Links to the Harris IBOC info pages

[autopaint-1]

http://www.broadcast.harris.com/radio/hdradio/default.asp

http://www.broadcast.harris.com/radio/hdradio/faq.asp (This should help answer some questions)

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Harris is just trying to sell new HD Radio transmission equipment necessary for iBiquity adjacent channel broadcasting. They clearly state that there will be additional interference, and as more HD Radio adjacent channel stations are added the additional adjacent channel digital interference will spread accross the AM and FM bands.
Here is an FM digital transmission system fully compatible with analog broadcasting that does not require new transmitters and antennas, and so Harris has little financial incentive to promote it:
www.dreinc.com

 

[calstymes]

SUPERCASTER said:

Harris is just trying to sell new HD Radio transmission equipment necessary for iBiquity adjacent channel broadcasting.

Yes is is. And Harris manufactures excellent commercial transmitting equipment! But they also have a very large financial investment in this technology and by golly, they are going to try and sell as many HD exciters to as many broadcasters as they possibly can by attempting to cast IBOC in as flattering a light as possible in their advertisements. They will attempt to cast IBOC technology in as positive a light as possible without actually adding any false statements to their copy.

Here is an FM digital transmission system fully compatible with analog broadcasting that does not require new transmitters and antennas, and so Harris has little financial incentive to promote it: http://www.dreinc.com

This is a very interesting company. Those "in the know" (not me by any means since I am a radio wannabe) realize that DRE has quietly been applying good business sense and excellent scientific talent to develop modern solutions for expanding FM broadcasting initiatives. Kudos to the folks at Digital Radio Express! Would that IBOC technology were this good (even though they CAN co-exist together on the same FM signal).

I wonder what would have happened if this company had developed a digital solution for AM?

Disclaimer: Nope. I own absolutely no stock in DRE. I wish I did!

Cal

 

[JasonW]

SUPERCASTER said:

Harris is just trying to sell new HD Radio transmission equipment necessary for iBiquity adjacent channel broadcasting.

Yes is is. And Harris manufactures excellent commercial transmitting equipment! But they also have a very large financial investment in this technology and by golly, they are going to try and sell as many HD exciters to as many broadcasters as they possibly can by attempting to cast IBOC in as flattering a light as possible in their advertisements. They will attempt to cast IBOC technology in as positive a light as possible without actually adding any false statements to their copy.

Here is an FM digital transmission system fully compatible with analog broadcasting that does not require new transmitters and antennas, and so Harris has little financial incentive to promote it: http://www.dreinc.com

This is a very interesting company. Those "in the know" (not me by any means since I am a radio wannabe) realize that DRE has quietly been applying good business sense and excellent scientific talent to develop modern solutions for expanding FM broadcasting initiatives. Kudos to the folks at Digital Radio Express! Would that IBOC technology were this good (even though they CAN co-exist together on the same FM signal).

I wonder what would have happened if this company had developed a digital solution for AM?

Disclaimer: Nope. I own absolutely no stock in DRE. I wish I did!

Cal

Perhaps they could partner with Leonard Kahn to market DRE's digital FM system and Kahn's CAM-D digital AM system to cover both bands. Once he gets the patent for CAM-D, it's possible that he might be agreeable to such an arrangement.

What seems to have been overlooked in this debate about IBOC is the fact that the airwaves belong to We The People, not to iBiquity or Clear Channel or any private concern. Since the airwaves are public property, the citizens who own them deserve the best possible digital transmission system (if they want one at all), whose merits should be determined through rigorous laboratory testing and real-world field testing. The job of the FCC is to impartially evaluate the competing systems and choose the best one based on its technical merits, not on which manufacturer has the most $$$$ behind it.

Some of the pro-IBOC assertions I've read on this forum ("It's here and there's nothing you can do about it," "It's the way radio's going to be whether you like it or not," etc.) smack of the high-pressure Republican "talking points" about the Iraq war that are being hammered upon again and again in the daily press briefings. I couldn't care less if iBiquity has poured millions of dollars into developing IBOC, because they don't own the airwaves. If their system is inferior to a competing system, then the other system should be implemented. There are winners and losers in every arena of business, and in the field of broadcast equipment standards in the United States, the FCC is vested with the power of the people (as delegated by Congress) to choose the winners based on technical merit.

-- Jason

 

[davideduardo]

What seems to have been overlooked in this debate about IBOC is the fact that the airwaves belong to We The People, not to iBiquity or Clear Channel or any private concern. Since the airwaves are public property, the citizens who own them deserve the best possible digital transmission system (if they want one at all), whose merits should be determined through rigorous laboratory testing and real-world field testing. The job of the FCC is to impartially evaluate the competing systems and choose the best one based on its technical merits, not on which manufacturer has the most $$$$ behind it.

Some of the pro-IBOC assertions I've read on this forum ("It's here and there's nothing you can do about it," "It's the way radio's going to be whether you like it or not," etc.) smack of the high-pressure Republican "talking points" about the Iraq war that are being hammered upon again and again in the daily press briefings. I couldn't care less if iBiquity has poured millions of dollars into developing IBOC, because they don't own the airwaves. If their system is inferior to a competing system, then the other system should be implemented. There are winners and losers in every arena of business, and in the field of broadcast equipment standards in the United States, the FCC is vested with the power of the people (as delegated by Congress) to choose the winners based on technical merit.

HD has been in development since 1990. The FCC reviewed it and approved it (in a conditional fashion which is a de facto approval) because, at the time, there were no other options and the FCC is a very strong proponent of digital... like the HDTV "switch." So there was a technical review, presentation of extensive testing and stations are permitted to use HD today.

The alternative systems either did not exist (funny how people want to get on the bandwagon after the fact) or were not possible (Eureka band is in use in the US and reserved for the military). So, at the time the test results and tech specs were presented, there were no alternatives.

HD also complies with the FCC policy of localism, recognizing that radio is predominantly listened to in the local market via local stations.

There is no permanently superior system. Technology advances, and we can not keep waiting until a perfect sytem emerges as such a system will only be perfect for a short time. The FCC seems very concerned that AM is dying, and they recognize that even FM is faced with new competion and warrants a solution now; maybe they learned form the AM stereo debacle.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

HD has been in development since 1990. The FCC reviewed it and approved it (in a conditional fashion which is a de facto approval) because, at the time, there were no other options and the FCC is a very strong proponent of digital... like the HDTV "switch." So there was a technical review, presentation of extensive testing and stations are permitted to use HD today.

The alternative systems either did not exist (funny how people want to get on the bandwagon after the fact) or were not possible (Eureka band is in use in the US and reserved for the military). So, at the time the test results and tech specs were presented, there were no alternatives.

Overall, the statement is untrue. FM multiplex transmission of digital data and audio multiplexing was tested by Armstrong (FM's inventor) at least as early as the 1940's. With great foresight Armstrong made provisions for just such future expansion by insisting on a wideband FM standard to accomodate just such farsighted applications as extra audio channels and digital.
The technical testing you mention was not done by the FCC but was presented for immediate (and premature) adoption (even though far from complete) by the proponents of the defective adjacent channel system, with the insistance and backing of powerful lobbyists including the NAB. That is why no other systems were considered or tested. Even though the adjacent channel system was incomplete and far from ready for prime time, it was granted preferential treatment, consideration and conditional approval, thus blocking other competing and future systems from any consideration.
No truly independent testing was done, and no other available or future alternatives considered.
HD Radio is all unscrupulous politics and not good engineering.
Now is the time to consider other systems such as FMeXtra, www.dreinc.com instead of automatically granting the unnecessary adjacent channel system final approval.

 

[autopaint]

"Now is the time to consider other systems such as FMeXtra, www.dreinc.com instead of automatically granting the unnecessary adjacent channel system final approval"

Not gonna happen. Maybe though, if you told me where I could buy a FMeXtra radio I'd be able to make the comparison. Again, for the final time... NO ONE LISTENS TO STATIONS ON ADJACENT CHANNELS, ONLY DXers! Time to get that analogue radio on E-Bay before you have a expensive doorstop.

 

[Chuck]

Time to get that analogue radio on E-Bay before you have a expensive doorstop.

Hmmm...


I thought you collected vintage radios and Hi-Fi equipment? Maybe I misunderstood, but I think you said you had a bunch of McIntosh stereo gear. No Mac tuner? If analog goes away as you predict (and it may eventually do that) it too will make a nice door stop.

I guess we should all invest in Ramsey because they ought to do well selling "Part 15" transmitters to convert the output of your Receptor into analog, so your existing equipment can still be used. Your neighbors can enjoy it too!

You're probably safe though, I'll predict that analog will be around for about as long as either you or I care about it.

Just out of curiosity, how does some of that vintage equipment react to the IBOC signals in the New York area? A friend in Dallas tells me that he can hear slight hissing (even on channel) on some stations with his vintage McIntosh wide band tuner. (A MX-110, I believe.)

My most wide band tuner is a Marantz (or a GE Super radio) but there are no HD stations out here to try it on.

 

[autopaint]

"I thought you collected vintage radios and Hi-Fi equipment? Maybe I misunderstood, but I think you said you had a bunch of McIntosh stereo gear. No Mac tuner? If analog goes away as you predict (and it may eventually do that) it too will make a nice door stop."

My Tuner is a Sansui TU 717. My Amp is a Mac. The tuner is nearly 30 years old. I think it's more than paid for itself.

"I guess we should all invest in Ramsey because they ought to do well selling "Part 15" transmitters to convert the output of your Receptor into analog, so your existing equipment can still be used. Your neighbors can enjoy it too!"



My neighobrs are far enough away that any part 15 transmitter would provide a fringe signal. When digial tuners become available and prices come down (uner 1K) I'll buy one.

"You're probably safe though, I'll predict that analog will be around for about as long as either you or I care about it."

Probably but who knows.

"Just out of curiosity, how does some of that vintage equipment react to the IBOC signals in the New York area? A friend in Dallas tells me that he can hear slight hissing (even on channel) on some stations with his vintage McIntosh wide band tuner. (A MX-110, I believe.)"

No problem. The AM section of most quality tuners is pretty bad. My tuner has analogue tuning and I don't have any problems with interference on any NY station. Sure I can hear some hissing on my super radio if I put it in wideband mode (on the other hand my Sony 2010 has no probelm with his in the wideband mode) but who listens to Am radio with a wide filter. In normal mode you can't hear the IBOC exciter when properly tuned. I hear all sorts of locally generated noise on most stations anyway. As an example, on all my radios the normal area stations from 710 to 880 are 710, 740, 770, 800, 820, 850 and 880 and I can hear everyone without interference from an IBOC station. They are at 710, 770 and 880 and they are all 50 KW stations. 820 has not been running IBOC but I was told by WNYC that they will be turning theri IBOC generator back on as soon as they are able. In the interim, they are running HD1, 2 & 3 streams. The HD 3 is a simulcast of their AM. Hope this helps answer some questions.


Posted on: Today at 06:53:38 amPosted by: autopaint

 

[SUPERCASTER]

"Now is the time to consider other systems such as FMeXtra, www.dreinc.com instead of automatically granting the unnecessary adjacent channel system final approval"

Not gonna happen. Maybe though, if you told me where I could buy a FMeXtra radio I'd be able to make the comparison. Again, for the final time... NO ONE LISTENS TO STATIONS ON ADJACENT CHANNELS, ONLY DXers! Time to get that analogue radio on E-Bay before you have a expensive doorstop.

FMeXtra does not require FCC final approval and does not use adjacent channels! Just an inexpensive encoder and simple FCC SCA authorization and you're FM station is on the air with an HD quality digital signal. No fees! FM eXtra radios will be simple and inexpensive. Some software radios are already available.
http://www.dreinc.com/company/pr/4_14_06.html

 

[davideduardo]

FMeXtra does not require FCC final approval and does not use adjacent channels! Just an inexpensive encoder and simple FCC SCA authorization and you're FM station is on the air with an HD quality digital signal. No fees! FM eXtra radios will be simple and inexpensive. Some software radios are already available.

It is a nice technology, but with no AM counterpart (which was one of the goals at the offset) and no broadcaster buy in. At this stage, with several hundred million invested in HD, there is no chance for any other technology.

P. S. The HD / iBiquity fees are pretty low, all things considered.