Time to reconsider AM stereo?

[HowardMBurgers]

 But the truth is, you have missed the real point and just like bad marksmen, you keep missing the target.

The FCC had at least 4 chances to get AM Stereo on the air in bulk. 1960, 1980, 1982, 1993, etc. The politics got in the way each and every time.

So unless we agree with you we're missing the target?  Uh.. I don't think so.  When it comes to AM stereo, you're shooting with a cap gun; a little noise and no impact.

AM stereo was dead and buried in 1993.  Game over..

Kahn should have been authorized from the get go. Was Leonard difficult to work with? Was his system not quite adequate for the task? I have heard these things and then some.

You heard correctly- and then some.  Now add in all the frivolous law suits and you're even closer to the mark.

AM can and is still valuable, I listen to 970 from Tampa every day from my home in Sa-ra-so-ta!

Only for people 50 and older.  Don't believe me?  Go ask someone in their 20's about when the last time was that they listened to an AM broadcast.  My guess is you'll get a blank stare.

Just because you're a radio hobbyest who happens to remember AM stereo, doesn't mean there is a bright future for the AM band.  Sorry, that's just the truth.

[Peter Q. George (K1XRB)]

The Kahn system, the very first AM stereo system worked quite well.  But, at the time it was in the developmental stages, FM was still the "little red-haired step-child" of broadcasting.  In order to give FM a little more of a push, the Zenith FM Stereo (the same system we use today both here and around the world) was approved in 1961.  But even then, FM didn't really grow all that much until the 50/50 simulcast rule was put in effect in 1965-66.  AM Stereo was put on the back-burner in order to give FM a "fighting chance".  FM grew by leaps and bounds until around 1975 when FM listening accounted for at least 50% of total listenership.  The young people were getting FM and FM Stereo receivers in droves.

Around that time (1975), the AM tuner sections of those receivers were becoming mere "afterthoughts" of the circuit.  By the time the FCC got around to dealing with AM Stereo, the damage had already been done.  Lenny Kahn's heart was in the right place, but several other applicants vying for the AM Stereo approval had deeper pockets and continuous research to improve THEIR systems.  I supported Kahn in the beginning.  But as time went on, I saw that Kahn's litigations only delayed the inevitable ruling.  Someone other than Kahn's would be "the standard".  The FCC approved the Magnavox system.  But faster than you could say "Jack Robinson", the Commission rescinded that ruling and decided "HEY, let's let the marketplace decide!".  They basically wiped their hands clean on the matter. Had Kahn accepted "the inevitable" sooner and not dragged the AM Stereo issue into court after court after court, he would have been able to keep the legacy as "the father of AM Stereo radio".  Yes, the Motorola C-QUAM system did have the "platform motion" issue.  But as time went on, both the exciters and the receivers improved tremendously.  It sounds really great, even on skywave.   I was happy to put a C-QUAM exciter on the air at WJIB 15 years ago.  It sounded great.  Many listeners, and yes we had quite a few, had AM Stereo radios.  And even those who had (mono) broadband GE Superradios (both II and III) saw the improvement on the high-end after the C-QUAM was installed.  It really stood out.

But, the breakdown of the "clears", mandatory NRSC filters (10 kHz), more former daytimers going full-time, Clear Channel's stupid directive that all of their AM's bandwidth would be limited to 5,000 Hz (thanks Randy) and finally IBOC pretty much is sealing AM's fate to the dustbin of broadcasting history.  It's a shame too. AM can do so much better than it is now.   And this is progress?

Over and out,
-Pete   

[DavidEduardo]

In order to give FM a little more of a push, the Zenith FM Stereo (the same system we use today both here and around the world) was approved in 1961.  But even then, FM didn't really grow all that much until the 50/50 simulcast rule was put in effect in 1965-66.

FM stereo progressed at an average rate of less than 1 new station per week for two years.

The "Drop Dead" date on simulcasting was in 1967; most stations held off until then... and it affected major markets most severely. What we got was a ton of new FM insturmental stations and a bunch of progressive / free form rock stations.

 

FM grew by leaps and bounds until around 1975 when FM listening accounted for at least 50% of total listenership.

In fact, it was between late '77 and '78 that national tabulations showed FM at parity. However, there were markets that reached parity and dominance well before, like Miami with stations like WMYQ and then Y-100 moving youth and the famous WLYF and WYOR beautiful music battle.  And there were markets that did not change until later... one top 15 market had a 14 share for all FM in 1978; some format changes converted this to over 55% FM by mid-1979.

The young people were getting FM and FM Stereo receivers in droves.

By the mid-70's, the most successful FMs were the 35+ targeted Bea<utiful Music stations... Shulke, Bonneville, FM 100 and all the rest of the syndicators had well over 1000 of these going and getting huge ratings. The first WJIB with Pete Taylor at the helm is one you might recognize! 

But, the breakdown of the "clears", mandatory NRSC filters (10 kHz), more former daytimers going full-time, Clear Channel's stupid directive that all of their AM's bandwidth would be limited to 5,000 Hz (thanks Randy) and finally IBOC pretty much is sealing AM's fate to the dustbin of broadcasting history.  It's a shame too. AM can do so much better than it is now.   And this is progress?

Add in all the extra stations and "portable transmitters" that Docket 80-90 created... even on AM. The real culprit, as you mentioned in a part I edited out, has been receiver design decline. Randy's dictate was in response to testing how AM's sounded best on a variety of K-Mart and WalMart radios...

[badjef]

 But the truth is, you have missed the real point and just like bad marksmen, you keep missing the target.

The FCC had at least 4 chances to get AM Stereo on the air in bulk. 1960, 1980, 1982, 1993, etc. The politics got in the way each and every time.

So unless we agree with you we're missing the target?  Uh.. I don't think so.  When it comes to AM stereo, you're shooting with a cap gun; a little noise and no impact.

AM stereo was dead and buried in 1993.  Game over..

By "missing the target" I meant, the thread started with the death of iBOC and taking all that aging AM Stereo equipment and trying again. This time going with a system that works. I may be reading into his post somewhat, but I will take that chance.
C-crap was psuedo. Go under a bridge and you lost the stereo. Kahn never did that. It held tight.

Kahn should have been authorized from the get go. Was Leonard difficult to work with? Was his system not quite adequate for the task? I have heard these things and then some.

You heard correctly- and then some.  Now add in all the frivolous law suits and you're even closer to the mark.

Do you blame him when there were individuals at Motorola and FCC that were preventing his system from the very marketplace in which the decision was being made in the first place? What were "P" and "D" afraid of anyway?

AM can and is still valuable, I listen to 970 from Tampa every day from my home in Sa-ra-so-ta!

Only for people 50 and older.  Don't believe me?  Go ask someone in their 20's about when the last time was that they listened to an AM broadcast.  My guess is you'll get a blank stare.

You are correct. When was the last time an AM station was targeting 18-24 or similar. Radio Disney probably goes lower but there is no localism. and there is no relate ability to the audience. It is just there for the vacation.

Just because you're a radio hobbyest who happens to remember AM stereo,

I wasn't a "hobbyest" at that time. I was gainfully employed for quite a few years even before that.

doesn't mean there is a bright future for the AM band.  Sorry, that's just the truth.

Start targeting those audience with something they can't get anywhere else and watch them come back. They already have the radios for goodness sakes.

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!
(here's to the Algore warm up)

[Carmine5]

But its transmitter land became so valuable that they, more recently, sold it when the price was right. The proceed built a new site, farther outside the District, and left a lot of money over after all was done.

As the real estate market improves, we will find more and more AMs that can't make much money cashing in the land value. Or, as some have already done, going from, let's say, 5 kw day 1 kw night, separate patterns to 2.2 kw non directional day, 180 watts non directional nights... acre or two of land (probably closer inside the market) and you can build it anywhere. The directional might need 6 to 10 acres, strategically placed to aim the signal.

One more reason why it makes more sense to open the 76-88 MHz band to AM licensees, rather than continuing to promote AM IBOC as the "solution".   Adopt an open source digital standard to keep receiver costs low, design the system to encourage single frequency networks, set a transition period of 20 years and let station owners decide when to shut down the medium wave transmitter and sell off the land.

This should have been planned from the start, but we may still have an opportunity.   Opponents of this proposal (NAB, MSTV, etc.) claim there's not enough vacant spectrum to accommodate the few remaining full service TV stations on channels 5 and 6, but where's the conclusive proof that they couldn't move down to 2, 3, or 4 -- or even UHF?     LPTVs and TV translators have much more flexibility to relocate (especially in rural markets) so they are less of a concern.   

Opponents also tried to derail this plan by telling us it would violate international agreements, but recently I heard Canada is quite interested in pursuing it.

I'm not so sure the FCC would agree to giving up Ch.5 in view of the fact that they're considering allotting Ch.5 for a new VHF station in Seaford, DE.  This is in keeping with their rule about each state having at least one commercial VHF station.  I get the impression from this new allotment that they see Ch.5 as reserved for television.

But turning Ch. 6 over to the FM band (for AM, LPFM, translators, new stations) makes total sense and could be easily done given that the majority of existing radios can tune the 87 portion of the band.

c5

[DavidEduardo]

You are correct. When was the last time an AM station was targeting 18-24 or similar. Radio Disney probably goes lower but there is no localism. and there is no relate ability to the audience. It is just there for the vacation.

First, Radio Disney targets 6-11 only. And how do you "localize" a station for pre-adolescents? That's like asking how to localize the Disney Channel.

Start targeting those audience with something they can't get anywhere else and watch them come back.

No, they won't. The band sounds bad... due to the radios of today and the high noise level... but mostly they won't "combe back" because if they are under 55 or so, they never were there to begin with and think of AM as something for geezers... if they think about it at all.

[Play Freebird]

I'm not so sure the FCC would agree to giving up Ch.5 in view of the fact that they're considering allotting Ch.5 for a new VHF station in Seaford, DE.  This is in keeping with their rule about each state having at least one commercial VHF station.  I get the impression from this new allotment that they see Ch.5 as reserved for television.

I would argue this rule is no longer necessary, now that UHF has proven superior to low-band VHF (and arguably high-band, too) for digital TV -- although it will take the FCC years to delete it from the books.  In any case, I would expect a substitute VHF channel could be found for Seaford, of all places.  How about Ch 4?  The closest place I see it used is Harrisburg.  Or if that's too tight, Channel 2?  Or something in high band?

According to the current DTV table of allotments in 73.622, it appears several states no longer have any full-service commercial stations transmitting in the VHF low- or high-band segments:

Iowa
Maryland
Maine (which has non-comms on 9 and 10)
Minnesota
New Hampshire
North Dakota
Rhode Island
Virginia (has a non-comm on 3 in Roanoke)
Washington (has a non-comm on 8 in Spokane)

DC is also all-UHF.

[Peter Q. George (K1XRB)]

I'm not so sure the FCC would agree to giving up Ch.5 in view of the fact that they're considering allotting Ch.5 for a new VHF station in Seaford, DE.  This is in keeping with their rule about each state having at least one commercial VHF station.  I get the impression from this new allotment that they see Ch.5 as reserved for television.

I would argue this rule is no longer necessary, now that UHF has proven superior to low-band VHF (and arguably high-band, too) for digital TV -- although it will take the FCC years to delete it from the books.  In any case, I would expect a substitute VHF channel could be found for Seaford, of all places.  How about Ch 4?  The closest place I see it used is Harrisburg.  Or if that's too tight, Channel 2?  Or something in high band?

According to the current DTV table of allotments in 73.622, it appears several states no longer have any full-service commercial stations transmitting in the VHF low- or high-band segments:

Iowa
Maryland
Maine (which has non-comms on 9 and 10)
Minnesota
New Hampshire
North Dakota
Rhode Island
Virginia (has a non-comm on 3 in Roanoke)
Washington (has a non-comm on 8 in Spokane)

DC is also all-UHF.

That's not exactly true......

New Hampshire has Manchester's WMUR-TV (Channel 9/ RF 9), a commercial ABC network affiliate.  Providence, Rhode Island has WPRI-TV (Channel 12/RF 13) and WNAC-TV (Channel 64/RF 12).  WPRI is CBS and WNAC is FOX.

[audioguy]

I'm tired of all the whining about the demise of AM, and that it's largely due to bad radios and excessive noise.

I travel a great deal, and my experience has been that in MOST locations that I drive through or listen in, there is relatively little electrical noise. That's just a myth that people like to perpetuate; why, I don't know. True, there are SOME locations where the noise is terrible, and if you happen to be in one of those then you're going to get poor reception. But in my home and in my car and in most of the hotels I stay in, electrical noise is quite low. I have quite a few high efficiency CFL lamps in my home... and computers. And they don't bother my AM reception!

Almost all of the noise on the AM band is SELF INFLICTED! It is caused by HD hiss covering the band from top to bottom, with very few exceptions. The remaining noise is due to the FCC allowing too many stations to operate with too much power, especially at night. Thus, listeners are stuck with very poor reception quality. But again, this is NOT due to "electrical noise", "power line noise", etc. in MOST cases.

As for bad radios: yes, if you buy poor quality ones, they are. I have a number of excellent ones, and some of them aren't even that expensive.

[Going back to Nashville]

AM is only for people over 50? Did you ever hear of sports talk? Have you ever looked at the 18-49's
for AM sports talk stations?

There are plenty of people in there 20's that listen to sports talk stations, and there is ratings evidence
to back up my point.

There are also quite a few people in their 20's that care about what is going on in the world, and will
turn on a talk station and listen while driving, and use news or talk stations for traffic or weather reports
on a daily basis. They don't care if it's AM or FM!

Just to add this into the mix, I am not naive, I know a lot of people in their 20's don't listen to much radio
these days, but, from what I've seen when they do, a lot of them are only listening to AM. When they are
done listening about their favorite team, or why they are stalled in traffic, or what new law a politician is
signing in to law that they don't like. When they are done, are lot of them turning their radio to FM? Yes
they are to an unused frequency to listen to their I-Pod!

They are not spooky DXers either.......oooooohhhhhh!!!!