Article View: rec.audio.tech
Article #902Re: HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio
From: SFTV_troy
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 09:16
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 09:16
37 lines
3413 bytes
3413 bytes
Steven wrote: > On Sep 30, 12:08 am, RHF <rhf-newsgro...@pacbell.net> wrote: > > On Sep 29, 2:02 pm, Tom <holden_fam...@sympatico.ca> wrote: > > > > > HDradio is worse than DAB insofar as the so-called IBOC implementation > > > guarantees interference to both the analog main channel and to > > > adjacent channel stations. DAB has been implemented on exclusive > > > spectrum, or, at least, spectrum that is not already used for consumer > > > applications. As to the quality, yes, a DAB multiplex can be exploited > > > to provide 1990's pioneer streaming audio quality for many program > > > streams channels or a few streams at 1980's near-CD quality. > > > > Tom - Good Response ~ RHF > > Yeah, I can agree with a lot of it. Critique without a bunch of URLs > also, which is astonishing when you realize that all came from HIM and > not a website. Much obliged! Unfortunately the spectrum DAB occupies is currently reserved by the U.S. military. So that literally means there's no place in U.S. Radio to insert a DAB-exclusive band. (The FCC is selling tv channels 51-69, but it will likely go to Internet Wireless.) Personally, I don't want to see DAB in the U.S. I like the FCC's plan to keep the current FM band (rather than discontinue it, as the UK/Germany is planning to do circa 2015). That means my favorite stations, the ones I grew up with like FM97 or WARM103 or WJTL90, will still be in their proper places ..... just upgraded to digital quality..... and with more sub-channels. I like the IBOC plan, even if the execution has been a little flawed. (For example, I would have banned AM-HD from nighttime, until after the analog shutdown.)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1191143760.386585.241500@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<1191065666.205537.159420@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <1191096585.135753.167530@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> <46ffb388.44729093@news.plus.net> <1191099764.677637.18050@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> <1191132499.561691.42030@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> <1191133016.459722.281360@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: fb1f8,428391383e1324a5 X-Google-Thread: 10a749,428391383e1324a5 X-Google-Thread: 114aac,cd4ad6cadcf2b245 X-Google-Thread: f7d8a,cd4ad6cadcf2b245 X-Google-Attributes: gidfb1f8,gid10a749,gid114aac,gidf7d8a,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: SFTV_troy <SFTV_troy@yahoo.com> Newsgroups: rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast Subject: Re: HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 02:16:00 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 38 Message-ID: <1191143760.386585.241500@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> References: <1191065666.205537.159420@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <1191096585.135753.167530@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> <46ffb388.44729093@news.plus.net> <1191099764.677637.18050@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> <1191132499.561691.42030@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> <1191133016.459722.281360@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.249.100.9 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1191143760 10703 127.0.0.1 (30 Sep 2007 09:16:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 09:16:00 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <1191133016.459722.281360@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.7) Gecko/20070914 Firefox/2.0.0.7,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: 22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.249.100.9; posting-account=ps2QrAMAAAA6_jCuRt2JEIpn5Otqf_w0