Media: World's first FM switch-off confirmed for 2017

Thorhild Widvey, Norwegian Minister of Culture, has confirmed that
FM switch-off will happen in 2017. (Photo: Ilja C. Hendel)

And it is official. Norway will switch off FM in 2017, as the first country in the world. The government, represented by the Minister of Culture, announced today. The replacement? Digital Audio Broadcasting, usually referred to as DAB+.

Media: "LTE Broadcast" - The Next Hyped Broadcasting Challenger

Broadcasting in Norway. 

What is seemingly the best reason to delay a decisions? By refering to something better, often a technology, that is in the process of being developed. Or at least, in the process of being planned.

EBU Recommends FM Switch Off

European Broadcasting Union recommends that European countries switch off FM. The announcement was made  during EBU Digital Radio Summit in Geneva last week. Norway has already announced an FM switch off. DAB coverage in Norway is now at 84%, but will be increased to 90% by the end of the year and to 99.5% by the end of 2014. 

The EBU is impressed by Norway, and now recommends other countries to do the same; To switch off FM and replace it by DAB+. 

This became clear in new technical recommendations that was presented in Geneva on February 13 by Javier Sánchez Perez who is Chair of the EBU’s Strategic Programme on Digital Radio Platforms.

The recommendations, titled Digital Radio Distribution in Europe (document R138), read:   

The EBU recommends that, 

1. The needs of all radio services in a country  be  considered  when  making  plans  for  the 

digitisation of radio, including future service expansion, the available spectrum, and the cost 

effectiveness of different standards for different services; 

2. Immediate deployment be done using DAB transmission as defined in ETSI EN 300 401 with 

DAB+ services as defined in ETSI TS 102 563 for digital radio broadcasting in VHF Band III; 

3. When DAB coverage is not possible, to use DRM as defined in ETSI ES 201 980 for digital radio 

broadcasting in the frequency bands currently used for analogue radio broadcasting; 

4. Digitisation is accompanied by the deployment of enhanced features, such as text, images and 

programme guides to keep radio relevant in the digital age; 

5. Hybrid radio services are deployed with digital broadcasting systems (for example using 

RadioDNS); 

6. Harmonisation in the timetable for deployment  of digital radio across Europe, including a 

target date for the switch-off of analogue  radio, would create a greater momentum and 

market take-up. 

The last point is a very strong signal. DAB+ is the clear recommendation of choice. DRM, or digital AM, is also mentioned, but only when DAB coverage is not possible, and only in the frequency bands currently used for analogue radio broadcasting (Band I and Band II that are used for FM). And DRM is rather costly.   

Radio is of vital importance

R138 is the first agreement among EBU Members on digital radio distribution. It was approved by the EBU Technical Committee two weeks ago.

The EBU also notes that 'FM radio is constrained by a lack of available spectrum in all developed markets,' and pinpoints the following:  

Radio is of vital cultural importance throughout Europe;

Radio is consumed by the vast majority of Europeans every week; 

Radio is consumed at home, at work and on the move; 

Terrestrial broadcast delivery is the only free-to-air and cost-effective method for truly mobile reception, particularly in cars.


This is a good and clear message from the EBU, which emphasizes their so called Euro-Chip concept. The name of that initiative is however awful, as I have argued earlier. 


But isn't all of this just nonsens? FM works just fine. Or does it? Read this blog post which contains links to yet another 18 blog posts that show why FM isn't all what it is cracked up to be. 

The Costly Business of DRM

Digital radio is conquering new countries every year. Most of them (over 40) use digital radio's de facto standard Eureka 147 (which includes DMB and DAB+). Some of them use DRM (Digital Radio Mondiale), which is like the AM of digital radio. It covers vast areas with few transmitters (i.e. India). The United States has, as usual, gone their own way and uses HD Radio, a proprietary solution.

Germany has used DAB+ since 2011 and is now covering over 80% of the country. Deutschlandradio in Germany did however also use DRM. Until September 2012 when it was switched off. Why? It cost the broadcaster 12 million Euro per year to run the system, the same as DAB+. The difference? Their DRM capacity was limited to 40kbps, just about enough for one radio station. DAB+ gives them 400kbps, 10 times as much for the same price. And while there are hundreds of receiver models capable of receiving DAB+, there are only a handful capable of receiving DRM.

DRM is a good option when you want to cover big areas with few radio stations. DAB+ is great when you want to provide many stations via broadcast radio. So, DAB+ for choice, DRM for reach to remote away places. Then again, in Norway DAB+ will provide both as 99.5 of the population will be covered by the end of 2014. And there aren't many countries that are more challenging when it comes to building a distribution infrastructure. 765 transmitters are needed to ensure better DAB+ coverage than what is currently the case for P1, the widest reaching radio station on FM.

Then again, India and Russia are somewhat bigger than Norway, and DRM may very well be a good solution in such huge countries.

What the Hell is 'Euro-Chip?'

UPDATE March 20, 2014: Name changed.

The European Broadcasting Union (EBU) has joined forces with the BBC and Deutschlandradio to in a better way promote digital radio across Europe. Or to put it in the words of the EBU:

'The 'Euro-Chip' initiative is a marketing project designed to promote an existing set of minimum features and functions that was originally created by WorldDMB, EBU and EICTA, for all new digital radio receivers.' 

This is a splendid project which has been presented by EBU Media Director, Annika Nyberg Frankenhaeuser, acting General Director of the BBC, Tim Davie and Director-General of Deutschlandradio, Willi Steul. But the name of the project defeats the purpose and does nothing by cause confusion and possible hostility from countries outside Europe.

I am attending the WorldDMB European Automotive Event in Berlin today with over a hundred other people that are working within the radio or the car industry. I'd say we know, understand and love radio. When the 'Euro-Chip' initiative was presented, many attendees reacted with surprise and a number of questions were asked:

- When will the new chip be introduced? 
- Is it a chip that costs only one Euro?
- It is not a chip? So it is some new software?
- How can we use this?
- Who produces this chip?
- When will the new chip be ready?
- Is it only for use in Europe?

A Marketing Project
We were told that this is only a marketing initiative to give digital radio a European wide push. The main message is pretty clear and easy, but it is being overshadowed by the name.

Or as Tim Davie put it when 'Euro-Chip' was introduced last month:

"Digital radio across Europe has been plagued by uncertainty. We may be reaching a tipping point, but first we have to bank what is certain about radio's digital hybrid future and join forces to promote a common vision across Europe."

Such chips that support FM, DAB, DAB+ and DMB are already in production and have been so for years. They ensure the interoperability between all new digital radio devices that are to be sold in Europe and eliminates uncertainty. All such radios will be able to receive radio no matter which way it is broadcast.

"This is of critical importance for broadcasters, manufacturers and the public. We must ensure that European consumers are able to buy future-proofed receivers that will provide them with radio services across Europe." Said Annika Nyberg Frankenhaeuser.

Many listeners don't even know what a chip is or that there is a chip inside radios. And why exclude the rest of the world by insisting on 'Euro' in the name? DMB and or DAB+ services are live on air in five continents.

There is really nothing new, except that broadcasters across Europe will work together to promote digital radio. Let us do so by using a language that people understand and a language that doesn't exclude or confuse. Please don't make it more difficult for us to do this, Annika, Tim and Willi. Scrap the name, not the project.

What Google Says
Or how about a websearch on 'Eurochip?'

Eurochip is already the name of no less than two European projects. In the first one, scientists from research institutions 'study various aspects of the hormonal communication between the gut and the brain.' In other words, a research project about obesity. Eurochip is in fact an acronym. Sort of. It stands for 'European Obesity Consortium studing the Hypothalamus and its Interaction with the Periphery.' The other one is a cancer health indicator project.

Eurochip is also a company that has 'your branch and tree removal needs covered,' a car chip for BMWs and an Italian bike park.

Eurochips, on the other hand, is a network; The European Committee for Children of Imprisoned Parents.

Any original ideas for a new name? Anyone? 

It is not too late to change the name, EBU. Sometimes even marketing people can get slogans and names wrong. And it is never too late to turn around and actually change something that was a less than perfect idea. Now, we will have to use a lot of effort on explaning what the "Euro-Chip" is supposed to be and what it certainly isn't istead of spending our energy on explaining what it really is and why a concept is called a chip.

Update (Nov 27):
The EBU seems to have taken the feedback to consideration. They now occasionally refer to the initiative as 'The Euro-Chip concept.' A little bit better, but there will be no cigar for creativity or clarity.

There's a New Buzzword in Town; LTE-A

A report by independent Dutch research institute TNO compares various networks that may be used to cover a country with digital radio and mobile television. LTE-A (Long Term Evolution Advanced) is the newest buzzword, or buzz acronym rather, to come from mobile network operators and the technology has been included in the comparison.

TNO is looking to its own country for a case. In the Netherlands, 16.5 million people share 31,000 square kilometers. An LTE-A network will require 38,500 transmitters on almost 13,000 sites to reach all of them, according to TNO. A DMB/DAB+ network will require 30 transmitters on the same number of sites. The differences in building costs, site rentals and other running expenses are major. The running costs for a LTE-A transmitter is 60,000 USD per year, according to Arqiva back in 2010.

Given that those figures still are accurate means running costs of 2.3 billion USD a year. In addition to four times as much in investments. That means that whoever would want to buy such a network covering over 99% of the country would need 4 million paying customers (25% of the population) to each pay 1,150USD a year to break even. And a revenue on top would be nice.

The TNO report maintains the need for cost efficient distribution solutions, that the capacity crunch in mobile networks is very real and that broadcasting networks are the most efficient means to distribute live content to a large audience.

The report has been commissioned by IDAG and will shortly be available to paying IDAG members. Not among those? Please get in touch with Ron du Croix to buy a license for individual or corporate use.

In January 2011 I wrote Why 4G is Hyped which you may also find useful.

Video Killed the Internet Star

Both Netflix and HBO are currently expanding to new markets. 

The costs of distributing on demand television via the internet are higher than via broadcasting as soon as you pass only 8,000 viewers, according to IHS Screen Digest.

To distribute one hour of web tv to 8,000 people will cost 29.58 Euro, or 0.003698 Euro per user hour. The price of an hour of broadcasting is 28.62 Euro, again according to IHS Screen Digest. The difference is that broadcasting can reach an infinite number of people bringing the cost per user hour to virually zero.

That means that a programme that is watched by, say 8 million people (as the highest freefall jump last week), will cost 29,580 Euro per hour to distribute via the internet. That is over a 1000 times more than the 28.62 Euro it will cost if it was broadcast.

But is 8 million viewers a lot? Not necessarily. Several events have reportedly had around one billion viewers. The cost then, if it were to be distributed via the internet (this is very hypotethically, as the infrastructure wouldn't at all be able to cope) would then be 3,697,500 Euro per hour, against 28.62 if broadcast. 129,000 times more expensive (given that all the viewers are in one country), in other words.

How does this translate to current television figures? IHS has made an estimation for the UK, given that all current TV viewing were to be distributed via the internet (again, very hypothetically). The CDN costs alone would exceed 1.2 billion Euro per year.

In the US, videos from Netflix alone is to "blame" for 33% of all internet traffic! And Netflix only provides on demand video, which in the US accounts for 2% of viewing times (98% is on traditional television, live or time shifted). Add YouTube traffic, and the figure increases to 44%. What if you add all live television viewing? You do the maths. And remember that Netflix and YouTube are not alone. HBO, Hulu, The BBC and others also provide online video services or are planning to do so.

The internet will not be able to distribute all sorts of radio and television content. It is already struggling with on demand videos. The figures shown above may illustrate why we need both broadcasting and the internet even clearer than other examples. I have provided a range of them in various blog posts the last few years, included posts such as Why the Internet Won't Solve Everything.

Maybe broadcasting isn't so stupid and old fashioned after all.

Denmark Also Switches Off FM

The government of Denmark has agreed with the opposition to switch off FM in 2019, reports radionyt.se. That makes Denmark the second country in the world to set a time frame for an FM switch off and to go for digital radio only, via DAB+. Norway has already decided on January 2017 as the switch off date for analogue radio.

”The world is going digital, and this is therefore a natural evolution that corresponds well to earlier work and political decisions in this area, just as what was the case with television a few years back. By setting a switch off date, we send a clear signal to both the industry and the listeners that we are moving forward. By setting a date so distant as 2019, the Danish will have plenty of time to take the FM switch off into consideration when they aquire new radio receivers." Says Danish Minister of Culture Uffe Elbæk in a press release issued today.

Denmark will at the same time go from DAB to more efficient and robust DAB+. 50% of the radio listening must happen digitally in 2018 for the switch off to happen, although this is a reasonable criteria that is not far off even today. Denmark was one of the first countries to start DAB transmissions, and both the uptake and the number of available DAB stations has been high. 

The Danish announcement is as expected. The questions now is which countries will follow next. I am guessing that the UK, the Netherlands, Poland, France and Germany will follow suit, as discussed here.

Which Country Next for FM Switch Off?

The UK is among the countries I believe will decide to switch off FM soon. Brilliant button @ Bob Bob Ricard, Soho.

The Norwegian government has decided to switch off FM in January 2017 (given certain criteria which will be fulfilled). And in neighbouring Sweden, a governmental report on radio and media in general was recently published. It clearly states that radio in Sweden will go digital and that the broadcasters will get extra money to do so. So, the future home of Julian Assange is set to follow in the steps of the Norwegians. The date is however uncertain, but probably by 2020. In the third Scandinavian country, politicians are expected to agree on a switch off in 2019. That is when the Danish FM licenses run out. The announcement can be expected as early as in October or November.

So, who dares go next? Two years ago no one outside the offices of certain broadcasters even dared utter the three words "FM", "switch" and "off" in the same sentence, let alone in that order. Now, to switch off FM is a clear goal being implemented in policies in more and more countries. Why? Because it saves broadcasters a lot of money that can be spent on better programs, it ensures the same radio offering to everyone whereever they live and it is much greener. Do you need more reasons? Here is a selection of articles. Help youself. 

My bet is that at least four out of the five countries below will follow suit and make an announcement of a forthcoming FM switch off no later than the end of 2014. The date of the actual switch off will vary, but a notice of 3-6 years is expected to be given. In reality, users should only be given two years. People are not stupid, they will get a new radio when one is needed. Not before. As is the case with a switch off of analogue television, most people wait until the last 2-3 weeks before the analogue signal goes off air until they buy the needed setup box. Consumers expect prices to fall while extra functionality will be added the longer they wait. Sales also pop up all over the place when retailers know something big is happening, so why buy now if you don't have to?

Great Britain
This was the first country to start a DAB trial, and DAB signals now reach 93% of the population. Coverage will be increased to 97% by the end of 2015. 40% of people in London listen to DAB every week, and the UK seems almost ready to take the plunge as the first big country. How about an announcement in 2013?

The Netherlands

DAB has been on air for years in the Netherlands, but with very little marketing and few devices in shops. This is about to change, and both the public service broadcaster and the commercial ones will have transmissions on air by September 1, 2013. In addition moile TV company MTVNL has mobile TV signals and updated traffic data on air via DMB. The government looks at the licensing of FM and DAB as one matter. If you're not on digital, you will not be allowed to remain on FM. The Dutch are more than ready to switch off FM relatively soon.

France
This might be a little bit of a surprise, given the reluctancy by the four big commercial broadcasters to go digital. They want to keep the competition away by staying on FM, milking it for what it is worth and sabotaging any attempt by the government to get going. Putting your head in a flower pot never helped anyone defeat hungry competitors, not even where cake should eradicate hunger. Frequency licenses are being handed out as we speak, and there are hundreds of applicants. The question is, will all the big four French dare not apply for digital licenses? What if one of them changes its mind two minutes before the deadline? Legislation is even in place to force all car manufacturers selling cars in France to add a digital broadcasting receiver in cars 18 months after regular DAB+ transmissions covers 20% of the country. This coverage level should be reached before the summer of 2013. 

Germany

The biggest economy in Europe last year introduced nationwide radio transmissions for the first time since WWII, via DAB+. Digital radios are selling reasonably well, and digital radio is attracting new players into the radio business. If you own a global company with a huge marketing budget, why not spend some of the money on a hip and trendy radio station? Did you mention DJ Red Bull?

Poland
This is an outsider, but given its proximity to Germany and it being the fastest growing economy in Europe, I think this may be the surprise country to announce a switch off relatively soon. They have already trialled both DMB and DAB+ with good results in Poland and the players there are innovative and forward leaning. 

Involvement  is a key criteria in any FM switch off plan, also in these five countries. Public broadcasters, commercial broadcasters, retailers AND governments must all work together to ensure success. In most of these countries, such processes have already started. And a switch off date is needed. No matter how many great new radio stations you add on digital, a fairly high percentage of the population will always be happy with what they already have. At least until they experience how much better the alternative is.

But what about all those radios?

Please don't use the awful excuse: "But everyone will have to buy new radios." You don't complain when you and each and every one of your family members, colleagues and friends buy a new Samsung or a new Iphone every 18 months, then brag about your new gadget on Facebook afterwards. One of those smart phones costs more than 10 times the price of an average digital radios and requires much more energy to produce.

You can also safely exclude another overused excuse: "But imagine the waste problem with all the radios that will be thrown away." Again, why not care equally about all those mobile phones, tablets and laptops that you throw away every other year? They contain many more chemicals and electronics than a simple FM radio. And a radio works "forever," so it has certainly done its duty compared to other gadgets that are old after a year or three. A radio also contains parts such as loudspeakers and antennas that can be reused with relative ease. Not to forget cheaper and cheaper adapter solutions that will actually pimp your old FM radio and make it a digital one. 

You Really Wanna Win the Mobile Phone War?

Samsung launched an ad campaign in the US shortly after the press launch of Apple's Iphone 5. Apple fans were not impressed and immediately started Photoshop jobs on the original ads.

Both camps of fans are however missing the point. The phone manufacturers brag about various features, many of which do more or less the same, but with various copyrighted or trademarked names. But where are the groundbreaking features?

The original ad. 

Response from Apple fans'.

And a slightly more neutral version.

These posters are all missing the point.

Who cares what you call your phone features, when they are not all that unique anyway? Why not dare to be innovative and add what really matters? I would like to see some new and exciting features that customers actually will benefit from in their mobile phones. Adding DAB+/DMB will give users the possibility to receive free to air radio in over 40 countries around the world and mobile TV in more and more countries. How about that for a USP?

Adding DMB, DAB and DAB+ in mobile phones would even be an advantage to MNOs in helping them with the following: 

• Divert synchronous data (radio/TV) to broadcasting networks. That would offload their own telecom networks which are already struggeling. Do keep in mind that mobile data traffic is forecasted to increase 35 times by 2015. The number of connected devices will also explode from 5 billion now via 15 billion in 2015 to a staggering 50 billion in 2020. 
• Increase the quality of service for all asynchronous services (normal web surfing) for all customers. 
• Add new revenue streams (i.e. tag and buy music tracks played on the radio).
• Introduce unique selling points to customers (many new free to air radio stations and mobile TV channels).
• Open up for partnerships with broadcasters and third party companies that offer services on top of broadcasting services. This may include marketing opportunities.

To name a few issues.  

So, who will be global brand to add what we're really missing in mobile phones? Samsung is ahead so far. They have already produced a mini tablet, The Samsung Galaxy S 5.0 Wifi with built-in DMB and DAB+. 

I hope to see the first DMB/DAB+ phone next year. But it will take a cooperation between broadcasters, phone manufacturers and not least mobile network operators. Sounds like a wide shot? Hardly. Not when everyone will benefit from it. 

Why Doesn't Everybody Drive Ferraris?

IBCed out. A random IBC delegate at the RAI.  

I was just at IBC in Amsterdam, one of the world's biggest exhibitions for professional broadcasting gear. There was also a conference there on DMB/DAB+, the de facto standard for digital radio and mobile television. DAB+ was presented from stage with cases from the UK, Germany and Australia, only 3 of over 40 countries around the world where the standard is being used.

Such conferences always attract a mixed crowd. There will always all sorts of questions, including some technical ones that often do not take into account that there are also issues relevant to the industry as a whole and the market. A typical questions starts like this: 'DAB is really old, why do you not go for [add a technology here] which is much better?' This was also the case in Amsterdam. A person asked the panel why they didn't rather go for 'amazing' DVB-T2 Lite instead of the 'old and inefficient DAB technology.' The panel dismissed his question as a technical one not related to the panel's topic. It made sense to do so in the setting.

Why not DVB-T2 Lite?

I'd however like to ellaborate a little. There are several reasons not to go for DVB-T2 Lite such as building costs, runnings costs and coverage issues. These three issues can proably be debated, and there will be a claim that the costs will go down with time. They always do, also for DMB/DAB+. I will not go into detail here. However, let me look at the main two reasons not to go for DVB-T2 Lite.

It is a non-proven standard that has not been put to use anywhere. Why not? It may boast impressive specifications, but there is no ecosystem around it. Where are the transmitters, the chipsets, the receivers, the car radios, the broadcasters, the development companies, the competence, the willingsness, the additional and parallell services? And last, but not least, where is the focus on radio?

DVB-T2 is a standard made for television, not for radio. The DVB Project is of course a serious one, do not get me wrong. They have 250 broadcasters as members, primarily focused on television. When Chairman Phil Laven asked his members which aspects of the DVB-T2 standard were most important, radio came in as 76th. There are 75 priorities in line before radio! Does this sound like the way to go for digital radio?

DVB-T2 may be efficient and possible the best standard on paper, but it isn't widely available, it is not focusing on the needs for radio and there is no available ecosystem. There have been DAB services on air since 1995. And just a little reminder. It took 50 years to introduce FM radio. DAB has been much faster, despite being looked on as old. And old isn't necessarily bad. The wheel is rather old. It is still widely used. Even on Ferraris.

Ferraris
Very few people drive Ferraris as they are expensive, not widely available, impractical, need frequent services which are available from only a few shops, and can't run on most roads. They look bloody cool though, and the specs are incredibly impressive. On paper. It can probably do 0-100 km/h in 4 seconds and a top speed of 300 km/h. But you need a proper road, perfect conditions on it and no traffic. It almost sounds like the prerequisites for radio and television to work semi-decently via the internet.

The specs of DVB-T2 Lite may sound very cool, but to go for DVB-T2 Lite is expensive, the standard is not at all available, it is impractical for radio, not available in any shops and incapable of working in most networks (without replanning them). And of course, if you go for DVB-T2 Lite, you can bet that it won't take many years before the guy who asked the original question will ask another; 'DVB-T2 Lite is really old, why do you not go for [add a technology here] which is much better?' You cannot win against those who always look for nothing by the, on paper, best specifications. Just don't forget to consider the entire picture, because they wont.

DAB+ is the de facto standard for digital radio broadcasting for a reason. And with DMB (part of the same standard) you can add mobile television on the premises of radio. Not the other way around as is the case with the theoretical DVB-T2 Lite route.

And just to finish off, the fastest Ferrari ever built, the Ferrari F12berlinetta, comes with DAB+. I told you, Ferraris come with incredibly impressive specs.

The French FM Switch Off Plan

When the going gets tough, the French gets going. France has been very slow in adopting digital radio. But this is now set to change on short notice. CSA (The Conseil supérieur de l'audiovisuel) recently announced that they open up for DAB+ in addition to DMB Audio.

Now they are moving fast from baby steps to giant leaps, according to daily newspaper Les Echos which claims that CSA has a two step plan. First they will allow digital radio in Paris to around fifty radio stations. Fourty stations in both Marseille and Nice will get the same treatment, thus making them able to start broadcasting digitally this year.

The second step is to call for applications in another 20 major cities, reaching a population coverage of more than 50%. It is expected that the broadcasters will follow CSAs last relevant announcement and go for DAB+, not DMB Audio. That lowers distribution costs per radio station as DAB+ is more effective for radio than DMB which is designed for mobile TV.

These two steps will clear the ground for France's ultimate goal within radio, to switch off FM.
Rachid Arhab of CSA tells Les Echos that a date for that will be set when 40% coverage has been reached, something which is achievable within a year given the plans to introduce digital radio to 20 cities in France.

This is a welcome step from France, finally making sure that they follow the "rest" of Europe in what is now set to be a common strategy to let radio go digital and to finally get rid of FM. Then again, they didn't have much of a choice should they avoid becoming a huge radio museum in the middle of Europe.

And now the plan is quite clear, according to Radio Numérique:

By the end of March :
• Letter to all radio stations to authorize them to broadcast in digital within four months.
Duration : stations have 2 + 2 month to start broadcasting
• Call for tender to those few stations that stopped transmitting digitally or gave back their frequency. The application will be 3 months after the tender is official. 

After the French elections:
• The new government will be asked to perform a public consultation to add DAB+ to the official standards list (this is mandatory due to the technical change). This will happen within 15 days of the new government taking office.
• As soon as the public consultation has been launched, a request will be sent to Brussels to add DAB+ to the recommended list of standards.

By August:
• There will be a call for tender for DAB+ frequencies in the 20 biggest cities.
• DAB+ is expected to have been validated in Brussels by then.

By September:
• Start of broadcasting in Paris, Nice and Marseille.

By February 2013:
• Start of broadcasting in another 20 cities.

Digital radio will then cover between 50% and 80% of the French population, something that will cause the government to set a switch off date for FM.

The Foreverness of Radio

Simple is good, right? Apple introduced their Iphone which did exactly the same as what Nokia N95 phones did at the time. The difference, except for the form factor of the device, was that the functions were easier to use on the Iphone. We all know what happened to the sales of Apple's Iphone and Nokia's smart phones.

Radio is simple. It’s linear and live, like life itself. It is just there. It can used as enjoyment, challengement, information or just to help pass time. Anywhere, anytime and while doing something else. It just doesn't seem to be very fashionable.

Linear radio. Just to utter the words these days suddenly makes the speaker seem old fashioned. It is on demand streaming or podcasts that are the trending topics of radio jargon these days. But the live bit is what I love about radio. The life of it, the immediacy. It gives me, as a listener, the possibility to discover new programs, new music, new genres and new topics just by listening in. No matter who my friends are, no matter whether anyone recommended something or “liked” it online. And no matter what I have listened to before, which kind of news I consume, my weight, my age or my gender. Radio does not discriminate it’s listeners. Everyone gets the same, at the same time. It is wonderfully non-personalized.   

Who needs radio with Spotify or Wimp, some people ask. Radio is so much more than music. And radio has survived LPs cassettes, mini discs, laser discs and CDs. Music has always been available, that I can listen it to other people’s playlists is not a game changer. People have always listened to radio, and they still do. I like the stories accompanying the music. Favorite program leaders and DJs are popular because they know their music, they know their listeners and they can communicate with them.

Radio is like a conversation that the listeners can take part in or just listen to. A conversation that is not live can certainly work, but I would argue that a live conversation has a totally different edge to it. It is happening now. No one knows what will come out of it. Like life itself.

I am getting towards the end. But first, I would like to quote a little part of a very well put speech which Ove Joanson of Media Conglomerate AB in Sweden gave during Medientage in Munich in October 2009. It is still as relevant now as then. 

"Radio is the medium of civilized man.

Radio balances emotion and intellect. Radio has more presence and authenticity than a printed text – without being burdened by the need to find moving images that so often influences the topics of television and blurs its focus. Radio is our most important medium because it is the medium of relevance to those who want to know and the medium of feelings to those who want to feel.

The problem for radio is its self-evidence. It is easy to produce, even easier to consume, so easy in fact that is it often taken for granted and often overlooked. Radio, being the largest mass medium in many countries, my own included, is the world’s most wide-spread secret.”

What to do to reveal the secret? The UN is doing their bit. Yesterday, february 13, was World Radio Day, the international radio day. Today is Valentine’s Day, the international love day. Let’s combine them. I love radio. And I will continue to be an enthusiastic, curious and keen listener, just like millions and billions of other people around the world. From now, to eternity.

Finally French Fast Forward on Digital Radio

CC licensed by McPig.

The evolution from analogue radio via FM to digital radio via DMB/DAB+ is picking up speed by the day. Germany launched nationwide radio for the first time since WWII in August via DAB+ while Norway in May decided to switch off FM. The signal effects have been strong, and we see many other countries on five continents follow suit.

And finally, France
But what about France? Merkel and Sarkozy are working very close on the economy, can we see the influence of the close German French cooperation also when it comes to radio?

We can now. The Conseil supérieur de l'audiovisuel (CSA) is the French institution that has been given the responsibility of regulating radio, television and other electronic media. It has now called for DAB+ to be used as a standard for digital radio in France. A letter formally asking the French government to adopt DAB+ as a new digital radio standard was sent from CSA in December, according to Les Echos, the most influencial business newspaper in France.

France has so far been very undecisive in their approach to digital radio. They first decided to go for DMB Audio, a part of the same standard (Eureka-147), but DMB is originally ment for mobile television, so it was an odd choice. No other country had chosen to go for DMB Audio as the radio standard, most preferred DAB or the more effective DAB+. And of course, there were hardly any DMB Audio receivers on the market, whereas there were hundreds of DAB/DAB+ models.

The Kessler hurdle
Then last year, David Kessler published his "Kessler report," a recommendation to prime minister Francois Fillon on what to do with regards to digitalization of radio. The report contained a number of errors, didn't properly take into consideration the international evolution and seemed to show a lack of understanding of the subject matter. Kessler concluded that the government should wait for two to three years before letting radio go digital. An odd choice given the progress in other big countries such as Germany, Australia, the UK, Italy and the Netherlands. Some speculated that Kessler was influenced strongly by private broadcasters that did not want to see competition in the already full FM band. DAB+ opens up for many more stations, thus increasing competition to those already holding lucrative FM licenses. The report came out in May last year (a week before the Norwegian government decided to switch off FM in 2017), and soon met the fate of other governmental reports of mediocre quality, it was left in a pile to turn yellow.

Note that DAB+ is already being tested in Lyon, with so many broadcasters interested in getting stations on air that more bandwidth (a second mux) will be made available. And radio sales are rumoured to go well in Lyon.

The successful test there may have contributed to CSA taking the matter in their own hands through their letter to the government, opening up for broadcasters to go for DAB+ in addition to DMB Audio. The decision was made in November 2011, but not made public until December and not picked up by me until now.

This is great news for radio in France. There will almost instantly be hundreds if not thousands of new radio models on the market. There will now be made room for more stations, something that usually forces broadcasters into making better radio programmes due to more competition. And digital radio also opens up for additional services, including a combination of broadcasting and the internet. France's move furthermore creates a  bigger market for device manufacturers, something that means better choice and lower prices in all the countries that have decided to go for DMB/DAB+, the de facto standard for digital radio and mobile TV.

The listeners win. They always do in the end, also in France.

Why FM is More Expensive than Digital

The Kolsås transmitting tower outside Oslo has transmitters for DMB/DAB. 

I often hear that FM is cheaper than digital radio or mobile TV via DMB/DAB/DAB+. This is often argued, especially when it comes to small local radios. Let us create a scenario.

An FM vs DAB coverage comparison on a larger scale. 

Tinyville
This little town has 10,000 inhabitants, all living within an area of 20 square kilometers. There is a small hill on one side where the local radio station, TinyFM, has a transmitter and an antenna which has beamed out it's programs for years. TinyFM is however not very financially stable. The only revenues come from some advertising and the weekly radio bingo, where the listeners buy bingo coupons and play for money prizes every Thursday eveneing. It is therefore important for them to keep all costs down.

Will digital radio be more expensive than analogue for TinyFM? It will not, although this is a common misconception. 

FM costs
TinyFM paid 3500 USD for it's complete FM transission gear. They have one radio station on air and need the following:

1 transmitter / amplifier
1 VHF mask filter
1 VHF antenna
Small bits and pieces

What would it cost to do the same via DAB/DAB+?

DMB/DAB/DAB+ costs
We would need the same kind of stuff, although not identical gear:

1 transmitter / amplifier
1 VHF mask filter
1 VHF antenna
Small bits and pieces

And some more:
1 server
1 front-end

European Broadcasting Union showed such a DMB/DAB/DAB+ setup at a conference in Belfast in October, 2010. The costs? 4 800 USD. That is 37% more expensive than FM.

But there is a major difference:

For FM one transmitter/amplifier is needed per radio station.
For DMB/DAB/DAB+, you can have over 20 radio stations, 6 mobile TV channels or a mixture of mobile TV schannels and radio stations.

 The moment you decide to transmit two radio stations, the costs go down to 2 400 USD per station. With 15 radio stations the cost will be 320 USD per station. That is 9% of the cost of one FM station (or a 90% discount). The prices here are for the equipment, not for running costs. Electricity costs are similar on the transmission side as long as there's only one radio station. The moment you introduce more stations (as you can do digitally), electricity used per station will decline dramatically.

TinyFM will therefore encounter a little higher costs for transmission gear, although not substantially. The moment they start an extra station which could boost listenership and revenues, they should benefit. TinyFM may however not have the staffing nor the potential advertising revenues that may justify another station. In that case, they may want to stay with FM, something that governments in both Norway and the UK have opened up for. They will not put pressure on local radio stations to move away from FM, but they may see the benefits and decide to do this themselves.

Friends on technology, foes on content
This is something that broadcasters in several countries have discovered, although on a much larger scale than in Tinyville. In i.e. Norway, Germany, Australia and the Netherlands competing broadcasters have decided to join forces. They cooperate on technology and compete on content. That is obviously a win win situation financially due to lower actual costs. By cooperating on the same mux, all costs can be devided between several companies. Instead of having to pay everything yourself (equipment, installation costs, running costs, internet / radio lines, etc.) this can now be divided by 2, 3, 4 or split between even more companies. Big savings, in other words.

But there are also other benefits:

• It is greener as one network will serve everyone.
• Hosting can be done more efficiently and secure.
• Marketing is more efficient. Competitors can help each other in getting people to get DMB/DAB/DAB+ receivers with the benefits and possibilities they give.
• A clearer message is carried across. One organization can easier coordinate towards the government, network operators, bureaucracy, etc. This makes communication and formal processes easier and faster. 

Like Selling Flowers to Unfaithful Husbands

Tivizen IP-100, the dongle that supercharges Ipads, Ipods and Iphones.

Do you have an Iphone, Ipod or Ipad? Do you miss radio or TV on the device? A lot of I-owners seem to be very pleased with their devices, but a little annoyed that there are no radio or TV functionality built in.

International DMB Advancement Group is cooperating with a Korean manufacturer to introduce a little dongle that plugs into Apple devices, directs the user to an app that instantly provides broadcasted radio and television to the device (via DMB/DAB/DAB+). Broadcasting means radio waves that distributes radio and mobile TV without an internet connection (just like to an traditional radio or television set). The dongle will therefore give you radio and TV without any costs or bandwidth constraints and without the need for an internet connection via Wi-Fi or 3G.

The device comes with it's own battery and can run off that one, run off the mother device's battery or even provide extra battery capacity to the "mother ship." The dongle's own battery works for 4 hours with constant radio or TV usage.

I was demonstrating the dongle at IFA, the world's biggest consumer electronics event which is being organized in Berlin every September. Virtually everyone that tested the device wanted one. Instantly. Like selling flowers to unfaithful husbands or umbrellas in Bergen, rain capital of the world. Except for the fact that I only had a few demo sets available, none which were for sale. I was offered cash, cheques and even drinks in return for one of my few demo sets. I had to decline and rather tell them that the device will be sold shortly around Europe.

The device will probably sell for 49-59 Euros. I would like to perform a little temperature measurement. Would you buy this dongle, which comes in black or white? Please comment below or send me an email. This will help IDAG (an organization which I head) plan distribution around the world. Do note that IDAG is a non-profit organization that works to promote, facilitate and coordinate DMB/DAB/DAB+ activities world wide. IDAG does not make money on this or other similar devices.

Voting, Chatting, Twittering.On Your TV, On Your Radio.

Interact via the internet while watching TV via DMB or listening to radio via DAB/DAB+
(CC by GG).

It has been over five months since I wrote about the first combination tablet being produced. The device in question is the Identity E201, a 7 inch Android tablet made by Enspert in Korea. It has been through some production delays, but it is finally being field tested in Norway, Germany, Netherlands and Italy with promising results.

Pick your radio channel (via DAB/DAB+).

Or watch TV (via DMB).

I'll cover the most relevant specs. The Identity E201 can receive mobile television and digital radio via DMB, DAB and DAB+ in Band III. The tablet has been approved by Google, so Android Market is available and the built-in GPS works well with Google Maps. It comes with Wi-Fi, but not yet with 3G. To get 3G, you will have to wait for it's sister model, the Identity E303 which will be available later in 2011.

What makes the device exciting is the combination of broadcasting (DMB/DAB/DAB+) and the internet (Wi-Fi). That means that you can watch live broadcasted TV while interacting with others through chat, Facebook or Twitter, receive breaking news through an RSS feed, get on-demand access the last or next episode of the programme you have just been watching and take part in on screen voting. Everything is accessed through an app, the beta version of which has now been launched.

Share your views on the programmes.

Post them to the wall.

Chat with friends, foes or strangers.

Plan your evening.

The examples above have already been implemented as pictured in this blog post, but there are virtually no limitations to which services you can add to live radio or TV programmes with such tablets when the API to the DMB/DAB/DAB+ chipset is available.

The Dutch distributor Rebox takes orders on these devices which will be available for delivery by the end of September. You can read more about availability on the on the website of IDAG (International DMB Advancement Group).


The Identity E201 has been approved by Google. That means that all
Android apps are available by a touch on your screen. The
DMB/DAB/DAB+ app is in beta. It's working title is MiniTV.



Media: Another Case Against T2

A DAB/DAB+ radio from Tecsonic and an Identity tablet with built in DMB/DAB/DAB+. (CC by GG.)

Whenever you have a problem, there will always be someone claiming that a solution will solve the problem in the near future. For digital radio and mobile TV, the so-called solution that is often being referred to is called DVB T2. I have argued that this is an immature standard without available receivers, that it will be very costly to build such a network and that current DVB-T networks will have to be replanned and possibly rebuilt. In other words, not the way to go. DVB T2 as the solution for digital radio and mobile TV is just another biased claim made by false prophets.

The solution is already here. It is called Eureka 147, more commonly known as DMB/DAB/DAB+. It is being used in over 40 countries around the globe, and over 500 million people will be covered by such signals by the end of the year. Germany is only the last country to launch such services, something that will happen through a soft launch in four days and officially one month later.

DVB T2 is not the way to go. It's not here now and may never be here in a form that will prove useful. And telecom networks won't do the trick either, as I have repeatedly covered earlier.

Radio futurologist James Cridland has written a piece looking at DVB T2-Lite. He claims that there are numerous issues with DVB T2 and that DMB/DAB/DAB+ is the way to go, not least due to it's flexibility which opens up for digital radio, mobile TV, additional services (i.e. live traffic information and interactivity) and a combination with the internet.

Cridland's post is well worth a read:

DVB-T2-Lite – a case of the BBC reinventing the wheel?

Double Distribution, Just Don’t Do It

The next Eurovision Song Contest finals will be held in Baku, Azerbaijan. CC licensed.


How can we best utilize frequencies or bandwidth? The top trick is to get rid of double distribution. Why distribute the same signals twice? If we stop doing such, we will make those frequencies and that bandwidth available to others. Most industrial countries have realized this when it comes to television. They switched off the analogue signals and replaced them with digital ones. Norway is doing the same for radio in 2017. Other countries will follow also when it comes to radio.

But the examples of analogue and digital television and radio are not the only relevant ones. We are also seeing a lot of double distribution divided between broadcasting and the Internet. Some people, usually titled consultants, think that the Internet will be able to take over for broadcasting. This is a wrong, misunderstood and distorted view. Why?

First or bust
The final of ESC (Eurovision Song Contest) gathers hundreds of millions of million simultaneous viewers. Very few of those viewers would have been satisfied if they had to watch a recorded version of the events after it went on air live. Sports and news are other examples of such events or programmes, where a recorded version in most cases just won’t do. Just think  of the Super Bowl, British royal weddings and the Olympics. Premieres of popular TV programmes also make people want to watch it when it first airs, although they can be equally enjoyed later (but being first or doing something first is something people often strive for, as exemplified through the lines outside cinemas when the newest Star Wars or Harry Potter movie premieres or outside shops when a new iPhone launches.

Even with giant TV successes such as ESC, the latest update on the bin Laden killing or the World Cup final an estimated 30-40 per cent of television viewers watch channels showing other programmes. You can't find the event which virtually everyone watching television wants to watch. Maybe except for the moon landing.

To upgrade the Internet to be able to handle such volumes of viewers may never be realistically possible speaking from a technical point of view. (There is also a range of other reasons why the Internet should not be the only distribution channel of live TV and radio.) Broadcasting will in other words always (at least in many, many years to come) be needed to technically distribute huge televised events. That leaves a natural question. Why even bother to upgrade the Internet infrastructure to be able to handle such volumes? To make it capable of managing peak times (if peak times are defined as being able to deliver television to everyone) is costly and not necessary.

Bandwith explosion even without TV and radio
After all, the Internet even struggles at times to deliver properly on normal surfing. And that is before we have even seen any major cloud computing efforts. Eventually billions of stationary and mobile devices will be depending on each other and centralized servers in order to deliver services. That means a lot of extra data. And that data increase comes in addition to the increased surfing in the population. And they won't start surfing less data hungry services anytime soon.

I am not saying that people should be banned from watching television live via the Internet. People should be able to enjoy their favourites from their preferred device. But broadcasting will always handle the majority of such distribution, let us rather expand and enhance the Internet so that it can do those things it is created to do, only better.

That will also mean that the Internet can deliver live television to more people, but should it? Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) pushed it to the limits during the World Skiing Championship earlier this year, compromising those people out there that want, need and depend on the Internet for other purposes.

Greed may be good, but for live television and radio, solidarity is what we need.

Digitalized Tunnels are Safer

Creative Commons photo by Peter Fiskerstrand.

The government in Norway has decided that FM will be switched off in 2017. But what does that mean for the radio coverage in road tunnels? Norway has over 1,200 tunnels, 500 of which are longer than 500 meters.

180 of those tunnels do currently have FM coverage for NRK P1, some also carry P4, the biggest commercial radio station. 30 tunnels do currently have DAB coverage. By 2017 the 180 tunnels now covered by FM will need to be covered by DAB. The Norwegian Road Authority does however have a bigger goal in mind. By 2020, all the 500 tunnels of more than 500 meters in length will be covered by DAB/DAB+ and possibly also by DMB.

Why is The Road Authority so keen on DAB? Because DAB doubles as an emergency system. In case of a car crash, accident, fire or similar the operator who follows the tunnels through video cameras will override all radio stations inside the tunnel and read out potentially life saving instructions to drivers and passengers. If the receivers also have a screen, additional info such as maps showing the nearest exit or the the nearest emergency phone can be shown.

Where is this stated? The Norwegian Road Authority has published a manual on Road Tunnels, Manual 021E. The English version was published in 2004. There is a revised version from 2010 with some minor updates, although this version is only available in Norwegian. The manual is very detailed and is considered so well written that it is also being used by several American states for road tunnels and by the Norwegian Railroad Authority for railway tunnels.

The relevant chapters are 602.3 Radio equipment, 602.31 Communication equipment and 602.32 Broadcasting equipment with "interruption facilities." The regulations stated in such an official manual have been made are part of the law and must be fulfilled.

That means that Norway's many long tunnels will be safer than before. The emergency system does however require that the radio (or DMB player) is actually turned on with the volume on (it cannot turn the radio on for you). Information encouraging drivers to keep their receivers on should therefore ideally be posted outside all long tunnels. It is not known if such road signs will be put up.

The Norwegian Road Authority is required by the EU (even though Norway's not a member) to have such an emergency system in place, but The Norwegian Road Authority has imposed tougher rules on themselves than what is being required. The EU directive calls for such emergency system in tunnels above 1,000 meters of length, not 500. Norway does, in other words, not only do what the EU requires them to, but even more for the sake of safety.

The EU directive?

DIRECTIVE 2004/54/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

AND OF THE COUNCIL

of 29 April 2004

on minimum safety requirements for tunnels in the

Trans-European Road Network.

Chapter 2.16 deals directly with what has been covered here:

2.16. Communication systems

2.16.1. Radio re-broadcasting equipment for emergency service use shall be installed in all tunnels

longer than 1 000 m with a traffic volume higher than 2 000 vehicles per lane.

2.16.2. Where there is a control centre, it must be possible to interrupt radio re-broadcasting of

channels intended for tunnel users, if available, in order to give emergency messages.