-
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
waaf coverage in ct question
- Thread starter Ozman
- Start date
J
Jack4
Guest
I just deleted AAF as a preset in my car today. I live and work in central CT and used to get AAF loud and clear. Now, absolutely nothing - not even a faint signal on 107.3
I would guess WCCC has the most to gain from this.
Jack4
> With AAF turning on their new tower do you think that AAF
> 1073 will be now not listenable up and down the I-91
> corridor from exit 4 in VT to almost I-95 in CT? their
> signal I have also listened to them without a problem at Mt
> Snow VT from base lodge to the summit. any ideas?
>
I would guess WCCC has the most to gain from this.
Jack4
> With AAF turning on their new tower do you think that AAF
> 1073 will be now not listenable up and down the I-91
> corridor from exit 4 in VT to almost I-95 in CT? their
> signal I have also listened to them without a problem at Mt
> Snow VT from base lodge to the summit. any ideas?
>
> With AAF turning on their new tower do you think that AAF
> 1073 will be now not listenable up and down the I-91
> corridor from exit 4 in VT to almost I-95 in CT? their
> signal I have also listened to them without a problem at Mt
> Snow VT from base lodge to the summit. any ideas?
>
You shouldn't be wearing walkmans skiing anyway!
Ok, maybe riding the lift...<P ID="signature">______________
"You need your head."
--Todd Rundgren</P>
> 1073 will be now not listenable up and down the I-91
> corridor from exit 4 in VT to almost I-95 in CT? their
> signal I have also listened to them without a problem at Mt
> Snow VT from base lodge to the summit. any ideas?
>
You shouldn't be wearing walkmans skiing anyway!
Ok, maybe riding the lift...<P ID="signature">______________
"You need your head."
--Todd Rundgren</P>
K
KML0224
Guest
I'm getting virtually nothing in New Britain's south end. Maybe I'll delete my preset, too. Now we need to get reception reports from those people who are east of the Connecticut River.
It's not any better here in the quiet corner (NE corner of the state up near Mass.) Apparently, AAF isn't getting reception in Boston either, whitch is where they are targeting this move too.
They've greatly decreased thier listening area, not sure why they see that as a good move. Hopefully it's not permanent.
They've greatly decreased thier listening area, not sure why they see that as a good move. Hopefully it's not permanent.
Receive 'AAF in Waterbury.
> It's not any better here in the quiet corner (NE corner of
> the state up near Mass.) Apparently, AAF isn't getting
> reception in Boston either, whitch is where they are
> targeting this move too.
I'm in the Boston area, and as of last weekend when I last listened in the car, it's worse than before. It used to be a fair signal around here, listenable, though not necessarily in solid stereo in all areas especially near downtown. (It was better in the suburbs away from the city).
Now it's all weak, breaking up while driving, and much more susceptible to off-channel interference from other strong local Boston stations. It won't come in at all on lower-level tuners like Walkmans or boom-boxes. I hope for their sake that they're still tweaking things, and that this isn't the final "upgrade". If it is, they were sold a lemon.
> the state up near Mass.) Apparently, AAF isn't getting
> reception in Boston either, whitch is where they are
> targeting this move too.
I'm in the Boston area, and as of last weekend when I last listened in the car, it's worse than before. It used to be a fair signal around here, listenable, though not necessarily in solid stereo in all areas especially near downtown. (It was better in the suburbs away from the city).
Now it's all weak, breaking up while driving, and much more susceptible to off-channel interference from other strong local Boston stations. It won't come in at all on lower-level tuners like Walkmans or boom-boxes. I hope for their sake that they're still tweaking things, and that this isn't the final "upgrade". If it is, they were sold a lemon.
K
KML0224
Guest
What ever happened to their 1150 AM simulcasts during the day? (Boston station, not WMRD-AM from Middletown.)
> > With AAF turning on their new tower do you think that AAF
> > 1073 will be now not listenable up and down the I-91
> > corridor from exit 4 in VT to almost I-95 in CT? their
> > signal I have also listened to them without a problem at
> Mt
> > Snow VT from base lodge to the summit. any ideas?
> >
>
> You shouldn't be wearing walkmans skiing anyway!
>
> Ok, maybe riding the lift...
>
I use around the neck headphones. their pretty handy so I can hear my surroundings and talk to people on the chairlifts.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Ozman on 11/09/05 04:12 PM.</FONT></P>
> > 1073 will be now not listenable up and down the I-91
> > corridor from exit 4 in VT to almost I-95 in CT? their
> > signal I have also listened to them without a problem at
> Mt
> > Snow VT from base lodge to the summit. any ideas?
> >
>
> You shouldn't be wearing walkmans skiing anyway!
>
> Ok, maybe riding the lift...
>
I use around the neck headphones. their pretty handy so I can hear my surroundings and talk to people on the chairlifts.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Ozman on 11/09/05 04:12 PM.</FONT></P>
I remeber a few years ago in putnam ct they were the only clear signal. of course I went to boarding school on top of a hill next to (where vanilla coke was presented) I was always able to get AAF on local.
> It's not any better here in the quiet corner (NE corner of
> the state up near Mass.) Apparently, AAF isn't getting
> reception in Boston either, whitch is where they are
> targeting this move too.
>
> They've greatly decreased thier listening area, not sure why
> they see that as a good move. Hopefully it's not permanent.
>
> It's not any better here in the quiet corner (NE corner of
> the state up near Mass.) Apparently, AAF isn't getting
> reception in Boston either, whitch is where they are
> targeting this move too.
>
> They've greatly decreased thier listening area, not sure why
> they see that as a good move. Hopefully it's not permanent.
>
> What ever happened to their 1150 AM simulcasts during the
> day? (Boston station, not WMRD-AM from Middletown.)
That was only for a brief period in 1997 when American Radio Systems owned both WAAF and 1150 (then WNFT) in Boston.
1150 in Boston has been through more ownership, call letter, and format changes than any station in the city. Here's what happened only after they simulcast WAAF.
Later in 1997, American Radio Systems merged with CBS/Infinity who acquired all their stations, and 1150's format was changed to "The Touch" Urban AC/Classic Soul satellite format from Texas. With no promotion or live programming whatsoever, this format actually beat established heritage urban AM station WILD in the Boston ratings, prompting WILD to change from Urban Contemporary and Hip-Hop to Classic Soul/R&B. (WILD recently changed to Gospel after launching their urban AC WILD-FM).
This didn't last, because CBS/Infinity was over ownership limits. In 1998 they sold WAAF, WRKO, WEEI and WEGQ (now WMKK) to Entercom, and soon after sold 1150 to Mega Broadcasting. 1150 became WAMG with Mega's Spanish format.
Experiencing financial difficulties, Mega sold 1150 in November 2003 to Salem Communications, who renamed it WTTT, airing their conservative talk network. That's as 1150 Boston stands today.
I actually worked at 1150 when it was oldies station WMEX owned by Greater Media from 1986 to 1988. (Not the original legendary Top 40 WMEX Boston which was on 1510 until the mid-70's, which is now WWZN "The Zone" satellite sports talk. 1150 WMEX was an oldies station emulating the heritage sound of the original).
> day? (Boston station, not WMRD-AM from Middletown.)
That was only for a brief period in 1997 when American Radio Systems owned both WAAF and 1150 (then WNFT) in Boston.
1150 in Boston has been through more ownership, call letter, and format changes than any station in the city. Here's what happened only after they simulcast WAAF.
Later in 1997, American Radio Systems merged with CBS/Infinity who acquired all their stations, and 1150's format was changed to "The Touch" Urban AC/Classic Soul satellite format from Texas. With no promotion or live programming whatsoever, this format actually beat established heritage urban AM station WILD in the Boston ratings, prompting WILD to change from Urban Contemporary and Hip-Hop to Classic Soul/R&B. (WILD recently changed to Gospel after launching their urban AC WILD-FM).
This didn't last, because CBS/Infinity was over ownership limits. In 1998 they sold WAAF, WRKO, WEEI and WEGQ (now WMKK) to Entercom, and soon after sold 1150 to Mega Broadcasting. 1150 became WAMG with Mega's Spanish format.
Experiencing financial difficulties, Mega sold 1150 in November 2003 to Salem Communications, who renamed it WTTT, airing their conservative talk network. That's as 1150 Boston stands today.
I actually worked at 1150 when it was oldies station WMEX owned by Greater Media from 1986 to 1988. (Not the original legendary Top 40 WMEX Boston which was on 1510 until the mid-70's, which is now WWZN "The Zone" satellite sports talk. 1150 WMEX was an oldies station emulating the heritage sound of the original).
If WAAF is on it's new transmitter, their signal has deteriorated immensely.... Driving in my area south of Boston, their signal used to be a killer here. Now it is fairly weak. I think they were better off up on Ashnesbumskit. That signal was solid all the way from Boston to the Berkshires. Since 'AAF had a core audience in Boston already, they would have gained NOTHING by moving to the Channel 27 tower in Boyleston. If I were them, I would go BACK to Ashnebumskit Hill in Paxton. For the sake of trying to call themselves Westborough-BOSTON, it think it was a mistake. There is NOTHING wrong with being a station, that happens to be licensed to Worcester. Worcester is nothing to sneeze at either. It is the second largest city in Massachusetts. Back in the days of the "Cocaine Realty Building", most of the people I knew thought that it was COOL to be listening to Worcester station. Back then, 'AAF was a preset in most car radios in my town (Randolph, MA, about 15 miles SOUTH of Boston).
73,
<P ID="signature">______________
Peter Q. George (K1XRB)
Whitman, Massachusetts</P>
73,
<P ID="signature">______________
Peter Q. George (K1XRB)
Whitman, Massachusetts</P>
Listening today, they seem to be coming in much better than a few days ago.
Maybe they moved back?Or fixed something?
When they first moved it was snowy, then they had what sounded to be co-channel interference, now its back to sounding ok.
> > It's not any better here in the quiet corner (NE corner of
>
> > the state up near Mass.) Apparently, AAF isn't getting
> > reception in Boston either, whitch is where they are
> > targeting this move too.
>
> I'm in the Boston area, and as of last weekend when I last
> listened in the car, it's worse than before. It used to be a
> fair signal around here, listenable, though not necessarily
> in solid stereo in all areas especially near downtown. (It
> was better in the suburbs away from the city).
>
> Now it's all weak, breaking up while driving, and much more
> susceptible to off-channel interference from other strong
> local Boston stations. It won't come in at all on
> lower-level tuners like Walkmans or boom-boxes. I hope for
> their sake that they're still tweaking things, and that this
> isn't the final "upgrade". If it is, they were sold a lemon.
>
Maybe they moved back?Or fixed something?
When they first moved it was snowy, then they had what sounded to be co-channel interference, now its back to sounding ok.
> > It's not any better here in the quiet corner (NE corner of
>
> > the state up near Mass.) Apparently, AAF isn't getting
> > reception in Boston either, whitch is where they are
> > targeting this move too.
>
> I'm in the Boston area, and as of last weekend when I last
> listened in the car, it's worse than before. It used to be a
> fair signal around here, listenable, though not necessarily
> in solid stereo in all areas especially near downtown. (It
> was better in the suburbs away from the city).
>
> Now it's all weak, breaking up while driving, and much more
> susceptible to off-channel interference from other strong
> local Boston stations. It won't come in at all on
> lower-level tuners like Walkmans or boom-boxes. I hope for
> their sake that they're still tweaking things, and that this
> isn't the final "upgrade". If it is, they were sold a lemon.
>
> Listening today, they seem to be coming in much better than
> a few days ago.
>
> Maybe they moved back? Or fixed something?
Perhaps something in their new airchain may have been <blink>intermittent</blink>...
> a few days ago.
>
> Maybe they moved back? Or fixed something?
Perhaps something in their new airchain may have been <blink>intermittent</blink>...
K
KML0224
Guest
Actually, Wocester is the second largest city in ALL of New England, not just Massachusetts.
C
channelsurf
Guest
This was planned in 1980!!!
What is amazing is that they have talked about moving to that Channel 27 tower for 25 years!!!! I can remember them discussing that very plan back during the spring of 1980!!!!! Usually, a move of this nature, only takes a couple of years!!! In those days, WAAF had kind of an inferiority complex, being a Worcester station, trying to compete with WBCN and WCOZ. After 25 years, it would appear that this wasn't too well planned out...
If WAAF is on it's new transmitter, their signal has
> deteriorated immensely.... Driving in my area south of
> Boston, their signal used to be a killer here. Now it is
> fairly weak. I think they were better off up on
> Ashnesbumskit. That signal was solid all the way from
> Boston to the Berkshires. Since 'AAF had a core audience in
> Boston already, they would have gained NOTHING by moving to
> the Channel 27 tower in Boyleston. If I were them, I would
> go BACK to Ashnebumskit Hill in Paxton. For the sake of
> trying to call themselves Westborough-BOSTON, it think it
> was a mistake. There is NOTHING wrong with being a station,
> that happens to be licensed to Worcester. Worcester is
> nothing to sneeze at either. It is the second largest city
> in Massachusetts. Back in the days of the "Cocaine Realty
> Building", most of the people I knew thought that it was
> COOL to be listening to Worcester station. Back then, 'AAF
> was a preset in most car radios in my town (Randolph, MA,
> about 15 miles SOUTH of Boston).
>
> 73,
>
What is amazing is that they have talked about moving to that Channel 27 tower for 25 years!!!! I can remember them discussing that very plan back during the spring of 1980!!!!! Usually, a move of this nature, only takes a couple of years!!! In those days, WAAF had kind of an inferiority complex, being a Worcester station, trying to compete with WBCN and WCOZ. After 25 years, it would appear that this wasn't too well planned out...
If WAAF is on it's new transmitter, their signal has
> deteriorated immensely.... Driving in my area south of
> Boston, their signal used to be a killer here. Now it is
> fairly weak. I think they were better off up on
> Ashnesbumskit. That signal was solid all the way from
> Boston to the Berkshires. Since 'AAF had a core audience in
> Boston already, they would have gained NOTHING by moving to
> the Channel 27 tower in Boyleston. If I were them, I would
> go BACK to Ashnebumskit Hill in Paxton. For the sake of
> trying to call themselves Westborough-BOSTON, it think it
> was a mistake. There is NOTHING wrong with being a station,
> that happens to be licensed to Worcester. Worcester is
> nothing to sneeze at either. It is the second largest city
> in Massachusetts. Back in the days of the "Cocaine Realty
> Building", most of the people I knew thought that it was
> COOL to be listening to Worcester station. Back then, 'AAF
> was a preset in most car radios in my town (Randolph, MA,
> about 15 miles SOUTH of Boston).
>
> 73,
>
K
KML0224
Guest
Check the index in the Rand McNally Road Atlas. They're using either Cencus data from 2000 or "other reliable sources."
> Check the index in the Rand McNally Road Atlas. They're
> using either Cencus data from 2000 or "other reliable
> sources."
>
accoriding to some sources providence has a population of 177,000
where as worchester has a population of 173,000
I am curious to know what you got for the demographics for the population
> using either Cencus data from 2000 or "other reliable
> sources."
>
accoriding to some sources providence has a population of 177,000
where as worchester has a population of 173,000
I am curious to know what you got for the demographics for the population
- Status