|
Has shortwave got a future?
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? 73s Mike |
I fully agree.
On 21 Nov 2004 20:08:24 GMT, "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? 73s Mike |
"Mike Terry" wrote in message ... 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? 73s Mike The future of shortwave will be spotty. Broadcasts to developed countries in North America, Europe, and Japan/South Korea will be a thing of the past because of satellite media. Some shortwave receivers are cheap, compared with satellite receivers, and will be still be used in the third world. As long as governments and religious groups want to convey their messages to these people, shortwave will still exist. For North Americans, the dx possibilities will be amazing. With high powered stations beamed away, it will be easier to get unusual broadcasts. |
"Mike Terry" wrote in message ...
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? 73s Mike I think this could happen, though I suspect that when a certain 'critical mass' of major broadcasters leave shortwave, the resulting vacuum will draw in others or perhaps convince some, who earlier shut down, to start up again. But whatever happens, I think there'll always plenty of interest to listen to on shortwave....unless broadband over powerlines completely destroys everything. Steve |
Mike Terry wrote:
Will dx become more interesting as the power blasters close down in favour of internet and satellite? The possibility of having to learn another language is very real. I see radio being used to cover large areas which are not profitable to wire for cable and phone. Many parts of South America, The Middle East and Asia come to mind. There are many more sub locales, I'm sure. The use of the major European languages will continue to decline, Spanish excluded. mike |
You can forger SW once the BPL Systems are up and delivering a 4 th
Broadband connection to Urban homes. Korbin On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:08:24 +0000, 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? 73s Mike |
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. |
Interesting question. Suppose with some of the bigger powerful stations out
of the way, we might hear some of the quieter ones that we never could before! That would be something good coming out of something bad! Mark. Auckland New Zealand. "Mike Terry" wrote in message ... 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? 73s Mike |
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! ;-) ) 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? 73s Mike |
"Mike Terry" wrote in message ... 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? 73s Mike The evangelists will be on shortwave as long as they think there are a few people out there listening to SW radio. As government and commercial concerns lose interest in SW, it's conceivable that others will fill the vacuum with inexpensive pirate operations based on ham radio gear. Frank Dresser |
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 |
Scott Dorsey wrote:
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. (A) ISDN was faster than dialup - no one (hopefully) is claiming that it was meant to replace leased lines. (B) Yes, ISDN was expensive in some places. In Ohio we got lucky. Business ISDN was tarriffed per minute, but you could get residential for as little as $37/month for 75 calls/month (metered access, 8c/call after that) or about $45 flat rate. And I still maintain that ISDN was more useful for that time period than BPL will be now. **SJS (trying to tie this argument back into radio somehow, and failing miserably) -- 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. |
R J Carpenter wrote:
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.. I can see LEO satellites as a possible eventual replacement for shortwave. But it's going to be pretty tough to get the costs low enough (both on the transmitting side and the receiving side) to make it fly in poorer countries. (I'm not familiar with WorldSpace's pricing) I've my doubts that any scheme that involves monthly subscription charges will work. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
Steve Sobol wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: 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. (A) ISDN was faster than dialup - no one (hopefully) is claiming that it was meant to replace leased lines. The telcos were pricing it higher than many leased line facilities. Hell, you could get Switched-56 for less than ISDN in Richmond, VA. (Sadly here in GTE-land we couldn't get either). I could get a 16KC 2-wire crosstown for less than a quarter what a single remote ISDN circuit cost. And I could get the 16KC loop installed with a week's notice, instead of a year. (B) Yes, ISDN was expensive in some places. In Ohio we got lucky. Business ISDN was tarriffed per minute, but you could get residential for as little as $37/month for 75 calls/month (metered access, 8c/call after that) or about $45 flat rate. Residental ISDN? You have to be kidding! Was it actually on the residential rate schedule? I gather that was a non-tariffed service? That never made it out anywhere around here. And I still maintain that ISDN was more useful for that time period than BPL will be now. I dunno, but I'd sure like to be able to order 48F burglar alarm circuits from the telco again. Now THAT was a cheap way of doing remote work. And sometimes it even sounded good. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Residental ISDN? You have to be kidding! Was it actually on the residential rate schedule? I gather that was a non-tariffed service? That never made it out anywhere around here. Residential ISDN is available in the Nashville area. My boss had it a few years ago - actually I'm pretty sure he still does. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
"R J Carpenter" wrote in news:co477k$som$1
@xuxa.iecc.com: 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.. I don't believe you can "see" the Worldspace satellites from North America, and even if you could, it's probably impossible to get one activated unless you have a european address. I realize the reception quality on satellite radio is much better than that on shortwave, but is replacing a free service with a subscription service really a sensible way to go (unless you own stock in the satellite company!)? -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH |
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:30 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com