Norway is starting their FM radio network switch off, replacing

>>58451451
Frees up bandwidth for wireless internet

Are they doing SFNs for their national networks?

>>58451630
Not really.
Broadcast is almost always better use of spectrum than individual comms, and the VHF-FM band is only a few megahertz in a wavelength unsuitable for wireless internet.

>>58451630
>fm spectrum
>internet

Predictable stupidity from a country whose greatest claim to fame over the past 2000 years is a shitty cheese slicer.

>>58451451
DAB is fine providing you give it enough bandwidth. DAB+ is far better though (and I think may actually be what Norway are using, though I may be wrong)

DAB here in the UK is a shitshow, and a downgrade on FM on every level. The BBC broadcast at either 128kbps stereo (for music) or 96kbps mono (for speech), both of which are far below FM quality. Most of the other music stations are being broadcast at 80kbps mono too. Bear in mind this is using the MP2 codec from the 80's.

I love 6Music, and it's far easier to have a DAB radio in the office than it is to stream it online, but if it were available on FM, I wouldn't touch DAB with a ten-foot barge pole.

>>58451794
If done correctly, a DAB system is completely superior to an FM one.
Better spectral efficiency, lower transmission costs, greater reception through SFNs, better audio quality, data transmissions, etc.

The only thing that worries me is >>58451849.
In Australia which uses DAB+, most broadcasters give 64kbps to each station. But when you factor in the data and error correction that is lowered to ~48kbps. That's lowered ever further still by the use of 960-frame AAC+, which is less efficient than standard 1024-frame AAC.]
I can provide samples if people like. It's a fucking farce.
Broadcasters are rolling out with "good enough" parameters, not "better than FM" parameters.

Although, that being said, from my own personal experiences and blind testing, at bitrates above 160kb/s, MP2 is better than AAC. It's a shame that broadcasters stick to minimums

Good. Fuck legacy poorfags living in the past and halting technology progress

>>58451451
>DAB
I want millenials to leave.

>>58451451
GAS THE NORSK

I digital broadcasting just a meme to push aside old analog equipment?

The money must flow.

>>58451910
From a study that the BBC performed when they were first researching DAB, they said that 192kbps was enough to match FM quality. Why they don't stick to that anymore I don't know. There were a lot of complaints when they dropped the bitrate of Radio 3 (their classical station) and so that got a boost back up to 160-192kbps but everything else is still worse than it is on FM.

>>58451957
What?

>>58451451
It must suck hard for all those that have an FM-only radios in their cars, since replacing them is costly as fuck. Also, all the older AM-FM radios become useless, which is a fucking waste, since those things are usually immortal.

>>58452028

But it helps the econmeme

>>58452041

*economeme

>>58452028
they really should have put in a period where new radios had to have dab by law from about 2010 if they were planning to turn it off in 2017
it's what they did when they switched over to digital television
most cars, etc would be dab compatible in that case, which they aren't at them moment

File: 6ee.jpg (52KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 600x600px

>>58452041

File: breivik[1].jpg (87KB, 1024x696px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1024x696px

>>58452069

You need more immigrant workers, or your economeme will crash with no survivors.

Trust me, go-... guy

Just be glad you aren't American.

The DAB system is completely open (as in patent free now), and the DAB+ system is standardised (won't be patent free until like 2025). Both have implementations in Free Software.

The yanks on the other hand use "HD Radio" which is protected forever by some silly US laws, and every station and manufacturer has to pay iBiquity royalties to use it.
It's illegal to transmit digital radio using any other technology.

They god jew'd fucking hard.

Just listen to chiru.no

>>58452055
>it's what they did when they switched over to digital television
TV switch was kinda a pain in the ass, but it didn't turn out to be expensive after all; SCART decoders were pretty cheap and it was a painless conversion, if you didn't bother having yet another remote. Radios can't be converted so easily, especially car's ones.

I've gone to too much effort.
I recorded a DAB+ sample.
Where can I upload a file bigger than 100mb?

>>58452833
catbox.moe

Here it is.

https://files.catbox.moe/a8be64.7z
Inside the archive is at least a minute from every station on the ABC/SBS mux (our equivalent to the BBC, ARD, etc) in my city with bitrates listed in a file.
I'd do the commercial radio mux, but it took me almost half an hour to get this.

If anyone would like an ETI sample as well, I can do that upon request.

>>58451997
>Why they don't stick to that anymore I don't know.
Because they want to transmit more content inside their single mux.
The way DAB works is you get one signal. By default it's 1184kbit/s.
You can send whatever you like inside that signal.
You can decide to have four stations at 256k or fourteen at 80k.
Whereas analogue was fixed in what it needed, digital gives you the flexibility to choose how much you allocate to each station.

http://wohnort.org/DAB/index.html
If you look at Wohnort (a brilliant resource for digital radio listings), you can see that the BBC national mux is practically bursting at the seams.
To make Radio 2 192k for example, they would have to get rid of something like the World Service (which uses 64k).
They've really got themselves into a rut, because people are going to complain either way.
If they dropped a network, people would complain. If they set up another mux, people would complain about the cost. If they keep the status quo, people complain.

>>58453091
>https://files.catbox.moe/a8be64.7z
jesus
that sounds terrible

FM radio vs DAB is bit dum.

At perfect signal with no quality degradation, FM might top out on DAB, but the reality of the nature is, FM radio rarely do for most people. Quality/signal loss is indicated in the classic radio white noise/static noise thats prevalent in any radio wave. Digital audio method would overall be a better experience even though theoretically it might be worse.

>>58451451
Owners of old cars with FM radios will be pleased to hear this. :^)

the only thing that frustrates me with digital radio is how poorly it's being managed
you have crappy rollouts, expensive equipment, low bitrates, licences fees and patents galore

something with a flexible bandwidth, but with opus as the codec and stupid amounts of error correction would be literally perfect

you'd have an odfm modulated baseband signal, but make it so broadcasters/regulators can pick bandwidth
10khz to slot into sw allocations (giving 10-20kbit/s)
20khz to slot into am allocations (giving 20-40kbits)
100khz to slot into fm allocations (giving 100-200kbits)
1000khz to have dab style or satellite multiplexes (of 1000-2000kbit/s)

that way you can have big broadcasters like the bbc or the nrk, etc running big national single frequency networks of ten or so programs
but the same system could also accommodate commercial broadcasters with only a couple of programs, or international broadcasters with a single service that could be received from thousands of kilometres away

the current systems (dab, iboc, drm, etc) all seem to have focused all their efforts on signal strength, without coming up with any usage cases or considering the payload signal. signal strength and reception is important, but useless if you are sending potato quality sound
it just seems too rushed

Once you had a radio, you could listen to FM as much as you wanted.
Internet requires a subscription pretty much everywhere.
That's the difference that counts. And why it was lobbied for.

File: Screenshot from 2017-01-13 04-49-13.png (199KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1366x768px

>>58453892
Digital radio is still free over the airwaves, it just requires a new radio.
Or if you are comfortable with computers, you can compile a SDR receiver from source. It's still early days, but it's getting pretty good.

norway think they slick....

THEY dabbin

>>58452152
based

stupid idea. am/fm radios are cheap, extremely low power, last forever and you can even build one yourself very easily. these qualities make the tech accessible to anyone and can be helpful in emergencies. we had a severe ice storm here in 1998 which knocked out power for weeks and the radio was very helpful for weather reports and updates on repairs to the electrical grid.

>>58451777
>he can't access the internet over the radio
pathetic.

http://www.homesteadnotes.com/use-ham-radio-for-internet-access/2/

>>58451451
does that mean you can only listen to the radio in the AM time (23:59-11:59) ? :3

>>58451451
As long as essential services such as emergency warnings and weather forecasts are moved over to AM, it's all good.

Who fucking cares.

>>58451794
Norway invented western civilization and are the purest whites.

>>58457194
Obviously /v/ermins like you

>>58451451
Oh great I would just love to need to have a fucking dedicated IC to decode (not demodulate because that's totes old) fucking FM that I could have done before using a homebrew one using discrete components on a breadboard

>>58451451
how long until you need a pay card like they did with digital tv. also expecting lower sound quality because it will be digital so even more compression maybe mp3.

>>58457196
You aren't fucking fooling anyone I saw the 13th warrior.

Your king lived in a fucking log cabin and there was nothing but shit and mud everywhere.

>>58457277
>he literally has down syndrome

Good luck in the special olympics, retard.

>>58451451
Someone please explain what exactly is bad about this?

Is it proprietary or non-free apart from the cost of the hardware?

My understanding of DAB is that it's an even higher bitrate than FM HD. Should make for much higher quality transmissions.

>>58451451
It's gonna be shit. DAB here in the UK is awful quality, bad signal strength. I was chatting to some radio producers on a train once and they said it's known in the business as the betamax of radio.

>>58451451
It's all about shutting down the common person's ability to send and receive information

>>58452055
Except that people still bitched and complained about this shit, and so the govt. told us that we could do it however we wanted then, just quit bitching.

But people didn't quit bitching.

>>58457315
13th warrior was based
They should ban all those animal shows and air deadliest warrior, and 13th warrior

it will be shit because the jews will use it with lowest bitrate and that makes it a downgrade from analog radio.

File: ihatemyself.jpg (22KB, 600x315px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 600x315px

>>58451451
>replacing it with DAB Digital Radio.

>>58453306
It's been known for years now. They've had time to find a solution.

>>58456885
As if the 4G network would go down to a mere storm these days. If that's what you're worried about, get a cell phone and use the internet.

>>58457388
Actually DAB is usually better than FM here.
It's like we're actually capable of doing something right, and not go full UK everytime.

File: 1477408222666.jpg (24KB, 375x444px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 375x444px

>thread full of dab shills
i really hope that they will not downgrade to that cancer here

>>58457522
>As if the 4G network would go down to a mere storm these days. If that's what you're worried about, get a cell phone and use the internet.
did you miss the first part of the post? a radio costs basically nothing and doesn't have to be charged. you don't even need batteries if you have one of those crank generator ones.

File: 1.gif (8KB, 256x264px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 256x264px

>>58457567
but they cant sell you subscriptions on old fm radios.

There is no accommodation for conditional access in the DAB standard.
Digital television supported it from the outset.

It's a shame that nobody uses the Satellite DAB standard.
You could send national stations once and cover an entire continent.

There was a test in 1995/96 by an Australian research group of the S-DAB standard.
They managed to travel from Adelaide to Eucla (1300km) with only one recorded disruption to a the signal when they went into a tunnel (which is known for signal outages already).

Australia would be a great place to do it, too.
You could replace hundreds of transmitters with just a handful.
It'd also cover 100% of the Australian landmass (as well as parts of New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and the Pacific), which has never been done before for portable radio.
And because the ABC and the SBS are funded by taxpayers, it would be a net saving for the general population.

I genuinely can't think of a flaw.

>>58457855
the flaw is that the sound quality will be so bad that it hurts to listen

>>58457895
just like it is already with internet radios. horribly overcompressed low bitrate ear rape noises

i remember sitting in class and my old school teacher stopping at exactly 11:11(when the first antenna started going down) and said "a minute of silence for the FM radio"
my teacher is great

>>58457895
>>58457895
Do you want me to let you in on a secret?
Many FM radio stations use 192k MP2 compression from studio to transmitter anyway.
Not to mention that a large number of commercial stations use 384k compression for music storage.

I can remember people saying the same thing about digital television here. "The analogue service looks better with less compression, zomg". What they didn't realise was that the analogue service was fed by the digital service. It was the digital, compression and all but with some noise on top.

Ignoring that though.
Using satellite would allow for greater bitrates for stations, as there would be greater bandwidth available with higher frequencies (T-DAB is typically in the 200MHz range, while S-DAB would be in the gigahertz range).
You could conceivably see stations using 192k AAC on satellite, which is considered by most to be transparent.

I don't care much about radio, really, I just listen to it when I'm driving and don't want to bother other people with my music, but these changes for the sake of change seem stupid and counter productive to me.

>>58458014
they changed to digital tv here only so they can sell you subscription cards that have a yearly fee and a channel fee. the content is still 480p in 2017

>>58458077
and that makes it really funny to look at ads that wants me to buy a fucking 4K tv when it will just make the image quality worse because it gets stretched to an even higher resolution

>>58458077
Where is this?
I can't think of anywhere in the world that uses NTSC derived specs and also has subscription terrestrial television.

The countries that are considering DAB typically don't allow such a thing by law. In Australia, encrypting anything on broadcast spectrum is a crime.

That and DAB doesn't have any way of supporting subscriptions or even encryption.

>>58457412
This.
The CIA wants you to be nigger cattle

>>58457412
It's not even. You know how I know? I've done it.
You can already transmit DAB radio using no non-free software, and like 300$ in open source hardware.
Even stallman can't complain.

>>58458119
That's America. They have a proprietary standard which you can't use without a licence.
This is Europe and the Asia Pacific we are talking about.

In Australia, there is even an overlapping frequency where anyone can transmit low power digital radio without broadcast permits.

>>58452144
Didn't even know this
Thats fucking stupid tho

>>58451777
I've done networks over hf. Absolute dog shit but can be done.

>>58458117
finland. theres 2 channels that are "testing" 1080i but all the commercial (ad supported) channels are still low res.

>>58458296
Oh.
It's not 480p, it's 576i. That's the same as what it was for analogue.
And if I recall correctly in Finland you get more on digital without a card or subscription than you did on analogue anyway, so it's a net plus.

Terrestrial broadcasts are usually not full of HD transmissions in our part of the world (Europe/Australia).
Australia has five channels in HD and like twenty in SD.

That's slowly changing as HD gets rolled out. We had only one HD channel a few years ago.

File: kirby-explains.gif (82KB, 138x98px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 138x98px

>>58451451
I th_nk _ha_ _w_ile advancemen_ in th_ ar_a of ra___ i_ _ good thing, we should not be get____ r_d of technolo_y bet__r su_te_ to the puropse.

>>58458501
*p_rp__

Digital is definitely superior WHEN you have a good signal.

>>58458501
Har har.

Norway is switching early because they get better reception through DAB than they do through FM.
Where most countries continued to maintain FM services, Norway has put all that funding and effort into improving digital services. Since the early 2000s, at least.

The only reason that digital radio is inferior in places like the United Kingdom is because it's still treated like a second class citizen policy wise.

Think of things like SFNs.

Currently in my city, there are two different FM frequencies for most stations.
One for people in the north, south and west and one for people in the east.
This is an unfortunate geological quirk.
Travelling between the two you need to change the frequency. If you live on the border of both, it can be hit and miss.

What digital can do for that, is an SFN, or using the same frequency from both transmitters.
In that case the signal will be continuous through both areas, like it was only one transmitter. It also improves reception in the border of the two signals, as you can use a bit of signal from both transmitters to enhance your reception.

(23:59-12:00) use exclusive range notation right asshole.

>not wanting your radio to have shit quality
>not listening to AM morning call shows on your way to work

The magic will be gone. It's so comfy...

>>58458863
AM radio is comfy, but have you ever tried to use it in anything remotely city like?
It's a real shame, but there is so much fucking interference these days.

I always use AM when I'm outside of the city though, even if something better is available.
That warm soft bassy sound is like semen straight into my ears.

>>58458792
the technology might be nice but im worried that they will use something like 64kbps mp3s and everything will have that metallic mp3 sound that low bitrate mp3s usually have. if they make it use 320kbps then it might be cool but im sure that it wont happen.

>>58459104
DAB uses MP2 (worse at lower bitrates than MP3, but better at higher bitrates)
DAB+ uses AAC.
The best you usually get on DAB is 192k, and the best you usually get on DAB+ is 128k.
It's usually closer to 128k, and 80k respectively though.

You can actually see bitrates all over the world at this website.
http://wohnort.org/DAB/index.html
In Germany, for example, most stations are about 96k AAC+.

That may seem low, but the transmission path for FM radio is usually pretty badly compressed anyway.

File: Roy Mad.png (147KB, 366x384px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 366x384px

>>58451451
Fuck that. DAB is awful just like DVB is awful because there are no quality standards. Sure, in a perfect world it means you get same/better quality audio and more stations but in the UK every fucking DAB station is 64-96 kb/s mono or 96-128 kb/s mp2 (no, not mp3). it sounds like shit, plus they put some weird bass bump in to make it artificially sound "better" compared to the FM equivalent.

I almost never listen to radio but if they ever turn FM off without offering equivalent quality audio (say 96 kb/s AAC using DAB+), which they won't, then I will stop listening for good.

>>58459399
yeah, the brits really fucked up their rollout
they dove straight into the deep end but before water was even in the pool

now that the rest of the world has dab+ they can get at least decent quality in the same space that you guys can get shit
wasn't there talk about britain rolling out dab+ too?

>>58459326
>That may seem low, but the transmission path for FM radio is usually pretty badly compressed anyway.
Don't forget all the DRC they apply on top of already DRCed-to-hell music.

>>58459438
DAB+ has been "talked about" for about 7 years. Basically it won't happen for ages because it took them way too long to mandate that players support DAB+. There are a lot of DAB radios out there now.

Also I doubt it'd help. We got DVB-T2 years ago and at first it was used for good quality HD at ~10 Mb/s per channel. Now they cram in 5-6 HD channels plus a bunch of SD and radio channels so they average 5 Mb/s if you're lucky. So even if we did switch to DAB+ I bet they'd just use the opportunity to cram even more shit stations in rather than restore the quality to an acceptable level.

>>58459399
This is why you use ISDB-TSB

>>58459439
I don't listen to commercial radio because of the content, but having worked briefly at one, I don't think I could even if it was any good.

The music was stored in musicam at the lowest acceptable bitrate.
This was played over a computer with a built in DRC into an analog console.
This analog signal was then re-digitized by a standalone DRC, which had only an analog output.
This now compressed analog signal was re-digitized and sent to the transmission site over an IDSN link at 224kb/s using the musicam codec.
From there it was sent to the airwaves.

When I saw that chain for the first time I almost cried.
No wonder it sounds like literal fucking ass.
From what I heard, that was commonplace at commercial broadcasters.

>>58459399
>>58459489
Don't blame DAB/DVB for your broadcast landscape being a shitheap dominated by the private sector.

British broadcasters (particularly private ones) will always go for the minimums to squeeze as much shit as they can in.
It would be no different if they used any other standards.

The best are probably the BBC, but they are at best average compared to overseas.

File: 1.gif (905KB, 240x228px) Image search: [Google]

905KB, 240x228px

>>58459571
why would anyone do this

>>58459602
Costcutting and general corporate bastardry.

The analog console was used because they didn't want to buy a new one.
The IDSN link was compressed because they didn't want to hire more than one.
The range compression was to sound louder without breaching federal regulations on sound levels.
The computer that stored the music was set up in the mid nineties, and they didn't want to go to the expense of re-acquiring the music.

>>58457196

Go eat a frog Varg.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (54KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1024x576px

who icf-sw23 masterrace here

>>58451451
This is just some shit they're doing because they the Norwegian government though it was hot shit like 10 years ago and doesn't want to take the embarrassment of admitting they fucked up.

This will be a bad thing for Norwegians for a few years, but will end up good for everyone else.
I'll bring down the cost of DAB radios and put more in new cars.

File: 1.jpg (100KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 1024x683px

Stay mad.

File: Ahmeds_Clock.jpg (314KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 600x800px

>>58461334
looks like a bomb

>>58461334
what's that?

>>58462111
ham radio
don't know why anyone would be mad

>>58462201
ham radio users are the most autistic people on this planet.

>>58462292
KWFAG HERE IN TUSCON ARIZONA
ITS A SUNNY DAY
YOU HAVE A SLIGHT HUMMING IN YOUR TRANSMISSION< BUT ITS SOUNDS GOOD
73 BACK TO YOU NET CONTROLLER

Is this real?

>>58457380
>replacing something that's been used and has worked for years and that a child could build a receiver for at home with new shit that will be expensive
>implying I give two shits about bitrate when the limiting factor would be the speakers in my car
>implying I don't care more about my current old alarm clock being built to last than I do about bitrate at the cost of using new shit that's made to break in a couple years.

>>58463397
>at the cost of using new shit that's made to break in a couple years
This is the only concern I have with the digital switch.

New stuff is really shoddily constructed.
A digital radio could be built to last. But they very rarely are.
I'd be happy to put down a wad of cash for one that is well built, too, but they don't seem to exist.

>>58457567
> Powerlines going down for more than 4 hours

The very limited places where this can happen would need to have generators as backup regardless.

Where next, do you think?

>>58451451
It's a big mistake.

>>58451794
>cheese slicer
It's Sweden, though.
Norway is the last standing white country, though.

>>58451451
I think I haven't been listening to any kind of radio since the '90s.

>>58461334
I'm so hard right now where did you get the transceiver?

>>58451451
Listen to radio from neighboring countries.

>>58452144
Americans confirmed for most cucked country.

Aren't digital radios hella expensive?
Like, you can get a reasonable name brand normal one for like $40 but digital ones are all like at least $150.

>>58467948
It's a bit like with the digital television switchover, I think.
I remember buying a generic branded standard definition digital set-top-box in 2005 for like 200$AU.
Once countries started to switch off their analogue services, they got really fucking cheap. I saw them being sold for like 5€ in places.
There is nothing about a digital radio that makes it expensive apart from how unpopular they are.

The Norwegians have taken one for the team, just like many European countries did with television. I'd imagine that a couple of years after the switch they'll go down drastically. They've practically just guaranteed that at least five or six million will be sold this year alone.

>>58451451
Are they providing any sort of free/subsidized receivers for people who don't already have DAB support, or is it completely at the cost of the consumer to supplement/replace their equipment?

>>58469666
There aren't any subsidies in Norway, although apparently the uptake is quite high already.
Their left wing parties have complained constantly about how the poor, the elderly and the regional may be left out by this.

>>58469787
>Their left wing parties have complained constantly about how the poor, the elderly and the regional may be left out by this.
Very legitimate concerns. Aside from that it also ruins the enjoyment factor of using good old analog receivers.

For example, you might not be too poor to afford a digital receiver, but if you have a valuable old car with an analog receiver, you might not want to ruin its originality/cosmetics by replacing the original receiver, but you'll also never be able to enjoy it as it was intended again.

The same applies to good home audio equipment, antique radios, etc. A lot of it will be made useless or at least less enjoyable due to needing a separate receiver. It's a real shame.

>>58470176
There really wasn't much on FM in Norway to begin with. They have like three main FM stations.
Europe is a very different market to places like the Americas.

To this end, the recommended solution in your example situations would be an adapter which retransmits a DAB station onto a low powered FM service. Because it could be placed properly, it avoids most of the problems with FM transmission.

>>58470339
>To this end, the recommended solution in your example situations would be an adapter which retransmits a DAB station onto a low powered FM service. Because it could be placed properly, it avoids most of the problems with FM transmission.

In the case of a car, that means having some sort of extra receiver mounted somewhere so you can operate it for changing stations and such. You also have to wire it in to power and the antenna. Will existing FM antennas even work well for DAB?

A home setup is simpler when it comes to power and wiring, but either way you're stuck using some newfangled ugly digital box to change stations. Your analog receiver will just stay on one station forever and you'll never get to enjoy flicking it around to switch stations. Obviously you have to be an audio autist to care about that, but for those of us who enjoy old receivers as a hobby, something like this is devastating.

I'm in the US and we still have our analog radio here, but analog TV was killed years ago and had the same effect of ruining the experience of using old TVs. Dialing in the stations is a large part of the fun.

>>58470452
This is gonna sound dumb, but bear with me.
When the receivers go down in price, you can just purchase three, and you've recreated the experience you had before.

I actually did this with analogue television. Converter boxes got really cheap, so I set up four to retransmit four television stations over the houses internal wiring. Ended up with a better experience than before.
The only problem I have now is the fact that broadcasters have stopped making their graphics fit in the '4:3 safe area', so I need to have thick black bars either side.

Sometimes progress just ruins functional equipment though.
It happened with UHF. It happened with Digital Television. It happened with the internet.

I think this is a good thing myself, as much as I can empathise with your points.
In Norway, the transmission is funded by licence payers.
The cost of maintaining both systems costs tonnes of money each year.

>>58451630
>I have absolutely no ideas about frequency allocation, bandwidth or much else really.
Nice try.

>>58451451
For what purpose? Doesn't FM already work well?

File: 12407252_930893073625037_886573577_n.jpg (55KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 640x640px

Did someone say DAB?

>>58470640
Yeah, with TV the switch to 16:9 would've ruined the experience anyway, even if analog transmissions were still around.

Doing the multiple converter and transmitter thing would be pretty easy for a home setup, and I can't think of any other issues (like the TV aspect ratio thing) that would affect radio. I'm not sure it would be viable for car use. I suppose if you can get/build cheap 12v converters and transmitters, you could just assemble some and put them in the trunk, but in the US it wouldn't be viable if you travel the country due to having many stations that are constantly changing.

>>58470727
I think I have to detail this for the people in the thread.

Norway started using Digital Radio in 1995 with the European DAB system.
Using this system, more services started.
The NRK for example, runs three radio stations on FM, but has twelve on the digital platform.
There are also other technical advantages to this digital system, like cheaper transmission, better flexibility and better resilience to conditions like multipath.
It has been more than twenty years now, and uptake of digital radio has reached a point deemed sufficient by the government.
To save money and to encourage the last percentage of the population to take up digital radio, they have decided to turn off FM services.
They intend to gradually do this over the year, region to region.

>>58470794
Europe is ideal for the converters anyway, because of the way DAB is designed and the way radio is done in Europe.
They have a few big national stations instead of lots of little independent ones.
If you tuned a converter to one national station, it's very likely that you would never need to touch it again even if you travelled across the country.
Especially if your country uses single frequency networks.

>>58451451
Why fuck over all the older cars out there? Suprized all the car companies on the us arn't pushing for this.

PSA: Don't buy Blaupunkt PP15DAB.

Weak reception, loud static noise, awkward controls, clock resets after power outage, even with batteries.

Just don't buy this shit.

>be me
>be malaysian
>be living in some remote as fuck area (still have access to HSPA tho and 4G is going to roll out in my area sometimes this year so I'm good)
>had old as fuck pocket radio
>still had AM frequency tuner built in
>tried the AM frequency
>get radio station from kalimantan (indonesia), philippines and even VOA on a very good day

I dunno. If we're into fallout kind of shtf mode, FM and AM radio station would likely be the ones that can still be maintained

>>58470960
That's the only thing that sucks about this all.
Some of the receivers are literally dogshit.

File: Blaupunkt.jpg (488KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

488KB, 1024x768px

>>58470960
Such progress.

>>58471060
If during a night a power there is a power shortage, your alarm clock refuses to work.

Happened to me a few times already, I had to set up secondary alarm clock in my phone, as a safeguard.

>>58470965
What are you doing shitposting on 4chan? Get back to tending those rice paddies, boy!

>>58471803
Eat shit

>>58451451
desu I have a lot of old FM radios I like so it would kind of suck not being able to use them just like my AM-only ones

other than that it sounds kind of cool

File: 2016-08-25 10.42.13.jpg (2MB, 2152x2869px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2152x2869px

>>58451957
millennials are too young to be doing real dabs anyway.

>>58473343
>not being able to use them just like my AM-only ones
Where do you live that there is no AM radio?

>>58473493
well I mean there are AM stations but none I like, mostly christian/spanish stations and one talk radio station

Norwegian guy here.

The whole DAB thing was started by the previous socialist govt. and has been inherited by the conservative/progressive govt. Local radios will not go off the FM net yet.

There are many problems here, normally glossed over:
- national warning system is controlled over the FM net. Really. There will be some expenses in redoing the warning systems (air warnings etc). bill b\will be sent to the tax payers which the earlier govt. was very happy about.
- tunnels have FM coverage in case of emergencies. DAB coverage is NOT yet fully in place. Previous govt. didn't care much for such anyway.

- Sweden will keep FM broadcasting and their stations can be received a long way inside Norway, even better now that stronger Norwegian stations will be closed. I can imagine the Swedish stations will see the commercial value here. We used to listen to Swedish stations earlier, the language is no problem.

Summing up: the law of unforeseen consequences will bite hard. This will be fun.

>>58451451
Radio sucks in general and I don't give a shit

>>58461334
>>58462111
>>58462201

It's a portable PSK31 setup. It's like text over radio. It's not HAM.

>>58474281
It's not HAM either, it's ham.

The DAB "upgrade" is fucking idiotic and not needed. DAB is like some sad hybrid between an internet stream and an analogue radio stream. FM is crazy cheap and provides excellent quality. Using my smartphone, a pair of earbuds as an antenna and nothing more, I can listen to broadcasts way out of my town. If I have money to blow, I'd just stream something over 3G/4G. Why is a fucking middle ground between the two needed that's both expensive yet doesn't offer a full selection as a connection to internet would?

File: shilling-on-g.png (49KB, 795x528px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 795x528px

>>58474521
>he's mad that he can't access digital radio cheaply just about anywhere

DAB is almost always underutilised though, in it's optimum form it also has broadcast text and data.

>>58474560
>Australian DAB+
All the channels are broadcasting at 32-64kbps, quality is fucking horrible. Nova seems to be the highest at 112kbps and it still has a bit of artifacting in the sound, but it is at least bearable.

>>58474560
I'm mad because change is being forced for no reason. We already have digital radio, it's called GPRS/EDGE/HSDPA/LTE/whatever else is there.

>>58474606
That's because commercial stations are allocated in 64kb/s blocks.
The problem that frustrates me is that most broadcasters have null bits, which aren't used for anything.

On the ABC&SBS mux, you'll often find that the bitrate is higher.
Also, commercial broadcasters allocate much of that to slideshow data, so the actual audio bitrate is usually lower than marked on your radio.

>>58474624
In countries like Norway it makes sense.
They have only a few stations on FM, and many more on DAB because of frequency allocations and the cost of transmission.
The reason FM is being switched off is because of the cost to the licence payer.

Also I laugh whenever people suggest mobile data.
If the listening audience of FM in my city was to switch to mobile streaming overnight, mobile networks would cease to function.
It's a terrible way of broadcasting to not broadcast at all.

>radio
the fifties called
they wanted their shit back

>>58451997
>92kbps was enough to match FM quality.
FM quality would be 32kHz 16-bit PCM Stereo but that requires 1.02 Mbps

>>58474624
>We already have digital radio, it's called GPRS/EDGE/HSDPA/LTE...
and it's extremely saturated

>>58451451
Straight up degeneracy
FM should remain around forever

>>58451997
Opus at 128 kbps is full band stereo transparent
But broadcasters rather pay the MPEG-LA jew

>>58451973
It's to push old analog equipment from broadcasting, the consumer is the least thought about this
It decreases broadcasting costs massively

>>58477105
because with royalty-free codecs there's no incentive for innovation.

>>58452028
People will just jump to their smartphones and personal FM transmitters

>>58452144
At least Americans will keep AM and FM forever

>>58477146
>personal FM transmitters
aaah... so finally my old Nokia C7 will have some use...

>>58477142
Thor, VP9, AV1, Daala and Dirac where full of innovation
Just like Opus

>>58476821
16 bit?
The signal to noise ratio of FM is pretty shit.

>>58477230
maybe AV1 will be the codec for Internet, that will be a good thing, the GPUs and mobile SoCs will surely make ASICs to decode AV1.
Who uses Dirac today?(hard mode: do not say BBC)
But the MPEG, Dolby and Fraunhofer (for MP3) lobby still will avoid the adoption of open standards.

>>58477232
okay, 14-bit.
Where I live stations are spaced 400 or 600 kHz so broadcasters end up with using less compression.

>>58452144
I don't know of a single person who listens to HD Radio in the US. They so fucked up the tech and ownership that it is a dead end with no consumer interest. Most radio stations don't even bother to promote their digital offerings anymore. Satellite radio is what has taken off in the US. Terrestrial radio got too greedy and consumers worked around by either going with satellite, mobile internet, or local storage.

>>58451451
Shit idea. DAB doesn't have the variation in transmission quality that FM does. You're either close enough to receive DAB or you don't receive it at all.

Right now I can listen to my favorite radio station over FM with a little static. DAB would mean that I'm limited to whatever Top 40 crap ClearChannel decides to allow me to listen to.

>>58451910
>samples
Please do, im curious

>>58477268
>AV1
>Codec for the internet
Top fucking kek, have you seen the members? So much broadshitting companies they'll block any attempt to throw away their fucking crap and say "WE'RE PAYING YOU MILLIONS!" even though they make 6 billion a year. FUCK BROADCASTERS
Then they'll end up using H266 which is coming sooner than you think. So all this just to fuck an internet-orientated codec with crappy limitations. These people seriously need to die in a fire like their industry. But now their own little haven is decaying because TV fucking sucks they're spreading like cancerous cockroaches and telling people the internet's the future of broadcasting. They'll come and say they have experience with live shit, tell everyone how to run internet video and fuck it up just like they fucked up their own industry. Stamp the bastards down with a boot before they can say "hardware encoders" or "dolby" once more.

>>58451630
If anything I'd imagine the bands would be relabeled for amateur use

>>58453306
I love when /g/ talks about car stereos. It's amazing how many of you think getting a new head unit means getting a now car.

>>58479864
With new cars this is a legitimate concern.

In short, a new integrated unit in a new car actually costs more than an old car. No joke.

Replacing units in old cars is no usually no problem, and you get decent units with DAB for a couple of hundred USD. The cheaper units costs next to nothing.

>>58459399
radio sucks anyway.
at least in my country its like 50% advertising, 40% repeated songs, 5% news, 2% talkshow, 3% good music.

>>58480031
It all depends on your local stations. I mean around here the only thing that plays anything remotely decent is a dadrock station, but if I drive south just a bit I could jam all day

>>58451451
That's a horrible idea! How the fuck are people supposed to get information in case of an emergency?? Analog always beats digital in cases like these.

>>58473983
>national warning system
This is probably the reason why the last county to turn off FM is the one with the Russian border.

>>58474692
>In countries like Norway it makes sense.
Oh?

>They have only a few stations on FM, and many more on DAB because of frequency allocations and the cost of transmission.
The royal Norwegian Labour party never liked private enterprise and it was the Norwegian Conservative party that opened up FM to local station use. There remains a lot of red tape, of course, and also the frequency/station planning is atrocious. So typically in any one populated place you can receive the state broadcaster station NRK P1 on 10 frequencies. The stupidity is on a level that requires active planning.

>The reason FM is being switched off is because of the cost to the licence payer.
Get real. The govt. NEVER cared about the cost to the license or tax payers, certainly not the Labour party. What you write is just hilarious. Moreover a FM transmitter is cheap and tried and trusted tech. One early excuse tried was that FM was so old they had problems getting spre parts. Really.

>Also I laugh whenever people suggest mobile data.
Is this some kind of congenital defect?

>If the listening audience of FM in my city was to switch to mobile streaming overnight, mobile networks would cease to function.
OK; so you have never heard of IP broadcast.

>It's a terrible way of broadcasting to not broadcast at all.
Syntax error.

>>58451451
it's shit

>>58479423
I did.
The samples were posted as
https://files.catbox.moe/a8be64.7z

>>58479864
The problem is that any new head unit you get won't match the original style and lighting. Most aftermarket units are downright hideous and ricer.

>>58465032
>It's Sweden, though.
You're wrong.

>>58482306
>Most aftermarket units are downright hideou
fucking this
i've never seen one that doesn't have flashing leds and look like shit

I think its generally a bad idea

>>58451451
It's fucking retarded. t. ham

>>58451451
You now pay 60% taxes for the upgrade.

>>58451910
Why don't they use Opus?

>>58488135
The upgrade had already been paid for over the past fifteen or so years.

>>58488204
DAB+ was standardised in ~2006.
At the time HE-AAC was very modern.
Opus was only stable around 2012-13.

This was all starting to be rolled out at a time when people still listened to 128kb/s MP3s on 2GB players with monochrome screens.

>>58487939
>>58487777
I'm on the fence a little about the whole thing.
FM radio was never this magical system.
It doesn't have the propagation characteristics of mediumwave AM, but it also isn't that great audio quality wise, particularly when you are decoding stereo.

In an ideal world, you'd use a system like DAB (with reasonable fucking bitrates), but you'd also keep your mediumwave transmitters on the main public services as a trusty reliable fallback.
A single well placed mediumwave transmitter could cover an entire country like Norway, but an FM network in an even slightly mountainous region can require hundreds of infill transmitters (something that most digital systems are designed better to handle).

>>58488888
why is fm so popular then if mw is so much better? why would the jews spend more money on fm transmitters if you can do it better with just one mw?

>>58490246
Firstly, there is limited bandwidth for stations.
Because stations travel so far, you can't have too many without them interfering with each other.
On a good night, someone in Australia can get stations from New Zealand reasonably clearly.

Secondly, the fidelity is worse. Good enough for speech or an emergency, but not for most music purposes.

They aren't competing technologies, but rather complementary. You have both AM+FM, much like I'd propose that it'd be best to do both AM+DAB.

>>58488888
>In an ideal world, you'd use a system like DAB (with reasonable fucking bitrates), but you'd also keep your mediumwave transmitters on the main public services as a trusty reliable fallback.

Even though it screws with FMDX, I like it as a compromise because it doesn't force people to buy a new receiver. Also portable digital radios suck and / or nonexistent at this point.

>>58490778
I like HD radio I meant to say.

>>58457522
>As if the 4G network would go down to a mere storm these days. If that's what you're worried about, get a cell phone and use the internet.
You mean like how Cell Phone service was not wiped out in NYC during Hurricane Sandy?

Oh, wait...

This is about the music companies trying to plug the analog hole. Once they get DAB, it will be encrypted and you'll have to buy keys to listen. And it will still have commercials.

I'm surprised nobody has pointed this out yet.

>>58490995
Are you retarded?

>>58491514
it's quite a realistic possibility desu

>>58491940
Not at all, as long as you can hear music with your ears and see movies with your eyes the analog hole will be there.