Many thanks to SWLing Post contributor, Don Elliott, who shares this piece in which Radio Ink interviews him regarding the future of AM radio:
The SWLing Post
Shortwave listening and everything radio including reviews, broadcasting, ham radio, field operation, DXing, maker kits, travel, emergency gear, events, and more
Some of the biggest radiostation in U.S is high powered AM “clear channel” radiostations.
The audience exists for AM radio. The station must have an interesting and creative offering, which makes us listeners want to listen. Playing music, a la Spotify playlists with robo-jocks does not work.
A couple of thoughts: First, in this case I think that a free market approach will satisfy AM listeners like me. I can find a car that includes an AM receiver if I want one, just like I had to seek out a SiriusXM option before those were so common. I can also install an aftermarket unit. So can users in the “data deserts” who need AM service. Second, if the government needs a nationwide emergency communications network, we’re pretty close with the existing NOAA weather radio system. That FM service could be hardened and interconnected to do the job, then mandated for installation in all cars, etc. with more efficient and more widely dispersed transmitters than existing AM. Don’t get me wrong, I love AM/MW, but this “controversy” is likely the NAB advocating for its members’ financial needs, not the needs of US citizens.
AM/MW only salvation is to switch over to DRM, or use the automobile audio chip (TE6686) that is currently ALL the rage…Quodosen SR-286…!…?
What is switching to DRM supposed to achieve considering there’s been only a handful of DRM-capable receivers released since the introduction of the standard (that is since over 2 decades), none of them are available anywhere else than in India and (presumably) North Korea (and even if you can get one from aliexpress, the prices are ridiculously high), and the majority of broadcasters involved in trials have already abandoned it? It’s been tried once and failed miserably. There’s been no improvements to the standard except for the replacement of audio codec, but everything underneath was left untouched – it still provides worse bitrates than 90s dialup internet. ‘Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results’. I don’t think anyone would like to trade their fiber internet connection in exhange for DSL (90s technology like DRM), go back to 2G cell phones or buy a car with 90s specs so why do some people still think there’s a market which is eagerly waiting for the (yet another one?) arrival of DRM?
..so then, are WE stuck with the 100 year old analogue radio technology? If so, how can WE improve our present radio receivers? More powerful transmission, car radio chips (TE6686), etc..?
I don’t think we’re really stuck with anything, in fact we’re seeing lots of developments in the field of radio technology, both analogue and digital. We obviously have evolving digital standards, stretching beyond traditional broadcasting, and there’s surprisingly a lot of progress in the analogue field as well. The TEF666x receivers you’ve pointed out are a great example – it’s true that the principles of analogue signals they’re receiving may be decades old, but these new receivers deliver such great results in terms of sensitivity, selectivity etc that would’ve been unthinkable even few years ago. I think it’s a great example showing that even analogue’s capabilities have not been fully utilized yet and I’m eager to see further improvements that are inevitably going to arrive. On the other side we have DRM that’s really stuck in the 90s with no changes except for their marketing website, a system that has not seen any meaningful upgrades since its inception, I could even argue that in fact it had seen a regress. There are less broadcasters using the system than ever before, the receivers supply is as scarce as ever and they work as poorly as back in the day. But for whatever reason, with the reduced availability, their prices have stayed basically at the same level as 20years ago. There’s clearly something wrong there and it makes me feel that this particular technology is a dead end.
You seem to believe great sensitivity, selectivity etc will be all what it takes to solve the AM woe automatically. DRM as a standard is fixed decade ago, but its implementation are not fully matured, and great progress in the digital communication techniques developed in the last decades are not fully exploited yet.