Time to reconsider AM stereo?

[davideduardo]

AM is only for people over 50? Did you ever hear of sports talk? Have you ever looked at the 18-49's
for AM sports talk stations?

Yeah, and they are moving to FM as fast as they can... look at Detroit. Or a variety of other markets where new FM sports stations have come on, or where AM sports stations have moved to FM.

There are plenty of people in there 20's that listen to sports talk stations, and there is ratings evidence to back up my point.

And there is more evidence that such stations, when moved to FM, dramatically increase their ratings.

There are also quite a few people in their 20's that care about what is going on in the world, and will turn on a talk station and listen while driving, and use news or talk stations for traffic or weather reports on a daily basis. They don't care if it's AM or FM!

They care a lot. Look at the 25-54 of WIBC in Indianapolis, and AM that moved to FM. When on AM, not even top 10 in the sales demos. When it moved to FM, it jumped into the top 5.

Or KTAR in Phoenix. Same story.

Or KSL... bad 25-54 prior to beginning an FM simulcast and now leading the market.

There are dozens and dozens of examples. News talk, sports, even news, improves dramatically in 25-54 when moved to FM or add a simulcast.

WTOP, all news now #1 after moving to FM. KCBS, poor in 25-54, now top 2 or 3 in the demo with an FM simulcast.

Just to add this into the mix, I am not naive, I know a lot of people in their 20's don't listen to much radio these days, but, from what I've seen when they do, a lot of them are only listening to AM.

The ratings data shows, in most markets, the 18-34 share for AM is around 5%, sometimes less.

 

[davideduardo]

I travel a great deal, and my experience has been that in MOST locations that I drive through or listen in, there is relatively little electrical noise. That's just a myth that people like to perpetuate; why, I don't know.

Here is a live example, proven by measurement in many locations throughout the LA metro survey area. Most of the Average Quarter Hour (AQH) listening to LA AMs is and has been inside the 15 mV/m contour. The reason was that the noise levels, going back to 1995, were commonly above any lower level and that was before CFLs and all the new microprocessor controlled devices. There are streets in places like Downey, Burbank, West Covina where even KFI is overpowered by line noise... and inside most office buildings AM is a difficult proposition. That's why noise is the second biggest problem for AM today.

True, there are SOME locations where the noise is terrible, and if you happen to be in one of those then you're going to get poor reception. But in my home and in my car and in most of the hotels I stay in, electrical noise is quite low. I have quite a few high efficiency CFL lamps in my home... and computers. And they don't bother my AM reception!

In our own 50 kw AM's office building, the AM is unlistenable. In my house, in a residential area, my AM listening is restricted to a 50 kw station whose towers I can see from the front windows. The CFLs, my computer network and a variety of other devices make AM reception on the usual kitchen and clock radios impossible.

Almost all of the noise on the AM band is SELF INFLICTED! It is caused by HD hiss covering the band from top to bottom, with very few exceptions.

That's absurd. I am no more than 10 miles from several HD transmitters, and I can listen to second adjacent stations with considerable ease. The real issue is man made noise on every channel and between all channels.

The remaining noise is due to the FCC allowing too many stations to operate with too much power, especially at night. Thus, listeners are stuck with very poor reception quality. But again, this is NOT due to "electrical noise", "power line noise", etc. in MOST cases.

No,not in "most cases" but in every case.

As for bad radios: yes, if you buy poor quality ones, they are. I have a number of excellent ones, and some of them aren't even that expensive.

Bad radios constitute the biggest reason for AM sounding bad and being unattractive to most people under 50. The average consumer buys radios today that are multifunction devices, such as clock radios or iPod docks with radios or kitchen radios with CD players and so on. They buy them at Bed, Bath and Beyond, WalMart, CVS and Walgreens and the are bought not for AM sound quality but for the functionality. Since so few people listen to AM under the age of 50, radios are not designed to sound good on AM. Nearly nobody will pay more for that... and when 9 cents price differential may mean the difference between WalMart stocking your radio or someone elses, manufacturers don't spend money on AM.

In fact, in the places where most home and office radios are sold, you can't even listen to the different models. They are value-priced and stacked on displays.

 

[joshzz]

I firmly believe that the only way AM can survive is to put all AM stations somewhere on a new expanded FM Band. josh

 

[audioguy]

Eduardo thus proclaimeth:

"I am no more than 10 miles from several HD transmitters, and I can listen to second adjacent stations with considerable ease. The real issue is man made noise on every channel and between all channels."

That is completely, patently false. Second adjacents are totally unlistenable with HD AM. It creates a tremendous screech that is impossible to listen to for more than a few seconds.

Eduardo, if you don't know this, then you don't even own a radio.

 

[Play Freebird]

That's not exactly true......

New Hampshire has Manchester's WMUR-TV (Channel 9/ RF 9), a commercial ABC network affiliate. Providence, Rhode Island has WPRI-TV (Channel 12/RF 13) and WNAC-TV (Channel 64/RF 12). WPRI is CBS and WNAC is FOX.

I stand corrected. I had just taken a quick look at the FCC "Table of DTV Allotments" on gpoaccess.gov which still shows some pre-2009 assignments. It will probably take the Government several years to update this list.

 

[HowardMBurgers]

I'm tired of all the whining about the demise of AM, and that it's largely due to bad radios and excessive noise.

Almost all of the noise on the AM band is SELF INFLICTED! It is caused by HD hiss covering the band from top to bottom, with very few exceptions. The remaining noise is due to the FCC allowing too many stations to operate with too much power, especially at night. Thus, listeners are stuck with very poor reception quality. But again, this is NOT due to "electrical noise", "power line noise", etc. in MOST cases.

I'm sorry but you're mistaken. IBOC-AM represents a small amount of noise relative to the entire US. I know there is a feeding frenzy here with some folks on the subject to whom their business or hobby is being affected by IBOC AM within a particular market, but as a domestic sum total; consumer product and utility terestrial noise sources far exceed, IBOC. Your personal situation or impression may be different, depending on how close you live or work near a major metropolitan location.

I'm not sure what you mean by the FCC allowing stations to operate with "too much power". In order to get over the noise, AM stations especially, need higher field strengths. With the increase in overall band noise, stations could use even more field strength which, of course they'll never get.

Here's an example: A few years ago, station KVI 570 Khz in Seattle WA. was concerned about the increasing number of complaints from listeners in particularly rural areas. The station had seen little or no change to the transmission system since some small modifications in the 1970's, but remained as a 5kW ND day and night, as it had been since the 1940's. As predicted, all the station operating parameters matched the license and the field measurements matched the original design and subsequent ND proofs over the years.

In visiting some of the areas of complaints, the common thread was the noise floor of the entire AM band in the area was less than 10dB, and in some cases less than 3dB under the highest measured radio carrier. We found noisy pole transformers, sodium lights, neon signs, CFL lights, sewage and water pump motors and of course switching power supplies from computers and alike in the sampled homes where they had reception problems. The problem with switching supplies, is they provide cumulative noise into the neutral AC line of entire neighborhoods. The more switching supplies on a particular street, the louder the noise. Add in some recently added BPL (Broadband over Power Lines), and the AM band didn't stand a chance.

 

[BRNout]

Eduardo thus proclaimeth:

"I am no more than 10 miles from several HD transmitters, and I can listen to second adjacent stations with considerable ease. The real issue is man made noise on every channel and between all channels."

That is completely, patently false. Second adjacents are totally unlistenable with HD AM. It creates a tremendous screech that is impossible to listen to for more than a few seconds.

Eduardo, if you don't know this, then you don't even own a radio.

I have to agree with audioguy on this point. Second adjacents get background hash even on excellent AM receivers. Basically, anything aside from a worldband radio set to the narrow bandwidth will have interference in such a case. For example, from where I live there are a couple of key 50 kw signals that have towers within 10-12 air miles of me: WGN (non HD), WSCR, and WBBM. WSCR's hash, when it's running, easily slops all over 660 and 680 even on my best receivers - rendering those channels useless. 650 and 690 still have the background whoosh in all but the narrowest bandwidth setting.

For whatever reason, WBBM's sidebands are even worse (even though the analog signal is roughly equal with WSCR). When on, 770 and 790 are obliterated. Even on WABC's best night, they are barely readable through the very strong hash signal. As for 760, WBBM's sidebands obliterate WJR's daytime signal as far NE as Waukegan (30 miles from their tx) unless you're right by Lake Michigan. At night, to listen to a very strong skywave from WJR, I have to null the IBOC whoosh even on my best receivers. As for 800, it's even worse - I can't null out all of the HD interference to hear the dreck on CKLW. The reason for this is likely that CKLW's skywave signal isn't nearly as robust as WJR's and can't punch through the interference.

These are real-world cases of interference to second adjacent signals from a location that's over 10 miles from the transmitter sites! So, please don't tell me that such a thing doesn't occur because even my Sony ICF-SW7600GR has issues with it.

As for WGN, it does not interfere with signals on 700 or 740 in any measurable way - day or night. And that's despite the fact that it has the strongest signal of all at my location. I can even null some of it's slop at night to hear a bit of what's on WOR (adjacent @ 710) when they're coming in.

We can argue demographics all day long, but they are a problem for AM; the issue of the high noise floor due to newer electrical devices, CFLs (which are an environmental time-bomb, by the way), and power lines is very true. And what was said about AM reception (or lack thereof) in offices is very true and probably accounts for a decent slice of AM's troubles now. Agreed on these points.

But this business that IBOC doesn't impact second adjacents is pure hogwash.

 

[davideduardo]

Eduardo thus proclaimeth:

"I am no more than 10 miles from several HD transmitters, and I can listen to second adjacent stations with considerable ease. The real issue is man made noise on every channel and between all channels."

That is completely, patently false. Second adjacents are totally unlistenable with HD AM. It creates a tremendous screech that is impossible to listen to for more than a few seconds.

Eduardo, if you don't know this, then you don't even own a radio.

I am about 8 miles from LA's 710, with 50 kw days... and have no trouble hearing XEWW. Distance to KFI is in the 25 mile range, but I am inside their 25 mvm contour. I can hear Hanford mixing with Tijuana with no trouble, just a lot of non HD moise like on every weak signal... a few weeks ago KFI lost 40 minutes in the afternoon, and I heard Hanford mixing with the Mexican station just as well, with the same noise level, as with KFI on the air. I am at the edge of the KNX usable metro signal, so saying I can hear the IE station or XEPRS is not as meaningful but, of course, I can listen to either with no trouble. Same goes for hearing San Diego on the other side of 1110.

In other words, well inside the 25 mvm contour for LA HD stations I am always able to hear second adjacents, although the man made interference makes listening to them impossible, whether in my home or in my car (where noise levels in some places just completely match the audio of the staitons referred to).

At no time am I able to use my R8B or R-75 on the AM band for any kind of DX listening... there is a noise across the band. And easy catches, like Kota Kinabalu on 1475, are completely burried under the noise.

 

[radiotower40]

Eduardo thus proclaimeth:

"I am no more than 10 miles from several HD transmitters, and I can listen to second adjacent stations with considerable ease. The real issue is man made noise on every channel and between all channels."

That is completely, patently false. Second adjacents are totally unlistenable with HD AM. It creates a tremendous screech that is impossible to listen to for more than a few seconds.

Eduardo, if you don't know this, then you don't even own a radio.

Thank you audioguy! I was just going to say exactly what you did. I'm becoming more convinced that Eduardo
just likes to hear himself type.....

David that is one of the most absurd statements I have ever heard, I live within 5-10 miles from 3 different stations that
broadcast in HD, and it is NOT POSSIBLE to listen to second adjacent channels with "considerable ease". It is not
even possible to hear any trace of that second adjacent, due to the buzzsaw. These were stations I used to hear with
relative ease before HD was implemented.

 

[BRNout]

In other words, well inside the 25 mvm contour for LA HD stations I am always able to hear second adjacents, although the man made interference makes listening to them impossible, whether in my home or in my car (where noise levels in some places just completely match the audio of the staitons referred to).

"Hearing" second adjacents is different that trying to say that the IBOC whoosh doesn't interfere with them. At night, I can hear 650 WSM fine - but WSCR's IBOC whoosh is (at the minimum) audible in the background. And, I can 'hear' CINF Montreal at 690 at night too - but the whoosh of WSCR's jammer is just as loud.

By this line of reasoning, IBOC doesn't interfere with adjacents either because I can occasionally "hear" WABC rise up into WBBM's overwhelming hash - though I still can't understand a word that's said.

Just ask Bob Savage whether being "heard" is sufficient for his station in his own market at night. Come on David, you are a very smart guy and can certainly make a better argument than this.....

 

[Tom Wells]

WSM is difficult to listen to in Chicago on the way to work in the evenings. In the 1971 Motorola, which probably needs a good IF peaking,
I can slide down to the low side of 650 and miss most of the noise. But not gone until I'd have tuned past to where WSM itself is off-tuned.
Otherwise, I can't really hear any of the old ajacents to 890 780, 1000, or 670 any more, and I really liked listening to New York,
Kansas City, etc. For the unique content of each. At home on a tuned loop I can eke out some 1st adjacents with a tuned loop and careful
nulling. I too, would like to more extrapolation of what the definition of hearing is.

There seems to be some agreement that the level of noise emissions permitted is by far the greatest problem.
As we are now aware, California passed a super-duper TV efficiency law, and manufacturers will have 3 years to comply.
A next good step would be a petition to the FCC for specific enforcement in strict compliance with existing laws,
and new laws to adress newer noisemaking technolgies. It's not just radio, it's your automatic coffeepot burning out dry one day for no apparent reason, or the garage door mysteriously opened. There's no time like the present, and some one reading this must know how to
file such a petitiion, and probably knows others who would be interested in supporting it.
It can only get a whole lot worse. Consider product life cycles, and it could start getting better in a year.

 

[davideduardo]

"Hearing" second adjacents is different that trying to say that the IBOC whoosh doesn't interfere with them.

Well, in the examples I used, there is no HD "noise" on 690, second adjacent to a 50 kw station. What there is, at home and all the route to work, is lots of noise from power lines and whatever else is contaminating the environment.

At night, I can hear 650 WSM fine - but WSCR's IBOC whoosh is (at the minimum) audible in the background. And, I can 'hear' CINF Montreal at 690 at night too - but the whoosh of WSCR's jammer is just as loud.

Of course, in this day, the issue of skywave is totally separate from that of local or semi-local AM groundwave reception. First, very little radio listening is at night. Second, there is essentially no reported listening to any 1-A or 1-B clear in an area that is only served by skywave. If that statistical "nobody" is listening, then beating the long dead horse of skywave reception is truly a moot point.

By this line of reasoning, IBOC doesn't interfere with adjacents either because I can occasionally "hear" WABC rise up into WBBM's overwhelming hash - though I still can't understand a word that's said.

The allocation system, as developed in the 30's, didn't contemplate listening to adjacents in the shadow of a strong local.

Just ask Bob Savage whether being "heard" is sufficient for his station in his own market at night. Come on David, you are a very smart guy and can certainly make a better argument than this.....

The statement was made that most of the interference on AM came from HD. In fact, very little comes from HD... the band is noisy from 535 to 1705 kHz, and only the most intense of signals is listened too as evidenced by ZIP code analysis of ratings going back a decade before HD even was tested.

 

[Carmine5]

I'm not so sure the FCC would agree to giving up Ch.5 in view of the fact that they're considering allotting Ch.5 for a new VHF station in Seaford, DE. This is in keeping with their rule about each state having at least one commercial VHF station. I get the impression from this new allotment that they see Ch.5 as reserved for television.

I would argue this rule is no longer necessary, now that UHF has proven superior to low-band VHF (and arguably high-band, too) for digital TV -- although it will take the FCC years to delete it from the books. In any case,

Agreed. We know that there are many such rules in the FCC's books that advances in technology have rendered obsolete. In my view, the FCC is completely rudderless and appears even more so when they apply outmoded rules such as this one.

But take, for example, DTV. Two-three years ago the Commission was touting it as the next advent for television; Hi-Def pictures, ancillary services, etc. Now they're seriously considering gutting broadcast television, reducing it to one SD channel, in favor of wireless broadband; a nebulous, feel good concept that is very short on specifics.

Unfortunately, now that the FCC has the broadcast television industry in its gun sights, expect to see the industry fight vigorously to retain Ch. 5 & 6 (even though we know it isn't much good for DTV). I may be a minority working in television who thinks giving these VHF channels over to radio is good idea because I see a much more important fight looming as the television industry struggles to retain its shrinking slice of UHF spectrum.

c5

 

[audioguy]

There are relatively few VHF channels in use; especially the lowest channels (2-4). I would think it should be feasible to free up channels 5 and 6 for radio broadcasting, and I hope the FCC will seriously consider this. That said, I don't think that this will mean the end of AM radio, even if a proposal such as the one put forward by the BMC were to be adopted. There is simply too much infrastructure in place, including millions of AM receivers already in the hands of the public, not to mention transmitters, antennas, etc. Plus, there is no viable alternative use of the AM spectrum. If channels 5 and 6 become radio broadcasting spectrum, it will be in addition to the existing bands.

For those who think radio is going away, especially AM radio: forget about it! Radio will be around long after we're all dead. It may morph and change; it may become just a bunch of time-brokered narrowcasts, but it will still be there. I won't be listening to that kind of stuff, but somebody undoubtedly will.

It may be premature to predict the demise of OTA DTV as well. Recently, the CEA and CTIA filed a joint proposal calling for the replacement of the current "high tower/high power" system with low power single frequency networks (DTS). They claim this would allow all of the current DTV and HDTV services to be retained while freeing up a considerable amount of spectrum for broadband. It's an interesting idea.

 

[badjef]

You are correct. When was the last time an AM station was targeting 18-24 or similar. Radio Disney probably goes lower but there is no localism. and there is no relate ability to the audience. It is just there for the vacation.

First, Radio Disney targets 6-11 only. And how do you "localize" a station for pre-adolescents? That's like asking how to localize the Disney Channel.

Because their ears are not alone. Mommy's are there also.

Start targeting those audience with something they can't get anywhere else and watch them come back.

No, they won't. The band sounds bad... due to the radios of today and the high noise level... but mostly they won't "come back" because if they are under 55 or so, they never were there to begin with and think of AM as something for geezers... if they think about it at all.

It still doesn't answer the question of sports. Just to say sports radio is migrating to FM, if that were the case, there would be sportsradio on FM in every market that has an NFL team. It just is not the case. It has taken NY a long time to start putting the Giants on an FM1.
Great format placement on WCBS-FM...Let's kill 101.1 again! This time with WFAN! A waste of RF even on HD-3.

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!

 

[Carmine5]

It may be premature to predict the demise of OTA DTV as well. Recently, the CEA and CTIA filed a joint proposal calling for the replacement of the current "high tower/high power" system with low power single frequency networks (DTS). They claim this would allow all of the current DTV and HDTV services to be retained while freeing up a considerable amount of spectrum for broadband. It's an interesting idea.

It's an intriguing concept to be sure, although the cost of installing and maintaining such a network is not too appealing.

But I also think terrestrial DTV will be around for a long time, especially now that more people are discovering that they can get rid of cable and by using a combination of antenna and internet get all of the television entertainment they need for free or for the cost of their internet connection.

Now if we can get Scripps and other cable-only program providers on board we can really offer viewers some great programming on these additional channels.

 

[davideduardo]

First, Radio Disney targets 6-11 only. And how do you "localize" a station for pre-adolescents?

Because their ears are not alone. Mommy's are there also.

The last 25-54 Women ranker I saw showed KDIS, the Radio Disney station in LA, somewhere below 50th in the market with a 0.0 to 0.1 share and about 400 AQH persons. The #1 station in the demo has about 30 times more listeners.

Mommy, like the sports fans, will go to FM if it is an option.

 

[HowardMBurgers]

Radio Disney is nothing more than a failed experiment become write-off. Disney over-paid for all these dog AM stations back when and now they're pretty much worthless. About all they can do is save face, stay under the corporate radar and just program them until the head office finally pulls the plug. I suspect about that time you'll see several AM licenses being turned in.

But hey, the good news is it will help reduce band congestion for 500 or so left in the 55+ DX crowd!

 

[badjef]

First, Radio Disney targets 6-11 only. And how do you "localize" a station for pre-adolescents?

Because their ears are not alone. Mommy's are there also.

The last 25-54 Women ranker I saw showed KDIS, the Radio Disney station in LA, somewhere below 50th in the market with a 0.0 to 0.1 share and about 400 AQH persons. The #1 station in the demo has about 30 times more listeners.

Mommy, like the sports fans, will go to FM if it is an option.

Key work is "if". More like when. Then, when the FM band is as crowded as it can be AM will be the alternative.

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!

 

[badjef]

Radio Disney is nothing more than a failed experiment become write-off. Disney over-paid for all these dog AM stations back when and now they're pretty much worthless. About all they can do is save face, stay under the corporate radar and just program them until the head office finally pulls the plug. I suspect about that time you'll see several AM licenses being turned in.

But hey, the good news is it will help reduce band congestion for 500 or so left in the 55+ DX crowd!

As I said in my rantpost, Radio Disney is there for park promotion only.

The mouse wants to bring everybody to Disney World for vacation. Deals so attractive, a family need not go or see anything that is not Disney o&o. From cruises to excursions to roller coasters to Disney owned islands off the Florida coast. Every place you turn will be a Disney symbol. It starts with the idea to keep it in sight and mind and that is Radio Disney.

hmmm. Seems to me that a guy named Sarnoff thought of that years ago when he was building a radio network. And a guy named Crosley when he was trying to sell spots at a 500kw AM radio station in Cincy, too.

Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!