV system has switched to all digital. Radio is going to follow at some point.

However, HD radio has been an absolute marketing flop. Possibly because there are so many other easier options for audio content listeners. The only hope AM license holders have long-term is full power digital. And they have to solve the "receiver marketing" problem even if full power digital works spectacularly well. It's basic economics, and the cheaper and easier to produce the receivers are, the more will be out there. If there are big intellectual property license fees and complicating restrictions, the receivers will never be built or sold in adequate numbers. We have seen that economic reality with HD already.

So, lets hope the full power digital tests go well, and that some markets, where AM is already dead, can be switched to full power digital to prove the concept, with some kind of common sense roll-out, whether by frequency, or geography set in motion to switch the country to digital and make MW competitive again, before the stations all turn off their transmitters for the last time.

All of that said, it will probably be a couple of decades before the big city big power AMs switch, and that won't happen until there are many more new digital receivers out there, than old AM receivers. It's the smaller market, already on life support AMs, that need these technical tests to work in order to save them now.

 

[mmnassour]

AT&T will fight the radio in a cell phone mandate until the last breath. The same goes for Verizon and I can assure you the hardware manufacturers will do the same.

And like NAB (which seems to grow weaker each year), all of the above companies make large, large campaign contributions through PACs, etc.

I'm not sayin' it can't happen....but it would be a bloody fight for an appliance that by the time it is "ubiquitous", would be practically obsolete.

Their argument...there's no reason why their business should be penalized to support a failing business model (iBiquity, not broadcasting in general). This isn't like mandating UHF/VHF tuners. One can indeed say that smartphones can be used for streaming media and that's fine. Let the WCBSs and WOAIs take their place alongside Joe's stream from Ypsilanti Michigan...and let the better programmer win.

But as far as an AM changeover, yes, let's do some tests on a couple of stations. But this isn't as simple as switching "some" markets, I'm afraid. What manufacturer will ramp up production for such a limited market? What happens to cars?

Oh well, I'll stop saying no and let the folks who want this to work to give it a shot! ;D

 

[satech]

What is the point of trying full-digital AM HD, when you can't even buy a radio anymore in stores that receives it, aside from car radios? All of the home and portable HD radios I can find anymore in Best Buy and Radio Shack are FM-only. Sure, you could mail-order a Sangean tuner, but how many people are going to do that just to receive AM HD? A few dozen, out of a marketplace of millions?

 

[TimeIsTight]

AT&T will fight the radio in a cell phone mandate until the last breath. The same goes for Verizon and I can assure you the hardware manufacturers will do the same.

I agree, which is why the pitch must be made on a "homeland security" basis. The opposition would also be much less if the "digital-radio receiver circuits" were fee free, as in open source. The otherwise very cheap extra feature of digital radio could also be a competitive selling point for cell phone models, and help reduce bandwidth congestion for cell phone providers caused by too many online radio listeners. This could be in the interests of both cell phone providers and manufacturers if it is done right.

What is the point of trying full-digital AM HD, when you can't even buy a radio anymore in stores that receives it, aside from car radios?

Well, either AM station owners call it nearly a century and start folding their tents, or they convince manufacturers to make cheap and easy to use digital receivers. The most likely to succeed business model, is an open source, fee free, world standard format. It's just economies of scale. From an economic perspective more radios are likely to be built, and sold, that will receive the digital signals that way. It would add an extra selling point to regular AM-FM radios too.

We only have to look at the current HD radio situation to see that as a mass medium the marketing doesn't work, and also needs to be completely re-thought. Somebody other than iBiquity should also be testing the available open source, Digital Radio Mondiale, global system too. The goal should be the find the system most likely to be adopted by the greatest number of potential listeners from an economic, and not necessarily technical, perspective.

 

[audioguy]

Not in favor of any requirements from the government to force manufacturers to put radios in cell phones. We have enough heavy-handed government regulation in this country already.

If people want a cell phone with a radio, let them buy one. I don't want one in mine. Especially not an HD radio. Or an AM radio. Or any kind of radio. Leave me alone!

 

[Casey]

AM radio integration in cell phones will never happen on a large scale, digital or not. The demand is not present and the technical requirements to make it work effectively are a deal breaker. For best performance you need a ferrite rod antenna. There is no room for a ferrite rod antenna in the iphone and competing android phones. More powerful smartphones create more interference, meaning more headaches for manufacturers. And the need for licensing will kill any chance of HD AM entering cell phones.

The homeland security basis will never work. People have done without all this time, satellite format stations rarely supply local emergency news, and the performance of the integrated radios in cell phones suck. There are 3 main places you would use your phone. At home, where you have a tv with superior emergency coverage. In the car where you will have a superior radio built in. And on the go, away from your car, where you are least likely to have a wire needed to make FM function. AM will be nearly impossible to receive without a ferrite rod. No one will care if a phone has a digital radio or not. Performance of the phone, cost, aesthetics, and if it has an Apple logo are the key selling points. Lessening congestion is also not a selling point. The 4G networks are not congested and a 32kbps aac+ stream will not make a difference for 3G networks.

The arguments for integrating radio and especially AM radio into cellphones are dead. The carriers are laughing at the NAB. Even if the NAB wins, the carriers have nothing to lose. Quite a few smart phones have FM radios anyway and it does not make a noticeable impact in sales.

 

[tomservo]

The 4G networks are not congested and a 32kbps aac+ stream will not make a difference for 3G networks.

The 4G networks aren't anywhere close to being ubiquitous at this point. My carrier doesn't even have ANY 4G rolled out yet. And speaking of them, that 32 kbps AAC+ stream sounds good but their 3G is incapable of handing it for more than a few minutes on average. I think my record between dropouts is 15 minutes over about 13 miles.

This is something the technorati fail to consider when it comes to streaming everything everywhere: no matter what city you're in, everyone is spread out across multiple carriers and one or more of them will have serious coverage or connectivity issues that will render the ability to listen to any one audio stream null at any given time. Depending on streaming radio as "the future" or wireless audio is a really, really bad idea.

Frankly everyone I know in real life seems to share my belief of "streaming is great but it isn't worth the $100 a month the most reliable carriers charge for near-unlimited internet access." Free radio simply works better and works everywhere, even in the deepest woods of the national forest. Even HD radio is a better option than depending on 3G in many parts of the country and worrying about hitting your bandwidth cap. A 32 kbps stream is not a huge data hog but on top of everything else we do with our phones (photos, videos, games, etc.) it's easy to hit the 2 GB cap most carriers have implemented.

 

[KB1OKL]

I could see putting analog AM in a cell phone for a national emergency although It will never happen, but AM HD or even full digital AM for emergencies? hahahahaha!!! That is one of the most unpractical suggestions I've ever heard of, digital radio would drop out at the most important time: Warning! The United States has just been...... hiss! Go to your nearest.... hiss!!! If that isn't a political suggestion to try to get the useless, moribund, and dying IBOC system relevant I don't know what is.

 

[TimeIsTight]

The real clincher for the cell phone industry is that NOAA has expressed that the carriers have a new capability for disaster warnings, and that the carriers are not to be considered as replacements for radio warnings:

http://www.noaa.gov/features/03_protecting/wireless_emergency_alerts.html

iBiquity and the NAB can't argue safety concerns any longer. They will have to get the Grand Chipset Salesman to do the dirty-work.

The fact that these text disaster warnings will be built into all cell phones shows that somebody at NOAA, and homeland security, gets the disaster communications related opportunities offered by cell phones that shouldn't be ignored or squandered by a government trying to protect, and serve, its citizens when disaster strikes.

These text services are for "warning" purposes. The purpose of the built in radios is mostly for information during and after the event, when the cell phone system may be overloaded, or off, and there is no electric power.

Saying TV, or car radios will serve the purpose are missing the fact that there is no TV without electric power. And in some big city areas, like NYC, millions of people don't own cars, so they don't have a car radio either. Those away from home only have whatever is in their pockets, that's most likely a cell phone, and if the cell system isn't working you need to be able to get information from a backup source.

If you have never been in these power-off situations, you need live anchored radio to guide you to places offering transport, shelter, water, emergency medical services. You need to know where the flood waters are rising, what roads are passable. You need to hear interviews with the mayor or the governor on what is being done, and what people in local areas should do. You're not going to get that from cell phones even if the system is working. In the truest sense of the word that information has to be "broad-cast."

With current smart phones, the AM-FM, or digital radio broadcast receiver is nothing more than another cheap app that requires inexpensive additional hardware in the form of an antenna. To a person carrying it, its value as a radio receiver in a disaster could be priceless and life saving. The whole point is to offer people with nothing but a cell phone the ability to make use of the broadcast system when the cell phone system is down, and it can be done for pennies a unit.

The expensive CEA and cell carrier lobbyists may have succeed in quashing this concept, but that will only increase the pressure for the cell system to always be up and running at peak capacity, and it will have more fingers pointed at it when it fails to provide its uniquely dependent customers the information streams they need in a disaster. It won't be the first time an industry has had to learn the hard way about being penny-wise and multi-million dollar foolish.

 

[Casey]

With current smart phones, the AM-FM, or digital radio broadcast receiver is nothing more than another cheap app that requires inexpensive additional hardware in the form of an antenna. To a person carrying it, its value as a radio receiver in a disaster could be priceless and life saving. The whole point is to offer people with nothing but a cell phone the ability to make use of the broadcast system when the cell phone system is down, and it can be done for pennies a unit.

That simply isn't true. There is nothing inexpensive about changing an entire design of a phone to fit in a ferrite rod antenna
needed for AM. To receive FM you need an external wire, usually the headset used for the phone. How many people carry that on them and will have it when an emergency strikes? Almost none. Without some sort of antenna, you do not have a radio. And this assumes you even have a charged cell phone battery. If you don't and the power goes out, very few people have a way of charging their phone by other means, making them useless.

The expensive CEA and cell carrier lobbyists may have succeed in quashing this concept, but that will only increase the pressure for the cell system to always be up and running at peak capacity, and it will have more fingers pointed at it when it fails to provide its uniquely dependent customers the information streams they need in a disaster. It won't be the first time an industry has had to learn the hard way about being penny-wise and multi-million dollar foolish.

There will always be fingers pointed when a network goes down. But there won't be any more fingers pointed because of the lack of integrated radio. Most people do not even know this whole debate has been occurring. And if a person does not carry a pocket radio or have some sort of other access to emergency information, that is not the carriers problem. Just like how it won't be the carriers problem when people realize their emergency crank radios do not work because they let the battery completely discharge for an extended period of time.