• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Changes at WNSH 94.7

Didn't the government play a critical role in setting up and protecting the clear channels? Many residents in rural areas and small towns frequently listened to the clear channels after sunset when their local AM daytimer signed-off.

Yes and then the gov't did away with them. And then the gov't did nothing while the AM noise floor increased, and radio receivers got lousy.

And the govt over licensed the AM & FM spectrum so there are more than a dozen stations in zero population towns.

So yes the govt has played a critical role in destroying radio as we knew it. They'd like to make internet service free too.
 
Didn't the government play a critical role in setting up and protecting the clear channels? Many residents in rural areas and small towns frequently listened to the clear channels after sunset when their local AM daytimer signed-off.

Yes, almost 70 years ago before nights belonged to TV, people listened to network radio at night. If there was not a local station, you listened to one that did come in.

And the government, back in the 30's, restricted the clear channels to relatively low power so that no small group of national stations could control listening.
 
Except a quarter wave broadcast band FM antenna is 28~30 inches which is why the headphone cord was used. Cell phones operate on UHF frequencies where tiny antennas work. The lowest frequency used for cell phones is the new 600 MHz LTE band and even that requires less than 5 inches for a quarter wave antenna which still fits inside a handset. Sure you can get FM broadcast receivers to work with a smaller antenna if you add an amp, like a shark fin on a modern car, but that stuff still requires both power to drive it and space for the circuit. The cell phone industry is all about miniaturization and squeezing as many hours out of a battery charge as possible and those things don't fit with their design objectives. At all.

Short antennas can be tuned to a frequency.

I had plenty of FM "transistor radios" I carried if I went out to dinner or the movies and wanted to check my 5 FM stations every 15 minutes. They fit in my pocket, and were only a bit bigger than a cigarette pack.

I could hear all of the stations... and the 4 AMs as well... anywhere in the city.

And that was before 1970! I am sure there is technology today that would make the size even smaller.

Oh, and an antenna does not have to be quarter wave to work. I had an AM station with a tower less than 1/8 wave length, and it had one of the best signals in the market. It just would have had a better signal if I could have found a place for a 130 meter tall antenna.
 
Then you don't listen in the way the majority of terrestrial, ad-supported stations program for. Most actual users of terrestrial radio want the added personality or human presence.

If you don't like it, as is often pointed out on this board, there are thousands of streaming only options with not talk and no or limited ads.

Dont like to do streaming in the car.
Radio is simpler less distracting.
 
Seems like we're mixing up two points here: Radio as an entertainment medium and radio as an essential service for critical emergency information.

Terrestrial radio can be both. Or I should say, "ad supported radio" which means AM, FM and streams of such services.

Radio as an entertainment medium is quickly becoming insignificant.

That would be why 89% of adults use terrestrial radio, right?

Music services like Spotify, Apple, and Google can deliver what listeners want to hear much better than a heavily researched playlist from a corporate program director.

You know that research actually identifies what listeners want to hear the most? Since when is asking users to tell what they want a negative?

For talk radio, there's an infinite number of podcasts although the listener doesn't have the option to call-in live and interact with the host. For DJ mix shows, there's MixCloud and SoundCloud.

The biggest "victims" of podcasts are not music radio stations... not even talk stations. They are pre-recorded TV talk shows.

The DJ presentation is exclusive to radio. The host can play music with a certain theme or include artist interviews and context behind the songs which can create a very personal experience for the listener. However, this requires significant resources and could impact ratings as it deviates from a predictable canned playlist format...which is why this programming has been replaced with shallow DJ banter. Do you really think people make an effort to tune in at a certain time every day to listen to all four hours of Ryan Seacrest?

Radio is not and has not been intended for a solid 4 hours of anything since the later 40's.

The idea of Seacrest or Bobby Bones or Charlemagne da God is to entertain while a person is having breakfast or in the car commuting or driving to the store or childcare center or whatever. You tune in, you are entertained, you leave. In fact, shows are designed not to require long-term listening any given day. It's Kibbles and Bits, not War & Peace. Dr Seuss, not Tolstoy.

There's definitely a role for radio to play as a service for critical information. Cell towers only cover about 2/3 of the country. Yet, one can travel anywhere to the most remote parts of the outback and still be able to receive at least one radio station, even if it's a distant AM signal. However, I would question how many of these stations would actually provide critical info to the public during an emergency. I recall reading about how many stations in Louisiana and Mississippi were either off-air or playing canned music in the days following Katrina. WWL served as a reliable lifeline for communities along the Gulf Coast by providing live and local news during that time but most of the other stations didn't take initiative. We may need to reconsider the amount of land resources, power, and infrastructure required to keep these stations running when they are nothing more than glorified distribution points for repetitive playlists and hollering preachers.

First, stations that survive a disaster can be automatically added to an emergency network via the EAS system. In fact, local stations can't activate that service... authorities with authorization have to do it. And, as long as even one station can stay on the air, that is better than cellular services which died in the Lake Charles area almost immediately with the flooding and loss of power (cell repeaters usually have limited duration battery power and if the mains is off, they have a finite life. And their connections with the Mother Ship are generally landlines, digital ones, of course, but physical installations that can be cut by floods, fires, earthquakes and other disasters we don't even want to think about.

By the way, the stations that could not stay on in New Orleans in many cases contributed to the manpower of WWL during the emergency so that information flowed. Landlines did not work. TV did not work (and works less now with all digital transmission), the newspaper did not publish. And cellphones did not work, and in some areas no service was restored for weeks.

And I mentioned Puerto Rico, USA, where in some locations cellular service took months to return following their hurricane. But AM and FM never, ever, lost service.
 
Besides Sirius XM, there are online services that have personalities on music stations, such as Slacker. Apple Music just added a Country station with lots of personality and interviews with country artists. It is free, and has no commercials.
It seems likely that cars in the near future will make it as easy to listen to streaming programming. as AM/FM. While stations such as WNSH reduce local content, satellite radio and streaming will probably chip away more and more at terrestrial radio.
Even if a large majority of people still listen to terrestrial radio, the decline of TSL amounts to an ongoing erosion of its use.
 
Apple Music just added a Country station with lots of personality and interviews with country artists. It is free, and has no commercials.

Are you sure? Apple Music requires a subscription.

US$9.99 / month for single license
US$99.00 / year for single license
US$14.99 / month for family license
US$4.99 / month for student license
 
Are you sure? Apple Music requires a subscription.

US$9.99 / month for single license
US$99.00 / year for single license
US$14.99 / month for family license
US$4.99 / month for student license

Apple Music now offers 3 radio type music channels with personalities, that do not require a subscription, just an Apple ID (which I believe is free). They are: Country Music Radio; Music One Radio (current pop); and Hits Music Radio (pop from the past).
 
Apple Music now offers 3 radio type music channels with personalities, that do not require a subscription, just an Apple ID (which I believe is free). They are: Country Music Radio; Music One Radio (current pop); and Hits Music Radio (pop from the past).

That's likely a temporary situation as an introduction.
 
Music One has been free for several years. The other two channels were recently added.
They do NOT require a subscription to Apple Music. As previously mentioned, they can be accessed by anyone with an Apple ID.
I hope that's not confusing-Though part of Apple Music, they can be listened to without a subscription.
 
Music One has been free for several years. The other two channels were recently added.
They do NOT require a subscription to Apple Music. As previously mentioned, they can be accessed by anyone with an Apple ID.
I hope that's not confusing-Though part of Apple Music, they can be listened to without a subscription.

Interesting. Do you know if Apple allows free streaming of these stations on Android? Knowing Apple, I wouldn’t be surprised if they restricted this “free” service to Apple hardware.
 
Interesting. Do you know if Apple allows free streaming of these stations on Android? Knowing Apple, I wouldn’t be surprised if they restricted this “free” service to Apple hardware.

Yes, as long as one has or obtains an Apple ID. The Apple Music app is available from the Android Play Store.
With its deep pockets, Apple may consider their 3 radio channels to be a promotion for their brand, and the Apple Music pay service.
BTW, one of the hosts of a daily show on Apple Music Country is Ty Bentli. He was last heard on terrestrial radio in New York on WNSH, as the former lead host of America's Morning Show, syndicated by Cumulus Media.
 
Music One has been free for several years.

But this replaces Beats, and Beats was a subscription service.

I predict there will be some kind of charge at some point. They didn't hire all these people and spend all this money to give it away for free.

Unless they sell ads, there's no value to building a stable of users.

If anything the music industry will hit them up about using their artists and music without requiring subscriptions.
 
But this replaces Beats, and Beats was a subscription service.

I predict there will be some kind of charge at some point. They didn't hire all these people and spend all this money to give it away for free.

Unless they sell ads, there's no value to building a stable of users.

If anything the music industry will hit them up about using their artists and music without requiring subscriptions.

I wouldn’t be so sure. Apple can use these channels as a promotion for their service and the labels can use them to promote new albums and artists. Apple can afford to cover the streaming royalty costs for these linear channels as they’re probably nominal compared to the on-demand streaming costs. Remember this is the company that forced the music industry to change from selling $15 CDs to $0.99 individual songs and later forced the industry to abandon DRM.
 
Dont wanna pay $60 yr for radio.

You don't like streaming in the car.
You don't want to pay for.
You don't like the way music stations present their songs which is, basically, the reason they still exist.

At that point, there is no solution except to put up with aspects of the free radio services you get 'cause you have closed yourself off to alternatives.

The fact is that stations do what they think attracts the most listeners. You are in all probability in a small minority who the can't please, ever.
 
Dont wanna pay $60 yr for radio.

Just curious about your previous comment that radio streaming in the car is too distracting. How is your smartphone setup in your car? Have you tried using voice commands to play the stations you want? I can say stuff like “play WGBH”, “play 102.5 KTU”, “play KFI”, “pick a random country station”, or “play the top 100 songs from 1986” and the music starts playing. I find it much less distracting than glancing down at the radio (taking my eyes off the road) to select the correct preset, switch from AM to FM, seek/scan, or tune to the exact frequency while im driving in traffic.

If you’re holding the phone in your hand and trying to navigate through a streaming app while you drive, I can see how that would be very distracting (and dumb). I hope nobody here has ever done that behind the wheel :)
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom