DAB in Ireland: RTE multiplex closed

scath

I think maybe its time for DAB to be dropped once DTT coverage expands to a like area. Why duplicate on transmission costs. I'm sure DTT radios are possible and you could also argue the same for DVB-H with mobile phones featuring DTT tuners in Germany. Battery life seems not to be as much a problem with more recent chipsets.See:http://www.broadbandtvnews.com/?p=5443 paragraph 3.

DTT will have overspill also. So why bother with the cost DAB? Of course capacity on the frequency is maybe an issue. Phased switchover rather than 2012 switchover may resolve that, freeing up spectrum for ASO multiplexes and other uses. If mobile operators adopt DTT tuners also then why bother with DVB-H. As gatekeepers they can surely work with Boxer on the subscription aspect for access to their customer base collecting revenues for pay channels and buying from Boxer the subscriptions at a wholesale rate. This would surely be cheaper than getting a DVB-H license and also spectrum efficient.

david23

DVB-T (as used for DTT) is no substitute for either DAB or DVB-H because the error correction used is too weak to give a constant signal on the move.

The DTT tuners in mobile phones will only work if the phone is in a stationary position (e.g. on a desk in the office). They won't work on buses/trains or walking down the road without signal break-up.

DAB & DVB-H were designed to be used in the mobile environment so they have much stronger error correction systems.

DMC

scath wrote: »

I think maybe its time for DAB to be dropped once DTT coverage expands to a like area.

Non-runner, given what david23 said, and considering this was agreed at European level to finally push some varient of DAB a few months ago.

http://www.ebu.ch/en/union/news/2008/tcm_6-63049.php

But in this economic climate, it is up to the individual country when they want to move.

scath

I agree. Its up to individual countries. The development on DAB was certainly a necessary one for digital radio to go forward. But you can argue the same for DTT with MPEG4 on mobiles. These will already work across countries. And well DVB-H works in Italy, but look at what happened in Germany. DAB-IP didn't seem to take off in the UK. So with the current economic situation, doesn't DTT not seem cost efficient both for broadcasters and consumers. Its only a matter of signal strength, infill and getting DTT radios out there. And once portable small DTT TVs come along. I think it won't be long (another 3 or 4 years into the all digital era, before hybrid radio-TV comes along, with simulataneous audio and visual ad breaks and shows, where you see the radio studio presenter. You can call it talk TV! Convergence is on the way: see: http://www1.alcatel-lucent.com/publications/abstract.jhtml?repositoryItem=tcm%3A172-195491635 for example, something that could assist DTT take-up.

If we adopt DTT for radio then we can have analogue radio switch-off with DTT spillover and freeview and freesat taking care of the rest.

Anyways back to DTT radio.


Don't know regarding whether break-up is as much of an issue walking down the road or buses-will people watch TV while walking? On trains or transport, probably. But then mobile phone masts could provide infill. Also an antenna on the phone may assist on that. Take a look at: http://www.digitaltelevision.gov.uk/pdf_documents/publications/art_exc_summary.pdf which talks about buildings not being as much a problem in city areas.

Of course this relates to the UK. Can mobile phone masts be used for infill without causing interference once they are using different bands? I don't know that much here. Maybe what yer saying still applies. How come Germany is doing it if it doesn't work? Hmm... and how about T2? Does it still apply similarly with that, given the error correction enhancements? I know we're not talking T2 here at the moment although Ofcom in the UK seem to be certainly going for T2 and some frequency reallignments due to neighbouring country switchover. Would T2 implementation improve things if used on mobiles and adopted by Boxer? Would ya still say its not a good idea DTT for radio/mobiles? In cars it seem not as big an issue, and is has been demonstrated according to: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/articles/Portable-DTT-Radio-Demos-at-the-IFA.php. Can work if the signal is strong enough.

If it comes down to signal strength as in the UK, then the shorter the switchover period between DTT transmission and analogue terrestrial switchoff the stronger the signal can be set earlier. But of course in an economic downturn people will want time to buy a box for every TV. If the dept are giving those on social welfare help with the upgrade with so many losing their jobs that could be some bill!

We haven't addressed the cost savings in transmission versus a system that hasn't the support of the commercial radio sector is DAB in Ireland and has floundered in the UK in recent times. Also if it is possible for mobile masts to do infill then it also means mobile operators can do a nice little deal on free-to-air carriage on the mobiles with the broadcasters meaning less signal break-up?

Again, engineering isn't my field so correct me if I'm still wrong why so?

Some factors in DTT for mobiles was pointed out to me by a person in the mobile industry was:

"1) Coverage – in Ireland our coverage will be similar to the German situation as we will have portable indoor coverage. In Germany the devices still required pull out antenna though.

2) Devices – you need devices – where are they? Could argue the same about DVB-H/DMB and FLO though!

3) Content – in Germany they have a lot more FTA content than we will have. This is a problem. But then City Channels, Bubble Hits, DCTV might help.

Also, will Boxer strike a deal to enable this content to be received on mobile devices?' That's a good question. I can't see why they would not strike one, as it would be an additional revenue stream for them.

The person went on "German operators did not opt out of DVB-H, they bid for the licence and lost it! It was then that they decided to look at DVB-T and Mobile3.0 had to hand back the licence as they did not have the support from the MNOs. It is important that all players in the value chain are happy with the service – broadcasters, MNOs, device manufacturers etc".

I guess one issue is device availability, that's always an issue, scale, deployments elsewhere economics. That probably can be overcome.

Another issue is signal consistency. That's an issue but that could be addressed by signal strength, and mobile mast infill?

DVB-T2 is probably can not be factored in unless the launch gets delayed. But RTÉ NL are deploying so I imagine launch is still likely.

What's the point anyways of DVB-H when there isn't available spectrum for it at the moment. Also DAB doesn't have the radio industry support whom apparently have concerns that more spectrum will dillute the audience, coupled with recessionary pressure on their advertising upon which they rely. When you factor transmission costs, then surely DTT for radio and mobiles makes more economic sense?

What's yere view?

david23 wrote: »

DVB-T (as used for DTT) is no substitute for either DAB or DVB-H because the error correction used is too weak to give a constant signal on the move.

The DTT tuners in mobile phones will only work if the phone is in a stationary position (e.g. on a desk in the office). They won't work on buses/trains or walking down the road without signal break-up.

DAB & DVB-H were designed to be used in the mobile environment so they have much stronger error correction systems.

L1011

scath - you still manage to miss the fact that no matter what technological advances we get, DTT on UHF will never be suitable for replacing radio on the movie. DTT on VHF III in theory could; but that would be relatively pointless seeing as VHF III is what DAB uses!

All the signal strength and infill transmitters in the world won't make UHF a suitable radio transmission format; infill transmitters also require SFN - which we aren't doing - and extreme cost. Using anything other than VHF II or III for radio would kill reception on the move, in city centres, and in hilly areas.

As it is I have a digital radio in my car which functions perfectly at 180km/h; its DAB...

reslfj

david23 wrote: »

DVB-T (as used for DTT) is no substitute for either DAB or DVB-H because the error correction used is too weak to give a constant signal on the move.

DVB-H is DVB-T with an added FEC layer + some power saving tech. DVB-H has a very low effective bitrate and is very far from 'state of the art'

DAB has very much weaker FEC than even DVB-T uses, but it is only transmitted with 4-QAM differential. DVB-T can use 4-QAM, 16-QAM and 64-QAM COFDM. DAB+ adds the ReedSolomon FEC and DAB+ is closer to DVB-T (4-QAM) robust, but differential modulation still makes it 2-3 dB less robust.

DVB-T operates nicely in VHFIII and DVB-T has modes that is as Doppler friendly as DAB.

The main problem with DVB-T is in the 7 Mhz channel that will use around 4 times the power of a 1.7 Mhz channel in each receiver.

A spectrum efficient modern protocol will be able to transmit 2-3 times higher bitrates than will DAB+ in a T-DAB channel (DAB is not worth talking about).

Lars

scath

Ok, we'd need to use VHF band II or III. That is using DAB grand at the moment. Well why not use it for DVB-T instead of DAB to address the range and moving. And if we could use DVB-T2 that would lower the power consumption. Okay DAB works fine at the moment. That's the point you make isn't it. Watty makes a similar case on http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055327451&page=14 but on the frequencies you mention.

So DVB-T uses more power. Does T2 address that better. So is it cheaper to use the same technology than DVB-T and DAB if power consumption is addressed? I guess the issue is we only have 1 block of VHF available isn't it post ASO or two? But that's probably enough for radio. But I guess it addressed radio but maybe not mobile TV? So if you had all of DTT on VHF instead of UHF, not enough spectrum?

I'm not well up on engineering. I suppose on the transmission side it certainly simplifies things isn't it, on the license side, its the power consumption. And why aren't we using SFN?s Is that not more spectrum efficient to do so and is switchover an opportunity to do so anyhow? So you would say scrap DAB and DAB+ ideas Lars and go for T2 for radio and TV?

L1011

Why would we use DVB-T with its higher power consumption, higher compression overheads, NO MOBILE RECEIVERS and absolute no bandwidth/bitrate improvements if not actually a huge disimprovement over DAB in VHF III?

Its an absolutely ludicrous idea and as a result, its not going to happen.

But there has to be a better way. Using 128Kbps MP2 audio is a step backwards from FM. While we might not be using 128K right now it could happen in the future if the service expands. I'm not saying we have to use DVB-T - anything but DAB.

L1011

DABv2. None of the useless overheads, technical problems and absolute dearth of receivers that using DVB-T would bring in but with modern codecs.

However, no matter what digital format is used there *will* be a race to the bottom bandwidth wise. Accountants rule over engineers and an accountant will just see that AAC allows them to sell 64kbits/sec streams where 128kbits/sec was used before.

reslfj

scath wrote: »

So DVB-T uses more power.

DVB-T do not as a technology use more power than DAB+, but DVB-T is only specified for 7 MHz channels in the VHFIII band. DAB/DAB+ uses 1/4 7 MHz VHFIII channel. So 4 DAB/DAB+ channels should be compared to 1 DVB-T channel.

The DAB-T channel has some 2-3 dB higher spectrum efficiency than the 4 DAB+ channels. (remember life is too short for outdated DAB)

More complicated modulation and better FEC uses a little more power, but Moore's Law has allowed very complicated battery devices to be build.
The power for the receiver should always be compared to the power used by the audio amp. and the speakers. (or display if TV)

DVB-H is DVB-T where multiplexing is allowed in bursts and the receiver power can be turned on only around the burst that contains the currently selected channel.
DVB-H also has yet another FEC layer on top of DVB-T's two FEC layers.

There are currently at least two newer standards that allows 1.7 MHz channels - DVB-SH and DVB-T2 - but if a DVB-H2 standard is developed it may be even better.
DVB-SH currently is focusing on S-Band and DVB-T2 on 8 MHz max-bitrate HDTV muxes.
However both standards (and the emerging standards LTE or WiMax broadband) shows how far off the DAB/DAB+ standards are from today's possibilities.

It is a total misunderstanding that DAB is better in mobile applications - it is NOT. VHF is better than UHF when Doppler is involved.
With proper parameters DVB-T/T2/H /SH will be better or much better in the same frequency band.

I think DAB - where it already is in use - should be allowed to continue for say 4-6 years. A new standard should be specified based on 'state of the art' technology and without accepting anything 'second best'.

To me a radio is not some device that plays audio, but a device that receive transported online 'audio' with an agreed 'quality of service'.

The audio encoding MP2, HE-AAC or ? is nothing special for a radio, but generic to reproducing any audio.

Lars

david23

That's all very interesting technically, but in practice it will be impossible for Ireland to switch from DAB/DAB+ without annoying a lot of people.

In 4-6 years time many new cars in Ireland will include these DAB/DAB+/DMB-A radios, which will receive digital radio anywhere as you drive around Europe:

http://www.worlddab.org/public_documents/EBU_WorldDMB_Digital_Radio_Receiver_Profiles_Press_Release_12Sept08.pdf

Eureka 147 has been officially approved by the EBU as the European digital radio standard.

Why would Ireland want to go it alone and choose a non-Eureka 147 system for digital radio (such as one based on DVB)? France has chosen DMB-A, Germany, Sweden & other countries have chosen DAB+, and the UK will eventually switch to DAB+.

Ireland needs to use DAB+ to stay in line with the rest of Europe and avoid expensive international compatibility problems.

watty

david23 wrote: »

That's all very interesting technically, but in practice it will be impossible for Ireland to switch from DAB/DAB+ without annoying a lot of people.

Hardly any people.

A small percentage of new cars are prefitted DAB
The coverage at present is useless for Driving
FM coverage for almost 100% people
Only RTE on DAB
Very Limited DAB coverage.

Who are these "a lot of people"?

DVB-t, or DVB-h or DRM+ makes more sense than dying DAB. A lot of Phones have FM and a few have DVB-t, some have DVB-h. None have DAB.

But we don't really need any of them at present.

reslfj

david23 wrote: »

In 4-6 years time many new cars in Ireland will include these DAB/DAB+/DMB-A radios, which will receive digital radio anywhere as you drive around Europe:

http://www.worlddab.org/public_documents/EBU_WorldDMB_Digital_Radio_Receiver_Profiles_Press_Release_12Sept08.pdf

Eureka 147 has been officially approved by the EBU as the European digital radio standard.

Why would Ireland want to go it alone and choose a non-Eureka 147 system for digital radio (such as one based on DVB)? France has chosen DMB-A, Germany, Sweden & other countries have chosen DAB+, and the UK will eventually switch to DAB+.

Ireland needs to use DAB+ to stay in line with the rest of Europe and avoid expensive international compatibility problems.

This is very far from "hard facts" - World DAB has a very poor record for its predictions.

This is very unlikely to happen - IMHO -

FM will be here for 15+ years, DAB+ will not be able to compete with LTE/WiMAX Internet. Broadcast radio needs the most efficient transmission possible to compete with LTE or WiMax.

DAB and DAB+ will newer be able to compete.

If you want to win - you MUST focus on the future - you must reach out for 'The Gold'.

Those early implementers that will be unhappy - just to bad, what can they do besides write a few letters to some newspapers - they can newer change any elections - and deep down the politicians know it.

A smart Ireland will do nothing and just wait until there is 100% certainty about the new standards. Until then keep the current FM (and DAB) broadcasts running. FM is real quality.

There are much better ways than DAB to invest in the ecomomic recovery - maybe there are only a few that are worse.

Lars

david23

watty wrote: »

Hardly any people.

A small percentage of new cars are prefitted DAB
The coverage at present is useless for Driving
FM coverage for almost 100% people
Only RTE on DAB
Very Limited DAB coverage.

Who are these "a lot of people"?

DVB-t, or DVB-h or DRM+ makes more sense than dying DAB. A lot of Phones have FM and a few have DVB-t, some have DVB-h. None have DAB.

But we don't really need any of them at present.

I was referring to the "4-6 years time" mentioned in the previous post, not the present situation.

How many car radios will have DVB-H in 4-6 years time? Virtually none, as many European broadcasters have rejected it and gone for DMB for mobile TV instead.

There's a story here about Holland awarding two national DMB licences.

http://www.wohnort.demon.co.uk/DAB/

DRM+ is still at the testing stage, but I haven't read about any countries that are proposing to adopt it as their main digital radio system.

As for DVB-T on the move, I have seen this in practice. When I went over to Cardiff a couple of weeks ago they had BBC News 24 on the city's buses. The signal breakup was so frequent that it was unwatchable. The only time that it was watchable was when the bus was stationary.

You're right, Ireland doesn't need to adopt any of these standards yet, but when the time is right it makes sense to adopt the same system as the rest of Europe, not to go it alone.

david23

david23 wrote: »

You're right, Ireland doesn't need to adopt any of these standards yet, but when the time is right it makes sense to adopt the same system as the rest of Europe, not to go it alone.

Though if we were to use that mentality we'd be using MPEG-2 for our DTT, something which I'm against for the same reasons I'm against DAB.

musa

Been listening to RTE DAB on the Maplin Car Radio for the past six months £60 Approx.Active aerial £20.In the house max signal on the log periodic aerial
£12.RTE Gold worth a listen as background music,no ads no DJ.

L1011

If anyones concerned about putting money down on a DAB unit and us moving to DAB+; since February Pure Digital have actually had the promised DAB+ compatible firmware for the Pure Highway in-car unit up on their website... not installed it yet however.

watty

Karsini wrote: »

Though if we were to use that mentality we'd be using MPEG-2 for our DTT, something which I'm against for the same reasons I'm against DAB.

No point to ANY digital Radio system yet, was the point I tried to make badly...

DAB itself is dying, Outside of RTE no-one wants it. What is value of it unless 100% nationwide and has some BBC on it too.

Large number of competing standards to replace DAB (DAB+, DRM, DRM+, Media-Flo, DMB, DVB-h, etc etc...)

No-one in present climate wants cost on simulcast on a new poorly subscribed to network.

L1011

watty wrote: »

No point to ANY digital Radio system yet, was the point I tried to make badly...

DAB itself is dying, Outside of RTE no-one wants it. What is value of it unless 100% nationwide and has some BBC on it too.

Large number of competing standards to replace DAB (DAB+, DRM, DRM+, Media-Flo, DMB, DVB-h, etc etc...)

No-one in present climate wants cost on simulcast on a new poorly subscribed to network.

BBC will not happen, end of. People need to build a bridge and get over it.

As goes "outside of RTE no-one wants it" - Phantom and DAP are both very very eager to resume digital broadcasting as far as it seems.

watty

Are they prepared to pay for it though?

Propellerhead

MYOB wrote: »

BBC will not happen, end of. People need to build a bridge and get over it.

As goes "outside of RTE no-one wants it" - Phantom and DAP are both very very eager to resume digital broadcasting as far as it seems.

I've built a slightly different bridge and got over that - I use satellite and wifi and never use DAB now as it doesn't provide what I want. My car FM radio provides usable BBC Radio 2 for most of my weekend travelling.

DAB is now irrelevant to me.

L1011

Grand so, so don't go looking for BBC on DAB like quite a few posters on here seem obsessed about... It was never, ever going to happen anyway.

10000maniacs

The only way to get DAB up and running in this country is to say to the indos that you cannot have that bandwidth anymore. We are going digital-only.

The Cush

10000maniacs wrote: »

The only way to get DAB up and running in this country is to say to the indos that you cannot have that bandwidth anymore. We are going digital-only.

Thats not going to happen for the foreseeable future, no country that I know of has announced the switchoff of analogue radio, everyone is concentrating on TV switchover which should be complete by Jun 2015.
The UK are looking at the 2015-2020 period, local radio licences are being renewed to 2015 atm.

darklordsbane

Hi All
can anybody tell me does dab radio work in Greystones County Wicklow, if so what equiptment do you need.
I am looking to slow down the radio signal to sync with tv coverage of irish rugby and soccer matches I can sometimes get these games on foriegn sattellite channels but not with english audio I believe this is possible with dab radios.
any help greatly appreciated
regards D

watty

Not any easier than feeding a FM radio signal through PC to delay it (or satellite Radio). RTE Radio is free on satellite. A second satellite receiver is 1/3rd price of a DAB radio.

You know there are no UK channels on RTE DAB?

You need a DAB radio.

darklordsbane

Thanks Watty
I thiught a pure dab radio was only €50 odd in tesco or debenhams at least thats what someone told me they paid for it. I know rte is free on sat but how do I slow that down, my motorised sat configuration is nowhere near the pc. thats why I want to know is dab available in Greystones I saw a footmap and it seems to stop way before Greystones.
regards D

byrnefm

From those excerpts, does this mean that RTÉ are considering turning *off* DAB in the process or just limiting it to its current broadcasting area?

The Cush

byrnefm wrote: »

From those excerpts, does this mean that RTÉ are considering turning *off* DAB in the process or just limiting it to its current broadcasting area?

RTÉ will not roll out DAB beyond the current transmitters until DAB Mux 2 is awarded and commercial broadcasters have launched their services. They said back in Oct 08

RTÉ has said it intends to roll-out DAB digital radio to 56% of the population over the coming three years however the broadcaster has stated that it will not progress with this roll-out until there is a regulatory framework in place that will allow commercial broadcasters to move to digital radio. This is to ensure that the whole industry moves together for the benefit of the listener.

ComReg has published the Technical Conditions for a DAB Multiplex Licence and set the Licence Fees. The Broadcasting (Amendment) Act 2007 regulates for the award of DAB Licences. The final piece of the jigsaw is the tendering and award of the commercial DAB Multiplex by the BCI.
I assume if the commercial radio stations wanted to launch on DAB they would be exerting pressure on the BCI to award the multiplex but over six months since RTE launched their multiplex no movement from the BCI or commercial broadcasters.
If the cash situation gets tighter at RTE and the commercial broadcasters fail to launch we may see a winding down of the current service as Cathal Goan indicated in his reply.

In a reply to a Dail question, in May, the Dept of Comms believes that the rollout of digital radio is likely to occur over a longer time period and in line with commercial and technology considerations.

Radio Broadcasting.

94. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he will provide an overview of DAB here; the number of listeners; the areas covered; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18704/09]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): DAB digital radio is an improved way of broadcasting radio via a network of terrestrial transmitters. It provides listeners with more choice, clearer sound and more features, while keeping all the features of FM radio, such as portability and free to use. The Broadcasting (Amendment) Act 2007 provides for the development of radio over digital multiplexes by both public service and commercial broadcasters.

It provides for RTÉ to be licensed for national multiplex(es) and it also provides for the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland (BCI) to issue national and regional multiplexes to commercial operators. However, unlike Digital Terrestrial Television (DTT), where there in an imperative to “go digital” at the earliest opportunity, there are no current plans for switching off the analogue radio services. This means that the rollout of digital radio is likely to occur over a longer time period and in line with commercial and technology considerations.

RTÉ has been running a trial of DAB radio over the last 2 years and has now commenced the rollout of a DAB multiplex. In this regard, RTÉ has developed a number of new radio channels specifically for this multiplex i.e. RTÉ Junior, RTÉ Choice, RTÉ Pulse, RTÉ Gold, RTÉ Chill and RTÉ 2xm. The present service is available in the greater Dublin area, the North East of the country, Cork City and Limerick City. Data on digital listening is not yet available to RTÉ.