Historic Point Reached

[R.F. Burns]

Again PocketRadio cites the "failure" of DAB in the UK, which is BS! Last year MORE DIGITAL RADIOS WERE SOLD THAN ANALOG! The UK is the biggest SUCCESS STORY thusfar in digital radio! You can tell 'cause analog radio sales are falling like the Bush Administration's poll numbers!

Canada, bless their souls, is to sparsely populated to do much other than adopt whatever system we adopt...just as they crouch over the border squinting to catch our tv and radio programs.

"2004/13 – DIFFUSION online"

"The DAB market has been very slow to catch on. The technology is 10-15 years old, and though it can be said that DAB is perhaps the most talked about technology, it can also be said that DAB has perhaps put itself into a corner."

http://www.ebu.ch/en/union/diffusion_on_line/dossiers/diffonline_2004_03_22.php

"President of WorldDMB was dishonest about DAB+ on BBC TV"

"There seems to be some confusion over the cumulative DAB sales in the UK so far, with Quentin Howard suggesting that there's been 4.5m receivers sold in the UK but the BBC saying that 3.5m have been sold... that there are around 120m FM radio receivers of one kind or another in the UK, then 4m only represents 3.3% of all the radio receivers in the market."

http://digitalradiotech.co.uk/articles/President-of-WorldDMB-was-dishonest-about-DAB+-on-BBC-TV.php

"Digital radio in Canada"

"The Commission is very concerned about the stalled DRB transition. Roughly 15 of the 76 authorized stations (including the digital-only operation in Toronto) are not on the air. Some stations that once operated have since ceased operations. Few recievers have been sold, and there is no interest in expanding DRB service beyond the six cities where it exists... "

http://americanbandscan.blogspot.com/2006/12/digital-radio-in-canada.html

Due to lack of consumer interest, DAB has stalled in Canada, HD/IBOC is stalling in the US, and DAB is slowing in the UK - consumers around the world are not buying into the digital radio farce.

How about Botswana? Maybe we should base our technological advances on what that society accepts. Let me tell you once more.. what Canada decides is right for there country has no impact on what is right for the United States.

 

[raydofan]

The FCC has stated in no uncertain terms, there is no further spectrum available for broadcast services.

Can you explain why that is?

My understanding is that these frequencies were auctioned off to various telecommunications companies, mainly cellular, or they were given away to 'emergency management'.

?

 

[R.F. Burns]

The FCC has stated in no uncertain terms, there is no further spectrum available for broadcast services.

Can you explain why that is?

My understanding is that these frequencies were auctioned off to various telecommunications companies, mainly cellular, or they were given away to 'emergency management'.

?

No I can't tell you why but I believe that the one freq range which other countries are using for over the air broadcasting (L band) is off limits. Prior to IBOC's creation, broadcasters tried to get a new frequency range for digital broadcasts and were turned down. Any other question, ask the FCC. Please let us know what they say.

 

[davideduardo]

Can you explain why that is?

My understanding is that these frequencies were auctioned off to various telecommunications companies, mainly cellular, or they were given away to 'emergency management'.

The band used in other countires for digital is used and protected by the military in the US. Have been ofr decades.

 

[KE4KLS_Radio]

I'm concerned about the analog tvs that will no longer work. My grandparents (who died a few years ago) NEVER had cable, though it ran right by their home. They never would have hooked up either. It was never available where my wife's mother lived. And satellite wouldn't have worked...the home was surrounded by tall trees. She would not have been able to afford a new digital tv (of course we would have bought one for her). But there are millions of low income people who may well lose their only tv service at the cutoff. I'm not saying tv shouldn't transisiton to digital. I'm saying the transition should be MUCH LONGER, as hopefully it will be with radio (though digital radio receiving equipment will be much less expensive...already is).

The 40 dollars the government will offer people to convert (to digital tv) won't begin to cover the cost of a new tv (or digital tuner box) and higher gain antenna (my mother in law got plenty of analog channels with "wabbit ears". I doubt she would have done as well with digital).

Having cable and OTA digital TV, I have found the OTA digital signal to be outstanding in our area, with over 30 channels to choose from. Having said that, my neighbor, who doesn't watch a lot of TV but has one to catch the local news, etc. saw my OTA setup and has purchased a DVR with ATSC tuner the other day, and was extremely pleased with the cost and ability to get additional programming with a better picture and signal, plus not having to pay a cable bill. With Wal-Mart and Target selling tons of SDTV's with the ATSC tuner, along with DVR recorders with the ATSC tuner, my guess is that there won't be a lot of folks without TV at the cutoff. From my own experience with the ATSC signal, I didn't have to change out any antennas, and in many cases the rabbit ears work well. Your mileage may vary...

 

[raydofan]

No I can't tell you why but I believe that the one freq range which other countries are using for over the air broadcasting (L band) is off limits. Prior to IBOC's creation, broadcasters tried to get a new frequency range for digital broadcasts and were turned down. Any other question, ask the FCC. Please let us know what they say.

The band used in other countires for digital is used and protected by the military in the US. Have been ofr decades.

I'm not talking about 'L Band'. I'm talking about the frequencies currently in use by TV @ 6 mHz each. Channels 2-13, to start with.

 

[davideduardo]

I'm not talking about 'L Band'. I'm talking about the frequencies currently in use by TV @ 6 mHz each. Channels 2-13, to start with.

... and which are in use at present. I don't think anyone wants to bet on the V's vacating their analog channels per the timetable... when HDTV's are still in the over-500 dollar range, and 27" CRT's are $100... so, for all practical purposes, those channels are not avaialble for several years, and maybe more.

 

[Mike Walker]

KE4KLS_Radio wrote "Having cable and OTA digital TV, I have found the OTA digital signal to be outstanding in our area, with over 30 channels to choose from. Having said that, my neighbor, who doesn't watch a lot of TV but has one to catch the local news, etc. saw my OTA setup and has purchased a DVR with ATSC tuner the other day, and was extremely pleased with the cost and ability to get additional programming with a better picture and signal, plus not having to pay a cable bill. With Wal-Mart and Target selling tons of SDTV's with the ATSC tuner, along with DVR recorders with the ATSC tuner, my guess is that there won't be a lot of folks without TV at the cutoff. From my own experience with the ATSC signal, I didn't have to change out any antennas, and in many cases the rabbit ears work well. Your mileage may vary..."

I have ordered a high def set, which will be delivered on July 7th (a Vizio 32"). I briefly had an HD tuner card for my laptop. On it I got the local PBS station (University of North Carolina Television), and not much else...despite the fact that I can get six or seven analog stations with 'wabbit ears" (snowy, but watchable) in my rural location. A storm took down my roof antenna (with rotar) last summer, and I haven't replaced them yet (I'm a DirecTV subscriber, and have signed up for their HD service...to be installed on Monday the 25th). Are you in a rural, suburban, or rural area? The closest towers to me are from Linville NC, about 40 miles away, and Winston Salem NC about 50 miles away.

 

[dbdigital]

The stage is set for a BIG fizzle for Apple. And it's about time. They're only human beings! Steve Jobs didn't invent the personal computer, the graphical user interface, the mp3 player, OR the cellular phone. He made them "purty"...stylish. Big whoop!

This betrays your total ignorance about Apple products and philosophy which is all about ease of use and increased productivity and reliability through tight integration of hardware and software and not simply making something "purty" as you put it. As for iPhone battery life, early reports indicate that it is very good, especially for what it is designed to do. Of course, this isn't a discussion board for phones or computers.

Come to think of it, an HD-Radio is partly a computer. One that takes far too much power for what it's designed to do.

db

 

[KE4KLS_Radio]

Mike,

I live in a surburban area, however, I've found the digital signals seem to work as well or better than the analog signals here in FL, in particular the low analog VHF channels 2 and 6 versus their UHF digital counterparts. Granted, at your location there will be some issues in rural areas as you either will get the signal or not. While a marginal analog signal may be watchable, the digital signal would be a problem as it would be dropping out or freeze framing. Since I am familiar with your location, would seem the Charlotte and Triad signals would be watchable with a good outdoor antenna such as a Winegard or Channel Master with good UHF capabilities. But I have to agree with you that many rural residents will either need to spend some dollars getting ATSC TV's and recorders, and ensuring their antennas are in good shape when the switch occurs. On the other hand, the majority of folks are on cable and satellite today anyway so it will be interesting to see what impact this will cause to folks in 2009.

Bill

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

I don't think anyone wants to bet on the V's vacating their analog channels per the timetable... when HDTV's are still in the over-500 dollar range, and 27" CRT's are $100... so, for all practical purposes, those channels are not avaialble for several years, and maybe more.

When 2/17/2009 rolls around, TV stations will have to give up one of their channels...either the present-day analog or present-day digital channels. Whichever one they keep will be required to run digital. However, the problem with digital TV transmitters, as told to me by several TV station engineers, is that they just don't work very well below about 100 MHz (current low-band VHF is 54-88 MHz, with a hole in the 72-76 MHz range). They remain stable at such low frequencies with extreme difficulty and are quite inefficient. Digital transmitters in the high-VHF band (174-216 MHz) work only slightly better, but are stable enough that many TV stations will likely stay on those channels when the switch occurs.

And when you begin using a digital TV, you'll find that the FCC-assigned channel numbers are irrelevant anyhow, because they're all set in software as part of the transmitted data stream. If New York's WCBS-DT (channel 56) wants the TV sets to display channel 2 (their analog channel), then that's what the set will display, even if they're transmitting on channel 56. Stations which have spent 30, 40, 50 years or more on the same analog channel, and which have spent that much time drilling the channel number into their viewers' heads, will not give up that promotional value easily, especially if it was a low easy-to-remember number like 2.

 

[davideduardo]

When 2/17/2009 rolls around, TV stations will have to give up one of their channels...either the present-day analog or present-day digital channels.

That is true today, and the FCC is anxious to aluction off the space. However, if too few people have converters or sets that are HDTV capable, there will be a stay of execution. Nobody can say this is not possible, or predict if it might happen. If it impacts minorities or the poor, count on it.

However, the problem with digital TV transmitters, as told to me by several TV station engineers, is that they just don't work very well below about 100 MHz

Because they were designed for UHF, of course. UHF analog transmitters don't work on high or low band VHF, either. In fact, a Channel 7 transmitter will have a really hard time being tuned to channel 6.

Stations which have spent 30, 40, 50 years or more on the same analog channel, and which have spent that much time drilling the channel number into their viewers' heads, will not give up that promotional value easily, especially if it was a low easy-to-remember number like 2.

You missed entirely the point... radio could not have made use of a protion of the spectrum, because its "liberation" is still several years away and there is no 100% guarantee that the V's will vacate in 2009.

 

[semoochie]

Providing an analog to digital converter to all who only receive OTA will make it unnecessary to delay the February 17 date.

 

[arnoldevns]

Ibiquity didn't start HD, for God's sake. Digital radio has been in development for the better part of two decades. Ibiquity's work incorporates technology from many firms who were once competitors...USADR (USA Digital Radio), Lucent Technologies, and others. I don't like the idea of one company holding all the patents (and getting all the licensing fees). That sucks. But that doesn't make it somehow dishonest. And digital radio wasn't an effort started by radio station owners. The ORIGINAL companies involved throughout most of last decade and this one were not radio station owners or groups...but general technology companies.

The digital radio ball began rolling when Clear Channel owned just a couple of AM stations (hence their name), consolidation wasn't even a blip on the radar, and there were no huge group owners. The conspiracy theory you guys like to believe in is lacking a crucial component...not to burdon you with facts...most of the ones you believe are "conspiritors" didn't even exist at the start of the process! You might as well blame Marconi. He's as responsible for Ibiquity's monopoly as station owners and managers! Like the free market, do ya'? THIS is what can result from a free market. Even if I don't like the face of HD (Ibiquity, and the faceless corporate broadcasters that rule the world these days), it doesn't mean the technology is corrupt, or the motives weren't pure. The superior quality and additional services offered by a digital platform benefit everyone...and there is no less benefit to terrestrial radio listeners than for satellite radio, digital tv, newspapers, or any of the other old-style technologies which have switched to digital delivery. THE FUTURE OF ALL MASS MEDIA IS DIGITAL. Deal with it, or don't. The Model T didn't give a damn whether the horses found it "corrupt".

You make a lot of good points, but it doesn't change the fact that the public has almost no interest in this particular piece of technology. HD radio sales are terrible. Some say more than a million sets have been sold, but that's largely based on polling data - not real sales numbers. Other say only 10,000 sets have been sold. My guess is it's somewhere on the lower end of that range. Regardless, the technology is just not top of mind to most consumers.

There are two reasons for the poor sales:
1. the companies supporting this technology have done a poor job of promoting it. Retailers don't care about it and don't do a good job selling what few radios they do have.

2. The cost of the radios are too high for most people to be interested in buying one. They'd rather buy and Ipod or smartphone. It's just that simple.

Until the price of the radios drop and the retailers get their act together this technology will remain dead in the water - regardless of how many stations broadcast in HD.

 

[raydofan]

I'm not talking about 'L Band'. I'm talking about the frequencies currently in use by TV @ 6 mHz each. Channels 2-13, to start with.

... and which are in use at present. I don't think anyone wants to bet on the V's vacating their analog channels per the timetable... when HDTV's are still in the over-500 dollar range, and 27" CRT's are $100... so, for all practical purposes, those channels are not avaialble for several years, and maybe more.

So, if you are in NYC, where Channel 10 is not in use (Channel 6 is being used by an LPTV) there is no possibility to even fit in a few experimental transmitters to even begin an exploration or discussion about
Digital Radio at a decent bitrate? The only issue I can foresee if there are other services using the same frequencies (pagers, etc) which could very possibly be multiplexed onto the new services...

 

[Mike Walker]

As I understand it, the government WILL NOT provide a digital tuner. They will provide FORTY DOLLARS so that YOU (and I) can buy one. Trouble is, they cost 200 bucks! Another reason I've got a hunch Congress will delay the analog shutoff. They don't want to be the ones to turn off grandma's tv!

 

[R.F. Burns]

I'm not talking about 'L Band'. I'm talking about the frequencies currently in use by TV @ 6 mHz each. Channels 2-13, to start with.

... and which are in use at present. I don't think anyone wants to bet on the V's vacating their analog channels per the timetable... when HDTV's are still in the over-500 dollar range, and 27" CRT's are $100... so, for all practical purposes, those channels are not avaialble for several years, and maybe more.

So, if you are in NYC, where Channel 10 is not in use (Channel 6 is being used by an LPTV) there is no possibility to even fit in a few experimental transmitters to even begin an exploration or discussion about
Digital Radio at a decent bitrate? The only issue I can foresee if there are other services using the same frequencies (pagers, etc) which could very possibly be multiplexed onto the new services...

If someone were to put a full power digital FM facility on the current channel 10, central Jersey and even Pennsylvanians would complain about interference to their channel 10. This has all be investigated. We are in a very crowded region. There are NO available frequencies. What you would have us do is make channel 10 a digital frequency in NY and maybe channel 9 in Philelphia and channel 12 in New Haven and on and on. You can't have broadcast stations spread out all over the spectrum depending on where one lives.

 

[raydofan]

I'm not talking about 'L Band'. I'm talking about the frequencies currently in use by TV @ 6 mHz each. Channels 2-13, to start with.

... and which are in use at present. I don't think anyone wants to bet on the V's vacating their analog channels per the timetable... when HDTV's are still in the over-500 dollar range, and 27" CRT's are $100... so, for all practical purposes, those channels are not avaialble for several years, and maybe more.

So, if you are in NYC, where Channel 10 is not in use (Channel 6 is being used by an LPTV) there is no possibility to even fit in a few experimental transmitters to even begin an exploration or discussion about
Digital Radio at a decent bitrate? The only issue I can foresee if there are other services using the same frequencies (pagers, etc) which could very possibly be multiplexed onto the new services...

If someone were to put a full power digital FM facility on the current channel 10, central Jersey and even Pennsylvanians would complain about interference to their channel 10. This has all be investigated. We are in a very crowded region. There are NO available frequencies. What you would have us do is make channel 10 a digital frequency in NY and maybe channel 9 in Philelphia and channel 12 in New Haven and on and on. You can't have broadcast stations spread out all over the spectrum depending on where one lives.

Why couldn't there be sets of frequencies depending on the region? Seems like that's what happens now anyway. There could be a wider 'spread sectrum' digital receiver. The radio can be programmed to 'hop'.

Investigation-exactly! That's the only way this can be sussed out.

It wouldn't be an issue once the TV frequencies are vacated.

 

[R.F. Burns]

I'm not talking about 'L Band'. I'm talking about the frequencies currently in use by TV @ 6 mHz each. Channels 2-13, to start with.

... and which are in use at present. I don't think anyone wants to bet on the V's vacating their analog channels per the timetable... when HDTV's are still in the over-500 dollar range, and 27" CRT's are $100... so, for all practical purposes, those channels are not avaialble for several years, and maybe more.

So, if you are in NYC, where Channel 10 is not in use (Channel 6 is being used by an LPTV) there is no possibility to even fit in a few experimental transmitters to even begin an exploration or discussion about
Digital Radio at a decent bitrate? The only issue I can foresee if there are other services using the same frequencies (pagers, etc) which could very possibly be multiplexed onto the new services...

If someone were to put a full power digital FM facility on the current channel 10, central Jersey and even Pennsylvanians would complain about interference to their channel 10. This has all be investigated. We are in a very crowded region. There are NO available frequencies. What you would have us do is make channel 10 a digital frequency in NY and maybe channel 9 in Philelphia and channel 12 in New Haven and on and on. You can't have broadcast stations spread out all over the spectrum depending on where one lives.

Why couldn't there be sets of frequencies depending on the region? Seems like that's what happens now anyway. There could be a wider 'spread sectrum' digital receiver. The radio can be programmed to 'hop'.

Investigation-exactly! That's the only way this can be sussed out.

It wouldn't be an issue once the TV frequencies are vacated.

Not gonna happen and by the way, not every station is leaving its VHF position. Some stations will remain and convert to digital. Would you have a TV signal in the middle of a radio broadcast band? Can you imagine the different specs for each? You think its a mess now?

 

[raydofan]

Not gonna happen and by the way, not every station is leaving its VHF position. Some stations will remain and convert to digital. Would you have a TV signal in the middle of a radio broadcast band? Can you imagine the different specs for each? You think its a mess now?

Wait a minute:

However, the problem with digital TV transmitters, as told to me by several TV station engineers, is that they just don't work very well below about 100 MHz (current low-band VHF is 54-88 MHz, with a hole in the 72-76 MHz range).  They remain stable at such low frequencies with extreme difficulty and are quite inefficient.  Digital transmitters in the high-VHF band (174-216 MHz) work only slightly better, but are stable enough that many TV stations will likely stay on those channels when the switch occurs.

So, what is the case here? I don't agree with the above statement. But I also submit that there is a way to manage both digital radio and TV interspersed with each other-like FM and VHF aircraft is now.

So, there is no digital keying system that can manage seperating a TV stream from a radio stream?