• 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

Interference Case #6 (AM)

A

audiophile.

Guest
User report from this message board:

Meanwhile, the digital hiss from WYHM's (1470) IBOC sidebands trashes WAZL (1490 kHz) just 10 miles from Hazleton, where WAZL is located.
http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,44763.10.html

If this report is accurate then WYHM's interference is cutting off 8 miles of WAZL's protected contour! These are NOT grandfathered or "shortspaced" stations.
 
audiophile. said:
User report from this message board:

Meanwhile, the digital hiss from WYHM's (1470) IBOC sidebands trashes WAZL (1490 kHz) just 10 miles from Hazleton, where WAZL is located.
http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,44763.10.html

If this report is accurate then WYHM's interference is cutting off 8 miles of WAZL's protected contour! These are NOT grandfathered or "shortspaced" stations.
Click to expand...

IF...and a big if at that, the report is accurate. Notice that the poster is a Ham. Which means he may be using a high-end radio, and may be hyper-sensitive to any sort of noise.

Or, there could be an issue. I certainly don't think it's worthy of one of your "case" numbers until it is verified.
 
I can show the interference on software. You want to see it?
 
IBOCRocks said:
IF...and a big if at that, the report is accurate. Notice that the poster is a Ham. Which means he may be using a high-end radio, and may be hyper-sensitive to any sort of noise.

Or, there could be an issue. I certainly don't think it's worthy of one of your "case" numbers until it is verified.
Click to expand...

Uh - the opinions of Ham operators are not to be considered suspicious or marginalized. Ham radio operators provide a tremendous service to the country when natural disasters occur - often times their voice is the only form of communication to or from a ravaged area. They deserve to be treated with respect.

High end radios are shielded against noise / have noise reduction circuitry incorporated. A good example is product detection - which - if incorporated into consumer receivers in a market penetrating fashion, would render the issue of audio quality on AM moot.

One thing we will all agree on - the bleeding text is excruciatingly annoying and hard to read. Puh-leeze: refrain from using it!!!
 
I think they called the text it "glow". It was my first time using it.

All points...I agree with 100%
 
All persons who favor HD on AM should use the IBOC font, as it is a very apt representation of what IBOC does to AM.
The data is still there, you just have to really WANT to decode it, despite the fuzzy garbage surrounding it.
 
Funny, I have a local station here which programs music for much of the day. I plan to record them tomorrow. Due to sideband splash you can't hear anything but noise on their first adjacents. Sounds almost as strong as the IBOC sidebands except at the end of the day it's still a analogue AM station.
 
Absolutely! This is why there shold still be on-site staff engineers! There are lots of overmodulated, hummy, gummy and you name it sounding stations. But report the spurious emmisions to the FCC directly, that the station may be rewarded for their operating standards directly.

Just because there are many examples of poor operation is no reason to adopt a standard that is lower.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom