-
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 over WBCN
- Thread starter dhoule
- Start date
N
neanderpol
Guest
> I believe this is the first time ever WAAF has bested WBCN.
> WAAF has broken the top 10 before in the Boston book but I
> don't think they've ever beat WBCN outright in 12+
>
It looks funny seeing WAAF above BCN 12+. Didn't a lot of you say that the "Worcester station" wouldn't ever factor in Boston?
Other than WROR, it appears in this trend at least as if WAAF is the highest rated rock station in Boston.
But then again...it is just a trend. But an impressive one to be sure.
> WAAF has broken the top 10 before in the Boston book but I
> don't think they've ever beat WBCN outright in 12+
>
It looks funny seeing WAAF above BCN 12+. Didn't a lot of you say that the "Worcester station" wouldn't ever factor in Boston?
Other than WROR, it appears in this trend at least as if WAAF is the highest rated rock station in Boston.
But then again...it is just a trend. But an impressive one to be sure.
E
edthedeal
Guest
> > I believe this is the first time ever WAAF has bested
> WBCN.
> > WAAF has broken the top 10 before in the Boston book but I
>
> > don't think they've ever beat WBCN outright in 12+
> >
>
> It looks funny seeing WAAF above BCN 12+. Didn't a lot of
> you say that the "Worcester station" wouldn't ever factor in
> Boston?
>
> Other than WROR, it appears in this trend at least as if
> WAAF is the highest rated rock station in Boston.
>
> But then again...it is just a trend. But an impressive one
> to be sure.
>
How about that WAAF Signal ? WAAF Signal is better now , in my area ( South of Boston ) . What about in the city ? Hillman love WBCN Morning show . <P ID="signature">______________
America most awful Hip Hop station list , KS107.5 Denver , KLUC Las Vegas , and Wired in Philly .</P>
> WBCN.
> > WAAF has broken the top 10 before in the Boston book but I
>
> > don't think they've ever beat WBCN outright in 12+
> >
>
> It looks funny seeing WAAF above BCN 12+. Didn't a lot of
> you say that the "Worcester station" wouldn't ever factor in
> Boston?
>
> Other than WROR, it appears in this trend at least as if
> WAAF is the highest rated rock station in Boston.
>
> But then again...it is just a trend. But an impressive one
> to be sure.
>
How about that WAAF Signal ? WAAF Signal is better now , in my area ( South of Boston ) . What about in the city ? Hillman love WBCN Morning show . <P ID="signature">______________
America most awful Hip Hop station list , KS107.5 Denver , KLUC Las Vegas , and Wired in Philly .</P>
> How about that WAAF Signal ? WAAF Signal is better now , in
> my area ( South of Boston ) . What about in the city ?
> Hillman love WBCN Morning show .
When WAAF tried using the West Boylston tower, the signal was actually worse inside Boston, which was the opposite of what they were trying to accomplish, so they went back to the stick in Paxton.
The best thing WAAF could do to improve listenership in downtown Boston is try to get a translator. Only thing is there may not be room for it anywhere on the FM dial. Anywhere outside of a 4 mile radius of the Pru, WAAF's signal is pretty good, it's just when you're near the Pru that it completely gets lost.
By the way, I like it when DLR is off on WBCN because then they play music.
Jacko
<P ID="signature">______________
I live for my dream,
And a pocket full of gold.
</P>
> my area ( South of Boston ) . What about in the city ?
> Hillman love WBCN Morning show .
When WAAF tried using the West Boylston tower, the signal was actually worse inside Boston, which was the opposite of what they were trying to accomplish, so they went back to the stick in Paxton.
The best thing WAAF could do to improve listenership in downtown Boston is try to get a translator. Only thing is there may not be room for it anywhere on the FM dial. Anywhere outside of a 4 mile radius of the Pru, WAAF's signal is pretty good, it's just when you're near the Pru that it completely gets lost.
By the way, I like it when DLR is off on WBCN because then they play music.
Jacko
<P ID="signature">______________
I live for my dream,
And a pocket full of gold.
</P>
They've been running from West Boylston for some time now with IBAC; there was a problem, it was fixed. Perhaps the West Boylston signal played a factor in Phase 2?
> When WAAF tried using the West Boylston tower, the signal
> was actually worse inside Boston, which was the opposite of
> what they were trying to accomplish, so they went back to
> the stick in Paxton.
>
> When WAAF tried using the West Boylston tower, the signal
> was actually worse inside Boston, which was the opposite of
> what they were trying to accomplish, so they went back to
> the stick in Paxton.
>
> They've been running from West Boylston for some time now
> with IBAC; there was a problem, it was fixed. Perhaps the
> West Boylston signal played a factor in Phase 2?
I haven't heard anywhere else of them returing to W. Boylston. Are you sure they're not running with IBOC from Paxton? The signal around Boston is currently no better than it ever was from Paxton.
According to their coverage map on Radio-Locator they're running from the Paxton site, and according to their station info page, their CP for the W. Boylston site, which used to be listed there, has been deleted.
We know Radio-Locator is not always accurate, but the last news I heard a couple of months ago was WAAF gave up on W. Boylston and turned in the permit when they went back to the far superior original Paxton site.
> > When WAAF tried using the West Boylston tower, the signal
> > was actually worse inside Boston, which was the opposite of
> > what they were trying to accomplish, so they went back to
> > the stick in Paxton.
> >
>
> with IBAC; there was a problem, it was fixed. Perhaps the
> West Boylston signal played a factor in Phase 2?
I haven't heard anywhere else of them returing to W. Boylston. Are you sure they're not running with IBOC from Paxton? The signal around Boston is currently no better than it ever was from Paxton.
According to their coverage map on Radio-Locator they're running from the Paxton site, and according to their station info page, their CP for the W. Boylston site, which used to be listed there, has been deleted.
We know Radio-Locator is not always accurate, but the last news I heard a couple of months ago was WAAF gave up on W. Boylston and turned in the permit when they went back to the far superior original Paxton site.
> > When WAAF tried using the West Boylston tower, the signal
> > was actually worse inside Boston, which was the opposite of
> > what they were trying to accomplish, so they went back to
> > the stick in Paxton.
> >
>
T
TXengineer
Guest
They have to be running from W. Boylston.
When the signal was on Asnebumkit Hill, it would just boom into Springfield, however when they first switched to Boylston, the signal was much weaker. When they switched back it was strong again. However a few weeks ago, It became weaker again and has been since.
Everything leads me to believe they are on Bolyston, and I'll find out Sunday.
> > They've been running from West Boylston for some time now
> > with IBAC; there was a problem, it was fixed. Perhaps
> the
> > West Boylston signal played a factor in Phase 2?
>
> I haven't heard anywhere else of them returing to W.
> Boylston. Are you sure they're not running with IBOC from
> Paxton? The signal around Boston is currently no better than
> it ever was from Paxton.
>
> According to their coverage map on Radio-Locator they're
> running from the Paxton site, and according to their station
> info page, their CP for the W. Boylston site, which used to
> be listed there, has been deleted.
>
> We know Radio-Locator is not always accurate, but the last
> news I heard a couple of months ago was WAAF gave up on W.
> Boylston and turned in the permit when they went back to the
> far superior original Paxton site.
>
> > > When WAAF tried using the West Boylston tower, the
> signal
> > > was actually worse inside Boston, which was the opposite
> of
> > > what they were trying to accomplish, so they went back
> to
> > > the stick in Paxton.
> > >
> >
>
When the signal was on Asnebumkit Hill, it would just boom into Springfield, however when they first switched to Boylston, the signal was much weaker. When they switched back it was strong again. However a few weeks ago, It became weaker again and has been since.
Everything leads me to believe they are on Bolyston, and I'll find out Sunday.
> > They've been running from West Boylston for some time now
> > with IBAC; there was a problem, it was fixed. Perhaps
> the
> > West Boylston signal played a factor in Phase 2?
>
> I haven't heard anywhere else of them returing to W.
> Boylston. Are you sure they're not running with IBOC from
> Paxton? The signal around Boston is currently no better than
> it ever was from Paxton.
>
> According to their coverage map on Radio-Locator they're
> running from the Paxton site, and according to their station
> info page, their CP for the W. Boylston site, which used to
> be listed there, has been deleted.
>
> We know Radio-Locator is not always accurate, but the last
> news I heard a couple of months ago was WAAF gave up on W.
> Boylston and turned in the permit when they went back to the
> far superior original Paxton site.
>
> > > When WAAF tried using the West Boylston tower, the
> signal
> > > was actually worse inside Boston, which was the opposite
> of
> > > what they were trying to accomplish, so they went back
> to
> > > the stick in Paxton.
> > >
> >
>
> They have to be running from W. Boylston.
> When the signal was on Asnebumkit Hill, it would just boom
> into Springfield, however when they first switched to
> Boylston, the signal was much weaker. When they switched
> back it was strong again. However a few weeks ago, It became
> weaker again and has been since.
>
> Everything leads me to believe they are on Bolyston, and
> I'll find out Sunday.
They have been weaker down here on the south shore in the past couple weeks also. It seems to be the same strength that they were at when they moved the first time.
I thought they had given up on this WUNI tower experiment? It really doesn't seem to be helping things for them much.
> When the signal was on Asnebumkit Hill, it would just boom
> into Springfield, however when they first switched to
> Boylston, the signal was much weaker. When they switched
> back it was strong again. However a few weeks ago, It became
> weaker again and has been since.
>
> Everything leads me to believe they are on Bolyston, and
> I'll find out Sunday.
They have been weaker down here on the south shore in the past couple weeks also. It seems to be the same strength that they were at when they moved the first time.
I thought they had given up on this WUNI tower experiment? It really doesn't seem to be helping things for them much.
B
Betagamma
Guest
> I believe this is the first time ever WAAF has bested WBCN.
> WAAF has broken the top 10 before in the Boston book but I
> don't think they've ever beat WBCN outright in 12+
>
Little should be aaid about the underperforming waaf besting wbcn after howard left. it's certainly not a quality adjustment
> WAAF has broken the top 10 before in the Boston book but I
> don't think they've ever beat WBCN outright in 12+
>
Little should be aaid about the underperforming waaf besting wbcn after howard left. it's certainly not a quality adjustment
The CP is still in the FCC data base.
The digital notification was filed on Feb 13.
>
> According to their coverage map on Radio-Locator they're
> running from the Paxton site, and according to their station
> info page, their CP for the W. Boylston site, which used to
> be listed there, has been deleted.
>
The digital notification was filed on Feb 13.
>
> According to their coverage map on Radio-Locator they're
> running from the Paxton site, and according to their station
> info page, their CP for the W. Boylston site, which used to
> be listed there, has been deleted.
>
- Status