WAAF reception.. updates..

[PaulRAnderson]

Do you think anyone at WAAF or Entercom who could do something about this is reading this forum? If not, we are talking to ourselves.

Moving back to Paxton would be better for everyone, especially if Boston area reception is the same and now that WKAF is on the air. As has been pointed out, they don't care if someone in New Britain or Brattleboro can get the station. But maybe it's just not worth the money to move back. I assume they can't just flip a switch to turn the Paxton transmitter on again.

Paul

 

[Ozman]

like i said anyone bug engineering or anyone on this board bug entercom about this issue? they won't listen to one person (aka Me) but if all of you started calling or e-mail them about the issue then maybe they will figure out something is wrong
sure they reallt don't care about people listening in New Britain or Brattleburo.. But the last I checked Many of us love to Go on vacation to Ct or VT. If AAF was on Paxton all the massholes could enjoy sitting in traffic on I-91 on the merge of I-84 or some cases I-90 listening to AAF.
-OZ

Do you think anyone at WAAF or Entercom who could do something about this is reading this forum? If not, we are talking to ourselves.

Moving back to Paxton would be better for everyone, especially if Boston area reception is the same and now that WKAF is on the air. As has been pointed out, they don't care if someone in New Britain or Brattleboro can get the station. But maybe it's just not worth the money to move back. I assume they can't just flip a switch to turn the Paxton transmitter on again.

Paul

 

[GovtMule1979]

XM comes in pretty clear between Provincetown and San Diego. If you want to hear good rock, go that route. Otherwise you're stuck with the same 20 Nickleback and Hinder songs over and over again, maybe the sound of static isn't so bad.

MULE

 

[Neanderpaul]

XM comes in pretty clear between Provincetown and San Diego. If you want to hear good rock, go that route. Otherwise you're stuck with the same 20 Nickleback and Hinder songs over and over again, maybe the sound of static isn't so bad.

MULE

XM is the CB radio of our generation. Gonna make a great paperweight when the unit's made obsolete by the merger.

Even Victor Kiam knew to get out when you lose that much $$$

 

[ciao99]

who would we have to talk to to get this bitch back up and running on paxton...
suggestions...
I have the Okemo-Stratton-Sunapee ski pass
I miss AAF at Stratton. that 12,000 watt does make a difference against the 107.1 interference
God I can add on to your list... kent, CT (Litchfield hills) Westport Ct, Block island,Marthards Vinyard...
Just imagine with all the new radios and tuners out there in the last 3 years that block the sidebands nowadays how much AAF's Bitchin signal can go out in VT and cape cod, central MA, and CT..
-OZ

We've been to Stratton Mtn VT the last 3-4 years. With the Paxton transmitter, AAF was like a local. The new transmiter, a big nothing despite a number of Boston stations being quite strong. The signal really has been degraded in most areas. Southington CT nada, Hebron CT nada, Great Barrington MA nada, southern VT and NH nada. Soputhwick MA nada and so on.

Dude you can listen to it on webstream. And it's not like you can't hear the music on WAAF on several other stations.

 

[vibe]

I know, but was discussing the signal strength of AAF, particularly while driving all over hell and high water the last few weeks.

 

[Ozman]

radio is not anywhere close to the same on the internet. 68k web streaming sucks + you can't win anything + does not work while driving now does it... I guess i am addicted to FM stereo. :
-OZ

Dude you can listen to it on webstream. And it's not like you can't hear the music on WAAF on several other stations.

 

[ciao99]

radio is not anywhere close to the same on the internet. 68k web streaming sucks + you can't win anything + does not work while driving now does it... I guess i am addicted to FM stereo. :
-OZ

Dude you can listen to it on webstream. And it's not like you can't hear the music on WAAF on several other stations.

Too bad dude. There are lots of format voids in Boston. The rest of us survive. You can listen to the WAAF type music on lots of stations on the dial.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

like i said anyone bug engineering or anyone on this board bug entercom about this issue? they won't listen to one person (aka Me) but if all of you started calling or e-mail them about the issue then maybe they will figure out something is wrong

Do you think anyone at WAAF or Entercom who could do something about this is reading this forum? If not, we are talking to ourselves.

Moving back to Paxton would be better for everyone

Not gonna happen, folks. Harassing their engineers isn't going to work, because it likely wasn't their decision to move it in the first place. Moving back to Paxton might be better for the listeners, but is out of the question.

What none of you except Neanderpaul seem to understand is that radio is a business. Commercial radio lives or dies by its advertising, so the station will go where the money is. Since WEAF ran what is generally considered to be the first radio commercial in 1920, it has always been that way...and as long as radio must depend on advertising, it will continue to be that way. That enormous coverage area that WAAF used to have wasn't worth a plug nickel to them. They were making not a single penny of advertising money in western Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Rhode Island or Connecticut, so there was no reason whatsoever to worry about keeping a good signal in those areas. It's not a terribly complicated concept: Analyze where your money comes from, and aim at those places.

 

[vibe]

You mean to say that if a car dealership advertised on AAF, they didn't get any peripheral/out of market sales? You mean that AAF listeners looking to buy a car listening in Springfield MA didn't at least comparison shop in the Boston burgs?

 

[WLYNWAZNgm]

Answer your own question: how far would you drive to comparison shop? 20 miles? 30 miles?
More?

WAAF would really need to sell mostly national ads for a territory that large, and national ads
are not as lucrative as locals. Yea, I remember when I could hear WAAF from my parents' house
in the southern 'burbs (not great, but could hear it...) all the way to Amherst in Western MA.
However, the marketplace was much less fragmented then than it is now...
Mr. Hair - you are dead on target, again... You most certainly are not dumb!

 

[LA_Guy]

Not gonna happen, folks. Harassing their engineers isn't going to work, because it likely wasn't their decision to move it in the first place. Moving back to Paxton might be better for the listeners, but is out of the question.

What none of you except Neanderpaul seem to understand is that radio is a business. Commercial radio lives or dies by its advertising, so the station will go where the money is. Since WEAF ran what is generally considered to be the first radio commercial in 1920, it has always been that way...and as long as radio must depend on advertising, it will continue to be that way. That enormous coverage area that WAAF used to have wasn't worth a plug nickel to them. They were making not a single penny of advertising money in western Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Rhode Island or Connecticut, so there was no reason whatsoever to worry about keeping a good signal in those areas. It's not a terribly complicated concept: Analyze where your money comes from, and aim at those places.

There's ony one problem with your comment-WAAF had a BETTER signal EVERYWHERE from Paxton! Even in downtown Boston the signal is BETTER from Paxton.
Following your logic, all the FM stations transmitting from the Pru should cut their power in half-because after all, they are only concerned with a ten mile radius of downtown.
The facts are this-radio stations rely on RATINGS to set their ad rates-and advertisers advertise based on ratings too. Arbitron diaries are distributed all over the market-NOT just in Downtown Boston. The more ears your signal covers, the better chance you have of getting your call letters in a diary-PERIOD! WAAF covered more ears from Paxton then they do now.

-End of story-

 

[BRNout]

There's ony one problem with your comment-WAAF had a BETTER signal EVERYWHERE from Paxton! Even in downtown Boston the signal is BETTER from Paxton.
Following your logic, all the FM stations transmitting from the Pru should cut their power in half-because after all, they are only concerned with a ten mile radius of downtown.
The facts are this-radio stations rely on RATINGS to set their ad rates-and advertisers advertise based on ratings too. Arbitron diaries are distributed all over the market-NOT just in Downtown Boston. The more ears your signal covers, the better chance you have of getting your call letters in a diary-PERIOD! WAAF covered more ears from Paxton then they do now.

-End of story-

EXACTLY! Many of us DO understand that radio is a business. But, this is bad business. If I can get a larger audience with the old tx location than I can with the new one, why wouldn't I? Frankly, the IN MARKET coverage has suffered - not just the out of market coverage. Paxton was a win-win and Univision is a lose-lose. It's as simple as that.

You know, this is not the same thing as if WAAF was now coming off of the Pru and we're all complaining about not getting WAAF in Belchertown and Rindge! See, that's how "dumber than a box of hair" is framing this argument. But, it's not correct. Not even close. We probably wouldn't be having an argument over this if that were the case.

The trouble is that WAAF's signal is the same or worse in probably 85-90% of the market. It's no better in Boston. It's weaker in Nashua, Braintree and Bedford. And, it's completely gone from the outlying areas. That's what makes the tower move seem like such a dumb thing to do. Why not have a killer signal over much of New England and better coverage over most of your market - particularly the 'burbs (where the audience is)? Hmmmm, why not? :

 

[HHH]

With the WKAF signal from Blue Hills, there seems no reason not to move the 107.3 back to Paxton.

I don't understand what is going on. If the Blue Hills signal did not exist, there might be a slight argument in staying in Boylston, since the 107.3 signal might be slightly better in some of Boston proper (but really not that much stronger if any stronger at all, and in some areas, actually worse).

The 97.7 Blue Hills / 107.3 Paxton combo is a match made in heaven. 97.7 for Boston proper....107.3 for the big reach....far bigger than any commercial Boston FM.

What they have now is a combined coverage map that is no better than most single Boston FMs.

Back in the late 1930s, Edwin Armstrong chose the Paxton site--due to its tremendous height-- to launch W1XOJ, America's first FM station:

http://www.fybush.com/site-030313.html

He knew what he was doing.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

There's ony one problem with your comment-WAAF had a BETTER signal EVERYWHERE from Paxton! Even in downtown Boston the signal is BETTER from Paxton.

Speaking as someone who has seen the "before" and "after" coverage studies: You are dead wrong.

The facts are this-radio stations rely on RATINGS to set their ad rates-and advertisers advertise based on ratings too.

Spoken just like the usual gang here, who have no clue about how the radio business actually operates. The facts are that any station which relies on ratings to set their ad rates will soon see their commercial business whither and die. Ad rates are a complicated mix of many factors, including but not limited to, ratings.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

Back in the late 1930s, Edwin Armstrong chose the Paxton site--due to its tremendous height-- to launch W1XOJ, America's first FM station:

http://www.fybush.com/site-030313.html

He knew what he was doing.

A completely irrelevant argument. Armstrong wasn't trying to make a go of a commercial business by selling ad time.

 

[Signpost]

Back in the late 1930s, Edwin Armstrong chose the Paxton site--due to its tremendous height-- to launch W1XOJ, America's first FM station:

A completely irrelevant argument. Armstrong wasn't trying to make a go of a commercial business by selling ad time.

Not irrelevant. This thread is about WAAF's signal, and Armstrong picked a good transmitter site.

 

[LA_Guy]

There's ony one problem with your comment-WAAF had a BETTER signal EVERYWHERE from Paxton! Even in downtown Boston the signal is BETTER from Paxton.

Speaking as someone who has seen the "before" and "after" coverage studies: You are dead wrong.

The facts are this-radio stations rely on RATINGS to set their ad rates-and advertisers advertise based on ratings too.

Spoken just like the usual gang here, who have no clue about how the radio business actually operates. The facts are that any station which relies on ratings to set their ad rates will soon see their commercial business whither and die. Ad rates are a complicated mix of many factors, including but not limited to, ratings.

No, spoken as the person who DESIGNED their current Paxton antenna! That antenna's pattern is DELIBERATELY distorted! It is HIGHLY directional towards Boston! Why do you think the bays are four feet out from the support pole? It isn't a coincidence! That antenna runs almost TWO TIMES the station's vertical ERP towards Boston! The predicted "signal" from that antenna filed with the FCC means NOTHING!! What matters is the actual MEASURED pattern from that antenna that came from Shiveley.

Next time, get the proper FACTS before you make your statements!

 

[LA_Guy]

The Stiles Hill antenna is a DOG!

Period.

 

[LA_Guy]

OOPS! I quoted where I should have corrected. Sorry.

Delete this please.