Australia backs DAB version 2 (DABv2) for digital radio

DABv2

It is now looking virtually certain that a new DAB version 2 standard will be released in the near future that will incorporate the state-of-the-art AAC+ audio codec and an additional "outer layer" of error correction coding to make transmissions more robust. I refer to AAC+ as the combination of the LC AAC (as used in iTunes) and the HE AAC (High Efficiency AAC) codec, because HE AAC uses the LC AAC codec as its "core codec", so that LC AAC can be used at bit rates higher than 64kbps, and HE AAC can be used for bit rates less than or equal to 64kbps. Basically, AAC+ is an excellent and very efficient audio codec, and the combination of the new AAC+ audio codec with the stronger error correction coding will make DABv2 hugely more efficient than the current DAB system that we have in the UK. Unfortunately, the UK will not be able to use DABv2, because too many receivers have been sold that only support the current DAB technology (DABv1).

Overview of Digital Radio in Australia

Australia has been debating which route to take for the transition to digital radio, with three possible routes proposed:

1. The current DAB system but where all existing analogue stations are given 224 kbps of capacity -- in some of their submissions to public consultations on digital radio, the backer of this proposals, Commercial Radio Australia, has delivered some scathing attacks on the audio quality available and the way DAB has been regulated in the UK (1.5MB). Commercial Radio Australia (CRA) also wanted to stop any new entrants from getting on to digital radio for a 10-year period after launch, in order to allow them to establish the system and recoup investment. I think this was mainly motivated by a smallish broadcaster that had purhcased a lot of AM radio licences in an attempt to get onto digital radio a bit by the back door, but that's just my impression, and I might be wrong. Although they did intend to provide high bit rates for their main radio stations, the 224kbps was also intended to provide lower bit rate secondary services, a bit like you have when Radio 4's secondary services are on air, or Radio 5 Sports Extra steals bits from the other BBC stations;
2. DAB-2, backed by Broadcast Australia, Australia's main transmission company;
3. a satellite digital radio system backed by WorldSpace.

Australian Government's Historic Decision

Not cowed by pressure from the CRA, which represents the vast majority of the Australian commercial radio industry, the Australian Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Helen Coonan, announced on Friday 14th that the government wants Australia to adopt DAB, but with a new codec, i.e. DABv2. The relevant quote from the speech is as follows (in the Technology choice section):

"Other digital radio platforms, including DRM, DMB and the Satellite SDARS platforms, all now make use of more advanced compression standards such as AAC+ (Advanced audio coding).
With the work taking place in Europe to develop hybrid Eureka/DRM platforms and to enable existing Eureka networks to take advantage of the emergence of the DMB platform, there is now a real chance that the Eureka 147 platform will also move to include more advanced compression capabilities in its technical specifications.
More advanced standards are now being considered by international standards bodies for inclusion in the Eureka 147 standard. The adoption of more advanced compression standards would enable broadcasters to deliver CD quality services or multiple FM quality services in 128 kbps.
And we have some time to look carefully at these developments.
Realistically, it will take two or three years for the necessary legislative changes to be enacted, for the spectrum planning and allocation to be undertaken and for the practical requirements of infrastructure rollout to take place.
Given the real spectrum limitations we face in Australia, it is vital that we look to all options to achieve the most efficient use of what is available.
Let’s face it, adoption now of a standard that is already 10 years old and may well be superseded, for implementation in another 2 to 3 years, would, in my view, be irresponsible.
Markets like the UK do not have the luxury of contemplating these more advanced standards, given they have an existing platform and would therefore face legacy issues.
But Australia does not have those legacy issues. We need to be absolutely confident we are not adopting a platform that could shortly be considered a legacy problem.
We are not alone in being at this point. There are a number of other large markets yet to introduce digital radio, including France, that will also need to determine whether to adopt a mature and now inefficient standard, or take advantage of technological advances.

Therefore, doing the best we can within the existing capacity restraints, incumbent commercial broadcasters will have guaranteed minimum rights to 128 kbps per service, with the ability to be allocated additional capacity up to a maximum 256 kbps on the condition that the additional capacity is used to provide new services."

The Australian radio broadcasters want to provide high audio quality, but there's insufficient spectrum available to allow them to do that (unsurprisingly, when you can only actually fit 5 x 224kbps stations in one multiplex), so the minister is basically forcing their hand to adopt DAB with a new codec.

This is a ground-breaking decision, because once the DABv2 standard is released in the next few months, the fact that one country has already stated that that's what they'll use for their digital radio system means that other countries will be able to follow them in full knowledge that they're not going it alone. This will likely mean that quite a few countries that are currently "backing" DAB, but aren't actually promoting it or showing any interest in the system, will likely re-appraise their decision and wait for new DABv2 receivers to be launched and go ahead with the new version instead.

It's also interesting that she mentioned France in the above quote, because I think the decision by the the four biggest French broadcasters not to adopt DAB precisely because it is out-of-date and now very inefficient probably gave WorldDAB one hell of a wake-up call.

It will be very interesting to see which countries persevere with DABv1. The UK will do, because it's too late to change. Denmark has made some progress with sales as well. But sales in all other countries have been abysmally low as a result of there being no or little advertising for DAB -- that is the reason DAB has sold in the UK, because without the advertising DAB in the UK would be where it was in 2001. That means that all the other countries could wait and adopt DABv2 instead.

An interesting long-term possibility is that because economies of scale would dictate that it is better for manufacturers and chip designers to only produce one product in large quantity rather than two in lower quantity, it seems likely that in the medium- to long-term, DAB receivers will all become DABv2 (because DABv2 will be backwardly-compatible with DABv1). And this would mean that all the receivers sold in the UK would also be DABv2. And that would allow the possibility that at some point in, say, a decade's time or whatever, the UK could also change to DABv2. That might annoy people at the moment who've just bought an expensive DABv1 radio. But in 10 years' time I don't think it would be an issue, because many of the current DAB receivers sold will have been replaced anyway, and new receivers that cost £50-£100 today will likely be a lot cheaper by then.

If Ofcom and the broadcasters are going to consider this possibility, I would suggest that they get a move on and liaise with the chip and receiver manufacturers so that DABv2 receivers are sold in the UK as soon as possible, because that will limit the number of people that would be affected when they decide to switch off DABv1 (did I really just say switch off DAB?).

Bookmark with:
Digg	del.icio.us	Reddit	Facebook
Google	Stumbleupon	Slashdot