Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
I totally agree with Rick as I monitored both KRKO and KKXA and both caused a lot more sideband hash in full HD, even at this distance. I can detect KRKO's hybrid hash nightly on 1370 KAST, a local at 5.3 miles. It is not an issue, but it sure can be noticed in the background. In total HD, the hash was noticeably noisier. I am sure for local listeners a few miles farther from KAST, the noise would have had them tune out of KAST. I just do not see IBOC working on AM in any regard. If the dial was go all HD, then most distant reception would be history, let alone DX. Patrick Martin Seaside OR KGED QSL Manager > From: rick...@shellworld.net > To: irca@hard-core-dx.com > Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 15:24:40 -0700 > Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > > Russ, > At least in the Seattle area all-HD tests, the interference was much > greater. > One would expect the opposite, since the hash would be in the center of the > main frequency, but the hash was maybe two or three times more intense than > in the hybrid mode. > Thus, 1360 in Tacoma was mixed with noticeable HD hash during the KRKO > tests, although none is heard normally. > The area's 1400 is a much weaker station, and it stood no chance against the > HD onslaught. > Incidentally, I'm not local to KRKO. It's a strong signal which can be heard > in HD during the day, but not a full-quieting local. > Same for 1520, which is in Snohomish County (I'm in King County.) > Based on the tests I've heard, the hash from a completely local HD station > would be so noisy in analog that it could persuade analog AM listeners to > turn it off rather than even look around for other stations on the dial. > If the AM band were a mix of HD-only and analog signals, it would be almost > like having a bunch of vacuum cleaners running, each taking up a total of > 60kHz. > I think that's the most graphic way I can explain what it sounded like in > analog. > But even in an all-HD situation, power would likely need to drop > considerably to keep HD-only stations from interfering with each other. > I can't see how all-HD signals would work compatibly in either a mixed or > total HD mode. > It was that bad. > -- > Rick > > -Original Message- > From: IRCA [mailto:irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com] On Behalf Of Russ Edmunds > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 1:51 PM > To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > <irca@hard-core-dx.com> > Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > > Bottom line, this is, after all, the NAB, and their mantra is "More, more > more stations". I would expect their rsults to understate the potential > issues. > > That said, a straight up digital signal would occupy the center of the main > channel - where today's analog signal is. And the digital signal should > occupy less bandwidth by itself and a typical analog signal. The IBOC hybrid > mode has the analog signal at center and the two hybrid digital signals on > either side. Thus the combined IBOC signal occupies substantially more > bandwidth than a single digital signal. That's why Chuck said ( or one > reason why ) it wasn't comparable. But that also doesn't predict much else. > > Russ Edmunds > 15 mi NW Phila > Grid FN20id > <wb2...@gmail.com> > > AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip > FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder; Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun > PL-310 ( 2); modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15'; Grundig G8 w/whip; > modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Nick Hall-Patch <n...@ieee.org> wrote: > > > It's quite easy to correlate Chuck. Just add ignorance and stir. I > > don't believe they actually said anything much about the digital > > signal, so assumption of all digital IBOC can reasonably be added to > > that mix. (other details about demodulation of the analog signal are > > also missing) > > > > Audio examples would be nice, and might help to convince the doubters.. > > > > > > http://www.radiomagonline.com/deep-dig/0005/broadcast-engineering-conf > > erence-radio-technology-forum-sessions/37600 > > offers descriptions of the conference sessions, but I haven't been > > able to quickly track down any more detailed results than what Dennis > linked to. > > > > http://diymedia.net/old/stuff/AM_IBOC_Test.pdf has a nice graphic on > > the first page which I assume is what Chuck is alluding to in terms of the > > difference between present IBOC and all-digital IBOC. Is that the case > > Chuck? If so, perhaps you could suggest a listening test that could > > be done with today's systems (the
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
The lack of success of HD on both AM and FM should be a lesson that not only do people need a reason to switch, it needs to be a strong reason. It is true that for both, the capable receivers were neither readily available nor reasonably priced. As to the coverage issues, there's a lesson to be learned from the TV conversion. In most cases, the digital coverage area was less than the analog coverage area, and the nature of the digital signals - all or nothing - is a contributing factor to that. I see nothing to suggest that digital on either AM or FM would improve reception in large concrete and steel buildings in the cities. Certainly that isn't the case with IBOC. The past 30 or so years however have demonstrated that neither the industry leaders nor the FCC are very good at absorbing the lessons of their past actions. Russ Edmunds 15 mi NW Phila Grid FN20id <wb2...@gmail.com> AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder; Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun PL-310 ( 2); modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15'; Grundig G8 w/whip; modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Rick Lewis <rick...@shellworld.net> wrote: > Chuck, > I'm convinced that any incomplete transition to digital would be so > chaotic, > and the results so unacceptable for listeners, that it would be the last > nail in the coffin for AM. > First people would need a reason to convert to HD. > The audio sounds so artificial that it's fatiguing. > The hash is so overpowering that the interference levels would be far > greater than anything our electronic landscape creates. > Fortunately, it would take less of a signal for an HD station to lock, but > non-HD stations would suffer greater interference. > Unfortunately, neither KRKO nor the 1520 did their HD during the originally > scheduled nighttime hours, so I never found out if their weaker signals > locked into HD here. I would have been truly amazed if 1520's HD could have > overcome the interference from Oregon (the Saturday reschedule would have > been great, since Lake Oswego was weak, but equipment problems prevented > the > night test.) > I suspect KRKO would have succeeded at night. > Incidentally, the promos talked about how clear the stereo was going to be, > etc., but the program sources for both stations was all mono, yes, even the > music on 1520. > And quite compressed, too. > -- > Rick > > -Original Message- > From: IRCA [mailto:irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com] On Behalf Of Chuck > Hutton > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 9:55 AM > To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > <irca@hard-core-dx.com> > Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > > You can bet on that, as it would be impossible for each and every station > to > switch over at the same time. > If the FCC mandates a switch to all digital, there would need to be a long > time period for that to occur to allow transmission equipment equipment to > be available, stations to buy the equipment as money is available, > engineers > to install and test the system, all sorts of sonsumer receivers to become > available and for the public to buy receivers. > If the FCC didn't mandate a switch and left it to market forces, expect the > transition to never be complete. > > Chuck > > From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Russ Edmunds > <wb2...@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 10:44 AM > To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > > If the intent were for all stations to go digital, then such a test would > be > meaningless; this suggests therefore that there is contemplation of mixing > all digital with analog all within the AM band ?? > > Russ Edmunds > 15 mi NW Phila > Grid FN20id > <wb2...@gmail.com> > > AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip > FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder; Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun > PL-310 ( 2); modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15'; Grundig G8 w/whip; > modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Chuck Hutton <charle...@msn.com> wrote: > > > Yes, desired to undesired is often-used nomenclature in the > > communications world. > > > > I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. > > What you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear with > > all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are vastly > > different. > > > > Chuck > > > > From: IRCA <irca-boun...@ha
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
Russ, At least in the Seattle area all-HD tests, the interference was much greater. One would expect the opposite, since the hash would be in the center of the main frequency, but the hash was maybe two or three times more intense than in the hybrid mode. Thus, 1360 in Tacoma was mixed with noticeable HD hash during the KRKO tests, although none is heard normally. The area's 1400 is a much weaker station, and it stood no chance against the HD onslaught. Incidentally, I'm not local to KRKO. It's a strong signal which can be heard in HD during the day, but not a full-quieting local. Same for 1520, which is in Snohomish County (I'm in King County.) Based on the tests I've heard, the hash from a completely local HD station would be so noisy in analog that it could persuade analog AM listeners to turn it off rather than even look around for other stations on the dial. If the AM band were a mix of HD-only and analog signals, it would be almost like having a bunch of vacuum cleaners running, each taking up a total of 60kHz. I think that's the most graphic way I can explain what it sounded like in analog. But even in an all-HD situation, power would likely need to drop considerably to keep HD-only stations from interfering with each other. I can't see how all-HD signals would work compatibly in either a mixed or total HD mode. It was that bad. -- Rick -Original Message- From: IRCA [mailto:irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com] On Behalf Of Russ Edmunds Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 1:51 PM To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America <irca@hard-core-dx.com> Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled Bottom line, this is, after all, the NAB, and their mantra is "More, more more stations". I would expect their rsults to understate the potential issues. That said, a straight up digital signal would occupy the center of the main channel - where today's analog signal is. And the digital signal should occupy less bandwidth by itself and a typical analog signal. The IBOC hybrid mode has the analog signal at center and the two hybrid digital signals on either side. Thus the combined IBOC signal occupies substantially more bandwidth than a single digital signal. That's why Chuck said ( or one reason why ) it wasn't comparable. But that also doesn't predict much else. Russ Edmunds 15 mi NW Phila Grid FN20id <wb2...@gmail.com> AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder; Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun PL-310 ( 2); modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15'; Grundig G8 w/whip; modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Nick Hall-Patch <n...@ieee.org> wrote: > It's quite easy to correlate Chuck. Just add ignorance and stir. I > don't believe they actually said anything much about the digital > signal, so assumption of all digital IBOC can reasonably be added to > that mix. (other details about demodulation of the analog signal are > also missing) > > Audio examples would be nice, and might help to convince the doubters. > > > http://www.radiomagonline.com/deep-dig/0005/broadcast-engineering-conf > erence-radio-technology-forum-sessions/37600 > offers descriptions of the conference sessions, but I haven't been > able to quickly track down any more detailed results than what Dennis linked to. > > http://diymedia.net/old/stuff/AM_IBOC_Test.pdf has a nice graphic on > the first page which I assume is what Chuck is alluding to in terms of the > difference between present IBOC and all-digital IBOC. Is that the case > Chuck? If so, perhaps you could suggest a listening test that could > be done with today's systems (thereby saving me the trouble of doing it > incorrectly)? Those secondary OFDM subcarriers already sound pretty nasty > on KRKO's signal this morning, and they would be stronger in the > digital only version. > > best wishes, > > Nick > > > > > > > At 05:03 22-04-16, you wrote: > >> ... >> >> I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. >> What you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear >> with all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are >> vastly different. >> >> Chuck >> >> From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick >> Hall-Patch < n...@ieee.org> >> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM >> To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America >> Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results >> Unveiled >> >> I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / >> undesired"? >> >> I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just >
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
Chuck, I'm convinced that any incomplete transition to digital would be so chaotic, and the results so unacceptable for listeners, that it would be the last nail in the coffin for AM. First people would need a reason to convert to HD. The audio sounds so artificial that it's fatiguing. The hash is so overpowering that the interference levels would be far greater than anything our electronic landscape creates. Fortunately, it would take less of a signal for an HD station to lock, but non-HD stations would suffer greater interference. Unfortunately, neither KRKO nor the 1520 did their HD during the originally scheduled nighttime hours, so I never found out if their weaker signals locked into HD here. I would have been truly amazed if 1520's HD could have overcome the interference from Oregon (the Saturday reschedule would have been great, since Lake Oswego was weak, but equipment problems prevented the night test.) I suspect KRKO would have succeeded at night. Incidentally, the promos talked about how clear the stereo was going to be, etc., but the program sources for both stations was all mono, yes, even the music on 1520. And quite compressed, too. -- Rick -Original Message- From: IRCA [mailto:irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hutton Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 9:55 AM To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America <irca@hard-core-dx.com> Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled You can bet on that, as it would be impossible for each and every station to switch over at the same time. If the FCC mandates a switch to all digital, there would need to be a long time period for that to occur to allow transmission equipment equipment to be available, stations to buy the equipment as money is available, engineers to install and test the system, all sorts of sonsumer receivers to become available and for the public to buy receivers. If the FCC didn't mandate a switch and left it to market forces, expect the transition to never be complete. Chuck From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Russ Edmunds <wb2...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 10:44 AM To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled If the intent were for all stations to go digital, then such a test would be meaningless; this suggests therefore that there is contemplation of mixing all digital with analog all within the AM band ?? Russ Edmunds 15 mi NW Phila Grid FN20id <wb2...@gmail.com> AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder; Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun PL-310 ( 2); modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15'; Grundig G8 w/whip; modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Chuck Hutton <charle...@msn.com> wrote: > Yes, desired to undesired is often-used nomenclature in the > communications world. > > I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. > What you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear with > all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are vastly > different. > > Chuck > > From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick > Hall-Patch < n...@ieee.org> > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM > To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results > Unveiled > > I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / undesired"? > > I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just > tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this > morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB > down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking > interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less > than ~15dB above the IBOC level. > > best wishes, > > Nick > > > > > At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: > > > http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-test-r > esults-unveiled/278670 > > > >Sent from my iPad > >___ > >IRCA mailing list > >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, > >September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. > >Registration info: > >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > > > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the > >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of > >the IRCA, its editors, publishi
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
I would anticipate that the larger potential interference problems will be when stations on the same channel are some digital and some analog, but the interference, I strongly suspect would be from the analog interfering with the digital due to the wider bandwidth and/or propagation. Russ Edmunds 15 mi NW Phila Grid FN20id <wb2...@gmail.com> AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder; Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun PL-310 ( 2); modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15'; Grundig G8 w/whip; modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Chuck Hutton <charle...@msn.com> wrote: > You can bet on that, as it would be impossible for each and every station > to switch over at the same time. > If the FCC mandates a switch to all digital, there would need to be a long > time period for that to occur to allow transmission equipment equipment to > be available, stations to buy the equipment as money is available, > engineers to install and test the system, all sorts of sonsumer receivers > to become available and for the public to buy receivers. > If the FCC didn't mandate a switch and left it to market forces, expect > the transition to never be complete. > > Chuck > > From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Russ Edmunds < > wb2...@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 10:44 AM > To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > > If the intent were for all stations to go digital, then such a test would > be meaningless; this suggests therefore that there is contemplation of > mixing all digital with analog all within the AM band ?? > > Russ Edmunds > 15 mi NW Phila > Grid FN20id > <wb2...@gmail.com> > > AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip > FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder; > Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun PL-310 ( 2); > modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15'; > Grundig G8 w/whip; modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Chuck Hutton <charle...@msn.com> wrote: > > > Yes, desired to undesired is often-used nomenclature in the > communications > > world. > > > > I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. What > > you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear > > with all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are vastly > > different. > > > > Chuck > > > > From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick Hall-Patch > < > > n...@ieee.org> > > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM > > To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > > Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > > > > I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / > undesired"? > > > > I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just > > tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this > > morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB > > down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking > > interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less > > than ~15dB above the IBOC level. > > > > best wishes, > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > > At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: > > > > > > http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-test-results-unveiled/278670 > > > > > >Sent from my iPad > > >___ > > >IRCA mailing list > > >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > > >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > > > > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention > > >Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. > > >Registration info: > > >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > > > > > > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the > > >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of > > >the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > > > > > >For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > > > > > >To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > > > > > ___ > > IRCA mailing list > > IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > > > Be
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
I think the initial reference to KRKO was their all-digital test some time back. Russ Edmunds 15 mi NW Phila Grid FN20id <wb2...@gmail.com> AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder; Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun PL-310 ( 2); modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15'; Grundig G8 w/whip; modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Chuck Hutton <charle...@msn.com> wrote: > Nick: > > All digital IBOC was specified and documented by iBiquity years ago, so > that's why you didn't see the basics repeated. Yes, the graphic at diymedia > shows the differences I referred to. > > As for a test, I'm not sure what you want to test. The Radio Magazine > article was about ch-channel testing (IBOC aninterference to analog on the > same channel) bit you are recounting problems with KRKO 1380 spilling onto > adjacent channel KAST 1370. In either case, all you need to form a real > world opinion are your ears. > > Chuck > > From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick Hall-Patch < > n...@ieee.org> > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:15 PM > To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > > It's quite easy to correlate Chuck. Just add ignorance and stir. I > don't believe they actually said anything much about the digital > signal, so assumption of all digital IBOC can reasonably be added to > that mix. (other details about demodulation of the analog signal are > also missing) > > Audio examples would be nice, and might help to convince the doubters. > > > http://www.radiomagonline.com/deep-dig/0005/broadcast-engineering-conference-radio-technology-forum-sessions/37600 > offers descriptions of the conference sessions, but I haven't been > able to quickly track down any more detailed results than what Dennis > linked to. > > http://diymedia.net/old/stuff/AM_IBOC_Test.pdf has a nice graphic on > the first page which I assume is what Chuck is alluding to in terms > of the difference between present IBOC and all-digital IBOC. Is > that the case Chuck? If so, perhaps you could suggest a listening > test that could be done with today's systems (thereby saving me the > trouble of doing it incorrectly)? Those secondary OFDM subcarriers > already sound pretty nasty on KRKO's signal this morning, and they > would be stronger in the digital only version. > > best wishes, > > Nick > > > > > > > At 05:03 22-04-16, you wrote: > >... > > > >I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. > >What you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear > >with all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are > >vastly different. > > > >Chuck > >____________________ > >From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick > >Hall-Patch <n...@ieee.org> > >Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM > >To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > >Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > > > >I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / > undesired"? > > > >I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just > >tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this > >morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB > >down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking > >interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less > >than ~15dB above the IBOC level. > > > >best wishes, > > > >Nick > > > > > > > > > >At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: > > >http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-tes > > t-results-unveiled/278670 > > > > > >Sent from my iPad > > >___ > > >IRCA mailing list > > >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > > >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > > > > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention > > >Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. > > >Registration info: > > >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > > > > > > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the > > >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of > > >the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > > > > > >For more infor
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
Bottom line, this is, after all, the NAB, and their mantra is "More, more more stations". I would expect their rsults to understate the potential issues. That said, a straight up digital signal would occupy the center of the main channel - where today's analog signal is. And the digital signal should occupy less bandwidth by itself and a typical analog signal. The IBOC hybrid mode has the analog signal at center and the two hybrid digital signals on either side. Thus the combined IBOC signal occupies substantially more bandwidth than a single digital signal. That's why Chuck said ( or one reason why ) it wasn't comparable. But that also doesn't predict much else. Russ Edmunds 15 mi NW Phila Grid FN20id <wb2...@gmail.com> AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder; Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun PL-310 ( 2); modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15'; Grundig G8 w/whip; modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Nick Hall-Patch <n...@ieee.org> wrote: > It's quite easy to correlate Chuck. Just add ignorance and stir. I don't > believe they actually said anything much about the digital signal, so > assumption of all digital IBOC can reasonably be added to that mix. (other > details about demodulation of the analog signal are also missing) > > Audio examples would be nice, and might help to convince the doubters. > > > http://www.radiomagonline.com/deep-dig/0005/broadcast-engineering-conference-radio-technology-forum-sessions/37600 > offers descriptions of the conference sessions, but I haven't been able to > quickly track down any more detailed results than what Dennis linked to. > > http://diymedia.net/old/stuff/AM_IBOC_Test.pdf has a nice graphic on the > first page which I assume is what Chuck is alluding to in terms of the > difference between present IBOC and all-digital IBOC. Is that the case > Chuck? If so, perhaps you could suggest a listening test that could be > done with today's systems (thereby saving me the trouble of doing it > incorrectly)? Those secondary OFDM subcarriers already sound pretty nasty > on KRKO's signal this morning, and they would be stronger in the digital > only version. > > best wishes, > > Nick > > > > > > > At 05:03 22-04-16, you wrote: > >> ... >> >> I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. What >> you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear >> with all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are vastly >> different. >> >> Chuck >> >> From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick Hall-Patch < >> n...@ieee.org> >> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM >> To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America >> Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled >> >> I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / >> undesired"? >> >> I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just >> tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this >> morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB >> down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking >> interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less >> than ~15dB above the IBOC level. >> >> best wishes, >> >> Nick >> >> >> >> >> At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: >> >http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-tes >> t-results-unveiled/278670 >> > >> >Sent from my iPad >> >___ >> >IRCA mailing list >> >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com >> >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca >> > >> >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention >> >Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. >> >Registration info: >> >http://www.nrcdxas.org >> > >> > >> >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the >> >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of >> >the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers >> > >> >For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org >> > >> >To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com >> >> >> ___ >> IRCA mailing list >> IRCA@hard-core-dx.com >> http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca >> >> Be sure to register now for the Joint DX C
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
Message received. Thanks Chuck... best wishes, Nick At 16:29 22-04-16, you wrote: Nick: All digital IBOC was specified and documented by iBiquity years ago, so that's why you didn't see the basics repeated. Yes, the graphic at diymedia shows the differences I referred to. As for a test, I'm not sure what you want to test. The Radio Magazine article was about ch-channel testing (IBOC aninterference to analog on the same channel) bit you are recounting problems with KRKO 1380 spilling onto adjacent channel KAST 1370. In either case, all you need to form a real world opinion are your ears. Chuck From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick Hall-Patch <n...@ieee.org> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:15 PM To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled It's quite easy to correlate Chuck. Just add ignorance and stir. I don't believe they actually said anything much about the digital signal, so assumption of all digital IBOC can reasonably be added to that mix. (other details about demodulation of the analog signal are also missing) Audio examples would be nice, and might help to convince the doubters. http://www.radiomagonline.com/deep-dig/0005/broadcast-engineering-conference-radio-technology-forum-sessions/37600 offers descriptions of the conference sessions, but I haven't been able to quickly track down any more detailed results than what Dennis linked to. http://diymedia.net/old/stuff/AM_IBOC_Test.pdf has a nice graphic on the first page which I assume is what Chuck is alluding to in terms of the difference between present IBOC and all-digital IBOC. Is that the case Chuck? If so, perhaps you could suggest a listening test that could be done with today's systems (thereby saving me the trouble of doing it incorrectly)? Those secondary OFDM subcarriers already sound pretty nasty on KRKO's signal this morning, and they would be stronger in the digital only version. best wishes, Nick At 05:03 22-04-16, you wrote: >... > >I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. >What you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear >with all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are >vastly different. > >Chuck > >From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick >Hall-Patch <n...@ieee.org> >Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM >To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America >Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > >I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / undesired"? > >I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just >tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this >morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB >down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking >interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less >than ~15dB above the IBOC level. > >best wishes, > >Nick > > > > >At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: > >http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-tes > t-results-unveiled/278670 > > > >Sent from my iPad > >___ > >IRCA mailing list > >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention > >Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. > >Registration info: > >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > > > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the > >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of > >the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > > > >For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > > > >To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > >___ >IRCA mailing list >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention >Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. >Registration info: >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of >the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > >For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > >To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com > >___ >IRCA mailing list >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com >http://
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
You can bet on that, as it would be impossible for each and every station to switch over at the same time. If the FCC mandates a switch to all digital, there would need to be a long time period for that to occur to allow transmission equipment equipment to be available, stations to buy the equipment as money is available, engineers to install and test the system, all sorts of sonsumer receivers to become available and for the public to buy receivers. If the FCC didn't mandate a switch and left it to market forces, expect the transition to never be complete. Chuck From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Russ Edmunds <wb2...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 10:44 AM To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled If the intent were for all stations to go digital, then such a test would be meaningless; this suggests therefore that there is contemplation of mixing all digital with analog all within the AM band ?? Russ Edmunds 15 mi NW Phila Grid FN20id <wb2...@gmail.com> AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder; Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun PL-310 ( 2); modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15'; Grundig G8 w/whip; modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Chuck Hutton <charle...@msn.com> wrote: > Yes, desired to undesired is often-used nomenclature in the communications > world. > > I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. What > you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear > with all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are vastly > different. > > Chuck > > From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick Hall-Patch < > n...@ieee.org> > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM > To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > > I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / undesired"? > > I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just > tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this > morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB > down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking > interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less > than ~15dB above the IBOC level. > > best wishes, > > Nick > > > > > At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: > > > http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-test-results-unveiled/278670 > > > >Sent from my iPad > >___ > >IRCA mailing list > >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention > >Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. > >Registration info: > >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > > > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the > >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of > >the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > > > >For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > > > >To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > > ___ > IRCA mailing list > IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention > Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. > Registration info: > http://www.nrcdxas.org > > > Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the > original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the > IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > > For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > > To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > ___ > IRCA mailing list > IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention > Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. > Registration info: > http://www.nrcdxas.org > > > Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the > original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the > IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > > For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > > To Post a message: irca@hard-core-d
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
Nick: All digital IBOC was specified and documented by iBiquity years ago, so that's why you didn't see the basics repeated. Yes, the graphic at diymedia shows the differences I referred to. As for a test, I'm not sure what you want to test. The Radio Magazine article was about ch-channel testing (IBOC aninterference to analog on the same channel) bit you are recounting problems with KRKO 1380 spilling onto adjacent channel KAST 1370. In either case, all you need to form a real world opinion are your ears. Chuck From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick Hall-Patch <n...@ieee.org> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:15 PM To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled It's quite easy to correlate Chuck. Just add ignorance and stir. I don't believe they actually said anything much about the digital signal, so assumption of all digital IBOC can reasonably be added to that mix. (other details about demodulation of the analog signal are also missing) Audio examples would be nice, and might help to convince the doubters. http://www.radiomagonline.com/deep-dig/0005/broadcast-engineering-conference-radio-technology-forum-sessions/37600 offers descriptions of the conference sessions, but I haven't been able to quickly track down any more detailed results than what Dennis linked to. http://diymedia.net/old/stuff/AM_IBOC_Test.pdf has a nice graphic on the first page which I assume is what Chuck is alluding to in terms of the difference between present IBOC and all-digital IBOC. Is that the case Chuck? If so, perhaps you could suggest a listening test that could be done with today's systems (thereby saving me the trouble of doing it incorrectly)? Those secondary OFDM subcarriers already sound pretty nasty on KRKO's signal this morning, and they would be stronger in the digital only version. best wishes, Nick At 05:03 22-04-16, you wrote: >... > >I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. >What you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear >with all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are >vastly different. > >Chuck > >From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick >Hall-Patch <n...@ieee.org> >Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM >To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America >Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > >I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / undesired"? > >I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just >tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this >morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB >down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking >interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less >than ~15dB above the IBOC level. > >best wishes, > >Nick > > > > >At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: > >http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-tes > t-results-unveiled/278670 > > > >Sent from my iPad > >___ > >IRCA mailing list > >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention > >Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. > >Registration info: > >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > > > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the > >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of > >the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > > > >For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > > > >To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > >___ >IRCA mailing list >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention >Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. >Registration info: >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of >the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > >For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > >To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com > >___ >IRCA mailing list >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > >Be sure to register now for the J
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
It's quite easy to correlate Chuck. Just add ignorance and stir. I don't believe they actually said anything much about the digital signal, so assumption of all digital IBOC can reasonably be added to that mix. (other details about demodulation of the analog signal are also missing) Audio examples would be nice, and might help to convince the doubters. http://www.radiomagonline.com/deep-dig/0005/broadcast-engineering-conference-radio-technology-forum-sessions/37600 offers descriptions of the conference sessions, but I haven't been able to quickly track down any more detailed results than what Dennis linked to. http://diymedia.net/old/stuff/AM_IBOC_Test.pdf has a nice graphic on the first page which I assume is what Chuck is alluding to in terms of the difference between present IBOC and all-digital IBOC. Is that the case Chuck? If so, perhaps you could suggest a listening test that could be done with today's systems (thereby saving me the trouble of doing it incorrectly)? Those secondary OFDM subcarriers already sound pretty nasty on KRKO's signal this morning, and they would be stronger in the digital only version. best wishes, Nick At 05:03 22-04-16, you wrote: ... I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. What you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear with all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are vastly different. Chuck From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick Hall-Patch <n...@ieee.org> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / undesired"? I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less than ~15dB above the IBOC level. best wishes, Nick At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: >http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-tes t-results-unveiled/278670 > >Sent from my iPad >___ >IRCA mailing list >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention >Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. >Registration info: >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of >the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > >For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > >To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
Somewhere on an SD card I do have audio from the KRKO test. I'm in northeast Seattle I'll see if I can locate it and post it somewhere. I can tell you, though, that there was enough HD hash on 1360 to make listening unpleasant for the casual listener, and that doesn't normally happen with KRKO's huybrid HD mode. It's possible that if I were nearer to KRKO, the hash would have spread further. And based on what I heard, I'd have to assume that 30-kHz between local all-HD signals would be the minimum required, maybe 40. -- Rick -Original Message- From: IRCA [mailto:irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hutton Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 10:04 PM To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America <irca@hard-core-dx.com> Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled Yes, desired to undesired is often-used nomenclature in the communications world. I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. What you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear with all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are vastly different. Chuck From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick Hall-Patch <n...@ieee.org> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / undesired"? I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less than ~15dB above the IBOC level. best wishes, Nick At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: >http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-test-re >sults-unveiled/278670 > >Sent from my iPad >___ >IRCA mailing list >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, >September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. >Registration info: >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the >IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > >For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > >To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
If the intent were for all stations to go digital, then such a test would be meaningless; this suggests therefore that there is contemplation of mixing all digital with analog all within the AM band ?? Russ Edmunds 15 mi NW Phila Grid FN20id <wb2...@gmail.com> AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder; Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun PL-310 ( 2); modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15'; Grundig G8 w/whip; modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Chuck Hutton <charle...@msn.com> wrote: > Yes, desired to undesired is often-used nomenclature in the communications > world. > > I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. What > you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear > with all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are vastly > different. > > Chuck > > From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick Hall-Patch < > n...@ieee.org> > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM > To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled > > I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / undesired"? > > I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just > tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this > morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB > down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking > interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less > than ~15dB above the IBOC level. > > best wishes, > > Nick > > > > > At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: > > > http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-test-results-unveiled/278670 > > > >Sent from my iPad > >___ > >IRCA mailing list > >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention > >Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. > >Registration info: > >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > > > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the > >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of > >the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > > > >For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > > > >To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > > ___ > IRCA mailing list > IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention > Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. > Registration info: > http://www.nrcdxas.org > > > Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the > original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the > IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > > For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > > To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > ___ > IRCA mailing list > IRCA@hard-core-dx.com > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > > Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention > Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. > Registration info: > http://www.nrcdxas.org > > > Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the > original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the > IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > > For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > > To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
Yes, desired to undesired is often-used nomenclature in the communications world. I don't see how you can correlate hybrid IBOC to all digital IBOC. What you hear with KRKO/KAST is different from what you will hear with all digital as the power spectrum and subcarrier levels are vastly different. Chuck From: IRCA <irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com> on behalf of Nick Hall-Patch <n...@ieee.org> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:51 AM To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America Subject: Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / undesired"? I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less than ~15dB above the IBOC level. best wishes, Nick At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: >http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-test-results-unveiled/278670 > >Sent from my iPad >___ >IRCA mailing list >IRCA@hard-core-dx.com >http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca > >Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention >Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. >Registration info: >http://www.nrcdxas.org > > >Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the >original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of >the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers > >For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org > >To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
Re: [IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
I presume "D/U" abbreviation in this piece refers to "desired / undesired"? I wonder if someone recorded audio from those tests, rather than just tossing dB's around? I have a recording of KAST-1370 from this morning that says otherwise, with KRKO-1380 IBOC sidebands about 25dB down andwelll, KAST is readable, but I wouldn't say it's lacking interference. The noise becomes really dominant if KAST is less than ~15dB above the IBOC level. best wishes, Nick At 21:05 21-04-16, you wrote: http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-test-results-unveiled/278670 Sent from my iPad ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
[IRCA] All-Digital AM Co-Channel Lab Test Results Unveiled
http://www.radioworld.com/article/all-digital-am-co-channel-lab-test-results-unveiled/278670 Sent from my iPad ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Be sure to register now for the Joint DX Convention Kansas City, September 9 to 11. Hotel space is filling up. Registration info: http://www.nrcdxas.org Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@hard-core-dx.com
