Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question
Patrick, You do realize you're going to need to buy out a stationery store to get enough supplies for your FM QSLs if you get serious about FM. I do poorly with skip here and I still have about 300 Es receptions. If you get real patient, you can also use meteors. Mike Hawkins On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Patrick Martin wrote: > Thanks Scott. I kind of follow it. 88.1 is interesting here, as when I > first tune to it on the Sony, I get analog KWAO Ocean Park WA, but within > seconds, HD signal KQOC Gleneden Beach OR takes over the frequency and > locks the HD, totally eliminating analog KWAO. Infact on any portable on > non HD radio, all I get is KWAO. I was quite taken back when the Sony gave > me KQOC! The same is true with 96.5. When I first tune it in, I am getting > analog KCYS Seaside, with within seconds again (depending of the signal), > KJAQ Seattle locks the frequency. At that point hearing KCYS takes work and > I have to turn the yagi to knock KJAQ down to get local KCYS. It is odd > sounding to me. Also sometimes when I land on 96.5, I immediately get the > KJAQ ID, before I get the station! So the audio is KCYS (also Country) and > I am getting the ID RDS from KJAQ. I guess that is what you have > explained, but it is different to say the least! So the sub channels I am > hearing, when they pop in at 1% of th > e analog signal. I thought I might get some HD from Seattle as I know > that years ago when the powers were a lot less (60s/70s), some ran a couple > KW or so from Cougar Mt and I got them in full FM Stereo. One I wanted was > KNHC 89.5, but so far no luck. even in analog. I used to get it years ago > off and on, but I did have a better yagi. I may stack two FM6's. I'll say > one thing, HD FM is a different thing. It will be interesting with E Skip. > I guess I could get the RDS ID without getting the audio from the station > too, depending on how stable the signal is. Being away from FM DX for 25 > years, the dial is sure a lot different than it was. > > Patrick > > Patrick Martin > Seaside OR > KGED QSL Manager > > > Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 14:19:15 -0400 > > From: sc...@fybush.com > > To: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > > > For those who are interested in the technical reasons why Patrick > > doesn't get the same kind of adjacent-channel hash that those of us in > > urban areas do, read on. For those who don't...another thread will be > > along shortly with convention news ;) > > > > -- > > > > As far as propagation is concerned, there is nothing at all magical > > about the digital signals that flank the analog FM signal to create HD > > radio on FM. The ionosphere doesn't care whether it's analog or digital > > modulation. If a signal is (a) strong enough to be received and (b) > > doesn't have something stronger sitting over it, you'll get it. If > > either of those factors doesn't exist, you won't. > > > > So: it helps to think of the digital signal as something separate from > > the analog. If you're getting KUOW in HD, for instance, you're really > > getting: > > > > --94.6 --- > > > > KUOW lower digital carriers (on the same piece of spectrum used by an > > analog 94.7 signal) > > > > --94.8 --- > > > > KUOW analog signal (centered at 94.9) > > > > --95.0 --- > > > > KUOW upper digital carriers (on the same spectrum used by an analog 95.1 > > signal) > > > > --95.2 --- > > > > Depending on the station's technical setup, the digital signal may > > literally be completely separate from the analog. At WXXI-FM, for > > instance, our digital signal uses a separate transmitter, separate > > transmission line and separate antenna bays interleaved with our analog. > > It is possible (albeit not currently legal) for us to completely turn > > off our analog transmission chain and run only the digital carriers. If > > you were listening on an analog radio, you'd hear nothing on 91.5 (or > > maybe even be able to DX something else on that frequency), but an HD > > radio would detect the digital carriers and still give you WXXI-FM when > > tuned to "91.5." > > > > The digital carriers operate at much lower power levels than the analog. > > Initially, digital operated at just 1% of analog, or 20 dB below carrier > > (-20 dBc). More recently, the FCC has started allowing stations to use > > higher power levels of 4% (-14 dBc) or even 10% (-20 dBc) of analog. > > > > So using KUOW as an example, let's say it's still -20 dBc. That's 100kW > > in analog and 1 kW in digital. If you're in metro Seattle, that 1 kW > > digital is plenty to still ride right over anything else that might be > > coming on the adjacent channels of 94.7 and 95.1. If you're way down in > > Seaside, though, those 1 kW digital signals are DX: point a good antenna > > right at Seattle and you might get them strongly enough to decode, IF > > there's nothing else in the way on those frequencies. Point the antenna > > away from Seattle or disconnect it and you won'
Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question
Rick, I guess nulling FM or AM hash is the same. I have tried to get "any" hash at this location. To date I have still never detected any. Now, it could be that the hash is so weak not the detect. If the hash on FM is 1%, then 500- 1,000 watts of digital hash on FM at 130 miles, probably there would be little left. AM is sure a lot different in that. Even the very weak signals adjacent to HD stations I can hear. An example is 88.3 next to HD 88.1. Patrick Patrick Martin Seaside OR KGED QSL Manager > From: rick...@shellworld.net > To: irca@hard-core-dx.com > Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 05:44:59 -0700 > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > Pat, > To me it sounds like you have the ideal FM situation. > The benefits of HD without the massive interference. > You'll get plenty of skip on those adjacents, too. > In the city itself, the HD hash is so strong that it wipes out most > adjacents, unless a way is found to null it somewhat. > I calculated once that 42 channels (out of a total of 100 FM channels) are > significantly blocked for me in Seattle by HD hash. > At one time that would have meant just 21 local frequencies, but since all > HD signals effectively take up three frequencies, that means there are 63 > frequencies blocked locally instead of the 21 there would have been without > the encroachment of HD. > As for smaller cities, with the exception of public stations that can get > grants to install HD, you're right, the economics don't favor it in many > cases. > The purchase of a new transmitter at over a hundred grand, plus licensing > fees for the technology, make it hard to justify, although some owners will > do it since it allows them to use a loophole that lets them apply for a > translator to retransmit the HD signal in analog. > I'll hold back regarding my opinions on _that_, since we've probably already > discussed this too much on an AM-related list. > -- > Rick > > -Original Message- > From: IRCA [mailto:irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com] On Behalf Of Patrick > Martin > Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 10:33 PM > To: IRCA > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > Rick, > > I am really amazed that I easily turn the Yagi to the NE, and I lose 94.9 & > 96.5 Seaside and get Seattle. In fact both for a time yesterday I got the > sub channels they offer. I may stack two of the FM6, if I can figure out how > to stack three antennas on one pole. I also have a UHF Yagi. But I think the > height would be an issue. The pole would have to be 18 feet rather than my > 15 feet. I do not know if I could keep it up in our winds. > > Patrick Martin > Seaside OR > KGED QSL Manager > > > From: rick...@shellworld.net > > To: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 07:15:15 -0700 > > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > > > Patrick, > > You're also really benefiting from the gain your antenna is providing, > > favoring the distant signals and somewhat nulling your locals. > > Most FM HD users won't have that benefit. > > -- > > Rick > > -Original Message- > > From: IRCA [mailto:irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com] On Behalf Of Rick > > Lewis > > Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 7:05 AM > > To: 'Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America' > > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > > > Hi Patrick, > > Sounds to me like you're working with, and benefiting from, very > > narrow filters on your FM. > > At least in my experience with the Sony X-drs3Hd and other radios at > > their factory settings without extra filtering, if an HD decodes, > > adjacents won't be heard. > > Granted, Seattle doesn't have trop the way the Northeast or southern > > California does. > > The Sony filters out much of the HD noise, but adjacents are still > > covered up. > > I also have a Tecsun portable CR-1100. Unusually, it doesn't filter > > out the HD noise on adjacents. > > I'm sure most people find those huge blocks of noise objectionable, > > but not me, because most of the time you can tell how well you're > > nulling out the HD adjacent. Some HD signals are misleading, but in > > many cases, even strong HD signals can be nulled out enough to that a > > semistrong station can defeat them. > > I'm blind, so I can't say how well the Sonys indicate nulling visually > > and whether this can be helpful. > > But with the CR-1100 it's easy to audibly determine when an HD > > adjacent is being nulled. > > On the Sony it's not. > > -- > > Rick > > > > -Original Message- > > From: IRCA [mailto:irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com] On Behalf Of Mike > > Hawkins > > Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 1:51 AM > > To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > > > I don't get hash on distant FM stations, but there really isn't hash at > all. > > Its a blanking of adjacents. You have to remember too that they are > > using lower power for the digital components. If t
[IRCA] TP 19 May Victoria version
Quite a lot of tantalizing and erratic carriers this morning with some audio that mostly bordered on the imaginary. .. Burbles in the splatter and noise (if lucky, language might be guessed at by cadence of talk, or parallel established by changes in talk or music) 738 rhythmic pop music 1121UT 1116 two men talking (one on the phone?) 1148UT 1332 woman talking 1201-7UT, peak 1204UT, maybe DU English, so close at times to picking out a word... 1548 woman talking, brief fade up through the 1550 splash at 1142UT Strongish het, no or "near imaginary" audio (either undermodulated or ravaged by splatter) 1008 1476 1503 1512 1557 1566 1611 1629 (audible hum) best wishes, Nick ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca 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 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] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question
Thanks Scott. I kind of follow it. 88.1 is interesting here, as when I first tune to it on the Sony, I get analog KWAO Ocean Park WA, but within seconds, HD signal KQOC Gleneden Beach OR takes over the frequency and locks the HD, totally eliminating analog KWAO. Infact on any portable on non HD radio, all I get is KWAO. I was quite taken back when the Sony gave me KQOC! The same is true with 96.5. When I first tune it in, I am getting analog KCYS Seaside, with within seconds again (depending of the signal), KJAQ Seattle locks the frequency. At that point hearing KCYS takes work and I have to turn the yagi to knock KJAQ down to get local KCYS. It is odd sounding to me. Also sometimes when I land on 96.5, I immediately get the KJAQ ID, before I get the station! So the audio is KCYS (also Country) and I am getting the ID RDS from KJAQ. I guess that is what you have explained, but it is different to say the least! So the sub channels I am hearing, when they pop in at 1% of th e analog signal. I thought I might get some HD from Seattle as I know that years ago when the powers were a lot less (60s/70s), some ran a couple KW or so from Cougar Mt and I got them in full FM Stereo. One I wanted was KNHC 89.5, but so far no luck. even in analog. I used to get it years ago off and on, but I did have a better yagi. I may stack two FM6's. I'll say one thing, HD FM is a different thing. It will be interesting with E Skip. I guess I could get the RDS ID without getting the audio from the station too, depending on how stable the signal is. Being away from FM DX for 25 years, the dial is sure a lot different than it was. Patrick Patrick Martin Seaside OR KGED QSL Manager > Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 14:19:15 -0400 > From: sc...@fybush.com > To: irca@hard-core-dx.com > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > For those who are interested in the technical reasons why Patrick > doesn't get the same kind of adjacent-channel hash that those of us in > urban areas do, read on. For those who don't...another thread will be > along shortly with convention news ;) > > -- > > As far as propagation is concerned, there is nothing at all magical > about the digital signals that flank the analog FM signal to create HD > radio on FM. The ionosphere doesn't care whether it's analog or digital > modulation. If a signal is (a) strong enough to be received and (b) > doesn't have something stronger sitting over it, you'll get it. If > either of those factors doesn't exist, you won't. > > So: it helps to think of the digital signal as something separate from > the analog. If you're getting KUOW in HD, for instance, you're really > getting: > > --94.6 --- > > KUOW lower digital carriers (on the same piece of spectrum used by an > analog 94.7 signal) > > --94.8 --- > > KUOW analog signal (centered at 94.9) > > --95.0 --- > > KUOW upper digital carriers (on the same spectrum used by an analog 95.1 > signal) > > --95.2 --- > > Depending on the station's technical setup, the digital signal may > literally be completely separate from the analog. At WXXI-FM, for > instance, our digital signal uses a separate transmitter, separate > transmission line and separate antenna bays interleaved with our analog. > It is possible (albeit not currently legal) for us to completely turn > off our analog transmission chain and run only the digital carriers. If > you were listening on an analog radio, you'd hear nothing on 91.5 (or > maybe even be able to DX something else on that frequency), but an HD > radio would detect the digital carriers and still give you WXXI-FM when > tuned to "91.5." > > The digital carriers operate at much lower power levels than the analog. > Initially, digital operated at just 1% of analog, or 20 dB below carrier > (-20 dBc). More recently, the FCC has started allowing stations to use > higher power levels of 4% (-14 dBc) or even 10% (-20 dBc) of analog. > > So using KUOW as an example, let's say it's still -20 dBc. That's 100kW > in analog and 1 kW in digital. If you're in metro Seattle, that 1 kW > digital is plenty to still ride right over anything else that might be > coming on the adjacent channels of 94.7 and 95.1. If you're way down in > Seaside, though, those 1 kW digital signals are DX: point a good antenna > right at Seattle and you might get them strongly enough to decode, IF > there's nothing else in the way on those frequencies. Point the antenna > away from Seattle or disconnect it and you won't hear much of anything, > as would be the case with ANY signal of 1000 watts from 100+ miles away. > > This leads to a bunch of interesting DX scenarios when you start to > break it all down: > > For instance - let's say that you were a little closer to your > semi-local on 94.9, enough so for it to be an un-nullable pest. But > let's also say that your local 94.9 is analog-only. So you might have a > spectrum that looks like this: > > 94.6 --
[IRCA] WWV Solar Report
:Product: Geophysical Alert Message wwv.txt :Issued: 2015 May 20 0010 UTC # Prepared by the US Dept. of Commerce, NOAA, Space Weather Prediction Center # # Geophysical Alert Message # Solar-terrestrial indices for 19 May follow. Solar flux 110 and estimated planetary A-index 17. The estimated planetary K-index at UTC on 20 May was 1. Space weather for the past 24 hours has been moderate. Geomagnetic storms reaching the G2 level occurred. No space weather storms are predicted for the next 24 hours. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Trends -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Date 18 18 18 18 18 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 UTC 0900 1200 1500 1800 2100 0300 0600 0900 1200 1500 1800 2100 SFlx 120 120 120 120 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 110 110 A-in 6668816 16 16 16 16 16 16 22 17 K-in 23313564232221 Current Solar information available at http://www.am-dx.com/wwv.htm ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca 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] WWV Solar Report
:Product: Geophysical Alert Message wwv.txt :Issued: 2015 May 19 1815 UTC # Prepared by the US Dept. of Commerce, NOAA, Space Weather Prediction Center # # Geophysical Alert Message # Solar-terrestrial indices for 18 May follow. Solar flux 115 and estimated planetary A-index 16. The estimated planetary K-index at 1800 UTC on 19 May was 2. Space weather for the past 24 hours has been moderate. Geomagnetic storms reaching the G2 level occurred. No space weather storms are predicted for the next 24 hours. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Trends -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Date 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 UTC 0300 0600 0900 1200 1500 1800 2100 0300 0600 0900 1200 1500 1800 SFlx 120 120 120 120 120 120 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 A-in 666668816 16 16 16 16 16 16 K-in 22233135642322 Current Solar information available at http://www.am-dx.com/wwv.htm ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca 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] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question
For those who are interested in the technical reasons why Patrick doesn't get the same kind of adjacent-channel hash that those of us in urban areas do, read on. For those who don't...another thread will be along shortly with convention news ;) -- As far as propagation is concerned, there is nothing at all magical about the digital signals that flank the analog FM signal to create HD radio on FM. The ionosphere doesn't care whether it's analog or digital modulation. If a signal is (a) strong enough to be received and (b) doesn't have something stronger sitting over it, you'll get it. If either of those factors doesn't exist, you won't. So: it helps to think of the digital signal as something separate from the analog. If you're getting KUOW in HD, for instance, you're really getting: --94.6 --- KUOW lower digital carriers (on the same piece of spectrum used by an analog 94.7 signal) --94.8 --- KUOW analog signal (centered at 94.9) --95.0 --- KUOW upper digital carriers (on the same spectrum used by an analog 95.1 signal) --95.2 --- Depending on the station's technical setup, the digital signal may literally be completely separate from the analog. At WXXI-FM, for instance, our digital signal uses a separate transmitter, separate transmission line and separate antenna bays interleaved with our analog. It is possible (albeit not currently legal) for us to completely turn off our analog transmission chain and run only the digital carriers. If you were listening on an analog radio, you'd hear nothing on 91.5 (or maybe even be able to DX something else on that frequency), but an HD radio would detect the digital carriers and still give you WXXI-FM when tuned to "91.5." The digital carriers operate at much lower power levels than the analog. Initially, digital operated at just 1% of analog, or 20 dB below carrier (-20 dBc). More recently, the FCC has started allowing stations to use higher power levels of 4% (-14 dBc) or even 10% (-20 dBc) of analog. So using KUOW as an example, let's say it's still -20 dBc. That's 100kW in analog and 1 kW in digital. If you're in metro Seattle, that 1 kW digital is plenty to still ride right over anything else that might be coming on the adjacent channels of 94.7 and 95.1. If you're way down in Seaside, though, those 1 kW digital signals are DX: point a good antenna right at Seattle and you might get them strongly enough to decode, IF there's nothing else in the way on those frequencies. Point the antenna away from Seattle or disconnect it and you won't hear much of anything, as would be the case with ANY signal of 1000 watts from 100+ miles away. This leads to a bunch of interesting DX scenarios when you start to break it all down: For instance - let's say that you were a little closer to your semi-local on 94.9, enough so for it to be an un-nullable pest. But let's also say that your local 94.9 is analog-only. So you might have a spectrum that looks like this: 94.6 --- KUOW lower digital sideband, weak but with nothing else in the way 94.8 --- Your local analog 94.9, loud enough to overwhelm KUOW's analog 95.0 --- KUOW upper digital sideband, weak but with nothing else in the way 95.2 --- On an analog radio, all you'd hear is the local when you tune to 94.9. But when you tune an HD radio to "94.9," if it can hear those upper and lower sidebands, it will ignore the analog in-between...and so you might hear your local 94.9 in analog for a few seconds and then, when the HD decodes, you'll hear KUOW instead, because while your radio says "94.9," it's really looking for signals above and below 94.9 to decode. There are all sorts of permutations on this that can happen when the dial is more crowded. It's easy, for instance, to think of scenarios where the spectrum is clear for a distant analog signal but its HD sidebands are overwhelmed by locals. For instance, I can easily hear 105 kW WTSS 102.5 Buffalo in analog from about 70 miles away - but its 1050-watt digital carriers are completely obscured by locals WVOR 102.3 and WLGZ on 102.7. If either of those locals goes off, there's WTSS in digital, because that bit of spectrum is suddenly open. Does that help make some sense of all of this? s ___ IRCA mailing list IRCA@hard-core-dx.com http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca 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] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question
Pat, To me it sounds like you have the ideal FM situation. The benefits of HD without the massive interference. You'll get plenty of skip on those adjacents, too. In the city itself, the HD hash is so strong that it wipes out most adjacents, unless a way is found to null it somewhat. I calculated once that 42 channels (out of a total of 100 FM channels) are significantly blocked for me in Seattle by HD hash. At one time that would have meant just 21 local frequencies, but since all HD signals effectively take up three frequencies, that means there are 63 frequencies blocked locally instead of the 21 there would have been without the encroachment of HD. As for smaller cities, with the exception of public stations that can get grants to install HD, you're right, the economics don't favor it in many cases. The purchase of a new transmitter at over a hundred grand, plus licensing fees for the technology, make it hard to justify, although some owners will do it since it allows them to use a loophole that lets them apply for a translator to retransmit the HD signal in analog. I'll hold back regarding my opinions on _that_, since we've probably already discussed this too much on an AM-related list. -- Rick -Original Message- From: IRCA [mailto:irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Martin Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 10:33 PM To: IRCA Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question Rick, I am really amazed that I easily turn the Yagi to the NE, and I lose 94.9 & 96.5 Seaside and get Seattle. In fact both for a time yesterday I got the sub channels they offer. I may stack two of the FM6, if I can figure out how to stack three antennas on one pole. I also have a UHF Yagi. But I think the height would be an issue. The pole would have to be 18 feet rather than my 15 feet. I do not know if I could keep it up in our winds. Patrick Martin Seaside OR KGED QSL Manager > From: rick...@shellworld.net > To: irca@hard-core-dx.com > Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 07:15:15 -0700 > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > Patrick, > You're also really benefiting from the gain your antenna is providing, > favoring the distant signals and somewhat nulling your locals. > Most FM HD users won't have that benefit. > -- > Rick > -Original Message- > From: IRCA [mailto:irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com] On Behalf Of Rick > Lewis > Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 7:05 AM > To: 'Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America' > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > Hi Patrick, > Sounds to me like you're working with, and benefiting from, very > narrow filters on your FM. > At least in my experience with the Sony X-drs3Hd and other radios at > their factory settings without extra filtering, if an HD decodes, > adjacents won't be heard. > Granted, Seattle doesn't have trop the way the Northeast or southern > California does. > The Sony filters out much of the HD noise, but adjacents are still > covered up. > I also have a Tecsun portable CR-1100. Unusually, it doesn't filter > out the HD noise on adjacents. > I'm sure most people find those huge blocks of noise objectionable, > but not me, because most of the time you can tell how well you're > nulling out the HD adjacent. Some HD signals are misleading, but in > many cases, even strong HD signals can be nulled out enough to that a > semistrong station can defeat them. > I'm blind, so I can't say how well the Sonys indicate nulling visually > and whether this can be helpful. > But with the CR-1100 it's easy to audibly determine when an HD > adjacent is being nulled. > On the Sony it's not. > -- > Rick > > -Original Message- > From: IRCA [mailto:irca-boun...@hard-core-dx.com] On Behalf Of Mike > Hawkins > Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 1:51 AM > To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > I don't get hash on distant FM stations, but there really isn't hash at all. > Its a blanking of adjacents. You have to remember too that they are > using lower power for the digital components. If they up the power, > you'll get the full force of the signal. > > They try to convince us that this is the future of radio, but the last > thing I want is to know whether Rush Limbaugh is wheezing. AM is > sports or conservative talk. FM is I-Heart-Monopoly. If it weren't > for skip, I would listen exclusively to the all-news station until I got bored with it. > Outside of the DX groups, I don't even know anyone who listens to > radio anymore. I know nobody who even owns a HD radio. They have had > years to get one, so where are they. I think the only thing that HD > radio has really accomplished is to lose all of the non-locals and > semi-locals in the noise left behind by the artifacts. > > The fidelity doesn't matter if the choices are non-existent. Elvis > left the building years ago. > > Mike > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 1:11 AM,
Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question
Russ, That is bad. No wonder I have heard that the FM Dial in metro areas are a wasteland when it comes to DXing. I would guess it would be worse than AM, as there are a lot less IBOC on AM than FM. I sure hope we do not get any locals running IBOC here. Patrick Martin Seaside OR KGED QSL Manager > Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 06:37:57 -0400 > From: wb2...@gmail.com > To: irca@hard-core-dx.com > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > I have 18 locals or close semi-locals running IBOC. Their hash kills > another 35 channels, so I lose 53 at the start. I am between 7 and 10 miles > from most of the local transmitters, all line-of-sight. > > I'm sure there are worse cases, but this is bad enough. > > Russ Edmunds > 15 mi NW Phila > Grid FN20id > > > 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 Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:22 AM, Patrick Martin wrote: > > > Thanks Russ. So then it does look like I am too far to get the HD hash. > > That pleases me as reports from FM DXers in Urban areas stated that FM DX > > is nearly useless with the number of locals and add to that the HD hash. It > > seems a lot of urban stations run HD. Here I do not have any locally and > > none of the Portland stations even show the HD logo. They are too weak. > > Seattle does, and it varies from time to time how many I get to lock in HD. > > FM IBOC hash is a lot different than AM hash. Too bad AM is not the same. > > It would make DXing easier. > > > > Patrick > > > > Patrick Martin > > Seaside OR > > KGED QSL Manager > > > > > Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 07:13:38 -0400 > > > From: wb2...@gmail.com > > > To: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > > > > > Typically, the IBOC hash on FM won't make it as far as you're talking > > > about, Patrick. I find that I can drive west and I will lose the hash on > > > the adjacents well before I start to have trouble with the ( analog, > > since > > > I don't have HD capability ) readability on the primary. Others who have > > > the Sonys report that the filtering remove a lot of it anyway - they can > > > usually hear stations adjacent to those having IBOC unless they have the > > > antenna aimed too close. > > > > > > Russ Edmunds > > > 15 mi NW Phila > > > Grid FN20id > > > > > > > > > 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 Mon, May 18, 2015 at 4:50 AM, Mike Hawkins < > > michael.d.hawk...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I don't get hash on distant FM stations, but there really isn't hash at > > > > all. Its a blanking of adjacents. You have to remember too that they > > are > > > > using lower power for the digital components. If they up the power, > > you'll > > > > get the full force of the signal. > > > > > > > > They try to convince us that this is the future of radio, but the last > > > > thing I want is to know whether Rush Limbaugh is wheezing. AM is > > sports or > > > > conservative talk. FM is I-Heart-Monopoly. If it weren't for skip, I > > > > would listen exclusively to the all-news station until I got bored with > > > > it. Outside of the DX groups, I don't even know anyone who listens to > > > > radio anymore. I know nobody who even owns a HD radio. They have had > > > > years to get one, so where are they. I think the only thing that HD > > radio > > > > has really accomplished is to lose all of the non-locals and > > semi-locals in > > > > the noise left behind by the artifacts. > > > > > > > > The fidelity doesn't matter if the choices are non-existent. Elvis > > left > > > > the building years ago. > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Patrick Martin > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks Mike. It sounds like, at least in your case, the FM IBOC > > noise is > > > > > an issue if on a local station. Do you get any IBOC FM Hash on > > distant > > > > > stations? As I mentioned, even the powerful 88.1 from Newport down > > the > > > > > coast, it is stable and I get both channels FM1 & FM2, yet on 88.3 I > > > > hear a > > > > > mix of Portland and some translator. I have compared a non-IBOC near > > an > > > > > IBOC, both distant signals and I do not notice anything different. > > The > > > > hash > > > > > must be wiped out at some distance then. I am glad we have no IBOC > > > > locally. > > > > > At least for now. Our stations for the most part have little money, > > so I > > > > > doubt we will get any soon. Two stations do run RDS though. KFMY > > 99.7 I > > > > > never detected the RDS before I got the FM6 up. The other is KOAC FM > > 89.7 > > > > > and
Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question
I have 18 locals or close semi-locals running IBOC. Their hash kills another 35 channels, so I lose 53 at the start. I am between 7 and 10 miles from most of the local transmitters, all line-of-sight. I'm sure there are worse cases, but this is bad enough. Russ Edmunds 15 mi NW Phila Grid FN20id 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 Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:22 AM, Patrick Martin wrote: > Thanks Russ. So then it does look like I am too far to get the HD hash. > That pleases me as reports from FM DXers in Urban areas stated that FM DX > is nearly useless with the number of locals and add to that the HD hash. It > seems a lot of urban stations run HD. Here I do not have any locally and > none of the Portland stations even show the HD logo. They are too weak. > Seattle does, and it varies from time to time how many I get to lock in HD. > FM IBOC hash is a lot different than AM hash. Too bad AM is not the same. > It would make DXing easier. > > Patrick > > Patrick Martin > Seaside OR > KGED QSL Manager > > > Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 07:13:38 -0400 > > From: wb2...@gmail.com > > To: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > > > Typically, the IBOC hash on FM won't make it as far as you're talking > > about, Patrick. I find that I can drive west and I will lose the hash on > > the adjacents well before I start to have trouble with the ( analog, > since > > I don't have HD capability ) readability on the primary. Others who have > > the Sonys report that the filtering remove a lot of it anyway - they can > > usually hear stations adjacent to those having IBOC unless they have the > > antenna aimed too close. > > > > Russ Edmunds > > 15 mi NW Phila > > Grid FN20id > > > > > > 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 Mon, May 18, 2015 at 4:50 AM, Mike Hawkins < > michael.d.hawk...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > I don't get hash on distant FM stations, but there really isn't hash at > > > all. Its a blanking of adjacents. You have to remember too that they > are > > > using lower power for the digital components. If they up the power, > you'll > > > get the full force of the signal. > > > > > > They try to convince us that this is the future of radio, but the last > > > thing I want is to know whether Rush Limbaugh is wheezing. AM is > sports or > > > conservative talk. FM is I-Heart-Monopoly. If it weren't for skip, I > > > would listen exclusively to the all-news station until I got bored with > > > it. Outside of the DX groups, I don't even know anyone who listens to > > > radio anymore. I know nobody who even owns a HD radio. They have had > > > years to get one, so where are they. I think the only thing that HD > radio > > > has really accomplished is to lose all of the non-locals and > semi-locals in > > > the noise left behind by the artifacts. > > > > > > The fidelity doesn't matter if the choices are non-existent. Elvis > left > > > the building years ago. > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Patrick Martin > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks Mike. It sounds like, at least in your case, the FM IBOC > noise is > > > > an issue if on a local station. Do you get any IBOC FM Hash on > distant > > > > stations? As I mentioned, even the powerful 88.1 from Newport down > the > > > > coast, it is stable and I get both channels FM1 & FM2, yet on 88.3 I > > > hear a > > > > mix of Portland and some translator. I have compared a non-IBOC near > an > > > > IBOC, both distant signals and I do not notice anything different. > The > > > hash > > > > must be wiped out at some distance then. I am glad we have no IBOC > > > locally. > > > > At least for now. Our stations for the most part have little money, > so I > > > > doubt we will get any soon. Two stations do run RDS though. KFMY > 99.7 I > > > > never detected the RDS before I got the FM6 up. The other is KOAC FM > 89.7 > > > > and they are strong in RDS. > > > > > > > > Patrick Martin > > > > Seaside OR > > > > KGED QSL Manager > > > > > > > > > Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 00:57:49 -0700 > > > > > From: michael.d.hawk...@gmail.com > > > > > To: irca@hard-core-dx.com > > > > > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question > > > > > > > > > > To me, FM IBOC is like bacon sizzling as its cooking. It not as > > > > obnoxious > > > > > as it is on AM, but it has the same effect. As an example, 97.3 > in San > > > > > Francisco (xmtr 20 or so miles away) runs IBOC. It does not have > > > obvious > > > > > artifacts on adjacent channels. If they turn it off (as they > sometimes > > > > > do), I immediately
