Is AM Dead in LA?

[radiohistory]

Very sad to this old-timer (age 53) that AM may die. I was hoping to be able to live to see the 100th anniversary of KFI, KNX ands KHJ in 2022. I'd likely be on of the few to be able to tell people when the story of how those stations first went on the air, when radio broadcasting was first getting started. But now it looks like it will be a question of whether these historic AM broadcasting stations will survive to see their 100th year on the air.

Jim Hilliker
Los Angeles radio historian

 

[flakunkel]

David,

Is the digital transition for TV going to happen with radio as well? From what I understand, withstanding being corrected, the government is not only taking back TV signals but also radio signals. Is this correct? Is the government not only taking VHF and UHF back, but also radio frequencies as well?

Is this not the reason for HD radio? I didn't completely finish reading the entire Telecommunications Act just yet!
So anyone with some clarification on this subject would be appreciated.

Cheers,


JoshuaEscandon.com

The government is not taking radio frequencies back. The digital conversions of radio and TV are unrelated. The so-called "HD radio" was spawned as a reaction to satellite radio. The suits at major chains thought they had to be "digital," but didn't want to give up their frequencies. So they formed a corporation (Ibiquity) to develop a system of "in band, on channel" (IBOC) digital broadcasting that would use the existing frequency allocations.

The technology was a kludge, with inferior audio quality and serious interference problems, especially on AM. And the premise was flawed, as satellite radio became technologically obsolete and the real threat is from the Internet, with streaming audio services now readily available on smart cellphones and, soon, mobile WiFi. Thus there is simply no marketplace need for "HD radio," and it has been rejected by retailers and consumers. It will soon go the way of quad FM and AM stereo, or be used for non-audio data services.

TV digital broadcasting, however, is mandated by law. Like it or not, over-the-air television will be digital, and unlike radio, the frequency allocations are different. The old frequencies are either to be sold to the highest (non-broadcast) bidder, or used by police and fire departments.

 

[4UH8SIMBKAGN]

KFI desperately needs to change that evening show (Suits and Kennedy) for something more entertaining.

As for Kennedy & Suits or (weekends) Armstrong & Getty, just awful. These people don't belong on Los Angeles radio or radio at all, for that matter.

Now I'm feeling lonely; I like Kennedy & Suits more than anyone else on KFI. Well, I like Suits, very very much, and Kennedy's, um, unconventional radio voice doesn't bother me the way it does some (most?). She's really very sharp and quick on her mental feet. The show doesn't have the stridency of John & Ken and it's just plain smarter on the issues than Handel.

I didn't go in with a good attitude about Suits. I was pissed about Ziegler leaving (at least until I found out he was a little bit loopy). But now, if I had to pick just one KFI show to listen to, his (theirs) would be it.

Kennedy & Suits do not know the issues well. During the election, they were just plain wrong about so many things, Example: Prop 8. They, at first, thought voting for Prop 8 was a vote for gay marriage.

I catch John & Ken not exactly knowing all the issues well but at least they create great passion and are a great act. "Heads on a Stick" which is currently ongoing, is just great, and is reflected on their webpage on KFI www.johnandken.com (although they did take out the bloody necks and burning state capitol...damn corporate dictatorship) . Listeners have been eating it up and very passionate themselves.

At least there will be someone to listen to after 7 PM (well, 6, but John & Ken will still be on) with Al Rantel returning to nights on KABC. He knows the issues and isn't two idiots trying to sound like they do.

 

[qtpieislit]

quad FM and AM stereo,

Wow. Quad FM. What an idea.

 

[davideduardo]

I agree and disagree with you. Radio and many other businesses are in decline. My main point is AM seems to be where talk radio has a solid home. So, as long as people enjoy talk radio I believe it will be a salable entity no matter the platform.

There is a rapidly declining listener base under age 55 on AM, and ijn the rated markets a large portion of advertisers (those with ad departments or agencies) don't generally buy any station for 55+ listeners. With a few exceptions like KLBJ and WTMJ, few AMs in the news/talk format do at all well in 25-54. KGO in San Francisco is currently not even in the top 15 in 25-54, and KFI is in the same "out of the top 15" which means reduced revenue.

News / talk as a format does better in sales demos when it is on FM. And once the major station in each market makes the move to FM, what is left is a small part of the previous shares, as there is even less reason to even switch to AM.

David, I have a question for you. Is the digital transition for TV going to happen with radio as well? From what I understand, withstanding being corrected, the government is not only taking back TV signals but also radio signals. Is this correct? Is the government not only taking VHF and UHF back, but also radio frequencies as well?

Nothing will save AM once the content is gone, and it is rapidly departing. FM HD offers multiple channels and a lot of opportunities, particularly for narrowcasting and much better fidelity versions of what would be on SCA channels otherwise.

The FCC is not recovering any radio spectrum, and there are even suggestions that the FM band be expanded to accomodate a move by many AMs to the new FM specturm that would be created. The issue is that most people today will neither buy a new FM radio with HD nor will they buy a radio to get an expanded FM band unless something of value is to be found there.

 

[semoochie]

Flakunkel, you were right when you said the government is not taking radio frequencies back. In 1990, a government agency, CBS Labs and others got together to provide a way for radio stations to operate digitally. The original idea was to use a satellite, that would approximate a station's current analog coverage.(Eureka 147) This concept was well underway in parts of Europe. When they tried to put it into effect in this country, the US government refused to relinquish the band that would have made it possible(L-Band) because it was(and is)being used by the military. An alternate band(S-Band) would have required too many repeaters so they went to work on an in-band solution. Over a period of time, several companies merged together, taking the best parts of each system and developing the best they could hope for under the circumstances. Many years later, XM and Sirius were offered use of the S-Band.

 

[djj]

Regards IBOC:

The technology was a kludge, with inferior audio quality and serious interference problems, especially on AM. And the premise was flawed... Thus there is simply no marketplace need for "HD radio," and it has been rejected by retailers and consumers. It will soon go the way of quad FM and AM stereo, or be used for non-audio data services.

But while it's true when David Eduardo says, "FM HD offers... a lot of opportunities, particularly for
narrowcasting and much better fidelity versions of what would be on SCA channels otherwise," I really
don't see that happening now in market #4. The HD-2 fare is plain blah, or duplicating other stations.
No money is being put into the HD-2 product, from what I can hear...
Plus, not all of the Bay Area can receive the HD-2 signals, let alone the HD-1 signal, as is the case where
I live, due to the Bay Area's hilly terrain. I don't see the L.A. Basin having that problem...correct me if
I'm wrong...
Even the HD-2 on the oldies station in Newport, Oregon, is duplicating 1230 KCUP...

This article from last September says it all about HD:
http://gormanmediablog.blogspot.com/2008/09/radio-hd-radio-alliances-blame-game.html

As John Gorman says: "The (HD) Alliance is leaving the future of HD Radio in the hands of the station owners."

TV digital broadcasting, however, is mandated by law. Like it or not, over-the-air television will be digital, and unlike radio, the frequency allocations are different. The old frequencies are either to be sold to the highest (non-broadcast) bidder, or used by police and fire departments.

But will AM, as I fear, also become moreso of that George Carlin line from his great 1967 recording, "Wonderful WINO"?:
"1750 on your dial, just above the Police Call Scan!!" (but going further left on the dial)...

I'd like to believe I am as optimistic as JoshuaEscandon on AM Radio's future, however...but it takes
money and quality-programmers to make it work, and those factors are simply not there for AM anymore...

In 1990, a government agency, CBS Labs and others got together to provide a way for radio stations to operate digitally. The original idea was to use a satellite, that would approximate a station's current analog coverage.(Eureka 147) This concept was well underway in parts of Europe. When they tried to put it into effect in this country, the US government refused to relinquish the band that would have made it possible(L-Band) because it was(and is)being used by the military.

The Eureka 147 was supposedly the way to go, too...
And whatever became of the Acorn DAB system that was demonstrated at the 1991 NAB Convention?
Being I'm not technically-inclined, can someone offer why that system did not take off? Same reason
for the end of the Eureka 147 here in the U.S., perhaps?
--jay

 

[RadioStarOne]

I still have my Radio Shack QTA-770 Quad Receiver in my storage, is it worth anything to collectors of useless junk? It has a killer amp in it. The AM/FM radio works great. I used it in LA back when KKDJ 102.7 was quad, anyone remember those days?