• 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

If WINS were to go FM what would it be called?

badjef said:
The "kick the can" mentality is a human behavior.

I only wish I could isolate it to D.C. bureaucrats. It would be much simpler to fix.

But they are much more fun to poke fun at.
:D

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!

Most of them deserve it, I'm not taking sides as they all do it.
 
badjef said:
joebtsflk1 said:
I was going to say that these big city class B FMs would be better served if they could assume C1 equivalent facilities and 60 dBu service contours instead of 54 dBu, which of course they can't under the present rules and considerable short-spacing examples.

We might not ever see TV channel 6 get repurposed for radio, but we might just see repacking of the current FM band to allow co-located full-power FMs to be on 3rd adjacents, rather than 4th adjacents as we have now.
2 thoughts here:

1.) When the the FM spacings were proposed, the receiver designs available were not selective enough for closer spacing. Now, it's too late in most markets. 94.7 and 105.9 in New York are the only frequencies available in the commercial band available to test the current designs. I used to equate the Sensitivity vs. selectivity problem in radios as similar to car engine designs between gas mileage vs. exhaust waste.

2.) There is a de-facto "repurposing" of Channels 6 occuring. I don't see the FCC actively targeting the elimination of FM Stereo 87.7. Unless there are complaints of interference - and I think that is where the ruling will eventually get pushed - the FCC members will kick the can toward the next group of commisioners.

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!

Problem with the two frequencies you mentioned. 94.7 is WFME whose signal spans from all the way out from complete western NJ to NYC. 105.9 is WQXR, weaker signal but still reaches NYC and northeast NJ.
 
NYCRadioGuy said:
badjef said:
joebtsflk1 said:
I was going to say that these big city class B FMs would be better served if they could assume C1 equivalent facilities and 60 dBu service contours instead of 54 dBu, which of course they can't under the present rules and considerable short-spacing examples.

We might not ever see TV channel 6 get repurposed for radio, but we might just see repacking of the current FM band to allow co-located full-power FMs to be on 3rd adjacents, rather than 4th adjacents as we have now.
2 thoughts here:

1.) When the the FM spacings were proposed, the receiver designs available were not selective enough for closer spacing. Now, it's too late in most markets. 94.7 and 105.9 in New York are the only frequencies available in the commercial band available to test the current designs. I used to equate the Sensitivity vs. selectivity problem in radios as similar to car engine designs between gas mileage vs. exhaust waste.

2.) There is a de-facto "repurposing" of Channels 6 occuring. I don't see the FCC actively targeting the elimination of FM Stereo 87.7. Unless there are complaints of interference - and I think that is where the ruling will eventually get pushed - the FCC members will kick the can toward the next group of commisioners.

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!

Problem with the two frequencies you mentioned. 94.7 is WFME whose signal spans from all the way out from complete western NJ to NYC. 105.9 is WQXR, weaker signal but still reaches NYC and northeast NJ.
I don't consider that a problem. I consider that a challenge.

WQXR is an easy fix of a power boost. The transmitter is in the right place, a press of a button does the rest.

94.7 will be available next month...

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!
 
You mean 1010 Wins/ 94.7 FM Wins just like how on the KCBS Hourly ID's its 740am KCBS and FM 106.9 KFRC San Francisco?
 
badjef said:
Problem with the two frequencies you mentioned. 94.7 is WFME whose signal spans from all the way out from complete western NJ to NYC. 105.9 is WQXR, weaker signal but still reaches NYC and northeast NJ.

94.7 is short-spaced to Springfield, MA. A new operator would have to put a directional on the ESB to get a full-market class B FM. 105.9 from what I know, cannot be built out. There's 105.9 in Hartford, CT and 106.1 in Patchogue, LI. IIRC, WQXR mentioned this in its advertising when it switched to 105.9 from 96.3. :)
 
radioguy39nj said:
badjef said:
Problem with the two frequencies you mentioned. 94.7 is WFME whose signal spans from all the way out from complete western NJ to NYC. 105.9 is WQXR, weaker signal but still reaches NYC and northeast NJ.

94.7 is short-spaced to Springfield, MA. A new operator would have to put a directional on the ESB to get a full-market class B FM. 105.9 from what I know, cannot be built out. There's 105.9 in Hartford, CT and 106.1 in Patchogue, LI. IIRC, WQXR mentioned this in its advertising when it switched to 105.9 from 96.3. :)
So was 103.5. It is NEW YORK CITY!!!

If they can have a third term of a two term-limited mayor, they can do anything.

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom