• 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

Should HD capability be required on all AM/FM receivers

There’s a reason why broadcasters are using translators to air what’s on their HD-2 signal most of the time.
That reason is that comparatively few people own HD radios, either in the house or in the car. I don't know the percentage, though.

I own two portable HD radios (but not in the car), and I use them both for HD2 feeds of Ancient Modulation stations that I can't receive. But I doubt there are enough of them in the hands of the general public to make it worthwhile as a mainstream system. It's way too late to mandate its use on FM now, and HD-AM was always a non-starter.
 
No it should not be required. Also duplicating main analog program on HD1 is a waste of bandwidth. Should be some other programming. Event at 48 kbit/s it's no match to well processed and clean transmitter chain analog signal. High treble frequencies sound too sharp and unnatural on HD codec and that's why I prefer analog. Whomever claimed that HD radio is CD quality is either deaf or is a liar salesman.
 
No it should not be required. Also duplicating main analog program on HD1 is a waste of bandwidth. Should be some other programming.
I don't hear any audio difference between analog and HD1 on my Sangean HDR-16.
Event at 48 kbit/s it's no match to well processed and clean transmitter chain analog signal. High treble frequencies sound too sharp and unnatural on HD codec and that's why I prefer analog. Whomever claimed that HD radio is CD quality is either deaf or is a liar salesman.
It's still FM, and (correct me if I'm wrong) the highest audio frequency allowed is 15 kHz in both analog and HD. Not CD quality and I don't recall ever hearing or reading that it was supposed to be.
 
I don't hear any audio difference between analog and HD1 on my Sangean HDR-16.
How old are you? Hearing loss can make telling a difference more difficult. But also that radio you have does not appear to have high fidelity speakers.
It's still FM, and (correct me if I'm wrong) the highest audio frequency allowed is 15 kHz in both analog and HD. Not CD quality and I don't recall ever hearing or reading that it was supposed to be.
HD does not have to be limited to 15KHz. Analog is limited to protect 19KHz stereo pilot. With good audio processing there is not a worthy difference compared to 20 KHz audio. Some analog stations can sound too sharp and shrill if that's how they set their processor. The problem with HD radio is their codec using something similar to AAC+ SBR where upper treble audio frequencies are synthesized from lower frequency data and it can sound fake on stereos with good tweeters. This always bothered me ever since the first time I listened to HD. In my opinion, listenable AAC codec quality starts at 128 kbit/s (youtube audio) and sounds pretty good at 192 kbps (SiriusXM web streams).
 
Last edited:
HD radio should have never been proprietary. The FCC could have said that they would never allow HD as long as it is proprietary. Or at least allow it to only be proprietary for 10 years, then it must be open. HD should have been implemented in 2000, around the same time as digital TV. Then require every radio to be an HD radio after 2006 and drop analog AM in 2009 and analog FM in 2013.
No, dropping analog AM and FM should not have been mandated -- too many really old radios are still around, and since radio broadcasters did not get a second channel for their digital broadcasts there is absolutely no reason why we would have wanted to obsolete those old radios.
 
How old are you? Hearing loss can make telling a difference more difficult. But also that radio you have does not appear to have high fidelity speakers.
Like I said, my HD radios are Sangean HDA-16s. Portables, not anything high-fidelity. BTW, I may be pushing 70, but my hearing is still pretty good. Now get off my lawn! :LOL:
 
I don't hear any audio difference between analog and HD1 on my Sangean HDR-16.
Psychoacoustic coding is maddening because everybody hears differently, and for some, it completely fails to mask its presence. I can attest that I hear the compression artifacts and SBR even on stations not running an HD2, i.e. whose digital bandwidths are dedicated entirely to the HD1. The SBR causes their higher frequencies to sound gritty, unnatural, and harsh to me. When the available bandwidth is further reduced by the introduction of an HD2, my ability to mentally tune out the artifacts and SBR is completely lost, and once an HD3 is added, the result is so bad sounding that I cannot enjoy the program material at all.

It's still FM, and (correct me if I'm wrong) the highest audio frequency allowed is 15 kHz in both analog and HD. Not CD quality and I don't recall ever hearing or reading that it was supposed to be.
I think IBOC HD does allow frequencies past 15 kHz. Also, analog isn't limited to 15 kHz by specification, but only by practice, as historically, early filter designs were too loose to support brickwall roll-offs right up to the pilot tone. In modern times, it is possible to find some stations with audio extending to 16 or 17 kHz.

That said, for me, the difference between 20 kHz and 15 kHz is analogous to the extra crispiness visible at 1080p versus 720p via ATSC. The gain is completely overshadowed (and mooted) however if you're only able to experience it at 1 mbit/s versus at 19 mbit/s. Likewise, all the benefits of IBOC, such as eliminating analog hiss and the HF peak reduction necessitated by pre-emphasis, can't be appreciated when your ears can easily pick out low bitrates and synthesized treble.
 
In my opinion, listenable AAC codec quality starts at 128 kbit/s (youtube audio) and sounds pretty good at 192 kbps (SiriusXM web streams).
Your experience seems to agree with mine. For listenable MP3, AAC, and Opus, I need 160, 128, and 112 kbit/s, respectively. For good to transparent MP3, I need 256 to 320; and 192 to 256 for AAC, and 160 to 192 for Opus.

And SBR never sounds good for me. When it is used at the higher bitrates (96-128 kbit/s), it doesn't necessarily sound especially gritty to me, but it still sounds dimensionless and fake. Down in the low bitrates like 32-64 kbit/s, though, SBR treble sounds pretty much like fine grained sand.
 
Absolutely not. It's not great sounding tech (in my opinion) and would drive up the cost of cheap radios. That's something we don't need to further discourage people from buying radios...
 
No it should not be required. Also duplicating main analog program on HD1 is a waste of bandwidth.
One of the stated purposes of HD that helped convince the FCC to approve it was to make the noise and interference prone AM analog signal replaceable with a digital one on HD radios. On FM, the FCC seems to have not wanted to force people to buy a patented device if they did not want to; the original purpose of HD was to expand the quality of both AM and FM, not to provide additional services.

The promoters of HD realized that they had to have both an AM and FM system to make the FCC consider a proprietary technology, so what we got was both the base AM and FM content being duplicated by the HD system.
 
........ Unfortunately, the way that HD was marketed when it first came out was that it was an "audiophile" feature and as a result, the auto makers saw it as an opportunity to offer HD as a "luxury upgrade" and nothing more. It wasn't until later when the "stations between the stations" campaigns started to come out where HD was being promoted for the reason it should have been heavily marketed on in the first place, the ability to offer more choices to the listener. The other issue is the proprietary nature of the iBiquity/Xperi system, which made it an even more expensive upgrade (ongoing royalties) for commercial stations to implement and create new stations.

The entire system was a good idea that was horribly marketed. Were it not so bulky to use, I would say it bordered on a great idea. It did have that pesky feature of causing a station to compete with even itself for radio ears, and oftentimes without spots. Even then, it would have slowed the blood flow from the terminally injured terrestrial radio patient for a little while had it been well marketed.

Ibiquity was interested only in making the cash register ring. No "billboards" or reach-out to speak of, no public facing marketing. Joe and Mary Sixpack had no idea (and for the most part still do not) that it was there. I have done a number of little nonscientific polls over the years....at campfires, with friends at lunch, etc. I ask them about HD radio in their cars, and do they listen. Almost to a person, they think I'm talking about SiriusXM. I even go a little further and explain where it is and how to use it. Blank stares. Later, a few call or text and say "Gee, thanks for that tip; it's pretty cool....how long has that been around?" They seem to think that have I disclosed some deep, dark, radio secret that no one was supposed to know. I as such seem to market HD Radio more than the owners do.

It appears to now be largely a legal loophole to legitimize translators wanting to provide program material not carried in the intended fashion.

It reminds me a little of the "FMX" project during the early 80s. That also was a good idea that could have resulted in a significant noise reduction on FM at the coverage edges. However, the technology was purchased early on from the developers, and those then owning it saw less the overall good it could do, but instead only the opportunity to ring the cash register. I was involved as a contractor with one of the 'big three' auto makers 'infomatics' groups at the time FMX was being marketed to them; they literally LAUGHED at what the owners wanted as a licensing fee for car radios. The two groups were several orders of magnitude apart in the licensing fees when the automakers essentially said "thanks but no thanks". Look up FMX on the web; aside from a rather lame Wikipedia entry on it, it's virtually been swallowed by history.

I recently traveled through Tampa, and out of sheer boredom did a little finger surfing on the FM band there....there is a TON of HD radio presence there. Again, I don't know if it's "feeding" (ha) translators with otherwise non-carried program material, or really intended to be listened to, but there sure is a lot there. After one band transit, though, I was back to streaming YouTube Music....getting exactly what I want for as long as I want.

It's pretty sad that someone who has put 45 years of beans and weenies on the table with checks from broadcasters now rarely listens. Too many spots that are not interesting and don't fit the format, too much vanilla voice tracking, and absolutely no control whatsoever of the programming.

The fat lady has arrived in the lobby, and is just taking her coat off and warming up, but she's most definitely in the house and getting ready to sing.
 
If no one in the broadcasting business is making any money, largely because of the number of new audio sources, including the internet competing for advertising dollars, why do we need HD radio? I forget. I'm sure there was a reason, but I don't think it was public outcry or the lines at the HD section at Best Buy might be longer. If you want to involve the government in more regulation, why not have them "force" broadcasters on the amplitude modulated band to broadcast only in HD? Would that not clear up the interference for those 19 people who rely on AM radio? It would also force them to buy new radios and boost the stock of the manufacturers of AM radio. Yet those who don't want to spend that kind of money can still listen on one of ten million translators that clog up the FM band. But for my money, I don't want the government forcing any marketplace ideas on anyone. If you choose to buy an HD radio, enjoy it. If you choose to not involve the government in decisions they don't need to be involved in, God bless you too.
 
I drive a lot around the country with lots of people. Nobody knows what HD radio is or how to tune in subchannels on my HD radio. Neither are they impressed by my knowledge of radio stations around the country. They do however get pissed when I’m listening to a station that they like and it fades out or the HD drops if it’s a subchannel.
 
3. It seems like there are some cool programs on the HD-2 and HD-3, stations. I could see this potentially being an avenue for broadcasting content that is more niche. Unfortunately, reception issues make it difficult to actually listen to these stations reliably though. There’s a reason why broadcasters are using translators to air what’s on their HD-2 signal most of the time.
Many of the HD channels are in fact niche formats. They simply don't have the mass appeal of the main channels. Most of the NPR stations here run their classical music either on their HD2, or in a smaller outlying city on the main channel.
 
No. As long as the HD Radio system requires patent royalties for receiver manufacturers, it should not be required.
The matter of on-going and multi-stream royalties for HD Radio is a non-starter for many station owners. It isn't like ATSC 1.0 in which the royalties for Mpeg 2, Dolby AC-3, 8-VSB and other technologies are baked into the price of the exciter, encoder and receiver and are fully paid for when the equipment is purchased. A TV station is free to cram as many program streams as it can safely mux on its carrier and not pay anything to anyone for doing so. The royalty structure for HD Radio should be similar to ATSC.
 
It appears to now be largely a legal loophole to legitimize translators wanting to provide program material not carried in the intended fashion.
And that is the key. For those unfamiliar with the rules and regulations, a translator can carry quite legally the content of any HD channel beyond the required first one that has to be a simulcast of the analog service. So you get a translator and if you can go to the maximum power and go to a very high antenna location or tower, you can reasonably cover even a medium market of a geographically small major one.

The licensee does not intend the HD channel to be profitable... it is all about the translator.

Of course, some translators rent an HD channel from another licensee, thus making the HD channel profitable!
 
I recently located to Columbia SC and scanning the dial tells a lot about the attitude towards broadcasting in general. I like HD radio and prefer it over analog if processed correctly, but when too many subchannels are crammed in, they sound horrible. The reason people don’t know about HD or what it is for the most part is they don’t care. The public just likes simple and something that works.

I like how artists experience shows up on the dashboard with station logo and/or album art. Why can’t I buy a radio for home with that? Oh that is right I can just stream it to my phone. (No thanks). So that brings me to my point, iHeart owns a majority of the stations on the dial in Columbia. When their HD has a problem or drops off the air the station does not bring it back up. I had to go to their website and open a complaint that the analog audio was getting into the digital so when the receiver switched to iboc it could not decode the audio (it would not sync) so there was just silence. That went on for days until the HD was turned off. I noticed all the HD is off on all of the several iHeart stations. The processing on one of their analog stations is very muddy with no highs. Do they not listen to the off air? The answer is NO. As long as the stream works good enough for them and that is broadcasting from corporate radio today.

IBOC was supposed to transition the radios from analog to all digital. It was the stepping stones to get there. Now that the FM dial is crammed the digital power can’t be increased like it needs to be for proper coverage. If the FCC does not sunset analog and force a transition it will just continue to slowly decline with more commercials and more network junk stations that keep things “mostly” on the air to satisfy the license. Sad but the market hands off approach is not working well. How is AM stereo working out? C-QUAM is the standard now but no receivers now but it does not matter because we have moved on, HD is the next to go when chopping costs.
 


Back
Top Bottom