• 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

94.3 The River

R

RadioOCD

Ok so last July, 94.3 WWNQ rebranded as classic hits "The River". Now they are taking a more classic rock approach. Do they realize it's a crowded house already? Even WEKL 105.7 out of Augusta is showing some numbers with their classic rock format! We all know Fox 102 isn't looking THAT great now either. What's it gonna take for someone in the Columbia market to WAKE UP?
 
Not only that but their signal is so weak that it is hard to pick up over here in parts of West Columbia as well. I personally think they made one huge mistake of getting rid of the classic country format that seemed to be doing much better than New 92 was doing at the time.
 
I generally pick up their signal all the way to St Mathews unless there is a band opening and of course that can't be helped. I will agree that their change in format from classic country was a huge let down for Columbia by a lot of people no matter what the ratings say the truth is how many people do you really have listening and quit often the ratings don't really seem to reflect everything that is going on in your listening area, it is a good guide but not the end all system that some in broadcast radio try to make it out to be and for that reason some radio stations that are axed often are doing much better than certain people think and some stations that seem to need to be axed simply slip by and keep going.
 
Can anyone in the know tell me why their audio is so "muddy"? I'm talking about lack of fidelity, not signal strength or static.
 
I almost wonder if the real issue is whatever they are using for an STL. The audio almost sounds heavily data-compressed.
 
We've either run out of ideas, or we're tired of Tim Miller calling to rant every time someone says something critical.
 
DudeFan said:
We've either run out of ideas, or we're tired of Tim Miller calling to rant every time someone says something critical.
Click to expand...

Here's a third option...no one cares about what Sleepy 92 or Muddy 94 are doing anyway.
 
But we just can't help ourselves! :D

When I listen casually (if that's possible) to the River, I find their playlist to be to my liking but I just can't listen through the muddddd! I can't even analyze the other aspects of the station b/c I can't bear to hear the lack of even decent audio fidelity.
 
I remember when they were still "Classic Counntry" and visiting SC how their audio sounded.... Some of the audio files sounded like they were laded at a lower bit rate... Some sounded like a cheap 64K file... Optimods if set right do sound good, but finding them is the problem... Too bad I won't get to hear The River till July, but from the sounds of it I am gonna have to get a little mud on the tire eh? CC1
 
Caroll:

Short description of the audio. It sounds like bit-reduced files, played back through something with no dynamic range and a low-cut and high-cut filter, so everything is mid-range. Drums have no impact and sound like you are tapping your finger on the bottom of a waxed-paper Dixie cup.

WLTY had audio issues for a good part of the day. Based on the way it sounded (and the digital stammering and skipping last night), my guess is that their IBOC importer/exporter took a dump. Not surprising, given almost all the IBOC stuff is run on Windows.
 
Hey Steve if it sounds that bad muddy might be to nice of a description instead more like swampy LOL... Being serious now that is the problem with a lot of stations now a days... Not only do they lack persomality, but a lot of them also lack the basics of good radio... To me good radio starts all the way rom the top all the way to the bottom and yes good audio is a part of the deal... Here in Rockford most stations have the sound of small town USA which to them as long as they are making money let's just settle at best and not be great. When we moved WPUB from 94.3 top 102.7 it took us atleast 6 months to get the audio where it should be... Of course I am sure by now some of the settings have been changed, but at one time between what me, Fayne, and Phil worked on made our little small town oldies station have a much bigger sound then what WOMG had. We were loud, but not tiring, We had good punch, but not like a top 40 station... I guess being sight impaired I am always on the look out for that certain sound and the only station I have heard that from believe it or not was the newly launched K-Hits in Chicago, but good sounding stations to me are getting fewer and far in between... CC1
 
It seems like alot of the newer digital processing is all about loudness but not much on broad sound quality. It reminds me of audio being beaten up againest a brick wall, the depth and seperation of the sound is gone even if the audio is clear. I am still running an Optimod 8600a and kinda of hate when the day comes I have to change it, right now our sound still sounds really good.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom