Clear Channel ‘tests’ found no problem with ‘HD’ power hike

[radioskeptic]

Inside Radio is reporting this morning (8/25/09) that Clear Channel engineers performed “extensive tests” in Connecticut and determined that a full 10-dB increase in “HD” digital signals on the FM band wouldn’t cause interference.

Oddly enough, this is the first time since the website was redesigned some months ago that a "read full story" link at the end of a www.insideradio.com homepage story précis has failed to bring up the full story!  It asked me to log in.  But to log in, you have to be a member, and there’s a substantial fee to join.

Does anybody know whether that Clear Channel “test” report is available online?  I’m sure some of us could rip its methodology to shreds!

[BRNout]

Knowing a bit about the geography and FM band distribution in Connecticut, I'd be fascinated to read this!  What did they do, sit in downtown Hartford, listen to the local in-market stations and ignore everything else from Springfield, SW CT, eastern CT, Long Island, etc?  I'll bet that's exactly what they did. 

What I'd bet that they didn't do was check out the effects of such a hike in a place like Fairfield or Bridgeport or Colchester or Southbury or Enfield.  Places where multiple markets' worth of FM signals are available.  Not to mention those humid days when signals from Providence and New Bedford come in like locals. 

Idiocy. 

[jhardis]

Does anybody know whether that Clear Channel “test” report is available online?

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=7019916722

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520014135
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520014136
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520014137
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520014138
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520014139
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520014140

  - Jonathan

[RadeoEngineer]

Well, in the opening statement it says "During
these tests at -10 dBc and licensed operation at -20 dBc, however, the station did not
receive a single complaint of interference from other stations or the public."

My question is, why would they?  Who is listening to this?  Buehler?  Buehler?

I didn't bother to read the rest of this gibberish.

[radioskeptic]

Of course it's gibberish.  They're just trying to counter the effects of the NPR calculator, but nobody's buying it.
(http://www.nprlabs.org/publications/distribution/interimIBOCpowerallowance/index2.php)

[Savage]

This was inevitable.  Somebody had to step up and provide research "for the record" or the FCC would have no possible "factual" basis for adopting a digital power increase.  There was simply no credible basis on which a new rule could be adopted other than sporadic and highly anecdotal experiments such as with KROQ Pasadena.  The NPR study had to be countered or the digital increase would be deader'n disco.

As is always the case with HD Radio, the fix is in.  Personally I think across-the-board -10 dBc may counterintuitively prove to be the best in the long run.  The interference will be horrible, and this time, unlike with HD-AM, the stakes will make the interference scenarios too costly and troublesome to finesse or ignore.

AM stations with which Big Group Radio has limited patience and interest are one thing.  High-billing FMs in major markets with tens of millions in annual billing are another.  As has been noted here, the Northeast is packed with short-spaced major-market adjacents in Boston, NYC, Philly, and nearby smaller cities.  (And then there is the NPR problem.)

As we all know, Alliance "experts" can cook the technical books all they want.  In the end, when managers, PDs and sales departments start seeing accelerating audience erosion due to interference, the hammer WILL come down.

[audioguy]

As we all know, Alliance "experts" can cook the technical books all they want.  In the end, when managers, PDs and sales departments start seeing accelerating audience erosion due to interference, the hammer WILL come down.

I hope so, but remain to be convinced, after the AM IBOC fiasco. I think what this will do is accelerate the exodus from terrestrial radio to other program sources; particularly Internet radio and offline listening (music players, etc.)

[stormy01]

Of course they - Crap Channel - are going to do and say whatever it takes to achieve their goals: greed and domination of their markets What else can we expect from Corporate America?

[Savage]

To get a good reading on this, you've gotta step outside the sphere of radio and engineering and related blogs for a moment.  Bribing the FCC is one thing, as are faking tests and "moving the goalposts" to "make" the interference seem acceptable.

It is absolutely a different matter to get people to buy HD radios, to get stations to convert when many of them are having problems meeting payroll, to get receiver manufacturers - particularly carmakers - to offer appealing and reasonably-priced HD products.  Or to get the public to care one whit about HD Radio.

All this assumes that the hybrid digital system works acceptably - which it doesn't and won't, -10 dBc or not.

At some point HD has to live in the real world.  Unlike its desperately stubborn and disappearing proponents.  You can jump start a car all day, until the booster cables melt and the starter motor overheats and self-destructs.  If it won't keep running....

[Play Freebird]

WKCI's digital signal is apparently transmitted from an aux antenna side-mounted on a wide tower, but the analog antenna is top mounted.  This would reduce the ratio of D to A behind the tower by several dB, particularly in the vertical polarization.  The "compatibility tests" were performed to the west.  So might the aux antenna be mounted on the east side?