one station;s programming on 2 frequencies

[Keith_Lake]

Who were the FIRST stations to do a same-market simulcast?

Where was the first two-station simulcast attempted? I found the information below at Georgia Tech's excellent Atlanta radio history page. Was this the first one, or did it happen earlier in another market?

http://users.ece.gatech.edu/~mleach/radio/fm.html

(begin quote)
The former simulcast of 104.1 and 106.7 was a strange association between two stations. At one time, no two FM stations could be owned by the same owner if their interferrence free contours overlapped (1 mV/m or 60 dBu). Then the FCC changed its rules to allow two stations to be owned (or LMA-ed) by the same owner as long as their city grade coutours did not overlap (3.16 mV/m or 70 dBu). Because 104.1 was rimshotting Atlanta from the southwest (LaGrange), its city grade signal encompassed only the south/southwest part of the urbanized area. With 106.7 rimshotting from the northeast (Gainesville), its city grade signal encompassed the north/northeast part of the area. The two city grade contours fell a few miles short of overlapping. In other words, neither station city graded downtown Atlanta.

So, although no one else could own two FMs in the market at that time, it was permissible to own or LMA these two, but just barely. Other Atlanta stations put city grade signals all over the metro area, but these two did not, or not quite. 104.1 was strong on the southside and 106.7 was strong on the northside. So they simulcasted programming on the two, calling it Y-104 and Y-106. During commercial breaks, they split off and fed separate commercials to the two frequencies, enabling local advertisers to focus on their own areas. The presumption by locals was that the two frequencies had ganged up against WKHX in an effort to win the country battle. Now, 104.1 is owned by Cox and 106.7 is owned by Cap Cities/Disney which also owns WKHX.

(end quote)

KL

<a href="http://home.nc.rr.com/gttyson/lastradio.html">The Last Radio Station<a><P ID="signature">______________
</P>

 

[dave73]

Re: Who were the FIRST stations to do a same-market simulcast?

> Where was the first two-station simulcast attempted? I
> found the information below at Georgia Tech's excellent
> Atlanta radio history page. Was this the first one, or did
> it happen earlier in another market?
>
> http://users.ece.gatech.edu/~mleach/radio/fm.html
>
> (begin quote)
> The former simulcast of 104.1 and 106.7 was a strange
> association between two stations. At one time, no two FM
> stations could be owned by the same owner if their
> interferrence free contours overlapped (1 mV/m or 60 dBu).
> Then the FCC changed its rules to allow two stations to be
> owned (or LMA-ed) by the same owner as long as their city
> grade coutours did not overlap (3.16 mV/m or 70 dBu).
> Because 104.1 was rimshotting Atlanta from the southwest
> (LaGrange), its city grade signal encompassed only the
> south/southwest part of the urbanized area. With 106.7
> rimshotting from the northeast (Gainesville), its city grade
> signal encompassed the north/northeast part of the area. The
> two city grade contours fell a few miles short of
> overlapping. In other words, neither station city graded
> downtown Atlanta.
>
> So, although no one else could own two FMs in the market at
> that time, it was permissible to own or LMA these two, but
> just barely. Other Atlanta stations put city grade signals
> all over the metro area, but these two did not, or not
> quite. 104.1 was strong on the southside and 106.7 was
> strong on the northside. So they simulcasted programming on
> the two, calling it Y-104 and Y-106. During commercial
> breaks, they split off and fed separate commercials to the
> two frequencies, enabling local advertisers to focus on
> their own areas. The presumption by locals was that the two
> frequencies had ganged up against WKHX in an effort to win
> the country battle. Now, 104.1 is owned by Cox and 106.7 is
> owned by Cap Cities/Disney which also owns WKHX.
>
> (end quote)
>
> KL
>
> The Last Radio Station
>
This is something the Nine FM trimulcast is being done right now. They however are on 3 frequencies: 92.5 which barely covers the far western suburbs of Chicago and areas surrounding Dekalb, including Rockford IL on a Class B 20kw signal. 92.7 covers the northern suburbs of Chicago on a 1.8kw Class A, and the original Nine FM on 99.9 on a 50kw signal, covering the Kankakee area and the south suburbs of Chicago, and portions of the south side of Chicago. Neither 99.9 nor 92.7 cover downtown Chicago because 92.7 gets hammered by 93.1 from the John Hancock & 99.9 gets the most interference in downtown Chicago from 99.5 & 100.3 from the John Hancock, plus interference from another 99.9 from Benton Harbor Michigan, which are all short-spaced with each other because of pre-1964 spacing rules. Downtown Chicago is the only area that gets little coverage of Nine FM because of second adjacent interference. Otherwise they cover a good part of the metropolitan area on 3 different signals. Between songs, they'll mention 92.5/92.7/99.9, but when it comes to top of the hour ID, they used to ID 92.5 WDEK Dekalb/92.7 WKIE Arlington Heights/99.9 WRZA Park Forest. Now they ID the stations the same way they run commercials; at the top of the hour, 92.5, 92.7, 99.9 are ID'd without the other stations lumped together. 99.9 is just ID'd as:Nine FM on 99.9 is WRZA Park Forest/Orland Park/Chicago. 92.7 is ID'd as Nine FM on 92.7 is WKIE Arlington Heights/Schaumburg/Chicago. 92.5 is Nine FM on 92.5 is WDEK Dekalb/Naperville/Chicago. 92.5 shouldn't even have Chicago in the station ID since it doesn't even cover Chicago in any way.
Commercials are run according to local area, so each signal runs separate commercials. 99.9 runs commercials for Chicago & south suburbs & Kankakee areas. 92.7 runs commercials for Chicago and the northern suburbs, and 92.5 runs commercials for Chicago & the western suburbs, but for some reason, they don't try to target Dekalb or Rockford for advertisers on the 92.5 signal.

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Many existed far before Atlanta simulcast.

> Where was the first two-station simulcast attempted? I
> found the information below at Georgia Tech's excellent
> Atlanta radio history page. Was this the first one, or did
> it happen earlier in another market?

There is one of the two station simulcasts that dates back to, I believe, the 30's and that is WLLH Lowell - Lawrence MA. Two separate licences were synchronized on 1400 AM.

Of course, famous AM syncronized two station combos include WBZ and WBZA, Boston and Springfield, and WBT and WBTA, Charlotte and Shelby, NC. Both these are gone, but they ran at least from the 40's. Both closed when the owners decided to close them as the second stations counted against the 7 AM limits in place at the time.

The two and three stations simulcast dates back to the 70's in Puerto Rico, where the WQBS/WORA/WPRP nets on AM and WIOA/WIOB/WIOC nets on FM started around 1974. These were quickly followed by other combinations, and today there are about 20 AM and FM simulcasts there.

In the 70's or 80's, the FCC allowed Highway Radio in california to simulcast on multiple facilities to cover the Victorville to Las Vegas corredor.

In Canada, synchronized simulcasts have existed for 50 years, not counting the hundreds and hundreds of CBC low power unattended synchronized repeaters.

 

[ojmurphy]

> > I know this is a huge off the subject thing to bring up
> and
> > the issue may have really come and gone by now so please
> > excuse me if this seems weird. I have after 30 years in
> > radio I have been out running on online business following
>
> > things from a distance since 2001 and have tried to keep
> up
> > since it is my first love, Having said al that there is
> > something that somehow has gone a way. In the late 90’s
> when
> > the idea of taking 1 station with outside of a major
> market
> > with a weak signal in that market and broadcasting the
> same
> > programming on another station in a small marketing on the
>
> > opposite end of that same major market, supposedly giving
>
> > the station a city grade signal, was a trend that started.
>
> >
> > Personally I never thought it would work because
> mentioning
> > 2 frequencies is to cluttered, gives the listener to much
> to
> > remember and as one station fades they are not likely to
> > remember were to go to find the station on a different
> > station and might not even remember the frequency they had
>
> > to tune to anyway. I am not writing to debate all that but
>
> > would like to know how that went and if it is a trend that
>
> > goes on . As far as I can tell in my traveling visiting
> > family and for other reasons I never hear this so I
> thought
> > I would check with some of you still in radio to find out.
>
> > If is stopped was it because of the things I mentioned or
> > other reasons and what were those reasons.
> >
>
> Actually many markets have what you described. Off the top
> of my head, in Chicago a network of three weak stations
> makes up the Nine FM network. (WDEK, WKIE, WRZA)
>
Here in the UK, where I think it's fair to say RDS is more widely used, car radios will often skip between alternate frequencies of the same station depending on which is the optimal signal (marked with 'TP' on many car radios - forgive me if this is common in the US, but I've certainly never seen it in any of my hire cars!) With our large national stations, which have many different transmitter sites, this is particularly useful on the longer journey. In fact there was a large regional station in the East of England which had several different frequencies, all of which were slightly out of time sync with each other, meaning when the RDS caused the radio to flip, you would often hear the presenter say the same few words over. It confused my non-radio friends for a long while, and it did sound VERY odd indeed.
<P ID="signature">______________
Owen</P>

 

[11south]

Call me Mr. obvious but isn't this also called a network? Same stuff...different places? Just have to market it better than we usually do. TV seems to be getting the hang of it "NBC 5" or "CBS 2" "Fox 54". Chicago is getting close with "Nine".

Slager Radio, operated and partially owned by Emmis, is the same programming on different frequencies around Hungary. Same thing..right?

Based on NBC Red and Blue from the 1920's...this has been around forever...what is the big deal? Synchronous transmission is a little bit different, as you are on the same frequency...but the basic concept remains the same...same stuff...over a wider geographical area. I guess we are relying too much on frequency numbers.

Jack could be a network. Listeners just write down they are listening to Jack. That works.

 

[davideduardo]

> Call me Mr. obvious but isn't this also called a network?
> Same stuff...different places? Just have to market it
> better than we usually do. TV seems to be getting the hang
> of it "NBC 5" or "CBS 2" "Fox 54". Chicago is getting
> close with "Nine".

I think the question was more about stations simulcasting in the same market. But the TV nets are not 24/7, so are not simulcasts. They take programming form a source, but don't commonly identify locally.
>
> Slager Radio, operated and partially owned by Emmis, is the
> same programming on different frequencies around Hungary.
> Same thing..right?

Europe is filled with these. Slager started as a single local Budapest station, and they they built repeaters. The repeaters are part of the master license. There is no such licens type in the US. The Slager licence essentially gives them the right to cover all Hungary.

Emmis' Mega in Buenos Aires also had a simulcast network. We also allowed stations to take part of the format, and do local stuff the rest of the time. At one point, there were about 30 stations on the simulcast.

I put together a simulcast net in Ecuador (only a part got built) in the 60's with nearly 20 FM allocations all under one master license. There was to be no local origination, and the links at the time were microwave from site to site.

My model was the European model of groups like SER in Spain.

> Based on NBC Red and Blue from the 1920's...this has been
> around forever...what is the big deal?

That is a net, not a simulcast, if I interpret the original poster. And the nets even allowed for local spots inside the programs as they do today.

 

[zman]

Re: More Simulcasters

In La Salle Peru Illinois (West of Chicago on I 80) We have WSTQ FM 97.7 Licenced to Streator covering the South and East part of the area & WIVQ FM 103.3 Licenced to Spring Valley Illinois and covering the nothwest part of the area in the cluster I work for. A mainstream top forty simulcast identified as Q 97.7 & Q 103.3 It has been a simulcast since March of 2000. Before that 103.3 had formats of light AC and talk. WSTQ went top forty in January of 2000. Before that it was country. I believe it had a brief try at satelite HOT AC. and before that it was beutiful music. Not sure of how long it had the beutiful music and the HOT AC. But for most of the 1990's it was country.
When WALS 102.1 in Olglesby Illinois (another station in our cluster) first signed on in 1993 it was kown as WZLC a simulcast of WGLC in Mendota Illinois. The stations were known as C 100 and C 102. IIRC. Wheh WGLC had Mendota high school sports WZLC stayed with the country music Satelite. I believe local sports was the only time they were seperate. I also remember them haveing seperate commercails. In 1996 They split the simulcast and did seperate country programming on each station.
Before WSTQ became top forty it was part of another simulcast during it's county days. WYYS 106.1 also licenced to Streator Illinois(now Unforgetable favoriets) and WSTQ simulcast the country format through the 1990's Until the simulcast was split in januarty of 200. WYYS went to a simulcast of WIZZ AM 1250(now WSPL). After a couple years of that simulcast WYYS swited to it's current format of Unforgetable Favoriets.

Edited by zman to add the simulcast of WSTQ/WYYS <P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by zman on 11/13/05 08:35 PM.</FONT></P>

 

[11south]

> > Call me Mr. obvious but isn't this also called a network?
>
> > Same stuff...different places? Just have to market it
> > better than we usually do. TV seems to be getting the hang
>
> > of it "NBC 5" or "CBS 2" "Fox 54". Chicago is getting
> > close with "Nine".
>
> I think the question was more about stations simulcasting in
> the same market. But the TV nets are not 24/7, so are not
> simulcasts. They take programming form a source, but don't
> commonly identify locally.
> >
> > Slager Radio, operated and partially owned by Emmis, is
> the
> > same programming on different frequencies around Hungary.
>
> > Same thing..right?
>
> Europe is filled with these. Slager started as a single
> local Budapest station, and they they built repeaters. The
> repeaters are part of the master license. There is no such
> licens type in the US. The Slager licence essentially gives
> them the right to cover all Hungary.
>
> Emmis' Mega in Buenos Aires also had a simulcast network. We
> also allowed stations to take part of the format, and do
> local stuff the rest of the time. At one point, there were
> about 30 stations on the simulcast.
>
> I put together a simulcast net in Ecuador (only a part got
> built) in the 60's with nearly 20 FM allocations all under
> one master license. There was to be no local origination,
> and the links at the time were microwave from site to site.
>
>
> My model was the European model of groups like SER in Spain.
>
>
> > Based on NBC Red and Blue from the 1920's...this has been
> > around forever...what is the big deal?
>
> That is a net, not a simulcast, if I interpret the original
> poster. And the nets even allowed for local spots inside the
> programs as they do today.
>

I agree with what you are saying, however there are many examples anymore of what I call networked stations within a very close geographical area...using splits in stop sets to localize the sales efforts. Usually a bunch of rim shots banding together, etc.

I think we all agree that it is tough for class "a" fm stations in suburbia to make a living without banding together to form one. Class B and Class C stations covering the entire metro areas are very difficult to find at a reasonable price. Look at "nine" in Chicago as an example of a big market....or look at WHTI and WHTY licensed to two towns in "BFE" Indiana, trying to make something happen in the Muncie market. (as pointless as this seems) The owner probably can't make a go of it as single sticks, etc.

I can see owners of class 4 am stations...commonly known as graveyards (1400, 1420, 1470, 1490, 1240) doing similar. In and around Chicago, there are a bunch of those stations...be a tough putt to make it work financially...but I could see broadcasters in places like central Iowa or Illinois potentially making it work. Kind of depends on the economy of the area, and how well these stations were maintained (not from a technical sense) over the past twenty years or so,

Years ago a guy tried something similar in and around Champaign Illinois with some Class A stations....I think it failed.

So to your post David, and mine also...it is a network, not in the traditional sense, but a network none the less. All the affiliates happen to be O and O's that simulcast for the most part.

 

[clichemoth]

> > Call me Mr. obvious but isn't this also called a network?
>
> > Same stuff...different places? Just have to market it
> > better than we usually do. TV seems to be getting the hang
>
> > of it "NBC 5" or "CBS 2" "Fox 54". Chicago is getting
> > close with "Nine".
>
> I think the question was more about stations simulcasting in
> the same market. But the TV nets are not 24/7, so are not
> simulcasts. They take programming form a source, but don't
> commonly identify locally.

Many of the radio examples mentioned here aren't 24/7 simulcasts either. They have different ads, sports programming, etc. Hence, they are more like networks, albeit small ones.

> >
> > Slager Radio, operated and partially owned by Emmis, is
> the
> > same programming on different frequencies around Hungary.
>
> > Same thing..right?
>
> Europe is filled with these. Slager started as a single
> local Budapest station, and they they built repeaters. The
> repeaters are part of the master license. There is no such
> licens type in the US. The Slager licence essentially gives
> them the right to cover all Hungary.

How do the licenses for certain Western US stations that have repeaters with reasonably high power and "KXXX-#" calls (most notably in the Salt Lake City market) function?

 

[Banjomax]

Re: More Simulcasters

And another...

WOKQ 97.5 Dover, NH/WPKQ 103.7 Berlin (CP for N. Conway), NH - Country music simulcast with localized commercials last I knew...

Peace.<P ID="signature">______________
It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt.
-- Samuel Langhorne Clemens
</P>

 

[Kent]

> How do the licenses for certain Western US stations that
> have repeaters with reasonably high power and "KXXX-#" calls
> (most notably in the Salt Lake City market) function?

Booster stations must be licensed individually. KEGA-1 has its own license as does KEGA-2 and on down the line. All booster stations must even file individual ownership transfer applications if they are sold with the parent station. I think they have to go silent if the parent station is sold and the boosters are not. Operating an unlicensed booster station carries a fine as well. Also, they are restricted to, I believe, 10% of the power of the parent station, and their citygrade signal contours must lie entirely within the predicted citygrade signal contour of the parent station.

 

[BoardmanDJ]

That's one way of looking at it. Generally people think of a network as stations in different areas.
These simulcasts, tri-mulcasts, etc are all aimed for the same metro.

6 of one, half dozen of the other.

> Call me Mr. obvious but isn't this also called a network?
> Same stuff...different places? Just have to market it
> better than we usually do. TV seems to be getting the hang
> of it "NBC 5" or "CBS 2" "Fox 54". Chicago is getting
> close with "Nine".
>
> Slager Radio, operated and partially owned by Emmis, is the
> same programming on different frequencies around Hungary.
> Same thing..right?
>
> Based on NBC Red and Blue from the 1920's...this has been
> around forever...what is the big deal? Synchronous
> transmission is a little bit different, as you are on the
> same frequency...but the basic concept remains the
> same...same stuff...over a wider geographical area. I guess
> we are relying too much on frequency numbers.
>
> Jack could be a network. Listeners just write down they are
> listening to Jack. That works.
>

 

[Ed_Walker]

> Booster stations must be licensed individually. KEGA-1 has
> its own license as does KEGA-2 and on down the line. All
> booster stations must even file individual ownership
> transfer applications if they are sold with the parent
> station. I think they have to go silent if the parent
> station is sold and the boosters are not. Operating an
> unlicensed booster station carries a fine as well. Also,
> they are restricted to, I believe, 10% of the power of the
> parent station, and their citygrade signal contours must lie
> entirely within the predicted citygrade signal contour of
> the parent station.

Boosters can operate with up to 20% of the power of the primary
signal, but must not exceed the predicted 60 dbu (not 70 dbu "city
grade") contour of the primary.

I've seen ownership transfer of boosters handled as a "line item"
in the transfer applications of the primary - (along with commonly-
owned translators). Boosters and translators have their own licenses,
but when a commonly-owned primary is transfered, they can be part of
the same transfer application - from what I've seen on CBDS in the past.

If you look at a Form 314 transfer application, under section II, paragraph 2, there's a section titled "Authorizations to be Assigned. List the authorized stations and construction permits to be assigned. Provide the Facility Identification Number and the Call Sign, or the Facility Identification Number and the File Number of the Construction Permit, and the location, for each station to be assigned. Include main stations, FM and/or TV translator stations, LPTV stations, SCA, FM and/or TV booster stations, and associated auxiliary service stations."

 

[jcolletta275]

Re: one station's programming on 2 frequencies

> > Up until recently, WTQX Charlotte, MI and WQTX Saint
> Johns,
> > MI were a sports/talk simulcast under the name "The
> Ticket".
> > Neither did very well in the ratings, though.
>
> With only a couple of exceptions, sports talk stations never
> do well in the 12+ ratings, but do very well in the prime
> 25-44 male demo, which is why they are such billing
> successes.

Even in it's target demo, The Ticket never did (and still doesn't do) well. If you don't carry MSU sports in Lansing (which no sports station does), you're not going to get the big numbers, even in your target demo.

Post 967 dedicated to WUFN, Albion, Michigan, home of Dave and Michelle (two of my mentors) in the Morning!<P ID="signature">______________
"Congratulations to Britney Spears and Kevin Federline, they had a baby yesterday. Spears said he sleeps 18 hours a day and so does the baby.
-- Conan O'Brien
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>

 

[DidYouKnow]

Re: More Simulcasters

> And another...
>
> WOKQ 97.5 Dover, NH/WPKQ 103.7 Berlin (CP for N. Conway), NH
> - Country music simulcast with localized commercials last I
> knew...
>
> Peace.

WPKQ 103.7 is North Conway now.
>

 

[KMRichards]

> That's one way of looking at it. Generally people think of
> a network as stations in different areas.
> These simulcasts, tri-mulcasts, etc are all aimed for the
> same metro.
>
> 6 of one, half dozen of the other.

You know a SIX STATION SIMULCAST?<P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[Banjomax]

Re: More Simulcasters

>
> WPKQ 103.7 is North Conway now.
>

I knew that they had the CP to move, but wasn't sure if they had actaully made the move as of yet. Thanks for the info.

Peace. <P ID="signature">______________
It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt.
-- Samuel Langhorne Clemens
</P>