This letter arrived in the post this morning which I thought I would share with you all. Appologies if you have already seen it.


"The Digital Dividend and availability of channel 69 for wireless microphones
This letter is to make you aware that Ofcom is consulting on important proposals concerning the future availability of channel 69 (854-862 MHz) for wireless microphones.

Throughout our Digital Dividend Review, which has considered how best to release the spectrum freed up by digital switchover (DSO) for new uses, we have noted the importance that wireless-microphone users place on having access to high-quality, UK-wide spectrum. We had therefore envisaged channel 69 remaining available for wireless-microphone use in the future, albeit that access would be granted by a band manager rather than by us or our agents (currently JFMG).

However, an increasing number of other European countries are creating their own digital dividends that include channel 69 as well as two other channels 61 and 62, currently planned for other use by (digital terrestrial television) in the UK after DSO. This is because this spectrum is likely to be particularly suitable for new generations of mobile-broadband services. As a result, we have considered whether we should include these channels in the UK's digital dividend and concluded that there would be very substantial net benefits from making _this change.

If we were to include channel 69 in the digital dividend, we must find other spectrum that is a suitable replacement for wireless microphones. We must also make sure that the change has as little adverse effect on users as possible. This includes ensuring existing licensees do not bear extra costs that must reasonably be incurred to move from channel 69.
We have proposed channel 38 (606-614 MHz) as the best alternative to channel 69 for wireless microphones. Channel 38 is available now across the UK, subject only to restrictions to protect a small number of radio astronomy sites. These restrictions will be removed during 2012.

To facilitate moving wireless microphones from channel 69, we have also proposed that:
• users should have continued UK-wide access to the spectrum being released by DSO until late 2012;
• funding should be available to cover the cost of modifying or replacing existing licensed equipment able to use channel 69 but not channel 38.

Our proposals can be found at http://www.ofcom.orq.uk/consult/condocs/800mhz/800mhz.pdf. We invite responses by 20 April 2009 and expect to announce our decisions shortly after.

You may also wish to note that wireless microphones can and will continue to be able to use channel 70 (863-865 MHz) without the need for a wireless telegraphy licence. Wireless microphones that use channel 69 may well be able to use channel 70 with little or no modification. Your equipment manufacturer may be able to advise you. However, you should also be aware that using spectrum on a licence-exempt basis does not confer the same protection from interference as licensed use.
If you would like to discuss the contents of this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me using the details given above.
Yours sincerely,
John Canavan "


I Hope that several thousand users will write to mr Canavan, I Know I will. For anyone who doesnt know, Ofcom can be found at Riverside House, 2A Southwark Bridge Road, London, SE1 9HA

From this I can assume that the large stock of CH69 Radios I own will become doorstops after 2012...Better try and get them out between now and then!

Neil

That still doesn't really give enough channels of radio pack though.
This effectively forces the industry to digital multiplexed units, which IMO are not the answer. Imagine the following scenario, a singer using handheld radio mic and wireless IEMs (like most solo artists). The desk is a digital desk (like most out on tour with solo artists).

So, we have:
ADC delay and a processing (encoding) delay in the radio mic, then a decoding delay and DAC delay in the receiver. Approx 4ms
ADC, DSP and DAC delay in the desk. Approx 4ms
ADC and encoding delay in the IEM transmitter, then a decoding and DAC delay in the receiver. Approx 4ms.

All of those delays were fairly insignificant alone. However we now have a cumulative delay of 12ms; on IEM this will be noticeable as there will be a direct signal from bone conduction. In studio land there has been a great push to get latencies below 5ms.

So, do we redesign all our new digital desks to have multiple AES/EBU or similar inputs and outputs to lessen this delay? (though it would likely still be in the region of 6-8ms for the multiplex encode/decode)

This ignores the engineering challenges of providing a multiplexed transmission from multiple discrete transmitters, at a cost that the industry can support.

It also means in our current age of recycle and be friendly to the earth that there will be 100s (1000s?) of transmitters that are effectively ready for the bin, as not much of the lower level kit can be tuned down to Ch38.

Not to mention the cost

to me it seems an inevitability. the future of these mics IMO is in digital signals, with digital outputs on the receivers, as Jon says. processing will just have to speed up to negate the delay imposed.

another idea I was thinking of was for the mics to use delta sigma encoding, which works in the MHz range of sampling. latencies using DS are fractional in comparison. I'm just not sure if converting it back to PCM at the receiver would negate these benefits or not.

So, as a school we're *ooked

I bought a Trantec 8 way racked'n'ready just short of two years ago to replace the ageing nearly 10 year old VHF's

I will now have to tell the finance dept that we have to skip them LONG before the end of their service life.... they are used once a year (maybe twice). By 2012 they will have had no more than approx 50 days actual use!!!!!!

OFCOM really do not give the slightest stuff about a large many of the people whom they are supposed to protect the interests of

I honestly believe they ONLY see pound signs, they only care about lining pockets, even if it isn't theirs

EDIT: Forgot to add...

Unless I can get a digital desk in a similar price bracket to current analogue... I dunno, say £500 for a mixer with 8mic ins, then digital is most definately NOT the way forward for a huge number of us!

So in that case, purchase was probably the wrong decision.

How come everyone has conveniently missed the line that says:

that will also come sooner than you think. its just a matter of time before the used market gets flooded with small analogue consoles.

Because nobody has a bloody license.

I agree 134%. If they get used once or at best twice a year then you'd have to be a fool to buy 8 units. 8 units can be hired for £360 per week exc vat, with HH, Lavs, or Headsets.

So let's average 1 and a half weeks per year, £540, would buy what. 1 unit and a spare headset / lavalier mic.

Who made that decision then?


Of course, the trick to the digital thing with lots of latency building up is keeping things in the digital domain. From mic to desk to IEM, even through processing on monitors and FOH, if we keep things in the digital domain for as much of the signal chain as we can then we'll minimise this. We'll probably take any life or warmth out of the sound, but at least it'll be low latency.



There are maybe 2 or 3 occassions per year where I have over 24 wireless units out. Any additioanl ones are sub hired. I don't buy things I don't use enough to make pay, I sub hire them. As a school buying expensive stuff like this that hardly gets used is a waste of money they don't have.

I don't think people have missed that line. The way it seems to be interpreted so far is a) you need to already have a channel 69 licence b) it's expected that depreciation will be applied (so you won't just be given the money to buy a new system) and c) the sum of money that is quoted in the discussion document is considered to be much less than the replacement cost of the actual radio system stock out there.

There's a strong belief that users will be considerably out of pocket.

Simon

The other important thing is:

"Our proposals can be found at http://www.ofcom.orq.uk/consult/condocs/800mhz/800mhz.pdf. We invite responses by 20 April 2009 and expect to announce our decisions shortly after. "

It's a CONSULTATION document.

Everything in it is up for discussion. If you don't like the proposals, e.g. on funding, then say so! Send in a response!

You can respond just on one point you don't have to comment on everything in the document.

But please, if you do respond to the consultation, get your facts straight first.

It certainly is.
However, Ofcom invited responses to the previous consultation. From memory, responses from the PMSE sector called for Channel 69 to be retained as a licenced block of spectrum available across the UK. There was a sense that although not perfect, something of that battle had been won, or at least the PMSE sector had been listened to.

Now the goalposts have been moved by Ofcom - they wish to sell channel 69, are providing potentially less alternative spectrum and are asking if we think it is a good idea? Furthermore, I suspect that I'm not the only one who feels that the questions posed in the consultation document tend to limit or guide the responses that can be made?

I don't think I've got any facts wrong, but I have quoted from some of the trade press responses to the February paper.

The document does state:
and:


Ofcom may well consult, but my mildly cynical mind suggests that certain decisions may have already be made;-)
Furthermore, those who didn't have licences will probably be stuffed. Some chose not to buy a licence - and that's their perogative, but many churches, charities and voluntary organisations simply didn't know they needed one. They bought the device, followed the "autotune" instructions and ended up with a working system that may be useless in three years time.
Simon

I whole heartily agree that the consultation is a "Making people feel better about having change for the worse forced upon them (so offcom can make some more money)" exercise, however I'd argue that those who are currently using radio mikes illegally are if anything in a better position than those with licences: offcom knows where to find those with licences, those with out can continue blithely unaware same as they have until now: it won’t be any less legal. Of course in theory one day someone else will buy that spectrum and they might have inference issues but that we can’t be sure about the outcome of: it could well be that a radio mic 50’ away will over power a mast 50 miles away.

Just for the record, all the people I’ve worked with have had licences for their radio mic’s even the one’s I wouldn’t have expected it from! (not that I’ve done a survey, but I have big flappy ears)

wish I'd not spoken up now

Regarding purchasing radio mics for school, to be brief:

Purchase money comes from a CAPEX budget and/or fundraising.
Hire money would come out of every show's ticket money.
This is one main reason why we stopped hiring, it wiped out a chunk of the ticket money which is needed for things that have to be hired, and consumables.

We talk inc. VAT prices so based on £400 per week hire, then add on transport (delivery) costs etc etc then after around 5-6 years we've almost broken even, if indeed we only used them for 1 week a year.
It is rather convenient to be able to drag the system out at a moments notice, not having to worry about booking a hire slot, then having to sort out returns... (I don't do this full time in the school, I have a zillion other jobs - in the school - too )
It does mean we can use them more as need arises, we also sometimes have loaned them out to other schools as a freebie.
They don't get abused so will last a long time, with only the occasional broken clip.

Commercially, I agree completely it doesn't make sense, but it works for us!

I was maybe a little general in my first post

I would delivery and collect for that price as I'm only an hour away but I understand where you're coming from. I'm realising now the units may have been cheaper than I thought too.

So basically, OFCOM are making people cease purchase of any current popular systems, as now we know, they know we know and it's up to us to pay for the modifications. Anybody without proof of purchase and/or a current licence is stuffed. Ok - that's me sorted then - I'm happy. I just will limp through until Sennheiser make a G3 that has wider bandwidth.

As for those without licences, hard luck. No sympathy there at all. If people don't read the instructions or are simply too unaware, it's their lookout. It's been talked about in the press and on-line for those interested enough. Trouble is, in many parts of the country, they may still be able to use the kit in ignorance, until the interference starts.

That assumes legality, Paul.

My prediction is a period of total chaos and recriminations as thousands (or tens of thousands) of schools, churches, pubs and even political parties who never knew they needed a license and who have no idea what's going on continue to try and use what ever "auto seek" frequency they're on--suffering interference but, at the same time, causing interference to whatever mobile comms company paid good money for the bandwidth.

It's almost worth coming back to the UK after 2012 with a spectrum analyser and a big bag of popcorn to watch with.

Bob

...I see a gap in the market for being subcontracted by ofcom as "airspace police"

It's not less spectrum in itself (I.e. the 8MHz block) but what occupies the adjacent spectrum isn't fixed. Ofcom offer the possibility of interleaved spectrum in 39 & 40 and potential availability in 31-37. That would certainly be good, but it's not set in stone. Their proposals in February 2008 stated that there would be no PMSE use in 31-37, 39-40 and 63-68. and Given that the overall guiding factor is to raise money, we still face the possibility that better funded interests may win.

It doesn't seem clear if in moving 69 to 38 it's intended to be shared or co-ordinated spectrum, but if it's the latter, then the present functionality of 69 may be lost.

In all of this, there is the possibility that contiguous spectrum may be made available - on both a dedicated and interleaved basis. Even if this does happen, it's unlikely that the present cost model will continue - the 09 document mentions something like a 60 fold increase in licence fee to maintain parity with others paying for spectrum.

Simon

Quite true....'opportunity cost' does certainly seem, to be one of Ofcom's favourite phrases.

Of course Ch 69 is rather unusual in currently being available as both co-ordinated and shared spectrum.

Channel 38 is currently only available as co-ordinated spectrum and with a lot of geographical restrictions, especially if you need it outdoors.

I agree with you Paul re people who don't license their equipment. I meet people every week who seem amazed when I explain the licensing proceedure to them, as they have not been made aware of their responsibilities by the providers of their equipment. I must however disagree with your first statement. I have both proof of purchase and an up to date licence for all my radios, but Ofcomm will not give me any financial assistance towards the cost of modifying them to receive CH38, and I bet Sony wont be interested. I imagine most manufacturers will prefer to sell us new digital equipment than upgrade older units, so as I said...expensive doorstops!

Perhaps if licensing was more compulsary ( like TV licensing ) then Ofcomm would have a better picture of how many users their really are and then perhaps we might have some clout

I quite agree, I think the large majority of wireless users have no idea they need a license now or that things are changing.
They have for example the Senn G1/G2 series and can select where they want in ch69/70 (and do) until they find a clear channel.
They will carry on doing so until the purchaser of Ch69 emits a strong signal and it wipes them out. It depends who buys Ch69 and what it is used for in your area. You still might be able to find a quiet channel or 2.
Can you see a mobile company trying to track down an interfering wireless mic that is only in use for 2 hours, affects a very small area, then appears in a different location the following week.
How would wireless mic transmission manifest itself on mobile broad band?, possibly slower transfer rates which could be attributed to lots of things.

I think they will just have to cease the sale of mics that cover CH69 and wait for them to reach their end of life, maybe 15 years!! and put up with the minor interference in the meantime.

I just love the joined up thinking of the goverment!!

Have I misread the letter?

I read it as if you have kit that can function on 69, but not on 38, then they WILL fund the retune - have I got this wrong? The letter says

So my systems on the current licenced band don't go down far enough to use 38 - so this is funded?

More confused now.

No, you have read it correctly.

...and if you can find a radio mic that will work (without a re-build) on both TV channels 38 and 69 then I would love to hear about it!

I'm rather hoping we just send Mr Sennheiser or Mr Shure a big package and convert them all to the new band, forgetting the high band forever?

They only fund the mods or new eqpt based on a life cycle of 10 years and its pro rata, see post 11 above

Direct quote from the Ofcom PDF below

5.69 At this initial stage, we believe the level of such financial assistance to which PMSE
users may be entitled should be based on the lower cost of either modifying
equipment or replacing it, the latter based on the residual equivalent value of existing
equipment and not the cost of buying new equipment. This avoids the situation where
public money is used to buy new equipment that would have replaced old equipment
with little remaining usable life anyway

 we would only consider assistance for equipment purchased before publication of
this consultation document (I.e. 2 February 2009);
 claimants would need to hold a licence to use channel 69 valid before publication
of this document;
 the equipment would need to be capable of tuning to channel 69 but not channel
38; and
 the full lifecycle of equipment from the date of its original purchase is 10 years

Why am I suddenly glad that I got my shared licence in January this year and all the mics that it covers have been purchased in the last couple of years.

It's a bit sh** for the hundreds if not thousands of people that successfully use the unlicensed band and obviously don't need a licence (mainly schools and churches).

My personal view for anyone in this situation is just continue to use them until they stop (either through fault or too much interference) and I don't think I'm the only one with that opinion.

Depends on how they determine the compensation... It could be 100% in the first year, but tapering rapidly to some pittance! The underlying sense is that you may get back what you already have (I.e what they think the residual value of your radio kit is) but you are not going to get new replacement kit.

But just to clarify... channel 70 wireless is still going to be fine after 2012... Pretty much all the ch69 devices should be able to work there shouldn't they? So we're still okay if we work in a nice big rural area and use under 4 channels of wireless!

M

Probably! However, I know of quite a few users who have 4 radios "working" in channel 70. However, they don't allways play together too well, despite what their manufacturer might say, so the user has 'strayed' into some convenient adjacent spectrum.

Channel 70 may well become a lot more congested if the wider "non professional" radio mic community finds that it cannot use spectrum outside of 863-865MHz.

Simon

....and at the risk of sounding like a broken record....

If you think that any of the criteria for deciding who gets funding and who doesn't are wrong, then send in a response to the consultation saying how and why they are wrong. None of this is set in stone yet, these are proposals.

You don't have to write a whole novel or even an essay. If you only want to comment on one aspect then maybe one paragraph is all that is needed.

If you are a member of any trade organisation or union then let them know your thoughts on this matter, they may well already have people working on a response so make sure that your views are represented.

And yes, at least one response will contain input from me...

No ,only if they transmit on CH70 aswell as CH 69. CH69 only kit like the Sony Freedom range will not tune up to ch 70 without modification which may not be possable despite what Ofcomm says. Check the range of your kit for more info.

Does this mean that AM-Dram's and School shows will stop bringing 40 rad mic's to plug into a 32 channel desk?!

Does this really mean I'll have to stop p*ssing about re-tuning all the extra rad's they bring in because they have about 10 receivers all set to the same frequency?!

Does this actually mean that people will have to learn to PROJECT, rather than blithely mis-casting shows with performers who are simply not up to the job?!

Does this mean I can start a nifty sideline in selling all those old "SM58 necklaces" to allow a performer to use a cable mic hands-free?!!

No,No,No,No

HTH

Oh bugger..!

BECTU have just opened a forum on their website to discuss Channel 69

It's at http://www.bectu.org.uk/get-involved/forum

This might _actually_ be the least worst option:

* After 2012, ch.69 will not be contiguous with any other usable spectrum, whereas 39/40 will be usable interleaved spectrum.
* Having a decent (planned) mobile broadband system reduces the commercial case for cognitive/whitespace devices (and the big players who've just paid for access to it won't want other people developing competing devices that use "free" spectrum).
* Ofcom have at least acknowledged the principle that they need to meet the cost of the retuning.

However, their claim that ch.38 is already available doesn't really stand up to much scrutiny - especially if you live within 90-odd miles
of Jodrell Bank (or any other radio telescope, for that matter). The February cut-off date for kit that qualifies for retuning assistance money effectively puts a 3-year moratorium on buying new radio mics.

Furthermore, that their compensation proposals fall well short of what it'll actually cost the industry. Many organisations still derive significant income from kit that is over ten years old (having spent large sums keeping it well-maintained), and they do not propose to meet the other business costs that go with retuning this quantity of kit (logistical costs, having kit out of operation during re-tuning).

They also mention, then fail expand on, the cost of vacating 61/2.

Perhaps most critically, their claim (perhaps "aspiration" is more appropriate) that adequate interleaved spectrum will be available post-DSO is shaky at best – personally, I find BEIRG's analysis* far more convincing, and comfortable reading it aint…

For those of you who've yet to join BEIRG, now would be a very good time. They've lobbied effectively so far, but they need to keep going, and this costs money. I worry that a bad deal on spectrum, and/or a massive inflation in the cost of owning or renting radio mics means that the UK Touring Musical circuit will die out, probably having a disastrous effect on the West End. If this were to happen, a significant proportion of us, perhaps a majority, will lose our jobs.

Thoughts?


Cheers,
Theo.

* http://www.beirg.org.uk/BEIRG%20response%2...gust%202008.pdf

It's a very busy forum !
/sarcastic mode

Same here, I'm a student studying performance and have taken it upon myself to set up an organisation (www.spectrumforthestage.com) try and tackle this situation, in the same line as BEIRG I suppose except I am working on this almost full time and trying to drum up public attention and support on the issue.
I have a petition on 10 Downing Street (http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/spectrum69/) and a facebook group (http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=42929622625)

Anyway this was actually a hot topic a few years ago but has taken a back seat recently for many people and organisations, but I am working on getting newspapers and magazines to take this up as a story again. So many people still have no idea that this is going on, at least this is what I have found having spoken to a number of places of education and theatre's/opera houses.

Everyone replying to the condoc?!

Yes, I will be replying to the condoc. Not quite sure what I make of this, as in my venue we have six units, two of which need replacing - so for us there is a significant cost, but it will be small-fry compared with many pro venues and hire companies out there.

If radio mics have to be used less then perhaps we need to think about new production methods and values?

Further, what worries me is how little I'm hearing from the manufacturers about new technologies that might help us get around the potential issues. Are the manufacturers holding back because nothing has been made certain yet? Or am I just misinformed through not having my ear to the ground?

As an aside, I'm not sure I'm looking forward to so many of us being beta-testers for whatever new technologies emerge - at least for most new and emerging technologies in the last few years (digital mixing, and the like) there have been workable older technology solutions to work from. In this situation it looks as if we're initially being sold less overall functionality with little or no overlap time to use alternative solutions until the newer kit and methods mature to an acceptable standard.

Or am I just being paranoid?

Either way - bring on the challange!

Assuming that the digital switchover is only affecting 470MHz - 865MHz am I right in thinking that VHF equipment will be fine to use after this switchover?

I can quite happily get 8 VHF mic's working together within the licence free/VHF spectrum and have never had any problems with interference.

Almost but not quite.

The digital switchover is only affecting 470MHz - 862MHz. VHF is not currently affected by this particular issue, although changes to DAB use of Band III may be of concern.

I am intrigued by your claim that you can "happily get 8 VHF mic's working together within the licence free/VHF spectrum", the only licence exempt VHF spectrum (in the UK) being from 173.7MHz - 175.1MHz which is normally only big enough for about three radio mics. JFMG - Licence Exempt
Other VHF frequencies are not licence exempt.

On this whole topic, I was wondering if anyone has found out if their radio mics (typically channels 67-69) could be modified or retuned to cover channel 38? My instinctive feeling is that this is not practical, but it would be good to have it straight from the manufacturers.

If I don't have any responses by tomorrow morning, I'll drop Shure and Sennheiser an email.

Sorry, I meant licence exempt and shared VHF spectrum.

WRT sennheiser stuff, there have been rumblings that all G2 stuff will be modifiable by senn to work on the new frequencies for a cost of £200 a unit. Also they have promised to rechip the 3000 series, although probs not for free. See both earlier in this thread for the press release, and in the recent thread 'how do I persuade the client that he wants 3000 series instead of evo stuff'. I can't comment on Shure.

I found the latter thread, but there was nothing concrete in it, and I couldn't find the press release you mentioned - can you point me in the right direction?

Thanks,

Dave

EDIT: See this post for info obtained from Sennheiser. £200+VAT for band conversion on Evo 300 G2. Sounds like it involves a board swap. However, none of their current models operate on ch 38 so it's not yet possible!

I for one think its hilarious that ofcom think that the best time for an entire industry to be beta testing new technology and the implications of new frequancy allocation is at the 2012 Olympics in london with the entire world watching

I believe that they have made the current spectrum available until after the Olympics.

Josh

The US is currently going through the whole digital TV switchover experience as well.
There are repercussions for radiomic users there also but the FCC seems to have a more open-minded (and less money-grabbing)approach than OFCOM. However - like our Ch69 issue - it does mean the loss of their current bit of spectrum.

It's interesting to see how radiomic manufacturers there are dealing with the retuning issue and could give an indication of how it will be handled in the UK/EU - though we are a smaller market.
There have been several acticles in the US Live Sound International mag over the past few months. You need to sign up to read them but there are some links to these (for free) from the ProSoundWeb site. (Go to the front page - not the forums)

On the plus side..... at least we have a bit of license-free spectrum in Ch70 - something I don't think they have ever had (officially) over there.

K

Ofcom Confirms Clearance of 800MHz Spectrum for Mobile Broadband

FromISP Review

Ofcom has today confirmed plans to clear the 800MHz band (790-862MHz) of radio spectrum, which is currently being used for the old analogue television (TV) services. The move opens the way for next generation Mobile Broadband services to utilise the frequency, thus delivering faster and cheaper wireless Internet access over an even wider coverage.

This is all part of the regulators 'Digital Dividend', which has seen a re-organisation of various spectrum bands to be more in line with modern uses and demands. Much of this frequency has been freed because newer digital services take up less room in the airwaves than analogue, leaving space for other uses.



It's anticipated that mobile operators, such as Three (3) UK, will now be able to bid for space on the 800MHz band. This could allow them to deploy both enhanced forms of existing Mobile Broadband services and possibly also future Long Term Evolution (LTE / 4G) technology.