[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Big Four AMs -- or not
- Subject: Re: Big Four AMs -- or not
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Martin J. Waters)
- Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 02:57:16 -0400
>Steve Ordinetz wrote:
>I'd hardly put 590 in the same category as the other 3...I don't know
>>where their signal goes, but it doesn't seem to go anywhere I've ever
>>been. Maybe not as bad as 1150, but pretty close.
You must live on the west side of Framingham and never leave town
<g>. I disagree strongly with comparing WEZE's signal to WNFT's. While 590
is weaker to the west than 680 and 850, it otherwise covers the metro area
just as well. In some places, it has a better signal than 850, especially
at night. And, at night, both 680 and 850 also have bad signals when you
get a little west of Framingham and definitely are trash when you get to
the I-90/I-495 junction, so the difference there is cut down quite a bit.
When I group "the big four" I'm not claiming all the signals are equal.
With AM directionals, everywhere you go in the area each one is a little
different. Obviously, WBZ is, literally, in a class by itself, for one
thing. I only do it because I think it's logical to group them as the major
AM signals and then think of all the others as secondary signals that have
some major holes in their coverage, especially at night. I brought up 1510
because it's a problem child -- sort of almost maybe enough of a signal to
be grouped with the other four, but, then again, maybe perhaps not really
Your comment prompts me to ask, Where specifically do you find that
WEZE's signal is bad but WEEI and WRKO are good?