-
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
AM HD TURNOFF PACE ACCELERATES
- Thread starter Savage
- Start date
WPPCProductions said:
You could also publish an article called "Debunking Radio Magazine." They appear to be more of a propaganda piece for HD radio than any other trade publication.
The reality is more like the old saying, "There are three sides to every story, yours, mine and the facts." I can certainly shoot holes in both the Prometheus and Radio Magazine sides. You probably can too.
Chuck said:
You are thinking of Radio World, a real magazine with a print and online edition. Radio "Magazine" is a considerably smaller publication... I have not seen an edition come through for a loooong time.
DavidEduardo said:
Nope, not Radio World. It is Radio Magazine. I get it every month, and have for years. http://radiomagonline.com/
Maybe your subscription lapsed.
There used to be a print version - we'd get about 6 copies of every issue, free circulation, no subscription - but they bagged that some time in 2009, IIRC. It had shrunk to virtually nothing. The last print issue I recall had about six display ads in it. I believe Radio Magazine is the descendant of the old Broadcast Engineering, a fine magazine in its day.
Very interesting stuff here. Dying inside a high powered transmitter? What a way to go! Loving the discussion of Detroit's directional signals.
I would have loved to have seen Ed Butterbaugh's field strength measurements on TWR with CKLW off the air. Where I grew up in West Central Ohio, CKLW became significantly weaker at night, then coupled with TWR blasting in, was unlistenable. (Though in Defiance at Scout Camp, it was string at night. Doubt it is now. ) A couple of years ago I drove up toward Sandusky at night, and in Bucyrus, Ohio I could barely start picking up CKLW with a University of Michigan football game there. It wasn't a local quality signal until I was in the Cedar Point parking lot. In the early 80s I stayed in Dearborn, MI, and though CKLW was strong, I could still easily null them and hear TWR.
I can remember some occasions in the late 60s and 70s when the Big 8 would stay on day pattern into the night (and sometimes vice versa..one time for about a week. We thought we had lost them forever!) When they were on day pattern at night, I'd hear requests coming in from Nashville, and other points where they were normally nulled.
I would have loved to have seen Ed Butterbaugh's field strength measurements on TWR with CKLW off the air. Where I grew up in West Central Ohio, CKLW became significantly weaker at night, then coupled with TWR blasting in, was unlistenable. (Though in Defiance at Scout Camp, it was string at night. Doubt it is now. ) A couple of years ago I drove up toward Sandusky at night, and in Bucyrus, Ohio I could barely start picking up CKLW with a University of Michigan football game there. It wasn't a local quality signal until I was in the Cedar Point parking lot. In the early 80s I stayed in Dearborn, MI, and though CKLW was strong, I could still easily null them and hear TWR.
I can remember some occasions in the late 60s and 70s when the Big 8 would stay on day pattern into the night (and sometimes vice versa..one time for about a week. We thought we had lost them forever!) When they were on day pattern at night, I'd hear requests coming in from Nashville, and other points where they were normally nulled.
Chuck said:
I'll check, but I have not seen a copy in our six person engineering department for a long time. I don't get it anymore, and haven't for a long time... don't recall getting a notice, either. Yet I am very aware of the Radio World renewal cards...
In any case, the article mentioned showed some major faults in the Prometheus study and obliquely demonstrated that the problem in evaluating HD is that there is so much disinformation (a long thread on whether BMW's have standard floo mats) being tossed about that the real issues and, if any, benefits, are being ignored.
Based on actual usage, as Mr. Savage knows, I changed my opinion on AM HD as I realized how few stations should use it or could use it effectively. When only one or two AM stations per metro can use HD to the listener's benefit, even if it sounds very nice (and it does) it's not a positive for radio.
But, OMG, it is really hard to separate truth from all the fiction, hyperbole and hate on this subject in order to make a real decision.
DavidEduardo said:
That's true. As I said, there are usually three sides to every story. Even though I own and operate a commercial FM station, my basic background is engineering and technical.
I've spent most of my life trying to make things work right, or at least "work as best as they can." There have always been a lot of half-baked ideas that actually make it to market. On purely technical grounds, this looks like one of them to me. Just “making it to market” doesn’t guaranty success.
In many parts of the USA, there are simply too many stations clogging the dial for this to work flawlessly, at least, without causing some interference to others. If there were more spacing between stations, it probably could work at some (to be determined) power level. Unfortunately, that idea simply ignores reality. In most areas, there are just too many stations. It is the old story of trying to cram five pounds of stuff into a one pound bag.
So, how do you “thin the herd,” and at what cost to others? I know I’m not particularly anxious to turn in my station’s license just so someone else can go HD. I doubt many other s owners are either.
Even if HD did work perfectly on a technical level, the business side of me has trouble with the whole concept of creating competition with myself. Meanwhile the creative side says "I'd love to have some more channels to program." That's another big problem... You can’t have it both ways.
Einstein said the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Are we there yet?
DavidEduardo said:
Although I have been known to support the idea of LPFM, I'd be the first to say that Prometheus is not my version of "reality" either. I know quite a few LPFM operators who would agree. Their agenda is more toward political and social change. Mine is not.
My concept of the service is more of being a good neighbor and an asset to the community where I live and work. To the credit of Prometheus, they have been more effective than anyone in getting the ear of Congress and the FCC when it comes to LPFM. Nobody else has really tried. Still I'd take their point of view with a large grain of salt.
Conversely, Radio Magazine had acted more like the ultimate cheerleader for HD and against LPFM. Those two topics seem to be their main selling points. The fact that the two offer completely opposing points of view should come as no surprise. You can shoot holes in both sets of arguments.
Comparatively, Radio World has been reasonably fair and balanced throughout all the HD and LPFM debate (with the exception of "Guy Wire"). At least Paul McLane has been quick to publish opposing points of view. I don't have to agree with someone 100% to respect them.
It was very interesting to note the Canadian approach to control and monitoring of a high-power AM station in 1972-73, as opposed to the American regimen. Even with CKLW's 50kw DA-2, there was a complete absence of the usual FCC-required complement of technical gear for remote controlling the Harrow transmitter site from the studios on Ouellette Avenue in Windsor.
There was no modulation monitor per se. The signal was simply picked up off-air on, IIRC, a Pioneer hi-fi tuner which fed MacIntosh amps in the studios; but now that I'm typing this I seem to recall a rackmount oscilloscope with a trapezoidal modulation pattern on display. There were no remote control system or phase monitor. No transmitter readings were taken; the board ops at The Big 8 were simply kids, often part-time jocks at smaller nearby Canadian stations - not engineers. All of that stuff was left to Ed Buterbaugh and his guys. And I've never seen a cleaner TX site in 43 years of radio.
Pattern change was accomplished by the operator simply flipping a toggle switch on a rack panel. There were also switches to change the AC supply in Harrow from Ontario Hydro (utility) to the big generator set out there. I think the statute of limitations has expired, so I can confidently testify that "failure to change to DA-N" was not an infrequent occurrence!
There was no modulation monitor per se. The signal was simply picked up off-air on, IIRC, a Pioneer hi-fi tuner which fed MacIntosh amps in the studios; but now that I'm typing this I seem to recall a rackmount oscilloscope with a trapezoidal modulation pattern on display. There were no remote control system or phase monitor. No transmitter readings were taken; the board ops at The Big 8 were simply kids, often part-time jocks at smaller nearby Canadian stations - not engineers. All of that stuff was left to Ed Buterbaugh and his guys. And I've never seen a cleaner TX site in 43 years of radio.
Pattern change was accomplished by the operator simply flipping a toggle switch on a rack panel. There were also switches to change the AC supply in Harrow from Ontario Hydro (utility) to the big generator set out there. I think the statute of limitations has expired, so I can confidently testify that "failure to change to DA-N" was not an infrequent occurrence!
“In many parts of the USA, there are simply too many stations clogging the dial for this to work flawlessly, at least, without causing some interference to others. If there were more spacing between stations, it probably could work at some (to be determined) power level. Unfortunately, that idea simply ignores reality. In most areas, there are just too many stations. It is the old story of trying to cram five pounds of stuff into a one pound bag.”
You are 100% correct. Forgetting digital for a moment. 540 – 1700 KHz can only handle so many signals at one time and the FCC continues to lower minimum interference levels to add more stations. That has only added to the level of interference and that in addition to the added interference cause by all the new consumer electronic devices, such as noisy computer power supplies has only made AM radio less listenable, especially in urban areas.
“Even if HD did work perfectly on a technical level, the business side of me has trouble with the whole concept of creating competition with myself. Meanwhile the creative side says, "I'd love to have some more channels to program." That's another big problem... You can’t have it both ways.”
This is a very valid point but lets look at who supports HD radio and who doesn’t. The big group owners are behind HD because they don’t sell a single station they sell groups. Buy a spot on one station and we’ll give you time on other co-owned market station’s. For these broadcasters the additional cost of adding the additional equipment is minimal. The more audio choices they place at the public disposal the better for them in the long run. The same goes for NPR stations; the more programming they air the better the chances of gaining subscribers. Obviously their business interests are different than yours.
You are 100% correct. Forgetting digital for a moment. 540 – 1700 KHz can only handle so many signals at one time and the FCC continues to lower minimum interference levels to add more stations. That has only added to the level of interference and that in addition to the added interference cause by all the new consumer electronic devices, such as noisy computer power supplies has only made AM radio less listenable, especially in urban areas.
“Even if HD did work perfectly on a technical level, the business side of me has trouble with the whole concept of creating competition with myself. Meanwhile the creative side says, "I'd love to have some more channels to program." That's another big problem... You can’t have it both ways.”
This is a very valid point but lets look at who supports HD radio and who doesn’t. The big group owners are behind HD because they don’t sell a single station they sell groups. Buy a spot on one station and we’ll give you time on other co-owned market station’s. For these broadcasters the additional cost of adding the additional equipment is minimal. The more audio choices they place at the public disposal the better for them in the long run. The same goes for NPR stations; the more programming they air the better the chances of gaining subscribers. Obviously their business interests are different than yours.
I found out some more information from a member of the NRC about the border blaster XELO who had been included in the NMSU XELO tour which is outlined in a Wiki entry although it turns out to be not entirely correct. A few days after the posts of a few pages back in this thread by Savage and DavidEduardo a fellow NRC member had asked about 892R tubes and I had mentioned that I had just read the Wiki entry on XELO because of some posts I had read about in another forum. Jim who is another member of the NRC also answered that the 892R's were used in the modulator not the finals, I asked him another question about it because he seemed to know more than he was letting on and he then wrote the following response to my questions:
First the the link of the Wikipedia entry is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XEROK-AM
and here is Jim's reply to my questions asking for more info on XELO:
Bob and all:
What I wrote about the old XELO is about it.
Well, not quite all.
I suggest reading that Wikipedia note first.
Then I can tell you I was in that group that toured
the station. I was by then already getting versed
in broadcast and had been licensed as a ham
for a few years. So I was kind of primed to see
stuff from a technical viewpoint.
Like the whine you could hear on the air. Way
down, probably 40 or 50 dB below full modulation
but if you waited for a quiet period and perhaps
tuned off to the side of the station a bit you could
hear it easily. About 3 kc or so.
On the tour, as soon as the fellow opened the
door and let us in the 'whine' source was evident.
It was from the motor-generator set they used to
light the final amplifier filaments.
We asked the fellow there if they had run a proof
of performance. He smiled and shook his head
and said no. Asked why, he said they were
afraid of the awful numbers it would reveal!
The Wikipedia writeup says that we were told to
keep our hands in our pockets. That was a kind
of editorial privilege by the author. The fellow
who designed and built the rig got electrocuted
by leaning against a plate current meter during
the initial tuneup. All such things had long since
been fixed. The entire rig was behind a fence
of very heavy wire. You could easily see through
it but that's about all. Very sturdy. Totally safe.
This is a common method of constructing this
kind of high-power stuff even nowadays,
especially one-shot rigs like that XELO rig.
I wonder what happened to that homebrew rig
when it was replaced by a commercial unit of
the same power level. I wouldn't be at all
surprised to hear that it was simply parted out to
the local hams and junk dealers. Maybe
museums (the big tubes).
The transmitter was located as I remember about
25 miles southeast of Juarez. Right across the
Rio Grande from Clint, Texas. And Clint was
used for their mail. I can almost hear it now
"Just send your offering to Reverend Jones,
Clint, Texas."
Similar to the XERF spots. Didn't they use
Del Rio, Texas as their mail address?
- Jim Tonne
First the the link of the Wikipedia entry is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XEROK-AM
and here is Jim's reply to my questions asking for more info on XELO:
Bob and all:
What I wrote about the old XELO is about it.
Well, not quite all.
I suggest reading that Wikipedia note first.
Then I can tell you I was in that group that toured
the station. I was by then already getting versed
in broadcast and had been licensed as a ham
for a few years. So I was kind of primed to see
stuff from a technical viewpoint.
Like the whine you could hear on the air. Way
down, probably 40 or 50 dB below full modulation
but if you waited for a quiet period and perhaps
tuned off to the side of the station a bit you could
hear it easily. About 3 kc or so.
On the tour, as soon as the fellow opened the
door and let us in the 'whine' source was evident.
It was from the motor-generator set they used to
light the final amplifier filaments.
We asked the fellow there if they had run a proof
of performance. He smiled and shook his head
and said no. Asked why, he said they were
afraid of the awful numbers it would reveal!
The Wikipedia writeup says that we were told to
keep our hands in our pockets. That was a kind
of editorial privilege by the author. The fellow
who designed and built the rig got electrocuted
by leaning against a plate current meter during
the initial tuneup. All such things had long since
been fixed. The entire rig was behind a fence
of very heavy wire. You could easily see through
it but that's about all. Very sturdy. Totally safe.
This is a common method of constructing this
kind of high-power stuff even nowadays,
especially one-shot rigs like that XELO rig.
I wonder what happened to that homebrew rig
when it was replaced by a commercial unit of
the same power level. I wouldn't be at all
surprised to hear that it was simply parted out to
the local hams and junk dealers. Maybe
museums (the big tubes).
The transmitter was located as I remember about
25 miles southeast of Juarez. Right across the
Rio Grande from Clint, Texas. And Clint was
used for their mail. I can almost hear it now
"Just send your offering to Reverend Jones,
Clint, Texas."
Similar to the XERF spots. Didn't they use
Del Rio, Texas as their mail address?
- Jim Tonne
KB1OKL said:
The Wiki entry is almost entirely wrong in fact. For example, the statement that XEROK was the highest rated Top 40 station in the US "except for possibly WABC" is totally wrong. WABC was not even close to being the highest rated... in the '75 to '77 period where XEROK averaged an 11 share WABC averaged a 7 share... but many other stations in the format did much better, including the average 28 share for WBBQ in Augusta.
I give all this detail because it shows that all the statements in the Wiki article are questionable.
The article says that the (daytime Spanish) format moved to 1060 in 1972, but fails to mention that the party that obtained the license for 1060 in El Paso had operated XELO! The contract with the owner of the license in Mexico was to run out, and he did not want to renew. Even after his death inside the transmitter, his "sucesión" ("heirs" in English) followed his wishes and did not renew... a significant action in that it was cause for finding a new operator (what we call an LMA today) who could take advantage of the big night signal.
Another possible error is the reference to a CCA 150 kw transmitter... unless it was custom built, CCA did not have such a model.
The most amusing part of the Wiki entry is the reference to asking about a "proof of performance" when, of course XELO was a Mexican station and the FCC mandated pop is a strictly US construct, neither required at the time nor observed by Mexican stations which obeyed SCT/SCOP regulations of their own.
DavidEduardo said:
Just a couple of corrections, the Wiki entry states that the first transmitter after the Branch was a CCA, it does not give the power, the transmitter after the CCA was a 150 KW Continental.
The Wiki entry also does not mention proof of performance, my friend from the tour wrote in his email above that one of the students had asked if they had performed one and the tour guide said no, they were afraid of the numbers it would reveal.
Anyway very interesting stuff.
After the thread took a little vacation on La Frontera, it's back to the good ole U-S-A with the cheerful news: a few more AM IBOCers bit the dust in recent weeks! ;D
Barry McLarnon's count has dipped - once again - to a new low of 241, with fewer than 80 stations with screechy, glitchy HD on 24-7. This latest tally includes WMVP and a handful of Disney AMs which have gone silent.
HD. Touted endlessly as the "savior of AM radio."
Yeahhhh. : Sure worked out for The Mouse, now didn't it??
(Meanwhile - congrats to all of us as this thread heads towards 10,000 views.)
Barry McLarnon's count has dipped - once again - to a new low of 241, with fewer than 80 stations with screechy, glitchy HD on 24-7. This latest tally includes WMVP and a handful of Disney AMs which have gone silent.
HD. Touted endlessly as the "savior of AM radio."
Yeahhhh. :
Sure worked out for The Mouse, now didn't it??(Meanwhile - congrats to all of us as this thread heads towards 10,000 views.)
- Status