From Chuckigo@maine.rr.com Wed Jul 1 21:12:38 2020 From: Chuckigo@maine.rr.com (Chuck Igo) Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 21:12:38 -0400 Subject: Dick Gosselin has passed away Message-ID: <202007020144.0621iMI0035670@isfahel.bostonradio.org> Saddened to share the news that Dick Gosselin, 50+ year pro in radio and tv in New Hampshire, Maine and Boston, has lost his mercifully short battle Lewy Body Dementia and Parkinsons. I have known Dick, man and boy, since 1979 when I first started at WCSH radio and he was on the TV side, and then got to know him even better when my wife & I purchased our home in South Portland just one door down from him. He began his adventure in radio in Somersworth, NH and landed on TV in Portland with WCSH (Channel 6). He actually worked for like one day at Channel 13, and did almost 20 years with WMTW (Channel 8). Along the way, he did weekends/swing/fill-in for WCVB in Boston and managed to host ?So You Think You Know Maine? for Maine Public Television for several years, as well. And for a time he operated his own videographer business (and the fully-equipped studio is still set up in his basement). For those who had the pleasure of knowing or working alongside Dick, his typical dry New England demeanor was a comfort and he was a pretty dang funny guy. We often joked about buying the house that sits between our houses, digging tunnels from either side and opening a broadcast production house without ever having to shovel out to get to work. He was a gem with his snowblower when he worked a later shift than I as I?d get home to a cleared driveway, and likewise ? those afternoon storms would move away and he?d get home after the 11pm cast to a clear driveway. We had each others? backs. I will miss him. Safe home, Dick. --Chuck Igo Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From billohno@gmail.com Wed Jul 1 23:09:08 2020 From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill) Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 03:09:08 +0000 Subject: Dick Gosselin has passed away In-Reply-To: <202007020144.0621iMI0035670@isfahel.bostonradio.org> References: <202007020144.0621iMI0035670@isfahel.bostonradio.org> Message-ID: I?m sorry for your loss of a good buddy, Chuck. That hurts. Thanks for letting us know more about Mr. Gosselin. Bill O?Neill Shoreham, Vermont ________________________________ From: Boston-Radio-Interest on behalf of Chuck Igo Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 9:12:38 PM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org Subject: Dick Gosselin has passed away Saddened to share the news that Dick Gosselin, 50+ year pro in radio and tv in New Hampshire, Maine and Boston, has lost his mercifully short battle Lewy Body Dementia and Parkinsons. I have known Dick, man and boy, since 1979 when I first started at WCSH radio and he was on the TV side, and then got to know him even better when my wife & I purchased our home in South Portland just one door down from him. He began his adventure in radio in Somersworth, NH and landed on TV in Portland with WCSH (Channel 6). He actually worked for like one day at Channel 13, and did almost 20 years with WMTW (Channel 8). Along the way, he did weekends/swing/fill-in for WCVB in Boston and managed to host ?So You Think You Know Maine? for Maine Public Television for several years, as well. And for a time he operated his own videographer business (and the fully-equipped studio is still set up in his basement). For those who had the pleasure of knowing or working alongside Dick, his typical dry New England demeanor was a comfort and he was a pretty dang funny guy. We often joked about buying the house that sits between our houses, digging tunnels from either side and opening a broadcast production house without ever having to shovel out to get to work. He was a gem with his snowblower when he worked a later shift than I as I?d get home to a cleared driveway, and likewise ? those afternoon storms would move away and he?d get home after the 11pm cast to a clear driveway. We had each others? backs. I will miss him. Safe home, Dick. --Chuck Igo Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From markwats@comcast.net Sun Jul 5 12:28:36 2020 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2020 12:28:36 -0400 Subject: Dick Gosselin has passed away In-Reply-To: <202007020144.0621iMI0035670@isfahel.bostonradio.org> References: <202007020144.0621iMI0035670@isfahel.bostonradio.org> Message-ID: <017001d652e9$5b8db700$12a92500$@comcast.net> Chuck Igo wrote: >Saddened to share the news that Dick Gosselin, 50+ year pro in radio and tv in New Hampshire, Maine and Boston, has lost his mercifully short battle Lewy Body Dementia and Parkinsons. Chuck, so sorry for the loss of your friend, neighbor and fellow broadcaster. His obituary is in today's Portland Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram: https://www.pressherald.com/2020/07/05/obituaryrichard-norman-gosselin/ So nice of the family to thank you in the obituary for all you did to help Dick & the family. Didn't know about the other jobs he had outside of his TV & radio career. With his knowledge of all things Portland & Maine he must have been an excellent tour guide. Also didn't know that one of the stops on his broadcasting career before hitting it big in Maine was here in Lowell. May Dick Gosselin Rest In Peace. Mark Watson From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu Jul 9 18:13:47 2020 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:13:47 -0400 Subject: Jay Severin passes away Message-ID: Michael Graham writes on Twitter: "Jay Severin passed away this week. He did me one of the biggest favors of anyone in my professional life: He's the reason I came to Boston. It took me a while to discover New England, but once I got here, I knew it was the place I wanted to call home. Thanks, Jay." https://t.co/2AX3ObzINU Severin was on WTKK, had a national show called Jay Severin Has Issues, and was on The Blaze TV network From richard@chonak.com Wed Jul 15 00:22:41 2020 From: richard@chonak.com (Richard Chonak) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:22:41 -0400 Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals Message-ID: <65d549ff-1ab9-b165-d9a9-4da912139c9a@chonak.com> The "Antenna Man" of Bethlehem, PA usually devotes his YouTube videos to testing TV antennas, and rating their performance at his location in the Poconos. Viewers all over the country ask him for advice, so in a video released July 14, he devoted an episode to explaining the FCC spectrum auction that led to many changes in reception. In particular, he zeroed in on PBS stations that took big payouts to move to low-VHF frequencies.? The prime example, of course, is WGBH's move to RF channel 5, and the $218M jackpot the auction yielded for it. Lamenting the poorer service which the public got, he shows a list of a dozen or so station employees with salaries running up to $400,000 and beyond it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrFib1jaBP0 --RC From geo.allen@comcast.net Wed Jul 15 14:35:21 2020 From: geo.allen@comcast.net (George Allen) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 14:35:21 -0400 Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <202007151912.06FJCCua013570@isfahel.bostonradio.org> Yeah, they really took the $ and ran. And... they get ongoing $$ from NBC10 by renting out RF32 (wgbx) to NBC10 for 15-1 and 15-2. So they cashed out twice at OTA viewer's expense. Somehow that seems not right, even if legal. Cord-cutting is rampant [I'm one of them], so tho maybe at one time OTA wasn't a big deal, it's a bigger deal now. Why don't they just stream HDTV over the web? Doesn't solve it for everyone but would make me happy. I have mixed emotions about all this. It was a good deal for them and raised a lot of cash. The Q is: what are they going to do with all that moola? George From: Richard Chonak Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:22:41 -0400 Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals The "Antenna Man" of Bethlehem, PA usually devotes his YouTube videos to testing TV antennas, and rating their performance at his location in the Poconos. Viewers all over the country ask him for advice, so in a video released July 14, he devoted an episode to explaining the FCC spectrum auction that led to many changes in reception. In particular, he zeroed in on PBS stations that took big payouts to move to low-VHF frequencies.? The prime example, of course, is WGBH's move to RF channel 5, and the $218M jackpot the auction yielded for it. Lamenting the poorer service which the public got, he shows a list of a dozen or so station employees with salaries running up to $400,000 and beyond it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrFib1jaBP0 --RC From geo.allen@comcast.net Wed Jul 15 19:09:08 2020 From: geo.allen@comcast.net (George Allen) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 19:09:08 -0400 Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals In-Reply-To: References: <202007151912.06FJCCua013570@isfahel.bostonradio.org> Message-ID: <202007152312.06FNC73m090134@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Those are very good points; the animosity comes from losing a HD Ch2/44 OTA signal. Even with the [coming soon I hope] bumpup to 36kW, I don't think it will equal what RF32 has [?]. With the chess moves below, where would NBC-10 find a new high-power Boston spectrum home? Not that I worry, but when below comes to pass, should NBC be worrying? At 04:10 PM 7/15/2020, Scott Fybush wrote: I don't get the animosity toward WGBH. They resisted selling off their WGBX license for years, while almost every other public TV entity took the fast cash and ran.? They could have gotten tens of millions for it when stations like WNED in Buffalo and WMHT in Albany were unloading theirs.? Instead, they've played a very long game. They deliberately didn't sell WGBX's spectrum, which means they still have a UHF ATSC 1 signal that's as good as any in the market. The WGBH 2 programming is available that way for anyone who can't get the RF 5 signal. And guess what? Once the ATSC 3 transition gets moving in earnest, it's a good bet the WGBH license will be used for ATSC 3. Which means while other broadcasters with only one license have to scramble to find channel-sharing partners to maintain dual ATSC 1/3 operations, WGBH will be all set internally.? ? And once ATSC 1 sunsets, which could be years from now yet, WGBH can move the ATSC 3 signal to UHF and *still* have another 6 MHz of VHF spectrum for more ATSC 3 data.? They're thinking several moves ahead on the chessboard compared to most of the industry. I don't hate them for that. I admire them for it.? On Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 3:12 PM George Allen wrote: Yeah, they really took the $ and ran.? And... they get ongoing $$ from NBC10 by renting out RF32 (wgbx) to NBC10 for 15-1 and 15-2.? So they cashed out twice at OTA viewer's expense.? Somehow that seems not right, even if legal.? Cord-cutting is rampant [I'm one of them], so tho maybe at one time OTA wasn't a big deal, it's a bigger deal now.? Why don't they just stream HDTV over the web?? Doesn't solve it for everyone but would make me happy. I have mixed emotions about all this.? It was a good deal for them and raised a lot of cash.? The Q is: what are they going to do with all that moola? ? ? George From: Richard Chonak Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:22:41 -0400 Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals The "Antenna Man" of Bethlehem, PA usually devotes his YouTube videos to testing TV antennas, and rating their performance at his location in the Poconos. Viewers all over the country ask him for advice, so in a video released July 14, he devoted an episode to explaining the FCC spectrum auction that led to many changes in reception. In particular, he zeroed in on PBS stations that took big payouts to move to low-VHF frequencies.??? The prime example, of course, is WGBH's move to RF channel 5, and the $218M jackpot the auction yielded for it. Lamenting the poorer service which the public got, he shows a list of a dozen or so station employees with salaries running up to $400,000 and beyond it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrFib1jaBP0 --RC From geo.allen@comcast.net Wed Jul 15 19:40:05 2020 From: geo.allen@comcast.net (George Allen) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 19:40:05 -0400 Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals In-Reply-To: <216B3870-7846-41AD-994F-94AB78D092D2@mac.com> References: <202007151912.06FJCCua013570@isfahel.bostonradio.org> <202007152312.06FNC73m090134@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <216B3870-7846-41AD-994F-94AB78D092D2@mac.com> Message-ID: <202007152343.06FNhdXr090477@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> John - Someone suggested that VHF, esp. low VHF, has more general [artificial -- eg interference] noise from a wide range of things. Noise seems to trump [sorry, poor word choice] better propagation at low VHF. It's a good Q, and this isn't necessarily the right answer. Why 5 and not 2? I have no idea... 2 would have made sense in an odd sort of way. George At 07:24 PM 7/15/2020, John Francini wrote: George, Scott, As a spectator (software engineer, not radio engineer) to all of this, I have a question. Why would having RF channel 32 (in the UHF band) be a 'better' signal than low VHF (channel 5)? And if they have to have a low VHF signal, why not their original RF channel 2? I always thought that lower frequency signals have better propagation for a given ERP? John ? John Francini ???I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace; that two are called a law firm; and that three or more become a Congress. And by God I have had *this Congress!??? ? John Adams > On 15 Jul 2020, at 19:09 , George Allen wrote: > > Those are very good points; the animosity comes from losing a HD Ch2/44 OTA signal. Even with the [coming soon I hope] bumpup to 36kW, I don't think it will equal what RF32 has [?]. With the chess moves below, where would NBC-10 find a new high-power Boston spectrum home? Not that I worry, but when below comes to pass, should NBC be worrying? > > > At 04:10 PM 7/15/2020, Scott Fybush wrote: > I don't get the animosity toward WGBH. > > They resisted selling off their WGBX license for years, while almost every other public TV entity took the fast cash and ran.?? > > They could have gotten tens of millions for it when stations like WNED in Buffalo and WMHT in Albany were unloading theirs.?? > > Instead, they've played a very long game. They deliberately didn't sell WGBX's spectrum, which means they still have a UHF ATSC 1 signal that's as good as any in the market. The WGBH 2 programming is available that way for anyone who can't get the RF 5 signal. > > And guess what? Once the ATSC 3 transition gets moving in earnest, it's a good bet the WGBH license will be used for ATSC 3. Which means while other broadcasters with only one license have to scramble to find channel-sharing partners to maintain dual ATSC 1/3 operations, WGBH will be all set internally.?? ?? > > And once ATSC 1 sunsets, which could be years from now yet, WGBH can move the ATSC 3 signal to UHF and *still* have another 6 MHz of VHF spectrum for more ATSC 3 data.?? > > They're thinking several moves ahead on the chessboard compared to most of the industry. I don't hate them for that. I admire them for it.?? > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 3:12 PM George Allen wrote: > Yeah, they really took the $ and ran.?? And... > they get ongoing $$ from NBC10 by renting out > RF32 (wgbx) to NBC10 for 15-1 and 15-2.?? So they > cashed out twice at OTA viewer's > expense.?? Somehow that seems not right, even if > legal.?? Cord-cutting is rampant [I'm one of > them], so tho maybe at one time OTA wasn't a big > deal, it's a bigger deal now.?? Why don't they > just stream HDTV over the web??? Doesn't solve it > for everyone but would make me happy. > > I have mixed emotions about all this.?? It was a > good deal for them and raised a lot of cash.?? The > Q is: what are they going to do with all that moola? > ?? ?? George > > > From: Richard Chonak > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:22:41 -0400 > Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals > > The "Antenna Man" of Bethlehem, PA usually > devotes his YouTube videos to testing TV > antennas, and rating their performance at his location in the Poconos. > > Viewers all over the country ask him for advice, > so in a video released July 14, he devoted an > episode to explaining the FCC spectrum auction > that led to many changes in reception. > > In particular, he zeroed in on PBS stations that > took big payouts to move to low-VHF > frequencies.?????? The prime example, of course, is > WGBH's move to RF channel 5, and the $218M > jackpot the auction yielded for it. Lamenting the > poorer service which the public got, he shows a > list of a dozen or so station employees with > salaries running up to $400,000 and beyond it. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrFib1jaBP0 > > --RC > > > From francini@mac.com Wed Jul 15 19:24:59 2020 From: francini@mac.com (John Francini) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 19:24:59 -0400 Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals In-Reply-To: <202007152312.06FNC73m090134@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <202007151912.06FJCCua013570@isfahel.bostonradio.org> <202007152312.06FNC73m090134@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <216B3870-7846-41AD-994F-94AB78D092D2@mac.com> George, Scott, As a spectator (software engineer, not radio engineer) to all of this, I have a question. Why would having RF channel 32 (in the UHF band) be a 'better' signal than low VHF (channel 5)? And if they have to have a low VHF signal, why not their original RF channel 2? I always thought that lower frequency signals have better propagation for a given ERP? John ? John Francini ?I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace; that two are called a law firm; and that three or more become a Congress. And by God I have had *this Congress!? ? John Adams > On 15 Jul 2020, at 19:09 , George Allen wrote: > > Those are very good points; the animosity comes from losing a HD Ch2/44 OTA signal. Even with the [coming soon I hope] bumpup to 36kW, I don't think it will equal what RF32 has [?]. With the chess moves below, where would NBC-10 find a new high-power Boston spectrum home? Not that I worry, but when below comes to pass, should NBC be worrying? > > > At 04:10 PM 7/15/2020, Scott Fybush wrote: > I don't get the animosity toward WGBH. > > They resisted selling off their WGBX license for years, while almost every other public TV entity took the fast cash and ran.? > > They could have gotten tens of millions for it when stations like WNED in Buffalo and WMHT in Albany were unloading theirs.? > > Instead, they've played a very long game. They deliberately didn't sell WGBX's spectrum, which means they still have a UHF ATSC 1 signal that's as good as any in the market. The WGBH 2 programming is available that way for anyone who can't get the RF 5 signal. > > And guess what? Once the ATSC 3 transition gets moving in earnest, it's a good bet the WGBH license will be used for ATSC 3. Which means while other broadcasters with only one license have to scramble to find channel-sharing partners to maintain dual ATSC 1/3 operations, WGBH will be all set internally.? ? > > And once ATSC 1 sunsets, which could be years from now yet, WGBH can move the ATSC 3 signal to UHF and *still* have another 6 MHz of VHF spectrum for more ATSC 3 data.? > > They're thinking several moves ahead on the chessboard compared to most of the industry. I don't hate them for that. I admire them for it.? > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 3:12 PM George Allen wrote: > Yeah, they really took the $ and ran.? And... > they get ongoing $$ from NBC10 by renting out > RF32 (wgbx) to NBC10 for 15-1 and 15-2.? So they > cashed out twice at OTA viewer's > expense.? Somehow that seems not right, even if > legal.? Cord-cutting is rampant [I'm one of > them], so tho maybe at one time OTA wasn't a big > deal, it's a bigger deal now.? Why don't they > just stream HDTV over the web?? Doesn't solve it > for everyone but would make me happy. > > I have mixed emotions about all this.? It was a > good deal for them and raised a lot of cash.? The > Q is: what are they going to do with all that moola? > ? ? George > > > From: Richard Chonak > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:22:41 -0400 > Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals > > The "Antenna Man" of Bethlehem, PA usually > devotes his YouTube videos to testing TV > antennas, and rating their performance at his location in the Poconos. > > Viewers all over the country ask him for advice, > so in a video released July 14, he devoted an > episode to explaining the FCC spectrum auction > that led to many changes in reception. > > In particular, he zeroed in on PBS stations that > took big payouts to move to low-VHF > frequencies.??? The prime example, of course, is > WGBH's move to RF channel 5, and the $218M > jackpot the auction yielded for it. Lamenting the > poorer service which the public got, he shows a > list of a dozen or so station employees with > salaries running up to $400,000 and beyond it. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrFib1jaBP0 > > --RC > > > From scott@fybush.com Wed Jul 15 20:26:27 2020 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 20:26:27 -0400 Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals In-Reply-To: <216B3870-7846-41AD-994F-94AB78D092D2@mac.com> References: <202007151912.06FJCCua013570@isfahel.bostonradio.org> <202007152312.06FNC73m090134@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <216B3870-7846-41AD-994F-94AB78D092D2@mac.com> Message-ID: UHF (now limited to RF channels 14-36) became the desirable place to be in the ATSC 1 digital world for a few reasons, biggest among them the ability to use a compact indoor antenna in most areas. VHF for digital TV worked well, even in the ATSC 1 universe, but only with a good outdoor antenna, which must of necessity be fairly large, especially for low-band VHF signals that are ~6 meters in wavelength. Power levels for VHF digital were set by the FCC with outdoor antennas as the standard, and turned out to be lower than they needed to be. UHF is still desirable for ATSC 3, because it includes new mobile reception modes, and you're still not going to have a phone or tablet with an antenna big enough to work well on VHF wavelengths. But... the more robust ATSC 3 signals should work better on stationary VHF antennas indoors, too. And why didn't WGBH go back to RF 2? Because that channel went to WSBE in Providence. The repack process didn't care much about original analog channels, and had no reason to. It's not like WGBH still had a channel 2 RF chain in place - that stuff was all removed quickly after 2009. The new WGBH signal isn't even at the same place channel 2 came from. That came from Cedar Street, and RF 5 comes from Cabot Street, the old candelabra tower. On Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 7:25 PM John Francini wrote: > George, Scott, > > As a spectator (software engineer, not radio engineer) to all of this, I > have a question. > > Why would having RF channel 32 (in the UHF band) be a 'better' signal than > low VHF (channel 5)? And if they have to have a low VHF signal, why not > their original RF channel 2? I always thought that lower frequency signals > have better propagation for a given ERP? > > John > > > ? > John Francini > ?I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace; > that two are called a law firm; and that three or more become a Congress. > And by God I have had *this Congress!? ? John Adams > > > On 15 Jul 2020, at 19:09 , George Allen wrote: > > > > Those are very good points; the animosity comes from losing a HD Ch2/44 > OTA signal. Even with the [coming soon I hope] bumpup to 36kW, I don't > think it will equal what RF32 has [?]. With the chess moves below, where > would NBC-10 find a new high-power Boston spectrum home? Not that I worry, > but when below comes to pass, should NBC be worrying? > > > > > > At 04:10 PM 7/15/2020, Scott Fybush wrote: > > I don't get the animosity toward WGBH. > > > > They resisted selling off their WGBX license for years, while almost > every other public TV entity took the fast cash and ran.? > > > > They could have gotten tens of millions for it when stations like WNED > in Buffalo and WMHT in Albany were unloading theirs.? > > > > Instead, they've played a very long game. They deliberately didn't sell > WGBX's spectrum, which means they still have a UHF ATSC 1 signal that's as > good as any in the market. The WGBH 2 programming is available that way for > anyone who can't get the RF 5 signal. > > > > And guess what? Once the ATSC 3 transition gets moving in earnest, it's > a good bet the WGBH license will be used for ATSC 3. Which means while > other broadcasters with only one license have to scramble to find > channel-sharing partners to maintain dual ATSC 1/3 operations, WGBH will be > all set internally.? ? > > > > And once ATSC 1 sunsets, which could be years from now yet, WGBH can > move the ATSC 3 signal to UHF and *still* have another 6 MHz of VHF > spectrum for more ATSC 3 data.? > > > > They're thinking several moves ahead on the chessboard compared to most > of the industry. I don't hate them for that. I admire them for it.? > > > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 3:12 PM George Allen > wrote: > > Yeah, they really took the $ and ran.? And... > > they get ongoing $$ from NBC10 by renting out > > RF32 (wgbx) to NBC10 for 15-1 and 15-2.? So they > > cashed out twice at OTA viewer's > > expense.? Somehow that seems not right, even if > > legal.? Cord-cutting is rampant [I'm one of > > them], so tho maybe at one time OTA wasn't a big > > deal, it's a bigger deal now.? Why don't they > > just stream HDTV over the web?? Doesn't solve it > > for everyone but would make me happy. > > > > I have mixed emotions about all this.? It was a > > good deal for them and raised a lot of cash.? The > > Q is: what are they going to do with all that moola? > > ? ? George > > > > > > From: Richard Chonak > > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:22:41 -0400 > > Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals > > > > The "Antenna Man" of Bethlehem, PA usually > > devotes his YouTube videos to testing TV > > antennas, and rating their performance at his location in the Poconos. > > > > Viewers all over the country ask him for advice, > > so in a video released July 14, he devoted an > > episode to explaining the FCC spectrum auction > > that led to many changes in reception. > > > > In particular, he zeroed in on PBS stations that > > took big payouts to move to low-VHF > > frequencies.??? The prime example, of course, is > > WGBH's move to RF channel 5, and the $218M > > jackpot the auction yielded for it. Lamenting the > > poorer service which the public got, he shows a > > list of a dozen or so station employees with > > salaries running up to $400,000 and beyond it. > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrFib1jaBP0 > > > > --RC > > > > > > > > From wollman@bimajority.org Wed Jul 15 23:02:27 2020 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 23:02:27 -0400 Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals In-Reply-To: References: <202007151912.06FJCCua013570@isfahel.bostonradio.org> <202007152312.06FNC73m090134@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <216B3870-7846-41AD-994F-94AB78D092D2@mac.com> Message-ID: <24335.49987.921920.348793@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > The repack process didn't care much about original analog channels, and had > no reason to. To maybe make this a bit clearer -- and put it in terms that will make sense to John and others who work in software -- we can talk a bit about how the spectrum auction worked. In each phase of the "incentive auction", the FCC started by determining an amount of spectrum they wanted to clear. They then ran a "forward auction" for the wireless carriers to bid on spectrum, which gave them a revenue figure. Then, multiple rounds of "reverse auction" were run, in which TV licensees were given individualized offers to go dark, move to VHF-high, or move to VHF-low as appropriate. The stations that refused the FCC's offer in any round were kicked out of the auction for the rest of the phase, and the offers to the remaining stations were *reduced* in value with each round until only the minimum number of stations had accepted an offer. Stations that had accepted an offer in any round were permanently bound by their last bid. Thus, the auction was designed to ensure that stations remained in the auction. For each round of the reverse auction, a satisfiability solver was run to ensure that there was *some* reassignment of spectrum that would give every remaining station a reasonable approximation of coverage of their market and would respect the agreements the FCC made with the Mexican and Canadian authorities, and that there was a feasible transition that required no more than two repack phases in each broadcast TV market. Satisfiability, or "SAT", is an NP-complete problem, which means that while it's easy to test whether any given solution actually works, there is no efficient way to compute such a solution in the first place. SAT algorithms are worst-case exponential in the number of terms, and the problem here -- reassigning spectrum throughout the entire US, the populated parts of Canada, and the border states of Mexico -- has millions of terms. Most SAT solvers use randomized algorithms to avoid the worst-case behavior (given some assumptions), so each subsequent run will result in a *different* assignment. This process was repeated in each subsequent phase, with the target amount of cleared spectrum *reduced* -- thereby increasing the wireless carriers' bids and decreasing the number of broadcast licensees the government was looking to buy out -- until the total of all the winning bids in the forward auction, minus the total of all the winning bids in the reverse auction, minus the estimated construction costs to be paid to broadcast licensees for changing channels, was greater than the Congressionally mandated "profit" the FCC was required to collect for the Treasury. Once the auction results were locked in, another solver run was initiated to compute the final set of channel assignments and transition phases for each market, along with those big lists of stations that all had to change at exactly the same time. The whole thing -- the "incentive auction" structure and all of the various pieces, comes out of a crossover field of economics and computer science called "mechanism design". (I learned about it by attending a talk at work by one of the theoreticians who had helped to figure out how to do the computational part efficiently.) -GAWollman From scott@fybush.com Wed Jul 15 16:10:46 2020 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 16:10:46 -0400 Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals In-Reply-To: <202007151912.06FJCCua013570@isfahel.bostonradio.org> References: <202007151912.06FJCCua013570@isfahel.bostonradio.org> Message-ID: I don't get the animosity toward WGBH. They resisted selling off their WGBX license for years, while almost every other public TV entity took the fast cash and ran. They could have gotten tens of millions for it when stations like WNED in Buffalo and WMHT in Albany were unloading theirs. Instead, they've played a very long game. They deliberately didn't sell WGBX's spectrum, which means they still have a UHF ATSC 1 signal that's as good as any in the market. The WGBH 2 programming is available that way for anyone who can't get the RF 5 signal. And guess what? Once the ATSC 3 transition gets moving in earnest, it's a good bet the WGBH license will be used for ATSC 3. Which means while other broadcasters with only one license have to scramble to find channel-sharing partners to maintain dual ATSC 1/3 operations, WGBH will be all set internally. And once ATSC 1 sunsets, which could be years from now yet, WGBH can move the ATSC 3 signal to UHF and *still* have another 6 MHz of VHF spectrum for more ATSC 3 data. They're thinking several moves ahead on the chessboard compared to most of the industry. I don't hate them for that. I admire them for it. On Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 3:12 PM George Allen wrote: > Yeah, they really took the $ and ran. And... > they get ongoing $$ from NBC10 by renting out > RF32 (wgbx) to NBC10 for 15-1 and 15-2. So they > cashed out twice at OTA viewer's > expense. Somehow that seems not right, even if > legal. Cord-cutting is rampant [I'm one of > them], so tho maybe at one time OTA wasn't a big > deal, it's a bigger deal now. Why don't they > just stream HDTV over the web? Doesn't solve it > for everyone but would make me happy. > > I have mixed emotions about all this. It was a > good deal for them and raised a lot of cash. The > Q is: what are they going to do with all that moola? > George > > > From: Richard Chonak > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:22:41 -0400 > Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals > > The "Antenna Man" of Bethlehem, PA usually > devotes his YouTube videos to testing TV > antennas, and rating their performance at his location in the Poconos. > > Viewers all over the country ask him for advice, > so in a video released July 14, he devoted an > episode to explaining the FCC spectrum auction > that led to many changes in reception. > > In particular, he zeroed in on PBS stations that > took big payouts to move to low-VHF > frequencies.? The prime example, of course, is > WGBH's move to RF channel 5, and the $218M > jackpot the auction yielded for it. Lamenting the > poorer service which the public got, he shows a > list of a dozen or so station employees with > salaries running up to $400,000 and beyond it. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrFib1jaBP0 > > --RC > > > From scott@fybush.com Wed Jul 15 19:37:16 2020 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 19:37:16 -0400 Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals In-Reply-To: <5f0f8ca0.1c69fb81.41ca3.6cb5SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> References: <202007151912.06FJCCua013570@isfahel.bostonradio.org> <5f0f8ca0.1c69fb81.41ca3.6cb5SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I'm pretty sure NBC has a solid long-term deal with WGBH for continued carriage. They're going to want to have ATSC 3 service on WBTS, too, which will happen via RF 5, at least at first. And when ATSC 3 arrives, it means more data throughput on the 6 MHz of RF... so you'll have HD (and maybe even 4K) versions of 2, 44 *and* NBC available that way. On Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 7:09 PM George Allen wrote: > Those are very good points; the animosity comes > from losing a HD Ch2/44 OTA signal. Even with > the [coming soon I hope] bumpup to 36kW, I don't > think it will equal what RF32 has [?]. With the > chess moves below, where would NBC-10 find a new > high-power Boston spectrum home? Not that I > worry, but when below comes to pass, should NBC be worrying? > > > At 04:10 PM 7/15/2020, Scott Fybush wrote: > I don't get the animosity toward WGBH. > > They resisted selling off their WGBX license for > years, while almost every other public TV entity took the fast cash and > ran.? > > They could have gotten tens of millions for it > when stations like WNED in Buffalo and WMHT in Albany were unloading > theirs.? > > Instead, they've played a very long game. They > deliberately didn't sell WGBX's spectrum, which > means they still have a UHF ATSC 1 signal that's > as good as any in the market. The WGBH 2 > programming is available that way for anyone who can't get the RF 5 signal. > > And guess what? Once the ATSC 3 transition gets > moving in earnest, it's a good bet the WGBH > license will be used for ATSC 3. Which means > while other broadcasters with only one license > have to scramble to find channel-sharing partners > to maintain dual ATSC 1/3 operations, WGBH will be all set internally.? ? > > And once ATSC 1 sunsets, which could be years > from now yet, WGBH can move the ATSC 3 signal to > UHF and *still* have another 6 MHz of VHF spectrum for more ATSC 3 data.? > > They're thinking several moves ahead on the > chessboard compared to most of the industry. I > don't hate them for that. I admire them for it.? > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 3:12 PM George Allen wrote: > Yeah, they really took the $ and ran.? And... > they get ongoing $$ from NBC10 by renting out > RF32 (wgbx) to NBC10 for 15-1 and 15-2.? So they > cashed out twice at OTA viewer's > expense.? Somehow that seems not right, even if > legal.? Cord-cutting is rampant [I'm one of > them], so tho maybe at one time OTA wasn't a big > deal, it's a bigger deal now.? Why don't they > just stream HDTV over the web?? Doesn't solve it > for everyone but would make me happy. > > I have mixed emotions about all this.? It was a > good deal for them and raised a lot of cash.? The > Q is: what are they going to do with all that moola? > ? ? George > > > From: Richard Chonak > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:22:41 -0400 > Subject: "Antenna Man" rakes WGBH over the coals > > The "Antenna Man" of Bethlehem, PA usually > devotes his YouTube videos to testing TV > antennas, and rating their performance at his location in the Poconos. > > Viewers all over the country ask him for advice, > so in a video released July 14, he devoted an > episode to explaining the FCC spectrum auction > that led to many changes in reception. > > In particular, he zeroed in on PBS stations that > took big payouts to move to low-VHF > frequencies.??? The prime example, of course, is > WGBH's move to RF channel 5, and the $218M > jackpot the auction yielded for it. Lamenting the > poorer service which the public got, he shows a > list of a dozen or so station employees with > salaries running up to $400,000 and beyond it. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrFib1jaBP0 > > --RC > > > From kenwvt@gmail.com Sat Jul 18 07:49:56 2020 From: kenwvt@gmail.com (Ken VanTassell) Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2020 07:49:56 -0400 Subject: Wmex reel to reels Message-ID: There is a guy on Facebook marketplace with a whole tub of wmex reel to reel airchecks for 20 bucks if anyone is interested. He is in Plymouth. They are late 50?s early 60?s and 70?s. -Ken From ssmyth@alumni.psu.edu Sun Jul 19 19:30:17 2020 From: ssmyth@alumni.psu.edu (Sean Smyth) Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 19:30:17 -0400 Subject: Wmex reel to reels In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I wonder how much effort it would take to convert r-to-r to mp3s? Aside: Are there many r-to-r machines out there? They were an endangered species 30 years ago. On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 12:18 PM Ken VanTassell wrote: > There is a guy on Facebook marketplace with a whole tub of wmex reel to > reel airchecks for 20 bucks if anyone is interested. He is in Plymouth. > They are late 50?s early 60?s and 70?s. > > -Ken > -- Sean Smyth Editor. Writer. Communicator. 617-448-3117 Twitter: @smythsays LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/seansmyth/ From dave@skywaves.net Mon Jul 20 00:47:08 2020 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 22:47:08 -0600 Subject: Wmex reel to reels In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000001d65e50$d4d76990$7e863cb0$@skywaves.net> RTR machines are sometimes available on eBay. That's where I got mine. They are usually heavy and expensive to ship. Even if you get it for "free" you might have to pay several hundred dollars in shipping and packing costs. I did some cassette conversions on a PC a year ago, and it was really easy. RTR would be little different, and I am about to embark on a similar project for RTR tapes once I get settled in Oregon. You can connect the RTR output (usually 2 RCA) to the PC input (a 3.5 mm stereo) using a cable, but you get better results with a real audio input device like a Scarlett 2i2 that connects to the PC via USB. Use any sound recording app. If you have Win 7, 8, or Vista, you can use the built-in soundrecorder.exe app. That app broke with the introduction of Windows 10, so if you're on Win10, you'll need to use an audio capture program or an editor program that has capture capability. -d -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Sean Smyth Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2020 5:30 PM To: Ken VanTassell Cc: Boston Radio Interest Subject: Re: Wmex reel to reels I wonder how much effort it would take to convert r-to-r to mp3s? Aside: Are there many r-to-r machines out there? They were an endangered species 30 years ago. On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 12:18 PM Ken VanTassell wrote: > There is a guy on Facebook marketplace with a whole tub of wmex reel > to reel airchecks for 20 bucks if anyone is interested. He is in Plymouth. > They are late 50?s early 60?s and 70?s. > > -Ken > -- Sean Smyth Editor. Writer. Communicator. 617-448-3117 Twitter: @smythsays LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/seansmyth/ From geo.allen@comcast.net Mon Jul 20 15:41:30 2020 From: geo.allen@comcast.net (George Allen) Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2020 15:41:30 -0400 Subject: Wmex reel to reels In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <202007202031.06KKVR91016628@isfahel.bostonradio.org> There are some. I have a 45-year old TEAC A730GSL semi-pro 1/4" 10-1/2" 7.5/15 ips reel2reel that still works. Every now and then I turn it on for a while to exercise the caps. I still have a bunch of old BSO concerts mostly from the 70s and some older that are Dolby-B dubs from the original WCRB Dolby-A tapes that I need to digitize some day. From: Sean Smyth To: Ken VanTassell Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 19:30:17 -0400 Subject: Re: Wmex reel to reels I wonder how much effort it would take to convert r-to-r to mp3s? Aside: Are there many r-to-r machines out there? They were an endangered species 30 years ago. From atolz@comcast.net Mon Jul 20 18:11:23 2020 From: atolz@comcast.net (Alan Tolz) Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2020 18:11:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Wmex reel to reels In-Reply-To: <202007202031.06KKVR91016628@isfahel.bostonradio.org> References: <202007202031.06KKVR91016628@isfahel.bostonradio.org> Message-ID: <1258235568.125840.1595283083831@connect.xfinity.com> I've converted many reels to MP3 over the years. It's time consuming because it's done in real time. I no longer have the Otari 50/50 set up that I was using, however, if anyone knows Ellis Feaster, he will be happy to get those airchecks and will get them from reel to MP3. He digitized a whole bunch of Jerry Williams audio for me from reels. > On 07/20/2020 3:41 PM George Allen wrote: > > > There are some. I have a 45-year old TEAC A730GSL semi-pro 1/4" > 10-1/2" 7.5/15 ips reel2reel that still works. Every now and then I > turn it on for a while to exercise the caps. I still have a bunch of > old BSO concerts mostly from the 70s and some older that are Dolby-B > dubs from the original WCRB Dolby-A tapes that I need to digitize some day. > > > From: Sean Smyth > To: Ken VanTassell > Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 19:30:17 -0400 > Subject: Re: Wmex reel to reels > > I wonder how much effort it would take to convert r-to-r to mp3s? Aside: > Are there many r-to-r machines out there? They were an endangered species > 30 years ago. From denapoli137@msn.com Tue Jul 21 12:33:47 2020 From: denapoli137@msn.com (Dennis D) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:33:47 -0400 Subject: Wmex reel to reels In-Reply-To: <202007202031.06KKVR91016628@isfahel.bostonradio.org> References: <202007202031.06KKVR91016628@isfahel.bostonradio.org> Message-ID: FYI I did have a conversation with Al he is now a member of Facebook Remember WMEX I am going to cover them to DVD Sent from my iPhone > On Jul 20, 2020, at 3:41 PM, George Allen wrote: > > ?There are some. I have a 45-year old TEAC A730GSL semi-pro 1/4" 10-1/2" 7.5/15 ips reel2reel that still works. Every now and then I turn it on for a while to exercise the caps. I still have a bunch of old BSO concerts mostly from the 70s and some older that are Dolby-B dubs from the original WCRB Dolby-A tapes that I need to digitize some day. > > > From: Sean Smyth > To: Ken VanTassell > Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 19:30:17 -0400 > Subject: Re: Wmex reel to reels > > I wonder how much effort it would take to convert r-to-r to mp3s? Aside: > Are there many r-to-r machines out there? They were an endangered species > 30 years ago. > > From oldetroll@hotmail.com Tue Jul 21 08:20:38 2020 From: oldetroll@hotmail.com (Ed Perry) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:20:38 +0000 Subject: WMEX Tapes Message-ID: Hi Folks, Could you send me contact info for the person selling the old WMEX tapes. We might be able to use some of them on the New WMEX. Thanks, Ed Perry 781 837-0102 office, 781 775-6704 cell From joe@attorneyross.com Wed Jul 22 00:42:34 2020 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 00:42:34 -0400 Subject: WMEX Tapes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5b5e1976-11be-20ba-7e36-e5bf20fe2ff1@attorneyross.com> Hey, the "New WMEX" is new again! On 7/21/2020 8:20 AM, Ed Perry wrote: > Hi Folks, > > Could you send me contact info for the person selling the old WMEX tapes. We might be able to use some of them on the New WMEX. > > Thanks, > > Ed Perry > > 781 837-0102 office, 781 775-6704 cell -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 617.367.0468 ? http://www.attorneyross.com From markwats@comcast.net Sun Jul 26 20:12:22 2020 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 20:12:22 -0400 Subject: Ed Ansin Has Passed Away Message-ID: <026601d663aa$9a423a30$cec6ae90$@comcast.net> Reported by Broadcasting & Cable on line that Ed Ansin, owner of WHDH & WLVI TV in Boston and WSVN TV in Miami has passed away at the age of 84. Despite WHDH losing the NBC affiliation a few years ago, they've held their own with an expanded news schedule and syndicated programming. May he Rest In Peace. Mark Watson From denapoli137@msn.com Mon Jul 27 12:52:28 2020 From: denapoli137@msn.com (dennisdenapoli) Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:52:28 -0400 Subject: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 24, Issue 62 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Re WMEX reel to reels Now I can say I have a piece of radio history Joe Smith recording on WMEX ? Sent from my iPad > On Jul 22, 2020, at 12:00 PM, boston-radio-interest-request@lists.bostonradio.org wrote: > > Send Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list submissions to > boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.bostonradio.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fboston-radio-interest&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4438b3b627204c2092bf08d82e589860%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637310305334713884&sdata=i%2FjDycFVvgYGM5vVRrLWQOwVCzDlTDq3MTypDCxaC4E%3D&reserved=0 > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > boston-radio-interest-request@lists.BostonRadio.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > boston-radio-interest-owner@lists.BostonRadio.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Boston-Radio-Interest digest..." > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Wmex reel to reels (Dennis D) > 2. WMEX Tapes (Ed Perry) > 3. Re: WMEX Tapes (A Joseph Ross) > > > > _______________________________________________ > Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list > Boston-Radio-Interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.bostonradio.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fboston-radio-interest&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4438b3b627204c2092bf08d82e589860%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637310305334733870&sdata=6oWvHQgAMVS4F2g3Vi4mKmAso87MBRaaP9Mab8WyTro%3D&reserved=0 From pbencurrier@hotmail.com Tue Jul 28 16:46:09 2020 From: pbencurrier@hotmail.com (Paul Currier) Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:46:09 +0000 Subject: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 24, Issue 62 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I recall a discussion on this list years ago about Joe Smith being on WMEX or not. I think it was never resolved. Thanks Dennis! Paul Cape Cod -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest On Behalf Of dennisdenapoli Sent: Monday, July 27, 2020 12:52 PM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org Subject: Re: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 24, Issue 62 Re WMEX reel to reels Now I can say I have a piece of radio history Joe Smith recording on WMEX ? Sent from my iPad > On Jul 22, 2020, at 12:00 PM, boston-radio-interest-request@lists.bostonradio.org wrote: > > Send Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list submissions to > boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flist > s.bostonradio.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fboston-radio-interest&dat > a=02%7C01%7C%7Cf6c0ca76b7cf4c9b767e08d832e06a6f%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435 > aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637315286750549724&sdata=S7kE8SpZuNhSr3Zx4b > t74W2wJ%2Br86gwFTK8W0frtgYc%3D&reserved=0 > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > boston-radio-interest-request@lists.BostonRadio.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > boston-radio-interest-owner@lists.BostonRadio.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Boston-Radio-Interest digest..." > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Wmex reel to reels (Dennis D) > 2. WMEX Tapes (Ed Perry) > 3. Re: WMEX Tapes (A Joseph Ross) > > > > _______________________________________________ > Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list > Boston-Radio-Interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flist > s.bostonradio.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fboston-radio-interest&dat > a=02%7C01%7C%7Cf6c0ca76b7cf4c9b767e08d832e06a6f%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435 > aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637315286750549724&sdata=S7kE8SpZuNhSr3Zx4b > t74W2wJ%2Br86gwFTK8W0frtgYc%3D&reserved=0 From dlh@donnahalper.com Tue Jul 28 20:58:02 2020 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:58:02 -0400 Subject: Joe Smith In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 7/28/2020 4:46 PM, Paul Currier wrote: > I recall a discussion on this list years ago about Joe Smith being on WMEX or not. I think it was never resolved. I can help Dennis to resolve it. Yes, Joe Smith did spend a few months at WMEX, in 1958.? Smith, the pride of Chelsea High School, was a popular deejay on WVDA in the mid-1950s. That station became WEZE when Vic Diehm sold it, and Smith left in early January 1958.? About a month or so later, he joined the new WMEX (which was bought by Mac Richmond in late 1957).? According to newspaper reports, he first did his show on tape because he was in New York working for a record production company. He stopped working at WMEX in December 1958 to join the new WILD. (Boston had a lot of format changes, as rock and roll took over the airwaves and some of the older M-O-R stations struggled to find a niche.) -- Donna L. Halper, PhD Associate Professor of Communication & Media Studies Lesley University, Cambridge MA