Changes, New "Branding" For WCRB-FM 995

[Laurence Glavin]

According to the Boston Musical Intelligencer, several major changes are coming to WCRB-FM 99.5 Lowell/Boston, including new "branding", starting Monday, 10/03. Read all about it at:

http://www.classical-scene.com/2011/10/02/change-is-on-the-air/

There's a comment by moi immediately after the article.

 

[rockcaptain]

Link = 404 Error

 

[Jimmy128]

Try this:


http://www.wgbh.org/articles/Classi...f19251984e6ba379512fded6de49&elqCampaignId=34

 

[robotique]

I forgot about the 96.3.

 

[jlehmann]

Seems that new branding may be on the way for 89.7 WGBH as well. Their RDS and HD displays have been showing "Boston Public Radio" for at least a week now.

 

[MHB]

Link = 404 Error

This link works:

http://classical-scene.com/2011/10/03/change-is-on-the-air/

 

[raccoonradio]

Interesting to think that a few yrs ago there was a move by Nassau to start a sports radio network
with 99.5 as flagship, and they attempted to sign Dennis and Callahan. Had that happened, maybe
it could have been a moderate success. CBS would not have started Sports Hub (Two's company,
three's a crowd)...and perhaps Greater or CBS might have either tried classical on one of its poorer
performing signals, or sold it off to WGBH which would have resurrected WCRB on 92.9, 96.9, 98.5 etc.
Of course:

--the Nassau deal for D&C and the idea of the sports network on 99.5 fell through

--Greater Media bought 102.5 from Charles River Broadcasting, then made a deal with Nassau (in
exchange for a Philly station) to take classical/WCRB to 99.5--WKLB landed on the closer-to-Boston 102.5
signal (Dec 1, 2006 was the freq/station switch)

--Later WGBH would buy WCRB and make it a non-comm. and keep classical alive, again (focusing on
99.5 with 89.7 going to more news/talk)

 

[Laurence Glavin]

I know many of you must have been startled to see an ERROR in one of MY posts! Actually, I did check the link to the Boston Musical Intelligencer story on Sunday afternoon and it worked. The owner of the site, Lee Eiseman later yesterday sent me an email (because I had posted to the story) that he had mistakenly published it on October 2nd although it apparently had been embargoed until October 3rd. That's why the working URL contains 2011/10/03.