iNiquity may have found a way !

[700WLW]

"FM Translators for AM Stations?", August 21, 2006

"Commentators on the NAB petition have said they support it as long as Class 1 50 kW stations are excluded. Keep in mind that the Class 1 stations operating at 50 kW do not need translators. What they need is the ability to run digital at night. That might be one reason not one 50kw station has filed a comment on the NAB petition as of this writing. The NAB petition looks like a win win and you would be surprised how fast it could get thru the FCC if all hands are pulling the same way."

http://www.broadcastlawblog.com/archives/fm-translators-fm-translators-for-am-stations.html

It's probably over, and Canada will surely follow suit - glad, that I only spent $10/each on my Sony's ! Is there anything left on SW, anymore, or is DRM going to destroy that, too ! The only hope, is that the public will continue not to buy into this farce !

 

[Tom Wells]

"FM Translators for AM Stations?", August 21, 2006

" The NAB petition looks like a win win and you would be surprised how fast it could get thru the FCC if all hands are pulling the same way."

The only hope, is that the public will continue not to buy into this farce !

If all hands are pulling the same way..... I am sure that they are not, but this is the language of a done deal.
ANY time I hear win-win suggested, I know there is skullduggery afoot.

What they mean is, "If those opposed can be effectively circumvented or discounted, the FCC hasn't any engineers to know better."
The NAB knows as much about RF as does the NBA. Approval and adoption of a standard does not change physics.
Besides, once it's on FM, it's NOT AM, and many areas have NO available frequencies on the FM for translators.

The FCC is chartered to manage a resource for the public, not rubber-stamp approvals on business plans.

 

[Chuck]

Besides, once it's on FM, it's NOT AM, and many areas have NO available frequencies on the FM for translators.

That’s the large “elephant fly” in the ointment. Not that long ago, NAB said "there is no room at the inn" for LPFM's. At the time, they were wrong, at least for many locations. There was room in some places.

Times have changed though, and there is even less available spectrum. Now, there are thousands of new translators on the air as well as about 900 LPFMs. There is also a huge backlog of translator applications still to be dealt with. There are literally thousands. Now NAB wants to add translators for AM's. That is interesting physics, unless they plan to locate most of them in Wyoming and Montana.

To be honest, I like the idea of FM translators for small AM broadcasters because I'm a big fan of local radio. But I have no idea where they intend to put them on the FM band, unless somebody plans to expand it. Frankly, I hope they do. You’ve already heard me go on and on about annexing TV Channels 5 & 6. That would solve a lot of problems. With less clutter on AM, the flamethrowers could fire up IBOC (or whatever) at night, the little stations would have a new home that would serve their city of license better. Those who aspire to become new broadcasters might have some place to go. There are a lot of plusses to this.

If it happens, I see the advent of the "software defined radio" which would be capable of decoding a variety of broadcasting schemes, including IBOC, DRM, FMExtra, C-Quam, standard analog stereo and analog mono, as well as new systems we haven't even thought of. Maybe even wireless Internet.

Ibiquity won't like that, but realistically, that is probably what it will take to make digital radio really work in the US, and probably elsewhere as well. A true "universal radio" would have the advantage of being a world wide contender, which could make manufacturing costs much more reasonable. Digital radio certainly has a future. I’d just like to do it right.

 

[700WLW]

"FM Translators for AM Stations?", August 21, 2006

" The NAB petition looks like a win win and you would be surprised how fast it could get thru the FCC if all hands are pulling the same way."

The only hope, is that the public will continue not to buy into this farce !

If all hands are pulling the same way..... I am sure that they are not, but this is the language of a done deal.
ANY time I hear win-win suggested, I know there is skullduggery afoot.

What they mean is, "If those opposed can be effectively circumvented or discounted, the FCC hasn't any engineers to know better."
The NAB knows as much about RF as does the NBA. Approval and adoption of a standard does not change physics.
Besides, once it's on FM, it's NOT AM, and many areas have NO available frequencies on the FM for translators.

The FCC is chartered to manage a resource for the public, not rubber-stamp approvals on business plans.

Unfortunately, I would have to agree with Tom and the second lawyer, that this is eventually going to be a done-deal. With all of these characters being in-bed-together, and now, with the low-power AMs having no recourse to challenge nighttime AM IBOC, it will eventually happen. The only question - where are they going to allocate all of the FM translators; here in Maryland, there is no room, since every FM slot is being used. Maybe, there is a bit of hope...

 

[700WLW]

To be honest, I like the idea of FM translators for small AM broadcasters because I'm a big fan of local radio. But I have no idea where they intend to put them on the FM band, unless somebody plans to expand it. Frankly, I hope they do. You’ve already heard me go on and on about annexing TV Channels 5 & 6. That would solve a lot of problems. With less clutter on AM, the flamethrowers could fire up IBOC (or whatever) at night, the little stations would have a new home that would serve their city of license better. Those who aspire to become new broadcasters might have some place to go. There are a lot of plusses to this.

If it happens, I see the advent of the "software defined radio" which would be capable of decoding a variety of broadcasting schemes, including IBOC, DRM, FMExtra, C-Quam, standard analog stereo and analog mono, as well as new systems we haven't even thought of. Maybe even wireless Internet.

Ibiquity won't like that, but realistically, that is probably what it will take to make digital radio really work in the US, and probably elsewhere as well. A true "universal radio" would have the advantage of being a world wide contender, which could make manufacturing costs much more reasonable. Digital radio certainly has a future. I’d just like to do it right.

These are some excellent ideas, but as with the problem with IBOC, you have to convince the general public to buy new receivers, when they are generally apathetic towards terrestrial radio.

 

[Chuck]

These are some excellent ideas, but as with the problem with IBOC, you have to convince the general public to buy new receivers, when they are generally apathetic towards terrestrial radio.

Any conversion to digital broadcasting will require buying a new radio. If you can do digital radio without ruining what you already have, then on balance converting is a good idea. It seems that in many cases, but probably not all, IBOC works on FM. It won't do small stations, translators or LPFM stations much good. For AM, I have serious doubts that it can be worked out to everyone's satisfaction.

If there is some good reason to buy a new digital radio, eventually most people will own one. It would be nice to make that a gradual change that doesn't render your old radio totally useless.

 

[700WLW]

If there is some good reason to buy a new digital radio, eventually most people will own one. It would be nice to make that a gradual change that doesn't render your old radio totally useless.

Actually, quite the opposite - that has certainly been the case in Canada, where as here, sales of digital radios has been anemic; the only reason the UK has sold 1.5 million, over a number of years, is that they are threatening to shut off analog, but that still is not many for a country of 45 million (and, I read most of these customers are older, not the younger generation). Good luck to terrestrial radio, once the baby-boomers start dying off.

 

[Chuck]

If there is some good reason to buy a new digital radio, eventually most people will own one. It would be nice to make that a gradual change that doesn't render your old radio totally useless.

Actually, quite the opposite - that has certainly been the case in Canada, where as here, sales of digital radios has been anemic; the only reason the UK has sold 1.5 million, over a number of years, is that they are threatening to shut off analog, but that still is not many for a country of 45 million (and, I read most of these customers are older, not the younger generation). Good luck to terrestrial radio, once the baby-boomers start dying off.

If I'm not mistaken, Canada's digital radio effort has been nothing more than duplicating existing formats that you can receive with the radio you already own. From a consumer's point of view, there is no incentive to buy the radios.

It does seem to be true that today’s kids are not very influenced by radio. Things are not like they were when we were kids living in "Pleasantville." They are too busy with all the other electronic distractions and traditional radio does not seem to be one of them.