From dan.strassberg@att.net Tue Nov 3 08:18:22 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:18:22 -0500 Subject: Entercom sells some towers to ATS; Is Boston affected? Message-ID: <2C34493246E8412584A9080F7F30DC98@SatU205S5044> According to Tom Taylor's column today at Radio-Info.com, Entercom has sold some of its towers to American Tower Systems. Apparently the tower company had more cash on hand than Entercom did and Entercom was able to use the infusion of cash to improve its balance sheet, which it may have needed to do to meet commitments to its creditors. Anyhow, Entercom owns (or maybe now the correct term is owned) six towers here that are well known to ATS: WRKO's three in Burlington and WEEI's three in Needham. Entercom acquired the six towers from ATS's presecessor, American Radio Systems, when it bought the stations from ARS, maybe a decade ago. Back then, ARS, which then changed its name to ATS, apparently decided that owning and operating broadcasting and communications towers would be a better business than owning and operating radio stations. I suspect that, at least during the recession, that hunch has proven correct. So are the WRKO and WEEI towers now back in the hands of the folks who sold them to Entercom? ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 From m_carney@yahoo.com Tue Nov 3 18:55:19 2009 From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 15:55:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: NECN job opening Message-ID: <366281.90630.qm@web53303.mail.re2.yahoo.com> If anyone is interested, or knows someone who is, NECN is looking for a Station Manager. It's a new position - Bill Bridgen is looking for someone to look after day-to-day operations as he's overseeing both NECN and CSN. Candidates don't need a straight news background as they are looking for someone "creative" (that's a direct quote from Bridgen this afternoon). Details are at the NECN website. From paul@derrynh.net Tue Nov 3 19:33:34 2009 From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 19:33:34 -0500 Subject: Nassau changes in NH In-Reply-To: <2C34493246E8412584A9080F7F30DC98@SatU205S5044> References: <2C34493246E8412584A9080F7F30DC98@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <8A1BDA85ED8F474E886B367DB6541CC7@PaulPC> WWHQ (101.5 Meredith NH "The Hawk") is moving to the 104.9 Wolfeboro NH signal tomorrow (Wed 11-4).... Anyone know what Nassau's putting on 101.5???? The FrankNH.com website still says 99 and 104.9, but the 'thehawkrocks.com' site clearly mentions the shift to 104.9 and they mentioned it on air today may times... Any guesses? (WEEI Network??????) -Paul Hopfgarten -Derry NH From scott@fybush.com Tue Nov 3 19:45:39 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:45:39 -0500 Subject: Nassau changes in NH In-Reply-To: <8A1BDA85ED8F474E886B367DB6541CC7@PaulPC> References: <2C34493246E8412584A9080F7F30DC98@SatU205S5044> <8A1BDA85ED8F474E886B367DB6541CC7@PaulPC> Message-ID: <4AF0CEB3.5010801@fybush.com> Paul Hopfgarten wrote: > WWHQ (101.5 Meredith NH "The Hawk") is moving to the 104.9 Wolfeboro NH > signal tomorrow (Wed 11-4).... > > Anyone know what Nassau's putting on 101.5???? > > The FrankNH.com website still says 99 and 104.9, but the > 'thehawkrocks.com' site clearly mentions the shift to 104.9 and they > mentioned it on air today may times... > > Any guesses? (WEEI Network??????) Still not sure about 101.5 - but at 100000watts.com, we're reporting that 99.1 is also dropping Frank, and will be flipping to some form of CHR tomorrow. s From chris2526@comcast.net Wed Nov 4 02:35:35 2009 From: chris2526@comcast.net (chris2526) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 02:35:35 -0500 Subject: Entercom-American Tower Message-ID: <5BA0B87FBEC14150B32A488B3273146A@Chicken159> I suspect they are talking FM or TV towers, WRKO being in the wetlands and the age of the 1946 self supporters very unlikely candidates for what American Tower usually does which is load their towers to the max. For example what they did with the new 93.7 tower in Peabody they kept when the station was sold to Entercom. In addition I doubt they would want either directional array of WEEI and WRKO to be in the hands of another party which is the situation that happened when WNFT was sold to CBS and American tower kept the Concord Ave, Lexington tower real estate. I could be wrong but my gut feeling says no. From raccoonradio@mail.com Wed Nov 4 10:59:40 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 10:59:40 -0500 Subject: WRKO to air World Series Game 6 Message-ID: <20091104155945.844CF83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> WEEI used to run promos saying, "If you missed (show), you dropped the ball..." WEEI/WRKO almost dropped the ball: originally WEEI was to run tonight's World Series game 6 after a Celtics 8 pm tipoff...which meant that the game (once thought to be "if necessary" but now very necessary) would be joined in progress by, oh, the 8th inning or so. But now given the interest level of Pedro vs. Pinstripes, it will air in its entirety on WRKO instead. From paul@derrynh.net Wed Nov 4 17:41:41 2009 From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:41:41 -0500 Subject: Nassau changes in NH In-Reply-To: <4AF0CEB3.5010801@fybush.com> References: <2C34493246E8412584A9080F7F30DC98@SatU205S5044> <8A1BDA85ED8F474E886B367DB6541CC7@PaulPC> <4AF0CEB3.5010801@fybush.com> Message-ID: <5890CD35EE994BE0B64E723BDD3AD25B@PaulPC> As of 5PM tonight... "The Hawk" moves from 101.5 Meredith to 104.9 Wolfeboro 101.5 now stunting Telling people the "Hawk" has moved.. 99.1 Henniker (WNNH) now simulcasting 105.5 Concord (WJYY)...how lon will that last??? Are changes coming to 105.5 Maybe 105.5/101.5 "The Bone"?????? (Another Nassua franchise) -Paul Hopfgarten -Derry NH ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Fybush" To: "Paul Hopfgarten" Cc: "Boston Radio Interest" Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 7:45 PM Subject: Re: Nassau changes in NH > Paul Hopfgarten wrote: >> WWHQ (101.5 Meredith NH "The Hawk") is moving to the 104.9 Wolfeboro NH >> signal tomorrow (Wed 11-4).... >> >> Anyone know what Nassau's putting on 101.5???? >> >> The FrankNH.com website still says 99 and 104.9, but the >> 'thehawkrocks.com' site clearly mentions the shift to 104.9 and they >> mentioned it on air today may times... >> >> Any guesses? (WEEI Network??????) > > Still not sure about 101.5 - but at 100000watts.com, we're reporting that > 99.1 is also dropping Frank, and will be flipping to some form of CHR > tomorrow. > > s > From jjlehmann@comcast.net Wed Nov 4 17:48:28 2009 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:48:28 -0500 Subject: Nassau changes in NH In-Reply-To: <5890CD35EE994BE0B64E723BDD3AD25B@PaulPC> References: <2C34493246E8412584A9080F7F30DC98@SatU205S5044> <8A1BDA85ED8F474E886B367DB6541CC7@PaulPC> <4AF0CEB3.5010801@fybush.com> <5890CD35EE994BE0B64E723BDD3AD25B@PaulPC> Message-ID: <001801ca5da0$ed587bb0$c8097310$@net> 99.1 and 101.5 are being sold, so soon they will no longer be under Nassau's control. They're probably just simulcasting JYY on 99.1 as filler. 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 Paul Hopfgarten Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 5:42 PM To: Scott Fybush Cc: Boston Radio Interest Subject: Re: Nassau changes in NH As of 5PM tonight... "The Hawk" moves from 101.5 Meredith to 104.9 Wolfeboro 101.5 now stunting Telling people the "Hawk" has moved.. 99.1 Henniker (WNNH) now simulcasting 105.5 Concord (WJYY)...how lon will that last??? Are changes coming to 105.5 Maybe 105.5/101.5 "The Bone"?????? (Another Nassua franchise) -Paul Hopfgarten -Derry NH From m_carney@yahoo.com Fri Nov 6 09:29:26 2009 From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 06:29:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cuts at WFXT Fox 25 Message-ID: <458502.77794.qm@web53305.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Butch Stearns and Jim Armstrong are out @ WFXT: http://bostonherald.com/business/media/view/20091106fox_dumps_last_sportscaster/srvc=home&position=4 Not a big suprise - Fox is moving to dump sports departments and trying to get anchors to run their own teleprompters. Haven't seen Butchie in the building @ CSN (yet), suspect WEEI will be his primary destination for now. CSN launches their new sports news and website on 12/3. From raccoonradio@mail.com Sat Nov 7 03:21:01 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 03:21:01 -0500 Subject: WGBH cancels blues, some folk programming Message-ID: <20091107082101.DBBAC83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> WGBH has made what it calls a difficult decision, cancelling the long running Blues on WGBH (formerly Blues After Hours with the late Mai Cramer) and Folk on WGBH. This is all part of the move due next month where they will start to offer classical music commercial free on WCRB 99.5 http://www.wgbh.org/listen/goodbyefolkandblues.cfm They mention stations like WUMB as places where folk can still be heard. Some shows, like A Celtic Sojourn and Prairie Home Companion, will stay, though. The folk and blues hosts were thanked. I know I for one found shows like Blues After Hours a great way to discover and learn about the blues. >>As we refocus the 89.7 schedule on news and information, it became apparent that it would not be possible to retain all of the nonnews elements of our schedule. "We've Got Blues Here"--Mai Cramer From dan.strassberg@att.net Sat Nov 7 07:58:57 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 07:58:57 -0500 Subject: WGBH cancels blues, some folk programming References: <20091107082101.DBBAC83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <404CD6163168432C8BFAB7FC6659EC45@SatU205S5044> But from what you say, there is no suggestion that any of the programming that is being dropped from 89.7, other than the midday classical block, will be moving to 99.5. Thus, it sounds as if, in its race to cater to the people who contribute the most, WGBH is alienating significant groups of listeners. Public radio seems to be adopting the same model as commercial radio, where some formats are available on three or four signals in a market and others, if they are heard at all on terrestrial signals, are only on HD-n subchannels (where n > 1). As the country allegedly becomes more diverse, we seem to be moving inexorably toward little or no diversity in the facets of life that supposedly distinguish our society as civilized. Rather frightening, really! I know, somebody is going to tell me about the hundreds of Web streams that carry blues. Not the same thing as having the format on an over-the-air terrestrial signal. Also, although I am really a fan of some kinds of jazz, and I like some kinds of blues, nobody would call me a blues afficionado. What I am wringing my hands about here is not so much that blues will be less accessible to the Boston radio audience; it's that economics seems to be increasingly limiting listeners' choices--providing a surfeit of what we already have enough of and a paucity of what can make for listening adventures. And don't give me the "radio is a business" line; WGBH is a noncommercial station. Wouldn't suprise me if 'GBH now fills the hours that blues used to occupy with the same BBC news already available in the same hours 1.2 MHz up the dial. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Nelson" To: "BostonRadio Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 3:21 AM Subject: WGBH cancels blues, some folk programming WGBH has made what it calls a difficult decision, cancelling the long running Blues on WGBH (formerly Blues After Hours with the late Mai Cramer) and Folk on WGBH. This is all part of the move due next month where they will start to offer classical music commercial free on WCRB 99.5 http://www.wgbh.org/listen/goodbyefolkandblues.cfm They mention stations like WUMB as places where folk can still be heard. Some shows, like A Celtic Sojourn and Prairie Home Companion, will stay, though. The folk and blues hosts were thanked. I know I for one found shows like Blues After Hours a great way to discover and learn about the blues. >>As we refocus the 89.7 schedule on news and information, it became >>apparent that it would not be possible to retain all of the nonnews >>elements of our schedule. "We've Got Blues Here"--Mai Cramer From raccoonradio@mail.com Sat Nov 7 11:14:41 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 11:14:41 -0500 Subject: WGBH cancels blues, some folk programming Message-ID: <20091107161442.6E19983985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Dan wrote: >>it sounds as if, in its race to cater to the people who contribute the most, WGBH is alienating significant groups of listeners. Public radio seems to be adopting the same model as commercial radio, where some formats are available on three or four signals in a market and others, if they are heard at all on terrestrial signals, are only on HD-n subchannels True, and evidently they feel they can still fund their programming even though more than a few listeners will be disappointed by this move. There are blues and folk shows on other stations, often not as powerful (my 130 watt WMWM for example) and yes if you get an HD radio you can find "Radio Mojo" on a WZLX HD signal. Satellite radio (XM, which I have) has a folk station (Folk Village) and a blues one (B.B. King's Bluesville). How many people want to pay for an HD radio, or pay every month for satellite? And yes, wifi radio is coming...to select cars. Radio Mojo has no DJs (song titles/artists probably are displayed on the radio and also on their website) and the folk/blues channels on XM/Sirius are not local. You won't have a DJ playing a blues artist then adding, "They will be performing at The C Note in Hull this Sunday". Cost-cutting also led to the demise of Blues On Sunday on WBOS awhile back. The host, Holly Harris, had frequently filled in for Mai Cramer on WGBH (the other 2 DJs on my blues show had worked on Mai's show, and our former DJ Josh Hull I believe had filled in for Mai). From joe@attorneyross.com Sat Nov 7 23:40:33 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:40:33 -0500 Subject: Digital TV Message-ID: <4AF64BC1.14563.732059@joe.attorneyross.com> Since I have cable, I don't often need to watch DTV off the air, even though I got the converters. But a couple of days ago I watched a show on channel 4 while my VCR taped a show off a cable channel. Even though the display showed good signal strength and signal quality, several times during the program, the signal broke up and the message "Bad or no signal" came on screen. Just why was this supposed to be an improvement? -- 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 Sun Nov 8 02:37:01 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 02:37:01 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4AF64BC1.14563.732059@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4AF64BC1.14563.732059@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911072337u1cd94580h7f770842df6fe130@mail.gmail.com> Umm well the government selling the spectrum ..... Chicago is a complete farce In my apartment in Evanston which is less than ten miles by seagull or crow from the Sears or Hancock I can get exactly two channels OTA WFLD (FOX 32) and low power analog channel 23. That is it... Before the conversion I got everything fine (with some ghosting) and also OTA from Michigan and Wisconsin. Now.. In Chicago the FCC allowed WLS-TV a second digital channel but my tuners are oblivious. No biggie to me having cable but geeze I have to laugh that LP-23 analog seems to be the only reliable signal in Cook County On 11/7/09, A. Joseph Ross wrote: > Since I have cable, I don't often need to watch DTV off the air, even > though I got the converters. But a couple of days ago I watched a > show on channel 4 while my VCR taped a show off a cable channel. > > Even though the display showed good signal strength and signal > quality, several times during the program, the signal broke up and > the message "Bad or no signal" came on screen. > > Just why was this supposed to be an improvement? > > -- > 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 rbello@belloassoc.com Sun Nov 8 13:17:20 2009 From: rbello@belloassoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:17:20 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4AF64BC1.14563.732059@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4AF64BC1.14563.732059@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <90ec04420911081017n12d803eag8053087824986d20@mail.gmail.com> The improvement is in picture quality. 1080P high def video. The plus for the government is freeing up spectrum space which they have auctioned to the highest bidder. Last week I setup a new Sony flat screen for my parents. Of course they didn't have the cable to connect to the Direct TV box. So, with my mother looking like a sad puppy, I cut the connector off an unused cable, striped one of wires and shoved the end into the antenna jack. Pushed scan and in 5 minutes had 22 channels of beautiful hidef video. The rest of the story is that they are located only a couple of miles south of the Needham / Newton antenna farm. No hills just line of sight reception. WHDH still is transmitting on both channel 7 and 42. Just 2 miles away, channel 7 would not lock in. On Saturday, November 7, 2009, A. Joseph Ross wrote: > Since I have cable, I don't often need to watch DTV off the air, even > though I got the converters. ?But a couple of days ago I watched a > show on channel 4 while my VCR taped a show off a cable channel. > > Even though the display showed good signal strength and signal > quality, several times during the program, the signal broke up and > the message "Bad or no signal" came on screen. > > Just why was this supposed to be an improvement? > > -- > 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 > > > -- Ron Bello Bello Associates, Inc. 160 Speen Street - Suite 303 Framingham, MA 01701 508-820-1100 Fax 820-1112 From TVNETDUDE@aol.com Sun Nov 8 17:36:07 2009 From: TVNETDUDE@aol.com (TVNETDUDE@aol.com) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 17:36:07 EST Subject: Digital TV Message-ID: In a message dated 11/8/2009 12:01:24 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, boston-radio-interest-request@tsornin.BostonRadio.org writes: >>>Just why was this supposed to be an improvement?<<< Don't get me started on that. The reason we use the modified-kluged method of the 1949 analog version of vestigial sideband modulation (8-VSB) is because the patent for it was owned by Zenith. In the 80's, when HDTV was first hatched, Zenith still made TV's and they were made in the US. It was supposed to rejuvenate the TV industry by selling receivers and the first shot at HDTV was analog! When digital came along they naturally had to move in that direction and that added to the delay. Long story short, Zenith was sold to the Koreans and by the time receivers were being marketed and sold with 8-VSB technology. Keep in mind at the time of testing in Washington at WRC, all of the problems that are being experienced now were known back in the early 90's (well all except the VHF transmission problems). The TV Networks were actually leading the way for a conversion to COFDM. There was actually a showdown at The Rayburn Office building with 8-VSB and COFDM ( the method everyone else uses) and they still went with the 8-VSB standard. COFDM is a much, much more robust system. It, or a variation of it, is used for mobile and portable TV everywhere just about everywhere else but here, Canada, Korea, and Mexico. Was this a coincidence that 8-VSB was approved or was it just genius on the part of the CEA? Get an inferior system in place and then take it off the air and sell the spectrum. Oh, and don't forget the money we spent on converter boxes for everyone! In all fairness, the TV stations were supposed to stay on their VHF channels and the UHF spectrum WAS supposed to be auctioned off for wireless. Think what the antenna length on a cell phone would look like on a VHF TV frequency? Mike Hemeon From kvahey@comcast.net Sun Nov 8 18:10:11 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 18:10:11 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> The bottom line is if someone like myself is having trouble getting a signal I really have to wonder how poor and elderly folks are coping. With all the digital signals in Chicago I should be able to get more than one DTV signal!!!!!! I have tried to help friends in the city and nobody can get WBBM-DT and WLS-DT is also hit or miss. From scott@fybush.com Sun Nov 8 18:16:31 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:16:31 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4AF7514F.1050509@fybush.com> Kevin Vahey wrote: > The bottom line is if someone like myself is having trouble getting a > signal I really have to wonder how poor and elderly folks are coping. > > With all the digital signals in Chicago I should be able to get more > than one DTV signal!!!!!! > > I have tried to help friends in the city and nobody can get WBBM-DT > and WLS-DT is also hit or miss. > For whatever it's worth, my Chicago DTV experience has been quite good so far. In the last year or so, I've tried from several locations around the city, including Ohio & Grand (June '09) and out in Oak Brook (June '08), and with the exception of WBBM-DT (then on 3) from Oak Brook, reception with an indoor antenna (the RIGHT indoor antenna - an unamplified Silver Sensor) has been flawless. This has not been the case in other markets. Downtown LA this past August was a disaster, for instance. s From kvahey@comcast.net Sun Nov 8 18:29:39 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 18:29:39 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4AF7514F.1050509@fybush.com> References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> <4AF7514F.1050509@fybush.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911081529l514517c4ka116415627b83cbc@mail.gmail.com> Scott I suspect the number of hi-rise apartment buildings on the northside along with the curve of Lake Michigan is the main problem for Evanston. Oak Brook doesn't have that problem. From dmoisan@davidmoisan.org Sun Nov 8 18:33:12 2009 From: dmoisan@davidmoisan.org (David Moisan) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 18:33:12 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: The bottom line is if someone like myself is having trouble getting a signal I really have to wonder how poor and elderly folks are coping. With all the digital signals in Chicago I should be able to get more than one DTV signal!!!!!! WHDH-TV is staying with its UHF signal. One point that has been made in the trade mags (TV Technology or Broadcast Engineering, forget which) is that many tuners may be susceptible to interference with certain combinations of RF channels, like in Boston, channel 21-30-42, for example. There are people who can't get signals despite being able to *see* the tower from the window. As with analog broadcasting, it is seldom tuner sensitivity that prevents reception, but multipath, which is brutal in digital since you can't see its true effect without a spectrum analyzer and it will just make a no signal at the TV with no idea why. I do get more digital signals than analog (where I only got WHDH) at my apartment in Salem. But no Fox 25, 38 or 56, and no WBZ unless I turn the antenna the other way. I've been told the very newest tuners coming out are somewhat better at multipath prevention. From m_carney@yahoo.com Sun Nov 8 19:37:53 2009 From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 16:37:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Isn't this why WMTW moved off Mt. Washington - concern that if they ran a full digital signal from up there the signal would miss Portland altogether? I too find I have to fiddle with the antenna to get Fox 25 and can't get 56 or 38 at all out in Holliston. Why wouldn't 56 come in if 7 comes in on both 7 and 42 and they're on the same tower? From dan.strassberg@att.net Sun Nov 8 19:55:26 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 19:55:26 -0500 Subject: Digital TV References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <26CF7C6D8A3840868E377DCB3A06E295@SatU205S5044> I live in Arlington Heights near Route 2 and Lexington. Less than a mile west of the top of Belmont Hill. 2, 4, 5, 38, and 44 are all on the same tower and some of them, I believe, are actually muliplexed onto the same antenna on the same tower. Not only does reception vary unpredictably over time (sometimes no audio dropouts/pixellation for several weeks at a time, then without warning, reception problems for weeks at a time), but it can vary A LOT from station to station. Generally, I have problems with 38 even when the others are good, but sometimes even 38 is OK--and can stay OK for days at a time. Unamplified indoor antenna, first floor. Maybe the most recent tuners are better. The set is less than 18 months old and Panasonic had only just introduced it maybe three of four months before I purchased it. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Maureen Carney" To: "Boston Radio Group" Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 7:37 PM Subject: Re: Digital TV > Isn't this why WMTW moved off Mt. Washington - concern that if they > ran a full digital signal from up there the signal would miss > Portland altogether? > > I too find I have to fiddle with the antenna to get Fox 25 and can't > get 56 or 38 at all out in Holliston. Why wouldn't 56 come in if 7 > comes in on both 7 and 42 and they're on the same tower? > > > From kc1ih@mac.com Sun Nov 8 21:22:36 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:22:36 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <"4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9 a004539396f8"@mail.gmail.com> <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0KST0028FL8OIH20@asmtp021.mac.com> At 07:37 PM 11/8/2009, Maureen Carney wrote: > Why wouldn't 56 come in if 7 comes in on both 7 and 42 and they're > on the same tower? > 56 (actually 41) is not on the same tower (as 7 and 42), it is on the candelabra tower. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From m_carney@yahoo.com Sun Nov 8 21:24:17 2009 From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 18:24:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <0KST0028FL8OIH20@asmtp021.mac.com> References: <"4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9 a004539396f8"@mail.gmail.com> <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <0KST0028FL8OIH20@asmtp021.mac.com> Message-ID: <405614.43291.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Thanks for the correction - I thought for some reason that Sunbeam put them in Newton during the digital conversion. From wollman@bimajority.org Sun Nov 8 21:26:08 2009 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 21:26:08 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <19191.32192.739345.997209@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > I too find I have to fiddle with the antenna to get Fox 25 and can't > get 56 or 38 at all out in Holliston. Why wouldn't 56 come in if 7 > comes in on both 7 and 42 and they're on the same tower? They're not. 41 ("56") is on the UHF Candelabra. 42 is on the old 7 tower. -GAWollman From wollman@bimajority.org Sun Nov 8 21:28:30 2009 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 21:28:30 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <19191.32334.785767.810326@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > The bottom line is if someone like myself is having trouble getting a > signal I really have to wonder how poor and elderly folks are coping. I know that, as someone who works in television, this may not be the most comfortable thought for you, but maybe they have figured out that *television is not a necessity of life*! -GAWollman From cohasset@frontiernet.net Sun Nov 8 22:40:48 2009 From: cohasset@frontiernet.net (Cohasset / Hippisley) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 22:40:48 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <19191.32334.785767.810326@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> <19191.32334.785767.810326@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <10845AF2-6CB8-43BA-8CC1-D0AE648AF157@frontiernet.net> On Nov 8, 2009, at 9:28 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < said: > >> The bottom line is if someone like myself is having trouble getting a >> signal I really have to wonder how poor and elderly folks are coping. > > I know that, as someone who works in television, this may not be the > most comfortable thought for you, but maybe they have figured out that > *television is not a necessity of life*! > > -GAWollman Here in the sticks (Adirondacks), last year I could get "passable" pictures from five or six of the Syracuse stations, three Watertown (NY), two Utica, and one Kingston, Ontario (Channel 11). Today, I can pick up one beautiful Watertown digital signal (the old analog Channel 7) and its subchannel (Fox outlet, I think), and the still-analog Kingston 11. Everything else over-the-air is gone. My situation is not unusual in this area for people outside the hamlets where Time Warner at least has Utica on their system (although I understand they have removed Syracuse from the basic level here). Unfortunately, satellite is no help because: a. We're not part of the Syracuse SMSA, we're considered part of Albany; and b. Utica and Watertown aren't part of any of the local choices. Oh, yes, we're part of the "poor and elderly" mentioned above. And I'd have to say that television is more of a "necessity of life" for our generation than for our kids and their kids. Our sons don't want much besides the various sports channels and Discovery channel so, for the most part, they don't much care about local coverage and certainly wouldn't lobby anyone for it. They get their "news" from yahoo's home page, YouTube, and any blogs that happen to cross their paths. I have to wonder if, in the longer term, it really matters much whether digital TV works well or not. The politicians think they have done something nice for us by trading one or two channels of hi-def network and syndicated shows for eleven or more of "passable" analog with local news and weather. But given what I see and hear the younger generation using for its entertainment and information sources, the only people invested in over-the-air TV are us "poor and elderly" and the people who work in the industry. Is over-the-air digital TV going the way of newsprint and real books? What will we do with all the 1100-foot towers in Newton and Needham -- put restaurants at the top? Bud Hippisley From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Nov 8 23:44:51 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:44:51 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: , , <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4AF79E43.19337.81E0B7@joe.attorneyross.com> On 8 Nov 2009 at 16:37, Maureen Carney wrote: > I too find I have to fiddle with the antenna to get Fox 25 and can't > get 56 or 38 at all out in Holliston. Why wouldn't 56 come in if 7 > comes in on both 7 and 42 and they're on the same tower? And why does the digital converter that I've got connected to the small LCD portable in my study (in Washington Square, Brookline) not see channel 4, when it sees all the others, and all the towers are together and nearby? -- 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 Nov 9 03:26:30 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 03:26:30 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4AF79E43.19337.81E0B7@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4AF79E43.19337.81E0B7@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911090026p3d4ce9efqa7e546bf207aea14@mail.gmail.com> Just an update I picked up at CVS a nice DTV 7 inch battery powered unit made by PRISM. When it locks in the picture is flawless..but In my bathroom which faces north I get all the Milwaukee stations perfectly and both WBBM and WLS. Move 10 feet and again nothing but WFLD. I have to wonder - the apartment building next to mine facing south has a cell phone nest on it. There is also an XM repeater one block away. I sense I live in mutipath hell From dan.strassberg@att.net Mon Nov 9 08:20:16 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:20:16 -0500 Subject: Digital TV References: <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com><4AF79E43.19337.81E0B7@joe.attorneyross.com> <4fc429770911090026p3d4ce9efqa7e546bf207aea14@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I have found that, sometimes, when my reception deteriorates, if I move the antenna 10-in (and sometimes even less) I can get a big improvement--maybe no reception problems for several days. Then, the reception will deteriorate again and sometimes, if I move the antenna back to the position it was in before I moved it to improve the reception, the reception will again improve. IOW, what "fixed" the problem on Monday can "break" it on Thursday and what "broke" the reception on Thursday can "fix" it again the following Monday. I can find no pattern in what causes the problem and what fixes it. Moreover the things to fiddle with are virtually limitless--especially when you take them in combination. I doubt that I can even do a good job of _listing_ the variables, never mind _trying_ them in combination. For absolutely certain, even though the positions of the whips, which are physically part of the indoor antenna unit, are not supposed to make a difference (the whips are for VHF reception and the signals--except for one of the two "7s"--are all UHF), they absolutely make a difference--often a profound difference. Nevertheless, if the industry/FCC grand plan is to frustrate me to the point of getting me to fork over $40+ per month for cable or satellite TV, the plan has not yet succeeded. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Vahey" To: "A. Joseph Ross" Cc: Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 3:26 AM Subject: Re: Digital TV > Just an update > > I picked up at CVS a nice DTV 7 inch battery powered unit made by > PRISM. When it locks in the picture is flawless..but > > In my bathroom which faces north I get all the Milwaukee stations > perfectly and both WBBM and WLS. Move 10 feet and again nothing but > WFLD. > > I have to wonder - the apartment building next to mine facing south > has a cell phone nest on it. There is also an XM repeater one block > away. > > I sense I live in mutipath hell From raccoonradio@mail.com Mon Nov 9 08:54:57 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:54:57 -0500 Subject: Fybush: WMUD bringing back WCLX Message-ID: <20091109135457.EDFC483985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Here's MUD on your dial, again; according to Fybush ( http://www.fybush.com/nerw.html ), the folks at Farm Fresh WMUD-LP 89.3 Moriah NY (but with studios on a farm in Bridport VT) are programming WCLX 102.9 Westport NY, which had been silent for 2 months. Americana/roots music...when WCLX went off I think I wondered that maybe WMUD-LP could somehow get their programming on there...have caught part of MUD while driving in VT From dan.strassberg@att.net Mon Nov 9 09:08:03 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 09:08:03 -0500 Subject: OFDM vs 8VSB Message-ID: <82A71D66CAD346338F31660F44733405@SatU205S5044> If the problem with over-the-air DTV reception really is multipath, and if the inventors of OFDM (orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing) are correct about their system, OFDM _should_ be the solution to the multipath problems. As I understand it, the whole idea behind OFDM is to make possible the transmission of high bit-rate data streams at low symbol rates. OFDM accomplishes this feat by packing a large number of bits into each symbol. Thus, a modest number of symbols can transmit a large number of bits. Multipath echoes appear to the decoder as delayed repetitions of the transmitted symbols. Because the OFDM symbol duration is relatively long, the effect of multipath is supposed to be minimized, I guess because the echoed symbols appear within the primary symbol time and, during the symbol time, each bit in the symbol is decoded as only a single value. The long symbol time thus gives the decoder a good shot at determining the correct value of each of the many bits in the symbol. OFDM is economically practical in consumer applications only because advances in IC (integrated circuit) technology have made it possible for IC designers to pack enormous amounts of DSP (digital signal processing) computational capability into low-cost IC chips. I believe that, on paper, there can be no doubt that OFDM (the DTV transmission standard in most of the world outside of the US) is more immune to multipath than 8VSB (eight-level vestigial sideband), the US DTV-transmission standard. Whether this theoretical advantage exists in practice may be a different matter, however. For certain, each new generation of 8VSB-decoder ICs seems to improve upon the multipath immunity of previous generations. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 From dmoisan@davidmoisan.org Mon Nov 9 08:31:50 2009 From: dmoisan@davidmoisan.org (David Moisan) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:31:50 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911090026p3d4ce9efqa7e546bf207aea14@mail.gmail.com> References: <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4AF79E43.19337.81E0B7@joe.attorneyross.com> <4fc429770911090026p3d4ce9efqa7e546bf207aea14@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: -----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, November 09, 2009 3:27 AM To: A. Joseph Ross Cc: bri@bostonradio.org Subject: Re: Digital TV Just an update I picked up at CVS a nice DTV 7 inch battery powered unit made by PRISM. When it locks in the picture is flawless..but In my bathroom which faces north I get all the Milwaukee stations perfectly and both WBBM and WLS. Move 10 feet and again nothing but WFLD. Yes you do live in multipath hell. I also got one of those Prism TVs to use as a monitor and have found the same. Oddly, when I took the TV to Winter Island in Salem for a video shoot this past summer, I tried tuning it, in the shadow of the power plant, and got every channel *except* WGBH. Strange. From map@mapinternet.com Mon Nov 9 09:49:41 2009 From: map@mapinternet.com (Mark Casey) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 09:49:41 -0500 Subject: TV viewers in Hilly areas sacrificed In-Reply-To: <10845AF2-6CB8-43BA-8CC1-D0AE648AF157@frontiernet.net> References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com><19191.32334.785767.810326@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <10845AF2-6CB8-43BA-8CC1-D0AE648AF157@frontiernet.net> Message-ID: <88C276C83BDD4B989663B773119DC3DA@CASEYPC> The end of fringe tv reception in mountainous or even, just hilly areas, is one of the bad results of digital tv. Many less VHF channels bending over the hills to supply rural areas with multiple signals. Although, in the flat areas of the country, my experience is that the digital signals are in some cases, almost as good, and in other cases, even better than their old analog, given the actual frequencies used. One thing that hasn't worked out, especiually given the Channel 7/42 example, is the original power limits on VHF. 15kw is just not enough on VHF-hiband to equal analog at 316kw or digital UHF with 1000kw. VHF hiband digital stations need at least 20% (63.2kw) , and maybe a lot more in an area with mountainouis terrain, to equal their old analog 316kw. I'll bet that if channel 7 was allowed to go up to 50% of their old analog power, with digital on RF Ch 7, all of their signal problems would dissapear, and they might even replicate their original footprint in the mountainous areas of central & western MA, NH, etc. Of course, then the redesigned station spacing might be compromised in some cases. Probably, the best case for the present situation is for the digitals that are on VHF to be given increases to as high a power as possible without interference to other stations. Directional antennas may help in some cases. The highest I've seen on VHF hiband is around 63 kw. That will help, but there are still going to be many places in the hilly areas all around the country that will continue to have lost most of their off the air stations. Channel 7 has moved and is, or has made the move to 42 permanent. Would they be willing to go back to 7 if given more power? And, will TV stations want to invest any more money in their off the air signal. I don't have a good feeling for that. So, many of you folks in the far-flung mountainous areas have been sacrificed. Mark Casey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cohasset / Hippisley" To: "List Mailing BostonRadio" Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 10:40 PM Subject: Re: Digital TV > Here in the sticks (Adirondacks), last year I could get "passable" > pictures from five or six of the Syracuse stations, three Watertown (NY), > two Utica, and one Kingston, Ontario (Channel 11). Today, I can pick up > one beautiful Watertown digital signal (the old analog Channel 7) and its > subchannel (Fox outlet, I think), and the still-analog Kingston 11. > Everything else over-the-air is gone. My situation is not unusual in > this area for people outside the hamlets where Time Warner at least has > Utica on their system (although I understand they have removed Syracuse > from the basic level here). > From gallen2@nescaum.org Mon Nov 9 12:11:07 2009 From: gallen2@nescaum.org (George Allen) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 12:11:07 -0500 Subject: TV viewers in Hilly areas sacrificed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: But the UHF signals bounce off hills much better than VHF! So as noted, sometimes pointing the antenna away from the station works better... certainly the case in Antrim NH for Boston channels. Things got much better there with DTV!! -- George From: "Mark Casey" At 12:00 PM 11/9/2009, you wrote: The end of fringe tv reception in mountainous or even, just hilly areas, is one of the bad results of digital tv. Many less VHF channels bending over the hills to supply rural areas with multiple signals. Although, in the flat areas of the country, my experience is that the digital signals are in some cases, almost as good, and in other cases, even better than their old analog, given the actual frequencies used. From aerie.ma@comcast.net Mon Nov 9 14:50:00 2009 From: aerie.ma@comcast.net (Jim Hall) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 14:50:00 -0500 Subject: WNNW? Message-ID: I wonder if something is going on with WNNW. Didn't show in the October ratings (compared to WKOX at 0.4) and the HD has been off lately. From necrat.alternate@gmail.com Mon Nov 9 14:48:44 2009 From: necrat.alternate@gmail.com (Mike Fitzpatrick) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 14:48:44 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <19191.32334.785767.810326@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> <19191.32334.785767.810326@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <000a01ca6175$a55269b0$eff73d10$@alternate@gmail.com> >I know that, as someone who works in television, this may not be the >most comfortable thought for you, but maybe they have figured out that >*television is not a necessity of life*! Unless you receive your paycheck from it, then it isn't. =) ( I say that tongue in cheek) A couple of notes which I have not seen address on this thread. 1) WHDH is staying at 42. They received the CP and Have filed for the license to cover on 42. Once the LTC is granted, then their authority to operate on 7 ceases, as I understand it. 2) WSBK, while operating from the same tower as GBH/BZ/CVB/GBX/YDN, and using the same antenna as BZ/CVB/GBX., but as significantly lower power. (BZ runs 825kW, CVB runs 625kW, GBX runs 500kW., WSBK runs 130kW). This is due to short spacings to 39 in New Haven, CT. In order for there to be more power, 39 would have to go directional. (Note: WGBH-DT runs 700kW from the "lower half" of the Stacked DTV master antenna, WYDN-DT runs 50kW from a side mount below the old VHF panels) 3) WBZ, I used to suffer the same issue here in Rhode Island with WBZ, where I couldn't receive them, but could receive 2,4,5,7,25,56 without any issues. I found by shutting the pre-amp I use OFF, WBZ would come in gangbusters. (only 5 and 25 can come in without a pre-amp here). So if you're trying for WBZ, try it without any pre-amplification. On next week's This Old House Hour on WGBH/WGBX, on the "Ask This Old House" segment, they are going to do something to help a guy with poor DTV reception. Should be interesting to watch. (The shot of the guy's set had WCVB-DT coming in and out) --Mike Fitzpatrick WPRI/WNAC -TV Providence, RI. From kc1ih@mac.com Mon Nov 9 17:33:45 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:33:45 -0500 Subject: Fybush: WMUD bringing back WCLX In-Reply-To: <20091109135457.EDFC483985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20091109135457.EDFC483985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: At 8:54 AM -0500 11/9/09, Bob Nelson wrote: >Here's MUD on your dial, again; according to Fybush ( >http://www.fybush.com/nerw.html ), the folks at Farm Fresh WMUD-LP >89.3 Moriah NY (but with studios on a farm in Bridport VT) are >programming WCLX 102.9 Westport NY, which had been silent >for 2 months. Americana/roots music...when WCLX went off I think I >wondered that maybe WMUD-LP could somehow get their >programming on there...have caught part of MUD while driving in VT I wonder if this will be much competition for "The Point" (WNCS and other stations make up a small network)? -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From kc1ih@mac.com Mon Nov 9 17:41:22 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:41:22 -0500 Subject: TV viewers in Hilly areas sacrificed In-Reply-To: <88C276C83BDD4B989663B773119DC3DA@CASEYPC> References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> <19191.32334.785767.810326@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <10845AF2-6CB8-43BA-8CC1-D0AE648AF157@frontiernet.net> <88C276C83BDD4B989663B773119DC3DA@CASEYPC> Message-ID: At 9:49 AM -0500 11/9/09, Mark Casey wrote: >Channel 7 has moved and is, or has made the move to 42 permanent. >Would they be willing to go back to 7 if given more power? Right now WHDH-DT is still simulcasting on 7 and 42, but that will end soon I've been told, possibly in a week or two they will be tuning off 7. As for what management would be willing to do, I do not have a crystal ball. -- Larry Weil WHDH/WLVI Master Control From scott@fybush.com Mon Nov 9 17:41:51 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:41:51 -0500 Subject: Fybush: WMUD bringing back WCLX In-Reply-To: References: <20091109135457.EDFC483985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <4AF89AAF.5040907@fybush.com> Larry Weil wrote: > I wonder if this will be much competition for "The Point" (WNCS and > other stations make up a small network)? > There's not that much signal overlap. WCLX's signal goes from Burlington (at its northern edge) south down Lake Champlain. WNCS's signal is more central VT, and Burlington is at its western edge. From kc1ih@mac.com Mon Nov 9 18:22:19 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:22:19 -0500 Subject: Fybush: WMUD bringing back WCLX In-Reply-To: <4AF89AAF.5040907@fybush.com> References: <20091109135457.EDFC483985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> <4AF89AAF.5040907@fybush.com> Message-ID: At 5:41 PM -0500 11/9/09, Scott Fybush wrote: >Larry Weil wrote: > >>I wonder if this will be much competition for "The Point" (WNCS and >>other stations make up a small network)? >> > >There's not that much signal overlap. WCLX's signal goes from >Burlington (at its northern edge) south down Lake Champlain. WNCS's >signal is more central VT, and Burlington is at its western edge. WNCS has a translator on 93.3 in Burlington, I wonder if it covers enough to be a factor? In any case, I see some overlap in the formats but I think there are still major differences. I'm planning to be in the Burlington area next weekend (staying in Williston), so perhaps I can find out for myself. -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From TVNETDUDE@aol.com Mon Nov 9 18:56:18 2009 From: TVNETDUDE@aol.com (TVNETDUDE@aol.com) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 18:56:18 EST Subject: OFDM vs 8VSB Message-ID: In a message dated 11/9/2009 12:44:45 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, boston-radio-interest-request@tsornin.BostonRadio.org writes: >>>believe that, on paper, there can be no doubt that OFDM (the DTV transmission standard in most of the world outside of the US) is more immune to multipath than 8VSB (eight-level vestigial sideband), the US DTV-transmission standard. Whether this theoretical advantage exists in practice may be a different matter, however. For certain, each new generation of 8VSB-decoder ICs seems to improve upon the multipath immunity of previous generations.<<< COFDM thrives on multipath. Not so much now because of handheld devices, but during the 90's when HDTV could have been rolled out, I always thought that mobile TV would be digital TV's killer app but another technology beat them to the punch. Mobile TV is installed in most subway and trains in the Asian countries with 15 minutes programs. I just don't understand the US always has to settle for "good enough" legacy technology with built in limitations. The same applies for HD Radio. Politics vs technology never seems to work. From TVNETDUDE@aol.com Mon Nov 9 19:24:50 2009 From: TVNETDUDE@aol.com (TVNETDUDE@aol.com) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 19:24:50 EST Subject: Digital TV Message-ID: In a message dated 11/9/2009 4:19:02 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, boston-radio-interest-request@tsornin.BostonRadio.org writes: >>I know that, as someone who works in television, this may not be the most comfortable thought for you, but maybe they have figured out that *television is not a necessity of life*! <<<< It is more like maybe OTA television is not a necessity of life. If the FCC can convince TV station operators to turn in their RF BW for millions in cash, I can see many stations in the smaller markets cashing out and signing off. There would be advantages to the TV stations going directly to cable and that is they would be cable stations then and would be on a level playing field with the cable stations and away from FCC OTA regulations. Of course this would not preclude the networks from becoming premium channels either. Comcast has this in their sites for NBC already. From hykker@wildblue.net Mon Nov 9 22:24:35 2009 From: hykker@wildblue.net (SteveOrdinetz) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:24:35 -0500 Subject: TV viewers in Hilly areas sacrificed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4af8dcfd.e701be0a.2a25.10f7@mx.google.com> At 12:11 PM 11/9/2009, George Allen wrote: >But the UHF signals bounce off hills much better than VHF! So as >noted, sometimes pointing the antenna away from the station works >better... certainly the case in Antrim NH for Boston >channels. Things got much better there with DTV!! > Trouble is, you need a spectrum analyzer to aim the antenna. It's not like analog where you can set the tv to a channel & turn the antenna until you get the best picture. If the converter doesn't see a signal when it does a scan, it doesn't know it exists. Not sure how it works with digital-ready tvs. From kc1ih@mac.com Mon Nov 9 23:12:12 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:12:12 -0500 Subject: TV viewers in Hilly areas sacrificed In-Reply-To: <4af8dcfd.e701be0a.2a25.10f7@mx.google.com> References: <4af8dcfd.e701be0a.2a25.10f7@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <0KSV00MAEKZ86X70@asmtp022.mac.com> At 10:24 PM 11/9/2009, SteveOrdinetz wrote: >At 12:11 PM 11/9/2009, George Allen wrote: >>But the UHF signals bounce off hills much better than VHF! So as >>noted, sometimes pointing the antenna away from the station works >>better... certainly the case in Antrim NH for Boston >>channels. Things got much better there with DTV!! > >Trouble is, you need a spectrum analyzer to aim the antenna. It's >not like analog where you can set the tv to a channel & turn the >antenna until you get the best picture. If the converter doesn't >see a signal when it does a scan, it doesn't know it exists. Not >sure how it works with digital-ready tvs. > With at least some converters you can go manual, and if you know the actual channel you can enter that manually, and then try to aim the antenna until you get reception. I can do this with my Insignia (Zenith) box. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From Kaimbridge@gmail.com Tue Nov 10 11:10:06 2009 From: Kaimbridge@gmail.com (Kaimbridge M. GoldChild) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:10:06 +0000 Subject: WHDH w/Message Slide...No, Now Blank Screen! (Was: TV viewers ...) Message-ID: <4AF9905E.90805@Gmail.com> Larry Weil wrote, >At 9:49 AM -0500 11/9/09, Mark Casey wrote: > >>Channel 7 has moved and is, or has made the move to 42 permanent. >>Would they be willing to go back to 7 if given more power? > >Right now WHDH-DT is still simulcasting on 7 and 42, but that >will end soon I've been told, possibly in a week or two they >will be tuning off 7. Actually, as of last night by about 11:05pm, 7.1 (really 7.3?) was running an audio announcement with slide saying they were switching to Ch.42 and that you need to rescan, but 7.2 was still running This-TV with no advisory. They were still that way at 6:30am this morning, then, when I just checked at about 9:53am, they suddenly went to a blank screen (both 7.1 and 7.2): The interesting thing is, the Insignia box shows full signal strength, but yet the "No Signal" icon is bouncing around the screen with no PSIP station data!(?) Would they pull the plug this soon or are they just trying to tie in 7.2 to the advisory? Anyone know the exact time (and date, if not today) they are shutting it down? ~Kaimbridge~ ----- Wikipedia?Contributor Home Page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kaimbridge ***** Void Where Permitted; Limit 0 Per Customer. ***** From kc1ih@mac.com Tue Nov 10 17:04:17 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:04:17 -0500 Subject: WHDH w/Message Slide...No, Now Blank Screen! (Was: TV viewers ...) In-Reply-To: <4AF9905E.90805@Gmail.com> References: <4AF9905E.90805@Gmail.com> Message-ID: At 4:10 PM +0000 11/10/09, Kaimbridge M. GoldChild wrote: > >Would they pull the plug this soon or are they just trying >to tie in 7.2 to the advisory? >Anyone know the exact time (and date, if not today) they are >shutting it down? > Hey, I work there. and even I don't know. I'm on the night shift this week, so I don't get to see too many people, but I'll ask some questions if I can and get back here if I get any info. -- Larry Weil WHDH/WLVI Master Control From attychase@comcast.net Tue Nov 10 17:10:09 2009 From: attychase@comcast.net (Robert S Chase) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:10:09 -0500 Subject: OFDM vs 8VSB References: Message-ID: <2C98D06589B1436EA06D36BB7AD99B78@HomeOffice> I believe the reason is we have the best Congress money can buy! > Message: 8 > Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 18:56:18 EST > From: TVNETDUDE@aol.com > Subject: Re: OFDM vs 8VSB > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > I just don't understand the US always has to settle for "good enough" > legacy technology with built in limitations. The same applies for HD > Radio. > Politics vs technology never seems to work. > ****************************************************** From kc1ih@mac.com Tue Nov 10 21:43:34 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 21:43:34 -0500 Subject: WHDH-DT Ch 7 Turn Off Message-ID: <0KSX002ZUBJFI330@asmtp021.mac.com> As I promised in an earlier reply, I asked around when I got to work tonight about when the Channel 7 carrier will be turned off. The answer seems to be that they are planning to do this sometime Friday, but this could change depending upon when the phone calls subside. As of now all programming is on Channel 42 only. Larry Weil WHDH/WLVI Master Control From joe@scanworcester.com Sun Nov 8 21:47:03 2009 From: joe@scanworcester.com (Joe) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 21:47:03 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <4fc429770911081510t7fc5ad3eifcd9a004539396f8@mail.gmail.com> <479371.78351.qm@web53306.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003501ca60e6$ed159680$c740c380$@com> I'm in Worcester, between Indian Hill and Green Hill (so, a rather low part of a valley), and with a Channel Master 4228-HD UHF 8-Bay antenna, I get everything from Boston (2, 4, 5, 7, 25, 38, 44, 56); as well as a few from Providence (12, 64), and a mix of others that I'm unsure of exact locations right now. One poster mentioned that TV is not a necessity of life, which is the whole reason why I dumped cable to begin with. I wasn't happy: with the programming (other than what comes from the Boston affiliates), with the service from Charter, or with the price I was paying. I do not regret making the change one bit. DTV is great where I am, and free HD? Can't beat that! Do others have the same results? No. I'm sure where some of you had "perfect" reception with analog, others had poor reception. Not everyone is going to be in a prime location, and there are tools to help gain that signal as best as possible. - Joe -----Original Message----- From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Maureen Carney Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 7:38 PM To: Boston Radio Group Subject: Re: Digital TV Isn't this why WMTW moved off Mt. Washington - concern that if they ran a full digital signal from up there the signal would miss Portland altogether? I too find I have to fiddle with the antenna to get Fox 25 and can't get 56 or 38 at all out in Holliston. Why wouldn't 56 come in if 7 comes in on both 7 and 42 and they're on the same tower? From lglavin@mail.com Tue Nov 10 17:41:33 2009 From: lglavin@mail.com (lglavin@mail.com) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:41:33 -0500 Subject: WHDH w/Message Slide...No, Now Blank Screen! (Was: TV viewers ...) In-Reply-To: References: <4AF9905E.90805@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <8CC306E151058B2-95C-FFCC@web-mmc-m10.sysops.aol.com> >-----Original Message----- >From: Larry Weil >To: Kaimbridge M. GoldChild ; Boston Radio Interest >Sent: Tue, Nov 10, 2009 5:04 pm >Subject: Re: WHDH w/Message Slide...No, Now Blank Screen! (Was: TV viewers ...) >At 4:10 PM +0000 11/10/09, Kaimbridge M. GoldChild wrote: > >Would they pull the plug this soon or are they just trying >to tie in 7.2 to the advisory? >Anyone know the exact time (and date, if not today) they are >shutting it down? > >Hey, I work there. and even I don't know. I'm on the night shift this week, so I don't get to see too many people, but I'll ask some questions if I can and get back here if I get any info. >-- Larry Weil >WHDH/WLVI Master Control I don't know how many of you visit www.universalhub.com every day, but it's one of my favorite non-radio websites. Actually, it's not unusual for the subject matter on any given day to be concerned with all the matters that are discussed here. Personalities at radio and TV stations, format changes, etc. Well, today (Tuesday, November 10th) the travails of people trying to watch WHDH-DT became an issue. If you decide to click on the site, be aware that MANY people are posting to it all day long...you may have to scroll down or go to page 2 or 3 to view this item. From lsochrin@rcn.com Mon Nov 9 12:04:14 2009 From: lsochrin@rcn.com (Larry Sochrin) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 12:04:14 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2558FC72-5C06-4AB7-A6B6-4DC207C7FC10@rcn.com> Might as well ring in from Brookline Village. Actually, we have a master digital antenna in my very large condo complex. But periodically, I'll get the bad signal or no signal message, especially on channel 2 (WGBH), both versions, but sometimes elsewhere. Playing with connector cables sometimes helps. But occasionally, doing a rescan (add a new channel) nearby will bring it back in. So that raises a different question, which is what would cause a station that was coming in perfectly fine to suddenly need a rescan? I split the antenna into two different brands of converter box, and each one of them needs the rescan when this happens. Other times, things correct themselves and then it disappears again. And occasionally, when a picture breaks up some, I find that physically shifting myself makes it better or worse. And that's not to mention the fact that since I didn't want to buy a DVR/TIVO, I bought two different converter boxes that have event timers built in. As a result, I have to program both the converter and the VCR to record a program, and, of course, sometimes the converter boxes decide not to obey my programming. But in fairness, when things are working, the image is better than it was prior to digital. From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Wed Nov 11 07:53:58 2009 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 06:53:58 -0600 Subject: WGIR vs WHEB Question Message-ID: <8bce0fe80911110453s781ba6a1pb72607eacee28547@mail.gmail.com> A friend of mine on Facebook posed this question regarding WHEB-FM vs WGIR FM ******************* One has to ask: why, in concord nh does wheb come in clear at 45 miles away and wgir at 15 miles doesnt...both at 50k watts It is very consistent.. every day same stretch. The strange part is WGIR's towers are a staight shot down the interstate, not topographic barriers, heck, you can virtually see the towers from Concord (the towers are actually in Hooksett, not Manchesters, I presume they are using a microwave signal from the studio to the tower) The whole area is a valley on the river, but elevation is consistent. I've only been commuting this route for about 6 weeks... and that entire time its been like that.. .I assume it's always been like that. ******************* I figured I'd ask here, I'm sure someone who is familiar with the area would have an answer. Is there some kind of terrain shielding or some form of terrestrial interference? (transltor or some kind of itnerference from another Fm signal? -- Sincerely, Paul B. Walker, Jr. www.onairdj.com walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com From jjlehmann@comcast.net Wed Nov 11 08:31:40 2009 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 08:31:40 -0500 Subject: WGIR vs WHEB Question In-Reply-To: <8bce0fe80911110453s781ba6a1pb72607eacee28547@mail.gmail.com> References: <8bce0fe80911110453s781ba6a1pb72607eacee28547@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001401ca62d3$4d510fa0$e7f32ee0$@net> > I figured I'd ask here, I'm sure someone who is familiar with the area > would > have an answer. Is there some kind of terrain shielding or some form of > terrestrial interference? (transltor or some kind of itnerference from > another Fm signal? I've always thought that WGIR-FM has come in fine in Concord when I've been passing through (many times). Jeff Lehmann Hanson, MA From nhradio@earthlink.net Wed Nov 11 09:15:02 2009 From: nhradio@earthlink.net (Steve Thompson) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:15:02 -0500 Subject: Parachutist Jumps From Farmington,CT TV Tower Message-ID: <84D5B67178904A769A8EE1AB11C56549@D7LLJX11> I don't know if anyone else on the group read or heard someone who allegedly jumped off the 1,339 foot TV tower on Rattlesnake Mountain in Farmington CT. It was in Thursdays 11/05 Hartford Courant and Wednesdays 11/04 Bristol Press (links below). The person was never caught in the act, so it doesn't appear anything will be able to be done by the police. Anyone heard of this happening elsewhere? http://www.courant.com/community/farmington/hc-web-farmington-parachute-1105 nov05,0,1347707.story?track=rss http://www.courant.com/community/farmington/hc-parachute-1105.artnov05,0,765 8812.story http://www.bristolpress.com/articles/2009/11/04/news/doc4af24d93631e98157829 68.txt Cheers Steve Thompson From dan.strassberg@att.net Wed Nov 11 09:48:11 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:48:11 -0500 Subject: WGIR vs WHEB Question References: <8bce0fe80911110453s781ba6a1pb72607eacee28547@mail.gmail.com> <001401ca62d3$4d510fa0$e7f32ee0$@net> Message-ID: <636A23E0CB0B4344B07F05B51E8D821B@SatU205S5044> I've mastered Asnebumskit (Paxton MA) and I'm part way to getting Neutaconconaut (not sure of the spelling, but I know it's in Johnston RI) but I haven't a clue about the name of the mountain or hill that is home to several Manchester FMs plus Channel "9" (RF 59 according to the software I'm using but the software may be out of date because I thought 59 was in the group of channels that was auctioned off for non-TV uses) or the name of the town in which that site is located. I do believe the name of the hill/mountain is a polysyllabic native-American name, however. Anyhow, isn't WGIR-FM on that same mountain/hill? And if so, shouldn't the first thing to do be to check out WZID, which is also there (if not on the same tower, then, on a tower that is quite close by)? If you have similar troubles receiving both stations, the problem is topography. I'm hoping that even if this post doesn't bring an answer to Paul's reception question, it will bring an answer to my name the mountain/town question. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Lehmann" To: "'Paul B. Walker, Jr.'" ; "'bri'" Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 8:31 AM Subject: RE: WGIR vs WHEB Question >> I figured I'd ask here, I'm sure someone who is familiar with the >> area >> would >> have an answer. Is there some kind of terrain shielding or some >> form of >> terrestrial interference? (transltor or some kind of itnerference >> from >> another Fm signal? > > I've always thought that WGIR-FM has come in fine in Concord when > I've been > passing through (many times). > > Jeff Lehmann > Hanson, MA > From aerie.ma@comcast.net Wed Nov 11 10:15:01 2009 From: aerie.ma@comcast.net (Jim Hall) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:15:01 -0500 Subject: WGIR vs WHEB Question In-Reply-To: <636A23E0CB0B4344B07F05B51E8D821B@SatU205S5044> References: <8bce0fe80911110453s781ba6a1pb72607eacee28547@mail.gmail.com><001401ca62d3$4d510fa0$e7f32ee0$@net> <636A23E0CB0B4344B07F05B51E8D821B@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <559BA0BDE6534BF099C1DF8D67A1CD26@aeriema> The mountain is Uncanoonuc. http://www.nelsap.org/nh/uncanoonuc.html http://www.gotopinardville.com/uncanoonuc_mountains.htm -----Original Message----- From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Dan.Strassberg Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 9:48 AM To: Jeff Lehmann; 'Paul B. Walker, Jr.'; 'bri' Subject: Re: WGIR vs WHEB Question I've mastered Asnebumskit (Paxton MA) and I'm part way to getting Neutaconconaut (not sure of the spelling, but I know it's in Johnston RI) but I haven't a clue about the name of the mountain or hill that is home to several Manchester FMs plus Channel "9" (RF 59 according to the software I'm using but the software may be out of date because I thought 59 was in the group of channels that was auctioned off for non-TV uses) or the name of the town in which that site is located. I do believe the name of the hill/mountain is a polysyllabic native-American name, however. Anyhow, isn't WGIR-FM on that same mountain/hill? And if so, shouldn't the first thing to do be to check out WZID, which is also there (if not on the same tower, then, on a tower that is quite close by)? If you have similar troubles receiving both stations, the problem is topography. I'm hoping that even if this post doesn't bring an answer to Paul's reception question, it will bring an answer to my name the mountain/town question. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Lehmann" To: "'Paul B. Walker, Jr.'" ; "'bri'" Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 8:31 AM Subject: RE: WGIR vs WHEB Question >> I figured I'd ask here, I'm sure someone who is familiar with the >> area >> would >> have an answer. Is there some kind of terrain shielding or some >> form of >> terrestrial interference? (transltor or some kind of itnerference >> from >> another Fm signal? > > I've always thought that WGIR-FM has come in fine in Concord when > I've been > passing through (many times). > > Jeff Lehmann > Hanson, MA > From atolz@comcast.net Wed Nov 11 10:32:25 2009 From: atolz@comcast.net (Alan Tolz) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:32:25 -0500 Subject: WGIR vs WHEB Question References: <8bce0fe80911110453s781ba6a1pb72607eacee28547@mail.gmail.com><001401ca62d3$4d510fa0$e7f32ee0$@net> <636A23E0CB0B4344B07F05B51E8D821B@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <2EC47FC953514FF68E30526A15E016EC@mediacenter> I think it's mount Oncanoonic. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan.Strassberg" To: "Jeff Lehmann" ; "'Paul B. Walker, Jr.'" ; "'bri'" Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 9:48 AM Subject: Re: WGIR vs WHEB Question > I've mastered Asnebumskit (Paxton MA) and I'm part way to getting > Neutaconconaut (not sure of the spelling, but I know it's in Johnston > RI) but I haven't a clue about the name of the mountain or hill that > is home to several Manchester FMs plus Channel "9" (RF 59 according to > the software I'm using but the software may be out of date because I > thought 59 was in the group of channels that was auctioned off for > non-TV uses) or the name of the town in which that site is located. I > do believe the name of the hill/mountain is a polysyllabic > native-American name, however. Anyhow, isn't WGIR-FM on that same > mountain/hill? And if so, shouldn't the first thing to do be to check > out WZID, which is also there (if not on the same tower, then, on a > tower that is quite close by)? If you have similar troubles receiving > both stations, the problem is topography. I'm hoping that even if this > post doesn't bring an answer to Paul's reception question, it will > bring an answer to my name the mountain/town question. > > ----- > Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) > eFax 1-707-215-6367 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Lehmann" > To: "'Paul B. Walker, Jr.'" ; "'bri'" > > Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 8:31 AM > Subject: RE: WGIR vs WHEB Question > > >>> I figured I'd ask here, I'm sure someone who is familiar with the >>> area >>> would >>> have an answer. Is there some kind of terrain shielding or some >>> form of >>> terrestrial interference? (transltor or some kind of itnerference >>> from >>> another Fm signal? >> >> I've always thought that WGIR-FM has come in fine in Concord when >> I've been >> passing through (many times). >> >> Jeff Lehmann >> Hanson, MA >> > > From kvahey@comcast.net Wed Nov 11 10:13:16 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:13:16 -0500 Subject: WGIR vs WHEB Question In-Reply-To: <636A23E0CB0B4344B07F05B51E8D821B@SatU205S5044> References: <8bce0fe80911110453s781ba6a1pb72607eacee28547@mail.gmail.com> <001401ca62d3$4d510fa0$e7f32ee0$@net> <636A23E0CB0B4344B07F05B51E8D821B@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <4fc429770911110713t5e38938jdaec5efb944aa3aa@mail.gmail.com> Uncanoonuc Mt in Goffstown. Spent many a shift up for WMUR up there. From tlmedia@triad.rr.com Wed Nov 11 12:19:54 2009 From: tlmedia@triad.rr.com (Ted Larsen) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:19:54 -0500 Subject: WGIR vs WHEB Question References: <8bce0fe80911110453s781ba6a1pb72607eacee28547@mail.gmail.com><001401ca62d3$4d510fa0$e7f32ee0$@net><636A23E0CB0B4344B07F05B51E8D821B@SatU205S5044> <559BA0BDE6534BF099C1DF8D67A1CD26@aeriema> Message-ID: <851B20505C3646759EA3FD06873D2E29@tedjqs7yoif5z5> Here's more than you ever wanted to know about Neutaconkanut Hill Summit - Rhode Island Mountain Peak Information. With topo map showing WPRO, etc. http://www.mountainzone.com/mountains/detail.asp?fid=2514756 I guess 292 ft. passes for a mountain in RI. Ted ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Hall" To: "'bri'" Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 10:15 AM Subject: RE: WGIR vs WHEB Question > The mountain is Uncanoonuc. > > http://www.nelsap.org/nh/uncanoonuc.html > http://www.gotopinardville.com/uncanoonuc_mountains.htm > > > -----Original Message----- > From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org > [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf > Of > Dan.Strassberg > Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 9:48 AM > To: Jeff Lehmann; 'Paul B. Walker, Jr.'; 'bri' > Subject: Re: WGIR vs WHEB Question > > I've mastered Asnebumskit (Paxton MA) and I'm part way to getting > Neutaconconaut (not sure of the spelling, but I know it's in Johnston > RI) but I haven't a clue about the name of the mountain or hill that > is home to several Manchester FMs plus Channel "9" (RF 59 according to > the software I'm using but the software may be out of date because I > thought 59 was in the group of channels that was auctioned off for > non-TV uses) or the name of the town in which that site is located. I > do believe the name of the hill/mountain is a polysyllabic > native-American name, however. Anyhow, isn't WGIR-FM on that same > mountain/hill? And if so, shouldn't the first thing to do be to check > out WZID, which is also there (if not on the same tower, then, on a > tower that is quite close by)? If you have similar troubles receiving > both stations, the problem is topography. I'm hoping that even if this > post doesn't bring an answer to Paul's reception question, it will > bring an answer to my name the mountain/town question. > > ----- > Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) > eFax 1-707-215-6367 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Lehmann" > To: "'Paul B. Walker, Jr.'" ; "'bri'" > > Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 8:31 AM > Subject: RE: WGIR vs WHEB Question > > >>> I figured I'd ask here, I'm sure someone who is familiar with the >>> area >>> would >>> have an answer. Is there some kind of terrain shielding or some >>> form of >>> terrestrial interference? (transltor or some kind of itnerference >>> from >>> another Fm signal? >> >> I've always thought that WGIR-FM has come in fine in Concord when >> I've been >> passing through (many times). >> >> Jeff Lehmann >> Hanson, MA >> > > > From dan.strassberg@att.net Wed Nov 11 12:27:00 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:27:00 -0500 Subject: RF 7 carrier must still be present Message-ID: <2BF2D3F5607E4510BC59AAB5AD9F34A0@SatU205S5044> Since I had read reports that the slide that told viewes to rescan was now gone from Channel 7, I decided this was the time to rescan, because I concluded (incorrectly, it seems) that the absence of the slide meant the carrier was now gone. So I rescanned. Punching up 7-1 or 7-2 on the remote still produces a black screen with a text box that makes a slow tour of the screen flashing "No program available" at each stop. In other words, there is no change from yesterday. I guess that means the ATSC carrier is still present on RF 7. I can get "7-1" (and, though I didn't try "7-2", I suspect that I can get that also) by simply using the remote's up-arrow key to go from RF 7 to RF 42 (the old and new 7-1 and 7-2 are adjacent to one another in the sequence of channels that appear when I use the arrow keys). But I find the need to do this both confusing and annoying, and I have a master's degree in Electrical Engineering from MIT. If the slide is gone, what earthly use is it to keep the carrier on RF 7? How do people without technical backgrounds cope with this needless confusion? Is the goal to so thoroughly frustrate viewers that they break down and buy cable in a fit of pique? ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 From sid@wrko.com Wed Nov 11 09:19:11 2009 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:19:11 -0500 Subject: WGIR vs WHEB Question In-Reply-To: <8bce0fe80911110453s781ba6a1pb72607eacee28547@mail.gmail.com> References: <8bce0fe80911110453s781ba6a1pb72607eacee28547@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC55299B2332@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> "A friend of mine on Facebook posed this question regarding WHEB-FM vs WGIR FM ******************* One has to ask: why, in concord nh does wheb come in clear at 45 miles away and wgir at 15 miles doesnt...both at 50k watts It is very consistent.. every day same stretch. The strange part is WGIR's towers are a staight shot down the interstate, not topographic barriers, heck, you can virtually see the towers from Concord (the towers are actually in Hooksett, not Manchesters, I presume they are using a microwave signal from the studio to the tower) The whole area is a valley on the river, but elevation is consistent." The towers in Hooksett are for WGIR(AM). The FM transmits from Mt. Uncanoonuc in Goffstown, about 200 feet from the WMUR-TV transmitter site, and is somewhat terrain-shielded to the north. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From necrat.alternate@gmail.com Wed Nov 11 13:45:58 2009 From: necrat.alternate@gmail.com (Mike Fitzpatrick) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:45:58 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <2558FC72-5C06-4AB7-A6B6-4DC207C7FC10@rcn.com> References: <2558FC72-5C06-4AB7-A6B6-4DC207C7FC10@rcn.com> Message-ID: <000901ca62ff$358bfe30$a0a3fa90$@alternate@gmail.com> Sounds like you are suffering from bad ingress. It's the same as what would happen with leaky cable tv wiring on channels, 2, 4, 5, and 7. Where you would see the cable's signal and the over the air signal simultaneously. Because the cable system's signal was different than the over the air. (RF Phase, RF frequency shift, etc), the signal would look bad. With your situation where you have a master antenna system, you have a cable driven RF signal on channel 19 (WGBH-DT) and over the air leakage. The two digital signals being entered into the box could cause all kinds of problems, such as the one you're describing (Because the master antenna system will "adjust" the RF slightly, to put it non technically). I come to this conclusion for two reasons. 1) you say playing with the connector helps., if the connectors were seated properly and spliced correctly, touching them would make absolutely no difference at all. And 2) you said shifting your body changes things, well your body affects over the air RF. If it is a closed master antenna system, yet shifting your body changes the effect, then you have ingress getting into it somewhere. You should be able to move all over your room and never see an effect on the signal. Have you tried disconnecting the master antenna system and just putting in a passive set top antenna? In Brookline, I would expect you'd get just about everything crystal clear. --Mike -----Original Message----- From: On Behalf Of Larry Sochrin Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 12:04 To: boston-radio-interest@tsornin.bostonradio.org Subject: Re: Digital TV Might as well ring in from Brookline Village... ...gs are working, the image is better than it was prior to digital. From bob.bosra@demattia.net Wed Nov 11 08:12:00 2009 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 08:12:00 -0500 Subject: Nassau changes in NH In-Reply-To: <001801ca5da0$ed587bb0$c8097310$@net> References: <2C34493246E8412584A9080F7F30DC98@SatU205S5044> <8A1BDA85ED8F474E886B367DB6541CC7@PaulPC> <4AF0CEB3.5010801@fybush.com> <5890CD35EE994BE0B64E723BDD3AD25B@PaulPC> <001801ca5da0$ed587bb0$c8097310$@net> Message-ID: www.franknh.com still shows the "Frank 99 & 104.9" branding in all its glory. The audio stream from this website is WJYY. Nothing like confusing your audience. -Bob On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Jeff Lehmann wrote: > 99.1 and 101.5 are being sold, so soon they will no longer be under Nassau's > control. They're probably just simulcasting JYY on 99.1 as filler. > > 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 > Paul Hopfgarten > Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 5:42 PM > To: Scott Fybush > Cc: Boston Radio Interest > Subject: Re: Nassau changes in NH > > As of 5PM tonight... > > "The Hawk" moves from 101.5 Meredith to 104.9 Wolfeboro > > 101.5 now stunting Telling people the "Hawk" has moved.. > > 99.1 Henniker (WNNH) now simulcasting 105.5 Concord (WJYY)...how lon will > that last??? Are changes coming to 105.5 > > Maybe 105.5/101.5 "The Bone"?????? (Another Nassua franchise) > > -Paul Hopfgarten > -Derry NH > > > From bob.bosra@demattia.net Wed Nov 11 13:55:23 2009 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:55:23 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <6276841028704894069@unknownmsgid> References: <2558FC72-5C06-4AB7-A6B6-4DC207C7FC10@rcn.com> <6276841028704894069@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: Although the roads from Needham to Brookline aren't very direct, the radio waves don't see things that way. Parts of Brookline are on 2 or 3 miles from the antennas. The RF fields are very strong there. The ingress could be right through the back of the TV itself if the TV is poorly designed. I have an RF site in Brookline that was suffering overload from analog-channel-7's transmitter a while back. At least the transition to DTV solved one problem for me! -Bob On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Mike Fitzpatrick wrote: > Sounds like you are suffering from bad ingress. It's the same as what would > happen with leaky cable tv wiring on channels, 2, 4, 5, and 7. > Where you would see the cable's signal and the over the air signal > simultaneously. Because the cable system's signal was different than the > over the air. > (RF Phase, RF frequency shift, etc), the signal would look bad. With your > situation where you have a master antenna system, you have a cable driven RF > signal on channel 19 (WGBH-DT) and over the air leakage. The two digital > signals being entered into the box could cause all kinds of problems, such > as the one you're describing (Because the master antenna system will > "adjust" the RF slightly, to put it non technically). I come to this > conclusion for two reasons. 1) you say playing with the connector helps., if > the connectors were seated properly and spliced correctly, touching them > would make absolutely no difference at all. And 2) you said shifting your > body changes things, well your body affects over the air RF. If it is a > closed master antenna system, yet shifting your body changes the effect, > then you have ingress getting into it somewhere. You should be able to move > all over your room and never see an effect on the signal. Have you tried > disconnecting the master antenna system and just putting in a passive set > top antenna? In Brookline, I would expect you'd get just about everything > crystal clear. > > --Mike > > -----Original Message----- > From: On Behalf Of Larry Sochrin > Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 12:04 > To: boston-radio-interest@tsornin.bostonradio.org > Subject: Re: Digital TV > > > Might as well ring in from Brookline Village... > > ...gs are working, the > image is better than it was prior to digital. > > From tlmedia@triad.rr.com Wed Nov 11 12:19:54 2009 From: tlmedia@triad.rr.com (Ted Larsen) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:19:54 -0500 Subject: WGIR vs WHEB Question References: <8bce0fe80911110453s781ba6a1pb72607eacee28547@mail.gmail.com><001401ca62d3$4d510fa0$e7f32ee0$@net><636A23E0CB0B4344B07F05B51E8D821B@SatU205S5044> <559BA0BDE6534BF099C1DF8D67A1CD26@aeriema> Message-ID: <851B20505C3646759EA3FD06873D2E29@tedjqs7yoif5z5> Here's more than you ever wanted to know about Neutaconkanut Hill Summit - Rhode Island Mountain Peak Information. With topo map showing WPRO, etc. http://www.mountainzone.com/mountains/detail.asp?fid=2514756 I guess 292 ft. passes for a mountain in RI. Ted ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Hall" To: "'bri'" Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 10:15 AM Subject: RE: WGIR vs WHEB Question > The mountain is Uncanoonuc. > > http://www.nelsap.org/nh/uncanoonuc.html > http://www.gotopinardville.com/uncanoonuc_mountains.htm > > > -----Original Message----- > From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org > [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf > Of > Dan.Strassberg > Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 9:48 AM > To: Jeff Lehmann; 'Paul B. Walker, Jr.'; 'bri' > Subject: Re: WGIR vs WHEB Question > > I've mastered Asnebumskit (Paxton MA) and I'm part way to getting > Neutaconconaut (not sure of the spelling, but I know it's in Johnston > RI) but I haven't a clue about the name of the mountain or hill that > is home to several Manchester FMs plus Channel "9" (RF 59 according to > the software I'm using but the software may be out of date because I > thought 59 was in the group of channels that was auctioned off for > non-TV uses) or the name of the town in which that site is located. I > do believe the name of the hill/mountain is a polysyllabic > native-American name, however. Anyhow, isn't WGIR-FM on that same > mountain/hill? And if so, shouldn't the first thing to do be to check > out WZID, which is also there (if not on the same tower, then, on a > tower that is quite close by)? If you have similar troubles receiving > both stations, the problem is topography. I'm hoping that even if this > post doesn't bring an answer to Paul's reception question, it will > bring an answer to my name the mountain/town question. > > ----- > Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) > eFax 1-707-215-6367 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Lehmann" > To: "'Paul B. Walker, Jr.'" ; "'bri'" > > Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 8:31 AM > Subject: RE: WGIR vs WHEB Question > > >>> I figured I'd ask here, I'm sure someone who is familiar with the >>> area >>> would >>> have an answer. Is there some kind of terrain shielding or some >>> form of >>> terrestrial interference? (transltor or some kind of itnerference >>> from >>> another Fm signal? >> >> I've always thought that WGIR-FM has come in fine in Concord when >> I've been >> passing through (many times). >> >> Jeff Lehmann >> Hanson, MA >> > > > From kc1ih@mac.com Wed Nov 11 16:55:30 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:55:30 -0500 Subject: Changes at WGBH-FM Message-ID: I know that WGBH has now announced that they are planning to end their Saturday Folk and Blues programming next month despite initially denying that this would happen with the acquisition on WCRB. This is being discussed on the Facebook group "Supporters of Folk and Blues on WGBH". I also understand that there are some changes (elimination?) coming to their local Jazz shows. Does anyone have any details on this? -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From markwats@comcast.net Wed Nov 11 17:20:03 2009 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:20:03 -0500 Subject: Changes at WGBH-FM References: Message-ID: Larry Weil wrote: >I know that WGBH has now announced that they are planning to end their >Saturday Folk and Blues programming next month despite initially denying >that this would happen with the acquisition on WCRB. I also wonder if this means WGBH will no longer broadcast the six hours of Saturday coverage of the Lowell Folk Festival that they've done for many years ? WGBH has also been a media sponsor of the festival for several years as well. Regarding the changes to the jazz programming, I've not read or heard anything regarding that. Mark Watson From markwats@comcast.net Wed Nov 11 17:24:48 2009 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:24:48 -0500 Subject: Live Morning Show On WLLH Message-ID: <70E9D0E15E7D44DAA6C3BD81AC0CD8BE@Mark> There's now a live morning show on WLLH. I heard a few minutes of it this morning. The hosts were talking to someone on the phone, then they went into a song. I don't know where this show is originating from, maybe a simulcast of one of Gois' other stations, WORC or their Hartford station, as I don't know if they have studios set up in Lowell or Lawrence as of yet. Mark Watson From joe@attorneyross.com Thu Nov 12 00:08:54 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:08:54 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: References: , <6276841028704894069@unknownmsgid>, Message-ID: <4AFB9866.31656.2599FCE@joe.attorneyross.com> On 11 Nov 2009 at 13:55, Bob DeMattia wrote: > I have an RF site in Brookline that was suffering overload from > analog-channel-7's transmitter a while back. At least the > transition to DTV solved one problem for me! And that is exactly why I can't understand why I get such bad reception here. Especially why one of my converter boxes can't see channel 4 at all. -- 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 bob.bosra@demattia.net Thu Nov 12 07:36:30 2009 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 07:36:30 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4AFB9866.31656.2599FCE@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <6276841028704894069@unknownmsgid> <4AFB9866.31656.2599FCE@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: It is likely plain old multipath. In additional to the direct path you've probably got some pretty strong reflections off the buildings in downtown Boston, the Blue Hills, and the Waltham hills, or planes flying overhead. I don't recall you saying what type of antenna you are using, but it should be as directional as possible. Also, all digital tuners are not equal. The echo-cancelling algorithms are CPU intensive. At the time the gen-1 models were made, the technology required to implement the more advanced algorithms of today was simply not there (from a practical standpoint). I imagine some of the cheap designs out there now may still be a generation or two back. -Bob From scott@fybush.com Thu Nov 12 11:31:28 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:31:28 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4AFB9866.31656.2599FCE@joe.attorneyross.com> References: , <6276841028704894069@unknownmsgid>, <4AFB9866.31656.2599FCE@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <4AFC3860.8070708@fybush.com> A. Joseph Ross wrote: > And that is exactly why I can't understand why I get such bad > reception here. Especially why one of my converter boxes can't see > channel 4 at all. > Too much RF can be just as deadly to DTV reception as too little. Here at Casa Fybush, 4300 feet from the Rochester TV transmitters, I've successfully eliminated some of my indoor DTV reception quirks (breakups as people walk around the room and such) by using a straightened-out paper clip inserted in the center hole of the antenna jack, in place of an actual antenna. (I don't even want to know how many volts of RF I'm getting here!) s From kvahey@comcast.net Fri Nov 13 00:26:23 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 23:26:23 -0600 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4AFC3860.8070708@fybush.com> References: <6276841028704894069@unknownmsgid> <4AFB9866.31656.2599FCE@joe.attorneyross.com> <4AFC3860.8070708@fybush.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911122126h1cc3cf0x58bc86befc70d5f7@mail.gmail.com> I am sure some tuners must have this feature but I wish mine would have a way of saving the database of channels found so you can then play with each signal one by one. Depending where I move the antenna I now get everything in my apartment except WBBM-DT over the air. I guess I keep Comcast after all :) From kvahey@comcast.net Fri Nov 13 00:17:12 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 23:17:12 -0600 Subject: The ghost of 1819 Elm St lives in Arkansas Message-ID: <4fc429770911122117g37505bcdud949c857b50f05bd@mail.gmail.com> I feel bad for the crew of this remote truck but it is funny in a tragic way http://www.kfsm.com/news/kfsm-news-nwa-satellite-truck-lost-in-river,0,1411223.story From joe@attorneyross.com Fri Nov 13 01:33:43 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 01:33:43 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: References: , <4AFB9866.31656.2599FCE@joe.attorneyross.com>, Message-ID: <4AFCFDC7.12370.6AA7B6@joe.attorneyross.com> On 12 Nov 2009 at 7:36, Bob DeMattia wrote: > I don't recall you saying what type of antenna you are using, but > it should be as directional as possible. A rabbit ears. -- 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 walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Fri Nov 13 06:23:11 2009 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 05:23:11 -0600 Subject: The ghost of 1819 Elm St lives in Arkansas In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911122117g37505bcdud949c857b50f05bd@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911122117g37505bcdud949c857b50f05bd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8bce0fe80911130323r2486ecf4v960a2b2bf0260d38@mail.gmail.com> My friend at The Hog Sports Radio in Fayetteville sent me this story last night and prefaced it with "THis could only happen in Arkansas" lol It is sad, but as Kevin said, Funny in a tragic way. Paul On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > I feel bad for the crew of this remote truck but it is funny in a tragic > way > > > http://www.kfsm.com/news/kfsm-news-nwa-satellite-truck-lost-in-river,0,1411223.story > From peterwmurray@gmail.com Fri Nov 13 11:55:31 2009 From: peterwmurray@gmail.com (Peter Murray) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:55:31 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: <4AFCFDC7.12370.6AA7B6@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4AFB9866.31656.2599FCE@joe.attorneyross.com> <4AFCFDC7.12370.6AA7B6@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: If it is really a "rabbit ears" - you'll want the telescoping elements to be fully down. UHF frequencies are about 50 centimeters and smaller. A directional UHF antenna would help to clear up much of the ghosting, and they come in unobtrusive panel forms these days. Not super-cheap, but the Winegard Square Shooter line is good, small, and durable. (NFI) http://winegard.com/offair/index.php -Peter On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 1:33 AM, A. Joseph Ross wrote: > On 12 Nov 2009 at 7:36, Bob DeMattia wrote: > >> I don't recall you saying what type of antenna you are using, but >> it should be as directional as possible. > > A rabbit ears. > > -- > 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 Fri Nov 13 13:02:59 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:02:59 -0500 Subject: Christmas time. Message-ID: <20091113180259.35F8F83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Have read that both WODS and WROR went all Christmas today prob early in morning At 1:01 pm: WROR, inst. version of Joy to the World Old Christmas jingle ("there are wonderful toys for all the girls and boys") Next Feliz Navidad 1:02, WODS: Rockin Around the Christmas Tree. Both stations now going off my presets. Too meep*-ing early *--word banned at Danvers High From jjlehmann@comcast.net Fri Nov 13 13:17:23 2009 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:17:23 -0500 Subject: Christmas time. In-Reply-To: <20091113180259.35F8F83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20091113180259.35F8F83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <000601ca648d$8c0f9c00$a42ed400$@net> > Have read that both WODS and WROR went all Christmas today prob early > in morning It happened just over an hour ago. According to yes.com, WODS started at 12:05 PM, WROR at 12:24 PM. Jeff Lehmann Hanson, MA From attychase@comcast.net Fri Nov 13 15:32:19 2009 From: attychase@comcast.net (Robert S Chase) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:32:19 -0500 Subject: The ghost of 1819 Elm St lives in Arkansas References: Message-ID: <994E5F4DFB7C4666AC11E53BAEC5BD2F@HomeOffice> Suggest everybody check the Carfax upon the purchase of a "new" remote truck in the near future! > Subject: Re: The ghost of 1819 Elm St lives in Arkansas >> I feel bad for the crew of this remote truck but it is funny in a tragic >> way >> http://www.kfsm.com/news/kfsm-news-nwa-satellite-truck-lost-in-river,0,1411223.story From kvahey@comcast.net Sat Nov 14 13:15:10 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 12:15:10 -0600 Subject: Chicago TV station turns back the clock 30 years Message-ID: <4fc429770911141015m17895168icbaac7764c1e84d5@mail.gmail.com> Like most CBS owned TV stations WBBM-TV has been a non-factor in Chicago for 20 years now. However 30 years ago they may have been the best local newscast in the US. Last night they went back to the anchor team that made them famous. http://cbs2chicago.com/video/?id=64673@wbbm.dayport.com WBBM's fall can be traced to not only losing Bill Kurtis but the ill fated hiring of Bill Applegate who was responsible for WNEV's Dream Team disaster. http://www.woio.com/Global/story.asp?S=5765199 If you watch the newscast from Friday night you will see WBBM's street level studio which shows no sign of human life in the Loop in the background. Chicago stations seem to love street level studios downtown which can have problems as WLS found out a couple of years ago http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPMUmoxNy2I WBBM's news director came from WBZ and he wants to rebrand the news WBBM instead of CBS2 but NY says no. From tlmedia@triad.rr.com Sat Nov 14 14:28:46 2009 From: tlmedia@triad.rr.com (Ted Larsen) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 14:28:46 -0500 Subject: Christmas time. References: <20091113180259.35F8F83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: Oh no! This HAS to be a ratings killer. Two weeks before Xmas used to be the norm. This is plain silly. Meep Meep...I don't live in Danvers ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Nelson" To: "BostonRadio Mailing List" Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 1:02 PM Subject: Christmas time. Have read that both WODS and WROR went all Christmas today prob early in morning At 1:01 pm: WROR, inst. version of Joy to the World Old Christmas jingle ("there are wonderful toys for all the girls and boys") Next Feliz Navidad 1:02, WODS: Rockin Around the Christmas Tree. Both stations now going off my presets. Too meep*-ing early *--word banned at Danvers High From raccoonradio@gmail.com Sat Nov 14 16:02:13 2009 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 16:02:13 -0500 Subject: Christmas time. In-Reply-To: References: <20091113180259.35F8F83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <1fbbbced0911141302p6e0e0247y8ab72b5766a50d70@mail.gmail.com> Supposedly both stations were getting a lot of emails asking when the Christmas music would start. No word on how many of them were from sponsors, and managers at Greater Media and CBS... On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Ted Larsen wrote: > Oh no! This HAS to be a ratings killer. Two weeks before Xmas used to be the > norm. This is plain silly. Back to Chri$tma$ has 2 S's in it and they're both dollar signs. Yes it is early but while some will "take it off the presets", many others will welcome the news. Listeners...also maybe some stores who will put these stations on as background music (provided they've paid the ASCAP/ BMI rights). The laundromat I go to usually has Magic...106.7...on, so I won't be bombarded by the Yule stuff. Supposedly it could have been earlier but they wanted to wait as the weather was still kind of warm (plus there was election day & veteran's day). They have gone from 2 wks before the holiday to the start of Dec to Thanksgiving, all the way back to the first or second week of Nov. But hey, the holiday stuff may have been in the stores around the same time the Halloween candy went in... From rbello@belloassoc.com Sat Nov 14 16:36:17 2009 From: rbello@belloassoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 16:36:17 -0500 Subject: Christmas time. In-Reply-To: <1fbbbced0911141302p6e0e0247y8ab72b5766a50d70@mail.gmail.com> References: <20091113180259.35F8F83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> <1fbbbced0911141302p6e0e0247y8ab72b5766a50d70@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <90ec04420911141336w723eba7oab1dd87114dbe016@mail.gmail.com> WODS has been running teasers for Christmas music for a couple of weeks. They had been streaming it for those who couldn't wait. It is a good time of the year to get CDs from the local library to add to my iPod or discover new music. Only 41 days until it goes away ! On Saturday, November 14, 2009, Bob Nelson wrote: > Supposedly both stations were getting a lot of emails asking when the > Christmas music would start. No word on how many of them were from > sponsors, and managers at Greater Media and CBS... > > On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Ted Larsen wrote: >> Oh no! This HAS to be a ratings killer. Two weeks before Xmas used to be the >> norm. This is plain silly. > > Back to Chri$tma$ has 2 S's in it and they're both dollar signs. Yes > it is early but while some will "take it off the presets", many others > will welcome the news. Listeners...also maybe some stores who will put > these stations on as background music (provided they've paid the > ASCAP/ > BMI rights). The laundromat I go to usually has Magic...106.7...on, so > I won't be bombarded by the Yule stuff. > > Supposedly it could have been earlier but they wanted to wait as the > weather was still kind of warm (plus there was election day & > veteran's day). They have gone from 2 wks before the holiday to the > start of Dec ?to Thanksgiving, all the way back to the first or second > week of > Nov. But hey, the holiday stuff may have been in the stores around the > same time the Halloween candy went in... > -- Ron Bello Bello Associates, Inc. 160 Speen Street - Suite 303 Framingham, MA 01701 508-820-1100 Fax 820-1112 From kc1ih@mac.com Sat Nov 14 15:43:39 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:43:39 -0500 Subject: Chicago TV station turns back the clock 30 years In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911141015m17895168icbaac7764c1e84d5@mail.gmail.co m> References: <4fc429770911141015m17895168icbaac7764c1e84d5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0KT4008WY9KKZU30@asmtp020.mac.com> At 01:15 PM 11/14/2009, Kevin Vahey wrote: >Like most CBS owned TV stations WBBM-TV has been a non-factor in >Chicago for 20 years now. However 30 years ago they may have been the >best local newscast in the US. > >Last night they went back to the anchor team that made them famous. > >http://cbs2chicago.com/video/?id=64673@wbbm.dayport.com I think another part of their downfall was when Jerry Springer was hired as a commentator, which caused the well respected Carol Marin (pronounced as marine) to leave in disgust. I see no mention of Ms. Marin in this post, is she by any chance back at the station? Larry Weil Temporarily in Lake Wobegone, VT Wobegone is a state of mind! From irw@well.com Sat Nov 14 17:42:42 2009 From: irw@well.com (Blaine Thompson) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 14:42:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Chicago TV station turns back the clock 30 years In-Reply-To: <0KT4008WY9KKZU30@asmtp020.mac.com> References: <4fc429770911141015m17895168icbaac7764c1e84d5@mail.gmail.com> <0KT4008WY9KKZU30@asmtp020.mac.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 14 Nov 2009, Larry Weil wrote: > I see no mention of Ms. Marin in this post, is she by any chance back at > the station? Marin is now with WMAQ-TV (Channel 5; NBC) as Political Editor. Marinis also a contributor to the show "Chicago Tonight" on WTTW (Channel 11; PBS) - Blaine --------------------------------------------------------------------- Blaine Thompson Indiana RadioWatch irw@well.com http://www.indianaradio.net AOL Instant Messenger: indianaradio5 From tlmedia@triad.rr.com Sat Nov 14 18:01:04 2009 From: tlmedia@triad.rr.com (Ted Larsen) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 18:01:04 -0500 Subject: Christmas time. References: <20091113180259.35F8F83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> <1fbbbced0911141302p6e0e0247y8ab72b5766a50d70@mail.gmail.com> <90ec04420911141336w723eba7oab1dd87114dbe016@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <820A1C2B947542F5B88C67A981592001@teddesktop> Next Year...LABOR DAY. Hey, bright idea coming up. Why not a 24/7 "All Christmas Music, All The Time Format."..."For The Santa In All Of Us." ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Bello" To: "Bob Nelson" Cc: "Ted Larsen" ; "BostonRadio Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 4:36 PM Subject: Re: Christmas time. WODS has been running teasers for Christmas music for a couple of weeks. They had been streaming it for those who couldn't wait. It is a good time of the year to get CDs from the local library to add to my iPod or discover new music. Only 41 days until it goes away ! On Saturday, November 14, 2009, Bob Nelson wrote: > Supposedly both stations were getting a lot of emails asking when the > Christmas music would start. No word on how many of them were from > sponsors, and managers at Greater Media and CBS... > > On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Ted Larsen wrote: >> Oh no! This HAS to be a ratings killer. Two weeks before Xmas used to be >> the >> norm. This is plain silly. > > Back to Chri$tma$ has 2 S's in it and they're both dollar signs. Yes > it is early but while some will "take it off the presets", many others > will welcome the news. Listeners...also maybe some stores who will put > these stations on as background music (provided they've paid the > ASCAP/ > BMI rights). The laundromat I go to usually has Magic...106.7...on, so > I won't be bombarded by the Yule stuff. > > Supposedly it could have been earlier but they wanted to wait as the > weather was still kind of warm (plus there was election day & > veteran's day). They have gone from 2 wks before the holiday to the > start of Dec to Thanksgiving, all the way back to the first or second > week of > Nov. But hey, the holiday stuff may have been in the stores around the > same time the Halloween candy went in... > -- Ron Bello Bello Associates, Inc. 160 Speen Street - Suite 303 Framingham, MA 01701 508-820-1100 Fax 820-1112 From kvahey@comcast.net Sat Nov 14 18:37:52 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 17:37:52 -0600 Subject: Chicago TV station turns back the clock 30 years In-Reply-To: <0KT4008WY9KKZU30@asmtp020.mac.com> References: <4fc429770911141015m17895168icbaac7764c1e84d5@mail.gmail.com> <0KT4008WY9KKZU30@asmtp020.mac.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911141537k598304dfhbb2dbfc1c21d8836@mail.gmail.com> Carol Marin was at WMAQ-TV. Both she and Ron Magers quit when NBC hired Joel Cheatwood from WSVN-WHDH to revamp local news. Cheatwood was wrongly blamed for the Springer move which was actually done by New York as part of the deal for Springer to tape at NBC Tower even though WMAQ never aired the show. Cheatwood then wound up at CBS and tried the WSVN format at both WCBS and WBBM. In Chicago WLS Eyewitness News is just impossible to beat now. From raccoonradio@mail.com Sat Nov 14 20:27:33 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 20:27:33 -0500 Subject: Christmas time. Message-ID: <20091115012733.AA52C83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> >>Why not a 24/7 "All Christmas Music, All The Time Format."..."For The Santa In All Of Us." I'm pretty sure there's at least some web streams that do that. I have something called Screamer Radio on my comp. and am pretty sure they have a yr round Christmas station on...Comcast cable may also have on of those Music Choice stations doing the same. Not surprising... And don't forget when some station tries a "Christmas in July" stunt, and Dr. Demento was known to also do Yule shows in July... From kvahey@comcast.net Sat Nov 14 21:08:08 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 20:08:08 -0600 Subject: Christmas time. In-Reply-To: References: <20091113180259.35F8F83985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911141808t7f973428k743cde051e0c0eaf@mail.gmail.com> WLIT in Chicago flipped today starting with Burl Ives... They also play a depressing Vietnam Christmas song...Christmas in the Jungle...there isn't any snow. From joe@attorneyross.com Sat Nov 14 21:24:17 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 21:24:17 -0500 Subject: Digital TV In-Reply-To: References: , <4AFCFDC7.12370.6AA7B6@joe.attorneyross.com>, Message-ID: <4AFF6651.11601.82C81A@joe.attorneyross.com> On 13 Nov 2009 at 11:55, Peter Murray wrote: > If it is really a "rabbit ears" - you'll want the telescoping elements > to be fully down. Of course. Already are. Actually, I should be more specific, since I have two converter boxes. The one in my bedroom is connected to one of those old rabbit- ears that has a UHF and a VHF connection (with a circular UHF antenna in between the rabbit ears). The converter is connected to the UHF connection. The one on the small TV in my study is connected to a rabbit ears that came with a TV set once upon a time. The ears are fully down. The main problem I have is that there's no base for it. I'm thinking of drilling a hole in a block of wood for it. -- 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 paulranderson@charter.net Sun Nov 15 08:28:21 2009 From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 08:28:21 -0500 Subject: Chicago TV station turns back the clock 30 years In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911141015m17895168icbaac7764c1e84d5@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911141015m17895168icbaac7764c1e84d5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Nov 14, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > WBBM's news director came from WBZ and he wants to rebrand the news > WBBM instead of CBS2 but NY says no. How, then, did WBZ-TV get away with rebranding their news with their call letters instead of "CBS4"? Paul From Kaimbridge@gmail.com Sun Nov 15 09:35:11 2009 From: Kaimbridge@gmail.com (Kaimbridge M. GoldChild) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 14:35:11 +0000 Subject: [B-R-I] Re: WHDH-DT Ch 7 Turn Off Message-ID: <4B00119F.9000801@Gmail.com> Larry Weil wrote, > As I promised in an earlier reply, I asked around when I got > to work tonight about when the Channel 7 carrier will be > turned off. The answer seems to be that they are planning to > do this sometime Friday, but this could change depending upon > when the phone calls subside. As of now all programming is > on Channel 42 only. Yup, they were still on (with "No Signal", full strength dead carrier on both 7.1 and 7.2) at about 9:30am Friday, but totally gone by about 12:20pm??noontime shutoff? ~Kaimbridge~ ----- Wikipedia?Contributor Home Page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kaimbridge ***** Void Where Permitted; Limit 0 Per Customer. ***** From scott@fybush.com Sun Nov 15 10:13:50 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 10:13:50 -0500 Subject: [B-R-I] Re: WHDH-DT Ch 7 Turn Off In-Reply-To: <4B00119F.9000801@Gmail.com> References: <4B00119F.9000801@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B001AAE.2020906@fybush.com> Kaimbridge M. GoldChild wrote: > Larry Weil wrote, > > > As I promised in an earlier reply, I asked around when I got > > to work tonight about when the Channel 7 carrier will be > > turned off. The answer seems to be that they are planning to > > do this sometime Friday, but this could change depending upon > > when the phone calls subside. As of now all programming is > > on Channel 42 only. > > Yup, they were still on (with "No Signal", full strength dead > carrier on both 7.1 and 7.2) at about 9:30am Friday, but totally > gone by about 12:20pm??noontime shutoff? 10 AM, per their transmitter engineer. s From kc1ih@mac.com Sun Nov 15 10:31:30 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 10:31:30 -0500 Subject: [B-R-I] Re: WHDH-DT Ch 7 Turn Off In-Reply-To: <4B00119F.9000801@Gmail.com> References: <4B00119F.9000801@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <0KT500AA6PSK2C10@asmtp015.mac.com> At 09:35 AM 11/15/2009, Kaimbridge M. GoldChild wrote: >Larry Weil wrote, > > > As I promised in an earlier reply, I asked around when I got > > to work tonight about when the Channel 7 carrier will be > > turned off. The answer seems to be that they are planning to > > do this sometime Friday, but this could change depending upon > > when the phone calls subside. As of now all programming is > > on Channel 42 only. > >Yup, they were still on (with "No Signal", full strength dead >carrier on both 7.1 and 7.2) at about 9:30am Friday, but totally >gone by about 12:20pm??noontime shutoff? >? Dunno, I'm off for a few days, currently in a hotel room in Vermont. Larry Weil Temporarily in Lake Wobegone, VT Wobegone is a state of mind! From gallen2@nescaum.org Sun Nov 15 13:01:44 2009 From: gallen2@nescaum.org (George Allen) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 13:01:44 -0500 Subject: Christmas time. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: For those who want even more, don't forget Radio Rudolph: http://www.radiorudolph.com/ Every version of Rudolph the red nose caribou ever record, streamed 24x7x365. Listen now, since near xmas, the site gets overloaded... -- George ________________________________________ From: "Ted Larsen" Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 18:01:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Christmas time. Next Year...LABOR DAY. Hey, bright idea coming up. Why not a 24/7 "All Christmas Music, All The Time Format."..."For The Santa In All Of Us." From dan.strassberg@att.net Sun Nov 15 13:43:13 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 13:43:13 -0500 Subject: [B-R-I] Re: WHDH-DT Ch 7 Turn Off References: <4B00119F.9000801@Gmail.com> <4B001AAE.2020906@fybush.com> Message-ID: <581B41D30757415A86A91DB612291C96@SatU205S5044> My Panasonic LCD TV generates different messages for no program content (message: "Program not available") and no signal (message: "No signal"). When I made my initial attempt at rescanning to get rid of the no video/no sound 7.1 and 7.2, I was getting the "Program not available" message on the non-functional 7.1 and 7.2. I realized after the fact that, therefore, there had been no reason for me to expect that my initial rescan would get rid of the two non-functional 7s. I other words, I should have waited to rescan until the non-functional 7s caused the "No signal" message to appear. So yesterday evening (Saturday 11/14), I checked to make sure that I was getting the "No signal" message on both of the non-functional 7s. When I found that to be the case, I rescanned thinking I now would surely eliminate the two non-functional selections. As the scan progressed, I became even more sure that, this time, rescanning was going to produce the desired result; this time, the scan had detected 25 channels, whereas on the previous attempt it had detected 26. I thought the channel that could no longer be detected must have been 7. (But two RF 7s had supposedly been deleted--7-1 and 7-2, so it seemed odd that the number of "channels" detected had dropped by only one.) Anyhow, I was wrong; I still got two 7.1's and two 7.2's, of which one displayed "No signal" and one displayed the appropriate program content. My next step will be to unplug the TV from the AC power line and wait a few minutes before restoring the AC power and re-scanning. My new theory is that the set won't forget the non-functioning 7s until I remove the power that is sustaining the memory. If, when I restore the power, the set goes immediately to setup mode, I think I can assume that any previous memory of the channel mapping has been wiped out. But if I then still get two 7-1's and two 7-2's of which one of each continues to provide no program, I'm going to be quite mystified and I will just have to give up. This exercise has got to be WAY too complicated for the average bear! ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Fybush" To: "Kaimbridge M. GoldChild" Cc: "Boston Radio Interest" Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 10:13 AM Subject: Re: [B-R-I] Re: WHDH-DT Ch 7 Turn Off > Kaimbridge M. GoldChild wrote: >> Larry Weil wrote, >> >> > As I promised in an earlier reply, I asked around when I got >> > to work tonight about when the Channel 7 carrier will be >> > turned off. The answer seems to be that they are planning to >> > do this sometime Friday, but this could change depending upon >> > when the phone calls subside. As of now all programming is >> > on Channel 42 only. >> >> Yup, they were still on (with "No Signal", full strength dead >> carrier on both 7.1 and 7.2) at about 9:30am Friday, but totally >> gone by about 12:20pm??noontime shutoff? > > 10 AM, per their transmitter engineer. > > s From as@shawsheen.com Sun Nov 15 16:59:33 2009 From: as@shawsheen.com (Alexander Svirsky) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 16:59:33 -0500 Subject: Digital TV Message-ID: <20091115165933.q86kzb7oa8skc0c0@shawsheen.com> A quick nod to the Fybush Paperclip HDTV Antenna.. Inspired, I tried this at my friend's in Brookline today. The existing setup was a Sylvania HDTV connected to non-HD cable with composite video output only, no HDMI. This would not be suitable for football. The Needham towers are almost visible from here. So, can we solve with readily available household items? I straightened out a small paperclip and stuck it into the coax connector and ran the auto-setup. The results? 4, 7, 25, 44, 62 are perfect. 2, 5, 56, 68 are watchable, and 38 unwatchable. Analog 24 is fuzzy but present. The setup menu antenna signal strength meter shows a steady "85" out of 100 for WBZ (RF 30). I am surprised that multipath is not an issue here. Paperclip Antenna is a win. My setup in Andover is still a 7-element yagi cut for 800 MHz (Cushcraft PC806N, not designed for TV use) into a 20 dB pre-amplifier. I'm having a good day when 4, 5, 7, and 25 don't mosaic. Things are better now that the leaves are down. 62, 44, 2, 66 and 27 are watchable if I fiddle with the antenna. 9 and 11 are usable when I switch to a homemade outdoor VHF dipole. 50 and 34 are fine when I turn the antenna to the NW. -- Alexander Svirsky http://shawsheen.com/ From kc1ih@mac.com Sun Nov 15 18:19:45 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 18:19:45 -0500 Subject: [B-R-I] Re: WHDH-DT Ch 7 Turn Off In-Reply-To: <581B41D30757415A86A91DB612291C96@SatU205S5044> References: <4B00119F.9000801@Gmail.com> <4B001AAE.2020906@fybush.com> <581B41D30757415A86A91DB612291C96@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <8D2490C9-17B3-4497-AC74-505012EF156C@mac.com> On my box, once a channel is found it remains found unless you manually delete it. That is, unless you do a complete new scan as if it were a new unit. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH Sent from my iPod Touch Big freekin deal! On Nov 15, 2009, at 1:43 PM, "Dan.Strassberg" wrote: > My Panasonic LCD TV generates different messages for no program > content (message: "Program not available") and no signal (message: "No > signal"). When I made my initial attempt at rescanning to get rid of > the no video/no sound 7.1 and 7.2, I was getting the "Program not > available" message on the non-functional 7.1 and 7.2. I > realized after the fact that, therefore, there had been no reason for > me to expect that my initial rescan would get rid of the two > non-functional 7s. I other words, I should have waited to rescan > until the non-functional 7s caused the "No signal" message to appear. > So yesterday evening (Saturday 11/14), I checked to make sure that I > was getting the "No signal" message on both of the non-functional 7s. > When I found that to be the case, I rescanned thinking I now would > surely eliminate the two non-functional selections. As the scan > progressed, I became even more sure that, this time, rescanning was > going to produce the desired result; this time, the scan had detected > 25 channels, whereas on the previous attempt it had detected 26. I > thought the channel that could no longer be detected must have been 7. > (But two RF 7s had supposedly been deleted--7-1 and 7-2, so it seemed > odd that the number of "channels" detected had dropped by only one.) > Anyhow, I was wrong; I still got two 7.1's and two 7.2's, of which one > displayed "No signal" and one displayed the appropriate program > content. My next step will be to unplug the TV from the AC power line > and wait a few minutes before restoring the AC power and re-scanning. > My new theory is that the set won't forget the non-functioning 7s > until I remove the power that is sustaining the memory. If, when I > restore the power, the set goes immediately to setup mode, I think I > can assume that any previous memory of the channel mapping has been > wiped out. But if I then still get two 7-1's and two 7-2's of which > one of each continues to provide no program, I'm going to be quite > mystified and I will just have to give up. This exercise has got to be > WAY too complicated for the average bear! > > ----- > Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) > eFax 1-707-215-6367 > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Fybush" > To: "Kaimbridge M. GoldChild" > Cc: "Boston Radio Interest" > > Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 10:13 AM > Subject: Re: [B-R-I] Re: WHDH-DT Ch 7 Turn Off > > >> Kaimbridge M. GoldChild wrote: >>> Larry Weil wrote, >>> >>> > As I promised in an earlier reply, I asked around when I got >>> > to work tonight about when the Channel 7 carrier will be >>> > turned off. The answer seems to be that they are planning to >>> > do this sometime Friday, but this could change depending upon >>> > when the phone calls subside. As of now all programming is >>> > on Channel 42 only. >>> >>> Yup, they were still on (with "No Signal", full strength dead >>> carrier on both 7.1 and 7.2) at about 9:30am Friday, but totally >>> gone by about 12:20pm??noontime shutoff? >> >> 10 AM, per their transmitter engineer. >> >> s > From dan.strassberg@att.net Sun Nov 15 20:08:36 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:08:36 -0500 Subject: [B-R-I] Re: WHDH-DT Ch 7 Turn Off References: <4B00119F.9000801@Gmail.com> <4B001AAE.2020906@fybush.com> <581B41D30757415A86A91DB612291C96@SatU205S5044> <8D2490C9-17B3-4497-AC74-505012EF156C@mac.com> Message-ID: Well, I tried removing the AC power from the TV, waiting a short while, and plugging the TV back into AC. That made the set "think" that it was being used for the first time--the setup menu was on the screen when the video appeared. BUT rescanning did not do away with the two non-functional RF 7 selections. So maybe any RF channels that have ever been found to be active remain active until you manually delete them. I tried manually editing the channel list and a got a fair way into the process, but I clearly need help in accessing everything I need to be able to access. I will have to see whether I can figure out from the manual how to access all of the selections that you apparently must access to delete a channel. Many of the editing controls are intuitive, but others are not--at least to me. Also, the menu does not make clear which of the 7.1's is on RF 7 and which is on RF 42. Same for the two 7.2's. I wonder whether the first of each in the channel menu really is the one on the lower-numbered RF channel. I also wonder whether, if I delete the wrong 7.1 or 7.2, I will be able to get it back. For now, the path of least resistance is to live with the non-functional channels and, after entering a channel number on the remote's keypad, to use the arrow keys when necessary to complete the selection. Maybe Panasonic's engineers did the best they could with the keys available on the remote but my Insignia ATSC to NTSC converter box seems a lot more straightforward. OTOH, I haven't yet tried to eliminate the duplicate 7s from its setup--in fact, I haven't looked to see whether it still accesses duplicate 7s. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Weil" To: "Dan.Strassberg" Cc: "Scott Fybush" ; "Kaimbridge M. GoldChild" ; "Boston Radio Interest" Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 6:19 PM Subject: Re: [B-R-I] Re: WHDH-DT Ch 7 Turn Off On my box, once a channel is found it remains found unless you manually delete it. That is, unless you do a complete new scan as if it were a new unit. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From mrschuyler@aol.com Fri Nov 13 16:01:39 2009 From: mrschuyler@aol.com (mrschuyler@aol.com) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 16:01:39 -0500 Subject: Sic Transit VII Message-ID: <8CC32BBA108B8A0-5674-3626@webmail-d006.sysops.aol.com> Turned on the tube at about 3:30 Friday afternoon to find RF 7 completely gone, not just in black with the carrier on. I'm the rare viewer for whom the "real" Channel 7 had a better signal for OTA DTV reception than did 42. From my hilltop location in Lunenburg, MA, using amplified rabbit ears, the "real" Channels 9 and 11 come in very well. RF 7 always registered higher on the Zenith/Insignia converter's signal strength meter than Virtual 7 (42). After months of experimentation, I had found the "perfect" position and settings on the antenna to receive 25 channels without jumping up every few minutes to make adjustments, but that ended when 42 immediately began breaking up a couple days ago. Bringing it back meant temporarily losing "25" and "56." A couple years back I read somewhere that stations with coverage problems like WHDH's would be setting up booster XMTRs in those shadows, such as in urban "concrete canyons." What happened with that idea? Is that another concept that on works on paper but not in reality, like much of digital broadcasting? ---Jim Schuyler loose cannon From ka3zci@yahoo.com Sun Nov 15 14:12:13 2009 From: ka3zci@yahoo.com (Robert Paine) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 11:12:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Christmas music Message-ID: <498041.36375.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I agree it's too early for Christmas music. Being that I'm out of touch with the radio industry - except this list and Broadcast Digest - my "druthers" would be: 1st week of December - 1 holiday song every half-hour. 2nd week - 2 or 3 per hour. 3rd week until the day before - 4 to 6 per hour. Midnight of the 24th - every other song. noon or 6 p.m. of the 24th - all holiday music. I use the term "holiday" because I'd include Hanukkah music in the mix. And, Kwanzaa may or may not have its own music. I figure, holidays are holidays, and it's interesting to have three occur at the same time of the year. But then, what do I know? I'm just the 800-pound gorilla on the list. Happy....whatever....(generic and all-inclusive holiday greeting) Bob Paine From marklaurence@mac.com Tue Nov 17 11:36:33 2009 From: marklaurence@mac.com (Mark Laurence) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:36:33 -0500 Subject: Sic Transit VII In-Reply-To: <8CC32BBA108B8A0-5674-3626@webmail-d006.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CC32BBA108B8A0-5674-3626@webmail-d006.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <4B02D111.2050803@mac.com> mrschuyler@aol.com wrote: > Turned on the tube at about 3:30 Friday afternoon to find RF 7 completely gone, not just in black with the carrier on. I'm the rare viewer for whom the "real" Channel 7 had a better signal for OTA DTV reception than did 42. From my hilltop location in Lunenburg, MA, using amplified rabbit ears, the "real" Channels 9 and 11 come in very well. > > RF 7 always registered higher on the Zenith/Insignia converter's signal strength meter than Virtual 7 (42). After months of experimentation, I had found the "perfect" position and settings on the antenna to receive 25 channels without jumping up every few minutes to make adjustments, but that ended when 42 immediately began breaking up a couple days ago. Bringing it back meant temporarily losing "25" and "56." > > A couple years back I read somewhere that stations with coverage problems like WHDH's would be setting up booster XMTRs in those shadows, such as in urban "concrete canyons." What happened with that idea? Is that another concept that on works on paper but not in reality, like much of digital broadcasting? They should try booster transmitters maybe, or low power relay stations. Fill the Worcester hills with these. As an alternative, why not allow rebroadcasts of major stations on a local station that could fill those gaps, such as 27-2, 27-3, and 27-4? There's no reason why that has to be a fringe Spanish broadcast, just because 27-1 is in Spanish. I keep thinking they have to come up with a solution for the many areas that have worse reception than before, or in some cases none at all. But increasingly I think it's not going to happen. Probably the 90% penetration of cable has something to do with it. Maybe most of the left-overs don't care about TV at all anymore. From mariogonz@aol.com Tue Nov 17 11:28:11 2009 From: mariogonz@aol.com (Mario Gonzalez Jr.) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:28:11 -0500 Subject: Christmas music In-Reply-To: <498041.36375.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <498041.36375.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003c01ca67a2$f4696070$dd3c2150$@com> I was in my car with my wife this morning and WODS was taking calls from listeners who were very happy to have the holiday music playing now. My wife shares their sentiments. I've decided that I do like it this year, but since I spend most of my time listening to internet radio, I have many more choices ... including very particular types of holiday music. Mario -----Original Message----- From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Robert Paine Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 2:12 PM To: Boston Radio Interest Subject: Christmas music I agree it's too early for Christmas music. Being that I'm out of touch with the radio industry - except this list and Broadcast Digest - my "druthers" would be: 1st week of December - 1 holiday song every half-hour. 2nd week - 2 or 3 per hour. 3rd week until the day before - 4 to 6 per hour. Midnight of the 24th - every other song. noon or 6 p.m. of the 24th - all holiday music. I use the term "holiday" because I'd include Hanukkah music in the mix. And, Kwanzaa may or may not have its own music. I figure, holidays are holidays, and it's interesting to have three occur at the same time of the year. But then, what do I know? I'm just the 800-pound gorilla on the list. Happy....whatever....(generic and all-inclusive holiday greeting) Bob Paine From donald_astelle@yahoo.com Tue Nov 17 13:21:22 2009 From: donald_astelle@yahoo.com (D. A.) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 10:21:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: LPFM In-Reply-To: <4B02D111.2050803@mac.com> Message-ID: <806660.67085.qm@web110509.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Here's a question for those more technically knowledgeable than me. ;-) How do you find the spots where a LPFM would/might be allowed? There is a "finder" site on the FCC web page, but you have to put in one set of coordinates, and it will tell you if a LPFM could be allowed at that specific site. I (and I assume others) are not so much interested in checking one set of ordinates..but in looking at some list as to where they might be allowed. I could sit there all afternoon with one set of coordinates after another...but is there a way to turn that process around and just show me where they might be viable according to the FCC? Thanks! From wollman@bimajority.org Tue Nov 17 13:44:28 2009 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:44:28 -0500 Subject: LPFM In-Reply-To: <806660.67085.qm@web110509.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <4B02D111.2050803@mac.com> <806660.67085.qm@web110509.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <19202.61196.229355.438700@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > I (and I assume others) are not so much interested in checking one > set of ordinates..but in looking at some list as to where they might > be allowed. There are software packages used by consulting engineers that can do that -- although with a good knowledge of the rules, CDBS, and a map you can often come pretty close. -GAWollman From mward@iname.com Tue Nov 17 13:52:56 2009 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:52:56 -0500 Subject: LPFM In-Reply-To: <19202.61196.229355.438700@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <4B02D111.2050803@mac.com> <806660.67085.qm@web110509.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <19202.61196.229355.438700@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <4B02F108.1000901@iname.com> Garrett Wollman wrote: > There are software packages used by consulting engineers that can do > that -- although with a good knowledge of the rules, CDBS, and a map > you can often come pretty close. Here's what I'll assume is a reasonably decent free site: http://cdbs.recnet.com/lpfm.php It's based at RECnet, which has a regular ol' broadcast query, too. It'd certainly get the OP close enough to know what's possible or "might" be allowed. From donald_astelle@yahoo.com Tue Nov 17 14:06:57 2009 From: donald_astelle@yahoo.com (D. A.) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:06:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: LPFM In-Reply-To: <4B02F108.1000901@iname.com> Message-ID: <29092.72495.qm@web110506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> > > There are software packages used by consulting > engineers that can do > > that -- although with a good knowledge of the rules, > CDBS, and a map > > you can often come pretty close. > > Here's what I'll assume is a reasonably decent free site: > > http://cdbs.recnet.com/lpfm.php > > It's based at RECnet, which has a regular ol' broadcast > query, too. It'd certainly get the OP close enough to know > what's possible or "might" be allowed. But, again, it's backwards. It starts with the coordinates. Looking for a list of locales to start. From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Tue Nov 17 14:15:39 2009 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:15:39 -0600 Subject: LPFM In-Reply-To: <29092.72495.qm@web110506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <4B02F108.1000901@iname.com> <29092.72495.qm@web110506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8bce0fe80911171115y8fb38acie34e590b95d7ee38@mail.gmail.com> And you arent going to get a list of locales, specific towns.. thats not how it works On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 1:06 PM, D. A. wrote: > > > > There are software packages used by consulting > > engineers that can do > > > that -- although with a good knowledge of the rules, > > CDBS, and a map > > > you can often come pretty close. > > > > Here's what I'll assume is a reasonably decent free site: > > > > http://cdbs.recnet.com/lpfm.php > > > > It's based at RECnet, which has a regular ol' broadcast > > query, too. It'd certainly get the OP close enough to know > > what's possible or "might" be allowed. > > But, again, it's backwards. > > It starts with the coordinates. > > Looking for a list of locales to start. > > > > > > -- Sincerely, Paul B. Walker, Jr. www.onairdj.com walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com From donald_astelle@yahoo.com Tue Nov 17 13:16:30 2009 From: donald_astelle@yahoo.com (D. A.) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 10:16:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Chicago TV station turns back the clock 30 years Message-ID: <460461.42685.qm@web110506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> > WBBM's news director came from WBZ and he wants to rebrand the news > WBBM instead of CBS2 but NY says no. >>How, then, did WBZ-TV get away with rebranding their news with their >>call letters instead of "CBS4"? Lose a ton of money and it's amazing what "New York" will let you do. Let your news slip into 3rd (or 4th) place, and it's amazing what Corporate will let you try. ;-) From donald_astelle@yahoo.com Tue Nov 17 15:47:50 2009 From: donald_astelle@yahoo.com (D. A.) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:47:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: =?utf-8?B?V2hv4oCZcyBhZnJhaWQgb2YgdGhlIGJpZywgYmFkIEZhaXJuZXNzIERvY3Ry?= =?utf-8?B?aW5lPw==?= Message-ID: <299631.95837.qm@web110502.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> I got this from a usenet newsgroup. An interesting perspective that puts to rest all of the fearmongering about what the FD would entail. Good analysis. http://groups.google.com/group/ba.broadcast/browse_thread/thread/40a2cfc9a29ec1ad/ef3bd7f4cb24e4fa?lnk=gst&q=nick+name#ef3bd7f4cb24e4fa Who?s afraid of the big, bad Fairness Doctrine? By Steve Almond | November 9, 2009 OF ALL the Big Lies told by the pooh-bahs of talk radio - that our biracial president hates white people, that global warming is a hoax, that a public health care plan to compete with private insurers equals socialism - the most desperate and deluded is this: that the so-called Fairness Doctrine would squash free speech. Nonsense. The Fairness Doctrine would not stop talk radio hosts from spewing the invective that has made them so fabulously wealthy. All it would do is subject their invective to a real-time reality check. If you don?t believe me, consult the historical evidence. The Federal Communications Commission adopted the Fairness Doctrine in 1949. Because the airwaves were both public and limited, the FCC wanted to ensure that licensees devoted ?a reasonable amount of broadcast time to the discussion of controversial issues,?? and that they did so ?fairly, in order to afford reasonable opportunity for opposing viewpoints.?? That?s the whole shebang. Pretty terrifying stuff, huh? From kvahey@comcast.net Tue Nov 17 16:34:49 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:34:49 -0600 Subject: Chicago TV station turns back the clock 30 years In-Reply-To: <460461.42685.qm@web110506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <460461.42685.qm@web110506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911171334i3bdb4eebhcfc755b1ed0c6436@mail.gmail.com> CBS2 is very entrenched in Chi, NY and LA. The so called CBS Mandate still isn't universal as WCCO-TV and KDKA-TV calls are used in Minneapolis and Pittsburgh. In NY and LA there is no way to co-brand as CBS has two all news stations in each market. Chicago and Philadelphia would be prime co-branding markets with WBBM and KYW. It just seems so obvious to co-brand your local TV news when in many markets your AM station delivers huge numbers. From paul@derrynh.net Tue Nov 17 17:17:47 2009 From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:17:47 -0500 Subject: Chicago TV station turns back the clock 30 years In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911171334i3bdb4eebhcfc755b1ed0c6436@mail.gmail.com> References: <460461.42685.qm@web110506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4fc429770911171334i3bdb4eebhcfc755b1ed0c6436@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <80215A0B272A4132AA556FE8B18AB6DA@PaulPC> I'm in Atlanta right now...and the CBS Afilliate here brands as CBS Atlanta (vs Fox5, CW69, WXIA 11, 2 (WSB-TV/ABC) -Paul Hopfgarten -Atlanta for today (Derry NH/Freeport ME) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Vahey" To: "D. A." Cc: "(newsgroup) Boston-Radio-Interest" Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:34 PM Subject: Re: Chicago TV station turns back the clock 30 years > CBS2 is very entrenched in Chi, NY and LA. > > The so called CBS Mandate still isn't universal as WCCO-TV and KDKA-TV > calls are used in Minneapolis and Pittsburgh. > > In NY and LA there is no way to co-brand as CBS has two all news > stations in each market. > > Chicago and Philadelphia would be prime co-branding markets with WBBM and > KYW. > > It just seems so obvious to co-brand your local TV news when in many > markets your AM station delivers huge numbers. > From wollman@bimajority.org Tue Nov 17 18:52:27 2009 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:52:27 -0500 Subject: Chicago TV station turns back the clock 30 years In-Reply-To: <80215A0B272A4132AA556FE8B18AB6DA@PaulPC> References: <460461.42685.qm@web110506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4fc429770911171334i3bdb4eebhcfc755b1ed0c6436@mail.gmail.com> <80215A0B272A4132AA556FE8B18AB6DA@PaulPC> Message-ID: <19203.14139.95365.387522@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > I'm in Atlanta right now...and the CBS Afilliate here brands as CBS Atlanta > (vs Fox5, CW69, WXIA 11, 2 (WSB-TV/ABC) If you did a survey asking Atlantans which channel CBS was on, I bet you'd find more people thinking it was on 5 (used to be) or 2 (never) than know that it's actually on 46. -GAWollman From raccoonradio@mail.com Tue Nov 17 19:29:17 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:29:17 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup Message-ID: <20091118002917.95329905C49@ws1-5a.us4.outblaze.com> I was curious to see what would be replacing the blues and folk shows on WGBH next month so I used the search feature on their schedule page. For the first Saturday in December, they list This American Life at noon followed by On the Media at 1, Celtic Sojourn at 3, Prairie Home at 6, Says You! at 8, then Jazz with Bob Parlocha at 10 pm. For weekdays I went to Dec 1 and 2 and found they still had classical listed 9 am to 4 pm but by Friday Dec 4 you see such things as blank spaces between 12-3 pm (still being worked out?) and: The Takeaway at 9 am, Diane Rehm at 10am, Fresh Air at 2 pm, and The World at 3 pm. The World also airs a bit later, I think. Eli P. noted that there's some duplication with WBUR. So, cost-cutting by getting rid of some local hosts...and other changes, the biggest of course being the migration of classical to 99.5. An effort (facebook group, etc.) to try to change their minds about losing the folk and blues shows is underway but we don't know if it will succeed. From dan.strassberg@att.net Tue Nov 17 21:59:32 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:59:32 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup References: <20091118002917.95329905C49@ws1-5a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <2607D42AA6924C9C906C3E99E42B4118@SatU205S5044> Says You at 8 followed by Jazz at 10 makes little sense. Says You is a one-hour show. Jazz currently begins at 9:00PM on Saturday, right after Says You. Do they have another talk show ready to go in the 9:00PM hour? Maybe What Do You Know? I think that is a two-hour show, but I guess they don't have to run all of it. The idea that 89.7 will carry so many of the programs that WBUR already carries (albeit in different day parts) strikes me as both uncreative and not very smart. I am under the impression that WBUR does not carry all of the talk shows that NPR, American Public Media, and the BBC syndicate. One would think that WGBH could find programs from those menus and could keep the duplication with WBUR down to a dull roar. If they can't choose programs that presumably are already available to them, 89.7 is going to fall on its sword. As for the classical on 99.5, if the promos they have been running on TV are any indication of the music selection, I think Mr Glavin is going to be seriously disappointed. I've heard nothing but familar orchestral works--none of the opera or atonal crap that are so dear to his heart. If 99.5 under WGBH ownership stays mainstram classical as it was for several decades under both Charles River and Nassau ownership, we can look for the rhetoric of the curmudgeon of Methuen to scale new heights of invective;>( ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Nelson" To: "BostonRadio Mailing List" Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 7:29 PM Subject: The new WGBH lineup I was curious to see what would be replacing the blues and folk shows on WGBH next month so I used the search feature on their schedule page. For the first Saturday in December, they list This American Life at noon followed by On the Media at 1, Celtic Sojourn at 3, Prairie Home at 6, Says You! at 8, then Jazz with Bob Parlocha at 10 pm. For weekdays I went to Dec 1 and 2 and found they still had classical listed 9 am to 4 pm but by Friday Dec 4 you see such things as blank spaces between 12-3 pm (still being worked out?) and: The Takeaway at 9 am, Diane Rehm at 10am, Fresh Air at 2 pm, and The World at 3 pm. The World also airs a bit later, I think. Eli P. noted that there's some duplication with WBUR. So, cost-cutting by getting rid of some local hosts...and other changes, the biggest of course being the migration of classical to 99.5. An effort (facebook group, etc.) to try to change their minds about losing the folk and blues shows is underway but we don't know if it will succeed. From raccoonradio@mail.com Tue Nov 17 22:24:25 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:24:25 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup Message-ID: <20091118032425.C4D4383BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com> I just went back to the page; it says "Says You" at 8 pm and the Jazz show is listed as starting at 10 but there is no info about 9 pm. The grid entries on the left read: 8:00 pm, 8:30 pm, 10:00 pm, 10:30 pm etc (entry for Dec 5). Same for Dec 12. Probably will be corrected soon. However on Dec 19 it lists "Jazz Set" as the program running from 9 until 10 pm. Whad Ya Know? is indeed a two hour show and it's possible that in the past stations were allowed to run only one hour (WGBH used to have it Sunday nights 6-7 pm at one point I think, but maybe they require both hours be picked up. At various times, WYK? has run on either 'BUR or 'GBH but not lately AFAIK.) Agreed about the duplication. From joe@attorneyross.com Wed Nov 18 00:35:17 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 00:35:17 -0500 Subject: Christmas music In-Reply-To: <498041.36375.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <498041.36375.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4B038795.14613.55808C@joe.attorneyross.com> On 15 Nov 2009 at 11:12, Robert Paine wrote: > noon or 6 p.m. of the 24th - all holiday music. > I use the term "holiday" because I'd include Hanukkah music in the > mix. And, Kwanzaa may or may not have its own music. I figure, > holidays are holidays, and it's interesting to have three occur at the > same time of the year. But Hanukkah this year ends on the 19th. -- 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 Nov 18 00:35:18 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 00:35:18 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup In-Reply-To: <2607D42AA6924C9C906C3E99E42B4118@SatU205S5044> References: <20091118002917.95329905C49@ws1-5a.us4.outblaze.com>, <2607D42AA6924C9C906C3E99E42B4118@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <4B038796.12911.558148@joe.attorneyross.com> On 17 Nov 2009 at 21:59, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > As for the classical on 99.5, if the promos they have been running on > TV are any indication of the music selection, I think Mr Glavin is > going to be seriously disappointed. I've heard nothing but familar > orchestral works--none of the opera or atonal crap that are so dear to > his heart. If 99.5 under WGBH ownership stays mainstram classical as > it was for several decades under both Charles River and Nassau > ownership, we can look for the rhetoric of the curmudgeon of Methuen > to scale new heights of invective;>( Well, WGBH has generally favored mainstream classical. When does WGBH's takeover of WCRB take effect? -- 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 Wed Nov 18 06:41:26 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 06:41:26 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup References: <20091118002917.95329905C49@ws1-5a.us4.outblaze.com>, <2607D42AA6924C9C906C3E99E42B4118@SatU205S5044> <4B038796.12911.558148@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: I think the "official" start date is December 1, but I suspect that the schedule will be in a state of flux for a minimum of two weeks thereafter. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Joseph Ross" To: "Dan.Strassberg" Cc: "boston Radio Interest" Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 12:35 AM Subject: Re: The new WGBH lineup > On 17 Nov 2009 at 21:59, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > >> As for the classical on 99.5, if the promos they have been running >> on >> TV are any indication of the music selection, I think Mr Glavin is >> going to be seriously disappointed. I've heard nothing but familar >> orchestral works--none of the opera or atonal crap that are so dear >> to >> his heart. If 99.5 under WGBH ownership stays mainstram classical >> as >> it was for several decades under both Charles River and Nassau >> ownership, we can look for the rhetoric of the curmudgeon of >> Methuen >> to scale new heights of invective;>( > > Well, WGBH has generally favored mainstream classical. > > When does WGBH's takeover of WCRB take effect? > > -- > 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 Wed Nov 18 10:23:09 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:23:09 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup Message-ID: <20091118152309.309BACD80FB@ws1-4a.us4.outblaze.com> The GBH schedule seems to say that some classical may run for a day or two past 12/1 on 89.7--perhaps with frequent mentions that "starting in a few days, tune to 99.5" and yes, the schedule would be in flux for a couple weeks. Globe article; the loss of folk and blues mentioned in a sidebar. Read the comments; complaints about losing these shows, worries about not being able to pick up 99.5 for many (check out the coverage map on the GBH site--south of Boston? Out of luck) http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/11/18/gbh_takeover_of_crb_alters_more_than_letters/ I made the following comment: "Looking ahead at the schedule page on WGBH's site, we see that several shows that WBUR carries will also be heard on WGBH. Why? Unnecessary duplication. The move to dump the folk and blues shows is sad and I hope they'll reconsider. The blues show was started in '78 by the late Mai Cramer. Both shows ran for many years and exposed great music to many. I have done a long running blues show on a North Shore station, but our 130 watts is nothing compared to WGBH's 100,000 watts. It's sad." (and in reply to one of the Globe article comments by someone who hoped Carlo would stay): "I believe Carlo may still be part of the new WCRB. On their sched page when you look up Dec 6 you will see Laura Carlo 5-9 am, Cathy Fuller 9a-1p, In Performance at 1, Ray Brown 2-6 etc" From donald_astelle@yahoo.com Wed Nov 18 11:11:56 2009 From: donald_astelle@yahoo.com (D. A.) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:11:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: The new WGBH lineup In-Reply-To: <20091118002917.95329905C49@ws1-5a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <712449.80508.qm@web110502.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> ...bring back Chris Lydon! --- On Tue, 11/17/09, Bob Nelson wrote: > From: Bob Nelson > Subject: The new WGBH lineup > To: "BostonRadio Mailing List" > Date: Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 7:29 PM > I was curious to see what would be > replacing the blues and folk shows on WGBH next month so I > used the search feature on > their schedule page. For the first Saturday in December, > they list This American Life at noon followed by On the > Media at 1, > Celtic Sojourn at 3, Prairie Home at 6, Says You! at 8, > then Jazz with Bob Parlocha at 10 pm. > > For weekdays I went to Dec 1 and 2 and found they still had > classical listed 9 am to 4 pm but by Friday Dec 4 you see > such things as blank spaces between 12-3 pm (still being > worked out?) and: The Takeaway at 9 am, Diane Rehm at 10am, > Fresh Air at 2 pm, and The World at 3 pm. The World also > airs a bit later, I think. Eli P. noted that there's some > duplication with WBUR. > > So, cost-cutting by getting rid of some local hosts...and > other changes, the biggest of course being the migration of > classical to 99.5. An effort (facebook group, etc.) to try > to change their minds about losing the folk and blues > shows is underway but we don't know if it will succeed. > From dan.strassberg@att.net Wed Nov 18 11:52:02 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 11:52:02 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup References: <712449.80508.qm@web110502.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2D260654E94F4313A856F82E8785F5B3@SatU205S5044> ----- Original Message ----- From: "D. A." To: "Bob Nelson" Cc: "BRI" Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 11:11 AM Subject: Re: The new WGBH lineup > > ...bring back Chris Lydon! > > Good host--if you are into his pompous presentation. But from what I've heard, not a very good person. The way I heard it, he took U Mass Lowell for a very expensive ride a few years back and delivered just about nothing at all. Now, l'affair WBUR preceded l'affair WUML (and, I believe, followed by a number of years l'affair WGBH-TV). Nevertheless, even though I was never a great fan of Jane Christo, Lydon apparently met his match in her--and got what he deserved (a fully escorted trip to the parking lot and a heads up about not letting the door hit him in the back). Any station that wants him as talent had better be fully aware of his history and management should conduct itself accordingly. He apparently can be very charming, but don't let the charm lull you into dropping your guard. From raccoonradio@mail.com Wed Nov 18 12:14:12 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:14:12 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup Message-ID: <20091118171412.3A1EDCD80FB@ws1-4a.us4.outblaze.com> Dan wrote: >>The way I heard it, he took U Mass Lowell for a very expensive ride a few years back and delivered just about nothing at all... Lydon apparently met his match in (Christo)--and got what he deserved (a fully escorted trip to the parking lot and a heads up about not letting the door hit him in the back). Interesting! btw since WGBH/WCRB is depending on listener contributions, an interesting study has come out about NPR/public/jazz, etc. listeners. In terms of average age, this study (mentioned in the Taylor-on-radio-info.com email newsletter) says that the average age of various public radio categories is skewing older--and with many of these people either retired or soon to retire, they may not be as willing or able to contribute anymore. "The Aging Audience" was Walrus research says the average age of NPR News listeners is 46 to 52 >> The percentage of those employed is getting smaller. (?For NPR News station listeners, retirement is top of mind.?) For jazz, the average is 45 to 55 and for classical, 56 to 65 The study also says that NPR News listeners are more loyal than NPR jazz listeners are. One wonders if WGBH feels it's better to use 89.7 to appeal to the slightly younger News listeners who may be more willing to contribute. Get rid of classical, put it on 99.5, and hope they can get enough contributors there...do cost-cutting, move studios to Guest St., etc. If the study is accurate, WGBH must be feeling that the money is in slightly younger people than the older, more likely to be retired folks. From kc1ih@mac.com Wed Nov 18 13:22:02 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:22:02 -0500 Subject: Christmas music In-Reply-To: <4B038795.14613.55808C@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <498041.36375.qm@web30104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4B038795.14613.55808C@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <0KTB000LKHOFFS70@asmtp012.mac.com> At 12:35 AM 11/18/2009, A. Joseph Ross wrote: >On 15 Nov 2009 at 11:12, Robert Paine wrote: > > > noon or 6 p.m. of the 24th - all holiday music. > > I use the term "holiday" because I'd include Hanukkah music in the > > mix. And, Kwanzaa may or may not have its own music. I figure, > > holidays are holidays, and it's interesting to have three occur at the > > same time of the year. > >But Hanukkah this year ends on the 19th. > I appreciate that someone is trying to be inclusive, even if it's after the fact. BTW, SiriusXM is doing Radio Channukah again this year, it can also be heard on DirecTV and Dish Network (on the channel that's currently "Escape"). Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From kc1ih@mac.com Wed Nov 18 13:24:59 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:24:59 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup In-Reply-To: <4B038796.12911.558148@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <20091118002917.95329905C49@ws1-5a.us4.outblaze.com> <2607D42AA6924C9C906C3E99E42B4118@SatU205S5044> <4B038796.12911.558148@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <0KTB000TVHTCFS70@asmtp012.mac.com> At 12:35 AM 11/18/2009, A. Joseph Ross wrote: >Well, WGBH has generally favored mainstream classical. > >When does WGBH's takeover of WCRB take effect? AFAIK, it's supposed to be December 1. There's still no word as to if the more "serious" classical music will remain on WGBH-HD. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From kc1ih@mac.com Wed Nov 18 13:37:25 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:37:25 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup In-Reply-To: <712449.80508.qm@web110502.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <20091118002917.95329905C49@ws1-5a.us4.outblaze.com> <712449.80508.qm@web110502.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0KTB003JSIEA2O60@asmtp011.mac.com> At 11:11 AM 11/18/2009, D. A. wrote: > ...bring back Chris Lydon! > > Please don't! I've always found his style to be too argumentative for my tastes. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From kc1ih@mac.com Wed Nov 18 13:41:19 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:41:19 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup In-Reply-To: <20091118171412.3A1EDCD80FB@ws1-4a.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20091118171412.3A1EDCD80FB@ws1-4a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <0KTB00L0KIKMKY20@asmtp015.mac.com> At 12:14 PM 11/18/2009, Bob Nelson wrote: >For jazz, the average is 45 to 55 and for classical, 56 to 65 > >The study also says that NPR News listeners are more loyal than NPR >jazz listeners are. >One wonders if WGBH feels it's better to use 89.7 to appeal to the >slightly younger News listeners who may be more willing >to contribute. Get rid of classical, put it on 99.5, and hope they >can get enough contributors there...do cost-cutting, >move studios to Guest St., etc. > >If the study is accurate, WGBH must be feeling that the money is in >slightly younger people than the older, more likely to >be retired folks. Yea, basing a station's programming on a single study is surely the way to go (not!). Look at what happened when WUMB tried just that. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From mike@miscon.net Wed Nov 18 13:45:42 2009 From: mike@miscon.net (mike@miscon.net) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:45:42 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: The new WGBH lineup In-Reply-To: <0KTB00L0KIKMKY20@asmtp015.mac.com> References: <20091118171412.3A1EDCD80FB@ws1-4a.us4.outblaze.com> <0KTB00L0KIKMKY20@asmtp015.mac.com> Message-ID: <.146.115.109.181.1258569942.squirrel@mail.miscon.net> While I am employed by The WGBH Educational Foundation, the views expressed here are my own, and do not necessarily reflect the management of that august institution. It is kind of weird that I used to work at 99.5fm when it was WSSH, and now it’s part of my broadcast career once again. I will have to break out the ol’ “Easy Favorites of Yesterday and Today” mug for kicks, on December 1st. As a “radio guy” - and listener - I am disappointed that a decision has been made to replace two locally produced programs (blues and folk) on 89.7 with nationally produced and syndicated programs. I have already expressed this to some people at management at WGBH, so if they’re reading this, it is not news to them that I feel this way. However, considering the frequency of changes in commercial radio formats, ownership changes, and the re-staffing that can take place after a bad book or two, it’s been about 13 years since WGBH has made any significant programming modifications (I’m referring here to “The World”). I am excited about the possibilities that the WCRB acquisition may provide, especially for more locally produced programming, for WGBH. As many of you have already noted, the WGBH broadcast schedule is in a state of flux, and I’m sure it will be for some time. (I have no inside information to share, sorry!) It will certainly be interesting to see what emerges… and I suppose this could be the chance for people to pitch that “better” program they’ve always wanted to produce. Mike From dan.strassberg@att.net Wed Nov 18 13:57:07 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:57:07 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup References: <20091118171412.3A1EDCD80FB@ws1-4a.us4.outblaze.com> <0KTB00L0KIKMKY20@asmtp015.mac.com> Message-ID: Moreover, the members of the largely affluent classical audience may well have more discretionary income, on average, as retrees than they had when they were regularly employed. And don't forget the bequests via wills and trusts. Not a good time to incur the wrath of well-to-do octogenarians who had been planning million-dollar gifts to your station when they depart this mortal coil. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Weil" To: "BRI" Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:41 PM Subject: Re: The new WGBH lineup > At 12:14 PM 11/18/2009, Bob Nelson wrote: > >> >>If the study is accurate, WGBH must be feeling that the money is in >>slightly younger people than the older, more likely to >>be retired folks. > > Yea, basing a station's programming on a single study is surely the > way to go (not!). Look at what happened when WUMB tried just that. > > > Larry Weil > Lake Wobegone, NH From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Wed Nov 18 10:11:09 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:11:09 -0500 Subject: WHDH/WCVB switchover, 1972 Message-ID: <20091118101109.lsvkq0cgbisgkook@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Curious about something . . . How many staff people at the old WHDH-TV signed contracts with Boston Broadcasters and moved over to WCVB when it went on the air? I wasn't in central Mass. at the time of the switch. I do know that Ken Vahey, Don Gillis and Frank Avruch were among those who made the transition. -Doug From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Wed Nov 18 10:48:24 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:48:24 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup Message-ID: <20091118104824.ln69k2vaiwe8sk0k@webmail.myfairpoint.net> We up heah in Maine still have questions about what's going to happen with the W-BACH stations once WCRB is transitioned from Nassau to WGBH. The Maine stations and WCRB "share staff", which is to say that much of W-BACH's programming is (it would seem) done at the WCRB studio with WCRB hosts: Ray Brown, Listo Fisher, et.al. Does anyone know whether they will continue with the Maine network? -Doug Quoting Bob Nelson : > The GBH schedule seems to say that some classical may run for a day > or two past > 12/1 on 89.7--perhaps with frequent mentions > that "starting in a few days, tune to 99.5" and yes, the schedule would be in > flux for a couple weeks. > > Globe article; the loss of folk and blues mentioned in a sidebar. Read the > comments; complaints about losing these shows, worries about not > being able to > pick up 99.5 for many (check out the coverage map on the GBH site--south of > Boston? Out of luck) > > http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/11/18/gbh_takeover_of_crb_alters_more_than_letters/ > > I made the following comment: > > "Looking ahead at the schedule page on WGBH's site, we see that several shows > that WBUR carries will also be heard on WGBH. Why? Unnecessary > duplication. The > move to dump the folk and blues shows is sad and I hope they'll > reconsider. The > blues show was started in '78 by the late Mai Cramer. Both shows ran for many > years and exposed great music to many. I have done a long running > blues show on > a North Shore station, but our 130 watts is nothing compared to > WGBH's 100,000 > watts. It's sad." > > (and in reply to one of the Globe article comments by someone who hoped Carlo > would stay): > "I believe Carlo may still be part of the new WCRB. On their sched > page when you > look up Dec 6 you will see Laura Carlo 5-9 am, Cathy Fuller 9a-1p, In > Performance at 1, Ray Brown 2-6 etc" > > > From raccoonradio@mail.com Wed Nov 18 14:19:15 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:19:15 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup Message-ID: <20091118191915.894C983985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> In that case, not wise to shift to a less powerful, less centrally located frequency >>Not a good time to incur the wrath of well-to-do octogenarians who had been planning million-dollar gifts to your station when they depart this mortal coil. And I'm not suggesting this single study had anything to do with the decision, but it just points out some interesting facts. From friedbagels@gmail.com Wed Nov 18 13:08:05 2009 From: friedbagels@gmail.com (Aaron Read) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:08:05 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup Message-ID: <4B043805.6070704@gmail.com> >> Good host--if you are into his pompous presentation. But from what >> I've heard, not a very good person. The way I heard it, he took U >> Mass Lowell for a very expensive ride a few years back and delivered >> just about nothing at all. >> Before you attack a man's character, you ought to know all the relevant details. More history of WUML is needed to understand Chris's involvement with them. Yes Chris has an ego and yes, it's pretty big. Of course he does: he's a talk show host. You can't survive that kind of job unless you've got a big ego, much less succeed at it. But he didn't take UML for a ride: he just sat in the limo that the UML administration hired for him. In 2002-03, UMass Chancellor William Hogan charged all the UMass campuses to find ways to better utilize their communications outlets. This wasn't exclusive to their radio stations, but WUML was considered "low hanging fruit" because of it's stereotypical "college radio" format, facilities, and style of management. Not to mention it's "college radio" programming and audience, which were both "niche", to put it kindly. With that political backing, the director of Public Affairs at UMass Lowell, Lou DiNatale, really had a liking for the idea that WUML (then WJUL) could be the WBUR for Merrimack Valley; powerful, lots of listeners, politically relevant, award-winning and (let's not forget) fiscally self-sufficient (if not turning a little profit). To that end, they embarked on plans for three major initiatives: one was to eventually get the Lowell Spinners baseball games on WUML, one was to launch a morning news show in partnership with the Lowell Sun newspaper, and one was to provide a home for Chris Lydon, who was looking for a home for the nascent "Radio Open Source". WUML provided substantial funding because the idea was that ROS would start out being produced at WGBH but eventually would move up to UMass Lowell's campus into new studios that were slated for construction. Chris would teach a few classes in the "visiting lecturer" style, and they'd produce a Merrimack-Valley-focused version of ROS for Friday afternoons, using a lot of students for help. All this would be the cornerstone of a major communications curriculum initiative on UMass Lowell's part. Viewed in that light, having Chris was a stroke of genius because he brought substantial star power and credibility to a college that didn't have either when it came to communications. Alas, the whole thing never happened because, and this is my own armchair quarterbacking here, UMass Lowell made a classic error in college radio: they tried to have it both ways. Keep the students involved so you can still say it's a student activity, but exclude them from any real power or decisions. This NEVER works, and the result was predictable: the students out-and-out revolted. Now, to be fair, the students fought very dirty and did things I thought were wholly inappropriate...and guaranteed that they would never be taken seriously by the administration...but given how UMass Lowell approached this whole thing, I'm not surprised they acted they way they did. Eventually the political fallout got pretty big, and - more importantly - Jack Wilson came in as the new President of UMass Lowell and he had no real desire to continue this fight, nor did he have the money to pursue the big, fancy, communications curriculum idea anymore. So he ended the fiscal support of Radio Open Source (and, later, of the Lowell Sunrise show...which the financially-shaky Lowell Sun had long since backed out of themselves). WUML eventually went back to the way it had been (a prototypical college radio station) and Radio Open Source was left in a bind. Without their main source of funding, potential affiliates shunned the show. A quarter-million-dollar MacArthur grant was achieved, but that only covers about 3-4 months of a major, national NPR show's production costs. Eventually it all just imploded under the costs and ROS became a podcast-only...although they are just now gradually re-purposing the podcasts into radio-friendly shows on PRX (I just started emailing them last week about that for WEOS). Maybe ROS could've cut costs and survived longer as a radio show but knowing what I know of the details...which is quite a lot, but not everything...I doubt it would've worked in the end. Producing quality radio is expensive, y'know? Personally, I don't think Chris *wants* to be a radio talk show host anymore. To draw on the immortal words of Murtaugh from Lethal Weapon: he's too old for that sh*t. It's a lot of work and he's already re-invented himself three times now. Plus, I know Chris and I know he believes passionately that web media, not radio, is the future. I'm sure he'll be happy to have broadcast outlets that will, in effect, promote his web venture, but he's not interested in being a radio show first, and web outlet second. He wants it the other way around. And there is the practical angle: WBUR, obviously, won't touch him after the fallout from him and Jane back in 2001, and they're happy with Tom Ashbrook as host of OnPoint anyways. (for the record, I'm the first to admit that neither side was "innocent" in that debacle) WGBH won't have Radio Open Source as a daily show, not after Lydon's stints as ROS host and as TV anchor. But I could see WGBH airing the new weekly version, especially since it wouldn't mean any direct employment...in this go-around, having Lydon on their airwaves is no different than having any other nationally-syndicated show on the airwaves; there's no inherent downside there. Now, all that said, I'd like to say a little on WGBH's proposed schedule, too. There are ample studies that say that duplication of NPR programming can (and often does) lead to more overall listeners for BOTH stations. So don't assume that just because WGBH airs a show that WBUR also airs that it's automatically a bad thing. And airing a show at a different time can attract a COMPLETELY different audience. At WEOS we got a lot of complaints when we moved Fresh Air from 12n-1pm to 1pm-2pm. Why? It was because lots of people listened to Terry during their lunch breaks. (if I could, I'd move it back, but it was the only way to "fix" our schedule when News & Notes ended earlier this year) Also, two major things worth noting: Whad'ya Know hasn't had a Boston outlet in years (honestly, I didn't think they'd had one ever) and it's one of the biggest markets that they don't have. So this is a major coup for them. The main WYK show is live from 11am - 1pm ET on Saturdays and you can't air just one hour of it; there's just one break after the first hour and it floats so there's no way to realistically take one hour. HOWEVER, WYK also offers a "WYK Radio Hour" which is a separate show done in the same style, but is not distributed live and is, of course, just one hour long. FWIW, Diane Rehm currently airs on WBUR in a reciprocation deal they have with WAMU for OnPoint; each airs the other's show later at night (I think 9pm). I wonder if this means WAMU will eventually drop OnPoint since WGBH will have it live? It's a possibility since Talk of the Nation doesn't have a DC affiliate (the irony, eh?) and in theory WAMU could move Tell Me More to a later hour and at least air one hour of TOTN...although given the demographics of both shows, and of DC, that could be a politically sensitive move. And concordantly, one wonders what would happen to Diane Rehm on WBUR at 10pm? More importantly to Boston, it will be VERY interesting to see what happens to OnPoint's ratings locally with it going up against Diane Rehm from 10am-12n. A lot of people can't stand Rehm's voice because of her spasmodic dysphonia, but she is a VERY smart interviewer...and the other guest hosts, like Susan Page, are generally pretty good, too. Rehm's show skews a lot more towards Washington and international politics than OnPoint does, something Boston hasn't had much of before, either. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Aaron Read | Finger Lakes Public Radio friedbagels@gmail.com | General Manager (WEOS & WHWS-LP) Geneva, NY 14456 | www.weos.org / www.whws.fm From dan.strassberg@att.net Wed Nov 18 14:41:00 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:41:00 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup References: <20091118191915.894C983985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: Wood Hill is not a great spot to launch a signal aimed at, say, Hingham, but it's probably OK for all those other rich towns whose names start with W: Winchester, Weston, Wayland, Wellesley, Wexington, Wincoln.... no, wait! (And it's probably better than Great Blue Hill for reaching places like Groton and Harvard--the town, not the university). ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Nelson" To: "Dan.Strassberg" ; "BRI" ; "Larry Weil" Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 2:19 PM Subject: Re: The new WGBH lineup In that case, not wise to shift to a less powerful, less centrally located frequency >>Not a good time to incur the wrath of well-to-do octogenarians who had been planning million-dollar gifts to your station when they depart this mortal coil. And I'm not suggesting this single study had anything to do with the decision, but it just points out some interesting facts. From dan.strassberg@att.net Wed Nov 18 14:57:14 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:57:14 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup References: <4B043805.6070704@gmail.com> Message-ID: <85A56BEE229248C2B62FC0076E49A5F8@SatU205S5044> I figured there was another side to the story and I should have said as much, but I did not _know_ that there was another side (which is not an excuse for failing to say that I guessed there was another side--there almost always are at least two sides in such situations). Well, now I know the other side and it makes for very interesting reading. Thanks, Aaron! ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Aaron Read" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:08 PM Subject: The new WGBH lineup > > Before you attack a man's character, you ought to know all the > relevant details. More history of WUML is needed to understand > Chris's involvement with them. > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Aaron Read | Finger Lakes Public Radio > friedbagels@gmail.com | General Manager (WEOS & WHWS-LP) > Geneva, NY 14456 | www.weos.org / www.whws.fm From wollman@bimajority.org Wed Nov 18 17:33:25 2009 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:33:25 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup In-Reply-To: References: <20091118191915.894C983985@ws1-2a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <19204.30261.728422.793824@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Wood Hill is not a great spot to launch a signal aimed at, say, > Hingham, but it's probably OK for all those other rich towns whose > names start with W: Winchester, Weston, Wayland, Wellesley, Wexington, > Wincoln.... no, wait! (And it's probably better than Great Blue Hill > for reaching places like Groton and Harvard--the town, not the > university). It's better than Great Blue Hill for reaching places like Framingham! Yes, we get a better 99.5 signal in Framingham than 89.7, thanks to that line of seven ridges just to the east. (My dentist was so relieved to hear that 99.5 would be staying classical, as it's one of the few stations she can get in the office that is acceptable for all patients.) -GAWollman From lglavin@mail.com Wed Nov 18 15:22:37 2009 From: lglavin@mail.com (lglavin@mail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:22:37 -0500 Subject: The new WGBH lineup In-Reply-To: <2607D42AA6924C9C906C3E99E42B4118@SatU205S5044> References: <20091118002917.95329905C49@ws1-5a.us4.outblaze.com> <2607D42AA6924C9C906C3E99E42B4118@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <8CC36A400321946-F28-26DE@web-mmc-d09.sysops.aol.com> >-----Original Message----- >From: Dan.Strassberg >To: Bob Nelson ; BostonRadio Mailing List >Sent: Tue, Nov 17, 2009 9:59 pm >Subject: Re: The new WGBH lineup >As for the classical on 99.5, if the promos they have been running on >TV are any indication of the music selection, I think Mr Glavin is >going to be seriously disappointed. I've heard nothing but familar >orchestral works--none of the opera or atonal crap that are so dear to >his heart. If 99.5 under WGBH ownership stays mainstram classical as >it was for several decades under both Charles River and Nassau >ownership, we can look for the rhetoric of the curmudgeon of Methuen >to scale new heights of invective;>( >----- Once again, Mr. Strassberg has imputed an opinion to me that I have never stated or even implied and have denied several times after a DS post. The timing is interesting: I've had a busy early fall concert-going season that has encompassed one-half of the complete Beethoven string quartets of Beethoven, operas by such avant-garde composers as Handel and Rossini, and on this coming Sunday I expect to go to an all-choral concert of music by Mendelssohn. But, I have to admit I did in fact go to a performance of a truly atonal work, at the South Mountain Concerts in Pittsfield over the Columbus Day weekend...the "Dissonance" Quartet by that despised, room-clearing composer Mozart. Thanks to Wikipedia, it's possible to display the opening passage of the piece here: http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/String_Quartet_No._19_(Mozart) Observe: there is no key signature in music example 1, the opening of the first movement. Technically, that would usually mean C-major (another possibility A-minor) a key with no sharps or flats, unless indicated by markings called 'accidentals'...and that's what actually happens. The mnenomic for the treble or G-cleft lines is Every Good Boy Does Fine, and the First Violin's fourth note is an F-sharp and the ninth note is D-flat. The second violin's very first note is an E-flat leading to a C-sharp art the start of the second measure,. The mnenomic for bass-clef instruments is Great Big Dogs From Africa; thus the 'C' that the 'cello plays is on the second space and is played natural for two measures. Violas have their own clef with middle C on the third line, so the first note is an A-flat as the Wikipedia article says. I know of examples by Haydn and Beethoven where they depart from expected places for instruments and singers to place themselves, and thus could also be described as 'atonal'. And don't get me started on Wagner! All of this is to let you know (to paraphrase 'Hamlet') that there's a lot more outside-the-box music that's much-beloved and frequently-performed than is dreamt of in your philosopy. From kvahey@comcast.net Wed Nov 18 17:35:15 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:35:15 -0600 Subject: WHDH/WCVB switchover, 1972 In-Reply-To: <20091118101109.lsvkq0cgbisgkook@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091118101109.lsvkq0cgbisgkook@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: <4fc429770911181435l273f5b1fx8485a63fa246212d@mail.gmail.com> Pretty much all the front line on-air talent, and 90 percent of union techs went from WHDH-TV to WCVB. Weatherman Bob Copeland left WHDH early when his contract was up and signed with BBI and wound up doing mornings after a year or two when CVB first went with Bob Ryan (now at WRC) and then Dick Albert. WCVB however hired very few of the WHDH reporting staff deciding to go with new blood. Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 9:11 AM, wrote: Curious about something . . . How many staff people at the old WHDH-TV signed contracts with Boston Broadcasters and moved over to WCVB when it went on the air? I wasn't in central Mass. at the time of the switch. I do know that Ken Vahey, Don Gillis and Frank Avruch were among those who made the transition. -Doug From mike@miscon.net Wed Nov 18 17:36:57 2009 From: mike@miscon.net (mike@miscon.net) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:36:57 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: an apology In-Reply-To: References: <20091118171412.3A1EDCD80FB@ws1-4a.us4.outblaze.com><0KTB00L0KIKMKY20@asmtp015.mac.com> <.146.115.109.181.1258569942.squirrel@mail.miscon.net> Message-ID: <.146.115.109.181.1258583817.squirrel@mail.miscon.net> My apologies for the formatting in my last post to this list. My comments were trivial and did not bring any new light on the subject at hand, and therefore do not bear repeating. I will try to be more considerate of formatting in the future. Mike From radiojunkie3@yahoo.com Wed Nov 18 17:52:08 2009 From: radiojunkie3@yahoo.com (Peter Q. George) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:52:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: WHDH/WCVB switchover, 1972 In-Reply-To: <20091118101109.lsvkq0cgbisgkook@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: <579816.93127.qm@web50805.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Virtually everyone from WHDH-TV (Channel 5) moved over to WCVB-TV on Sunday, March 19, 1972. A few people from the old Channel 5 stuck around for a few months to help in the transition to breakdown the old facility. For the most part, by the beginning of 1973, the entire crew had made the move to Needham. WHDH-TV left an excellent legacy with great people. WCVB-TV did not want to break apart a great team from the WHDH-TV staff, so about 90% of the WHDH-TV crew made the transition to WCVB-TV. It didn't hurt to be in the same local union, either. Peter Q. George (K1XRB) Whitman, Massachusetts "Scanning the bands since 1967" radiojunkie3@yahoo.com *********************************************************** --- On Wed, 11/18/09, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: > From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net > Subject: WHDH/WCVB switchover, 1972 > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 10:11 AM > Curious about something . . . How > many staff people at the old WHDH-TV signed contracts with > Boston Broadcasters and moved over to WCVB when it went on > the air?? I wasn't in central Mass. at the time of the > switch.? I do know that Ken Vahey, Don Gillis and Frank > Avruch were among those who made the transition.? > > -Doug > > > From kvahey@comcast.net Wed Nov 18 20:13:31 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:13:31 -0600 Subject: WTAG-TV? Message-ID: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> Does anyone here know how close WTAG-TV channel 5 ever got to actually going on the air? I understand they had the license in hand and mailed it back to the FCC. Did they ever transmit a test pattern? If any of this is true then the T&G may have pulled one of the all time blunders. I can confirm they sold WTAG-FM on the cheap in the early 60's and it became WSRS. From kvahey@comcast.net Wed Nov 18 21:47:44 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:47:44 -0600 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <049701ca68be$4354b420$c9fe1c60$@com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> <049701ca68be$4354b420$c9fe1c60$@com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911181847u302afed1j8eb6093ed681f50c@mail.gmail.com> On 11/18/09, Gary's Ice Cream wrote: > Years ago I applied for a job a WSRS...when I had my interview with the PD > he told me the story of the building - it had been built for TV...but he > said that the license from the FCC and the cancellation letter from T&G > crossed in the mail. > > > > -----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, November 18, 2009 8:14 PM > To: (newsgroup) Boston-Radio-Interest > Subject: WTAG-TV? > > Does anyone here know how close WTAG-TV channel 5 ever got to actually > going on the air? > > I understand they had the license in hand and mailed it back to the FCC. > > Did they ever transmit a test pattern? > > If any of this is true then the T&G may have pulled one of the all > time blunders. I can confirm they sold WTAG-FM on the cheap in the > early 60's and it became WSRS. > > From kvahey@comcast.net Wed Nov 18 21:48:55 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:48:55 -0600 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911181847u302afed1j8eb6093ed681f50c@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> <049701ca68be$4354b420$c9fe1c60$@com> <4fc429770911181847u302afed1j8eb6093ed681f50c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com> You really have to wonder what on earth the T&G management were thinking. Had they signed on they most likely would have been DuMont or ABC (or both) and it would have put a decent signal into Boston and Providence. Then would WMUR-TV even exist? We are not talking about a shaky UHF investment...Channel 5 would have been a license to print money. Friends who grew up in Worcester tell me the 'ruling families' of the city didn't want progress. They fought to keep the Mass Pike away from the city and how did that work out? They built an airport that is impossible to get to and other weird things. From cdsull502@aol.com Wed Nov 18 22:17:06 2009 From: cdsull502@aol.com (cdsull502) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:17:06 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911181847u302afed1j8eb6093ed681f50c@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com>, <049701ca68be$4354b420$c9fe1c60$@com>, <4fc429770911181847u302afed1j8eb6093ed681f50c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <27968997.60e1.46f2.8c3d.bded69ac0b95@aol.com> What were they thinking? You didn't have to be a genius then to know that having a VHF TV license in the early 50's was a license to print money. The ABC affiliation for Boston and Providence would have been available to them, I would think. I wonder why they built a building and tower presumably, and then walked away from it. Chris Sullivan CdSull502@aol.com In a message dated 11/18/09 21:49:13 Eastern Standard Time, kvahey@comcast.net writes: On 11/18/09, Gary's Ice Cream wrote: > Years ago I applied for a job a WSRS...when I had my interview with the PD > he told me the story of the building - it had been built for TV...but he > said that the license from the FCC and the cancellation letter from T&G > crossed in the mail. > > > > -----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, November 18, 2009 8:14 PM > To: (newsgroup) Boston-Radio-Interest > Subject: WTAG-TV? > > Does anyone here know how close WTAG-TV channel 5 ever got to actually > going on the air? > > I understand they had the license in hand and mailed it back to the FCC. > > Did they ever transmit a test pattern? > > If any of this is true then the T&G may have pulled one of the all > time blunders. I can confirm they sold WTAG-FM on the cheap in the > early 60's and it became WSRS. > > From dan.strassberg@att.net Wed Nov 18 21:43:15 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:43:15 -0500 Subject: With WAMG gone, WLS comes in like it did back in the day Message-ID: <243AA48AD386495FA84CDB1133C12199@DansCpq6515b> Anyone else notice how well WLS comes in? Loud and clear with little fading on many nights--as good as 20-30 years ago. Did they replace the old ground radials a couple years ago (either before ABC sold its stations or before Citadel ran out of money)??? Unlike the other three Chicago ex-IAs, WLS is located well south of the Loop. WLS's location must have better ground conductivity than WSCR, WGN, or WBBM because the skywave is noticeably better here than those stations'. ----- Dan Strassberg eFax 1-707-215-6367 From kvahey@comcast.net Wed Nov 18 23:48:17 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:48:17 -0600 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <27968997.60e1.46f2.8c3d.bded69ac0b95@aol.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> <049701ca68be$4354b420$c9fe1c60$@com> <4fc429770911181847u302afed1j8eb6093ed681f50c@mail.gmail.com> <27968997.60e1.46f2.8c3d.bded69ac0b95@aol.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911182048u2a2201a8y820e206391a63ebf@mail.gmail.com> There has to be a part of the story nobody knows.... The T&G may have been owned by some stuffed shirts but they couldn't have been that braindead. WTAG-TV could most likely have joined NBC given the long relationship the AM station had with the network. Westinghouse would have screamed but WJAR-TV was the same distance from Boston. From joe@attorneyross.com Thu Nov 19 00:21:29 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:21:29 -0500 Subject: WHDH/WCVB switchover, 1972 In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911181435l273f5b1fx8485a63fa246212d@mail.gmail.com> References: <20091118101109.lsvkq0cgbisgkook@webmail.myfairpoint.net>, <4fc429770911181435l273f5b1fx8485a63fa246212d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B04D5D9.75.1987BF5@joe.attorneyross.com> On 18 Nov 2009 at 16:35, Kevin Vahey wrote: > Pretty much all the front line on-air talent, and 90 percent of union > techs went from WHDH-TV to WCVB. > > Weatherman Bob Copeland left WHDH early when his contract was up and > signed with BBI and wound up doing mornings after a year or two when > CVB first went with Bob Ryan (now at WRC) and then Dick Albert. > > WCVB however hired very few of the WHDH reporting staff deciding to go > with new blood. I seem to remember that John Henning moved over to WCVB. -- 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 Nov 19 00:21:32 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:21:32 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com>, <4fc429770911181847u302afed1j8eb6093ed681f50c@mail.gmail.com>, <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B04D5DC.22874.198851D@joe.attorneyross.com> On 18 Nov 2009 at 20:48, Kevin Vahey wrote: > Then would WMUR-TV even exist? Maybe or maybe not, but since WHDH-TV wouldn't have existed, the Herald Traveler would not have become so dependent on TV revenues. So perhaps if it hadn't gotten the channel 5 license, the Herald Traveler might still be in business. > We are not talking about a shaky UHF investment...Channel 5 would have > been a license to print money. As it was for the Herald Traveler. -- 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 Thu Nov 19 00:56:23 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:56:23 -0600 Subject: WHDH/WCVB switchover, 1972 In-Reply-To: <4B04D5D9.75.1987BF5@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <20091118101109.lsvkq0cgbisgkook@webmail.myfairpoint.net> <4fc429770911181435l273f5b1fx8485a63fa246212d@mail.gmail.com> <4B04D5D9.75.1987BF5@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911182156y7073095cn8e5a01fcd66bb978@mail.gmail.com> Henning was the weekend anchor at both HDH and CVB. Bill Harrington and Chet Curtis made the move but others like Lesley Stahl and George Forsythe did not. CVB had people like Mike Taibbi, Arnold. Zenker and Natalie Jacobson waiting in Needham. I also think Arch McDonald was at CVB on day 1. Clark Booth would also arrive shortly. From kvahey@comcast.net Thu Nov 19 01:04:26 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:04:26 -0600 Subject: With WAMG gone, WLS comes in like it did back in the day In-Reply-To: <243AA48AD386495FA84CDB1133C12199@DansCpq6515b> References: <243AA48AD386495FA84CDB1133C12199@DansCpq6515b> Message-ID: <4fc429770911182204v7c81a8b3jbf4db22499d42e12@mail.gmail.com> My experience with Chicagoland stations in Boston were 670 no chance with WRKO 720 Could almost never lock it in as it was hammered by WOR and CKAC 780 very reliable 890 solid 1000 usually the strongest - being directional to the east gave it a bump On 11/18/09, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > Anyone else notice how well WLS comes in? Loud and clear with little fading > on many nights--as good as 20-30 years ago. Did they replace the old ground > radials a couple years ago (either before ABC sold its stations or before > Citadel ran out of money)??? Unlike the other three Chicago ex-IAs, WLS is > located well south of the Loop. WLS's location must have better ground > conductivity than WSCR, WGN, or WBBM because the skywave is noticeably > better here than those stations'. > > ----- > > Dan Strassberg > eFax 1-707-215-6367 > > From sid@wrko.com Wed Nov 18 21:34:14 2009 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:34:14 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC5529318D7D@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> "Does anyone here know how close WTAG-TV channel 5 ever got to actually going on the air? I understand they had the license in hand and mailed it back to the FCC. Did they ever transmit a test pattern? If any of this is true then the T&G may have pulled one of the all time blunders. I can confirm they sold WTAG-FM on the cheap in the early 60's and it became WSRS." I was the CE for WSRS from 1980 to 1983. The way it was explained to me by the old-timers on the WSRS staff was that the T&G never believed television would take off the way it did, and they did indeed turn in the license. I came across the original plans for the Paxton building, and there above the main entrance was the legend "WTAG-TV." As far as I'm aware they never even built the transmitting facility. While I was there WSRS had become a pretty consistent #1 station in the Worcester market, but a number of us heard the GM of WTAG (still owned by the T&G back then) state with a straight face that WSRS "was not a factor in the market." We all got a good laugh out of that one. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From paulranderson@charter.net Thu Nov 19 08:28:50 2009 From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 08:28:50 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> <049701ca68be$4354b420$c9fe1c60$@com> <4fc429770911181847u302afed1j8eb6093ed681f50c@mail.gmail.com> <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Nov 18, 2009, at 9:48 PM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > Then would WMUR-TV even exist? New Hampshire would have had to had a TV station somewhere. Even a VHF in Worcester wouldn't have served Manchester well. > Friends who grew up in Worcester tell me the 'ruling families' of the > city didn't want progress. They fought to keep the Mass Pike away from > the city and how did that work out? They built an airport that is > impossible to get to and other weird things. I wonder how Worcester would be different today if it had had a strong TV station all these years. The attention such a station would have brought to the city would have helped in so many ways. There's almost no coverage of Worcester or its surrounding towns today on TV as the city is inbetween Boston and Springfield. (Does WBZ-TV still have a studio in Worcester?) Although WSMW channel 27 was a decent independent in its day, Worcester is left with a Spanish-language station and a "religious" station run by out-of-towners. As far as the Mass Pike goes, wasn't the placement of the road outside Worcester some sort of political retaliation? I'm sure the story is convoluted. But remember, roads like I-90 were supposed to go _near_ cities, not through them, by design. But the lack of a good Pike connection to the southeast (such as Route 146 is today) and the lack of Channel 5 probably did hurt the city. Paul From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Thu Nov 19 10:06:05 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:06:05 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? Message-ID: <20091119100605.lddf2ny58wdckgco@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Did anyone make an effort to try to move Channel 5 to Worcester in the late '60s when it was apparent that the Herald Traveler might lose the license? -Doug Quoting Paul Anderson : > On Nov 18, 2009, at 9:48 PM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > > > Then would WMUR-TV even exist? > > New Hampshire would have had to had a TV station somewhere. Even a VHF in > Worcester wouldn't have served Manchester well. > > > Friends who grew up in Worcester tell me the 'ruling families' of the > > city didn't want progress. They fought to keep the Mass Pike away from > > the city and how did that work out? They built an airport that is > > impossible to get to and other weird things. > > I wonder how Worcester would be different today if it had had a strong TV > station all these years. The attention such a station would have > brought to the > city would have helped in so many ways. > > There's almost no coverage of Worcester or its surrounding towns > today on TV as > the city is inbetween Boston and Springfield. (Does WBZ-TV still > have a studio > in Worcester?) Although WSMW channel 27 was a decent independent in its day, > Worcester is left with a Spanish-language station and a "religious" > station run > by out-of-towners. > > As far as the Mass Pike goes, wasn't the placement of the road > outside Worcester > some sort of political retaliation? I'm sure the story is convoluted. But > remember, roads like I-90 were supposed to go _near_ cities, not > through them, > by design. But the lack of a good Pike connection to the southeast (such as > Route 146 is today) and the lack of Channel 5 probably did hurt the city. > > Paul > From outofthebusiness@gmail.com Thu Nov 19 05:48:28 2009 From: outofthebusiness@gmail.com (Bud Yacomb) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 05:48:28 -0500 Subject: WHDH/WCVB switchover Message-ID: The only strictly TV street reporters (without any anchor duties or radio assignments) I remember from WHDH-TV were Rosemarie Van Camp and Andy MacMillan, neither of whom ended up at WCVB. I think Van Camp ended up at Tufts and then other big time schools, and MacMillan was in Buffalo for a spell, but that's based on vague memory. At any rate, they were still working when Jaberwocky was a mere memory. From markwats@comcast.net Thu Nov 19 19:43:01 2009 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:43:01 -0500 Subject: Oprah Winfrey Show To End In 2011 Message-ID: Oprah Winfrey will announce on her Friday "Oprah" show that her talk show will end in 2011, which will be the show's 25th season. WCVB has aired "Oprah" as the lead in to it's 5PM news for several years, helping WCVB hold on to it's first place status among early evening newscasts, although I did see somewhere recently that "Judge Judy" which airs on WBZ had edged ahead of "Oprah" but couldn't hold the audience for it's 5 o'clock news. WMUR also airs the show as a lead in to it's 5PM news. Oprah's production company informed all the stations that carry the show of the impending announcement today so they would not be surprised by Oprah's comments on Friday. Even though we're less than 2 years from the final "Oprah", one has to wonder if the folks at Hearst are worried about seeing their longtime ratings stronghold and strong news lead in counting down the months & days till the final show. A link to a brief AP article from the Boston Globe's website: http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2009/11/19/winfrey_to_announce_friday_show_will_end_in_2011/ Mark Watson From joe@attorneyross.com Fri Nov 20 00:07:36 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:07:36 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com>, <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com>, Message-ID: <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> On 19 Nov 2009 at 8:28, Paul Anderson wrote: > As far as the Mass Pike goes, wasn't the placement of the road outside > Worcester some sort of political retaliation? I'm sure the story is > convoluted. But remember, roads like I-90 were supposed to go _near_ > cities, not through them, by design. But the lack of a good Pike > connection to the southeast (such as Route 146 is today) and the lack > of Channel 5 probably did hurt the city. I believe there were some major powers in the Legislature at the time who were from farther west. This may be why there are so many exits around the Springfield-Chicopee area. It may also be why there is I- 91 along the Connecticut River, but no similar north-south road in Worcester County. -- 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 Fri Nov 20 01:02:17 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:02:17 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com>, <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com>, <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <4B0630E9.8030305@fybush.com> A. Joseph Ross wrote: > I believe there were some major powers in the Legislature at the time > who were from farther west. This may be why there are so many exits > around the Springfield-Chicopee area. It may also be why there is I- > 91 along the Connecticut River, but no similar north-south road in > Worcester County. > The Connecticut River itself may also explain the existence of a north-south road - there were natural north-south trade and travel routes along the river going back to the 18th century, if not earlier. There was never really a comparable natural route north-south through hilly Worcester County. The 1920s-era system of New England regional road numbering designated "Route 12," which still runs south from NH through Worcester County and into Connecticut to this day, but it never spawned a north-south US route to match US 5 along the Connecticut River or US 1 along the coast. (And yes, route 8 through the Berkshires and route 10 through the Pioneer Valley are also still-extant remnants of the old New England routes, as is route 14 through central Mass. and eastern Connecticut.) From kc1ih@mac.com Fri Nov 20 01:15:05 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:15:05 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com> <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: At 12:07 AM -0500 11/20/09, A. Joseph Ross wrote: > It may also be why there is I- >91 along the Connecticut River, but no similar north-south road in >Worcester County. I-395/I-290/I-190 runs from the CT border to Leominister, so it's sorta the same thing, just doesn't go as far north. -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From scott@fybush.com Fri Nov 20 01:35:51 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:35:51 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com> <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <4B0638C7.7060204@fybush.com> Larry Weil wrote: > At 12:07 AM -0500 11/20/09, A. Joseph Ross wrote: >> It may also be why there is I- >> 91 along the Connecticut River, but no similar north-south road in >> Worcester County. > > I-395/I-290/I-190 runs from the CT border to Leominister, so it's sorta > the same thing, just doesn't go as far north. > It's more or less the routing of the old New England Route 12...and yes, most of it was a very late addition to the Interstate system. (I was incorrect earlier, by the way, in attributing MA 14/CT 14 to the old New England routes. Those numbers came along later. But other Mass. routes, including 28, do trace their history all the way back to the old New England routes.) s From sid@wrko.com Fri Nov 20 07:18:32 2009 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:18:32 -0700 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com>, <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com>, <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B2CDE8B@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> > As far as the Mass Pike goes, wasn't the placement of the road outside > Worcester some sort of political retaliation? I'm sure the story is > convoluted. But remember, roads like I-90 were supposed to go _near_ > cities, not through them, by design. But the lack of a good Pike > connection to the southeast (such as Route 146 is today) and the lack > of Channel 5 probably did hurt the city. The story, as I understand it, is that the PTW in Worcester at the time tried to tell Turnpike Authority chairman William F. Callahan where the Pike should go. As with Robert Moses in New York, no one ever told Callahan how and where to build roads, and his retaliation was to keep the Pike well south of Worcester. At the time the Turnpike Authority was created (1953), there was no Interstate Highway system, and even when it was created (1956), toll roads were specifically excluded from it, something that didn't change until many year after the original law was passed. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Fri Nov 20 10:02:35 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:02:35 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? Message-ID: <20091120100235.92w7id64694o040g@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Back in the late '70s when I-190 was being built, I was told that there had been plans for a four-lane highway between Leominster and Worcester (an expansion of Route 12, presumably) since 1943. One wonders why the delay. -Doug Quoting Scott Fybush : > Larry Weil wrote: > > At 12:07 AM -0500 11/20/09, A. Joseph Ross wrote: > >> It may also be why there is I- > >> 91 along the Connecticut River, but no similar north-south road in > >> Worcester County. > > > > I-395/I-290/I-190 runs from the CT border to Leominister, so it's sorta > > the same thing, just doesn't go as far north. > > > > It's more or less the routing of the old New England Route 12...and yes, > most of it was a very late addition to the Interstate system. > > (I was incorrect earlier, by the way, in attributing MA 14/CT 14 to the > old New England routes. Those numbers came along later. But other Mass. > routes, including 28, do trace their history all the way back to the old > New England routes.) > > s > From aerie.ma@comcast.net Fri Nov 20 10:14:35 2009 From: aerie.ma@comcast.net (Jim Hall) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:14:35 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <20091120100235.92w7id64694o040g@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091120100235.92w7id64694o040g@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: Someone once told me that the purpose of I-190/I-395 was to enable troops from Fort Devens to reach the nuclear submarine and coast guard bases in New London, CT rapidly in the event of a national emergency. You will notice some enormous shoulder areas on the portion of I-190 north of Worcester: supposedly those were to allow tanks or other large military vehicles a place to pull off the road. This may all be apocryphal, however. :) Back in the late '70s when I-190 was being built, I was told that there had been plans for a four-lane highway between Leominster and Worcester (an expansion of Route 12, presumably) since 1943. One wonders why the delay. -Doug From paulranderson@charter.net Fri Nov 20 10:27:40 2009 From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:27:40 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: References: <20091120100235.92w7id64694o040g@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: On Nov 20, 2009, at 10:14 AM, Jim Hall wrote: > You will notice some enormous shoulder areas on the portion of I-190 north of Worcester: > supposedly those were to allow tanks or other large military vehicles a place to pull off the road. Those areas are so that snow plowed from the road will, when melting, drain into culverts that keep the road runoff from ending up in the Wachusett Reservoir. Paul From kvahey@comcast.net Fri Nov 20 11:46:05 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:46:05 -0600 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B0630E9.8030305@fybush.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com> <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> <4B0630E9.8030305@fybush.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911200846h31ae1691rbaf6bc64ed84f1c0@mail.gmail.com> Worcester was a thriving radio market up until 30 years ago. WTAG, WORC, WNEB and WORC all did well. People forget that Worcester was the second largest city in all of New England. The city tried many things, such as the downtown mall that failed and the Centrum that worked for awhile. The airport was and is a disaster which is sad because in another location it could be as big as Providence or Manchester as a regional airport. The Turnpike by-passing Worcester didn't help and is similar to how Philadelphia suffered when the NJ Turnpike was built. To this day Philly drivers have no direct slam dunk route to NYC. Providence was perhaps worse off than Worcester but turned things around. Who knows what the NY Times will do with the T&G. I suspect they may fold it and publish a Central Mass edition of the Globe if they can't sell it. Had WTAG-TV launched you can only wonder what the landscape would be like today. If they had become a NBC affilate which given the strong relationship TAG had with NBC I suspect that as ownership rules changed NBC would have bought the station and when channel 4 became CBS in 1995, NBC would have made a move similar to what happened in San Jose-San Francisco. From marklaurence@mac.com Fri Nov 20 12:10:48 2009 From: marklaurence@mac.com (Mark Laurence) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:10:48 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911200846h31ae1691rbaf6bc64ed84f1c0@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com> <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> <4B0630E9.8030305@fybush.com> <4fc429770911200846h31ae1691rbaf6bc64ed84f1c0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B06CD98.5010901@mac.com> Kevin Vahey wrote: > Worcester was a thriving radio market up until 30 years ago. WTAG, > WORC, WNEB and WORC all did well. > WSRS, WXLO, WTAG, and WCRN are all focusing on Worcester (as much as any radio station focuses on its home market in 2009) along with "The Pike" and WORC-FM, so it's still got about as much local broadcasting as ever. > People forget that Worcester was the second largest city in all of New England. > AFAIK it still is. But Worcester's suburbs are much smaller than other metros in New England, and the eastern suburbs with the most population are all credited to Boston. So Worcester is pretty much tied with Providence in city population, but the Providence metro is about twice the size as metro Worcester. That's been the case since they started talking about metro areas. > Who knows what the NY Times will do with the T&G. I suspect they may > fold it and publish a Central Mass edition of the Globe if they can't > sell it. > Last I heard there was a local coalition of buyers led by the owners of Polar Beverages who were making a bid for the T&G. I don't think a Worcester edition of the Globe is going to happen, although they'd probably be smart to share more of their resources. > Had WTAG-TV launched you can only wonder what the landscape would be > like today. I guess that's like saying "if the Telecommunications act of 1996 hadn't passed, what would radio be like today?" WTAG-TV would have given Worcester much more prominence from the 60's through the 80's for sure, but in this decade you have to wonder if the impact of a local VHF station is anything like it used to be. It's likely that a Worcester channel 5 would have tried to move its real focus to Boston, like WAAF and channel 27. From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Fri Nov 20 12:32:57 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:32:57 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? Message-ID: <20091120123257.zyn94imgyh0go8o8@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Worcester was indeed a thriving radio market for many years. During the '60s, WORC and WAAB both had Top 40 formats and were hotly competitive; WNEB, the smallest of the bunch, held the CBS affiliation, and was oriented toward older listeners; and WTAG, the kingpin, was with NBC, had a full-service format, and a powerful regional signal that went well up into New Hampshire and Vermont. It was arguably one of the most prominent stations in New England, which adds to the mystery as to why it would pass in the TV license. As for the NBC affiliation, though WTAG was one of the first NBC affiliates, it left the network in 1943, if memory serves, to join CBS (formerly with WORC). It would have been during the time of its CBS affiliation that the station started building its TV studio. WTAG dropped CBS in the late fifties and was independent for several years before reaffiliating with NBC around 1966. It remained with the network through the Westwood One transition, returned to CBS in the early nineties, and is now with Fox. Dick Wright, the former GM of WTAG, got together with some his colleagues and tried to buy the station from the T&G before the newspaper was sold to the San Francisco Chronicle. Didn't happen, obviously. -Doug Quoting Kevin Vahey : > Worcester was a thriving radio market up until 30 years ago. WTAG, > WORC, WNEB and WORC all did well. > > People forget that Worcester was the second largest city in all of > New England. > > The city tried many things, such as the downtown mall that failed and > the Centrum that worked for awhile. The airport was and is a disaster > which is sad because in another location it could be as big as > Providence or Manchester as a regional airport. > > The Turnpike by-passing Worcester didn't help and is similar to how > Philadelphia suffered when the NJ Turnpike was built. To this day > Philly drivers have no direct slam dunk route to NYC. > > Providence was perhaps worse off than Worcester but turned things around. > > Who knows what the NY Times will do with the T&G. I suspect they may > fold it and publish a Central Mass edition of the Globe if they can't > sell it. > > Had WTAG-TV launched you can only wonder what the landscape would be > like today. If they had become a NBC affilate which given the strong > relationship TAG had with NBC I suspect that as ownership rules > changed NBC would have bought the station and when channel 4 became > CBS in 1995, NBC would have made a move similar to what happened in > San Jose-San Francisco. > From sid@wrko.com Fri Nov 20 13:00:15 2009 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 13:00:15 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B06CD98.5010901@mac.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com> <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> <4B0630E9.8030305@fybush.com> <4fc429770911200846h31ae1691rbaf6bc64ed84f1c0@mail.gmail.com> <4B06CD98.5010901@mac.com> Message-ID: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B2CE442@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> "> People forget that Worcester was the second largest city in all of New England. > AFAIK it still is." Not according to the 2000 census: Providence: 173,618 (118th among cities with 50,000+ population) Worcester: 172,648 (120th) Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From m_carney@yahoo.com Fri Nov 20 15:40:10 2009 From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:40:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <20091120123257.zyn94imgyh0go8o8@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091120123257.zyn94imgyh0go8o8@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: <954938.66338.qm@web53307.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Perhaps CBS had something to do with turing in the license? First, they were ambivalent about TV well into the 50s (especially after mechanical color was scrapped). Second, they had part ownership in the original channel 2 license in Boston. You have to think they were giving prospective affiates mixed messages. On the other hand no one was enamored with WNAC as an affiliate, so an alternative would have been nice. Maureen From dan.strassberg@att.net Fri Nov 20 16:11:28 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:11:28 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? References: <20091120123257.zyn94imgyh0go8o8@webmail.myfairpoint.net> <954938.66338.qm@web53307.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: CBS was the first applicant for a TV station in Boston that proposed a site in the Newton/Needham area. It was for WEEI-TV on Channel 5. It may or may not have been the first application for Channel 5 in Boston. If others had applied for Channel 5 in Boston before CBS, I don't know who they were or what transmitter sites they had proposed. I don't remember the date of the CBS app either, but my guess is around 1953 or '54. At the time, I believe, Channel 7 was in Medford, Channel 4 was in Allston, and Channel 2 was on Great Blue Hill. Also, at the time of the CBS app, I believe that George Storer either owned Channel 9 in Manchester or was trying to buy it. He wanted to move Channel 9 to a 1000+-ft tower that he proposed to build in Georgetown MA. I believe he lost interest in Georgetown and Channel 9 after it became clear that there would be three commercial VHF stations in Boston and that his proposed Channel 9, even if it retained Manchester as its CoL, would have a signal in Boston that was inferior to those of the other three commercial VHFs. Channel 9 would thus wind up without a network affiliation, which meant that, at best, it would be only marginally profitable. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Maureen Carney" To: ; "Boston Radio Group" Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 3:40 PM Subject: Re: WTAG-TV? > Perhaps CBS had something to do with turing in the license? First, > they were ambivalent about TV well into the 50s (especially after > mechanical color was scrapped). Second, they had part ownership in > the original channel 2 license in Boston. You have to think they > were giving prospective affiates mixed messages. On the other hand > no one was enamored with WNAC as an affiliate, so an alternative > would have been nice. > > Maureen > > > From torchia@technologist.com Fri Nov 20 05:11:06 2009 From: torchia@technologist.com (torchia@technologist.com) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:11:06 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B0638C7.7060204@fybush.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com> <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com> <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> <4B0638C7.7060204@fybush.com> Message-ID: <8CC37E0E8B74E4B-17C-4F8D@web-mmc-d03.sysops.aol.com> Having lived through the planning/construction of I-290. the original design of which was to replace all the east - west minor interstate and intrastate routes that has been previously mentioned on this blog. The original route was supposed to go from the Tpke exit at Sturbridge east through the back part of Spencer, (approx. where Rt. 49 is now) then north of Worcester, on eastward, connecting to 495 at approx. the same point it does now, but a little bit further north in Clinton. Fourteen term Congressman Harold Donohue wanted it to go through Worcester, hence the screwed up mess it has become over the years. Bud Torchia From jay_lavelle@earthlink.net Fri Nov 20 08:05:18 2009 From: jay_lavelle@earthlink.net (Jay Lavelle) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:05:18 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com>, <4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com>, <4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <4B06940E.2060604@earthlink.net> There are lots of legends around Worcester that it was the fault of Robert Stoddard, who ran Wyman-Gordon (a major defense contractor) and was a part-owner of the local newspaper (and WTAG). Stoddard was an arch conservative (he was one of the founders of the John Birch Society), who allegedly ran Worcester from the dining room of the Worcester Club. But a more likely reason might be topography given the convoluted path the Boston & Albany railroad took to get to the center of Worcester (the Pike follows the B&A main line for the most part). Its just a lot flatter going through Grafton, Millbury, and Auburn. Why it took 50 years for Rt 146 to be upgraded to a connector is another question. A. Joseph Ross wrote: > On 19 Nov 2009 at 8:28, Paul Anderson wrote: > > >> As far as the Mass Pike goes, wasn't the placement of the road outside >> Worcester some sort of political retaliation? I'm sure the story is >> convoluted. But remember, roads like I-90 were supposed to go _near_ >> cities, not through them, by design. But the lack of a good Pike >> connection to the southeast (such as Route 146 is today) and the lack >> of Channel 5 probably did hurt the city. >> > > I believe there were some major powers in the Legislature at the time > who were from farther west. This may be why there are so many exits > around the Springfield-Chicopee area. It may also be why there is I- > 91 along the Connecticut River, but no similar north-south road in > Worcester County. > > From lglavin@mail.com Fri Nov 20 14:08:24 2009 From: lglavin@mail.com (lglavin@mail.com) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:08:24 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B2CE442@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com><4fc429770911181848o79ed9191jc548efca15f78e34@mail.gmail.com><4B062418.24062.5228A7@joe.attorneyross.com> <4B0630E9.8030305@fybush.com><4fc429770911200846h31ae1691rbaf6bc64ed84f1c0@mail.gmail.com><4B06CD98.5010901@mac.com> <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B2CE442@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> Message-ID: <8CC382BF6445ACA-A80-594E@web-mmc-d18.sysops.aol.com> >-----Original Message----- >From: Sid Schweiger >Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org >.Sent: Fri, Nov 20, 2009 1:00 pm >Subject: RE: WTAG-TV? >"> People forget that Worcester was the second largest city in all of New ngland. AFAIK it still is." Not according to the 2000 census: Providence: 173,618 (118th among cities with 50,000+ population) Worcester: 172,648 (120th) Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 The population figures for "inside-the-city-limits" are on thing; however the METRO populations for Providence, RI and Springfield, MA were and are much larger than for for Worcester. That's why Providence ended up with let's say two-and-a-half V's and Springfield would up in the analog days with two U's that were commercially viable locally-oriented TV stations. = From dlh@donnahalper.com Fri Nov 20 17:26:31 2009 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:26:31 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <20091120123257.zyn94imgyh0go8o8@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091120123257.zyn94imgyh0go8o8@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: <20091120222644.D1FDD1B4076@relay24.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> At 12:32 PM 11/20/2009, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: >Worcester was indeed a thriving radio market for many years. During >the '60s, WORC and WAAB both had Top 40 formats and were hotly >competitive; WNEB, the smallest of the bunch, held the CBS >affiliation, and was oriented toward older listeners; and WTAG, the >kingpin, was with NBC, had a full-service format, and a powerful >regional signal that went well up into New Hampshire and >Vermont. It was arguably one of the most prominent stations in New >England, which adds to the mystery as to why it would pass in the TV license. I wonder if it's an urban legend that WTAG actually had a license in hand. I am not saying somebody at WTAG didn't think about it or even make some inquiries. But I am going through my files and I am checking who is on record (and who is reported) as applying for the Herald-Traveler's license. On 26 March 1963, the NY Times reported that a consortium of 15 businessmen, known as Charles River Civic Television Inc and led by WCRB's Theodore Jones (the group was chaired by Thomas D. Cabot), was trying to get the license. Another group mentioned in newspaper reports (Wall St. Journal, NY Times, Christian Science Monitor) as a potential licensee was the Greater Boston TV Company, but not much is said about it. And then, as we all know, there was Boston Broadcasters Inc. But of all the many names mentioned in these articles, none are associated with Worcester radio stations, as far as I can see. I'll keep looking. From marklaurence@mac.com Fri Nov 20 18:02:14 2009 From: marklaurence@mac.com (Mark Laurence) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:02:14 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <20091120222644.D1FDD1B4076@relay24.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> References: <20091120123257.zyn94imgyh0go8o8@webmail.myfairpoint.net> <20091120222644.D1FDD1B4076@relay24.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> Message-ID: <4B071FF6.5000104@mac.com> Donna Halper wrote: > At 12:32 PM 11/20/2009, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: >> Worcester was indeed a thriving radio market for many years. During >> the '60s, WORC and WAAB both had Top 40 formats and were hotly >> competitive; WNEB, the smallest of the bunch, held the CBS >> affiliation, and was oriented toward older listeners; and WTAG, the >> kingpin, was with NBC, had a full-service format, and a powerful >> regional signal that went well up into New Hampshire and Vermont. It >> was arguably one of the most prominent stations in New England, which >> adds to the mystery as to why it would pass in the TV license. > > I wonder if it's an urban legend that WTAG actually had a license in > hand. I am not saying somebody at WTAG didn't think about it or even > make some inquiries. But I am going through my files and I am checking > who is on record (and who is reported) as applying for the > Herald-Traveler's license. On 26 March 1963, the NY Times reported > that a consortium of 15 businessmen, known as Charles River Civic > Television Inc and led by WCRB's Theodore Jones (the group was chaired > by Thomas D. Cabot), was trying to get the license. Another group > mentioned in newspaper reports (Wall St. Journal, NY Times, Christian > Science Monitor) as a potential licensee was the Greater Boston TV > Company, but not much is said about it. And then, as we all know, > there was Boston Broadcasters Inc. But of all the many names > mentioned in these articles, none are associated with Worcester radio > stations, as far as I can see. I'll keep looking. 1963 was long after the alleged Worcester license turnback. I did an internship at WTAG in the 70's and I heard about this from long time employees who were probably at the scene when it happened. Sometime in the mid-50's, the powers-that-be decided it was too expensive and risky for their hugely successful newspaper and radio station business and they turned down the TV license. I heard they tore it up, but maybe they mailed it back. I know it sounds insane now, but this is a company that had been dumping money into one of the country's first FM stations for 15 years with nothing to show for it. WWOR was losing money on channel 14 (dying after only 3 years in 1955 in its first incarnation). I'm not sure but I think some other short-lived UHF station lived and died in Worcester in the 50's as well. In that climate, the T&G's judgment might not look totally crazy. From radiojunkie3@yahoo.com Fri Nov 20 21:00:50 2009 From: radiojunkie3@yahoo.com (Peter Q. George) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:00:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B071FF6.5000104@mac.com> Message-ID: <168250.85823.qm@web50804.mail.re2.yahoo.com> I'm not sure > but I think some other short-lived UHF station lived and > died in Worcester in the 50's as well. In that > climate, the T&G's judgment might not look totally > crazy. The other UHF station (which never came to the air) was WAAB-TV Channel 20 in Worcester. After seeing that Channel 14 (WWOR-TV) was loosing money hand-over-fist, they decided to let the WAAB-TV CP lapse. At that time, UHF's were losing money, except for those who were in UHF Islands (markets without a VHF station). And even then, it was at a minimal profit. Springfield was one of those rare markets. WWLP and WHYN-TV (Channels 22 and 40) had no other competitors until 1957 when WTIC-TV (Channel 3, now WFSB) signed on, eventually displacing the existing CBS affiliate (owned and operated WHCT-TV, Channel 18). WHCT had a dismal signal and was not a factor in the Springfield area. About that time, WWLP (then a combo NBC/ABC affiliate) and WHYN-TV (a combo CBS/ABC affiliate, now WGGB) changed their part-time affiliations to full-time with WWLP going full-time NBC and WHYN-TV going full-time ABC, a line-up that continues to this very day. Of course WWLP had a better coverage in the the market with fulltime satellite WRLP (Channel 32) in Greenfield signing on in '57, serving the northern area of Western Massachusetts. As for Channel 20 in Worcester. That allocation was eventually shifted to Waterbury, CT to allow WATR-TV to move from Channel 53 to Channel 20, though to a shorter tower in lieu of their old Meriden site atop Meriden Mountain. Peter Q. George (K1XRB) Whitman, Massachusetts "Scanning the bands since 1967" radiojunkie3@yahoo.com *********************************************************** From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Fri Nov 20 23:27:09 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:27:09 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? Message-ID: <20091120232709.xk9lldr49cusoo4o@webmail.myfairpoint.net> I've always been curious about WATR-TV's NBC affiliation, given that WHNB-TV Channel 30 in New Britain was only about thirty miles away (if that). Is the terrain down there so hilly that one NBC affiliate wasn't sufficient to cover the area? -Doug Quoting "Peter Q. George" : > I'm not sure > > but I think some other short-lived UHF station lived and > > died in Worcester in the 50's as well. In that > > climate, the T&G's judgment might not look totally > > crazy. > > The other UHF station (which never came to the air) was WAAB-TV Channel 20 in > Worcester. After seeing that Channel 14 (WWOR-TV) was loosing money > hand-over-fist, they decided to let the WAAB-TV CP lapse. At that > time, UHF's > were losing money, except for those who were in UHF Islands (markets > without a > VHF station). And even then, it was at a minimal profit. Springfield > was one of > those rare markets. WWLP and WHYN-TV (Channels 22 and 40) had no other > competitors until 1957 when WTIC-TV (Channel 3, now WFSB) signed on, > eventually > displacing the existing CBS affiliate (owned and operated WHCT-TV, > Channel 18). WHCT had a dismal signal and was not a factor in the > Springfield area. About > that time, WWLP (then a combo NBC/ABC affiliate) and WHYN-TV (a combo CBS/ABC > affiliate, now WGGB) changed their part-time affiliations to > full-time with WWLP > going full-time NBC and WHYN-TV going full-time ABC, a line-up that > continues to > this very day. Of course WWLP > had a better coverage in the the market with fulltime satellite WRLP > (Channel > 32) in Greenfield signing on in '57, serving the northern area of Western > Massachusetts. > > As for Channel 20 in Worcester. That allocation was eventually > shifted to > Waterbury, CT to allow WATR-TV to move from Channel 53 to Channel 20, > though to > a shorter tower in lieu of their old Meriden site atop Meriden Mountain. > > > > Peter Q. George (K1XRB) > Whitman, Massachusetts > "Scanning the bands since 1967" > > radiojunkie3@yahoo.com > *********************************************************** > > > > > > > From joe@attorneyross.com Sat Nov 21 00:14:01 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:14:01 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <954938.66338.qm@web53307.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <20091120123257.zyn94imgyh0go8o8@webmail.myfairpoint.net>, <954938.66338.qm@web53307.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4B077719.10836.4C1134@joe.attorneyross.com> On 20 Nov 2009 at 12:40, Maureen Carney wrote: > On the other hand no one was enamored with WNAC as an affiliate, so > an alternative would have been nice. Why? -- 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 Nov 21 00:14:02 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:14:02 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <20091120222644.D1FDD1B4076@relay24.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> References: <20091120123257.zyn94imgyh0go8o8@webmail.myfairpoint.net>, <20091120222644.D1FDD1B4076@relay24.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> Message-ID: <4B07771A.15523.4C1347@joe.attorneyross.com> On 20 Nov 2009 at 17:26, Donna Halper wrote: > On 26 March 1963, the NY Times reported that a consortium of 15 > businessmen, known as Charles River Civic Television Inc and led by > WCRB's Theodore Jones (the group was chaired by Thomas D. Cabot), > was trying to get the license. WCRB-TV? Now THAT would have been interesting! -- 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 Nov 21 00:14:02 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:14:02 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B071FF6.5000104@mac.com> References: <20091120123257.zyn94imgyh0go8o8@webmail.myfairpoint.net>, <20091120222644.D1FDD1B4076@relay24.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com>, <4B071FF6.5000104@mac.com> Message-ID: <4B07771A.7326.4C13E4@joe.attorneyross.com> On 20 Nov 2009 at 18:02, Mark Laurence wrote: > I know it sounds insane now, but this is a company that had been > dumping money into one of the country's first FM stations for 15 years > with nothing to show for it. WTAG-FM in the late 1950s ran separate programs from the AM at a time when few stations did. They had classical music from the QXR 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 Sat Nov 21 00:14:02 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:14:02 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B0638C7.7060204@fybush.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com>, , <4B0638C7.7060204@fybush.com> Message-ID: <4B07771A.2077.4C149F@joe.attorneyross.com> On 20 Nov 2009 at 1:35, Scott Fybush wrote: > It's more or less the routing of the old New England Route 12...and > yes, most of it was a very late addition to the Interstate system. Well, I-91 runs alongside the older Routes 5 and 10. -- 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 Sat Nov 21 00:16:08 2009 From: nostaticatall@charter.net (Dave Tomm) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:16:08 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <20091120232709.xk9lldr49cusoo4o@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091120232709.xk9lldr49cusoo4o@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: <424F3B62-C9AD-4C51-B263-D56AB6D000E8@charter.net> According to Wikipedia (for whatever that's worth) NBC put it's programming on WATR-TV to reach the New Haven area in 1966. Hartford/ New Haven has been a combined TV market for over 50 years, and Channel 30 couldn't cover it all. By the early 70's, WHNB had signed on translators in New Haven (59) and Torrington (79) to fill in their coverage gaps. I would assume once that happened WATR lost their NBC affiliation, but I couldn't find an exact date. -Dave Tomm On Nov 20, 2009, at 11:27 PM, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: > I've always been curious about WATR-TV's NBC affiliation, given that > WHNB-TV Channel 30 in New Britain was only about thirty miles away > (if that). Is the terrain down there so hilly that one NBC > affiliate wasn't sufficient to cover the area? -Doug > From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Sat Nov 21 00:34:09 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:34:09 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? Message-ID: <20091121003409.x5mqr3sdnyjo884s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> I remember WTAG-FM running Caspar Citron's late-evening program from QXR. I think the T&G did the best it could in trying to make a success of the station. It was a class act in the early '60s, and of course the AM always was. The T&G sold the FM at just the wrong time. I doubt that in 1966 very many people could foresee what FM would become. WSRS's beautiful music format caught on very quickly. -Doug Quoting "A. Joseph Ross" : > On 20 Nov 2009 at 18:02, Mark Laurence wrote: > > > I know it sounds insane now, but this is a company that had been > > dumping money into one of the country's first FM stations for 15 years > > with nothing to show for it. > > WTAG-FM in the late 1950s ran separate programs from the AM at a time > when few stations did. They had classical music from the QXR > 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 m_carney@yahoo.com Sat Nov 21 09:18:01 2009 From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:18:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B077719.10836.4C1134@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <20091120123257.zyn94imgyh0go8o8@webmail.myfairpoint.net>, <954938.66338.qm@web53307.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4B077719.10836.4C1134@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <526348.52133.qm@web53304.mail.re2.yahoo.com> They had signal issues outside of the immediate Boston area (the main reason CBS switched to WHDH in 1962). Yet some of the financial figures of the 60s had them worth more than WBZ or WHDH. Maybe that was RKO General's cooked books? ________________________________ From: A. Joseph Ross To: Maureen Carney Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Sent: Sat, November 21, 2009 12:14:01 AM Subject: Re: WTAG-TV? On 20 Nov 2009 at 12:40, Maureen Carney wrote: > On the other hand no one was enamored with WNAC as an affiliate, so > an alternative would have been nice. Why? -- 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 radiojunkie3@yahoo.com Sat Nov 21 09:20:26 2009 From: radiojunkie3@yahoo.com (Peter Q. George) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:20:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re: WTAG-TV?) In-Reply-To: <424F3B62-C9AD-4C51-B263-D56AB6D000E8@charter.net> Message-ID: <496055.1050.qm@web50801.mail.re2.yahoo.com> WATR-TV (Channel 20) provided the NBC coverage that WHNB could not provide due to the hilly terrain west of Hartford. In 1978, WHNB made a major power increase to a full 4 million watts of power from a taller tower. At the same time, the station was sold to Viacom and had the call-letters changed to WVIT. With solid cable coverage and a solid OTA coverage, WATR (a very poor NBC affiliate) had no reason to be there. Channel 20 made a major power increase in 1982 and as such would overlap the coverage area of WVIT. So, Channel 20 was sold and became Independent WTXX. It immediately became a smash in the Hartford area. It was Hartford's first Indy, ever since Channel 18 (WHCT) went religious in the late 70's. The two WVIT translators (59 New Haven and 79 Torrington) continued into the 1990's until WTVU/59 finally fired up after 40+ years of CP status. Channel 79 was forgotten around 1996 after the engineer stopped visiting. The unit is still there in the woods but has been silent since around '97. Peter Q. George (K1XRB) Whitman, Massachusetts "Scanning the bands since 1967" radiojunkie3@yahoo.com *********************************************************** By the early 70's, WHNB had > signed on translators in New Haven (59) and Torrington (79) > to fill in their coverage gaps.? I would assume once > that happened WATR lost their NBC affiliation, but I > couldn't find an exact date. > > -Dave Tomm > > On Nov 20, 2009, at 11:27 PM, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net > wrote: > > > I've always been curious about WATR-TV's NBC > affiliation, given that WHNB-TV Channel 30 in New Britain > was only about thirty miles away (if > that).???Is the terrain down there so hilly > that one NBC affiliate wasn't sufficient to cover the > area?? -Doug > > > > From kvahey@comcast.net Sat Nov 21 09:58:34 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:58:34 -0600 Subject: WREP-TV Channel 25 Message-ID: <4fc429770911210658u16bec426r439df01d8a1b9fba@mail.gmail.com> Another UHF with a curious history was WREP-TV Channel 25 which never made it on the air. However I visited their studios in 1968 on Comm Ave in Allston and everything was ready to go. The studio was operational. I don't know if they ran out of money but they wound up giving the license back and a few years later Pat Robinson put WXNE on the air. The CE of WREP would later hire me at WSMW. He remembered my visiting the facility but I can't recall why they never went on the air. From dlh@donnahalper.com Sat Nov 21 13:27:31 2009 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:27:31 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? Message-ID: <20091121182746.9B3BA1B4011@relay16.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> I don't know if you nice folks have been in correspondence with sometimes list-member John Andrews, but he sent me his recollections about WTAG and early television. I have not been able to verify the 1945 date he gives, however, nor do I see a channel 5 assignment in any of the reference books from that period which I possess. That doesn't mean he is wrong-- it just means more digging is required, and alas, I don't have a ton of free time to do it. I was able to verify in early 1940s issues of Radio Annual that WTAG Radio was in fact a CBS affiliate, with the other Worcester radio stations being (WAAB) Mutual/Yankee and Blue Network (WORC). Anyway, for those who did not see John's comments about WTAG-TV, here they are: The Worcester Telegram & Gazette did indeed have a CP for Channel 5 in 1945. And they did indeed surrender it without having built the TV station. As best I could determine it, there were several reasons: 1. That Channel 5 allocation to Worcester was very different than the one that eventually turned up for Boston. It was short-spaced to a grant on Long Island (hope I'm right about the location), and was given an ERP about 1/10 of the other northeast grants. Given the proposed transmitter site on Little Asnebumskit Hill in Paxton, the Boston coverage would have been troublesome, even with the rooftop antennas that became common in the early TV days. I know that WTAG did look seriously at a Blue Hill site for the TV operation, but the only real planning was done for the Paxton location. 2. WTAG-AM was indeed a CBS affiliate after 1943, as NBC had stopped allowing simulcast of network material on WTAG-FM. Crazy as it may seem now, CBS had invested considerable R&D on their "color wheel" color transmission system, and it was incompatible with the fledgling B/W standards. CBS was telling their affiliates that the VHF channels would forever be stuck in black & white, and that color TV would only be on UHF. Amazing, but CBS appears to have heavily pushed that concept to their radio affiliates. 3. TV Network affiliations were a problem with every TV scheme that the Telegram & Gazette investigated. None of the networks (Dumont included) would ever commit to either a primary affiliation to try to cover Boston, or to a duplicate affiliation at that distance. For those reasons, the CP was turned back. Within less than 2 years (if memory serves), the T&G got in the middle of the 10/11/12 switch in Providence, trying to get 12 for Worcester. They dropped out after again getting no agreement with a network. From scott@fybush.com Sat Nov 21 13:38:56 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:38:56 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B07771A.2077.4C149F@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4fc429770911181713p2e7fef03u186c763143a448c4@mail.gmail.com>, , <4B0638C7.7060204@fybush.com> <4B07771A.2077.4C149F@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <4B0833C0.4090606@fybush.com> A. Joseph Ross wrote: > On 20 Nov 2009 at 1:35, Scott Fybush wrote: > >> It's more or less the routing of the old New England Route 12...and >> yes, most of it was a very late addition to the Interstate system. > > Well, I-91 runs alongside the older Routes 5 and 10. Right - but I-91 was a part of the original Interstate system as designed in the mid-50s. I-395/I-290/I-190 were not. They were added much later. s From DanKelleher@clearchannel.com Sat Nov 21 12:48:01 2009 From: DanKelleher@clearchannel.com (Kelleher, Daniel) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:48:01 -0600 Subject: WTAG open house? Message-ID: Hello All I am thinking about hosting an open house at the WTAG transmitter site in Holden. Some Saturday in January, perhaps the afternoon of the 16th. Much old hardware and ephemeral material has been collected at the site. WTAG alumni like CE John Andrews, hold interesting recollections. John, what do you think? Who might be gathered up? Before proceeding, I'd like to know there is a level of interest. How many might be close enough to attend. Let me know. Thanks dankelleher@clearchannel.com Dan Kelleher Chief Engineer -IT Director Clear Channel Radio Worcester WSRS WTAG 96 Stereo Lane Paxton, Mass. 01612 Main Phone 508 757 9696 Office Phone 508 471 2847 Cell Phone 774 364 0157 FCC First Class since 1971 PG-1-11697 KB1BB From scott@fybush.com Sat Nov 21 15:57:04 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:57:04 -0500 Subject: WTAG open house? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B085420.1050303@fybush.com> I've been wanting to see the WTAG site for a very long time now...and depending on the date and the weather, this would probably be all the incentive I'd need to clear a couple of days out of my schedule and make the drive to New England. (Especially if a tour of the studios/WSRS site could be arranged, too :) s Kelleher, Daniel wrote: > Hello All > > I am thinking about hosting an open house at the WTAG transmitter site > in Holden. Some Saturday in January, perhaps the afternoon of the 16th. > Much old hardware and ephemeral material has been collected at the site. > WTAG alumni like CE John Andrews, hold interesting recollections. John, > what do you think? Who might be gathered up? Before proceeding, I'd like > to know there is a level of interest. How many might be close enough to > attend. Let me know. Thanks > > dankelleher@clearchannel.com > > > Dan Kelleher > Chief Engineer -IT Director > Clear Channel Radio Worcester > WSRS WTAG > 96 Stereo Lane > Paxton, Mass. 01612 > Main Phone 508 757 9696 > Office Phone 508 471 2847 > Cell Phone 774 364 0157 > FCC First Class since 1971 > PG-1-11697 KB1BB > > From joe@scanworcester.com Sat Nov 21 14:13:19 2009 From: joe@scanworcester.com (Joe) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:13:19 -0500 Subject: WTAG open house? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001601ca6ade$b1d34f20$1579ed60$@com> I'd be interested. The towers are within eye-sight for me. - Joe -----Original Message----- From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Kelleher, Daniel Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2009 12:48 PM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Cc: John Andrews Subject: WTAG open house? Hello All I am thinking about hosting an open house at the WTAG transmitter site in Holden. Some Saturday in January, perhaps the afternoon of the 16th. Much old hardware and ephemeral material has been collected at the site. WTAG alumni like CE John Andrews, hold interesting recollections. John, what do you think? Who might be gathered up? Before proceeding, I'd like to know there is a level of interest. How many might be close enough to attend. Let me know. Thanks dankelleher@clearchannel.com Dan Kelleher Chief Engineer -IT Director Clear Channel Radio Worcester WSRS WTAG 96 Stereo Lane Paxton, Mass. 01612 Main Phone 508 757 9696 Office Phone 508 471 2847 Cell Phone 774 364 0157 FCC First Class since 1971 PG-1-11697 KB1BB From dave@skywaves.net Sat Nov 21 17:20:31 2009 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:20:31 -0500 Subject: WTAG open house? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi all- I'd definitely be interested in revisiting WTAG. Dan gave me the tour a while back. It is a fascinating place, with historical items that go way beyond your expectations! Well worth the trip if you're from out of town. -Dave Doherty Skywaves Consulting LLC PO Box 4 Millbury, MA 01527 401-354-2400 202-370-6357 (DC) From friedbagels@gmail.com Sat Nov 21 20:07:57 2009 From: friedbagels@gmail.com (Aaron Read) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:07:57 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? Message-ID: I grew up in Groton/Mystic, CT and my vote is on apocryphal. Groton/New London has always been Navy and Coast Guard. Devens was an Army base, with some Marines. While the Marines are part of the Navy, they're rarely associated with submarines; there's little or no Navy surface ships at Groton besides the subtenders. Also, I-395 doesn't go to New London. It bears SW around Montville and heads for Niantic Bay. There's a major connector that links I-395 to Rt.32, and Rt.32 south of this connector is a semi-divided highway with two lanes in each direction. Rt.32 does, indeed, go to New London and connects to I-95 there. In fact, the USCG Academy is literally right off Rt.32...I drove it every day on my way to high school in Uncasville. But the expansion of Rt.32 and the connector to I-395 came, I believe, many years after I-395 was built. There's also the connector from I-395 to Mohegan Sun (which crosses Rt.32) which was built around the same time as the aforementioned Rt.32 connector in Montville...but in a much smaller form. The current major connector was put in not long after Mohegan Sun opened...1994 or 1995, something like that. Good story, though. :-) -- -- ----------------------------------------- Aaron Read friedbagels@gmail.com WEOS 89.7FM General Manager (315) 781-3811 Someone once told me that the purpose of I-190/I-395 was to enable troops from Fort Devens to reach the nuclear submarine and coast guard bases in New London, CT rapidly in the event of a national emergency. You will notice some enormous shoulder areas on the portion of I-190 north of Worcester: supposedly those were to allow tanks or other large military vehicles a place to pull off the road. This may all be apocryphal, however. :) From scott@fybush.com Sat Nov 21 20:48:00 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:48:00 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B089850.4090405@fybush.com> Aaron Read wrote: > Also, I-395 doesn't go to New London. It bears SW around Montville > and heads for Niantic Bay. And there's a good reason for that. What's now I-395 in CT was patched together in 1982 out of two roads - the western piece of the old Connecticut Turnpike from Old Lyme to Plainfield and the 1962/1968 vintage Route 12 Bypass (later known as Route 52) from Plainfield north to the Massachusetts line. The CT Turnpike was made up of what's now I-95 from the New York line to Old Lyme, what's now I-395 from Old Lyme to Plainfield and the unmarked US 6 connector from Plainfield to the RI state line. (That last bit would have become part of the never-built I-84 from Providence to Hartford.) Everything else in eastern CT came later, including I-95 east of Old Lyme in the late fifties. s From dillane@sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 21 20:56:13 2009 From: dillane@sbcglobal.net (Bill Dillane) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:56:13 -0500 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re: WTAG-TV?)) Message-ID: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net> >So, Channel 20 was sold and became Independent WTXX. It immediately became a smash in the Hartford area. WTXX made a couple of good decisions after their power and tower increase in April, 1982. They advertised Warner Brothers cartoon characters on statewide billboards to get the kids to watch this new station, showed movies during prime time, and aired Star Trek nightly at 6 and 10. The 10:00 Star Trek was not originally planned. Tribune at the last minute backed out of the deal for Ch 20 to air Independent Network News because of WPIX-11, and 20 needed to fill the time. The Honeymooners and other classics were on the schedule. WTVU-59 did not go on until 1995 because they had trouble finding a tower location. Previous owners of WTNH denied WTVU's request to rent tower space. However LIN, after purchasing WTNH, offered WTVU LMA and tower rental agreements. LIN now owns 59. On another note, the FCC in the 50s and early 60s made several attempts to move the Channel 3 allocation from Hartford to Providence. Travelers Insurance fought back (both before and after the WTIC-TV3 sign-on), and Senator Abe Ribicoff publicly petitioned the FCC. The FCC's purpose was to make Hartford an all-UHF market (Ch 8 in New Haven was grandfathered because it had gone on the air before the TV allocation freeze). From joe@scanworcester.com Sat Nov 21 19:31:14 2009 From: joe@scanworcester.com (Joe) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:31:14 -0500 Subject: WTAG open house? In-Reply-To: <4B085420.1050303@fybush.com> References: <4B085420.1050303@fybush.com> Message-ID: <001e01ca6b0b$1b10ab50$513201f0$@com> I'm sure I could arrange something for WSRS, if need be. - Joe -----Original Message----- From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Scott Fybush Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2009 3:57 PM To: Kelleher, Daniel Cc: John Andrews; boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: WTAG open house? I've been wanting to see the WTAG site for a very long time now...and depending on the date and the weather, this would probably be all the incentive I'd need to clear a couple of days out of my schedule and make the drive to New England. (Especially if a tour of the studios/WSRS site could be arranged, too :) s Kelleher, Daniel wrote: > Hello All > > I am thinking about hosting an open house at the WTAG transmitter site > in Holden. Some Saturday in January, perhaps the afternoon of the 16th. > Much old hardware and ephemeral material has been collected at the site. > WTAG alumni like CE John Andrews, hold interesting recollections. John, > what do you think? Who might be gathered up? Before proceeding, I'd like > to know there is a level of interest. How many might be close enough to > attend. Let me know. Thanks > > dankelleher@clearchannel.com > > > Dan Kelleher > Chief Engineer -IT Director > Clear Channel Radio Worcester > WSRS WTAG > 96 Stereo Lane > Paxton, Mass. 01612 > Main Phone 508 757 9696 > Office Phone 508 471 2847 > Cell Phone 774 364 0157 > FCC First Class since 1971 > PG-1-11697 KB1BB > > From kvahey@comcast.net Sat Nov 21 21:07:30 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:07:30 -0600 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B089850.4090405@fybush.com> References: <4B089850.4090405@fybush.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911211807w2bd53192k28c22030c6fd4055@mail.gmail.com> While we are at it we should bow our heads for the long forgotten I-86 from Sturbridge to Hartford. Of course this is nothing compared to I-95 in New Jersey. From dillane@sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 21 21:44:01 2009 From: dillane@sbcglobal.net (Bill Dillane) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:44:01 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? Message-ID: <001a01ca6b1d$a60bdf60$f2239e20$@net> >While we are at it we should bow our heads for the long forgotten I-86 from Sturbridge to Hartford. I forgot about that. I believe I-84 was suppose to cut thru Eastern CT to go to RI. It was about this time 40 years ago that I-84 was completed to connect Hartford to points west. The recently demolished Channel 30 building in West Hartford was on a main road until I-84 construction eliminated the road. From dillane@sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 21 22:02:03 2009 From: dillane@sbcglobal.net (Bill Dillane) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:02:03 -0500 Subject: WHDH/WCVB switchover, 1972 Message-ID: <001b01ca6b20$2b35ebc0$81a1c340$@net> Probably thing that remained the same on Ch 5 after the switch.Perry Mason was still on at 5:00 p.m. From paulranderson@charter.net Sat Nov 21 22:30:20 2009 From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:30:20 -0500 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re: WTAG-TV?)) In-Reply-To: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net> References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net> Message-ID: On Nov 21, 2009, at 8:56 PM, Bill Dillane wrote: > On another note, the FCC in the 50s and early 60s made several attempts to > move the Channel 3 allocation from Hartford to Providence. Travelers > Insurance fought back (both before and after the WTIC-TV3 sign-on), and > Senator Abe Ribicoff publicly petitioned the FCC. The FCC's purpose was to > make Hartford an all-UHF market (Ch 8 in New Haven was grandfathered because > it had gone on the air before the TV allocation freeze). In reading the histories of various early UHF stations that failed, it's interesting that UHF in Hartford and Springfield was successful from the start. Everybody had UHF tuners or converters. I moved from New Jersey to Connecticut in 1968 and we sure got a UHF converter fast! Not even poor little channel 20 failed during all those years that other UHFs went under in other parts of the country. I have an Arbitron ratings book from 1961 and it shows WHNB (channel 30) very competitive with channels 3 and 8 in the Hartford area, often beating channel 3 in certain dayparts. Paul From dan.strassberg@att.net Sat Nov 21 23:02:03 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:02:03 -0500 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re:WTAG-TV?)) References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net> Message-ID: Interesting contrast with New York's Capital district, only about 100 miles away. No doubt, however, that would have turned out much different if WRGB hadn't been a legacy VHF signal and if ways hadn't been found to drop two short-spaced VHF channels (10 and 13) into the market. What I never undestood and still don't understand, though, is why10 and 13 didn't swap transmitter sites (or channels). I believe that both 10 and 13 used directional antennas to protect the stations to which they were short spaced. Thirteen's Bald Mtn site (originally built for 35) is east of most of the population in the market (ideal for 10, which was short-spaced to Providence), Ten's Helderberg site is south of most of the market population and is short spaced to WNET. Had the two stations swapped channels or sites, most of the market population would have gotten, in effect, full-power signals from both 10 and 13. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Anderson" To: "Boston Radio Group" Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2009 10:30 PM Subject: Re: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re:WTAG-TV?)) On Nov 21, 2009, at 8:56 PM, Bill Dillane wrote: > On another note, the FCC in the 50s and early 60s made several > attempts to > move the Channel 3 allocation from Hartford to Providence. > Travelers > Insurance fought back (both before and after the WTIC-TV3 sign-on), > and > Senator Abe Ribicoff publicly petitioned the FCC. The FCC's purpose > was to > make Hartford an all-UHF market (Ch 8 in New Haven was grandfathered > because > it had gone on the air before the TV allocation freeze). In reading the histories of various early UHF stations that failed, it's interesting that UHF in Hartford and Springfield was successful from the start. Everybody had UHF tuners or converters. I moved from New Jersey to Connecticut in 1968 and we sure got a UHF converter fast! Not even poor little channel 20 failed during all those years that other UHFs went under in other parts of the country. I have an Arbitron ratings book from 1961 and it shows WHNB (channel 30) very competitive with channels 3 and 8 in the Hartford area, often beating channel 3 in certain dayparts. Paul= From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Nov 22 00:16:03 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:16:03 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <20091121003409.x5mqr3sdnyjo884s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091121003409.x5mqr3sdnyjo884s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: <4B08C913.28177.8D8C34@joe.attorneyross.com> On 21 Nov 2009 at 0:34, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: > I remember WTAG-FM running Caspar Citron's late-evening program from > QXR. I think the T&G did the best it could in trying to make a > success of the station. It was a class act in the early '60s, and of > course the AM always was. The T&G sold the FM at just the wrong time. > I doubt that in 1966 very many people could foresee what FM would > become. > WSRS's beautiful music format caught on very quickly. -Doug I don't know, I remember reading an article somewhere (perhaps Readers Digest) which asserted that FM was at that time expanding more rapidly than television. There were new stations coming on frequently, and I was following them closely. This was when I was in high school, or perhaps in the summer between high school and college. Which means prior to September 1963. -- 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 Sun Nov 22 00:16:04 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:16:04 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <20091121182746.9B3BA1B4011@relay16.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> References: <20091121182746.9B3BA1B4011@relay16.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> Message-ID: <4B08C914.7502.8D8D3E@joe.attorneyross.com> On 21 Nov 2009 at 13:27, Donna Halper wrote: > 2. WTAG-AM was indeed a CBS affiliate after 1943, as NBC had stopped > allowing simulcast of network material on WTAG-FM. Crazy as it may > seem now, CBS had invested considerable R&D on their "color wheel" > color transmission system, and it was incompatible with the fledgling > B/W standards. CBS was telling their affiliates that the VHF channels > would forever be stuck in black & white, and that color TV would only > be on UHF. Amazing, but CBS appears to have heavily pushed that > concept to their radio affiliates. Harry Castleman and Walter J. Pedrazik's early-1980s book "Watching TV" indicates that CBS got behind in early television development because they kept insisting that television was still experimental and advocated postponing the start of regular TV broadcasts until it could be done all in color. William Paley also liked radio, with the result that CBS didn't cancel its radio soap operas until around 1961 and continued to program new dramatic radio on Sunday evenings for a few years into the 1960s. And, of course, there was the CBS Mystery Theater on radio in the 1970s. Unlike the situation in most large corporations today, William Paley had a lot of power and could pretty well get away with whatever he wanted, within broad limits. -- 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 Sun Nov 22 00:16:04 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:16:04 -0500 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re: WTAG-TV?)) In-Reply-To: References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net>, Message-ID: <4B08C914.32310.8D8DDA@joe.attorneyross.com> On 21 Nov 2009 at 22:30, Paul Anderson wrote: > In reading the histories of various early UHF stations that failed, > it's interesting that UHF in Hartford and Springfield was successful > from the start. Everybody had UHF tuners or converters. I moved from > New Jersey to Connecticut in 1968 and we sure got a UHF converter > fast! Not even poor little channel 20 failed during all those years > that other UHFs went under in other parts of the country. That's probably because there were strong UHF stations and not very strong VHF stations. In Western Massachusetts, the Springfield UHF stations were the only strong stations until channel 3 in Hartford came on. Channel 8 in Hartford didn't reach Western Massachusetts very well, and in the valley, the Boston and Schenectady VHF stations were difficult or impossible to receive. Channel 19 in North Adams, relaying Albany, and perhaps some Hartford UHFs was all that reached there. By the time channel 3 came on, UHF stations were well- established. For similar reasons, UHF caught on in the Albany area. There was only the one VHF station, and the UHF stations very quickly got network affiliations and carried top-rated shows. However, perhaps because of the mountainous terrain, the UHFs were at a disadvantage to channel 6 in range and eventually took advantage of opportunities to move to VHF channels. At one point the FCC had planned to designate the Albany area as all- UHF. There were even plans to force WRGB to move to channel 47. This was a front-page story in the Albany Times-Union in early 1957 as we were preparing to move back to the Boston area. -- 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 Sun Nov 22 00:16:04 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:16:04 -0500 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re:WTAG-TV?)) In-Reply-To: References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net>, Message-ID: <4B08C914.30610.8D8E76@joe.attorneyross.com> On 21 Nov 2009 at 23:02, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > Interesting contrast with New York's Capital district, only about 100 > miles away. No doubt, however, that would have turned out much > different if WRGB hadn't been a legacy VHF signal and if ways hadn't > been found to drop two short-spaced VHF channels (10 and 13) into the > market. What I never undestood and still don't understand, though, is > why10 and 13 didn't swap transmitter sites (or channels). I believe > that both 10 and 13 used directional antennas to protect the stations > to which they were short spaced. Thirteen's Bald Mtn site (originally > built for 35) is east of most of the population in the market (ideal > for 10, which was short-spaced to Providence), Ten's Helderberg site > is south of most of the market population and is short spaced to WNET. > Had the two stations swapped channels or sites, most of the market > population would have gotten, in effect, full-power signals from both > 10 and 13. The UHF stations in Albany caught on much better than in other markets, almost as well as the Springfield stations. As I've just described in another post, there was an FCC proposal to move WRGB to a UHF channel, but it never went anywhere. Changing the UHF stations to VHF channels happened instead. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. 617.367.0468 92 State Street, Suite 700 Fax 617.507.7856 Boston, MA 02109-2004 http://www.attorneyross.com From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Nov 22 00:16:03 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:16:03 -0500 Subject: WTAG open house? In-Reply-To: <001601ca6ade$b1d34f20$1579ed60$@com> References: , <001601ca6ade$b1d34f20$1579ed60$@com> Message-ID: <4B08C913.15523.8D8B2B@joe.attorneyross.com> On 21 Nov 2009 at 14:13, Joe wrote: > I'd be interested. The towers are within eye-sight for me. I would, too, but I'm afraid I'm already committed for that Sunday. -- 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 Sun Nov 22 09:07:24 2009 From: rickkelly@gmail.com (Rick Kelly) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:07:24 -0500 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re:WTAG-TV?)) In-Reply-To: References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net> Message-ID: <521b7fd10911220607l242e094bw263d4db7cba11901@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > Thirteen's Bald Mtn site (originally built for 35) is east of most > of the population in the market (ideal for 10, which was short-spaced to > Providence), Ten's Helderberg site is south of most of the market population > and is short spaced to WNET. Actually, Thirteen/Albany/Bald Mtn is short spaced to WNET/Thrteen NYC. WTEN/Albany/10 is short spaced to Providence. As a kid, I had always heard that 13/Albany could not have done a Helderberg location, due the situation with 13/NYC. -Rick Kelly www.northeastairchecks.com From dan.strassberg@att.net Sun Nov 22 10:29:23 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 10:29:23 -0500 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re:WTAG-TV?)) References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net> <521b7fd10911220607l242e094bw263d4db7cba11901@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <980D78ADA1D9451AB1218A36B7E60551@SatU205S5044> I don't think your message and mine said anything different from each other. Moving 10 to Bald Mtn would have reduced the already short spacing to Providence, but so what? The ERP toward Providence would have had to be reduced to less than it was from the Helderberg site. But with relatively little population to the east of Bald Mtn, this should not have been a big deal. Meanwhile, from Bald Mtn, 10 could have sent a full-power signal to the west over all three of the major cities in the Capital District. Same reasoning would have covered 13 if it had moved to the Helderbergs. Yes, the spacing to WNET would have been reduced, but again, so what? The ERP to the south would have had to be reduced further than it was from Bald Mtn, but most of the population would have been to the north and northeast, directions in which the station could have transmitted a full-power signal. Also, by moving to Bald Mtn, 10 would have been closer to the area where it could deliver the least signal. The shorter distance would have at least partly compensated for the reduced ERP. Similarly, by moving to the Herderbergs, 13 would have been quite a few miles closer to the area where it had to deliver a reduced signal. The reduced distance would have at least partially mitigated the effects of the reduced ERP. And the full-power signal to the north/northeast would have improved reception in Albany, Schenectady, and Troy. In this respect, siting a directional station, whether it's AM, FM, or TV should follow one fairly simple rule: if possible, locate the transmitter so that the population center to be served is in the direction opposite to that where the required protection is most severe. This may necessitate more severe protections than orignally thought but it delivers the strongest signal to the area you are trying to serve. Best example I know of is WBZ (AM). It's east of downtown Boston and directional to the west, north, and south. Only fish live east of the site and, for good measure, the signal reaches land to the north, west, and south via a high-conductivity salt-water path. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Kelly" To: "Dan.Strassberg" Cc: "Paul Anderson" ; "Boston Radio Group" Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:07 AM Subject: Re: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re:WTAG-TV?)) > On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Dan.Strassberg > wrote: > >> Thirteen's Bald Mtn site (originally built for 35) is east of most >> of the population in the market (ideal for 10, which was >> short-spaced to >> Providence), Ten's Helderberg site is south of most of the market >> population >> and is short spaced to WNET. > > Actually, Thirteen/Albany/Bald Mtn is short spaced to WNET/Thrteen > NYC. WTEN/Albany/10 is short spaced to Providence. As a kid, I had > always heard that 13/Albany could not have done a Helderberg > location, > due the situation with 13/NYC. > > -Rick Kelly > www.northeastairchecks.com From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Sun Nov 22 10:22:22 2009 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:22:22 -0600 Subject: WJAR's Art Lake Passes Away Message-ID: <8bce0fe80911220722h4b028fbfpe5a8cef77b81ec22@mail.gmail.com> >From turnto10.com http://www2.turnto10.com/jar/news/local/article/nbc_10s_art_lake_dies/27188/ -- Sincerely, Paul B. Walker, Jr. www.onairdj.com walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Sun Nov 22 10:22:22 2009 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:22:22 -0600 Subject: WJAR's Art Lake Passes Away Message-ID: <8bce0fe80911220722h4b028fbfpe5a8cef77b81ec22@mail.gmail.com> >From turnto10.com http://www2.turnto10.com/jar/news/local/article/nbc_10s_art_lake_dies/27188/ -- Sincerely, Paul B. Walker, Jr. www.onairdj.com walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Sun Nov 22 18:10:09 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 18:10:09 -0500 Subject: WTAG open house? Message-ID: <20091122181009.lxmycclezv484cs8@webmail.myfairpoint.net> If this were early enough in the day, it's something for which I might even drive all the way down from Maine! -Doug Quoting "Kelleher, Daniel" : > Hello All > > I am thinking about hosting an open house at the WTAG transmitter site > in Holden. Some Saturday in January, perhaps the afternoon of the 16th. > Much old hardware and ephemeral material has been collected at the site. > WTAG alumni like CE John Andrews, hold interesting recollections. John, > what do you think? Who might be gathered up? Before proceeding, I'd like > to know there is a level of interest. How many might be close enough to > attend. Let me know. Thanks > > dankelleher@clearchannel.com > > > Dan Kelleher > Chief Engineer -IT Director > Clear Channel Radio Worcester > WSRS WTAG > 96 Stereo Lane > Paxton, Mass. 01612 > Main Phone 508 757 9696 > Office Phone 508 471 2847 > Cell Phone 774 364 0157 > FCC First Class since 1971 > PG-1-11697 KB1BB > > From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Sun Nov 22 22:25:26 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 22:25:26 -0500 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re: WTAG-TV?)) Message-ID: <20091122222526.1njgrwhetdsws80o@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Am I correct in thinking that Channel 30 has been owned by NBC twice? Wasn't there a related AM station at one time (WHNB or WKNB 840 in New Britain)? WTIC was Hartford's NBC Radio affiliate for decades before it switched to CBS in the late '80s --- was 840 with NBC as well? -Doug Quoting Paul Anderson : > On Nov 21, 2009, at 8:56 PM, Bill Dillane wrote: > > > On another note, the FCC in the 50s and early 60s made several attempts to > > move the Channel 3 allocation from Hartford to Providence. Travelers > > Insurance fought back (both before and after the WTIC-TV3 sign-on), and > > Senator Abe Ribicoff publicly petitioned the FCC. The FCC's purpose was to > > make Hartford an all-UHF market (Ch 8 in New Haven was > grandfathered because > > it had gone on the air before the TV allocation freeze). > > In reading the histories of various early UHF stations that failed, it's > interesting that UHF in Hartford and Springfield was successful from > the start. Everybody had UHF tuners or converters. I moved from New > Jersey to Connecticut > in 1968 and we sure got a UHF converter fast! Not even poor little > channel 20 > failed during all those years that other UHFs went under in other > parts of the > country. > > I have an Arbitron ratings book from 1961 and it shows WHNB (channel 30) very > competitive with channels 3 and 8 in the Hartford area, often beating > channel 3 > in certain dayparts. > > Paul > From joe@attorneyross.com Mon Nov 23 00:30:58 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:30:58 -0500 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re:WTAG-TV?)) In-Reply-To: <980D78ADA1D9451AB1218A36B7E60551@SatU205S5044> References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net>, <980D78ADA1D9451AB1218A36B7E60551@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <4B0A1E12.6069.5F92FA@joe.attorneyross.com> On 22 Nov 2009 at 10:29, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > I don't think your message and mine said anything different from each > other. Moving 10 to Bald Mtn would have reduced the already short > spacing to Providence, but so what? The ERP toward Providence would > have had to be reduced to less than it was from the Helderberg site. > But with relatively little population to the east of Bald Mtn, this > should not have been a big deal. Meanwhile, from Bald Mtn, 10 could > have sent a full-power signal to the west over all three of the major > cities in the Capital District. Same reasoning would have covered 13 > if it had moved to the Helderbergs. Yes, the spacing to WNET would > have been reduced, but again, so what? The ERP to the south would have > had to be reduced further than it was from Bald Mtn, but most of the > population would have been to the north and northeast, directions in > which the station could have transmitted a full-power signal. Also, by > moving to Bald Mtn, 10 would have been closer to the area where it > could deliver the least signal. The shorter distance would have at > least partly compensated for the reduced ERP. Similarly, by moving to > the Herderbergs, 13 would have been quite a few miles closer to the > area where it had to deliver a reduced signal. The reduced distance > would have at least partially mitigated the effects of the reduced > ERP. And the full-power signal to the north/northeast would have > improved reception in Albany, Schenectady, and Troy. So the question is, was it really a good idea to move those stations to VHF channels, rather than try to put up a better UHF signal? Where were the UHF signals deficient? This was one of the few markets where UHF receiver penetration wasn't the issue. As I regularly complained to my parents at the time, we were the ONLY people in the entire area who had a TV incapable of receiving the UHF channels. ;-> > Best example I know of is WBZ (AM). It's east of downtown Boston > and directional to the west, north, and south. Only fish live east > of the site and, for good measure, the signal reaches land to the > north, west, and south via a high-conductivity salt-water path. Why does WBZ have a directional signal at all? What do they have to protect? -- 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 walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Mon Nov 23 00:35:26 2009 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:35:26 -0600 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re:WTAG-TV?)) In-Reply-To: <4B0A1E12.6069.5F92FA@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net> <980D78ADA1D9451AB1218A36B7E60551@SatU205S5044> <4B0A1E12.6069.5F92FA@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <8bce0fe80911222135x2e12d288o60c7df3b13cca3c6@mail.gmail.com> THis is an easy one, theyre directional so they dont shoot half their power out to sea. -- Sincerely, Paul B. Walker, Jr. www.onairdj.com walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com > > > Best example I know of is WBZ (AM). It's east of downtown Boston > > and directional to the west, north, and south. Only fish live east > > of the site and, for good measure, the signal reaches land to the > > north, west, and south via a high-conductivity salt-water path. > > Why does WBZ have a directional signal at all? What do they have to > protect? > > -- > 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 Mon Nov 23 08:57:51 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:57:51 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net>, <980D78ADA1D9451AB1218A36B7E60551@SatU205S5044> <4B0A1E12.6069.5F92FA@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <848A6B21306447B4813787DA9BC4A6EA@SatU205S5044> Back in the day. there were four Class IA clear-channel stations that operated DA-1 (same facilities day and night): WBZ, WWL, WEAF (now WFAN), and WTAM. Of those, two remain directional. In all cases, really, the reason for directionalizing was the same, not to protect any station but to send the signal over land (where people live) and not waste it over water (where only fish and a smaller number of crustaceans live). In WBZ's case, the water is the Atlantic Ocean to the east; in WWL's case, it is the Gulf of Mexico to the south; in WEAF's case, it was Long Island Sound to the east; and in WTAM's case it was Lake Erie to the north. Of these four stations, WBZ is the most directional (sends the least signal--the equivalent of ~1 kW ND--over Mass Bay). WWL sends something approaching the equivalent of 5 kW ND to the south; I don't know why. I have never seen WTAM's or WEAF's patterns. but my understanding is that neither of these stations (both then owned by RCA/NBC) was strongly directional. WEAF's transmitter was in Port Washington on Long Island's north shore in Nassau County, a pretty good distance from mid-town Manhattan. The signal was boosted to the west to level the playing field with New York's other Class IA clears, WJZ 770, which transmitted from New Jersey (I think it was Bound Brook until the 1943 move to the current Lodi site) and WABC 880. (For those who don't remember that far back, the WABC calls were on 880 until, I think, 1943. 880, then as now, was on an island east of the Bronx in Long Island Sound--but it was a different island back then.) WEAF's signal to the east over Long Island and Connecticut was pretty potent--I've heard the equivalent of 25 kW ND, but I can't verify that. As for WTAM, there was a significant potential audience in Ontario, 50 miles or so across Lake Erie. Also, the transmitter itself may have been south of downtown Cleveland. The antenna was quite unusual for a US station. The designer, the legendary Carl Smith, used a technique that has been used successfully in Mexico and Europe but was never popular with the FCC. It was a one-tower, two element, DA. The tall uniform cross-section, guy-supported tower was, of course, one of the elements. The second element was a wire dropped from one of the supporting guys, resulting in unequal element heights and rather close spacing between the elements. Neither of those characteristics was a killer and, indeed, those characteristics are shared by many current two-element DAs constructed of two conventional towers. I remember seeing a polar plot of the WTAM pattern. It was not very directional and the radiation efficiency was HUGE--much higher than that of WTAM's current conventional half-wave tower. I don't know the height of the old tower; presumably, it was more than helf wave--maybe as much as 5/8 wave. There were other Class IA AMs that might have benefitted from using DAs but never chose to do so. The most notable was KFI, which, back in the '30s, could have built a two-tower array (or even a one-tower setup like WTAM's) on Catalina Island. I suspect, however, that KFI's owner, auto dealer Earl C Anthony, figured that the publicity from having the station's 750' tower right next to his auto dealership was a good trade-off for the coverage KFI could have gained in southern California's then-sparsely populated desert areas. Also, there might have been problems with getting the audio to a transmitter "26 miles across the sea." I don't know in what year Pacific T&T installed its first undersea cable between Santa Monica and Avalon. As for what stations the directional operations protect, although that was not an issue when any of these ex-IA stations was built, changes in the FCC rules might make it an issue now if WBZ or WWL wanted to abandon its DA-1 operation. WBZ's radiation toward a station in Puerto Rico might become an issue if WBZ wanted to operate ND. And I believe that there is now at least one full-time station on 1030 in Florida. WWL's limited radiation to the south now protects several signals in (I believe) Venezuela and surrounding countries. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Joseph Ross" To: "Dan.Strassberg" Cc: "Boston Radio Group" Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 12:30 AM Subject: Re: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re:WTAG-TV?)) > > Why does WBZ have a directional signal at all? What do they have to > protect? > > -- > 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 dave@skywaves.net Mon Nov 23 11:16:29 2009 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:16:29 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs In-Reply-To: <848A6B21306447B4813787DA9BC4A6EA@SatU205S5044> References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net>, <980D78ADA1D9451AB1218A36B7E60551@SatU205S5044><4B0A1E12.6069.5F92FA@joe.attorneyross.com> <848A6B21306447B4813787DA9BC4A6EA@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <0472966DE2904B5DBB21634B2D0841F6@dave> My dad worked for NBC-TV, and one of my earliest memories is of the "NBC Picnic" held at the Port Washington site. Big building, brick, as I recall, with a pond out front and a fountain - to cool the transmitter, of course, but it looked neat and extravagant. IIRC, there were two towers, oriented north-south. If that memory is correct, they would probably have been reducing power to the south over the ocean. Two-tower patterns are always symmetrical about the axis, so they would have been putting as much power east as west if the towers were aligned N-S. Maybe they were more like NW-SE, which would make more sense. There's some more info in this article: http://jeff560.tripod.com/am4.html - and a lot of early radio info, as well. Note in paragraph 15 the reference to the joint WCBS/WNBC tower being demolished in an airplane accident in 1967, and WNBC's temporary move to the site in Lodi formerly used by WABC. I don't recall that WABC ever left the Lodi site, but the article may refer to the short aux tower on that site. There's more on that site. It's worth a look: http://jeff560.tripod.com/broadcasting.html WABC, WMAQ, and WGN are three stations that have roughly half-wave towers with shorter aux towers on the property that I understand were used in the early days to directionalize the signals a bit. All are "ND" today, and the aux towers are available for standby use but mostly they just support STL and other aux antennas. -d -------------------------------------------------- From: "Dan.Strassberg" Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 8:57 AM To: "A. Joseph Ross" Cc: "Boston Radio Interest" Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs From paulranderson@charter.net Mon Nov 23 10:28:38 2009 From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:28:38 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <424F3B62-C9AD-4C51-B263-D56AB6D000E8@charter.net> References: <20091120232709.xk9lldr49cusoo4o@webmail.myfairpoint.net> <424F3B62-C9AD-4C51-B263-D56AB6D000E8@charter.net> Message-ID: <992FF4F1-A993-4806-9816-548D0501DC45@charter.net> On Nov 21, 2009, at 12:16 AM, Dave Tomm wrote: > According to Wikipedia (for whatever that's worth) NBC put it's programming on WATR-TV to reach the New Haven area in 1966. Hartford/New Haven has been a combined TV market for over 50 years, and Channel 30 couldn't cover it all. By the early 70's, WHNB had signed on translators in New Haven (59) and Torrington (79) to fill in their coverage gaps. I would assume once that happened WATR lost their NBC affiliation, but I couldn't find an exact date. I can't say how big the coverage area for the New Haven channel 59 translator was, but the Torrington channel 79 translator didn't get out that far and certainly would not have affected channel 20 in Waterbury. Channel 79 was on the air at least by 1968. I thought channel 59 was on by then, too, but it might have been later. What did in WATR's NBC affiliation was the power increase at channel 30, not the existence of their translators. Paul From brian_vita@cssinc.com Mon Nov 23 12:01:33 2009 From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:01:33 -0500 Subject: WTAG open house? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001b01ca6c5e$9cf70340$d6e509c0$@com> Sign me up! Pro Cinema - Pro Audio - Pro & Consumer AV Equipment & Supplies Brian Vita President Cinema Service & Supply, Inc. 77 Walnut St - Ste 4 Peabody, MA 01960-5691 brian_vita@cssinc.com AIM: btvita > Hello All > > I am thinking about hosting an open house at the WTAG transmitter > site > in Holden. Some Saturday in January, perhaps the afternoon of the 16th. > Much old hardware and ephemeral material has been collected at the > site. > WTAG alumni like CE John Andrews, hold interesting recollections. John, > what do you think? Who might be gathered up? Before proceeding, I'd > like > to know there is a level of interest. How many might be close enough to > attend. Let me know. Thanks > > dankelleher@clearchannel.com > > > Dan Kelleher > Chief Engineer -IT Director > Clear Channel Radio Worcester > WSRS WTAG > 96 Stereo Lane > Paxton, Mass. 01612 > Main Phone 508 757 9696 > Office Phone 508 471 2847 > Cell Phone 774 364 0157 > FCC First Class since 1971 > PG-1-11697 KB1BB > From dan.strassberg@att.net Mon Nov 23 12:27:52 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:27:52 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net>, <980D78ADA1D9451AB1218A36B7E60551@SatU205S5044><4B0A1E12.6069.5F92FA@joe.attorneyross.com> <848A6B21306447B4813787DA9BC4A6EA@SatU205S5044> <0472966DE2904B5DBB21634B2D0841F6@dave> Message-ID: <742AF827DFAF46868C9113AC98034D64@SatU205S5044> I absolutely can't agree with the north-south orientation of the two towers. It HAD to be roughly east-west. Maybe you were confused by the orientation of the shore-line at the site. At that spot, the shore-line very likely runs south to north. The objective was to reduce radiation over Long Island Sound and increase it over New York City. As you pointed out, a two-tower setup could do that only if the towers were on a more-or-less east-west line. One corroboating fact is that, when 750-kW superpower was being considered for roughly half of the then-IA AMs (maybe 1960s), 660 was held back from further disposition; that is, no Class IIA assignment was made on 660 at that time. 770 already had KOB, which was a special case and was made a IIA. 880 got KRVN. 660 _ultimately_ got KTNN, a IIA-like station, but that was after the superpower idea had died. KTNN began life either as a Class II (no A suffix) or went straight to Class B. I don't think I can list all of the IA channels to which no IIAs were assigned, but here's a stab at the list: 640, 650, 660, 700, 720 (I think) 750, 760, 820, 830, 840 (I think), 870, 1040, 1160, 1200. (Hmmm... that's 14; I thought there were only 13.) I don't think the stations in NV on 720 or 840, though IIA-like, ever were IIAs. Note also that KTWO on 1030 WAS a IIA, which always seemed odd to me, because you'd think 1030 would have been held back because WBZ was already directional. Also note that being near the geographical center of the 48 contiguous states didn't preserve a station's candidacy for superpower: KPNW was assigned to 1120, thus limiting KMOX to 50 kW. As for WNBC's temporary use of a tower formerly used by WABC 770 in Lodi, I believe, like you, that once it moved from Bound Brook to Lodi (1943, I think), 770 has transmitted continuously from the Lodi site. However, the move away from Bound Brook was the result of the government's taking the Bound Brook site for use in the (World) War (II) effort. WJZ may well have constructed a temporary tower at the Lodi site and later used it as an auxiliary tower, still later replacing that tower with the current (rather short) auxiliary tower. I believe that the original auxiliary tower at the Lodi site was used repeatedly by other New Your stations during emergencies. I think the old WNEW (AM) 1130 used it for several months in the 1950s after a hurricane destroyed its S Kearney site (the two towers were unscathed but the transmitter building was flooded out and a pair of virtually new Westinghouse 50 kW transmitters were a total loss). ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Doherty" To: "Dan.Strassberg" ; "A. Joseph Ross" Cc: "Boston Radio Interest" Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 11:16 AM Subject: Re: Directional ex-Class IA AMs > My dad worked for NBC-TV, and one of my earliest memories is of the > "NBC Picnic" held at the Port Washington site. Big building, brick, > as I recall, with a pond out front and a fountain - to cool the > transmitter, of course, but it looked neat and extravagant. > > IIRC, there were two towers, oriented north-south. If that memory is > correct, they would probably have been reducing power to the south > over the ocean. Two-tower patterns are always symmetrical about the > axis, so they would have been putting as much power east as west if > the towers were aligned N-S. Maybe they were more like NW-SE, which > would make more sense. > > There's some more info in this article: > http://jeff560.tripod.com/am4.html - and a lot of early radio info, > as well. Note in paragraph 15 the reference to the joint WCBS/WNBC > tower being demolished in an airplane accident in 1967, and WNBC's > temporary move to the site in Lodi formerly used by WABC. I don't > recall that WABC ever left the Lodi site, but the article may refer > to the short aux tower on that site. > > There's more on that site. It's worth a look: > http://jeff560.tripod.com/broadcasting.html > > WABC, WMAQ, and WGN are three stations that have roughly half-wave > towers with shorter aux towers on the property that I understand > were used in the early days to directionalize the signals a bit. All > are "ND" today, and the aux towers are available for standby use but > mostly they just support STL and other aux antennas. > > -d > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Dan.Strassberg" > Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 8:57 AM > To: "A. Joseph Ross" > Cc: "Boston Radio Interest" > > Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs > > > From scott@fybush.com Mon Nov 23 12:28:08 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:28:08 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs In-Reply-To: <848A6B21306447B4813787DA9BC4A6EA@SatU205S5044> References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net>, <980D78ADA1D9451AB1218A36B7E60551@SatU205S5044> <4B0A1E12.6069.5F92FA@joe.attorneyross.com> <848A6B21306447B4813787DA9BC4A6EA@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <4B0AC628.10100@fybush.com> Dan.Strassberg wrote: > It was not very directional > and the radiation efficiency was HUGE--much higher than that of WTAM's > current conventional half-wave tower. I don't know the height of the > old tower; presumably, it was more than helf wave--maybe as much as > 5/8 wave. The old tower still stands - it was also the tower for WTAM's sister TV station, WNBK, which is today's WKYC-TV 3. The tower is 278 meters (911') tall. I don't recall whether it was segmented or not. I suspect it must have been - 278 meters is almost exactly a full wavelength at 1100 kHz, so segmenting it with an insulator halfway up would create a near-perfect Franklin antenna. That site is indeed south of Cleveland, in the Parma/Seven Hills antenna farm near the junction of I-480 and I-77. The previous WTAM site, to which WTAM returned after its experiment with DA operation, is a few miles to the southeast of the TV tower in Brecksville. (It's still the current WTAM site.) > There were other Class IA AMs that might have benefitted from using > DAs but never chose to do so. The most notable was KFI, which, back in > the '30s, could have built a two-tower array (or even a one-tower > setup like WTAM's) on Catalina Island. I suspect, however, that KFI's > owner, auto dealer Earl C Anthony, figured that the publicity from > having the station's 750' tower right next to his auto dealership was > a good trade-off for the coverage KFI could have gained in southern > California's then-sparsely populated desert areas. Also, there might > have been problems with getting the audio to a transmitter "26 miles > across the sea." I don't know in what year Pacific T&T installed its > first undersea cable between Santa Monica and Avalon. The Army beat the telephone company to that particular task - there was a cable in place by 1923, though it had only 7 circuits available at first. But the challenges of operating a 50 kW transmitter from Catalina back then would have been stiff ones. A fulltime engineering staff would have to have been housed on the island, and KFI would likely have needed to operate its own generator as well. I should correct a misconception here, while I'm at it: when Earle Anthony built the current KFI transmitter site in 1931, it was not next to his auto dealership. The dealership was in downtown LA, crowned by two big towers that continued to advertise KFI long after the transmitter moved out of the city. The transmitter site in La Mirada, on the Orange/LA county line, was surrounded by orange groves as late as the 1980s, when then-owner Cox built warehouses over the ground system around the tower base. > As for what stations the directional operations protect, although that > was not an issue when any of these ex-IA stations was built, changes > in the FCC rules might make it an issue now if WBZ or WWL wanted to > abandon its DA-1 operation. WBZ's radiation toward a station in Puerto > Rico might become an issue if WBZ wanted to operate ND. And I believe > that there is now at least one full-time station on 1030 in Florida. > WWL's limited radiation to the south now protects several signals in > (I believe) Venezuela and surrounding countries. That's an interesting question. Before the latest incarnation of the Rio treaty, it's my understanding that as I-A stations, WBZ and WWL operated directionally at their own discretion and could revert to ND operation at will. A former WBZ engineer once told me a story of a visit from a newly-minted FCC field agent, who showed up to inspect the site and wanted to go out and examine the station's monitoring points to determine whether the DA was operating properly. Trouble was, there were no monitoring points specified on the license, since WBZ was essentially a de jure ND station operating as a de facto DA. That was all well and good when WBZ had 1030 to itself. It would not work as well now, with stations jammed on to the channel right up to the edges of WBZ's protections. My guess is that the DA operations at WBZ and WWL are effectively grandfathered in place now that the I-A/I-B distinction has been eliminated, and any changes either station might make in the future would be handled under the same rules that apply to any class A AM signal. s From friedbagels@gmail.com Mon Nov 23 13:17:46 2009 From: friedbagels@gmail.com (Aaron Read) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:17:46 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911211807w2bd53192k28c22030c6fd4055@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B089850.4090405@fybush.com> <4fc429770911211807w2bd53192k28c22030c6fd4055@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B0AD1CA.30704@gmail.com> Kevin Vahey wrote: > While we are at it we should bow our heads for the long forgotten I-86 > from Sturbridge to Hartford. > Eh? I thought that's what I-84 was today? There's the still-kicking-around idea of extending I-384 from Bolton, CT to Providence, RI...replacing the "Suicide Six" (US RT.6) road that's incredible dangerous as it repeatedly goes from twisty-hilly-two-lane-farm-road to four-lane-divided-highway. If you're trying to get from Hartford to Providence, it's almost faster to take SR 2 to SR 11 to ST 85 to I-95. Of course, the reason I-384 never gets built is: who the hell wants to get from Providence to Hartford (or vice versa)??? :-) > Of course this is nothing compared to I-95 in New Jersey. > Indeed. And it wouldn't be nearly as obnoxious if there were an interchange between I-95 and I-276 (Penn Turnpike)...but of course, there isn't. Found that out the hard way, once. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Aaron Read | Finger Lakes Public Radio friedbagels@gmail.com | General Manager (WEOS & WHWS-LP) Geneva, NY 14456 | www.weos.org / www.whws.fm From wollman@bimajority.org Mon Nov 23 13:18:12 2009 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:18:12 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs In-Reply-To: <4B0AC628.10100@fybush.com> References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net> <980D78ADA1D9451AB1218A36B7E60551@SatU205S5044> <4B0A1E12.6069.5F92FA@joe.attorneyross.com> <848A6B21306447B4813787DA9BC4A6EA@SatU205S5044> <4B0AC628.10100@fybush.com> Message-ID: <19210.53732.499689.372667@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > I should correct a misconception here, while I'm at it: when Earle > Anthony built the current KFI transmitter site in 1931, it was not next > to his auto dealership. The dealership was in downtown LA, crowned by > two big towers that continued to advertise KFI long after the > transmitter moved out of the city. Wasn't the 1430 incarnation of KECA (before Anthony bought KEHE) there as well? What's at 10th and Hope these days? -GAWollman From torchia@technologist.com Sun Nov 22 06:50:13 2009 From: torchia@technologist.com (torchia@technologist.com) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 06:50:13 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV Message-ID: <8CC398115380A99-D2C-71F9@web-mmc-d17.sysops.aol.com> Bill Dellane wrote: >"While we are at it we should bow our heads for the long forgotten I-86 from Sturbridge to Hartford. I forgot about that. I believe I-84 was suppose to cut thru Eastern CT to go to RI." >>> Which brings up another politically inspired mess. When the hiway was started in the early 60's, for a long time you had to get off of I-84 heading west at Sission Avenue, in Hartford, then go out Park road in West Hartford and get back on at Trout Brook drive in West Hartford. Then there was another such break in the hiway between West Hartford at the New Britian line, and you didn't get back on until just south of Wolcott mountain in Southington. You could then proceed on I-84 into Waterbury. That roadblock remained for several years also. The entire travel log menagerie of I-84 continued for a number of years. It wasn't until the powers to be agreed to have I-84 run through downtown Hartford and part of downtown East Hartford, that the initial connection was made between the Buckley bridge in Hartford and Trout Brook drive in West Hartford. They finally got around to building the hiway as it is today much later on. I-84 is a death trap between the Buckley bridge and Bristol, and was never intended to run the course it now does. Being a close friend of one of the supervising engineers on the job at that time, he told me the original plans were for I-84 to go north from a point just beyond Bristol and completely bypass the city of Hartford, intersecting with I-91 (which was completed to Windsor at that time) so that travelers could have access to Bradley Field and Springfield in one direction, and Hartford in the other. It was then supposed to run north and east through Simsbury, Rockville, etc. and split at approx. West Willington, with one branch going east to facilitate easy access to UCONN and eventually connecting to I-395 (which at that time just a thought on a blue print) at Putnam, and continue on over to Providence, and the other branch going north to Sturbridge. Of course politics got in the way of common sense and things became as they are now. Bud Torchia From PeterH5322@rattlebrain.com Mon Nov 23 13:33:38 2009 From: PeterH5322@rattlebrain.com (PeterH) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:33:38 -0800 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs In-Reply-To: <742AF827DFAF46868C9113AC98034D64@SatU205S5044> References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net>, <980D78ADA1D9451AB1218A36B7E60551@SatU205S5044><4B0A1E12.6069.5F92FA@joe.attorneyross.com> <848A6B21306447B4813787DA9BC4A6EA@SatU205S5044> <0472966DE2904B5DBB21634B2D0841F6@dave> <742AF827DFAF46868C9113AC98034D64@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <6F091975-8474-409A-ABE6-D710C1241F8B@rattlebrain.com> On Nov 23, 2009, at 9:27 AM, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > I absolutely can't agree with the north-south orientation of the two > towers. It HAD to be roughly east-west. Maybe you were confused by the > orientation of the shore-line at the site. At that spot, the > shore-line very likely runs south to north. The objective was to > reduce radiation over Long Island Sound and increase it over New York > City. As you pointed out, a two-tower setup could do that only if the > towers were on a more-or-less east-west line. One corroboating fact is > that, when 750-kW superpower was being considered for roughly half of > the then-IA AMs (maybe 1960s), 660 was held back from further > disposition; that is, no Class IIA assignment was made on 660 at that > time. 770 already had KOB, which was a special case and was made a > IIA. 880 got KRVN. 660 _ultimately_ got KTNN, a IIA-like station, but > that was after the superpower idea had died. KTNN began life either as > a Class II (no A suffix) or went straight to Class B. I don't think I > can list all of the IA channels to which no IIAs were assigned, but > here's a stab at the list: 640, 650, 660, 700, 720 (I think) 750, 760, > 820, 830, 840 (I think), 870, 1040, 1160, 1200. (Hmmm... that's 14; I > thought there were only 13.) I don't think the stations in NV on 720 > or 840, though IIA-like, ever were IIAs. Note also that KTWO on 1030 > WAS a IIA, which always seemed odd to me, because you'd think 1030 > would have been held back because WBZ was already directional. Also > note that being near the geographical center of the 48 contiguous > states didn't preserve a station's candidacy for superpower: KPNW was > assigned to 1120, thus limiting KMOX to 50 kW. > The United States started out with forty ... yes FORTY ... frequencies on which stations of the Class I-A type (de-facto) were allocated, with five such stations per geographic "region", over the eight "regions". Yet, we wound up with only 25 Class I-As (in-fact) after NARBA. U.S. Class I-A frequencies were: 640, 650, 660, 670, 680 (*), 700, 720, 750, 760, 770, 780, 810 (*), 820, 830, 840, 850 (*), 870, 880, 890, 1000 (*), 1020, 1030, 1040, 1100, 1110 (*), 1120, 1160, 1180, 1200 and 1210. 680 (San Francisco) was broken-down for Raleigh, and later Boston, but it was a Class I-A in the beginning. 810 (Oakland) was was broken-down for Schenectady, but it was a Class I-A in the beginning. General Electric's flagship station, WGY wound up with ND-U, whereas KGO wound up with DA-1. 850 (Denver) was broken down for , and later Boston, but it was a Class I-A in the beginning. 1000 (Seattle) was broken-down for Chicago, but it was a Class I-A in the beginning. 1110 (Charlotte) was broken-down for Omaha, but it was a Class I-A in the beginning. CBS got 100 percent use of 780, by KFAB vacating that frequency, forever, in return for KFAB moving to 1110 and KFAB and WBT both directionalizing, but WBT's directional was not completed under CBS' ownership. Of the 25 Class I-As, after the initial break-downs mentioned, above, the following were in the initial Class II-A List, and were available for specific states within the under-served West: 670, 720, 780, 880, 890, 1020, 1030, 1100, 1120, 1180 and 1210. The revised Class II-A List included 770. 720 was available for either Idaho or Nevada, but went to Nevada (Las Vegas). 1120 was available for either California or Oregon, but went to Oregon (Eugene). After revision, 770 went to New Mexico (Albuquerque), as a final solution to the infamous "KOB Problem". Class I-As which have operated with directional antennas include: 660, 870, 1030 and 1100. Presently, only 870 and 1030 operate directionally. >> >> WABC, WMAQ, and WGN are three stations that have roughly half-wave >> towers with shorter aux towers on the property that I understand >> were used in the early days to directionalize the signals a bit. All >> are "ND" today, and the aux towers are available for standby use but >> mostly they just support STL and other aux antennas. All the network O&O Class I-As had auxiliaries. A few of their Class I-Bs, too. WLS' auxiliary was built in the 1980s. It is 199' tall and is built for 50 kW, unlike some auxiliaries, such as KFIs, which is built for only 25 kW. If WLS' auxiliary was built after "Rio", then it would have been ratcheted, as were the WFAN/WCBS and WWL auxiliaries, on account of interference to new Class As in Central and South America. Also Cuba. From paulranderson@charter.net Mon Nov 23 13:59:13 2009 From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:59:13 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <20091121182746.9B3BA1B4011@relay16.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> References: <20091121182746.9B3BA1B4011@relay16.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> Message-ID: On Nov 21, 2009, at 1:27 PM, Donna Halper wrote: > I don't know if you nice folks have been in correspondence with sometimes list-member John Andrews, but he sent me his recollections about WTAG and early television. I have not been able to verify the 1945 date he gives, however, nor do I see a channel 5 assignment in any of the reference books from that period which I possess. That doesn't mean he is wrong-- it just means more digging is required, and alas, I don't have a ton of free time to do it. In the "Directional ex-Class IA AMs" thread, recently started on this list, look at the following chart of TV allocations from 1947: Note that Worcester had an allocation for channel 5! Also of note, Waterbury had channel 12, Hartford-New Britain had 8 and 10, New Haven had 6, Providence had 11, Springfield-Holyoke had 3, Boston had 2, 4, 7, 9 and 13, Lowell-Lawrence-Haverhill had 6, and Manchester had one "community" channel. Some of these allocations disappeared and some moved to nearby cities eventually. Whatever happened to the concept of "metropolitan" and "community" channels? Paul From kvahey@comcast.net Mon Nov 23 15:51:27 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:51:27 -0600 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4B0AD1CA.30704@gmail.com> References: <4B089850.4090405@fybush.com> <4fc429770911211807w2bd53192k28c22030c6fd4055@mail.gmail.com> <4B0AD1CA.30704@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911231251r276dfd9cmff85a8aefd4a9afc@mail.gmail.com> I-86 seems to be the interstate version of US 2 which vanishes at Rouses Point, NY and reappears in Michigan. 86 can be found in New York State and then Idaho I don't know if there were plans for 86 to continue west of East Hartford and in any event when 84 to Providence was killed they re numbered 86 to 84. 95 north of Philadelphia is just comical. I swear Pennsylvania and New Jersey just refuse to deal with each other. Classic case is the Betsy Ross Bridge that doesn't connect to anything on the Jersey side. From paulranderson@charter.net Mon Nov 23 15:57:55 2009 From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:57:55 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <001a01ca6b1d$a60bdf60$f2239e20$@net> References: <001a01ca6b1d$a60bdf60$f2239e20$@net> Message-ID: <29CA2D8B-07A4-4E6C-A0EC-95851E814757@charter.net> On Nov 21, 2009, at 9:44 PM, Bill Dillane wrote: > It was about this time 40 years ago that I-84 was completed to connect > Hartford to points west. The recently demolished Channel 30 building in > West Hartford was on a main road until I-84 construction eliminated the > road. The road is/was New Britain Avenue. But before I-84 was built, it was US Route 6. The entrance to WVIT today is on Ridgewood Road, but I wouldn't be surprised if the entrance was on New Britain Avenue then. I've seen an old picture of the building and there's a big lawn in front that was taken for I-84. At that time, US 6 went east from Colt Highway in Farmington but instead of joining I-84, travelled along South Road to New Britain Avenue, where West Farms Mall is today. (If you travel this road now, it's hard to believe it was ever part of US 6. It looks very suburban, and too narrow to carry such an important road.) It continued along New Britain Avenue into Hartford but I don't know what path it took through Hartford. I think it eventually wound up on Silver Lane in East Hartford. Paul From sid@wrko.com Mon Nov 23 16:09:40 2009 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:09:40 -0700 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911231251r276dfd9cmff85a8aefd4a9afc@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B089850.4090405@fybush.com> <4fc429770911211807w2bd53192k28c22030c6fd4055@mail.gmail.com> <4B0AD1CA.30704@gmail.com> <4fc429770911231251r276dfd9cmff85a8aefd4a9afc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B74ED26@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> "86 can be found in New York State and then Idaho" ...and likewise, I-84 is in two distinct pieces: the west branch (Portland OR to Echo UT) and the east branch (Dunmore PA to Sturbridge MA). The piece of I-86 in New York is supplanting in parts, and will eventually replace in whole, NY-17 (the Southern Tier Expressway). Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From dave@skywaves.net Mon Nov 23 16:09:20 2009 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:09:20 -0500 Subject: Where did the roads go? [was WTAG-TV?] In-Reply-To: <29CA2D8B-07A4-4E6C-A0EC-95851E814757@charter.net> References: <001a01ca6b1d$a60bdf60$f2239e20$@net> <29CA2D8B-07A4-4E6C-A0EC-95851E814757@charter.net> Message-ID: <3632C595B57E4160AB984E7D4A72FA0F@dave> Since there's so much interest in highway history, the University of New Hampshire has a nice collection of historic topographic maps of the region at http://docs.unh.edu/nhtopos/nhtopos.htm -d From wollman@bimajority.org Mon Nov 23 16:14:41 2009 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:14:41 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? In-Reply-To: <29CA2D8B-07A4-4E6C-A0EC-95851E814757@charter.net> References: <001a01ca6b1d$a60bdf60$f2239e20$@net> <29CA2D8B-07A4-4E6C-A0EC-95851E814757@charter.net> Message-ID: <19210.64321.895706.560332@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > On Nov 21, 2009, at 9:44 PM, Bill Dillane wrote: >> It was about this time 40 years ago that I-84 was completed to connect >> Hartford to points west. The recently demolished Channel 30 building in >> West Hartford was on a main road until I-84 construction eliminated the >> road. > The road is/was New Britain Avenue. But before I-84 was built, it > was US Route 6. The entrance to WVIT today is on Ridgewood Road, but > I wouldn't be surprised if the entrance was on New Britain Avenue > then. Given that the 30 studios always had a New Britain Ave. address (#1422), that would make sense. -GAWollman From friedbagels@gmail.com Mon Nov 23 16:38:20 2009 From: friedbagels@gmail.com (Aaron Read) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:38:20 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 Message-ID: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> I drove 86 last summer for the first time, coming home from Philadelphia (my wife and I just decided to take the Watkins Glen route home) and we were wondering why that road wasn't officially an Interstate Highway for many miles until I nearly t-boned some poor bastard coming off a tiny side road that just exited right onto a 55MPH divided, four-lane highway. Holy crap! There's at least a half-dozen of those "interchanges" where the eastbound traffic can make a left-hand-turn across the westbound lanes onto what looks like personal driveways. (that's how teeny those side roads are) Yee-haw! I don't know all the politics, but given the state's budget crisis and how little anyone in Albany ever cares about the Southern Tier, and the terrain (in some places it's basically mountain on one side, river on the other) I don't think the DOT will *ever* build proper US Interstate System interchanges/flyovers there. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Aaron Read | Finger Lakes Public Radio friedbagels@gmail.com | General Manager (WEOS & WHWS-LP) Geneva, NY 14456 | www.weos.org / www.whws.fm The piece of I-86 in New York is supplanting in parts, and will eventually replace in whole, NY-17 (the Southern Tier Expressway). Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From sean.smyth@yahoo.com Mon Nov 23 17:57:13 2009 From: sean.smyth@yahoo.com (Sean Smyth) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:57:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> On Mon, 11/23/09, Aaron Read wrote: > I don't know all the politics, but given the state's budget > crisis and how little anyone in Albany ever cares about the > Southern Tier, and the terrain (in some places it's > basically mountain on one side, river on the other) I don't > think the DOT will *ever* build proper US Interstate System > interchanges/flyovers there. Aren't interstates significantly funded by the feds? The figure in my head is 90 percent, but I could be wrong. On topic, sort of: I'm always amazed by the cross pollination between the radio geek and road geek communities. Several regulars here also post at misc.transport.road, or at least did when I regularly hung out over there (admittedly, many years ago now). And we're all interested in highway signage, too, it seems. From ka3zci@yahoo.com Mon Nov 23 18:34:28 2009 From: ka3zci@yahoo.com (Robert Paine) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:34:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: WVIT (was WTAG-TV) Message-ID: <452735.99754.qm@web30103.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I can't prove it but I'm 99 & 44/100 % sure that the original entrance to Ch. 30 was from New Britain Ave. The station moved to 1422 a year or so after it started operations. According to Ch. 30 engineer in the 70s, the station had temporary studios and offices in a West Hartford shopping center near 1422. My uncle worked for George Dewey and Co. movers and helped moved WKNB-TV into the then-new studios. He had a photo of himself and another man, standing by the moving van with the call letters prominently displayed on the front of the building. As to NBC owning Ch. 30 twice, yes. In the mid-fifties, NBC purchased the station and the call letters changed to WNBC, and I believe there was a -TV at the end. About the same time, CBS bought WGTH Channel 18 from General Tire Hartford - one version of what GTH was supposed to have represented. An acquaintance was an engineer with WTHT and, after the station ceased being a separate entity, went temporarily to WGTH radio, the amalgam of WTHT and WONS, now WPOP. He went back to 18 when it went on the air in August, 1954. But, back to Ch. 30. The great UHF experiment didn't work out. I don't know why NBC sold 30, but CBS dumped out on 18 after WTIC-TV (the original) started. There is an urban legend that on the last night of its affiliation with CBS, an enterprising person put a tear in the corner of the CBS slide. Good story, anyway. Dick Bertel, late of WTIC radio, worked at WGTH radio. He said in his recent reminiscence of the late Bob Ellsworth that aired on WJMJ-FM that WGTH radio was co-located at 555 Asylum Ave. for a time. I've been researching the history of WTHT AM and FM since 1974 and never heard that. My understanding is that, after the merger the station operated from the WONS site at 54 Pratt Street. If anyone has information about the station working out of the old WTHT studios, I'd like to know about it. When I saw the studios - about 1972 or so - the large radio studio had become TV control; radio control contained racks of TV equipment and the small studio and former WTHT-FM room(s) I have no knowledge of. Bob Paine From dillane@sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 23 19:34:21 2009 From: dillane@sbcglobal.net (Bill Dillane) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:34:21 -0500 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re: WTAG-TV?)) Message-ID: <003101ca6c9d$dd78fec0$986afc40$@net> >The entrance to WVIT today is on Ridgewood Road, but I wouldn't be surprised if the entrance was on New Britain Avenue. I remember Route 6 (New Britain Ave.) Channel 30's main entrance was on New Britain Ave. >Wasn't there a related AM station at one time (WHNB or WKNB 840 in New Britain)...was 840 with NBC as well? Yes, and it was WKNB 840. WTIC was the exclusive NBC affil. >Channel 79 (Torrington) was on the air at least by 1968. Prior to that, WHNB had a Channel 79 translator on Channel 20's tower from 1964-1966. >http://jeff560.tripod.com/1947tvalloc.html >Waterbury had (allocation for) channel 12 WATR originally applied for Channel 12 before the freeze. From paul@derrynh.net Mon Nov 23 20:17:29 2009 From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:17:29 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3FE0F8036BA04DA7B9184D286BC775F6@PaulPC> I saw this post ant was thinking of the I-84 then I-86 then back to I-84 stretch from Sturbridge MA to Hartford CT (had changed to I-86 when they "THOUGHT" I-84 would go over to Providence....then changed it back to I-84 whne they killed the I-84 to Providence idea... Oh, and WTAG made me think THIS was the I-86 in question..... -Paul Hopfgarten -Derry NH/Freeport ME ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Smyth" To: "Aaron Read" ; Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 5:57 PM Subject: Re: WTAG-TV? I-86 > On Mon, 11/23/09, Aaron Read wrote: >> I don't know all the politics, but given the state's budget >> crisis and how little anyone in Albany ever cares about the >> Southern Tier, and the terrain (in some places it's >> basically mountain on one side, river on the other) I don't >> think the DOT will *ever* build proper US Interstate System >> interchanges/flyovers there. > > Aren't interstates significantly funded by the feds? The figure in my head > is 90 percent, but I could be wrong. > > On topic, sort of: I'm always amazed by the cross pollination between the > radio geek and road geek communities. Several regulars here also post at > misc.transport.road, or at least did when I regularly hung out over there > (admittedly, many years ago now). And we're all interested in highway > signage, too, it seems. > > > > From sid@wrko.com Mon Nov 23 20:25:57 2009 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:25:57 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B41F431@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> "I don't know all the politics, but given the state's budget crisis and how little anyone in Albany ever cares about the Southern Tier, and the terrain (in some places it's basically mountain on one side, river on the other) I don't think the DOT will *ever* build proper US Interstate System interchanges/flyovers there." Unless the state legislature modifies the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, which was passed in 1998 and which specifically sets out the funding and timetable for the project, the entire 381 miles of the east-west portion of NY-17 and its seven-mile extension into PA are already slated for conversion to I-86. There are still substantion portions of the upgrade not yet finished, including portions of the road in Chemung (exits 56-59), Binghamton (the "Kamikaze Curve") and the Catskill Mountains (exits 84-87 and 97-99). I'll bet your near-miss was in one of those areas. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From joe@attorneyross.com Tue Nov 24 01:29:00 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:29:00 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com>, <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> On 23 Nov 2009 at 14:57, Sean Smyth wrote: > On topic, sort of: I'm always amazed by the cross pollination between > the radio geek and road geek communities. Several regulars here also > post at misc.transport.road, or at least did when I regularly hung out > over there (admittedly, many years ago now). And we're all interested > in highway signage, too, it seems. Then maybe someone can explain why they took away the Route 128 designation for the southernmost part of Route 128. When I had court in Brockton for the first time in many years, coming back up Route 24, I got completely confused because What I always knew as Route 128 North was now I-93 South. They can designate the Interstate highways with whatever Interstate numbers they like, but why can't the state route numbers be left alone? -- 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 Nov 24 01:29:00 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:29:00 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs In-Reply-To: <848A6B21306447B4813787DA9BC4A6EA@SatU205S5044> References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net>, <848A6B21306447B4813787DA9BC4A6EA@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <4B0B7D2C.26591.88A67B@joe.attorneyross.com> On 23 Nov 2009 at 8:57, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > (For those who don't remember that far back, the WABC calls were on > 880 until, I think, 1943. Actually, WEAF became WNBC and WABC became WCBS on the same day in November 1946. -- 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 Tue Nov 24 04:27:07 2009 From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:27:07 -0500 Subject: Interstates and Nassau (but not why there are no Interstates IN Nassau...that would be a different thread) In-Reply-To: <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com>, <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: I believe that there may have been some deal with the Feds to drop the 128 designation from Canton to Braintree (I-93 US-1 now). BTW They added US 1 to the SE Expressway/Old 128 Braintree-Dedham stretch due to trucks crashing into the Storrow Drive Bridges Stretch of US 1.... Originally, the I-95 Canton-Peabody stretch of 128 was ALSO supposed to lose the 128 designation. Dropping the 128 sineage from Canton to Braintree ONLY maybe was a compromise? I would have put the I-93 signs on Rte 24 from Randolph to Tiverton RI, made the short Randolph-Canton stretch of Former 128 as I-595 (or such)...and made Rte 3 from Braintree-Bourne signed as I-193, but that's just me... Oh...and so it's radio.... Nassau is still stunting on 101.5 Meredith (WWHQ) to move to 104.9 (WLKZ Wolfeboro) and for the last week, 99.1 Henniker (WNNH) has been stunting the entire NH Nassau property group (93.3 WNHI Belmont, 106.3 WFNQ Nashua, 105.5 WJYY Concord, 104.9 WLKZ Wolfeboro, 98.3 WLNH Laconia & 1490 WEMJ Laconia) -Paul Hopfgarten Derry NH/Freeport ME (formerly Randolph MA) ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Joseph Ross" To: Cc: "boston Radio Group" Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:29 AM Subject: Re: WTAG-TV? I-86 > On 23 Nov 2009 at 14:57, Sean Smyth wrote: > >> On topic, sort of: I'm always amazed by the cross pollination between >> the radio geek and road geek communities. Several regulars here also >> post at misc.transport.road, or at least did when I regularly hung out >> over there (admittedly, many years ago now). And we're all interested >> in highway signage, too, it seems. > > Then maybe someone can explain why they took away the Route 128 > designation for the southernmost part of Route 128. When I had court > in Brockton for the first time in many years, coming back up Route > 24, I got completely confused because What I always knew as Route 128 > North was now I-93 South. They can designate the Interstate highways > with whatever Interstate numbers they like, but why can't the state > route numbers be left alone? > > -- > 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 sid@wrko.com Tue Nov 24 06:56:04 2009 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 06:56:04 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B41F431@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B41F431@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> Message-ID: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B74EFA4@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> "Unless the state legislature modifies the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century..." TEA-21 is an act of Congress, as I have been reminded by our moderator. That's what I get for trying to read three things at once. My bad. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From sid@wrko.com Tue Nov 24 07:05:08 2009 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:05:08 -0700 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com>, <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B74EFA7@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> "They can designate the Interstate highways with whatever Interstate numbers they like, but why can't the state route numbers be left alone?" AFAIK it's usual practice for state and federal route numbers to disappear on an existing road which is designated as an Interstate route, but I believe there are other exceptions to that rule besides I-95/MA-128 for various reasons, not the least of which is local custom. Despite the fact that the Canton-to-Randolph stretch of the Yankee Division Highway has not been signed as 128 for quite a while now, I still hear traffic reporters on radio and TV refer to it as 128. Since 128 is by most accounts the first "beltway" in the country, there may be some historical recognition at work as well. I'm betting the locals along New York's Southern Tier will be calling the Southern Tier Expressway "route 17" for many years to come, I-86 signage notwithstanding. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From dan.strassberg@att.net Tue Nov 24 07:54:47 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 07:54:47 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net>, <848A6B21306447B4813787DA9BC4A6EA@SatU205S5044> <4B0B7D2C.26591.88A67B@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <89B1EB22EDD24A9E8CBED18B4F33FBE8@SatU205S5044> Yes, but better to say 660 became WNBC and 880 became WCBS in November 1946, because nearly everybody who sees WABC immediately thinks of 770, which did not switch its calls from WJZ to WABC until several years after 880 gave up the WABC calls. What confusion there would have been if there had been a three-way call sign change in New York on the same day in November 1946! But this does bring up the question of what became of the WABC calls after 880 gave them up. I wonder whether anyone had yet thought of "warehousing" calls back in the 1940s. I suspect somebody had already done that, although I know of no examples. Was it pure luck that the WABC call sign was unused after the Blue Network changed its name to ABC and wanted the WABC calls for its New York City O&O? Or had somebody taken the calls, requiring the newly renamed network to pay them off in order to transfer them to 770 in New York? And if the WABC calls were in use when ABC Inc wanted them for 770 in New York, who had the calls at that time? The answers to those questions might make some great radio trivia. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Joseph Ross" To: "Dan.Strassberg" Cc: "Boston Radio Interest" ; "Scott Fybush" Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:29 AM Subject: Re: Directional ex-Class IA AMs > On 23 Nov 2009 at 8:57, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > >> (For those who don't remember that far back, the WABC calls were on >> 880 until, I think, 1943. > > Actually, WEAF became WNBC and WABC became WCBS on the same day in > November 1946. > > -- > 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 sid@wrko.com Tue Nov 24 08:42:56 2009 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:42:56 -0500 Subject: Alan Dary obit in the Boston Globe Message-ID: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B74F01A@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> The Globe has finally run an obit for the late Alan Dary, who died October 2nd: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/obituaries/articles/2009/11/24/alan_dary_popular_host_of_boston_radio_shows_at_89/ Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Tue Nov 24 11:14:27 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:14:27 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs Message-ID: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net> I had thought that WEAF became WRCA, and then WNBC. Channel 30 in New Britain had been WNBC when NBC owned it; when the station was sold, the WNBC calls got transferred to New York. Am I missing something in the timeline? -Doug Quoting "A. Joseph Ross" : > On 23 Nov 2009 at 8:57, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > > > (For those who don't remember that far back, the WABC calls were on > > 880 until, I think, 1943. > > Actually, WEAF became WNBC and WABC became WCBS on the same day in > November 1946. > > -- 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 Nov 24 12:21:03 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:21:03 -0600 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911240921k390de464j4b3c55dad2730527@mail.gmail.com> 128 signage is spotty as for example I have told many people to take Rte 2 to 128 and I keep forgetting the signs on Rte 2 only say 95. One move I have never been able to confirm why it was done was renumbering the Southeast Expressway to US 1 (along with it being I-93 and SR 3). US 1 used to snake along the river and then to the Jamiacaway but 10-15 years ago it was changed. I suspect it was Big Dig related concering funding. BTW in Illinois they make a big deal over US 66 which is no longer official and I wonder why it was decertified given the history. From friedbagels@gmail.com Tue Nov 24 09:54:07 2009 From: friedbagels@gmail.com (Aaron Read) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:54:07 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 Message-ID: <4B0BF38F.20104@gmail.com> Yeah, the near-miss was in Chemung county, IIRC. Down near the PA border. As for the "specific timetable", I got a good laugh out of that one. A very rueful laugh, I might add, and not directed at you. It's just that Albany does things when it damn well pleases, not when a little thing like "the law" says so. Scott might be less cynical than me, but I think he'll back me up here. It was especially noticeable when the state senate switched to Democratic control, and mostly downstate Democratic control at that. I've no love for Republicans but it was amazing how fast funding for anything north of Westchester suddenly disappeared eleven months ago. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Aaron Read | Finger Lakes Public Radio friedbagels@gmail.com | General Manager (WEOS & WHWS-LP) Geneva, NY 14456 | www.weos.org / www.whws.fm "I don't know all the politics, but given the state's budget crisis and how little anyone in Albany ever cares about the Southern Tier, and the terrain (in some places it's basically mountain on one side, river on the other) I don't think the DOT will *ever* build proper US Interstate System interchanges/flyovers there." Unless the state legislature modifies the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, which was passed in 1998 and which specifically sets out the funding and timetable for the project, the entire 381 miles of the east-west portion of NY-17 and its seven-mile extension into PA are already slated for conversion to I-86. There are still substantion portions of the upgrade not yet finished, including portions of the road in Chemung (exits 56-59), Binghamton (the "Kamikaze Curve") and the Catskill Mountains (exits 84-87 and 97-99). I'll bet your near-miss was in one of those areas. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From bob.bosra@demattia.net Tue Nov 24 13:04:16 2009 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:04:16 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <4B0BF38F.20104@gmail.com> References: <4B0BF38F.20104@gmail.com> Message-ID: My favorite interstate story has to be I-99, located in Pennsylvania. It's a prime example of what happens when politicians get involved. I'm pretty sure that route 128 is signed at most interchanges, though the signs are often small signs by the side of the road rather than being on the large overhead signs. I remember when I got married in '92 that our wedding reception was located off route 28 in Randolph. At the time, the south end of 128 was a combination of I-93 North/Route 1 North/Route 128 South. I had lived on the south shore for thirty years and until I had to write out the directions, I don't think I ever understood how the I-93/I-95/Route 128 nomenclature worked until I had to write those directions. I'm not sure how many out-of-town attendees were confused by those directions! I think maybe having a road labelled both North and South at the same time may be a reason why they dropped the "128" designation. -Bob On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Aaron Read wrote: > Yeah, the near-miss was in Chemung county, IIRC. Down near the PA border. > > As for the "specific timetable", I got a good laugh out of that one. A > very rueful laugh, I might add, and not directed at you. It's just that > Albany does things when it damn well pleases, not when a little thing like > "the law" says so. Scott might be less cynical than me, but I think he'll > back me up here. > > It was especially noticeable when the state senate switched to Democratic > control, and mostly downstate Democratic control at that. I've no love for > Republicans but it was amazing how fast funding for anything north of > Westchester suddenly disappeared eleven months ago. > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Aaron Read | Finger Lakes Public Radio > friedbagels@gmail.com | General Manager (WEOS & WHWS-LP) > Geneva, NY 14456 | www.weos.org / www.whws.fm > > > "I don't know all the politics, but given the state's budget crisis and > how little anyone in Albany ever cares about the Southern Tier, and the > terrain (in some places it's basically mountain on one side, river on > the other) I don't think the DOT will *ever* build proper US Interstate > System interchanges/flyovers there." > > Unless the state legislature modifies the Transportation Equity Act for the > 21st Century, which was passed in 1998 and which specifically sets out the > funding and timetable for the project, the entire 381 miles of the east-west > portion of NY-17 and its seven-mile extension into PA are already slated for > conversion to I-86. There are still substantion portions of the upgrade not > yet finished, including portions of the road in Chemung (exits 56-59), > Binghamton (the "Kamikaze Curve") and the Catskill Mountains (exits 84-87 > and 97-99). I'll bet your near-miss was in one of those areas. > > Sid Schweiger > IT Manager, Entercom New England > 20 Guest St / 3d Floor > Brighton MA 02135-2040 > From scott@fybush.com Tue Nov 24 13:16:41 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:16:41 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs In-Reply-To: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: <4B0C2309.9030909@fybush.com> vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: > I had thought that WEAF became WRCA, and then WNBC. Channel 30 in New > Britain had been WNBC when NBC owned it; when the station was sold, the > WNBC calls got transferred to New York. Am I missing something in the > timeline? -Doug Yup. The launch of the WNBC and WCBS calls in 1946 was coordinated. Both flips happened on Nov. 1, 1946. CBS flipped the calls on its FM (WABC-FM) and TV (WCBW) properties as well; NBC changed WEAF-FM to WNBC-FM, but kept the WNBT calls on its TV station. The WNBC calls had been used in New Britain, CT (on what's now WPOP 1410) until 1944. I believe, but am not certain, that NBC bought the calls from the New Britain station in 1944 and parked them on one of its shortwave transmitters awaiting use on the flagship station in NYC. The WCBS calls had been used in Springfield, IL on what became WCVS 1450. (The calls stood for "Community Broadcast Service," the owner of the Springfield station.) The WABC and WEAF calls were not reused immediately. I suspect, given the power that CBS and NBC wielded at the FCC, that they were held in some sort of informal "reserved" status and not available to Joe Radio Station who might have wanted them. On March 1, 1953, ABC changed the calls of WJZ/WJZ-FM/WJZ-TV to WABC/WABC-FM/WABC-TV. On Oct. 18, 1954, RCA rebranded many of its stations with callsigns reflecting the corporate ownership. That's when WNBC/WNBC-FM and WNBT(TV) became WRCA/WRCA-FM/WRCA-TV. KNBH(TV) in Los Angeles became KRCA(TV), and WNBW(TV) in Washington became WRC-TV, matching the existing WRC/WRC-FM. I don't know why NBC didn't change the calls on its remaining O&Os - KNBC/KNBC-FM in San Francisco kept their calls, as did WMAQ/WMAQ-FM/WNBQ(TV) in Chicago and WTAM/WTAM-FM/WNBK(TV) in Cleveland. (Actually, I'm pretty sure I know why they didn't bother with Cleveland - they were trying to unload the stations, and when they traded them to Westinghouse for KYW/WPTZ(TV) in Philadelphia, the Philly stations became WRCV/WRCV-TV.) Once again, I'm certain there were behind-the-scenes discussions with the FCC to keep the WNBC calls out of the "available" pool. On a more practical level, RCA's lawyers surely would have looked unkindly at any NBC affiliate that tried to snatch those calls, and why would a non-NBC affiliate have wanted them? The WNBC calls came back into use in 1957 on channel 30, ex-WKNB-TV. On May 23, 1960, NBC flipped WRCA/WRCA-FM/WRCA-TV back to WNBC/WNBC-FM/WNBC-TV. I think the change from WNBC(TV) to WHNB(TV) on channel 30 took place a few days earlier. The other "RC" calls went away around the same time - KRCA(TV) became KNBC(TV) in 1960, while KNBC/KNBC-FM in San Francisco became KNBR/KNBR-FM. WRCV/WRCV-TV in Philadelphia hung on until 1965, when the NBC/Westinghouse swap was undone and the Philly stations reverted to KYW/KYW-TV. There was no attempt to come up with "NBC" branding for the Cleveland stations when NBC got them back; Westinghouse had had some success with the radio station as KYW, and so the "KY" branding was maintained with new calls WKYC/WKYC-FM/WKYC-TV. WNBQ(TV) in Chicago finally became WMAQ-TV in 1964. I don't know why it took so long. WRC/WRC-FM/WRC-TV in Washington kept those calls, which were historic and long predated the RCA branding initiative of 1954. WABC-FM went away on Feb. 14, 1971, becoming WPLJ. WNBC-FM went away in 1975 with the launch of the News and Information Service, which rebranded 97.1 as WNWS(FM). WNBC(AM) went away on October 7, 1988, of course, and on June 1, 1992, NBC quietly changed the calls of WNBC-TV to simply WNBC. s From dan.strassberg@att.net Tue Nov 24 14:02:54 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:02:54 -0500 Subject: ABC call signs and batteries References: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net> <4B0C2309.9030909@fybush.com> Message-ID: So the WABC calls disappeared from Nov 1, 1946 to Mar 1, 1953--six years and four months. Either ABC also had friends at the FCC or ABC was trading on CBS's relationships. And to think, there was no American Broadcasting Co when the WABC calls were first assigned (to the station that is now WCBS). Although ABC is obviously highly memorable and could have stood for almost anything, the origiual WABC stood for Atlantic Battery Company, the name of the original owner of the station that is now WCBS. Battery companies were apparently really into station ownership. I think the second B in WBBM also stood for battery and the M stood for manufacturing. Except for crystal sets, which were powered by the signals they received, early 1920's radio receivers needed batteries (several different types in each receiver--filament, plate, screen--anyone else remember screen grids?) and I don't think rechargeable batteries, which probably would have had to be lead-acid batteries, were popular for use in radios. I guess that radio batteries were typically zinc-carbon (I don't think alkaline batteries had yet been invented) and the battery manufacturers must have envisioned huge profits from the sale of batteries--if only they could provide the listeners with a reason to tune in--and therefore to keep buying more batteries. I wonder if anyone has compiled a list of early radio stations that were owned by battery manufacturers. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Fybush" To: Cc: "Dan.Strassberg" ; "A. Joseph Ross" ; "'Boston Radio Interest'" Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:16 PM Subject: Re: Directional ex-Class IA AMs > vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: >> I had thought that WEAF became WRCA, and then WNBC. Channel 30 in >> New Britain had been WNBC when NBC owned it; when the station was >> sold, the WNBC calls got transferred to New York. Am I missing >> something in the timeline? -Doug > > Yup. > > The launch of the WNBC and WCBS calls in 1946 was coordinated. Both > flips happened on Nov. 1, 1946. CBS flipped the calls on its FM > (WABC-FM) and TV (WCBW) properties as well; NBC changed WEAF-FM to > WNBC-FM, but kept the WNBT calls on its TV station. > > The WABC and WEAF calls were not reused immediately. I suspect, > given the power that CBS and NBC wielded at the FCC, that they were > held in some sort of informal "reserved" status and not available to > Joe Radio Station who might have wanted them. > > On March 1, 1953, ABC changed the calls of WJZ/WJZ-FM/WJZ-TV to > WABC/WABC-FM/WABC-TV. > > WABC-FM went away on Feb. 14, 1971, becoming WPLJ. > > s From kc1ih@mac.com Tue Nov 24 14:32:48 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:32:48 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B74EFA7@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B74EFA7@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> Message-ID: At 5:05 AM -0700 11/24/09, Sid Schweiger wrote: > >I'm betting the locals along New York's Southern Tier will be >calling the Southern Tier Expressway "route 17" for many years to >come, I-86 signage notwithstanding. I thought they called it "The Quickway"? -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From scott@fybush.com Tue Nov 24 14:42:10 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:42:10 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <4B0BF38F.20104@gmail.com> References: <4B0BF38F.20104@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B0C3712.2030202@fybush.com> The conversion from NY17 to I-86 is actually progressing pretty close to schedule. I drive the eastern part of the highway (Bath to Harriman) several times a year en route to NYC, and the road has already transformed dramatically in the last decade or so. One of the last at-grade crossings in the Catskills (the Parksville "exit") was in the midst of massive reconstruction when I drove through last month, with a new bypass being built around Parksville. (Sadly, it will probably kill off the little Dari-King ice cream stand that's been a favorite roadside rest stop for me for many years.) There's already "Future I-86" signage in place along much of the Catskills "Quickway" section of 17. Aaron Read wrote: > Yeah, the near-miss was in Chemung county, IIRC. Down near the PA border. > > As for the "specific timetable", I got a good laugh out of that one. A > very rueful laugh, I might add, and not directed at you. It's just that > Albany does things when it damn well pleases, not when a little thing > like "the law" says so. Scott might be less cynical than me, but I > think he'll back me up here. > > It was especially noticeable when the state senate switched to > Democratic control, and mostly downstate Democratic control at that. > I've no love for Republicans but it was amazing how fast funding for > anything north of Westchester suddenly disappeared eleven months ago. > From scott@fybush.com Tue Nov 24 14:46:36 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:46:36 -0500 Subject: ABC call signs and batteries In-Reply-To: References: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net> <4B0C2309.9030909@fybush.com> Message-ID: <4B0C381C.90401@fybush.com> Dan.Strassberg wrote: > So the WABC calls disappeared from Nov 1, 1946 to Mar 1, 1953--six > years and four months. Either ABC also had friends at the FCC or ABC > was trading on CBS's relationships. It's also possible that ABC's lawyers were watching closely to make sure none of ABC's own affiliates tried to snag the calls - and as the "ABC network" brand became more prominent, it would have made less and less sense for any non-ABC to want the calls. > > And to think, there was no American Broadcasting Co when the WABC > calls were first assigned (to the station that is now WCBS). Although > ABC is obviously highly memorable and could have stood for almost > anything, the origiual WABC stood for Atlantic Battery Company, the > name of the original owner of the station that is now WCBS. WABC was actually the second set of calls for that station; it began as WAHG, named for radio manufacturer A.H. Grebe. s From kc1ih@mac.com Tue Nov 24 14:49:06 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:49:06 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs In-Reply-To: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: At 11:14 AM -0500 11/24/09, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: >I had thought that WEAF became WRCA, and then WNBC. I do seem to remember as a kid growing up in the NY area when WRCA became WNBC, it was maybe mid 50's? -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From kc1ih@mac.com Tue Nov 24 14:59:36 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:59:36 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911240921k390de464j4b3c55dad2730527@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> <4fc429770911240921k390de464j4b3c55dad2730527@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: At 11:21 AM -0600 11/24/09, Kevin Vahey wrote: > >BTW in Illinois they make a big deal over US 66 which is no longer >official and I wonder why it was decertified given the history. What drives me crazy when driving around Chicago is that all the traffic reports on the radio refer to the highways by the names which the natives use, yet my maps and the signs mostly use the interstate highway numbers. You'de think that with my sister living in the area for the last almost 30 years and me visiting mostly annually that I'de have the names figured out, but that is not yet the case. -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From dave@skywaves.net Tue Nov 24 15:08:13 2009 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:08:13 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com><121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com><4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com><4fc429770911240921k390de464j4b3c55dad2730527@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <28EA7806267B4AE187CC0C77A4CC325A@dave> The really weird thing about Chicago is they they closed the Dan Ryan (I think - is that right?) when I lived there about 25 years ago to rebuild it. Everybody was forecasting all kinds of delays on the remaining interstates. Nothing happened. The other roads were just as bad as usual, but no worse. Maybe the ghost of old Mayor Daley got his voters to stay buried for the duration... :-) -------------------------------------------------- From: "Larry Weil" Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:59 PM To: "'Boston Radio Interest'" Subject: Re: WTAG-TV? I-86 > > At 11:21 AM -0600 11/24/09, Kevin Vahey wrote: >> >>BTW in Illinois they make a big deal over US 66 which is no longer >>official and I wonder why it was decertified given the history. > > What drives me crazy when driving around Chicago is that all the traffic > reports on the radio refer to the highways by the names which the natives > use, yet my maps and the signs mostly use the interstate highway numbers. > You'de think that with my sister living in the area for the last almost 30 > years and me visiting mostly annually that I'de have the names figured > out, but that is not yet the case. > > -- > Larry Weil > Lake Wobegone, NH > From wollman@bimajority.org Tue Nov 24 15:09:35 2009 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:09:35 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> <4fc429770911240921k390de464j4b3c55dad2730527@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <19212.15743.774639.362825@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > What drives me crazy when driving around Chicago is that all the > traffic reports on the radio refer to the highways by the names which > the natives use, yet my maps and the signs mostly use the interstate > highway numbers. You'de think that with my sister living in the area > for the last almost 30 years and me visiting mostly annually that > I'de have the names figured out, but that is not yet the case. Once you do get them figured out, they change the names. I still haven't quite gotten over the Calumet being called the (Bishop) Ford now. And didn't they rename the East-West Tollway at some point? (Wikipedia says that it's now the Ronald Reagan Tollway.) Unlike in Boston, the Chicago radio traffic people seem to adopt the new names fairly quickly. -GAWollman From sid@wrko.com Tue Nov 24 15:11:03 2009 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:11:03 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B74EFA7@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> Message-ID: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B802BB4@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> "I thought they called it "The Quickway"?" To be more precise, the Quickway is NY-17/I-86 between the Thruway/I-87 in Harriman and I-81 in Binghamton. West of I-81, it's the Southern Tier Expressway. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom New England 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Brighton MA 02135-2040 From rbello@belloassoc.com Tue Nov 24 13:41:34 2009 From: rbello@belloassoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:41:34 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: References: <4B0BF38F.20104@gmail.com> Message-ID: <90ec04420911241041g5d189fdat82dd8a2bf924d181@mail.gmail.com> The change in Route 1's location was tied to reconstruction of the VFW Parkway in West Roxbury which was also Route 1. ?They wanted fewer vehicles to be tied up in construction traffic. On Tuesday, November 24, 2009, Kevin Vahey wrote: > 128 signage is spotty as for example I have told many people to take > Rte 2 to 128 and I keep forgetting the signs on Rte 2 only say 95. > > One move I have never been able to confirm why it was done was > renumbering the Southeast Expressway to US 1 (along with it being I-93 > and SR 3). ?US 1 used to snake along the river and then to the > Jamiacaway but 10-15 years ago it was changed. > > I suspect it was Big Dig related concering funding. > > BTW in Illinois they make a big deal over US 66 which is no longer > official and I wonder why it was decertified given the history. > -- Ron Bello Bello Associates, Inc. 160 Speen Street - Suite 303 Framingham, MA 01701 508-820-1100 Fax 820-1112 From rogerkirk@ttlc.net Tue Nov 24 16:10:43 2009 From: rogerkirk@ttlc.net (Roger Kirk) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:10:43 -0500 Subject: ABC call signs and batteries In-Reply-To: References: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net> <4B0C2309.9030909@fybush.com> Message-ID: <4B0C4BD3.8030901@ttlc.net> Dan.Strassberg wrote: > Except for crystal sets, which were powered by the > signals they received, early 1920's radio receivers needed batteries > (several different types in each receiver--filament, plate, > screen--anyone else remember screen grids?) and I don't think > rechargeable batteries, which probably would have had to be lead-acid > batteries, were popular for use in radios. I guess that radio > batteries were typically zinc-carbon The "A" battery was for filaments. Typically big and supplied a lot of current. (Predecessor to today's "AA" & "AAA") Frequently re-chargeable and referred to as a "wet" battery. The "B" battery was for Plate Power. Hence "B+" - Big, with multiple cells for higher voltage & lower current. 90 Volts each and frequently two batteries in series. Generally not re-chargeable & referred to as a "dry battery" The "C" Battery was for Grid Bias. Modest in size, 10 vots or under and tapped between cells. Minimal current draw from the radio gave this a longer life. Most (if not all) of these batteries had fahnestock clips (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahnestock_clip) For pictures: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_(vacuum_tube) From scott@fybush.com Tue Nov 24 16:18:16 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:18:16 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B74EFA7@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> Message-ID: <4B0C4D98.9060008@fybush.com> Larry Weil wrote: > At 5:05 AM -0700 11/24/09, Sid Schweiger wrote: >> >> I'm betting the locals along New York's Southern Tier will be calling >> the Southern Tier Expressway "route 17" for many years to come, I-86 >> signage notwithstanding. > > I thought they called it "The Quickway"? > There are two pieces to Route 17 in NY: the Southern Tier Expressway runs from the PA line to I-81 at Binghamton, while the Quickway runs from I-81 at Binghamton to I-87 (the Thruway) at Harriman. The "Quickway" nomenclature for the part through the Catskills is largely obsolete, though there's still a Quickway Diner near Middletown where I ate last month on the way to NYC. That part of the road is now known almost exclusively as "17." The "Southern Tier Expressway" is still signed along most of what's now I-86, but it's also largely given way to "17" in spoken usage. s From kc1ih@mac.com Tue Nov 24 15:22:57 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:22:57 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <19212.15743.774639.362825@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> <4fc429770911240921k390de464j4b3c55dad2730527@mail.gmail.com> <19212.15743.774639.362825@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: At 3:09 PM -0500 11/24/09, Garrett Wollman wrote: > >Unlike in Boston, the Chicago radio traffic people seem to adopt the >new names fairly quickly. > It also drives me buggy that the Chicago traffic reports give you the info in terms of the time it takes to get between certain points. As a visitor I have no idea if that's normal or indicates a delay, as I am not that familiar with those points. -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From kc1ih@mac.com Tue Nov 24 15:25:37 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:25:37 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B802BB4@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B74EFA7@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> <0D5E60C875634E4AA1031FC691BCCC552B802BB4@ENTCORMB2.etmcorad.com> Message-ID: At 3:11 PM -0500 11/24/09, Sid Schweiger wrote: >"I thought they called it "The Quickway"?" > >To be more precise, the Quickway is NY-17/I-86 between the >Thruway/I-87 in Harriman and I-81 in Binghamton. West of I-81, it's >the Southern Tier Expressway. > Thanks for the clarification. I know when a kid we took The Quickway to get to the Boy Scout camp (Onteora Scout Reservation) in Livingston Manor. -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From wollman@bimajority.org Tue Nov 24 16:30:16 2009 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:30:16 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> <4fc429770911240921k390de464j4b3c55dad2730527@mail.gmail.com> <19212.15743.774639.362825@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <19212.20584.144285.306616@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > It also drives me buggy that the Chicago traffic reports give you the > info in terms of the time it takes to get between certain points. As > a visitor I have no idea if that's normal or indicates a delay, as I > am not that familiar with those points. See, I actually prefer that. If I'm driving from O'Hare to the Loop, having the traffic report tell me that the Kennedy is 90 minutes from O'Hare to the Loop is exactly the information I want to know -- particularly when I *don't* know what is typical. I'd love to have a traffic report that gave me an estimate of Turnpike travel time from Route 128 to Logan, for example -- that would be something I could use when planning a trip to the airport. Telling me "Pike east slow from Weston to the supermarket and from Allston-Brighton to the Pru tunnel" isn't helpful. -GAWollman From kvahey@comcast.net Tue Nov 24 16:41:09 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:41:09 -0600 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911240921k390de464j4b3c55dad2730527@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com> <121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> <4fc429770911240921k390de464j4b3c55dad2730527@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4fc429770911241341k64b3be8fp732a8d9a6409b1f0@mail.gmail.com> I think you can count the number of people in Maine that call the road between Bangor-Calias as Route 9 on one hand. It is 'The Airline' Maine SR 9 has to be the strangest road in the US. No matter where you go in Maine it seems to appear :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maine_State_Route_9 From paul@derrynh.net Tue Nov 24 17:23:14 2009 From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:23:14 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911240921k390de464j4b3c55dad2730527@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B0B00CC.9020606@gmail.com><121204.26410.qm@web110513.mail.gq1.yahoo.com><4B0B7D2C.22191.88A4C6@joe.attorneyross.com> <4fc429770911240921k390de464j4b3c55dad2730527@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <44C7D8DB135F4FC8A6AF5532E906F797@PaulPC> Rte 1 was put on the X-Way because too many trucks were getting stuck on Storrow Drive and were using US 1 as their 'guidepost' -Paul Hopfgarten -Derry NH/Freeport ME ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Vahey" To: "A. Joseph Ross" Cc: "boston Radio Group" Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:21 PM Subject: Re: WTAG-TV? I-86 > 128 signage is spotty as for example I have told many people to take > Rte 2 to 128 and I keep forgetting the signs on Rte 2 only say 95. > > One move I have never been able to confirm why it was done was > renumbering the Southeast Expressway to US 1 (along with it being I-93 > and SR 3). US 1 used to snake along the river and then to the > Jamiacaway but 10-15 years ago it was changed. > > I suspect it was Big Dig related concering funding. > > BTW in Illinois they make a big deal over US 66 which is no longer > official and I wonder why it was decertified given the history. > From joe@attorneyross.com Wed Nov 25 02:16:28 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:16:28 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs In-Reply-To: <89B1EB22EDD24A9E8CBED18B4F33FBE8@SatU205S5044> References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net>, <89B1EB22EDD24A9E8CBED18B4F33FBE8@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <4B0CD9CC.30690.9A89A5@joe.attorneyross.com> On 24 Nov 2009 at 7:54, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > Yes, but better to say 660 became WNBC and 880 became WCBS in November > 1946, because nearly everybody who sees WABC immediately thinks of > 770, which did not switch its calls from WJZ to WABC until several > years after 880 gave up the WABC calls. What confusion there would > have been if there had been a three-way call sign change in New York > on the same day in November 1946! But this does bring up the question > of what became of the WABC calls after 880 gave them up. I wonder > whether anyone had yet thought of "warehousing" calls back in the > 1940s. I suspect somebody had already done that, although I know of no > examples. Was it pure luck that the WABC call sign was unused after > the Blue Network changed its name to ABC and wanted the WABC calls for > its New York City O&O? Or had somebody taken the calls, requiring the > newly renamed network to pay them off in order to transfer them to 770 > in New York? And if the WABC calls were in use when ABC Inc wanted > them for 770 in New York, who had the calls at that time? The answers > to those questions might make some great radio trivia. Indeed it would. The oldest example of warehousing call letters that I know of is when WNBC became WRCA, and the WNBC calls were put on channel 30 in Connecticut. I assume that was an attempt to warehouse the calls. And another bit of radio/TV trivia would be why RCA/NBC decided to change WNBC to WRCA and its Los Angeles station to KRCA. And then why the decided to change back. Anyone know anything they can share? -- 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 Nov 25 02:16:28 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:16:28 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs In-Reply-To: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: <4B0CD9CC.14756.9A8ABE@joe.attorneyross.com> On 24 Nov 2009 at 11:14, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: > I had thought that WEAF became WRCA, and then WNBC. Channel 30 in New > Britain had been WNBC when NBC owned it; when the station was sold, > the WNBC calls got transferred to New York. Am I missing something > in the timeline? -Doug Yes. As stated, WEAF became WNBC in November 1946. WNBC became WRCA in October 1954 and became WNBC again in May 1960. -- 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 Nov 25 02:16:28 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:16:28 -0500 Subject: ABC call signs and batteries In-Reply-To: References: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net>, Message-ID: <4B0CD9CC.23403.9A8C45@joe.attorneyross.com> On 24 Nov 2009 at 14:02, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > So the WABC calls disappeared from Nov 1, 1946 to Mar 1, 1953--six > years and four months. Either ABC also had friends at the FCC or ABC > was trading on CBS's relationships. Back in the 1970s, the political organization in Brookline which supported funding for the schools was called ABC, which stood for "A Brookline Coalition." As sometimes happens with local political organizations, at some point it petered out. A few years later, school supporters got together to form a new group. They called it Coalition for Brookline Schools, or CBS. I asked at a meeting of Brookline Pax whether the next education coalition would be called NBC or FOX. -- 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 Nov 25 04:29:43 2009 From: paul@derrynh.net (Paul Hopfgarten) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 04:29:43 -0500 Subject: ABC call signs and batteries In-Reply-To: <4B0CD9CC.23403.9A8C45@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <20091124111427.3e64vgfw8tcg4ccs@webmail.myfairpoint.net>, <4B0CD9CC.23403.9A8C45@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <2D6302708AD54AB0BF80E6B275415E5C@PaulPC> Well, NBC could be "New Brookline Classrooms" as a pro-new school building.... But only the HS Xylophone dept could use FOX as "Fund Our Xylophones" Also, we could have a pro-increase teacher initiative "Increase Our (k)Nowledge" (ION). And the anti-tax folks could have CW/Brookline "Cut Waste".... And on cable, we could have TBS "Together (for) Brookline Schools" Need I continue............(acronyms are us) -Paul Hopfgarten Derry NH/Freeport ME ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Joseph Ross" To: "Dan.Strassberg" Cc: "Boston Radio Interest" Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 2:16 AM Subject: Re: ABC call signs and batteries > > Back in the 1970s, the political organization in Brookline which > supported funding for the schools was called ABC, which stood for "A > Brookline Coalition." As sometimes happens with local political > organizations, at some point it petered out. A few years later, > school supporters got together to form a new group. They called it > Coalition for Brookline Schools, or CBS. I asked at a meeting of > Brookline Pax whether the next education coalition would be called > NBC or FOX. > > -- > 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 dillane@sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 25 07:02:56 2009 From: dillane@sbcglobal.net (Bill Dillane) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:02:56 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs Message-ID: <001d01ca6dc7$39c71bb0$ad555310$@net> >and the WNBC calls were put on channel 30 in Connecticut. I assume that was an attempt to warehouse the calls. Sounds right. AM 840 remained WKNB during NBC's brief ownership of it and Channel 30. From rickkelly@gmail.com Wed Nov 25 07:03:43 2009 From: rickkelly@gmail.com (Rick Kelly) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:03:43 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs In-Reply-To: <4B0CD9CC.30690.9A89A5@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <000201ca6b16$f8d14fc0$ea73ef40$@net> <89B1EB22EDD24A9E8CBED18B4F33FBE8@SatU205S5044> <4B0CD9CC.30690.9A89A5@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <521b7fd10911250403v3a408c0ar3d794526d7eb423f@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:16 AM, A. Joseph Ross wrote: > The oldest example of warehousing call letters that I know of is when > WNBC became WRCA, and the WNBC calls were put on channel 30 in > Connecticut. ?I assume that was an attempt to warehouse the calls. With Channel 30 being licensed to New Britain, Connecticut, I reckoned that was how the N-B-C was formed. -Rick Kelly northeastairchecks.com From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Wed Nov 25 09:07:56 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:07:56 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 Message-ID: <20091125090756.iwqjga1p6j9c0wk0@webmail.myfairpoint.net> You can say that again. The idea seems to have been, "Let's lay out a route from Portland to Calais and make it as convoluted as possible." Even more confusing is the numbered highway layout on the Blue Hill peninsula, on the east side of Penobscot Bay. Look at it on a map, check out the three-digit route numbers, and see if you can figure it out. It's at least as entertaining as "Where's Waldo?". -Doug Quoting Kevin Vahey : > I think you can count the number of people in Maine that call the road > between Bangor-Calias as Route 9 on one hand. It is 'The Airline' > > Maine SR 9 has to be the strangest road in the US. No matter where you > go in Maine it seems to appear :) > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maine_State_Route_9 > From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Wed Nov 25 09:10:13 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:10:13 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs Message-ID: <20091125091013.og7hw5r1cq0o8o4s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> How long were the WJZ calls mothballed before Westinghouse reclaimed them for Channel 13 in Baltimore? -Doug Quoting "A. Joseph Ross" : > On 24 Nov 2009 at 7:54, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > > > Yes, but better to say 660 became WNBC and 880 became WCBS in November > > 1946, because nearly everybody who sees WABC immediately thinks of > > 770, which did not switch its calls from WJZ to WABC until several > > years after 880 gave up the WABC calls. What confusion there would > > have been if there had been a three-way call sign change in New York > > on the same day in November 1946! But this does bring up the question > > of what became of the WABC calls after 880 gave them up. I wonder > > whether anyone had yet thought of "warehousing" calls back in the > > 1940s. I suspect somebody had already done that, although I know of no > > examples. Was it pure luck that the WABC call sign was unused after > > the Blue Network changed its name to ABC and wanted the WABC calls for > > its New York City O&O? Or had somebody taken the calls, requiring the > > newly renamed network to pay them off in order to transfer them to 770 > > in New York? And if the WABC calls were in use when ABC Inc wanted > > them for 770 in New York, who had the calls at that time? The answers > > to those questions might make some great radio trivia. > > Indeed it would. > > The oldest example of warehousing call letters that I know of is when > WNBC became WRCA, and the WNBC calls were put on channel 30 in > Connecticut. I assume that was an attempt to warehouse the calls. > > And another bit of radio/TV trivia would be why RCA/NBC decided to > change WNBC to WRCA and its Los Angeles station to KRCA. And then > why the decided to change back. Anyone know anything they can share? > > -- 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 Wed Nov 25 11:13:32 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:13:32 -0500 Subject: Directional ex-Class IA AMs References: <20091125091013.og7hw5r1cq0o8o4s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: Years, but since they were three-letter calls, there was no worry about someone else getting them. The problem was satisfying the FCC that Westinghouse should get them back. Westinghouse started WJZ but no longer owned it when the calls were changed to WABC. And the new WJZ was a TV station not a radio station and was in Baltimore, not Newark or New York City. Only recently did the WJZ calls return to AM (in Baltimore). ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Dan.Strassberg" ; "A. Joseph Ross" Cc: "'Boston Radio Interest'" Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 9:10 AM Subject: Re: Directional ex-Class IA AMs > How long were the WJZ calls mothballed before Westinghouse reclaimed > them for Channel 13 in Baltimore? -Doug > > > Quoting "A. Joseph Ross" : >> On 24 Nov 2009 at 7:54, Dan.Strassberg wrote: >> >> > Yes, but better to say 660 became WNBC and 880 became WCBS in >> > November >> > 1946, because nearly everybody who sees WABC immediately thinks >> > of >> > 770, which did not switch its calls from WJZ to WABC until >> > several >> > years after 880 gave up the WABC calls. What confusion there >> > would >> > have been if there had been a three-way call sign change in New >> > York >> > on the same day in November 1946! But this does bring up the >> > question >> > of what became of the WABC calls after 880 gave them up. I wonder >> > whether anyone had yet thought of "warehousing" calls back in the >> > 1940s. I suspect somebody had already done that, although I know >> > of no >> > examples. Was it pure luck that the WABC call sign was unused >> > after >> > the Blue Network changed its name to ABC and wanted the WABC >> > calls for >> > its New York City O&O? Or had somebody taken the calls, requiring >> > the >> > newly renamed network to pay them off in order to transfer them >> > to 770 >> > in New York? And if the WABC calls were in use when ABC Inc >> > wanted >> > them for 770 in New York, who had the calls at that time? The >> > answers >> > to those questions might make some great radio trivia. >> >> Indeed it would. >> The oldest example of warehousing call letters that I know of is >> when >> WNBC became WRCA, and the WNBC calls were put on channel 30 in >> Connecticut. I assume that was an attempt to warehouse the calls. >> And another bit of radio/TV trivia would be why RCA/NBC decided to >> change WNBC to WRCA and its Los Angeles station to KRCA. And then >> why the decided to change back. Anyone know anything they can >> share? >> >> -- 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 vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Wed Nov 25 11:21:33 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:21:33 -0500 Subject: Interstates and Nassau (but not why there are no Interstates IN Nassau...that would be a different thread) Message-ID: <20091125112133.xmouoiirz9nosg4c@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Paul: Pardon my ignorance; please explain the term "stunting". You've lost me on that one. -Doug Quoting Paul Hopfgarten : > I believe that there may have been some deal with the Feds to drop the 128 > designation from Canton to Braintree (I-93 US-1 now). BTW They added US 1 to > the SE Expressway/Old 128 Braintree-Dedham stretch due to trucks crashing > into the Storrow Drive Bridges Stretch of US 1.... > > Originally, the I-95 Canton-Peabody stretch of 128 was ALSO supposed to lose > the 128 designation. Dropping the 128 sineage from Canton to Braintree ONLY > maybe was a compromise? > > I would have put the I-93 signs on Rte 24 from Randolph to Tiverton RI, made > the short Randolph-Canton stretch of Former 128 as I-595 (or such)...and > made Rte 3 from Braintree-Bourne signed as I-193, but that's just me... > > Oh...and so it's radio.... Nassau is still stunting on 101.5 Meredith (WWHQ) > to move to 104.9 (WLKZ Wolfeboro) and for the last week, 99.1 Henniker > (WNNH) has been stunting the entire NH Nassau property group (93.3 WNHI > Belmont, 106.3 WFNQ Nashua, 105.5 WJYY Concord, 104.9 WLKZ Wolfeboro, 98.3 > WLNH Laconia & 1490 WEMJ Laconia) > > -Paul Hopfgarten > Derry NH/Freeport ME (formerly Randolph MA) > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "A. Joseph Ross" > To: > Cc: "boston Radio Group" > Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:29 AM > Subject: Re: WTAG-TV? I-86 > > > > On 23 Nov 2009 at 14:57, Sean Smyth wrote: > > > >> On topic, sort of: I'm always amazed by the cross pollination between > >> the radio geek and road geek communities. Several regulars here also > >> post at misc.transport.road, or at least did when I regularly hung out > >> over there (admittedly, many years ago now). And we're all interested > >> in highway signage, too, it seems. > > > > Then maybe someone can explain why they took away the Route 128 > > designation for the southernmost part of Route 128. When I had court > > in Brockton for the first time in many years, coming back up Route > > 24, I got completely confused because What I always knew as Route 128 > > North was now I-93 South. They can designate the Interstate highways > > with whatever Interstate numbers they like, but why can't the state > > route numbers be left alone? > > > > -- > > 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 Wed Nov 25 11:50:41 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 10:50:41 -0600 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <20091125090756.iwqjga1p6j9c0wk0@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091125090756.iwqjga1p6j9c0wk0@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: <4fc429770911250850x1586036cxce4110cd51786ca8@mail.gmail.com> I was in Calias one night and the locals flat out told me I was not driving 'The Airline' that night because of fog and we wound up in St Stephen for the evening. That road is no picnic in sunshine either. On 11/25/09, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: > You can say that again. The idea seems to have been, "Let's lay out a > route from Portland to Calais and make it as convoluted as possible." > > Even more confusing is the numbered highway layout on the Blue Hill > peninsula, on the east side of Penobscot Bay. Look at it on a map, > check out the three-digit route numbers, and see if you can figure it > out. It's at least as entertaining as "Where's Waldo?". -Doug > > > Quoting Kevin Vahey : >> I think you can count the number of people in Maine that call the road >> between Bangor-Calias as Route 9 on one hand. It is 'The Airline' >> >> Maine SR 9 has to be the strangest road in the US. No matter where you >> go in Maine it seems to appear :) >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maine_State_Route_9 >> > > > > From vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net Wed Nov 25 12:11:47 2009 From: vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net (vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:11:47 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 Message-ID: <20091125121147.uir2v930qxa8kk8s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> The Airline is WAY better than it used to be in the days when it was narrow, hilly, badly paved, and full of curves and dips. It's been considerably widened and straightened in recent years, and one can actually get from Bangor to Calais in about two hours, maybe even a little less. That having been said, however, the road is still treacherous in the winter and in fog. There's a good bit of truck traffic on it, and moose can pop out of the woods anytime. When it's nice out, it's a pretty drive. -Doug Quoting Kevin Vahey : > I was in Calias one night and the locals flat out told me I was not > driving 'The Airline' that night because of fog and we wound up in St > Stephen for the evening. > > That road is no picnic in sunshine either. > > > > On 11/25/09, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: > > You can say that again. The idea seems to have been, "Let's lay out a > > route from Portland to Calais and make it as convoluted as possible." > > > > Even more confusing is the numbered highway layout on the Blue Hill > > peninsula, on the east side of Penobscot Bay. Look at it on a map, > > check out the three-digit route numbers, and see if you can figure it > > out. It's at least as entertaining as "Where's Waldo?". -Doug > > > > > > Quoting Kevin Vahey : > >> I think you can count the number of people in Maine that call the road > >> between Bangor-Calias as Route 9 on one hand. It is 'The Airline' > >> > >> Maine SR 9 has to be the strangest road in the US. No matter where you > >> go in Maine it seems to appear :) > >> > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maine_State_Route_9 > >> > > > > > > > > > From marklaurence@mac.com Wed Nov 25 13:08:06 2009 From: marklaurence@mac.com (Mark Laurence) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:08:06 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <20091125121147.uir2v930qxa8kk8s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091125121147.uir2v930qxa8kk8s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: <4B0D7286.8000709@mac.com> When I first lived in Maine, the Airline was my favorite road trip. There was no electricity and no telephone for most of the route, and the weird non-names for towns (Entering Township 1 Range 7) added to the sense of complete isolation. For about 45 miles there was only one outpost, a general store in Beddington, and when they got telephone service and electricity, it made the front page of the Globe. For people today who panic when they lose cellphone service, that would be quite unsettling. When you neared the eastern end, you'd be at the top of a hill overlooking Calais and St. Stephen and you'd start picking up Canadian radio stations, adding to the sense that you'd made a major journey. Mark vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: > The Airline is WAY better than it used to be in the days when it was > narrow, hilly, badly paved, and full of curves and dips. It's been > considerably widened and straightened in recent years, and one can > actually get from Bangor to Calais in about two hours, maybe even a > little less. That having been said, however, the road is still > treacherous in the winter and in fog. There's a good bit of truck > traffic on it, and moose can pop out of the woods anytime. When it's > nice out, it's a pretty drive. -Doug > > > > Quoting Kevin Vahey : >> I was in Calias one night and the locals flat out told me I was not >> driving 'The Airline' that night because of fog and we wound up in St >> Stephen for the evening. >> That road is no picnic in sunshine either. >> >> >> On 11/25/09, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: >> > You can say that again. The idea seems to have been, "Let's lay out a >> > route from Portland to Calais and make it as convoluted as possible." >> > >> > Even more confusing is the numbered highway layout on the Blue Hill >> > peninsula, on the east side of Penobscot Bay. Look at it on a map, >> > check out the three-digit route numbers, and see if you can figure it >> > out. It's at least as entertaining as "Where's Waldo?". -Doug >> > >> > >> > Quoting Kevin Vahey : >> >> I think you can count the number of people in Maine that call the >> road >> >> between Bangor-Calias as Route 9 on one hand. It is 'The Airline' >> >> >> >> Maine SR 9 has to be the strangest road in the US. No matter where >> you >> >> go in Maine it seems to appear :) >> >> >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maine_State_Route_9 >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > From rogerkirk@ttlc.net Wed Nov 25 18:03:55 2009 From: rogerkirk@ttlc.net (Roger Kirk) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:03:55 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <20091125121147.uir2v930qxa8kk8s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091125121147.uir2v930qxa8kk8s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: <4B0DB7DB.8090104@ttlc.net> vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: > The Airline is WAY better than it used to be in the days when it was > narrow, hilly, badly paved, and full of curves and dips. It's been > considerably widened and straightened in recent years, and one can > actually get from Bangor to Calais in about two hours, maybe even a > little less. That having been said, however, the road is still > treacherous in the winter and in fog. There's a good bit of truck > traffic on it, and moose can pop out of the woods anytime. When it's > nice out, it's a pretty drive. -Doug Amen to the straightening - major improvement. In addition to widening, they've added several "Slow Truck" passing lanes. When my wife is driving, we make Calais from Bangor in 90 minutes. Assuming no fog, no snow & no ice. Haven't had the pleasure of a moose sighting yet, though. Several times, the wait at the border has exceeded the traveling time. Now, trucks take a different route. From rogerkirk@ttlc.net Wed Nov 25 18:26:02 2009 From: rogerkirk@ttlc.net (Roger Kirk) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:26:02 -0500 Subject: WTAG-TV? I-86 In-Reply-To: <4B0D7286.8000709@mac.com> References: <20091125121147.uir2v930qxa8kk8s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> <4B0D7286.8000709@mac.com> Message-ID: <4B0DBD0A.2090204@ttlc.net> Mark Laurence wrote: > When I first lived in Maine, the Airline was my favorite road trip. > There was no electricity and no telephone for most of the route, and > the weird non-names for towns (Entering Township 1 Range 7) added to > the sense of complete isolation. For about 45 miles there was only > one outpost, a general store in Beddington, and when they got > telephone service and electricity, it made the front page of the > Globe. For people today who panic when they lose cellphone service, > that would be quite unsettling. There used to be a gas station/convenience store in Wesley ~1990. That's gone, now. It must be difficult for the people who live in that neck of the woods to do things like grocery shopping, etc. One summer returning from P.E.I. there was a major accident in one of the long, lonely stretches and the police detoured us east all the way down to Machias on Route 1 - adding 30+ miles (and 70+ minutes) to an already overly long trip. From kc1ih@mac.com Wed Nov 25 19:20:28 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:20:28 -0500 Subject: Airline Highway (was:Re: WTAG-TV? I-86) In-Reply-To: <4B0DB7DB.8090104@ttlc.net> References: <20091125121147.uir2v930qxa8kk8s@webmail.myfairpoint.net> <4B0DB7DB.8090104@ttlc.net> Message-ID: At 6:03 PM -0500 11/25/09, Roger Kirk wrote: > >Amen to the straightening - major improvement. In addition to >widening, they've added several "Slow Truck" passing lanes. When my >wife is driving, we make Calais from Bangor in 90 minutes. Assuming >no fog, no snow & no ice. Haven't had the pleasure of a moose >sighting yet, though. Several times, the wait at the border has >exceeded the traveling time. Now, trucks take a different route. The US and Canadian governments just opened a new border crossing including a new bridge between Callis and St. Steven. Hopefully this will alive the long waits at the border, I guess next summer will be the real test. -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From scott@fybush.com Wed Nov 25 23:19:23 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:19:23 -0500 Subject: Home for the holidays! Message-ID: <4B0E01CB.20300@fybush.com> For those of you NERW fans who've been following the meanderings of that lonely translator that's been slowly migrating from Gloucester to Fitchburg, there's some good news tonight: I think that after 14 relocations and 7 frequencies (most recently 105.5), our little lost translator (currently W288CE) has finally come home. There's a new application, filed just today, that will shift it from 105.5 (up north by the NH border) to 105.3, with 250 watts, non-directional, from a site about 1000' above sea level just west of downtown Fitchburg. This looks like it will be the permanent facility for this translator, which is going to relay WPKZ 1280. I'm quite sure this is not at all what the authors of the translator rules ever had in mind...but you've somehow got to admire the sheer determination it takes to pull off a move like this, anyway. s From scott@fybush.com Wed Nov 25 23:37:27 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:37:27 -0500 Subject: Home for the holidays! In-Reply-To: <8bce0fe80911252026n7fd7d1d9o98f1dde13c8ebe87@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B0E01CB.20300@fybush.com> <8bce0fe80911252026n7fd7d1d9o98f1dde13c8ebe87@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B0E0607.3020601@fybush.com> Paul B. Walker, Jr. wrote: > Did they have it on air at each of the 14 relocaitons? It's my > understanding you have to actually have it on the air before moving it > again. > > We have an FM translator on AM here in IL... had to make 2 hops and were > not sure it was ever on the air in the intermediate location even though > they said it was If someone can prove it wasn't, that's grounds for license revocation, since you have to file an application to cover each CP along the way with a license - and that involves certifying that the CP was built out correctly. I know of a couple of translators that were moved several times here in western NY (they're now relaying WCJW 1140 Warsaw), and in this case I know they did indeed operate (briefly) at each intermediate location. It doesn't take much to get a translator on the air, especially the little 10-watt jobbies that the WPKZ translator was supposedly using along the way. You can build one in a couple of hours, if the goal is just to get something in place quickly and then move it a day or two later. s From nostaticatall@charter.net Thu Nov 26 00:24:33 2009 From: nostaticatall@charter.net (Dave Tomm) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 00:24:33 -0500 Subject: Interstates and Nassau (but not why there are no Interstates IN Nassau...that would be a different thread) In-Reply-To: <20091125112133.xmouoiirz9nosg4c@webmail.myfairpoint.net> References: <20091125112133.xmouoiirz9nosg4c@webmail.myfairpoint.net> Message-ID: "Stunting" is when a radio station decides to change format, and there's a period of unusual programming before the new format is introduced. In the case of the NH stations, they are running looped announcements promoting other radio stations that are owned by the same company, directing that station's audience to those signals. In other instances, a station may play the same song over and over for days on end, sound effects, a computerized countdown clock, or something else strange to create a buzz before unveiling the new, permanent format. Hope this helps. -Dave Tomm On Nov 25, 2009, at 11:21 AM, vzeej5wn@myfairpoint.net wrote: > Paul: Pardon my ignorance; please explain the term "stunting". > You've lost me on that one. -Doug > From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Wed Nov 25 23:26:42 2009 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:26:42 -0600 Subject: Home for the holidays! In-Reply-To: <4B0E01CB.20300@fybush.com> References: <4B0E01CB.20300@fybush.com> Message-ID: <8bce0fe80911252026n7fd7d1d9o98f1dde13c8ebe87@mail.gmail.com> Did they have it on air at each of the 14 relocaitons? It's my understanding you have to actually have it on the air before moving it again. We have an FM translator on AM here in IL... had to make 2 hops and were not sure it was ever on the air in the intermediate location even though they said it was Paul On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: > For those of you NERW fans who've been following the meanderings of that > lonely translator that's been slowly migrating from Gloucester to Fitchburg, > there's some good news tonight: > > I think that after 14 relocations and 7 frequencies (most recently 105.5), > our little lost translator (currently W288CE) has finally come home. > > There's a new application, filed just today, that will shift it from 105.5 > (up north by the NH border) to 105.3, with 250 watts, non-directional, from > a site about 1000' above sea level just west of downtown Fitchburg. > > This looks like it will be the permanent facility for this translator, > which is going to relay WPKZ 1280. > > I'm quite sure this is not at all what the authors of the translator rules > ever had in mind...but you've somehow got to admire the sheer determination > it takes to pull off a move like this, anyway. > > s > -- Sincerely, Paul B. Walker, Jr. www.onairdj.com walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com From lglavin@mail.com Wed Nov 25 15:30:19 2009 From: lglavin@mail.com (lglavin@mail.com) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:30:19 -0500 Subject: 750 South Street Studio (Maybe Towers?) To Be Vacated Message-ID: <8CC3C253DB0BA90-8D0-1C5F@web-mmc-d15.sysops.aol.com> The Boston Radio Watch blog says that WGBH will be carting away about 10,000 CDs from the WCRB studio at South Street in Waltham (9700 of which will have been shrink-wrapped a decade ago and never used) and the facility will probably be totally vacated. Ok, this makes sense. But over the past year-and-a-half, I've wondered why the owners of the office park that also occupies the space haven't persuaded Nassau to tear down those towers that, along with the supports, take up so much space. WRCA had to move to the Sawmill Brook Parkway location long before the 3-station buildout was finished, presumably because Nassau wasn't willing to extend the lease. One tower appears to have the STL to Wood Hill, but I don't think it has to be 200 feet up. Gee, if WGBH is stuck with the building and towers, could some station install a transmitter there on the cheap and get better reception west of Boston, like WMKI or WROL, or even AM 890 whatever it does? From Jibguy@aol.com Thu Nov 26 11:20:11 2009 From: Jibguy@aol.com (Jibguy@aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:20:11 EST Subject: 750 South Street Studio (Maybe Towers?) To Be Vacated Message-ID: In a message dated 11/26/2009 8:05:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, lglavin@mail.com writes: But over the past year-and-a-half, I've wondered why the owners of the office park that also occupies the space haven't persuaded Nassau to tear down those towers that, along with the supports, take up so much space. --------------------------------------------- Perhaps with the change in the economy, there was also a change in land-owner's attitude. I'll be right now, the office park owner would be pleased to have thousands a month coming in from the towers as opposed to managing (and possibly having to pay for) having them taken down. -------jibguy From raccoonradio@mail.com Sat Nov 28 02:47:14 2009 From: raccoonradio@mail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 02:47:14 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossley talk show etc Message-ID: <20091128074714.BA21583BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com> http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/11/28/wgbh_bringing_tv_shows_to_radio/ The new incarnation of WGBH will do some radio versions of some of its TV shows, and come January there will be a talk show with Emily Rooney and Caillie Crossley (middays, weekdays) At least they're taking advantage of their TV talent on the radio side; look for Beat the Press to wind up on 89.7 too From dlh@donnahalper.com Sat Nov 28 03:47:36 2009 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 03:47:36 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossley talk show etc In-Reply-To: <20091128074714.BA21583BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20091128074714.BA21583BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <20091128084750.E98E81B41C6@relay15.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> At 02:47 AM 11/28/2009, Bob Nelson wrote: >http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/11/28/wgbh_bringing_tv_shows_to_radio/ I'm always glad to be quoted, but bless his heart, he kind of distorted a couple of things I said. Still, Emily and Callie are excellent commentators and interviewers, and it will be interesting to hear them on the radio. From martinjwaters@yahoo.com Sat Nov 28 11:46:24 2009 From: martinjwaters@yahoo.com (Martin Waters) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:46:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossley talk show etc Message-ID: <234794.83368.qm@web112109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> --- On Sat, 11/28/09, Donna Halper wrote: > > I'm always glad to be quoted, but bless his heart, he kind > of distorted a couple of things I said. ???Can you be more specific? I'm very curious. ???Is the problem about stating that TV simulcasts on radio are often all about saving money? ???In the specific case of "60 Minutes," I've had the impression that CBS more or less told its major-market owned all-news stations to run it. It's on all over the country. Some sort of re-enforcement of the "60 Minutes" franchise, I suppose. ???WCBS also runs the 6:30 p.m. network news every day -- but obviously is gritting its teeth at the same time. It's interesting listening. The radio anchors jump in repeatedly . . . covering all the ads and parts of the TV newscast with WCBS news, and especially traffic and weather. ???As far as I can hear, all that half-hour does for WCBS is cause it to give up its spots at a prime hour. ? ? WCBS doesn't even want to run the full 5-minute hourly radio network news. Most hours it cuts out after 3 minutes. ? ???Wasn't it Tip O'Neill who said, All all-news radio is local? ??? From dlh@donnahalper.com Sat Nov 28 11:53:27 2009 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:53:27 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossley talk show etc In-Reply-To: <234794.83368.qm@web112109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <234794.83368.qm@web112109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20091128165342.D6C4C1EF24C@relay8.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> At 11:46 AM 11/28/2009, Martin Waters wrote: > Can you be more specific? I'm very curious. Is the problem > about stating that TV simulcasts on radio are often all about > saving money? In the specific case of "60 Minutes," I've had the > impression that CBS more or less told its major-market owned > all-news stations to run it. I said that most of the time, TV does NOT translate well over radio, and that TV is a visual medium, so unless the hosts are specially prepared for the simulcast (which most are not), they say things like "As you can see by this map..." Radio is a story-telling medium where you paint pictures with words. TV is visual, and as such, it wasn't meant to be a substitute for a skilled radio announcer. I said that while it can work sometimes-- as with CBS simulcasting 60 Minutes, which is helpful to people who are in their car, for example, and can't get home to watch the show, generally companies that do simulcasting are doing it to save money. From dlh@donnahalper.com Sat Nov 28 12:01:50 2009 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 12:01:50 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH-TV on the radio, Rooney/Crossley talk show etc In-Reply-To: <647105.37637.qm@web110510.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <20091128084750.E98E81B41C6@relay15.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> <647105.37637.qm@web110510.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20091128170206.35474201CEE@relay8.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> At 03:56 AM 11/28/2009, Sean Smyth wrote: >Johnny Diaz makes Susan Bicklehaupt look like a Pulitzer winner. He >has little grasp of media, specifically radio, and it comes through >in his writing time and again. He's young, he's new at this (he wasn't trained to report on radio), and although we talked for about 40 minutes, I am not sure he fully got the distinctions. In fairness to him, he was restricted to 800 words. But on the other hand, I miss Dean Johnson, who truly got what radio was about and dedicated his reporting to it. Today, most newspapers treat radio as an afterthought and don't even try to understand what is unique about it. From dlh@donnahalper.com Sat Nov 28 12:06:19 2009 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 12:06:19 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossley talk show etc In-Reply-To: <647105.37637.qm@web110510.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <20091128084750.E98E81B41C6@relay15.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> <647105.37637.qm@web110510.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20091128170634.935EA1EF24C@relay8.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> And for those who didn't see it, today's Patriot-Ledger discusses the sports-talk wars on radio here: http://www.patriotledger.com/business/x1297504991/A-sports-media-frenc y-in-Boston From kvahey@comcast.net Sat Nov 28 12:38:18 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:38:18 -0600 Subject: Sports Media exploding in Boston Message-ID: <4fc429770911280938s35238e17t876670e17cc762b7@mail.gmail.com> http://www.patriotledger.com/sports/x1297504991/A-sports-media-frency-in-Boston The Patriot Ledger looks at the expanding sports media universe in Boston CSN New England is really making a splash on both TV and the web. New sportsdesks shows being added and the website has hired many big names and hired the long time sports editor of the Providence Journal. NESN doesn't seem to care and seems willing to to let CSN take over. From ssmyth@psualum.com Sat Nov 28 13:40:48 2009 From: ssmyth@psualum.com (Sean Smyth) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 10:40:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Globe: WGBH-TV on the radio, Rooney/Crossley talk show etc In-Reply-To: <20091128170206.35474201CEE@relay8.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> Message-ID: <945431.50534.qm@web110502.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> On Sat, 11/28/09, Donna Halper wrote: > At 03:56 AM 11/28/2009, Sean Smyth > wrote: > > Johnny Diaz makes Susan Bicklehaupt look like a > Pulitzer winner. He has little grasp of media, specifically > radio, and it comes through in his writing time and again. > > He's young, he's new at this (he wasn't trained to report > on radio), and although we talked for about 40 minutes, I am > not sure he fully got the distinctions. In fairness to > him, he was restricted to 800 words. But on the other > hand, I miss Dean Johnson, who truly got what radio was > about and dedicated his reporting to it. Today, most > newspapers treat radio as an afterthought and don't even try > to understand what is unique about it. I just see no effort, similar mistakes repeated time and again, no concern for even getting call letters correct -- that's something a copy editor doesn't change willy-nilly. You're a reporter, you should ask and verify all this, but it seems like he doesn't even put in an effort. And we're not just talking about radio, we're talking about his coverage of media overall. From friedbagels@gmail.com Sat Nov 28 23:04:45 2009 From: friedbagels@gmail.com (Aaron Read) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 23:04:45 -0500 Subject: WGBH TV on the Radio Message-ID: One thing worth keeping in mind, the options for mid-afternoon (12n to 4pm) programming are surprising slim in the NPR news/talk realm. There's basically: Fresh Air, Here & Now and Talk of the Nation. If you don't mind a little delay, there's also Democracy Now and Tell Me More. Or maybe toss in an hour or two of the BBC World Service. WBUR already airs Fresh Air, H&N and TOTN, and I suspect DN! would alienate more WGBH listeners than it would attract (especially since WZBC already has it on at 12n anyways). So that leaves Tell Me More, which is a good show but is still just one hour. Admittedly, they COULD also go the "blue plate lunch special" approach, where you air a different once-a-week show at a given time each day. I know a lot of stations that do that, WEOS included, and I care for the approach...generally it doesn't go over all that well with listeners, either. Actually, I'm a little disappointed they didn't try to do a local talk show. Nothing as fancy as On Point, just a host and maybe a producer or two...more like Brudnoy than Ashbrook. A locally-focused talk show is something long lacking in the Boston pubradio market. -- ----------------------------------------- Aaron Read friedbagels@gmail.com WEOS 89.7FM General Manager (315) 781-3811 From francini@mac.com Sat Nov 28 22:50:22 2009 From: francini@mac.com (John Francini) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 22:50:22 -0500 Subject: Sports Media exploding in Boston In-Reply-To: <4fc429770911280938s35238e17t876670e17cc762b7@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fc429770911280938s35238e17t876670e17cc762b7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Well, NESN has the games themselves from two of the four major sports -- Sox and Bruins -- and since they're owned by those two teams, NESN isn't likely to lose the rights to them any time soon. So those time slots are locked up. However, there's still an awful lot of air time to fill up when the games aren't on. Charlie Moore on yet another fishing trip doesn't cut it for me. Nor do things like the Sox-themed dating show and other fluff. j On 28 Nov 2009, at 12:38, Kevin Vahey wrote: > http://www.patriotledger.com/sports/x1297504991/A-sports-media-frency-in-Boston > > > The Patriot Ledger looks at the expanding sports media universe in > Boston > > CSN New England is really making a splash on both TV and the web. New > sportsdesks shows being added and the website has hired many big names > and hired the long time sports editor of the Providence Journal. > > NESN doesn't seem to care and seems willing to to let CSN take over. From friedbagels@gmail.com Sun Nov 29 00:21:01 2009 From: friedbagels@gmail.com (Aaron Read) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:21:01 -0500 Subject: WGBH TV on the Radio - correction Message-ID: Whoops - I just re-read that Globe article and I see they ARE planning on running a daily mid-day talk show with Emily Rooney and Callie Crossley! Doesn't say if it'll have call-ins from listeners, just that they'll "discuss the news". I would imagine they'll take calls, though...seems kinda silly not to. -- -- ----------------------------------------- Aaron Read friedbagels@gmail.com WEOS 89.7FM General Manager (315) 781-3811 From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Nov 29 02:03:05 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 02:03:05 -0500 Subject: WGBH TV on the Radio In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B121CA9.6922.AC9BFD@joe.attorneyross.com> On 28 Nov 2009 at 23:04, Aaron Read wrote: > WBUR already airs Fresh Air, H&N and TOTN, and I suspect DN! would > alienate more WGBH listeners than it would attract (especially since > WZBC already has it on at 12n anyways). So that leaves Tell Me More, > which is a good show but is still just one hour. On the other hand, the WGBH signal certainly has much better coverage than WZBC. -- 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 Sun Nov 29 02:03:05 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 02:03:05 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossley talk show etc In-Reply-To: <20091128074714.BA21583BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20091128074714.BA21583BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <4B121CA9.19683.AC99F9@joe.attorneyross.com> On 28 Nov 2009 at 2:47, Bob Nelson wrote: > The new incarnation of WGBH will do some radio versions of some of its > TV shows, and come January there will be a talk show with Emily Rooney > and Caillie Crossley (middays, weekdays) It would be nice if they would carry the British radio versions of some of the British TV shows that they have. A number of British shows do have radio versions. One thing I'd love to hear is the radio versions of Rumpole of the Bailey. Rumpole continued on British radio even after the TV series ended. -- 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 Sun Nov 29 02:28:00 2009 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 02:28:00 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossley talk show etc In-Reply-To: <4B121CA9.19683.AC99F9@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <20091128074714.BA21583BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com> <4B121CA9.19683.AC99F9@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <19218.8832.621992.953516@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > It would be nice if they would carry the British radio versions of > some of the British TV shows that they have. A number of British > shows do have radio versions. > One thing I'd love to hear is the radio versions of Rumpole of the > Bailey. Rumpole continued on British radio even after the TV series > ended. There may be rights issues with those; although they don't seem to have any problem with making pretty much all spoken-word radio available worldwide over the Internet, licensing them for broadcast by another entity in a different country may be a very different matter. (Programs that don't involve licensing externally-created works, like comedy and quizzes, are probably easier, although I've seen no evidence that any Radio 4 entertainment programs have made it to these shores since "My Word!", which ended production in 1990 -- although someone is apparently still distributing it in syndication today.) Frankly, I've love it if someone in the public-radio world here could arrange to put Radio 4 on their HD3 with a five-hour delay (similar to Sirius XM's delayed rebroadcast of Radio 1). That would give me a reason to get an HD tuner for the car. In the mean time, I'm stuck with . -GAWollman From kvahey@comcast.net Sun Nov 29 09:43:49 2009 From: kvahey@comcast.net (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 08:43:49 -0600 Subject: The 'other' Bob Kennedy Message-ID: <4fc429770911290643m7587f056v33201518fc801a1e@mail.gmail.com> This just showed up on You Tube in the past few weeks. Bob Kennedy on WBZ Radio from 1968. Bob would soon be replaced by Jerry Williams and he would move on to Chicago and WLS-TV before being taken from us by cancer in the mid 70's http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRbteNp5EIw From dan.strassberg@att.net Sun Nov 29 10:44:52 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 10:44:52 -0500 Subject: WGBH TV on the Radio - correction References: Message-ID: Robin Young often discusses the day's news on Here and Now. She never takes listener calls, however. ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Aaron Read" To: Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 12:21 AM Subject: WGBH TV on the Radio - correction > Whoops - I just re-read that Globe article and I see they ARE > planning > on running a daily mid-day talk show with Emily Rooney and Callie > Crossley! Doesn't say if it'll have call-ins from listeners, just > that they'll "discuss the news". I would imagine they'll take > calls, > though...seems kinda silly not to. > > -- > -- > ----------------------------------------- > Aaron Read > friedbagels@gmail.com > WEOS 89.7FM General Manager > (315) 781-3811 From sean.smyth@yahoo.com Sun Nov 29 11:16:49 2009 From: sean.smyth@yahoo.com (Sean Smyth) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 08:16:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: WGBH TV on the Radio - correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <759921.70579.qm@web110509.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> On Sun, 11/29/09, Dan.Strassberg wrote: > Robin Young often discusses the day's > news on Here and Now. She never takes listener calls, > however. I would like to see WGBH attempt a daily version of something similar to Radio Boston, which I enjoy a lot. It's really good, smart radio; I'm sure it's also not cheap, relatively speaking, to produce. Maybe that's what they have in mind with Emily Rooney's show. Or maybe they can hire David Boeri (I'm not sure what else he is doing now besides working at WBUR). I'm not a Tell Me More fan, and the World Service's mid-afternoon schedule has pockets that don't seem to work for an American audience, which as Aaron says limits early afternoon programming. This is where Day to Day's cancellation hurts. For instance, previously WGBH could have had the second hour of Talk of the Nation to itself. This is the BBCWS schedule for tomorrow afternoon (EST). There seems to be some variation each day in the 2 p.m. ET block, so keep that in mind, too. Noon: Europe Today 1 p.m.: World, Have Your Say 2 p.m.: Documentary 2:30 p.m.: Americana 3 p.m.: Outlook 3:30 p.m.: The Strand From wollman@bimajority.org Sun Nov 29 11:28:21 2009 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 11:28:21 -0500 Subject: WGBH TV on the Radio - correction In-Reply-To: <759921.70579.qm@web110509.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <759921.70579.qm@web110509.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <19218.41253.31255.690331@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > This is the BBCWS schedule for tomorrow afternoon (EST). For which of the World Service program streams? > There seems to be some variation each day in the 2 p.m. ET block, so > keep that in mind, too. The World Service schedule, generally speaking, is composed of a combination of daily and weekly programs. The hours that WBUR currently carries are pretty much all daily shows (mostly World Briefing and The World Today), but there are several hours each day devoted to weekly (or at least less-than-daily) programs like "FOOC", "Science in Action", "Politics UK", "Heart and Soul", "Global Business", and so on. These are generally half-hour shows. I suspect the biggest problem for most stations with carrying the BBC in the afternoon is the limited opportunity for underwriting. There are only two one-minute breaks in an hour of World Service programming. -GAWollman From friedbagels@gmail.com Sun Nov 29 12:42:04 2009 From: friedbagels@gmail.com (Aaron Read) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:42:04 -0500 Subject: WGBH TV on the Radio - correction In-Reply-To: <759921.70579.qm@web110509.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <759921.70579.qm@web110509.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I hadn't really looked at the BBC-WS schedule but yeah, that's not an ideal lineup for an American audience. I suppose theoretically you could tape-delay BBC NewsHour or something...although that's got its own risks. Speaking of D2D, it's also where News & Notes' cancellation hurts, too. I can't speak too much to TMM because I only hear it occasionally, but at WEOS we aired N&N and from my perspective it was a very good show. Can't say if it "spoke" to an African-American audience, but as a white man with limited understanding of race relations, it did a good job of taking African-American issues and making them more accessible to me. Of course, another part of the problem is the 12n - 4pm is a "dead zone" ratings-wise...it's hard to expend a lot of capital on a time when you know that - like as not - nothing you do will garnish all THAT many listeners. - Aaron On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Sean Smyth wrote: > > I'm not a Tell Me More fan, and the World Service's mid-afternoon schedule has pockets that don't seem to work for an American audience, which as Aaron says limits early afternoon programming. This is where Day to Day's cancellation hurts. For instance, previously WGBH could have had the second hour of Talk of the Nation to itself. > > This is the BBCWS schedule for tomorrow afternoon (EST). There seems to be some variation each day in the 2 p.m. ET block, so keep that in mind, too. > > Noon: Europe Today > 1 p.m.: World, Have Your Say > 2 p.m.: Documentary > 2:30 p.m.: Americana > 3 p.m.: Outlook > 3:30 p.m.: The Strand > > > > -- -- ----------------------------------------- Aaron Read friedbagels@gmail.com WEOS 89.7FM General Manager (315) 781-3811 From friedbagels@gmail.com Sun Nov 29 12:47:36 2009 From: friedbagels@gmail.com (Aaron Read) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:47:36 -0500 Subject: WGBH TV on the Radio In-Reply-To: <4B121CA9.6922.AC9BFD@joe.attorneyross.com> References: <4B121CA9.6922.AC9BFD@joe.attorneyross.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 2:03 AM, A. Joseph Ross wrote: > On 28 Nov 2009 at 23:04, Aaron Read wrote: >> WBUR already airs Fresh Air, H&N and TOTN, and I suspect DN! would >> alienate more WGBH listeners than it would attract (especially since >> WZBC already has it on at 12n anyways). ?So that leaves Tell Me More, >> which is a good show but is still just one hour. > > On the other hand, the WGBH signal certainly has much better coverage > than WZBC. > True, but again, DN! caters to a very specific audience...it's a real love/hate show, either you love it or hate it. It's not good for a station like WGBH to deliberately annoy the majority of their audience just to pick up a comparatively small audience for DemNow. Going further, I would postulate that most of the DN fans in eastern Mass are mostly living well inside WZBC's range; they're not living in the suburbs as much. -- -- ----------------------------------------- Aaron Read friedbagels@gmail.com WEOS 89.7FM General Manager (315) 781-3811 From sean.smyth@yahoo.com Sun Nov 29 13:03:29 2009 From: sean.smyth@yahoo.com (Sean Smyth) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 10:03:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: WGBH TV on the Radio In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <863867.53137.qm@web110504.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> On Sun, 11/29/09, Aaron Read wrote: > Going > further, I would postulate that most of the DN fans in > eastern Mass > are mostly living well inside WZBC's range; they're not > living in the > suburbs as much. 89.7 has a wonderful signal, but I also wonder if there will be some attempt to fill in the pockets on the Cape lost from switching the From HeritageRadio@msn.com Sun Nov 29 22:11:41 2009 From: HeritageRadio@msn.com (Thomas Heathwood) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 22:11:41 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH " TV on the radio" , Rooney/Crossleytalk show etc In-Reply-To: <20091128084750.E98E81B41C6@relay15.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com><647105.37637.qm@web110510.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20091128170634.935EA1EF24C@relay8.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> References: <20091128084750.E98E81B41C6@relay15.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com><647105.37637.qm@web110510.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20091128170634.935EA1EF24C@relay8.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> Message-ID: This URL (below) yields an error message. <> ----- Original Message ----- From: Donna Halper To: Sean Smyth Cc: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2009 12:06 PM Subject: Re: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossleytalk show etc And for those who didn't see it, today's Patriot-Ledger discusses the sports-talk wars on radio here: http://www.patriotledger.com/business/x1297504991/A-sports-media-frenc y-in-Boston From kc1ih@mac.com Sun Nov 29 21:35:46 2009 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 21:35:46 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossley talk show etc In-Reply-To: <19218.8832.621992.953516@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <20091128074714.BA21583BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com> <4B121CA9.19683.AC99F9@joe.attorneyross.com> <19218.8832.621992.953516@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: At 2:28 AM -0500 11/29/09, Garrett Wollman wrote: > >Frankly, I've love it if someone in the public-radio world here could >arrange to put Radio 4 on their HD3 with a five-hour delay (similar to >Sirius XM's delayed rebroadcast of Radio 1). That would give me a >reason to get an HD tuner for the car. In the mean time, I'm stuck >with . I believe that the US distribution of all BBC programming is owned by the Discovery Channel. So, no mater what we may wish for, if they can't make a profit from it ain't gonna happen. -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Nov 29 23:41:12 2009 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:41:12 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossley talk show etc In-Reply-To: <19218.8832.621992.953516@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <20091128074714.BA21583BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com>, <4B121CA9.19683.AC99F9@joe.attorneyross.com>, <19218.8832.621992.953516@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <4B134CE8.10171.7FA7FE@joe.attorneyross.com> On 29 Nov 2009 at 2:28, Garrett Wollman wrote: > There may be rights issues with those; although they don't seem to > have any problem with making pretty much all spoken-word radio > available worldwide over the Internet, licensing them for broadcast by > another entity in a different country may be a very different matter. I suppose, but the TV versions of these shows have been shown here, so I would assume that the rights for the radio versions to be shown here could be available. But maybe not. -- 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 bob.bosra@demattia.net Mon Nov 30 08:43:12 2009 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 08:43:12 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH " TV on the radio" , Rooney/Crossleytalk show etc In-Reply-To: References: <20091128084750.E98E81B41C6@relay15.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> <647105.37637.qm@web110510.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20091128170634.935EA1EF24C@relay8.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com> Message-ID: There's an extra space in Donna's email. The correct URL is: http://www.patriotledger.com/business/x1297504991/A-sports-media-frenc< http://www.patriotledger.com/business/x1297504991/A-sports-media-frenc y-in-Boston Hope my mailed and/or the list server won't mutilate the URL again! -Bob On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Thomas Heathwood wrote: > This URL (below) yields an error message. <> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Donna Halper > To: Sean Smyth > Cc: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org> > Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2009 12:06 PM > Subject: Re: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossleytalk > show etc > > > And for those who didn't see it, today's Patriot-Ledger discusses the > sports-talk wars on radio here: > > > > From rac@gabrielmass.com Sun Nov 29 19:09:13 2009 From: rac@gabrielmass.com (Richard Chonak) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:09:13 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossley talk show etc In-Reply-To: <19218.8832.621992.953516@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <20091128074714.BA21583BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com> <4B121CA9.19683.AC99F9@joe.attorneyross.com> <19218.8832.621992.953516@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <4B130D29.6070105@server4.gabrielmass.com> Garrett Wollman wrote: > In the mean time, I'm stuck > with . With a suitable phone or laptop and an all-you-can-eat data plan, you could play that in your car now. Of course, it's not push-button convenient yet. --RC From scott@fybush.com Mon Nov 30 16:55:16 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:55:16 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down Message-ID: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> At least from here in Rochester, wcrb.com appears to be gone as of 4:55 PM. I was hoping to hear the station's last hours, but there doesn't appear to be a stream anywhere, since WGBH's stream isn't up yet. I hope someone local is rolling tape (or bits) on the historic moment... s From dave@skywaves.net Mon Nov 30 17:02:28 2009 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:02:28 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> Message-ID: It looks good from here, Scott. -d -------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Fybush" Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 4:55 PM To: "Boston Radio Group" Subject: WCRB website down > > At least from here in Rochester, wcrb.com appears to be gone as of 4:55 > PM. I was hoping to hear the station's last hours, but there doesn't > appear to be a stream anywhere, since WGBH's stream isn't up yet. > > I hope someone local is rolling tape (or bits) on the historic moment... > > s > From rac@gabrielmass.com Mon Nov 30 17:16:38 2009 From: rac@gabrielmass.com (Richard Chonak) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:16:38 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> Message-ID: <4B144446.9080005@server4.gabrielmass.com> Here, http://www.wcrb.com responds slowly ; http://wcrb.com does not respond (DNS error). --RC Dave Doherty wrote: > It looks good from here, Scott. > > -d > > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Scott Fybush" > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 4:55 PM > To: "Boston Radio Group" > Subject: WCRB website down > >> >> At least from here in Rochester, wcrb.com appears to be gone as of >> 4:55 PM. I was hoping to hear the station's last hours, but there >> doesn't appear to be a stream anywhere, since WGBH's stream isn't up yet. >> >> I hope someone local is rolling tape (or bits) on the historic moment... >> >> s >> > From rogerkirk@ttlc.net Mon Nov 30 17:19:09 2009 From: rogerkirk@ttlc.net (Roger Kirk) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:19:09 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> Message-ID: <4B1444DD.60704@ttlc.net> Scott Fybush wrote: > At least from here in Rochester, wcrb.com appears to be gone as of > 4:55 PM. I was hoping to hear the station's last hours, but there > doesn't appear to be a stream anywhere, since WGBH's stream isn't up yet. > > I hope someone local is rolling tape (or bits) on the historic moment... Can't access it from the (Wang) Cross Point Towers in Lowell, either. From gary@garysicecream.com Mon Nov 30 17:22:05 2009 From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:22:05 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <4B144446.9080005@server4.gabrielmass.com> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> <4B144446.9080005@server4.gabrielmass.com> Message-ID: <038701ca720b$8cee61c0$a6cb2540$@com> I'm getting "dns error" on both -----Original Message----- From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@tsornin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Richard Chonak Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 5:17 PM To: Boston Radio Group Subject: Re: WCRB website down Here, http://www.wcrb.com responds slowly ; http://wcrb.com does not respond (DNS error). --RC Dave Doherty wrote: > It looks good from here, Scott. > > -d > > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Scott Fybush" > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 4:55 PM > To: "Boston Radio Group" > Subject: WCRB website down > >> >> At least from here in Rochester, wcrb.com appears to be gone as of >> 4:55 PM. I was hoping to hear the station's last hours, but there >> doesn't appear to be a stream anywhere, since WGBH's stream isn't up yet. >> >> I hope someone local is rolling tape (or bits) on the historic moment... >> >> s >> > From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Mon Nov 30 17:07:17 2009 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:07:17 -0600 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> Message-ID: <8bce0fe80911301407h1c590693hd849863babeab325@mail.gmail.com> The website doesnt work for me here in Marion, IL On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Dave Doherty wrote: > It looks good from here, Scott. > > -d > > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Scott Fybush" > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 4:55 PM > To: "Boston Radio Group" > Subject: WCRB website down > > > >> At least from here in Rochester, wcrb.com appears to be gone as of 4:55 >> PM. I was hoping to hear the station's last hours, but there doesn't appear >> to be a stream anywhere, since WGBH's stream isn't up yet. >> >> I hope someone local is rolling tape (or bits) on the historic moment... >> >> s >> >> -- Sincerely, Paul B. Walker, Jr. www.onairdj.com walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Mon Nov 30 15:58:30 2009 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:58:30 -0600 Subject: IMUS Message-ID: <8bce0fe80911301258r71f8847fv76b414fa142b1bbb@mail.gmail.com> I wonder why WCCC-AM is adding IMUS again. They had him for awhile, even after 1290 went classical and dropped him, now are adding him back. Why put him on a Classical music AM station that no one more then 2 or 3 miles away can hear before sunrise? -- Sincerely, Paul B. Walker, Jr. www.onairdj.com walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com From aerie.ma@comcast.net Mon Nov 30 17:38:30 2009 From: aerie.ma@comcast.net (Jim Hall) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:38:30 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> Message-ID: <85A03B3E9C294D9B90025511248C57DB@aeriema> The link at wcrb.com to "listen live" redirects you to WGBH's web site: http://mediaplayer.wgbh.org/?xml=classicalhd.xml&resize=1 The link on "about WCRB" for http://995allclassical.org redirects to http://www.wgbh.org/listen/bostonsallclassical.cfm They are streaming now, but apparently it's from WGBH already. -----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, November 30, 2009 4:55 PM To: Boston Radio Group Subject: WCRB website down At least from here in Rochester, wcrb.com appears to be gone as of 4:55 PM. I was hoping to hear the station's last hours, but there doesn't appear to be a stream anywhere, since WGBH's stream isn't up yet. I hope someone local is rolling tape (or bits) on the historic moment... s From dave@skywaves.net Mon Nov 30 17:37:43 2009 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:37:43 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <8bce0fe80911301407h1c590693hd849863babeab325@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> <8bce0fe80911301407h1c590693hd849863babeab325@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2A374FEBE827407C9A010D1010285BC3@dave> It seems likely that they made a DNS change and moved the hosting to whatever provider WGBH uses. That would explain the kind of rolling "now you see, now you don't" reports, because DNS changes can take a day to propagate. My guess it it'll be fine tomorrow. -d From: Paul B. Walker, Jr. Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 5:07 PM To: Dave Doherty Cc: Scott Fybush ; Boston Radio Group Subject: Re: WCRB website down The website doesnt work for me here in Marion, IL On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Dave Doherty wrote: It looks good from here, Scott. -d -------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Fybush" Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 4:55 PM To: "Boston Radio Group" Subject: WCRB website down At least from here in Rochester, wcrb.com appears to be gone as of 4:55 PM. I was hoping to hear the station's last hours, but there doesn't appear to be a stream anywhere, since WGBH's stream isn't up yet. I hope someone local is rolling tape (or bits) on the historic moment... s -- Sincerely, Paul B. Walker, Jr. www.onairdj.com walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com From markwats@comcast.net Mon Nov 30 17:47:05 2009 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:47:05 -0500 Subject: Jimmy Jay Produces Dick Clark 80th Birthday Special Message-ID: Jimmy Jay. who hosted the "Time Tunnel" show on WILD in the 80's & 90's (using the name Jay Michaels) has produced a 3 hour radio special in honor of Dick Clark's 80th birthday (which is today, 11/30). The special aired this past weekend on WATD, but will air tonight at 9PM on WLNG (92.1) Sag Harbor NY, live stream available via www.wlng.com Here's a link to an article about the special from the Norton Mirror weekly newspaper: http://www.wickedlocal.com/norton/news/x730412172/DJ-celebrates-80th-birthday-of-America-s-Oldest-Teenager Mark Watson From scott@fybush.com Mon Nov 30 17:48:05 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:48:05 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <85A03B3E9C294D9B90025511248C57DB@aeriema> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> <85A03B3E9C294D9B90025511248C57DB@aeriema> Message-ID: <4B144BA5.5020204@fybush.com> Jim Hall wrote: > The link at wcrb.com to "listen live" redirects you to WGBH's web site: > http://mediaplayer.wgbh.org/?xml=classicalhd.xml&resize=1 > > The link on "about WCRB" for http://995allclassical.org redirects to > http://www.wgbh.org/listen/bostonsallclassical.cfm > > They are streaming now, but apparently it's from WGBH already. That's the existing stream of 89.7-HD2, which will be // 99.5 tomorrow morning...but for now, it doesn't help those of us outside the market hoping to hear the last hours of classical WCRB. Hope *someone* is rolling on it there... s From rac@gabrielmass.com Mon Nov 30 18:01:49 2009 From: rac@gabrielmass.com (Richard Chonak) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:01:49 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <4B144BA5.5020204@fybush.com> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> <85A03B3E9C294D9B90025511248C57DB@aeriema> <4B144BA5.5020204@fybush.com> Message-ID: <4B144EDD.2020300@server4.gabrielmass.com> Scott Fybush wrote: > > That's the existing stream of 89.7-HD2, which will be // 99.5 tomorrow > morning... Is it somewhat of a waste to have 89.7-HD2 and 99.5-HD airing the same programming? The opportunity for a more "purist" classical program stream suggests itself. I'd call it the Unpopular Classical Music Channel, 'cause "Deep Tracks" is already taken. --RC From atolz@comcast.net Mon Nov 30 18:12:50 2009 From: atolz@comcast.net (Alan Tolz) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:12:50 -0500 Subject: IMUS References: <8bce0fe80911301258r71f8847fv76b414fa142b1bbb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi, Paul...WCCC AM has not aired Imus before. In fact, when Imus was on WFAN, Connecticut stations were not allowed to carry his program. WCCC AM has a PSSA that allows for full power at 6 AM and 25% or so at 4:30 AM and I'm pretty sure that for the hours of Imus' program, WCCC AM is at its full power. Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul B. Walker, Jr." To: "bri" Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 3:58 PM Subject: IMUS >I wonder why WCCC-AM is adding IMUS again. They had him for awhile, even > after 1290 went classical and dropped him, now are adding him back. > > Why put him on a Classical music AM station that no one more then 2 or 3 > miles away can hear before sunrise? > > > -- > Sincerely, > Paul B. Walker, Jr. > www.onairdj.com > walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com > From jjlehmann@comcast.net Mon Nov 30 18:45:18 2009 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:45:18 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <4B144BA5.5020204@fybush.com> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> <85A03B3E9C294D9B90025511248C57DB@aeriema> <4B144BA5.5020204@fybush.com> Message-ID: <000601ca7217$2c6b6350$854229f0$@net> > Hope *someone* is rolling on it there... I've been recording in 6 hour segments in Cool Edit since midnight. Jeff Lehmann Hanson, MA From scott@fybush.com Mon Nov 30 18:48:06 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:48:06 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <000601ca7217$2c6b6350$854229f0$@net> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> <85A03B3E9C294D9B90025511248C57DB@aeriema> <4B144BA5.5020204@fybush.com> <000601ca7217$2c6b6350$854229f0$@net> Message-ID: <4B1459B6.9090307@fybush.com> Jeff Lehmann wrote: >> Hope *someone* is rolling on it there... > > I've been recording in 6 hour segments in Cool Edit since midnight. You rock, Jeff. Thanks! s From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Mon Nov 30 18:16:29 2009 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:16:29 -0600 Subject: IMUS In-Reply-To: References: <8bce0fe80911301258r71f8847fv76b414fa142b1bbb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8bce0fe80911301516u17738a3cn30c5826ade72bd40@mail.gmail.com> Ok, I have egg on my face....... I just realized something. It was Howard STERN WCCC-AM had on before, not IMUS. I get those two old windbags confused. Still curious, why is a classical station adding IMUS? Paul On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Alan Tolz wrote: > Hi, Paul...WCCC AM has not aired Imus before. In fact, when Imus was on > WFAN, Connecticut stations were not allowed to carry his program. > > WCCC AM has a PSSA that allows for full power at 6 AM and 25% or so at 4:30 > AM and I'm pretty sure that for the hours of Imus' program, WCCC AM is at > its full power. > > Alan > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul B. Walker, Jr." < > walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com> > To: "bri" > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 3:58 PM > Subject: IMUS > > > > I wonder why WCCC-AM is adding IMUS again. They had him for awhile, even >> after 1290 went classical and dropped him, now are adding him back. >> >> Why put him on a Classical music AM station that no one more then 2 or 3 >> miles away can hear before sunrise? >> >> >> -- >> Sincerely, >> Paul B. Walker, Jr. >> www.onairdj.com >> walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com >> >> > -- Sincerely, Paul B. Walker, Jr. www.onairdj.com walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com From paulranderson@charter.net Mon Nov 30 18:31:26 2009 From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:31:26 -0500 Subject: IMUS In-Reply-To: References: <8bce0fe80911301258r71f8847fv76b414fa142b1bbb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0DFFE7FC-B75C-442B-AA5D-5AD99B1B12C0@charter.net> On Nov 30, 2009, at 6:12 PM, Alan Tolz wrote: > WCCC AM has not aired Imus before. In fact, when Imus was on WFAN, Connecticut stations were not allowed to carry his program. So has Don Imus _ever_ been on a Hartford-area station? I can see WFAN's exclusivity extending to Fairfield County, part of the New York market. But even though WFAN shows up in the Hartford book, a local station carrying Imus would certainly increase the total number of listeners to the show compared to people in Hartford having to rely on a station so far away. I wonder how many listeners will tune in for both Imus and classical music. And wasn't Howard Stern on a smooth jazz station once? Was that in Boston? Paul From jjlehmann@comcast.net Mon Nov 30 19:22:29 2009 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:22:29 -0500 Subject: IMUS In-Reply-To: <0DFFE7FC-B75C-442B-AA5D-5AD99B1B12C0@charter.net> References: <8bce0fe80911301258r71f8847fv76b414fa142b1bbb@mail.gmail.com> <0DFFE7FC-B75C-442B-AA5D-5AD99B1B12C0@charter.net> Message-ID: <000701ca721c$5e528ec0$1af7ac40$@net> > And wasn't Howard Stern on a smooth jazz station once? Was that in > Boston? No, you're thinking of Imus, who was on 96.9 WSJZ briefly before it changed to WTKK. Jeff Lehmann Hanson, MA From bob.bosra@demattia.net Mon Nov 30 19:22:46 2009 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:22:46 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <4B1459B6.9090307@fybush.com> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> <85A03B3E9C294D9B90025511248C57DB@aeriema> <4B144BA5.5020204@fybush.com> <000601ca7217$2c6b6350$854229f0$@net> <4B1459B6.9090307@fybush.com> Message-ID: >From my charter cable modem account: nslookup www.wcrb.com gives 67.19.55.218 nslookup wcrb.com doesn't resolve. 67.19.55.218 is "theplanet" internet services. There are 159 websites that resolve to this IP, many of them radio stations. >From my shore.net account, neither name resolves. I think you're right about the DNS's being changed. -Bob From mward@iname.com Mon Nov 30 18:03:14 2009 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:03:14 -0500 Subject: Globe: WGBH "TV on the radio", Rooney/Crossley talk show etc In-Reply-To: <4B130D29.6070105@server4.gabrielmass.com> References: <20091128074714.BA21583BE2@ws1-1a.us4.outblaze.com> <4B121CA9.19683.AC99F9@joe.attorneyross.com> <19218.8832.621992.953516@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <4B130D29.6070105@server4.gabrielmass.com> Message-ID: <4B144F32.3010507@iname.com> Richard Chonak wrote: > With a suitable phone or laptop and an all-you-can-eat data plan, you > could play that in your car now. Of course, it's not push-button > convenient yet. I already do this with streams like BBC World Service on my Droid phone. I haven't gone looking for the other flavors of the Beeb, but I'm sure they are out there somewhere. I use a cassette adapter, a rather low-tech way to get it to my car radio...but it sounds superb, with a high-bandwidth feed and within the limitations of a cassette-to-3.5mm jack adapter. From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Mon Nov 30 19:23:01 2009 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:23:01 -0600 Subject: IMUS In-Reply-To: <0DFFE7FC-B75C-442B-AA5D-5AD99B1B12C0@charter.net> References: <8bce0fe80911301258r71f8847fv76b414fa142b1bbb@mail.gmail.com> <0DFFE7FC-B75C-442B-AA5D-5AD99B1B12C0@charter.net> Message-ID: <8bce0fe80911301623o3e6eb61evca0a6a1ef60e9617@mail.gmail.com> Probably very few, would be my guess Paul On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Paul Anderson wrote: > > I wonder how many listeners will tune in for both Imus and classical music. > > Paul From dillane@sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 30 19:59:46 2009 From: dillane@sbcglobal.net (Bill Dillane) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:59:46 -0500 Subject: UHF in Southern New England (was WHNB/WVIT Channel 30 (was Re: WTAG-TV?)) Message-ID: <005801ca7221$93724ff0$ba56efd0$@net> >The entrance to WVIT today is on Ridgewood Road, but I wouldn't be surprised if the entrance was on New Britain Avenue. >I remember Route 6 (New Britain Ave.) Channel 30's main entrance was on New Britain Ave. Now that the old Channel 30 building has been replaced with a driveway, you can see the new building's entrance from Ridgewood Rd. Picture at the Brooks File (NBC Connecticut anchor Gerry Brooks)... http://brooksfile.wordpress.com/2009/11/30/paradise-is-a-parking-lot From dave@skywaves.net Mon Nov 30 19:13:07 2009 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:13:07 -0500 Subject: IMUS In-Reply-To: <8bce0fe80911301516u17738a3cn30c5826ade72bd40@mail.gmail.com> References: <8bce0fe80911301258r71f8847fv76b414fa142b1bbb@mail.gmail.com> <8bce0fe80911301516u17738a3cn30c5826ade72bd40@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1335D0ACF09141598FA9D3509BD4E3C8@dave> So they can sell at least one daypart? -------------------------------------------------- From: "Paul B. Walker, Jr." Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 6:16 PM To: "Alan Tolz" Cc: "bri" Subject: Re: IMUS > > Ok, I have egg on my face....... I just realized something. > > It was Howard STERN WCCC-AM had on before, not IMUS. I get those two old > windbags confused. > > Still curious, why is a classical station adding IMUS? > > Paul > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Alan Tolz wrote: > >> Hi, Paul...WCCC AM has not aired Imus before. In fact, when Imus was on >> WFAN, Connecticut stations were not allowed to carry his program. >> >> WCCC AM has a PSSA that allows for full power at 6 AM and 25% or so at >> 4:30 >> AM and I'm pretty sure that for the hours of Imus' program, WCCC AM is >> at >> its full power. >> >> Alan >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul B. Walker, Jr." < >> walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com> >> To: "bri" >> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 3:58 PM >> Subject: IMUS >> >> >> >> I wonder why WCCC-AM is adding IMUS again. They had him for awhile, even >>> after 1290 went classical and dropped him, now are adding him back. >>> >>> Why put him on a Classical music AM station that no one more then 2 or 3 >>> miles away can hear before sunrise? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sincerely, >>> Paul B. Walker, Jr. >>> www.onairdj.com >>> walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com >>> >>> >> > > > -- > Sincerely, > Paul B. Walker, Jr. > www.onairdj.com > walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com > From dan.strassberg@att.net Mon Nov 30 21:20:41 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:20:41 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> <85A03B3E9C294D9B90025511248C57DB@aeriema><4B144BA5.5020204@fybush.com> <4B144EDD.2020300@server4.gabrielmass.com> Message-ID: <811A22FADD7146BA93AE8BDC6DDF8145@SatU205S5044> How about the Laurence Glavin Channel? ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Chonak" To: "'bri'" Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 6:01 PM Subject: Re: WCRB website down > Scott Fybush wrote: >> >> That's the existing stream of 89.7-HD2, which will be // 99.5 >> tomorrow morning... > > > Is it somewhat of a waste to have 89.7-HD2 and 99.5-HD airing the > same programming? The opportunity for a more "purist" classical > program stream suggests itself. I'd call it the Unpopular > Classical Music Channel, 'cause "Deep Tracks" is already taken. > > --RC > > From dan.strassberg@att.net Mon Nov 30 21:21:14 2009 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan.Strassberg) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:21:14 -0500 Subject: IMUS References: <8bce0fe80911301258r71f8847fv76b414fa142b1bbb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <9D25A48E78664964893A313B174CDCEC@SatU205S5044> I doubt whether the PSRA allows this. I'd bet on someone at the station deciding that, if the PSRA allows 125W at 6:00AM in January, when sunrise is at 7:30, it should therefore allow us to run the same power ay 4:30AM in a month when official local sunrise is at 6:00AM. Sure; that's what it must mean; if we get caught, I'll say that the language was unclear. Until you get caught, that's called creativity. Afterwards, depending on how many times you were caught doing it, it's called "just pay the fine." ----- Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net) eFax 1-707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Tolz" To: "Paul B. Walker, Jr." ; "bri" Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 6:12 PM Subject: Re: IMUS > Hi, Paul...WCCC AM has not aired Imus before. In fact, when Imus > was on WFAN, Connecticut stations were not allowed to carry his > program. > > WCCC AM has a PSSA that allows for full power at 6 AM and 25% or so > at 4:30 AM and I'm pretty sure that for the hours of Imus' program, > WCCC AM is at its full power. > > Alan From elipolo@earthlink.net Mon Nov 30 22:27:02 2009 From: elipolo@earthlink.net (Eli Polonsky) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:27:02 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: WCRB website down Message-ID: <9747421.1259638022589.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> > From: "Richard Chonak" > To: "'bri'" > Monday, November 30, 2009 6:01 PM > > Scott Fybush wrote: >> >> That's the existing stream of 89.7-HD2, which >> will be // 99.5 tomorrow morning... > > Is it somewhat of a waste to have 89.7-HD2 and > 99.5-HD airing the same programming? No, because the location of the 99.5 transmitter in Andover results in spotty reception in metro Boston and the west suburbs, and poor to none at all in the south suburbs. The Blue Hill location of the 89.7 transmitter does a great job of covering metro Boston and the west and south suburbs. Many people who can not hear 99.5 analog clearly (or 99.5 HD at all) in metro Boston and to the south will be able to hear it on 89.7 HD2 from Blue Hill. The two locations are actually very complementary to one another for serving the all of the Boston market from north (99.5) to south (89.7) in HD. I just had to buy my mom an HD radio so that she could continue to listen to classical on 89.7 HD2. There's a hill behind her house in Newton blocking clear reception of 99.5 from 25 miles away to the north in Andover on all of her analog home radios. However, I was pleased to find that the "iLuv" HD clock radio has the best HD tuner I've heard yet. I knew it would have no problem with 89.7 HD2 in Newton, but it also gets 99.5 in HD despite the hill blocking the signal! It also has no problem with the Boston HD3 signals even six miles away behind the hill. My Sangean won't decode HD3's at all at my Somerville apartment three miles line of sight of the Pru. I'm planning to replace my Sangean with an "iLuv" radio this week while my 20% off coupon at You-Do-It Electronics is good. EP From rac@gabrielmass.com Mon Nov 30 23:11:02 2009 From: rac@gabrielmass.com (Richard Chonak) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:11:02 -0500 Subject: HD tuners (was: WCRB website down) In-Reply-To: <9747421.1259638022589.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <9747421.1259638022589.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <4B149756.5010305@server4.gabrielmass.com> Eli Polonsky wrote: >> > However, I was pleased to find that the "iLuv" HD > clock radio has the best HD tuner I've heard yet. > I knew it would have no problem with 89.7 HD2 in > Newton, but it also gets 99.5 in HD despite the > hill blocking the signal! It also has no problem > with the Boston HD3 signals even six miles away > behind the hill. My Sangean won't decode HD3's at > all at my Somerville apartment three miles line > of sight of the Pru. I'm planning to replace my > Sangean with an "iLuv" radio this week while my > 20% off coupon at You-Do-It Electronics is good. Thanks for bringing up this subject. Does anyone know whether there's any buying advice about HD radio tuners/receivers available on the 'net, beyond what Eli has mentioned? This could become a regular FAQ topic, perhaps deserving of its own page on the bostonradio.org web site! --RC From scott@fybush.com Mon Nov 30 22:12:17 2009 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:12:17 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <811A22FADD7146BA93AE8BDC6DDF8145@SatU205S5044> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> <85A03B3E9C294D9B90025511248C57DB@aeriema><4B144BA5.5020204@fybush.com> <4B144EDD.2020300@server4.gabrielmass.com> <811A22FADD7146BA93AE8BDC6DDF8145@SatU205S5044> Message-ID: <4B148991.7010401@fybush.com> Dan.Strassberg wrote: > How about the Laurence Glavin Channel? While the Laurence-from-Methuen channel would no doubt be a big hit on an HD2, at least if you're Laurence from Methuen. But there's actually a very good, and very obvious, reason for simulcasting 99.5-1 on 89.7-2 - 89.7 from Great Blue Hill puts a strong-enough-for-HD2-decode signal over a lot of territory on the South Shore, Cape Cod and the Providence market, where 99.5 is noisy or nonexistent even in analog. s From jjlehmann@comcast.net Mon Nov 30 23:23:15 2009 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:23:15 -0500 Subject: WCRB website down In-Reply-To: <4B148991.7010401@fybush.com> References: <4B143F44.3080504@fybush.com> <85A03B3E9C294D9B90025511248C57DB@aeriema><4B144BA5.5020204@fybush.com> <4B144EDD.2020300@server4.gabrielmass.com> <811A22FADD7146BA93AE8BDC6DDF8145@SatU205S5044> <4B148991.7010401@fybush.com> Message-ID: <002001ca723e$011124c0$03336e40$@net> > While the Laurence-from-Methuen channel would no doubt be a big hit on > an HD2, at least if you're Laurence from Methuen. > > But there's actually a very good, and very obvious, reason for > simulcasting 99.5-1 on 89.7-2 - 89.7 from Great Blue Hill puts a > strong-enough-for-HD2-decode signal over a lot of territory on the > South > Shore, Cape Cod and the Providence market, where 99.5 is noisy or > nonexistent even in analog. Maybe the Laurence-from-Methuen channel could go on 99.5 HD2? I'm surprised he hasn't commented much about the demise of WCRB as we know it. Maybe he's out celebrating? Jeff Lehmann Hanson, MA