Low Power FM Report Rejects Interference Concerns
akb writes "Back in 2000, Slashdot covered the Low Power Radio setback by Congress, detailing a law which gutted an FCC initiative that would have created thousands of Low Power FM radio stations (LPFMs). Congress overruled the FCC, ostensibly because of interference concerns, and cut the number of stations from thousands to a few hundred, with hardly any in urban areas. A concession was made to allow a study of the interference caused by LPFMs, and that report has been released. The verdict: 'Based on the measurements and analysis reported herein, existing third-adjacent channel distance restrictions should be waived to allow LPFM operation at locations that meet all other FCC requirements, [with the exception of several minor technical requirements]'. There's more coverage at DIYmedia.net"
The FCC screwed up FM from day one. Signal bleed on FM is .5 MHz, and the stations are all .2 MHz apart. I seriously doubt a bunch of low powered stations will make FM any worse than it already is.
Interference was always a straw man. Media monopolies like Clear Channel (yikes! how unintentionally appropriate!) just want to maximize the spectrum available for their musical monoculture.
What I really miss is all those low-power campus and community stations. Yeah, they mostly played crap, but it was local crap. And it was a good way for budding young radio DJs and journalists to break into the field. I've always found it strange that NPR is on the "stop interference!" bandwagon, since all their best people come from the low-power community.
The purpose of the FCC is to raise the barier of entry to the communications marketplace. It used to be about protecting a public good, the airwaves, but I think we can safely say, that is not it's real purpose today.
Think what it would mean to someone like ClearChannel if anyone with a few hundred dollars could legally set up a low power radio station? In the San Francisco Bay area, people do it illegally, and they are really some of the only radio worth listening to here. No one would listen to corporate rock if there were little local alternatives.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
This is very good news indeed.
This is really a battle over control of the airwaves. America has given the broadcast spectrum to large money interests, and it shows. FM radio is so completely devoid of useful things to listen to (with the one exception of NPR, thankfully) that I've started listening to streamed broadcasts from the BBC, where quality, imagination and diversity still exist.
With low power stations, you might see an increase in the divirsity of broadcasting again. Maybe. It would certainly allow for new and different stations, some silly, some serious and some seriously weird. That would be a wonderful thing to see.
There were never any inferference issues here. Well, there were, but the interference was from the corporations which didn't want this to happen at all. A little 5W FM statation is not going to have much coverage, but it will make for some interesting pockets of color in an otherwise mostly vapid FM landscape.
--STeve Andre' (wb8wswf)
I think we all know what this report is all about:
Justification for pirate radio! I highly suggest that anyone and everyone buy a transmitter, and don't just absorb the radio: be the radio!
Also, read Radio as a Means of Communication, A Talk on the Function of Radio, by Berthold Brecht. He seems to get it.
The technical aspect of radio modulation has improved over the year. There's no reason why we can't trash FM/AM and adopt a digital technology that uses the same spectrum-that way, we wouldn't even have to trash your antennas.
Your radio sets would probably be gone though. Oh well, I threw away my old style roller skates when I got some Rollerblades (R). Let's join hands and fart into the future!
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
ostensibly because of interference concerns, and cut the number of stations from thousands to a few hundred
NPR lobbied extensively to kill LPFM, primarily because they didn't want the competition with people listening to real community radio.
So congress decided that they were "engineers" and said that there would be "inteference", and gutted LPFM.
I don't pledge to NPR, and I am thinking of an "anti-pledge" campaign when they shill for money.
Radio as we know it today is dead, primarily used for corporate interests, not the public's.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
Here's the reason why the big time FM owners are claiming that LPFM interferes but the studies don't back them up. The "protected countour" of an FM signal is not always the same as its actual coverage range. That is to say, some FM radio stations are heard loud and clear in places that the FCC's prediction model doesn't expect them to be, and conversely absent in others. The problem here is simple, a coverage map based on a topographical map will always be inaccurate because no map perfectly maps everything, and pesky things like skyscrapers sometimes have to be taken into account. Broadcasters have better technology, so they do a better job of guessing where their signal will actually go when they request approval for a tower site.
So, FM stations will be able to produce listner complaints that say "I used to live in Wxxx's coverage range, but now some pesky LPFM from 4 towns over is jamming their signal out." The truth is, that listener was never in Wxxx's protected countor, the area where Wxxx has a right to complain to any interference with their signal, because the FCC's prediction system didn't expect Wxxx's signal to be there. So, when the LPFM interjects actual interference into the territory, the maps don't show any problemsome overlap.
In some ways, this is a case of government not keeping up with reality. On the other hand, it's also a case of the FM station owners enjoying signal reach that the law never entitled them to. AM skip works the same way... distant stations can be heard at night when the weather is good, but even the former "clear channel" (lower case, meaning no other station on the same frequency, not the megacompany) stations now face stations on the opposite coast using their frequency and can't complain about being interfered with in those distant cities, just if something is going to bother them in their home territory.
Just because the government lets something be the way it is for years without messing with it doesn't let a business assume it's going to be that way forever. LPFM is a great idea on the chalkboard, but a lot more work than most applicants realize. But, for those who can get it together, let them have the technology...
I am significantly less concerned about the future of Low Power FM than I am about the fact that Clear Channel owns some 70% of the market. I haven't heard decent music on the radio in years, and (coincidentally) I hear the same music in Arizona as I did in Minnesota. Not only do I hear the same music, but I hear the same station names with the same cheesy slogans but with different numbers.
Low Power FM isn't really all that useful because one is almost never in range to hear it. Minneapolis had a LPFM station for a while called The Beat. I lived 5 miles from the station and couldn't hear it. They were unliscensed and subsequently got shut down by the FCC in a well documented media event. The Beat now does a nice internet radio stream. And I think that internet radio has much more potential than LPFM ever will.
The summary is Low Power FM just isn't all that. Internet radio can be all it could have been and more, and allows the user greater control and allows more distrubuters into the fold. This effort would be much better spent protecting internet radio and fighting back against companies such as Clear Channel.
Are you sure about this? Most electronic devices need to be compliant to FCC regulations as far as concerns of interference goes even if they wouldn't technicaly interfere with interstate broadcasts. And I would be extremely doubtful if I was to erect an antenna near an airfield, and begin "interfering" with radio broadcasts and what not, that the FCC or somebody wouldn't come knocking on my door.
Your facts may be correct, but I sincerly doubt it. I am guessing that you heard this story second hand? or can you link to something like a story regarding it?
And who modded this down? even if he is wrong, I would hardly say this isn't a matter for discussion.
Very interesting thought. As I understand the LPFM rules they cannot be commercial in nature, but that would not necessarily be a problem.
Unfortunately I expect the NAB (who ramrodded the initial house resolution) will still argue that possible degradation within a 1300m radius of the LPFM antenna site is unacceptable. The initial HR was run through using receiver performance figures from about 1950-1960 (IIRC). Although the NAB will find it has a tough time arguing the technical quality of the work done by MITRE.
Seems like a decent open project. If they do relax the rules (which certainly isn't guaranteed) when will you have the site up? (G)
Congress wasn't talking about interference in the technical sense that channels would interfere in the spectrum of the existing channels, but about interference in the audience. It's business interference that the low power FM channels are being accused of by the oligopolists...
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
I don't know what a Segway is so I'll skip it,
BetaMax had higher technical quality, but had several important flaws that lead to its downfall. The most important was that it was short. There were MANY full length movies that had to be shipped on two. I wouldn't like switching tapes in the middle of the Matrix.
Windows has very good quality. Most people here refuse to admit it, but Windows is a large complex peice of quality software. It also works beutifully for running a radio station. In an environment where zero downtime is a must Windows is trusted over Mac, Unix, Linux, BSD, ect. competators for some simple reasons.
1. There is a large company backing it up. I know most of you think it's a large evil company, but it is a large powerful company which isn't going anywhere for a while.
2. It's very stable. You set up a good instalation of 2K, put what you NEED on it, and keep what you don't off, stop end users from making un-necessary config changes and you'll see that thing running like a rock.
3. It's very easy to write software for. Because of this, there is much more software availible for it. Because of this, there is much more quality software availible for it.
Microsoft didn't get where it is today with marketing, it needed a quality product. That's why radio stations use it.
It's sad that a local station is allowed to spew 50,000 watts of Country music into the air, overflowing into adjacent frequencies, but if someone broadcasts a stable 1,000-watt signal, they're (still) doing something against the law.
Me, bitter? Nah...