🚀 go-pugleaf

On Oct 3, 5:29 pm, "Hein ten Horn" <tenhornRem...@ThiSraketnet.nl>
wrote:
> SFTVratings_t...@yahoo.com wrote
>
> > On Oct 2, 6:17 pm, RHF wrote:
>
> >> drm ain't iboc -and- iboc ain't drm ~ RHF
>
> > You are dumb.  DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode.  See this manual,
> > page 20.  Notice how the DRM sits "in-band on-channel" same as the HD
> > Radio works.
> >www.drm.org/pdfs/Broadcast_Manual.pdf
>
> No, the manual does not state
> "DRM has a hybrid digital/analog mode".
> A simulcast is not necessarily hybrid.
> I also cannot find any affirmation on your statement
> Notice how the DRM sits "in-band on-channel".
>
> RHF dumb?
> Don't think so.
> Take a good look on that page 20 of the manual.
>
> [quote]
> DRM supports a number of different simulcast options. Currently the
> supported simulcast modes require the use of additional spectrum outside
> an assigned 9 or 10 kHz channel (Multi-Channel or Multi-frequency
> Simulcast, MCS). The DRM signal can be located in the next adjacent
> upper or lower channel and can occupy a half or whole channel
> depending on the bandwidth option chosen.
> [unquote]
>
> So far nothing about IBOC.
> In general, a simulcast is a simultaneous transmission of the same
> programme. Here, both transmissions are located in two adjacent
> channels, the DRM transmitter operating with less power than the
> analogue signal transmitter.
>
> [quote]
> (..) a satisfactory compromise can be obtained when the DRM power
> level is around 14-16 dB below the adjacent analogue signal.
> [unquote]
>
> Unfortunately, operating on two adjacent frequencies (channels) may
> give rise to interference problems. With IBOC no such problems
> would occur, isn't it?
> Now read the following about a possible DRM-future...
>
> [quote]
> In an ideal world it would also be possible to transmit both an analogue
> and a digital signal within the same channel (9 or 10 kHz) so that the
> analogue service could be received, without interference from the
> digital signal, on any analogue receiver.
> [unquote]
>
> With only one transmission there would be no interference,
> so in the real world anno 2007 interference may arise and
> DRM is not IBOC.
> The statement "DRM is not IBOC" is also apparent from
> some other quotes from page 20:
>
> [quote]
> (..) promising proposals for a SCS (Single Channel Simulcast)
> option are currently being evaluated (..)
> Even if single channel simulcast may prove a difficult goal to
> achieve (..)
> [unquote]
>

- DRM is not IBOC,
- correct me if I'm wrong.
-
- gr, Hein

HtH - I am so sorry - I can not correct you
-cause- you ain't wrong. ~ RHF

Yes HtH - You Are Right "DRM -Ain't- IBOC" !

SFTV -aka- "Hybrid Digital" Man,

Here are a few more thoughs to consider :

DRM 'may' have the Analog "AM" Signal along-side
'Adjacent-To the Digital Signal. {Two Unque Functions}
-NOTE- This uses up even more Bandwidth then
DRM alone.
-IMHO- The better approach for DRM would be to
have the separate Digial and Analog "Simulcast"
Signals 'spaced' 50 kHz apart so that each of the
two independant Broadcast Signal would have no
chance of interferring with each other; and the DRM
Signal could be Transmitted at Full Power.
-Remember- DRM is a single Mode of Transmission.
-Also Note- DRM Radio/Receivers are Manual
Single Mode Operation.

IBOC has the Analog "AM" Signal 'nested' in-between
the Two Outer Digital Side-Bands : By-Design and is
Bi-Modal 100% of the time. {Functions in Tandem}
-Remember- IBOC is a Dual Transmission Mode.
-Also Note- IBOC Radio/Receivers are Automatic
Dual Mode Operation.
 .