Slashdot Mirror


Norway Will Switch Off FM Radio In 2017

New submitter titten writes The Norwegian Ministry of Culture has announced that the transition to DAB will be completed in 2017. This means that Norway, as the first country in the world to do so, has decided to switch off the FM network. Norway began the transition to DAB in 1995. In recent years two national and several local DAB-networks has been established. 56 per cent of radio listeners use digital radio every day. 55 per cent of households have at least one DAB radio, according to Digitalradio survey by TNS Gallup, continuously measuring the Norwegian`s digital radio habits.

62 of 293 comments (clear)

  1. About half by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So in other words they're going to cause problems for nearly half the households?

    1. Re:About half by kimvette · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even bigger problem is cars where you cannot replace the head unit without disrupting the CAN bus or losing some functionality (like turn indicator reminders, warning tones, etc.)

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    2. Re:About half by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 2

      Ooh, found my answer, "20 % of private cars are equipped with DAB radio." So 80% aren't. I think 80% of people are going to not like this once it happens.

    3. Re:About half by omglolbah · · Score: 2

      "55 per cent of households have at least one DAB radio"

      Do the rest care about radio or have the people who listen already moved on?

      My parents listen to radio here in Norway, but they use their TV for it these days since all the channels are available through the "Radio" option on their fiber cable/internet/everything system.

    4. Re:About half by kyrsjo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Rather the opposite - nice cars (or anything newer than 10-15 years) has integrated headunits, which is basically what kimvette says. On old/simple cars, the radio was just a radio, sitting in a DIN socket.

      However, there are aftermarket solutions, some nicer than other. And of course, the nice solutions are krkrkrkrkrkrkrkrkrkrkrkrkrkr...

    5. Re:About half by kimvette · · Score: 2

      SAAB 9-3.

      Brands which this affects:

        * BMW
        * SAAB
        * Volvo
        * Cadillac
        * Porsche

      Hardly cheap pieces of shit. It's actually a more common design in higher end brands.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    6. Re:About half by kimvette · · Score: 2

      Chrysler (including Jeep) - okay, cheap pieces of shit there, I'll grant you that
      Mercedes
      Newer Toyota models (including Lexus), especially the higher end models

      You can get a CAN interface to bypass the radio but at risk of losing audio for turn indicators, headlamp warning, key left in ignition warning, and so forth. You may or may not also lose your steering wheel controls for the radio; some aftermarket head units and CAN interfaces can translate various makes' control codes, but some cannot, and most head units lack this integration entirely. Getting vehicles' warning tones with an aftermarket head unit is very iffy at best, so many installers take the factory head unit and relocate it so the functionality is retained, sometimes by rerouting or eliminating ductwork and shoving the radio deeper into the dash, but increasingly often by either eliminating the glove box or extending the factory wire harness and relocating the head unit to a different location, or simply installing aftermarket head units above or below the factory head unit and custom fabricating a new center console.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    7. Re:About half by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      Every cell phone I've owned has had a built-in FM radio tuner. Handy for news when both the power and internet are down.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    8. Re:About half by kimvette · · Score: 2

      Another thing I'd forgotten about; an increasingly common trend with top-end vehicles (not cheap pieces of shit as you claim) is integrating even MORE features from the CAN bus into the head unit, particularly climate control. This is becoming increasingly (and annoyingly) commonplace, and is starting to filter down into midrange vehicles as well.

      It's only the cheap pieces of shit and high-end vehicles from a handful of makes which only hand-build cars (Koeningsegg, Spyker, etc.) where volume is too low to justify highly integrated units where you can swap a head unit and not have to jump through hoops to not lose any functionality.

      Sure, in most vehicles you can either install a CAN hub or even a passive connector and get the car to run, but you will lose some of the original features and kill trade-in/resale value in the process - and for the vehicles which have jumped on the touch-screen-for-everything trend, good luck selling a car where heat/defrost/AC doesn't work.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    9. Re:About half by Kjella · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ooh, found my answer, "20 % of private cars are equipped with DAB radio." So 80% aren't. I think 80% of people are going to not like this once it happens.

      That doesn't even begin to cover it, many people have an FM radio that they occasionally use for example at cabins or whatever, more than 80% will probably have to replace some radio. And note that they asked for "digital listeners" not "DAB listeners" meaning if you use your smartphone or tablet or PC to listen to radio, you get counted in favor of DAB even though you don't use DAB.

      Actually this (Norwegian) is the truth, in 2014 about 64% of the population listened to radio daily and only 19% on DAB. There's no numbers for it but even less exclusively used DAB. I don't have a DAB radio. It sucks for any kind of battery-driven device, meaning just the kind of remote places and mobile appliances where you'd want radio. We'd do better just upgrading so we'd get 3G/4G coverage everywhere rather than DAB.

      Nobody else is phasing out FM or even planning to phase out FM. This is just Norway going off on its own crusade urged on by commercial interests of 10+ new channels, fuck whether it makes sense to throw out millions of radios. On the bright side, I expect this to lead to a massive interest in building out 3G/4G coverage as ex-FMers give DAB the middle finger. Streaming with Spotify + offline playlists is likely to be the new "radio".

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    10. Re:About half by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I foresaw this from the digital TV switch. When we'd have a tornado warning in the analog days, I could turn on our television as loud as I could(to allow others in the area to be alerted if they weren't already) and we could go to the basement and listen to see where it was and if it was safe to come out. Today even though I live less than 3 miles from the very same transmitter, thanks to RF ghosting, bad weather means absolutely ZERO reception. The same will happen with radio to many others. In the event of a disaster, you will be utterly fucked. I get that digital looks and sounds better for the most part but I'm ALL about dual compatibility just in case.

    11. Re:About half by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 2

      Yes, they did shu..//../ but digital is worse when it comes to 99000...///// ddddd..... when I want to wa@/.....,'''[[[[ bad weathe.../[][]][;;;

      --
      _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
    12. Re:About half by Quantum+gravity · · Score: 2

      Nobody else is phasing out FM or even planning to phase out FM.>

      A (much discussed) study for Swedish parliament recommended that FM radio be closed down 2022.

    13. Re:About half by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nobody else is phasing out FM or even planning to phase out FM.

      That's not true, actually. The UK, for one, is clearly mulling the idea, in fact, trying very hard to make up numbers to justify proposing it... and failing. Given their habit to make up numbers for other things they want to set policy for, that's telling. Other countries are doing similar things, eg. the Netherlands badly wants to "get with the times", just doesn't dare come out and say so (yet). That makes this really a tidy little lobbyist victory in Norway that they'll inevitably use elsewhere.

      Doesn't make it less stupid, of course. In case of disaster FM radio is a good way to still reach people otherwise unreachable, since many people "just happen" to have a receiver around. That includes car radios, kitchen radios, even (and do spot the irony) smartphones and feature phones that have an FM receiver thrown into their RF handling chippery, as a trivial extra.

      DAB (with or without added +) for many reasons is a really poor choice to try and run disaster relief radio service over, but it'll be all they have. Go Norway.

    14. Re:About half by ultranova · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Meh. Didn't we hear the same argument when color TV was introduced? Or CDs, Digital TV, Digital cameras, Fly by wire, the Internet etc etc every other technology implementation ever?

      Cassettes and analog cameras weren't banned. They simply fell out of favor because CDs and digital cameras were way superior as far as the end user was concerned. By contrast, digital tv and digital radio don't benefit the end user, they'll simply let parts of the spectrum be auctioned off; so they require legislation to force the end users to pay the costs for the transition so someone else can profit.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    15. Re: About half by johanw · · Score: 2

      Good luck with most modern European cars. There aren't any unless you buy a second hand 10 years old one.

    16. Re:About half by johanw · · Score: 2

      "Then again, somebody has to go first."

      No, why? What's so bad about FM that it needs replacing? And even if you replace it, why would you do it with a dead standard that has failed to become popular when it might have mattered, and is now outdated already? If you want digital, use 3G/4G; if you just want radio, analoge FM is the best there is.

    17. Re:About half by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 2

      Sadly, FM radio in cell phones is fairly uncommon in the US. Not because the chip sets in the phones don't have the capability (most do), but because the US carriers insist that the phone makers turn it off.

    18. Re: About half by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Good news! They're going to turn off those broadcasts!

    19. Re:About half by gzuckier · · Score: 2

      Boy, you rich guys with your modern fancy cars with radios in them.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  2. Perfect time by ArchieBunker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For pirate FM stations to fly their flags.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:Perfect time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For pirate FM stations to fly their flags.

      "Perfect time"...?!
      3 decades ago, as a child growing up in a small Greek city, i had a pirate FM station - i had my room full of wires and stuff, i was electro-shocked several times (stupid home-made circuit), i had the police constantly investigate about me (and few other fellow FM pirates) for disrupting important radio communication/transmitions, and all that for what: for just an old Greek (warning: it would be all Greek to you!) comedy movie about FM pirates...
      Nowdays anyone can communicate/transmit his stupidity from the internet - no need for FM pirates anymore.

    2. Re:Perfect time by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 2

      Cool! Several friends and I ran pirate FM intermittently for a bunch of years.

      Anyone know where to get English subtitles for that film? Might be fun to compare to the handful of other pirate radio movies.

      I was hoping to see more interest in local pirate TV when analog NTSC got shut down. The long reign of cable TV weaned enough people away from local antennas altogether, so viewer base probably limited in most areas.

      --
      Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  3. DAB or DAB+? by Rising+Ape · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I find here in the UK the DAB stations often sound worse than their FM equivalents, thanks to an antiquated codec (MP2!). DAB+ was supposed to fix this by using AAC+, but that doesn't seem to have been deployed here. Backwards compatibility issues I guess.

    1. Re:DAB or DAB+? by brambus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think many stations in the UK are using MP2 at 128kbps for stereo, which is just atrocious. MP2 should definitely not be used below 192kbps, in which case it'll definitely be better than even FM using 100kHz spacing.

    2. Re:DAB or DAB+? by sjames · · Score: 2

      It *SHOULD NOT* be less that 192kbps, but is it?

    3. Re:DAB or DAB+? by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 2

      Had a year's worth of Sirius satellite radio with a new vehicle. Couldn't stand to listen to it. the sound quality was awful, just like you describe. Even talk stations were tinny and clipped and grating on the ears.

      Well you have no-one to blame but yourself for that, if you'd remembered to tape on your Brilliant Pebbles with Teflon Tape, plug in your Tice Clock, and outline the speaker in Green Pen, then you'd have noticed the difference immediately, with strong bass in impact and quantity, clear mids, nice extension and clarity in the trebles, and one of the best soundstages in the market, the physical properties of width and depth producing a sense of great size and space when listening (except that final bit where the third cellist from the left paused to scratch their elbow, which upset the recorded acoustic imaging a bit).

  4. Less accessible by sevenisloud · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One of the things about FM radio is it's so easily accessible - you can (in the UK at least) buy a rubbish FM radio from a pound shop - it might not be great of course, but it makes it a medium practically everyone can enjoy. DAB is comparatively quite expensive.

    1. Re:Less accessible by 50000BTU_barbecue · · Score: 2, Informative

      Two days later the Chinese will flood the same dollar stores with one cell, one button digital receivers, don't worry about that.

      --
      Mostly random stuff.
    2. Re:Less accessible by queazocotal · · Score: 2

      The components used to make a DAB reciever, while they have come down lots in price and power use recently - still use a _LOT_ of power - from the point of view of something running on small batteries.
      http://www.amazon.co.uk/Robert... - for example.
      4-5 hours on two AA cells.
      FM radios (at modest volume on headphones) can last over 200, with the same cells.

  5. I think one of my locals already has by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2

    There was one station I would listen to, the local rock station (yes, it played real rock, not that poser stuff) and as of late, it sounds like crap.

    The only way I can describe what it now sounds like would be tinny and clipped. Songs which used to have a roundness to them sound horrible. It's as if the treble has been tripled and the bass halved. Reminds me of when my work went from analog phones to the "new and improved" digital phones. Immediately voices sounded off and messages and voicemail could and would be jittery.

    Fortunately there are still a few stations to flip through, including NPR, but it's the only time I listen to the radio. Normally I just bring my cds to listen to.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  6. So much for long distance Listening by FlyingGuy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Digital ANYTHING over the air for listening just plain sucks.

    If your signal is not perfect you simply don't hear anything. If I am WAY away from an analog broadcast, it might be fuzzy, it might in and out of stereo but I can still HEAR and understand it. With digital, one the signal gets fuzzy is just does not decode it.

    This is only one of the reasons why cops and fire fighters hate the new digital radios.

    --
    Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
    1. Re:So much for long distance Listening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      This effect is called "digital cliff". In theory, digitally encoded information (in this case, sound we want to hear) does not suffer the quality degradation no matter that there is actual degradation in signal. Until signal quality becomes so horrible that is not possible to get encoded information from the signal. With analog modulation, you would get more noise in information when you get more noise in signal. Illustrated as: http://www.aerialsandtv.com/_wp_generated/wpea5bfb21_01_1a.jpg In practice this works ok for digital television. You get best possible* image with DTV where you would get unwatchable static-covered picture.

      The problem here is that digitalization is often used to decrease the power of the emitter, so you cannot compare digital and analog case directly.

      Honestly, I don't have an idea if this works well with sound. Sound is rarely distorted in analog TV, even when video itself is completely ruined. And this depends heavily on modulation and encoding.

      *) As much as MPEG2 and MPEG4 can give you

    2. Re:So much for long distance Listening by X0563511 · · Score: 2

      The way the digital stations around here work, is they broadcast both - and the receiver in my car seem to be intelligent enough to downgrade if the digital signal is too weak.

      Basically, the radio starts off sounding like poo as it starts off in analog, but then as it 'locks in' (for lack of a better term) it switches over to digital and thus sounds much better. If I drive into a tunnel or such, the digital signal will drop and the radio will (without gap, mind you) drop back to analog, and switch back up when the digital signal is again stable.

      I think what it does is it receives both, and keeps a running error talley on the digital stream. It uses this to determine if the signal is stable enough to use. I would expect even better performance if the streams were buffered for a second or two, but this isn't the case (at least the analog signal isn't - verified with my "real" radio)

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    3. Re:So much for long distance Listening by dryeo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You get best possible* image with DTV where you would get unwatchable static-covered picture.

      The problem with the switch to digital TV was all the channels moved into the UHF band which does not carry as far. Here I used to get ch. 2 and 6 clear and a couple of other ones were sometimes watchable, after the switch to digital we don't get any channels. Being 30 miles outside of one of the biggest cities in Canada means no other options, satellite blocked by hills and trees, no cable, no cell coverage and with the privatized phone system 3 9's means that every 9 days the phone is out for 9 hours (18 hours last time), usually due to cable theft.
      FM radio is still good but I'm sure if it switched to digital that would also be gone. This raises the question about Norway and how good the DAB coverage is compared to FM

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    4. Re:So much for long distance Listening by wisnoskij · · Score: 2

      This. Used to be a thunderstorm just meant a fussy TV. Now a little rain and TV is out completely.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    5. Re:So much for long distance Listening by thegarbz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Digital ANYTHING over the air for listening just plain sucks.

      If your signal is not perfect you simply don't hear anything. If I am WAY away from an analog broadcast, it might be fuzzy, it might in and out of stereo but I can still HEAR and understand it.

      You're assuming the goal of listening radio is simply to understand. For most people it most definitely isn't. There's nothing more fatiguing than trying to understand content through static in the background. Heck when FM drops out of stereo most people typically change the channel, and and many intelligent radios consider the signal lost at this point and look for another station.

      This is only one of the reasons why cops and fire fighters hate the new digital radios.

      The cops and firefighters have a rosy view of the past. The reality is that modern digital radios have receivers with far greater sensitivities than those analogue counterparts. TETRA or P25 on a power for power basis with older analogue equipment works well over 3 times the distance where analogue becomes unintelligible. The modern equipment is now so good they've started downrating the equipment's power output.

      If you have a coverage issue at all then it's never the fault of the radio standard.

    6. Re:So much for long distance Listening by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 3, Informative

      Used to be a thunderstorm just meant a fussy TV.

      Used to be a fussy TV no matter the weather. And a pair of pliers to change the channel because the crappy plastic knob fell off.

    7. Re:So much for long distance Listening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You post repeatedly like you have an interest in DAB.

      Bubbling to silence is way more "fatiguing" than a bit of fuzz which never stops the signal from being intelligible. Having to recharge batteries daily instead of every few weeks is also tiresome. And, in the UK at least, FM audio is better than the low bitrate MP2 most channels use - i.e. even at perfect reception, it sounds awful.

      And there's nothing like a dork sitting in a lab to tell people actually using their equipment whether it works or not. Maybe they are more sensitive on paper. Maybe on paper they do work "well over 3 times the distance". But, no matter how big the kickback to those responsible for buying proprietary digital solutions, they still frustrate people on the ground whose radios don't work in theoretical or simplified lab environments.

    8. Re:So much for long distance Listening by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      TETRA or P25 on a power for power basis with older analogue equipment works well over 3 times the distance where analogue becomes unintelligible.

      Outside. I know particularly the firefighters have complained about poorer coverage inside buildings, which is usually where their life-saving work is done. Details...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    9. Re:So much for long distance Listening by InsectOverlord · · Score: 2

      Interesting. Did you have a TV that became fastidious and hard to please during thunderstorms?

    10. Re:So much for long distance Listening by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      It's not an outside vs inside issue. It's a design issue. The sensitivity of modern digital radios are far superior to those of the analogue radios from 15 years ago people are used to. All else being equal, digital handhelds replacing analogue ones have better coverage.

      Now taking that into account I have seen:
      - People skimping on diversity because some modelling software said it'll be fine (this is a pretty big issue for coverage around obstacles)
      - People skimping on power because some modelling software said it'll will be fine.
      - Why the fuck can't I get an 800MHz TETRA radio from Motorola with a gain of higher than 1? All our old radios were provided with options.
      - People installing new gear on old gear not understanding the different requirements (highly sensitive receive electronics are more sensitive to intermodulation and noise induced by poor earthing).
      - People in general installing gear without appreciating the specifics (one antenna I saw measured quite well across a broad frequency spectrum but the ignorant person signing off the job didn't realise that spike of poor performance was right in the middle of the transmit frequency for that equipment).

      If a firefighter can't hear or has a coverage issue it has nothing to do with new digital vs old analogue and the fault lies squarely on the designer and installer of the equipment.

      Now on the other hand people complaining about sound not being as clear (new equipment has lower bandwidth / higher compression), sound being delayed (compression, transmission, software defined radio, and decompression delays), or longer call setup times (with all the additional features call setup times have increased), then I would buy the argument.

    11. Re:So much for long distance Listening by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Informative

      AM is only used in a few areas in central Europe like Germany and France, but it's a dead end in Europe.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    12. Re:So much for long distance Listening by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It also doesn't help that digital transitions are when broadcasters usually give in to the temptation to squeeze in a bunch of extra channels. When they get really greedy, the results are so bandwidth starved that they sound like horribly compressed crap(because they are) even under ideal circumstances. Even if they don't push it that hard, they haven't typically been very conservative about building in a lot of margin for degradation.

    13. Re:So much for long distance Listening by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      The trouble is usually that the broadcasters just hear 'extra channels!' and zone out. You can have higher quality and redundancy; but using those bits to squeeze in a bunch of extra channels and then pretend that the results are acceptable has a tendency to win out.

  7. Long Wave for Mariners by turkeydance · · Score: 2

    Norway's population is concentrated into three urban zones which makes Digital appropriate. The off-shore fishers, rig workers. etc. need Long Wave radio signals.

  8. About That Now Available 20 MHz... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    All the (Not necessarily compatible...) DAB systems use High-VHF/UHF frequencies.

    So what then happens to the 88-108 MHZ "FM" Band when DAB is forced upon us/US? (Lost in the Noise is the fact that Norway's Plan only effects the State Broadcasting System- Commercial and Private Stations can continue with Analog for now...)
    Somebody has plans for that very valuable 20MHz Spectrum, and they are being very quiet on what they plan to do with it, once they have it.

  9. not in the usa by luther349 · · Score: 2

    the whole digital radio never caught on hear in the states despite a hard push or it and even including them in newer cars.

    1. Re:not in the usa by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah but neither did the metric system, public health or regulation of dangerous weapons. The US is hardly the benchmark for what is considered a good idea or not.

  10. Just like TV this will bite the big one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When analog tv went away, the signals got very weak and undependable.

    FM will do the same there

  11. Re:I don't get why the government is involved at a by Xolotl · · Score: 2, Informative

    The governenet cares because they sell spectrum allocations, and can re-sell the ones taken back from analog. Furthermore because the digital broadcasts use less bandwidth per station and are less susceptible to crosstalk they can sell more of them per Mhz of spectrum.

  12. Too busy to rip the radio out of my car by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 2

    It is only the fact that have been too busy to rip the radio out of my car. I have a screen/computer to put into it that will then play lectures, audio books, podcasts, etc. Also I have it ready to replace my dashcam with a series of cameras that not only can record but also upload via a dataplan if needed.

    At no point in my buying did I even look for an FM or even AM option to add on. And certainly I never looked for a satellite radio technology (those things just piss me off in rentals).

    To me even satellite radio is so 20th century. DAB is also just a bandaid to try to keep the radio station media companies relevant.

    But the reality is that this isn't a technology issue. For the last portion of the 20th century a variety of media conglomerates bought up all the radio stations and turned them into MBA masturbatory dreams. All profit with no content. About the last time I listened to radio was just before a DJ that I know told me that his new format was to go into work, record all his blurps between songs in one long scripted 1.5 hour session including interviews, and then go home. The songs and his blurps were all run automatically by the computer.

    The few things that come off NPR, BBC, or the CBC that I care about "Art of persuasion, quirks, this american life, etc" I download. But even the CBC is just on a march further and further to the PC left and I can't stomach having one great feature cut short so they can give massive amounts of time to someone with some extreme view on some stupid social issue and listen to them grind their axe endlessly.

    So the best of radio on today is worse than silence. But my own playlist is awesome and the technology is sitting in a drawer so that I don't have to use my stupid FM transmitter to get crap off my iPhone.

    So like my car not coming with an ashtray, I want my next car to not come with a radio, DAB or not.

  13. re: broadcasting both analog and digital by King_TJ · · Score: 2

    As I understand it, that's only one of the possible modes of operation for the "HD" FM stereo used in the USA right now.
    Up here in the DC area, that seems to be exactly what stations like DC 101FM are doing. If the digital signal cuts out, the radio falls back to the analog broadcast until it can switch back to digital.

    The problem with FM HD though is they often opt to broadcast 1 or 2 additional digital stations, and there are no analog equivalents for those. So they just abruptly cut out when the signal gets weak. (And it happens OFTEN when driving around a metropolitan area with tall buildings and the like which intermittently block part of the signal.) Makes the whole thing unusable, IMO.

  14. Situation in Finland by jones_supa · · Score: 2

    In Vinnland there was experimental DAB broadcasting set up during years 1997-2005, but it was discontinued due to low interest. It's like how Blu-Ray had a bit stiff adoption over DVD -- people felt that FM was good enough.

    1. Re:Situation in Finland by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 2

      Blu-Ray didn't stumble because of DVDs, it had stumbled because of information distribution no longer requires physical media (ie the Internet).

  15. DAB/DAB+ is obsolete already by Z00L00K · · Score: 2

    In addition to this DAB/DAB+ is obsoleted by internet streaming services.

    Of course - it sucks to stream in a car, and the result may be that people won't be able to listen to radio in their cars at all and instead play their MP3s or whatever and miss out on traffic information and other important information.

    I just wait for FM to be turned off and then a major event to happen where information is sent on the DAB+ net where nobody listens and then we have a lot of people driving into a closed off area.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    1. Re:DAB/DAB+ is obsolete already by Sique · · Score: 2

      I actually never listen to music in my car at all, except the radioprogramming is sending some. But I don't listen to music stations. So MP3s are a non-option for me. (In some way, I am a-music at all, as I don't listen to music in general). My preferred radio stations for long drives are news/information broadcasters, but when I was in the U.S., they seem to be missing in general, at least in the regions I was driving around.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    2. Re:DAB/DAB+ is obsolete already by CanEHdian · · Score: 2

      In addition to this DAB/DAB+ is obsoleted by internet streaming services.

      DAB(+) = Free

      Data usage (+ roaming charges) = costly to expensive to "no signal".

      Do you work for a wireless carrier?

      --
      When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
    3. Re:DAB/DAB+ is obsolete already by Z00L00K · · Score: 2

      AM is rare in Europe. There are a few, but mostly in central Europe.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  16. Re:Oh FFS by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

    If you want to be pedantic about acceptable variations choosing something with such a long history and such wide use in various disciplines is a terrible plan.

    "Percent" is probably the most common flavor currently; but 'per cent', 'per cent.', 'pct', 'pc', and likely others are still within the realm of accepted use. Hell, the '%' sign isn't even entirely settled, unicode has something like four defined variants. And that doesn't count the archaic, but historically used and still recognizable, specimens that cropped up between Latin and the present day.

    I take it that you were exposed to basic literacy and only basic literacy, none of that messy intermediate stuff.

  17. Not Applicable to North America by Freshly+Exhumed · · Score: 4, Informative

    The DAB radio system was not adopted in the U.S.A. or Canada. The Canadian authorities permitted testing of DAB for quite awhile but eventually allowed it to die off due to lack of interest.

    Instead, the iBiquity HDRadio IBOC standard was adopted in North America, which is a hybrid digital/analogue system that retains the traditional FM Radio band. While DAB and FM Radio occupy different parts of the spectrum, in North America you can think of digital radio as being a "superset" of the traditional analogue stations in the same band (IBOC means "In Band, On Channel).

    So, a tuner with HDRadio capability and an old analogue FM tuner will both tune in the exact same station, but the former will process the digital portion of the station's signal in all its superior quality.

    For broadcasters, the iBiquity HDRadio IBOC system can also be switched to 100% digital someday, but it is not likely to happen for a very long time if ever due to all the legacy analogue FM radios out there even in brand new consumer electronic gear. The automakers have come onboard with HDRadio-equipped tuners for the North American market.

    --
    I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
  18. Re:posting from 1986? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2

    If you set up your playlists properly, and sync things at your house, all of this and more is easily doable on a phone nowadays.

    I do have an iphone, so my specific use case applies to that, but the same general steps apply to any phone/mp3 player. I have ripped my entire collection of CDs etc via AAC lossless (used to be FLAC, you can convert between them easily and quickly these days) in my server library, about 500GB or so at this point. I choose what songs etc I'd like in my playlists, and sync only those to my phone. When I get a new album, I tend to sync that album for an initial listen. So I get everything you're talking about plus I don't have to look at the phone because I use a swiping app to change songs. The songs are already preselected, and can be changed at will whenever I'm at home. Given the storage on the device, that's enough play time for between home syncs.

    When I push those songs to my phone, I use a 256 kbps bitrate AAC as I found it doesn't make any real difference in the car or phone. (I used to use 320kbps MP3s) I may change back to lossless since the device storage has gotten significantly larger and the size may not matter and as a bonus, I can drive the home stereo purely from the phone and not need the home server running all the time. For home listening the lossless is noticeably better and the fact that lossless is, well, lossless and I can convert to anything later on is the decision to store everything in the home library.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.