KPFA

[SML]

To be fair, KPFA has a nice technical plant, 59KW atop Grizzly Peak, and a new antenna system and a fairly new 20KW Nautel solid-state transmitter. KPFK operates with a recently new antenna system and a rebuilt studio and transmitter site.
I do what I can to make sure it all runs good, but thankfully nobody asks me to influence the programming. I am just another listener out there in that regard.

 

[DavidKaye]

To be fair, KPFA has a nice technical plant, 59KW atop Grizzly Peak, and a new antenna system and a fairly new 20KW Nautel solid-state transmitter. KPFK operates with a recently new antenna system and a rebuilt studio and transmitter site.

Do you commute a lot between Hawai'i and California?

 

[travisl5678]

Are You the Chief Engener? Are there any plans to go HD anytime soon?

 

[KTN Corp]

The site on top of the Caldecott Tunnel seems to be a prime location for a transmitter. That site means they there's less of a need to set up a network of boosters for the Tri-Valley area. The site would be especially good for TV as it's troublesome from my experience to receive SF TV signals from Concord, Walnut Creek, etc. But I guess no matter where a SF/OAK transmitter is located, there's bound to be dead spots.

Isn't Mount Diablo the highest point in the Bay Area? Why not build an antenna farm there as S.F.'s version of Mount Wilson?

 

[SML]

Do you commute a lot between Hawai'i and California?


Isn't Mount Diablo the highest point in the Bay Area? Why not build an antenna farm there as S.F.'s version of Mount Wilson?

Hawaiian Airlines and I have a good working relationship, yes. There have been plenty of discussions about HD on both KPFA and KPFK. But KPFT is the only Pacifica station doing it. Money is the main issue.
As for Mt. Diablo, Jim Gabbert can tell you all about trying to serve the Bay area from up there. With 100 KW it sort of worked, but not well enough. KPFA has a booster on North Peak, which is helpful in certain areas of the Central Valley. But transmitting from Mt Diablo and trying to provide a useful signal to the Bay does not work. Too far away, and too many shadows.

 

[MR5229]

The whole East Bay west of the Oakland hills are shadowed from Mt. Diablo. One way of determining where the shadows are is to use tvfool.com and type in the call letters KTNC. That TV station has a transmitter on Mt. Diablo so you would be able to see a map that shows where the shadows would be.

 

[kenrayc]

Mt. Diablo was originally a chosen site for the Sacramento/Stockton/Modesto Market, which would be more perfect for them (better than the Walnut Grove site) than The Bay Area, KOVR 13 (ABC) Stockton originally transmitted from there, but there was to much overlap with the ABC network with KGO 7 and KNTV 11 (which of course we all know had their own overlap problem) making it only good for Independent stations.

 

[travisl5678]

I think the north bay would be best for TV because it would give equal coverage to the east bay and pennisula

 

[TheBigA]

This is a fascinating discussion, but honestly, as one who has volunteered for Pacifica in my life, I can attest that signal is not the reason why KPFA does so poorly in the ratings. And I imagine most of the people who work there aren't interested in ratings. The same applies to all of their stations around the country. They view ratings in about the same way Groucho Marx viewed clubs.

 

[LKellerIII]

This is a fascinating discussion, but honestly, as one who has volunteered for Pacifica in my life, I can attest that signal is not the reason why KPFA does so poorly in the ratings. And I imagine most of the people who work there aren't interested in ratings. The same applies to all of their stations around the country. They view ratings in about the same way Groucho Marx viewed clubs.

So...you're saying I shouldn't donate money to a non-commercial station that would have me as a listener?

 

[TheBigA]

So...you're saying I shouldn't donate money to a non-commercial station that would have me as a listener?

That's pretty funny. I guess you're right.

 

[DavidKaye]

Mt. Diablo was originally a chosen site for the Sacramento/Stockton/Modesto Market, which would be more perfect for them (better than the Walnut Grove site) than The Bay Area, KOVR 13 (ABC) Stockton originally transmitted from there, but there was to much overlap with the ABC network with KGO 7 and KNTV 11 (which of course we all know had their own overlap problem) making it only good for Independent stations.

I believe KOVR left Diablo when they went from indie to ABC affiliation. The callsign was originally chosen as a promo tie-in, KOVR "KOVeRs Northern California", as one brochure from previous owner Metromedia said.

San Jose's chennel 36 was well-received in Sacramento when it was analog. I don't know what the signal is like now, but it was an easy view in Sac when I lived there. So, not just Diablo but Mission Peak is also a good site for extended TV coverage. Radio's another thing, though.

 

[DavidKaye]

This is a fascinating discussion, but honestly, as one who has volunteered for Pacifica in my life, I can attest that signal is not the reason why KPFA does so poorly in the ratings. And I imagine most of the people who work there aren't interested in ratings. The same applies to all of their stations around the country. They view ratings in about the same way Groucho Marx viewed clubs.

Personally, I don't have a problem with that. Let others go after ratings. Pacifica provides lots of alternatives to conventional broadcasting, and shouldn't broadcasting be about more voices instead of fewer? Pacifica's "Democracy Now" is an excellent daily program that goes beyond even NPR's "Talk of the Nation" in both timeliness and ability to bring in informed people to discuss the real issues of the day.

KPFA has some excellent fringe programming that may not be of much interest to the mainstream, but thank goodness they're there. There's "America's Back 40" the Sunday bluegrass and Americana music show. There's Emmit Powell's "Gospel Experience" early on Saturdays. KPFA also has "Discreet Music" which includes new unusual music, many of which is chamber and symphonic classical music. There are, of course, various jazz shows sprinkled throughout the schedule.

And then there's "Puzzling Evidence", a show that runs Friday mornings from 3am until whenever, which is a sort of stream of consciousness amalgam of mood music, callers, ruminations, etc. Here's a description: "Deranged "edits" segue into a cascade of echoing glossolaliac madness, the voicing of lyric ruminations from the free-falling brains of disintegrating personalities." It's the kind of pastiche radio was made for. Here's a description, along with photos and other evidence from the Laughing Squid website: http://laughingsquid.com/puzzling-evidence/

 

[TheBigA]

Pacifica provides lots of alternatives to conventional broadcasting, and shouldn't broadcasting be about more voices instead of fewer?

Well, in their case, it's more voices that are of interest to a few ears. Some wonder if such powerful signals would be better used with programming of interest to more people. But their supporters have staunchly held on, turning down huge offers, especially for the 99.5 frequency in New York City. I view it as something one can point to when people say the radio dial is boring, predictable, and owned by big corporations. Really? Listen to Pacifica and see if you still feel that way.

 

[DavidKaye]

Well, in their case, it's more voices that are of interest to a few ears. Some wonder if such powerful signals would be better used with programming of interest to more people.

Let's flip this idea on its ear. The conventional wisdom is to use the biggest signals to reach the biggest audiences. But that leave the smallest signals for the smallest audiences, and we already know that that kind of business plan doesn't work. So, take the largest signals (KPFA, WBAI, KPFK) and give them to the smallest voices, thereby assuring that the smallest voices can reach more potential listeners. Then the smallest signals can STILL make money speaking to the largest audiences. Therefore everyone will be successful!

Personally, I'd like to hear KMEL's programming on 92.7 and KALW's programming on 106.1.

 

[TheBigA]

So, take the largest signals (KPFA, WBAI, KPFK) and give them to the smallest voices, thereby assuring that the smallest voices can reach more potential listeners.

For what purpose? Changing their minds? Converting them to another POV? That assumes those listeners want to hear small voices. Typically they don't, and the numbers bear that out.

The ability to reach, and having them actually listen are two different things. You can lead a horse to water, as they say. People listen for what they want to hear. We have found that minority audiences who seek radio programming in foreign languages are willing to jump through all kinds of technological hoops to get it. Even if it means weak AM stations.

 

[DavidKaye]

For what purpose? Changing their minds? Converting them to another POV? That assumes those listeners want to hear small voices. Typically they don't, and the numbers bear that out.

You don't seem to understand or you're being particularly dense. A big signal flies over the heads of lots of people. Therefore, therefore it's easier to reach more people who would like what a smaller broadcaster has to offer. And as for giving the small signals to the more mainstream broadcasters, they wouldn't hurt for listeners, either.

I'll use KALW as an example. KALW, the "other" NPR station in SF, has a 1900 watt signal. KQED-FM, another NPR station, has a 115,000 watt signal, or roughly 100 times the power of KALW. I've done some extensive analysis of both stations based on their ratings and signal coverage as well as some pledge reports when I volunteered there. KALW actually reaches more people within its city grade signal than KQED does. The problem is that KALW's city grade signal doesn't even cover its city of license entirely. Give KALW a signal such as 106.9 or 106.1 and they'd likely be as popular as KQED or may even outdraw them.

The ability to reach, and having them actually listen are two different things. You can lead a horse to water, as they say. People listen for what they want to hear. We have found that minority audiences who seek radio programming in foreign languages are willing to jump through all kinds of technological hoops to get it. Even if it means weak AM stations.

If KPFA didn't serve a community need then they'd no longer be in business. I'm not sure if KPFA takes any corporate grants; they used to have a policy against it. So, they were dependent upon listener pledges to make up I think 90% of their operating revenue. KPFA has been on the air since 1949. Obviously people do listen and they are willing to put their money on the table to continue KPFA's programming. Had KPFA been cursed with KPOO's signal (which I think is 850 watts) they'd have gone out of business by 1950. But their massive signal and good transmitter placement has made KPFA successful.

 

[TheBigA]

You don't seem to understand or you're being particularly dense.

That's uncalled for.

Therefore, therefore it's easier to reach more people who would like what a smaller broadcaster has to offer.

Assuming people listen to radio based on ownership rather than content. I don't think that's true.

If KPFA didn't serve a community need then they'd no longer be in business.

Same could be said of KOIT.

The fact is that the audience of this station will seek out the programming regardless of signal strength. This happened when WCLV Cleveland, WCRB Boston, and WQXR New York switched their classical format to a weaker signal. The audience size remained about the same, even though the signal was inferior.

 

[LKellerIII]

I understand your argument, Big A. But on the other hand, one of the reasons I rarely listen to the small signal non-comms on the left (of the dial) is that I listen primarily in the car, and poor signals make it difficult to listen for any length of time. Even at home on the south side of Bernal hill, most weak signals (AM and FM) are lost to me, unless they come from the South Bay.

Besides, what would be on 94.1, if not KPFA? Probably "Q-94, the Bay's Hot Hits"...or maybe "Fresh 94.1, Soft Rock but better than KOIT (honest!)"...or perhaps "Classic Hits 94.1, the all new KFRC"...or something. OK - I know some of you would like that last one.

But whatever it is , it would probably have a format 80% identical to a half dozen other stations on the dial with voice-tracked DJs and 7 minute commercial stop sets.

 

[TheBigA]

Besides, what would be on 94.1, if not KPFA?

It could also be KALW. Or another channel of KQED. Why not a frequency trade? The problem with KPFA isn't its signal. Millions of people are in reach of their signal, and they choose NOT to tune in.

The reality is that the Pacifica Foundation has been approached many times to sell its stations and it refuses. So that isn't about to change.