Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
David Eduardo David Eduardo is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 69
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 30, 9:15 am, wrote:
Frank Dresser wrote:

In my market, Chicago, the top 2 stations account for about 10% of the
listeners. The bottom 15 on the Arbitron list draw 1% or less. And
there
are a number of stations which don't even make the list.


Actually, I just looked at the Chicago market. The ratings don't
support your claim. Even in Chicago, the listeners are fairly evenly
divided amongst the top 20 stations. (ranging from approximately 2 to
5% of the listeners, per station).

That seems to suggest listeners do what I do:
- jump from station to station
- looking for variety across multiple channels
- they would LOVE having 3-4 times more options on the FM dial.



SILENCE?

Guess I caught you in a lie. The Arbitron ratings don't support your
claim, but you're not willing to admit you got caught in alie.

Typical grandpa.


The average radio listener has three stations they regularly use, with very
few listening to only one (mostly evangelical stations) and many listening
to 4 or 5. In the People meter, the average listener has 5 to 7 stations
they sample at least once every two weeks. Having more local choices
increases use of terrestrial radio.


  #82   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
SoCal Tom SoCal Tom is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


"SFTV_troy" blabbed:
... this new receiving technique would not improve the sound
(it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would only reduce
interference.

At least in the States, AM & FM broadcasting is limited to 50 Hz to 15KHz.

Digital broadcasting is limited to under 20 Hz to over 20KHz, or basically,
the extent of the normal human hearing range.

If you're listening to 100 to 6,000 Hz, you're listening to a poor telephone
connection.

SoCal Tom


  #83   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Don Pearce Don Pearce is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,726
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 13:48:23 -0700, "SoCal Tom"
wrote:

If you're listening to 100 to 6,000 Hz, you're listening to a poor telephone
connection.


100Hz to 6000Hz would be an unbelievably good telephone connection.
300 to 3000 is more like a normal one.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com
  #84   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
David Eduardo David Eduardo is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 69
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


"SoCal Tom" wrote in message
...

"SFTV_troy" blabbed:
... this new receiving technique would not improve the sound
(it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would only reduce
interference.

At least in the States, AM & FM broadcasting is limited to 50 Hz to 15KHz.


AM is restricted by the NRSC standard to a 10 kHz brick wall.

Digital broadcasting is limited to under 20 Hz to over 20KHz, or
basically, the extent of the normal human hearing range.

If you're listening to 100 to 6,000 Hz, you're listening to a poor
telephone connection.


Bob Orban, on the NRSC committee, found that consumer radios almost without
exception, rolled off by at least 10 db by 4.2 kHz, and passed practically
nothing over 5 kHz.


  #85   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Eric F. Richards Eric F. Richards is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

SFTV_troy wrote:



Yes it does. AM-HD sounds like FM quality. FM-HD sounds near-CD
quality.


Let me say that I am thoroughly grateful that I don't have your ears.




  #86   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Steve[_12_] Steve[_12_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 76
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Sep 30, 4:06 pm, wrote:
On Sep 30, 1:37 am, wrote:
On Sep 29, 11:19 pm, RHF wrote:


What Analog Shut Down ?


The plan is to kill the analog signals and go strictly digital.

wrote:
That will millions of radios obsolete. Don't think
that will happen. IBOC will die first...


There are millions of obsolete televisions which will stop working in
just over a year. Does it look like the advertisers care?

They won't care about obsolete radios eith


Yeah, but it's doubtful enough HD radios will be sold to make a
difference. The few that are sold will certainly be obsolete soon,
though.

  #87   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Steve[_12_] Steve[_12_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 76
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Sep 30, 4:17 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...





On Sep 30, 1:37 am, wrote:
On Sep 29, 11:19 pm, RHF wrote:


What Analog Shut Down ?


The plan is to kill the analog signals and go strictly digital.


wrote:
That will millions of radios obsolete. Don't think
that will happen. IBOC will die first...


There are millions of obsolete televisions which will stop working in
just over a year. Does it look like the advertisers care?


If they are on cable, it does not matter. 70-some percent of the US is on
cable, and another significant percent is on satellite.



They won't care about obsolete radios either.


Radio stations are not ready to go all digital, and probably will not be for
8 to 10 years.... if ever.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Internet radio stations are already all digital. Those are the
stations everyone will be listening do after analog is dead, Wimax is
deployed, and HD radio has become a mere anachronism.

  #88   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
RHF RHF is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 131
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Sep 30, 2:20 am, SFTV_troy wrote:
Soundhaspriority wrote:
"SFTV_troy" wrote in message


Well FM-Hybrid Digital *already* sounds better than the old analog
FM. The AM also sounds better, albeit at the loss of hearing distant
stations (which can still be done via internet streaming).


No, it doesn't.


Yes it does. AM-HD sounds like FM quality. FM-HD sounds near-CD
quality.

Both of these will dramatically improve after the analog shutdown (FM
will have room for 300 kbps per station).


No shutdown is anticipated.


Riiiight. And my analog television will still be operational in
2010. And the UK/German committee discussions to shut-down analog in
2015, didn't actually happen. It was all faked.

Riiight. The FCC's going to let analog/digital coexist forever on TV
and Radio

Riiight.
And California doesn't have earthquakes.
Denial is fun.

;-)


SFTV - DOH ! - Internet Radio - Ain't Radio
* It's Wire-to-Wire -aka- Telegraph / Telephone

Free Over-the-Air Radio is Radio [.]
-PS- No "CoDec" Required !

SFTV, { DOH ! - Hybrid Digital Radio Fanatic }

AM/MW "HD" Radio is 'by-design' Engineered to Interfer
with the two Adjacent AM/MW Radio Channels at 10 kHz.
http://electronicdesign.com/Files/29.../Figure_02.gif

1 - Sear This Graphic Into Your Minds Eye.

2 - Then Actually Listen To What AM/MW Radio Has Become
Due To IBOC {HD} Radio Broadcasting.

I Ask Myself : What IBOC ?
All I See Is The Blinking Blue Light ! ~ RHF
In That Distant Land* Where IBOC Fears To Go :
Life Exists and Radio Listeners Live Beyond the 10mv/m Contour.
* Twain Harte, CA -USA-
  #89   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Steve[_12_] Steve[_12_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 76
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Sep 30, 5:09 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"SoCal Tom" wrote in message

...



"SFTV_troy" blabbed:
... this new receiving technique would not improve the sound
(it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would only reduce
interference.


At least in the States, AM & FM broadcasting is limited to 50 Hz to 15KHz.


AM is restricted by the NRSC standard to a 10 kHz brick wall.



Digital broadcasting is limited to under 20 Hz to over 20KHz, or
basically, the extent of the normal human hearing range.


If you're listening to 100 to 6,000 Hz, you're listening to a poor
telephone connection.


Bob Orban, on the NRSC committee, found that consumer radios almost without
exception, rolled off by at least 10 db by 4.2 kHz, and passed practically
nothing over 5 kHz.


That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.

  #90   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Steven Steven is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 138
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Sep 30, 8:33 am, "Richard Crowley" wrote:
wrote ...

(By the way, why do europeans hate america so much?
What did we do to you to create such animosity?)


It comes and goes. Look up the recent French presidential
elections, etc.


It depends on whether we saved their asses from Uncle Adolph and the
SS meat tenderizers and married their women or we want their oil to
triple in price and sell them software and save their asses again.

Who knows. They're Europeans. We got in rickedy old ships to escape
them and ever since have wanted to run to the Tyrolian mountainsides
and get happy with drunk chicks in tiny cars.

This interloper is only 23.53 percent better than Chuckie.



  #91   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Steven Steven is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 138
Default HD RADIO is NO!, and your mother will back me up so don't bother asking

On Sep 30, 3:09 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"SoCal Tom" wrote in message

...



"SFTV_troy" blabbed:
... this new receiving technique would not improve the sound
(it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would only reduce
interference.


At least in the States, AM & FM broadcasting is limited to 50 Hz to 15KHz.


AM is restricted by the NRSC standard to a 10 kHz brick wall.



Digital broadcasting is limited to under 20 Hz to over 20KHz, or
basically, the extent of the normal human hearing range.


If you're listening to 100 to 6,000 Hz, you're listening to a poor
telephone connection.


Bob Orban, on the NRSC committee, found that consumer radios almost without
exception, rolled off by at least 10 db by 4.2 kHz, and passed practically
nothing over 5 kHz.


Bob Orban is the alien from the late Weekly World News.

god darn it, we've had EVERY TROLL in the group except the K-Man, the
Scott Lifshine/Wereo entity, and the RRAP brigade in this thread!

Morein/McCarty/66.6% of the world's asshole postings has chimed in
even.

I predict the world will simply implode and then go back to whatever
it was doing beforehand.

  #92   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Steve[_12_] Steve[_12_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 76
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Sep 30, 6:53 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

ps.com...

On Sep 30, 5:09 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:


Bob Orban, on the NRSC committee, found that consumer radios almost
without
exception, rolled off by at least 10 db by 4.2 kHz, and passed
practically
nothing over 5 kHz.


That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.


The document was linked from one of Mr. Orban's posts on this ng, and is
searchable by Google.


You must have been posting under an alias.

  #93   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
SFTV_troy SFTV_troy is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 132
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


wrote:

Consumer interest in DAB in the UK is slowing (only 3.5 million DAB
radios have been sold in ten years), DAB stalled in Canada, and there
is almost zero consumer interest in HD Radio in the US - consumers
must realize that digital radio is a farce:

http://hdradiofarce.blogspot.com/



Do you have a similar website for DAB?

  #94   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Earl Kiosterud Earl Kiosterud is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 132
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio



"SFTV_troy" wrote in message
oups.com...

Earl Kiosterud wrote:

Synchronous AM demodulation uses a locally regenerated carrier, fed along with the AM
signal
(upper or lower set of sidebands) to a multiplier (modulator). The result is the audio.
It
replaces the envelope (diode) detector usually used. You can think of it as another
superhet
stage where the result, instead of another IF frequency, is the baseband audio. That's
because the local oscillator is the same frequency as the carrier of the (IF) signal, so
the
difference is zero. The sidebands wind up translated to baseband audio instead of to
another IF frequency.

There are advantages. Since one set of sidebands or the other can be used, if there's a
distant station 10KHz away, causing that AM whistle, you just switch to the other set of
sidebands, whichever comes in the cleanest. Also, it doesn't depend on proper amplitude
and
phase of both sets of sidebands to work properly, as does the regular envelope detector,
so
it works better with impaired signals.




I only understood about 75% of what your wrote, but if I understand
your meaning, this new receiving technique would not improve the sound
(it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would only reduce
interference.



Troy,

Well, the 6 KHz limit is due to the narrow bandwidth of the receivers, not the detector
used, or the stations. I think most AM radios actually do much worse than that. AM radios
are designed with a limited bandpass because it gets noisy as the bandwidth goes up. The AM
band is a soup of distant stations, particularly at night, and that's the source of much of
the noise. AM radio stations in the US are allowed up to 10 KHz audio. That's pretty
listenable -- there's only a little over a half octave to the 15 KHz limit of FM.

The synchronous detector, in addition to being able to use one set of sidebands or the
other, whichever is the best under the conditions, is not subject to distortion from
asymmetrical sidebands, such as when there is fading, multipath, etc. There may be a
non-flat audio bandpass from those conditions, but a conventional detector will also have
distortion.
--
Regards from Virginia Beach,

Earl Kiosterud
www.smokeylake.com


  #95   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
[email protected] SFTVratings_troy@yahoo.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 103
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

David Eduardo wrote:
wrote in message



There are millions of obsolete televisions which will stop working in
just over a year. Does it look like the advertisers care?
They won't care about obsolete radios either.


Radio stations are not ready to go all digital, and probably will not be for
8 to 10 years.... if ever.




Both the UK and Germany have "tentatively" set 2015 as the shut-down
for FM. (They expect DAB to fill that role.) I figure the U.S.
transition will require a similar time period of fifteen years, so
sometime around 2020 will be the end of analog.

Although, I'd like to see AM die as early as 2010 since so few people
listen to it. Just make it pure digital, 10 kHz per channel.

FM can continue until 2020 (it has no interference problems).



  #96   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Telamon Telamon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 116
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

In article . com,
SFTV_troy wrote:

Telamon wrote:

You're the second person to say something like that. But that's not
problem a with HD Radio, because U.S. radio doesn't air infomercials
(half-hour ads).


Good heavens. I suggest you listen to more radio more often. Make it a
portable so you get out more often. Heck there are infomercials that go
on for hours on the radio.




Please list a couple stations that do "hours" of infomercials, and
then point me to some of the Station websites, so I can check it out
for myself. This is a whole new phenomenon to me, because I've never
heard anything like that locally (neither on FM Music, nor AM Talk).


A local talk news station to me KVEN 1450 Sunday mornings has these
stupid supplement programs selling the latest bottle of pills that will
make you healthier or Realtors, loan brokers, CPA's, lawyers trying to
get your business. Any of these professions usually are selling books
and tapes. I hear this sort of thing up and down the dial.

If you listen to radio you got to be hearing this stuff.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
  #97   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Telamon Telamon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 116
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

In article om,
SFTV_troy wrote:

Telamon wrote:
SFTV_troy wrote:
Earl Kiosterud wrote:

I think the USB to which Tom refers is upper sideband. Converting
AM stations would mean they'd transmit only one set of sidebands,
the upper set, reducing the bandwidth to almost half. More
stations could be licensed in the same band. ...


But still have the same poor AM sound. Digital offers
an upgrade to near-FM quality.


I'll take the AM sound over low bit rate digital anytime.




Uh huh. Take a quick listen to these "low bit rate digital" AAC+
stations. They sound better than the AM Stereo radio in my car.

SKY FM New Age - http://160.79.128.40:7030
SKY- http://www.shoutcast.com/sbin/shoutc...e=filename.pls
Q93 -
http://www.shoutcast.com/sbin/shoutc...e=filename.pls


I have listened. Terrible sound similar to looking at pixilated pictures.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
  #98   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Telamon Telamon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 116
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

In article om,
SFTV_troy wrote:

Soundhaspriority wrote:
"SFTV_troy" wrote in message

Well FM-Hybrid Digital *already* sounds better than the old analog
FM. The AM also sounds better, albeit at the loss of hearing distant
stations (which can still be done via internet streaming).

No, it doesn't.


Yes it does. AM-HD sounds like FM quality. FM-HD sounds near-CD
quality.


Oh god. Another idiot. Oh yeah you are an electrical engineer that
doesn't understand the difference between a CD and radio propagation.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
  #100   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Telamon Telamon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 116
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...
Frank Dresser wrote:
"SFTV_troy" wrote in message

Wouldn't it be cool to have 5.1 surround from your radio?

Neither AM nor FM are currently broadcast close to thier technical
fidelity
limits. Plenty of people are happy with the current mid-fi radio and
perfect audio reproduction, even if it were possible, would not bring in
more listeners.


I agree with that. What would attract people to HD Radio is seeing
their favorite stations (like mine: FM97) multiply into 3 or 4
channels..... thus giving more choices to the listener.


For every additional channel a station adds in IBOC, their main channel
bitrate MUST suffer, as bandwidth is taken away from it, so it of necessity
MUST cut back the bitrate. DAB in the UK suffers greatly from this. Back
when they first started broadcasting, reports are that the Eureka system
sounded quite good, but as more streams were added, and the bandwidth and
bitrate of all stations had to be throttled back, complaints of artifacting
and poor audio reproduction started coming in.


For God's sake the guy claims to be a digital engineer. Clearly he
should understand this elementary concept. You shouldn't have to explain
it to him.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California


  #101   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car
Randy Yates Randy Yates is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 839
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

"Karl Uppiano" writes:

"SFTV_troy" wrote in message
ups.com...

Peter Larsen wrote:
wrote:

Frankly I'm a bit surprised at the reaction. There's currently a
transition from analog to digital broadcasting, and there will be some
growing pains, but it's only temporary. The Digital radio will
provide better sound than the current analog (like squeezing 5.1
surround into the current FM bands).

What is it that makes you assume that digital radio will be
ACTUALLY better than FM directly off the air?



For the same reason why Digital satellite radio, or digital internet
radio sounds better than FM. Better encoding of the signal yields
better sound.


Digital internet radio sounds better than FM? How? Are you talking about raw
technology or current practices? Because FM done right can sound spectacular
(it is practically never done right).


I'm not sure what your point is, but even though FM "done right" may
sound spectacular, a digital system can easily be more efficient in
terms of either power or bandwidth (or both) for an equivalent sound
quality using today's technology. This can be shown from first
principles using Shannon, entropy and all that.
--
% Randy Yates % "Bird, on the wing,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % goes floating by
%%% 919-577-9882 % but there's a teardrop in his eye..."
%%%% % 'One Summer Dream', *Face The Music*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
  #103   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Telamon Telamon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 116
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 30, 9:15 am, wrote:
Frank Dresser wrote:

In my market, Chicago, the top 2 stations account for about 10% of the
listeners. The bottom 15 on the Arbitron list draw 1% or less. And
there
are a number of stations which don't even make the list.

Actually, I just looked at the Chicago market. The ratings don't
support your claim. Even in Chicago, the listeners are fairly evenly
divided amongst the top 20 stations. (ranging from approximately 2 to
5% of the listeners, per station).

That seems to suggest listeners do what I do:
- jump from station to station
- looking for variety across multiple channels
- they would LOVE having 3-4 times more options on the FM dial.



SILENCE?

Guess I caught you in a lie. The Arbitron ratings don't support your
claim, but you're not willing to admit you got caught in alie.

Typical grandpa.


The average radio listener has three stations they regularly use, with very
few listening to only one (mostly evangelical stations) and many listening
to 4 or 5. In the People meter, the average listener has 5 to 7 stations
they sample at least once every two weeks. Having more local choices
increases use of terrestrial radio.


Oh great! Now your talking to your sock puppet. Well, that should be
more enjoyable than conversing with other people.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
  #104   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Telamon Telamon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 116
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

In article om,
Steve wrote:

On Sep 30, 5:09 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"SoCal Tom" wrote in message

...



"SFTV_troy" blabbed:
... this new receiving technique would not improve the sound
(it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would only reduce
interference.


At least in the States, AM & FM broadcasting is limited to 50 Hz to 15KHz.


AM is restricted by the NRSC standard to a 10 kHz brick wall.



Digital broadcasting is limited to under 20 Hz to over 20KHz, or
basically, the extent of the normal human hearing range.


If you're listening to 100 to 6,000 Hz, you're listening to a poor
telephone connection.


Bob Orban, on the NRSC committee, found that consumer radios almost without
exception, rolled off by at least 10 db by 4.2 kHz, and passed practically
nothing over 5 kHz.


That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.


Bob didn't test all the different model radios.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
  #105   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
David Eduardo David Eduardo is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 69
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


"Telamon" wrote in message
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.


Bob didn't test all the different model radios.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California


He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented audio
processing.




  #106   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Eric F. Richards Eric F. Richards is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

Telamon wrote:


For God's sake the guy claims to be a digital engineer. Clearly he
should understand this elementary concept. You shouldn't have to explain
it to him.


This guy is no engineer. That should be obvious.

  #107   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Telamon Telamon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 116
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

That's funny, I just asked Bob if he 'found' this and he said no way,
that you're basically just making **** up off the top of your head.


Bob didn't test all the different model radios.


He tested enough for a reliable sample of what Americans use. I'm guessing
you don't know who Bob Orban is, so you might google him and the term
Optimod or NRSC to learn a little bit about the man who reinvented audio
processing.


Yep, that where you got stuck somehow.

Reality = Take some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Oops! It's not quite what you wanted. Try again.

Reality = Makeup some samples + apply statistics + shake vigorously

Looking good.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
  #108   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Telamon Telamon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 116
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

In article XNWLi.896$ht5.398@trnddc02,
"Earl Kiosterud" wrote:

"SFTV_troy" wrote in message
oups.com...

Earl Kiosterud wrote:

Synchronous AM demodulation uses a locally regenerated carrier,
fed along with the AM signal (upper or lower set of sidebands) to
a multiplier (modulator). The result is the audio. It replaces
the envelope (diode) detector usually used. You can think of it as
another superhet stage where the result, instead of another IF
frequency, is the baseband audio. That's because the local
oscillator is the same frequency as the carrier of the (IF)
signal, so the difference is zero. The sidebands wind up
translated to baseband audio instead of to another IF frequency.

There are advantages. Since one set of sidebands or the other can
be used, if there's a distant station 10KHz away, causing that AM
whistle, you just switch to the other set of sidebands, whichever
comes in the cleanest. Also, it doesn't depend on proper
amplitude and phase of both sets of sidebands to work properly, as
does the regular envelope detector, so it works better with
impaired signals.




I only understood about 75% of what your wrote, but if I understand
your meaning, this new receiving technique would not improve the
sound (it would still be limited from 100-6000 hertz), but would
only reduce interference.



Troy,

Well, the 6 KHz limit is due to the narrow bandwidth of the
receivers, not the detector used, or the stations. I think most AM
radios actually do much worse than that. AM radios are designed with
a limited bandpass because it gets noisy as the bandwidth goes up.
The AM band is a soup of distant stations, particularly at night, and
that's the source of much of the noise. AM radio stations in the US
are allowed up to 10 KHz audio. That's pretty listenable -- there's
only a little over a half octave to the 15 KHz limit of FM.

The synchronous detector, in addition to being able to use one set of
sidebands or the other, whichever is the best under the conditions,
is not subject to distortion from asymmetrical sidebands, such as
when there is fading, multipath, etc. There may be a non-flat audio
bandpass from those conditions, but a conventional detector will also
have distortion.


I just made a few empirical measurements on a receiver with digitally
adjustable filters and noted increased high end audio response out to
8K. 8 khz wide is not pleasing because most radio stations are
apparently boosting the high end. I usually set the bandwidth 4.4 khz
for best sound otherwise it is to sharp.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
  #109   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
[email protected] kimmikat@gmail.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

They won't be shutting down at all. Something a lot better then IBOC
needs to come around. We all know Ibiquity is a farce.

On Sep 30, 5:18 pm, wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:
wrote in message


There are millions of obsolete televisions which will stop working in
just over a year. Does it look like the advertisers care?
They won't care about obsolete radios either.


Radio stations are not ready to go all digital, and probably will not be for
8 to 10 years.... if ever.


Both the UK and Germany have "tentatively" set 2015 as the shut-down
for FM. (They expect DAB to fill that role.) I figure the U.S.
transition will require a similar time period of fifteen years, so
sometime around 2020 will be the end of analog.

Although, I'd like to see AM die as early as 2010 since so few people
listen to it. Just make it pure digital, 10 kHz per channel.

FM can continue until 2020 (it has no interference problems).



  #110   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Frank Dresser Frank Dresser is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 26
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


wrote in message
ups.com...

Frank Dresser wrote:
And more expenses for the broadcaster.


They doesn't seem to be stopping them from adding second and third
channels Like WIYY in Baltimore, which has *voluntarily* added
Classic Rock and Indie Rock to their AOR primary station. Now
listeners of that style have three times as much content to enjoy.



But how is the extra programming being paid for?




Plus: If a smaller station can't afford multiple program, then they
don't need to do anything. They can just limit themselves to 1 high-
quality channel (300 kbps).


Gee, maybe if some independant station can't afford multiple programming,
they'll have even have trouble justifing buying the IBOC hardware.




Certainly not. And just because the frequency response of AM radio can

go
from 20 to 15kHz, or better doesn't mean it does. And FM radio is also
capable of excellent fidelity but it doesn't really happen either.
5.1 would be compromised in similar ways.



And then the listeners of that Classic Music station would complain,
and the manager would have to decide between (a) increasing bitrate or
(b) losing customers.


Yeah, there's a few stations in which true high fidelity sound would matter.
Not many.







People in Canada, Japan, and Australia bought AM Stereo radio in
droves. Why? Because there was a single standard, not the 4-way mess
the FCC left behind. (It's similar to today's HD DVD versus Blu-ray
battle; most people are just waiting to see who wins.)


Oh? A great many radios sold in the US are the same as the radios sold in
other countries and AM stereo still pretty rare here.


If the FCC had picked just ONE standard, then u.s. citizens would have
acted like canadians, japanese, and australians, and bought the radio
upgrade.



If they cared. The demand for AM stereo was fragile.



But with a 4-way race.... well u.s. citizens were left confused. And
it was the FCC's fault.

NOTE: This situation doesn't exist today. FCC has selected HDR, and
thus people know what they need to buy to get double or triple the #
of stations on the dial.


Yep. And HD radio is selling about as well as AM stereo did.






I already agreed with you that HQ is not going to motivate people to
upgrade. It will be seeing their favorite FM stations split into 3 or
4 programs, thus tripling their options, that will motive people to
buy.



Are they making money on the secondary channels yet? Are they even carrying
commercial advertising?


And I'm sure a fellow as clever and imaginative as you are can figure how
they might try to make money even if there aren't enough listeners to sell
commercial advertising.

Hint: They won't call it "HD radio"







In my market, Chicago, the top 2 stations account for about 10% of the
listeners. The bottom 15 on the Arbitron list draw 1% or less. And

there
are a number of stations which don't even make the list.



Hmm, interesting. In my markets (Lancaster, York, Harrisburg,
Baltimore), the listeners are fairly evenly divided bwtween the
stations. They all get a piece of the pie. See:
http://www1.arbitron.com/tlr/public/report.do



Baltimore, huh? Got any friends at ibiquity?



Actually, I just looked at the Chicago market. The ratings don't
support your claim. Even in Chicago, the listeners are fairly evenly
divided amongst the top 20 stations. (ranging from approximately 2 to
5% of the listeners, per station).


OK, I would have supported my point better if I had said:

"Many people listen to a few top rated stations, and a few people listen to
many bottom rated stations."

Either way, I'm aiming at the same point.

And my point is that there are alot of stations which don't have many
listeners, already. And HD radio does little to increase the number of
people listening to the radio.

HD radio does little to aid the health of the radio industry in general, but
it may be harmful to those people who are trying to run a small time low
profit station.


That seems to suggest listeners do what I do:

- jump from station to station
- looking for variety across multiple channels
- and that they would LOVE having 3-4 times more options on the FM
dial.


Good for you! Keep up the bandscanning!!

And if you double and redouble your efforts, you just might stumble across a
radio infomertial!!!

Frank Dresser




  #111   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Frank Dresser Frank Dresser is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 26
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 30, 9:15 am, wrote:
Frank Dresser wrote:

In my market, Chicago, the top 2 stations account for about 10% of the
listeners. The bottom 15 on the Arbitron list draw 1% or less. And

there
are a number of stations which don't even make the list.


Actually, I just looked at the Chicago market. The ratings don't
support your claim. Even in Chicago, the listeners are fairly evenly
divided amongst the top 20 stations. (ranging from approximately 2 to
5% of the listeners, per station).

That seems to suggest listeners do what I do:
- jump from station to station
- looking for variety across multiple channels
- they would LOVE having 3-4 times more options on the FM dial.



SILENCE?


Hey, I've got a life. I spend hours -- even days away from usenet.

It's pretty common. Get used to it. This isn't a chatroom.



Guess I caught you in a lie. The Arbitron ratings don't support your
claim, but you're not willing to admit you got caught in alie.


I overstated my arguement when I said:

"In most markets, most listeners are listening to a few stations."


I'm sure we can agree on:

"Many people listen to a few top rated stations, and a few people listen to
many bottom rated stations."

Is there really an important difference between the two statements?



Typical grandpa.


Oh, yeah I'm quite the old timer. Why, I remember when that Armstrong kid
was telling me about the high fidelity radio system he was working on which
would quickly obselete the old AM system.

Ah, the optimism of youth.

Frank Dresser


  #112   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Ken Ken is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:42:37 -0700, SFTV_troy
wrote:


wrote:

Consumer interest in DAB in the UK is slowing (only 3.5 million DAB
radios have been sold in ten years), DAB stalled in Canada, and there
is almost zero consumer interest in HD Radio in the US - consumers
must realize that digital radio is a farce:

http://hdradiofarce.blogspot.com/



Do you have a similar website for DAB?


http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/

  #113   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
[email protected] SFTVratings_troy@yahoo.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 103
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message

Guess I caught you in a lie. The Arbitron ratings don't support your
claim, but you're not willing to admit you got caught in alie.


I overstated my arguement when I said:
"In most markets most listeners are listening to a few stations."
I'm sure we can agree on:
"Many people listen to a few top rated stations, and a
few people listen to many bottom rated stations."
Is there really an important difference between the two statements?




Yeah it's false. The ratings show there are at least 20 channels with
near-identical numbers of listeners. That's more than a "few"

  #114   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Frank Dresser Frank Dresser is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 26
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


wrote in message
ups.com...

Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message

Guess I caught you in a lie. The Arbitron ratings don't support your
claim, but you're not willing to admit you got caught in alie.


I overstated my arguement when I said:
"In most markets most listeners are listening to a few stations."
I'm sure we can agree on:
"Many people listen to a few top rated stations, and a
few people listen to many bottom rated stations."
Is there really an important difference between the two statements?




Yeah it's false. The ratings show there are at least 20 channels with
near-identical numbers of listeners. That's more than a "few"



I thought I've heard every possible claim about the Arbitron numbers here,
but this is the first time I've heard that a 5.8 share is nearly identical
to a 1.9 share.

And that supports your arguement as well as it can be supported.

It's all a matter of semantics, I suppose. What do words such as many, top
rated, bottom rated and few mean?

By the way, Chicago's a big market. At least a few stations didn't make the
list. And those stations really do have "near identical numbers".

Frank Dresser


  #115   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
[email protected] SFTVratings_troy@yahoo.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 103
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message

Yeah it's false. The ratings show there are at least 20 channels with
near-identical numbers of listeners. That's more than a "few"



I thought I've heard every possible claim about the Arbitron numbers here,
but this is the first time I've heard that a 5.8 share is nearly identical
to a 1.9 share.


That's not a big difference. 6 months ago the 5.8 station had dropped
to 4-something, and the 1.9 station had almost 3. There really is not
a huge different between ~5% and ~2% of an audience.

Now contrast that with:

YOU stated that "the top 2 stations have 90% of the listeners" (or
something like that) which is so wrong, it's a borderline lie.



  #116   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
David Eduardo David Eduardo is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 69
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio


wrote in message
s.com...

Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message

Yeah it's false. The ratings show there are at least 20 channels with
near-identical numbers of listeners. That's more than a "few"



I thought I've heard every possible claim about the Arbitron numbers
here,
but this is the first time I've heard that a 5.8 share is nearly
identical
to a 1.9 share.


That's not a big difference. 6 months ago the 5.8 station had dropped
to 4-something, and the 1.9 station had almost 3. There really is not
a huge different between ~5% and ~2% of an audience.


A 5.8 that moves to a 4.0 has lost nearly a third of its audience. You
measure each station over time against itself, first. Like TV shows, some
radio stations go up, others bomb or go down.

In a market like Chicago, every share point is worth about $7 million on the
average. A 25-54 share is probably worth close to $9 million, so a
difference of a single share is huge.

YOU stated that "the top 2 stations have 90% of the listeners" (or
something like that) which is so wrong, it's a borderline lie.


He said the top two alone have 10%, which is absolutely true. Frank's point
here is totally valid.



  #117   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
SFTV_troy SFTV_troy is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 132
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message
Frank Dresser wrote:
And more expenses for the broadcaster.


They doesn't seem to be stopping them from adding second and third
channels Like WIYY in Baltimore, which has *voluntarily* added
Classic Rock and Indie Rock to their AOR primary station. Now
listeners of that style have three times as much content to enjoy.


But how is the extra programming being paid for?


Advertising of course. Plus the money they save because Digital does
not require as much power.



Plus: If a smaller station can't afford multiple program, then they
don't need to do anything. They can just limit themselves
to 1 high-quality channel (300 kbps).


Gee, maybe if some independant station can't afford multiple programming,
they'll have even have trouble justifying buying the IBOC hardware.


It's not that expensive. No more expensive than a mono to stereo
upgrade for an FM station.


5.1 would be compromised in similar ways.


And then the listeners of that Classic Music station would complain,
and the manager would have to decide between (a) increasing
bitrate or (b) losing customers.


Yeah, there's a few stations in which true high fidelity
sound would matter. Not many.


Agreed. But the advantage of the HE-AAC codec is you don't need a
high bitrate to get FM quality. Only 24 is sufficient. At 64kbit/s
you get near-CD quality. It's a VERY efficient compression standard.

So a station could divide itself into 300 / 4 channels == 64-96 kbit/s
per channel, and still have quality ranging from near-CD to CD.




People in Canada, Japan, and Australia bought AM Stereo radio in
droves. Why? Because there was a single standard, not the 4-way mess
the FCC left behind. (It's similar to today's HD DVD versus Blu-ray
battle; most people are just waiting to see who wins.)


Oh? A great many radios sold in the US are the same as the radios
sold in other countries and AM stereo still pretty rare here.


Because by the time the U.S. fixed on a standard (circa 1990), the AM
Stereo stations had largely disappeared. Thus there's no impetus for
customers to upgrade.

In contrast, Japan and Canada and Australia had a fixed standard in
the early 80s, thus giving consumers confidence that they were not
wasting money the next Betamax.


I already agreed with you that HQ is not going to motivate people to
upgrade. It will be seeing their favorite FM stations split into 3 or
4 programs, thus tripling their options, that will motive people.



Are they carrying commercials [on secondary channels]?
And I'm sure a fellow as clever and imaginative as you are can figure
how they might try to make money even if there aren't enough listeners
to sell commercial advertising. Hint: They won't call it "HD radio"


I have no idea what you have in mind as an alternative to commercial-
support.



In my markets (Lancaster, York, Harrisburg, Baltimore).....


Baltimore, huh? Got any friends at ibiquity?


Sorry. There are roughly 50 million people living in the Philly-
Wilmington-Baltimore-DC "megaopolis". The odds of me meeting someone
from iBiquity, by sheer random event, are about nil.





HD radio does little to aid the health of the radio industry in general, but
it may be harmful to those people who are trying to run a small time low
profit station.


My "smalltime" low-profit Christian station seems to be doing
alright. They happily embraced the new technology, streaming out 3
separate programs.

  #118   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Steve[_12_] Steve[_12_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 76
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

On Oct 2, 4:37 pm, SFTV_troy wrote:


My "smalltime" low-profit Christian station seems to be doing
alright. They happily embraced the new technology, streaming out 3
separate programs.


It's a shame they've never heard about audio streaming on the
internet. Could have saved them a bundle and prepared them for the
future.

  #119   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Earl Kiosterud Earl Kiosterud is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 132
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

I read once that AM radio in the US was allowed up to 15 KHz, but the NRSC standard, adopted
by the FCC, calls for a limit of 10 KHz. THat's only about a half octave from the 15 KHz
limit of FM, and sounds pretty OK, certainly better than rendered by most AM radios.

--
Regards from Virginia Beach,

Earl Kiosterud
www.smokeylake.com

Note: Top-posting has been the norm here.
Some folks prefer bottom-posting.
But if you bottom-post to a reply that's
already top-posted, the thread gets messy.
When in Rome...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"SFTV_troy" wrote in message
ups.com...

Earl Kiosterud wrote:

I think the USB to which Tom refers is upper sideband. Converting AM stations would mean
they'd transmit only one set of sidebands, the upper set, reducing the bandwidth to
almost
half. More stations could be licensed in the same band. ...



But still have the same poor AM sound. Digital offers an upgrade to
near-FM quality.

As a side issue, the loss of fidelity for which AM is notorious is largely in the
receivers,
with their narrow bandwidths, resulting in audio that is rolling off pretty fast around
the
5 KHz point. (AM stations actually transmit a fairly high-fidelity signal.)


How high? 0-10000 hertz? That's not as good as the 0-15000 possible
with AAC+SBR.



  #120   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
dizzy dizzy is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 652
Default HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

wrote:

SILENCE?


****WIT TROLL?

*PLONK*

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA: New Delco GM Chevy OEM CD/Radio w/Nav TV Aux Connector (for IPod,DVD,Sat Radio etc.) dg Marketplace 0 February 20th 06 04:38 PM
FA: Old Lafayette Radio, Heathkit & Radio Shack Catalogs [email protected] Marketplace 0 August 27th 05 04:05 PM
FA 1953 Crosley radio D25CE "dashboard radio" AHoudini Vacuum Tubes 0 October 21st 04 02:02 AM
Radio reception worse than factory radio, antenna adapter? AC/DCdude17 Car Audio 3 December 24th 03 03:17 PM
HD Radio = mp3 radio, only worse. Dan Popp Pro Audio 25 October 9th 03 02:17 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:25 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"