Slashdot Mirror


(Short-, Medium-, Long)wave Radio Meets Digital Stereo

cryptec writes "Today shortwave radio will have some new life pumped into it as the German broadcaster Deutsche Welle will be the first full time shortwave broadcaster of DRM (Digital Radio Mondiale). DRM is a full stereo fully digital broadcast system. The quality of the broadcasts are close to that of FM radio. For samples check out this link." Akai adds this link to an article in the San Francisco Chronicle with some more information, like the involvement of the BBC and Voice of America in this undertaking.

58 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. DRM? by Roto-Rooter+Man · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't think that's a popular acronym around here.

    --

    The goatse guy for president. Win one for the gaper!
    1. Re:DRM? by BJH · · Score: 5, Funny

      It'll get even worse when the RIAA starts screaming that DRM needs DRM.

  2. Wie sind die Borg... by cruppel · · Score: 2, Funny

    Come on, we've heard enough about DRM from M$, now from German DJs?!?

    1. Re:Wie sind die Borg... by Distinguished+Hero · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wie sind die Borg...

      Yeah, how are the Borg? :P

      (Wie = How, Wir = We)

      --
      Uttering logically derived and empirically supported truths to the disciples of the orthodox establishment.
  3. Nice! by meringuoid · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Well, it sounds nice, over the web... Of course, that's before the /. effect strikes :-)

    Digital radio over SW sounds interesting. I wonder if old Auntie's going to pick this one up? I gather BBC services got cut over North America recently in favour of web broadcasts... maybe digital technology will allow that to be reinstated in the future?

    --
    Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    1. Re:Nice! by wfberg · · Score: 5, Funny

      Digital radio over SW sounds interesting. I wonder if old Auntie's going to pick this one up? I gather BBC services got cut over North America recently in favour of web broadcasts... maybe digital technology will allow that to be reinstated in the future?


      Sure. You see, it's far cheaper to use as-yet-experimental state-of-the-art technology than to continue using transmitters and technologies that have been in use for decades and that are well understood and easily serviced by thousands of technicians.

      The new transmitters will no doubt be fitted in, say, a few weeks. Then, in about three months, just about every household in North America will have bought the new receivers, and switch to tuning in small transistor radio sets to BBC broadcasts, instead of, say, surfing pornography or using AOL. Once the BBC starts digital broadcasts, well, no one will want, or need, broadband internet connections!

      Notice that the bitrates used in these AAC streams are wayyyy too high to ever be transferred over a dial-up connection. Even IF PCs could be equipped with AAC decoders, or similar codecs, such as ogg vorbis, the bitrates needed, some even exceeding 22 kilobits per second would prove a lethal hurdle for people who would want to listen to a stream using such a "magical" codec on their PCs..

      Plus, other, existing, methods of delivery for digital radio, such as satellite, are clearly inferior to this new technology.

      </SARCASM>
      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
  4. You will need special gear by wowbagger · · Score: 4, Informative

    Obviously, you will need special gear to receive this - they are using COFDM so your normal shortwave rig is unlikely to give you anything meaningful.

    I suppose IF you had a single-sideband rig with a wide enough filter set, and IF you then used your computer, you COULD decode this, but the usual means is going to be a dedicated receiver.

    (Hmmm. Have to see if I can get the spec, and see if I can write a decoder for it....)

    1. Re:You will need special gear by SuperQ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it will have to be a good signal, considering the kind of character drops I got when a friend (WB0POQ) was demonstrating PSK31, the bandwidth fits in normal SSB, and we get about line of text for every 10 seconds of tx.

      -KC0NBY

    2. Re:You will need special gear by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ten-tec has instructions on their web site about how to do this with their receivers. Apparently you need 12-16KHz of receiver bandwidth, and software: "This software is only available through the consortium via the DRM Software Radio web site located at www.drmrx.org. It is not available through Ten-Tec or any other distributor. "

    3. Re:You will need special gear by GigsVT · · Score: 5, Informative

      Coded Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing

      It's similar in purpose to CDMA. It is spread spectrum, sorta. It uses many narrowband carriers transmitting in parallel. The data transmitted on the subcarriers uses forward error correction coding, it's sorta like RAID1 for radio. They can also use tricks like sending the more important data at lower speeds. It's a pretty robust system, but it was mostly designed to combat multipath fade at VHF and above.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    4. Re:You will need special gear by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, PSK31 doesn't have error checking like DRM does. DRM has configurable "robustness modes" for use in more or less noisy environments.

      Did you ask your friend to put the PSK31 signal on the speaker? The really cool thing about PSK31 is that your computer can copy a signal you can't even hear.

      (For anyone who's wondering, we're still talking about digital radio. PSK31 is a modulation technique for text which fits a slow TTY-like signal into 31.5 Hz of bandwidth).

    5. Re:You will need special gear by PsibrII · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well now, the question is how many megawatts were you using ? ;)

      Most likely you guys weren't using more than a few hundred watts, or an antenna more than 100 feet off the ground.

      But not everyone can be allowed to run a megawatt generating gas turbine to power the radio rig in their back yard, otherwise braces, metal rimmed glasses, and umbrellas would become unpopular very fast.

      Broadcasters always have the edge over certin technical problems becase they can pump out megawatts, have 1-2 thousand feet towers, and afford the best techies money can buy.

    6. Re:You will need special gear by josh+crawley · · Score: 2, Funny

      The really cool thing about PSK31 is that your computer can copy a signal you can't even hear.
      Umm yeah that's cool that I can't hear radio waves, I think.

    7. Re:You will need special gear by emeb2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, but not too special. A slightly modified Shortwave Receiver and your computer running this software: ww.tu-darmstadt.de It's even available for Linux!

  5. The first? by ShadyG · · Score: 4, Funny
    the German broadcaster Deutsche Welle will be the first full time shortwave broadcaster of...a full stereo fully digital broadcast system.

    Hardly the first. Lisp has been doing this for decades.

    -- ShadyG
    1. Re:The first? by boomgopher · · Score: 2, Funny

      What's funnier than this post is that it was marked interesting instead of funny... gotta love those moderators.

      --
      Your hybrid is not saving the environment. Its purpose is to make you feel good about buying something.
  6. ham radio by tadheckaman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    amatuer radio might be able to use this, since they dont need a boat load of bandwidth, only a tiny bit. They allready have VHF and UHF digital radios, too, so I dont see why it wouldnt work on HF.

    --
    My potato gun was confiscated by the United Nations. They said I wasn't allowed to have weapons of mash destruction.
    1. Re:ham radio by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 3, Interesting

      At first glance it looks like the big win would be using the error correction protocols to get through noise and cope with hostile ionospheric conditions.

      "The RF bandwidth can be chosen between 4.5,5, 9, 10, 18 and 20 kHz", according to an article at drm.org. Ham voice transmissions already fit inside 3KHz.

      There's also a bucket of features which are great for broadcast, like redirect pointers to better frequencies, which are irrelevant bloat in the ham world.

  7. BURN THEM! by NeoPotato · · Score: 4, Funny

    Deutsche Welle will be the first full time shortwave broadcaster of DRM

    Broadcasting DRM! How dare they! First, they try to stuff copy-protected CDs down our throats. Then they introduced copy-protected HARDWARE! And now, they're trying to RESTRICT OUR RADIO!

    WE MUST BURN TH-eh? Read the article? Bah! I'm fighting Digital Rights Management! No time for that!

  8. Re:but then ... by tadheckaman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    RANGE man, range! worldwide FM quality shortwave is gonna be cool.

    --
    My potato gun was confiscated by the United Nations. They said I wasn't allowed to have weapons of mash destruction.
  9. Why not WMD for Wireless Music Device? by corebreech · · Score: 4, Funny

    Or IRS for International Radio Service?

    Or PMS for Portable Media System?

    Or any of a thousand other shit-poor choices for acronyms?

  10. Text of website... by tadheckaman · · Score: 4, Informative

    The British Broadcasting Corp., Voice of America and other international broadcasters launched digital short-wave radio service Monday, promising to provide near-FM quality in the place of static-filled signals.

    Digital broadcasts don't increase a station's range, but they eliminate static and let broadcasters transmit text, such as news updates and song information, with the audio signal. For now, digital radio receivers are considerably more expensive than analog radios.

    The Digital Radio Mondiale consortium launched its digital service at a global radio meeting in Geneva.

    "DRM's introduction will forever alter the course of radio broadcasting," said Peter F. Senger, chairman of the consortium, which has more than 80 members.

    The initial signals were transmitted from a nearby mountain in France shortly after 8 p.m., when Senger gave the word during a ceremony in conjunction with the World Radiocommunication Conference in Geneva. The conference is held every few years to decide airwave issues such as the sharing of radio and satellite frequencies.

    Simultaneously, other short-wave broadcasters started using digital transmitters in different parts of the world. The transmissions received at the reception featured voices in Chinese, French, English, German, Russian and Spanish, followed by static-free music.

    For the foreseeable future, broadcasters will use both traditional analog systems alongside the digital transmissions so people with traditional radios will still be able to tune in. At first, broadcasts will be aimed at Europe, North America, the Middle East, Australia and New Zealand.

    Digital radio signals are duplicated enough so that even if some are lost from interference, the receiver is able to put the transmission back together so it can be heard correctly. And Senger said the system uses much less electricity than analog, which will save broadcasters considerably on their biggest cost item.

    Although the Federal Communications Commission has approved a different digital standard for U.S. domestic broadcasters, Senger said the new system is meant to be universal and could eventually be used in the United States.

    Other broadcasters in Europe, Asia and Canada have been using digital transmissions for several years. That system, known as Eureka 147 or DAB, uses a different set of frequencies than traditional AM, FM or short-wave bands.

    --
    My potato gun was confiscated by the United Nations. They said I wasn't allowed to have weapons of mash destruction.
  11. yet another avenue for Peer to Peer by victorvodka · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Say what you want to about the utility of digital music over short-wave, I think it's a fascinating development. It's just another big application of Peer to Peer technology, one completely bypasses the internet. It's not just music that can be broadcasted this way - files can be sent and they could contain anything - newspapers, video, software, worms - and they could come from anyone with enough power to broadcast them. If the use of such technology becomes widespread enough - look for this becoming just another way to suck data into your computer, no matter how isolated you happen to be.

    --

    The flag just makes more sense than the constitution. - Judas Gutenberg

    1. Re:yet another avenue for Peer to Peer by nickgrieve · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hmm... not so sure about your P2P dream.

      Its one thing to stream digital data and have it picked up by a device and spat out via a DAC.

      Its another thing altogether to have to co-ordinate lossless data transmission. You are going to need a protocol that handles retransmission CRCs etc... i.e. some sort of transmission control protocol maybe?

      People have been getting all sorts of stuff. Digital stuff over SW for a long time now, bouncing packets of meteor trails containing e-mail and shit.

      Good idea... bit late

    2. Re:yet another avenue for Peer to Peer by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Informative

      These wavelengths aren't so great for reliable transmissions. They tend to come in and go out depending on the weather, time of day, solar activity and every other variable. Sometimes nearer transmitters get lost but nuch more distant ones can be tuned in.

      I suppose if you had a reciever and a transmitter, with a lot of bands open, and can "hunt" bands, it might work but those are big ifs. You'll be able to transfer data, but my guess is that bandwidth and latency are still big issues, but still secondary to connection reliability.

  12. Redundancy for satellites... by dpbsmith · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm suddenly starting to wonder just how much modern digital techniques bring to the party. For example, remember the technique of bounding signals off of meteor trails? I believe they recorded audio at normal speed, then waited for a meteor trail and squirted it out at many times normal speed... that sort of thing would be trivial and cheap to do with digital technology.

    Maybe a LOT of old, low-fi, unreliable radio broadcast technologies can have useful new digital life. It could be very handy as a backup for satellite-based communications.

    1. Re:Redundancy for satellites... by ColaMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's a commercial packet radio system around for long-distance trucking fleets that uses the meteor trail to do just that. It listens for a signal from home base then quickly sends a packet or two back. Good for digital store-and-forward of truck info etc.

      Maybe it was on slashdot? was a year or two ago now tho'

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
  13. Isn't going to fly by ferreth · · Score: 3, Interesting

    'Ya know, I used to think short wave radio was cool - until I discovered internet broadcast. Now I can listen to stations around the world, without buying any extra gear.

    Maybe in the 3rd world, oh wait, the gear is going to be more expensive than SW radio - maybe not there either. Who is going to buy this to get the mass market price down? Not me.

    --

    W9x:Thanks for the make-work project Bill.

  14. Re:but then ... by VoyagerRadio · · Score: 3, Informative

    Does anyone still listen to shortwave? By the way, there's an interesting history of shortwave I picked up one day at the library and couldn't put down. It's called "On the Short Waves, 1923-1945: Broadcast Listening in the Pioneer Days of Radio", by Jerome S. Berg.

    --
    Harold
  15. Re:but then ... by Blue+Stone · · Score: 4, Informative
    "quality of the broadcasts are close to that of FM radio"

    "what's the point ? maybe I missed something ?"

    Well, here in the UK, there's a point. Already the BBC has squeezed so much into it's limited DAB multiplex, that it can only pump out BBC Radio 7 at 80kbps MONO. It's World Service, which sometimes broadcasts music, has an output of 64Kbps MONO, as does it's Asian Network.

    If it shifts these services to (ugh) DRM, then the they can be output in stereo, probably at better rates. The remaining services can go up in quality (BBC 6 Music, currently at 128Kbps on DAB, could go up to 160, etc.)

    More bandwidth, at better quality. I would guess that that's the point.

    --
    Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
  16. Re:Okay... by PsibrII · · Score: 5, Informative


    There are in the US people who actually live so far out in the middle of nowhere that shortwave is the only option for radio unless they want to put up a huge antenna.

    Its also a fairly widespread hobby. Starting cost can be as low as $10 for a garage sale world band radio up to several thousand for the latest in equipment.

    Its pretty fun being able to hear programs from austalia, india, or wherever someone can muster a few kilowatts to bounce a signal off the ionosphere.

  17. Re:but then ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seems like some people still want to listen on shortwave.

  18. Not so special by poptones · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A receiver with a wideband IF output (ie just about any ham receiver), a PC, and a soundcard. That ain't so special; some of you need to free your minds, much less free your radios.

    1. Re:Not so special by wowbagger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not quite - the IF out on most ham rigs is 10.7 MHz. You are going to have a problem sampling that with your soundcard, as your soundcard's inputs will filter that right out.

      You'd need to bring that down with another mixer to below about 20 kHz so that the filters on the soundcard won't trash it, or you would have to bypass the filters on your soundcard and subsample it.

    2. Re:Not so special by poptones · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not exactly. By "wideband" I mean post I-F but before audio filtering. This is fairly common even on those "world radio" sets you buy at consumer goods stores (I want to say wal-mart but I'm not sure if wallyworld has one. I'm confident, however, radio shack has more than one model like this). The "wideband" output will be something like 100-100khz instead of 100-10khz, and this can be sampled by a soundcard. back when FM stereo was new many FM radios were retrofitted just this way: take the IF output and run it into an external decoder. Only now a PC with a cheapo soundcard and can handle the bandwidth of an HF transmission.

    3. Re:Not so special by pe1rxq · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wideband outputs are totally useless for drm.
      These outputs are past the demodulater, so you get a unfiltered basenband signal.
      You need a IF signal as that still has the properties of the RF signal. Most smallband FM rigs or AM rigs have a second IF of 455 or 473 Khz which can be mixed down to 12Khz rather easily. This can then be sampled with an audio card.

      Jeroen

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
  19. To answer my own question by The+Tyro · · Score: 4, Informative

    here's a website I found in the UK that gives a very detailed explanation.

    Wrap your brain around this.

    I tried to digest all of it...

    Now my head hurts.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
  20. Software defined radio! by tweakt · · Score: 3, Interesting
    This is a perfect application for Software-Defined Radio... see GNURadio.

    It's already been used to decode HDTV signals.

    Slashdot also covered this technology a couple years ago.

    1. Re:Software defined radio! by wowbagger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I am well aware of GnuRadio - in fact, if you look at the FAQ, you will see I am quoted in it.

      Also, I do Software Defined Radio for a living.

      However, the point of my previous message is that the average person with the average receiver is not going to be able to receive this signal.

  21. Citizen's bandits by poptones · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Actually, it's never occurred to me until now that this same technique could (as another person here suggested) be applied to p2p communications. The FCC pretty much abandoned 11 metres long ago; there are several folks around here who still dabble in CB and not one of them is strictly "legal" - sliders, amplifiers, and even FM gear are all the norm on the band. It's awash in noise and crap but might actually be usable if some modern DSP methods were applied to communications. And, because it is (unofficially) unregulated, there is an opportunity for pretty much anyone with a CB and a PC with a soundcard to get involved.

    In an area where 802. gear is pretty much useless because of line of sight issues, this might be just the ticket. There is more bandwidth in an HF carrier than in a phone line, and using low cost DSP tx/rx front ends it would even be possible to utilize two or three channels at once.

    Hmmmm.... I think I need to go visit the neighbor.

    1. Re:Citizen's bandits by poptones · · Score: 2, Informative
      It doesn't have to be "short" of 802.11-ish long haul/personal ssh-ish. All that need be done is get rid of FSK and use a reasonably SOTA method - like cofdm, quam, etc.

      Modems use ~3khz of bandwidth to get >48kbps. HF channels have more than twice that bandwidth available, and if you are using a digital front end there's no reason at all you can't use more than channel at the very same time. Use two VHF channels (say, on the also-unregulated 49mhz band) and it's not at all unreasonable to expect >200kbps - on a packetized multichannel service with no line-of-sight issues.

      This is NOT "packet radio."

  22. I like it! by zakezuke · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There are those who would be critical of such things, but I like it! Ham radio to broadcast digital media will open a new door to... dare I say it, multi-casting! Why bother broadcasting on the net when you can actually recieve digital media over shortwave / ham and not have it suck up your bandwidth. Took us long enough to converge these two technologies.

    Bit-torrent is a pretty cool and hip standard in it self, but imagine releases sent digitaly via the airwaves, using a simple 50ft long wire that can reach between seattle and finland. Not perfect mind you, even the best sets are going to have some unrecoverable packet loss, but hey. Not exactly ideal for let's say a linux distro, but through the use of checksums I can see how such a broadcast service could get you most of what you need, and anything that fails you can just download via standard means.

    And as a bonus... to people who have a broadcast license, could open the door to ham based ISPs. While a dated technology, short wave / long wave is a proven one. While i'm sure statalight would no doubt be superior, land based access would be cheeper to deploy, and can even be based on older tube technology.

    This is something i'd use, even if just to get music from overseas.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  23. Deutche Welle needs a name change. by eightball01 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Anyone else read that as "douche well" instead of Deutche Welle?

    1. Re:Deutche Welle needs a name change. by GigsVT · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, they should just reaname the whole country, since the name looks offensive in english.

      Just like you can't use the word "niggardly" anymore because it looks like it should be offensive. :)

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  24. Re:but then ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    >> Does anyone still listen to shortwave?

    Yes.

    SW is the only communication you can get in certain poor rural zones, because:

    - telephone lines are too expensive to install;
    - same for optic fiber & microwave links;
    - FM&AM&TV are't close enough;
    - satellite receiving equipment too expensive;
    - internet requires one of the above;
    - etc.

    People really use SW, because they need general news, government announcements and entertainment.

    Of course, this idea will only work if someone can come up with an inexpensive enough apparatus.

    Now that I come to think of it, this is like Vorbis streaming thru internet, over amateur radio.

    Hey, Cringely, do you want cheap internet access? (ok, your project was way cooler, but then, not that cheap...)

    One could use a range of frequencies to get more bandwidth (duh). Is this spread-spectrum?

  25. Acronyms by Luke-Jr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is the 3rd definition of DRM now...
    1. Digital Restrictions Management (M$)
    2. Direct Rendering M(anagement?) (XFree)

    --
    Luke-Jr
  26. Re:You will need special gear... DL the standard by smokin_juan · · Score: 2, Informative

    (Hmmm. Have to see if I can get the spec, and see if I can write a decoder for it....)

    If you really want the spec visit the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) website, search for Digital Radio Mondiale, register for free and download the system specification.

  27. cynicism is cheap. by Erris · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You miss the big picture. Bandwith that onec was negelected due to poor quality can now be used to send reasonable quality sound around the world. There is NO radio technology currently used who's transmision has not been well understood since Maxwell. The change is in frequency hopping and digital encoding. It is doing neat stuff and provign over and over that there is no scarcity of available broadcast specturm. Whey you grok this, you might condlude that satellite is an expensive way to get the message around the world. If you don't grok it, I doubt anyone will miss your input.

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
    1. Re:cynicism is cheap. by wfberg · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's nothing wrong with digital over AM/SW. It's just that these experiments are in NO way relevant to the current operation of the BBC world service, or any other radio station. It will takes some years to develop this technology further AND, most importantly, it will take *decades* before the installed base reaches any sort of critical mass. Before that happens this is a play thing.

      With regard to your comments about satellite being expensive - already companies are selling satellite tuners that connect to your regular FM radio's antenna so you can use your regular radio as a satellite receiver.. In Africa. Satellite is already being used by the BBC world service (and the world services of many other countries).

      You might want to check out a little thing called 'context'.

      The original poster's comment was like saying "Wow! Now the BBC can switch to online streaming audio!" when the very first streaming audio was sent over the ARPAnet in 1973 (RFC 508).

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
  28. I was at the 2003 NAB and heard AM IBOC digital by Newer+Guy · · Score: 4, Informative

    In the Harris booth they weren't even running it in stereo. They were using mono voice and it sounded just awful - full of really bad artifacts that made the speaker sound like he was gargling liquid while speaking.

    A German fellow came up and was listening to the audio on a second headphone. he commented at how awful it sounded. Turns out that he does DSP for a living - perceptual coding in particular. he had done some work on the coser used and was embarrassed at what he was hearing on the headphone.

    By contrast, the DRM samples I hear here sound just great! ...and this with dual (dueling?) bit rate conversions (analog > DRM > MP3 > analog).

    FM DAB sounds somewhat better...but then again is's using a 96K bit rate - even Windows Media sounds good at that high a bit rate!

    What I'd like to hear is OGG at both the 32k bit rates of AM DAB and the 96k bit rates of FM DAB... My guess is that it would sound great!

  29. Re:Wonderful. But...... by poptones · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If there is something you want or need to listen to there and you live in some third world country, chances are you're not going to be able to afford some nice new digital receiver

    Dude.... how much is a cellphone now? Aren't they giving them away in blister packs at the grocers?

    It's just another digitial radio. The only thing hindering this is a standard; if there were a WARC approved standard and a few broadcasters using it there would be twenty dollar receivers being sold at ratshack - and handed out in the third world by peace corps volunteers.

  30. The magic words... by Air-conditioned+cowh · · Score: 2, Informative
    DRM is the world's only non-proprietary, digital system for short-wave, medium-wave/AM and long-wave with the ability to use existing frequencies and bandwidth across the globe.


    Well thank God it's not based on WM9. Unfortunately some DAB radio solution manufactures are looking into WM9 instead of MP1 layer II. I can only conclude they are mad and want their company (and the world) to be ruined like Sendo.
  31. Re:Aww... by AndroSyn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You realize that me, you and probably like 2 other people know who Welle:Erdball is, which is unfortunate because you've got to give a band credit that actually uses a C-64 as an instrument. Also, hell they've got a song called Bill Gates Komm' Fick Mitt Mir(translates out to "Bill Gates Come Fuck with me").

  32. DRM Sales pitch by cocotoni · · Score: 3, Informative

    It is an amazing coincidence, but I was at the sales pitch for DRM last Friday. Well, apart from things being rehashed here on /. some insider information:

    DRM is going to be certified by ITU (International Telecomms Union), basicaly the body that gives the certs for these kind of things.

    Most of the digital radio concepts failed because they were able to produce a small run of say 10,000 receivers that would cost an arm&leg when they hit the streets. Well, it seems that DRM will not share this fate, since China, having poor radio coverage in rural areas (FM not viable, shitty AM/SW reception) has chosen DRM as their new standard. Starting run will be ~14mil receivers, so from start they will be able to produce them dirt cheap. Basically the deal is that the West will supply the transmitters, and China will flood the market with cheap receivers.

    Otherwise the test rig shown at the pitch sounded really good.

  33. Re:but then ... by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "The quality of the broadcasts are close to that of FM radio."

    Obviously, the person who commented thus had either a) never listened to the sample clips or b) never heard an FM radio that cost more than $5.

    --
    That was classic intercourse!
  34. Re:Wonderful. But...... by ONOIML8 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Dude.... how much is a cellphone now? Aren't they giving them away in blister packs at the grocers?"

    In third world countries?!?!? The last time I was in one of those places they wern't giving anything away. Hell you couldn't even get a decent selection of sanitary food in some of those places.

    It's true that cell phones cost far less than they used to due to the scale of mass production. Still most retail for $150 US on up. The ones being "given away" are usually refurbs as those have no other market value and it's a cheap way for the carrier to get you to spend an airtime dollar if you're too cheap to sign a contract and buy a phone.

    The difference as I see it is that this radio market is going to be a tiny fraction of what the cellular communications market is. So I doubt there will be the kind of numbers you need to bring receiver price down that far that fast.

    Maybe the MW market will help drive the price down somewhat and make it afordable for the SWL market. But MW is a hurting market too. If you're in the US you might remember how the MW broadcasters tried like hell to save their market share with the miracle of AM stereo. Or maybe you don't remember that...which would make my point. A lot of people just don't bother with that band because they can get all the programming they want on the VHF FM band without propagation flutter and fade.

    Seems to me that the MW and SW listeners are a different breed with different requirements. They're not after high quality signal, they're just happy to have signal. They're not after full digital stereo news, they're just happy to hear the news at all.

    Besides, Rush Limbaugh gets his point across in analog mono just the same as he would in digital stereo. :)

    --
    . Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
  35. Re:but then ... by khakipuce · · Score: 2, Informative

    Confess I don't know anything about DRM but lower frequency generally means lower bandwidth. It's simple, at 500kHz, 50kHz of bandwith represents 10% but at 5MHz it only represents 1%

    --
    Art is the mathematics of emotion
  36. Shortwave News provides a different perspective by jeepliberty · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Does anyone still listen to shortwave?

    I listen to SW news to get a different perspective of the world. The local and network news in the US is politically slanted and full of sound bites. Where I live, the BBC, Radio Netherlands and Radio Cuba have strong signals at night.

    I was listening to the BBC when it was first announced that Lady Di died in a car crash. It was a solemn moment The Brits did it with dignity. The American press handled it like the tabloids.