E
eyg2181
Guest
Do coverage maps for HD stations exist?
will Radio-Locator eventually add them on to their site?
will Radio-Locator eventually add them on to their site?
-
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
From my personal experience with my Accurian receiver in Raleigh-Durham, NC, the best predictor of reliable FM HD Radio coverage seems to be the city grade coverage area on Radio-locator.com. This is both with the strand antenna in the kit and a set of rabbit ears I bought from Radio Shack. There are no AM HD offerings in our market, so I don't know how that band's HD stations works with regards to Radio-locator's coverage maps. I've heard that the AM signal must be extremely strong for its HD counterpart to be receivable. I tried to listen to the HD signal of Norfolk, VA's WJOI 1230 in Newport News, but couldn't receive it. Richmond's 50,000-watt HD-AM WRVA blasts in there during the day there, but no HD signal was receivable from them there either.
Despite having been home to the nation's second commercial HD station (WRAL-FM), market #43 lags behind in HD due to a confluence of two factors: three of the market's four CC properties and one of its four Radio One properties are awaiting moves to new transmitter sites and locally-based group owner Curtis Media, which controls most of the viable AM stations in town along with seven FMs won't adopt the technology. Additionally, of the eight FM stations broadcasting in HD, only three (WRAL-FM, WCMC and WRVA-FM) offer HD2 programming and none HD3 or higher.
Despite having been home to the nation's second commercial HD station (WRAL-FM), market #43 lags behind in HD due to a confluence of two factors: three of the market's four CC properties and one of its four Radio One properties are awaiting moves to new transmitter sites and locally-based group owner Curtis Media, which controls most of the viable AM stations in town along with seven FMs won't adopt the technology. Additionally, of the eight FM stations broadcasting in HD, only three (WRAL-FM, WCMC and WRVA-FM) offer HD2 programming and none HD3 or higher.
google 'HD Radio coverage maps'...notably WSHU in Fairfield, CT. It has an HD coverage map on their own website (wshu.org). I compared it with the one at Radio Locator, and the coverage seems weaker then the local coverage analog signal.
staticradio said:
WSHU assumes 65 dBu for digital coverage, which is reasonable across flat terrain like the northern coast of Long Island. However, the northern coverage around Newtown, CT and along I-84 between Danbury and Waterbury should look more like "swiss cheese" behind those rocky hills.
A perspective of the horizon from the WSHU antenna is at:
http://www.heywhatsthat.com/?view=HCP9364B
To see the problem, click "Visibility Cloak" on the map for a line-of-sight/shadow plot, then click "Show Profile" and move around to various spots on the map like Danbury and Waterbury. The terrain in that part of Connecticut is much different from Houston, where everyone reports that HD works just fine.
Play Freebird said:
That is rather perceptive of them! Analysis of Arbitron diaries shows that at work and at home listening (which is about 66% to 70% of all radio listening) takes place about 80% in the 70 dbu contour and another 15% between the 70 and the 64 dbu contour. There is nearly no analog listening to FMs outside the 64, in fact, except in isolated semi-rural areas.
So, what this station is saying is that the HD signal is usable to the same contour that the analog signal is truly used.
DavidEduardo said:
However, the problem in areas of irregular terrain (like Fairfield County, CT) is that the actual field strength varies greatly with location; therefore a simplified prediction method like FCC F(50,50) doesn't provide an accurate picture. I used to live on the northeast side of one of those hills along I-84 and could receive nothing listenable on FM from the southwest (Stamford or Norwalk), yet a half-mile up the road both of those stations and all of the NYC Empire stations sounded fine.
However, I did have a clear path to the southeast, so little 3 kW WLNG-FM out on Long Island came in Crystal Clear. Speaking of WLNG, there's a station that sees no need for HD Radio -- or for that matter, FM stereo -- but they're turning a bigger profit than several major market broadcasters I can think of.
http://www.wlng.com/dollarwise.htm
http://www.resumedesign.com/kratoville/jackjr/radio/wlng.html
And they're doing a nice job online, too:
http://www.wlng.com/streamreport.htm
Play Freebird said:
Can you site any numbers. I love WLNG and know they do really well as a local outlet in Sag Harbour, NY. I don't believe you can compare their numbers with those of any of the commercial major market FM's in say NYC. As much as I at 52 enjoy WLNG, wanna bet how long they'd last in NYC? Try not to compare small market facilities no matter how much fun they are with a major market facility or for that matter with the competition at the level of a NYC station.
Play Freebird said:
Please! The Hamptons / Riverhead market has 14 stations home to it, and a flat $7.1 million dollars in total radio billings. Only 32.7% of the local listening is to local stations.
WLNG is reported to bill (that means gross billings, before expenses and depreciation and taxes) $1.3 million. The profit likely provides a nice but not affluent lifestyle for the owner, but $1.3 million is not a lot of money.
By comparison, the New York Cith market bills about $800 million, or nearly 75 times that of the Hamptons market, and the top biller does over $60 million in gross revenues.
I don't mean to demean WLNG, only to put things in perspective. WLNG does what few stations do, which is serve their communities day in and day out. Sure, there are lots of community stations across the nation, and they deserve credit, too. But few do it under the shadow of some of America's biggest radio stations and succeed.
The point I made about WLNG is that it may be a small operation, but at least they are turning a profit while continuing to serve the community.
Check some of the quarterly reports that were just released by the publicly-traded consolidators. I'll take Radio One as an example:
Radio One (Nasdaq:ROIAK) lost $386 million in the quarter ended Dec. 31, or $3.91 per share, compared with a $25 million loss, or 26 cents per share, in the year-ago quarter.
Radio One's closing stock price yesterday: $1.34, down from $30 in December 1999, despite spending millions on HD Radio installations.
Check some of the quarterly reports that were just released by the publicly-traded consolidators. I'll take Radio One as an example:
Radio One (Nasdaq:ROIAK) lost $386 million in the quarter ended Dec. 31, or $3.91 per share, compared with a $25 million loss, or 26 cents per share, in the year-ago quarter.
Radio One's closing stock price yesterday: $1.34, down from $30 in December 1999, despite spending millions on HD Radio installations.
Play Freebird said:
But while you are seeing the world through small time operations with a single owner who would be satisfied with a nice return at the end of the day for that individual owner, that isn't the real world of radio in the 21 century where you have large corporations with Wall Street breathing down its back to not only cut costs but earn enormous sums of gross income to please its stock holders. We might as well be talking about different industries here. The competition at this level is fearce and the stakes are very high. Each broadcaster must do what it can to stay current and that means moving into the digital age, just as every other technology has. Where a 10 million dollar layout would be enormous for a WLNG, that 10 million dollar investment might be just the right business move at this level. In NY radio saleries of $100,000 a year or more while not as prevelent as they used to be are not unusual. Here a engineer working for the right company with overtime can earn over $100,000 annualy. Air personalities earn at least that much if not many times more. That kind of income outside of maybe a station owner doesn't exist in smaller markets. That is why as difficult as it is for you to understand us, we have as many problems understanding what you are talking about. No one is forcing anyone to convert to IBOC but for many of us in the larger markets its seen as a means towards survival, as competition increases.
Play Freebird said:
Since the 50's, around half of all US radio stations has not made a profit. Bad operators or those who assumed too much debt or those with unviable technical facilities or smaller stations in over-radioed markets are all prime candidates for red ink. There are too many stations and too many bad ones. In fact, WLNG started as an AM daytimer on 1600.... that licence is, today, so useless that Paul Sidney turned it back to the FCC to be canceled.
Peter Q. George (K1XRB) said:
But, obviously, it had little value to Paul Sidney or he would not have sold. It's value was only in the eyes of WWRL, not of WLNG.
DavidEduardo said:
Not exactly. WWRL needed to purchase WLNG AM to let out their signal when they increased their daytime power output from 5 K to 25 K. They also purchased WERA, 1590 in Plainfield NJ. I'm sure when Mr. Sidney saw the numbers waved in his face to shut his station down combined with the importance of having a low power AM station simulcasting his FM facility, he realized that in todays world he would never achive the same profit by keeping his little 1600 operation on the air. In his case he had the more powerful alternative FM which continues to great success. On the other hand the Plainfield 1590 owners just sold out when they saw dollar signs waved in their face. Neither stations would have realized that kind of profit either by remaining on the air or selling out to a new owner.
Let's look at the bigger story here.
Paul Sidney was granted an FM license in 1969, which allowed WLNG to provide fulltime service throughout his market, something that wasn't possible on the 1600 AM daytime allocation. Over the years, as listeners acquired FM receivers, the AM became obsolete. WWRL came along and gave him a financial incentive to shut down the AM. He realized that the FM signal was doing a fine job of serving the local community and took the offer.
Compare this with the current plans for digital radio in the US.
Will IBOC allow any Class D AM licensees to provide fulltime service across their daytime coverage areas, like the FM channel did for WLNG? Absolutely not! AM IBOC's other shortcomings are also common knowledge.
So, as a result of AM IBOC's failure to deliver real benefits, now we're seeing overwhelming support for AM translators in the FM band. Fortunately, some small market stations will be able to find open FM channels, but availability in most large markets is very scarce.
The NAB should immediately petition the FCC to reconsider their earlier decision on digital radio. Stop the medium-wave in-band disaster and allow AM licensees to transmit their digital component in vacant low-band VHF TV channels which are opening up less than a year from now.
Paul Sidney was granted an FM license in 1969, which allowed WLNG to provide fulltime service throughout his market, something that wasn't possible on the 1600 AM daytime allocation. Over the years, as listeners acquired FM receivers, the AM became obsolete. WWRL came along and gave him a financial incentive to shut down the AM. He realized that the FM signal was doing a fine job of serving the local community and took the offer.
Compare this with the current plans for digital radio in the US.
Will IBOC allow any Class D AM licensees to provide fulltime service across their daytime coverage areas, like the FM channel did for WLNG? Absolutely not! AM IBOC's other shortcomings are also common knowledge.
So, as a result of AM IBOC's failure to deliver real benefits, now we're seeing overwhelming support for AM translators in the FM band. Fortunately, some small market stations will be able to find open FM channels, but availability in most large markets is very scarce.
The NAB should immediately petition the FCC to reconsider their earlier decision on digital radio. Stop the medium-wave in-band disaster and allow AM licensees to transmit their digital component in vacant low-band VHF TV channels which are opening up less than a year from now.
R.F. Burns said:
That is exactly what I said... WLNG was getting no value from the AM, but probably did not want to go silent on 1600 for fear someone would file for the frequency. So along comes WWRL with money and a way to prevent 1600 from reappearing on the east end. WLNG loses no billings, gets some cash, and prevents 1600 from reapperaring. 1600 held no value to Mr. Sidney, but it did to WWRL.
Paul Sidney's facility either had value or it did not. If he was able to sell it for an appreciable figure, WLNG-AM had value. The reasons the purchaser had for buying the station are irrelevant.
If I sell you my Jaguar for $30,000, that's by definition what the car is worth, since that is the price paid by a willing purchaser. In terms of arriving at a specific value, it makes no difference if you thereafter drive and enjoy the car or push it over a cliff.
If I sell you my Jaguar for $30,000, that's by definition what the car is worth, since that is the price paid by a willing purchaser. In terms of arriving at a specific value, it makes no difference if you thereafter drive and enjoy the car or push it over a cliff.
Play Freebird said:
I keep seeing this nonsense on this board, and repeating it endlessly doesn't make it any less nonsensical. The frequencies which will be abandoned by TV broadcasters on 2/17/2009 are NOT available for broadcast use. They have already been reserved by the FCC for other, NON-broadcast uses. End of story. Putting HD radio signals on those frequencies is NOT going to happen. (Besides, post-DTV-transition, there are some TV stations which have notified the FCC that they will be switching their DTV operations to their NTSC channels, some of which are in the channel 2-6 range, so those channels won't be entirely vacant.)
And even if those frequencies were available, what sense does it make when no one has radios that will tune to those frequencies? At least now an HD radio can receive analog signals from the same stations when either the station isn't transmitting HD or the HD signals won't lock and decode for whatever reason.
- Status