• 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

"Satellite in Trouble as HD Grows"

audiophile. said:
WFMK transmitter is on the far SE side of Lansing. The test location was in downtown (center) Lansing, on the convention floor behind concrete walls. About 7 miles with no antenna, inside bldg, not bad..
Click to expand...

Not bad at all! What was the audio quality like? I haven't heard DRE (is it DRE or DRM?) before.
 
The radio speaker was small, but the audio seemed very respectable. It didn't notice any "HF" artifacts.

This was running two extra channels (I assume 32k each).
 
audiophile. said:
The radio speaker was small, but the audio seemed very respectable. It didn't notice any "HF" artifacts.

This was running two extra channels (I assume 32k each).
Click to expand...

I'm all for it if it works. I'm in no way sold on IBOC for AM. Cool stuff!!
 
Here is what an engineering coleague wrote:

I was very privileged to be at the WFMK transmitter Sunday afternoon, when the DRE exciter was plugged. Other than the injection being too high, which we then corrected within a few minutes, it was a five minute job. We had two stereo audio sources on. We threw the receiver in the car, using an outside 1/4 wave mag mount and drove up 127 for 32 miles before we took a hit on the DRE signal.
As a broadcast engineer of 30 years, I was impressed. DRE's future now depends on whether of not they can get receivers out there.
 
audiophile. said:
Here is what an engineering coleague wrote:

I was very privileged to be at the WFMK transmitter Sunday afternoon, when the DRE exciter was plugged. Other than the injection being too high, which we then corrected within a few minutes, it was a five minute job. We had two stereo audio sources on. We threw the receiver in the car, using an outside 1/4 wave mag mount and drove up 127 for 32 miles before we took a hit on the DRE signal.
As a broadcast engineer of 30 years, I was impressed. DRE's future now depends on whether of not they can get receivers out there.
Click to expand...

That's great! I need to study up a bit more on it, but on the surface it looks very good! I assume that this technology is more skywave friendly?
 
zumahans said:
IBOCRocks said:
SayNoToIBOC said:
"Thumbs Down on Receptor HD FM Antenna"

http://digital-am-fm.com/2006/03/thumbs_down_on_receptor_hd_fm.html
Click to expand...

Still haven't shown us where it says that you MUST use the 7-foot dipole.

It's because you lied. Admit it and move on.
Click to expand...

The Radio World article was pretty clear that the HD radio failed without the 7-foot dipole and the NPR labs guys were trying to get it to work.
Click to expand...

It did in their test, but in real life there are lots of people who don't need it. A far cry from MUST having it.
 
Thanks, I needed that ! Well, since IBOC has only 60% coverage of analog, it is pretty clear. Article after article, blog after blog, has confirmed that the Receptor HD needs a dipole, and I experienced that at Best Buy - Washington, D.C. wouldn't be considered a fringe area ! :)
 
audiophile. said:
Here is what an engineering coleague wrote:

I was very privileged to be at the WFMK transmitter Sunday afternoon, when the DRE exciter was plugged. Other than the injection being too high, which we then corrected within a few minutes, it was a five minute job. We had two stereo audio sources on. We threw the receiver in the car, using an outside 1/4 wave mag mount and drove up 127 for 32 miles before we took a hit on the DRE signal.
As a broadcast engineer of 30 years, I was impressed. DRE's future now depends on whether of not they can get receivers out there.
Click to expand...

Wow. 32 miles away from the tower before it dumped.

I'm sure the sales department can take that coverage zone to the bank.
 
I just checked, 32.2 miles is the distance 60 dBu contour.

So DRE basically worked to the 60 dBu...
 
SayNoToSayNoToIBOC said:
audiophile. said:
I just checked, 32.2 miles is the distance 60 dBu contour.

So DRE basically worked to the 60 dBu...
Click to expand...

WOW that is worse than HD Radio. Every instance I have had HD has gone well beyond the 60bBu area.
Click to expand...

Every? Not likely.

My understanding is as soon as the first drop out happened they stopped and turned the car around. Now that doesn't mean it wouldn't have reached further if they had continued. This was with minimal injection, and didn't cause any increase interference.

If you wanted to really see what it could DRE do (from a technology shootout perspective), allow digital SCA's to go out to 198 kHz and and allow 100 kHz devation (25 kHz being alloted to SCA's only).
 
I.B. Iquity asked:

"Well, it won't!"

What do you base this on?
Click to expand...

I was commenting on your following statement:

I agree that a station needs talent to attract an audience. However, improved technical quality is also a must. I love the anti IBOC crowd who discount technical improvements by stating that technical alone won't help broadcasters.
Click to expand...

The fact is, technical alone WON'T help broadcasters.

Unless you think that with the advent of HD then the programming will get better. Notice I said "better". Not "more varied" (as with the ability to offer separate programming streams on HD-2 and HD-3 FM channels).

"And it is very debatable as to whether or not IBOC is really a technical "improvement", and if it is, whether or not the public is actually interested enough in it to spend money on it."

The same can be said for any new technology. The only way we will know is to put it out there and see how the public responds. At this point it seems the most anti I-BOC group are those with opposing interests. They aren't honest players in all this.
Click to expand...

I have no opposing interests. I am not in any way connected with any company that offers competing or supplemental technology for digital radio. I am, however, jaded because I know what the ubiquitous folks did and how they got to where they are today. These are all things that the great unwashed public (including those who work in major broadcasting markets) would not necessarily know. You wouldn't know about these things unless you had some kind of information from people who are on "the inside" of the digital radio industry.

"The I-Pod phenomenon has absolutely nothing to do with HDradio or broadcasting. That device is popular because people like to have THEIR music portable and available at their fingertips."

I must disagree with you. I-PODS, computers etc are all competition for Radio. They provide entertainment and information alternatives and so must be considered competitors. Why do you think many of todays broadcasters are now providing their product as Podcasts?
Click to expand...

The people whose primary vehicle of listening entertainment is the I-Pod basically IGNORE terrestrial radio already. Attempting to appeal to them with HD/IBOC is a lost cause.

"The fact is, I cannot listen to the HDradio carriers of my most favorite AM radio stations in my market. This is very disappointing, to say the least"

Why is that? What market are you in where IBOC has made it impossible for you to listen to your local stations? If your favorites are out of market that's something else. This all sounds like the lament of the DXer to me.
Click to expand...

I am no DXer. I am in the New York City market, specifically in Manhattan. You can't DX in Manhattan. There is way too much RF background noise.

With the BA Receptor I am unable to decode the HD carriers of any AM radio station in this market in which I am interested with any degree of reliability. WOR's signal oscillates between HD and analog constantly, and I can't even pull in the IBOC carriers of WFAN and WCBS. The receiver blinks at me that HD is available but it never switches.

The ubiquitous folks lied. They said that digital carriers would be receivable even when analog signals were noisy. NOT SO! And before you say that they didn't say that, remember that I have been following the development of this questionably "superior" technology since the mid-1990s. I remember who it was who dreamed it up and how he went about getting research and development for it. And he is no longer associated with it. The ubiquitous folks have seen to that.
 
What part of the city are you in? I live in near the city and have no trouble with any of the HD stations in the market and I use a HD Receptor too. If I knew where you lived maybe I could help you improve your reception.
 
Do you know where the WCBS/WFAN transmitter is? It's non directional in the L.I. Sound on High Island in the Bronx. WCBS and WFAN can hardly be heard in midtown due to the steel and concrete which makes up Manhattan. I drive the West Side highway every day and when you get to 56th street at the light you can barely hear either of those stations. IBOC, especially as it's operating today won't penetrate the caverns of NYC. That is one of the reasons that WCBS and WFAN are now streaming on the internet. They do so to be heard in Manhattan. Manhattan is very different in its effect on RF than most cities. As I've said I live in a northern suburb of NYC and have no propblem with my receptor receiving any of the NY IBOCS and I've brought the radio into our shielded building on the west side and with the small loops which came with the radio listened to WADO, WNYC and WOR (All IBOC at the time) signals even though the analogue was riddled with computer generated noise. By the way I am on the first floor (street level) in a room with no exterior windows or walls.
 
But if it doesn't work in a big city, what point is it?

Maybe he ouught to get rabbit ears and tinfoil for his "portable" radio.
 
Cal Stymes said:
The people whose primary vehicle of listening entertainment is the I-Pod basically IGNORE terrestrial radio already. Attempting to appeal to them with HD/IBOC is a lost cause.
Click to expand...

Historically and today, greater consumers of recorded music are greater users of radio. I've surveyed many people in the last 3 years as MP3 players grew and found that there is a correlation between owning one and heavier radio usage. Several published studies reported on in the trades have also shown that music collectors tend to be radio users in a greater amount than those less passionate about music. Several other studies have shown that hte average iPod has around 300 songs on it, not thousands.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom