This link is to a collection of short articles pertaining to broadcasting. One in particular, "Can AM Be Saved? Should AM Be Saved?", caught my attention.
The author states some of the technical problems with AM and proposes an expanded VHF band to where these stations can be moved. One of his proposals caught my attention "Create an allocation scheme to ensure all existing AM stations would have priority and a level playing field, being treated equally in the new-band." So if one already is in the "good ole boy club" they will benefit but new players can just go XXXXXXXX?
Blaming the known technical problems of AM, noise, low fidelity, poor receivers, and crowded band conditions for the decline in AM ratings may have merit but the author omits what I believe is the prime factor which is lack of programming which attracts listeners.
When you read the article, take note of the remark about a station run by high school students and another about what to do with the AM band after it is vacated.
Neil
If FM Expands would part 15 operators get to use the new frequencies? Or would AM be given to part 15? But even so it still won't eliminate the noise floor. Not unless all you listeners were to buy old tube Radio's for their home. And who would re tube and replace the resistors and caps? I've said it before that the FCC needs to force the makers of all receivers to have the sensitivity and selectivity of the earlier FM and AM receivers if not better and then instead of gigawatt stations running around and spewing out all the interference they could run lower power and still cover a great area. No more entire dial being washed by an over powered AM or FM station. All new FM receivers would be compared to a Zenith tube FM receiver fully re tubed and aligned. AM Radio's would have to meet the sensitivity of a Blupankt (German Radio). Any manufacture who fails to meet the standard would be fined the same amount as AT&T was fined for throttling. These crappy receivers made in the USA should not be allowed and then we can make it better for everyone including part 15 AM and FM. Think about it you'd get a guaranteed 800 feet In STEREO and you would not have to ask for more power (maybe a little more but not quite as much to reach ¼ mile).
Old tube radios picked up static too but it sounded better on the big electro-magnetic speakers.
Most radio's are crap. At least they should be made to the standard that GE superradios were. With wide band setting for better AM fidelity. Everything thelegacy says is right....but that won't solve the noise interference from hydro.
My point is it was never this way in the past so what's happened to make hydro so dirty and emit all this crap? Used to have a Marconi tube radio that I grew up listening to from the late fifties till the early eighties with the 6 tubes(RF stage) and it was fantastic for DXing....no noise floor and NO interference from hydro.
Now if you have a radio plugged into A/C forget it. When hydro goes out AM is like it used to be! Want to revitalize AM make better receivers and do something about the hydro.
Mark
Just a clarification...
The term "hydro" commonly is used by Canadians for the a-c power they are provided -- as in early days, that power was produced by generator turbines driven by water pressure.
But regardless of how a-c power was/is now generated, the r-f electrical noise on a-c power lines in Canada, the US and most other locations is NOT produced by the a-c generator itself, but by the equipment components connected to, and using that a-c power.
Appreciate the link shared by Rob Veld from the Netherlands, written by Ruxandria Obreja of the BBC.
At first she had me worried with talk of shutting things down, but she rallied near the end and suggested we hang on to the old systems because they might come back into fashion the way vinyl records have.
The part I didn't like was the idea of maybe ending up with two digital standards. There is one digital "standard" I wish would die a speedy death.
DRM might be good.