|
||||||||
Interest for new Manchester Mux |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 94
|
Interest for new Manchester Mux
Muxco have issued this on there blog... http://www.muxco.com/blog/
Would it be viable? Would at least give the trial mux stations a bigger coverage area, if they decided to move over. Last edited by richardpaul1987 : 08-12-2016 at 18:20. Reason: Incorrect title |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 252
|
I don't think the title here is accurate. It looks more like a unilateral action by MuxCo to try and pressure Ofcom into releasing spectrum for a new Manchester multiplex.
In any case, it's a great idea - the Bauer mux is full (mainly with Bauer services) and it's difficult for new entrants to get into the marketplace. The demand is demonstrably there, evidenced by the heavy use of the Manchester minimux. A second multiplex for a major city like Manchester is a no-brainer. London has three, so two for major areas like Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham etc is only fair. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 94
|
Quote:
I don't think the title here is accurate. It looks more like a unilateral action by MuxCo to try and pressure Ofcom into releasing spectrum for a new Manchester multiplex.
In any case, it's a great idea - the Bauer mux is full (mainly with Bauer services) and it's difficult for new entrants to get into the marketplace. The demand is demonstrably there, evidenced by the heavy use of the Manchester minimux. A second multiplex for a major city like Manchester is a no-brainer. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 363
|
The success of many of the minimuxes demostrates there's demand for another tier of muxes, and they would probably be sustainable in most conurbations.
Muxco have also shown that, presumably via lower operating costs, or perhaps smaller capex because the technology is more mature, new services can be developed (see n.yorks or n.wales & chester mux as examples), which wouldn't have got a look in on the Bauer local muxes, full as they are of their own automated decades services, and apparently with much higher carriage fees.. Therefore I think, whilst this is a bold claim, it's a justified one, and could open a new tier of broadcasting for communities of interest in big cities and urban areas, as well as reducing the domiance of the big radio groups. From a pratical point of view, following the reorganisation of the mux frequencies and additional tx'es, just how many spare frequencies are there on DAB in a city like Manchester, or other big cities? Now the L-band is dead, would it be technically possible to license another city wide mux on a frequency which didn't affect geographically neighbouring muxes? |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 13,572
|
Quote:
From a pratical point of view, following the reorganisation of the mux frequencies and additional tx'es, just how many spare frequencies are there on DAB in a city like Manchester, or other big cities?
Now the L-band is dead, would it be technically possible to license another city wide mux on a frequency which didn't affect geographically neighbouring muxes? http://www.wohnort.org/dab/ukloc.html#Manch Shame they will not say make some existing stations like Kiss Fresh DAB+ to allow new DAB+ stations, but some existing listeners without DAB+ sets might lose out? Going to 12C enabled the Manchester commercial mux to increase power. However Liverpool also has 2 local commercial muxes, but no minimux. 11C is in use in Yorkshire and other parts of the UK and will also be used for the proposed Isle of Mann mux, Guess it could be reused in Manchester for a new power limited commercial mux as it should not interfere with other 11C muxes, will allow better coverage than the minimux on 10B, but less than the current commercial mux on 12C?. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: SE London
Posts: 796
|
It's sensible to look at giving major cities outside London with well-developed radio markets the option of a second commercial multiplex - certainly in Manchester and Birmingham there's not even room for all the local AM/FM licences to be accommodated. London has three regular muxes including CE's competing/coexisting with each other and a minimux; until recently, outside London the MXR muxes took up some of the slack, bur with those gone there's become something of a capacity crunch, which means a poorer sservice for those outside London. Whilst some stations previously operating on local/regional muxes are now national (Radio X, LBC, Capital Xtra) and consolidation has killed off others (Century and Real being swallowed into Heart for instance), there is still likely to be interest in reaching major population centres from stations which can't or won't get coverage on existing muxes or D1/SDL...
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,877
|
There is definitely demand for a second full-scale multiplex in Manchester, the trial mux currently has 19 stations crammed in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 252
|
Quote:
However Liverpool also has 2 local commercial muxes, but no minimux. The coverage map for the MuxCo multiplex shows its protected area as being North East Wales, western parts of Cheshire and the Wirral - Liverpool is overspill. MuxCo have done the same with their Surrey multiplex, putting it on Crystal Palace and covering South London. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,877
|
Whether official or overspill, MuxCo NE Wales/W Cheshire covers Liverpool very well and is even transmitted from the Radio City tower in Liverpool City Centre.
The maps on the Ofcom website show Merseyside is well covered, right up to Southport. http://static.ofcom.org.uk/static/ra...s/dl000049.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: England
Posts: 147
|
Quote:
Muxco have issued this on there blog... http://www.muxco.com/blog/
If they want to do something, they need to concentrate on selling the spare capacity on their own multiplexes rather than a land grab for multiplex frequencies all around the country. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 363
|
Quote:
This is a good call but Muxco? I don't think so. In the 3 years they've sold only 65% of the bandwidth they are sitting on. And progressive they are not. Just 5 of the 73 services they carry are in DAB+ .
70th If they want to do something, they need to concentrate on selling the spare capacity on their own multiplexes rather than a land grab for multiplex frequencies all around the country. Regarding unused bandwith, you could argue that it's difficult to make comparisons as many of their muxes cover relatively rural areas. That, and the Bauer muxes are only full because of their automated decades stations, which some people argue are little more than placeholders to justify higher carriage fees to local competition, creating the illusion of high demand. Elsewhere Stoke, and in the past, Inverness were as bad an example of under untilised muxes as anything muxco operates. That said I do agree this seems like an attempt at a land grab. Of course ofcom would have to advertise any future muxes as per the normal application process, so there's no guarantee they'd win it. I think it's good they're forcing the conversation. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,266
|
I can't believe no one has said this already, but, here's an imaginary timeline based on MuxCo's previous mux launches:
January 2018: Ofcom advertises Manchester 2nd mux May 2018: Ofcom awards licence to MuxCo October 2025: MuxCo launch Manchester 2nd mux
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 13,572
|
The last local mux rollout was delayed by an Ofcom review so providing existing operators Bauer, Global and Niocast (As the existing muxes are full) do not object another mux can be advertised and up and running at existing sites Littleborough, Saddleworth, Sunley Building, Sutton Common and Winter Hill within a year.
But will there be a rush of new commercial stations willing to pay for Greater Manchester coverage. Nation seem to be behind the bid http://radiotoday.co.uk/2016/12/dab-...in-manchester/ so Chris Country and Dragon (perhaps renamed) will move. XS is another possibility?, as the 4 London muxes are full it could be a commercial success. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,092
|
Quote:
This is a good call but Muxco? I don't think so. In the 3 years they've sold only 65% of the bandwidth they are sitting on. And progressive they are not. Just 5 of the 73 services they carry are in DAB+ .
Also, any new multiplexes wouldn't be handed to Muxco, of course. There'd have to a awards process. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 252
|
Quote:
I can't believe no one has said this already, but, here's an imaginary timeline based on MuxCo's previous mux launches:
January 2018: Ofcom advertises Manchester 2nd mux May 2018: Ofcom awards licence to MuxCo October 2025: MuxCo launch Manchester 2nd mux ![]() Speaking of Nation and Niocast, why has Dragon Radio appeared on the Trial Manchester multiplex? A voicetracked AC station targeting Wales doesn't appear to have any particular relevance to Manchester - it's not like there's a huge Welsh diaspora desperate for news from home that they'll only be able to get from Dragon. I expect it's a placeholder of some kind for a Dragon/Thames style service for Manchester itself. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,448
|
If we are having another Manchester multiplex then what about Birmingham?
I'm not getting into a tedious debate about which is the second city but they are both large urban areas which deserve more than one MUX. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 252
|
Quote:
If we are having another Manchester multiplex then what about Birmingham?
I'm not getting into a tedious debate about which is the second city but they are both large urban areas which deserve more than one MUX. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,343
|
Quote:
If we are having another Manchester multiplex then what about Birmingham?
I'm not getting into a tedious debate about which is the second city but they are both large urban areas which deserve more than one MUX. A pity the West Mids regional closed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: SouthWirral 1986-2002 & 2004-?
Posts: 7,070
|
Quote:
Whether official or overspill, MuxCo NE Wales/W Cheshire covers Liverpool very well and is even transmitted from the Radio City tower in Liverpool City Centre.
The maps on the Ofcom website show Merseyside is well covered, right up to Southport. http://static.ofcom.org.uk/static/ra...s/dl000049.pdf Having a transmitter located somewhere to cover somewhere nearby but not officially the area in which it's transmitting from is done quite a few times. The Storeton transmitter on the Wirral provides BBC ONE Wales & ITV Wales to aim the signal into Deeside in places like Connah's Quay & Flint which are in the shadow of Moel Y Parc, meaning those channels must be scanned in in most houses in the area that use Freeview. |
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Dewsbury, England
Posts: 8,685
|
Rather than creating more multiplexes, Ofcom should decide who broadcasts o each multiplex based on how many hours they are live and local, and take the decision away from the multiplex opperators. All broadcasters could pay their fair share to cover transmission costs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12
|
Quote:
Rather than creating more multiplexes, Ofcom should decide who broadcasts o each multiplex based on how many hours they are live and local, and take the decision away from the multiplex opperators. All broadcasters could pay their fair share to cover transmission costs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: England
Posts: 147
|
Quote:
... Manchester has a population of approx half the size of Birmingham, so it makes sense for B'ham to be included. .
If you are to replicate the existing local DAB coverage then Birmingham's 2nd city-wide multiplex will have an MCA circa 965,000 and Manchester's 2nd multiplex will have an MCA circa 1,600,000. That to one side, both Manchester and Birmingham clearly require an alternative local multiplex operator to CE Digital's monopolistic platform/service provider grip on digital radio in two of our major cities. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,867
|
Quote:
I can't believe no one has said this already, but, here's an imaginary timeline based on MuxCo's previous mux launches:
January 2018: Ofcom advertises Manchester 2nd mux May 2018: Ofcom awards licence to MuxCo October 2025: MuxCo launch Manchester 2nd mux ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,343
|
Quote:
It's based on the urban (not metropolitan) areas and Manchester has a larger population than Birmingham.
If you are to replicate the existing local DAB coverage then Birmingham's 2nd city-wide multiplex will have an MCA circa 965,000 and Manchester's 2nd multiplex will have an MCA circa 1,600,000. . Perhaps the 2 urban areas West Mids and GM could benefit from another mux. Then again we've been there before with the WM mux. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:37.


