KRKO - Did I Miss The Memo?

[Andrew Skotdal]

Hi Multiplex. I will concede the KRKO HD is better than KKXAs. This is exacerbated by the fact that Ibiquity currently has no field test equipment to enable stations to measure the signal in the field as adjustments are made. We have no idea what is happening in the field when we make adjustments in the directional antenna, but in a pure comparison, we do get drops with KKXA that we do not get on KRKO. Given better diagnostic tools, we likely could achieve a better result than we currently have for KXA, but a spectrum analyzer on the common point is all we get to see right now. Also, I don't know if you are southeast of the transmitter site, but I do know that the signal integrity is rough along the backside when we're directional. KRKO and KKXA technically are closer spaced than they should be to make HD work, but we put a lot of effort into the phasing design and tuning networks to give us as much flexibility as possible.

The HD swishiness you perceive from time-to-time in KKXA is something we attribute to the sample rate of some of the songs we're playing. Ostensibly, they are all uncompressed .wav files, but not all of them have been recorded the same way. The analog quality seems receiver dependent to me on top of that. Receivers that have HD Radio capability were forced to restrict the analog AM bandwidth in order to make the difference between HD and analog sound even more impressive. In a pure analog radio, like in my Chevrolet, KXA sounds great to me in analog. On an HD enabled radio, the analog is not as good. We have a top-of-the-line Vorsis processor on the main transmitter and a top-of-the-line Orban on the backup. All our audio runs to the transmitter site as AES/EBU.

I agree that KKDZ has had its share of challenges.

Let me know where your reception location is, and perhaps one of these days we can meet at the transmitter site.

It sounds as though you have some engineering background. We certainly aren't done tweaking.

 

[multiplex]

Hi Andy,
I'm in the U District in Seattle.
I'm not versed in engineering, but I want to see radio stations provide the best audio they can in analog.
I'll admit it: I'm against HD in all its forms, because, frankly, I feel that its interference to other licensees outweighs any perceived benefits.
That being said, I do own two HD radios and have access to a third, and I certainly evaluate what's available to me.
Although I have very strong anti-HD opinions, I know you care about what your stations offer, and I respec that. I also realize that you've made quite an investment in the technology for two stations, and I applaud your willingness to share your perspective.
Oh, in case you wonder why I own HD radios when I'm not in favor of the system, I still want to be aware of what's available and how it sounds, and one side benefit of Hd on FM is the extra selectivity needed to make HD decode properly.
Alas, with HD, you need as much radio as you can get, in order to try and make up for the interference it creates. It doesn't balance out, but it helps.