nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

DAB in Ireland: RTE multiplex closed

rlogue

WestBriton informs me that he obtained good DAB reception on a portable DAB radio in the foothills of the Dublin mountains.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

The Cush

Elmo wrote: »

Thanks

Where does the BAI lie in all of this?

I think the BAI is concentrating on DTT right now, digital radio will have to wait considering there is no analogue radio switchoff deadline.

A BCI funded report was published last Sept on digital radio in Ireland.

Macy0161

Sorry to post again, but can anyone confirm Kippure DAB in Wicklow (Roundwood area)? Getting pushed to suggest a fathers day present...:D

bkehoe

Kippure is on, I can get the RTE mux all the way down to Carlow; no way that Three Rock is doing this. I assume that there's a limited beamwidth on the transmissions though due to the lack of coverage in East Wicklow.

Our man in Havana

What frequency is kippure on?

L1011

12C, the same as every other mux. They run in a SFN.

Macy0161

Thanks bkehoe, I'll take the punt and report back (tomorrow hopefully) - from the sounds of it it could go either way.

Macy0161

Well tried last night, inside the house, with nothing on the scan. Switched to FM and was getting BBC2 loud and clear though!

If I get a chance I'll try again tonight outside before it goes back (it's going back anyway, as the display doesn't work when the power is coming from the batteries rather than mains).

watty

Is Internet Radio and RTE's internet player more important than DAB?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/07/06/bbc_radio_review/

L1011

watty wrote: »

Is Internet Radio and RTE's internet player more important than DAB?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/07/06/bbc_radio_review/

Answer: No.

Internet radio doesn't work in cars and is never going to do so reliably. Any form of terrestrial broadcast is superior seeing as more listening is done on-the-go than static.

david23

watty wrote: »

Is Internet Radio and RTE's internet player more important than DAB?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/07/06/bbc_radio_review/

Orlowski is a well-known opponent of DAB and supporter of internet radio.

The BBC Trust just acknowledged what everyone knew already, namely that total DAB sales in the UK are much lower in 2010 than was predicted back in 2001. Total digital listening (all platforms) in the UK stands at around 24%, well below the 50% prediction.

Indoor DAB reception is poor and many digital-only stations in the UK have closed.

The new UK coalition Government are due to make a statement about DAB on Thursday.

Internet radio doesn't work for many copyrighted programmes (sports rights etc) so it cannot replace FM in any country.

watty

However NO-ONE has been talking about replacing or turning off FM-band II.

In many countries quite the reverse. IP "on Demand" delivery of radio or TV, even if everyone had fibre can't replace Broadcast.

Many DAB radios are bought and then used as FM radios. Radio on DVB-t can be used mobile and in cars. There is really no future for DAB as Broadcast vs Satellite, FM-BandII, DRM on LW/MW/SW and DVB-t Mobile in Cars and phones.

"Orlowski is a well-known opponent" of many things, that misses the point. DAB was envisaged for Niche programming. Internet Radio does that better, that's what the BBC Trust report is saying to my mind.

However while UK DAB quality is poorer often than FM-VHF Radio, most Internet Radio quality is worse.

BBC R6 is better carried on DVB-t than DAB for terrestrial Mobile

The Cush

watty wrote: »

However NO-ONE has been talking about replacing or turning off FM-band II.

but they have been talking about the Possibilities for the Digitalisation of Band II since 2007/08 leading to a recent ECC Report

watty

Can't see it happening.

marclt

I think the developing issue is that whilst FM works well, and some hanker for the continuation of AM (I like the way some songs sound on MW) there is the expectation that people are demanding more from technology.

FM RDS is good, but how many in car receivers allow RDS text? It was ruled out, but it seems that the Pure Highway allows for digital text, which is hugely helpful in giving song information etc etc.

The same goes for listening to the radio via mobile phones and the various smartphone app. Does sound quality really matter as much in a car?

Is there a model for internet radio working in cars?

Sam Russell

I would have thought that the installed base of FM radios was so great that the cost to the user and the incredibly high cost of obsolete radios would prohibit any change in this form of broadcast. Surely, DAB type broadcasts will allow expansion if any is required, and the fact that DAB has not taken off is no reason to mess with FM.

Why render most existing radios obsolete?

watty

Virtually every car radio in last 6 to 8 years does RDS auto tuning, Traffic announcements and basic RDS text. Fancy text not allowed in UK (e.g. scrolling, song info etc) as it is deemed to distract driver.

AM *IS* being replaced by Digital Radio Mondail (DRM) and FM.

RTE MW is gone.

loads of phones have FM Radio. Many do Internet Radio, some do Radio and TV via DTT (LG selling them in Germany has about killed any chance or DVB-h there).

Some phones have built in FM TX (iTrip style) and it's as cheap as 8 Eur to add and then any FM radio inc Car will feed Phone's MP3's or Internet Radio to main car radio.

I've demoed RDS for Artist, Track, Album etc (even possible on static RDS display!). Newer "iTrips" that are integrated or use docking or USB2Go connectors actually generate RDS for the MP3 tag info.

Some people are into HiFi in Car, and have been since 1970s.

DAB does nothing legal for Car Driver that most existing car FM Radios don't do. Mobile FM reception coverage is far better too than DAB, even in UK.

marclt

I think the difficulty here is that RDS text was never really given the opportunity to grow. To access it you have to go into menus on most radios, whereas DAB radios benefit from the two line text screens.

It then depends on radio stations to provide accurate information on the song info being played - not as easy to do if you use CDs in the studio. But very easy to set up if you use an automated playout system like Myriad, for example.

The BBC have this dynamic text down to a fine art, especially Radio 4 and Radio 5live. Constantly updating text which works on both FM and DAB for Radio 4.

Sadly RTE just use a generic line of text (something like '2FM - the popular music service of Radio Telefis Eireann) and gives the time every now and then. It has always been seen as secondary.

I won't argue with you that FM coverage will probably always trump DAB or DAB+ if it ever gets rolled out. As for DRM - I've read abit about the Plymouth trial - but they reported rapid drop off in signal quality at nightfall in the fringe reception area. Will this get off the ground? It certainly seems slow.

With the advancement towards all things IP, including telephone lines over IP networks rather the current methods, I think things will move more rapidly. Who'd have thought 10 years ago, we'd be listening to radio over the internet on an iPhone, or making telephone calls for free at near CD quality via Skype? In those days some of us were still on the 088 network!

It's not to say that Internet radio will trump the traditional options of receiving radio broadcasts, but they will compliment in certain circumstances and be the weapon of choice for others more technically competent.

Sam Russell

The huge installed base of FM radios would suggest that it be left alone. I am typing on a qwerty keyboard that was laid out to slow down the typist as the mechanism could not keep up. We still use it. Why not leave FM alone for tyhe same reason - the installed base and the usage to too great to change.

All very well to try DAB or DTT to provide new radio streams, but FM fills a market at the moment. All that will happen with new technology is more crap, with less quality.

[Deleted User]

I'm not so sure that IP can replace FM for the simple reason that it's a pull technology. Because of this, major dropouts require rebuffering and the fact it has to be encoded, buffered and decoded causes an excessive time delay in the broadcast.

watty

IP is complementary to Broadcast never a replacement.

The new UK Government has re-iterated the previous position, FM would only be turned off if a Majority of Listeners agreed. In any case their plan was only to cease National and major Local stations, but that Community Radio and small Stations would continue indefinitely on FM Band II.

[Deleted User]

Sam Russell wrote: »

All very well to try DAB or DTT to provide new radio streams, but FM fills a market at the moment. All that will happen with new technology is more crap, with less quality.

I dunno about that.
I've heat radio on dtt and think it's great.
Ad free music all day.
That channel is on dab in the UK.

watty

RTE radio, esp the news is painful with adverts.

I think as a PSB they should banish music and adverts from RTE Radio1 and add some decent content.

Then consider what they are doing on R2.

What pays for "Heat Radio"?

I can get over 25 stations on FM with roof aerial or Car Radio. But there is not a huge choice of content. Six or seven.

david23

This is the new UK Government's stance on DAB, as outlined in a speech today by Culture minister Ed Vaizey:

http://www.culture.gov.uk/news/ministers_speeches/7226.aspx

They have also published a Digital Radio Action Plan:

http://www.culture.gov.uk/publications/7227.aspx

Vaizey wants all new cars in the UK fitted with DAB by the end of 2013.

RTÉ Pulse: Dave

marclt wrote: »

Sadly RTE just use a generic line of text (something like '2FM - the popular music service of Radio Telefis Eireann) and gives the time every now and then. It has always been seen as secondary.

I

Ill correct you there... we have full Dynamic DLS information running concurrently on DAB and as infotext on FM.

There is a whole trauch of dynamic info on all 11 Digital Radio services, and 4 FM services.
We are also pushing DAB EPG and TMC over FM,

we are also the first broadcaster in Europe to offer Radiotext+ over FM for song Tagging on iTunes.

RTÉ Pulse: Dave

also can i draw your attention to the following article. found here http://www.digitalradioltd.com/online-v-fm/

Online v FM

29 March 2010 7 Comments

Last week a general email discussion has been going on talking about the costs of broadcasting online versus one-to-many broadcasting with FM or DAB.
JP Coakley, Director of Operations at RTÉ Radio made some very good points which I’m sharing with his permission. Please note these are JP’s personal thoughts and not necessarily those of RTÉ.
First things first. Let’s not demonise either side. This is neither a question of New Media refuseniks who are unable to see the tidal wave of the web coming toward them as they hold to a dying past, nor is it a question of New Media fanatics who are incapable of understanding the value of FM as a universally available and free to air platform. This is purely and simply a strategic dilemma that requires thought, discussion and critically, decisive positioning.
Costs of transmission.
Right now, we estimate the relative costs per listener per hour of the web versus FM is 2000 to 1. The web is 2,000 times more expensive per listener per hour than FM. Part of this is explained by the fact that the FM network is expensive to build but, once built, is very efficient at serving large audiences. The web is not. The unit cost to serve the millionth web user is exactly the same as the first. If we had a situation where 50% of our audience was on the web, we would be forced to reduce other activities to pay for it. Also, there would be a punitive charge to popularity, i.e. if a programme gained more listeners than it was expected to, the cost of transmitting that programme would rise.
We are in the very early days of internet traffic. What we can see is, in the UK, there are very real threats from ISPs to “throttle” the BBC iPlayer on the basis that it now constitutes nearly 10% of total online traffic. It is highly likely that the BBC will be obliged eventually to pay for the distribution of the iPlayer. Of course you will hear a lot about next generation networks but there is a real question over who will pay for them.
The problem with the web business model is that the people who make the networks are not the people profiting. There are five main businesses in net use, shopping, gaming, pornography, gambling and media. None of these returns money to the people who build networks, and of these, media (including social media) consumes most bandwidth yet delivers least return, both to the ISPs and, critically, to the businesses themselves. I really don’t see how this model will work in the future without businesses being charged by ISPs, according to use, or governments deciding to build the network. If the charge for the new networks is to be passed to the broadband subscriber we will see a very significant jump in tariffs.
Costs of content.
The web favours aggregators over originators. The most successful business model on the web, is Google. Ironically that’s our business model; charging advertisers for access to audiences rather than charging audiences for access to content (telco model). Google do this by aggregating content – they do not create anything – and bringing it to a single place where advertisers may also live. Where there are propositions that involve a mixture of aggregation and origination, such as YouTube and Twitter, money is not being made. Why? Because good stuff – veracity, reliability, creativity – costs money. So we see YouTube acknowledging that it will pay or share revenue to get the “good stuff” from established media. At the same time we see Rupert Murdoch, and many other papers, testing the idea of pay walls around their business. Why? Because as things stand they will have no business if they don’t. It is reasonable to suggest that they should adapt to this new reality but a “crowd in the cloud” remains an elusive way to ensure revenue.
The most successful media website in the country, RTÉ.ie makes approximately one twentieth of the total commercial revenue made by Radio (RTÉ Annual Report 2008). What all “traditional” media are facing is a situation where they cannot afford to be on the web on a free model and still, they cannot afford not to be there. Literally thousands of businesses have tried to find alternative methods to fund their activities online. Very few have survived without subscription models. Yet, as Liam O’Brien has pointed out, RTÉ is rightly obliged to avoid charging the domestic user on the basis that they pay a licence fee.
Rights – Intellectual Property.
Pandora, Last FM and Spotify are examples of organisations that started brightly but tripped badly on rights. All of them have had to confine and/or charge for their services in the past two years. Anyone who works in a web business that involves IP will tell you that this is the most troublesome and expensive element of their business. This is and was true also of “traditional” media, the difference being that they have learned to deal with it and have business models that incorporate these costs. Typically also, their rights are for limited territories, not the worldwide audience that the web offers. This time last year, Last FM were in negotiation with literally hundreds of separate rights organisations to try to secure rights for their service worldwide. They have not succeeded. Colleagues involved in internet only radio stations will tell you that the new cost models proposed by the record industry will simply close them down. However in tune or out of tune we are with the prevailing zeitgeist, if no one pays, then no one gets paid. Simple.
Overall
The theme is of money, investment and control re-asserting itself – to a certain extent. If the story of the web from 2004 to 2010 was real expansion post the dotcom bubble, it is likely that the next five years will see retrenchment as an unlikely combination of authors, artists, record labels, press companies, broadcasters and others try to make people pay for their content. For example, few musicians have the courage to publicly disapprove of file sharing but a Swedish 2008 poll of musicians (when Pirate Bay was at its height) found that 38% wanted to legalise file sharing – or to put it another way, 62% don’t. Ironically 59% admitted to using file sharing.
The good news is that RTÉ can provide the best of both. We are obliged, where possible, to avoid subscription and we can also provide quality content and access on the web. The warning is that, like many others, we don’t yet have a way to make this pay to the scale needed to sustain quality and diverse output.
In the meantime it’s about trial and error to a certain extent. Pre-rolls, mid rolls, dynamic ads (multiplatform) and yes, subscription for value add services, are things we should look at, try and learn from.
FM is still a strong proposition. However, it needs a face lift. This is why many broadcasters advocate digital radio. It is mobile, simple and free yet offers additional content and services more akin to the net. Of course there are huge obstacles and many problems associated with making digital radio as attractive, popular and ubiquitous as FM, but Dusty comments, and figures from other digital radio countries show, that if you get it right people like it – and not only that, they actually favour it over web radio.
One thing, unfortunately, we can say with certainty. If our audience is largely online in 5 years, based on current trends, we will be compelled to be a drastically smaller industry than we are today.
Key to our future (as we said in 2004) are digital radio and the internet. We will now live on two platforms, whether FM or digital radio is the first. We are actually not doing a bad job so far, but our next decisions on new web services must take into account that we are funded and paid to be RTÉ Radio, not RTÉ “Lost” FM.

watty

I had in previous studies put cost of IP (Internet, not Intellectual Property) vs Broadcast at closer to 10,000:1
But that was for high quality. Most web content is not HiFi.

DTT is now a better candidate than DAB to deliver nationwide Mobile and Fixed Digital Radio.

mike65

The Sunday Times has a piece in Culture Ireland section today by the regular media scribe. Outlining the current fiasco. I doubt its online unless someone can scan it (I read it round my sisters pace and I ain't going back over to get it!)

edit this was meant ot be in the DTT thread.

L1011

watty wrote: »

DTT is now a better candidate than DAB to deliver nationwide Mobile and Fixed Digital Radio.

Show me a DTT radio.

Oh wait, there aren't any...

watty

LG HB620T

Portable DTT & Phone

Released in 2008
http://www.gsmarena.com/lg_hb620t-2486.php

There are others too.
http://www.rapidtvnews.com/index.php/200804291012/mobile-dtt-from-vodafonet-mobile.html

Since UK has DAB and the retailers here sell UK stuff and most countries are not interested in Digital Radio, you see DAB radios.

It's now possible to have DTT portables and DTT in Car radio, cheaper than DAB as the world market for DAB chips is tiny compared to DTT. DAB is a duplication of DTT transmissions for Radio using obsolete MP2 codec.

A USB DTT receiver or cheap DTT setbox will do Digital Radio at home.

L1011

Thats a mobile phone with a DTT *television* in it.

Show me a DTT radio-only device. There aren't any.