Butch,

My understanding is that the IBOC standard dictates that 10% of a station's 
power is allocated to the digital encoding, and the rest is used just as it 
is now.  Once, when I was about 100 miles away from home, I tuned in a 
station from home that I knew was broadcasting in HD, and was unable to pick 
up the hash on either side.  I wonder if that will be true when AM stations 
start broadcasting at night.

Steve

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Butch Bussen" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 13:33
Subject: Re: FCC aproves HD A M broadcasting 24 hours a day


> Where did you get the idea digital runs less power.  I've never read that.
> The problem with digital radio is the same problem with all digital
> formats.  It is either there, or it is not and it takes a very very good
> signal to noise ratio to work.  Under the same conditions, analog will be
> more dependable and reach farther.  Any of you remember the good old
> analog cell phone days.  Once in a while the signal would get noisy, but
> you could still copy.  You could also wonder around and find a hot spot.
> Can't do that at all with digital.  I hate the audio on today's digital
> cell phones, but they can cram more subscribers on a single channel, and
> that is the name of the game.  The motto seems to be "digital is better".
> Well some times it is, and some times not.  Look ahead a bit.  Do you
> really think we'll still have free radio once everything goes digital?  I
> doubt it.  The format will be in place to make radio pay radio.  Look at
> the control that can be exercised.  I get satellite on direct tv, and
> because they know my zip code, the games are blacked out here in Vegas.  I
> don't have a clue why, as we can get them on the same channel locally that
> is uplinked to the satellite.  The point is that with digital, all of this
> is so easily controled.  Adds can even be targeted to specific areas or
> zip codes.  To me, it is kind of scarry.
> 73s
> Butch Bussen
> wa0vjr
>
>
>