| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
In article ,
"Brian Hill" wrote: "Frank Dresser" wrote in message Ultimately, there's a chance something wonderful may happen if the old line international broadcasters go away. The international broadcast bands will be nearly empty, and they won't be refilled any faster than the other currently underutilixed SW bands. Hobby broadcasters could start broadcasting, and the governments might not even care if there's no international broadcasting to be interfered with. Frank Dresser You may have something there Frank. Lets hope. I cant see the short-wave medium going away. There's always someone going to use it. Good point. It may end up like CB. Unlicensed and uncared for, because (relatively speaking) no one is listening. Dan Drake R8, Radio Shack DX-440, Grundig Satellit 650, Satellit 700, YB400 Tecsun PL-230 (YB550PE), Kaito KA1102 Hallicraters S-120 (1962) Zenith black dial 5 tube Tombstone (1937) E. H. Scott 23 tube Imperial Allwave in Tasman cabinet (1936) |
"Dan" wrote in message news:me- Good point. It may end up like CB. Unlicensed and uncared for, because (relatively speaking) no one is listening. Dan Gee Dan. I hope it doesn't get that bad. -- 73 Brian ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die. Brian's Radio Universe http://webpages.charter.net/brianehill/ |
"Dan" wrote in message ... In article , Good point. It may end up like CB. Unlicensed and uncared for, because (relatively speaking) no one is listening. Dan That's about it. What would happen if the governments abandon the SW broadcast bands? How much effort would the government agencies make tracking down and prosecuting unlicensed broadcasters? Enforcement depends, not only on the law, but on how many important toes get stepped on. I'll guess they will have more important things to do with their time and budgets unless the pirates interfere with the established broadcasters, TV, radio amateurs or whatever. I suppose they could even legitimize hobby SW broadcasting and charge a reasonable licence fee. Treat the SW broadcast bands like a national park. Frank Dresser |
WShoots1 wrote:
Certainly shortwave broadcasting should continue to serve third world countries. I wish Venezuela had a government shortwave station on the air. I think The States will be attacking there via Columbia very shortly. Venezuela is the fifth largest producer of oil in the world. Bush is trying to tie the Spain bombings to Venezuelan funding. With his record of dishonesty, not many will believe him . mike |
Paul_Morphy wrote:
The Richard Clarke book is a case in point. Although it is selling well, it is not changing many peoples' minds about the role of the government before and after 9/11. People who were inclined to think the government failed find support in the book, but people who think the government is doing a fine job don't believe it. The people who think the government is doing a fine job won't be buying the book at all. I do miss the old days, though. There was nothing so enervating as listening to R. Tirana, when Albania hated everybody. I used to think enervating meant something like invigorating, or energizing. Then I found out it meant the OPPOSITE of what I thought... mike |
"B Banton" wrote in message
... On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 13:27:56 GMT, "LewBob" wrote: Our local Cable and PBS each carry BBC and Deutsche Welle every evening. (digital cable service carries BBCWorld 24/7) Shortwave is obsolete. Unfortunatly. Not entirely obsolete. Having recently visited Cuba (legally as a working journalist), I listen to Radio Havana almost every night. Got a chance to meet three of the folks working there during my stay in Havana. Fascinating country. Wonderful people. All they need is a little freedom and opportunity. Oh is that all. Just a "little freedom and opportunity". I could go into considerable -- off topic -- discussion about the Cuban people, but I will try to be concise. Considering that Cuba is (and always has been) a Third World country, the people are remarkably well educated, spirited and welcoming. They are ingenious at making do with what they have and keeping mechanical things working. They live under a totalitarian regime that suppresses all opposition -- as best it can -- and the socialist system provides free freedoms and little opportunity for advancement, therefore no incentives to improve productivity and no hope of improving their lifestyles. Restricted though they are, they manage to subsist at a higher level that the average citizens in almost any other Third World country. If Castro would allow them a few freedoms, e.go. to travel, to own, buy and sell cars and property, to change jobs, I believe the Cuban people would amaze a lot of onlookers with their abilities and passions. Yeah, just a little freedom and opportunity. |
How does one forget the Radio Tirana interval signal titled
"With Pick Axe and Rifle" Those were the shortwave days. Greg "Harris" wrote in message ... Dan wrote: Yeah. Radio Moscow on the old Cuba relay on 11840 calling us "running dog capitalists" was fun. Now VOR has commercials! Not to forget Radio Peking and Radio Tirana! Art Harris |
I think The States will be attacking there via Columbia very shortly.
Venezuela is the fifth largest producer of oil in the world. Also, It's a member of OPEC and has the sweetest crude in the world. But back to your statement: Regarding Haiti, Kerry is pro-democratic government but, regarding Venezuela, he is anti-democratic government.The difference is that Haiti has no oil. Speaking of FM stations, Venezuela has them, but they are privately-owned. So, Prez Chavez allows unlicensed pro-government stations to operate. Which reminds me... The FCC is illegally controlling intRAstate radiation. But the FCC has, as has the IRS, the guns. Bill, K5BY |
Cops (especially narcs and detectives) have been using cellphones for
many years due to security issues. The funny thing is Nextel may have to reconfigure their whole system to make room for cop radios on 800. On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 16:01:46 -0400, "Corbin Ray" wrote: This is a time of change throughout the broadcasting industry. My local small-town police force, who I thought would be broadcasting VHF forever, skipped right by trunking, and now our entire town's communications is handled through Nextel. As a former newsperson, this breaks my heart, especially when I have several scanners that won't be a whole lot of use to me from now on. |
The people who think the government is doing a good job aren't the
type who are likely to read anything. On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 01:18:29 GMT, m II wrote: Paul_Morphy wrote: The Richard Clarke book is a case in point. Although it is selling well, it is not changing many peoples' minds about the role of the government before and after 9/11. People who were inclined to think the government failed find support in the book, but people who think the government is doing a fine job don't believe it. The people who think the government is doing a fine job won't be buying the book at all. I do miss the old days, though. There was nothing so enervating as listening to R. Tirana, when Albania hated everybody. I used to think enervating meant something like invigorating, or energizing. Then I found out it meant the OPPOSITE of what I thought... mike |
David wrote:
The people who think the government is doing a good job aren't the type who are likely to read anything. ;-) mike -- __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / / / /\ \/ /\ \/ /\ \/ / /_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ ..let the cat out to reply.. |
Frank....here's a good link on tropical bands past and present.
http://members.lycos.co.uk/chrisbran...bands____part_ one__by_chris -- Remove NOSPAM to reply "Frank Dresser" wrote in message ... "Bob" wrote in message om... The 40 years of the Cold War was the time of the greatest number of SW stations on the air. The propaganda war raged constantly until the fall of the Iron Curtain. The war is pretty much over and the need for the propaganda organs is just not there. Voice of Russia is still on the air with a (usually) strong signal and is much less strident than the old Radio Moscow. It is worth a listen for an alternate perspective. I too, miss the "Golden Days". Gone is the thumping Latin beat on RRadio RRhumbos, a station that introduced me to S.American music. Too much has gone , I suspect forever. (Sniff, sniff--tear on cheek.) Bob Well, I don't miss the golden days of stations packed in sholder to sholder, utility transmitters on SW broadcast bands, high power jammers and the Soviet woodpecker. I'll agree about the tropical band stations, though. Most of 'em are gone, and I did like hearing them. Frank Dresser Frank Dresser |
Sorry.....Here is the right link.....
members.lycos.co.uk/chrisbrand1977/id24.htm -- Remove NOSPAM to reply "gil" wrote in message link.net... Frank....here's a good link on tropical bands past and present. http://members.lycos.co.uk/chrisbran...bands____part_ one__by_chris -- Remove NOSPAM to reply "Frank Dresser" wrote in message ... "Bob" wrote in message om... The 40 years of the Cold War was the time of the greatest number of SW stations on the air. The propaganda war raged constantly until the fall of the Iron Curtain. The war is pretty much over and the need for the propaganda organs is just not there. Voice of Russia is still on the air with a (usually) strong signal and is much less strident than the old Radio Moscow. It is worth a listen for an alternate perspective. I too, miss the "Golden Days". Gone is the thumping Latin beat on RRadio RRhumbos, a station that introduced me to S.American music. Too much has gone , I suspect forever. (Sniff, sniff--tear on cheek.) Bob Well, I don't miss the golden days of stations packed in sholder to sholder, utility transmitters on SW broadcast bands, high power jammers and the Soviet woodpecker. I'll agree about the tropical band stations, though. Most of 'em are gone, and I did like hearing them. Frank Dresser Frank Dresser |
In article
. rogers.com, "Pierre L" wrote: Somewhat the same situation is going on now in photography, with the growing popularity of digital. However, I think the same arguments against can be made as with shortwave. If it's digital, it's somewhat exclusive to those who can pay, and it requires a fairly steep investment in equipment that is rapidly superceded. It might be better in performance, but to keep up with it, the user pretty much becomes a slave to the technology. Shortwave, on the other hand, just needs a cheap receiver, and it's free for the taking. Just like an expensive digital camera gives you the picture but takes all the fun out of actually taking it, satellite radio is good, and just a button press away, but is there any fun in it? Where's the fun in listening to "radio" on the internet? Hopefully, radio will not become like TV, where the good programming is only available to those who can and are willing to pay for satellite or digital cable services. Personally, I find this trend profoundly disturbing... entertainment for the affluent. By the way, as has already happened twice to me in the five years, when the power goes out, so does all that digital junk. But radio still works as long as you have batteries on hand. Broadcast radio got me through 7 days of no electricity. There was no TV, no cells phones, no internet. It seems to me that if shortwave and ordinary broadcast radio did not exist at this time, we would have to invent it, because you can't rely on anything digital being there when you need it. During the power failure in the east last summer, I was on my way somewhere in the car. I couldn't make it because, with no traffic lights, it was gridlock everywhere. Cellphones were out too. But AM radio was on, and within less than half an hour, anyone with an AM radio could know what was going on. Was it a big terrorist attack? No, just a power failure. But I knew that because as I was sitting in the gridlock, the radio in my car worked fine. I never thought about it much before the two big power failures that affected me directly, but I like broadcast AM and shortwave just as it is. I want to wrap this up by saying that, in terms of things that you can actually listen to, I find shortwave is better now than it has ever been. I don't see a decline at all. If anything, it's the opposite. These are very good points! Because of the cheap receivability of analog shortwave, I assume it will continue to be broadcast for many years yet, though with signals increasingly aimed at just the third world. For the casual listener like me, this does not auger well. I've always liked those big broadcasters because you could easily receive them on the cheap radios and small antennas I've always had. What are some stations/shows that you listen to that make shortwave now better than it's ever been? Leonard -- "Everything that rises must converge" --Flannery O'Connor |
tommyknocker wrote in message ...
I was just thinking about this today. Has anybody noticed that shortwave radio has really declined over the past five years or so? We've lost BBC and Deutsche Welle transmissions to North America, we've lost several smaller European broadcasters entirely, other stations have drastically cut back. Are transmitting facilities really going on the blink so soon after the end of the cold war? Or has everybody jumped on the BBC's bandwagon and concluded that satellite and internet broadcasting has replaced shortwave? Any thoughts? 4 or 5 years ago my brother and I bought my father a grundig 800. He is a ww2 vet, Navy signalman and loved to listen to morse. He had always asked me if I was interested in SW and at the time being possesed by the internet I thought it (SW) was a dying interest only taken to by guys like my dad. Well as ill health has taken much of his mobility he gave me the 800 (about 4 mos ago). Well to cut to the chase I now have my own little mini-shack next to my pc and I'm loving it. To work the dials in the dark of the late evening, pulling in some radio broadcast from the other side of the planet is something I find hard to explain! My once flat and clean Passport now dogeared and smudged attest to my late hours. I don't listen to any sw from the net as I kind of want to keep it the way it is. My father by the way most vicariously shares my "new" found interest. Sure things will change over time...I have,,good listening RN |
Here's a question. Back in the late 1930s-early 1940s many homes had
big console radios with standard broadcast AM and a couple of shortwave bands. Table radios with shortwave bands were abundant too. Was there really a lot of shortwave listening going on in that time period? Or did manufacturers put shortwave into radios as sort of a "luxury" feature? (or way to one-up your neighbors) -- jhaynes at alumni dot uark dot edu |
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 19:17:04 -0500, R Neutron wrote
(in message ): tommyknocker wrote in message ... I was just thinking about this today. Has anybody noticed that shortwave radio has really declined over the past five years or so? We've lost BBC and Deutsche Welle transmissions to North America, we've lost several smaller European broadcasters entirely, other stations have drastically cut back. Are transmitting facilities really going on the blink so soon after the end of the cold war? Or has everybody jumped on the BBC's bandwagon and concluded that satellite and internet broadcasting has replaced shortwave? Any thoughts? 4 or 5 years ago my brother and I bought my father a grundig 800. He is a ww2 vet, Navy signalman and loved to listen to morse. He had always asked me if I was interested in SW and at the time being possesed by the internet I thought it (SW) was a dying interest only taken to by guys like my dad. Well as ill health has taken much of his mobility he gave me the 800 (about 4 mos ago). Well to cut to the chase I now have my own little mini-shack next to my pc and I'm loving it. To work the dials in the dark of the late evening, pulling in some radio broadcast from the other side of the planet is something I find hard to explain! My once flat and clean Passport now dogeared and smudged attest to my late hours. I don't listen to any sw from the net as I kind of want to keep it the way it is. My father by the way most vicariously shares my "new" found interest. Sure things will change over time...I have,,good listening RN If your Dad likes a particular type of broadcast - as opposed to chasin' DX - you might think of recording some of what he likes. /gray// |
"R Neutron" wrote in message 4 or 5 years ago my brother and I bought my father a grundig 800. He is a ww2 vet, Navy signalman and loved to listen to morse. He had always asked me if I was interested in SW and at the time being possesed by the internet I thought it (SW) was a dying interest only taken to by guys like my dad. Well as ill health has taken much of his mobility he gave me the 800 (about 4 mos ago). Well to cut to the chase I now have my own little mini-shack next to my pc and I'm loving it. To work the dials in the dark of the late evening, pulling in some radio broadcast from the other side of the planet is something I find hard to explain! My once flat and clean Passport now dogeared and smudged attest to my late hours. I don't listen to any sw from the net as I kind of want to keep it the way it is. My father by the way most vicariously shares my "new" found interest. Sure things will change over time...I have,,good listening RN Yep its just plain fun and you never know what you will find in the ether. SW fuels the imagination unlike any other medium and when it is gone nothing will ever replace it. -- 73 Brian ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die. Brian's Radio Universe http://webpages.charter.net/brianehill/ |
Was there really a lot of shortwave listening going on in that time period?
I recall in the Thirties that the people with real jobs had serious aerials on their roofs. But I also recall that all I heard, from out on a sidewalk, were MW stations broadcasting Stella Dallas and other soaps. G In the evening, we kids would take over and listen to The Lone Ranger, Captain Midnight, et al. When I was 15 (1945), I sometimes substituted on my sister's baby sitting job. The homeowner had a big floor Zenith. My ex-WU op mom had already taught me wire Morse, so I became fascinated by the radio code I heard thumping wartime stuff on shortwave. (Sigh...) That got me interested in going for my ham ticket. (I got it in 1947.) 73, Bill, K5BY |
This reminds me... The speakers in those old radios had electromagnets. The
larger coil around the cone's coil doubled as a filter choke in the power supply. Replacing one of those speakers with a perm mag jobbie required also installing a smoothing choke for the power supply. But those old speakers did have punch. Bill, K5BY |
|
Internet radio generally means being tied to an internet-connected
computer, preferably with broadband. The majority of Americans do not have broadband as of yet. Even with broadband, "tuning" internet radio is an annoyance. Many of the stations aren't available, and when they are, you can expect a nice 10+-second delay between clicking "Listen" and actually hearing something. With shortwave, one can tune around freely and comfortably. Plus, how many people do you know that regularly listen to internet radio? Not saying shortwave has any more, but still... As for satellite, it might be nice with XM and all, but the range of international voices are still small on those services (XM and Sirius). There may be the BBC, and isn't DW on the other sat? But what about VOR, R Vatican, RVI, R Netherlands, R Japan, R Australia, etc. Do you actually think smaller broadcasters (at least less-known ones) will be on the birds any time soon? From impressions, Worldspace hasn't been going over too well in the third world, either. It would be awesome to have an open satellite radio system good for exploring and having a technical element to it, kind of like shortwave or even satellite TV (Telstar 5, etc.), but XM and Sirius are nothing more than corporate-controlled networks for normal consumers who want clear audio and familliar sounds. There is no thrill. "Satellite and internet" are definitely not the forces driving shortwave stations off the air in developing nations. It's more likely things like broader FM radio coverage, satellite/local TV, etc. Shortwave, however, remains the most effective method in such nations of covering a large audience with little resources (e.g. 1 250 kW SW transmitter vs. 50 50 kW FM transmitters). Even in the first world, portability is an issue. Portable shortwave receivers are small and convenient. If you're out in the wilderness camping, you can pull out a shortwave with a few dozen feet of wire attached and hear the VOA, REE, BBC, or Deutsche Welle, without a subscription or any serious hassles. Has anybody tried listening to internet radio in such an environment? On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 01:04:03 -0400, Dan Robinson wrote: Shortwave is, to our dismay, on the way out. Anyone who uses as hope the fact that some areas of the world are still in "need" of shortwave is ignoring the great potential of internet and satellite for reaching these same places. Stations are not going to continue to pay to support shortwave transmission means just to reach the remotest folks in villages in Africa and Asia simply because these people are still "thirsting" for free and objective information. After all, solar powered internet is already a reality in many places, as is solar and other alternative powered sat TV. Hard for many of us (including those of us working in international broadcasting) to swallow, but it's the truth... From: "Mark S. Holden" Reply-To: Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 00:19:15 -0400 Subject: Shortwave's decline over past five years tommyknocker wrote: I was just thinking about this today. Has anybody noticed that shortwave radio has really declined over the past five years or so? We've lost BBC and Deutsche Welle transmissions to North America, we've lost several smaller European broadcasters entirely, other stations have drastically cut back. Are transmitting facilities really going on the blink so soon after the end of the cold war? Or has everybody jumped on the BBC's bandwagon and concluded that satellite and internet broadcasting has replaced shortwave? Any thoughts? I'm not happy when I hear another major broadcaster is going to cut back or stop broadcasting to the USA, but I think shortwave will be around for a very long time. In certain parts of the world, internet connections are scarce. Some parts of the USA don't have affordable access to high speed connections. While the internet is competition in some respects, it's also a great resource for information to help you get more enjoyment out of the SW hobby. It may just be positive thinking, but it seems we've had somewhat of an uptick in the number of pirate stations over the last couple years. The other thing to consider is back when the hobby started, the number of signals was probably a small fraction of what we have to choose from today. Of course one thing you can do to help promote the hobby is get the better radios you're not using into the hands of kids. |
Jacob Norlund wrote:
Internet radio generally means being tied to an internet-connected computer, preferably with broadband. The majority of Americans do not have broadband as of yet. Even with broadband, "tuning" internet radio is an annoyance. Many of the stations aren't available, and when they are, you can expect a nice 10+-second delay between clicking "Listen" and actually hearing something. With shortwave, one can tune around freely and comfortably. Plus, how many people do you know that regularly listen to internet radio? Not saying shortwave has any more, but still... I've heard that attempts have been made to create a tunable internet radio that would have a satellite broadband connection and work like a shortwave (or even an AM/FM) radio, but the technology doesn't allow it at this time. Eventually it will happen-if for no other reason than Moore's Law-and then not only SW but AM and FM will be in big trouble. But that's at least 5 years off, if not longer. As for satellite, it might be nice with XM and all, but the range of international voices are still small on those services (XM and Sirius). There may be the BBC, and isn't DW on the other sat? But what about VOR, R Vatican, RVI, R Netherlands, R Japan, R Australia, etc. Do you actually think smaller broadcasters (at least less-known ones) will be on the birds any time soon? From impressions, Worldspace hasn't been going over too well in the third world, either. It would be awesome to have an open satellite radio system good for exploring and having a technical element to it, kind of like shortwave or even satellite TV (Telstar 5, etc.), but XM and Sirius are nothing more than corporate-controlled networks for normal consumers who want clear audio and familliar sounds. There is no thrill. "Thrill" doesn't drive consumers' choices, unfortunately. But the rise of MP3's have shown that "free" is still a powerful marketing tool. With satellite radio, people will think "Why should I pay monthly subscription fees for something I can get with a normal FM stereo receiver?" People have become resigned to shelling out big money for satellite TV (I'm talking small dish stuff like DirecTV and Dish Network) because of the choice it offers. Satellite radio, from what I've heard, offers no more choice than AM/FM, and the quality isn't any better than FM. "Satellite and internet" are definitely not the forces driving shortwave stations off the air in developing nations. It's more likely things like broader FM radio coverage, satellite/local TV, etc. Shortwave, however, remains the most effective method in such nations of covering a large audience with little resources (e.g. 1 250 kW SW transmitter vs. 50 50 kW FM transmitters). In poor areas shortwave is still number one. In the cities they have AM and FM, but AM and FM, even when brought to inland areas, have limited coverage in comparison to the amount of impenetrable jungle or desert territory with thinly spread populations that many Third World nations have. In small Third World nations like Haiti or Eritrea, AM and FM are viable for covering the whole country. But think of South America or Africa and the vast regions of jungles and deserts with few cities that exist. These regions have no comparison in the US. Look at a map of Nevada or Wyoming or Alaska, they are dotted with small cities that can afford to cover their surrounding areas with AM and FM stations. Then look at someplace like Brazil where most "towns" are a few shacks in size and much poorer. Even in the first world, portability is an issue. Portable shortwave receivers are small and convenient. If you're out in the wilderness camping, you can pull out a shortwave with a few dozen feet of wire attached and hear the VOA, REE, BBC, or Deutsche Welle, without a subscription or any serious hassles. Has anybody tried listening to internet radio in such an environment? Like I said, when an "internet radio" is invented that looks and acts like a radio but connects to the internet wirelessly, conventional radio will be doomed. I'm confident that I'll see it in my lifetime (I'm 29). But until then regular radio will do ok. On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 01:04:03 -0400, Dan Robinson wrote: Shortwave is, to our dismay, on the way out. Anyone who uses as hope the fact that some areas of the world are still in "need" of shortwave is ignoring the great potential of internet and satellite for reaching these same places. Stations are not going to continue to pay to support shortwave transmission means just to reach the remotest folks in villages in Africa and Asia simply because these people are still "thirsting" for free and objective information. After all, solar powered internet is already a reality in many places, as is solar and other alternative powered sat TV. Hard for many of us (including those of us working in international broadcasting) to swallow, but it's the truth... From: "Mark S. Holden" Reply-To: Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 00:19:15 -0400 Subject: Shortwave's decline over past five years tommyknocker wrote: I was just thinking about this today. Has anybody noticed that shortwave radio has really declined over the past five years or so? We've lost BBC and Deutsche Welle transmissions to North America, we've lost several smaller European broadcasters entirely, other stations have drastically cut back. Are transmitting facilities really going on the blink so soon after the end of the cold war? Or has everybody jumped on the BBC's bandwagon and concluded that satellite and internet broadcasting has replaced shortwave? Any thoughts? I'm not happy when I hear another major broadcaster is going to cut back or stop broadcasting to the USA, but I think shortwave will be around for a very long time. In certain parts of the world, internet connections are scarce. Some parts of the USA don't have affordable access to high speed connections. While the internet is competition in some respects, it's also a great resource for information to help you get more enjoyment out of the SW hobby. It may just be positive thinking, but it seems we've had somewhat of an uptick in the number of pirate stations over the last couple years. The other thing to consider is back when the hobby started, the number of signals was probably a small fraction of what we have to choose from today. Of course one thing you can do to help promote the hobby is get the better radios you're not using into the hands of kids. |
tommyknocker wrote: Jacob Norlund wrote: Internet radio generally means being tied to an internet-connected computer, preferably with broadband. The majority of Americans do not have broadband as of yet. Even with broadband, "tuning" internet radio is an annoyance. Many of the stations aren't available, and when they are, you can expect a nice 10+-second delay between clicking "Listen" and actually hearing something. With shortwave, one can tune around freely and comfortably. Plus, how many people do you know that regularly listen to internet radio? Not saying shortwave has any more, but still... I've heard that attempts have been made to create a tunable internet radio that would have a satellite broadband connection and work like a shortwave (or even an AM/FM) radio, but the technology doesn't allow it at this time. Eventually it will happen-if for no other reason than Moore's Law-and then not only SW but AM and FM will be in big trouble. But that's at least 5 years off, if not longer. Nothing particularly new or difficult about this. I haven't tried lately but several years ago there were a number of HF (short wave) receivers which could be remotely tuned over the net. Problem was they could only serve one user per receiver. Equipment for remote control of radio receivers over the internet is commercially available off-the-shelf from several suppliers. There was a multi-channel "FM" style service started up in some Canadian cities three or four years ago; but it died IIRC from lack of interest. I used to listen to music from internet services which provided a wide variety of choices, and were entertaining and of high quality; but drifted back to real radio where I could receive items related to my particular area. They were OK for background music, if that is what you want radio for. As for satellite, it might be nice with XM and all, but the range of international voices are still small on those services (XM and Sirius). There may be the BBC, and isn't DW on the other sat? But what about VOR, R Vatican, RVI, R Netherlands, R Japan, R Australia, etc. Do you actually think smaller broadcasters (at least less-known ones) will be on the birds any time soon? From impressions, Worldspace hasn't been going over too well in the third world, either. It would be awesome to have an open satellite radio system good for exploring and having a technical element to it, kind of like shortwave or even satellite TV (Telstar 5, etc.), but XM and Sirius are nothing more than corporate-controlled networks for normal consumers who want clear audio and familliar sounds. There is no thrill. "Thrill" doesn't drive consumers' choices, That should be news to the advertising industry! Have you looked at advertising during the last 50 years or so? Sorry make that 25 years for you. unfortunately. But the rise of MP3's have shown that "free" is still a powerful marketing tool. With satellite radio, people will think "Why should I pay monthly subscription fees for something I can get with a normal FM stereo receiver?" People have become resigned to shelling out big money for satellite TV (I'm talking small dish stuff like DirecTV and Dish Network) because of the choice it offers. Satellite radio, from what I've heard, offers no more choice than AM/FM, and the quality isn't any better than FM. "Satellite and internet" are definitely not the forces driving shortwave stations off the air in developing nations. It's more likely things like broader FM radio coverage, satellite/local TV, etc. Shortwave, however, remains the most effective method in such nations of covering a large audience with little resources (e.g. 1 250 kW SW transmitter vs. 50 50 kW FM transmitters). In poor areas shortwave is still number one. In the cities they have AM and FM, but AM and FM, even when brought to inland areas, have limited coverage in comparison to the amount of impenetrable jungle or desert territory with thinly spread populations that many Third World nations have. In small Third World nations like Haiti or Eritrea, AM and FM are viable for covering the whole country. But think of South America or Africa and the vast regions of jungles and deserts with few cities that exist. These regions have no comparison in the US. Look at a map of Nevada or Wyoming or Alaska, they are dotted with small cities that can afford to cover their surrounding areas with AM and FM stations. Then look at someplace like Brazil where most "towns" are a few shacks in size and much poorer. Even in the first world, portability is an issue. Portable shortwave receivers are small and convenient. If you're out in the wilderness camping, you can pull out a shortwave with a few dozen feet of wire attached and hear the VOA, REE, BBC, or Deutsche Welle, without a subscription or any serious hassles. Has anybody tried listening to internet radio in such an environment? Like I said, when an "internet radio" is invented that looks and acts like a radio but connects to the internet wirelessly, conventional radio will be doomed. I'm confident that I'll see it in my lifetime (I'm 29). But until then regular radio will do ok. When wireless internet is available in those countries using SW for domestic service FM/AM will be cheaper to provide and listen to. Several stations which I can receive on AM and FM are also on the internet. But I use a radio to listen to them - it is cheaper, more reliable, and easily portable. When I use my HAM radio and want to talk locally I use VHF FM. When I want to talk over a long range I can use HF (ShortWave) - I can also use a simple hand-held VHF radio and an IRLP node to communicate globally over the Internet, but IRLP and other similar Internet wireless links, while fun and easy to do, are hardly posing a threat to conventional radio communications. Dave |
tommyknocker wrote:
I've heard that attempts have been made to create a tunable internet radio that would have a satellite broadband connection and work like a shortwave (or even an AM/FM) radio, but the technology doesn't allow it at this time. There was the old Kerbango radio a few years back (during the internet boom). Cost a mint (about $400), and really required a broadband connection to work well..... |
But yes, satellite and internet are going to replace shortwave. It's inevitable. BBC is available on many cable TV systems already. Noisy, static filled, fading, garbled shortwave is about as interesting to today's digital satellite TV watching, MP3 player toting, cable modem equipped PC "digital consumer" as smoke signals were to us 40 years ago. I myself sometimes stream BBC over my cable modem. It's the only way I listen to Australia. There's something to be said for the more personal touch of amaetur radio, to actually be reaching out to make communication, not merely placate victim to it. although the general point of the digital consumer age is to mock spending effort, to bring us maximal convenience and laziness, there'something to be said for doing so. Particularly with short wave because it is an art itself. having said that, the way things are going, we have a lot of signals and systems evolution to do before ham radio as a technology can mature past perhaps deserving maybe some of the of the smoke signals jokes. Permit the quote: "97.1(b) Contiunation and extension of the amateur's proven ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art." although modes like PSK31 provide an easy entry point; just plug in your sound card; i'm sure amateurs will start cooking up more advanced direct sampling systems which we can then digitally process and optimize signals. mixed signal silicon will advance and be made more integrable, hopefully, and we can use these to design more efficient and further advanced networks. to advance the art. The corporations are done; they've achieved perfection in the cell phone network and will dole out improvement one wireless .5 generations at a time. the consumer cant imagine demanding any more. they built their wireless networks and they're tied to that infrasturcture. Aside from some bandwidth tweaking for 3G, 3.5G, 4G, they're happy and static. they'll just dump a boatload of cash into refining the existing network and never design something better. Call me cynical; hell, I could just be talking about Intel and the x86/Pentium story, but I cant help but feel the same corporate game applies to radio. that leaves amateurs to evolve radio, not because we need it, but for the sake of advancing the art. It may seem a sad state of affairs to us, but the day is surely coming when all you will hear on a shortwave radio is static. although i have absolute faith that noise will not be unwasted, i do worry you are right. this aspect could have a more tragic fate. i cannot speak for amateur's radio role as a raw communications element yet. ( still cant afford that first rig to be able to comment better). still, i cannot help but imagine it will always have a place. in todays slightly more heated world, people will again seek supranational communication. a large part of the reason i seek to become a ham is to connect with a nationality outside my own: 97.1(d) "Contination and extension of the amateu's unique abiliuty to enhance international goodwill", as the party line goes. please pity some 97.1(c) on me while I try and join you guys and catch up: "Encouragement and improvement of the amatuer service through rules which proivde for advancing skills in both the communications and technical phases of the art". I'm trying to learn FPGA's now in hopes of future application within amateur radio. I'll be lurking till then. -myren |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:22 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com