Taking on the hype

Are high power FMs really necessary or desirable anymore?

One clear reason/need for them is to serve mobile receivers (auto radios) over a wide geographic area. A legal Part 15 FM might cover a few acres, but a car would drive through that in such a short period of time that attempting to serve that (large) audience is impractical.
//

However, if you leave IBOC out for a moment, with the newer PLL synthesized transmitters are 3 adjacent channels needed to provide a clear signal?

When you throw IBOC in the answer is of course no, but that's a different topic.

If you could cut it down to a single adjacent channel, then there would be room for more LPFM licensed stations that could serve the public. But money talks, and LPFM walks. Even if it was 2 adjacent channels there would be room for many 10 watt (effective) channels for community radio to use. From the location where our school is, we could hit most of what we want with 2 watts (FM) or under on a simple low gain omni antenna.

The problem with research like this is that you have to get qualified people with qualified equipment. Those people and that equipment cost money. I can tell you that even if I fired up on any of the channels in my market, the other broadcasters would crush the signal from my Ramsey FM25A, I would estimate about 10 feet at most under those conditions.

The problem with high power FMs (50 to 100KW) is that they simply can't serve the public over such a large area. At one time, before the FM band became crowded, they may have served a purpose. As it is now, there is no lack of FM stations in the U.S. So in effect the high power stations monopolize frequencies that could be used for more lower power stations rather than few high powered ones. With the concentration of media control you can pick up essentially the same programming/music, etc. wherever you are without resorting to tuning to a high powered station. So from my point of view they no longer serve a purpose. As far as mobile receivers go satellite radio is becoming a preferred choice among listeners. One can't help wonder if all of the hoopla over satellite radio modulators isn't a fight against lost FM audiences rather than any concern about interference. In addition the result of large corporate ownership has stolen many local stations in smaller communities. These hijacked stations have applied for higher power only so they can locate their transmitters near a metropolitan area and still cover their city of license. This is a loss of a community station and due to the higher power, prevents other stations on the same or adjacent channels for some distance. It's quite funny to hear some of these stations do their legal ID. They emphasize the city they want to be associated with and underplay their city of license. They have no interest whatsoever in programming for or from their city of license. In our area a high power hijacked station covered the severe weather hitting the metropolitan area. Once it was past there they went back to their canned music programming. Too bad. Their town of license was hit by a tornado and lives were lost. They covered the story the next day.

In a recent broadcast magazine editorial on "ancient mode" radio, the author (an engineer with Saga Broadcasting), pointed out that having fewer AM radio stations with more "localized" signal coverage made sense for AM HD-R. Then, the nighttime propagation issues become a non-issue because the potential listening audience is all local. Broadcasters have harped on "localism" as being their primary strength for years. Frankly, its just a lot of rhetoric.

The big 3 broadcasting groups in the U.S. have no intention of making the listner number one on their list of priorities. They are, instead, real estate brokers, in the broadcast business and responsible to their stockholders only. The bottom line is the bottom line. Advertising sales figures in radio broadcasting have been steadily shrinking for over a decade. Advertisers have more choices to make today than 5 years ago, and technology has supplied them with entirely new and lucrative markets.

AM HD-R, at this point in history, is purely experimental. And without totally remaking the AM broacast band by increasing channel bandwidth, developing "anti-skywave groundwave" antenna systems, establishing new audio standards for transmitters and receivers, just to mention a few, the AM band will remain pretty much as it has been since 1985. The FCC's answer has been to spread out 10 to 50 kilowatt stations across the landscape in hopes of "weeding out" the local mom-'n-pop "noise makers". You will notice all of the stations in the expanded band above 1600 KHz were licensed at 10 kilowatts.

Part 15 stations are considered by these licensed AM stations as background noise, no matter how many people they serve or where they are located. And after some personal research, many of the licensed AM stations have not maintained their antenna systems and are broadcasting signals substantially below levels expected in license documents filed with the FCC.

This is precisely why, community broadcasters should make some political noise with lawmakers and policymakers. The study to differentiate between over powered "fm mods" and Part 15 AM & FM community broadcasting is the correct approach.

IBOC HD-R on FM works well with very few if any changes to the FM broadcast band. The same cannot be said for the AM broadcast band. Which is the exact reason the FCC will NOT authorize AM HD-R (IBOC) to be broadcast at night.

Additionally, an AM broadcaster gets a single HD-R channel per/license. His FM counterpart gets several potential channels for "multicasting".

So, why not propose a new low power (translated 1-10 watts to the antenna system) AM community broadcast service. Signals would propagate 10-20 miles supplying rural communities service they can't currently get due to the large high power FM stations. The upcoming FM frequency auction (March 2007) is offering construction permits for as little as $1500.00. Most of the low priced allocations have been on the auction block for as long as two years, primarily because the signals have a population density within the primary signal service area of hundreds instead of thousands. Low power AM's make more sense for these areas. The AM stations just need enough power to overcome the environmental noise level present at local receivers. This is the very same issue Part 15 AM has been dealing with for decades.

I hope you can make heads or tails of all this. I have been involved with building new broadcast stations for over 35 years. And oddly enough, the issues and the players have changed very little in all that time.

Marshall Johnson, Sr.
Senior Pastor, President
Rhema Christian Fellowship, Inc.

Rhema Radio - The Word In Worship
AM 1660 - FM 93.5
http://www.rhemaradio.org

Broadcasters have harped on "localism" as being their primary strength for years. Frankly, its just a lot of rhetoric.

The big 3 broadcasting groups in the U.S. have no intention of making the listner number one on their list of priorities. They are, instead, real estate brokers, in the broadcast business and responsible to their stockholders only. The bottom line is the bottom line. Advertising sales figures in radio broadcasting have been steadily shrinking for over a decade. Advertisers have more choices to make today than 5 years ago, and technology has supplied them with entirely new and lucrative markets.

I used to work for Cheap Channel TV, you couldn't more correct! The bottom line is the only thing that matters!

One can't help wonder if all of the hoopla over satellite radio modulators isn't a fight against lost FM audiences rather than any concern about interference.

Of course that's the reason. Why do you think THEY killed the micro FM class? They wanted to limit competition, and use the "extra" channels
for digital. Now they get 3 channels for the price of one.

THEY would be more than happy to send the audio content all out of one big centrally located building with as few humans as is possible, just like satellite radio.

community broadcasters should make some political noise with lawmakers and policymakers. The study to differentiate between over powered "fm mods" and Part 15 AM & FM community broadcasting is the correct approach.
...
So, why not propose a new low power (translated 1-10 watts to the antenna system) AM community broadcast service. Signals would propagate 10-20 miles supplying rural communities service they can't currently get due to the large high power FM stations....The AM stations just need enough power to overcome the environmental noise level present at local receivers. This is the very same issue Part 15 AM has been dealing with for decades.

I can only second Marshalls comments. He pretty much hit the nail on the head.

I personally have no interest in FM. Let the commercial operators have it and give us back the AM band.

Community radio is where it's at, I don't care about the money, it's about the one word that the big broadcasters have forgotten: C O M M U N I T Y

There is a proposed low-power AM proposal working its way through the FCC right now. A large number of current and potential low-power broadcasters (including myself!) are either sponsors or signatories to the proposal.

The proposal is to allow 10 watt operation somewhat similar to TIS. The specifications are not totally taken from TIS, modelled after them since the FCC is already familiar with TIS. initial operation is prorposed in the X-band (1610 to 1700). There's more information at www.recnet.com on the proposal.

I agree with other posters that the commercial interests can have FM. Medium wave and AM are perfect for community radio stations. Our British cousins have low-power (1 watt) AM community stations. Why shouldn't we?

Frank
www.easthillradio.com

I saw that! I *hope* that becomes a fact.

We'll be moving to Missouri in a few years and a couple watts would be perfect to cover our little town there.

Marshall,

Excellent post and I couldn't agree more.

My Part 15 stayed on the air through the hurricanes and
storms in Florida in 2004 and 2005. During Hurricane Frances, at some points, my station was the only AM on the dial. The
big boys lost power, STLs, etc. There I was, live on the air, giving out Red Cross shelter info, storm updates and such.

I'm a signatory, along with Frank of East Hill Radio and some others, for the 10-watt proposal modeled somewhat like TIS stations. I'd love to see it happen.

Alan

I agree that low power community stations would better serve the public. As it stands FM is extremely limited for part 15 use however I still feel we have to stand up to misinformation about part 15 interference. Sure we can say "forget about FM". Then what? Wait until similar studies are released about AM? Whether you have any intention of ever using FM at all we should take steps to correct the information in the "studies" by the NAB and NPR. The study I am conducting covers both AM and FM part 15 operations. It is important that we build credibility which we can accomplish by legal operations and releasing accurate information about part 15's role in local broadcasting. Thank you to those of you who have emailed and are taking part. I'd like to see more participation. You do not have to reveal details of your operation or, for that matter, your town, city, or state. Our radio non-profit corporation is paying for the costs and no one will ask you for a donation either. Email us to take part: [email protected]

When you start to think about it, these part 15 AM rigs are great for center of disaster broadcasting... What else can you use that runs as long as these will on a set of D cells! How long would it go on a fully charged car battery? Days maybe?

Hello all,

I oppose an increase in allowable power for community AM broadcasting above part 15 rules as we now know them, and as I ponder the question there is a recurring negative thought which leads me to this conclusion.

Suppose that AM is allowed at 1 watt. This should enable a microcaster to cover a few miles radius with a reliable signal. 10 watts, based on TIS experience, would allow a radius of 5 to 20 miles.

OK... Bob goes on the air and through good efforts achieves a loyal audience. Jack goes on the air and interferes with Bob. Bill goes on the air and interferes with Bob and Jack who are now interfering with him. Jim tries to find a clear frequency but there are none.

Presently, part 15 AM is limited to the point where mutual interference is unlikely and folks such as I can find a quiet frequency, operate, and not bother anyone. But in a higher power scenairo one must ask how do we deal with the "rights" to a frequency in an area?

I would present that a rational approach is that someone or some elected or appointed body would be created to mediate interference by assigning operating frequencies in each area. What form would this take? Voluntary? Not without authority, most likely from the FCC directly or indirectly. It appears that such a low power AM service would need licensing and we would be right back where we are with competition for available channels. The "little people" will be left out once again.

I have experience with amateur radio repeater coordination (which is voluntary but is backed by FCC authority) and have been told more than once when I and others wanted to establish a repeater that "no frequencies are available". Why would I not expect the same to happen concerning microbroadcasting on AM?

There is limited spectrum available and who is going to decide the allocations and based on what?

Neil

Neil,

I do not disagree wqith your observations with regard to repeater coordination, but that being said, it works more than it doesn't.

WDCX AM1610 Part 15
John
Owner-Operator-Chief Engineer-Program Manager

Having been chairman of the Oregon Region Relay Council frequency corrdinating committee for a number of years, I am well aware of the problems created by limited spectrum and overheated demand. However, If users and those who make application for a repeater frequency would do their own interference studies and document the results with test data, the frequency coordinating bodies could better serve the "liitle guy".

Over communicating accurate data on frequency coordination applications (establishing a need such as emergency communications) can give decision makers more choices. Why not ask them to suggest a frequency? Maybe, do your homework and find a coordination that is off the air and is only a "paper" coordination. Paper or fake or unused coordinations happen all the time all across the country. Don't trust a database or a frequency guide to be accurate. Do the research.

We no longer live a world where you can shoot from the hip and expect everybody to nod in agreement. Understanding where your coordination request sets in the whole scheme of things is very important. And supplying the needed supplemental exhibits to the application is essential. I understand, very well, the feelings Neil writes about re: his inability to secure a repeater pair for his use. I have been there and done that. But, I got involved with the frequency coordination body and began by gaining consensus on the rewriting of policy. Then I was given the reigns of the group for 2 years and finally coordinated my own repeater pair with the blessing of the amateur radio community.

Just because someone has had a bad experience with self regulation doesn't mean we should throw the baby out with the bath water. When we give up too soon on our dreams and aspirations, we get what we gave. And it's usually just short of success. A read of the book by Napolean Hill, "Think and Grow Rich" seems in order here. Enough of the rant.

If the commercial AM service continues on its current course, in the hands of the NAB and NPR, the FCC will, sooner or later, consider the service off it's radar screen. This lack of attention by regulators and policy makers will allow the AM band to become more screwed up than it is now. An example: When the FCC allowed all Class D AM stations to stay at one kilowatt afterdark, the interference be damned, the die was cast. Listen at night, even in the "X" band. The skywave interference, the new band plan was supposed to solve is horrendous. Without sufficient power to the transmit antenna to produce a strong enough signal to overcome environmental noise and other AM broadcast signals, the band will eventually become unusable. And the only organization authorized, by law, to make those kind of policy decisions is the FCC, as mandated by Congress.

Neil presents only one scenario and it is accurate as far as it goes. But eventually, to preserve the usuability of the band and provide an AM broadcast service for the people of rural and local metro communities, the FCC will need to totally rethink and rewrite the regulations and band plan. Like it or not, the FCC has the responsibility to preserve and protect the public trust and usability of radio spectrum. It has been that way since 1934. And the vehicle of choice, in the face of overheated demand (like it or not), is licensing. And for Part 15 broadcasters to be taken seriously by regulators, joining the tradition of spectrum licensing is inevitable.

Marshall Johnson, Sr.
Senior Pastor, President
Rhema Christian Fellowship, Inc.

Rhema Radio - The Word In Worship
AM 1660 - FM 93.5
http://www.rhemaradio.org