Pete KE9OA wrote:
I agree on the point of myself having any appreciable effect. I did receive
an e-mail response from Mr. Miller of the FCC this morning. He wants me to
send him some spectrographs of the stations in question. I am going to see
if I can take one of the 8560 spectrum analyzers home for a day or two. This
way, I can use the marker function and show the delta between the carrier
and the adjacent channel sideband power. The VSA would be even better,
because it could measure ACCP (adjacent channel coupled power).
I did get a response from one of the managers from WTMJ 620 this afternoon.
Nothing from WBBM yet, but I won't hold my breath on this one.

WTMJ is certainly a smaller group, and I don't think they have the
financial interest in Ibiquity some of the larger groups have.

I *have* heard reports of IBOC signals splattering out considerably
further than the theory suggests they should. (for example, of "FM"
IBOC stations trashing 2nd and 3rd adjacents - which shouldn't happen)
I can certainly see where problems in the transmission system can cause
that, and since this is a new mode I'd bet a lot of engineers aren't yet
familiar with what can go wrong.

I doubt you'll get any action from a spectrum analyzer plot that shows
all its energy within 15KHz of carrier. However, I wouldn't be
surprised to see some outside that range, and I can see the FCC acting
on that.

I do believe that if many people expressed their concern there would be a
very small chance that it would have some effect. Unfortunately, money makes
the world go around and if the radio stations think IBOC can increase their
revenue they will go for it.

I think they're grasping at straws, hoping IBOC can stave off
competition from satellite. (much as AM station operators hoped analog
AM stereo could stave off competition from FM)

I just hope it fails quickly enough to not kill off the service entirely.

--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

Ham stuff for sale:
http://www.w9wi.com/articles/4sale.htm

It would be good if IBOC fizzles out sooner than later. In my correspondance
with WTMJ, I did tell them that I can phone them and actually play one of my
radios............demonstrating that actual level of interference.
We as SWLs are more aware of this type of interference because the receivers
we use are sensitive enough to hear that interference in the first place.
WTMJ's sideband noise is at the 30uV level here in Waukegan Illinois, and
many of the "household" radios that you find in homes aren't going to detect
that low of a level. Exceptions are some of the better auto radios.
It is a shame about that interference but, maybe it won't be forever.

Pete

"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message
...
Pete KE9OA wrote:
I agree on the point of myself having any appreciable effect. I did
receive an e-mail response from Mr. Miller of the FCC this morning. He
wants me to send him some spectrographs of the stations in question. I am
going to see if I can take one of the 8560 spectrum analyzers home for a
day or two. This way, I can use the marker function and show the delta
between the carrier and the adjacent channel sideband power. The VSA
would be even better, because it could measure ACCP (adjacent channel
coupled power).
I did get a response from one of the managers from WTMJ 620 this
afternoon. Nothing from WBBM yet, but I won't hold my breath on this one.

WTMJ is certainly a smaller group, and I don't think they have the
financial interest in Ibiquity some of the larger groups have.

I *have* heard reports of IBOC signals splattering out considerably
further than the theory suggests they should. (for example, of "FM" IBOC
stations trashing 2nd and 3rd adjacents - which shouldn't happen) I can
certainly see where problems in the transmission system can cause that,
and since this is a new mode I'd bet a lot of engineers aren't yet
familiar with what can go wrong.

I doubt you'll get any action from a spectrum analyzer plot that shows all
its energy within 15KHz of carrier. However, I wouldn't be surprised to
see some outside that range, and I can see the FCC acting on that.

I do believe that if many people expressed their concern there would be a
very small chance that it would have some effect. Unfortunately, money
makes the world go around and if the radio stations think IBOC can
increase their revenue they will go for it.

I think they're grasping at straws, hoping IBOC can stave off competition
from satellite. (much as AM station operators hoped analog AM stereo
could stave off competition from FM)

I just hope it fails quickly enough to not kill off the service entirely.

--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

Ham stuff for sale:
http://www.w9wi.com/articles/4sale.htm

Pete KE9OA wrote:
It would be good if IBOC fizzles out sooner than later. In my correspondance
with WTMJ, I did tell them that I can phone them and actually play one of my
radios............demonstrating that actual level of interference.
We as SWLs are more aware of this type of interference because the receivers
we use are sensitive enough to hear that interference in the first place.
WTMJ's sideband noise is at the 30uV level here in Waukegan Illinois, and
many of the "household" radios that you find in homes aren't going to detect
that low of a level. Exceptions are some of the better auto radios.

What the stations are going to say is that you're outside the service
area of the station being interfered with. WSM doesn't deliver a
protected-contour signal to Waukegan, so officially, you can't get WSM
there, and so officially, WSCR's lower digital sideband can't be
interfering with WSM.

(as I understand the rules, right now WSM *does* deliver a
protected-contour signal to Waukegan at night - but IBOC proponents want
to drop all protection for skywave signals. There's no way IBOC can be
authorized at night on clear channels, or on 1st or 2nd adjacents to
clear channels (like 620), if they don't.)

But it sure seems to me like AM IBOC already is - during the day -
causing interference within the protected groundwave contours of
existing stations.

A new station (WCKD) came on the air on 1490 in Lebanon, Tenn. around
the first of the year. That's about 40 miles from the WLAC-1510 tower.
On a hunch, I drove over there last weekend.

On a typical car radio (factory radio in 2002 Ford Focus) there was
noticable IBOC QRM on WCKD *within the Lebanon city limits*. Again,
this is on a typical consumer radio - not a hypersensitive DX setup.

Again, as I understand the rules, a station (like WCKD) will not be
authorized unless its city-grade signal encompasses the entire city of
license. The city-grade contour is even smaller than the
interference-protected contour - in other words, WCKD's protected
contour extends beyond the city limits.

In other words, if I understand the rules properly, at least one
"AM"-IBOC station *is* causing interference within the protected
contours of an analog station. I would be very surprised if this is the
only example. I *believe* I've heard interference in the protected
contour of WJJM, Lewisburg (also on 1490) but haven't actually driven
*into* Lewisburg to verify.

Certainly, WCKY-1530 has ceased to be a listening option until WLAC
turns off their HD around 5:00...

FM, IMHO, is much less of a problem. Still, I think many listeners
(especially in further out suburbs, like Waukegan, and outlying cities
like Clarksville) will be surprised to learn they can't officially get
their favorite stations. (the battle between the sidebands of co-owned
96.9 Zion and 97.1 Chicago will be interesting...)

I expect to lose my only adult-alternative and my only jazz choices if
FM-IBOC is fully deployed.
--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

Ham stuff for sale:
http://www.w9wi.com/articles/4sale.htm

"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message
...

[snip]


That said, I think IBOC is going to fail of its own volition. On AM,
it'll never sell to the vast majority of stations unless it can be left
on all night. But if it *is* left on all night, the massive
interference will kill the AM service altogether.

Nighttime IBOC might not kill AM radio, but it sure will make most fringe
reception impossible. I've recently spent some time in California and the
nighttime jumble of ground wave, skywave and adjacents is even worse than
what I'm used to here in the Midwest. I can imagine the damage IBOC will
cause.


On FM, I think it'll simply never sell. IBOC-FM will fade away, as the
digital transmitters suffer inevitable breakdowns & budget-conscious
managers decide not to spend money repairing transmitters nobody is
listening to.

Let's not forget the digital transmission fees Ibiquity intends to impose.


On the receiver end, set prices will have to pretty much equal those of
existing analog sets if they're to compete with satellite. They have a
VERY long way to go to reach that point!

The electronic "journalists" correctly tell us analog sets are cheap and
often sound crummy, but they don't tell us analog receivers could be much
better for little extra cost. But cheap has been good enough for the people
who buy radios. So, it's questionable whether alot of people would pay
Ibiquity's digital receiver license fee mark-up, at least on the merits of
"CD quality" sound.

However, people might pay extra for multicasting's extra program channels.
Hell, if Ibiquity has a subscription radio scheme up their sleeve, they
might get people to pay and pay and pay.

Frank Dresser





..

The media corporations keep telling us that more channels mean catering to
niche audiences. But cable and satellite TV have mostly given us multiple
channels feeding us programs from the same tired library of action movies
and off-network reruns whether we pay or not.

Shopping channels and infomercials take up the rest of the time and space.

The stock corporation business model applied to media is the problem.

Norm Lehfeldt

"Frank Dresser" wrotf:

However, people might pay extra for multicasting's extra program channels.
Hell, if Ibiquity has a subscription radio scheme up their sleeve, they
might get people to pay and pay and pay.

Frank Dresser

In article ,
"Frank Dresser" wrote:


"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message
...

[snip]


That said, I think IBOC is going to fail of its own volition. On
AM, it'll never sell to the vast majority of stations unless it can
be left on all night. But if it *is* left on all night, the
massive interference will kill the AM service altogether.

Nighttime IBOC might not kill AM radio, but it sure will make most
fringe reception impossible. I've recently spent some time in
California and the nighttime jumble of ground wave, skywave and
adjacents is even worse than what I'm used to here in the Midwest. I
can imagine the damage IBOC will cause.

Snip

I grew up in western New York and don't recall AMBCB stations having
the amount of selective fading as they do here in southern california.
Night time AM broadcast band here in southern California is terrible
most nights with selective fading where the station can be completely
unintelligible for up to a minute or two even with continuously strong
signal levels. Back east the AMBCB or short wave stations would just
have the "normal" signal strength fading where the signal strength
would drop so it could not be heard momentarily. I have as a
consequence found sync detection indispensable for night time AMBCB and
the majority of short wave reception is much improved with it. Recall
that I am a program listener so I spend hours listening to a broadcast
and don't want to miss parts of it.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"norml" wrote in message
...
The media corporations keep telling us that more channels mean catering to
niche audiences. But cable and satellite TV have mostly given us multiple
channels feeding us programs from the same tired library of action movies
and off-network reruns whether we pay or not.

Give up on TV. Radio is where it's at!

TV progammers have learned to cater to the unimaginative. Did much of the
"Leave it to Beaver"'s audience consider the possibility that Ward and June
had taken Eddie Haskell under wing because Eddie's dad (the guy who was
continually sleeping late or clobbering Eddie) was an abusive alcoholic?
That's just one of the subtleies of that show, brilliantly written about a
boy who was becoming dimly aware of the of the world and who idealized his
parents. Did people think June really got dressed up to do housework? Talk
about TV's pearls before swine.

Had the show been written twenty years later, a "very special" Beaver would
have had the Cleavers doing an intervention on Haskell Sr. and fixing him in
half an hour. Well, that one might have had to have been a two parter, but
I'm sure they could have made Fred Rutherford less of a pompous ass in only
one episode. Such was the understated reality of TV as the color era
matured.

Should 3-D TV ever be developed, I'm sure complete morons will be the most
appreciative.



Shopping channels and infomercials take up the rest of the time and space.

The stock corporation business model applied to media is the problem.


In previous times in our economic history, there weren't enough skilled
factory workers. Now we have the New Economy, and perhaps these now surplus
workers could be retrained to productively program all those stupid
repetitious TV channels. I've seen the schedules. Hardly any apocolyptic
cold war dramas, cape canaveral monsters, flesh eaters and the like. Months
can go between two-headed transplant movies. Well, I know what I'd put on
my cable channel. But, then again, we all should get out and be more
active. Or at least watch one of the fifty excercise equipment
informertials running an any one time.

Frank Dresser

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 01:56:05 GMT, norml wrote:

The media corporations keep telling us that more channels mean catering to
niche audiences. But cable and satellite TV have mostly given us multiple
channels feeding us programs from the same tired library of action movies
and off-network reruns whether we pay or not.

Shopping channels and infomercials take up the rest of the time and space.

The stock corporation business model applied to media is the problem.
Wrong!

The problem is that the audience is not demanding better. We are
crappy consumers consuming crap.

David wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 01:56:05 GMT, norml wrote:

The media corporations keep telling us that more channels mean catering to
niche audiences. But cable and satellite TV have mostly given us multiple
channels feeding us programs from the same tired library of action movies
and off-network reruns whether we pay or not.

Shopping channels and infomercials take up the rest of the time and space.

The stock corporation business model applied to media is the problem.
Wrong!

The problem is that the audience is not demanding better. We are
crappy consumers consuming crap.

Speak for yourself, 'tard boy.

Now run along, mommy says it's time for your morning meds.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 02:52:46 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

In article ,
"Frank Dresser" wrote:


"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message
...

[snip]


That said, I think IBOC is going to fail of its own volition. On
AM, it'll never sell to the vast majority of stations unless it can
be left on all night. But if it *is* left on all night, the
massive interference will kill the AM service altogether.

Nighttime IBOC might not kill AM radio, but it sure will make most
fringe reception impossible. I've recently spent some time in
California and the nighttime jumble of ground wave, skywave and
adjacents is even worse than what I'm used to here in the Midwest. I
can imagine the damage IBOC will cause.

Snip

I grew up in western New York and don't recall AMBCB stations having
the amount of selective fading as they do here in southern california.
Night time AM broadcast band here in southern California is terrible
most nights with selective fading where the station can be completely
unintelligible for up to a minute or two even with continuously strong
signal levels. Back east the AMBCB or short wave stations would just
have the "normal" signal strength fading where the signal strength
would drop so it could not be heard momentarily. I have as a
consequence found sync detection indispensable for night time AMBCB and
the majority of short wave reception is much improved with it. Recall
that I am a program listener so I spend hours listening to a broadcast
and don't want to miss parts of it.

I'm 25 miles North of Hollywood. KNX comes in OK at night. The rest
of my listening is S. F., Reno and Las Vegas. I can get KOMO
(Seattle) better than 90% of L.A. at night.