AM radio fights for survival

[roadman65]

One other thing that sucks about AM is the fact power lines distort the transmission.  The same for overpasses as you drive on the highway.  Every bridge you pass beneath you hear static for the time you are under it. 

Also if you have power lines that are above the street you drive forget about getting a clear broadcast as the static alone will be with you the entire way.  FM has no distortions under these conditions.

[GCrites]

And if there's lightning anywhere between you and the station, including heat lightning, there's interference. So if I'm listening to a Reds game on WLW out of Cincinnati one little zap in Xenia and I hear it.

[Stephane Dumas]

A bit off-topic but I spotted that article on Jalopnik where half of the radio stations (including FM stations) will disseapear by 2024.
http://jalopnik.com/expert-predicts-half-of-all-radio-stations-to-disappea-1652034874

[agentsteel53]

why do I get the idea that the last station playing will be hosting Rush Limbaugh?

[ZLoth]

Another thing to consider.... since many stations are streaming their audio, what I have been doing is recording the audio stream for playback. The local classical radio station has six programs that I listen to: "Cinema Saturday", "Connections", "Thistle and Shamrock", "Song Travels", "Metropolitan Opera", and "At The Opera". Part of the reason is that I'm asleep during the day when these programs are on. But, once the MP3 files are created, I've used Audacity to trim the beginning and ending out, remove the one minute station plugs in the middle, then save it for playback through my Android phone where I can then listen to the programs either through the Bluetooth connection on my phone or Bluetooth headset at work. I also listen to plenty of audiobooks.

It was unheard of in 2006 (when I purchased my last car) to play audio from your cell phone to your car. People were more concerned about whether the car had a CD player. The introduction of the iPhone in 2007 changed that, and now, it is rare for a recent model car NOT to have at least an aux audio input, and, if you are playing a little more, Bluetooth integration. In fact, one of the requirements when I was purchasing a car this year was that it had to have Bluetooth.

I think people got sick and tired of yammering radio personalities and loads of commercials when all they want to do is listen to music or actual content.

[SteveG1988]

I was able to pick up WLW 700 on I-39 in IL

[vdeane]

It was unheard of in 2006 (when I purchased my last car) to play audio from your cell phone to your car. People were more concerned about whether the car had a CD player. The introduction of the iPhone in 2007 changed that, and now, it is rare for a recent model car NOT to have at least an aux audio input, and, if you are playing a little more, Bluetooth integration. In fact, one of the requirements when I was purchasing a car this year was that it had to have Bluetooth.

Did people not think to use their iPods the same way?

I think people got sick and tired of yammering radio personalities and loads of commercials when all they want to do is listen to music or actual content.

I use radio whenever I'm within the I-90/Thruway corridor where I have the stations mapped (I have four; 100.5 for exits 48A to 40, 100.3 for exits 40 to 32, 96.9 for exits 32 to 28, and 92.3 for exits 28 to 20 (also on the Northway up to exit 26 or I-88 to exit 21; I don't have the eastern boundary mapped yet, but it's probably near MassPike exit 2)).  Outside of that I use my ancient iPod nano (3rd generation; the fat one with video).

[GCrites]

It was unheard of in 2006 (when I purchased my last car) to play audio from your cell phone to your car. People were more concerned about whether the car had a CD player. The introduction of the iPhone in 2007 changed that, and now, it is rare for a recent model car NOT to have at least an aux audio input, and, if you are playing a little more, Bluetooth integration. In fact, one of the requirements when I was purchasing a car this year was that it had to have Bluetooth.

Did people not think to use their iPods the same way?

People used those little radio adapters or used cassette adapters if their car came with a tape deck (like many 2002 models still did).

[jwolfer]

People have been saying radio is dead for a long time. Most radio stations suck. Same songs over and over. A wacky, crazy morning show where they just break all the rules. And the same thing in every city. I think if radio becomes less profitable we will see some innovation . The station that. Is actually different can now be heard world wide via internet. It will change and we may be surprised where it goes

[vdeane]

It was unheard of in 2006 (when I purchased my last car) to play audio from your cell phone to your car. People were more concerned about whether the car had a CD player. The introduction of the iPhone in 2007 changed that, and now, it is rare for a recent model car NOT to have at least an aux audio input, and, if you are playing a little more, Bluetooth integration. In fact, one of the requirements when I was purchasing a car this year was that it had to have Bluetooth.

Did people not think to use their iPods the same way?

People used those little radio adapters or used cassette adapters if their car came with a tape deck (like many 2002 models still did).

But the aux input is SO much better!  The radio adapter has a few issues:
-Uses the flat iPod power out instead of the headphone jack, so it's quieter than the radio and quiet songs are impossible to hear
-Periodically need to change station, which can take several minutes if you don't know the area
-Doesn't work in major metro areas  (like NYC) because it requires a continuous section of spectrum where about 3 (preferably 5) stations aren't taken

For some reason, my parents didn't get a cassette adapter even though the car could have used it.  Might be because they're currently late adopters to technology (they both started getting into iPods when the iPhone came out, and we didn't get any kind of cell phones, not even flip phones, until even later), which is odd because Dad had Windows 3.11 and a car phone back in the early 90s.

People have been saying radio is dead for a long time. Most radio stations suck. Same songs over and over. A wacky, crazy morning show where they just break all the rules. And the same thing in every city. I think if radio becomes less profitable we will see some innovation . The station that. Is actually different can now be heard world wide via internet. It will change and we may be surprised where it goes

"The same thing in every city"?  I have yet to find a 90s to now station other than Rochester's 100.5.  If there are others, they're not based in the parts of upstate NY I've lived in.

Internet doesn't work in the car unless you pay for a data connection.  No thank you.  And I'll be listening to the Fly Morning Rush for as long as I can - it's even one of the reasons I don't want to move out of Albany!

[Pete from Boston]

People have been saying radio is dead for a long time. Most radio stations suck. Same songs over and over. A wacky, crazy morning show where they just break all the rules. And the same thing in every city. I think if radio becomes less profitable we will see some innovation . The station that. Is actually different can now be heard world wide via internet. It will change and we may be surprised where it goes

That innovation exists today.  Individuals (no NPR, no corporate owner, no college) put in over a million dollars a year voluntarily and make this amazing, amazing thing happen:

www.wfmu.org

[jwolfer]

People have been saying radio is dead for a long time. Most radio stations suck. Same songs over and over. A wacky, crazy morning show where they just break all the rules. And the same thing in every city. I think if radio becomes less profitable we will see some innovation . The station that. Is actually different can now be heard world wide via internet. It will change and we may be surprised where it goes

That innovation exists today.  Individuals (no NPR, no corporate owner, no college) put in over a million dollars a year voluntarily and make this amazing, amazing thing happen:

www.wfmu.org

I went to Upsala College in East Orange NJ 1988-1990. It was the college radio station there broadcasting from the basement of the dorms. The college closed in 1995 but the radio station is still going

[Pete from Boston]

But the aux input is SO much better!  The radio adapter has a few issues:
-Uses the flat iPod power out instead of the headphone jack, so it's quieter than the radio and quiet songs are impossible to hear
-Periodically need to change station, which can take several minutes if you don't know the area
-Doesn't work in major metro areas  (like NYC) because it requires a lcontinuous section of spectrum where about 3 (preferably 5) stations aren't taken

Works in NYC.  I use it there a lot.  Changing stations infrequently is about as much trouble as shifting your ass when it falls asleep.  And I hear quiet songs in a noisy vehicle.

You're right that a jack is better, but they didn't have jacks standard back in the dark ages when they made my truck.  The adapter is minimal trouble.

Internet doesn't work in the car unless you pay for a data connection.  No thank you.  And I'll be listening to the Fly Morning Rush for as long as I can - it's even one of the reasons I don't want to move out of Albany!

Paying for mobile data is becoming the rule, not the exception.  It's what home internet was ~twenty years ago.  Services are going to increasingly be tailored with that fact in mind. 

[Pete from Boston]

People have been saying radio is dead for a long time. Most radio stations suck. Same songs over and over. A wacky, crazy morning show where they just break all the rules. And the same thing in every city. I think if radio becomes less profitable we will see some innovation . The station that. Is actually different can now be heard world wide via internet. It will change and we may be surprised where it goes

That innovation exists today.  Individuals (no NPR, no corporate owner, no college) put in over a million dollars a year voluntarily and make this amazing, amazing thing happen:

www.wfmu.org

I went to Upsala College in East Orange NJ 1988-1990. It was the college radio station there broadcasting from the basement of the dorms. The college closed in 1995 but the radio station is still going

In the late 1990s, WFMU raised money, bought their license from the bankrupt Upsala, and bought a building in downtown Jersey City before the neighborhood blew up. 

If one not-for-profit independent station can do a good enough job to get the listener support to do all this, than others can, too. 

[vdeane]

But the aux input is SO much better!  The radio adapter has a few issues:
-Uses the flat iPod power out instead of the headphone jack, so it's quieter than the radio and quiet songs are impossible to hear
-Periodically need to change station, which can take several minutes if you don't know the area
-Doesn't work in major metro areas  (like NYC) because it requires a lcontinuous section of spectrum where about 3 (preferably 5) stations aren't taken

Works in NYC.  I use it there a lot.  Changing stations infrequently is about as much trouble as shifting your ass when it falls asleep.  And I hear quiet songs in a noisy vehicle.

You're right that a jack is better, but they didn't have jacks standard back in the dark ages when they made my truck.  The adapter is minimal trouble.

Internet doesn't work in the car unless you pay for a data connection.  No thank you.  And I'll be listening to the Fly Morning Rush for as long as I can - it's even one of the reasons I don't want to move out of Albany!

Paying for mobile data is becoming the rule, not the exception.  It's what home internet was ~twenty years ago.  Services are going to increasingly be tailored with that fact in mind. 

Well, my iTrip never worked in NYC.  I couldn't find a station that wasn't overwhelmed by static.  There were many songs where I had to turn the radio volume to the max just to hear them - one even has a beginning so low that the iTrip's automatic shutoff would engage!

Changing stations was always a hassle. First you pause the iPod, move the radio to a different station, move the iTrip to that same station, and resume the iPod, all before the automatic shutoff engaged (if it did, the iTrip would need to be unplugged to reset it).  And that's if you knew of an open station.  If you didn't, it was just guesswork and trial and error (my iTrip didn't have the ability to scan for a free station, and its turner didn't go low or high enough to get to the stations that aren't commonly used).

Isn't mobile data finite?  Why would I want to chew up limited, expensive data for a smartphone I neither own nor am willing to pay for?  My "landline" internet (Verizon FiOS) is expensive enough.  Granted, Verizon is now making it cheaper to have a data plan than not have one for individual plans (which makes NO sense, but whatever), but that's why I pay my parents to keep my phone on their plan rather than get my own.

Seriously, it REALLY frustrates me that those of us who aren't jumping on the smartphone/tablet bandwagon are increasingly being left out in the cold.  Just yesterday I read an article that NYC is considering a system that would allow people to pay for the exact amount of parking that they use rather than overpay or risk a ticket - but only for smartphone users (never mind that credit cards COULD do the same thing).

[Pete from Boston]

But the aux input is SO much better!  The radio adapter has a few issues:
-Uses the flat iPod power out instead of the headphone jack, so it's quieter than the radio and quiet songs are impossible to hear
-Periodically need to change station, which can take several minutes if you don't know the area
-Doesn't work in major metro areas  (like NYC) because it requires a lcontinuous section of spectrum where about 3 (preferably 5) stations aren't taken

Works in NYC.  I use it there a lot.  Changing stations infrequently is about as much trouble as shifting your ass when it falls asleep.  And I hear quiet songs in a noisy vehicle.

You're right that a jack is better, but they didn't have jacks standard back in the dark ages when they made my truck.  The adapter is minimal trouble.

Internet doesn't work in the car unless you pay for a data connection.  No thank you.  And I'll be listening to the Fly Morning Rush for as long as I can - it's even one of the reasons I don't want to move out of Albany!

Paying for mobile data is becoming the rule, not the exception.  It's what home internet was ~twenty years ago.  Services are going to increasingly be tailored with that fact in mind. 

Well, my iTrip never worked in NYC.  I couldn't find a station that wasn't overwhelmed by static.  There were many songs where I had to turn the radio volume to the max just to hear them - one even has a beginning so low that the iTrip's automatic shutoff would engage!

Changing stations was always a hassle. First you pause the iPod, move the radio to a different station, move the iTrip to that same station, and resume the iPod, all before the automatic shutoff engaged (if it did, the iTrip would need to be unplugged to reset it).  And that's if you knew of an open station.  If you didn't, it was just guesswork and trial and error (my iTrip didn't have the ability to scan for a free station, and its turner didn't go low or high enough to get to the stations that aren't commonly used).

Isn't mobile data finite?  Why would I want to chew up limited, expensive data for a smartphone I neither own nor am willing to pay for?  My "landline" internet (Verizon FiOS) is expensive enough.  Granted, Verizon is now making it cheaper to have a data plan than not have one for individual plans (which makes NO sense, but whatever), but that's why I pay my parents to keep my phone on their plan rather than get my own.

Seriously, it REALLY frustrates me that those of us who aren't jumping on the smartphone/tablet bandwagon are increasingly being left out in the cold.  Just yesterday I read an article that NYC is considering a system that would allow people to pay for the exact amount of parking that they use rather than overpay or risk a ticket - but only for smartphone users (never mind that credit cards COULD do the same thing).

I have a Griffin transmitter.  When the connection gets bad, I adjust the transmitter and the tuner by one, and 7 out of 10 times, I would say, that does it.  9.5/10 times a second change will do it if that doesn't.  I don't even need to look at the transmitter.  No pause necessary.

As for that "bandwagon," get used to it.  You're fighting a losing fight, and are only going to get more annoyed and more left out in the cold.  Never mind parking fines–I hope you don't need a cab quickly late at night, because smartphone users will soon have first dibs in every major city.  This is what the market wants.

~15 years ago there was a sizable portion of people who were steadfastly anti-cell-phone, chiding friends who gave in and bought one, and declaring things like "I don't see why you need to pay to be reachable all the time."  Most of them now have cell phones.  In your smartphone opposition I hear it all over again, with only the name of the item changed.

[golden eagle]

If it weren't for sports talk, I wouldn't really listen to AM radio. Even that medium is moving gradually towards FM. The ESPN station in Jackson is on FM.

[Roadrunner75]

I can't stand using FM transmitters.  In my last car (which is now my wife's) there was no aux input jack, and I used the FM transmitter option on my portable Sirius radio.  I had to constantly change the station in my travels.  My current car has the jack, and I've since primarily moved over to the Ipod, which is much better.  The stock radio in my wife's car otherwise works fine, so I keep thinking that one of these days I will rig up an aux input via the unused CD changer port in the back if possible, so she can use an MP3 player/Sirius too.

As for radio, I once actually received a survey from Arbitron a couple of years ago.  Until then I thought Nielsen and Arbitron were phantom rating systems that everyone hears about but no one ever actually gets or even hears about anyone getting surveyed.  I finally had my chance to weigh in on AM/FM.  But, as usual, it ended up in a huge stack of other things on my desk that I need to take care of or respond to, which get ignored until they eventually become moot and dumped into the recycle bin.  So I guess when radio finally disappears it will be partly my fault.

[Laura]

Clearly none of y'all knew about using 87.7 and 87.9 on your FM transmitters. Because both of my cars were/are from the early '00s, they had/have a CD player and did not have a cassette player or aux port, so I've had to use an FM transmitter. I currently use the 2009 version of the iTrip in "international mode" and it works well in rural areas, and used to work well in urban areas. However, now that the FCC has allowed  stations on those bands (and all of the low power "inbetween" bands), it won't work in any city that does. I can't use it in Philly or DC, but fortunately (for now) I can still use it in most of Baltimore. I can't use it when I am close to TV Hill or Hopkins hospital due to antenna interference, but otherwise it works.

ETA: amusingly, I would have gotten a different radio for my car, but since the GM factory radio has great AM capabilities, I refuse to do so.

iPhone

[ZLoth]

Again, I'm speaking from my own experience. Your mileage will vary. And, yes, I will repeat some points from a previous post. 

The ideal connection between your portable audio device (cell phone, iPod, MP3 player) and your car audio system is either Bluetooth (wireless) or a direct wired input (AUX). The problem is that, up until a few years ago, an AUX input and/or a Bluetooth connection was not available for cars. I know that my 2005 Chevy Malibu did not have that connection, but my 2013 Buick Verano does. In checking the car listings through Hertz Car Sales, practically all of the cars (2012-2013) had an Aux input, while the upper level ones had Bluetooth.

However, if you are driving an older vehicle, more than likely, you don't have a Aux input in your radio. The cheapest solution is to purchase a FM transmitter which can cost between $10-$30. The problem is that these units are very low power (cannot transmit more than 200 feet away), and you have to find an empty frequency. Part of the problem is that it can also be picked up by neighboring cars. As an example, I was listening to a not-so-strong station that was playing Christmas music when a car pulls up next to me, and I am listening to that person playing back their voice mail messages. 

The solution, obviously, is that you want to have some sort of direct connection to the radio. The problem with the Malibu is that the radio is also part of the driver information display, so a radio swap is out of the question. For some car radios, like my friend's 2006 Toyota Camry, there are some aftermarket solutions that will allow you to hook up directly to the radio. For my Chevy Malibu, no such option exists.

So, the next plan was to install a FM Modulator. An FM modulator hooks directly to the Antenna input of your radio and then you hook up an external antenna. One of the motivating factors was that the installation of the FM modulator was only $100 for me compared to repairing the CD player at over $300. Be sure to get a FM modulator that, when activated, disconnects the external antenna. The one that I had installed didn't have that capability, so in some areas, a strong local broadcaster jammed my FM modulator. On the other hand, it was a good solution for the circumstances.

Of course, now they have Mini Bluetooth speakers on sale that are around the size of a coke can that you can stick into a cup holder in your car.

[Roadrunner75]

For some car radios, like my friend's 2006 Toyota Camry, there are some aftermarket solutions that will allow you to hook up directly to the radio.

This is pretty much the plan I have for my wife's car ('05 Camry) - aux input via the unused CD changer port.

[GCrites]

People have been saying radio is dead for a long time. Most radio stations suck. Same songs over and over. A wacky, crazy morning show where they just break all the rules. And the same thing in every city. I think if radio becomes less profitable we will see some innovation . The station that. Is actually different can now be heard world wide via internet. It will change and we may be surprised where it goes

This reminds me that I haven't heard "You Shook Me All Night Long" today. Luckily there is a radio nearby.

[vdeane]

I have a Griffin transmitter.  When the connection gets bad, I adjust the transmitter and the tuner by one, and 7 out of 10 times, I would say, that does it.  9.5/10 times a second change will do it if that doesn't.  I don't even need to look at the transmitter.  No pause necessary.

I didn't like the gap in the music that would be caused by changing stations.  Hence the pause.  I also had to turn the radio volume down if I didn't want a roar of static assaulting my ears (as I had to run the volume so high with the iTrip - I swear the power audio was keyed to whatever volume the quietest song you had was at).  I would have to change by more than one often enough to annoy me - the transmitter was very weak so it was susceptible to bleed through from adjacent stations.

As for that "bandwagon," get used to it.  You're fighting a losing fight, and are only going to get more annoyed and more left out in the cold.  Never mind parking fines–I hope you don't need a cab quickly late at night, because smartphone users will soon have first dibs in every major city.  This is what the market wants.

I will never understand the tendency of humans to move like a herd and then discriminate against anyone who doesn't subscribe to their groupthink.  Quite frankly, I don't give a **** what any "market" wants.

~15 years ago there was a sizable portion of people who were steadfastly anti-cell-phone, chiding friends who gave in and bought one, and declaring things like "I don't see why you need to pay to be reachable all the time."  Most of them now have cell phones.  In your smartphone opposition I hear it all over again, with only the name of the item changed.

I don't have a smartphone for simple economic reasons.  I already spend $55/month for FiOS (will be over $80/month once my two year discount expires in May 2016).  Why should I spend the same amount just to get a puny monthly allocation of data on a slower connection to be used by a device that is much less convienen to use than my computers?  Give me a mouse and tabbed browsing (seriously, I have 13 tabs open right now, and that's nothing compared to just a few minutes ago; no idea how I'd browse AA Roads or Facebook without them) to a tiny touch screen any day of the week.  While the idea of a smartphone is kinda cool, I can't justify the cost.  Quite frankly, I can't afford it, especially since I spend almost all my time either at home (where I can use computers with my FiOS), at work (where I'm pretty sure people aren't supposed to be on their smartphones), or driving.  It doesn't fit into my life.

And that's fine.  What's not fine is society deciding that I don't need to be fully participating in it because of that.  Or deciding that it should dumb down the desktop computer interfaces to be more phone like.

Honestly, I would have gotten a smartphone years ago if the phone companies would let you use it with wifi only rather than force you to pay an arm and a leg for a data plan.*

*OK, so Ting does allow just that, but even with them I'd be paying more than twice as much (estimated) than what I currently pay Mom to keep me on the family plan.  Plus they're a Sprint reseller, so the network coverage is more limited.

Clearly none of y'all knew about using 87.7 and 87.9 on your FM transmitters.

I used 87.9 for a while, but even that didn't work in NYC do to adjacent station bleedthrough.  My iTrip didn't go to 87.7.

[Scott5114]

~15 years ago there was a sizable portion of people who were steadfastly anti-cell-phone, chiding friends who gave in and bought one, and declaring things like "I don't see why you need to pay to be reachable all the time."  Most of them now have cell phones.  In your smartphone opposition I hear it all over again, with only the name of the item changed.

I don't have a smartphone for simple economic reasons.  I already spend $55/month for FiOS (will be over $80/month once my two year discount expires in May 2016).  Why should I spend the same amount just to get a puny monthly allocation of data on a slower connection to be used by a device that is much less convienen to use than my computers?  Give me a mouse and tabbed browsing (seriously, I have 13 tabs open right now, and that's nothing compared to just a few minutes ago; no idea how I'd browse AA Roads or Facebook without them) to a tiny touch screen any day of the week.  While the idea of a smartphone is kinda cool, I can't justify the cost.  Quite frankly, I can't afford it, especially since I spend almost all my time either at home (where I can use computers with my FiOS), at work (where I'm pretty sure people aren't supposed to be on their smartphones), or driving.  It doesn't fit into my life.

And that's fine.  What's not fine is society deciding that I don't need to be fully participating in it because of that.  Or deciding that it should dumb down the desktop computer interfaces to be more phone like.

Honestly, I would have gotten a smartphone years ago if the phone companies would let you use it with wifi only rather than force you to pay an arm and a leg for a data plan.*

*OK, so Ting does allow just that, but even with them I'd be paying more than twice as much (estimated) than what I currently pay Mom to keep me on the family plan.  Plus they're a Sprint reseller, so the network coverage is more limited.

And there were people saying the same thing about Internet access in general 10 years ago. I've had customers inquire about jobs at my workplace and then squawk whenever I tell them that it's all done online. Sorry, dude, that's how job applications are done in 2014. Fight the power all you want, but you're the one who chose not to get the Internet, now you suffer the consequences of that decision.

I definitely agree with you that touchscreens are of the Devil, but a smartphone is used as a supplement, not a replacement, for your computer. Any serious work I do on my desktop, same as I always have. The phone comes out when I'm on a break at work and I want to dash off a quick response to an email or catch up on AARoads with Tapatalk. (Usually when I'm on mobile and I come across something more involved I want to do, particularly moderation tasks, I will make a mental note and then go back and do it on the desktop when I'm at home.) A smartphone is just a way to access the Internet for a few moments when you are away from the desktop. It is cramped and stripped-down but it is better than not having it at all. Plus, you find yourself using it in novel ways (the camera flash can double as a flashlight, most people don't bother with watches anymore since their phone's lock screen displays a clock, etc.)

They do–or did at one time–make a "data-plan-free smartphone". It's the iPod Touch. It's, as far as I know, exactly like an iPhone, except it has no phone feature and uses wifi only. Most tablets run a smartphone OS too, and also run on wifi only, though many people would find them too cumbersome to take out of the house.

[vdeane]

And there were people saying the same thing about Internet access in general 10 years ago. I've had customers inquire about jobs at my workplace and then squawk whenever I tell them that it's all done online. Sorry, dude, that's how job applications are done in 2014. Fight the power all you want, but you're the one who chose not to get the Internet, now you suffer the consequences of that decision.

At least one can go to the library to use the internet if they don't have it.