HOW DRM handles skywave propagation (digital radio mondiale) [Archive]

October 1st 07, 02:15 AM

This is copied directly from the DRM User Guide:

"For ionospheric propagation, the most severe Doppler spread is
observed in the case of Near Vertical Incidence Sky-wave (NVIS)
propagation. Because the path lengths between transmitter and
receiver are quite short for NVIS, the distances between the
ionospheric layers represent a larger proportion of the total path
length. The several reflections can also have similar energy levels.
This gives rise to significant values of Doppler spread.

"To counter the effects of Doppler shift and Doppler spread the
frequency separation between the OFDM carriers in the DRM signal is
progressively increased (e.g. the carrier spacing in Mode D is more
than 2.5 times that in Mode A). This ensures that the frequency
spread experienced is kept to a sufficiently small fraction of the
carrier spacing to allow correct demodulation."

Ratata

October 1st 07, 07:42 PM

wrote:

> "To counter the effects of Doppler shift and Doppler spread the
> frequency separation between the OFDM carriers in the DRM signal is
> progressively increased (e.g. the carrier spacing in Mode D is more
> than 2.5 times that in Mode A). This ensures that the frequency
> spread experienced is kept to a sufficiently small fraction of the
> carrier spacing to allow correct demodulation."

better than IBOC ??

--
--
Shortwave transmissions in English, Francais, Nederlands, Deutsch,
Suid-Afrikaans, Chinese, Dansk, Urdu, Cantonese, Greek, Spanish,
Portuguese, ...
http://shortwave.blogsite.org/ Updated every month or so ....

[email protected]

October 2nd 07, 12:26 PM

On Oct 1, 1:42 pm, Ratata > wrote:
> wrote:
> > "To counter the effects of Doppler shift and Doppler spread the
> > frequency separation between the OFDM carriers in the DRM signal is
> > progressively increased (e.g. the carrier spacing in Mode D is more
> > than 2.5 times that in Mode A). This ensures that the frequency
> > spread experienced is kept to a sufficiently small fraction of the
> > carrier spacing to allow correct demodulation."
>
> better than IBOC ??

Digital Radio Mondiale *is* IBOC. (Like HD Radio, it sits right next-
door to the AM signal, widening the channel by a few more kilohertz)

Phil Kane

October 2nd 07, 11:51 PM

On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 04:26:10 -0700, wrote:

>Digital Radio Mondiale *is* IBOC. (Like HD Radio, it sits right next-
>door to the AM signal, widening the channel by a few more kilohertz)

A few kilohertz here, a few kilohertz there, pretty soon you have
"real money" -- channel overlap a.k.a. harmful interference as
defined in communications law.
--
Phil Kane
Beaverton, OR

RHF

October 3rd 07, 12:17 AM

On Oct 2, 4:26 am, wrote:
> On Oct 1, 1:42 pm, Ratata > wrote:
>
> > wrote:
> > > "To counter the effects of Doppler shift and Doppler spread the
> > > frequency separation between the OFDM carriers in the DRM signal is
> > > progressively increased (e.g. the carrier spacing in Mode D is more
> > > than 2.5 times that in Mode A). This ensures that the frequency
> > > spread experienced is kept to a sufficiently small fraction of the
> > > carrier spacing to allow correct demodulation."
>
> > better than IBOC ??
>

- Digital Radio Mondiale *is* IBOC. (Like HD Radio, it sits right
next-
- door to the AM signal, widening the channel by a few more kilohertz)

SFTV -aka- "Hybrid Digital" Man,

DOH ! - You had beeter go back and re-do your
DRM 101 and IBOC 101 Classes again. ~ RHF

Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Radio_Mondiale
Unique Digital Broadcast Signal Mode {Non-Analog AM}

In-Band On-Channel (IBOC) so called "HD" Radio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBOC
Combined Analog and Digital Broadcast Signal Modes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_Radio

DRM is All Digital Mode of Shortwave (HF) Radio Transmission
http://www.eiinfo.fh-konstanz.de/download/drm/image35.jpg

DRM Digital Signal at 13,790 kHz with AM Analog
http://shortwaveradio.org/drm_13_Af_010511_2100.jpg
Signals at 13770 kHz; 13800 kHz; and 13810 kHz.
* Clearly you can see that DRM requires at least
15 kHz of Channel "Spacing" for it not to interfere
with any 'adjacent' DRM or Analog Radio Broadcast.

Note - That the DRM Shortwave Radio Broadcasts are
independent and separate from the older Analog "AM"
Radio Transmission Mode Broadcasts.
* International, National and Local DRM Broadcasts
Underway in Markets Worldwide
http://www.drm.org/livebroadcast/livebroadcast.php

>From what I have read and heard DRM appears to work
best as a Directed Beam Radio {Audio} Delivery System
up to 1000 Miles and out to 2500 Miles.
* DRM Tropical Band {With-In-Country} Omni-Directional
Radio Broadcasting best up to 300 Miles and out to 1000
Miles.

Analog "AM" And DRM Can Not Co-Exist On The Same
Channel {Frequency} At The Same Time [.]

As with all Shortwave Radio Broadcasting the Coordinated
Scheduling of Broadcast Time and Frequency is important
for DRM Broadcasters since they take up Four Times (4X)
the Bandwidth as the Analog "AM" Broadcasters.

High Frequency Co-ordination Conference (HFCC)
HFCC => http://www.hfcc.org/

drm ain't iboc -and- iboc ain't drm ~ RHF

[email protected]

October 3rd 07, 01:02 PM

On Oct 2, 6:17 pm, RHF > wrote:
>
> drm ain't iboc -and- iboc ain't drm ~ RHF
> .

You are dumb. DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode. See this manual,
page 20. Notice how the DRM sits "in-band on-channel" same as the HD
Radio works.

www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf

Richard Crowley

October 3rd 07, 01:55 PM

THIS DISCUSSION IS OFF-TOPIC FOR REC.AUDIO.TECH
(AND REC.AUDIO.CAR, FOR THAT MATTER)
PLEASE DROP REC.AUDIO.TECH FROM THIS DISCUSSION

Hein ten Horn

October 4th 07, 01:29 AM

wrote
> On Oct 2, 6:17 pm, RHF wrote:
>>
>> drm ain't iboc -and- iboc ain't drm ~ RHF
>
> You are dumb. DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode. See this manual,
> page 20. Notice how the DRM sits "in-band on-channel" same as the HD
> Radio works.
> www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf

No, the manual does not state
"DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode".
A simulcast is not necessarily hybrid.
I also cannot find any affirmation on your statement
Notice how the DRM sits "in-band on-channel".

RHF dumb?
Don't think so.
Take a good look on that page 20 of the manual.

[quote]
DRM supports a number of different simulcast options. Currently the
supported simulcast modes require the use of additional spectrum outside
an assigned 9 or 10 kHz channel (Multi-Channel or Multi-frequency
Simulcast, MCS). The DRM signal can be located in the next adjacent
upper or lower channel and can occupy a half or whole channel
depending on the bandwidth option chosen.
[unquote]

So far nothing about IBOC.
In general, a simulcast is a simultaneous transmission of the same
programme. Here, both transmissions are located in two adjacent
channels, the DRM transmitter operating with less power than the
analogue signal transmitter.

[quote]
(..) a satisfactory compromise can be obtained when the DRM power
level is around 14-16 dB below the adjacent analogue signal.
[unquote]

Unfortunately, operating on two adjacent frequencies (channels) may
give rise to interference problems. With IBOC no such problems
would occur, isn't it?
Now read the following about a possible DRM-future...

[quote]
In an ideal world it would also be possible to transmit both an analogue
and a digital signal within the same channel (9 or 10 kHz) so that the
analogue service could be received, without interference from the
digital signal, on any analogue receiver.
[unquote]

With only one transmission there would be no interference,
so in the real world anno 2007 interference may arise and
DRM is not IBOC.
The statement "DRM is not IBOC" is also apparent from
some other quotes from page 20:

[quote]
(..) promising proposals for a SCS (Single Channel Simulcast)
option are currently being evaluated (..)
Even if single channel simulcast may prove a difficult goal to
achieve (..)
[unquote]

DRM is not IBOC,
correct me if I'm wrong.

gr, Hein

Hein ten Horn

October 4th 07, 01:30 AM

RHF wrote:
>
> But presently the majority of DRM Broadcasting on the
> Shortwave Radios is Pure {100%} DRM "Digital"

Make it: all DRM broadcasts.
A simultaneous AM transmission on an adjacent channel
does not make the DRM transmission less digital.

gr, Hein

RHF

October 4th 07, 08:20 AM

On Oct 3, 5:29 pm, "Hein ten Horn" >
wrote:
> wrote
>
> > On Oct 2, 6:17 pm, RHF wrote:
>
> >> drm ain't iboc -and- iboc ain't drm ~ RHF
>
> > You are dumb. DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode. See this manual,
> > page 20. Notice how the DRM sits "in-band on-channel" same as the HD
> > Radio works.
> >www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf
>
> No, the manual does not state
> "DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode".
> A simulcast is not necessarily hybrid.
> I also cannot find any affirmation on your statement
> Notice how the DRM sits "in-band on-channel".
>
> RHF dumb?
> Don't think so.
> Take a good look on that page 20 of the manual.
>
> [quote]
> DRM supports a number of different simulcast options. Currently the
> supported simulcast modes require the use of additional spectrum outside
> an assigned 9 or 10 kHz channel (Multi-Channel or Multi-frequency
> Simulcast, MCS). The DRM signal can be located in the next adjacent
> upper or lower channel and can occupy a half or whole channel
> depending on the bandwidth option chosen.
> [unquote]
>
> So far nothing about IBOC.
> In general, a simulcast is a simultaneous transmission of the same
> programme. Here, both transmissions are located in two adjacent
> channels, the DRM transmitter operating with less power than the
> analogue signal transmitter.
>
> [quote]
> (..) a satisfactory compromise can be obtained when the DRM power
> level is around 14-16 dB below the adjacent analogue signal.
> [unquote]
>
> Unfortunately, operating on two adjacent frequencies (channels) may
> give rise to interference problems. With IBOC no such problems
> would occur, isn't it?
> Now read the following about a possible DRM-future...
>
> [quote]
> In an ideal world it would also be possible to transmit both an analogue
> and a digital signal within the same channel (9 or 10 kHz) so that the
> analogue service could be received, without interference from the
> digital signal, on any analogue receiver.
> [unquote]
>
> With only one transmission there would be no interference,
> so in the real world anno 2007 interference may arise and
> DRM is not IBOC.
> The statement "DRM is not IBOC" is also apparent from
> some other quotes from page 20:
>
> [quote]
> (..) promising proposals for a SCS (Single Channel Simulcast)
> option are currently being evaluated (..)
> Even if single channel simulcast may prove a difficult goal to
> achieve (..)
> [unquote]
>

- DRM is not IBOC,
- correct me if I'm wrong.
-
- gr, Hein

HtH - I am so sorry - I can not correct you
-cause- you ain't wrong. ~ RHF

Yes HtH - You Are Right "DRM -Ain't- IBOC" !

SFTV -aka- "Hybrid Digital" Man,

Here are a few more thoughs to consider :

DRM 'may' have the Analog "AM" Signal along-side
'Adjacent-To the Digital Signal. {Two Unque Functions}
-NOTE- This uses up even more Bandwidth then
DRM alone.
-IMHO- The better approach for DRM would be to
have the separate Digial and Analog "Simulcast"
Signals 'spaced' 50 kHz apart so that each of the
two independant Broadcast Signal would have no
chance of interferring with each other; and the DRM
Signal could be Transmitted at Full Power.
-Remember- DRM is a single Mode of Transmission.
-Also Note- DRM Radio/Receivers are Manual
Single Mode Operation.

IBOC has the Analog "AM" Signal 'nested' in-between
the Two Outer Digital Side-Bands : By-Design and is
Bi-Modal 100% of the time. {Functions in Tandem}
-Remember- IBOC is a Dual Transmission Mode.
-Also Note- IBOC Radio/Receivers are Automatic
Dual Mode Operation.

SFTV_troy

October 4th 07, 03:19 PM

Phil Kane wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 04:26:10 -0700, wrote:
>
> >Digital Radio Mondiale *is* IBOC. (Like HD Radio, it sits right next-
> >door to the AM signal, widening the channel by a few more kilohertz)
>
> A few kilohertz here, a few kilohertz there, pretty soon you have
> "real money" -- channel overlap a.k.a. harmful interference as
> defined in communications law.

Yes, both HD and DRM have that flaw, because they are both IBOC.

SFTV_troy

October 4th 07, 03:24 PM

RHF wrote:
> On Oct 2, 4:26 am, wrote:
> >
>
>> Digital Radio Mondiale *is* IBOC. (Like HD Radio, it sits right
>> next to the AM signal, widening the channel by a few more kilohertz)
>
>
>
> DOH ! - You had beeter go back and re-do your
> DRM 101 and IBOC 101 Classes again. ~ RHF
>
> Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Radio_Mondiale

You had "beeter" try reading the wikipedia article you site. Read
it. Quote: "A full 10 kHz channel for AM, plus a 5 kHz half-channel
sideband for DRM."

That's in-band on-channel mode.

IBOC.

duh

SFTV_troy

October 4th 07, 03:25 PM

RHF wrote:
> On Oct 3, 5:02 am, wrote:
>
> - You are dumb. DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode.
> - See this manual, page 20. Notice how the DRM sits
> - "in-band on-channel" same as the HD Radio works.
> - www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf
>
>
>
> But presenetly the majority of DRM Broadcasting on the
> Shortwave Radios is Pure {100%} DRM "Digital" and it
> Trashes 20 kHz of Bandwidth around it and makes good
> old AM Analog Shortwave Broadcasting very hard to Hear.

Well what the heck do you expect from an IBOC format??? (Yes you
heard right; IBOC.)

[email protected]

October 4th 07, 03:31 PM

Hein ten Horn wrote:
> wrote
> >
> > DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode. See this manual,
> > page 20. Notice how the DRM sits "in-band on-channel"
> > same as the HD Radio works.
> > www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf
>
> No, the manual does not state
> "DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode".
> A simulcast is not necessarily hybrid.

By that reasoning, HD Radio is not a hybrid format, because the
digital information sits *next to* the AM signal.

HD Radio is a simulcast format.

> [quote]
> DRM supports a number of different simulcast options. Currently the
> supported simulcast modes require the use of additional spectrum outside
> an assigned 9 or 10 kHz channel (Multi-Channel or Multi-frequency
> Simulcast, MCS). The DRM signal can be located in the next adjacent
> upper or lower channel and can occupy a half or whole channel
> depending on the bandwidth option chosen.
> [unquote]
>
> So far nothing about IBOC.

Okay. By that reasoning, because HD Radio sits "next to" the AM
signal, then it is not IBOC either. It is a simulcast format.

Do you agree with that statement?

Steve[_13_]

October 4th 07, 04:24 PM

On Oct 4, 10:31 am, wrote:
> Hein ten Horn wrote:
> > wrote
>
> > > DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode. See this manual,
> > > page 20. Notice how the DRM sits "in-band on-channel"
> > > same as the HD Radio works.
> > >www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf
>
> > No, the manual does not state
> > "DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode".
> > A simulcast is not necessarily hybrid.
>
> By that reasoning, HD Radio is not a hybrid format, because the
> digital information sits *next to* the AM signal.
>
> HD Radio is a simulcast format.
>
> > [quote]
> > DRM supports a number of different simulcast options. Currently the
> > supported simulcast modes require the use of additional spectrum outside
> > an assigned 9 or 10 kHz channel (Multi-Channel or Multi-frequency
> > Simulcast, MCS). The DRM signal can be located in the next adjacent
> > upper or lower channel and can occupy a half or whole channel
> > depending on the bandwidth option chosen.
> > [unquote]
>
> > So far nothing about IBOC.
>
> Okay. By that reasoning, because HD Radio sits "next to" the AM
> signal, then it is not IBOC either. It is a simulcast format.
>
> Do you agree with that statement?

What statement?

RHF

October 4th 07, 06:56 PM

On Oct 4, 7:24 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> RHF wrote:
> > On Oct 2, 4:26 am, wrote:
>
> >> Digital Radio Mondiale *is* IBOC. (Like HD Radio, it sits right
> >> next to the AM signal, widening the channel by a few more kilohertz)
>
> > DOH ! - You had beeter go back and re-do your
> > DRM 101 and IBOC 101 Classes again. ~ RHF
>
> > Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM)
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Radio_Mondiale
-
- You had "beeter" try reading the wikipedia article you site. Read
- it. Quote: "A full 10 kHz channel for AM, plus a 5 kHz half-
channel
- sideband for DRM."
-
- That's in-band on-channel mode.
-
- IBOC.
-
- duh

DOH ! - When you 'sight' a spelling mistake and choose
to 'cite' it; make sure you do not 'site' it instead. ~ RHF

SFTV -aka- "Hybrid Digital" Man,

If you continue to argue that DRM 'is' IBOC : Then clearly some
people on this Shortwave Radio Newsgroup are going to call to
question your educational claims and technical expertise as
an "EE".

One Again Please Read :

Note- The 'operative word here is 'may'.

DRM 'may' have the Analog "AM" Signal along-side
'Adjacent-To {as an Adjunct to} the Digital Signal.
{Two Unque and Separate Functions}
-NOTE- This uses up even more Bandwidth then DRM
alone and DRM alone uses up more Bandwidth then
Analog "AM" alone.
PLUS - The DRM Digital Signal Level Must be 'reduced'
so that it will not Interfere with the Simulcast of the
Analog "AM" Signal.
-IMHO- The better approach for DRM would be to
have the separate Digial and Analog "Simulcast"
Signals 'spaced' 50 kHz apart so that each of the
two independant Broadcast Signal would have no
chance of interferring with each other; and the DRM
Signal could be Transmitted at Full Power.
-Remember- DRM is a single Mode of Transmission.
-Also Note- DRM Radio/Receivers are Manual
Single Mode Operation and you would have to Tune to
each of the DRM or Analog "AM" Signals independly.

BY-DESIGN - IBOC has the Analog "AM" Signal
'nested' in-between the Two Outer Digital Side-Bands
and is Always 100% of the time Bi-Modal.
{Always Functions in Tandem : Analog and Digital}
-Remember- IBOC is a Dual Transmission Mode.
-Also Note- IBOC Radio/Receivers are Automatic
Dual Mode Operation; allowing you to Tune to a Single
Frequency and Receive either the Digital or Analog
when available. {True IBOC and not just a Simulcast}

Please refer to the DRM Manual -wrt- IBOC
www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf
Pages 19, 43 and 58 apply.

Wikipedia is 'Readers Digest' version of "What DRM Is"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Radio_Mondiale

IBOC is a Single Frequency Broadcasting "Technology"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBOC
In-Band On-Channel (IBOC)

Simulcast is a Dual Frequency Broadcasting "Concept"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulcast

The Bottom Line : DRM -Ain't- IBOC

RHF

October 4th 07, 07:29 PM

On Oct 4, 7:25 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> RHF wrote:
> > On Oct 3, 5:02 am, wrote:
>
> > - You are dumb. DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode.
> > - See this manual, page 20. Notice how the DRM sits
> > - "in-band on-channel" same as the HD Radio works.
> > -www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf
>
- - But presenetly the majority of DRM Broadcasting on the
- - Shortwave Radios is Pure {100%} DRM "Digital" and it
- - Trashes 20 kHz of Bandwidth around it and makes good
- - old AM Analog Shortwave Broadcasting very hard to Hear.
-
- Well what the heck do you expect from an IBOC format???
- (Yes you heard right; IBOC.)

SFTV - Spoken like a 'true' "Hybrid Digital" Man ! ~ RHF
- - - Clearly Digital "Hash" has had it's 'effect' on you. ;-}

Please Understand that a Pure {100%} DRM "Digital" Signal;
which the majority of DRM Shortwave Broadcasting 'is' - Is a
Single Signal and hence can not be consider IBOC. They do
NOT Transmit any Analog along with the DRM Digital Signal.

Steven

October 4th 07, 09:58 PM

On Oct 4, 8:24 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> RHF wrote:
> > On Oct 2, 4:26 am, wrote:
>
> >> Digital Radio Mondiale *is* IBOC. (Like HD Radio, it sits right
> >> next to the AM signal, widening the channel by a few more kilohertz)
>
> > DOH ! - You had beeter go back and re-do your
> > DRM 101 and IBOC 101 Classes again. ~ RHF
>
> > Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM)
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Radio_Mondiale
>
> You had "beeter" try reading the wikipedia article you site. Read
> it. Quote: "A full 10 kHz channel for AM, plus a 5 kHz half-channel
> sideband for DRM."
>
> That's in-band on-channel mode.
>
> IBOC.
>
> duh

The Whore Book Encyclopedia can be written by any John. Doesn't
justify the Whore...

DUH

Run along and play in the IN BAND OFF CHANNEL STREET--esp. if the
adjacent frequency is a river or a cliff.

Hein ten Horn

October 5th 07, 10:55 PM

wrote:
> Hein ten Horn wrote:
>> wrote
>>>
>>> DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode. See this manual,
>>> page 20. Notice how the DRM sits "in-band on-channel"
>>> same as the HD Radio works.
>>> www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf
>>
>> No, the manual does not state
>> "DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode".
>> A simulcast is not necessarily hybrid.
>
> By that reasoning, HD Radio is not a hybrid format, because the
> digital information sits *next to* the AM signal.

[a copy]
> By that reasoning, HD Radio is not a hybrid format, (..)

False.

[copy]
> (..) HD Radio is not a hybrid format, because the
> digital information sits *next to* the AM signal.

False.

> HD Radio is a simulcast format.

True, on the understanding that both programme contents are the same.

>> [quote]
>> DRM supports a number of different simulcast options. Currently the
>> supported simulcast modes require the use of additional spectrum outside
>> an assigned 9 or 10 kHz channel (Multi-Channel or Multi-frequency
>> Simulcast, MCS). The DRM signal can be located in the next adjacent
>> upper or lower channel and can occupy a half or whole channel
>> depending on the bandwidth option chosen.
>> [unquote]
>> So far nothing about IBOC.
>
> Okay. By that reasoning, because HD Radio sits "next to" the AM
> signal, then it is not IBOC either. It is a simulcast format.
>
> Do you agree with that statement?

As a whole? No.

gr, Hein

RHF

October 6th 07, 12:57 AM

On Oct 4, 7:31 am, wrote:
> Hein ten Horn wrote:
> > wrote
>
> > > DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode. See this manual,
> > > page 20. Notice how the DRM sits "in-band on-channel"
> > > same as the HD Radio works.
> > >www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf
>
> > No, the manual does not state
> > "DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode".
> > A simulcast is not necessarily hybrid.
>

- By that reasoning, HD Radio is not a hybrid format, because
- the digital information sits *next to* the AM signal.

SFTV -aka- "Hybrid Digital" Man,

As and "EE", your above Statement is NOT Correct nor Clear
and it does not represent the Technical Specification {Facts}
of both iBiquity's IBOC and DRM. Please endeavor to be more
Factual and Accurate in your future representaions here.

Now For The Third Time :

iBiquity's IBOC Broadcast System is a Dual Mode Broadcasting
Scheme; with both the Analog AM and Digital Signals 'being'
"Intrinsic" to the Radio Transmission Process.

The Key Word Being : "Intrinsic"
http://www.answers.com/intrinsic&r=67

The DRM Broadcast System was initally designed and implemented
as a Single (1) Mode All Digital Broadcasting Scheme.

Note - Simulcasting and Analog AM Signal along with the Digital is
a 'possibility' but is NOT currently done on the Shortwave Radio
Band.

FWIW - The DRM Digital Signal 'may' be Broadcast along side
of an Analog AM Signal {Co-Channeled} -but- Both Signals are
Broadcast Separately and are 'independent' of each other; they
are NOT "Intrinsic" to each other as part of a Unified Radio
Broadcast System.

Caution - That the DRM Digital Signal has to be 'reduced' when
it is Broadcast along side an Analog AM Signal to prevent any
Interference to the Analog AM Signal.

The-Bottom-Line : Presently in the Shortwave Bands DRM
is Broadcast 'solely' in the 100% Digital Mode; as it was
designed to do.

for the third time or more - keeping it simple and practical ~ RHF

Steven

October 6th 07, 06:59 AM

He isn't using a No. 2 pencil so the entire test is INVALID.
-----
Fantastic Science by Better Abuse

Steven

October 6th 07, 10:32 AM

On Oct 3, 6:55 am, "Richard Crowley" > wrote:
> THIS DISCUSSION IS OFF-TOPIC FOR REC.AUDIO.TECH
> (AND REC.AUDIO.CAR, FOR THAT MATTER)
> PLEASE DROP REC.AUDIO.TECH FROM THIS DISCUSSION

Why didn't you remove them your self or change the follow-ups?

Better yet why didn't you just hire Tonya HARDING to do a SEARCH AND
KNEEWHACK?

RHF

October 6th 07, 10:51 AM

On Oct 6, 2:32 am, Steven > wrote:
> On Oct 3, 6:55 am, "Richard Crowley" > wrote:
>
> > THIS DISCUSSION IS OFF-TOPIC FOR REC.AUDIO.TECH
> > (AND REC.AUDIO.CAR, FOR THAT MATTER)
> > PLEASE DROP REC.AUDIO.TECH FROM THIS DISCUSSION
-
- Why didn't you remove them your self or change the follow-ups?
-
- Better yet why didn't you just hire Tonya HARDING
- to do a SEARCH AND KNEEWHACK ?

LMAO & ROTFL ! :o) ~ RHF

SFTV_troy

October 9th 07, 06:08 PM

RHF wrote:
> On Oct 4, 7:25 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > RHF wrote:
> > > On Oct 3, 5:02 am, wrote:
> >
> > > - You are dumb. DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode.
> > > - See this manual, page 20. Notice how the DRM sits
> > > - "in-band on-channel" same as the HD Radio works.
> > > -www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf
> >
> - - But presenetly the majority of DRM Broadcasting on the
> - - Shortwave Radios is Pure {100%} DRM "Digital" and it
> - - Trashes 20 kHz of Bandwidth around it and makes good
> - - old AM Analog Shortwave Broadcasting very hard to Hear.
> -
> - Well what the heck do you expect from an IBOC format???
> - (Yes you heard right; IBOC.)
>
> SFTV - Spoken like a 'true' "Hybrid Digital" Man ! ~ RHF
> - - - Clearly Digital "Hash" has had it's 'effect' on you. ;-}
>
> Please Understand that a Pure {100%} DRM "Digital" Signal;
> which the majority of DRM Shortwave Broadcasting 'is' - Is a
> Single Signal and hence can not be consider IBOC. They do
> NOT Transmit any Analog along with the DRM Digital Signal.

Neither does HD Radio you stupid dog-****ing idiot. I am sick and
tgired of tlaking to asswhokle like ytou .s yogu sutpiodk fudge0-
pioamncing bastaredd.

SFTV_troy

October 9th 07, 06:13 PM

Hein ten Horn wrote:
> wrote:
> >
> > Okay. By that reasoning, because HD Radio sits "next to" the AM
> > signal, then it is not IBOC either. It is a simulcast format.
> > Do you agree with that statement?
>
> As a whole? No.

There is no technical difference. Both HD radio and DRM operate on
the same principles:
- 2 separate signals
- 1 analog
- 1 digital
- the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal

SFTV_troy

October 9th 07, 06:15 PM

Steven wrote:
> He isn't using a No. 2 pencil so the entire test is INVALID.

Hey look!!!! A two-year-old wittle baby boyee!!! He hasn't learned
manners yet.

RHF

October 9th 07, 07:41 PM

On Oct 9, 10:08 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> RHF wrote:
> > On Oct 4, 7:25 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > > RHF wrote:
> > > > On Oct 3, 5:02 am, wrote:
>
> > > > - You are dumb. DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode.
> > > > - See this manual, page 20. Notice how the DRM sits
> > > > - "in-band on-channel" same as the HD Radio works.
> > > > -www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf
>
> > - - But presenetly the majority of DRM Broadcasting on the
> > - - Shortwave Radios is Pure {100%} DRM "Digital" and it
> > - - Trashes 20 kHz of Bandwidth around it and makes good
> > - - old AM Analog Shortwave Broadcasting very hard to Hear.
> > -
> > - Well what the heck do you expect from an IBOC format???
> > - (Yes you heard right; IBOC.)
>
> > SFTV - Spoken like a 'true' "Hybrid Digital" Man ! ~ RHF
> > - - - Clearly Digital "Hash" has had it's 'effect' on you. ;-}
>
> > Please Understand that a Pure {100%} DRM "Digital" Signal;
> > which the majority of DRM Shortwave Broadcasting 'is' - Is a
> > Single Signal and hence can not be consider IBOC. They do
> > NOT Transmit any Analog along with the DRM Digital Signal.

- Neither does HD Radio you stupid dog-****ing idiot.
- I am sick and tgired of tlaking to asswhokle like ytou .s yogu
- sutpiodk fudge0- pioamncing bastaredd.

SFTV - Spoken like a 'true' "Hybrid Digital" Man ! ~ RHF

-Once Again- Clearly Digital "Hash" has had it's 'effect' on you. ;-}

-wrt- "Dog-****ing" Please don't express your Sexual Fantasies
on this Shortwave Radio Newsgroup - They Are Clealy Off-Topic.

-and- yes i am an 'idiot' who loves
to listen to free over-the-air radio ~ RHF

RHF

October 9th 07, 07:49 PM

On Oct 9, 10:13 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> Hein ten Horn wrote:
> > wrote:
>
> > > Okay. By that reasoning, because HD Radio sits "next to" the AM
> > > signal, then it is not IBOC either. It is a simulcast format.
> > > Do you agree with that statement?
>
> > As a whole? No.
>
- There is no technical difference.
- Both HD radio and DRM operate on the same principles:
- 2 separate signals
- 1 analog
- 1 digital
- the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal

SFTV -aka- "Hybrid Digital" Man,

Once Again the Key Word Being : "Intrinsic"
http://www.answers.com/intrinsic&r=67

iBquity's IBOC Broadcast System is 'Intrinsic'

DRM's Simulcast Broadcast Scheme is NOT 'Intrinsic'

yes it is that simple ~ RHF

Telamon

October 10th 07, 03:10 AM

In article m>,
SFTV_troy > wrote:

> Steven wrote:
> > He isn't using a No. 2 pencil so the entire test is INVALID.
>
>
> Hey look!!!! A two-year-old wittle baby boyee!!! He hasn't learned
> manners yet.

Looks like its time to up the Prozac dosage.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon

October 10th 07, 03:19 AM

In article om>,
SFTV_troy > wrote:

> RHF wrote:
> >
> > As and "EE", your above Statement is NOT Correct nor Clear
> > and it does not represent the Technical Specification {Facts}
> > of both iBiquity's IBOC and DRM. Please endeavor to be more
> > Factual and Accurate in your future representaions here.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> There is no technical difference. Both HD radio and DRM operate on
> the same principles:
> - 2 separate signals
> - 1 analog
> - 1 digital
> - the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal
>
> YOU go read the specs.

Hey nobody here is forcing you to get educated. Staying ignorant is your
prerogative.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Steven

October 10th 07, 03:57 AM

It ain't no Jack Kennedy either.

SFTV_troy

October 11th 07, 01:43 PM

David Eduardo wrote:
> "SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
> >
> > There is no technical difference. Both HD radio and DRM operate on
> > the same principles:
> > - 2 separate signals
> > - 1 analog
> > - 1 digital
> > - the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal
> >
>
> No, DRM is 100% digital. To run analog simultaneously you need a separate
> frequency. Some testing is being done, like that in Mexico, by placing the
> DRM signal on the adjacent AM channel... a station on 1060 is going to have
> DRM on 1070.

And I repeat:

HD radio works the same way. The digital signal sits *next to* the
station at 1070.

SFTV_troy

October 11th 07, 01:45 PM

On Oct 9, 9:10 pm, Telamon >
wrote:
> SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > Steven wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > > He isn't using a No. 2 pencil so the entire test is INVALID.
>
> > Hey look!!!! A two-year-old wittle baby boyee!!! He
> > hasn't learned manners yet.
>
> Looks like its time to up the Prozac dosage.

Time to pick-out your coffin, and crawl in. The world will be a
better place without assholes like yourself.

SFTV_troy

October 11th 07, 01:48 PM

RHF wrote:
> On Oct 9, 10:13 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > Hein ten Horn wrote:
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > > Okay. By that reasoning, because HD Radio sits "next to" the AM
> > > > signal, then it is not IBOC either. It is a simulcast format.
> > > > Do you agree with that statement?
> >
> > > As a whole? No.
> >
> - There is no technical difference.
> - Both HD radio and DRM operate on the same principles:
> - 2 separate signals
> - 1 analog
> - 1 digital
> - the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal
>
>
> iBquity's IBOC Broadcast System is 'Intrinsic'
> DRM's Simulcast Broadcast Scheme is NOT 'Intrinsic'

That distinction is more about FAITH, than reality. There's no real
difference between DRM's version (sitting next-to the AM signal) and
HD's version (also sitting next-to the AM signal).

Neither sits their digital signal on-top of the AM!
That would not work.
Duh.

RHF

October 11th 07, 07:48 PM

On Oct 11, 5:45 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> On Oct 9, 9:10 pm, Telamon >
> wrote:
>
> > SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > > Steven wrote:
>
> > > > He isn't using a No. 2 pencil so the entire test is INVALID.
>
> > > Hey look!!!! A two-year-old wittle baby boyee!!! He
> > > hasn't learned manners yet.
>
> > Looks like its time to up the Prozac dosage.

- Time to pick-out your coffin, and crawl in. The world
- will be a better place without assholes like yourself.

SFTV - Please Take Your Own Advise First as a Demostration
of Commitment to Your Own Words. {Walk-the-Talk} ~ RHF

RHF

October 11th 07, 07:51 PM

On Oct 11, 5:43 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> David Eduardo wrote:
> > "SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
>
> > > There is no technical difference. Both HD radio and DRM operate on
> > > the same principles:
> > > - 2 separate signals
> > > - 1 analog
> > > - 1 digital
> > > - the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal
>
> > No, DRM is 100% digital. To run analog simultaneously you need a separate
> > frequency. Some testing is being done, like that in Mexico, by placing the
> > DRM signal on the adjacent AM channel... a station on 1060 is going to have
> > DRM on 1070.
>
> And I repeat:
>

- HD radio works the same way.
- The digital signal sits *next to* the station at 1070.

SFTV,

BLATANTLY TECNICALLY WRONG ARE YOU SURE YOU ARE AN "EE" ?

us lesser being would like proof ~ RHF

RHF

October 11th 07, 07:53 PM

On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> RHF wrote:
> > On Oct 9, 10:13 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > > Hein ten Horn wrote:
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Okay. By that reasoning, because HD Radio sits "next to" the AM
> > > > > signal, then it is not IBOC either. It is a simulcast format.
> > > > > Do you agree with that statement?
>
> > > > As a whole? No.
>
> > - There is no technical difference.
> > - Both HD radio and DRM operate on the same principles:
> > - 2 separate signals
> > - 1 analog
> > - 1 digital
> > - the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal
>
> > iBquity's IBOC Broadcast System is 'Intrinsic'
> > DRM's Simulcast Broadcast Scheme is NOT 'Intrinsic'
>

- That distinction is more about FAITH, than reality.

- There's no real difference between DRM's version
- (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
- (also sitting next-to the AM signal).

SFTV,

BLATANTLY TECNICALLY WRONG !
ARE YOU SURE YOU ARE AN "EE" ?

us lesser being would like proof ~ RHF

Telamon

October 12th 07, 03:15 AM

In article . com>,
SFTV_troy > wrote:

> On Oct 9, 9:10 pm, Telamon >
> wrote:
> > SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > > Steven wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > He isn't using a No. 2 pencil so the entire test is INVALID.
> >
> > > Hey look!!!! A two-year-old wittle baby boyee!!! He
> > > hasn't learned manners yet.
> >
> > Looks like its time to up the Prozac dosage.
>
>
> Time to pick-out your coffin, and crawl in. The world will be a
> better place without assholes like yourself.

You must have taken your meds today. Nice to see you calmed down a bit.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon

October 12th 07, 03:16 AM

In article om>,
SFTV_troy > wrote:

> David Eduardo wrote:
> > "SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
> > >
> > > There is no technical difference. Both HD radio and DRM operate on
> > > the same principles:
> > > - 2 separate signals
> > > - 1 analog
> > > - 1 digital
> > > - the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal
> > >
> >
> > No, DRM is 100% digital. To run analog simultaneously you need a separate
> > frequency. Some testing is being done, like that in Mexico, by placing the
> > DRM signal on the adjacent AM channel... a station on 1060 is going to have
> > DRM on 1070.
>
> And I repeat:
>
> HD radio works the same way. The digital signal sits *next to* the
> station at 1070.

If you took a buss how many people would sit down next to you?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Steven

October 12th 07, 03:43 AM

On Oct 11, 8:16 pm, Telamon
> wrote:
> In article om>,
>
>
>
>
>
> SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > David Eduardo wrote:
> > > "SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
>
> > > > There is no technical difference. Both HD radio and DRM operate on
> > > > the same principles:
> > > > - 2 separate signals
> > > > - 1 analog
> > > > - 1 digital
> > > > - the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal
>
> > > No, DRM is 100% digital. To run analog simultaneously you need a separate
> > > frequency. Some testing is being done, like that in Mexico, by placing the
> > > DRM signal on the adjacent AM channel... a station on 1060 is going to have
> > > DRM on 1070.
>
> > And I repeat:
>
> > HD radio works the same way. The digital signal sits *next to* the
> > station at 1070.
>
> If you took a buss how many people would sit down next to you?

The owner of the store selling the fuses. If they are littelfuses, he
might get away with it.

Steven

October 12th 07, 03:44 AM

Steven

October 12th 07, 03:45 AM

On Oct 11, 8:44 pm, Steven > wrote:
> On Oct 11, 8:16 pm, Telamon
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > In article om>,
>
> > SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > > David Eduardo wrote:
> > > > "SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
>
> > > > > There is no technical difference. Both HD radio and DRM operate on
> > > > > the same principles:
> > > > > - 2 separate signals
> > > > > - 1 analog
> > > > > - 1 digital
> > > > > - the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal
>
> > > > No, DRM is 100% digital. To run analog simultaneously you need a separate
> > > > frequency. Some testing is being done, like that in Mexico, by placing the
> > > > DRM signal on the adjacent AM channel... a station on 1060 is going to have
> > > > DRM on 1070.
>
> > > And I repeat:
>
> > > HD radio works the same way. The digital signal sits *next to* the
> > > station at 1070.
>
> > If you took a buss how many people would sit down next to you?
>
> The owner of the store selling the fuses. If they are littelfuses, he
> might get away with it.

AH! STEREO FUSES!

RHF

October 12th 07, 09:06 AM

On Oct 11, 11:53 am, RHF > wrote:
> On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > RHF wrote:
> > > On Oct 9, 10:13 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > > > Hein ten Horn wrote:
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Okay. By that reasoning, because HD Radio sits "next to" the AM
> > > > > > signal, then it is not IBOC either. It is a simulcast format.
> > > > > > Do you agree with that statement?
>
> > > > > As a whole? No.
>
> > > - There is no technical difference.
> > > - Both HD radio and DRM operate on the same principles:
> > > - 2 separate signals
> > > - 1 analog
> > > - 1 digital
> > > - the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal
>
> > > iBquity's IBOC Broadcast System is 'Intrinsic'
> > > DRM's Simulcast Broadcast Scheme is NOT 'Intrinsic'
>
> - That distinction is more about FAITH, than reality.
>
> - There's no real difference between DRM's version
> - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
> - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
>

- SFTV,
-
- BLATANTLY TECNICALLY WRONG !
- ARE YOU SURE YOU ARE AN "EE" ?
-
- us lesser beings would like proof ~ RHF
- .

SFTV,

IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
- Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
* Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
+ Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
-Note- The IBOC Signa supports the current AM Mono Signal as well as
the Digital {IBOC} Signal. Provides for 40kbps Data Rate, for Full
Stereo plus a Low Speed Data Path. Audio 36kbps, Song Title and Artist
4kbps .
http://www.rthk.org.hk/about/digitalbroadcasting/DSBS/ABU_AIR_2003/ses1_files/frame.htm#slide0143.htm

RHF

October 12th 07, 09:11 AM

On Oct 11, 11:51 am, RHF > wrote:
> On Oct 11, 5:43 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > David Eduardo wrote:
> > > "SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
>
> > > > There is no technical difference. Both HD radio and DRM operate on
> > > > the same principles:
> > > > - 2 separate signals
> > > > - 1 analog
> > > > - 1 digital
> > > > - the digital is simulcast "next to" the original analog signal
>
> > > No, DRM is 100% digital. To run analog simultaneously you need a separate
> > > frequency. Some testing is being done, like that in Mexico, by placing the
> > > DRM signal on the adjacent AM channel... a station on 1060 is going to have
> > > DRM on 1070.
>
> > And I repeat:
>
> - HD radio works the same way.
> - The digital signal sits *next to* the station at 1070.
>

- SFTV,
-
- BLATANTLY TECNICALLY WRONG ARE YOU SURE YOU ARE AN "EE" ?
-
- us lesser beings would like proof ~ RHF
- .

SFTV,

iBquity's IBOC Hybrid Mode for AM/MW "HD" Radio
http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif

- Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}

0 Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}

+ Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}

* The Three (3) Signals are Combined into 'a' "Single"
Unified Broadcasting System. {Intrinsic}

-Note- The IBOC Signa supports the current AM Mono Signal as well as
the Digital {IBOC} Signal. Provides for 40kbps Data Rate, for Full
Stereo plus a Low Speed Data Path. Audio 36kbps, Song Title and Artist
4kbps .

SFTV_troy

October 12th 07, 04:52 PM

RHF wrote:
> > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
> >
> > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
> > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
> > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
>
>
> IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
> http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
> - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
> + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}

Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/- 10
kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+ or - 10 kHz).

SFTV_troy

October 12th 07, 04:52 PM

RHF

October 13th 07, 02:40 AM

On Oct 12, 8:52 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> RHF wrote:
> > > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
>
> > > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
> > > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
> > > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
>
> > IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
> >http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
> > - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> > * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
> > + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
>

- Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/-
10
- kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+ or - 10 kHz).

SFTV - There you go again being Factually Wrong -and-
Clearly Misstating the Technical Specifications.

DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
x x x Does Not Equal x x x
IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
http://electronicdesign.com/Files/29/12194/Figure_02.gif

SFTV - It is now becoming very obvious to all :
That you got your claimed 'ee' degree;
straight-out of a Box of Cracker-Jacks.

i b oc'd ~ RHF

RHF

October 13th 07, 02:42 AM

On Oct 12, 8:52 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> RHF wrote:
> > > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
>
> > > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
> > > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
> > > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
>
> > IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
> >http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
> > - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> > * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
> > + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}

- Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/-
10
- kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+ or - 10 kHz).

SFTV - There you go again being Factually Wrong -and-
Clearly Misstating the Technical Specifications.

DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
x x x Does Not Equal x x x
IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
http://electronicdesign.com/Files/29/12194/Figure_02.gif

SFTV - It is now becoming very obvious to all :
That you got your claimed 'ee' degree;
straight-out of a Box of Cracker-Jacks.

i b oc'd ~ RHF

SFTV_troy

October 13th 07, 05:13 PM

RHF wrote:
> On Oct 12, 8:52 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > RHF wrote:
> > > > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
> >
> > > > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
> > > > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
> > > > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
> >
> > > IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
> > >http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
> > > - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> > > * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
> > > + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
>
> - Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/-
>
> - 10 kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+/- 10 kHz).
>
>
>
> DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
> x x x Does Not Equal x x x
> IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands

I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using sidebands,
adjacent to the analog AM signal.

SFTV_troy

October 13th 07, 05:13 PM

David Eduardo

October 13th 07, 06:05 PM

"SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>
> RHF wrote:
>> On Oct 12, 8:52 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
>> > RHF wrote:
>> > > > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
>> >
>> > > > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
>> > > > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
>> > > > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
>> >
>> > > IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
>> > >http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
>> > > - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
>> > > * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
>> > > + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
>>
>> - Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/-
>>
>> - 10 kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+/- 10 kHz).
>>
>>
>>
>> DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
>> x x x Does Not Equal x x x
>> IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
>
>
>
> I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using sidebands,
> adjacent to the analog AM signal.

DRM is not using a sideband; to do analog and digital requires a separate
transmitter for each on a separate carrier frequency. HD is a combined
analog and digital signal on the same carrier frequency. DRM is digital
only... if you want analog, you have to have a separate channel, close to or
not to the DRM one.

Don Pearce

October 13th 07, 06:43 PM

On Sat, 13 Oct 2007 10:05:11 -0700, "David Eduardo"
> wrote:

>
>"SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>>
>> RHF wrote:
>>> On Oct 12, 8:52 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
>>> > RHF wrote:
>>> > > > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
>>> >
>>> > > > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
>>> > > > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
>>> > > > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
>>> >
>>> > > IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
>>> > >http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
>>> > > - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
>>> > > * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
>>> > > + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
>>>
>>> - Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/-
>>>
>>> - 10 kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+/- 10 kHz).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
>>> x x x Does Not Equal x x x
>>> IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
>>
>>
>>
>> I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using sidebands,
>> adjacent to the analog AM signal.
>
>DRM is not using a sideband; to do analog and digital requires a separate
>transmitter for each on a separate carrier frequency. HD is a combined
>analog and digital signal on the same carrier frequency. DRM is digital
>only... if you want analog, you have to have a separate channel, close to or
>not to the DRM one.
>

Exactly. DRM is a separate signal that can go wherever the operator
chooses. He may elect to place it next to his AM transmitter or the
regulator may force him to place it there so any interference will be
to his own service. Whatever, the signal will appear at only one point
in the spectrum. It is not a sideband of the AM.

HD, on the other hand is an actual sideband of the AM carrier. There
are two digital channels available, the primary and the secondary.
Each of them occupies 5kHz either side of the AM carrier, the primary
from 10 to 15kHz, and the secondary from 5 to 10kHz. The HD signal is
irrevocably combined with its host AM service.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

dxAce

October 13th 07, 07:14 PM

David Eduardo wrote:

> "SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
> ps.com...
> >
> > RHF wrote:
> >> On Oct 12, 8:52 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> >> > RHF wrote:
> >> > > > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
> >> >
> >> > > > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
> >> > > > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
> >> > > > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
> >> >
> >> > > IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
> >> > >http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
> >> > > - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> >> > > * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
> >> > > + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> >>
> >> - Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/-
> >>
> >> - 10 kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+/- 10 kHz).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
> >> x x x Does Not Equal x x x
> >> IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
> >
> >
> >
> > I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using sidebands,
> > adjacent to the analog AM signal.
>
> DRM is not using a sideband; to do analog and digital requires a separate
> transmitter for each on a separate carrier frequency. HD is a combined
> analog and digital signal on the same carrier frequency. DRM is digital
> only... if you want analog, you have to have a separate channel, close to or
> not to the DRM one.

Both = QRM

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Telamon

October 13th 07, 08:50 PM

In article m>,
SFTV_troy > wrote:

> RHF wrote:
> > On Oct 12, 8:52 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > > RHF wrote:
> > > > > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
> > >
> > > > > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
> > > > > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
> > > > > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
> > >
> > > > IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
> > > >http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
> > > > - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> > > > * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
> > > > + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> >
> > - Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/-
> >
> > - 10 kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+/- 10 kHz).
> >
> >
> >
> > DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
> > x x x Does Not Equal x x x
> > IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
>
>
>
> I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using sidebands,
> adjacent to the analog AM signal.

Ok, here is a difference you should understand. DRM uses two separate
transmitters and antennas one digital and one analog. HD uses two
different exciters one digital and the other analog that input into the
same transmitter and antenna at the same time.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

RHF

October 13th 07, 11:38 PM

On Oct 13, 9:13 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> RHF wrote:
> > On Oct 12, 8:52 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > > RHF wrote:
> > > > > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
>
> > > > > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
> > > > > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
> > > > > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
>
> > > > IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
> > > >http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
> > > > - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> > > > * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
> > > > + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
>
> > - Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/-
>
> > - 10 kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+/- 10 kHz).
>
> > DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
> > x x x Does Not Equal x x x
> > IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
>
> I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using sidebands,
> adjacent to the analog AM signal.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

SFTV - There you go again one more time being Factually Wrong
-and- Clearly Misstating the Technical Specifications.

DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
-Note- That is Two 'separate' Signals -NOT- Sidebands
x x x Does Not Equal x x x
IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
http://electronicdesign.com/Files/29/12194/Figure_02.gif

i b oc'd ~ RHF

RHF

October 13th 07, 11:51 PM

On Oct 13, 9:13 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> RHF wrote:
> > On Oct 12, 8:52 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > > RHF wrote:
> > > > > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
>
> > > > > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
> > > > > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
> > > > > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
>
> > > > IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
> > > >http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
> > > > - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> > > > * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
> > > > + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
>
> > - Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/-
>
> > - 10 kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+/- 10 kHz).
>
> > DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
> > x x x Does Not Equal x x x
> > IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
>

= I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using
sidebands,
= adjacent to the analog AM signal.

SFTV - There you go again one more time being Factually Wrong
-and- Clearly Misstating the Technical Specifications.

DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
-Note- That is Two 'separate' Signals -NOT- Sidebands
x x x Does Not Equal x x x
IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
http://electronicdesign.com/Files/29/12194/Figure_02.gif

i b oc'd ~ RHF

SFTV_troy

October 15th 07, 03:20 PM

Don Pearce wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Oct 2007 10:05:11 -0700, "David Eduardo"
> >"SFTV_troy"
> >>
> >>
> >> I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using
> >> sidebands, adjacent to the analog AM signal.
> >
> >DRM is not using a sideband; to do analog and digital requires a separate
> >transmitter for each on a separate carrier frequency. HD is a combined
> >analog and digital signal on the same carrier frequency. DRM is digital
> >only... if you want analog, you have to have a separate channel, close to or
> >not to the DRM one.
> >
>
> Exactly. DRM is a separate signal that can go wherever the operator
> chooses. ..... It is not a sideband of the AM.
> HD, on the other hand is an actual sideband of the AM carrier.

I see your point, but that seems a trivial difference. Especially
since HD also uses a separate signal (exciter), separate from the
analog signal. "As with AM, FM stations may use separate exciters to
modulate the very different signals." - wikipedia.

Sounds like simulcast of two signals.

Not just one.

SFTV_troy

October 15th 07, 03:22 PM

On Oct 13, 2:50 pm, Telamon
> wrote:
>
> Ok, here is a difference you should understand. DRM uses two separate
> transmitters and antennas one digital and one analog. HD uses two
> different exciters one digital and the other analog that input into the
> same transmitter and antenna at the same time.

Why does DRM have to use two separate antennas? Why can't DRM use a
combiner and output both signals through a single antenna?

Don Pearce

October 15th 07, 03:31 PM

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 07:20:19 -0700, SFTV_troy >
wrote:

>
>Don Pearce wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Oct 2007 10:05:11 -0700, "David Eduardo"
>> >"SFTV_troy"
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using
>> >> sidebands, adjacent to the analog AM signal.
>> >
>> >DRM is not using a sideband; to do analog and digital requires a separate
>> >transmitter for each on a separate carrier frequency. HD is a combined
>> >analog and digital signal on the same carrier frequency. DRM is digital
>> >only... if you want analog, you have to have a separate channel, close to or
>> >not to the DRM one.
>> >
>>
>> Exactly. DRM is a separate signal that can go wherever the operator
>> chooses. ..... It is not a sideband of the AM.
>> HD, on the other hand is an actual sideband of the AM carrier.
>
>
>
>
>I see your point, but that seems a trivial difference. Especially
>since HD also uses a separate signal (exciter), separate from the
>analog signal. "As with AM, FM stations may use separate exciters to
>modulate the very different signals." - wikipedia.
>
>Sounds like simulcast of two signals.
>
>Not just one.

An exciter is simply a source of a signal which can be modulated onto
a carrier.

If you want an analogy, HD is a little like the stereo subcarrier on
an FM signal - not the same as the baseband signal, but an integral
part of the overall signal. DRM would be like transmitting the stereo
signal on another channel entirely, with its own transmitter.

The difference is far from trivial.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

David Eduardo

October 15th 07, 04:36 PM

"SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Don Pearce wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Oct 2007 10:05:11 -0700, "David Eduardo"
>> >"SFTV_troy"
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using
>> >> sidebands, adjacent to the analog AM signal.
>> >
>> >DRM is not using a sideband; to do analog and digital requires a
>> >separate
>> >transmitter for each on a separate carrier frequency. HD is a combined
>> >analog and digital signal on the same carrier frequency. DRM is digital
>> >only... if you want analog, you have to have a separate channel, close
>> >to or
>> >not to the DRM one.
>> >
>>
>> Exactly. DRM is a separate signal that can go wherever the operator
>> chooses. ..... It is not a sideband of the AM.
>> HD, on the other hand is an actual sideband of the AM carrier.
>
>
>
>
> I see your point, but that seems a trivial difference. Especially
> since HD also uses a separate signal (exciter), separate from the
> analog signal. "As with AM, FM stations may use separate exciters to
> modulate the very different signals." - wikipedia.

On the same carrier for HD, on separate carriers for DRM. DRM is a pure
digital system, and if analog is also employed, it is on a separate
allocation, close or not so close to the digital frequency.

David Eduardo

October 15th 07, 04:37 PM

"SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Oct 13, 2:50 pm, Telamon
> > wrote:
>>
>> Ok, here is a difference you should understand. DRM uses two separate
>> transmitters and antennas one digital and one analog. HD uses two
>> different exciters one digital and the other analog that input into the
>> same transmitter and antenna at the same time.
>
>
>
> Why does DRM have to use two separate antennas? Why can't DRM use a
> combiner and output both signals through a single antenna?

Because the carrier frequencies are different... and because there is no
analog component to DRM... to do analog requires a separate station,
license, frequency.

Frank Dresser

October 15th 07, 05:32 PM

"SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Don Pearce wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Oct 2007 10:05:11 -0700, "David Eduardo"
> > >"SFTV_troy"
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using
> > >> sidebands, adjacent to the analog AM signal.
> > >
> > >DRM is not using a sideband; to do analog and digital requires a
separate
> > >transmitter for each on a separate carrier frequency. HD is a combined
> > >analog and digital signal on the same carrier frequency. DRM is digital
> > >only... if you want analog, you have to have a separate channel, close
to or
> > >not to the DRM one.
> > >
> >
> > Exactly. DRM is a separate signal that can go wherever the operator
> > chooses. ..... It is not a sideband of the AM.
> > HD, on the other hand is an actual sideband of the AM carrier.
>
>
>
>
> I see your point, but that seems a trivial difference. Especially
> since HD also uses a separate signal (exciter), separate from the
> analog signal. "As with AM, FM stations may use separate exciters to
> modulate the very different signals." - wikipedia.
>
> Sounds like simulcast of two signals.
>
> Not just one.
>

Frank Dresser

October 15th 07, 05:36 PM

"SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
>
>
> I see your point, but that seems a trivial difference. Especially
> since HD also uses a separate signal (exciter), separate from the
> analog signal. "As with AM, FM stations may use separate exciters to
> modulate the very different signals." - wikipedia.
>
> Sounds like simulcast of two signals.
>
> Not just one.
>

IBOC was engineered from the get-go with compatible recievers in mind. The
receivers would autoswitch from the analog to the digital signal.

Was DRM engineered with such autoswitching receivers in mind?

Are any such autoswitching receivers currently available?

Frank Dresser

dxAce

October 15th 07, 07:32 PM

David Frackelton Gleason, still posing as the fraudulent 'Eduardo', wrote:

> "SFTV_troy" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> > On Oct 13, 2:50 pm, Telamon
> > > wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok, here is a difference you should understand. DRM uses two separate
> >> transmitters and antennas one digital and one analog. HD uses two
> >> different exciters one digital and the other analog that input into the
> >> same transmitter and antenna at the same time.
> >
> >
> >
> > Why does DRM have to use two separate antennas? Why can't DRM use a
> > combiner and output both signals through a single antenna?
>
> Because the carrier frequencies are different... and because there is no
> analog component to DRM... to do analog requires a separate station,
> license, frequency.

License? Apparently you didn't need one for amateur radio in Ecuador, Edweenie!

Telamon

October 16th 07, 02:27 AM

In article . com>,
SFTV_troy > wrote:

> On Oct 13, 2:50 pm, Telamon
> > wrote:
> >
> > Ok, here is a difference you should understand. DRM uses two separate
> > transmitters and antennas one digital and one analog. HD uses two
> > different exciters one digital and the other analog that input into the
> > same transmitter and antenna at the same time.
>
>
>
> Why does DRM have to use two separate antennas? Why can't DRM use a
> combiner and output both signals through a single antenna?

Because it's different. Try to process that.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Hein ten Horn

October 16th 07, 08:30 PM

Frank Dresser wrote:
>
> IBOC was engineered from the get-go with compatible recievers in mind.
> The receivers would autoswitch from the analog to the digital signal.
> Was DRM engineered with such autoswitching receivers in mind?

Obviously a DRM receiver can handle both analogue and
digital signals.
Once a DRM signal is received, all parallel frequencies of
the service are automatically stored in the receiver's memory.
If the signal becomes weak the receiver will automatically switch
to a better signal (if available), even in other bands.
With a small amount of digital information added to an existing
analogue AM broadcast (AMSS, AM Signalling System) the
receiver recognizes the alternative frequency information and
schedules for other DRM, DAB, AM and FM transmissions
carrying the same or related programme material.
When you tune in to an analoque AM transmission on 630 kHz
in the medium wave band the receiver could let you listening to
for instance a DRM broadcast on 9740 kHz on short wave.

> Are any such autoswitching receivers currently available?

Himalaya DRM2009
http://www.himalaya.com.hk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=28&lang=en

Morphy Richards DRM Radio
http://www.morphyrichards.co.uk/index.pl?REFID=mruk&ORPGM=productOverview&ORPGT=perl&ORPRD=27024&ORGRP=R11&ORCAT=SR03&ORLID=ENG

Both receivers are equipped with the modern RadioScape
RS500 module.

gr, Hein

Frank Dresser

October 17th 07, 08:17 AM

"Hein ten Horn" > wrote in message
...
> Frank Dresser wrote:
> >
> > IBOC was engineered from the get-go with compatible recievers in mind.
> > The receivers would autoswitch from the analog to the digital signal.
> > Was DRM engineered with such autoswitching receivers in mind?
>
> Obviously a DRM receiver can handle both analogue and
> digital signals.
> Once a DRM signal is received, all parallel frequencies of
> the service are automatically stored in the receiver's memory.
> If the signal becomes weak the receiver will automatically switch
> to a better signal (if available), even in other bands.
> With a small amount of digital information added to an existing
> analogue AM broadcast (AMSS, AM Signalling System) the
> receiver recognizes the alternative frequency information and
> schedules for other DRM, DAB, AM and FM transmissions
> carrying the same or related programme material.
> When you tune in to an analoque AM transmission on 630 kHz
> in the medium wave band the receiver could let you listening to
> for instance a DRM broadcast on 9740 kHz on short wave.

That's interesting, and I can imagine that approach working well. There
would be no need for the adjacent channel digital interference which is
designed into IBOC.

So it looks like DRM can be better than IBOC.

>
> > Are any such autoswitching receivers currently available?
>
> Himalaya DRM2009
>
http://www.himalaya.com.hk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=28&lang=en
>
> Morphy Richards DRM Radio
>
http://www.morphyrichards.co.uk/index.pl?REFID=mruk&ORPGM=productOverview&ORPGT=perl&ORPRD=27024&ORGRP=R11&ORCAT=SR03&ORLID=ENG
>
> Both receivers are equipped with the modern RadioScape
> RS500 module.
>
> gr, Hein
>

Thanks for the info!

Frank Dresser

IBOCcrock

October 18th 07, 03:52 PM

On Oct 13, 12:13 pm, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> RHF wrote:
> > On Oct 12, 8:52 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > > RHF wrote:
> > > > > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
>
> > > > > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
> > > > > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
> > > > > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
>
> > > > IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
> > > >http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
> > > > - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> > > > * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
> > > > + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
>
> > - Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/-
>
> > - 10 kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+/- 10 kHz).
>
> > DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
> > x x x Does Not Equal x x x
> > IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
>
> I still don't see the difference. Both standards are using sidebands,
> adjacent to the analog AM signal.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hey - you homo butt-****er! You disgust me, gay boy!

RHF

October 19th 07, 02:39 AM

On Oct 18, 7:52 am, IBOCcrock > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 12:13 pm, SFTV_troy > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > RHF wrote:
> > > On Oct 12, 8:52 am, SFTV_troy > wrote:
> > > > RHF wrote:
> > > > > > On Oct 11, 5:48 am, SFTV_troy
>
> > > > > > - There's no real difference between DRM's version
> > > > > > - (sitting next-to the AM signal) and HD's version
> > > > > > - (also sitting next-to the AM signal).
>
> > > > > IBOC AM/MW "HD" Radio - Hybrid Mode
> > > > >http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/rfi/AM620_KMKI/AM_IBOC_Mask10.gif
> > > > > - Lower Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
> > > > > * Analog Host Signal (Mono) {Nested}
> > > > > + Upper Digital Sidebands {Co-SideBand}
>
> > > - Thanks for proving my point. HD sits *next to* the AM signal (+/-
>
> > > - 10 kHz). Same as DRM sits *next to* the AM signal (+/- 10 kHz).
>
> > > DRM = Simulcast without Specification {Sans-Mask}
> > > x x x Does Not Equal x x x
> > > IBOC = Intrinsic {Mask} : Nested Analog + Two Digital Co-Sidebands
>

- - I still don't see the difference.
- - Both standards are using sidebands,
- - adjacent to the analog AM signal.

- Hey - you homo butt-****er!
- You disgust me, gay boy!

IBOC Crock,

You sure do read a lot of weirdness
into other people's on-topic posts.

please do not post your 'closet' sexual fantasies
to this shortwave radio listener's newsgroup ~ RHF