What Is Cheapest Tabletop HD Radio For Sale?

[fybush]

Even so, where I live (Texas) 40-50 miles is more or less considered to be local. Unfortunately, this technology doesn't seem to work very well at that distance. Perhaps HD really does make a new definition of "Local Radio."

I was referring to w9wi's high-on-the-dial "local" AMs, 5 kW on 1430 and 50 kW on 1510. Totally different from the big class C FMs I presume you're talking about in Texas.

The consensus so far seems to be that pretty much no AMs work well in HD at 40 or 50 miles, even flamethrowers like WBZ.

I am no fan of the AM system. I think the FM system holds some promise. There's no good technical reason why it shouldn't work at 40 or 50 miles on a class C signal, assuming relatively clean adjacent channels and a decently-configured transmission system. (Based on anecdotal reports, this seems to be an issue in the DFW market at present.)

When it comes to defining "local" signals, I'm less interested in distance (given all the variables in AM ground conductivity, FM classes, etc) than in received signal strength.

For an AM station, any system that's even remotely usable ought to function to around the 2 mV/m contour. The Ibiquity system doesn't. My experience suggests that at least 10 mV/m is needed for it to decode on most radios. How many stations have 10 mV/m coverage of all, or most, of a sprawling market like Dallas or Houston? Very few, if any.

For an FM, NPR's research has suggested that the limit for reliable mobile use of HD is somewhere in the 64 dBu range. Receiver performance seems to have improved somewhat since those early tests. My experience says most of the car receivers that are out there now can decode down to about 60 dBu. That may not hit the fringes of a station's current analog coverage, but it's respectable, and there's at least some hope for incremental improvement with higher HD injection levels and better transmit antennas.

And, Chuck, come over and say hi at Barry's next luncheon, won't you?

 

[Chuck]

I am no fan of the AM system. I think the FM system holds some promise. There's no good technical reason why it shouldn't work at 40 or 50 miles on a class C signal, assuming relatively clean adjacent channels and a decently-configured transmission system. (Based on anecdotal reports, this seems to be an issue in the DFW market at present.)

I'll bet that is mostly because the DFW area is so large. We do a LOT of driving around here. I purchased a new car in mid October of 2006. It now has 33,000 miles on it. Other than one trip to Michigan via Chicago, it hasn't gone anywhere that I don't consider to be fairly "local." Around here we don't judge distances in miles, but rather than how long it takes to get somewhere. For instance "Tyler is about 40 minutes away." It is nice to be able to listen to the same station on your entire trip.

When I owned a business in Dallas, we had employees who commuted every day from McKinney or Plano, "about an hour away" if traffic conditions weren't too snarled up. From what I can tell, Radioman100's posts not withstanding, HD is not working very well in these areas.

When it comes to defining "local" signals, I'm less interested in distance (given all the variables in AM ground conductivity, FM classes, etc) than in received signal strength.

I suspect that John Q. Public is more interested in how far he can reliably receive a signal without going to extraordinary means. There aren't that many of us who have a FIM handy....

For an AM station, any system that's even remotely usable ought to function to around the 2 mV/m contour. The Ibiquity system doesn't. My experience suggests that at least 10 mV/m is needed for it to decode on most radios. How many stations have 10 mV/m coverage of all, or most, of a sprawling market like Dallas or Houston? Very few, if any.

For an FM, NPR's research has suggested that the limit for reliable mobile use of HD is somewhere in the 64 dBu range. Receiver performance seems to have improved somewhat since those early tests. My experience says most of the car receivers that are out there now can decode down to about 60 dBu. That may not hit the fringes of a station's current analog coverage, but it's respectable, and there's at least some hope for incremental improvement with higher HD injection levels and better transmit antennas.

It is probably safe to say that for FM, HD probably works "well enough." At least it will until (when and if) everyone lights up and then the feces may hit the fan. Some markets may have more problems than others. For lower power stations and translators HD just doesn't make any sense, but it may cause a lot of interference to those services. Love 'em or hate 'em, they are a part of the landscape, and some are even worthwhile. (Admittedly, some aren't)

For AM, I think we need to find a better alternative. Sometimes, doing nothing is the best choice you can make. The only good thing I see on the AM side is a few stations have invested in fixing or replacing their old equipment.

And, Chuck, come over and say hi at Barry's next luncheon, won't you?

I'l do that.

 

[R.F. Burns]

I am no fan of the AM system. I think the FM system holds some promise. There's no good technical reason why it shouldn't work at 40 or 50 miles on a class C signal, assuming relatively clean adjacent channels and a decently-configured transmission system. (Based on anecdotal reports, this seems to be an issue in the DFW market at present.)

I'll bet that is mostly because the DFW area is so large. We do a LOT of driving around here. I purchased a new car in mid October of 2006. It now has 33,000 miles on it. Other than one trip to Michigan via Chicago, it hasn't gone anywhere that I don't consider to be fairly "local." Around here we don't judge distances in miles, but rather than how long it takes to get somewhere. For instance "Tyler is about 40 minutes away." It is nice to be able to listen to the same station on your entire trip.

When I owned a business in Dallas, we had employees who commuted every day from McKinney or Plano, "about an hour away" if traffic conditions weren't too snarled up. From what I can tell, Radioman100's posts not withstanding, HD is not working very well in these areas.

When it comes to defining "local" signals, I'm less interested in distance (given all the variables in AM ground conductivity, FM classes, etc) than in received signal strength.

I suspect that John Q. Public is more interested in how far he can reliably receive a signal without going to extraordinary means. There aren't that many of us who have a FIM handy....

For an AM station, any system that's even remotely usable ought to function to around the 2 mV/m contour. The Ibiquity system doesn't. My experience suggests that at least 10 mV/m is needed for it to decode on most radios. How many stations have 10 mV/m coverage of all, or most, of a sprawling market like Dallas or Houston? Very few, if any.

For an FM, NPR's research has suggested that the limit for reliable mobile use of HD is somewhere in the 64 dBu range. Receiver performance seems to have improved somewhat since those early tests. My experience says most of the car receivers that are out there now can decode down to about 60 dBu. That may not hit the fringes of a station's current analog coverage, but it's respectable, and there's at least some hope for incremental improvement with higher HD injection levels and better transmit antennas.

It is probably safe to say that for FM, HD probably works "well enough." At least it will until (when and if) everyone lights up and then the feces may hit the fan. Some markets may have more problems than others. For lower power stations and translators HD just doesn't make any sense, but it may cause a lot of interference to those services. Love 'em or hate 'em, they are a part of the landscape, and some are even worthwhile. (Admittedly, some aren't)

For AM, I think we need to find a better alternative. Sometimes, doing nothing is the best choice you can make. The only good thing I see on the AM side is a few stations have invested in fixing or replacing their old equipment.

And, Chuck, come over and say hi at Barry's next luncheon, won't you?

I'l do that.

I'm with you on this Chuck. I believe it was a mistake to force Ibiquity to come up with a hybrid digital system for AM because it's obvious that AM IBOC is basically an afterthought or a poor step child. The problem is that outside of Ibiquities AM system, I don't know of any other compatible system on the horizon and not only is Khan's system not entirely digital, but I don't believe he's ever demonstrated his systems ability to shut off the analog carrier entirely and still work, although he's made lots of promises. I believe he wore out his welcome within the industry after the way he handled the AM stereo decision. If he had gone away then, things might have been different today, like it or not.

 

[fybush]

I'll bet that is mostly because the DFW area is so large. We do a LOT of driving around here. I purchased a new car in mid October of 2006. It now has 33,000 miles on it. Other than one trip to Michigan via Chicago, it hasn't gone anywhere that I don't consider to be fairly "local." Around here we don't judge distances in miles, but rather than how long it takes to get somewhere. For instance "Tyler is about 40 minutes away." It is nice to be able to listen to the same station on your entire trip.

Which is exactly why your part of the country was allotted huge class C FMs that can cover from, say, Tyler up to McKinney, while my part of the country (where "an hour away" is the next market over and then some) has class Bs that are lucky to put the same signal strength over a third of that area.

When I owned a business in Dallas, we had employees who commuted every day from McKinney or Plano, "about an hour away" if traffic conditions weren't too snarled up. From what I can tell, Radioman100's posts not withstanding, HD is not working very well in these areas.

That's what I'm hearing from others in the market, too, which leads me to wonder if there are conditions specific to the market, like the antenna configurations at Cedar Hill, playing into it. I'm not hearing the same sorts of problems (or experiencing them myself) in other markets, even of similar geographic sprawl.

I suspect that John Q. Public is more interested in how far he can reliably receive a signal without going to extraordinary means. There aren't that many of us who have a FIM handy....

No, no, no, you're misinterpreting what I'm saying here, because I think we do agree on this point.

Let me try again: for John Q. Public, the line between "usable signal" and "can't hear a durned thing through all this blasted static" falls somewhere around the 2 mV/m line under the best of conditions, and perhaps as close in as the 10 mV/m line if there's a lot of ambient electrical noise.

John Q. himself doesn't need to know that, of course. But we as broadcasters do, if we're going to be able to talk intelligibly about a system that has to perform both in Dallas, where "an hour away" is solidly within the market, and up in my neck of the woods where you're out of the market in 20 minutes in some directions.

The only way to make any kind of comparison on a national basis is by talking field strength. For my friends in the acquisitions side of the business, not to mention the engineers over at the FCC, field strength-over-population count is pretty much the ONLY metric that really matters.

And if you're a broadcaster trying to cover all (or even most) of a big market like Dallas with a 2 mV/m analog AM signal, any digital system that doesn't work below 10 or 15 mV/m is automatically a failure.

Joe Q. may not know the numbers, but the results speak for themselves.

 

[Chuck]

And if you're a broadcaster trying to cover all (or even most) of a big market like Dallas with a 2 mV/m analog AM signal, any digital system that doesn't work below 10 or 15 mV/m is automatically a failure.

Joe Q. may not know the numbers, but the results speak for themselves.

I suspect that you, I, Savage, Clouseau, Hippo, R. Bruce Carter, R. F. Burns, Mike Walker, David Eduardo and even Supercaster actually agree on more than is evident on these Boards. (Sorry of I left out someone - I know I did.) We'd all like radio to prosper. That's the bottom line.

I don't think anyone objects to the concept of digital radio. I'd just like a system that really works, does no harm to your neighbor and was fair to all broadcasters. I question whether we got that.

 

[fybush]

Hear, hear!

Having had the pleasure of personal encounters with at least Savage, Burns and Eduardo (and probably one or two others I'm not recognizing under their noms de plume), I do believe that we're all in this for the best interests of radio, whatever we might see that as meaning.

The only reason I'm dragging an FIM into this (and believe me, I wish I actually owned an FIM to drag into this!) is out of a belief that if we're going to declare all or part of the system a failure, we've got to be able to quantify it. I think the evidence exists to label the AM system thusly. Your last sentence sums it up nicely...

 

[Madmansam]

Wow, all I did was asked "What Is The Cheapest Tabletop HD Radio For Sale" and we get all this? Maybe this thread should be moved to TAKE IT TO THE OUTSIDE? Again Thanks to Mike Walker for stearing me towards RADIOSOPHY.

 

[Chuck]

Wow, all I did was asked "What Is The Cheapest Tabletop HD Radio For Sale" and we get all this? Maybe this thread should be moved to TAKE IT TO THE OUTSIDE? Again Thanks to Mike Walker for stearing me towards RADIOSOPHY.

No, I don't think it needs to go to "Take it Outside." Mike gave you accurate advice. For 3 db more money you should also look at the Sony and Sangean radios. The Accurian, from Radio Shack, is sale priced at $149 or so right now. Take your pick.

 

[Madmansam]

Wow, all I did was asked "What Is The Cheapest Tabletop HD Radio For Sale" and we get all this? Maybe this thread should be moved to TAKE IT TO THE OUTSIDE? Again Thanks to Mike Walker for stearing me towards RADIOSOPHY.

No, I don't think it needs to go to "Take it Outside." Mike gave you accurate advice. For 3 db more money you should also look at the Sony and Sangean radios. The Accurian, from Radio Shack, is sale priced at $149 or so right now. Take your pick.

I agree with you Chuck that Mike gave me accurate advice. It just seems that everyone else was deviating from the original subject (What Is The Cheapest Tabletop HD Radio For Sale?). Maybe not moved to TAKE IT TO THE OUTSIDE, but most of the discussion should have been under a different thread? I already bought the RADIOSOPHY radio. As for the Accurian from Radio Shack, As of yesterday, It is still listed at $199.99. It may get cheaper, but the Radiosophy is by far the cheapest (at $99.99).

 

[SUPERCASTER]

And if you're a broadcaster trying to cover all (or even most) of a big market like Dallas with a 2 mV/m analog AM signal, any digital system that doesn't work below 10 or 15 mV/m is automatically a failure.

Joe Q. may not know the numbers, but the results speak for themselves.

I suspect that you, I, Savage, Clouseau, Hippo, R. Bruce Carter, R. F. Burns, Mike Walker, David Eduardo and even Supercaster actually agree on more than is evident on these Boards. (Sorry of I left out someone - I know I did.) We'd all like radio to prosper. That's the bottom line.

I don't think anyone objects to the concept of digital radio. I'd just like a system that really works, does no harm to your neighbor and was fair to all broadcasters. I question whether we got that.

I agree.
On AM, HD Radio is a disaster.
On FM, expensive, complex, proprietary HD radio is unnecessary. You can get better performance, extra programming channels, digital performance, and better compatibility without using adjacent channels.
See FMeXtra, the truly In Band On Channel FM digital transmission system that got final FCC approval before HD radio:
www.dreinc.com

 

[LinoNYC]

I agree.
On AM, HD Radio is a disaster.
On FM, expensive, complex, proprietary HD radio is unnecessary. You can get better performance, extra programming channels, digital performance, and better compatibility without using adjacent channels.
See FMeXtra, the truly In Band On Channel FM digital transmission system that got final FCC approval before HD radio:
www.dreinc.com

Since we are into repeating ourselves here: "On AM, HD Radio is a disaster."

Am radio is a disaster. Ancient demos, declining listener base, it's remaining viable format slowly migrating to FM. Once-great AM facilities now in the hands of churches and other hucksters.

AM iboc may be grasping at straws but the stations that can implement it are atleast trying to survive.

FM Extra: Nice idea I like the concept of non-proprietary software, however it kills the use of subcarriers and if you want full digital bandwidth (which is still half the iboc maximum) you have to kill the baseband stereo. Mono FM, is that your idea of progress?

Stations broadcasting in FM Extra - USA= 4
" " FM Iboc - USA = 1200+ and counting.

Receivers?

Lino

 

[vsa]

I agree.
On AM, HD Radio is a disaster.
On FM, expensive, complex, proprietary HD radio is unnecessary. You can get better performance, extra programming channels, digital performance, and better compatibility without using adjacent channels.
See FMeXtra, the truly In Band On Channel FM digital transmission system that got final FCC approval before HD radio:
www.dreinc.com

Since we are into repeating ourselves here: "On AM, HD Radio is a disaster."

Am radio is a disaster. Ancient demos, declining listener base, it's remaining viable format slowly migrating to FM. Once-great AM facilities now in the hands of churches and other hucksters.

AM iboc may be grasping at straws but the stations that can implement it are atleast trying to survive.

FM Extra: Nice idea I like the concept of non-proprietary software, however it kills the use of subcarriers and if you want full digital bandwidth (which is still half the iboc maximum) you have to kill the baseband stereo. Mono FM, is that your idea of progress?

Stations broadcasting in FM Extra - USA= 4
" " FM Iboc - USA = 1200+ and counting.

Receivers?

Lino

"....now in the hands of churches and other hucksters..."

Do I detect some religious bias here? churches = hucksters? The hucksters are where the big money is, on television.

As for going mono with FMeXtra, it's a perfect solution for those migrating mono AM news/talk formats onto FM. You get 128k left over to work with for less than $10,000 - as opposed to HD radio's very expensive 96k.

 

[LinoNYC]

"....now in the hands of churches and other hucksters..."

Do I detect some religious bias here? churches = hucksters? The hucksters are where the big money is, on television.

As for going mono with FMeXtra, it's a perfect solution for those migrating mono AM news/talk formats onto FM. You get 128k left over to work with for less than $10,000 - as opposed to HD radio's very expensive 96k.

If you believe that any form of organized superstition is anything but mass lunacy...that's your business. Don't inflict it on me.

The above remark isn't aimed at you but I don't like seeing what has happened to AM radio as it's audience abandonds it.


You mention "migrating mono AM news/talk formats onto FM" -why do you think that is happening when most N-T stations are on strong AM signals?

The reason is that young listners won't tune-in AM. Hannitty, limbaugh etc. have no long-term future as long as their fate is tied to a medium that has over-50 listeners only. BTW: It's fine with me if those shows and their like vanish.

The problem with FM Extra (aside from no one using it or making receivers) is the fact that it is a band-exclusive solution, it does nothing for AM and you and I both know that if it comes to manufacturers deciding what to put their money into the AM section will get the short end.

I know that people will suggest the Kahn system but while it may be less disruptive to the band, it's a half-assed grafted-on approach and again, it'll reqire separate licensing to manufacture it and Fm Extra as well as a more complicated receiver.

If iboc ultimately fails, I'd suggest that we except that some things will just remain analog and push for better receiver standards along with a widened AM mask. I know what high quality AM can sound like, I grew up with it, but for 40 years AM has been an afterthought and it will take a major push to turn it's fate at this point.

Lino

 

[Radioman100]

As a Christian, much of the religious broadcasting offends me. I don't see anything wrong with a legitimate, conventional church broadcasting its services. That is a valuable service to people who might want to attend but can't attend for a variety of reasons.

Organizations like TBN are a different matter entirely. They're an embarrassment. TBN is a perpetual begathon that preaches prosperity gospel (if you give them money, God will bless you, if you don't, God will punish you.) It's owners reportedly have some 30 homes and a private jet.

FMeXtra is a joke. Too late to the party. Virtually nobody using the system. I'm sure it works fine for some apps like STL and reading services, but it will never gain traction as a broadcast medium.

 

[Mike Walker]

We REALLY shouldn't get into religion here, but IF religion is all superstition (and the burden of proof should be upon the believers, right?), then it would follow that there's no such thing as a "legitimate" church. Logical, right? Of course, religion is the one place where logic CLEARLY has no place!