105.7 is live

[rbrucecarter5]

WOAI is geting with the 21st Century and finally broadcasting on FM! Bravo.

UGH! More useless talk on FM. What a waste of bandwidth. They can take all that piddle, drivel, and swill back to AM and leave it there. There are precious few FM stations playing music I care to listen to these days, and corporate radio is making the musical choices narrower by the day.

A little hint - people quit listening to AM when? When all this talk radio started. When they jam every FM frequency with this stuff, maybe people will quit FM as well.

The FCC should halt this giveaway of FM frequencies to AM stations, and roll back the ones they have already done. We don't want or need the same programming two spots on the dial. If an AM station wants an FM frequency, let them surrender the AM license when they start up on FM. At least that way, somebody might have a chance to broadcast something more relevant than syndicated talk.

This is also an indication that HD radio failed to catch on. WOAI was kind of the flagship station for AM HD. I've noted the sidebands have been off lately, meaning they threw in the towel. But I still don't know what the heck the use is for high fidelity and stereo on talk. You don't stereo mike the host. Speech is limited to 3.5kHz. Perfect match for AM. Why waste a perfectly good FM stereo signal on 3.5 kHz talk? It makes no sense!

 

[jras20]

For the first time I was able to pick up 105.7 when I had to go to Luling to do a on set job, I like AM better though it goes a lot farther.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

For the first time I was able to pick up 105.7 when I had to go to Luling to do a on set job, I like AM better though it goes a lot farther.

Nothing wrong with WOAI here in Houston, it is almost like a local since they switched the stupid HD sidebands off. MUCH stronger. So the building penetration - which is what the AM stations always moan about - is going to be much better in San Antonio.

There is some sort of paranoia that a station on AM will be "left behind". Unless somebody is afraid that future radios will somehow not even have an AM band - which is probably only going to happen if radio chips are included in cell phones - I'm not aware of any trend to abolish the AM band. iPod docks have AM. clock radios have AM. My AV receiver has AM. the shower radio has AM. My car radios have AM. The biggest problem AM has is that manufacturers are doing away with even minimal ferrite bars in favor of external loops - which are seldom even attached by buyers unless they are regular AM listeners. This is a manufacturing issue - if broadcasters got the FCC to mandate proper internal antennas for ALL AM radios, then AM would work on everything.

AM is at least easier to understand than the cryptic "stations between the stations" advertisement for HD radio, which probably made more DX'ers than HD listeners.

Talk belongs on AM. WOAI is one of the strongest signals in the country. Only its relatively high dial position limits it in any way, now that they have shut stupid HD off. The AM bandwidth is ideal for talk. Talk radio and AM radio are good matches for each other. Keep FM for music and AM for talk and sports.

 

[bturner]

To correct a point, AM listeners began migrating to FM en masse around the mid-1970s and in a few years overtook AM listening. AM radio stations continued to lose its listener base until Talk Radio emerged to bring life back to the AM dial. Now Talk Radio is trying FM in many markets to expand the listening base as the younger end of the demos don't go to the AM band. Love him or hate him, Rush gave AM stations a real shot in the arm as everyone in syndication began to jump on the bandwagon.

 

[sdh483]

Younger end of the demo? Since when do most younger ends listen to talk? You act like people 18-25 have never heard of AM in their whole lives.

I agree, makes no sense to have talk radio on FM. It sounds boring and dull. FM should stick to music formats, God knows we need more variety on FM. Talk and Religious stations aren't the answer, we have plenty of those.

 

[daypart]

Younger end of the demo? Since when do most younger ends listen to talk? You act like people 18-25 have never heard of AM in their whole lives.

I agree, makes no sense to have talk radio on FM. It sounds boring and dull. FM should stick to music formats, God knows we need more variety on FM. Talk and Religious stations aren't the answer, we have plenty of those.

The issue is actually that some of the younger demos are avoiding terrestrial radio altogether. I have a 20 year-old who has never voluntarily listened to music radio. He couldn't name a music station in this market at gunpoint. He gets his music online, on his Mac, on his iPod, on his phone, but not on the radio.

Talk is a format that still draws a broadcast audience. If music isn't drawing the audience that it used to, it's not unreasonable for FM programmers to shove it aside for talk.

 

[Infamous]

Is CC keeping WOAI on 105.7? I haven't heard anything promoting WOAI's 105.7 channel at all. I haven't listened to either frequency much, but I haven't heard anything about a new FM station mentioned on WOAI. I called their studio number once and the guy answering had absolutely no idea what I was talking about.

Just a thought but maybe the staff at WOAI doesn't even know they are on 105.7 FM because it's not their deal. Maybe Carlos Lopez just needed something to translate on that frequency so he opted to use WOAI?? Not sure if this is the case but I've been a lot of other translator owners do this before to sort of like to get the translator granted and to "park" the translator until they do something else with it or sell it off. You're suppose to get permission from the main station you're translating to do this but 8 out of 10 times they don't. They just simply apply with the FCC stating they will be translating "this station" or "that station". Carlos could have also just asked an Engineer or a GM under the table "hey can I translate WOAI on my translator for a couple of months" and they could could have just said yes with no intention on ever promoting or using the FM translator for their own agenda. Again, I don't know if this is the case but I have seen this done before just so the translator owner can get the translator granted and on the air until they do something else with it.

 

[fredcantu]

I'm not aware of any trend to abolish the AM band.

No, but the push to FM-only and digital broadcasting is going strong around the world. Even Mexico is well on its way to transitioning its AM stations to FM and longtime AM stations there are beginning to shut down.

Remember, receivers are not made just for the US market. If the makers can't sell AM worldwide they may stop making them.

 

[davideduardo]

I'm not aware of any trend to abolish the AM band.

AM is simply fading away, for a variety of reasons.

First is the rapidly increasing man-made noise level which reduces signal effectiveness by substantial amounts.

Second is the continuing urban sprawl and the concentration of populations in urban areas where even the best AM stations that were designed for 1934 conditions generally just don't cover their markets.

Third is the availability of music and information via smartphones, tablets, laptops and other new generation devices. The result is that AM, by comparison, sucks big time.

Then there is the issue that most people under 50 have grown up in an FM world where AM had nothing of interest. When you look at the stats, in some markets less than 5% of radio usage by this group goes to AM... and then it tends to be in a market where sports is only on an AM.

Fifth is the horrible quality of AM receivers over the last two decades, and now the relative lack of availability of stand-alone radios of any kind.

Finally, many devices with OTA radios don't have FM. I have several iPod docks, and none has AM. I have a non-Apple MP3 player, and it has FM but no AM.

Talk belongs on AM. WOAI is one of the strongest signals in the country. Only its relatively high dial position limits it in any way, now that they have shut stupid HD off. The AM bandwidth is ideal for talk. Talk radio and AM radio are good matches for each other. Keep FM for music and AM for talk and sports.

As the operators of successful AM talk stations from KSL to KIRO to WSB to WIBC to WWL have found, staying on AM alone is a death sentence. As the FM generations age, they don't go to AM for talk, even if they have a definite interest in some of the content. Yet when you move to FM or add an FM simulcast, suddenly the under-55 and under-50 groups like 35-54 or 35-49 move, sometimes dramatically, upwards. Folks under 55 like the programming, but they hate AM.

As Fred Cantú has mentioned, Mexico is moving over 80% of its AMs to FM, and the vacant frequencies will not be relicensed. The only reason 20% of the AMs will remain is that in certain areas of Mexico there is not enough FM room.

Canada has gradually moved about 60% of its AMs to FM, with only a few in major markets being relicensed to serve "underserved" communities.

Many nations, from Austria to South Africa to Jamaica have totally or almost entirely eliminated AM. In Latin America, in many countries from Ecuador to El Salvador, the AM station count is off by 25% to as much as half as AMs simply can't make money.

The Electron Priest is waiting outside to administer Last Rites.

 

[bturner]

Wow, what a cutting comments on my post. I think the poster needs to re-read it as I think you misunderstood.

AM radio typically reaches 50+ demos that grew up with AM radio. A 35 to 49 demo is YOUNGER or what can be called a Younger Demo! See what I mean?

Most 35 to 49 are on FM but some might choose talk radio. When talk radio began to take over the AM dial it was this 35-49 demo that was the core. To move to FM gives the opportunity to reach the 35-49 demo that would not likely choose AM over FM. We have seen this with Sports Talk that was traditionally an AM only format. Now it happens with Talk Radio. The reason is the need for younger demos.

I know 20 year olds are not as frequently radio listeners like the previous generation was. 18 to 25 has never been a target of Talk Radio.

Working in radio I sometimes forget to include full details in case readers are not in the business, assuming you get what I did not convey. I'll keep that in mind when I post. However, the sharp words are not needed and are just plain mean. For the life of me I can't figure how my post ruffled feather, it was so non-offensive in my mind.

 

[grantchester]

As a contrarian, I must disagree.
The idea that AM is fading leads corporations to move content to FM, and starve AM of content and promotion. Less content and less promotion mean fewer listeners. It's a self fulfilling prophesy; a feed-back loop; or maybe a death spiral.
At some point, as the license to broadcast on AM is devalued, it becomes economically viable for niche specific programming. As that happens, creative broadcasters will find ways to attract enough listeners to make a profit. The key will be to find unserved or underserved groups, and serve them.
On line? Wi-fi? 4-G? The move is to charge by the byte for bandwidth. AM is free to the listener. That's going to be a powerful advantage. It's going to be a race, though, to see if creative broadcasters can utilize the potential of free over the air broadcasting before the station license becomes worth less than the copper grounding wire in the transmitter array.

 

[davideduardo]

A little hint - people quit listening to AM when? When all this talk radio started. When they jam every FM frequency with this stuff, maybe people will quit FM as well.

People under 55 for the most part don't listen to AM, or listen very, very little.

Take a market like Houston... where there is the typical American situation of only a couple of reasonably viable signals on AM... the 18-49 share for AM is around a 5.

In NY, one of only a couple of US markets with a real handful of decent AMs, the 18-49 AM share is under 10, often as low as low as a mid-eight-percent share.

The reason why FM should have a complement of spoken word formats is not just that under-50's don't frequent the AM band but the fact that it makes it so much more convenient for all listeners to have all the formats they like on one band.

 

[davideduardo]

The idea that AM is fading leads corporations to move content to FM, and starve AM of content and promotion. Less content and less promotion mean fewer listeners. It's a self fulfilling prophesy; a feed-back loop; or maybe a death spiral.

The problem is that in the top 100 US markets, there are less than 200 viable AMs altogether. And that is with a loose definition of "viability" where I looked for stations that have a usable signal day and night that covers at least 80% of the metro.

A very few markets like New York and Chicago have over three viable AMs, and some, like DC, have none.

So it's very hard for an AM to compete with a deficient signal when comparable content comes on FM. And AM station owners know that, and try to anticipate being put in a vulnerable position where someone else take the FM mountain.

As those who do listen to AM get older and older and are not replaced by younger listeners, the band will die.

 

[fredcantu]

People under 55 for the most part don't listen to AM, or listen very, very little... In NY, one of only a couple of US markets with a real handful of decent AMs, the 18-49 AM share is under 10, often as low as low as a mid-eight-percent share.

If the AM radio dial can only draw 10% of the 18-49 demo in New York, what chance do smaller markets like San Antonio and Austin have. New York has so many 50,000 watt AM signals. And you can't say they're not spending on programming: We're talking amazing AM stations like WABC, WCBS, WINS, WOR and WFAN.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

If the AM radio dial can only draw 10% of the 18-49 demo in New York, what chance do smaller markets like San Antonio and Austin have. New York has so many 50,000 watt AM signals. And you can't say they're not spending on programming: We're talking amazing AM stations like WABC, WCBS, WINS, WOR and WFAN.

Replying to several of these posts here ---

First and foremost - WABC is NOT an amazing radio station. It WAS amazing when it was musicradio WABC top-40. It was a tough DX target from Texas because of stupid KOB, but the end result was worth it. The music died, and with it WABC. Now it is just another talker. Bor-ring!

Secondly, I welcome the trend to turn off AM in Mexico. Get ALL those border blasters off of there, for good! The AM band is jammed enough as it is, without having high power Mexican stations into the mix. You would think they are doing this on purpose, but of course they wouldn't do that, because they couldn't sell advertising outside their city of license.

I agree the AM band is dying. HD radio was just one more nail in the coffin because it increases the noise on the band, which was already intolerable. The FCC killed AM many years ago by failing to stick to the reason why the original FRC was founded - to keep interference off the band:

(1) The FCC licensed too many stations on each frequency, at too high of a power.
(2) They allowed "critical hours" broadcasting with too much power when signal propagate.
(3) They dropped the ball when Mexico wanted to supersize signals over the US.
(4) They did nothing to regulate interference from florescent lighting, light dimmers, applicances, DSL, wifi, and a myriad of other sources. All of them should have been forced to redesign until they did not cause interference.
(5) They rubber stamped defective HD radio technology for AM

What we are left with is an unsalvagable mess. And they are repeating the disaster by trying to give every AM that is losing money an FM frequency - in the process re-making the FM band in the image of AM. Too many stations with too much power, interfering with each other. At this rate, the FM band will be an unsalvagable cacophony of interfering signals in a few years.

The FCC does NOTHING to stop interference - and therefore is not fulfilling its first, and most important mandate. It should be abolished immediately. You can't put 117 AM and 100 FM signals on in every city - but that is what the FCC is aiming to do. In places like New YOrk and Los Angeles, even Orlando - it is now possible to receive 70 or 80 FM stations. And at night, anywhere in the US, you can hear stations on all AM frequencies. It would be a DX'ers paradise, except there are multiple stations on each frequency. I haven't verified this, but I bet you can get at least carriers if not modulation from US stations everywhere on the planet at night. That is overkill, gross negligent mismanagement, almost criminal destruction of a band that is supposed to be operated in the public interest. When everybody has a station - nobody does - because there is so much interference.

 

[Mediafrog+]

AM radio has been in a death spiral since the 1970's, long before many if not most of the present day interference issues. As Bill Clinton might say, "It's the fidelity, stupid." The difference between FM and AM was then readily apparent even to the non-audiophile listener.

Any large reduction in the number of signals on AM would greatly limit the amount of programming choices, with the unintended result of driving whatever listeners are left to other distribution platforms, most of which didn't exist years ago. The days of "one size fits all" formats are long gone as programming has become too fragmented.

In many parts of the world, the number of AM stations have been kept relatively low but extremely high transmitter powers are allowed, often many hundreds of kilowatts; sometimes even over a Megawatt. Despite the blockbuster signals, AM is still dying in those places as well.

I'll bang the drum again: The FM band should be expanded down to 76 MHz, which would allow many if not most AM stations to migrate there. This puts all radio stations on the same band, with the same reception characteristics, and the same fidelity.

However, a more realistic future probably involves technology that is "platform agnostic"...a smartphone or smartradio that has apps that find whatever programming you want, without regard to the distribution method. The listener wouldn't know or care how it is getting to them because "it just works."

 

[davideduardo]

First and foremost - WABC is NOT an amazing radio station. It WAS amazing when it was musicradio WABC top-40. It was a tough DX target from Texas because of stupid KOB, but the end result was worth it. The music died, and with it WABC. Now it is just another talker. Bor-ring!

While WABC is not, perhaps, the world's best talker, you still are talking about a station that cumes the equivalent of the total population of the SA market.

And the "music died" on WABC because, despite being one of the last significant Top 40 holdouts and doing a darned fine job of it, the listeners had gone to FM stations that sounded a whole heck of a lot better.

Secondly, I welcome the trend to turn off AM in Mexico. Get ALL those border blasters off of there, for good! The AM band is jammed enough as it is, without having high power Mexican stations into the mix.

There are no real border blasters left... XERF is running just 100 kw (and 1570 is a Mexican clear channel) and XEROK is down to 50 kw (on a clear shared by Mexico and Canada). XEG in Monterrey does not run its full 150 kw. End of list. There have been no other "Border Blasters" for the last 50 years, and all have been legal, licensed and approved by the USA via NARBA.

In any event, among the 170 AMs that will remain in Mexico are nearly all the border stations because the band is too congested in that area to accommodate moves to FM.

They dropped the ball when Mexico wanted to supersize signals over the US.

You do know, don't you, that Mexico insisted on being allowed higher power on their clears in the NARBA negotiations in the late 30's because the US was "dumping" so many night directional stations on Mexico? Along the Gulf and the Mexican border states, US stations that wanted to increase night power from the 1934 standard of 5 day 1 night on the regional channels ended up shooting their major lobe over the city of license and then south, making the radio dial in Mexico at night sound more like Kentucky than The United Mexican States.

Since night listening was radio's bread and butter back in the 40's, Mexico felt they had to have some big stations, like XEW, XEX, XEQ and others to effectively deliver programming to the more rural areas where all people could get were the major lobes of US stations!

And, in your criticism, you forget that Canada "supersized" as well. 50 kw on regional channels when the US limited them to 5 kw, and 10 kw on local channels when the FCC limited them to 1 kw.

I haven't verified this, but I bet you can get at least carriers if not modulation from US stations everywhere on the planet at night.

Just, simply, not true. The rest of the world has tens of thousands of AM stations still, so nearly any effort to find a US signal results in no reception unless you are well placed with 1000 meter long antennas and high end communications receivers aimed at North America.

When, as recently as the early 60's, many frequencies were completely clear on the mainland US during the Sunday night maintenance period, it was indeed a challenge to get foreign stations other than the neighboring nations of North America. Hearing Egypt or Australia from the Midwest on totally clear channels was something that happened perhaps once or twice a year. The reverse is true regarding US stations... perhaps more so because the US licensed stations with such low powers while most of the rest of the world, sensibly, considers 5 kw to be low power and 50 kw to be medium power.

 

[fredcantu]

rbrucecarter5, I would love to hear a recording of the 70-80 FM signals you can receive at one location. Maybe you can post one on youtube. How many are truly listenable to anyone except we true DXers? There will always be marginal signals until we go to all-digital broadcasting with it's infamous "cliff effect" where you either have enough signal to lock in a perfect signal or you have nothing at all.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

rbrucecarter5, I would love to hear a recording of the 70-80 FM signals you can receive at one location. Maybe you can post one on youtube. How many are truly listenable to anyone except we true DXers? There will always be marginal signals until we go to all-digital broadcasting with it's infamous "cliff effect" where you either have enough signal to lock in a perfect signal or you have nothing at all.

Those were on rental car radios. Stock from the factory. Bandscans in those cities are amazing. I am surprised so many first adjacents come in so well. LA and Orlando are since the HD radio debacle - first adjacents still manage to punch in over the interference.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

There are no real border blasters left... XERF is running just 100 kw (and 1570 is a Mexican clear channel) and XEROK is down to 50 kw (on a clear shared by Mexico and Canada). XEG in Monterrey does not run its full 150 kw. End of list. There have been no other "Border Blasters" for the last 50 years, and all have been legal, licensed and approved by the USA via NARBA.

I know it sounds like I am picking on Mexico, which probably has something to do with the fact that on just about any frequency out of town (Houston), the dominant language is Spanish. Since Houston is at least 300 miles from Mexico, it seems to me that a whole lot of Mexican stations are pumping power over the US uselessly. If they re-directed that power over their intended audience, they would probably better serve them.

No doubt those near the Northern border bemoan the Canadian invasion, but at least it isn't a foreign language. Unless they are getting Quebec stations. Either way, I don't speak foreign and wish they would keep their signal over their intended coverage area. And - US stations should do the same.