By 2017, Norway wants to be the first country to ditch FM radio entirely

Unlike digital radio listeners elsewhere (US included), 50 percent-plus already use DAB.

Read the whole story

 

[ads2]

Unlike the analog TV switchoff earlier this decade in the US, this doesn't seem like it would free up much spectrum for new tech. Is there a specific application they have in mind?

 

[saru-kun]

It is immensely frustrating that we've once again ignored international standards and instead chose a spec that will only apply in the US, for seemingly no good reason whatsoever.

 

[Marid]

I was wondering when this would happen in the US. Local radio was killed by consolidation. Now I only listen to local college sports games. These are also available online.

 

[Danrarbc]

Here in the US, the FCC approved digital radio in 2002 with iBiquity's HD Radio as the chosen standard. However, as the LA Daily News recently pointed out, it's nowhere near as widespread as Norway's digital solution, and a full-transition to digital is not imminent in the US at this time.

Keep in mind HD Radio uses FM frequencies, it isn't possible for us to shut down FM in favor of HD Radio. That said we could move to 100% digital over FM and rely on subchannels to open some bands up without losing stations.

 

[Personne]

saru-kun[/url]":46c1dxqx]...seemingly no good reason whatsoever.

Exceptionalism.

 

[LB1LF]

ads2[/url]":107866n7]Unlike the analog TV switchoff earlier this decade in the US, this doesn't seem like it would free up much spectrum for new tech. Is there a specific application they have in mind?

-AFAIK, there are no plans to use the freed up spectrum for anything (though I am sure some enterprising company will come up with something!) - the main idea is that it is a lot cheaper to run a DAB network than a FM network.

(FM requires dedicated transmitters & antennas for every single channel set to cover an area; DAB interleaves multiple channels in one data stream which can be sent by a single transmitter - so even if this transmitter is more costly (for one, the power amplifier needs to be vee-eery linear, which is not that much of a consideration with FM) - the benefits of less hardware to build, install, power and maintain soon adds up.)

 

[LB1LF]

HueHueHue[/url]":1knwez9k]

LB1LF[/url]":1knwez9k] (...)the main idea is that it is a lot cheaper to run a DAB network than a FM network.

I'm glad the switch is happening, but if it really is cheaper, it shouldn't take a government mandate to enforce it.

-Norway will not go DAB only in 2017; local broadcasters are free to keep using their FM setups for the foreseeable future. What goes dark in 2017 is the national broadcasters (Primarily NRK, public radio, but also a couple of commercial channels.)

Basically, they are the ones large enough for the savings to offset the required investment in infrastructure; if you are running a 25W local broadcaster with the transmitter occupying 2U in a rack and the antenna on the roof of your studio, abandoning this to embrace DAB doesn't necessarily make sense.

Also, I facepalm for not connecting the dots - obviously, there's no plans to use the FM broadcast band for anything else in the near future as (part of it, anyway!) will still be occupied by broadcasters post-2017.

 

[brotlifst]

A whole lot of Norwegians don't have it yet.

And, only the newest cars have DAB. Add to this that cars is maybe the place where most people listen to radio and you have me wondering.

 

[mikiev]

Personne[/url]":lrotirga]

saru-kun[/url]":lrotirga]...seemingly no good reason whatsoever.

Exceptionalism.

Follow the money.

HD Radio doesn't require a switch-over to digital from analog, so no 'sun-setting' of analog transmissions is required.

http://www.ibiquity.com/international/general_overview

US stations can transmit 'digital' signals along with their existing analog signals = they can pay lip-service to 'digital' while keeping the status quo with analog = no disruptions to revenue streams, and no blow-back from listeners mad their radios wouldn't work with digital - like the mandate for 'adapters' when broadcast TV went digital.

The US broadcasters haven't switched-over to digital-only because there is no monetary - or regulatory - incentive to do so.

 

[Red Zero]

Personne[/url]":1a79wtj5]

saru-kun[/url]":1a79wtj5]...seemingly no good reason whatsoever.

Exceptionalism.

I have started to interpret the word "Exceptionalism" when in context to the U.S. as to meaning everyone else EXCEPT us.

 

[Tenkom]

No, it's electromagnetism.

 

[LB1LF]

Red Zero[/url]":1llcky3o]
I have started to interpret the word "Exceptionalism" when in context to the U.S. as to meaning everyone else EXCEPT us.

-I guess every continent's got to have a France.

 

[Borkis]

brotlifst[/url]":1czn13tv]A whole lot of Norwegians don't have it yet.

And, only the newest cars have DAB. Add to this that cars is maybe the place where most people listen to radio and you have me wondering.

Sure, only newer cars comes with integrated DAB support. However, many third-party radios support DAB, and there's also a myriad of gadgets that will receive DAB signals and transmit them as FM signals to your radio.

No need to staunch progress for that reason alone.

EDIT: Typing error.

 

[phyzome]

Morbus[/url]":2b9175pa]

nutela[/url]":2b9175pa]So would this pave a way to use the FM spectrum for communications? I have quite a big trouble with the harmful radiation in the 3G and Wifi (2.4Ghz) range, no joke

Dude, it's just sound, it's not radiation.

It's LITERALLY sound.

No, it's LITERALLY light. If you're going to condescendingly dismiss someone, you should at least get the basics right.

 

[dlux]

Well, Steely Dan is gonna be pissed!

 

[genekellyjr]

Morbus[/url]":3ikq035t]

nutela[/url]":3ikq035t]So would this pave a way to use the FM spectrum for communications? I have quite a big trouble with the harmful radiation in the 3G and Wifi (2.4Ghz) range, no joke

Dude, it's just sound, it's not radiation.

It's LITERALLY sound.

3G, Wifi, and FM are not sound at all. They are light waves. Photons carry them. Air particles are not vibrating to transmit them. They move at the speed of light. Higher frequencies are higher energy.
High energy photons are termed radiation (along with high energy electrons/protons/atoms/ions/any particle that is high energy). High energy means it has a higher chance of penetrating deeper and messing up important things, that eventually lead to cancer. Photons follow quantum effects so you can never be completely sure they'll be stopped.
3G/Wifi use x10^9 freq (GHz), FM uses x10^6 (MHz). Start of radiation that is most commonly referenced are X-Rays at x10^16 to x10^19 freq. Ultraviolet radiation from the sun is around x10^15 freq.
3G/Wifi is higher energy than FM, yes. Is it radiation? Not by current terms.
Long term exposure can be an issue, though. Is it enough to cause damage with high flux Wifi/3G environments? I don't know, I haven't looked it up.

TL;DR: Not sound. Not radiation. Just lower energy light waves. All prob okay.

 

[Andrewcw]

Well. If it does come become available I see the name Verizon or Comcast stamped on it.

 

[tjones2]

Morbus[/url]":1bgijh48]

nutela[/url]":1bgijh48]So would this pave a way to use the FM spectrum for communications? I have quite a big trouble with the harmful radiation in the 3G and Wifi (2.4Ghz) range, no joke

Dude, it's just sound, it's not radiation.

It's LITERALLY sound.

Hey, don't mock, maybe he is just trying to run an amateur radio telescope.

 

[Spuzzell]

LB1LF[/url]":ja2u49ty]

ads2[/url]":ja2u49ty]Unlike the analog TV switchoff earlier this decade in the US, this doesn't seem like it would free up much spectrum for new tech. Is there a specific application they have in mind?

-AFAIK, there are no plans to use the freed up spectrum for anything (though I am sure some enterprising company will come up with something!) - the main idea is that it is a lot cheaper to run a DAB network than a FM network.

(FM requires dedicated transmitters & antennas for every single channel set to cover an area; DAB interleaves multiple channels in one data stream which can be sent by a single transmitter - so even if this transmitter is more costly (for one, the power amplifier needs to be vee-eery linear, which is not that much of a consideration with FM) - the benefits of less hardware to build, install, power and maintain soon adds up.)

The other - potential - consideration is that DAB signals can - potentially - be higher quality than FM signals.

The trade off is the more of the available digital goodness is given over to quality, the less digital goodness is available for quantity. So at the extremes you can either have a few stations broadcasting in CD quality stereo, or a huge amount of stations broadcasting in 96k mono.

In the UK we were supposed to be DAB only this year but the switchover has been postponed indefinitely as the number of DAB households is still slightly below 50%.. mainly because the switchover keeps being delayed.

It's a rather chicken and egg situation, so well done Norway for dealing with it properly.

 

[Carbon Fibre]

Danrarbc[/url]":vtfc77cn]

Here in the US, the FCC approved digital radio in 2002 with iBiquity's HD Radio as the chosen standard. However, as the LA Daily News recently pointed out, it's nowhere near as widespread as Norway's digital solution, and a full-transition to digital is not imminent in the US at this time.

Keep in mind HD Radio uses FM frequencies, it isn't possible for us to shut down FM in favor of HD Radio. That said we could move to 100% digital over FM and rely on subchannels to open some bands up without losing stations.

Thanks for mentioning. Transmitting bits needs to be Frequency Modulated anyways.

 

[conan77]

There was some argument about iBiquity being more patent encumbered than DAB, anyone know more about that?

Edit - From Wikipedia:

Whereas the AAC (Advanced Audio Coding) family of codecs are publicly documented standards, the HDC codec exists only within the HD Radio system, and is an iBiquity trade secret. Similarly DRM and DAB are open specifications, while iBiquity's HD Radio specification is partly open but mostly private.

 

[tjones2]

http://www.ibiquity.com/international/general_overview

Like almost all high technology products in the world, the use of HD Radio Technology incorporates the payment of certain royalties for using proprietary intellectual property.. iBiquity operates in a manner similar to a technology consortium, in that it licenses and sub-licenses the necessary intellectual property, including patents, for the development and use of the technology.

In the United States, radio broadcasters pay a one-time fee directly to iBiquity for the use of its patents, trademarks, software and know-how in connection with the stations’ main programming. Additionally, there is a provision in the license that requires them to share with iBiquity the revenue that they realize from the use of certain advanced features of the technology, such as Multicasting or data services.

Why the hell did the US pick a standard owned by one royalty-charging company when there was a perfectly good European standard? :facepalm:

 

[Carewolf]

LB1LF[/url]":2ocm7d9y]

Red Zero[/url]":2ocm7d9y]
I have started to interpret the word "Exceptionalism" when in context to the U.S. as to meaning everyone else EXCEPT us.

-I guess every continent's got to have a France.

The US and France are brothers, born at the same time and fighting the UK for their right to exist.

 

[Carewolf]

I really hope the make sure to switch to DAB+, the old DAB is crap, it us just MP2 over radio, with not even error-correction added.

 

[Allaun]

Morbus[/url]":14brsdj4]

nutela[/url]":14brsdj4]So would this pave a way to use the FM spectrum for communications? I have quite a big trouble with the harmful radiation in the 3G and Wifi (2.4Ghz) range, no joke

Dude, it's just sound, it's not radiation.

It's LITERALLY sound.

What they are describing is considered to be the result of the "Nocebo Effect" . What they are attributing is called the Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity, which to date has no scientific basis.

 

[Chipkin]

Morbus[/url]":35djqtik]

nutela[/url]":35djqtik]So would this pave a way to use the FM spectrum for communications? I have quite a big trouble with the harmful radiation in the 3G and Wifi (2.4Ghz) range, no joke

Dude, it's just sound, it's not radiation.

It's LITERALLY sound.

There is ABSOLUTELY ZERO evidence to support the claim that RF radiation is harmful at the frequencies and amplitudes that people have any chance of being exposed to. This is entirely a psychosomatic illness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromag ... ensitivity

 

[dlux]

tjones2[/url]":3jjagrgy]Why the hell did the US pick a standard owned by one royalty-charging company when there was a perfectly good European standard?

Those marina dues aren't gonna pay themselves, you know.

 

[nickf]

Carewolf[/url]":1xks98z9]I really hope the make sure to switch to DAB+, the old DAB is crap, it us just MP2 over radio, with not even error-correction added.

It's been a few years since I lived in the UK, but I had a DAB radio from Pure back in the day, and the reception in my house was very poor. Muddy burbling for most of the time. FM was fine (but no Test Match Special, hence the radio purchase).

I guess reception is no longer a problem as everyone's using Internet radios now, but the encoding issue still stands.

 

[Joriarty]

Morbus[/url]":28xhjj7t]

nutela[/url]":28xhjj7t]So would this pave a way to use the FM spectrum for communications? I have quite a big trouble with the harmful radiation in the 3G and Wifi (2.4Ghz) range, no joke

Dude, it's just sound, it's not radiation.

It's LITERALLY sound.

Better not yell to your neighbours at the wrong pitch then, or you'll get nabbed for broadcasting at wavelengths reserved for government communications

(I'm struggling to comprehend how you can be so absolutely sure of yourself, yet so wrong...)

 

[Feniks]

It took a few decades for OTA television to die. I think FM radio will last a while yet.

 

[Feniks]

saru-kun[/url]":32nabsg4]It is immensely frustrating that we've once again ignored international standards and instead chose a spec that will only apply in the US, for seemingly no good reason whatsoever.

What was it again? "American exceptionalism"

 

[DeschutesCore]

dlux[/url]":32if6p0g]Well, Steely Dan is gonna be pissed!

No static at all...

 

[sporkme]

saru-kun[/url]":3c359r83]It is immensely frustrating that we've once again ignored international standards and instead chose a spec that will only apply in the US, for seemingly no good reason whatsoever.

There's a really good reason - for Ibiquity. They get royalties everywhere.

This is a nice write-up (assuming Norway is using the DRM standard):

http://www.engineeringradio.us/blog/201 ... -hd-radio/

Actually, I'm lost, I don't know what Norway is using. What's important to note is the other standards are not proprietary. If you're at all fascinated with this, the HD-Radio™ posts here are a great read from someone that's an engineer who also has some strong opinions about the radio business: http://www.engineeringradio.us/blog/tag/hd-radio/

 

[silbaco]

saru-kun[/url]":1thz5a8x]It is immensely frustrating that we've once again ignored international standards and instead chose a spec that will only apply in the US, for seemingly no good reason whatsoever.

There are several reasons actually. We still use the spectrum DAB uses (VHF) for OTA TV. We also have way more stations than can be reasonably broadcast using DAB. And DAB really isn't that good.

In reality it doesn't really matter. All forms of digital radio (DAB, HD Radio, DRM) have more or less failed. Internet radio is likely going to replace all forms of radio in the next decade.