• 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

Someone Claims To Have *THE* Answer To Make HD Work

Former FCC chairman Mark Fowler is the managing partner of an outfit called Digital Power Radio, and he claims his company has a "game changer" for HD reception.

"The company says its system will provide coverage gains of approximately 5 dB hybrid for FM signals in mobile handsets/smart phones and tabletops in buildings, and approximately 7 dB of gains into auto receivers for hybrid FM broadcast signals. Similar gains will be realized for AM hybrid broadcasts."

http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/a...to-reveal-an-hd-radio-game-cha?ref=mail_recap
 
In general, it would be necessary to increase the signal to noise ratio for the analog or create a higher redundancy method that does not impact the transmitted digital audio too noticably.

The first method would simply be a way to make analog work even worse at the expense of the digital.

The second may mean longer accquistion time, and a noticable drop in ultimate resolution of high frequency data,
but could be far less susceptible to dropping.

I can't wait to see how much real info is shared about the method in this report.

<Post Reading of piece>

Well, It would be great if they've found a way to make the decoder follow the data through the effects of rf propogation variabilities.
A 5 db increase sure would help quite a few listeners.
 
dumber than a box of hair said:
Former FCC chairman Mark Fowler is the managing partner of an outfit called Digital Power Radio, and he claims his company has a "game changer" for HD reception.

"The company says its system will provide coverage gains of approximately 5 dB hybrid for FM signals in mobile handsets/smart phones and tabletops in buildings, and approximately 7 dB of gains into auto receivers for hybrid FM broadcast signals. Similar gains will be realized for AM hybrid broadcasts."

http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/a...to-reveal-an-hd-radio-game-cha?ref=mail_recap

A little (well a LOT) short on technical details. At this point, it is like putting bandaids on the Titanic.
 
It still smacks of putting lipstick on a pig, particularly in the AM band, where DPR's so-called fixes don't even begin to address the issue of crapping in the yard of a station on an adjacent channel. And it's not as if the public has actually tried HD and decided it doesn't work...there's just no interest out there, and this so-called fix isn't going to magically turn that around either.
 
I don't think it can help AM enough to make it viable because of the electrical noise from lightning, powerlines, etc. For FM, a gain of 5-7 db would be great when coupled with a power increase and asymmetrical power. However, another problem with HD radio is competition from Wifi radio. I recently purchased a Wifi radio and have been able to listen to 128 kb streams with excellent frequency response through a full range audio system. Since purchasing the Wifi, I rarely listen to terrestrial radio - HD and analog. Eventually, it will be possible to to interface this technology through a car radio. What that happens, there will be no reason to listen to over the air signals. My point is this: Even if HD radio becomes technically viable, its success will be limited to the success of terrestrial radio.
 
Geographer said:
Eventually, it will be possible to to interface this technology through a car radio.

It's already possible. Granted, a smartphone usually acts as the middle man, but it's very much an available technology.

What that happens, there will be no reason to listen to over the air signals. My point is this: Even if HD radio becomes technically viable, its success will be limited to the success of terrestrial radio.

The one thing HD would have going for it, if broadcasters could offer something compelling on it, is that it's significantly cheaper than streaming. Even with the start up costs and the fees to iBiquity, HD is a drop in the bucket compared with streaming.
 
Whether or not this is "A New Future for HD Radio" or not remains to be seen. Mark Fowler as Managing Partner of Digital Power Radio is credible -- but more of interest to me is the direct role of Beasley CEO George Beasley, who says the new HD Radio technology "could be a game-changer for radio". DPR is owned by Beasley Broadcast Group and the Fowler Radio Group. Since it will be presented at the NAB Show, let's wait and see the response. If this new tech can greatly improve reception of HD multicast channels, even for upcoming portable receivers that will include HD Radio, and radio then begins effectively using HD channels, the public demand may come.

I remember my first fulltime radio job in 1965 at an FM station in Atlantic City, NJ, after a couple of years of weekend work at a nearby (small town) hometown AM station while in high school. "No one listens to FM, it will never be successful, AM will always have all the listeners" -- were the common thoughts. Then when FM added programming that people wanted (AOR - "underground radio"), it caught on, took off, and became successful with more formerly AM-only music formats -- and now people say "AM radio is dead." HD Radio could have a future too. But that's still a big COULD.

By the way, in the early 1970s, when I realized a onetime dream of working at WMID-AM in Atlantic City ("The Jersey Giant"), under PD Gary Lane, WMID-AM was still the top-rated station in the market, even though we also had an FM sister, WGRF-FM. (Both stations were then owned by Merv Griffin.) So from 1965-1972, FM still hadn't begun to rule, even though it offered superior audio quality and static-free signals -- and even true stereo! I kept wondering why people stayed with AM over FM. My point: it may take quite some time, but HD Radio (or eventually a non-IBOC digital?) very well could be the future of over-the-air radio.
 
This isn't going to work, it's kind of like putting lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig and IBOC is still IBOC. The basic premise of IBOC just doesn't work, it's a compromise which doesn't work. I have a Sony HDRF1HD which was touted as being one of the best HD tuners and it needs a roof top Yagi to get anything in HD reliably. This chip is just going to amplify everything including surrounding stations and noise. EVEN Strubie doesn't like the idea, although of course that's probably because his company didn't design it.

BTW you guys who think HD is going to be the new FM are dreaming, there was a lot more to the big FM migration than good sound there was NEW programming and the difference in sound from AM to FM was much more dramatic than the purported difference between analog and IBOC.
The main thing that jumps out at people newly listening to IBOC is all the drop outs and this new chip won't stop them.
 
The article says it makes the changes at the receiver end. Too bad not many companies make receivers any more. These people will have to convince manufacturers who aren't making HD receivers to add their improvement. Good luck.
 
TheBigA said:
The article says it makes the changes at the receiver end. Too bad not many companies make receivers any more. These people will have to convince manufacturers who aren't making HD receivers to add their improvement. Good luck.

The interesting thing is that Strbbe came out and said that the premise of Fowler's company is not valid nor accurate.

This is looking like a food fight with garbage.
 
DavidEduardo said:
The interesting thing is that Strbbe came out and said that the premise of Fowler's company is not valid nor accurate.

Yep, that also caught my attention. You'd think they'd want to encourage all the help they could get. But then they'd have to admit that their system needs improvement. My view is improving receivers doesn't matter if no one is buying the receivers in the first place.
 
KB1OKL said:
This isn't going to work, it's kind of like putting lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig and IBOC is still IBOC. The basic premise of IBOC just doesn't work, it's a compromise which doesn't work. I have a Sony HDRF1HD which was touted as being one of the best HD tuners and it needs a roof top Yagi to get anything in HD reliably. This chip is just going to amplify everything including surrounding stations and noise. EVEN Strubie doesn't like the idea, although of course that's probably because his company didn't design it.

I have one of the HD Radio "dongles" for the iPhone that I got for $15 when Radio Shack was trying to close them out. I haven't had the reception problems you're describing, though it can be hit and miss in some areas. I also found it pretty worthless to use in downtown Springfield, MO, probably because of all the buildings. A friend of mine who had a car with an HD Radio could get KTXR 101.3's HD subchannel all over town and almost to Monett (nearly 70 miles from the tower) with few to no problems. I suppose the occasional dropouts could be enough to get an average person to give up on the technology, though. After all, radio people tend to ignore little drops like that while a regular person might think it was too much work to enjoy.

BTW you guys who think HD is going to be the new FM are dreaming, there was a lot more to the big FM migration than good sound there was NEW programming and the difference in sound from AM to FM was much more dramatic than the purported difference between analog and IBOC.
The main thing that jumps out at people newly listening to IBOC is all the drop outs and this new chip won't stop them.

I'm surprised more people don't mention this, but one of the biggest reasons FM replaced AM for music was because cities and metro areas started growing outside of the AM directional patterns. As an example, when Dallas and Ft. Worth were combined into one market in the mid-70's, there weren't even 5 AM's that covered the combined area 24/7. You can't compete in a market if you can't cover it! Kansas City had similar issues as the suburbs in Johnson County exploded in growth in the late-70's/early-80's, and onetime dominant AM's, like 810 KCMO, went directional at night from a site 30+ miles away, which made their signals weaker in Johnson County. St. Louis is another. AM's had their towers in Illinois, where land was cheaper, but St. Louis grew in the other direction. In the 30's and earlier, no one could've predicted this growth. In the case of St. Louis, you'd have sworn East St. Louis was an up and coming city and never could've foreseen it becoming the wasteland it is today. Almost every large market has a story like this.

So, one area where I do agree with you is that HD isn't going to be the savior of FM radio. In many larger cities, people already commute 100-150 miles round trip every day. Going back to Dallas (which I'm more familiar with because I grew up there), commutes from northern Collin County are common, especially to Plano and the telecom corridor in Richardson. All of those areas are in the far northern part of the Dallas metro, and most of the towers are in far south Dallas. If you live north of McKinney (central Collin County), you're already outside the 60 dBu signal contour, and you'll have some radios that won't be able to get good signals on the south Dallas sticks. HD isn't going to help anyone reach these people.
 
Kent said:
So, one area where I do agree with you is that HD isn't going to be the savior of FM radio. In many larger cities, people already commute 100-150 miles round trip every day. Going back to Dallas (which I'm more familiar with because I grew up there), commutes from northern Collin County are common, especially to Plano and the telecom corridor in Richardson. All of those areas are in the far northern part of the Dallas metro, and most of the towers are in far south Dallas. If you live north of McKinney (central Collin County), you're already outside the 60 dBu signal contour, and you'll have some radios that won't be able to get good signals on the south Dallas sticks. HD isn't going to help anyone reach these people.

I did some measurements on Dallas HD stations from about 4 miles North of Van Alstyne, about 64 miles from the DFW antenna farm. I had perfect HD decode on every DFW HD FM station, and on KMKI 620. KAAM 770 was problematic for me, even in the city of Plano 9.4 miles from the KAAM tower. Contrast that to perfect C-Quam reception on KAAM 290 miles away during the daytime, at a rest stop in the Crosbyton canyon. The only issue was the presence of KKOB underneath KAAM, but it didn't cause platform motion until I tried KAAM from Lubbock, another 40 miles West.

I've also measured reception on Houston HD stations and found that they go about 70 miles in HD in my car. I do know, also, that the Missouri City stations are pretty much gone by North of Huntsville. HD probably drops out about 15 to 20 miles South of there, but should be solid in areas like Conroe and the Woodlands. I haven't done a drive test that direction yet.

I find HD to be pretty robust over the city, but there are other problems such as IF images and small nulls which cause HD to dropout as close as 20 miles to the towers. AM HD drops because of power lines by the road. HD reception of AM is seriously compromised by any interference source. I can get AM HD on College Station 1620 about 60 miles away, but it drops immediately anywhere near a power line.

Any new IC would have to actively cancel power line interference to improve AM - theoretically possible if you can characterize exactly the noise waveform and feed it back precisely out of phase at the precise level required to cancel, but that assumes the signal doesn't saturate and a very high bandwidth system to perform the cancellation. I am highly skeptical. As far as FM, no chip can solve the IF image jamming problem, nor can it solve the micro null problem. I find that the micro nulls where HD drops also has degraded analog reception, often dropping analog stereo as well.

The ONLY possible solution to the FM problem would be to move the digital sidebands into the FM channel - as far as I can tell the software will decode sidebands no matter where they are located so no firmware change should be necessary on the receiver end. It would solve the IF image problem, and also the coverage problem. The HD-2 drop to silence problem is still an issue. What is needed is faster locking algorithms.

The solution for AM is to fall back to C-Quam, call it HD, issue firmware updates to any HD radio that doesn't already decode it. AM HD is too prone to interference to be fixed - no matter what the power level, unless they want to allocate 500 kW or more to HD AM and hope it can out-shout the power lines. But I doubt even that would solve the power line problem.
 
DavidEduardo said:
TheBigA said:
The article says it makes the changes at the receiver end. Too bad not many companies make receivers any more. These people will have to convince manufacturers who aren't making HD receivers to add their improvement. Good luck.

The interesting thing is that Strbbe came out and said that the premise of Fowler's company is not valid nor accurate.

This is looking like a food fight with garbage.

I wish there was a "Like" button. If I'd been drinking milk, I might have passed it through my nostrils. ;)

It looks like we have another Science Project that is looking for a Fair.
 
rbrucecarter5 said:
I did some measurements on Dallas HD stations from about 4 miles North of Van Alstyne, about 64 miles from the DFW antenna farm. I had perfect HD decode on every DFW HD FM station, and on KMKI 620. I've also measured reception on Houston HD stations and found that they go about 70 miles in HD in my car. I do know, also, that the Missouri City stations are pretty much gone by North of Huntsville. HD probably drops out about 15 to 20 miles South of there, but should be solid in areas like Conroe and the Woodlands. I haven't done a drive test that direction yet.

The car experiment my friend and I conducted between Springfield and Joplin a few years ago yielded similar results. The strongest Joplin stations in HD (KSYN 92.5 and KIXQ 102.5) were able to decode by the Halltown exit at the 58 MM on I-44. That's not even 20 miles from downtown Springfield. It's about 55-60 miles from the Joplin tower farm, which was spared from the devastating tornado a couple years ago because it's slightly west of town. So, I doubt there's been much change since then. As I mentioned, KTXR's tower is in Fordland, and we got the HD as far out as Monett, which is at least 60 miles from Fordland.

As you might expect, the results on the iPhone dongle and app aren't anywhere near as good. Walking around downtown Springfield, KTXR's almost non-existent in HD. I've also tried walking at Route 66 State Park outside of St. Louis and listening to HD Radio via the iPhone. Route 66 State Park is 2-3 miles east of Six Flags Over Mid-America at the site of the former city of Times Beach. It's no more than 15 miles from the main tower farm, but you can forget about HD walking around in the woods there. However, in Kansas City, I've had quite good results with HD. One of my favorite places to walk is the area near 87th and Lackman in Lenexa, KS, a good 30 miles from the main tower farm in Liberty. HD works fine there with minimal dropouts.

Of course, the real question is how many dropouts are too many for an average listener. I doubt someone like my mother would put up with even the relatively few dropouts between Joplin and Springfield or Springfield and Monett. Also, the fact that she wouldn't be able to get HD on every radio at a distance like that would probably mean she wouldn't give much thought to listening to those extra stations in the car. For most people, radio will always be a passive medium, something taken for granted that it's just there, not really something to seek out.
 
Kent said:
I'm surprised more people don't mention this, but one of the biggest reasons FM replaced AM for music was because cities and metro areas started growing outside of the AM directional patterns.

Maybe. Amother reason was the Armstrong patent ran out, and manufacturers could install FM chips in radios for next to nothing. So it became a value-added thing for radios. No such thing with HD. Until THAT patent runs out. By then, it really won't matter.
 
I seem to be something of a Lone Ranger here because my car-based HD receiver seems to work very well in my relatively flat metro area. I have discovered only one isolated area in Snottsdale where I have a lock problem and it only lasts seconds as you pass by a four-story building. Not even in downtown Phoenix in the heart of the financial center does my car radio (a Lexicon) drop the HD signal (downtown is miles closer to the towers than is Snottsdale).

I have always thought that for any terrestrial station to be successful you needed two things: coverage and content.

Without adequate coverage nothing else is possible. Insofar as FM HD is concerned I have been as far north as the mesa's on I-17 (45 miles from the towers), as far east as San Tan Valley (50 miles from the towers) and still had no drop-out problem. Granted, there are very few obstructions to both areas. Based on those directions I would assume the HD signal would be receivable south to at least Casa Grande (about 45 miles) and west to the White Tank mountains on the extreme edge of the metro area. That is pretty good coverage. There may be reception issues behind some of the local peaks - I haven't tested those. Given that KOOL-FM's analog signal reaches the outskirts of Tucson (100+ miles) the HD coverage is nothing to brag about but as long as I stay within my metro area the HD signal does have value for me.

Without desirable content coverage doesn't matter. Because the main signal for my personal favorite genre has defiled itself with music I don't like I searched the HD signals for better options and found one on an HD2. Therefore, as long as this HD signal is available and maintains its current playlist I will stay with it. Should it disappear and nothing take it's place I would be done with radio in my car since the only other option for me is an AM which does not cover my end of the Valley. I do listen to that AM streaming online at home however.

I do not have a streaming option in the car but I do have XM/Sirius (not subscribed), DVD-Audio and flash drive so plenty of choices to keep me company should terrestrial radio drop the ball. For now though I am happy with HD and would buy it again in my next vehicle (although by the time I need to replace this car either my hearing will be totally shot or they won't let me drive any longer) ;D
 
DavidEduardo said:
The interesting thing is that Strbbe came out and said that the premise of Fowler's company is not valid nor accurate.

Of course he said that. iBiquity can't make any money from it because it's not their invention/IP.

As I said: It's putting lipstick on a pig.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom