• 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

DAYTIMERS

J

jayedwards

Guest
I see daytimers again want the FCC to grant them FM translators in order to offer night programming. much chance of the FCC granting this? I feel sorry for daytimers. I began on one. (1960's) Didn't Ted Baxter begin on one too!!!!???? (Ted Knight on The Mary Tyler Moore Show! he was very funny! I've worked with many guys just like Ted Baxter!!!!)
 
If the FCC is going to do this, there needs to be alot more enforcement and checking on things or translators will just get abused all over again by the religious bible thumpers and big corporations who don't give a crud.
 
I think it is pretty amazing that NAB, who vehemently opposed LPFM radio citing "Unacceptable Interference," now seems to think that more translators for AM stations would be a good idea. So a 100 watt LPFM makes more interference than a 250 watt translator that can be much closer spaced than a LPFM? That’s an interesting point of view.

The good news is, if this is passed, it might allow translators to receive their signals via alternate means other than off the air. Rebroadcasting an AM from a receiver with 5 KHz bandwidth on an FM translator would not do justice for the service. The FCC's current restrictions on commercial band translators state that the signal must be derived off the air, not via STL or other means. The Commission did this to prevent large networks of satellite delivered programming via translators. I agree with them on that point, but my experience with actual off the air receivers at translator locations is that at best they are a problem waiting for a place to happen. Between tropospheric ducting, and hijacking by iPods and other wireless devices, there has to be a better way. STL, VOIP, or even just a plain old wire makes a lot more sense to me.

Just my rant for the day... :)
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom