Two more down and only 299,999,970 to go !

[paul vincent zecchino]

A hundred stations added HD in the past several months? So? Is there more to that? Or is it the name of a good book we're supposed to read?

So what? Hundreds of theaters installed 'Smell-o-Vision', "Emerg-o", and 3-D during the Fab Fifties. Where are they today? Long razed, today they're gated communities larded with people who own fine AM/FM analog radios, iPods, WiFi's, and who couldn't care less about some self-serving contrivance which unlawfully jams for the sole benefit of brain dead dullards who have more dollars than sense, and who live to destroy good talent.

Didn't many stations install AM stereo? Wha' happen?

Stations install HD because the HD Cotillion reportedly exerts undue influence against broadcasters and vendors, in hope of pimping off its worthless jamming scheme.

A hundred stations installed HD? Who's listening? Do advertisers pay to reach stations? I thought they bought ads to reach listeners? Or did HD Stooges reinvent that truth as well?

Who's listening? Aside from a few curious civilians and some station personnel, no one is.

A thousand stations can install HD stooge-mitters. So what? It's the commercial equivalent of a thousand movie houses showing Quentin Tarantino's current stink-bomb. They can show it all they want. People won't come. Why not? They know it stinks.

People know HD stinks. They know everything about HD is a big, fat lie.


A hundred stations went HD? How many of these are PBS stations who could care less about squandering taxpayers' wealth?

A hundred installed HD? How many Jonestownians drank the Kool-Aid? Lotta good that did, huh? Alla them, inna heat, all swole up like that...

Dr. Paul Vincent Zecchino
Manasota Key, Florida
10 May, 2007

 

[oaktree]

I'm 120 miles as the crow flies from my nearest HD station and little hope of it ever coming here until transmitters and equipment prices come way down... So, I sent it back.

 

[clouseau]

HD, 'the standard'? No, it's not. FCC stated, when approving HD unflushable sewer pickle, "let the marketplace decide".

This is just an out and out lie.

The FCC stated they would allow the public to determine the "SPEED" of the digital transition. Not whether it WOULD happen. Not what system we would use. The only thing the public will determine is "HOW FAST".

Lie all you want, but that's what is says. In Black and white. Is this more of your Bahamian Interfernece on the Florida West coast???

The marketplace decided.

Pocket Radio is not the person to emulate when you are looking for credibility. Your OPINION is NOT a fact.

HD is DOA.

Your opinion. There have been 100 additional HD stations since the first of the year. Someone on an island in Florida can't change that...

Flatline on sales charts.

You and I know there are no sales chart. Liar Liar pants on fire. You are making things up. I guess the better question would be.... Why is now any different than a while ago when you appeared here and were shown to be ..... Unreliable?

The more people learn about this HD sump dumpling, the more they reject it.

More of the MANATEE Key's unfounded opinions - presented as facts.

'The standard'? Spare us? Why embarass yourselves? Blatting the Kazoo of 'It's the Law!' fools no one. Many so-called 'standards' have come and gone. HD's time is long gone.

That "Might " happen some day. But not now. You are showing us your grasp of the subject.... Right now. HD is the standard. If you deny it, you are a liar. READ THE RULES. It's "THE" law.

Hespite cheat tacticts of jamming and keeping it secret from the public, HD enjoys no immunity from reality.

You're right. HD is not jamming. HD is operating within the rules. You can accept it... or you can not. Wanna argue this in court?

There is no immunity for anyone. It is written as law. It "IS" the standard. Your semi incoherant wailings don't change it.

HD radios at Wal-Mart? Looks as if Souk q'Wah-lid has greater troubles - lousy sales.

TIME OUT. Can I get a translation please???

Not to worry, you can't even find HD stooge-radios there. Did they already sell out?

There in MY Wal Mart. If they're NOT in yours then maybe they DID sell out.

Yeah! that's it! Wal-Mart sold outa HD stooge-radios real fast. Va va veem! Let's see now...You can buy perfectly good waterproof AM/FM radios at Wal-Mart for five bucks.

Hold on. Let me congratulate you here. You got through 2/3's of a post without the term "Stooge".

Tell us, why spend a couple hundred bucks on HD stooge-radio which requires outside antennas, eats power, has limited range and 'seedy quality audio', and whose streams are largely skipping records and moronic formats like 'Rooty Kazooty Hit Parade!', 'Great Autopsy Narratives from the 1950's!', along with my perennial fave, "Zimbabwe's Hour of Political Culture, with your Host - Robert 'Big Bob' Mugabe!" Ooooohwow!

errr.. Never mind. I thought we were having a debate here. I didn't realize the context. Never mind. It's clear you are doing something else.

Good luck.

Dr. Paul Vincent Zecchino
Manasota Key, Florida
10 May, 2007

Is some hibernation season over??

Clouseau

 

[calstymes]

radiopilot pointed out:

The NYC board has a great discussion about HD radio in it's area and apprarently alot of listeners who bought the HD radios aren't happy... of course these are radio 'geeks' otherwise they wouldn't be on these boards, I can only imagine there aren't too many consumers in NYC that bought the radios let alone are listening to the HD broadcasts...

And scroll down that thread to read dumber than a box of hair's post. What he says in that single paragraph represents what I have so far been able to discern as being majority opinion from those who actually work in radio broadcast engineering (the opinion of R.F. Burns notwithstanding, of course).

 

[radiopilot]

radiopilot pointed out:

The NYC board has a great discussion about HD radio in it's area and apprarently alot of listeners who bought the HD radios aren't happy... of course these are radio 'geeks' otherwise they wouldn't be on these boards, I can only imagine there aren't too many consumers in NYC that bought the radios let alone are listening to the HD broadcasts...

And scroll down that thread to read dumber than a box of hair's post. What he says in that single paragraph represents what I have so far been able to discern as being majority opinion from those who actually work in radio broadcast engineering (the opinion of R.F. Burns notwithstanding, of course).

What's more ludicrous is that RFBurns is in the NYC area and is the poster child of HD radio YET has not even come to HD radio's defense in that topic.... Go figure...

Radiopilot

 

[PocketRadio]

This is just an out and out lie.

Clouseau

"4/4/07 - FCC: Market to Decide Fate of HD Radio"

"According to staff testimony at the meeting (which starts at ~1:01:00), the FCC appears unconcerned with HD Radio's potential pitfalls and more than willing to let the industry set the pace of radio's analog/digital transition. According to Ann Gallagher, an engineer in the Audio Division of the FCC's Media Bureau, "substantial additional testing" by iBiquity and the National Association of Broadcasters justifies the expedited deployment of HD Radio. Stations may now commence multicasting and separate their analog and digital antenna systems without formal FCC approval."

http://www.diymedia.net/archive/0407.htm

The marketplace is determining the fate of HD Radio, FMeXtra, and AM Stereo - HD Radio will stall, due to lack of consumer interest. Meanwhile, HD/IBOC will jam our airways with adjacent-channel interference.

 

[clouseau]

A hundred stations added HD in the past several months? So? Is there more to that? Or is it the name of a good book we're supposed to read?

So what? Hundreds of theaters installed 'Smell-o-Vision', "Emerg-o", and 3-D during the Fab Fifties. Where are they today?

Most 50's movie theatres are gone. Why? The method by which the entertainment gets to the consumer changed. The people who oversee the distribution of the product authorized NEW METHODS to get the movie to Eyeballs. Things like Television, HBO, VHS and later DVD and .... Whatever. Distribution methods evolve. This situation is no different.

Long razed, today they're gated communities larded with people who own fine AM/FM analog radios, iPods, WiFi's, and who couldn't care less about some self-serving contrivance which unlawfully jams...

Sorry, again you are just dead wrong, A legally authorized activity by definition is NOT unlawful. Your continually posting it's alledged unlawfulness is just inaccurate.

for the sole benefit of brain dead dullards who have more dollars than sense, and who live to destroy good talent.

C'mon, now. Do you think the owners of 1300 radio stations "Live to destroy good talent". That would mean they get up in the morning and say "Darn it... That kid I hired in Richmond is getting pretty good. I have to get rid of him... NOW!!", right? Do you honestly think this is happening?

Didn't many stations install AM stereo? Wha' happen?

Some stations still use it and HD precludes it.

Stations install HD because the HD Cotillion reportedly exerts undue influence against broadcasters and vendors, in hope of pimping off its worthless jamming scheme.

Just what "undue influence" are you alledging. Is this the "buy it now before the price goes up" complaint I have heard? IIRC, Early adopters paid $5k. Current Adopters pay $10K. Future are scheduled for $15K and $20K. Or is it the "Buy HD or the puppy gets it." If you don't have HD as a station, then Ibiquity has nothing over you to "Influence" that I can think of.

A hundred stations installed HD? Who's listening?

In that period, would you agree that additional HD radios were sold? The audience is not large, but it is growing.

Do advertisers pay to reach stations?

HD-1s. Defininitly. Many to most HD2s and HD3s are commercial free. They have only been allowed to sell individual time for a few weeks. I'll bet somebody has sold an HD2 or HD3 ad somewhere. But what's the point of your question?

I thought they bought ads to reach listeners?

They do.

Or did HD Stooges reinvent that truth as well?

Who's listening? Aside from a few curious civilians and some station personnel, no one is.

I'm not going to get into a "How many is a few" discussion. We can agree the audience is not yet large.

A thousand stations can install HD stooge-mitters.

One thousand Three hundred, actually

So what? It's the commercial equivalent of a thousand movie houses showing Quentin Tarantino's current stink-bomb. They can show it all they want. People won't come. Why not? They know it stinks.

Uhhh. OK

People know HD stinks. They know everything about HD is a big, fat lie.

I'd be real careful throwing around the "L" word. You're still claiming HD radio is against the law.

A hundred stations went HD? How many of these are PBS stations who could care less about squandering taxpayers' wealth?

I don't know, but I would suggest there are a few.

A hundred installed HD? How many Jonestownians drank the Kool-Aid? Lotta good that did, huh? Alla them, inna heat, all swole up like that...

Dude, this is a discussion about radio.. Jonestown? "Alla them, inna heat, all swole up like that..."?

You got issues..

Clouseau

 

[clouseau]

This is just an out and out lie.

Clouseau

"4/4/07 - FCC: Market to Decide Fate of HD Radio"

Thanks for reposting the link that proves my point. Let's quote you article shall we...


"According to staff testimony at the meeting ...the FCC appears unconcerned with HD Radio's potential pitfalls and more than willing to let the industry set the pace of radio's analog/digital transition.

http://www.diymedia.net/archive/0407.htm


Set thepace of the transition. Not determine if we shoud HAVE HD radio. Not determine which system we should use. It only means what it says. Let the industry set the pace of radio's analog/digital transition.

You can post the link some more, but I wouldn't count on the wording changing to suddenly start supporting your hopes of what you woul LIKE it to say.

Clouseau

 

[PocketRadio]

This is just an out and out lie.

Clouseau

"4/4/07 - FCC: Market to Decide Fate of HD Radio"

Thanks for reposting the link that proves my point. Let's quote you article shall we...


"According to staff testimony at the meeting ...the FCC appears unconcerned with HD Radio's potential pitfalls and more than willing to let the industry set the pace of radio's analog/digital transition.

http://www.diymedia.net/archive/0407.htm


Set thepace of the transition. Not determine if we shoud HAVE HD radio. Not determine which system we should use. It only means what it says. Let the industry set the pace of radio's analog/digital transition.

You can post the link some more, but I wouldn't count on the wording changing to suddenly start supporting your hopes of what you woul LIKE it to say.

Clouseau

I never said that, here is what I said, again:

"4/4/07 - FCC: Market to Decide Fate of HD Radio"

"According to staff testimony at the meeting (which starts at ~1:01:00), the FCC appears unconcerned with HD Radio's potential pitfalls and more than willing to let the industry set the pace of radio's analog/digital transition. According to Ann Gallagher, an engineer in the Audio Division of the FCC's Media Bureau, "substantial additional testing" by iBiquity and the National Association of Broadcasters justifies the expedited deployment of HD Radio. Stations may now commence multicasting and separate their analog and digital antenna systems without formal FCC approval."

http://www.diymedia.net/archive/0407.htm

The marketplace is determining the fate of HD Radio, FMeXtra, and AM Stereo - HD Radio will stall, due to lack of consumer interest.

 

[scanman1]

Quote: "The marketplace is determining the fate of HD Radio, FMeXtra, and AM Stereo - HD Radio will stall, due to lack of consumer interest."

It's too early in the life of HD Radio to declare the public "uninterested". If in the next 5 years the sales of radios still lag, then we can determine the public lacks interest.

Personally, I feel it will have taken off by the end of 2012! 8)

 

[PocketRadio]

Quote: "The marketplace is determining the fate of HD Radio, FMeXtra, and AM Stereo - HD Radio will stall, due to lack of consumer interest."

It's too early in the life of HD Radio to declare the public "uninterested". If in the next 5 years the sales of radios still lag, then we can determine the public lacks interest.

Personally, I feel it will have taken off by the end of 2012! 8)

"Top Players Look To DAB As Radio's Saviour"

"The debate began in earnest when Ralph Bernard, chief executive of GCap Media, challenged chair Torin Douglas' assertion that sales of DAB had started to slow down. Bernard, also chairman of the Digital Radio Development Bureau (DRDB) said that in fact the apparent year on year slowdown in sales was due to one major supermarket deciding to sell their entire stock of analogue radio for £1, with the month in which that occurred, dramatically distorting the figures. He added that he saw the fact that major supermarkets are clearing their stock of analogue sets as an encouraging sign, although warned that other retailers were likely to follow suit in the next few months and thus also distort DAB sales figures."

http://seminars.mediatelgroup.co.uk/content.php?seminarId=7&nlr=futureradio6.htm

Radio: on the up?

"Table 1 shows the audience profiles across the various radio media. What is notable, if not very surprising, is how emerging media works so well together for the industry. The older age groups have taken to digital radio and particularly buying of digital radio sets, while younger generations are accessing stations via the web and on mobiles - although the latter is still at a very low base."

http://www.mediatelgroup.co.uk/press.php?fileid=9&pressid=53

"Digital radio in Canada"

"The Commission is very concerned about the stalled DRB transition. Roughly 15 of the 76 authorized stations (including the digital-only operation in Toronto) are not on the air. Some stations that once operated have since ceased operations. Few recievers have been sold, and there is no interest in expanding DRB service beyond the six cities where it exists."

http://americanbandscan.blogspot.com/2006/12/digital-radio-in-canada.html

Google Trends for "hd radio", "internet radio", xm, sirius, and podcast in the US:

http://tinyurl.com/2hae89

Google Trends for "dab radio", "digital radio", podcast, and iPod in the UK:

http://tinyurl.com/2lhxum

Google Trends for "dab radio" and "digital radio" in Canada:

http://tinyurl.com/ynmthw

HD/IBOC should have taken off by now. DAB has stalled in Canada. In the UK, sales of DAB radios are slowing. In all three countries, sales of digital radios are anemic and/or slowing down - what is there for anyone not to understand ?

 

[R.F. Burns]

Why do you keep bringing up Canada? They used a different system then in the US. They have a much smaller population and economically are not in the same league as the United States. I for one happen to love Canada and its people but comparing bi-lingual Canada to the US is just plain.. Stupid! In other threads I have posted links to a list of stores selling HD radios. The numbers keep growing and growing. There are many more radios available today, at lower prices then there were a year ago. I keep getting the same feeling when I read some of these comments that it's like watching a weather forcast where the weatherman tells you in no uncertain terms that no matter how sunny it is outside, you shouldn't let your eyes fool you, it's actually raining.

 

[PocketRadio]

Quote: "The marketplace is determining the fate of HD Radio, FMeXtra, and AM Stereo - HD Radio will stall, due to lack of consumer interest."

It's too early in the life of HD Radio to declare the public "uninterested". If in the next 5 years the sales of radios still lag, then we can determine the public lacks interest.

Personally, I feel it will have taken off by the end of 2012! 8)

Here is a question, that I posted on the DAB UK board:

"I'm over in the States, and was wondering, how all of you felt about DAB versus analog. There is a great debate, among radio-geeks in the US, concerning HD Radio/IBOC and analog. Looking through your forum, it looks like DAB has the same issues with poor reception, as HD/IBOC (having to mount external antennas). Also, portable DAB radios look to be pretty expensive, at least $100. Reading through the DAB website, looks like reception with on-the-move portable DAB is even more problematic. Also, reading through the Internet, it looks like mainly older folks are interested in purchasing DAB radios. Would really appreciate any thoughts - thanks !"

And, here is the response:

"DAB has its excuses, being actually 25+ years old. Even given that, technically it's capable of delivering excellent quality audio... However, being digital, a signal disruption is far more intrusive and disconcerting than the fades and crackles of analogue, so signal quality has to be far superior to that of analogue, as the consequences are worse. In addition, limited bandwidth (worsened by cramming too many stations in) is the second major downfall. At high bitrates, even MP2 (used by DAB) can deliver quality sufficient to at worse satisfy 95% of the audience. In reality, bitrates above 96kbps are a luxury and quality suffers, especially when listening to music. DAB, even as it stands, is more than adequate for talk-based radio, especially as most of the analogue equivalents here reside on MW (AM) - but the music lovers migrating from FM have every right to feel let down... I'm in a good signal area and listen mainly to sport & talk, so DAB's perfectly acceptable - both personal & mains powered. The flexibility of recording to SD card is another advantage of DAB, which often incorporates features that were not so accessible on analogue sets. I'd have hoped HD radio would fare better, but I guess some of the same issues apply. In the UK, people are already looking to DRM+, DAB2, DAB+ or whatever to relaunch digital radio on a better footing."

http://www.radioandtelly.co.uk/cgi-bin/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1178924493

Geeez... maybe, everyone should stick to analog - LOL !

 

[awj223]

"DAB has its excuses, being actually 25+ years old. Even given that, technically it's capable of delivering excellent quality audio... However, being digital, a signal disruption is far more intrusive and disconcerting than the fades and crackles of analogue, so signal quality has to be far superior to that of analogue, as the consequences are worse.

This is perhaps the best example I can give of why you SHOULD NOT allow broadcasters to determine the bitrate of each audio stream and the number of audio streams in the channel. Like I said in another post, digital can be more reliable, about the same, or less reliable than analog, depending on the tradeoffs between stream bitrate, error correction, and bandwidth. With a fairly high quality stream in a very large bandwidth, sufficient error correction can be used to make the signal more reliable than analog. That's what I like about digital - in analog, ANY errors at the receiver become errors out of the speakers (aka noise and static) but with digital it doesn't HAVE to.

Unfortunately, if left to decide for themselves broadcasters would prefer to have 3 lower quality audio streams in the same bandwidth. What gets sacrificed? Well sound quality, obviously, but also error correction, since there's less space for redundant bits to correct errors. Rather than static, you get signal dropouts. IMO HD-2 and HD-3 channels should be banned, and broadcasters required to use only one channel at the highest sound quality/reliability by FCC mandate.

By the way, the HD Radio spec shows three sets of subcarriers in full digital mode, called primary, secondary, and tertiary, all sent at different power levels. Why are there three separate sets and what are they for? What happens if you can only get the primary but not the secondary or tertiary due to noise/distance from transmitter?

 

[R.F. Burns]

"DAB has its excuses, being actually 25+ years old. Even given that, technically it's capable of delivering excellent quality audio... However, being digital, a signal disruption is far more intrusive and disconcerting than the fades and crackles of analogue, so signal quality has to be far superior to that of analogue, as the consequences are worse.

This is perhaps the best example I can give of why you SHOULD NOT allow broadcasters to determine the bitrate of each audio stream and the number of audio streams in the channel. Like I said in another post, digital can be more reliable, about the same, or less reliable than analog, depending on the tradeoffs between stream bitrate, error correction, and bandwidth. With a fairly high quality stream in a very large bandwidth, sufficient error correction can be used to make the signal more reliable than analog. That's what I like about digital - in analog, ANY errors at the receiver become errors out of the speakers (aka noise and static) but with digital it doesn't HAVE to.

Unfortunately, if left to decide for themselves broadcasters would prefer to have 3 lower quality audio streams in the same bandwidth. What gets sacrificed? Well sound quality, obviously, but also error correction, since there's less space for redundant bits to correct errors. Rather than static, you get signal dropouts. IMO HD-2 and HD-3 channels should be banned, and broadcasters required to use only one channel at the highest sound quality/reliability by FCC mandate.

By the way, the HD Radio spec shows three sets of subcarriers in full digital mode, called primary, secondary, and tertiary, all sent at different power levels. Why are there three separate sets and what are they for? What happens if you can only get the primary but not the secondary or tertiary due to noise/distance from transmitter?

The average person who listens to their music on MP3 players using "ear buds" could care less. There is a learning curve to providing the best audio usinig available technology, but over time quality will improve. Considering the fact that CD's are going the way of vinyl and downloads are the most popular method of getting ones music, we should face the facts that for the average person good enough is good enough.

 

[Tom Wells]

"DAB has its excuses, being actually 25+ years old. Even given that, technically it's capable of delivering excellent quality audio... However, being digital, a signal disruption is far more intrusive and disconcerting than the fades and crackles of analogue, so signal quality has to be far superior to that of analogue, as the consequences are worse.

This is perhaps the best example I can give of why you SHOULD NOT allow broadcasters to determine the bitrate of each audio stream and the number of audio streams in the channel. Like I said in another post, digital can be more reliable, about the same, or less reliable than analog, depending on the tradeoffs between stream bitrate, error correction, and bandwidth. With a fairly high quality stream in a very large bandwidth, sufficient error correction can be used to make the signal more reliable than analog. That's what I like about digital - in analog, ANY errors at the receiver become errors out of the speakers (aka noise and static) but with digital it doesn't HAVE to.

Unfortunately, if left to decide for themselves broadcasters would prefer to have 3 lower quality audio streams in the same bandwidth. What gets sacrificed? Well sound quality, obviously, but also error correction, since there's less space for redundant bits to correct errors. Rather than static, you get signal dropouts. IMO HD-2 and HD-3 channels should be banned, and broadcasters required to use only one channel at the highest sound quality/reliability by FCC mandate.

By the way, the HD Radio spec shows three sets of subcarriers in full digital mode, called primary, secondary, and tertiary, all sent at different power levels. Why are there three separate sets and what are they for? What happens if you can only get the primary but not the secondary or tertiary due to noise/distance from transmitter?

The average person who listens to their music on MP3 players using "ear buds" could care less. There is a learning curve to providing the best audio usinig available technology, but over time quality will improve. Considering the fact that CD's are going the way of vinyl and downloads are the most popular method of getting ones music, we should face the facts that for the average person good enough is good enough.

Yes, RF. Let's just drop all professional standards and let it all go to hell.
The reason standards are adopted are to maintain the BEST we can strive for



You have exposed your callous side once again. This relaxing of standards will surely come back to bite you.

This attitute was well represented by the comment used by one of my professors, who would express the unspoken
response to one of his assignments.....
"Hewitt asks," What's the least we can do to get by?", Well, Hewitt..."
Someday, somewhere, you will find one of YOUR preferences has been reduced to a choice between excrement A or B.
I hope it regards something you care about deeply and I hope it annoys you as continuously as IBOC AM hisses in daytime.

Good enough is NOT good enough. Those are lazy words, and I expect you to sound more professional.
You are supposed to know better, and uphold standards.
You seem to be in it for a paycheck only with such words.

Have some coffee, and reread your comments, and consider how far you're willing to drop your standards.

 

[awj223]

The average person who listens to their music on MP3 players using "ear buds" could care less. There is a learning curve to providing the best audio usinig available technology, but over time quality will improve. Considering the fact that CD's are going the way of vinyl and downloads are the most popular method of getting ones music, we should face the facts that for the average person good enough is good enough.

You have addressed the tradeoff between audio quality (stream bitrate) and audio quality, but have missed another key tradeoff that I have mentioned. Your point is that a 64kbps audio stream is good enough for the average person using ear buds and I would agree with you that this is true in most cases. The other tradeoff is between bandwidth and reliability as the stream bitrate is held constant. If you use the entire channel for a single 64kbps stream in full digital mode you can have some seriously robust error correction. I'm saying that this would be better than trying to fit an HD2 and HD3 station in there too, with a less robust signal. Sound quality would not be affected in areas with strong signals, but in areas with weaker signals like indoors it would make a huge difference.

Speaking of something being good enough, I'd say that analog FM is good enough for most people. Why use IBOC at all? If MP3s over ear buds are acceptable, FM is already good enough. The best thing about digital is that it can be used to make a signal more reliable. I'm concerned that the way it's being used, all it is doing is allowing broadcasters to put more streams in the same channel at the expense of both reliability and sound quality. What's the point if with end up with a digital system that's inferior to analog in both of those categories?

Does nobody really know what the primary, secondary, and tertiary subcarriers do and why they are separated as such? I would hope that they can provide some type of graceful degradation. For example, a 48kbps audio stream is encoded onto the primary subcarriers. You receive the primary only, that's what you get. A 64kbps stream is also encoded at the transmitter, and the secondary subcarriers contain the differences between the 48kbps and 64kbps audio. You get the secondary and primary and the receiver can use both to recover the higher bitrate stream. Likewise, the tertiary subcarriers contain the difference information between the 64kbps stream and yet another, higher bitrate stream. That way the signal won't suddenly just drop out, but you'll hear a gradual degradation in audio quality, which would be especially useful on AM skywave in full digital mode at night.

 

[PocketRadio]

Some guy just sent me this message on the UK DAB board - maybe, just like in the US, UK broadcast engineers are afraid to speak-out in public forums:

This site reflects nearly all of my concerns about DAB:

http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/

 

[Tom Wells]

The average person who listens to their music on MP3 players using "ear buds" could care less. There is a learning curve to providing the best audio usinig available technology, but over time quality will improve. Considering the fact that CD's are going the way of vinyl and downloads are the most popular method of getting ones music, we should face the facts that for the average person good enough is good enough.

You have addressed the tradeoff between audio quality (stream bitrate) and audio quality, but have missed another key tradeoff that I have mentioned. Your point is that a 64kbps audio stream is good enough for the average person using ear buds and I would agree with you that this is true in most cases. The other tradeoff is between bandwidth and reliability as the stream bitrate is held constant. If you use the entire channel for a single 64kbps stream in full digital mode you can have some seriously robust error correction. I'm saying that this would be better than trying to fit an HD2 and HD3 station in there too, with a less robust signal. Sound quality would not be affected in areas with strong signals, but in areas with weaker signals like indoors it would make a huge difference.

Speaking of something being good enough, I'd say that analog FM is good enough for most people. Why use IBOC at all? If MP3s over ear buds are acceptable, FM is already good enough. The best thing about digital is that it can be used to make a signal more reliable. I'm concerned that the way it's being used, all it is doing is allowing broadcasters to put more streams in the same channel at the expense of both reliability and sound quality. What's the point if with end up with a digital system that's inferior to analog in both of those categories?

Does nobody really know what the primary, secondary, and tertiary subcarriers do and why they are separated as such? I would hope that they can provide some type of graceful degradation. For example, a 48kbps audio stream is encoded onto the primary subcarriers. You receive the primary only, that's what you get. A 64kbps stream is also encoded at the transmitter, and the secondary subcarriers contain the differences between the 48kbps and 64kbps audio. You get the secondary and primary and the receiver can use both to recover the higher bitrate stream. Likewise, the tertiary subcarriers contain the difference information between the 64kbps stream and yet another, higher bitrate stream. That way the signal won't suddenly just drop out, but you'll hear a gradual degradation in audio quality, which would be especially useful on AM skywave in full digital mode at night.

You either read the ibiquity papers or absorbed this info somewhere, because you are right on the money.

As described in the original "white paper" by ibiquity, the primary, secondary and tertiary sidebands are supposed to
"overlay" one another, each set adding additional resolution AND data redundancy.

If this feature functions, you should be able, as you suggest, to hear several "tiers" of audio quality from AM iboc HD as decoded
to analog, but I've never heard anyone mention hearing this on HD AM.

This is probably a feature which sounds good, but is difficult to make work as conceived.

I would bet that as implemented, AM HD is more in a "locked high redundancy" mode, rather than trying to implement higher bandwidths.

 

[awj223]

You either read the ibiquity papers or absorbed this info somewhere, because you are right on the money.

As described in the original "white paper" by ibiquity, the primary, secondary and tertiary sidebands are supposed to
"overlay" one another, each set adding additional resolution AND data redundancy.

If this feature functions, you should be able, as you suggest, to hear several "tiers" of audio quality from AM iboc HD as decoded
to analog, but I've never heard anyone mention hearing this on HD AM.

This is probably a feature which sounds good, but is difficult to make work as conceived.

I would bet that as implemented, AM HD is more in a "locked high redundancy" mode, rather than trying to implement higher bandwidths.

I've never read the Ibiquity papers, only some of the NRSC stuff showing three sets of subcarriers and the relative amplitudes of each set in dBc. Making a system that has both redundancy and graceful degradation just seemed like the logical thing to do. At least Ibiquity didn't botch that part of the system.