WGN off the IBOC list
Frank Dresser
they're off the IBOC list.
http://ibiquity.com/hd_radio/hdradio_find_a_station/IL/StnMarket#stationlist
Frank Dresser
dxAce
Frank Dresser wrote:
Reportedly off since mid-May according to this:
http://topazdesigns.com/iboc/station-list.html
Now I just wish that the dumbass bastards at WBBM 780, Chicago, would turn
theirs off as well.
Oh well, I fully expect Edweenie to be along shortly to tell us all just how
great HD/IBOC really is.
dxAce
Michigan
USA
cuh...@webtv.net
air.
cuhulin
Frank Dresser
"Frank Dresser" <analo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:lF2%g.105391$QZ1....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
A look at the google cache of the Illinois IBOC page, dated Sept. 21, 2006,
shows 35 IBOC stations as opposed to the newer list showing 33 stations.
The other IBOC delister was Chicago's ABC owned 94.7 WZZN-FM.
Frank Dresser
Joe Analssandrini
I have never heard an IBOC broadcast and, as I rarely DX on the MWs, I
have not personally been bothered by spillover.
However, it seems to me that while IBOC is probably fine for the FM
broadcast band, either as an adjunct or even possibly the only
broadcast method on that band in the future, it, and all other known
digital transmission schemes, ought to be totally banned off the MW
band. This band (and its analog broadcasting method) is the only
reliable means of communication within the United States; it has the
two advantages of long-distance reception capability and a huge
installed base of receivers. (Relatively few people own shortwave
receivers.) This, of course, would be invaluable in the case of any
disaster, natural or man-made. No digital scheme has these advantages.
I should like to see the MW band expanded, say, from 510 kHz to 2000
kHz (and yes - I know this would eliminate an amateur band). Some of
these frequencies could then be restricted to clear-channel broadcasts,
perhaps one station each from the twenty or so largest cities all
around the US. In the event of a catastrophe, the desirability of such
stations is self-evident.
My $0.02 anyway.
Best,
Joe
cuh...@webtv.net
forever.
cuhulin
Frank Dresser
"Joe Analssandrini" <analssa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1161630758....@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> Dear Frank,
>
> I have never heard an IBOC broadcast and, as I rarely DX on the MWs, I
> have not personally been bothered by spillover.
Hardly anyone has heard an IBOC broadcast because hardly anyone has gone to
the trouble of buying an IBOC radio. We just hear the damn useless noise.
According to ibiquity, IBOC broadcasts are available in your area, no matter
where in ihe US your area might be:
"HD Radio broadcasting is sweeping the nation. Many of your favorite
stations are already HD Radio broadcasters."
http://ibiquity.com/hd_radio/hdradio_find_a_station
Yep, it's that giant sweeping sound.
>
> However, it seems to me that while IBOC is probably fine for the FM
> broadcast band, either as an adjunct or even possibly the only
> broadcast method on that band in the future, it, and all other known
> digital transmission schemes, ought to be totally banned off the MW
> band. This band (and its analog broadcasting method) is the only
> reliable means of communication within the United States; it has the
> two advantages of long-distance reception capability and a huge
> installed base of receivers. (Relatively few people own shortwave
> receivers.) This, of course, would be invaluable in the case of any
> disaster, natural or man-made. No digital scheme has these advantages.
I'll agree that digital and AM ought to be kept seperate. IBOC, at best, is
only semi compatable with AM. Some AM radios do hear the noise even when
they are properly tuned to the main channel. If IBOC AM really does catch
on, there will be enough sideband noise around to hurt some stations. And,
I have no doubt that a full IBOC implementation will drive some listeners
away from AM, as their scan tuned radios will be continually dropping right
onto that annoying noise as if there were something intelligible there.
>
> I should like to see the MW band expanded, say, from 510 kHz to 2000
> kHz (and yes - I know this would eliminate an amateur band). Some of
> these frequencies could then be restricted to clear-channel broadcasts,
> perhaps one station each from the twenty or so largest cities all
> around the US. In the event of a catastrophe, the desirability of such
> stations is self-evident.
>
> My $0.02 anyway.
>
> Best,
>
> Joe
>
In that case, I suppose the government could order the stations to turn off
the IBOC noisemakers. It would be little loss, as IBOC AM, in it's current
form, is just a redundant simulcast of the main channel.
If there is a need for clear channel broadcasting during national disasters,
the government could mandate all sorts of emergency broadcast plans, up to
reinstating the old CONELRAD plan.
And I don't think there will be much need for expanding the AM radio band.
The new media are challenging the old media. In ten or twenty years, I
don't think there will be any shortages of newsprint, film stock or radio
bandwidth.
Frank Dresser