|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
Announcement :: Media |
|
WEFT off the air |
Current rating: 0 |
by Sandra Ahten
Email: spiritofsandra (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified!)
Phone: 217-367-6345 |
16 Jun 2005
|
|
Problems with the transmitter controller have put WEFT 90.1FM off the air since Tuesday early morning. |
|
It still is not completely diagnosed and unclear as to whether replacements parts will have to be obtained from the company that made the transmitter. If part do not have to be obtained from afar... Thursday afternoon is the earliest it might be back up. |
See also:
http://www.weft.org/
|
This work is in the public domain |
Comments
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by uh-nawn
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jun 2005
|
If you don't devote enough attention and resources to the crumbling tech that enables WEFT to be heard, this is the result.
All the committee meetings in the world, arguing over programming and internal politics, are pointless. Nobody wanted to address the quite serious, perpetually degrading, underlying tech shortcomings. Either due to lack of interest, or lack of needed talent, or unwillingness to commit financial resources to hire the needed talent or purchase improvements for the longstanding open tech wounds.
Spiffing up the clubhouse was all fine and dandy, but shouldn't that money have been spent on keeping the signal on the air, first? Same with all the crumbling, broken-down playback and DJ equipment.
Two words - dead air. The most grave of sins for broadcast radio. I can hear all the spin and backlash to this message now. But, you're off the air. For days. For shame.
And, I told you so. |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by second that
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jun 2005
|
With you on this one, uh-nawn. Don't want to use my name here because it's just going to get me swept into the storm that continuously swirls around weft.
Same issue with ucimc. The website, which for me is the core function of the whole thing, is often slow, down, or just not working right.
In both situations, the central mission should come first, and everything else after that.
Berthold Brecht said it: "First grub, then philosophy." |
|
Acts of God |
by Dose of Reality
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jun 2005
|
While it may be comforting for critics to anonymously beat their favorite dead horse about volunteer organizations at every opportunity, unless you're actually involved in doing the work, you're just taking potshots.
The massive electrical storm the other evening is what I heard is responsible for the WEFT outage. No amount of paying attention to basics can deal with a lightning hit. And no one can predict when it will happen, but it goes with the territory or being a radio station
You can flog whoever or whatever you want, but you're just being silly to claim that internal politics has anything to do with where lightning strikes -- although we may wish it would strike certain people who spend far more time and effort criticizing the volunteers that make community organizations work than they've ever done in actually helping said orgs work. |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by La Ley
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jun 2005
|
|
I'm a WEFT associate, but I'm not involved in the day to day running of the station. Personally, I'm tired of anonymous complaints about clubhouse mentalities that end in an "I told you so." If you want to be constructive, then do something to fix the transmitter and build infrastructure instead of wringing your hands and complaining about it, which accomplishes nothing other than annoying and alienating the people who actually do the hard work. |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by 5
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jun 2005
|
WWHP out of Farmer City has been off the air (haven't checked today) since the storm as well.
WLRW goes off the air from time to time after storms as have other stations in town.
*yawn* The bitching is boring.... |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by cmb
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jun 2005
|
Basically it appears that what we have here is a liar. WEFT has spent thousands of dollars in tech improvements over the past two years alone. And there's nothing crumbling or neglected about our transmission equipment. It is under constant watch and improvement. Further, WEFT goes the extra mile so as not to be spending valuable listener contributions on frills. When our tube socket went down for the first time, instead of purchasing a new one for over a thousand bucks, we had it rebuilt at considerable bother for a couple hundred. It's called stewardship.
If the uh-nonymous whiners can point up a technology to make a community radio station immune to electrical storms, they should feel free to do so.
Meanwhile, I will remind our detractor that all WEFT committee meetings - including programming and engineering - are publicized and open to the public, so that they may have a little more success putting their money where their mouth is. -cmb
p.s. Regarding WEFT's 'spiffing up of the clubhouse' (what a vicious, unwarranted characterization!), I think making the station handicapped accessible was worth it. Other, more able creatures may differ. |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by Randall Cotton
recotton (nospam) earthlink.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jun 2005
Modified: 02:56:15 PM |
I think it's also important to realize that the primary technical volunteer for the transmitter was just a few days out of the hospital from what was essentially emergency major surgery. And the secondary (paid professional) contact happened to be on vacation at the time. The circumstances here are exceptional.
I'd like to emphasize the importance of more *volunteer participation* at the brilliant community resource we have in WEFT. WEFT can always be improved, but it will happen only through the efforts of folks who pitch in.
There is a new, easy way to volunteer at WEFT. Stop by the station sometime at 113 N. Market St. Champaign, near University (once we're back on the air, that is) and check out the new "Volunteer Opportunities" posting board in the main lobby, just a few feet from the front door on your right as you walk in.
You'll find many ways you can "plug in" to WEFT by signing up for volunteer work from simple tasks like delivering our newspaper "The Weft Revue" around town to more involved things like building improvement efforts to full blown engineering projects. Our Public Relations committee, in particular, needs new volunteer energy right now.
Randall Cotton
WEFT Board Member (but not formally speaking for the Board in this comment). |
|
off air update |
by Sandra Ahten
spiritofsandra (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jun 2005
|
Apparently we are waiting on "chips" that may put us back on the air on Friday. But if that doesn't happen we'll be without our beloved WEFT until Monday.
Dang I miss it.
S |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by uh-nawn
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jun 2005
|
To my knowledge, the building upgrades were not primarily about providing handicapped access. Yes, that was one of the results, but hardly the focus.
Thanks for the clarification about storm damage, but I also recall that transmitter or antenna upgrades are still long, long overdue, and read here or elsewhere that that particular situation was beginning to become worrisome if not critical.
I'm hardly happy about WEFT losing it's signal. It's truly a CU treasure. But IMO, priorities are still misplaced. Acts of god aside. |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by uh-nawn
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jun 2005
|
|
In addition, the opening post makes no scapegoat of storm damage. What is the real cause for days of dead air, I'd now like to know? |
|
Then Quit Looking for Goats to Scape |
by Dose of Reality
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
16 Jun 2005
|
The only one scapegoating anyone here is you. You'd rather jump to an unsupportable conclusion that fits your biases than consider a far simpler and more truthful explanation as being the likely cause of the outage. That's not the fault of the story -- that's your own fault.
Perhaps you should explain yourself rather than demanding explanations from others? What you're up to looks just like trolling to me, as others have noted before. |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by curious
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
17 Jun 2005
|
|
Randall, I am living just beside WEFT station, I am pretty advanced technically, though not advanced financially and haven't a lot of free time. I truly want to help. Do you have any specific suggestions for me or should I phone Mike Wolf? I also don't want to look tactless, all I want is to help. |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by curious
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
17 Jun 2005
|
|
Randall, I am living just beside WEFT station, I am pretty advanced technically, though not advanced financially and haven't a lot of free time. I truly want to help. Do you have any specific suggestions for me or should I phone Mike Wolf? I also don't want to look tactless, all I want is to help. |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by curious
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
17 Jun 2005
|
|
Randall, I am living just beside WEFT station, I am pretty advanced technically, though not advanced financially and haven't a lot of free time. I truly want to help. Do you have any specific suggestions for me or should I phone Mike Wolf? I also don't want to look tactless, all I want is to help. |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by Randall Cotton
recotton (nospam) earthlink.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
17 Jun 2005
|
To curious (and all others wondering):
I am on the WEFT Engineering Committee, Building Committee and Music Committee as well as the Board of Directors (and I also attend nearly every other WEFT meeting) and I'd be glad to speak with anyone interested in volunteering at WEFT to help them get involved in whatever way they wish to contribute.
And yes, we do have a very strong need for technical folks as well.
Please feel free to e-mail or call anytime 8-)
Randall Cotton
recotton (at) earthlink.net
217-722-8470 |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by curious
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
17 Jun 2005
|
|
Randall, if the transmitter was damaged by lightening as some people here are guessing, I think, that this time I can't be of help, as it means a new transmitter or so. Though, if you need some electronic diagnostic, I would be able and happy to help. So, if this is the case, please, let me know in this comments threat, as I am ready to do what needs to be done about the electronic diagnostic. |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by curious
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
17 Jun 2005
|
|
I meant 'thread' not 'threat' as I mistyped |
|
Back tonight if all goes well! |
by Sandra Ahten
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
20 Jun 2005
|
Per station mgmnt:
We hope to get the transmitter controller unit back from Radio Doctors
later in the day, if all goes well. Darren Martin, our engineer, is back
in town. We will confer with Ed West, former Chief Engineer of WILL, who
has been assisting. We hope to head out to the site by early evening to
reinstall. If all goes well, we will be back up tonight. Let's plan at
the moment for the jazz program to hit the airwaves by 8PM. |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by memories
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
25 Jun 2005
|
brad, er, i mean, "uh-nawn":
don't you have better things to do in your new home far away from c-u? aren't there some other volunteer or community organizations in your neck of the woods that you can get all bent out of shape about? |
|
Re: WEFT off the air |
by reader
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
26 Jun 2005
|
The posts by uh-nawn and subsequent attempts to "shoot the messenger" only serve to reinforce suspicion that his/her accusations are valid.
Is there any other evidence that your radio station's down time was purely a result of a lighting strike, instead of station mismanagement or lack of foresight, as uh-nawn claims? Like a newspaper article posted elsewhere, or other documented evidence of repair for lightning damage (as opposed to simple spontaneous equipment failure).
If uh-nawn's accusations are untrue, why not attempt to defend the lighting strike explanation, instead of attacking him/her or attempting to "out" his/her identity? |
|
