Acceptable registrations in the queue through March 16 at 11:00a ET have now been activated. Enjoy! -M.W.

Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619

"Narrower" Band FM

The technical side of broadcasting. Think IBOC is a sham? Talk about it here! How about HDTV? Post DX reports here as well.
User avatar
Ben Zonia
Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm
Location: Honor

"Narrower" Band FM

Post by Ben Zonia » Wed Dec 14, 2022 12:27 am

What if you were on a first adjacent channel and you used 50-60 kHz deviation instead of 75 kHz deviation, and processing that would compensate somewhat, allowing some peaks between 60-75 kHz, would it be easier to tune in and capture as a first adjacent with less interference from IBOC? Aren't the IBOC sidebands supposed to be on the very edge of the adjacent channel? Or would you need a very narrow IF filter setting to take advantage of it, in this age of interference from IBOC sidebands? Many first adjacent stations are still 50 to 65 miles away, even Class Bs to each other, like WWWW and WDKL, and WFBE and WMMQ.


"I had a job for a while as an announcer at WWV but I finally quit, because I couldn't stand the hours."

-Author Unknown

User avatar
audiophile
Posts: 8546
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.

Re: "Narrower" Band FM

Post by audiophile » Wed Dec 14, 2022 7:23 am

IBOC is really IBAC. It goes to center of the adjacent channel.


Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!

k8jd
Posts: 603
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 3:35 pm
Location: Commerce, MI

Re: "Narrower" Band FM

Post by k8jd » Sat Dec 17, 2022 4:53 pm

The authorities came up with the devation for BCFM , for the best IF noise supression etc, using 1940's tech . It has been used so long, it's hard to make any major changes in spectrum use etc.



User avatar
Ben Zonia
Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm
Location: Honor

Re: "Narrower" Band FM

Post by Ben Zonia » Sun Dec 25, 2022 3:05 pm

I just checked the spacing between WWWW-FM 102.9 and WDKL 102.7. WBRB-FM...WDKL was around 52 miles from the old location to the WOIA...WWWW-FM location near the gravel pit near Wagner Rd. WWWW-FM had moved about three miles further away to West of Zeeb Rd. Now the distance between WWWW-FM 102.9 to WDKL 102.7 is an incredibly short 36.68 miles! That has to be some kind of Commercial 92-108 MHz Class B to Class B first adjacent short spaced record, except maybe some pre 1964 authorizations on the opposite sides of a mountain range. Anybody know of any that are less?

I know that some of you Great Lakes area radio geeks will think of this, so I checked WDRV 97.1 to WWDV 96.9 and it's 45.21 miles.

WWWW-FM has a very well designed antenna from ERI that avoids unnecessarily deep nulls in the MEASURED pattern.

WWDV has a FCC ENVELOPE pattern that is 17.1 dB maximum to minimum, in excess of the 15 dB normally allowed domestically by the FCC.

Just checked WFBE 95.1 to WMMQ 94.9 and it is 51.51 miles from the WTRX North Tower.

In the NCE-FM 88-92 MHz Band, there are different rules, more similar to the early 1960s Commercial contour overlap rules, in which both classes of stations, A and B, were protected to the 1 mV/m (now usually called 60 dBu F(50,50)) contour. Thus, both with DAs, WFUM 91.1 and WRCJ 90.9 are only 34.43 miles apart, and are Class Bs only protected to the 60 dBu contour.


"I had a job for a while as an announcer at WWV but I finally quit, because I couldn't stand the hours."

-Author Unknown

User avatar
MWmetalhead
Site Admin
Posts: 11871
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 11:23 am

Re: "Narrower" Band FM

Post by MWmetalhead » Sat Dec 31, 2022 10:28 am

Now the distance between WWWW-FM 102.9 to WDKL 102.7 is an incredibly short 36.68 miles! That has to be some kind of Commercial 92-108 MHz Class B to Class B first adjacent short spaced record, except maybe some pre 1964 authorizations on the opposite sides of a mountain range. Anybody know of any that are less?
I think you are probably right. The first adjacent situations involving signals in the Washington, D.C. and Baltimore, MD areas have at least 7 or 8 miles of extra space.

There is an interesting co-channel situation involving 105.7 MHz in York, PA and Baltimore, MD. I am unsure if tall hills / low topped mountains separate the two signals or not.

I've not driven 275 through Wayne County in a long time, but I'd be curious if W4 has seen any material degradation in reception since WDKL's relocation from Clinton Twp. to Oak Park.

Going eastbound on I-94, W4 always used to have decent reception until around Metro Airport before splatter from 102.7 became too annoying.

W4's signal has always been a little shaky near the 696 / 275 / 96 / M-5 junction near the Novi - Farmington Hills border, even pre-IBOC.



billmich88888
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:11 am

Re: "Narrower" Band FM

Post by billmich88888 » Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:55 am

i live off 275, there has been moderate degradation of 102.9 in western wayne area



ftballfan
Posts: 875
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:38 pm

Re: "Narrower" Band FM

Post by ftballfan » Tue Jan 31, 2023 8:10 pm

Then there are the 104.7s in Columbia, SC (WNOK) and Charlotte, NC (WKQC). Both are heavily directional but do run 100,000 watts in the direction away from each other.

There do appear to be some hills between Baltimore and York.



k8jd
Posts: 603
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 3:35 pm
Location: Commerce, MI

Re: "Narrower" Band FM

Post by k8jd » Wed Feb 01, 2023 2:07 pm

Narrower AM HD ?
I just took a look at an AM HD siglnal .It covers 30 kHz of the band spectrum ! The "main" carrier is at 1340 kHz, the basic AM sidebands go +/- 5 kHz, the Digital AM stereo "carrier" is at +/-10 KHz and the digital signals extend above 1350 another 5 kHz and below 1330 by another 5 kHz.
Looks like it takes up, at least , half of both the upper adjacent and lower adjacent channel !



Post Reply Previous topicNext topic