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 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

Look at page 19 of the document.

craigm wrote:
Hein ten Horn wrote:

(..)
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.

Look at page 19 of the document.

Thanks, craigm.
To be honest, by and by it occurs to me that this document is
intending to make DRM-IBOC-things look better than they are.

[quote, page 19]
The system is flexible in other ways as well, in that the broadcaster has
the facility to vary the occupied bandwidth of the signal to meet the
spectrum requirements of different frequency bands in different regions
of the world. This can include the ability to provide services often
described as IBOC (In Band on Channel).
[unquote]

What is meant by "This"?
If that is "a set of requirements", then the IBOC remark says nothing
about DRM.
If it is "the system flexibility", then why hasn't been written
"This includes..." instead of "This can include..."?
In that case the answer is quite simple: nowadays there's no DRM
in band on channel available, as is stated on page 20 (see above)
and on page 19 (below).

[quote, page 19]
A number of promising proposals have also been made for a single
channel simulcast option (SCS), whereby an analogue and DRM
signal together occupy a single 9 or 10 kHz transmission channel.
These proposals offer the possibility of a signal which is compatible
with reception on both analogue and digital receivers. Work is still
actively in progress to determine which of the proposals would
provide the best way of meeting this requirement.
[unquote]

Promises, promises...
So, until further notice DRM provides no IBOC-ability.

gr, Hein

Hein ten Horn wrote:

craigm wrote:
Hein ten Horn wrote:

(..)
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.

Look at page 19 of the document.

Thanks, craigm.
To be honest, by and by it occurs to me that this document is
intending to make DRM-IBOC-things look better than they are.

[quote, page 19]
The system is flexible in other ways as well, in that the broadcaster has
the facility to vary the occupied bandwidth of the signal to meet the
spectrum requirements of different frequency bands in different regions
of the world. This can include the ability to provide services often
described as IBOC (In Band on Channel).
[unquote]

What is meant by "This"?
If that is "a set of requirements", then the IBOC remark says nothing
about DRM.
If it is "the system flexibility", then why hasn't been written
"This includes..." instead of "This can include..."?
In that case the answer is quite simple: nowadays there's no DRM
in band on channel available, as is stated on page 20 (see above)
and on page 19 (below).

[quote, page 19]
A number of promising proposals have also been made for a single
channel simulcast option (SCS), whereby an analogue and DRM
signal together occupy a single 9 or 10 kHz transmission channel.
These proposals offer the possibility of a signal which is compatible
with reception on both analogue and digital receivers. Work is still
actively in progress to determine which of the proposals would
provide the best way of meeting this requirement.
[unquote]

Promises, promises...
So, until further notice DRM provides no IBOC-ability.

gr, Hein


I suppose it matters what you define IBOC to really mean. In Band On
Channel, just by looking at the words, may only mean "In Band" as between
the highest and lowest frequencies of the band, 530-1710 kHz for the US AM
broadcast band, and "On Channel" by being centered on a one of the common
transmitting frequencies (a multiple of 10 kHz for AM broadcast in the US).

Ideally it would would also require less bandwidth than the channel spacing,
but that is not the case for HD Radio in the US. However it is "On Channel"
if you consider that an analog station could use the same bandwidth if it
was broadcasting 15 kHz audio bandwidth.

So, depending upon the definition of "channel" On Channel may also imply
fitting within the channel.

To relate this to DRM and shortwave, if a DRM signal is broadcast within the
bounds of one of the shortwave broadcast bands, and its central frequency
is the same as an analog broadcast would use then it may be appropriate to
call it IBOC. If the DRM signal is using 10 kHz bandwidth, then it would be
using the same approximate bandwidth as many(most?) analog shortwave
stations.

In the US, IBOC may be used as if it were synonymous with HD Radio. (HD
Radio being what Ibiquity is promoting.) I would consider HD Radio to be a
specific form, or implementation, of IBOC. (Here, my definition of IBOC is
only what I describe above.)

While I might consider DRM to be a form of IBOC, I consider DRM and HD Radio
to be significantly different.

If anyone has a a reference to the 'official' definition of IBOC, I'd like
to see it.

It would also be interesting to see what folks consider a "channel" to be.
Specifically, how many kHz wide is a channel?

craigm

"craigm" wrote in message
...

I suppose it matters what you define IBOC to really mean. In Band On
Channel, just by looking at the words, may only mean "In Band" as between
the highest and lowest frequencies of the band, 530-1710 kHz for the US AM
broadcast band, and "On Channel" by being centered on a one of the common
transmitting frequencies (a multiple of 10 kHz for AM broadcast in the
US).


IBOC in the US= In band (as in not needing to use a separate frequency band)
On Channel (as in using nominally the same channel as the simultaneous
analog transmission)

For the record, I don't buy into the definition, since it's obvious that the
digital subcarriers most definately protrude into the adjacent channel's
bandwidth(s).

In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote:

"craigm" wrote in message
...

I suppose it matters what you define IBOC to really mean. In Band On
Channel, just by looking at the words, may only mean "In Band" as between
the highest and lowest frequencies of the band, 530-1710 kHz for the US AM
broadcast band, and "On Channel" by being centered on a one of the common
transmitting frequencies (a multiple of 10 kHz for AM broadcast in the
US).


IBOC in the US= In band (as in not needing to use a separate frequency band)
On Channel (as in using nominally the same channel as the simultaneous
analog transmission)

For the record, I don't buy into the definition, since it's obvious that the
digital subcarriers most definately protrude into the adjacent channel's
bandwidth(s).

You and anyone else that uses their brain.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

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.