|
"Aztech" wrote in message ... Satellite radio does every thing DRM promises. ... if you're in the US, which doesn't include 95% of the world. Az. I think there's direct broadcast satellites serving areas outside the US. The cost of satellite receivers is a real concern, but it's also a concern for DRM. Anyway, the international broadcasters could get together and put up a few direct broadcast satellites, if they really wanted to make the investment. DRM doesn't really get around shortwave's reliability problems. The shortwave utility bands used to be filled with digital signals 25 years ago. These signals were highly reliable. If there was any propagation at all, they would get the message through. Despite having high power shortwave transmitters, selective and sensitive receivers, highly directional antennas, sometimes the message didn't get through. There's now only maybe 10% the utility traffic there once was. The balance, plus the whatever expansion there was, went to satellites. The utility stations wanted 100% reliable communication. They ditched SW. Frank Dresser |
Dan Say wrote in message news:clmqmm$ik4
Countries are finding that none of their nationals are listening, Germans not listening to DW, Brits not listening to BBCWS etc. So the most important self-market is lost. Is that actually true? I can think of several fellow British people who have reason to be abroad reguarly every year who rely on the BBC World Service to hear news not only from their home broadcaster, but also British news. This is the same for friends who just go on holiday for a few weeks. Sure, BBC World and Prime may be available in their hotel rooms abroad but thats all international perspective. Many international broadcasters still recognise foreign nationals and ex-pats as being important. Although Radio Vlaanderen Internationaal are killing the majority of their output, what will be left of the Flemish service apparently has one sole target area. South and South East Europe. Where most Belgians go on vacation. International SW broadcasting still has various purposes, IMO: * As mentioned above - nationals abroad. No one else is going to serve them. * International news for an international audience. If BBC World is going to exist happily on TV, why shouldn't BBC World Service on radio? I'll hold back on dozens of other examples * As you say, serving rural areas, freedom-suppressed regions. It's more important than just building diplomacy though, some people depend on SW as a lifeline, the ONLY way they can get any sort of real news and education. If people are turning away from shortwave (of which there is no doubt), a big part of that will be the technology. SW used to be good enough. But AM broadcasting on SW is ancient. Satellite sounds much better. Even low-bitrate net streams sound a damn sight better than a distant SW transmission. That's where DRM is going to be crucial. It's going to make international broadcasting listenable again, attractive again. It will have the advantages of satellite and internet radio as far as audio quality is concerned, with all the portability of REAL radio. And theres no doubt that in a short space of time, DRM receivers will become affordable in poorer areas of the world. It's shortsighted to write off DRM so soon. It must be given a chance. Stephen H |
StephenH wrote: Dan Say wrote in message news:clmqmm$ik4 Countries are finding that none of their nationals are listening, Germans not listening to DW, Brits not listening to BBCWS etc. So the most important self-market is lost. Is that actually true? I can think of several fellow British people who have reason to be abroad reguarly every year who rely on the BBC World Service to hear news not only from their home broadcaster, but also British news. This is the same for friends who just go on holiday for a few weeks. Sure, BBC World and Prime may be available in their hotel rooms abroad but thats all international perspective. Many international broadcasters still recognise foreign nationals and ex-pats as being important. Although Radio Vlaanderen Internationaal are killing the majority of their output, what will be left of the Flemish service apparently has one sole target area. South and South East Europe. Where most Belgians go on vacation. International SW broadcasting still has various purposes, IMO: * As mentioned above - nationals abroad. No one else is going to serve them. * International news for an international audience. If BBC World is going to exist happily on TV, why shouldn't BBC World Service on radio? I'll hold back on dozens of other examples * As you say, serving rural areas, freedom-suppressed regions. It's more important than just building diplomacy though, some people depend on SW as a lifeline, the ONLY way they can get any sort of real news and education. If people are turning away from shortwave (of which there is no doubt), a big part of that will be the technology. SW used to be good enough. But AM broadcasting on SW is ancient. Satellite sounds much better. Even low-bitrate net streams sound a damn sight better than a distant SW transmission. That's where DRM is going to be crucial. It's going to make international broadcasting listenable again, attractive again. It will have the advantages of satellite and internet radio as far as audio quality is concerned, with all the portability of REAL radio. And theres no doubt that in a short space of time, DRM receivers will become affordable in poorer areas of the world. It's shortsighted to write off DRM so soon. It must be given a chance. Sure, keep the QRM a coming.... dxAce Michigan USA |
dxAce wrote in message ...
Aztech wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Anything is better than the current nightmare of a dying medium with little else to offer but propaganda stations from curious parts of the world, firebrands reciting scripture and others reciting Pi. And you think that with DRM you'll get something better? Certainly can't be any worse than the current predicament. Some folks don't necessarily consider it a 'predicament'. Get yourself a nice FM radio or an XM or Sirius setup. Be happy, and don't screw up someone else's spectrum. dxAce Michigan USA I'm actually quite fond of the current predicament and hope it continues as long as possible. When I turn on my receiver at night, there's plenty of stuff to listen do on SW bands, and the program quality if very high. If shortwave became 'popular' again it would attract the attention of all sorts of commercial interests who'd drag shortwave programming into the muck that we currently find television and mainstream AM radio in. Long live the marginalization of shortwave! Steve |
The key to it's success will be whether users will buy the needed
digital receiver. Given that most major brodcasters are moving toward satellite, FM and MW broadcasts I don't think there wil be much reason for a broad range of SW listerners to buy a digital unit. Neat idea, but too late. The speaker said as much: "Admittedly listeners would need new receivers. As a consequence, the real challenge for the DRM consortium would be to achieve successful implementation, said Technical Director of the EBU, Mr. Philip Laven." "Mike Terry" wrote in message ... Monday, 25 October 2004 "Digital short-wave will revolutionise cross-border broadcasts and will initiate a world-wide renaissance of radio". This was the opinion of the Director General of Deutsche Welle, Mr Erik Bettermann, during a panel discussion at Münchner Medientage. Bettermann, the head of the German international broadcaster - and instigator of the event - was not the only one to present an optimistic prediction of a "Digital Global Radio" development: The other panel specialists also emphasised the advantages of digitalisation in the so-called AM range, i.e. short-, medium- and long-wave. The discussion was chaired by Peter Senger, Director of Distribution at Deutsche Welle and Chairman of the Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) Consortium; and next to Erik Bettermann, BBC representative Mike Cronk, Dan D'Aversa of RTL Group and Phil Laven of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) were also participating in the debate. Senger outlined the advantages of digital short-wave as follows: The world-wide accepted DRM standard provided an excellent audio-quality comparable to FM. In addition, the search for frequencies was obsolete, as the station identification tuned in to the designated frequency and automatically switched to the best one. In parallel, it allows for the sending of accompanying programme information such as text messages. "On top of everything, digital transmission technology saves a lot of energy and costs compared to the analogue one", Senger said. This would open up enormous opportunities, especially for international broadcasters. For several years, DW - like many other broadcasters - has noted that listeners migrated from short-wave to FM or other new distribution channels in digital quality, said Bettermann. Deutsche Welle had to stay abreast of these changes. "According to test transmissions being operated by Deutsche Welle, we anticipate large area coverage in almost FM quality without interference such as jitters, induced power-noise or fading", the General Director stated. At the same time, not only stationery indoor reception, but also mobile reception in cars and with small portable devices is possible...(snip)..... Mike Cronk stated that the BBC had invested heavily in DRM and that they were now developing "a detailed strategy for its initial deployment, probably into Europe, in 2005". According to Cronk, DRM offered the unique combination of wide area short-wave coverage and FM usability and quality. As a consequence of using this digital medium, continuous direct delivery to the audience avoiding "political or other regulatory obstacles" will be possible...(snip).... (See more in a long article at http://ukradio.com/news/articles/E69...A75DE7F8A5.asp ) |
dxAce wrote in message ...
StephenH wrote: It's shortsighted to write off DRM so soon. It must be given a chance. Sure, keep the QRM a coming.... As sarcastic as that may (be intended to) sound, you know, I know and I'm sure everyone else knows that is a serious point. DRM *is* causing serious problems to adjacent channels. The evidence is there on a daily basis, and if DRM is to grow this problem will only get worse. This is where the HFCC should come in. If DRM is going to be taken seriously, even by long-term hardcore DXers, then it can't be made to co-exist smack back in the middle of established AM broadcasts. There *has* to be a "DRM corner", on a few or all of the broadcast SW metre bands. Initally, a space of 50 to 100 kHz on each band, dedicated to DRM only broadcasts. Where this might be allowing more capacity than required for DRM in the meantime, it should allow DRM to grow a little more - possibly to the extent where it might begin to be commerically attractive/viable - with NO impact on existing AM broadcasts. As time goes on, increase the DRM "band" while reducing the AM band. AM doesn't need to disappear completely, nor do I believe it will. (Same with FM vs DAB/IBOC) But there must be more to it than this. Maybe I'm making it sound too simple, there *must* be a real, logical reason as to why this approach hasn't already been taken. Otherwise, doesn't this approach solve most problems with interference, whilst giving DRM the space it needs to grow a little more? Stephen Howie, Reading, U.K |
StephenH wrote: dxAce wrote in message ... StephenH wrote: It's shortsighted to write off DRM so soon. It must be given a chance. Sure, keep the QRM a coming.... As sarcastic as that may (be intended to) sound, you know, I know and I'm sure everyone else knows that is a serious point. DRM *is* causing serious problems to adjacent channels. The evidence is there on a daily basis, and if DRM is to grow this problem will only get worse. This is where the HFCC should come in. If DRM is going to be taken seriously, even by long-term hardcore DXers, then it can't be made to co-exist smack back in the middle of established AM broadcasts. There *has* to be a "DRM corner", on a few or all of the broadcast SW metre bands. Initally, a space of 50 to 100 kHz on each band, dedicated to DRM only broadcasts. Where this might be allowing more capacity than required for DRM in the meantime, it should allow DRM to grow a little more - possibly to the extent where it might begin to be commerically attractive/viable - with NO impact on existing AM broadcasts. As time goes on, increase the DRM "band" while reducing the AM band. AM doesn't need to disappear completely, nor do I believe it will. (Same with FM vs DAB/IBOC) But there must be more to it than this. Maybe I'm making it sound too simple, there *must* be a real, logical reason as to why this approach hasn't already been taken. Otherwise, doesn't this approach solve most problems with interference, whilst giving DRM the space it needs to grow a little more? I certainly agree with you. dxAce Michigan USA |
|
"John S." wrote:
The key to it's success will be whether users will buy the needed digital receiver. Given that most major brodcasters are moving toward satellite, FM and MW broadcasts I don't think there wil be much reason for a broad range of SW listerners to buy a digital unit. Neat idea, but too late. The speaker said as much: "Admittedly listeners would need new receivers. As a consequence, the real challenge for the DRM consortium would be to achieve successful implementation, said Technical Director of the EBU, Mr. Philip Laven." There's also the possibility that DRM or any digital shortwave system won't always be free to the listener. It could become like subcription satellite radio, where the user has to pay for the service before the receiver is activated. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
"StephenH" wrote in message m... This is where the HFCC should come in. If DRM is going to be taken seriously, even by long-term hardcore DXers, then it can't be made to co-exist smack back in the middle of established AM broadcasts. There *has* to be a "DRM corner", on a few or all of the broadcast SW metre bands. Initally, a space of 50 to 100 kHz on each band, dedicated to DRM only broadcasts. Where this might be allowing more capacity than required for DRM in the meantime, it should allow DRM to grow a little more - possibly to the extent where it might begin to be commerically attractive/viable - with NO impact on existing AM broadcasts. As time goes on, increase the DRM "band" while reducing the AM band. AM doesn't need to disappear completely, nor do I believe it will. (Same with FM vs DAB/IBOC) Why reduce the AM shortwave broadcast band at all? The AM SW BC bands have been expanded since the SW commercial utility stations have mostly left. Just let some of the new expansions go to DRM. But there must be more to it than this. Maybe I'm making it sound too simple, there *must* be a real, logical reason as to why this approach hasn't already been taken. Otherwise, doesn't this approach solve most problems with interference, whilst giving DRM the space it needs to grow a little more? Stephen Howie, Reading, U.K Maybe a station is equipped and licensed to operate on a certain frequency, so that's where they operate, DRM or AM. The real, logical reason might be that nobody though much about interference until now, and the implementation is haphazard. Frank Dresser |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:51 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com