The content on this page and other DCITA document archive pages is provided to assist research and may contain references to activities or policies that have no current application. See the full archive disclaimer.

Final report of the Digital Radio Advisory Committee

1. Threshold issues

Digital radio broadcasting (DRB)¹ is a new method of assembling, broadcasting and receiving communications services using the same digital technology now common in many products and services - such as computers, compact discs (CDs) and telecommunications.

DRB systems use advanced digital techniques to convert an audio signal to a digital signal which is then compressed, along with other signals, before being broadcast from a transmitter. The receiver converts the digital transmissions back to sound (or text, graphics, etc). A fundamental difference between analog and digital broadcasting is that the latter involves the delivery of digital bit streams that can be used not only for sound broadcasting but all manner of multimedia services. DRB can:

• provide for better reception of radio services than current amplitude modulation (AM) and frequency modulation (FM) radio broadcasts;
• deliver higher-quality sound than current AM and FM radio broadcasts to fixed, portable and mobile receivers;
• carry ancillary services-in the form of audio, images, data and text-providing information associated with the station and its audio programs (such as station name, song title, artist's name and record label, as well as news, weather, time, traffic and other information) and other services (eg paging and global satellite positioning); and
• reconfigure capacity allocations to provide different kinds of services (eg change from a single stereo music program in one time slot to two mono talk programs in another).

• A number of new applications are being developed for DRB, including multimedia services.

  While DRB has the potential to provide many benefits to consumers and broadcasters, it requires new reception equipment for listeners, as well as new transmitters, and possibly studio equipment and other infrastructure for broadcasters. The first consumer DRB receivers are expected to become available in early 1998, at prices around $1000 (comparable to top of the line motor vehicle analog radio receivers). Typical transmission hardware costs are estimated to range from $50 000 to $150 000 per operator for terrestrial DRB services.²

  The technical and policy framework for introducing DRB in Australia has been under consideration by DRAC. Its terms of reference and membership are listed at Appendices 1 and 2 respectively. The Committee released a discussion paper in September 1996³, and a summary of submissions arising from that paper is at Appendix 3. In addition, a summary of DRB technical trials undertaken in Australia is at AppendiX 4.

  Countries experimenting with, planning to introduce, or already introducing DRB using terrestrial transmitters and/or satellite systems include the United Kingdom, Sweden, France, Germany, Japan, China, Italy, Switzerland, Canada and the United States of America (USA). Development of DRB services is most advanced in the United Kingdom and Canada. Further details of overseas developments are at Appendix 5.

  DRAC supports the introduction of DRB because of the inherent advantages of digital technology for communications services generally and radio broadcasting in particular, and because digital technology is being adopted by all media.

  Its introduction in Australia would facilitate innovative programming, improved sound quality, particularly in the mobile environment, and offer listeners a range of new, diverse and locally relevant communication services. It is expected that digital radio would need to coexist with the present analog system to allow listeners to move to digital technology as and when they need to replace their receivers, and that ultimately only a minority of services would be carried on the analog system.

  However, some amendment to the existing legislation would be likely to be necessary.

  Recommendation 1: DRB should be introduced into Australia to enhance and realise the full potential of radio broadcasting services and new services.

  TECHNOLOGY

  DRAC considers that of the two major terrestrial digital radio systems currently under consideration - Eureka 147 and in-band systems - the Eureka 147 system would be the more appropriate for implementation in Australia.

  Eureka 147

  Eureka 147 was developed in Europe by a consortium of broadcasters, Government research bodies and a segment of the electronic manufacturing industry. While the original notion of satellite compatible delivery is still implicit in the system design, the standard is optimised for high grade service delivery to mobile receivers from terrestrial transmitters. As Eureka 147 was originally developed for delivering satellite services, the same receiver may be used for both terrestrial and satellite services.⁴ (Some further development work is being undertaken in Europe on the use of Eureka 147 for satellite delivery.)

  Eureka 147 is being adopted in Europe and Canada to replace existing analog services. Terrestrial transmission and consumer reception equipment is being manufactured for a world market. The initial emphasis is on equipment for the motor vehicle market, for launch in 1997 with market release in early 1998, to be followed by receivers for home and portable use in the subsequent two to three years.

  Like other DRB systems, the Eureka 147 system uses advanced digital techniques to convert the audio signal from an analog waveform to a digital signal, sampling the amplitude of the wave and creating a stream of ones and zeros which accurately represent the original sound. The sampled information is digitally compressed, and several audio channels are brought together and encoded into a single data stream by means of a multiplex. Data and other services can be added. The whole digital stream is referred to as an ensemble. Receivers separate and decode the signals in the digital stream.

  Each Eureka 147 multiplex occupies 1.5 MHz of spectrum and is able to provide: five CD quality programs; or around six FM quality services; or around 12 AM quality services; or around 30 voice channels; or some combination of these.⁵

  A greater number of digital than analog services can be located in a given amount of spectrum, and digital services require less power to cover a given area than analog services. Also, the signals can be dynamically reconfigured, ie a high quality service can be readily switched to a number of lesser quality services or vice versa.

  Eureka 147 permits the establishment of single frequency networks (SFNs). These allow for wide-area coverage using several transmitters carrying the same signal on the same frequency, so that reception can be maintained when travelling from one area to another. Signals using the Eureka 147 system can be retransmitted on the same frequency to provide 'in-fill' coverage in areas of poor reception.

  Additional transmitters can also be used to 'shape' coverage to match the intended service area. It may also be possible, with Eureka 147, to provide for insertion of limited local content within an SFN with otherwise homogeneous programming. This is currently being further trialed in Europe.

  Eureka 147 technology can operate throughout an extensive range of frequencies. This means there are a number of options for locating DRB services in the radiofrequency spectrum, thus increasing the chances for sufficient spectrum to be allocated to provide for a range of services.

  Depending upon the particular technical and spectrum arrangements adopted, the Eureka 147 system may offer:

• use of one receiver for both terrestrial and satellite reception;
• the commencement in early 1998 of markets for domestic receivers, and transmission and studio equipment;
• higher quality sound than AM or FM radio, providing an appropriate bit rate is used;
• the capability to reconfigure services for different programming requirements;
• greater flexibility in coverage than analog services;
• more effective use of spectrum than analog services;
• more reliable reception to fixed, portable and mobile receivers than current AM or FM radio;
• program-associated information and ancillary services;
• reduced radiated power requirements for coverage of a given area than analog services;
• the ability to operate over a range of frequency bands; and
• capital and operating costs generally lower than, or comparable with, AM and FM radio.

  Recommendation 2: Australia should adopt the Eureka 147 technology to provide DRB services.

  In-band

  DRAC did not find any general support for introducing the in-band systems currently under development in the USA.

  The two main in-band systems under development are In-Band On Channel (IBOC) and In-Band Adjacent Channel (IBAC). The IBOC system transmits a digital signal simultaneously within an existing analog AM or FM signal. The IBAC system transmits a digital signal within unused spectrum adjacent to that used by existing FM signals. In-Band Reserve Channel (IBRC), which is based on using 'spare' spectrum not able to be used for other services, is also a possibility.

  In-band systems are aimed at providing CD and high-quality stereo sound, as well as ancillary data, text and other services. However, their limited bandwidth means that the potential for providing ancillary data, text and other services will be restricted. The limited degree of functionality offered by in-band systems, compared with Eureka 147, also means they are unlikely to become an attractive alternative to AM and FM radio for consumers or broadcasters.

  In addition, data from the USA Electronics Industry Association technical trials suggests that the in-band systems have so far failed to perform as well as their proponents hoped, with serious deficiencies evident in a number of key areas. However, several submissions to DRAC noted that in-band solutions might become viable at a future date.

  Recommendation 3: The development of in-band systems in the USA should continue to be monitored.

  SPECTRUM ALLOCATION

  In 1992, the World Administrative Radio Conference (WARC-92) allocated the frequency band from 1452 to 1492 MHz (commonly known as the L band) for satellite and complementary terrestrial digital audio broadcasting uses. This allocation has been incorporated in the Australian Spectrum Plan, which is the formal statutory rule that specifies the broad purposes for which particular frequency bands may be used in Australia.

  DRAC considers that any spectrum planning proposal should be broadly in accordance with the findings of the report, Digital Radio Broadcasting for Australia Part 2-Technical Possibilities and Spectrum Implications⁶. This report was commissioned by the Digital Radio Broadcasting Task Force, a group convened by the Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) to identify broadcasting requirements for DRB use of the 1.5 GHz spectrum (which encompasses the L band). The Task Force established a Spectrum Requirements Working Party to assist in considering these issues. The Working Party's report came to a number of findings on DRB in Australia, including use of the Eureka 147 system, sharing of the L band and satellite delivery of DRB services.

  To ensure the orderly and equitable development of DRB, which provides for the most effective use of spectrum, it would be desirable to conduct detailed planning of services. The Task Force study showed sufficient L band spectrum is available to meet the initial requirements of existing broadcasters, with scope for sharing between DRB and fixed services. Broadcasters accept that, in return for access to DRB spectrum, they may need to vacate their existing spectrum when DRB is fully established, thus making these frequencies available for alternative uses.

  As Eureka 147 can operate in spectrum other than the L band, DRAC considered the possibility of using very high frequency (VHF) band III spectrum for providing DRB. For example, planning work to date has indicated that terrestrial DRB using L band may be an expensive option in markets of wide coverage and small pockets of listeners.

  Overall, it was generally accepted that the principle provision for DRB should be in L band spectrum, but further investigation should be made to compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of VHF and L band spectrum.

  DRAC considers that to await the results of further assessment of VHF options might create unnecessary delays in implementing the new technology. The Committee also recognises that current spectrum usage in Australia may make a VHF band III allocation for DRB difficult to achieve. It is, therefore, recommended that detailed planning for developing DRB within the allocated L band spectrum proceed, while consideration of VHF options continues.

  Any planning of DRB services should take into account other users, in particular, Telstra's digital radio concentrator system (DRCS), but also others such as radio astronomy observatories, in the band 1400 to 1427 MHz. In addition, in order for all incumbent and some aspirant broadcasters to be accommodated, some non-broadcasting services may need to be relocated.

  Recommendation 4: Detailed planning for developing DRB in the existing L band frequency allocation of 1452 to 1492 MHz should proceed, with minimal disruption to existing users of the band in the short term, having regard to agreements reached in the ABA DRB Task Force report, Digital Radio Broadcasting for Australia Part 2-Technical Possibilities and Spectrum Implications. The possible advantages of using VHF spectrum for DRB should also be further investigated.

  TIMING

  Timing for introducing DRB hinges on two main considerations: the availability of reasonably priced domestic receivers; and the speed with which services could be provided, having regard to the need to finalise technical as well as commercial arrangements. Receiver prices can be expected to drop following the launch of consumer receivers in Europe later this year.

  In particular, DRAC considers detailed planning work is necessary to facilitate the introduction of DRB. The Committee, therefore, believes it would be appropriate to introduce DRB in Australia in 2000, following a period of planning, further experimentation, and monitoring of overseas developments in 1998 and 1999.

  Recommendation 5: Planning of DRB services should be undertaken as soon as possible, with services commencing in 2000.

  SERVICE PROVIDERS

  DRAC considers DRB should be introduced in an incremental way to provide an orderly transition to digital technology. In the initial phase, it might only be necessary for the Government to take threshold policy decisions on the use of the Eureka 147 system, spectrum allocation and the role of existing broadcasters. This approach would allow policy and implementation decisions to be made after the implications of DRB were more clearly understood.

  A majority of DRAC members, namely the ABA, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS), the Federation of Australian Radio Broadcasters (FARB), the Federation of Australian Commercial Television Stations (FACTS), the Community Broadcasting Association of Australia (CBAA), the Federation of Australian Narrowcasting and Subscription Services (FANSS) and the Communications Law Centre (CLC), argued that, since DRB is essentially an enhanced form of transmission, rather than an alternative or new technology, the right to provide DRB services should be automatically available to existing broadcasters as the first step in its introduction.

  The CLC argued that the licensing regime should be designed to provide opportunities both for existing broadcasters and new players in the industry who could offer new and innovative programming choices to the communities served.

  FANSS proposed that narrowcasters should be accorded favoured access because established broadcasting services already enjoy an enormous competitive advantage. The ABC, SBS, FARB and CBAA considered that established broadcasters were best placed to introduce digital broadcasting to the public, as they had proven marketing skills and the necessary industry experience to judge whether simulcasting, different programming mixes, or other service improvements were more likely to attract audiences to DRB.

  FANSS argued that, if automatic migration were to take place, all narrowcasting services should be converted to DRB, including narrowcasters licensed through the ABA's licence area planning process, low power open narrowcasters operating at the fringes of the FM band, and narrowcasters operating on frequencies outside the AM and FM bands.

  In response, the ABA suggested that while access rights should perhaps accrue to narrowcast licences acquired through the ABA's licence area plans and associated allocation processes under section 34 of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, this should not extend to the short-term, over the counter, very low cost transmitter licences issued prior to the ABA preparing licence area plans.

  The ABC, SBS, FARB and the CBAA also concurred with the view that services which operate under a broadcasting services band (BSB) licence⁷ and national services should be distinguished from services operating under a class licence, while the underlying features of class licences (temporary nature, periodical bidding, etc) should be clearly identified and reflected in any DRB access regime.

  Submissions to DRAC were generally supportive of using L band spectrum for DRB. More services could be expected to be accommodated in the longer term because technical improvements could permit high-quality services at a lower bit rate, and some non-broadcasting users of the band may relocate. In the short term, however, the majority of submissions proposed that preference should be given to accommodating incumbent broadcasters, rather than aspirant broadcasters and low power open narrowcasters operating at the fringes of the FM band.

  Recommendation 6: National broadcasters and existing commercial broadcasters, community broadcasters and narrowcasters licensed under the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and operating within the broadcasting services bands should have a right to automatic access to DRB with the same licence conditions as apply under analog technology. Detailed planning should provide capacity for other narrowcasters and other services as a next priority.

  RECEIVERS

  The cost of receivers will be likely to be a central factor in the consumer adoption of DRB. To some extent this cost will be driven by the global, rather than the local, market. Equipment is currently being manufactured for the European and Canadian markets, with the first consumer receiver models displayed at the World of Consumer Electronics fair (Internationale Funkausstellung, IFA) in Berlin in August and September 1997. These are likely to appear on the market in late 1997 or early 1998. To date, receivers (and other equipment) have been produced for experimental purposes only, although overseas broadcasters have been advising manufacturers on desirable receiver design and features.

  The design of receivers will inevitably be driven by the larger markets in Europe and Canada, and there are likely to be cost advantages for consumers if the receiver design adopted for Australia is compatible with overseas standards, rather than one that is unique to this country. The same cost advantages would also seem to apply if the industry adopted open standards in receiver design, rather than several proprietary systems.

  Recommendation 7: The development of equipment standards for receivers through the Standards Australia forum should start as soon as possible. These should be open standards which are compatible with international standards.

  Some production and/or assembly of receivers could take place domestically and provide an opportunity for investment in the local manufacturing sector, with supply to the Australian market perhaps a precursor to the development of an export market. As a further option, the development of a domestic receiver industry could include introducing manufacturer incentives to supply inexpensive DRB receivers, as in Germany, where the Government has provided subsidies to manufacturers.

  Measures to reduce or offset the cost to consumers would increase the attractiveness of new receivers and, therefore, of the new technology overall. These might include government subsidies or tax concessions to facilitate market penetration of DRB receivers.

  Recommendation 8: The Department of Communications and the Arts (DCA) should give urgent consideration to developing strategies to encourage the early supply of inexpensive, mass produced receivers, and consult further with the domestic manufacturing sector on appropriate strategies.

  Radio is a particularly valuable medium to sections of the community who have a print handicap, and it is important to ensure that this group should not be disadvantaged by introducing DRB. Ideally, receiver design should take account of the needs of those with a print handicap, and receivers that offer program associated text should be adaptable for alternative format delivery of that information, without the imposition of significant extra costs.

  Recommendation 9: The introduction of DRB should have regard to the localised and/or specialist needs of the Australian community, including the print handicapped. DCA should recommend to government ways in which digital radio might be implemented to ensure access and equity principles are upheld.

  CONSUMER AWARENESS

  There is presently only limited awareness among consumers about the possible benefits and impact of introducing DRB into Australia. Given that receivers are expected to be relatively expensive in the short term, some promotion of DRB is likely to be necessary if consumers are to adopt this new technology.

  The limited community awareness of DRB, together with limited availability of test receivers, has restricted the possibilities for conducting consumer research on DRB. DRAC, therefore, believes that to have conducted consumer research before this point might have been premature.

  While consumer research and promotion of the new technology is a role for industry, rather than government, DRAC believes some government involvement might be useful to ensure uniformity of approach across sectors.

  Recommendation 10: Government and industry should cooperate in a consumer awareness campaign on DRB in Australia.

  1. Other terms used to describe digital radio broadcasting include digital audio broadcasting (DAB) and digital sound broadcasting (DSB).

  2. Developing Digital Radio Broadcasting for Australia, Report of the Australian Broadcasting Authority Digital Radio Broadcasting Task Force, October 1996.

  3. A Discussion Paper on Digital Radio Broadcasting in Australia, Digital Radio Advisory Committee, September 1996.

  4. There are other systems for delivering DRB via satellite, including the WorldSpace system.

  5. The evidence to date would suggest that digital compression at a bit rate of 224 kbps using joint stereo mode is required for near CD quality audio (as defined by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU)). Five 224 kbps channels using the required protection coding can be accommodated on a Eureka 147 multiplex.

  6. Digital Radio Broadcasting for Australia Part 2 - Technical Possibilities and Spectrum Implications, Report of the Spectrum Requirements Working Party of the Australian Broadcasting Authority Digital Radio Broadcasting Task Force, October 1996.

  7. The ABA is responsible for the detailed planning of services in spectrum which has been designated by the Minister under section 31 of the Radiocommunications Act 1992 as being primarily for broadcasting purposes (ie broadcasting services bands or BSBs).

• Document ID: 9397 |
• Last modified: 6 February 2008, 2:25pm