Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hi, ye, I just think radio exects ignore what people really want, and instead follow 'templates'...
Like how reality tv has changed tv...reality am radio...could change radio...
I'm not talking about stale radio auctions or call in shows, I'm talking allowing people to air their own 'train wrecks' live...
If I had capitol, I'd proove that that could work...but unfortunatly, without capital, your ideas really don't go anywhere...
Advertisers control radio with their advertising dollars. Want to hear polka on the radio? Call up a station's ad director and tell them you'll buy whatever amount of advertising they want to get a polka show playing in the afternoon. While I would love to see public access style programing, as long as advertising dollars are paying the bills, they don't care what people want to hear, but what they want people to hear.
I think that's one reason progressive left wing radio hasn't taken off quite like right leaning talk has. The left often sees commercialism as a bad thing, using terms like "selling out" to define commercial success. On the other hand, conservative radio has taken a NASCAR style appoach to promote brand loyalty. The biggest talkers have exclusive ad deals because advertisers know that a Sean Hannity fan is more likely to buy an expensive adjustable bed because Sean sleeps on it or buy gold coins because Glen Beck tells them thats what the government doesn't want them to do. I don't know that he was the originator but Paul Harvey was the king. to this day, my father in law still drinks Welchs' grape juice right by his Eden Pure heater.
There are actually fewer AM stations than there once were.
Most in my age cohort (I am 24) do not have any use for AM radio, and only listen to FM, if they listen to radio at all.
AM has become the ghetto of 1) conservative talk stations, 2) sports radio stations, 3) "Music of Your Life", nostalgia, and similar-format stations, and 4) ethnic stations. The first two still garner large audiences, though a lot of them are transitioning to FM, whether through translators, full-power simulcast stations a la WSB, or simply abandoning AM to go full-time on FM (if they even had AM before). The third will live only as long as its listeners, and the fourth is viable, though not so much for stations competing with FM stations of the same format.
The reason for the rapid waning of AM does not lie in its limited fidelity. AM provides enough clarity for talk and sports radio stations. Rather, I believe it lies in 1) noise, 2) interference, and 3) subpar receivers. The amount of noise in most locations has increased exponentially in recent years with the introduction of all kinds of electronic gadgets which produce spurious emissions: plasma TVs, laptop computers, flourescent lights and dimmers, etc. This makes listening to even full-power AM stations a chore, if not impossible, in many locations. The second is that even in the few quiet locations left, AM is plagued with interference at night. Our locals on AM (10 miles away) may be fine during the day, but not many people want to listen to ESPN Radio 560 with WIND Chicago in the background or WGEE 970 or KQDS 1490 with who-knows-how-many-stations fighting with it at night. In addition, frequencies once deemed "clear channels" now have many other stations operating on them 24 hours a day, limiting their listenership. HD Radio has only aggravated this pitiful situation, with the entire range of 1010 to 1140 filled with full-power station set on mutually-aided destruction of one another with their AM sidebands. 1020 KDKA, 1030 WBZ, 1040 WHO, 1070 WTSO, 1100 WTAM, 1110 KFAB, 1120 KMOX, 1130 KFAN were all perfectly audible on a car radio during the nighttime hours (with the possible exception of WBZ) before the FCC gave permission to AM stations to emit their HD radio sidebands at night. The third reason largely follows up from the other two, with the biggest culprit being car radios.
Cheap DSP technology exists today to filter out some of the noise, but radiomakers aren't using it. They probably see more money in XM radio and iPod connectivity.
I live in Tennesse and I listen to my former AM radio station, 630 WMAL (Washington DC area), on my computer. I'm listening to Rush Limbaugh right now on the WMAL website. When I lived in Maryland I listened to the station in my car and in my opinion, it had the strongest signal on the AM dial.
There are actually fewer AM stations than there once were.
Most in my age cohort (I am 24) do not have any use for AM radio, and only listen to FM, if they listen to radio at all.
AM has become the ghetto of 1) conservative talk stations, 2) sports radio stations, 3) "Music of Your Life", nostalgia, and similar-format stations, and 4) ethnic stations. The first two still garner large audiences, though a lot of them are transitioning to FM, whether through translators, full-power simulcast stations a la WSB, or simply abandoning AM to go full-time on FM (if they even had AM before). The third will live only as long as its listeners, and the fourth is viable, though not so much for stations competing with FM stations of the same format.
The reason for the rapid waning of AM does not lie in its limited fidelity. AM provides enough clarity for talk and sports radio stations. Rather, I believe it lies in 1) noise, 2) interference, and 3) subpar receivers. The amount of noise in most locations has increased exponentially in recent years with the introduction of all kinds of electronic gadgets which produce spurious emissions: plasma TVs, laptop computers, flourescent lights and dimmers, etc. This makes listening to even full-power AM stations a chore, if not impossible, in many locations. The second is that even in the few quiet locations left, AM is plagued with interference at night. Our locals on AM (10 miles away) may be fine during the day, but not many people want to listen to ESPN Radio 560 with WIND Chicago in the background or WGEE 970 or KQDS 1490 with who-knows-how-many-stations fighting with it at night. In addition, frequencies once deemed "clear channels" now have many other stations operating on them 24 hours a day, limiting their listenership. HD Radio has only aggravated this pitiful situation, with the entire range of 1010 to 1140 filled with full-power station set on mutually-aided destruction of one another with their AM sidebands. 1020 KDKA, 1030 WBZ, 1040 WHO, 1070 WTSO, 1100 WTAM, 1110 KFAB, 1120 KMOX, 1130 KFAN were all perfectly audible on a car radio during the nighttime hours (with the possible exception of WBZ) before the FCC gave permission to AM stations to emit their HD radio sidebands at night. The third reason largely follows up from the other two, with the biggest culprit being car radios.
Cheap DSP technology exists today to filter out some of the noise, but radiomakers aren't using it. They probably see more money in XM radio and iPod connectivity.
I can tell you just got out of college...you wrote that like a thesis...a very well laid out report on the state of AM...
(although I could detect a bit of political bias in there)
But all and all...that was excellent...I learned a lot from reading it...
There are actually fewer AM stations than there once were.
Most in my age cohort (I am 24) do not have any use for AM radio, and only listen to FM, if they listen to radio at all.
AM has become the ghetto of 1) conservative talk stations, 2) sports radio stations, 3) "Music of Your Life", nostalgia, and similar-format stations, and 4) ethnic stations. The first two still garner large audiences, though a lot of them are transitioning to FM, whether through translators, full-power simulcast stations a la WSB, or simply abandoning AM to go full-time on FM (if they even had AM before). The third will live only as long as its listeners, and the fourth is viable, though not so much for stations competing with FM stations of the same format.
The reason for the rapid waning of AM does not lie in its limited fidelity. AM provides enough clarity for talk and sports radio stations. Rather, I believe it lies in 1) noise, 2) interference, and 3) subpar receivers. The amount of noise in most locations has increased exponentially in recent years with the introduction of all kinds of electronic gadgets which produce spurious emissions: plasma TVs, laptop computers, flourescent lights and dimmers, etc. This makes listening to even full-power AM stations a chore, if not impossible, in many locations. The second is that even in the few quiet locations left, AM is plagued with interference at night. Our locals on AM (10 miles away) may be fine during the day, but not many people want to listen to ESPN Radio 560 with WIND Chicago in the background or WGEE 970 or KQDS 1490 with who-knows-how-many-stations fighting with it at night. In addition, frequencies once deemed "clear channels" now have many other stations operating on them 24 hours a day, limiting their listenership. HD Radio has only aggravated this pitiful situation, with the entire range of 1010 to 1140 filled with full-power station set on mutually-aided destruction of one another with their AM sidebands. 1020 KDKA, 1030 WBZ, 1040 WHO, 1070 WTSO, 1100 WTAM, 1110 KFAB, 1120 KMOX, 1130 KFAN were all perfectly audible on a car radio during the nighttime hours (with the possible exception of WBZ) before the FCC gave permission to AM stations to emit their HD radio sidebands at night. The third reason largely follows up from the other two, with the biggest culprit being car radios.
Cheap DSP technology exists today to filter out some of the noise, but radiomakers aren't using it. They probably see more money in XM radio and iPod connectivity.
Is it my imagination, or does the quality of the signal of AM radio sound different these days? If AM stations are focusing on talk and sports, a sharp signal probably doesn't matter so much.
If you want to listen to music, FM is the place to be. It just sounds better.
News and talk tend to appeal to an older audience, and many of them grew up with nothing but AM radio. It seems like FM passed up AM in the Seventies or maybe the Eighties, depending on where you are.
If you check the ratings for most markets the AM stations with a Talk or News format are at the lead for most age groups above 24. Next is the one or several FM stations with a country format, with the exception of the largest cities, and even a few of those have country stations with high ratings.
I don't think talk radio is going to leave AM. I haven't seen any trend of talk radio moving to FM here on the West Coast, although some of the smaller markets simulcast a few of the overnight talk programs because it is makes a few $$ and keeps listeners thinking about the little station in town.
Growth of Spanish programming appears to stop around 40-50%. You can drive up and down California and you will only hear about half of the stations in Spanish on AM or FM. What I think is odd is the astronomical growth of religious stations on the West Coast. I don't know if this is a trend in other parts of the country, but it is particularly odd here because this region is relatively agnostic,and even atheist to a point. I don't know what is driving it. I've read several complaints about other organizations claiming religious broadcasters are being favoured by the FCC.
If you check the ratings for most markets the AM stations with a Talk or News format are at the lead for most age groups above 24. Next is the one or several FM stations with a country format, with the exception of the largest cities, and even a few of those have country stations with high ratings.
I don't think talk radio is going to leave AM. I haven't seen any trend of talk radio moving to FM here on the West Coast, although some of the smaller markets simulcast a few of the overnight talk programs because it is makes a few $$ and keeps listeners thinking about the little station in town.
Growth of Spanish programming appears to stop around 40-50%. You can drive up and down California and you will only hear about half of the stations in Spanish on AM or FM. What I think is odd is the astronomical growth of religious stations on the West Coast. I don't know if this is a trend in other parts of the country, but it is particularly odd here because this region is relatively agnostic,and even atheist to a point. I don't know what is driving it. I've read several complaints about other organizations claiming religious broadcasters are being favoured by the FCC.
The trend of AM news-talk stations moving or simulcasting on FM hasn't hit California yet (although KMJ has a partial simulcast in Fresno) but it's increasing throught the Western U.S including markets such as Seattle, Salt Lake, Phoenix, and Las Vegas. It's also becoming more common throughout the U.S. WSB/Atlanta just got a huge ratings boost after simulcating on FM, the demographics got younger as well.
Is it my imagination, or does the quality of the signal of AM radio sound different these days? If AM stations are focusing on talk and sports, a sharp signal probably doesn't matter so much.
If you want to listen to music, FM is the place to be. It just sounds better.
News and talk tend to appeal to an older audience, and many of them grew up with nothing but AM radio. It seems like FM passed up AM in the Seventies or maybe the Eighties, depending on where you are.
The sound quality of AM radio is largely dependent on the receiver, perhaps even more so than FM. It can sound awful, as it does on many cheap radios that include AM as an oversight, or it can sound very nice and warm (but not with the clarity of FM) on a nicer tuner, e.g. an old "tube" radio.
If anybody remembers, there was an effort in the 1980's to make AM broadcasts stereophonic. The FCC never set a standard, several systems competed - and all lost. Beginning in 2005 or so, many AM stations began digital "in-band on-channel" (some would say "in-band adjacent-channel") broadcasts using the de facto HD Radio system from Ibiquity. I have heard various HD broadcasts on my XDR-F1HD from distant stations skipping in, and although they sound excellent, the system is impractical as the same factors that plague analog AM broadcasts devastate digital AM radio, causing drop-outs rather than fading, noise, or cross-channel interference. Even a station like WHO or WHAS cannot reliably cover its local listening area in digital. In addition, digital AM radio at night has destroyed reception (particularly when in a car) of many sky wave stations. For example, I used to occasionally tune into WTAM 1110 Cleveland or KFAB 1100 Omaha at night when driving when nothing interesting was on the FM band, but after the FCC allowed digital AM broadcasting at night in 2007, these stations became all but impossible to listen to on most nights, as KFAB's digital transmission partly takes place on 1110, and WTAM's on 1100, leading to the "MAD" phenomenon described in my last post.
The sound quality of AM radio is largely dependent on the receiver, perhaps even more so than FM. It can sound awful, as it does on many cheap radios that include AM as an oversight, or it can sound very nice and warm (but not with the clarity of FM) on a nicer tuner, e.g. an old "tube" radio.
If anybody remembers, there was an effort in the 1980's to make AM broadcasts stereophonic. The FCC never set a standard, several systems competed - and all lost. Beginning in 2005 or so, many AM stations began digital "in-band on-channel" (some would say "in-band adjacent-channel") broadcasts using the de facto HD Radio system from Ibiquity. I have heard various HD broadcasts on my XDR-F1HD from distant stations skipping in, and although they sound excellent, the system is impractical as the same factors that plague analog AM broadcasts devastate digital AM radio, causing drop-outs rather than fading, noise, or cross-channel interference. Even a station like WHO or WHAS cannot reliably cover its local listening area in digital. In addition, digital AM radio at night has destroyed reception (particularly when in a car) of many sky wave stations. For example, I used to occasionally tune into WTAM 1110 Cleveland or KFAB 1100 Omaha at night when driving when nothing interesting was on the FM band, but after the FCC allowed digital AM broadcasting at night in 2007, these stations became all but impossible to listen to on most nights, as KFAB's digital transmission partly takes place on 1110, and WTAM's on 1100, leading to the "MAD" phenomenon described in my last post.
All those things fail on AM because the listeners don't really care about HiFi audio quality. Broadcasters have pushed for increased audio quality because they are in denial as to why they are losing listeners, which is because their programming is mind-numbingly boring, and the only reason they have any ratings at all is because there isn't much else to listen to other than syndicated junk. Do you really think many people care to hear Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck screaming in stereo?
I don't have a problem with the audio quality of analog broadcasts. I do think digital has it's place, however. I think a better idea would be to have spectrum set aside for digital broadcasts. Since most of the VHF stations have moved to UHF due to the transition to digital television a portion of that spectrum could be used. Since TV channel 6 is immediately below the FM band it would make sense. Many other countries use what is our lower VHF TV spectrum for FM broadcasts. Eastern Europe uses 65.8-74 Mhz and Japan has a slightly different FM band, which is 76-90 Mhz. Using the channel 6 allocation for digital broadcasting just seems like it would make a lot of sense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
