Radio-Info.com

Radio-Info.com Discussion Boards
Login November 21, 2009, 04:01:13 PM *
Username Password Session Length
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email? Did you forget your password?
:  
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: ABC CITADEL AM STATIONS SUSPEND NIGHTTIME IBOC  (Read 11622 times)
Sam Lit
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 726

Hy Lit Radio Technologies Inc. President/CEO


« Reply #40 on: October 03, 2007, 08:34:52 PM »

Thank you WLS. There's no hsssss in my signal at WNMB in North Myrtle Beach tonight Grin The AM Stereo is clear, clean and bright.

 Stereo? As in C-QUAM stereo. With only 500 watts? Does anybody still do that anymore with any margin of success?
Logged

awj223
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 335


« Reply #41 on: October 03, 2007, 08:46:03 PM »

But, here we are, having a techincal discussion about all of this.  The average listener won't care about the engineering aspects.  All he'll know is that there's a strange and annoying noise in what used to be a reasonably clear signal.  He may or may not complain to the station, but if it goes on for too long he'll be gone.  Further erosion of AM's core demo is also not what it needs right now.
I think everyone may have to admit that Leonard Kahn took the right approach.  Rather than ignore the laws of physics and the findings of Claude Shannon, he didn't try to cram 3 liters of water into a 1 liter container like iBiquity did (and now iBiquity is wondering why 2 liters spilled on the floor adjacent to the bag).  With channel separations less than channel size, there simply isn't room to transmit a full digital signal next to the analog.  If the problem you're trying to solve is the fidelity issue, reuse the information you're already sending in analog and just transmit the treble in digital and use a smart receiver to recombine it!

Like you say, the average listener won't care about the engineering aspects.  All he'll know is that the frequency response of CAM-D sounds a lot better than analog only.  At least you'll still be able to hear your skywave in traditional, lower fidelity when you're farther from the transmitter, rather than the iBiquity-developed situation of mutually assured destruction: being able to hear neither signal.

Quote from: LinoNYC
On the contrary, the onus is on the opponentsof this system to come forth with a viable solution to AM's unsustainable condition.
CAM-D as an interim, followed by conversion to DRM.

We also need to clean out the band, especially all the stations that should never have been licensed.  As I said before in another post (where someone nominated me "FCC Broadcast Plan Czar"), all Class C and D stations should go to FM, as well as most Class B stations operating on what should be clear channels should vacate mediumwave as well.  They should end up on the additional channels created by our friends at iBiquity.  All that should remain on mediumwave are the Class A stations, and they should be allowed to raise power to at least 500,000 watts when they switch on DRM, with 10 kHz channel size in mode B or C.  The band should be cleared out and kept clear to allow for protected contours of all existing Class A stations out to at least 0.1 mV/m operating at 500 kW.

The message from the FCC should be this: when you broadcast in hybrid (CAM-D) mode or pure analog mode, you are limited to 50,000 watts.  When you go DRM with a strict 10 kHz channel size, you can blast 500,000 watts from your facility because you aren't stepping on your neighbors' turf.  WLW might have been given 500 kW non experimental if it weren't for the adjacent channel interference.
Logged
JIBGUY
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 492


« Reply #42 on: October 03, 2007, 08:58:52 PM »

Quote
Stereo? As in C-QUAM stereo. With only 500 watts? Does anybody still do that anymore with any margin of success?
Logged
JIBGUY
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 492


« Reply #43 on: October 03, 2007, 09:02:15 PM »

Quote
Stereo? As in C-QUAM stereo. With only 500 watts? Does anybody still do that anymore with any margin of success?
---------------------------------------------
I still do AM stereo with my little 250-watt pea-shooter which covers Boston (on 740). C-Quam sounds GREAT (and 25 listeners who have AM-stereo receivers LOVE it).   C-Quam sounds better than flawed IBOC ever would.
Logged
Philip J. Smith
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 1639

Formerly "BozoTheCat"


« Reply #44 on: October 03, 2007, 10:23:54 PM »

Thank you WLS. There's no hsssss in my signal at WNMB in North Myrtle Beach tonight Grin The AM Stereo is clear, clean and bright.

A few of us out here nailed it:  IBOC from WLS was the culprit for your station's nighttime noise.  Believe me, being only 19 miles from the WLS transmitter, it sure is nice to have WLS "back in its box" where it belongs, staying mostly between 883 and 897 instead of spewing buzz from 865 to 915.  At 19 miles & 50,000 watts, I couldn't get reliable nighttime IBOC reception from WLS, anyway.
Logged
Sam Lit
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 726

Hy Lit Radio Technologies Inc. President/CEO


« Reply #45 on: October 03, 2007, 11:01:48 PM »

Quote
Stereo? As in C-QUAM stereo. With only 500 watts? Does anybody still do that anymore with any margin of success?
---------------------------------------------
I still do AM stereo with my little 250-watt pea-shooter which covers Boston (on 740). C-Quam sounds GREAT (and 25 listeners who have AM-stereo receivers LOVE it).   C-Quam sounds better than flawed IBOC ever would.

    Sure is a nice self supporter your sportin’ there Bob. It would be nice to be able to hear that 740 C-QUAM down here in Philly. I used to love AM, until I-Buzz took the life out of it.
     Speaking of I-Buzz, has anyone else noticed this? I have never heard this before until now. And I still cannot believe that 1210/WPHT Philadelphia drifts. The analogue center tuning on 1210/Philadelphia drifts, particularly now that they are running AMHD. Before this I have only heard FM stations drift, and this was mostly before AFC. When I first experienced drift on a non digital AM tuner, I thought I was imagining this. At first I figured with all the equipment I have running here, (including, off the record, my own transmitters, at times), perhaps I was creating this phenomenon. But how many time do you have to calibrate your own equipment, before you begin to say, that this may be an exercise in futility. Sometimes it would drift in a matter of less than a half hour. Always at different clock speeds, no pattern. And very subtlety. It’s like you realize that after a measured period of time, you're listening to I-Hash.  So I decided to ask someone who also is a die hard AM’er. And they confirmed the same thing. I was stunned.
Logged

Ray22
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 51


« Reply #46 on: October 04, 2007, 01:48:21 AM »

the "drift" you are noticing is probably due to slight frequency drift in your model of receiver over time causing the on-channel "null" of HD hiss and the need to re-tune.  This would be sort of normal on many radios.  Also, with HD nighttime operation even minor HD fading of station "sides" can seem to reappear on-channel.  Very interesting to hear the on-channel "hiss" roll in and out with fading of even local stations.     
Logged
Zach
curious bystander
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 1167

5 out of 4 people don't understand fractions.


« Reply #47 on: October 04, 2007, 05:24:06 AM »

[btw]... THANKS CITADEL!!!  I can hear WSB again! ...From ONE state over!  Sounds like a BIG-TIME DX to me Cheesy

Count me in as #3 thanking Citadel for being able to listen to WSB again.  I'm two states away now and until nighttime IBOC, I used to get WSB better here in Mississippi than I did in Alabama!  Not that I listen all that much, but if I'm on AM at night, it is due to WSB (there is no local AM here, day or night.)

Usually they are pretty decent around here, but lately there'd be periods where the signal meter was nearly maxed out in the car, yet it would be completely inaudible audio beneath hash. Ugh.
Logged
Savage
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 1715


« Reply #48 on: October 04, 2007, 05:44:23 AM »

You know it's time to move on when the thread's discourse deteriorates to this level:

Q:  In light of Citadel's yanking HD-AM off their big AMs due to adjacent-channel interference, what SPECIFICALLY do you propose to fix IBOC-AM since you so passionately believe it is the only hope to save the band?  (After all, the Citadel decision is the thread's subject matter.)

A.  (i)  Why did you spend $400,000 upgrading your AM and why didn't you get an FM instead?  (As if the poster had never heard of a little thing called "the filing auction.")

(ii)  Your station is one of a group "which never should have been licensed."

(iii)  You don't have enough audience, and your station will soon be sold to a religious broadcaster.

(iv)  I've talked to BE/Harris/iBiquity engineers.  They know what they're doing.

Best wishes to all - I'm wanted back on Planet Earth.
Logged
rbrucecarter5
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 2064


« Reply #49 on: October 04, 2007, 08:32:14 AM »

Stereo? As in C-QUAM stereo. With only 500 watts? Does anybody still do that anymore with any margin of success?

C-Quam is robust as the main signal.  I have heard C-Quam stations in almost perfect stereo for hundreds of miles in stereo daytime, and over a thousand at night.  It is IBOC that has coverage problems, not C-quam.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP

Postings on Radio-Info.com are the opinions of the people who post them. Views expressed do not necessarily represent the views of Radio-Info.com or its parent in3 media, inc. In fact many of the views expressed here are just plain wrong. But they are opinions and this site allows us all to discuss those opinions. Any reliance on information posted is done so at the user's own risk. For a detailed look at the rules, regulations and uses of Radio-Info.com please see our TERMS OF SERVICE. 14

Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 1.39 seconds with 19 queries.