| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote: "--exray--" wrote in message ... Frank Dresser wrote: "David Eduardo" wrote in message m... Is it a coincidence that the rise of domestic SW came after the decline of the radio networks? keyphrase doesn't compute. "Rise of domestic SW" ??? As far as I can tell, the FCC pulled out of the political content regulation business entirely. And the same line of thought would make the FCC domestic SW content ban unenforcable. Good for the FCC! Good for Rev. Norris, too! I think the FCC is at least cognizant enough to consider Domestic SWBC a non-issue. Outside of a couple dozen radiofolk here, who would listen to Domestic SW? You have the key. No listeners. Even in supposed hotbeds of SW listening, the use of SW is much exaggerated. When I was working in South America in the 60's, I inspected the radio ratings questionnaires for tens of thousands of people. I never, ever saw a SW station reported in any city with local radio. There are a lot of short wave radios out there and nobody is using them? I think there are many people using them for information and news but not so much for entertainment. The entertainment factor may be making the difference in which SW does not show up in the surveys. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
"Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , "David Eduardo" wrote: Even in supposed hotbeds of SW listening, the use of SW is much exaggerated. When I was working in South America in the 60's, I inspected the radio ratings questionnaires for tens of thousands of people. I never, ever saw a SW station reported in any city with local radio. There are a lot of short wave radios out there and nobody is using them? Nope. From a statistical point of view, 0.01 percent of the population is "no one." I think there are many people using them for information and news but not so much for entertainment. The entertainment factor may be making the difference in which SW does not show up in the surveys. "Many" to me would be lots of people. 5% or 10% of the population in mass media would probably be a bottom limit for "many." A few hundred people in a city of a million or so would not. Surveys show any listening. Back when I saw ones for some South American cities, they were what is known as coincidental. In other words, they recorded what the person was listening to at that very moment, not what they remembered. And they still did not pick up any SW listening. |
50 kw for a domestic shortwave relay service is practical.
http://cbc.am/cbc.htm Canada's rural and northern populations are not served by AM & FM radio stations during daytime hours. The lack of daytime radio service is a disservice to the people in these remote regions. The CBC / SRC has pretty much failed its mandate to provide adequate radio service to these remote regions since the 1980s. Most of Canada's remotely populated areas can be reached by only two shortwave transmission sites. Shortwave is an ideal media for delivering radio programming to remote regions during daytime hours. The proposal before you is for the site that could serve western and northern Canada. The transmitter site is in British Columbia. Technical Notes A second transmitter could be added to this shortwave relay site. The two transmitters could use the same antenna with the aid of a multiplexer. With a second transmitter the output power (of both transmitters) could be reduced to 30 kw. A second transmitter does not imply that the 2 transmitters would be used continuously. It is expected that the two transmitters would only be used simultaneously during prime listening hours. The two transmitters would run in parallel around 8 hours / day, out of an 18 hours / day transmission schedule. It is assumed that compatible DRM (Digital Radio Mondiale) AM [+ digital subcarriers] will be the primary transmission mode. DRM consumes 10 khz of andbandwidth is highly robust. DRM allows for high quality digital audio transmission over very long distances. These computations are not fully optimized. The frequency and antenna types may need to be (slightly) altered to optimally achieve the goal of covering 75% of Canada's landmass with a reliable SW service. Radio Canada International's Sackville Relay Station could be expected to fill in the gaps that this transmitter site is not able to reach with a similar transmission system. Masset, BC was chosen because it allows for an all water path. Water is highly reflective of RF energy in the 500 khz to 25 mhz range. This reflectivity greatly decreases signal loss, making the critical first hop into the ionosphere more productive. It is estimated that the transmitter output power is reduced by 50 kw by using this technique. Multilingual Broadcasting It is expected that some SRC programmes and news will be transmitted to the western provinces and northern territories, but it is not expected to be more than 2 hours / day. Some programming in northern languages from CBC North is also expected to be transmitted as well, but no more than 2 hours / day. While not wanting to get into the pirate argument, do note that the FCC regulations establish a *minimum* power of 50kw for International Broadcast Stations. (there doesn't seem to be any maximum!) 50kw requires a far more expensive transmitter than most pirates could afford. The domestic shortwave relays operated by a handful of Canadian MW stations (CFRX Toronto etc.) seem to demonstrate that with careful frequency selection, usable coverage can be obtained with much lower powers. (they do also seem to demonstrate that even at lower powers these operations don't make economic sense...) -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
MH,
Sounds Good, I'd Vote for It ! - - - Ooops I'm NOT a Canadian :o) jftfoi ~ RHF .. .. = = = "http://CBC.am/" = = = wrote in message ... 50 kw for a domestic shortwave relay service is practical. http://cbc.am/cbc.htm Canada's rural and northern populations are not served by AM & FM radio stations during daytime hours. The lack of daytime radio service is a disservice to the people in these remote regions. The CBC / SRC has pretty much failed its mandate to provide adequate radio service to these remote regions since the 1980s. Most of Canada's remotely populated areas can be reached by only two shortwave transmission sites. Shortwave is an ideal media for delivering radio programming to remote regions during daytime hours. The proposal before you is for the site that could serve western and northern Canada. The transmitter site is in British Columbia. Technical Notes A second transmitter could be added to this shortwave relay site. The two transmitters could use the same antenna with the aid of a multiplexer. With a second transmitter the output power (of both transmitters) could be reduced to 30 kw. A second transmitter does not imply that the 2 transmitters would be used continuously. It is expected that the two transmitters would only be used simultaneously during prime listening hours. The two transmitters would run in parallel around 8 hours / day, out of an 18 hours / day transmission schedule. It is assumed that compatible DRM (Digital Radio Mondiale) AM [+ digital subcarriers] will be the primary transmission mode. DRM consumes 10 khz of andbandwidth is highly robust. DRM allows for high quality digital audio transmission over very long distances. These computations are not fully optimized. The frequency and antenna types may need to be (slightly) altered to optimally achieve the goal of covering 75% of Canada's landmass with a reliable SW service. Radio Canada International's Sackville Relay Station could be expected to fill in the gaps that this transmitter site is not able to reach with a similar transmission system. Masset, BC was chosen because it allows for an all water path. Water is highly reflective of RF energy in the 500 khz to 25 mhz range. This reflectivity greatly decreases signal loss, making the critical first hop into the ionosphere more productive. It is estimated that the transmitter output power is reduced by 50 kw by using this technique. Multilingual Broadcasting It is expected that some SRC programmes and news will be transmitted to the western provinces and northern territories, but it is not expected to be more than 2 hours / day. Some programming in northern languages from CBC North is also expected to be transmitted as well, but no more than 2 hours / day. While not wanting to get into the pirate argument, do note that the FCC regulations establish a *minimum* power of 50kw for International Broadcast Stations. (there doesn't seem to be any maximum!) 50kw requires a far more expensive transmitter than most pirates could afford. The domestic shortwave relays operated by a handful of Canadian MW stations (CFRX Toronto etc.) seem to demonstrate that with careful frequency selection, usable coverage can be obtained with much lower powers. (they do also seem to demonstrate that even at lower powers these operations don't make economic sense...) -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
"David Eduardo" wrote in message . com...
This stipulation required the broadcasters to engage in programming that "will reflect the culture of this country and will promote international good will and understanding," Are you saying that if supporters of the Dalai Lama wanted to broadcast into Tibet, promoting the Tibetan Buddhist culture that Red China seeks to supplant, they would be denied a license? -- Buster http://www.rev.net/~aloe/freedom |
"The Green Troll" wrote in message om... Are you saying that if supporters of the Dalai Lama wanted to broadcast into Tibet, promoting the Tibetan Buddhist culture that Red China seeks to supplant, they would be denied a license? -- Buster http://www.rev.net/~aloe/freedom American evangalists broadcast into the mid east in Arabic, not so much on SW but on satellite TV. I'm sure it makes some in the State Department squirm. The US isn't an ideal location for a SW broadcaster to either the Tibet or the mid east, but I doubt much would be done to stop transmissions, nowadays. Frank Dresser |
-- Telamon Ventura, California I think there are many people using them for information and news but not so much for entertainment. The entertainment factor may be making the difference in which SW does not show up in the surveys. -- What makes you think that using radio for news and information instead of for entertainment would lessen the extent to which shortwave listener would be reflected in survey results? It wouldn't make any difference. Surveys either measure listening coincidentally (as in "What are you listening to right now?") or through recall via diary or interview (as in "Write down what you listened to today or tell us what you listened to today"). There is no reason why results would be skewed by program content. Shortwave listening is essentially zip in developed countries and just about zip in impoverished countries (as a percentage of radio listeners who _ever_ listen to shortwave, that is.... (In audience research work, the term "lots" as in "lots" of shortwave radios are sold or "lots" of people get their news, etc., doesn't cut it statistically). Shortwave is a technology the time for which has come and gone in terms of being of any serious utility. And it "disappears" just a little bit more day by day. And _that_ is not surprising. Don Forsling |
"David Eduardo" wrote in message om...
"RedOctober90" wrote in message om... "http://CBC.am/" wrote in message ... Domestic SW broadcasting in the US is illegal! The law has been on the books since the 1970s. I don't see a problem with domestic SW. I proudly support WBCQ which promotes freedom of speech. How? Are you not free to speak today? (The Constitution only guarantees that the government will not restrict that freedom, not that they will give you a freee soap box.) The liberals hate WBCQ because of the high conservative political shows. You don't have people "telling it exactly like it is" on AM or FM, mostly because it's run by Clear Channel and they focus on demographics and image. They would never have any show on clear channel that focued on true conservative and constitutional issues. Mostly because the issue of racism comes about, clear channel is scared to hell of being called racist, even if the truth is "racist" This is where shortwave comes in, the main intent of the feds law to restrict SW in the homeland US is because they fear that there are those out there that would broadcast propaganda to the states. Hey if you don't like the content.. you can just turn the radio off. Big deal, you shouldn't be blocked from listening to that stuff if you want. Where is the 1st amendment? Of course, proudly the SW signals of US broadcasters come in well in the homeland. Thank goodness for that. Keeps me away from the mainstream hollywood orientated media. All I know is, WBCQ comes in full-scale in Northeastern PA and I support it fully. I think this SW restriction was designed to limit the use of free speech and let big corporations take over the airwaves. The restriction came form the 30's, not the 70's. And it was intended to preserve the intended purpose of the clear channel stations, which was to serve rural America as well as large cities. When the rule was enacted originally, the whole USA had around 780 radio staitons. But this is SW! Most radios you will find in the bargin bin at a dollar store has AM/FM. It's hard to find SW radios in your basic Walmart or Target Why would they fear the destruction of the clear channel stations? Barely anyone I know even knows what SW is. I couldn't give a crap about Clear Channel and it's AM radio stations, which broadcast crap ads for "male performance substitute" every couple of minutes. I focus mostly on content, I want content, that is why I choose SW over the stations who are mostly for advertising, whose talk radio hosts are complete jokes and can't say what is the truth. If they started to fine some of the show hosts on WBCQ that to me would be an attack on the freedom of speech that the constitution supposely protects. Show hosts, announcers and disk jockeys are not fined by the FCC. Fining the station which might limit some of the station activitises. Anyway there still is pirate radio, I am for anyone to go out and buy a transmitter and broadcast on clear unused frequencies in the SW band, where making extra printed paper money isn't the goal. And no I am not against people's ambitions to make money, make as much of it as you want. But please don't restrict my access to stations like WBCQ. |
"Don Forsling" wrote in message ... What makes you think that using radio for news and information instead of for entertainment would lessen the extent to which shortwave listener would be reflected in survey results? It wouldn't make any difference. Surveys either measure listening coincidentally (as in "What are you listening to right now?") or through recall via diary or interview (as in "Write down what you listened to today or tell us what you listened to today"). There is no reason why results would be skewed by program content. Shortwave listening is essentially zip in developed countries and just about zip in impoverished countries (as a percentage of radio listeners who _ever_ listen to shortwave, that is.... (In audience research work, the term "lots" as in "lots" of shortwave radios are sold or "lots" of people get their news, etc., doesn't cut it statistically). Shortwave is a technology the time for which has come and gone in terms of being of any serious utility. And it "disappears" just a little bit more day by day. And _that_ is not surprising. Don Forsling No doubt the surveys have missed some. I don't think there's any guarantee anybody from the paranoid SWL fringe will actually reveal his listening habits to an outsider. "Too busy for radio, I've been watching e-bay auctions.", "I've been studying the Talmud!", "I've been analyzing movies Mel Gibson hasn't released yet!", "I've been keeping my eyes on Planet X!", "I've been lusting after the Olsen twins!!" At least that's what I tell those lackeys of the New World Order every time they manage to squeeze an inquiry into the Barricade of Doom. Frank Dresser |
In article ,
"Don Forsling" wrote: -- Telamon Ventura, California I think there are many people using them for information and news but not so much for entertainment. The entertainment factor may be making the difference in which SW does not show up in the surveys. -- What makes you think that using radio for news and information instead of for entertainment would lessen the extent to which shortwave listener would be reflected in survey results? It wouldn't make any difference. Surveys either measure listening coincidentally (as in "What are you listening to right now?") or through recall via diary or interview (as in "Write down what you listened to today or tell us what you listened to today"). There is no reason why results would be skewed by program content. Shortwave listening is essentially zip in developed countries and just about zip in impoverished countries (as a percentage of radio listeners who _ever_ listen to shortwave, that is.... I have been surveyed by radio stations and every time all the questions were entertainment related with no mention of news, weather, talk, and commentary. (In audience research work, the term "lots" as in "lots" of shortwave radios are sold or "lots" of people get their news, etc., doesn't cut it statistically). Shortwave is a technology the time for which has come and gone in terms of being of any serious utility. And it "disappears" just a little bit more day by day. And _that_ is not surprising. A lot of money has been spent on SW radios over the years. People must be doing something with them. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
-- "RedOctober90" wrote in message But this is SW! Most radios you will find in the bargin bin at a dollar store has AM/FM. It's hard to find SW radios in your basic Walmart or Target Why would they fear the destruction of the clear channel stations? Barely anyone I know even knows what SW is. I couldn't give a crap about Clear Channel and it's AM radio stations, which broadcast crap ads for "male performance substitute" every couple of minutes. I'm afraid that there's some confusion in your mind about what was/is a "clear channel station" and a Clear Channel Station (note the caps in the latter). While Clear Channel (caps, again) owns a number of what used to be known as clear channel (no caps) stations, not all clear channel stations are Clear Channel stations. Back to the point of the thread: There is simply no doubt that the rules against domestic broadcasting via shortwave in this county were promulgated, the ban was mainly in response to the fears of SW competition held by the large MW and particularly clear channel stations. The fears were in hindsinght probably unfounded. But it's all there is the regulatory and legislative history if you'd care to read it.. This happened way, way, way before Clear Channel (the company) was ever dreamed of. This is simply a fact. There is no need to speculate about the matter. Don Forsling |
|
Don Forsling wrote: I wonder how many people in a state with a population of, say, 3,000,000 are listening to SW during an evening hour? My off-hand estimate would be no more than 100. My estimate is probably on the high side. I agree that shortwave listening is a very small part of the total radio audience, especially if you include FM. However I think you're estimate is probably on the low side. Of course it depends on what world events may be taking place on any given day/night. -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
"Don Forsling" wrote in message ...
Sure a lot of money has been spent on SW radios, but as a percentage of the amount spent on radios without shortwave capability, the amount is miniscule--peanuts. I wonder how many people in a state with a population of, say, 3,000,000 are listening to SW during an evening hour? My off-hand estimate would be no more than 100. My estimate is probably on the high side. DF, Maybe more like 0.01% or - One in Ten Thousand (1:10,000) or - - 300 out of 3 Million. jm2cw ~ RHF .. .. |
"Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , "Don Forsling" wrote: I have been surveyed by radio stations and every time all the questions were entertainment related with no mention of news, weather, talk, and commentary. Radio stations do their own proprietary research. Most phone research has to do with music and morning shows. Ratings are not opinion-based. They are done by Arbitorn in the US, BBM in Canada, etc. they consist of finding out what station a person listend to at what time. (In audience research work, the term "lots" as in "lots" of shortwave radios are sold or "lots" of people get their news, etc., doesn't cut it statistically). Shortwave is a technology the time for which has come and gone in terms of being of any serious utility. And it "disappears" just a little bit more day by day. And _that_ is not surprising. A lot of money has been spent on SW radios over the years. People must be doing something with them. Certainly not listening in any appreciable or measurable number. Oh, define "lot" and compare to the value of the 700 million radios in the USA. |
--"David Eduardo" wrote in message . .. "Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , "Don Forsling" wrote: I have been surveyed by radio stations and every time all the questions were entertainment related with no mention of news, weather, talk, and commentary. No, Don Forsling didn't write this :-\ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:22 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com