He's Seen the Future and its HD RADIO!

[KB1OKL]

Ya' know, if Clear Channel, Infinity, Citadel, etc. supplied the bulk of my radio listening, I'D FREAKIN' SEE NO POINT TO HD EITHER! Thank God I'm not young, and into the "hippest" new music (the fact that I use a term like "hippest" no doubt proves my point), and that I prefer to know what's going on in the world around me, as well as hear unusual music, makes public radio fertile ground for MY listening.

Were I younger/hipper/flashier, no doubt I'd be pretty unimpressed!

I also listen to NPR most of the time and see absolutely no reason for them to be broadcasting in iBlock and I hope they are not using any of my tax dollars to install that jammer.

Frankly, I hope they don't have any opf my tax dollars at all, but that's for another thread.

I am not going to subsidize any ill-fated lead balloon of a technology which is going absolutely nowhere fast.

Bob,

I noticed you did get an in IBlock and lead balloon, however in order to truly graduate to the next level you will need Destructive, Defective and of course to appeal to the heart of the "Anti" crowd, you might want to mix in a "Titanic 2000 of Broadcasting".

You might also want to mix in a "Belching" and perhaps create a title for yourself such as Ambassador, Doctor or El Presidente. (I wonder if "Inspector" would; work?)

But seriously, welcome to the forum.

Imperial Comentator

Clouseau

El Presidente Roberto, the belching canary of the coal mine in charge of warning the unwashed masses of the impending, destructive, defective, Titanic 2000 of broadcasting: iBlock!

Thank you Inspector, I will do nothing to let my side down. ;D

 

[fybush]

I also listen to NPR most of the time and see absolutely no reason for them to be broadcasting in iBlock and I hope they are not using any of my tax dollars to install that jammer.

*sigh*

Wanna hear a story? Be warned - it doesn't fit your preconceptions.

The NPR member station for which I work part-time, WXXI in Rochester, operates two major radio services: a 24-hour classical service on WXXI-FM 91.5 (a 45 kW class B signal with full-market coverage and then some) and a news-talk service on WXXI 1370, a 5 kW DA-N signal that's decent by day but that's long since been outgrown by the market's suburban sprawl at night.

For more than two decades, that night signal on the AM (and remember, "night" begins at 4:45 this time of year over here) has been a source of frustration for both the station and its listeners. There's no way to expand the reach of the AM, thanks to a combination of a tight allotment situation and NIMBYism that would keep it from moving to a marginally better location. There's no room on the noncommercial end of the dial for a new FM signal. Buying an existing commercial class B FM would carry a price tag of between $12-24 million in this market.

There are also new shows coming down the pipeline from NPR and other sources that would appeal to the news-talk audience, if only there were more than 24 hours a day of airtime to fit them all in. Shows such as "Day to Day" and "On Point" weren't available over the air in the market at all. (Or CBC's "As it Happens," which hasn't been heard here since CBL left the AM dial in 1999.)

So it made perfect sense, in this particular case, to make use of FM HD multicasting. WXXI-FM needed a new antenna anyway (its existing antenna dated to 1974). I haven't seen the budget numbers, but I'd guess adding HD (new transmitter, importer, exporter, automation, etc) increased the price tag on the project by less than $30,000.

So instead of spending $12 million or more to add one new full-market programming stream, WXXI was able to add two new full-market programming streams for about 4% of that cost. The AM 1370 programming is now on 91.5-HD2, and there's a brand new service of additional NPR/BBC/CBC programming on 91.5-HD3.

Is it working? Again, you're not going to want to hear this, but:

I spent the last two weeks guest-hosting the "1370 Connection" midday talk show. Our Friday show last week was an extended edition of the "Mixed Media" technology/media segment that I do each week as a local insert into our "All Things Considered" broadcast. (The weekly segment is available as a podcast at http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wxxi/.jukebox?action=viewPodcast&podcastId=6463 - the special talk show should be available there sometime in the next day or so.)

The promos for the broadcast talked mainly about the DTV conversion. I promise you that there was not a single mention of HD Radio in the opening segment of the show. (We did do a special "1370 Connection" back in September to introduce the HD Radio rollout.)

And out of the dozen or so calls that we took on-air that hour (and our screening policy is very liberal - you call in, you get on the air, mostly), three of them were about HD Radio. Two of them were from actual current WXXI-FM HD listeners, with a third from someone wanting to know how to get a radio. Again I emphasize - these were unsolicited calls. One of them already had HD at home (in an area where the AM signal is particularly useless) and wanted to know more about car radios. One was wondering about coverage of the HD signal in an area where it's likely to be pretty fringy, and we told him as much. One just wanted to know how much the radios cost.

Is this any kind of overall proof of anything? Of course it isn't. But I think it does show that if there's content people want to hear, and if the system is promoted in an intelligent way that focuses on that desirable content, listeners will find the radios. (WXXI has been offering them during pledge drives with some success.)

At the moment, it seems like that content is more likely to be found in the public radio arena than at most of the commercial HD signals I've heard. While the circumstances at WXXI are unusual (the lousy AM signal), they're not unique, and there are other public radio stations doing interesting things - and finding listeners - on HD multicast channels.

(And of course I speak only for myself and not for WXXI or anyone else...)

 

[clouseau]

I also listen to NPR most of the time and see absolutely no reason for them to be broadcasting in iBlock and I hope they are not using any of my tax dollars to install that jammer.

*sigh*

Wanna hear a story? Be warned - it doesn't fit your preconceptions.

The NPR member station for which I work part-time, WXXI in Rochester, operates two major radio services: a 24-hour classical service on WXXI-FM 91.5 (a 45 kW class B signal with full-market coverage and then some) and a news-talk service on WXXI 1370, a 5 kW DA-N signal that's decent by day but that's long since been outgrown by the market's suburban sprawl at night.

For more than two decades, that night signal on the AM (and remember, "night" begins at 4:45 this time of year over here) has been a source of frustration for both the station and its listeners. There's no way to expand the reach of the AM, thanks to a combination of a tight allotment situation and NIMBYism that would keep it from moving to a marginally better location. There's no room on the noncommercial end of the dial for a new FM signal. Buying an existing commercial class B FM would carry a price tag of between $12-24 million in this market.

There are also new shows coming down the pipeline from NPR and other sources that would appeal to the news-talk audience, if only there were more than 24 hours a day of airtime to fit them all in. Shows such as "Day to Day" and "On Point" weren't available over the air in the market at all. (Or CBC's "As it Happens," which hasn't been heard here since CBL left the AM dial in 1999.)

So it made perfect sense, in this particular case, to make use of FM HD multicasting. WXXI-FM needed a new antenna anyway (its existing antenna dated to 1974). I haven't seen the budget numbers, but I'd guess adding HD (new transmitter, importer, exporter, automation, etc) increased the price tag on the project by less than $30,000.

So instead of spending $12 million or more to add one new full-market programming stream, WXXI was able to add two new full-market programming streams for about 4% of that cost. The AM 1370 programming is now on 91.5-HD2, and there's a brand new service of additional NPR/BBC/CBC programming on 91.5-HD3.

Is it working? Again, you're not going to want to hear this, but:

I spent the last two weeks guest-hosting the "1370 Connection" midday talk show. Our Friday show last week was an extended edition of the "Mixed Media" technology/media segment that I do each week as a local insert into our "All Things Considered" broadcast. (The weekly segment is available as a podcast at http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wxxi/.jukebox?action=viewPodcast&podcastId=6463 - the special talk show should be available there sometime in the next day or so.)

The promos for the broadcast talked mainly about the DTV conversion. I promise you that there was not a single mention of HD Radio in the opening segment of the show. (We did do a special "1370 Connection" back in September to introduce the HD Radio rollout.)

And out of the dozen or so calls that we took on-air that hour (and our screening policy is very liberal - you call in, you get on the air, mostly), three of them were about HD Radio. Two of them were from actual current WXXI-FM HD listeners, with a third from someone wanting to know how to get a radio. Again I emphasize - these were unsolicited calls. One of them already had HD at home (in an area where the AM signal is particularly useless) and wanted to know more about car radios. One was wondering about coverage of the HD signal in an area where it's likely to be pretty fringy, and we told him as much. One just wanted to know how much the radios cost.

Is this any kind of overall proof of anything? Of course it isn't. But I think it does show that if there's content people want to hear, and if the system is promoted in an intelligent way that focuses on that desirable content, listeners will find the radios. (WXXI has been offering them during pledge drives with some success.)

At the moment, it seems like that content is more likely to be found in the public radio arena than at most of the commercial HD signals I've heard. While the circumstances at WXXI are unusual (the lousy AM signal), they're not unique, and there are other public radio stations doing interesting things - and finding listeners - on HD multicast channels.

(And of course I speak only for myself and not for WXXI or anyone else...)

I suspect this story is closer to the norm than anyone would like to admit.

The "alledged" spectacular claims of those who do not SCREAM against HD are largely exagerrated.

Does it make Fm sound like a CD? Full blown HD 1 probably sounds closer to a CD than anything else in broadcast. And frankly better than SOME CDs. Does HD1 sound better than FM analog if correctly implemented? I suspect the vast majority of listeners say yes.

Does AM HD make AM sound like FM? Well I've heard it and it sounds better than conventional AM when set up properly. A LOT better. Again, I'm inclined to generally accept the AM like FM and FM like CD thing.

Is that statement totally technically accurate? I give up. I've never seen frequency response "Specs" for FM or AM. I know what they CAN do, but overall most stations don't do it. I believe most people would say HD "IS" a sound quality improvement.

Does HD go as far as analog? - No.

Does it go to the protected service contour? I would say yes, with a caveat. We tend to overestimate our service areas. There actually ISN't 60 bdu service inside all of the theoretical line. Or 54 or 57. Your situation may vary.

Does HD fall back to analog seamlessly? - Yes if set up properly.

Does HD work as well as it's proponents woud like? - I would suspect not. Range is an issue. Not at the actual coverage, but at the theoretical.

Does HD work as poorly as opponents claim? - No, it seems to exceed those boundaries. he claims of 1-2 miles on AM are very suspect. Also, you don't know what the station is transmitting.

Leave it to Scott Fybush to probably frame up the issue in a fair way. Now we'll see if "HE" is branded a shill. After all, he does work somewhere where they use HD.

Clouseau

 

[Savage]

Scottso - at the risk of temporarily diverting this thread into a Western New York blog, just curious:

Was there any inquiry, or awareness during the WXXI call-in, concerning HD-AM radio? Or was the chat relegated to receiving the 1370 signal via HD2

 

[fybush]

Scottso - at the risk of temporarily diverting this thread into a Western New York blog, just curious:

Was there any inquiry, or awareness during the WXXI call-in, concerning HD-AM radio? Or was the chat relegated to receiving the 1370 signal via HD2

Nobody asked about it specifically. I mentioned in passing that two of our local AMs (WHAM and WHTK) were running AM HD, but that we weren't on 1370.

 

[Play Freebird]

Leave it to Scott Fybush to probably frame up the issue in a fair way. Now we'll see if "HE" is branded a shill. After all, he does work somewhere where they use HD.

I think Scott's opinion is very well-founded. Fortunately, WXXI-FM has an excellent, centrally-located transmitter facility that blankets most of the city of Rochester with a predicted service contour better than 90 dBu -- that's 100 times the minimum city-grade power. Most of the population in the market is concentrated within ten miles, and the surrounding terrain is relatively flat, so you have a situation that doesn't violate the laws of physics. Add to that worthwhile programming appealing to an upscale, educated audience (people who don't mind spending $200 on a radio) and you have a formula for success. It would be nice if this were the case everywhere, but it's not.

Although I've made some money installing digital transmitters, my enthusiasm for HD Radio is so-so. Compare its benefits against those of digital TV, and there's no question that the radio industry got a bad deal.

On the positive side:

1) The FM system does help to overcome urban multipath distortion.

2) When a single channel is offered (the full 96 k devoted to one program) there is a noticeable improvement in audio quality over FM.

3) If an FM broadcaster is willing to sacrifice quality, additional multicast programs can be offered at lower fidelity than conventional FM (but this is an unfortunate tradeoff DTV stations aren't required to make)

4) It allows program associated data to be transmitted along with the audio

5) AM stations can offer extended frequency response on their digital signals within a limited area (but this is largely based on "spectral replication" and requires a reduction in analog fidelity)

6) There's a provision designed into the IBOC scheme which could allow full digital operation "someday", but many unanswered questions about the feasibility of eliminating the analog component within the next 20 years. Compare that against the DTV transition, which was slightly delayed, but is now well on its way to becoming a reality.


But here are a few of the shortcomings:

1) IBOC presently offers no way for AM daytimers to extend their operating hours, which is inexcusable. (However, this could be solved by opening 76-88 MHz to AM licensees for transmission of a VHF digital signal)

2) IBOC doesn't allow AM Class C, DA-N or DA-2 stations (like WYSL) to maintain consistent day and night coverage areas. Again, this should have been a primary objective of any "revolutionary" new digital audio broadcasting system adopted by the FCC.

3) The nighttime interference problem of AM IBOC is disastrous, as we've already heard.

4) Digital coverage of both AM and FM stations falls short of predicted primary contours in most cases. The noise immunity of the AM digital signal is a bad joke, and can't be improved without further violating the Shannon-Hartley theorem.

5) On-channel boosters (gap fillers) aren't practical until the system goes full digital, and even then, probably can't be used in the AM band. Not an major issue in states like Florida or Texas, but quite valuable in New England, California, PA, upstate NY, etc. Meanwhile, the Europeans designed their DAB and DTV systems around this concept, and even American DTV broadcasters have modified their system to allow "distributed transmission".

6) So we're screwed on the boosters, how about translators or simulcasting on different channels? Oops, there's no provision in the HD protocol for automatic receiver retuning to alternate frequencies, a standard feature of RDS (very successfully implemented in Europe). We've taken a step backwards!

7) Multicast channels have no analog backup; a major issue, thanks to 4), 5), and 6) And, AM broadcasters aren't even entitled to multicast channels, even though they may be in a better position to offer niche formats.

And I won't even get into the issues of marketing, promotion, factory-installed car radios, iBiquity licensing fees, etc.

 

[Savage]

Excellent analysis, Freebird. I pick you for my team. Let me know where to send the t-shirt.

Scott Fybush IS a freakin' shill. A reliable source told me he listens to Keith Olbermann too.

 

[Play Freebird]

Excellent analysis, Freebird. I pick you for my team. Let me know where to send the t-shirt.

I'll pick up the t-shirt (and signing bonus) next time I'm in Rochester, haven't talked with you in over 20 years. Would enjoy a tour, too.

 

[fybush]

Excellent analysis, Freebird. I pick you for my team. Let me know where to send the t-shirt.

I'll pick up the t-shirt (and signing bonus) next time I'm in Rochester, haven't talked with you in over 20 years. Would enjoy a tour, too.

Hey, wait a minute - where's MY WYSL T-shirt? And whenever this tour is happening, count me in for Wahlburgers afterward. Maybe I can even get my buddy Keith to show up...

 

[rbrucecarter5]

But here are a few of the shortcomings:

You forgot an important shortcoming: Like its AM counterpart, FM IBOC jams first adjacent frequencies with unacceptable levels of interference. This problem is acute in densely population areas where multiple allocations on first adjacents appear in close proximity, especially on the lower non-commercial end of the band.

 

[Radioman100]

But here are a few of the shortcomings:

You forgot an important shortcoming: Like its AM counterpart, FM IBOC jams first adjacent frequencies with unacceptable levels of interference. This problem is acute in densely population areas where multiple allocations on first adjacents appear in close proximity, especially on the lower non-commercial end of the band.

Unacceptable to whom? The FCC has no issue with it.

 

[Chuck]

Unacceptable to whom? The FCC has no issue with it.

Maybe so Radioman, but check out a few of the things the FCC has done in the last 30 days or so. If you can tell me truthfully that Chairman Martin and friends are acting in the best public interest, then we'll call a friendly truce. There are a lot of genuinely good (and nice) people at the FCC, but at the moment, it looks like an agency that is out of control. That problem starts at the very top.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Unacceptable to whom? The FCC has no issue with it.

Unacceptable to quite a few NPR listeners who are vigorously complaining about it. The FCC has no issue with the mess AM IBOC makes either. They are chair bound paper pushing lawyers, not technically competant. The do not act in the public interest, their only concern is raising money by auctioning spectrum. That and listening to the whining of every minority out there about minority ownership. I think the whole sorry lot ought to be kicked out for the IBOC debacle, the AM stereo debacle, the ownership debacle, and every other major goof they have made in the last 30 years. Totally incompetant and ruled by special interests. These are the PUBLIC airwaves we are talking about, and they are guilty of gross mismanagement. The PUBLIC has no input whatsoever as to how they are used.

And if you are a station owner, get ready. Third adjacent protection is about to be lifted. A whole lot more trouble and interference for your station - courtesy of your anemic FCC.

 

[davideduardo]

I think Scott's opinion is very well-founded. Fortunately, WXXI-FM has an excellent, centrally-located transmitter facility that blankets most of the city of Rochester with a predicted service contour better than 90 dBu -- that's 100 times the minimum city-grade power. Most of the population in the market is concentrated within ten miles, and the surrounding terrain is relatively flat, so you have a situation that doesn't violate the laws of physics.

Nearly 40% of the radio market's population is outside of Monroe County. This, in fact, is why really only WHAM is considered viable on AM

 

[Savage]

Freebird and Scottsoid, you'll get a free tote bag with your WYSL tour (Oprah's got NOTHIN on us.) Signing bonuses and t-shirts will be inside. Please make tour reservations 24 hours in advance to avoid disappointment due to Holiday crowds. Keith is welcome as long as he promises to wear pants.

"The FCC has no issue with (adjacent-channel interference)?" Precisely. You've put your finger on the problem.

Actually, the bumbling amateur political hacks known collectively as "the FCC" have not a single broadcaster on board, a large factor in how the HD Radio mess got launched in the first place. Essentially the Commission exists to pander to special interests (including the usual minority interests and big broadcast groups,) bask in the adoration of lobbyists and spew political correctness. The FCC is aloof and clueless - another out-of-control ship of fools and elites screwing up American society. The only fix is to reduce the size of government by two-thirds so there won't be so many bureaucrats to waste money and take away our freedoms, step by tiny step.

 

[Play Freebird]

Nearly 40% of the radio market's population is outside of Monroe County. This, in fact, is why really only WHAM is considered viable on AM

By my calculations, only 33% of the Arbitron metro is outside Monroe, but if full market coverage is such a determining factor in Rochester, how does little 0.8 kW WDKX manage to remain the number two FM? And they're even doing it without the "benefits" of HD!

 

[Radioman100]

Unacceptable to whom? The FCC has no issue with it.

Maybe so Radioman, but check out a few of the things the FCC has done in the last 30 days or so. If you can tell me truthfully that Chairman Martin and friends are acting in the best public interest, then we'll call a friendly truce. There are a lot of genuinely good (and nice) people at the FCC, but at the moment, it looks like an agency that is out of control. That problem starts at the very top.

I'm not so sure that newspaper cross-ownership is a problem. I really don't see radio companies buying up newspapers in any great numbers or vice-versa. As far as I know, there are just a few of these situations out there, and they've had waivers to operate for years, they just couldn't buy any more stations in the markets where they were already operating.

It became a political lightning rod because liberal politicians absolutely, positively don't want to reward the same broadcasters that put Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity on the air with anything. That, and somehow this is going to help squeeze out more minority broadcasters. The funny thing is I know of one minority owned, minority focused company that this will actually help - Perry Broadcasting in Oklahoma. They publish a newspaper for the black community in Oklahoma City and Tulsa and also own radio stations. How they've been able to do that under the old rules, I'm not sure. Just flying under the radar I guess. http://www.perry-pub-broadcasting.com/about.html

 

[Chuck]

I'm not so sure that newspaper cross-ownership is a problem. I really don't see radio companies buying up newspapers in any great numbers or vice-versa. As far as I know, there are just a few of these situations out there, and they've had waivers to operate for years, they just couldn't buy any more stations in the markets where they were already operating.

That's just the tip of the iceberg. In the past few months they have reversed or altered so many of their previous decisions, it makes your head swim. I guess you haven't been following all the news about translators, moving rim-shots into metro's, City of License changes, LPFM, EAS changes/requirements, DTV, local origination requirements, possible 24 hour manning of stations, and such. They have been busy bees, and very little of it make much engineering sense.

God only knows what they are doing on the telecommunications front. That’s where the really big money is. By comparison, broadcasting is just a pimple on their a$$.

 

[Radioman100]

That's just the tip of the iceberg. In the past few months they have reversed or altered so many of their previous decisions, it makes your head swim. I guess you haven't been following all the news about translators, moving rim-shots into metro's, City of License changes, LPFM, EAS changes/requirements, DTV, local origination requirements, possible 24 hour manning of stations, and such. They have been busy bees, and very little of it make much engineering sense.

God only knows what they are doing on the telecommunications front. That’s where the really big money is. By comparison, broadcasting is just a pimple on their a$$.

I did hear about the possible 24 hour manning. I'm totally in favor of that, but I doubt it will ever happen. As far as serving the public goes, that would go a long way. Forget the technology that is supposed to make meeting your public service / safety responsibilities possible. There's nothing like having a live body there when the tornado is coming or there's a mishap at the chemical plant.

 

[Chuck]

I'm totally in favor of that, but I doubt it will ever happen. As far as serving the public goes, that would go a long way. Forget the technology that is supposed to make meeting your public service / safety responsibilities possible. There's nothing like having a live body there when the tornado is coming or there's a mishap at the chemical plant.

I don’t see how it is necessary to require that a person has to physically be at the station if a means is in place to originate emergency information from a remote site. With simple to implement (and inexpensive) remote control systems, it would be easy enough to have a person "on call" to handle those duties, if and when they are needed. I do agree that someone should be on call, but I’ve found I don't need to actually be at the station to go on the air. I can do it from just about anywhere, including my kitchen. I've even done it from a ship at sea. If a lowly LPFM like mine can figure it out, so can the big guys.

The problem with this particular desire to have a warm body at the station 24/7 is that it won't be something a lot of smaller stations can afford to do. Many of them will just sign off at 10 or midnight. That’s the way it was back in the 1950s & 60's. How does that help?

I can think of a small station that is operated by a senior citizens group. They do a pretty good job during the day, but I doubt that many of them stay awake past 9:00 PM. I guess they'd just have to go off the air after 9:00. I don't see how that serves the public interest. For that matter how does it foster localism?

I’m in favor of localism, but this in itself will not make it happen. Instead, you will either get “nothing” because the station signed off, or at best there will be a $6.00 per hour person sitting there watching the automation. That’s assuming they haven’t nodded off to go to sleep.

If you like the way the FCC is running things, how do you feel about “Radio Goldfield,” the Nevada pirate that became licensed after proper political pressure was exerted on the Commission.? The guy may be doing a great job of serving his community. I hope so, but the point is the FCC is being run by politicians, not by engineers. Not many of your elected officials have a clue when it comes to nuts and bolts technology. Every now and then, someone persuades Congress that they are electrical engineers and we get another fine mess. Lord knows what they are dong in the Telecom field, but every FCC Daily Digest is loaded with news about the latest giveaways and edicts. It makes me shudder to think about it.