• 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's REAL business plan?

True, except the FCC has repeatedly taken the public stance it won't kill analog radio, and doubling back on that would invite an almost inevitable Congressional probe. That's the nightmare scenario for Washington bureaucrats; they hate that. And where's the upside for the FCC to hand revenue over to iBiquity? Maybe I'm missing something here, but it seems to me that (a) the FCC would want the spectrum revenue instead, and (b) 20 mHz of spectrum isn't enough bandwidth to generate much revenue. The whole FM band represents the equivalent of three TV channels plus spare change.
 
The white papers from US Digital Radio spoke in a tone that sounded as though the future of radio was most assuredly digital.

Every aspect was focused on the eventual inevitabilty of digital only radio, with illustrations of the "future" digital-only
bandwidth mode.

Which is why I dedicated myself to debunking such a foolish premise.

If digital were so good we'd have stayed with pure digital communications, developed by Samuel Morse in 1844,
but we ADVANCED to analog.

As soon as "wireless" tried to use digital as adapted to RF by Marconi, the drawbacks and weak coverage due to
"quenched oscillations" were recognized and CW, based on analog technology was developed because it was an advancement.

The whole point of analog (in radio) is to let the maximum amount of information possible GET TO the "end point", and let the
human receiver analyze it. We all have the world's best A/D converter and signal processing in our head,
to let a computer fuddle around and give up so easily is a crime against all information technology.

Zeros and ones work well in a controlled, defined evironment, which RF propogation isn't.
 
If analog is so good on RF, what is it that is connecting your cell phone to the nearest tower? Why can amateur radio operators make worldwide connections with PSK31? What is connecting your laptop to the Internet? What is the Dish/DirectTV/Sirius/XM signal? And let's not forget HDTV.

IBOC is running at 1% of the analog level. And on FM one of the complaints is dropouts. Imagine the digital coverage of a digital only band running with a power level anywhere close to analog.
 
Hint: there is no such thing as digital. There is always "slew" There is a rise time and fall time to each "pulse".
HOW much redundancy is required for PSK to "work"?
CW puts all the energy on ONE "analog" frequency, and the EAR and BRAIN is better equipped to "analyze" an analog
audio waveform and interpret than letting a "logic level" discriminator decide if it's 1 or 0.

I'm NOT knocking digital. I live in world of both analog and digital, and can tell when each is or isn't "working".
With the old analog cell phone, I could hear through the flutter of a weak connection.
With digital, I can hear the phone "giving up" much too easily, and deciding there's no point in trying.

With analog TV I could "see" some snow, and the desired signal at whatever level.
With digital, I see a message at the top of the screen saying "NO SIGNAL" when I know darn well it's just not
enough of a stream to begin reconstructing the data.

I have no problem imagining a full power digital band, or how well it works, we have the testimony of many who now cannot receive television signals in places where they used to be able to.

Digital is great in a medium which WORKS for the mode, like water in a pipe.
In fiber optics it is absolutely the best, most loss-free and best way to move data.

Say, when are they bringing that fiber optic system around to my neighborhood? :D Haw haw.

You can transmit "pulses" of water pressure in a pipe quite nicely, but don't try it in mid-air.
Radio works as simply as wave motion in water when it's analog, and suffers exactly the same interference.
You cannot transmit "pressure" pulses through open air with water with any more sucess than digital in lower frequencies
of RF. Make the wavelength short enough and it starts to look and act like it's in a "pipe", and OK, my computer works on
3G or wifi. But it's not radio then, it's like the behavior of light.

When you can get all the QRN and ionospheric aspects to play nice, I'm ready to migrate radio to digital.
Until then, I'll take my lightning crashes, deep fades, and intermodulation over a blinking blue silent LED any day.
I can make a blue LED blink without all that overhead procesing and in "real-time", too, no 8 second delay.

"ONE" of the complaints? How 'bout the intrusive iboc noise in multipath spots on FM?
1% is too MUCH!
In a spectrum defined specifically for digital, I'm OK with anything you wanna try, and I'll buy one and try it out.
I could even be a big booster for THAT!
When someone tells me that a digital signal can be anywhere near (spectrum-wise) an analog signal, and I won't hear intermodulating and mixing with the analog, I have enough of an engineering background to see through such dishonesty.
 
A quck reply..

"HOW much redundancy is required for PSK to "work"?" For PSK31 it is zero. The amount of redundancy is dependant on how many errors you are willing to tolerate in the final result. See QST for an exercise in transmitting messages where errors are not allowed.

Wi-Fi sure is radio to me. If you are getting Wi-Fi over a 15 mile path then it is radio (2.4 GHz).

I am still waiting for FIOS here too :)
 
Hmm. PSK is a some of glorified teletype mode then....I have experience with a HAL RTTY decoder into a
Teletype model 15 and it's been a few years since the R390A has been "healthy", but I remember just about
how much "there" had be there, for that to work at 45.45 baud.

I was aware there are some forward-error correcting modes and just guessed PSK might be one of them.

For me, there's still world of difference above and below 30 mhz.

Radio bends, light refracts.

Here in the city, at ground level or 2nd floor, inside with a remote wifi card in window,
I was able to dx the nearby university wifi at 250' barely.

And woudn't you think that one in of the densest populations areas of a major, flat, city with a GRID street system,
they'd have figured out how to put in a fiber optic system by now?

It won't happen because the cable is here already.

It's too GOOD for the likes of us.

Data carriers would much rather squeeze our wallets on some "manufactured scarcity of bandwidth" via cable.
If the fiberoptic were already here, they'd charging for bandwidth and Gigs at some other bottleneck.
 
PSK uses a lot less bandwidth than RTTY. Just a little more than CW. There are several other modes with forward error correction. But they use more bandwidth.

Getting back on topic. I was always hoping that when broadcast went digital, it would be Eureka or DRM on it's own band. The HD hybrid we have now is neither fish nor fowl and will make nobody happy. But having said that, I do like the HD-2 channels, and for the HD-1, no picket fencing and full stereo (no blending).
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom