• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

iBiquity HD problems for adjacent signals?

S

SamSpade

In the Salt Lake City area, recently two signals at 99.5 FM and 98.7 FM have turned on iBiquity's equipment.

99.5's has been on for a while, and their signal is relayed to a translator in the southern portion of our large metro area.

So now, here in Salt Lake City, it seems the translator, located on Lake Mountain in Utah County, is dead. However, it is not - as we have received reports from a listener in that valley who can still hear it just fine.

Does two signals both using IBOC technology cause this to happen to farther-away signals?

Thanks!
-----------------------
Utah Radio News and Information
http://www.utahradioonline.com
http://www.radiogrind.com
 
Re: iBiquity HD problems for adjacent signals?-SOLUTION!

THE SOLUTION TO HD RADIO INTERFERENCE!
SEE MY OTHER POST HERE:
http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=667022&Board=hd
http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
The HD Radio interference will just get worse, as more stations sign on, unless we adopt a better system that does not jam other stations.
www.dreinc.com

> In the Salt Lake City area, recently two signals at 99.5 FM
> and 98.7 FM have turned on iBiquity's equipment.
>
> 99.5's has been on for a while, and their signal is relayed
> to a translator in the southern portion of our large metro
> area.
>
> So now, here in Salt Lake City, it seems the translator,
> located on Lake Mountain in Utah County, is dead. However,
> it is not - as we have received reports from a listener in
> that valley who can still hear it just fine.
>
> Does two signals both using IBOC technology cause this to
> happen to farther-away signals?
>
> Thanks!
> -----------------------
> Utah Radio News and Information
> http://www.utahradioonline.com
> http://www.radiogrind.com
>
 
Re: iBiquity HD problems for adjacent signals?-SOLUTION!

You have to understand that the big broadchasers behind iniquity want this effect because it takes away competition. Yes, you will lose whatever you hear on adjacent channels due to the IBOC being out of channel. It should really be called IBAC since it is NOT ON Channel. And if you have digital on 88.1 or 107.9 it will be both out of band and adjacent channel.... I cant see ever allowing an FM on 107.9 to go IBOC because of interference to aircraft navigation equipment. Same with IBOC in a city with a channel 6 TV, the IBOC will destroy the CH 6 audio.




> THE SOLUTION TO HD RADIO INTERFERENCE!
> SEE MY OTHER POST HERE:
> http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=667022&Board=hd
> http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
> The HD Radio interference will just get worse, as more
> stations sign on, unless we adopt a better system that does
> not jam other stations.
> www.dreinc.com
>
> > In the Salt Lake City area, recently two signals at 99.5
> FM
> > and 98.7 FM have turned on iBiquity's equipment.
> >
> > 99.5's has been on for a while, and their signal is
> relayed
> > to a translator in the southern portion of our large metro
>
> > area.
> >
> > So now, here in Salt Lake City, it seems the translator,
> > located on Lake Mountain in Utah County, is dead. However,
>
> > it is not - as we have received reports from a listener in
>
> > that valley who can still hear it just fine.
> >
> > Does two signals both using IBOC technology cause this to
> > happen to farther-away signals?
> >
> > Thanks!
> > -----------------------
> > Utah Radio News and Information
> > http://www.utahradioonline.com
> > http://www.radiogrind.com
> >
>
 
GOOD GRIEF! The mis information continues.....

Oh good grief, thats it! You got it! The companies investing in HD radio want to eliminate competition <Huge roll of eyes>.

Do you really think that there is a town that has air navagation on 108.1 with a 107.9 in town?

And right about the Channel six thing (NOT!). 500 watts of HD Radio will destroy 10,000 watts of analog channel 6 audio. (I dont think so)

Do you see your logic does not compute?



> You have to understand that the big broadchasers behind
> iniquity want this effect because it takes away competition.
> Yes, you will lose whatever you hear on adjacent channels
> due to the IBOC being out of channel. It should really be
> called IBAC since it is NOT ON Channel. And if you have
> digital on 88.1 or 107.9 it will be both out of band and
> adjacent channel.... I cant see ever allowing an FM on
> 107.9 to go IBOC because of interference to aircraft
> navigation equipment. Same with IBOC in a city with a
> channel 6 TV, the IBOC will destroy the CH 6 audio.
>
>
>
>
> > THE SOLUTION TO HD RADIO INTERFERENCE!
> > SEE MY OTHER POST HERE:
> > http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=667022&Board=hd
> > http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
> > The HD Radio interference will just get worse, as more
> > stations sign on, unless we adopt a better system that
> does
> > not jam other stations.
> > www.dreinc.com
> >
> > > In the Salt Lake City area, recently two signals at 99.5
>
> > FM
> > > and 98.7 FM have turned on iBiquity's equipment.
> > >
> > > 99.5's has been on for a while, and their signal is
> > relayed
> > > to a translator in the southern portion of our large
> metro
> >
> > > area.
> > >
> > > So now, here in Salt Lake City, it seems the translator,
>
> > > located on Lake Mountain in Utah County, is dead.
> However,
> >
> > > it is not - as we have received reports from a listener
> in
> >
> > > that valley who can still hear it just fine.
> > >
> > > Does two signals both using IBOC technology cause this
> to
> > > happen to farther-away signals?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > -----------------------
> > > Utah Radio News and Information
> > > http://www.utahradioonline.com
> > > http://www.radiogrind.com
> > >
> >
>
 
It all depends on the translator. If it is meant to serve Salt Lake then you should have no troubles. There are a lot of translators that are directional.

I will sight my example again.

Locally we have a 103.7 running HD Radio (25 miles away). In Chicago there is a 103.5 (90+ miles away). I have been able to get the 103.5 in stereo while the 103.7 is running HD.

People still dont realize that the HD Radio signal is ONE PERCENT POWER of the analog power. So if a station is 50kW the HD signal is 500 watts. If the stations is 6kW the HD signal is 60 watts. And so on.

There will be some distant stations that you may have trouble with, but these will not be in their protected coverage.

Does that help?



> In the Salt Lake City area, recently two signals at 99.5 FM
> and 98.7 FM have turned on iBiquity's equipment.
>
> 99.5's has been on for a while, and their signal is relayed
> to a translator in the southern portion of our large metro
> area.
>
> So now, here in Salt Lake City, it seems the translator,
> located on Lake Mountain in Utah County, is dead. However,
> it is not - as we have received reports from a listener in
> that valley who can still hear it just fine.
>
> Does two signals both using IBOC technology cause this to
> happen to farther-away signals?
>
> Thanks!
> -----------------------
> Utah Radio News and Information
> http://www.utahradioonline.com
> http://www.radiogrind.com
>
 
Re: GOOD GRIEF! The mis information continues.....

Thats a side benefit.... and yeah, I know that if theres a CH6 in town there will NOT be a radio station on 88.1 UNLESS, they share transmitter sites. I also know there is a guard area on the NAV band....... I'm not as dumb as I look. They did let me into the SBE, you know...


Oh good grief, thats it! You got it! The companies
> investing in HD radio want to eliminate competition .
>
> Do you really think that there is a town that has air
> navagation on 108.1 with a 107.9 in town?
>
> And right about the Channel six thing (NOT!). 500 watts of
> HD Radio will destroy 10,000 watts of analog channel 6
> audio. (I dont think so)
>
> Do you see your logic does not compute?
>
>
>
> > You have to understand that the big broadchasers behind
> > iniquity want this effect because it takes away
> competition.
> > Yes, you will lose whatever you hear on adjacent channels
>
> > due to the IBOC being out of channel. It should really be
>
> > called IBAC since it is NOT ON Channel. And if you have
> > digital on 88.1 or 107.9 it will be both out of band and
> > adjacent channel.... I cant see ever allowing an FM on
> > 107.9 to go IBOC because of interference to aircraft
> > navigation equipment. Same with IBOC in a city with a
> > channel 6 TV, the IBOC will destroy the CH 6 audio.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > THE SOLUTION TO HD RADIO INTERFERENCE!
> > > SEE MY OTHER POST HERE:
> > >
> http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=667022&Board=hd
> > > http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
> > > The HD Radio interference will just get worse, as more
> > > stations sign on, unless we adopt a better system that
> > does
> > > not jam other stations.
> > > www.dreinc.com
> > >
> > > > In the Salt Lake City area, recently two signals at
> 99.5
> >
> > > FM
> > > > and 98.7 FM have turned on iBiquity's equipment.
> > > >
> > > > 99.5's has been on for a while, and their signal is
> > > relayed
> > > > to a translator in the southern portion of our large
> > metro
> > >
> > > > area.
> > > >
> > > > So now, here in Salt Lake City, it seems the
> translator,
> >
> > > > located on Lake Mountain in Utah County, is dead.
> > However,
> > >
> > > > it is not - as we have received reports from a
> listener
> > in
> > >
> > > > that valley who can still hear it just fine.
> > > >
> > > > Does two signals both using IBOC technology cause this
>
> > to
> > > > happen to farther-away signals?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > -----------------------
> > > > Utah Radio News and Information
> > > > http://www.utahradioonline.com
> > > > http://www.radiogrind.com
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
 
Re: GOOD GRIEF! The mis information continues.....

Then why did you make the statement?


> Thats a side benefit.... and yeah, I know that if theres a
> CH6 in town there will NOT be a radio station on 88.1
> UNLESS, they share transmitter sites. I also know there is
> a guard area on the NAV band....... I'm not as dumb as I
> look. They did let me into the SBE, you know...
>
>
> Oh good grief, thats it! You got it! The companies
> > investing in HD radio want to eliminate competition .
> >
> > Do you really think that there is a town that has air
> > navagation on 108.1 with a 107.9 in town?
> >
> > And right about the Channel six thing (NOT!). 500 watts
> of
> > HD Radio will destroy 10,000 watts of analog channel 6
> > audio. (I dont think so)
> >
> > Do you see your logic does not compute?
> >
> >
> >
> > > You have to understand that the big broadchasers behind
> > > iniquity want this effect because it takes away
> > competition.
> > > Yes, you will lose whatever you hear on adjacent
> channels
> >
> > > due to the IBOC being out of channel. It should really
> be
> >
> > > called IBAC since it is NOT ON Channel. And if you have
>
> > > digital on 88.1 or 107.9 it will be both out of band and
>
> > > adjacent channel.... I cant see ever allowing an FM on
> > > 107.9 to go IBOC because of interference to aircraft
> > > navigation equipment. Same with IBOC in a city with a
> > > channel 6 TV, the IBOC will destroy the CH 6 audio.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > THE SOLUTION TO HD RADIO INTERFERENCE!
> > > > SEE MY OTHER POST HERE:
> > > >
> > http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=667022&Board=hd
> > > > http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
> > > > The HD Radio interference will just get worse, as more
>
> > > > stations sign on, unless we adopt a better system that
>
> > > does
> > > > not jam other stations.
> > > > www.dreinc.com
> > > >
> > > > > In the Salt Lake City area, recently two signals at
> > 99.5
> > >
> > > > FM
> > > > > and 98.7 FM have turned on iBiquity's equipment.
> > > > >
> > > > > 99.5's has been on for a while, and their signal is
> > > > relayed
> > > > > to a translator in the southern portion of our large
>
> > > metro
> > > >
> > > > > area.
> > > > >
> > > > > So now, here in Salt Lake City, it seems the
> > translator,
> > >
> > > > > located on Lake Mountain in Utah County, is dead.
> > > However,
> > > >
> > > > > it is not - as we have received reports from a
> > listener
> > > in
> > > >
> > > > > that valley who can still hear it just fine.
> > > > >
> > > > > Does two signals both using IBOC technology cause
> this
> >
> > > to
> > > > > happen to farther-away signals?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > -----------------------
> > > > > Utah Radio News and Information
> > > > > http://www.utahradioonline.com
> > > > > http://www.radiogrind.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
 
Re: GOOD GRIEF! The mis information continues.....

If you are in the 100 dbu circle, commonly known as the "blanketing contour," then you may have adjacent channel overload....with or without IBOC.
Going back to engineering 101, IF the IBOC system were to occupy bandwith OUTSIDE the 200 Khz channel, it would be ILLEGAL. AND, the FCC would not approve the system.
ClearChannel, Cumulus, and God combined would/could not change this!
And furthermore, why would station groups shoot themselves in the foot by advocating a system which destroys FM receiver performance? Do you argue that the engineering staffs of these companies DO NOT UNDERSTAND?? Last time I looked....there's some pretty damn smart engineers in these groups. And I think, if it were so obvious that IBOC is detrimental to FM performance, that these EXPERTS would have killed IBOC years ago.
Posting innuendo and voodoo is not helpful to the discussion. Leave the magic to the real magicians!




Thats a side benefit.... and yeah, I know that if theres a
> CH6 in town there will NOT be a radio station on 88.1
> UNLESS, they share transmitter sites. I also know there is
> a guard area on the NAV band....... I'm not as dumb as I
> look. They did let me into the SBE, you know...
>
>
> Oh good grief, thats it! You got it! The companies
> > investing in HD radio want to eliminate competition .
> >
> > Do you really think that there is a town that has air
> > navagation on 108.1 with a 107.9 in town?
> >
> > And right about the Channel six thing (NOT!). 500 watts
> of
> > HD Radio will destroy 10,000 watts of analog channel 6
> > audio. (I dont think so)
> >
> > Do you see your logic does not compute?
> >
> >
> >
> > > You have to understand that the big broadchasers behind
> > > iniquity want this effect because it takes away
> > competition.
> > > Yes, you will lose whatever you hear on adjacent
> channels
> >
> > > due to the IBOC being out of channel. It should really
> be
> >
> > > called IBAC since it is NOT ON Channel. And if you have
>
> > > digital on 88.1 or 107.9 it will be both out of band and
>
> > > adjacent channel.... I cant see ever allowing an FM on
> > > 107.9 to go IBOC because of interference to aircraft
> > > navigation equipment. Same with IBOC in a city with a
> > > channel 6 TV, the IBOC will destroy the CH 6 audio.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > THE SOLUTION TO HD RADIO INTERFERENCE!
> > > > SEE MY OTHER POST HERE:
> > > >
> > http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=667022&Board=hd
> > > > http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
> > > > The HD Radio interference will just get worse, as more
>
> > > > stations sign on, unless we adopt a better system that
>
> > > does
> > > > not jam other stations.
> > > > www.dreinc.com
> > > >
> > > > > In the Salt Lake City area, recently two signals at
> > 99.5
> > >
> > > > FM
> > > > > and 98.7 FM have turned on iBiquity's equipment.
> > > > >
> > > > > 99.5's has been on for a while, and their signal is
> > > > relayed
> > > > > to a translator in the southern portion of our large
>
> > > metro
> > > >
> > > > > area.
> > > > >
> > > > > So now, here in Salt Lake City, it seems the
> > translator,
> > >
> > > > > located on Lake Mountain in Utah County, is dead.
> > > However,
> > > >
> > > > > it is not - as we have received reports from a
> > listener
> > > in
> > > >
> > > > > that valley who can still hear it just fine.
> > > > >
> > > > > Does two signals both using IBOC technology cause
> this
> >
> > > to
> > > > > happen to farther-away signals?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > -----------------------
> > > > > Utah Radio News and Information
> > > > > http://www.utahradioonline.com
> > > > > http://www.radiogrind.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
 
> People still dont realize that the HD Radio signal is ONE
> PERCENT POWER of the analog power. So if a station is 50kW
> the HD signal is 500 watts. If the stations is 6kW the HD
> signal is 60 watts. And so on.

I believe your figures are incorrect. The IBOC signal is supposed to be 10% of the analog power. That is a big difference. A 50 KW HD rig has a 5000 watt digital signal. At the right HAAT, that is more than enough to go a very long way.

On a public radio news group that I subscribe to, reserved band stations in the northeast have reported losing some coverage in areas outside their protected contour, where the previously were able to be received, at least on a car radio. They aren't exactly happy about that, since the NPR stations are early adopters, and understandably want the ability to multicast. The official NPR party line is IBOC causes no problems, but they are slowly discovering that it can and does under the right conditions. Keep in mind that many reserved band stations are short spaced, and in the Northeast, that is more the norm rather than the exception. It probably isn’t a problem for stations in Wyoming.

Sorry to burst anyone's balloon.
 
> > People still dont realize that the HD Radio signal is ONE
> > PERCENT POWER of the analog power. So if a station is
> 50kW
> > the HD signal is 500 watts. If the stations is 6kW the HD
>
> > signal is 60 watts. And so on.
>
> I believe your figures are incorrect. The IBOC signal is
> supposed to be 10% of the analog power. That is a big
> difference. A 50 KW HD rig has a 5000 watt digital signal.
> At the right HAAT, that is more than enough to go a very
> long way.
>
> On a public radio news group that I subscribe to, reserved
> band stations in the northeast have reported losing some
> coverage in areas outside their protected contour, where the
> previously were able to be received, at least on a car
> radio. They aren't exactly happy about that, since the NPR
> stations are early adopters, and understandably want the
> ability to multicast. The official NPR party line is IBOC
> causes no problems, but they are slowly discovering that it
> can and does under the right conditions. Keep in mind that
> many reserved band stations are short spaced, and in the
> Northeast, that is more the norm rather than the exception.
> It probably isn’t a problem for stations in Wyoming.
>
> Sorry to burst anyone's balloon.
>
IBOC is 20Db down from main carrier. Ergo....1000 watts IBOC for 100,000 watts analog.
Sorry about your balloons.....
 
> > > People still dont realize that the HD Radio signal is
> ONE
> > > PERCENT POWER of the analog power. So if a station is
> > 50kW
> > > the HD signal is 500 watts. If the stations is 6kW the
> HD
> >
> > > signal is 60 watts. And so on.
> >
> > I believe your figures are incorrect. The IBOC signal is
> > supposed to be 10% of the analog power. That is a big
> > difference. A 50 KW HD rig has a 5000 watt digital signal.
>
> > At the right HAAT, that is more than enough to go a very
> > long way.
> >
> > On a public radio news group that I subscribe to, reserved
>
> > band stations in the northeast have reported losing some
> > coverage in areas outside their protected contour, where
> the
> > previously were able to be received, at least on a car
> > radio. They aren't exactly happy about that, since the
> NPR
> > stations are early adopters, and understandably want the
> > ability to multicast. The official NPR party line is IBOC
> > causes no problems, but they are slowly discovering that
> it
> > can and does under the right conditions. Keep in mind that
>
> > many reserved band stations are short spaced, and in the
> > Northeast, that is more the norm rather than the
> exception.
> > It probably isn’t a problem for stations in Wyoming.
> >
> > Sorry to burst anyone's balloon.
> >
> IBOC is 20Db down from main carrier. Ergo....1000 watts IBOC
> for 100,000 watts analog.
> Sorry about your balloons.....
>

Exactly my figures. Thank you.
 
> > IBOC is 20Db down from main carrier. Ergo....1000 watts
> IBOC
> > for 100,000 watts analog.
> > Sorry about your balloons.....
> >
>
> Exactly my figures. Thank you.
>
You are correct about the power levels, and I am mistaken. You're quite right, there is a LOT if misinformation out there, including what I just quoted. My source was wrong. I had to go to the NRSC web site for the correct figures.

None the less, the reports of interference problems outside of protected contours are real, at least on the reserved FM band where short spacing and overcrowding is the norm. I didn't make up that report. It was reported by the CE of one of the stations in question. I tend to believe him. He has no reason to lead us otherwise, since the particular station in question is a NPR affiliate.

There is no HD activity in my part of the country, but 150 miles away, there are several HD stations. So far, I have noticed no problem on FM. But on AM, HD stations do transmit a very loud hissing on their adjacent channels. It is clearly receivable where I am. While there is nothing on either channel that I'd want to listen to, I can see how the cumulative use of this could be a problem.

I hope the technology works, but so far, I'm not a believer. I hope to be proven wrong, but my gut tells me there has to be a better way to do this.
 
> > IBOC is 20Db down from main carrier. Ergo....1000 watts
> IBOC
> > for 100,000 watts analog.
> > Sorry about your balloons.....
> >
>
> Exactly my figures. Thank you.
>
You are correct about the power levels, and I am mistaken. You're quite right, there is a LOT if misinformation out there, including what I just quoted. My source was wrong. I had to go to the NRSC web site for the correct figures.

None the less, the reports of interference problems outside of protected contours are real, at least on the reserved FM band where short spacing and overcrowding is the norm. I didn't make up that report. It was reported by the CE of one of the stations in question. I tend to believe him. He has no reason to lead us otherwise, since the particular station in question is a NPR affiliate.

There is no HD activity in my part of the country, but 150 miles away, there are several HD stations. So far, I have noticed no problem on FM. But on AM, HD stations do transmit a very loud hissing on their adjacent channels. It is clearly receivable where I am. While there is nothing on either channel that I'd want to listen to, I can see how the cumulative use of this could be a problem.

I hope the technology works, but so far, I'm not a believer. I hope to be proven wrong, but my gut tells me there has to be a better way to do this.
 
Re: GOOD GRIEF! The mis information continues.....

> And furthermore, why would station groups shoot themselves
> in the foot by advocating a system which destroys FM
> receiver performance? Do you argue that the engineering
> staffs of these companies DO NOT UNDERSTAND?? Last time I
> looked....there's some pretty damn smart engineers in these
> groups. And I think, if it were so obvious that IBOC is
> detrimental to FM performance, that these EXPERTS would have
> killed IBOC years ago.

Unfortunately there are few station groups where the engineers make the calls. 9 times out of 10 the decisions are made by the corporate bean-counters who know jack diddley about radio.

I'm familiar with the original poster's situation, since I'm in the same area. Within the translator station's predicted grade A contour, the translator is almost totally lost under the IBOC hash. If you're driving and you hit it just right, you can hear the translator for a moment. Before the IBOC came on, the translator came in perfectly. Why that is I don't know. There don't seem to be the same issues with other IBOC stations and distant second adjacents.


Maybe all this IBOC stuff worked fine in the lab. This is the real world.
 
Re: GOOD GRIEF! The mis information continues-YUP, SURE DOES!

The FCC has not yet given final approval to the HD radio proposal. FCC MM Docket No. 99-325 (the HD Radio standard) has not yet been approved.
If the RIAA has it's way HD Radio may have to change the codec for rights protection. That is still being negotiated, and may obsolete all existing HD radios.
The digital HD Radio signal occupies over 400 kHz. Even iBiquity and the HD Radio cartel acknowledge this.
htp://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
You are right about the misinformation coming from the HD Radio cartel.
Question the "information" from a car salesman selling Yugo's.
He has an interest in making the sale, and a quota to fill to satisfy his employer. The employer has an interest in pushing the product.

Question authority, they may have an ulterior motive, or hidden agenda.

> If you are in the 100 dbu circle, commonly known as the
> "blanketing contour," then you may have adjacent channel
> overload....with or without IBOC.
> Going back to engineering 101, IF the IBOC system were to
> occupy bandwith OUTSIDE the 200 Khz channel, it would be
> ILLEGAL. AND, the FCC would not approve the system.
> ClearChannel, Cumulus, and God combined would/could not
> change this!
> And furthermore, why would station groups shoot themselves
> in the foot by advocating a system which destroys FM
> receiver performance? Do you argue that the engineering
> staffs of these companies DO NOT UNDERSTAND?? Last time I
> looked....there's some pretty damn smart engineers in these
> groups. And I think, if it were so obvious that IBOC is
> detrimental to FM performance, that these EXPERTS would have
> killed IBOC years ago.
> Posting innuendo and voodoo is not helpful to the
> discussion. Leave the magic to the real magicians!
>
>
>
>
> Thats a side benefit.... and yeah, I know that if theres a
> > CH6 in town there will NOT be a radio station on 88.1
> > UNLESS, they share transmitter sites. I also know there
> is
> > a guard area on the NAV band....... I'm not as dumb as I
> > look. They did let me into the SBE, you know...
> >
> >
> > Oh good grief, thats it! You got it! The companies
> > > investing in HD radio want to eliminate competition .
> > >
> > > Do you really think that there is a town that has air
> > > navagation on 108.1 with a 107.9 in town?
> > >
> > > And right about the Channel six thing (NOT!). 500 watts
>
> > of
> > > HD Radio will destroy 10,000 watts of analog channel 6
> > > audio. (I dont think so)
> > >
> > > Do you see your logic does not compute?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > You have to understand that the big broadchasers
> behind
> > > > iniquity want this effect because it takes away
> > > competition.
> > > > Yes, you will lose whatever you hear on adjacent
> > channels
> > >
> > > > due to the IBOC being out of channel. It should
> really
> > be
> > >
> > > > called IBAC since it is NOT ON Channel. And if you
> have
> >
> > > > digital on 88.1 or 107.9 it will be both out of band
> and
> >
> > > > adjacent channel.... I cant see ever allowing an FM
> on
> > > > 107.9 to go IBOC because of interference to aircraft
> > > > navigation equipment. Same with IBOC in a city with a
>
> > > > channel 6 TV, the IBOC will destroy the CH 6 audio.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > THE SOLUTION TO HD RADIO INTERFERENCE!
> > > > > SEE MY OTHER POST HERE:
> > > > >
> > >
> http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=667022&Board=hd
> > > > > http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
> > > > > The HD Radio interference will just get worse, as
> more
> >
> > > > > stations sign on, unless we adopt a better system
> that
> >
> > > > does
> > > > > not jam other stations.
> > > > > www.dreinc.com
> > > > >
> > > > > > In the Salt Lake City area, recently two signals
> at
> > > 99.5
> > > >
> > > > > FM
> > > > > > and 98.7 FM have turned on iBiquity's equipment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 99.5's has been on for a while, and their signal
> is
> > > > > relayed
> > > > > > to a translator in the southern portion of our
> large
> >
> > > > metro
> > > > >
> > > > > > area.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So now, here in Salt Lake City, it seems the
> > > translator,
> > > >
> > > > > > located on Lake Mountain in Utah County, is dead.
> > > > However,
> > > > >
> > > > > > it is not - as we have received reports from a
> > > listener
> > > > in
> > > > >
> > > > > > that valley who can still hear it just fine.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does two signals both using IBOC technology cause
> > this
> > >
> > > > to
> > > > > > happen to farther-away signals?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > -----------------------
> > > > > > Utah Radio News and Information
> > > > > > http://www.utahradioonline.com
> > > > > > http://www.radiogrind.com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by SuperSound on 02/28/06 10:10 AM.</FONT></P>
 
Wheres the proof...AGAIN

OK we have asked you multiple times to back up your statements. None have shown up yet. Still waiting.......

> The FCC has not yet given final approval to the HD radio
> proposal. FCC MM Docket No. 99-325 (the HD Radio standard)
> has not yet been approved.
> If the RIAA has it's way HD Radio may have to change the
> codec for rights protection. That is still being negotiated,
> and may obsolete all existing HD radios.
> The digital HD Radio signal occupies over 400 kHz. Even
> iBiquity and the HD Radio cartel acknowledge this.
> htp://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
> You are right about the misinformation coming from the HD
> Radio cartel.
> Question the "information" from a car salesman selling
> Yugo's.
> He has an interest in making the sale, and a quota to fill
> to satisfy his employer. The employer has an interest in
> pushing the product.
>
> Question authority, they may have an ulterior motive, or
> hidden agenda.
>
> > If you are in the 100 dbu circle, commonly known as the
> > "blanketing contour," then you may have adjacent channel
> > overload....with or without IBOC.
> > Going back to engineering 101, IF the IBOC system were to
> > occupy bandwith OUTSIDE the 200 Khz channel, it would be
> > ILLEGAL. AND, the FCC would not approve the system.
> > ClearChannel, Cumulus, and God combined would/could not
> > change this!
> > And furthermore, why would station groups shoot themselves
>
> > in the foot by advocating a system which destroys FM
> > receiver performance? Do you argue that the engineering
> > staffs of these companies DO NOT UNDERSTAND?? Last time I
> > looked....there's some pretty damn smart engineers in
> these
> > groups. And I think, if it were so obvious that IBOC is
> > detrimental to FM performance, that these EXPERTS would
> have
> > killed IBOC years ago.
> > Posting innuendo and voodoo is not helpful to the
> > discussion. Leave the magic to the real magicians!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thats a side benefit.... and yeah, I know that if theres
> a
> > > CH6 in town there will NOT be a radio station on 88.1
> > > UNLESS, they share transmitter sites. I also know there
>
> > is
> > > a guard area on the NAV band....... I'm not as dumb as I
>
> > > look. They did let me into the SBE, you know...
> > >
> > >
> > > Oh good grief, thats it! You got it! The companies
> > > > investing in HD radio want to eliminate competition .
>
> > > >
> > > > Do you really think that there is a town that has air
> > > > navagation on 108.1 with a 107.9 in town?
> > > >
> > > > And right about the Channel six thing (NOT!). 500
> watts
> >
> > > of
> > > > HD Radio will destroy 10,000 watts of analog channel 6
>
> > > > audio. (I dont think so)
> > > >
> > > > Do you see your logic does not compute?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > You have to understand that the big broadchasers
> > behind
> > > > > iniquity want this effect because it takes away
> > > > competition.
> > > > > Yes, you will lose whatever you hear on adjacent
> > > channels
> > > >
> > > > > due to the IBOC being out of channel. It should
> > really
> > > be
> > > >
> > > > > called IBAC since it is NOT ON Channel. And if you
> > have
> > >
> > > > > digital on 88.1 or 107.9 it will be both out of band
>
> > and
> > >
> > > > > adjacent channel.... I cant see ever allowing an FM
>
> > on
> > > > > 107.9 to go IBOC because of interference to aircraft
>
> > > > > navigation equipment. Same with IBOC in a city with
> a
> >
> > > > > channel 6 TV, the IBOC will destroy the CH 6 audio.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > THE SOLUTION TO HD RADIO INTERFERENCE!
> > > > > > SEE MY OTHER POST HERE:
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=667022&Board=hd
> > > > > > http://worldsupercaster.blogspot.com
> > > > > > The HD Radio interference will just get worse, as
> > more
> > >
> > > > > > stations sign on, unless we adopt a better system
> > that
> > >
> > > > > does
> > > > > > not jam other stations.
> > > > > > www.dreinc.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > In the Salt Lake City area, recently two signals
>
> > at
> > > > 99.5
> > > > >
> > > > > > FM
> > > > > > > and 98.7 FM have turned on iBiquity's equipment.
>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 99.5's has been on for a while, and their signal
>
> > is
> > > > > > relayed
> > > > > > > to a translator in the southern portion of our
> > large
> > >
> > > > > metro
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > area.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So now, here in Salt Lake City, it seems the
> > > > translator,
> > > > >
> > > > > > > located on Lake Mountain in Utah County, is
> dead.
> > > > > However,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > it is not - as we have received reports from a
> > > > listener
> > > > > in
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > that valley who can still hear it just fine.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does two signals both using IBOC technology
> cause
> > > this
> > > >
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > happen to farther-away signals?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > -----------------------
> > > > > > > Utah Radio News and Information
> > > > > > > http://www.utahradioonline.com
> > > > > > > http://www.radiogrind.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
 
Re: GOOD GRIEF! The mis information continues.....

I didnt reaalize that translators sudden have protected coverage now. When did that happen?



>
> Unfortunately there are few station groups where the
> engineers make the calls. 9 times out of 10 the decisions
> are made by the corporate bean-counters who know jack
> diddley about radio.
>
> I'm familiar with the original poster's situation, since I'm
> in the same area. Within the translator station's predicted
> grade A contour, the translator is almost totally lost under
> the IBOC hash. If you're driving and you hit it just right,
> you can hear the translator for a moment. Before the IBOC
> came on, the translator came in perfectly. Why that is I
> don't know. There don't seem to be the same issues with
> other IBOC stations and distant second adjacents.
>
>
> Maybe all this IBOC stuff worked fine in the lab. This is
> the real world.
>
 
Re: GOOD GRIEF! The mis information continues.....

> Going back to engineering 101, IF the IBOC system were to
> occupy bandwith OUTSIDE the 200 Khz channel, it would be
> ILLEGAL.
______________

The "hybrid" version of FM+HD Radio(IBOC) has digital carriers in the spectra from +/-129 kHz to +/-198 kHz from the analog center frequency, so the spectral bandwidth of an FM+HD station is nearly 400 kHz.

The digital carriers of AM+HD Radio occupy spectra from about +/-10 kHz to +/-15 kHz from the AM analog carrier frequency. The digital carriers can cause severe interference to adjacent channel AM signals, which is the reason AM HD is not permitted at night.

The amplitudes of these digitals carriers fall within the occupied spectrum "mask" authorized by the FCC.

Here is a link to a paper showing the spectra of these systems, and how to measure it...

http://www.broadcastsignallab.com/Evaluating Emissions of IBOC Transmitter.pdf

Richard Fry
RF Applications Engr, Harris Broadcast Div (retired)
 
Re: GOOD GRIEF! The mis information continues.....

> > Going back to engineering 101, IF the IBOC system were to
> > occupy bandwith OUTSIDE the 200 Khz channel, it would be
> > ILLEGAL.
> ______________
>
> The "hybrid" version of FM+HD Radio(IBOC) has digital
> carriers in the spectra from +/-129 kHz to +/-198 kHz from
> the analog center frequency, so the spectral bandwidth of an
> FM+HD station is nearly 400 kHz.
>
> The digital carriers of AM+HD Radio occupy spectra from
> about +/-10 kHz to +/-15 kHz from the AM analog carrier
> frequency. The digital carriers can cause severe
> interference to adjacent channel AM signals, which is the
> reason AM HD is not permitted at night.
>
> The amplitudes of these digitals carriers fall within the
> occupied spectrum "mask" authorized by the FCC.
>
> Here is a link to a paper showing the spectra of these
> systems, and how to measure it...
>
http://www.broadcastsignal> lab.com/Evaluating Emissions of IBOC Transmitter.pdf
>
>
> Richard Fry
> RF Applications Engr, Harris Broadcast Div (retired)
>

You are right, and I stand corrected. Thanks for the link!! I shall be careful, in the future, to state "emissions OUTSIDE the mask."
 
Re: GOOD GRIEF! The mis information continues.....

> > Going back to engineering 101, IF the IBOC system were to
> > occupy bandwith OUTSIDE the 200 Khz channel, it would be
> > ILLEGAL.
> ______________
>
> The "hybrid" version of FM+HD Radio(IBOC) has digital
> carriers in the spectra from +/-129 kHz to +/-198 kHz from
> the analog center frequency, so the spectral bandwidth of an
> FM+HD station is nearly 400 kHz.
>
> The digital carriers of AM+HD Radio occupy spectra from
> about +/-10 kHz to +/-15 kHz from the AM analog carrier
> frequency. The digital carriers can cause severe
> interference to adjacent channel AM signals, which is the
> reason AM HD is not permitted at night.
>
> The amplitudes of these digitals carriers fall within the
> occupied spectrum "mask" authorized by the FCC.
>
> Here is a link to a paper showing the spectra of these
> systems, and how to measure it...
>
http://www.broadcastsignal> lab.com/Evaluating%20Emissions%20of%20IBOC%20Transmitter.pdf
>
>
> Richard Fry
> RF Applications Engr, Harris Broadcast Div (retired)
>


Great link Richard. Thank you very much!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom