GA,

"The only flaw I see in the design is that they should
have left OUT satellite reception altogether."

I believe that the marketing scheme of XM Satellite Radio
has them provide a small fee to the manufacture of each
radio for each monthly subscriber.

So for each Eton E1 XM Radio that subscribes to XM Satellite
Radio per month.


XM Satellite Radio will send the ETON Corp. a Check.

Creating a Passive 'recurring' Residual Income after the
original sale of the radio. A second income source as
a result of the initial saqle of the radio.


jm2cw ~ RHF
..
..
= = = (Gary) wrote in message
= = = . com...
"Jim Hackett" wrote in message nk.net...
I find the whole concept of that receiver to be flawed.

A real portable MW/FM/SW receiver with THREE MW/SW bandwidths,
selectable-sideband sync detector, PASSBAND offset tuning, separate
bass and treble controls, etc. etc., and you say the whole concept of
the receiver is flawed? Personally, I don't care about paying for
satellite radio. My main interest is in the MW/FM/SW bands which this
set might excell in. AND, designed by R.L. Drake. The only flaw I
see in the design is that they should have left OUT satellite
reception altogether. I would have kept it MW/FM/SW and made sure it
was the BEST portable available on these bands.
..

I never said that---------------"I find the whole concept of that receiver
to be flawed."



"RHF" wrote in message
om...
GA,

"The only flaw I see in the design is that they should
have left OUT satellite reception altogether."

I believe that the marketing scheme of XM Satellite Radio
has them provide a small fee to the manufacture of each
radio for each monthly subscriber.

So for each Eton E1 XM Radio that subscribes to XM Satellite
Radio per month.


XM Satellite Radio will send the ETON Corp. a Check.

Creating a Passive 'recurring' Residual Income after the
original sale of the radio. A second income source as
a result of the initial saqle of the radio.


jm2cw ~ RHF
.
.
= = = (Gary) wrote in message
= = = . com...
"Jim Hackett" wrote in message
nk.net...
I find the whole concept of that receiver to be flawed.

A real portable MW/FM/SW receiver with THREE MW/SW bandwidths,
selectable-sideband sync detector, PASSBAND offset tuning, separate
bass and treble controls, etc. etc., and you say the whole concept of
the receiver is flawed? Personally, I don't care about paying for
satellite radio. My main interest is in the MW/FM/SW bands which this
set might excell in. AND, designed by R.L. Drake. The only flaw I
see in the design is that they should have left OUT satellite
reception altogether. I would have kept it MW/FM/SW and made sure it
was the BEST portable available on these bands.
.

I did. As others have pointed out, I would rather that they had put their
effort into AM/FM/SW.

However, if they came out with a larger version that actually had speakers
on each end of the cabinet (heck, let's dream -- DETACHABLE speakers!) I
would be interested in one that included XM.

-- Stinger

"Jim Hackett" wrote in message
ink.net...
I never said that---------------"I find the whole concept of that receiver
to be flawed."



"RHF" wrote in message
om...
GA,

"The only flaw I see in the design is that they should
have left OUT satellite reception altogether."

I believe that the marketing scheme of XM Satellite Radio
has them provide a small fee to the manufacture of each
radio for each monthly subscriber.

So for each Eton E1 XM Radio that subscribes to XM Satellite
Radio per month.


XM Satellite Radio will send the ETON Corp. a Check.

Creating a Passive 'recurring' Residual Income after the
original sale of the radio. A second income source as
a result of the initial saqle of the radio.


jm2cw ~ RHF
.
.
= = = (Gary) wrote in message
= = = . com...
"Jim Hackett" wrote in message
nk.net...
I find the whole concept of that receiver to be flawed.

A real portable MW/FM/SW receiver with THREE MW/SW bandwidths,
selectable-sideband sync detector, PASSBAND offset tuning, separate
bass and treble controls, etc. etc., and you say the whole concept of
the receiver is flawed? Personally, I don't care about paying for
satellite radio. My main interest is in the MW/FM/SW bands which this
set might excell in. AND, designed by R.L. Drake. The only flaw I
see in the design is that they should have left OUT satellite
reception altogether. I would have kept it MW/FM/SW and made sure it
was the BEST portable available on these bands.
.

On 24 Apr 2004 22:09:46 GMT, (Super ****ed Dad) wrote:

DAB

A terrestrial digital standard used in Europe. It uses either the old
TV Band III or L Band.

WorldSpace

A sat-based system which covers Asia and Africa, primarily.

DRM

Digital Radio Mondiale. A digital system using shortwave bands.

On 23 Apr 2004 07:29:26 -0700, (Lawrence H. Bulk)
wrote:

I received a reply from Walter Hess of Eton to my query if the Eton E1
XM will have IBOC capability. The answer, in a word, is no. No IBOC,
no DAB, no WorldSpace, no DRM. Not even Sirius. AM, FM, SW, and XM
satellite (subscription) only.

http://www.etonmall.com/asp/EIXM.asp

Claims that this receiver is DAB ready.

I've seen that notice too but Walter Hess did not mention it to me in
his e-mail reply. Also, unfortunately, DAB would be of use only to
European, Canadian, or US users in the northern states, I believe.

Remember when any radio could work anywhere in the world? This
fragmenting of broadcast standards may be a first step (intentionally
or not) to restrict availability of information which could then be
"censored" locally by the powers-that-be (and I might mention that I
am NOT a "right-wing conspiracy advocate"). TV has basically always
been that way. What a shame.

I think I'll wait until a multi-format portable receiver is designed
(if ever). Like some others, I have no interest in "pay" radio (which
is not true world-band, anyway).

Lawrence

Noel wrote in message . ..

http://www.etonmall.com/asp/EIXM.asp

Claims that this receiver is DAB ready.

Sirius Satellite Radio carries many International (aka ''Worldband'')
Broadcasters. Don't look now, but Shortwave Broadcasting is dying
very quickly due to the fact that it's plain ass painful to listen to.

The content has moved from the ancient technology to something a
little more user friendly. Adapt or die.

The content is much more enjoyable in static-free high-fidelity sound.

On 26 Apr 2004 09:18:39 -0700, (Lawrence H. Bulk)
wrote:

I've seen that notice too but Walter Hess did not mention it to me in
his e-mail reply. Also, unfortunately, DAB would be of use only to
European, Canadian, or US users in the northern states, I believe.

Remember when any radio could work anywhere in the world? This
fragmenting of broadcast standards may be a first step (intentionally
or not) to restrict availability of information which could then be
"censored" locally by the powers-that-be (and I might mention that I
am NOT a "right-wing conspiracy advocate"). TV has basically always
been that way. What a shame.

I think I'll wait until a multi-format portable receiver is designed
(if ever). Like some others, I have no interest in "pay" radio (which
is not true world-band, anyway).

Lawrence

Noel wrote in message . ..

http://www.etonmall.com/asp/EIXM.asp

Claims that this receiver is DAB ready.

"Lawrence H. Bulk" wrote in message
om...
I've seen that notice too but Walter Hess did not mention it to me in
his e-mail reply. Also, unfortunately, DAB would be of use only to
European, Canadian, or US users in the northern states, I believe.

Remember when any radio could work anywhere in the world?


That changed in the late 30s with the introduction of FM in the US.

And the FM band of Japan is different than the FM bands of the rest of the
world. The Soviet/Eastern Europe FM band was different, but they've been
moving up to the standard FM band over the last few years.

If you limit the choice to a standard AM broadcast band radio, they still
work anywhere in the world, and will for the forseeable future.



This
fragmenting of broadcast standards may be a first step (intentionally
or not) to restrict availability of information which could then be
"censored" locally by the powers-that-be (and I might mention that I
am NOT a "right-wing conspiracy advocate"). TV has basically always
been that way. What a shame.

I think I'll wait until a multi-format portable receiver is designed
(if ever). Like some others, I have no interest in "pay" radio (which
is not true world-band, anyway).

Lawrence


The current IBOC transmission are compatable with current radios. The IBOC
standard can go all digital, which can only be received on IBOC radios,
provided this IBOC thing proves to be sucessful.

I can see why nobody is making a true multimode radio. Many of these
standards have license fees and additional manufacturing costs, and if these
standards aren't in common use, they will needlessly add cost to the radio.
More than that, a consumer might expect the features to actually do
something even if no broadcaster in the area is using the system. And
there's no guarantee any broadcasters will be using these systems in ten
years.

Frank Dresser

"Dan" wrote in message
...



I agree with all of this. I simply don't understand this "Oh My God
Shortwave Is Dieing, Write To xxxx and Save The Station!" attitude.
It's a *good* thing, people. It's progress. Why *not* have all of
the current shortwave broadcasters, along with TV from all of those
countries, available via cable or satellite? In crystal clear stereo
and HDTV?


Why not have all the current international broadcasters? Maybe because the
production costs are expensive and hard to justify when a nation's economy
slumping. To quote the Radio Nederland website story about SRI:

"The cuts now threatened not just shortwave, but the Swissinfo Website as
well. "

Money is the real issue, not shortwave or the technology of program
distribution. Don't expect all of the current shortwave broadcasters to be
available in the future.



Very few people like tuning thru crowded, noisy, fading radio bands,
and then fiddling with fine tuners, sync detectors, AGC & bandwidth
controls just to barely hear Top of the Pops. You notice that few
people manually tune TV sets and adjust fine tuning, color and hue
controls while fiddling with rabbit ears these days?

I myself would much rather just push a button on a remote and be done
with it. It's the same thing with radio. Radio needs to join the
21st century or it's going to die completely. The technology hasn't
changed in what - 80 years?


International broadcasters will stick around if they have the funding. I
suppose they can have fundraisers like the US public broadcasters.



If that means my collection of radios becomes obsolete, well, that's
the way it goes. Just like my TRS-80 and Apple // computers are
obsolete.


AM modulation and shortwave radio need never be obselete. If the
international broadcasters abandon the SW bands, I'm sure the void will be
filled with radio hobbyists.



It just means I get to buy all new computers and radios!

Dan


That assumes somebody will want to pay for international broadcasting in a
new form. Since international broadcasting is a form of public diplomacy,
some countries will continue with it. I wouldn't bet they all will,
however.

Frank Dresser

I love my shortwave radios. I just don't listen to them for
''broadcast'' style content any more. I'm enjoying listening to the
Utes, the Pirates and AMDX. I just don't need to get my news through
a flanger any more.

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 21:28:39 -0400, Dan wrote:

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 00:50:45 GMT, "Frank Dresser"
wrote:

Money is the real issue, not shortwave or the technology of program
distribution. Don't expect all of the current shortwave broadcasters to be
available in the future.

Indeed. But if truly no one is listening, then there won't be either
shortwave broadcasting *or* internet/satellite broadcasting.

International broadcasters will stick around if they have the funding. I
suppose they can have fundraisers like the US public broadcasters.

But since satellite/internet is paid for with subscriptions and/or
commercials, these have a better chance of surviving.

AM modulation and shortwave radio need never be obselete. If the
international broadcasters abandon the SW bands, I'm sure the void will be
filled with radio hobbyists.

Technically, it's already obsolete. If/When more major broadcasters
completely abandon shortwave (BBC, Netherlands, Canada, VOA, WBCQ,
Cuba, Russia, etc.) then it will be obsolete *to me*. Unless "radio
hobbyists" have interesting programming (something more than just
playing 70's classic rock), then count me as not interested.

It just means I get to buy all new computers and radios!

That assumes somebody will want to pay for international broadcasting in a
new form. Since international broadcasting is a form of public diplomacy,
some countries will continue with it. I wouldn't bet they all will,
however.

Agreed. The truly BIG names (BBC, VOA, etc.) probably will. The
rest can just go internet/satellite/cable. People might actually
listen when it's not fading and noisy, and it's easy to find.
Already, internet is the only way I listen to Australia and sometimes
BBC.

Yes, it will be a sad day when I no longer tune a shortwave radio *at
all*. But it will be no worse than when I packed up my TRS-80
computer with 2, 180K floppy drives, 5 meg hard drive and 48K RAM. I
still have TRS-80's, and still break them out once a year or so.

I can see me breaking out a shortwave radio once a year and spinning
the knob, to see if (A) it still works and (B) to see if there's
"anybody out there". Will probably happen in about 10 years.

Dan

Drake R8, Radio Shack DX-440,
Grundig S650, S700, S800, YB400, YB550PE
Degen DE1102, Kaito KA1102
Hallicrafters S-120 (1962)
Zenith black dial 5 tube Tombstone (1937)
E. H. Scott 23 tube Imperial Allwave in Tasman cabinet (1936)