Translators are taking over!

[Wimmmex]

I just checked my locale on https://zipsignal.v-soft.com/ for the strongest signals...and it appears some of the best signals in the area are translators!

 

[Kmagrill]

I just checked my locale on https://zipsignal.v-soft.com/ for the strongest signals...and it appears some of the best signals in the area are translators!

There are a lot of translators scattered all around the bay area. No matter where you go, there will probably be a few translators that are close enough to have strong signals. The difference is that no translator has a strong signal over the whole market, whereas the full powered stations in town completely blanket the whole market with a good signal.

In other words, translators are good for covering neighborhoods or some of the communities within a major metro, but in most cases, are unable to cover the entire city.

 

[Ai4i]

The commission should consider that these are not the 1940's with pre-AFC tube-type receivers and allow full power second adjacencies wherever they will fit, giving priority to existing translators and LPFMs but keeping the non-com status of the LPFMs, and make these stations primary to allow them to discontinue on AM if they want to. AMs and translators should be permanently connected to not allow the sale of either without the other or split programming.

 

[davideduardo]

The commission should consider that these are not the 1940's with pre-AFC tube-type receivers and allow full power second adjacencies wherever they will fit, giving priority to existing translators and LPFMs but keeping the non-com status of the LPFMs, and make these stations primary to allow them to discontinue on AM if they want to. AMs and translators should be permanently connected to not allow the sale of either without the other or split programming.

Good point. Many, if not most, countries in the world allow full power stations on the second adjacent channel on both AM and FM.

There are few problems, and where there are it is only in small areas near one of the transmitter sites. Some nations have fixed even this by designating one area for each market's transmitter sites or antenna farms.

Back in the late 60's I had AM's on 570 and 590 in the same market and also had FM's on 95.1, 95.5 and 95.9 in the same location as well. No problems at all.

 

[Michael Rivers Kramer]

Good point. Many, if not most, countries in the world allow full power stations on the second adjacent channel on both AM and FM.

There are few problems, and where there are it is only in small areas near one of the transmitter sites. Some nations have fixed even this by designating one area for each market's transmitter sites or antenna farms.

Back in the late 60's I had AM's on 570 and 590 in the same market and also had FM's on 95.1, 95.5 and 95.9 in the same location as well. No problems at all.

Good example would be Tijuana, BC 2nd adjacent FM stations at the same site.

Also Look at LA, several grandfathered 2nd adjacent Class As to "super powered" B's in the market. Same in Chicago, San Francisco and New York.

 

[wlsl]

I just checked my locale on https://zipsignal.v-soft.com/ for the strongest signals...and it appears some of the best signals in the area are translators!

Locally WDCF 1350 in Dade City is on a translator assigned to 102.3. Likewise WZHR in Zhills is using a translator on 104.3. They certainly cover the AM service area alright, the only problem is they area re-hashing WTAN in Clearwater almost 50 radio miles away. There is no programming/advertising that services eastern Pasco County, at least not from where stand. Go figure?

 

[Jimmy Backrow]

The commission should consider that these are not the 1940's with pre-AFC tube-type receivers and allow full power second adjacencies wherever they will fit, giving priority to existing translators and LPFMs but keeping the non-com status of the LPFMs, and make these stations primary to allow them to discontinue on AM if they want to. AMs and translators should be permanently connected to not allow the sale of either without the other or split programming.

I'd agree...if the FM dial wasn't already a mess from the mass of translators. There are so many on the air right now that they're cutting into what used to be listenable signals..not just adjacent, but on the same frequency. Gone are the days of being able to listen to an FM that was just a town or city away.
What really gets me is the 50KW AMs taking up FM dialspace. What's the point?
But, yes...let the AM stations with translators run separate programming if they'd like. Being on two bands at once makes no sense to me. If the big boys really do think that AM is so useless that they think a bunch of peanut whistle short range FM signals are better, let us maniacs loose on the AM stations.

 

[b-turner]

Would be nice but the cost of having an FM translator for your AM station is by FCC Rules, a simulcast of te AM signal...gotta pay to keep the AM on in order to earn the FM translator. I agree. If the AM can have equal or greater success with the 250 watt translator, make it primary and let the broadcaster give up the AM license. Maybe the FCC will think that way at some point. It would be nice if the translator could originate programming different than the AM, but again a translator is just what it is, a repeater on the the home station.

 

[kc1ih]

What really gets me is the 50KW AMs taking up FM dialspace. What's the point?

The point is that many people, especially younger people, won't listen to AM no matter how strong the signal is. Some of them barely know that AM exists. And in the middle of a metro area the noise on AM can be so bad that even a nearby 50 KW AM station is noisy. So the city people get a clear signal from the translator while the AM serves those further away.

Interestingly some AM stations feed their translator(s) from an HD-2 or HD-3 signal on a co-owned FM. So in some cases if you have an HD radio the best way to listen some of the AM stations is via the HD stream. A good example of this is WFLA on 97.9 HD-2.

 

[Radi0411]

Interestingly some AM stations feed their translator(s) from an HD-2 or HD-3 signal on a co-owned FM. So in some cases if you have an HD radio the best way to listen some of the AM stations is via the HD stream. A good example of this is WFLA on 97.9 HD-2.

Might make sense for some of these AM operators to follow the above and seek an HD sub to feed these translators. Granted they wouldn't *own* the primary channel but I would think in most cases it would be a lot more cost-effective especially with the decline and erosion to the AM Band. I believe though, if I am not mistaken, that with the acquisition of a translator for an AM during the most recent "invasion", that they have to maintain the simulcast for a period of 4 years? HD radio certainly isn't going to bring in very many people but it could serve its own purpose (as a primary station) combined with streaming. While it pains me to say it, the days of AM are indeed declining as each and everyday passes and while I'll miss DX'ing, its time.

 

[CTListener]

Might make sense for some of these AM operators to follow the above and seek an HD sub to feed these translators. Granted they wouldn't *own* the primary channel but I would think in most cases it would be a lot more cost-effective especially with the decline and erosion to the AM Band. I believe though, if I am not mistaken, that with the acquisition of a translator for an AM during the most recent "invasion", that they have to maintain the simulcast for a period of 4 years? HD radio certainly isn't going to bring in very many people but it could serve its own purpose (as a primary station) combined with streaming. While it pains me to say it, the days of AM are indeed declining as each and everyday passes and while I'll miss DX'ing, its time.

But streaming gets more expensive for radio stations every year as payments to various players in the music industry increase. A pipsqueak AM with a translator is often in no financial position to stream over the internet.

 

[Radi0411]

But streaming gets more expensive for radio stations every year as payments to various players in the music industry increase. A pipsqueak AM with a translator is often in no financial position to stream over the internet.

Its a catch-22 either way... throw away money on a flea-flicker AM or invest the money in a modern platform and stream. Smart speakers seem to be of increasing interest (at least from what I have seen myself) with the older demos just based on how simple they are to use after initial setup. If the same money is going to be spent, may as well use it the most effective way. May be a wise decision to geo-fence and make it more affordable that way since people outside of your core coverage aren't beneficial as far as ROI is concerned for advertisers.

 

[b-turner]

That's just the point, it's not the same money. Streaming requires a rate far above what radio has never been able to monetize through advertising. Simply put, steaming any typical radio music programming will cost more than you could ever earn in advertising. If you have 10 listeners as a hobby, it's not that much. If you have a million listeners you have the power to negotiate. To have the numbers to earn advertising based on cost per thousand, the rate you'll pay for streaming will keep you in the red. Something has to give and nobody is willing to budge at this point. Talk programming without copyrighted bumper music is an option that could make you money but finding enough listeners is the key. Radio and TV remain the best mediums to promote online sites. If the individually owned radio station can figure out a way to make money streaming, it will be a major deal.