We noted last week that the
FCC's official approval of HD radio was good news for embattled terrestrial broadcasters, but Richard Menta of MP3 newswire clues us in to a dirty little secret on the consumer side of things: most of the hardware on the market today sucks. Specifically, Menta put three current models (Boston Acoustics'
Recepter Radio HD, Polk Audio's
I-Sonic Entertainment System, and the Accurian HD Radio from Radio Shack) up against three analog units he had lying around the house (his car stereo, a cheap Sony shower radio, and just for fun, a 1940 Zenith tube radio), and much to his surprise, even the crappiest of the latter group was able to pick up analog stations better than the most expensive HD device. Furthermore, the HD models did a terrible job picking up the digital stations they're meant to highlight in signal-rich central Jersey, as they were only able lock in one of the 13 channels promoted by the HD Radio Alliance with any regularity. Luckily this poor performance seems due to the lack of sensitivity in the tuners these radios are built with -- an issue that's easily solved -- so the real question is whether manufacturers have the will to start tossing better parts in. If not, things don't look very good for HD Radio, so all that NAB can really do is hope that its
anti-merger smear campaign is gaining some ground
posted Mar 28th 2007 5:02AM
No surprise there then. Same happened over here in the UK with DAB, they squeezed the bitrates so much that they sound like a moderately bad MP3.
I just dont get why they bother if they can't make it sound better what is the point exactly?
More channels I guess...
Wondered when this would happen. As Chris mentioned, it's awful here in the UK. The Digital radios here are like toys -- no one's marketing anything of any quality. I guess they're all holding back to see if the thing ever really takes off. It's hyped a lot, but these receivers are laughable with their tiny speakers and no flexibility in hookup or stuff like that.
Maybe why Sonic Gear caught my ear at CeBIT, with a new batch of valve radios and aux-in:
http://www.sonicgear.com.sg/pdetail.php?category=VAL&idnye=11
For all the old skool types.
You know, I love my HDTV but I just don't quite see the point of HD radio. I mean I "get" the whole audiophile scene, I totally understand people who want the best quality at any cost, but I mean, these are RADIOS, for god's sake. We're not talking about carefully planned full-size home audio systems here. These are little shelf systems. They're never going to sound all that great - good, yeah, but not great. And any analog system can sound "good" too.
I mainly listen to the radio in my car, with the built-in sound system. It's a pretty good sound system, but again, the speakers aren't good enough that I'd get any benefit from an HD radio... and if the signal strength is worse, what's the point? As it is, I never hear any static; I have a great tuner. Sounds like I wouldn't get any better sound but would get worse reception with HD radio.
I just don't get it.
It's called the waterfall curve. With digital demodulation at a certain point the ability to decode falls off rapidly (like a waterfall). With analog it just slowly gets worse.
If communications companies still had some kind of idea about programming then HD Radio would have been an awesome idea, one that could have given Satellite Radio a run for it's money.
Unfortunately HD Radio seems more like a knee-jerk reaction to Satellite Radio.
(Arguably competition from Sat Radio has helped things along.)
I work at a Radio Shack and the Accurian had mediocre sound even with an external source, so how well is it going to do with HD Radio or anything else?
To be fair, Sirius radios seem designed with one purpose in mind: Selling replacement power cables and antennas, though the sound and hardware quality differ there too.
Overall I think it is more fair to say that radio hardware OVERALL has become very shoddy as factories belch them out in the thousands per minute.
That issue is somewhat separate from the issue that HD radio has been launched by an industry that will ruin it by building content around commercials instead of the other way around.
As someone who grew up listening to radio after too many TVs took lightning hits I welcome content from anywhere it can come from, but Terrestrial Radio (be it analog or digital) needs to re-invent itself if it hopes to compete in the digital world.
Time to clear a few things up.
HD radio is NOT high-definition, it actually never was designed to have massively better audio quality than analog FM radio, it isn't a knee-jerk reaction to Satellite Radio.
HD radio is radio's equivalent to ATSC, the TV standard to become THE standard in 2009(not HDTV). Neither ATSC nor HD radio claim ( or can they claim) to offer "better" reception than their analog counterparts other than the lack of "analog" static. They are digital signals that essentially carry they same information as their analog counterparts.
The major benefit to the digital signals of HD radio as well as ASTC is that they allow many more channels than the current analog signals. The portions of the radio spectrum designated to analog TV and radio are both crowded and offer little room for growth, HD radio and ATSC will allow more much greater channel availabiliy for more broadcasters and channels to be available to the consumer.
Just like cell phones. My old analog phone is 10 times better than any digital phone I've ever had. I only stopped using it 'cause I didn't want brain cancer.
I have a Kenwood HD tuner add-on for the car. Not only is the HD tuning great, but the analog radio performance is better than the 6mo head unit.
HD radio really irks me. It's just coat-tailing on the success of High Definition television -- HD radio stands for "Hybrid Digital," not "High Definition" as marketers want you to assume.
I bought an HD radio last December, and my experience bears this article out...in spades! I live in central NJ and the reception was horrible! I actually pulled my 30-year-old clock radio back out of the garbage and immediately resold the HD radio on eBay for just about what I paid. Good riddance.
I agree--I have the Accurian, and I can't pull in anything!
Antonio:
There is only one problem...Radio broadcasters did not get any new Radio Frequency spectrum for their transition to digital. TV broadcasters, on the other hand, got new spectrum AND the transition to digital was mandatory for them. In 2009 all analog TV signals will go dark. Not the case for radio...
If we HAD gotten new spectrum for digital radio the quality could have been much better.
Regarding DAB, it is fundamentally different from HD Radio in several ways...
First, it is in a completely different frequency band from analog broadcasting.
Second, it operates as a "single frequency network" which means that all transmitters are carrying the same information. The radios just select from available streams transmitted in the same data stream on the same frequency.
Finally, HD Radio is proprietary and licensed by a company called iBiquity. DAB is more of an open standard.
HD Radio CAN work here in the US, even if it isn't the best solution in the world.
-Shane
As a broadcast engineer who is has alot of experience with HD and all of its positive and negative aspects of this emerging technology, I offer a suggestion.
The desktop/tabletop radios do not perform well with the wire based dipole antennas that come out of the box. Yes, the radios could use an improvement on their sensitivity.
Get a basic set of TV rabbit ears, like the following ones from Radio Shack (Catalog #: 15-236):
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2062018&cp=2032057.2032187.2032189.2032204&fbn=Type%2FVHF+only&f=PAD%2FProduct+Type%2FVHF+only&fbc=1&parentPage=family
It'll be the best $10 you've spent!
Reciever sensitivity is only part of the problem. The other thing is, while broadcasters operate in what is known as the hybrid mode, we are broadcasting in both analog and digital on the same spectrum. The digital power is lower so that it will not interfere with the analog broadcast. The digital power is 100 times lower (-20dB) than the analog power, and accordingly, its harder for the digital signal to penetrate large buildings. The theory is that one day we'll be all digital, and the digital power will increase and better penetrate into buildings and such.
For what it's worth, I've got the JVC KD-HDR1 head unit for my car stereo. It replaced an older (2003-ish) Clarion head unit. I find that the standard FM and reception is just as good, if not better than my Clarion unit. The HD reception is also great. I live in central-eastern Connecticut, and I lock into all of the major broadcaster's HD signals.
I don't notice a whole lot of difference between standard FM and 'HD' FM signals, but certain things (like percussion instruments) sound much more clear.
The big winner for me is the digital AM reception (Or the digital sub-channels, some stations broadcast their AM sister stations). I listen to a fair amount of talk radio, and it sounds FANTASTIC on HD.
Personally, I'm quite happy with my purchase.
Reading these comments, I'm starting to wonder if HD radio is any different to the DAB radio that's been in the UK for something like the last five years. http://www.bbc.co.uk/digitalradio/
Is that true? If not could someone tell me the differences and point me in the right direction?
Better parts? So these $400 HD radios need BETTER PARTS? So, then they'd be $550 HD radios? Wow, so $400 units with inferior parts really equates to raping the consumer once again.
As a broadcast engineer, I would have to agree. It is a fairly mixed bag out there right now with regard to HD receiver quality. Hopefully the quality will improve as manufacturing techniques are refined.
Here is my personal experience with the following receivers:
Kenwood KTC-HR100 (excellent unit--no reception problems--One of the very first units out there and my "reference standard" for receiver quality)
Boston Acoustics Recepter HD (Kind of deaf...Not all that great at receiving analog OR digital signals without a good antenna--if you use the included "rat tail" antenna make sure it is stretched out all the way!)
Radio Shack Accurian (mixed results...an OK compromise for the price but still a bit deaf when it comes to reception)
Polk iSonic (Pretty good--better sound quality and reception quality than the BA but still needs a pretty good antenna to lock on to HD)
Sangean HDT-1 (Excellent results--If you want to add HD radio to a home system check this one out)
To the posters commenting on programming, don't forget about the fact that the HD2/HD3 channels are often commercial free and Public Radio channels are commercial free entirely!
Public Radio helped pioneer HD technology. If you haven't listened to the stations on the left hand side of the dial give them a listen! You might be surprised.
--Shane
It should also be noted that the DAB standard implemented in Europe and in Canada required new spectrum to be issued, and the FCC/Congress was not willing to give radio new spectrum. So the hybrid HD Radio system was born in the US. It's a compromise.