Should IBOC Rollout Be Stopped?

[Chuck]

This from radio World's "Leslie Report:"

"A member of the NRSC believes the FCC should rescind its IBOC rules until Ibiquity reveals more technical information about its IBOC system...." http://www.radioworld.com/pages/s.0121/t.7440.html

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

This from radio World's "Leslie Report:"

"A member of the NRSC believes the FCC should rescind its IBOC rules until Ibiquity reveals more technical information about its IBOC system...." http://www.radioworld.com/pages/s.0121/t.7440.html

Not gonna happen. iBucquity will never reveal their technical specs, lest someone steal the info and upset their extortionate gravy train.

 

[Chuck]

Not gonna happen. iBucquity will never reveal their technical specs, lest someone steal the info and upset their extortionate gravy train.

I agree, but I thought it was an interesting article, especially for Radio World. It reminded me of some of the things Cal Stymes was talking about some time ago. Speaking of whom, we haven't heard from him recently.

I suspect that Mike Walker, RF Burns and Clouseau are boycotting the site, but it seems other "regulars" are missing too.

 

[MasterTheseus]

Not gonna happen. iBucquity will never reveal their technical specs, lest someone steal the info and upset their extortionate gravy train.

I agree, but I thought it was an interesting article, especially for Radio World. It reminded me of some of the things Cal Stymes was talking about some time ago. Speaking of whom, we haven't heard from him recently.

I suspect that Mike Walker, RF Burns and Clouseau are boycotting the site, but it seems other "regulars" are missing too.

I have talked with several people that were turned off by the violent arguing debates about IBOC. I myself feel that for the most part I have not been abused on this site and am encouraged by the level of civilized two way input.

I myself have talked to Leslie, and they have reviewed some of our products. . . I would guess that they would like the informatio, and I would assume the public can binefit from such. . . But I agree we would likely not see that any time soon.

 

[Tom Wells]

If iBiquity has not fully disclosed their technology, a competitor may sue to have the patents invalidated, which I think Mr. Kahn is doing.
One of the primary reasons for granting a patent was the LIMITED enjoyment of monopoly IN EXCHANGE for a FULL disclosure of
the technology such that the science or art is promoted generally. If ibiquity refuses to disclose full specifications, they should
lose their patents. Or they have every right to maintain this as a trade secret, in the manner of the Coca Cola formula.
But the FCC is not supposed to be approving "secret" technologies, either.
I don't know who was more wrong in this debacle, but it tastes like Chicago politics.
(There's nothing that enough cash in the right places can't fix.)

Fortunately the laws of physics are relatively incorruptible, whether or not the FCC is.

Ibiquity has been visiting the Chicago 50kw AMs, presumably for upgrades.
Last week, WSCR and WBBM had iBOC off for a day, WLS was analog only on monday this week, and yesterday WGN was analog only.
They are still brickwalling audio at 5khz while the iBOC is off, but intelligibilty and purity of sound are still better during these "outages".

Hard for me to understand why these AM's audio should still have so much 100-300 hz audio "mud".
It ruins intelligibility. Old world common sense from my instructors was: If you cut off one end of your audio, you MUST balance by cutting off
the other end to prevent muddiness or raspiness.
I have good hearing, so I can't imagine what it must be like for someone with poor upper-end hearing, but it can only be worse.

 

[dbdigital]

It could be that the HD-Radio rollout will stop on its own from a lack of inertia.

There is a wonderful article in today's cnet news that details the reasons for the problems iBiquity is having in getting HD-Radio off the ground. There's also a nice, concise history of iBiquity and its investors.

http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9750405-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20

Here is one note worthy quote:

"The chicken and egg problem can usually be dealt with over time. The lack of subsidies, however, has really made it difficult for iBiquity to move things along. Moreover, the slow adoption rate has kept the company's operating expense burn rate high, which has in turn delayed investors' payoff. If the burn rate is high enough and the rate of adoption is slow enough, well, let's just say that's not a good thing.

To add to the company's woes, last year the broadcasting industry ponied up $200 million in advertising funds to promote the new service, but nobody seemed to notice. Maybe that's because the advertising was on broadcasters' airwaves, which strikes me as a relatively narrow media plan."

The article also offers some alternate scenarios for iBiquity should HD-Radio permanently stall. Worth reading.

db

 

[RememberWHEN]

Tom Wells - Check out the "DX and Reception" page; Topic, "How is IBOC destroying AM DX" and go to FredRichards comments. Give a listen to the 2nd mp3 he has posted there. Apparently, the first digital carrier on IBOC is at (I'm drawing on memory here) 182 hZ or so. This may expain what you are hearing.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Hard for me to understand why these AM's audio should still have so much 100-300 hz audio "mud".

I've noticed it on both AM and FM. My theory is this (a bit conspiratorial, I admit) - the stations are jacking up the 100 to 300 Hz "bass" so their stations will sound good on all of these HD tabletop radios - which say that they have really good "bass" when in reality their enclosures and drivers can't produce much below 100 Hz, probably more like 150 in some cases. So HD radio sounds really good in stores, when in reality all that is coming through is the analog portion, but with enhanced bass. This trend got terrible a few months ago - song after song was picked that had "bass" in that band, and the stations sounded like somebody went into the studio and cranked up all the 30 channel graphic equalizers to full in the 100 to 300 Hz range. This was across owners and formats.

Then, about 2 months ago - they suddenly stopped.

To me, as a serious audiophile, "bass" is not something you roll off at 100 Hz and put out of a 6 inch or smaller speaker. It continues down to subsonic frequencies and usually requires large drivers with deep enclosures (usually the type of cabinet that looks like the antithesis of what is considered "cool" these days). My subwoofer equalizer consists of a 4 pole Butterworth filter with a gain of 20 dB and a -3 dB point of 13 Hz. Yes, I said "thirteen". It reaches unity gain in its roll off before 50 Hz. It takes hundreds of watts to drive the speakers. But it sounds great - on movies you get an effect like being in a theater. And low organ notes in classical can actually be felt through the floor.

So - if there was a conspiracy to make small table radios sound better, it was totally lost on true audiophiles, the ones that would adopters of HD because they want to squeeze every last dB out of the noise floor of their systems.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Tom Wells - Check out the "DX and Reception" page; Topic, "How is IBOC destroying AM DX" and go to FredRichards comments. Give a listen to the 2nd mp3 he has posted there. Apparently, the first digital carrier on IBOC is at (I'm drawing on memory here) 182 hZ or so. This may expain what you are hearing.

Quote and audio links:

"Digital Radio, Friend or Foe" (Technical Talk) Fred Vobbe talks with engineer and author Barry McLarnon about digital radio, IBOC, and show examples of the adjacent channel interference that many DX’ers have talked about. This informative interview goes in depth with great detail about IBOC from the DX’ers stand point. (57 minutes for all three tracks)

01: http://www.e-dxn.com/news/audio/ARIII1OO6/AllRadio_03-A.mp3

02: http://www.e-dxn.com/news/audio/ARIII1OO6/AllRadio_03-B.mp3

03: http://www.e-dxn.com/news/audio/ARIII1OO6/AllRadio_03-C.mp3

 

[rwagoner]

Not gonna happen. iBucquity will never reveal their technical specs, lest someone steal the info and upset their extortionate gravy train.

I agree, but I thought it was an interesting article, especially for Radio World. It reminded me of some of the things Cal Stymes was talking about some time ago. Speaking of whom, we haven't heard from him recently.

I suspect that Mike Walker, RF Burns and Clouseau are boycotting the site, but it seems other "regulars" are missing too.

I have talked with several people that were turned off by the violent arguing debates about IBOC. I myself feel that for the most part I have not been abused on this site and am encouraged by the level of civilized two way input.

I myself have talked to Leslie, and they have reviewed some of our products. . . I would guess that they would like the informatio, and I would assume the public can binefit from such. . . But I agree we would likely not see that any time soon.

The arguments here were/are annoying and not informative. You have a few people that generally haven't ever heard HD/IBOC and do nothing than post bad statements about it, over and over again. I have learned very little from the discussions on these boards in particular, and the tone of most is not civil.

I expected far greater than gradeschool level arguments, but that's about all that has been going on here ... if even that high a level.

 

[PhilJSmith67]

Not gonna happen. iBucquity will never reveal their technical specs, lest someone steal the info and upset their extortionate gravy train.

The specs are as plain as day, on file with the FCC, and everything you need to know about emissions (COFDM carriers, power levels, adjacent-channel splatter, etc) are all highly documented. You can look up the specs for AM and FM HD Radio yourself at fcc.gov.

 

[hipporadio]

Ibiquity has been visiting the Chicago 50kw AMs... Last week, WSCR and WBBM had iBOC off for a day, WLS was analog only on monday this week, and yesterday WGN was analog only. They are still brickwalling audio at 5khz while the iBOC is off, but intelligibilty and purity of sound are still better during these "outages". Hard for me to understand why these AM's audio should still have so much 100-300 hz audio "mud". It ruins intelligibility.

On a recent trip to Indiana, I was dismayed at the “muddy” lackluster audio on 50kw powerhouses; 700 WLW, 840 WHAS, 1070 WIBC, and 1190 WOWO. ALL of these stations have a heritage that included EXCELLENT AUDIO over many, MANY years... ALL currently employ IBOC. While one [or possibly two] could have a mere “change of preference” about their processing/audio bandwidth – it’s highly unusual that ALL FOUR would... IBOC is the common denominator.

I first noticed that “something was up” at 1530 WSAI Cincinnati in late-Spring 2004 during their “Real Oldies” era. That station had AWESOME AUDIO and a music format that clearly-displayed it. One afternoon, I heard an unpleasant difference while listening on the analog-tuned Tivoli Model One [Henry Kloss] table radio – a receiver with much-better than average AM audio quality. Highs had been noticeably-reduced and the bass was “fake” [and even distorted]. I soon caught that infamous “buzz-saw” at the periphery of their passband and knew the frustrating “HD Radio” era had begun :'(

 

[4dude]

Yes i think it should be stopped!!!!!

Its too compromising on the AM mode........ (Its bad enough on FM)

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Not gonna happen. iBucquity will never reveal their technical specs, lest someone steal the info and upset their extortionate gravy train.

I agree, but I thought it was an interesting article, especially for Radio World. It reminded me of some of the things Cal Stymes was talking about some time ago. Speaking of whom, we haven't heard from him recently.

I suspect that Mike Walker, RF Burns and Clouseau are boycotting the site, but it seems other "regulars" are missing too.

I have talked with several people that were turned off by the violent arguing debates about IBOC. I myself feel that for the most part I have not been abused on this site and am encouraged by the level of civilized two way input.

I myself have talked to Leslie, and they have reviewed some of our products. . . I would guess that they would like the informatio, and I would assume the public can binefit from such. . . But I agree we would likely not see that any time soon.

The arguments here were/are annoying and not informative. You have a few people that generally haven't ever heard HD/IBOC and do nothing than post bad statements about it, over and over again. I have learned very little from the discussions on these boards in particular, and the tone of most is not civil.

I expected far greater than gradeschool level arguments, but that's about all that has been going on here ... if even that high a level.

Hearing or not hearing HD radio in digital has little to do with many of the objections to the technology. I have heard AM and HD radio jamming my radio and adjacent channels. I don't need an HD radio to hear all that loud jamming all over the radio dial. For each HD station to jam at least 3 and sometimes more then 5 channels is proof enough that this is deceptive, defective technology. What ever happened to In Band On Channel?
Instead HD radio turns out to be out of band (top and bottom of the band stations) and all over the dial, and mostly on other stations channels.
I have visited a dozen stores with HD radio demonstration displays, (some within plain sight of the broadcasting towers) and have yet to hear one AM or FM HD station, in actual digital HD. I hear their analog signals fine on the displays, just no digital HD. If the dealers can't get HD radio to work with all their money, resources and supposed technical expertise, then what results can the typical consumer expect?
Poor to non-existent digital HD radio reception, and even poorer building penetration has been blamed by HD supporters on almost everything else but the defective HD radio concept itself! HD radio is an excellent example of problematic, incompatible, failed technology, and public rejection of the whole concept.

 

[Radioman100]

The arguments here were/are annoying and not informative. You have a few people that generally haven't ever heard HD/IBOC and do nothing than post bad statements about it, over and over again. I have learned very little from the discussions on these boards in particular, and the tone of most is not civil.

I expected far greater than gradeschool level arguments, but that's about all that has been going on here ... if even that high a level.

You hit the nail on the head. The same half dozen guys preaching to their own little choir and acting like gradeschoolers whenever someone presents a differing opinion. Not worth my time or anyone else's apparently.

 

[Tom Wells]

Those of us who oppose this technology HAVE heard it, both decoded in HD and the mangled analog of the hybrid signal.
We are just as convinced it's wrong as ibiquity is that they are right.
The fact that something is annoying has no bearing on whether it is factual.
If this forum did not exist, there would be no place to address the "less than honest" methods and disinformation of ibiquity.
They continue to encourage broadcasters to create willful, intentional, malicious repeated interference to their neighbors.
That is a fact. They also encourage broadcasters to interfere with THEIR OWN SIGNAL, and require them to
limit audio to completely unacceptable degree. A Mr. Microphone actually does sound better now than a 50kw IbOC AM HD.


It is unfortunate so few within the industry have sufficient integrity, knowledge or wherewithal to oppose this sham.
Sorry the comments from the opposed side seem preachy.
As I have no affiliations or obligations with the radio industry, my interest is for the preservation of radio, not seeing it
transformed into just another computer. Some things are too important to turn over to computers and digital technology.
Things that are made to work against their nature are never reliable.
I trust something you enjoy and value will be defiled sooner or later, that you may understand more fully.
I do not wish for this, but the universe has a way of teaching these things.
Don't criticize those who are trying to protect a limited, valuable resource.

 

[Radioman100]

If this forum did not exist, there would be no place to address the "less than honest" methods and disinformation of ibiquity.
They continue to encourage broadcasters to create willful, intentional, malicious repeated interference to their neighbors.
That is a fact.

This is a perfect example. I've been involved in several HD Radio deployments and I'll swear on a stack of bibles that I've never heard anything that even resembled malice being discussed. No broadcaster signs on an HD signal to do anything but provide better service to their listeners and eventually improve their bottom line.

 

[dbdigital]

Not gonna happen. iBucquity will never reveal their technical specs, lest someone steal the info and upset their extortionate gravy train.

I agree, but I thought it was an interesting article, especially for Radio World. It reminded me of some of the things Cal Stymes was talking about some time ago. Speaking of whom, we haven't heard from him recently.

I suspect that Mike Walker, RF Burns and Clouseau are boycotting the site, but it seems other "regulars" are missing too.

I have talked with several people that were turned off by the violent arguing debates about IBOC. I myself feel that for the most part I have not been abused on this site and am encouraged by the level of civilized two way input.

I myself have talked to Leslie, and they have reviewed some of our products. . . I would guess that they would like the informatio, and I would assume the public can binefit from such. . . But I agree we would likely not see that any time soon.

The arguments here were/are annoying and not informative. You have a few people that generally haven't ever heard HD/IBOC and do nothing than post bad statements about it, over and over again. I have learned very little from the discussions on these boards in particular, and the tone of most is not civil.

Nearly all of us have heard HD-Radio (that is, if you can get a signal the radio can lock on to) and are just not impressed.

I included comments from a respected engineer below as a way of tempering the criticism that this board is nothing more than a long screed from the anti-HD radio crowd. In his lengthy letter, engineer Elliot Klein indicated that many broadcast engineers he knows do not like what HD-Radio in hybrid mode is doing to the signals they work hard to keep clean and legal. Most of us who listen to radio don't like what its doing either.

There is the seldom-posted-to "other" board in which any negative comments on HD-Radio are not allowed. You might like the discussion there better.

BTW, Mark Ramsey announced yesterday that the 200 million dollar ad campaign for HD-Radio will end January 2008. Opinion is that, so far, it hasn't been a success.

db

 

[rwagoner]

I'm not against people stating they don't like it and stating why. This board tends not to do that. Instead, the same people tend to post the exact same thing OVER AND OVER again in numerous topics, and it has become nothing more than a bitch session of preaching to the choir. There has been very little civil debate, and as someone still on the fence (I am concerned about interference but like the sound when the signal is processed right), I have been very turned off by the posts here against HD. Very few posts are actually thoughtful, most appear to be at the level of a junior high school debate.

Here's a fact: AM is dead. DEAD. Put a fork in it. Most people I know under 35 have never even tuned to an AM station. AM Stereo didn't help because most radios were narrowband stereo and people thought what I thought the first time I heard a Radio Shack tuner: same static, but stereo. I sincerely doubt analog stereo is coming back. And either I buy different radios than you, but the post about "all current AM radios are wideband" is a lie. The radios I own and have heard are very narrow. The Blaupunkt in my truck is able to effectively filter the HD hash on AM so well that 2nd adjacent stations come in fine. (1090 from Mexico is loud and clear with no interference between HD's at 1110 and 1070 in Los Angeles, and I live in LA County).

SO it's not that I only want to read positive things about HD; I'd rather hear technical arguments about why it is bad. But those who have never heard it other than on samples who still say it sounds bad are just wrong. I own an HD tuner; my hearing is still good; it sounds good.

 

[vsa]

I'm not against people stating they don't like it and stating why. This board tends not to do that. Instead, the same people tend to post the exact same thing OVER AND OVER again in numerous topics, and it has become nothing more than a bitch session of preaching to the choir. There has been very little civil debate, and as someone still on the fence (I am concerned about interference but like the sound when the signal is processed right), I have been very turned off by the posts here against HD. Very few posts are actually thoughtful, most appear to be at the level of a junior high school debate.

Here's a fact: AM is dead. DEAD. Put a fork in it. Most people I know under 35 have never even tuned to an AM station. AM Stereo didn't help because most radios were narrowband stereo and people thought what I thought the first time I heard a Radio Shack tuner: same static, but stereo. I sincerely doubt analog stereo is coming back. And either I buy different radios than you, but the post about "all current AM radios are wideband" is a lie. The radios I own and have heard are very narrow. The Blaupunkt in my truck is able to effectively filter the HD hash on AM so well that 2nd adjacent stations come in fine. (1090 from Mexico is loud and clear with no interference between HD's at 1110 and 1070 in Los Angeles, and I live in LA County).

SO it's not that I only want to read positive things about HD; I'd rather hear technical arguments about why it is bad. But those who have never heard it other than on samples who still say it sounds bad are just wrong. I own an HD tuner; my hearing is still good; it sounds good.

The Blaupunkt in your truck is similar to most GM vehicle radios - no AM treble at all. The interference to 1090 AM is there and it's God-awful. Your hearing may be good, but your radio doesn't hear it because it hears no highs on the AM band whatsoever. Try a variety of radios by a variety of makers. Then, you'll wonder how the FCC ever took HD-radio on AM seriously.