• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Power 106 To Get A Boost

speer360- could it be described as a distributed transmission system (DTS) implementation of FM boosters?

Distributed transmission system - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

I have no position. It is an interesting topic to discuss, pros and cons.

I think many broadcasters will be very happy with the MaxxCast product. As with any new product, your mileage may vary.
DTS might not be for everybody, but for some it could be a game changer.

I have listened to the Boston area Triple A station and understand their signal challenges. They are probably very happy with the product. Good for them.

Geo Broadcast Solutions has excellent engineering talent.
 
Last edited:
Greg Strickland said:
speer360- could it be described as a distributed transmission system (DTS) implementation of FM boosters?

Distributed transmission system - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

I have no position. It is an interesting topic to discuss, pros and cons.

I think many broadcasters will be very happy with the MaxxCast product. As with any new product, your mileage may vary.
DTS might not be for everybody, but for some it could be a game changer.

I have listened to the Boston area Triple A station and understand their signal challenges. They are probably very happy with the product. Good for them.

Geo Broadcast Solutions has excellent engineering talent.
Click to expand...

Very similar.
 
I wish more car radios allowed continuous listening of simulcast signals when driving through different areas. For instance, back when KSON/San Diego was on both 97.3 and 92.1 FM, my old BMW radio would switch seamlessly between the two while driving. The radio in my newer Avalon doesn't do that.
 
Greg Strickland said:
Since this topic came up again, I ask again-
How is the protected contour of KPWR determined?
Click to expand...
Whatever was in the original application, I suspect. This changed over the years - used to be you did it with 8 radials to determine height above average terrain, then when computer modeling came along it got more accurate (maybe). But protected contours still do not allow for terrain shielding, which makes for some strange rules regarding allocation - like how those of us in the foothills of the Sierras have to protect stations in Reno. But I digress... The easiest way to determine a protected contour is to use the fantastic website built by one of our moderators. KPWR can be found here:


Legally they can set up a booster that covers anywhere within that red circle.

Dave B.
 
DaveBayArea said:
Whatever was in the original application, I suspect. This changed over the years - used to be you did it with 8 radials to determine height above average terrain, then when computer modeling came along it got more accurate (maybe). But protected contours still do not allow for terrain shielding, which makes for some strange rules regarding allocation - like how those of us in the foothills of the Sierras have to protect stations in Reno. But I digress... The easiest way to determine a protected contour is to use the fantastic website built by one of our moderators. KPWR can be found here:


Legally they can set up a booster that covers anywhere within that red circle.

Dave B.
Click to expand...
As I mentioned on another thread, a spokesman for the FCC said that if they were now to take terrain shielding into account, they would have "to redo about half the FM stations in the country". My comment was that I thought that's what "Super Computers" were for!
 
TomásEstefan said:
As I mentioned on another thread, a spokesman for the FCC said that if they were now to take terrain shielding into account, they would have "to redo about half the FM stations in the country". My comment was that I thought that's what "Super Computers" were for!
Click to expand...
When lawyers come into contact with computers, the result is unpredictable!
 
TomásEstefan said:
As I mentioned on another thread, a spokesman for the FCC said that if they were now to take terrain shielding into account, they would have "to redo about half the FM stations in the country". My comment was that I thought that's what "Super Computers" were for!
Click to expand...
I doubt they need supercomputers. Today's garden variety Unix servers probably have adequate horsepower. Current model Windows or Mac boxes too. The terrain data's all out there, even if the FCC has to license it from Google or whoever. And there are boatloads of places where terrain will never be an issue, like most of the pancake-flat Midwest, or Florida. That fact alone probably cuts the number of places to be analyzed in half (at least).
 
ChannelFlipper said:
Nonsense. Bad things will occur every time, guaranteed!
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. I have worked with a few lawyers who had a solid understanding of technology and who could bridge the gaps in understanding between lawyers and technologists. They're rare enough that they make piles of money (including one that I know who's based in Los Angeles), but they're good people to have on your side. I think the real issues with understanding at this point come with many judges who haven't kept up with the times.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom