• 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

Saving AM Radio

Oh, there's something like a booster here: KATD 990 is a rebroadcast of KIQI 1010 to provide coverage in the Sacramento area.

So, KATD functions essentially as a booster in practice, even though it technically isn't because it operates on a different frequency than the signal it's "boosting"; a true booster, if I'm not mistaken, would operate on the same frequency as the originating station.

c
 
Anyone ever propose using a wideband dBx type of encode/decode noise reduction system on an AM broadcast instead of the single ended audio processing (the dBx type NR decoding would restore the dynamic range of music and also reduce the noise caused by increased noise in the AM band)?


Kirk Bayne
 
Someone in New Mexico might want to check and see if the KKOB booster in Santa Fe is still in operation, its listed on FCCdata.org. I don't see anything there that indicates it was taken off the air. On 770 with 230 Watts ND fulltime.
There might be one or two of the originals that keep renewing their STA. The bottom line was the test results indicated the test deployment of AM boosters was an abject failure.
 
Oh, there's something like a booster here: KATD 990 is a rebroadcast of KIQI 1010 to provide coverage in the Sacramento area.

So, KATD functions essentially as a booster in practice, even though it technically isn't because it operates on a different frequency than the signal it's "boosting"; a true booster, if I'm not mistaken, would operate on the same frequency as the originating station.
Broadcasting the same programming on two AM stations on different frequencies is called a simulcast, not a booster.
 
Anyone ever propose using a wideband dBx type of encode/decode noise reduction system on an AM broadcast instead of the single ended audio processing (the dBx type NR decoding would restore the dynamic range of music and also reduce the noise caused by increased noise in the AM band)?
No.
 
Someone in New Mexico might want to check and see if the KKOB booster in Santa Fe is still in operation, its listed on FCCdata.org. I don't see anything there that indicates it was taken off the air. On 770 with 230 Watts ND fulltime.
It was still there when I was in Santa Fe last year on a house-hunting trip. The effect of the booster is noticeable: the nighttime signal in central Santa Fe is better than the daytime signal. The synchronous transmitter is on the same tower as KTRC and KVSF, roughly a mile and a half west of the Plaza near the Santa Fe River.

I imagine there are some odd effects when you go southwest of Santa Fe toward Bernalillo and Albuquerque, but potential audience in that area would mostly be in the pueblos and I don't think those folks are particularly interested in hearing the nighttime ravings of angry white men!

Edit to add: Under the terms of the experimental permit, which dates to 1987(!), KKOB is required to file a statement periodically with the Commission regarding any interference complaints. This is the latest one I could find, from 2015: https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/p...etimportletter_exh.cgi?import_letter_id=57703
 
There might be one or two of the originals that keep renewing their STA. The bottom line was the test results indicated the test deployment of AM boosters was an abject failure.
Actually, the ones that Blanco Pi did in Puerto Rico for his AM news talk stations did amazingly well and he showed considerable ratings in the Nielsen zones where only the boosters gave good signals.

KKOB, going back to KOB, went through years of litigation and filings and multiple frequencies to be on 770 with WABC. Maybe the FCC regards the license as a special case and they are allowed to keep the booster. I don't know that, but the station sure got kicked around for decades.
 
The two stations in the top five. One is WLW
700 kHz AM. One of the old 50kw former "all clear channel " stations, while no longer the only station on 700 kHz in north America, is still 50kw non directional. The other is WKRC
550 kHz. 5kw directional but that low frequency...? So, yes, I see your point.
My favorite classic country station is at 550. One day in NC, when I was farther north than that station, I was almost dark. I heard WKRC.
 
Let's pause for a moment: Removing protection. Don't we depend on government to protect us?

In answer to your question: Of course! But at what cost. One of my relatives lost their entire backyard to eminent domain, when the state decided to double the size of a nearby highway. So they lost the protection of their property rights because of population explosion. How did this happen? Money was appropriated and they were given a payment to compensate them for their loss.

Would that happen if FM stations lost their second adjacents? That would be a matter of litigation. When I receive a license, it is a partnership. There are certain rights and obligations in that license. I agree to follow the FCC laws, and they agree to protect my frequency. Part of this is going after pirates who infringe on the rights of the licensees. But if they eliminate those protections, they're basically changing the size of your property. They're reneging on their side of the deal. Or at least changing it in a major way. So what's my compensation? You might say radios are more selective now, but that doesn't change the fact that their changing the size of my property. Why hasn't it happened here as it has in other countries? Because we are a lot more litigious than other countries. If you study the battle over LPFM, you'll get a taste of what this would be.
OK, from that perspective, it makes sense. Thank you for your informative answer, BigA.
 
KKOB, going back to KOB, went through years of litigation and filings and multiple frequencies to be on 770 with WABC. Maybe the FCC regards the license as a special case and they are allowed to keep the booster. I don't know that, but the station sure got kicked around for decades.
The most concise explanation of the KOB situation - though one that appears to have some errors - is in KOB - Goddard's Magic Mast, 50 Years of Pioneer Broadcasting, by Ann Velia. It's at worldradiohistory.com, but I have a physical copy as well. Velia's explanation regarding the NARBA negotiations is at the start of Chapter 23 on page 170:

In that year (1934), and for the following two years, KOB was still an educational radio station. KOB did not send a representative to the conference, for it was felt the educational interests in Washington would see that KOB received a good channel assignment.

It took a number of years for the new allocations to be implemented. It wasn't until 1941 that KOB discovered that, through its sin of neglect, it had been left out entirely and had no wavelength assignment on which to operate!
Yeah, but. Broadcasting, September 15, 1940, on page 14 in an article written by Sol Taishoff himself, reported:

The biggest single surprise was the assignment of KOB, Albuquerque, which holds a construction permit for 50,000 watts, from 1180 kc to 1030 kc. It was slated to operate on 1200 kc, with WCAU, Philadelphia. On 1030 it will use the same wave as WBZ-WBZA, Boston-Springfield. Thus WCAU retains clear-channel status, unduplicated, while WBZ-WBZA, which are synchronized, get a treaty-defined I-B status.

In the process, KOB was downgraded to class II status. If KOB had not found about this until 1941, as Velia wrote, the station management, at the very least, wasn't paying attention. And, apparently, KOB had been accounted for. The explanation offered in the quote from her book seems just a bit fishy.

Velia went on in the chapter to write extensively about the interference complaints that resulted, quoting station documentation, so I tend to believe what she wrote about that.

When the SSA for 770 kHz was issued (October 14, 1941 per FCC history cards; actually implemented on November 3, 1941 according to KOB advertising in the Albuquerque Journal and the Albuquerque Tribune) it was spun in the local papers as an improvement in dial position. It undoubtedly was that, but other motivations weren't made clear in the articles that I've found.

The sequence of frequencies in 1941 was 1180 → 1030 → 770, just two frequency changes. So there wasn't a lot of shifting around but I'm sure there was a lot of nail-biting, especially given that a brand-new 50,000-watt transmitter (which began operating July 9 of that year according to Broadcasting) was in the mix.

The SSAs for 50 kw day, 25 kw night on 770 were renewed again and again until 1957. In 1956, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled against Time-Life, KOB's owner at the time, and the commission ordered KOB to install a nighttime directional antenna. KOB got it installed and operational in just under seven months, according to the FCC history cards.

After Hubbard bought KOB radio and TV in 1957, it continued to pursue relief through the 1960s and 1970s but those efforts ultimately came to an end.

The irony here is that nighttime coverage over far-flung distances became less and less important. In the end, KOB came out pretty well with the deal, especially with daytime coverage, with the main remaining problem being nighttime coverage in Santa Fe, which is about 60 miles northeast of Albuquerque and thus in the nighttime null. It could be received in Santa Fe at night, but it was a noisy signal, with phase shifts making it hard to listen to. KOB's real stroke of luck, though, was being in a city that never seemed to stop growing until about 15 years ago. Santa Fe coverage may have been of some importance just to show that the broader market was being covered...and, as sparsely populated as the state of New Mexico is, every person counts...but Albuquerque is what made it prosper. The KKOB booster is icing on the cake.
 
What you describe is an AM booster station. The Commission issued a handful of STA's for stations to test on-channel AM boosters. Essentially take all the quirks and physics hassles of FM boosters and multiply them by about five.
The problem was the interference zone between the primary and booster was really unlistenable, in spite of locking both oscillators to GPS, there was still a boatload of heterodyne. In the end AM boosters were a failure, and because of such poor results, the FCC decided no permanent AM boosters would be allowed.
You're still thinking analog AM. I'm proposing all-digital, something that supposedly works according to Xperi. Plus there would be somewhat upwards of a half-dozen transmitters in a market. Not the severe null that results from two transmitters being exactly out of phase with equal signals. I guess that technically doesn't mean "saving AM" does it. It's replacing AM with OFDM. But still at 540-1700 KHz. So only kind of...

Dave B.
 
No, they are not "radios" in the traditional sense. We are finding that all audio without pictures is being called "radio" by some, but the term is still vague.
I just discovered an example of this.

I was listening to the stream of "The Big 615 Country." It's one of several "stations" programmed by Garth Brooks since he cut ties with SXM about a year ago.

I had assumed it was a terrestrial station. Then I heard a song containing both the "s" word and the "f' word. What!! That's when I realized it's simply a stream posing as a "radio station."
 
I just discovered an example of this.

I was listening to the stream of "The Big 615 Country." It's one of several "stations" programmed by Garth Brooks since he cut ties with SXM about a year ago.

I had assumed it was a terrestrial station. Then I heard a song containing both the "s" word and the "f' word.
The "f" word? On a Garth Brooks-programmed station? Hard to believe. Any idea what the song or artist was?
 
Actually, the ones that Blanco Pi did in Puerto Rico for his AM news talk stations did amazingly well and he showed considerable ratings in the Nielsen zones where only the boosters gave good signals.

KKOB, going back to KOB, went through years of litigation and filings and multiple frequencies to be on 770 with WABC. Maybe the FCC regards the license as a special case and they are allowed to keep the booster. I don't know that, but the station sure got kicked around for decades.
Yeah, I read some somewhere way back when that the folks at WABC had a sh*t-fit when they heard that KOB was moving to 770 !
Was probably the same reaction at KCBS when they heard KBIG had been approved way back in 1952.
 
You're still thinking analog AM. I'm proposing all-digital, something that supposedly works according to Xperi. Plus there would be somewhat upwards of a half-dozen transmitters in a market. Not the severe null that results from two transmitters being exactly out of phase with equal signals. I guess that technically doesn't mean "saving AM" does it. It's replacing AM with OFDM. But still at 540-1700 KHz. So only kind of...

Dave B.
A cellular approach might be interesting, but between the naysayers (there's nothing wrong with analog AM) and lack of manufacturer support for digital AM transmission gear, I doubt technically reinventing AM transmission will be of interest to most broadcasters or the Commission. Several larger broadcast groups dumped a ton of money into AM and FM HD twenty five plus years ago and still haven't recovered their investment. Also given the revenue/ad environment, I doubt most AM broadcasters have the capital to experiment on such a gamble.
 
That's TuneIn. They do linear radio on the internet. Not as popular as on-demand music on Spotify or Pandora.
The point of my post was that it's being called, "radio."

As I believe David said, the word isn't dead -- just being used to describe things other than traditional terristial broadcasting.
 
The point of my post was that it's being called, "radio."

Correct. That's what TuneIn calls itself: ''Free Internet Radio."

That's also why I say radio is not one thing. It can be a device, it can be a certain approach to content, or anything.

The word can be used in many ways. Nobody owns a trademark on it.
 


Back
Top Bottom