You believe that "the authorities" are against DAB+. They're not. <a href="http://media.info/radio/news/dab-starts-in-the-uk-what-you-need-to-know">http://media.info/radio/news/dab-starts-in-the-uk-what-you-need-to-know</a> shows that a trial is taking place, and that it'll (probably) be part of the new national digital multiplex next year. The nervousness is because there are millions of sets out there that won't pick DAB+ up. That's relatively understandable nervousness that they don't want to force early adopters to go out and get new sets to continue listening to the radio.<div><br></div><div>In my kitchen, incidentally, I can't get FM stations at all, but get a good selection of DAB services. I'm in the wilds of... North London. Adequate reception is horses for courses. I've seen other Scottish contributors saying that DAB is a significant upgrade when in-car in comparison to FM. The moral of the story is that no platform is perfect; so a decent radio should hide all these platforms from audiences, and just connect them to brilliant content.</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://james.cridland.net">james.cridland.net</a></div><div><br><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon Nov 17 2014 at 12:09:26 PM Two Lochs Radio <<a href="mailto:tlr@gairloch.co.uk">tlr@gairloch.co.uk</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
<div bgcolor="#ffffff">
<div><font face="Tahoma">Thanks, that's makes things a lot clearer and we
can share at least most of our hymn sheets now!</font></div>
<div><font face="Tahoma"></font> </div>
<div><font face="Tahoma">"DAB was designed for clarity", sure, but that
was 30 years ago with the thought of putting a maximum of 4 'CD-quality' or
6 'FM-quality' national channels on a multiplex, not the current 10 of the
Arqiva/BBC multiplex, with only one service (R3) broadly matching
FM-quality. Once the multi-channel alternatives of piling 'em high and setting
the bit rate low was realized, quality had to take a back seat of course.
</font></div>
<div><font face="Tahoma"></font> </div>
<div><font face="Tahoma">The system was also attractive to the BBC as it
came along in the mid-80s just as the perceived threat to the corporation from
local commercials was becoming a major concern - operated as an SFN it
was seen by some suits in the BBC as a bit of a 'local radio killer',
the BBC's 'new weapon in the war'. I remember an <em>Ariel</em> article in
the late 1980s making an oblique reference to the same point. In
Scotland the BBC has no local radio, but DAB has proved a problem
for its Scottish national channels just the same way. So it's not
surprising there's some consumer resistance.</font></div>
<div><font face="Tahoma"></font> </div>
<div><font face="Tahoma">As I mentioned, a clear possibility for sorting
things out in remote areas while sticking to DAB- is for the BBC to
pay community-owned local multiplex operators for carriage of
the missing BBC channels and local fill-ins signals that aren't provided by
the Arqiva network (the law prohibits the BBC from owning/operating its own
multiplexes directly, so it would have to be with some third party in any
event). This could make local small-scale DAB sustainable for remote areas in a
way that it doesn't currently appear to be.</font></div>
<div><font face="Tahoma"></font> </div>
<div><font face="Tahoma">DAB+ could be a more cost-effective solutio to
this problem, but if our authorities remain set against that, then the locla DAB
multiplex seems the only answer - or I guess requiring the BBC and national
commercials to maitain their FM coverage of remote areas
indefinitely.</font></div>
<div><font face="Tahoma"></font> </div>
<div><font face="Tahoma">Ineresting also to note that the very first duty
placed upon Ofcom by the law in relation to licensing broadcast radio is to
"...</font><font face="Tahoma"><font><span><em> do all that they</em> [sic] <em>can to
secure the provision within the United Kingdom of
</em></span></font></font><font face="Tahoma"><font><span><em>a diversity of national services each
catering for tastes and interests different from those catered for by the
others."</em> And the second key duty is to do the same for "<em>a diversity of
local services</em>". Those are pretty comprehensive objectives, and how better
to satisfy those obligations in remote areas than to promote a means
by which the BBC's nations service can be carried on DAB alongside small-scale
local services?</span></font></font></div>
<div><font face="Tahoma"><font><span></span></font></font> </div>
<div><font face="Tahoma">Re the auto FM/DAB/IP switching, yes of course
there are practical difficulties, especially the latency one, but it just needs
a modest degree of intelligence in the switching logic, for example
avoiding frequent switching back and forth unless an alternative source has
provided a cleaner source over some useful period (maybe a variable period
related to the difference in latencies), but switching immediately if the
current source becomes unusuable. </font></div>
<div><font face="Tahoma"></font> </div>
<div><font face="Tahoma">
<div><font face="Tahoma">So it's not rocket science, just some relatively
simple logic. Much more I guess it's a market choice by the receiver makers and
broadcasters - in that light what you say about the former BBC services is
interesting.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div>We have an area locally where car receivers flick back and forth several
times between three BBC FM ransmitters as one drives along a five mile
stretch of road, but of course as they are all FM there aren't such issues of
latency (there some however, owing to the use of satellite feed versus off-air
relays). None of the DAB multiplexes coming from the same transmitters are
receivable at all in that area. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>Cheers</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Alex</div></div>
<div> </div></font></div>
<div><font face="Tahoma"></font> </div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT:#000000 2px solid;PADDING-LEFT:5px;PADDING-RIGHT:0px;MARGIN-LEFT:5px;MARGIN-RIGHT:0px" dir="ltr"></blockquote></div><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT:#000000 2px solid;PADDING-LEFT:5px;PADDING-RIGHT:0px;MARGIN-LEFT:5px;MARGIN-RIGHT:0px" dir="ltr">
<div style="FONT:10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </div>
<div style="FONT:10pt arial;BACKGROUND:#e4e4e4"><b>From:</b>
<a title="james@cridland.net" href="mailto:james@cridland.net" target="_blank">James
Cridland</a> </div>
<div style="FONT:10pt arial"><b>To:</b> <a title="tlr@gairloch.co.uk" href="mailto:tlr@gairloch.co.uk" target="_blank">tlr@gairloch.co.uk</a> ; <a title="cma-l@mailman.commedia.org.uk" href="mailto:cma-l@mailman.commedia.org.uk" target="_blank">The Community Media Association
Discussion List</a> </div>
<div style="FONT:10pt arial"><b>Sent:</b> Monday, November 17, 2014 10:18
AM</div>
<div style="FONT:10pt arial"><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cma-l] Community &
Local Radio - the Digital Issue</div>
<div><br></div></blockquote></div><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT:#000000 2px solid;PADDING-LEFT:5px;PADDING-RIGHT:0px;MARGIN-LEFT:5px;MARGIN-RIGHT:0px" dir="ltr">Thanks for this, Alex.<br>
<div><br></div>
<div>My "DRM+" comment was because the initial document in this thread
recommended it as a solution. It's a great technical solution, but it isn't a
good fit when you consider the market....</div></blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>