Or, it could also be phrased “A solution that causes more problems.” Radio World, once again, has a good article on the consequences of increasing IBOC power of the FM hybrid system. Especially telling is figure 24, a fuzzy 400 Hz sine wave showing how much distortion is added to the analog signal by a mere 4% HD signal. I’d be especially interested to see the results of the full 10% now allowed.
Naturally, HD proponents will cry “But this is only temporary! Wait until the transition to all digital!”
Bunk.
If HD radios were indeed flying off the shelves as iBiquity claims, and if the public expressed interest, okay, maybe. Clearly, that is not the case. The only thing that HD radio is doing is creating more interference. Period. More interference to the parent station and more interference to the adjacent channels all for an audience that does not exist. Another way to put it: NOBODY IS LISTENING. One of the station that I service had a Harris Deathstar go off line for four days. NOT ONE PHONE CALL, NOBODY CARES!
The public did not perceive a technical problem with analog FM broadcasting. Of course, that can always change as the band gets filled with interference.
Lets see where FM IBOC stands:
Rolled out with 1% digital power vs analog carrier, the system was found to lack building penetration and generally performed poorly in mobile listening environments (NPR labs study, Nov 24, 2009)
FCC allows up to 10% digital power vs analog carrier to overcome these problems, a few stations implement some type of power increase
The shows that self interference is the largest problem IBOC needs to fix, one that is un-fixable due to the laws of physics
The public yawns, turns on their iPod
IBOC is a failure, both in AM and FM bands.
We are watching the self destruction of radio broadcasting in the US.
I see this statement being made on various forums, blogs and other places. As some would like to believe, the problem with HD radio is that people don’t like change. A Look at the early days of FM radio in the 1950′s is a good example of this. FM radio took decades to catch on, HD Radio is no different. Currently, HD Radio is experiencing “growing pains” and the occasional “bump in the road.”
Except; no, not really.
Here is a side by side comparison:
Problem/issue
FM radio 1950
HD radio 2010
Implementation of technology
A new band was created and new radios containing the old (AM) and new FM band were manufactured. During the experimental phase (1937-47), the frequencies were between 42-50 MHz. This changed to 88-108 MHz in 1947. Uptake on new radios was slow due to a frequency shift.
Existing AM and FM frequencies were utilized using “Hybrid” mode. This entailed changing existing channel bandwidths arbitrarily
Funding
FM radio was implemented by broadcasters who, for the most part, bore the brunt of the costs themselves.
The CPB has granted millions of tax payer dollars to public radio stations to implement HD radio with most of that money going to one company, the owner of the proprietary technology. To date, NPR stations are the single largest user segment of HD radio.
Creation of interference
FM broadcasting created no interference to any other broadcasting station when it was rolled out
HD radio has created many interference problems, especially on the AM band at night, where skywave propagation makes adjacent channel stations bear the brunt of exceeded bandwidths. FM is prone to co-carrier interference from higher digital power levels created to solve poor reception issues in addition to adjacent channel interference to adjacent FM broadcasters from exceeded bandwidths.
Lack of consumer awareness or interest
Consumers were generally aware of FM radio, however, the FCC created a major stir when forcing FM broadcasters to move from their original frequency band of 42-50 MHz to 88-108 MHz. This move rendered obsolete many FM radios and caused hard feelings amount early FM radio fans.
Consumers generally unaware of HD. Those that are become disappointed with the lack of additional programming choices and poor receiver performance
Technical reception problems
FM stations began broadcasting with low power levels and horizontally polarized antennas. Radio was not yet a mobile medium. Many FM listeners needed to install outdoor antennas on their homes to get reception. Radio listeners were willing to undertake this for good reception.
HD power levels are less than needed to have reliable reception in buildings and mobile listening environments. A 6 to 10 dB increase has not effectively been implemented nor solved the problem
Audio quality
FM broadcasting is markedly superior to AM broadcasting in the areas of noise reduction and fidelity.
HD radio offers a slight improvement to “CD quality” which is hard for the average listener to tell apart from typical analog FM. AM offers increased audio quality over analog, however, due to reception problems, AM receivers often loose data synchronization and return to the analog signal, creating up/down listening experience most find annoying.
Auxillary services, additional channels
FM broadcasting did not have any such features in 1950
HD radio offers the choice of 2 additional channels for programming. These channels are taken from the existing bandwidth/bit rate of the digital carrier and are a lower quality than the main channel. In addition to that, there is a data channel that can be used to display song titles and such
Programming
FM broadcasting began by offering programming unique from AM stations. The programming often consisted of classical music networks, educational programs, news programs and other such things. Additionally, commercial FM broadcasting often had fewer commercials than it’s AM counterpart
HD radio main channel is the exact duplicate of its analog signal. HD-2 and HD-3 channel offer a variety of programming choices including simulcasts of AM stations, retransmissions of co-owned out of market stations, syndicated satellite programs, and occasionally a niche format.
Electronic Media availability
During the early FM development and implementation the only competing electronic medium was AM radio
The choices of electronic media are wide and diverse. These include TV, satellite radio, internet, 3G wireless, mp3 players, AM and FM radio
Regulatory environment
The FCC staff was filled with ex or future RCA employees, who were interested in the status quo, thus keeping FM from becoming too big too fast and competing with the roll out of RCA’s television technology. Therefore it was hobbled with low power levels and a bizarre station class structure
HD radio has enjoyed a rubber stamp environment where large businesses and the FCC work together to re-write interference regulations with no regard for technical consequences.
The FM roll out in the late forties and early fifties is vastly different from the HD Radio rollout in the zero zeros. Due to fear of competition and patent disputes, RCA in conjunction with the FCC did all they could to squash the new technology. That is why FM radio took so long to be accepted by the general public. For those not versed with the history of FM development and FM broadcasting in the US, see Empire of the Air, by Tom Lewis. See also: Edwin H. Armstrong. It is a good read for those radio obsessed.
HD Radio is failing because the consumer is not buying it, I see little to change their mind.
Could be. Digital Radio Mondiale, or DRM, is a modulation scheme that a group of broadcasters and transmitter manufactures have been working on since about 1997 or so. There are numerous shortwave broadcasters; the BBC, the CBC, Deutsche Welle, Radio France Internationale, the VOA, and others have been using DRM on shortwave for several years now. I can state that the shortwave DRM system works well, I have a software decoder and use the sound card input on my computer to decode and listen to DRM shortwave broadcasts.
The goal of DRM is to establish a world wide open standard for digital broadcasting in the LF, MF, HF, and VHF bands. In the early years of development, DRM was designed for digital broadcasting on the bands below 30 MHz. This system is now known as DRM30. Since then, the DRM consortium has expanded that to the VHF band (up to 174 MHz) as well (meaning where the current FM band is located) and have called that system DRM+.
DRM uses COFDM (Coded Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplex) modulation, which is the same as IBOC HD radioTM. This is a robust modulation system that employs multiple carriers at lower power (than an analog carrier) spread across the entire alloted bandwidth.
One of the claims is DRM transmits less power and is more energy efficient. In general, digital radio modulation does transmit less power, that is true. However, transmitters have to be run more linear for digital due to the increased bandwidth. This may not translate to greatly increased efficiency from the AC mains to RF standpoint. Because of that, there is more waste heat, and thus more air conditioning is needed to cool the transmitter room.
Some of the advantages of DRM over Ibiquity’s HD radioTM are:
Open source system. Royalties are paid by the transmitter manufactures only (and do date, most major US transmitter manufactures have already paid these). There is no royalties paid by the broadcaster to install DRM or by the consumer when purchasing a DRM capable receiver. One company does not own the rights to the modulation system for all the broadcasters in the country.
Universally standard; accepted by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), International Electrotechnical Committee (IEC), and the International Telecommunications Union’s (ITU).
The CODEC is HE-AAC 4, which is widely used world wide.
DRM30 and DRM+ fits into existing band plans and will not interfere with other users on adjacent channels. DRM30 is designed for 9 KHz channel spacing and DRM+ is designed for 100 KHZ channel spacing, all of which comply with existing FCC regulations.
Standardized receiver profiles, things that must be included in all DRM receivers. There are several advanced options as well, such as a media rich system that includes video.
DRM+ has several added features: DRM text, which is similiar to RBDS. EPG or electronic programming guide, which shows what is coming up next and a searchable schedule of when programs may be heard out to seven days. Some DRM+ receivers will have a TIVO like recording device that allows the user to record programs and play back later.
Traffic reporting and routing
In addition to that, DRM30 station have the ability to transmit low frame rate H. 264 video. This is a distinct advantage for short wave stations that are seeking a way around fire wall blocking. The video image is small, 176 x 144 pixels, and it is 8 frames per second, which is about as good as can be expected using a 9 KHz channel.
In some cases, DRM is capable of a hybrid mode (ed note: DRM calls this “Simulcast mode”), but what have we learned about hybrid mode digital radio: It doesn’t work very well. In short, it would be better if DRM were employed in the digital only mode. To many, this is a distinct disadvantage, but I don’t see it that way. There have been many that have made the IBOC roll out/FM broadcasting roll out annology. Frankly, those arguments don’t hold water. When FM was introduced, no attempt was made to shoe horn it into the existing AM (Standard Broadcast) band, it was not designed to interfere with other stations or itself, power levels were sufficient for good reception using existing technology, quality over AM was markedly improved and programming was often separate (simulcasting with existing AMs did not start until later). My point here is that any digital broadcasting should be introduced on a separate set of frequencies. Some have proposed using TV channels 5 and 6, which makes some good sense. Whatever the outcome is, we have learned, the hard and expensive way, that hybrid digital broadcasting does not work well.
A brief video about DRM30.
Currently, DRM30 is only allowed on shortwave broadcast frequencies in the US. I asked a product development engineer from a major reputable broadcast transmitter manufacture about this, his response was:
Medium wave broadcasting in the US already has HD radio, so the FCC would be disinclined to allow a new standard
One might be able to apply for an experimental license to broadcast DRM, but it would likely have an expiration date
It is possible to operate DRM in a hybrid mode on the AM band and occupy the same bandwidth as HD radioTM (30 Khz), it might also be possible to squeeze that down to 20 KHz.
Most modern (read: solid state) AM broadcast transmitters should be able to transmit DRM without modification (antenna systems may be a different matter).
It might be fun to apply for an experimental license to broadcast somewhere in the 1600-1700 KHz range with DRM30 only and no analog modulation, except for an hourly station ID in morse. A 1/4 wave tower in the middle of that band would be 141 feet tall. With use of a skirt, a grounded tower can be employed. That and a few above ground radials and the system would likely be pretty efficient. Part of the experiment would include driving around and taking signal strength readings while recording the programming material. This would give some real world testing on how the system would perform in wide spread use.
Of course, this would require a major about face by the FCC, which is not likely unless someone there grows or somehow acquires a back bone.
Some people question the need to do any type of digital broadcasting. I am a realist, in one way, shape, or form, digital radio broadcasting will (or already is) take(ing) place. It would make the most sense if the best system were used, which is not necessarily the first system proposed. The big question is, will today’s terrestrial broadcasters be involved, or out of business.
A little bit of information on what an AM HD Radio exciter looks like:
IBOC exciter, AM HD Radio
That is a Nautel version. The Harris version is called the “Dexstar,” Which has been nicknamed the “Deathstar” by those that work in the field. I was calling it the Harris Disaster, but found that nick name to be ambiguous.
Far better than I could ever explain it, Dave Hershberger, of Continental Electronics explains some of the potential problems with increasing the IBOC carrier(s) in an FM HD Radio system. If you have not already read it, read the entire article, it sheds some interesting light on the IBOC system and how it works.
Transmitting more digital power will certainly increase the digital coverage area and reduce digital dropouts. However, there may be some unintended consequences, which every broadcaster will have to evaluate before increasing digital power.
It is all right there. What amazes me is that the IBOC proponents do not acknowledge the system’s problems. Perhaps the above article is a bit over the head of the average general manager, or group VP, whatever the title dejour is. Engineers should understand this. Engineers should be able to explain this in an understandable way to managers and owners. It is the owners or whoever is holding their paper that have the most to loose in this scheme, which is to say, everything. Forget the FCC, they are in the pockets of their corporate sponsors anyway. Radio station owner’s and the bankers that control them should take a real hard look at this and see for themselves that they are writing their own epitaph.
Letter to the editor in the April 15, 1987 Radio World:
I’ve heard all the garbage I can stand about the AM stereo “issue.” The problem?
1. Motorola and Kahn each was a monopoly.
2. The stations don’t want to waste $6,000 on the wrong system.
3. The FCC is afraid it will be sued by the “sore loser” in a standard decision.
4. The receiver makers are afraid of wasting millions of the wrong system.
5. The listeners don’t know anything about AM stereo.
Does any of this sound vaguely familiar regarding some AM “improvement” scheme currently being used? Those that fail to learn from history are destined to repeat it, Bob.
In a way that never ceases to amaze me, Bob Strubel spins another yarn about HD Radio.™ According to Bob:
Tom’s experiences at the Ford dealership are disappointing. We believe they reflect the growing pains which often occur when companies launch new technologies. Tom hit the lot as factory installed HD Radio receivers were just launching.
Well, then, I guess that explains that. If I went to a Ford dealership today, I’d find plenty of models with HD radio(s)™ stock, right?
As far as new technology and growing pains, let us pick that apart piece by piece:
IBOC has been in development since 1990 or thereabouts. Not really new technology. Apple’s iPhone and iPad are new technology (2 years and 3 months respectively).
Ford Motor Company has been an HD Radio™ partner since 2007. One would think that all the kinks would be worked out by now.
The IBOC roll out hit a wall around 2008 and hasn’t grown since then, both the AM technology, which appears to be shrinking, and the FM technology, which appears to be subsidized by the US government.
To test Mr. Strubel’s next statement:
Had he been able to hold out with his old Explorer for another couple months, he would have been able to purchase an Escape with a factory installed HD Radio receiver as these vehicles hit dealerships the first week of August.
It is now the third week in August, I stopped by three Ford dealerships in reasonable sized cities around here. Not really wanting to waste a sales person’s time, I cut to the chase and asked about vehicles with HD radios. Here is the response:
Dealership #1 said they knew about HD radio, but none were in any of their stock vehicles. They also could not give me an idea of how long I’d have to wait to receive one, if ordered separately.
Dealership #2 pointed me in the direction of SiriusXM, saying that satellite radio was digital radio, or HD Radio™ or whatever it was
Dealership #3 never heard of HD Radio™ and said that all their radios were digital (Like, Duh!)
Finally, there is this standard iBiquity statement that seems to go well in any situation:
…it’s ironic that his negative experience happened at a time when the consumer rollout of HD Radio Technology is stronger than it has ever been. We are seeing dramatic receiver sales increases across all segments – OEM auto, consumer electronics, and the new portable HD Radio category. Overall sales of HD Radio receivers will more than double in 2010, and that is on top of a doubling from 2008 to 2009. Can anyone point to any other facet of AM/FM that has seen this sort of growth over the last several years?
Sure, analog AM and FM receivers continue to fly off the shelves in all the markets quoted above too. Furthermore, doubling receiver sales from one small number to another small number is not that dramatic. Like Mark Twain said: “There are three kinds of lies; lies, damned lies and statistics.” It’s like the rookie batting 1000 after his first time at bat; it happens occasionally, it is really not that dramatic or remarkable.
Comparing new technology such as the iPad to middle aged technology such as IBOC is silly. The iPad has all sorts of neat features, interactive programs, applications, etc. IBOC is just a one way radio that does sound any better than the old style radios.
I was reading several very interesting IBOC related articles and posts today. First of all, if Tom Ray, engineer from WOR and strong proponent of AM HD Radio seems a little reticent lately, well, perhaps this explains a few things:
It is telling that one of the most vocal proponents of IBOC would publish an article such as this. It seems to be diametrically opposed to the latest press release from iBiquity insisting all is well, never fear, etc. Perhaps it is meant to spur things on, rally the troops as it were.
The second item I found very interesting, Paul Riismandel from Radio Survivor fools around with a Sony XDRF1 HD receiver. He posts a great deal of information about his experience. It is a good read. To summarize some of the points of this story:
It is difficult to receive HD radio signals in the Chicago Suburbs.
When FM HD radio is in use, it is difficult to tell the difference in sound quality between the analog and the IBOC programming
Secondary channels have low bit rates and are not suitable for listening to music
Finally, Radio World, again, states that after six months 86 FM stations have completed the allowed IBOC power upgrade. That information is from the NAB. I cannot find any official FCC information regarding this, I would like to know if any of those 86 stations are around here. By the way, 86 out of 1,524 stations represents 6 percent of existing IBOC stations have upgraded. That makes 0.9 percent of the total number of FM stations licensed to the US running -14dBc IBOC carriers.
I will allow the reader to draw his/her own conclusions.
Let’s just hope that this is more of iBiquity’s wishful thinking, which is often presented as actual important news being based in fact. By iBiquity.
Why does the CRTC need a plan B anyway? Is in not enough that Eureka 147 failed mainly due to lack of public interest? If it was something that was commercially viable, wouldn’t it have taken off on its own? Now they are thinking of ruining the FM broadcast band, which, in my experience in Canada, is working perfectly fine.
Who says “digital” is better? If anything, what has been discovered in this country is when it comes to HD radio, digital is worse. Thus far, HD radio has the following going for it:
Proprietary system with expensive licensing fees
Complicated infrastructure
Insufficient building penetration
Poor performance in mobile reception evironments
Lack of original programming
Adjacent channel interference
Poor receiver sales
Lack of general interest and/or knowledge by public
All of these things have been well documented. If you work for the Canadian Radio Television and Telecommunication Commission (CRTC) and are thinking about this, contact me. I’ll even invite you down for a drive around and you can experience HD radio, in all its glory, first hand.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
~1st amendment to the United States Constitution
Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
~Benjamin Franklin
...radio was discovered, and not invented, and that these frequencies and principles were always in existence long before man was aware of them. Therefore, no one owns them. They are there as free as sunlight, which is a higher frequency form of the same energy.
~Alan Weiner
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes the freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers
~Universal Declaration Of Human Rights, Article 19
Heard in the clear