[cma-l] DAB Radio

[Associated Broadcast Consultants]

An extra thing I forgot to say is that with Small Scale DAB you'd instantly
avail of the user-friendly tuning and station awareness functionality of
DAB on users radio sets - especially if your station is called something
like !Aardvark FM!   That would be worth quite a lot in itself.

Glyn



On 18 May 2015 at 15:17, Associated Broadcast Consultants <info at a-bc.co.uk>
wrote:

> Shame - I was all ready to jack-in the day job and take-up a £70-80k a
> year community radio job ;-)
>
> I wouldn't write-off Small Scale DAB so readily.  Yes, the maximum power
> for the trials is a fraction of what the incumbents use, but it could still
> provide useful coverage at a "local radio" level.  Take for example the map
> on this page <http://a-bc.co.uk/dab-coverage-maps/> that shows coverage
> from a 50w Small Scale DAB transmitter on a tall building in the town
> centre of Swindon - using standard Ofcom levels.  Other DAB coverage map
> suppliers are available.
>
> Of course the incumbent mux in the area (which uses 3 transmitters,
> probably all with much higher power) covers a larger area
> <http://www.localdigitalradio.co.uk/SwindonTX.png>, but I've spoken to
> many a station manager who is more interested in density of coverage in the
> populated area than "covering sheep" (their words).
>
> An additional consideration for Community radio is that generally (I'm not
> saying always) it is easier for them to raise funds for "one-off" capital
> investments (eg: purchase of a transmission chain) than to raise funds for
> an ongoing (and relatively high) ongoing operational cost like leasing
> capacity from an incumbent Mux.  It's to do with the way grants-giving
> bodies typically operate.   Yes yes, maybe they could capitalise on bigger
> revenue from a bigger coverage area, but that is a risky game to play - if
> it were that easy all the incumbent Muxes would be full to capacity.
>
> Horses for courses I say.  If SSD muxes are licenced it can only be a good
> thing because it widens choice for smaller stations, which will widen
> listener choice (Ian will like that quote!)
>
> Glyn
>
> --
> Glyn Roylance - Principal Consultant
> Associated Broadcast Consultants <http://www.a-bc.co.uk/>
>
>
> On 18 May 2015 at 14:52, James Cridland <james at cridland.net> wrote:
>
>> For clarification, cost of someone's salary is the cost to the business,
>> not the equivalent money that person earns. For new employees, I've always
>> doubled the salary as the total cost to the business for that employee, and
>> am assuming the same here.
>>
>> But yes, DAB's expensive. Small-scale DAB might not be as pricey; but
>> with the sort of transmission coverage levels being talked about, it also
>> sounds as if small-scale DAB will be mostly un-listenable anyway,
>> remembering that DAB doesn't degrade gracefully into hiss but instead
>> squelches into abrupt silence.
>>
>> The question is - could being on DAB earn you enough money as a business
>> to cover the cost? DAB would give you much more broadcast area, and
>> wouldn't have any restrictions on advertising (assuming you were to split
>> your output somehow). Would you think of yourself as an FM station with a
>> DAB addition, or a DAB station with a cheap FM marketing opportunity? Would
>> you use FM to do worthy community broadcasting and training, and your DAB
>> to produce something that is less self-indulgent and more consistent to
>> listen to, using the same resources and same studios? Great broadcasters
>> graduate from FM to DAB only when ready?
>>
>> There's an opportunity here if you'd like to take it. Depending on why
>> you're in this game, this glass is half-full from where I see it.
>>
>>


-- 
Glyn Roylance - Principal Consultant
Associated Broadcast Consultants <http://www.a-bc.co.uk/>
 <http://www.a-bc.co.uk/index.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20150518/6bed883d/attachment.html>