Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
May 19 2004
SHORTWAVE BROADCASTERS TO PROMOTE DRM IN U.S. Shortwave broadcasters in the United States want to promote Digital Radio Mondiale, a digital transmission technology for shortwave, medium-wave/AM and longwave. http://www.rwonline.com/dailynews/one.php?id=5237 |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the info.
It's about time they got away from this IBOC garbage. "Mike Terry" wrote in message ... May 19 2004 SHORTWAVE BROADCASTERS TO PROMOTE DRM IN U.S. Shortwave broadcasters in the United States want to promote Digital Radio Mondiale, a digital transmission technology for shortwave, medium-wave/AM and longwave. http://www.rwonline.com/dailynews/one.php?id=5237 |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dr. Who" schreef:
Thanks for the info. It's about time they got away from this IBOC garbage. But with DRM you loose your analogue audience, since it is digital only. So for a long period of time you need 2 frequencies and 2 transmitters at least per channel! Impossible on AM, and SW broadcasters will have a hard time with these "double costs" for a long time. What should be done is developing a system wich can simulcast analogue and digital on one channel, without the disadvantages of the present IBOC system. DRM could form the base for this. This new system then can be used world-wide and on all AM bands! (SW, MWorAM and LW in Europe and Asia). Ruud "Mike Terry" wrote in message ... May 19 2004 SHORTWAVE BROADCASTERS TO PROMOTE DRM IN U.S. Shortwave broadcasters in the United States want to promote Digital Radio Mondiale, a digital transmission technology for shortwave, medium-wave/AM and longwave. http://www.rwonline.com/dailynews/one.php?id=5237 |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ruud Poeze" wrote in message ... "Dr. Who" schreef: Thanks for the info. It's about time they got away from this IBOC garbage. But with DRM you loose your analogue audience, since it is digital only. So for a long period of time you need 2 frequencies and 2 transmitters at least per channel! Impossible on AM, and SW broadcasters will have a hard time with these "double costs" for a long time. What should be done is developing a system wich can simulcast analogue and digital on one channel, without the disadvantages of the present IBOC system. DRM could form the base for this. This new system then can be used world-wide and on all AM bands! (SW, MWorAM and LW in Europe and Asia). Ruud The current hybrid AM/digital IBOC system is supposed to be transitional. The IBOC receivers are supposed to be capable of demodulating the hybrid modulation and a full digital modulation standard. Of course, the transition to full digital won't happen until the broadcasters think there's a high enough percentage of IBOC receivers in the marketplace. That won't happen anytime soon, if ever. I can't see why any US MW broadcaster would have any interest in DRM, even if the FCC allows it. Frank Dresser |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Frank Dresser wrote:
"Ruud Poeze" wrote in message But with DRM you loose your analogue audience, since it is digital only. So for a long period of time you need 2 frequencies and 2 transmitters at least per channel! Impossible on AM, and SW broadcasters will have a I can't see why any US MW broadcaster would have any interest in DRM, even if the FCC allows it. On the other hand, we do now have "duopoly" in the U.S. - it's now legal for the same company to own more than one AM station in the same city. WLAC could, for example, buy WAMB-1160. Convert WAMB to DRM, and use it to carry the same program (but in digital mode) as WLAC. Once (if!) the majority of listeners have DRM radios, they could swap stations for a few years. (converting WLAC to DRM and WAMB back to analog) When the number of analog radios in use becomes negligible, either shut off WAMB, sell it to someone else, or start a second DRM station. Most group owners are still far enough short of the limit for the number of AM stations they're permitted to own in most major markets, and there are generally enough "also-ran" small AM stations available to buy. The coverage of the DRM stations would be less than that of the existing analog outlets, but if the IBOC adjacent-channel interference from other stations isn't there then the actual coverage with DRM might well be *better*. Of course, the *right* answer (for the listener, not for the DXer!) is Eureka on VHF/UHF. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message ... On the other hand, we do now have "duopoly" in the U.S. - it's now legal for the same company to own more than one AM station in the same city. WLAC could, for example, buy WAMB-1160. Convert WAMB to DRM, and use it to carry the same program (but in digital mode) as WLAC. Once (if!) the majority of listeners have DRM radios, they could swap stations for a few years. (converting WLAC to DRM and WAMB back to analog) When the number of analog radios in use becomes negligible, either shut off WAMB, sell it to someone else, or start a second DRM station. Most group owners are still far enough short of the limit for the number of AM stations they're permitted to own in most major markets, and there are generally enough "also-ran" small AM stations available to buy. The coverage of the DRM stations would be less than that of the existing analog outlets, but if the IBOC adjacent-channel interference from other stations isn't there then the actual coverage with DRM might well be *better*. Yes, but if the second station doesn't increase revenues by increasing audience, the money is wasted. Not that broadcasters haven't wasted money like that before, they used to simulcast their AM programming on FM. But the FCC didn't like simulcasting, and pretty much stopped it. AM IBOC has been around for a year or two, and it's still something of a novelty. It doesn't seem to be taking off as quickly as AM Stereo, and there aren't many receivers available, yet. I also don't know if there's much of a market for digital radios which receive the same old stuff that any old cheap radio receives. Maybe if all the radios were the same price, but IBOC hopes to make money on licensing fees. I don't know the bandwidth of full digital IBOC, but if the full digital bandwidth is the same as DRM, it seems the IBOC has an advantage with the transitional hybrid system. Of course, the *right* answer (for the listener, not for the DXer!) is Eureka on VHF/UHF. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com If we ever manage how to figure out how to put satellites up reliably and economically, the networks will probably put up high-power, non-subscription direct broadcast satellites. Frank Dresser |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Ruud Poeze" wrote in message
... "Dr. Who" schreef: Thanks for the info. It's about time they got away from this IBOC garbage. But with DRM you loose your analogue audience, since it is digital only. So for a long period of time you need 2 frequencies and 2 transmitters at least per channel! Impossible on AM, and SW broadcasters will have a hard time with these "double costs" for a long time. I thought there was a mixed mode? Az. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 21 May 2004 17:47:43 +0200, Ruud Poeze wrote:
"Dr. Who" schreef: Thanks for the info. It's about time they got away from this IBOC garbage. But with DRM you loose your analogue audience, since it is digital only. So for a long period of time you need 2 frequencies and 2 transmitters at least per channel! Impossible on AM, and SW broadcasters will have a hard time with these "double costs" for a long time. Will the cost really double? You certainly know DRM transmissions consume less power. Example: "our" Radio Netherlands consumes "only" 40 kW of power for the daily 9815 kHz DRM transmission (around 12:00 GMT). Generally, with analogue broadcasts, 2 times the DRM transmission power is consumed. This brings up a question. Is hiring a DRM transmitter that expensive? Whatever the answer to that question is, I can see one point: SW broadcasting is considered expensive (some even say superfluous) these days. In any case, cost increase is not exactly appreciated. What should be done is developing a system wich can simulcast analogue and digital on one channel, without the disadvantages of the present IBOC system. DRM could form the base for this. hmm ... remember you only have one single 10 kHz channel at your disposal. I think you're just asking too much, for this moment. Who knows what future will bring. This new system then can be used world-wide and on all AM bands! (SW, MWorAM and LW in Europe and Asia). If that new system becomes reality, yes (although I'm not sure whether LW will survive - ugh those transmit antennas!). -- mvg, Giovanni. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Mike Terry" wrote in message ... May 19 2004 SHORTWAVE BROADCASTERS TO PROMOTE DRM IN U.S. Shortwave broadcasters in the United States want to promote Digital Radio Mondiale, a digital transmission technology for shortwave, medium-wave/AM and longwave. The idea of transmitting digital-mode signals on the short-wave bands, with their characteristic susceptibility to fading, noise, solar blackouts and other natural and man-made noises is almost **as laughable** as WBCQ's plan to utilize a single wind powered generator to supply the electricity for their 50KW transmitters. (WBCQ's wind power idea is akin to what the PRR Railroad Historical Club wanted to do in the 70's, when someone came up with the idea to power a GG1 electric locomotive +via batteries+ for a railfan run down the NE Corridor, since the PCB filled Xfmrs in the Locomotive were banned from Amtrak catenary power - they discovered that 10 boxcarloads of submarine batteries could not power a single GG1 for more than 10 miles....amazing how history repeats.) |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|