|
DRM for Alaska on SW?
From Radio World:
Proposed Alaska test of Digital Radio Mondiale on three shortwave frequencies inFCC application from Digital Aurora Radio Technologies for experimental authorization. The DoD-funded test would use Continental transmitters designed for an Over-the-Horizon radar transmitting system and a digital signal generator operating from the Delta Junction area. “Compared to an ordinary analog shortwave signal, the DRM signal can operate with the same coverage reliably … in a 10 kHz channel using a transmitter power level approximately one-fifth of that needed for the analog signal,” states Digital Aurora in the application, which remains pending at the commission. The company hopes to determine the “impact of high-latitude ionospheric propagation in the shortwave bands on digital audio modulation using the DRM system,” as well as determine what transmission power levels will produce a reliable signal that can be received on DRM radios. Digital Aurora also hopes to determine an antenna specification to deliver a signal statewide. Judging from the application, the two-year test proposal appears notable because it would be the first time DRM has been tested in the U.S. at such high latitudes, and because the company is proposing to broadcast using digital shortwave technology to an entire state. Digital Aurora believes it can contain most of the signal within Alaska with little spillover into Canada. To avoid causing interference it plans to stay at least two adjacent channels away from any channels used by international broadcasters into western Canada. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: From Radio World: Proposed Alaska test of Digital Radio Mondiale on three shortwave frequencies inFCC application from Digital Aurora Radio Technologies for experimental authorization. The DoD-funded test would use Continental transmitters designed for an Over-the-Horizon radar transmitting system and a digital signal generator operating from the Delta Junction area. “Compared to an ordinary analog shortwave signal, the DRM signal can operate with the same coverage reliably … in a 10 kHz channel using a transmitter power level approximately one-fifth of that needed for the analog signal,” states Digital Aurora in the application, which remains pending at the commission. The company hopes to determine the “impact of high-latitude ionospheric propagation in the shortwave bands on digital audio modulation using the DRM system,” as well as determine what transmission power levels will produce a reliable signal that can be received on DRM radios. Digital Aurora also hopes to determine an antenna specification to deliver a signal statewide. Judging from the application, the two-year test proposal appears notable because it would be the first time DRM has been tested in the U.S. at such high latitudes, and because the company is proposing to broadcast using digital shortwave technology to an entire state. Digital Aurora believes it can contain most of the signal within Alaska with little spillover into Canada. To avoid causing interference it plans to stay at least two adjacent channels away from any channels used by international broadcasters into western Canada. More QRM. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
dxAce wrote:
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Michael |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. .... on an otherwise empty band if trends continue as they have been. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. Ace would rather have no stations than stations using digital modulation. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. Ace would rather have no stations than stations using digital modulation. Pay attention, 'Eduardo' ... I'd rather not have any QRM. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
dxAce wrote:
msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. I know I'm going to hell for this, but..... If IBOC kept it's crap within the channel of the station's allocation, it wouldn't be near the problem it is, today. That's where it differs from DRM. DRM is contained within channel, and provides, often-but not always, better audio clarity, with surprisingly less power. Not to say I'm a big fan of DRM, because, right now, more often than not, it's a pain in the ass, but if implemented as promised, DRM offers more to the radio listening public than IBOC ever will. What DRM has to deal with is the propagation characteristics of HF. And that may be the razor by which we judge DRM. But...and I say this with caution, and knowing that I stand a great risk of agreeing with those with whom I've disagreed in the past...I'm of the opinion that if DRM can be implemented in such a manner as it respects the SW bandplan, and can keep it's splatter within it's own channel, DRM may well be the solution that IBOC was meant to be. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. I know I'm going to hell for this, but..... If IBOC kept it's crap within the channel of the station's allocation, it wouldn't be near the problem it is, today. That's where it differs from DRM. DRM is contained within channel, and provides, often-but not always, better audio clarity, with surprisingly less power. Not to say I'm a big fan of DRM, because, right now, more often than not, it's a pain in the ass, but if implemented as promised, DRM offers more to the radio listening public than IBOC ever will. What DRM has to deal with is the propagation characteristics of HF. And that may be the razor by which we judge DRM. But...and I say this with caution, and knowing that I stand a great risk of agreeing with those with whom I've disagreed in the past...I'm of the opinion that if DRM can be implemented in such a manner as it respects the SW bandplan, and can keep it's splatter within it's own channel, DRM may well be the solution that IBOC was meant to be. DRM needs to be moved to its own particular portion of the various SW bands. Somewhere where the real stations are not operating. Then, the DRM'ers can QRM each other. I'm all in favour of that. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
dxAce wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. I know I'm going to hell for this, but..... If IBOC kept it's crap within the channel of the station's allocation, it wouldn't be near the problem it is, today. That's where it differs from DRM. DRM is contained within channel, and provides, often-but not always, better audio clarity, with surprisingly less power. Not to say I'm a big fan of DRM, because, right now, more often than not, it's a pain in the ass, but if implemented as promised, DRM offers more to the radio listening public than IBOC ever will. What DRM has to deal with is the propagation characteristics of HF. And that may be the razor by which we judge DRM. But...and I say this with caution, and knowing that I stand a great risk of agreeing with those with whom I've disagreed in the past...I'm of the opinion that if DRM can be implemented in such a manner as it respects the SW bandplan, and can keep it's splatter within it's own channel, DRM may well be the solution that IBOC was meant to be. DRM needs to be moved to its own particular portion of the various SW bands. Somewhere where the real stations are not operating. Then, the DRM'ers can QRM each other. I'm all in favour of that. And that's a good solution. One, that, sadly, doesn't seem to be in the cards with the allocation committees. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: Ace would rather have no stations than stations using digital modulation. Pay attention, 'Eduardo' ... I'd rather not have any QRM. In a few years, you won't. There wlll be no SW stations at all. Aren't you one of those idiots that predicted that was going to happen at least 20 years ago? No, I did not predict there would be no stations on SW back in 1988. However, even in 1967 when I bought an Ecuadorian station that had an inactive SW permit, I realized the growth of local AM and shortwave would preclude the need for domestic SW on the Tropical band and decided not to build the permit. Over the years, we have seen a profusion of local stations in areas previously only served by SW and, thus, a reduction of SW stations. A friend who syndicates programming internationally noted after a trip to about 14 sub-Saharan African nations that cities that previously had no local radio and depended on reception from a larger city or the capital now had as many as several dozen FM stations, some parts of networks, some local. All have virtually replaced listening to distant stations of any kind. The Alaskan DRM concept, if it works and they can finance it, changes the usage of SW, but makes the long distance coverage of SW a viable concept again. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... dxAce wrote: And that's a good solution. One, that, sadly, doesn't seem to be in the cards with the allocation committees. Do you see that as caused by the traditionally dysfunctional committees, or the perception of SW as not worth the effort (a dying medium in some minds) or the fact that there is scant unity among the SW broadcasters themselves? |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: Ace would rather have no stations than stations using digital modulation. Pay attention, 'Eduardo' ... I'd rather not have any QRM. In a few years, you won't. There wlll be no SW stations at all. Aren't you one of those idiots that predicted that was going to happen at least 20 years ago? No, I did not predict there would be no stations on SW back in 1988. However, even in 1967 when I bought an Ecuadorian station that had an inactive SW permit, I realized the growth of local AM and shortwave would preclude the need for domestic SW on the Tropical band and decided not to build the permit. Over the years, we have seen a profusion of local stations in areas previously only served by SW and, thus, a reduction of SW stations. You bought nothing. A friend who syndicates programming internationally noted after a trip to about 14 sub-Saharan African nations that cities that previously had no local radio and depended on reception from a larger city or the capital now had as many as several dozen FM stations, some parts of networks, some local. All have virtually replaced listening to distant stations of any kind. The Alaskan DRM concept, if it works and they can finance it, changes the usage of SW, but makes the long distance coverage of SW a viable concept again. But for now, and into the forseeable future, DRM = QRM. Pay attention, 'Eduardo'. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... No, I did not predict there would be no stations on SW back in 1988. However, even in 1967 when I bought an Ecuadorian station that had an inactive SW permit, I realized the growth of local AM and shortwave would preclude the need for domestic SW on the Tropical band and decided not to build the permit. Over the years, we have seen a profusion of local stations in areas previously only served by SW and, thus, a reduction of SW stations. You bought nothing. OK, be nit-picky. My company bought from one Fausto Vallejo Silva the assets of Radio Amaguaña, licencee of HCSP1 595 kHz in San Pedro de Amaguaña, Provincia del Pichincha, Ecuador, and the permit for a tropical band SW stations in the same canton of San Pedro de Amaguaña. The AM was bought on the condition that the licence would be moved to Quito and reassigned; the SW permit was left to expire or do whatever unbuilt permits did. A friend who syndicates programming internationally noted after a trip to about 14 sub-Saharan African nations that cities that previously had no local radio and depended on reception from a larger city or the capital now had as many as several dozen FM stations, some parts of networks, some local. All have virtually replaced listening to distant stations of any kind. The Alaskan DRM concept, if it works and they can finance it, changes the usage of SW, but makes the long distance coverage of SW a viable concept again. But for now, and into the forseeable future, DRM = QRM. Pay attention, 'Eduardo'. How can you interfere with an ever declining analog station base? |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... No, I did not predict there would be no stations on SW back in 1988. However, even in 1967 when I bought an Ecuadorian station that had an inactive SW permit, I realized the growth of local AM and shortwave would preclude the need for domestic SW on the Tropical band and decided not to build the permit. Over the years, we have seen a profusion of local stations in areas previously only served by SW and, thus, a reduction of SW stations. You bought nothing. OK, be nit-picky. My company bought from one Fausto Vallejo Silva the assets of Radio Amaguaña, licencee of HCSP1 595 kHz in San Pedro de Amaguaña, Provincia del Pichincha, Ecuador, and the permit for a tropical band SW stations in the same canton of San Pedro de Amaguaña. The AM was bought on the condition that the licence would be moved to Quito and reassigned; the SW permit was left to expire or do whatever unbuilt permits did. A friend who syndicates programming internationally noted after a trip to about 14 sub-Saharan African nations that cities that previously had no local radio and depended on reception from a larger city or the capital now had as many as several dozen FM stations, some parts of networks, some local. All have virtually replaced listening to distant stations of any kind. The Alaskan DRM concept, if it works and they can finance it, changes the usage of SW, but makes the long distance coverage of SW a viable concept again. But for now, and into the forseeable future, DRM = QRM. Pay attention, 'Eduardo'. How can you interfere with an ever declining analog station base? You and your pals should know. It's called IBOC. Pay attention, 'Eduardo', IBOC = QRM. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... How can you interfere with an ever declining analog station base? You and your pals should know. It's called IBOC. Pay attention, 'Eduardo', IBOC = QRM. On SW it is called DRM, and this thread started with the announcement of a plan to build DRM statewide SW facilities in Alaska. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... How can you interfere with an ever declining analog station base? You and your pals should know. It's called IBOC. Pay attention, 'Eduardo', IBOC = QRM. On SW it is called DRM, and this thread started with the announcement of a plan to build DRM statewide SW facilities in Alaska. No kidding? Damn, you sure are one smart faux Hispanic. Glad to see that you recovered from your Cinco de Mayo bender. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... How can you interfere with an ever declining analog station base? You and your pals should know. It's called IBOC. Pay attention, 'Eduardo', IBOC = QRM. On SW it is called DRM, and this thread started with the announcement of a plan to build DRM statewide SW facilities in Alaska. No kidding? Damn, you sure are one smart faux Hispanic. I started the thread. Your memory is failing. In any case, this is an idea (the Alaskan one, not the one of your memory failing) that has some potential for reviving SW's usage for service to rural areas with a 21st Century modulation scheme. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... How can you interfere with an ever declining analog station base? You and your pals should know. It's called IBOC. Pay attention, 'Eduardo', IBOC = QRM. On SW it is called DRM, and this thread started with the announcement of a plan to build DRM statewide SW facilities in Alaska. No kidding? Damn, you sure are one smart faux Hispanic. I started the thread. Your memory is failing. Really? In any case, this is an idea (the Alaskan one, not the one of your memory failing) that has some potential for reviving SW's usage for service to rural areas with a 21st Century modulation scheme. It's a dumb idea. But that's so like you, oh faux one. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... How can you interfere with an ever declining analog station base? You and your pals should know. It's called IBOC. Pay attention, 'Eduardo', IBOC = QRM. On SW it is called DRM, and this thread started with the announcement of a plan to build DRM statewide SW facilities in Alaska. No kidding? Damn, you sure are one smart faux Hispanic. I started the thread. Your memory is failing. Really? Yes. I posted an extract from the RW article. In any case, this is an idea (the Alaskan one, not the one of your memory failing) that has some potential for reviving SW's usage for service to rural areas with a 21st Century modulation scheme. It's a dumb idea. But that's so like you, oh faux one. Serving areas of Alaska that do not have reliable... or any... radio service is dumb? I think the idea is good. Such a rural audience as exists across Alaska can not be served any other way. There is not the economy of scale for satellite, and the high latitudes may not offer good direct satellite broadcast opportunities. AM can not serve such areas day and night, and even considering AM is silly due to the vast difference in daylight hours around the year. FM is strictly local and the terrain prohibits any viable network due to cost. Regular analog SW is probably not practical as most people under 40 or so just will not listen to fading and analog AM quality. The Internet is not mobile enough, and even WiMax and emerging technologies will not have the rural coverage needed. That leaves DRM, a conclusion I am sure the promoters came up with in the same elimination of alternatives" process. It's a very bright idea if it can be made financially self supporting. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... How can you interfere with an ever declining analog station base? You and your pals should know. It's called IBOC. Pay attention, 'Eduardo', IBOC = QRM. On SW it is called DRM, and this thread started with the announcement of a plan to build DRM statewide SW facilities in Alaska. No kidding? Damn, you sure are one smart faux Hispanic. I started the thread. Your memory is failing. Really? Yes. I posted an extract from the RW article. I was referring to my memory failing, dumbass. Please, try to pay attention. In any case, this is an idea (the Alaskan one, not the one of your memory failing) that has some potential for reviving SW's usage for service to rural areas with a 21st Century modulation scheme. It's a dumb idea. But that's so like you, oh faux one. Serving areas of Alaska that do not have reliable... or any... radio service is dumb? I think the idea is good. Yeah, retards like you think that QRM is good. That's why you promote IBOC, right? Such a rural audience as exists across Alaska can not be served any other way. There is not the economy of scale for satellite, and the high latitudes may not offer good direct satellite broadcast opportunities. AM can not serve such areas day and night, and even considering AM is silly due to the vast difference in daylight hours around the year. FM is strictly local and the terrain prohibits any viable network due to cost. Regular analog SW is probably not practical as most people under 40 or so just will not listen to fading and analog AM quality. The Internet is not mobile enough, and even WiMax and emerging technologies will not have the rural coverage needed. That leaves DRM, a conclusion I am sure the promoters came up with in the same elimination of alternatives" process. It's a very bright idea if it can be made financially self supporting. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: Serving areas of Alaska that do not have reliable... or any... radio service is dumb? I think the idea is good. Yeah, retards like you think that QRM is good. That's why you promote IBOC, right? This has nothing to do with IBOC. It's about Alaska, and an interesting plan to bring SW to a high level of visibility. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: Serving areas of Alaska that do not have reliable... or any... radio service is dumb? I think the idea is good. Yeah, retards like you think that QRM is good. That's why you promote IBOC, right? This has nothing to do with IBOC. Sure it does, oh faux one. IBOC = QRM just like DRM = QRM. Please, pull your head out of your ass and pay attention. It's about Alaska, and an interesting plan to bring SW to a high level of visibility. Yeah, right. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
On May 8, 11:25*am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message ... - - More QRM. - On the other hand, if this works, it could become a - revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated - and remote areas of the world and even reverse the - decline in SW station numbers. d'Eduardo, So they would be using the Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) Signal as a intra-continental Domestic Broadcast System with a Range out to 900~1200 Miles. Much like the Tropical Bands {5 MHz and below} are used for Domestic Shortwave Radio Broadcasting to serve Nations like : Russia, China, Brazil, Australia, Indonesia, India, etc. Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) can work within {intra} Europe, Russia, China, India, Brazil, Australia, Indonesia, Alaska, Canada, Large Nations requiring a Nation-Wide Domestic Broadcast System covering the Rual and Remote Areas; where the Local AM and FM Radio Stations can not get. http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...ed7bc429af3132 Question - Is there a Place for Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) in the Scheme-of-Things for the USA . . . only time will tell. Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) Welcomes Go-Ahead for “Tropical Band” DRM Broadcasts http://blogs.rnw.nl/medianetwork/drm...and-broadcasts Again for Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) to be 'effective' the Band Plan for any and all Tropical {Domestic} and Shortwave {International} has to be Redefined from 5~10kHz Channel Spacing to 20~25 kHz to Reduce the Potential for Adjacent Channel Interference. Since these would be 'fixed' {un-changing} Domestic Broadcast Frequencies that should in the long term not represent a problem for the In-Country National Broadcasters; provided that approprite Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) Power Levels are used along with the properly 'configured' Antenna System to cover their Nation within it's Borders. The Tropical Bands and National {Domestic} Broadcastion is about servive the Needs of the Radio Listeners within a Country consistant with their National need for the Distribution of Information -translation- DXer's Be Damned. On-the-Plus-Side - The State of Alaska has enough Money from Oil Revenues to Buy Every Citizen and Household a new All Alaska AM/FM/DRM Radio to "Make-the-System" HAPPEN ! |
Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) Covering the Nation Not the World
On May 8, 1:06*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: Ace would rather have no stations than stations using digital modulation. Pay attention, 'Eduardo' ... I'd rather not have any QRM. In a few years, you won't. There wlll be no SW stations at all. Aren't you one of those idiots that predicted that was going to happen at least 20 years ago? No, I did not predict there would be no stations on SW back in 1988. However, even in 1967 when I bought an Ecuadorian station that had an inactive SW permit, I realized the growth of local AM and shortwave would preclude the need for domestic SW on the Tropical band and decided not to build the permit. Over the years, we have seen a profusion of local stations in areas previously only served by SW and, thus, a reduction of SW stations. A friend who syndicates programming internationally noted after a trip to about 14 sub-Saharan African nations that cities that previously had no local radio and depended on reception from a larger city or the capital now had as many as several dozen FM stations, some parts of networks, some local. All have virtually replaced listening to distant stations of any kind. - The Alaskan DRM concept, if it works and they can - finance it, changes the usage of SW, but makes the - long distance coverage of SW a viable concept again. d'Eduado, Correction - No Not Long Distance -but- Intermediate Distance for use as a Nation-Wide {Intra-Country} Domestic Broadcasting Service a-la the Tropical Bands. Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) Covering the Nation Not the World. http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...b553514d5c72d7 |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote: "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... dxAce wrote: And that's a good solution. One, that, sadly, doesn't seem to be in the cards with the allocation committees. Do you see that as caused by the traditionally dysfunctional committees, or the perception of SW as not worth the effort (a dying medium in some minds) or the fact that there is scant unity among the SW broadcasters themselves? I see it as being promoted by dysfunctional people. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
Telamon wrote:
In article , D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. I know I'm going to hell for this, but..... If IBOC kept it's crap within the channel of the station's allocation, it wouldn't be near the problem it is, today. That's where it differs from DRM. DRM is contained within channel, and provides, often-but not always, better audio clarity, with surprisingly less power. You are psychic. I wish that was true Peter but even the narrow mode of DRM trashes the adjacent SW channels and the wide mode even more. I find it shocking that you would say DRM sounded "good". I think it sounds terrible. How is low bit rate audio supposed to sound other than like crap? The codexes employed generate artifacts that are hard to take no different than IBOC. I"ve heard DRM broadcasts that were largely artifact free. More like listening to a decent MP3 than a low bit webfeed. Not to say I'm a big fan of DRM, because, right now, more often than not, it's a pain in the ass, but if implemented as promised, DRM offers more to the radio listening public than IBOC ever will. Maybe the wide mode that takes up a bunch of channels. What DRM has to deal with is the propagation characteristics of HF. And that may be the razor by which we judge DRM. The DRM modulation scheme does a very simplistic job at best of dealing with fading and drop outs. You need a lot of bandwidth to keep the bit rate up and you need more bandwidth for FEC overhead so that you could claim any kind of improvement over analog. Perhaps. I"m not of teh belief that DRM is the beginning and the end, here. Only that what's being proposed is a decent start to a better solution than what's been implemented for domestic broadcast. But...and I say this with caution, and knowing that I stand a great risk of agreeing with those with whom I've disagreed in the past...I'm of the opinion that if DRM can be implemented in such a manner as it respects the SW bandplan, and can keep it's splatter within it's own channel, DRM may well be the solution that IBOC was meant to be. DRM is as bad an idea as IBOC. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
On May 8, 4:50�pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... How can you interfere with an ever declining analog station base? You and your pals should know. It's called IBOC. Pay attention, 'Eduardo', IBOC = QRM. On SW it is called DRM, and this thread started with the announcement of a plan to build DRM statewide SW facilities in Alaska. No kidding? Damn, you sure are one smart faux Hispanic. I started the thread. Your memory is failing. In any case, this is an idea (the Alaskan one, not the one of your memory failing) that has some potential for reviving SW's usage for service to rural areas with a 21st Century modulation scheme.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - "Why don't you use DRM on Shortwave?" "Some large companies are pushing DRM by convincing program producers and broadcasters to start airing in DRM ahead of time, but unless there is mass availability and penetration of receivers on the listeners side, this will remain - unfortunately - a technological experiment, and broadcasters using it to reach their listeners now, are clearly throwing their money out of the window." http://www.egradio.org/index.php?name=FAQ&id_cat=7 Same problem with HD/IBOC - no one cares about digital radio. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
On May 8, 5:28�pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: Serving areas of Alaska that do not have reliable... or any... radio service is dumb? I think the idea is good. Yeah, retards like you think that QRM is good. That's why you promote IBOC, right? This has nothing to do with IBOC. It's about Alaska, and an interesting plan to bring SW to a high level of visibility. SW is dying. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
On May 9, 6:48Â*am, wrote:
On May 8, 5:28�pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: Serving areas of Alaska that do not have reliable... or any... radio service is dumb? I think the idea is good. Yeah, retards like you think that QRM is good. That's why you promote IBOC, right? This has nothing to do with IBOC. It's about Alaska, and an interesting plan to bring SW to a high level of visibility. - SW is dying. This To Will Come To Pass . . . -wrt- Dying - Some Day Some How We All Do ~ RHF |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
In article
, D Peter Maus wrote: Telamon wrote: In article , D Peter Maus wrote: dxAce wrote: msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. I know I'm going to hell for this, but..... If IBOC kept it's crap within the channel of the station's allocation, it wouldn't be near the problem it is, today. That's where it differs from DRM. DRM is contained within channel, and provides, often-but not always, better audio clarity, with surprisingly less power. You are psychic. I wish that was true Peter but even the narrow mode of DRM trashes the adjacent SW channels and the wide mode even more. I find it shocking that you would say DRM sounded "good". I think it sounds terrible. How is low bit rate audio supposed to sound other than like crap? The codexes employed generate artifacts that are hard to take no different than IBOC. I"ve heard DRM broadcasts that were largely artifact free. More like listening to a decent MP3 than a low bit webfeed. Must have been the wide mode that takes up three channels and trashes the two adjacent channels for a grand total of 5 channels. Not to say I'm a big fan of DRM, because, right now, more often than not, it's a pain in the ass, but if implemented as promised, DRM offers more to the radio listening public than IBOC ever will. Maybe the wide mode that takes up a bunch of channels. What DRM has to deal with is the propagation characteristics of HF. And that may be the razor by which we judge DRM. The DRM modulation scheme does a very simplistic job at best of dealing with fading and drop outs. You need a lot of bandwidth to keep the bit rate up and you need more bandwidth for FEC overhead so that you could claim any kind of improvement over analog. Perhaps. I"m not of teh belief that DRM is the beginning and the end, here. Only that what's being proposed is a decent start to a better solution than what's been implemented for domestic broadcast. Actually is the beginning of the end. First the consortium tried to pass off the one channel that trashed the adjacent channels as sounding "good" and when that didn't work they started (duh) increasing the bandwidth used. But...and I say this with caution, and knowing that I stand a great risk of agreeing with those with whom I've disagreed in the past...I'm of the opinion that if DRM can be implemented in such a manner as it respects the SW bandplan, and can keep it's splatter within it's own channel, DRM may well be the solution that IBOC was meant to be. DRM is as bad an idea as IBOC. DRM and IBOC both suck big time. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
|
Shortwave Radio Lives . . .
On May 9, 5:34*pm, Telamon
wrote: - - SW is dying. - If SW is dying then DRM is stillborn. - - -- - Telamon - Ventura, California - You are Born : And Then You Live : To Die. * Shortwave Radio was Created by Man. * Shortwave Radio Lives in the Hearts and Minds of Men. * Shortwave Radio Will Live in some form or fashion as long as One Man continues to to Love It as a Medium. * When the Last Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Dies -then- Shortwave Radio Itself Will Die. it is the nature {life cycle} of all things that live ~ RHF |
Shortwave Radio Lives . . .
RHF wrote:
On May 9, 5:34*pm, Telamon wrote: - - SW is dying. - If SW is dying then DRM is stillborn. - - -- - Telamon - Ventura, California - You are Born : And Then You Live : To Die. * Shortwave Radio was Created by Man. * Shortwave Radio Lives in the Hearts and Minds of Men. * Shortwave Radio Will Live in some form or fashion as long as One Man continues to to Love It as a Medium. * When the Last Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Dies -then- Shortwave Radio Itself Will Die. it is the nature {life cycle} of all things that live ~ RHF . FWIW - The Talking Pictures : The Movies : TV : Digital Media all did not Kill Books - Books Are Still Alive -because- People Still Love To Read Books. . Good talking. -- Mats Peterson http://www.geocities.com/matsp888/ |
Shortwave Radio Lives . . .
RHF wrote:
On May 9, 5:34*pm, Telamon wrote: - - SW is dying. - If SW is dying then DRM is stillborn. - - -- - Telamon - Ventura, California - You are Born : And Then You Live : To Die. * Shortwave Radio was Created by Man. * Shortwave Radio Lives in the Hearts and Minds of Men. * Shortwave Radio Will Live in some form or fashion as long as One Man continues to to Love It as a Medium. * When the Last Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Dies -then- Shortwave Radio Itself Will Die. it is the nature {life cycle} of all things that live ~ RHF . FWIW - The Talking Pictures : The Movies : TV : Digital Media all did not Kill Books - Books Are Still Alive -because- People Still Love To Read Books. . Just testing something, don't bother this posting. -- Mats Peterson http://www.geocities.com/matsp888/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:24 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com