The 26-27MHz band for AM HD?

[OKCRadioGuy]

Ladies and Gentlemen... I just read something in Radio World on page 46 titled "Rethinking AM's Future" that suggested that the 25-27Mhz band be used for AM HD. I THINK THAT WOULD BE AWESOME! That band and even possibly part of the old two-way frequencies for land-mobile that are abandoned would be a great re-use of spectrum that the rest of the world could care less about and would provide AM a pretty good foundation for the future. The current HD system for AM is a failure. Let's regroup and hop on this wonderful idea before we can't go back! Keep in mind if the industry didn't complain, we'd be stuck with spinning discs for color TV, FM wouldn't have been compatible with mono radios, and many other things would be totally wrong too. There aren't that many radios rolled out YET, so changing to the 25-27MHz band we already OWN currently reserved for RPU use ("Marti" frequencies nearly no one uses anymore) applying the AM IBOC standards in digital only mode would be the only hope to do things right for AM. IF we could get channel 5 and 6 TV channels , that would be better, however I don't see broadcast radio getting what could be auctioned off. Let's get started and do a proposal for rulemaking!

;D

 

[Chuck]

Ladies and Gentlemen... I just read something in Radio World on page 46 titled "Rethinking AM's Future" that suggested that the 25-27Mhz band be used for AM HD. I THINK THAT WOULD BE AWESOME! That band and even possibly part of the old two-way frequencies for land-mobile that are abandoned would be a great re-use of spectrum that the rest of the world could care less about and would provide AM a pretty good foundation for the future. The current HD system for AM is a failure. Let's regroup and hop on this wonderful idea before we can't go back! Keep in mind if the industry didn't complain, we'd be stuck with spinning discs for color TV, FM wouldn't have been compatible with mono radios, and many other things would be totally wrong too. There aren't that many radios rolled out YET, so changing to the 25-27MHz band we already OWN currently reserved for RPU use ("Marti" frequencies nearly no one uses anymore) applying the AM IBOC standards in digital only mode would be the only hope to do things right for AM. IF we could get channel 5 and 6 TV channels , that would be better, however I don't see broadcast radio getting what could be auctioned off. Let's get started and do a proposal for rulemaking!

;D

The idea has been tossed around quite a bit on Barry Mishkind's radio news group in the last couple of months. In fact, part of what Radio World printed sounded like it was a "cut and paste" from posts found there. Possibly even one of my posts. Radio World also said it wasn't a good solution.

There are a few minor technical problems with the idea, but I think it could work. It would be a lot simpler "fix" than trying to do HD on AM. Somehow I doubt the idea will gather much momentum though. It's all about money. Too much has been spent on the current band-aid fix for AM. It is unlikely that most of the big participants would go willingly to 26-27 MHz. For one thing, it would level the playing field for all stations on that band, and that wouldn't go down too well. Part of the attractiveness about the Ibiquity AM scheme is it keeps small stations small, while allowing the larger stations to keep a good signal.

Besides, they'd probably use DRM on 26 MHz, and that would put Ibiquity out of the picture. I suspect Ibiquity might work OK there too, but I'm not sure they have any interest in pursuing it. The current HD scheme preserves the status quo, and many broadcasters would like to keep it that way. (I’m not one of them.)

 

[4dude]

I THINK THAT WOULD BE AWESOME!

Why would this be awesome??

We would lose our 11 METER BAND!!!!!!!!

What if this was gonna wipe out one of your blasted ham bands? Would you also say "I THINK THIS IS AWESOME??"

 

[Chuck]

I THINK THAT WOULD BE AWESOME!

Why would this be awesome??

We would lose our 11 METER BAND!!!!!!!!

What if this was gonna wipe out one of your blasted ham bands? Would you also say "I THINK THIS IS AWESOME??"

The last I looked, Hams are authorized for the 10 meter band. 11 meters is CB. We're talking about frequencies below the 11 Meter Citizen's Band. Right now, it;s just a bunch of pirate CB operators using their 1000 watt linear amplifiers on frequencies they are not authorized to use.

 

[texasradio]

No. No. No.

The propagation on this band is terrible. In the low part of the sunspot cycle, it wouldn't serve a local market. In the height of the cycle, it would reach around the world.

Think things are bad on the AM band at night. Try it at this frequency.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Making 26 Mhz (or some other frequency) using DRM the only legal "digital broadcasting band" and offering the licenses exclusively to new, local broadcasters, that want to serve the public, and promote localism, sounds like a good solution. That would remove the interfering, problematic, HD radio digital signals from the AM and FM broadcast bands.
That seems to be the only way the public, and listeners could benefit by this digital technology.

 

[Mike Walker]

If there is no in-band solution for AM that doesn't cause horrendous interference, and is actually usable at night, then this could be the solution.

Frequencies aren't that far below the bottom of VHF TV, so propagation shouldn't be that much worse than, say, Channel 2. I get WFMY, channel 2 in Greensboro (about 70 miles away) just fine.

The FM system, however, seems to be working just fine. Remember we're in "rollout mode". I don't have a car HD Radio, so I have no idea what reception on the road would be like in my (remote) area. Considering that the power of the HD signal is 1/100th that of analog, it's shockingly good now. Think about it...70-80 mile SOLID coverage from 70-100 watts in the crowded FM band. That ain't too shabby. The power level was deliberately kept low at first to kind of find the threshold...work up to where it causes a real problem (with analog reception), then back off until the problem subsides. Bingo...that's the power level. From what I've read, power levels willl probably be experimentally increased on the HD signal before long.

Some stations are set to experiment with higher bitrates than the total 96kbps in the "rollout" mode. However, higher bitrates can result in less robust HD signals, which could restrict range. HD now struggles (and usually fails) to reach as far as the analog signal, so this is a real balancing act.

Go for 26mhz! And leave the AM broadcast band alone! Hell, if FM HD stays put (between 88.1 and 107.9), perhaps frequencies could be available for new LOCAL service, as Supercaster suggested. THAT would benefit everyone!

 

[Chuck]

Go for 26mhz! And leave the AM broadcast band alone! Hell, if FM HD stays put (between 88.1 and 107.9), perhaps frequencies could be available for new LOCAL service, as Supercaster suggested. THAT would benefit everyone!

I still think that annexing TV channels 5 & 6 is the best solution, with the 40-50 MHz "Armstrong Band" as the second runner up. 26 MHz would be my third choice, but I would back any of those choices if the FCC would make any of them available.

The real problem is we are trying to cram too much information into too little spectrum.

 

[4dude]

I THINK THAT WOULD BE AWESOME!

The last I looked, Hams are authorized for the 10 meter band. 11 meters is CB. We're talking about frequencies below the 11 Meter Citizen's Band. Right now, it;s just a bunch of pirate CB operators using their 1000 watt linear amplifiers on frequencies they are not authorized to use.

Oh i see what ya mean (Between 11 and 12) -- Might cause alot of SPLASH all thru 11 meters though (@ maybe into 10)

 

[Mike Walker]

Perhaps you're right Chuck (about 5 & 6), IF they turn off analog tv. I'm still skeptical they'll actually do that. There are lots of poor people in rural areas that I am certain know nothing of an analog cutoff, and either can't afford cable or satellite, or no cable is available.

I live in a quite rural area. These days we have (available) digital cable and broadband. But they have been available for only about five of the twenty plus years I've been here. (I subscribe to cable internet, but not tv. I'm a DirecTV fan).

I can think of a half-dozen households IN MY FAMILY in rural areas, with neither cable nor satellite, where they would be stunned and angered by a shutdown of analog tv. I guarantee they're not alone. Does a Democratically-controlled Congress REALLY want allow this to go forward? After all, it will probably affect ONLY low income and rural households. Will the party of the "little guy" really allow this? I have my doubts!

 

[Black_Shire]

Perhaps you're right Chuck (about 5 & 6), IF they turn off analog tv. I'm still skeptical they'll actually do that. There are lots of poor people in rural areas that I am certain know nothing of an analog cutoff, and either can't afford cable or satellite, or no cable is available.

I live in a quite rural area. These days we have (available) digital cable and broadband. But they have been available for only about five of the twenty plus years I've been here. (I subscribe to cable internet, but not tv. I'm a DirecTV fan).

I can think of a half-dozen households IN MY FAMILY in rural areas, with neither cable nor satellite, where they would be stunned and angered by a shutdown of analog tv. I guarantee they're not alone. Does a Democratically-controlled Congress REALLY want allow this to go forward? After all, it will probably affect ONLY low income and rural households. Will the party of the "little guy" really allow this? I have my doubts!

I hope you're right, because I'm one of them (disabled working poor). However, our Channel 2 TV station here in Fairbanks is apparently eagerly anticipating the analog cut-off because they've let their analog signal go to hell for the last five years (the signal has gotten progressively weaker, and their tower is just 4 blocks from my home!).


-- Black Shire

 

[Chuck]

Perhaps you're right Chuck (about 5 & 6), IF they turn off analog tv. I'm still skeptical they'll actually do that. There are lots of poor people in rural areas that I am certain know nothing of an analog cutoff, and either can't afford cable or satellite, or no cable is available.

That is a good question. I live in a rural area in East Texas. There is cable in some parts, but it doesn't come down my street. From what I've seen on my neighbors TVs, we aren't missing much. We get most of our TV by satellite, which is OK. We also get off the air TV as well, but all the stations are in different directions, so without a rotor or multiple antennas, OTA reception is a challenge. Because multi-path (ghosting) isn't as big an issue with digital TV, it actually works a lot better than traditional analog. Of course HDTV is a huge leap over NTSC, but even taking that out of the equation, a standard definition picture is usually a lot better in digital than analog. The change over may not be as traumatic as it might seem.

Supposedly the government is going to provide a subsidy for low income individuals to buy a converter box which will allow them to keep using their existing TV's. Of course, they will probably make the process so complicated that it is hardly worth doing. After all, it is coming from the same nice folks who hatched "Medicare Part D" that nobody can figure out.

Then there are all the LPTV stations. We have several in the area. They aren't exactly easy to pick up where I live, but I guess they do OK in towns. It is uncertain what their digital future will be. I may be mistaken, but I don't think they suffer from the same analog shut down date as full power stations. Perhaps they will find a new revenue stream by becoming agents for full power digital TV stations. It would be easy for them to down-convert a digital TV signal and rebroadcast it in glorious analog. It might be more profitable than running the Home Shopping Channel. It's just a thought.

Congress has postponed the Analog Shut Down once. It wouldn't surprise me if they did it again, citing "national security” or some such reason. I guess we'll see as the date gets nearer.

 

[hipporadio]

No. No. No.

The propagation on this band is terrible. In the low part of the sunspot cycle, it wouldn't serve a local market. In the height of the cycle, it would reach around the world.

Think things are bad on the AM band at night. Try it at this frequency.

BINGO Texas... The propagation issue was the first thing to hit my head when I heard this as an "option"... WELL beyond any groundwave ameba but short of typical "line of sight" FM-style propagation. 26-27 megs seems to be "forgotton territory" within the RF community. Assuming local coverage issues could be addressed, wouldn't the "seven-year itch" (sunspot skip) be a concern? Am I wrong... Should I drag out my old World Radio Handbook? WHY was CB "Citizen's Band" placed there many moons ago? Was 26-27 megs just "defective goods" passed on to "the folks" for use at four watts?

'Seems to this fairly rational mind that the soon to be surrendered CH 5-6 sprectrum may be a better bet. I'm well short of an "expert" in these matters... I'd like to hear some technical input on this... I promise to read on with an open mind... and learn! HAPPY Non-iBLOCK NEW YEAR ALL

 

[Chuck]

[I hope you're right, because I'm one of them (disabled working poor). However, our Channel 2 TV station here in Fairbanks is apparently eagerly anticipating the analog cut-off because they've let their analog signal go to hell for the last five years (the signal has gotten progressively weaker, and their tower is just 4 blocks from my home!).


-- Black Shire

I know of at least two TV stations (under the same ownership) who are considering abandoning analog transmission before the cut off date. They figure that 80-85% of their audience gets their signal by cable or satellite. The remaining 15-20% are OTA viewers. An increasing number of those OTA people receive their new digital signals via the new HDTV they bought at Wal-Mart for Christmas. I have to admit, once you convert to HDTV, you won't want to go back to analog.

Their theory is that the small remaining audience who either can't afford a new TV or don't want a new TV aren't worth broadcasting to, since no sponsor would really want to address that group of people. If they shut off the analog, they will drastically reduce their electric bills, and no longer have to maintain their 25 year old analog transmitters. Both power and maintenance are "big ticket" items. They see this as a significant saving, with no down side reflected in their income.

It's ugly, but it is what some broadcasters are thinking.

 

[Chuck]

BINGO Texas... The propagation issue was the first thing to hit my head when I heard this as an "option"... WELL beyond any groundwave ameba but short of typical "line of sight" FM-style propagation. 26-27 megs seems to be "forgotton territory" within the RF community. Isn't "sunspot skip" a big problem? Am I wrong? If so, WHY was CB "Citizen's Band" placed there many moons ago?

'Seems to this fairly rational mind that the soon to be surrendered CH 5-6 sprectrum may be a better bet. I'm well short of an "expert" in these matters... I'd like to hear some technical input on this... I promise to read on with an open mind... and learn! HAPPY Non-iBLOCK NEW YEAR ALL

When I mentioned "some technical issues" propagation was one of them. The seven year sun spot cycle certainly does strange things at those frequencies. The theory is 26 MHz would be a local service, used mostly to replace 1KW AM day-timers. Even under bizarre conditions, they should still be able to serve their city of license. I'm not sure what would happen to digital signals during high sun spot activity. Probably nobody knows for sure without actually trying it with multiple signals. It's kind of like HD on AM. You really don't know how bad it will be until you fire up every station at night.

At least, with the 26 MHz band, if you signed on to broadcast there, you should know what to expect. There will be some problems, but nobody is making you apply for a license. At least, you don't have a new technology moving in to your already established territory causing "new and improved" interference.

For many reasons, Channel 6 is still a better place for a new or expanded service. Whether the FCC and Congress would ever agree is a totally different story.

 

[w9wi]

No. No. No.

The propagation on this band is terrible. In the low part of the sunspot cycle, it wouldn't serve a local market. In the height of the cycle, it would reach around the world.

Think things are bad on the AM band at night. Try it at this frequency.

Even in the current low end of the sunspot cycle, there's frequent sporadic-E ("short skip") in this band. Back in June & July, I monitored the 29.62MHz ham repeater in NYC. It came in EVERY DAY for two months (I'm near Nashville, Tenn.), frequently with very strong signals. Sporadic-E 4MHz lower, in the 25-26MHz band, is even more frequent & intense.

I suspect where this came from...

There is an internationally-assigned shortwave broadcasting band in this vicinity. 25.6-26.1MHz if I recall properly. In the UK, someone's been authorized to try some domestic DRM broadcasting in this band. I want to say they're running about 100 watts.

But as you say, local coverage will be quite limited on this band, certainly not enough to replicate the coverage of a low-on-the-dial 5kw regional, let alone a 50kw clear-channel. (even in its groundwave coverage)

 

[OKCRadioGuy]

The channel 5-6 tv band WOULD be a better option IF we can get the damn government to cooperate. It would be worth the wait actually. Here's the problem. How many decades will it take to kill analog TV? How much money will the government loose not whoring out the channels to other "services"? As far as technical usefulness, the 5-6 tv band would have better and more useful. It would be MUCH easier for receiver manufactures and could use the same antenna as FM. With that being said, we'll be lucky if we get the inferior 25-27MHz.

 

[texasradio]

OKCRadioGuy has a point. ANY new frequency for AM stations will likely be tied to a requirement to relinquish the analog frequency at some later date. Remember the cries directed to congress and the FCC regarding the digital TV "spectrum give away?" Congress has turned the FCC into a revenue generating agency with the sale of unused spectrum. This "revenue generating" mentality seems to have taken hold at upper levels of the FCC. Certain lobbying groups sure seem to have taken advantage of it (but that is another story).

Unless HD radios are issued for free, it will take years, generations, for the listening public to acquire new receivers. The TV cutoff will be a disaster. That is not a good marketing plan to follow.

Time to make lemonaid out of lemons. HD radio won't work on AM. The band allocation plan won't support the real world bandwidth that the Ibiquity system occupies. So fellow broadcasters, lets stop pissing ourselves while we hope in vain that the Digital Revolution will take hold. Turn it off. Wait till a better alternative emerges, then hope that a reasonable transition period is provided.

An HF allocation for HD is not the solution unless we want to deep six HD radio. Hmmm, maybe that is the point.