I can't help but to have noticed over the last 10 years I have to work
harder to catch a little English broadcasting (unless it is religous
stuff - which of course they have every right to spend their money on
broadcasting but it is disheartening to get a blasting good signal of
crap).

I have a very fast internet connection, two killer computers (one a
laptop other a dual processor 64 bit desktop machine) and I perish the
thought of listening to these stations via them. I also have Sirius
and despise the idea of listening to the BBC or any other station that
I have grown accustomed to listening to via shortwave. It is the
challenge... the romance. I get two hours of BBC in the evening on
5975kHz here in the Northwest US and it isn't enough. I think they're
broadcasting to Central/South America and it still blasts in but is
overtaken by a different broadcaster just at the time of the evening
I'd like to listen. Radio Netherlands has also changed their 8PM
(local Pacific Time) English broadcast which used to be a bulletproof
"go to" listen on 6165 and 9590. They do have earlier broadcasts but
the declining "prime time" English broadcasts are fading. Prime time
to me is 7PM - midnight.

It is somewhat sad but I'm glad to have been listening for the time I
have been and I really hope something happens to revive this great way
of broadcasting news and stories. On the other hand, if it is going to
slide all the way until I can no longer hear English broadcasting from
other nations I'll be somewhat proud to say I was there before the end,
and listening as much as ever during the decline.

Long live shortwave.

Adam

On 14 Feb 2006 08:12:41 -0800, "chevyorange"
wrote:

I can't help but to have noticed over the last 10 years I have to work
harder to catch a little English broadcasting (unless it is religous
stuff - which of course they have every right to spend their money on
broadcasting but it is disheartening to get a blasting good signal of
crap).

I have a very fast internet connection, two killer computers (one a
laptop other a dual processor 64 bit desktop machine) and I perish the
thought of listening to these stations via them. I also have Sirius
and despise the idea of listening to the BBC or any other station that
I have grown accustomed to listening to via shortwave.

I initially started listening to HF Broadcasting for the geek appeal.
But as I got older I realized that the only way to find out what's
going on in the USA is to hear it from an objective ''third-party''
perspective as provided by the International Broadcasters; thus I got
hooked on the content.

I am very glad that rather than vanish entirely some broadcasters have
remained alive via 21st Century delivery methods e.g. the internets
and the Sirius.

In article 1139819980.46520@teuthos, adam214 wrote:
I'm lucky i live in Australia, whilst most stations don't broadcast to
Australia directly.But im close proximity to Asia so i can piggy back
and listen to Asian streams, especially the SE asian one and sometimes
the S asia ones (esp DW radio).Also you can listen to Radio Australia in
USA and almost everywhere, despite being underfunded as is ABC
(australia broadcasting corporation)generally.You hear genuine
australian stuff not just stuff broken down in bite size pieces for
world consumption.Hell i even listen to this its better than the
mainstream media in Australia.Sorry to peddle but it is good.

No disagreement, some of the best radio in the world. But they've
lightened up their schedule quite a bit especially for their Pacific
schedule track, and we now get a lot of Radio Australia produced chatter
+ music shows (as of this last year or so, instead of a second or third
rerun of a bunch of the Radio National shows). And they've gone to
using ABC Radio Local for some of their weekend stuff. Which shows us
that your radio can be just as insipid as NPR. ;-)

Mark Zenier
Googleproofaddress(account:mzenier provider:eskimo domain:com)

In article .com,
chevyorange wrote:
....
I get two hours of BBC in the evening on
5975kHz here in the Northwest US and it isn't enough. I think they're
broadcasting to Central/South America and it still blasts in but is
overtaken by a different broadcaster just at the time of the evening
I'd like to listen.

The hour at 01:00 where it goes away is a bit peculiar. 5975 from
22:00 to 01:00 (2-5 PM PST) comes in with varying quality. (But not a
convenient time. I miss 6135, etc that went to 10 or 11 PM. Gotta sell
those XM subscriptions, I guess).

Radio Netherlands has also changed their 8PM
(local Pacific Time) English broadcast which used to be a bulletproof
"go to" listen on 6165 and 9590.

It's still pretty good at 9 PM PST, although the 5 PM (aimed at the
Central US) is often stronger.

Mark Zenier
Googleproofaddress(account:mzenier provider:eskimo domain:com)

crouqet it is.
GIVE BLOOD,PLAY RUGBY! I saw that in one of my big books I have here
about Ireland.Now,there is a SPORT! No holes bared.I like Irish Road
Bowling too.
cuhulin

David wrote:

On 14 Feb 2006 08:12:41 -0800, "chevyorange"
wrote:

I can't help but to have noticed over the last 10 years I have to work
harder to catch a little English broadcasting (unless it is religous
stuff - which of course they have every right to spend their money on
broadcasting but it is disheartening to get a blasting good signal of
crap).

I have a very fast internet connection, two killer computers (one a
laptop other a dual processor 64 bit desktop machine) and I perish the
thought of listening to these stations via them. I also have Sirius
and despise the idea of listening to the BBC or any other station that
I have grown accustomed to listening to via shortwave.

I initially started listening to HF Broadcasting for the geek appeal.
But as I got older I realized that the only way to find out what's
going on in the USA is to hear it from an objective ''third-party''
perspective as provided by the International Broadcasters; thus I got
hooked on the content.

I am very glad that rather than vanish entirely some broadcasters have
remained alive via 21st Century delivery methods e.g. the internets
and the Sirius.


Didn't you just post an article detailing how the Pentagon wants to
smash or control the internet so as to restrict the free flow of
information? They could conceivably block overseas websites that
broadcast the truth, such as the BBC. Right now Britain is an ally; but
if Tony Blair gets kicked out of office (he could conceivably be
dethroned by a no confidence vote at any time) that could change
quickly. Satellite radio is also subject to government control. There
are only two providers, and with that sort of monopoly satellite radio
is subject to pressure from the US govt. I've been trying to point this
out to you, but you refuse to see it. To chevyorange: I mainly listen to
the BBC for The World Today, which comes in fine most nights on 5975.

The u.n.wants to control the intenet and tax us for using the
internet.The Pentagon is building,or considering building,an internet
system of their own.Or so I read on the internet less than two years
ago.The internet that we use is very crowded,but there is a way to
double more space for an even larger intenet.
cuhulin

David wrote:

Since I get the World Service 24/7 in breathtaking hifi sound via XM
and Sirius I haven't seen any need to torture myself with the
Singapore relay.

"Breathtaking hifi sound"?? I, too, am a Sirius subscriber, and I also
frequently listen to the BBC WS on Sirius. While, sure, the audio
quality of BBC WS on Sirius is acceptable, it's certainly not
"breathtaking hifi sound"! LOL...

On 14 Feb 2006 13:36:20 -0800, "junius" wrote:


David wrote:

Since I get the World Service 24/7 in breathtaking hifi sound via XM
and Sirius I haven't seen any need to torture myself with the
Singapore relay.

"Breathtaking hifi sound"?? I, too, am a Sirius subscriber, and I also
frequently listen to the BBC WS on Sirius. While, sure, the audio
quality of BBC WS on Sirius is acceptable, it's certainly not
"breathtaking hifi sound"! LOL...

Well, whoop de doo.

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 12:55:57 -0800, running dogg wrote:

David wrote:




Didn't you just post an article detailing how the Pentagon wants to
smash or control the internet so as to restrict the free flow of
information? They could conceivably block overseas websites that
broadcast the truth, such as the BBC. Right now Britain is an ally; but
if Tony Blair gets kicked out of office (he could conceivably be
dethroned by a no confidence vote at any time) that could change
quickly. Satellite radio is also subject to government control. There
are only two providers, and with that sort of monopoly satellite radio
is subject to pressure from the US govt. I've been trying to point this
out to you, but you refuse to see it. To chevyorange: I mainly listen to
the BBC for The World Today, which comes in fine most nights on 5975.


All transmission vectors are subject to usurpation by the
disinformers.