Retain FM radio

As part of the digital Britain report, it was proposed that national FM radio be switched off to free up bandwidth for DAB broadcasts. I believe that FM radio should be retained. I also believe that if we are to switch to a digital format, there are several formats which have considerable advantages over DAB.

I suggested to the last government that FM should be retained and DAB allowed to die. Their response was that DAB had to proceed since there were already a few million DAB sets in the UK. The fact that there are hundreds of millions of FM receivers in the UK seemed lost on them.

Why is this idea important?

As part of the digital Britain report, it was proposed that national FM radio be switched off to free up bandwidth for DAB broadcasts. I believe that FM radio should be retained. I also believe that if we are to switch to a digital format, there are several formats which have considerable advantages over DAB.

I suggested to the last government that FM should be retained and DAB allowed to die. Their response was that DAB had to proceed since there were already a few million DAB sets in the UK. The fact that there are hundreds of millions of FM receivers in the UK seemed lost on them.

FM radio

I am a full time carer for my disabled wife and we often listen to our local radio station on FM especially when we are out and about.

 

Are you (The goverment) going to assist us and many more like us to upgrade all our radio equipment so that we can get the radio stations that we like listening too. I doubt this very much so I ask you to reconsider this plan, as upgrading all our TV's have cost us a lot and now the prospect of having to upgrade or change all the radios we have will just be crippling.

 

Why change things that don't need changing?

Why is this idea important?

I am a full time carer for my disabled wife and we often listen to our local radio station on FM especially when we are out and about.

 

Are you (The goverment) going to assist us and many more like us to upgrade all our radio equipment so that we can get the radio stations that we like listening too. I doubt this very much so I ask you to reconsider this plan, as upgrading all our TV's have cost us a lot and now the prospect of having to upgrade or change all the radios we have will just be crippling.

 

Why change things that don't need changing?

Bypass DAB and promote internet

Promote radio braodcasting via internet (no cost in expensive new aerials), and businesses will start to make more internet wi-fi radios using cableless routers already in place in most househoolds. The added benefit is that you do not need Megahertz bandwidths to stream radio. You could also keep the exisitng FM transmitters for use in car radios.

Why is this idea important?

Promote radio braodcasting via internet (no cost in expensive new aerials), and businesses will start to make more internet wi-fi radios using cableless routers already in place in most househoolds. The added benefit is that you do not need Megahertz bandwidths to stream radio. You could also keep the exisitng FM transmitters for use in car radios.

Do not switch off FM and force people to use the inferior DAB service

The country is in a financial mess, which the people will have to pay for over many years. We all know this, and must accept it. It is unreasonable to force the ordinary people of this country, who are already having to pay for government mis-management, to spend money replacing perfectly good radios, when the only benefactors would be a few importers, and several far east manufacturers.

The choice MUST be left to the people, and market forces MUST be the deciding factor. If digital radio is the way forward, let the technology prove itself, and market forces sort it out, in a similar way to video or dvd recorders. It is getting harder to buy video players, as market forces and superior technology make dvd players/recorders more popular. Soor, VHS will die the death, but it will be by market forces, NOT government direction. 

Why is this idea important?

The country is in a financial mess, which the people will have to pay for over many years. We all know this, and must accept it. It is unreasonable to force the ordinary people of this country, who are already having to pay for government mis-management, to spend money replacing perfectly good radios, when the only benefactors would be a few importers, and several far east manufacturers.

The choice MUST be left to the people, and market forces MUST be the deciding factor. If digital radio is the way forward, let the technology prove itself, and market forces sort it out, in a similar way to video or dvd recorders. It is getting harder to buy video players, as market forces and superior technology make dvd players/recorders more popular. Soor, VHS will die the death, but it will be by market forces, NOT government direction. 

Remove threat to FM radio

In common with probably millions of people all over the UK I would like to be able to retain the FM radio signal. Please review the plans for Digital Broadcasting; even when the take-up of digital radio increases in the population, please do not switch off the analogue FM signal. This would lead to horrendous waste and expense all over the country.

Why is this idea important?

In common with probably millions of people all over the UK I would like to be able to retain the FM radio signal. Please review the plans for Digital Broadcasting; even when the take-up of digital radio increases in the population, please do not switch off the analogue FM signal. This would lead to horrendous waste and expense all over the country.

Keep FM radio.

It doesnt seem all that long ago we were all having to get used to FM frequencies for our favourite radio stations. Now we are (possibly) going to totally lose FM in favour of DAB. Why? I havnt seen any good write ups for it. In fact, it seems to me that its an excuse by government who may be looking to get more taxpayers money if they switch off FM and force people against their wills to get DAB. I cant afford it. My car is the only place I listen to a radio and I wont replace it in favour of DAB. I live in a rural location and I doubt very much if I could receive DAB.

I say keep FM and if anyone wants DAB, let them get it. Dont force it on the taxpayer. As the saying goes, if it aint broke etc!!

Why is this idea important?

It doesnt seem all that long ago we were all having to get used to FM frequencies for our favourite radio stations. Now we are (possibly) going to totally lose FM in favour of DAB. Why? I havnt seen any good write ups for it. In fact, it seems to me that its an excuse by government who may be looking to get more taxpayers money if they switch off FM and force people against their wills to get DAB. I cant afford it. My car is the only place I listen to a radio and I wont replace it in favour of DAB. I live in a rural location and I doubt very much if I could receive DAB.

I say keep FM and if anyone wants DAB, let them get it. Dont force it on the taxpayer. As the saying goes, if it aint broke etc!!

Please keep analogue radio

Since I was a child I have enjoyed listening to and exploring "steam" radio and do not see any point to changing things so that we will no longer be able to listen to the BBC and local radio unless we buy very expensive DAB radios.

I would be forced to only be able to listen to CD's in my car and would have to buy expensive equipment in order to listen on my hifi.

From my experience of TV the sound quality is much poorer than that obtainable on UHF/VHF frequency modulation broadcasts and nothing like as reliable as the broadcasts on MW/LW amplitude modulation broadcasts.

My crystal set would also cease working after 90 years.

I cannot see the point with radio so implore everyone to join a petition to save analogue radio, for all the frequency bands to go silent would be a disaster and a waste of the investment millions of people have put in when buying good, functional radios.

Why is this idea important?

Since I was a child I have enjoyed listening to and exploring "steam" radio and do not see any point to changing things so that we will no longer be able to listen to the BBC and local radio unless we buy very expensive DAB radios.

I would be forced to only be able to listen to CD's in my car and would have to buy expensive equipment in order to listen on my hifi.

From my experience of TV the sound quality is much poorer than that obtainable on UHF/VHF frequency modulation broadcasts and nothing like as reliable as the broadcasts on MW/LW amplitude modulation broadcasts.

My crystal set would also cease working after 90 years.

I cannot see the point with radio so implore everyone to join a petition to save analogue radio, for all the frequency bands to go silent would be a disaster and a waste of the investment millions of people have put in when buying good, functional radios.

Keep FM Radio

I recognise that Mr Vaizey has made some mildly encouraging noises recently but I wish to add my voice to the debate about the threatened shut down of the FM channels on the radio. The FM Channels MUST be maintained. My concerns fall into two areas:

1. Cost

2. Performance

1. I have 7 FM receivers about the house and one in the car. I would not afford to replace them with similar quality DAB devices so I would do without. As I listen only to BBC R3 & R4, there is no obvious net gain (to me) from switching to DAB, merely additional unnecessary expense.

2. Currently, DAB is not fit for purpose. I have only one DAB receiver (a portable) which I use when I am out walking the dog but it suffers from frequent "hiccups". I have approached the BBC in the past to ask if the DAB signal is poor in the Gosport area and they tell me all is fine. Well, it is not fine! DAB does not work properly. Even when reception strength is OK, the sound quality is as good on DAB as it is with FM.

Why is this idea important?

I recognise that Mr Vaizey has made some mildly encouraging noises recently but I wish to add my voice to the debate about the threatened shut down of the FM channels on the radio. The FM Channels MUST be maintained. My concerns fall into two areas:

1. Cost

2. Performance

1. I have 7 FM receivers about the house and one in the car. I would not afford to replace them with similar quality DAB devices so I would do without. As I listen only to BBC R3 & R4, there is no obvious net gain (to me) from switching to DAB, merely additional unnecessary expense.

2. Currently, DAB is not fit for purpose. I have only one DAB receiver (a portable) which I use when I am out walking the dog but it suffers from frequent "hiccups". I have approached the BBC in the past to ask if the DAB signal is poor in the Gosport area and they tell me all is fine. Well, it is not fine! DAB does not work properly. Even when reception strength is OK, the sound quality is as good on DAB as it is with FM.

Retain AM and VHF Radio Broadcasting

The government is planning to do away with AM and VHF broadcasting.

At the moment, millions of people use these services. And although AM radio is somewhat dated, VHF is certainly not.

The VHF service is a high quality one, offering sterio broadcasting in most cases, and is very well respected throughout the country.

The government wants to scrap the service alogether, and thereby make us all by digital (DAB) radios.

These radios are expensive, and are nearly always monophonic.

Why is this idea important?

The government is planning to do away with AM and VHF broadcasting.

At the moment, millions of people use these services. And although AM radio is somewhat dated, VHF is certainly not.

The VHF service is a high quality one, offering sterio broadcasting in most cases, and is very well respected throughout the country.

The government wants to scrap the service alogether, and thereby make us all by digital (DAB) radios.

These radios are expensive, and are nearly always monophonic.

cancel FM and AM radio switchoff

The Communications Minister Ed Vaizey says that "listeners need to be persuaded that the quality (of Digital Radio) is high, Digital Radio is affordable and the quality is as good as FM"

This seems to be the same attitude as the last government; i.e. if the public don't want it, the public are wrong, so they must be persuaded. Well it is Mr Vaizey that must be persuaded, that is what many of us are trying to do. Here are the arguments:

1. He says that "Digtal Radio is a huge opportunity…" Well, no. Digital Radio WAS a huge opportunity 25 years ago when it was intruduced (first with test transmissions in the Midlands). Now we have the prospect of Radio 6 Music, one of the few digital only stations, being closed down.

2. The quality is as good as FM. Wrong. The quality has the potential to be better than FM, but the bit rate is variable, and often restricted in order to accomodate more stations. Pre-emphesis and companding used on FM is also used in digital transmission.

3. The FM transmissions run in parallel with digital radio would require no seperate distribution system, the same distribution feeds both at the same transmitter sites, as it does at the moment. Only continued maintenance revenue for already exitisting FM transmitters would be needed. The cost of this is less than the extra battery current required by every portable receiver, of which there are tens of thousands per transmitter.

4. Not only do car radios need to be replaced, as in recent publicity, but many Hi-Fi enthusiasts have the FM tuner integral to their music system. Buying a portable is not an option, enthusiasts want to reproduce the signal; through their quality loudspeakers. Also the substitution of a digital tuner for an FM one is not simple in such a system.

5. For television, analogue closure was necessary to allow the full power digital transmissions in all areas in the same transmission bands (bands IV and V). The FM band II is not required for digital use because the digital band is seperate.

6  If you want a government which allows people choice, why not have FM and Digital both available, and let the listeners choose. The cost of continuing an already existing FM transmitter in a given area (paid for by the listener through the television lisence fee) will be less than the ongoing cost of extra batteries for digital receivers. (also paid for by the listener).

7. Have you actually listened to a digital receiver, such as the Gemini, and compared the quality to reasonable size stereo speakers (such as the LS3/5A by Rogers, a BBC design, commercially available)? I think if committee had done this in an A-B test, you would stop saying that Digital is as good as FM. One has to consider the whole system and what comes out in the listeners' room.

8.  Radio 4 Long Wave is valued by many sports listeners, particularily for Test Match Special. The last time its closure was proposed there was a demonstration march to Broadcasting House.

9. What will happen to digital services in a serious national emergency, when radio is the only means of contacting the people? AM receivers are small, simple, and can be used almost anywhere with an internal ferrite rod aerial.

                                         thanks for the opportunity to give my opinion,

                                                           Colin Pierpoint

Why is this idea important?

The Communications Minister Ed Vaizey says that "listeners need to be persuaded that the quality (of Digital Radio) is high, Digital Radio is affordable and the quality is as good as FM"

This seems to be the same attitude as the last government; i.e. if the public don't want it, the public are wrong, so they must be persuaded. Well it is Mr Vaizey that must be persuaded, that is what many of us are trying to do. Here are the arguments:

1. He says that "Digtal Radio is a huge opportunity…" Well, no. Digital Radio WAS a huge opportunity 25 years ago when it was intruduced (first with test transmissions in the Midlands). Now we have the prospect of Radio 6 Music, one of the few digital only stations, being closed down.

2. The quality is as good as FM. Wrong. The quality has the potential to be better than FM, but the bit rate is variable, and often restricted in order to accomodate more stations. Pre-emphesis and companding used on FM is also used in digital transmission.

3. The FM transmissions run in parallel with digital radio would require no seperate distribution system, the same distribution feeds both at the same transmitter sites, as it does at the moment. Only continued maintenance revenue for already exitisting FM transmitters would be needed. The cost of this is less than the extra battery current required by every portable receiver, of which there are tens of thousands per transmitter.

4. Not only do car radios need to be replaced, as in recent publicity, but many Hi-Fi enthusiasts have the FM tuner integral to their music system. Buying a portable is not an option, enthusiasts want to reproduce the signal; through their quality loudspeakers. Also the substitution of a digital tuner for an FM one is not simple in such a system.

5. For television, analogue closure was necessary to allow the full power digital transmissions in all areas in the same transmission bands (bands IV and V). The FM band II is not required for digital use because the digital band is seperate.

6  If you want a government which allows people choice, why not have FM and Digital both available, and let the listeners choose. The cost of continuing an already existing FM transmitter in a given area (paid for by the listener through the television lisence fee) will be less than the ongoing cost of extra batteries for digital receivers. (also paid for by the listener).

7. Have you actually listened to a digital receiver, such as the Gemini, and compared the quality to reasonable size stereo speakers (such as the LS3/5A by Rogers, a BBC design, commercially available)? I think if committee had done this in an A-B test, you would stop saying that Digital is as good as FM. One has to consider the whole system and what comes out in the listeners' room.

8.  Radio 4 Long Wave is valued by many sports listeners, particularily for Test Match Special. The last time its closure was proposed there was a demonstration march to Broadcasting House.

9. What will happen to digital services in a serious national emergency, when radio is the only means of contacting the people? AM receivers are small, simple, and can be used almost anywhere with an internal ferrite rod aerial.

                                         thanks for the opportunity to give my opinion,

                                                           Colin Pierpoint

FM radio

Let's keep FM radio. I have one digital radio in the house ( a free set, courtesy of Classic FM.)And I have  four FM radios, plus one in the car that I do not want the expense of replacing.Where are all the redundant sets to go?  Landfill?Expense

Why is this idea important?

Let's keep FM radio. I have one digital radio in the house ( a free set, courtesy of Classic FM.)And I have  four FM radios, plus one in the car that I do not want the expense of replacing.Where are all the redundant sets to go?  Landfill?Expense

Keep FM radio

No compulsory switch-off of FM transmissions to compel us to change to digital, making our many FM receivers useless. 

Digital uses much more power, and incurs considerable capital costs [sets are much dearer], with no way of recyling the old radios.   Will not be able to go from one room to another set with continuity of programme.  Music will be less faithfully reproduced.

 Also, the Time Signal will be wrong!

Why is this idea important?

No compulsory switch-off of FM transmissions to compel us to change to digital, making our many FM receivers useless. 

Digital uses much more power, and incurs considerable capital costs [sets are much dearer], with no way of recyling the old radios.   Will not be able to go from one room to another set with continuity of programme.  Music will be less faithfully reproduced.

 Also, the Time Signal will be wrong!

Repeal the Digital Economy Act (ending of FM and medium wave radio )

The Digital Economy Act (ending of FM and medium wave radio ) is ill thought out and typical of the Big Brother State of New Labour who sought to control every aspect of the UK citizens life. The switch to digital broadcasting is not necessary, the current frequency band allocations are well mapped and do not cause mutual interference within the UK.

Why is this idea important?

The Digital Economy Act (ending of FM and medium wave radio ) is ill thought out and typical of the Big Brother State of New Labour who sought to control every aspect of the UK citizens life. The switch to digital broadcasting is not necessary, the current frequency band allocations are well mapped and do not cause mutual interference within the UK.

With immediate effect block the digitalization of broadcast radio.

Stop the move to digital radio. Leave AM/FM as is the reasoning behind this is that many will not get DAB and it is not suitable on the move. Further the labour jump into DAB is seriously flawed as the system has many faults not least of which is the fact that the rest of Europe has not and will not be adopting it making aforesaid special for UK radios very expensive.

Why is this idea important?

Stop the move to digital radio. Leave AM/FM as is the reasoning behind this is that many will not get DAB and it is not suitable on the move. Further the labour jump into DAB is seriously flawed as the system has many faults not least of which is the fact that the rest of Europe has not and will not be adopting it making aforesaid special for UK radios very expensive.

DAB Radio

The turning off of theFM broadcasting is quite wrong.  There are millions of radios that would be effected and it is quite wrong that this is being imposed on the public.  By all means run both in tandum but do not turn off the signal – I can't imagine any contry in Europe planning to go down this road!!!

Why is this idea important?

The turning off of theFM broadcasting is quite wrong.  There are millions of radios that would be effected and it is quite wrong that this is being imposed on the public.  By all means run both in tandum but do not turn off the signal – I can't imagine any contry in Europe planning to go down this road!!!

Digital radio

I have spent thousands of pounds on FM radio equipment which will be made useless by the Bill sneaked in at the end of the last Parliament.

Repeal the legislation at the first opportunity.

Why is this idea important?

I have spent thousands of pounds on FM radio equipment which will be made useless by the Bill sneaked in at the end of the last Parliament.

Repeal the legislation at the first opportunity.

repeal digital radio switchover requirement

This doesn't quite fit any of your categories, so I'll put it here for somewhere to put it.

The switchover to digital radio is a waste of time, money, effort and carbon emissions.

Digital radio uses significantly more electricity than FM, so the switchover will increase carbon emissions permanently just when we're trying to reduce them.

The quality of broadcast is inferior, particularly affecting all music stations.

Most households have multiple radios (I have 8, excluding the car) and the cost of replacing them all will be prohibitive. Additionally, the manufacture and purchase of all these extra radios will waste resources and increase one-off carbon emissions.

Old radios, we are told, will receive the new stations and so not be 'redundant' – but I want to listen to the stations I choose, not some mythical new ones. I want BBC Radios 3 and 4 to continue on FM!

Changing radios in cars will be difficult and very expensive.

Does anyone really want all the extra radio stations we're supposed to get?

Who is supposed to benefit from this switchover?

This is a wasteful, unnecessary, expensive nonsense – please drop it forthwith.

Why is this idea important?

This doesn't quite fit any of your categories, so I'll put it here for somewhere to put it.

The switchover to digital radio is a waste of time, money, effort and carbon emissions.

Digital radio uses significantly more electricity than FM, so the switchover will increase carbon emissions permanently just when we're trying to reduce them.

The quality of broadcast is inferior, particularly affecting all music stations.

Most households have multiple radios (I have 8, excluding the car) and the cost of replacing them all will be prohibitive. Additionally, the manufacture and purchase of all these extra radios will waste resources and increase one-off carbon emissions.

Old radios, we are told, will receive the new stations and so not be 'redundant' – but I want to listen to the stations I choose, not some mythical new ones. I want BBC Radios 3 and 4 to continue on FM!

Changing radios in cars will be difficult and very expensive.

Does anyone really want all the extra radio stations we're supposed to get?

Who is supposed to benefit from this switchover?

This is a wasteful, unnecessary, expensive nonsense – please drop it forthwith.

Rescind the discontinuance of FM/AM radio

By discontinuing AM and FM radio transmission, the Government is committing the UK to several billion in unnecessary expenditure. 

My four radios will cost over £500 to replace with digital radios and equivalent facilities.  If that is repeated across 15 million households the cost to the country would be at least £7 billion.  A digital car radio will cost at least £300.  There are 20 million vehicles in the UK so the cost to replace all those radios could be in excess of £6 billion.

The total cost to the economy will be at least £10 billion and probably nearer £15 billion.  And the reason cited is that it will free up more channels.  If this is likely and is needed by the emergency services, then it makes more sense to
  a] reduce the number of broadcasters,
  b] rationalise the frequencies and
  c] dedicate more sections of the bandwidth to emergency services
rather than committing the UK to wasting billions on not-very-good "new" facilities.

There is no need for several hundred [or thousand?] broadcasters of pop music.  This is just an ego-trip for most DJs and wastefully crowds the airwaves with the same or very similar material.

Furthermore, most digital users seem to think their new radios give no better service than FM and the coverage in remote areas of the country is reputedly rubbish!  Just because digital is the in-thing and is new doesn't make it a priori better.

Please reverse the decision.

Ray7033

Why is this idea important?

By discontinuing AM and FM radio transmission, the Government is committing the UK to several billion in unnecessary expenditure. 

My four radios will cost over £500 to replace with digital radios and equivalent facilities.  If that is repeated across 15 million households the cost to the country would be at least £7 billion.  A digital car radio will cost at least £300.  There are 20 million vehicles in the UK so the cost to replace all those radios could be in excess of £6 billion.

The total cost to the economy will be at least £10 billion and probably nearer £15 billion.  And the reason cited is that it will free up more channels.  If this is likely and is needed by the emergency services, then it makes more sense to
  a] reduce the number of broadcasters,
  b] rationalise the frequencies and
  c] dedicate more sections of the bandwidth to emergency services
rather than committing the UK to wasting billions on not-very-good "new" facilities.

There is no need for several hundred [or thousand?] broadcasters of pop music.  This is just an ego-trip for most DJs and wastefully crowds the airwaves with the same or very similar material.

Furthermore, most digital users seem to think their new radios give no better service than FM and the coverage in remote areas of the country is reputedly rubbish!  Just because digital is the in-thing and is new doesn't make it a priori better.

Please reverse the decision.

Ray7033