• 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

The IBOC debacle

L

LA_Guy

So it looks like all IBOC carriers are increasing from -20 to -14 db and can go up to as high as -10 db in most cases. I don't know about you, but already I hear hiss in the background of all the analog FM stations on my tuner. Increasing these carriers by 6-10 db will only make things worse. Did you know that the average 'good' (and I'm not including clock radios, walkmans, etc. here) component FM tuner only has about 6 db adjacent channel selectivity? This means that your IBOC carriers only have to be 6 db hotter then your main carrier to obliterate it completely. The FCC is going to allow it to be 10 db down in most cases-and it's 100 modulated with buzz jamming-AND there's one on EACH SIDE of your main carrier!

Expect to see your ANALOG FM coverage cut in half by this fiasco and greatly increased noise on your analog EVERYWHERE!

I hope that you are happy watching your listenership drop by 30-30% because of this!

And they said that broadcasters were too smart to shoot their foot off!
 
I'd say those that are for the power increase deal have been drinking wayyyy too much corporate coolaid if they think that A. the increase will help sell radios and B. will not loose analog listeners. Some stations it won't affect too badly but others will get slammed by the interference. The industry can't leave well enough alone for now until (let's say 20 years from now) there are enough digital tuners out there to start hurting the analog signal a bit more without hurting listenership as much. No... We have to spend tons more money to self-jam ourselves. If CC, Cit, ABC, Cumeless, and others would have spent a tenth of what they wasted on capital upgrades in the talent field I don't think they'd be in nearly as bad of shape as they are. The industry isn't in horrible shape do to sound quality. They industry is in horrible shape because what comes out the two speakers has become stale and irrelivent. The suits think that talent is like a light bulb that can be simply substituted for another bought off the shelf. HD is just another example. They think they can fix the industry by buying more channels and going digital. News Flash --- That's not going to help. If they jack up the power enough, they'll actually buy themselves even less listenership.

Brilliant, eh?
 
I'm guessing this might be the "killer app" that will push Internet streaming over the top. Listening to limited bandwidth is in most cases preferable to trying to listen through the hash.
 
Half the time I can't get WLUP FM 97.9 in stereo, 7 miles from downtown Chicago, as the sidebands encroach into the analog.
My mono FM radios in the cars will suffer, but not as much as the tuner here at home.
Say goodbye to all fringe coverage if this "indulgence in pollution" is fully exercised.
And goodbye to stereo capability in many cases. This would be a good time to add a mono switch to your FM
tuner, or even a mono switch somewhere in the audio line to bridge the two channels, so it will be possible to cut
a good deal of the noise as heard in stereo.
 
Tom Wells said:
Half the time I can't get WLUP FM 97.9 in stereo, 7 miles from downtown Chicago, as the sidebands encroach into the analog.
My mono FM radios in the cars will suffer, but not as much as the tuner here at home.
Say goodbye to all fringe coverage if this "indulgence in pollution" is fully exercised.
And goodbye to stereo capability in many cases. This would be a good time to add a mono switch to your FM
tuner, or even a mono switch somewhere in the audio line to bridge the two channels, so it will be possible to cut
a good deal of the noise as heard in stereo.
Click to expand...

Would just bridging the audio eliminate the noise? I lost my last FM tuner with a kill switch for the stereo but I understood that it cut the stereo decoding circuit and made it a mono tuner. The hiss from interference or low signal is introduced by the information on the stereo sub channel or that was my impression. Also shutting down the stereo helped with the picket fence effect in car receivers.
 
PLEASE tell me this only applies to FM IBOC???? If it applies to AM, you might just as well send in your license if you aren't a 50kW blowtorch.
 
nmoore6676 said:
Tom Wells said:
Half the time I can't get WLUP FM 97.9 in stereo, 7 miles from downtown Chicago, as the sidebands encroach into the analog.
My mono FM radios in the cars will suffer, but not as much as the tuner here at home.
Say goodbye to all fringe coverage if this "indulgence in pollution" is fully exercised.
And goodbye to stereo capability in many cases. This would be a good time to add a mono switch to your FM
tuner, or even a mono switch somewhere in the audio line to bridge the two channels, so it will be possible to cut
a good deal of the noise as heard in stereo.
Click to expand...

Would just bridging the audio eliminate the noise? I lost my last FM tuner with a kill switch for the stereo but I understood that it cut the stereo decoding circuit and made it a mono tuner. The hiss from interference or low signal is introduced by the information on the stereo sub channel or that was my impression. Also shutting down the stereo helped with the picket fence effect in car receivers.
Click to expand...
Bridging the audio cuts any noise that's only audible in stereo, but my problem is that the sidebands encroach into the analog signal,
and the tuner can't even detect the 19kc pilot to light up the stereo, hence no 38 khz to decode stereo from.
On a good day, I can get it to decode in stereo, but the adjustment on tuning is "razor thin".
This is a NEW problem since iboc. Stations in analog only still have a "normal width" tuning as to the stereo light function.
 
Tom, are the stations in question operating in “extended hybrid” mode? If so, consider the following quote:
There is no significant difference in spectrum occupancy between the “extended hybrid” mode of IBOC today and these earlier systems [i.e., experimental systems from the late 1980’s], which were deemed by the NRSC and others to be incompatible with the host analog FM signal.
Click to expand...
The source? Derek Kumar, one of the principles in Digital Radio Express, which has recently been renamed VuCast. It’s from a December 14, 2005 interview in Radio World Engineering Extra, available as a reprint at http://www.bext.com/RW/RWFMeXtraDec05.pdf. That quote is from page 1, column 3, of the PDF.

And here’s an even more interesting quote (from page 2, column 1):
Early on, we saw that IBOC was going nowhere as long as there were multiple proponents, and even in the best estimates, it would be many years before there would be any return on investment. So we decided to license our patent portfolio for use in IBOC to USA Digital Radio, which eventually merged with Lucent’s IBOC group to form Ibiquity. We are an Ibiquity shareholder.
Click to expand...
That was before DRE went on to develop its digital SCA “FMeXtra” system. See this Ibiquity press release: http://www.ibiquity.com/press_room/news_releases/1999/92

So DRE was paid in Ibiquity stock, not in cash. Worse, there is apparently some sort of non-disparagement clause in the arrangement, which may well function as a de facto non-compete agreement, and thus could conceivably be an illegal restraint of trade.
 
The FM Extra scam

The FCC was essentially PAID OFF by Ibiquity to rule that FM Extra was NOT a broadcast service, so receivers CAN NOT be sold to the general public.

The system that interferes with it's neighbors (and it's analog sister), has CRAP coverage, requires tens of thousands of dollars to install, is a plumbing nightmare, and sounds like S#*T is A-OK, while the one that sets up in half an hour to your existing transmitter, doesn't interfere with anyone, has better coverage and better sound (due to its using AAC+ for its codec) CAN'T be used!

Got it?
 
Actually, receivers can be sold to the general public. But unfortunately, the only one I've heard of is the Aruba (you'll find it on the VuCast web site: http://www.vucastmedia.com/aruba.html), and it sells for around $200. If more stations were using the system, perhaps more manufactureres would offer FM Extra radios at more reasonable prices. Of course, economies of scale would help, too.

The problem is that the consolidators are firmly committed to the Iniquity system, and at least some of the smaller stations that could, collectively, provide the impetus for the marketing of cheaper FM Extra receivers might be able afford the $12k or so to put it on the air, but it would such a long time before they'd see any ROI that they can't justify it.

It's a classic chicken-and-egg conundrum.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom