Free Radio Forum: Re: DRM

Hope I have posted this the right place this time!

The DRM+ plus Band II tests from Craigkelly were quite positive, see:

https://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/whp/whp-pdf-files/WHP199.pdf

We (SIBC) spent years (from late 90s) trying to persuade the regulators and the UK government to allow us to test DRM+ on 96.2 from Bressay, mainly because Band II has a far greater coverage in hilly terrain to Band III.

Our thinking was to start with DRM+ as a low bit-rate subcarrier of the stereo FM, then, as part of a transition, a higher DRM+ bit-rate with mono FM and then, eventually, entirely DRM+ at the highest bit-rate.

Unfortunately we were being too logical and this is now a blip in history.

Previous Message

I can listen to "broadcasts from beyond our shores" easily using the internet and SDR's. I'm not aware of any plans from the UK government to control this unlike in some authoritarian countries whose broadcasts are among those I can listen to as well as visit their websites.

I'm a long time supporter financially of Amnesty and in more recent years Liberty and am sure if this was proposed those organisations would object as would many of our elected or other legislators.

Add to that all the other media/internet sites/messageboards/tweets etc from beyond our shores I can access which is one reason I've recently added Hope Not Hate to the organisations I support.

Your argument certainly applies to many other countries, Russia and China are the first two that come to mind.

Previous Message

The introduction of DAB, with hundreds of small power transmitters, to cover regions of the UK, gives government absolute control of broadcasts beyond our shores. This was a major factor behind the various marine broadcasting laws.
DRM would open up the world to cross border, high quality, digital signals. I can't think of any government that would encourage this.
Control from the centre trumps any technological gain.

Previous Message

Around 20 years ago, I saw an exhibit at a trade show (probably IBC) which was promoting the 'Digital Radio' (DR) brand. The idea was to encourage manufacturers to produce combined DRM / DAB receivers and they had a couple of prototypes bearing the 'DR' logo. The DRM consortium were involved and I think the BBC (or at least BBC R&D) were among the broadcasters pushing the concept.

They also had a live SW DRM demo running and I remember being impressed by the sound quality, this being the first time I'd actually heard DRM in action.

I can't help but think that, India notwithstanding, the opportunity for large scale DRM implementation has long since passed. Never say never of course, but if the 'DR' initiative had been successful things might have turned out differently.

Previous Message

It is an uphill battle the DRM lobby have Simon, for mainly commercial reasons. Not do much a question of which horse will win the race, more that there seem to be several different races and some are trying to cover all bases and enter them in all.

the Indians have been pumping out 20 and 40 kW MW signals of DRM for about ten years now. The biggest problem seems to be that the people who own the patent on the receiver circuitry were demanding high royalties. In Bombay, there are three differently badged receivers on the market but only one is a 'kosher' licensed one.

That is always going to be the key to the success of any platform - how easily can Joe Public tune in. If its expensive or a battle of any kind, even unfair competition, then it will fail. Worst fo all, unless the programme is in demand, there is no hope for success.

The key is, as ever, to have a popular programme that the public WANT to hear. Make it easily available (including cheap!) and only then. will a new platform be successful.

DRM quality is (or perhaps "can be") very good, better than DAB, and that may be the way forward for MW, with the band reorganised to give wider channels - 20kHz spacing would be perfect.