Will WSB AM be the new #1 station in ATL?

[jabba17]

Consider reallocating the AM assignments from 10 kHz intervals to nine.

The reduction of fidelity that is the NRSC standard was necessary due to the interference of strong signals on adjacent channels... reducing separation to 9 kHz just makes the band sound worse.

I'm sure there can be quality analog transmission standards implemented which can be used in a narrow transmission spectrum. Outside of North and South America, nine-kilohertz interval is the standard for AM and it hasn't gone the way of the dinosaur in those regions.

You've just rendered most digital AM tuners obsolete with such a move. IMO that would be a bridge too far.

Actually can't some digital tuners be reprogrammed to accommodate 9 kHz intervals? I know that my old Kenwood car stereo could do that and oddly enough, the factory radio in my 1987 Dodge Shadow could also. I remember when I first got the car that I somehow reprogrammed it to do that and for the life of me, I can't figure out how it happened; neither did the dealer.

Some can explicitly (I had a 1981 Technics receiver with such a switch on the back), and some may have it as an undocumented feature. But who all is going to put up with hacking their radio to make it work? AM has enough listenership issues already.

I wonder how many FM digital tuners can be hacked to go down to 78MHz, like they use in Japan, for potential FM x-band usage?

 

[klutch00]

Guy named Ray Livesay wanted to do 9kHz spacing in the 70s. His plan was to put all daytimers on newly created channels as fulltimers.

That might not've been a bad idea; and in the '70s might've been the time to do it! The only thing is that quality stereo standards should've also been made available with versatile radios available to decode whichever standards were out there.

Was Livesay the same guy who owned WHOW in Clinton IL?

 

[gr8oldies]

He owned WERT AM/FM in Van Wert OH and WLBH Am/FM in Matoon IL, I don't know about WHOW

 

[secondchoice]

Warning: the following will make some people at Cox mad:

With Atlanta’s lack of full market coverage radio facilities both AM & FM, I personally feel that duplicating any station that covers the Atlanta (or any other top 100 market) on AM or FM should be prohibited by the FCC. A couple of stations that do not have significant overlap, like 105.7 & 96.7 should be allowed. If someone wants to tie an AM “class D” with a FM that should be allowed. Taking two 24 hour AM or FM “unlimited” signals that have overlapping “city grade” at either COL should not be allowed. If WSB wants to do talk on FM, that is OK. But then do something else (at least different talk shows) with 750 AM. If Cox feels they can not make $$ with 750 AM then either LMA (790 AM did OK for 94.1’s owners) or sell it. . IMHO the lack of diversity in programming is killing radio.

Back to AM:

There was an idea floating around some of the other boards to allow class C AM up the power. I am not up on the treaty for nighttime signals but I see no harm in letting the Clear AM’s which are protected for hundreds of miles going at least 200Kw daytime. The class AM D’s under 5KW should become Commercial Class D FM’s where there is room on FM or moved to an expending FM band to includes the old analog channel 6.

 

[kilamanjero]

And to answer the specific question at hand, it's possible.

Based on what normally happens, you'd think a very well performing talk radio station could reach #1, especially on FM. However, it will be interesting to see them battling out V-103, The BIG Station.

Considering how good at evolving with the times V-103 has been in the past 2 decades as an urban contemporary, in the PPM environ, and currently being CBS Radio's urban division flagship, I doubt WSB will have an easy time overtaking them. WSB needs to go back to be a news station and leave the opinion radio to CC, whom seem to be masters at manipulation. That's one of my main pet-peeves with Cox Radio, they seem to alienate most of their listeners because they never seem to ever show any freedom of programming with any of its stations. The killing thing is none of them are cash strapped like other companies like CC, CBS, Cumulus, etc., but they certain do program like their stations are.

This is the MAIN reason why Cox Radio Atlanta urban stations could never take down V-103 regardless of what ever they tried (urban combos, signals move-ins, etc.) because if one offered an alternative to their crap then they will take it over them hands down.

 

[davideduardo]

With Atlanta’s lack of full market coverage radio facilities both AM & FM, I personally feel that duplicating any station that covers the Atlanta (or any other top 100 market) on AM or FM should be prohibited by the FCC. . IMHO the lack of diversity in programming is killing radio.

The FCC mandated an end to simulcasts that, in some cases, had been going for 20 years to foster diversity and to give FM a chance; this was in some ways the equivalent of the FCC's even more emphatic "save" of UHF with the tuner requirement in the same decade.

But that was over 40 years ago.

Move ins, upgrades, new allocations, satellite, cable, the Internet have all created more diversity than any individual is capable of assimilating. The need to prohibit simulcasting is not real. But the need to allow AMs to preserve the viability of their content is very real. Allowing simulcasts is a good way of achieving this.

There was an idea floating around some of the other boards to allow class C AM up the power. I am not up on the treaty for nighttime signals but I see no harm in letting the Clear AM’s which are protected for hundreds of miles going at least 200Kw daytime.

That would only double the daytime coverage area, but would often put the enhanced clear channel station into prohibited overlap with stations on adjacent frequecies when the current separation is right at the minimum. Most stations today could not increase for this reason.

The class AM D’s under 5KW should become Commercial Class D FM’s where there is room on FM or moved to an expending FM band to includes the old analog channel 6.

In most cases, there is not room. And adding what is essentially a new band this late in the radio game is not likely to be useful or successful.

 

[jabba17]

With Atlanta’s lack of full market coverage radio facilities both AM & FM, I personally feel that duplicating any station that covers the Atlanta (or any other top 100 market) on AM or FM should be prohibited by the FCC. . IMHO the lack of diversity in programming is killing radio.

The FCC mandated an end to simulcasts that, in some cases, had been going for 20 years to foster diversity and to give FM a chance; this was in some ways the equivalent of the FCC's even more emphatic "save" of UHF with the tuner requirement in the same decade.

But that was over 40 years ago.

Move ins, upgrades, new allocations, satellite, cable, the Internet have all created more diversity than any individual is capable of assimilating. The need to prohibit simulcasting is not real. But the need to allow AMs to preserve the viability of their content is very real. Allowing simulcasts is a good way of achieving this.

The class AM D’s under 5KW should become Commercial Class D FM’s where there is room on FM or moved to an expending FM band to includes the old analog channel 6.

In most cases, there is not room. And adding what is essentially a new band this late in the radio game is not likely to be useful or successful.

I would argue that we have more programming diversity now than 25 years ago when ATL had 5 AC stations with 5 owners all going for the brass ring...and 35 years ago when ATL had about as many BM stations.

Why wouldn't an expanded FM band be successful? It wouldn't be successful right out of the box, but if you had a UHF-like tuner requirement you'd get an installed base of receivers out there pretty quickly. And unlike HD, the cost difference would be minimal--on the order of pennies per receiver.

 

[secondchoice]

Dave:
You said:
“Move ins, upgrades, new allocations, satellite, cable, the Internet have all created more diversity than any individual is capable of assimilating.”

I was thinking automobiles. I forgot where I heard it but the “satellite” radio people tend to increase they terrestrial listening (that’s a lot of radio). Right now there are 117 AM frequencies and 80 commercial FM frequencies. If AM’s are only viable when tied to FM’s then we have gone from 197 to 80 viable frequencies nation wide. There are some areas that you can use your cell phone to stream a station but my personal experience with “dropped” coverage is very frustrating. (The cell phone streaming is the future IMHO.) The FCC is about to degrade FM by adding more non commercial class D’s.

“The need to prohibit simulcasting is not real. But the need to allow AMs to preserve the viability of their content is very real. Allowing simulcasts is a good way of achieving this.”

In a weird way the AM band has been more “creative” than FM in the last 20 or 30 years. There are a large number of people who believe the talk “saved” AM. Would talk be as successful today had not Rush been a success on WABC? How many FM operators in the 1980’s would take a chance on an “unproven” format and put talk on FM. Most radio stations will not “experiment” with formats or programming if they are successful. A lot of AM stations have little to lose and will experiment. A lot of the sports talk started on AM. IIRC one of the first of what is now called “classic rock” stations was the old WFAA 570AM Dallas. There might be a format out there that either you or I have not hear of that is the next “big thing”. Will it start on an Atlanta FM? I doubt it. Compelling programming will work on either AM of FM. Talk radio has proved that. I will accept that any body under 40 has most likely never used the “static” band.

“That would only double the daytime coverage area, but would often put the enhanced clear channel station into prohibited overlap with stations on adjacent frequecies when the current separation is right at the minimum. Most stations today could not increase for this reason.”

If the class D AM’s were gone there would be a lot less static. Not all of the clears could upgrade, but some could. This might not be financially practical (directional arrays etc.)

“In most cases, there is not room. And adding what is essentially a new band this late in the radio game is not likely to be useful or successful.”

Analog channel 6 already is attracting pirates 87.7

 

[nightmanager]

How well do you think Coast to Coast A.M. would work for WSB? With all the bad things I hear about WGST, I'm thinking it would probably be better off if WSB adopted the overnight show with daytime ratings.

Given that CC owns the show, it's probably staying where it is. But that said, on the nights when I am out driving around late, I don't even try to listen to GST. The AM signal is worthless. I do listen to the online stream in the car, but usually to KFI's feed rather than GSTs. Same thing, no annoying GST branding.

It's sad that these two stations have nearly the same lineups but the end result could not be more different.