Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Media Technology

High Definition Radio is Here 389

nfranzen submits this story/advertisement: "Yesterday, I had the opportunity to buy the first High Definition (HD) Radio in the United States. HD Radio, invented by iBiquity Digital, adds a digital channel to the sidebands of an existing analog FM signal. The technology is still pretty new, but I can tell you first-hand that listening to my favorite local FM station in HD sounds just like I am listening to a CD. Well, except for the commercials (grin). Here are some links to local TV news coverage and a news release for more info. HD receivers will hit the open market following the Consumer Electronics Show next week in Vegas." We had an old story about the FCC approving these digital broadcasts in the FM radio bands.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

High Definition Radio is Here

Comments Filter:
  • by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @06:03PM (#7896417) Homepage Journal
    I bought into satellite a year and half ago and rarely listen to regular broadcast anymore. Audio quality is good enough and far fewer annoying DJ's and commercials. The only reason left to catch local broadcasts is traffice reports.

    Worth it? Yeah, I spend an average of an hour a day driving. It's definitely worth it.

  • All digital? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Cat_Byte ( 621676 ) on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @06:04PM (#7896440) Journal
    Is this all digital or dual mode? I still steer clear of all-digital networks of cell phones simply because the range is shorter. Instead of getting static when the signal gets weak it just shuts off. Anybody know if this is the case on these things?
  • by daBass ( 56811 ) on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @06:10PM (#7896510)
    Two words: multipath distortion. Seen as ghosting on your TV, but also a big problem with radio in both mountainous as urban enviroments.
  • by Schlemphfer ( 556732 ) on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @06:13PM (#7896544) Homepage
    I see a couple show stoppers that could keep this technology from reaching critical mass. First this link [kcrg.com] (from the summary) says that one station needed to pay $200,000 to switch to digital equipment. That's a helluva lot of money, especially in light of the fact that radio stations are cutting costs at every turn; and are even canning local DJ's, and replacing them with canned national announcers, to save dough.

    Which brings me to a second point: nearly all radio today is utter crap. The sort of early adapter who would be willing to shell out $400 extra for digital FM is exactly the kind of person who already shelled out $400 for satellite radio. And why would anyone with that kind of discretionary income want to listen to anything on the FM dial? At the risk of sounding terribly elitist, if you're smart enough to have earned gobs of money, your tastes are likely discriminating enough to want to want nothing to do with what's on the FM band.

    The one kind of station that might benefit from high fidelity is NPR, but considering that they're bellyaching for cash every twelve weeks or whatever during pledge drives, this is probably the last type of organization who could cough up the extra dough.

  • Hardly useful. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by irokitt ( 663593 ) <archimandrites-i ... m ['aho' in gap]> on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @06:14PM (#7896554)
    Everything that's good about HD Radio is better when you spend (less) money on an in-car MP3 player. Flash memory, thank you, and it doesn't skip. And commercials don't exist. After all, I think most of us probably have a very diverse, vast collection of music on our hard drives already.
  • by Malc ( 1751 ) on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @06:15PM (#7896566)
    How does this compare with what the BBC already offers [bbc.co.uk]? According to the coverage map [bbc.co.uk], 70% of the UK population can already get it.
  • by BrookHarty ( 9119 ) on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @06:16PM (#7896575) Journal
    This is a product looking for a market.

    You don't understand, this is a simple upgrade for local radio stations to add digital. Sirius and XM radio are already an option or standard on new cars. Expect to see HD radio included in car radios also.

    This is like tv's going from Black and white to color, its a simple, its better, its about time.

    BTW, I listen to talk radio and Howard Stern, this will be a great improvement over sound quality.
  • by Malc ( 1751 ) on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @06:18PM (#7896595)
    From what I've read about digital radio in the UK, they can also broadcast additional programme information. It's always on the same frequency. I'm sure there are other benefits. I wish CBC Radio 1 would go digital...
  • Re:All digital? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mlyle ( 148697 ) on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @06:18PM (#7896609)
    Yes, you can tune in plain FM stations with a HD-FM receiver.

    BTW, digital cellular is popular with the carriers not only because of spectrum efficiency, but because of superior link budgeting with lower output power. The range is actually better on digital cellular protocols (whether TDMA or CDMA) than FDMA/AMPS. The reason why your user experience is better with analog is that there is so much more analog stuff deployed. This is likely to change (not exactly a ton of AMPS equipment is still getting deployed).

    Data compression reduces signal bandwidth. And reduced bandwidth means less noise in the band where the signal is, and also means that the signal, since it is less wide, is stronger. This translates to better S/N and thus better link budget. Also, there are things like coding gain which you can't make use of with analog transmissions.

    I don't know how the HD FM divides output power/spectrum to the subcarriers. But it is likely that you can still get a perfectly clear digital signal when the analog FM station would be unlistenable.
  • by rueger ( 210566 ) on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @06:32PM (#7896782) Homepage
    "HD" Radio (formerly known as IBOC [beradio.com], or In Band on Channel), is an inferior technology which many have found less than awe inspiring [beradio.com]. It's adoption in the U.S. is the result of politics and money, not technological superiority.

    One reviewer above described IBOC thus: "Let's start with audio quality. It's my opinion that the current 96kb/s codec is incapable of reproducing even a simple male voice without generating objectionable artifacts. It gets worse with music. On the classical cut the strings were thin and harsh. For those of you who are broadcasting contemporary formats, the codec removes sibilance unnaturally, changes the timber of symbols and makes back up vocals strident. This is not CD-quality by a long shot. In fact, during my listening test I found that our station's plain old analog signal sounded better than the 96kb/s codec."

    At the same time that the U.S. has locked themselves into IBOC, the rest of the world has been moving ahead with Eureka 147 DAB [worlddab.org], a purely Digital technology without the legacy concerns. Fifty countries and counting, with DAB building steadily, especially in Europe [rwonline.com].

  • The USA Stands Alone (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TimSneath ( 139039 ) on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @06:36PM (#7896828)
    It's astonishing to see how far the USA is prepared to be isolated from the rest of the world when it comes to technological standards like this. The rest of the world is switching to Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB) for digital radio as a replacement for FM, with countries like the UK being particularly advanced in their adoption. Here's a map [worlddab.org] showing DAB adoption across the world - notice the big empty space where the US is? Instead the US have decided to go it alone with this hybrid solution that will be the NTSC of the radio world. What a pity...

    I've had a DAB radio for six months now and have been really impressed with the sound quality, ease of tuning and extra information that's displayed with each broadcast. No more trying to guess the band playing a particular song - it scrolls automatically along the LCD display. Want to see what stations are available? Just scroll through the list, rather than speculatively twiddling a knob and trying to identify something through the white noise. There's a whole world out there that the US is missing out on...
  • by HiKarma ( 531392 ) * on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @07:25PM (#7897387)
    Not that more bandwidth is bad, but the real excitement in radio these days is new ways to use it, more features.

    For example, since it's so easy and cheap to do, why not a car radio with Tivo like functions:

    a) Recording multiple stations at once, letting me switch among the recordings, FF, pause and rewind among them. Heck, with software radio record _all_ the stations, all the time.

    b) Know the local traffic stations (ie. traffic every 10 minutes on the 8s) and record that slot and give it to me at the touch of a button, or better still just tune in some digital traffic service that will tell me only of my route.

    Ditto the news, always record the latest newscast, let me hear it any time I want.

    c) Of course let me pause and resume. Also record my favourite talk shows (NPR for example) like Tivo, and let me play them.

    d) Have a speech interface so I don't have to look at the radio to select programs or tune it or otherwise control it! Just give me a little wheel or 4-way control on the wheel similar to what MP3 players have.

    e) And of course, what I am now playing with is using an MP3 jukebox to forget about radio entirely, exept for news, traffic and weather.
    I download NPR programs into the jukebox to listen to them. I can even record Morning Edition in the early morning and listen to it in the morning commute, except with FF and pause etc.

    Plus of course, music, which Mp3 jukeboxes do just great.

    f) Speaking of radio, put 802.11 in the car MP3 player so when it notices it is parked in the driveway, it syncs up my latest music and audio.

    More bandwidth is of course nice, but boring.
    Think about cool features.
  • by Detritus ( 11846 ) on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @07:31PM (#7897438) Homepage
    A lot is dependent on the design of the codec. The Space Shuttle uses a delta modulation system (Modified Abate Adaptive Delta Modulation [titan-aeu.com]) that was designed to degrade gracefully on high BER communication links.
  • High Fidelity Crap (Score:2, Interesting)

    by forward1 ( 468552 ) <edb@bennett.nu> on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @09:14PM (#7898428)
    OK, I'm supposed to get excited about FM radio now? Give me a break - I've had an XM Radio for 2 years and I will NEVER listen to commercial FM radio again. Silence is better entertainment. There used to be good radio, but it's very hard to find - and not worth the effort. The almighty dollar has driven everything to the LCD - except when the dollar pays for quality like HBO, and the satellite radio services.
  • by WebMasterJoe ( 253077 ) <joe AT joestoner DOT com> on Tuesday January 06, 2004 @09:50PM (#7898669) Homepage Journal
    It doesn't appear that anybody cares! And I'm not surprised; I don't care either. Sure, the idea might be somewhat cool, but the slashdot crowd has evolved along with the rest of the world out of the dot-com era where "cool new technology" was assumed to translate into something that will improve our lives. Just as nobody orders groceries through a web site, nobody turns on their FM radio for good entertainment anymore.

    My morning commute is 20 minutes long, and I don't want to spend 12 of those minutes listening to advertisements. I don't care what American media says, I don't need to purchase products to be happy. I don't need a new SUV (or a used one, for that matter) and tonight I won't be tuning into the latest episode of Fox's newest, most outrageous reality series that everyone will be talking about tomorrow. My morning commute is where I clear my head and prepare to deal with the onslaught of crap that I'll face at work. For that, the Dodge Durango jingle just won't work - sorry, but I need <insert your favorite band here>.*

    This is a solution to the wrong problem. We're not concerned with the quality of the FM radio feed, we're concerned with the idiots sending out the signal! This move is just a diversionary tactic that will result in crisp, clear crap. If I ever get tired of listening to my own albums, I'll be looking towards XM or Sirius.

    *I hate when people name-drop their favorite obscure band in an attempt to show off how cool they are. Just pretend I mentioned your favorite musician. And I'll pretend that your favorite musician is as cool as mine. :)
  • by bigt_littleodd ( 594513 ) on Wednesday January 07, 2004 @02:08AM (#7900559)
    Digital FM radio? Who cares?

    Schlock is schlock, whether it be analog or digital.

    Give the masses what they want: Better programming! There's a ton of good stuff to listen to out there, but the powers that be (Clear Channel, et al) keep broadcasting the same tired trash. And then the recording industry wonders why CD sales are down.

    Sheesh.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 07, 2004 @02:09AM (#7900564)
    On the road its MP3's. At home its broadcast streams of my favorite 'radio' stations, such as 95BFm, NZ [95bfm.com]. Near zero commericals and those that there are are all inhouse crafted (no canned spam man) With the tiem zone difference it makes for great listening. Streams at 12KB and 4KB

All great discoveries are made by mistake. -- Young

Working...