jras20 said:I'm looking at the JVC car HD radio now, I might get it. Not sure yet though. I wish I could improve my Truck radio reception in general first before I get HD.
Not in this case. I tried getting one of those external HD radio at first on my car (An add-on if you will), and reception was not all great, maybe say 35 miles on Houston stations. When I installed the JVC KD-HDR1, I started to catch HD on FM for 45-50 miles. I completely loose HD around the 65-70 mile marker. AM is definetily improved, AM would lock in the city, but it would be a pain outside the city, with the JVC, I am now able to receive WBAP in my car while driving around all the way to College Station TX. (And yes, I still hear engine noise before it locks, so this means I can still improve the signal and get better coverage on HD)KB1OKL said:jras20 said:I'm looking at the JVC car HD radio now, I might get it. Not sure yet though. I wish I could improve my Truck radio reception in general first before I get HD.
From HD-Anonymous or HDA: Insanity is doing the same thing expecting different results.
oldjohnny said:KD-HDR1, I started to catch HD on FM for 45-50 miles. I completely loose HD around the 65-70 mile marker.
rbrucecarter5 said:oldjohnny said:KD-HDR1, I started to catch HD on FM for 45-50 miles. I completely loose HD around the 65-70 mile marker.
As I recall, the original car FM stereo radios would drop stereo at - guess what - about 50 miles. Even today, the very tallest tower and 100 kW over flat terrain has some stereo dropouts at 50 miles, but receiver technology has progressed to the point - with stereo blend to mono - that you hardly notice the difference. Even at 100 miles and beyond - as much as 130 - it is possible to get a really listenable signal before you are over the event horizon. These advances have been driven by receiver - not transmitter - improvements, and I have every reason to believe HD will be the same way. All that is required is consumer acceptance. HD advocates like to compare the acceptance of FM stereo to HD, so this is a legitimat comparison. IF HD catches on with consumers, in 30 years HD range, based on receiver improvements alone, should match analog range - if you factor in the occasional problems that exist today more than 50 miles out. HD may always be worse, but that is because of the lock time. It is long in comparison to signal swing times. But 50 plus miles is outside of the market for most stations - unless you are in the suburbs of Dallas or Houston or similar markets - and outside of market reception is not guaranteed by the FCC.
Savage said:If the much-squeezed-for 10x increase in digital IBOC power goes through, HD-FM will do even "less well in the car." Especially for analog listeners. Or, put another way: "virtually all of the listeners."
rbrucecarter5 said:The thing that concerns me most about a 10x power increase that the highest power on the Eastern seaboard is 50kW analog, only 500W HD. It scales down from there. In the West, 100kW with 1000W HD. Neither power level is particularly strong in tropo or E-layer skip. But you increase those powers tenfold, then during strong tropo and e-skip events, substantial energy will get transferred into the atmosphere and show up across the country. The situation is bad enough as it is - we happen to be in a lull period for various types of skips (rotten timing), but this is cyclic - and if stations are plagued by normal or excessive amounts of skip, which is more realistic than the lull period now, they are going to have e-hash from distant FM stations to contend with. VERY annoying to listeners if the capture ratio blanks them out and brings in the hash instead.
Savage said:Bob Anderson, the saviour of Avis Rent-A-Car and the guy who invented the legendary "We Try Harder" marketing campaign, wrote that "every organization needs a Vice-President In Charge Of Killing Bad Ideas." Boy, does the radio industry need one.