/ 10.13.2009
AM Relevance: 10 Steps to Fix AM’s Problems
One in a series of responses from readers to RW’s Sept. 1 article exploring whether AM radio is "still relevant."

Radio World in recent issues has asked, "Is AM radio relevant?" Previously they’ve asked, "Is the FCC relevant?" I’m sure you would have had a bigger response if you’d asked if shortwave radio or ham radio is relevant.

Since Radio World is read widely in many radio stations, I’d like to address not only engineers but talent, PDs, managers and owners.

I can’t help get an AM radio application built into a cellphone without wireless Internet or a 60-foot antenna attached to an iPod, so my comments are limited to what we can do today, with the equipment that now exists.

To fix AM’s problems, we have to take a 10-step approach.

Mark Heller. ‘Nothing is as sweet as a well-run AM signal that someone actually cares about. When you hear it, you know.’ Photo by Tim Swoboda
Nothing is as sweet as a well-run AM signal that someone actually cares about. When you hear it, you know. Unfortunately, they’re not as prevalent as they were 30 years ago.

Mother Nature has always affected AM broadcasts when lightning was involved. But today, man-made devices interfere around the clock. Sodium vapor lights, farm fences that are electrified, aging power transformers and even the common personal computer monitor affect us.

Here are some "nuts and bolts" solutions. Not the latest, shiniest thing. We in broadcasting sometimes chase after things that sparkle, are new and trendsetting. Roll up your sleeves, and feel free to cross the items off as you complete the list.
  1. The 5 kHz reduction of audio of recent years was a disaster. It was started by one major group and others quickly followed in lock step. You’ve surrendered your bandwidth for the benefit of a few IBOC operators.

    Here’s a little-known secret. AM radio does not have to be all-talk or all-sports. Music can be played on AM radios.

    Put your radio station back at your original specs, according to FCC rules, the way the transmitter manufacturer worked so hard to build it. The guys who invented AM radio never wanted it to sound like a police scanner. Knock it off! Your advertisers with music beds and singing jingles will appreciate it, too.
  2. Frequency synchronization has been patented for AM radio carriers at least twice since 2001. It came out of Oak Ridge, Tenn., and the University of Tennessee.

    Simply put, end the fluttering noise at night on AM with every one of the licensed frequencies, coordinated using a GPS device to stay exactly on frequency. Listeners know the difference, especially at night. P.S. It’s not expensive to do, either.
  3. Power levels on AM must be legal and honest. If you have a license that says 11 watts at night and you are running 125 watts, you deserve to get fined. You are contributing to the overall noise at night. If you are the manager or licensee, ask your engineer how he computes your nighttime power.
  4. Doing high school sports on AM with a simple cellphone? Grow up!

    Just because your station has a trade-out with a cell provider doesn’t mean you have to do four-hour remotes with "tin-can" audio. Dust off your Marti transmitter. Find that Comrex audio extender. If you can’t afford the latest "near-studio-quality" equipment, check out the used items on eBay or from your audio dealer’s used inventory.

    It’s OK to put a cellphone on the air at an emergency or breaking news like an accident, but stop kidding yourself.
  5. A major issue is expanded-band AMs that kept the original frequencies they were supposed to give up. Please explain how 80 broadcasters were given a new frequency and, to win them, were graded on how much interference their current old AM signal caused; then, after five years, they kept the original frequency as well.

    There is a small corner in hell reserved for these licensees. The expanded band was created exclusively to clean up interference in the rest of the AM band.
  6. IBOC at night didn’t work, doesn’t work and won’t work. Turn it off at night until a fix is found and proven.

    Citadel Media, one of the early adapters, was sensitive to their adjacent neighbors and did the right thing. They deserve a lot of credit for their common sense.
  7. When was the last time you "proofed" your AM station?

    I don’t mean getting that annual 20-minute drive by R.F. Emission Measurement, either. Take the station down on a Sunday night and proof the audio chain with a tone, including the processor, and check your connections on the ATU at the antenna.

    I’m betting your answer to the question is, "I can’t remember." Proof it!
  8. The next two points have a political overtone. They need to be said.

    NRSC standards were adopted back in the 1980s to address solid-state florescent bulbs, solid-state vapor lights and other interference. It’s time to reconvene this group. Some of the original members of this group have either passed away or long since retired from the business.
  9. Marathon, Fla., has one AM station, with a directional array pointed away from the U.S. It’s time to make a deal to make it go away.

    It’s not an FCC problem, either. We as loyal broadcasters stood mostly silent while our government attempted to reach Cuba with up to 100 kilowatts from this station, only to have Cuba successfully jam more than one frequency back at us. That jamming continues today. Write your congressman. The NAB and SBE right now don’t care.
  10. Finally, to managers and program directors: You’re busy giving away concert tickets, free pizzas and the kitchen sink on your FM station to maintain your cume and share of audience. When are you going to do this with your AM station?

    One of my colleagues says, "All that AM needs after these corrections is one ‘gangbuster’ promotion, more than giving away a box of cereal or tickets to a minor-league baseball team." Do something dramatic.

Mark Heller is president and general manager of WGBW Radio in Two Rivers, Wis.



Comments
Post New Comment
If you are already a member, or would like to receive email alerts as new comments are
made, please login or register.

Enter the code shown above:

(Note: If you cannot read the numbers in the above
image, reload the page to generate a new one.)

1.
Posted by: Dave Gardiner
Wed, 09-21-2011 - 12:46PM Report Comment
It may well be time to bring back the clears, giving the heritage Class A's up to 1000 kW power, and move the Class D's on clears and regionals to an expanded FM band. I've noticed big power is run in Europe and Asia for national coverage.No IBOC either.Run audio back out to the 10 kHz limit.
2.
Posted by: Pdmtr
Tue, 10-20-2009 - 12:16PM Report Comment
The truth is that AM is a media that could be viable for many more years! But it has to be "re-invent" it self, as the lack of creative programming of the present has stalled the "AM listeners" from hitting the AM mode button of their receivers! Talk radio is no way the De facto solution for getting listeners attention, but its ruther the solution for sending them away from AM! Radio has to stay an entertaining and informative media alltogether, and not just the one side or the other at all! AM STEREO (C-QUAM Analog system) was, and IMHO still is, the best way/solution to make AM broads more pleasant for the common listener, without trying to conviced him to throw out any old radios to get the Digi-zaster newer radios, just to listen the exact same programming material, that could easily hear with the older lower value radios, that he was forced to get rid off!!! The C-QUAM did work at day & night also while it wasn't an expensive system to install and mostly, to work with all time long, while the IBOC is too expensive both to install and even worst, to keep it running every year (maybe the term "annual fees" makes it more attractive) for the most smaller broaders. And till IBOC at AM seems to have huge problems, mostly during the night. So why somebody will turn off its CQUAM AM STEREO exciter at a radio station, just to force their listeners to buy the new HD radios? AM could have a real good quality if the stations kept their AM STEREO CQUAM systems on! Not CD quality of course, but far better than currently available, STILL monophonic, Digi-Analog and vice versa, changeover that HD radios do almost anytime!
3.
Posted by: Johnny Philips
Fri, 10-30-2009 - 8:55AM Report Comment
Great comments. Run AM back out to 10.2KHz frequency response curve. The FCC should have mandated minimum receiver standards for AM radios instead of IBOC. The FCC should mandate DSP noise blankers, adjustable bandwidth (auto and/or manual), C-Quam stereo (or even an option for Kahn for that matter - with automatic switching), "AMAX" standards as it were for any AM radio to meet these standards that have FM stereo. Oh, and most important, after these items are done - in 2 years or less, put some innovative programming on your AM, like music programmed by some college kids. Remember FM radio in 1972? - make your AM station like that today, using those programming formulas in the 70's that made FM so well known. AM still has it in it, and I wouldn't mind the FCC revisiting "SuperPower" stations for a dozen clear channels in the USA with 750KW - 1MW from a national security standpoint, WLW, WJR, KOA, WLS, KHJ, WWL, WBZ, etc should all have 'super power status' - in analog stereo, NOT IBOC. Let's make it easy for the FCC - if your AM call sign is only 3 letters long, you get as much power as you want. And don't forget, put some innovative music programming on your AM! AM was the king, and can still be a handsome prince again!
4.
Posted by: Eye in the Sky
Fri, 11-06-2009 - 12:22PM Report Comment
11) Don't be a deadbeat; pay your bills and don't steal engineering.
5.
Posted by: Charles River
Tue, 10-13-2009 - 12:33PM Report Comment
There may be some merit to eliminating most of the small AM radio stations and bringing back the clears. Before that happens though, we need to stop using double sideband with full carrier. Instead the carrier and one of the sidebands should be supressed. This will double the number of channels that are available allowing for more clears. If you want to put up an AM radio station you will operate with 50kw of single sideband AM and will be expected to cover the lower 48 states at night. Your antenna will be required to be a full .64 wavelength tall over 120 ground mounted radials or the equivalent of raised radials. We should end religious broading because it A. puts everyone to sleep, B. gives AM radio a bad name. Anyone who has been pro-iboc should be thrown out of the industry on their keysters. What percentage of people, under the age of 30 have actually listened to AM radio? How many of them would know how to? How many would want to?
6.
Posted by: Bob H.
Tue, 10-13-2009 - 7:24PM Report Comment
Mark, you are absolutely correct! AM is indeed still a viable medium for the public. Just because AM does not have "DC-to-Light" frequency response (as some have complained about), doesn't mean it's no good. It doesn't really need to have that; it just needs to be better programed and have people care about quality. 10 kHz of spectrum IS indeed good for quality audio. How sad it is that we've let AM radios and stations get soo degraded as it has become. However, there are still a few that do care and we have AM stations that sound good and are carrying their own just fine. Kudos to you, Mark, for a great article.
7.
Posted by: Art Major
Mon, 11-02-2009 - 12:09PM Report Comment
Johnny, I think you are dreaming. People don't want to listen to music unless it's at least the quality you get from FM stereo. The only way you are going to get that is to switch from AM to digital only. So, to solve the AM problem you need to increase the number of VHF FM channels that are available and move local broaders up to VHF where they belong. Medium wave should be treated like shortwave and every station that stays on medium wave is protected nationwide and their programming must be of interest to a nationwide audience. Not a local one. Otherwise they can give up their channel for someone else. Standard AM, must bit into the 10 kHz channel and no iboc. Don't even think of iboc. Anyone who says the word iboc get's shot on sight.
8.
Posted by: Art Major
Tue, 10-13-2009 - 10:38AM Report Comment
What is AM radio good for? What is AM radio? Current AM radio is substandard audio that is broaded on a radio band that is unsuitable for local broading. The audio is adequate for voice but leaves a lot of be desired for music. It's a wonder that anyone listens at all. I think that the problems of AM have been solved by the current FM broad band, satellite radio, cable radio, and streaming audio over the internet. Why listen to AM with it's poor quality compared with the alternatives? In Boston we do have talk radio on FM and it sounds great. We can listen to Rush Limbaugh on FM. AM does have a distance advantage at night but it still sounds lousy. I'd rather listen to 94.9 FM on Mt. Washington that covers Northern New England better than WBZ does and with excellent audio. It's impressive listening in the north country, mountains all around you, going up and down, and WHOM is barrel assing in in stereo with excellent audio quality. No fading, it's everywhere. Of course 50kw erp in both horizontal and vertical from the highest peak for hundreds of miles, doesn't hurt it's coverage any. If I'm going to listen to AM, I may as well listen to shortwave. Tune in on Radio Havana Cuba and listen to ros rants. It's more entertaining. For something a bit more sane, there is the BBC World Service. Then there are the religious broaders. WWCR 500,000 watts from Nashville TN. World Wide Crackpot Radio. Don't forget about WBOQ I think it is in Monticello Maine on 5150 khz and the Radio Timtron Worldwide show on Saturday nights. "I have a voice that sticks out like a sore dong." says Timmy. It's true, he does. So, where does that leave AM radio? Well, there are those that are too feeble to shut their AM radios off or tune the dial. I think they make up most of the listenership. The problems of AM radio were fixed with the introduction of the FM broad band in the vicinty of 100 mHz + and -. Why do we still
9.
Posted by: Art Major
Thu, 10-22-2009 - 3:39PM Report Comment
The magic question is what kind of programming is suitable to a narrow bandwidth and is programming that people will pay for by doing business with your advertisers? Programming that is not too expensive to create. I can't think of any. Why is talk radio appearing on FM? Why did 98.5 just become the "Sports Hub" in Boston? AM radio is apparently so bad that the talk shows have to move over to FM in order to get listeners. Talk does sound a lot better on FM. I say that unless the medium wave band is converted to digital and can produce audio quality similar to that of FM, it's going to be history because there is simply no need for it. Aside from hobbyists and those who like AM because they either work in the industry or have been listening to it for so long, AM has no value over FM or digital. Digital satellite radio solves the distance problem. You can listen to the same station from Maine to Florida. So, where is AM's strongpoint? What does AM do better? People want good audio quality and reliability. Medium wave is not conducive to good audio quality with the current number of stations due to a lack of bandwidth and propagation is by means of groundwave during the day and skywave at night. The band changes markedly which cuts into reliability. Stations you hear at night are not audible during the day. Other stations have to reduce power or go off the air at night. What does AM excel at?
10.
Posted by: Art Major
Thu, 10-22-2009 - 3:38PM Report Comment
It all depends on what level of quality you are willing to accept. Everyone is different. AM does sound clear, usually, but it's not what people are used to hearing from whatever device they listen to music on. Stereo or not, it doesn't matter. Another problem with AM is that they have tried to cram too many stations into the band. If you are a radio hobbyest, you may enjoy listening to the distant AM stations. You may also enjoy the sound of AM. For those who aren't hobbiests, they can listen to distant stations via streaming audio, and listen to very good stereo quality sound. So, what should be done with the medium wave broad band? 1. Bring back the clears and protect them for the whole lower 48 states. That will mean a lot fewer stations. Medium wave is capable of long range so use it for long range. 1 Clear per state plus an addition regional clear should leave enough room for Canada and Mexico. 2. Stations that only want local coverage should be moved off of medium wave to a band that is conducive to local broading. Basically anything about above 60 or so mHz. Preferably higher. 3. Choose the mode carefully. I suggest some form of digital in order to have better audio quality. No backwards compatibility with existing receivers because that would waste bandwidth. Complete switchover. 4. Don't waste your time broading music unless you can do it in stereo and have it sound similar to what you hear on the FM broad band.
11.
Posted by: Art Major
Thu, 10-22-2009 - 3:25PM Report Comment
It all depends on what level of quality you are willing to accept. Everyone is different. AM does sound clear, usually, but it's not what people are used to hearing from whatever device they listen to music on. Stereo or not, it doesn't matter. Another problem with AM is that they have tried to cram too many stations into the band. If you are a radio hobbyest, you may enjoy listening to the distant AM stations. You may also enjoy the sound of AM. For those who aren't hobbiests, they can listen to distant stations via streaming audio, and listen to very good stereo quality sound. So, what should be done with the medium wave broad band? 1. Bring back the clears and protect them for the whole lower 48 states. That will mean a lot fewer stations. Medium wave is capable of long range so use it for long range. 1 Clear per state plus an addition regional clear should leave enough room for Canada and Mexico. 2. Stations that only want local coverage should be moved off of medium wave to a band that is conducive to local broading. Basically anything about above 60 or so mHz. Preferably higher. 3. Choose the mode carefully. I suggest some form of digital in order to have better audio quality. No backwards compatibility with existing receivers because that would waste bandwidth. Complete switchover. 4. Don't waste your time broading music unless you can do it in stereo and have it sound similar to what you hear on the FM broad band.
12.
Posted by: Anonymous
Tue, 10-13-2009 - 10:12AM Report Comment
Unfortunately, you can't make a turd shine. The medium wave band is not the place for local broading. 10 kHz of spectrum is not enough for good quality audio. I suggest the following. 1. Move to VHF or UHF. 2. Decide on your mode, AM, FM, or digital. 3. Use 100 kHz or more of bandwidth for decent audio quality. 4. Allocate enough spectrum so that you have an adequate number of channels in a given area. There is no reason to continue broading on medium wave and with a bandwidth of only about 10 kHz.
13.
Posted by: Ann Teak
Tue, 10-13-2009 - 12:42PM Report Comment
In order to attract listeners, it's important to have programming that they may want to listen to. I think it's time to bring back the old radio programs. Bring back the CBS Radio Mystery Theatre. Bring back the Sears Radio Theatre. Bring back the famous radio programs from the 30s, 40's 50's. Bring back Throckmorton P. Gildersleeve. Audio versions of the History Channel and Discovery Channel may go over well for those who are travelling and want something interesting to listen to. Sports listeners tend to make up a large number of AM radio listeners but their collective intelligence isn't very impressive. Football fans in particular tend to be unable to count to 1 without unzipping their pants. AM radio should go for a more intelligent audience. National Public Radio is on FM in these parts and the audio is quite nice. Synchronization has been around a lot longer than that. It used to be used on occasion to allow two transmitters to transmit the same programming on the same frequency at the same time and not interfere with each other. I believe WBZ and WBZA did this.
14.
Posted by: Adam Baum
Tue, 10-13-2009 - 10:20AM Report Comment
I think that broaders should be allowed to broad on the 11 meter citizens radio service using the AM mode. The reason for this is that there are a lot of CB radios out there that are not being used. A new broad band on 11 meters would provide a use for those radios as well as allow broaders to cover an area out to 30 or more miles without the interference encountered every night on the present broad band. I suggest that the power limit be in the neighborhood of 10kw erp. No restrictions on antenna height. I also suggest that the bottom 20 cb channels be allocated to broading. That will allow 20 channels for regular cb use, which should be more than enough. This will also allow the older 23 channel cb radios to hear all of the broad channels. Many scanners will tune down to the cb band as will shortwave receivers.




Friday 12:00AM
McAdams On: Surplus Spectrum
Recall that broadcasters were accused of spectrum squatting when the digital transition took longer than the arbitrary timetable set by Congress.

 
Featured Articles
Discover TV Technology