10th June 2010, 2:25 PM
http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2010...-boost.ars
This is an interesting article, but what it really does is drive home an important point, AM should be killed off by the FCC, and a few decades later, follow it up by killing off FM.
Both broadcasting standards take up a ridiculous amount of the spectrum compared to digital broadcasting, but AM is by far the greater offender.
The biggest argument for AM's "value" seems to be that it broadcasts at greater distances. This is a nice feature, but it's not a feature of the AM standard, it's a feature of the wavelengths AM is assigned to. In other words, that's all the more reason to kill AM and reapportion digital signals to the spectrum. More will fit, and thanks to the nature of digital, less interference issues will result.
I am willing to accept a lone exception to this, a single frequency should remain allocated to AM for the purposes of emergency broadcasting in a region, for the sake of reaching people with only AM receivers during emergencies. Otherwise, killing it is just as justified as what is currently going on with TV broadcasts, with the mandated switch to digital broadcasting.
FM can wait longer, since it has a substantial listener base right now, but eventually it's time should also come as more and more switch to digital radio receivers. I give it maybe 3 decades tops.
The FCC is fully justified in refusing this request for some emergency life support on a standard doing more harm than good, but should go farther. Those stations that currently have licenses can have special deals to freely convert their license to either a digital station in the new block or switch to an available FM station (for a small price instead of free, to push more towards digital broadcasting instead of FM). There could even be some tax relief offered to stations that make the switch so they can better afford to.
This is an interesting article, but what it really does is drive home an important point, AM should be killed off by the FCC, and a few decades later, follow it up by killing off FM.
Both broadcasting standards take up a ridiculous amount of the spectrum compared to digital broadcasting, but AM is by far the greater offender.
The biggest argument for AM's "value" seems to be that it broadcasts at greater distances. This is a nice feature, but it's not a feature of the AM standard, it's a feature of the wavelengths AM is assigned to. In other words, that's all the more reason to kill AM and reapportion digital signals to the spectrum. More will fit, and thanks to the nature of digital, less interference issues will result.
I am willing to accept a lone exception to this, a single frequency should remain allocated to AM for the purposes of emergency broadcasting in a region, for the sake of reaching people with only AM receivers during emergencies. Otherwise, killing it is just as justified as what is currently going on with TV broadcasts, with the mandated switch to digital broadcasting.
FM can wait longer, since it has a substantial listener base right now, but eventually it's time should also come as more and more switch to digital radio receivers. I give it maybe 3 decades tops.
The FCC is fully justified in refusing this request for some emergency life support on a standard doing more harm than good, but should go farther. Those stations that currently have licenses can have special deals to freely convert their license to either a digital station in the new block or switch to an available FM station (for a small price instead of free, to push more towards digital broadcasting instead of FM). There could even be some tax relief offered to stations that make the switch so they can better afford to.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)