HD Radio in Europe

[audioguy]

I just returned from a trip to a European country where I not only had an opportunity to do some listening to Long Wave, Medium Wave (AM), and FM, but also to discuss the future of broadcasting with the national regulator.

The AM band is very uncluttered in this particular country. In fact, there are no AM stations operating there. During the daytime, I could only hear two extremely weak signals coming from elsewhere in Europe. They were not strong enough to listen to on a reasonably sensitive portable radio outdoors.

By contrast, the FM band is very active. They use a 100 kHz grid, allowing stations to be "packed in" to utilize the band in the most efficient way. Note that this does not mean that stations are spaced only 100 kHz apart in a particular area, but they can be assigned to operate on any 100 kHz center frequency, as appropriate.

The person I spoke with is in charge of spectrum allocations. He said that he was quite familiar with HD radio technology and had been under a lot of pressure from Ibiquity to authorize its use. But he said that he was well aware of the interference implications and that they would not be adopting it because it was incompatible with their spectrum allocation framework. He said that if they were to adopt HD, many stations would be forced to go off the air, or would receive unacceptable levels of interference. He believes that the future of digital radio in his country is DAB+, but adoption has been slow because people feel that FM works well enough. The government is not going to mandate a digital switchover.

Based on this, I wouldn't expect widespread adoption of HD radio in Europe, except perhaps in limited cases.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

By contrast, the FM band is very active. They use a 100 kHz grid, allowing stations to be "packed in" to utilize the band in the most efficient way. Note that this does not mean that stations are spaced only 100 kHz apart in a particular area, but they can be assigned to operate on any 100 kHz center frequency, as appropriate.

The person I spoke with is in charge of spectrum allocations. He said that he was quite familiar with HD radio technology and had been under a lot of pressure from Ibiquity to authorize its use. But he said that he was well aware of the interference implications and that they would not be adopting it because it was incompatible with their spectrum allocation framework. He said that if they were to adopt HD, many stations would be forced to go off the air, or would receive unacceptable levels of interference. He believes that the future of digital radio in his country is DAB+, but adoption has been slow because people feel that FM works well enough. The government is not going to mandate a digital switchover.

Based on this, I wouldn't expect widespread adoption of HD radio in Europe, except perhaps in limited cases.

This is interesting. I was aware of the 100 kHz grid in Europe, but it isn't the most efficient way of allocating stations for several reasons.

(1) Assuming Europe uses the same deviation as the United States: +/- 75 kHz, the bandwidth of FM stations would still be 150 kHz, making a 100 kHz first adjacent impossible because they would overlap. Even if the two stations are not used in the same town, any skip could cause unwelcome jamming from a station only 100 kHz away.

(2) Virtually all FM radios use 10.7 MHz IF frequencies. The odd frequency, combined with odd ten's 200 kHz spacing, insures that the local oscillator frequency will not jam a frequency used for broadcast. The US even has spacing requirements for stations operating 10.6 and 10.8 MHz from each other to avoid image problems. Those protections would be moot in a 100 kHz grid, and station 10.7MHz away from a local station would have the potential for jamming.

Somebody went to a great deal to think out the allocations in the US and make sure interference would be reduced. Sounds like Europe took a giant step backward - not forward in allocations.

I can see the concern HD would raise. The first adjacent slop is unacceptable enough in the US, with every HD station jamming two adjacent frequencies. With a 100 kHz grid, each HD station would jam four frequencies at least, two on each side, and maybe even three. In closely packed situations, it would severely reduce the number of available frequencies.

Usually it is Europe exporting really bad ideas to the United States, not the other way around. But HD crossing the Atlantic, well, it would be payback, maybe.

 

[tomservo]

About the only imaginable use for HD in Europe would be for a state broadcaster with few transmitter sites to double their audio output. But I don't know of any countries in Europe anymore that still exist on that style of broadcasting alone.

 

[diymedia]

Yeah, the only country in Europe to really look into HD was Switzerland, and that was due to the interest of one broadcaster...he had some sort of falling-out with iBiquity, and that was the end of that.

Many early-adopters of DAB are now reconfiguring/rebuilding their multiplex-networks to accommodate DAB+...

...And I wonder if anybody's seriously considering DRM+?

 

[Ai4i]

(1) Assuming Europe uses the same deviation as the United States: +/- 75 kHz, the bandwidth of FM stations would still be 150 kHz...

Carson's rule and the Modulation Index suggest that the total bandwidth of a stereo signal, RBDS, and a couple of SCA's could be about double that:
The highest modulating frequencies are at least added to the amount of total deviation.

(2) Virtually all FM radios use 10.7 MHz IF frequencies.

In order to raise an issue, two stations 10.6/7/8 MHz apart need to be really really close and the receiver needs to be within a very strong signal overlap area.
As for two stations being received 100 KHz apart, the capture effect would discriminate very well, although a loud hip-hop station could play havoc with a classical station that is not full quieting.

Somebody went to a great deal to think out the allocations in the US and make sure interference would be reduced.

Somebody went to a great deal to come up with NTSC color television, a great idea which was improved upon with PAL and SECAM.
The same could be said about TDMA and Groupe Spécial Mobile.

 

[Ai4i]

About the only imaginable use for HD in Europe would be for a state broadcaster with few transmitter sites to double their audio output.

State broadcasters love DAB because they can squeeze more than a half dozen services onto a single DAB bouquet. Plus, the listeners merely tune to the station name, whatever bouquet or channel the station happens to be on anywhere within the country. Also, as the listener travels from one area to another, the receiver will always find the best way to provide uninterrupted audio. Think spatial diversity reception, frequency diversity reception, and polarity or time diversity reception, all rolled into one.

 

[Ai4i]

Yeah, the only country in Europe to really look into HD was Switzerland.

Maybe France, too.
The French like to avoid standard technologies...think positive video modulation with AM sound.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

About the only imaginable use for HD in Europe would be for a state broadcaster with few transmitter sites to double their audio output.

State broadcasters love DAB because they can squeeze more than a half dozen services onto a single DAB bouquet. Plus, the listeners merely tune to the station name, whatever bouquet or channel the station happens to be on anywhere within the country. Also, as the listener travels from one area to another, the receiver will always find the best way to provide uninterrupted audio. Think spatial diversity reception, frequency diversity reception, and polarity or time diversity reception, all rolled into one.

Think only 6 formats available in the whole country, you want something different - you are out of luck. Wait a minute - that kind of describes corporate radio in the US, doesn't it?!

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Somebody went to a great deal to come up with NTSC color television, a great idea which was improved upon with PAL and SECAM.
The same could be said about TDMA and Groupe Spécial Mobile.

PAL - maybe better black levels. But SECAM? I never could find any sort of advantage to it except it made certain that nobody in France could watch anything but French television, and nobody outside of France could watch French television. Protectionism / isolationism. Yet more bad ideas from Europe that end in "ism".

TDMA and GSM are the same thing. Neither would work without GPS.

 

[davideduardo]

Think only 6 formats available in the whole country, you want something different - you are out of luck. Wait a minute - that kind of describes corporate radio in the US, doesn't it?!

Think multiple transmitters, each with 6 "stations". That's dozens of formats or variants.

Heck, in markets like Dallas and Ft. Worth, there are more than 6 different Spanish language formats... so the "corporate radio" thing doesn't work here, either.

 

[mmnassour]

PAL - maybe better black levels. But SECAM?

I have to say it.....SECAM: System Essentially Contrary to Accepted Methods.

 

[audioguy]

As I stated, stations are not spaced 100 kHz apart in the same area. The regulator is very familiar with FM occupied bandwidth requirements. However, by utilizing all of the 100 kHz centers they can get more stations on the air than they could if they were restricted to a 200 kHz grid, as we are in the U.S. They use very advanced frequency planning software from one of the largest companies in the business that also does coordination for satellites and other services. My contact said that they were pretty satisfied with the results they obtain.

A comment; I do not necessarily think that the image problem is as much of a factor today as it was when the U.S. allocations were developed. I note that I did not have any problem tuning in stations on my small portable radio. In any case, HD radio "emissions" would fall on those 100 kHz frequencies and would be just as much a factor here in the U.S. as a distant station being received due to tropospheric enhancement.

One benefit of the frequency plan used in many European countries is that it allows them to authorize very low powered stations (by U.S. standards), and in some cases it enables them to form networks to extend their coverage where this can be done without causing interference. The regulator is also able to grant temporary licenses for special events like fairs and scout jamborees; something that is unavailable and that would be very nice to have here in the U.S. By contrast, I can vouch for the fact that the coverage obtainable using a legal Part 15 FM transmitter is absolutely useless for all practical intents and purposes.

 

[Ai4i]

But SECAM? I never could find any sort of advantage to it except it made certain that nobody in France could watch anything but French television, and nobody outside of France could watch French television. Protectionism / isolationism.

Positive video and AM sound were protectionist, but...
Accepted throughout the Warsaw Pact group, SECAM was created before PAL. This means that if anything, PAL was created to be protectionist against French manufacturers! Completely immune to phase and signal issues, this AM-FM color system eliminated the need for intensity and phase (hue) controls on receivers. The later developed PAL eliminated the need for hue controls only. NTSC's VIRS only worked once per field or frame, but this SECAM quality was integral to every pair of lines, like PAL, only better. The vertical resolution was reduced to half but the horizontal color resolution is reduced more than that in all systems. Color confetti would rear its ugly face under less than full quieting conditions, but with adequate signal levels, the picture would approach absolute perfection.

The only serious issue of SECAM was that it produced the ugliest anomalies on cheap monochrome TV's, even in areas of zero color saturation. Viva la France!

 

[Chuck]

I have to say it.....SECAM: System Essentially Contrary to Accepted Methods.

I always thought it stood for "System Essentially Contrary to the American Method." ;D

The only SECAM I've seen was in Paris and Russia. It was a bit underwhelming. Even the Russians sought out multi-standard TV's so they could watch PAL and NTSC programming.

 

[local oscillator]

Chuck, my recollection matches yours:

NTSC = Never The Same Color
SECAM = System Essentially Contrary to the American Method
PAL = Peace At Last

 

[Ai4i]

NTSC = Never The Same Color

Never Twice (the) Same Color!