Has any manufacturer designed a dashcam that will not affect UK DAB yet?

mikeyranson

New Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
18
Reaction score
7
Country
United Kingdom
I have a range rover sport where the first four years of ownership i have experimented with several cameras and one DIY project but all have failed using a rear camera. I have spent a fortune and the last four years, i have not bothered, just gave up. I didnt do any short cuts, branded equipment and materials all the way through, yet the rear camera has always been a problem. My DIY project was a 4ch DVR with intentions of using four cameras in total including side views on the wing mirrors facing away but with the rear camera interferring, which for me was the second crucial camera after the front.
I still read that many are still having this issue in the UK, so after all these years, i'd like to think someone has designed a camera that works in any car. Obviously shielding and radio antennas are the problems for rear mounted. I'd like to purchase the 2ch blackvue next but again, will it or wont it work?
Anyone know of any such camera yet?
 
All digital cameras create a bit of interference, so if you are in a weak signal area then you are probably out of luck.
The latest generation of dashcams does seem significantly better than earlier generations, and I think works OK in most places, but there will still be some noise.

Probably your best bet, and also the cheapest, is to fit a good quality roof mounted DAB radio antenna, something the vehicle manufacturers never seem to do! Then all your problems will disappear since the antenna can't receive the interference through the metal of the roof... unless you have a large glass sunroof...

The quality of the DAB receiver can also make a difference.
 
Thanks nigel. I would like to trhink that land rover use only branded and not cheap. They do a all surrond camera system as an option and it would have been perfect if they had incorporated a DVR to plug into their camera systems. Even today, are there any car manufacturers factory build dash cams into the vehicles?
 
Even today, are there any car manufacturers factory build dash cams into the vehicles?
Tesla, and BMW has an option, but they are not very good.

Land Rover will fit the cheapest antenna they can while still producing a reasonable quality while nothing extra is plugged into the car. With DAB, being digital, it tends to either be perfect or useless, and it doesn't take much interference to go from one to the other! There are some very good DAB antennas available at reasonable cost. The other issue is that the manufacturers don't like roof mounted antennas because they add a tiny amount of extra aerodynamic drag and thus affect their emissions regulations figures, so they always go for window mounted antennas, and they are highly susceptible to interference from dashcams.
 
One of the most effective solutions seems to be using ferrite chokes snapped on the cable near the cam. Sometimes one at the other end, and sometimes two by the cam will help. Cable re-routing sometimes helps. There's no guaranteed solution, but if all this along with a top-grade rooftop antenna don't solve it, then it's likely that nothing will work.

Occasionally a different cam has helped someone, but there's no specific one which does that- it varies by car. I'm sure a cam could be made to give the least chance of interference, but to make such would require someone with lots of RF engineering experience and the requisite lab equipment, and that is way beyond something most people would pay for as a dashcam. Plus their resulting 'solution' would likely not work with other cars beyond the specific ones they've tested with :( It's really not a situation which will improve until car manufacturers design in dashcams at their engineering level and offer them at their sales point.

As much as we like our little video recorders, the truth is that they are cheap consumer-grade devices built to a price-point, and because of that you cannot get the best of anything with them. All we can do is suggest things which might (or might not) help you based on experiences people have shared with us here. Sometimes nothing workable can be found and you're left with choosing between DAB radio or dashcam and not both :cry: If you haven't seen them, here's some threads about EMI/RFI/DAB issues:

https://dashcamtalk.com/forum/threads/question-for-you-electronic-gurus-whoever-you-may-be.11857/
https://dashcamtalk.com/forum/threads/fm-interference.11958/
https://dashcamtalk.com/forum/threads/radio-interference-from-camera-mounted-in-rear-window.20620/
https://dashcamtalk.com/forum/threads/dashcam-kills-dab-radio-reception.26456/

Ignore the titles, all the info will apply as this is all essentially EMI and will apply similarly. Good luck with finding a solution you can live with (y)

Phil
 
If you have a chance (local store seller with return policy) try a Garmin cam.
 
And just 500 Euros :eek::ROFLMAO:
No mention of processor chipset or sensors used or details of cabling. I am not sure that those would matter as i have found no connection between them and DAB comparability, but having that information would add to the overall knowledge which perhaps could bring us one step closer to the solution.

Phil
 
One of the most effective solutions seems to be using ferrite chokes snapped on the cable near the cam. Sometimes one at the other end, and sometimes two by the cam will help. Cable re-routing sometimes helps. There's no guaranteed solution, but if all this along with a top-grade rooftop antenna don't solve it, then it's likely that nothing will work.
Yes, agree, try ferrite rings, You can get a bag of assorted rings from Amazon, however, they may or may not work.

I have a 2004 MY Land Rover Discovery 2. When I placed a RoadHawk HD dashcam in the rear window it affected certain FM radio stations, the FM aerials are in both of the rear side panes of glass and thus the rear dashcam was very close to the aerials.

Snap-on ferrite rings on the dashcam power lead didn't work for me but they may work for you.

In the end, I decided to run the rear dashcam and either put up with the interference or just not have the radio on, as a rear dashcam is more important to me. Although saying that, my RoadHawk has recently died so I will have to replace it with another - probably a second Viofo A119 V3.

Regards,
 
And just 500 Euros :eek:

And with a AVI container :eek:

I am glad i dont do any form of radio, not even after radio stations actually worth a listen have popped up.
My FM antenna are always off the roof as i cant bother with now that i wash my car so often, and DAB / satellite are way too new things for me to even bother about.
So i stick to a memory card with music ripped off my collection of CDs.
 
I won't venture an opinion on when, but terrestrial radio broadcasting is dying so this problem won't exist one day. Then we will be hearing about satellite radio interference issues here instead :rolleyes: That's a very sad thing for me, as I've always loved radio in every form from SW to local, and TBH I'm not interested in being forced to accept one form of service over the others such as has happened with DAB, which is going to come to the US here as well :cry:

Phil
 
The Mobius camera was first introduced as a FPV camera for radio controlled air craft and drones. One problem people sometimes encountered was that the camera could introduce RFI that interfered with the radio controls, the video broadcast signals and the GPS and some found that with RFI/EMI shielding foil tape or RF/EMI shielding paint applied to the inside of the camera housings the problems disappeared or at least were ameliorated.

It's not cheap and it can sometimes be difficult to find these materials in smaller quantities but conceivably this could be a solution to this problem. Sometimes sample quantities can be requested or ordered.

https://slt.co/

https://www.emrss.com/collections/emf-shielding-paint

https://www.emrss.com/collections/e...ts/hf-lf-shielding-paint-sample-set-4-x-100ml
 
Last edited:
Copper shielding tape strategically applied to the interior of a Mobius 1 action camera housing along with fine mesh shielding applied to various components on the pcb such as the DSP, the microSD card slot and the receptacle clamp for the lens module ribbon cable.

mobius_shielding.jpeg
 
Last edited:
I won't venture an opinion on when, but terrestrial radio broadcasting is dying so this problem won't exist one day.

Phil
I suspect radio will be around a long time. It may have a reduced number of stations compared to todays offerings but I believe it will continue. Talk radio will probably always exist locally. If the new music does not improve music radio could kill itself.
 
I suspect radio will be around a long time. It may have a reduced number of stations compared to todays offerings but I believe it will continue. Talk radio will probably always exist locally. If the new music does not improve music radio could kill itself.
The content of today's radio will always exist in some form or other, but actual radio broadcasts on AM, FM, DAB, DTTV, satellite TV/Radio, are no longer a good solution for distribution of that content. Nearly all of us have good connection to the internet, which means we have access to perfect quality streamed radio stations and podcasts via the internet, and I think it is fair to say that I now have a more reliable connection to radio via the internet than via broadcast in nearly all situations. Also, internet access is one of the basics of the country's infrastructure, along with water, electricity, physical mail, access to road transport, everybody should have access, while the radio broadcast system has only ever targeted a large percentage of the population. There have always been many places where FM radio and TV reception was difficult/impossible and many more places with a very limited number of channels, DAB is significantly better but still many places without it, UK only has one radio station that can be received anywhere in the UK and that is on LW so not great quality. With internet radio accessible by everyone, radio broadcasts, terrestrial or satellite are redundant.

Most of the radio I now listen to is via the internet, sometimes for live stuff I stream it via internet, sometimes I listen to it live on DTTV because it is a couple of mouse clicks less to access it, but normally, apart from news broadcasts, I listen to radio program podcasts, accessed via computer if in my living room or via phone (wifi/mobile internet) everywhere else, including when in the car or walking. Podcasts have the big advantage of not fading out when you go through a poor reception area, and you can queue/download them so that you don't run out if spending a long time in a zero reception area. The only exception is my alarm clock radio which is DAB and I often listen to the news on, but I only use that because I already have it, in reality it is my phone that I use as my main alarm clock, and that has perfectly good internet radio that could be used.

The only good argument for not turning off all radio/TV broadcasts sometime in the next two decades is that even with government commitments to internet and mobile phone access for everyone, some people still can't access the internet, but the Starlink satellite network is going to take care of that. Hopefully it will not stay as a monopoly for long and won't fall under Trump control, but I suspect that like the GPS system it may be a few decades and need government intervention from Russian/European/Chinese governments on security/military and public infrastructure grounds before a Galileo type competitor emerges and we have good cheap reliable internet access everywhere above ground level. These will probably get military funding since with the increase in space weapons (escalated by Trump's Space Force), normal military communication satellites are at risk, while shooting down the highly redundant system of 40,000 tiny Starlink satellites to prevent military communication is going to be a much bigger challenge and MAD on the basis of space debris!
 
Broadcast radio in the US has always had good station availability in all but the most remote areas (or in valleys for FM) for home listening, although that sometimes required that you tap into your TV antenna for good FM reception. Internet has pretty much taken over that area, but radio reception is free while an internet connection isn't, so there is still a place for in-home radio. It's just tiny now. And with the advent of CD's, issues of music fidelity waned since most of those listeners went to user-provided digital listening everywhere, which reduced those complaints greatly. The issue of poor reception in cars has always been a problem except in larger cities. Oddly enough, reception in the largest cities is also a problem due to interference from having too many stations in place. Since radio is a commercially-driven business here, there was not much push to cover smaller markets, so the FCC (government) adopted rules and requirements causing those lesser areas to be covered as a part of allowing a company to have a part of the larger markets. It has generally worked well here, and proposed plans to change things have been dropped. So for the foreseeable future US radio is intact.

Portable and mobile reception has inherent issues which cannot be completely solved. Those desiring musical fidelity can provide their own and most do; only a small segment of the market listens to AM/FM in their cars for music anymore. Sports and talk radio dominate the terrestrial mobile radio market now, especially on the AM band because of it's low-fi restrictions. XM/Sirrius satellite radio (a pay-as-you-go subscription service) has eliminated most of the issues regards mobile reception here, and you have dozens of station choices everywhere with it. So our problems here is almost all in portable radio reception, where again self-provided digital media has addressed music fidelity issues well enough, and presonal radio via wifi or cellphone internet has covered the rest. Only a handful of folks use portable radio anymore here. Much of that is now an 'ethnic' market, aimed for non-English speakers and immigrants. But wherever you go, you can still receive several stations so you can usually find something to listen to which you like (except for non-ethnic music on AM). Most people were and still are unaware the the US once had hi-fi AM stereo broadcasting; the high cost of the special receivers needed put the nails in it's coffin but a few stations still broadcast in that format. You can receive those with a standard AM radio set, but not with the enhanced fidelity. We would lose what we've got here, but for the fact that even a complete recovery of the AM/FM radio spectrum would not result in a 'sellable' product like going to digital TV did. But RF spectrum is limited by nature- we cannot add to it- so at some point in time it will become 'sellable' and we will then lose it to other services.

The main problems with mobile DAB are two-fold; it has to allow for multiple synchronized transmitters in different locations to compensate for it's power restrictions, and it's place in the radio spectrum is such that there can be no long-range or robust signal transmission. It is also limited in it's 'self-correction' capabilities by the receiver's limitations on which codecs can be used. You can only update it to a point, which beyond that old receivers will no longer work. It's at it's limits now in this. A related but not inherent issue is in government regulation; each transmitter has a cap on the data bandwith it is allowed to send which has to be shared across all of the 'channels' on it's assigned frequency. The norm is to have one or two 'hi-fi' channels with the rest having lower fidelity. Your receiver can't give you sound quality it's not receiving, and by it's nature digital 'lo-fi' will have worse error-correction since there is less data to compare to. And in traveling, when your receiver switches to a different synchronized transmitter, the bitrate being sent can change so your fidelity goes with it. It was quite advanced at it's inception but it's inherent limitations preclude improving it any further unless you reduce the number of 'channels' each transmitter has. It too will be going away someday as satellite broadcasting takes over.

TL;DR
Given the limited radio spectrum we have, the more we use of it the more interference issues we will have. The more data we send on any given portion if it, the more interference problems we will have in both transmission and reception. All electrics and electronics generate RFI/EMI, and shielding can only somewhat limit that, so the more computerized devices we have in and around our cars, the less capable the radios in them will be in receiving a hi-fidelity signal. We are going to have to either accept the problems we create for ourselves in our digital advancements, or reduce our usage of all things computerized, especially those intentionally broadcasting such as wifi (which isn't going to happen). Satellite radio will take over for at least with it you can attenuate much of the digital interference by antenna aim, signal polarization, and directional-specific shielding which can all be very effective. Until we reach that point globally we will have cam interference issues sometimes, and their instances will be increasing.

Phil
 
I always listened to the radio while driving. I seldom listen to radio at home even through the internet options. I gathered up my own music that I liked that is on a thumb drive in my cars aftermarket radio. I did not leave radio, radio mostly left me. When the stations stopped playing what I wanted to hear I had to find my own sources of music.

Many people refuse to pay $10 a month for car satellite radio. Internet radio does not work at 70mph on the interstate. regular radio fits that nitch perfectly as long as it provides content people want to hear.
 
Last edited:
...$10 a month for car satellite radio.
With some 'hard ball' negotiations it can be had for about half of that.


Package/Plan
Subscription Term
Charges
XM Select (1 Year - Promo)
06/07/2020 - 06/07/2021​
$60.00​
SiriusXM Video (1 Year)
06/07/2020 - 06/07/2021​
$0.00​
U.S. Music Royalty Fee
$12.84​
Subscription Credit
($0.40)​
Total Charges
$72.44​
 
Internet has pretty much taken over that area, but radio reception is free while an internet connection isn't, so there is still a place for in-home radio.
Free radio but not free internet is a government decision. Since internet is now a basic requirement to live in our societies and broadcast radio/TV is not, it would make sense to move the money used for providing free broadcast for everyone into providing free internet for everyone. Without the government funding the broadcast transmitters would probably go out of business pretty fast!

The main problems with mobile DAB are two-fold; it has to allow for multiple synchronized transmitters in different locations to compensate for it's power restrictions, and it's place in the radio spectrum is such that there can be no long-range or robust signal transmission.
That is the way it was designed, so that cities can have their own channels without interfering with the transmissions of those of a few cities distance. Maybe the problem for the USA is that it was designed for the distances between UK cities, not USA ones! In the UK, it is impossible to get better quality from FM stereo than from DAB, because the content arrives at the FM transmitter in DAB format, for best quality you are better off converting to analogue at home. The big advantages of DAB is that it carries far more channels than FM ever can, and due to the lower power, my DAB reception is never corrupted by French or Irish radio transmissions like the FM is in certain weather conditions.

Internet radio does not work at 70mph on the interstate.
It does if you listen to it in the form of podcasts.
 
In the US, in-band interference from neighboring transmitters is handled by regulating power, regulating the signal pattern, and frequency distancing on the dial. It works well except in the largest metro areas where too many people want to transmit. There's big money in advertising revenue in those areas and good profits for popular stations. And in those places you will have at least two dozen station choices. Even in remote areas, there are usually several stations within reception range ;)

Unlike the UK, the Government here doesn't subsidize, fund, or create programming for radio broadcasting. Station costs are all paid privately and the only 'cut' the Government makes is in licensing fees. Over here, if you want to buy a station and play whatever music or programming you like on it, you can. And one such local guy does just that: WPCI wikipedia article :cool: Moreover, that station is one of the few reputed to still be broadcasting in AM Stereo (though one info source tells me that has ceased). You can also set up and operate "Low Power" stations here with few restrictions involved. While many Nations governments restrict or control radio broadcasting (sometimes completely), radio in the US has always been the 'free-est' in the world :love:

But as technology marches on, this too will change, and with "Starlink" internet going ahead at full steam, the time will come when free internet radio (and possibly TV too) fully dominates broadcasting to such a degree that there will be nothing else offered or available anywhere.

Phil
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
I What Should I Buy? 3
Back
Top