Comments on: Digital radio for Australia even further away

By: M Man

M Man — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 14:26:49 +0000

The blame for the delay this time should be firmly be aimed at ACMA.

The regulator wouldn't work in an iron lung I'm sure.

ACMA have dragged their knuckles on DRB planned for far too long now and came up with half baked transmission plans that wouldn't have allowed the higher signal threshold needed for DRB available in many places.

Using some silly arguments about interference to adjacent TV services, ACMA has hobbled and held back the DRB launch.

Don't even get me started on the fact that adjacent cap city markets have been left out either - these 'commuter markets' are very high users of radio, relying on cap city and local stations.

Total madness to omit them when all that's required is that Defence use their spectrum more efficiently and shuffle off the 230-240 MHz, 'channel 13' frequencies - this would allow all existing cap city and adjacent markets to be on air together.

What I'm looking forward to is the standardisation of TX location and that all services will leave the same TX antenna, equal, clear radio on all stations, no inferior AM susceptible to poor quality car radio aerial connection builds or circuit deficiencies.

While we're at it, throw out the 1980's, outdated licence area definitions and allow DRB to 'live a little' and cover far and wide to ensure good coverage within the primary area.

By: Hung-Su Nguyen

Hung-Su Nguyen — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 04:04:25 +0000

As someone who rarely has access to online radio due to slow or no internet, and also as someone who can appreciate high quality music *pats UE Super.Fis* digital radio is very compelling.

Does digital radio itself have any kind of range advantage over analog?

By: AJ

AJ — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 00:26:08 +0000

There doesn’t seem to be much that is really compelling about digital radio. I mostly listen to radio in the car so any imrpoved sound quality will be drowned out by engine noice. Having the name of the song that is playing being displayed is handy when the stations don’t back-announce it, but is it really worth getting a new radio for?

By: Angus Kidman

Angus Kidman — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 22:42:04 +0000

That’s subscriber-only access, though, which means it might as well be on CompuServe for all the use it is to most people.

By: Jason

Jason — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 22:36:11 +0000

Incidentally, the Australian Financial Review does put its articles online: http://www.afr.com

The article you are referring to is: http://www.afr.com/home/login.aspx?ATL://20080910000030291682&section=search

By: Shane

Shane — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:10:09 +0000

I think digital radio could potentially fill a niche that is currently served by some online stations. The problem with online radio is that it’s hard to be mobile unless you have some sort of uber-generous wireless data plan. Digital radio won’t have end-user bandwidth costs. At least, I _hope_ it won’t.

By: dangercharlie

dangercharlie — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:47:11 +0000

tough call.. I think digital radio will eventuate itself in the future. Especially considering all digital tv’s are able to tune into digital radio, I think it will be down to the content available.

The UK has a vast array of digital radio channels, many not even available on standard AM/FM

I think if the major commercial networks can provide the content, the people will tune in.

However its never been a more exciting time to be into internet radio – interesting interview with the founder of 8tracks.com here… http://blog.wired.com/music/2008/08/interview-david.html