Take the simulated HD radio test drive? in Electronics http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r21035290 en Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:25:20 EDT Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:25:20 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21130020 Vchat20 :
said by TheMG See Profile :

Well, that's assuming traditional radio doesn't die altogether.

It's not the quality that bothers me. It's that every radio station around here is like 50% ads. How can people keep listening to this junk?
Yeah. I'm in full agreement there. Unfortunately the FCC and the likes of ClearChannel have it in their heads that constant commercials and canned voice tracking is the best thing around.

We actually have Cumulus Broadcasting in control of most of the bigger stations in the area here and at least they realize the importance of live on-air personalities that actually live in the area and make the face of these stations. Still doesn't account for the commercials though, but that's all FCC's little pansy regulations making the mess.

Also, Dude111 See Profile: I just checked out your link again in the first post and that is hardly an HD Radio benchmark and I don't know who the smartass was who decided to actually publish that demo. A more accurate representation of the quality is available here: »ibiquity.com/hd_radio/hdradio_experience_it and is nearly spot on with real world quality/performance of HD broadcasts.
--
I swear, some people should have pace-makers installed to free up the resources. Breathing and heart beat taxes their whole system, all of their brain cells wasted on life support.-two bit brains, and the second bit is wasted on parity! ~head_spaz]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21130020 Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:15:55 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21129951 TheMG :
said by Vchat20 See Profile :

It's almost 2010, FM's showing it's age. HD Radio at this current moment in time is a prime upgrade to bring the FM Radio system into the digital age.
Well, that's assuming traditional radio doesn't die altogether.

It's not the quality that bothers me. It's that every radio station around here is like 50% ads. How can people keep listening to this junk?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21129951 Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:55:00 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21129010 Vchat20 : Well, I'm sorry that you have such hatred towards the format and you aren't basing your opinions on a small subset of tuners. I'm sure as a supposed 'Audophile' you realize that not all tuner's are made equal and reception on some is sub-par at best.

I'm not advocating the road that iBiquity took for this format and would have much preferred to see the tried and true DAB system implemented here in the states on it's own band barring FCC approval.

Fact of the matter is, the quality and interference caused to adjacent analog bands isn't nearly as bad as you all make it out to be. On the AM band, sure. I won't disagree there. There's just WAY too much potential for interference PERIOD there. But FM's right in the sweet spot for the technology.

The local station here with a 50kW transmitter about 45mi away actually simulcasts in HD alongside the analog broadcast and both are top notch quality. The analog is crystal clear and the frequency range peaks at 16khz and the digital transmission is certainly very well near cd quality (there are SOME compression artifacts if you listen REAL close and are extremely anal about it, but nothing sowstopping).

Either way, it's just like the digital tv transition with the only difference being there's a private company behind it and all the pros/cons to go with it. It's almost 2010, FM's showing it's age. HD Radio at this current moment in time is a prime upgrade to bring the FM Radio system into the digital age. And iBiquity has at least been nice enough to make analog and digital co-existing on the same FCC allocated frequency with VERY little quality degradation for either side if the station engineer is worth his/her salt.

With HD FM Radio, stations can push up to 150kbit/s for 1 channel alongside the analog carrier which would FAR surpass CD quality using the format's AAC+SBR compression. And up to 300kbit/s in single channel digital only mode which would be damn near studio quality with the compression format and I dare say adding possible support for 5.1 audio if it came to that (Live Jazz anyone?)

I think the biggest thing is that it is very easy to screw this up and wreak havoc on not only the analog carrier of the same broadcast but adjacent channels in the same area if the station engineer does it half assed. We have like 6 stations locally that broadcast in HD and I haven't heard any degradation in quality from any of them in comparison to before they moved to broadcasting in HD additionally. Half of those are all served by the same engineer in the same transmitter farm here.
--
I swear, some people should have pace-makers installed to free up the resources. Breathing and heart beat taxes their whole system, all of their brain cells wasted on life support.-two bit brains, and the second bit is wasted on parity! ~head_spaz]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21129010 Thu, 18 Sep 2008 00:05:43 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21128608 anon : Ya know, I don't care.

I have listened to several radios in several stores, and in some radio stations. Funny, in many stations, the only place I could listen was at the transmitter site!

The only Radio Shack that had working radios was in Kent, Washington. But I have listened at Fry's, using my Ety 6Ps, so the speakers were not a factor.

It sounds like ass.

If it were not for the broadcasters, and they lobby, the NAB, we would have Eureka 147. The broadcasters were protected. They didn't let those little AMs get a good signal, and the public was screwed. Now, it appears broadcasters are screwed too. People are listening to AM and FM less and less.

THEN we get this IBAC (In Band ADJACENT Channel) crap. It kills AM at night, and many stations turn it off at night because they are killing stations they own in other markets.

Broadcasters are not even behind it. They don't program the secondaries. They just set up a PC to be a low end iPod, and don't bother to promote it.

Only NPR stations do something, and often that isn't that much.

Of course, it really tears up AM, and it isn't good on FM either. I can no longer listen to several out of town FM stations I used to listen to, though it doesn't matter much because I have an iPod.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21128608 Wed, 17 Sep 2008 22:53:19 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21127333 Vchat20 : The CODEC in use also matters a great deal. Don't assume that ALL audio is going to be based around mp3 or ogg or some similar low-efficiency format.

Satellite Radio and HD Radio both share the same codec which, last I can recall, is AAC+SBR based and if you've actually LISTENED to the format or used it in some fashion, you'd realize the efficiency it carries.

With AAC+SBR using Parametric Stereo you can usually get FM quality audio at 32kbps and cd quality at 48kbps or higher with very little compression artifacts. The most you'll get is some tinnyness the lower you go on the bitrate (fm quality is possible as low as 20kbps, but that tinnyness is very noticable.)
--
I swear, some people should have pace-makers installed to free up the resources. Breathing and heart beat taxes their whole system, all of their brain cells wasted on life support.-two bit brains, and the second bit is wasted on parity! ~head_spaz]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21127333 Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:20:56 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21127293 anon : It shouldn't sound as good as a 128k MP3, because, AT BEST the data rate is 96k. When they turn on the HD2 or HD2 and HD3 the data rate can be (and generally is) 48k bps.

Now, imagine that -- would you rip music for your iPod at 48k? Of course it sounds like crap.

Add to that the fact that the power has to be low to avoid more interference than it already makes, so the coverage sucks. Then there is the "blending" which isn't blending at all, but just switching back to analog. This can be jarring if the broadcaster has the analog delay set JUST RIGHT, and most don't. In fact, some don't delay at all, so the listener keeps jumping forward and back in time 8 seconds!

Many car radios make you disable the HD every time you start the car too. It is just awful.

I won't buy a car with an HD radio because of this.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21127293 Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:14:44 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21112018 alphapointe :
said by batsona See Profile :

now, a cellphone is digital too, but its sampling rate is MUCH less (can someone post info about this rate..?)
The GSM codec is between 6 and 13kbps, I don't know about CDMA, but I'd imagine it's similar.

GSM has used a variety of voice codecs to squeeze 3.1 kHz audio into between 5.6 and 13 kbit/s. Originally, two codecs, named after the types of data channel they were allocated, were used, called Half Rate (5.6 kbit/s) and Full Rate (13 kbit/s). These used a system based upon linear predictive coding (LPC). In addition to being efficient with bitrates, these codecs also made it easier to identify more important parts of the audio, allowing the air interface layer to prioritize and better protect these parts of the signal.

GSM was further enhanced in 1997[11] with the Enhanced Full Rate (EFR) codec, a 12.2 kbit/s codec that uses a full rate channel. Finally, with the development of UMTS, EFR was refactored into a variable-rate codec called AMR-Narrowband, which is high quality and robust against interference when used on full rate channels, and less robust but still relatively high quality when used in good radio conditions on half-rate channels.
From the GSM wikipedia article..

Edited to clarify infomation...It pays to look stuff up before quoting it... :)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21112018 Mon, 15 Sep 2008 09:33:35 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21112011 batsona : It's all in the bitrate. CD-quality sound is 172KByte/sec. that sounds pretty good. now, a cellphone is digital too, but its sampling rate is MUCH less (can someone post info about this rate..?) this is why all cellphones sound like you're in a tin-can, 1,500 mi away...

also, does anyone know what the sampling-rate is for HD Radio? Is it close to, or exceeding 172KByte/sec?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21112011 Mon, 15 Sep 2008 09:30:35 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21098065 TheMG :
said by SmokChsr See Profile :

Not exactly true, keep in mind that FM signals are limited to 15 KHz audio frequency response. FM does have noise, and it has preemphsis. All of which do limit its capabilities.
Hmmm I guess that's true, maybe it was 'near CD quality', not 'better than'.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21098065 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 08:56:29 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21097138 SmokChsr :
said by TheMG See Profile :

If I'm not mistaking, a good strong FM signal can actually have better-than-CD quality in terms of distortion and noise levels. A good radio receiver (and antenna if external) is all you need. Yeah, of course the cheap radios you pick up at the dollar store are gonna suck.
Not exactly true, keep in mind that FM signals are limited to 15 KHz audio frequency response. FM does have noise, and it has preemphsis. All of which do limit its capabilities.

AM is limited by NRSC-2 which requires a roll off at 9.5 KHz. Add to that cheep narrow band receiver circuits. The typical AM receiver on the market can barely pass 3.5 KHz of audio on the AM band.

Now what I do want to pick on is the way they did the audio in the simulation. In the supposed terrestrial sections more than anything they rolled off the bass. EXCUSE ME??? the bass?? The Bass passes extremely well on analog. What can I say marketers, they are just like politicians. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21097138 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:09:35 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21096013 Dude111 :
quote:
Lol they make it sound like AM and FM radio have horrible frequency response. Actually their demonstration is more like comparing a CB radio to AM radio.
Yes they are clearly wanting people who dont know the first thing about radio to get reeled in by thier lies......]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21096013 Thu, 11 Sep 2008 19:51:28 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21095885 TheMG : Lol they make it sound like AM and FM radio have horrible frequency response. Actually their demonstration is more like comparing a CB radio to AM radio.

If I'm not mistaking, a good strong FM signal can actually have better-than-CD quality in terms of distortion and noise levels. A good radio receiver (and antenna if external) is all you need. Yeah, of course the cheap radios you pick up at the dollar store are gonna suck.

The reason why I don't listen to FM radio anymore? Too much crap, especially the commercials it's getting really terrible. Some stations have nearly 50% of their airtime used up just by commercials.

So I find myself a good high-bitrate and ad-free internet radio station and call it a day, but not because of the quality.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21095885 Thu, 11 Sep 2008 19:29:04 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21088266 Dude111 : Yes i know........

People were idiotic way back thinking DIGITAL is better..... DIGITAL IS GARBAGE!!

From cell phones to Ipods,they all sound like crap........(To me anyway) -- Analog sounds much better!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21088266 Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:38:22 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21086358 SmokChsr :
said by Dude111 See Profile :

DXing is getting harder from .53 to 1.7Mhz because of this IBOC crap.....
The Majority of the AM IBOC are getting turned off. (cause they aren't working).

Sound quality? you want sound quality? What kind of weirdo are you? it's all about being "DIGITAL!" it's new stuff so it must be better. So you've got digital artifact, compression, lost bits, it's digital it's better! remember that! :D ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21086358 Wed, 10 Sep 2008 05:00:32 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21067126 Dude111 :
quote:
I would have to say I was not impressed, CD quality my butt, it sounded about as good as a 128K MP3 to me...
Exactly right......

Digital cannot produce the same sound,ANALOG is the best/most pure sound...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21067126 Sat, 06 Sep 2008 08:02:42 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21066659 b10010011 : I listened to an HD radio at the Sony outlet in Seattle last weekend.

I would have to say I was not impressed, CD quality my butt, it sounded about as good as a 128K MP3 to me...

I guess for free it's "ok", but the radios are still too expensive and I don't think any HD signal reaches all the way up here.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21066659 Sat, 06 Sep 2008 02:00:56 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21049101 anon : IBOC has within it's protocols, the future ability to encrypt broadcasts, so it's quite possible that once analog is bannished, digital radio will become subscription-based.

The big problem with IBOC, politically, is that the high cost of the equipment places a nearly impossible barrier to entry for independant fledgling stations. Large conglomerates can afford the $50K exciter, a couple hundred grand for the combiners and new antennas, but the small stations that are barely breaking even will not afford it. It's another case of stacking the odds in favor of Big Broadcasting.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21049101 Wed, 03 Sep 2008 02:22:22 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21043071 Vchat20 : On the other side of the argument though, HD/Digital Radio in general brings the same advantages that the likes of the current OTA DTV does and more.

Take this scenario for example: You have a favorite station that still has REAL live on-air personalities and is in your genre of music as well. But it's just distant enough that you can only pull it in somewhat clear in the evening and either have it half clobbered with static during the day or just stomped on by another station from the opposite direction.

HD/Digital radio would help cure this up to a point. It only needs enough signal to differentiate between 0s and 1s and that's often much less than that needed to have a crisp static-free analog signal. In addition, HD radio has the added benefit of bitrate fallback if it can't keep up in a really low signal environment or a seamless transfer back to analog in a worst case scenario.

I do agree though that the whole iBOC system was horridly designed in favor of the license holders and the US would have been much better off to have used the DAB standard instead.
--
I swear, some people should have pace-makers installed to free up the resources. Breathing and heart beat taxes their whole system, all of their brain cells wasted on life support.-two bit brains, and the second bit is wasted on parity! ~head_spaz]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21043071 Tue, 02 Sep 2008 00:14:02 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21042940 alphapointe :
said by Thane_Bitter See Profile :

I wonder why the FCC opted for iBiquity's HD system over the DAB standard.
Probably because iBiquity lined some pockets at the FCC...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21042940 Mon, 01 Sep 2008 23:40:42 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21042894 Thane_Bitter :
said by Jahntassa See Profile :

HD Radio is not a subscription service. Satellite however, is. HD Radio is just the cost of the receiver (plus the cost of advertising you have to listen to on the 'side' digital stations.)
Opps, yes your right Jahntassa, HD radio doesn't carry a consumer subscription cost, my mistake. :o

I wonder why the FCC opted for iBiquity's HD system over the DAB standard.
--
...A bitter ray of sunshine]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21042894 Mon, 01 Sep 2008 23:31:06 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21042627 Jahntassa :
said by Thane_Bitter See Profile :

It is not about quality (though that is how they are marketing it - most people would assume HD stands for High Definition rather then a trademark), it is about making more money by selling monthly access subscriptions (and licensing the technology as well).
As you're in Canada i'll correct you.

HD Radio is not a subscription service. Satellite however, is. HD Radio is just the cost of the receiver (plus the cost of advertising you have to listen to on the 'side' digital stations.)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21042627 Mon, 01 Sep 2008 22:30:41 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21042474 anon : After enjoying commercial-free music on XM for so many years now, I can't believe believe AM/FM is still around.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21042474 Mon, 01 Sep 2008 21:56:06 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21039192 Dude111 : Yes but that isnt worth what we are losing in my opinion (GOOD SOUND,etc)

DXing is getting harder from .53 to 1.7Mhz because of this IBOC crap.....]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21039192 Mon, 01 Sep 2008 07:08:55 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21039078 IllIlIlllIll : the only thing i see coming out of this that makes it worthwhile is the sub-channels for each station.
that means more stations to choose from.
--
S.C.P.D. Live Scanner Feed
N.C.P.D. Live Scanner Feed]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21039078 Mon, 01 Sep 2008 03:56:02 EDT Re: Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21037220 Thane_Bitter : I am familiar with DAB, the digital radio equivalent over in Europe, but was not even aware digital radio was available over here other then satellite (Sirus/XM).
EDIT - well shucks, looks like some places in North America do broadcast in DAB - but there are no HD radio stations in Canada, only the US).

It is not about quality (though that is how they are marketing it - most people would assume HD stands for High Definition rather then a trademark), it is about making more money by selling monthly access subscriptions (and licensing the technology as well).
The sad thing is eventually this will knock analogue off the air. :(

"The medium is the message" Marshall McLuhan
--
...A bitter ray of sunshine]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21037220 Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:08:19 EDT Take the simulated HD radio test drive? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21035290 Dude111 : Talk about dirty rotten lies. Listen to their simulated comparisons of Am/Fm and their supposed HD sound.

My 10 year old ANALOG RADIO sounds 1000% better than this crap!!

They are just trying to push this garbage and my opinion is: GET IT OFF OUR ANALOG BANDS!!!

I tell ya something is wrong when they have to degrade the sound of Am/Fm on purpose to make their system sound better. My GE superradio sounds just as good if not better! (IBOC is pure crap)

»www.hdradio.com/how_does_hd_digi···ound.php]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21035290 Sun, 31 Aug 2008 10:51:26 EDT