221–230 of 285 posts
Compound that with heavy advertising (for some stations) , and the "duty cycle" is even lower. It reminds me of those billboard trucks that drive up and down las Vegas, just burning gasoline, creating traffic, so you can see their ads.
I don't really know how successful they are but since their inception 13 years ago I've probably listened to them more than all other stations combined. And I donate to them.
My concern with radio is energy consumption. Transmitters are only about 50% efficient. So a 50kw transmitter is likely slurping down 100kw of power, 24/7. That can be incredibly wasteful, depending on how many people are listening at any given time. Compound that with heavy advertising (for some stations) , and the "duty cycle" is even lower. It reminds me of those billboard trucks that drive up and down las Vegas,…
Efficiency is up, more in the upper 70%'s now days. (of course broadcasters will use a transmitter until it is unfixable, so there are some 50 year old units still on the air). Each user requires a 9 volt battery to listen (maybe a bit more...)
Compare that electricity with the streaming cost. The streamers computers and routers. The infrastructure cost for the internet (not all amortized to streaming, of course). The desktop / laptop / phone electricity for EACH user / subscriber.
Once you hit a certain audience size, broadcasting is more efficient.
Note: I agree with you on the billboard trucks. A waste.
My sad guess: radio will make less and less money, until the point owners view the spectrum as more valuable than the revenue left to extract from it, and ATT or the like will buy them out (after buying out the FCC) and use it for something else.
Good radio died in the mid 80s. Most people today can hardly remember when radio was curated live. Perhaps if you were near a small station you might have had the experience. Most major markets were completely corporate by the early 90s. I know, my first career pick was radio, and by the time I was in college at a college radio station in the late 90s. That career path was dead unless I wanted to be in marketing or s…
The playlist was set by corporate (or by a consultant). You could maybe change the order of the songs, but you were not allowed to add / subtract any songs.
By 1980 over 1/2 of the stations were "automated". Music was provided by a service, on Reel to Reel tape (played by Revox B77's).
Path to a radio job in 1980? A Third Class RadioTelephone License with Broadcast Endorsement.
Good radio died in the mid 80s. Most people today can hardly remember when radio was curated live. Perhaps if you were near a small station you might have had the experience. Most major markets were completely corporate by the early 90s. I know, my first career pick was radio, and by the time I was in college at a college radio station in the late 90s. That career path was dead unless I wanted to be in marketing or s…
In 1980 I worked in local radio. The playlist was set by corporate (or by a consultant). You could maybe change the order of the songs, but you were not allowed to add / subtract any songs. By 1980 over 1/2 of the stations were "automated". Music was provided by a service, on Reel to Reel tape (played by Revox B77's). Path to a radio job in 1980? A Third Class RadioTelephone License with Broadcast Endorsement.
The automation machine at one station I worked at had 2047 programmable steps. (well, 2048, 0 was a step)
As a 16 year old, I could not fathom why it was not 2400. With 2400 steps, you could program each hour the exact same; not so with 2047.
Editing was a dream on the ASR33 teletype. Seems scissors and tape are very effective.
My concern with radio is energy consumption. Transmitters are only about 50% efficient. So a 50kw transmitter is likely slurping down 100kw of power, 24/7. That can be incredibly wasteful, depending on how many people are listening at any given time. Compound that with heavy advertising (for some stations) , and the "duty cycle" is even lower. It reminds me of those billboard trucks that drive up and down las Vegas,…
Not that many 50kw stations. Efficiency is up, more in the upper 70%'s now days. (of course broadcasters will use a transmitter until it is unfixable, so there are some 50 year old units still on the air). Each user requires a 9 volt battery to listen (maybe a bit more...) Compare that electricity with the streaming cost. The streamers computers and routers. The infrastructure cost for the internet (not all amortized…
I know it's more complicated than that, if they shut off the transmitter at night, they would lose listeners in total. I just think it's wasteful compared to other forms of communication.
There’s a human connection element to old radio that streaming will never replicate. And I worry that it’s gone from modern automated radio too. It used to be if you were driving down the road and heard a song you liked Hearing a song you liked on the radio hit harder then playing it yourself because you knew that there was another human nearby at that moment in time that had picked it out and played it. You were phy…
You can still listen to the radio while driving, many people still do that, I still do that. I agree though that in essence streaming is a very alienating experience.
The local NPR backed station the Current is good but their audio quality is terrible, even their HD stream is muffled and wonky. They also eliminated many of the DJs I had grown to like and I never got that same connection with their replacement, which definitely impacted how I listen.