The Beginning of the HD Radio Conquest of the Bands

[rbc]

I'm tired of seeing "The Beginning of the end for HD Radio" at the top of the list on this forum. I'll twist it the other way. It's probably only going to apply in major markets for a while to come, but I see analog fading as HD radio moves toward full deployment. That whole conversation about how HD1 has to closely match the analog signal highlights how hybrid is a necessary compromise even on the FM band. Hybrid AM was even worse, and it's becoming clear that all-digital is the way to go.

 

[Will_H_69_9]

I'm tired of seeing "The Beginning of the end for HD Radio" at the top of the list on this forum. I'll twist it the other way. It's probably only going to apply in major markets for a while to come, but I see analog fading as HD radio moves toward full deployment. That whole conversation about how HD1 has to closely match the analog signal highlights how hybrid is a necessary compromise even on the FM band. Hybrid AM was even worse, and it's becoming clear that all-digital is the way to go.

i wouldn't mind the HD Radio technology get saved, in fact, if we go full digital HD Radio, we need to have the stations have the same amount of signal reach as the analog signal is now.

 

[davideduardo]

I'm tired of seeing "The Beginning of the end for HD Radio" at the top of the list on this forum. I'll twist it the other way. It's probably only going to apply in major markets for a while to come, but I see analog fading as HD radio moves toward full deployment. That whole conversation about how HD1 has to closely match the analog signal highlights how hybrid is a necessary compromise even on the FM band. Hybrid AM was even worse, and it's becoming clear that all-digital is the way to go.

Not happening. People are not buying new radios unless they come attached to a car. And there are fewer than 25% of all cars with HD now, and considering that new car sales are stalled due to the virus the transition will take even longer.

A significant station will not go all digital on FM until nearly every car has HD, And doing so will eliminate the listening at home and at work, which still is over half of all listening.

The annoying thing about digital is that it drops out in places like between bigger buildings, in underpasses, in shadow zones. Without analog backup, stations will just "turn off" just like satellite does in such situations. It's likely that a greater digital power would be needed, and that would require licensing a new power level for digital.

And in smaller markets and small towns, HD is simply not in use at all.

 

[rbc]

And in smaller markets and small towns, HD is simply not in use at all.

Most of rural Mississippi receives HD coverage from Mississippi Public Radio. I've spent a fair amount of time driving to no-where places in Mississippi and I can almost always pull in both HD1 and HD2 from one of the MPB stations. When traveling during bad weather, it works better for me to leave MPB on, than monitor the weather with a smart phone. I don't have to take my eyes off the road when weather alerts are aired.

 

[anotherguyTN]

The only thing I can see that HD has been useful for has been for feeding FM translators in areas where that's available. Otherwise there are no stations that use it in my area and no reason for me to buy a radio that will have it, and I don't see any way that will change.

 

[davideduardo]

Most of rural Mississippi receives HD coverage from Mississippi Public Radio. I've spent a fair amount of time driving to no-where places in Mississippi and I can almost always pull in both HD1 and HD2 from one of the MPB stations. When traveling during bad weather, it works better for me to leave MPB on, than monitor the weather with a smart phone. I don't have to take my eyes off the road when weather alerts are aired.

I did not know that... my only excuse is that I don't follow non-commercial radio closely enough. That is a rather practical use of the system for regional coverage.

 

[rbc]

The only thing I can see that HD has been useful for has been for feeding FM translators in areas where that's available. Otherwise there are no stations that use it in my area and no reason for me to buy a radio that will have it, and I don't see any way that will change.

I'm sure it varies by marketplace. In my marketplace there are some places where it works pretty well.

 

[rbc]

I did not know that... my only excuse is that I don't follow non-commercial radio closely enough. That is a rather practical use of the system for regional coverage.

MPB isn't so great for news about my home town. I listen to local radio for that. When I'm traveling though, I listen to MPB quite a bit. I can and do stream my local stations when I'm traveling, but sometimes cell phone coverage in Mississippi gets pretty scratchy.

 

[Ralph Martin]

I agree that digital radio is the future. However, analog FM and AM will still be here for a very long time. I support the broadcaster's choice, especially on the mediumwave band. Those stations that decide to stay analog or hybrid should have that decision to serve their listeners.

For an LPFM such as ours, HD Radio's hybrid feature offers an advantage because of our technical limitations (low broadcast antenna height, low power). The blending solidifies the signal in our fringe coverage. It helps alleviate some of the problems, such as signal blocking and multipath interference. The analog and digital services tend to blend and cover for each other. It's an ancillary benefit to those listeners with HD Radio capabilities in their cars. It's a significant number in our community. It works for us.

Broadcasters should be given a chance to rely on their expertise as professionals to make the right choice for their community. It's a good way forward.

Hey, we still have a turntable in our studio. The kids love "spinning vinyl." Here's to analog!! And, here's to digital!! Let's have some fun!!

Ralph
KVCB-LP/HD

 

[rbc]

For an LPFM such as ours, HD Radio's hybrid feature offers an advantage because of our technical limitations (low broadcast antenna height, low power). The blending solidifies the signal in our fringe coverage. It helps alleviate some of the problems, such as signal blocking and multipath interference. The analog and digital services tend to blend and cover for each other.

Once stations go all-digital on FM, won't listeners get better digital reception of the main channel due to the increase in the digital HD1 part of the power budget?

 

[davideduardo]

Once stations go all-digital on FM, won't listeners get better digital reception of the main channel due to the increase in the digital HD1 part of the power budget?

The problem here is that no viable station is going to go all digital while nearly 100% of home radios and 75% or more of car radios do not have HD.

And any change involves determining if listeners perceive that digital has significant advantages.

 

[rbc]

The problem here is that no viable station is going to go all digital while nearly 100% of home radios and 75% or more of car radios do not have HD.

And any change involves determining if listeners perceive that digital has significant advantages.

Sure, but once that point is reached and stations decide to go all-digital, the terrestrial coverage of the digital programming for those stations should improve right?

 

[Kelly A]

Sure, but once that point is reached and stations decide to go all-digital, the terrestrial coverage of the digital programming for those stations should improve right?

It depends: Are you determining coverage digital as compared with analog? Digital has the problem of 'cliff effect', where enough packets are lost in reception that it's no longer receivable. In that case, the signal is either clear and listenable, or gone. Analog signals might be partially covered by noise, but one can still make out what's being broadcast. Which is considered "better"?

 

[rbc]

It depends: Are you determining coverage digital as compared with analog? Digital has the problem of 'cliff effect', where enough packets are lost in reception that it's no longer receivable. In that case, the signal is either clear and listenable, or gone. Analog signals might be partially covered by noise, but one can still make out what's being broadcast. Which is considered "better"?

I mean in the case of a hybrid station that goes all-digital. The range of the digital side-bands for that station should increase, because they no are longer sharing the power and spectrum budget with the analog signal.

 

[tested]

Sure, but once that point is reached and stations decide to go all-digital, the terrestrial coverage of the digital programming for those stations should improve right?

I think David's point is that we are unlikely to see the day when that point is reached. I agree.

I'm all for AM stations trying all-digital if they think it will help in their particular case and they can make a compelling format. But it seems unlikely any major FM would do the same.

 

[Kelly A]

I mean in the case of a hybrid station that goes all-digital. The range of the digital side-bands for that station should increase, because they no are longer sharing the power and spectrum budget with the analog signal.

Based on the testing so far, there are some coverage advantages to running MA3 digital, especially when propagation is good, like at night. The definition of coverage is debatable. Some people can tolerate picking analog reception out of a .1mVm signal, but one couldn't receive MA3 reliably at that low of a field strength.

 

[rbc]

I think David's point is that we are unlikely to see the day when that point is reached. I agree.

I'm all for AM stations trying all-digital if they think it will help in their particular case and they can make a compelling format. But it seems unlikely any major FM would do the same.

I get all that. I'm sitting at the edge of comfortable reception of HD from one of my local radio stations. There are some spots in my house where HD reception is difficult. I'll be glad when the digital side gets stronger. I know it will be a while.

 

[rbc]

Based on the testing so far, there are some coverage advantages to running MA3 digital, especially when propagation is good, like at night. The definition of coverage is debatable. Some people can tolerate picking analog reception out of a .1mVm signal, but one couldn't receive MA3 reliably at that low of a field strength.

Are you talking about AM, FM, or both bands?

 

[davideduardo]

Are you talking about AM, FM, or both bands?

Kelly said "at night".

Since FM has no propagation changes at night, it is clear he is discussing AM only.

 

[rbc]

Kelly said "at night".

Since FM has no propagation changes at night, it is clear he is discussing AM only.

Right. You caught me not paying attention.