desk-music-headphones-earphones

Momentum Grows for FM in Smartphones

There’s been good news recently for advocates of activating FM radio receivers in smartphones. First came the announcement by AT&T Wireless—the #2 wireless carrier in the U.S.—that it will request its Android phone manufacturers to activate FM reception capability on all their devices in 2016 and beyond. Next, NAB Labs released its latest tracking data of activated FM capability in U.S. smartphones, which showed continued growth in early 2015, reaching the highest percentage of phones sold in any calendar quarter to date (see chart below). And most recently, T-Mobile joined the party, essentially matching AT&T’s move toward pushing its Android platform providers to activate the FM chip in all future devices it provides the carrier. This now represents a significant tipping point in the FM-activation battle, with the majority of U.S. wireless providers now supporting the activation of FM receivers in their smartphones.

FM Graph

The chart above shows the impact of wireless carrier Sprint’s arrangement with broadcasters to have its device suppliers activate FM on their smartphones. The strong growth this deal engendered in 2014 can now be seen to continue into 2015, with over 9 million smartphones sold in the U.S. with their FM capability fully activated by at least one U.S. wireless carrier during 1Q15. Given that only about 2.6 million such phones were sold in 1Q14, this reflects a growth rate of over 350% year-to-year, mostly resulting from Sprint’s action.

Further, the 9.2 million smartphones sold with FM activated by at least one carrier in 1Q15 represented 27% of all phones sold during the period (see chart below). While there’s still a long way to go, this is the highest percentage of total U.S. smartphone sales ever recorded by FM-activated units since NAB Labs started tracking this item in 2012.

FMChart

The Sprint-driven growth in FM-activated smartphone sales included the preloading of the NextRadio app in essentially all of its smartphones except the iPhone (more on that in a moment). The impact of this deal with a single, smaller carrier will likely be significantly amplified in 2016, when AT&T’s and T‑Mobile’s moves to activate FM on all their Android phones hit the market. This implies that the current growth in FM activation in smartphones will continue to accelerate.

By the way, both AT&T and T-Mobile already offer a few phones with activated FM receivers (although none include the NextRadio app preloaded yet—users can download it from an Android app store and it will work on most of these phones). But a recent scan of the AT&T website showed that among its 28 currently available Android phone models, only 5 had FM activated—and most of these were not among its best-selling models. If AT&T’s and T-Mobile’s new announcements bear full fruit, therefore, the number of additional FM-activated phones in 2016 should be substantial.

At present, this leaves Verizon as the sole U.S. major wireless carrier that has not supported FM activation in its smartphones. Verizon is the largest U.S. carrier (by subscribers), and it has traditionally been the least supportive of FM activation in its devices, so a major challenge among carriers remains. The AT&T and T-Mobile actions will add to the Sprint installed base and push the percentage of FM-activated smartphones toward a majority position, however, perhaps making it difficult for Verizon to persist in isolation with its anti-FM position.

Nevertheless, the bigger challenge to making FM activation a default condition among smartphones remains with Apple. The multiple models of iPhones on sale currently account for about half of the entire smartphone market’s sales (by units), and unlike most other smartphone manufacturers—which either enable FM unilaterally, or at the request of the wireless carriers they sell to—Apple has never activated FM radio on any iPhone, although they all have contained an FM receiver chip since the iPhone 3GS. Meanwhile, other Apple products, like several recent generations of the iPod Nano, do include a high-performance FM receiver, so it’s obvious that Apple can develop a great FM radio experience in its devices. The iPod Nano has no WiFi or other wireless network connectivity, though, so Apple’s strategy seems to be based consistently on the premise that if the device can be network-connected, it shall have no working FM radio. Apple must have its reasons for this, likely due to its unique position of being both a consumer electronics manufacturer and an entertainment service provider, but this renders the wireless carriers who want to activate FM on their smartphones unable to do so on any iPhone at present.

Another recently discovered item in NAB Labs’ research is that one of the top-selling smartphones in 1Q15 included a new connectivity chip that—unlike all other top-selling models—does not include an FM radio receiver. The Motorola DROID Turbo, so far available exclusively through Verizon, uses a Qualcomm Atheros QCA6164 chip for its WiFi and Bluetooth connectivity, with no FM radio bundled into the silicon (as all other current connectivity chips do). If this departure from common practice becomes a trend, the climb toward activating FM in most smartphones could become steeper, moving from simply activating hardware already on board to requiring installation of additional hardware.

So while the numbers are improving and alliances are growing, the situation remains fluid, and the battle to activate FM in smartphones will continue on two fronts: with wireless carriers (primarily Verizon) and with smartphone manufacturers (primarily Apple).

FCC and Broadcasters Focusing on Field Enforcement

FCC field office map

Last March the FCC put forth what turned out to be a controversial plan to modernize and reduce the Commission’s field enforcement activities, resulting in significant review and comment by industry stakeholders as well as members of the U.S. Congress. In the midst of these discussions about Field Offices, the Commission in June hosted a “Pirate Radio Roundtable” focusing on strategies to combat illegal pirate radio operations. These activities recently culminated in the release of an FCC Order on reorganization of the Enforcement Bureau’s field operations and a letter from NAB to FCC Chairman Wheeler summarizing ideas from the Pirate Radio Roundtable for possible actions to combat Pirate Radio.

The FCC’s Order, released July 16, 2015, outlines several actions to realign the mission and resources of the FCC field offices and Equipment Development Group. Most notably, the Order closes completely eight of the 24 current field offices and closes an additional three offices with plans to still maintain a “local presence” in these cities (Anchorage, Kansas City, and San Juan). The table and map shown here summarize these office closure actions.

LOCATION OFFICE TYPE STATUS
Anchorage, AK Resident Agent CLOSED – LOCAL PRESENCE MAINTAINED
Atlanta, GA District RELOCATED NEARBY
Boston, MA District OPEN
Buffalo, NY Resident Agent CLOSED                                                       
Chicago, IL District OPEN
Columbia, MD District RELOCATED NEARBY
Dallas, TX District OPEN
Denver, CO District OPEN
Detroit, MI District CLOSED                                                       
Honolulu, HI Resident Agent OPEN
Houston, TX Resident Agent CLOSED                                                       
Kansas City, MO District CLOSED – LOCAL PRESENCE MAINTAINED
Los Angeles, CA District OPEN
Miami, FL Resident Agent OPEN
New Orleans, LA District OPEN
New York, NY District OPEN
Norfolk, VA Resident Agent CLOSED                                                       
Philadelphia, PA District CLOSED                                                       
Portland, OR Resident Agent OPEN
San Diego, CA District CLOSED                                                       
San Francisco, CA District RELOCATED NEARBY
San Juan, PR Resident Agent CLOSED – LOCAL PRESENCE MAINTAINED
Seattle, WA District CLOSED                                                       

More generally, the Order directs the field offices to embark on a program to update equipment and employee skillsets to address the likely issues that will accompany new and expanded uses of spectrum. The Commission wants this program to include the expanded use of remotely operated monitoring equipment to supplement field staff, as well as the identification and use of portable devices capable of assessing interference issues in bands expected to experience heavy spectrum use.  The Order also stipulates that:

  • all Bureau field agents shall have electrical engineering backgrounds;
  • within six weeks of release of the Order, the Bureau will establish procedures for industry and public safety complainants to escalate their complaints within the Field organization;
  • the Commission will continue to work with outside stakeholders to develop a comprehensive policy and enforcement approach to the issue of unlicensed radio broadcasting;

the Commission will implement a nationwide outplacement effort to assist all displaced employees to find positions in the public or private sectors, including other vacancies within the Commission for which they are qualified and selected.

In an NAB news release on the FCC Order, NAB Executive Vice President of Communications Dennis Wharton said that “NAB appreciates the work of both the FCC and Congress in forging a compromise FCC field office proposal that keeps open many more enforcement offices than was originally proposed. We also thank both Republican and Democratic commissioners for expressing a need to better enforce prohibition against pirate radio stations. NAB looks forward to working with all stakeholders to police the airwaves against these illegal operations.”

In a separate but related matter, on July 17, 2015, NAB General Counsel and Executive Vice President Rick Kaplan sent a letter to FCC Chairman Wheeler with a list of ideas resulting from the FCC’s “Pirate Radio Roundtable” focusing on strategies to combat illegal pirate radio operations. At the Roundtable discussion it was noted that pirate radio operations erode the advertising and membership base of legitimate broadcast stations (both full- and low-power), and undermine investment in legitimate stations, particularly minority-owned stations. They also threaten the health and safety of radio listeners and local residents. Pirate radio operations disrupt the Emergency Alert System (EAS), interfere with aviation frequencies and often transmit from residential buildings where unchecked RF radiation can cause health problems.

Some of the suggestions generated at the Roundtable discussion are summarized in the NAB letter and include the following:

  • Significantly increase the number of enforcement actions, including Notices of Apparent Liability, Forfeitures and equipment seizures issued by the FCC against pirate operators. This effort should begin immediately as the number of pirate radio stations often increases during the summer months. While the Enforcement Bureau has issued hundreds of Notices of Unlicensed Operation, it has issued relatively few fines or equipment seizures;
  • Develop a Commission policy statement to share with private and law enforcement groups and help channel Commission resources towards pirate radio enforcement;
  • Implement a dual strategy that increases pirate enforcement effort in the short term using all existing enforcement tools while working on changes in the Communications Act and other federal laws to improve enforcement against pirate radio. This will include a legislative strategy for expanding the Commission’s authority to prosecute pirate radio operators, including coordination with the Federal Aviation Authority and the Federal Emergency Management Agency;
  • Raise the awareness of entities (e.g., concert venues, building owners and managers, advertisers) that may unknowingly aid and abet pirate radio operators. Develop best practices with representative trade associations and organizations;
  • Enlist law enforcement entities that can serve as partners in education efforts;
  • Enhance the Commission’s ability to identify and prosecute pirate operators, including the continued assistance of broadcasters in locating illegal radio transmitters and studios;
  • Further examine the impact of pirate radio on the nation’s EAS system;
  • Create a permanent liaison between the Commission, U.S. Attorney’s Offices, US Marshal’s service, and state and local law enforcement agencies to facilitate pirate radio enforcement;
  • Explore using private sector engineers to help FCC offices work with local law enforcement in a more efficient manner.
RDS logos

RDS2 Demonstrated at 2015 RDS Forum Meeting

For nearly three decades the Radio Data System (RDS) digital FM subcarrier has been providing FM broadcasters the ability to transmit a digital data stream to listeners. Developed in Europe, RDS was slow to take hold in the U.S. at first, but the introduction of digital radio services in the early 2000’s also heralded a significant uptake in the use of RDS to provide song title and artist and traffic-related information to RDS-equipped receivers. It is estimated that there are currently over 5 billion RDS-equipped radios worldwide.

While extremely useful, the RDS signal is severely limited in data capacity, and the RDS Standards (IEC 62106 and NRSC-4-B) include a number of features that have become out-of-date and are no longer needed. Given these factors, the RDS Forum, a European-based standards-development group responsible for the initial development and on-going maintenance of the IEC version of the Standard, agreed at its annual meeting in July 2014 to begin considering an update to RDS that would address these issues. A follow-on meeting to discuss a proposed enhancement called “RDS2” was held in Budapest in November 2014 which resulted in a “feasibility document” describing the proposed RDS2 system.

Last week, the RDS Forum held its 2015 annual meeting, and a prototype RDS2 system was demonstrated.  Further, after deliberating the potential benefits afforded by this new system, the RDS Forum created a Working Group with the goal of updating the RDS Standard to include RDS2. A brief description of RDS2 is given here:

  • RDS2 offers the ability to transmit one, two or three additional subcarriers along with, and identical in structure to, the legacy RDS subcarrier. While the legacy subcarrier is centered at 57 kHz (within the FM baseband), the three new subcarriers are centered at 66.5, 71.25 and 76 kHz (as with the legacy 57 kHz subcarrier, these new  subcarriers are each derivable from the 19 kHz pilot). Shown in the figure below is a spectral plot of the RDS and RDS2 subcarriers and the 19 kHz pilot tone (this plot is from the prototype system demonstrated to the RDS Forum);

RDS2 spectrum

  • The proposed RDS2 system design was developed by Attilla Ladanyi, T&C Holdings (Germany) and Peter Jako, Hungarian Radio. The demo transmission hardware operated and on display at this year’s Forum was developed by Allen Hartle and Seth Stroh, Jump2Go (USA), and is based upon Jump2Go’s “JumpGate3” platform; the demo reception hardware was developed by Hendrik van der Ploeg, Catena and Joop Beunders, MacBe (Netherlands). A photo of the demo setup is shown below. Note that this was an actual low-power “over-the-air” transmission.

RDS2 test setup

  • It is proposed that the new RDS2 subcarriers will be used exclusively to transmit “Open Data Application” (ODA) information. Previously established as part of the legacy RDS format, ODAs are used to support a variety of data services, and are the principal way that new services utilize RDS. Since the new subcarriers will be freed from transmitting the various “overhead” types of RDS data such as the Program Information (PI) and Program Service (PS) codes, the overall data capacity of the RDS2 signal (for “payload”) is on the order of 10 to 20 times (or more) of that available with the legacy RDS subcarrier alone.

A comparison of data capacity is given in the table below, where three cases are compared: Case 0 illustrates the capacity (in effective bit rate) of a legacy RDS subcarrier where 10% of the payload is used for transmitting ODA data (this is a typical scenario in use today); Case 1 again represents a legacy RDS subcarrier but this time with a 70% ODA payload, showing essentially the maximum ODA payload throughput using the legacy RDS signal; and finally, Case 3 shows a 30-fold improvement in ODA payload capacity when all three RDS2 subcarriers are used to carry 100% ODA data (assuming no ODA data on the legacy subcarrier; this is the proposed use case for RDS2). For this table, “STREAM 0” refers to the data stream used to modulate the legacy RDS subcarrier while “STREAMS_1-3” refers to the data streams modulating the three RDS2 subcarriers.

RDS2 table (1)

Some of the new applications that are proposed for and would be supportable by RDS2 include the ability to transmit a station logo and the use of the UTF-8 character set to support longer Radio Text and Program Service text strings. Currently, these applications are not supportable with RDS because of the limited capacity of the existing system as illustrated by the cases shown in the above table.

With the completion of the successful prototype demonstration and the RDS Forum members in agreement that RDS2 should be incorporated into the Standard, it is now the task of the newly formed RDS Forum Working Group to develop the detailed specification for RDS2, and in addition to identify the obsolete sections of the existing Standards that can be eliminated. NAB Senior Director, Advanced Engineering David Layer, who participated in this year’s RDS Forum meeting as a liaison for the National Radio Systems Committee (NRSC, co-sponsored by NAB and the Consumer Electronics Association), will be participating in the RDS Forum Working Group, and will work to ensure compatibility of the updated European Standard with the NRSC’s version of the RDS Standard (NRSC-4-B, United States RBDS Standard).

In parallel with the Standards development work, the RDS Forum intends to work on identifying “killer applications” for RDS2, and identifying chip and receiver manufacturer partners interested in developing hardware that will support these upgrades to the RDS system. Outreach is also planned to broadcasters to inform them of this work, and to seek out their input and participation in the Standards-setting and applications development processes.

Visit the RDS Forum and NRSC websites for additional information on these organizations. For additional information on the RDS2 project or to find out how to get involved in this work,  at NAB.

Low-power FM Proponents Seek Power Increase

Low-power FM (LPFM) stations are increasing in number as a result of the FCC’s October 2013 filing window for new LPFM applications. The most recent “ Broadcast Totals” published by the FCC (dated March 31, 2015) show 1,029 licensed LPFM stations which is an increase of 255 from one year earlier, and many more can be expected since, according to the Media Bureau, 2,826 new LPFM applications were filed in 2013.

Currently, LPFM stations are authorized for 100 watts ERP (“LP-100”), but on May 15, 2015 the FCC released for comment a Petition for Rulemaking seeking to increase this to a maximum of 250 watts (“LP-250”).  REC Networks, an LPFM advocacy group which also provides broadcast engineering services to LPFM broadcasters, submitted this petition which in addition to asking for a power increase, also requests that the FCC make additional rule changes favorable to the LPFM service at the expense of additional potential interference to full-power FM stations and a reduction in future availability of FM translators.  REC’s primary justification for the Petition is to better enable LPFM signals to penetrate inside buildings and automobiles. Comments on this Petition are being accepted by the FCC until June 15, 2015.

LP-250 example1

The figure above, taken from Appendix A of the Petition, shows an example of the impact of increasing the LPFM power from 100 to 250 watts for station WDFC-LP, Greensboro, NC.  Also shown in the figure is the 88.4 dBu contour of 2nd-adjacent full-power station WJMH, Reidsville, NC (class C0, 102.1 MHz). Here are some of the details of the proposed rule changes (page numbers refer to the Petition document):

  • (Page 11) REC proposes a new class of service for LPFM. This service will be allowed to operate at a maximum of 250 watts at 30 meters height above average terrain (“HAAT”) which will result in a service contour of 7.1 kilometers. Under the new LP-250 class of service, LPFM stations may operate at a minimum of 101 watts at 30 meters HAAT with a service contour exceeding 5.6 kilometers and up to 7.1 kilometers;
  • (Page 13) REC proposes that if a short-spaced LP-100 station wishes to upgrade to LP-250, they will need to make a technical showing that the interfering contour of the proposed upgraded LPFM facility will not overlap the service contour of the full-service contour;
  • (Page 14) REC proposes that all requests for an upgrade to LP-250 that already has or will result in a new second-adjacent channel short spacing must be accompanied by a request for a waiver of §73.807 of the Commission’s Rules in respect to the short-spaced second adjacent channel station(s). The waiver request would need to include a technical study that either shows that the second-adjacent channel interfering contour of the upgraded LPFM station would not overlap the service contour of the shortspaced station or a demonstration of no interference which can include such items as a map of the proposed interference area, a tower diagram, a satellite or aerial photograph, the antenna manufacturer’s vertical radiation pattern and/or any details about any nearby structures or major roadways. This will mean that LP-100 stations already on a waiver would have to ask for a new waiver to upgrade to LP- 250;
  • (Page 26) To help expedite the process to allow for LP-100 stations to be permitted to upgrade to LP-250, REC proposes that an automatic upgrade authority (“AUA”) be given to LPFM stations that meet specific criteria. Under AUA, LP-100 stations would be given a period of time (such as 180 days) to voluntarily upgrade their stations to LP-250;
  • (Page 32) Currently, FM translators are only required to protect LPFM stations on co-channel and first adjacent channels while LPFM stations are required to protect FM translators on co-channel, first adjacent and second-adjacent channel. REC proposes that FM translators now be required to protect LPFM stations on second adjacent channels as well.

Also included in the Petition is a table which estimates the number of LPFM stations that would likely be eligible for upgrading to the LP-250 service:

Screen Shot 2015-08-20 at 11.25.03 AM

Comments on this Petition (due June 15, 2015) may be filed electronically:Visit the FCC’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) web page at http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/upload/display;

  • Visit the FCC’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) web page at http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/upload/display;
  • Enter Proceeding Number RM-11749;
  • Provide the requested contact information, note that comments may be filed by anyone and an attorney is not required (if no attorney then simply leave this information blank);
  • Under “Details” the only information required is Type of Filing: COMMENT;
  • Provide the requested address information;
  • Under “Documents” choose the file containing your prepared comments – it is best to submit this in Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) format;
  • Click on CONTINUE which brings up a page for review;
  • Click on CONFIRM to submit your Comments.
The Voltair device in The Telos Alliance booth at the 2015 NAB Show, where it was publicly introduced.

Examining Ratings Watermarks: Voltair and the PPM

One of the most notable technology issues in the radio industry recently regards the consistency in performance of Nielsen Audio’s (formerly Arbitron’s) Personal People Meter (PPM) TM audience ratings system across various radio formats and/or different listening environments. Broadcasters have lodged complaints about the PPM’s accuracy in these respects almost since its introduction in 2007, but more recently the concerns have been taken to a new level, even finding their way to Congressional hearings in 2009, and continuing industry discussions.

At the 2015 NAB Show, Dr. Barry Blesser, director of research for The Telos Alliance, and co-founder of one of its subsidiaries, 25-Seven Systems, delivered a paper entitled “Monitoring for Ratings: Putting Yourself in Your Listeners’ Ears.” It considered some of the reasons why the audio watermarking and perceptual masking techniques used by the PPM system might perform differently based on the format of the radio service involved, or the ambient sound conditions surrounding the PPM. It should be noted that Dr. Blesser/25-Seven Systems also promoted a product at the Show that addresses these issues, which is described below.

In his paper, Blesser first reviewed the structure of the PPM’s watermarking signals, explaining the system’s use of frequency-shift keyed (FSK) tone-bursts within five different bands, at varying amplitudes within the audio band, which are utilized in conjunction with perceptual masking analysis (similar to that used by digital audio codecs in data-compression systems) employed to keep the watermark tones essentially inaudible.

Untitled

Dr. Barry Blesser making his presentation on “Monitoring for Ratings” at the 2015 NAB Broadcast Engineering Conference.

He then cited the problem that the optimum length of a given watermark tone burst, say 600 ms, may not be possible to include in its entirety under the masking threshold, and so the tone burst might therefore be truncated by the masking system. While the precise length of the FSK tone burst is not critical to the encoded data, the shorter the burst, the lower the likelihood of proper detection. This problem is exacerbated if the acoustical environment in which the PPM hears the broadcast includes high levels of background noise.

Opportunities for the FSK tones to be masked are plentiful under certain program conditions, such as popular music formats, but they are less available in conditions where speech is predominant, such as news/talk formats.

Blesser presented numerous spectrographs illustrating the problem, and concluded his paper presentation with a brief reference to the new product formally introduced at the Show by 25-Seven Systems called the  Voltair, which monitors the level of the PPM watermark over time on the device’s high-resolution display.

The manufacturer claims that the Voltair device can also potentially increase the likelihood of watermark detection by PPMs under difficult audio program or ambient noise conditions, via the application of proprietary audio processing. Based on the company’s substantial research, the Voltair unit re-evaluates the masking characteristics of the current audio program (relative to the PPM encoder’s original masking assessments), and allows the broadcaster to adjust the relative level of the previously embedded watermark within the recalculated mask. A 0-24 range setting is provided, and the manufacturer suggests that users start with a setting of 6, and experiment from there.

As with any aural watermark, the two parameters to be balanced are audibility and robustness, with Voltair giving the broadcaster a wide range of choices within this spectrum. The manufacturer recommends placing the Voltair device after the station’s audio processor and before the stereo generator, or more ideally, between compression and final limiting in the audio processing chain (where some single-box audio processors may provide an insertion point).

The device includes a General Purpose Input/Output (GPIO) control interface, which can be used to toggle the device’s operation across two or three different stored settings. One application of this feature suggested by the manufacturer is programming it to change the setting on a frequent, regular basis across a rating period (e.g., setting the control to level 10 on even minutes and level 12 for odd minutes, which would provide an average of level 11 over a quarter-hour), which could have the effect of reducing the impact of environmental variables, compared to using a single setting throughout the period. Toggling between  three settings could purportedly provide even more reliable results and predictions. This could provide a broadcaster with a simple method of running its own automated and logged optimization experiments or other statistical exercises during ratings periods, and evaluating the ratings results from those periods when they are subsequently received from Nielsen.

The Telos Alliance has established a research department devoted to general watermarking technology—a rapidly expanding field—so it is implied that future devices (or even field upgrades to existing devices) may address aural watermark systems beyond the Nielsen PPM.

Dr. Blesser’s full presentation is available online at  NAB Show Playback, as part of the  Playback Select 2015: Broadcast Engineering Conference package.

Follow