91.9's calls are CHIN-FM-1, which they got when they signed on as a repeater. In theory, they should have been swapped to originating calls when programming separated, but....

Programming is regulated by CRTC, call-letters by Industry Canada. Industry Canada doesn't track programming changes.

In the end, they are separate call-letters, and changing them to indicate originating station designation may just be good form, but not 100% required.

The FCC database is not a reliable source of information about Canadian call letters. Canadian data in the FCC database exists only to tell US consulting engineers (like me) what Canadian signals must be protected under international treaty obligations. It often bears little to no resemblance to what's actually on the air across the border, because treaties often require protection to facilities that don't exist anymore or in some cases never existed. Sometimes there are no call letters attached to those protected facilities at all. 

The better source for actual callsigns, to the extent those matter anymore, is ISEDC (the old Industry Canada). Looking at the ISEDC database via FCCdata.org (which is not an FCC site, but rather a privately-run, US-based site that amalgamates data from several international regulators), it appears the actual record for the current 91.9 facility is this one:

https://fccdata.org/?lang=en&canfm=CHIN-1-FM

The callsign for 91.9 is "CHIN-1-FM," which in the ISEDC system is distinct from "CHIN-FM" or a hypothetical "CHIN-FM-1," To the extent I understand how ISEDC does it, it works like this:

"CHIN" (four letters, no suffix) would be an AM station.
"CHIN-FM" (four letters, -FM suffix) would be an FM station.
"CHIN-1" (four letters, number suffix) would be an AM station, generally one that relays another AM station.
"CHIN-1-FM" (four letters, number suffix, then -FM) would be an FM station that relays an AM station.
"CHIN-FM-1" (four letters, -FM, then number suffix) would be an FM station that relays another FM station.

So it makes sense that "CHIN-1-FM" would be an FM station (originally on 101.3, then on 91.9) relaying "CHIN" from the AM dial, right? Just like it makes sense that "CJKX-FM-2" is an FM station (on 89.9, in this case) that relays another FM station, CJKX-FM from Ajax.

But there are some caveats.

First, ISEDC isn't always consistent. The 107.7 signal in Oshawa really should be "CKDO-1-FM," since it's an FM relay of "CKDO" on 1580 AM. But it's "CKDO-FM-1" instead, and I don't know why. 92.9 in Chatham-Kent is "CFCO-1-FM," as it should be, and 103.9 in Sarnia is "CHOK-1-FM." Maybe someone at ISEDC just screwed up on the Oshawa one. 

Second, the ISEDC system really doesn't care whether a particular facility is licensed by the CRTC as a "station" or as a "transmitter." As I understand it from south of the border, a "station" has its own separate license status and obligations and originates programming. Unlike in the FCC system, a "station" can have multiple "transmitters." And there's a maddening inconsistency as to how those transmitters get labeled. Transmitters can have completely separate callsigns and still be licensed under another "station" license - at one time, for instance, the old CJNH Bancroft was simply a transmitter under the license of CJTN Trenton, if memory serves. 

(I've been trying to keep the CBC out of this, but there's a good example here: over the years, CBLFT-TV has gone back and forth from being its own separate license to being a transmitter of CBOFT-TV Ottawa to being its own separate license again. You couldn't do that in the US.) 

And here's where 91.9 comes in: if the CRTC allows you to convert a transmitter into a separate license, as they did with CHIN splitting 91.9 off from 1540, the callsign doesn't automatically change. Blackburn did that in Windsor, where CKUE-FM-1 was originally set up as a transmitter relaying CKUE-FM Chatham. A few years ago, they were able to split the Windsor signal off to a separate license (on a new frequency, too), and so now CKUE-FM-1 Windsor is a separate license with some separate programming from Chatham. 

So that's the very long-winded explanation I have: CHIN-FM-1 on 91.9 is now a separate license from both CHIN on 1540 and CHIN-FM on 100.7. 

(In our next installment, the even more tangled mess that is the CBC's informal callsign system...)

As for ratings: nobody's writing anything about "CHIN" or "91.9" in a diary, because Toronto is a PPM meter market. That may be one reason CHIN hasn't bothered to sort out any confusion - Numeris provides separate encoders for 1540, 91.9 and 100.7, and the meters log separate listening for each frequency. 

And about that "CHIN-FM-AX1" - ISEDC, unlike the FCC, appears to issue a completely separate license for auxiliary/standby facilities. "CHIN-FM-AX1" is the auxiliary/standby to keep CHIN-FM 100.7 on the air when the CN Tower is out of service - it's a 230-watt signal from the Church Street studios, if I'm reading the records correctly. It has nothing to do with 91.9.

If there were a standby/aux for 91.9, it would presumably be CHIN-1-FM-AX1. My head hurts!

Thanks for the explanations - I think! I'm not sure I'm any more enlightened than when I started, but it's certainly educational. But what a mess! (This, by the way, is the 8th response on this board to this post. So is it SOWNY-FM-8 or SOWNY-8-FM? Or just SOWNY-8? Frankly, I'm already lost!)

I was actually laughing out loud as I read Mr. Fybush's attempt to outline how it works. But I think the point is that this is, indeed, a unique situation and in most cases, a "new" station should have new call signs. Leave it to the government to come up with a system like this.    

Fewer and fewer stations use their call letters anyway, other than official id's.   And listeners don't really concern themselves much about the technical side or variations of call letters for stations, or whether what they are listening to is a rebroadcaster etc. The technical side regardless is always pretty confusing to those of us that aren't trained in this area.

And correct me if I am wrong, but call letters aren't actually "assigned" by Industry Canada.  I would think the applicant for a new station, or a station changing format/image actually can have  a lot of input or determine the calls if they choose.  And as long as they are following the guidelines. 

There seem to be many call letters that have a relationship to the branding or even the founder.  CJDV-Dave, CKIS-Kiss, CHBM-Boom, CKWD-Wild, CFTR-Ted Rogers, CKPW-Power, CFPG-Peggy, CIHT-Hot, CISS-Kiss Ottawa,  etc.. I don't imagine these call letters were assigned by Industry Canada, but they would approve them.

RadioAaron wrote:

fybush wrote:

As for ratings: nobody's writing anything about "CHIN" or "91.9" in a diary, because Toronto is a PPM meter market.

Numeris does run a simultaneous diary survey in PPM markets. It's not publicy published (you can find it if you know your way around one of the ratings software programs), but used for the audience profile information that the sales departments love.

For PPM, the CHIN stations don't encode anyway.
 

I did not know that! I don't believe Nielsen Audio does anything similar in PPM markets here, but I'm not a ratings expert. (I'll ask my guru friends about it, though.)
 

I'm in the middle of an on line rating week and it's quite simple. You enter the time you start listening and stop listening from a drop box... then it asks you for the frequency of the station you were listening to. A list of stations comes up and you scroll until you find the right brand for your market and enter it. The next time period if you enter the same frequency your market station pops up first. 

In the car I listen mostly to SiriusXM 60's on 6 or 70's on 7 but Sirius is not on the menu. You can add a station to the list if it's not there but since ratings mean nothing to SiriusXM I'm listening to local radio and recording them appropriately for this week. 

For me the survey period started Monday and ends Sunday. 

The diary method is far from perfect and naturally is not 100% foolproof.  No survey or poll is.  However it is a good indication of trends and changes in the marketplace and that is what it is intended to do. And if there is a good response to a particular survey, it is reasonably accurate given the limitations.

The on line survey is easy and not time consuming and much more user friendly than the old pen and paper diary.  If you want you can easily add distant US stations or Sirius XM if they don't come up when you enter the frequencies that you listened to.  I completed a survey a few months ago, no issues at all and I enjoyed taking part. 

And you are right, most people don't listen to 4 or 5 stations in a 15 minute period (other than radio people).  The average listener is who the survey is designed for and who Numeris really wants.
 
I might  trust former radio people (including myself) a little less than the average listener since some may use this as a feeble last chance to correct a past slight or something they think is wrong.  Bet it happens more than we like to admit!  As we know some broadcasters don't get over grudges easily.

Anyway, I hope your friend doesn't overthink this too much, or constantly look for flaws.  You can make it real complicated if you want to, but that's not how the vast majority completing a survey would approach it.