Time to reconsider AM stereo?

[Tom Wells]

WSM is difficult to listen to in Chicago on the way to work in the evenings. In the 1971 Motorola, which probably needs a good IF peaking,
I can slide down to the low side of 650 and miss most of the noise. But not gone until I'd have tuned past to where WSM itself is off-tuned.
Otherwise, I can't really hear any of the old ajacents to 890 780, 1000, or 670 any more, and I really liked listening to New York,
Kansas City, etc. For the unique content of each.   At home on a tuned loop I can eke out some 1st adjacents with a tuned loop and careful
nulling.     I too, would like to more extrapolation of what the definition of hearing is.

There seems to be some agreement that the level of noise emissions permitted is by far the greatest problem.
As we are now aware, California passed a super-duper TV efficiency law, and manufacturers will have 3 years to comply.
A next good step would be a petition to the FCC for specific enforcement in strict compliance with existing laws,
and new laws to adress newer noisemaking technolgies.  It's not just radio, it's your automatic coffeepot burning out dry one day for no apparent reason, or the garage door mysteriously opened.  There's no time like the present, and some one  reading this must know how to
file such a petitiion, and probably knows  others who would be interested in supporting it.
It can only get a whole lot worse.  Consider product life cycles, and it could start getting better in a year.

[DavidEduardo]

"Hearing" second adjacents is different that trying to say that the IBOC whoosh doesn't interfere with them. 

Well, in the examples I used, there is no HD "noise" on 690, second adjacent to a 50 kw station. What there is, at home and all the route to work, is lots of noise from power lines and whatever else is contaminating the environment.

At night, I can hear 650 WSM fine - but WSCR's IBOC whoosh is (at the minimum) audible in the background.  And, I can 'hear' CINF Montreal at 690 at night too - but the whoosh of WSCR's jammer is just as loud.   

Of course, in this day, the issue of skywave is totally separate from that of local or semi-local AM groundwave reception. First, very little radio listening is at night. Second, there is essentially no reported listening to any 1-A or 1-B clear in an area that is only served by skywave. If that statistical "nobody" is listening, then beating the long dead horse of skywave reception is truly a moot point.

By this line of reasoning, IBOC doesn't interfere with adjacents either because I can occasionally "hear" WABC rise up into WBBM's overwhelming hash - though I still can't understand a word that's said.

The allocation system, as developed in the 30's, didn't contemplate listening to adjacents in the shadow of a strong local.  

Just ask Bob Savage whether being "heard" is sufficient for his station in his own market at night. Come on David, you are a very smart guy and can certainly make a better argument than this.....

The statement was made that most of the interference on AM came from HD. In fact, very little comes from HD... the band is noisy from 535 to 1705 kHz, and only the most intense of signals is listened too as evidenced by ZIP code analysis of ratings going back a decade before HD even was tested.

[Carmine5]

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,

Agreed.  We know that there are many such rules in the FCC's books that advances in technology have rendered obsolete. In my view, the FCC is completely rudderless and appears even more so when they apply outmoded rules such as this one.

But take, for example, DTV.  Two-three years ago the Commission was touting it as the next advent for television; Hi-Def pictures, ancillary services, etc.  Now they're seriously considering gutting broadcast television, reducing it to one SD channel, in favor of wireless broadband; a nebulous, feel good concept that is very short on specifics.

Unfortunately, now that the FCC has the broadcast television industry in its gun sights, expect to see the industry fight vigorously to retain Ch. 5 & 6 (even though we know it isn't much good for DTV).  I may be a minority working in television who thinks giving these VHF channels over to radio is good idea because I see a much more important fight looming as the television industry struggles to retain its shrinking slice of UHF spectrum.

c5

[audioguy]

There are relatively few VHF channels in use; especially the lowest channels (2-4). I would think it should be feasible to free up channels 5 and 6 for radio broadcasting, and I hope the FCC will seriously consider this. That said, I don't think that this will mean the end of AM radio, even if a proposal such as the one put forward by the BMC were to be adopted. There is simply too much infrastructure in place, including millions of AM receivers already in the hands of the public, not to mention transmitters, antennas, etc. Plus, there is no viable alternative use of the AM spectrum. If channels 5 and 6 become radio broadcasting spectrum, it will be in addition to the existing bands.

For those who think radio is going away, especially AM radio: forget about it! Radio will be around long after we're all dead. It may morph and change; it may become just a bunch of time-brokered narrowcasts, but it will still be there. I won't be listening to that kind of stuff, but somebody undoubtedly will.

It may be premature to predict the demise of OTA DTV as well. Recently, the CEA and CTIA filed a joint proposal calling for the replacement of the current "high tower/high power" system with low power single frequency networks (DTS). They claim this would allow all of the current DTV and HDTV services to be retained while freeing up a considerable amount of spectrum for broadband. It's an interesting idea.

[badjef]

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.

Because their ears are not alone. Mommy's are there also.

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 "come 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.

It still doesn't answer the question of sports. Just to say sports radio is migrating to FM, if that were the case, there would be sportsradio on FM in every market that has an NFL team. It just is not the case. It has taken NY a long time to start putting the Giants on an FM1.
Great format placement on WCBS-FM...Let's kill 101.1 again! This time with WFAN! A waste of RF even on HD-3.

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!

[Carmine5]

It may be premature to predict the demise of OTA DTV as well. Recently, the CEA and CTIA filed a joint proposal calling for the replacement of the current "high tower/high power" system with low power single frequency networks (DTS). They claim this would allow all of the current DTV and HDTV services to be retained while freeing up a considerable amount of spectrum for broadband. It's an interesting idea.

It's an intriguing concept to be sure, although the cost of installing and maintaining such a network is not too appealing.

But I also think terrestrial DTV will be around for a long time, especially now that more people are discovering that they can get rid of cable and by using a combination of antenna and internet get all of the television entertainment they need for free or for the cost of their internet connection.

Now if we can get Scripps and other cable-only program providers on board we can really offer viewers some great programming on these additional channels.

[DavidEduardo]

First, Radio Disney targets 6-11 only. And how do you "localize" a station for pre-adolescents?

Because their ears are not alone. Mommy's are there also.

The last 25-54 Women ranker I saw showed KDIS, the Radio Disney station in LA, somewhere below 50th in the market with a 0.0 to 0.1 share and about 400 AQH persons. The #1 station in the demo has about 30 times more listeners.

Mommy, like the sports fans, will go to FM if it is an option.

[HowardMBurgers]

Radio Disney is nothing more than a failed experiment become write-off.  Disney over-paid for all these dog AM stations back when and now they're pretty much worthless.  About all they can do is save face, stay under the corporate radar and just program them until the head office finally pulls the plug.  I suspect about that time you'll see several AM licenses being turned in.

But hey, the good news is it will help reduce band congestion for 500 or so left in the 55+ DX crowd!

[badjef]

First, Radio Disney targets 6-11 only. And how do you "localize" a station for pre-adolescents?

Because their ears are not alone. Mommy's are there also.

The last 25-54 Women ranker I saw showed KDIS, the Radio Disney station in LA, somewhere below 50th in the market with a 0.0 to 0.1 share and about 400 AQH persons. The #1 station in the demo has about 30 times more listeners.

Mommy, like the sports fans, will go to FM if it is an option.

Key work is "if". More like when. Then, when the FM band is as crowded as it can be AM will be the alternative.

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!

[badjef]

Radio Disney is nothing more than a failed experiment become write-off.  Disney over-paid for all these dog AM stations back when and now they're pretty much worthless.  About all they can do is save face, stay under the corporate radar and just program them until the head office finally pulls the plug.  I suspect about that time you'll see several AM licenses being turned in.

But hey, the good news is it will help reduce band congestion for 500 or so left in the 55+ DX crowd!

As I said in my rantpost, Radio Disney is there for park promotion only.

The mouse wants to bring everybody to Disney World for vacation. Deals so attractive, a family need not go or see anything that is not Disney o&o. From cruises to excursions to roller coasters to Disney owned islands off the Florida coast. Every place you turn will be a Disney symbol. It starts with the idea to keep it in sight and mind and that is Radio Disney.

hmmm. Seems to me that a guy named Sarnoff thought of that years ago when he was building a radio network. And a guy named Crosley when he was trying to sell spots at a 500kw AM radio station in Cincy, too.

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!