Al Patrick wrote:

I think you might be right -- provided someone doesn't create a lot of
static for the SW spectrum. This is what some predict concerning
broadcasting over the power lines, whatever that is called. (Man, the
"senior moments" are something! ;-) )



There, there..Let's go have another hot cocoa...






mike

In article ,
Art Clemons wrote:

Mike Terry wrote:

Will dx become more interesting as the power blasters close down in
favour of internet and satellite?

Things could be getting exciting for dxers.

I suggest that without the big name broadcasters to draw folks to
broadcasting, there will be lesser listenership and less reason for dx
stations to remain on the air. Broadcasting is expensive as all
getout, especially for poor countries. The justification for reaching
listeners outside said poor country is slowly fading away and with the
internet, cd distribution and the like, the need to listen to shortwave
for music and entertainment is slowly fading away too.

I'ld love to see SW broadcasting remain, I'm not always near an internet
connection and all too many of the SW broadcasters I used to regularly
listen to, now have skimpy or no signals with me using better receivers
than I even dreamed about when I first started listening years ago. I
just don't see it continuing for long.

The Internet being the end of short wave is an old refrain. I have not
tried streaming news from the BBC web site lately but in the past it has
been just terrible and I have a DSL connection. Audio and video was full
of artifacts and slow. Audio from the BBC sounds much better over short
wave than over the Internet.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Mike Terry wrote:
Will dx become more interesting as the power blasters close down in favour
of internet and satellite?

Things could be getting exciting for dxers.

What do you think?

I think that unless the FCC starts actually enforcing Part 15 regulations
for a change, that QRM is going to be more of an issue in the future than
interference from the powerhouse shortwave stations.

I also think that MW DXing is either going to be dealt a huge blow from
IBOC, or it's going to be considerably improved by the stations reducing
channel bandwidth in preparation for IBOC. It's certainly going to change.

But, much as we are disturbed by the impending implementation of BPL, it
is no worse than many other interference sources which are currently illegal
and about which the FCC does nothing. These problems will just continue
getting worse. Touch lamps a mile away are clearly audible on 80M here.
Now imagine that multiplied a millionfold in an urban area. You think
Wal-Mart cares that they are selling products that don't meet FCC regulations?
You think the FCC even cares?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Some thoughts on the future of shortwave broadcasting:

1. Internet over power lines (BPL) is a stillborn technology, arriving ten
years too late to have any impact. The explosion in broadband connectivity
is already here, and it's a wireless future. I'd be surprised if the
technology lasts more than two years, with only minor rollouts in rural
areas. The nail in the coffin will be subscribers losing their connection
every time Joe CB'er down the block keys up. I don't see BPL noise as a
factor in shortwave's future prospects.

2. One by one, the industrialized nations will find the internet a neater,
cheaper way of reaching their target audience, and their shortwave
operations will end, except for

3. DRM, digital broadcasting over shortwave. This broadband technology
cannot continue to co-exist on the same bands as analog broadcasts or
services (just listen how Deutsche Welle's DRM sender trashes the entire
3950-4000 kHz sector of the U.S. 75 meter band). I don't see DRM as
becoming a major player in world broadcasting, because a) the proprietary
nature of the technology will impair its proliferation in cheap encoders
and receivers, and b) satellite-delivered radio can provide a more stable,
more dependable, higher-quality signal to most corners of the globe.

4. More and more antiquated shortwave transmitters - many installed during
the colonial era - will break down, and become a low priority for repair,
because...

5. FM (VHF) coverage will continue to increase in the developing world,
negating the need for regional shortwave operations.

The "DX targets" all of the above will leave will be:

6. Clandestine broadcasters, targeting strife-torn areas where the
broadcasting infrastructure is impaired;

7. Intermittent pirate "broadcasters;" and,

8. Religious broadcasters, who will snap up fire-sale equipment and airtime
and pretty much take over the international broadcast bands.

10. Eventually, world regulatory agencies and the ITU will examine the
state of international broadcasting and see that it has turned exclusively
into a fundraising tool for bible thumpers. At this point, they will be
hard-pressed to justify maintaining the valuable spectrum allocations for
shortwave broadcasting. All of the current shortwave broadcasting bands
will shrink to 100-200 kHz apiece, and some will vanish altogether, as the
worldwide demands for digital data spectrum increases.

11. Our lovely shortwave radios will end up in the same junk heap as
8-track players, becoming collectable antiques in 75 years or so.

Al Q.
NY

Al Quaglieri writes:
1. Internet over power lines (BPL) is a stillborn technology

It's sort of the ISDN of radio.

Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
Al Quaglieri writes:

1. Internet over power lines (BPL) is a stillborn technology


It's sort of the ISDN of radio.

Meaning what, that it will have a small niche market? I doubt it. ISDN actually
had broad appeal back in the days before DSL and cablemodems - I used it for a
year or two myself. It was still used widely in Europe for some time after DSL
and cable became commonplace here. BPL won't be that popular. BPL probably
won't even manage the small niche that I believe you're referring to. It's just
too late in the game.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) /
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

Al Quaglieri wrote:
1. Internet over power lines (BPL) is a stillborn technology, arriving ten
years too late to have any impact. The explosion in broadband connectivity
is already here, and it's a wireless future. I'd be surprised if the
technology lasts more than two years, with only minor rollouts in rural
areas. The nail in the coffin will be subscribers losing their connection
every time Joe CB'er down the block keys up. I don't see BPL noise as a
factor in shortwave's future prospects.

I'm with you and Steve on this. BPL has already been tried and failed
in a number of other countries; at least one pilot project here in the
U.S. has already failed as well. Interference to/from amateurs is
occasionally cited as a reason but IMHO if the BPL operators felt they
could make money, the regulatory agencies would see to it the amateurs
went away, not the BPL.

2. One by one, the industrialized nations will find the internet a neater,
cheaper way of reaching their target audience, and their shortwave
operations will end, except for

I've my doubts the Internet will be a real viable replacement for all
shortwave anytime in the near future.

For those broadcasts intended to reach a country's citizens abroad, yes,
the Internet is probably a more economic solution. Likewise, for those
intended to reach an audience of foreigners in a developed country.

The Internet is more easily jammed (the Chinese are already doing so on
a nationwide basis) and it's far easier to monitor what people are
listening to. It will not, with current protocols, replace shortwave
for reaching audiences in countries where the government would rather
they weren't listening.

Computers may be cheap, but they're still a LOT more expensive than a
cheap radio. In isolated areas a reliable Internet connection with
adequate bandwidth might be an even bigger problem. (heck, at my
location - within 30 miles of Nashville - internet audio is problematic
due to my connection) I don't think the Internet will in the near
future replace shortwave for reaching audiences in sparsely-populated
and poor countries.

Of course, that does mean that secular broadcasts directed at rich free
nations are likely to go away. Listeners will have to develop new
skills to pull out the weak stations beaming their signals to far away
parts of the world -- and to identify the broadcasts in exotic
languages. Won't be much English - or for that matter, Spanish, French,
German, or Japanese - left.

10. Eventually, world regulatory agencies and the ITU will examine the
state of international broadcasting and see that it has turned exclusively
into a fundraising tool for bible thumpers. At this point, they will be
hard-pressed to justify maintaining the valuable spectrum allocations for
shortwave broadcasting. All of the current shortwave broadcasting bands
will shrink to 100-200 kHz apiece, and some will vanish altogether, as the
worldwide demands for digital data spectrum increases.

Don't really see much demand for spectrum for data on shortwave. (VHF &
especially microwave are a different story!) It's not easy to reliably
transfer significant amounts of data over shortwave; SW transmission
will be very much a last resort. So many of the point-to-point users
have shifted to satellites. I think the allotments will largely stay
put. I could even see a point where the FCC concludes a segment could
be opened for "amateur broadcasting", where "pirates" could operate
legally as long as they keep their power down to a reasonable level.
--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

Telamon wrote in message

It is an old refrain, and I don't understand it. If you ask every
SWLer why they listen to news via shortwave, how many of them would
say, "Because it's not available over the internet"? Few if any, I
suspect. People listen to the news via shortwave because they like
listening to shortwave and like the news services that shortwave makes
available. Period.

I'd also like to point out that I returned to shortwave listening
after being away from it for many years. Why did I return? Because of
shortwave related information that I came across ON THE INTERNET! And
indeed, it seems to me that the internet could be the best thing that
ever happened to ham radio and SWLing. We, and the organizations that
represent us, just have to USE the internet to educate people about
our fascinating hobbies. If you put the information out there, people
will be drawn to it. That's just the way it is.

It seems to me that the internet could be precisely the thing that
saves SWLing!

Steve

Steve Sobol wrote:
Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
Al Quaglieri writes:

1. Internet over power lines (BPL) is a stillborn technology


It's sort of the ISDN of radio.

Meaning what, that it will have a small niche market? I doubt it. ISDN actually
had broad appeal back in the days before DSL and cablemodems - I used it for a
year or two myself. It was still used widely in Europe for some time after DSL
and cable became commonplace here. BPL won't be that popular. BPL probably
won't even manage the small niche that I believe you're referring to. It's just
too late in the game.

In Europe, ISDN came in early, was adopted very quickly, and was very
reasonably-priced compared with the alternatives. In the US, the pricing
schemes were outrageously expensive and most of the telcos either did not
have it available or didn't even know what it was. As late as five years
ago, I went around with GTE for two months trying to get an ISDN line for
a local voiceover studio.

In the US, ISDN was a flop because it was too expensive, too slow, and too
late to market. If it had become available as quickly as it had in Europe
and as universally, it would have been very popular. But it wasn't.

I gather these are the issues with BPL... it's not anything that you can't
get better from other services that have been in place longer.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in
message ...

I've my doubts the Internet will be a real
viable replacement for all
shortwave anytime in the near future.

For those broadcasts intended to reach a
country's citizens abroad, yes,
the Internet is probably a more economic
solution. Likewise, for those
intended to reach an audience of foreigners in a
developed country.

SNIP

Computers may be cheap, but they're still a LOT
more expensive than a
cheap radio. In isolated areas a reliable
Internet connection with
adequate bandwidth might be an even bigger
problem. (heck, at my
location - within 30 miles of Nashville -
internet audio is problematic
due to my connection) I don't think the
Internet will in the near
future replace shortwave for reaching audiences
in sparsely-populated
and poor countries.

But how about WorldSpace satellite radio? They
have a couple of dozen channels with coverage of
Africa and Asia and much of Europe. They even
carry different services on the various spot beams
from a single satellite. I gather they rent some
space to national broadcasters. Their receivers
aren't dirt cheap, but well within the means of
many people in the third world. I gather that they
are NOT doing well financially, however. They have
a web site www.worldspace.com . There was some
initial relationship between them and XM, but
WorldSpace's partial foreign ownership killed that
from what I heard..

bob w3otc