Telamon wrote:

There is plenty to read in this news group on the subject of digital
transmission. Most people in the news group don't want it. The reason
are several but paramount is the fact that the implementations are old
technology......

Old? Both HD Radio and DRM (and also DAB+) are using the latest MPEG4
HE-AAC+SRM codecs. That's the newest and most-advanced digital
compression standard currently available.

The modulation is COFDM - also one of the newest ideas available for
sending data via broadcast.


The best match so far with the applied technology is FM because it most
closely emulates the conditions or transmission path for which those
outdated ideas were originally conceived. Daytime AMBCB comes in next
and nigh time AMBCB and short wave come in last.

Interesting. First, what is AMBCB? Second, why do you rank AM lower
than FM? And why do you rank skywave transmission as last?



Arguments that current digital broadcasts by proponents fall flat
because everyone has or now realizes that this type of transmission has
its own downfalls compared to analog.

Such as? You keep telling me "digital has downfalls" but so far
you've not told me what they are. Please share that information,
because I'm curious to know.



Arguments of proposed improved digital broadcast by proponents are just
collections of insipid stupid ideas like using additional bandwidth or
more power or just reduce the coverage area of a transmitter. Just more
dumb-ass ideas on top of the current old and unsuitable concepts

Why are these idea "dumbass"? Please explain.



And just as bad as the poorly considered technology is the
implementation where the whole of the band is used instead of just a
part so a great deal of chaos ensues generally ****ing people off.

How would the FCC go about using "part" of the band in its transition
from AM to Digital, or FM to Digital?


But don't worry digital mode proponents; the hilarious HD troll Eduardo

I've not met him yet.