-
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
Wasted 50KW AM Signals
- Thread starter MediaBoy4Radio
- Start date
F
FreddyE1977
Guest
Mrwns said:
Wow! I had to read that at least three times to make sure it was not a joke.
That example is going to be tough to beat (unless KDKA goes all-Tradio soon).
There are a lot of Environmentalists in Vancouver, and I am a bit surprised that the
green/sustainable development folks have not turned up at their door bearing
torches and pitchforks.
FreddyE1977 said:
Actually, such a station in a big (congested) metropolitan area could be quite useful. I could certainly foresee it being a plausible use of a solid AM signal in tough traffic markets such as LA, Washington, New York and Chicago and probably in others as well. And, ironically, it might do pretty well in total Cume too.
Hardly a waste like those religious nutjobs, fringe foreign language and infomercial formats; I'd actually listen to this one once in a while.
Dear Mr. BRNout,
Please, just because your life experience is limited, you should not dismiss "religious nutjobs, fringe foreign language and infomercial formats." They can make a good buck. I know because I've been associated with lots of the "flavors" there menioned, and even a combination of those flavors.
One 50kw I know with a brilliant owner and equally brilliant manager (me) grossed over a thousand a DAY in a top 20 market.
Please, just because your life experience is limited, you should not dismiss "religious nutjobs, fringe foreign language and infomercial formats." They can make a good buck. I know because I've been associated with lots of the "flavors" there menioned, and even a combination of those flavors.
One 50kw I know with a brilliant owner and equally brilliant manager (me) grossed over a thousand a DAY in a top 20 market.
I too would vote for KOKC. It is a shell of its once former self. My Dad, in the early 60's, used to broadcast a mobile pirate over the top of KOMA in Pocatello, Idaho to harass kissing couples listening to it at night time! That, because it was the number one listened to station at night in IDAHO, over 1,000+ miles away.
As for 50kw's, what a sad situation. You add 50kw + clear channel (not the company) and you get, voila! DISASTER! The FCC began emasculating their power 30 years ago and adding new licenses, taking away from their reach. It hit a culmination though, when the FCC allowed WOWO to cut power at night. Radio ain't the same as it was, thanks to the feds.
As for 50kw's, what a sad situation. You add 50kw + clear channel (not the company) and you get, voila! DISASTER! The FCC began emasculating their power 30 years ago and adding new licenses, taking away from their reach. It hit a culmination though, when the FCC allowed WOWO to cut power at night. Radio ain't the same as it was, thanks to the feds.
F
FreddyE1977
Guest
K6JHU said:
if all-traffic radio can't make it in L.A., one has to wonder if it can be viable anyplace
All traffic is on the air on 50KW 730 in Vancouver, BC and I can't understand why.
elchupacabras said:
That was over 45 years ago. This is 2009. I'm almost willing to bet the rent that few if any folks listen to an Oklahoma City station in Idaho anymore.
Why is there a need for even one 50 kW station anymore (yes, I'm stirring the pot here. ;D )?
If the maximum power was 10 kW, would these stations lose any revenue from the lost coverage in rural areas? Their metros would still be served during the day (10 kW is still good to 100 miles or more at the low end of the dial and probably 50-60 miles in the expanded band). AM listening at night is almost nonexistent other than sports, so who cares about nighttime coverage anymore? But at 10 kW, it would still be decent.
10 kW would still cover a wide area at night, just not "38 states and Canada" like they used to announce years ago - maybe 12 states and southern Ontario, in the case of midwestern stations. The savings on electricity alone might cover the slight loss in revenue that would occur if (for example) WFAN and WCBS would no longer be audible in Hartford or Allentown on a cheap AM radio at 10 kW.
The only stations that might be able to justify 50 kW anymore are the ones in Alaska, plus KRVN Lexington NE (farm-oriented service in a vast rural area) and KTNN Window Rock, AZ (serving the Navajo Nation). I can't think of any others that would be forced off the air if they had to drop to 10 kW.
KeithE4 said:
The power is needed to overcome man made noise and penetrate big buildings and apartments in large cities. It's gotten so bad that in metros like NY and LA, 20 to 25 MVm is needed to get any listening.
In a situation where I was involved, a market of 17 million, our AM, originally 50 kw at 710, went to 100 kw and directionalized towards the city intentionally so that the worst areas of town had a usable signal. Only with the power increase and the directional operation was that achieved; no other station, including a dozen with 50 kw, noiselessly covers the densest central city locations.
10 Kw in metros is listenable with a noise free maybe 25 to 30 miles (depending on condutivity) in some of the larger markets (LA, DC, SF, NYC) at the low end, and maybe 15 miles at the high end of the dial. That does not cut it in most larger cities. And few stations are non-directional, and most have interference at night, so 10 kw or less, unless it is a WIND, KLAC, WMCA, WIP, does not cut it.
In the case of an LA 50 kw station, the absolute night coverage is limited to the 8.7 MV/m interference free contour, which misses significant parts of the market. At 10 kw, it would not cover 25% of the population.
The question was posed as to why preserve 50kw signals?
Frankly another reason is digital. Although I am not a fan of IBOC, 50kw signals are the ONLY ones that work with HD AM. You can at least get 20 miles out on a digital signal with them. Anything less just doesn't work.
Although archaic, I would also be supportive of the idea of keeping them EMP wave proof in case of a national emergency, where the could be used, like they used to be, as Presidential entry points for national security.
Frankly another reason is digital. Although I am not a fan of IBOC, 50kw signals are the ONLY ones that work with HD AM. You can at least get 20 miles out on a digital signal with them. Anything less just doesn't work.
Although archaic, I would also be supportive of the idea of keeping them EMP wave proof in case of a national emergency, where the could be used, like they used to be, as Presidential entry points for national security.
Just out of curiosity, how well does XEWW (690 AM), Rosarito, Baja California, penetrate San Diego and L.A. for that matter? W Radio promotes themselves as being focused at L.A., and listening to them, they have L.A. traffic. Being so far away from the metro, how well does the signal penetrate. I have read that they are at 100kw, but I have seen that contradicted in other sites, citing anywhere from 65-85kw.
Perhaps, David "El Mago," you could offer some information.
DavidEduardo said:
The big buildings are generally (but not always) downtown. The transmitters are generally in suburbia. I don't think even 100 kW would help in this situation considering how far the skyscrapers are from the transmitters. And how many folks in the office are listening to WGN, KFI, or WABC anyway? Some, but not many, I'll guess. But in any case, if one really wants to listen to an AM station with no FM simulcast, there's always the Internet if company policy allows.
Was this in the US? If not, then your argument is irrelevant. Other countries' people, cultures, and terrain are different than ours. Not better or worse, mind you, just different. What works in Buenos Aires, Mexico City, or Toronto won't necessarily work in New York, Chicago or LA - and vice-versa. Every situation is unique and yours apparently worked for that (unnamed) area. But I don't think it would work anywhere in the US.
Maybe on a cheap walkman or one of those garbage $10 headphone radios. But on a decent car radio, 10 kW should be good to 100 miles depending on ground conductivity and frequency (the lower the better, of course). Maybe half that or a bit more on a decent home radio. Those who still listen to AM are more tolerant of noise (which is to say, us older folks) than those who grew up with FM.
Which LA station? KFI or KNX? What part of the LA metro don't they cover? KRLA, KTNQ, or KDIS I'll believe since they are Class B stations. I'm talking about Class A.
Keith,
You are showing your ignorance. It DID happen in the US and MORE.
Go back and read the history of 500kw WLW and then try and spew your anti-international broadcasting venom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WLW
Your attitude is reflective of the imperialist attitudes (by calling them "untamed") that have created so many problems for the U.S. in foreign policy.
elchupacabras said:
First of all, lighten up! We can debate foreign policy all you want, but that's not the subject of this thread. You apparently read something into my post that was not there.
You might also want to re-read my post. The word was "unnamed" - with an N, not a T. I called it that because David did not name the city in which his station was located. He's mentioned it in the past, but I don't remember what it was.
Second of all, I am fully aware of the history of WLW. Its experiment with 500 kW was in the 1930s. It caused more problems than it was worth. If they tried that in 2009 (their last request for super-power was in 1962), the problems would be even worse.
Third, I'm not anti-International Broadcasting. I do think its time on shortwave has come and gone, other than broadcasting to areas with little or no Internet service or satellite coverage. But I do think that such broadcasting has no place on the AM band in the United States and Canada (which is close to getting rid of AM completely other than a few large stations). If other countries want to continue with it, that's their right. Many countries do and will continue to do so.
elchupacabras said:
690 is local in San Diego County, although the sparsely populated East County is not great, especially at night. The transmitter is only maybe 15 miles south of the border, and pushes a 200kw lobe NW from Tijuana. The TPO is 77 kw, but most is sent north.
In the LA market, it's listenable only along the coast and a bit inland, diminishing as you go north. The issue, of course, is that the Hispanic Spanish dominant population is not situated along the coast.
The studio is in Burbank. You can't hear it in Burbank.
KeithE4 said:
In places like NY, you have big apartment compexes going tens and tens of miles out of the City. The Boroughs are almost all apartments, and much of the rest of the metro is, too. But the issue is not just buildings... although in newer or growth markets like SLC, Phoenix, Vegas, Dallas, Houston, Austin, Atlanta, Orlando, even homes have insulation with foil on the inside and outer side, making a virtual Faraday shield.
The issue is noise. CFLs, all types of machinery, computers, computers, and dimmers, etc. The noise level for AM is growing very fast. Building penetration is an issue, but it's really about overcoming the noise floor.
Oh, and cities like DFW have several downtowns. LA has about 7 of them... maybe 8.
It was in Buenos Aires, which is smaller geographically than metros like LA, NYC, Houston, Dallas, etc. And it is not as noisy as there just are not as many CFLs and computers and other noise makers.
But it's still noisy, and we found, even though the ground conductivity is more like that of Houston than the horrible LA and NY conductivity, we needed a lot of raw power to really sound great everywhere.
Anyway, ground conductivity varies as much inside the US as it does in different cities out of the US, and culture and langauge have nothing to do with the laws of physics.
A study of where diary returns come from by ZIP code (excluding in car, which moves through ZIPS) indicates that in the biggest metros... those through the size of places like Pittsburgh and Cleveland, or the top 25 markets more or less, the minimum signal to get any type of diary return is 15 MV/m, and smaller markets it's still over 10 MV/m in the populated areas.
This is why 50 kw WTOP moved to FM in DC.... no AM in DC has a usable signal over the whole market. Then KIRO, a big 50 kw on 710, moved to FM in Seattle. And 50 kw WIBC on the hugely conductive soil of Indiana moved to FM only. AM is hampered by sound quality and interference / noise, even with big stations.
KTNQ... located to the East of most of the market, pumping about 220 kw in its lobe over LA. Yet at night, neither the San Fernando Valley nor most of Orange County has a usable signal.
There are not enough A's in the country to limit observations to just them. Still, there are unlistenable areas in LA county for KFI right in the San Fernando Valley, and KNX has some ratty areas from Duarte and Industry out to Pomona. 50 kw today is just not enough.
DavidEduardo said:
I remember visting my grandfather in his midtown Manhattan apartment in 1968. All the big NYC stations came in loud and clear. Granted it was 40 years ago, but the noise levels can't have increased that much over the years. Urban canyons like that have always been radio hell.
But since AM listening is dying, does it matter anymore?
I take it that folks in Argentina are still listening to AM more than they are in the US and Canada.
As you've said many times, AM is dying and those stations that move to FM do better. In the case of the three stations you mention above, the move is necessary. WTOP doesn't cover the DC metro. Don't know about KIRO - is that a case of Bonneville moving all their major AM talkers to FM over the next few years (like WTOP and KTAR)?
WIBC was on one of only four reasonably-full-market AM stations, and 1070 is highly directional at night. I grew up in the area (Bloomington) and can tell you that Indy has been a predominately FM market since the late '60s. The arrival of WNAP (now WIBC-FM) in 1968 wasn't the first nail in the Indianapolis AM coffin (poor signals on too few stations were), but it was probably the second - and the beginning of the end.
David, make up your mind. You've said repeatedly that AM is dying, and only old folks bother with it anymore. So why push for a power increase, even if it's only for the 25-or-so Class A stations that are still viable AM-ers? If the audience for these stations is dying of old age, why would a station want to continue to run up a big power bill to run a 50,000 watt transmitter that fewer and fewer are listening to?
My feeling is that the AM band needs to be torn down and started over, although I'm not sure if that's possible anymore. The following proposal is theoretical. If the FCC actually enacted it, the resulting lawsuits from displaced broadcasters would keep the courts busy for about 20 years.
First of all, most of the existing AM stations need to be moved to FM, starting with all Class C & D, and most Class B stations. That would require expanding the FM band to 76-108 MHz, eliminating TV channels 5 & 6.
Now, we'll use David's argument that power needs to be increased to 100 kW or more. That would mean only one or two stations to a frequency since I would also say No to directional antennas and daytime-only operation. I'm proposing the following classes of AM stations:
Class 1: 100 kW ND on 520-530, 550-680, 700-720, 750-790, 810-850, 870-890, 910-930, 950-980, 1000, 1020-1040, 1060-1220. These stations would be primary over stations in Canada & Mexico. These stations would be AM only (no IBOC or DRM).
Class 2: 100 kW ND on 540, 690, 730-740, 800, 860, 900, 990, 940, 990, 1010, & 1050. These stations would be secondary to stations in Canada & Mexico. These stations would also be AM only.
Class 3: 10 kW ND on 1230-1700. Stations on 1540, 1550, 1570, and 1580 would be secondary to stations in Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean. Digital stations would also be authorized here.
I would also propose a low-power AM service on Class 3 frequencies. They would be allowed to run up to 50 watts output into a 1/16 wavelength vertical monopole (approximately 50 feet at 1230 kHz, 35 feet at 1700 kHz). AM or digital would be OK, but no protection from any higher-class station would be offered.
Every state would be allowed at least one Class 1 or Class 2 station (the biggest bottlenecks there would be Delaware and New Jersey, both of whom like almost wholly within the NYC or Philly markets).
My idea is 10 kW ND across the entire band, plus the LPAM service. But this whole idea is something that can be debated.
In the Chicago high rises you can only hear the 50KW AMs if you're near a window and in the case of WLS you can hardly hear them.
- Status