Bandwidth is never worthless. How it's used may change, but it has value one way or another.
-
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
Buffalo WGR to Simulcast on 107.7
- Thread starter Buddy Shula
- Start date
K.M. Richards
Program Director, The Eighties Channel™
Is there a viable repurposing of 540 to 1700kHz?
No more than there is for the long wave band below 540 kHz. In the Netherlands, they apparently allow hobbyists to use it at low power... sort of like the old CB radio but with music. Breaker, breaker!
K.M. Richards
Program Director, The Eighties Channel™
So we could eliminate most or all of the full-power AM stations and leave the band open to Part 15-type operations, maybe with a loosening of the restrictions on coverage. Might even be more useful that way.
A quick count from the 2026 World Radio TV Handbook shows 95 LPAM stations in The Netherlands running between one watt and 100 watts. Not sure if they would really be considered “hobbyist” stations, though. I have heard a few of them on the UTwente SDR during their local midday hours.
The Netherlands also has several low power private shortwave stations running between 100 watts and 2kw.
For non-broadcast purposes there might be use for low-rate data transmissions employing a “one to many” model, similar to the TeleSwitch service in the UK.
Not sure if over the horizon radar is practical on mediumwave, as it has been used on shortwave, much to the annoyance of SWLs.
I’d vote for the aforementioned Dutch model. Might help with the pirate problem on FM, giving those programmers a legal platform. Would be nice if such a service could be digital using DRM. But of course there is the issue with receiver availability and adoption.
K.M. Richards
Program Director, The Eighties Channel™
But will the pirates conform? They are on FM because that's where the mass audience is.
All the successful pirate stations know where their audiences arrr!
What, pray tell, is a "successful pirate station"?
I have not heard of a "successful" pirate since Radio Caroline and a few of its friends...
Last edited:
One that doesn’t get shut down by the FCC
Moving this thread back on topic...
Audacy has just filed to change 107.7's call letters to WGR-FM as of 2/19 (albeit WZGR in database until manually revised to get around LMS limitations) and I can confirm multiple domain registrations made yesterday as well.
radioinsight.com
Audacy has just filed to change 107.7's call letters to WGR-FM as of 2/19 (albeit WZGR in database until manually revised to get around LMS limitations) and I can confirm multiple domain registrations made yesterday as well.
WGR Launches FM Simulcast
Audacy will flip Country “107.7/104.7 The Wolf” WLKK Wethersfield Township/W284AP Buffalo NY to a simulcast of Sports 550 WGR Buffalo. The move will mark a return to Sports for the 107.7 facility as it was WNSA from 2000 to 2004 competing against WGR. Audacy has been accelerating its move of AM...
radioinsight.com
Liz Mantel is I beleive the only live talent on the Wolf. I hope Audacy can find a spot for her at one of their other stations.
Kiss is likely the only landing spot available. Everything else is on AM.
The Dutch low-power AM stations occupy a niche similar to LPFM in the United States. Generally, there are one or two such stations in any given area. For example, Eindhoven has one, Radio 4 Brainport, which broadcasts on 747 kHz in English for expats. If I remember correctly, it runs 100 watts. The station was on DAB+, too, but that apparently has come to an end.
Link: | Radio 4 Brainport
If you create a whole new digital spread-spectrum service, yes. With channel bonding, OFDM, MIMO, and other techniques, it could support a lot of different applications. Of course, every AM radio would be obsolete and Amplitude Modulation would be history. Right now, AM reaches underserved populations better than either FM or TV signals. Perhaps reallocation of resources and widening the bandwidth to create fewer bands with better quality audio might be more reasonable. As more stations fold, that could be a viable option to retain value for those who put resources into the technology and listeners who rely on it.
K.M. Richards
Program Director, The Eighties Channel™
The fly in that ointment is that it took forever for HD to take off (some will argue that it still hasn't, and in a lot of markets, HD is used to feed translators for analog reception, or simulcasting co-owned AMs that don't have translators). Your idea is dependent on people buying new radios, which they have proven hesitant to do, and the station owners -- having already been "stung" by HD -- aren't very likely to invest in an unproven new transmission mode.
And then the old "chicken and egg" conundrum comes into play.
What you hint at in the second part of your post might be workable, except the same problem (the masses' unwillingness to buy new radios) comes into play. But it would have a better chance because, if the AM band was predicated on wider "channel spacing" -- which would be achievable once there are sufficiently fewer stations on the band in operation -- then an expanded bandwidth version of AM would, in all likelihood, be compatible with existing radios, and stations could invest in new equipment as the old equipment needed replacement.
It still feels like the old problem of pushing a rope uphill, largely because even though either idea would result in an improved service, the public is going to be hard to convince. History has already proven that: Look how long it took FM to become more popular than just among hi-fi enthusiasts ... even if you remove the stumbling block that was caused when it was moved from the 44mc band, it wasn't until the 1970s that it started to catch on (and then, mostly in the major markets until nearly the end of the decade).
However, even without the expanded bandwidth capability, just the fact that your second idea would presumably be compatible with existing receivers would make AM stronger in rural areas, where it is most needed.
And then the old "chicken and egg" conundrum comes into play.
What you hint at in the second part of your post might be workable, except the same problem (the masses' unwillingness to buy new radios) comes into play. But it would have a better chance because, if the AM band was predicated on wider "channel spacing" -- which would be achievable once there are sufficiently fewer stations on the band in operation -- then an expanded bandwidth version of AM would, in all likelihood, be compatible with existing radios, and stations could invest in new equipment as the old equipment needed replacement.
It still feels like the old problem of pushing a rope uphill, largely because even though either idea would result in an improved service, the public is going to be hard to convince. History has already proven that: Look how long it took FM to become more popular than just among hi-fi enthusiasts ... even if you remove the stumbling block that was caused when it was moved from the 44mc band, it wasn't until the 1970s that it started to catch on (and then, mostly in the major markets until nearly the end of the decade).
However, even without the expanded bandwidth capability, just the fact that your second idea would presumably be compatible with existing receivers would make AM stronger in rural areas, where it is most needed.
A government that is seeking to mandate AM in every vehicle isn't going to also create a digital spectrum for AM.
Especially when one exists known as the internet.
Anyone know the time for the switch to the simulcast of WGR?
The initiative to require AM did not come from "the government" but was lobbied by the NAB and many broadcast groups.
Congress is part of the government. If it becomes law, it becomes a government mandate.
Digital music royalties came from the RIAA, but are now mandated by the government.
Still, the idea did not come from Congress... it came from Broadcasters.
Again, the idea came from the RIAA. They lobbied and got their mandate.