Slashdot Mirror
FCC considers low power FM licenses
V for Victory writes "Would you like to run your very own over-the-air radio station with a real, legal license to broadcast? The FCC is currently considering a plan to license low power FM band broadcasters with 10, 100, or 1000 watt power ratings. Naturally, this proposal is being opposed by Big Radio Companies and the National Association of Broadcasters. However, at the moment the FCC is accepting comments from the public. Read more about it here. The deadline for comments is September 1, 1999. "
I don't know what you are talking about but our school has a 5watt FM station that reaches out a few blocks in all directions. Maybe your school has a 1000 MilliWatt station.
The "Search the FCC's database" link links back to slashdot! Are the two secretly collaborating on this project? Perhaps our rhetoric shall be heard after all...
This site is from a station currently broadcasting local news, music, and original programming you can't find on large stations. It has the story of Stephen Dunnifer, the man who has been in court and largely responsible for the FCC's recent about-face on this issue. Check it out and educate yourself.
http://www.freeradio.org
You're right, but it's YOUR responsibility to keep that broadcast within the 1/2 mile range, regardless of weather, transmitting, or power grid conditions.
If your broadcast can be received even one inch outside of the 1/2 mile, your equipment is siezed, and some have gone to jail.
Makes it pretty risky, doesn't it? Now you know why you don't see many micro-broadcasters.
I'm sorry to say, it really is only the over 100 watt stations that the FCC regulates. Everything else is up for grabs, according to the law.
Except, the courts have turned the law on its head. They rule that you must have prior permission before transmitting. And since the FCC has never promulgated rules for the =100 watt stations, you don't have prior permission. Do not pass go, go directly to jail.
I wonder if they also have an 11 step process in place so you can tell them how retarded their form is. Have they never heard of HTML forms??? Are they on crack? I'll bet Al Gore is behind this.
Well, on the surface it seems easy enough to point the finger at the big bad, FCC and big brother government, but who is controlling big brother? The big radio companies. There was no reason in the past for the FCC to limit free microradio broadcasts, but the radio companies want people to only have them as an option to listen to so they can have a larger audience and make more money. Obviously.
Of course the capitalist libertarians will tell you if you just end government involvement altogether, everything will be fine. Keep in mind it's these big corporations that want government involvement...to give them corporate subsidies and bail their asses out when they're in risk of going under (the big ones, the ones that employ a large number of people) and to allow them to control more. It won't look good if people are losing jobs left and right and corporations are rising up and collapsing constantly. This isn't good for corporations nor people, since their job security would be awful...our tight economic control would be total chaos.
Of course my assumptions could completly wrong. it could be a total utopian society, although history begs to differ.
I am no way advocating state control over everything. I think that would be worse for people (freedom and security) than what we have now, or maybe even worse than what would happen with anarcho-capitalism.
You could get alot of 1000 watt radio stations across the nation and give some people some cheap linux boxes with a DSL or cable modem to brodcast streaming mp3 media from someplace in cyberspace. It would not cost that much to do this and to get the broadcast nationwide. You could sell national ad space to inet companies really cheap and have it paid for in a few years. You could call it "Slashdot, Radio for nerds, news and music that Matters"
Orbit! (forgot my Password. not an AC)
Dlink220@yahoo.com
The wretched Chancellor Media, whatever it's called now, makes its money off Art Bell (ugh).
With the rules of the FCC, the government can play favorites, steering business with the big campaign donors.
With the rules opened up, those campaign donations won't get you a monopoly. That's why low power radio will never be permitted.
The name for the system of government that plays favorites for friends is FASCISM. It's ultimate expression is Taxpayer Supported Radio.
I'm from minneapolis too... It seems like ALL of the stations here, besides 770, are playing pop top 40 hits... Rev105 was the last "real" radio station we had... I remember being shocked by the last broadcast, the entire staff was crying and weeping in the background. Maybe this new law will bring a new culture to the airwaves. Or, maybe the FCC will once again screw up and overcharge for these licenses? Who knows. It's the US government. Nobody knows what they'll do next.
I heard about this several weeks ago on protest.net.
I think both capitalist libertarians, people concerned for their own freedom, and those more to the left should all be concerned about this. These corporations are controlling the airwaves and our access to information (what we can know, what music we hear, what words are allowed to be said or not) with the help of our (US) government.
No matter how afraid you are of community owned, non profit things, if you support what the FCC and these companies are doing, you are not supporting (capitalist) libertarianism.
More information on this can be found at here and the micromedia empowerment coalition can be found here.
- Darwin's theory of the struggle for existence and the selectivity connected with it has by many people been cited as authorization of the encouragement of the spirit of competition. Some people also in such a way have tried to prove pseudoscientifically the necessity of the destructive economic struggle of competition between individuals. But this is wrong, because man owes his strength in the struggle for existence to the fact that he is a socially living animal. As little as a battle between ants of an ant hill is essential for survival, just so little is this the case with the individual members of a human community. -- Albert Einstein, from an address at Albany, NY, October 15, 1936
What is the product called specifically? Can anyone anonymously describe how to make it transmit a longer distance too? Or point to a page?
This has been needed ever since the invention of radio licenses. SCREW the FCC !!!! This is just another way for BIG BROTHER to control your thoughts, and actions. Freedom?!?!?!?! HA!! You have to have a LICENSE for that !!!! I am suprised they dont have a 'phone operators license' to make a damn phone call. or 'computer operators license' -you know those things can get you into trouble.
Yeah, its a 2.4 Ghz cordless phone. You can get them at Best Buy for like $240.00.
I saw one advertised up to 3 miles range.
The 50% of the U.S. population without Internet accesss don't count, anyway. Your point?
Not everyone has a cable modem/adsl/T3 at their disposal like you. 50% of americans have computers. I can bet that 99% have radios.
Currently, the FCC allows unlicensed broadcasting at a power level of around 100 mW input on AM with a 10 foot antenna (about 100 meter radius) and around 1 uW input on FM (about 10 meter radius). This is good enough for listening to your home stereo or real-audio in your backyard, but not much else.
If the station is located on a college or high school campus, enough power is allowed to cover the campus and 100 meters outside of it (usually 1-10 watts - AM only).
The minimum power allowed for a licensed station is 100 watts FM and 250 watts AM.
FCC Chairman Kennard is all for breaking up the broadcast semi-monopolies, but Congress is in favor of continuing the status quo. And the FCC is mandated to enforce the laws that Congress enacts and Slick Willie signs.
Even before the Communications Act of '96, Congress passed a law in effect giving total control of the airwaves to the US Government, calling it the "Revenue Enhancement Act" or something like that. Part of that law is the reason why there are "auctions" for things like Cellular Telephone licenses. This money is to reduce the deficit. In effect, it means that the government owns the radio spectrum and is selling it off for BIG $$$$.
Surprisingly, no one has taken this to the Supreme Court, as it has no constitutional grounds whatsoever.
They're too busy voting to count, anyway.
"In the year 2009, the Code of the West will no longer apply."
Don't think so, Bruce. But oddly enough, my radio still works even when I'm in the middle of rural Colorado.
This isn't really my field, but I did a couple years as a radio DJ in college (four counties of coverage!) and so we had to learn a bit of the law before they'd give us our licenses (I hear you don't need a license anymore to be a college dj?)
The FCC doesn't just randomly sit around and scan. They have neither the time nor the resources to do it. They wait til they get a complaint, then they scan. But there's a lot of people in America who... believe strongly in traditional values, shall we say. Thus, there's plenty of people who have the time to listen to the radio and phone the FCC any time they hear something that's objectionable
From what a friend who used to run a pirate station in Pittsburgh told me, the FCC took Radio Free Berkley to court and lost. First amendment and all that. they claimed first amendment violations via the golden soapbox rule. Sure, you can say anything you want, just so long as you pay us for a solid gold soapbox to stand on.
The FCC gave Radio Carson (Pittsburgh, PA) a few cease and decist orders before confiscation the equiptment. After a bit of bullying by the FCC, the people who ran Radio Carson felt they had too much to lose and gave up.
I think this whole movement to allow licenses for the sub 100 watt power range is bullshit. They are doing it to maintain control over the airwaves. Once legislation is in place, they will attach licensing fees to supposedly go to "administration expenses" and slowly restrict the license terms.
I suppose if some community group forms to maintain first amendment protection in relation to the use of airwaves then it might be a good idea.
Thats my two cents worth.
./null
I suppose i'm paranoid, but then some people are after me.
I do a low power FM (illegal) radio show on 106.1 Radio Free Cambridge (MA) Tuesdays 10-12pm. Check it out. Punk rock and more. Low power radio rules. Fsck the FCC.
Chris
Back in the 80's my college campus had a microwatt FM station. As is the case with most college campuses we were having problems with plagiarism from a rival school. The microwatt station was thought up as a way to limit the broadcast of private news. Although the frequency was commonly known (who can keep a secret on a college campus?), we had very good documentation of who was recieving the broadcast. In order to receive the signal a rival school would need to bring an amplifier on to our campus. Of course their amplifier would display different characteristics than those of our stationary receivers, so their vehicle and occupants could be immediatly Identified by the campus police, sometimes without stopping the vehicle and alerting the occupants. I remember in at least one case where information that had been gathered from our broadcast was used by an individual for financial gain. If s/he hadn't been under surveilance at the time they would have got away with the crime.
Basically, the FCC says if you can hear one of these flea-power FM transmitters past about 100 feet, you're transmitting too much power.
If you all want to know some who are the people who made this possible (put pressure on the FCC to make this proposal).
Check out the list of stations at:
http://www.radio4all.org
For Microradio news:
http://www.radio4all.org/news.html
BTW, the deadline for public comments is, August 2nd. So make your comments soon!
While your at it, why don't you add your endorsement to the National Lawyers Guild/Committe on Democratic Communications comments on the FCC LPFM proposal:
http://www.nlgcdc.org/fcc.html
Any moron knows that a 19.5 W ~3M signal can go a few blocks. Heck, a 1W 2M signal goes 5 miles or more on a rubberducky.
What we need is a better antenna! May I suggest a simple 3 element yagi? A friend of mine needed his 900 Mc fone to go about 3/4 mi from the RV to the house, so he cut it open and slapped a 4 element yagi on it. Does great in the mountains!
An anonymous ham (K?5*)
This could have a real impact in the rural counties of this country, which, geographically, comprise 95% of the country.
I live in a rural county about the size of Delaware, but almost all live in one city. A 10 watter would cover it. With its low costs, it could cover the same demographics as the 50k stations, but with much a much more affordable rate card.
And, who knows, we might even get local coverage, instead of nonstop satellite programming. No more All John-John, All Of The Time.
Now, we need to do this with TV stations, too. Can you say goodbye, national media?
Don't get your hopes up, folks.
If you go read up on this proposal, which has been
on the table for months, now, you'll see that they
are only going to give out a handful of licenses,
and only in major metro areas, and places like
San Francisco and Philadelphia will only get to
have 1 or 2 low power stations. Smaller cities
fare better, but still, it's not like every
block will have its own station.
This is my first post to Slashdot, so please be gentle.
I am heavily involed in a LPFM station, Free Radio Asheville, which broadcasts at a power of 20 watts in my home town. We have been on the air for over a year now and have raided once by the FCC.
Make no mistake the FCC would never have begun to make these proposals on their own had it not been for the hundreds of Micro-power stations like ours that began popping up like mushrooms over the last three years. While these proposals are a good start they don't go nearly as far as the LPFM movement would like.
Check out http://members.rotfl.com/SEAM/
for our point of view.
One thing I would like to point out to everyone here about the efficacy of these Internet streaming technologies for liberalizing the broadcast media. I would hazard to guess that a percentage approaching 100 of the population in America owns a radio of some sort. You can buy one at Wal-mart for 5 bucks. Computers and Internet though are not so widely (geographicaly and economicaly) distributed. 90% of the world's population do not have access to a phone much less a computer with an internet connection. The largest broadcasting corporations know this and have been buying up broadcast licenses in America like penny candy ever since 1996, and are begining to work where they can in the foreign markets. This is no accident!
If you want community based media you are going to have to fight for it. A good book for background on how long the FCC and the commercial broadcasters have been in bed is:
Telecommunications, Mass Media, and Democracy : The Battle for the Control of U.S. Broadcasting, 1928-1935
Robert W. McChesney / Paperback / Published 1995
---
The fact is, it is a privileged minority of people who have net access. Go to a minority/immigrant/blue collar worker community, and try counting how many people have computers.
And go to other countries, and do the same.
---
I'm not so sure about this. Could you be more specific? I would like to see the assumptions behind your judgement. Like wattage, number of people who would want to set up a station, number of people who would actually run one on regular schedule, frequency allocation, etc.
Use the internet! I am watching a 300K bit-per-second stream from NASA Mission Control at the moment, courtesy of broadcast.com . It looks great, with high resolution and 12+ frames per second when there is enough action in the picture - it seems to fall back on a much slower rate when there is less movement.
I use a 33.6 modem to connect to the Internet. Where I live (Puerto Rico), there are no plans that I know of for cable modems, ADSL, or any of those high speed access technologies /. techies seem to think everyone will soon have. Where I live, a very low percentage of the population has a computer. Almost everyone has a radio, though.
So you see, if I and a group of people wanted to communicate to our community, radio is the way to go.
This is the wave of the future. In 10 years or so we will all have 5 Megabit-per-second fiber-optic feeds that cost the same as cable-tv+telephone today. We will choose what we want to see in our homes, and when we want to see it.
This is false. I mean, the "we all" part. Most people won't have such access. And there is the threat that this kind of connection be subsidized by private interests that will have a say on what kind of content we will be able to choose from.
Case in point: I have a cousin living in Houston who gets free dialup net access. When she connects, a non-minimizable, always-on-top window displays ads. For example, one of the sponsors is Barnes and Noble. I remember that I tried to connect to Bookpool and Amazon, and it gave me an error message-- The access provider actually blocks out competitors to one of its sponsors!
Have you stopped to think that this kind of arrangement could very well be what will bring your vision of "cheap internet for everyone" to reality? TV already works like this...
BTW, where I live, basic cable TV is almost $50/mo. Phone is quite cheap, though, since the phone company was owned by the government and they would subsidize phone for low income people. But the government recently sold the phone co. to GTE, so I expect prices to go up gradually...
---
Let's stick to _your_ point for a second. I didn't say 50%; I said _more than_ 50%. So you're saying that the majority of the U.S. population doesn't count.
My point is that they do. And the rest of the world's population, every bnit as much.
Did you need me to clarify this, or were you just eager to spout techno-elitist crap?
---
Sorry to reply twice, I just had to say something else about this bit.
It would be really fun, and good from the standpoint of the people running the transmitters [...]
Hmm. I think you should consider the fact that the people who are pushing this are already doing this, have been doing it in many cases for years, and definitely not (at least not primarily, in any case) for fun; unless you consider being on the receiving end of an FCC raid to be fun...
---
Anyway, my comment had absolutely nothing to do with microradio. I was just pointing out the tacit assumption of an absurd idea: "everyone has net access". I gave counterexamples: poor people in the US (and industrialized countries), and most people nearly everywhere else.
---
If it were so... Last I heard, voter turnout at US elections is terrible.
---
Veering further off topic, a similar thing happened here back in April. A very popular "new rock" station called 96X went down without a word one Sunday night. The next morning, they had been replaced with a periodically looping blurb directing the listeners of "the former 96X" to the local top-40 station, Y105. At around 9am, they had been completely replaced with "Kiss 96", an R&B oldies station. 96X and the station that replaced it are owned by Cumulus Broadcasting. 96X had just put on a large concert with some big-name bands (no small feat, since it was just a dinky local station in an area that usually isn't first on the list for big-name concerts), and they had what many people thought was the best morning show in the area. The obvious question is, what was Cumulus Broadcasting smoking? ...ah, but I suppose this isn't really the proper forum for this. Oh well...
I'd like to see lots of small, low-power radio stations because, in times of major societal breakdown or other calamity, they are less likely to be disabled than the Internet. I am not a survivalist or a conspiracy theorist, but I believe that having plenty of small, distributed xmtrs is a Good Thing. One reason the U.S. would be almost impossible to invade and conquer is the fact that we have an armed populace and millions of CBs that populace can use to communicate. LPFM extends the commo capability. If, in good times, we get to hear some offbeat music and political views, that's fine, too, but as far as I'm concerned, that's just a fringe benefit.
Those kits are barely a jumping-off point. They use relatively cheap components, which means they have a fair amount of frequency instability (they drift). Sound quality is tolerable. You'd need to do a fair bit of upgrading to make it really usable.
On the other hand, if you don't mind spending in the hundreds, Ramsey also has a higher-powered transmitter that works really well.
...phil
...phil
"For a list of the ways which technology has failed to improve our quality of life, press 3."
You generally pay a flat fee that I think is indexed to your gross earnings, and you must occasionally (I think we did it once a year at the radio station I PDd) do a two- or three-day "survey" where you fill out every artist/song/label, so that ASCAP/BMI have a fairly representative view of what's being played nationwide.
They can't do this themselves by listening the radio, because they're busy hassling auto mechanics and barbers who play the radio in their shops.
Keep in mind, though, that there is a growing body of music not controlled by ASCAP/BMI, and that there are other forms of broadcast content than music programming.
I do hope they allow LPFM to proceed. It's needed now more than ever, due to the oppressive sameness imposed by the national radio companies and their consultants.
--
No, it's definitely not free if you consider the bandwidth that it takes. You may be able to piggy-back off of somebody who's already paid for it if you're at a University or if you're at a job where they let you use their network, but somebody has to pay for it.
-----
Free P2P Backup, Windows & Linux
Due to a change in FCC rules, companies can buy more radio stations in the same markets. Chancellor Media on the verge of owning 500 radio stations! Soon all radio will be owned by five companies! The only thing that can alter the almighty power of these companies is local home brew broadcasters. Only these people care about the LOCAL community.
Check out www.2600.com OFF THE HOOK for more info!
Linux is only free if your time has no value. Windows is only free if you threaten to use Linux.
I also noticed the above... no Word format! Heheheh. Too bad that right after that they offer a spreadsheet in Excel format only. =(
I'm pretty sure that 100 and 1000 watt radio stations are legal. In fact I believe the lowest allowable by law is 19.5 watts. Coincidentally thats also how much power my campus' radio station has, and I live two blocks from where its broadcast and can never pick it up.
My Slashdot account is old enough to drink...
I have no faith in the FCC wanting to make the airwaves available to the public. There is no way they would want to touch all the sticky issues of MP3 and the RIAA. Not only that, it would give people a voice. We can't have that. The FM radio band is dying anyway. Let the big companies strangle the monopoly until people no longer have receivers, but mp3 players and internet for the news.
I will not even voice my opinion to the FCC, because they would not want my opinion. I'm the type they would not even want on the air. I'd be one of those people they would want banned for life and blacklisted from even getting a permit in the first place.
Pirate radio stations can even be evasive. I won't even suggest *cough* *cough* transmitters strung from a tree powered by solar cells and getting a feed from a stealth IR beam. When the tree is raided, an alarm is tripped and the operator is the wiser. Who needs the trenchcoat FBI raiding your house because you want a little free speech? If ya wanna be heard, yall be heard, damnit, and the FCC cannot put a muzzle on your mouth or tunes. The internet let the cat out of the bag for encryption, Linux, music artists without a label, and now radio. Its too late. We're free! Damn the government.
(cue to the sound of tanks running over my house)
Walmart sells small FM stereo transmitters for the purpose of allowing your cd player to work over your car stereo. Cost? $20.00 It is a low power transmitter and I won't tell you which two resistors to replace with lower values to increase the output power, because I'd get in trouble and you can easily guess which two they are. Those things normally transmit about 20 feet, but with the illegal mod and a few feet of the antenna, they go a few blocks or more.
Have fun, get one for each mp3 player and monopolize the frequency band with music people actually want to listen.
So support the idea, but makes sure your comments specifically point out the bad parts. And add that transmitting Internet data would be particularly beneficial as a way to boost throughput to users doomed to be modem connected for the foreseeable future. Cheap data recievers could make their life much better.
The good news is that there is a whole big world outside the U.S. that could use this kind of technology to make Internet access better.
I wrote parts of this stuff
This is the wave of the future. In 10 years or so we will all have 5 Megabit-per-second fiber-optic feeds that cost the same as cable-tv+telephone today. We will choose what we want to see in our homes, and when we want to see it.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Yes it is needed. Not everyone can afford a computer and an internet connection, but most can afford a good radio for $15.
Again, though, not everyone can hear your internet radio station. Many many people cannot afford even what we think of as "cheap" computers and internet access fees. They can afford a cheap radio.
This would, naturally, lead some to believe that if you want to broadcast there, it's okay to do so. Nothing preventing you from it, right?
Heh.
If you take the time to dig, you can find documented, verifiable reports of the FCC calling in local police, FBI, and other MIB-types, doing dawn raids, ninja-style gear, the whole bit. Just to shut down microtransmitters.
Having no rules would be best, in my ideal world. But that doesn't seem to have worked. As long as the rules are vageuly sane -- say, cheap licensing fees, few to no requirements for content control...
Oh, sorry. You meant in the real world?
This looks great, but between the FCC's control fetish and the overwhelming influence of people with money, odds are nothing will come of this.
However, the RIAA is convinced radio stations don't pay enough. Anyone remember the rules for online 'radio' they are pushing through? Way more restrictive on what you can play, and costs more too. RIAA people are quoted as saying, effectively, 'We let radio get too sweet a deal, and we're not going to repeat that mistake'. Radio's argument was always 'We shouldn't pay that much, after all we do you a service by advertising your product'.
2. Complete FORM-ET using Notepad or another ASCII text editor. Because E-mail filings are automatically processed, they must include specific ECFS Document Index Terms, and must be computer readable...
:-)
It seems that someone there understands why open standards matter! What a refreshing feeling after all of the requests to submit Word documents...
That just made my day.
Cheers,
Ben
My usual seat in the cluetrain is at A HREF="http://pub4.ezboard.com/biwethey.ht
Americans for Radio Diversity and Radio 4 All are where to go to learn more ont his from a src other than just the FCC.
The european Digital Audio Broadcast (DAB) standard is not spread spectrum.
To gain resistance to fading caused by multipath interference a signal needs to be a few megahertz wide.
In the case of cellular phones the narrow data signal is spread my mixing it with a higher rate spreading sequence.
DAB works differently: it aggregates a large number of compressed audio signals and transmits them using one high-rate carrier.
Another reason why DAB is so efficient is that it is possible to transmit the same signal from several transmitters covering overlapping areas and the signals will not interfere with each other in the overlapping zones. A regular radio station has a small area where the signal is received with good quality and a very large zone where reception is poor but the frequency cannot be reused. DAB can cover an entire continent with continous coverage of the same signal - good, but only for big centralized broadcasters.
I'm afraid that any public access to DAB transmission will be more similar to the cable model.
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
For a while last year I enjoyed blasting a BroadcastWarehouse 1 watt PLL xmtr for about a 3 mile radius on an empty freq (nearest legal station was over 200 miles away) but still the risk of the MIB taking my stereo and computer stuff was a bummer and it's no longer on. Just playing some stuff I like, like weekend marathons of the huge Harry Shearer online archives or old radio programs; some Air Checks and stuff - for a creative person the possibilities are endless.
Chuck
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
I think it's ASCAP does that; there was an article here on /. about them trying to collect license fees from web sites for even LINKING to another site w/ licensed music on it. Free radio sounds great to me, but don't think the, ahem, 'establishment' would like it one bit.
Chuck
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
It's pretty sobering to see how tightly controlled radio really is. Check out Broadcast Architecture to learn the soulless truth.
Curiously enough, my favourite radio station is a Broadcast Architecture product, but the methodology with which it was developed scares me a little. Unfortunately, it's where I have to go for my favourite music, which is modern jazz instrumentals a la Keiko Matsui.
D
----
that was one of the more arcane systems for commenting. they could have set up a web form in the space it took to describe how to email in the comments...
Synergies are basically awesome, and they're even better when you leverage them. -PA
People who are interested in low-power radio, the positive effects these stations have on communities, and the current corporate welfare system that leads to their being shut down, should check out this article from Reason; another article appears in the current (August/September) issue.
My Blog. Sela Ward can sell me long distanc
This is a one-time chance to do for radio broadcast what the Internet has done for wires. This is the equivalent of RIAA v MP3. If this proposal crashes, current broadcasters will be smug for a century, while indies will be permanently locked out... short of today's midnight knocks on the door and confiscation. Think about the schlock you hear on most radio stations; think about what it would be like to tune a local station playing what YOU listen to all the time... or owning one...
Sure, we all think we could pick better tunes and do beter chatter than the real djs/producers/megaradio companies (and the reason all radio sounds the same is because of tight control somewhere, i know that much.) but doesn't a broadcaster have to pay some sort of fee (equaling royalties) for playing songs on the radio? Just think of the uproar when they find out that k-jimbo is broadcasting "illegal" mp3's straight out of his basement. Does anyone else know better than me about this?
"I want peace on earth and good will toward men." "We're the U.S. government. We don't do that sort of thing!!"
I got one of those transmitters at Wal-Mart a couple of weeks ago for $7 at clearance price. If you want one of these things, get it now. The goofy thing is, I got it to transmit tapes to my CD player. (My music is on CD now, but the occasional book on tape is nice for trips.)
Weblogging Considered Harmful:
I'm just wondering if this is really needed? With shoutcast and the proliferance of high bandwidth connections we can already transmit "higher quality than radio" shows to anyone across the world, let alone our neighbourhood. Plus it's free and we don't have to pay the FCC $$$ to get our own channel.
Wedge`
This is true, but you need to think about some stuff here.
First, there are only a fixed number of channels available in the spectrum. If they did hand these things out you know what it would sound like? You would have everyone in the world stepping on each other and you would NOT be able to understand anything. This is not like AM where you can hear both signals at once. The strongest FM signal wins, and the rest become noise which mix in with the strong FM signal, then it clobbers it. No way, no how can two nearby FM signals share the same frequency.
Other things have to be taken into consideration as well such as output power. A 1000 watt signal is going to be able to go quite a distance, so for a certain range nobody else can use that frequency. I am not sure exactly how they are going to determine who gets what power licence, but I would think that in some areas you would do better with 10 watts than 1000. 1000 would be good for the little towns where the nearest neighbor is 2 miles away. 10 watts would be good for a station which supports a 3 or 4 block neighborhood.
Also, the reason that this proposal "has been on the table for months" is because they always do this. It gives everyone time to draft their proposals. Sometimes they will extend the comment period, sometimes they do not.
Mister programmer
I got my hammer
Gonna smash my smash my radio
Even in the US a lot of people won't have DSL/cable modems. Consider the people in say rural Arkansas who may not even have a local ISP, much less high speed connectivity. Most of the fast connections will be in high population/high income areas leaving a lot of people out of the loop.
"When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it
Try the FM-10 kits that Ramsy makes, and there are alot tunning that could be done that would boost the output wattage.
I ate my tag line.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
Yeah, they do have the PLL digitaly tune systems. I have seen schematics for a PLL system in Radio Electronics (Electronics Now). But the price for DIY was still up there.
But on the FM 10, there is away to replace the variable choke coil and place in a couple of caps and resistors to make it tuned, but due to the quality of parts you may be off on the tune a lil' bit.
I ate my tag line.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
Yeah, in Santa Cruz they have a bunch of free radio stations that put out a nice wattage rating. They just get a petition of people's signatures that live in the broadcast's area and then they just give it to the fcc (I think that is how it happens).
I ate my tag line.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
Yes, radio stations have to pay everytime they play a song. Damed RIAA. So, when you hear about a big time artist lossing money from mp3s, think about what they get from those top 40 sations.....
I ate my tag line.
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
Just last week in Ames the radio Station 107 'dot' 5 got swallowed up and turned into "KISS 107 FM"
the station origonaly started out as an 'alternative' type format, but had gradualy began to shift into a more pop format, although they usualy played a lot of what would be considerd 'alternative, or modern rock' though.
after they got baught out by the KISS people they went strate into the craper! I mean now they play Will Smith!! and britany spears! There new motto is "all of the hits, not just some of them" I mean what the fuck does that mean?
The weird thing was, they "the 'dot'" had just put on a huge "dot fest" with lots of music. And the station was a great place for local music to break in as well.
well all I can say is, thank god for MP3s
_
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
In this discussion
the FCC can't regulate other contrys
_
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
After the 1996 Telecommunications Act was passed into law, the media focused mainly on cable TV and cell phones with no coverage of the potential impact on radio. According to ARD by the end of 1997 over 4000 of the nation's 11,000 radio stations had been sold and in the 50 largest markets three firms controlled over 50% of the ad revenue (in 23 of those markets 3 firms controlled over 80% of revenues.)
This buying frenzy sent the cost of radio skyrocketing. The Rev, a radio station with a weak signal and less than a 2% market share, sold for over $17 million! More than ever, when you travel around the country, you hear the same songs, the same voices, the same commercials -- no matter what station you listen to.
While MP3 streaming radio has helped to fill the gap for me, it's only a moderately reasonable alternative because of my DSL connection.
To me, this falls in line with some of the same goals of the Open Source movement. More and better access for everyone, and less of an opportunity for special interest control. Control of the airwaves by media conglomerates means less artistic freedom and more packaged and processed drivel.
-djH
Does anyone know of such a device? I'm not looking for a cell phone.
http://www.freeradio.org
They've been broadcasting since '93 without a license the whole time. They've also managed to stave off the FCC's legal action.
--
A mind is a terrible thing to taste.
"A mind is a terrible thing to taste."
The problem with stringing a transmitter from a tree powered by solar cells is the cost factor. You must be willing to lose all the hardware during each raid.
Now, if you just wanted to be heard once, then maybe this would be worth it. But to gain listeners, (afterall, people usually have their stations memorzied, preset, etc) that takes time. And after the FCC finds the 'first tree' they'll be trolling for your next broadcast, and get their quicker.
Now how about a mobile transmittor - ala Pump Up The Volume). What would be nice is to set it up in a mass transit system, and let the city unwittingly move it 24/7. Subway/L-Train is the only thing I can think of that goes 24/7. If you wanted to put it in a bus, you might want some "down time" at night when the bus is parked all night.
It is an interesting idea that could blwo some power back in to radio by making it more Internet-like (less "mass media"), but on the other hand, its lifetime is a few years at most. Icecast is where the future of streaming music is, not the FM.
We have MP3 playing machines now, I wonder when can see are gonna see the first radio set that plugs into the home network and streams music off the net (except for my old Pentium with mpg123 in the bookcase).
As always, the devil will be in the details. If 1-10, 100, and 1000 watt stations are licensed it could be a wonderful opening of radio to all points of view. Just don't count on it.
My pessimistic inner self keeps screaming two things: First, the FCC is a bureaucracy that might easily be persuaded into burdening these new classes of station with enough regulations, fees, and hoops to jump through as to make the whole concept meaningless. Second, the big broadcasters will fight a genuinely liberal small station policy to the death.
My fear on this is that the micro station classes will be created but only one or two percent of people who would like to run one will be able to get by the red tape and costs. It will be a big P.R. victory for the FCC. Perhaps even the big broadcasters will "support" it and claim some high moral ground. Just remember, when the red drains from the faces of the radio establishment honchos and is replaced by benevolent smiles, be very, very suspicious!
Geeky modern art T-shirts
Is when I have to get a license to practise free speech. And the FCC is almost there. I don't think that a pirate station should be taken down, when there have been few or no complaints about it. Actions like these are fascist, and seem to stem from a juvenile(sp?) attitude of "if it's not mine, it is evil." There should be a side band (108-120fm) that is included on any new recievers that is under no regulation. If a parent doesn't want their child listening to it, they can install a prevento-dongle that keeps the device from sliding that far. If this happened, the FCC would step up about 3 noches in my opinion.
. when in danger or in doubt, run in circles scream and shout --Robert Heinlein
For some reason, slashdot is mangling the URL when I paste it into an anchor tag. The URL is https://gullfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/ecfs/ comsrch.hts?ws_mode=retrieve_list&id_pro ceeding=99-25 (with no space in the middle of "proceeding"). You can also get there by entering "99-25" into the Proceeding field of the form you get at https://gullfoss.fcc. gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/ecfs/comsrch.hts.
--
Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
A couple of other links: You can search the FCC's database for already filed comments in this proceeding (there are 974 of them as I write this), and file comments from your web browser.
One thing to note when commenting to the FCC: The FCC is especially unswayed by the kind of rhetoric folks around here tend to sling. Go read the Linux Advocacy HOWTO, and then be even more reserved than it recommends.
--
Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
Anyway, this is for people to make their own radio stations, and is more than for HAM radio enthusists. I don't know about you, but it's still going to take a while for internet radio car stereo's to make it out for the general public to chose it, along with chrome rims, and a/c.
Gawd, the FCC is so freaking totalitarian
The Secret Government Ego Project
I completly agree, the FCC is to late on this. There is a huge underground shoutcast/icecast radio broadcast cult going on right now. And the cool thing is theres no commercials-no FCC regulations-its free AND you have a pick from top 40 to techno to talk radio even cell fones.
I do the DJing for a show on a christian community radio station ( Fish FM) here in Australia. While I don't see that any FCC decision will affect me in any way, I have had first-hand experience with quite amateurish radio equipment. Fish FM shares a community band (currently has no license, but is expecting to be awarded one in the next few weeks) and transmits 70 watts. For this, Fish has to host a transmitter on a ridge (extremely expensive), transmit from the studio to it with a link transmitter (another expensive device). Not to mention the cost of the board, the compressor, the equipment, etc etc etc.
I don't see how, without experience and money, the average joe public could create a successful radio station, especially considering every other interested joe p. would be attempting the same thing.
I personally am interested in using the technology for wireless communication. The lack of discussion on this point has made me wonder whether it is somehow unrelated to the FCC business (not the impression I got). I would like to walk around the house with my laptop, and stay connected to my network. In fact, I would like to also take it outside, maybe down to the lake (a few hundred metres from my house).
Any comments on why licensing for broadcasting for lower power transmitters is particularly useful?
Joe is right - the FCC does not want tirades about "more alternative rock" or about "how media moguls own all the stations in my town."
If you file a comment, be sure that it addresses some of the issues set forth, like interference contours and loosening of the 3rd adjacent rules. Simply saying you want more of X artist won't matter one hill of beans to the folks at the FCC.
As you can tell from my email address, I am employed in the Broadcasting industry and think that LPFM would generally be a bad idea. I don't stand to profit from it's existance or non-existance, but changing the interference contours of existing stations could make a mess of the radio dial.
Yes, LPFM would give new owners a station, but we're talking about small coverage areas - no where near that of an existing class A facility (6kw at 328 feet). If you covered a few blocks, you would be lucky! Is such a small coverage area really worth having?
I regularly listen to CBC Radio One (Toronto), otherwise known as "News, and More" (all broadcasted regions can be listened to on the CBC website and CBC Radio Two (nation-wide), otherwise known as "Classics, and beyond", over real-audio. These radio stations are Publicly funded and have No Commercial Interests. The News on CBC is considered to be the world standard, very unbiased (though, obviously, the occasional bias slips through).
Its very listenable radio, no ads, lots of cool science programs, art programs, International news every hour.
OFTC: By the community, for the community
It would be cool if you could use one of these licenses for local, digital broadcasting. ie no station identification, short of packet headers :-)
... because we are heading fast towards Mbone and cheap commonplace wireless services. At some point in the near future everyone everywhere will be able to set up an Internet radio station with little more than a home stereo and a PC; the original point of "microcasting" (as low power FM is nicknamed) is to give voices to people who are not represented by corporation-owned radio stations!
It will be useful to the radio enthusiast though, much like ham radio.
That was a blow to Beat Radio, but they didn't quit. They took the FCC to court and they are winning!
Additionally, Beat Radio was able to make it back on the air, nationwide from feb. to oct. 1998 on these stations:
- Minneapolis/St. Paul: WWTC 1280 AM
- Phoenix: KIDR 740 AM
- New York: WJDM (now WWRU) 1660 AM
- Los Angeles: KPLS 830 AM
- Denver: KKYD 1340 AM
- Chicago: WAUR 930 AM
- Ft. Worth/Dallas: KAHZ 1360 AM
- Kansas City: KCAZ (now KUPN) 1480 AM
- Philadelphia: WPWA 1590 AM
- Detroit: WCAR 1090 AM
So, if you were lucky enough to hear the beat, or would like to hear it on the air again, please check out the Beat Radio Website. There's lots of information about lowpower FM, but probably the most interesting is a scan of an "Action Plan and Resource Kit" distributed by the National Associated of Broadcasters (NAB). The kit was distributed to NAB members in an attempt to rally support AGAINST low power FM!So, yes, from all the watching I've been doing, the LPFM issue is BIG here in the Twin Cities (as a previous poster had noted.)
Remember, the airwaves are public property, or at least, they shouldn't be only accessible to the rich or powerful corporations, right? It seems to me that if the public doesn't have control of the flow of information, we're that much closer to being led wildly astray. And, the rules governing LPFM seem to fit closely with deciding just WHO has the chance to control that flow of information...
Hi!
I'm interested in using high-frequency ranges for data, phone, etc... and am interested to know what we be involved in doing this, and what regulations might exist.
1. What would it take to buy or build both broadcast and directed microwave transmitters... used for either data or analog audio. I'm aware of many solutions for directed microwave... but am more interested in home-brewed devices.
2. What range would be expected for broadcast microwave for audio (looking for at least FM radio quality)... and for various data rates?
I appreciate any further information
It doesn't matter anyhow if there are a ton of licenses. As with most things, the good low-power ones will survive and make a niche for themselves. The rest will die because they won't be given the proper attention.
Someone truly wanting to do this and do it right won't have too much a problem keeping their station's listener-base, if you ask me. I'm willing to bet there are knowledgable and talented people out there willing to give it a shot.
It's just like most everything else in life, survival of the fittest.
-- Primis.
Sorry guys. Don't be so dumb as to believe this crap, this proposal is designed to *kill* micropower radio and it was drafted by the broadcast industry. And it's goal is to *stop* free DIGITAL radio for a few more years... (Ever read Brer Rabbit "Dont throw me in that bramble bush" ? Well, it applies..)
Some points.. How would these new micropower stations support themselves if ALL advertising is banned?
How come the proposal says that any micropower station can be taken off the air if it "interferes" with *any* commercial station, *anywhere*?
Why do existing broadcast outlets get first dibs on *all* the available frequencies?
....
Just a HEADS-UP.
This is just a very carefully-drafted plan to KILL micropower and ESPECIALLY, hold off what the broadcasters see as the real threat. Spread-spectrum *DIGITAL* radio like they have in Europe and the rest of the world.. Why? Because with spead-spectrum, their big arguement, that spectrum is scarce and there are only a limited amount of channels, is completely deflated.
(The big thing they always hold up to hold off the liberals, that the equipment is more expensive, is also completely full of crap.. )
You can have *many* *many* digital radio channels operating in the same slice of spectrum, and ultimately the radios can actually be *cheaper* to make in quantities than current, analog equipment..
Say no to the crumb thrown by the FCC.. say YES to UNLIMITED channels of FREE DIGITAL RADIO.
(The NAB hates the idea of micropower because "Their property" -OUR airwaves- has in the last few years, appreciated in value and is now VERY costly for all but the very rich...Basically-
four years ago, when the Republicans took over the house, Newt had a special meeting with the broadcast industry to ask what they could do for them, Result: they started selling licenses to the highest bidder, the mega-corporations, who had the money to buy up all the local stations and replace them with satellite spewed crap, and we lost out. Dont let their whining about "return on investment" win.. the airwaves are owned by EVERYBODY.. They are taking advantage of our ignorance on these issues. the FCC is not our friend.
For a ALTERNATIVE view on this issue, please read
http://www.radio4all.org/news/cdcreply. html
Just a heads-up. (Thank you Mike, for opening my eyes.)
ZXCV MBONE.
If you all want to know about some of the people who who made this possible (put pressure on the FCC to make this proposal).
Check out the list of stations at:
http://www.radio4all.org
For Microradio news:
http://www.radio4all.org/news.html
BTW, the deadline for public comments is, August 2nd. So make your comments soon!
While your at it, why don't you add your endorsement to the National Lawyers Guild/Committe on Democratic Communications comments on the FCC LPFM proposal:
http://www.nlgcdc.org/fcc.html
The A-Infos Radio Project http://www.radio4all.net