This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"As of May 2009, there were more stations in the world on the air with HD Radio technology than any other digital radio technology."
Really? Even more so than broadcasting in the DAB? It comes to my attention that HDradio is a system thats mostly limmited to Unites States and a few European areas., And the statistics in that paregraph shows the stations that are only in United States, Theres alot of radio stations in the world, and a good majority is outside the united States, and The worlds a pretty big place you know.....
(I'm sorry my english is bad, I really speak Russiwn...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.5.158.162 ( talk) 06:53, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Is the link to http://www.hdradioreviews.com/ really necessary? It appears to have more Google AdSense ads then anything useful and I suspect it might have been stuck there for commercial gain.
Q: How does this differ from satellite radio like Sirius and XM? I've never heard of HD Radio until I ran across this entry.
A: Unlike satellite radio, HD radio is a free service. There are no monthly fees; you only need an HD Radio receiver. It is also local radio, meaning that the station is, like a regular analog radio station, is broadcasting for your specific area.
Also, the sound quality of HD Radio is CD QUALITY, unlike satellite radio which is highly compressed and sounds more like analog AM stereo. Teamgoon 11:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
`Now their main analog signal has a lot of hash and a constant whine, like alternator noise in a poorly filtered automotive sound system' <- that is probably not HD radio' fault, but instead some poorly shielded wiring. The missing high frequencies, that could be a result of the compression. But AM radio is also missing all high frequencies too -- with 10 KHz of bandwidth available, that means all frequencies over 5 KHz must be cut off. But human speech is perfectly understandable even if you cut off everything over 3 KHz, like as you mentioned telephones. This station probably has other issues. dougmc 14:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
If you want significant proof that this hash exists, come to Salt Lake City and tune any where around the three local stations that currently use HD, those being KUTR, KWDZ, and the mother of all hashes, KSL. I can not hear anything from 1140-1180 during the day and night here in Salt Lake, the hash of the signal is too great. HD radio is still too young to make any significant claims of benefits, including audio quality. Milonica ( talk) 02:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
DAB uses COFDM - so to say "spread spectrum", is wrong. There is an extension that was introduced some years ago, DMB (not DMB-S). It allows for better compresseion codecs, and can even transmit video data. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.152.202.77 ( talk) 14:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
The article should not contain only references to (vendor-authored) PR articles about what countries are testing it - the source should be a government agency or independent consortium. Indeed, one could factually state that *any* system has been *evaluated* (just by shipping a test system to them). The articles provided were here say without independent vouching.
Why does Sony is not making car stereos HD ready? MarioV 01:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
I would say that Sony is a transition of some given products. They were known for some excellent shortwave models but much of those have either been discontinued or mimiced by far cheaper models from china (see Kaito/Degen) Sony is pushing everything towards a PS 3 launch later this season and since HD radio would be simply a one time seller it's understandable why they aren't in it yet. Give them a year to year and a half and I'm sure they'll do something.
It seems that this article has more useful information on AM radio than the AM broadcasting article. --
In any discussion of HD Radio's merits, please try to seperate your attacks on HD's negative affects on AM radio from those about FM radio. As a broadcast engineer, I know that HD causes many more interference problems on AM than it does on FM. I use it on FM, but hate it on AM. When you don't qualify your "hash" and interference complaints about stations and situations with a discussion of what band you're hearing this trouble on, you give the public the impression HD Radio is as bad for FM as it is for AM, which it clearly isn't. -
128.61.18.2 (
talk)
11:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
"The term "on channel" is a misnomer because the system actually broadcasts on the ordinarily unused channels adjacent to an existing radio station's allocation"
Am rather amused by this bald lie. It goes to show how dishonest the HDR proponents are.
On the AM BC band there are no vacant slots either side of an AM station. In fact the modulation bandwidth is as wide (or wider) than the channel spacing.
It might be true that local stations are well spaced, but more distant stations are at 10 KHz spacing, so there is no way to avoid the digital sidebands when listening to a distant station..
~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.207.18.233 ( talk) 10:56, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Should there be a sentence explaining what the HD in the title stands for? I'm sure they intend for it to stand for High Definition, although that's probably just a way to cash in on the HDTV non-craze that's going down. Is there some official title for the HD portion of the name?
HD Radio does not stand for anything.-- XMBRIAN 19:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
The first paragraph of the text explains what HD stands for (Hybrid Digital).
Actually, the first paragraph does NOT explain what it stands for, merely what it does not stand for. Clarification should be added to make sure that if it doesn't mean anything, then it simply stands for nothing. Mattygabe ( talk) 22:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Is not the title syntax wrong and it should be HD radio? 1archie99 ( talk) 00:35, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I believe that there is an error in the article, "It does not generally cause interference to any analog station within its 1mV/m² signal strength contour, the lowest limit to which the FCC protects most stations." The units of radio signal strength should be mV/m. See the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_strength . Bartonsmith 13:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I understand the difference of the HD radio signal and the radio receiver. But what about the radio speakers? Is there a difference or are they just putting an improved signal through the same old speakers which will not maximize the new HD singal?
There is no such thing as "HD" or Digital speakers or even headphones. I laugh everytime I see digital in reference to sound waves. Ever listen to a modem... that's what digital sounds like. Also, don't ever think that the higher the wattage the better the speaker. Always look for efficiancy when buying speakers. A 1000 watt speaker just takes a 1000 watt amp to push it.
Ty —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.195.66.44 ( talk) 14:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I changed the definition of what HD stands for at the end of the first paragraph. It originally said it stands for Hybrid technology, however according to Howstuffworks.com.
Yeah, it's a sloppy edit. :-(
Fontenot 1031 22:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
It does stand for Hybrid Digital which was purposely chosen by iBiquity and abbreviated HD so consumers would be fooled into think that it stands for High Definition which is far from the truth.
Gata4001 02:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
That's kind of deceptive to call something "HD" expecting people to associate it with "High Definition" but then say that it really doesn't mean that, and it doesn't mean "Hybrid Digital" and that it really doesn't mean anything at all. Should we be more clear in the first paragraph about this strangeness?
-- Rcronk ( talk) 22:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I just got the response back from HD Radio:
I'll tweak the first paragraph to be more clear on this.
-- Rcronk ( talk) 21:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
David 18:00, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
72.87.188.9 07:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
First of all the fm analog signal is still the same, the hd sidebands were added which contain the data i.e. the four different sources: music, news, etc. However the hd signal is at a lower power level about half of the analog signal. The FCC allowed the stations that broadcast HD to increase the HD power to that of the stations analog signal. Which means that the HD signal will reach out further. My information is from a good friend who is a Chief Engineer at a large market radio station. Segars 15 Jun 2013 (est) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.244.157.167 ( talk)
Are the complete, exact technical specifications of the digital format etc secret? If not, please give the basic info in the article, and link to complete info. If the specs are secret, how foolish and wrong to pick this as a "public" broadcast standard -- good thing the rest of the world seems smarter! What about decoding this digital signal with a computer? (howstuffworks seems like a valuable additional source: http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/hd-radio1.htm) - 69.87.204.244 14:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
HD radio is described as "CD quality", but it is not. Audio CDs supply 1411 Kb/s Red Book (audio CD standard), but HD radio has 96 Kb/s at the most to work with (less for multicasting). To make up the difference, lossy compression is used. There is a general misunderstanding these days that digital allows higher quality in less bandwidth compared to analog. The opposite is true. Digital allows using MORE bandwidth to achieve greater quality and error correction/perfection. (What computations are needed to convert this 96 Kb/s to MP3?) - 69.87.204.244 14:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
To be fair, they say it is "almost CD quality," not CD quality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.93.188 ( talk) 17:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
This article says, 'the FM system has been described as "CD quality"'. Oh boy, that's rich! There is no form of radio anywhere that is remotely near CD quality in terms of S/N ratio, dynamic range, stereo imaging, or transient response. Considering the fundamental truth that the newer formats (satellite, etc.) sound even worse, I can go ahead and predict that there will never be any form of radio that is CD quality in terms of S/N ratio, dynamic range, stereo imaging, or transient response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.100.147 ( talk) 00:37, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
The article says:
Other criticisms, particularly from the television broadcast industry, cite HD radio’s rather colloquial usage of the term HD, which has historically been used and reserved for television. Some have argued this usage may be a form of trademark infringement. However, most arguments are unsubstantiated—the HD networks and media conglomerates (Fox, ABC, etc) failed to secure the trademark initially, and hence lost the HD branding to the public domain (similar to “Hoover” for vacuums, “Kleenex” for tissues, “Ziplock” for plastic bags, among others).
Terms such as Hoover, Kleenex, Ziploc and others (thought that list is woefully incomplete, missing, for instance, "spam" and "google") are registered trademarks that have become "genericized" and are in danger of losing or have in fact lost their trademark registrations. They are, in effect, victims of their own popularity. In contrast, nobody registered the term HD as a trademark or, more appropriately, as a certification mark and, as a result, the term can be used by anybody except to the extent that the companies that have used the term HD in relation to television image quality have common law trademark rights.
The comparison to so-called genericized trademarks is not appropriate in the context of the term HD and should be removed by somebody who is responsible for this page.
Kaplanmyrth 03:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
There should be some words on the final rules for HD as the FCC has made the decision earlier this week, including allowing AM-HD broadcasting at night. TravKoolBreeze 04:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
--Nightime AM HD Broadcasts?--
How does that work with some of the 50,000 watt blowtorches that broadcast in HD? If you can pull in one of those stations such as WABC 770 AM in NY,NY do you pick up the HD signal or just the analog?
Feel free to add a HD radio column to the OFDM#OFDM system comparison table. Mange01 11:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
`This article may be too technical for a general audience' ... no way! If you want to add a less technical summary, fine, but don't remove all the technical bits. dougmc 14:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Although most magazines refer to FM-HD radio as a "96 kbps standard", if you read the actual iBiquity white papers it says the nominal FM rate is "99.3" kbps (and higher with additional modes). What's with the discrepancy between the reported "96" and the actual standard's 99.3 data rate? Theaveng 23:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
24.81.130.107 10:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Image:Hdradiologo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
This page seems to be heavily biased against HD radio, including lots of unsourced statements:
The criticism section is large and criticism creeps into the other sections anyway. The whole article needs references and criticisms should be limited to those with sources. I'd make many of these edits myself, but I don't really know much about the subject. I've added several "attribution needed" tags where appropriate. Oren0 02:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Why does 75% of this article read like it was written by one of iBiquity's shills who probably invests in the company? Why are things like high quality audio left in without qualification? The FCC has not mandated any analog shutdown for radio, not even any talk of it, why is that lie allowed in there, who wrote it, you purport to be an online encyclopedia, why are all these inaccuracies and iBiquity propagandas allowed in this article? The main sources seem to be iBiquity itself, is iBiquity an unbiased source on their own product which is failing miserably at this point? Gata4001 21:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm an electrical engineer. I did a lot of research on HD Radio and how it works (or does not work), reviewing various white papers and FCC studies of the hardware. And what happens next? Along came 2 people who basically destroyed all my hard work. I was going to go back and try to restore all the facts I had added to article, but you know what? Forget it. There's no point in me wasting my time trying to "fix" the article, if people can so easily ERASE EVERYTHING I ADDED to the article. Why should I waste my time???
Yes I'm angry. The vandals erased some VALID information (both the pros and cons) along with my carefully researched citations. What did I waste my time for? - Theaveng 14:08, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
What do we need to do to get rid of this guy? Reviewing the history I notice that, even after a change is reverted ("Please don't editorialize and don't have deceptive edit summaries"), he immediately goes back, ignores the advice just given, and puts back his hate-filled opinions ("is this high quality besides iBiquity's?"). He's clearly here to disrupt and destroy the encylopedia. I vote to ban him immediately. - Theaveng 14:16, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
If Gato4001 only did this once or twice, I wouldn't care, but he keeps making these same changes again-and-again-and-AGAIN, even though he has been instructed not to do so. He is a DISRUPTIVE editor, not a constructive one. He seeks to destroy the article, rather than create a better one. He seeks to create chaos, rather than harmony & cooperation.
Yes I'm angry. I'm sick of seeing these Barbarian Vandal Raids destroying all my hard work (improving the article) over the last month. He's also destroying other people's hard work who originally created the article ~2 years ago. GATO4001 is disruptive, uncooperative, and creating chaos. - Theaveng 11:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I notice some one changed the "regular radio comes with all cars" to "most cars". I'm curious to know: What car models do NOT come with a radio? I recently looked at the cheapest car I could buy (toyota yaris), and it came with a radio even with everything else stripped (no power brakes; no power steering; no a/c). ----- Point is: I am unaware of any car model that does not come with an analog radio; it's standard equipment. Isn't it? - Theaveng 14:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
You can add these to the article AFTER you give us some citations. If you don't have citations, then they can not be added. (Because they are merely unsubstantiated opinions without validation. They are also not NPOV (neutral).)
- Theaveng 17:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I've come across these comparisons between HD-Radio and DRM already on the DRM page. I edited it and posted the reason what was wrong with it. Please, read it and fix especially the paragraph AM-HD vs. AM-DRM that is completely wrong.
BTW, there is nothing called AM-DRM. DRM is a standard for radio broadcasting on frequencies below 30MHz. That is what you may call AM. The standard for broadcasting on FM will be called DRM+. 24.81.130.107 09:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Why is the following comparison allowed which is both in both AM and FM: "If in the future the FCC decides to discontinue analog radio, as they have done with analog television, etc." This sentence insinuates that because the FCC mandated total conversion to digital in television, that this edict is also imminent in radio, this is a remore possiblity, and the two should not be linked at all. Gata4001 15:25, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Since we're discussing Analog Shutdown, I thought you might find this interesting: "WORLDBEAT - UK: ANALONG MAY END IN 2015." commercial radio companies in the United Kingdom are looking to set a firm end date for analog radio." GERMANY is also targeting 2015 for a shutdown. That would put the shutdown at ~16 years after Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB) was first introduced to the UK, and also make the UK & Germany the first nations to end FM radio. More here: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.info/browse_thread/thread/e4d202b113f98cfd - Theaveng 18:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
It makes the entry look very biased and is free advertising. Gata4001 15:31, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Theaveng, You are right, I still do not agree with it, but I definitely lost this one, and actually I think 8 track cassettes had the best audio ever invented. - Gata4001 00:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know Theaveng that the article looks a little more balanced to me now. I still hate IBOC and can't wait until it dies of apathy unless it is legislated into our faces like they (FCC, big money, etc.) did to TV (although with TV at least it makes some sense) but it does look and read better. Incidentally I was kidding about 8 tracks, I thought they were the worst form of music reproduction ever made. I also like LP's and still buy them especially new ones when I can. I have several MFSL LP's and they sound unbelievable. I think a good LP blows away any digital form of music reproduction. Gata4001 06:55, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I've just read through this, and I have yet to figure out how exactly to listen to HD radio signals. Me thinks it's time to stop with the "I wish I was a high school electronics teacher" speech, and just get to the point. This is an encyclopedia, not an electronics manual. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.183.121.32 ( talk) 11:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm curious as to whether any future date for a switch-off of analog radio in the USA has been announced. Analog cell phones are being shut off in the USA in 2008, and analog television in 2009. Is it likely that analog radio may one day be shut off also, so as to free wireless spectrum for more data services? Pine ( talk) 21:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
The correct terms are stereo AM and stereo FM, not AM stereo and FM stereo. "Stereo" modifies the transmission system, not the other way 'round. As a wag remarked some decades back, "FM stereo is stereo with flutter".
Kahn was not the inventor of stereo AM. There are several stereo AM systems, of which his is one.
WilliamSommerwerck ( talk) 14:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
The first portable HD radio was produced by Coby in 2008, about 1 year before Best Buy's Insignia unit was released. The model is HDR-700. Also, the Coby unit has both AM HD and FM HD, however the Insignia unit is FM HD only. Therefore, the Coby HDR-700 is still the only portable AM HD and FM HD radio.
http://www.cobyusa.com/read_news.php?news_id=17
http://www.cobyusa.com/?p=prod&prod_num_id=194&pcat_id=3005 —Preceding unsigned comment added by NiklasE ( talk • contribs) 05:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
a. HD radio
Around the Boston area what are the lowest cost Hybrid Digital HD radios, that do the job in a manner of speaking, for listening to music and listening to singing?...
b. Satellite radio
What are the lowest cost tabletop or boombox type radios or setups available around the Boston area for both sirius and xm satellite radio services?...
Among a few references checked so far
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hd_radio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius_Satellite_Radio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM_Satellite_Radio
-- the zak 22:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Problem: at this time, this section's tone degenerates into future-predictive FUD by its end. Accuracy of the content notwithstanding, the tone seems far afield of Wikipedia standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PScooter63 ( talk • contribs) 18:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Not to mention, certain sections sound just like advertisements. -- Milonica ( talk) 19:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)
DumZiBoT ( talk) 02:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Theaveng, rather than removing any reference that clarifies the HDC relationship to AAC, lets try this: you cite an article that show HDC IS compatible with the MPEG standard; if you cannot and it stands that the HDC bitstream is NOT compliant with the MPEG standard, then consumers have a right to know this, and we ask that you stop glossing this fact over by saying "AAC-derived". Incompatible is, incompatible, and proprietary is proprietary. Again you can disprove this by citing references.
You can also stop deleting references to fact: that second generation DAB stations are using AAC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ken2009 ( talk • contribs) 16:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't think the advert template is justified here. I did not see a justification in the edit summary or here. A short list of who makes technology available to consumers is I think always helpful in a article like this. patsw ( talk) 17:35, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
« FMeXtra is even less expensive, and—on the transmission side—requires no installation (and therefore no cost), other than plugging it into the transmitter. However, special radios are required for reception in most cases.»
Is it contradicting itself!
-- Mahmudmasri ( talk) 14:19, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Admittedly, I'm still very new here at Wikipedia, but I'm a fast learner. I'm wondering why the reference I included in a recent edit were removed by IP 76.84.142.26. Was it the quoted text, or the source reference? Argguy ( talk) 05:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
If HD is free on cable, why can Radio HD be free? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Munozonfuego ( talk • contribs) 07:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
This article has several slams, some subtle, to HD radio and the radio broadcasting industry as a whole, placing the agenda and opinions of those who support LPFM above facts.
In the Bandwidth section:
Ironically, the National Association of Broadcasters claims this is not a problem, while at the same time using it as justification to keep LPFM stations (except its own members' translator stations) off the air.
Speculation, opinion, and a stance of those who support LPFM
The entire "Translators" section is all amateur analysis of the law and incorrect at that. The entire section can be summed up in two or three objective sentences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sraolive ( talk • contribs) 19:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
What tabletop HD radios are the best?... Many tabletop radios with hybrid digital HD radio appear to be of deficient audio quality, for example the tabletop HD radios at Radio Shack stores.
--
the zak (
talk)
08:01, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
I changed kilobit/s ( base 2) to kB/s (base 10 ) to keep in parallel with kHz which is a base 10 measurement. Also because the latter kilobit/s ( base 2) is not common knowledge nor in standard usage to date. Also because standard audio equipment is measured in the standard base 10 systems of kHz and kB/s etc -- Anthony morgan peters ( talk) 14:16, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
reverted back to above edit because kbits are in there infancy as a industry standard--
Anthony morgan peters (
talk)
19:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
undid all of the above edits.--
Anthony morgan peters (
talk)
19:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Kilobit are base 10 (and implicit /s). kilobyte/s is traditional base 2. You convert between bits and bytes by dividing by 8. I think you are confusing bit with bytes and bytes with (ki)bibytes. Carewolf ( talk) 20:50, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Rearanged and added the following to the intro for clearer reading and understanding "to transmit audio and data via a digital signal in conjunction with their analog signals. As a standared practice,the kilohertz signal rate is written next to its corresponding data transfer rate kilobits/s or kbits/s in Hd radio documentation."-- Anthony morgan peters ( talk) 19:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
I made a disambiguating edit for a link of the word bandwidth to the article bandwidth (signal processing). In the edit I made, it was clearly referring to an effective range of analog signal frequencies. However, there are other places where the same word is used to refer to bandwidth (computing), or perhaps equivalently, bit rate. This is not confusing to electrical engineers, but newcomers to the topic may want to know that there is a distinction. (I'm in the middle of looking for everywhere that links to the disambiguation page bandwidth, so I thought I would drop a note to see if anyone else wants to tackle this. If not, I may or may not come back in a few months and do it myself!) CosineKitty ( talk) 20:32, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
The FCC has released an order dated January 28, 2010 that allows for a four-fold IBOC power increase, with some restrictions for a few stations, and ground rules for settling interference issues.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-208A1.pdf
This order contains some technical inforamtion so someone with more technical knowledge will have to read it before anything is added to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.27.224.139 ( talk) 23:29, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Restored edits made 29 January 2010 as these contain information that is more current.
WQXR: See station website, station was sold and WNYC acquired the 105.9 frequency in a three-way deal with Univision, and put WQXR and Q2 on 105.9, and WQXR on the HD2 of WNYC, in a simultameous move on October 8, 2009.
Mormon Channel See radio.lds.org, which will confirm content, and unique nature of being a noncommerciial station on a commercial station's HD2, may not be the only one as there had been one in Ohio for at least a time broadcasting an NPR affiliate via a commercial station's HD2.
Translators: Red link is of call of translator that is one of a very small number of HD Radio broadcasters that are broadcating HD Radio in via translators (not putting HD2 on analog translator), the others are in Vermont and southern Nevada (KNPR translators). Verifiable in directory at hdradio.com, click the link to see more than just the major markets for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.27.224.139 ( talk) 00:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks on that, maybe I am a little less clear on defining things, the KUER translator, the KNPR translators, and the Vermont translators all take the main signal as-is, and don't pick up the HD stream separately, unlike some others that simply rebroadcast one of the HD2 channels as an analog signal, so what you are really getting on the translators is the full station, with all HD signals included.
These are very few presently and they are hard to find on the listings at hdradio.com since you have to go to the clickable map to get all that is in one state and even then there are not that many so it's hit or miss on those, but there will be more, especially now that the power increase has been approved. See the link in the previous section for that. If you have a better way to say what I was really shooting for, by all means put it into the article as an edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.27.224.139 ( talk) 21:15, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Conditional Access is mentioned as being a requirement to offer Services such as reading for the blind. This is untrue. Previous generation of that service only required a received capable of decoding SCA signals, and Radio reading service were most definitely not 'illegal to receive', required no subscription, and no conditional access.
The Boston COMINS project operated at MIT in the mid 1980s is another example of using the SCA channel.
rhyre ( talk) 20:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
The comparison with DAB does not seem to mention how it performs in mobile environment with the effects of multipath, DAB was designed specifically for use in cars and does not suffer from the distortion experienced with FM where there is multipath. HD Radio is based on an FM transmission so how does it compare?-- jmb ( talk) 23:49, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
The whole comparison with DAB section is utterly biased and America-centic and sound like it was taken from HD Radio promotional material. The contemporary DAB+ is even ignored, comparing HD Radio with an old standard. If the WP section even reflects the sources, then the sourcer are not up to par. PizzaMan ( ♨♨) 00:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Hd radio has now been around awhile. AM Hd is really cool when rolled out right but it rarely is done. News AM station in Dallas and College station sound well. A small AM Disney station in Houston, does sound really well. You could use the format to put old music back on the radio. The station in question sounds awesome. I have never Got am digital at home. Only on my mobile unit. I am the HD boy, I own 4 radios. Tuner, portable, table, and a great inexpensive car radio by JVC. They all vary in reception. All radio's do. Also how someone rolls out HD makes a huge difference on how it sound. Some HD ones sound great. I have heard some roll-outs with no back ground noise, no articulation and just great sound. Most twos sound a little articulated. If you read HD white papers, (I have) they talk about what files to encrypt and not to process. Wrong file, it will sound bad. Stations even mix them. The mask is a little small. You basically need to be in the target area of the station. The DXing at this point is just for those who live in the area of broadcast. Get a car unit. Oh lets talk mobile. My JVC is great. I can get great sound in target areas well. I just replaced a Honda radio with it and it works fine. Most two (HD-2) stations hold up well under bridges and buildings. Most DX sadly live, quiet retired lives out in the country, where you need a home antenna to even get analog FM. Big steel does work rurally and you can get a nearby market ok on HD. Where HD really is cool is the multi signals. Old formats are brought back, bad AM are FMed, and some other formats could go national. HD will rock win the stations figure out how to make money. The non profits are having all kinds of fun with it. San Antonio, Texas got an African American station back. Houston got Christian rock. The internet is also a boon two these two stations. As for the haters, these guys sound like early Americans who hated electricity and phones. They forget that when FM rolled out no one, no one cared. Am stations where given FM licenses for free and did nothing with them. Later it mattered. HD can be a good median to expand the band, but not turn the lights off on real band. And oh by the way, Radio is still free. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottradioman ( talk • contribs) 02:44, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
HD Radio. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:54, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
I noticed there's nothing in the article about the emergency and traffic alert capabilities of HD, via scrolling text messages. There's a whole section on the Crutchfeld site called transmission of additional information [ [1]] but it's not the most reliable source, since they sell the radios. Will keep looking for a better, neutral source. Timtempleton ( talk) 18:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on HD Radio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:07, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on HD Radio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-208A1.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:27, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
I would like some answer on:
AM HD Radio coverage distance.
That is for example: Can I receive any American digital HD radio on AM antenna in Europe?
Is digital reception possible in Europe?
I do not really know what is even AM analog distance.
But I suppose it could be possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.221.231.106 ( talk) 18:31, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Regarding receiving different digital and analog stations, it says: there is no way for the receiver to recognize that there is no correlation between the two. It seems to me that it can't be harder than Shazam. Gah4 ( talk) 09:50, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Many people mistakenly believe that HD radio is about high definition. I doubt the truth could be much further from that mistaken belief. In this case the HD is basically a trademark, and stands for "Hybrid Digital". I think the article should explictly call this out, to help prevent further spreading of the belief that HD Radio is in any way high definition. (In theory it could be, but when you spread the available bandwidth across 4 lossy sub channels, it's baredly "standard definition" let alone anything close to "high definition".)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"As of May 2009, there were more stations in the world on the air with HD Radio technology than any other digital radio technology."
Really? Even more so than broadcasting in the DAB? It comes to my attention that HDradio is a system thats mostly limmited to Unites States and a few European areas., And the statistics in that paregraph shows the stations that are only in United States, Theres alot of radio stations in the world, and a good majority is outside the united States, and The worlds a pretty big place you know.....
(I'm sorry my english is bad, I really speak Russiwn...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.5.158.162 ( talk) 06:53, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Is the link to http://www.hdradioreviews.com/ really necessary? It appears to have more Google AdSense ads then anything useful and I suspect it might have been stuck there for commercial gain.
Q: How does this differ from satellite radio like Sirius and XM? I've never heard of HD Radio until I ran across this entry.
A: Unlike satellite radio, HD radio is a free service. There are no monthly fees; you only need an HD Radio receiver. It is also local radio, meaning that the station is, like a regular analog radio station, is broadcasting for your specific area.
Also, the sound quality of HD Radio is CD QUALITY, unlike satellite radio which is highly compressed and sounds more like analog AM stereo. Teamgoon 11:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
`Now their main analog signal has a lot of hash and a constant whine, like alternator noise in a poorly filtered automotive sound system' <- that is probably not HD radio' fault, but instead some poorly shielded wiring. The missing high frequencies, that could be a result of the compression. But AM radio is also missing all high frequencies too -- with 10 KHz of bandwidth available, that means all frequencies over 5 KHz must be cut off. But human speech is perfectly understandable even if you cut off everything over 3 KHz, like as you mentioned telephones. This station probably has other issues. dougmc 14:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
If you want significant proof that this hash exists, come to Salt Lake City and tune any where around the three local stations that currently use HD, those being KUTR, KWDZ, and the mother of all hashes, KSL. I can not hear anything from 1140-1180 during the day and night here in Salt Lake, the hash of the signal is too great. HD radio is still too young to make any significant claims of benefits, including audio quality. Milonica ( talk) 02:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
DAB uses COFDM - so to say "spread spectrum", is wrong. There is an extension that was introduced some years ago, DMB (not DMB-S). It allows for better compresseion codecs, and can even transmit video data. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.152.202.77 ( talk) 14:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
The article should not contain only references to (vendor-authored) PR articles about what countries are testing it - the source should be a government agency or independent consortium. Indeed, one could factually state that *any* system has been *evaluated* (just by shipping a test system to them). The articles provided were here say without independent vouching.
Why does Sony is not making car stereos HD ready? MarioV 01:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
I would say that Sony is a transition of some given products. They were known for some excellent shortwave models but much of those have either been discontinued or mimiced by far cheaper models from china (see Kaito/Degen) Sony is pushing everything towards a PS 3 launch later this season and since HD radio would be simply a one time seller it's understandable why they aren't in it yet. Give them a year to year and a half and I'm sure they'll do something.
It seems that this article has more useful information on AM radio than the AM broadcasting article. --
In any discussion of HD Radio's merits, please try to seperate your attacks on HD's negative affects on AM radio from those about FM radio. As a broadcast engineer, I know that HD causes many more interference problems on AM than it does on FM. I use it on FM, but hate it on AM. When you don't qualify your "hash" and interference complaints about stations and situations with a discussion of what band you're hearing this trouble on, you give the public the impression HD Radio is as bad for FM as it is for AM, which it clearly isn't. -
128.61.18.2 (
talk)
11:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
"The term "on channel" is a misnomer because the system actually broadcasts on the ordinarily unused channels adjacent to an existing radio station's allocation"
Am rather amused by this bald lie. It goes to show how dishonest the HDR proponents are.
On the AM BC band there are no vacant slots either side of an AM station. In fact the modulation bandwidth is as wide (or wider) than the channel spacing.
It might be true that local stations are well spaced, but more distant stations are at 10 KHz spacing, so there is no way to avoid the digital sidebands when listening to a distant station..
~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.207.18.233 ( talk) 10:56, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Should there be a sentence explaining what the HD in the title stands for? I'm sure they intend for it to stand for High Definition, although that's probably just a way to cash in on the HDTV non-craze that's going down. Is there some official title for the HD portion of the name?
HD Radio does not stand for anything.-- XMBRIAN 19:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
The first paragraph of the text explains what HD stands for (Hybrid Digital).
Actually, the first paragraph does NOT explain what it stands for, merely what it does not stand for. Clarification should be added to make sure that if it doesn't mean anything, then it simply stands for nothing. Mattygabe ( talk) 22:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Is not the title syntax wrong and it should be HD radio? 1archie99 ( talk) 00:35, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I believe that there is an error in the article, "It does not generally cause interference to any analog station within its 1mV/m² signal strength contour, the lowest limit to which the FCC protects most stations." The units of radio signal strength should be mV/m. See the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_strength . Bartonsmith 13:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I understand the difference of the HD radio signal and the radio receiver. But what about the radio speakers? Is there a difference or are they just putting an improved signal through the same old speakers which will not maximize the new HD singal?
There is no such thing as "HD" or Digital speakers or even headphones. I laugh everytime I see digital in reference to sound waves. Ever listen to a modem... that's what digital sounds like. Also, don't ever think that the higher the wattage the better the speaker. Always look for efficiancy when buying speakers. A 1000 watt speaker just takes a 1000 watt amp to push it.
Ty —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.195.66.44 ( talk) 14:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I changed the definition of what HD stands for at the end of the first paragraph. It originally said it stands for Hybrid technology, however according to Howstuffworks.com.
Yeah, it's a sloppy edit. :-(
Fontenot 1031 22:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
It does stand for Hybrid Digital which was purposely chosen by iBiquity and abbreviated HD so consumers would be fooled into think that it stands for High Definition which is far from the truth.
Gata4001 02:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
That's kind of deceptive to call something "HD" expecting people to associate it with "High Definition" but then say that it really doesn't mean that, and it doesn't mean "Hybrid Digital" and that it really doesn't mean anything at all. Should we be more clear in the first paragraph about this strangeness?
-- Rcronk ( talk) 22:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I just got the response back from HD Radio:
I'll tweak the first paragraph to be more clear on this.
-- Rcronk ( talk) 21:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
David 18:00, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
72.87.188.9 07:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
First of all the fm analog signal is still the same, the hd sidebands were added which contain the data i.e. the four different sources: music, news, etc. However the hd signal is at a lower power level about half of the analog signal. The FCC allowed the stations that broadcast HD to increase the HD power to that of the stations analog signal. Which means that the HD signal will reach out further. My information is from a good friend who is a Chief Engineer at a large market radio station. Segars 15 Jun 2013 (est) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.244.157.167 ( talk)
Are the complete, exact technical specifications of the digital format etc secret? If not, please give the basic info in the article, and link to complete info. If the specs are secret, how foolish and wrong to pick this as a "public" broadcast standard -- good thing the rest of the world seems smarter! What about decoding this digital signal with a computer? (howstuffworks seems like a valuable additional source: http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/hd-radio1.htm) - 69.87.204.244 14:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
HD radio is described as "CD quality", but it is not. Audio CDs supply 1411 Kb/s Red Book (audio CD standard), but HD radio has 96 Kb/s at the most to work with (less for multicasting). To make up the difference, lossy compression is used. There is a general misunderstanding these days that digital allows higher quality in less bandwidth compared to analog. The opposite is true. Digital allows using MORE bandwidth to achieve greater quality and error correction/perfection. (What computations are needed to convert this 96 Kb/s to MP3?) - 69.87.204.244 14:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
To be fair, they say it is "almost CD quality," not CD quality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.93.188 ( talk) 17:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
This article says, 'the FM system has been described as "CD quality"'. Oh boy, that's rich! There is no form of radio anywhere that is remotely near CD quality in terms of S/N ratio, dynamic range, stereo imaging, or transient response. Considering the fundamental truth that the newer formats (satellite, etc.) sound even worse, I can go ahead and predict that there will never be any form of radio that is CD quality in terms of S/N ratio, dynamic range, stereo imaging, or transient response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.100.147 ( talk) 00:37, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
The article says:
Other criticisms, particularly from the television broadcast industry, cite HD radio’s rather colloquial usage of the term HD, which has historically been used and reserved for television. Some have argued this usage may be a form of trademark infringement. However, most arguments are unsubstantiated—the HD networks and media conglomerates (Fox, ABC, etc) failed to secure the trademark initially, and hence lost the HD branding to the public domain (similar to “Hoover” for vacuums, “Kleenex” for tissues, “Ziplock” for plastic bags, among others).
Terms such as Hoover, Kleenex, Ziploc and others (thought that list is woefully incomplete, missing, for instance, "spam" and "google") are registered trademarks that have become "genericized" and are in danger of losing or have in fact lost their trademark registrations. They are, in effect, victims of their own popularity. In contrast, nobody registered the term HD as a trademark or, more appropriately, as a certification mark and, as a result, the term can be used by anybody except to the extent that the companies that have used the term HD in relation to television image quality have common law trademark rights.
The comparison to so-called genericized trademarks is not appropriate in the context of the term HD and should be removed by somebody who is responsible for this page.
Kaplanmyrth 03:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
There should be some words on the final rules for HD as the FCC has made the decision earlier this week, including allowing AM-HD broadcasting at night. TravKoolBreeze 04:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
--Nightime AM HD Broadcasts?--
How does that work with some of the 50,000 watt blowtorches that broadcast in HD? If you can pull in one of those stations such as WABC 770 AM in NY,NY do you pick up the HD signal or just the analog?
Feel free to add a HD radio column to the OFDM#OFDM system comparison table. Mange01 11:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
`This article may be too technical for a general audience' ... no way! If you want to add a less technical summary, fine, but don't remove all the technical bits. dougmc 14:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Although most magazines refer to FM-HD radio as a "96 kbps standard", if you read the actual iBiquity white papers it says the nominal FM rate is "99.3" kbps (and higher with additional modes). What's with the discrepancy between the reported "96" and the actual standard's 99.3 data rate? Theaveng 23:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
24.81.130.107 10:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Image:Hdradiologo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
This page seems to be heavily biased against HD radio, including lots of unsourced statements:
The criticism section is large and criticism creeps into the other sections anyway. The whole article needs references and criticisms should be limited to those with sources. I'd make many of these edits myself, but I don't really know much about the subject. I've added several "attribution needed" tags where appropriate. Oren0 02:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Why does 75% of this article read like it was written by one of iBiquity's shills who probably invests in the company? Why are things like high quality audio left in without qualification? The FCC has not mandated any analog shutdown for radio, not even any talk of it, why is that lie allowed in there, who wrote it, you purport to be an online encyclopedia, why are all these inaccuracies and iBiquity propagandas allowed in this article? The main sources seem to be iBiquity itself, is iBiquity an unbiased source on their own product which is failing miserably at this point? Gata4001 21:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm an electrical engineer. I did a lot of research on HD Radio and how it works (or does not work), reviewing various white papers and FCC studies of the hardware. And what happens next? Along came 2 people who basically destroyed all my hard work. I was going to go back and try to restore all the facts I had added to article, but you know what? Forget it. There's no point in me wasting my time trying to "fix" the article, if people can so easily ERASE EVERYTHING I ADDED to the article. Why should I waste my time???
Yes I'm angry. The vandals erased some VALID information (both the pros and cons) along with my carefully researched citations. What did I waste my time for? - Theaveng 14:08, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
What do we need to do to get rid of this guy? Reviewing the history I notice that, even after a change is reverted ("Please don't editorialize and don't have deceptive edit summaries"), he immediately goes back, ignores the advice just given, and puts back his hate-filled opinions ("is this high quality besides iBiquity's?"). He's clearly here to disrupt and destroy the encylopedia. I vote to ban him immediately. - Theaveng 14:16, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
If Gato4001 only did this once or twice, I wouldn't care, but he keeps making these same changes again-and-again-and-AGAIN, even though he has been instructed not to do so. He is a DISRUPTIVE editor, not a constructive one. He seeks to destroy the article, rather than create a better one. He seeks to create chaos, rather than harmony & cooperation.
Yes I'm angry. I'm sick of seeing these Barbarian Vandal Raids destroying all my hard work (improving the article) over the last month. He's also destroying other people's hard work who originally created the article ~2 years ago. GATO4001 is disruptive, uncooperative, and creating chaos. - Theaveng 11:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I notice some one changed the "regular radio comes with all cars" to "most cars". I'm curious to know: What car models do NOT come with a radio? I recently looked at the cheapest car I could buy (toyota yaris), and it came with a radio even with everything else stripped (no power brakes; no power steering; no a/c). ----- Point is: I am unaware of any car model that does not come with an analog radio; it's standard equipment. Isn't it? - Theaveng 14:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
You can add these to the article AFTER you give us some citations. If you don't have citations, then they can not be added. (Because they are merely unsubstantiated opinions without validation. They are also not NPOV (neutral).)
- Theaveng 17:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I've come across these comparisons between HD-Radio and DRM already on the DRM page. I edited it and posted the reason what was wrong with it. Please, read it and fix especially the paragraph AM-HD vs. AM-DRM that is completely wrong.
BTW, there is nothing called AM-DRM. DRM is a standard for radio broadcasting on frequencies below 30MHz. That is what you may call AM. The standard for broadcasting on FM will be called DRM+. 24.81.130.107 09:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Why is the following comparison allowed which is both in both AM and FM: "If in the future the FCC decides to discontinue analog radio, as they have done with analog television, etc." This sentence insinuates that because the FCC mandated total conversion to digital in television, that this edict is also imminent in radio, this is a remore possiblity, and the two should not be linked at all. Gata4001 15:25, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Since we're discussing Analog Shutdown, I thought you might find this interesting: "WORLDBEAT - UK: ANALONG MAY END IN 2015." commercial radio companies in the United Kingdom are looking to set a firm end date for analog radio." GERMANY is also targeting 2015 for a shutdown. That would put the shutdown at ~16 years after Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB) was first introduced to the UK, and also make the UK & Germany the first nations to end FM radio. More here: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.info/browse_thread/thread/e4d202b113f98cfd - Theaveng 18:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
It makes the entry look very biased and is free advertising. Gata4001 15:31, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Theaveng, You are right, I still do not agree with it, but I definitely lost this one, and actually I think 8 track cassettes had the best audio ever invented. - Gata4001 00:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know Theaveng that the article looks a little more balanced to me now. I still hate IBOC and can't wait until it dies of apathy unless it is legislated into our faces like they (FCC, big money, etc.) did to TV (although with TV at least it makes some sense) but it does look and read better. Incidentally I was kidding about 8 tracks, I thought they were the worst form of music reproduction ever made. I also like LP's and still buy them especially new ones when I can. I have several MFSL LP's and they sound unbelievable. I think a good LP blows away any digital form of music reproduction. Gata4001 06:55, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I've just read through this, and I have yet to figure out how exactly to listen to HD radio signals. Me thinks it's time to stop with the "I wish I was a high school electronics teacher" speech, and just get to the point. This is an encyclopedia, not an electronics manual. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.183.121.32 ( talk) 11:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm curious as to whether any future date for a switch-off of analog radio in the USA has been announced. Analog cell phones are being shut off in the USA in 2008, and analog television in 2009. Is it likely that analog radio may one day be shut off also, so as to free wireless spectrum for more data services? Pine ( talk) 21:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
The correct terms are stereo AM and stereo FM, not AM stereo and FM stereo. "Stereo" modifies the transmission system, not the other way 'round. As a wag remarked some decades back, "FM stereo is stereo with flutter".
Kahn was not the inventor of stereo AM. There are several stereo AM systems, of which his is one.
WilliamSommerwerck ( talk) 14:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
The first portable HD radio was produced by Coby in 2008, about 1 year before Best Buy's Insignia unit was released. The model is HDR-700. Also, the Coby unit has both AM HD and FM HD, however the Insignia unit is FM HD only. Therefore, the Coby HDR-700 is still the only portable AM HD and FM HD radio.
http://www.cobyusa.com/read_news.php?news_id=17
http://www.cobyusa.com/?p=prod&prod_num_id=194&pcat_id=3005 —Preceding unsigned comment added by NiklasE ( talk • contribs) 05:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
a. HD radio
Around the Boston area what are the lowest cost Hybrid Digital HD radios, that do the job in a manner of speaking, for listening to music and listening to singing?...
b. Satellite radio
What are the lowest cost tabletop or boombox type radios or setups available around the Boston area for both sirius and xm satellite radio services?...
Among a few references checked so far
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hd_radio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius_Satellite_Radio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM_Satellite_Radio
-- the zak 22:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Problem: at this time, this section's tone degenerates into future-predictive FUD by its end. Accuracy of the content notwithstanding, the tone seems far afield of Wikipedia standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PScooter63 ( talk • contribs) 18:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Not to mention, certain sections sound just like advertisements. -- Milonica ( talk) 19:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)
DumZiBoT ( talk) 02:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Theaveng, rather than removing any reference that clarifies the HDC relationship to AAC, lets try this: you cite an article that show HDC IS compatible with the MPEG standard; if you cannot and it stands that the HDC bitstream is NOT compliant with the MPEG standard, then consumers have a right to know this, and we ask that you stop glossing this fact over by saying "AAC-derived". Incompatible is, incompatible, and proprietary is proprietary. Again you can disprove this by citing references.
You can also stop deleting references to fact: that second generation DAB stations are using AAC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ken2009 ( talk • contribs) 16:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't think the advert template is justified here. I did not see a justification in the edit summary or here. A short list of who makes technology available to consumers is I think always helpful in a article like this. patsw ( talk) 17:35, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
« FMeXtra is even less expensive, and—on the transmission side—requires no installation (and therefore no cost), other than plugging it into the transmitter. However, special radios are required for reception in most cases.»
Is it contradicting itself!
-- Mahmudmasri ( talk) 14:19, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Admittedly, I'm still very new here at Wikipedia, but I'm a fast learner. I'm wondering why the reference I included in a recent edit were removed by IP 76.84.142.26. Was it the quoted text, or the source reference? Argguy ( talk) 05:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
If HD is free on cable, why can Radio HD be free? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Munozonfuego ( talk • contribs) 07:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
This article has several slams, some subtle, to HD radio and the radio broadcasting industry as a whole, placing the agenda and opinions of those who support LPFM above facts.
In the Bandwidth section:
Ironically, the National Association of Broadcasters claims this is not a problem, while at the same time using it as justification to keep LPFM stations (except its own members' translator stations) off the air.
Speculation, opinion, and a stance of those who support LPFM
The entire "Translators" section is all amateur analysis of the law and incorrect at that. The entire section can be summed up in two or three objective sentences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sraolive ( talk • contribs) 19:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
What tabletop HD radios are the best?... Many tabletop radios with hybrid digital HD radio appear to be of deficient audio quality, for example the tabletop HD radios at Radio Shack stores.
--
the zak (
talk)
08:01, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
I changed kilobit/s ( base 2) to kB/s (base 10 ) to keep in parallel with kHz which is a base 10 measurement. Also because the latter kilobit/s ( base 2) is not common knowledge nor in standard usage to date. Also because standard audio equipment is measured in the standard base 10 systems of kHz and kB/s etc -- Anthony morgan peters ( talk) 14:16, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
reverted back to above edit because kbits are in there infancy as a industry standard--
Anthony morgan peters (
talk)
19:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
undid all of the above edits.--
Anthony morgan peters (
talk)
19:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Kilobit are base 10 (and implicit /s). kilobyte/s is traditional base 2. You convert between bits and bytes by dividing by 8. I think you are confusing bit with bytes and bytes with (ki)bibytes. Carewolf ( talk) 20:50, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Rearanged and added the following to the intro for clearer reading and understanding "to transmit audio and data via a digital signal in conjunction with their analog signals. As a standared practice,the kilohertz signal rate is written next to its corresponding data transfer rate kilobits/s or kbits/s in Hd radio documentation."-- Anthony morgan peters ( talk) 19:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
I made a disambiguating edit for a link of the word bandwidth to the article bandwidth (signal processing). In the edit I made, it was clearly referring to an effective range of analog signal frequencies. However, there are other places where the same word is used to refer to bandwidth (computing), or perhaps equivalently, bit rate. This is not confusing to electrical engineers, but newcomers to the topic may want to know that there is a distinction. (I'm in the middle of looking for everywhere that links to the disambiguation page bandwidth, so I thought I would drop a note to see if anyone else wants to tackle this. If not, I may or may not come back in a few months and do it myself!) CosineKitty ( talk) 20:32, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
The FCC has released an order dated January 28, 2010 that allows for a four-fold IBOC power increase, with some restrictions for a few stations, and ground rules for settling interference issues.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-208A1.pdf
This order contains some technical inforamtion so someone with more technical knowledge will have to read it before anything is added to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.27.224.139 ( talk) 23:29, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Restored edits made 29 January 2010 as these contain information that is more current.
WQXR: See station website, station was sold and WNYC acquired the 105.9 frequency in a three-way deal with Univision, and put WQXR and Q2 on 105.9, and WQXR on the HD2 of WNYC, in a simultameous move on October 8, 2009.
Mormon Channel See radio.lds.org, which will confirm content, and unique nature of being a noncommerciial station on a commercial station's HD2, may not be the only one as there had been one in Ohio for at least a time broadcasting an NPR affiliate via a commercial station's HD2.
Translators: Red link is of call of translator that is one of a very small number of HD Radio broadcasters that are broadcating HD Radio in via translators (not putting HD2 on analog translator), the others are in Vermont and southern Nevada (KNPR translators). Verifiable in directory at hdradio.com, click the link to see more than just the major markets for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.27.224.139 ( talk) 00:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks on that, maybe I am a little less clear on defining things, the KUER translator, the KNPR translators, and the Vermont translators all take the main signal as-is, and don't pick up the HD stream separately, unlike some others that simply rebroadcast one of the HD2 channels as an analog signal, so what you are really getting on the translators is the full station, with all HD signals included.
These are very few presently and they are hard to find on the listings at hdradio.com since you have to go to the clickable map to get all that is in one state and even then there are not that many so it's hit or miss on those, but there will be more, especially now that the power increase has been approved. See the link in the previous section for that. If you have a better way to say what I was really shooting for, by all means put it into the article as an edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.27.224.139 ( talk) 21:15, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Conditional Access is mentioned as being a requirement to offer Services such as reading for the blind. This is untrue. Previous generation of that service only required a received capable of decoding SCA signals, and Radio reading service were most definitely not 'illegal to receive', required no subscription, and no conditional access.
The Boston COMINS project operated at MIT in the mid 1980s is another example of using the SCA channel.
rhyre ( talk) 20:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
The comparison with DAB does not seem to mention how it performs in mobile environment with the effects of multipath, DAB was designed specifically for use in cars and does not suffer from the distortion experienced with FM where there is multipath. HD Radio is based on an FM transmission so how does it compare?-- jmb ( talk) 23:49, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
The whole comparison with DAB section is utterly biased and America-centic and sound like it was taken from HD Radio promotional material. The contemporary DAB+ is even ignored, comparing HD Radio with an old standard. If the WP section even reflects the sources, then the sourcer are not up to par. PizzaMan ( ♨♨) 00:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Hd radio has now been around awhile. AM Hd is really cool when rolled out right but it rarely is done. News AM station in Dallas and College station sound well. A small AM Disney station in Houston, does sound really well. You could use the format to put old music back on the radio. The station in question sounds awesome. I have never Got am digital at home. Only on my mobile unit. I am the HD boy, I own 4 radios. Tuner, portable, table, and a great inexpensive car radio by JVC. They all vary in reception. All radio's do. Also how someone rolls out HD makes a huge difference on how it sound. Some HD ones sound great. I have heard some roll-outs with no back ground noise, no articulation and just great sound. Most twos sound a little articulated. If you read HD white papers, (I have) they talk about what files to encrypt and not to process. Wrong file, it will sound bad. Stations even mix them. The mask is a little small. You basically need to be in the target area of the station. The DXing at this point is just for those who live in the area of broadcast. Get a car unit. Oh lets talk mobile. My JVC is great. I can get great sound in target areas well. I just replaced a Honda radio with it and it works fine. Most two (HD-2) stations hold up well under bridges and buildings. Most DX sadly live, quiet retired lives out in the country, where you need a home antenna to even get analog FM. Big steel does work rurally and you can get a nearby market ok on HD. Where HD really is cool is the multi signals. Old formats are brought back, bad AM are FMed, and some other formats could go national. HD will rock win the stations figure out how to make money. The non profits are having all kinds of fun with it. San Antonio, Texas got an African American station back. Houston got Christian rock. The internet is also a boon two these two stations. As for the haters, these guys sound like early Americans who hated electricity and phones. They forget that when FM rolled out no one, no one cared. Am stations where given FM licenses for free and did nothing with them. Later it mattered. HD can be a good median to expand the band, but not turn the lights off on real band. And oh by the way, Radio is still free. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottradioman ( talk • contribs) 02:44, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
HD Radio. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:54, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
I noticed there's nothing in the article about the emergency and traffic alert capabilities of HD, via scrolling text messages. There's a whole section on the Crutchfeld site called transmission of additional information [ [1]] but it's not the most reliable source, since they sell the radios. Will keep looking for a better, neutral source. Timtempleton ( talk) 18:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on HD Radio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:07, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on HD Radio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-208A1.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:27, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
I would like some answer on:
AM HD Radio coverage distance.
That is for example: Can I receive any American digital HD radio on AM antenna in Europe?
Is digital reception possible in Europe?
I do not really know what is even AM analog distance.
But I suppose it could be possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.221.231.106 ( talk) 18:31, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Regarding receiving different digital and analog stations, it says: there is no way for the receiver to recognize that there is no correlation between the two. It seems to me that it can't be harder than Shazam. Gah4 ( talk) 09:50, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Many people mistakenly believe that HD radio is about high definition. I doubt the truth could be much further from that mistaken belief. In this case the HD is basically a trademark, and stands for "Hybrid Digital". I think the article should explictly call this out, to help prevent further spreading of the belief that HD Radio is in any way high definition. (In theory it could be, but when you spread the available bandwidth across 4 lossy sub channels, it's baredly "standard definition" let alone anything close to "high definition".)