Just another thought: There are some articles being written about "Saving AM Radio" by allowing simulcast on FM translators. To my way of thinking that's not saving AM at all but instead is throwing in the towel and moving things to FM. In fact, it could be just the first step of a long-range FCC plan to close down AM service completely.
-
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
The state of AM Radio
- Thread starter JaneChristo
- Start date
Last edited:
S
stevensonair
Guest
Much of the AM "revitalization" effort was spearheaded by a Republican commissioner prior to now. One wonders if it's not in part a backdoor effort to prop up the conservative talk format which a large amount of AM stations carry prior to a midterm election.
That ship has already sailed, Mr. Pai.
If I were to really waste a good 'magic wand' on this issue:
Every large market FM has HDRadio or FMeXtra/VuCast, and they use that multicasting capability to simulcast both their own corporate cluster AMs AND one or two small biz broadcasters (tax incentives being the carrot).
New lines of 4-6 inch Android/Bada/OpenWebOS-based touch devices debut, the very ones that should've existed years ago. They cost under $100, and they connect with Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, USB, and aux. cords., complimenting everyone's device connection. Tuning software allowing a Manhattanite wanting to listen to "Digital 710, WOR" to type in '710', as it will map from (example) WAXQ 104.3-HD3 or its FMeXtra equivalent.
I never said anything bout selling ads in cities served by skywave. I am saying that the groundwave contour of a powerful AM station covers more terrain than a similarly powered FM station. I've worked at AM stations that can be heard all the way up and down the coast of Florida... that's ground wave, not skywave my friend.
I guess broadcast engineering isn't your strong point... there is to this day, still much debate about whether or not increasing power would increase noise and interference. I am of the opinion that the benefits would outweigh the consequences. You can bounce a 1/2 watt signal off the F layer at night and be heard half way across the country. Letting low power stations turn up a little bit isn't going to make that much of a difference with respect to skywave interference. In my opinion, low power Class C stations would benefit LOCALLY by cranking up the power. Many within the FCC have actually proposed this... so it's not something I'm making up.
As for DXing, I never suggested it would pay the bills, I merely suggested it would make things more interesting. You seem to think AM radio is dead and incapable of making any money. Again, I've been doing this for 10 years now, and never had any trouble putting food on the table. Large broadcast companies are still investing large sums of money in new AM broadcast towers... think about it... peace.
BTW, I wholeheartedly disagree with this comment. Regular people outside of the broadcast industry DO, I repeat DO absolutely pay attention to call letters. Some call letters are less significant or memorable than others... but do you really think there would be NO change in listenership if a station like WGN, WBZ, WLS, WBT, WEBN, KFI, etc changed their call letters??!?!?! I don't see what PPM has to do with this dude, even people younger than I associate call letters with what they hear on the radio. If you change something people are comfortable with, they WILL change the channel. Getting rid of a heritage callsign is only a wise idea if the station is already failing and/or the call becomes associated with something negative. Otherwise it's the dumbest thing you could possibly do, and practically guarantees failure. Maybe calls aren't relevant in other countries, but this is the USA and we're still required to ID at least 24 times a day... people notice... trust me...
Last edited:
Callsigns absolutely DO matter - if that is how a station identifies itself to the public.
Not so important if it is mumbled once an hour to satisfy legal requirements, but
normally calls itself something else. Examples -- 96 Rock, F-105. Oldies 103. etc.
Not so important if it is mumbled once an hour to satisfy legal requirements, but
normally calls itself something else. Examples -- 96 Rock, F-105. Oldies 103. etc.
Gee, I feel like I'm dumber than a box of hair, since I have no idea of what you are trying to say above. In fact, I really don't see how anything above can "save" amplitude-modulated radio broadcasts that rely on propagating signals into "the air".
Am I alone on this?
They do, if - and this is a very big if - the callsign has remained a consistent part of the station's branding over the years. "WBZ" and "KFI" mean something to their current listeners not just because of what those callsigns meant 30 or 40 or 90 years ago but because they're still associated with contemporary programming of value to those listeners now. By contrast, "WMEX" in Boston doesn't mean a thing to anyone under the age of 55 or so, and there's nothing anyone can do to change that. Neither, for that matter, do "WXKS-FM" or "KYSR." If "Kiss 108" changed its calls to WQFJ or "Alt 98.7" became KFWX, I don't believe their ratings would budge even a tenth of a point.
No one with any engineering competence is "debating" this. You can't pretend that you can just crank up the power without any consequences to anything else. And just because "many" at the FCC have proposed it means nothing. The FCC, after all, is the one who has screwed up AM more than anyone else by refusing to enforce its own Part 15 regulations. Their ignorance of the laws of physics, despite having some very smart engineering talent in the agency, is what got AM to this point.
So, you can bounce 1/2 watt off of the ionosphere. Again, I ask: What difference will it make? It's not going to help sell a product and bring in revenue. It's not going to magically make programming that now appeals to the 55-to-death demo appeal to young people. It's not going to somehow kill all the noise and interference.
I've seen the changes over my 44 years in this business. I've watched the gradual diminishment and encroaching abandonment of a once vibrant, innovative medium. The only broadcasters building new AM towers are those who must, because either they are being forced to move or their tower is structurally unsound.
I'm glad you're so bullish on AM, and I hope somehow I'm proven wrong. But AM's problems are structural and have been getting worse for far too long without any rescue attempts. The FCC commissioners' suggestions will not save AM.
People don't listen to call signs. They listen to programming. If you change the call sign and don't touch the programming, you will not lose a single listener.
But most Central and South American and Caribbean stations use slogans as their main IDs: Radio Musical, Radio Tropical, Radio Reloj, Radio Rebelde, etc. Australian stations use odd number-letter combinations like 2FJ and 8JX; I wouldn't call them callsigns, I'm really not sure what they are. Maybe the prefix (VK? VL?) that would turn them into legitimate calls is omitted?
AM started to die when automakers started to make AM-FM standard in the mid 70's.
We saw the trend where news/talk would be AM and music on FM and for awhile WBZ,WEEI, WHDH and WRKO held their own.
The reality is the people who grew up on AM is dying off. The average listener knows that their favorite FM signal can be heard clearly day or night, they don't understand (or care) how AM signals work.
When I lived in Chicago in the 80's, WBZ was my lifeline to home. There was no internet, I would get the Globe 3 days later. Without fail WBZ would appear an hour before Chicago sunset and be as clear as WMAQ, WBBM, WLS and WGN.
AM's biggest problem today is the simple cost of maintaining a transmitter. Between land and ground system issues AM is far more expensive than FM if you are directional. I would have to think Entercom has to be looking at combining 680 and 850 at one site again. Property taxes in Needham and Burlington have exploded over the past 40 years as the towns grew.
The future looks bleak.
We saw the trend where news/talk would be AM and music on FM and for awhile WBZ,WEEI, WHDH and WRKO held their own.
The reality is the people who grew up on AM is dying off. The average listener knows that their favorite FM signal can be heard clearly day or night, they don't understand (or care) how AM signals work.
When I lived in Chicago in the 80's, WBZ was my lifeline to home. There was no internet, I would get the Globe 3 days later. Without fail WBZ would appear an hour before Chicago sunset and be as clear as WMAQ, WBBM, WLS and WGN.
AM's biggest problem today is the simple cost of maintaining a transmitter. Between land and ground system issues AM is far more expensive than FM if you are directional. I would have to think Entercom has to be looking at combining 680 and 850 at one site again. Property taxes in Needham and Burlington have exploded over the past 40 years as the towns grew.
The future looks bleak.
Sorry to say, I don't foresee a promising future for AM. Simply put, the AM band is to broadcasting as the 28.8Kbps modem is to the internet. It served us in the past, but its relevance has one foot in the grave and the other in a Dr. Scholl's foot bath.
That is an excellent analogy.
80% of the American population lives in cities, in metro areas. If you live there and you are swimming in active radio stations, giving A.M. radio a push into the grave seems like the intelligent and practical thing to do.
But 20% of the population lives in fly-over country. Some of that 20% is well served by F.M. signals.... some not so much.
So what do we provide for the maybe 10% of the American public that has NO LOCAL SERVICE if A.M. is killed off?
You can do a computerized study and point out how many rural communities have a licensed F.M. station.... but if you put boots-on-the-ground and visit the community you discover that even though once an hour the rural community is named in the LEGAL I.D. , the programming is originating from and tailored to some (***) city.
*** I thought long and hard about saying distant city or nearby city. If you are a truly rural community and do not function as or see yourself as a suburb of the (***) city, then even if you are only 15 miles away, you see yourself as distant.
Let's use this opportunity to pressure her to do the right thing since she opened up her mouth and made an otherwise empty promise. Let's push to grab channel 2-6 on a secondary basis to existing tv stations. No more
New ones.... Secondly, let's ask for AMs wishing to simulcast in digital to be able to do that on another maker AM station in pure IBOC digital, not hybrid, and be counted in market caps as one radio station. In fact, let the digital simulcast(s) replicate the entire day or night signal of a station within 60 miles or less of the tower. Another words, let's let the big boys cash out the crap am stations that just want to get some bucks and call it quits, and use them for hopefully more meaningful programming in AM HD that actually works. The remaining stations should then apply and get a new 2-6 channel. In 6 or so years, cars radios will catch up. I can see a day when the AM band will mainly consist of more powerful stations and a few small market holdouts that simply can't afford to upgrade at all. The new band could be very useful for most of the little guys in the future.
New ones.... Secondly, let's ask for AMs wishing to simulcast in digital to be able to do that on another maker AM station in pure IBOC digital, not hybrid, and be counted in market caps as one radio station. In fact, let the digital simulcast(s) replicate the entire day or night signal of a station within 60 miles or less of the tower. Another words, let's let the big boys cash out the crap am stations that just want to get some bucks and call it quits, and use them for hopefully more meaningful programming in AM HD that actually works. The remaining stations should then apply and get a new 2-6 channel. In 6 or so years, cars radios will catch up. I can see a day when the AM band will mainly consist of more powerful stations and a few small market holdouts that simply can't afford to upgrade at all. The new band could be very useful for most of the little guys in the future.
I can't see how anyone would really loose with this two-prong approach. Folks, we need to press hard and firm on this. We need to create a meaningful and useful path to upgrade AM while it is still politically fresh in the Commissioners' minds.
- Status