[BC] The Ibiquity system just won't cut it

[James Somich]

IIRC, Ibiuity "let go" all their best engineers. A money-saving step, I
guess and, after all, the system was perfect!

The Ibiquity engineers were the best of the best, but the hybrid approach
presents tremendous challenges to a designer (especially for am). This is a
great start, but it is only a start.

IBIQUITY will have to change. If they do not, their system will fail and a
better one will be proposed. I don't know if they will change or not, but CC
owns a big chunk of Ibiquity stock and this could be an influence.

I think HD Radio can be the system that ushers in the digital era for
terrestrial broadcasting. It has many good points. We all know that every
approach has its pluses and minuses. This is going to be an interesting time
for broadcasters.


On 12/21/06, Robert Meuser <Robertm at broadcast.net> wrote:
>
> Bob
>
>
> I would normally agree with your statements. IBOC has one big problem
> the other technologies you mentioned do not - Ibiquity. IBOC can not
> evolve as well when there are proprietary closed systems that are
> basically handed down from on high.  There is also a political
> problem. The DRM model with some experimentation would be a better
> fit in the AM bands but politically will never happen here if things
> remain as they are. There is also a lot of cutting edge work with the
> VHF version of DRM that goes way beyond what we are even thinking
> about here.  Will we have digital broadcasting?  YES  Will it look
> like the model we now have?  I don't think so.  I really wish the
> concerned parties would buy out the other Ibiquity share holders and
> turn that operation back into a research organization, open the
> system and back down on licensing.  The real money to be made is in
> selling radios and selling airtime not being a middleman that holds
> back progress.
>
> R
>
>
> Bob Tarsio wrote:
>
> >Jim:
> >
> >Right on brother! The spirit of invention is purely the reason that we
> are
> >as advanced as we are. This is in every one of mankind's endeavors. This
> >will not happen with digital radio if the naysayer mentality has its way.
> >Sure the system isn't perfect. What system is? These are the
> opportunities
> >that individuals and corporations alike are presented with to make things
> >better.
> >Even if we did what the Europeans and our neighbors to the north did and
> >adopted a system that utilized a new band there would be problems. Eureka
> >has its problems too. There is a parallel to DTV here. I was involved
> with
> >its implementation a few years back and the receivers were terrible.
> There
> >was little provision for the correction of pre ghost time delays. Now,
> the
> >latest generation of receivers has near symmetrical correction of pre and
> >post ghost signals. This has made a huge difference in total system
> >performance. Coding and compression algorithms have also improved making
> for
> >a more robust transmission medium. This didn't happen overnight. Millions
> of
> >dollars and thousands of smart people working on the problem made the
> system
> >better. The same will be true with digital radio.
> >I think we need to face facts. America needs a good, robust over the air
> >radio broadcasting infrastructure. We have one that is getting better.
> The
> >business model is changing but the business still has legs. Satellite,
> the
> >internet, etc. are all great but there is still something to be said for
> the
> >practicality of a simple point to multipoint transmission system such as
> >AM/FM/digital broadcasting. In emergency situations satellite operators
> will
> >be reticent to use precious air time to disseminate information to a
> >localized emergency like New Orleans. Terrestrial broadcasting will
> continue
> >to fulfill the role of emergency communicator. The internet can't do this
> as
> >it relies too heavily on ground based distributed infrastructure to be of
> >use in natural disaster scenarios. Perhaps some of the others on the list
> >can tell of how long it took to get high speed internet up and running
> after
> >Katrina. Or for that matter what its effectiveness was during the
> disaster.
> >In the final analysis Jim is right. It will get better. More to the
> point,
> >it better get better because we all need broadcasting for the vital role
> it
> >plays in our daily lives.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> The BROADCAST [BC] list is sponsored by SystemsStore On-Line Sales
> Cable-Connectors-Blocks-Racks-Wire Management-Test Gear-Tools and More!
> www.SystemsStore.com       Tel: 407-656-3719    Sales at SystemsStore.com
>
>