Private shortwave broadcasters in the US
 

COMMENTARY by Andy Sennitt, 27 May 2004
Radio Netherlands - Netherlands
.... It's good news, though, that the private shortwave broadcasters in
the US, as well as ... Nineteen years at the World Radio TV Handbook taught
me that, in general ...
http://www.rnw.nl/realradio/features/html/digital040527.html

"Mike Terry" wrote in message
...
COMMENTARY by Andy Sennitt, 27 May 2004
Radio Netherlands - Netherlands
... It's good news, though, that the private shortwave broadcasters in
the US, as well as ... Nineteen years at the World Radio TV Handbook
taught
me that, in general ...
http://www.rnw.nl/realradio/features/html/digital040527.html



DRM claims there are tests by US domestic broadcasters. It's called "The
Voice of the NASB" They're listed here at the Oct. 23, 2003 press release:

http://drm.org/newsevents/globpressreleas.htm

But, it's not like any US private broadcaster is using DRM on his own
transmitter. It looks like it's more like they are mailing tapes to Jeff
White, and those recordings get broadcast on a European Transmitter, beamed
to Europe.

http://drm.org/livebroadcast/globfieldtrial.htm

Even worse, it looks like we aren't sharing the good stuff like the Alex
Jones Show, The Jerimiah 33-3 Ministries guy, George W. Gentry, or any of
the Gold Bugs and Medicine Shows. If Europeans get lucky, WRMI might share
James Lloyd.

Frank Dresser

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

Even worse, it looks like we aren't sharing the good stuff like the Alex
Jones Show, The Jerimiah 33-3 Ministries guy, George W. Gentry, or any of
the Gold Bugs and Medicine Shows. If Europeans get lucky, WRMI might
share
James Lloyd.

Frank Dresser

DRM and it's digital broadcasting mode
children will never appear on shortwave.
Mark it in your book. Analog will be here
for a very long time to come, as any digital
dependent mode requires a clear signal
path for reception. When was the last time
we heard a clear shortwave program or
station that had ZERO fading, noise or
propagation issues with it's signal?
My guess is you can count them on one hand.

A perfect example is how everyone has had
to endure poor signal degradation from someone
using a modern cellphone. 20% of the calls
I get from people out in the field usually cut out
or are partially garbled, and I am using a brand
new Samsung and Nokia digital phone. Any loss
of "data" between you and 'over there/wherever'
on the other end of the cellphone line and your
call is useless or interrupted. If it's this bad with
local Verizon cell phone service in a major metro area
(NJ/NY/Ct) then how bad will it be with a digital
shortwave signal comming halfway around the world
on a much lower frequency prone to atmospherics
and other degradation...?

Digital Shortwave???? Sounds alot like New Coke
or the Yugo car or any one of another 'brilliant' consumer
technology or product ideas that are now in the rubbish
bin of history.

Flander's Fartwhistle wrote:

DRM and it's digital broadcasting mode
children will never appear on shortwave.
Mark it in your book. Analog will be here
for a very long time to come, as any digital
dependent mode requires a clear signal
path for reception. When was the last time
we heard a clear shortwave program or
station that had ZERO fading, noise or
propagation issues with it's signal?
My guess is you can count them on one hand.

A perfect example is how everyone has had
to endure poor signal degradation from someone
using a modern cellphone. 20% of the calls
I get from people out in the field usually cut out
or are partially garbled, and I am using a brand
new Samsung and Nokia digital phone. Any loss
of "data" between you and 'over there/wherever'
on the other end of the cellphone line and your
call is useless or interrupted. If it's this bad with
local Verizon cell phone service in a major metro area
(NJ/NY/Ct) then how bad will it be with a digital
shortwave signal comming halfway around the world
on a much lower frequency prone to atmospherics
and other degradation...?

Digital Shortwave???? Sounds alot like New Coke
or the Yugo car or any one of another 'brilliant' consumer
technology or product ideas that are now in the rubbish
bin of history.

The success of DRM doesn't depend on perfect propagation conditions. If
it did, the proponents of this technology wouldn't consider using it for
ionospheric propagation. It's a matter of how degraded the conditions
can be before the digital signal can not be decoded properly. DRM has
considerable tolerance for poor propagation. The cell phone comparison
is apples and oranges. They are two very different technologies and
frequency ranges. If DRM fails to catch on, it will most likely be
because people don't want to buy new receivers for international
broadcasting when it appears to have an uncertain future at this time.


-----= 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! =-----

In article , starman
wrote:

Flander's Fartwhistle wrote:

DRM and it's digital broadcasting mode children will never appear
on shortwave. Mark it in your book. Analog will be here for a very
long time to come, as any digital dependent mode requires a clear
signal path for reception. When was the last time we heard a clear
shortwave program or station that had ZERO fading, noise or
propagation issues with it's signal? My guess is you can count them
on one hand.

A perfect example is how everyone has had to endure poor signal
degradation from someone using a modern cellphone. 20% of the calls
I get from people out in the field usually cut out or are partially
garbled, and I am using a brand new Samsung and Nokia digital
phone. Any loss of "data" between you and 'over there/wherever' on
the other end of the cellphone line and your call is useless or
interrupted. If it's this bad with local Verizon cell phone
service in a major metro area (NJ/NY/Ct) then how bad will it be
with a digital shortwave signal comming halfway around the world on
a much lower frequency prone to atmospherics and other
degradation...?

Digital Shortwave???? Sounds alot like New Coke or the Yugo car or
any one of another 'brilliant' consumer technology or product ideas
that are now in the rubbish bin of history.

The success of DRM doesn't depend on perfect propagation conditions.
If it did, the proponents of this technology wouldn't consider using
it for ionospheric propagation. It's a matter of how degraded the
conditions can be before the digital signal can not be decoded
properly. DRM has considerable tolerance for poor propagation. The
cell phone comparison is apples and oranges. They are two very
different technologies and frequency ranges. If DRM fails to catch
on, it will most likely be because people don't want to buy new
receivers for international broadcasting when it appears to have an
uncertain future at this time.

The FEC in DRM is pretty weak. FEC in stable medium just to overcome the
stable defects needs to be about 1/3 of the transmitted overhead. DRM
does not even provide this much for a non stable path and so it is
completely inadequate for HF propagation. DRM on SW is not unlike
pounding screws into wood with a hammer instead of using a screw driver.
The hammer will pound in the screws just like a nail but you will not
derive the benefit of using the screw over the nail for greater
fastening power by pounding it in with the hammer.

The wheels came off this technology before it even got started.

DRM - the claims amount to a Michael Bryant type of non reality.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:

In article , starman
wrote:

Flander's Fartwhistle wrote:

DRM and it's digital broadcasting mode children will never appear
on shortwave. Mark it in your book. Analog will be here for a very
long time to come, as any digital dependent mode requires a clear
signal path for reception. When was the last time we heard a clear
shortwave program or station that had ZERO fading, noise or
propagation issues with it's signal? My guess is you can count them
on one hand.

A perfect example is how everyone has had to endure poor signal
degradation from someone using a modern cellphone. 20% of the calls
I get from people out in the field usually cut out or are partially
garbled, and I am using a brand new Samsung and Nokia digital
phone. Any loss of "data" between you and 'over there/wherever' on
the other end of the cellphone line and your call is useless or
interrupted. If it's this bad with local Verizon cell phone
service in a major metro area (NJ/NY/Ct) then how bad will it be
with a digital shortwave signal comming halfway around the world on
a much lower frequency prone to atmospherics and other
degradation...?

Digital Shortwave???? Sounds alot like New Coke or the Yugo car or
any one of another 'brilliant' consumer technology or product ideas
that are now in the rubbish bin of history.

The success of DRM doesn't depend on perfect propagation conditions.
If it did, the proponents of this technology wouldn't consider using
it for ionospheric propagation. It's a matter of how degraded the
conditions can be before the digital signal can not be decoded
properly. DRM has considerable tolerance for poor propagation. The
cell phone comparison is apples and oranges. They are two very
different technologies and frequency ranges. If DRM fails to catch
on, it will most likely be because people don't want to buy new
receivers for international broadcasting when it appears to have an
uncertain future at this time.

The FEC in DRM is pretty weak. FEC in stable medium just to overcome the
stable defects needs to be about 1/3 of the transmitted overhead. DRM
does not even provide this much for a non stable path and so it is
completely inadequate for HF propagation. DRM on SW is not unlike
pounding screws into wood with a hammer instead of using a screw driver.
The hammer will pound in the screws just like a nail but you will not
derive the benefit of using the screw over the nail for greater
fastening power by pounding it in with the hammer.

The wheels came off this technology before it even got started.

DRM - the claims amount to a Michael Bryant type of non reality.

I was with you until you went OT at the end.


-----= 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! =-----

yes, shortwave will have fading mostly, but how digital technology can
help sw to reach remote places? Will satellite radios be able to reach
every corner of this planet? The price range and subscription services
are still out of reach for most of the people around the world. What I
feel that high-tech worlds will have all the new technolgies -- DRM
and other DAB kind of thingie -- but alas, remote places will be
always "remote" as digital divide goes on.

raqueeb hassan
congo (drc)

In article , starman
wrote:

Telamon wrote:

In article , starman
wrote:

Flander's Fartwhistle wrote:

DRM and it's digital broadcasting mode children will never appear
on shortwave. Mark it in your book. Analog will be here for a very
long time to come, as any digital dependent mode requires a clear
signal path for reception. When was the last time we heard a clear
shortwave program or station that had ZERO fading, noise or
propagation issues with it's signal? My guess is you can count them
on one hand.

A perfect example is how everyone has had to endure poor signal
degradation from someone using a modern cellphone. 20% of the calls
I get from people out in the field usually cut out or are partially
garbled, and I am using a brand new Samsung and Nokia digital
phone. Any loss of "data" between you and 'over there/wherever' on
the other end of the cellphone line and your call is useless or
interrupted. If it's this bad with local Verizon cell phone
service in a major metro area (NJ/NY/Ct) then how bad will it be
with a digital shortwave signal comming halfway around the world on
a much lower frequency prone to atmospherics and other
degradation...?

Digital Shortwave???? Sounds alot like New Coke or the Yugo car or
any one of another 'brilliant' consumer technology or product ideas
that are now in the rubbish bin of history.

The success of DRM doesn't depend on perfect propagation conditions.
If it did, the proponents of this technology wouldn't consider using
it for ionospheric propagation. It's a matter of how degraded the
conditions can be before the digital signal can not be decoded
properly. DRM has considerable tolerance for poor propagation. The
cell phone comparison is apples and oranges. They are two very
different technologies and frequency ranges. If DRM fails to catch
on, it will most likely be because people don't want to buy new
receivers for international broadcasting when it appears to have an
uncertain future at this time.

The FEC in DRM is pretty weak. FEC in stable medium just to overcome the
stable defects needs to be about 1/3 of the transmitted overhead. DRM
does not even provide this much for a non stable path and so it is
completely inadequate for HF propagation. DRM on SW is not unlike
pounding screws into wood with a hammer instead of using a screw driver.
The hammer will pound in the screws just like a nail but you will not
derive the benefit of using the screw over the nail for greater
fastening power by pounding it in with the hammer.

The wheels came off this technology before it even got started.

DRM - the claims amount to a Michael Bryant type of non reality.

I was with you until you went OT at the end.

That was a reference to not possible statements such as DRM will sound
better using the same bandwidth even when some of that bandwidth will be
used for other things. That and other BS statements to that effect.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

I agree with Raqueeb.

The following article tells the of the continuing importance of radio in most
of the world.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4953281/

Many thanks to RadioIntel.com for headlining this article.

Bill, K5BY
SETexas

"starman" wrote:
The success of DRM doesn't depend on perfect propagation conditions. If
it did, the proponents of this technology wouldn't consider using it for
ionospheric propagation. It's a matter of how degraded the conditions
can be before the digital signal can not be decoded properly. DRM has
considerable tolerance for poor propagation.


I have to disagree.

After trying the first "stand alone" DRM receiver for a week now (from
MAYAH) - I must say that so far I haven't been able to listen to ANY
broadcasts in DRM without many, many breaks. With the built in telescopic
aerial hardly anything in DRM is receivable but with an outdoor longwire
aerial I do get a few of the VERY strongest stations broadcasting in DRM,
such as RN, RTL and DW. However, so far I haven't heard anything souding
reasonable. It is impossible to follow a programme because when the signal
fades out briefly the sound will become very distorted and then disappear
for a few seconds or even several seconds - then the distorted audio appears
again and then clean audio for a while till the next deep fade.

As everyone knows - with AM you can easily follow a programme even though
there is some fading.

Either is the MAYAH DRM receiver very very poor - or DRM is only usuable
when you have a local, stable signal with no fading.

Best 73s,
Stig Hartvig Nielsen,
Denmark

In article ,
"Stig Hartvig Nielsen" wrote:

"starman" wrote:
The success of DRM doesn't depend on perfect propagation
conditions. If it did, the proponents of this technology wouldn't
consider using it for ionospheric propagation. It's a matter of how
degraded the conditions can be before the digital signal can not be
decoded properly. DRM has considerable tolerance for poor
propagation.


I have to disagree.

After trying the first "stand alone" DRM receiver for a week now
(from MAYAH) - I must say that so far I haven't been able to listen
to ANY broadcasts in DRM without many, many breaks. With the built in
telescopic aerial hardly anything in DRM is receivable but with an
outdoor longwire aerial I do get a few of the VERY strongest stations
broadcasting in DRM, such as RN, RTL and DW. However, so far I
haven't heard anything souding reasonable. It is impossible to
follow a programme because when the signal fades out briefly the
sound will become very distorted and then disappear for a few seconds
or even several seconds - then the distorted audio appears again and
then clean audio for a while till the next deep fade.

As everyone knows - with AM you can easily follow a programme even
though there is some fading.

Either is the MAYAH DRM receiver very very poor - or DRM is only
usuable when you have a local, stable signal with no fading.

Your experience is what I expect from this technology on short wave and
I don't think it has anything to do with your particular receiver being
poor.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon schreef:

In article ,
"Stig Hartvig Nielsen" wrote:

"starman" wrote:
The success of DRM doesn't depend on perfect propagation
conditions. If it did, the proponents of this technology wouldn't
consider using it for ionospheric propagation. It's a matter of how
degraded the conditions can be before the digital signal can not be
decoded properly. DRM has considerable tolerance for poor
propagation.


I have to disagree.

After trying the first "stand alone" DRM receiver for a week now
(from MAYAH) - I must say that so far I haven't been able to listen
to ANY broadcasts in DRM without many, many breaks. With the built in
telescopic aerial hardly anything in DRM is receivable but with an
outdoor longwire aerial I do get a few of the VERY strongest stations
broadcasting in DRM, such as RN, RTL and DW. However, so far I
haven't heard anything souding reasonable. It is impossible to
follow a programme because when the signal fades out briefly the
sound will become very distorted and then disappear for a few seconds
or even several seconds - then the distorted audio appears again and
then clean audio for a while till the next deep fade.

As everyone knows - with AM you can easily follow a programme even
though there is some fading.

Either is the MAYAH DRM receiver very very poor - or DRM is only
usuable when you have a local, stable signal with no fading.

Your experience is what I expect from this technology on short wave and
I don't think it has anything to do with your particular receiver being
poor.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

If this is true, than DRM is not fit for SW, or any other frequency with
alternating frequency quality.
ruud

On Mon, 31 May 2004 00:04:33 +0200, "Stig Hartvig Nielsen"
wrote:

Either is the MAYAH DRM receiver very very poor - or DRM is only usuable
when you have a local, stable signal with no fading.


I wonder if your experience may be due to using the Mayah. I have been
using the WinRadio G303i PC-based receiver with the software-based DRM
decoder, and the result is superb: I have very few drop-outs on weak
signals, and no drop-outs whatsoever on strong stations.

Could it be that the DRM decoder used in the stand-alone Mayah
receiver is not that good as the PC-based one? One can imagine that
the PC-based software should be more sophisticated than the firmware
inside a chip...

David

In article 40bb41ab.14410330@news-server,
(David Clark) wrote:

On Mon, 31 May 2004 00:04:33 +0200, "Stig Hartvig Nielsen"
wrote:

Either is the MAYAH DRM receiver very very poor - or DRM is only
usuable when you have a local, stable signal with no fading.


I wonder if your experience may be due to using the Mayah. I have
been using the WinRadio G303i PC-based receiver with the
software-based DRM decoder, and the result is superb: I have very few
drop-outs on weak signals, and no drop-outs whatsoever on strong
stations.

Could it be that the DRM decoder used in the stand-alone Mayah
receiver is not that good as the PC-based one? One can imagine that
the PC-based software should be more sophisticated than the firmware
inside a chip...

Yeah, Real Audio over the Internet should work much better.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

On Mon, 31 May 2004 15:29:57 +0200, Ruud Poeze wrote:

Telamon schreef:

In article ,
"Stig Hartvig Nielsen" wrote:

"starman" wrote:
The success of DRM doesn't depend on perfect propagation
conditions. If it did, the proponents of this technology wouldn't
consider using it for ionospheric propagation. It's a matter of how
degraded the conditions can be before the digital signal can not be
decoded properly. DRM has considerable tolerance for poor
propagation.


I have to disagree.

After trying the first "stand alone" DRM receiver for a week now
(from MAYAH) - I must say that so far I haven't been able to listen
to ANY broadcasts in DRM without many, many breaks. With the built in
telescopic aerial hardly anything in DRM is receivable but with an
outdoor longwire aerial I do get a few of the VERY strongest stations
broadcasting in DRM, such as RN, RTL and DW. However, so far I
haven't heard anything souding reasonable. It is impossible to
follow a programme because when the signal fades out briefly the
sound will become very distorted and then disappear for a few seconds
or even several seconds - then the distorted audio appears again and
then clean audio for a while till the next deep fade.

As everyone knows - with AM you can easily follow a programme even
though there is some fading.

Either is the MAYAH DRM receiver very very poor - or DRM is only
usuable when you have a local, stable signal with no fading.

Your experience is what I expect from this technology on short wave and
I don't think it has anything to do with your particular receiver being
poor.



If this is true, than DRM is not fit for SW, or any other frequency with
alternating frequency quality.

Ruud, DRM is fitted for SW, but as receivers are still in the
development stage, DRM currently only works (more or less) reliably on
not-too-long distances from the transmitter, while using at least a long
wire antenna. DRM Rxs are currently not as good as plain old AM Rxs, to
say the least.

That's the impression I got from (yet another) review of the Mayah (in
German):
http://www.teltarif.de/arch/2004/kw23/s13868.html
(got the link from a german group, news:de.alt.hoerfunk , msg-id:
).

--

mvg,
Giovanni.