KSBJ moving K259AB translator.

[purpledevil]

...but why? CP was granted yesterday to move Sugar Land's K259AB at 99.7 to 99.9 with the same 125 watts of power, but at less height. Anyone have a clue as to why this move is being made? I personally hope this gives KVST/Willis an opportunity to increase their power.

 

[ChuckTiller]

It ought to be turned "OFF." That will interfere with KSHN. Sometimes I can get them on the west side. That move will prevent the reception. In fact, I don't understand why they even need it. KSBJ comes in fine on their 89.3 location on my end of town.

 

[HoustonListener]

I also have never understood why KSBJ needs a translator in Sugar Land... seems that their signal reaches just fine into Sugar Land.

I don't like the way that the current 99.7 interferes with reception for KVST... and I won't like the way 99.9 translator will interfere with the reception for KSHN (from my place near the Galleria).

Is there any area that cannot receive the full signal on 89.3 for KSBJ that is covered by the Sugar Land translator?

 

[ChuckTiller]

I am obviously in agreement.

 

[OldChicago]

I also have never understood why KSBJ needs a translator in Sugar Land... seems that their signal reaches just fine into Sugar Land.

I don't like the way that the current 99.7 interferes with reception for KVST... and I won't like the way 99.9 translator will interfere with the reception for KSHN (from my place near the Galleria).

Is there any area that cannot receive the full signal on 89.3 for KSBJ that is covered by the Sugar Land translator?

I wonder if KSHN could file a complaint with the FCC. I looks sort of short-spaced to me.

Old Chicago

 

[jd]

I wonder if KSHN could file a complaint with the FCC. I looks sort of short-spaced to me.
Old Chicago

They could but it would be thrown out, since the channel study shows that the distance to KSHN is "close" but it meets the separation requirements by a few miles. For a complaint to have any merit at all it would have to be proven that KSHN has significant listening in the Houston area. Besides people like us on the board, I doubt that's the case.

 

[purpledevil]

I wonder if KSHN could file a complaint with the FCC. I looks sort of short-spaced to me.
Old Chicago

They could but it would be thrown out, since the channel study shows that the distance to KSHN is "close" but it meets the separation requirements by a few miles. For a complaint to have any merit at all it would have to be proven that KSHN has significant listening in the Houston area. Besides people like us on the board, I doubt that's the case.

It certainly diminishes any hope of KSHN increasing power to the levels of KHJK, KTJM, or KPTY. I have driven all over Sugar Land, Mo. City, Westwood, and Sharpstown, and anywhere I have been able to pick up the translator I've also been able to pick up the main KSBJ signal out of Humble with a very listenable signal. Seems pointless to this poster to have 99.7/99.9 as well, but who needs logic in radio these days?

 

[Mediafrog+]

It certainly diminishes any hope of KSHN increasing power to the levels of KHJK, KTJM, or KPTY.

KSHN probably can't increase power as long as KVST is in the way as a first adjacent.

I still keep waiting for some grand frequency change proposal that would move around signals such as KVST, KSTB, KTWL, and KPTI and allow for some upgrades.

 

[Fieldtech1]

Wonder if they would ever consider puting their new NGEN HD2 Channel on this translator?

 

[mrbeasley]

Well, I know I've been accused of being a KSBJ basher and HD hater on this board; but, that would be a perfect use of KSBJ's Sugarland translator. The HD-2 signal certainly won't make it to Sugarland; so that would give them a way to pick up NGEN listeners in that area. The translator has been there for many years and apparently meets the separation requirements from both KVST and KSHN. Otherwise it would have been gone a long time ago.

 

[OldChicago]

Wonder if they would ever consider puting their new NGEN HD2 Channel on this translator?

They probably would consider it, but I do not think the FCC will allow it.
Although I am no expert at the FCC rules, but I think translators are only
allowed to re-transmit/relay the signal of it parent station. To put NGEN
on it probably would not be allowed because it is a separate program. They COULD however ask to have that status of the translator changed from a translator to a LPFM. Perhaps, they could do that. However, like the Essex once sang, that is easier said than done.


Old Chicago

 

[mrbeasley]

Translators operating on commercial frequencies must be fed by the over-the-air signal of the parent station. There is no requirement that it be the main-channel program of the parent station. Since the HD-2 is an over-the-air signal; it is perfectly legal for them to re-transmit that program on the translator.

 

[stan]

Translators are being used in other markets to get better coverage for HD2 signals. CC is doing this in some other markers.

 

[ultra_defense]

The post is not correct. The translator was granted a move from K260BM 99.9 to 99.7

 

[radiobop]

The fact that many broadcasters are putting a format on HD for the sole reason to rebroadcast programming on a translator seems to make a mockery of the need and purpose of HD broadcasting What a waste of spectrum, electricity and resources...using an HD channel solely as a reason to rebroadcast a signal to a potential real audience. NGEN will most likely be a success...thanks to the internet, translators and supporting promotion on their main station. I'm still surprised at the lack of availability of HD receivers in the marketplace...

 

[ChuckTiller]

The fact that many broadcasters are putting a format on HD for the sole reason to rebroadcast programming on a translator seems to make a mockery of the need and purpose of HD broadcasting What a waste of spectrum, electricity and resources...using an HD channel solely as a reason to rebroadcast a signal to a potential real audience. NGEN will most likely be a success...thanks to the internet, translators and supporting promotion on their main station. I'm still surprised at the lack of availability of HD receivers in the marketplace...

There hasn't been enough consumer demand. The reason why I haven't purchased HD, is because I have not wanted to part with the money. When I was young, if you wanted to get UHF-TV, you had to buy one. There was only one station in Houston, KNUZ-TV Channel 39. Those that had televisions had VHF models. KNUZ-TV ceased to exist because of lack of sets. When it became mandatory for television manufacturers to include both VHF and UHF, then UHF had a chance to survive. Before the end of the 1960s, we had two UHF stations, KHTV Channel 39 and KVVV Channel 16 (Channel 16 did not survive) However it wasn't long before KVRL Channel 26 made the Houston scene.

The same will have to happen with HD radio. It will eventually, but it will take time. That stated, programmers better putting really good on it and the main FM stations too if they want it to be successful.

 

[mrbeasley]

Well, think about it for a minute. If I have an analog translator (that most people can listen to) and I want people to hear my HD format and help it grow; what better way to get it out there. It's a perfect way to test drive the new format.

 

[ChuckTiller]

MrBeasley, I think that is a good idea.

 

[ChuckTiller]

Obviously, there those here who are into the HD experience. Therefore, you may know which brands do you prefer; also, home and portable. Which units are the best in performance and price? Since it has been around a few short years, I'm sure some of you have developed preferences and knowledge on HD radios.

 

[stan]

I'd like to gain some knowledge about HD as well. We have friends in Beaumont who listen to KSBJ and were excited about the HD2 but had no idea on how to receive it here, or if they are too far away.