From wollman@bimajority.org  Tue Jan  1 11:51:37 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 11:51:37 -0500
Subject: WUNR/WKOX/WRCA construction
Message-ID: <18298.28569.804348.4505@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

I have more photos of the WUNR etc. construction progress at
<http://gallery.bostonradio.org/2007-12/wunr/>.  (Sniff! The very last
photo gallery of 2007!)  Thanks to Grady Moates for coming in on
Sunday to show me around.

-GAWollman


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Tue Jan  1 12:24:00 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 12:24:00 -0500
Subject: WUNR/WKOX/WRCA construction
References: <18298.28569.804348.4505@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <000601c84c9b$1adca9d0$baeda644@SatU205S5044>

Hi, Garrett: Is there room in the building for a) a  backup generator
and b) auxiliary transmitters? If the answer to b) is "no," are the
transmitters "self-sparing?" (Meaning, are the transmitters designed
so that each one is, in effect, two transmitters, each rated for
approximately half the normal output power, with provisions for
operating the working portion at half power while repairs are made to
the failed portion?) With all of the dough that has gone into this
installation and despite the onerous conditions on the building
configuration imposed by the City of Newton, I would think that
station ownership would have insisted on some such requirement. WKOX's
Framingham site may remain operational indefinitely, I suppose, and if
so, in the absence of a backup plan for the Newton site, CCU would
doubtless get it licensed as an auxiliary site, but while the 10 kW
day facilities may prove adequate as a backup, the 1 kW-N really will
not cut it. As for WRCA, I'm sure that the plan is to remove the
towers in Waltham ASAP, perhaps even before the license to cover has
been granted for the Newton facility. And WUNR has no backup site at
all, though if Champion really wanted to spend the $$$ (doubtful), one
might be constructed, I suppose, at the WXKS site at 99 Revere Beach
Parkway.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
To: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 11:51 AM
Subject: WUNR/WKOX/WRCA construction


>I have more photos of the WUNR etc. construction progress at
> <http://gallery.bostonradio.org/2007-12/wunr/>.  (Sniff! The very
> last
> photo gallery of 2007!)  Thanks to Grady Moates for coming in on
> Sunday to show me around.
>
> -GAWollman
>


From wollman@bimajority.org  Tue Jan  1 14:57:49 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 14:57:49 -0500
Subject: WUNR/WKOX/WRCA construction
In-Reply-To: <000601c84c9b$1adca9d0$baeda644@SatU205S5044>
References: <18298.28569.804348.4505@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<000601c84c9b$1adca9d0$baeda644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <18298.39741.382562.325067@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Tue, 1 Jan 2008 12:24:00 -0500, "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net> said:

> Hi, Garrett: Is there room in the building for a) a  backup generator
> and b) auxiliary transmitters?

(a) No.

(b) Only if they can fit in the rack below the HD importer and antenna
controller.  As I mentioned, the BE AM-5E that WUNR is currently using
will remain as a backup.  Neither WRCA's old Harris DX-10 nor WKOX's
new BE AM-10A would fit in the building.

> If the answer to b) is "no," are the transmitters "self-sparing?"

BE's 4MX tranmsitters are modular in design.  The company claims that
most common faults will be isolated to a single module, which can be
taken out of service automatically, without disruption to the signal.

> WKOX's Framingham site may remain operational indefinitely, I
> suppose,

It can't, since 1200 can't city-grade Newton from Framingham.[1] I
don't think WKOX's NIF on the 1-kW rig even hits Newton.  Grady is
eager to get 1200 out of Mt. Wayte so he can put IBOC on 1060 (the
current combiner isn't broadband enough, but could be if 1200 were
removed).

-GAWollman

[1] I'm not sure if the FCC applies this rule to AMs, but for FMs at
least the protected contour of an auxiliary transmitter must be entirely
within the protected contour of the main transmitter.  That's why, for
example, all of the Seattle FM backups on Cougar are directional.

From billohno@gmail.com  Wed Jan  2 10:14:53 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:14:53 -0500
Subject: NERW WOW
Message-ID: <477BAA6D.4030400@gmail.com>

If you haven't checked out Scott Fybush's year in review, spin your 
dial... I mean click your mouse on over there. About as definitive a 
review as you could ask for.   www.fybush.com/nerw.html

Bill O'Neill


-- 
I could tell my parents hated me. My bath toys were a toaster and a radio.
/Rodney Dangerfield/

From raccoonradio@gmail.com  Wed Jan  2 13:34:04 2008
From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:34:04 -0500
Subject: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
Message-ID: <1fbbbced0801021034q510e00des6a4cb28c42a6da65@mail.gmail.com>

First it was noticed that Clear Channel registered the domain
kiss953.com and had a page up suggesting that the
seacoast NH area station WUBB (lic. to York Center, ME) might become a
Kiss 108 clone (it also suggested that Matty
in the Morning would be carried, and a weather page linked to a
forecast for Portsmouth NH). Then the page
went blank. Now it's back up and saying "coming soon--Sports"...with a
link to MSN/Fox Sports (Fox
Sports Radio is syndie by Clear Channel's Premiere Radio). Something's going on.

The signal does reach into northern Essex County (a bit further south
it's trumped by WHRB)

From lglavin@mail.com  Wed Jan  2 13:50:47 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:50:47 -0500
Subject: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
Message-ID: <20080102185047.B87291BF2A3@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com>

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Bob Nelson" 
>To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
>Subject: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:34:04 -0500

>First it was noticed that Clear Channel registered the domain
>kiss953.com and had a page up suggesting that the
>seacoast NH area station WUBB (lic. to York Center, ME) might become a
>Kiss 108 clone (it also suggested that Matty
>in the Morning would be carried, and a weather page linked to a
>forecast for Portsmouth NH). Then the page
>went blank. Now it's back up and saying "coming soon--Sports"...with a
>link to MSN/Fox Sports (Fox
>Sports Radio is syndie by Clear Channel's Premiere Radio). 
>Something's going on.
>The signal does reach into northern Essex County (a bit further south
>it's trumped by WHRB)

Phooey...it's NOT trumped enough by WHRB;  the latter's signal is a mess
in the Merrimack Valley due to WUBB as well as on the North Shore.  On those
rare occasions when ratings for the Seacoast Region of NH appear, WUBB's
number is minimal for inclusion inasmuch as it competes with WOKQ.  The
real tragedy is the fact that Harvard was so lackadaiacal about its licensed station
that they let an outlet go on the air on 95.3 in Southern Maine in the first place.
At that time, they were broadcasting from the stick atop the bank building in Harvard
Square.  If they had moved to Murray St. Medford when WEEI-FM vacated that site, 
there probably wouldn't be a WUBB!

-- 
Got No Time? Shop Online for Great Gift Ideas!
http://mail.shopping.com/?linkin_id=8033174


From wollman@bimajority.org  Wed Jan  2 15:03:55 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:03:55 -0500
Subject: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
In-Reply-To: <20080102185047.B87291BF2A3@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com>
References: <20080102185047.B87291BF2A3@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <18299.60971.749019.167700@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:50:47 -0500, "Laurence Glavin" <lglavin@mail.com> said:

> real tragedy is the fact that Harvard was so lackadaiacal about its
> licensed station that they let an outlet go on the air on 95.3 in
> Southern Maine in the first place.

They probably didn't have any choice.  At a separation of 115 km, WUBB
is (was) deemed by the FCC not to interfere with WHRB.  It could be
moved even closer with section 73.215 contour protection.

-GAWollman

From lglavin@mail.com  Wed Jan  2 15:25:07 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:25:07 -0500
Subject: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
Message-ID: <20080102202507.A116D1CE7A8@ws1-6.us4.outblaze.com>

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Garrett Wollman" 
>To: "Laurence Glavin" 
>Subject: Re: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:03:55 -0500

< said:

> real tragedy is the fact that Harvard was so lackadaiacal about its
> licensed station that they let an outlet go on the air on 95.3 in
> Southern Maine in the first place.

>They probably didn't have any choice. At a separation of 115 km, WUBB
>is (was) deemed by the FCC not to interfere with WHRB. It could be
>moved even closer with section 73.215 contour protection.
>-GAWollman

Ah, but would that have been the case if the WHRB stick was on Murray Street,
Medford, a hilltop location NE of Boston?  


-- 
Got No Time? Shop Online for Great Gift Ideas!
http://mail.shopping.com/?linkin_id=8033174


From wollman@bimajority.org  Wed Jan  2 15:33:42 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:33:42 -0500
Subject: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
In-Reply-To: <20080102202507.A116D1CE7A8@ws1-6.us4.outblaze.com>
References: <20080102202507.A116D1CE7A8@ws1-6.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <18299.62758.944220.845923@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:25:07 -0500, "Laurence Glavin" <lglavin@mail.com> said:

>> [I wrote:]
>> They probably didn't have any choice. At a separation of 115 km, WUBB
>> is (was) deemed by the FCC not to interfere with WHRB. It could be
>> moved even closer with section 73.215 contour protection.

> Ah, but would that have been the case if the WHRB stick was on Murray Street,
> Medford, a hilltop location NE of Boston?  

Yes.  They might have had to find a different Maine or New Hampshire
town to license it to, but 95.3A York Center was allocated at
*exactly* the minimum distance from 95.3A Cambridge's reference
coordinates.  If WHRB had been in Medford, a few miles north of its
current location, then the Maine allocation would have had to be a few
miles farther north than it is.

-GAWollman

From scott@fybush.com  Wed Jan  2 16:13:30 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:13:30 -0500
Subject: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
In-Reply-To: <18299.62758.944220.845923@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <20080102202507.A116D1CE7A8@ws1-6.us4.outblaze.com>
	<18299.62758.944220.845923@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <477BFE7A.4040205@fybush.com>

Garrett Wollman wrote:

>> Ah, but would that have been the case if the WHRB stick was on Murray Street,
>> Medford, a hilltop location NE of Boston?  
> 
> Yes.  They might have had to find a different Maine or New Hampshire
> town to license it to, but 95.3A York Center was allocated at
> *exactly* the minimum distance from 95.3A Cambridge's reference
> coordinates.  If WHRB had been in Medford, a few miles north of its
> current location, then the Maine allocation would have had to be a few
> miles farther north than it is.

It probably could still have been licensed to York Center. Only the 
"reference coordinates" for the allocation have to meet the minimum full 
spacings of 73.207, and once the reference coordinates have been 
established, the transmitter itself can go in a short-spaced location 
via the magic of 73.215.

s

From nostaticatall@charter.net  Thu Jan  3 16:26:55 2008
From: nostaticatall@charter.net (David Tomm)
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 16:26:55 -0500
Subject: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
In-Reply-To: <1fbbbced0801021034q510e00des6a4cb28c42a6da65@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1fbbbced0801021034q510e00des6a4cb28c42a6da65@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5516abf5e74dd01734a09fab9b7d286b@charter.net>

WHRB regularly wreaks havoc on WUBB south of Portsmouth, but it's 
really pronounced in the summertime.

CHR would not make sense for WUBB.  WERZ is still reporting to the 
trades as a CHR, even though they have always taken an adult approach 
with it.  The station has 25 years of heritage in the format, is 
normally a top 4 station overall in the ratings, and bills well.  Why 
would CC want to mess with that? Combine that with the ratings success 
co-owned WJMN normally pulls in the market, there really is no need for 
another female targeted 18-34 station.  Even if the company was to 
transition WERZ to a full-blown Hot AC, thats too many stations chasing 
after similar demos in a small market.  That doesn't even include WRED, 
the JJ Jeffrey-owned rhythmic station in Saco, right up the dial and 
down the road from WUBB.  It would be overkill.

Doing country didn't make sense either in the shadow of the mighty WOKQ 
but WUBB stuck with it for nine years and rarely even placed in the 12+ 
ratings.  I'm surprised CC didn't make changes sooner.  The last time 
that station pulled any kind of decent ratings was the mid-90's, when 
it ran an oldies format as Cool 95.3.  It normally placed in the two's 
12+ and was considered successful keeping in mind it's signal 
limitations.  If CC can find the right niche format that's cheap to 
run, they should be able to make some money with that signal.

Sports would be an interesting choice.  Running Fox Sports Radio along 
with Jim Rome and local games (CC holds the market rights to the Sox 
and I think the Celtics) would be an inexpensive solution.  My question 
is--with the Nassau deal to put WEEI on several of their stations 
reportedly dead, is Clear Channel thinking about putting WEEI on 95.3?  
Since they have the Sox and C's rights, WUBB could essentially straight 
simulcast WEEI including games, which would extend WEEI's reach into 
Southern Maine, where the 850 signal begins to fade out, particularly 
at night.   It would be unusual for Clear Channel and Entercom to work 
with each other like this, but with Entercom desperately wanting to 
extend the WEEI brand further into New England, it wouldn't surprise me 
if it was to happen.

-Dave Tomm
"Mike Thomas" (...channelling Joe Gallant...)


On Jan 2, 2008, at 1:34 PM, Bob Nelson wrote:

> First it was noticed that Clear Channel registered the domain
> kiss953.com and had a page up suggesting that the
> seacoast NH area station WUBB (lic. to York Center, ME) might become a
> Kiss 108 clone (it also suggested that Matty
> in the Morning would be carried, and a weather page linked to a
> forecast for Portsmouth NH). Then the page
> went blank. Now it's back up and saying "coming soon--Sports"...with a
> link to MSN/Fox Sports (Fox
> Sports Radio is syndie by Clear Channel's Premiere Radio). Something's 
> going on.
>
> The signal does reach into northern Essex County (a bit further south
> it's trumped by WHRB)
>


From paul@derrynh.net  Thu Jan  3 18:21:45 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 18:21:45 -0500
Subject: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
In-Reply-To: <5516abf5e74dd01734a09fab9b7d286b@charter.net>
Message-ID: <006201c84e5f$6849dd30$82a8184c@YOURF7ED5FB036>

Speaking of Nassau...

Is there some delay in the flip of WWHQ/WWHK to //WEEI?

I get the impression that the change is NOT about to happen at least at
these stations.

Anyone know what's going on?

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
David Tomm
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 4:27 PM
To: Bob Nelson
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...

WHRB regularly wreaks havoc on WUBB south of Portsmouth, but it's 
really pronounced in the summertime.

CHR would not make sense for WUBB.  WERZ is still reporting to the 
trades as a CHR, even though they have always taken an adult approach 
with it.  The station has 25 years of heritage in the format, is 
normally a top 4 station overall in the ratings, and bills well.  Why 
would CC want to mess with that? Combine that with the ratings success 
co-owned WJMN normally pulls in the market, there really is no need for 
another female targeted 18-34 station.  Even if the company was to 
transition WERZ to a full-blown Hot AC, thats too many stations chasing 
after similar demos in a small market.  That doesn't even include WRED, 
the JJ Jeffrey-owned rhythmic station in Saco, right up the dial and 
down the road from WUBB.  It would be overkill.

Doing country didn't make sense either in the shadow of the mighty WOKQ 
but WUBB stuck with it for nine years and rarely even placed in the 12+ 
ratings.  I'm surprised CC didn't make changes sooner.  The last time 
that station pulled any kind of decent ratings was the mid-90's, when 
it ran an oldies format as Cool 95.3.  It normally placed in the two's 
12+ and was considered successful keeping in mind it's signal 
limitations.  If CC can find the right niche format that's cheap to 
run, they should be able to make some money with that signal.

Sports would be an interesting choice.  Running Fox Sports Radio along 
with Jim Rome and local games (CC holds the market rights to the Sox 
and I think the Celtics) would be an inexpensive solution.  My question 
is--with the Nassau deal to put WEEI on several of their stations 
reportedly dead, is Clear Channel thinking about putting WEEI on 95.3?  
Since they have the Sox and C's rights, WUBB could essentially straight 
simulcast WEEI including games, which would extend WEEI's reach into 
Southern Maine, where the 850 signal begins to fade out, particularly 
at night.   It would be unusual for Clear Channel and Entercom to work 
with each other like this, but with Entercom desperately wanting to 
extend the WEEI brand further into New England, it wouldn't surprise me 
if it was to happen.

-Dave Tomm
"Mike Thomas" (...channelling Joe Gallant...)


On Jan 2, 2008, at 1:34 PM, Bob Nelson wrote:

> First it was noticed that Clear Channel registered the domain
> kiss953.com and had a page up suggesting that the
> seacoast NH area station WUBB (lic. to York Center, ME) might become a
> Kiss 108 clone (it also suggested that Matty
> in the Morning would be carried, and a weather page linked to a
> forecast for Portsmouth NH). Then the page
> went blank. Now it's back up and saying "coming soon--Sports"...with a
> link to MSN/Fox Sports (Fox
> Sports Radio is syndie by Clear Channel's Premiere Radio). Something's 
> going on.
>
> The signal does reach into northern Essex County (a bit further south
> it's trumped by WHRB)
>


From sean.smyth@yahoo.com  Thu Jan  3 18:41:11 2008
From: sean.smyth@yahoo.com (Sean Smyth)
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 15:41:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
In-Reply-To: <006201c84e5f$6849dd30$82a8184c@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <157013.89323.qm@web58308.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Paul Hopfgarten <paul@derrynh.net> wrote:
> Speaking of Nassau...
> 
> Is there some delay in the flip of WWHQ/WWHK to //WEEI?
> 
> I get the impression that the change is NOT about to happen at least
> at
> these stations.
> 
> Anyone know what's going on?

Well, David said in the previous post that the deal is dead.

Is it? I thought the flip was supposed to happen in December.


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 


From scott@fybush.com  Thu Jan  3 18:59:41 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 18:59:41 -0500
Subject: doings at WUBB 95.3 seacoast of NH/ME...
In-Reply-To: <157013.89323.qm@web58308.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <157013.89323.qm@web58308.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <477D76ED.4030102@fybush.com>

Sean Smyth wrote:
> Paul Hopfgarten <paul@derrynh.net> wrote:
>> Speaking of Nassau...
>>
>> Is there some delay in the flip of WWHQ/WWHK to //WEEI?
>>
>> I get the impression that the change is NOT about to happen at least
>> at
>> these stations.
>>
>> Anyone know what's going on?
> 
> Well, David said in the previous post that the deal is dead.
> 
> Is it? I thought the flip was supposed to happen in December.

The deal is dead. Nassau's confirmed it.

s

From lglavin@mail.com  Sat Jan  5 15:04:16 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 15:04:16 -0500
Subject: "Ray Brown" Has Left The Building
Message-ID: <20080105200416.16B8A164287@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com>

The 'Forum' at hippogryph.com reports that longtime WCRB announcer "Ray Brown"
(I use quotes because I don't know if it's his real name) no longer has a bio on 
WCRB's website.   Only time will tell if he is in fact gone from that outlet and 
if so whether the parting was his decision or Nassau's.  I'd have to say that he's
probably the only announcer there who could find work at another station, and in
fact I believe his pipes can be heard on numerous TV spots and possibly some 
promos on WBZ-TV.

-- 
Got No Time? Shop Online for Great Gift Ideas!
http://mail.shopping.com/?linkin_id=8033174


From ewerme@comcast.net  Sun Jan  6 12:45:39 2008
From: ewerme@comcast.net (Ric Werme)
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 12:45:39 -0500
Subject: "Ray Brown" Has Left The Building
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 06 Jan 2008 12:00:00 EST."
	<mailman.0.1199638800.35334.boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Message-ID: <20080106174539.831F75BC79@c-24-128-108-153.hsd1.nh.comcast.net>

Laurence Glavin notes:

> The 'Forum' at hippogryph.com reports that longtime WCRB announcer "Ray
> Brown" (I use quotes because I don't know if it's his real name) no
> longer has a bio on WCRB's website.

Google still has it in their cache (Yay Google cache),
I think http://www.google.com/search?q=%22ray+Brown%22+wcrb will work.

See also the top link, http://www.raybrown.biz/html/clients.html and
oh, my, Laura Carlo is leaving too, oh wait, the story is dated
November 12, 2006....
http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=53904.0;prev_next=next

	-Ric Werme

P.S. While I have the floor, Harry Kozlowski wants to expand WCNH-LP
beyond LP.
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071209/NEWS01/31209
0063/-1/news
"Highland has applied for five full-power FM licenses around the state,
none in southern Hillsborough County."

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071230/BUSINESS/7123
00337/1265/BUSINESS



From lglavin@mail.com  Mon Jan  7 13:08:52 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:08:52 -0500
Subject: "Ray Brown" Has Left The Building
Message-ID: <20080107180852.9AF781F50B6@ws1-2.us4.outblaze.com>



----- Original Message -----
From: "Ric Werme" 
To: boston-radio-interest@tsornin.bostonradio.org
Subject: Re: "Ray Brown" Has Left The Building
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 12:45:39 -0500

>Laurence Glavin notes:

> The 'Forum' at hippogryph.com reports that longtime WCRB announcer "Ray
> Brown" (I use quotes because I don't know if it's his real name) no
> longer has a bio on WCRB's website.

>Google still has it in their cache (Yay Google cache),
>I think http://www.google.com/search?q=%22ray+Brown%22+wcrb will work.

The upper right window of wcrb.com's website shows the announcer or announciatrix
on duty, and early Monday afternoon it's Art Steinberg.  It may not be until
later in the day that we'll see if Ray's disappearance from the website bio page
means something.  It could be just one strand in personnel cutbacks by Nassau after
the Entercom deal with its cash infusion fell through.  


-- 
Got No Time? Shop Online for Great Gift Ideas!
http://mail.shopping.com/?linkin_id=8033174


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Tue Jan  8 07:13:25 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 07:13:25 -0500
Subject: "Ray Brown" Has Left The Building
References: <20080107180852.9AF781F50B6@ws1-2.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <000801c851ef$e154e510$10f8a742@SatU205S5044>

Wsn't there (or isn't there still) a guy with the same name, Ray 
Brown, who did (or still does) an old-time jazz show on a weekend 
night on WGBH-FM? I listen to 89.7 on Saturday evenings (Prairie Home 
Companion, Says You, and a 9:00PM-to-midnight Blues show, which I 
generally turn off if I haven't fallen asleep), so if the old-time 
jazz is still on, it must be on Sunday nights, when I don't listen, or 
maybe the old-time jazz (Bix Beiderbecke et al) has morphed (wouldn't 
be too much of a morph) into the Saturday night Blues show. Anyhow, if 
I have the correct air name for the GBH guy, I very much doubt that it 
was the same Ray Brown who was on 99.5 and before that on 102.5. So 
who, if anyone, has 'CRB plugged into the departed Ray Brown's time 
slot--or is the station now running "jockless" in his former (weekday 
mid-afternoon?) slot?

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Laurence Glavin" <lglavin@mail.com>
To: "Ric Werme" <ewerme@comcast.net>; 
<boston-radio-interest@tsornin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: "Ray Brown" Has Left The Building




----- Original Message -----
From: "Ric Werme"
To: boston-radio-interest@tsornin.bostonradio.org
Subject: Re: "Ray Brown" Has Left The Building
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 12:45:39 -0500

>Laurence Glavin notes:

> The 'Forum' at hippogryph.com reports that longtime WCRB announcer 
> "Ray
> Brown" (I use quotes because I don't know if it's his real name) no
> longer has a bio on WCRB's website.

>Google still has it in their cache (Yay Google cache),
>I think http://www.google.com/search?q=%22ray+Brown%22+wcrb will 
>work.

The upper right window of wcrb.com's website shows the announcer or 
announciatrix
on duty, and early Monday afternoon it's Art Steinberg.  It may not be 
until
later in the day that we'll see if Ray's disappearance from the 
website bio page
means something.  It could be just one strand in personnel cutbacks by 
Nassau after
the Entercom deal with its cash infusion fell through.


-- 
Got No Time? Shop Online for Great Gift Ideas!
http://mail.shopping.com/?linkin_id=8033174


From raccoonradio@mail.com  Tue Jan  8 10:51:29 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 10:51:29 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
Message-ID: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>

Tom Taylor, in his free email-subscription newsletter, says today he is hearing that WCRB is now on 
the market ("Star Media Group?s Doug Ferber has the listing to sell WCRB" -- available by free
subscription via http://www.radio-info.com )
We know about Entercom and Nassau and how their agreement fell through (to put
WEEI on several Nassau stations, and Entercom would get half of 99.5). But now Taylor's
hearing that Nassau is peddling the longtime classical outlet. Would the new owners keep
it classical, or find a way to satisfy that longterm agreement to keep classical by
putting it on an HD, an AM signal they may have, a smaller FM, etc.?




From dan.strassberg@att.net  Tue Jan  8 11:10:15 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 11:10:15 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
References: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <000901c85210$f844ec40$adf8a742@SatU205S5044>

This won't happen, of course; it makes too much sense: Suppose
Entercom were to buy 99.5 and move WAAF there. The 99.5 signal
downtown is good enough that 97.7 might no longer be needed as a WAAF
simulcast--although 97.7's South Shore coverage might be an asset to
99.5. Then the "classics" (I'm putting that in quotes to forestall
another of Mr Glavin's diatribes) could move up the dial to 107.3 and
Entercom might even be smart enough to move 107.3 back to where it
belongs--on Asnebumsket Hilll in Paxton (assuming the FCC hasn't shut
that door)--because the WCRB format is unduplicated in the rest of the
old 107.3 coverage area, so the larger signal would potentially be
saleable to advertisers as a regional signal. If "classical" (quotes
again; they're getting as tiresome as Mr G's venting) can't be sold on
an essentially Boston signal, it might be a little more saleable on a
signal that covered half the land area of New England and WAY more
than half the population.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Nelson" <raccoonradio@mail.com>
To: "BostonRadio Mailing List"
<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:51 AM
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?


Tom Taylor, in his free email-subscription newsletter, says today he
is hearing that WCRB is now on
the market ("Star Media Group's Doug Ferber has the listing to sell
WCRB" -- available by free
subscription via http://www.radio-info.com )
We know about Entercom and Nassau and how their agreement fell through
(to put
WEEI on several Nassau stations, and Entercom would get half of 99.5).
But now Taylor's
hearing that Nassau is peddling the longtime classical outlet. Would
the new owners keep
it classical, or find a way to satisfy that longterm agreement to keep
classical by
putting it on an HD, an AM signal they may have, a smaller FM, etc.?




From kc1ih@mac.com  Tue Jan  8 12:53:50 2008
From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:53:50 -0500
Subject: "Ray Brown" Has Left The Building
In-Reply-To: <000801c851ef$e154e510$10f8a742@SatU205S5044>
References: <20080107180852.9AF781F50B6@ws1-2.us4.outblaze.com>
	<000801c851ef$e154e510$10f8a742@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <001801c8521f$73f50380$c7151bac@MasterExtra>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org 
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org]
>  On Behalf Of Dan.Strassberg
> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 7:13 AM
> To: Laurence Glavin; Ric Werme; 
> boston-radio-interest@tsornin.bostonradio.org
> Subject: Re: "Ray Brown" Has Left The Building
> 
> Wsn't there (or isn't there still) a guy with the same name, 
> Ray Brown, who did (or still does) an old-time jazz show on a 
> weekend night on WGBH-FM?

There was a Ray Brown who was a well known jazz bassist, who played with
many of the greats.

Larry Weil
Lake Wobegone, NH
 


From kc1ih@mac.com  Tue Jan  8 12:56:04 2008
From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:56:04 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>
References: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <001901c8521f$bf7a8280$c7151bac@MasterExtra>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org 
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org]
>  On Behalf Of Bob Nelson
> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:51 AM
> To: BostonRadio Mailing List
> Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
> 
> Tom Taylor, in his free email-subscription newsletter, says 
> today he is hearing that WCRB is now on the market ("Star 
> Media Group's Doug Ferber has the listing to sell WCRB" -- 
> available by free subscription via http://www.radio-info.com 
> ) We know about Entercom and Nassau and how their agreement 
> fell through (to put WEEI on several Nassau stations, and 
> Entercom would get half of 99.5). But now Taylor's hearing 
> that Nassau is peddling the longtime classical outlet. Would 
> the new owners keep it classical, or find a way to satisfy 
> that longterm agreement to keep classical by putting it on an 
> HD, an AM signal they may have, a smaller FM, etc.?

I think that any purchasser would not be a party to said agreement.

Larry Weil
Lake Wobegone, NH 


From scott@fybush.com  Tue Jan  8 13:28:00 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:28:00 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <001901c8521f$bf7a8280$c7151bac@MasterExtra>
References: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<001901c8521f$bf7a8280$c7151bac@MasterExtra>
Message-ID: <4783C0B0.1010902@fybush.com>

Larry Weil wrote:

> I think that any purchasser would not be a party to said agreement.

It would seem, from a lot of what was being said around the time of the 
99.5/102.5 switch, that the "agreement" didn't turn out to be binding 
anyway. (And while IANAL, there's a case to be made that under FCC 
regulations, the seller of a station can't legally bind the purchaser to 
  any specific programming; furthermore, even if a court were to 
determine that the Jones trust barred the *sale* of WCRB if it would 
have led to the end of classical programming - which is at least 
possibly legal - there's no conceivable way that clause could have 
applied to 99.5. I think.)

I do agree with those who suspect that a Nassau sale of 99.5 would be 
the death knell for commercial classical in Boston. The format is at 
death's door on a national scale, with recent defections in Washington, 
LA and Milwaukee, among others.

The only operators still doing commercial classical in bigger markets 
are (with one big exception) not "corporate radio": a foundation owns 
KING-FM in Seattle, the city of Dallas owns WRR-FM, the Lutheran Church 
owns KFUO-FM in St. Louis, the NY Times operates WQXR as a classy (and 
not unprofitable) bit of PR, and Chicago's WFMT, while commercial, is 
operated by public TV station WTTW. The last corporate classical FM 
station I can think of in a sizable market is Bonneville's KDFC, San 
Francisco.

s

From nostaticatall@charter.net  Tue Jan  8 13:30:31 2008
From: nostaticatall@charter.net (David Tomm)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:30:31 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <000901c85210$f844ec40$adf8a742@SatU205S5044>
References: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<000901c85210$f844ec40$adf8a742@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <781f07ab4dc0f07badc778dbc3fd6d96@charter.net>

I think Nassau was brought in as a third party facilitator to get the 
Charles River/Greater Media deal done for 102.5.  They never had any 
long term plans to keep the station.  It really doesn't fit in with the 
rest of their portfolio, and running a standalone operation in a major 
market with a boutique format on a suburban stick in a tough radio 
economy doesn't make much sense.   The Entercom deal was the best 
Nassau was going to get in terms of cash relief, so now that it's dead, 
it's only other option is to sell.  CBS and GM are maxed out, and Clear 
Channel is in a selling mode right now so spinning it to Entercom is a 
distinct possibility.  No matter who purchases 99.5, the classical goes 
to HD2.

Under Entercom, my guess is that WEEI would go to 99.5.  I can't see 
WAAF moving there.  Their core listening area is Metrowest and 
Worcester County, and 107.3 covers that area much better than 99.5.  
There's too much heritage on 107.3 for Entercom to risk taking the rock 
off that signal.  However, if they were to do that, maybe they put WEEI 
on 107.3/97.7, and move 107.3 back on Asnebumsket.  That would fill in 
the holes between Providence, Central Mass. and Springfield, where WEEI 
is already simulcasting on 103.7/Westerly and 105.5/Easthampton.  Then 
the company could spin off 1440.

The other option for 99.5 is for Salem to pick it up and put one of 
their "Fish" contemporary Christian formats on it.  Another would be 
for one of the big Hispanic broadcasters like Univision or SBS to come 
in and try a Spanish language-based format.  In any instance, if 99.5 
sells, the classical is gone from the main signal.

-Dave Tomm
"Mike Thomas"



On Jan 8, 2008, at 11:10 AM, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> This won't happen, of course; it makes too much sense: Suppose
> Entercom were to buy 99.5 and move WAAF there. The 99.5 signal
> downtown is good enough that 97.7 might no longer be needed as a WAAF
> simulcast--although 97.7's South Shore coverage might be an asset to
> 99.5. Then the "classics" (I'm putting that in quotes to forestall
> another of Mr Glavin's diatribes) could move up the dial to 107.3 and
> Entercom might even be smart enough to move 107.3 back to where it
> belongs--on Asnebumsket Hilll in Paxton (assuming the FCC hasn't shut
> that door)--because the WCRB format is unduplicated in the rest of the
> old 107.3 coverage area, so the larger signal would potentially be
> saleable to advertisers as a regional signal. If "classical" (quotes
> again; they're getting as tiresome as Mr G's venting) can't be sold on
> an essentially Boston signal, it might be a little more saleable on a
> signal that covered half the land area of New England and WAY more
> than half the population.
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)


From kvahey@comcast.net  Tue Jan  8 13:36:15 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:36:15 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <4783C0B0.1010902@fybush.com>
References: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<001901c8521f$bf7a8280$c7151bac@MasterExtra>
	<4783C0B0.1010902@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801081036u1852c8e7k29aceb4b1dd0a828@mail.gmail.com>

Scott I believe KDFC is now owned by Entercom.

I also think it is one of the highest rated stations in the Bay Area

On 1/8/08, Scott Fybush <scott@fybush.com> wrote:
 The last corporate classical FM
> station I can think of in a sizable market is Bonneville's KDFC, San
> Francisco.

From scott@fybush.com  Tue Jan  8 13:38:59 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:38:59 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <781f07ab4dc0f07badc778dbc3fd6d96@charter.net>
References: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>	<000901c85210$f844ec40$adf8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<781f07ab4dc0f07badc778dbc3fd6d96@charter.net>
Message-ID: <4783C343.6040603@fybush.com>

David Tomm wrote:

> Under Entercom, my guess is that WEEI would go to 99.5.  I can't see 
> WAAF moving there.  Their core listening area is Metrowest and Worcester 
> County, and 107.3 covers that area much better than 99.5.  There's too 
> much heritage on 107.3 for Entercom to risk taking the rock off that 
> signal.  However, if they were to do that, maybe they put WEEI on 
> 107.3/97.7, and move 107.3 back on Asnebumsket.  That would fill in the 
> holes between Providence, Central Mass. and Springfield, where WEEI is 
> already simulcasting on 103.7/Westerly and 105.5/Easthampton.  Then the 
> company could spin off 1440.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall at Nassau headquarters right now. From 
the outside, I can't tell whether the collapse of the WEEI/Nassau 
network deal is a long-term falling-out between the two companies, or 
whether it's just a bump in the road en route to a later deal.

Common sense would seem to suggest that if Entercom were serious about 
buying 99.5, the deal would be done already and Nassau wouldn't be 
shopping the station to other buyers. But stranger things have certainly 
happened in this business before, so as long as Entercom's cash remains 
green, I suppose it can't be ruled out as a possible buyer.

s

From kvahey@comcast.net  Tue Jan  8 13:41:33 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:41:33 -0500
Subject: Boston is a Top 10 market again
Message-ID: <4fc429770801081041w5125c42v1148babd354c6764@mail.gmail.com>

Very quietly Boston is now ranked #10 by Arbitron after being at 11 last year.

It looks like we are now ranked higher than Detroit which is losing
population at an alarming rate.

From scott@fybush.com  Tue Jan  8 13:45:42 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:45:42 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801081036u1852c8e7k29aceb4b1dd0a828@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>	
	<001901c8521f$bf7a8280$c7151bac@MasterExtra>	
	<4783C0B0.1010902@fybush.com>
	<4fc429770801081036u1852c8e7k29aceb4b1dd0a828@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4783C4D6.6070801@fybush.com>

Kevin Vahey wrote:
> Scott I believe KDFC is now owned by Entercom.
> 
> I also think it is one of the highest rated stations in the Bay Area

The license is still held by Bonneville for now; Entercom operates it 
under an LMA while waiting for a station swap to close.

And yes, KDFC is a tremendous success story, at least commercially. It 
may not get high marks from the Laurence Glavins of the world for its 
musical choices or seriousness of presentation, but it definitely draws 
an audience.

s

From kvahey@comcast.net  Tue Jan  8 13:46:50 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:46:50 -0500
Subject: Boston is a Top 10 market again
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801081041w5125c42v1148babd354c6764@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4fc429770801081041w5125c42v1148babd354c6764@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801081046o8595587ne7a4ec1ab8986ba8@mail.gmail.com>

Here is the new list

http://www.arbitron.com/home/mm001050.asp

One market that is vanishing is Buffalo which at the current rate maybe
smaller than Rochester in a short time.

Buffalo is 52   Rochester 54




On 1/8/08, Kevin Vahey <kvahey@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Very quietly Boston is now ranked #10 by Arbitron after being at 11 last
> year.
>
> It looks like we are now ranked higher than Detroit which is losing
> population at an alarming rate.
>

From scott@fybush.com  Tue Jan  8 13:56:41 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:56:41 -0500
Subject: Boston is a Top 10 market again
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801081046o8595587ne7a4ec1ab8986ba8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4fc429770801081041w5125c42v1148babd354c6764@mail.gmail.com>
	<4fc429770801081046o8595587ne7a4ec1ab8986ba8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4783C769.3030803@fybush.com>

Kevin Vahey wrote:
> Here is the new list
>  
> http://www.arbitron.com/home/mm001050.asp
>  
> One market that is vanishing is Buffalo which at the current rate maybe 
> smaller than Rochester in a short time.
>  
> Buffalo is 52   Rochester 54

Take those numbers with at least a small grain of salt, only because the 
counties between Buffalo and Rochester have a tendency to flop back and 
forth between markets from year to year.

Like Detroit, Buffalo has really become two markets - a surprisingly 
affluent and vital ring of suburbs surrounding a decaying central city. 
  At that, there are more sparks of life in the city of Buffalo right 
now than there are within Detroit city limits.

There's another thing about Buffalo that the numbers don't show: the 
market feels bigger than Rochester in large part because of the mammoth 
Golden Horseshoe of southern Ontario, from Niagara up to Toronto, that's 
just across the river. Especially as the Canadian dollar hangs in there 
above par, there's a steady stream of commerce across the border. That's 
one big reason why they have an NFL team and an NHL team (and almost 
landed an NL baseball team in the eighties), and we have...er...the 
National Lacrosse League champions.

s

From billohno@gmail.com  Tue Jan  8 13:57:30 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:57:30 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <4783C0B0.1010902@fybush.com>
References: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>	<001901c8521f$bf7a8280$c7151bac@MasterExtra>
	<4783C0B0.1010902@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <4783C79A.40401@gmail.com>

Scott Fybush wrote:
> The format is at death's door on a national scale, with recent 
> defections in Washington, LA and Milwaukee, among others.

Is this due to the fact that the classical demo is more likely to access 
the product through new(er) media, HD, and are less bound to a 
terrestrial signal?

Bill O'Neill
/

/

From rac@gabrielmass.com  Tue Jan  8 14:23:22 2008
From: rac@gabrielmass.com (Richard Chonak)
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:23:22 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <4783C79A.40401@gmail.com>
References: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>	<001901c8521f$bf7a8280$c7151bac@MasterExtra>	<4783C0B0.1010902@fybush.com>
	<4783C79A.40401@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4783CDAA.8070804@gabrielmass.com>

Lately I've been listening to the UK's "Classic FM" service over the 
net, and wondering whether something similar could do well here in the 
States.   Any thoughts?

--rc


From songbook2@comcast.net  Tue Jan  8 14:53:39 2008
From: songbook2@comcast.net (Russ Butler)
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:53:39 -0800
Subject: Ray Brown WCRB photo
Message-ID: <4783D4C3.9000608@comcast.net>

Go to the "Images" link on Google for "Ray Brown WCRB" to see his color 
photo.  =Russ

From lglavin@mail.com  Tue Jan  8 16:56:53 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:56:53 -0500
Subject: Boston is a Top 10 market again
Message-ID: <20080108215653.827AE164290@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com>

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Scott Fybush" 
>To: "Kevin Vahey" 
>Subject: Re: Boston is a Top 10 market again
>Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:56:41 -0500

>Take those numbers with at least a small grain of salt, only 
>because the counties between Buffalo and Rochester have a tendency 
>to flop back and forth between markets from year to year.
>Like Detroit, Buffalo has really become two markets - a 
>surprisingly affluent and vital ring of suburbs surrounding a 
>decaying central city. At that, there are more sparks of life in 
>the city of Buffalo right now than there are within Detroit city 
>limits.
>There's another thing about Buffalo that the numbers don't show: 
>the market feels bigger than Rochester in large part because of the 
>mammoth Golden Horseshoe of southern Ontario, from Niagara up to 
>Toronto, that's just across the river. Especially as the Canadian 
>dollar hangs in there above par, there's a steady stream of 
>commerce across the border. That's one big reason why they have an 
>NFL team and an NHL team (and almost landed an NL baseball team in 
>the eighties), and we have...er...the National Lacrosse League 
>champions.

It's a good thing for Buffalo that Scott is around to hype the City...unlike the
NY Times two months ago.  Then, they ran an article in the Sunday Arts Section 
about Marin Alsop, who had just assumed the music directorship of the
Baltimore Symphony Orchestra.  The paper identified her as the FIRST woman to 
hold that office of a MAJOR U.S. symphony orchestra...then in parentheses, the
author noted that, yes indeed, Joann Falletta is a woman and the music director of 
the Buffalo Philharmonic, BUT that orchestra is not considered to be a MAJOR 
symphony orchestra!  I fully expected letters to the editor of the Times arts
section by Lukas Foss and/or Michael Tilson Thomas, both prominent American
musicians who had been Music Directors of the B.P.O. but none appeared!  BTW,
to relate this to radio, Marin Alsop appears frequently as a commentator on music
on NPR, principally on Weekend Edition/Saturday and Sunday.
s


-- 
Are we headed for a recession? Read more on the Money Portal
Mail.com Money - http://www.mail.com/Money.aspx?cat=money


From lglavin@mail.com  Tue Jan  8 17:01:29 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 17:01:29 -0500
Subject: Boston is a Top 10 market again
Message-ID: <20080108220130.81C25164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com>

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Kevin Vahey" 
>To: "BostonRadio Mailing List" 
>Subject: Boston is a Top 10 market again
>Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:41:33 -0500

>Very quietly Boston is now ranked #10 by Arbitron after being at 11 last year.
>It looks like we are now ranked higher than Detroit which is losing
>population at an alarming rate.

Interesting timing:  just today, I saw items on a few radio websites to the
effect that Dennis Miller's syndicator is making a big push to get his show 
on more stations.  Their claim is that Dennis Miller is now on in ALL TEN OF
THE TOP TEN MARKETS!  Ooops...not here.   I checked the Dennis
Miller show website, and their closest outlet is WPEP-AM, Providence.  Do you
think it  may be time to revise their affiliate list?

-- 
Are we headed for a recession? Read more on the Money Portal
Mail.com Money - http://www.mail.com/Money.aspx?cat=money


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Tue Jan  8 20:48:14 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:48:14 -0500
Subject: Boston is a Top 10 market again
References: <20080108215653.827AE164290@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <006601c85261$b3511540$6501a8c0@pastor2>

I wonder to what extent Canadian (Toronto-area) radio is listened to in
Buffalo and Rochester, and vice-versa?  -Doug


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Laurence Glavin" <lglavin@mail.com>
To: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>; "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>
Cc: "BostonRadio Mailing List"
<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 4:56 PM
Subject: Re: Boston is a Top 10 market again


>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Scott Fybush"
>To: "Kevin Vahey"
>Subject: Re: Boston is a Top 10 market again
>Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:56:41 -0500

>Take those numbers with at least a small grain of salt, only
>because the counties between Buffalo and Rochester have a tendency
>to flop back and forth between markets from year to year.
>Like Detroit, Buffalo has really become two markets - a
>surprisingly affluent and vital ring of suburbs surrounding a
>decaying central city. At that, there are more sparks of life in
>the city of Buffalo right now than there are within Detroit city
>limits.
>There's another thing about Buffalo that the numbers don't show:
>the market feels bigger than Rochester in large part because of the
>mammoth Golden Horseshoe of southern Ontario, from Niagara up to
>Toronto, that's just across the river. Especially as the Canadian
>dollar hangs in there above par, there's a steady stream of
>commerce across the border. That's one big reason why they have an
>NFL team and an NHL team (and almost landed an NL baseball team in
>the eighties), and we have...er...the National Lacrosse League
>champions.

It's a good thing for Buffalo that Scott is around to hype the City...unlike
the
NY Times two months ago.  Then, they ran an article in the Sunday Arts
Section
about Marin Alsop, who had just assumed the music directorship of the
Baltimore Symphony Orchestra.  The paper identified her as the FIRST woman
to
hold that office of a MAJOR U.S. symphony orchestra...then in parentheses,
the
author noted that, yes indeed, Joann Falletta is a woman and the music
director of
the Buffalo Philharmonic, BUT that orchestra is not considered to be a MAJOR
symphony orchestra!  I fully expected letters to the editor of the Times
arts
section by Lukas Foss and/or Michael Tilson Thomas, both prominent American
musicians who had been Music Directors of the B.P.O. but none appeared!
BTW,
to relate this to radio, Marin Alsop appears frequently as a commentator on
music
on NPR, principally on Weekend Edition/Saturday and Sunday.
s


-- 
Are we headed for a recession? Read more on the Money Portal
Mail.com Money - http://www.mail.com/Money.aspx?cat=money


From scott@fybush.com  Tue Jan  8 21:12:53 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:12:53 -0500
Subject: Boston is a Top 10 market again
In-Reply-To: <006601c85261$b3511540$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <20080108215653.827AE164290@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com>
	<006601c85261$b3511540$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <47842DA5.3010502@fybush.com>

Doug Drown wrote:
> I wonder to what extent Canadian (Toronto-area) radio is listened to in
> Buffalo and Rochester, and vice-versa?  -Doug

Less and less every year, thanks to the congestion of the FM dial.

Toronto radio was never a huge factor in Rochester - we're just too far 
east to get reliable signals from most of the Toronto stations. A few of 
the big CN Tower FMs - CFNY 102.1, CHUM-FM 104.5, CILQ 107.1, CBL-FM 
94.1 - used to be adequately listenable here. Then a whole bunch of 
80-90 drop-ins and new translators came along, and today there's not a 
one of them that's really listenable in Rochester. CFMZ (ex-CFMX) 103.1 
from Cobourg, directly north of us across the lake, does put a decent 
signal over Rochester and has a cult following for its classical format. 
On AM, most of the Toronto stations are directional away from us. CHWO 
740 is the big exception, and again has a small following here. (Many of 
us down here listened to 740 religiously in its CBL days, too.)

Rochester radio doesn't reach Toronto at all. Our FM stations have small 
listenership along the lake east of Toronto (Belleville, Cobourg area), 
but that's dying off as more new FMs go on the air up there and block 
our signals off the dial.

The relationship between the Buffalo and Toronto markets is much closer. 
It's only 35 air miles or so from downtown to downtown, and both markets 
have superpower FMs that far exceed usual class B maximums. Until about 
a decade ago, Toronto was very under-FM-ed, which meant plenty of room 
for most of the Buffalo FMs to get in cleanly. Several - most notably 
urban WBLK 93.7 - offered formats that were unduplicated in Toronto and 
thus picked up not only listeners but advertisers up there. Likewise, 
most of the big Toronto FMs were heard clearly in Buffalo and drew 
ratings there.

Again, translators and Canadian FM shoehorns have had a big impact. 
Canada has gone so far as to put class A signals in Toronto 
first-adjacent to and even co-channel with Buffalo FMs, so WBLK is now 
wiped out by CFXJ on 93.5 (also urban), WYRK 106.5 is wiped by CFAV on 
106.5, and so on.

There's plenty of signal back and forth on the AM dial between Buffalo 
and Toronto - indeed, Buffalo's WNED 970 is heard better in downtown 
Toronto than in some eastern Buffalo suburbs - but not much cross-border 
listening anymore. It was not always thus; old radios from the 
push-button era that were used around Toronto invariably have buttons 
set for Buffalo's WGR, WBEN and WKBW.

s

From ewerme@comcast.net  Wed Jan  9 01:05:37 2008
From: ewerme@comcast.net (Ric Werme)
Date: Wed,  9 Jan 2008 01:05:37 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
Message-ID: <20080109060537.F22D95BDA0@c-24-128-108-153.hsd1.nh.comcast.net>

Scott wrote:

>  The last corporate classical FM 
> station I can think of in a sizable market is Bonneville's KDFC, San 
> Francisco.

Cleveland (#28 at http://www.arbitron.com/home/mm001050.asp ) appears to
still have WCLV at 104.9 and http://wclv.com/.  They had a program, I think
on Saturday that was similar to WCRB's Saturday Night.  For a while they
exchanged parts of their program with the other.  Each was involved in
fund raising for the biggest "local" orchestra, I remember a WCLV vistor
having trouble pronouncing names like Leominster.  (He nailed Worcester.)

Their page http://wclv.com/page.php?pageID=62 is worth reading, an excerpt:


  The culmination of a three-year process to preserve classical music on the
  radio in Cleveland took place on November 1, 2001, when WCLV 104.9 FM was
  donated to the non-profit WCLV Foundation, established under the auspices
  of The Cleveland Foundation. Robert Conrad and Richard Marschner, the
  majority stockholders of WCLV, made the donation.

  WCLV 104.9 FM continues to operate as a commercial radio station, with any
  excess profits benefiting five major Cleveland arts institutions: The
  Cleveland Orchestra, The Cleveland Museum of Art, The Cleveland Institute
  of Music, The Cleveland Playhouse, ideastream and The Cleveland Foundation.

I grew up in Painesville, about 25 miles east of Cleveland.  Haven't heard
WCLV in ages.

  -Ric Werme

From joe@attorneyross.com  Wed Jan  9 01:24:48 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 01:24:48 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <4783CDAA.8070804@gabrielmass.com>
References: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<4783C79A.40401@gmail.com>, <4783CDAA.8070804@gabrielmass.com>
Message-ID: <47842260.18611.791A13@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 8 Jan 2008 at 14:23, Richard Chonak wrote:

> Lately I've been listening to the UK's "Classic FM" service over the
> net, and wondering whether something similar could do well here in the
> States.   Any thoughts?

There are a number of US classical services on the net.  I sometimes 
listen to them when I'm tired of WCRB.  WCRB is also on the net.

What's the URL for the UK's Classic FM service.  I assume this isn't 
the same as BBC Radio 3, which I've already listened to.  There's 
also a Bavarian FM station, "Bayern 4 Klassik" at  
http://radio.real.com/mediaHurl/_/stationid/7004808?pcode=RN&cpath=CNT
&rsrc=radio.classical-ns.main

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From rac@gabrielmass.com  Wed Jan  9 06:12:19 2008
From: rac@gabrielmass.com (Richard Chonak)
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 06:12:19 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <47842260.18611.791A13@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <20080108155129.2E50083BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<4783C79A.40401@gmail.com>, <4783CDAA.8070804@gabrielmass.com>
	<47842260.18611.791A13@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <4784AC13.90300@gabrielmass.com>

On 01/09/2008 01:24 AM, A. Joseph Ross wrote:
 >
 > There are a number of US classical services on the net.  I sometimes 
listen to them when I'm tired of WCRB.  WCRB is also on the net.
 >
 > What's the URL for the UK's Classic FM service.  I assume this isn't
 > the same as BBC Radio 3, which I've already listened to.


Their site doesn't mention the BBC, so I assume this is independent. 
"Classic FM" is on the web at http://www.classicfm.co.uk , and has 
streaming audio options at
http://www.classicfm.co.uk/Article.asp?id=421143&spid=13479

If your audio player accepts mmsh: URLs, you can try this one:
mmsh://mediasrv-the.musicradio.com/ClassicFM?MSWMExt=.asf

--RC


From scott@fybush.com  Wed Jan  9 14:41:58 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:41:58 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <20080109060537.F22D95BDA0@c-24-128-108-153.hsd1.nh.comcast.net>
References: <20080109060537.F22D95BDA0@c-24-128-108-153.hsd1.nh.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <47852386.60101@fybush.com>

Ric Werme wrote:

> I grew up in Painesville, about 25 miles east of Cleveland.  Haven't heard
> WCLV in ages.

And you wouldn't hear it if you went home to Painesville, either!

Bob Conrad's heart was in the right place when he did that big signal 
swap in 2001, trading WCLV's full-market class B signal on 95.5 for a 
west-side rimshot A on 104.9 (it's licensed to Lorain) and a pile of 
cash to help keep WCLV alive.

Unfortunately, the audience for classical music in Cleveland is mostly 
on the east side of town, and 104.9 just doesn't go there. As part of 
those 2001 swaps, Conrad picked up the AM 1420 signal (previously, and 
now again, WHK), hoping at the time that HD Radio might come along 
quickly and make classical viable on the AM side. That didn't happen, 
and after a few years operating 1420 with standards (first as WCLV AM, 
then as WRMR), he sold the station to Salem.

WCLV's classical format was also simulcast for a few years on the 1460 
in Painesville, under the WBKC calls, but the audio quality was abysmal 
and ratings never materialized.

I give Conrad plenty of credit for trying to keep classical alive in 
Cleveland - but it's hard to run a radio station when your target 
listeners can't hear you!

s

From lglavin@mail.com  Wed Jan  9 15:17:06 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 15:17:06 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
Message-ID: <20080109201706.797821158CC@ws1-7.us4.outblaze.com>

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Scott Fybush" 
>To: "Ric Werme" 
>Subject: Re: Is WCRB up for sale?
>Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:41:58 -0500

The subject line is based on items appearing on various radio websites, but
as of today (Wednesday) neither the Boston Globe nor the Boston Herald has 
mentioned anything about the possible sale of WCRB.  If such a story appears
anywhere else than Clea Simon's column in the Globe, it might be on the 
business page Thursday...at the Herald, if Heslam is aware of it at all, she may run it too.


-- 
Are we headed for a recession? Read more on the Money Portal
Mail.com Money - http://www.mail.com/Money.aspx?cat=money


From songbook2@comcast.net  Wed Jan  9 19:25:23 2008
From: songbook2@comcast.net (Russ Butler)
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 16:25:23 -0800
Subject: All Classical
Message-ID: <478565F3.8040909@comcast.net>

In my neck of the woods it's  www.allclassical.org  the stream for 
KBPS-FM.  Great programming in Portland OR.  =Russ

From paul@derrynh.net  Thu Jan 10 05:46:24 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 05:46:24 -0500
Subject: WUBB
In-Reply-To: <478565F3.8040909@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <005601c85376$0bb3fad0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

In 'flipping the dial" this AM, I've noticed that former Country station
WUBB (95.3FM York Ctr.) is now simulcasting WQSO "The Wave" (96.7
Somersworth) and it's Oldies 60s-70s format..

Don't know if its permanent or stunting...(I see wubb.com still defaults to
"Sports coming soon")

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH


From raccoonradio@mail.com  Thu Jan 10 12:10:44 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:10:44 -0500
Subject: WUBB
Message-ID: <20080110171047.55E0283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>

Yes, someone had noted that Clear Channel had registered kiss953.com and put up a page suggesting the station
would flip to a Kiss 108-like format; then the "Coming Soon, Sports" page went up on that site. Now as you
note, wubb.com redirects to that same page and you're hearing, for now at least, a simulcast of 
WQSO.

Wonder if they may be picking up Fox Sports--I believe WTSN runs ESPN Radio--or possibly they could
eventually pick up WEEI simulcasts, if Entercom is still planning to do re-broadcasters (just not
Nassau stations...?)


From lglavin@mail.com  Thu Jan 10 13:20:44 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:20:44 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
Message-ID: <20080110182044.C6CA91158CE@ws1-7.us4.outblaze.com>

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Laurence Glavin" 
>To: "Scott Fybush" , "Ric Werme" 
>Subject: Re: Is WCRB up for sale?
>Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 15:17:06 -0500
>
>The subject line is based on items appearing on various radio websites, but
>as of today (Wednesday) neither the Boston Globe nor the Boston Herald has
>mentioned anything about the possible sale of WCRB. If such a story appears
>anywhere else than Clea Simon's column in the Globe, it might be on the
>business page Thursday...at the Herald, if Heslam is aware of it at 
>all, she may run it too.

Clea Simon's column ran in the Thursday Globe and contained much the same information 
as the radio-info.com news item by Tom Taylor (didn't he play Captain Marvel in the movies?).
That puts the information before the general public (it appeared in the Globe's 'Style & Arts'
section), or at least those who read stories about the radio IN - DUSS-  TREEEE!
(Sorry, a "Firesign Theater" flashback).


-- 
Are we headed for a recession? Read more on the Money Portal
Mail.com Money - http://www.mail.com/Money.aspx?cat=money


From ewerme@comcast.net  Thu Jan 10 22:53:54 2008
From: ewerme@comcast.net (Ric Werme)
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:53:54 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
Message-ID: <4786E852.7040502@comcast.net>

 > Ric Werme wrote:
 >
 > > I grew up in Painesville, about 25 miles east of Cleveland.  
Haven't heard
 > > WCLV in ages.
 >
 > And you wouldn't hear it if you went home to Painesville, either!

Sigh.

...

 > WCLV's classical format was also simulcast for a few years on the 1460
 > in Painesville, under the WBKC calls, but the audio quality was abysmal
 > and ratings never materialized.

That was another surprise when I was in the area - I remember 1460 as
WPVL and finding that vital local interest station had turned into
something entirely different was a bit of shock.  Of course, that was
long before I subscribed to this list largely to keep an eye on WCRB
shenanigans.  At the time I didn't quite realize what has happened to
the AM market.

I moved to Painesville in 1957 or so and stayed essentially until I left
for college in Pittsburgh in 1968.  I actually do have roots that add
to my interest in this list.  My first parttime job was to setup and
monitor the Sunday AM remote broadcast of church services in the area.
Every month I'd go to a different church and handle the different
configuration, hope that no one had cut the unswitched telco line that
had been underfoot for the last year or so, deal with snow, fog, trains
blocking the only paved access to the station, etc.

I learned a lot about local radio and how different the various churches 
are.
A lot of people listened to that broadcast and played WPVL-O, a sorta
Bingo-like game, and local news, and even the "Be Still and Know" homily
played at the End of the Broadcast Day.

   - Ric Werme


From paul@derrynh.net  Fri Jan 11 06:40:29 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 06:40:29 -0500
Subject: WUBB
Message-ID: <002101c85446$c4c57d20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

Well....

Kiss 95.3 it is....

There's a qtr page ad in the Union Leader today announcing...

"No it's not a new lipstick"
"It's not a dating service either"
"It's the best kiss the seacoast will ever have"
Monday January 14th Stay Tuned.

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH


-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Hopfgarten [mailto:paul@derrynh.net] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 5:46 AM
To: 'boston-radio-interest@tsornin.bostonradio.org'
Subject: WUBB

In 'flipping the dial" this AM, I've noticed that former Country station
WUBB (95.3FM York Ctr.) is now simulcasting WQSO "The Wave" (96.7
Somersworth) and it's Oldies 60s-70s format..

Don't know if its permanent or stunting...(I see wubb.com still defaults to
"Sports coming soon")

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Fri Jan 11 14:33:23 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:33:23 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
Message-ID: <21810144.8027071200080004285.JavaMail.root@vms226.mailsrvcs.net>

I'm in Mass. for a couple of days and having been listening to WCRB, which not only has been touting its upcoming 60th anniversary but which, in offering itself as an advertising medium, refers to itself as a world-renowned radio station. (I wouldn't argue that historically it's at least nationally renowned.) 

I wouldn't think references like this would be made if Nassau were seriously considering selling.  -Doug





From: Laurence Glavin <lglavin@mail.com>
Date: 2008/01/10 Thu PM 12:20:44 CST
To: Laurence Glavin <lglavin@mail.com>, Scott Fybush <scott@fybush.com>, 
	Ric Werme <ewerme@comcast.net>
Cc: 'BostonRadio Mailing List' <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Subject: Re: Is WCRB up for sale?

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Laurence Glavin" 
>To: "Scott Fybush" , "Ric Werme" 
>Subject: Re: Is WCRB up for sale?
>Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 15:17:06 -0500
>
>The subject line is based on items appearing on various radio websites, but
>as of today (Wednesday) neither the Boston Globe nor the Boston Herald has
>mentioned anything about the possible sale of WCRB. If such a story appears
>anywhere else than Clea Simon's column in the Globe, it might be on the
>business page Thursday...at the Herald, if Heslam is aware of it at 
>all, she may run it too.

Clea Simon's column ran in the Thursday Globe and contained much the same information 
as the radio-info.com news item by Tom Taylor (didn't he play Captain Marvel in the movies?).
That puts the information before the general public (it appeared in the Globe's 'Style & Arts'
section), or at least those who read stories about the radio IN - DUSS-  TREEEE!
(Sorry, a "Firesign Theater" flashback).


-- 
Are we headed for a recession? Read more on the Money Portal
Mail.com Money - http://www.mail.com/Money.aspx?cat=money


From sid@wrko.com  Fri Jan 11 14:43:20 2008
From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:43:20 -0700
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
Message-ID: <s7876477.099@entbalms2.entercom.com>

>>I wouldn't think references like this would be made if Nassau were
seriously considering selling.<<

I would.  They'd want the station to be worth as much as possible at
sale time, and the sale price includes existing contracts and
commitments, like advertising.  The more advertisers they have, the more
the station is worth.



Sid Schweiger
IT Manager, Entercom New England
WAAF - WEEI AM/FM - WKAF
WMKK - WRKO - WVEI AM/FM
20 Guest St / 3d Floor
Boston MA  02135-2040
Phone: 617-779-5369
Fax: 617-779-5379
E-Mail: sid@wrko.com

From lglavin@mail.com  Fri Jan 11 15:59:41 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:59:41 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
Message-ID: <20080111205941.8D44D1158CC@ws1-7.us4.outblaze.com>

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Doug Drown" 
>To: "Ric Werme" , "Laurence Glavin" , "Scott Fybush" 
>Subject: Re: Re: Is WCRB up for sale?
>Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:33:23 -0600 (CST)

>I'm in Mass. for a couple of days and having been listening to 
>WCRB, which not only has been touting its upcoming 60th anniversary 
>but which, in offering itself as an advertising medium, refers to 
>itself as a world-renowned radio station. (I wouldn't argue that 
>historically it's at least nationally renowned.)

There IS  a W C R B that is or soon will be world-renowned:
the World Congres on Reproductive Biology, a conference scheduled to
take place in Hawaii in May of this year.
For those who like to truncate call letters minus the W- or K-, 
the Commodity Research Bureau advertises itself at its website 
crbtrader.com as the "world's leading commodities and futures research
firm."  
On a more localized site, the Wisconsin Compensation Rating Bureau is of
interest to cheeseheads.




-- 
Are we headed for a recession? Read more on the Money Portal
Mail.com Money - http://www.mail.com/Money.aspx?cat=money


From joe@attorneyross.com  Fri Jan 11 23:53:12 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:53:12 -0500
Subject: Is WCRB up for sale?
In-Reply-To: <s7876477.099@entbalms2.entercom.com>
References: <s7876477.099@entbalms2.entercom.com>
Message-ID: <47880168.29240.430ECF@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 11 Jan 2008 at 12:43, Sid Schweiger wrote:

> >>I wouldn't think references like this would be made if Nassau were
> seriously considering selling.<<
> 
> I would.  They'd want the station to be worth as much as possible at
> sale time, and the sale price includes existing contracts and
> commitments, like advertising.  The more advertisers they have, the
> more the station is worth.

But how would that help a buyer who wanted to drop the classical 
format? 

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From francini@mac.com  Sat Jan 12 08:02:21 2008
From: francini@mac.com (John Francini)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:02:21 -0500
Subject: I thought the WEEI-Nassau deal was dead...
Message-ID: <B0D42FF9-D398-409A-8C72-73E34E25E02E@mac.com>

...if so, then why has WEEI been saying, both at ~:30 and ~:00, "This  
is the WEEI Sports Radio Network"?  (And then, at the top of the  
hour, doing the usual bunch-o-stations ID.)

Curiosity abounds!

j


From jjlehmann@comcast.net  Sat Jan 12 08:13:48 2008
From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:13:48 -0500
Subject: I thought the WEEI-Nassau deal was dead...
In-Reply-To: <B0D42FF9-D398-409A-8C72-73E34E25E02E@mac.com>
Message-ID: <022101c8551c$f8647ec0$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>

> ...if so, then why has WEEI been saying, both at ~:30 and ~:00, "This
> is the WEEI Sports Radio Network"?  (And then, at the top of the
> hour, doing the usual bunch-o-stations ID.)

I started hearing some of those IDs just before Christmas. They were
probably produced when they thought the deal was still going to happen.
Since they do have 4 stations of their own, I would think that still
qualifies as a network.

Jeff Lehmann
Hanson, MA


From billohno@gmail.com  Sat Jan 12 12:48:47 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:48:47 -0500
Subject: I thought the WEEI-Nassau deal was dead...
In-Reply-To: <022101c8551c$f8647ec0$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>
References: <022101c8551c$f8647ec0$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>
Message-ID: <4788FD7F.5070500@gmail.com>

Jeff Lehmann wrote:
> Since they do have 4 stations of their own, I would think that still
> qualifies as a network.
>   
Even with mega-dollars behind sports flagships and affiliated stations, 
it still sounds very medium market/camp when I hear flagship calls 
across a network.  Name it after Auntie and call it the Ethel Sports 
network if you must but come on....

Bill O'Neill

From wollman@bimajority.org  Sun Jan 13 00:14:11 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 00:14:11 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
Message-ID: <18313.40483.634176.905649@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

I was not far from the 1300 transmitter site today and heard what
I believed to be an overmodulated 91.3 pirate very near that location
(State & Palmer, off Sea St.).  Does anyone know anything about it?

I also noticed, last week when I was up on the hill in Haverhill, that
90.9 was not audible.  This could easily be a mixing product in my car
radio (92.5 - 1.49 ~= 91.0), but in the past there was an issue with
1490's RF leaking into the 92.5 composite feed to the transmitter.  (I
also finally found the perfect angle fromf which to take a decent
picture of those towers, but did not have my camera with me.)

-GAWollman


From jjlehmann@comcast.net  Sun Jan 13 00:21:52 2008
From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann)
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 00:21:52 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
In-Reply-To: <18313.40483.634176.905649@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <027901c855a4$3573d400$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>

> I was not far from the 1300 transmitter site today and heard what
> I believed to be an overmodulated 91.3 pirate very near that location
> (State & Palmer, off Sea St.).  Does anyone know anything about it?
> 
> I also noticed, last week when I was up on the hill in Haverhill, that
> 90.9 was not audible.  This could easily be a mixing product in my car
> radio (92.5 - 1.49 ~= 91.0), but in the past there was an issue with
> 1490's RF leaking into the 92.5 composite feed to the transmitter.  (I
> also finally found the perfect angle fromf which to take a decent
> picture of those towers, but did not have my camera with me.)

There's been a very strong 91.3 pirate on West Selden St. in Dorchester for
a year or two. Perhaps this is the one you were hearing? They have one of
the more interested antenna setups I've seen, it's quite high up a tree!

http://belmizikfm.com/

Jeff Lehmann
Hanson, MA




From dan.strassberg@att.net  Sun Jan 13 06:13:30 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 06:13:30 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
References: <027901c855a4$3573d400$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>
Message-ID: <001601c855d5$559d0d10$40eda644@SatU205S5044>

And as the tree grows, I assume, so does the HAAT. A previously
undiscovered method of having the coverage grow to match urban
sprawl;>) The perfect marriage of new and old technologies;>) (Slaps
forehead in one of those "I could have had a V8" moments.)

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeff Lehmann" <jjlehmann@comcast.net>
To: "'Garrett Wollman'" <wollman@bimajority.org>;
<boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 12:21 AM
Subject: RE: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?


>> I was not far from the 1300 transmitter site today and heard what
>> I believed to be an overmodulated 91.3 pirate very near that
>> location
>> (State & Palmer, off Sea St.).  Does anyone know anything about it?
>>
>> I also noticed, last week when I was up on the hill in Haverhill,
>> that
>> 90.9 was not audible.  This could easily be a mixing product in my
>> car
>> radio (92.5 - 1.49 ~= 91.0), but in the past there was an issue
>> with
>> 1490's RF leaking into the 92.5 composite feed to the transmitter.
>> (I
>> also finally found the perfect angle fromf which to take a decent
>> picture of those towers, but did not have my camera with me.)
>
> There's been a very strong 91.3 pirate on West Selden St. in
> Dorchester for
> a year or two. Perhaps this is the one you were hearing? They have
> one of
> the more interested antenna setups I've seen, it's quite high up a
> tree!
>
> http://belmizikfm.com/
>
> Jeff Lehmann
> Hanson, MA
>
>
>


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Sun Jan 13 07:04:54 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 07:04:54 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
References: <027901c855a4$3573d400$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>
	<001601c855d5$559d0d10$40eda644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <000b01c855dc$843fd100$40eda644@SatU205S5044>

Brings to mind another pressing question: As global warming increases
the mean sea level, do all of the FCC's records (FM and TV at
least--and there surely must be many, many other types) need to be
continuously updated for the change in HAMSL (height above mean sea
level)? One would think an algorithm could be applied that would make
the correction automatically. This would be especially helpful when
the FCC's offices themselves slip below the waves;>( (OK, I guess it
would be more correct to say "as the waves rise up to envelop the
FCC's offices"). A little gallows humor there.

Also, I believe the FCC needs to think about grandfathering AM
overlaps that suddenly appear because of new salt-water paths that
result from rising sea levels. Oh, the humanity!

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
To: "Jeff Lehmann" <jjlehmann@comcast.net>; "'Garrett Wollman'"
<wollman@bimajority.org>; <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 6:13 AM
Subject: Re: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?


> And as the tree grows, I assume, so does the HAAT. A previously
> undiscovered method of having the coverage grow to match urban
> sprawl;>) The perfect marriage of new and old technologies;>) (Slaps
> forehead in one of those "I could have had a V8" moments.)
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jeff Lehmann" <jjlehmann@comcast.net>
> To: "'Garrett Wollman'" <wollman@bimajority.org>;
> <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 12:21 AM
> Subject: RE: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
>
>
>>> I was not far from the 1300 transmitter site today and heard what
>>> I believed to be an overmodulated 91.3 pirate very near that
>>> location
>>> (State & Palmer, off Sea St.).  Does anyone know anything about
>>> it?
>>>
>>> I also noticed, last week when I was up on the hill in Haverhill,
>>> that
>>> 90.9 was not audible.  This could easily be a mixing product in my
>>> car
>>> radio (92.5 - 1.49 ~= 91.0), but in the past there was an issue
>>> with
>>> 1490's RF leaking into the 92.5 composite feed to the transmitter.
>>> (I
>>> also finally found the perfect angle fromf which to take a decent
>>> picture of those towers, but did not have my camera with me.)
>>
>> There's been a very strong 91.3 pirate on West Selden St. in
>> Dorchester for
>> a year or two. Perhaps this is the one you were hearing? They have
>> one of
>> the more interested antenna setups I've seen, it's quite high up a
>> tree!
>>
>> http://belmizikfm.com/
>>
>> Jeff Lehmann
>> Hanson, MA
>>
>>
>>
>


From rogerkola@aol.com  Sun Jan 13 10:10:50 2008
From: rogerkola@aol.com (Roger Kolakowski)
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 10:10:50 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
References: <027901c855a4$3573d400$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1><001601c855d5$559d0d10$40eda644@SatU205S5044>
	<000b01c855dc$843fd100$40eda644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <003201c855f6$7c17a7e0$0200a8c0@Tanguray>

Maybe the FCC should have stayed at the top of the Customs House in Boston?

Roger
WA1KAT

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>; "Jeff Lehmann"
<jjlehmann@comcast.net>; "'Garrett Wollman'" <wollman@bimajority.org>;
<boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Cc: <rcarpen1@verizon.net>; "PeterH5322" <peterh5322@rattlebrain.com>; "Glen
Clark" <glen@clarkcom.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 7:04 AM
Subject: Re: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?


> Brings to mind another pressing question: As global warming increases
> the mean sea level, do all of the FCC's records (FM and TV at
> least--and there surely must be many, many other types) need to be
> continuously updated for the change in HAMSL (height above mean sea
> level)? One would think an algorithm could be applied that would make
> the correction automatically. This would be especially helpful when
> the FCC's offices themselves slip below the waves;>( (OK, I guess it
> would be more correct to say "as the waves rise up to envelop the
> FCC's offices"). A little gallows humor there.
>
> Also, I believe the FCC needs to think about grandfathering AM
> overlaps that suddenly appear because of new salt-water paths that
> result from rising sea levels. Oh, the humanity!
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> To: "Jeff Lehmann" <jjlehmann@comcast.net>; "'Garrett Wollman'"
> <wollman@bimajority.org>; <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 6:13 AM
> Subject: Re: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
>
>
> > And as the tree grows, I assume, so does the HAAT. A previously
> > undiscovered method of having the coverage grow to match urban
> > sprawl;>) The perfect marriage of new and old technologies;>) (Slaps
> > forehead in one of those "I could have had a V8" moments.)
> >
> > -----
> > Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> > eFax 1-707-215-6367
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Jeff Lehmann" <jjlehmann@comcast.net>
> > To: "'Garrett Wollman'" <wollman@bimajority.org>;
> > <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 12:21 AM
> > Subject: RE: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
> >
> >
> >>> I was not far from the 1300 transmitter site today and heard what
> >>> I believed to be an overmodulated 91.3 pirate very near that
> >>> location
> >>> (State & Palmer, off Sea St.).  Does anyone know anything about
> >>> it?
> >>>
> >>> I also noticed, last week when I was up on the hill in Haverhill,
> >>> that
> >>> 90.9 was not audible.  This could easily be a mixing product in my
> >>> car
> >>> radio (92.5 - 1.49 ~= 91.0), but in the past there was an issue
> >>> with
> >>> 1490's RF leaking into the 92.5 composite feed to the transmitter.
> >>> (I
> >>> also finally found the perfect angle fromf which to take a decent
> >>> picture of those towers, but did not have my camera with me.)
> >>
> >> There's been a very strong 91.3 pirate on West Selden St. in
> >> Dorchester for
> >> a year or two. Perhaps this is the one you were hearing? They have
> >> one of
> >> the more interested antenna setups I've seen, it's quite high up a
> >> tree!
> >>
> >> http://belmizikfm.com/
> >>
> >> Jeff Lehmann
> >> Hanson, MA
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>


From brian_vita@cssinc.com  Sun Jan 13 09:34:51 2008
From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita)
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 09:34:51 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
In-Reply-To: <027901c855a4$3573d400$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>
References: <027901c855a4$3573d400$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>
Message-ID: <478A218B.8000503@cssinc.com>

Is it me or are the pirates getting bigger cohones advertising on the 
web?  I guess that the FCC doesn't know about the Internet yet.  "Hey!  
We're doing something illegal.  Check us out!".

Just me.  Maybe I'm getting old.

Brian

Jeff Lehmann wrote:
>> I was not far from the 1300 transmitter site today and heard what
>> I believed to be an overmodulated 91.3 pirate very near that location
>> (State & Palmer, off Sea St.).  Does anyone know anything about it?
>>
>> I also noticed, last week when I was up on the hill in Haverhill, that
>> 90.9 was not audible.  This could easily be a mixing product in my car
>> radio (92.5 - 1.49 ~= 91.0), but in the past there was an issue with
>> 1490's RF leaking into the 92.5 composite feed to the transmitter.  (I
>> also finally found the perfect angle fromf which to take a decent
>> picture of those towers, but did not have my camera with me.)
>>     
>
> There's been a very strong 91.3 pirate on West Selden St. in Dorchester for
> a year or two. Perhaps this is the one you were hearing? They have one of
> the more interested antenna setups I've seen, it's quite high up a tree!
>
> http://belmizikfm.com/
>
> Jeff Lehmann
> Hanson, MA
>
>
>   


From markwats@comcast.net  Sun Jan 13 17:28:06 2008
From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson)
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 17:28:06 -0500
Subject: WATD "Yesterday's Memories" Co-Host George Denham Has Passed Away
Message-ID: <002a01c85633$930ca760$39a0764c@Mark>

   George Denham, co-host of the Saturday night oldies show "Yesterday's 
Memories" on WATD (95.9 Marshfield) passed away Saturday evening of cancer, 
according to a message on the show's website and also posted elsewhere. 
George also was the DJ/MC for many of the record collector conventions that 
were held at the John Hancock Hall in Boston. I went to several of them back 
in the 80's, and had met George a couple of times at those shows. Info on 
services will be posted when they are finalized. Here's the link to Ed & 
George's show website:

http://www.realoldies.com/

Mark Watson





From joe@attorneyross.com  Sun Jan 13 22:54:51 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:54:51 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
In-Reply-To: <478A218B.8000503@cssinc.com>
References: <027901c855a4$3573d400$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>,
	<478A218B.8000503@cssinc.com>
Message-ID: <478A96BB.28618.97783E@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 13 Jan 2008 at 9:34, Brian Vita wrote:

> Is it me or are the pirates getting bigger cohones advertising on the
> web?  I guess that the FCC doesn't know about the Internet yet.  "Hey!
>  We're doing something illegal.  Check us out!".
> 
> Just me.  Maybe I'm getting old.
 
It's probably the same sort of phenomenon as the kids who put all 
sorts of information on their MySpace pages that come back to haunt 
them when prospective employers check them out there.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From raccoonradio@mail.com  Mon Jan 14 08:52:32 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:52:32 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
Message-ID: <20080114135232.91B4C83986@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>

Speaking of pirate radio, a station in Winter Haven, FL just got shut down by local authorities--
as that state has a first-in-the-nation law which allows faster action on shutdowns. They
broadcast "gangsta rap with offensive language" and the police feel the pirate was
encouraging gangster activity. One of those arrested (and subject to a third degree
felony) was a man who paid $700 for the station to run ads for a place called
the Jamaican Lounge. I am sure that the IRS saw no revenue from this income...

It would be interesting if such a law were passed here in Massachusetts, allowing local
authorities to raid and shut down stations well before the FCC might...

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/local/article.aspx?s=rss&storyid=71619

The pirate stations have been putting up websites that make them seem
legitimate. One Boston outlet, Choice FM, made it sound like they had the
call letters WCFM, which should come as news to a legit station in
Williamstown with those calls. The site boasts of a 100 mile reach
and 2,000 watts. 

http://choice1029.com/about.php


From wayne@vacationdreams.org  Mon Jan 14 09:07:29 2008
From: wayne@vacationdreams.org (wayne@vacationdreams.org)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:07:29 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
Message-ID: <478b6ca1.340.6334.840538689@vacationdreams.org>

That was a first run story on our local news today... and
there has been a fair amount of chatter about others that
are already being targeted.

oops! second... right after something about a snow event up
your way... :^)


----- Original Message Follows -----
From: "Bob Nelson" <raccoonradio@mail.com>
To: "Brian Vita" <brian_vita@cssinc.com>, "Jeff Lehmann"
<jjlehmann@comcast.net>
Cc: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
Subject: Re: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:52:32 -0500

>Speaking of pirate radio, a station in Winter Haven, FL
>just got shut down by local authorities-- as that state has
>a first-in-the-nation law which allows faster action on
>shutdowns. They broadcast "gangsta rap with offensive
>language" and the police feel the pirate was encouraging
>gangster activity. One of those arrested (and subject to a
>third degree felony) was a man who paid $700 for the
>station to run ads for a place called the Jamaican Lounge.
>I am sure that the IRS saw no revenue from this income...
>
>It would be interesting if such a law were passed here in
>Massachusetts, allowing local authorities to raid and shut
>down stations well before the FCC might...
>
>http://www.tampabays10.com/news/local/article.aspx?s=rss&storyid=71619
>
>The pirate stations have been putting up websites that make
>them seem legitimate. One Boston outlet, Choice FM, made it
>sound like they had the call letters WCFM, which should
>come as news to a legit station in Williamstown with those
>calls. The site boasts of a 100 mile reach and 2,000 watts.
>
>http://choice1029.com/about.php
>

From ncn86@hotmail.com  Mon Jan 14 12:38:10 2008
From: ncn86@hotmail.com (Nickolas Noseworthy)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:38:10 -0500
Subject: WUBB
In-Reply-To: <478b6ca1.340.6334.840538689@vacationdreams.org>
References: <478b6ca1.340.6334.840538689@vacationdreams.org>
Message-ID: <BAY120-W7855385C645EE35786B7CA2460@phx.gbl>

Listening to WUBB this morning, I noticed that at 6AM they started off their "new" station by simulcasting Kiss 108 WXKS. Matty in the Morning was heard, as well as Kiss 108 jingles, but mixed in was a voice stating that you were listening to Kiss 95.3 WUBB. They are running there own commercials for the seacoast, as well as traffic and weather, but they are also doing traffic and weather from WXKS as well. Does WXKS now own WUBB,  or are they becoming a sort of "half simulcast?" This would push the range of WXKS a lot further.
 
N Noseworthy
the DXer
Merrimack, NH
_________________________________________________________________
Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008

From nostaticatall@charter.net  Mon Jan 14 13:09:18 2008
From: nostaticatall@charter.net (David Tomm)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:09:18 -0500
Subject: WUBB
In-Reply-To: <BAY120-W7855385C645EE35786B7CA2460@phx.gbl>
References: <478b6ca1.340.6334.840538689@vacationdreams.org>
	<BAY120-W7855385C645EE35786B7CA2460@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <b674132d1b07f6bb31fad1fddc4b4fe0@charter.net>

Clear Channel has owned WUBB for quite awhile now and own Kiss 108 as 
well.  This is a change in strategy for the Clear Channel cluster in 
Portsmouth.  After trying to take a bite out of WOKQ for years with 
little success, they're trying something different with 95.3.  The 
company also owns WERZ on the Seacoast, whose format has evolved to Hot 
AC after being the hit station for the market for many years.

There is some regional synergy happening here.  WJMN has always done 
very well in the Portsmouth market, especially for an out of market 
station.  WXKS-FM makes it up there too, but it's signal isn't as 
strong, particularly in the northern part of the market.  Flipping WUBB 
to a Kiss 108 clone fills those gaps, and allows WERZ to go more 
adult--and presumably bill better.  Between WJMN, WERZ and the new 
Kiss, CC/Portsmouth has built a "wall of women" position they can own 
and sell.  It might be too much pop music for the market to handle, but 
we'll see how it all plays out.

I think the straight simulcast of Kiss 108 will only be temporary.  
Eventually they'll most likely simulcast Matty then go their own way 
after 10am.  I could even see them use the exact same music logs as 
Boston, but broadcast separately with the Boston jocks cutting 
customized breaks for 95.3.

-Dave Tomm
"Mike Thomas"


On Jan 14, 2008, at 12:38 PM, Nickolas Noseworthy wrote:

> Listening to WUBB this morning, I noticed that at 6AM they started off 
> their "new" station by simulcasting Kiss 108 WXKS. Matty in the 
> Morning was heard, as well as Kiss 108 jingles, but mixed in was a 
> voice stating that you were listening to Kiss 95.3 WUBB. They are 
> running there own commercials for the seacoast, as well as traffic and 
> weather, but they are also doing traffic and weather from WXKS as 
> well. Does WXKS now own WUBB,  or are they becoming a sort of "half 
> simulcast?" This would push the range of WXKS a lot further.
>
> N Noseworthy
> the DXer
> Merrimack, NH


From tcoco@whav.net  Mon Jan 14 13:02:57 2008
From: tcoco@whav.net (Tim Coco)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:02:57 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
In-Reply-To: <478A96BB.28618.97783E@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <027901c855a4$3573d400$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>,
	<478A218B.8000503@cssinc.com>
	<478A96BB.28618.97783E@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <021c01c856d7$b2d6ad30$2f01a8c0@executive>

The ease of obtaining equipment and "having fun" is probably behind "most"
of these pirate efforts.  However, one must admit, there are a few people
with legitimate concerns about how the FCC has managed the spectrum, its
limited filing windows and support for consolidation.  Federal marshals
pointing guns with kids playing with a Mr. Microphone also seems to be a bit
disproportionate.

I also feel for the small legitimate broadcasters who can't attract
advertising or afford to provide local news as has been the case in the
Merrimack Valley. As an aside, and I hope I'm not out of line here, I don't
understand why the 49% minority owner (a corporation related to the
Eagle-Tribune newspaper) can't help WCCM put on the news.

Tim Coco
WHAV.net

-----Original Message-----
From: A. Joseph Ross [mailto:joe@attorneyross.com] 
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 10:55 PM
To: Jeff Lehmann; Brian Vita
Cc: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
Subject: Re: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?

On 13 Jan 2008 at 9:34, Brian Vita wrote:

> Is it me or are the pirates getting bigger cohones advertising on the 
> web?  I guess that the FCC doesn't know about the Internet yet.  "Hey!
>  We're doing something illegal.  Check us out!".
> 
> Just me.  Maybe I'm getting old.
 
It's probably the same sort of phenomenon as the kids who put all sorts of
information on their MySpace pages that come back to haunt them when
prospective employers check them out there.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com





From joe@attorneyross.com  Mon Jan 14 19:06:17 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:06:17 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
In-Reply-To: <021c01c856d7$b2d6ad30$2f01a8c0@executive>
References: <027901c855a4$3573d400$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>,
	<478A96BB.28618.97783E@joe.attorneyross.com>,
	<021c01c856d7$b2d6ad30$2f01a8c0@executive>
Message-ID: <478BB2A9.7641.4EC9385@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 14 Jan 2008 at 13:02, Tim Coco wrote:

> The ease of obtaining equipment and "having fun" is probably behind
> "most" of these pirate efforts.  However, one must admit, there are a
> few people with legitimate concerns about how the FCC has managed the
> spectrum, its limited filing windows and support for consolidation. 
> Federal marshals pointing guns with kids playing with a Mr. Microphone
> also seems to be a bit disproportionate.
 
I suppose so, but they could do Internet radio, reach a lot more 
people, and do it legally.  I keep thinking, for example, of the 
movie "Pump Up the Volume," where the teenager played by Christian 
Slater could, in today's world, have gone online, got the word out in 
school, and done everything legally.

Of course, some kids like the thrill of doing things illegally, but 
...

A propos, I read a story last week in the Globe about the new rules 
for teenage drivers.  the kids think the hefty fines and losses of 
license or learner's permit are draconian, but it's getting their 
attention.  They're actually starting to observe speed limits and 
obey the traffic laws, and the teen driving fatalities have dropped.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From rogerkirk@ttlc.net  Mon Jan 14 19:33:43 2008
From: rogerkirk@ttlc.net (Roger Kirk)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:33:43 -0500
Subject: 91.3 pirate in Quincy?
In-Reply-To: <478BB2A9.7641.4EC9385@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <027901c855a4$3573d400$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>,
	<478A96BB.28618.97783E@joe.attorneyross.com>,
	<021c01c856d7$b2d6ad30$2f01a8c0@executive>
	<478BB2A9.7641.4EC9385@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <478BFF67.1070908@ttlc.net>

A. Joseph Ross wrote:
> A propos, I read a story last week in the Globe about the new rules 
> for teenage drivers.  the kids think the hefty fines and losses of 
> license or learner's permit are draconian, but it's getting their 
> attention.  They're actually starting to observe speed limits and 
> obey the traffic laws, and the teen driving fatalities have dropped.
>   
Kids raised/schooled in an environment where incorrect spelling isn't 
corrected, games aren't scored (to avoid making anyone feel bad) and 
grade compression places almost every student on the honor roll would, 
most likely, consider any rule or restriction draconian.

However, I am glad it's getting their attention.  Maybe it'll save some 
lives.


From theseacoast@maine.rr.com  Tue Jan 15 13:16:24 2008
From: theseacoast@maine.rr.com (The Seacoast)
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:16:24 -0500
Subject: WUBB
In-Reply-To: <BAY120-W7855385C645EE35786B7CA2460@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <002601c857a2$bd888b60$6e01a8c0@hpomnibook2>

Really offers my town of York Beach, that local presence!  God bless the
FCC!!!

-----Original Message-----
From: Nickolas Noseworthy [mailto:ncn86@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 12:38 PM
To: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org
Subject: WUBB

Listening to WUBB this morning, I noticed that at 6AM they started off their
"new" station by simulcasting Kiss 108 WXKS. Matty in the Morning was heard,
as well as Kiss 108 jingles, but mixed in was a voice stating that you were
listening to Kiss 95.3 WUBB. They are running there own commercials for the
seacoast, as well as traffic and weather, but they are also doing traffic
and weather from WXKS as well. Does WXKS now own WUBB,  or are they becoming
a sort of "half simulcast?" This would push the range of WXKS a lot further.
 
N Noseworthy
the DXer
Merrimack, NH
_________________________________________________________________
Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008


From dlh@donnahalper.com  Wed Jan 16 00:41:58 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:41:58 -0500
Subject: Bob Lobel
Message-ID: <20080116054210.AFC011505A7@relay4.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>

What's the deal with Bob Lobel lately?  I've seen him on WBZ-TV 
recently and he looks awful.  Arm in a sling, face all puffy... 
what's happening with him?


From sean.smyth@yahoo.com  Wed Jan 16 00:57:39 2008
From: sean.smyth@yahoo.com (Sean Smyth)
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:57:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Bob Lobel
In-Reply-To: <20080116054210.AFC011505A7@relay4.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
Message-ID: <278642.85398.qm@web58309.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Donna Halper <dlh@donnahalper.com> wrote:
> What's the deal with Bob Lobel lately?  I've seen him on WBZ-TV 
> recently and he looks awful.  Arm in a sling, face all puffy... 
> what's happening with him?

He recently had rotator cuff surgery. He was doing his weekly WEEI show
over the phone a couple Sundays ago. I'm sure the pain meds don't make
you look too hot.


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

From dlh@donnahalper.com  Wed Jan 16 01:09:08 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:09:08 -0500
Subject: Bob Lobel
In-Reply-To: <278642.85398.qm@web58309.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <20080116054210.AFC011505A7@relay4.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
	<278642.85398.qm@web58309.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20080116060920.69CAD1B4019@relay8.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>

At 12:57 AM 1/16/2008, Sean Smyth wrote:

>He recently had rotator cuff surgery. He was doing his weekly WEEI show
>over the phone a couple Sundays ago.

Umm, I didn't realize he was a pitcher!!!  Seriously, there are all 
sorts of internet rumours flying about his health.


From ssmyth@psualum.com  Wed Jan 16 01:16:30 2008
From: ssmyth@psualum.com (Sean Smyth)
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 22:16:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Bob Lobel
In-Reply-To: <20080116060920.69CAD1B4019@relay8.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
Message-ID: <618030.74101.qm@web58313.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Donna Halper <dlh@donnahalper.com> wrote:
> At 12:57 AM 1/16/2008, Sean Smyth wrote:
> 
> >He recently had rotator cuff surgery. He was doing his weekly WEEI
> show
> >over the phone a couple Sundays ago.
> 
> Umm, I didn't realize he was a pitcher!!!  Seriously, there are all 
> sorts of internet rumours flying about his health.

Just repeating what was said on the radio show with him and Steve
Burton. I don't know if a high-profile personality in a larger market
such as this can get away with "hiding" (my word) an illness for too long.


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

From revdoug1@verizon.net  Wed Jan 16 05:41:13 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 05:41:13 -0500
Subject: Bob Lobel
References: <618030.74101.qm@web58313.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <007701c8582c$51b8a5c0$6501a8c0@pastor2>

There's more to this than rotator cuff surgery.  He hasn't looked well for
quite some time.  -Doug


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sean Smyth" <ssmyth@psualum.com>
To: "Donna Halper" <dlh@donnahalper.com>;
<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 1:16 AM
Subject: Re: Bob Lobel


> Donna Halper <dlh@donnahalper.com> wrote:
> > At 12:57 AM 1/16/2008, Sean Smyth wrote:
> >
> > >He recently had rotator cuff surgery. He was doing his weekly WEEI
> > show
> > >over the phone a couple Sundays ago.
> >
> > Umm, I didn't realize he was a pitcher!!!  Seriously, there are all
> > sorts of internet rumours flying about his health.
>
> Just repeating what was said on the radio show with him and Steve
> Burton. I don't know if a high-profile personality in a larger market
> such as this can get away with "hiding" (my word) an illness for too long.
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
________
> Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


From kvahey@comcast.net  Fri Jan 18 10:22:21 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (kvahey@comcast.net)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 10:22:21 -0500
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
Message-ID: <4fc429770801180722i30af59edm2f160d022f365bc5@mail.gmail.com>

Red Sox fans will no longer have to suffer listening to Glenn Geffner
as he has been hired by the Florida Marlins to be their #2 announcer.
Dave O'Brien will be back fulltime. Jerry Trupiano was also considered
for the job.

From dlh@donnahalper.com  Fri Jan 18 13:16:20 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:16:20 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
Message-ID: <20080118181628.04D20151D18@relay4.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>

Do any of you nice folks recall when a phone call used to be put on 
the air, how you'd hear a really annoying beep every few seconds?  I 
am trying to find out when the FCC said you didn't have to do that 
anymore... and why they made radio stations do it in the first 
place... My vague recollection is that it was done because the caller 
was being warned that his/her call was going out over the air-- but 
that seems like a silly reason, given that callers to talk shows 
WANTED their call to be put on the air...  

From sean.smyth@yahoo.com  Fri Jan 18 12:25:13 2008
From: sean.smyth@yahoo.com (Sean Smyth)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:25:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801180722i30af59edm2f160d022f365bc5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <524244.17216.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
> Red Sox fans will no longer have to suffer listening to Glenn Geffner
> as he has been hired by the Florida Marlins to be their #2 announcer.
> Dave O'Brien will be back fulltime. Jerry Trupiano was also
> considered
> for the job.

Who will fill in when O'Brien has to work on ESPN games?


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 


From mamros@MIT.EDU  Fri Jan 18 13:33:37 2008
From: mamros@MIT.EDU (Shawn Mamros)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:33:37 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:16:20 EST."
	<20080118181628.04D20151D18@relay4.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com> 
Message-ID: <200801181833.m0IIXbxo004508@scrubbing-bubbles.mit.edu>

>Do any of you nice folks recall when a phone call used to be put on 
>the air, how you'd hear a really annoying beep every few seconds?  I 
>am trying to find out when the FCC said you didn't have to do that 
>anymore... and why they made radio stations do it in the first 
>place... My vague recollection is that it was done because the caller 
>was being warned that his/her call was going out over the air-- but 
>that seems like a silly reason, given that callers to talk shows 
>WANTED their call to be put on the air...  

I think the regulation required the beep anytime a phone conversation
was recorded.  The intention was to warn the caller of said recording.
It applied to more than just radio talk shows, but they were probably
the most well-known case where the caller was recorded (for seven-second
delay and/or archival purposes).

Nowadays, a message stating "this call may be recorded" is considered
sufficient.  I don't know when that regulation changed.

-Shawn Mamros
E-mail to: mamros -at- mit dot edu

From sid@wrko.com  Fri Jan 18 13:47:25 2008
From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:47:25 -0700
Subject: that horrible BEEP
Message-ID: <s79091e3.070@entbalms2.entercom.com>

>>Nowadays, a message stating "this call may be recorded" is considered sufficient.<<

That is a drastic oversimplification.  Many many broadcasters get skunked on this regulation and end up liable for $8000 fines.

PRIOR to airing or recording a broadcast, ALL callers must be notified in advance of the station's intent to air or record the call.  The only exception to this rule is for people who call the station in connection with a program in which calls are "customarily" aired (i.e., a talk show, all-request show, etc.), or for callers who are employees of the station (for example, news reporters).  You cannot notify the caller after the airing or recording has begun.  The intent of the rule is to give the caller an opportunity to "opt out."

For reference, it's 47 CFR ?73.1206.



Sid Schweiger
IT Manager, Entercom New England
WAAF - WEEI AM/FM - WKAF
WMKK - WRKO - WVEI AM/FM
20 Guest St / 3d Floor
Boston MA  02135-2040
Phone: 617-779-5369
Fax: 617-779-5379
E-Mail: sid@wrko.com


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Fri Jan 18 14:03:15 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:03:15 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <200801181833.m0IIXbxo004508@scrubbing-bubbles.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <033801c85a04$cb255690$6501a8c0@pastor2>

If memory serves, Shawn is right; the beep had to do with the station's (or
network's) intent to record.  Moreover, it encompassed not only phone
callers, but news correspondents.  Didn't the radio networks have beeps in
at least some of their remote actualities years ago?  I think that was even
the case on TV back in the early '60s, if I remember correctly.   -Doug

---- Original Message ----- 
From: "Shawn Mamros" <mamros@MIT.EDU>
To: "Donna Halper" <dlh@donnahalper.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


> >Do any of you nice folks recall when a phone call used to be put on
> >the air, how you'd hear a really annoying beep every few seconds?  I
> >am trying to find out when the FCC said you didn't have to do that
> >anymore... and why they made radio stations do it in the first
> >place... My vague recollection is that it was done because the caller
> >was being warned that his/her call was going out over the air-- but
> >that seems like a silly reason, given that callers to talk shows
> >WANTED their call to be put on the air...
>
> I think the regulation required the beep anytime a phone conversation
> was recorded.  The intention was to warn the caller of said recording.
> It applied to more than just radio talk shows, but they were probably
> the most well-known case where the caller was recorded (for seven-second
> delay and/or archival purposes).
>
> Nowadays, a message stating "this call may be recorded" is considered
> sufficient.  I don't know when that regulation changed.
>
> -Shawn Mamros
> E-mail to: mamros -at- mit dot edu


From m_carney@yahoo.com  Fri Jan 18 14:23:56 2008
From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:23:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
Message-ID: <788156.23665.qm@web52603.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

His committment to ESPN is done so he's available for all games.

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Smyth <sean.smyth@yahoo.com>
To: kvahey@comcast.net; (newsgroup) Boston-Radio-Interest <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 12:25:13 PM
Subject: Re: Glenn Geffner is gone

kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
> Red Sox fans will no longer have to suffer listening to Glenn Geffner
> as he has been hired by the Florida Marlins to be their #2 announcer.
> Dave O'Brien will be back fulltime. Jerry Trupiano was also
> considered
> for the job.

Who will fill in when O'Brien has to work on ESPN games?


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.   http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

From ssmyth@psualum.com  Fri Jan 18 13:28:57 2008
From: ssmyth@psualum.com (Sean Smyth)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 10:28:57 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801181004y2558f232meeb6c48e13b9a800@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <202244.10286.qm@web58310.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
> They are considering Ordway for home games and on the road an
> announcer from the other team.

Ordway does NOT have the style to suit baseball.

He has great, great pipes, but he'd be a fish out of water.

(As an aside, I heard Ordway on The Big Show yesterday with just Steve
DeOssie -- apparently Butch Stearns didn't show up until later in the
show. It's amazing how good he can be when he isn't trying to
out-scream a Fred Smerlas type.)


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

From dlh@donnahalper.com  Fri Jan 18 15:15:27 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:15:27 -0500
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
In-Reply-To: <202244.10286.qm@web58310.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <4fc429770801181004y2558f232meeb6c48e13b9a800@mail.gmail.com>
	<202244.10286.qm@web58310.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20080118201535.6410C151E75@relay4.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>

At 01:28 PM 1/18/2008, Sean Smyth wrote:

>(As an aside, I heard Ordway on The Big Show yesterday with just Steve
>DeOssie -- apparently Butch Stearns didn't show up until later in the
>show. It's amazing how good he can be when he isn't trying to
>out-scream a Fred Smerlas type.)

I may be in the minority here, but I thought Castiglione and Trupiano 
made a great team.  Okay fine, they didn't make the world forget Curt 
Gowdy (or Vin Scully or Mel Allen for that matter), but they sounded 
good together.  Geffner's leaving doesn't ruin my life at all.  As 
for the Big Show, am I correct in thinking that it has consistently 
maintained some of the highest ratings in sports/talk of any station 
in the format, or is that just Entercom publicity that makes such a claim?    


From ssmyth@psualum.com  Fri Jan 18 18:08:26 2008
From: ssmyth@psualum.com (Sean Smyth)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:08:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
In-Reply-To: <20080118201535.6410C151E75@relay4.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
Message-ID: <8777.80545.qm@web58306.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Donna Halper <dlh@donnahalper.com> wrote:
> As 
> for the Big Show, am I correct in thinking that it has consistently 
> maintained some of the highest ratings in sports/talk of any station 
> in the format, or is that just Entercom publicity that makes such a
> claim?    

They may be, but I don't find the screaming enjoyable. 

Maybe I'm a snob, but I'd love to see an NPR-style sports network.
Probably never would succeed, though.


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 


From kvahey@comcast.net  Fri Jan 18 13:04:26 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (kvahey@comcast.net)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:04:26 -0500
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
In-Reply-To: <524244.17216.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <4fc429770801180722i30af59edm2f160d022f365bc5@mail.gmail.com>
	<524244.17216.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801181004y2558f232meeb6c48e13b9a800@mail.gmail.com>

They are considering Ordway for home games and on the road an
announcer from the other team.

On 1/18/08, Sean Smyth <sean.smyth@yahoo.com> wrote:
> kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
> > Red Sox fans will no longer have to suffer listening to Glenn Geffner
> > as he has been hired by the Florida Marlins to be their #2 announcer.
> > Dave O'Brien will be back fulltime. Jerry Trupiano was also
> > considered
> > for the job.
>
> Who will fill in when O'Brien has to work on ESPN games?
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
>

From raccoonradio@mail.com  Sat Jan 19 02:41:37 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:41:37 -0500
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
Message-ID: <20080119074137.3FF2583BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>

>>They are considering Ordway for home games and on the road an
announcer from the other team.

I assume you mean O'Brien not Ordway ("...you're making my point!")

It was said not too long ago that O'Brien would be available for
a lot more games starting this year.



From raccoonradio@mail.com  Sat Jan 19 02:53:11 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:53:11 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
Message-ID: <20080119075311.2830883BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>

The long running public radio show Whad Ya Know has a feature every week called Town of the
Week, in which they pay tribute to various spots on the map...after announcer Jim Packard
reads a bit of information about the town, they call up a resident there who talks
about what life is like in that locality. They are given a prize for their trouble. Someone must have
told the show's producers about that FCC rule, because one week I heard host Mike Feldman
say, "Right now we're calling someone in (town) and we're getting their permission for
them to talk on the air. We've been told we have to do that."




From raccoonradio@mail.com  Sat Jan 19 02:56:59 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:56:59 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
Message-ID: <20080119075659.38EA183985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>

Speaking of beeps--or bells-- I've noticed over the years some "blips" during radio
network newscasts (maybe an audible signal sent to stations for some reason)...

...and how about the days when you'd tune to one of the network TV affiliates in prime time (especially)
and hear a bell at the top of the hour? Sometimes you would even see, briefly,
a slide for the flagship station--so when Ch 7 was the CBS affiliate in the 70s,
you would hear that beep and perhaps briefly see a slide for "WCBS-TV 2 New York City".

Want to hear that beep for old times sake? It shows up when you click on to 
http://www.tvparty.com

Ding! (Maybe related to the Southwest Airlines ding!)


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Sat Jan 19 07:53:54 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 07:53:54 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119075659.38EA183985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <039101c85a9a$5c0c9110$6501a8c0@pastor2>

If you're talking about CBS' historic on-the-hour "bong," which is still
used on the radio, I remember it very well from TV when I was a kid.  I
don't think it was eliminated until the early '70s.

I'll check out that website link, Bob.  Terry Morgan out in New York knows
the histories of these things.  I'll try to contact him and see if he can
put in his two cents' worth.

  -Doug

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Nelson" <raccoonradio@mail.com>
To: "Donna Halper" <dlh@donnahalper.com>;
<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 2:56 AM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


Speaking of beeps--or bells-- I've noticed over the years some "blips"
during radio
network newscasts (maybe an audible signal sent to stations for some
reason)...

...and how about the days when you'd tune to one of the network TV
affiliates in prime time (especially)
and hear a bell at the top of the hour? Sometimes you would even see,
briefly,
a slide for the flagship station--so when Ch 7 was the CBS affiliate in the
70s,
you would hear that beep and perhaps briefly see a slide for "WCBS-TV 2 New
York City".

Want to hear that beep for old times sake? It shows up when you click on to
http://www.tvparty.com

Ding! (Maybe related to the Southwest Airlines ding!)


From raccoonradio@mail.com  Sat Jan 19 08:18:25 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 08:18:25 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
Message-ID: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>

Well, I meant the blip heard when they went to a commercial (network radio news)--which also could
be a series of two two-tone messages (musical notes, approximately: E-C...D-B...
But yes there is the TOH "bong" before the network radio news on CBS...
the "ding" I referred to was on TV, especially in prime time.

Example, from 1970s:
Saturday 9 pm (IIRC)
--Slide for Ch 7 Boston
--Ding!
--Start of theme song for "Maude"

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Sat Jan 19 09:28:14 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 09:28:14 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>

I believe that those "blips" were (barely) audible cues from a system
that CBS installed at the radio network in (I think) the '50s and
continued to use for decades thereafter. It was called NetAlert. If
I'm not mistaken, I first heard NetAlert cues on WROW Albany after it
replaced WTRY Troy as the CBS affiliate in New York's Capital
District. That would have been while I was in college around 1953 or
so.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Nelson" <raccoonradio@mail.com>
To: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>; "Bob Nelson"
<raccoonradio@mail.com>; "Donna Halper" <dlh@donnahalper.com>;
<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


Well, I meant the blip heard when they went to a commercial (network
radio news)--which also could
be a series of two two-tone messages (musical notes, approximately:
E-C...D-B...
But yes there is the TOH "bong" before the network radio news on
CBS...
the "ding" I referred to was on TV, especially in prime time.

Example, from 1970s:
Saturday 9 pm (IIRC)
--Slide for Ch 7 Boston
--Ding!
--Start of theme song for "Maude"


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Sat Jan 19 09:41:58 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 09:41:58 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <039b01c85aa9$8c9be920$6501a8c0@pastor2>

Some of the two-tone messages are often heard on programs originating from
Westwood One.  They're a holdover from WW1's ownership of the Mutual
Broadcasting System, which used them for decades.  Then there's the CBS
"chirp", which the network uses one second prior to the TOH "bong" as well
as a segue into commercials during its newscasts.  That's been in use for
many years too.  In fact, I can remember hearing it at the top of the
hour --- despite no hourly newscast --- on WEEI-FM and, later, WODS, long
before the Westinghouse takeover.  That usage has since been discontinued on
the O&Os.

-Doug



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Nelson" <raccoonradio@mail.com>
To: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>; "Bob Nelson"
<raccoonradio@mail.com>; "Donna Halper" <dlh@donnahalper.com>;
<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


Well, I meant the blip heard when they went to a commercial (network radio
news)--which also could
be a series of two two-tone messages (musical notes, approximately:
E-C...D-B...
But yes there is the TOH "bong" before the network radio news on CBS...
the "ding" I referred to was on TV, especially in prime time.

Example, from 1970s:
Saturday 9 pm (IIRC)
--Slide for Ch 7 Boston
--Ding!
--Start of theme song for "Maude"


From brian_vita@cssinc.com  Sat Jan 19 09:18:42 2008
From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 09:18:42 -0500
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
In-Reply-To: <8777.80545.qm@web58306.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <8777.80545.qm@web58306.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <479206C2.9010701@cssinc.com>


> They may be, but I don't find the screaming enjoyable. 
>
> Maybe I'm a snob, but I'd love to see an NPR-style sports network.
> Probably never would succeed, though.
>
>
>   
We have that.  Its called "golf".

Brian

From cohasset@frontiernet.net  Sat Jan 19 11:10:36 2008
From: cohasset@frontiernet.net (Cohasset / Hippisley)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:10:36 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <07cf01c85ab5$d47fe0f0$7d7fa2d0$@net>

There are two different kinds of "beeps" that I recall.

I was a control room engineer for the CBS radio affiliate in Syracuse during
the summer of 1960 ("WHEN in Syracuse, dial 620....").  At that time the
only beeps I ever heard were what I think Mr. Strassberg is referring to as
the NetAlert beeps.  An "Alert" consisted of a series of equally spaced
beeps that were intended to alert station personnel that something important
was about to come across the network feed.  My recollection (which could
very well be faulty on this point) is that the number of beeps helped define
the urgency of the upcoming feed.  Sometimes the beeps referred to (breaking
news) content in a standard top-of-the-hour newscast, but sometimes the
beeps meant a special news feed was coming during a normally-inactive period
on the network link.  

Later, long after I had left WHEN, CBS Radio added another kind of beep,
which I prefer to think of as a "cricket click"; it was a 2-piece sound that
was used to cue stations to break away from the network, such as at 58:55
past the hour, when we inserted local ads.  I think CBS radio still uses
such a system.  I hated it when they introduced it, and I still don't much
care for it.

Bud Hippisley  


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Sat Jan 19 11:49:09 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:49:09 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<07cf01c85ab5$d47fe0f0$7d7fa2d0$@net>
Message-ID: <03a501c85abb$36b95940$6501a8c0@pastor2>

During the '70s (and, I think, before,), the CBS AM O&Os --- which by then
had all-news formats --- led into the hourly network newscasts with a series
of second-to-second "bongs" that were softer than the one at TOH.  They were
accompanied by voiceover segues and station IDs.  I can't remember if they
started at -:10 or -:05.
-Doug


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Cohasset / Hippisley" <cohasset@frontiernet.net>
To: <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 11:10 AM
Subject: RE: that horrible BEEP


> There are two different kinds of "beeps" that I recall.
>
> I was a control room engineer for the CBS radio affiliate in Syracuse
during
> the summer of 1960 ("WHEN in Syracuse, dial 620....").  At that time the
> only beeps I ever heard were what I think Mr. Strassberg is referring to
as
> the NetAlert beeps.  An "Alert" consisted of a series of equally spaced
> beeps that were intended to alert station personnel that something
important
> was about to come across the network feed.  My recollection (which could
> very well be faulty on this point) is that the number of beeps helped
define
> the urgency of the upcoming feed.  Sometimes the beeps referred to
(breaking
> news) content in a standard top-of-the-hour newscast, but sometimes the
> beeps meant a special news feed was coming during a normally-inactive
period
> on the network link.
>
> Later, long after I had left WHEN, CBS Radio added another kind of beep,
> which I prefer to think of as a "cricket click"; it was a 2-piece sound
that
> was used to cue stations to break away from the network, such as at 58:55
> past the hour, when we inserted local ads.  I think CBS radio still uses
> such a system.  I hated it when they introduced it, and I still don't much
> care for it.
>
> Bud Hippisley
>


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Sat Jan 19 11:55:36 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:55:36 -0500
Subject: CBS chirp
Message-ID: <03b001c85abc$28c96d60$6501a8c0@pastor2>

I believe I'm correct in saying that the aforesaid "cricket chirp" used by
CBS Radio isn't supposed to be heard by listeners prior to the hourly
"bong."  It's designed to be a - :01 time alert to prepare stations for the
newscast.  A lot of stations overlook that and play it, but I've read
comments that it's kind of unprofessional.   -Doug


From paulranderson@charter.net  Sat Jan 19 12:54:44 2008
From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:54:44 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <07cf01c85ab5$d47fe0f0$7d7fa2d0$@net>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<07cf01c85ab5$d47fe0f0$7d7fa2d0$@net>
Message-ID: <80C5DA8D-65BD-402D-99B4-E035E1241D91@charter.net>


On Jan 19, 2008, at 11:10 AM, Cohasset / Hippisley wrote:

> An "Alert" consisted of a series of equally spaced beeps that were  
> intended to alert station personnel that something important was  
> about to come across the network feed.

How would station personnel hear this beep?  Would someone be expected  
to monitor the network feed at all times?

ABC radio always had a tone at five seconds before a newscast started.

They also had a tone that would activate an optional alarm at the  
station.  This was used for bulletins or special reports.  I worked at  
two stations that carried ABC news but neither one had the optional  
alarm that would sound when the network sent the special tone.  I  
wonder if they still have such a thing.

Paul

From dlh@donnahalper.com  Sat Jan 19 13:09:07 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 13:09:07 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <80C5DA8D-65BD-402D-99B4-E035E1241D91@charter.net>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<07cf01c85ab5$d47fe0f0$7d7fa2d0$@net>
	<80C5DA8D-65BD-402D-99B4-E035E1241D91@charter.net>
Message-ID: <20080119180915.C38C815037B@relay4.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>


>Paul wrote--
>
>ABC radio always had a tone at five seconds before a newscast started.

Yes, and I do remember those tones (like the NBC chimes, or the 
telegraph sounder that ran under the news... even though nobody had 
used telegraph in years).  But what started my original query was 
that I'm trying to figure out was why some of the pioneering radio 
talkers like Joe Pyne and KDKA's Ed & Wendy King at first paraphrased 
the caller instead of putting him or her on the air.  I thought it 
was technological-- but then I found clippings of callers put on the 
air in 1929.  SO now I am thinking maybe it was the annoying beep on 
the phone line?  


From rogerkola@aol.com  Sat Jan 19 14:05:12 2008
From: rogerkola@aol.com (Roger Kolakowski)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:05:12 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com><000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044><07cf01c85ab5$d47fe0f0$7d7fa2d0$@net><80C5DA8D-65BD-402D-99B4-E035E1241D91@charter.net>
	<20080119180915.C38C815037B@relay4.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
Message-ID: <004501c85ace$38302020$0200a8c0@Tanguray>

"the telegraph sounder that ran under the news... even though nobody had
used telegraph in years"

Teletype? The origin of "Rip and Read"

Roger
WA1KAT

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Donna Halper" <dlh@donnahalper.com>
To: "Paul Anderson" <paulranderson@charter.net>;
<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


>
> >Paul wrote--
> >
> >ABC radio always had a tone at five seconds before a newscast started.
>
> Yes, and I do remember those tones (like the NBC chimes, or the
> telegraph sounder that ran under the news... even though nobody had
> used telegraph in years).  But what started my original query was
> that I'm trying to figure out was why some of the pioneering radio
> talkers like Joe Pyne and KDKA's Ed & Wendy King at first paraphrased
> the caller instead of putting him or her on the air.  I thought it
> was technological-- but then I found clippings of callers put on the
> air in 1929.  SO now I am thinking maybe it was the annoying beep on
> the phone line?
>
>


From sid@wrko.com  Sat Jan 19 13:31:59 2008
From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:31:59 -0700
Subject: that horrible BEEP
Message-ID: <s791dfbe.003@entbalms2.entercom.com>

>>ABC radio always had a tone at five seconds before a newscast
started.<<

Nope.  Ten seconds.  In the ABC Radio air studios, the button that
generated the ten-second warning tone also automatically fired cart
machine #1 exactly ten seconds later, so that's where you put the
opening theme cart (or left it empty, in the case of the FM Network).

>>They also had a tone that would activate an optional alarm at the  
station.  This was used for bulletins or special reports.  I worked at  
two stations that carried ABC news but neither one had the optional  
alarm that would sound when the network sent the special tone.<<

2930 Hz.  It wasn't used much, but I remember well one night when we
used it frequently, once even in the middle of a commercial break:  July
24th, 1974...the evening on which the House Judiciary Committee took its
first vote to recommend impeachment of President Nixon.

>>I wonder if they still have such a thing.<<

I don't believe so.  They now use a continuously running "squawk box"
channel that all affiliates are supposed to leave open in their
newsrooms or control rooms.

Sid Schweiger
IT Manager, Entercom New England
Former ABC Radio Network Studio Engineer

From kvahey@comcast.net  Sat Jan 19 14:38:54 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (kvahey@comcast.net)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:38:54 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801191138p61628f02i972a46c5b2813b64@mail.gmail.com>

I can recall visiting WEEI in the early 60's when they were in the
Edison Buiding on Tremont. In master control there was a huge rack
that was devoted to Net Alert. I don't know if the affliates had the
same rack that the O&O's had but the engineer on duty told me they had
no control over it. If New York wanted air the system would give it to
them.

From billohno@gmail.com  Sat Jan 19 15:05:53 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 15:05:53 -0500
Subject: CBS chirp
In-Reply-To: <03b001c85abc$28c96d60$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <03b001c85abc$28c96d60$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <47925821.6090906@gmail.com>

Doug Drown wrote:
> I believe I'm correct in saying that the aforesaid "cricket chirp" used by
> CBS Radio isn't supposed to be heard by listeners prior to the hourly
> "bong."  It's designed to be a - :01 time alert to prepare stations for the
> newscast.  A lot of stations overlook that and play it, but I've read
> comments that it's kind of unprofessional.   -Doug
And if the audio processing at an affiliate is capable of 
tonsillectomies-on-inhale,  then it is also capable of cranking up a -18 
dB chirp fairly effectively.

Bill (inhale, wheeze, crackle, splat) O'Neill

From paulranderson@charter.net  Sat Jan 19 15:28:44 2008
From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 15:28:44 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <s791dfbe.003@entbalms2.entercom.com>
References: <s791dfbe.003@entbalms2.entercom.com>
Message-ID: <A97CA1CD-CBC7-4946-A809-D47DBCD659C0@charter.net>

On Jan 19, 2008, at 1:31 PM, Sid Schweiger wrote:

>>> ABC radio always had a tone at five seconds before a newscast  
>>> started.
>
> Nope.  Ten seconds.

Yes, you're right.  It was ten, not five, seconds.  Our clock at WCCC  
was always off, so we depended on the VU meter showing ten seconds  
before the newscast so as not to step on the ABC announcer.

> In the ABC Radio air studios, the button that generated the ten- 
> second warning tone also automatically fired cart machine #1 exactly  
> ten seconds later, so that's where you put the opening theme cart  
> (or left it empty, in the case of the FM Network).

And for the Contemporary Radio Network, too, sometime after 1976.   
They made the sounder optional, as in stations could play it themselves.

>>> They also had a tone that would activate an optional alarm at the  
>>> station.  This was used for bulletins or special reports.
>
> 2930 Hz.  It wasn't used much, but I remember well one night when we
> used it frequently, once even in the middle of a commercial break:   
> July
> 24th, 1974...the evening on which the House Judiciary Committee took  
> its
> first vote to recommend impeachment of President Nixon.

It was used daily in the afternoon, too, IIRC, for the reading of what  
network spots had changed since the sheet listing all the  
availabilities was printed.

Paul

From sid@wrko.com  Sat Jan 19 16:46:05 2008
From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:46:05 -0700
Subject: that horrible BEEP
Message-ID: <s7920d3e.081@entbalms2.entercom.com>

>>I can recall visiting WEEI in the early 60's when they were in the
Edison Buiding on Tremont. In master control there was a huge rack
that was devoted to Net Alert. I don't know if the affliates had the
same rack that the O&O's had but the engineer on duty told me they had
no control over it. If New York wanted air the system would give it to
them.<<

I worked for one or two CBS Radio affiliates over the years.  The
affiliates' NetAlert box was, eventually, a small module about three
inches square, with screw terminals on the back for an audio connection
from the network, and a single-character digital readout in the front. 
It also had a small plastic card on the bottom which you could pull out,
on which were printed the meaning of the number codes.

FCC rules, then as now, would prohibit the network from taking control
of the on-air programming away from stations they did not own.

IIRC the term NetAlert was also used on air, as in: "We interrupt this
program to bring you this CBS Radio NetAlert bulletin..."



Sid Schweiger
IT Manager, Entercom New England
WAAF - WEEI AM/FM - WKAF
WMKK - WRKO - WVEI AM/FM
20 Guest St / 3d Floor
Boston MA  02135-2040
Phone: 617-779-5369
Fax: 617-779-5379
E-Mail: sid@wrko.com

From joe@attorneyross.com  Sat Jan 19 23:57:11 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:57:11 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <47928E57.2375.34C3B4@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 19 Jan 2008 at 8:18, Bob Nelson wrote:

> Well, I meant the blip heard when they went to a commercial (network
> radio news)--which also could be a series of two two-tone messages
> (musical notes, approximately: E-C...D-B... But yes there is the TOH
> "bong" before the network radio news on CBS... the "ding" I referred
> to was on TV, especially in prime time.

I remember when Channel 7 had a rather distinctive tone on the hour, 
and it always seemed to be a second or so before the CBS tone. 

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Sat Jan 19 23:57:11 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:57:11 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <47928E57.11210.34C4B8@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 19 Jan 2008 at 9:28, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> I believe that those "blips" were (barely) audible cues from a system
> that CBS installed at the radio network in (I think) the '50s and
> continued to use for decades thereafter. It was called NetAlert. If
> I'm not mistaken, I first heard NetAlert cues on WROW Albany after it
> replaced WTRY Troy as the CBS affiliate in New York's Capital
> District. That would have been while I was in college around 1953 or
> so.

Since I remember it, and we moved to Albany just after Thanksgiving 
1953, I think this would have been sometime in 1954 or maybe 1955.  I 
never understood why the change took place, but it affected three of 
the four networks and four stations.  CBS moved from WTRY to WROW, 
ABC moved from WROW to WPTR, and Mutual moved from WPTR to WOKO.  NBC 
remained on WGY.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From dan.strassberg@att.net  Sun Jan 20 09:01:11 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 09:01:11 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<47928E57.11210.34C4B8@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <001301c85b6d$824e1fa0$52eca644@SatU205S5044>

The reasons for the big Capital District radio-network affiliation 
shift of the mid fifties were complicated. It was played to the public 
that the group (from Providence) that acquired WTRY was committed to 
local independent radio and so dropped the (very lucrative) CBS 
affiliation, thus precipitating the round-robin switch, which left 
WTRY indpendent and made WOKO a network affiliate (which it had not 
been in many years). As an independent, WTRY continued to prosper. 
However, I think the the reason for the shift was more 
complex--related to the lifting of the freeze on construction of TV 
stations and the formation of Capital Cities Broadcasting (which over 
many decades and many mergers, morphed into ABC and Disney).

Capital Cities started in the Capital District (and indeed was named 
for it) and WROW was its very first station! WROW got a TV CP, which 
initially resulted in the construction of Channel 41 (now Channel 10 
et al). In those days, it was cutomary for radio and TV networks to 
affiliate with commonly owned radio and TV stations in most markets 
where they existed. IIRC, WROW-TV (which was later renamed WTEN after 
it built the Channel 10 facility in Vail Mills) initially became the 
CBS-TV affiliate. It was thus fitting for WROW (AM) to be the CBS 
Radio affiliate. Although WTRY was 5 kW-U with excellent coverage of 
Albany, Troy, and Schenectady, it couldn't match WROW's daytime 
coverage of the Hudson Valley. WROW's lower night power (1 kW) 
apparently didn't bother CBS, perhaps because WROW's low dial position 
at least partially compensated for the lower power.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 11:57 PM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


> On 19 Jan 2008 at 9:28, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
>
>> I believe that those "blips" were (barely) audible cues from a 
>> system
>> that CBS installed at the radio network in (I think) the '50s and
>> continued to use for decades thereafter. It was called NetAlert. If
>> I'm not mistaken, I first heard NetAlert cues on WROW Albany after 
>> it
>> replaced WTRY Troy as the CBS affiliate in New York's Capital
>> District. That would have been while I was in college around 1953 
>> or
>> so.
>
> Since I remember it, and we moved to Albany just after Thanksgiving
> 1953, I think this would have been sometime in 1954 or maybe 1955. 
> I
> never understood why the change took place, but it affected three of
> the four networks and four stations.  CBS moved from WTRY to WROW,
> ABC moved from WROW to WPTR, and Mutual moved from WPTR to WOKO. 
> NBC
> remained on WGY.
>
> -- 
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
> 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004                    http://www.attorneyross.com
>
> 


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Sun Jan 20 12:16:21 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 12:16:21 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<47928E57.11210.34C4B8@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<001301c85b6d$824e1fa0$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <03f401c85b88$36c66270$6501a8c0@pastor2>

That early history of television in the Capital District is indeed
interesting and quite complicated.  I can remember when WTEN (then party of
the Capital Cities family, along with WROW AM and FM) operated not one, but
two adjunct UHF stations --WCDC, Channel 19 in Adams, Mass (the original
WROW-TV)., and WCDA, Channel 41 in Albany --- to compensate for its
inadequate signal coverage amidst the surrounding hills and mountains.  I
assume that it was that reason that enabled Cap Cities to get around
whatever rules then existed regarding local media monopolies.

Similarly, WAST, Channel 13, simulcast on WTRI, Channel 35.

All of this changed when the stations built new towers in the
      -Doug








----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
To: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 9:01 AM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


> The reasons for the big Capital District radio-network affiliation
> shift of the mid fifties were complicated. It was played to the public
> that the group (from Providence) that acquired WTRY was committed to
> local independent radio and so dropped the (very lucrative) CBS
> affiliation, thus precipitating the round-robin switch, which left
> WTRY indpendent and made WOKO a network affiliate (which it had not
> been in many years). As an independent, WTRY continued to prosper.
> However, I think the the reason for the shift was more
> complex--related to the lifting of the freeze on construction of TV
> stations and the formation of Capital Cities Broadcasting (which over
> many decades and many mergers, morphed into ABC and Disney).
>
> Capital Cities started in the Capital District (and indeed was named
> for it) and WROW was its very first station! WROW got a TV CP, which
> initially resulted in the construction of Channel 41 (now Channel 10
> et al). In those days, it was cutomary for radio and TV networks to
> affiliate with commonly owned radio and TV stations in most markets
> where they existed. IIRC, WROW-TV (which was later renamed WTEN after
> it built the Channel 10 facility in Vail Mills) initially became the
> CBS-TV affiliate. It was thus fitting for WROW (AM) to be the CBS
> Radio affiliate. Although WTRY was 5 kW-U with excellent coverage of
> Albany, Troy, and Schenectady, it couldn't match WROW's daytime
> coverage of the Hudson Valley. WROW's lower night power (1 kW)
> apparently didn't bother CBS, perhaps because WROW's low dial position
> at least partially compensated for the lower power.
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
> To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 11:57 PM
> Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP
>
>
> > On 19 Jan 2008 at 9:28, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
> >
> >> I believe that those "blips" were (barely) audible cues from a
> >> system
> >> that CBS installed at the radio network in (I think) the '50s and
> >> continued to use for decades thereafter. It was called NetAlert. If
> >> I'm not mistaken, I first heard NetAlert cues on WROW Albany after
> >> it
> >> replaced WTRY Troy as the CBS affiliate in New York's Capital
> >> District. That would have been while I was in college around 1953
> >> or
> >> so.
> >
> > Since I remember it, and we moved to Albany just after Thanksgiving
> > 1953, I think this would have been sometime in 1954 or maybe 1955.
> > I
> > never understood why the change took place, but it affected three of
> > the four networks and four stations.  CBS moved from WTRY to WROW,
> > ABC moved from WROW to WPTR, and Mutual moved from WPTR to WOKO.
> > NBC
> > remained on WGY.
> >
> > -- 
> > A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
> > 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> > Boston, MA 02109-2004                    http://www.attorneyross.com
> >
> >
>


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Sun Jan 20 13:32:12 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 13:32:12 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<47928E57.11210.34C4B8@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<001301c85b6d$824e1fa0$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<03f401c85b88$36c66270$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <000801c85b92$c7da8980$52eca644@SatU205S5044>

Channel 41 (which, if still on the air, may be WCDA) was the original
home of WROW-TV. Channel 35 was the original home of WTRI (WTRY's TV
affiliate and not part of the sale of the AM to the Providence group
headed by Mowry Lowe that I mentioned in previous posts). There is no
way I can fully reconstruct the saga of either TV station and I don't
even know the current calls of Channel 13--all I know is that it is no
longer WAST, which were the calls for many years after it signed on on
Channel 13.

The Capital District was originally deprived of multiple VHF
assignnments by its proximity to other metros in the northeast.
Albany-Schenectady-Troy's sole post-freeze VHF was WRGB Channel 6, one
of, if not THE, oldest commercial TV station in the US. All other
assignments were on less desirable UHF channels. I remember the
original assignments on 23, 35, and 41. There were probably others
that I don't recall. WROW built an ~700' tower (fairly tall for that
era--but no record breaker, for sure) in North Greenbush. The problem
was that the tower base was in the valley, so the HAAT was not great
and the signal in Schenectady was not very good. (The tower exists to
this day and is home to WRPI (FM), the student-run station of my alma
mater, RPI in Troy.) WTRI located atop Bald Mountain north of Troy.
I'm not sure of the tower height, but I'm pretty sure that WTRI
achieved an HAAT of 1000' or close to it.

WROW extended its reach by acquiring or leasing WMGT Channel 74 in
North Adams MA with transmitter atop Mt Greylock, the highest point in
MA. After a fire that destroyed the Channel 74 Tx, WMGT relocated to
Channel 19 and became, I believe, WCDC. It may still have those calls.
WROW also built another station to the west of the Capital District
near Amsterdan in Hagaman NY on Channel 29. I believe the calls for
Channel 29 were WCDB. Channel 29 took care of the poor Channel 41
reception in Schenectady, although I believe that Channel 19 also
comes in pretty well in Schenectady.

Then came WROW's big plan. With the rejuggling of VHF assignments in
Utica, Syracuse, and Rochester, WROW's engineers recognized that a
small triangular piece of land just south of Sacondaga Reservoir in
the hamlet of Vail Mills NY, had become just far enough (170 miles)
from Channel 10 assignments in Rochester, Providence, and Montreal to
allow the construction of a full-power VHF station that was (just
barely) not short-spaced to anything. The Channel 10 station could
replace Channel 29 and, it was hoped, also cover the entire Capital
District. WROW was granted a CP and soon constructed a 1300+' tower.
Even before construction could get started, Capital District residents
noted that the site was more than 35 miles from downtown Albany and
that, tall tower notwithstanding, the high-band VHF signal was
unlikely to do a very good job of penetrating into the valley, where
most of the population in the metro lived. Decent over-the-air
reception of Channel 10 would therefore probably require expensive
outdoor antennas. (Remember, at that time, cable had not yet really
gotten off the ground.) Moreover, for most Capital District residents,
Vail Mills lay to the northwest, whereas Channel 6 transmitted from a
site in the Helderberg Mountains, southwest of Albany, so antenna
rotators were also likely to be needed. When Channel 10 took to the
air, the worst fears about reception were confirmed.

At some point, the idea came up of relocating Channel 10 to a site in
the Helderbergs, where it would be short-spaced to Providence. That is
indeed what happened.

As for Channel 13, I believe that a site south of Lake Champlain would
theoretically not be short spaced to co-channel stations licensed to
Montreal, Newark NJ (New York City), or Utica. Such a site would be a
bit further from downtown Albany than Vail Mills was, but might have
been able to do a better job of penetrating the valley. Whether
Channel 35 ever actually applied for such facilities, much less built
them, I don't know. I do know that a Channel 13 that is short spaced
to Newark was built at the Channel 35 site on Bald Mtn, where, AFAIK,
it replaced Channel 35. AFAIK, Channel 13 still operates from that
site, although I believe I've read that its DTV station is located in
the Helderbergs.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>; "A. Joseph Ross"
<joe@attorneyross.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


> That early history of television in the Capital District is indeed
> interesting and quite complicated.  I can remember when WTEN (then
> party of
> the Capital Cities family, along with WROW AM and FM) operated not
> one, but
> two adjunct UHF stations --WCDC, Channel 19 in Adams, Mass (the
> original
> WROW-TV)., and WCDA, Channel 41 in Albany --- to compensate for its
> inadequate signal coverage amidst the surrounding hills and
> mountains.  I
> assume that it was that reason that enabled Cap Cities to get around
> whatever rules then existed regarding local media monopolies.
>
> Similarly, WAST, Channel 13, simulcast on WTRI, Channel 35.
>
> All of this changed when the stations built new towers in the
>      -Doug
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> To: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 9:01 AM
> Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP
>
>
>> The reasons for the big Capital District radio-network affiliation
>> shift of the mid fifties were complicated. It was played to the
>> public
>> that the group (from Providence) that acquired WTRY was committed
>> to
>> local independent radio and so dropped the (very lucrative) CBS
>> affiliation, thus precipitating the round-robin switch, which left
>> WTRY indpendent and made WOKO a network affiliate (which it had not
>> been in many years). As an independent, WTRY continued to prosper.
>> However, I think the the reason for the shift was more
>> complex--related to the lifting of the freeze on construction of TV
>> stations and the formation of Capital Cities Broadcasting (which
>> over
>> many decades and many mergers, morphed into ABC and Disney).
>>
>> Capital Cities started in the Capital District (and indeed was
>> named
>> for it) and WROW was its very first station! WROW got a TV CP,
>> which
>> initially resulted in the construction of Channel 41 (now Channel
>> 10
>> et al). In those days, it was cutomary for radio and TV networks to
>> affiliate with commonly owned radio and TV stations in most markets
>> where they existed. IIRC, WROW-TV (which was later renamed WTEN
>> after
>> it built the Channel 10 facility in Vail Mills) initially became
>> the
>> CBS-TV affiliate. It was thus fitting for WROW (AM) to be the CBS
>> Radio affiliate. Although WTRY was 5 kW-U with excellent coverage
>> of
>> Albany, Troy, and Schenectady, it couldn't match WROW's daytime
>> coverage of the Hudson Valley. WROW's lower night power (1 kW)
>> apparently didn't bother CBS, perhaps because WROW's low dial
>> position
>> at least partially compensated for the lower power.
>>
>> -----
>> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
>> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
>> To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
>> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 11:57 PM
>> Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP
>>
>>
>> > On 19 Jan 2008 at 9:28, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
>> >
>> >> I believe that those "blips" were (barely) audible cues from a
>> >> system
>> >> that CBS installed at the radio network in (I think) the '50s
>> >> and
>> >> continued to use for decades thereafter. It was called NetAlert.
>> >> If
>> >> I'm not mistaken, I first heard NetAlert cues on WROW Albany
>> >> after
>> >> it
>> >> replaced WTRY Troy as the CBS affiliate in New York's Capital
>> >> District. That would have been while I was in college around
>> >> 1953
>> >> or
>> >> so.
>> >
>> > Since I remember it, and we moved to Albany just after
>> > Thanksgiving
>> > 1953, I think this would have been sometime in 1954 or maybe
>> > 1955.
>> > I
>> > never understood why the change took place, but it affected three
>> > of
>> > the four networks and four stations.  CBS moved from WTRY to
>> > WROW,
>> > ABC moved from WROW to WPTR, and Mutual moved from WPTR to WOKO.
>> > NBC
>> > remained on WGY.
>> >
>> > -- 
>> > A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
>> > 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
>> > Boston, MA 02109-2004
>> > http://www.attorneyross.com
>> >
>> >
>>
>


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Sun Jan 20 13:27:24 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 13:27:24 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<47928E57.11210.34C4B8@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<001301c85b6d$824e1fa0$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<03f401c85b88$36c66270$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <03fc01c85b92$1e1c1990$6501a8c0@pastor2>

WROW-TV was indeed Channel 41.  I stand corrected.  WCDC 19 was originally
known was WMGT (Mount Greylock Television), and simulcast WROW's signal for
the Western Mass. and Vermont viewers, which WCDC continues to do today for
WTEN.  WCDC's signal comes in clearly as far east as the Gardner
ea.   -Doug

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>; "A. Joseph Ross"
<joe@attorneyross.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


> That early history of television in the Capital District is indeed
> interesting and quite complicated.  I can remember when WTEN (then party
of
> the Capital Cities family, along with WROW AM and FM) operated not one,
but
> two adjunct UHF stations --WCDC, Channel 19 in Adams, Mass (the original
> WROW-TV)., and WCDA, Channel 41 in Albany --- to compensate for its
> inadequate signal coverage amidst the surrounding hills and mountains.  I
> assume that it was that reason that enabled Cap Cities to get around
> whatever rules then existed regarding local media monopolies.
>
> Similarly, WAST, Channel 13, simulcast on WTRI, Channel 35.
>
> All of this changed when the stations built new towers in the
>       -Doug
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> To: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 9:01 AM
> Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP
>
>
> > The reasons for the big Capital District radio-network affiliation
> > shift of the mid fifties were complicated. It was played to the public
> > that the group (from Providence) that acquired WTRY was committed to
> > local independent radio and so dropped the (very lucrative) CBS
> > affiliation, thus precipitating the round-robin switch, which left
> > WTRY indpendent and made WOKO a network affiliate (which it had not
> > been in many years). As an independent, WTRY continued to prosper.
> > However, I think the the reason for the shift was more
> > complex--related to the lifting of the freeze on construction of TV
> > stations and the formation of Capital Cities Broadcasting (which over
> > many decades and many mergers, morphed into ABC and Disney).
> >
> > Capital Cities started in the Capital District (and indeed was named
> > for it) and WROW was its very first station! WROW got a TV CP, which
> > initially resulted in the construction of Channel 41 (now Channel 10
> > et al). In those days, it was cutomary for radio and TV networks to
> > affiliate with commonly owned radio and TV stations in most markets
> > where they existed. IIRC, WROW-TV (which was later renamed WTEN after
> > it built the Channel 10 facility in Vail Mills) initially became the
> > CBS-TV affiliate. It was thus fitting for WROW (AM) to be the CBS
> > Radio affiliate. Although WTRY was 5 kW-U with excellent coverage of
> > Albany, Troy, and Schenectady, it couldn't match WROW's daytime
> > coverage of the Hudson Valley. WROW's lower night power (1 kW)
> > apparently didn't bother CBS, perhaps because WROW's low dial position
> > at least partially compensated for the lower power.
> >
> > -----
> > Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> > eFax 1-707-215-6367
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
> > To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> > Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 11:57 PM
> > Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP
> >
> >
> > > On 19 Jan 2008 at 9:28, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
> > >
> > >> I believe that those "blips" were (barely) audible cues from a
> > >> system
> > >> that CBS installed at the radio network in (I think) the '50s and
> > >> continued to use for decades thereafter. It was called NetAlert. If
> > >> I'm not mistaken, I first heard NetAlert cues on WROW Albany after
> > >> it
> > >> replaced WTRY Troy as the CBS affiliate in New York's Capital
> > >> District. That would have been while I was in college around 1953
> > >> or
> > >> so.
> > >
> > > Since I remember it, and we moved to Albany just after Thanksgiving
> > > 1953, I think this would have been sometime in 1954 or maybe 1955.
> > > I
> > > never understood why the change took place, but it affected three of
> > > the four networks and four stations.  CBS moved from WTRY to WROW,
> > > ABC moved from WROW to WPTR, and Mutual moved from WPTR to WOKO.
> > > NBC
> > > remained on WGY.
> > >
> > > -- 
> > > A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
> > > 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> > > Boston, MA 02109-2004                    http://www.attorneyross.com
> > >
> > >
> >
>


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Sun Jan 20 14:49:48 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:49:48 -0500
Subject: WTRY
Message-ID: <041901c85b9d$9dd145b0$6501a8c0@pastor2>

WTRY, back in its Top 40 heyday, used to be owned by an outfit named
Kops-Monahan Communications, which also owned WAVZ in New Haven.  One of its
principals, whose name was (I think) Richard Monahan, was originally from
Fitchburg and was the brother of my sixth-grade teacher.  Does anyone know
what other stations, if any, Kops-Monahan owned?

-Doug


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Sun Jan 20 14:08:14 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:08:14 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000a01c85aa7$88454b20$e3f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<47928E57.11210.34C4B8@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<001301c85b6d$824e1fa0$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<03f401c85b88$36c66270$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<000801c85b92$c7da8980$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <040d01c85b97$d97c9930$6501a8c0@pastor2>

After reading your post, Dan, it's amazing Channels 10 and 13 ever got up
and running at all.

WAST 13 built on Bald Mountain in Center Brunswick around 1965 or '66, if my
memory is right.  I remember when the tower was built and how impressed I
was by it.  WAST was, traditionally, the also-ran of the three stations.  It
was an ABC affiliate, it didn't telecast in color until the late '60s, and
originally made up much of its local broadcasting day with cartoons, old
movies and documentaries.  Even the graphics were lousy.  WRGB and WTEN, by
contrast, were class acts --- especially WRGB, which broadcast (and
continues to broadcast) out of a magnificent facility on Balltown Road in
Niskayuna, built with money from GE's very deep pockets.  (BTW, WRGB is
indeed not only the oldest commercial TV station in the U.S. but  the oldest
TV station in the world, period.  It began broadcasting experimentally in
1928 and received its present call letters in 1939.)

WAST's poor-third status was reversed in the '80s after WRGB dropped its
long-time NBC affiliation (it was one of NBC's  original affiliates) and
went with CBS.   WAST picked up NBC, and its then-owner, which I think was
Viacom, almost completely rebuilt the station from scratch, spending
millions on it.  Shortly thereafter, NBC became the #1-rated network, and
WAST changed its call letters to WNYT.  It is now one of the network's
foremost affiliates, and vies with WRGB (depending on which newscast) as the
top-rated news operation in the Capital District.

-Doug



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
To: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>; "A. Joseph Ross"
<joe@attorneyross.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


> Channel 41 (which, if still on the air, may be WCDA) was the original
> home of WROW-TV. Channel 35 was the original home of WTRI (WTRY's TV
> affiliate and not part of the sale of the AM to the Providence group
> headed by Mowry Lowe that I mentioned in previous posts). There is no
> way I can fully reconstruct the saga of either TV station and I don't
> even know the current calls of Channel 13--all I know is that it is no
> longer WAST, which were the calls for many years after it signed on on
> Channel 13.
>
> The Capital District was originally deprived of multiple VHF
> assignnments by its proximity to other metros in the northeast.
> Albany-Schenectady-Troy's sole post-freeze VHF was WRGB Channel 6, one
> of, if not THE, oldest commercial TV station in the US. All other
> assignments were on less desirable UHF channels. I remember the
> original assignments on 23, 35, and 41. There were probably others
> that I don't recall. WROW built an ~700' tower (fairly tall for that
> era--but no record breaker, for sure) in North Greenbush. The problem
> was that the tower base was in the valley, so the HAAT was not great
> and the signal in Schenectady was not very good. (The tower exists to
> this day and is home to WRPI (FM), the student-run station of my alma
> mater, RPI in Troy.) WTRI located atop Bald Mountain north of Troy.
> I'm not sure of the tower height, but I'm pretty sure that WTRI
> achieved an HAAT of 1000' or close to it.
>
> WROW extended its reach by acquiring or leasing WMGT Channel 74 in
> North Adams MA with transmitter atop Mt Greylock, the highest point in
> MA. After a fire that destroyed the Channel 74 Tx, WMGT relocated to
> Channel 19 and became, I believe, WCDC. It may still have those calls.
> WROW also built another station to the west of the Capital District
> near Amsterdan in Hagaman NY on Channel 29. I believe the calls for
> Channel 29 were WCDB. Channel 29 took care of the poor Channel 41
> reception in Schenectady, although I believe that Channel 19 also
> comes in pretty well in Schenectady.
>
> Then came WROW's big plan. With the rejuggling of VHF assignments in
> Utica, Syracuse, and Rochester, WROW's engineers recognized that a
> small triangular piece of land just south of Sacondaga Reservoir in
> the hamlet of Vail Mills NY, had become just far enough (170 miles)
> from Channel 10 assignments in Rochester, Providence, and Montreal to
> allow the construction of a full-power VHF station that was (just
> barely) not short-spaced to anything. The Channel 10 station could
> replace Channel 29 and, it was hoped, also cover the entire Capital
> District. WROW was granted a CP and soon constructed a 1300+' tower.
> Even before construction could get started, Capital District residents
> noted that the site was more than 35 miles from downtown Albany and
> that, tall tower notwithstanding, the high-band VHF signal was
> unlikely to do a very good job of penetrating into the valley, where
> most of the population in the metro lived. Decent over-the-air
> reception of Channel 10 would therefore probably require expensive
> outdoor antennas. (Remember, at that time, cable had not yet really
> gotten off the ground.) Moreover, for most Capital District residents,
> Vail Mills lay to the northwest, whereas Channel 6 transmitted from a
> site in the Helderberg Mountains, southwest of Albany, so antenna
> rotators were also likely to be needed. When Channel 10 took to the
> air, the worst fears about reception were confirmed.
>
> At some point, the idea came up of relocating Channel 10 to a site in
> the Helderbergs, where it would be short-spaced to Providence. That is
> indeed what happened.
>
> As for Channel 13, I believe that a site south of Lake Champlain would
> theoretically not be short spaced to co-channel stations licensed to
> Montreal, Newark NJ (New York City), or Utica. Such a site would be a
> bit further from downtown Albany than Vail Mills was, but might have
> been able to do a better job of penetrating the valley. Whether
> Channel 35 ever actually applied for such facilities, much less built
> them, I don't know. I do know that a Channel 13 that is short spaced
> to Newark was built at the Channel 35 site on Bald Mtn, where, AFAIK,
> it replaced Channel 35. AFAIK, Channel 13 still operates from that
> site, although I believe I've read that its DTV station is located in
> the Helderbergs.
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>
> To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>; "A. Joseph Ross"
> <joe@attorneyross.com>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 12:16 PM
> Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP
>
>
> > That early history of television in the Capital District is indeed
> > interesting and quite complicated.  I can remember when WTEN (then
> > party of
> > the Capital Cities family, along with WROW AM and FM) operated not
> > one, but
> > two adjunct UHF stations --WCDC, Channel 19 in Adams, Mass (the
> > original
> > WROW-TV)., and WCDA, Channel 41 in Albany --- to compensate for its
> > inadequate signal coverage amidst the surrounding hills and
> > mountains.  I
> > assume that it was that reason that enabled Cap Cities to get around
> > whatever rules then existed regarding local media monopolies.
> >
> > Similarly, WAST, Channel 13, simulcast on WTRI, Channel 35.
> >
> > All of this changed when the stations built new towers in the
> >      -Doug
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> > To: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
> > Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 9:01 AM
> > Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP
> >
> >
> >> The reasons for the big Capital District radio-network affiliation
> >> shift of the mid fifties were complicated. It was played to the
> >> public
> >> that the group (from Providence) that acquired WTRY was committed
> >> to
> >> local independent radio and so dropped the (very lucrative) CBS
> >> affiliation, thus precipitating the round-robin switch, which left
> >> WTRY indpendent and made WOKO a network affiliate (which it had not
> >> been in many years). As an independent, WTRY continued to prosper.
> >> However, I think the the reason for the shift was more
> >> complex--related to the lifting of the freeze on construction of TV
> >> stations and the formation of Capital Cities Broadcasting (which
> >> over
> >> many decades and many mergers, morphed into ABC and Disney).
> >>
> >> Capital Cities started in the Capital District (and indeed was
> >> named
> >> for it) and WROW was its very first station! WROW got a TV CP,
> >> which
> >> initially resulted in the construction of Channel 41 (now Channel
> >> 10
> >> et al). In those days, it was cutomary for radio and TV networks to
> >> affiliate with commonly owned radio and TV stations in most markets
> >> where they existed. IIRC, WROW-TV (which was later renamed WTEN
> >> after
> >> it built the Channel 10 facility in Vail Mills) initially became
> >> the
> >> CBS-TV affiliate. It was thus fitting for WROW (AM) to be the CBS
> >> Radio affiliate. Although WTRY was 5 kW-U with excellent coverage
> >> of
> >> Albany, Troy, and Schenectady, it couldn't match WROW's daytime
> >> coverage of the Hudson Valley. WROW's lower night power (1 kW)
> >> apparently didn't bother CBS, perhaps because WROW's low dial
> >> position
> >> at least partially compensated for the lower power.
> >>
> >> -----
> >> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> >> eFax 1-707-215-6367
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- 
> >> From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
> >> To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> >> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> >> Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 11:57 PM
> >> Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP
> >>
> >>
> >> > On 19 Jan 2008 at 9:28, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I believe that those "blips" were (barely) audible cues from a
> >> >> system
> >> >> that CBS installed at the radio network in (I think) the '50s
> >> >> and
> >> >> continued to use for decades thereafter. It was called NetAlert.
> >> >> If
> >> >> I'm not mistaken, I first heard NetAlert cues on WROW Albany
> >> >> after
> >> >> it
> >> >> replaced WTRY Troy as the CBS affiliate in New York's Capital
> >> >> District. That would have been while I was in college around
> >> >> 1953
> >> >> or
> >> >> so.
> >> >
> >> > Since I remember it, and we moved to Albany just after
> >> > Thanksgiving
> >> > 1953, I think this would have been sometime in 1954 or maybe
> >> > 1955.
> >> > I
> >> > never understood why the change took place, but it affected three
> >> > of
> >> > the four networks and four stations.  CBS moved from WTRY to
> >> > WROW,
> >> > ABC moved from WROW to WPTR, and Mutual moved from WPTR to WOKO.
> >> > NBC
> >> > remained on WGY.
> >> >
> >> > -- 
> >> > A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
> >> > 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> >> > Boston, MA 02109-2004
> >> > http://www.attorneyross.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>


From nostaticatall@charter.net  Sun Jan 20 16:25:02 2008
From: nostaticatall@charter.net (David Tomm)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 16:25:02 -0500
Subject: WTRY
In-Reply-To: <041901c85b9d$9dd145b0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <041901c85b9d$9dd145b0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <7fcea528b91ca6e00e25aedbb4a14bea@charter.net>

They also owned 101.3 in New Haven and around 1981 or so moved the Top 
40 format off WAVZ (13 "Waves") and on to the FM as "KC-101," which 
still exists today.  I don't know if they were in any other markets 
besides Albany and New Haven.

Believe it or not, New Haven is one of Clear Channel's original 
markets.  IIRC, Kops-Monahan sold WAVZ and WKCI to Noble Broadcasting 
in the mid 80's.  Noble was acquired by Jacor, which eventually morphed 
into Clear Channel.  While many other stations were bought, sold and 
swapped by CC over the years, WAVZ/WKCI have always been part of their 
portfolio.


On Jan 20, 2008, at 2:49 PM, Doug Drown wrote:

> WTRY, back in its Top 40 heyday, used to be owned by an outfit named
> Kops-Monahan Communications, which also owned WAVZ in New Haven.  One 
> of its
> principals, whose name was (I think) Richard Monahan, was originally 
> from
> Fitchburg and was the brother of my sixth-grade teacher.  Does anyone 
> know
> what other stations, if any, Kops-Monahan owned?
>


From songbook2@comcast.net  Sun Jan 20 18:43:01 2008
From: songbook2@comcast.net (Russ Butler)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 15:43:01 -0800
Subject: Hourly beeps
Message-ID: <4793DC85.50003@comcast.net>

The WTIC Hartford CT hourly sounder "dah-dah-dah-dar" (Letter "V" in 
Morse Code) is still a unique, hourly audible beep in broadcasting, I 
think. 

Weren't those large old Western Electric studio clocks with the little 
red light bulb on the cream colored dial that lit up on the hour with 
the hourly beep connected to a mechanism that re-set the time each hour 
automatically? The second-hand would flick back to the 12-o'clock 
position when it was re-set with the tone signal and red light to click 
away for another hour.
 
Then there was/is the WWV National Bureau of Standards "beeps" following 
the automated announcer's time signal and the dull "ticking clock" sound 
each second for the other 59 seconds each minute.

-Russ Butler  songbook2@comcast.net

(...remember the parody "This is W W V, all time, all the time, anytime!")


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Sun Jan 20 20:37:52 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 20:37:52 -0500
Subject: Hourly beeps
References: <4793DC85.50003@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <000701c85bce$44188f70$54a44c0c@DansCpq6515b>

Also, WWV... If you've got the time, we've got the time.
-----

Dan Strassberg
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Russ Butler" <songbook2@comcast.net>
To: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>; "Russ Butler"
<songbook2@comcast.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 6:43 PM
Subject: Hourly beeps


> The WTIC Hartford CT hourly sounder "dah-dah-dah-dar" (Letter "V" in Morse
> Code) is still a unique, hourly audible beep in broadcasting, I think.
> Weren't those large old Western Electric studio clocks with the little red
> light bulb on the cream colored dial that lit up on the hour with the
> hourly beep connected to a mechanism that re-set the time each hour
> automatically? The second-hand would flick back to the 12-o'clock position
> when it was re-set with the tone signal and red light to click away for
> another hour.
>
> Then there was/is the WWV National Bureau of Standards "beeps" following
> the automated announcer's time signal and the dull "ticking clock" sound
> each second for the other 59 seconds each minute.
>
> -Russ Butler  songbook2@comcast.net
>
> (...remember the parody "This is W W V, all time, all the time, anytime!")
>


From attychase@comcast.net  Sun Jan 20 21:11:19 2008
From: attychase@comcast.net (Robert S Chase)
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 21:11:19 -0500
Subject: Hourly beeps
References: <mailman.874.1200879506.644.boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Message-ID: <000501c85bd2$eb78a030$6400a8c0@HomeOffice>

Isn't Morse V pronounced dit dit dit dah? All us first (now general) 
radiotelephones might not know that but the hams would. <grin> Are there any 
first radiotelegraphs left?

>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Russ Butler" <songbook2@comcast.net>
> To: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>; "Russ Butler"
> <songbook2@comcast.net>
> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 6:43 PM
> Subject: Hourly beeps
>
>
>> The WTIC Hartford CT hourly sounder "dah-dah-dah-dar" (Letter "V" in 
>> Morse
>> Code) is still a unique, hourly audible beep in broadcasting, I think.
>> 



From joe@attorneyross.com  Mon Jan 21 00:06:32 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:06:32 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <001301c85b6d$824e1fa0$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<001301c85b6d$824e1fa0$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <4793E208.18237.5EEC2B@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 20 Jan 2008 at 9:01, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> Capital Cities started in the Capital District (and indeed was named
> for it) and WROW was its very first station! WROW got a TV CP, which
> initially resulted in the construction of Channel 41 (now Channel 10
> et al). In those days, it was cutomary for radio and TV networks to
> affiliate with commonly owned radio and TV stations in most markets
> where they existed. 

I don't know when it became Capital Cities, but while I was there, up 
until May 1957, the company that owned WROW was called "Hudson Valley 
Broadcasting," and that was how they answered their phone.

> IIRC, WROW-TV (which was later renamed WTEN after
> it built the Channel 10 facility in Vail Mills) initially became the
> CBS-TV affiliate. It was thus fitting for WROW (AM) to be the CBS
> Radio affiliate. 

My recollection is that WROW-TV was not originally a CBS affiliate. 
When we moved to the area in late November 1953, WROW radio was still 
an ABC affiliate and WROW-TV had just come on.  It may have been an 
independent station or it may have been nominally an ABC affiliate.  
Just after the start of 1954, I saw an ad in the paper proclaiming 
that it really was a happy new year because Channel 35 would soon be 
on the air.  It would be WTRI and would be a sister station to WTRY 
CBS.  That meant that Channel 35 started as a CBS affiliate.  Channel 
74, WMGT was a separate station with its own programming, possibly 
with a DuMont affiliation.  At the time, however, whatever the 
affiliations of the UHF stations, WRGB, although an NBC affiliate, 
also carried many programs from the other networks, often by delayed 
broadcast.  I recall that they had Ed Sullivan's show on Friday 
evening and Jack Benny on Sunday afternoon.  At one point Bishop 
Fulton J. Sheen's Tuesday night show on DuMont was also on Sunday 
afternoon.  Space Patrol, an ABC program, was carried live from the 
network on Saturday morning at 11:00.  Some of CBS's weekday 
afternoon shows were also carried on WRGB.

I don't remember whether it happened at the same time as the radio 
shift, but at some point WROW-TV began to advertise itself as the new 
CBS affiliate (despite all the CBS shows on WRGB).  WTRI at that 
point went off the air for awhile.

Finally, I believe in 1956, WTRI returned as an ABC affiliate.  By 
that time, WROW-TV had become WCDA channel 41 and WCDB, channel 29, 
and WMGT had left the air.  I believe it had already shifted to 
Channel 19 before the fire.  I'm not quite sure the timing of its 
return as WCDC, but I suspect it might have been motivated at least 
in part by the demise of the DuMont Television Network.

In 1956, when WTRI came back on, there was a general reallignment of 
programming, and all CBS programs moved to WCDA etc. and ABC programs 
still being carried on WRGB moved to WTRI (with one exception I 
remember:  I was surprised to discover that Art Baker's "You Asked 
For It," which was WRGB continued to carry, was an ABC program).

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Mon Jan 21 00:06:32 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:06:32 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <03fc01c85b92$1e1c1990$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<03fc01c85b92$1e1c1990$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <4793E208.22646.5EED54@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 20 Jan 2008 at 13:27, Doug Drown wrote:

> WROW-TV was indeed Channel 41.  I stand corrected.  WCDC 19 was
> originally known was WMGT (Mount Greylock Television), and simulcast
> WROW's signal for the Western Mass. and Vermont viewers, which WCDC
> continues to do today for WTEN.  WCDC's signal comes in clearly as far
> east as the Gardner ea.   -Doug

I remember in the early 1970s visiting some friends in Brimfield and 
discovering that we could get a fairly good signal (only a little 
snow) on WCDC on a small portable that I had brought for my friend to 
install a new filter capacitor. 

On the other hand, in the 1960s, at UMass Amherst, which is in the 
valley, we couldn't generally get WCDC, except in my senior year, 
when I moved to the new high-rise dorms.  There, we got a clear 
signal on WCDC, and I remember watching a televised debate for 
governor of New York on that station.  I also saw Howard Tupper, the 
weatherman, whom I remembered seeing in the 1950s on WRGB and hearing 
on WGY.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Mon Jan 21 00:06:32 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:06:32 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <000801c85b92$c7da8980$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000801c85b92$c7da8980$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <4793E208.9111.5EEE1F@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 20 Jan 2008 at 13:32, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> Channel 41 (which, if still on the air, may be WCDA) was the original
> home of WROW-TV. Channel 35 was the original home of WTRI (WTRY's TV
> affiliate and not part of the sale of the AM to the Providence group
> headed by Mowry Lowe that I mentioned in previous posts). There is no
> way I can fully reconstruct the saga of either TV station and I don't
> even know the current calls of Channel 13--all I know is that it is no
> longer WAST, which were the calls for many years after it signed on on
> Channel 13.

I'm not certain of this, but I believe that WMGT moved to channel 19 
before the fire.  Apparently there was a lot less range on the higher-
numbered channel.
 
> Albany-Schenectady-Troy's sole post-freeze VHF was WRGB Channel 6, one
> of, if not THE, oldest commercial TV station in the US. All other
> assignments were on less desirable UHF channels. I remember the
> original assignments on 23, 35, and 41. 

WRGB moved from Channel 4 to Channel 6 in January 1954.  While most 
TV sets had a fine tuning knob, our Muntz didn't.  There was a screw 
adjustment, accessed by removing the knobs and a metal plate on the 
front of the TV.  Apparently TV servicemen were very busy at that 
point adjusting sets to receive WRGB on channel 6.  We had lousy 
reception and sometimes slightly better reception on channel 5 for 
some reason.  

Finally, tired of waiting for a TV serviceman, my father adjusted the 
set himself.  Then he came into my room and told me to come see what 
he had just done.  When I saw the clear picture on the TV, I was the 
world's happiest 8-year-old.  He was the family hero for at least a 
couple of days for that.

As we were about to move back to the Boston area, the headlines were 
that the FCC was pushing a plan to have all UHF stations in the 
Capital area, moving WRGB to channel 47.  That, of course, never 
happened, but when we left, that was in the wind, and the move of 
WROW and WTRI to VHF was still in the future.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From wollman@bimajority.org  Mon Jan 21 00:36:46 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:36:46 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <4793E208.9111.5EEE1F@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<000801c85b92$c7da8980$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<4793E208.9111.5EEE1F@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <18324.12142.922802.4748@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:06:32 -0500, "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com> said:

> WRGB moved from Channel 4 to Channel 6 in January 1954.

The problem was that Schenectady was short-spaced to New York.  Moving
Schenectady's allotment from 4 to 6 required that New Haven move from
6 to 8, which then opened up 6 in New Bedford.  A new, fully-spaced 4
allotment was added in Utica, but with site restrictions that made it
not worth building, and to this day it never has been.  At the same
time, 11 Providence moved to 10, allowing 11 Portsmouth (now Durham)
and 12 Providence to be added.  This was also tied in with a bunch of
other channel moves elsewhere Upstate that eventually allowed 5 and 9
to come on in Toronto.  I've been after Scott to write up an article
about this whole business for the better part of a decade.

> As we were about to move back to the Boston area, the headlines were 
> that the FCC was pushing a plan to have all UHF stations in the 
> Capital area, moving WRGB to channel 47.

This plan was called "de-intermixture", and did actually come to pass
in Albany -- with all the UHF stations moving to VHF rather than the
one VHF moving to UHF.  There were numerous other markets where this
was supposed to happen, and (IIRC) exactly two where it actually did,
but the FCC eventually backed down in the face of tremendous
opposition from the licensed broadcasters.

-GAWollman


From scott@fybush.com  Mon Jan 21 00:46:07 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:46:07 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <18324.12142.922802.4748@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>	<000801c85b92$c7da8980$52eca644@SatU205S5044>	<4793E208.9111.5EEE1F@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<18324.12142.922802.4748@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <4794319F.5030501@fybush.com>

Garrett Wollman wrote:

> This plan was called "de-intermixture", and did actually come to pass
> in Albany -- with all the UHF stations moving to VHF rather than the
> one VHF moving to UHF.  There were numerous other markets where this
> was supposed to happen, and (IIRC) exactly two where it actually did,
> but the FCC eventually backed down in the face of tremendous
> opposition from the licensed broadcasters.

Three, actually - WIRL-TV in Peoria had a CP for channel 8, but was 
bumped to 19 before it could get on the air, where it joined existing 
stations on 25 and 31.

And yes, I'll get that article written, one of these days...

s

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Mon Jan 21 10:04:39 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 10:04:39 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<001301c85b6d$824e1fa0$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<4793E208.18237.5EEC2B@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>

When I arrived in Troy in late August 1952, WROW was owned by Hudson
Valley, the company that built the station (probably around 1947 or
1948). I remember seeing a letter on WROW's stationery, which very
promnently announced "Harry L Goldman, President."

The following anecdote reveals a certain irony in Goldman's so
unabashedly publicizing his ownership of the station: Probably in the
early fall of 1953, when Goldman still owned the station. a new
announcer, Arnold Friedman, joined the air staff. Friedman was very
good (as were all of WROW's announcers with the possible exception of
Ralph Vartigian, who I regarded as marginal for a major market
station). But a few weeks after Friedman appeared, he quietly
disappeared. A couple of weeks later, "another" announcer, who sounded
EXACTLY like Friedman, appeared on WROW. This guy was "Mark Edwards."
A while later, I visited the WROW studios, located in a cramped and
dirty former apartment building not far from the State Capitol
building on the south side of State St in Albany. I asked the
announcer on duty (might have been George Leighton) what the story was
with Friedman/Edwards. He said that Goldman had decided that the
Capital District audience was not ready to accept an announcer with a
Jewish name, so he had Friedman disappear for a while and then
reappear with a more generic (that is, WASP) name. Apparently, Goldman
figured that the advertisers WERE ready to do buiness with a station
owned by a Jew. How else could he have justified having his own name
appear so prominently on the station's stationery?

Anyhow, when WXKW 850 left the air in the fall of 1953, WROW took over
the ABC Radio affiliation from WXKW.  At that time, WROW dropped
Mutual, which I believe migrated to WOKO or maybe WPTR. Goldman still
owned WROW when that happened, but I believe that Hudson Valley had
already been granted (or expected to soon be granted) Channel 41. I
believe that Goldman had hired Friedman in expectation of his working
in both TV and radio.

You have placed WTRY's dropping of CBS Radio in 1955, which seems
quite right to me. WROW picked up CBS and dropped ABC at that time. I
believe that was when ownership of WROW was transferred to Capital
Cities. I have a couple of reasons for thinking so; I think both WROW
(AM) and WROW-TV switched affiliations at the same time. Also, Frank
Gicca, who was one class ahead of me at RPI, had formed Rho Tau Sigma,
the short-lived national undergraduate extracurricular
radio-television honor society. Rho Tau Sigma was Gicca's ticket to
being named to Who's Who in American Colleges and Universities. Gicca
graduated from RPI in 1955. Before he graduated, he had assiduously
cultivated the gentleman who had come to WROW from New York City to be
general manager of WROW AM and TV. That gentleman was Roger Bauer,
best known as the creator and producer of the Mutual Network comedy
show "Can You Top This?" I clearly recall Bauer receiving an award
from Rho Tau Sigma and appearing as the guest speaker at the RPI
chapter's first annual awards ceremony and induction dinner, which,
IIRC, took place in the spring of 1955. Gicca's and WRPI's association
with Bauer paid off, but not until both Frank and I had graduated from
RPI (he in '55; I a year later).

As had many AMs in the 50's, WROW had dabbled in FM, operating WROW-FM
93.9 from WROW's transmitter site in Glenmont, running 1 kW from a GE
transmitter into a single-bay antenna mounted on a telephone pole near
the Tx building. WROW was on the air the legal minimum of six hours a
day (3:00PM to 9:00PM) and IIRC never did anything but simulcast WROW
(AM). Gicca knew that WROW was going to surrender its FM license
(which it did a year or so later) and he wanted the station to donate
the GE transmitter to RPI for use at WRPI, which he hoped would apply
for an FM license. And that is exactly what happened. I remember
traveling to Troy for WRPI-FM's formal sign-on cermony while I was a
graduate student at MIT (which means it HAD to have happened between
'56 and '58).

Moreover, the relationship between WROW and WRPI continued to bear
fruit. Later, when WRPI (by then using the donated transmitter on 91.5
with a (probably different) single-bay antenna mounted on a different
telephone pole outside RPI's 15th St student lounge building) wanted
to increase its coverage, it moved to WROW-TV's (or maybe by then it
was WCDA's) Channel 41 tower in N Greenbush and increased its ERP to
10 kW. (BTW, WROW later got back into FM with a new WROW-FM on 95.5
with full Class B facilities from a site in the Helderbergs.) Anyhow,
I'm sure that Bauer was at WROW in 1955 and I don't think he arrived
until Captial Cities had acquired the station.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 12:06 AM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


> On 20 Jan 2008 at 9:01, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
>
>> Capital Cities started in the Capital District (and indeed was
>> named
>> for it) and WROW was its very first station! WROW got a TV CP,
>> which
>> initially resulted in the construction of Channel 41 (now Channel
>> 10
>> et al). In those days, it was cutomary for radio and TV networks to
>> affiliate with commonly owned radio and TV stations in most markets
>> where they existed.
>
> I don't know when it became Capital Cities, but while I was there,
> up
> until May 1957, the company that owned WROW was called "Hudson
> Valley
> Broadcasting," and that was how they answered their phone.
>
>> IIRC, WROW-TV (which was later renamed WTEN after
>> it built the Channel 10 facility in Vail Mills) initially became
>> the
>> CBS-TV affiliate. It was thus fitting for WROW (AM) to be the CBS
>> Radio affiliate.
>
> My recollection is that WROW-TV was not originally a CBS affiliate.
> When we moved to the area in late November 1953, WROW radio was
> still
> an ABC affiliate and WROW-TV had just come on.  It may have been an
> independent station or it may have been nominally an ABC affiliate.
> Just after the start of 1954, I saw an ad in the paper proclaiming
> that it really was a happy new year because Channel 35 would soon be
> on the air.  It would be WTRI and would be a sister station to WTRY
> CBS.  That meant that Channel 35 started as a CBS affiliate.
> Channel
> 74, WMGT was a separate station with its own programming, possibly
> with a DuMont affiliation.  At the time, however, whatever the
> affiliations of the UHF stations, WRGB, although an NBC affiliate,
> also carried many programs from the other networks, often by delayed
> broadcast.  I recall that they had Ed Sullivan's show on Friday
> evening and Jack Benny on Sunday afternoon.  At one point Bishop
> Fulton J. Sheen's Tuesday night show on DuMont was also on Sunday
> afternoon.  Space Patrol, an ABC program, was carried live from the
> network on Saturday morning at 11:00.  Some of CBS's weekday
> afternoon shows were also carried on WRGB.
>
> I don't remember whether it happened at the same time as the radio
> shift, but at some point WROW-TV began to advertise itself as the
> new
> CBS affiliate (despite all the CBS shows on WRGB).  WTRI at that
> point went off the air for awhile.
>
> Finally, I believe in 1956, WTRI returned as an ABC affiliate.  By
> that time, WROW-TV had become WCDA channel 41 and WCDB, channel 29,
> and WMGT had left the air.  I believe it had already shifted to
> Channel 19 before the fire.  I'm not quite sure the timing of its
> return as WCDC, but I suspect it might have been motivated at least
> in part by the demise of the DuMont Television Network.
>
> In 1956, when WTRI came back on, there was a general reallignment of
> programming, and all CBS programs moved to WCDA etc. and ABC
> programs
> still being carried on WRGB moved to WTRI (with one exception I
> remember:  I was surprised to discover that Art Baker's "You Asked
> For It," which was WRGB continued to carry, was an ABC program).
>
> -- 
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
> 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004                    http://www.attorneyross.com
>
>


From billohno@gmail.com  Mon Jan 21 10:23:55 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 10:23:55 -0500
Subject: HDTV question
Message-ID: <4794B90B.9040702@gmail.com>

I am ignorant of the HDTV universe, so who can explain why CNN HD that I 
am watching here from a coffee shop in Middlebury, Vermont, on a 50" 
plasma-double-secret-probation-mega-large screen has "HD" wallpaper down 
each edge of the screen leaving what seems to be the old aspect ratio 
for content?

Also the "garbage-in garbage-out" axiom comes to mind when I observe 
various feeds to the program that are mixed poorly, etc.

Bill O'Neill

From wollman@bimajority.org  Mon Jan 21 12:40:34 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:40:34 -0500
Subject: HDTV question
In-Reply-To: <4794B90B.9040702@gmail.com>
References: <4794B90B.9040702@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <18324.55570.685066.860438@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 10:23:55 -0500, "Bill O'Neill" <billohno@gmail.com> said:

> I am ignorant of the HDTV universe, so who can explain why CNN HD that I 
> am watching here from a coffee shop in Middlebury, Vermont, on a 50" 
> plasma-double-secret-probation-mega-large screen has "HD" wallpaper down 
> each edge of the screen leaving what seems to be the old aspect ratio 
> for content?

"High definition" does not imply 16:9 aspect ratio (even if they
nearly always go together).  By sticking with 4:3, CNN gets two
benefits:

1) They can easily upconvert legacy 4:3 sources (which would include
most of them).

2) They can easily downconvert to NTSC without letterboxing.

I'm not sure anybody is quite ready for Larry King in widescreen
anway....

-GAWollman

From kc1ih@mac.com  Mon Jan 21 14:48:27 2008
From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:48:27 -0500
Subject: HDTV question
In-Reply-To: <4794B90B.9040702@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <001201c85c66$9ccb06f0$a9141bac@core2k>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org 
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org]
>  On Behalf Of Bill O'Neill
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 10:24 AM
> To: Boston Radio Interest
> Subject: HDTV question
> 
> I am ignorant of the HDTV universe, so who can explain why 
> CNN HD that I am watching here from a coffee shop in 
> Middlebury, Vermont, on a 50" 
> plasma-double-secret-probation-mega-large screen has "HD" 
> wallpaper down each edge of the screen leaving what seems to 
> be the old aspect ratio for content?
> 
> Also the "garbage-in garbage-out" axiom comes to mind when I 
> observe various feeds to the program that are mixed poorly, etc.
> 

I'm guessing (I haven't actually seen CNN HD) that perhaps while their
studio cameras may be HD, the rest of their cameras aren't.  I don't know
how many total cameras CNN owns, but I wouldn't expect them all to be
replaced with HD cameras at once.

Larry Weil
Lake Wobegone, NH  


From joe@attorneyross.com  Mon Jan 21 15:52:20 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:52:20 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <4794BFB4.28746.3C0D5B1@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 21 Jan 2008 at 10:04, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> He said that Goldman had decided that the Capital District audience
> was not ready to accept an announcer with a Jewish name, so he had
> Friedman disappear for a while and then reappear with a more
> generic (that is, WASP) name. Apparently, Goldman figured that the
> advertisers WERE ready to do buiness with a station owned by a Jew.
> How else could he have justified having his own name appear so
> prominently on the station's stationery? 

That sounds consistent with other stories about Jews in the 
entertainment business.  Louis B. Mayer didn't change his name, but 
he made sure that his Jewish stars did, and there was little or no 
Jewish content in the movies and radio programs.  Jack Benny (Ben 
Kubelski) and George Burns (Nathan Birnbaum) were depicted 
celebrating Christmas and eating ham sandwiches (and, truth to tell, 
they probably did anyway).  In front of the camera or microphone, 
Jews had to be invisible, but behind it, it didn't matter as much.

I think Donna has mentioned Arnie Ginsburg as the first Jewish radio 
personality to use a Jewish name on the air.  And he got away with it 
largely because he originally produced his own show and bought the 
time on WBOS (now WUNR), so that when he moved to WMEX, he was 
already a personality with a following.  If not for that, WMEX would 
probably have made him just another Fenway or Dan Donovan.
 
> Anyhow, when WXKW 850 left the air in the fall of 1953, WROW took over
> the ABC Radio affiliation from WXKW.  At that time, WROW dropped
> Mutual, which I believe migrated to WOKO or maybe WPTR.

Had to be WPTR.  Mutual was on WPTR when I got there and moved to 
WOKO in the great shift, later.

> You have placed WTRY's dropping of CBS Radio in 1955, which seems
> quite right to me. WROW picked up CBS and dropped ABC at that time. I
> believe that was when ownership of WROW was transferred to Capital
> Cities. 

I was unaware of any change in WROW's ownership by the time we left 
in May 1957, but I do remember seeing an article in the Times-Union, 
while Channel 19 was silent, to the effect that when it came back on, 
it would be as part of the "Hudson Valley Broadcasting" group.  I'm 
willing to believe that the change to Capital Cities took place 
before we left the area in May 1957, but that I was unaware of it.  
But because of that article and some later phone calls to WROW, I 
don't think it was as early as the TV switch to WCDA-WCDB or the 
return of channel 19 as WCDC.

I wonder whether there's any way to check these things. I do know 
that somewhere I have a special Sunday edition of the Albany Times-
Union celebrating their 100th (I think) anniversary, which has an 
article in it on Albany broadcasting.  I'm not sure where it is, but 
I'll try to find it, and if I do, I think it contains some helpful 
information.  

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Mon Jan 21 15:52:20 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:52:20 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <4794319F.5030501@fybush.com>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<18324.12142.922802.4748@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>,
	<4794319F.5030501@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <4794BFB4.17484.3C0D66D@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 21 Jan 2008 at 0:46, Scott Fybush wrote:

> Three, actually - WIRL-TV in Peoria had a CP for channel 8, but was
> bumped to 19 before it could get on the air, where it joined existing
> stations on 25 and 31.
 
It's interesting what happened in Western Massachusetts, where UHF 
affiliates for two major networks have coexisted with CBS on Channel 
3.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Mon Jan 21 15:52:19 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:52:19 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <18324.12142.922802.4748@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<4793E208.9111.5EEE1F@joe.attorneyross.com>,
	<18324.12142.922802.4748@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <4794BFB3.4040.3C0D1E8@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 21 Jan 2008 at 0:36, Garrett Wollman wrote:

> The problem was that Schenectady was short-spaced to New York.  Moving
> Schenectady's allotment from 4 to 6 required that New Haven move from
> 6 to 8, which then opened up 6 in New Bedford.  A new, fully-spaced 4
> allotment was added in Utica, but with site restrictions that made it
> not worth building, and to this day it never has been.  At the same
> time, 11 Providence moved to 10, allowing 11 Portsmouth (now Durham)
> and 12 Providence to be added.  

The original allocations didn't take into account the need for more 
than one or two stations in a market.  With four, and then three, 
networks, and the example of radio to go by, one would have thought 
the FCC to be less short-sighted in its channel assignments, but 
then again, they were government bureaucrats.

I remember the change from channel 11 to 10 in Providence before we 
moved to Albany.  The newspapers in Boston, then and now, listed the 
Providence channel with the TV listings, and I was used to seeing NBC 
shows as being on 4 and 11.  Then it became 4 and 10.  I turned our 
TV to channel 10 to see if I could get it, but I could only get some 
faint sound.  Well, we did have a Muntz, after all.  I heard from 
others that the nice thing about the Providence channel was that it 
didn't pre-empt Howdy Doody for baseball games.

> This plan was called "de-intermixture", and did actually come to pass
> in Albany -- with all the UHF stations moving to VHF rather than the
> one VHF moving to UHF.  There were numerous other markets where this
> was supposed to happen, and (IIRC) exactly two where it actually did,
> but the FCC eventually backed down in the face of tremendous
> opposition from the licensed broadcasters.
 
As I recall, the Albany area did get some more UHF stations later, 
beginning with a PBS outlet.  Given the existence of the Fox and 
other newer networks, I would assume they got some more stations 
there.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From rickkelly@gmail.com  Mon Jan 21 12:20:06 2008
From: rickkelly@gmail.com (Rick Kelly)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:20:06 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<001301c85b6d$824e1fa0$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<4793E208.18237.5EEC2B@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <521b7fd10801210920k18bb9158nc7d7cfff0a820d92@mail.gmail.com>

Great information Dan and Joe!  The North Greenbush tower was a
mystery to me as a kid during the 60's... I'd say Channel 41 must have
gone off the air in the early 60's... maybe '63... and the North
Greenbush tower was just left for nothing from that time until 1970,
when WRPI signed on from there.

-RK

On Jan 21, 2008 10:04 AM, Dan.Strassberg <dan.strassberg@att.net> wrote:
> When I arrived in Troy in late August 1952, WROW was owned by Hudson
> Valley, the company that built the station (probably around 1947 or
> 1948). I remember seeing a letter on WROW's stationery, which very
> promnently announced "Harry L Goldman, President."
>
> The following anecdote reveals a certain irony in Goldman's so
> unabashedly publicizing his ownership of the station: Probably in the
> early fall of 1953, when Goldman still owned the station. a new
> announcer, Arnold Friedman, joined the air staff. Friedman was very
> good (as were all of WROW's announcers with the possible exception of
> Ralph Vartigian, who I regarded as marginal for a major market
> station). But a few weeks after Friedman appeared, he quietly
> disappeared. A couple of weeks later, "another" announcer, who sounded
> EXACTLY like Friedman, appeared on WROW. This guy was "Mark Edwards."
> A while later, I visited the WROW studios, located in a cramped and
> dirty former apartment building not far from the State Capitol
> building on the south side of State St in Albany. I asked the
> announcer on duty (might have been George Leighton) what the story was
> with Friedman/Edwards. He said that Goldman had decided that the
> Capital District audience was not ready to accept an announcer with a
> Jewish name, so he had Friedman disappear for a while and then
> reappear with a more generic (that is, WASP) name. Apparently, Goldman
> figured that the advertisers WERE ready to do buiness with a station
> owned by a Jew. How else could he have justified having his own name
> appear so prominently on the station's stationery?
>
> Anyhow, when WXKW 850 left the air in the fall of 1953, WROW took over
> the ABC Radio affiliation from WXKW.  At that time, WROW dropped
> Mutual, which I believe migrated to WOKO or maybe WPTR. Goldman still
> owned WROW when that happened, but I believe that Hudson Valley had
> already been granted (or expected to soon be granted) Channel 41. I
> believe that Goldman had hired Friedman in expectation of his working
> in both TV and radio.
>
> You have placed WTRY's dropping of CBS Radio in 1955, which seems
> quite right to me. WROW picked up CBS and dropped ABC at that time. I
> believe that was when ownership of WROW was transferred to Capital
> Cities. I have a couple of reasons for thinking so; I think both WROW
> (AM) and WROW-TV switched affiliations at the same time. Also, Frank
> Gicca, who was one class ahead of me at RPI, had formed Rho Tau Sigma,
> the short-lived national undergraduate extracurricular
> radio-television honor society. Rho Tau Sigma was Gicca's ticket to
> being named to Who's Who in American Colleges and Universities. Gicca
> graduated from RPI in 1955. Before he graduated, he had assiduously
> cultivated the gentleman who had come to WROW from New York City to be
> general manager of WROW AM and TV. That gentleman was Roger Bauer,
> best known as the creator and producer of the Mutual Network comedy
> show "Can You Top This?" I clearly recall Bauer receiving an award
> from Rho Tau Sigma and appearing as the guest speaker at the RPI
> chapter's first annual awards ceremony and induction dinner, which,
> IIRC, took place in the spring of 1955. Gicca's and WRPI's association
> with Bauer paid off, but not until both Frank and I had graduated from
> RPI (he in '55; I a year later).
>
> As had many AMs in the 50's, WROW had dabbled in FM, operating WROW-FM
> 93.9 from WROW's transmitter site in Glenmont, running 1 kW from a GE
> transmitter into a single-bay antenna mounted on a telephone pole near
> the Tx building. WROW was on the air the legal minimum of six hours a
> day (3:00PM to 9:00PM) and IIRC never did anything but simulcast WROW
> (AM). Gicca knew that WROW was going to surrender its FM license
> (which it did a year or so later) and he wanted the station to donate
> the GE transmitter to RPI for use at WRPI, which he hoped would apply
> for an FM license. And that is exactly what happened. I remember
> traveling to Troy for WRPI-FM's formal sign-on cermony while I was a
> graduate student at MIT (which means it HAD to have happened between
> '56 and '58).
>
> Moreover, the relationship between WROW and WRPI continued to bear
> fruit. Later, when WRPI (by then using the donated transmitter on 91.5
> with a (probably different) single-bay antenna mounted on a different
> telephone pole outside RPI's 15th St student lounge building) wanted
> to increase its coverage, it moved to WROW-TV's (or maybe by then it
> was WCDA's) Channel 41 tower in N Greenbush and increased its ERP to
> 10 kW. (BTW, WROW later got back into FM with a new WROW-FM on 95.5
> with full Class B facilities from a site in the Helderbergs.) Anyhow,
> I'm sure that Bauer was at WROW in 1955 and I don't think he arrived
> until Captial Cities had acquired the station.
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
> To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 12:06 AM
> Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP
>
>
> > On 20 Jan 2008 at 9:01, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
> >
> >> Capital Cities started in the Capital District (and indeed was
> >> named
> >> for it) and WROW was its very first station! WROW got a TV CP,
> >> which
> >> initially resulted in the construction of Channel 41 (now Channel
> >> 10
> >> et al). In those days, it was cutomary for radio and TV networks to
> >> affiliate with commonly owned radio and TV stations in most markets
> >> where they existed.
> >
> > I don't know when it became Capital Cities, but while I was there,
> > up
> > until May 1957, the company that owned WROW was called "Hudson
> > Valley
> > Broadcasting," and that was how they answered their phone.
> >
> >> IIRC, WROW-TV (which was later renamed WTEN after
> >> it built the Channel 10 facility in Vail Mills) initially became
> >> the
> >> CBS-TV affiliate. It was thus fitting for WROW (AM) to be the CBS
> >> Radio affiliate.
> >
> > My recollection is that WROW-TV was not originally a CBS affiliate.
> > When we moved to the area in late November 1953, WROW radio was
> > still
> > an ABC affiliate and WROW-TV had just come on.  It may have been an
> > independent station or it may have been nominally an ABC affiliate.
> > Just after the start of 1954, I saw an ad in the paper proclaiming
> > that it really was a happy new year because Channel 35 would soon be
> > on the air.  It would be WTRI and would be a sister station to WTRY
> > CBS.  That meant that Channel 35 started as a CBS affiliate.
> > Channel
> > 74, WMGT was a separate station with its own programming, possibly
> > with a DuMont affiliation.  At the time, however, whatever the
> > affiliations of the UHF stations, WRGB, although an NBC affiliate,
> > also carried many programs from the other networks, often by delayed
> > broadcast.  I recall that they had Ed Sullivan's show on Friday
> > evening and Jack Benny on Sunday afternoon.  At one point Bishop
> > Fulton J. Sheen's Tuesday night show on DuMont was also on Sunday
> > afternoon.  Space Patrol, an ABC program, was carried live from the
> > network on Saturday morning at 11:00.  Some of CBS's weekday
> > afternoon shows were also carried on WRGB.
> >
> > I don't remember whether it happened at the same time as the radio
> > shift, but at some point WROW-TV began to advertise itself as the
> > new
> > CBS affiliate (despite all the CBS shows on WRGB).  WTRI at that
> > point went off the air for awhile.
> >
> > Finally, I believe in 1956, WTRI returned as an ABC affiliate.  By
> > that time, WROW-TV had become WCDA channel 41 and WCDB, channel 29,
> > and WMGT had left the air.  I believe it had already shifted to
> > Channel 19 before the fire.  I'm not quite sure the timing of its
> > return as WCDC, but I suspect it might have been motivated at least
> > in part by the demise of the DuMont Television Network.
> >
> > In 1956, when WTRI came back on, there was a general reallignment of
> > programming, and all CBS programs moved to WCDA etc. and ABC
> > programs
> > still being carried on WRGB moved to WTRI (with one exception I
> > remember:  I was surprised to discover that Art Baker's "You Asked
> > For It," which was WRGB continued to carry, was an ABC program).
> >
> > --
> > A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
> > 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> > Boston, MA 02109-2004                    http://www.attorneyross.com
> >
> >
>
>



-- 
-RK

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Mon Jan 21 17:03:16 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:03:16 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<4794BFB4.28746.3C0D5B1@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <000801c85c79$6f0bc660$19eca644@SatU205S5044>

I'm pretty sure that the FCC (probably as part of its CDBS database)
maintains complete records of station ownership and transfers of
control--with dates. Although technical information about AM stations
is readily available from CDBS via the AM Query Web page at the FCC
Web site, I don't know how to access ownership info beyond the name of
the current licensee. Scott and Garrett, among others, must know how
to get at the info we are looking for, though.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 3:52 PM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


>
>> You have placed WTRY's dropping of CBS Radio in 1955, which seems
>> quite right to me. WROW picked up CBS and dropped ABC at that time.
>> I
>> believe that was when ownership of WROW was transferred to Capital
>> Cities.
>
> I was unaware of any change in WROW's ownership by the time we left
> in May 1957, but I do remember seeing an article in the Times-Union,
> while Channel 19 was silent, to the effect that when it came back
> on,
> it would be as part of the "Hudson Valley Broadcasting" group.  I'm
> willing to believe that the change to Capital Cities took place
> before we left the area in May 1957, but that I was unaware of it.
> But because of that article and some later phone calls to WROW, I
> don't think it was as early as the TV switch to WCDA-WCDB or the
> return of channel 19 as WCDC.
>
> I wonder whether there's any way to check these things. I do know
> that somewhere I have a special Sunday edition of the Albany Times-
> Union celebrating their 100th (I think) anniversary, which has an
> article in it on Albany broadcasting.  I'm not sure where it is, but
> I'll try to find it, and if I do, I think it contains some helpful
> information.
>
> -- 
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
> 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004                    http://www.attorneyross.com
>
>


From kvahey@comcast.net  Mon Jan 21 16:46:35 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:46:35 -0600
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <521b7fd10801210920k18bb9158nc7d7cfff0a820d92@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<001301c85b6d$824e1fa0$52eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<4793E208.18237.5EEC2B@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<521b7fd10801210920k18bb9158nc7d7cfff0a820d92@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801211346y70034bd0oc1f2701f1c40a781@mail.gmail.com>

Waving from Chicago and I waved to Scott when the train passed Rochester the
other night

Concerning VHF assignments

Obviously the big problem with WJAR being on Channel 11 was being only 130
air miles from WPIX in NY which had to cause major problems for both in
eastern Connecticut and Long Island. Moving to 10 solved the Providence
problem.

In Chicago there has always been a great debate at how much influence the
Chicago Tribune had with the FCC in those days. Not only were they able to
get Channel 11 in New York but the belief exists that the Tribune was able
to reduce the number of VHF stations in Chicago to enhance the value of
their Channel 9. Chicago didn't get the same amount of extra stations that
NYC and LA received winding up with 2,4,5,7,9 and later 11 (public)

WGN thrived for 30 years as the only non-network VHF and it wasn't until
cable took hold in the 80's that the UHF signals in Chicago began to compete
with WGN.

From scott@fybush.com  Mon Jan 21 18:45:30 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:45:30 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801211346y70034bd0oc1f2701f1c40a781@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>	<001301c85b6d$824e1fa0$52eca644@SatU205S5044>	<4793E208.18237.5EEC2B@joe.attorneyross.com>	<000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>	<521b7fd10801210920k18bb9158nc7d7cfff0a820d92@mail.gmail.com>
	<4fc429770801211346y70034bd0oc1f2701f1c40a781@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <47952E9A.8050706@fybush.com>

Kevin Vahey wrote:
> Waving from Chicago and I waved to Scott when the train passed Rochester the
> other night

Oh, THAT's who that was! If you'd looked to the north of the train as it 
left the Rochester station, you'd have seen WXXI's studios just a couple 
of blocks north of the train tracks.

Stop and say howdy, next time... :-)

> Concerning VHF assignments
> 
> Obviously the big problem with WJAR being on Channel 11 was being only 130
> air miles from WPIX in NY which had to cause major problems for both in
> eastern Connecticut and Long Island. Moving to 10 solved the Providence
> problem.

The FCC initially gravely underestimated the reach of VHF TV, creating a 
whole bunch of short-spacings, mainly in the northeast. There were the 
channel 4s in Boston, Schenectady, NYC, Lancaster and Washington; the 7s 
in Boston, NYC, Wilmington DE and Washington; 7s in Detroit, Grand 
Rapids and Chicago; 4 in Detroit and Cleveland, and so on. Most of those 
problems were alleviated by the 1952 realignment, about which, yes, I'll 
write something one of these days.

> In Chicago there has always been a great debate at how much influence the
> Chicago Tribune had with the FCC in those days. Not only were they able to
> get Channel 11 in New York but the belief exists that the Tribune was able
> to reduce the number of VHF stations in Chicago to enhance the value of
> their Channel 9. Chicago didn't get the same amount of extra stations that
> NYC and LA received winding up with 2,4,5,7,9 and later 11 (public)
> 
> WGN thrived for 30 years as the only non-network VHF and it wasn't until
> cable took hold in the 80's that the UHF signals in Chicago began to compete
> with WGN.

It worked out very nicely for Tribune in Chicago, didn't it? Chicago was 
initially allocated the full roster of Vs, as I recall - 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 
11 and 13. 13 ended up reallocated to Rockford (and wedged in, 
tremendously short-spaced, across Lake Michigan in Grand Rapids), and 4 
went away from Chicago so that it could be used in Milwaukee by WTMJ, 
which had to get off 3 to clear up a terrible short-spacing to WKZO-TV 
Kalamazoo across the lake. Had 4 not been moved to Milwaukee, it 
probably would have been a second independent (really a first 
independent, since WGN-TV was the DuMont station in Chicago until DuMont 
folded), and would probably have ended up with Fox three decades later.

Other very sizable markets ended up even shorter of channels. Detroit, 
which I believe was the fifth largest market in the fifties, had only 2, 
4 and 7, plus 9 across the river in Windsor. DC and Philly each ended up 
with only 4 VHF signals, just like Boston.

One wonders how the dynamic would have changed if CBS had gotten its way 
and moved ALL TV to UHF in the early fifties, eliminating the artificial 
scarcity of channels at the time.

s

From kc1ih@mac.com  Mon Jan 21 18:58:40 2008
From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:58:40 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <47952E9A.8050706@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <001c01c85c89$8d074d00$a9141bac@core2k>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org 
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org]
>  On Behalf Of Scott Fybush
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 6:46 PM
> To: Kevin Vahey
> Cc: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org; Dan.Strassberg
> Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP> 

> Other very sizable markets ended up even shorter of channels. 
> Detroit, which I believe was the fifth largest market in the 
> fifties, had only 2,
> 4 and 7, plus 9 across the river in Windsor. DC and Philly 
> each ended up with only 4 VHF signals, just like Boston.

Another sizeable market that remains short of channels to this day is St.
Louis.  2, 4, 5, 9(Public) and 11 are the only VHF's, and not that many
UHF's either.

Larry Weil
Lake Wobegone, NH  


From scott@fybush.com  Mon Jan 21 19:17:30 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 19:17:30 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <001c01c85c89$8d074d00$a9141bac@core2k>
References: <001c01c85c89$8d074d00$a9141bac@core2k>
Message-ID: <4795361A.2030907@fybush.com>

Larry Weil wrote:

> Another sizeable market that remains short of channels to this day is St.
> Louis.  2, 4, 5, 9(Public) and 11 are the only VHF's, and not that many
> UHF's either.
> 
> Larry Weil
> Lake Wobegone, NH  

I wouldn't call five VHF signals "short of channels." Even today, there 
are only three US markets (NY, LA, Salt Lake) with seven Vs, and only a 
handful (Seattle/Tacoma, San Francisco/San Jose, Dallas/Fort Worth) with 
six. St. Louis' 5 puts it in the company of Chicago, Minneapolis, 
Phoenix, and other cities that are or were of similar size...and of 
course well ahead of Philadelphia, DC, Boston and others that got only four.

St. Louis did end up without very many UHFs. I don't know why that was - 
perhaps because there was both an indie (KPLR 11) and PBS (KETC 9) on 
VHF, so the hurdle for an indie U was quite high.

s

From wollman@bimajority.org  Mon Jan 21 21:11:25 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 21:11:25 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <000801c85c79$6f0bc660$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
	<000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<4794BFB4.28746.3C0D5B1@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<000801c85c79$6f0bc660$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <18325.20685.762870.684768@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:03:16 -0500, "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net> said:

> I'm pretty sure that the FCC (probably as part of its CDBS database)
> maintains complete records of station ownership and transfers of
> control--with dates.

Only as far back as those records exist in electronic form.  If it
wasn't current in 1981, when the FCC first moved most of its broadcast
records into a database, then it's not in CDBS now.

You can find current ownership information by searching for the
biennial ownership reports (fourth option on the CDBS main menu page
at <http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/cdbs_pa.htm>).

-GAWollman


From joe@attorneyross.com  Mon Jan 21 23:39:47 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 23:39:47 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <4794BFB4.28746.3C0D5B1@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<4794BFB4.28746.3C0D5B1@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <47952D43.17190.17347F9@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 21 Jan 2008 at 15:52, A. Joseph Ross wrote:

> I wonder whether there's any way to check these things. I do know that
> somewhere I have a special Sunday edition of the Albany Times- Union
> celebrating their 100th (I think) anniversary, which has an article in
> it on Albany broadcasting.  I'm not sure where it is, but I'll try to
> find it, and if I do, I think it contains some helpful information.  

I found it! I was thinking of scanning the article in question, but 
the paper is too fragile.  I'll have to summarize the answers to our 
questions that I've found there. If I get ambitious, maybe I'll copy 
out the entire article for later reference.

Anyway, this is indeed the Centennial edition of the Albany Times-
Union, dated Sunday 22 April 1956.  I don't have the entire paper, 
but I have a number of special sections that I saved.  The one in 
question is entitled "Communications."  It consists mainly of the 
history of the Times-Union and of the print media in Albany in 
general.  There is no article about radio, but there is one about 
area television history.

The article describes how, in 1926, GE engineer Dr. E. F. 
Alexanderson gave the first public demonstration of television (the 
rotating perforated disk system) at his home that January.  In May, 
WGY began a schedule of three regular television broadcasts a week.  
The station carried the first remote telecast of an outdoor event in 
1928 when Governor Alfred E. Smith gave an outdoor speech accepting 
the Democratic nomination for President

The first long-distance reception of "modern high-definition 
television" (!) took place in the Helderberg Hills in 1939, where the 
Schenectady station received pictures of King George VI and Queen 
Elizabeth touring the New York World's Fair.

The first television network went into operation on 12 January 1940, 
when the General Electric relay station and transmitter W2XB 
rebroadcast programs from New York City to the Albany area.

As of the date of the article, there were only two television 
stations in the area:  WRGB and WCDA-WCDB.  WTRI was scheduled to 
resume in August on channel 35 as an ABC affiliate.  The article said 
that it was no longer connected with WTRY radio.  WMBT-TV (sic) was 
hoping to return to the air by 1 July when it replaced its storm-
damaged antenna.  WCDA-WCDB was scheduled to become a full CBS 
affiliate on 1 August, at which time WRGB would replace the CBS 
programs it was then carrying with more NBC programs.

After the end of the FCC freeze, there were six Albany-area groups 
vying for the three commercial UHF allocations.  By June 1953, things 
had sorted themselves out by mergers and withdrawals, and the FCC had 
granted construction permits for channel 41, WROW, channel 35, WTRI, 
and channel 23, Patroon Broadcasting Co. (WPTR).  The last had not 
been built to date, and apparently never was.

WROW-TV went on the air in October 1953 with a temporary 100-foot 
mast, switching to a permanent tower with full power a few months 
later.  WTRI started on 28 February 1954, but suspended operations 11 
months later, when it lost all network programs.  

WMGT "became a strong factor in the area TV picture" when it moved 
from channel 74 to channel 19 in December 1954.  The station was off 
the air after a storm toppled its tower on Mount Greylock "this past 
February," but hoped to be back in July.  

WROW changed its name to WCDA-WCDB "this spring" when the channel 29 
relay went on.  Channel 17, reserved for a non-commercial station, 
also had not been used at the time, though I think it has been since.

Since I distinctly recall a later article indicating that channel 19 
would return to the air as part of Hudson Valley Broadcasting, which 
I knew at the time to be WROW-WCDA-WCDB, the takeover by Capital 
Cities could not have happened by this time.  Whether it happened 
later, before we left the area in May 1957, I can't say for sure.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From francini@mac.com  Tue Jan 22 09:16:12 2008
From: francini@mac.com (John Francini)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 09:16:12 -0500
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
In-Reply-To: <8777.80545.qm@web58306.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <8777.80545.qm@web58306.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <AFC183CF-9DF2-430B-88BF-F44F65E0EA3F@mac.com>

>
> They may be, but I don't find the screaming enjoyable.
>
> Maybe I'm a snob, but I'd love to see an NPR-style sports network.
> Probably never would succeed, though.
>

Ye gods, no!  Sports radio lives or dies on the (perceived or real)  
*emotional investment* of the hosts and callers on the subjects in  
question. Unlike things in Real Life which should be discussed in a  
calm, dispassionate, and perhaps even scientific manner, sports are  
an inherently emotional endeavor, therefore the discussion about them  
will *also* be an inherently emotional endeavor.  There have been  
other attempts made at (relatively) dispassionate sports talk in this  
market -- they generally sink without a trace.

I know I for one wouldn't listen to an NPR-style sports network.  Not  
for one minute.  While WEEI is as locked in as a station can be on a  
radio.

john


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Tue Jan 22 10:03:35 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:03:35 -0500
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
References: <8777.80545.qm@web58306.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<AFC183CF-9DF2-430B-88BF-F44F65E0EA3F@mac.com>
Message-ID: <001101c85d07$f7e6c730$19eca644@SatU205S5044>

Well, that certainly says nothing good about you! You give no
indication of ever having listened to NPR's Only a Game, which is by
miles (light years even), the funniest, most literate, sports talk on
the air around here--and most likely anywhere in the US. If NPR did
call-in sports talk and had OaG's Bill Littlefield as host, it would
be interesting to see how many callers would understand the schtick
and would rise to the challenge of civil--albeit sardonic--discourse
on sports. I think many would do so and would welcome the opportunity
to demonstrate that Littlefield isn't the only guy who can maintain a
rational perspective on sports--and have fun while he's doing it. The
program's title neatly encapsulates its theme.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Francini" <francini@mac.com>
To: <ssmyth@psualum.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: Glenn Geffner is gone


>
> I know I for one wouldn't listen to an NPR-style sports network.
> Not  for one minute.  While WEEI is as locked in as a station can be
> on a  radio.
>
> john
>


From raccoonradio@mail.com  Tue Jan 22 10:46:03 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:46:03 -0500
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
Message-ID: <20080122154603.DA64249B6BE@ws1-3a.us4.outblaze.com>

>>Ye gods, no!  Sports radio lives or dies on the (perceived or real) 
  *emotional investment* of the hosts and callers on the subjects 
in  question.

Yes--look at J.T. The Brick on Fox Sports Radio (WEEI overnight);
they'll dump callers who aren't passionate, sound sleepy, etc.
And The Big Show on WEEI gets people who complain about shouting,
talking over other people, etc.--yet it gets HUGE ratings, as
does the whole station. If they went to a less emotional
approach (and were to dump the humor element) their ratings
would plunge.

From francini@mac.com  Tue Jan 22 11:43:19 2008
From: francini@mac.com (John Francini)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 11:43:19 -0500
Subject: Glenn Geffner is gone
In-Reply-To: <001101c85d07$f7e6c730$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
References: <8777.80545.qm@web58306.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<AFC183CF-9DF2-430B-88BF-F44F65E0EA3F@mac.com>
	<001101c85d07$f7e6c730$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <9778A4E4-36A6-4565-9C6C-AF51B9D2735C@mac.com>

Dan,

Is there any valid reason for resorting to ad-hominem attacks? Please  
discuss the SUBJECT and not the purveyor of the subject.

To your point.  Even the title itself betrays the very reason why it  
would not do well on commercial radio.  For most people who have an  
emotional investment in their local sports teams, even their  
conversations amongst fellow fans of the same team in REAL LIFE is  
full of the same passion that you find in sports talk radio.  Denying  
that absolute reality -- by trying to treat sports in the George F.  
Will-esque way that OaG's discourse is described -- will find few  
listeners and few advertisers.

"It's Only a Game" is a *very* loaded phrase -- because it belittles  
the emotional attachment people have to sports, and implies that  
anything more than aloof, dispassionate, logical analysis is somehow  
a Bad Thing. It's the kind of thing a parent might tell a child, a  
rather perjorative term. It's as emotionally loaded as telling  
someone to grow up.

OaG can live and find an audience because it's not commercial radio,  
and doesn't have to completely live or die on its Arbitrons.  But, I  
assure you, it's not going to catch on with the masses.  Period.   
Sports are an escape valve from a very serious world full of very  
serious problems. It's an adult toybox.

No, I have not listened to OaG. When I turn on sports talk, I want a  
distraction, not erudition.

Perhaps that makes me lowbrow.

"So be it, Jedi."

John Francini


On 22 Jan 2008, at 10:03, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> Well, that certainly says nothing good about you! You give no
> indication of ever having listened to NPR's Only a Game, which is by
> miles (light years even), the funniest, most literate, sports talk on
> the air around here--and most likely anywhere in the US. If NPR did
> call-in sports talk and had OaG's Bill Littlefield as host, it would
> be interesting to see how many callers would understand the schtick
> and would rise to the challenge of civil--albeit sardonic--discourse
> on sports. I think many would do so and would welcome the opportunity
> to demonstrate that Littlefield isn't the only guy who can maintain a
> rational perspective on sports--and have fun while he's doing it. The
> program's title neatly encapsulates its theme.
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Francini" <francini@mac.com>
> To: <ssmyth@psualum.com>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 9:16 AM
> Subject: Re: Glenn Geffner is gone
>
>
>>
>> I know I for one wouldn't listen to an NPR-style sports network.
>> Not  for one minute.  While WEEI is as locked in as a station can be
>> on a  radio.
>>
>> john
>>
>


From francini@mac.com  Tue Jan 22 13:09:27 2008
From: francini@mac.com (John Francini)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 13:09:27 -0500
Subject: Ad hominem (was: Re: Glenn Geffner is Gone)
In-Reply-To: <001301c85d1c$301243f0$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
References: <8777.80545.qm@web58306.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<AFC183CF-9DF2-430B-88BF-F44F65E0EA3F@mac.com>
	<001101c85d07$f7e6c730$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<9778A4E4-36A6-4565-9C6C-AF51B9D2735C@mac.com>
	<001301c85d1c$301243f0$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <CEAE4000-D50F-459F-A9BA-CB0368DA48F0@mac.com>

[CC'ed back onto the BRI list, because I do not believe this should  
be discussed in private. It is very relevant to the (modified)  
subject under discussion.]


On 22 Jan 2008, at 12:28, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> Hey, that WAS NOT an ad hominem attack! An ad hominem attack is a an
> attack on a person and not on his or her actions. If I had labeled you
> an idiot, that would have been an ad hominem attack.

That is an example of a particular type of "ad hominem abusive"  
argument -- a direct abusive attack against a person instead of the  
subject at hand.  But an argument can still be ad hominem without  
being abusive.

> But I did not
> attack you; I criticized a personal preference of which you had
> boasted. Moreover, I did not criticize YOU per se; I criticized your
> avowed affinity for programs that deal in yelling, invectives, and
> crude attempts as humor. In other words, I objected to a (proudly)
> avowed preference, of which should be ashamed--and too humilated to
> mention. The fact that WEEI is so popular and so successful says
> nothing good about its listeners, no matter how many of them there may
> be.

That is, in fact, the primary definition (sense 1, in fact) of ad  
hominem, at least according to the Random House Dictionary:

1. appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests  
rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2. attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

Full set of 5 different dictionary definitions here: <http:// 
dictionary.reference.com/browse/ad%20hominem>

So you are engaging in an ad-hominem rejection (sense 1) of those  
selfsame listeners you would profess to encourage to listen to a  
commercial version of It's Only a Game?  Because those are the  
listeners who buy the stuff that the station's advertisers sell;  
those are the ones who pay $250/seat to sell out the Wang Center for  
the Whiney Awards (whose proceeds go to charity), who donate the over  
$2 million each year to the Jimmy Fund through the Radiothon every  
August...

And also in an ad-hominem rejection of my arguments with the line  
"this says nothing good about you."


> I know it's all a matter of taste and that everyone is entitled to
> enjoy whatever makes him or her happy as long as that enjoyment does
> no harm to others. But you can't seriously believe that professing to
> enjoy WEEI's programming will garner you one ounce of credibility with
> any thinking human being!

Certainly not one who believes that his viewpoint on the subject is  
the only one that matters.

>
> So start by learning the meaning of the words you choose before you
> use them and then re-examine the personal habits of which you choose
> to boast.

I know the meaning very well, as you see from the above.  There are  
many ways to commit ad hominem attacks. Calling someone an epithet of  
some sort is merely the most obvious. Others, as you see, are much  
more subtle.

Would you care to comment on the substance of my reply?

John



>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Francini" <francini@mac.com>
> To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> Cc: <ssmyth@psualum.com>; <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 11:43 AM
> Subject: Re: Glenn Geffner is gone
>
>
>> Dan,
>>
>> Is there any valid reason for resorting to ad-hominem attacks?
>> Please  discuss the SUBJECT and not the purveyor of the subject.
>>
>> To your point.  Even the title itself betrays the very reason why it
>> would not do well on commercial radio.  For most people who have an
>> emotional investment in their local sports teams, even their
>> conversations amongst fellow fans of the same team in REAL LIFE is
>> full of the same passion that you find in sports talk radio.
>> Denying  that absolute reality -- by trying to treat sports in the
>> George F.  Will-esque way that OaG's discourse is described -- will
>> find few  listeners and few advertisers.
>>
>> "It's Only a Game" is a *very* loaded phrase -- because it belittles
>> the emotional attachment people have to sports, and implies that
>> anything more than aloof, dispassionate, logical analysis is somehow
>> a Bad Thing. It's the kind of thing a parent might tell a child, a
>> rather perjorative term. It's as emotionally loaded as telling
>> someone to grow up.
>>
>> OaG can live and find an audience because it's not commercial radio,
>> and doesn't have to completely live or die on its Arbitrons.  But, I
>> assure you, it's not going to catch on with the masses.  Period.
>> Sports are an escape valve from a very serious world full of very
>> serious problems. It's an adult toybox.
>>
>> No, I have not listened to OaG. When I turn on sports talk, I want a
>> distraction, not erudition.
>>
>> Perhaps that makes me lowbrow.
>>
>> "So be it, Jedi."
>>
>> John Francini
>>
>>
>> On 22 Jan 2008, at 10:03, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
>>
>>> Well, that certainly says nothing good about you! You give no
>>> indication of ever having listened to NPR's Only a Game, which is
>>> by
>>> miles (light years even), the funniest, most literate, sports talk
>>> on
>>> the air around here--and most likely anywhere in the US. If NPR did
>>> call-in sports talk and had OaG's Bill Littlefield as host, it
>>> would
>>> be interesting to see how many callers would understand the schtick
>>> and would rise to the challenge of civil--albeit
>>> sardonic--discourse
>>> on sports. I think many would do so and would welcome the
>>> opportunity
>>> to demonstrate that Littlefield isn't the only guy who can maintain
>>> a
>>> rational perspective on sports--and have fun while he's doing it.
>>> The
>>> program's title neatly encapsulates its theme.
>>>
>>> -----
>>> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
>>> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Francini"
>>> <francini@mac.com>
>>> To: <ssmyth@psualum.com>
>>> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 9:16 AM
>>> Subject: Re: Glenn Geffner is gone
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I know I for one wouldn't listen to an NPR-style sports network.
>>>> Not  for one minute.  While WEEI is as locked in as a station can
>>>> be
>>>> on a  radio.
>>>>
>>>> john
>>>>
>>>
>>
>


From wollman@bimajority.org  Tue Jan 22 13:22:23 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 13:22:23 -0500
Subject: Ad hominem (was: Re: Glenn Geffner is Gone)
In-Reply-To: <CEAE4000-D50F-459F-A9BA-CB0368DA48F0@mac.com>
References: <8777.80545.qm@web58306.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<AFC183CF-9DF2-430B-88BF-F44F65E0EA3F@mac.com>
	<001101c85d07$f7e6c730$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<9778A4E4-36A6-4565-9C6C-AF51B9D2735C@mac.com>
	<001301c85d1c$301243f0$19eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<CEAE4000-D50F-459F-A9BA-CB0368DA48F0@mac.com>
Message-ID: <18326.13407.943342.559284@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 13:09:27 -0500, John Francini <francini@mac.com> said:

> [CC'ed back onto the BRI list, because I do not believe this should  
> be discussed in private. It is very relevant to the (modified)  
> subject under discussion.]

ENOUGH!

Dan: this is no place for personal attacks (and yes, I read what you
wrote as an attack on John as well).

John: if someone send you private email, you need their permission to
repost it (or parts of it) to a mailing-list.  Email, like p-mail, is
the author's copyrighted property, and if they did not choose to
publish it, you have no right to do so.

-GAWollman


From friedbagels@gmail.com  Tue Jan 22 13:56:03 2008
From: friedbagels@gmail.com (Aaron Read)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 13:56:03 -0500
Subject: Only a Game (was "Glenn Geffner is gone")
Message-ID: <47963C43.60609@gmail.com>

John Francini francini@mac.com wrote:
---------------------
OaG can live and find an audience because it's not commercial radio,
and doesn't have to completely live or die on its Arbitrons.  But, I
assure you, it's not going to catch on with the masses.  Period.
---------------------

Ummm...WBUR most definitely appears in the Arbitrons, and they most 
definitely pay a lot of attention to them.  And guess what?  Only a Game 
is number one in 25-54 for all of metro Boston in its timeslot (7am 
Saturdays).  Number one by a country mile, I might add.  It's a VERY 
popular show.

OAG is not quite the top biller for WBUR...the Car Talk & Wait Wait 
Don't Tell Me combo mid-day Saturdays claims that one, IIRC (or maybe 
Morning Edition does)...but it's right up there.

And while Saturday morning is, admittedly, not morning drive when it 
comes to sheer numbers of listeners...there are quite a few people 
listening around 7am on Saturday.  Most of the upper (lucrative) end of 
the 25-54 demo is usually getting up around then so they're listening 
while they get ready for the day.

All this said, speaking as someone who lives and dies with public radio 
(and now manages a public radio station) I'm inclined to agree that the 
relatively quiet, well-reasoned and dry-humor approach that NPR has 
would not be a good fit to program an entire station by.  Sports fans 
are PASSIONATE about their team, and a station needs to stoke that 
passion.  NPR is almost the antithesis of that; a wink and a wry grin 
rather than a spittle-laded scream of support.

Mind you, I'm not dissing that kind of scream.  Hell, I do it for most 
of the month of September (and hopefully into October).  ;-)

Anyways, it'd also be cost-prohibitive; OAG has a host, a senior 
producer and two associate producers, plus a tech they share with Car 
Talk.  Each works 40+ hrs a week to produce JUST ONE HOUR of 
programming.  Not to mention the freelancers and commentators who 
regularly appear.  To maintain the level of quality of OAG even for a 
daily show (10-15 hours/week) would take two dozen people at least.

-- 

---------------------------------------------------
Aaron Read	       |  Fried Bagels Consulting
friedbagels@gmail.com  |  (315) 521-0569 cell
Rochester, NY 14618    |  WEOS 89.7FM Geneva, NY

From scott@fybush.com  Tue Jan 22 18:23:05 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 18:23:05 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <47952D43.17190.17347F9@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<4794BFB4.28746.3C0D5B1@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<47952D43.17190.17347F9@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <47967AD9.6020001@fybush.com>

A. Joseph Ross wrote:

> Since I distinctly recall a later article indicating that channel 19 
> would return to the air as part of Hudson Valley Broadcasting, which 
> I knew at the time to be WROW-WCDA-WCDB, the takeover by Capital 
> Cities could not have happened by this time.  Whether it happened 
> later, before we left the area in May 1957, I can't say for sure.

Oddly enough, I've just been reading an obscure little book called, 
"Capital Cities/ABC The Early Years 1954-1986: How the Minnow Came to 
Swallow the Whale."

And from it we learn that Hudson Valley Broadcasting and Capital Cities 
were the same company, at least after 1954, when the existing (and 
failing!) shell of Hudson Valley Broadcasting was sold by WROW founder 
Harry Goldman to a consortium led by Frank Smith and Lowell Thomas. The 
"new" Hudson Valley Broadcasting became Cap Cities in December 1957, as 
it grew beyond Albany to acquire WTVD Durham NC and KTRK Houston - but 
it was essentially the same company from 1954 through the eventual sales 
of WTEN and WROW-AM/FM and, ultimately, the 1986 acquisition of ABC (and 
the later sale to Disney.)

s


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Tue Jan 22 21:48:28 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:48:28 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<000701c85c3e$f3eef270$19eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<4794BFB4.28746.3C0D5B1@joe.attorneyross.com><47952D43.17190.17347F9@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<47967AD9.6020001@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <001501c85d6a$73533a90$19eca644@SatU205S5044>

Hi, Scott: Thank you! Your answer is really cool--and totally
unexpected. How many disagreements are settled these days with both
parties turning out to be right? I believe (but am not sure) that,
after CapCities, the next owner of WROW (radio, not TV--and maybe only
AM) was WOR's John Gambling. What I don't know is whether it was John
A Gambling or John R. If I've got the initials right, John A was the
son of WOR's first morning man, John B, and father of John R, who took
over the AM-drive slot when John A retired. John R is currently a WABC
personality. I think it was John A who bought WROW. WROW (AM) has had
several New York City connections. Besides <whichever> Gambling
(owner) and Roger Bauer (Bower?) (first GM under what eventually
became CapCities), there was also former WINS DJ Geoff Davis, a
big-voiced guy who did AM drive there for several years in the '50s.

And I mustn't forget John B Gambling's Rochester connection; for many
years, John B had a very small studio orchestra, the Gamboleers, whose
conductor was Vincent Sori (not sure of spelling). As I understand it,
Sori was a Rochester native who may have taught at the Eastman school
before migrating to New York in the late teens or early 20s. I know
this because my mother was a Rochester native who migrated to New York
in the early 20s and I guess that the Rosenthals were at least
acquainted with--if not actually friends of--the Soris.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
To: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: that horrible BEEP


> A. Joseph Ross wrote:
>
>> Since I distinctly recall a later article indicating that channel
>> 19 would return to the air as part of Hudson Valley Broadcasting,
>> which I knew at the time to be WROW-WCDA-WCDB, the takeover by
>> Capital Cities could not have happened by this time.  Whether it
>> happened later, before we left the area in May 1957, I can't say
>> for sure.
>
> Oddly enough, I've just been reading an obscure little book called,
> "Capital Cities/ABC The Early Years 1954-1986: How the Minnow Came
> to Swallow the Whale."
>
> And from it we learn that Hudson Valley Broadcasting and Capital
> Cities were the same company, at least after 1954, when the existing
> (and failing!) shell of Hudson Valley Broadcasting was sold by WROW
> founder Harry Goldman to a consortium led by Frank Smith and Lowell
> Thomas. The "new" Hudson Valley Broadcasting became Cap Cities in
> December 1957, as it grew beyond Albany to acquire WTVD Durham NC
> and KTRK Houston - but it was essentially the same company from 1954
> through the eventual sales of WTEN and WROW-AM/FM and, ultimately,
> the 1986 acquisition of ABC (and the later sale to Disney.)
>
> s
>


From joe@attorneyross.com  Wed Jan 23 00:27:23 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 00:27:23 -0500
Subject: that horrible BEEP
In-Reply-To: <47967AD9.6020001@fybush.com>
References: <20080119131825.DF2D283985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>,
	<47952D43.17190.17347F9@joe.attorneyross.com>,
	<47967AD9.6020001@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <479689EB.9956.31EC07@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 22 Jan 2008 at 18:23, Scott Fybush wrote:

> And from it we learn that Hudson Valley Broadcasting and Capital
> Cities were the same company, at least after 1954, when the existing
> (and failing!) shell of Hudson Valley Broadcasting was sold by WROW
> founder Harry Goldman to a consortium led by Frank Smith and Lowell
> Thomas. The "new" Hudson Valley Broadcasting became Cap Cities in
> December 1957, as it grew beyond Albany to acquire WTVD Durham NC and
> KTRK Houston - but it was essentially the same company from 1954
> through the eventual sales of WTEN and WROW-AM/FM and, ultimately, the
> 1986 acquisition of ABC (and the later sale to Disney.)
 
Aha!  Mystery solved.  That explains both my memory and Dan's.  What 
a neat solution!

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From billohno@gmail.com  Wed Jan 23 12:52:06 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:52:06 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
Message-ID: <47977EC6.1080409@gmail.com>

I am forwarding this to the list since my TV technical knowledge 
rolls-off after the mute button and power switch.

Bill O'Neill

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	16:9 Aspect Ratio
Date: 	Tue, 22 Jan 2008 04:42:35 -0500
From: 	thomas heathwood <HeritageRadio@msn.com>
To: 	<billohno@gmail.com>



Hi Bill -
 
As an old radio broadcaster with little information on current day tech. 
advances in TV-casting,  I have a question for you, as someone obviously
well-versed in modern day TV.  Who decided that the world would enjoy 
16:9 aspect ratio and widescreen TV receivers? Was there a vote or did
manufacturers just want something "new" to replace the 4:34 raytio which 
had been more than satisfactory for lo, these many years?
I find when I view certain programs at dealer showrooms on "widescreen" 
sets, there is a distortion of the some pictures, with the vertical
height "shrunk" and in other cases, the horizontal width "exaggerated.
Will the new law going into effect early next year make 16:9 "mandatory" 
as well as the transmission process?
Will older sets with old picture aspect ratios look bizarre? 
Is there any place on the web that one can read in detail (but not 
necessarily technical language) the whys and wherefores of how this all 
came about and if there is any sense protesting widescreen ??
 
Many thanks for any information.  Feel free to share my 
comments/questions with the Boston Interest group.
TOM
Tom Heathwood - HeritageRadio@msn.com 
<mailto:HeritageRadio@msn.com>       Host, Heritage Radio Theatre -   
1/22/08
 


From sid@wrko.com  Wed Jan 23 13:02:39 2008
From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 11:02:39 -0700
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
Message-ID: <s7971ee4.061@entbalms2.entercom.com>

>>Who decided that the world would enjoy 
16:9 aspect ratio and widescreen TV receivers?<<

IIRC there was a group (may still be around) called the ATSC...the
Advanced Television Systems Committee, which determined the HDTV
standard.

16:9 happens to be the same aspect ratio as a widescreen motion picture
(i.e., CinemaScope or PanaVision).



Sid Schweiger
IT Manager, Entercom New England
WAAF - WEEI AM/FM - WKAF
WMKK - WRKO - WVEI AM/FM
20 Guest St / 3d Floor
Boston MA  02135-2040
Phone: 617-779-5369
Fax: 617-779-5379
E-Mail: sid@wrko.com

From brian_vita@cssinc.com  Wed Jan 23 13:42:40 2008
From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:42:40 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
In-Reply-To: <s7971ee4.061@entbalms2.entercom.com>
Message-ID: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia>

>>Who decided that the world would enjoy
16:9 aspect ratio and widescreen TV receivers?<<

>16:9 happens to be the same aspect ratio as a widescreen motion picture
(i.e., CinemaScope or PanaVision).

Aha! Finally a question where I'm the expert!

Cinema people don't refer to the picture aspect ratios in the same terms as
TV folk.  For example, we call the 4:3 ratio 1.33:1.  We call "widescreen"
(currently the flat non-anamorphic format) 1.85: and CinemaScope is actually
2.35:1.

The "widescreen" HDTV format of 16:9 would thus translate to 1.77:1.  This
is NOT the CinemaScope format.  It is slightly squarer than the standard
"flat" 1.85:1 ratio.  This would mean that most movies that are shot "flat"
would crop nicely to the HDTV 16:9 format.  Cinemascope (and its variations)
would still be letterboxed.

As a side note, CinemaScope was originally a trademark of 20th Century Fox.
When the other studios wanted to do a wide screen anamorphic process they
had to come up with their own name and "squeeze"ratio.  This created a major
problem as you now had to have a set of lenses for each studio.  There were
variable lenses with swivel prisms that could adjust the squeeze ratio but
these ate light incredibly.  The industry finally standardized on the 2.35:1

------------------------------------
Cinema Service & Supply, Inc.
Brian Vita
President
brian_vita@cssinc.com
77 Walnut St - Ste 4
Peabody, MA  01960-5691
tel: 978-538-7575
tel2:(800)231-8849
fax: 978-538-7550
IM: btvita@hotmail.com
www.cssinc.com
AIM: btvita
------------------------------------

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.9/1239 - Release Date: 1/23/2008
10:24 AM
 


From kc1ih@mac.com  Wed Jan 23 15:14:27 2008
From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:14:27 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
In-Reply-To: <47977EC6.1080409@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <001201c85dfc$985024b0$a9141bac@core2k>

The various stretches you see aremostly being done in the TV set, usually
there are several modes that can be selected from the remote, though
sometimes the stations or networks (esp some of the cable nets) stretch the
picture themselves.

AFAIK, there is no mandate for 16:9.

Larry Weil
Lake Wobegone, NH  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org 
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org]
>  On Behalf Of Bill O'Neill
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:52 PM
> To: Boston Radio Interest
> Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
> 
> I am forwarding this to the list since my TV technical 
> knowledge rolls-off after the mute button and power switch.
> 
> Bill O'Neill
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: 	16:9 Aspect Ratio
> Date: 	Tue, 22 Jan 2008 04:42:35 -0500
> From: 	thomas heathwood <HeritageRadio@msn.com>
> To: 	<billohno@gmail.com>
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Bill -
>  
> As an old radio broadcaster with little information on 
> current day tech. 
> advances in TV-casting,  I have a question for you, as 
> someone obviously well-versed in modern day TV.  Who decided 
> that the world would enjoy
> 16:9 aspect ratio and widescreen TV receivers? Was there a 
> vote or did manufacturers just want something "new" to 
> replace the 4:34 raytio which had been more than satisfactory 
> for lo, these many years?
> I find when I view certain programs at dealer showrooms on 
> "widescreen" 
> sets, there is a distortion of the some pictures, with the 
> vertical height "shrunk" and in other cases, the horizontal 
> width "exaggerated.
> Will the new law going into effect early next year make 16:9 
> "mandatory" 
> as well as the transmission process?
> Will older sets with old picture aspect ratios look bizarre? 
> Is there any place on the web that one can read in detail 
> (but not necessarily technical language) the whys and 
> wherefores of how this all came about and if there is any 
> sense protesting widescreen ??
>  
> Many thanks for any information.  Feel free to share my 
> comments/questions with the Boston Interest group.
> TOM
> Tom Heathwood - HeritageRadio@msn.com 
> <mailto:HeritageRadio@msn.com>       Host, Heritage Radio Theatre -   
> 1/22/08
>  
> 


From lspin@comcast.net  Wed Jan 23 18:32:25 2008
From: lspin@comcast.net (Lou)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:32:25 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
In-Reply-To: <47977EC6.1080409@gmail.com>
References: <47977EC6.1080409@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c85e18$35f53eb0$a1dfbc10$@net>

Just as a personal preference...  I really dislike the way so many
widescreen TVs are set to stretch any and every picture they receive merely
to fill the wide screen.  It really detracts from the appearance of new TVs.
There is a setting on my Sony 40" that will automatically change screen
ratio as is needed.  I'm sure many (if not all) manufacturers provide this
option.  

I appears that some stations broadcasting 4:3 programming in 16:9 have a way
of very gradually stretching the picture from the center to the edges -
almost none at the center, more towards the edge.  It looks a little better,
but still is distracting at times.

-Lou


-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Bill O'Neill
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:52 PM
To: Boston Radio Interest
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]

I am forwarding this to the list since my TV technical knowledge 
rolls-off after the mute button and power switch.

Bill O'Neill

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	16:9 Aspect Ratio
Date: 	Tue, 22 Jan 2008 04:42:35 -0500
From: 	thomas heathwood <HeritageRadio@msn.com>
To: 	<billohno@gmail.com>



Hi Bill -
 
As an old radio broadcaster with little information on current day tech. 
advances in TV-casting,  I have a question for you, as someone obviously
well-versed in modern day TV.  Who decided that the world would enjoy 
16:9 aspect ratio and widescreen TV receivers? Was there a vote or did
manufacturers just want something "new" to replace the 4:34 raytio which 
had been more than satisfactory for lo, these many years?
I find when I view certain programs at dealer showrooms on "widescreen" 
sets, there is a distortion of the some pictures, with the vertical
height "shrunk" and in other cases, the horizontal width "exaggerated.
Will the new law going into effect early next year make 16:9 "mandatory" 
as well as the transmission process?
Will older sets with old picture aspect ratios look bizarre? 
Is there any place on the web that one can read in detail (but not 
necessarily technical language) the whys and wherefores of how this all 
came about and if there is any sense protesting widescreen ??
 
Many thanks for any information.  Feel free to share my 
comments/questions with the Boston Interest group.
TOM
Tom Heathwood - HeritageRadio@msn.com 
<mailto:HeritageRadio@msn.com>       Host, Heritage Radio Theatre -   
1/22/08
 


From ncn86@hotmail.com  Wed Jan 23 18:31:03 2008
From: ncn86@hotmail.com (Nickolas Noseworthy)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:31:03 -0500
Subject: WEEI 103.3FM
Message-ID: <BAY120-W30DDD15377E97956E3BEBFA23F0@phx.gbl>

Hi all, 
I'm hoping someone out there can help me figure this one out. I was working on my demo when I came across some old station id's from the old Hit Radio WEEI FM in Boston. I decided to make a top hour ID using these, and added it to my demo. At the end of this top hour ID, I found (luckily) a clip of a man named Doug Gahling (may be misspelled) doing a Top Hour ID at 5PM on March 8th 1982. That evening at midnight, they changed their call letters to WHTT. 
My question is, does anyone know the company that made that jingle package that they were using that final evening on March 8th? And also where those old ids and jingles might be being stored right now? I would be very interested in getting a copy of some of those jingles, and maybe even more airchecks as well. 
 
Nick Noseworthy
the DXer from NH
_________________________________________________________________
Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging.?You IM, we give.
http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join

From paulconnors@earthlink.net  Wed Jan 23 20:44:24 2008
From: paulconnors@earthlink.net (paulconnors@earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 20:44:24 -0500
Subject: WEEI 103.3FM
Message-ID: <380-22008142414424703@earthlink.net>

Nick,

I was did mornings there beginning Valentine's Day 1983.  The date of the
switch was March 9, 1983 (it became official at midnight) - and if I ever
forget the date I can look at my souvenir logo cocktail glasses on my bar
downstairs!  The guy you heard was Doug Alling, who did afternoons.

I don't remember what company did the Hitradio WEEI-FM jingle package.  It
was a good one.  The top-of-the-hour jingle was a fun "talk-up"!  If it
still exists, the package might be found at WODS - Hitradio's descendent.

I remember that they had us stop using the call letters on-air (except for
legal IDs) around the beginning of January in anticipation of the call
letter change.  We'd say "Hitradio 103FM" and all jingles with the call
letters were dropped then as well.

I don't have copies of the package, just lots of airchecks of me on the air
during my time there twenty-five years ago.  Contact me off-list if you'd
like me to send you a couple.

Paul Connors


> [Original Message]
> From: Nickolas Noseworthy <ncn86@hotmail.com>
> To: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Date: 1/23/2008 6:34:55 PM
> Subject: WEEI 103.3FM
>
> Hi all, 
> I'm hoping someone out there can help me figure this one out. I was
working on my demo when I came across some old station id's from the old
Hit Radio WEEI FM in Boston. I decided to make a top hour ID using these,
and added it to my demo. At the end of this top hour ID, I found (luckily)
a clip of a man named Doug Gahling (may be misspelled) doing a Top Hour ID
at 5PM on March 8th 1982. That evening at midnight, they changed their call
letters to WHTT. 
> My question is, does anyone know the company that made that jingle
package that they were using that final evening on March 8th? And also
where those old ids and jingles might be being stored right now? I would be
very interested in getting a copy of some of those jingles, and maybe even
more airchecks as well. 
>  
> Nick Noseworthy
> the DXer from NH
> _________________________________________________________________
> Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging.?You IM, we
give.
> http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join



From ewerme@comcast.net  Wed Jan 23 20:18:23 2008
From: ewerme@comcast.net (Ric Werme)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 20:18:23 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Only a Game (was Glenn Geffner is gone)
Message-ID: <20080124011823.7D0735BED7@c-24-128-108-153.hsd1.nh.comcast.net>


> ...  For most people who have an  
> emotional investment in their local sports teams, even their  
> conversations amongst fellow fans of the same team in REAL LIFE is  
> full of the same passion that you find in sports talk radio.  Denying  
> that absolute reality -- by trying to treat sports in the George F.  
> Will-esque way that OaG's discourse is described -- will find few  
> listeners and few advertisers.

Wow, comparing George F. Will with Charlie Pierce.  Does that compute?
I think they've put Charlie on sedatives, he only seems to get really
worked up for things worth getting worked up for.  Now if you compared
him to Click & Clack at Car Talk....

Besides, OaG is not call-in talk radio, it's a news program.  Usually.

http://www.onlyagame.org/about/staff/charliepierce.asp says in part:
  Charlie Pierce, Analyst

  Charles P. Pierce was born December 28, 1953 in Worcester, MA. Six months
  earlier, his mother hid in the basement as a massive tornado leveled his
  future hometown of Shrewsbury, MA. The effect of prenatal imprinting is
  still being debated in medical circles, but a connection does not seem
  implausible.

> No, I have not listened to OaG. When I turn on sports talk, I want a  
> distraction, not erudition.

0700 is too early for erudition.  I generally lie in bed debating if I
want to listen to the next story or get up and make coffee.  Occasionally
it occurs to me I could turn on the radio in the kitchen.  I need someone
to make a cup of coffee for me before I get up to make a pot.

> Perhaps that makes me lowbrow.

Perhaps that makes me lowbrew.  :-)

	-Ric Werme

From kc1ih@mac.com  Wed Jan 23 21:22:44 2008
From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 21:22:44 -0500
Subject: Only a Game (was Glenn Geffner is gone)
In-Reply-To: <20080124011823.7D0735BED7@c-24-128-108-153.hsd1.nh.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <000301c85e30$09d42b80$a9141bac@core2k>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org 
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org]
>  On Behalf Of Ric Werme
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 8:18 PM
> To: John Francini
> Cc: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
> Subject: Re: Only a Game (was Glenn Geffner is gone)

> 0700 is too early for erudition.  I generally lie in bed 
> debating if I want to listen to the next story or get up and 
> make coffee.  Occasionally it occurs to me I could turn on 
> the radio in the kitchen.  I need someone to make a cup of 
> coffee for me before I get up to make a pot.

I believe WBUR repeats the show several times each weekend, and it's also on
NHPR sometime over the weekend too.


From billohno@gmail.com  Wed Jan 23 21:28:00 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 21:28:00 -0500
Subject: Only a Game (was Glenn Geffner is gone)
In-Reply-To: <20080124011823.7D0735BED7@c-24-128-108-153.hsd1.nh.comcast.net>
References: <20080124011823.7D0735BED7@c-24-128-108-153.hsd1.nh.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <4797F7B0.7040507@gmail.com>

Ric Werme wrote:
> 0700 is too early for erudition.  I generally lie in bed debating if I
> want to listen to the next story or get up and make coffee.  Occasionally
> it occurs to me I could turn on the radio in the kitchen.  I need someone
> to make a cup of coffee for me before I get up to make a pot.
>   
I like the show. Not a bad way to get up on Saturday. 7:00 is 
late-rising for me these days. Then an hour of Morning Edition. 9 am on 
Saturday in Vermont means it's time for "Music to Go to the Dump By" 
with Ken Squire and his faithful companion, Buster the Wonder Dog on 
WDEV (96.1 Warren).  My son and I actually do load up the pickup and 
head off to the dump while listening to said program. (I mean 'transfer 
station.') 

Bill O'Neill

From wollman@bimajority.org  Wed Jan 23 21:38:43 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 21:38:43 -0500
Subject: Only a Game (was Glenn Geffner is gone)
In-Reply-To: <4797F7B0.7040507@gmail.com>
References: <20080124011823.7D0735BED7@c-24-128-108-153.hsd1.nh.comcast.net>
	<4797F7B0.7040507@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <18327.64051.896712.697246@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 21:28:00 -0500, "Bill O'Neill" <billohno@gmail.com> said:

> I like the show. Not a bad way to get up on Saturday. 7:00 is 
> late-rising for me these days.

So I see you're settling in well to your new life in Vermont....

-GAWollman


From jjlehmann@comcast.net  Wed Jan 23 21:42:19 2008
From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 21:42:19 -0500
Subject: WEEI 103.3FM
In-Reply-To: <380-22008142414424703@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <011901c85e32$bdbec130$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>

I believe the jingles used at the end of WEEI-FM's life were from "The Fyre"
package from JAM, originally produced for WFYR Chicago. They originally were
sung with WEEI-FM in them, but I don't they used the ones mentioning the
call letters at the end. You can find all of their demos up on
www.jingles.com. I have a montage of many of them from WEEI-FM, but I'm not
sure exactly what year it's from. If you want, I can send the file to anyone
that wants to hear it.

Jeff Lehmann
Hanson, MA

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf
> Of paulconnors@earthlink.net
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 8:44 PM
> To: Nickolas Noseworthy; boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
> Subject: RE: WEEI 103.3FM
> 
> Nick,
> 
> I was did mornings there beginning Valentine's Day 1983.  The date of the
> switch was March 9, 1983 (it became official at midnight) - and if I ever
> forget the date I can look at my souvenir logo cocktail glasses on my bar
> downstairs!  The guy you heard was Doug Alling, who did afternoons.
> 
> I don't remember what company did the Hitradio WEEI-FM jingle package.  It
> was a good one.  The top-of-the-hour jingle was a fun "talk-up"!  If it
> still exists, the package might be found at WODS - Hitradio's descendent.
> 
> I remember that they had us stop using the call letters on-air (except for
> legal IDs) around the beginning of January in anticipation of the call
> letter change.  We'd say "Hitradio 103FM" and all jingles with the call
> letters were dropped then as well.
> 
> I don't have copies of the package, just lots of airchecks of me on the
> air
> during my time there twenty-five years ago.  Contact me off-list if you'd
> like me to send you a couple.
> 
> Paul Connors
> 
> 
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Nickolas Noseworthy <ncn86@hotmail.com>
> > To: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> > Date: 1/23/2008 6:34:55 PM
> > Subject: WEEI 103.3FM
> >
> > Hi all,
> > I'm hoping someone out there can help me figure this one out. I was
> working on my demo when I came across some old station id's from the old
> Hit Radio WEEI FM in Boston. I decided to make a top hour ID using these,
> and added it to my demo. At the end of this top hour ID, I found (luckily)
> a clip of a man named Doug Gahling (may be misspelled) doing a Top Hour ID
> at 5PM on March 8th 1982. That evening at midnight, they changed their
> call
> letters to WHTT.
> > My question is, does anyone know the company that made that jingle
> package that they were using that final evening on March 8th? And also
> where those old ids and jingles might be being stored right now? I would
> be
> very interested in getting a copy of some of those jingles, and maybe even
> more airchecks as well.
> >
> > Nick Noseworthy
> > the DXer from NH
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. You IM, we
> give.
> > http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join



From jjlehmann@comcast.net  Wed Jan 23 21:58:10 2008
From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 21:58:10 -0500
Subject: WEEI 103.3FM
In-Reply-To: <011901c85e32$bdbec130$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>
Message-ID: <012201c85e34$f4bbfc50$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>

> I believe the jingles used at the end of WEEI-FM's life were from "The
> Fyre"
> package from JAM, originally produced for WFYR Chicago. They originally
> were
> sung with WEEI-FM in them, but I don't they used the ones mentioning the
> call letters at the end. You can find all of their demos up on
> www.jingles.com. I have a montage of many of them from WEEI-FM, but I'm
> not
> sure exactly what year it's from. If you want, I can send the file to
> anyone
> that wants to hear it.

Actually it looks like "The Fyre" isn't on their website. Here's the demo:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/yk1pvg

And the EEI-FM file I have, supposedly from September 1982:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/8dfo6a

Jeff Lehmann
Hanson, MA


From billohno@gmail.com  Thu Jan 24 07:31:52 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 07:31:52 -0500
Subject: Only a Game (was Glenn Geffner is gone)
In-Reply-To: <18327.64051.896712.697246@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <20080124011823.7D0735BED7@c-24-128-108-153.hsd1.nh.comcast.net>	<4797F7B0.7040507@gmail.com>
	<18327.64051.896712.697246@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <47988538.8080003@gmail.com>

Garrett Wollman wrote:
> <<On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 21:28:00 -0500, "Bill O'Neill" <billohno@gmail.com> said:
>
>   
>> I like the show. Not a bad way to get up on Saturday. 7:00 is 
>> late-rising for me these days.
>>     
As they say here, "It's not too awful bad."  (Boston translation: "It's 
wicked good.")

Bill O'

From kenwvt@gmail.com  Wed Jan 23 14:17:04 2008
From: kenwvt@gmail.com (Ken VanTassell)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:17:04 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
In-Reply-To: <647737520801231115s68353618leef109117921e18b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <s7971ee4.061@entbalms2.entercom.com>
	<004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia>
	<647737520801231115s68353618leef109117921e18b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <647737520801231117l2ed4934coc23a5ed4955b18@mail.gmail.com>

Isn't Thomas's original question about "stretching" 4:3 to fit the 16:9 ?

Here is a very interesting article on the subject of "stretching"

http://www.graphpaper.com/2007/03-19_are-some-people-just-visually-dull

-Ken

From dave@skywaves.net  Thu Jan 24 20:13:25 2008
From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty)
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:13:25 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
References: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia>
Message-ID: <001e01c85eef$7c9603e0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>

A couple of additional points to add to Brian's excellent report...

When HDTV was developed in the 1980s (that is NOT a typo!), there were no 
blue LEDs, so LED TVs were out of the question, and LCDs were incredibly 
slow. The only practical direct-display devices were CRTs.

>From the structural viewpoint, the larger the CRT, the heavier the glass 
frontplate must be. And the rest of the glass has to be stronger as the tube 
gets less symmetrical. (Remember those early-days round CRTs in the cheap 
TVs? That's why they were made that way.) So as you make the CRTs bigger and 
wider, they get heavier, and that happens way out of proportion to the 
increase in the viewing size.  Even moderately-sized 16:9 CRTs weigh 
hundreds of pounds.

Today, of course, those factors don't carry much weight.  (ta-da!)  Screens 
can be made in any shape you want, and there will undoubtedly be many more 
choices in the future. Broadcast TV will probably stick to 16:9, but movies 
can be released in CinemaScope or even Cinerama or IMax, and you can view 
them that way if you can afford the screen.

Something that hasn't gotten much public notice is that 16:9 is 4:3 squared, 
which makes a lot of the image conversion processing math easier, and the 
following item possible:

You can display four 4:3 images simultaneously on a 16:9 display - one full 
size, and three 1/3 size images stacked on one side or the other. If you 
really wanna go nuts and you have the processing available, you can display 
a main 4:3 image and two columns of six small images each - a total of 13 
simultaneous 4:3 images - more than sufficient to satisfy even the most 
hard-core news junkie on election night!

-Dave Doherty
 Skywaves, Inc.
 97 Webster Street
 Worcester, MA 01603
 508-425-7176






----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian Vita" <brian_vita@cssinc.com>
To: "'Sid Schweiger'" <sid@wrko.com>; "'Boston Radio Interest'" 
<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 1:42 PM
Subject: RE: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]


>>Who decided that the world would enjoy
16:9 aspect ratio and widescreen TV receivers?<<

>16:9 happens to be the same aspect ratio as a widescreen motion picture
(i.e., CinemaScope or PanaVision).

Aha! Finally a question where I'm the expert!

Cinema people don't refer to the picture aspect ratios in the same terms as
TV folk.  For example, we call the 4:3 ratio 1.33:1.  We call "widescreen"
(currently the flat non-anamorphic format) 1.85: and CinemaScope is actually
2.35:1.

The "widescreen" HDTV format of 16:9 would thus translate to 1.77:1.  This
is NOT the CinemaScope format.  It is slightly squarer than the standard
"flat" 1.85:1 ratio.  This would mean that most movies that are shot "flat"
would crop nicely to the HDTV 16:9 format.  Cinemascope (and its variations)
would still be letterboxed.

As a side note, CinemaScope was originally a trademark of 20th Century Fox.
When the other studios wanted to do a wide screen anamorphic process they
had to come up with their own name and "squeeze"ratio.  This created a major
problem as you now had to have a set of lenses for each studio.  There were
variable lenses with swivel prisms that could adjust the squeeze ratio but
these ate light incredibly.  The industry finally standardized on the 2.35:1

------------------------------------
Cinema Service & Supply, Inc.
Brian Vita
President
brian_vita@cssinc.com
77 Walnut St - Ste 4
Peabody, MA  01960-5691
tel: 978-538-7575
tel2:(800)231-8849
fax: 978-538-7550
IM: btvita@hotmail.com
www.cssinc.com
AIM: btvita
------------------------------------

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.9/1239 - Release Date: 1/23/2008
10:24 AM





From dan.strassberg@att.net  Thu Jan 24 21:18:54 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:18:54 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
References: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia>
	<001e01c85eef$7c9603e0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
Message-ID: <000701c85ef8$a7c53a00$41eda644@SatU205S5044>

OK, I've got it: Main image 12x9. Small images 4x3. Stack the small
images atop one another and they use 4x9. Place that panel beside the
12x9 image and you get 16x9. Would have been nice if your original
message had said that! With four sets of headphones or a switch that
allowed you to select which audio came out of the speakers or a single
set of headphones, it might even be useful.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
To: "Brian Vita" <brian_vita@cssinc.com>; "'Sid Schweiger'"
<sid@wrko.com>; "'Boston Radio Interest'"
<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]


>
> You can display four 4:3 images simultaneously on a 16:9 display -
> one full size, and three 1/3 size images stacked on one side or the
> other. If you really wanna go nuts and you have the processing
> available, you can display a main 4:3 image and two columns of six
> small images each - a total of 13 simultaneous 4:3 images - more
> than sufficient to satisfy even the most hard-core news junkie on
> election night!
>
> -Dave Doherty


From dave@skywaves.net  Thu Jan 24 22:52:14 2008
From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty)
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:52:14 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
References: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia>
	<001e01c85eef$7c9603e0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<000701c85ef8$a7c53a00$41eda644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <002301c85f05$ac9796b0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>

Hi Dan-

You raise an excellent point about the audio.

Human beings are organized to process visual input before aural. We have two 
eyes and two ears, in accord with the normal redundancies, gender-related 
and otherwise; but our visual acuity may be more responsible for the ascent 
of humankind than any other factor.

Our visual acuities are based upon the short wavelengths associated with 
light, but our aural acuities are based upon the long wavelengths associated 
with sound. Our eyes are close together and pointed in roughly the same 
direction, but our ears are farther apart and pointed about 45 degrees 
off-axis.

Human eyes are exquisite sensors of light, and our brains are fabulous 
interpreters of that input. Interpretation of the huge amounts of visual 
input occupy massive amounts of our brains' computational abilities at all 
times when we are awake.

Aural input helps us to determine the source of the sound using the brain's 
ability to process differential input from the ears, but the brain assumes 
that aural input to both ears comes from a single source.

So here's the problem:

We can look at four simultaneous video displays and get a sense of what's 
happening overall without overloading our brains.

Absent earbuds, we can only listen to one aural source at a time. With 
earbuds, and with long-term practice, we may be able to actively monitor as 
many as two aural channels.

-d


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
To: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>; "Brian Vita" 
<brian_vita@cssinc.com>; "'Sid Schweiger'" <sid@wrko.com>; "'Boston Radio 
Interest'" <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]


> OK, I've got it: Main image 12x9. Small images 4x3. Stack the small
> images atop one another and they use 4x9. Place that panel beside the
> 12x9 image and you get 16x9. Would have been nice if your original
> message had said that! With four sets of headphones or a switch that
> allowed you to select which audio came out of the speakers or a single
> set of headphones, it might even be useful.
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
> To: "Brian Vita" <brian_vita@cssinc.com>; "'Sid Schweiger'"
> <sid@wrko.com>; "'Boston Radio Interest'"
> <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 8:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
>
>
>>
>> You can display four 4:3 images simultaneously on a 16:9 display -
>> one full size, and three 1/3 size images stacked on one side or the
>> other. If you really wanna go nuts and you have the processing
>> available, you can display a main 4:3 image and two columns of six
>> small images each - a total of 13 simultaneous 4:3 images - more
>> than sufficient to satisfy even the most hard-core news junkie on
>> election night!
>>
>> -Dave Doherty
>
>
> 


From wollman@bimajority.org  Fri Jan 25 00:52:38 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:52:38 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
In-Reply-To: <002301c85f05$ac9796b0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
References: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia>
	<001e01c85eef$7c9603e0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<000701c85ef8$a7c53a00$41eda644@SatU205S5044>
	<002301c85f05$ac9796b0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
Message-ID: <18329.31014.514277.626234@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:52:14 -0500, "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net> said:

> Absent earbuds, we can only listen to one aural source at a time. With 
> earbuds, and with long-term practice, we may be able to actively monitor as 
> many as two aural channels.

Obviously you haven't traveled with Mr. Fybush.

I think it's possible to handle about four distinct sources, provided
they are all physically separated.  That doesn't necessarily imply
*listening* to four things at once, just monitoring them to the point
of determining which one requires immediate attention.  My own hearing
isn't good enough to do more than three, sometimes two.  (I also have
trouble keeping up a conversation in a noisy restaurant, for the same
reason.)

-GAWollman

From dave@skywaves.net  Fri Jan 25 08:04:24 2008
From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 08:04:24 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
References: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia><001e01c85eef$7c9603e0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net><000701c85ef8$a7c53a00$41eda644@SatU205S5044><002301c85f05$ac9796b0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<18329.31014.514277.626234@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <002001c85f52$cf5e7450$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>

> That doesn't necessarily imply *listening* to four things at once, just 
> monitoring them to the point of determining which one requires immediate 
> attention.

Agreed.  I was thinking about actively listening and comprehending.

The cleanest scenario I can think of is a quad-split video conference in 
which all four participants are on screen simultaneously. They can be moving 
about, gesturing, scratching, whatever without being overly disturbing.  But 
if all four speak at once, it is impossible - in real time - to sort out 
what they are all saying. With really good digital processing applied to an 
excellent recording, you might be able to sort it out afterwards.

-d



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
To: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 12:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]


> <<On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:52:14 -0500, "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net> 
> said:
>
>> Absent earbuds, we can only listen to one aural source at a time. With
>> earbuds, and with long-term practice, we may be able to actively monitor 
>> as
>> many as two aural channels.
>
> Obviously you haven't traveled with Mr. Fybush.
>
> I think it's possible to handle about four distinct sources, provided
> they are all physically separated.  That doesn't necessarily imply
> *listening* to four things at once, just monitoring them to the point
> of determining which one requires immediate attention.  My own hearing
> isn't good enough to do more than three, sometimes two.  (I also have
> trouble keeping up a conversation in a noisy restaurant, for the same
> reason.)
>
> -GAWollman
>
> 


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Fri Jan 25 10:37:55 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:37:55 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
References: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia><001e01c85eef$7c9603e0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net><000701c85ef8$a7c53a00$41eda644@SatU205S5044><002301c85f05$ac9796b0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net><18329.31014.514277.626234@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<002001c85f52$cf5e7450$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
Message-ID: <000c01c85f68$aacf9ef0$41eda644@SatU205S5044>

If the TV that displays the four-way videoconference were equipped
with, say, 5.1 surround sound (I'm not positive I understand what that
technogibberish means--but I think I have an idea), is it more likely,
less likely, or equally likely that a viewer/listener could pick out
what a particular individual was saying and make sense of it--compared
with what the viewer/listener could do if all of the sound from all
four conference participants were mixed into a single loudspeaker of
similar quality?

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
To: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]


>> That doesn't necessarily imply *listening* to four things at once,
>> just monitoring them to the point of determining which one requires
>> immediate attention.
>
> Agreed.  I was thinking about actively listening and comprehending.
>
> The cleanest scenario I can think of is a quad-split video
> conference in which all four participants are on screen
> simultaneously. They can be moving about, gesturing, scratching,
> whatever without being overly disturbing.  But if all four speak at
> once, it is impossible - in real time - to sort out what they are
> all saying. With really good digital processing applied to an
> excellent recording, you might be able to sort it out afterwards.
>
> -d
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
> To: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 12:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
>
>
>> <<On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:52:14 -0500, "Dave Doherty"
>> <dave@skywaves.net> said:
>>
>>> Absent earbuds, we can only listen to one aural source at a time.
>>> With
>>> earbuds, and with long-term practice, we may be able to actively
>>> monitor as
>>> many as two aural channels.
>>
>> Obviously you haven't traveled with Mr. Fybush.
>>
>> I think it's possible to handle about four distinct sources,
>> provided
>> they are all physically separated.  That doesn't necessarily imply
>> *listening* to four things at once, just monitoring them to the
>> point
>> of determining which one requires immediate attention.  My own
>> hearing
>> isn't good enough to do more than three, sometimes two.  (I also
>> have
>> trouble keeping up a conversation in a noisy restaurant, for the
>> same
>> reason.)
>>
>> -GAWollman
>>
>>
>


From HeritageRadio@msn.com  Fri Jan 25 03:08:45 2008
From: HeritageRadio@msn.com (thomas heathwood)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 03:08:45 -0500
Subject: Aspect Ratio
Message-ID: <BLU120-DAV5A62BE0307C7BF20A1DA9B5390@phx.gbl>

Many thanks to Ken Van Tassell for his explanation and actual picture explaining what it was I find so objectionable in watching widescreen
TV.  The comments on the hyperlink detail the problem even further.
I was beginning to think that I was the only one who saw the extent of the trouble. I guess I also hoped that when the new TV transmission
methodology is implemented next year, the problems might disappear, but after reading the comments at the link, I'm not too hopeful. Trouble apparently, for both 4:3 AND 15:9 viewers.   Tom Heathwood  

 www.graphpaper.com/2007/03-19_are-some-people-just-visually-dull<http://www.graphpaper.com/2007/03-19_are-some-people-just-visually-dull>

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Fri Jan 25 12:03:29 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:03:29 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
References: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia><001e01c85eef$7c9603e0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net><000701c85ef8$a7c53a00$41eda644@SatU205S5044><002301c85f05$ac9796b0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net><18329.31014.514277.626234@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<002001c85f52$cf5e7450$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
Message-ID: <000c01c85f74$44fe7130$41eda644@SatU205S5044>

Back to the video side: The names for the various video formats (for
example 1080p, 1080i) suggest that a 16:9 TV display should have 1080
pixels vertically (and 1920 pixels horizontally), or an integral
multiple thereof and that formats such as 720p would omit every third
horizontal line. I can't believe that's what really happens because I
believe that the omission would be very noticeable and very annoying
(especially in displays of small text). So what gives? If the picture
is transmitted with 1080 horizontal lines but the display has 1152
pixels vertically (perhaps a more convenient number than 1080 because
the largest common factor of 1080 and 1920 is 120, which is not an
integer power of 2, whereas the largest common factor of 2048 and
1152 is 128, which equals 2^7), it would suggest that the screen would
display a 1920 by 1080-pixel image letterboxed within the 2048 by
1152-pixel screen. Although the borders would be quite narrow (36
pixels top and bottom, 64 pixels left and right) is that what really
happens? I imagine not.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
To: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]



From brian_vita@cssinc.com  Fri Jan 25 11:48:54 2008
From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:48:54 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
In-Reply-To: <000c01c85f68$aacf9ef0$41eda644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <003001c85f72$2e87eeb0$6400a8c0@lysthia>

> If the TV that displays the four-way videoconference were 
> equipped with, say, 5.1 surround sound (I'm not positive I 
> understand what that technogibberish means--but I think I 
> have an idea),

5.1 Surround sound is defined as follows:
Left (viewer's left side of the screen)
Center 
Right
Surround Left
Surround Right
Subwoofer - this is the ".1" channel as its limited bandwith (typically
125hz to the lower limit of the system)

7.1 Surround Sound adds:
Left Back Surround
Right Back Surround

In the cinema world 5.1 stereo (Dolby, DTS or SDDS) is discrete in that each
channel is recorded on the medium separately.  7.1 is a kluge where they
matrix the L/R Right surrounds to produce the back center channel.  This
technology actually leaves an extra, unused channel which is typically
dubbed VOG (Voice of God).  It has been speculated that some enterprising
producer will ask for ceiling mounted surrounds and use the VOG channel for
that.

As a sidebar, while the above formats are essentially discrete (except for
the 7.1 witchcraft), the original Dolby stereo in movie theatres which later
became MTS stereo on your TV and "pro-logic" on your home theatre receiver
is actually stolen from the old Sansui patent for quadriphonic stereo.  It
is a matrixed format where:

L=L
R=R
When L=R then you get center
L-R is surround (there is only a mono surround in this format)
The subwoofer channel is produced by a bandpass filter on the L/C/R
channels.  That is to say, its not recorded discretely as it is in the 5.1
and 7.1 formats.

Dolby or Dolby A - Dolby A type NR (analog)
Dolby SR - Dolby Spectral Recording NR (analog)
Dolby SR-D - Dolby Digital
Dolby SR-Dex (Dolby Sex) - Dolby Digital with the bastardized 7.1 described
above
With all of the Dolby formats the sound is on the film

DTS - Digital Theatre Systems digital stereo (sound comes on a synced disk)

SDDS - Sony Dynamic Digital Stere (or still don't do sh..) Obsolete format -
Sony stopped making processors 4 years ago.  Flakey as hell.

Lest we forget, my favorite:

Panavision Blue - an industry inside joke where someone took a bad 16mm B/W
adult film and blew it up to a 70mm release print.  They took the original
mono "grunt" track and placed it on all 6 channels.

Any questions?

We now return to our regularly scheduled discussion.

Brian Vita, President
Cinema Service & Supply, Inc.
77 Walnut St - Ste 4
Peabody, MA  01960-5691
 
Office:  (978)538-7575
Fax:     (978)538-7550

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.11/1243 - Release Date: 1/25/2008
11:24 AM
 


From wollman@bimajority.org  Fri Jan 25 13:53:08 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:53:08 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
In-Reply-To: <003001c85f72$2e87eeb0$6400a8c0@lysthia>
References: <000c01c85f68$aacf9ef0$41eda644@SatU205S5044>
	<003001c85f72$2e87eeb0$6400a8c0@lysthia>
Message-ID: <18330.12308.385386.797160@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:48:54 -0500, "Brian Vita" <brian_vita@cssinc.com> said:

> In the cinema world 5.1 stereo (Dolby, DTS or SDDS) is discrete in that each
> channel is recorded on the medium separately.

In the Digital TV world, and also on 5.1-channel DVDs, the audio
system used is Dolby AC3, also known as ATSC A/52.

In digital audio compression, there are several different ways to
represent multichannel sound.  The simplest way is to compress each
channel separately.  This requires the most bandwidth, because it does
not exploit redundancy between the channels.  A step down from that is
to interleave the audio information from each channel and then
compress the result; for some codecs, this is provably equivalent to
the previous case.  Stepping down again, it is possible to determine
the perceived direction of each sound in a group of samples, and
represent this as a vector (amplitude and direction); the direction of
the vector can be quantized.  There are other possibilities; I don't
know which one A/52 actually uses.

-GAWollman

From billohno@gmail.com  Fri Jan 25 17:28:55 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:28:55 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
In-Reply-To: <18329.31014.514277.626234@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia>	<001e01c85eef$7c9603e0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>	<000701c85ef8$a7c53a00$41eda644@SatU205S5044>	<002301c85f05$ac9796b0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<18329.31014.514277.626234@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <479A62A7.8030800@gmail.com>

Garrett Wollman wrote:
> Obviously you haven't traveled with Mr. Fybush.
>
> I think it's possible to handle about four distinct sources, provided
> they are all physically separated. 

I have to believe that Mr. Fybush's many years in news rooms were 
formative to this skill.  I recall Scott in the news room with, among 
other sources of audio at full volume: ABC private channel, ABC news 
audio, news scanner, and two legacy AP machines, ringing phones, air 
monitor....

Bill O'Neill
//

From billohno@gmail.com  Fri Jan 25 17:34:26 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:34:26 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
In-Reply-To: <000c01c85f74$44fe7130$41eda644@SatU205S5044>
References: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia><001e01c85eef$7c9603e0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net><000701c85ef8$a7c53a00$41eda644@SatU205S5044><002301c85f05$ac9796b0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net><18329.31014.514277.626234@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>	<002001c85f52$cf5e7450$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<000c01c85f74$44fe7130$41eda644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <479A63F2.6050505@gmail.com>

Dan.Strassberg wrote:
> ...or an integral
> multiple thereof and that formats such as 720p would omit every third
> horizontal line. <snip>  but the display has 1152
> pixels vertically (perhaps a more convenient number than 1080 because
> the largest common factor of 1080 and 1920 is 120, which is not an
> integer power of 2, whereas the largest common factor of 2048 and
> 1152 is 128, which equals 2^7), it would suggest that the screen would
> display a 1920 by 1080-pixel image letterboxed within the 2048 by
> 1152-pixel screen. <snip>
Darn it! Dan beat me to it!  <g> Whew! ;-)

b -

From scott@fybush.com  Fri Jan 25 18:36:16 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:36:16 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
In-Reply-To: <479A62A7.8030800@gmail.com>
References: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia>	<001e01c85eef$7c9603e0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>	<000701c85ef8$a7c53a00$41eda644@SatU205S5044>	<002301c85f05$ac9796b0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>	<18329.31014.514277.626234@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<479A62A7.8030800@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <479A7270.10102@fybush.com>

Bill O'Neill wrote:
> Garrett Wollman wrote:
>> Obviously you haven't traveled with Mr. Fybush.
>>
>> I think it's possible to handle about four distinct sources, provided
>> they are all physically separated. 
> 
> I have to believe that Mr. Fybush's many years in news rooms were 
> formative to this skill.  I recall Scott in the news room with, among 
> other sources of audio at full volume: ABC private channel, ABC news 
> audio, news scanner, and two legacy AP machines, ringing phones, air 
> monitor....

Which was really just practice for the BZ newsroom, which added about 
eight more audio sources (CNN, later CBS, plus more scanners, the Group 
W news squawker, etc.) into the mix. And then they moved us in with TV...

But to get back to Garrett's original point: it's true that I sometimes 
have multiple sources of audio going at once when I'm trying to get a 
bunch of top-hour IDs while traveling. Even with the help of earbuds, 
though, I really can't focus usefully on more than perhaps three audio 
sources at once. Everything else becomes background noise, which is not 
always a good thing!

s

From lspin@comcast.net  Fri Jan 25 18:25:22 2008
From: lspin@comcast.net (Lou)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:25:22 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
In-Reply-To: <003001c85f72$2e87eeb0$6400a8c0@lysthia>
References: <000c01c85f68$aacf9ef0$41eda644@SatU205S5044>
	<003001c85f72$2e87eeb0$6400a8c0@lysthia>
Message-ID: <000601c85fa9$9081b330$b1851990$@net>

Interesting info, Brian.

Back in the day when we dared to play with our under-dash car stereo wiring,
some of us would install the Left and Right on the rear deck (6"x9"
speakers, of course).  Then we'd take the + lead from each of the left and
right and connect them to the front factory radio speaker.  It produced a
cool, surround effect where oddly embedded sounds in a music mix would
appear.  Depending on the particular mix, vocals would move to the front or
get trapped in the rear with a ghostly echo at the front.  "Riders on The
Storm" by the Doors was a great demo song for this speaker configuration.
It never seemed to 'smoke' any of the stereo decks to which I applied this
'poor-man's-surround.'  Of course, if we still wanted to hear the factory AM
radio, we'd have to install a switch to switch the front speaker back and
forth.

-Lou


-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Brian Vita
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 11:49 AM
To: 'Dan.Strassberg'; 'Dave Doherty'; 'Garrett Wollman'
Cc: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
Subject: RE: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]

> If the TV that displays the four-way videoconference were 
> equipped with, say, 5.1 surround sound (I'm not positive I 
> understand what that technogibberish means--but I think I 
> have an idea),

5.1 Surround sound is defined as follows:
Left (viewer's left side of the screen)
Center 
Right
Surround Left
Surround Right
Subwoofer - this is the ".1" channel as its limited bandwith (typically
125hz to the lower limit of the system)

7.1 Surround Sound adds:
Left Back Surround
Right Back Surround

In the cinema world 5.1 stereo (Dolby, DTS or SDDS) is discrete in that each
channel is recorded on the medium separately.  7.1 is a kluge where they
matrix the L/R Right surrounds to produce the back center channel.  This
technology actually leaves an extra, unused channel which is typically
dubbed VOG (Voice of God).  It has been speculated that some enterprising
producer will ask for ceiling mounted surrounds and use the VOG channel for
that.

As a sidebar, while the above formats are essentially discrete (except for
the 7.1 witchcraft), the original Dolby stereo in movie theatres which later
became MTS stereo on your TV and "pro-logic" on your home theatre receiver
is actually stolen from the old Sansui patent for quadriphonic stereo.  It
is a matrixed format where:

L=L
R=R
When L=R then you get center
L-R is surround (there is only a mono surround in this format)
The subwoofer channel is produced by a bandpass filter on the L/C/R
channels.  That is to say, its not recorded discretely as it is in the 5.1
and 7.1 formats.

Dolby or Dolby A - Dolby A type NR (analog)
Dolby SR - Dolby Spectral Recording NR (analog)
Dolby SR-D - Dolby Digital
Dolby SR-Dex (Dolby Sex) - Dolby Digital with the bastardized 7.1 described
above
With all of the Dolby formats the sound is on the film

DTS - Digital Theatre Systems digital stereo (sound comes on a synced disk)

SDDS - Sony Dynamic Digital Stere (or still don't do sh..) Obsolete format -
Sony stopped making processors 4 years ago.  Flakey as hell.

Lest we forget, my favorite:

Panavision Blue - an industry inside joke where someone took a bad 16mm B/W
adult film and blew it up to a 70mm release print.  They took the original
mono "grunt" track and placed it on all 6 channels.

Any questions?

We now return to our regularly scheduled discussion.

Brian Vita, President
Cinema Service & Supply, Inc.
77 Walnut St - Ste 4
Peabody, MA  01960-5691
 
Office:  (978)538-7575
Fax:     (978)538-7550

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.11/1243 - Release Date: 1/25/2008
11:24 AM
 


From dave@skywaves.net  Fri Jan 25 19:46:03 2008
From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty)
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:46:03 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
References: <004d01c85def$bc0aa400$6400a8c0@lysthia>	<001e01c85eef$7c9603e0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>	<000701c85ef8$a7c53a00$41eda644@SatU205S5044>	<002301c85f05$ac9796b0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>	<18329.31014.514277.626234@hergotha.csail.mit.edu><479A62A7.8030800@gmail.com>
	<479A7270.10102@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <001501c85fb4$d42b7930$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>

>Everything else becomes background noise

Including that police siren?

:-)

-d

PS- Loved your writeup this week on DKVEZ. What a mess.




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
To: "Bill O'Neill" <billohno@gmail.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]


> Bill O'Neill wrote:
>> Garrett Wollman wrote:
>>> Obviously you haven't traveled with Mr. Fybush.
>>>
>>> I think it's possible to handle about four distinct sources, provided
>>> they are all physically separated. 
>> 
>> I have to believe that Mr. Fybush's many years in news rooms were 
>> formative to this skill.  I recall Scott in the news room with, among 
>> other sources of audio at full volume: ABC private channel, ABC news 
>> audio, news scanner, and two legacy AP machines, ringing phones, air 
>> monitor....
> 
> Which was really just practice for the BZ newsroom, which added about 
> eight more audio sources (CNN, later CBS, plus more scanners, the Group 
> W news squawker, etc.) into the mix. And then they moved us in with TV...
> 
> But to get back to Garrett's original point: it's true that I sometimes 
> have multiple sources of audio going at once when I'm trying to get a 
> bunch of top-hour IDs while traveling. Even with the help of earbuds, 
> though, I really can't focus usefully on more than perhaps three audio 
> sources at once. Everything else becomes background noise, which is not 
> always a good thing!
> 
> s
> 
>

From lglavin@mail.com  Sat Jan 26 13:23:22 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 13:23:22 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
Message-ID: <20080126182322.9320416427A@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com>

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Scott Fybush" 
>To: "Bill O'Neill" 
>Subject: Re: [Fwd: 16:9 Aspect Ratio]
>Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:36:16 -0500


Bill O'Neill wrote:
> Garrett Wollman wrote:
>> Obviously you haven't traveled with Mr. Fybush.
>>
>> I think it's possible to handle about four distinct sources, provided
>> they are all physically separated.
>
> I have to believe that Mr. Fybush's many years in news rooms were 
> formative to this skill. I recall Scott in the news room with, 
> among other sources of audio at full volume: ABC private channel, 
> ABC news audio, news scanner, and two legacy AP machines, ringing 
> phones, air monitor....

Long before the internets, many of us subscribed to the Vane A. Jones North American Radio
& TV Station Guide.   The frontispiece provided a brief bio of Mr. Jones, and he was always 
described as interested in many things, and at the same time had several TV's, radios, scanners
etc going on at the same time.  So one could say of Scott: "you're so Vane".


-- 
Want an e-mail address like mine?
Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com!


From markwats@comcast.net  Sun Jan 27 10:25:19 2008
From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson)
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 10:25:19 -0500
Subject: ABC Returns To WCAP
Message-ID: <000501c860f8$d4d6c520$39a0764c@Mark>

  This past Tuesday, WCAP (980 Lowell) once again became an ABC Radio 
affiliate, after several years with the USA Network.

  Also, WCAP's new website  www.980wcap.com  recently went live, along with 
live streaming 24/7 of WCAP's programming.

Mark Watson

Mark Watson 


From markwats@comcast.net  Sun Jan 27 10:29:10 2008
From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson)
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 10:29:10 -0500
Subject: New PD at WBMX & WODS
Message-ID: <000901c860f9$5db97ea0$39a0764c@Mark>

  Jay Beau Jones, recently afternoons/APD at WXLO (104.5 
Fitchburg/Worcester) has been named Program Director for WBMX & WODS. Jerry 
McKenna, who was 'BMX PD and Pete Falconi, who was Oldies' PD, have 
reportedly both exited the building.

Mark Watson 


From radiojunkie3@yahoo.com  Sun Jan 27 22:53:24 2008
From: radiojunkie3@yahoo.com (Peter Q. George)
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 19:53:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: WCAP/980 (was Re: ABC Returns To WCAP)
In-Reply-To: <000501c860f8$d4d6c520$39a0764c@Mark>
Message-ID: <927344.13726.qm@web50809.mail.re2.yahoo.com>


--- Mark Watson <markwats@comcast.net> wrote:

>   This past Tuesday, WCAP (980 Lowell) once again
> became an ABC Radio 
> affiliate, after several years with the USA Network.
> 
>   Also, WCAP's new website  www.980wcap.com 
> recently went live, along with 
> live streaming 24/7 of WCAP's programming.
> 
> 
> Mark Watson
 
I think Clark is doing a great job in continuing the
56+ year old tradition of WCAP.  This is one station
that launched many a career in radio, for over 56
years.  No doubt, the station is in competent hands. 
If you look at the list of some of the people who are
part of today's WCAP, it's literally a "who's who in
Boston radio".  I've listened to 980 on my way home
from work (from Manchester, NH).  I love the music. 
The execution of the format is really good.  Did I
actually hear some liners from Dick Summer (ex WBZ,
WNBC and WPIX-FM et.al.)?  It's good to know that 'CAP
is streaming.  I'll bookmark it, for sure!  All the
best to Clark and crew at WCAP.

Peter Q. George (K1XRB)
Whitman, Massachusetts   
 


Peter Q. George (K1XRB)
Whitman, Massachusetts
                           "Scanning the bands since 1967"
radiojunkie1@yahoo.com
radiojunkie3@yahoo.com
***********************************************************


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Mon Jan 28 09:44:18 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:44:18 -0500
Subject: WTTT (or is it?)
Message-ID: <000b01c861bc$44b04dd0$9deca644@SatU205S5044>

Most likely at 12:01 AM today, WTTT 1150 AM flipped from Salem
Communications' conservative talk network to what I presume to be CCM
en Espanol. From what I can tell (and remember, I don't speak Spanish,
so a lot of this is pure guesswork), the programming is a simulcast of
an FM 105.5 in Miami, which must call itself Radio Luz (which sounds a
lot like Radio Lose to these monolingual ears). Radio Lose would be an
apt moniker for the majority of the formats that have graced the
Boston 1150 frequency for decades. Still, I don't believe that, as an
ideolically driven ultra-right-wing talker, WTTT managed to capture
the Boston market crown for fewest listeners per watt. That award
probably still goes to 50 kW WWZN 1510.

BTW, this is not 1150's first flirtation with Espanol. 1150 was the
original Boston market home of the WAMG calls (now on ESPN 890). When
1150 was WAMG, it was the local outlet for Mega Communications
(Communicaciones?), which also owned 890 and left the WAMG calls
behind there when it hastily withdrew from the market while paddling
furiously to reach the shore of the Sea of Red Ink in which it was
engulfed.

I have yet to notice any kind of TOH ID on Radio Luz. For sure, I have
not heard a TOH ID in English, and if there was one in Spanish, I did
not realize it. So I don't know whether 1150 is or is not still WTTT.

I hope someone can supply more info on the Miami station. Does Salem
own it? It is programmed by Salem or is it LMAed to somebody else? If
Salem programs it, is this a format Salem has placed on the bird?
Could this apparent simulcast just be stunting until the REAL new
format (presumably also en Espanol) arrives this Friday, February 1?
Inquiring minds want to know.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Mon Jan 28 10:10:47 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:10:47 -0500
Subject: WTTT (or is it?)
References: <012820081449.15440.479DEB94000F327400003C5022068150930C050303@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <001901c861bf$f845c930$9deca644@SatU205S5044>

Well, I can't find a 105.5 FM in the Miami area and 105.5 is second
adjacent to stations in communities close enough to Miami that a 105.5
in Miami would pretty much have to be a priate, I think. Although FM
pirates abound in Florida, simulcasting one on a licensed AM in Boston
would certainly be an "interesting" ploy--especially for Salem. At
Google, after I got past the Radio Luz in El Salvador and others in S
America, I did find a company named Radio Luz in Orlando. However, I
found no indiation that it owns any US stations or that it furnishes
programming to any US stations, so it remains a mystery to me.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <bradfordwood@comcast.net>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 9:49 AM
Subject: Re: WTTT (or is it?)


> http://www.talk1150.com/
>
> Radio Luz is coming...
>


From jjlehmann@comcast.net  Mon Jan 28 10:23:32 2008
From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:23:32 -0500
Subject: WTTT (or is it?)
In-Reply-To: <001901c861bf$f845c930$9deca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <02e001c861c1$bed14fb0$6400a8c0@DHPP0DB1>

> Well, I can't find a 105.5 FM in the Miami area and 105.5 is second
> adjacent to stations in communities close enough to Miami that a 105.5
> in Miami would pretty much have to be a priate, I think. Although FM
> pirates abound in Florida, simulcasting one on a licensed AM in Boston
> would certainly be an "interesting" ploy--especially for Salem. At
> Google, after I got past the Radio Luz in El Salvador and others in S
> America, I did find a company named Radio Luz in Orlando. However, I
> found no indiation that it owns any US stations or that it furnishes
> programming to any US stations, so it remains a mystery to me.

I believe the station you're trying to find is WWWK Islamorada, FL. They're
50 miles from Miami I've heard them in e skip a couple times.

Jeff Lehmann
Hanson, MA


From dbroda@nycap.rr.com  Mon Jan 28 11:56:59 2008
From: dbroda@nycap.rr.com (Doug Broda)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:56:59 -0500
Subject: WTTT (or is it?)
In-Reply-To: <001901c861bf$f845c930$9deca644@SatU205S5044>
References: <012820081449.15440.479DEB94000F327400003C5022068150930C050303@comcast.net>
	<001901c861bf$f845c930$9deca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <479E095B.1070003@nycap.rr.com>

There is a Spanish CCM station in/near Orlando, WRLZ 1270 Eatonville, 
called Radio Luz.

http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/info?call=WRLZ&service=AM

http://www.radioluz1270.com/

I've also tripped over stations of the same name via Google in San 
Salvador and Guatemala. However, an article at
http://juantornoe.blogs.com/hispanictrending/2006/01/hispanic_christ.html 
says that WRLZ is "owned by Iglesia el Calvario, an Assemblies of God 
ministry with about 1,500 members in Orlando." So who knows.... :

Dan.Strassberg wrote:
> Well, I can't find a 105.5 FM in the Miami area and 105.5 is second
> adjacent to stations in communities close enough to Miami that a 105.5
> in Miami would pretty much have to be a priate, I think. Although FM
> pirates abound in Florida, simulcasting one on a licensed AM in Boston
> would certainly be an "interesting" ploy--especially for Salem. At
> Google, after I got past the Radio Luz in El Salvador and others in S
> America, I did find a company named Radio Luz in Orlando. However, I
> found no indiation that it owns any US stations or that it furnishes
> programming to any US stations, so it remains a mystery to me.
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: <bradfordwood@comcast.net>
> To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 9:49 AM
> Subject: Re: WTTT (or is it?)
>
>
>> http://www.talk1150.com/
>>
>> Radio Luz is coming...
>>
>


From raccoonradio@mail.com  Mon Jan 28 12:48:26 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:48:26 -0500
Subject: WTTT (or is it?)
Message-ID: <20080128174827.3C9F983BE3@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>

WTTT's website, http://www.talk1150.com , now says "Radio Luz is coming" and has a cross on it.
WTTT had featured Salem's conservative talk lineup of Bill Bennett, Mike Gallagher, Dennis
Praeger, Hugh Hewitt, and Michael Medved plus Citadel/ABC's Sean Hannity and I believe they
had Dr. Laura overnight (although I thought she was also aired on WROL). Much like WKOX
and WXKS, which dumped prog. talk for a Spanish format, now WTTT has done the same.
WTTT hadn't shown up in the 12 plus ratings (not sure if they showed up in 25-54s).



From scott@fybush.com  Mon Jan 28 12:54:17 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:54:17 -0500
Subject: WMEX sold
Message-ID: <479E16C9.407@fybush.com>

Looks like EMF (K-Love) has found a foothold in the Granite State - 
they're buying WMEX from Dennis Jackson for $1 million or thereabouts. 
Good for Dennis...maybe not so much for the cause of local radio on the 
Seacoast.

s

From kvahey@comcast.net  Mon Jan 28 12:59:22 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:59:22 -0600
Subject: WTTT (or is it?)
In-Reply-To: <479E095B.1070003@nycap.rr.com>
References: <012820081449.15440.479DEB94000F327400003C5022068150930C050303@comcast.net>
	<001901c861bf$f845c930$9deca644@SatU205S5044>
	<479E095B.1070003@nycap.rr.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801280959v16905d09oeae4bf505efacbf6@mail.gmail.com>

Salem actually changed the website

http://www.talk1150.com/

From paulranderson@charter.net  Mon Jan 28 13:29:40 2008
From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:29:40 -0500
Subject: WTTT (or is it?)
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801280959v16905d09oeae4bf505efacbf6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20080128132940.F2Z68.498721.root@fepweb05>

So now Paul Harvey is off-the-air once again in Boston.

Paul

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Mon Jan 28 14:29:41 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:29:41 -0500
Subject: WTTT
Message-ID: <002201c861e4$22ae38a0$9deca644@SatU205S5044>

I did finally hear a TOH legal ID in English. As of 1:00PM today, the
calls were still WTTT. Since it appears that Salem is not selling the
station but rather is LMAing it to Radio Luz, I imagine there will be
no change in the call sign--as there was none, for example, at WQEW as
long as the Times owned it. Indeed, there appears to have been none at
WQEW since ABC exercised its option to buy and acquired it from the
Times.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367


From RBello@BelloAssoc.com  Mon Jan 28 14:30:19 2008
From: RBello@BelloAssoc.com (Ron Bello)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:30:19 -0500
Subject: New PD at WBMX & WODS
In-Reply-To: <000901c860f9$5db97ea0$39a0764c@Mark>
References: <000901c860f9$5db97ea0$39a0764c@Mark>
Message-ID: <120154861701@mx04.gis.net>


Both these stations have 1 other commonality, neither has their HD 
signal operating.
Was told by Pete Falconi last spring.... Any day now, they have to 
move the transmitters to make room.


At 10:29 AM 1/27/2008, Mark Watson wrote:
>  Jay Beau Jones, recently afternoons/APD at WXLO (104.5 
> Fitchburg/Worcester) has been named Program Director for WBMX & 
> WODS. Jerry McKenna, who was 'BMX PD and Pete Falconi, who was 
> Oldies' PD, have reportedly both exited the building.
>
>Mark Watson

From kvahey@comcast.net  Mon Jan 28 15:18:19 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:18:19 -0600
Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT
Message-ID: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>

With yet another format change on 1150 you have to look back at this station
as being the worst performing AM in Boston history.

When you consider the full time AM's to Boston  590, 680, 850, 1030, 1150,
1260, and 1510  the 1150 license has done very little of note in its
history.  ( I didn't include 950 or 1330 or 1600 )

Every other AM at one time was the most listened to station in the city as
even WEZE 1260 was huge in the mid 60's before WJIB (96.9) came along and
blew it away.

Certainly 1150 must lead in call letter changes ( with 1510 right behind )

In my lifetime only once did 1150 matter to most Bostonians. They were a NBC
station in the 60's and they had the rights to the 1967 World Series.

Also remember 1150 fondly for Monitor in the 60's before the station flipped
to country.

From lglavin@mail.com  Mon Jan 28 15:16:53 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:16:53 -0500
Subject: "Tony Bruno Show" On WWZN Ends
Message-ID: <20080128201653.C496211581F@ws1-7.us4.outblaze.com>

According to radio-info.com, backed up by a message from Sporting News Radio's website, Tony
Bruno has ended his association with that network.  Recently, WWZN-AM 1510 in Boston
dropped an hour-long informercial for "nutritional supplements" to pick up the first hour
of Tony Bruno (although they run a locally-originated show during the last hour of TB...oops
not a good abbreviation).  The message boards are humming like the chorus in Puccini's 
"Madame Butterfly" about the possibility that this presages the demise of the Sporting News
Radio Network!

-- 
Want an e-mail address like mine?
Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com!


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Mon Jan 28 16:33:32 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:33:32 -0500
Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>

Well, Donna Halper will tell you that, somehow or other, WTTT traces
its heritage back to WGI and its predecessor whose calls I don't
recall (W1<something>). Since WBZ was licensed to Springfield for a
year or so after it first signed on--after which Westinghouse swapped
the WBZ calls from Springfield to Boston and the WBZA calls from
Boston to Springfield, WGI (if it were still around in a form
recognizable as WGI) might claim to have been Boston's first station.
As I understand it, WGI took to the air, one way or another, while WBZ
was still WBZA, and since WBZA no longer exists (although maybe some
unrelated station now has the calls), WGI might lay claim to having
been on the air first in Boston. Of course, you've never heard WTTT or
any of its predecessors boast about the lineage and it looks like a
safe bet that Radio Luz will never boast about it en Espanol. Donna is
probably the only living person who has researched the history of the
station. If she has the complete sequence of call sign changes (let
alone ownership, frequency, and CoL changes), it might not fit on one
page.

And come to think of it, there might be a problem with the above line
of reasoning. I believe that WGI was licensed to Medford or Medford
Hillside (never a real political subdivision, AFAIK). So since there
may have been a WBZ Springfield before there was a WGI Medford
Hillside and neither one was originally licensed to Boston, the
argument for WGI being first may be on shaky ground.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:18 PM
Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT


> With yet another format change on 1150 you have to look back at this
> station
> as being the worst performing AM in Boston history.
>
> When you consider the full time AM's to Boston  590, 680, 850, 1030,
> 1150,
> 1260, and 1510  the 1150 license has done very little of note in its
> history.  ( I didn't include 950 or 1330 or 1600 )
>
> Every other AM at one time was the most listened to station in the
> city as
> even WEZE 1260 was huge in the mid 60's before WJIB (96.9) came
> along and
> blew it away.
>
> Certainly 1150 must lead in call letter changes ( with 1510 right
> behind )
>
> In my lifetime only once did 1150 matter to most Bostonians. They
> were a NBC
> station in the 60's and they had the rights to the 1967 World
> Series.
>
> Also remember 1150 fondly for Monitor in the 60's before the station
> flipped
> to country.
>


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Mon Jan 28 18:15:09 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:15:09 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002101c86203$a1ed8160$6501a8c0@pastor2>

I remember WEZE's glass-paneled streetside studio on Boylston Street from
when I was a kid.  The station was proud of its NBC affiliation, and it was
a major player in the Boston radio market.  For whatever
in-hindsight-foolish reasons, WEZE dropped its NBC affiliation around 1965
or so and WCOP picked it up.  I think by the time I was in college (1969)
WCOP had been sold, changed its call letters, and Boston was bereft of NBC
Radio.  That was the case until a few years later when WMEX became WITS,
which didn't last long.  After the mid-'70s,  I don't remember Boston having
an NBC outlet again until the early- to mid-'80s when WRKO signed on with
the network.  It remained an affiliate until a couple of years into Westwood
One ownership, when it picked up CBS after WEEI was sold.

NBC really hasn't had a consistent presence in Boston since WBZ dropped it
back in 1956.  And, of course, the network barely exists now, but that's
another (sad) story . . .

-Doug




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:18 PM
Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT


> With yet another format change on 1150 you have to look back at this
station
> as being the worst performing AM in Boston history.
>
> When you consider the full time AM's to Boston  590, 680, 850, 1030, 1150,
> 1260, and 1510  the 1150 license has done very little of note in its
> history.  ( I didn't include 950 or 1330 or 1600 )
>
> Every other AM at one time was the most listened to station in the city as
> even WEZE 1260 was huge in the mid 60's before WJIB (96.9) came along and
> blew it away.
>
> Certainly 1150 must lead in call letter changes ( with 1510 right behind )
>
> In my lifetime only once did 1150 matter to most Bostonians. They were a
NBC
> station in the 60's and they had the rights to the 1967 World Series.
>
> Also remember 1150 fondly for Monitor in the 60's before the station
flipped
> to country.


From w1mnk@tampabay.rr.com  Mon Jan 28 19:14:57 2008
From: w1mnk@tampabay.rr.com (Jon Maguire)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:14:57 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <002101c86203$a1ed8160$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101c86203$a1ed8160$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <479E7001.50909@tampabay.rr.com>

1150 was WCOP thru 1975, when I left the engineering ranks. It was owned 
by Schering Plough.

Jon Maguire

Doug Drown wrote:
> I remember WEZE's glass-paneled streetside studio on Boylston Street from
> when I was a kid.  The station was proud of its NBC affiliation, and it was
> a major player in the Boston radio market.  For whatever
> in-hindsight-foolish reasons, WEZE dropped its NBC affiliation around 1965
> or so and WCOP picked it up.  I think by the time I was in college (1969)
> WCOP had been sold, changed its call letters, and Boston was bereft of NBC
> Radio.  That was the case until a few years later when WMEX became WITS,
> which didn't last long.  After the mid-'70s,  I don't remember Boston having
> an NBC outlet again until the early- to mid-'80s when WRKO signed on with
> the network.  It remained an affiliate until a couple of years into Westwood
> One ownership, when it picked up CBS after WEEI was sold.
>
> NBC really hasn't had a consistent presence in Boston since WBZ dropped it
> back in 1956.  And, of course, the network barely exists now, but that's
> another (sad) story . . .
>
> -Doug
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>
> To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:18 PM
> Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT
>
>
>   
>> With yet another format change on 1150 you have to look back at this
>>     
> station
>   
>> as being the worst performing AM in Boston history.
>>
>> When you consider the full time AM's to Boston  590, 680, 850, 1030, 1150,
>> 1260, and 1510  the 1150 license has done very little of note in its
>> history.  ( I didn't include 950 or 1330 or 1600 )
>>
>> Every other AM at one time was the most listened to station in the city as
>> even WEZE 1260 was huge in the mid 60's before WJIB (96.9) came along and
>> blew it away.
>>
>> Certainly 1150 must lead in call letter changes ( with 1510 right behind )
>>
>> In my lifetime only once did 1150 matter to most Bostonians. They were a
>>     
> NBC
>   
>> station in the 60's and they had the rights to the 1967 World Series.
>>
>> Also remember 1150 fondly for Monitor in the 60's before the station
>>     
> flipped
>   
>> to country.
>>     
>
>   

From revdoug1@verizon.net  Mon Jan 28 19:29:15 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:29:15 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101c86203$a1ed8160$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<479E7001.50909@tampabay.rr.com>
Message-ID: <003701c8620d$fbb502e0$6501a8c0@pastor2>

Jon: Thanks for the info.  I remember WCOP becoming WHUE, then WSNY.  Was the station still with NBC when you left?  And did Schering Plough still own the station when it did the format and call letter change?

-Doug
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jon Maguire 
  To: Doug Drown 
  Cc: Kevin Vahey ; Dan.Strassberg ; boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org 
  Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 7:14 PM
  Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC


  1150 was WCOP thru 1975, when I left the engineering ranks. It was owned by Schering Plough.

  Jon Maguire

  Doug Drown wrote: 
I remember WEZE's glass-paneled streetside studio on Boylston Street from
when I was a kid.  The station was proud of its NBC affiliation, and it was
a major player in the Boston radio market.  For whatever
in-hindsight-foolish reasons, WEZE dropped its NBC affiliation around 1965
or so and WCOP picked it up.  I think by the time I was in college (1969)
WCOP had been sold, changed its call letters, and Boston was bereft of NBC
Radio.  That was the case until a few years later when WMEX became WITS,
which didn't last long.  After the mid-'70s,  I don't remember Boston having
an NBC outlet again until the early- to mid-'80s when WRKO signed on with
the network.  It remained an affiliate until a couple of years into Westwood
One ownership, when it picked up CBS after WEEI was sold.

NBC really hasn't had a consistent presence in Boston since WBZ dropped it
back in 1956.  And, of course, the network barely exists now, but that's
another (sad) story . . .

-Doug




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:18 PM
Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT


  With yet another format change on 1150 you have to look back at this
    station
  as being the worst performing AM in Boston history.

When you consider the full time AM's to Boston  590, 680, 850, 1030, 1150,
1260, and 1510  the 1150 license has done very little of note in its
history.  ( I didn't include 950 or 1330 or 1600 )

Every other AM at one time was the most listened to station in the city as
even WEZE 1260 was huge in the mid 60's before WJIB (96.9) came along and
blew it away.

Certainly 1150 must lead in call letter changes ( with 1510 right behind )

In my lifetime only once did 1150 matter to most Bostonians. They were a
    NBC
  station in the 60's and they had the rights to the 1967 World Series.

Also remember 1150 fondly for Monitor in the 60's before the station
    flipped
  to country.
    
  

From kvahey@comcast.net  Mon Jan 28 21:22:20 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (kvahey@comcast.net)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:22:20 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <479E7001.50909@tampabay.rr.com>
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101c86203$a1ed8160$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<479E7001.50909@tampabay.rr.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801281822s2a9a3980m64bf78816f787df0@mail.gmail.com>

The WEZE studios were actually a block south of Boylston in the
Statler now Park Plaza office building. I was last there in 1972
visiting former WRKO jock Gary Martin when EZE went to a 50-50 format
(one current one oldie ) Gary was doing overnight before he vanished
completely. I suspect he is no longer on the planet. WEZE went
religion shortly afterwards I think.

I think Plough owned 1150 into the WACQ period beforeit was sold and
became WHUE in l979.

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Mon Jan 28 21:31:11 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:31:11 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101c86203$a1ed8160$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>

When I first arrived in Boston (OK, Cambridge) in late May of '56, WBZ
was in the throes of announcing its new all-local schedule as an
independent station (the terminology back then for non-network
affiliates): DeSuze, Dary, Egan, Marlowe, Prescott, Bassett, and
others whose names would ring a bell if you were to mention them. Dave
Maynard was not part of the initial lineup; I remember him joining WBZ
(from WORL 950) several months after the new schedule debuted.

WNAC 680 was the NBC Radio affiliate, but IIRC, it was affiliated with
another network as well and did not carry anything like the full NBC
Radio schedule. Since we know that the other network couldn't have
been CBS (because CBS was on its O&O, WEEI 590), it had to be either
ABC (as I recall, there was still only one ABC Radio network) or
Mutual. I think it was Mutual, but I'm not sure.

Now. was the Yankee Network still in existence in the summer of '56?
WNAC had been a long-time Yankee affiliate (in fact, it had been the
regional network's key station, as befitted the affiliate in the
largest city of the region the network served). Like most Yankee
affiliates, WNAC had carried Mutual as well. (Yankee was one of
several regional networks that were more or less part of Mutual.) If
WNAC remained a Yankee affiliate after becoming an NBC Radio
affiliate, it would have had to continue carrying Yankee news because
news was about the only programming--outside of the Mutual feed--that
Yankee provided and was probably the ONLY programming that Yankee
_originated_. My recollection is really fuzzy, but I think WNAC
dropped Yankee news and replaced it with NBC Radio news, while
continuing to carry Mutual's rntertainment product. If so, and if
Yankee continued to exist, it presumably moved (sans Mutual) to some
other Boston station. WCOP? Dunno. The natural would have been WEZE
1260 (by then, I believe, the _former_ WVDA), which was the same
facility that had been WNAC until around 1954, when General TeleRadio
bought WLAW 680 and moved WNAC to the big 50-kW 680 spot. WEZE might
have been the natural, but I don't think it did become the Yankee
affiliate, although I'm far from sure. I'm quite sure, though, that it
wasn't WHDH 850, which remained an independent as it always had been.

In that time frame (probably a little later) I seem to remember the
radio networks doing something they had never done before: if they
were unable to line up full-time stations as affiliates in major
markets, they would take on daytimers just to be able to clear some
network programming. That would have let WORL, WILD 1090, and WHIL
1430 into the game. It's even possible that, at some point, little
WTAO 740 carried one of the national network news services for a short
while.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>
To: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>; "Dan.Strassberg"
<dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 6:15 PM
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC


>I remember WEZE's glass-paneled streetside studio on Boylston Street
>from
> when I was a kid.  The station was proud of its NBC affiliation, and
> it was
> a major player in the Boston radio market.  For whatever
> in-hindsight-foolish reasons, WEZE dropped its NBC affiliation
> around 1965
> or so and WCOP picked it up.  I think by the time I was in college
> (1969)
> WCOP had been sold, changed its call letters, and Boston was bereft
> of NBC
> Radio.  That was the case until a few years later when WMEX became
> WITS,
> which didn't last long.  After the mid-'70s,  I don't remember
> Boston having
> an NBC outlet again until the early- to mid-'80s when WRKO signed on
> with
> the network.  It remained an affiliate until a couple of years into
> Westwood
> One ownership, when it picked up CBS after WEEI was sold.
>
> NBC really hasn't had a consistent presence in Boston since WBZ
> dropped it
> back in 1956.  And, of course, the network barely exists now, but
> that's
> another (sad) story . . .
>
> -Doug
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>
> To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:18 PM
> Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT
>
>
>> With yet another format change on 1150 you have to look back at
>> this
> station
>> as being the worst performing AM in Boston history.
>>
>> When you consider the full time AM's to Boston  590, 680, 850,
>> 1030, 1150,
>> 1260, and 1510  the 1150 license has done very little of note in
>> its
>> history.  ( I didn't include 950 or 1330 or 1600 )
>>
>> Every other AM at one time was the most listened to station in the
>> city as
>> even WEZE 1260 was huge in the mid 60's before WJIB (96.9) came
>> along and
>> blew it away.
>>
>> Certainly 1150 must lead in call letter changes ( with 1510 right
>> behind )
>>
>> In my lifetime only once did 1150 matter to most Bostonians. They
>> were a
> NBC
>> station in the 60's and they had the rights to the 1967 World
>> Series.
>>
>> Also remember 1150 fondly for Monitor in the 60's before the
>> station
> flipped
>> to country.
>


From xtrovato@yahoo.com  Mon Jan 28 21:53:59 2008
From: xtrovato@yahoo.com (Rob Trovato)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:53:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <804921.76287.qm@web35904.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


> Now. was the Yankee Network still in existence in
> the summer of '56?

There is an aircheck that makes the rounds of Ed
Miller on WRKO/WNAC the night before they went top 40.

He says something like "tomorrow don't forget to tune
in for the Now Sound..."

But he also says something about "all your favorite
Yankee Network programs" or something referring to the
Yankee Network.

That was 1967, right?




      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

From kvahey@comcast.net  Mon Jan 28 21:55:52 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (kvahey@comcast.net)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:55:52 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101c86203$a1ed8160$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801281855s18e24f1cjabed21c3a84c4ebd@mail.gmail.com>

Dan The Yankee Network was still on WNAC as late as the mid 60's as
they were still using Yankee Doodle as a news intro. It may well have
survived until the change to WRKO. I remember hearing the news intro
and Palmer Payne doing the news on a Portland station in the summer of
65. I am pretty certain that the Gus Saunders cooking show was fed on
the Yankee until WNAC died.

From dlh@donnahalper.com  Mon Jan 28 22:06:42 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:06:42 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <003701c8620d$fbb502e0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101c86203$a1ed8160$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<479E7001.50909@tampabay.rr.com>
	<003701c8620d$fbb502e0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <20080129030652.B05CC1C94EC@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>

At 07:29 PM 1/28/2008, Doug Drown wrote:
>Jon: Thanks for the info.  I remember WCOP becoming WHUE, then 
>WSNY.  Was the station still with NBC when you left?  And did 
>Schering Plough still own the station when it did the format and 
>call letter change?

 From my research, see if this helps (much info is from FRC, FCC, and 
newspapers).  Originally, the station was supposed to be WMFH.  Its 
original owner took ill and then dropped dead, which slowed things 
down.  Ultimately, the WCOP calls were obtained, and studios built in 
the Copley Plaza Hotel.

WCOP    Boston call letter history (originally 1120.  Moved to 1150 
by NARBA, 1941)

11/13/34  Granted a C.P. for a new station on 1120kc with 500 watts,
           Daytime, at Boston, Mass.  The first listed call letters
           were WMFH.  There were extensions of completion date.

7/23/35  The call letters are changed to WCOP.

  8/24/35  Granted Spec. Auth. to operate 6:45 to 9pm with 500 watts,
on 8/26/35, to broadcast the station's opening.

  9/17/35  Date first licensed.  The licensee was Joseph M. Kirby,
Boston, Mass.  He was granted 1120kc, 500 watts, Daytime.   [first 
broadcast is 26 Sept 1935]

5/28/36  Vol. assign. of lic. to Massachusetts Broadcasting Corp.

2/2/37  Vol. transfer of cont. of lic. corp. from Joseph M. Kirby,
(deceased) by Mary A. Kirby, Administratrix, to Arde Bulova.

11/26/40  Granted a C.P. for 1120kc, 500 watts, DA-N, unlimited.

3/24/41  Under NARBA, they were granted 1150kc, 500 watts, Daytime.

12/18/41  Granted a lic. to cover the C.P., as modified, for 1150kc,
500 watts, DA-N, unlimited.

10/9/44  Vol. transfer of cont. of lic. corp. from Arde Bulova and
Harold A. Lafount to Iowa Broadcasting Co., eff. 10/25/44.

3/20/46  Granted a C.P. for 1150kc, 5kw, DA-2, unlimited.  License
to cover the C.P. granted 8/26/46.

4/11/51  Vol. assign. of lic. to Cowles Broadcasting Co.,
effective 4/14/51.

12/5/51  Vol. assign. of lic. to T.B. Baker, Jr., A.G. Beaman and
Roy V. Whisnand, A Partnership, eff. 12/22/51.

5/26/54  Vol. assign. of lic. to Boston Post Publishing Co., effective 7/8/54.

5/3/56  Vol. assign. of lic. to Plough Broadcasting Corp.,
effective 5/10/56?

or ?12/17/62  Vol. assign. of lic. to Plough Broadcasting Co., 
Inc.,  eff. 12/31/62.?  (not sure why this is in the files twice, 
with 2 different dates)

12/9/70  Vol. transfer of cont. of lic. corp. from Plough, Inc. to
Schering-Plough Corp., eff. 1/15/71.

5/20/77  The call letters changed to WACQ.

6/3/77  New transmitter installed (RCA BTA-5L1).

12/21/78  Vol. assign. of lic. to GCC Communications of Boston, Inc.,
eff. 1/1/79.

1/1/79  The call letters changed to WHUE.

4/1/81  The call letters changed to WSNY. 

From dlh@donnahalper.com  Mon Jan 28 22:48:10 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:48:10 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <804921.76287.qm@web35904.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<804921.76287.qm@web35904.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20080129034820.58C3B1C94EC@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>

At 09:53 PM 1/28/2008, Rob Trovato wrote:

> > Now. was the Yankee Network still in existence in
> > the summer of '56?

Yankee Network breathed its last in February of 1967. 


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Mon Jan 28 23:08:49 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:08:49 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
References: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<804921.76287.qm@web35904.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<20080129034820.58C3B1C94EC@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
Message-ID: <007101c8622c$a7583cc0$6501a8c0@pastor2>

The Yankee Network ceased to exist when WNAC became WRKO.  IIRC, toward the
end, the network had two or three newscasts a day (with the "Yankee Doodle"
intro), plus it broadcast a Saturday evening religious program featuring the
evangelist Jack Wyrtzen.  Wyrtzen's ministry was part of my upbringing; he
had a decades-long association with the Yankee Network and, earlier, with
Mutual.

The question of WNAC's dual affiliation with NBC and Mutual in the late '50s
has to do with WNAC's ownership by General Tire and Rubber, which bought the
station from John Shepard in the late '40s, I think (I'd have to look up the
date; Donna would know right away).  Shepard had started the Yankee Network,
with WNAC as its flagship.  General Tire at one time owned Mutual as well as
several regional networks, of which Yankee became one.

I'm sure there's a list of former Yankee affiliates somewhere on the Net.  I
know Norman Knight's stations (WGIR, WEIM, WHEB, WSAR) were all affiliates,
by virtue of his former connection with WNAC.  I used to listen to Yankee
newscasts (and Wyrtzen's show) on WEIM.

Point of trivia: WNAC-TV 7's test pattern had the Yankee Network logo on it
long after the Yankee Network became defunct.

-Doug


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Donna Halper" <dlh@donnahalper.com>
To: "Rob Trovato" <xtrovato@yahoo.com>; "Dan.Strassberg"
<dan.strassberg@att.net>; "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>; "Kevin Vahey"
<kvahey@comcast.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 10:48 PM
Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC


> At 09:53 PM 1/28/2008, Rob Trovato wrote:
>
> > > Now. was the Yankee Network still in existence in
> > > the summer of '56?
>
> Yankee Network breathed its last in February of 1967.
>


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Mon Jan 28 23:12:14 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:12:14 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101c86203$a1ed8160$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<4fc429770801281855s18e24f1cjabed21c3a84c4ebd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <007901c8622d$23e06ce0$6501a8c0@pastor2>

<<I remember hearing the news intro and Palmer Payne doing the news on a
Portland station in the summer of 65. I am pretty certain that the Gus
Saunders cooking show was fed on the Yankee until WNAC died.>>

You're right --- Gus Saunders' Yankee Kitchen show was also on the Yankee
Network until the day of its demise.  I'd forgotten that.  I'm not sure all
the stations carried it, though.  And Palmer Payne was one of the last
anchors.  He remained with WRKO for some time after the format switch.

-Doug

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kvahey@comcast.net>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>; "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>;
<boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC


> Dan The Yankee Network was still on WNAC as late as the mid 60's as
> they were still using Yankee Doodle as a news intro. It may well have
> survived until the change to WRKO. I remember hearing the news intro
> and Palmer Payne doing the news on a Portland station in the summer of
> 65. I am pretty certain that the Gus Saunders cooking show was fed on
> the Yankee until WNAC died.


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Mon Jan 28 23:16:45 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:16:45 -0500
Subject: Yankee Network studios
Message-ID: <009a01c8622d$c2ffe620$6501a8c0@pastor2>

What has become of the old WNAC/Yankee Network building at 21 Brookline
Avenue?  (I don't get to Boston all that often anymore.)   -Doug



From dlh@donnahalper.com  Mon Jan 28 23:43:43 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:43:43 -0500
Subject: Yankee Network studios
In-Reply-To: <009a01c8622d$c2ffe620$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <009a01c8622d$c2ffe620$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <20080129044353.03412151C42@relay5.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>

At 11:16 PM 1/28/2008, Doug Drown wrote:
>What has become of the old WNAC/Yankee Network building at 21 Brookline
>Avenue?  (I don't get to Boston all that often anymore.)   -Doug

They were abandoned for many years.  Now I think the Hotel 
Buckminster (where the Yankee Network once had their studios) bought 
them up for a proposed expansion. 


From rac@gabrielmass.com  Mon Jan 28 23:56:15 2008
From: rac@gabrielmass.com (Richard Chonak)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:56:15 -0500
Subject: Yankee Network studios
In-Reply-To: <20080129044353.03412151C42@relay5.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
References: <009a01c8622d$c2ffe620$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<20080129044353.03412151C42@relay5.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
Message-ID: <479EB1EF.2080409@gabrielmass.com>

Donna Halper wrote:
> At 11:16 PM 1/28/2008, Doug Drown wrote:
>> What has become of the old WNAC/Yankee Network building at 21 Brookline
>> Avenue?  (I don't get to Boston all that often anymore.)   -Doug
> 
> They were abandoned for many years.  Now I think the Hotel Buckminster 
> (where the Yankee Network once had their studios) bought them up for a 
> proposed expansion.


If you'd like to see the current status of the neighborhood (more or 
less), see Google Maps, which has street-level photos of Brookline Ave.

--RC

From HeritageRadio@msn.com  Tue Jan 29 00:46:02 2008
From: HeritageRadio@msn.com (thomas heathwood)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:46:02 -0500
Subject: Boston Radio History
References: <mailman.1333.1201575253.644.boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Message-ID: <BLU120-DAV6458B019115BA284DEB9AB5350@phx.gbl>

We need Donna's help in getting down in print (in addition to her fine existing books) a comprehensive chronology of all Boston stations/frequencies over the years from the earlest years in the 20's through the current time.  Such a list would be voluminous, but should include Call letters, ownership,
On-Air dates, Ownership, Network affiliations and subsequent changes, locations of studios and transmitters, available online pictures, stories, etc.
Jerry Williams (who will be honored with a new book about his life soon to be released, had the best memory of anyone I knew about facts re: Boston radio from the mid-50's on.  Art Amadon was quite an historian on pre-50's Boston Radio,  Donna has filled in a lot of the rest.
Tom Heathwood 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: boston-radio-interest-request@tsornin.BostonRadio.org<mailto:boston-radio-interest-request@tsornin.BostonRadio.org> 
  To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org<mailto:boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org> 
  Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 9:54 PM
  Subject: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 12, Issue 31


  Send Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list submissions to
  boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org<mailto:boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>

  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
  http://lists.BostonRadio.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-radio-interest<http://lists.bostonradio.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-radio-interest>
  or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
  boston-radio-interest-request@lists.BostonRadio.org<mailto:boston-radio-interest-request@lists.BostonRadio.org>

  You can reach the person managing the list at
  boston-radio-interest-owner@lists.BostonRadio.org<mailto:boston-radio-interest-owner@lists.BostonRadio.org>

  When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
  than "Re: Contents of Boston-Radio-Interest digest..."

From HeritageRadio@msn.com  Tue Jan 29 00:48:20 2008
From: HeritageRadio@msn.com (thomas heathwood)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:48:20 -0500
Subject: Fw: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
Message-ID: <BLU120-DAV400FAF7ADA8DDA147AEA4B5350@phx.gbl>




When I was a teen intern at WCOP in the late 40's, it was an ABC Network station owned by Plough, Inc.  I believe this affiliation happened when they moved from the Copley Plaza Hotel to 485 Boylston Street (The New England Mutual Bldg.) into the most modern, spacious and beautifu; studios of ANY radio station in Boston.. It lost ABC in the next decade, but don't know what year. It had it's own "Hayloft Jamboree Network"
for a few years and originated local country shows both with live talent and record show formats.  The did really big country remote shows from
Boston Garden, Mechanics Hall and many other venues.  They also did local "record hops" for Pepsi Cola, who had sponsored a lot of the country programming.    Tom Heathwood
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dan.Strassberg<mailto:dan.strassberg@att.net> 
  To: Doug Drown<mailto:revdoug1@verizon.net> ; Kevin Vahey<mailto:kvahey@comcast.net> 
  Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org<mailto:boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org> 
  Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 9:31 PM
  Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC


  When I first arrived in Boston (OK, Cambridge) in late May of '56, WBZ
  was in the throes of announcing its new all-local schedule as an
  independent station (the terminology back then for non-network
  affiliates): DeSuze, Dary, Egan, Marlowe, Prescott, Bassett, and
  others whose names would ring a bell if you were to mention them. Dave
  Maynard was not part of the initial lineup; I remember him joining WBZ
  (from WORL 950) several months after the new schedule debuted.

  WNAC 680 was the NBC Radio affiliate, but IIRC, it was affiliated with
  another network as well and did not carry anything like the full NBC
  Radio schedule. Since we know that the other network couldn't have
  been CBS (because CBS was on its O&O, WEEI 590), it had to be either
  ABC (as I recall, there was still only one ABC Radio network) or
  Mutual. I think it was Mutual, but I'm not sure.

  Now. was the Yankee Network still in existence in the summer of '56?
  WNAC had been a long-time Yankee affiliate (in fact, it had been the
  regional network's key station, as befitted the affiliate in the
  largest city of the region the network served). Like most Yankee
  affiliates, WNAC had carried Mutual as well. (Yankee was one of
  several regional networks that were more or less part of Mutual.) If
  WNAC remained a Yankee affiliate after becoming an NBC Radio
  affiliate, it would have had to continue carrying Yankee news because
  news was about the only programming--outside of the Mutual feed--that
  Yankee provided and was probably the ONLY programming that Yankee
  _originated_. My recollection is really fuzzy, but I think WNAC
  dropped Yankee news and replaced it with NBC Radio news, while
  continuing to carry Mutual's rntertainment product. If so, and if
  Yankee continued to exist, it presumably moved (sans Mutual) to some
  other Boston station. WCOP? Dunno. The natural would have been WEZE
  1260 (by then, I believe, the _former_ WVDA), which was the same
  facility that had been WNAC until around 1954, when General TeleRadio
  bought WLAW 680 and moved WNAC to the big 50-kW 680 spot. WEZE might
  have been the natural, but I don't think it did become the Yankee
  affiliate, although I'm far from sure. I'm quite sure, though, that it
  wasn't WHDH 850, which remained an independent as it always had been.

  In that time frame (probably a little later) I seem to remember the
  radio networks doing something they had never done before: if they
  were unable to line up full-time stations as affiliates in major
  markets, they would take on daytimers just to be able to clear some
  network programming. That would have let WORL, WILD 1090, and WHIL
  1430 into the game. It's even possible that, at some point, little
  WTAO 740 carried one of the national network news services for a short
  while.

  -----
  Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net<mailto:dan.strassberg@att.net>)
  eFax 1-707-215-6367

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net<mailto:revdoug1@verizon.net>>
  To: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net<mailto:kvahey@comcast.net>>; "Dan.Strassberg"
  <dan.strassberg@att.net<mailto:dan.strassberg@att.net>>
  Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org<mailto:boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>>
  Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 6:15 PM
  Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC


  >I remember WEZE's glass-paneled streetside studio on Boylston Street
  >from
  > when I was a kid.  The station was proud of its NBC affiliation, and
  > it was
  > a major player in the Boston radio market.  For whatever
  > in-hindsight-foolish reasons, WEZE dropped its NBC affiliation
  > around 1965
  > or so and WCOP picked it up.  I think by the time I was in college
  > (1969)
  > WCOP had been sold, changed its call letters, and Boston was bereft
  > of NBC
  > Radio.  That was the case until a few years later when WMEX became
  > WITS,
  > which didn't last long.  After the mid-'70s,  I don't remember
  > Boston having
  > an NBC outlet again until the early- to mid-'80s when WRKO signed on
  > with
  > the network.  It remained an affiliate until a couple of years into
  > Westwood
  > One ownership, when it picked up CBS after WEEI was sold.
  >
  > NBC really hasn't had a consistent presence in Boston since WBZ
  > dropped it
  > back in 1956.  And, of course, the network barely exists now, but
  > that's
  > another (sad) story . . .
  >
  > -Doug
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > From: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net<mailto:kvahey@comcast.net>>
  > To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net<mailto:dan.strassberg@att.net>>
  > Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org<mailto:boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>>
  > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:18 PM
  > Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT
  >
  >
  >> With yet another format change on 1150 you have to look back at
  >> this
  > station
  >> as being the worst performing AM in Boston history.
  >>
  >> When you consider the full time AM's to Boston  590, 680, 850,
  >> 1030, 1150,
  >> 1260, and 1510  the 1150 license has done very little of note in
  >> its
  >> history.  ( I didn't include 950 or 1330 or 1600 )
  >>
  >> Every other AM at one time was the most listened to station in the
  >> city as
  >> even WEZE 1260 was huge in the mid 60's before WJIB (96.9) came
  >> along and
  >> blew it away.
  >>
  >> Certainly 1150 must lead in call letter changes ( with 1510 right
  >> behind )
  >>
  >> In my lifetime only once did 1150 matter to most Bostonians. They
  >> were a
  > NBC
  >> station in the 60's and they had the rights to the 1967 World
  >> Series.
  >>
  >> Also remember 1150 fondly for Monitor in the 60's before the
  >> station
  > flipped
  >> to country.
  >



From joe@attorneyross.com  Tue Jan 29 00:55:24 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:55:24 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>,
	<002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <479E797C.29958.6495F0@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 28 Jan 2008 at 21:31, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> WNAC 680 was the NBC Radio affiliate, but IIRC, it was affiliated with
> another network as well and did not carry anything like the full NBC
> Radio schedule. Since we know that the other network couldn't have
> been CBS (because CBS was on its O&O, WEEI 590), it had to be either
> ABC (as I recall, there was still only one ABC Radio network) or
> Mutual. I think it was Mutual, but I'm not sure.

It was.  The Yankee Network was a Mutual affiliate and supplied 
Mutual programming to its affiliates.  WLLH was also an affiliate of 
the Yankee and Mutual networks at that time.  
 
> Now. was the Yankee Network still in existence in the summer of '56?
> WNAC had been a long-time Yankee affiliate (in fact, it had been the
> regional network's key station, as befitted the affiliate in the
> largest city of the region the network served). Like most Yankee
> affiliates, WNAC had carried Mutual as well. (Yankee was one of
> several regional networks that were more or less part of Mutual.) If
> WNAC remained a Yankee affiliate after becoming an NBC Radio
> affiliate, it would have had to continue carrying Yankee news because
> news was about the only programming--outside of the Mutual feed--that
> Yankee provided and was probably the ONLY programming that Yankee
> _originated_. My recollection is really fuzzy, but I think WNAC
> dropped Yankee news and replaced it with NBC Radio news, while
> continuing to carry Mutual's rntertainment product. 

If I remember correctly, WNAC carried both Yankee Network and NBC 
news, at different parts of the hour.  I don't remember whether they 
carried Mutual news at any point during the day.

> If so, and if Yankee continued to exist, it presumably moved (sans
> Mutual) to some other Boston station. WCOP? Dunno. The natural
> would have been WEZE 1260 (by then, I believe, the _former_ WVDA),
> which was the same facility that had been WNAC until around 1954,
> when General TeleRadio bought WLAW 680 and moved WNAC to the big
> 50-kW 680 spot. WEZE might have been the natural, but I don't think
> it did become the Yankee affiliate, although I'm far from sure. I'm
> quite sure, though, that it wasn't WHDH 850, which remained an
> independent as it always had been. 

At some point, around 1957 or 1958, I believe, NBC changed its 
affiliation to 1260.  I think it may still have been WVDA when it 
became an NBC affiliate, but it continued an NBC affiliate as WEZE.  
I think at some point, a couple of years later, WEZE dropped most NBC 
programming other than the news.  For some reason, though, they 
continued to carry Groucho Marx's "You Bet Your Life" as long as it 
remained on NBC radio.
 
> In that time frame (probably a little later) I seem to remember the
> radio networks doing something they had never done before: if they
> were unable to line up full-time stations as affiliates in major
> markets, they would take on daytimers just to be able to clear some
> network programming. That would have let WORL, WILD 1090, and WHIL
> 1430 into the game. It's even possible that, at some point, little
> WTAO 740 carried one of the national network news services for a short
> while.
 
WTAO was an ABC affiliate for a number of years in the late 50s 
and/or early 60s.  Occasionally some ABC evening programming may also 
have been carried on WXHR (FM).  By that time, ABC was mainly a news 
service, but Don McNeal's Breakfast Club was still around, as was an 
early-evening children's show called "The Story Princess" on Saturday 
or Sunday.  The Story Princess was Arlene Dalton, who earlier 
appeared in that role on the Howdy Doody Show during 1955-56.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Tue Jan 29 00:55:25 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:55:25 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <20080129030652.B05CC1C94EC@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>,
	<003701c8620d$fbb502e0$6501a8c0@pastor2>,
	<20080129030652.B05CC1C94EC@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
Message-ID: <479E797D.3603.649880@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 28 Jan 2008 at 22:06, Donna Halper wrote:

> 1/1/79  The call letters changed to WHUE.
> 
> 4/1/81  The call letters changed to WSNY. 

I never understood the change to WSNY, since the station kept the 
beautiful music format during that time, along with the FM station, 
which continued to be WHUE (or WHUE-FM).  It wasn't long (a year at 
most, I think) before the AM became WHUE again.  

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Tue Jan 29 00:55:25 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:55:25 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <007101c8622c$a7583cc0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<007101c8622c$a7583cc0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <479E797D.17088.6499D8@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 28 Jan 2008 at 23:08, Doug Drown wrote:

> I'm sure there's a list of former Yankee affiliates somewhere on the
> Net.  I know Norman Knight's stations (WGIR, WEIM, WHEB, WSAR) were
> all affiliates, by virtue of his former connection with WNAC.  I used
> to listen to Yankee newscasts (and Wyrtzen's show) on WEIM.

And WLLH.
 
> Point of trivia: WNAC-TV 7's test pattern had the Yankee Network logo
> on it long after the Yankee Network became defunct.
 
I always wondered why it was there at all, since there wasn't a 
Yankee Network on television.  Or was there?

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Tue Jan 29 00:55:25 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:55:25 -0500
Subject: WHDH Children's Playhouse
Message-ID: <479E797D.2094.649B8D@joe.attorneyross.com>

While we're talking about 1950s and 1960s radio, does anyone know 
anything about "Children's Playhouse"?  It was a Sunday morning show 
on WHDH for many years, hosted by a woman named Robin.  I remember 
listening to it from sometime in the late 1940s, before we had a TV, 
until we moved to Albany in 1953, and again after we returned to the 
area in 1957.  I don't remember when I stopped listening or when it 
went off.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From dlh@donnahalper.com  Tue Jan 29 01:10:36 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 01:10:36 -0500
Subject: Boston Radio History
In-Reply-To: <BLU120-DAV6458B019115BA284DEB9AB5350@phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.1333.1201575253.644.boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
	<BLU120-DAV6458B019115BA284DEB9AB5350@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <20080129061046.9F2971CAEEF@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>

At 12:46 AM 1/29/2008, thomas heathwood wrote:
>We need Donna's help in getting down in print (in addition to her 
>fine existing books) a comprehensive chronology of all Boston 
>stations/frequencies over the years from the earlest years in the 
>20's through the current time.

I have an updated timeline of the first 20 years of greater Boston 
radio, plus a revised timeline of other decades, if anyone wants to 
see it.  And yes, it's time-consuming but I thought it ought to be 
done so that our history would in fact be preserved somewhere.


From martinjwaters@yahoo.com  Tue Jan 29 01:19:48 2008
From: martinjwaters@yahoo.com (Martin Waters)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:19:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <738410.42408.qm@web39104.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Dan Strassberg wrote:

      WNAC 680 was the NBC Radio affiliate, but IIRC,
it was affiliated with another network as well and did
not carry anything like the full NBC Radio schedule
... Now, was the Yankee Network still in existence in
the summer of '56? WNAC had been a long-time Yankee
affiliate (in fact, it had been the regional network's
key station, as befitted the affiliate in the largest
city of the region the network served). Like most
Yankee affiliates, WNAC had carried Mutual as well . .
.
---------------------------

    As was mentioned in the string, WNAC and the
Yankee Network were co-owned and married at the hip.
Yankee always originated from WNAC. I'm betting there
never was a period when Yankee was on another Boston
station. Just seems like it couldn't be. (Donna, can
you help here?).

   From 1963, when my memory starts, I recall Yankee
as running a 5-minute (I think) top-hour newscast
every second hour. WNAC did its own newscast on the
other hours and followed Yankee with 5 minutes of its
own. Some, or maybe all, the news announcers on Yankee
were also on WNAC -- and I can't recall if the same
announcer read both newscasts at the same hour on
WNAC.

   I recall that by that time at least, WEZE was the
NBC affiliate, although I think perhaps they did not
run Monitor on the weekends and maybe didn't clear
some other programming beyond the hourly news.

    I remember in Scituate listening to Monitor from
WCSH in Portland, which put in a near-local signal
daytime and a good signal nighttime. (Today, it's not
so good at night -- because, I imagine, the FCC has
licensed dozens of nighttime signals that interfere.)
But maybe I just listened to Monitor on WCSH because
its signal was so much better than WEZE's down there. 
And, again, I'd be very surprised to learn that WNAC
ever ran NBC news on the hour. 

   RKO General killed the Yankee Network the same day
it flipped WNAC to WRKO and top 40.

   Shepard/RKO General/WNAC also had a second regional
network, the Colonial Network, about which I know just
about nothing and don't remember ever hearing. It may
have been killed off earlier.

   Shepard started the Yankee Network, according to
the stories I have read (perhaps written by Donna!),
back in the '30s, when radio was still fighting with
newspapers about access to wire service news, etc.

    The news intro, up until the end -- and I think
always -- was a semi-subtle slap at the newspapers:
"News while it is news. The Yankee Network is on the
air."

-Marty Waters
 






From martinjwaters@yahoo.com  Tue Jan 29 01:32:28 2008
From: martinjwaters@yahoo.com (Martin Waters)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:32:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
Message-ID: <663803.6110.qm@web39112.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


Donna Halper helpfully provided, in the WCOP/1150
timeline she posted:

3/20/46  Granted a C.P. for 1150kc, 5kw, DA-2,
 unlimited.  License
to cover the C.P. granted 8/26/46.
--------------------------

    Does that coincide with WCOP moving to its present
transmitter site from the spot on Soldiers Field Road
that Westinghouse at just about that time purchased to
put up a building to house the radio and the TV
station it was in the process of getting ready to put
on the air (air date June 1948)?

    I've seen the WBZ location referred to as the
former WCOP transmitter site.

    Connected with this, I'm curious about the history
of the AM tower in the WBZ parking lot that's now the
10 kW backup for the main site in Hull. Is it,
perhaps, the leftover WCOP tower? That would mean it
also was there when the TV tower so famously fell over
onto the building around 1954. 

    That backup tower is amusing to see -- they have a
belt-and-suspenders thing going on there. It's a
self-supporting tire with guy wires anyway.

--Marty Waters 





From dlh@donnahalper.com  Tue Jan 29 01:39:06 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 01:39:06 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <738410.42408.qm@web39104.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<738410.42408.qm@web39104.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20080129063916.50C441C96C3@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>


>Martin said--
>
>     As was mentioned in the string, WNAC and the
>Yankee Network were co-owned and married at the hip.
>Yankee always originated from WNAC. I'm betting there
>never was a period when Yankee was on another Boston
>station. Just seems like it couldn't be. (Donna, can
>you help here?).

Yankee was on two stations for a while-- WNAC and then WAAB during 
the 1930s and very early 40s.  The late great John Shepard 3rd did 
the same thing with both stations that NBC did with Red and Blue-- he 
used WNAC for his important shows, and used WAAB (which had 
originally been WLEX in Lexington) as the place for new shows with no 
following, public service shows, religion, etc.  WAAB served that 
function till it moved to Worcester in late 1942.   


From kvahey@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 02:23:06 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 01:23:06 -0600
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <20080129063916.50C441C96C3@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
References: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<738410.42408.qm@web39104.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<20080129063916.50C441C96C3@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801282323x5a1a7fc6m93637558f00c4974@mail.gmail.com>

Donna was WAAB on 1440 in Boston before the move to Worcester?

I can confirm WTAO was on ABC in the early 60's. Their afternoon man Ray
Walker ( who also filled in at WHDH ) use do do a remote every Friday from
the Dunkin Donuts in Porter Sq.

Also in the early 60's WBOS was a Mutual affilate. I remember this from my
visit with Norm Ruby at the WBOS studios in Kenmore Sq who explained to a
young teen how ABC and Mutual shared the same telco line but WBOS could only
take Mutual programs.

From donald_astelle@yahoo.com  Tue Jan 29 02:26:40 2008
From: donald_astelle@yahoo.com (Don A)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 02:26:40 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>,
	<003701c8620d$fbb502e0$6501a8c0@pastor2>,
	<20080129030652.B05CC1C94EC@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
	<479E797D.3603.649880@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <00ab01c86248$8bf9a420$6501a8c0@default>


>> 4/1/81  The call letters changed to WSNY.
>
> I never understood the change to WSNY, since the station kept the
> beautiful music format during that time, along with the FM station,
> which continued to be WHUE.


I believe 1150AM became WSNY - "Sunny", because they were all vocal format 
(similar to Format41)...and what many other Beautiful Music FM's later 
became.  This was different from 100.7 which was virtually all instrumental. 


From paul@derrynh.net  Tue Jan 29 03:15:10 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:15:10 -0500
Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00e401c8624f$116884e0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

My father was a regular listener to 1-1-5-0...WCOP...in the late 60s (the
Country years)

And I actually listened to 1150 for a bit in the WACQ days (late 70s?) when
I had s**tbox cars w/o FM radios.....

-Paul H

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Kevin Vahey
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:18 PM
To: Dan.Strassberg
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT

With yet another format change on 1150 you have to look back at this station
as being the worst performing AM in Boston history.

When you consider the full time AM's to Boston  590, 680, 850, 1030, 1150,
1260, and 1510  the 1150 license has done very little of note in its
history.  ( I didn't include 950 or 1330 or 1600 )

Every other AM at one time was the most listened to station in the city as
even WEZE 1260 was huge in the mid 60's before WJIB (96.9) came along and
blew it away.

Certainly 1150 must lead in call letter changes ( with 1510 right behind )

In my lifetime only once did 1150 matter to most Bostonians. They were a NBC
station in the 60's and they had the rights to the 1967 World Series.

Also remember 1150 fondly for Monitor in the 60's before the station flipped
to country.


From paul@derrynh.net  Tue Jan 29 03:16:26 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:16:26 -0500
Subject: "Tony Bruno Show" On WWZN Ends
In-Reply-To: <20080128201653.C496211581F@ws1-7.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <00e501c8624f$3f41e280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

WGAM/WGHM have (to this point) also carried Tony Bruno, breaking from Fox
Sports Radio during that time of day...

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Laurence Glavin
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:17 PM
To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: "Tony Bruno Show" On WWZN Ends

According to radio-info.com, backed up by a message from Sporting News
Radio's website, Tony
Bruno has ended his association with that network.  Recently, WWZN-AM 1510
in Boston
dropped an hour-long informercial for "nutritional supplements" to pick up
the first hour
of Tony Bruno (although they run a locally-originated show during the last
hour of TB...oops
not a good abbreviation).  The message boards are humming like the chorus in
Puccini's 
"Madame Butterfly" about the possibility that this presages the demise of
the Sporting News
Radio Network!

-- 
Want an e-mail address like mine?
Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com!


From paul@derrynh.net  Tue Jan 29 03:16:26 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:16:26 -0500
Subject: "Tony Bruno Show" On WWZN Ends
In-Reply-To: <20080128201653.C496211581F@ws1-7.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <00e501c8624f$3f41e280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

WGAM/WGHM have (to this point) also carried Tony Bruno, breaking from Fox
Sports Radio during that time of day...

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Laurence Glavin
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:17 PM
To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: "Tony Bruno Show" On WWZN Ends

According to radio-info.com, backed up by a message from Sporting News
Radio's website, Tony
Bruno has ended his association with that network.  Recently, WWZN-AM 1510
in Boston
dropped an hour-long informercial for "nutritional supplements" to pick up
the first hour
of Tony Bruno (although they run a locally-originated show during the last
hour of TB...oops
not a good abbreviation).  The message boards are humming like the chorus in
Puccini's 
"Madame Butterfly" about the possibility that this presages the demise of
the Sporting News
Radio Network!

-- 
Want an e-mail address like mine?
Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com!


From paul@derrynh.net  Tue Jan 29 03:16:26 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:16:26 -0500
Subject: "Tony Bruno Show" On WWZN Ends
In-Reply-To: <20080128201653.C496211581F@ws1-7.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <00e501c8624f$3f41e280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

WGAM/WGHM have (to this point) also carried Tony Bruno, breaking from Fox
Sports Radio during that time of day...

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Laurence Glavin
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:17 PM
To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: "Tony Bruno Show" On WWZN Ends

According to radio-info.com, backed up by a message from Sporting News
Radio's website, Tony
Bruno has ended his association with that network.  Recently, WWZN-AM 1510
in Boston
dropped an hour-long informercial for "nutritional supplements" to pick up
the first hour
of Tony Bruno (although they run a locally-originated show during the last
hour of TB...oops
not a good abbreviation).  The message boards are humming like the chorus in
Puccini's 
"Madame Butterfly" about the possibility that this presages the demise of
the Sporting News
Radio Network!

-- 
Want an e-mail address like mine?
Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com!


From paul@derrynh.net  Tue Jan 29 03:20:49 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:20:49 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

If you think about it, WHOM is also currently licensed to a "non-political"
subdivision.

Mt. Washington is NOT actually a political subdivision in New Hampshire (I
want to say it's Sargent's Purchase...which even at that, is still
unincorporated).

I guess "common knowledge" of a location is sufficient for the FCC...

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Dan.Strassberg
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 4:34 PM
To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT

Well, Donna Halper will tell you that, somehow or other, WTTT traces
its heritage back to WGI and its predecessor whose calls I don't
recall (W1<something>). Since WBZ was licensed to Springfield for a
year or so after it first signed on--after which Westinghouse swapped
the WBZ calls from Springfield to Boston and the WBZA calls from
Boston to Springfield, WGI (if it were still around in a form
recognizable as WGI) might claim to have been Boston's first station.
As I understand it, WGI took to the air, one way or another, while WBZ
was still WBZA, and since WBZA no longer exists (although maybe some
unrelated station now has the calls), WGI might lay claim to having
been on the air first in Boston. Of course, you've never heard WTTT or
any of its predecessors boast about the lineage and it looks like a
safe bet that Radio Luz will never boast about it en Espanol. Donna is
probably the only living person who has researched the history of the
station. If she has the complete sequence of call sign changes (let
alone ownership, frequency, and CoL changes), it might not fit on one
page.

And come to think of it, there might be a problem with the above line
of reasoning. I believe that WGI was licensed to Medford or Medford
Hillside (never a real political subdivision, AFAIK). So since there
may have been a WBZ Springfield before there was a WGI Medford
Hillside and neither one was originally licensed to Boston, the
argument for WGI being first may be on shaky ground.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:18 PM
Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT


> With yet another format change on 1150 you have to look back at this
> station
> as being the worst performing AM in Boston history.
>
> When you consider the full time AM's to Boston  590, 680, 850, 1030,
> 1150,
> 1260, and 1510  the 1150 license has done very little of note in its
> history.  ( I didn't include 950 or 1330 or 1600 )
>
> Every other AM at one time was the most listened to station in the
> city as
> even WEZE 1260 was huge in the mid 60's before WJIB (96.9) came
> along and
> blew it away.
>
> Certainly 1150 must lead in call letter changes ( with 1510 right
> behind )
>
> In my lifetime only once did 1150 matter to most Bostonians. They
> were a NBC
> station in the 60's and they had the rights to the 1967 World
> Series.
>
> Also remember 1150 fondly for Monitor in the 60's before the station
> flipped
> to country.
>


From paul@derrynh.net  Tue Jan 29 03:25:18 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:25:18 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801281822s2a9a3980m64bf78816f787df0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00e701c86250$7c3939d0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

I remember listening to WEZE in its short-lived semi-pop incarnation. This
would be sometime after Feb 1972 when I moved to Randolph MA because I
recall listening to 'EZE after that time.

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
kvahey@comcast.net
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 9:22 PM
To: Jon Maguire
Cc: Dan.Strassberg; boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC

The WEZE studios were actually a block south of Boylston in the
Statler now Park Plaza office building. I was last there in 1972
visiting former WRKO jock Gary Martin when EZE went to a 50-50 format
(one current one oldie ) Gary was doing overnight before he vanished
completely. I suspect he is no longer on the planet. WEZE went
religion shortly afterwards I think.

I think Plough owned 1150 into the WACQ period beforeit was sold and
became WHUE in l979.


From paul@derrynh.net  Tue Jan 29 03:30:41 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:30:41 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <479E797D.3603.649880@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <00e801c86251$3ce7b3f0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

I thought WSNY was more of a "Music-of-your-life" format...

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
A. Joseph Ross
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 12:55 AM
To: Donna Halper
Cc: Dan.Strassberg; boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC

On 28 Jan 2008 at 22:06, Donna Halper wrote:

> 1/1/79  The call letters changed to WHUE.
> 
> 4/1/81  The call letters changed to WSNY. 

I never understood the change to WSNY, since the station kept the 
beautiful music format during that time, along with the FM station, 
which continued to be WHUE (or WHUE-FM).  It wasn't long (a year at 
most, I think) before the AM became WHUE again.  

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From raccoonradio@mail.com  Tue Jan 29 03:49:11 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:49:11 -0500
Subject: WTTT (or is it?)
Message-ID: <20080129084911.CB13983985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>

Boston Radio Watch says that Salem tried to make a go of conservative talk but the ratings and billings just
weren't there. A source is quoted saying that leased time on Salem Comm's WEZE made $2 million in 2006; leased time on their
WROL made $1 million the same year. WTTT, on the other hand, only made $200,000. So now they are leased
time, too, for "Radio Luz".

http://www.bostonradiowatch.com

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Tue Jan 29 07:52:33 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:52:33 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
References: <738410.42408.qm@web39104.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <003c01c86275$d2c746f0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>

I don't think I ever heard the Colonial Network but I'm pretty sure
that its key station was WAAB, which was co-owned with WNAC (and was a
very early AM diplex with WNAC from a Blaw-Knox diamond tower at a
site in Quincy or Milton, which might even be today's WMKI site). In
those days ('30s, probably), neither station was directional and WNAC
was the higher powered of the two. When the FCC outlawed duopolies
(1943, I believe), Shepard had the choice of selling one station
(obviously, it would be the lower powered WAAB) or moving one station
out of market. He chose the latter course, which is how WAAB wound up
in Worcester (now WVEI). Did the Colonial network die when WAAB moved
to Worcester? Dunno. Maybe. If it did not die then, what station was
the Boston affiliate after WAAB decamped? It's going to be harder to
get answers to these questions than it was to get answers about the
Yankee Network because so few people who are still living remember
the Colonial Network. I might remember it if I had lived in New
England during its lifetime, but I grew up in the Bronx, where I could
hear the Yankee Network on WICC Bridgeport, and I could also pick up
Class IV WNAB Bridgeport during the daytime, but I do not recall WNAB
being a Colonial Network affiliate.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Waters" <martinjwaters@yahoo.com>
To: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:19 AM
Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC


> Dan Strassberg wrote:
>
>      WNAC 680 was the NBC Radio affiliate, but IIRC,
> it was affiliated with another network as well and did
> not carry anything like the full NBC Radio schedule
> ... Now, was the Yankee Network still in existence in
> the summer of '56? WNAC had been a long-time Yankee
> affiliate (in fact, it had been the regional network's
> key station, as befitted the affiliate in the largest
> city of the region the network served). Like most
> Yankee affiliates, WNAC had carried Mutual as well . .
> .
> ---------------------------
>
>    As was mentioned in the string, WNAC and the
> Yankee Network were co-owned and married at the hip.
> Yankee always originated from WNAC. I'm betting there
> never was a period when Yankee was on another Boston
> station. Just seems like it couldn't be. (Donna, can
> you help here?).
>
>   From 1963, when my memory starts, I recall Yankee
> as running a 5-minute (I think) top-hour newscast
> every second hour. WNAC did its own newscast on the
> other hours and followed Yankee with 5 minutes of its
> own. Some, or maybe all, the news announcers on Yankee
> were also on WNAC -- and I can't recall if the same
> announcer read both newscasts at the same hour on
> WNAC.
>
>   I recall that by that time at least, WEZE was the
> NBC affiliate, although I think perhaps they did not
> run Monitor on the weekends and maybe didn't clear
> some other programming beyond the hourly news.
>
>    I remember in Scituate listening to Monitor from
> WCSH in Portland, which put in a near-local signal
> daytime and a good signal nighttime. (Today, it's not
> so good at night -- because, I imagine, the FCC has
> licensed dozens of nighttime signals that interfere.)
> But maybe I just listened to Monitor on WCSH because
> its signal was so much better than WEZE's down there.
> And, again, I'd be very surprised to learn that WNAC
> ever ran NBC news on the hour.
>
>   RKO General killed the Yankee Network the same day
> it flipped WNAC to WRKO and top 40.
>
>   Shepard/RKO General/WNAC also had a second regional
> network, the Colonial Network, about which I know just
> about nothing and don't remember ever hearing. It may
> have been killed off earlier.
>
>   Shepard started the Yankee Network, according to
> the stories I have read (perhaps written by Donna!),
> back in the '30s, when radio was still fighting with
> newspapers about access to wire service news, etc.
>
>    The news intro, up until the end -- and I think
> always -- was a semi-subtle slap at the newspapers:
> "News while it is news. The Yankee Network is on the
> air."
>
> -Marty Waters
>
>
>
>
>
>


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Tue Jan 29 08:28:36 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 08:28:36 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
References: <663803.6110.qm@web39112.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <004601c8627a$dc4746d0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>

Most likely, if the WBZ aux tower was used originally by WCOP (or
whatever its calls were then), it was one of a pair and its mate
ascended to the great broadcast history book in the sky when WBZ (AM
and TV) took over the site more than half a century ago. In other
words, when it was at that site, WCOP almost certainly used a
horizontal-wire antenna and like most such antennas, it was probably
suspended between two towers. Yes, there were horizontal-wire antennas
that used only one tower and the last of them in regular service is
still in use after a brief retirement a year or so ago, at KYPA 1230
in Los Angeles. Scott Fybush, who has photographed the KYPA antenna,
can probably explain the mechanics of how the antenna is suspended
from one tower. Actually, the WBZ aux tower itself must provide clues.
As I understand it (and Scott and others can confirm or correct), the
WBZ tower does not radiate (except incidentally). It acts only as a
support for one end of the horizontal antenna, which stretches from
the building to the tower. An interesting question for which Scott may
be able to provide an answer, is whether a ground system for the
horizontal-wire antenna exists beneath the tarmac of the WBZ parking
lot. Unlike ground systems for vertical MW antennas, ground systems
for horizontal-wire antennas obviously do not consist of radial wires
emanating from the tower base. I don't know what the typical ground
for a horizontal AM transmitting antenna looked like. Perhaps it was a
rectangular screen. Can anybody enlighten me?

I suspect that 1150's first and only DA is the one that still stands
at 75 Concord Ave in Lexington, which means that it dates only back to
1946--a mere 62 years. After looking at the building, which was in
horrendous shape until Greater Media rehabilitated it more than a
decade ago prior to the sale of 1150 to American Radio Systems (the
site and towers are still owned by ARS's successor, American Tower
Systems), I had assumed that it was built before World War II.
Imagine, though, only about six months elapsed between the grant of
the CP and the grant of a license! Does anyone think that, with all of
our modern technology, a three-tower DA could be built and tuned up so
quickly? Or is there more to the story? Were the building and towers
in place before the US entered the war? Did the station operate under
STA until the war ended?

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Waters" <martinjwaters@yahoo.com>
To: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:32 AM
Subject: WCOP & WBZ


>
> Donna Halper helpfully provided, in the WCOP/1150
> timeline she posted:
>
> 3/20/46  Granted a C.P. for 1150kc, 5kw, DA-2,
> unlimited.  License
> to cover the C.P. granted 8/26/46.
> --------------------------
>
>    Does that coincide with WCOP moving to its present
> transmitter site from the spot on Soldiers Field Road
> that Westinghouse at just about that time purchased to
> put up a building to house the radio and the TV
> station it was in the process of getting ready to put
> on the air (air date June 1948)?
>
>    I've seen the WBZ location referred to as the
> former WCOP transmitter site.
>
>    Connected with this, I'm curious about the history
> of the AM tower in the WBZ parking lot that's now the
> 10 kW backup for the main site in Hull. Is it,
> perhaps, the leftover WCOP tower? That would mean it
> also was there when the TV tower so famously fell over
> onto the building around 1954.
>
>    That backup tower is amusing to see -- they have a
> belt-and-suspenders thing going on there. It's a
> self-supporting tire with guy wires anyway.
>
> --Marty Waters
>
>
>
>


From w1mnk@tampabay.rr.com  Tue Jan 29 08:33:41 2008
From: w1mnk@tampabay.rr.com (Jon Maguire)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 08:33:41 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <007901c8622d$23e06ce0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>	<002101c86203$a1ed8160$6501a8c0@pastor2>	<002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>	<4fc429770801281855s18e24f1cjabed21c3a84c4ebd@mail.gmail.com>
	<007901c8622d$23e06ce0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <479F2B35.5000609@tampabay.rr.com>

Doug, Gus was doing his show on WCOP for part, if not all of my years 
there (1970-75). I used to occasionaly
check his remote equipment, and patch 'em him in at air time.

Jon Maguire (retiring from 30 years of IT with IBM, looking to get back 
into my first love, broadcast engineering :-)

Doug Drown wrote:
> <<I remember hearing the news intro and Palmer Payne doing the news on a
> Portland station in the summer of 65. I am pretty certain that the Gus
> Saunders cooking show was fed on the Yankee until WNAC died.>>
>
> You're right --- Gus Saunders' Yankee Kitchen show was also on the Yankee
> Network until the day of its demise.  I'd forgotten that.  I'm not sure all
> the stations carried it, though.  And Palmer Payne was one of the last
> anchors.  He remained with WRKO for some time after the format switch.
>
> -Doug
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <kvahey@comcast.net>
> To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> Cc: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>; "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>;
> <boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 9:55 PM
> Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
>
>
>   
>> Dan The Yankee Network was still on WNAC as late as the mid 60's as
>> they were still using Yankee Doodle as a news intro. It may well have
>> survived until the change to WRKO. I remember hearing the news intro
>> and Palmer Payne doing the news on a Portland station in the summer of
>> 65. I am pretty certain that the Gus Saunders cooking show was fed on
>> the Yankee until WNAC died.
>>     
>
>   

From revdoug1@verizon.net  Tue Jan 29 08:49:55 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 08:49:55 -0500
Subject: Colonial Network
Message-ID: <00e501c8627d$d5144a90$6501a8c0@pastor2>

This is a 1936 list of Colonial affiliates, taken from BRI's own website
(Donna's work, I suspect):  WAAB, WRDO, WLBZ, WICC, WSAR, WTHT (Hartford,
now WPOP), WLNH, WLLH, WFEA, WNBH, WNLC, WEAN, WSPR, and WBRY.

It's curious that WCSH wasn't included, as Maine Broadcasting owned WCSH,
WLBZ, WRDO and WFEA at the time.

WNAC, WAAB and WEAN were all owned by Shepard.

I don't know whether Colonial died when WAAB moved to Worcester (Donna -?),
but I do know that Shepard II continued to own WAAB for several years after
the move.  I visited WAAB's 34 Mechanic Street studios once when I was a
teen, during the time Atlantic Records owned the station.  Niiiiice digs,
and aside from modernized equipment, pretty much unchanged from the Shepard
years.  In fact, the original WAAB logo, in Yankee/Colonial's unique art
deco typeface, still appeared over the main door.

-Doug


From brian_vita@cssinc.com  Tue Jan 29 09:30:46 2008
From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 09:30:46 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <479E797D.3603.649880@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>,
	<003701c8620d$fbb502e0$6501a8c0@pastor2>,
	<20080129030652.B05CC1C94EC@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
	<479E797D.3603.649880@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <479F3896.2030708@cssinc.com>

Bit of trivia, GCC Communications was actually General Cinema Corp 
(formerly Midwest Drive-Ins) out of Chestnut Hill.  At one point, in 
addition to being one of the largest chains of cinemas, they were also 
the largest distributor of Pepsi.  They started radio and, I believe, a 
billboard division at the same time expanding their cinema chain.  The 
outside businesses never really worked nor did they know what to do with 
them.  They expanded themselves into oblivion sometime in the mid 90's.

Brian


A. Joseph Ross wrote:
> On 28 Jan 2008 at 22:06, Donna Halper wrote:
>
>   
>> 1/1/79  The call letters changed to WHUE.
>>
>> 4/1/81  The call letters changed to WSNY. 
>>     
>
> I never understood the change to WSNY, since the station kept the 
> beautiful music format during that time, along with the FM station, 
> which continued to be WHUE (or WHUE-FM).  It wasn't long (a year at 
> most, I think) before the AM became WHUE again.  
>
>   


From wollman@bimajority.org  Tue Jan 29 09:33:50 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 09:33:50 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <18335.14670.334060.767504@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:20:49 -0500, "Paul Hopfgarten" <paul@derrynh.net> said:

> If you think about it, WHOM is also currently licensed to a "non-political"
> subdivision.

> Mt. Washington is NOT actually a political subdivision in New Hampshire (I
> want to say it's Sargent's Purchase...which even at that, is still
> unincorporated).

> I guess "common knowledge" of a location is sufficient for the FCC...

The FCC generally prefers incorporated municipalities, and if pressed
will accept a "Census-defined place" (particularly in southern states
where municipalities ae in short supply).  They don't believe our
towns really exist, because the Census Bureau conflates them with
midwestern townships.

For allocations purposes today, there is something called "/Tuck/
analysis" which is supposed to demonstrate that the proposed community
is a real community.  The commission was much more lax in the days of
yore when they could hardly give away FM licenses.

-GAWollman

From wollman@bimajority.org  Tue Jan 29 09:49:33 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 09:49:33 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <479F3896.2030708@cssinc.com>
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>
	<003701c8620d$fbb502e0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<20080129030652.B05CC1C94EC@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
	<479E797D.3603.649880@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<479F3896.2030708@cssinc.com>
Message-ID: <18335.15613.974487.922889@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 09:30:46 -0500, Brian Vita <brian_vita@cssinc.com> said:

> Bit of trivia, GCC Communications was actually General Cinema Corp 
> (formerly Midwest Drive-Ins) out of Chestnut Hill.  At one point, in 
> addition to being one of the largest chains of cinemas, they were also 
> the largest distributor of Pepsi.  They started radio and, I believe, a 
> billboard division at the same time expanding their cinema chain.  

Notably, in 1991, they purchased the textbook publisher Harcourt,
Brace, Jovanovich, after which time the company was known as Harcourt
General.  My publishing-history timeline shows:

1919:Harcourt, Brace \& Co. established by former Henry Holt employees.
1969:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich acquires Academic Press.
1975:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich acquires Pyramid Books, renames to Jove.
1979:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich sells Jove to Putnam Berkley Group.
1987:CBS sells Holt, Rinehart \& Winston and W.B. Saunders to Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
1991:General Cinema acquires Harcourt, Brace \& Co.
1992-07-03:General Cinema changes name to Harcourt General.
1993:Harcourt General spins off General Cinema.
1994-11-01:Harcourt General sells insurance business to GE.
1997:Harcourt General acquires Churchill Livingstone from Pearson.
1997-06-10:Harcourt General acquires controlling interest in Steck-Vaughn.
1998:Harcourt General acquires Morgan Kaufmann.
1998-09-09:Harcourt General acquires medical publisher Mosby.
1999-10-22:Harcourt General spins off Neiman-Marcus.
2000-06-19:Harcourt General announces plans to "explore strategic
alternatives".
2000-10-27:Reed Elsevier announces takeover offer for Harcourt
General, with Higher Education division to be sold to Thomson;
Harcourt board recommands acceptance.
2001-07-11:Reed Elsevier acquires Harcourt General.
2001-07-11:Thomson acquires Harcourt Higher Education from Reed Elsevier.

-GAWollman

From scott@fybush.com  Tue Jan 29 12:05:46 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 12:05:46 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <004601c8627a$dc4746d0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
References: <663803.6110.qm@web39112.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<004601c8627a$dc4746d0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <479F5CEA.3080404@fybush.com>

Dan.Strassberg wrote:
> Most likely, if the WBZ aux tower was used originally by WCOP (or
> whatever its calls were then), it was one of a pair and its mate
> ascended to the great broadcast history book in the sky when WBZ (AM
> and TV) took over the site more than half a century ago. 

The WBZ aux tower was NOT a leftover from WCOP. By 1934-35, vertical 
antenna technology was becoming fairly commonplace, and I'm reasonably 
certain WCOP's tower was a vertical one.

I know that when the WBZ building was being expanded on the east side 
(toward the old Ground Round building and the helipad) in 1995, they 
found the concrete footings for a tower as they were excavating.

The WBZ aux tower that now stands on the west side of the building 
arrived in 1951 as a backup tower for WBZ-TV. It was apparently shipped 
to Allston from Pittsburgh, where it had been a tower for the first 
incarnation of KDKA-FM, which went silent pretty early on.

s

From kvahey@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 12:14:32 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:14:32 -0600
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <479F5CEA.3080404@fybush.com>
References: <663803.6110.qm@web39112.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<004601c8627a$dc4746d0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<479F5CEA.3080404@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801290914s262bd413t83aab1f8f8202a33@mail.gmail.com>

It should also be remembered that where 1170 SFR was built was considered
semi-rural for Boston up until 1960. Across the street from WBZ was a horse
farm and training track.

Now nthe one thing that burns me about current WBZ management is they they
call the complex the BRIGHTON studios. It is EAST of Everett St so it is in
ALLSTON.


On 1/29/08, Scott Fybush <scott@fybush.com> wrote:
>
> Dan.Strassberg wrote:
> > Most likely, if the WBZ aux tower was used originally by WCOP (or
> > whatever its calls were then), it was one of a pair and its mate
> > ascended to the great broadcast history book in the sky when WBZ (AM
> > and TV) took over the site more than half a century ago.
>
> The WBZ aux tower was NOT a leftover from WCOP. By 1934-35, vertical
> antenna technology was becoming fairly commonplace, and I'm reasonably
> certain WCOP's tower was a vertical one.
>
> I know that when the WBZ building was being expanded on the east side
> (toward the old Ground Round building and the helipad) in 1995, they
> found the concrete footings for a tower as they were excavating.
>
> The WBZ aux tower that now stands on the west side of the building
> arrived in 1951 as a backup tower for WBZ-TV. It was apparently shipped
> to Allston from Pittsburgh, where it had been a tower for the first
> incarnation of KDKA-FM, which went silent pretty early on.
>
> s
>

From raccoonradio@mail.com  Tue Jan 29 12:51:39 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 12:51:39 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
Message-ID: <20080129175139.827B783985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>

I knew about General Cinema and their ownership of WHUE. They had a theatre in Peabody and
before the show they'd have an animation of their logo, a G, C, and C, that looked like a projector (the
C's being the film reel and takeup reel). As a beautiful music station on 100.7 and 1150,
the ads in the paper read "Beautiful Music for YOU" (apparently we were to pronounce
the "HUE" as "YOU"...)

You can see that GCC logo here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonrev/1003637900/
`





From kvahey@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 13:02:12 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 12:02:12 -0600
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <20080129175139.827B783985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
References: <20080129175139.827B783985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801291002u4fd7783cj15e21d0cd1de235@mail.gmail.com>

General Cinema used some clout to get WHUE some product placement in the
Burt Reynolds movie STARTING OVER (1979)

Reynolds boards a MBTA bus in Brighton with a huge WHUE ad on the side of
the bus.

From kvahey@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 13:04:54 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 12:04:54 -0600
Subject: Prayers for Jefferson Kaye
Message-ID: <4fc429770801291004g22bac658q906d8ed554c1f841@mail.gmail.com>

I am in Phoenix working as a tech for the Super Bowl and word has filtered
in that longtime voice of NFL Films ( and former WBZ and WKBW announcer )
Jeff Kaye can no longer work and is very ill with throat cancer.

Prayers for Jeff

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Tue Jan 29 13:09:56 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 13:09:56 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
References: <20080129175139.827B783985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com>
Message-ID: <000901c862a2$29b34e60$47eca644@SatU205S5044>

If you noticed, the two Cs in the GCC logo rotated in opposite
directions, so instead of acting as a takeup reel for the film from
the upper C, the lower C spilled the film on the floor, where it must
have created an incredible mess. No doubt the film became so tangled
it would never again pass through the projector without causing a jam.
One often hears that companies get into financial trouble when they
neglect or forget about the fundamentals of their business. Certainly,
if you run movie theaters, knowing how to thread a projector is one of
those fundamentals. Maybe in this age of digital delivery of
theatrical films, the same fundamentals no longer apply. Therefore,
maybe a resurrected GCC could make it in this new age;>)

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Nelson" <raccoonradio@mail.com>
To: "Brian Vita" <brian_vita@cssinc.com>; "A. Joseph Ross"
<joe@attorneyross.com>
Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
<boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 12:51 PM
Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC


I knew about General Cinema and their ownership of WHUE. They had a
theatre in Peabody and
before the show they'd have an animation of their logo, a G, C, and C,
that looked like a projector (the
C's being the film reel and takeup reel). As a beautiful music station
on 100.7 and 1150,
the ads in the paper read "Beautiful Music for YOU" (apparently we
were to pronounce
the "HUE" as "YOU"...)

You can see that GCC logo here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonrev/1003637900/
`





From dlh@donnahalper.com  Tue Jan 29 13:11:52 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 13:11:52 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801282323x5a1a7fc6m93637558f00c4974@mail.gmail.co
 m>
References: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<738410.42408.qm@web39104.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<20080129063916.50C441C96C3@relay3.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
	<4fc429770801282323x5a1a7fc6m93637558f00c4974@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20080129181202.AF03C680C00@relay5.relay.iad.emailsrvr.com>

At 02:23 AM 1/29/2008, Kevin Vahey wrote:
>Donna was WAAB on 1440 in Boston before the move to Worcester?

They were actually at 1410 before NARBA moved everyone's dial position in 1941. 


From dlh@donnahalper.com  Tue Jan 29 13:14:15 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 13:14:15 -0500
Subject: Prayers for Jefferson Kaye
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801291004g22bac658q906d8ed554c1f841@mail.gmail.co
 m>
References: <4fc429770801291004g22bac658q906d8ed554c1f841@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20080129181425.30E7E680BA1@relay5.relay.iad.emailsrvr.com>

At 01:04 PM 1/29/2008, Kevin Vahey wrote:
>I am in Phoenix working as a tech for the Super Bowl and word has filtered
>in that longtime voice of NFL Films ( and former WBZ and WKBW announcer )
>Jeff Kaye can no longer work and is very ill with throat cancer.

Wow-- he was my favourite d.j.  when I was growing up.  I loved 
"Hootenanny" on WBZ on Sunday nights.  Anyone know how to send him a 
get well card? 


From kvahey@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 13:21:17 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 12:21:17 -0600
Subject: Prayers for Jefferson Kaye
In-Reply-To: <20080129181425.30E7E680BA1@relay5.relay.iad.emailsrvr.com>
References: <4fc429770801291004g22bac658q906d8ed554c1f841@mail.gmail.com>
	<20080129181425.30E7E680BA1@relay5.relay.iad.emailsrvr.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801291021o40a54401v9bd28706644074b0@mail.gmail.com>

The address i was given
Jeff Kaye
% NFL Films
1 NFL Plaza
Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054


On 1/29/08, Donna Halper <dlh@donnahalper.com> wrote:
>
> At 01:04 PM 1/29/2008, Kevin Vahey wrote:
> >I am in Phoenix working as a tech for the Super Bowl and word has
> filtered
> >in that longtime voice of NFL Films ( and former WBZ and WKBW announcer )
> >Jeff Kaye can no longer work and is very ill with throat cancer.
>
> Wow-- he was my favourite d.j.  when I was growing up.  I loved
> "Hootenanny" on WBZ on Sunday nights.  Anyone know how to send him a
> get well card?
>
>

From lspin@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 13:22:48 2008
From: lspin@comcast.net (Lou)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 13:22:48 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <00e701c86250$7c3939d0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <4fc429770801281822s2a9a3980m64bf78816f787df0@mail.gmail.com>
	<00e701c86250$7c3939d0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <000b01c862a3$f4e26c50$dea744f0$@net>

WEZE also had a shorter incarnation in the later 70s with Clark Smidt's
"AlbuM 1260."  It was progressive, soft rock on AM radio.

-Lou


-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Paul Hopfgarten
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 3:25 AM
Subject: RE: WEZE, WCOP and NBC

I remember listening to WEZE in its short-lived semi-pop incarnation. This
would be sometime after Feb 1972 when I moved to Randolph MA because I
recall listening to 'EZE after that time.

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
kvahey@comcast.net
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 9:22 PM
To: Jon Maguire
Cc: Dan.Strassberg; boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC

The WEZE studios were actually a block south of Boylston in the
Statler now Park Plaza office building. I was last there in 1972
visiting former WRKO jock Gary Martin when EZE went to a 50-50 format
(one current one oldie ) Gary was doing overnight before he vanished
completely. I suspect he is no longer on the planet. WEZE went
religion shortly afterwards I think.

I think Plough owned 1150 into the WACQ period beforeit was sold and
became WHUE in l979.


From hykker@wildblue.net  Tue Jan 29 14:04:46 2008
From: hykker@wildblue.net (Steve Ordinetz)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:04:46 -0500 (EST)
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <00e701c86250$7c3939d0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <4fc429770801281822s2a9a3980m64bf78816f787df0@mail.gmail.com>
	<00e701c86250$7c3939d0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <22121.63.118.166.2.1201633486.squirrel@webmail.wildblue.net>

> The WEZE studios were actually a block south of Boylston in the
> Statler now Park Plaza office building. I was last there in 1972
> visiting former WRKO jock Gary Martin when EZE went to a 50-50 format
> (one current one oldie ) Gary was doing overnight before he vanished
> completely. I suspect he is no longer on the planet.

Well, he didn't vanish right away.  Wasn't he at WCGY in the early-mid 80s?


From Joe@attorneyross.com  Tue Jan 29 14:30:52 2008
From: Joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:30:52 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801290914s262bd413t83aab1f8f8202a33@mail.gmail.com>
References: <663803.6110.qm@web39112.mail.mud.yahoo.com>,
	<479F5CEA.3080404@fybush.com>,
	<4fc429770801290914s262bd413t83aab1f8f8202a33@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <479F389C.25990.1C78C1@Joe.attorneyross.com>

On 29 Jan 2008 Kevin Vahey wrote:

> Now nthe one thing that burns me about current WBZ management is they
> they call the complex the BRIGHTON studios. It is EAST of Everett St
> so it is in ALLSTON.

Allston was part of the former town of Brighton, which was annexed to 
Boston sometime in the 1970s.  There never was a separate town of 
Allston.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                   617.367.0468
92 State Street, Suite 700            Fax: 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           http://www.attorneyross.com



From Joe@attorneyross.com  Tue Jan 29 14:30:52 2008
From: Joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:30:52 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <479F5CEA.3080404@fybush.com>
References: <663803.6110.qm@web39112.mail.mud.yahoo.com>,
	<004601c8627a$dc4746d0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<479F5CEA.3080404@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <479F389C.11424.1C7806@Joe.attorneyross.com>

On 29 Jan 2008 Scott Fybush wrote:

> The WBZ aux tower that now stands on the west side of the building
> arrived in 1951 as a backup tower for WBZ-TV. It was apparently
> shipped to Allston from Pittsburgh, where it had been a tower for the
> first incarnation of KDKA-FM, which went silent pretty early on.

It had to be earlier than 1951.  I remember seeing both towers when 
we moved to Allston in 1949. 

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                   617.367.0468
92 State Street, Suite 700            Fax: 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           http://www.attorneyross.com



From scott@fybush.com  Tue Jan 29 14:35:10 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:35:10 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <479F389C.11424.1C7806@Joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <663803.6110.qm@web39112.mail.mud.yahoo.com>,
	<004601c8627a$dc4746d0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<479F5CEA.3080404@fybush.com>
	<479F389C.11424.1C7806@Joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <479F7FEE.8060306@fybush.com>

A. Joseph Ross wrote:
> On 29 Jan 2008 Scott Fybush wrote:
> 
>> The WBZ aux tower that now stands on the west side of the building
>> arrived in 1951 as a backup tower for WBZ-TV. It was apparently
>> shipped to Allston from Pittsburgh, where it had been a tower for the
>> first incarnation of KDKA-FM, which went silent pretty early on.
> 
> It had to be earlier than 1951.  I remember seeing both towers when 
> we moved to Allston in 1949. 
> 

The ASR record for the tower (#1003434) claims it was built in 1950. 
Those records are often somewhat inaccurate, so I'd take it with a grain 
of salt:

http://fccinfo.com/CMDProASRLookup.php?tabSearchType=ASR+Search&sASR=1003434

s

From brian_vita@cssinc.com  Tue Jan 29 15:10:30 2008
From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:10:30 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <000901c862a2$29b34e60$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <000701c862b3$82c84490$6400a8c0@lysthia>

Actually in a typical 35mm projector that still uses reels, the upper feed
reel runs counterclockwise, the takeup reel below runs clockwise.  In Europe
they both run clockwise.  Very few theatres actually still use reels,
however.

------------------------------------
Cinema Service & Supply, Inc.
Brian Vita
President
brian_vita@cssinc.com
77 Walnut St - Ste 4
Peabody, MA  01960-5691
tel: 978-538-7575
tel2:(800)231-8849
fax: 978-538-7550
IM: btvita@hotmail.com
www.cssinc.com
AIM: btvita
------------------------------------


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan.Strassberg [mailto:dan.strassberg@att.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:10 PM
> To: Bob Nelson; Brian Vita; A. Joseph Ross
> Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org
> Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
> 
> 
> If you noticed, the two Cs in the GCC logo rotated in 
> opposite directions, so instead of acting as a takeup reel 
> for the film from the upper C, the lower C spilled the film 
> on the floor, where it must have created an incredible mess. 
> No doubt the film became so tangled it would never again pass 
> through the projector without causing a jam. One often hears 
> that companies get into financial trouble when they neglect 
> or forget about the fundamentals of their business. 
> Certainly, if you run movie theaters, knowing how to thread a 
> projector is one of those fundamentals. Maybe in this age of 
> digital delivery of theatrical films, the same fundamentals 
> no longer apply. Therefore, maybe a resurrected GCC could 
> make it in this new age;>)
> 
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Bob Nelson" <raccoonradio@mail.com>
> To: "Brian Vita" <brian_vita@cssinc.com>; "A. Joseph Ross" 
> <joe@attorneyross.com>
> Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>; 
> <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 12:51 PM
> Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
> 
> 
> I knew about General Cinema and their ownership of WHUE. They 
> had a theatre in Peabody and before the show they'd have an 
> animation of their logo, a G, C, and C, that looked like a 
> projector (the C's being the film reel and takeup reel). As a 
> beautiful music station on 100.7 and 1150, the ads in the 
> paper read "Beautiful Music for YOU" (apparently we were to 
> pronounce the "HUE" as "YOU"...)
> 
> You can see that GCC logo here: 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonrev/1003637900/
> `
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.15/1249 - Release 
> Date: 1/29/2008 9:51 AM
> 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.15/1249 - Release Date: 1/29/2008
9:51 AM
 


From raccoonradio@mail.com  Tue Jan 29 15:44:44 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:44:44 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
Message-ID: <20080129204444.A838B49B6BE@ws1-3a.us4.outblaze.com>

Good eye! Here's what I was talking about, complete with that famed
backing music

http://youtube.com/watch?v=nZVfA2tJRXc

>>If you noticed, the two Cs in the GCC logo rotated in opposite
directions, so instead of acting as a takeup reel for the film from
the upper C, the lower C spilled the film on the floor, where it must
have created an incredible mess. 

I have some movie theatre horror stories: When I saw Robin Williams
in "Cadillac Man" the film broke (can't remember if they had a spare
copy or if we had to come back to see it again later). And at the
Sack/Sony/whatever in Danvers, at the first showing of "Born on
The Fourth of July", after 20 minutes the film suddenly turned into
something about giant worms. Turned out the second reel was from
a forthcoming sci-fi movie, "Tremors", and it was distorted because
one film was 70mm and one was 35, I believe...We got refunds and
I saw the whole film a couple days later.

From raccoonradio@mail.com  Tue Jan 29 15:47:38 2008
From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:47:38 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
Message-ID: <20080129204738.A446C49B6BE@ws1-3a.us4.outblaze.com>

Ah! The same film shot a scene at the Building 19 in Lynn (where I would later work, 1981). He's
seen pushing a shopping cart around and near the service desk and I could hear the voice of
one of my (future) co-workers, Eva DeLeon, over the loudspeaker. I was told it took them
quite awhile to film what wound up being 1 minute of the movie.



From wollman@bimajority.org  Tue Jan 29 16:18:06 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:18:06 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <479F389C.25990.1C78C1@Joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <663803.6110.qm@web39112.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<479F5CEA.3080404@fybush.com>
	<4fc429770801290914s262bd413t83aab1f8f8202a33@mail.gmail.com>
	<479F389C.25990.1C78C1@Joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <18335.38926.676098.217672@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:30:52 -0500, "A. Joseph Ross" <Joe@attorneyross.com> said:

> Allston was part of the former town of Brighton, which was annexed to 
> Boston sometime in the 1970s.  There never was a separate town of 
> Allston.

1970s?!  Try 1870s, Joe.  (That always-reliable source of
authoritative geographic information, Wikipedia, puts it at a
reassuringly exact Januay, 1874.)

-GAWollman


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Tue Jan 29 16:44:55 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:44:55 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
References: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<007101c8622c$a7583cc0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<479E797D.17088.6499D8@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <016901c862c0$30be7450$6501a8c0@pastor2>

> Point of trivia: WNAC-TV 7's test pattern had the Yankee Network logo
> on it long after the Yankee Network became defunct.

<<I always wondered why it was there at all, since there wasn't a
Yankee Network on television.  Or was there?>>

I can't answer that except to say that if it did exist, I don't remember it
at all, and I can remember Boston television back to about 1954.  I'm
wondering --- perhaps Donna can help us out  here --- whether the name of
Shepard's parent company for WNAC
and WNAC-TV may have been The Yankee Network, Inc., or something along those
lines.  If that were the case, it would explain the logo on the test
pattern --- General Teleradio/RKO General simply retained it, maybe as a tip
of the hat to history.

-Doug




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
To: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 12:55 AM
Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC


> On 28 Jan 2008 at 23:08, Doug Drown wrote:
>
> > I'm sure there's a list of former Yankee affiliates somewhere on the
> > Net.  I know Norman Knight's stations (WGIR, WEIM, WHEB, WSAR) were
> > all affiliates, by virtue of his former connection with WNAC.  I used
> > to listen to Yankee newscasts (and Wyrtzen's show) on WEIM.
>
> And WLLH.
>
> > Point of trivia: WNAC-TV 7's test pattern had the Yankee Network logo
> > on it long after the Yankee Network became defunct.
>
> I always wondered why it was there at all, since there wasn't a
> Yankee Network on television.  Or was there?
>
> -- 
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
>  92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004                    http://www.attorneyross.com
>
>


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Tue Jan 29 16:47:07 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:47:07 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
References: <663803.6110.qm@web39112.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<479F5CEA.3080404@fybush.com>
	<4fc429770801290914s262bd413t83aab1f8f8202a33@mail.gmail.com>
	<479F389C.25990.1C78C1@Joe.attorneyross.com>
	<18335.38926.676098.217672@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <016f01c862c0$8210ef90$6501a8c0@pastor2>

I've always understood that when Back Bay was filled in, Boston annexed the
adjacent communities.  So Wikipedia's date sounds accurate.  -Doug


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
To: "A. Joseph Ross" <Joe@attorneyross.com>
Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
<boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: WCOP & WBZ


> <<On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:30:52 -0500, "A. Joseph Ross"
<Joe@attorneyross.com> said:
>
> > Allston was part of the former town of Brighton, which was annexed to
> > Boston sometime in the 1970s.  There never was a separate town of
> > Allston.
>
> 1970s?!  Try 1870s, Joe.  (That always-reliable source of
> authoritative geographic information, Wikipedia, puts it at a
> reassuringly exact Januay, 1874.)
>
> -GAWollman
>


From elipolo@earthlink.net  Tue Jan 29 16:44:56 2008
From: elipolo@earthlink.net (Eli Polonsky)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:44:56 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
Message-ID: <21419677.1201643096079.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

I guess Allston and Brighton are considered to be areas,
or neighborhoods, within the City of Boston. 

I was always curious whether there was a distinct line
separating the Brighton and Allston neighborhoods, and if 
so, where it is. I didn't know it was (or is) specifically 
Everett St, but that is also claimed by a Wikipedia entry, 
which also claims that the line south of Everett St. runs 
along Gordon Rd. and Kelton St. (to the Brookline line).

Also, Brighton was annexed to Boston in the 1870s. Typo.

EP

> > From: "A. Joseph Ross" <Joe@attorneyross.com>
> CC: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>,
> 	boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
> To: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>
> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:30:52 -0500
> Subject: Re: WCOP & WBZ
> 
> On 29 Jan 2008 Kevin Vahey wrote:
> 
> > Now the one thing that burns me about current WBZ management 
> > is they they call the complex the BRIGHTON studios. It is EAST 
> > of Everett St so it is in ALLSTON.
> 
> Allston was part of the former town of Brighton, which was annexed
> to Boston sometime in the 1970s.  There never was a separate town 
> of Allston.
> 
> -- 
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                   617.367.0468
> 92 State Street, Suite 700            Fax: 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004           http://www.attorneyross.com





From kvahey@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 17:41:40 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (kvahey@comcast.net)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:41:40 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <21419677.1201643096079.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <21419677.1201643096079.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801291441xbd15fc9u98c37c6c7905ff8c@mail.gmail.com>

Where Allston ends and Brighton begins is one of the great mysteries
of Boston. The general rule of thumb is the zip code 02134 which BZ is
in is Allston. When I was growing up the border along the Charles was
based as if Cambridge was on the other side it was Allston and if
Watertown it would be Brighton. Everett St marks that spot on Soldiers
Field Road. Allston begins at the BU Bridge allong that part of
Commonwealth that Boston kept when Brookine broke away from Boston in
the late 1800's. Brookine wanted nothing to do with Boston or Suffolk
County and was given to Norfolk County even though the town does not
touch any other part of the county. In any event WBZ is in Allston.

From dlh@donnahalper.com  Tue Jan 29 17:53:34 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:53:34 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <016901c862c0$30be7450$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <002c01c8621f$04eb3210$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<007101c8622c$a7583cc0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<479E797D.17088.6499D8@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<016901c862c0$30be7450$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <20080129225344.4077544D596@relay1.r1.iad.emailsrvr.com>


>it was asked--
>
>I can't answer that except to say that if it did exist, I don't remember it
>at all, and I can remember Boston television back to about 1954.  I'm
>wondering --- perhaps Donna can help us out  here --- whether the name of
>Shepard's parent company for WNAC

Shepard died in 1950, so maybe subsequently the name was changed, but 
not that I recall. Radio-- both AM and FM used the Yankee 
branding.  WNAC-TV went on the air the third week of June 1948, after 
WBZ had already gone on the air several weeks earlier.  But even in 
my old New England TV Guides, it never refers to Yankee- anything in 
their big display ads about TV-- just "WNAC-TV channel 7."  I'll see 
if I can find the corporate name used for TV in those early years.        


From gary@garysicecream.com  Tue Jan 29 17:57:26 2008
From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:57:26 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <20080129225344.4077544D596@relay1.r1.iad.emailsrvr.com>
Message-ID: <05f801c862ca$52b50510$0200a8c0@Office>

 Go here (http://www.ggninfo.com/TP2.htm) to see an old Ch 7 test pattern -
it says "Yankee Network"



-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Donna Halper
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 5:54 PM
To: Doug Drown; A. Joseph Ross
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC


>it was asked--
>
>I can't answer that except to say that if it did exist, I don't 
>remember it at all, and I can remember Boston television back to about 
>1954.  I'm wondering --- perhaps Donna can help us out  here --- 
>whether the name of Shepard's parent company for WNAC

Shepard died in 1950, so maybe subsequently the name was changed, but not
that I recall. Radio-- both AM and FM used the Yankee branding.  WNAC-TV
went on the air the third week of June 1948, after WBZ had already gone on
the air several weeks earlier.  But even in my old New England TV Guides, it
never refers to Yankee- anything in their big display ads about TV-- just
"WNAC-TV channel 7."  I'll see 
if I can find the corporate name used for TV in those early years.        


From markwats@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 18:55:22 2008
From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:55:22 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
References: <4fc429770801281822s2a9a3980m64bf78816f787df0@mail.gmail.com><00e701c86250$7c3939d0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<22121.63.118.166.2.1201633486.squirrel@webmail.wildblue.net>
Message-ID: <006f01c862d2$69b84f80$39a0764c@Mark>

 Steve Ordinetz wrote:

> Well, he didn't vanish right away.  Wasn't he at WCGY in the early-mid 
> 80s?

  I believe he was there in the mid & late 80's, I don't think he was there 
during the "Blue Suede Radio" days of the early 80's.

Mark Watson 


From markwats@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 19:05:06 2008
From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:05:06 -0500
Subject: WCAP/980 (was Re: ABC Returns To WCAP)
References: <927344.13726.qm@web50809.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <008a01c862d3$c56dfb80$39a0764c@Mark>

Peter Q. George wrote:

 > Did I actually hear some liners from Dick Summer (ex WBZ, WNBC and 
WPIX-FM et.al.)?

  Yes you sure did. He does the local news intros in AM drive and the 
weather intros during the day. He also does one of the rotating top of hour 
ID's. Another of the TOH's is voiced by Ron Dwyer (ex-WVBF, now at WATD). 
Ron also voiced intros & bumpers for  "CAP's "Merrimack Magazine" AM & PM 
editions.

  Good to hear some of the pre-64 oldies in the "Beatles & Before" rotation.

Mark Watson



From rogerkirk@ttlc.net  Tue Jan 29 19:16:41 2008
From: rogerkirk@ttlc.net (Roger Kirk)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:16:41 -0500
Subject: WCAP/980 (was Re: ABC Returns To WCAP)
In-Reply-To: <008a01c862d3$c56dfb80$39a0764c@Mark>
References: <927344.13726.qm@web50809.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
	<008a01c862d3$c56dfb80$39a0764c@Mark>
Message-ID: <479FC1E9.6030003@ttlc.net>



Mark Watson wrote:
> Yes you sure did. He does the local news intros in AM drive and the 
> weather intros during the day. He also does one of the rotating top of 
> hour ID's. Another of the TOH's is voiced by Ron Dwyer (ex-WVBF, now 
> at WATD). Ron also voiced intros & bumpers for  "CAP's "Merrimack 
> Magazine" AM & PM editions.
Calling in a couple of favors?


From markwats@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 19:19:04 2008
From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:19:04 -0500
Subject: WTTT (or is it?)
References: <20080128132940.F2Z68.498721.root@fepweb05>
Message-ID: <00a201c862d5$b8ffff40$39a0764c@Mark>


Paul Anderson wrote:

> So now Paul Harvey is off-the-air once again in Boston.

  Would WRKO or WTKK consider picking up Paul Harvey? I don't think WBZ will 
consider returning Harvey to it's schedule. So for now, for those within 
range, Paul Harvey still airs on WEIM (1280 Fitchburg). Does anyone to the 
south of Boston (Providence, New Bedford, Fall River) carry Harvey's 
broadcasts?

  Now that WCAP had returned to the ABC Radio Network fold, maybe they could 
make a bid for Paul Harvey.

Mark Watson


From wollman@bimajority.org  Tue Jan 29 20:13:26 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:13:26 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801291441xbd15fc9u98c37c6c7905ff8c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <21419677.1201643096079.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<4fc429770801291441xbd15fc9u98c37c6c7905ff8c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <18335.53046.965494.102915@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:41:40 -0500, kvahey@comcast.net said:

> Allston begins at the BU Bridge allong that part of
> Commonwealth that Boston kept when Brookine broke away from Boston 

Brookline was never a part of Boston, so it could hardly have
"broke[n] away" from it.  The current Norfolk County (the second to
bear that name) was formed in 1793 by splitting Suffolk County, and
Brookline was a part of Norfolk County from the very beginning.
Brookline became disconnected from the rest of the county in 1873 when
Boston annexed West Roxbury, and lost that strip of Charles River
shoreline by Act of the General Court when Boston annexed Brighton
(prior to which, Brighton had been in Middlesex).

-GAWollman


From dillane@sbcglobal.net  Tue Jan 29 20:18:14 2008
From: dillane@sbcglobal.net (Bill Dillane)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:18:14 -0500
Subject: WTRY
Message-ID: <000301c862de$07202cb0$15608610$@net>

>I don't know if they were in any other markets besides Albany and New
Haven.

Just WTRY in Albany and WAVZ/WKCI in New Haven.  Kops-Monahan (Daniel W.
Kops and Richard Monahan) sold WTRY in the early 70s, and sold WAVZ/WKCI
when they retired in the 80s.

>Believe it or not, New Haven is one of Clear Channel's original markets.

Clear Channel has owned WELI since the late 70s.  WAVZ/WKCI moved into
WELI's Radio Towers Park after Clear Channel acquired the stations from
Noble Broadcasting in the early 90s.


From dillane@sbcglobal.net  Tue Jan 29 20:23:56 2008
From: dillane@sbcglobal.net (Bill Dillane)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:23:56 -0500
Subject: Hourly beeps
Message-ID: <000401c862de$c8dbf820$5a93e860$@net>

>The WTIC Hartford CT hourly sounder "dah-dah-dah-dar" (Letter "V" in Morse
Code) is still a unique, hourly audible beep in broadcasting, I 
think.

WTIC-TV-3 in the 60s had its radio tone going into the CBS tone at the top
of the hour.

The V tone is at the WTIC Alumni site at www.wticalumni.com (audio works
with Internet Explorer, not Firefox).


From jscavo@maine.rr.com  Tue Jan 29 21:50:35 2008
From: jscavo@maine.rr.com (John)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:50:35 -0500
Subject: WCAP/980 (was Re: ABC Returns To WCAP)
In-Reply-To: <927344.13726.qm@web50809.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
References: <000501c860f8$d4d6c520$39a0764c@Mark>
	<927344.13726.qm@web50809.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <011601c862ea$e3f51c20$6501a8c0@vpr1>

Also, I hear Ron Dryer doing several of the sweepers.


John 

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Q. George [mailto:radiojunkie3@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 10:53 PM
To: Mark Watson; Boston Radio
Subject: WCAP/980 (was Re: ABC Returns To WCAP)


--- Mark Watson <markwats@comcast.net> wrote:

>   This past Tuesday, WCAP (980 Lowell) once again became an ABC Radio 
> affiliate, after several years with the USA Network.
> 
>   Also, WCAP's new website  www.980wcap.com recently went live, along 
> with live streaming 24/7 of WCAP's programming.
> 
> 
> Mark Watson
 
I think Clark is doing a great job in continuing the
56+ year old tradition of WCAP.  This is one station
that launched many a career in radio, for over 56
years.  No doubt, the station is in competent hands. 
If you look at the list of some of the people who are
part of today's WCAP, it's literally a "who's who in
Boston radio".  I've listened to 980 on my way home
from work (from Manchester, NH).  I love the music. 
The execution of the format is really good.  Did I
actually hear some liners from Dick Summer (ex WBZ,
WNBC and WPIX-FM et.al.)?  It's good to know that 'CAP
is streaming.  I'll bookmark it, for sure!  All the
best to Clark and crew at WCAP.

Peter Q. George (K1XRB)
Whitman, Massachusetts   
 


Peter Q. George (K1XRB)
Whitman, Massachusetts
                           "Scanning the bands since 1967"
radiojunkie1@yahoo.com
radiojunkie3@yahoo.com
***********************************************************


 
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs



From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com  Tue Jan 29 22:00:50 2008
From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:00:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <006f01c862d2$69b84f80$39a0764c@Mark>
Message-ID: <531897.6838.qm@web52305.mail.re2.yahoo.com>



> 
> > [Gary Martin], he didn't vanish right away. 
Wasn't he at
> WCGY in the early-mid 
> > 80s?


Gary Martin was also at Magic in the 80's as well.




      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

From tcoco@whav.net  Tue Jan 29 22:03:00 2008
From: tcoco@whav.net (Tim Coco)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:03:00 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <22121.63.118.166.2.1201633486.squirrel@webmail.wildblue.net>
References: <4fc429770801281822s2a9a3980m64bf78816f787df0@mail.gmail.com><00e701c86250$7c3939d0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<22121.63.118.166.2.1201633486.squirrel@webmail.wildblue.net>
Message-ID: <003901c862ec$a026a430$2f01a8c0@executive>

Speaking of WEZE...I used to work with Earl Gynan at WHAV during the late
1970s. He told me IIRC that he previously was "Mr. Midnight" at WEZE and
worked in a studio with a large window at street level.  My memory eludes
me, but does anyone recall Earl Gynan or "Mr. Midnight?"

He worked only a couple of nights a week at WHAV and seemed semi-retired.
He had a great wit and always had a short cigar stub in his mouth.  When
anything would go wrong on his watch, he'd quietly make a fix (taking apart
a cart and repairing the tape, or example) and then whisper "no one need
ever know."

Tim Coco
President & General Manager
WHAV

189 Ward Hill Avenue
Ward Hill, MA 01835-6973
Telephone: (978) 374-2111
Fax: (978) 521-4636
www.whav.net
"WHAV" and "WHAV.NET" are registered service marks.


The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential,
and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, or any employee or agent responsible for delivering this
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
WHAV immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your
computer. Thank you.


-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Ordinetz [mailto:hykker@wildblue.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 2:05 PM
To: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org
Subject: RE: WEZE, WCOP and NBC

> The WEZE studios were actually a block south of Boylston in the 
> Statler now Park Plaza office building. I was last there in 1972 
> visiting former WRKO jock Gary Martin when EZE went to a 50-50 format 
> (one current one oldie ) Gary was doing overnight before he vanished 
> completely. I suspect he is no longer on the planet.

Well, he didn't vanish right away.  Wasn't he at WCGY in the early-mid 80s?




From dave@skywaves.net  Tue Jan 29 22:39:30 2008
From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:39:30 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044><00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<18335.14670.334060.767504@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>

There's a lot of case law about New England towns because the legal 
organizations of communities are so different here than in the bulk of the 
country. I think it is likely that every square inch of New England belongs 
to some "town" or other. That is patently not true in other areas of the 
country, particularly the West.

CDPs were meant to add substance to concentrations of population that were 
not incorporated in the traditional sense. They are accepted by the FCC as 
licensable communities without any further documentation. If the community 
is not a CDP and is not incorporated, then there are qualifications hoops to 
jump through - local governance, local school district, local police force, 
band existence of local businesses all help to establish a place as a 
licensable community.

The peak of Mt. Washington is in Sargents, but the slopes include Crawfords 
(where the base station is located), Beans, Chandler, Thomson and Meserves, 
Cutts, and arguably several others. I doubt anybody actually lives in any of 
these "towns," and not one is included in the census places table. I am 
totally guessing here, but I suspect that these "towns" represent the 
original landholdings granted by the King or the territorial Governor way 
back when.

So, could you license WHOM today to "Mount Washington?" Probably not. Gorham 
would a piece of cake, though.

Tuck showings are intended primarily to establish that a community is not a 
made-up entity within a larger community. It works mostly to prevent 
wholesale moves of stations from small communities to large metros. When you 
move a station to a new community, you can't propose to serve more than a 
particular percentage of any recognized urbanized area. As an example, you 
could not propose to move a station from, say, Provincetown to Norwood, if 
the station would serve more than half the Boston urbanized area.

-d



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
To: <paul@derrynh.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 9:33 AM
Subject: RE: Licensed to non-actual locations


> <<On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:20:49 -0500, "Paul Hopfgarten" <paul@derrynh.net> 
> said:
>
>> If you think about it, WHOM is also currently licensed to a 
>> "non-political"
>> subdivision.
>
>> Mt. Washington is NOT actually a political subdivision in New Hampshire 
>> (I
>> want to say it's Sargent's Purchase...which even at that, is still
>> unincorporated).
>
>> I guess "common knowledge" of a location is sufficient for the FCC...
>
> The FCC generally prefers incorporated municipalities, and if pressed
> will accept a "Census-defined place" (particularly in southern states
> where municipalities ae in short supply).  They don't believe our
> towns really exist, because the Census Bureau conflates them with
> midwestern townships.
>
> For allocations purposes today, there is something called "/Tuck/
> analysis" which is supposed to demonstrate that the proposed community
> is a real community.  The commission was much more lax in the days of
> yore when they could hardly give away FM licenses.
>
> -GAWollman
>
> 


From dlh@donnahalper.com  Tue Jan 29 22:51:50 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:51:50 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <003901c862ec$a026a430$2f01a8c0@executive>
References: <4fc429770801281822s2a9a3980m64bf78816f787df0@mail.gmail.com>
	<00e701c86250$7c3939d0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<22121.63.118.166.2.1201633486.squirrel@webmail.wildblue.net>
	<003901c862ec$a026a430$2f01a8c0@executive>
Message-ID: <20080130035200.978E8705FF3@relay6.relay.iad.emailsrvr.com>

At 10:03 PM 1/29/2008, Tim Coco wrote:
>Speaking of WEZE...I used to work with Earl Gynan at WHAV during the late
>1970s. He told me IIRC that he previously was "Mr. Midnight" at WEZE and
>worked in a studio with a large window at street level.  My memory eludes
>me, but does anyone recall Earl Gynan or "Mr. Midnight?"

Gynan got his start on the old WEEI in the early 40s, when then-PD 
Arthur Edes started a radio school train (men) announcers-- no women 
allowed, btw.  After being trained, he got hired at the old WLAW in 
Lawrence.  He also worked for another long defunct station, WVDA in 
the early 50s, back when it was owned by Vic Diehm.  he stayed on 
when it became WEZE circa 1957.  He died in 1986, and I believe that 
has not changed...   


From tcoco@whav.net  Tue Jan 29 22:56:58 2008
From: tcoco@whav.net (Tim Coco)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:56:58 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <20080130035200.978E8705FF3@relay6.relay.iad.emailsrvr.com>
References: <4fc429770801281822s2a9a3980m64bf78816f787df0@mail.gmail.com>
	<00e701c86250$7c3939d0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<22121.63.118.166.2.1201633486.squirrel@webmail.wildblue.net>
	<003901c862ec$a026a430$2f01a8c0@executive>
	<20080130035200.978E8705FF3@relay6.relay.iad.emailsrvr.com>
Message-ID: <006601c862f4$2a157250$2f01a8c0@executive>

Wow! You really do have radio history at your fingertips.  Thank you!  


Tim Coco
President & General Manager
WHAV

189 Ward Hill Avenue
Ward Hill, MA 01835-6973
Telephone: (978) 374-2111
Fax: (978) 521-4636
www.whav.net
"WHAV" and "WHAV.NET" are registered service marks.

-----Original Message-----
From: Donna Halper [mailto:dlh@donnahalper.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 10:52 PM
To: tcoco@whav.net; boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: RE: WEZE, WCOP and NBC

At 10:03 PM 1/29/2008, Tim Coco wrote:
>Speaking of WEZE...I used to work with Earl Gynan at WHAV during the 
>late 1970s. He told me IIRC that he previously was "Mr. Midnight" at 
>WEZE and worked in a studio with a large window at street level.  My 
>memory eludes me, but does anyone recall Earl Gynan or "Mr. Midnight?"

Gynan got his start on the old WEEI in the early 40s, when then-PD Arthur
Edes started a radio school train (men) announcers-- no women allowed, btw.
After being trained, he got hired at the old WLAW in Lawrence.  He also
worked for another long defunct station, WVDA in the early 50s, back when it
was owned by Vic Diehm.  he stayed on when it became WEZE circa 1957.  He
died in 1986, and I believe that 
has not changed...   






From scott@fybush.com  Tue Jan 29 22:59:23 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:59:23 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044><00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>	<18335.14670.334060.767504@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
Message-ID: <479FF61B.8010809@fybush.com>

Dave Doherty wrote:

> CDPs were meant to add substance to concentrations of population that 
> were not incorporated in the traditional sense. They are accepted by the 
> FCC as licensable communities without any further documentation. If the 
> community is not a CDP and is not incorporated, then there are 
> qualifications hoops to jump through - local governance, local school 
> district, local police force, band existence of local businesses all 
> help to establish a place as a licensable community.

I'm not sure I agree that the FCC accepts a CDP as prima facie evidence 
that a community exists for allocations purposes. My understanding (and 
I am not a communications lawyer, or any type of lawyer at all!) is that 
further documentation is still required, but that the presumption is 
heavily in favor of licenseability if a community is a CDP.
> 
> The peak of Mt. Washington is in Sargents, but the slopes include 
> Crawfords (where the base station is located), Beans, Chandler, Thomson 
> and Meserves, Cutts, and arguably several others. I doubt anybody 
> actually lives in any of these "towns," and not one is included in the 
> census places table. I am totally guessing here, but I suspect that 
> these "towns" represent the original landholdings granted by the King or 
> the territorial Governor way back when.
> 
> So, could you license WHOM today to "Mount Washington?" Probably not. 
> Gorham would a piece of cake, though.

The standards were much, much looser in the very early days of FM. I'm 
pretty sure that the Yankee FM on Mount Washington was actually licensed 
as a "Boston" station at one point. I think the Mount Mitchell FM in 
North Carolina may have been licensed as "Charlotte" around the same time.

What's interesting to me is that the "Mount Washington" COL was allowed 
to be reused when the current FM signal up there was licensed in 1958. A 
few years later, and it would have to have been licensed somewhere else 
- probably to Poland Spring, Maine, where its sister TV was licensed. As 
WMTW-FM, it must have had a main-studio waiver to put its studios first 
in Poland Spring and later in Portland, right?

> Tuck showings are intended primarily to establish that a community is 
> not a made-up entity within a larger community. It works mostly to 
> prevent wholesale moves of stations from small communities to large 
> metros. When you move a station to a new community, you can't propose to 
> serve more than a particular percentage of any recognized urbanized 
> area. As an example, you could not propose to move a station from, say, 
> Provincetown to Norwood, if the station would serve more than half the 
> Boston urbanized area.

That's not quite my understanding. The "more than half the urbanized 
area" test is what triggers the Tuck analysis. If you're proposing to 
move a station from outside an urbanized area to an urbanized area (by 
way of a COL change), the Tuck analysis is required when that 50% 
threshold is reached. It's a multi-prong test that looks at factors like 
whether the proposed COL has its own media (I've seen even local 
websites cited to meet that prong of the test), whether people who live 
in the community also work there (as little as 10% can fulfill that 
criterion), whether there are businesses that identify themselves by the 
community's name, whether the community has its own phone book, post 
office, local fire/police/schools, and so on.

One could argue, with quite a bit of validity, that the Tuck tests don't 
really accomplish what they were meant to do (as Dave so ably lays it 
out above) - I'd have no problem writing a convincing Tuck analysis that 
would demonstrate that Cambridge, for instance, is a community separate 
from Boston for allotment purposes. (Actually, that one's almost a 
gimme, since the FCC has a presumption that any community that already 
has stations licensed to it is therefore a licenseable community.)

The one I've always wanted to try is Brooklyn - except for the fact that 
it's governmentally part of New York City, it meets all the Tuck 
criteria and then some. (And I could probably spin the existence of the 
Kings County government and the Brooklyn borough government, not to 
mention noncomm WKRB-FM Brooklyn, to get over that hump!)

s

From kvahey@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 23:58:31 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (kvahey@comcast.net)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 23:58:31 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <479FF61B.8010809@fybush.com>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<18335.14670.334060.767504@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<479FF61B.8010809@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801292058s1cb1c674q6fd99a3a9bf5f8a@mail.gmail.com>

Wasn't WPTZ Channel 5 licensed to North Pole, NY? Does North Pole even exist?

From scott@fybush.com  Wed Jan 30 00:04:09 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 00:04:09 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801292058s1cb1c674q6fd99a3a9bf5f8a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>	
	<00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>	
	<18335.14670.334060.767504@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>	
	<002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>	
	<479FF61B.8010809@fybush.com>
	<4fc429770801292058s1cb1c674q6fd99a3a9bf5f8a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <47A00549.1060307@fybush.com>

kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
> Wasn't WPTZ Channel 5 licensed to North Pole, NY? Does North Pole even exist?

Was and still is. North Pole is a hamlet in the town of Wilmington, NY. 
It has a seasonal post office and not much else. It probably wouldn't be 
licenseable as a COL today.

s


From dave@skywaves.net  Wed Jan 30 00:16:44 2008
From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 00:16:44 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044><00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>	<18335.14670.334060.767504@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<479FF61B.8010809@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <003901c862ff$4e3667b0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>

Hi Scott-

I have an interesting case in the works that rests partially on the CDP 
issue. I can't comment on it now because it is "ongoing."  The attorney for 
our side says CDPs are accepted prima facie, and i've seen a number of cases 
to support that position.  It never hurts to include the local governance 
and economy stuff in support of the case, though.

I think you are right about Mt. Washington and Mt. Mitchell being licensed 
to Boston and Charlotte way back when.  Of course in those days if you had 
today's receivers and 1950's FM station counts, there would be hardly any 
interference and you could probably pick up both stations in Maryland!

I remember sitting in the ham shack at RPI late at night in the early '70s 
and listening to the NYC FMs 150 miles down the road.  Today, you'd be lucky 
to hear any of them.

I don't know what the principal community signal requirements were in the 
1950s. I think the 70dbu requirement was laid down in the mid 1960s.  But 
until the era of dereg, the studios had to be in the principal community. 
For WMTW there was no real community, so I have no idea how they handled it.

This brings to mind the case of the Upstate NY network of Class B stations 
licensed to Cherry Valley, Weathersfiled Township, and other places. My 
understanding is that there was only one studio for the five or six stations 
in that network.  When I was a teenager in Delmar, I was able to pick up the 
Cherry Valley station. It was a kind of background music format, as I 
recall. The owner or his estate eventually transferred the stations to CBN, 
who ran Christian programming, and eventually sold them when they made their 
commitment to TV and the CBN University project. They are now individual 
stations, and not all retained the religious affiliation that came with CBN.

Tuck is a kind of Catch-22. Cambridge already has a station, so it qualifies 
as a community. But it would be really hard to justify a move from 
Provincetown to Cambridge under 307(b) because Cambridge already has a 
station. The most convincing 307(b) showing includes the fact that the 
community does not have a local station, thus justifying the removal of the 
service from the current community.

Brooklyn is intriguing, but WKRB probably works against the case.

-d


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
To: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
Cc: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>; <paul@derrynh.net>; 
<boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 10:59 PM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> Dave Doherty wrote:
>
>> CDPs were meant to add substance to concentrations of population that 
>> were not incorporated in the traditional sense. They are accepted by the 
>> FCC as licensable communities without any further documentation. If the 
>> community is not a CDP and is not incorporated, then there are 
>> qualifications hoops to jump through - local governance, local school 
>> district, local police force, band existence of local businesses all help 
>> to establish a place as a licensable community.
>
> I'm not sure I agree that the FCC accepts a CDP as prima facie evidence 
> that a community exists for allocations purposes. My understanding (and I 
> am not a communications lawyer, or any type of lawyer at all!) is that 
> further documentation is still required, but that the presumption is 
> heavily in favor of licenseability if a community is a CDP.
>>
>> The peak of Mt. Washington is in Sargents, but the slopes include 
>> Crawfords (where the base station is located), Beans, Chandler, Thomson 
>> and Meserves, Cutts, and arguably several others. I doubt anybody 
>> actually lives in any of these "towns," and not one is included in the 
>> census places table. I am totally guessing here, but I suspect that these 
>> "towns" represent the original landholdings granted by the King or the 
>> territorial Governor way back when.
>>
>> So, could you license WHOM today to "Mount Washington?" Probably not. 
>> Gorham would a piece of cake, though.
>
> The standards were much, much looser in the very early days of FM. I'm 
> pretty sure that the Yankee FM on Mount Washington was actually licensed 
> as a "Boston" station at one point. I think the Mount Mitchell FM in North 
> Carolina may have been licensed as "Charlotte" around the same time.
>
> What's interesting to me is that the "Mount Washington" COL was allowed to 
> be reused when the current FM signal up there was licensed in 1958. A few 
> years later, and it would have to have been licensed somewhere else - 
> probably to Poland Spring, Maine, where its sister TV was licensed. As 
> WMTW-FM, it must have had a main-studio waiver to put its studios first in 
> Poland Spring and later in Portland, right?
>
>> Tuck showings are intended primarily to establish that a community is not 
>> a made-up entity within a larger community. It works mostly to prevent 
>> wholesale moves of stations from small communities to large metros. When 
>> you move a station to a new community, you can't propose to serve more 
>> than a particular percentage of any recognized urbanized area. As an 
>> example, you could not propose to move a station from, say, Provincetown 
>> to Norwood, if the station would serve more than half the Boston 
>> urbanized area.
>
> That's not quite my understanding. The "more than half the urbanized area" 
> test is what triggers the Tuck analysis. If you're proposing to move a 
> station from outside an urbanized area to an urbanized area (by way of a 
> COL change), the Tuck analysis is required when that 50% threshold is 
> reached. It's a multi-prong test that looks at factors like whether the 
> proposed COL has its own media (I've seen even local websites cited to 
> meet that prong of the test), whether people who live in the community 
> also work there (as little as 10% can fulfill that criterion), whether 
> there are businesses that identify themselves by the community's name, 
> whether the community has its own phone book, post office, local 
> fire/police/schools, and so on.
>
> One could argue, with quite a bit of validity, that the Tuck tests don't 
> really accomplish what they were meant to do (as Dave so ably lays it out 
> above) - I'd have no problem writing a convincing Tuck analysis that would 
> demonstrate that Cambridge, for instance, is a community separate from 
> Boston for allotment purposes. (Actually, that one's almost a gimme, since 
> the FCC has a presumption that any community that already has stations 
> licensed to it is therefore a licenseable community.)
>
> The one I've always wanted to try is Brooklyn - except for the fact that 
> it's governmentally part of New York City, it meets all the Tuck criteria 
> and then some. (And I could probably spin the existence of the Kings 
> County government and the Brooklyn borough government, not to mention 
> noncomm WKRB-FM Brooklyn, to get over that hump!)
>
> s
>
> 


From wollman@bimajority.org  Wed Jan 30 00:18:31 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 00:18:31 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<18335.14670.334060.767504@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
Message-ID: <18336.2215.742782.667085@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:39:30 -0500, "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net> said:

> There's a lot of case law about New England towns because the legal 
> organizations of communities are so different here than in the bulk of the 
> country. I think it is likely that every square inch of New England belongs 
> to some "town" or other.

Nope.  The unincorporated communities in Vermont, New Hampshire, and
a very large chunk of Maine are not towns.  (With a couple of
exceptions: there are a few unincorporated towns in Vermont; these
places were formerly towns and later disincorporated when the
population left in the mid-nineteenth century.)

> So, could you license WHOM today to "Mount Washington?" Probably not. Gorham 
> would a piece of cake, though.

Only just -- Gorham already has a station, so you'd have to do it as a
"second local".  That also lets out Berlin (1), Jackson (1), Conway
(3f), North Conway (1), Lancaster (2), and Whitefield (1).  You could
do Bartlett (only an LP) or Twin Mountain or Bethlehem (1 app) or
Fryeburg (1 app), or even make a try for Bretton Woods.

-GAWollman


From wollman@bimajority.org  Wed Jan 30 00:20:10 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 00:20:10 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <47A00549.1060307@fybush.com>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<18335.14670.334060.767504@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<479FF61B.8010809@fybush.com>
	<4fc429770801292058s1cb1c674q6fd99a3a9bf5f8a@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A00549.1060307@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <18336.2314.817709.318799@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 00:04:09 -0500, Scott Fybush <scott@fybush.com> said:

> Was and still is. North Pole is a hamlet in the town of Wilmington, NY. 
> It has a seasonal post office and not much else. It probably wouldn't be 
> licenseable as a COL today.

Which didn't help WPTZ when they tried to legally move to
Plattsburgh.  Perhaps if they had specified Peru....

-GAWollman


From kvahey@comcast.net  Tue Jan 29 20:19:01 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:19:01 -0600
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <18335.53046.965494.102915@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <21419677.1201643096079.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<4fc429770801291441xbd15fc9u98c37c6c7905ff8c@mail.gmail.com>
	<18335.53046.965494.102915@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801291719t759ce652h5f71b8a307e0e38@mail.gmail.com>

Who knew.....I was told Brookline broke away by the nuns at St Paul's in
Cambridge

On Jan 29, 2008 7:13 PM, Garrett Wollman <wollman@bimajority.org> wrote:

> <<On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:41:40 -0500, kvahey@comcast.net said:
>
> > Allston begins at the BU Bridge allong that part of
> > Commonwealth that Boston kept when Brookine broke away from Boston
>
> Brookline was never a part of Boston, so it could hardly have
> "broke[n] away" from it.  The current Norfolk County (the second to
> bear that name) was formed in 1793 by splitting Suffolk County, and
> Brookline was a part of Norfolk County from the very beginning.
> Brookline became disconnected from the rest of the county in 1873 when
> Boston annexed West Roxbury, and lost that strip of Charles River
> shoreline by Act of the General Court when Boston annexed Brighton
> (prior to which, Brighton had been in Middlesex).
>
> -GAWollman
>
>

From joe@attorneyross.com  Wed Jan 30 01:12:22 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:12:22 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <000701c862b3$82c84490$6400a8c0@lysthia>
References: <000901c862a2$29b34e60$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<000701c862b3$82c84490$6400a8c0@lysthia>
Message-ID: <479FCEF6.12451.790429@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 29 Jan 2008 at 15:10, Brian Vita wrote:

> Actually in a typical 35mm projector that still uses reels, the upper
> feed reel runs counterclockwise, the takeup reel below runs clockwise.
>  In Europe they both run clockwise.  Very few theatres actually still
> use reels, however.
 
What do they use?

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Wed Jan 30 01:12:22 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:12:22 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <21419677.1201643096079.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <21419677.1201643096079.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <479FCEF6.13246.79068B@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 29 Jan 2008 at 0:00, Eli Polonsky wrote:

> I guess Allston and Brighton are considered to be areas,
> or neighborhoods, within the City of Boston. 

Brighton is a "district" which includes Allston, at least for 
judicial purposes.
 
> Also, Brighton was annexed to Boston in the 1870s. Typo.

Right, it was the 1870s.   

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Wed Jan 30 01:12:23 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:12:23 -0500
Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT
In-Reply-To: <00e401c8624f$116884e0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>,
	<00e401c8624f$116884e0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <479FCEF7.25634.7908CD@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 29 Jan 2008 at 3:15, Paul Hopfgarten wrote:

> My father was a regular listener to 1-1-5-0...WCOP...in the late 60s
> (the Country years)

I was a regular listener in the 1950s Top-40 era.  We got a really 
strong signal in Bedford.  WCOP DJs were the ones most often hired to 
do school record hops.  Some of them lived in Bedford -- probably 
because the studios, by that time, were at the transmitter site in 
Lexington.
 
> And I actually listened to 1150 for a bit in the WACQ days (late 70s?)
> when I had s**tbox cars w/o FM radios.....

I did too.  I liked the format at that time.  They had one of the 
first female Top-40 DJs, who called herself Marcia Nicely.  I wonder 
who she really was.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Wed Jan 30 01:12:24 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:12:24 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <18335.38926.676098.217672@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <663803.6110.qm@web39112.mail.mud.yahoo.com>,
	<479F389C.25990.1C78C1@Joe.attorneyross.com>,
	<18335.38926.676098.217672@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <479FCEF8.3233.790B9C@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 29 Jan 2008 at 16:18, Garrett Wollman wrote:

> 1970s?!  Try 1870s, Joe.  (That always-reliable source of
> authoritative geographic information, Wikipedia, puts it at a
> reassuringly exact Januay, 1874.)
 
Yeah, typos abound!  I was in my office when I wrote that.  If I had 
been at home, I could have checked my handy-dandy reference of 
"Historical Data Relating to Counties, Cities, and Towns in 
Massachusetts," published by the office of Paul Guzzi, Secretary of 
the Commonwealth, in 1975.  

It says that the Town of Brighton was incorporated on 24 February 
1807 from part of Cambridge and annexed another part of Cambridge on 
27 January 1816.  The legislation annexing Brighton to Boston was 
enacted on 21 May 1873, accepted by both Brighton and Boston on 27 
October 1873, and took effect 5 January 1874.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Wed Jan 30 01:12:24 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:12:24 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801291441xbd15fc9u98c37c6c7905ff8c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <21419677.1201643096079.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>,
	<4fc429770801291441xbd15fc9u98c37c6c7905ff8c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <479FCEF8.15248.790D03@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 29 Jan 2008 at 17:41, kvahey@comcast.net wrote:

> Where Allston ends and Brighton begins is one of the great mysteries
> of Boston. The general rule of thumb is the zip code 02134 which BZ is
> in is Allston. When I was growing up the border along the Charles was
> based as if Cambridge was on the other side it was Allston and if
> Watertown it would be Brighton. Everett St marks that spot on Soldiers
> Field Road. Allston begins at the BU Bridge allong that part of
> Commonwealth that Boston kept when Brookine broke away from Boston in
> the late 1800's. Brookine wanted nothing to do with Boston or Suffolk
> County and was given to Norfolk County even though the town does not
> touch any other part of the county. In any event WBZ is in Allston.
 
No, Brookline did not break away in the late 1800s.  It broke away in 
November 1705.  The town celebrated its 300th anniversary a couple of 
years ago.  When Brighton was annexed to Boston, there was also a 
move to annex Brookline, but Brookline rejected annexation by a vote 
of 707-299.  However, a portion of Brookline along the Charles River 
was annexed to Boston in order to connect Brighton to the rest of 
Boston.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookline-
Boston_annexation_debate_of_1873

When the Legislature created Norfolk County in 1793, from the 
southern part of Suffolk, it included Brookline, West Roxbury, and 
Hyde Park, and Brookline was not geographically separate from the 
rest of the county.  When West Roxbury, and Hyde Park were annexed to 
Boston, those towns became part of Suffolk County, and Brookline at 
that point became noncontiguous with the rest of the county  See 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norfolk_County%2C_Massachusetts

Cohasset is also a non-contiguous part of Norfolk County.  This, 
according to the Wikipedia article, is because Hingham and Hull were 
originally to be part of Norfolk County but, for some reason, were 
transferred to Plymouth County instead.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Wed Jan 30 01:12:23 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:12:23 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <18335.53046.965494.102915@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <21419677.1201643096079.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>,
	<4fc429770801291441xbd15fc9u98c37c6c7905ff8c@mail.gmail.com>,
	<18335.53046.965494.102915@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <479FCEF7.22655.790A15@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 29 Jan 2008 at 20:13, Garrett Wollman wrote:

> Brookline was never a part of Boston, so it could hardly have
> "broke[n] away" from it.  

Actually, it was, but it broke away in 1705.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Wed Jan 30 01:12:25 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:12:25 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
Message-ID: <479FCEF9.25664.790F16@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 29 Jan 2008 at 22:39, Dave Doherty wrote:

> There's a lot of case law about New England towns because the legal
> organizations of communities are so different here than in the bulk of
> the country. I think it is likely that every square inch of New
> England belongs to some "town" or other. That is patently not true in
> other areas of the country, particularly the West.
 
That certainly is true in Massachusetts.  When four towns were 
abolished to create the Quabbin Reservoir in the 1930s, their 
territory was annexed to surrounding towns.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From wollman@bimajority.org  Wed Jan 30 01:58:20 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:58:20 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <479FCEF9.25664.790F16@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<479FCEF9.25664.790F16@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <18336.8204.524802.217493@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:12:25 -0500, "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com> said:

> That certainly is true in Massachusetts.  When four towns were 
> abolished to create the Quabbin Reservoir in the 1930s, their 
> territory was annexed to surrounding towns.

Of course, that is a "can't happen" condition in many other states,
where the state constitution places even more restrictions on special
legislation than the Massachusetts constitution does.  (In
Massachusetts, the General Court can still abolish a town at will, if
I read the Home Rule Amendment correctly; in many other states, this
can only be done with the consent of the voters.)

Canada has seen quite a bit of this with the forcible amalgamation of
cities, in Quebec and Ontario particularly.  I don't know if the CRTC
ever officially ruled on whether amalgamation automatically changed
the stations' communities of license, or if stations must actually
apply for the change.  (Not that they ever identify anyway.)

-GAWollman

From paul@derrynh.net  Wed Jan 30 02:50:57 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:50:57 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
Message-ID: <000001c86314$d9ec7ff0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

Actually, The various "Purchases and Grants" in Northern NH are not Towns
per se. They are (AFAIK) unincorporated political subdivisions, and for
example, I think the few residents in these places basically are considered
residents of Coos County for the purposes of taxes, schools, etc. (Sargent's
Purchase, Bean's Grant, etc)

I believe Maine also has many unincorporated places, especially in Aroostook
County.

Having said that, I agree that New England (and I believe NJ may also fall
into this category) send to operate by Town (or Township in NJ), while most
of the rest of the country operates by County. Size of the land area
probably has a lot to do with that...

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH 

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Doherty [mailto:dave@skywaves.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 10:40 PM
To: Garrett Wollman; paul@derrynh.net
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations

There's a lot of case law about New England towns because the legal 
organizations of communities are so different here than in the bulk of the 
country. I think it is likely that every square inch of New England belongs 
to some "town" or other. That is patently not true in other areas of the 
country, particularly the West.

CDPs were meant to add substance to concentrations of population that were 
not incorporated in the traditional sense. They are accepted by the FCC as 
licensable communities without any further documentation. If the community 
is not a CDP and is not incorporated, then there are qualifications hoops to

jump through - local governance, local school district, local police force, 
band existence of local businesses all help to establish a place as a 
licensable community.

The peak of Mt. Washington is in Sargents, but the slopes include Crawfords 
(where the base station is located), Beans, Chandler, Thomson and Meserves, 
Cutts, and arguably several others. I doubt anybody actually lives in any of

these "towns," and not one is included in the census places table. I am 
totally guessing here, but I suspect that these "towns" represent the 
original landholdings granted by the King or the territorial Governor way 
back when.

So, could you license WHOM today to "Mount Washington?" Probably not. Gorham

would a piece of cake, though.

Tuck showings are intended primarily to establish that a community is not a 
made-up entity within a larger community. It works mostly to prevent 
wholesale moves of stations from small communities to large metros. When you

move a station to a new community, you can't propose to serve more than a 
particular percentage of any recognized urbanized area. As an example, you 
could not propose to move a station from, say, Provincetown to Norwood, if 
the station would serve more than half the Boston urbanized area.

-d



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
To: <paul@derrynh.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 9:33 AM
Subject: RE: Licensed to non-actual locations


> <<On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:20:49 -0500, "Paul Hopfgarten" <paul@derrynh.net>

> said:
>
>> If you think about it, WHOM is also currently licensed to a 
>> "non-political"
>> subdivision.
>
>> Mt. Washington is NOT actually a political subdivision in New Hampshire 
>> (I
>> want to say it's Sargent's Purchase...which even at that, is still
>> unincorporated).
>
>> I guess "common knowledge" of a location is sufficient for the FCC...
>
> The FCC generally prefers incorporated municipalities, and if pressed
> will accept a "Census-defined place" (particularly in southern states
> where municipalities ae in short supply).  They don't believe our
> towns really exist, because the Census Bureau conflates them with
> midwestern townships.
>
> For allocations purposes today, there is something called "/Tuck/
> analysis" which is supposed to demonstrate that the proposed community
> is a real community.  The commission was much more lax in the days of
> yore when they could hardly give away FM licenses.
>
> -GAWollman
>
> 


From paul@derrynh.net  Wed Jan 30 02:54:39 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:54:39 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <47A00549.1060307@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <000601c86315$6477b950$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

Wouldn't that be like licensing to "Auburndale (Newton MA)"; Allston (Boston
MA); Penacook (Concord-Boscawen NH) or Pinardville (Manchester-Goffstown NH)

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry Village NH 

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Scott Fybush
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 12:04 AM
To: kvahey@comcast.net
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations

kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
> Wasn't WPTZ Channel 5 licensed to North Pole, NY? Does North Pole even
exist?

Was and still is. North Pole is a hamlet in the town of Wilmington, NY. 
It has a seasonal post office and not much else. It probably wouldn't be 
licenseable as a COL today.

s


From paul@derrynh.net  Wed Jan 30 03:00:40 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 03:00:40 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <479FCEF6.13246.79068B@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <000701c86316$34bf9420$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

Definitely neighborhoods of Boston (Oak Sq was Ward 22 IIRC from when I
lived there). I would guess the 02134/02135 split is the best way to denote
the lines between Allston and Brighton.

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH
(Brighton 1981-4; Allston 1984-5)

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
A. Joseph Ross
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:12 AM
To: Eli Polonsky
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: WCOP & WBZ

On 29 Jan 2008 at 0:00, Eli Polonsky wrote:

> I guess Allston and Brighton are considered to be areas,
> or neighborhoods, within the City of Boston. 

Brighton is a "district" which includes Allston, at least for 
judicial purposes.
 
> Also, Brighton was annexed to Boston in the 1870s. Typo.

Right, it was the 1870s.   

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From paul@derrynh.net  Wed Jan 30 03:03:49 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 03:03:49 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <18336.8204.524802.217493@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <000801c86316$a6e699e0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

That's odd that a "Home Rule" State like MA can abolish a town at will..

In NH, the state is the responsible party for creating towns, but I believe
the citizens would be the party to "dissolve" a town. And we don't have Home
Rule.

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH (NH State Rep, FWIW)

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Garrett Wollman
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:58 AM
To: A. Joseph Ross
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations

<<On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:12:25 -0500, "A. Joseph Ross"
<joe@attorneyross.com> said:

> That certainly is true in Massachusetts.  When four towns were 
> abolished to create the Quabbin Reservoir in the 1930s, their 
> territory was annexed to surrounding towns.

Of course, that is a "can't happen" condition in many other states,
where the state constitution places even more restrictions on special
legislation than the Massachusetts constitution does.  (In
Massachusetts, the General Court can still abolish a town at will, if
I read the Home Rule Amendment correctly; in many other states, this
can only be done with the consent of the voters.)

Canada has seen quite a bit of this with the forcible amalgamation of
cities, in Quebec and Ontario particularly.  I don't know if the CRTC
ever officially ruled on whether amalgamation automatically changed
the stations' communities of license, or if stations must actually
apply for the change.  (Not that they ever identify anyway.)

-GAWollman


From kvahey@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 01:08:41 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (kvahey@comcast.net)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:08:41 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <18336.2314.817709.318799@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<18335.14670.334060.767504@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<479FF61B.8010809@fybush.com>
	<4fc429770801292058s1cb1c674q6fd99a3a9bf5f8a@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A00549.1060307@fybush.com>
	<18336.2314.817709.318799@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801292208n53694725x43b31dcc4a6fda39@mail.gmail.com>

I am reminded of the ill fated WXPO Channel 50 that was licensed to
Manchester but never had as much as a PO Box there. The station was
based in Lowell but the FCC would not approve a second COL so 70
percent of programming had to come from the transmitter in Windham
which was less than 15 air miles from Manchester. In the long run it
didn't matter as we couldn't pick up the signal in Lowell as the
transmitter was poorly designed. The defacto owner of the station Neil
Cortel argued with the FCC that 50 should be a Lowell outlet but.

Still ranks as the greatest fiasco in Boston area broadcasting.

From nostaticatall@charter.net  Wed Jan 30 04:03:30 2008
From: nostaticatall@charter.net (David Tomm)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:03:30 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <000601c86315$6477b950$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <000601c86315$6477b950$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <b004c4d2ff59c53302e362abb414434e@charter.net>

That is acceptable to the FCC if they feel it's a known location.  One 
that comes to mind is WILI AM & FM in Willimantic, CT.  Willimantic was 
technically a separately governed borough of Windham.  Back in the late 
1980's the town and the borough reconsolidated.  If you look on any map 
of Connecticut, Willimantic is still listed even though for municipal 
purposes it technically doesn't exist anymore.  The ownership formally 
asked the FCC back then if they had to have their station licenses 
redone to reflect the town of Windham instead of Willimantic.  They 
said there was no need since it was a recognizable location to 
potential listeners, and the stations continue to ID as Willimantic to 
this day.

-Dave Tomm
"Mike Thomas"



On Jan 30, 2008, at 2:54 AM, Paul Hopfgarten wrote:

> Wouldn't that be like licensing to "Auburndale (Newton MA)"; Allston 
> (Boston
> MA); Penacook (Concord-Boscawen NH) or Pinardville 
> (Manchester-Goffstown NH)
>
> -Paul Hopfgarten
> -Derry Village NH
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On 
> Behalf Of
> Scott Fybush
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 12:04 AM
> To: kvahey@comcast.net
> Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
> Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>
> kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
>> Wasn't WPTZ Channel 5 licensed to North Pole, NY? Does North Pole even
> exist?
>
> Was and still is. North Pole is a hamlet in the town of Wilmington, NY.
> It has a seasonal post office and not much else. It probably wouldn't 
> be
> licenseable as a COL today.
>
> s
>


From kvahey@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 04:36:15 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (kvahey@comcast.net)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:36:15 -0500
Subject: at least in Chicago 1030 rules
Message-ID: <4fc429770801300136q104acf99i2c420dcdb551339c@mail.gmail.com>

In a hotel in downtown Chicago and at 3:30 AM the strongest AM signal
on my trusty Grundig belongs to the mighty 1030 out of Hull. It is
stronger than 670,720,780,890 or 1000.

Of note I also got a clear ID from WWZN which in theory is impossible.

From revdoug1@verizon.net  Wed Jan 30 07:38:06 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:38:06 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <000001c86314$d9ec7ff0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <01f301c8633c$f74d3940$6501a8c0@pastor2>

Maine has four municipal categories: cities, towns, plantations, and
unorganized townships.  A community of any size can have a city charter if
it wishes; Eastport (population around 1400) has been a city for decades.
Plantations differ from towns
in that they have assessors rather than selectmen, and I believe shoreline
zoning laws have applications in plantations that differ from those in
towns.  Unorganized townships can be either towns that used to exist (they
actually voted to disband, which is still possible), or they are territories
that never received town charters.  There are vast areas of Maine that fall
into this category.  For example, if you travel up I-95 toward Millinocket
from Lincoln, you'll see a sign that reads: "Entering T2 R8 NWP" --- 
Township 2, Range 8, North of the Waldo Patent.  DeLorme's Maine Atlas and
Gazetteer contains a grid depicting all these.  Most, if not all, of the
patents and territories go back to colonial times.  Some of the territories
are inhabited; most aren't.  As in New Hampshire, people living in
unorganized territories pay their taxes directly to the state.  Their
respective county commissioners have municipal oversight, and the State DOT
maintains their paved roads.

A lot of people don't realize that Maine used to be part of Massachusetts,
that it's the most forested state in the Union [including Alaska] and, like
Massachusetts, it is still firmly and strongly linked to colonial and
aboriginal history.  The county I live in, Somerset, received its charter
from King Charles I in 1629.

-Doug



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Hopfgarten" <paul@derrynh.net>
To: "'Dave Doherty'" <dave@skywaves.net>; "'Garrett Wollman'"
<wollman@bimajority.org>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 2:50 AM
Subject: RE: Licensed to non-actual locations


> Actually, The various "Purchases and Grants" in Northern NH are not Towns
> per se. They are (AFAIK) unincorporated political subdivisions, and for
> example, I think the few residents in these places basically are
considered
> residents of Coos County for the purposes of taxes, schools, etc.
(Sargent's
> Purchase, Bean's Grant, etc)
>
> I believe Maine also has many unincorporated places, especially in
Aroostook
> County.
>
> Having said that, I agree that New England (and I believe NJ may also fall
> into this category) send to operate by Town (or Township in NJ), while
most
> of the rest of the country operates by County. Size of the land area
> probably has a lot to do with that...
>
> -Paul Hopfgarten
> -Derry NH
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Doherty [mailto:dave@skywaves.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 10:40 PM
> To: Garrett Wollman; paul@derrynh.net
> Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
> Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>
> There's a lot of case law about New England towns because the legal
> organizations of communities are so different here than in the bulk of the
> country. I think it is likely that every square inch of New England
belongs
> to some "town" or other. That is patently not true in other areas of the
> country, particularly the West.
>
> CDPs were meant to add substance to concentrations of population that were
> not incorporated in the traditional sense. They are accepted by the FCC as
> licensable communities without any further documentation. If the community
> is not a CDP and is not incorporated, then there are qualifications hoops
to
>
> jump through - local governance, local school district, local police
force,
> band existence of local businesses all help to establish a place as a
> licensable community.
>
> The peak of Mt. Washington is in Sargents, but the slopes include
Crawfords
> (where the base station is located), Beans, Chandler, Thomson and
Meserves,
> Cutts, and arguably several others. I doubt anybody actually lives in any
of
>
> these "towns," and not one is included in the census places table. I am
> totally guessing here, but I suspect that these "towns" represent the
> original landholdings granted by the King or the territorial Governor way
> back when.
>
> So, could you license WHOM today to "Mount Washington?" Probably not.
Gorham
>
> would a piece of cake, though.
>
> Tuck showings are intended primarily to establish that a community is not
a
> made-up entity within a larger community. It works mostly to prevent
> wholesale moves of stations from small communities to large metros. When
you
>
> move a station to a new community, you can't propose to serve more than a
> particular percentage of any recognized urbanized area. As an example, you
> could not propose to move a station from, say, Provincetown to Norwood, if
> the station would serve more than half the Boston urbanized area.
>
> -d
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
> To: <paul@derrynh.net>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 9:33 AM
> Subject: RE: Licensed to non-actual locations
>
>
> > <<On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:20:49 -0500, "Paul Hopfgarten"
<paul@derrynh.net>
>
> > said:
> >
> >> If you think about it, WHOM is also currently licensed to a
> >> "non-political"
> >> subdivision.
> >
> >> Mt. Washington is NOT actually a political subdivision in New Hampshire
> >> (I
> >> want to say it's Sargent's Purchase...which even at that, is still
> >> unincorporated).
> >
> >> I guess "common knowledge" of a location is sufficient for the FCC...
> >
> > The FCC generally prefers incorporated municipalities, and if pressed
> > will accept a "Census-defined place" (particularly in southern states
> > where municipalities ae in short supply).  They don't believe our
> > towns really exist, because the Census Bureau conflates them with
> > midwestern townships.
> >
> > For allocations purposes today, there is something called "/Tuck/
> > analysis" which is supposed to demonstrate that the proposed community
> > is a real community.  The commission was much more lax in the days of
> > yore when they could hardly give away FM licenses.
> >
> > -GAWollman
> >
> >
>


From mike@miscon.net  Wed Jan 30 08:30:02 2008
From: mike@miscon.net (mike@miscon.net)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:30:02 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: Allston / Brighton
In-Reply-To: <000701c86316$34bf9420$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <000701c86316$34bf9420$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <.132.185.144.122.1201699802.squirrel@mail.miscon.net>



Paul Hopfgarten said: 
> I would guess the 02134/02135 split is
the best way to denote 
> the lines between Allston and
Brighton.?

Sadly - especially for those ZOOM fans out
there - with WGBH's move, their zip code is now (indeed) 0-2-1-3-5




From fox893@yahoo.com  Wed Jan 30 08:35:43 2008
From: fox893@yahoo.com (Cooper Fox)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:35:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <479FF61B.8010809@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <37241.2012.qm@web39108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


is WHOM actually license to Mt Washington?  I guess I
never noticed.

I know that WPKQ is licensed to North Conway.


--- Scott Fybush <scott@fybush.com> wrote:

> Dave Doherty wrote:
> 
> > CDPs were meant to add substance to concentrations
> of population that 
> > were not incorporated in the traditional sense.
> They are accepted by the 
> > FCC as licensable communities without any further
> documentation. If the 
> > community is not a CDP and is not incorporated,
> then there are 
> > qualifications hoops to jump through - local
> governance, local school 
> > district, local police force, band existence of
> local businesses all 
> > help to establish a place as a licensable
> community.
> 
> I'm not sure I agree that the FCC accepts a CDP as
> prima facie evidence 
> that a community exists for allocations purposes. My
> understanding (and 
> I am not a communications lawyer, or any type of
> lawyer at all!) is that 
> further documentation is still required, but that
> the presumption is 
> heavily in favor of licenseability if a community is
> a CDP.
> > 
> > The peak of Mt. Washington is in Sargents, but the
> slopes include 
> > Crawfords (where the base station is located),
> Beans, Chandler, Thomson 
> > and Meserves, Cutts, and arguably several others.
> I doubt anybody 
> > actually lives in any of these "towns," and not
> one is included in the 
> > census places table. I am totally guessing here,
> but I suspect that 
> > these "towns" represent the original landholdings
> granted by the King or 
> > the territorial Governor way back when.
> > 
> > So, could you license WHOM today to "Mount
> Washington?" Probably not. 
> > Gorham would a piece of cake, though.
> 
> The standards were much, much looser in the very
> early days of FM. I'm 
> pretty sure that the Yankee FM on Mount Washington
> was actually licensed 
> as a "Boston" station at one point. I think the
> Mount Mitchell FM in 
> North Carolina may have been licensed as "Charlotte"
> around the same time.
> 
> What's interesting to me is that the "Mount
> Washington" COL was allowed 
> to be reused when the current FM signal up there was
> licensed in 1958. A 
> few years later, and it would have to have been
> licensed somewhere else 
> - probably to Poland Spring, Maine, where its sister
> TV was licensed. As 
> WMTW-FM, it must have had a main-studio waiver to
> put its studios first 
> in Poland Spring and later in Portland, right?
> 
> > Tuck showings are intended primarily to establish
> that a community is 
> > not a made-up entity within a larger community. It
> works mostly to 
> > prevent wholesale moves of stations from small
> communities to large 
> > metros. When you move a station to a new
> community, you can't propose to 
> > serve more than a particular percentage of any
> recognized urbanized 
> > area. As an example, you could not propose to move
> a station from, say, 
> > Provincetown to Norwood, if the station would
> serve more than half the 
> > Boston urbanized area.
> 
> That's not quite my understanding. The "more than
> half the urbanized 
> area" test is what triggers the Tuck analysis. If
> you're proposing to 
> move a station from outside an urbanized area to an
> urbanized area (by 
> way of a COL change), the Tuck analysis is required
> when that 50% 
> threshold is reached. It's a multi-prong test that
> looks at factors like 
> whether the proposed COL has its own media (I've
> seen even local 
> websites cited to meet that prong of the test),
> whether people who live 
> in the community also work there (as little as 10%
> can fulfill that 
> criterion), whether there are businesses that
> identify themselves by the 
> community's name, whether the community has its own
> phone book, post 
> office, local fire/police/schools, and so on.
> 
> One could argue, with quite a bit of validity, that
> the Tuck tests don't 
> really accomplish what they were meant to do (as
> Dave so ably lays it 
> out above) - I'd have no problem writing a
> convincing Tuck analysis that 
> would demonstrate that Cambridge, for instance, is a
> community separate 
> from Boston for allotment purposes. (Actually, that
> one's almost a 
> gimme, since the FCC has a presumption that any
> community that already 
> has stations licensed to it is therefore a
> licenseable community.)
> 
> The one I've always wanted to try is Brooklyn -
> except for the fact that 
> it's governmentally part of New York City, it meets
> all the Tuck 
> criteria and then some. (And I could probably spin
> the existence of the 
> Kings County government and the Brooklyn borough
> government, not to 
> mention noncomm WKRB-FM Brooklyn, to get over that
> hump!)
> 
> s
> 



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Wed Jan 30 08:57:16 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:57:16 -0500
Subject: Allston / Brighton
References: <000701c86316$34bf9420$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<.132.185.144.122.1201699802.squirrel@mail.miscon.net>
Message-ID: <022201c86348$069fcbf0$6501a8c0@pastor2>

Yeah, I suspect the volume of mail at the Brighton postal branch diminished
considerably when ZOOM was discontinued.  That was a cool show.  I liked it
even as an adult.

And as for WBZ, I suspect 1170 Soldiers Field Road, Boston 02134 is probably
the best-known address in eastern New England.   -Doug


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <mike@miscon.net>
To: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 8:30 AM
Subject: Allston / Brighton


>
>
> Paul Hopfgarten said:
> > I would guess the 02134/02135 split is
> the best way to denote
> > the lines between Allston and
> Brighton.
>
> Sadly - especially for those ZOOM fans out
> there - with WGBH's move, their zip code is now (indeed) 0-2-1-3-5
>
>
>


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Wed Jan 30 09:08:50 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:08:50 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044><002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net><479FCEF9.25664.790F16@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<18336.8204.524802.217493@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <003801c8634a$0e0f69c0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>

How does that square with the recent situation in a couple of towns in
the north-central part of the state (Shirly and Ayer, maybe)? There
was a move to take land from these towns to create a new town that
would have been named Devens and would have encompassed much of what
used to be Fort Devens. Didn't happen because the the citizens of the
affected communities voted against it in a referendum (by a narrow
margin, I believe). I don't think the referendum was in any way
optional. It had to pass with the voters in the towns that would lose
the land before the territory could be annexed to form the new town.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
To: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:58 AM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> (In
> Massachusetts, the General Court can still abolish a town at will,
> if
> I read the Home Rule Amendment correctly; in many other states, this
> can only be done with the consent of the voters.)
>
> -GAWollman


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Wed Jan 30 09:11:39 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:11:39 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044><00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>	<18335.14670.334060.767504@hergotha.csail.mit.edu><002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net><479FF61B.8010809@fybush.com>
	<003901c862ff$4e3667b0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
Message-ID: <003901c8634a$0e81daa0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>

Back in the 50s, WFLY 92.3 Troy (then owned by the Troy Record
Newspaper), though not one of the five Class B's you mentioned, was
nevertheless a member of the network you referred to. For quite a few
years, that network was known as the 'QXR Network. It had begun life
several years earlier as the Rural Radio Network, and in that
incarnation, I don't think it included WFLY. The 'QXR Network relayed
WQXR-FM's classical music programming across central and western New
York via over-the-air pickup and rebroadcast. WFLY would pick up
WQXR-FM over the air from New York City at its Tx site in the
Helderbergs, southwest of Albany (a distance that probably exceeds 130
miles). I think the next station in the chain was the one in DeRuyter,
but I'm not sure about that.

When WFLY started the over-the-air pickup from New York, Class B FMs'
maximum ERP was 20 kW at an HAAT of 500'. (50 kW at 500' was nearly a
decade in the future and 50 kW at 150m was about another decade away.)
The FM band was, of course, very sparsely populated, FM was still all
in mono, and Docket 80-90 was what? three decades in the future?
Nevertheless, when the over-the-air relay began, the designers of
the network envisioned situations when the over-the-air signal from
New York as it was received in the Helderbergs would be inadequate and
they built in a backup--an over-the-air pickup of WQXR (AM) 1560, then
only 10 kW-U and broadcasting from its present (horrendous) site in
Queens. Indeed, cut-overs to the AM pickup did happen every now and
then and when the skywave and groundwave cooperated, the audio quality
could be quite acceptable. Alas, the skywave/groundwave cooperation
was not especially dependable, but the receivers were usually
able to produce pretty good audio despite the presence of 50 kW-U WPTR
only 20 kcps (no kHz yet) away from WQXR. No doubt, WPTR's directional
pattern, with deep minima to the south and west (more or less in the
direction of WFLY), made the receiver selectivity less critical.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
To: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 12:16 AM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> Hi Scott-
>
> I have an interesting case in the works that rests partially on the
> CDP issue. I can't comment on it now because it is "ongoing."  The
> attorney for our side says CDPs are accepted prima facie, and i've
> seen a number of cases to support that position.  It never hurts to
> include the local governance and economy stuff in support of the
> case, though.
>
> I think you are right about Mt. Washington and Mt. Mitchell being
> licensed to Boston and Charlotte way back when.  Of course in those
> days if you had today's receivers and 1950's FM station counts,
> there would be hardly any interference and you could probably pick
> up both stations in Maryland!
>
> I remember sitting in the ham shack at RPI late at night in the
> early '70s and listening to the NYC FMs 150 miles down the road.
> Today, you'd be lucky to hear any of them.
>
> I don't know what the principal community signal requirements were
> in the 1950s. I think the 70dbu requirement was laid down in the mid
> 1960s.  But until the era of dereg, the studios had to be in the
> principal community. For WMTW there was no real community, so I have
> no idea how they handled it.
>
> This brings to mind the case of the Upstate NY network of Class B
> stations licensed to Cherry Valley, Weathersfiled Township, and
> other places. My understanding is that there was only one studio for
> the five or six stations in that network.  When I was a teenager in
> Delmar, I was able to pick up the Cherry Valley station. It was a
> kind of background music format, as I recall. The owner or his
> estate eventually transferred the stations to CBN, who ran Christian
> programming, and eventually sold them when they made their
> commitment to TV and the CBN University project. They are now
> individual stations, and not all retained the religious affiliation
> that came with CBN.
>
> Tuck is a kind of Catch-22. Cambridge already has a station, so it
> qualifies as a community. But it would be really hard to justify a
> move from Provincetown to Cambridge under 307(b) because Cambridge
> already has a station. The most convincing 307(b) showing includes
> the fact that the community does not have a local station, thus
> justifying the removal of the service from the current community.
>
> Brooklyn is intriguing, but WKRB probably works against the case.
>
> -d
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
> To: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
> Cc: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>; <paul@derrynh.net>;
> <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 10:59 PM
> Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>
>
>> Dave Doherty wrote:
>>
>>> CDPs were meant to add substance to concentrations of population
>>> that were not incorporated in the traditional sense. They are
>>> accepted by the FCC as licensable communities without any further
>>> documentation. If the community is not a CDP and is not
>>> incorporated, then there are qualifications hoops to jump
>>> through - local governance, local school district, local police
>>> force, band existence of local businesses all help to establish a
>>> place as a licensable community.
>>
>> I'm not sure I agree that the FCC accepts a CDP as prima facie
>> evidence that a community exists for allocations purposes. My
>> understanding (and I am not a communications lawyer, or any type of
>> lawyer at all!) is that further documentation is still required,
>> but that the presumption is heavily in favor of licenseability if a
>> community is a CDP.
>>>
>>> The peak of Mt. Washington is in Sargents, but the slopes include
>>> Crawfords (where the base station is located), Beans, Chandler,
>>> Thomson and Meserves, Cutts, and arguably several others. I doubt
>>> anybody actually lives in any of these "towns," and not one is
>>> included in the census places table. I am totally guessing here,
>>> but I suspect that these "towns" represent the original
>>> landholdings granted by the King or the territorial Governor way
>>> back when.
>>>
>>> So, could you license WHOM today to "Mount Washington?" Probably
>>> not. Gorham would a piece of cake, though.
>>
>> The standards were much, much looser in the very early days of FM.
>> I'm pretty sure that the Yankee FM on Mount Washington was actually
>> licensed as a "Boston" station at one point. I think the Mount
>> Mitchell FM in North Carolina may have been licensed as "Charlotte"
>> around the same time.
>>
>> What's interesting to me is that the "Mount Washington" COL was
>> allowed to be reused when the current FM signal up there was
>> licensed in 1958. A few years later, and it would have to have been
>> licensed somewhere else - probably to Poland Spring, Maine, where
>> its sister TV was licensed. As WMTW-FM, it must have had a
>> main-studio waiver to put its studios first in Poland Spring and
>> later in Portland, right?
>>
>>> Tuck showings are intended primarily to establish that a community
>>> is not a made-up entity within a larger community. It works mostly
>>> to prevent wholesale moves of stations from small communities to
>>> large metros. When you move a station to a new community, you
>>> can't propose to serve more than a particular percentage of any
>>> recognized urbanized area. As an example, you could not propose to
>>> move a station from, say, Provincetown to Norwood, if the station
>>> would serve more than half the Boston urbanized area.
>>
>> That's not quite my understanding. The "more than half the
>> urbanized area" test is what triggers the Tuck analysis. If you're
>> proposing to move a station from outside an urbanized area to an
>> urbanized area (by way of a COL change), the Tuck analysis is
>> required when that 50% threshold is reached. It's a multi-prong
>> test that looks at factors like whether the proposed COL has its
>> own media (I've seen even local websites cited to meet that prong
>> of the test), whether people who live in the community also work
>> there (as little as 10% can fulfill that criterion), whether there
>> are businesses that identify themselves by the community's name,
>> whether the community has its own phone book, post office, local
>> fire/police/schools, and so on.
>>
>> One could argue, with quite a bit of validity, that the Tuck tests
>> don't really accomplish what they were meant to do (as Dave so ably
>> lays it out above) - I'd have no problem writing a convincing Tuck
>> analysis that would demonstrate that Cambridge, for instance, is a
>> community separate from Boston for allotment purposes. (Actually,
>> that one's almost a gimme, since the FCC has a presumption that any
>> community that already has stations licensed to it is therefore a
>> licenseable community.)
>>
>> The one I've always wanted to try is Brooklyn - except for the fact
>> that it's governmentally part of New York City, it meets all the
>> Tuck criteria and then some. (And I could probably spin the
>> existence of the Kings County government and the Brooklyn borough
>> government, not to mention noncomm WKRB-FM Brooklyn, to get over
>> that hump!)
>>
>> s
>>
>>
>


From brian_vita@cssinc.com  Wed Jan 30 09:45:21 2008
From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:45:21 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <479FCEF6.12451.790429@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <000901c862a2$29b34e60$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<000701c862b3$82c84490$6400a8c0@lysthia>
	<479FCEF6.12451.790429@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <47A08D81.9010004@cssinc.com>

A. Joseph Ross wrote:
> On 29 Jan 2008 at 15:10, Brian Vita wrote:
>
>   
>> Actually in a typical 35mm projector that still uses reels, the upper
>> feed reel runs counterclockwise, the takeup reel below runs clockwise.
>>  In Europe they both run clockwise.  Very few theatres actually still
>> use reels, however.
>>     
>  
> What do they use?
>
>   
Platters.  Its usually a set of 3 to 5 52" disks that each would hold 4+ 
hours of film.  The film is fed out of the center and taken up on an 
adjacent empty deck around a removable core.  During the next 
performance, the core is removed and the film is again fed out of the 
center.  There is no rewinding or backing up with this system.  The film 
still arrives at the theatre on 20 minute reels.  The projectionist or 
manager/operator splices the reels end to end, much like the old home 
movies, as he winds it onto the platter deck.  At the end of the run, 
the process is reversed.

See:

http://www.strong-cinema.com/DisplayFileObjects.aspx?i=e1a34fc1-ffd1-4e6d-bf35-9edee66afa81

That's the most common brand and the one that I happen to sell

Brian

From brian_vita@cssinc.com  Wed Jan 30 09:47:04 2008
From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:47:04 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <479FCEF9.25664.790F16@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<479FCEF9.25664.790F16@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <47A08DE8.7030506@cssinc.com>

A. Joseph Ross wrote:
> On 29 Jan 2008 at 22:39, Dave Doherty wrote:
>
>   
>> There's a lot of case law about New England towns because the legal
>> organizations of communities are so different here than in the bulk of
>> the country. I think it is likely that every square inch of New
>> England belongs to some "town" or other. That is patently not true in
>> other areas of the country, particularly the West.
>>     
>  
> That certainly is true in Massachusetts.  When four towns were 
> abolished to create the Quabbin Reservoir in the 1930s, their 
> territory was annexed to surrounding towns.
>
>   
What were the four towns?

Brian

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Wed Jan 30 09:31:58 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:31:58 -0500
Subject: at least in Chicago 1030 rules
References: <4fc429770801300136q104acf99i2c420dcdb551339c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <005201c8634c$e2014ee0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>

It would be interesting to find out the NIF value for WNVR 1030 Vernon 
Hills IL (40 miles--give or take--northwest of the Loop). WNVR, which 
broadcasts Polish-language talk, runs 120W-N from two short but 
heavily top-loaded towers that produce a figure-eight pattern oriented 
north-south with deep minima toward Boston. It's no surprise at all 
that WNVR would be completely inaudible at night within the Chicago 
city limits, but a good question is whether the night signal can be 
heard at all beyond the end of the station's own ground radials.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kvahey@comcast.net>
To: "(newsgroup) Boston-Radio-Interest" 
<boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>; "A. Joseph Ross" 
<joe@attorneyross.com>; "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 4:36 AM
Subject: at least in Chicago 1030 rules


> In a hotel in downtown Chicago and at 3:30 AM the strongest AM 
> signal
> on my trusty Grundig belongs to the mighty 1030 out of Hull. It is
> stronger than 670,720,780,890 or 1000.
>
> Of note I also got a clear ID from WWZN which in theory is 
> impossible. 


From paulranderson@charter.net  Wed Jan 30 10:17:14 2008
From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:17:14 -0500
Subject: WCAP/980 (was Re: ABC Returns To WCAP)
In-Reply-To: <011601c862ea$e3f51c20$6501a8c0@vpr1>
Message-ID: <20080130101714.715CL.793682.root@fepweb12>

I've tuned to WCAP for a while the last few days while driving to work.  I'm very impressed.

Compared with a lot of the sloppy board work of a lot of stations (distorted or mismatched volume, various elements being stepped on, etc.) WCAP sounds wonderful!  Everything is well-crafted, including the top-of-the-hour cut to network news, which many stations get wrong.  The pacing is good and the branding is not in-your-face, with the call letters or slogans being repeated ad naseum.

Good job.  Now add Paul Harvey to your ABC lineup!

Paul

From hmglaz@worldnet.att.net  Wed Jan 30 10:30:41 2008
From: hmglaz@worldnet.att.net (Howard Glazer)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:30:41 -0500
Subject: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT
References: <4fc429770801281218y1ad541d5rf8c1cb1eec56c8db@mail.gmail.com>,
	<00e401c8624f$116884e0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<479FCEF7.25634.7908CD@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <001e01c86355$16507240$5e884c0c@oemcomputer>


----- Original Message -----
From: A. Joseph Ross <joe@attorneyross.com>
To: <paul@derrynh.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:12 AM
Subject: RE: The unimpressive run of 1150 AM was: WTTT


> On 29 Jan 2008 at 3:15, Paul Hopfgarten wrote:
>
> > My father was a regular listener to 1-1-5-0...WCOP...in the late 60s
> > (the Country years)
>
> I was a regular listener in the 1950s Top-40 era.  We got a really
> strong signal in Bedford.  WCOP DJs were the ones most often hired to
> do school record hops.  Some of them lived in Bedford -- probably
> because the studios, by that time, were at the transmitter site in
> Lexington.
>
> > And I actually listened to 1150 for a bit in the WACQ days (late 70s?)
> > when I had s**tbox cars w/o FM radios.....
>
> I did too.  I liked the format at that time.  They had one of the
> first female Top-40 DJs, who called herself Marcia Nicely.  I wonder
> who she really was.
>

No idea about Marcia Nicely, but I think the first female Top 40 DJ in
Boston was Melody McShane on WRKO several years earlier.

Howard



From kvahey@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 09:29:57 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:29:57 -0600
Subject: odd clip on WCVB website
Message-ID: <4fc429770801300629t544fecbaif50d1016119e77bc@mail.gmail.com>

WCVB-TV is ramping up for the 30th anniversary of the 78 blizzard.

On the website is Harvey Leonard's forecast. Was not Harvey at WNAC-TV then?

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/video/15084460/index.html

From hmglaz@worldnet.att.net  Wed Jan 30 10:40:16 2008
From: hmglaz@worldnet.att.net (Howard Glazer)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:40:16 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <000601c86315$6477b950$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<b004c4d2ff59c53302e362abb414434e@charter.net>
Message-ID: <003701c86356$6a3bcb60$5e884c0c@oemcomputer>


----- Original Message -----
From: David Tomm <nostaticatall@charter.net>
To: <paul@derrynh.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 4:03 AM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> That is acceptable to the FCC if they feel it's a known location.  One
> that comes to mind is WILI AM & FM in Willimantic, CT.  Willimantic was
> technically a separately governed borough of Windham.  Back in the late
> 1980's the town and the borough reconsolidated.  If you look on any map
> of Connecticut, Willimantic is still listed even though for municipal
> purposes it technically doesn't exist anymore.  The ownership formally
> asked the FCC back then if they had to have their station licenses
> redone to reflect the town of Windham instead of Willimantic.  They
> said there was no need since it was a recognizable location to
> potential listeners, and the stations continue to ID as Willimantic to
> this day.
>
> -Dave Tomm
> "Mike Thomas"
>
>

Does the same thinking apply to WHUS, the University of Connecticut's
station, which IDs as Storrs? Storrs, a section of Mansfield, has never been
a town.

Howard





From m_carney@yahoo.com  Wed Jan 30 10:50:59 2008
From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:50:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: odd clip on WCVB website
Message-ID: <383825.29335.qm@web52610.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

If not there he was at WPRI in Providence. I can't quite remember when he moved up to Boston.

----- Original Message ----
From: Kevin Vahey <kvahey@comcast.net>
To: (newsgroup) Boston-Radio-Interest <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 9:29:57 AM
Subject: odd clip on WCVB website

WCVB-TV is ramping up for the 30th anniversary of the 78 blizzard.

On the website is Harvey Leonard's forecast. Was not Harvey at WNAC-TV then?

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/video/15084460/index.html


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 


From martinjwaters@yahoo.com  Wed Jan 30 10:51:18 2008
From: martinjwaters@yahoo.com (Martin Waters)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:51:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
Message-ID: <578476.93757.qm@web39115.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

> On 29 Jan 2008 Scott Fybush wrote:
> 
>> The WBZ aux tower that now stands on the west side
 of the building
>> arrived in 1951 as a backup tower for WBZ-TV. It
 was apparently
>> shipped to Allston from Pittsburgh, where it had
 been a tower for the
>> first incarnation of KDKA-FM, which went silent
 pretty early on.

    So, where was the main TV tower that fell in
relation to the existing tower, that the latter
survived the collapse?

    And, is the existing tower in the same place as it
was then? 

    I take it that after the channel 4 tower in
Needham was up, with a short backup tower there, the
tower at the station was converted to its current
radio use? 

    Did WBZ (AM) have a backup facility before then?









From brian_vita@cssinc.com  Wed Jan 30 11:03:39 2008
From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:03:39 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <006b01c86358$ac32c760$0202a8c0@OPZT3SQCQXSI1V>
Message-ID: <000c01c86359$ae88f6f0$6400a8c0@lysthia>

Oh no.  Watch out for the black helicopters circling overhead....

I tried to send you directly to the pdf at their website.  Try this link
instead:

http://www.strong-cinema.com/Products.aspx?cmd=open&c=121  then click either
of the first two links under "platters"



------------------------------------
Cinema Service & Supply, Inc.
Brian Vita
President
brian_vita@cssinc.com
77 Walnut St - Ste 4
Peabody, MA  01960-5691
tel: 978-538-7575
tel2:(800)231-8849
fax: 978-538-7550
IM: btvita@hotmail.com
www.cssinc.com
AIM: btvita
------------------------------------


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Terry [mailto:tmw207@roadrunner.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 10:56 AM
> To: Brian Vita
> Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
> 
> 
> Brian, when you click on that link,,,,,it says "you should 
> not be here"
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Brian Vita" <brian_vita@cssinc.com>
> To: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 9:45 AM
> Subject: Re: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
> 
> 
> > A. Joseph Ross wrote:
> >> On 29 Jan 2008 at 15:10, Brian Vita wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Actually in a typical 35mm projector that still uses reels, the 
> >>> upper feed reel runs counterclockwise, the takeup reel below runs 
> >>> clockwise.  In Europe they both run clockwise.  Very few theatres 
> >>> actually still use reels, however.
> >>>
> >>  What do they use?
> >>
> >>
> > Platters.  Its usually a set of 3 to 5 52" disks that each 
> would hold 
> > 4+
> > hours of film.  The film is fed out of the center and taken 
> up on an 
> > adjacent empty deck around a removable core.  During the 
> next performance, 
> > the core is removed and the film is again fed out of the 
> center.  There is 
> > no rewinding or backing up with this system.  The film 
> still arrives at 
> > the theatre on 20 minute reels.  The projectionist or 
> manager/operator 
> > splices the reels end to end, much like the old home 
> movies, as he winds 
> > it onto the platter deck.  At the end of the run, the 
> process is reversed.
> >
> > See:
> >
> > 
> http://www.strong-cinema.com/DisplayFileObjects.aspx?i=e1a34fc1-ffd1-4
> > e6d-bf35-9edee66afa81
> >
> > That's the most common brand and the one that I happen to sell
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> > ---
> > avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
> > Virus Database (VPS): 080130-0, 01/30/2008
> > Tested on: 1/30/2008 10:16:40 AM
> > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software. 
> http://www.avast.com
> >
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
> Virus Database (VPS): 080130-0, 01/30/2008
> Tested on: 1/30/2008 10:56:27 AM
> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software.
> http://www.avast.com
> 
> 
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.16/1251 - Release 
> Date: 1/30/2008 9:29 AM
> 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.16/1251 - Release Date: 1/30/2008
9:29 AM
 


From mamros@MIT.EDU  Wed Jan 30 11:08:48 2008
From: mamros@MIT.EDU (Shawn Mamros)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:08:48 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:51:18 PST."
	<578476.93757.qm@web39115.mail.mud.yahoo.com> 
Message-ID: <200801301608.m0UG8mjZ010297@home-on-the-dome.mit.edu>

>    So, where was the main TV tower that fell in
>relation to the existing tower, that the latter
>survived the collapse?

The pictures I've seen (thought I remember seeing one online, but
I can't find it at the moment) shows the TV tower being behind
the building.  If the current tower is considered to be just west
of the building, the TV tower would have been to the south of it.
It fell directly across the building, towards the road, nowhere
near the direction of the current tower.

-Shawn Mamros
E-mail to: mamros -at- mit dot edu

From billohno@gmail.com  Wed Jan 30 11:14:12 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:14:12 -0500
Subject: Allston / Brighton
In-Reply-To: <.132.185.144.122.1201699802.squirrel@mail.miscon.net>
References: <000701c86316$34bf9420$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<.132.185.144.122.1201699802.squirrel@mail.miscon.net>
Message-ID: <47A0A254.60804@gmail.com>

mike@miscon.net wrote:
> Sadly - especially for those ZOOM fans out
> there - with WGBH's move, their zip code is now (indeed) 0-2-1-3-5
>
>   
Now, that is just wrong. The humanity! Up there with 
Andrew-eight-seven-thousand.

b -

From ncn86@hotmail.com  Wed Jan 30 08:35:08 2008
From: ncn86@hotmail.com (Nickolas Noseworthy)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:35:08 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <000601c86315$6477b950$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <47A00549.1060307@fybush.com>
	<000601c86315$6477b950$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <BAY120-W381F82D9AC6CFAF9D4F4DFA2360@phx.gbl>

When I first applied for a posistion at WNTN 1550 in Newton MA, I was very confused when the station personal kept telling me the station was in Auburndale. Everywhere else said it was Newton. "No, the station is in both towns" they would say. Very, very confusing. Some of the earliest literature sent to the station was labeled to Auburndale, but a majority of the mail today is labeled to Newton. The station is licensed to Newton, as said in the Top Hour ID. But where they originally licensed to Auburndale when they went on the air in 1968? 
-Nick Noseworthy
Merrimack NH

_________________________________________________________________
Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser!
http://biggestloser.msn.com/

From songbook2@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 11:26:36 2008
From: songbook2@comcast.net (Russ Butler)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:26:36 -0800
Subject: WEZE "Window"
Message-ID: <47A0A53C.9020706@comcast.net>

Tim Coco mentioned the WEZE "window studio on the street level" - that 
would be on the first floor of The Statler Hotel, at the curved corner 
that had wrap around windows.

I believe they also had drapes that could be pulled together for some 
privacy or nighttime security.(Columbus Avenue and Stuart Street weren't 
that friendly at night in the 1950's). I don't think the windows were 
bullet-proof glass (like Lexan on the NYC "Today" show set, etc.) but 
there weren't many people walking past the window to stop and look 
anyway.  Drivers  would blow their car horns driving past that corner of 
what is now The Boston Park Plaza. (Everybody wants to be heard on the 
radio, I guess)

Interesting side note: The Statler in Boston was the first hotel in the 
world to offer in-room radio service when it opened in 1927. It was a 
two channel system with guests able to select the channel from a 
receiver and listen with either 2 headsets or radio loudspeaker. The 
cost of this installation in Boston was $50,000 (1927 dollars, by the 
way) and it cost another $750,000 to install radios in the chain's six 
older houses.  I wonder what two channels or stations they chose that 
guests would be able to hear in 1927?  WBZ, of course, the other?

(I'll bet these 2 channels worked better than those cheesy, little table 
alarm clock radios the hotels have now with no decent reception at all 
on AM or FM - buzzing yes, music no).

=Russ Butler  songbook2@comcast.net



From wollman@bimajority.org  Wed Jan 30 11:29:25 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:29:25 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <003701c86356$6a3bcb60$5e884c0c@oemcomputer>
References: <000601c86315$6477b950$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<b004c4d2ff59c53302e362abb414434e@charter.net>
	<003701c86356$6a3bcb60$5e884c0c@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <18336.42469.767245.277515@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:40:16 -0500, "Howard Glazer" <hmglaz@worldnet.att.net> said:

> Does the same thinking apply to WHUS, the University of Connecticut's
> station, which IDs as Storrs? Storrs, a section of Mansfield, has never been
> a town.

Sure.  An even better example, on Cape Cod: there are multiple
stations licensed to Hyannis, which is a fire district in the town of
Barnstable.  (Whose English namesake, for what it's worth, is spelled
"Barnstaple" with a "p".)  There is also a station licensed to
Barnstable itself (WQRC), plus another to West Barnstable (WKKL).

-GAWollman


From hmglaz@worldnet.att.net  Wed Jan 30 11:31:35 2008
From: hmglaz@worldnet.att.net (Howard Glazer)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:31:35 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net><479FCEF9.25664.790F16@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<47A08DE8.7030506@cssinc.com>
Message-ID: <001901c8635d$95883860$5e884c0c@oemcomputer>


----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Vita <brian_vita@cssinc.com>
To: A. Joseph Ross <joe@attorneyross.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> A. Joseph Ross wrote:
> > On 29 Jan 2008 at 22:39, Dave Doherty wrote:
> >
> >
> >> There's a lot of case law about New England towns because the legal
> >> organizations of communities are so different here than in the bulk of
> >> the country. I think it is likely that every square inch of New
> >> England belongs to some "town" or other. That is patently not true in
> >> other areas of the country, particularly the West.
> >>
> >
> > That certainly is true in Massachusetts.  When four towns were
> > abolished to create the Quabbin Reservoir in the 1930s, their
> > territory was annexed to surrounding towns.
> >
> >
> What were the four towns?
>
> Brian
>
>

Enfield, Greenwich, Prescott and Dana. Am I the 10th caller with the answer?
What do I win?

Howard



From wollman@bimajority.org  Wed Jan 30 11:31:56 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:31:56 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <200801301608.m0UG8mjZ010297@home-on-the-dome.mit.edu>
References: <578476.93757.qm@web39115.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<200801301608.m0UG8mjZ010297@home-on-the-dome.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <18336.42620.908114.382014@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:08:48 -0500, Shawn Mamros <mamros@mit.edu> said:

[WBZ-TV/Hurricane Carol]
> The pictures I've seen (thought I remember seeing one online, but
> I can't find it at the moment) shows the TV tower being behind
> the building.

One footing is still there in the parking lot.  See
<http://gallery.bostonradio.org/2005-06/boston/100-02977-med.html>.

-GAWollman

From martinjwaters@yahoo.com  Wed Jan 30 11:34:13 2008
From: martinjwaters@yahoo.com (Martin Waters)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:34:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Blizzard of  '78
Message-ID: <983104.55282.qm@web39106.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


    With the 30th anniversary coming next week, Feb.
5-6: What were the effects of the blizzard on the
radio and TV operations of stations in the Boston
area? I was in western Massachusetts then, But had the
imPression that some stations were knocked off for
significant periods?

    I know that WBZ (AM) had to use its backup in
Allston - which was not 10 kW then. It was 1 or 5, I
think. I've heard that WBZ's site in Hull went down
because snow and ice clogged all the ventilation
openings in the transmitter building, the transmitter
overheated and caught fire. Dramatic true story, or
urban legend? How long was it until they got back on
at 50 kW? 


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Wed Jan 30 11:39:00 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:39:00 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
References: <47A00549.1060307@fybush.com><000601c86315$6477b950$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<BAY120-W381F82D9AC6CFAF9D4F4DFA2360@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <001a01c8635e$9f7f60e0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>

Auburndale is part of Newton. Almost certainly, it was once an
independent town as was (I assume) Nonantum (OK, Nonantum may be a
section of Watertown rather than Newton; I'm not sure) and probably
all of the other named sections of Newton. Kind of the same idea as
Readville in Boston. Readville may even be more curious. Isn't
Readville considered to be part of Hyde Park, which in turn is part of
Boston?

I'm reminded of the old rhyme:
Dogs have fleas on their backs to bite 'em,
and the fleas have little fleas,
and so on, ad infinitum.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nickolas Noseworthy" <ncn86@hotmail.com>
To: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 8:35 AM
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale


When I first applied for a posistion at WNTN 1550 in Newton MA, I was
very confused when the station personal kept telling me the station
was in Auburndale. Everywhere else said it was Newton. "No, the
station is in both towns" they would say. Very, very confusing. Some
of the earliest literature sent to the station was labeled to
Auburndale, but a majority of the mail today is labeled to Newton. The
station is licensed to Newton, as said in the Top Hour ID. But where
they originally licensed to Auburndale when they went on the air in
1968?
-Nick Noseworthy
Merrimack NH

_________________________________________________________________
Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser!
http://biggestloser.msn.com/=


From sean.smyth@yahoo.com  Wed Jan 30 11:39:13 2008
From: sean.smyth@yahoo.com (Sean Smyth)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:39:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <BAY120-W381F82D9AC6CFAF9D4F4DFA2360@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <288616.85715.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Nickolas Noseworthy <ncn86@hotmail.com> wrote:
> When I first applied for a posistion at WNTN 1550 in Newton MA, I was
> very confused when the station personal kept telling me the station
> was in Auburndale. Everywhere else said it was Newton. "No, the
> station is in both towns" they would say. Very, very confusing. Some
> of the earliest literature sent to the station was labeled to
> Auburndale, but a majority of the mail today is labeled to Newton.
> The station is licensed to Newton, as said in the Top Hour ID. But
> where they originally licensed to Auburndale when they went on the
> air in 1968? 

Auburndale is not a town. It is one of numerous villages in Newton. (I
forget the exact number.) The City of Newton is the governing body.


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Wed Jan 30 11:47:28 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:47:28 -0500
Subject: WEZE "Window"
References: <47A0A53C.9020706@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <003a01c8635f$ce7c1360$58efa644@SatU205S5044>

Wasn't the studio in the Statler Office Building, which adjoined the
hotel, and not in the hotel itself?

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Russ Butler" <songbook2@comcast.net>
To: <boston-radio-interest@tsornin.bostonradio.org>; <tcoco@whav.net>;
"Russ Butler" <songbook2@comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 11:26 AM
Subject: WEZE "Window"


> Tim Coco mentioned the WEZE "window studio on the street level" -
> that would be on the first floor of The Statler Hotel, at the curved
> corner that had wrap around windows.
>
> I believe they also had drapes that could be pulled together for
> some privacy or nighttime security.(Columbus Avenue and Stuart
> Street weren't that friendly at night in the 1950's). I don't think
> the windows were bullet-proof glass (like Lexan on the NYC "Today"
> show set, etc.) but there weren't many people walking past the
> window to stop and look anyway.  Drivers  would blow their car horns
> driving past that corner of what is now The Boston Park Plaza.
> (Everybody wants to be heard on the radio, I guess)
>
> Interesting side note: The Statler in Boston was the first hotel in
> the world to offer in-room radio service when it opened in 1927. It
> was a two channel system with guests able to select the channel from
> a receiver and listen with either 2 headsets or radio loudspeaker.
> The cost of this installation in Boston was $50,000 (1927 dollars,
> by the way) and it cost another $750,000 to install radios in the
> chain's six older houses.  I wonder what two channels or stations
> they chose that guests would be able to hear in 1927?  WBZ, of
> course, the other?
>
> (I'll bet these 2 channels worked better than those cheesy, little
> table alarm clock radios the hotels have now with no decent
> reception at all on AM or FM - buzzing yes, music no).
>
> =Russ Butler  songbook2@comcast.net
>
>


From songbook2@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 11:59:35 2008
From: songbook2@comcast.net (Russ Butler)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:59:35 -0800
Subject: Statler Hotel correction
Message-ID: <47A0ACF7.3000205@comcast.net>

/*Dan.Strassberg wrote:

Wasn't the studio in the Statler Office Building, which adjoined the 
hotel, and not in the hotel itself?*/


Right you are, Dan, thanks.  I remember the whole building as a "hotel" 
- but that was 56 years ago!  Perceptions and recollections change in 
the aging process, I guess.  I appreciate the correction.   =Russ



From chuckigo@maine.rr.com  Wed Jan 30 12:02:54 2008
From: chuckigo@maine.rr.com (Chuck Igo)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:02:54 -0500
Subject: WEZE "Window"
References: <47A0A53C.9020706@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <001b01c86361$f5f79480$0201a8c0@Family>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Russ Butler" <songbook2@comcast.net>

Russ wrote:


> Tim Coco mentioned the WEZE "window studio on the street level" - that 
> would be on the first floor of The Statler Hotel, at the curved corner 
> that had wrap around windows.
>
> I believe they also had drapes that could be pulled together for some 
> privacy or nighttime security.(Columbus Avenue and Stuart Street weren't 
> that friendly at night in the 1950's). I don't think the windows were 
> bullet-proof glass (like Lexan on the NYC "Today" show set, etc.) but 
> there weren't many people walking past the window to stop and look anyway. 
> Drivers  would blow their car horns driving past that corner of what is 
> now The Boston Park Plaza. (Everybody wants to be heard on the radio, I 
> guess)(snip)

the aforementioned Gary Martin was a radio instructor at Grahm in the 70's 
and mentioned to us the downside of that studio setup... replete with 
stories of inebriated sots not realizing they were relieving themselves in 
front a person doing a live radio show.

- -Chuck Igo 


From martinjwaters@yahoo.com  Wed Jan 30 12:06:37 2008
From: martinjwaters@yahoo.com (Martin Waters)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:06:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Allston / Brighton
Message-ID: <201902.75795.qm@web39106.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

  
> --- Bill O'Neill <billohno@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >   
> > Now, that is just wrong. The humanity! Up there
> with
> > 
> > Andrew-eight-seven-thousand.
> > 
> > b -
> >
 
  And 617-254-5678.

From kvahey@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 12:09:40 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:09:40 -0600
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <18336.42620.908114.382014@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <578476.93757.qm@web39115.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<200801301608.m0UG8mjZ010297@home-on-the-dome.mit.edu>
	<18336.42620.908114.382014@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801300909p113374b6n8c624c8286ada396@mail.gmail.com>

The old WBZ-TV tower

http://www.ggninfo.com/PIX/WBZ-TV4.jpg

On the WBZ-TV history page you can see where the old tower was
compared to the smaller one

http://wbz.com/The-1950-s/3778

From kvahey@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 12:12:18 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:12:18 -0600
Subject: Yankee Network studios
In-Reply-To: <479EB1EF.2080409@gabrielmass.com>
References: <009a01c8622d$c2ffe620$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<20080129044353.03412151C42@relay5.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>
	<479EB1EF.2080409@gabrielmass.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801300912u24e70c82vac1b9c74ad25be01@mail.gmail.com>

This picture shows that The Yankee Network was indeed used by WNAC-TV

http://www.ggninfo.com/November.htm

From billohno@gmail.com  Wed Jan 30 12:12:54 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:12:54 -0500
Subject: WEZE "Window"
In-Reply-To: <001b01c86361$f5f79480$0201a8c0@Family>
References: <47A0A53C.9020706@comcast.net>
	<001b01c86361$f5f79480$0201a8c0@Family>
Message-ID: <47A0B016.2090704@gmail.com>

Chuck Igo wrote:
> the aforementioned Gary Martin was a radio instructor at Grahm in the 
> 70's and mentioned to us the downside of that studio setup... replete 
> with stories of inebriated sots not realizing they were relieving 
> themselves in front a person doing a live radio show. //
When you're on the go...
Your station for relief...
If you gotta go, take us with you...

Bill O'Neill
//

From kvahey@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 12:19:34 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:19:34 -0600
Subject: WEZE "Window"
In-Reply-To: <47A0B016.2090704@gmail.com>
References: <47A0A53C.9020706@comcast.net>
	<001b01c86361$f5f79480$0201a8c0@Family> <47A0B016.2090704@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801300919r3b23d105yf716653e785a0643@mail.gmail.com>

another downside as WLS-TV found out a few weeks ago

http://youtube.com/watch?v=SZqng1s2v9E

Ravi Baichwal's reaction to a minivan crashing through the studio window



On 1/30/08, Bill O'Neill <billohno@gmail.com> wrote:
> Chuck Igo wrote:
> > the aforementioned Gary Martin was a radio instructor at Grahm in the
> > 70's and mentioned to us the downside of that studio setup... replete
> > with stories of inebriated sots not realizing they were relieving
> > themselves in front a person doing a live radio show. //
> When you're on the go...
> Your station for relief...
> If you gotta go, take us with you...
>
> Bill O'Neill
> //
>

From songbook2@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 12:41:48 2008
From: songbook2@comcast.net (Russ Butler)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:41:48 -0800
Subject: Window Studios
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801300919r3b23d105yf716653e785a0643@mail.gmail.com>
References: <47A0A53C.9020706@comcast.net>	
	<001b01c86361$f5f79480$0201a8c0@Family>
	<47A0B016.2090704@gmail.com>
	<4fc429770801300919r3b23d105yf716653e785a0643@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <47A0B6DC.5060802@comcast.net>

Kevin Vahey reminds me that WLS-TV in Chicago has a window studio which 
was where a minivan crash occurred.

Thanks, Kevin.  Speaking of Chicago:   I did a radio show in a window 
studio "inside" the lobby of The Edgewater Beach Hotel in Chicago in the 
late-50's.  The hotel guests would wander by, stop for a few minutes (or 
longer sometimes) and peer into the fishbowl and occasionally tap on the 
glass.  Then wave at ya!  The station engineer thoughtfully installed a 
loud speaker under the window for folks to hear the broadcast  (which 
was easily muted from the studio console, thankfully).

WEBH-FM had their transmitter on top of the hotel and a small space set 
up with one onair studio and two offices, a receptionist desk and a 
closet that contained the LP library.  Ah, the memories linger on, those 
Montavani albums and each newscast  was read live and  had to have a 
Montavani instrumental track as background music, per the owner's (Buddy 
Black) programming mandate.  It made the bad news items sound better, I 
guess.   Does anyone else have a "window studio" story?

=Russ   songbook2@comcast.net

Kevin Vahey wrote:

>another downside as WLS-TV found out a few weeks ago
>
>http://youtube.com/watch?v=SZqng1s2v9E
>
>Ravi Baichwal's reaction to a minivan crashing through the studio window
>
>
>
>On 1/30/08, Bill O'Neill <billohno@gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>Chuck Igo wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>the aforementioned Gary Martin was a radio instructor at Grahm in the
>>>70's and mentioned to us the downside of that studio setup... replete
>>>with stories of inebriated sots not realizing they were relieving
>>>themselves in front a person doing a live radio show. //
>>>      
>>>
>>When you're on the go...
>>Your station for relief...
>>If you gotta go, take us with you...
>>
>>Bill O'Neill
>>//
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

From mark.springer@gmail.com  Wed Jan 30 12:59:26 2008
From: mark.springer@gmail.com (Mark Springer)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:59:26 -0900
Subject: WEZE window
Message-ID: <eb1f51ac0801300959w29450f5anfc3c0ec6f9076d09@mail.gmail.com>

Back in the good old days a kid could ask the lovely receptionist if it was
ok to go into the studio and she usually said yes, a friend and I wandered
into WEZE and spent some time visiting the DJ. He told us a funny story.
Seems one cold winters night a gentleman in dire need of the use of indoor
plumbing but seemingly out of time stood on front of the studio window,
"whipped it out," as it were, and let fly.
Craaaaack........

Also, on the multiple location front, the old WPLM id often said "With
studios in Plymouth and in the Cape Cod mall in Hyannis"...

de Mark Springer, WL7BCT
Bethel, Alaska

From RBello@BelloAssoc.com  Wed Jan 30 11:12:33 2008
From: RBello@BelloAssoc.com (Ron Bello)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:12:33 -0500
Subject: odd clip on WCVB website
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801300629t544fecbaif50d1016119e77bc@mail.gmail.co
 m>
References: <4fc429770801300629t544fecbaif50d1016119e77bc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <120170954901@mx04.gis.net>


Harvey Leonard was with channel 7 until 2002


At 09:29 AM 1/30/2008, Kevin Vahey wrote:
>WCVB-TV is ramping up for the 30th anniversary of the 78 blizzard.
>
>On the website is Harvey Leonard's forecast. Was not Harvey at WNAC-TV then?
>
>http://www.thebostonchannel.com/video/15084460/index.html

From scott@fybush.com  Wed Jan 30 13:16:46 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:16:46 -0500
Subject: WEZE "Window"
In-Reply-To: <001b01c86361$f5f79480$0201a8c0@Family>
References: <47A0A53C.9020706@comcast.net>
	<001b01c86361$f5f79480$0201a8c0@Family>
Message-ID: <47A0BF0E.7070907@fybush.com>

Chuck Igo wrote:

> the aforementioned Gary Martin was a radio instructor at Grahm in the 
> 70's and mentioned to us the downside of that studio setup... replete 
> with stories of inebriated sots not realizing they were relieving 
> themselves in front a person doing a live radio show.

I have heard similar stories from Anthony Silva, who was at WEZE between 
WMLO and WBZ, if memory serves.

s

From scott@fybush.com  Wed Jan 30 13:18:42 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:18:42 -0500
Subject: Allston / Brighton
In-Reply-To: <201902.75795.qm@web39106.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <201902.75795.qm@web39106.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <47A0BF82.5010707@fybush.com>

Martin Waters wrote:
>   
>> --- Bill O'Neill <billohno@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>   
>>> Now, that is just wrong. The humanity! Up there
>> with
>>> Andrew-eight-seven-thousand.
>>>
>>> b -
>>>
>  
>   And 617-254-5678.
> 

Ah...but while Andrew-eight-EIGHT-thousand no longer works, and while 
WGBH now gets its mail at oh-two-one-three-FIVE, 254-5678 still goes to 
exactly the same place it always did...it's just that it's now the #2 
line on the rollover that starts with 254-1030. (Or at least it was a 
few years ago when last I checked...)

s

From rogerkirk@ttlc.net  Wed Jan 30 13:24:19 2008
From: rogerkirk@ttlc.net (Roger Kirk)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:24:19 -0500
Subject: WEZE, WCOP and NBC
In-Reply-To: <000701c862b3$82c84490$6400a8c0@lysthia>
References: <000701c862b3$82c84490$6400a8c0@lysthia>
Message-ID: <47A0C0D3.4050309@ttlc.net>



Brian Vita wrote:
> Actually in a typical 35mm projector that still uses reels, the upper feed
> reel runs counterclockwise, the takeup reel below runs clockwise.  In Europe
> they both run clockwise. 
The US film reel configuration flexes the film (the "other way") during 
its stay on the take-up reel.

The Euro configuration is similar to reel-to-reel tape.  The medium 
always has the same "curl" to it - take-up or supply reel.

IIRC  The Brush SoundMirror tape recorder's take-up reel rotated (CW) 
opposite of the supply reel. (CCW)




From billohno@gmail.com  Wed Jan 30 13:36:06 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:36:06 -0500
Subject: WEZE "Window"
In-Reply-To: <47A0BF0E.7070907@fybush.com>
References: <47A0A53C.9020706@comcast.net>	<001b01c86361$f5f79480$0201a8c0@Family>
	<47A0BF0E.7070907@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <47A0C396.2030600@gmail.com>

Scott Fybush wrote:
> I have heard similar stories from Anthony Silva, who was at WEZE 
> between WMLO and WBZ, if memory serves.
>
<cue harp sfx> And we're confident that Scott can recall many a view 
from the studio window at WCAP overlooking "the alley."  Not far from 
"the ladies' entrance" of Cappy's Copper Kettle, and before they would 
install a chain link gate, the alley "sounds" made for great background 
noise to many a stop-set, replete with the sound of breaking beer 
bottles, 'social gatherings' and mating cats.  <harp sfx fade>

Bill O'Neill

From rogerkirk@ttlc.net  Wed Jan 30 13:37:18 2008
From: rogerkirk@ttlc.net (Roger Kirk)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:37:18 -0500
Subject: Advertising (NOT) On Minority Stations
Message-ID: <47A0C3DE.6030404@ttlc.net>

According to R&R:

FCC commissioners met last week with major ad ass.reps, Minority Media 
Telecomm Council, NAB's Education Foundation and Interep to discuss how 
the FCC can prevent advertising contracts that dictate no Urban or 
Hispanic-aimed radio stations be bought when exercising an advertising plan.

Don't advertisers have the right to place ads on the stations of their 
choice?  Would a meat-packing plant want to advertise on a station whose 
format targets vegetarians?  Would a Heavy-Metal record label push their 
product to a predominantly Hip-Hop audience?  Are Viagra ads appropriate 
for Radio Disney?

I find it curious that a company would be compelled to advertise their 
product to an indifferent, unwilling or hostile audience.


From Joe@attorneyross.com  Wed Jan 30 13:45:05 2008
From: Joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:45:05 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801292208n53694725x43b31dcc4a6fda39@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<18336.2314.817709.318799@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>,
	<4fc429770801292208n53694725x43b31dcc4a6fda39@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <47A07F61.28843.21DD8E@Joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 kvahey@comcast.net wrote:

> I am reminded of the ill fated WXPO Channel 50 that was licensed to
> Manchester but never had as much as a PO Box there. The station was
> based in Lowell but the FCC would not approve a second COL so 70
> percent of programming had to come from the transmitter in Windham
> which was less than 15 air miles from Manchester. In the long run it
> didn't matter as we couldn't pick up the signal in Lowell as the
> transmitter was poorly designed. The defacto owner of the station Neil
> Cortel argued with the FCC that 50 should be a Lowell outlet but.
> 
> Still ranks as the greatest fiasco in Boston area broadcasting.

I don't know, I think it is surpassed by WUPY/WUPI, Peabody.

--
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                        617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                Fax: 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004              http://www.attorneyross.com



From billohno@gmail.com  Wed Jan 30 13:50:17 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:50:17 -0500
Subject: Advertising (NOT) On Minority Stations
In-Reply-To: <47A0C3DE.6030404@ttlc.net>
References: <47A0C3DE.6030404@ttlc.net>
Message-ID: <47A0C6E9.1060303@gmail.com>

Roger Kirk wrote:
> ... FCC can prevent advertising contracts that dictate no Urban or 
> Hispanic-aimed radio stations be bought when exercising an advertising 
> plan. <snip> I find it curious that a company would be compelled to 
> advertise their product to an indifferent, unwilling or hostile audience.
I would imagine that they figure that even those of the urban culture 
would occasion to run out and buy Metamucil, scooter-chairs, Dentu-grip, 
Best of Johnny Mathis CDs, and Depends.  They're looking out for us 
all.  Gotta run - the local Kiss-FM is giving away free clappers and 
back scratchers that double as a tub brush.

Bill O'Neill


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Wed Jan 30 14:03:24 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:03:24 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044><00e601c8624f$dbd00280$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<18335.14670.334060.767504@hergotha.csail.mit.edu><002501c862f1$b8cd93e0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net><479FF61B.8010809@fybush.com>
	<003901c862ff$4e3667b0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<003901c8634a$0e81daa0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <024601c86372$ca638340$6501a8c0@pastor2>

I remember the QXR Network; WTAG-FM (now WSRS) was an affiliate, and used to
carry the Caspar Citron Show late in the evening.  As a kid I was intrigued
and amused that anyone could have the name Caspar Citron.   -Doug

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
To: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>; "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> Back in the 50s, WFLY 92.3 Troy (then owned by the Troy Record
> Newspaper), though not one of the five Class B's you mentioned, was
> nevertheless a member of the network you referred to. For quite a few
> years, that network was known as the 'QXR Network. It had begun life
> several years earlier as the Rural Radio Network, and in that
> incarnation, I don't think it included WFLY. The 'QXR Network relayed
> WQXR-FM's classical music programming across central and western New
> York via over-the-air pickup and rebroadcast. WFLY would pick up
> WQXR-FM over the air from New York City at its Tx site in the
> Helderbergs, southwest of Albany (a distance that probably exceeds 130
> miles). I think the next station in the chain was the one in DeRuyter,
> but I'm not sure about that.
>
> When WFLY started the over-the-air pickup from New York, Class B FMs'
> maximum ERP was 20 kW at an HAAT of 500'. (50 kW at 500' was nearly a
> decade in the future and 50 kW at 150m was about another decade away.)
> The FM band was, of course, very sparsely populated, FM was still all
> in mono, and Docket 80-90 was what? three decades in the future?
> Nevertheless, when the over-the-air relay began, the designers of
> the network envisioned situations when the over-the-air signal from
> New York as it was received in the Helderbergs would be inadequate and
> they built in a backup--an over-the-air pickup of WQXR (AM) 1560, then
> only 10 kW-U and broadcasting from its present (horrendous) site in
> Queens. Indeed, cut-overs to the AM pickup did happen every now and
> then and when the skywave and groundwave cooperated, the audio quality
> could be quite acceptable. Alas, the skywave/groundwave cooperation
> was not especially dependable, but the receivers were usually
> able to produce pretty good audio despite the presence of 50 kW-U WPTR
> only 20 kcps (no kHz yet) away from WQXR. No doubt, WPTR's directional
> pattern, with deep minima to the south and west (more or less in the
> direction of WFLY), made the receiver selectivity less critical.
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
> To: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 12:16 AM
> Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>
>
> > Hi Scott-
> >
> > I have an interesting case in the works that rests partially on the
> > CDP issue. I can't comment on it now because it is "ongoing."  The
> > attorney for our side says CDPs are accepted prima facie, and i've
> > seen a number of cases to support that position.  It never hurts to
> > include the local governance and economy stuff in support of the
> > case, though.
> >
> > I think you are right about Mt. Washington and Mt. Mitchell being
> > licensed to Boston and Charlotte way back when.  Of course in those
> > days if you had today's receivers and 1950's FM station counts,
> > there would be hardly any interference and you could probably pick
> > up both stations in Maryland!
> >
> > I remember sitting in the ham shack at RPI late at night in the
> > early '70s and listening to the NYC FMs 150 miles down the road.
> > Today, you'd be lucky to hear any of them.
> >
> > I don't know what the principal community signal requirements were
> > in the 1950s. I think the 70dbu requirement was laid down in the mid
> > 1960s.  But until the era of dereg, the studios had to be in the
> > principal community. For WMTW there was no real community, so I have
> > no idea how they handled it.
> >
> > This brings to mind the case of the Upstate NY network of Class B
> > stations licensed to Cherry Valley, Weathersfiled Township, and
> > other places. My understanding is that there was only one studio for
> > the five or six stations in that network.  When I was a teenager in
> > Delmar, I was able to pick up the Cherry Valley station. It was a
> > kind of background music format, as I recall. The owner or his
> > estate eventually transferred the stations to CBN, who ran Christian
> > programming, and eventually sold them when they made their
> > commitment to TV and the CBN University project. They are now
> > individual stations, and not all retained the religious affiliation
> > that came with CBN.
> >
> > Tuck is a kind of Catch-22. Cambridge already has a station, so it
> > qualifies as a community. But it would be really hard to justify a
> > move from Provincetown to Cambridge under 307(b) because Cambridge
> > already has a station. The most convincing 307(b) showing includes
> > the fact that the community does not have a local station, thus
> > justifying the removal of the service from the current community.
> >
> > Brooklyn is intriguing, but WKRB probably works against the case.
> >
> > -d
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
> > To: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
> > Cc: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>; <paul@derrynh.net>;
> > <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 10:59 PM
> > Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
> >
> >
> >> Dave Doherty wrote:
> >>
> >>> CDPs were meant to add substance to concentrations of population
> >>> that were not incorporated in the traditional sense. They are
> >>> accepted by the FCC as licensable communities without any further
> >>> documentation. If the community is not a CDP and is not
> >>> incorporated, then there are qualifications hoops to jump
> >>> through - local governance, local school district, local police
> >>> force, band existence of local businesses all help to establish a
> >>> place as a licensable community.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure I agree that the FCC accepts a CDP as prima facie
> >> evidence that a community exists for allocations purposes. My
> >> understanding (and I am not a communications lawyer, or any type of
> >> lawyer at all!) is that further documentation is still required,
> >> but that the presumption is heavily in favor of licenseability if a
> >> community is a CDP.
> >>>
> >>> The peak of Mt. Washington is in Sargents, but the slopes include
> >>> Crawfords (where the base station is located), Beans, Chandler,
> >>> Thomson and Meserves, Cutts, and arguably several others. I doubt
> >>> anybody actually lives in any of these "towns," and not one is
> >>> included in the census places table. I am totally guessing here,
> >>> but I suspect that these "towns" represent the original
> >>> landholdings granted by the King or the territorial Governor way
> >>> back when.
> >>>
> >>> So, could you license WHOM today to "Mount Washington?" Probably
> >>> not. Gorham would a piece of cake, though.
> >>
> >> The standards were much, much looser in the very early days of FM.
> >> I'm pretty sure that the Yankee FM on Mount Washington was actually
> >> licensed as a "Boston" station at one point. I think the Mount
> >> Mitchell FM in North Carolina may have been licensed as "Charlotte"
> >> around the same time.
> >>
> >> What's interesting to me is that the "Mount Washington" COL was
> >> allowed to be reused when the current FM signal up there was
> >> licensed in 1958. A few years later, and it would have to have been
> >> licensed somewhere else - probably to Poland Spring, Maine, where
> >> its sister TV was licensed. As WMTW-FM, it must have had a
> >> main-studio waiver to put its studios first in Poland Spring and
> >> later in Portland, right?
> >>
> >>> Tuck showings are intended primarily to establish that a community
> >>> is not a made-up entity within a larger community. It works mostly
> >>> to prevent wholesale moves of stations from small communities to
> >>> large metros. When you move a station to a new community, you
> >>> can't propose to serve more than a particular percentage of any
> >>> recognized urbanized area. As an example, you could not propose to
> >>> move a station from, say, Provincetown to Norwood, if the station
> >>> would serve more than half the Boston urbanized area.
> >>
> >> That's not quite my understanding. The "more than half the
> >> urbanized area" test is what triggers the Tuck analysis. If you're
> >> proposing to move a station from outside an urbanized area to an
> >> urbanized area (by way of a COL change), the Tuck analysis is
> >> required when that 50% threshold is reached. It's a multi-prong
> >> test that looks at factors like whether the proposed COL has its
> >> own media (I've seen even local websites cited to meet that prong
> >> of the test), whether people who live in the community also work
> >> there (as little as 10% can fulfill that criterion), whether there
> >> are businesses that identify themselves by the community's name,
> >> whether the community has its own phone book, post office, local
> >> fire/police/schools, and so on.
> >>
> >> One could argue, with quite a bit of validity, that the Tuck tests
> >> don't really accomplish what they were meant to do (as Dave so ably
> >> lays it out above) - I'd have no problem writing a convincing Tuck
> >> analysis that would demonstrate that Cambridge, for instance, is a
> >> community separate from Boston for allotment purposes. (Actually,
> >> that one's almost a gimme, since the FCC has a presumption that any
> >> community that already has stations licensed to it is therefore a
> >> licenseable community.)
> >>
> >> The one I've always wanted to try is Brooklyn - except for the fact
> >> that it's governmentally part of New York City, it meets all the
> >> Tuck criteria and then some. (And I could probably spin the
> >> existence of the Kings County government and the Brooklyn borough
> >> government, not to mention noncomm WKRB-FM Brooklyn, to get over
> >> that hump!)
> >>
> >> s
> >>
> >>
> >
>


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Wed Jan 30 14:05:11 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:05:11 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<18336.2314.817709.318799@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>,
	<4fc429770801292208n53694725x43b31dcc4a6fda39@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A07F61.28843.21DD8E@Joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <001501c86373$0bde3540$58efa644@SatU205S5044>

The guy who built WUPY (later WUPI) 105.3 was named Harvey Sheldon,
right? If I'm not mistaken, he was a vegetarian long before it was
fashionable to be a vegetarian, and I remember him touting on the air
herbal cures for various and sundry maladies (pretty much like the
infomercials on WBIX do today). I gather that Sheldon or his companies
filed for and emerged from bankruptcy a couple of times before he went
under for the full count. I guess the WUPY/I transmitter was in
Peabody, but wasn't the station licensed to Lynn? I think so. Sheldon
also had a station in Miami, IIRC--a full Class B (on 95.7, I
believe). In fact, when he received the CP for the Miami station,
didn't he move the WUPY calls there and rename the Lynn station WUPI?
I think that, after a relatively short period on the air, he lost the
Miami license for some transgression, but I can't recall what. Can
you?

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <Joe@attorneyross.com>
To: <kvahey@comcast.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:45 PM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> On 30 Jan 2008 kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> I am reminded of the ill fated WXPO Channel 50 that was licensed to
>> Manchester but never had as much as a PO Box there. The station was
>> based in Lowell but the FCC would not approve a second COL so 70
>> percent of programming had to come from the transmitter in Windham
>> which was less than 15 air miles from Manchester. In the long run
>> it
>> didn't matter as we couldn't pick up the signal in Lowell as the
>> transmitter was poorly designed. The defacto owner of the station
>> Neil
>> Cortel argued with the FCC that 50 should be a Lowell outlet but.
>>
>> Still ranks as the greatest fiasco in Boston area broadcasting.
>
> I don't know, I think it is surpassed by WUPY/WUPI, Peabody.
>
> --
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                        617.367.0468
> 92 State Street, Suite 700                Fax: 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004              http://www.attorneyross.com
>
>


From nostaticatall@charter.net  Wed Jan 30 14:18:31 2008
From: nostaticatall@charter.net (David Tomm)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:18:31 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <288616.85715.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <288616.85715.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ff7d6c609703633c364b8e08579b5561@charter.net>

Tell that to the locals, particularly the lifers.  Technically yes, 
Auburndale is not a town, but if you ask anyone in Newton where they 
live, they'll probably say Auburndale, Lower Falls, Waban, Newtonville, 
etc.  If someone says they're from "Newton," chances are they're 
relatively new to the area or they're talking to someone who has no 
idea about the whole village thing.

There are thirteen villages in Newton:  Auburndale, Chestnut Hill, Four 
Corners, Newton Centre, Newton Corner, Newton Highlands, Newton Lower 
Falls, Newton Upper Falls, Newtonville, Nonantum, Oak Hill, 
Thomsonville and Waban.

-Dave Tomm
"Mike Thomas"


On Jan 30, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Sean Smyth wrote:

> Auburndale is not a town. It is one of numerous villages in Newton. (I
> forget the exact number.) The City of Newton is the governing body.


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Wed Jan 30 14:50:31 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:50:31 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
References: <288616.85715.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<ff7d6c609703633c364b8e08579b5561@charter.net>
Message-ID: <029701c86379$604f6df0$6501a8c0@pastor2>

I wonder how many of those Newton villages have post offices?
The distinctions between villages within a town or city can be very
important to New Englanders.  In many instances, where there is a town
center and a mill village (or what was one), there has been an economic
disparity that has engendered a wariness between the people of the two
villages.  Those old animosities tend to die away very slowly.  I know; I've
witnessed it.    -Doug





----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Tomm" <nostaticatall@charter.net>
To: <ssmyth@psualum.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 2:18 PM
Subject: Re: WNTN in Auburndale


> Tell that to the locals, particularly the lifers.  Technically yes,
> Auburndale is not a town, but if you ask anyone in Newton where they
> live, they'll probably say Auburndale, Lower Falls, Waban, Newtonville,
> etc.  If someone says they're from "Newton," chances are they're
> relatively new to the area or they're talking to someone who has no
> idea about the whole village thing.
>
> There are thirteen villages in Newton:  Auburndale, Chestnut Hill, Four
> Corners, Newton Centre, Newton Corner, Newton Highlands, Newton Lower
> Falls, Newton Upper Falls, Newtonville, Nonantum, Oak Hill,
> Thomsonville and Waban.
>
> -Dave Tomm
> "Mike Thomas"
>
>
> On Jan 30, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Sean Smyth wrote:
>
> > Auburndale is not a town. It is one of numerous villages in Newton. (I
> > forget the exact number.) The City of Newton is the governing body.
>


From nostaticatall@charter.net  Wed Jan 30 15:31:44 2008
From: nostaticatall@charter.net (David Tomm)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:31:44 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <029701c86379$604f6df0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <288616.85715.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<ff7d6c609703633c364b8e08579b5561@charter.net>
	<029701c86379$604f6df0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <2654d8bac1d1dbd51bb2e19f2bd2e52a@charter.net>

I used to go to the Lower Falls Post Office all the time when I lived 
in Wellesley, since it's very close to the line.  For me it was closer 
to get to and more convenient than the Wellesley Hills post office on 
the corner of Cliff Rd. and Washington St.  I know Waban has one,  and 
would assume some of the bigger villages like Chestnut Hill, Auburndale 
and Newtonville should have post offices as well.  I'm not sure about 
the rest.


On Jan 30, 2008, at 2:50 PM, Doug Drown wrote:

> I wonder how many of those Newton villages have post offices?
> The distinctions between villages within a town or city can be very
> important to New Englanders.  In many instances, where there is a town
> center and a mill village (or what was one), there has been an economic
> disparity that has engendered a wariness between the people of the two
> villages.  Those old animosities tend to die away very slowly.  I 
> know; I've
> witnessed it.    -Doug
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Tomm" <nostaticatall@charter.net>
> To: <ssmyth@psualum.com>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 2:18 PM
> Subject: Re: WNTN in Auburndale
>
>
>> Tell that to the locals, particularly the lifers.  Technically yes,
>> Auburndale is not a town, but if you ask anyone in Newton where they
>> live, they'll probably say Auburndale, Lower Falls, Waban, 
>> Newtonville,
>> etc.  If someone says they're from "Newton," chances are they're
>> relatively new to the area or they're talking to someone who has no
>> idea about the whole village thing.
>>
>> There are thirteen villages in Newton:  Auburndale, Chestnut Hill, 
>> Four
>> Corners, Newton Centre, Newton Corner, Newton Highlands, Newton Lower
>> Falls, Newton Upper Falls, Newtonville, Nonantum, Oak Hill,
>> Thomsonville and Waban.
>>
>> -Dave Tomm
>> "Mike Thomas"
>>
>>
>> On Jan 30, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Sean Smyth wrote:
>>
>>> Auburndale is not a town. It is one of numerous villages in Newton. 
>>> (I
>>> forget the exact number.) The City of Newton is the governing body.
>>
>


From john@minutemancomm.com  Wed Jan 30 15:40:07 2008
From: john@minutemancomm.com (John Mullaney)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:40:07 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <ff7d6c609703633c364b8e08579b5561@charter.net>
References: <288616.85715.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<ff7d6c609703633c364b8e08579b5561@charter.net>
Message-ID: <000301c86380$4d07a710$6a00a8c0@johnster1>

 You made up a couple.... I like Thomasville

It is...

1. Nonantum
2. Newton Corner
3. West Newton
4. Newtonville
5. Newton Upper Falls
6. Newton Lower Falls
7. Auburndale
8. Waban
9. Newton Centre
10. Oak Hill
11. Thompsonville
12. Chestnut Hill
13. Newton Highlands

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
David Tomm
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 2:19 PM
To: ssmyth@psualum.com
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: WNTN in Auburndale

Tell that to the locals, particularly the lifers.  Technically yes,
Auburndale is not a town, but if you ask anyone in Newton where they live,
they'll probably say Auburndale, Lower Falls, Waban, Newtonville, etc.  If
someone says they're from "Newton," chances are they're relatively new to
the area or they're talking to someone who has no idea about the whole
village thing.

There are thirteen villages in Newton:  Auburndale, Chestnut Hill, Four
Corners, Newton Centre, Newton Corner, Newton Highlands, Newton Lower Falls,
Newton Upper Falls, Newtonville, Nonantum, Oak Hill, Thomsonville and Waban.

-Dave Tomm
"Mike Thomas"


On Jan 30, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Sean Smyth wrote:

> Auburndale is not a town. It is one of numerous villages in Newton. (I 
> forget the exact number.) The City of Newton is the governing body.




From paulconnors@earthlink.net  Wed Jan 30 15:46:29 2008
From: paulconnors@earthlink.net (paulconnors@earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:46:29 -0500
Subject: Window Studios
Message-ID: <380-220081330204629609@earthlink.net>

>Russ Butler wrote:
>Does anyone else have a "window studio" story?

My first commercial radio job was at WNEB in Worcester from 1976-1979.  The
studios were inside the Galleria at Worcester Center, and one entire wall
of the air studio was a window.  That window attracted quite a wide variety
of the curious - multiple meanings of the word intended.

Back then, Massachusetts Blue Laws still required stores to close on
Sunday.  During one Sunday afternoon airshift I felt the "call of nature"
and responded to it.  At the time the format was country, and all those
*#@! songs were only three minutes long!  Soon, the song was finishing up
even though I had not quite finished.  I ran down the hall with my pants
around my ankles to start the next song.  Flying into the studio, I found
myself facing two grandmotherly types, noses pressed to the window.  We
were separated only by a pane of glass.  I started the turntable, waved
hello, and ran back out of the room.

I wasn't going to back in there until they were gone, dead air or not. 
They soon left.  

I had forgotten that one of the restaurants in the mall was open, and that
diners could walk through the mall between the garage and the restaurant!

Over the years, I would sometimes "embellish" this tale by saying that,
when I saw the ladies I started the song, cracked the mic and said "This is
Barry Wilson..." (the name of the midday guy), but I didn't think that fast.


Paul Connors, (not-so-well) known then as Paul Stevens



From nostaticatall@charter.net  Wed Jan 30 15:51:31 2008
From: nostaticatall@charter.net (David Tomm)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:51:31 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <000301c86380$4d07a710$6a00a8c0@johnster1>
References: <288616.85715.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<ff7d6c609703633c364b8e08579b5561@charter.net>
	<000301c86380$4d07a710$6a00a8c0@johnster1>
Message-ID: <bf5d973bea1094d266f7c9ceca14f12a@charter.net>

I didn't make them up.  I took the list off the town website.

http://www.mass.info/newton.ma/description.htm

I just assumed they would have had the list correct.  I thought it 
looked strange that West Newton wasn't listed, but wasn't sure if it 
was considered an official village or not.


On Jan 30, 2008, at 3:40 PM, John Mullaney wrote:

>  You made up a couple.... I like Thomasville
>
> It is...
>
> 1. Nonantum
> 2. Newton Corner
> 3. West Newton
> 4. Newtonville
> 5. Newton Upper Falls
> 6. Newton Lower Falls
> 7. Auburndale
> 8. Waban
> 9. Newton Centre
> 10. Oak Hill
> 11. Thompsonville
> 12. Chestnut Hill
> 13. Newton Highlands
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On 
> Behalf Of
> David Tomm
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 2:19 PM
> To: ssmyth@psualum.com
> Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
> Subject: Re: WNTN in Auburndale
>
> Tell that to the locals, particularly the lifers.  Technically yes,
> Auburndale is not a town, but if you ask anyone in Newton where they 
> live,
> they'll probably say Auburndale, Lower Falls, Waban, Newtonville, etc. 
>  If
> someone says they're from "Newton," chances are they're relatively new 
> to
> the area or they're talking to someone who has no idea about the whole
> village thing.
>
> There are thirteen villages in Newton:  Auburndale, Chestnut Hill, Four
> Corners, Newton Centre, Newton Corner, Newton Highlands, Newton Lower 
> Falls,
> Newton Upper Falls, Newtonville, Nonantum, Oak Hill, Thomsonville and 
> Waban.
>
> -Dave Tomm
> "Mike Thomas"
>
>
> On Jan 30, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Sean Smyth wrote:
>
>> Auburndale is not a town. It is one of numerous villages in Newton. (I
>> forget the exact number.) The City of Newton is the governing body.
>
>
>


From billohno@gmail.com  Wed Jan 30 15:54:07 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:54:07 -0500
Subject: Window Studios
In-Reply-To: <380-220081330204629609@earthlink.net>
References: <380-220081330204629609@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <47A0E3EF.5080603@gmail.com>

paulconnors@earthlink.net wrote:
> Soon, the song was finishing up
> even though I had not quite finished.  I ran down the hall with my pants
> around my ankles to start the next song.  

Bill Clinton, guest DJ.


From john@minutemancomm.com  Wed Jan 30 16:01:45 2008
From: john@minutemancomm.com (John Mullaney)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 16:01:45 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <bf5d973bea1094d266f7c9ceca14f12a@charter.net>
References: <288616.85715.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<ff7d6c609703633c364b8e08579b5561@charter.net>
	<000301c86380$4d07a710$6a00a8c0@johnster1>
	<bf5d973bea1094d266f7c9ceca14f12a@charter.net>
Message-ID: <000401c86383$5303c240$6a00a8c0@johnster1>

http://www.ci.newton.ma.us/MIS/GIS/Maps/Villages.htm

And the city's website is http://www.ci.newton.ma.us/ 

-----Original Message-----
From: David Tomm [mailto:nostaticatall@charter.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 3:52 PM
To: John Mullaney
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org; ssmyth@psualum.com
Subject: Re: WNTN in Auburndale

I didn't make them up.  I took the list off the town website.

http://www.mass.info/newton.ma/description.htm

I just assumed they would have had the list correct.  I thought it looked
strange that West Newton wasn't listed, but wasn't sure if it was considered
an official village or not.


On Jan 30, 2008, at 3:40 PM, John Mullaney wrote:

>  You made up a couple.... I like Thomasville
>
> It is...
>
> 1. Nonantum
> 2. Newton Corner
> 3. West Newton
> 4. Newtonville
> 5. Newton Upper Falls
> 6. Newton Lower Falls
> 7. Auburndale
> 8. Waban
> 9. Newton Centre
> 10. Oak Hill
> 11. Thompsonville
> 12. Chestnut Hill
> 13. Newton Highlands
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On 
> Behalf Of David Tomm
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 2:19 PM
> To: ssmyth@psualum.com
> Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
> Subject: Re: WNTN in Auburndale
>
> Tell that to the locals, particularly the lifers.  Technically yes, 
> Auburndale is not a town, but if you ask anyone in Newton where they 
> live, they'll probably say Auburndale, Lower Falls, Waban, 
> Newtonville, etc.
>  If
> someone says they're from "Newton," chances are they're relatively new 
> to the area or they're talking to someone who has no idea about the 
> whole village thing.
>
> There are thirteen villages in Newton:  Auburndale, Chestnut Hill, 
> Four Corners, Newton Centre, Newton Corner, Newton Highlands, Newton 
> Lower Falls, Newton Upper Falls, Newtonville, Nonantum, Oak Hill, 
> Thomsonville and Waban.
>
> -Dave Tomm
> "Mike Thomas"
>
>
> On Jan 30, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Sean Smyth wrote:
>
>> Auburndale is not a town. It is one of numerous villages in Newton. 
>> (I forget the exact number.) The City of Newton is the governing body.
>
>
>




From lglavin@mail.com  Wed Jan 30 16:37:40 2008
From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 16:37:40 -0500
Subject: at least in Chicago 1030 rules
Message-ID: <20080130213740.BD4211CE7A2@ws1-6.us4.outblaze.com>

>----- Original Message -----
>From: kvahey@comcast.net
>To: "(newsgroup) Boston-Radio-Interest" , "A. Joseph Ross" , "Scott Fybush" 
>Subject: at least in Chicago 1030 rules
>Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:36:15 -0500

>In a hotel in downtown Chicago and at 3:30 AM the strongest AM signal
>on my trusty Grundig belongs to the mighty 1030 out of Hull. It is
>stronger than 670,720,780,890 or 1000.

>Of note I also got a clear ID from WWZN which in theory is impossible.

I wonder...if you look carefully at the WWZN datapoints at fcc.gov, there
seems to be a slight uptick in the 315-degree azimuth;  and the always reliable 
radio-locator.com displays a bay-window bulge to the NW.  On a few 
occasions, I've picked up WWZN pretty well in Pittsfield, MA.


-- 
Want an e-mail address like mine?
Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com!


From kvahey@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 14:21:12 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:21:12 -0600
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <47A07F61.28843.21DD8E@Joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>
	<18336.2314.817709.318799@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<4fc429770801292208n53694725x43b31dcc4a6fda39@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A07F61.28843.21DD8E@Joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801301121g66df02e6q2a7791efb7772728@mail.gmail.com>

While a great fiasco WUPY shares the same fate at WTAO-TV. Nobody had
sets that could get the stations.

WXPO failed through utter incompetence.


On 1/30/08, A. Joseph Ross <Joe@attorneyross.com> wrote:
>
>
> I don't know, I think it is surpassed by WUPY/WUPI, Peabody.
>
> --
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                        617.367.0468
> 92 State Street, Suite 700                Fax: 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004              http://www.attorneyross.com
>
>
>

From rogerkirk@ttlc.net  Wed Jan 30 17:06:41 2008
From: rogerkirk@ttlc.net (Roger Kirk)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:06:41 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <47A07F61.28843.21DD8E@Joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<18336.2314.817709.318799@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>,
	<4fc429770801292208n53694725x43b31dcc4a6fda39@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A07F61.28843.21DD8E@Joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <47A0F4F1.7070107@ttlc.net>

On 30 Jan 2008 kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
>> I am reminded of the ill fated WXPO Channel 50 that was licensed to
>> Manchester but never had as much as a PO Box there. The station was
>> based in Lowell but the FCC would not approve a second COL so 70
>> percent of programming had to come from the transmitter in Windham
>> which was less than 15 air miles from Manchester. In the long run it
>> didn't matter as we couldn't pick up the signal in Lowell as the
>> transmitter was poorly designed. The defacto owner of the station Neil
>> Cortel argued with the FCC that 50 should be a Lowell outlet but.
>>
>> Still ranks as the greatest fiasco in Boston area broadcasting.
>>     
> To fully appreciate the fiasco-ness (fiascosity?) of WXPO-TV Channel 50, one must contemplate placement of a film island on a 2nd-floor balcony constructed of flexing wood, freezing and bursting (twice) of the TX heat exchanger (filled only with water) on top of Morrison Hill in sub-zero weather, the Lowell Studio's proximity to a 1 Kw AM transmitter and refusal of the Lowell Sun to sell advertising to them.  Other than that, it was just your plain, old, garden-variety fiasco.
>
>   


From donald_astelle@yahoo.com  Wed Jan 30 17:10:28 2008
From: donald_astelle@yahoo.com (Don A)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:10:28 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044><18336.2314.817709.318799@hergotha.csail.mit.edu><4fc429770801292208n53694725x43b31dcc4a6fda39@mail.gmail.com><47A07F61.28843.21DD8E@Joe.attorneyross.com>
	<4fc429770801301121g66df02e6q2a7791efb7772728@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <007d01c8638c$eea10380$6501a8c0@default>


> On 1/30/08, A. Joseph Ross <Joe@attorneyross.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't know, I think it is surpassed by WUPY/WUPI, Peabody.


Was this the same owner/operator that ran WUPE in the western part of the 
state?

I seem to recall he had ties to the Salem/Lynn area. 


From dave@skywaves.net  Wed Jan 30 17:44:30 2008
From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:44:30 -0500
Subject: at least in Chicago 1030 rules
References: <4fc429770801300136q104acf99i2c420dcdb551339c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00cf01c86391$ad2f5ff0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>

670 and 720 have almost identical transmitter plants, about a mile apart, 
way out west of town in Schaumberg and/or Itasca. If your hotel room is 
facing the lake (lucky you!), there's a lot of building blocking those 
signals.

-d


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kvahey@comcast.net>
To: "(newsgroup) Boston-Radio-Interest" 
<boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>; "A. Joseph Ross" 
<joe@attorneyross.com>; "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 4:36 AM
Subject: at least in Chicago 1030 rules


> In a hotel in downtown Chicago and at 3:30 AM the strongest AM signal
> on my trusty Grundig belongs to the mighty 1030 out of Hull. It is
> stronger than 670,720,780,890 or 1000.
>
> Of note I also got a clear ID from WWZN which in theory is impossible.
>
> 


From kvahey@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 19:37:03 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:37:03 -0600
Subject: at least in Chicago 1030 rules
In-Reply-To: <00cf01c86391$ad2f5ff0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
References: <4fc429770801300136q104acf99i2c420dcdb551339c@mail.gmail.com>
	<00cf01c86391$ad2f5ff0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801301637p339e6b72re28d513cc3260a6e@mail.gmail.com>

Yesterday was a weather day I won't forget. temperture dropped from 55
to 0 in 5 hours.

On 1/30/08, Dave Doherty <dave@skywaves.net> wrote:
> 670 and 720 have almost identical transmitter plants, about a mile apart,
> way out west of town in Schaumberg and/or Itasca. If your hotel room is
> facing the lake (lucky you!), there's a lot of building blocking those
> signals.
>
> -d

From rac@gabrielmass.com  Wed Jan 30 19:45:39 2008
From: rac@gabrielmass.com (Richard Chonak)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 19:45:39 -0500
Subject: Allston / Brighton
In-Reply-To: <47A0BF82.5010707@fybush.com>
References: <201902.75795.qm@web39106.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<47A0BF82.5010707@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <47A11A33.2040101@gabrielmass.com>

On 01/30/2008 01:18 PM, Scott Fybush wrote:


 > WGBH now gets its mail at oh-two-one-three-FIVE,

Sort of: the station moved, but its PO box remains in Allston, and ZOOM 
fans can keep on mailing to 02134.

--rc




From elipolo@earthlink.net  Wed Jan 30 21:08:11 2008
From: elipolo@earthlink.net (Eli Polonsky)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 21:08:11 -0500 (EST)
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
Message-ID: <11670701.1201745291350.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

I grew up mostly in Newton (Newtonville), and in addition to
my sporadic and part-time radio work, I've driven a taxicab
in Newton for over 30 years, so I know the area quite well.

West Newton is certainly a village, with it's own P.O. 02465

The small neighborhood of Thompsonville has become somewhat 
archaic. Old timers in the area say they're in Thompsonville, 
but younger residents consider it as part of Newton Centre.

Newton Corner didn't appear on maps until recent decades.
Residents always called the area Newton Corner, but street 
directories still simply call the area just "Newton", and 
the Newton Corner intersection (the rotary bridges over the 
Pike by the Sheraton) was labeled "Nonantum Square" on maps
until a few decades ago, though it's over a mile from the
heart of the village Nonantum along Watertown St. (Rte. 16).
(I guess the Pike actually took away the old "Nonantum Sq.")

And, many residents (including older ones) call the area in
between Newton Corner and Newton Centre simply "Newton".

"Four Corners" isn't officially a village, though some may
claim to live there. It's the area immediately around the 
intersection of Beacon and Walnut streets, which once had a 
gas station on all "four corners", though in the past few 
decades that has dwindled to only one station remaining. I
think the area is actually part of the village of Newton 
Highlands, though it also borders Newton Centre and Waban.

I remember WNTN's early days on the air in 1968 as a full-
service suburban MOR music daytimer. I was upset that, on
my cheap Radio Shack transistor radio, WNTN bled all over 
WMEX, which was weak in Newton. I don't remember WNTN ever 
ID'ing as Auburndale, though. 

It seems strange to me if they had ever claimed their 
address was Auburndale, because street guides list their
street Rumford Ave. as being in West Newton, although
Lexington St. immediately south of it is in Auburndale.
Rumford, and Lexington St. north to the Waltham line, is 
considered to be in West Newton rather than Auburndale. 

EP


> From:	"David Tomm" <nostaticatall@charter.net>
> CC:	boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
> To:	"John Mullaney" <john@minutemancomm.com>
> Date:	Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:51:31 -0500
> Subject:	Re: WNTN in Auburndale
>
> I didn't make them up.  I took the list off the town website.
>
> http://www.mass.info/newton.ma/description.htm
>
> I just assumed they would have had the list correct.  I thought it 
> looked strange that West Newton wasn't listed, but wasn't sure if it 
> was considered an official village or not.

On Jan 30, 2008, at 3:40 PM, John Mullaney wrote:

>  You made up a couple.... I like Thomasville
>
> It is...
>
> 1. Nonantum
> 2. Newton Corner
> 3. West Newton
> 4. Newtonville
> 5. Newton Upper Falls
> 6. Newton Lower Falls
> 7. Auburndale
> 8. Waban
> 9. Newton Centre
> 10. Oak Hill
> 11. Thompsonville
> 12. Chestnut Hill
> 13. Newton Highlands
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Tomm
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 2:19 PM
> To: ssmyth@psualum.com
> Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
> Subject: Re: WNTN in Auburndale
>
> There are thirteen villages in Newton:  Auburndale, Chestnut Hill, Four
> Corners, Newton Centre, Newton Corner, Newton Highlands, Newton Lower 
> Falls, Newton Upper Falls, Newtonville, Nonantum, Oak Hill, Thomsonville 
> and Waban.
>
> -Dave Tomm
> "Mike Thomas"






From markwats@comcast.net  Wed Jan 30 21:59:45 2008
From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 21:59:45 -0500
Subject: WEZE "Window"
References: <47A0A53C.9020706@comcast.net>	<001b01c86361$f5f79480$0201a8c0@Family><47A0BF0E.7070907@fybush.com>
	<47A0C396.2030600@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006e01c863b5$56be94a0$39a0764c@Mark>

Bill O'Neill wrote:

 And we're confident that Scott can recall many a view
> from the studio window at WCAP overlooking "the alley."  Not far from "the 
> ladies' entrance" of Cappy's Copper Kettle, and before they would install 
> a chain link gate, the alley "sounds" made for great background noise to 
> many a stop-set, replete with the sound of breaking beer bottles, 'social 
> gatherings' and mating cats.

   Bill, did you ever play "Stray Cat Strut" while all that commotion was 
going on in the alley? <g>. I'm almost certain there are still alley sounds 
occasionally happening behind the "Lowell Museum of Broadcasting" (a/k/a 
WCAP) but thanks to night and overnight automation, the listeners at home no 
longer get to hear them under Clark Smidt's or Dick Summer's liners.

Mark Watson 


From dave@skywaves.net  Wed Jan 30 23:28:17 2008
From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 23:28:17 -0500
Subject: at least in Chicago 1030 rules
References: <4fc429770801300136q104acf99i2c420dcdb551339c@mail.gmail.com>
	<00cf01c86391$ad2f5ff0$336ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<4fc429770801301637p339e6b72re28d513cc3260a6e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000c01c863c1$b3da8660$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>

Normal midwest weather...


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>
To: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
Cc: "(newsgroup) Boston-Radio-Interest" 
<boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>; "A. Joseph Ross" 
<joe@attorneyross.com>; "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: at least in Chicago 1030 rules


> Yesterday was a weather day I won't forget. temperture dropped from 55
> to 0 in 5 hours.
>
> On 1/30/08, Dave Doherty <dave@skywaves.net> wrote:
>> 670 and 720 have almost identical transmitter plants, about a mile apart,
>> way out west of town in Schaumberg and/or Itasca. If your hotel room is
>> facing the lake (lucky you!), there's a lot of building blocking those
>> signals.
>>
>> -d
>
> 


From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:43 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:43 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801300909p113374b6n8c624c8286ada396@mail.gmail.com>
References: <578476.93757.qm@web39115.mail.mud.yahoo.com>,
	<18336.42620.908114.382014@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>,
	<4fc429770801300909p113374b6n8c624c8286ada396@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <47A12A27.30308.962F44@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 11:09, Kevin Vahey wrote:

> On the WBZ-TV history page you can see where the old tower was
> compared to the smaller one
> 
> http://wbz.com/The-1950-s/3778

Yeah, but what's that bit about the daytime programming of WBZ and 
WBZA becoming separated in 1956?  Is that even possible?

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:44 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:44 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <18336.8204.524802.217493@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<479FCEF9.25664.790F16@joe.attorneyross.com>,
	<18336.8204.524802.217493@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <47A12A28.12250.9630DA@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 1:58, Garrett Wollman wrote:

> Of course, that is a "can't happen" condition in many other states,
> where the state constitution places even more restrictions on special
> legislation than the Massachusetts constitution does.  (In
> Massachusetts, the General Court can still abolish a town at will, if
> I read the Home Rule Amendment correctly; in many other states, this
> can only be done with the consent of the voters.)

That's not clear.  Certainly it was the case before the Home Rule 
Amendment to the state constitution was passed in 1966.  But now, the 
General Court can act with respect to cities and towns only if the 
legislation applies to a class of no fewer than two, or if the city 
or town petitions for the legislation.  

In any event, except for the Quabbin Reservoir towns, the Legislature 
ahs usually called for a referendum in any city or town involved.  
 
-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:44 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:44 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <000701c86316$34bf9420$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <479FCEF6.13246.79068B@joe.attorneyross.com>,
	<000701c86316$34bf9420$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <47A12A28.3059.9631B5@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 3:00, Paul Hopfgarten wrote:

> Definitely neighborhoods of Boston (Oak Sq was Ward 22 IIRC from when
> I lived there). I would guess the 02134/02135 split is the best way to
> denote the lines between Allston and Brighton.

Since Allston was never a separate town, but was part of the Town of 
Brighton, I think it is perfectly correct to call any part of Allston 
"Brighton."

Allston is simply eastern Brighton, which acquired its name in 1868, 
when a railroad depot and post office were named after the painter 
Washington Allston.  See 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allston%2C_Boston%2C_Massachusetts

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:44 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:44 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <000801c86316$a6e699e0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <18336.8204.524802.217493@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>,
	<000801c86316$a6e699e0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <47A12A28.9868.9632FD@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 3:03, Paul Hopfgarten wrote:

> That's odd that a "Home Rule" State like MA can abolish a town at
> will..
 
Cities and towns are completely creatures of the state in 
Massachusetts.  Home rule is considerably less than in many other 
states, even after the 1966 Home Rule Amendment to the state 
constitution.  The amendment was an attempt to create broad home-rule 
powers for cities and towns.  Unfortunately, the process of getting a 
constitutional amendment passed requires a certain amount of 
bargaining and compromise, and the amendment that passed contained a 
number of exceptions to home-rule powers which have largely swallowed 
up the rule.

The big test came when Brookline, in 1968, decided to use its newly-
granted home rule powers to institute a rent grievance board.  The 
landlords took the town to court, and the Supreme Judicial Court 
struck it down.  Towns have generally not attempted to use broad home-
rule powers since.

Brookline went on to get legislative authorization for rent control, 
so the landlords who took the town to court ended up with regulation 
stronger than what they got struck down.  I pointed that out once to 
the landlord who was the principal plaintiff in the suit.  He said 
that the bigger victory was being able to stop cities and towns 
generally from adopting rent regulations without legislative 
authorization.  

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:45 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:45 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <003801c8634a$0e0f69c0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<003801c8634a$0e0f69c0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <47A12A29.28600.9633E7@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 9:08, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> How does that square with the recent situation in a couple of towns in
> the north-central part of the state (Shirly and Ayer, maybe)? There
> was a move to take land from these towns to create a new town that
> would have been named Devens and would have encompassed much of what
> used to be Fort Devens. Didn't happen because the the citizens of the
> affected communities voted against it in a referendum (by a narrow
> margin, I believe). I don't think the referendum was in any way
> optional. It had to pass with the voters in the towns that would lose
> the land before the territory could be annexed to form the new town.
 
In one sense it's optional, in another, it isn't.  The Legislature 
will generally not create a new town or change municipal boundaries 
without approval of the people concerned, nowadays in a referendum, 
once upon a time in a town meeting.  That's why, in 1873, when 
Brookline Town Meeting voted against annexation, it ended there.  The 
Legislature had the power to force annexation on Brookline, but it 
refrained.

There are exceptions, however, and the abolition of four Quabbin 
towns was one.  In that case, the state took all the property by 
eminent domain for the reservoir, and the people concerned had no say 
in the matter.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:45 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:45 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <003901c8634a$0e81daa0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<003901c8634a$0e81daa0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <47A12A29.20779.9634A3@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 9:11, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> The 'QXR Network relayed WQXR-FM's classical music programming
> across central and western New York via over-the-air pickup and
> rebroadcast. 

Sometime in the late 50s/early 60s, WTAG-FM in Worcester and WXHR in 
Boston were also part of the QXR network.  I assume WXHR got the 
programming over the air from WTAG-FM.  I don't know how WTAG-FM got 
them.

As I recall, WTAG-FM was a QXR affiliate first.  When I got my first 
FM radio in December 1958, WXHR was signing on at 4:30 PM.  Sometime 
in the next year or so, they joined the QXR network and expanded to a 
full broadcast day.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:45 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:45 -0500
Subject: WCAP/980 (was Re: ABC Returns To WCAP)
In-Reply-To: <20080130101714.715CL.793682.root@fepweb12>
References: <011601c862ea$e3f51c20$6501a8c0@vpr1>,
	<20080130101714.715CL.793682.root@fepweb12>
Message-ID: <47A12A29.10603.96357D@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 10:17, Paul Anderson wrote:

> I've tuned to WCAP for a while the last few days while driving to
> work.  I'm very impressed.

Me too.  I've been listening to it on the Internet, and I'm very much 
enjoying the music.  But I am worried that I'm not hearing any 
commercials.  Or is the new owner a disciple of Bob Bittner? 

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:45 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:45 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <578476.93757.qm@web39115.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <578476.93757.qm@web39115.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <47A12A29.4512.963648@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 7:51, Martin Waters wrote:

>     So, where was the main TV tower that fell in relation to the
> existing tower, that the latter survived the collapse? 

Behind the building.  When WBZ was celebrating its 75th anniversary a 
few years back, and Scott Fybush was still working there, he was 
soliciting memorabilia, and I brought over some pictures which my 
aunt took of the truncated tower after Hurricane Carol blew it down.  
He showed me around the station, including one corner of the old TV 
tower that remains as an anchor for one of the guy-wires holding the 
present auxiliary tower.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:45 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:45 -0500
Subject: Yankee Network studios
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801300912u24e70c82vac1b9c74ad25be01@mail.gmail.com>
References: <009a01c8622d$c2ffe620$6501a8c0@pastor2>,
	<479EB1EF.2080409@gabrielmass.com>,
	<4fc429770801300912u24e70c82vac1b9c74ad25be01@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <47A12A29.23327.963704@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 11:12, Kevin Vahey wrote:

> This picture shows that The Yankee Network was indeed used by WNAC-TV
> 
> http://www.ggninfo.com/November.htm
 
We already know that they used the name -- it appeared on their test 
patterns.  But was there ever actually a TV network called the Yankee 
Network?

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:46 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:46 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <001a01c8635e$9f7f60e0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>
References: <47A00549.1060307@fybush.com>,
	<001a01c8635e$9f7f60e0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <47A12A2A.22436.96385C@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 11:39, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> Auburndale is part of Newton. Almost certainly, it was once an
> independent town as was (I assume) Nonantum (OK, Nonantum may be a
> section of Watertown rather than Newton;

There's no reason to assume that.  In fact, the reverse is more 
likely.  Many times what were once unincorporated villages within a 
town became separate towns.  

In any event, my reference, "Historical Data Relating to Counties, 
Cities, and Towns in Massachusetts," published by the State 
Secretary's office in 1975, contains no mention of Auburndale or 
Nonantum as having once been independent towns.

> I'm not sure) and probably all of the other named sections of
> Newton. Kind of the same idea as Readville in Boston. Readville may
> even be more curious. Isn't Readville considered to be part of Hyde
> Park, which in turn is part of Boston? 

The Newton villages were never separate towns, nor was Readville.  

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:46 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:46 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <001501c86373$0bde3540$58efa644@SatU205S5044>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<001501c86373$0bde3540$58efa644@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <47A12A2A.8273.963927@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 14:05, Dan.Strassberg wrote:

> The guy who built WUPY (later WUPI) 105.3 was named Harvey Sheldon,
> right? If I'm not mistaken, he was a vegetarian long before it was
> fashionable to be a vegetarian, and I remember him touting on the air
> herbal cures for various and sundry maladies (pretty much like the
> infomercials on WBIX do today). I gather that Sheldon or his companies
> filed for and emerged from bankruptcy a couple of times before he went
> under for the full count. I guess the WUPY/I transmitter was in
> Peabody, but wasn't the station licensed to Lynn? I think so. Sheldon
> also had a station in Miami, IIRC--a full Class B (on 95.7, I
> believe). In fact, when he received the CP for the Miami station,
> didn't he move the WUPY calls there and rename the Lynn station WUPI?
> I think that, after a relatively short period on the air, he lost the
> Miami license for some transgression, but I can't recall what. Can
> you?
 
I don't know much about that.  What I remember is the station coming 
on, sometime in the early 1960s, when I was avidly following every 
new FM station.  It then went off the air, and at some time I called 
the FCC to ask about it.  I was told that the call had been changed 
to WUPI and that it had permission to be silent, but would return 
soon.  I remember hearing it after its return, Harvey Sheldon doing 
the announcing.  They were jazz 24/7, and for awhile, Anthony's 
restaurants were a major sponsor.

I remember hearing a live broadcast from one of Anthony's restaurants 
on a Saturday evening, shortly after WUPY first came on, with Harvey 
Sheldon, rambling on and on and not sounding professional at all.  By 
the time I heard him doing a morning show on WUPI, he was sounding 
much better.  At that point, he was calling it "Woopie Radio."

Then the station disappeared again.  And when I got to UMass and 
joined WMUA, someone there told me some background dirt.  According 
to him, Sheldon was mainly a con artist, and he conned Anthony into 
thinking he was going to own his own radio station.  Whether that was 
true or not, Harvey Sheldon's house of cards eventually fell down, 
and the FCC killed the channel assignment, apparently because of too 
much interference with another station somewhere.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:46 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:46 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801301121g66df02e6q2a7791efb7772728@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<47A07F61.28843.21DD8E@Joe.attorneyross.com>,
	<4fc429770801301121g66df02e6q2a7791efb7772728@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <47A12A2A.19736.9639F2@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 13:21, Kevin Vahey wrote:

> While a great fiasco WUPY shares the same fate at WTAO-TV. Nobody had
> sets that could get the stations.
 
I understand the problem with WTAO-TV.  It was a UHF station when UHF 
had just started, and nobody's TV sets could tune it in.  But what do 
you mean that nobody had sets that could get WUPY?  It came in on any 
FM station within range.  I heard it loud and clear in Bedford.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From joe@attorneyross.com  Thu Jan 31 01:53:46 2008
From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:46 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <029701c86379$604f6df0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <288616.85715.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>,
	<029701c86379$604f6df0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <47A12A2A.2694.963ABD@joe.attorneyross.com>

On 30 Jan 2008 at 14:50, Doug Drown wrote:

> I wonder how many of those Newton villages have post offices?
> The distinctions between villages within a town or city can be very
> important to New Englanders.  In many instances, where there is a town
> center and a mill village (or what was one), there has been an
> economic disparity that has engendered a wariness between the people
> of the two villages.  Those old animosities tend to die away very
> slowly.  I know; I've witnessed it.    -Doug

The Town of Norwood site contains a history page that details the 
increasing animosity that existed between the northern and southern 
parts of Dedham, which led to South Dedham (and a small portion of 
Walpole) becoming the Town of Norwood in 1872. At their first Town 
Meeting, Norwood graciously adopted a resolution thanking the 
inhabitants of Dedham and Walpole for their assistance in the 
formation of Norwood.

http://www.ci.norwood.ma.us/townhall/brief.html .

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004           	         http://www.attorneyross.com



From nostaticatall@charter.net  Thu Jan 31 02:25:53 2008
From: nostaticatall@charter.net (David Tomm)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:25:53 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <47A12A2A.2694.963ABD@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <288616.85715.qm@web58302.mail.re3.yahoo.com>,
	<029701c86379$604f6df0$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<47A12A2A.2694.963ABD@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <6e94a45fde7b9452f46bcb7d40f2e5a0@charter.net>

There must have been a lot of that going on around Eastern Mass. at 
that time.  A few years after Norwood, the village of West Needham 
which essentially functioned as their own town away from the rest of 
Needham formally separated and became what is now known as Wellesley.

http://www.ci.wellesley.ma.us/Pages/WellesleyMA_Selectmensoffice/hist

On Jan 31, 2008, at 1:53 AM, A. Joseph Ross wrote:

> On 30 Jan 2008 at 14:50, Doug Drown wrote:
>
>> I wonder how many of those Newton villages have post offices?
>> The distinctions between villages within a town or city can be very
>> important to New Englanders.  In many instances, where there is a town
>> center and a mill village (or what was one), there has been an
>> economic disparity that has engendered a wariness between the people
>> of the two villages.  Those old animosities tend to die away very
>> slowly.  I know; I've witnessed it.    -Doug
>
> The Town of Norwood site contains a history page that details the
> increasing animosity that existed between the northern and southern
> parts of Dedham, which led to South Dedham (and a small portion of
> Walpole) becoming the Town of Norwood in 1872. At their first Town
> Meeting, Norwood graciously adopted a resolution thanking the
> inhabitants of Dedham and Walpole for their assistance in the
> formation of Norwood.
>
> http://www.ci.norwood.ma.us/townhall/brief.html .
>


From paul@derrynh.net  Thu Jan 31 02:57:10 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:57:10 -0500
Subject: Allston / Brighton
In-Reply-To: <47A0BF82.5010707@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <00d201c863de$e3f76530$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

Hey, at least it's not a 931 exchange as primary. 

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Scott Fybush
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:19 PM
To: Martin Waters
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: Allston / Brighton

Martin Waters wrote:
>   
>> --- Bill O'Neill <billohno@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>   
>>> Now, that is just wrong. The humanity! Up there
>> with
>>> Andrew-eight-seven-thousand.
>>>
>>> b -
>>>
>  
>   And 617-254-5678.
> 

Ah...but while Andrew-eight-EIGHT-thousand no longer works, and while 
WGBH now gets its mail at oh-two-one-three-FIVE, 254-5678 still goes to 
exactly the same place it always did...it's just that it's now the #2 
line on the rollover that starts with 254-1030. (Or at least it was a 
few years ago when last I checked...)

s


From paul@derrynh.net  Thu Jan 31 03:05:34 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:05:34 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <000301c86380$4d07a710$6a00a8c0@johnster1>
Message-ID: <00d501c863e0$0eebaed0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

Where is Thompsonville (That's the only one I'm unfamiliar with)

Some "villages" straddle multiple political subdivisions, like the 2 NH
villages I had mentioned (Pinardville and Penacook)

Some villages even become major destination names (EG: The I-89 North exit
off I-93 in Concord lists White River Jct, VT as a desitination, while WRJ
is actually only a village of the town of Hartford VT.)

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
John Mullaney
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 3:40 PM
To: 'David Tomm'; ssmyth@psualum.com
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: RE: WNTN in Auburndale

 You made up a couple.... I like Thomasville

It is...

1. Nonantum
2. Newton Corner
3. West Newton
4. Newtonville
5. Newton Upper Falls
6. Newton Lower Falls
7. Auburndale
8. Waban
9. Newton Centre
10. Oak Hill
11. Thompsonville
12. Chestnut Hill
13. Newton Highlands

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
David Tomm
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 2:19 PM
To: ssmyth@psualum.com
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: WNTN in Auburndale

Tell that to the locals, particularly the lifers.  Technically yes,
Auburndale is not a town, but if you ask anyone in Newton where they live,
they'll probably say Auburndale, Lower Falls, Waban, Newtonville, etc.  If
someone says they're from "Newton," chances are they're relatively new to
the area or they're talking to someone who has no idea about the whole
village thing.

There are thirteen villages in Newton:  Auburndale, Chestnut Hill, Four
Corners, Newton Centre, Newton Corner, Newton Highlands, Newton Lower Falls,
Newton Upper Falls, Newtonville, Nonantum, Oak Hill, Thomsonville and Waban.

-Dave Tomm
"Mike Thomas"


On Jan 30, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Sean Smyth wrote:

> Auburndale is not a town. It is one of numerous villages in Newton. (I 
> forget the exact number.) The City of Newton is the governing body.




From paul@derrynh.net  Thu Jan 31 02:58:40 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:58:40 -0500
Subject: Advertising (NOT) On Minority Stations
In-Reply-To: <47A0C3DE.6030404@ttlc.net>
Message-ID: <00d301c863df$17e59d80$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

2 things I learned today...

Ads have Asses, and those asses have reps!

WOW!

(Appropriately LMAO)

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Roger Kirk
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:37 PM
To: bri@bostonradio.org
Subject: Advertising (NOT) On Minority Stations

According to R&R:

FCC commissioners met last week with major ad ass.reps, Minority Media 
Telecomm Council, NAB's Education Foundation and Interep to discuss how 
the FCC can prevent advertising contracts that dictate no Urban or 
Hispanic-aimed radio stations be bought when exercising an advertising plan.

Don't advertisers have the right to place ads on the stations of their 
choice?  Would a meat-packing plant want to advertise on a station whose 
format targets vegetarians?  Would a Heavy-Metal record label push their 
product to a predominantly Hip-Hop audience?  Are Viagra ads appropriate 
for Radio Disney?

I find it curious that a company would be compelled to advertise their 
product to an indifferent, unwilling or hostile audience.


From paul@derrynh.net  Thu Jan 31 02:59:55 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:59:55 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <47A07F61.28843.21DD8E@Joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <00d401c863df$44974400$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

Was WUPI/WUPY where WLYN/WFNX(then WLYN-FM) was headed?

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
A. Joseph Ross
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:45 PM
To: kvahey@comcast.net
Cc: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations

On 30 Jan 2008 kvahey@comcast.net wrote:

> I am reminded of the ill fated WXPO Channel 50 that was licensed to
> Manchester but never had as much as a PO Box there. The station was
> based in Lowell but the FCC would not approve a second COL so 70
> percent of programming had to come from the transmitter in Windham
> which was less than 15 air miles from Manchester. In the long run it
> didn't matter as we couldn't pick up the signal in Lowell as the
> transmitter was poorly designed. The defacto owner of the station Neil
> Cortel argued with the FCC that 50 should be a Lowell outlet but.
> 
> Still ranks as the greatest fiasco in Boston area broadcasting.

I don't know, I think it is surpassed by WUPY/WUPI, Peabody.

--
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                        617.367.0468
 92 State Street, Suite 700                Fax: 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004              http://www.attorneyross.com



From paul@derrynh.net  Thu Jan 31 03:10:43 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:10:43 -0500
Subject: at least in Chicago 1030 rules
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801301637p339e6b72re28d513cc3260a6e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00d601c863e0$c6d6a900$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

I read somewhere that a North or South Dakota location had a 100 degree
temperature drop in 24 hours one time, from 76 to -24....

I know that places affected by the shanook (sp?) winds (mostly in the
western plains states) can have those wild temperature swings during the
winter..

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Kevin Vahey
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 7:37 PM
To: Dave Doherty
Cc: (newsgroup) Boston-Radio-Interest
Subject: Re: at least in Chicago 1030 rules

Yesterday was a weather day I won't forget. temperture dropped from 55
to 0 in 5 hours.

On 1/30/08, Dave Doherty <dave@skywaves.net> wrote:
> 670 and 720 have almost identical transmitter plants, about a mile apart,
> way out west of town in Schaumberg and/or Itasca. If your hotel room is
> facing the lake (lucky you!), there's a lot of building blocking those
> signals.
>
> -d


From rickkelly@gmail.com  Thu Jan 31 06:37:26 2008
From: rickkelly@gmail.com (Rick Kelly)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 06:37:26 -0500
Subject: Yankee Network studios
In-Reply-To: <47A12A29.23327.963704@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <009a01c8622d$c2ffe620$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<479EB1EF.2080409@gabrielmass.com>
	<4fc429770801300912u24e70c82vac1b9c74ad25be01@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A12A29.23327.963704@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <521b7fd10801310337g3cb6077bu831cdc8083029459@mail.gmail.com>

On Jan 31, 2008 1:53 AM, A. Joseph Ross <joe@attorneyross.com> wrote:

> We already know that they used the name -- it appeared on their test
> patterns.  But was there ever actually a TV network called the Yankee
> Network?

There is the possibility as well that the photo was just taken outside
the WNAC studios and the "Yankee Network" on the building was in the
picture because that's where the remote truck parked.  It may have
been referring to WNAC-AM.

Rick Kelly
www.northeastairchecks.com

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Thu Jan 31 07:38:20 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 07:38:20 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<003901c8634a$0e81daa0$58efa644@SatU205S5044>
	<47A12A29.20779.9634A3@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>

I think there must have been an affiliate in the Hartford area--on 
Meriden Mtn where most of the Hartford FMs are. WQXR-FM must have been 
a pretty easy catch from Meriden Mtn. Meriden Mtn to Worcester is 
another easy hop. And, of course, Asnebumskit Hill in Paxton (where 
WTAG-FM was and where its successor, WSRS, still is) to Zion Hill in 
Woburn (where WXHR was) is duck soup. At one point, there was an FM in 
Hartford named WHCN, which was co-owned with WBCN (the CN part of both 
calls stood for Concert Network). I think those two stations used a 
direct over-the-air relay from Meriden Mtn to Boston--although I don't 
know where WBCN was in those days. Maybe Top of the OLD Pru (which is 
much shorter than THE Pru). WHDH-FM (now WJMN) was there until the 
(then) new tower for the old WHDH-TV (5) was built Newton. That tower 
is now FM-128.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:53 AM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> On 30 Jan 2008 at 9:11, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
>
>> The 'QXR Network relayed WQXR-FM's classical music programming
>> across central and western New York via over-the-air pickup and
>> rebroadcast.
>
> Sometime in the late 50s/early 60s, WTAG-FM in Worcester and WXHR in
> Boston were also part of the QXR network.  I assume WXHR got the
> programming over the air from WTAG-FM.  I don't know how WTAG-FM got
> them.
>
> As I recall, WTAG-FM was a QXR affiliate first.  When I got my first
> FM radio in December 1958, WXHR was signing on at 4:30 PM.  Sometime
> in the next year or so, they joined the QXR network and expanded to 
> a
> full broadcast day.
>
> -- 
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
> 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004                    http://www.attorneyross.com
>
> 


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Thu Jan 31 08:11:53 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:11:53 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <00d401c863df$44974400$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <004701c8640a$e1b6e710$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>

Don't think so. I don't know where WLYN-FM was originally located but,
at some point, the WLYN (AM) tower was replaced with the (present)
taller structure to increase the FM's antenna height. So the FM was
mounted on the AM tower at least at that point. Didn't the FM then
move to the old Channel 7 tower in Medford? And isn't WFNX now atop
One Financial Center across the street from South Station in Boston?

Replacing WLYN (AM)'s tower with the present taller tower had the
incidental effect of increasing the AM's antenna efficiency, which
necessitated the power decrease from 1 kW to the present 700W to
protect WFEA and WDRC.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Hopfgarten" <paul@derrynh.net>
To: "'A. Joseph Ross'" <Joe@attorneyross.com>; <kvahey@comcast.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 2:59 AM
Subject: RE: Licensed to non-actual locations


> Was WUPI/WUPY where WLYN/WFNX(then WLYN-FM) was headed?
>
> -Paul Hopfgarten
> -Derry NH
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On
> Behalf Of
> A. Joseph Ross
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:45 PM
> To: kvahey@comcast.net
> Cc: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
> Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>
> On 30 Jan 2008 kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> I am reminded of the ill fated WXPO Channel 50 that was licensed to
>> Manchester but never had as much as a PO Box there. The station was
>> based in Lowell but the FCC would not approve a second COL so 70
>> percent of programming had to come from the transmitter in Windham
>> which was less than 15 air miles from Manchester. In the long run
>> it
>> didn't matter as we couldn't pick up the signal in Lowell as the
>> transmitter was poorly designed. The defacto owner of the station
>> Neil
>> Cortel argued with the FCC that 50 should be a Lowell outlet but.
>>
>> Still ranks as the greatest fiasco in Boston area broadcasting.
>
> I don't know, I think it is surpassed by WUPY/WUPI, Peabody.
>
> --
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                        617.367.0468
> 92 State Street, Suite 700                Fax: 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004              http://www.attorneyross.com
>
>


From aerie.ma@comcast.net  Thu Jan 31 08:28:55 2008
From: aerie.ma@comcast.net (Jim Hall)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:28:55 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<003901c8634a$0e81daa0$58efa644@SatU205S5044><47A12A29.20779.9634A3@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <00f801c8640d$42ad1150$128e3f81@MoeHoward>

There is a very short timeline for the Concert Network on
http://www.wncn.org/Ownership___Management.html

Wikipedia claims the programming originated in Boston at WBCN
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WAXQ

I think WBCN at the time was at the top of the old John Hancock building
(the weather beacon one).

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Dan.Strassberg
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 7:38 AM
To: A. Joseph Ross
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations

I think there must have been an affiliate in the Hartford area--on 
Meriden Mtn where most of the Hartford FMs are. WQXR-FM must have been 
a pretty easy catch from Meriden Mtn. Meriden Mtn to Worcester is 
another easy hop. And, of course, Asnebumskit Hill in Paxton (where 
WTAG-FM was and where its successor, WSRS, still is) to Zion Hill in 
Woburn (where WXHR was) is duck soup. At one point, there was an FM in 
Hartford named WHCN, which was co-owned with WBCN (the CN part of both 
calls stood for Concert Network). I think those two stations used a 
direct over-the-air relay from Meriden Mtn to Boston--although I don't 
know where WBCN was in those days. Maybe Top of the OLD Pru (which is 
much shorter than THE Pru). WHDH-FM (now WJMN) was there until the 
(then) new tower for the old WHDH-TV (5) was built Newton. That tower 
is now FM-128.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:53 AM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> On 30 Jan 2008 at 9:11, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
>
>> The 'QXR Network relayed WQXR-FM's classical music programming
>> across central and western New York via over-the-air pickup and
>> rebroadcast.
>
> Sometime in the late 50s/early 60s, WTAG-FM in Worcester and WXHR in
> Boston were also part of the QXR network.  I assume WXHR got the
> programming over the air from WTAG-FM.  I don't know how WTAG-FM got
> them.
>
> As I recall, WTAG-FM was a QXR affiliate first.  When I got my first
> FM radio in December 1958, WXHR was signing on at 4:30 PM.  Sometime
> in the next year or so, they joined the QXR network and expanded to 
> a
> full broadcast day.
>
> -- 
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
> 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004                    http://www.attorneyross.com
>
> 


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Thu Jan 31 08:34:50 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:34:50 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <002401c861f5$70e5f6a0$47eca644@SatU205S5044>,
	<003901c8634a$0e81daa0$58efa644@SatU205S5044><47A12A29.20779.9634A3@joe.attorneyross.com><004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<00f801c8640d$42ad1150$128e3f81@MoeHoward>
Message-ID: <000501c8640e$1397bbd0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>

Right you are! And when I referred to the OLD Pru, I was mistaken; I
meant the OLD Hancock tower. sorry!

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim Hall" <aerie.ma@comcast.net>
To: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 8:28 AM
Subject: RE: Licensed to non-actual locations


> There is a very short timeline for the Concert Network on
> http://www.wncn.org/Ownership___Management.html
>
> Wikipedia claims the programming originated in Boston at WBCN
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WAXQ
>
> I think WBCN at the time was at the top of the old John Hancock
> building
> (the weather beacon one).
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
> [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On
> Behalf Of
> Dan.Strassberg
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 7:38 AM
> To: A. Joseph Ross
> Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
> Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>
> I think there must have been an affiliate in the Hartford area--on
> Meriden Mtn where most of the Hartford FMs are. WQXR-FM must have
> been
> a pretty easy catch from Meriden Mtn. Meriden Mtn to Worcester is
> another easy hop. And, of course, Asnebumskit Hill in Paxton (where
> WTAG-FM was and where its successor, WSRS, still is) to Zion Hill in
> Woburn (where WXHR was) is duck soup. At one point, there was an FM
> in
> Hartford named WHCN, which was co-owned with WBCN (the CN part of
> both
> calls stood for Concert Network). I think those two stations used a
> direct over-the-air relay from Meriden Mtn to Boston--although I
> don't
> know where WBCN was in those days. Maybe Top of the OLD Pru (which
> is
> much shorter than THE Pru). WHDH-FM (now WJMN) was there until the
> (then) new tower for the old WHDH-TV (5) was built Newton. That
> tower
> is now FM-128.
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
> To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:53 AM
> Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>
>
>> On 30 Jan 2008 at 9:11, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
>>
>>> The 'QXR Network relayed WQXR-FM's classical music programming
>>> across central and western New York via over-the-air pickup and
>>> rebroadcast.
>>
>> Sometime in the late 50s/early 60s, WTAG-FM in Worcester and WXHR
>> in
>> Boston were also part of the QXR network.  I assume WXHR got the
>> programming over the air from WTAG-FM.  I don't know how WTAG-FM
>> got
>> them.
>>
>> As I recall, WTAG-FM was a QXR affiliate first.  When I got my
>> first
>> FM radio in December 1958, WXHR was signing on at 4:30 PM.
>> Sometime
>> in the next year or so, they joined the QXR network and expanded to
>> a
>> full broadcast day.
>>
>> -- 
>> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
>> 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
>> Boston, MA 02109-2004
>> http://www.attorneyross.com
>>
>>
>


From brian_vita@cssinc.com  Thu Jan 31 08:42:04 2008
From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:42:04 -0500
Subject: Allston / Brighton
In-Reply-To: <47A11A33.2040101@gabrielmass.com>
References: <201902.75795.qm@web39106.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<47A0BF82.5010707@fybush.com>
	<47A11A33.2040101@gabrielmass.com>
Message-ID: <47A1D02C.5010704@cssinc.com>

Richard Chonak wrote:
> On 01/30/2008 01:18 PM, Scott Fybush wrote:
>
>
> > WGBH now gets its mail at oh-two-one-three-FIVE,
>
> Sort of: the station moved, but its PO box remains in Allston, and 
> ZOOM fans can keep on mailing to 02134.
>
> --rc
>
>
Gee, they must love still getting fan mail from a bunch of 40 year olds.

Brian

From scott@fybush.com  Thu Jan 31 09:59:19 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:59:19 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <47A12A27.30308.962F44@joe.attorneyross.com>
References: <578476.93757.qm@web39115.mail.mud.yahoo.com>,
	<18336.42620.908114.382014@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>,
	<4fc429770801300909p113374b6n8c624c8286ada396@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A12A27.30308.962F44@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <47A1E247.4000506@fybush.com>

A. Joseph Ross wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2008 at 11:09, Kevin Vahey wrote:
> 
>> On the WBZ-TV history page you can see where the old tower was
>> compared to the smaller one
>>
>> http://wbz.com/The-1950-s/3778
> 
> Yeah, but what's that bit about the daytime programming of WBZ and 
> WBZA becoming separated in 1956?  Is that even possible?

I have a timeline of WBZ/WBZA technical history that I copied off the 
wall of the engineering office that makes the same claim. I have never 
seen it substantiated anywhere else.

I suppose the daytime signal from Hull gets just weak enough around 
Springfield that it could have been overridden in town by the East 
Springfield signal, but it would have created a ring of noisy, messy 
interference across much of the rest of central and western Mass.

s


From elipolo@earthlink.net  Thu Jan 31 10:09:22 2008
From: elipolo@earthlink.net (Eli Polonsky)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:09:22 -0500
Subject: WCAP/980 (was Re: ABC Returns To WCAP)
Message-ID: <C3C74ED1.2C99%elipolo@earthlink.net>

You may hear some local spots on WCAP if you listen during
their daytime talk shows, or when they occasionally air
school sports games, but I haven't yet heard any spots
during their automated "Beatles and Before" oldies format.

As much as we "of a certain age" enjoy hearing the "older"
oldies no longer played on major mainstream oldies stations
like WODS, I think that the oldies format on WCAP is just
something that the station flips on whenever they have no
local talk or other feature programming for given periods
of time. I'd imagine we may see the oldies diminish as more
local talk or other community interest programming becomes
added, though I'm sure there will always be some time, such
as late nights, which will not be filled, and could remain
oldies.

As the station is just starting out under the new ownership,
I'm sure they're more focused on trying to sell ad time on
their local talk, sports and feature programming rather than
during their automated oldies format, though I'd imagine that
spots could eventually appear during the oldies if there are
any sponsors interested in those slots.

EP


> From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
> CC: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
> To: "Paul Anderson" <paulranderson@charter.net>
> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:53:45 -0500
> Subject: RE: WCAP/980 (was Re: ABC Returns To WCAP)
> 
> On 30 Jan 2008 at 10:17, Paul Anderson wrote:
> 
>> I've tuned to WCAP for a while the last few days while
>> driving to work.  I'm very impressed.
> 
> Me too.  I've been listening to it on the Internet, and
> I'm very much enjoying the music.  But I am worried that
> I'm not hearing any commercials.  Or is the new owner a
> disciple of Bob Bittner?
> 
> -- 
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
> 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004                        http://www.attorneyross.com
> 
> 
> 


From brian_vita@cssinc.com  Thu Jan 31 10:29:15 2008
From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:29:15 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <001901c8635d$95883860$5e884c0c@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <000601c8641e$14dddd20$6400a8c0@lysthia>

> > >
> > > That certainly is true in Massachusetts.  When four towns were 
> > > abolished to create the Quabbin Reservoir in the 1930s, their 
> > > territory was annexed to surrounding towns.
> > >
> > >
> > What were the four towns?
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> 
> Enfield, Greenwich, Prescott and Dana. Am I the 10th caller 
> with the answer? What do I win?
> 
> Howard
> 
A year's supply of Turtle Wax.  Isn't that about one can?  I always
wondered...

Brian

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.16/1251 - Release Date: 1/30/2008
9:29 AM
 


From m_carney@yahoo.com  Thu Jan 31 10:46:31 2008
From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 07:46:31 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Yankee Network studios
Message-ID: <495632.72656.qm@web52610.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

Probably not - there were only 4 VHF stations on the air in the late 40s in New England (WNAC, WBZ, WJAR and WNHC). Obviously WBZ wouldn't have been an affiliate. My best guess is that John Sheppard would have like to have a Yankee TV network but the need and structure just weren't there. 

----- Original Message ----
From: A. Joseph Ross <joe@attorneyross.com>
To: Kevin Vahey <kvahey@comcast.net>
Cc: Boston Radio Interest Board <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:53:45 AM
Subject: Re: Yankee Network studios

On 30 Jan 2008 at 11:12, Kevin Vahey wrote:

> This picture shows that The Yankee Network was indeed used by WNAC-TV
> 
> http://www.ggninfo.com/November.htm

We already know that they used the name -- it appeared on their test 
patterns.  But was there ever actually a TV network called the Yankee 
Network?

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                          617.367.0468
92 State Street, Suite 700                  Fax 617.507.7856
Boston, MA 02109-2004                      http://www.attorneyross.com


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

From RBello@BelloAssoc.com  Thu Jan 31 10:51:23 2008
From: RBello@BelloAssoc.com (Ron Bello)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:51:23 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <00d501c863e0$0eebaed0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <000301c86380$4d07a710$6a00a8c0@johnster1>
	<00d501c863e0$0eebaed0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <120179468201@mx04.gis.net>


It is at the intersection of Route 9 (Boylston St) and Langeley Rd - 
Atrium Mall area.

My parent live around the  corner and have never thought they lived
in Thompsonville.  You live in either Newton Centre (English spelling)
or Chestnut Hill.  The Chestnut Hill post office covers parts of Newton,
Brookline and West Roxbury (Boston).


At 03:05 AM 1/31/2008, Paul Hopfgarten wrote:
>Where is Thompsonville (That's the only one I'm unfamiliar with)
>
>Some "villages" straddle multiple political subdivisions, like the 2 NH
>villages I had mentioned (Pinardville and Penacook)
>
>Some villages even become major destination names (EG: The I-89 North exit
>off I-93 in Concord lists White River Jct, VT as a desitination, while WRJ
>is actually only a village of the town of Hartford VT.)
>
>-Paul Hopfgarten
>-Derry NH
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
>[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
>John Mullaney
>Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 3:40 PM
>To: 'David Tomm'; ssmyth@psualum.com
>Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
>Subject: RE: WNTN in Auburndale
>
>  You made up a couple.... I like Thomasville
>
>It is...
>
>1. Nonantum
>2. Newton Corner
>3. West Newton
>4. Newtonville
>5. Newton Upper Falls
>6. Newton Lower Falls
>7. Auburndale
>8. Waban
>9. Newton Centre
>10. Oak Hill
>11. Thompsonville
>12. Chestnut Hill
>13. Newton Highlands
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
>[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
>David Tomm
>Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 2:19 PM
>To: ssmyth@psualum.com
>Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
>Subject: Re: WNTN in Auburndale
>
>Tell that to the locals, particularly the lifers.  Technically yes,
>Auburndale is not a town, but if you ask anyone in Newton where they live,
>they'll probably say Auburndale, Lower Falls, Waban, Newtonville, etc.  If
>someone says they're from "Newton," chances are they're relatively new to
>the area or they're talking to someone who has no idea about the whole
>village thing.
>
>There are thirteen villages in Newton:  Auburndale, Chestnut Hill, Four
>Corners, Newton Centre, Newton Corner, Newton Highlands, Newton Lower Falls,
>Newton Upper Falls, Newtonville, Nonantum, Oak Hill, Thomsonville and Waban.
>
>-Dave Tomm
>"Mike Thomas"
>
>
>On Jan 30, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Sean Smyth wrote:
>
> > Auburndale is not a town. It is one of numerous villages in Newton. (I
> > forget the exact number.) The City of Newton is the governing body.

From RBello@BelloAssoc.com  Thu Jan 31 10:53:36 2008
From: RBello@BelloAssoc.com (Ron Bello)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:53:36 -0500
Subject: Yankee Network studios
In-Reply-To: <521b7fd10801310337g3cb6077bu831cdc8083029459@mail.gmail.co
 m>
References: <009a01c8622d$c2ffe620$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<479EB1EF.2080409@gabrielmass.com>
	<4fc429770801300912u24e70c82vac1b9c74ad25be01@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A12A29.23327.963704@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<521b7fd10801310337g3cb6077bu831cdc8083029459@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <120179481401@mx04.gis.net>

At 06:37 AM 1/31/2008, Rick Kelly wrote:
>On Jan 31, 2008 1:53 AM, A. Joseph Ross <joe@attorneyross.com> wrote:
>
> > We already know that they used the name -- it appeared on their test
> > patterns.  But was there ever actually a TV network called the Yankee
> > Network?
>
>There is the possibility as well that the photo was just taken outside
>the WNAC studios and the "Yankee Network" on the building was in the
>picture because that's where the remote truck parked.  It may have
>been referring to WNAC-AM.
>
>Rick Kelly
>www.northeastairchecks.com


Yankee Network" is painted on the truck 

From elipolo@earthlink.net  Thu Jan 31 10:56:10 2008
From: elipolo@earthlink.net (Eli Polonsky)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:56:10 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
Message-ID: <11255090.1201794970584.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

> > From: "Paul Hopfgarten" <paul@derrynh.net>
> CC: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org
> To: "'John Mullaney'" <john@minutemancomm.com>,
> 	"'David Tomm'" <nostaticatall@charter.net>, 
>       <ssmyth@psualum.com>
> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:05:34 -0500
> Subject: RE: WNTN in Auburndale
> 
> Where is Thompsonville (That's the only one I'm unfamiliar with)

The small Newton village of Thompsonville is the uphill area of 
Langley Road which rises south of Newton Centre and ends at Route 
9 (just west of Chestnut Hill), and all of the streets off of the 
Langley Road hill which are mostly dead ends, "cul de sacs", and 
developments with no outlet besides the entrance from Langley Road.

The east end of Jackson Street which ends at Langley Road, and the 
small streets off of it, may also be considered Thompsonville. In
the past, Thompsonville may have been considered to go the length
of Jackson Street out to Parker Street, including Cypress Street.

Mainly old-timers and people with family roots in the area still
call it Thompsonville. Most residents currently consider the area
to be part of Newton Centre.

> Some "villages" straddle multiple political subdivisions, like 
> the 2 NH villages I had mentioned (Pinardville and Penacook)

"Chestnut Hill" is part of Newton, part of Brookline, and part of
the Boston neighborhood West Roxbury. Some consider parts of the
Boston neighborhood Brighton (near BC) to also be in Chestnut Hill. 

EP





From HeritageRadio@msn.com  Thu Jan 31 02:40:17 2008
From: HeritageRadio@msn.com (thomas heathwood)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:40:17 -0500
Subject: Window Studios
References: <380-220081330204629609@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <BLU120-DAV4478E8DC69FF1E7D1E5C0B5370@phx.gbl>

WKOX in the early 50's had a "remote studio" on the lower level of Shopper's World in Framingham. It was basically a small storefront, but people walking by could look in and see what was happening when it was in use.       Tom Heathwood
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: paulconnors@earthlink.net<mailto:paulconnors@earthlink.net> 
  To: Russ Butler<mailto:songbook2@comcast.net> ; boston-radio-interest@tsornin.bostonradio.org<mailto:boston-radio-interest@tsornin.bostonradio.org> 
  Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 3:46 PM
  Subject: RE: Window Studios


  >Russ Butler wrote:
  >Does anyone else have a "window studio" story?

  My first commercial radio job was at WNEB in Worcester from 1976-1979.  The
  studios were inside the Galleria at Worcester Center, and one entire wall
  of the air studio was a window.  That window attracted quite a wide variety
  of the curious - multiple meanings of the word intended.

  Back then, Massachusetts Blue Laws still required stores to close on
  Sunday.  During one Sunday afternoon airshift I felt the "call of nature"
  and responded to it.  At the time the format was country, and all those
  *#@! songs were only three minutes long!  Soon, the song was finishing up
  even though I had not quite finished.  I ran down the hall with my pants
  around my ankles to start the next song.  Flying into the studio, I found
  myself facing two grandmotherly types, noses pressed to the window.  We
  were separated only by a pane of glass.  I started the turntable, waved
  hello, and ran back out of the room.

  I wasn't going to back in there until they were gone, dead air or not. 
  They soon left.  

  I had forgotten that one of the restaurants in the mall was open, and that
  diners could walk through the mall between the garage and the restaurant!

  Over the years, I would sometimes "embellish" this tale by saying that,
  when I saw the ladies I started the song, cracked the mic and said "This is
  Barry Wilson..." (the name of the midday guy), but I didn't think that fast.


  Paul Connors, (not-so-well) known then as Paul Stevens




From revdoug1@verizon.net  Thu Jan 31 12:19:14 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:19:14 -0500
Subject: Yankee Network studios
References: <009a01c8622d$c2ffe620$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<479EB1EF.2080409@gabrielmass.com>
	<4fc429770801300912u24e70c82vac1b9c74ad25be01@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A12A29.23327.963704@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<521b7fd10801310337g3cb6077bu831cdc8083029459@mail.gmail.com>
	<120179481401@mx04.gis.net>
Message-ID: <038101c8642d$67c79c60$6501a8c0@pastor2>

The one way to find a definitive answer to this question would be to check
an old (c. 1950) copy of The Broadcasting Yearbook.  The public library in
Fitchburg used to have a collection of them that went back to the '40s.
Whether it still does, I have no idea.

-Doug

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Bello" <RBello@BelloAssoc.com>
To: "Rick Kelly" <rickkelly@gmail.com>; "A. Joseph Ross"
<joe@attorneyross.com>
Cc: "Boston Radio Interest Board"
<boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 10:53 AM
Subject: Re: Yankee Network studios


> At 06:37 AM 1/31/2008, Rick Kelly wrote:
> >On Jan 31, 2008 1:53 AM, A. Joseph Ross <joe@attorneyross.com> wrote:
> >
> > > We already know that they used the name -- it appeared on their test
> > > patterns.  But was there ever actually a TV network called the Yankee
> > > Network?
> >
> >There is the possibility as well that the photo was just taken outside
> >the WNAC studios and the "Yankee Network" on the building was in the
> >picture because that's where the remote truck parked.  It may have
> >been referring to WNAC-AM.
> >
> >Rick Kelly
> >www.northeastairchecks.com
>
>
> Yankee Network" is painted on the truck


From wollman@bimajority.org  Thu Jan 31 12:33:13 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:33:13 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <00d501c863e0$0eebaed0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <000301c86380$4d07a710$6a00a8c0@johnster1>
	<00d501c863e0$0eebaed0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <18338.1625.20448.671441@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:05:34 -0500, "Paul Hopfgarten" <paul@derrynh.net> said:

> Some villages even become major destination names (EG: The I-89 North exit
> off I-93 in Concord lists White River Jct, VT as a desitination, while WRJ
> is actually only a village of the town of Hartford VT.)

Actually, it's more than just a village, it's a Village.  (Or at least
it was when I lived in Vermont.)  Unlike most of the other New England
states, but like New York and Connecticut, Vermont has incorporated
villages, and White River Junction was one of those.  (Which is how
you could get stations licensed to both Hartford and WRJ, for example,
even though for most purposes these are the same place.)  In
Connecticut, the "village" level of government is called a borough.

-GAWollman


From dlh@donnahalper.com  Thu Jan 31 12:54:52 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:54:52 -0500
Subject: WCOP & WBZ
In-Reply-To: <47A1E247.4000506@fybush.com>
References: <578476.93757.qm@web39115.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<18336.42620.908114.382014@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
	<4fc429770801300909p113374b6n8c624c8286ada396@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A12A27.30308.962F44@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<47A1E247.4000506@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <20080131175459.305A31DCAC6@relay1.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>

At 09:59 AM 1/31/2008, Scott Fybush wrote:


>>>http://wbz.com/The-1950-s/3778
>>Yeah, but what's that bit about the daytime programming of WBZ and 
>>WBZA becoming separated in 1956?  Is that even possible?

We are busy updating the website history even as we speak.  What 
happened in 1956 was that WBZ stopped using NBC programming.  But the 
programming had been simulcast for years except for some local 
programs-- in the 1930s, there was a "Springfield Hour" on WBZA for 
example, and the Sunday morning religious shows were separate too.  


From xtrovato@yahoo.com  Thu Jan 31 13:10:46 2008
From: xtrovato@yahoo.com (Rob Trovato)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:10:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: NPR: "Piano Jazz"  &  "Echoes"
Message-ID: <495522.88437.qm@web35902.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


Does anyone know if either NPR's "Piano Jazz" or
"Echoes" can be heard in Boston.  I seem to recall
hearing them at one point, now I don't see them on
anyone's schedule.

Are they available on any station that can be heard in
Boston?

Thanks!


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

From dlh@donnahalper.com  Thu Jan 31 13:12:12 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:12:12 -0500
Subject: Yankee Network studios
In-Reply-To: <038101c8642d$67c79c60$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <009a01c8622d$c2ffe620$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<479EB1EF.2080409@gabrielmass.com>
	<4fc429770801300912u24e70c82vac1b9c74ad25be01@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A12A29.23327.963704@joe.attorneyross.com>
	<521b7fd10801310337g3cb6077bu831cdc8083029459@mail.gmail.com>
	<120179481401@mx04.gis.net>
	<038101c8642d$67c79c60$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <20080131181218.EF1481DCAB1@relay1.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>

At 12:19 PM 1/31/2008, Doug Drown wrote:
>The one way to find a definitive answer to this question would be to check
>an old (c. 1950) copy of The Broadcasting Yearbook.  The public library in
>Fitchburg used to have a collection of them that went back to the '40s.
>Whether it still does, I have no idea.

I have every Radio Annual and Television Annual from 1938 till they 
stopped publishing it in 1964.   In  1958, for example, the owner of 
WNAC-TV is listed as RKO Teleradio Pictures, 21 Brookline Ave, and 
Norman Knight is the president at that time, with the station being a 
CBS affiliate.  


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Thu Jan 31 13:51:01 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:51:01 -0500
Subject: Yankee Network studios
Message-ID: <03c201c8643a$3ade7f40$6501a8c0@pastor2>

I think what we're specifically looking for here is what the name of
Shepard's corporate entity was before General Tire took it over.   -Doug
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>
To: "Ron Bello" <RBello@BelloAssoc.com>; "Rick Kelly" <rickkelly@gmail.com>;
"A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
Cc: "Boston Radio Interest Board"
<boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: Yankee Network studios


> The one way to find a definitive answer to this question would be to check
> an old (c. 1950) copy of The Broadcasting Yearbook.  The public library in
> Fitchburg used to have a collection of them that went back to the '40s.
> Whether it still does, I have no idea.
>
> -Doug
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ron Bello" <RBello@BelloAssoc.com>
> To: "Rick Kelly" <rickkelly@gmail.com>; "A. Joseph Ross"
> <joe@attorneyross.com>
> Cc: "Boston Radio Interest Board"
> <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 10:53 AM
> Subject: Re: Yankee Network studios
>
>
> > At 06:37 AM 1/31/2008, Rick Kelly wrote:
> > >On Jan 31, 2008 1:53 AM, A. Joseph Ross <joe@attorneyross.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > We already know that they used the name -- it appeared on their test
> > > > patterns.  But was there ever actually a TV network called the
Yankee
> > > > Network?
> > >
> > >There is the possibility as well that the photo was just taken outside
> > >the WNAC studios and the "Yankee Network" on the building was in the
> > >picture because that's where the remote truck parked.  It may have
> > >been referring to WNAC-AM.
> > >
> > >Rick Kelly
> > >www.northeastairchecks.com
> >
> >
> > Yankee Network" is painted on the truck
>


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Thu Jan 31 13:47:29 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:47:29 -0500
Subject: "Piano Jazz"  &  "Echoes"
References: <495522.88437.qm@web35902.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <03ad01c86439$bb6b1610$6501a8c0@pastor2>

WMEA, the Maine Public Broadcasting station in Portland (90.1), broadcasts
"Piano Jazz" from 8 to 10 PM on Fridays, and "Echoes" from 11 to midnight
Monday through Thursday.  The station can be picked up in most of
northeastern Massachusetts, I think, but maybe not Boston itself.  -Doug

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rob Trovato" <xtrovato@yahoo.com>
To: "BRI" <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:10 PM
Subject: NPR: "Piano Jazz" & "Echoes"


>
> Does anyone know if either NPR's "Piano Jazz" or
> "Echoes" can be heard in Boston.  I seem to recall
> hearing them at one point, now I don't see them on
> anyone's schedule.
>
> Are they available on any station that can be heard in
> Boston?
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
________
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?
> Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping


From dlh@donnahalper.com  Thu Jan 31 14:24:51 2008
From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:24:51 -0500
Subject: Yankee Network studios
In-Reply-To: <03c201c8643a$3ade7f40$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <03c201c8643a$3ade7f40$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <20080131192459.396E71B4099@relay6.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com>

At 01:51 PM 1/31/2008, Doug Drown wrote:
>I think what we're specifically looking for here is what the name of
>Shepard's corporate entity was before General Tire took it over.

The earliest yearbook that mentions names of companies other than 
General Tire or RKO General is the 1952 Radio/TV Annual which says 
WNAC is owned by "Thomas S. Lee Enterprises."  After that, it's 
always permutations of General Tire.  BUT... keep in mind that in 
1948, when Shepard was ill (he would die in 1950), he was voted out 
as the director.  From then on, General Tire ran everything. The 
Yankee Network was still operating, doing news, sending out 
reporters, hiring musicians... but it was no longer listed as an 
owner of anything.  In fact, my 1948 Radio Annual even lists General 
Tire and the owners of WNAC Radio.

From revdoug1@verizon.net  Thu Jan 31 13:14:33 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:14:33 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
References: <000301c86380$4d07a710$6a00a8c0@johnster1>
	<00d501c863e0$0eebaed0$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<18338.1625.20448.671441@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <039a01c86435$220dc070$6501a8c0@pastor2>

Just curious . . . What does the term "incorporatged village" imply?  I know
such entities exist, but I don't know how they're governed, or even if
they're self-governing within the larger towns of which they are a part.
Can you explain?  -Doug

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
To: <paul@derrynh.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 12:33 PM
Subject: RE: WNTN in Auburndale


> <<On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:05:34 -0500, "Paul Hopfgarten" <paul@derrynh.net>
said:
>
> > Some villages even become major destination names (EG: The I-89 North
exit
> > off I-93 in Concord lists White River Jct, VT as a desitination, while
WRJ
> > is actually only a village of the town of Hartford VT.)
>
> Actually, it's more than just a village, it's a Village.  (Or at least
> it was when I lived in Vermont.)  Unlike most of the other New England
> states, but like New York and Connecticut, Vermont has incorporated
> villages, and White River Junction was one of those.  (Which is how
> you could get stations licensed to both Hartford and WRJ, for example,
> even though for most purposes these are the same place.)  In
> Connecticut, the "village" level of government is called a borough.
>
> -GAWollman
>


From steve.low@gordianconcepts.com  Thu Jan 31 13:30:01 2008
From: steve.low@gordianconcepts.com (Stephen R. Low)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:30:01 -0500
Subject: "Piano Jazz"  &  "Echoes"
References: <495522.88437.qm@web35902.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <046f01c86437$52fc3b60$0201a8c0@stephenl>

Piano Jazz is b'cast on WICN--twice per week. Yes, it can be heard in Boston (and around the world) on-line. Programs from 2007 and 2008 are archived at NPR's piano jazz website.

Steve Low


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Rob Trovato 
  To: BRI 
  Sent: 01/31/2008 1:10 PM
  Subject: NPR: "Piano Jazz" & "Echoes"



  Does anyone know if either NPR's "Piano Jazz" or
  "Echoes" can be heard in Boston.  I seem to recall
  hearing them at one point, now I don't see them on
  anyone's schedule.

  Are they available on any station that can be heard in
  Boston?

  Thanks!


        ____________________________________________________________________________________
  Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

From billohno@gmail.com  Thu Jan 31 14:45:59 2008
From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:45:59 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <11255090.1201794970584.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <11255090.1201794970584.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <47A22577.2070008@gmail.com>

Eli Polonsky wrote:
> The small Newton village of Thompsonville is the uphill area of 
> Langley Road which rises south of Newton Centre and ends at Route 
> 9 (just west of Chestnut Hill), and all of the streets off of the 
> Langley Road hill which are mostly dead ends, "cul de sacs", and 
> developments with no outlet besides the entrance from Langley Road.//
>   

And I thought that the City of Lowell was colloquial.  The neighborhoods 
in Lowell are how you would describe where you are from, or where you 
are lost.  Or where you lost it, etc.  (The Highlands. Christian Hill 
(which is a section of) Centralville (pronounced Centerville or 
Sennaville).  Old-timers may also call Centralville "Jersey" 
(manhattan/Hudson River/NJ reference),  Pawtucketville, Belvediere (to 
old-timers.  The newbies, there is Upper Belvediere and Lower 
Belvediere. Old-timers from lower Belvediere take exception to the upper 
crust trying to be uppity!)  Then there's South Lowell, Downtown, The 
Acre, Ayers City, The Flats, and a few I may have missed.

Bill O'Neill
(formerly of Pawtucketville, The Highlands, and Christian Hill)
//

From gary@garysicecream.com  Thu Jan 31 15:53:13 2008
From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:53:13 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <47A22577.2070008@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0a0901c8644b$4c33d810$0200a8c0@Office>

What about "The Grove" and "Spaghettiville".

 

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Bill O'Neill
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 2:46 PM
To: Eli Polonsky
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: WNTN in Auburndale

Eli Polonsky wrote:
> The small Newton village of Thompsonville is the uphill area of 
> Langley Road which rises south of Newton Centre and ends at Route
> 9 (just west of Chestnut Hill), and all of the streets off of the 
> Langley Road hill which are mostly dead ends, "cul de sacs", and 
> developments with no outlet besides the entrance from Langley Road.//
>   

And I thought that the City of Lowell was colloquial.  The neighborhoods 
in Lowell are how you would describe where you are from, or where you 
are lost.  Or where you lost it, etc.  (The Highlands. Christian Hill 
(which is a section of) Centralville (pronounced Centerville or 
Sennaville).  Old-timers may also call Centralville "Jersey" 
(manhattan/Hudson River/NJ reference),  Pawtucketville, Belvediere (to 
old-timers.  The newbies, there is Upper Belvediere and Lower 
Belvediere. Old-timers from lower Belvediere take exception to the upper 
crust trying to be uppity!)  Then there's South Lowell, Downtown, The 
Acre, Ayers City, The Flats, and a few I may have missed.

Bill O'Neill
(formerly of Pawtucketville, The Highlands, and Christian Hill)
//


From markwats@comcast.net  Thu Jan 31 18:33:22 2008
From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:33:22 -0500
Subject: WCAP/980 (was Re: ABC Returns To WCAP)
References: <011601c862ea$e3f51c20$6501a8c0@vpr1>,
	<20080130101714.715CL.793682.root@fepweb12>
	<47A12A29.10603.96357D@joe.attorneyross.com>
Message-ID: <006101c86461$aca3f250$39a0764c@Mark>

 A. Joseph Ross wrote:

 > I've been listening to it on the Internet, and I'm very much
> enjoying the music.  But I am worried that I'm not hearing >any 
> commercials.  Or is the new owner a disciple of Bob >Bittner?

   More spots run during the daytime hours, but there are a few spots during 
the night/overnight music programming. WCAP has actually picked up a few new 
advertisers who didn't advertise while Maurice Cohen owned the station.

Mark Watson


From kc1ih@mac.com  Thu Jan 31 19:27:20 2008
From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:27:20 -0500
Subject: NPR: "Piano Jazz"  &  "Echoes"
In-Reply-To: <495522.88437.qm@web35902.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <495522.88437.qm@web35902.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <p06240801c3c816675cb8@[192.168.0.100]>

At 10:10 AM -0800 1/31/08, Rob Trovato wrote:
>Does anyone know if either NPR's "Piano Jazz" or
>"Echoes" can be heard in Boston.  I seem to recall
>hearing them at one point, now I don't see them on
>anyone's schedule.
>
>Are they available on any station that can be heard in
>Boston?

Piano Jazz is on WICN 90.5 from Worcester, you can also listen to the 
current show by following the links from http://www.npr.org.  I 
hesitate to give a more specific like because it seems to change each 
week, but if there's not a direct link click on "Jazz and Blues" and 
it should get you there.

-- 
Larry Weil
Lake Wobegone, NH

From kc1ih@mac.com  Thu Jan 31 19:35:59 2008
From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:35:59 -0500
Subject: "Piano Jazz"  &  "Echoes"
In-Reply-To: <03ad01c86439$bb6b1610$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <495522.88437.qm@web35902.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<03ad01c86439$bb6b1610$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <p06240803c3c819871858@[192.168.0.100]>

At 1:47 PM -0500 1/31/08, Doug Drown wrote:
>WMEA, the Maine Public Broadcasting station in Portland (90.1), broadcasts
>"Piano Jazz" from 8 to 10 PM on Fridays, and "Echoes" from 11 to midnight
>Monday through Thursday.  The station can be picked up in most of
>northeastern Massachusetts, I think, but maybe not Boston itself.  -Doug

Most if not all NPR/PRI stations stream.  The quality of the streams 
vary, and as such a music program on a station that is primarily talk 
may not sound all that great.
-- 
Larry Weil
Lake Wobegone, NH

From markwats@comcast.net  Thu Jan 31 19:40:46 2008
From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:40:46 -0500
Subject: WCAP/980 (was Re: ABC Returns To WCAP)
References: <C3C74ED1.2C99%elipolo@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <006801c8646b$16963480$39a0764c@Mark>


Eli Polonsky wrote:


> You may hear some local spots on WCAP if you listen during
> their daytime talk shows, or when they occasionally air
> school sports games, but I haven't yet heard any spots
> during their automated "Beatles and Before" oldies format.

   As I posted in my reply to A. Joseph Ross' post about WCAP, ther are a 
few spots that air during the music hours. And to clarify, at this time WCAP 
isn't airing any high school sports games, the only sports they are airing 
are Lowell Devils AHL hockey and some U Mass Lowell hockey games (simulcast 
with and produced by WUML). Although someone told me they heard a promo on 
WCAP this afternoon that they will be carrying the audio of Comcast CN8 
cable channel's high school basketball game of the week, I haven't heard it 
myself so I can't vouch for this being true.

> As much as we "of a certain age" enjoy hearing the "older"
> oldies no longer played on major mainstream oldies stations
> like WODS, I think that the oldies format on WCAP is just
> something that the station flips on whenever they have no
> local talk or other feature programming for given periods
> of time. I'd imagine we may see the oldies diminish as more
> local talk or other community interest programming becomes
> added, though I'm sure there will always be some time, such
> as late nights, which will not be filled, and could remain
> oldies.

  Currently the WCAP oldies schedule is Mon-Fri 6:30 -8PM and 10PM-5 AM (6AM 
on Sat.). A local talk show hosted by George Anthes (currently out on a 
medical leave, guest hosts filling in) airs Mon-Fri nights 8 to 10, except 
when pre-empted for Devils or U Mass Lowell hockey. Saturdays the oldies run 
from 2PM till 6AM on Sunday, inturrpted for special remotes or hockey. 
Sundays the oldies run from Noon till 5AM Monday, again inturrupted for 
special remotes or hockey. I have heard some favorable comments about the 
oldies from some long time listeners, hopefully they'll share their comments 
with Clark Smidt & Sam Poulten.

> As the station is just starting out under the new ownership,
> I'm sure they're more focused on trying to sell ad time on
> their local talk, sports and feature programming rather than
> during their automated oldies format, though I'd imagine that
> spots could eventually appear during the oldies if there are
> any sponsors interested in those slots.

   They have a sales staff of 4 out drumming up business, headed up by Bill 
Wayland, a veteran of many years in the radio biz, having been at WCOZ while 
it was riding high in the ratings. Prior to his arrival at WCAP, Bill was 
associated with WNBP in Newburyport. So far, they have brought in some new 
advertisers, plus they've done a few remotes in Lowell and one just this 
past weekend in Andover. With WCCM apparently having cut back on it's local 
content, not to mention it's broadcast day in the Winter months since it's 
move to 1110 Salem NH, WCAP has been touting it's live and local service to 
the Merrimack Valley, including Lawrence & Haverhill and no doubt the sales 
staff has been working those areas as well.

Mark Watson 


From paul@derrynh.net  Thu Jan 31 20:08:10 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:08:10 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>
Message-ID: <008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

WHCN (105.9) I believe was the Hartford affiliate

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org
[mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of
Dan.Strassberg
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 7:38 AM
To: A. Joseph Ross
Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations

I think there must have been an affiliate in the Hartford area--on 
Meriden Mtn where most of the Hartford FMs are. WQXR-FM must have been 
a pretty easy catch from Meriden Mtn. Meriden Mtn to Worcester is 
another easy hop. And, of course, Asnebumskit Hill in Paxton (where 
WTAG-FM was and where its successor, WSRS, still is) to Zion Hill in 
Woburn (where WXHR was) is duck soup. At one point, there was an FM in 
Hartford named WHCN, which was co-owned with WBCN (the CN part of both 
calls stood for Concert Network). I think those two stations used a 
direct over-the-air relay from Meriden Mtn to Boston--although I don't 
know where WBCN was in those days. Maybe Top of the OLD Pru (which is 
much shorter than THE Pru). WHDH-FM (now WJMN) was there until the 
(then) new tower for the old WHDH-TV (5) was built Newton. That tower 
is now FM-128.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <joe@attorneyross.com>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:53 AM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> On 30 Jan 2008 at 9:11, Dan.Strassberg wrote:
>
>> The 'QXR Network relayed WQXR-FM's classical music programming
>> across central and western New York via over-the-air pickup and
>> rebroadcast.
>
> Sometime in the late 50s/early 60s, WTAG-FM in Worcester and WXHR in
> Boston were also part of the QXR network.  I assume WXHR got the
> programming over the air from WTAG-FM.  I don't know how WTAG-FM got
> them.
>
> As I recall, WTAG-FM was a QXR affiliate first.  When I got my first
> FM radio in December 1958, WXHR was signing on at 4:30 PM.  Sometime
> in the next year or so, they joined the QXR network and expanded to 
> a
> full broadcast day.
>
> -- 
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
> 92 State Street, Suite 700                   Fax 617.507.7856
> Boston, MA 02109-2004                    http://www.attorneyross.com
>
> 


From revdoug1@verizon.net  Thu Jan 31 20:17:01 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:17:01 -0500
Subject: "Piano Jazz"  &  "Echoes"
References: <495522.88437.qm@web35902.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<03ad01c86439$bb6b1610$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<p06240803c3c819871858@[192.168.0.100]>
Message-ID: <003a01c86470$26971750$6501a8c0@pastor2>

Maine Public Broadcasting streams, and the quality is very good.   -Doug

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Larry Weil" <kc1ih@mac.com>
To: "BRI" <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 7:35 PM
Subject: Re: "Piano Jazz" & "Echoes"


> At 1:47 PM -0500 1/31/08, Doug Drown wrote:
> >WMEA, the Maine Public Broadcasting station in Portland (90.1),
broadcasts
> >"Piano Jazz" from 8 to 10 PM on Fridays, and "Echoes" from 11 to midnight
> >Monday through Thursday.  The station can be picked up in most of
> >northeastern Massachusetts, I think, but maybe not Boston itself.  -Doug
>
> Most if not all NPR/PRI stations stream.  The quality of the streams
> vary, and as such a music program on a station that is primarily talk
> may not sound all that great.
> -- 
> Larry Weil
> Lake Wobegone, NH


From paul@derrynh.net  Thu Jan 31 20:00:17 2008
From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:00:17 -0500
Subject: WNTN in Auburndale
In-Reply-To: <18338.1625.20448.671441@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <008401c8646d$d0e91c10$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>

We do have village districts in NH, but they are not "incorporated" in the
sense of being a separate political subdivision.

In my town, we had an East Derry Village District for Fire Protection, but
all other services were through the Town of Derry. The voters chose to
dissolve the district in 2005.

-Paul Hopfgarten
-Derry NH

-----Original Message-----
From: Garrett Wollman [mailto:wollman@bimajority.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 12:33 PM
To: paul@derrynh.net
Cc: boston-radio-interest@BostonRadio.org
Subject: RE: WNTN in Auburndale

<<On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:05:34 -0500, "Paul Hopfgarten" <paul@derrynh.net>
said:

> Some villages even become major destination names (EG: The I-89 North exit
> off I-93 in Concord lists White River Jct, VT as a desitination, while WRJ
> is actually only a village of the town of Hartford VT.)

Actually, it's more than just a village, it's a Village.  (Or at least
it was when I lived in Vermont.)  Unlike most of the other New England
states, but like New York and Connecticut, Vermont has incorporated
villages, and White River Junction was one of those.  (Which is how
you could get stations licensed to both Hartford and WRJ, for example,
even though for most purposes these are the same place.)  In
Connecticut, the "village" level of government is called a borough.

-GAWollman


From scott@fybush.com  Thu Jan 31 21:12:45 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:12:45 -0500
Subject: "Piano Jazz"  &  "Echoes"
In-Reply-To: <003a01c86470$26971750$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <495522.88437.qm@web35902.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<03ad01c86439$bb6b1610$6501a8c0@pastor2>	<p06240803c3c819871858@[192.168.0.100]>
	<003a01c86470$26971750$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <47A2801D.20004@fybush.com>

Doug Drown wrote:
> Maine Public Broadcasting streams, and the quality is very good.   -Doug

As do we at WXXI in Rochester, with very good quality as well. Echoes 
airs Friday nights at 10 and Saturday nights at 9 on WXXI-FM 91.5; Piano 
Jazz Saturdays at 8 on WXXI AM 1370.

s

From kvahey@comcast.net  Thu Jan 31 21:13:28 2008
From: kvahey@comcast.net (kvahey@comcast.net)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:13:28 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
Message-ID: <4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com>

Has anybody in New York IDed themselves as Brooklyn or Queens and not
NYC itself? Could they use a boro name istead of New York?

From scott@fybush.com  Thu Jan 31 21:19:51 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:19:51 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>	<008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <47A281C7.7010707@fybush.com>

kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
> Has anybody in New York IDed themselves as Brooklyn or Queens and not
> NYC itself? Could they use a boro name istead of New York?
> 

I raised this question earlier in the thread. There is one station 
licensed specifically to "Brooklyn," Kingsborough Community College's 
WKRB, and one licensed to "Staten Island," Staten Island U.'s WSIA.

s

From wollman@bimajority.org  Thu Jan 31 21:21:41 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:21:41 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <18338.33333.715335.520742@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:13:28 -0500, kvahey@comcast.net said:

> Has anybody in New York IDed themselves as Brooklyn or Queens and not
> NYC itself? Could they use a boro name istead of New York?

Absolutely.  WKRB Brooklyn and WSIA Staten Island still do.

-GAWollman

From revdoug1@verizon.net  Thu Jan 31 21:33:48 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:33:48 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A281C7.7010707@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <005401c8647a$e109e950$6501a8c0@pastor2>

This brings up another question in my mind, having to do with broadcasting
stations that are ID'd in one community yet are actually located in a
different municipality altogether.  I'll use two examples:  WTAG and WGY.
The former used to have its studios in Worcester; they're now in Paxton.
The latter used to have its studios in Schenectady; they were later in
Niskayuna, then Colonie (which is in a different county), now they're back
in Niskayuna.  And yet the two stations are still ID'd as WTAG Worcester and
WGY Schenectady, respectively.  Is this permitted only because they're
grandfathered?    -Doug

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
To: <kvahey@comcast.net>
Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
<boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:19 PM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
> > Has anybody in New York IDed themselves as Brooklyn or Queens and not
> > NYC itself? Could they use a boro name istead of New York?
> >
>
> I raised this question earlier in the thread. There is one station
> licensed specifically to "Brooklyn," Kingsborough Community College's
> WKRB, and one licensed to "Staten Island," Staten Island U.'s WSIA.
>
> s


From scott@fybush.com  Thu Jan 31 21:44:58 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:44:58 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <005401c8647a$e109e950$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A281C7.7010707@fybush.com>
	<005401c8647a$e109e950$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <47A287AA.3050305@fybush.com>

Doug Drown wrote:
> This brings up another question in my mind, having to do with broadcasting
> stations that are ID'd in one community yet are actually located in a
> different municipality altogether.  I'll use two examples:  WTAG and WGY.
> The former used to have its studios in Worcester; they're now in Paxton.
> The latter used to have its studios in Schenectady; they were later in
> Niskayuna, then Colonie (which is in a different county), now they're back
> in Niskayuna.  And yet the two stations are still ID'd as WTAG Worcester and
> WGY Schenectady, respectively.  Is this permitted only because they're
> grandfathered?    -Doug

"Community of license" has become a tricky concept since the rules 
changed in the 80s.

Until the rules changed, stations had to maintain a main studio in their 
community of license (or, alternately, at their transmitter site) at 
which the majority of their programming originated.

Today, the only things a station has to do for its city of license are 
to provide a city-grade signal over it (and not even all of it, always) 
and to provide a phone number that's toll-free from that city.

The actual main studio can be anywhere within 25 miles, or within the 
city-grade contour of any station licensed to that community, whichever 
is larger.

s

From dave@skywaves.net  Thu Jan 31 21:45:42 2008
From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:45:42 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044><008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036><4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com><47A281C7.7010707@fybush.com>
	<005401c8647a$e109e950$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <000601c8647c$8a0c3fc0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>

Hi Doug-

The old radio rule was that the main studio had to be located within the 
principal community contour of the station. That's what originally allowed 
WGY to be located in Niskayuna and WSRS to be located in Paxton.

On another thread, somebody mentioned WPTZ-TV, licensed to North Pole, NY, 
but with studios in Plattsburgh. Roughly the same concept applies, although 
in TV Land, the principal community is called the City of License.

The current radio rules allow for the main studio to be located within the 
principal community contour (5mv/m day for AM, 70dbu for FM) of ANY station 
licensed to the same community.  There is also a 25 mile rule that allows 
the main studio to be located that far from the community. There are several 
cases of stations that cannot be heard at their studios as a result.

There are proposals on the table right now that would require that the 
studios be located in the principal community.

-Dave Doherty
 Skywaves, Inc.
 97 Webster Street
 Worcester, MA 01603
 508-425-7176




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>
To: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>; <kvahey@comcast.net>
Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>; 
<boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:33 PM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> This brings up another question in my mind, having to do with broadcasting
> stations that are ID'd in one community yet are actually located in a
> different municipality altogether.  I'll use two examples:  WTAG and WGY.
> The former used to have its studios in Worcester; they're now in Paxton.
> The latter used to have its studios in Schenectady; they were later in
> Niskayuna, then Colonie (which is in a different county), now they're back
> in Niskayuna.  And yet the two stations are still ID'd as WTAG Worcester 
> and
> WGY Schenectady, respectively.  Is this permitted only because they're
> grandfathered?    -Doug
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
> To: <kvahey@comcast.net>
> Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
> <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>
>
>> kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
>> > Has anybody in New York IDed themselves as Brooklyn or Queens and not
>> > NYC itself? Could they use a boro name istead of New York?
>> >
>>
>> I raised this question earlier in the thread. There is one station
>> licensed specifically to "Brooklyn," Kingsborough Community College's
>> WKRB, and one licensed to "Staten Island," Staten Island U.'s WSIA.
>>
>> s
>
>
> 


From wollman@bimajority.org  Thu Jan 31 22:04:27 2008
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 22:04:27 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <47A287AA.3050305@fybush.com>
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>
	<008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com>
	<47A281C7.7010707@fybush.com>
	<005401c8647a$e109e950$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<47A287AA.3050305@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <18338.35899.708370.216326@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>

<<On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:44:58 -0500, Scott Fybush <scott@fybush.com> said:

> Today, the only things a station has to do for its city of license are 
> to provide a city-grade signal over it (and not even all of it, always) 
> and to provide a phone number that's toll-free from that city.

You forgot one: it must mention the name of the community of license
"hourly, as close to the hour as feasible, at a natural break in
program offerings".  (Thus allowing far too many GMs and PDs to
demonstrate their complete inability to comprehend simple instructions
written in plain English words of nine letters or fewer.  You know who
I'm talking about.)

-GAWollman

From revdoug1@verizon.net  Thu Jan 31 22:10:51 2008
From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 22:10:51 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044><008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036><4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com><47A281C7.7010707@fybush.com>
	<005401c8647a$e109e950$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<000601c8647c$8a0c3fc0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
Message-ID: <005e01c86480$0d8a5460$6501a8c0@pastor2>

Thanks, Scott and Dave.
BTW, why WAS WPTZ licensed to North Pole, New York??  A publicity gimmick?
---And--- If they wished, could WPTZ, WCAX and WVNY include Montreal in
their station ID's?  (I'm thinking of WGME in Portland, which often ID's
itself as Portland/Lewiston --- but obviously Lewiston is still in Maine,
and in the U.S.)

-Doug


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
To: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>; "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>;
<kvahey@comcast.net>
Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
<boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:45 PM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> Hi Doug-
>
> The old radio rule was that the main studio had to be located within the
> principal community contour of the station. That's what originally allowed
> WGY to be located in Niskayuna and WSRS to be located in Paxton.
>
> On another thread, somebody mentioned WPTZ-TV, licensed to North Pole, NY,
> but with studios in Plattsburgh. Roughly the same concept applies,
although
> in TV Land, the principal community is called the City of License.
>
> The current radio rules allow for the main studio to be located within the
> principal community contour (5mv/m day for AM, 70dbu for FM) of ANY
station
> licensed to the same community.  There is also a 25 mile rule that allows
> the main studio to be located that far from the community. There are
several
> cases of stations that cannot be heard at their studios as a result.
>
> There are proposals on the table right now that would require that the
> studios be located in the principal community.
>
> -Dave Doherty
>  Skywaves, Inc.
>  97 Webster Street
>  Worcester, MA 01603
>  508-425-7176
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>
> To: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>; <kvahey@comcast.net>
> Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
> <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:33 PM
> Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>
>
> > This brings up another question in my mind, having to do with
broadcasting
> > stations that are ID'd in one community yet are actually located in a
> > different municipality altogether.  I'll use two examples:  WTAG and
WGY.
> > The former used to have its studios in Worcester; they're now in Paxton.
> > The latter used to have its studios in Schenectady; they were later in
> > Niskayuna, then Colonie (which is in a different county), now they're
back
> > in Niskayuna.  And yet the two stations are still ID'd as WTAG Worcester
> > and
> > WGY Schenectady, respectively.  Is this permitted only because they're
> > grandfathered?    -Doug
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
> > To: <kvahey@comcast.net>
> > Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
> > <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:19 PM
> > Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
> >
> >
> >> kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
> >> > Has anybody in New York IDed themselves as Brooklyn or Queens and not
> >> > NYC itself? Could they use a boro name istead of New York?
> >> >
> >>
> >> I raised this question earlier in the thread. There is one station
> >> licensed specifically to "Brooklyn," Kingsborough Community College's
> >> WKRB, and one licensed to "Staten Island," Staten Island U.'s WSIA.
> >>
> >> s
> >
> >
> >
>


From dan.strassberg@att.net  Thu Jan 31 22:08:34 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 22:08:34 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044><008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036>
	<4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <003c01c8647f$bcff47d0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>

Back in the 40s and maybe the 50s, WBNX 1380 (now, I think, WKDM) IDed
as WBNX Bronx. Before that, WBYN Brooklyn 1430 (replaced by WNJR
Newark (now WNSW) after WBYN lost its license for broadcasting
horse-race results), IDed as WBYN Brooklyn. Also in the 40s--and
surely earlier, WBBR, a 1330 share-timer owned by the Watchtower Bible
and Tract Society (Jehovah's Witnesses) and completely unrelated to
today's WBBR, broadcast from Watchtower's worldwide headquarters in
Brooklyn and IDed as WBBR Brooklyn. In the same era, WWRL, then a 250W
Class IV on the 1600 kc Class III channel, IDed as WWRL Woodside. WWRL
was located in what looked like a former two-family house with a tower
in its back yard in the Woodside neighborhood of the New York City
borough of Queens. AFAIK, WWRL was licensed to Woodside, not Queens,
and certainly not to New York City, which with that power, on that
frequency, with that soil conductivity, it most certainly could not
have hoped to serve. After a power increase to 5 kW-U DA-2 and Tx move
to the Jersey Meadowlands, WWRL applied for relicensing to New York
City. Only after modification of its license did it start to ID as
WWRL New York.

In the 20s and 30s there were literally scores of tiny AMs (nearly all
of them share-timers) that served only part of one or another New York
City borough. I believe that only a few of those low-power share-time
stations were audacious enough to ID as Wxxx New York. There were,
however, other stations whose signals were so poor that they reached
only a fraction of  New York's (geographically large) area but
neverthless did ID as Wxxx New York. One such was the station then
owned by the City of New York, WNYC 830. WNYC's transmitter was in
Queens or Brooklyn (I don't know which) across the East River from
~33rd St in Manhattan. The 1 kW signal was always unlistenable in the
northwest Bronx where I lived. At the same time, WLIB 1190 ran 1 kW
from somewhere in Queens (maybe not far from the Queens end of the
Bronx-Whitestone Bridge). Where I lived, WLIB's signal was only
marginally better than WNYC's. As did WNYC, WLIB used a New York ID.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kvahey@comcast.net>
To: <paul@derrynh.net>
Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
<boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> Has anybody in New York IDed themselves as Brooklyn or Queens and
> not
> NYC itself? Could they use a boro name istead of New York?


From sean.smyth@yahoo.com  Thu Jan 31 21:22:23 2008
From: sean.smyth@yahoo.com (Sean Smyth)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:22:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <457017.19785.qm@web58312.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
> Has anybody in New York IDed themselves as Brooklyn or Queens and not
> NYC itself? Could they use a boro name istead of New York?

WNYE Brooklyn.
WKRB Brooklyn.


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

From dan.strassberg@att.net  Thu Jan 31 22:23:21 2008
From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 22:23:21 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044><008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036><4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com><47A281C7.7010707@fybush.com><005401c8647a$e109e950$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<47A287AA.3050305@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <004a01c86481$cda72060$79f8a742@SatU205S5044>

I've always found that rule humorous for the following
reason--following it to the letter would allow all stations licensed
to New York City to locate their studios and offices in New London CT,
more than 100 miles by road from Manhattan. The reason is that WFAN
(and possibly WCBS and WOR) put city-grade (5 mV/m) signals into New
London. Not that any station would actually do it... but I'm just
saying... After all, $2 million probably still buys a pretty nice
house in New London--even one with a good view of Long Island
Sound--vs a cramped studio apartment in Manhattan.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
To: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>
Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
<boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations

>
> The actual main studio can be anywhere within 25 miles, or within
> the city-grade contour of any station licensed to that community,
> whichever is larger.
>


From scott@fybush.com  Thu Jan 31 22:26:01 2008
From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 22:26:01 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <005e01c86480$0d8a5460$6501a8c0@pastor2>
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044><008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036><4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com><47A281C7.7010707@fybush.com>
	<005401c8647a$e109e950$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<000601c8647c$8a0c3fc0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<005e01c86480$0d8a5460$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <47A29149.6050808@fybush.com>

Doug Drown wrote:
> Thanks, Scott and Dave.
> BTW, why WAS WPTZ licensed to North Pole, New York??  A publicity gimmick?
> ---And--- If they wished, could WPTZ, WCAX and WVNY include Montreal in
> their station ID's?  (I'm thinking of WGME in Portland, which often ID's
> itself as Portland/Lewiston --- but obviously Lewiston is still in Maine,
> and in the U.S.)

A station can say anything it wants after its legal ID. "WJIB 
Cambridge-Boston-New York-San Francisco" would be entirely legal, if 
somewhat exaggerated.

s

From dave@skywaves.net  Thu Jan 31 23:01:52 2008
From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 23:01:52 -0500
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044><008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036><4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com><47A281C7.7010707@fybush.com>
	<005401c8647a$e109e950$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<000601c8647c$8a0c3fc0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<005e01c86480$0d8a5460$6501a8c0@pastor2>
Message-ID: <001901c86487$2dba8460$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>

Channel 5 was originally allocated to Lake Placid.

North Pole was a community that (a) met the definition of a community, (b)
met the distance separation requirements that existed at the time the
allocation was moved, and (c) was within the radius the FCC allowed at the
time to move a city of license, maybe 15 miles..

Plattsburgh did not qualify, because it was way beyond the city of license
move limitation.

-d

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>
To: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>; "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>; 
<kvahey@comcast.net>
Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>; 
<boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 10:10 PM
Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations


> Thanks, Scott and Dave.
> BTW, why WAS WPTZ licensed to North Pole, New York??  A publicity gimmick?
> ---And--- If they wished, could WPTZ, WCAX and WVNY include Montreal in
> their station ID's?  (I'm thinking of WGME in Portland, which often ID's
> itself as Portland/Lewiston --- but obviously Lewiston is still in Maine,
> and in the U.S.)
>
> -Doug
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dave Doherty" <dave@skywaves.net>
> To: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>; "Scott Fybush" 
> <scott@fybush.com>;
> <kvahey@comcast.net>
> Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
> <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>
>
>> Hi Doug-
>>
>> The old radio rule was that the main studio had to be located within the
>> principal community contour of the station. That's what originally 
>> allowed
>> WGY to be located in Niskayuna and WSRS to be located in Paxton.
>>
>> On another thread, somebody mentioned WPTZ-TV, licensed to North Pole, 
>> NY,
>> but with studios in Plattsburgh. Roughly the same concept applies,
> although
>> in TV Land, the principal community is called the City of License.
>>
>> The current radio rules allow for the main studio to be located within 
>> the
>> principal community contour (5mv/m day for AM, 70dbu for FM) of ANY
> station
>> licensed to the same community.  There is also a 25 mile rule that allows
>> the main studio to be located that far from the community. There are
> several
>> cases of stations that cannot be heard at their studios as a result.
>>
>> There are proposals on the table right now that would require that the
>> studios be located in the principal community.
>>
>> -Dave Doherty
>>  Skywaves, Inc.
>>  97 Webster Street
>>  Worcester, MA 01603
>>  508-425-7176
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Doug Drown" <revdoug1@verizon.net>
>> To: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>; <kvahey@comcast.net>
>> Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
>> <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:33 PM
>> Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>>
>>
>> > This brings up another question in my mind, having to do with
> broadcasting
>> > stations that are ID'd in one community yet are actually located in a
>> > different municipality altogether.  I'll use two examples:  WTAG and
> WGY.
>> > The former used to have its studios in Worcester; they're now in 
>> > Paxton.
>> > The latter used to have its studios in Schenectady; they were later in
>> > Niskayuna, then Colonie (which is in a different county), now they're
> back
>> > in Niskayuna.  And yet the two stations are still ID'd as WTAG 
>> > Worcester
>> > and
>> > WGY Schenectady, respectively.  Is this permitted only because they're
>> > grandfathered?    -Doug
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message ----- 
>> > From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
>> > To: <kvahey@comcast.net>
>> > Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>;
>> > <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
>> > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:19 PM
>> > Subject: Re: Licensed to non-actual locations
>> >
>> >
>> >> kvahey@comcast.net wrote:
>> >> > Has anybody in New York IDed themselves as Brooklyn or Queens and 
>> >> > not
>> >> > NYC itself? Could they use a boro name istead of New York?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I raised this question earlier in the thread. There is one station
>> >> licensed specifically to "Brooklyn," Kingsborough Community College's
>> >> WKRB, and one licensed to "Staten Island," Staten Island U.'s WSIA.
>> >>
>> >> s
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
> 


From irw@well.com  Thu Jan 31 23:12:46 2008
From: irw@well.com (Blaine Thompson)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:12:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Licensed to non-actual locations
In-Reply-To: <47A29149.6050808@fybush.com>
References: <004501c8640a$e10ff8b0$79f8a742@SatU205S5044><008801c8646e$ec3a8f20$d38fe847@YOURF7ED5FB036><4fc429770801311813y69680ec7s4248a653ccf87b0f@mail.gmail.com><47A281C7.7010707@fybush.com>
	<005401c8647a$e109e950$6501a8c0@pastor2>
	<000601c8647c$8a0c3fc0$346ba8c0@skywaves.net>
	<005e01c86480$0d8a5460$6501a8c0@pastor2> <47A29149.6050808@fybush.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0801312011050.20985@well.com>

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Scott Fybush wrote:

> A station can say anything it wants after its legal ID. "WJIB
> Cambridge-Boston-New York-San Francisco" would be entirely legal, if
> somewhat exaggerated.

Indeed, and it has been done before. :-)

http://www.tophour.com/audio/Winchester%20VA-Martinsburg%20WV/fm0975_1990-08_wkmz_bthompson.mp3


From songbook2@comcast.net  Thu Jan 31 23:37:36 2008
From: songbook2@comcast.net (Russ Butler)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:37:36 -0800
Subject: WALE and KPPC Window Studios
Message-ID: <47A2A210.9080104@comcast.net>

There was (maybe still is?) a storefront studio at WALE 990AM in 
downtown Providence, RI  The call letters came from when the station was 
licensed to New Bedford, MA originally, I think for "The Whaling 
City."   There was usually a crowd peering in the sidewalk window at 
night during the gay-lesbian show (....they brokered time at WALE, 
anyone could be on the air who purchased time).

Also, KPPC 1240AM in Pasadena CA  had a storefront studio on Colorado 
Boulevard.  The station had legendary calls since 1924, formed as a part 
time broadcaster of the Pasadena Presbyterian Church  only to air 
services all day Sundays and Wednesday nights. (It is now dark).  They 
also had an FM station at 106.7 which has been sold and is now a rock 
station in LA.

=Russ Butler  songbook2@comcast.net