Joe Analssandrini wrote:
Dear Frank,

From what I have read, IBOC is "coming." Quite a number of US stations
have "signed on" with Ibiquity and are starting to broadcast now (or
will be very soon). I do not know if this mode of transmission will be
successful (it appears, again from my readings, more satisfactory on
FM than AM, but I read recently that at least most of the problems on
AM have been resolved. I believe WOR 710 kHz is running tests).
However, I feel Eton should have included it along with DRM. I believe
these radios will not be sold outside of the US except to special
order. I should have also mentioned that I believe the European and
Canadian digital radio (Eureka 147 in its various modes) should also
have been included. The Eton E1-XM should be a radio which would be
highly desired by the SW community as well as the general public. A
true world receiver would be something to which most of us would
aspire, in my opinion. As the design appears right now, it just evokes
yawns, again in my opinion.

Joe

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message ...

Why should they include an IBOC decoder?

Ibiquity charges a license fee for each IBOC radio. Right now, the only
IBOC radio I'm aware of is the $1000 Kenwood car radio. While I doubt the
license fee is several hundred dollars per radio, I do think the license fee
is big enough to characterize it as "High Dollar" radio. And I really doubt
people outside the US will really enjoy paying the High Dollar license fee.

More than that, the IBOC bandwidth is something like 45kHz. This bandwidth
hog is a threat to AM DXing. So, not only will non-UnitedStatesians have no
use for an IBOC decoder, but the IBOC scheme is a thorn in the side of
domestic radio hobbyists.

Frank Dresser
IBOC transmissions are "bandwidth hogs". From my location in Chicago,
WTMJ 620 in Milwaukee wipes out both 610kHz and 630kHz with the digital
sidebands. Here in Chicago, WIND 560 wipes out both 550kHz and 570kHz.
When I phoned Ibiquity and asked to speak to one of their field
engineers, I was forwarded to his phone mail. I called later that
afternoon and explained that I hadn't heard from him. I was told that he
was in meetings all day. They were nice enough to give me his direct
e-mail address. He didn't respond, instead, turning the matter over to
one of his associates.
His associate explained to me that when I heard the superb transmission
capabilities of their system I would be impressed.
I asked him how they were going to deal with the multipath effects of
evening reception, with their selective fading. I also explained that
the sync detector on my soon to be released radio addressed these
problems and that users would be able to enjoy the benefits without
having to pay a licensing fee, and that 3 channels of spectrum wouldn't
have to be wasted on a system such as theirs. I also explained that
their approach defeated the whole purpose of extending the MW bandplan
in th USA.
He never responded to me.

Pete

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...

[snip]

His associate explained to me that when I heard the superb transmission
capabilities of their system I would be impressed.
I asked him how they were going to deal with the multipath effects of
evening reception, with their selective fading. I also explained that
the sync detector on my soon to be released radio addressed these
problems and that users would be able to enjoy the benefits without
having to pay a licensing fee, and that 3 channels of spectrum wouldn't
have to be wasted on a system such as theirs. I also explained that
their approach defeated the whole purpose of extending the MW bandplan
in th USA.
He never responded to me.

Pete

Since the FCC is no longer worried about adjacent channel interference,
let's hope they drop the bandwidth restrictions on standard AM. I really
doubt the major networks have some new found interest in high fidelity
broadcasting, but some of the local independents might. There certainly is
a radio hobbyist interest in hi-fi AM.

And if hi-fi AM takes off with the general public, the non-IBOC broadcasters
could compete right now, using non-proprietary technology.

Frank Dresser

Frank Dresser wrote:

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...

[snip]

His associate explained to me that when I heard the superb transmission
capabilities of their system I would be impressed.
I asked him how they were going to deal with the multipath effects of
evening reception, with their selective fading. I also explained that
the sync detector on my soon to be released radio addressed these
problems and that users would be able to enjoy the benefits without
having to pay a licensing fee, and that 3 channels of spectrum wouldn't
have to be wasted on a system such as theirs. I also explained that
their approach defeated the whole purpose of extending the MW bandplan
in th USA.
He never responded to me.

Pete

Since the FCC is no longer worried about adjacent channel interference,
let's hope they drop the bandwidth restrictions on standard AM. I really
doubt the major networks have some new found interest in high fidelity
broadcasting, but some of the local independents might. There certainly is
a radio hobbyist interest in hi-fi AM.

Probably extremely limited. Increased bandwidth would mean less DX opportunities
for those who do DX the MW band.

And if hi-fi AM takes off with the general public, the non-IBOC broadcasters
could compete right now, using non-proprietary technology.

It's highly doubtful that HI-FI AM is of any great interest to the general
public.

dxAce

Frank Dresser wrote:
Since the FCC is no longer worried about adjacent channel interference,
let's hope they drop the bandwidth restrictions on standard AM.

Their owners would never permit it.

--
Both Kerry and Edwards announced their candidacy near the beginning of September,
2003, so let's only count votes before then. From January, 2003, to August, 2003,
Senator Edwards didn't vote 69 out of 320 opportunities (~22%) and Senator Kerry
didn't vote 182 out of 320 opportunities (~57%). http://www.mwilliams.info/archives/001349.php