INTERFERENCE GENERATORS - LET'S FIX 'EM!

[Savage]

Okay, let's try this. If there is any hypocrisy going on, this should smoke it out.

As I understand the HD-AM arguments, they are (a) the AM band is overcrowded with too-many "interference generator" signals, and (b) nobody listens to AM skywave any more except for pocket-protector geek hobbyist losers. (Or something like that.)

Well, fine. Let's take the pro-IBOCers' arguments at face value.

I would say that by definition, an "interference generator" would be a 50kw AM which occupies three channels where it used to occupy one. So: since "distant listening" is antique and unnecessary, let's make all 50kw AMs elect ONE option: you may either continue to run 50kw at night analog only, or, if you'd like to tie your destiny to HD-AM, you must cut night power to 5kw. Stations would elect with a simple notification by letter to the FCC, and their operating authority would be thus revised.

So which do you want? Distant listening or HD? Take your pick. You can't have it both ways.

 

[hipporadio]

Bob... I recently attended a Crosley memorial dinner in Cincinnati. There was plenty of history on display there about Mr. Crosley; his business acumen, radio products, and WLW. Recalled, were the years when WLW enjoyed “experimental” authority to transmit with 500kw! Granted, they had exclusive use of their 700khz frequency in the continental U.S. at that time, but still faced a decision by the FCC to return to 50kw operation – thus rendering an expensive investment in “super-power”—USELESS!

And the reason given by the Commission? ...NOT interference to others ON 700khz – rather the resulting occupation of, and interference to, ADJACENT CHANNELS. The FCC wisely concluded that WLW at “super-power” levels SHOULD NOT be entitled to confiscate [in the practical sense] ADDITIONAL CHANNELS for its mere enjoyment of exceptional coverage. Now further consider at that time – the AM band was FAR-LESS POPULATED, and the results from such an R.F. “Gorilla” would have been less detrimental.

Today, as WLW diminishes the AURAL QUALITY of its analog signal and cranks-out IBOC “HD” for the “enjoyment” of a hundred or so “HD enthusiasts” in and near Cincy [many who are CCU employees] – WLW is effectively-inflicting the very-damage [day AND night] the FCC prohibited them from pursuing in their original ruling! The AM band between 1000-1220khz is now clearly A MESS after sunset... For ANY competent person employed within an R.F. technology position to come on this board and allege the opposite, and maintain that: “I just can’t hear the IBOC interference”, is not only disingenuous—but borderline outrageous! I don’t believe for a moment that such is an anecdote similar to some alcoholic in denial—it is pure “calculation” and corporate radio politics at its most shameless level. In short: continued denial may possibly just make the problem “go away”.

Mr. Savage has EVERY RIGHT to his own outrage...When one invests his precious capital within the prevailing FCC rules of that time and improves a facility - only to see it “smacked” early and late in the day, and obliterated by the narrow self-interest of a “hoggish” neighbor at night; his professional [and moral] outrage SHOULD be noticed, understood, and taken-stock of! I can easily identify DOZENS of other victims of this self-serving “science-fair project”—an inconsiderate, unpopular, and commercially-doomed technology which advances the cause of “the public interest” at the most-insignificant of levels.

 

[Savage]

Thanks, Hippo. You know: I'm so fond of this skywave-doesn't-matter argument, I think maybe it's time for a formal Petition For Rulemaking to this effect. We'll marshall our technical and legal arguments and draft this and make sure it hits the FCC rulemaking desk soon.

50kw AMs: if the argument is, skywave/distant listening is "irrelevant in this era of the internet, cellphone media and other services," either you need distant coverage - or you don't. If you run HD at night, you drop to 5kw. If you want to stay analog the implication is, you ARE interested in distant listeners. You must elect and can't have both. We'll append the HD-AM interference argument as Exhibit One.

There are many, many AMs licensed to major markets with 5kw, and many would give "a major appendage" to be able to run NDA at night, so the old 50kw "interference generators" would still be getting a sweet deal to operate with only one stick at 5kw. Example; why does WHAM need 50kw NDA to serve Rochester, a city of 230,000, and a home County of 775,000? They'd do great LOCALLY with 5kw nondirectional. Coastal stations like WBZ and WOR could still fold their signals over (voluntarily DA) into the populated metro areas to make sure the field is sufficient to achieve HD-lock on those forthcoming "fourth generation receivers."

 

[Radioman100]

The argument for 50kW AMs these days isn't distant listening, it's building penetration and overcoming noise from computers and other modern household appliances.

I do completely agree though that a station like WHAM in a market like Rochester has no need for 50kW at night. A lot of the established AM allocations make absolutely no sense.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

The argument for 50kW AMs these days isn't distant listening, it's building penetration and overcoming noise from computers and other modern household appliances.
I do completely agree though that a station like WHAM in a market like Rochester has no need for 50kW at night. A lot of the established AM allocations make absolutely no sense.

But,

building penetration and overcoming noise from computers and other modern household appliances.

is precisely one of the many defects and shortcomings of HD radio!

A lot of the established AM allocations make absolutely no sense.

Perhaps the FCC should reallocate the entire AM and FM bands to accommodate HD stations that are now at least 3 and sometimes (locally) 5 channels wide. :

 

[clouseau]

Perhaps the FCC should reallocate the entire AM and FM bands to accommodate HD stations that are now at least 3 and sometimes (locally) 5 channels wide. :

And now I guess it is politically incorrect to "Assault" you by questioning your "5 channels wide assertion", right?

Repeating an innacurracy make it a repeaterd innacuracy, Not a Fact.

Clouseau

 

[Tom Wells]

Let's count the noisy channels.

A- 20 khz below offender. High pitched hiss, more or less ruining reception for many radios.
B- 10 khz below offender. Medium to high pitched hiss, completely obliterating reception for all radios.
C- Offenders' rightful spectrum. Hiss degrades audio as well as clipped high end.
D- 10 khz above offender. Medium to high pitched hiss, completely obliterating reception for all radios.
E- 20 khz above offender. High pitched hiss, more or less ruining reception for many radios.

As I count them, there are 5 channels being occupied by 1 station, which used to fit in 1/5 of the space now used.
By gum, it looks like Supercaster CAN count.

How do you tally these up, inspector?

 

[rbrucecarter5]

The narrowest band receiver I own is a Hammarlund SP-600JX. I can tune the IF bandwidth down to 300 Hz. But for all practical purposes, 1.6kHz is about the lowest I can use and still have an intelligible signal. +/- 20 kHz hiss from IBOC second adjacents is still clearly audible in 1.6 kHz bandwidth mode.

 

[4dude]

I say DISTANT LISTENING....

 

[Tom Wells]

I say DISTANT LISTENING....

You're RIGHT, Dude! It is distant listening which makes MW's particular ADVANTAGES important to be used wisely!

Any old freq can work for a short haul, but a co-ordinated usefulness of such a scare commodity such as was devised
in the 20's and 30's is something that would never have happened in such a time as now, when ideals are sacrificed for expediencies.

It is not the job of artists to protect their art from the crass ones who would flick boogers on the canvas.
RF interference of our (not my) adoption, welcomed into your homes has precipitated this.
Why have you engineers not caused the FCC to act upon the increasing QRM, as the laws already exist!

Why ARE there SCR dimmers not fully encased in METAL with incredible bypass and choke circuits?
This is is all fixable, and I reject the argument that's it's not, because I fix things all day long in electronics.
I hate lazy answers and lazy minds.

I hate it most when YET another "electrical " technology is advanced which seems to have nothing but utter disrespect, outright contempt and ignorance of its own background, and innate underlying nature, which is hertzian waves; ie radio.

 

[Radioman100]

Why ARE there SCR dimmers not fully encased in METAL with incredible bypass and choke circuits?
This is is all fixable, and I reject the argument that's it's not, because I fix things all day long in electronics.
I hate lazy answers and lazy minds.

Practicality, not laziness is the reason. Adding parts adds cost.

 

[JIBGUY]

---
------------------------------------------
And step #2.... get as many station owners to sign it/be a part of it, as possible. Should be lots of those willing.

 

[Tom Wells]

Why ARE there SCR dimmers not fully encased in METAL with incredible bypass and choke circuits?
This is is all fixable, and I reject the argument that's it's not, because I fix things all day long in electronics.
I hate lazy answers and lazy minds.

Practicality, not laziness is the reason. Adding parts adds cost.

The FRC/FCC established standards that more or less eliminated radiation from the local oscillators that was ruining reception.
They can MANDATE compliance which manufacturers must meet, however cheaply they can engineer it is their problem.
The FCC has all the tools they need to fine these offenders, and ban sale and import.
And what's the excuse for using switching power supplies with no bypassing on these LED traffic signals?
LEDs make no noise in conducting DC. The practicality of parts count is irrelevant, the offending devices are many.

Interference is impractical, not following good engineering practice is lazy.

I like the idea that HD 50kw AM run 5kw at night. They can't have it both ways.
If you adopt a "local" service modulation mode, you must relinquish your 30-odd state wide-area night service.
That's fully fair. If you don't care enough to serve a wide audience, you have no right to beat up listeners of other stations.

 

[Radioman100]

The FRC/FCC established standards that more or less eliminated radiation from the local oscillators that was ruining reception.
They can MANDATE compliance which manufacturers must meet, however cheaply they can engineer it is their problem.
The FCC has all the tools they need to fine these offenders, and ban sale and import.
And what's the excuse for using switching power supplies with no bypassing on these LED traffic signals?
LEDs make no noise in conducting DC. The practicality of parts count is irrelevant, the offending devices are many.

Interference is impractical, not following good engineering practice is lazy.

I say go get 'em cowboy! Let us know how it goes.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Perhaps the FCC should reallocate the entire AM and FM bands to accommodate HD stations that are now at least 3 and sometimes (locally) 5 channels wide. :

And now I guess it is politically incorrect to "Assault" you by questioning your "5 channels wide assertion", right?

Repeating an innacurracy make it a repeaterd innacuracy, Not a Fact.

Clouseau

The 5 channel wide HD interference in primary coverage areas close to HD stations has been widely reported here as well as elsewhere.

Yes, HD supporters

Repeating an innacurracy make it a repeaterd innacuracy, Not a Fact.

What is a "repeaterd innacuracy". A fraudian slip?

 

[davideduardo]

I like the idea that HD 50kw AM run 5kw at night. They can't have it both ways.
If you adopt a "local" service modulation mode, you must relinquish your 30-odd state wide-area night service.
That's fully fair. If you don't care enough to serve a wide audience, you have no right to beat up listeners of other stations.

5 kw is not enough to cover adequately most major metros... in LA, only a couplle of the 50's fullly cover the market at night, and those with less power and high frequencies are relegated to doing niche formats, as they don't have the ablitity to compete. At 5 kw, you would put many stations out of business or reduce them to brokered programming.

Remember, many cities don't have the ground conductivity of Dallas or Wichita... and stations on the higher frequencies don't have the low-dial advantage. Were the 50 kw station on 1500 in DX to drop to 5 kw, it would essentially be a Bethesda local station, for example. Even at 50, the station could not cover the whole market, and they ended up moving the format to FM where the get adequate coverage.

 

[hipporadio]

I like the idea that HD 50kw AMs run 5kw at night. They can't have it both ways!

5 kw is not enough to cover adequately most major metros... At 5 kw, you would put many stations out of business or reduce them to brokered programming.

GOOD! ...Let the HERD-THINNING begin! And you corporate radio types can “step-up” for a change.

WISHFUL THINKING, right ??? Possibly NOT... Once the “Fantasy Hour” meets cancellation in its current time-slot, I could delightfully-imagine some basic Darwinism in their not-so-rosy future If “YOU” don’t take the initiative – the marketplace eventually WILL!

 

[Savage]

Fine. So if 5kw doesn't do the job in major markets with larger landmass to cover, reduce the former 50kw to some power level, be it 7kw or 11,350 watts, which will get the job done for them LOCALLY. Any competent consulting engineer can calculate this in such a fashion that effects a reasonable compromise, so the HD-AM station can reach its local listeners without throwing adjacent-channel hash onto out-of-market stations. Like I said before - either HD-AM means the end of skywave service or it doesn't. If the IBOC crowd isn't being hypocritical they should applaud this suggestion. It reduces the interference they decry.

The point here is: 50kw was the number selected 75 years ago as the maximum AM power level to achieve good groundwave and skywave coverage. If we're deciding as an industry that skywave is antiquated and unncessary, then the nighttime power levels should be reduced to comport with "the new HD realities." By the way, if a 50kw HD-AM is causing adjacent channel DAYTIME problems, the same principle should apply then as well.



The burden of proof should be shifted to the interfering station to PROVE that they are not interfering with the groundwave of the distant station(s), rather than the current "you must first cut down the tallest tree in the forest...with a HERRING" burden of proof cynically being imposed on the station who has lost coverage.

The you're-only-entitled-to-your-NIF argument is fallacious. The rules never envisioned that the 5 and 2.5 contours would be totally unusable under ANY conditions. And the measured NIF varies widely in physical coverage from season to season due to conductivity changes.

 

[Savage]

Wait a minute!!!

HYPOCRISY ALERT! HYPOCRISY ALERT!!

Last I checked, the FCC had this concept called "City (or community) Of License." So, let me get this straight:

An analog AM who wants to reach the retail trading area commonly referred to as "the market" is sternly told by the IBOC crowd: "you're only entitled to your puny little NIF, you twerp," and interfering stations can even invade THAT with impunity unless the victim resorts to expensive litigation.

But the suggestion that an HD-AM 50kw'er who is throwing IBOC spurs on adjacent channels for hundreds of miles should get a pass, because "they need that 50kw to cover THE MARKET at night." Hear that? NOT their "City Of License," but THEIR MARKET.

So it appears SOME (If not most) HD-AM proponents don't think the rules should apply to them but expect analog broadcasters to silently accept disastrous interference from adjacent channels.

Well, as I said first in this thread: "if there's any hypocrisy going on, this should smoke it out." I don't know about you guys but my "smoke detector" is screaming.

 

[davideduardo]

The point here is: 50kw was the number selected 75 years ago as the maximum AM power level to achieve good groundwave and skywave coverage. If we're deciding as an industry that skywave is antiquated and unncessary, then the nighttime power levels should be reduced to comport with "the new HD realities." By the way, if a 50kw HD-AM is causing adjacent channel DAYTIME problems, the same principle should apply then as well.

Anecdote... when working with a group in Argentina, we wanted to cover Buenos Aires with a signal that could be heard clearly everywhere in the city (In Latin America, cities grow outwards with the population; there are generally no sepaately incorporated suburbs) and so we initially decided on 100 kw on 710. But that proved inadequate to cover the city, so a passive reflector (quarter wave unexcited tower a quarter wave from the main tower opposite from the direction towards the city) was added, making a fat lobe towards downtown. That was enough to adequately cover the city on a good frequency with a wet, marshy ground.

LA only has two 50's that cover adequately the whole market. 50 kw is not enough in mpost larger cities, which is part of why why news talk is moving to FM...