Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old January 31st 05, 02:02 AM
Joel Kolstad
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...
Then, for SW digital broadcast radio to be successful, the listeners will
still have to accept the unreliability of SW.


I suppose so, although I think it's safe to do that, in many areas, the
reliability is a very slowly changing function (i.e., dependent much more on
something like the sunspot cycle rather than local atmospheric conditions).

The bottom line is that digital broadcasting can make SW more reliable than
it is now. True, it will never approach the 'realiability' of a local
broadcaster, but presumably the typical use of SW (excluding hobbyists for a
moment) is when the local broadcasts are either unavailable or considered to
be too heavily influenced by the local government.

Reliable communications have never been cheaper, and they will get much
cheaper yet. I think the day will soon come when SW radio won't be the
first choice for any business or government worldwide communication.


Yes.

The SW spectrum will only be useful for emergency communications and radio
hobbyists.


I'd wager that the users of the HF spectrum for free e-mail services such as
Winlink 2000 won't go away any time soon either. :-)

I'm not convinced the average radio listener cares much about fidelity.


I think they care a lot about fidelity, but not how you'd typically measure
it. To the average person, static or fading is far more annoying than heavy
compression artifacts (that abount on XM and Sirius) or even short dropouts.

Satellite's
appeal seems to be it's wide range of programming.


True.

---Joel


  #2   Report Post  
Old January 31st 05, 01:48 PM
Frank Dresser
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Joel Kolstad" wrote in message
...

I'm not convinced the average radio listener cares much about fidelity.


I think they care a lot about fidelity, but not how you'd typically

measure
it. To the average person, static or fading is far more annoying than

heavy
compression artifacts (that abount on XM and Sirius) or even short

dropouts.


Maybe, but it took thirty years for wideband FM to become competitive with
AM. And FM didn't replace AM. FM didn't start growing until there was a
market for additional stations.

Frank Dresser


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
197 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (23-NOV-04) Albert P. Belle Isle Shortwave 1 November 28th 04 01:46 PM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1402 ­ June 25, 2004 Radionews Policy 1 June 26th 04 02:07 AM
209 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (04-APR-04) Albert P. Belle Isle Shortwave 0 April 5th 04 05:20 AM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1379 – January 16, 2004 Radionews General 0 January 18th 04 09:34 PM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1379 – January 16, 2004 Radionews Dx 0 January 18th 04 09:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017