Re: [IRCA] A Perfect Example

["Neil Kazaross" <neilkaz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nice post, Scott. Note also that WBZ's early evening IBOC in the winter 
bothers KDKA considerably here, even though I have a local on 1030. The IBOC 
sideband hiss still comes in inspite of the fact that I cannot really hear 
WBZ 'til my local drops power.

The same effect is noted on 850 where KOA's early evening IBOC puts out much 
hiss on 840 and 860 in spite of my having local and strong Limited Time WCPT 
on 850.

73 KAZ wanting you to truly understand how bad nighttime IBOC will be. The 
only ones of us who will be able to still get much decent DX during 
widespread nightime IBOC will be living in corner of the US and needing 
phasing and cardiod patterned antennas. ie..NEw England will still be OK for 
TA with a cardiod to take out most domestic QRM and will still be OK for 
LA's in deep AU's.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America" 
<irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: [IRCA] A Perfect Example


> Ah, but keep in mind that KDKA and WBZ are co-owned, so it's not as
> though one side doesn't know or care what the other is doing.
>
> There's actually a VERY long history of problems stemming from this
> particular poorly-conceived set of allocations, going all the way back
> to the thirties. When the clear channel alliance went to the FCC in the
> early sixties to apply for 750 kW or more on the I-A clear channels,
> they acknowledged even then that it would be impossible to operate both
> KDKA and WBZ at that power level because of the adjacent-channel
> splatter that would result, and even then Westinghouse told the FCC that
> it would sacrifice superpower potential for KDKA in order to maximize
> WBZ's coverage. (And back then, Pittsburgh was still a top-15 market, if
> memory serves; the disparity in market size has only grown since then.)
>
> It would have made far more sense, at some point in the distant past, to
> have shuffled some allocations around to take KDKA and WBZ off adjacent
> channels (originally 980/990, then 1020/1030 after NARBA in 1941). If
> WBZ were on 1040, this wouldn't be an issue at all.
>
> (Note that most of the first-adjacent channel pairs among the I-A clears
> have far more distance between them - LA/Nashville on 640/650,
> Nashville/NY on 650/660, NY/Chicago on 660/670, 770/780, 880/890, and so
> on. Probably the next worst example is WJR vs. WABC on 760/770, but that
> doesn't seem to cause anywhere near as many problems as KDKA/WBZ always
> has.)
>
> It doesn't help, either, that the "new" antenna KDKA installed in the
> early nineties has not lived up to expectations at all.
>
> But at the core of it, this particular issue is ultimately an internal
> one within CBS. If they believe that sacrificing KDKA's fringe coverage
> is worth it in order to put IBOC on WBZ, no amount of listener
> complaints will change their minds on the matter.
>
> Fred Schroyer wrote:
>> Thanks to all who encouraged me to complain to KDKA re WBZ's IBOC QRM. I
>> emailed KDKA's eng. dept. Be interesting to see if I get a response...if
>> I do, will post...
>>
>> I think we should have a competition for the best "real meaning" of the
>> acronym IBOC. How about "I Bash Other Channels" or "I Broadcast Onerous
>> Crap"?
>>
>> Fred Schroyer
>> Freelance Science Writer / Editorial Consultant
>> 955 Sixth Street - Waynesburg, PA 15370
>> (40 air mis S of Pittsburgh - 20 air mis N of Morgantown, WV)
>> Home 724-627-8844 - Work 304-599-7830 x 1120
>> freditor@xxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://arizona.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx