• 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

Achilles Heel of FM Translators ?

kfbkfb

kfbkfb

I listen to 3 FM translators - 102.5, 103.7 (less now), 106.9 (I'm the local reception range for all 3).

I tried using my Sony ICF-C218 clock radio to listen to 103.7, couldn't tune it in, I bought a Sony CDF-S70 w/digital tuner for 103.7.

I just tried my Sony ICF-P26 pocket radio - couldn't tune in 103.7.

I then tried my Sony ICF-P27 pocket radio (DSP based) - it did tune in 103.7.


If (local) FM translators can't be tuned in on some (maybe most) analog tuned FM radios, how does allowing an AM to have an FM translator help?


Kirk Bayne
 
Ya sorta answered your own question...

"Location, location, location."

-or-

Crappy receivers

--or--

(the real answer...)

A combination of both.
 
I'm the local reception range for all 3 FM translators, I was a little surprised that the (DSP based) Sony pocket radio was able to tune in 103.7 whereas the analog Sony pocket radio wasn't.


Kirk Bayne
 
crap radios and poor building penetration

250 watts on a tall tower will have great overall coverage, but analog dial tuned radios won't have the precise tuning and selectivity required
 
I don't know if there is any data out there to show either way, but I question the business effectiveness of translators here in the 21st Century. Consumers don't think like radio nerds who will switch to a different frequency than the main promoted one, or like Kirk, who intentionally listens to translators. Yeah, I know..
Back in the day, say thirty years ago when radio was the only game in town, listeners would actively switch if they knew there was an alternative to the main signal fading out within a limited geographic area. Fast forward thirty years and with the alternatives to a signal fading out, say I can listen to SXM from coast to coast or can fire up AppleCarplay and stream music, entertainment, or news coast to coast.
In other words; how many normal/average listeners of radio-or radio adjacent programming today actively listen to the limited coverage of translators, let alone know-about or even bother switching from the main channel to the translator? Or, are we broadcasters just delusional in thinking that if we put a signal of the same programming out there, that someone will bother listening to it? I'm sure there are outlying communities that rely on a translator because of terrain, or because it's been there since Christ was a corporal, blah, blah, but what is the documented impact, positive or negative, of sticking a translator on the air here, now, this year?
 
It depends on the translator of course, but certainly some of them are working well.

Look at WFNI in Indianapolis -- Emmis ran FM translators for their 50kw AM for years, and when they got an attractive offer for the AM tower site, they shut off the AM and replaced it with two 250w translators. Ratings didn't take a major hit, and years later, the HD2 fed translators are still getting decent ratings.

As others have mentioned, location and technical specs matter, but so does the format, of course.

Here in Madison, iHeart has an HD2 oldies station on a 250 watt translator that's outperforming 2 class A FMs (at least in the 12+ numbers), even though the translator only covers the center of the market. The translator's antenna is on a tall (650ft) tower, so even at just 250 watts, it gets out pretty well. Anecdotally, as far as building penetration ... my barber used to always have Magic 98 (WMGN) on at their shop, now it's always U100.9. At least in the core of the market, building penetration seems fine (I'm able to pick it up on my kitchen radio just fine, too).

Other Madison area translators, with less impressive technical specs, less optimal tower sites, and less popular formats have seen much smaller ratings. But I imagine even with these stations, the translators are responsible for more listening than the parent AM, and the AM would be off the air by now without the FM translator. Given the miniscule ratings, it's hard for me to imagine the stations are making much money, translator or no.

Seems like most AM stations at this point will only be around for as long as it takes for someone to make an offer for the tower real estate or the AM transmitter plant to develop a prohibitively expensive problem to repair. If the format is getting significant ratings and a translator is available, it can continue on as an HD2 translator like KDWN in Las Vegas. Audacy replaced a 25kw on 720AM with a 250watt translator and the translator now has about the same ratings. Not great ratings, but I see the 250w translator just beat Vegas' Class C (22kw @ 3,900ft) NPR affiliate in the latest monthly 12+ ratings.
 
jlalande said:
It depends on the translator of course, but certainly some of them are working well.

Look at WFNI in Indianapolis -- Emmis ran FM translators for their 50kw AM for years, and when they got an attractive offer for the AM tower site, they shut off the AM and replaced it with two 250w translators. Ratings didn't take a major hit, and years later, the HD2 fed translators are still getting decent ratings.
Click to expand...
And I agree with that view. Legacy translators with established coverage and a listener base over many years are no doubt still viable. That's easily documented/monitored in the form of ratings and revenue. To that point, my question is whether a broadcaster shoehorning another translator on the band is going to see any return on that investment. Or, just like one could argue about what happened to the AM band over the years; is band congestion creating more problems than it solves?
jlalande said:
As others have mentioned, location and technical specs matter, but so does the format, of course.
Click to expand...
Exactly, content is King. Always has been, and always will be.
 
The Achilles’ heel for translators on the east coast is tropospheric ducting wiping them out with adjacent full power co-channels. Especially during morning drive in spring and early summer.
 
w00t said:
The Achilles’ heel for translators on the east coast is tropospheric ducting wiping them out with adjacent full power co-channels. Especially during morning drive in spring and early summer.
Click to expand...

I lived 1 1/2 miles from a super translator on 94.5...... 250 Watts on a tall tower on a tall hill and tropo would semi regularly wipe it out for WNED Buffalo 110-115 miles away, once in a blue moon, HD from Pittsburgh and now and then WNED's HD and twice in 2 years, HD 2 form Houston
 
Kelly A said:
I don't know if there is any data out there to show either way, but I question the business effectiveness of translators here in the 21st Century. Consumers don't think like radio nerds who will switch to a different frequency than the main promoted one, or like Kirk, who intentionally listens to translators. Yeah, I know..
Back in the day, say thirty years ago when radio was the only game in town, listeners would actively switch if they knew there was an alternative to the main signal fading out within a limited geographic area. Fast forward thirty years and with the alternatives to a signal fading out, say I can listen to SXM from coast to coast or can fire up AppleCarplay and stream music, entertainment, or news coast to coast.
In other words; how many normal/average listeners of radio-or radio adjacent programming today actively listen to the limited coverage of translators, let alone know-about or even bother switching from the main channel to the translator? Or, are we broadcasters just delusional in thinking that if we put a signal of the same programming out there, that someone will bother listening to it? I'm sure there are outlying communities that rely on a translator because of terrain, or because it's been there since Christ was a corporal, blah, blah, but what is the documented impact, positive or negative, of sticking a translator on the air here, now, this year?
Click to expand...
I think you've hit the nail on the head. Even with the interference issues on AM, in my experience, the AM primary signal has a far greater coverage than the translator.

Outside of the downtown of the city of license (close to the transmitter, in other words), translators are often very spotty with lots of multipath issues, etc. Add in walls of a building, etc. and the effective range of a lot of translators is actually quite small.

I'm not sure how many listeners are bouncing from translator to translator, but my guess is... not many.
 
I know of many translators that put out a powerful signal. The ones in Montgomery can be heard in Selma, when the wind is blowing right. The ones we have here are very powerful and can be heard up to 33 to 50 miles, when the wind is blowing right. I can even hear the one from Marion, although Greenville's Q 94.3 tends to fight with them. My own LPFM has a coverage area of around 35 miles, in certain directions, when the wind is blowing right. The new antenna, line and transmitter is working very well. They're performing like a well oiled machine.

Dan <><​
 
Last edited:
R.D.P. said:
I know of many translators that put out a powerful signal. The ones in Montgomery can be heard in Selma, when the wind is blowing right. The ones we have here are very powerful and can be heard up to 33 to 50 miles, when the wind is blowing right. I can even hear the one from Marion, although Greenville's Q 94.3 tends to fight with them. My own LPFM has a coverage area of around 35 miles, in certain directions, when the wind is blowing right. The new antenna, line and transmitter is working very well. They're performing like a well oiled machine.

Dan <><​
Click to expand...
"When the wind is blowing right."

But to the average listener, if they can't get the station consistently... They aren't going to be a consistent listener and after a couple of times tuning in to nothingness will probably stop trying. That's an issue that daytimer AMs have been fighting for a long, long time and is one of the reasons why they were granted low power overnight in many cases starting in the late 80s. (Morning/Afternoon Drive being the other, probably bigger reason).

Radio nerds like the folks on this forum will try different radio placement, antennas, swap out lightbulbs, turn off TVs, etc. The average Joe, though? If the station doesn't come in clearly and consistently when they turn on their radio, they probably won't keep listening.

Our 50,000 watt AM in Pittsburgh, KDKA, has a translator that's 99 watts (I believe) and it gets out pretty good. Hasn't really helped their ratings much so far as I can tell, though. It also has nowhere near the coverage the AM does, even in the suburbs around the city (15-20 miles out, which is prime listening area for the station). Granted, 99 watts is never going to equal 50,000 watts, but still.
 
AMRadioGuy said:
"When the wind is blowing right."

But to the average listener, if they can't get the station consistently... They aren't going to be a consistent listener and after a couple of times tuning in to nothingness will probably stop trying. That's an issue that daytimer AMs have been fighting for a long, long time and is one of the reasons why they were granted low power overnight in many cases starting in the late 80s. (Morning/Afternoon Drive being the other, probably bigger reason).

Radio nerds like the folks on this forum will try different radio placement, antennas, swap out lightbulbs, turn off TVs, etc. The average Joe, though? If the station doesn't come in clearly and consistently when they turn on their radio, they probably won't keep listening.

Our 50,000 watt AM in Pittsburgh, KDKA, has a translator that's 99 watts (I believe) and it gets out pretty good. Hasn't really helped their ratings much so far as I can tell, though. It also has nowhere near the coverage the AM does, even in the suburbs around the city (15-20 miles out, which is prime listening area for the station). Granted, 99 watts is never going to equal 50,000 watts, but still.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to repeat it here in full, but please consider my reply on one of the other translator threads where this same conversation is looping around.

Generalizing about "all" or even "most" translators isn't reflective of the real world beyond Pittsburgh.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom