"HD Power Increase Has Been Trouble-Free"

[radiogooroo]

I thought we come here to discuss real-world issues, not imaginary scenarios. Rumination about how wonderful HD could be if It Were Only All-Digital seems kind of like a waste of time, since (a) how well HD actually would work in all-digital mode is unknowable in advance and (b) it's not going to happen.

It's fun to daydream about how municipal tap water might be found to be an effective cure for all kinds of cancer. Or about how a biogeneticist might breed a nine-story high German shepherd that eats politicians, poops Kruggerrands and pees hi-test gasoline.

But kind of beside the point, n'est-ce pas? ;D

PS Closed Circuit for gooroo: thanks for the backwards swipe at my radio station. Typical from the HD-booster crowd. If you knew anything about us, you'd know we do all kinds of innovative things every day. But they're programming-oriented: you know, the part of "radio" listeners actually care about.....?

You know, the TV folks probably thought the same thing about scrapping their analog transmitters several years ago, but it happened. You never know what the future holds. There's another thread happening on this board right now where several people are postulating that "the market" will allow the cellular industry to bend the laws of physics and everyone listening to terrestrial radio right now will soon be able to migrate to IP audio. That to me seems about as likely as a transition to all digital FM, and impossible without the Commission granting them a lot more spectrum.

What swipe? Questioning what kind of innovation you're personally engaging in vs. bemoaning how the rest of the industry spends its time and money with HD? Just pointing out the obvious - you can't control the rest of the industry, so I assume you're busy innovating on your own. I was just rhetorically curious as to what that innovation might be. It seems to me that you should be happy the folks over at WHAM are wasting all this time and money on HD that they could be spending out programming and out promoting you.

 

[KB1OKL]

Questioning what kind of innovation you're personally engaging in vs. bemoaning how the rest of the industry spends its time and money with HD?

Couldn't these stations have found a good use for the money instead, such as putting it into programing?

 

[tomservo]

There's another thread happening on this board right now where several people are postulating that "the market" will allow the cellular industry to bend the laws of physics and everyone listening to terrestrial radio right now will soon be able to migrate to IP audio. That to me seems about as likely as a transition to all digital FM, and impossible without the Commission granting them a lot more spectrum.

The problem with that is, the Commission very well may grant more spectrum for IP delivery. They are all about broadband-broadband-broadband at the moment and I wouldn't put it past them to suck a few more TV channels up from broadcasters for the purposes of expanding wireless internet services.

I just don't see enough usable spectrum existing to migrate over every radio listener in America, along with all the HDTV viewers in America, along with all the YouTubers, gamers, Pandora fans, etc. It just doesn't exist with current technology.

Which is why it's more important than ever for radio to really push HD AND online. Put the old creaky AM on an HD-2 channel. Put the main channel and the AM online. Make it easy for anyone to listen, whether they have an iPhone or a Windows phone or Symbian or even a feature phone (this is the part they are totally missing, most only cater to a few high end smart phones). Cross promote over and over.

At home I can listen to the local public radio station's HD-2 on my computer. In the car I can listen off the air. At the gym I can listen on a smart phone.

Radio has always been everywhere and it must continue to do so with new technology.

 

[Savage]

Two things, gooroo: "questioning what kind of innovation we're engaging in" at WYSL is, by implication, suggesting we aren't. So it is a swipe at our radio station. WYSL also has nothing to do with the subject under discussion, HD Radio and its vaunted digital power increase. You're just indulging in a little Guy Wireism by snarking at another broadcaster because there aren't any cogent rational defenses of HD, when the immutable facts are brought into the discussion.

And I know plenty of people at WHAM, some friends of mine for decades. And each and every one of them would have turned off the HD noisemaker two years ago if they were permitted to. Oh, wait: they already did during nighttime hours to prevent the mutually-assured skywave destruction with WWVA. They agree with me.

 

[Chuck]

Not really, it is easy to get a little bit of water through a small pipe. Getting a lot of water though the same small pipe is a lot harder (if not impossible) trick.

HD tries to cram 5 pounds of sh*t into a one pound sack. That's a big part of the problem...

How so?

Let's use digital TV for comparison. TV channels are 6 MHz wide. FM channels are .2 MHz wide. HDTV crams 19.3 Mbps into that 6 MHz. If HD Radio takes the entire FM channel, it gives you 384 kbps to play with.

Unless you are willing to turn off your analog signal, you have 96 kbps to play with. That can, and does, sound pretty good with HD. Unfortunately that signal is just a digital version of your current analog signal. While it is a gain, it isn't much of one to most people. It is hard to justify the investment just so a handful of people can play with their newly purchased radios. You can divide that stream up however you like to produce additional channels, but with each new arrival, you get a smaller data stream to play with. Consequentially, audio quality deteriorates. Granted, most people are tone deaf, but they do notice when the stream cuts out and there is nothing left but silence. Currently, that happens frequently with HD-2 and HD-3 streams,, especially in mobile applications.

If we were talking about killing all analog audio on the FM band, we might have something. An open source system like DRM would work fine. Of course there wouldn't be any additional licensing fees or royalties to Ibiquity... But an all digital system would indeed be the way to go.

To keep from making obsolete millions of analog radios, running a “mirror” all digital channel in new spectrum would be the obvious solution. TV channels 5 & 6 come to mind as the ideal place to do this, but obviously, the FCC doesn’t see it that way. At least, not yet.

That leaves you with doing a hard cut to digital to enjoy its real benefits you expouse. Realistically speaking though, I don't know anyone in radio who is suicidal enough to want to kill their analog signal in my lifetime. (I admit I'm old enough to collect Social Security).

If this system had happened about ten to fifteen years ago, I think it would have gained some traction. But the world has moved on. So should we.

 

[Carmine5]

To keep from making obsolete millions of analog radios, running a “mirror” all digital channel in new spectrum would be the obvious solution. TV channels 5 & 6 come to mind as the ideal place to do this, but obviously, the FCC doesn’t see it that way. At least, not yet.

I don't think that will happen, Chuck, at least not until the Obama FCC succeeds in completely destroying broadcast television. Notice Genachowski's most recent statement on the subject:

"...we want to look at proposals to improve VHF so it is more desirable for digital broadcasting so that we can end up with as much UHF spectrum as possible released for mobile broadband and broadcasters being very comfortable with VHF."

So it appears that, ultimately, they would like to see all TV broadcasters huddle together on the VHF band which, of course, would include channels 5 & 6.

If you've checked out what is available for Auction 91 you know the FCC has reached the very bottom of the vacant allotment barrel--the grossly irregular sizes that even Ross department stores can't sell. So it would be nice to see FM get, at least, channel 6 and provide AM stations and LPFM a chance to have a channel there and a place on the next generation of smart phones.

 

[JimmyJames]

I find it funny so many of you insist we're running out of FM channels when there's numerous places in the rural upper midwest where there's plenty open - but of course, you have to wait forever for the FCC to get around to putting them up for auction or application (in the case of noncomms.) Some of these markets are actually still, under-served. Yes, in 2010, there's still places that still have nothing but the 2 local commercials (usually automated) and the handful of statewide NPR or religious translators.

 

[Chuck]

I find it funny so many of you insist we're running out of FM channels when there's numerous places in the rural upper midwest where there's plenty open - but of course, you have to wait forever for the FCC to get around to putting them up for auction or application (in the case of noncomms.) Some of these markets are actually still, under-served. Yes, in 2010, there's still places that still have nothing but the 2 local commercials (usually automated) and the handful of statewide NPR or religious translators.

There is probably an economic reason for that, regardless of how slow the FCC is to open up new filing windows.

 

[RadeoEngineer]

I find it funny so many of you insist we're running out of FM channels when there's numerous places in the rural upper midwest where there's plenty open - but of course, you have to wait forever for the FCC to get around to putting them up for auction or application (in the case of noncomms.) Some of these markets are actually still, under-served. Yes, in 2010, there's still places that still have nothing but the 2 local commercials (usually automated) and the handful of statewide NPR or religious translators.

It's very, very expensive to build even a modest FM radio station from the ground up, and extremely tough to eak out a living, much less break even, if you don't have a sufficient population base in your coverage. I have to believe open channels are there because no one believes they can make them work financially.

 

[local oscillator]

Auction 91 has six CP's for sale in my state (MI), five of the six are even in the lower peninsula. Tempting? Anyone with guts, be my guest. And when you build it, why not throw in a little extra and go HD -- an HD2 and maybe even an HD3 would be a nice touch! To set a reference point for you, let me say that there is only ONE commercial station in all of northern Michigan (the UP and the northern half of the LP) operating with HD, and it's owned by a company that has done some -- how can I put this diplomatically -- very strange things.

 

[radiogooroo]

Two things, gooroo: "questioning what kind of innovation we're engaging in" at WYSL is, by implication, suggesting we aren't. So it is a swipe at our radio station. WYSL also has nothing to do with the subject under discussion, HD Radio and its vaunted digital power increase. You're just indulging in a little Guy Wireism by snarking at another broadcaster because there aren't any cogent rational defenses of HD, when the immutable facts are brought into the discussion.

Well Savage, I'm glad you know my intentions better than I do. Prior to reading your comments, I had no idea that's what I was doing! Yeah, I see some possibilities for HD Radio. That by definition must make me some sort of insult hurling a-hole. Puhleez!

This is an insult Savage - you're an obsessed, irrational, and apparently paranoid man whose judgement is apparently tainted by this war you're waging. Don't hurt yourself while you're jumping to conclusions.

And even if I was taking a swipe at you and your station, which I wasn't, wouldn't that be fair? You ridicule and deride this technology on a daily basis. You call the people behind it out by name, making all sorts of outlandish claims against them that have little to no basis in fact. You purport that the FCC has been bought off. PROVE IT! Frankly, I have to think you're lucky that these people have lives and have better things to do than mess with you or you'd find yourself on the wrong end of a libel suit.

WYSL is your life's work. HD Radio is the life's work of others, and it's a component of what I do. I'm just as proud of every HD installation I've done as I am of every analog project.

And I know plenty of people at WHAM, some friends of mine for decades. And each and every one of them would have turned off the HD noisemaker two years ago if they were permitted to. Oh, wait: they already did during nighttime hours to prevent the mutually-assured skywave destruction with WWVA. They agree with me.

Do you ever consider the implications of your words Savage? You just said all your friends at this station, by implication, disagree with their corporate bosses at Clear Channel. Are you trying to get people in trouble here?

 

[KB1OKL]

Two things, gooroo: "questioning what kind of innovation we're engaging in" at WYSL is, by implication, suggesting we aren't. So it is a swipe at our radio station. WYSL also has nothing to do with the subject under discussion, HD Radio and its vaunted digital power increase. You're just indulging in a little Guy Wireism by snarking at another broadcaster because there aren't any cogent rational defenses of HD, when the immutable facts are brought into the discussion.

Well Savage, I'm glad you know my intentions better than I do. Prior to reading your comments, I had no idea that's what I was doing! Yeah, I see some possibilities for HD Radio. That by definition must make me some sort of insult hurling a-hole. Puhleez!

This is an insult Savage - you're an obsessed, irrational, and apparently paranoid man whose judgement is apparently tainted by this war you're waging. Don't hurt yourself while you're jumping to conclusions.

And even if I was taking a swipe at you and your station, which I wasn't, wouldn't that be fair? You ridicule and deride this technology on a daily basis. You call the people behind it out by name, making all sorts of outlandish claims against them that have little to no basis in fact. You purport that the FCC has been bought off. PROVE IT! Frankly, I have to think you're lucky that these people have lives and have better things to do than mess with you or you'd find yourself on the wrong end of a libel suit.

WYSL is your life's work. HD Radio is the life's work of others, and it's a component of what I do. I'm just as proud of every HD installation I've done as I am of every analog project.

I'sd like to interject here, his life work is an ANALOG station it doesn't hash all over other adjacent stations like all IBOC stations do.

And I know plenty of people at WHAM, some friends of mine for decades. And each and every one of them would have turned off the HD noisemaker two years ago if they were permitted to. Oh, wait: they already did during nighttime hours to prevent the mutually-assured skywave destruction with WWVA. They agree with me.

Do you ever consider the implications of your words Savage? You just said all your friends at this station, by implication, disagree with their corporate bosses at Clear Channel. Are you trying to get people in trouble here?

Truth is the truth, ever read any of the "confessions" at stopiboc.com? Many employees of radio can't speak up about senseless pointless IBOC for fear of losing their job.

 

[radiogooroo]

I'sd like to interject here, his life work is an ANALOG station it doesn't hash all over other adjacent stations like all IBOC stations do.

It doesn't matter what IBOC stations do or don't do. It's the law of the land. The Commission has made changes to the rules changing spacings, power levels, etc. many times over the years. This is just the latest.

Truth is the truth, ever read any of the "confessions" at stopiboc.com? Many employees of radio can't speak up about senseless pointless IBOC for fear of losing their job.

Hadn't bothered until now. I scanned a few. Of the ones I read, I don't think anyone would get in trouble for the substance of what they said, but the style in which they said it might be embarrassing to their companies. A lot of what was written there appeared to be just made up. The very first supposed quote claims there were "massive complaints from neighbors" about interference to various devices, including telephones, cable TV and internet from IBOC on a 6 kW FM.

Either that's complete B.S. or the worst engineered FM in history. In my city, most of the big FMs are in a tower farm that is located adjacent to a large residential area. We're talking about over a dozen full C stations that are all broadcasting HD Radio. Zero interference complaints.

Maybe it's the ridiculous, false and over the top assertions like that one that have them in fear of losing their jobs.

 

[tomservo]

It doesn't matter what IBOC stations do or don't do. It's the law of the land. The Commission has made changes to the rules changing spacings, power levels, etc. many times over the years. This is just the latest.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe previous changes affected broadcasters so negatively as this move to IBOC has. Earlier, someone pointed out several grossly overlapping first adjacents on FM in the northeast. If either or both stations were to employ IBOC, they'd a) both lose significant amounts of coverage inside their protected contours, and b) find out that the HD signal would not be very robust over much of their coverage area(s).

And then there's the matter of HD sidebands on AM at night.

Never that I know of has the commission ever signed off on a scheme that has the potential to damage any station's coverage so much. AM HD at night should be discontinued immediately and closely spaced FMs should be forbidden from using it, or using both sidebands.

I'm not rabidly pro- or anti- HD. I see the potential in it, and realize that we're dealing with (relatively) new technology that has yet to be fully sussed out. But there are some lingering serious concerns with how nonchalantly the FCC has acted with this technology.

 

[Savage]

Hey gooroo - nice tantrum! Suggestion: before posting here, if you're interested in maintaining your credibility and making a persuasive case for your beloved HD Radio, it would be better to first take off the cranky-pants and slip into something more comfortable. And rational.

I "purported" the FCC has been bought off? Nope. Never said it.

The comments I made about HD's leading proponents are absolutely true. Which is why there will never be the "libel suit" you're squeezing for. Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Besides, you can't bring a defamation suit for "insulting a technology."

Also thanks for the not-so-tacit admission you WERE insulting my station. Again, not that I give a rip about what you think about our station, but you have again illustrated the typical MO of every losing HD cheerleader who is slowly realizing he's on the wrong side of engineering history. It goes like this:

Q: What about the destructive interference you keep insisting doesn't exist??

A. Your station sucks.

As far as making comments which reflect unfavorably on somebody's employer, all I'm gonna say is - after that last post, if I were your boss and I knew who you were, you'd be in my office first thing Monday morning for "a discussion." Assuming for a moment that everyone of your management team shares your enthusiasm for HD, you're hardly making any kind of case that the technology is worth saving with public displays like your last one.

 

[KB1OKL]

I'sd like to interject here, his life work is an ANALOG station it doesn't hash all over other adjacent stations like all IBOC stations do.

It doesn't matter what IBOC stations do or don't do. It's the law of the land. The Commission has made changes to the rules changing spacings, power levels, etc. many times over the years. This is just the latest.

It's nothing to do with the spacing or the power levels that's making them hash over first and second adjacents, it's the junk technology called HD and the last thing I knew there has been no new FCC rule that allows a station to take up 3 channels, it is just extremely lax enforcement of the interference rules by a bunch of non-technical hacks.

 

[Don Juannn]

Hey gooroo - nice tantrum! Suggestion: before posting here, if you're interested in maintaining your credibility and making a persuasive case for your beloved HD Radio, it would be better to first take off the cranky-pants and slip into something more comfortable. And rational.

Savage...calling others cranky-pants! LOL!

 

[radiogooroo]

I could be wrong, but I don't believe previous changes affected broadcasters so negatively as this move to IBOC has. Earlier, someone pointed out several grossly overlapping first adjacents on FM in the northeast. If either or both stations were to employ IBOC, they'd a) both lose significant amounts of coverage inside their protected contours, and b) find out that the HD signal would not be very robust over much of their coverage area(s).

And then there's the matter of HD sidebands on AM at night.

Never that I know of has the commission ever signed off on a scheme that has the potential to damage any station's coverage so much. AM HD at night should be discontinued immediately and closely spaced FMs should be forbidden from using it, or using both sidebands.

I'm not rabidly pro- or anti- HD. I see the potential in it, and realize that we're dealing with (relatively) new technology that has yet to be fully sussed out. But there are some lingering serious concerns with how nonchalantly the FCC has acted with this technology.

I don't think it's a case of the Commission acting nonchalantly. I think it's more an issue of a handful of malcontents trying to stir things up.

The FCC is most likely giving HD Radio all the consideration and reconsideration it deserves.

If the problems were anywhere near as bad as the frequent contributors here assert, the Commission would have done something by now to rectify things. Instead, they increased the power level FM IBOC's are allowed to transmit with. What does that tell you?

I do think it's entirely possible that the Commission is seemingly ignoring some legitimate IBOC concerns because they're having a hard time figuring out which ones are legitimate and which ones aren't. If the complaints they receive are anything like the threads on this board, that wouldn't be surprising.

 

[radiogooroo]

Savage...calling others cranky-pants! LOL!

Funny isn't it? He can sure dish it, but most definitely can't take it. Not that there was anything to take here. Like many of the comments on his stop IBOC site, it's all in his head.

 

[Carmine5]

Auction 91 has six CP's for sale in my state (MI), five of the six are even in the lower peninsula. Tempting? Anyone with guts, be my guest. And when you build it, why not throw in a little extra and go HD -- an HD2 and maybe even an HD3 would be a nice touch! To set a reference point for you, let me say that there is only ONE commercial station in all of northern Michigan (the UP and the northern half of the LP) operating with HD, and it's owned by a company that has done some -- how can I put this diplomatically -- very strange things.

I've had an engineer friend of mine look at a few of the vacant allotments for Auction 91. What he found is that it's either case of not enough people served for the station to be financially viable or that the channel is just close enough to 1st or 2nd adjacent signals that it would require considerable work and expense to get the signal to provide 60 dBu coverage over the COL without running afoul of FCC spacing requirements--or both.

The allotments might work as translators but this auction is little more than a government-sanctioned rip-off. Like I said, it would be nice to give the FM band some breathing room with additional spectrum but it's looking more likely that the FCC will keep all of VHF for television and force more TV stations back onto that band.