Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question

[Russ Edmunds <wb2bjh@xxxxxxxxx>]

I have 18 locals or close semi-locals running IBOC. Their hash kills
another 35 channels, so I lose 53 at the start. I am between 7 and 10 miles
from most of the local transmitters, all line-of-sight.

I'm sure there are worse cases, but this is bad enough.

Russ Edmunds
15 mi NW Phila
Grid FN20id
<wb2bjh@xxxxxxxxx>

AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip
FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder;
Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun PL-310 ( 2);
modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15';
Grundig G8 w/whip; modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip


On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:22 AM, Patrick Martin <mwdxer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Thanks Russ. So then it does look like I am too far to get the HD hash.
> That pleases me as reports from FM DXers in Urban areas stated that FM DX
> is nearly useless with the number of locals and add to that the HD hash. It
> seems a lot of urban stations run HD. Here I do not have any locally and
> none of the Portland stations even show the HD logo. They are too weak.
> Seattle does, and it varies from time to time how many I get to lock in HD.
> FM IBOC hash is a lot different than AM hash. Too bad AM is not the same.
> It would make DXing easier.
>
> Patrick
>
> Patrick Martin
> Seaside OR
> KGED QSL Manager
>
> > Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 07:13:38 -0400
> > From: wb2bjh@xxxxxxxxx
> > To: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question
> >
> > Typically, the IBOC hash on FM won't make it as far as you're talking
> > about, Patrick. I find that I can drive west and I will lose the hash on
> > the adjacents well before I start to have trouble with the ( analog,
> since
> > I don't have HD capability ) readability on the primary. Others who have
> > the Sonys report that the filtering remove a lot of it anyway - they can
> > usually hear stations adjacent to those having IBOC unless they have the
> > antenna aimed too close.
> >
> > Russ Edmunds
> > 15 mi NW Phila
> > Grid FN20id
> > <wb2bjh@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > AM: Modified Sony ICF2010's (2) barefoot w/whip
> > FM: Yamaha T-80 & T-85, each w/ Conrad RDS Decoder;
> > Onkyo T-450RDS; Tecsun PL-310 ( 2);
> > modified Sony ICF2010 w/APS9B @ 15';
> > Grundig G8 w/whip; modified Sony ICF2010 w/whip
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 4:50 AM, Mike Hawkins <
> michael.d.hawkins@xxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I don't get hash on distant FM stations, but there really isn't hash at
> > > all.  Its a blanking of adjacents.  You have to remember too that they
> are
> > > using lower power for the digital components.  If they up the power,
> you'll
> > > get the full force of the signal.
> > >
> > > They try to convince us that this is the future of radio, but the last
> > > thing I want is to know whether Rush Limbaugh is wheezing.  AM is
> sports or
> > > conservative talk.  FM is I-Heart-Monopoly.  If it weren't for skip, I
> > > would listen exclusively to the all-news station until I got bored with
> > > it.  Outside of the DX groups, I don't even know anyone who listens to
> > > radio anymore.  I know nobody who even owns a HD radio.  They have had
> > > years to get one, so where are they.  I think the only thing that HD
> radio
> > > has really accomplished is to lose all of the non-locals and
> semi-locals in
> > > the noise left behind by the artifacts.
> > >
> > > The fidelity doesn't matter if the choices are non-existent.  Elvis
> left
> > > the building years ago.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Patrick Martin <mwdxer@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks Mike. It sounds like, at least in your case, the FM IBOC
> noise is
> > > > an issue if on a local station. Do you get any IBOC FM Hash on
> distant
> > > > stations? As I mentioned, even the powerful 88.1 from Newport down
> the
> > > > coast, it is stable and I get both channels FM1 & FM2, yet on 88.3 I
> > > hear a
> > > > mix of Portland and some translator. I have compared a non-IBOC near
> an
> > > > IBOC, both distant signals and I do not notice anything different.
> The
> > > hash
> > > > must be wiped out at some distance then. I am glad we have no IBOC
> > > locally.
> > > > At least for now. Our stations for the most part have little money,
> so I
> > > > doubt we will get any soon. Two stations do run RDS though. KFMY
> 99.7 I
> > > > never detected the RDS before I got the FM6 up. The other is KOAC FM
> 89.7
> > > > and they are strong in RDS.
> > > >
> > > > Patrick Martin
> > > > Seaside OR
> > > > KGED QSL Manager
> > > >
> > > > > Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 00:57:49 -0700
> > > > > From: michael.d.hawkins@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > > To: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: Re: [IRCA] IBOC Hash AM vs FM OT question
> > > > >
> > > > > To me, FM IBOC is like bacon sizzling as its cooking.  It not as
> > > > obnoxious
> > > > > as it is on AM, but it has the same effect.  As an example, 97.3
> in San
> > > > > Francisco (xmtr 20 or so miles away) runs IBOC.  It does not have
> > > obvious
> > > > > artifacts on adjacent channels.  If they turn it off (as they
> sometimes
> > > > > do), I immediately have a strong signal from Visalia CA (200 miles
> > > away)
> > > > > and a RDS readout.  I don't get RDS on 97.5, but I also get a
> strong
> > > > signal
> > > > > from 97.5 in Merced about 130 miles away.  Its effect is as bad on
> FM
> > > as
> > > > it
> > > > > is on AM.  You just don't notice how bad it really is until you
> can do
> > > an
> > > > > IBOC on/IBOC off comparison.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have a college station on 91.1 that uses HD 1 mile away from
> me.  I
> > > > > cannot get the Sacramento powerhouse on 90.9 until I am 15-20 miles
> > > away,
> > > > > and if I hear anything at all on 91.3, I know its skip.  The
> Stockton
> > > > > station on 91.3 NEVER comes in at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike Hawkins
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Patrick Martin <mwdxer@xxxxxxxxx
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > This is a bit off tropic, but I know some of you DX FM at times.
> I
> > > just
> > > > > > got an FM6 yagi up and I am very impressed with the Sony XFR
> radio.
> > > > Between
> > > > > > the filters and sensitivity, it leaves my old Pioneer TX9100 in
> the
> > > > dust
> > > > > > (1970s). Anyway, out here on the Northern Oregon Coast we have
> no AM
> > > > or FM
> > > > > > HD stations. The nearest are Newport (100 miles), Portland (75
> > > miles),
> > > > or
> > > > > > Seattle (130 miles). I have received several FM stations in HD.
> A few
> > > > stay
> > > > > > locked and others come and go. But so far I have not detected any
> > > hash
> > > > on
> > > > > > adjacent frequencies. None. The tuner is very selective and
> > > sensitive.
> > > > I
> > > > > > can easily get weak stations next to locals without any splash.
> The
> > > HD
> > > > > > signals like 95.7 Seattle, I can easily get 95.9 Bay City OR,
> and so
> > > > on. AM
> > > > > > IBOC hash is horrible as we all know and covers great distances.
> Off
> > > > the
> > > > > > Eastern Beverage I have heard IBOC hash from the Midwest at
> night..
> > > But
> > > > so
> > > > > > far nothing on FM. This is my first shot at hearing FM HD. One
> thing
> > > I
> > > > will
> > > > > > say, the FM dial is sure a l
> > > > > >  ot different than it was 20 years ago. Translators all over the
> > > place
> > > > > > along with some LPFMs. By the way, I do find FM HD to be touchy,
> as I
> > > > get
> > > > > > nothing in HD from Portland over the Coast range, not even a
> flashing
> > > > HD
> > > > > > symbol. But Seattle from Cougar & Tiger Mountains come in much
> > > > stronger. I
> > > > > > have even caught several with their sub channels. But does FM
> IBOC
> > > hash
> > > > > > cause as much noise locally? It sure does not carry very far. I
> > > cannot
> > > > wait
> > > > > > for my first E Skip as I might get a taste of "local" sounding
> > > station
> > > > in
> > > > > > HD.  Thanks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Patrick
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Patrick Martin
> > > > > > Seaside OR
> > > > > > KGED QSL Manager
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > IRCA mailing list
> > > > > > IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of
> the
> > > > > > original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > IRCA mailing list
> > > > > IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
> > > > >
> > > > > Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of
> the
> > > > original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of
> the
> > > > IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
> > > > >
> > > > > For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
> > > > >
> > > > > To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > IRCA mailing list
> > > > IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
> > > >
> > > > Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the
> > > > original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of
> the
> > > > IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
> > > >
> > > > For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
> > > >
> > > > To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > IRCA mailing list
> > > IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
> > >
> > > Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the
> > > original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the
> > > IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
> > >
> > > For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
> > >
> > > To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > IRCA mailing list
> > IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
> >
> > Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the
> original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the
> IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
> >
> > For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
> >
> > To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> IRCA mailing list
> IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
>
> Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the
> original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the
> IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
>
> For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
>
> To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx