• 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

A CBS Boston exec told me WSCR headed to 104.3 shortly

audioguy said:
Such a shame to lose K-Hits to a copycast of 670. This is yet another sign of the deterioration of broadcasting in this country. More and more duplicated signals. What a waste of spectrum! Ridiculous. The FCC should outlaw this.

It wouldn't be a duplicate (as WBBM NewsRadio is). It would be a different broadcast. It would also give Chicago three full-time sports stations, which is at least two too many, and I'm a sports fan.

Say this actually happens. It would be the first long-form network program on 670 since what, Monitor? And that eventually moved to WMAQ-FM.
 
tvnut said:
audioguy said:
Such a shame to lose K-Hits to a copycast of 670. This is yet another sign of the deterioration of broadcasting in this country. More and more duplicated signals. What a waste of spectrum! Ridiculous. The FCC should outlaw this.

It wouldn't be a duplicate (as WBBM NewsRadio is). It would be a different broadcast. It would also give Chicago three full-time sports stations, which is at least two too many, and I'm a sports fan.

Say this actually happens. It would be the first long-form network program on 670 since what, Monitor? And that eventually moved to WMAQ-FM.

I think we all agree that we are appalled at what is happening to AM all across the US.

3 years ago WBZ-FM in Boston launched sports radio against longtime leader WEEI 850 and in 3 months they caught WEEI. Now WBZ-FM was helped by CBS moving the Patriot's and Bruins play-by-play contract to 98.5 from WBCN and WBZ-AM ( WEEI 850 had Red Sox and Celtics)

One year ago WEEI moved to FM ( Entercom blew up popular Mike-FM on 93.7 ) and WEEI regained the lead. Truth is there are a lot of people under the age of 40 who have NEVER listened to AM.

HD Radio has been an epic fail on FM and on AM the IBOC hash has destroyed many legacy signals.
 
Fenway1912 said:
I think we all agree that we are appalled at what is happening to AM all across the US.

I don't understand what is appalling. AM radio began its decline soon after the FCC mandated the end to FM simulcasts, and now two generations of Americans have grown up without any real habit of listening to AM. In fact, for many the only reason to listen to AM for many has been sports, particularly play by play.

AM broadcasting is a 100 year old technology. FM is going on 75. As content delivery moves to newer technologies, it will decline too. That should neither be surprising nor appalling.

Truth is there are a lot of people under the age of 40 who have NEVER listened to AM.

The main reason is that AM sounds inferior to FM, is subject to all kinds of noise, and most stations don't even cover their whole markets, and that's why more and more people have no use for AM and haven not had any use for it in decades.

HD Radio has been an epic fail on FM and on AM the IBOC hash has destroyed many legacy signals.

HD on FM may indeed have little success, although NPR might disagree. And on AM, HD digital noise does not affect any significant AM station in its metro area. So HD can't be blamed for the change in the way consumers want content delivered.
 
Fenway1912 said:
I agree in principal but I also can not ignore that in virtually every market where an AM signal is now being heard on a FM simulcast the bottom line has improved.

One of those exceptions is New York 1 ESPN' s LMA of an Emmis FM

http://www.radio-info.com/stations/wepn-fm


Fenway1912 said:
I would love to see the WBBM breakdown between AM and FM - same in Boston with WEEI and Philly with WIP.

That would be very interesting especially WBBM with disparity in coverage that David Eduardo pointed out in an early post. With the FM's only delivering 74% of the market population. Of course WBBM AM 780 can't quite cover as much area 670 verses 780 but WBBM dose show up in a lot of out of market surveys like WSCR:

http://www.radio-info.com/stations/wbbm-am

verses

http://www.radio-info.com/stations/wscr-am
 
WBBM's tower is a little more efficient than WSCR's. And many radios become less sensitive as you go lower on the dial, that is they are factory peaked at a higher frequency. Sometimes that is for the middle of the dial, sometimes near the high end. All this means that WBBM's coverage is about the same, and that has been my observation for over 40 years with all kinds of radios, even here in SE Michigan.
 
Is Does WIND "cover" as many people as 780 of 670? I use to live in Libertyville in the 1960's and 560's signal was on par with 890 and 1000. Or does the "less sensitive as you go lower on the dial" effect them?
 
secondchoice said:
One of those exceptions is New York 1 ESPN' s LMA of an Emmis FM

But it is quite possible that, even with the $8 million LMA fee, that the bottom line may be improving by being on FM.

I would love to see the WBBM breakdown between AM and FM - same in Boston with WEEI and Philly with WIP.

Once a station elects single line reporting (available only as an option for 100% simulcasts) there is no break-out data available. Even the station does not get it, unless they pay a considerable amount for a special tabulation.
 
secondchoice said:
Is Does WIND "cover" as many people as 780 of 670? I use to live in Libertyville in the 1960's and 560's signal was on par with 890 and 1000. Or does the "less sensitive as you go lower on the dial" effect them?

WIND beams its signal more to the northwest, to cover the Chicago metro from its transmitter in NW Indiana. 5 kW on 560 will allow for excellent coverage - about as good as WYLL's 50 kW on 1160 would be if they used the same transmitter site and antenna pattern.
 
secondchoice said:
Is Does WIND "cover" as many people as 780 of 670? I use to live in Libertyville in the 1960's and 560's signal was on par with 890 and 1000. Or does the "less sensitive as you go lower on the dial" effect them?

5 mV/m coverage for WIND is 7.6 million, vs. 11.6 for WSCR and 12.5 million for WBBM and 12.8 milllion for WGN.
 
WIND is directed NW (major lobe)and SE (minor lobe) in the daytime. I would say yes, it does affect them. You can really see it if the radio is from the early days of transistor radios and has a tuning meter on it. I have a Sony like that that I got at an antique show. The meter deflection is proportional to the AVC voltage. High end stations deflect the meter more for the same actual field strength than the low end stations. Also I had a 1970 Impala, the first with the windshield antenna that I had, and the low end was a disaster. I remember hearing white noise on local stations at the low end. I tried the trimmer behind the tuning knob but still couldn't get rid of the low end band noise. Probably if you are using a GE SuperRadio, or one of the extra TRF sets, it may not be true. DXers and other radio types tend to gravitate to radios that will maximize coverage rather than "equalize" coverage across the band. But I'd say for the typical listener with cheap radios built for FM rather than AM, it's still true. But the FM RF and IF sections aren't that good either. The FM IF's are usually ridiculously wide, making it difficult to hear second adjacents, so you aren't tempted to listen to "suburban" and nearby market stations, which might have a more imaginative format. If you can't get the station, it can't show up on PPMs, right?
 
DavidEduardo said:
Fenway1912 said:
WSCR on FM can deliver the Chicago billable market.

I don't know what the term "billable" means, but will assume you mean "the entire metro survey area."

The Willis and Hancock B's deliver about 6 million in the 65 dbu contour, and about 7 million in the 60 dbu contour.

The market is 9.34 million.

WSCR delivers over 11 million in its 5 mV/m contour.

So an FM does not deliver the market... as to in-home and at work listening, where a 65 dbu signal is pretty much a minimum, they miss a third of the population.

Add to that, the fact that WSCR, WGN, and WBBM all transmit from the most desirable area in the Chicago metro other than the near-north side of the city and the Winnetka/Wilmette/Kenilworth rich-folks' area (both solid Cubs country): Northwest Cook and Dupage Counties. Even the Sears Willis Tower FMs start having trouble as one drives west of the Tri-State Tollway. In these areas, the 50 kW AMs do better than the FMs in the city.

But if these stations want to reach the Loop and near north side, then they'd have to get an FM because the AMs don't come in well there, what with all the tall buildings causing reception problems both inside them and while driving downtown (How do the NYC stations do so well in Manhattan? I would think that would be even worse). Of the three (WSCR, WGN, and WBBM), I would think that WSCR would be the one that needs an FM the least, since they do so well already in the areas where Sox fans live.
 
scanman1 said:
I hope that's not true. Right now, K-Hits is my number 1 station of choice! The presentation is good, the music selection has improved and even the processing sounds good now. Besides, 670 covers the Chicagoland area completely, and even goes further out to make it accessable to folks who are transplants from Chicago and like to keep up with sports here. So my message to CBS is: let's keep K-Hits on the air! 8)
You know cbs radio. I'm fairly certain the executive meetings go something along these lines:
"People are actually listening to one of our stations!"
"Oh Dear Lord! No! QUICK! CHANGE THE FORMAT TO POLKA NOW!"
 
DavidEduardo said:
secondchoice said:
Is Does WIND "cover" as many people as 780 of 670? I use to live in Libertyville in the 1960's and 560's signal was on par with 890 and 1000. Or does the "less sensitive as you go lower on the dial" effect them?

5 mV/m coverage for WIND is 7.6 million, vs. 11.6 for WSCR and 12.5 million for WBBM and 12.8 milllion for WGN.

I don't know what WMVP's daytime totals are, but WMVP is the only station to put a 25 mV/m predicted signal over the entire City of Chicago, day and night. WIND's directional pattern cuts off some of the market as well as the maximum lobe not being as big as the nondirectional 50 kW stations. Pretty good signal for 5000 watts though.
 
KeithE4 said:
DavidEduardo said:
Fenway1912 said:
WSCR on FM can deliver the Chicago billable market.

I don't know what the term "billable" means, but will assume you mean "the entire metro survey area."

The Willis and Hancock B's deliver about 6 million in the 65 dbu contour, and about 7 million in the 60 dbu contour.

The market is 9.34 million.

WSCR delivers over 11 million in its 5 mV/m contour.

So an FM does not deliver the market... as to in-home and at work listening, where a 65 dbu signal is pretty much a minimum, they miss a third of the population.

Add to that, the fact that WSCR, WGN, and WBBM all transmit from the most desirable area in the Chicago metro other than the near-north side of the city and the Winnetka/Wilmette/Kenilworth rich-folks' area (both solid Cubs country): Northwest Cook and Dupage Counties. Even the Sears Willis Tower FMs start having trouble as one drives west of the Tri-State Tollway. In these areas, the 50 kW AMs do better than the FMs in the city.

But if these stations want to reach the Loop and near north side, then they'd have to get an FM because the AMs don't come in well there, what with all the tall buildings causing reception problems both inside them and while driving downtown (How do the NYC stations do so well in Manhattan? I would think that would be even worse). Of the three (WSCR, WGN, and WBBM), I would think that WSCR would be the one that needs an FM the least, since they do so well already in the areas where Sox fans live.

I think the stations with transmitters in NJ are much closer to Manhattan than Addison/Roselle/Itasca is to The Loop, and stations like WINS, WOR, WEPN, and WADO BLAST into Manhattan because their directional antennas concentrate the signal toward it, even though the conductivity in Manhattan is very low.
 
This report came out of New York a month ago concerning a possible move to FM for WFAN
http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/signs-in-air-for-wfan-to-make-fm-jump_

In May, Brian Thomas left WCBS-FM for CBS Radio in Tampa. Instead of hiring from outside or even promoting from within, to fill that spot, CBS gave Jim Ryan a dual programming role. He was hired in 2011 as the Fresh 102.7 program director. Therefore, in a effort to “keep the seat warm,” once a move is decided, WFAN can easily take over the 102.7 spot.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if CBS uses 660 as a clearing house for the CBS Sports Network while 102.7 maintains a local angle,” the source tells FishbowlNY.
 
audioguy said:
Such a shame to lose K-Hits to a copycast of 670. This is yet another sign of the deterioration of broadcasting in this country. More and more duplicated signals. What a waste of spectrum! Ridiculous. The FCC should outlaw this.
You can blame the Republicans and the Telecommunications Act of 1996
for this.


Old Chicago
 
Fenway1912 said:
cd637299 said:
^ It's the future of radio, anyway. Music will be thinned out more and more over the years....what exists on AM will eventually be on FM. It'll take some markets longer than others. What's on FM now, will be downloaded in the future.

I believe that even WGN will have to purchase an FM eventually. How soon, I could not say.

cd


WGN at one time owned WFMT. They from what I hear GAVE the station (did not sell) to WTTW in the early 70's. I bet they are kicking
themselves in the rear now for doing that.


Old Chicago

It appears Tribune Broadcasting is for sale but the buyers of the TV stations may not want an AM.

Most likely buyer of WGN Radio?

Merlin (Randy)

ugh
 
OldChicago said:
WGN at one time owned WFMT. They from what I hear GAVE the station (did not sell) to WTTW in the early 70's. I bet they are kicking themselves in the rear now for doing that.

Tribune's getting rid of WFMT was the end-result of a 1968 court order that is still in effect. It's not like they had a choice. Tribune is still not allowed to own an FM station as long as it owns the newspaper, AM 720, and Channel 9. One of those would have to go.
 
OldChicago said:
This is yet another sign of the deterioration of broadcasting in this country. More and more duplicated signals. What a waste of spectrum! Ridiculous. The FCC should outlaw this.

You can blame the Republicans and the Telecommunications Act of 1996
for this.

Simulcasting was re-allowed when the FCC realized that the goal of prohibiting it, way back in 1967, had been achieved; FM could stand on its own legs.

On the other hand, the FCC realizes that AM is in deep trouble. Most AM allocations, based on the original frequency plans from the late 20's and early 30's, are now way to low powered for the urban sprawl of the later decades.

For example, in those around-1930-days, a power of 5 kw day and 1 kw night was considered very adequate to serve large cities. 250 watts on one of the 6 local channels was thought to be enough for the smaller population centers, ranging from Bakersfield to Atlantic City.

Today, those levels are inadequate even in smaller sized metros.

And the FCC thought that having enough stations in each large market to carry each of the major networks was really enough... meaning two or three stations per larger market around 1940.

Many more AMs were licensed post-WW II, and the majority of them were daytimers or fulltime stations shoehorned into the original allocation plans and most suck totally. As a side effect, the ones that are fulltime add tons of interference to the band.

Then the FCC ruined the local channels by allowing first 1 kw daytime, then all the time. After that, they broke down the clear channels, allowing many new facilities on the clear channels.

There's more... but the main point is that none of this happened due to reregulation in 1996, none had to do with the Republicans and all ended up making the AM dial congested and pretty useless to most Amercians.

The FCC did not enforce rules against man made interference, so in most places where 2 to 5 mV/m was enough signal to listen to AM, now it takes 15 mV/m to overcome the dimmers, CFLs and microprocessors. Man made noise has reduced the effective coverage of metro area AMs by as much as 75%.

Canada realized there is no turning back, and has graudually allowed about 65% of all AMs to move to FM. Mexico, in an act of congress, has declared that AM is not economically sustainable and that as many as possible of the nation's 860 AMs should move to FM and the AM channels permanently deleted; all but 170 AMs are now moving to GM and the band will be totally empty in most of the nation soon.

It's easy to blame the 1996 legislation or a particular administration or party. The fact is that AM is 100 year old technology that has been superseded by, first, FM and now by new media distribution channels.
 
Schroedingers Cat said:
I don't know what WMVP's daytime totals are, but WMVP is the only station to put a 25 mV/m predicted signal over the entire City of Chicago, day and night.

WMVP puts a 5 mV/m over 9.1 million, just about the population of the Metro Survey Area (Cook, IL, DuPage, IL,Grundy, IL,Kane, IL,Kendall, IL,Lake, IL,McHenry, IL,Will, IL,Lake, IN,Porter, IN,Kenosha, WI) but I suspect that some of it is lost over IN and IL counties not in the metro. Still, a very adequate signal.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom