1460 returns

Surprised that no one picked up on this but 1460 has returned to the air in a creative way. With all the discussion about KNTB, KBRO and KLDY it must have slipped by everyone. 1460 is definitely on the air under new ownership. Family stations has given Jim Dalke the license for 1460 as a write off. He's running 1KW from a temporary long wire antenna near the Microsoft campus off NE40th. I can't get the signal on Vashon. Has anyone listened?
Jim is known in the engineering community, and is owner/operator of his new station.

Good for Jim! He's a great guy and a terrific engineer.

It sounds like a fun project for a good engineer, rebuilding an old KARR. Drive it around a little then sell it.

Listened for a bit while I was in Bellevue. Religious program. Reading parts of the Bible.

Format change coming? (Pleasepleaseplease)?

Bongwater said:

Format change coming? (Pleasepleaseplease)?

Click to expand...

At least a music format would be fun.
The concept of "KARR tunes" too tempting to pass up.

Could the same thing be done for 1480 KNTB? Make it a simple directional. What if one owner swooped in and picked up all four stations KARR/KBRO/KNTB/KLDY, Could you set up a semi local/regional network. Brokered programming looks to be the easiest and most viable. Are the four together more likely to make money versus each operating/format on their own?

You mean like Country Gold Network, where a local (now formerly) rich guy and his wife in Fife picked up some dilapidated AM stations and programmed them with an odd mix of classic country? I'd say that idea has little chance of success.

I vote its time to permanently sign off all these neglected and pretty much useless AM stations to thin the band. Yes I know, everyone who participates in this board has a better idea that nobody else has tried yet, but unless you're going to put your money where your keyboard is, it's time for the amateurs to move aside and let those AM stations which still have a few resources and listeners left some more life with reduced restrictions and interference from a over-congested band.

Kelly A said:

You mean like Country Gold Network, where a local (now formerly) rich guy and his wife in Fife picked up some dilapidated AM stations and programmed them with an odd mix of classic country? I'd say that idea has little chance of success.

I vote its time to permanently sign off all these neglected and pretty much useless AM stations to thin the band. Yes I know, everyone who participates in this board has a better idea that nobody else has tried yet, but unless you're going to put your money where your keyboard is, it's time for the amateurs to move aside and let those AM stations which still have a few resources and listeners left some more life with reduced restrictions and interference from a over-congested band.

Click to expand...

I would argue FM is a FAR more overly congested band than AM. But in this day and age, it would probably be better to focus on the streaming end because that's what increasing in popularity.

Kelly A said:

I vote its time to permanently sign off all these neglected and pretty much useless AM stations to thin the band. Yes I know, everyone who participates in this board has a better idea that nobody else has tried yet, but unless you're going to put your money where your keyboard is, it's time for the amateurs to move aside and let those AM stations which still have a few resources and listeners left some more life with reduced restrictions and interference from a over-congested band.

Click to expand...

If we even did the analysis on "viable-only" AM stations, I wonder what the count would be .... and, if reasonably small, could we migrate to a 'one-band' scenario (whether FM assignment for AM, move viable AM & FM to new band, etc.). Considering how valuable spectrum is....and how much is marginally used, surprised this doesn't come up more often. On the other hand, suggesting that ANY licensee would have to "shut down" because they aren't viable enough is not something even the DUMBEST politician would take on. But for low-audience specialty formats, seems centralized streaming would be more effective distribution model than terrestrial broadcast.

Then on flip side...we aren't doing things in a hyper-local way where broadcast WOULD make sense...though LPFM doing it in some cases. A station that broadcasts to an island and there in case of geo-specific emergencies makes sense...traffic that specifically addresses a small corridor, etc. (e.g. Everett/Marysville ... Mt. Vernon/Bellingham ... NOT the "entire Puget Sound Traffic on the 4's" bull%%%%.

Given the significant increase in terrestrial interference to the AM band caused by consumer devices and electrical interference over the past 20 years, even 50kW formerly clear channel stations cover less than 70% of the their market population day and night. That means these 5kW and less stations, plus directional and class D stations cover less than 25% or their markets. And the noise is increasing. Where it used to take 5mVm for decent AM reception, now it take >10mVm. I maintain that all the stations mentioned here, don't adequately cover their city of license anyway, so why keep them around? Then consider the lousy ground conductivity of the Seattle area (especially on the East Side), and practical coverage of a station is even less.

I recently suggested it's time for the FCC to consider DAB broadcasting in the US, allowing existing viable AM stations willing to invest in a shared DAB transmission facility that operates on one low VHF TV channel selected for that market. Like DTV, the Commission would require all new radio receivers to have DAB capability. Then after 10 years, or when 75% of the market has DAB reception capability, stations would shut off their AM signal (whichever comes first). Just think, everyone would have much better quality and signal parity. The difference between stations would be based on just their programming.

I think it's more practical and cost effective to skip the fussing around with the stand-alone devices and move straight into the future and go streaming. Because your hands right now are on the future of radio.

The problem will be how it will be delivered. There is an idea still being talked about. And it just might work....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...27d3e0-698b-11e2-ada3-d86a4806d5ee_story.html

Bongwater said:

I think it's more practical and cost effective to skip the fussing around with the stand-alone devices and move straight into the future and go streaming. Because your hands right now are on the future of radio.

Click to expand...

From what I understand the four major hurdles for moving from OTA broadcasting to streaming are:

1. Cost to consumer. Granted this means more to some than others, but streaming via the Internet is basically a subscription model. A larger number of listeners than you might imagine, are used to free radio. Internet bandwidth costs money, even if baked into your smartphone plan. In spite of AM listeners aging-out, how many would be willing to pay or even understand the technical requirements to receive a streamed radio station in their home or car when used to it for free? That is one of the business limiting barriers that SiriusXM (satellite radio) ran into and still hasn't resolved.

2. Community-based radio stations get lost in the Internet radio streaming ocean. Thousands of well intentioned people starting streams all the time, only to fail because they don't have the marketing capital to stand out and retain listeners. Take a popular syndicated talk show currently on AM for example.. Why would a listener in Seattle go specifically to that local station' stream, when there are a sea of other choices available? Ultimately the local station loses, big time. For AM, estimates say plan on losing 80% of your existing audience.

3. Geographically controlling the stream. "Geo-Blocking" a stream to include only the coverage area of a market is possible, but it comes at an additional cost along with the stream. For various reasons, advertisers and agencies can't allow spots developed for local or regional stations to go outside that region.

4. SoundExchange, etc. Currently OTA radio stations are given consideration when it comes to licensing and royalties. Lose the OTA component, and costs go through the roof (by comparison). One of the many reasons that "popular" streaming services like Pandora haven't made a red cent of profit to date. Why do you think Pandora went out an bought a radio station?

BigA can undoubtedly add more. These are just examples off the top of my pointy head.

Pardon me for getting back to the original subject of this thread, but ...
In NE Seattle I barely received 1460 about three or four weeks ago. About the weakest thing on the dial in the daytime (on a good radio), so wondered about power/dummy load, etc.
Family Radio programming. Barely heard part of ID at the top of the 1 PM hour; if I hadn't known the calls, I wouldn't have been able to make them out.
Haven't heard it since, and I check at least once a day.
Much weaker than the 1420/1560 are here. Much weaker. Weaker than 1520 at night. I'm saying it was barely over the noise.
In contrast, KBRO was an easy copy when it was on the air.

I think they are just running to keep the license active. It's sounds like it's running on a temporary long wire antenna at 1kw. Depending how the wire is strung it could be directional towards you.

And whether someone has their laundry drying on the long wire too. Wet clothing de-tunes things a bit. The coverage goes from two blocks to 1.5. I hear it makes Jim's already stiff shirts that much more stiff when exposed to 1460KHz.

Kelly A said:

From what I understand the four major hurdles for moving from OTA broadcasting to streaming are:

1. Cost to consumer. Granted this means more to some than others, but streaming via the Internet is basically a subscription model. A larger number of listeners than you might imagine, are used to free radio. Internet bandwidth costs money, even if baked into your smartphone plan. In spite of AM listeners aging-out, how many would be willing to pay or even understand the technical requirements to receive a streamed radio station in their home or car when used to it for free? That is one of the business limiting barriers that SiriusXM (satellite radio) ran into and still hasn't resolved.

2. Community-based radio stations get lost in the Internet radio streaming ocean. Thousands of well intentioned people starting streams all the time, only to fail because they don't have the marketing capital to stand out and retain listeners. Take a popular syndicated talk show currently on AM for example.. Why would a listener in Seattle go specifically to that local station' stream, when there are a sea of other choices available? Ultimately the local station loses, big time. For AM, estimates say plan on losing 80% of your existing audience.

3. Geographically controlling the stream. "Geo-Blocking" a stream to include only the coverage area of a market is possible, but it comes at an additional cost along with the stream. For various reasons, advertisers and agencies can't allow spots developed for local or regional stations to go outside that region.

4. SoundExchange, etc. Currently OTA radio stations are given consideration when it comes to licensing and royalties. Lose the OTA component, and costs go through the roof (by comparison). One of the many reasons that "popular" streaming services like Pandora haven't made a red cent of profit to date. Why do you think Pandora went out an bought a radio station?

Click to expand...

And most of these issues have been the same ones unresolved since streaming began during the Clinton administration. Maybe there's a message there - if bright minds haven't yet found a way to make streaming as ubiquitous and profitable as OTA radio, it may be a problem that will never have a solution.

Rob Piotrowski said:

And most of these issues have been the same ones unresolved since streaming began during the Clinton administration. Maybe there's a message there - if bright minds haven't yet found a way to make streaming as ubiquitous and profitable as OTA radio, it may be a problem that will never have a solution.

Click to expand...

The other side of the "nothing has happened" is that broadcasters are notoriously slow in driving change.
If a new idea is on the table....the first reaction is "who ELSE is doing this?"
If an old idea is on the table....the reaction is "everyone ELSE is already doing this."

Very few big-picture thinkers.

Saw an interesting update on NW Broadcasters that some of you might find interesting:

"Shenandoah, IA-based Family Stations, Inc. has filed an application with the FCC to transfer ownership of Seattle market KARR AM 1460 Kirkland to local broadcast engineer James A. Dalke. Value of the transaction is listed as $3,000."

That's pretty funny. Jim bought himself the ultimate-challenged fixer-upper. Honestly, I hope it works out for him. Hey Crainebo(sp), maybe there is hope for your smooth jazz making a comeback! I can hear the liners now: "KARR 1460, smooth jazz for two square miles in Kirkland".