I don't see why HDFM can be full power instead of only 1% of the power. I think that could save the rimshot stations even.. I also enjoy having some sports AM channels multicasting on HDFM, I hope they can increase the power, I really don't have any problem with the analog signals close to a HD signal. My home place I am about 30 miles from KVET (HD) and about 30 or so away from KLTO (97.7) and no interference. From KBPA a (100kw station) HD also, is only about 15 miles from me or so, and I can get KTXX down in karnes city.
-
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
Why can't HD be full power?
- Thread starter jras20
- Start date
At the moment, the movement on the part of the Ibiquity people is to petition for HD to be at 10% of full power. A 10x increase over the present signal. Doesn't sound like much, but it's enough to obliterate a number of adjacent and second-adjacent station in congested areas. A mess in the making.
Sorry to say, but the entire IBOC model should never have gotten off the ground. A digital-only spectrum, as they have in the UK would have made a lot more sense.
Sorry to say, but the entire IBOC model should never have gotten off the ground. A digital-only spectrum, as they have in the UK would have made a lot more sense.
jras20 said:
RDS is a subcarrier that is injected into the analog FM signal in the exact same way as an audio SCA (Sub Channel Authorization) signal is. The signal is injected at 57 KHz. The difference is the SCA is analog and usually used for music or speech applications. The RDS signal is digital and used for transmitting data like station identifiers, song information, time, weather, traffic or whatever data you want to send to the encoder. You could even use it for commercial messages that scroll across your radio. Because it is a very low baud rate, (1185.7 bits per second) it doesn't take up much bandwidth.
RDS has lots of neat features that aren't always used in this country, but are quite common around the world. Not the least of which is the ability to automatically switch to an affiliated station that is broadcasting the same programming. That's called "AF" or "Alternate Frequency." In Europe, most FM radio is done with networks of fairly low power transmitters, all broadcasting the same source material. With RDS, as you drive from point to point, your radio can automatically select whichever transmitter is delivering the best signal.
RDS can do many of the things that HD radio touts as "features." It can even support itunes tagging if you want. It is a mature technology with a long track record. It has been in wide spread use in Europe and Latin America since the early 1990's. It is cheap and easy to install. RDS encoders can be found in price ranges from under $200 to a bit over $2000. They only take a few minutes to install, and are quite reliable. I even run it on my low power FM station and it’s translators. It allows me to remote control the translators without having to actually drive to one and turn off the power switch. Practically speaking, the RDS signal is as robust as your analog signal. If you can listen to the station the RDS will also come through.
It can also be used to interrupt whatever you are listening to for emergency weather or traffic information. It has the ability to do this even if you aren't listening to the radio. I don't believe this feature is used commonly, but I wonder why not? The technology has been available for a long time. Meanwhile we continue to fart around with a broken and patched together Emergency Alert System.
We tend to think that here in the good old USA, we live on the cutting edge of technology, but if you travel very much, it becomes painfully obvious that we currently live in a technological back-water. I think that is tragic. We an do better.
I don't see why in theory a station couldn't operate at full power on its own channel; i.e., not in "Hybrid Digital" mode, but in full digital mode. I have not checked the rules, so I don't know if this is currently allowed or what the permitted digital power level would be in comparison to a station's authorized analog power (most likely somewhat less, I would think).
This might be an option for a group owner who has 5 or six channels in a given market and could convert one or two of them over to digital only broadcasting, leaving the others in analog only for now and eventually switching them all to exclusively digital operation.
In my opinion, it is the HD system that is faulty; if you had an 100% digital system I would think the performance would be much better. And also (importantly), there would be no adjacent channel interference since all of the emissions would be contained on channel.
This might be an option for a group owner who has 5 or six channels in a given market and could convert one or two of them over to digital only broadcasting, leaving the others in analog only for now and eventually switching them all to exclusively digital operation.
In my opinion, it is the HD system that is faulty; if you had an 100% digital system I would think the performance would be much better. And also (importantly), there would be no adjacent channel interference since all of the emissions would be contained on channel.
Nobody has gone fully digital because it would be the business equivalent of cutting your own throat. In fact, it's very, very telling that no one has even discussed the idea. Every owner out there knows that, if they went all digital, almost NOBODY would hear them. Even the lowest rated station in a given market will certainly garner better ratings than a 0.03 - which is what you'd get if absolutely everyone who had an hd radio was listening to you. All the time.
That's why. Because this concept has been absurdly marketed and implemented. At it's current rate of growth, HD will have 10% market penetration by, say, 2060.
That's why. Because this concept has been absurdly marketed and implemented. At it's current rate of growth, HD will have 10% market penetration by, say, 2060.
Notwithstanding all the hype from industry publications, iBiquity, Alliance stations stubbornly clinging to this failed technology and the NAB, HD Radio is already being measured for its casket by the vast majority of the broadcast industry and the most unforgiving critic of all - the radio-consuming public.
The constant harping for the -10dBc digital level is HD's Hail-Mary pass. The system is an interference nightmare on AM offering no tangible benefit, none whatsoever, and the FM can best be described as "semi-functional." So that game's over as well, since tech consumers never give new-system developers a "do-over." HD had its shot - and blew it.
The real world has moved on - the real interest is in internet radio. Whether HD gets its 10dB increase or not (or, most likely, some "compromise" digital enhancement) it won't improve the system's fortunes. Everyone - including HD proponents - agree it doesn't work acceptably as-is. If they get, say 6dB more, HD still won't work right. If they actually get an across-the-board 10dB, it won't work right, but the interference will become unacceptable.
Smell the coffee, Glynn Walden, Peter Smyth, Paul Donovan, Jeff Littlejohn, Cris Alexander, Tom Ray, et al. It's over. Time for you clowns to get back to doing what you do best - pulling cable, managing budgets and arguing with 28-year old program directors about IT issues. Your fates were sealed when you became egocentric engineering "stars," reading and believing all the press releases about what geniuses you were for developing HD Radio.
And everyone who would try to force an unwanted and destructive "innovation" on the industry, trying to do a smash-and-grab for fame and fortune at the expense of other broadcasters, go to school on the HD debacle. I personally can't want for the heads to start rolling over the enormous waste of resources HD has represented. The engineer-egomaniacs so richly deserve their comeuppance; it will be fun to watch.
The constant harping for the -10dBc digital level is HD's Hail-Mary pass. The system is an interference nightmare on AM offering no tangible benefit, none whatsoever, and the FM can best be described as "semi-functional." So that game's over as well, since tech consumers never give new-system developers a "do-over." HD had its shot - and blew it.
The real world has moved on - the real interest is in internet radio. Whether HD gets its 10dB increase or not (or, most likely, some "compromise" digital enhancement) it won't improve the system's fortunes. Everyone - including HD proponents - agree it doesn't work acceptably as-is. If they get, say 6dB more, HD still won't work right. If they actually get an across-the-board 10dB, it won't work right, but the interference will become unacceptable.
Smell the coffee, Glynn Walden, Peter Smyth, Paul Donovan, Jeff Littlejohn, Cris Alexander, Tom Ray, et al. It's over. Time for you clowns to get back to doing what you do best - pulling cable, managing budgets and arguing with 28-year old program directors about IT issues. Your fates were sealed when you became egocentric engineering "stars," reading and believing all the press releases about what geniuses you were for developing HD Radio.
And everyone who would try to force an unwanted and destructive "innovation" on the industry, trying to do a smash-and-grab for fame and fortune at the expense of other broadcasters, go to school on the HD debacle. I personally can't want for the heads to start rolling over the enormous waste of resources HD has represented. The engineer-egomaniacs so richly deserve their comeuppance; it will be fun to watch.
audioguy said:
Do you really think we are going to throw away over a half BILLION analog receivers away just because a few mega-egomaniac conglomerate radio owners and and their equally egomaniac brainwashed engineers want to jam IBOC down our throats? Not in this life time.
If that had been done on an all new band such as has been mentioned here many times that it may have been a different story but evidently the FCC is selling all that new open space to the highest bidder, so they left the mess that is iboc in place for all of us to watch slowly fall apart...and we are.
KB1OKL said:
Well said--I couldn't agree more.
- Status