Broadcasting (July - Dec 1936)

iregional service in larger communities where at present a number iof high-frequency regional channels are the principal ones in use. A power increase seems desirlable for regional stations in larger 'cities, since definite technical iand economic objectives are thus (achieved, he said. These objectives are not as easily defined, ihowever, in the case of some of rthe smaller regional stations and it is conceivable that some of them do not care to obtain an increase in power. The increase might be arrived at by adopting a value of power that would result in equal 'signal values at a point half-way ! to the fading wall of a clear channel station and half-way to the > interference wall of a regional station. "The above considerations again seem to strengthen the argument Ithat low frequency regional as. signments should be made in the larger cities, and in addition higher values of transmitting power would seem to be indicated and desirable for this class of regional station. * * * A system _ of allocation of regional facilities that would place low-frequency and higher power regional stations in larger population centers of the country would undoubtedly be ■ most sound economically. While it ' is realized that any sudden change might be undesirable and impracticable, a trend toward such a j system would seem to be in order." Locals Face Same Problem THE principal problem of the local station in a larger town is very much the same as that of the regional, Prof. Byrne continued. Most of the discussion on regional, he said, could be repeated for locals. "The question of increases in power is thus reduced to a question of increase in quality of broadcast service, and economically, the question becomes, what is the increased quality of service worth in dollars and cents?" said Prof. Byrne. "This question should be answered by the local stations themselves, with some top limit of power authorized." Prof. Byrne entered into a discussion of antenna efficiency, asserting that power increases and use of shorter antennas can accomplish good results in increased coverage. The cost of additional power in the case of regionals, he said, should be compared with fixed charges on the antenna system. On directional antennas, he i said a minimum height limitation j on directional systems would seem to be inadvisable, particularly on the lower frequencies. Here again, he said, the additional cost of power should be compared with the actual fixed charges on the antenna system, and an antenna height selected that results in greatest economy. As for synchronization, Mr. Byrne said that during night hours it might provide a solution for high-frequency regionals in large cities where sizable adjacent communities now receive no night service. If the engineering and economic phases of operation are carefully worked out, he said, it would seem that such operation should be permitted and in some cases encouraged. "The use of a directional antenna at the booster can greatly increase the feasibility of such schemes," he said, "as the areas of distortion can be chosen so as to include as little population as possible." Caldwell's Defense of CLEAR CHANNELS Mr. Caldwell IN DEFENSE of the Clear Channel Group case, Louis G. Caldwell, counsel, on Oct. 19 presented rebuttal t e s t i mony designed to refute arguments advanced by other witnesses with respect to clear channel duplication. He put into the record an analysis of the postcard responses in the recent FCC clear channel survey to show that listeners in the Far West generally are in favor of clear channel operation. Declaring that he had time to compile the responses to postcards from only a few states, he said these were almost unanimously in favor of retention of clear channels and that the general complaint was against interference on certain clear channels. A case in point which Mr. Caldwell emphasized was that of KNX, Los Angeles, operating on the 1050 kc. clear channel which has a low-powered station in Quebec on its frequency. The responses from western states, he said, rather generally protested against interference to KNX reception, and he said the impeding influence was the Quebec station with its low power and with only 40% modulation. He cited this as a glaring example of what duplication can do on a clear channel. The listener comments on the clear channel survey postcards, Mr. Caldwell said, answered practically every question that has been raised, from the listener viewpoint, with respect to clear channel coverage. The farmers, he said, want more power and they are opposed to "interference on clear channels". Moreover, he declared, these comments reveal that farmers and rural residents generally are interested in news, market reports, weather reports and other services which they normally get from clear channel stations. The theory that they do not listen at night is fallacious also, he said. Mr. Caldwell urged the FCC to make a complete analysis of these postcard returns because of the "wealth of information" they contain. He said that these comments are more important in allocation needs than all of the statistics, graphs and charts that economists can present. Mr. Caldwell introduced for the record, maps of clear channel coverage, both day and night, in an effort to refute contentions made by Dr. Greenleaf Whittier Pickard for the Regional Group. He also commented upon the coverage maps of regional stations introduced by Dr. Pickard, declaring that they were inaccurate in that in many cases part-time stations were credited with their full-time audiences even though they were duplicated. Recordings as Proof SEVERAL transcriptions of programs on dominant clear channels were played by Mr. Caldwell to show the degree of interference resulting on such channels. One of these was the WTIC-KRLD duplication on 1040 kc. Then he also performed records of clear channel stations operating exclusively tm • 4 ;i ,1 I V V ***** Vv v v >a BROADCASTING • Broadcast Advertising November 1, 1936 • Page 61