I checked the FCC website and found that 3 stations were granted permission to operate at -10dBC digital power. The stations are: WNPR in Norwich CT, KQOC in Gleneden Beach OR, and KUWC in Casper WY. It would be nice to hear reception reports of these stations regarding digital coverage, and/or reports of interference to adjacent stations, assuming these stations are already operating at -10dBc.
-
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
RECEPTION REPORTS FOR FM STATIONS OPERATING AT -10dBC DIGITAL POWER
- Thread starter Len14043
- Start date
Well I'd like to weigh in.
I have heard some hash on 91.1 KSGR in Portland TX. It happens at night when I'm getting all kinds of signals from all over the place. But there is definite interference there. Especially if I listen in stereo.
KUWC is in high power HD mode in Casper, WY. While I have never checked, I've never heard hash or multipath on 91.1 locally before in South Texas. This has to be them.
I have been an HD advocate before, but I am beginning to see the damage that can be dome from as far away as Wyoming. I have to tell you, our local 91.1 was REALLY BAD last night. The heck with those loons in Wyoming. No one should mess with Texas. Or their FM signals Screw HD. Wyoming interferes with Texas.
I'm appauled.
Cloouseau
I have heard some hash on 91.1 KSGR in Portland TX. It happens at night when I'm getting all kinds of signals from all over the place. But there is definite interference there. Especially if I listen in stereo.
KUWC is in high power HD mode in Casper, WY. While I have never checked, I've never heard hash or multipath on 91.1 locally before in South Texas. This has to be them.
I have been an HD advocate before, but I am beginning to see the damage that can be dome from as far away as Wyoming. I have to tell you, our local 91.1 was REALLY BAD last night. The heck with those loons in Wyoming. No one should mess with Texas. Or their FM signals Screw HD. Wyoming interferes with Texas.
I'm appauled.
Cloouseau
Well, I'm shocked, amazed and hopeful.
At first I considered that someone had hacked into inspector's profile, but I must applaud this candid, unbiased observation.
It sounds as though you have kept an open mind and maintained objectivity.
Don't know who will try this first in Chicago, but I'll be checking 91.1 here, too.
My analog tuned radios are a bit harder to tune on FM since iboc, and when a station (in the car) drops out due to multipath,
the HD whine intrudes. So where there used to be a "dropout" now there's noise, just like when AM signals
are drowned in noise under a powerline. Why was this particular drawback and detriment to FM analog glossed over?
Isn't this pretty much "Making FM sound like AM"?
IF RF Burns comes back and declares that he hears unacceptable degradation, I'll throw a party.
At first I considered that someone had hacked into inspector's profile, but I must applaud this candid, unbiased observation.
It sounds as though you have kept an open mind and maintained objectivity.
Don't know who will try this first in Chicago, but I'll be checking 91.1 here, too.
My analog tuned radios are a bit harder to tune on FM since iboc, and when a station (in the car) drops out due to multipath,
the HD whine intrudes. So where there used to be a "dropout" now there's noise, just like when AM signals
are drowned in noise under a powerline. Why was this particular drawback and detriment to FM analog glossed over?
Isn't this pretty much "Making FM sound like AM"?
IF RF Burns comes back and declares that he hears unacceptable degradation, I'll throw a party.
Inspector, this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Once summer temperature inversions get started, this problem is going to affect lots of places, not just Texas! I sat in IEEE meetings where they casually dismissed these events as "anomalous propagation" that would seldom occur. From my observations, it's not as anomalous as people think... just ask any Amateur Radio operator who is active on the VHF and UHF bands!
I don't see how Texas can take these insults lying down. Don't you guys have any super power FM's that you can crank up to -10 dBc and throw some hiss back at Wyoming?
Let the hiss wars begin!
I don't see how Texas can take these insults lying down. Don't you guys have any super power FM's that you can crank up to -10 dBc and throw some hiss back at Wyoming?
Let the hiss wars begin!There is a wonderful article in RBR which shows that radio (and television) use is growing rather than retreating, contrary to the claims of some web-biased research firms.
http://www.rbr.com/features/viewpoints/21701.html
I mention this point because I think the radio industry, by endorsing HDR and the power increase, is in for a world of hurt. At a time when radio is apparently gaining growth the last thing it needs is a technology that impedes listening. But how long will listeners put up with interference or having their favorite station fade out in a hail of noise before they shut it off?
As one engineer I quoted earlier put it, radio is "shooting itself in the foot" with this power increase.
(Hey, wasn't "Don't mess with Texas" an anti-litter slogan? How appropriate when applied to HD Radio).
c5
http://www.rbr.com/features/viewpoints/21701.html
I mention this point because I think the radio industry, by endorsing HDR and the power increase, is in for a world of hurt. At a time when radio is apparently gaining growth the last thing it needs is a technology that impedes listening. But how long will listeners put up with interference or having their favorite station fade out in a hail of noise before they shut it off?
As one engineer I quoted earlier put it, radio is "shooting itself in the foot" with this power increase.
(Hey, wasn't "Don't mess with Texas" an anti-litter slogan? How appropriate when applied to HD Radio).
c5
Carmine5 said:
There are a LOT of "technologies that impede listening." As I've said many times before, LPFM will eat away at the signals of local radio stations in much the same way. If interference is bad, why no objections to the expansion of LPFM?
There were lots of noise problems back in the early days of FM stereo. All it took was a filter to fix the problem. Isn't such a thing possible for IBOC?
TheBigA said:
No, regrettably not. The only possible mitigation I can think of would be a large yagi out on the roof, and that would not fix the problem if the offending station was in the same direction as the desired one. And of course, no such solution exists for mobile listeners.
IBOC is like "the emperor's new clothes". Why can't people see that?
TheBigA said:
Last time I checked, this is the HD Radio board not the Community Radio board.
Besides there are only about 850 LPFM stations on the air--hardly a threat. If anything the power increase will adversely affect LPFM stations, not the other way around. Didn't the FCC order basically tell LPFM stations that they would have to suck it up--that is to say, that they are required to accept any interference from this IBOC power increase?
Carmine5 said:
If the issue is unwanted interference, then it's relevant.
Tell you what, though, if the FCC mandated that HD must be run as community stations, with local content and employees, would that change your view?
Carmine5 said:
Then why not deal with it properly and forbid BOTH? Instead they allow both, and you see the results. This is what happens when regulators don't regulate and just throw their hands up. But the government has an agenda of cramming more stations into the existing bandspace, so both support that agenda. That's why I say these two things are related, and why the government won't do anything to stop either.
Problem is, you can't just keep on cramming more stations and more bits into the same amount of spectrum, without creating more and more interference.
We could potentially get new spectrum in the VHF TV band, but apparently nobody wants to do that; they just want to stay in the same bands we're in. It's a lose-lose situation.
Either advocate for additional spectrum for low power radio, or digital radio (or both), or else stop adding more stations and cranking up the power.
The FCC is not responsible for the mess our bands are in! Rather, it is because our own industry, as represented by the NAB, NPR, and others have expressly requested the FCC to take these actions.
We could potentially get new spectrum in the VHF TV band, but apparently nobody wants to do that; they just want to stay in the same bands we're in. It's a lose-lose situation.
Either advocate for additional spectrum for low power radio, or digital radio (or both), or else stop adding more stations and cranking up the power.
The FCC is not responsible for the mess our bands are in! Rather, it is because our own industry, as represented by the NAB, NPR, and others have expressly requested the FCC to take these actions.
'audioguy said:
That's not true. The NAB and NPR have been fighting against LPFM for years. The FCC started this back in the 80s when they over-licensed the spectrum. And if the FCC is against something the NAB wants, all they have to do is say no. They are the government and they're bigger and more powerful than the entire broadcasting industry put together, especially now.
The FCC is directly responsible for this, and they're also directly responsible for a bunch of other things. But they've been out to lunch for 25 years.
True, the industry did not want LPFM. But it did want relaxations on the duopoly rule; and I think it is fair to say that the LPFM movement would never have gotten any traction except for the fact that a few large conglomerates were allowed to own all of the commercial radio stations in a market.
With respect to HD radio, the FCC gave industry exactly what it wanted.
With respect to HD radio, the FCC gave industry exactly what it wanted.
TheBigA said:
It is because LPFM doesn't pose much of a threat to anyone, even if Congress does get rid of the third adjacent channel protections. There are almost ten times as many translators and boosters out there as there are LPFM stations, and nobody seems all that concerned about their interference. (Every transmitter makes a little.) They only protect second adjacents, and in some instances, not even that. There is probably a good reason for the lack of concern about these devices. It seems in practical terms they really don't make significant interference, even though they can be much higher power and have taller antennas than LPFM is allowed. NAB and NPR seem to think translators and boosters are fine. You can't have it both ways.
What is going to make significant interference is the HD power boost, especially when it comes to co-channel neighbors. It is very bad news for many rim-shot stations. As it is right now, I'm co-channeled with an HD station that is about 135 miles away. So far, I've had two reports from my listeners that, on occasion, the distant HD channel has over-ridden our analog channel. I expect that will get worse when the spring time "skip" season cranks up. I can't imagine how things will get better for me if my co-channel neighbor cranks up the power by 6-10 db. The good news is there aren’t many radios in the field that can receive the HD signal. It does make a good case for mandating a “HD Defeat” switch on every radio sold.
How did this thread get so derailed from the original topic? Oh yeah the poster who posted reply #6 posted an off topic reply and started it all, how unusual. Ritalin can fix that.
I live about 90 miles from WNPR. I will be checking during the next day or two on 88.9 (WERS Boston) and 90.3 for hash in my car.
I live about 90 miles from WNPR. I will be checking during the next day or two on 88.9 (WERS Boston) and 90.3 for hash in my car.
clouseau said:
Greetings Clouseau ??? :-\, KUWC is located 1150 miles from Portland TX and their digital sideband is 53 watts, and there are 127 stations on 91.1 within 1150 miles of Portland Texas. If there is hiss on your local at 91.3, could the hiss be caused by any of the other 127 co-channels on that frequency within that distance? As most DXers know, if the D/U ratio is less that about 10 db, the undesired signal will manifest itself as a hiss under the desired signal, without regard to program material. I appreciate your response to my post, but I just have to ask the question.
- Status