DRM receivers
 

Please excuse any ignorance I am going to show- you have helped me a lot as
I learned to DX and what kind of radio gives the most bang for the buck.

What is the real deal with DRM? Are analog SW radios going away? Have any of
you invested in a DRM capable receiver and how are they? Should I begin to
move towards DRM and if so, what receivers will pick up and decode those
signals? What are the limitations, or the cons if any, of DRM?

Thanks for any info/opinions you are willing to pass on...

Pastor K


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004

Considering DRM costs a ton right now, I doubt
that analog is going away anytime soon.

--Mike L.

"Karl Graff" wrote in message
...
Please excuse any ignorance I am going to show- you have helped me a
lot as
I learned to DX and what kind of radio gives the most bang for the
buck.

What is the real deal with DRM? Are analog SW radios going away?
Have any of
you invested in a DRM capable receiver and how are they? Should I
begin to
move towards DRM and if so, what receivers will pick up and decode
those
signals? What are the limitations, or the cons if any, of DRM?

Thanks for any info/opinions you are willing to pass on...

Pastor K


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004

If you have a receiver with a 12KHz IF, all you need to do is feed this
into your sound card and Dream software (available for free) will decode
the DRM program. Give it a try before you invest into it, to see if you
like it. I would not invest a lot into it at this time, but I believe it is
the direction SW is going.

The sound quality of DRM is much better than standard shortwave. Its
biggest downfall is that it needs a lot of signal or you will get drop outs
(total loss of signal). Drop outs are very annoying and a lot harder to
take than standard fading on short wave. Music comes across very nice via
DRM, unfortunately there isn't much music available on short wave.

I get solid copy most of the time from Bonaire, Netherlands Antilles and
Sackville, NB Canada. I have not picked up anything from Europe.

Like I said, give it a try and see how you like it.

Al KA5JGV
San Antonio, Tx.



"Karl Graff" wrote in message
...
Please excuse any ignorance I am going to show- you have helped me a lot
as I learned to DX and what kind of radio gives the most bang for the
buck.

What is the real deal with DRM? Are analog SW radios going away? Have any
of you invested in a DRM capable receiver and how are they? Should I
begin to move towards DRM and if so, what receivers will pick up and
decode those signals? What are the limitations, or the cons if any, of
DRM?

Thanks for any info/opinions you are willing to pass on...

Pastor K


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:46:07 -0600, Karl Graff wrote
(in message ):

Please excuse any ignorance I am going to show- you have helped me a lot as
I learned to DX and what kind of radio gives the most bang for the buck.

What is the real deal with DRM?

"Change" if not "progress". [smile]

Are analog SW radios going away?

I've got a Ten*Tec RX-320 abd can have it
converted for U$60 and buy the software
for another U$60 (last year anyway).

So, U$120 to play with a few stations.


Most commercial and national shortwave
broadcasters are much more interested
in reaching an audience of ten of
thousands (more or less) rather than
23 listeners.

So - for most folks - there would be the
necessity of buying a new shortwave
radio but for what?


And - going from the experience of a domestic broadcasting in Single-Side Ban
- which went over like sumthin or anudder - no one (with the exception, of
course, of bleeding edge pre-early adapters) - is going to rush to go with
DRM.

The above is solely my opinion and I haven't paid any attention to DRM since
the first few months after it was introduced. (I'm not overly excited, as you
prolly tell [grin].)



Have any of
you invested in a DRM capable receiver and how are they? Should I begin to
move towards DRM and if so, what receivers will pick up and decode those
signals? What are the limitations, or the cons if any, of DRM?



Gray Shockley
Vicksburg, MS
-----------------------------------
[Insert Radios Here]
[Insert Antennas Here]
[insert Appropriate Quote]



Thanks for any info/opinions you are willing to pass on...

Pastor K


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004

In article , Karl Graff wrote:
Please excuse any ignorance I am going to show- you have helped me a lot as
I learned to DX and what kind of radio gives the most bang for the buck.

What is the real deal with DRM? Are analog SW radios going away? Have any of
you invested in a DRM capable receiver and how are they? Should I begin to
move towards DRM and if so, what receivers will pick up and decode those
signals? What are the limitations, or the cons if any, of DRM?

This is totaly my opinion:

Shortwave broadcasting is used for two things.

1. To reach an audience outside of one's country to for propaganda,
cultural or relegious purposes.

2. To spread news, etc inside a country where there are large areas with
poor communication, e.g. Northern Canada, India, Russia, China.

DRM is a way of providing high (sound) quality programing using existing
shortwave transmission facilites. It is not compatible with older recivers
and therefore requires the listener put up money to hear it.

In some places it will take off. For example, I assume that shortwave
broadcasting in remote parts of Canada has been replaced by the internet
where possible. Where there is no internet access, DRM will move in to
fill the niche.

In other places such as India or Africa, where the population is poor and
can't afford batteries yet alone radios, good old fasishioned AM will remain
for many years.

Relegious brodcasters already use shortwave, satelitte tv and the internet,
some will add DRM as way of reaching a larger "flock".

The only reason I see DRM taking off in poorer countries is because being
digital it can be encrypted. For example, a someone could produce
DRM radios that only play signals encrypted with a certain key.

How about that for VOA or Radio Moscow only radios?

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem Israel
IL Voice: 972-544-608-069 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838

"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" wrote:

In article , Karl Graff wrote:
Please excuse any ignorance I am going to show- you have helped me a lot as
I learned to DX and what kind of radio gives the most bang for the buck.

What is the real deal with DRM? Are analog SW radios going away? Have any of
you invested in a DRM capable receiver and how are they? Should I begin to
move towards DRM and if so, what receivers will pick up and decode those
signals? What are the limitations, or the cons if any, of DRM?

This is totaly my opinion:

Shortwave broadcasting is used for two things.

1. To reach an audience outside of one's country to for propaganda,
cultural or relegious purposes.

2. To spread news, etc inside a country where there are large areas with
poor communication, e.g. Northern Canada, India, Russia, China.

DRM is a way of providing high (sound) quality programing using existing
shortwave transmission facilites. It is not compatible with older recivers
and therefore requires the listener put up money to hear it.

In some places it will take off. For example, I assume that shortwave
broadcasting in remote parts of Canada has been replaced by the internet
where possible. Where there is no internet access, DRM will move in to
fill the niche.

In other places such as India or Africa, where the population is poor and
can't afford batteries yet alone radios, good old fasishioned AM will remain
for many years.

Relegious brodcasters already use shortwave, satelitte tv and the internet,
some will add DRM as way of reaching a larger "flock".

The only reason I see DRM taking off in poorer countries is because being
digital it can be encrypted. For example, a someone could produce
DRM radios that only play signals encrypted with a certain key.

How about that for VOA or Radio Moscow only radios?

Radio Moscow no longer exists.

DRM = QRM

dxAce
Michigan
USA

codingtechnologies.com The inventors of DRM have a USB DRM Radio on
their website for 199 euros

codingtechnologies.com The inventors of DRM have a USB DRM Radio on
their website for 199 euros

In article ,
"Karl Graff" wrote:

Please excuse any ignorance I am going to show- you have helped me a lot as
I learned to DX and what kind of radio gives the most bang for the buck.

What is the real deal with DRM? Are analog SW radios going away? Have any of
you invested in a DRM capable receiver and how are they? Should I begin to
move towards DRM and if so, what receivers will pick up and decode those
signals? What are the limitations, or the cons if any, of DRM?

Thanks for any info/opinions you are willing to pass on...

It's a bad idea made to be something better through a hype campaign and
wishful thinking. DRM is a con job.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

= = = Telamon wrote in message
= = = ...
In article ,
"Karl Graff" wrote:

Please excuse any ignorance I am going to show- you have helped me a lot as
I learned to DX and what kind of radio gives the most bang for the buck.

What is the real deal with DRM? Are analog SW radios going away? Have any of
you invested in a DRM capable receiver and how are they? Should I begin to
move towards DRM and if so, what receivers will pick up and decode those
signals? What are the limitations, or the cons if any, of DRM?

Thanks for any info/opinions you are willing to pass on...

It's a bad idea made to be something better through a hype campaign and
wishful thinking. DRM is a con job.


TELAMON,

Good 'old fashion' (Tried-and-True) "Analog" AM International
Broadcasting {Long Distance} may have it's FADE and Weak Signals.
- Remember Analog Celphones ?

DRM "Digital" AM Broadcasting AM International Broadcasting
{Long Distance} has it's Signal Drop-Off.
- Its Here (Can be Heard) "Great Sound" and then Its Gone [.]
- Think of Digital Celphones !

DRM may be good and useful for In-Country 1000 Mile Broadcasting;
but for "Around-the-World" International Broadcasting it offers no
real advantage in Punching the Signal Through and Getting Heard.

The Most Cost-Effective-Method and the Trend for Governments and
'others' who want to get their Message-Out to the Masses of other
Countries will continue to be Internet Broadcasting "On-Demand"
Streaming Audio that is THERE when the Listener Whats to Hear It;
and Host Country Re-Broadcasting via 'local' AM and FM Band Radios;
or via "In-Country" Shortwave Relays.

ssi ~ RHF
..
..

"Karl Graff" wrote in message
...
Please excuse any ignorance I am going to show- you have helped me a lot
as
I learned to DX and what kind of radio gives the most bang for the buck.

What is the real deal with DRM?

In my opinion, it's a solution to a problem which doesn't exist. There's
the idea that there's a lot of people who would want to listen to SW radio,
if only SW radio had better sound. I'll say that more people would listen
to SW radio if only the programming appealed to them. Most nations are
cutting budgets for SW programming.

There's some hope that DRM might help with the penny pinching, if the
digital modulation will work acceptably with lower transmitter power.

About 20 years ago, there was hope that the SWL hobby would boom as the
affordable digital display radios became common. There was a sort of boom,
in that the radios sold fairly well. But I think a large number of those
sales went to existing SWLs who were replacing their analog display radios.
I don't think the easier to tune radios attracted many new listeners.
Again, I don't think SW radio appeals to most people.


Are analog SW radios going away?

Not any time soon. Nearly all SW transmissions are analog. An even higher
percentage of newly manufactured radios have analog demodulators.


Have any of
you invested in a DRM capable receiver and how are they?

I've thought of going the hobbyist route. My SX-62 has variable IF
selectivity, and the wide setting seem suitable for DRMs bandwidth. Using
the BFO, I should be able to generate a 12kHz IF output. I just need to tap
off the detector, and feed the output to the soundcard in my computer. Of
course, that radio is hardly frequency stable, and the combination of local
oscillator and BFO stability would be stinko. But it would be cheap.

I don't want to play with it. Everything I want to hear is on standard AM.


Should I begin to
move towards DRM and if so, what receivers will pick up and decode those
signals?

DRM will have to get pretty inexpensive before it becomes popular. I really
don't think there's much added value in DRM for most SWLs and certainly not
for most normal people. Consider that US satellite radio carries some of
the big international broadcasters. The audio quality is supposed to be
excellent. But few Americans subscribe to satellite radio, and it's
unlikely that more than a small percentage of those subscribers listen to
international broadcasting.


What are the limitations, or the cons if any, of DRM?

Ready to go DRM receivers are expensive, right now. Hobbyists can put stuff
together for DRM reception at a much lower cost, but that involves alot of
skilled work. And, in the end, you're still listening to the same old
international broadcasters.

The dropout/fadeout problem has been brought up. I'm another who would find
dropouts far more jarring than fadeouts.



Thanks for any info/opinions you are willing to pass on...

Pastor K


Frank Dresser

In article ,
Frank Dresser wrote:

I've thought of going the hobbyist route. My SX-62 has variable IF
selectivity, and the wide setting seem suitable for DRMs bandwidth. Using
the BFO, I should be able to generate a 12kHz IF output. I just need to tap
off the detector, and feed the output to the soundcard in my computer. Of
course, that radio is hardly frequency stable, and the combination of local
oscillator and BFO stability would be stinko. But it would be cheap.

And it probably wouldn't work. According to one of the series of
articles in Elektor Electronics magazine, you need a good oscillator
in your receiver to get a signal the software can deal with. Their
DRM receiver project used a DDS chip for the LO.

Mark Zenier Washington State resident

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message ...
"Karl Graff" wrote in message
...
Please excuse any ignorance I am going to show- you have helped me a lot
as
I learned to DX and what kind of radio gives the most bang for the buck.

What is the real deal with DRM?

In my opinion, it's a solution to a problem which doesn't exist. There's
the idea that there's a lot of people who would want to listen to SW radio,
if only SW radio had better sound. I'll say that more people would listen
to SW radio if only the programming appealed to them. Most nations are
cutting budgets for SW programming.

There's some hope that DRM might help with the penny pinching, if the
digital modulation will work acceptably with lower transmitter power.


I think you're right. I listen to SW because the programming appeals
to me--and I suspect the current audience of SWLers is made up of
people like me, who are turned off by what they hear on much of MW and
certainly by what they hear on FM. If DRM caused the nature of SW
programming to change, then it might create a new (very small)
audience, but I suspect it would lose a huge chunk of the current SW
audience.

Steve

"Mark Zenier" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Frank Dresser wrote:

I've thought of going the hobbyist route. My SX-62 has variable IF
selectivity, and the wide setting seem suitable for DRMs bandwidth.
Using
the BFO, I should be able to generate a 12kHz IF output. I just need to
tap
off the detector, and feed the output to the soundcard in my computer.
Of
course, that radio is hardly frequency stable, and the combination of
local
oscillator and BFO stability would be stinko. But it would be cheap.

And it probably wouldn't work. According to one of the series of
articles in Elektor Electronics magazine, you need a good oscillator
in your receiver to get a signal the software can deal with. Their
DRM receiver project used a DDS chip for the LO.

Mark Zenier Washington State resident


I wouldn't say it wouldn't work at all. I was kinda expecting it might lock
for ten of fifteen seconds at a time.

I've got a bunch of FT-243 crystals, and I might even be able to find or
grind one to give me a suitable local oscillator for the radio.

Ten or fifteen seconds. That's about how long I thought this might be a
worthwhile project.

Frank Dresser

Rember the predicted death of Medium Wave.
What do you think revivied it to it's current robust state?

I think it was CONTENT!

Do you remember some of the technological "advancements" the
industry tried to institute in order to "compete" with VHF FM BCB?
(AM Stereo for one).

To broaden your listener ship, you need CONTENT.
Something people want, but can't get easily elsewhere.
------------------------------------------------

Here is a thought: In 10 years HF BCB could be the terrestile equivalent of
sattelite radio via DRM. (is that good or bad?) In my mind it is only bad
if content is limited.

Digital radio is a bad idea for DXing. You are basically at the mercy of
the computer inside the radio to give you audio. And only one stream of
audio - the one the computer decides to lock on to - the strongest signal
only. You, your ears and brain, have thus lost the ability to listen for
weak signal DXl.

Do what stereo AM radio manufacturers did - DON'T BUY A DRM RADIO!
Manufacturers will stop producing them and radio stations will pull the plug
on digital. DRM will go the way of stereo AM.

DRM is a marketers dream come true. There is little incentive for the
consumer to invest. IT IS ALL CREATED FOR THE MARKETING FOLKS!

"0ff_Ramp" wrote in message ...
Digital radio is a bad idea for DXing. You are basically at the mercy of
the computer inside the radio to give you audio. And only one stream of
audio - the one the computer decides to lock on to - the strongest signal
only. You, your ears and brain, have thus lost the ability to listen for
weak signal DXl.

Do what stereo AM radio manufacturers did - DON'T BUY A DRM RADIO!
Manufacturers will stop producing them and radio stations will pull the plug
on digital. DRM will go the way of stereo AM.

DRM is a marketers dream come true. There is little incentive for the
consumer to invest. IT IS ALL CREATED FOR THE MARKETING FOLKS!

Yep, I don't understand the attraction of DRM receivers. It sounds
like they promise to bring the primary *disadvantages* of other
broadcast media to shortwave.

Steve

"-=jd=-" wrote in message
...


Back when I was toying with a DRM signal, I was able to get 10
to 15 seconds worth (before drop-out) with an unmodified PCR-
1000 simply be using ssb and tuning down a bit. I also had to
set Dream to reverse some setting in the software that I can't
recall at the moment. It was the only setting that allowed you
to reverse/invert some aspect of the processing.

-=jd=-


Yeah, those were interesting posts. That's what triggered my thoughts on
using a computer as a DRM detector with the 62 and feeding the signal back
to radio's hi-fi audio section. The experiment would be cheap enough for
me, and it's probably doable, but I'm just not interested enough in DRM to
start playing with it.

Frank Dresser

On 13 Nov 2004 04:56:02 -0800, (Steve) wrote:

"0ff_Ramp" wrote in message ...
Digital radio is a bad idea for DXing. You are basically at the mercy of
the computer inside the radio to give you audio. And only one stream of
audio - the one the computer decides to lock on to - the strongest signal
only. You, your ears and brain, have thus lost the ability to listen for
weak signal DXl.

Do what stereo AM radio manufacturers did - DON'T BUY A DRM RADIO!
Manufacturers will stop producing them and radio stations will pull the plug
on digital. DRM will go the way of stereo AM.

DRM is a marketers dream come true. There is little incentive for the
consumer to invest. IT IS ALL CREATED FOR THE MARKETING FOLKS!

Yep, I don't understand the attraction of DRM receivers. It sounds
like they promise to bring the primary *disadvantages* of other
broadcast media to shortwave.

Steve

DRM is being pushed by broadcasters because it saves power (therefore
money) for the broadcasters (Transmission power) - what other reason
would they have in promoting it?

juny

"juny" wrote in message
...
On 13 Nov 2004 04:56:02 -0800, (Steve) wrote:


DRM is being pushed by broadcasters because it saves power (therefore
money) for the broadcasters (Transmission power) - what other reason
would they have in promoting it?

juny

Sangean and Sony are also part of the DRM consortium. Obviously, they have
an interest in selling a new generation of higher priced radios.

I don't think any of the Chinese manufacturers are involved with DRM.

Frank Dresser

"-=jd=-" wrote in message
...
On Sat 13 Nov 2004 04:53:51p, "Frank Dresser"
wrote in message

t:


"-=jd=-" wrote in message
...


Back when I was toying with a DRM signal, I was able to
get 10 to 15 seconds worth (before drop-out) with an
unmodified PCR- 1000 simply be using ssb and tuning down a
bit. I also had to set Dream to reverse some setting in
the software that I can't recall at the moment. It was the
only setting that allowed you to reverse/invert some
aspect of the processing.

-=jd=-


Yeah, those were interesting posts. That's what triggered
my thoughts on using a computer as a DRM detector with the
62 and feeding the signal back to radio's hi-fi audio
section. The experiment would be cheap enough for me, and
it's probably doable, but I'm just not interested enough in
DRM to start playing with it.

Frank Dresser


The one thing I got to hear most of was the undecoded signal -
As soothing as a bored 8-year old with a 100-foot length of
bubble-wrap. But for 10 to 15 seconds at a time, the decoded
signal quality was *scary* nice. I would have to say it was
notably better than FM. I had the impression I was in the same
room with the broadcaster. It would be nice to hear an
uninterrupted stream for a half-hour to get a better sampling.


-=jd=-
--
My Current Disposable Email:

(Remove YOUR HAT to reply directly)

"-=jd=-" wrote in message
...

[snip]


The one thing I got to hear most of was the undecoded signal -
As soothing as a bored 8-year old with a 100-foot length of
bubble-wrap. But for 10 to 15 seconds at a time, the decoded
signal quality was *scary* nice. I would have to say it was
notably better than FM. I had the impression I was in the same
room with the broadcaster. It would be nice to hear an
uninterrupted stream for a half-hour to get a better sampling.



I don't know if this is the same thing, but I was listening to one of the
local 1000 watt AMers today, and it sounded really nice. There was a three
dimensional sound from the studio that's not normally heard. I think the
normal studio reverberations and such are supressed either deliberately or
as a byproduct of the usual studio audio processing. Anyway, it sure
sounded lifelike.

I'm not so sure lifelike audio is much of a selling point, however. Hi-Fi
radio has been around in one form or another since the thirties, and it's
never been real popular. I figure people usually listen to the radio
casually, and pull out the recordings when they want to listen intently.

The only problem with standard AM as a high fidelity medium is it takes alot
of signal to get a good signal to noise ratio. I really doubt DRM can
better the fidelity potentially availiable from standard AM with a strong
signal. But, even in very strong signal areas, there seems to be no
interest in high fidelity AM anymore.

Frank Dresser

Sangean and Sony are also part of the DRM consortium. Obviously, they
have
an interest in selling a new generation of higher priced radios.

I don't think any of the Chinese manufacturers are involved with DRM.


I don't know the numbers but, there are increasingly more products from Sony
that are outsourced to China.
I was dismayed when I purchased a second Sony TV, about 4 years after I
purchased the same model earlier, only to discover it was made in Mexico.
The quality between the two TV sets are obvious. The first one, made in
Japan, is superior in every way to the newer made in Mexico model.

Sony will be exiting the SW WorldBand radio market. Get one while you still
can!

Sangean (=Grundig/Eton) are a Taiwan company. All of their radios are made
on mainland China in the same factories (I believe, correct me if wrong) as
Tecsun which is owned by the Chinese Communist Party - believe it or not!

DRM is a another way to extract $$$ from unsuspecting consumers.
If I want "digital" radio I'll "subscribe" (remember that -
"S.U.B.S.C.R.I.B.E.") to XM or Serius or satellite TV or internet stream...
I don't want Ibiquous(sp?) or DRM!

Whatever became of Motorola's Symphony Chip for analog radio?
It was supposed to perform wonders from current AM broadcast signals.

"Motorola has developed this system to improve radio reception at the
receiver by using the 1,500 MIPs processor to demodulate the received
signal. The improvement comes without any transmission changes required of
the broadcaster."
http://beradio.com/departments/radio...phony_digital/

"Motorola's Symphony digital radio chipset delivers breakthrough AM/FM
reception and performance"

"Unlike other digital radio offerings, the new digital radio chipset does
not require broadcasters to buy new digital broadcast equipment. Neither
does it require consumers to pay a monthly subscription fee like those
charged by satellite services because it operates on traditional AM/FM
analog broadcasts."

http://mrtmag.com/dealers/automotive...phony_digital/


The DSP56371 is priced at $9.95(USD) (suggested list price) for 100,000-unit
quantities.
http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/...798_23,00.html