RadioDiscussions.com

 
Login June 19, 2013, 08:46:44 PM *
Username Password Session Length
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email? Did you forget your password?
:  
   Home   Help Search Contact Us Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 ... 115   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES  (Read 110110 times)
spunker88
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 746


Re: AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES
« Reply #330 on: December 04, 2010, 11:38:22 AM »

Two applications for new stations on 650 in upstate NY have been sitting in the pile for ten years.  One of them proposes 9 towers at night -- so why is this necessary if only the groundwave coverage of WSM requires protection?

http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/MB/Databases/AM_DA_patterns/454546-68139.pdf

http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/MB/Databases/AM_DA_patterns/587725-74682.pdf

Of course we have WFAN's IBOC signal on 650 here in Upstate NY which drowns out WSM. I'd like to see a smaller signal fight with WFAN's IBOC and WSM, they'd be better off finding a graveyard channel.
Logged

DX Radios:
Sony XDR-F1HD
Tecsun PL-390

Location:
Near Watertown, NY

Site:
http://users8.jabry.com/spunker88
KB1OKL
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 1933


Re: AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES
« Reply #331 on: December 04, 2010, 11:44:44 AM »

Two applications for new stations on 650 in upstate NY have been sitting in the pile for ten years.  One of them proposes 9 towers at night -- so why is this necessary if only the groundwave coverage of WSM requires protection?

http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/MB/Databases/AM_DA_patterns/454546-68139.pdf

http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/MB/Databases/AM_DA_patterns/587725-74682.pdf

Of course we have WFAN's IBOC signal on 650 here in Upstate NY which drowns out WSM. I'd like to see a smaller signal fight with WFAN's IBOC and WSM, they'd be better off finding a graveyard channel.

WFAN drowns out WSM here in MA also.
Logged
KB1OKL
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 1933


Re: AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES
« Reply #332 on: December 04, 2010, 11:48:49 AM »



So that brings us to the current incarnation of the FCC.  This FCC is not going to do anything that gives a handful of huge radio companies (and they're the ones who own all the 50K AMs) the ability to reach more people.  The primary interest of the government, and you heard it again last week from Michael Copps, is built around stations better serving their licensed markets, not blanketing the continent. If anyone is going to have a station that operates in a national way, it will be owned by the government, not some private profit-making company.  And that decision was made back in the 1950s, when civil defense plans were begun, and later in the 1960s, when NOAA's weather radio service replaced local radio weather forecasting.  If you turn off the physics rules for a minute, and study the HISTORY of the federal government in the 20th century, and the fundmental change that occured in the 1930s, you'll begin to understand why the concept of privately owned radio stations reaching large areas of the country are not in the best interests of the federal government.  Rather than take advantage of the "benefits" of AM skywaves, the government would prefer to see AM radio die, and as a result, has done nothing to help AM in over 30 years. 

If the FCC is now promoting smaller local stations over the big boys who cover a lot of land why do they allow 50KW stations like WBZ and WINS to hash all over their adjacents? Those are hardly small local stations. They use the skywaves to obliterate local stations hundreds of miles away at night. That is not in the best interests of small local stations.
Logged
TheBigA
rimember

Online Online

Posts: 10924


Re: AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES
« Reply #333 on: December 04, 2010, 12:01:13 PM »

If the FCC is now promoting smaller local stations....


This isn't a recent change for the FCC.  This is a longstanding agenda of theirs going back almost 30 years.

why do they allow 50KW stations like WBZ and WINS to hash all over their adjacents?

Re-read my last sentence.  Approving HD made radio companies the enemy instead of the FCC.  Mission accomplished.
Logged
Don Juannn
Just another radio geek!
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 286

Just another radio geek....


Re: AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES
« Reply #334 on: December 04, 2010, 12:38:44 PM »


 HD Radio is a not-so-shining example.  It's a broadcasting system designed by computer geeks, with the connivance of a few self-interested - and short-sighted - broadcasters.

   ....and complained about by a few hobbyists, DX-ers and operators of pipsqueak stations that need every ounce of strength to be heard on the next block.

Logged

Don Guilmette
Don Juannn
Just another radio geek!
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 286

Just another radio geek....


Re: AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES
« Reply #335 on: December 04, 2010, 01:14:56 PM »


If the FCC is now promoting smaller local stations over the big boys who cover a lot of land why do they allow 50KW stations like WBZ and WINS to hash all over their adjacents?

The question is where geographically is the hash audible....if it's somewhere no one cares about...then it's a non-issue.
Logged

Don Guilmette
audioguy
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 909


Re: AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES
« Reply #336 on: December 04, 2010, 02:37:49 PM »

The hash is audible right on your own dirty signal, on almost every kind of radio that I have tested. Therefore, in addition to screwing your neighbors on the dial, you're hurting your own audience. But, I guess people don't care (especially CBS, the worst IBOC polluter on the radio).
Logged

Proud owner of a classical low power high-fidelity AM radio station
DaveBayArea
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 596


Re: AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES
« Reply #337 on: December 04, 2010, 02:50:52 PM »


The question is where geographically is the hash audible....if it's somewhere no one cares about...then it's a non-issue.


The real question is "Where is the hash audible AND identifiable as interference by the general public?"  When a radio station has static and distortion on it the general listener will just listen to something else.  The trained ear of those of us in the business (generally) know the difference between digital noise and regular 4ktb noise. 

A large number of radio stations in the US - both AM and FM - just sort of disappeared a few years ago for many people.  They don't know why, but they don't listen to them any more.

Dave B.
Logged
TheBigA
rimember

Online Online

Posts: 10924


Re: AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES
« Reply #338 on: December 04, 2010, 03:02:41 PM »


A large number of radio stations in the US - both AM and FM - just sort of disappeared a few years ago for many people.  They don't know why, but they don't listen to them any more.


The decline of audience for AM stations began over 20 years ago, pre-dating IBOC.  So to attach it as the reason for AM's decline isn't factually correct.

I guess people don't care (especially CBS, the worst IBOC polluter on the radio).

Clearly listeners don't care, because there is no relationship between stations using IBOC and ratings.
Logged
Don Juannn
Just another radio geek!
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 286

Just another radio geek....


Re: AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES
« Reply #339 on: December 04, 2010, 05:49:40 PM »


The hash is audible right on your own dirty signal, on almost every kind of radio that I have tested. Therefore, in addition to screwing your neighbors on the dial, you're hurting your own audience. But, I guess people don't care (especially CBS, the worst IBOC polluter on the radio).

The question was where GEOGRAPHICALLY is the hash located.  If it's in your own town, then you probably don't have "neighbors".   If it's somewhere no one cares about...then it's a non-issue.
Logged

Don Guilmette
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 ... 115   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP

Postings on Radiodiscussions.com are the opinions of the people who post them. Views expressed do not necessarily represent the views of Radiodiscussions.com or its owner or operator. In fact many of the views expressed here are just plain wrong. But they are opinions and this site allows us all to discuss those opinions. Any reliance on information posted is done so at the user's own risk. For a detailed look at the rules, regulations and uses of Radiodiscussions.com please see our TERMS OF SERVICE.

Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.078 seconds with 19 queries.