FM - no AM - portable CD player

[Kelly A]

Ahh humanity. We all are so alike and yet our opinions can be so much different. I love Sports, but you might like listening to vinyl albums (me too, by the way),

Listen to vinyl via Gramophone? Didn't think so. AM is the radio version of a Gramophone.

and so our definiton of compelling on the radio could be so distinct. That doesn't necessarily mean it's a lost cause. I mean we have categorized people's interests into radio genres such as classic hits, news/talk, comedy, hip-hop, sports, travel info, alternative, etc. Unfortunately, AM has been way homogenized into all talk stations on every frequency.

That's because spoken word involving news, sports, and controversial talk programming is all that can be tolerated on a technically inferior medium. I'll bet that even then, most of the non-radio nerd population would prefer to consumer that same programming on streaming or FM.

Scientists have known for decades that the average range of human hearing is 15 khz. AM stations and recievers of old often came close to that mark, but with 10 khz spacing, AM had a disadvantage. I have a portable radio that I can manually set the bandwidth between 1 and 6. I notice that between 4 and 6 (wideband), it gets close to FM quality,

It can't. AM stations can only broadcast with a bandwidth of 10kHz. Most of that is rolled off in the filters starting at 5kHz. FM starts rolling off audio about 12kHz. If one can't tell the difference between 5kHz and 12kHz, may need to get hearing checked.

then I push the music/voice button and it sounds good. But imagine having 8-10 or more! Perhaps it's time to experiment with widening those station allotments again.

What about noise floor and the lack of a comparable stereo method? Add in Faraday effects, and interference from other stations? AM's days are numbered.

Sure FM "solves" this problem with ease, and I'm always happy to tune into an FM station, but it feels more like a cheat code than a solution.

It was a solution back in the late 50's, early 60's. But because people still made money off of talk and sports on AM, it stuck around. Not so much anymore.

 

[JJSPC]

Take a look at how many Americans under 40 own any type of "radio" other than in their vehicle. It's not just AM, but FM to a somewhat lesser extent is in trouble as well. 50+ Oldies formats on FM are making a comeback because those people (myself included) still use actual radios. AM though is nothing more than nostalgic. We aren't watching black and white television anymore either.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

IMO rather than poo-poohing Kirk's idea of improving AM receivers, he should try to build a noise tolerant AM facility. You can buy a graveyard AM for less than a nicely optioned car, and building a basic radio receiver isn't hard.

If it works, he might have a decent cottage industry. If it works really well, he might be able to sell it.

But I'm not going to invest until it's a proven technical solution.

A mandate, though, is a fever dream. Congress can't legislate its way out of a paper bag the last ~15 years, and something as insignificant as the AM radio lobby is really unlikely to get legislative time.

 

[Kelly A]

IMO rather than poo-poohing Kirk's idea of improving AM receivers, he should try to build a noise tolerant AM facility.

But there's this little thing called earths atmosphere which is intrinsically already noisy, and the man-made terrestrial noise pollution therein. One could build the highest quality facility in the world, and it wouldn't help a thing.

You can buy a graveyard AM for less than a nicely optioned car, and building a basic radio receiver isn't hard.

And spend hundreds of thousand or millions, then lose it, guaranteed. May as well build the finest horse buggies, expecting to revive the form of transportation.

But I'm not going to invest until it's a proven technical solution.

Technology won't change consumer behavior once it's already switched to something else. Especially trying to resurrect 100+ year old forms of media.

A mandate, though, is a fever dream. Congress can't legislate its way out of a paper bag the last ~15 years, and something as insignificant as the AM radio lobby is really unlikely to get legislative time.

It's not congress' job to save a business model, unless they already have personal investment it in. Coal comes to mind.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

And spend hundreds of thousand or millions, then lose it, guaranteed. May as well build the finest horse buggies, expecting to revive the form of transportation.

That's the spirit of the free market, Kelly. Not every idea that launches a business has to be a good idea.

 

[Kelly A]

That's the spirit of the free market, Kelly. Not every idea that launches a business has to be a good idea.

Maybe on something new, not something over 100 years old. If it's not a good idea, it will fail. Your idea is an expensive ticket to failure.
We seem be to leaving out two of the biggest factor of all: Listeners, or lack thereof, and physics.

 

[ZantennaG1]

Stay tuned for the next round, where the government will force ATSC 1.0 stations to consolidate all DTV stations to one signal per market via ATSC 3.0. That way all that remaining TV spectrum will be auctioned-off to cell/PCS providers too.

I knew there was no way ATSC 3.0 wouldn't be mandatory. It may be voluntary right now, but watch the FCC change it's tone by 2025. A3.0 is the superior standard by ten-fold.

 

[Kent]

Here, sports/talk is on AM (KCSP [also 106.5 HD2], KCTE and WHB), with the Kansas City Chiefs possibly heading to the World Cup or World Series or some similar affair, I suspect that a wide age range of sports fans are listening to AM radio now.

I realize I'm a tad late to the game, but you won’t hear the Chiefs on AM. KCFX 101.1 took them from KCMO 810 more than 30 years ago. WDAF-FM got them about three years ago. The Chiefs aren’t alone on that. You won’t find many professional sports franchises on AM in their home markets. I grew up in Texas and Oklahoma, and KVIL getting the Cowboys cratered a deal Evergreen had to buy KRLD in Dallas and KODA in Houston. Both were the flagship stations for the Cowboys and Oilers, and the deal was contingent on those stations keeping their sports rights. Evergreen couldn’t renegotiate the price after KVIL sacked KRLD for the Cowboys' rights and walked away from the deal. Within two years, Evergreen sold its only station in its home market.

My mother lives in Tulsa, and, when I drive from my house in Mid-Missouri to her house for the holidays, the Chiefs are on FM all the way down except for in the Joplin area, where they’re on 860. KKOW has a Joplin translator at 97.5, but I'll usually punch the AM button after KKLH 104.7 starts picket fencing because I can hear 860 until I get in range of Tulsa's KRMG-FM 102.3.

I do occasionally find myself listening to KCSP and WHB when interesting sports news happens. Those are usually Mondays after big games. I can hear both of them in my car in the daytime, and my work has an open internet policy. So, I'll stream them off of Audacy and TuneIn until I get bored with them. If there’s any hope for a youth movement in AM, it’s sports and/or guy talk. That won’t save all the stations, though. I can’t imagine any market has room for more than three of those types of stations. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton seem to be bringing in a slightly younger audience than Rush had in his final years, but, as another poster mentioned, the floor for angry white male programming is still middle age at its youngest. It won’t likely get younger with time.

 

[vchimpanzee]

To add another data point, none of the hotels I've stayed in over the past few years (which includes two or three after the pandemic) have had a radio. Instead, a subset of the local radio stations are generally available through the TV, usually after the TV stations. I presume behind the scenes, there are radios tuned to the relevant frequencies (or computers 'tuned' to internet streams) feeding a distribution system.

I don't think I ever stayed in a hotel that provided a radio. In the 70s there were three FM stations on cable. The last time I checked, there were three channels with announcements and community information which happened to use Music Choice channels. Actually, I don't think those are even there any more.

 

[Kelly A]

I knew there was no way ATSC 3.0 wouldn't be mandatory. It may be voluntary right now, but watch the FCC change it's tone by 2025. A3.0 is the superior standard by ten-fold.

Assuming the Cell/PCS carriers are still scrambling for spectrum, you're right. That's the one and only advantage ATSC 3.0 holds, the ability to mux all the TV's in a single market together onto one signal. (Forget 4K/UHD then) I'm assuming the Commission is waiting for the cell carriers to get hungrier, and more willing to aggressively pay for all that spectrum that would be freed up across the country.

 

[Greg Goodfellow]

As I said, the word "mandate" is not one you want to throw around. The FCC has no teeth for enforcing these kinds of things over foreign companies, particularly in communist countries. You might think it's a great idea, but the practicality of it doesn't exist. AM radio is what it is. There will be no technical investments in it any more.



Do you have a consensus definition of what that means? That everyone will agree on? Because if you scan these pages, you'll see everybody has their own personal idea of what "compelling content" is. And even if you come up with the next big thing, you have to overcome the audio quality issue that Major Armstrong solved 90 years ago.

No, I do not have a definition to which everyone would agree. I was thinking about local operations that superserve their audience, which just might accept programming that isn't cookie-cutter. I realize AM will never return to its former glory, but the station group I used to do part-time work for actually started an AM station that is successful, because, along with its stable mates, it superserves its local community. I want you to know that I really appreciate everything you add to this site!

 

[boombox4]

Maybe on something new, not something over 100 years old. If it's not a good idea, it will fail. Your idea is an expensive ticket to failure.
We seem be to leaving out two of the biggest factor of all: Listeners, or lack thereof, and physics.

Not every technology that is 100 years old is useless. 60 hz AC power and the electric motor are 100 year-old technology. The diesel engine is 120 year-old technology, and the world's commerce still runs on diesel ships and diesel electric trains. Paper books are 200+ year old tech, and they still sell. So the age of a technology in itself really is not important in determining its validity. FM radio is 90 year-old technology (80+ years if you determine it from the years FM radios were first introduced in the US.

That said, although it's true that AM radio has been losing audience, it still has roughly one quarter the cume of FM radio (58 million AM versus 235 million FM listeners weekly), according to the latest stats I could find. So it's not dead yet.

By the time AM radio is completely gone -- maybe 15-20 years hence, after the ethnic AM stations migrate completely to FM or the internet, FM will start being vacated for the internet. It's too bad that digital on AM wasn't introduced earlier on, it might have made a long term difference for the medium, or at least extended its life for a couple decades. As it is now, OTA radio has already seen the future -- all one has to do is take a listen to the Shortwaves today and that will be the state of FM and AM by the last half of the century.

 

[Kelly A]

Not every technology that is 100 years old is useless. 60 hz AC power and the electric motor are 100 year-old technology.

My point was to PTBoardOp, that his suggestion that if only someone would build expensive and modern technology based AM stations, somehow a revival would be possible. Things like physics and consumer habits would argue against that view.

That said, although it's true that AM radio has been losing audience, it still has roughly one quarter the cume of FM radio (58 million AM versus 235 million FM listeners weekly), according to the latest stats I could find. So it's not dead yet.

If you owned an AM station(s), that's a increasing and alarming trend. As myself and other's have mentioned, the cost of running an AM with dying (literally) audiences is a tough reality. Some owners have turned in their licenses because the property value of the transmitter site is more valuable than owning the station. Some have thrown caution to the wind and gone full MA3 mode. Whereas I applaud their pioneering spirit, it's not going to change consumer habits of relying on their smartphone and smartspeakers for aural news and entertainment.

By the time AM radio is completely gone -- maybe 15-20 years hence, after the ethnic AM stations migrate completely to FM or the internet, FM will start being vacated for the internet.

I don't think there's a particular tipping point where the AM band goes silent once and for all. For some very small markets, AM may be all there is. But just like everywhere else, as the population ages-out in those areas, there will be little choice for small market AM station licensees but to close up shop. Owning AM stations is riskier than opening a restaurant.

It's too bad that digital on AM wasn't introduced earlier on, it might have made a long term difference for the medium, or at least extended its life for a couple decades.

And the blame for that aims squarely at AM broadcasters and radio nerds. Back when the IBOC standard was being chosen for AM, the cries and objections from duffer's claiming AM ain't broke, delayed any progress on having full digital AM as an option. Now here we are: AM is the gramophone of quality, relegated to a number of formats you can count on one hand. Consumers have moved on to other more convenient devices. Not that consumer habits wouldn't have changed anyway, but the shortsightedness of those who said AM was fine the way it was, ultimately are being proven dead wrong.

As it is now, OTA radio has already seen the future

I disagree. OTA radio is still popular. Saw a stat the other day, that even Millenialls and Gen-Z car buyers, insist on having a radio when shopping for a new car.

-- all one has to do is take a listen to the Shortwaves today and that will be the state of FM and AM by the last half of the century.

For AM, perhaps. FM will continue to be another option among others, for music, news and entertainment programming. No subscription needed.

 

[vchimpanzee]

Assuming the Cell/PCS carriers are still scrambling for spectrum, you're right. That's the one and only advantage ATSC 3.0 holds, the ability to mux all the TV's in a single market together onto one signal. (Forget 4K/UHD then) I'm assuming the Commission is waiting for the cell carriers to get hungrier, and more willing to aggressively pay for all that spectrum that would be freed up across the country.

What worries me about this possibility is that low-VHF isn't good for anything else.

 

[ZantennaG1]

Unfortunately, our noise problems will not go away on their own, but perhaps we could convince people to buy a loop antenna or something?

 

[AbrahamJSimpson]

You can’t.

The phrase beating a dead horse was perhaps never more apt.

 

[ZantennaG1]

You can’t.

The phrase beating a dead horse was perhaps never more apt.

When AM is reduced to Brother Stair on every remaining station, plus Cuban propaganda nonsense, now that is beyond useless and dead to me 🤣
Comparing what you can find on Shortwave with what's on AM for example, or Longwave with AM, it would seem as if AM is still healthy. Here are a few posts:

I don't think there's a particular tipping point where the AM band goes silent once and for all. For some very small markets, AM may be all there is. But just like everywhere else, as the population ages-out in those areas, there will be little choice for small market AM station licensees but to close up shop. Owning AM stations is riskier than opening a restaurant.

OTA radio is still popular. Saw a stat the other day, that even Millenialls [sic] and Gen-Z car buyers, insist on having a radio when shopping for a new car.

Not every technology that is 100 years old is useless. 60 hz AC power and the electric motor are 100 year-old technology. The diesel engine is 120 year-old technology, and the world's commerce still runs on diesel ships and diesel electric trains. Paper books are 200+ year old tech, and they still sell. So the age of a technology in itself really is not important in determining its validity. FM radio is 90 year-old technology (80+ years if you determine it from the years FM radios were first introduced in the US.

That said, although it's true that AM radio has been losing audience, it still has roughly one quarter the cume of FM radio (58 million AM versus 235 million FM listeners weekly), according to the latest stats I could find. So it's not dead yet.

By the time AM radio is completely gone -- maybe 15-20 years hence, after the ethnic AM stations migrate completely to FM or the internet, FM will start being vacated for the internet. It's too bad that digital on AM wasn't introduced earlier on, it might have made a long term difference for the medium, or at least extended its life for a couple decades. As it is now, OTA radio has already seen the future -- all one has to do is take a listen to the Shortwaves today and that will be the state of FM and AM by the last half of the century.

 

[TheBigA]

When AM is reduced to Brother Stair on every remaining station, plus Cuban propaganda nonsense, now that is beyond useless and dead to me

Keep in mind there was a time when there was great programming on AM, and the audience left for FM. It's a 50 year process from Boss Radio to Brother Stair. It didn't happen all at once, and it didn't happen because of radio companies. They would have loved it if everything stayed as it was.

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

AM is expensive to maintain too.

KSKO went from 1 10KW full time AM transmitter to one Class D FM non comm as the "main" signal and 8 Class D non comm fm's as "Repeaters" as its much much cheaper to run.. and we cover more people, better now than the AM did.

For what it cost to run JUST THE AM transmitter for a year, we can run the ENTIRE operation now for 3-4 months.
(No city mains power, $6 to $8 a gallon for generator fuel, maintenance, repairs)

We dont cover a bunch of tundra tumbleweeds now, but more villages than before have perfect reception 24/7 because the FM signals are located in their village.. not 100-150-200 miles away. Plus, during solar upsets/storms, it would ruin anything but local AM radio reception

 

[ZantennaG1]

AM is expensive to maintain too.

KSKO went from 1 10KW full time AM transmitter to one Class D FM non comm as the "main" signal and 8 Class D non comm fm's as "Repeaters" as its much much cheaper to run.. and we cover more people, better now than the AM did.

For what it cost to run JUST THE AM transmitter for a year, we can run the ENTIRE operation now for 3-4 months.
(No city mains power, $6 to $8 a gallon for generator fuel, maintenance, repairs)

We dont cover a bunch of tundra tumbleweeds now, but more villages than before have perfect reception 24/7 because the FM signals are located in their village.. not 100-150-200 miles away. Plus, during solar upsets/storms, it would ruin anything but local AM radio reception

Yes AM is expensive no matter how you slice it. Would you say that the Alaskan Bush has poor ground conductivity, though? Perhaps an AM NPR station (You do run a public format, right?) would make better sense in the Dakotas, Kansas, or Manitoba/Saskatchewan where you've got CBK and CBW covering 400+ miles with one signal.