NPR Claims LPTV Broadcasting On Ch. 6 Is Illegal; LPTV Owner Says It's Hogwash

DToTheJ · Jan 19, 2011

A broadcasting firm that owns a collection of low-power television stations on Channel 6, and simulcasting on 87.7 FM, is on the offensive following claims by National Public Radio that these stations are violating FCC rules by broadcasting audio without a visual signal.

"False," says Venture Technologies. "[We] never received a single valid complaint from the public... The institutional elitism of NPR must end."

More info:
http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/a...e-defends-channel-6-lptvs-as-fms-in-fcc-fili#

cd637299 · Jan 19, 2011

I was told that *some* kinda signal must be present on video.....even if it doesn't jell with the audio.

We have one like that here in Miami. They have been on for 1.5 years now....no complaints I know of. There are even bumper stickers for "87.7" around town.

cd

aaronread · Jan 19, 2011

There is very specifically NO requirement that the video be related to the audio, but yes you must transmit a video signal...even if it's just a still image; the video carrier must be there. Additionally, there ARE specific rules about exactly what frequency you're transmitting on, and what method of stereo you use, among other things. Several of the "Frankenstein FM's" (LPTV's on Channel 6) are breaking the rules by using radio FM transmission methods instead of television FM/audio transmission methods.

I have heard that the FCC is not actively pursuing "Frankenstein FM's" because they figure the problem will go away on its own; LPTV's will face mandated digital TV migration within the next year or two, supposedly. After that, there won't be any FM carrier for radios to pick up so the "Frankenstein FM" era will come to a close.

Frankly (pun intended) I find the whole idea of "Frankenstein FM's" to be clever but rampagingly obnoxious. It's not like "LPFM" where the worst that could happen is not much because it's only 100 watts....some of these LPTV's are 3000 watts of aural carrier; that's essentially the equivalent of a commercial Class A FM!

I like how Venture says they've never received a single VALID complaint. Wonder how many complaints they HAVE gotten that were determined to be "invalid"? :

w9wi · Jan 20, 2011

aaronread said:
There is very specifically NO requirement that the video be related to the audio, but yes you must transmit a video signal...even if it's just a still image; the video carrier must be there.

Yep: the FCC sent a NOV to the first LPTV to try this, when they thought they could operate without a visual transmitter.

Additionally, there ARE specific rules about exactly what frequency you're transmitting on, and what method of stereo you use, among other things. Several of the "Frankenstein FM's" (LPTV's on Channel 6) are breaking the rules by using radio FM transmission methods instead of television FM/audio transmission methods.

I'm an engineer, not a lawyer, but the way I read the rules the modulation depth rules *do not apply to low-power stations*. By my reading it's legal for LPTVs to use 75KHz peak deviation, just like FM stations.

It would have been legal for *full-power* analog TV stations to use the FM stereo standard. (back when there *were* full-power analog stations!) The rules required any station using 31.5KHz for their stereo subcarrier to use the BTSC standard, but FM stereo uses 38KHz.

aaronread · Jan 22, 2011

I'm an engineer, not a lawyer, but the way I read the rules the modulation depth rules *do not apply to low-power stations*. By my reading it's legal for LPTVs to use 75KHz peak deviation, just like FM stations. It would have been legal for *full-power* analog TV stations to use the FM stereo standard. (back when there *were* full-power analog stations!) The rules required any station using 31.5KHz for their stereo subcarrier to use the BTSC standard, but FM stereo uses 38KHz.

Over on the PUBtech listserv (public radio engineers, many of whom have active interest in TV6) there has been significant debate on whether the rules would really apply to LPTV's or not. I'm not a lawyer, either, though...like I said, I think the bottom line is that it's fun to debate but really only the FCC can render a judgment and they've elected not to.

BTW, I have heard of cases where the FCC has rendered judgments that run counter to the rules spelled out in the CFR; they do have the freedom to redefine things via R&O's pretty much any way they want...assuming Congress lets them.

SML · Jan 23, 2011

There is no loophole or wink-wink on the part of FCC rule enforcement. LPTV stations operate under part 74 rules, and they clearly state that aural and visual programming can be unrelated and separate. This was confirmed in Alaska when it first came up 10 years ago. Since then a pile of LPTV FM stations have been operating this way. There are some technical standards for (now extinct) analog TV stations that do not apply to LPTV stations. The power limit of 20% aural, modulation limits and so forth found in Part 73 were never specified in the part 74 FCC rules for LPTV.
It is not a matter of violating the FCC rules. It is taking advantage of what the FCC rules don't say. And yes, it will all go away when analog LPTV goes away in a few years.

w9wi · Jan 23, 2011

Don Mussell said:
There is no loophole or wink-wink on the part of FCC rule enforcement. LPTV stations operate under part 74 rules, and they clearly state that aural and visual programming can be unrelated and separate. This was confirmed in Alaska when it first came up 10 years ago.

Very true. (and the ability to run unrelated aural and visual programming was/is not limited to LPTV, that was OK for full-power stations as well)

The other thing they tried in Alaska, though, was to operate without a visual carrier at all. That, the FCC didn't buy. The station took care of it by putting up a slide.

Since then a pile of LPTV FM stations have been operating this way. There are some technical standards for (now extinct) analog TV stations that do not apply to LPTV stations. The power limit of 20% aural, modulation limits and so forth found in Part 73 were never specified in the part 74 FCC rules for LPTV.

What I strongly suspect happened:...

- The LPTV service grew out of the TV Translator service.
- TV Translators were required to rebroadcast the signals of a full-power TV station.
- The vast majority of TV Translators took the entire received full-power signal, converted it to a different frequency, and amplified it. Without changing any characteristics of the full-power signal except frequency and amplitude.
- So, if the full-power station being relayed was in compliance with the Part 73 rules for aural power, deviation, and stereo, the TV Translator would automatically be in compliance.
- When the LPTV service was created, the FCC forgot that LPTV stations originating their own programming would not automatically be in compliance with Part 73 technical rules.
- And really, until the "FrankenFM" stations came along, it was in the financial interest of LPTV stations to comply -- they'd deliver a better signal to their viewers by complying. Even today, unless you're on channel 6 it's in your best interests to comply with Part 73.

(and yes, as Don says this will become a moot point in a year or two...)

aaronread · Jan 24, 2011

Interesting, W9WI...thanks for the exposition. That chain of events does explain a lot, including the reason why so many people (including myself, apparently) thought that LPTV's had those requirements as well.

Ai4i · Feb 13, 2011

Don Mussell said:
The power limit of 20% aural...and so forth...were never specified in the part 74 FCC rules for LPTV.

Could an LPTV-6 run this much audio power and this much video power?
My JVC car stereo must be too selective; channel sixes have always been distorted on it.

aaronread · Feb 13, 2011

Maybe try widening the I.F. filter on your JVC?

SML · Feb 14, 2011

ai4i said:
Don Mussell said:

The power limit of 20% aural...and so forth...were never specified in the part 74 FCC rules for LPTV.

Click to expand...

Could an LPTV-6 run this much audio power and this much video power?
My JVC car stereo must be too selective; channel sixes have always been distorted on it.

Many car radios can't quite tune in to the 87.75 carrier, so they sound distorted as they are capturing the edge of the carrier at 87.7. And yes, there is no specific rule found in Part 74 that says aural must be 20 % of visual, and in fact, many of these Ch. 6 LPTV stations run 90% aural and 10% visual. As I said above, the visual/aural ratio is not specified, so they are not violating any rules, because the rules don't specify the power ratios for LPTV.

OhioMediaWatch · Feb 15, 2011

As OMW reported a while back, we're about to get one of these here in Cleveland:

http://ohiomediawatch.wordpress.com/2011/01/30/the-curious-case-of-wxox-radio/

Yep, it's owned by Venture.

I was unaware that these stations could boost the aural power.

musichead1029 · Mar 18, 2011

Turf Protection vs Technology: Stoning The Innovators

Here's an example of operators responding to the market, which places a higher value on an audio service that can be received by existing receivers than a video service that is limited in power and reach, since there is no must-carry rule protection for LPTVs. (That's a good thing - must-carry rules have propped up nonviable Class As and full power TVs as FCC-mandated infomercial-laden bandwidth sinks on cable systems for too long. Here the lack of must carry protection prompted operators to create a service that actually attracts willing consumers.)

Through an apparent loophole in the technical rules, this unintended application is a legal use of the licensed spectrum.

NPR, which is heavily invested in the terrestrial status quo and has been known to come down on services it perceives as competing for its turf, tries to claim illegality and (apparently undocumented) interference. NPR engineering has done some solid studies in HD and other areas. But this sounds like whining in pursuit of the worst of intentions - political advantage.

And "Franken FM?" Come on, boys and girls. If audio broadcasters want to use 87.7 as a standard FM channel, they should file with the FCC proposing such a service rather than resorting to disparagement and name-calling toward those who have found a compliant and innovative use of the largely unwatched LPTV service.

rgseark2009 · Mar 19, 2011

There's one of those "Franken FM's" in Memphis (WPGF-LP) which recently went from progressive/classic rock (The Pig) to conservative talk. Another on ch6 (WJMF-LP) went on the air in Jackson MS with 70's-80's music. I never thought that the use of the term "Franken FM" was disparaging. Yes the broadcasters are using a loophole, but as long as analog is permitted with LPTV stations, I have no issue with them on the air as "radio stations". (Plus it gives something for us DX'ers to log during Summer E's openings).

TheBigA · Mar 19, 2011