Here come the complaints...

[vsa]

I need to add that, yes, the 25 mv/m contours overlap in this situation. Nevertheless, WCBS says it has expended time, effort and money to further attenuate its signal in this situation and claims that within the .5 contour it is in compliance.

 

[R.F. Burns]

I need to add that, yes, the 25 mv/m contours overlap in this situation. Nevertheless, WCBS says it has expended time, effort and money to further attenuate its signal in this situation and claims that within the .5 contour it is in compliance.

Since WCBS has installed their rebuilt exciter I will say that their sidebands are probably the most narrow of all the AM IBOC's I've heard. Again, I know what WRKL is looking for. First they are trying to serve an audience far outside the coverage area of their primary signal. That and the fact that they have not been granted a renewal and now with a 50 KW station which they fear will cut down on their coverage, legal or otherwise will lower the value of the station. They bought WRKL so that they could tell advertisers that they were getting a signal into NYC, even if NYC is beyond WRKL's protected coverage area. I've already provided an audio demonstation showing that WRKL receives within it's primary protected contour, no interference from WCBS, but hey, anyone can sue anyone for anything. The key will be, can they prove it.

 

[calstymes]

The Dude replied:

BUT THEY ARE RUNNING GARBAGE.....Its thier own fault though,NO ONE FORCED THEM TO GO IBOC!! (The FCC isnt making stations go it .. Thats what is so confusing to me,why are all these stations doing this? Huh)

The answer is relatively simple and I have explained it before on this here message board.

It is because many of these "high profile" stations that are installing and lighting up AM IBOC are owned by large radio companies that have a financial interest in and are part of a CARTEL that stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars when iBiQuity takes their company public. These companies are powerful and rich and they have a lot of influence with the administrative agency that oversees such matters.

This is no secret, but it is something that HD supporters don't often think about, or if they think about it they deny it because they are blinded by what they perceive to be an AM digital (more like cellular telephone) broadcasting system that they think will be the salvation of terrestrial AM radio. Unfortunately, they have been badly misled by pro-AM IBOC propaganda.

Follow the money.

 

[calstymes]

R.F. Burns thusly spake:

Since WCBS has installed their rebuilt exciter I will say that their sidebands are probably the most narrow of all the AM IBOC's I've heard.

Bravo to WCBS! Obviously they have done some seriously good engineering work (although I still can't pick up their HD signal on my BA Receptors in midtown Manhattan).

Again, I know what WRKL is looking for. First they are trying to serve an audience far outside the coverage area of their primary signal.

Blame or discredit the victim. Good tactic!

That and the fact that they have not been granted a renewal and now with a 50 KW station which they fear will cut down on their coverage, legal or otherwise will lower the value of the station.

They fear will cut down on their coverage? They don't fear it. They are obviously already experiencing it, otherwise, why would they have filed this action? Generally, actions are not filed on fear of damage alone. Usually, a damage needs to have already occurred. Oh yes, and the value of their station has already been lowered by the decreased coverage they are experiencing. They don't need to fear that. It is already a reality and the administrative agency which oversees these matters have already legalized it. Isn't that superb?

They bought WRKL so that they could tell advertisers that they were getting a signal into NYC, even if NYC is beyond WRKL's protected coverage area.

Any idiot, including me, can see that NYC is not even close to WRKL's protected coverage area. Last I checked, I didn't think WRKL was trying to sell any advertising time to NYC advertisers, although I could be mistaken.

I've already provided an audio demonstation showing that WRKL receives within it's primary protected contour, no interference from WCBS, but hey, anyone can sue anyone for anything. The key will be, can they prove it.

If the key will be, can they prove it, then the question is, do you think they would go to the trouble of filing this action if they couldn't?

 

[R.F. Burns]

"Since WCBS has installed their rebuilt exciter I will say that their sidebands are probably the most narrow of all the AM IBOC's I've heard.


Bravo to WCBS! Obviously they have done some seriously good engineering work (although I still can't pick up their HD signal on my BA Receptors in midtown Manhattan)."



I would be surprised if you could pick up WCBS 's analog signal in Manhattan. It has nothing to due with the IBOC technology. It's because the level of RF which WCBS puts into Manhattan is miniscule due to poor ground conductivity and the number of skyscrapers between High Island in the Bronx and your location in the city. You can't hear them in the 60's or 70's on the West Side Highway either. How many times must this be repeated? Your B.A. is defective, that's already been established. I have posted demos of all of these stations from my suburban location and they not only come in well on my Recepetor but on my HDT-1 as well. You even said that you were impressed with the Sangean demo. I've even used my receptor inside a shielded building on the west side of manhattan and while i couldn't hear WCBS, WOR, WNYC and WADO IBOC were loud and clear. There was no WABC IBOC at the time of my test.



"Again, I know what WRKL is looking for. First they are trying to serve an audience far outside the coverage area of their primary signal.


Blame or discredit the victim. Good tactic!"


Victim? Hardly a victim. WRKL has alledged interference. They haven't proven a thing yet, have they? Also, I happen to have specific inside information about that facility, having worked there, which I doubt you and others are privy to.


"That and the fact that they have not been granted a renewal and now with a 50 KW station which they fear will cut down on their coverage, legal or otherwise will lower the value of the station.

They fear will cut down on their coverage? They don't fear it. They are obviously already experiencing it, otherwise, why would they have filed this action? Generally, actions are not filed on fear of damage alone. Usually, a damage needs to have already occurred. Oh yes, and the value of their station has already been lowered by the decreased coverage they are experiencing. They don't need to fear that. It is already a reality and the administrative agency which oversees these matters have already legalized it. Isn't that superb?"


They also have other real problems. First; because the commission hasn't renewed their license which they applied for in 2006. What that means is that while they can still broadcast on 910 KHZ, they can not sell their facility. AM property values are dropping due to audience numbers dwindling. I don't live in Brooklyn so I can't at this point do any testing. I do travel to Orange county, into Monroe on occasion and WRKL comes in as well as it ever did. Same goes for my trip into Manhattans west side. You choose to believe that WRKL is the poor plaintiff in this case without any proof other than choosing to take the side of whoever is against and IBOC staton. For someone who obviously has little inside information in this case, that's very even handed of you.



"They bought WRKL so that they could tell advertisers that they were getting a signal into NYC, even if NYC is beyond WRKL's protected coverage area.


Any idiot, including me, can see that NYC is not even close to WRKL's protected coverage area. Last I checked, I didn't think WRKL was trying to sell any advertising time to NYC advertisers, although I could be mistaken."



Well it really shows what you know about this situation. You are mistaken. They bought WRKL to get a NY pressence. Their listeners are in central Jersey, around the Elizabeth area and in Brooklyn. They are already on record of having problems with interference from WPAT (930). I was told the reason they bought WRKL was that it was what they could afford and that they coundn't afford to purchase a better NY signal.

"I've already provided an audio demonstation showing that WRKL receives within it's primary protected contour, no interference from WCBS, but hey, anyone can sue anyone for anything. The key will be, can they prove it.



"If the key will be, can they prove it, then the question is, do you think they would go to the trouble of filing this action if they couldn't?"


Law suits have been brought for many reasons. Maybe they hope for a payoff from deep pocketed CBS or maybe they've been sold a line of B.S. and like their purchase of WRKL they bought this hook, line and sinker. I'll have to find out who provided them with the info they will base their lawsuit on. On another note concerning WRKL's commitment to serving Rockland County. Check out the official Rockland county web site (http://www.co.rockland.ny.us/) and look for the link to WRKL (they have them for WRCR and the low power county run 1640 on the left side of the page). There is no link to WRKL because they don't serve Rockland County, which is a shame because they are the only local signal that covers the entire county. They are used basically to rebroadcast WNVR and also act as a remote studio for WNVR. WLIM used to simulcast the WRKL feed as well with no local programing originating from that site. The three stations were tied together via ISDN line. Now WLIM is no longer part of this network. There aren't enough listeners in Rockland county to support that radio station. They depend on a fringe out of area audience to make a go of it. Without going into too much detail I happen to know that every week things such as audio level had been checked and readjusted to keep them within spec and most every week knobs had been turned, after correction had been made to put out more audio so that their signal could be heard in those fringe areas outside of their protected contour a little better. Even though they run 24 hours a day I have been told by a person in a managment position at the station that they only cared about their daytime signal because they knew after sundown they couldn't be heard in the areas they wanted to reach.

 

[R.F. Burns]

I found this on another site and THIS says it all about this case;


WRKL's Side;

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518808409


http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518912523


http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518913456



And WCBS's response;

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518919218

 

[calstymes]

R.F. Burns proclaimed:

I would be surprised if you could pick up WCBS 's analog signal in Manhattan. It has nothing to due with the IBOC technology. It's because the level of RF which WCBS puts into Manhattan is miniscule due to poor ground conductivity and the number of skyscrapers between High Island in the Bronx and your location in the city. You can't hear them in the 60's or 70's on the West Side Highway either. How many times must this be repeated? Your B.A. is defective, that's already been established.

Correct on all accounts and thank you for the lesson!

You even said that you were impressed with the Sangean demo.

I was and am still impressed with that demo! Nice job there!

WRKL has alledged interference. They haven't proven a thing yet, have they?

Not yet I presume. No doubt they are saving their proof for the administrative law judge who will hear the case.

Also, I happen to have specific inside information about that facility, having worked there, which I doubt you and others are privy to.

Yes, I am an idiot because I don't have the information about WRKL that you do. I agree.

AM property values are dropping due to audience numbers dwindling.

Yes, and audience numbers are dwindling because of legalized interference from IBOC in the AM broadcast band. Shocking!

You choose to believe that WRKL is the poor plaintiff in this case without any proof other than choosing to take the side of whoever is against and IBOC staton.

I chose to believe nothing. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that WRKL obviously didn't ask WCBS to install and light up IBOC which has caused some level of interference to them that they find to be unacceptable. WRKL has demonstrated that in the form of a complaint and good for them!

For someone who obviously has little inside information in this case,

Yes, that's right. My obviously little information in this and other cases caused me to state on this message board many months ago that these kind of actions were coming. There will be many, many more. My information may be little, but it is of a very high quality.

that's very even handed of you.

Thank you. I am a very even handed kind of individual. Ask anyone who knows me.

Well it really shows what you know about this situation. You are mistaken.

Yes, that's right. I know very little about this situation, and virtually nothing about anything. You win!

I was told the reason they bought WRKL was that it was what they could afford and that they coundn't afford to purchase a better NY signal.

You were? Who told you that?

Maybe they hope for a payoff from deep pocketed CBS

Now THAT is incredibly humorous! What makes you think CBS is so deep pocketed? The last I heard, the folks at CBS Radio were pinching the penny a bit.

or maybe they've been sold a line of B.S. and like their purchase of WRKL they bought this hook, line and sinker.

Unfortunately, the only entities that have bought a hook, line and sinker are the ones that have purchased AM IBOC equipment with the expectation that digital AM will save the AM broadcast band from extinction.

I'll have to find out who provided them with the info they will base their lawsuit on.

When you find this out, please let us all know! Thanks, R.F.!

 

[R.F. Burns]

I will let you know if I find out who's idea this was. Did you read the links to both the WRKL complaints and the WCBS reply? Read it all before you come to any conclusions. I believe WCBS addresses WRKL's complaints. As for who told me, let's just say that if I provide a name it would mean nothing to you. The gentleman is a Polnet executive.

 

[calstymes]

R.F. Burns replied:

I will let you know if I find out who's idea this was.

Thank you!

Did you read the links to both the WRKL complaints and the WCBS reply?

I did! It was fascinating reading. Those links were also posted by dumber than a box of hair in the very first message of this topic.

Read it all before you come to any conclusions.

Ok. However, my conclusions are immaterial. The only conclusions that matter are those arrived at by the FCC and its administrative law judges.

I believe WCBS addresses WRKL's complaints.

Well it certainly appears that CBS Radio East thinks they addressed WRKL's complaints. I wonder what WRKL thinks?

As for who told me, let's just say that if I provide a name it would mean nothing to you. The gentleman is a Polnet executive.

Copy that!

 

[R.F. Burns]

R.F. Burns replied:

I will let you know if I find out who's idea this was.

Thank you!

Did you read the links to both the WRKL complaints and the WCBS reply?

According to a friend of mine the assertation that WRKL covers much of NYC with a .5 Millivolt signal might bring interest of the FCC into what exactly WRKL is doing to cover "much of NYC" with a .5 MV signal from northern Rockland county some 20 to 50 or more miles away, with 1 KW day and 800 Watts night.

 

[calstymes]

R.F. Burns observed:

According to a friend of mine the assertation that WRKL covers much of NYC with a .5 Millivolt signal might bring interest of the FCC into what exactly WRKL is doing to cover "much of NYC" with a .5 MV signal from northern Rockland county some 20 to 50 or more miles away, with 1 KW day and 800 Watts night.

That was poorly written, wasn't it? It was probably a relatively large mistake for WRKL to put that statement in their brief. Somebody certainly went overboard on that assertation!

 

[vsa]

R.F. Burns wrote: "According to a friend of mine the assertation that WRKL covers much of NYC with a .5 Millivolt signal might bring interest of the FCC into what exactly WRKL is doing to cover "much of NYC" with a .5 MV signal from northern Rockland county some 20 to 50 or more miles away, with 1 KW day and 800 Watts night."

Look at:

http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/pat?call=WRKL&service=AM&status=L&hours=D

As you can see, the purple line (.5 mv/m) covers much of New York City.

 

[R.F. Burns]

R.F. Burns wrote: "According to a friend of mine the assertation that WRKL covers much of NYC with a .5 Millivolt signal might bring interest of the FCC into what exactly WRKL is doing to cover "much of NYC" with a .5 MV signal from northern Rockland county some 20 to 50 or more miles away, with 1 KW day and 800 Watts night."

Look at:

http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/pat?call=WRKL&service=AM&status=L&hours=D

As you can see, the purple line (.5 mv/m) covers much of New York City.

Brought to your home directly from Radio locator...."This image is intended solely for entertainment purposes. Radio-Locator makes no claims as to the accuracy of this information, nor towards its suitability for any intended purpose."

Read the WCBS reply to the WRKL claim. They measured WRKL at 700 microvolts in the north eastern Bronx. Do you know NYC geographically? WRKL is closest to the Bronx and even there they don't achive a .5 mv signal. They are located in northern Rockland County, which is about 20 miles north east of the Bronx/Westchester border and WCBS reported that their sidebands are down 74 DB at 910 KHZ. They only have to be down 35 DB according to law. I worked at WRKL in the 70's and have at least one freind who worked there as chief eng. until recently. I went out on proofs, and spent many days checking monitoring points for that station. WRKL is trying to reach an audience in Brooklyn and central Jersey. Both of those locations are far outside of their coverage area. Actually looking at the radio locator image again for daytime, they barely reach the north west Bronx with a .5 MV signal if that map is to be believed. By the way, those figures are theoretical. The ground coductivity in NY is notoreously poor. Here is the FCC iunfo on WRKL; http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/amq?list=0&facid=50057 for day and night information. For instance, here's a theoretical picture of their nighttime pattern; http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/MB/Databases/AM_DA_patterns/565622-73125.pdf . Here's a page which shows WRKL's relationship to NYC; http://tiger.census.gov/cgi-bin/map...IES,&off=streets,GRID,shorelin&ht=1.5&wid=1.5

Here's an area map. As you can se NY isn't even in the same area as WRKL;

http://tiger.census.gov/cgi-bin/map...IES,&off=streets,GRID,shorelin&ht=0.5&wid=0.5

The station is playing fast and loose with the facts and their complaint looks foolish for all the factual errors it contains.

 

[awj223]

They measured WRKL at 700 microvolts in the north eastern Bronx. Do you know NYC geographically? WRKL is closest to the Bronx and even there they don't achive a .5 mv signal.

There are 1000 microvolts in a millivolt (1000 uV = 1mV). Therefore 700 microvolts is .7 millivolts, which is greater than .5mV.

 

[R.F. Burns]

They measured WRKL at 700 microvolts in the north eastern Bronx. Do you know NYC geographically? WRKL is closest to the Bronx and even there they don't achive a .5 mv signal.

There are 1000 microvolts in a millivolt (1000 uV = 1mV). Therefore 700 microvolts is .7 millivolts, which is greater than .5mV.

But check out NY. They had a .7 in the northern Bronx (About 25 miles from WRKL) where the WCBS sidebands were 74 DB down on 910 KHZ. Do you think WRKL has a .5 in Brooklyn (about 40 miles from WRKL), Manhattan (33 miles from WRKL), Queens (40 miles from Queens) , Staten Island (over 50 miles away) or the mid and south Bronx (Between 30 and 40 miles away)? Do you thinkn there 1 KW or 800 watts covers MUCH of NYC with a .5 MV signal? If WCBS measured that their sidebands were down 74 DB where the WRKL signal was at .7 MV and they has a 1.4 volt signal, don't you think this claim of interference is supect?

 

[awj223]

WRKL is trying to reach an audience in Brooklyn and central Jersey. Both of those locations are far outside of their coverage area. Actually looking at the radio locator image again for daytime, they barely reach the north west Bronx with a .5 MV signal if that map is to be believed.

If the r-i maps are to be believed, the .5 mV signal goes well past the Bronx, reaching most of Staten Island and western Long Island all the way to Levittown. The .5 mV contour is the PURPLE line, not the RED one.

The idea of doing this is actually not that crazy if you think about it. Down to .1 mV is really pushing it (and probably not logical) but since stations are supposed to be interference free inside their protected contours and radio signals don't get attenuated infinitely by arbitrary boundaries, it follows that they must be nearly interference free slightly outside that contour, and mostly interference free farther outside, and somewhat listenable (but possibly with a lot of noise) farther still. If there is any competition far outside the protected contour then those listeners can probably be written off, but in the absence of competition listeners won't have a better signal to listen to. The industry seems to have forgotten that content drives listening, not signal quality alone. People will generally put up with otherwise annoying amounts of noise if they don't have another choice, and because of the laws of physics protecting the signal from interference inside its protected contour assures that it is listenable, even if there is some interference, not too far outside that contour.

But check out NY. They had a .7 in the northern Bronx (About 25 miles from WRKL) where the WCBS sidebands were 74 DB down on 910 KHZ. Do you think WRKL has a .5 in Brooklyn (about 40 miles from WRKL), Manhattan (33 miles from WRKL), Queens (40 miles from Queens) , Staten Island (over 50 miles away) or the mid and south Bronx (Between 30 and 40 miles away)? Do you thinkn there 1 KW or 800 watts covers MUCH of NYC with a .5 MV signal? If WCBS measured that their sidebands were down 74 DB where the WRKL signal was at .7 MV and they has a 1.4 volt signal, don't you think this claim of interference is supect?

I think the r-i maps are suspect if the actual signal is .7 by the time it gets to the edge of the Bronx. However, the report says that they measured 1.2 mV/m at Englewood Cliffs, NJ. If that is true, then I have a hard time believing that it weakens from 1.2 to .7 just across the river. Something is definitely suspect but I have no reason to believe one claim over the other.

As far as the signal being 74 dB down, I can believe that it could cause interference if the radios being used to tune WRKL are cheap enough and wideband enough. What is the definition of "interference free"? Interference free on what receiver? My radios can pick up signals that sound intolerably noisy on cheap receivers. So is WRKL using bad criteria (cheap receivers) to evaluate interference? Does it need to tell its listeners to stop listening on cheap radios? Or, did the HD Radio alliance pick receivers that have higher-than-average immunity to IBOC noise to "prove" that it causes less interference than it really does? I think both.

 

[R.F. Burns]

WRKL is trying to reach an audience in Brooklyn and central Jersey. Both of those locations are far outside of their coverage area. Actually looking at the radio locator image again for daytime, they barely reach the north west Bronx with a .5 MV signal if that map is to be believed.

If the r-i maps are to be believed, the .5 mV signal goes well past the Bronx, reaching most of Staten Island and western Long Island all the way to Levittown. The .5 mV contour is the PURPLE line, not the RED one.

The idea of doing this is actually not that crazy if you think about it. Down to .1 mV is really pushing it (and probably not logical) but since stations are supposed to be interference free inside their protected contours and radio signals don't get attenuated infinitely by arbitrary boundaries, it follows that they must be nearly interference free slightly outside that contour, and mostly interference free farther outside, and somewhat listenable (but possibly with a lot of noise) farther still. If there is any competition far outside the protected contour then those listeners can probably be written off, but in the absence of competition listeners won't have a better signal to listen to. The industry seems to have forgotten that content drives listening, not signal quality alone. People will generally put up with otherwise annoying amounts of noise if they don't have another choice, and because of the laws of physics protecting the signal from interference inside its protected contour assures that it is listenable, even if there is some interference, not too far outside that contour.

But check out NY. They had a .7 in the northern Bronx (About 25 miles from WRKL) where the WCBS sidebands were 74 DB down on 910 KHZ. Do you think WRKL has a .5 in Brooklyn (about 40 miles from WRKL), Manhattan (33 miles from WRKL), Queens (40 miles from Queens) , Staten Island (over 50 miles away) or the mid and south Bronx (Between 30 and 40 miles away)? Do you thinkn there 1 KW or 800 watts covers MUCH of NYC with a .5 MV signal? If WCBS measured that their sidebands were down 74 DB where the WRKL signal was at .7 MV and they has a 1.4 volt signal, don't you think this claim of interference is supect?

I think the r-i maps are suspect if the actual signal is .7 by the time it gets to the edge of the Bronx. However, the report says that they measured 1.2 mV/m at Englewood Cliffs, NJ. If that is true, then I have a hard time believing that it weakens from 1.2 to .7 just across the river. Something is definitely suspect but I have no reason to believe one claim over the other.

As far as the signal being 74 dB down, I can believe that it could cause interference if the radios being used to tune WRKL are cheap enough and wideband enough. What is the definition of "interference free"? Interference free on what receiver? My radios can pick up signals that sound intolerably noisy on cheap receivers. So is WRKL using bad criteria (cheap receivers) to evaluate interference? Does it need to tell its listeners to stop listening on cheap radios? Or, did the HD Radio alliance pick receivers that have higher-than-average immunity to IBOC noise to "prove" that it causes less interference than it really does? I think both.

If you knew NY radio (That's where I live and work) you'd know that WRKL has a minimal signal once you get into northern Manhattan. Almost no signal in Queens or Brooklyn and none in Staten Island. You can't compare the NY metro area to other markets. There is no regions in the world with such a heavy level of RF and the poor conductivity here makes every Philadelphia station (90 miles from NYC) and Conneticut station unlisteable in NY. Unless you have spent any time in NYC you might be shocked to learn just how poorly even 5 KW stations coverasge is. Even 50 KW WQEW on 1560 has fairly poor coverage. WRKL's case will be thrown out. Heck they haven't even been granted a license renewal since they applied in 2006. This case is a waste of time.

 

[Tom Wells]

Tomorrow through friday of this week I will be in Jersey City, so I will have good chance to hear exactly what this sounds like.
I plan to do some driving around, too. Only thing not in my control will be rental car radio bandwidth.
If I can avoid a GM product, I will, for the sake of bandwidth on AM.

I already know not to base Manhattan or Long Island reception on what I hear in Jersey.

I suspect I will find WCBS in "compliance", with enough strength on 890-894 to wipe out most cheap radios tuned to 920,
especially those more to the southern region. I expect the car radio will be OK with this situation.

 

[R.F. Burns]

Tomorrow through friday of this week I will be in Jersey City, so I will have good chance to hear exactly what this sounds like.
I plan to do some driving around, too. Only thing not in my control will be rental car radio bandwidth.
If I can avoid a GM product, I will, for the sake of bandwidth on AM.

I already know not to base Manhattan or Long Island reception on what I hear in Jersey.

I suspect I will find WCBS in "compliance", with enough strength on 890-894 to wipe out most cheap radios tuned to 920,
especially those more to the southern region. I expect the car radio will be OK with this situation.

WRKL isn't licensed to serve Jersey City. The station is located on Rt 202 in Pomona NY, which is north of their licensed New City (The county seat). Jersey City is nearly 40 miles from WRKL's Transmitter site. I'd guess if you are coming into NJ via air you'll land at Newark airport. As long as you're tuning around why not check out 1 KW, WFAS on 1230. they are closer to NYC and they have almost no signal into much of NYC. Repeating what I've said over and over here; If the transmission is clean and within spec, which WCBS AM is and there are millions of faulty receivers, it's the fault of the radios. For all of these faulty radios which people speak of (and claiming that your 1930 Radiola has trouble is of no concern to that vast majority of the public and anyway, RCA no longer supports the Radiola) Every radio I own and I have all types, has no problems with IBOC. The only outrage I hear expressed is from the anti IBOC crowd and these very small stations who are afraid they will lose their deep fringe audience. The listeners have said nothing. I've read no complaints on any of the local talk shows or read of any complaints in the newspapers.

 

[radiopilot]

Repeating what I've said over and over here; If the transmission is clean and within spec, which WCBS AM is and there are millions of faulty receivers, it's the fault of the radios. For all of these faulty radios which people speak of. Every radio I own and I have all types, has no problems with IBOC. The only outrage I hear expressed is from the anti IBOC crowd and these very small stations who are afraid they will lose their deep fringe audience. The listeners have said nothing. I've read no complaints on any of the local talk shows or read of any complaints in the newspapers.

WHAT???? You mean to tell all of us here and the rest of the general public all the analog radios they've bought over the decades and listened to them just fine without a complaint (unless you bought cheap $5.00 radios), are all defective? Right and Global Warming is the result of starlight from distant galaxies and stars!

The fact that there are probably no complaints so far is that alot of these so called listeners are 1) either not listening to radio. 2) The listeners listen to radio but figure 'who' do they complain to about the hiss and noise, (Hint: Not everyone is a member of these boards or radio boards). 3) Why would the listeners feel they must put up time to get a complaint in a newspaper... any complaints to a radio station or talk show is met with outright resistance...

The radio stations and NAB crooks, along with the crooks at the FCC have the RIGHT to make the public feel they have a part of the airwaves not to have some half azz system implemented without regard for their rights... digital or not! :

Now just because the so called transmission is on spec... Whose's spec, the spec for interfering between the airwaves? I thought that is WHY we have the FCC... to prevent this!

Radiopilot