"Green 960" a bad joke

[rickradio]

And wasn't it that notable S.F. pundit Herb Caen who said "the coldest winter I ever spent was summer in San Francisco?"

He was correct.

Actually, landtuna, Mark Twain said that, although Herb Caen may have repeated it.

And I think the quote was about a summer day in San Francisco.

 

[DaveBayArea]

Since the board editor has been selectively chopping this thread up, I will at least say that HD Radio broadcasts amount to roughly 1% of the power of the regular signal. Since KKGN is 5000 watts, that would make the HD signal about 50 watts. Not sure what the shutting down of a 50 watt transmitter equals in regard to cars per year taken off the road, but I'm willing to bet it's not much.

I will also mention that one could easily pay a visit to the HD Radio board to see what the original poster's opinions are of the technology.

While the power is still insignificant compared to many, many other things (radio transmissions - even digital ones - are efficient) the actual power level is something like 10%. More on that here:

http://www.am-dx.com/iboc_power.htm

Also, digital transmitters must be more linear and therefore less efficient than analog. Still, it's nothing compared to automobiles, air conditioning in a large building, or even the Internet colo site that is probably hosting this message.

Dave B.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Since the board editor has been selectively chopping this thread up, I will at least say that HD Radio broadcasts amount to roughly 1% of the power of the regular signal. Since KKGN is 5000 watts, that would make the HD signal about 50 watts. Not sure what the shutting down of a 50 watt transmitter equals in regard to cars per year taken off the road, but I'm willing to bet it's not much.

I will also mention that one could easily pay a visit to the HD Radio board to see what the original poster's opinions are of the technology.

While the power is still insignificant compared to many, many other things (radio transmissions - even digital ones - are efficient) the actual power level is something like 10%. More on that here:

http://www.am-dx.com/iboc_power.htm

Also, digital transmitters must be more linear and therefore less efficient than analog. Still, it's nothing compared to automobiles, air conditioning in a large building, or even the Internet colo site that is probably hosting this message.

Dave B.

Wrong, again.

Your link above refers to AM HD digital and analog transmitter power outputs NOT transmitter power inputs.

The wasted power to accommodate the linear amplifiers necessary to carry along the HD digital signals with the AM analog carrier is several times greater then the total transmitter output power. About 3 times what is required to generate an analog (only) RF carrier in an efficient AM only transmitter.
Most of the power is wasted in the form of additional heat generated, which must also be removed from the transmitter and building at great cost and further inefficiency.

Power consumed to create the HD radio signal is the AC power input from power lines going into the transmitter plant. Your link above only addresses HD radio signals power output, not the huge amount of wasted power and heat needed to create it.

The inefficient amplifiers required to transmit HD radio digital signals, lossy combining networks, band filters and reject loads often waste over 90% of the input power to the FM transmitter. Additional air circulation and air conditioning requirements further reduce efficiency.

In HD AM, very inefficient linear amplifiers are used to accurately pass the HD radio digital RF waveform without aberrations, artifacts, and out of tolerance byproducts.

Just to give you some perspective, to generate a 50,000 watt unmodulated AM analog carrier in a typical 90% high efficiency analog (only) AM transmitter takes about 55,000 watts.

On the other hand, the combined HD/analog AM transmitter necessary for passing both HD digital and AM analog RF carriers is typically only 30% efficient when generating both the analog and digital HD carriers.
For the same 50,000 watt analog RF carrier output case above the HD transmitter would consume about 165,000 watts instead of 55,000 watts!
165,000 watts
-55,000 watts
Equals
110,000 additional watts consumed of wasted input power, which shows up as additional heat. The additional heat created from the necessary inefficient HD signal generation must also be removed by additional inefficient ventilation and air conditioning, wasting even more electrical input current.

The linear amplifier necessary to accurately pass the HD radio signals through along with the AM analog carrier consumes several times more input power and requires large amounts of additional power to remove the massive amount of accumulated heat by additional cooling of the transmitter and transmitter building.

Just as an additional note, a typical portable plug in electrical room heater uses less then 1000 watts.

 

[DavidKaye]

I'm not commenting about KTRB because I have no knowledge about how they power their transmitter (if at all).
Your personal criticism of me for not addressing your demands that I criticize KTRB shows your biased personal agenda and "where your priorities are".

You critiqued KKGN for not being "green" enough, and I pointed out a station that wastes more energy and causes more pollution than any other Bay Area radio station, for that matter maybe more than any other American radio station. I'm not biased for or against KKGN. I barely even listen to them.

 

[DavidKaye]

What does David Kaye have against KTRB? He continually has negative attitude toward them while they are only developing a service to the community and given all of the competition, it doesn't happen overnight.

I was all in favor of KTRB building a 50kw station in the Bay Area. I listened with a lot of interest as they were program testing. I liked their tribute to the 60s, hearing music that probably hasn't been on Bay Area radio in decades. I also liked the aircheck collages, something nobody else has done in Bay Area radio.

But, for a 50kw station, their engineering is very poor. Take a look at the topography of their site 2 miles east of Sunol. Basically they're feeding a 50kw signal into the side of a mountain. The signal is not a monster in SF; in fact, at some times it gets overrun by skip from other stations on 860. This shouldn't happen with a 50kw station aimed toward SF where the ERP should probably be closer to 100kw.

And then there's the programming. It's 3rd-string. Mancow is really the only thing on the station that could pull ratings, but it doesn't. The rest is dreck that neither KSFO nor KNEW will touch.

Pappas has tons of money. They're the biggest independent TV owner in the U.S., and yet they're not spending any money on live air staff, a proven way to get listeners in the Bay Area.

The problem is not any bias on my part -- as I said I was all for them when they began -- but jeez, 1 year into their new station and it's unlistenable both from a technical and a programming standpiont. That's not my fault; it's theirs.

 

[LKellerIII]

"But, for a 50kw station, their engineering is very poor. Take a look at the topography of their site 2 miles east of Sunol. Basically they're feeding a 50kw signal into the side of a mountain. The signal is not a monster in SF; in fact, at some times it gets overrun by skip from other stations on 860. This shouldn't happen with a 50kw station aimed toward SF where the ERP should probably be closer to 100kw. "

I live in SF on the south slope of Bernal Heights. With that southern orientation, the San Jose and South Bay FM stations come in loud and clear, while a few of the San Francisco FMs come in poorly, or have excessive static. But most of the AMs (KGO, KSFO, KCBS, KKGN) come in just fine, even 1550. KTRB's signal does not come in at all.

I haven't listened in my car duing the last few months (their programming sucks), but the last time I did, the fidelity was awful - almost as if the programs were coming in on phone lines, like the network radio news did many years ago before satellites took over.

So far, KTRB is a total waste of a signal, in my opinion.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

I'm not commenting about KTRB because I have no knowledge about how they power their transmitter (if at all).
Your personal criticism of me for not addressing your demands that I criticize KTRB shows your biased personal agenda and "where your priorities are".

You critiqued KKGN for not being "green" enough, and I pointed out a station that wastes more energy and causes more pollution than any other Bay Area radio station, for that matter maybe more than any other American radio station. I'm not biased for or against KKGN. I barely even listen to them.

I'm on the east coast and have never heard either station, so, as I said, any station bias or "priorities" must be solely yours. I'm just an unbiased observer.

I just mentioned how hypocritical it is of KKGN to call themselves "green" while wasting huge amounts of power transmitting a wasteful HD radio signal to (what researchers say) is less then 2 persons (average) per HD station. I did not rank KKGN's transmitting efficiency against any other radio stations. Indeed, all stations transmitting HD radio are needlessly wasting power transmitting to an audience that isn't there. Not all stations claim to be "green" and that is what magnifies KKGN's hypocrisy.

You replied with your demanding KTRB "red herring" claiming that by not criticizing KTRB transmitter inefficiency, immediately, exactly the way you wanted me to do, it showed "where my priorities are".

Does KTRB also claim to be "green" as KKGN does?

I replied that I know nothing about KTRB or how (or if) KTRB powers their transmitter, so I would decline responding to your contrived demands, your accusation about my priorities, and refuse your insistence that I e-mail KTRB.

Good luck peddling your "red herrings".

 

[LKellerIII]

"I just mentioned how hypocritical it is of KKGN to call themselves "green" while wasting huge amounts of power transmitting a wasteful HD radio signal to (what researchers say) is less then 2 persons (average) per HD station."

Your main axe to grind seems to be that HD radio on AM has technical problems. You could be right. Some months ago, I tried to read a technical explanation of this on another board, and frankly - it zoomed way over my technologically challenged head.

But calling KKGN (Clear Channel) hypocritical is a stretch - perhaps it's a small hypcrisy, but not much more than that. It's like calling Al Gore a hypocrite for wasting jet fuel flying all over the world to spread his message about global warming. Obviously, Gore couldn't spread his message efficiently by driving to all his appearances in a Toyota Prius.

For better or worse, the terrestrial broadcasters have latched onto HD radio, and they have correctly decided that they can't get people to buy HR receivers and listen to HD stations unless the content is there waiting for people to hear. It's one of those chicken-or-the-egg conundrums.

I listen to some of the HD FM stations, and am enjoying the extra variety of music they provide. Since they're just juke-boxes with occasional pre-recorded liners, they must be cheap to run...you could run those stations off an I-pod on "shuffle." I guess the power bill and engineering factors into costs as well. But I think it's a good service, and the price to the consumer is right...free.

 

[DavidKaye]

I'm on the east coast and have never heard either station

So, you admit that you have no idea what you're talking about. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

I'm on the east coast and have never heard either station

So, you admit that you have no idea what you're talking about. Thank you for pointing this out.

Also false.

More red herring.

I said nothing here about the programming on any station, just that KKGN is very hypocritical calling itself "green" while it wastes large amounts of electrical power transmitting digital HD radio signals to virtually no one.

 

[DaveBayArea]

I said nothing here about the programming on any station, just that KKGN is very hypocritical calling itself "green" while it wastes large amounts of electrical power transmitting digital HD radio signals to virtually no one.

As mentioned elsewhere, that's a real stretch when compared to total electrical power consumption. First of all, I'll guarantee you that the average listenership for KKGN in HD is greater than two. Remember, this is the Bay Area. Second, the power consumed for HD is significant, but not nearly as much as a single large office building in the Summer in Walnut Creek. I don't claim to be able to predict the future accurately, but I believe HD will fail on its own accord, and criticism on this board will have zero effect. I salute the people at Green 960 for their attempt at a unique format, and while I rarely listen personally, I wish them well.

Like it or not, we're going to eventually have digital radio in one form or another, although I doubt it will be through Ibiquity. The introduction of HD here in the Bay Area (over 4 years ago) meant that I lost my favorite commercial station, which transmits on 107.5. A San Francisco station on 107.7 with digital carriers wiped them out. So I have a huge dislike for HD. But since then, I've discovered fatmusicradio, WNCW, KHUM, and a host of others on the Internet. So I guess you could say that, for me at least, HD was a negative thing for terrestrial radio. There are a number of other possibilities for digital audio transmissions, especially now that the analog TV spectrum is slated to be reclaimed. Like it or not, it's time to wait for the marketplace to decide.

Dave B.

 

[fandango]

This is true. All entities that cannot do everything absolutely up to the highest standard of perfection should make no effort whatsoever.

Better to curse the darkness than to light any candles at all.

I thought KQKE was a nazi cartoon of a "Liberal" talk station when it signed on four years ago. Just horrible. An insult to San Francisco.

... but over the last eight months or so, KKGN has improved a lot. I still think San Francisco deserves a better progressive radio outlet, but the station obviously bought a clue along the way.

The joke is on the guy who started this thread. His post reads like a troll, but that's OK. It's quite possible to use a troll for ones' own ends. In this case, angie (bless her heart) got to remind all of us how environmentally unfriendly candles are; and I got to volunteer that KQKE stunk on ice, and that the KKGN transmogrification is much, much better.

The KKGN program schedule is especially good during the day. If Rachel Maddow would stop the MSNBC krap, KKGN will be good all the way to 10:00 PM, and that's saying more than KGO can say these days

One more improvement: Swap timeslots for Peter B. Collins and Ed Schultz.

fan