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.
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.
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?
Perhaps it is a good time to pose a few questions regarding the future of radio broadcasting and digital radio in particular. For this article, I will assume that everyone understands that digital radio is a type of modulation using data transmitted at high speeds, which is reassembled in the receiver to generate audio for the listener.
Why is digital radio needed?
What are the benefits of transitioning to digital radio?
Who would benefit most?
Who would benefit the least?
What are the alternatives to digital radio?
Why or why not proceed with the transition already started?
To answer the first question, we need to understand the current consumer marketplace and the all-pervasive notion of disruptive (aka destructive) innovation. That is to say, a new technology that builds on existing technology or knowledge, while eventually replacing or destroying its predecessor. Think; horse and buggy vs. automobile, microwave network vs. fiber optic network, wired telephone network vs. cellular phones or film photography vs digital photography. In other words, the older technology becomes obsolete and is abandoned in view of the improvements brought on by innovations.
Disruptive Technology
No one can argue that innovations have not greatly improved our lifestyle and productivity in the last one hundred years. Few would opt to permanently return to an era of no electricity, no electronic communications, and no cars. In order for the destructive innovation argument to succeed, however, the technology in question must be improved in a way that benefits the greater society.
Digital modulation methods have been under development since ATT started using T-carriers to transmit telephone calls over long-distance circuits. Over the years, several different methods were developed including Phase (or Frequency) Shift Keying (PSK), Multiple Phase Shift Keying (QPSK), Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM), and Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (ODFM).
For various purposes, these digital modulation methods offer distinct advantages over analog modulation methods.
Thus, the proponents of digital radio broadcasting postulate the advantages of transitioning to digital radio are:
Improved sound quality, often using terms like “CD Quality,” etc
Improved spectrum efficiency, more broadcasting channels for the same amount of frequency allotted.
Improved coverage area, less interference, out-of-band noise, etc
Value-added accessories, such as data services (song title and artist), album art, Electronic Programming Guide, H. 264 video, etc
Keep up with evolving technology
Thus, the question of why digital radio is needed is answered by listing the possible benefits of such a transition. By the list of benefits above, most consumers would find improvements in digital radio broadcasting as would most broadcasters. In theory, it is not a bad idea.
In the real world, theory, and application are often radically different. Innovation is most often, although not always, driven by a profit motive. Digital radio technology is no different. The proponents of digital radio are attempting to move technology forward while making a profit. There is nothing wrong with that, provided the consumer sees the value in the new technology and embraces it. That is a key part of the current digital radio puzzle which is missing; the consumer.
Unfortunately for digital radio broadcasting, several of the above benefits have not been fully realized in the first iteration of the technology. In several countries, digital radio has taken the form of IBOC via either DRM or HD Radio®. Others choose to do DAB via Eureka 147. In almost every case, the average consumer has not embraced the new technology for several reasons:
Coincidentally with the rollout of IBOC, the mobile internet has become pervasive through the use of things like smartphones, tablets, and similar devices. Via 3G and 4G mobile networks, consumers can access almost an unlimited number of programming choices from across the world.
Programming offerings on digital radio differ only slightly from those available on analog radio. Consumers are left with no compelling reason to purchase or install a digital radio.
The technical advantages of digital radio are not consistent enough or significant enough to make a difference in the listening experience.
The availability of other competing entertainment mediums such as MP3 players, satellite radio (XM/Sirius), internet streaming, etc.
Many point out that internet-type services require an internet service provider (ISP), mobile data plans, or some other type of paid service. Further; 3G, 4G, and or WiFi services are not universally available. All of that may be true, however, mobile data networks are rolling out far faster than IBOC. Consumers appear to be willing to pay for internet service for a variety of reasons, including mobile listening.
The major flaw of internet technology is the capability of ISPs to cut off service at the request of the government for any reason. There is also the ability to block access to certain websites, countries, search results, or services. There are several bills currently under consideration in Congress to codify this, which is an ominous development. Eventually, one of these bills will make it through and become law, creating some form of censorship on the internet. In light of the potential issues with the internet, free, over-the-air broadcasting is necessary, if not vital, to democracy provided the ownership is dispersed and diverse.
There are distinct advantages to digital radio broadcasting which may be realized with different systems that are developed in the future. It may require a re-think of what it means to be a broadcaster and how to make digital radio broadcasting more like IP-based interactive web streaming, available for free using different frequencies than what is in use currently. The general public has shown, by their lack of interest, that digital radio broadcasting as is being carried out today is not necessary. While digital modulation has been around for quite some time, the politics and bureaucracy involved with creating a digital radio broadcasting service has stunted development, making the technology almost irrelevant.
Radio World, bless them, has yet another article about the public’s lack of awareness regarding HD Radio®. Calling it a “lack of awareness,” is overly kind and I think they are missing the point. It would be better phrased as “apathy” or “indifference.”
There is a general misconception in the world that one either loves or hates something. That is not true, the opposite of love is indifference, not hate. The public has voted, with their wallets, for things like 3 and 4G wireless devices, satellite radio, iPods, and other entertainment venues. Why? Because HD Radio® is not an advance, it is a repackaging of old ideas with slick marketing. The general public has viewed the great digital radio conversion with a jaundiced eye, opting to sit on the fence and wait for something better. What has iBiquity given them?
The technology itself is a step backward with many band-aids needed to affect the same coverage area as analog FM. A technology that has poorer building penetration, less coverage area, and mobile reception issues with no appreciable difference in sound quality or program material offerings. A power increase from 1% to 10% analog carrier power (20dBc to -10dBc) hasn’t really made a difference. Now, studies are underway looking at asymmetrical sidebands and same-frequency repeater networks for FM IBOC. All of these things, are not to improve radio reception, but rather to achieve the same coverage as analog FM.
The AM HD Radio® has even greater issues.
There is nothing at all surprising about the public indifference toward HD Radio®.
