• 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

HD Interference Case #1 (FM)

I.B. Iquity said:
"There is very little modulation you can apply to an SCA signal without getting into the analog. RDS is usually 3%. Data is typically 10%. Thats not a lot of modulation folks!"
Are you going to allow facts to get in the way of a good rant? People don't listen to radio, & people don't mind paying for anything, no matter what. I haven't listened to radio in 10 years but I know everythig played on it is lousy, because I read about it being bad somewhere. With this digital system I can't hear my favorite station from Uranus. It's that great statioon on a 9 Khz split which everyone where I live listens to and on and on.
Click to expand...

All I am trying to do is add some technical information and measured data to the discussion. I truly would like to see TRUE data come out for and EDUCATED discussion. Not one out of fear mongering, or emotions. Audiophile I still apprecaite your ability to keep this on a decent level. I think we would have a great time "palying radio"
 
So why even attempt fm-xtra with such low injections? Toss that crap out and go with HD Radio, now that I've heard it I'm convinced!
 
It would be interesting to see a technology shoot out with SCA's above 100 kHz, with greater injections levels...
 
SaynotoIBOC, you have been reported to management for masquerading as, SayNoToIBOC.
 
audiophile. said:
It would be interesting to see a technology shoot out with SCA's above 100 kHz, with greater injections levels...
Click to expand...

You know, some of us are trying to have a discussion here!
 
SaynotoIBOC and SayNoToSayNoToIBOC are too busy masquerading as SayNoToIBOC.
 
What's sad is that their posts are about as intelligent.
 
audiophile. said:
It would be interesting to see a technology shoot out with SCA's above 100 kHz, with greater injections levels...
Click to expand...

I think that would be called HD Radio, except that HD takes advantage of the ability to low level modulate some digital carriers under some of the SCAs giving a but moire bandwidth.
 
quote author=IBOCRocks link=topic=48042.msg332183#msg332183 date=1158766887]
700WLW said:
"When did this happen? iBiquity did the research, it was peer-reviewed, tested, and accepted. The NRSC committee and the FCC looked at it and approved it for testing. How did iBiquity write their own rules? I'lll concede that IBOC on AM is an issue, but I 100% disagree that FM is a problem. I've travelled all over, and have not had any reception issues, nor have we heard of any widespread interference complaints. Again, the coverage isn't poor - there are lots of people who pull out "predicted" coverage maps, but in the middle of the country, a 50Kw FM running IBOC can easily cover 30+ miles in HD/HD2. Receiver design is the key...you don't need to use "brute force" to get a clean signal...you need just enough to decode."

Becasue the FCC did not even consider alternative working technologies, as DRM, which doesn't have the serious issues, as with IBOC. There are many testimonials to IBOC FM interference.
Click to expand...

There are many testimonials, most of which are anecdotal at the moment. Until there is some solid proof, and some rulings to back it up, it's a "he said, she said" proposition.

The FCC is free to consider or not consider anything. At the time IBOC appeared to them to be the superior technology. Who knows, they may still feel that way.
[/quote]

Thirdly, Here you go IBOCRocks...
 
audiophile. said:
quote author=IBOCRocks link=topic=48042.msg332183#msg332183 date=1158766887]
700WLW said:
"When did this happen? iBiquity did the research, it was peer-reviewed, tested, and accepted. The NRSC committee and the FCC looked at it and approved it for testing. How did iBiquity write their own rules? I'lll concede that IBOC on AM is an issue, but I 100% disagree that FM is a problem. I've travelled all over, and have not had any reception issues, nor have we heard of any widespread interference complaints. Again, the coverage isn't poor - there are lots of people who pull out "predicted" coverage maps, but in the middle of the country, a 50Kw FM running IBOC can easily cover 30+ miles in HD/HD2. Receiver design is the key...you don't need to use "brute force" to get a clean signal...you need just enough to decode."

Becasue the FCC did not even consider alternative working technologies, as DRM, which doesn't have the serious issues, as with IBOC. There are many testimonials to IBOC FM interference.
Click to expand...

There are many testimonials, most of which are anecdotal at the moment. Until there is some solid proof, and some rulings to back it up, it's a "he said, she said" proposition.

The FCC is free to consider or not consider anything. At the time IBOC appeared to them to be the superior technology. Who knows, they may still feel that way.
Click to expand...

Thirdly, Here you go IBOCRocks...
[/quote]

Again, not really.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom