K
k9ez
Guest
Heard it was turned on at 5AM Tuesday.
With how much I dislike IBOC, this is one station I wouldnt mind hearing in IBOC.
With how much I dislike IBOC, this is one station I wouldnt mind hearing in IBOC.
-
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
K
k8eo
Guest
Well at least you guys have a good station like that to listen to for oldies, accented by the fact that there isn't anything else left in Chicago for oldies. I am in Detroit, & while I would be surprised if they got rid of the oldies station here because it does do well, it's owned by Infinity so it's sure possible.
WRLL actually comes in quite well In central Michigan at times, so I am wondering what affect, if any, there will be on the signal if they are transmitting in IBOC....<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by k8eo on 07/08/05 01:31 PM.</FONT></P>
WRLL actually comes in quite well In central Michigan at times, so I am wondering what affect, if any, there will be on the signal if they are transmitting in IBOC....<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by k8eo on 07/08/05 01:31 PM.</FONT></P>
D
D1075
Guest
> Well at least you guys have a good station like that to
> listen to for oldies, accented by the fact that there isn't
> anything else left in Chicago for oldies. I am in Detroit,
> & while I would be surprised if they got rid of the oldies
> station here because it does do well, it's owned by Infinity
> so it's sure possible.
> WRLL actually comes in quite well In central Michigan at
> times, so I am wondering what affect, if any, there will be
> on the signal if they are transmitting in IBOC....
>
I wish WRLL would be more of a mainstream 50s-early 70s station instead of this oldies/standards mix they are currently doing. With WJMK gone, they could recreate their sound from 5 or 10 years ago. I don't see many former JMK listeners willing to sit through Sinatra & Pat Boone in order to hear Beach Boys, Four Seasons and other WJMK oldies artists. I know I don't want to hear the standards, but I'm not in the target demo for either WJMK or WRLL, but I do like 60s and 70s music.
> listen to for oldies, accented by the fact that there isn't
> anything else left in Chicago for oldies. I am in Detroit,
> & while I would be surprised if they got rid of the oldies
> station here because it does do well, it's owned by Infinity
> so it's sure possible.
> WRLL actually comes in quite well In central Michigan at
> times, so I am wondering what affect, if any, there will be
> on the signal if they are transmitting in IBOC....
>
I wish WRLL would be more of a mainstream 50s-early 70s station instead of this oldies/standards mix they are currently doing. With WJMK gone, they could recreate their sound from 5 or 10 years ago. I don't see many former JMK listeners willing to sit through Sinatra & Pat Boone in order to hear Beach Boys, Four Seasons and other WJMK oldies artists. I know I don't want to hear the standards, but I'm not in the target demo for either WJMK or WRLL, but I do like 60s and 70s music.
B
bossmsx
Guest
> Heard it was turned on at 5AM Tuesday.
Funny as I just jumped on this board to ask if it was indeed on..The www.hd-radio.com website lists 1690 WRLL, as of yesterday, as being a full IBOC station.
Funny as I just jumped on this board to ask if it was indeed on..The www.hd-radio.com website lists 1690 WRLL, as of yesterday, as being a full IBOC station.
M
mario
Guest
WBBM-AM too
Add WBBM NewsRadio 780 to the list of IBOC stations
> Heard it was turned on at 5AM Tuesday.
>
>
> With how much I dislike IBOC, this is one station I wouldnt
> mind hearing in IBOC.
>
Add WBBM NewsRadio 780 to the list of IBOC stations
> Heard it was turned on at 5AM Tuesday.
>
>
> With how much I dislike IBOC, this is one station I wouldnt
> mind hearing in IBOC.
>
> > Well at least you guys have a good station like that to
> > listen to for oldies, accented by the fact that there
> isn't
> > anything else left in Chicago for oldies. I am in
> Detroit,
> > & while I would be surprised if they got rid of the
> oldies
> > station here because it does do well, it's owned by
> Infinity
> > so it's sure possible.
> > WRLL actually comes in quite well In central Michigan at
> > times, so I am wondering what affect, if any, there will
> be
> > on the signal if they are transmitting in IBOC....
> >
> I wish WRLL would be more of a mainstream 50s-early 70s
> station instead of this oldies/standards mix they are
> currently doing. With WJMK gone, they could recreate their
> sound from 5 or 10 years ago. I don't see many former JMK
> listeners willing to sit through Sinatra & Pat Boone in
> order to hear Beach Boys, Four Seasons and other WJMK oldies
> artists. I know I don't want to hear the standards, but I'm
> not in the target demo for either WJMK or WRLL, but I do
> like 60s and 70s music.
>
But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound more like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the audience the station has attracted to date. Many of us out here in the right age group detest the "main stream" oldies sound. I live in Columbus OH, have a button on my car radio preset to WRLL (generally poor, but listenable signal at night and early morning) and listen to it online at home every chance I get.
> > listen to for oldies, accented by the fact that there
> isn't
> > anything else left in Chicago for oldies. I am in
> Detroit,
> > & while I would be surprised if they got rid of the
> oldies
> > station here because it does do well, it's owned by
> Infinity
> > so it's sure possible.
> > WRLL actually comes in quite well In central Michigan at
> > times, so I am wondering what affect, if any, there will
> be
> > on the signal if they are transmitting in IBOC....
> >
> I wish WRLL would be more of a mainstream 50s-early 70s
> station instead of this oldies/standards mix they are
> currently doing. With WJMK gone, they could recreate their
> sound from 5 or 10 years ago. I don't see many former JMK
> listeners willing to sit through Sinatra & Pat Boone in
> order to hear Beach Boys, Four Seasons and other WJMK oldies
> artists. I know I don't want to hear the standards, but I'm
> not in the target demo for either WJMK or WRLL, but I do
> like 60s and 70s music.
>
But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound more like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the audience the station has attracted to date. Many of us out here in the right age group detest the "main stream" oldies sound. I live in Columbus OH, have a button on my car radio preset to WRLL (generally poor, but listenable signal at night and early morning) and listen to it online at home every chance I get.
A
am_listener
Guest
<snip>
I live in Columbus OH, have a button on my car radio
> preset to WRLL (generally poor, but listenable signal at
> night and early morning) and listen to it online at home
> every chance I get.
>
And this is the problem with WRLL. I live in Chicago, and when I go downtown, I cannot pick up the station. From the southwest side (around 95th and Western) it starts to fade out and is totally gone by the time I hit the loop. All I get is static. Now to say someone in Ohio can pick up a Chicago station better than someone who lives in Chicago is a definite problem. And there is no way I can listen to then at work (and don't say listen on the computer, not allowed where I work). I would like to listen to them, but I can't
I live in Columbus OH, have a button on my car radio
> preset to WRLL (generally poor, but listenable signal at
> night and early morning) and listen to it online at home
> every chance I get.
>
And this is the problem with WRLL. I live in Chicago, and when I go downtown, I cannot pick up the station. From the southwest side (around 95th and Western) it starts to fade out and is totally gone by the time I hit the loop. All I get is static. Now to say someone in Ohio can pick up a Chicago station better than someone who lives in Chicago is a definite problem. And there is no way I can listen to then at work (and don't say listen on the computer, not allowed where I work). I would like to listen to them, but I can't
B
bossmsx
Guest
> And this is the problem with WRLL. I live in Chicago, and
> when I go downtown, I cannot pick up the station.
So where is the signal for WRLL strongest in the market??
> when I go downtown, I cannot pick up the station.
So where is the signal for WRLL strongest in the market??
K
k9ez
Guest
> > And this is the problem with WRLL. I live in Chicago, and
>
> > when I go downtown, I cannot pick up the station.
>
> So where is the signal for WRLL strongest in the market??
>
Southside.
But really, what can you receive in the valley of all of those buildings?
>
> > when I go downtown, I cannot pick up the station.
>
> So where is the signal for WRLL strongest in the market??
>
Southside.
But really, what can you receive in the valley of all of those buildings?
M
My02AccordEx
Guest
> I live in Columbus OH, have a button on my car radio
> > preset to WRLL (generally poor, but listenable signal at
> > night and early morning) and listen to it online at home
> > every chance I get.
> >
>
> And this is the problem with WRLL. I live in Chicago, and
> when I go downtown, I cannot pick up the station. From the
> southwest side (around 95th and Western) it starts to fade
> out and is totally gone by the time I hit the loop. All I
> get is static. Now to say someone in Ohio can pick up a
> Chicago station better than someone who lives in Chicago is
> a definite problem. And there is no way I can listen to
> then at work (and don't say listen on the computer, not
> allowed where I work). I would like to listen to them, but
> I can't
>
I find it extremely hard to beleive that 1690 wrll starts to fade at 95th and western seeing the transmitter is only 2 miles away at 87th and kedzie. I think that 1000watts can make it out more then 2 miles, sounds like you need a new radio or car with a decent radio.
> > preset to WRLL (generally poor, but listenable signal at
> > night and early morning) and listen to it online at home
> > every chance I get.
> >
>
> And this is the problem with WRLL. I live in Chicago, and
> when I go downtown, I cannot pick up the station. From the
> southwest side (around 95th and Western) it starts to fade
> out and is totally gone by the time I hit the loop. All I
> get is static. Now to say someone in Ohio can pick up a
> Chicago station better than someone who lives in Chicago is
> a definite problem. And there is no way I can listen to
> then at work (and don't say listen on the computer, not
> allowed where I work). I would like to listen to them, but
> I can't
>
I find it extremely hard to beleive that 1690 wrll starts to fade at 95th and western seeing the transmitter is only 2 miles away at 87th and kedzie. I think that 1000watts can make it out more then 2 miles, sounds like you need a new radio or car with a decent radio.
> >
> But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound more
> like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the
> audience the station has attracted to date.
The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience size that can be put in jeopardy.
> But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound more
> like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the
> audience the station has attracted to date.
The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience size that can be put in jeopardy.
B
burbs
Guest
> > >
> > But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound
> more
> > like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the
> > audience the station has attracted to date.
>
> The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience
> size that can be put in jeopardy.
Hey David-
When's that flip to Air America that you predicted going to happen?
> > But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound
> more
> > like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the
> > audience the station has attracted to date.
>
> The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience
> size that can be put in jeopardy.
Hey David-
When's that flip to Air America that you predicted going to happen?
I wish, I wish, I wish. Good God. Then if they change to what YOU wish those loyal P1's will miss THEIR station. It's really quite simple. You can have everything you want by using the net, satellite, cable music, IPOD (which is as on demand as you can get) and more. Being tied into one media and expecting it to be everythign you want just isn't the way it is nor is it healthy to dwell on the way you wish it was when the way you want it exists in other forms. Your wishes have been granted you just have to use them.
I laugh at what radio chooses to put on it's air and question any stupid move made based on the reasons the geniuses give for making those changes (especially when they flip a format that BILLS LESS FOR YEARS).
Thanks to technology even us old timers get what we want because there's just so much choice that it makes radio an afterthought. I just "wish" radio wasn't given the chance to put itself in the (BLEEP) position it has. That's a shame but it's what allowed all these other forms of media distribution to flourish so... thanks radio, you helped pull your own plug.
> > Well at least you guys have a good station like that to
> > listen to for oldies, accented by the fact that there
> isn't
> > anything else left in Chicago for oldies. I am in
> Detroit,
> > & while I would be surprised if they got rid of the
> oldies
> > station here because it does do well, it's owned by
> Infinity
> > so it's sure possible.
> > WRLL actually comes in quite well In central Michigan at
> > times, so I am wondering what affect, if any, there will
> be
> > on the signal if they are transmitting in IBOC....
> >
> I wish WRLL would be more of a mainstream 50s-early 70s
> station instead of this oldies/standards mix they are
> currently doing. With WJMK gone, they could recreate their
> sound from 5 or 10 years ago. I don't see many former JMK
> listeners willing to sit through Sinatra & Pat Boone in
> order to hear Beach Boys, Four Seasons and other WJMK oldies
> artists. I know I don't want to hear the standards, but I'm
> not in the target demo for either WJMK or WRLL, but I do
> like 60s and 70s music.
>
I laugh at what radio chooses to put on it's air and question any stupid move made based on the reasons the geniuses give for making those changes (especially when they flip a format that BILLS LESS FOR YEARS).
Thanks to technology even us old timers get what we want because there's just so much choice that it makes radio an afterthought. I just "wish" radio wasn't given the chance to put itself in the (BLEEP) position it has. That's a shame but it's what allowed all these other forms of media distribution to flourish so... thanks radio, you helped pull your own plug.
> > Well at least you guys have a good station like that to
> > listen to for oldies, accented by the fact that there
> isn't
> > anything else left in Chicago for oldies. I am in
> Detroit,
> > & while I would be surprised if they got rid of the
> oldies
> > station here because it does do well, it's owned by
> Infinity
> > so it's sure possible.
> > WRLL actually comes in quite well In central Michigan at
> > times, so I am wondering what affect, if any, there will
> be
> > on the signal if they are transmitting in IBOC....
> >
> I wish WRLL would be more of a mainstream 50s-early 70s
> station instead of this oldies/standards mix they are
> currently doing. With WJMK gone, they could recreate their
> sound from 5 or 10 years ago. I don't see many former JMK
> listeners willing to sit through Sinatra & Pat Boone in
> order to hear Beach Boys, Four Seasons and other WJMK oldies
> artists. I know I don't want to hear the standards, but I'm
> not in the target demo for either WJMK or WRLL, but I do
> like 60s and 70s music.
>
It's obvious if it isn't a Hispanic station you point out its flaws because only Hispanic programming is king? It's a niche just like every other format on the dial. It's not about the ratings it's about the billing remember?
While they're not making a killing, it's an AM music station, and until it becomes a problem it's staying there.
> > >
> > But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound
> more
> > like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the
> > audience the station has attracted to date.
>
> The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience
> size that can be put in jeopardy.
>
While they're not making a killing, it's an AM music station, and until it becomes a problem it's staying there.
> > >
> > But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound
> more
> > like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the
> > audience the station has attracted to date.
>
> The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience
> size that can be put in jeopardy.
>
W
WYTZZ95FM
Guest
> > When's that flip to Air America that you predicted going
> to
> > happen?
>
> 850 beat them to it.
>
> -A
>
No Adam,
NewsWeb did not "beat" CC into the flip. There was no competition for the flip. It was trade speculation that CC would come to a "deal" with AAR for their programming. Which ended up being untrue. <P ID="signature">______________
"Z"
Music Coordinator/Technical Support</P>
> to
> > happen?
>
> 850 beat them to it.
>
> -A
>
No Adam,
NewsWeb did not "beat" CC into the flip. There was no competition for the flip. It was trade speculation that CC would come to a "deal" with AAR for their programming. Which ended up being untrue. <P ID="signature">______________
"Z"
Music Coordinator/Technical Support</P>
W
WYTZZ95FM
Guest
So using your analogy...WRTO is.....
> > >
> > But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound
> more
> > like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the
> > audience the station has attracted to date.
>
> The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience
> size that can be put in jeopardy.
>
(Actually WRLL is #32 after combining all simulcasts in the market, for Spr P2.)
WRTO is #36. Even LESS of an audience size that can be put in jeopardy. Format change time!!!!
Polish? Russian? Some Asian variant we can determine after calling out for unbiased research. Brokered? Maybe even some Anglo Oldies that can better the numbers than the format is pulling on there right now?
(shaking head)<P ID="signature">______________
"Z"
Music Coordinator/Technical Support</P>
> > >
> > But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound
> more
> > like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the
> > audience the station has attracted to date.
>
> The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience
> size that can be put in jeopardy.
>
(Actually WRLL is #32 after combining all simulcasts in the market, for Spr P2.)
WRTO is #36. Even LESS of an audience size that can be put in jeopardy. Format change time!!!!
Polish? Russian? Some Asian variant we can determine after calling out for unbiased research. Brokered? Maybe even some Anglo Oldies that can better the numbers than the format is pulling on there right now?
(shaking head)<P ID="signature">______________
"Z"
Music Coordinator/Technical Support</P>
> > >
> > But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound
> more
> > like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the
> > audience the station has attracted to date.
>
> The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience
> size that can be put in jeopardy.
>
Hey, David, #33 in Chicago would have to be, at least, #1 in Keokut, Iowa, wouldn't you say? You just can't phantom that WRLL isn't the local AAR affliate. With all your computer information and "expertise", you will attack this station's success in being able to stay on the air and, yet, you have been SO wrong.
At least in this case, we should be giving CC huge accolades for staying the course with WRLL.
> > But, changes such as you suggest would make WRLL sound
> more
> > like a "main stream" oldies station, jeopardizing the
> > audience the station has attracted to date.
>
> The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience
> size that can be put in jeopardy.
>
Hey, David, #33 in Chicago would have to be, at least, #1 in Keokut, Iowa, wouldn't you say? You just can't phantom that WRLL isn't the local AAR affliate. With all your computer information and "expertise", you will attack this station's success in being able to stay on the air and, yet, you have been SO wrong.
At least in this case, we should be giving CC huge accolades for staying the course with WRLL.
> Hey, David, #33 in Chicago would have to be, at least, #1 in
> Keokut, Iowa, wouldn't you say?
Were WRLL to have the same share in Keokuk, it would not be able to bill anything. In markets like Keokuk, there are a dozen or so Class C FMs that cover the market.
> You just can't phantom that
> WRLL isn't the local AAR affliate.
I really don't care if it is AA or Farsi. I don't even like AA, but will accept it would have made more sense on WRLL than on WAIT.
Everyone, including Feder, Inside Radio, RBR, All Access, etc. at one point reported it was likely CCU would take the station to talk. Whatever happened, we don't know. It's too bad, though.
> With all your computer
> information and "expertise", you will attack this station's
> success in being able to stay on the air and, yet, you have
> been SO wrong.
It's on the air because it essentially "floats" on the CCU cluster, and is the best AM facility CCU is going to get there.
>
> At least in this case, we should be giving CC huge accolades
> for staying the course with WRLL.
Why? There is no moral victory in preserving that format.
> Keokut, Iowa, wouldn't you say?
Were WRLL to have the same share in Keokuk, it would not be able to bill anything. In markets like Keokuk, there are a dozen or so Class C FMs that cover the market.
> You just can't phantom that
> WRLL isn't the local AAR affliate.
I really don't care if it is AA or Farsi. I don't even like AA, but will accept it would have made more sense on WRLL than on WAIT.
Everyone, including Feder, Inside Radio, RBR, All Access, etc. at one point reported it was likely CCU would take the station to talk. Whatever happened, we don't know. It's too bad, though.
> With all your computer
> information and "expertise", you will attack this station's
> success in being able to stay on the air and, yet, you have
> been SO wrong.
It's on the air because it essentially "floats" on the CCU cluster, and is the best AM facility CCU is going to get there.
>
> At least in this case, we should be giving CC huge accolades
> for staying the course with WRLL.
Why? There is no moral victory in preserving that format.
Re: So using your analogy...WRTO is.....
> > The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience
> > size that can be put in jeopardy.
No agency buys 33 or 32 deep.
> >
>
> (Actually WRLL is #32 after combining all simulcasts in the
> market, for Spr P2.)
>
> WRTO is #36. Even LESS of an audience size that can be put
> in jeopardy. Format change time!!!!
Actually, there is a different metric for Spanish staitons. WRTO has between a 5 and 6 share of Spanish dominant Hispanics. This is often what ad agencies look for... Arbitron does a Hispanic book, by the way.
Talk formats are often bought differently. In LA, neither news station is in the top 20, yet they bill in the top 10. In NY, the sports station seldom gets to #15, but bills in the top 4.
Music formats are a commodity... bought by pure numbers and demos. And WRLL, in sales demos, is not even in the top 40.
>
> Polish? Russian? Some Asian variant we can determine after
> calling out for unbiased research. Brokered? Maybe even some
> Anglo Oldies that can better the numbers than the format is
> pulling on there right now?
WRTO, also, is part of the national RadioCadena Univision. As such, it is a package of 11 AMs in the top 15 Hispanics markets and sold as a single station. WRLL can not do that. This is the way lower rated syndicated shows make money... they sell national coverage and tonage. It's a differnt concept, and does not apply to a 65+ music station.
> > The station is #33 in Chicago. That is hardly an audience
> > size that can be put in jeopardy.
No agency buys 33 or 32 deep.
> >
>
> (Actually WRLL is #32 after combining all simulcasts in the
> market, for Spr P2.)
>
> WRTO is #36. Even LESS of an audience size that can be put
> in jeopardy. Format change time!!!!
Actually, there is a different metric for Spanish staitons. WRTO has between a 5 and 6 share of Spanish dominant Hispanics. This is often what ad agencies look for... Arbitron does a Hispanic book, by the way.
Talk formats are often bought differently. In LA, neither news station is in the top 20, yet they bill in the top 10. In NY, the sports station seldom gets to #15, but bills in the top 4.
Music formats are a commodity... bought by pure numbers and demos. And WRLL, in sales demos, is not even in the top 40.
>
> Polish? Russian? Some Asian variant we can determine after
> calling out for unbiased research. Brokered? Maybe even some
> Anglo Oldies that can better the numbers than the format is
> pulling on there right now?
WRTO, also, is part of the national RadioCadena Univision. As such, it is a package of 11 AMs in the top 15 Hispanics markets and sold as a single station. WRLL can not do that. This is the way lower rated syndicated shows make money... they sell national coverage and tonage. It's a differnt concept, and does not apply to a 65+ music station.
- Status