Probable new FM translators in Middle Tennessee

[w9wi]

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-13-283A2.xlsx

The FCC today released a list of "singleton" FM translator applications from the 2003 filing window. These are applications that are not mutually-exclusive with other translator applications and will not preclude LPFM service.

The ones in Middle Tennessee:

97.5 Berry Hill // WFXX-93.9 Florence, Alabama (Educational Media Foundation/WLVU 97.1)
92.5 Brentwood // WFXX-93.9 Florence, Alabama (Educational Media Foundation/WLVU 97.1)
93.9 Columbia // WMOT-89.5 Murfreesboro (MTSU)
103.9 Columbia // WMXX-103.1 Jackson (Edgewater Broadcasting)
105.5 Goodlettsville // KAWZ-89.9 Twin Falls, Idaho via W214BQ-90.7 Brentwood (Calvary Chapel of Twin Falls)
103.7 Hermitage // WPLN-FM 90.3 Nashville (Tune-Atomic Music)
98.3 Madison // WSIX-FM 97.9 Nashville (Capstar)
98.7 Nashville // WFFI-94.1 Smyrna (Caron Broadcasting Inc./93.7/94.1/104.9 The Fish)
96.7 Smyrna // WSGM-104.7 Coalmont (Turbo Technical Services)
106.3 Spring Hill // WMXX-103.1 Jackson (Radio Assist Ministry)

I doubt the stations listed as carry WMXX, WPLN, or WSIX will actually carry those stations. My best guess is that 98.3 Madison will carry a HD2 or an AM station, and the WMXX translators will be sold.

 

[NashvilleNative]

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-13-283A2.xlsx

93.9 Columbia // WMOT-89.5 Murfreesboro (MTSU)

NO! This will force me to remove 93.9 The Duck from my preset, which by the way, comes in fine in my car and home in Columbia. Grr! By the way, I need to post the video I took this morning of 97.9 for the first mile of my commute in downtown Columbia. Way's 99.3 translator bleeds all over it horribly.

Good luck with the 98.7 signal, as WHOP has some strong spells here and there.

 

[Kent T]

Radio Assist Ministries, Calvary Chapel, Educational Media Foundation, all major well known translator operators (at least EMF is translating an on air signal legally), the other two translate only a satellite dish (why is this not cracked down on).

 

[skippertthomas]

If the parent or feed license of a translator is non-commerical, they are allowed to repeat, by satellite...
At least, that was the last I knew from the network CE's...

 

[firepoint525]

Good luck with the 98.7 signal, as WHOP has some strong spells here and there.

I haven't noticed that as much lately as I used to. I directed some disgruntled Mix 92.9 listeners to check out the Hoptown station after Mix dropped "DUH-lilah."

 

[deltas69]

Just for curiosity's sake How much does a translator sell for ??

 

[Tibbs4]

Whats going to come of the new 94.9?

 

[CommoChief]

Seems to me the FCC is handing translators out like candy. My question is... if small town AM station owners in areas like Hartsville and Woodbury have acquired translators - how come the 5K "Hometown" AM stations like WHIN/Gallatin or WAKM/Franklin don't do the same? Seems to me their listenership and advertising could possibly double with an FM signal. The clusters in Cookeville have FM Translators simulcasting their AM news and sports stations.

 

[deltas69]

WHIN had the chance several years ago to grab one..as well as increase their power to well over the 5K they run now...but declined...they could easily have put a translator up on top of the mountain..and increased their power on AM..but chose not to...my guess is it had to do with $$$$$$$.. :-\

 

[secondchoice]

Seems to me the FCC is handing translators out like candy. My question is... if small town AM station owners in areas like Hartsville and Woodbury have acquired translators - how come the 5K "Hometown" AM stations like WHIN/Gallatin or WAKM/Franklin don't do the same? Seems to me their listenership and advertising could possibly double with an FM signal. The clusters in Cookeville have FM Translators simulcasting their AM news and sports stations.

FM translators can "accept" interference but they can not interfere with a class A, B, or C. So a "rural" station 50 or more miles outside a big market most likely will have RF "room" to fit in like Cookeville. The best translators have been taken in most major markets if there was room. A lot of "suburban" AM's missed out or the was not a workable spectrum "hole" to make it worth doing. I personally believe translators should count against station ownership caps. A better solution IMHO would the old VHF TV channels should be made accessible for an extension of the FM band for the class D and C AM's to migrate. The cellular companies don't want the old Channel 2-6 analog.

 

[w9wi]

The FCC seems to have loosened the interference protection rules to allow use of second-adjacent channels for translators. Witness 96.7 Smyrna (vs. 96.3 & 97.1) and 98.3 Madison (vs. 97.9) among others. And, keep in mind the translator applications we're talking about were filed in 2003. (yes, it's taking the FCC **ten years** to act on them...)

If I'm not mistaken, these translator applications wouldn't have reached this point if they weren't technically acceptable. We *will* see many if not all of these eventually on the air.

Personally, I'm of mixed mind as to whether AMs should have been allowed FM translators. The problem is, that these translators will "prop up" stations which otherwise would have failed. And if they had failed.... they would have ceased to contribute to the overall interference problem which is, fundamentally, what's killing AM.

There might have been some point to requiring AM stations which acquire translators to shut off the AM transmitter. At least at night.

_________________________________________________

The suggestion to use TV channels 2-6 for FM expansion is pretty popular. There are some issues with it.

- There are VERY few radios for this band in the hands of consumers. Even if we mandate inclusion of this band in all radios, it will take at least a decade to equip most listeners.

- This spectrum *is* still in use for TV, and IMHO there will be *more* TV signals in this band in the not too distant future.

The entire band would be unavailable in New Jersey, Delaware, and in the New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington metropolitan areas:

Channel 2: a court has ordered the FCC to process an application for a new full-power DTV station at Wilmington, Delaware. This application is almost certainly technically acceptable.
Channel 3: see above, for a new full-power DTV station in the New Jersey suburbs of NYC.
Channel 4: There is a new full-power DTV station operating on this channel from a site just outside Philadelphia.
Channel 5: There is a permit for a new full-power DTV station on this channel in eastern Maryland.
Channel 6: In use by the ABC affiliate in Philadelphia.

- As the UHF TV channels are refarmed yet again, many LPTV stations will be displaced from UHF. In many cases, channels 2-6 will be the only place they can go.

 

[secondchoice]

IIRC the digital tv signal is "tighter" than the old analog signals. You can have for an example channel 33 and 35 in the same town. If the old VHF is to be used analog 7-13 could be still be used. FM turners have a lot better ajacent channel rejection now than 50 years ago when the FM band was first allocated. If the FM band does not get expanede, I would after 5 to 10 years require the AM's using tranlators to turn in their AM lisence and the tranlator being classified "A1" and being protected.

 

[jimford1973]

Speaking of AM, I read somewhere about an idea to make the AM band digital only. This seems like a good idea to me. I also have mixed feelings about AM radio. 20 years ago I thought the band was in part a victim of a bad rap. Now, I think technology has gotten away from the band.

 

[onetake]

I think there's another translator not on this list but reported by the FCC. WNSR sports talk is getting an FM translator. On the right tower they would have a strong day and night signal.

 

[w9wi]

- Could be one of the owners on the list plans to sell their translator to WNSR.
- The list showed only "singletons", translators that aren't mutually exclusive with anything else. There were a LOT more translator applications filed, which were mutually-exclusive with other translators. Those don't appear on the list but will eventually go to auction & be authorized to *someone*. Could be WNSR will end up with one of these.

I do NOT see anything on file to the same licensee as WNSR. But again, either they could buy one from someone else or they could have filed under a different corporate name...

 

[radiotower40]

The question of ownership is one that needs to be discussed. There are to many translators being run off of an HD-2 or 3. A lot of these cover major population center's almost as well as their regular counterparts in effect giving the big operator's more stations than allowed. 250 watts on a tall tower can get some good coverage, especially when located in densly packed cities.

The fcc says that since HD transmission is part of the broadcast signal it can legally be shuffled to the regular airwaves visa vi translator stations. Is HD Radio really just a regular FM signal? You need new equipment and special radios to listen. In my view, this is a secondary signal like an FM subcarrier, if they can feed a translator from an HD channel why not a subcarrier? This seems very unfair to me.

I get why AM stations want a translator on FM just for the exposure and potential listeners who may find it on FM and don't use AM. I have a problem with it on the other hand. A lot of these stations now have most of their listeners' on FM. These AM signals are wasted in most cases. This is speeding up the already fast erosion of AM listeners.

I do like to dx, I always will, we do have the internet now which allows you to listen to the AM stations without skipping and interference. For the overall good, might it be better that daytime or stations with very low power at night be allowed more power to cover an area at night?

The noise floor is already out of our hands due to manmade noise such as led traffic signals and computers. A lot of the 50kW stations are running cosst to coast or red eye radio at the same time.

Why not let my local station stay on at night with more than 5 watts? We are not losing what most clear channels' were designed for, to give coverage to rural areas at night when no local is available. Sure the signal is still there, what tho is the need to hear coast to coast and red eye on almost every station? Most run recorded news and traffic at night anyway, this is no help to most towns they cover in an emergency such as weather. This would probably handled better by the local daytime station, even if its just a ems trigger from noaa during a weather warning at night.

The noise is already on AM, it will only get worse why not just relax the clear channel rules and let the AM stations have higher power at night?

I think AM still serves a purpose if we continue to have AM on tranlator's it will make AM even less relevent.

I know a lot of people think AM is a lost cause already, you may be right. I think if we could get more local content back on AM geared at small areas in allowing some part 15 people who run these small stations with 10, 100, or 250 watts instead of the 1/10th of one watt.

They could just use a simple setup much like a current part 15 or tis stations, no antenna farms and big power bills. This is of course if the regular stations really don't want the AM side and would probably shut it off and just use the translators.

Why not offer these airwaves to community minded people who would hyper focus on the area?

 

[w9wi]

The question of ownership is one that needs to be discussed. There are to many translators being run off of an HD-2 or 3. A lot of these cover major population center's almost as well as their regular counterparts in effect giving the big operator's more stations than allowed. 250 watts on a tall tower can get some good coverage, especially when located in densly packed cities.

The fcc says that since HD transmission is part of the broadcast signal it can legally be shuffled to the regular airwaves visa vi translator stations. Is HD Radio really just a regular FM signal? You need new equipment and special radios to listen. In my view, this is a secondary signal like an FM subcarrier, if they can feed a translator from an HD channel why not a subcarrier? This seems very unfair to me.

The theory is that subcarriers are a non-public service. (they're theoretically closed-circuit, it's technically illegal to listen to one if you aren't authorized by whoever runs the SC) HD2 and HD3 signals are designed to be received by the general public.

That said, I fully agree that the FCC blew it by allowing translators to convert HD2/HD3 signals to analog. Let them relay a HD2 *as a HD2*, but not as an analog. And to your point about "...250 watts on a tall tower..." -- note the thread on the 89.9 pirate and the legal translator which has displaced it. The legal translator is running 250 watts at 316 meters, and has a coverage radius nearly identical to WRLT-100.1. All to relay a HD3.

I get why AM stations want a translator on FM just for the exposure and potential listeners who may find it on FM and don't use AM. I have a problem with it on the other hand. A lot of these stations now have most of their listeners' on FM. These AM signals are wasted in most cases. This is speeding up the already fast erosion of AM listeners.

I do like to dx, I always will, we do have the internet now which allows you to listen to the AM stations without skipping and interference. For the overall good, might it be better that daytime or stations with very low power at night be allowed more power to cover an area at night?

The problem with that is you create a kind of arms race. Increase the power of the daytime-only and low-night-power stations on 1510, and now you've increased the interference under WLAC; listeners outside Davidson County are going to have trouble getting a clean WLAC signal at night. So now, WLAC needs to increase power to overcome the interference. Which will result in more interference to the ex-daytimers. Who will clamor for more power. Which will interfere with WLAC. Which will cause WLAC to increase power. In computing we call that an infinite loop

Personally, I think we should never have licensed daytime-only stations in the first place, and we certainly shouldn't be doing anything to prop them up.

Here's my suggestion: If an AM station has an FM translator, we allow them to shut down the AM transmitter and broadcast *only* on FM. The AM remains "on the books" so as to define the area in which translators are allowed to operate, but the station is not required to actually operate the AM transmitter.

For any AM station where the protected contour signal of the translator(s) fully encompasses the nighttime protected contour signal of the AM, we *require* that the AM be shut down. (so that it doesn't unnecessarily interfere with, or limit the facilities of, other stations)

 

[jetfli]

The bigger problem is that so many of these arguments regarding AM have been around for years and years. The only thing new to the mix is the addition of the HD subchannel questions, and what a big issue they've become. Like so many other things the FCC has signed off on in the last several years, HD was unleashed without all of the loose ends tied off neatly. Now the HD-related concerns have only added to, rather than partially solving, the many AM issues. Could it be the largest problem of all is... *not enough* engineers sitting on The Commission?

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

The only thing new to the mix is the addition of the HD subchannel questions, and what a big issue they've become.

To the technical issues, maybe so. What is the BIG CHANGE in the mix is economic reality. In the past, AM stations were like kudzu or johnson grass. You just couldn't kill one. There was always someone waiting back stage to give a dying station mouth-to-mouth resusitation and keep it going. We seem to be in an era where people are willing to stand back and let an AM die of natural causes.

THAT.... is a game-changer.