|
Indoor Antenna vs Web Stream
On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 05:59:53 -0700, dave wrote:
Unless you are some kind of masochist why not just tune your AM radio via the internet? Ummmm....I can think of several reasons why someone would listen to the radio using a radio and not over the Internet. 1. Maybe the station the person wants to listen to hear doesn't stream its audio over the Internet. 2. Maybe the user is not listening from a locatiopn where an Internet connection is handy. 3. Maybe the listener is listening to a sporting event (often the contracts with radio networks for broadcasting of sports events doesn't permit the broadcasts to be streamed over the Internet) 4. Maybe the listener's Internet connection isn't fast enough (often the case for users who are on a dialup). 5. And finally: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm According to the stats on that web page, only 20% (1.3 billion) of the world's population (6.6 billion) has home Internet access. Perhaps the listener is one of the 5.3 billion people worldwide who doesn't. JK |
Indoor Antenna vs Web Stream
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:16:14 -0700, dave wrote:
John Kasupski wrote: On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 05:59:53 -0700, dave wrote: Unless you are some kind of masochist why not just tune your AM radio via the internet? Ummmm....I can think of several reasons why someone would listen to the radio using a radio and not over the Internet. 1. Maybe the station the person wants to listen to hear doesn't stream its audio over the Internet. 2. Maybe the user is not listening from a locatiopn where an Internet connection is handy. 3. Maybe the listener is listening to a sporting event (often the contracts with radio networks for broadcasting of sports events doesn't permit the broadcasts to be streamed over the Internet) 4. Maybe the listener's Internet connection isn't fast enough (often the case for users who are on a dialup). 5. And finally: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm According to the stats on that web page, only 20% (1.3 billion) of the world's population (6.6 billion) has home Internet access. Perhaps the listener is one of the 5.3 billion people worldwide who doesn't. JK Dialup works very well for talk radio streams. No it doesn't, and I can attest to that from personal experience. Also, that assumes the listener is interested in talk radio (not necessarily the case) and doesn't address the other four points contained in my post. T which I will now add another point: 6. Perhaps the listener is interested in RADIO rather than some digitized stream from the Internet. JK |
Indoor Antenna vs Web Stream
John Kasupski wrote:
Dialup works very well for talk radio streams. No it doesn't, and I can attest to that from personal experience. That is what we call "anecdotal evidence" and it is unsupported by the science. |
Indoor Antenna vs Web Stream
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 05:13:16 -0700, dave wrote:
John Kasupski wrote: Dialup works very well for talk radio streams. No it doesn't, and I can attest to that from personal experience. That is what we call "anecdotal evidence" and it is unsupported by the science. Well, stick your head in the sand if you're more comfortable in that position, then, but I was on a 56K dialup, which in my area resulted in an average connection speed of ~48K and often slower, due to the limitations of the local telco network. The results for streaming audio left a lot to be desired. You've still said nothing about the other half dozen points I raised, so I'll assume you have no rebuttal. Ergo, we can conclude that Internet streams are no substitute for live, on-the-air broadcasts. JK |
Indoor Antenna vs Web Stream
John Kasupski wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 05:13:16 -0700, dave wrote: John Kasupski wrote: Dialup works very well for talk radio streams. No it doesn't, and I can attest to that from personal experience. That is what we call "anecdotal evidence" and it is unsupported by the science. Well, stick your head in the sand if you're more comfortable in that position, then, but I was on a 56K dialup, which in my area resulted in an average connection speed of ~48K and often slower, due to the limitations of the local telco network. The results for streaming audio left a lot to be desired. You've still said nothing about the other half dozen points I raised, so I'll assume you have no rebuttal. Ergo, we can conclude that Internet streams are no substitute for live, on-the-air broadcasts. JK Ergo? 24 kb/s MP-3 sounds way better than AM radio. |
Indoor Antenna vs Web Stream
On Sat, 03 May 2008 20:52:32 -0700, dave wrote:
John Kasupski wrote: On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 05:13:16 -0700, dave wrote: John Kasupski wrote: Dialup works very well for talk radio streams. No it doesn't, and I can attest to that from personal experience. That is what we call "anecdotal evidence" and it is unsupported by the science. Well, stick your head in the sand if you're more comfortable in that position, then, but I was on a 56K dialup, which in my area resulted in an average connection speed of ~48K and often slower, due to the limitations of the local telco network. The results for streaming audio left a lot to be desired. You've still said nothing about the other half dozen points I raised, so I'll assume you have no rebuttal. Ergo, we can conclude that Internet streams are no substitute for live, on-the-air broadcasts. JK Ergo? http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ergo 24 kb/s MP-3 sounds way better than AM radio. Cool. Let me know where I can get live 24K MP-3 broadcasts of major league baseball games, NFL football games, and NHL hockey games delivered to me for free to listen to while I'm sitting a surveillance at about midnight local time in a part of town where even the local cops don't like to get out of their cars unless they have about 15 other cops around for backup. JK |
Indoor Antenna vs Web Stream
John Kasupski wrote:
Ergo, we can conclude that Internet streams are no substitute for live, on-the-air broadcasts. John, Let me respectfully submit that this time it is now YOU who is jumping to conclusions . Internet streams (other than a few second delay) are indeed "live" broadcasts and can easily be a 'substitute for a live broadcast', depending on your ultimate goal. Each has its place. One does not necessarily replace the other nor are they mutually exclusive. Yes, it is difficult to get a wi-fi connection in your car. Yes, there are some sporting events that are "blacked out" on the internet. On the other hand, if you are truly listening for content, have the appropriate internet connection, don't want to put up with QRN or QSB or IBOC crud or want to hear a station that does not have propagation to your QTH, streaming is a fine way to go. It's an un-winnable debate, as BOTH sides are correct. 73... |
Indoor Antenna vs Web Stream
John Kasupski wrote:
On Sat, 03 May 2008 20:52:32 -0700, dave wrote: John Kasupski wrote: On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 05:13:16 -0700, dave wrote: John Kasupski wrote: Dialup works very well for talk radio streams. No it doesn't, and I can attest to that from personal experience. That is what we call "anecdotal evidence" and it is unsupported by the science. Well, stick your head in the sand if you're more comfortable in that position, then, but I was on a 56K dialup, which in my area resulted in an average connection speed of ~48K and often slower, due to the limitations of the local telco network. The results for streaming audio left a lot to be desired. You've still said nothing about the other half dozen points I raised, so I'll assume you have no rebuttal. Ergo, we can conclude that Internet streams are no substitute for live, on-the-air broadcasts. JK Ergo? http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ergo 24 kb/s MP-3 sounds way better than AM radio. Cool. Let me know where I can get live 24K MP-3 broadcasts of major league baseball games, NFL football games, and NHL hockey games delivered to me for free to listen to while I'm sitting a surveillance at about midnight local time in a part of town where even the local cops don't like to get out of their cars unless they have about 15 other cops around for backup. JK I don't think they play baseball at Midnight. |
Indoor Antenna vs Web Stream
On Sun, 04 May 2008 13:12:53 -0700, dave wrote:
John Kasupski wrote: Cool. Let me know where I can get live 24K MP-3 broadcasts of major league baseball games, NFL football games, and NHL hockey games delivered to me for free to listen to while I'm sitting a surveillance at about midnight local time in a part of town where even the local cops don't like to get out of their cars unless they have about 15 other cops around for backup. JK I don't think they play baseball at Midnight. I am beginning to suspect that you "don't think" at all on this particular subject, sir. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_zones I live in the Buffalo, NY area. When it is midnight local time, it is 9:00 PM on the west coast, the night games being played out west are still going on, and the broadcasts of those games are still on the air, not only from stations on the west coast, but also by local affiliate stations broadcasting for the visiting teams back east. During football season, the NFL's game on Monday night often runs past midnight even if it's being played in New Jersey. Those games are syndicated on national radio networks. A six-year old could find the game on a $4.99 piece of junk clock radio...but of course he'd be up way past his bedtime. For those who want basketball, despite the NBA's deal with Sirius, you can still hear plenty of games on AM. If the Celtics are in Portland playing the Blazers, WEEI 850 has the game on the air unless it conflicts with something, in which case it'll be on WRKO 680. My personal favorite is baseball. Major league games are syndicated on national, regional, and local broadcast outlets, which for listeners with a real radio to listen to is FREE - unlike XM which requires you to pay for it. Oakland, San Francisco, San Diego, Seattle, Anaheim, and Los Angeles all have major league ballparks and broadcasts of those games fill the airwaves on any given night during the season. During hockey season, if the NHL's Buffalo Sabres are in L.A. playing the Kings, or in Edmonton playing the Oilers, or in Vancouver playing the Canucks, I can listen to those games on WGR 550 in Buffalo, and it doesn't cost me one red cent to listen to it on the radio in my truck, no paying for XM/Sirius, no special hardware needed, no Internet connection (in fact the station does not stream its Sabres broadcasts over the Internet at all), no nothing - I just turn on the radio, park it on the right station, and enjoy the game. And that's the way it's supposed to be! JK |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:12 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com