Eugene Radio Happenings

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 1,109 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #512
    Microphone
    Participant

    I think we have accept the whole idea of HD radio is tanking. It never really got the promotion the HD Radio Alliance assured would happen. It’s also difficult for stations to measure the return on investment (ROI) of installing HD equipment and providing programming.

    #513
    the_radio_guy
    Participant

    I don’t see much of a future for HD Radio. If KRVM could afford to buy an FM translator, and simulcast their HD2 programming, they could sell underwriting there, and make some money. Without a translator, HD2 channels don’t exist for 99.9% of the population.

    #514
    silverdollar
    Participant

    Well it’s only my opinion and I’m not in the business… But I just don’t see any point in doing sub channels in a small market like Eugene. Make your HD1 as good as it can be and leave it at that.

    A couple years ago I got my intro to HD in a new car. At that time, when I tuned KRVM HD1 (there was no HD2 then) the display said “HD Radio Live”. No other HD station I’ve tried in Eugene or Portland has said “Live”. I’m assuming they were using highest quality possible with minimum data compression. The “Live” seemed to go away around the time they turned on HD2. Funny thing is I’ve googled it etc and never found any explanation for the “Live” designation.

    Having said that, what HD there is in Eugene all sounds very good to me, HD1 that is.

    EDIT I just found a screenshot showing “Live”: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5926087-HD-Radio-Live-icon-showed-up-today. Coincidentally I had a VW too with the same radio.

    Disclaimer: I may be an idiot. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    #515
    Craig_Adams
    Participant

    Here’s “The Radio Guy”s post from 1949:

    “I don’t see much of a future for FM Radio. If KPFM could afford to buy an AM station, and simulcast their programming, they could sell underwriting there, and make some money. Without an AM station, FM signals don’t exist for 99.9% of the population.

    #516
    semoochie
    Participant

    The idea has always been to put HD Radio in as many receiving devices as possible and over time, people will find it and listen because they already have it. They’ve just recently started getting it into portables. Eventually, if people listen to terrestrial radio, it’ll be HD, by default.

    #517
    the_radio_guy
    Participant

    The only reason that HD Radio signals exist in some small markets, is to “feed” an FM translator, adding a station/format to a cluster’s portfolio.

    Sure, us radio geeks enjoy HD Radio, but the average listener simply doesn’t care.

    #518
    W7PAT
    Participant

    Craig, That’s sure an ironic quote.

    I enjoy having HD available. I can listen to KEX on 100.3 HD-2 clear into Salem, which is much better than the 102.3 translator can do (only to Wilsonville). Smooth Jazz lives in HD-2 land. And, if you go up to Seattle there is all sorts of stations on HD-2.

    It needs a lot or promotion and giving away radios, just like back in the ’70’s when they promoted FM.

    #519
    silverdollar
    Participant

    Presumably this is not top secret ๐Ÿ˜‰ KRKT and KDUK seem to have their RBDS/RDS artist & track data on full-time now.

    I want to amend what I said about not seeing the value of HD2. If I don’t have my facts right, someone please correct me…

    If running both HD1 & HD2 with music in real stereo, isn’t HD1 going to have audible digital compression artifacts? That’s what I don’t like about HD2. It shouldn’t compromise the quality of HD1. Using HD2 for talk, or music in some low-bitrate format like parametric stereo, is fine.

    #520
    Andy Brown
    Participant

    “If running both HD1 & HD2 with music in real stereo, isn’t HD1 going to have audible digital compression artifacts?”

    In general, any sideband will interfere with other sidebands around the same carrier. Analog or digital. The sidebands will also interfere with the main band. In analog, it’s called crosstalk, sub to main and main to sub, or in other words how much L+R leaks into L-R and vice versa, and there is a maximum allowable amount.

    In digital, or a complete analysis of the analog plus digital waveform, any subchannel will create artifacts in other channels, sub or main. Although “digital” information is modulated around the carrier, the overall waveform is still analog and it can be shown how any subcarrier will interfere with any other sub or main carrier. It’s a mathematical certainty.

    Having said all that, adding more subcarriers just makes for more anomalies. Whether or not HD2 really compromises HD1 any more than HD1 compromises the analog signal is not subjective, it is fact and measurable. The more robust the subcarrier (power, bandwidth, rate) the more anomalies (distortion).

    Remember, the same argument was made by those folks that wanted FM to stay mono because of the sub to main distortion, multipath and coverage differences between mono and stereo.

    Offhand, I appreciate your complaint but it’s really not an issue to consumers. Either the signal is good enough to listen to or not and Lord knows HD is far from a perfect solution. Ibiquity has their method locked in and until that changes there won’t be much improvement.

    #521
    Borderblaster
    Participant

    “…clear into Salem…”

    Just an allusion OM, analog FM is just fine, donโ€™t need no stinking hybrid digital…

    #522
    jr_tech
    Participant

    “donโ€™t need no stinking hybrid digital”

    So let’s turn off the analog and add *more* digital sub-channels with improved bit rates. ๐Ÿ™‚

    #523
    silverdollar
    Participant

    Thanks for the more technical explanation. I guess at a more basic level I was thinking about the digital bitrate and level of compression applied to the data on HD1, and how using more bits for HD2 presumably has a negative impact on the quality of HD1. Like encoding/listening to a stereo MP3 at 128kbps vs. 256kbps vs. 320kbps.

    It’s not digital: It’s Hybrid Digital! ๐Ÿ˜‰

    #524
    jr_tech
    Participant

    “I guess at a more basic level I was thinking about the digital bitrate and level of compression applied to the data on HD1, and how using more bits for HD2 presumably has a negative impact on the quality of HD1.”

    I believe that that argument is *also* valid. There *are* several modes for hybrid transmission, Indeed, in the various “extended hybrid” modes, more digital sub-carriers are added to increase the permissible bitrate that can be delivered, with increasing anomalies being the result, as AB described.

    It is also the case that within a given mode, the broadcaster can choose the bitrate to be applied to each stream… use the whole standard mode 96k for one really nice sounding stream or split it 48/48 or 32/32/32 or other combinations for multiple streams, with decreasing sound quality per stream.

    Nice Ibiquity “White Paper” here detailing the FM sub-carriers in various modes:

    http://ibiquity.com/i/pdfs/Waveforms_FM.pdf

    #525
    boisebill
    Participant

    What I can’t find in the documents is if 48 kbps is the minimum you can use for the HD1? Say you have talk on HD1 and Jazz on HD2 could you give HD1 32 and HD2 64?

    #526
    jr_tech
    Participant

    I can’t find it either… I may be wrong about 32/32/32… might have been something like 48/24/24 or 48/32/16.

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 1,109 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.