HD Radio opponents-Not ignorant, just unbiased.

[autopaint-1]

"I know I'm in a minority on this one, but I have never cared for the sound of FM."

Time for an injection of humor here. David Sarnoff, have you come back from the other world?

 

[JasonW]

"I know I'm in a minority on this one, but I have never cared for the sound of FM."

Time for an injection of humor here. David Sarnoff, have you come back from the other world?

That's GENERAL Sarnoff to you! -- Jason

(As an aside, a bar owner I knew in Miami once called the White House while drunk, demanding that then-president Jimmy Carter dispatch David Sarnoff to his home to personally repair his RCA phonograph. When the switchboard operator politely informed him that Sarnoff was deceased, he refused to believe it.)

 

[dbdigital]

Given that the FCC has digital radio on it's agenda for this Thursday's meeting, John Anderson over at the DIY Media site has written a wonderful analysis on the impact IBOC is having on the broadcasting landscape so far and how the FCC may decide on the issue.

If some are wondering why IBOC and the whole unholy iBiquity/NAB/FCC alliance is smelling like yesterday's fish entrails, John's article sums it up very well.

http://www.diymedia.net/

db

 

[JasonW]

Given that the FCC has digital radio on it's agenda for this Thursday's meeting, John Anderson over at the DIY Media site has written a wonderful analysis on the impact IBOC is having on the broadcasting landscape so far and how the FCC may decide on the issue.

If some are wondering why IBOC and the whole unholy iBiquity/NAB/FCC alliance is smelling like yesterday's fish entrails, John's article sums it up very well.

http://www.diymedia.net/

db

They may as well give permission for all of the AM HD stations to leave their IBOC exciters on after Sunset. In the spirit of the Manhattan Project's test of the "gadget" at the Trinity Site, let's see what happens!

-- Jason

 

[dbdigital]

Given that the FCC has digital radio on it's agenda for this Thursday's meeting, John Anderson over at the DIY Media site has written a wonderful analysis on the impact IBOC is having on the broadcasting landscape so far and how the FCC may decide on the issue.

If some are wondering why IBOC and the whole unholy iBiquity/NAB/FCC alliance is smelling like yesterday's fish entrails, John's article sums it up very well.

http://www.diymedia.net/

db

They may as well give permission for all of the AM HD stations to leave their IBOC exciters on after Sunset. In the spirit of the Manhattan Project's test of the "gadget" at the Trinity Site, let's see what happens!

-- Jason

True and like any test of that type, the FCC will have to endure the "fallout" which in this case will come in the form of a barrage of interference complaints.

db

 

[autopaint-1]

Maybe so, but somehow I don't think the compaints will be as great as some predict. That is outside of the DX community. 99% of the population listen to local radio stations with clear interference free signals. The numbers who listen to first adjacent weak stations are few and far between. I guess time will tell. I love these predictions though. They remind me of those who gaurenteed that Air America would no longer be heard in NYC after April 1 of this year, yea right.

 

[dbdigital]

Maybe so, but somehow I don't think the compaints will be as great as some predict. That is outside of the DX community. 99% of the population listen to local radio stations with clear interference free signals. The numbers who listen to first adjacent weak stations are few and far between. I guess time will tell. I love these predictions though. They remind me of those who gaurenteed that Air America would no longer be heard in NYC after April 1 of this year, yea right.

Great article on why IBOC must not be used for AM in today's online edition of Radio World.

http://www.rwonline.com/reference-room/commentary/2006.07.19-03_rw_hd_guest_barry_2.shtml

I especially like this quote: "The nature of the AM IBOC modulation does virtually guarantee that it will create interference to other stations. If you don't accept that, well, you're simply in denial."

Apparently, IBOC for AM was an afterthought and it sure acts like it.
The author advocates DRM for AM instead of IBOC but I still think CAM-D holds the greatest potential for digital AM.

db

 

[1q2w3e]

Maybe so, but somehow I don't think the compaints will be as great as some predict. That is outside of the DX community. 99% of the population listen to local radio stations with clear interference free signals. The numbers who listen to first adjacent weak stations are few and far between. I guess time will tell. I love these predictions though. They remind me of those who gaurenteed that Air America would no longer be heard in NYC after April 1 of this year, yea right.

Great article on why IBOC must not be used for AM in today's online edition of Radio World.

http://www.rwonline.com/reference-room/commentary/2006.07.19-03_rw_hd_guest_barry_2.shtml

I especially like this quote: "The nature of the AM IBOC modulation does virtually guarantee that it will create interference to other stations. If you don't accept that, well, you're simply in denial."

Apparently, IBOC for AM was an afterthought and it sure acts like it.
The author advocates DRM for AM instead of IBOC but I still think CAM-D holds the greatest potential for digital AM.

db

Why do you prefer CAM-D? Looking for good technical reasoning.

I would love to see a CAM-D receiver. IMHO there is too much smoke and mirrors with CAM-D

 

[dbdigital]

Maybe so, but somehow I don't think the compaints will be as great as some predict. That is outside of the DX community. 99% of the population listen to local radio stations with clear interference free signals. The numbers who listen to first adjacent weak stations are few and far between. I guess time will tell. I love these predictions though. They remind me of those who gaurenteed that Air America would no longer be heard in NYC after April 1 of this year, yea right.

Great article on why IBOC must not be used for AM in today's online edition of Radio World.

http://www.rwonline.com/reference-room/commentary/2006.07.19-03_rw_hd_guest_barry_2.shtml

I especially like this quote: "The nature of the AM IBOC modulation does virtually guarantee that it will create interference to other stations. If you don't accept that, well, you're simply in denial."

Apparently, IBOC for AM was an afterthought and it sure acts like it.
The author advocates DRM for AM instead of IBOC but I still think CAM-D holds the greatest potential for digital AM.

db

Why do you prefer CAM-D? Looking for good technical reasoning.

I would love to see a CAM-D receiver. IMHO there is too much smoke and mirrors with CAM-D

My opinion of CAM-D is based entirely on the the descriptions of it from Leonard Kahn's website and, particularly, from the engineers who have worked with it.

Supposedly CAM-D:

1. Will not interfere with adjacent channels
2. Offers analog audio up to 8 KHz bandwidth
3. Offers much better coverage than IBOC
4. Has no time delay from mike to speaker
5. Will work with existing transmitters and towers
6. Is a one time purchase, no license fees
7. Will utilize several data channels
8. Is able to broadcast 24 hours a day in digital
9. Allows analog radio stations to continue to broadcast in stereo
10. Will work equally well with any signal pattern
11. Was designed for AM, not as an afterthought

As you say, it could all be smoke and mirrors but if these claims are true then CAM-D holds great promise for AM. Three stations are already broadcasting in CAM-D; KDYL, KRCM, KOLE. Supposedly there is a fourth, East Coast station, that has recently installed the CAM-D system.

I, too, would love to hear it on a receiver, not just as download audio samples.

db

 

[JasonW]

If I recall correctly, CAM-D is an outgrowth of Leonard Kahn's AM Stereo system, which many engineers said was the best of the competing systems.

It would be great if someone like Chris Cuff (who builds 100 milliwatt C-QUAM AM Stereo demonstration transmitters and AM Stereo receivers) could build CAM-D demo transmitters and receivers.

-- Jason

 

[SUPERCASTER]

dbdigital-Thanks for placing this link:

Great article on why IBOC must not be used for AM in today's online edition of Radio World.

http://www.rwonline.com/reference-room/commentary/2006.07.19-03_rw_hd_guest_barry_2.shtml

I especially like this quote: "The nature of the AM IBOC modulation does virtually guarantee that it will create interference to other stations. If you don't accept that, well, you're simply in denial."

I knew it all along, those damn waterlogged Egyption engineers have been lying to us!

I wonder when Barry will do an expose about HD Radio/iBiquity digital FM. I can't wait!

 

[dbdigital]

If I recall correctly, CAM-D is an outgrowth of Leonard Kahn's AM Stereo system, which many engineers said was the best of the competing systems.

It would be great if someone like Chris Cuff (who builds 100 milliwatt C-QUAM AM Stereo demonstration transmitters and AM Stereo receivers) could build CAM-D demo transmitters and receivers.

-- Jason

Sure, if ol' Lenny will cut loose at reveal the technology behind CAM-D. But since his patent is still pending, he's not telling anything.

I had heard a rumor of someone working on a crack and/or work around for HD radio so that it would be open to Part-15 users but I can't confirm that.

Maybe Chris or even Keith at Rangemaster could do something with that in the future.

db

 

[JasonW]

dbdigital wrote:

<I had heard a rumor of someone working on a crack and/or work around for HD radio so that it would be open to Part-15 users but I can't confirm that.

Maybe Chris or even Keith at Rangemaster could do something with that in the future.>

I'd love to see Part 15 HD AM tried in digital-only mode (100 milliwatts is too little power to split it up in a hybrid analog/digital system).

Digital-only HD AM might reliably get clear signals out 1 - 2 miles or more at 100 milliwatts.

-- Jason

 

[Kelly]

Interesting thread... Ran a little off course now and again, but it happens.

Speaking of off course, as much as I think Leonard Kahn is a very smart man, yet he is one of those directly responsible for the demise of AM stereo, and I seriously doubt CAM-D will make ANY headway toward a viable system. Trust me on this one guys, I was involved with testing one of the original Kahn ISB systems.

Now the real problem is, there are no IBOC/HD receivers, and the big-three auto manufacturers won't touch it, so in it's current form for FM, it's game over.

BUT... Honestly, I think AM benefits most from IBOC. Now wait a minute before you jump all over me with the DXing rationale, (Bruce), let me ask a hypothetical question...

Let's say the FCC allowed Domestic Medium Wave stations to operate day only mode in HD for three years, and mandated that receiver manufacturers, (as in DTV), had to put IBOC chips in all new radios. Then on a particular date, all stations operating in IBOC, turn off their analog audio portion, and ran only digital modulation 24-7. Those who refused to install a IBOC exciter on their system, choose to deal with any interference. One year after that point, all Medium Wave stations must transition only to digital.

It seems to me that if receiver manufacturers were required to build receivers with the IBOC chips, and stations to transmit in only digital, then who cares about adjacent channel interference. And for AM, since the digital signal seems to be more robust against TI, and travel further than the analog portion, then everyone wins. DXer's just need to use IBOC radios to hear distant stations, and the quality of the audio and signal for AM is greatly improved.

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

I hope it is safe for anti-IBOC folks to post in this thread - it's not that I haven't been accused ot being a troll, or anything, on the "other" board (obvioulsy, both boards are visited by the same people). One of the moderators on the HD board would debate with me, make the final post/comment/personal insult, then lock the thread.

Here is an article that summarizes the problems with HD/IBOC on the AM band - after having done pretty extensive reading, my impression is that HD/IBOC does not propagate/modulate very well on the AM band, and even has coverage and interference problems on the FM band:

http://www.wbdhradio.com/html/say_no_to_iboc.html

I believe that IBOC is already dying - recently, having been taken off the FCC agenda, and with proposed Congressional legislation to force satellite and HD/IBOC radio to add a "digital flag", and/or some type of encryption/decryption, to protect copying of the digital streams, is definately a blow to iBiquity.

Yesterday, I was in Best Buy (Gaithersburg, Md.) and the HD/IBOC and satellite radios are still in the back of the store (the HD/IBOC radio wasn't even plugged in, and it just had the old long-wire antenna, not the suggested dipole antenna). The HD Raptor radio looks like a real piece of junk and is not even portable (I heard that HD/IBOC radio have a power consumption issue, so that it would eat up batteries). Imagine, having to hook up a dipole antenna to listen to AM/FM (like consumers are going to be willing to do that). The HD/IBOC radios (unlike what Ibiquity has been saying for the past year) are just not available to consumers - there is no consumer interest in this technology. I read the Sirius and XM are both deeply in debt and only have a fraction of subscribers they expected. But, the Sirius S50 portable radio looks pretty impressive, but no way am I going to pay a monthly fee, just to listen to radio (prefer AM Dxing).

I asked my 17 year-old twin boys, if any of there large circle of friends listen to any type of terrestrial radio - they said, no way, they listen to iPods and car satellite radio.

 

[autopaint-1]

I'll respond and say of course you are entitled to your opinion and what you are posting are the opinions of others, not established facts. You have no experience with IBOC radio. You are quoting others who hold similar views to yours.

As far as HD dying, that is wishful thinking. There was a variance in the Ibiquity filing, nothing more. That kind of thing happens all the time.

Now, as to your children. My children are two young ladies 20 and 18 years old (about the age of your children). They are both in college and they both own IPODS and both listen to FM radio in their cars. They also buy CD's and own DVD's. The radio audience in the North Eastern part of the US is very healthy. Without radio they'd have no idea about new music coming out and what the want to add to their collection. Neither one has satellite radio nor expressed interesting in getting one. Funny, that none of their friends own satellite radios either. If you look at the subscription numbers of satellite verses the number of listeners to terrestrial radio you'd have to laugh. Radio nationally has over 100,000,000 million people. Both XM & Sirrius have maybe 6 million listeners combined and I've heard those numbers include people that purchase new cars and are given a 1 year free subscription in hopes that they will re-up once it expires. Like the cable news networks who tout that they are number one on cable, their numbers are dwarfed by the over the air news broadcasts.

The fact that the IBOC radios are in back of your Best Buy store has no merrit at all. The TV's, of all types are in the back of a local Circuit City store where I live. I guess that means that there isn't any interest in television either. IBOC is just starting out. Stations are just coming on the air. Hey, WNYC FM in NYC just added an HD 3 channel to their stream and it sounds great. Tivoli who initially said they wouldn't do HD have just announced that they are going to be releasing their new Tivoli HD this fall and it's based on IBOQUITIES 2nd generation chip set. Radios are coming on the market now and stations are appearing. Best of all there is no monthly bill for HD radio and its codec actually sounds better than the codec used by either satellite broadcaster.


By the way, what do you mean that the Receptor "looks like a piece of junk"? That is a foolish comment. See, that's your problem you need an editor. The B.A. Receptor is a fine radio that is very well built and very versitile with great sound. By the way, it's a table radio not a portable. It's not designed to carry around. Maybe that's where you were confused. I know wht you mean about the lack of HD portables on the market. They'd better do something soon to compete with the hundreds of portable walkman type satellite radios I'm seeing. Somehow I don't think that people will have a problem hooking up an external antenna to the B.A. After all, I don't know of any satellite radio that works without and antenna. Maybe I've missed something and both XM & Sirrius are now using internal ferrite loops to receive those services. By the way, you are assuming that there is no consumer interest in HD radio. I guess time will tell, but I'd suggest there's a lot more interest in HD than there is in DXing. try to do a little better forming your arguments. Right now they are pretty weak.

 

[autopaint-1]

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

The fact that the HD Raptor is in the back of the store, has a lot to do with how interested Best Buy is in marketing this technology, and with consumer interest. Also, at current prices (again, for the last year iBiquity has been promising HD/IBOC radios for < $100), comsumers are going to bypass this technology - who is going to spend more than $25 - $50 for just an AM/FM radio. Today's fliers for Best Buy and Circuit City have no mention of HD/IBOC radios, but a whole page for satellite radios. Here is a link, to the lack of HD/IBOC radios, in retail stores:

http://rwonline.com/reference-room/iboc/2006.05.10-01_rw_hd_receiver_buy_3.shtml

Many AM/FM radio stations have already turned off HD/IBOC, because of propagation problems and listener complaints (WLW being one of them - correspondence through personal email).

Please, reread my previous post - you have numerous misquotes, and lack of responses to particular statements.

 

[autopaint-1]

I've read your post 12 times and in other rooms. You are in dream land and IBOC is not dying. I gave you facts. The satellites are in financial trouble. They are deeply in debt and there's talk that one or the other will go out of business. Feel free to think what you will but all the posts in the world won't change the future. I own an IBOC radio and love it. Best part is No monthly bill for programming. I have DirecTV and can listen to XM through it. My opinion is that you should enjoy your Satellite radio and enjoy the monthly bill (if you are paying for your childs expenses still) and I will enjoy my HN. Wait a few years for cheap radios. It's only over the past few years that satellite radios have dropped. They were in the 300 dollar range not that long ago. By the way, my parents bought a Tivoli a few years ago so don't fool yourself that people won't spend over 25 dollars for a radio. You are only deceiving yourself.

 

[SayNoToIBOC]

Yes, IBOC is dying - it has been stalled by the FCC, and the RIAA/Congress will probably stall it further. As I said, many broadcasters have already turned off IBOC - WLW, as an example, as they told me they MAY experiment with it in the future. It is interesting how you, "selectively", respond to my posts. Now, do you recall the well-know, well-respected, highly-qualified Dr. Conrad's view on HD/IBOC:

http://www.audiographics.com/agd/061206-1.htm

Here is Congress's PERFORM ACT, to stall HD/IBOC:

http://rwonline.com/reference-room/iboc/2006.06.07-02_rw_opinion_june_7_web.shtml

We need a dipole antenna for this - could there be penetration/coverage/reception issues:

http://rwonline.com/reference-room/iboc/2006.05.10-02_rw_hd_recepter_antenna_3.shtml