Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 88-252
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
.\ FCC Red :\o. l Q Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 88-252 1i(lns. as well as C\)nsideratilln of the minimum usable Before the signal strength as a function of listener prefcrem:e. at Federal Communications Commission mnspheric and man-made noise. and receiver design. It Washington. D.C. 20554 discussed the equally important co-channel and adjacent channel signal ratios that constitute the basic tradeoff in the AM s~rvice between the quality of received signals and the quantity of stations authorized. In :iddition. it :\1\1 Docket No. 88-376 invited comments on a new proposal to permit AM broad casters to enter into mutual agreements concerning the ln the matter \)f degree of interference protection to be afforded in specific cases. as well as approval for the use of new. internation .-\mcndment nf the Cnmmissinn·s RM-5S32 ally developed AM service propagation curves. Rules to improve the quality RM-617.+ .+. Other potentially less complex issues included discus sion of the suitability of the current AM emission of the .-\l\1 Broadcast Sen·ice limitations. audio signal processing practices and the meth by redlH.:ing adjacent channel od of determining the cumulative intei-ference resulting interference and by eliminating from the reception of multiple signals. We also solicited restrictinns pertaining to the comment on the desirability of amending Section 73.37(b) protected daytime contour. of the Rules to permit AM station licensees to increase their transmitter output power provided that no additional interference would be caused to co-channel or adjacent ~OTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING channel licensees. and notwithstanding the fact that inter ference from other stations would be caused to areas Adopted: July 20. 1988; Released: September 12, 1988 within the expanded service area. The intent of this change was not necessarily to increase the size of the original service area (although some expansion is possi Ih the Commission: ble). but rather to increase the signal level within the original service area. thereby improving the quality of service in areas normally subject to protection from inter INTRODUCTION ference. l. The ClH11mission has under consideration comments 5. On November 6. 1987 (subsequent to issuance of the and reply comments in response to the .\'mice of Inquiry Inquiry), the Commission received a petition (RM-6174) (Inquiry) in MM Docket No. 87-267. which solicited com from the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) re ments on a comprehensive review of the techmcal questing formal adoption of an AM transmitter audio assignment principles currently applicable. to AM _broa~i standard developed by the National Radio Systems Com casting.1 This review was prompted by comments filed 111 mittee (NRSC). 3 Because the NRSC standard is intended response to the Mass Media Bureau ·s 1986 Report on the to reduce adjacent channel interference by requiring sub Si<l!IIS tlze AJf Broadcast Rules (Report! which noted a of stantial attenuation of audio signals above 10 kHz, and by consistent decline in public satisfaction with the quality of limitino- the maximum amount of audio pre-emphasis be AM broadcast service in recent years. largely because of 2 low 10° kHz. it will be considered in connection with a deficiencies related to its current technical limitations. new emission limitation proposed herein, with which it is Based upon the information developed in the Inquiry. ~e closely related. intend to explore. in successive and separate rule makmg proceedings. a wide variety of technical a~d pol.icy issues and related rule amendments that we believe will enable DISCUSSION AM broadcasters to compete more effectively in the audio 6. Since thorough analysis of the many comments filed service delivery marketplace. in response to the Notice of Inquiry is expected to be a :.. This particular Notice will address two technical pro time-consuming process, we propose early treatment of posals mentioned in the Inquiry that we believ~ can ef~ect the less complicated issues in order that improvement in near-term improvement in the AM broadcastmg serv.1ce: the quality of AM service can be achieved without unnec 1) the adoption of a new emission limitation a~d possi?ly essary delay. Accordingly. we will address the radio fre a new audio processing standard. both of which are in quency (RF) emission limitations (including the NRSC tended to reduce the level of adjacent channel interfer audio standard recommended by NAB), as a means of ence. thereby encouraging the development of bett~r reducing adjacent channel interference, and address quality AM receivers: and, 2) elimination of the restr_1c whether Section 73.37(b) should be amended to generally tions currently contained in Section 73.37(b) concerning permit received overlap4 to occur where requisite prot~c daytime contour protection. to allow some stations to use tion is provided to other stations. These matters are dis additional power. cussed at length below. BACKGROUND REVISION OF THE EMISSION LIMITATIONS 3. Our Inquiry addressed a wide varie~y o_f fundal!1ental 7. The existing AM service transmission system emission but nevertheless complex assignment cntena us.ed in the limitations are set forth in Section 73.44 of the Rules.5 AM radio service. For example. it included a review of the Basically, they permit an AM broadcaster to transmit an suitability of the current signal strength values which de unattenuated audio signal between 0 and 15 kHz. How fine the protected contours (or service areas) of AM sta- ever, the best possible AM performance is seldom ever 5687 FCC 88·252 Federal Communications Commission Record 3 FCC Red No.· 19 approached in practice for many reasons, one of which is troduction of wider bandwidth receivers with substantially the narrow receiver bandwidth that is necessary because improved fidelity compared to current models. Such an frequency assignments in the AM service are made in 10 improvement in fidelity, they argue, would make the AM kHz increments throughout the band.6 This can result in service more competitive with the FM broadcast service. situations (particularly at night, when reception of very 12. The rules recommended by NAB <ire based on one distant stations is common) where the emissions of adja of two voluntary standards developed by the NRSC to cent channel stations overlap each other substantially. Par reduce adjacent channel interference: One recommended tial sideband overlap during daytime groundwave service NRSC standard would define the characteristics of the also can occur in the case of stations separated in fre audio signals fed to the input of a transmitter. The other quency by 20 kHz (second adjacent channel stations). would define the characteristics of the radio frequency Thus, a desired station's sideband emissions are suscept signal emitted by the transmission system. NAB recom ible to being contaminated by signals of first and second mends the FCC mandate compliance with the NRSC input adjacent channel stations. standard. It has two parts. One would limit the maximum 8. To limit the interference caused by these overlapping audio frequency at the transmitter input to 10 kHz so as sidebands, the Commission developed various co-channel to limit the potential for adjacent channel interference. and adjacent channel signal protection ratios that essen The other part would limit the maximum amount of tially define both the quantity (i.e., the number of sta pre-emphasis11 that can be applied to audio signals below tions) and the quality of AM service. 7 These ratios ensure 10 kHz in order to set a limit on the amount of interfer that the signal of any particular AM station is substantially ence that may be caused to first adjacent channel sta stronger (in its service area) than the signals of the other tions.12 The reduction in adjacent channel interference is stations. However, in order to provide for diversity in expected to encourage the production of receivers employ what was then effectively the sole aural service, the Com ing a standard de-emphasis which in turn would lead to mission was compelled to limit the interference protection better reception. Although about 15% of AM licensees afforded individual stations in order to be able to au have already adopted the NRSC audio standard volun thorize a greater number of stations. As a result, AM tarily, NAB, nevertheless, requests that the Commission receivers must cope with adjacent channel interference mandate its use beginning January 1, 1990. This, NAB levels that effectively preclude reception of high fidelity argues, will give receiver manufacturers an incentive to AM service. 8 promptly design and market the better quality receivers 9. In order to reduce the effects of permissible levels of made possible by the reduction in adjacent channel inter adjacent channel interference, AM receiver manufacturers ference and universal use of a specific audio pre-emphasis generally have designed receivers with substantially re characteristic. stricted radio frequency (RF) and intermediate frequency 13. We agree that if the NRSC audio pre-emphasis is (IF) bandwidths. This typically results in an upper limit used at an otherwise properly adjusted and operating sta receiver audio frequency response of 3 kHz to 5 kHz.9 In tion, adjacent channel interference should be substantially an attempt to overcome this limitation, AM broadcasters reduced because the NRSC audio pre-emphasis standard often try to "brighten" their sound by boosting the higher would effectively limit the highest permissible audio fre audio frequencies. This improves fidelity somewhat, but quency to just under 10 kHz. Fre~uencies above this limit not nearly enough to overcome the effect of the narrow would. be substantially attenuated 3 and sideband compo receiver bandwidth. Moreover, boosting the higher audio nents outside the 20 kHz bandwidth channel would be frequencies can exacerbate adjacent channel interference.