-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
terrestrial radio versus internet radio
- Thread starter doowopvault
- Start date
In fact, don't they change the salt in the winter due to icing?As I remember, It had good ground conductivity due to all the bird droppings.
I have enjoyed each and everyone of the posters here. Opens my eyes more on the dynamics of this crazy, dysfunctional, but great business.
Forgive my rambling, bullet pointed postings. It is just the way I think..Here goes.
As for Mr. Limbaugh. Did he save many AM stations? I think he did, initially anyway. Personally, I think that was a savior for all the wrong reasons. A lazyman's way of doing something to save their a**es from pending doom. Either because they can't afford to do local radio the right way, or don't care enough to try.
It worked for a while. Their audience grew. Then the country divided. Now years later, A Limbaugh or Hannity isn't the slam dunk they once were. Why? Because in carrying their drumbeats, you then alienate a potenial large segment of listeners, and ADVERTISERS, that wont listen or align themselves with that kind of programming. The doors close instead of opening.
Then lets look at religious station owners. many think everything is solved through prayer. If things go bad, they pray. Meanwhile, the dollar a hollar preachers think they can solve the worlds ills by their radio ministries. Maybe they can help a lonely listener, or two. But for the most part, listenership is rather small. This means another local channel taken out of the public eyes and ears. The stations may eek out a manageable income, But facillities suffer, upgrades aren't made, another eyesore on AM.
The religous broadcasters, if done right, can print money. and serve their community. But they choose to serve god, and god only. Or in their myopic ways, think they are serving the community.
As an honorably religious person, I think most religious stations, are rather boring, meant to serve the "End of your life" demo.
The state of radio comes down to two lethal elements..Cost cutting, and lazyness. This transends into other industries and portions of our culture. No one seems to want to work hard anymore.
My thoughts on howard stern. Talented guy. Was better on terrestrial. Either jumped to Satellite on Bad advice, or with total hubris.. Or both.
I see a good future for radio, Where your favorite station(if you have one loyal to) will be heard on Radio, Internet, WiFi, or cellphone. Choose your poison.
And I too love the radio of yesterday. Someone somewhere will perpeutate it's goodness on some venue. But this is 2007. Time to switch gears some, and get to younger audiences. Radio is the most hypocritical of business....Encourage other to advertise their business on radio, but radio did a absolutely poor job of promoting itself.
At the next proxy meeting of a large broadcaster, someone of better means of speaking, should ask how much has been spent on promoting themselves?
Forgive my rambling, bullet pointed postings. It is just the way I think..Here goes.
As for Mr. Limbaugh. Did he save many AM stations? I think he did, initially anyway. Personally, I think that was a savior for all the wrong reasons. A lazyman's way of doing something to save their a**es from pending doom. Either because they can't afford to do local radio the right way, or don't care enough to try.
It worked for a while. Their audience grew. Then the country divided. Now years later, A Limbaugh or Hannity isn't the slam dunk they once were. Why? Because in carrying their drumbeats, you then alienate a potenial large segment of listeners, and ADVERTISERS, that wont listen or align themselves with that kind of programming. The doors close instead of opening.
Then lets look at religious station owners. many think everything is solved through prayer. If things go bad, they pray. Meanwhile, the dollar a hollar preachers think they can solve the worlds ills by their radio ministries. Maybe they can help a lonely listener, or two. But for the most part, listenership is rather small. This means another local channel taken out of the public eyes and ears. The stations may eek out a manageable income, But facillities suffer, upgrades aren't made, another eyesore on AM.
The religous broadcasters, if done right, can print money. and serve their community. But they choose to serve god, and god only. Or in their myopic ways, think they are serving the community.
As an honorably religious person, I think most religious stations, are rather boring, meant to serve the "End of your life" demo.
The state of radio comes down to two lethal elements..Cost cutting, and lazyness. This transends into other industries and portions of our culture. No one seems to want to work hard anymore.
My thoughts on howard stern. Talented guy. Was better on terrestrial. Either jumped to Satellite on Bad advice, or with total hubris.. Or both.
I see a good future for radio, Where your favorite station(if you have one loyal to) will be heard on Radio, Internet, WiFi, or cellphone. Choose your poison.
And I too love the radio of yesterday. Someone somewhere will perpeutate it's goodness on some venue. But this is 2007. Time to switch gears some, and get to younger audiences. Radio is the most hypocritical of business....Encourage other to advertise their business on radio, but radio did a absolutely poor job of promoting itself.
At the next proxy meeting of a large broadcaster, someone of better means of speaking, should ask how much has been spent on promoting themselves?
Wow! Touchdown! Well said!
As for 'self-promotion' ... ask the HD Radio Alliance and the major groups promoting it. They are putting up another $238-mill to promote a so far flat-liner technology in 2008, despite poor ratings for programming "content" already in trouble. Does that count?
As for 'self-promotion' ... ask the HD Radio Alliance and the major groups promoting it. They are putting up another $238-mill to promote a so far flat-liner technology in 2008, despite poor ratings for programming "content" already in trouble. Does that count?
As for 'self-promotion' ... ask the HD Radio Alliance and the major groups promoting it. They are putting up another $238-mill to promote a so far flat-liner technology in 2008, despite poor ratings for programming "content" already in trouble. Does that count?
Yup. it does
I really appreciate the wealth of information put out here in this thread by Oaktree, Sam Lit, and tcp/ip. This is really good stuff. Oaktree, I am going to give Inside Music Media and Hear 2.0 a spin in my RSS reader - thanks.
A note that hasn't really been touched upon very much is the relatively low cost and flexibility of running an internet stream as compared to a terrestrial station. With just the equipment that I have at home, plus the server box I use for my freelance web design, I can be up and running with my own programming in hours if I wanted to be. Anyone with a bit of technical capability or DIY-determination could do the same. I've set up a stream with a computer cobbled together from spare parts, a free linux distribution, and a university internet connection before - in other words, you can get off the ground for a grand total of $0.
To recap - it is free to start an internet radio station. Anyone can do it.
Why then, is it a question of IF the terrestrial radio model will be eclipsed by internet radio, and not WHEN for some of you? Nine percent is an incredible increase for streaming radio considering that mobile internet technologies like cell phones and iPods are just now starting to creep into the mainstream. When a technology like WiMax allows for truly ubiquitous wireless broadband, it WILL kill whatever's left of terrestrial radio. Stations that spend millions of dollars annually in operating costs will suddenly be on a level playing field with stations that spend close to nothing, and that will be that. That is, unless, they scramble to compete with stations that either narrowcast to specific tastes and interests, or find a way to market themselves as an alternative to stations that allow users to even create their own content (hint: they probably won't).
Seriously - I can go to pandora.com or last.fm and have my own custom station up and running within seconds. How can a WYSP, WMMR, or WRFF - stations that break the bank to figure out what kids want to listen to - ever hope to compete with that once I am able to take Pandora with me wherever I go?
A note that hasn't really been touched upon very much is the relatively low cost and flexibility of running an internet stream as compared to a terrestrial station. With just the equipment that I have at home, plus the server box I use for my freelance web design, I can be up and running with my own programming in hours if I wanted to be. Anyone with a bit of technical capability or DIY-determination could do the same. I've set up a stream with a computer cobbled together from spare parts, a free linux distribution, and a university internet connection before - in other words, you can get off the ground for a grand total of $0.
To recap - it is free to start an internet radio station. Anyone can do it.
Why then, is it a question of IF the terrestrial radio model will be eclipsed by internet radio, and not WHEN for some of you? Nine percent is an incredible increase for streaming radio considering that mobile internet technologies like cell phones and iPods are just now starting to creep into the mainstream. When a technology like WiMax allows for truly ubiquitous wireless broadband, it WILL kill whatever's left of terrestrial radio. Stations that spend millions of dollars annually in operating costs will suddenly be on a level playing field with stations that spend close to nothing, and that will be that. That is, unless, they scramble to compete with stations that either narrowcast to specific tastes and interests, or find a way to market themselves as an alternative to stations that allow users to even create their own content (hint: they probably won't).
Seriously - I can go to pandora.com or last.fm and have my own custom station up and running within seconds. How can a WYSP, WMMR, or WRFF - stations that break the bank to figure out what kids want to listen to - ever hope to compete with that once I am able to take Pandora with me wherever I go?
Here's another great resource about "now ... and then."
This may be time dated. http://www.kurthanson.com/archive/news/111207/index.shtml
This may be time dated. http://www.kurthanson.com/archive/news/111207/index.shtml
Well, there's a lot of links with articles, most well written, but all but one are OPINION. The very first link ranking the "best" markets clearly explains in the first sentance of the second story that hthe writer "choices" may seem "contrary"! It' opinion, not facts. It's what the writer likes!
The CC story is factual. That company has been through tremendous growth, then cash loss. But CC has truly changed thae landscape of radio as we KNEW it forever (I'm a realist). However, they just purchase Philly's Lincon Financial Group's WBT radio/TVcluster in VA and NC. So they're not dead yet either.
The comment about the expense of operating a net station vs. broadcast is true. But think about this. The #1 (or#2) gripe about CC style programming (any format) is repitition and voice tracking. Two of Philly's best webcasts, Sam & Hy Lit and Jim Nettleton both have the freedom (and wisdom) to explore the Billboard Top 100, and then some. But both rely on liners and voice tracking, except when on a live remote. That's where most terretrial station excell...live human contact.
That's also where Ipods fail. "Hundreds of million" Ipods sold? Doubtful. MAYBE the total of mp3 players sold worldwide, but not just in the U.S. Million+ I'll concede. That doesn't mean they're not ever going to listen to radio again ever. Same with the net. There are many choices for entertainment today.
Now, here's where I think all of the posters here are getting close. Fella's...whether it's conventional broadcast, net, satcast...talk or news or music...it's all about content. I'll agree that MANY radio groups get D-. I think today's radio station owners need to reach out to the Grade & High School kids and let 'em rip! Creativity.
Here's a radical thought: Every Delaware Valley High School should have it's own LPFM or LPAM as a creative outlet and training for the industry. Every Philly broadcaster should support these stations, financially and professionally.
The CC story is factual. That company has been through tremendous growth, then cash loss. But CC has truly changed thae landscape of radio as we KNEW it forever (I'm a realist). However, they just purchase Philly's Lincon Financial Group's WBT radio/TVcluster in VA and NC. So they're not dead yet either.
The comment about the expense of operating a net station vs. broadcast is true. But think about this. The #1 (or#2) gripe about CC style programming (any format) is repitition and voice tracking. Two of Philly's best webcasts, Sam & Hy Lit and Jim Nettleton both have the freedom (and wisdom) to explore the Billboard Top 100, and then some. But both rely on liners and voice tracking, except when on a live remote. That's where most terretrial station excell...live human contact.
That's also where Ipods fail. "Hundreds of million" Ipods sold? Doubtful. MAYBE the total of mp3 players sold worldwide, but not just in the U.S. Million+ I'll concede. That doesn't mean they're not ever going to listen to radio again ever. Same with the net. There are many choices for entertainment today.
Now, here's where I think all of the posters here are getting close. Fella's...whether it's conventional broadcast, net, satcast...talk or news or music...it's all about content. I'll agree that MANY radio groups get D-. I think today's radio station owners need to reach out to the Grade & High School kids and let 'em rip! Creativity.
Here's a radical thought: Every Delaware Valley High School should have it's own LPFM or LPAM as a creative outlet and training for the industry. Every Philly broadcaster should support these stations, financially and professionally.
amfmsw said:The comment about the expense of operating a net station vs. broadcast is true. But think about this. The #1 (or#2) gripe about CC style programming (any format) is repitition and voice tracking. Two of Philly's best webcasts, Sam & Hy Lit and Jim Nettleton both have the freedom (and wisdom) to explore the Billboard Top 100, and then some. But both rely on liners and voice tracking, except when on a live remote. That's where most terretrial station excell...live human contact.
I disagree. Most terrestrial stations are starting to do more of what Sam and Hy are doing, and that's voicetracking as much as possible because they can no longer afford to hire a staff to do live shifts. There are a multitude of these stations in Philadelphia right now that either pipe in syndicated programming or have one or two personalities (sometimes the program director) voicetrack the entire day. The ones that we've been talking about most often on these boards have been WYSP and WRFF. You can probably think of a significant chunk besides those that are being run out of a closet.
On the flip side, you do have some internet radio streams out there doing things the way big terrestrial stations used to do them. To use the example again, Jim McGuinn has filled the day rotation with volunteer staffers both at Y100Rocks.com and Y-Rock on XPN. He still runs the station as though they never left 100.3 FM, and the results are clear in the sound and personality of the stream.
There are plenty of other streams out there with that "human touch", although it might come in a different form - Last.fm has a feature that allows you to create "Recommendation Radio" for another person to listen to. Although it's not a DJ (the concepts of Last.FM and Pandora don't really make DJing practical) it carries it's own personality with it in that it was created just for you by another person. Isn't that what a radio playlist is supposed to be - to make it's listeners feel like it was hand-crafted just for them?
I agree with you, amfmsw - it's all about the content. Past that, though - the medium used to deliver it via terrestrial can not stand up long once streaming becomes as widespread and mainstream as today's AM/FM radios, for the reasons I listed earlier.
amfmsw said:CC has truly changed thae landscape of radio as we KNEW it forever (I'm a realist). However, they just purchase Philly's Lincon Financial Group's WBT radio/TVcluster in VA and NC. So they're not dead yet either.
Guess you didn't read Tom Taylor's column here this morning (Tuesday 11/13/2007). The winner of LFM's radio operations in Charlotte was privately held, Boston-based Greater Media with a bid of $100 million for WBT (AM) plus two FMs. As everyone here doubtless knows, GM also has a major presence in Philadelphia.
amfmsw said:...butt all but one are OPINION. The very first link ranking the "best" markets clearly explains in the first sentance of the second story that hthe writer "choices" may seem "contrary"! It' opinion, not facts. It's what the writer likes!
I think you best check again. Your "facts" of statement about Arbitron "quoting" declining audience are way off. Direct your comment to the second story on the link, not the "best market" story ... which had no bearing on your unreliable content. Arbitron says that radio listenership is down 17% in the last 8 years. Do the math. At the present rate of listener erosion, with no "audience growth" in sight, in two decades radio will have lost more than HALF it's listeners (51-55%) In four decades, when the next generation turns 60 ... radio could, conceivably, be a thing of the past.
The CC story is factual. That company has been through tremendous growth, then cash loss. But CC has truly changed thae landscape of radio as we KNEW it forever (I'm a realist). However, they just purchase Philly's Lincon Financial Group's WBT radio/TVcluster in VA and NC. So they're not dead yet either.
A realist, albeit not an accurate one. As mentioned above and it was major news, the $100-million dollar sale of the Lincoln Financial Charlotte Radio Cluster is going to Greater Media ... the proud owners of the NOT so proud anymore, WPEN and a station that's had it's share of problems over the last few years, WMGK-FM. The sale of the other Linc Financial stations is on hold to find appropriate buyers, not just a fire sale. Facts, my friend...
The comment about the expense of operating a net station vs. broadcast is true. But think about this. The #1 (or#2) gripe about CC style programming (any format) is repitition and voice tracking.
Not totally true. Programming bad programming, first, then repetition, voice tracking and ... dropping of local news in market after market, dropping of local talk in market after market, a "strategic" alliance with FOX News in market after market, esoteric and not well liked programming for its HD2 and HD3 streams ... not to mention, being mixed up in the IBOC hash racket hasn't helped them either. Oh, and might I add ... Clear Channels biggest problem? NOT MAKING MONEY in market after market. That's why some of CCs biggest deals are in jeopardy to close. CC raked all it could at the expense of good people, entire staffs and a lack of advertising revenue, again, in market after market. I know ... I live in one such market.
Two of Philly's best webcasts, Sam & Hy Lit and Jim Nettleton both have the freedom (and wisdom) to explore the Billboard Top 100, and then some. But both rely on liners and voice tracking, except when on a live remote. That's where most terretrial station excell...live human contact.
Don't blame Sam, or Hy or Jim for voice tracking. It's a lot less expensive for small operators to do ... every bit as much as Clear Channel gets blamed as the 1200 pound elephant for doing the same thing. But it's not just Clear Channel. It's stations and groups both large and small that do the very same thing every hour, every day. And you forget one other problem...CC's rampant use of in-house syndication (Premiere) on not only their own facilities ... but on damn well near everyone else's, as well. Look at WABC, soon ... all national syndication, including Clear Channel programming, about but 1-3/4 hours a day. Talk about "Coast-to-Coast" radio ... It's national, not local ... and THAT's what killing radio everywhere, not just with CC.
That's also where Ipods fail. "Hundreds of millions" Ipods sold? Doubtful. MAYBE the total of mp3 players sold worldwide, but not just in the U.S. Million+ I'll concede.
Concede more, my friend ... and do the research. Just Google "How many iPods sold." The answer, "110-MILLION" as of September, 2007. That is a more than a hundred million. Fact...not fantasy. A million? Yeah, times 110.
That doesn't mean they're not ever going to listen to radio again ever. Same with the net. There are many choices for entertainment today.
Conjecture and speculation with your "opinion." What's going to bring them back? AM? FM? Forget it. They can do their own programming. We couldn't do that back in the days of Wibbage. Not well, anyway. Today, everybody's a PD.
Now, here's where I think all of the posters here are getting close. Fella's...whether it's conventional broadcast, net, satcast...talk or news or music...it's all about content.
You have hit it on the head with this one. Content. And TIME. It's not, in my opinion (and others) that people will have to listen to Stern for 5 hours a day, or any other local, regional or national radio program in the future. It will come down to minutes per day. Enough to get to class or work and enough to get back home. 45 minutes, tops. Again, look at the "facts" on time spent listening today. Longer TSLs don't equate to bigger ratings today like they used to ... because so many others are only using radio in much shorter "attention spans" than before. Another fact. I'd read Jerry Del Colliano's blog on how he sees it happening with his USC media industry classes. He sure gets quoted a lot in the mainstream press about it. A Philly guy, too.
I'll agree that MANY radio groups get D-. I think today's radio station owners need to reach out to the Grade & High School kids and let 'em rip! Creativity.
Again, you're spot on. Only one thing ... grade and high school kids CAN let it rip ... and do so everyday with their PCs, some music software, a CD ripper, the ability to download (legally and illegally) and ... they produce their OWN content ... for everyone and anyone with the biggest signal going ... worldwide. And at a cost that can't be beat ... almost FREE.
Here's a radical thought: Every Delaware Valley High School should have it's own LPFM or LPAM as a creative outlet and training for the industry. Every Philly broadcaster should support these stations, financially and professionally.
I'm sorry. That's not accurate. Radio doesn't depend on the superstar "jocks" anymore ... or their salaries "of the day." You failed to mention the biggest problem in all of radio broadcasting today ... S A L E S. Whoever started the model sure got us fixed on doing it that way. Without SALES, you have nothing. Without Ratings, you have no revenues. You can't do both without huge sums of money for people ... and, guess what gets cut first? The people...of course. Duh!
Can we please get back to something much more immediately important, like part 15 bashing. Now who’s planning on buying an Inovonics distortomax for Christmas?
Dave, I’m really not taking a shot at you, and I’m really not trying to be condescending….but, …Perhaps a paper weight is required for the mountains of paperwork required for the indirect method long form calculations of determining the exact plate voltage for a power reduction to 7 watts. Hey, that’s just marginally above part 15. Here we go again. No, actually Dave needs a paper weight for the mountains of paper work required for the new 15 tower engineering study to keep WVCH on at night with 1kw, while protecting CHWO.
R
raydofan
Guest
tcp/ip said:My thoughts on howard stern. Talented guy. Was better on terrestrial. Either jumped to Satellite on Bad advice, or with total hubris.. Or both.
Was good on terrestrial, is far better on satellite. Dare I say: BRILLIANT.
So you're not a subscriber?
Oak and Sam,
It's not even being used as a paperweight. Just sitting on an old bookcase we have.Not even sure what the Efficiency Factor would be for a rig like our Gates One.And, our night power is 6 watts LOLOL! To get WVCH to 1 kW at night, you'd need at least 6 towers to provide enough protection to Toronto..Not sure what the ground conductivity is at the CHWO/CJBC transmitter site in Hornby, ON(about 25 miles wet of downtown Toronto)but 50 kW going into a half- wave high tower at 740, and the same tower appearing 5/9 wavelength high at 860, both CHWO and CJBC have massive signals here at night.
It's not even being used as a paperweight. Just sitting on an old bookcase we have.Not even sure what the Efficiency Factor would be for a rig like our Gates One.And, our night power is 6 watts LOLOL! To get WVCH to 1 kW at night, you'd need at least 6 towers to provide enough protection to Toronto..Not sure what the ground conductivity is at the CHWO/CJBC transmitter site in Hornby, ON(about 25 miles wet of downtown Toronto)but 50 kW going into a half- wave high tower at 740, and the same tower appearing 5/9 wavelength high at 860, both CHWO and CJBC have massive signals here at night.
Summer Arbitron book Persons Using Radio (PUR) numbers showing more declines ... now to the lowest level since statistics began in the Fall of 1998. Every cell dropped ... except for 50-54 year old demos (and we know how agencies love that group.) The sharpest drops according to an Inside Radio report today shows drops continuing to be among teens and young adults, especially in males 18-24 and 18-34 cells with the biggest drops in year-over-year declines. The 25-54 money demo isn't fairing as well, either, with agencies reporting down buys and ratings taking a hit.
Any questions?
Any questions?
Yes. How many questions do we get?
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.