|
Eton E1 XM FYI
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. Personally I think this is a mistake in what looks otherwise to be a very interesting new receiver. Lawrence |
"Lawrence H. Bulk" wrote in message om... 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. Personally I think this is a mistake in what looks otherwise to be a very interesting new receiver. Lawrence I find the whole concept of that receiver to be flawed. Subscribe to XM radio for $8.00 (?) per month and get glorious digital-quality MONAURAL sound? No thanks. It would have made a LOT more sense if they had added a matching "satellite" speaker. -- Stinger |
It would be even better if they actually made the radio...
"Stinger" wrote in message ... "Lawrence H. Bulk" wrote in message om... 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. Personally I think this is a mistake in what looks otherwise to be a very interesting new receiver. Lawrence I find the whole concept of that receiver to be flawed. Subscribe to XM radio for $8.00 (?) per month and get glorious digital-quality MONAURAL sound? No thanks. It would have made a LOT more sense if they had added a matching "satellite" speaker. -- Stinger |
LOL! How true!
-- Stinger "Jim Hackett" wrote in message k.net... It would be even better if they actually made the radio... "Stinger" wrote in message ... "Lawrence H. Bulk" wrote in message om... 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. Personally I think this is a mistake in what looks otherwise to be a very interesting new receiver. Lawrence I find the whole concept of that receiver to be flawed. Subscribe to XM radio for $8.00 (?) per month and get glorious digital-quality MONAURAL sound? No thanks. It would have made a LOT more sense if they had added a matching "satellite" speaker. -- Stinger |
Stinger wrote:
Subscribe to XM radio for $8.00 (?) per month and get glorious digital-quality MONAURAL sound? No thanks. -- Stinger I get excellent stereo through my XM radio. What are you looking at? -- Brian Denley http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html |
Brian Denley wrote:
Stinger wrote: Subscribe to XM radio for $8.00 (?) per month and get glorious digital-quality MONAURAL sound? No thanks. -- Stinger I get excellent stereo through my XM radio. What are you looking at? The Eton radio this thread is about is apparently monaural. |
LHB,
For a collection of News and Information about the ETON E1 XM Radio. {Formally the Grundig Satellit 900 Receiver.} Check-Out the ETON E1 XM Radio {Grundig Satellit 900} eGroup at YAHOO ! ETON-E1-XM= http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Grundig-Satellit-900/ ~ RHF .. .. = = = (Lawrence H. Bulk) wrote in message = = = . com... 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. Personally I think this is a mistake in what looks otherwise to be a very interesting new receiver. Lawrence |
"Brian Denley" wrote in message news:j6lic.11130$0u6.1984116@attbi_s03... Stinger wrote: Subscribe to XM radio for $8.00 (?) per month and get glorious digital-quality MONAURAL sound? No thanks. -- Stinger I get excellent stereo through my XM radio. What are you looking at? -- Brian Denley http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html Brian, My next vehicle will have SatRadio, too. I wasn't putting that down at all -- just the RADIO in question. The problem I have with the Eton E1 XM radio? -- it only has ONE speaker! Sure, I know you can do the "computer speakers in the headphone jack" routine, but seeing as how the Sat800 is so huge, it does seem like the precedent is set for large, so they could have put one of their great-sounding speakers on each end of a larger box. -- Stinger |
"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 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. Can someone tell me what IBOC,DAB,WorldSpace,DRM,Satellite Radio is.How do you get these features. spd |
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 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) |
"Dan" wrote in message ... 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. And the right people have to be listening. I'm sure I make no difference to the international broadcasters, and maybe you don't either. They want the decision makers and opinion formers or whatever. As public diplomacy goes, it's probably cheaper and more effective to host a big party at a diplomatic mission. Broadcasting of one form or another does serve the citizens(taxpayers) in foriegn nations. So nations will likely continue with broadcasting in their own native languages for a while. 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. I think the subscription fee spreads pretty thin between 100+ channels and the high cost of launching satellites. The BBC and DW might be able to defray some costs by selling some programming to US public radio, but I don't think there will be any money for Radio Obscura. 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. Yeah, technically home computers are obselete the minute they are paid for. On the other hand, AM modulation is as obselete as the piston engine, which was to be replaced by the turbine or wankel at least 20 years ago. 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. I suppose a few hobby broadcasters could be as good as Alan Maxwell. Most will be like CBers. 10-4 on the classic rock thing. I might take up hobby missle technology. Something to home in on "Freebird" and "Stairway to Heaven". 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. Listeners or not, a nation has a right to expect a return for the expense of broadcasting. 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 I have no idea of the time frame. The changes in technology are only a small part of the changes in international broadcasting. Economics and politics play a far larger part. For all I know, international broadcasting will become the haven of useless political payrollers. In that case, it will go on endlessly. Frank Dresser |
AM is a bandwidth hog and way too sensitive to interference. I can
see why the FAA likes it on VHF (you can hear both transmitters if 2 light-up at the same time) but for entertainment delivery I'm afraid the light dimmers and touch lamps are winning. On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 15:31:52 GMT, "Frank Dresser" On the other hand, AM modulation is as obselete as the piston engine, which was to be replaced by the turbine or wankel at least 20 years ago. |
"David" wrote in message ... AM is a bandwidth hog and way too sensitive to interference. I can see why the FAA likes it on VHF (you can hear both transmitters if 2 light-up at the same time) but for entertainment delivery I'm afraid the light dimmers and touch lamps are winning. How is AM a bandwidth hog? Standard AM on SW is about 10khz wide. For communicaton puropses, 3khz SSB is adequate. DRM is also in a 10khz channel, but it's interference potential is much worse than AM because it's energy is more evenly distributed across the channel, while there's usually little high frequency energy in a an AM channel with normal programming. You have a point about the interference problems with AM, but touch lamps, light dimmers and switchmode power supplies can be made much cleaner for little more expense. Electrically clean products are available right now. If interference ever becomes much of an issue for most people, it would be easier and cheaper to enforce existing Part 15 rules, rather than force everyone to buy a new radio. Frank Dresser |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:14 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com