HD radio – Page 7 – Engineering Radio

Brazil: The place where they test tech before it is implemented

After extensive testing of Both HD Radio and DRM, the Secretary of the Ministry of Communications Electronic Communications, Genildo Lins, said the tests of the two technologies have had poor results, especially high-power FM . The testing demonstrated the digital signal coverage is approximately 70% of the current analog signal. “The future of radio is digital, but that future is not yet. We are unable to make a decision on these results.” A polite way of saying “This is not the digital radio we were hoping for.”

These are just a few brief excerpts of the FM HD Radio test reports from Sao Paulo. The method of testing:

The transmission system was located in the center of the city of São Paulo. The signal HD Radio digital broadcast was extended hybrid mode combined with the analog signal in the air, with separation of 163.8 kHz from the carrier’s analog FM signal and the carriers of HD Radio digital signal in sub-upper and lower sidebands. The power used in transmitter for the analog signal was 27 kW, and for the digital signal of 1 kW. Attaching the FM and HD Radio systems in their respective transmission antennas, the power Isotropic Effectively Irradiated (EIRP) of the analog signal was 112.3 kW and the digital signal of 1.12 kW. Thus, the protection ratio (EIRP power ratio between the analog and digital signals) was 20 dB (sic). During the measurement campaign, two commercial FM receivers were used analysis of analog reception, both to verify their potential impacts on receiving due the introduction of the digital signal, as to assist in verifying the coverage area of the signal analog.

The results of this testing:

Checking the results on each route, the route R1 radial (southeast direction), the stretch P1 to P2, that extends to 10.88 km (7.3 miles) of distance from the transmitter, the audio decoding was 71.6% of the digital audio frames received, and in the remaining sections of the route were little digital coverage.

In radial route R2 (southwest direction) was decoding of digital audio throughout the stretch to P1 P2, which extends up to 10.7 km (6.6 miles) of distance from the transmitter. In the following passage (P2 P3), the first blend was 17 km (10.5 miles) from the station. Following the passage P3 to P4, 26.4 to 44.9 km (27.9 miles), there was only 21.8% decoding of digital audio frames received within that stretch. In the last section (P4 to P5), from 44.9 km, there was almost no coverage digital.

In R4 route (northwest), there was decoding of digital audio throughout the stretch P1 to P2, extending up to 11.8 km (7.3 miles) of distance from the transmitter. In the following passage (P2 P3), from 11.8 to 24.9 km, was 62.5% of decoding digital audio frames received within that stretch. Following the stretch from 24.9 to 47.5 km (29.5 miles), (P3 to P4) the percentage was 24.3%. In the last stretch, from 47.5 to 61.7 km (P4 to P5), no digital coverage.

In route R6 (northeast direction), the stretch up to 9.8 km (6 miles), (P1 to P2) was 74.7% decoding of audio frames. In the passage P2 to P3 from 9.8 km to 29.8 km (18 miles) of the station, there was audio decoding 100% of the received frames. Following the stretch from 29.8 to 45.3 km (28.1 miles) (P3 to P4), the percentage was 87.2%, and in the last stretch, from 45.3 to 60.9 km (P4 to P5), the percentage was 47.9%.

Routes are shown on a map:

Using unbiased real-world testing, HD Radio does not look so hot. One caveat; the digital carrier level is -20dBc. That being duly noted, results show a 112 KW EIRP analog station with a 1.12 KW digital carrier that is unusable 6 miles from the transmitter site in some areas. It is almost hard to believe. Original documents can be found on the Government of Brazil Ministry of Communications website (in Portuguese). They are interesting reading, although you may need to parse them through Google translator.

AM HD Radio (no surprise) and DRM have similar or worse results.

Thus the myth “Digital is better,” is called to question. I am not opposed to new technology, provided it works better than the technology it is replacing.

The NAB’s AM study

As has been widely reported in other places, the NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) has completed its study of AM Radio and recommendations to improve the service. The NAB has taken a cautious, if the not somewhat paternalistic approach of holding the report while they review their options. It seems that the technical nature of such a document would not be understood by us mere mortals.

Some of the AM improvement options that have been bantered about in the past include:

Moving AM stations to the vacant frequencies of TV Channels 5 and 6, see this.
Reducing the number of AM stations on the band, see this.
Increasing transmission power of AM stations, see this.
Converting AM stations to all digital modulation, see this.

There may be a few other options considered also.

It does not take too much analytical prowess to deduce where the NAB’s proposal is going. My prediction is that they will be promoting an all-digital “solution” to the AM broadcasting issue using iBquity’s HD Radio product. I base this prediction on the fact that all of the major radio members of the NAB (Clear Channel, Cumulus, CBS, et al) are heavily invested in the iBquity product. For this reason, the NAB will find (or has found) that digital broadcasting in the medium wave band will solve all of the currently perceived problems with AM and everyone should embrace the technology.

A few numbers to note:

iBiquity and the FCC data base reports that there are currently either 270 or 299 AM stations licensed to operate with HD Radio. Other sources note that several of these stations have been turned off and the actual number using HD Radio is 215.
There are 4754 AM stations licensed by the FCC.
Currently, HD Radio is transmitted 4-6% of the AM stations in the country.
It costs $25,000 US to license a single HD Radio station through iBiquity. They are, however, discounting that to between $11,500 and 13,500 and have a convenient payment plan (limited time offer, expires December 31, 2012, FCC license fees are extra).
It costs between $75,000 and $150,000 to equip and or modify a single AM station with HD Radio gear.

Unless iBiquity drops all patent claims and licensing fees to use its product, an FCC mandate for AM stations to install HD Radio would be skating dangerously close to corporate fascism (AKA Mussolini Fascism or Corporatism) as one corporate entity would then control broadcast radio by licensing its modulation scheme. And no, the patent is not going to expire.

Digital modulation schemes used in the medium wave band have their own set of technical issues. HD Radio is not the panacea for AM broadcasting’s self inflicted woes.

AM Radio Improvement Plan

There has been lots of hand wringing and ink spilled regarding the sorry state of affairs in the senior service. AM is plagued with problems; interference, poor bandwidth, etc. To that end, the NAB has launched studies and initiatives and hired all sorts of pricey consultants to consult with. Here is my own AM improvement plan and it is rather simple:

Clean up the transmitter site.
Get rid of AM HD radio.
Variable IF bandwidth receivers.
Improve Programming.

How many of us have seen AM transmitter site dumps? Deferred maintenance, malfunctioning directional arrays, trees growing up on the ground system, flooded buildings and ATU’s, rusty towers, transmitters not a full power, ground system deteriorated or missing all together, just to list a few problems. Many AM transmitter sites are technical disasters. Think that these things have no bearing on the AM station’s signal? Think again.

differed maintenance, AM transmitter site — Differed maintenance, AM transmitter site (there is a tower in there somewhere)

Trees growing around the tower base can attenuate the signal by 30%. A comment from a well known engineering firm:

…Recently XXX field engineers had occasion to measure an AM station at XXXX kHz before and after removing vegetation in the vicinity. The station had a quarter-wave tower. The base area had grown up in brush and hardwood trees to a height of perhaps 30 feet (9m) and this extended from near the base across the entire ground system. After clearing (cutting, no ground system disturbance), the signal measured at some 16 locations on four radials went up a uniform amount of about 15% or 1.2 DB. That’s about a 30% increase in radiated power…

That is an inexpensive power boost and they didn’t even have to file with the FCC! A 1 – 2 dB power gain is pretty nice and can mean the difference between a listenable signal and static. How many times have I heard the lament that AM band is full of noise and not listenable. Certainly, there are major challenges in the urban listening environment. Putting forth a better signal will overcome some of this electrical noise.

There is a reason why engineering standards were developed for the physical plant; they work.

There is no cure for the noise that AM HD Radio puts out into the adjacent channels. This self interference benefits none, not even the station transmitting AM HD Radio. This dubious technology has proved itself a non-starter and should be discontinued. For smaller station owners, the cost of implementing AM HD Radio is prohibitive. Licensing of a proprietary modulation scheme, new transmitting equipment, specialized exciters plus any needed bandwidth improvements to AM antenna arrays can easily exceed $100,000.00. Unfortunately, it is often the small AM radio operators that are making a good showing, and serving their community of license and making money. These are the very stations that are hurt the most by adjacent channel AM HD Radio interference.

Receiver design over the last twenty to thirty years has been the greater issue with perceived low AM broadcast quality. AM receivers have an average bandwidth of just 3-4 KHz, which is slightly better than telephone quality. AM broadcasting has gotten a bad wrap because of this and there are many comments about how AM is “inferior quality” to FM. With a quality older receiver, AM can sound very good. Of course, the receiver manufactures all point adjacent channel interference as their rational for reducing IF bandwidth. Why not leave it in the hands of the user? The GE Superradio had this feature with a “wide” and “narrow” setting for AM reception. They worked remarkably well. A receiver could also be designed to automatically increase IF bandwidth at higher received signal strengths.

Finally, as the saying goes; Garbage in, Garbage out (GIGO). This holds true for many things including radio programming. Expecting that mediocre satellite syndicated news talk will garner great ratings and huge revenues is silly. For years and years, station owners have put minimal effort into AM radio and expected big returns. It is not working. AM stations that go against that trend; those with unique formats (Gasp! Music, on AM?), local content, and community oriented programming can and do succeed. They are fighting an up hill battle in both directions. With all of the business pressures from larger broadcast groups, interference issues and negative viewpoint on the viability of the AM band, one wonders how long they can last.

The Death Star strikes again

No, not that Death Star, this one:

Because Hey! It’s digital, therefore it must be better!

I found this faulted HD Radio exciter on my weekly site visit for WFAS-FM. I have no idea how long it was in the fault condition. The radio station received zero calls about the HD Radio being off. When I looked at the fault log, it stated that it was unable to ping something or another. However, the reason for the exciter shutting down was… wait for it… the fault log was full.

I rebooted the unit, it came up without problems and there appears to be no lingering communications issues.

At least these things weren’t terribly expensive… Oh no, wait, they were.

Well, at least people are getting enjoyment from their wonderful sounding digital radio, except, no: People don’t seem to know about it, or care.

So, the radio stations must be making tons of money on this thing, right? What? No?

I am confused, why are we doing this again?