I read many years ago on a forum such as this (but not this one) that the commercial stations agreed to support the rollout of DAB+ and in return the government agreed that there would be no new (commercial) stations for a certain number of years (was it 5?).
1 Like
Yes it was either 5 or 10, but then the government and ACMA reneged on offering new players the chance to bid for new licences. Instead they let the incumbents swallow up the spectrum. Itâs a protection racket.
When FM was introduced across the globe, most nations gave existing AM stations access to to the FM band for free. It was considered that the AM radio stations had an absolute right to also broadcast on FM. Australia was different. We viewed FM as a new technology and that AM stations did not have automatic right to access the FM band.
In the UK AM stations were given an FM frequency and simply broadcast in both AM and FM. They had the right to simulcast. In 1988 the stations were required to provide seperate programming for their AM and FM frequencies - thus Capital FM played the Top 40 and the AM station became Capital Gold. This was to provide audiences with more variety.
In the United States, the AM stations were able to convert to FM (at no cost - the FM frequency was their right), although they did need to relinquish their AM frequency, which the Federal Government then auctioned to a new player.
In 1974 Australiaâs first FM station starts when not-for-profit 2MBS goes to air in Sydney. At this point point the existing AM stations should have asked the Federal Government for access to the FM band. But there was silence. The existing AM stations had no appetite for the expensive conversions of studios and new antennas so they could broadcast in stereo. They had seen the obscene amount of money the commercial TV stations had paid to introduce colour TV and not one AM station broke ranks and asked to switch to FM.
Rod Muir (who programmed 2SM to the top of the ratings in the mid 1970s), worked behind the scenes to get the Commonwealth to open up the FM band to new players, after all the AM stations had shown zero interest in stereo broadcasting. His aim for for one of the new players to be himself. He wanted to own a radio station.
In 1979 the decision was made to âgive awayâ licences for FM broadcasting to new players and now the AM cartel wanted a piece of the action but it was too late. Rod Muir was successful in gaining the 104.9FM frequency in Sydney. He paid to set up the station but was given the frequency for free. It was to soon be worth millions. In 2000 the 96.9 frequency in Sydney was sold off for $150M. How times had changed.
Donât forget that in 1979, few were predicting how technology would change and FM would be more than a niche player. Only 4% of cars had an FM receiver, there were no Walkmans and most portable radios only had one speaker (making AM versus FM less of an issue). Muir had been to the United States and witnessed the growing popularity of FM.
By the time digital radio arrived the existing players would not make the same mistake again. They lobbied for exclusive access to DAB+ and were more than willing to raise the money to retool for digital radio.
8 Likes
2MMM was dubbed âMuirâs Money Machineâ for a reason back in the 80s. In hindsight, possibly one of the shrewdest decisions in the history of capitalism. Unlike AM Stereo and DAB, âOGâ FM broadcasting was a proven success elsewhere, hence a surer bet.
2 Likes
Interesting that you should say that. Around 1978 or 79, 3DB Melbourne had a tour of the US. Iâm not sure if it was like those Womenâs Weekly tours that you could pay to go on or if it was just a radio promotion. Anyway, one time during a weekday breakfast show they crossed over to the tour where they talked to someone about commercial FM. They tuned across the dial to see what was on. They would have surely known by then.
1 Like
Iâm sure the AM operators knew about commercial FM radio but they thought it would be the AM operators that would be able to make the switch. After all, this is what had happened in other nations. Their lack of enthusiasm was to eventually prevent the capital city AM stations from converting over - apart from the few auctioned conversions in the late 80s to mid 1990s that cost a fortune. For example 3KZ paid $37M
1 Like
60 Minutes ran a story on FM radio in New York ahead of the introduction here. They were amazed by the number of stations and that there was news radio WCBS FM (all news 24 hours a day).
4 Likes
Is the ABC have a more favourable view of FM and its potential back in the 1970âs?
Theyâve never bothered moving their main capital city stations to FM with the exception of 8DR Darwin becoming 8DDD. Even regionally, itâs a hodgepodge.
1 Like
Not exactly, FM was just an âadditionalâ band⌠in the 40s many broadcasters were excited to simulcast their static-ridden standard band stations on the new âstatic freeâ band and permits were easy to come by, especially for established operators, but a number of factors conspired to keep FM from taking off then - not the least of which was the lack of receivers and the arrival of TV here in the late 40s/early 50s that quickly made broadcasters shift funding from FM to TV. Many FMs were left to languish if not be deleted altogether.
In the mid 60s, the FCC ruled that FM stations in markets with more than 100,000 people would no longer be allowed to simply simulcast their AM counterparts, this led to an abundance of automated classical and elevator music stations⌠and the first progressive rock stations (KMPX/San Francisco, WMMS/Cleveland, et al), which got young people into FM and help spur the bandâs growth in the late 60s and early 70s. In the US, FM listening had achieved parity with AM by the end of the 70s.
Of course, simulcast rules have been relaxed since then, and most major AMs have FM simulcasts, but there was never any âconversionâ in the US as in other countries.
8 Likes
I love talking about this!
I suppose I should have said that AM stations in the United States migrated to FM without having to pay new licence fees. Most of this migration occurred in the 1970s. Today AM and FM stations in the United States can simulcast the same broadcast, this new rule was passed by the FCC in 2020 (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-366001A1.pdf).
Interestingly, there were two factors that slowed the uptake of FM broadcasting in the US.
One was that the original FM band allocated was between around 40 - 50MHZ. In 1948 the decision was made to move to the now international 88 - 108MHZ. This made all FM receivers redundant and the FM stations had to retool antennas for the new 88 - 108 frequencies (that they were again given free of charge). Consumers had confidence in AM as a broadcasting method but worried that household investment in FM radio could again lead to new band frequencies. A century ago radios were expensive. A quick look at Wikipedia shows they cost about a weekâs wage. Not that I put a lot of faith in Wikipedia.
The second factor was that stereo FM broadcasting was not approved until 1961. The FCC insisted on a system whereby old mono FM receivers would still work with the new stereo technology. They had already burnt consumers with the move from 40 - 50MHZ to 88 - 108 MHZ and did not want to history to repeat for a second time.
3 Likes
Yes, by the mid-eighties, the FCC had to reverse their rule, this time because AM was dying.
There werenât many stations broadcasting on the old FM band in the pre 1946 era, before the change to 88-108. And very few receivers.
Most of the early stations were experimental.
1 Like
Totally true.
All the early experimental stations were licensed to the inventor of FM radio, Edwin Armstrong. He had the patent for FM broadcasting and received royalties from station owners.
By the mid 1940s there were around 60 FM stations, all licensed by the FCC and paying royalties to Armstrong.
https://jeff560.tripod.com/1946fm.html
The move to 88 - 108FM meant that Armstrong lost his patent and no longer received royalties. I am not too sure why he lost the patent, the technology was largely the same.
Armstrong took his own life in 1954. Itâs reported (but I canât confirm it through sources such as his family) it was because he lost the patent and any acknowledgement of the role he played in the advent of FM broadcasting.
In 1990 I was doing an Economics degree at UNSW and we needed to choose an industry undergoing structural change. I chose to report on the growing popularity of FM broadcasting, although information was scarce (no internet). Detail on this subject is still scarce today. Thereâs lots of opinion pieces on the worldwide switch to FM but itâs not sourced. An example is the lack of material on Edwin Armstrong, although more sites are appearing. Brittanica is a trusted source and they now have more information.
In obsessed. It all happened in the US less than a century ago but little serious documentation exists.
3 Likes
Fortunately, there is an abundance of information now.
The best resource is David Gleasonâs World Radio History site, with near-complete collections of searchable early documents like FM Magazine, which was published monthly throughout the 40s and is one of the best contemporary chronicles of the development of the band.
2 Likes
According to Wikipedia, Armstrongâs primary FM patents expired in late 1950.
1 Like
I donât love Wikipedia, I do like it though. Iâve also read that NBC saw FM radio as a threat to their AM radio stations so they developed a competing FM technology that they allowed broadcasters to use for free. NBC had the cash to continually challenge Armstrongâs patent until the Supreme Court finally watered down the patent to a point where it was meaningless. NBC wanted to ensure that accessing FM was not going to involve ongoing royalty payment and they largely succeeded.
Iâve also read a lot of documents that the move to 88-108FM killed the patent. This part I donât understand.
It is bizarre to think that initially FM radio was a patented technology.