-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
IBOC or DAB UK
- Thread starter vg4or
- Start date
Found the answer
<a href="http://beradio.com/transmission/radio_advanced_dab/">
http://beradio.com/transmission/radio_advanced_dab/</a>
> WHY is IBOC the standard and in the UK it's DAB?
> I don't ever see complaints in the UK about DAB like we see
> here with IBOC.
> I am sure the dead carriers i hear even from Portland are
> because of IBOC.
>
<a href="http://beradio.com/transmission/radio_advanced_dab/">
http://beradio.com/transmission/radio_advanced_dab/</a>
> WHY is IBOC the standard and in the UK it's DAB?
> I don't ever see complaints in the UK about DAB like we see
> here with IBOC.
> I am sure the dead carriers i hear even from Portland are
> because of IBOC.
>
> WHY is IBOC the standard and in the UK it's DAB?
There's really not a worldwide standard with respect to which bands will be the new home for radio, though apparently all other nations will be using Eureka. For example, France and Canada will be using the L-band while the UK and most other nations will be using frequencies in the 200+ mHz areas. One of the reasons for IBOC in the US is that spectrum is less plentiful. The L-band, for example, is used by the US military. Another reason is the vast areas stations in the US have to cover. The L-band would likely not work here when you consider it takes multiple pods (transmitters; think 5 or 6 booster signals for every radio station) for a station to cover a big city. Last I heard, Toronto and other large cities still had plenty of nulls despite multiple transmitters. 70 mile coverage radii just don't happen in the L-band. Generally, the higher the frequency, the poorer the range per kilowatt. In most other countries, AM and FM stations don't cover nearly the same area. So, they can afford to go to a higher frequency for the same or similar coverage without it being cost prohibitive. And, yes, there are definitely some other less intelligent reasons for IBOC, like the fear of a spectrum auction.
> I don't ever see complaints in the UK about DAB like we see
> here with IBOC.
Probably at least partly because you don't live in the UK. Last I heard, support for DAB in the UK (and most other countries) was pretty tepid with DAB receivers collecting dust on retail shelves. Many of them also have 40-60 year plans to convert to the new system. That means this 30-something will be retired, or maybe even dead, before DAB becomes the only way to listen to these radio stations. The fact that US broadcasters are trying to convert to digital on the exact same signal they're using for analog is ripe for trouble and complaints. Of course, if you have an IBOC receiver, you don't hear all the hiss and interference. However, my radio sounds fine, and I don't feel like spending a ton just for digital. I'm certainly not alone on that one.
There's really not a worldwide standard with respect to which bands will be the new home for radio, though apparently all other nations will be using Eureka. For example, France and Canada will be using the L-band while the UK and most other nations will be using frequencies in the 200+ mHz areas. One of the reasons for IBOC in the US is that spectrum is less plentiful. The L-band, for example, is used by the US military. Another reason is the vast areas stations in the US have to cover. The L-band would likely not work here when you consider it takes multiple pods (transmitters; think 5 or 6 booster signals for every radio station) for a station to cover a big city. Last I heard, Toronto and other large cities still had plenty of nulls despite multiple transmitters. 70 mile coverage radii just don't happen in the L-band. Generally, the higher the frequency, the poorer the range per kilowatt. In most other countries, AM and FM stations don't cover nearly the same area. So, they can afford to go to a higher frequency for the same or similar coverage without it being cost prohibitive. And, yes, there are definitely some other less intelligent reasons for IBOC, like the fear of a spectrum auction.
> I don't ever see complaints in the UK about DAB like we see
> here with IBOC.
Probably at least partly because you don't live in the UK. Last I heard, support for DAB in the UK (and most other countries) was pretty tepid with DAB receivers collecting dust on retail shelves. Many of them also have 40-60 year plans to convert to the new system. That means this 30-something will be retired, or maybe even dead, before DAB becomes the only way to listen to these radio stations. The fact that US broadcasters are trying to convert to digital on the exact same signal they're using for analog is ripe for trouble and complaints. Of course, if you have an IBOC receiver, you don't hear all the hiss and interference. However, my radio sounds fine, and I don't feel like spending a ton just for digital. I'm certainly not alone on that one.
R
Rocco
Guest
> However, my radio sounds fine, and I don't feel like
> spending a ton just for digital. I'm certainly not alone on
> that one.
One thing, too, is that the digital signal has quite a limited range. As you said, the analog signal sounds fine until you get beyond a certain distance from the transmitter and analog noise starts becoming an issue. The silly thing about IBOC is that this is the location where the digital signal could really be a decided advantage, but at this distance from the tower, the digital signal isn't even there! Closer to the tower, where the analog signal is just fine, the digital signal is already artifact-prone, and it sounds kind of like one of those garbled cellphone calls. It's only when you're fairly close to the tower that the digital signal is clean.
> spending a ton just for digital. I'm certainly not alone on
> that one.
One thing, too, is that the digital signal has quite a limited range. As you said, the analog signal sounds fine until you get beyond a certain distance from the transmitter and analog noise starts becoming an issue. The silly thing about IBOC is that this is the location where the digital signal could really be a decided advantage, but at this distance from the tower, the digital signal isn't even there! Closer to the tower, where the analog signal is just fine, the digital signal is already artifact-prone, and it sounds kind of like one of those garbled cellphone calls. It's only when you're fairly close to the tower that the digital signal is clean.
> Probably at least partly because you don't live in the UK.
> Last I heard, support for DAB in the UK (and most other
> countries) was pretty tepid with DAB receivers collecting
> dust on retail shelves.
I was in Dixons (the main high street electrical store over here in the UK) yesterday. They had a selection of about 20 different DAB receivers. They were no longer even selling stand-alone analogue receivers. This wasn't in London, but in Oxford - a city where none of the local stations are even on DAB yet, only the national services.
This could, of course, have something to do with high cost DAB receivers making better profits per sale than low cost FM receivers. And to do with Dixons having a near-total monopoly in most places, so consumers can't simply go next door and see that FM radios are in reality still available and much cheaper. But they must be selling.
> Many of them also have 40-60 year
> plans to convert to the new system. That means this
> 30-something will be retired, or maybe even dead, before DAB
> becomes the only way to listen to these radio stations.
The EU wants to phase out analogue radio by 2020 or something. To be blunt, it ain't going to happen. In the UK a date before that is being bandied about - but that ain't going to happen either for various reasons. For example certain stations will never be able to switch for either technical or financial reasons.
> Last I heard, support for DAB in the UK (and most other
> countries) was pretty tepid with DAB receivers collecting
> dust on retail shelves.
I was in Dixons (the main high street electrical store over here in the UK) yesterday. They had a selection of about 20 different DAB receivers. They were no longer even selling stand-alone analogue receivers. This wasn't in London, but in Oxford - a city where none of the local stations are even on DAB yet, only the national services.
This could, of course, have something to do with high cost DAB receivers making better profits per sale than low cost FM receivers. And to do with Dixons having a near-total monopoly in most places, so consumers can't simply go next door and see that FM radios are in reality still available and much cheaper. But they must be selling.
> Many of them also have 40-60 year
> plans to convert to the new system. That means this
> 30-something will be retired, or maybe even dead, before DAB
> becomes the only way to listen to these radio stations.
The EU wants to phase out analogue radio by 2020 or something. To be blunt, it ain't going to happen. In the UK a date before that is being bandied about - but that ain't going to happen either for various reasons. For example certain stations will never be able to switch for either technical or financial reasons.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.