Slashdot Mirror


Griffin RadioSHARK Exceeds Expectations

reifman writes "Picked up a Griffin RadioSHARK (think TiVo for radio) at the Apple store this evening: It exceeds all expectations. The user experience is simple. The iPod synchronization is seamless. The RadioSHARK is a counter-attack on the recording industry and its draconian file sharing lawsuits. I'm glad to see Griffin had the balls to release this product. ."

24 of 191 comments (clear)

  1. Nice but... by Max+von+H. · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wish it featured an external signal input. Thing I get very bad radio reception at my place but I get near-digital quality (and free) radio through my cable TV outlet (there's 2 connectors, one for TV one for radio).

    Nice gadget anyway!

    --
    -- It's always darker before it goes pitch black.
    1. Re:Nice but... by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 5, Interesting

      here is a trick. get a radio with the loose cable antenna (you know the stuff that is like a string) and then tie the end around the metal connector on your cable line (it can be connected to a TV) that turns the entire cable shielding on all connected lines into a huge antenna for your radio. works great for me.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    2. Re:Nice but... by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 4, Interesting

      try wrapping a copper wire around it and connecting that to the cable line

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    3. Re:Nice but... by Luscious868 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not really about music. I think it's more about talk radio. Think about it, what geek in their right mind would want to record a music from a radio station? It's pretty much pointless. You have no idea what music your going to get or in what order (plus 50% - 75% of the music is crap, 15% to 20% is the idiot DJ and/or commercials). Talk radio is different. There are several talk radio shows I would like to record. For instance there's a local sports show that I would love to be able to record TiVo style because it's on from 7:00 pm to 11:00 pm weeknights but two or three nights a week I'm out with friends and miss all or part of it. I can think of quite a few talk programs I'd like to record if I could.

  2. DAB Version! Digital, Baby! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    well, hate to be a bit of a whinger, but call me back when they do a DAB version for the uk- AM/FM? Welcome to the 20th Century!

    1. Re:DAB Version! Digital, Baby! by Lurks · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Yeah where digital is 'crystal clear sound' right? Except that it's 128kbps layer-ii audio and so full of horrible artifacts. Thanks but I'll stick with FM - DAB is a complete face.

      Note: In other countries they do use proper bitrates per channel but in the UK we've got 50 of exactly the same sort of garbage pop radio station vying to get into each multiplex. Quality in programming seems to have taken a back seat.

      My kingdom for BBC 6 Music in 256kbps...

  3. Crackdown, T-Minus ? days by theluckyleper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone want to take a guess on how long it'll be before the crackdown commences?

    Actually, I just went to RIAA's website for the first time... all of the "latest news" articles on the main page are about lawsuits they've filed. Nice!

    Don't they realize that something is wrong with their business when their news is about lawyers, and not musicians?!

    --
    Visit the Game Programming Wiki!
    1. Re:Crackdown, T-Minus ? days by StateOfTheUnion · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I would think that this device would hold up in court for the same reason that the VCR did when it was challenged in the supreme court. deivices that record broadcasts for reasons of time shifting were upheld as legal.

      However that doesn't mean that the recording industry won't try to ban this product . . .

  4. Uhh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Looks cool but..

    What's a "radio"?

    1. Re:Uhh.. by generic-man · · Score: 5, Funny

      A "radio" is a device capable of wirelessly receiving audio broadcasts synchronously across dozens of channels. Assuming a modest 64 kilobits per second on one "radio" station, well-served markets such as New York City enjoy a total streaming throughput of well over two mibobites per second. This service is made available to the consumer free of charge thanks to the United States Free Communications Commission (FCC).

      Tomorrow, we'll investigate how you can get over 80 channels of television-quality video in real-time streaming for about $50 a month.

      --
      For more information, click here.
  5. Neat, but old hat... by binaryspiral · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "I'm glad to see Griffin had the balls to release this product."

    I don't see how releasing this required any balls. FM broadcasts are horrible when compared to the AAC streams from XM.

    The RIAA have written off FM copyright lawsuits because any kid with a boombox can swipe a low quality song.

    I've been doing this for two years using a TV/FM tuner that costs about the same as the Radioshark - and the bonus is I can record cable TV so now I can have low quality video too!

  6. Cool idea, but... by dborod · · Score: 5, Informative

    I ordered mine in July of 2003 and got it last week.

    The application (at least on OS X) leaves a lot to be desired. It does not behave like a typical OS X application in many ways, have no way to edit a preset- if you want to go back and put in the radio station's call sign or a genre descriptor you have to re-add the station as a preset and then delete the first instance of the preset, there are no menu options (and thus no keyboard shortcuts) for many of the really important GUI elements.

    The time shift feature is a good idea, but is poorly implemented. You can set a number of seconds to move forwards or backwards (defaults to 10 seconds) by pressing the left and right arrow or you can drag the slider around forwards and backwards in the time shift buffer but these 2 methods are either too granular or too coarse to help you pinpoint a precise location.

    It would be so cool if Griffin Technologies opened up the API... since the GUI and user interface are just so lame.

  7. Huh? by damiam · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Spoken word programs can be recorded in the more compact AIFF format.

    When was AIFF ever more compact than AAC? Isn't it, in fact, the least compact format possible?

    --
    It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  8. SightLight by Brian+Kendig · · Score: 4, Interesting

    His glowing review almost convinced me, until I got to the end where he similarly praises the Griffin SightLight.

    The SightLight is one of the most poorly-conceived products on the market. It's a light for the iSight webcam; it's a ring of white LEDs which mounts around the iSight lens to illuminate you so that people can see you when you're using the webcam in an otherwise dark room. Sounds clever, right?

    Except that using the SightLight is like trying to talk to an automobile headlight two feet in front of your face. And you'd think that in return for being blinded, you could at least be seen better by the person on the other end of the conversation - but no, that's not true; for as retina-piercingly bright as the SightLight is, it does a terrible job of actually lighting you up. A face lit by the SightLight will look ghostly pale and near-dark to the person on the other end, and the user has to be very close to the light to be seen at all.

    And all this for $39.95!

    I returned mine the very next day, and I now approach Griffin products with skepticism.

    1. Re:SightLight by lax-goalie · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've done a lot of lighting for both video and stage, and you're missing the point. The SightLight isn't supposed to be the primary light source for the iSight. If you use it that way, (depening on ambient light) you'll get an image with a lot of contrast and noise.

      The way to use the SightLight is as a secondary fill source. Especially with overhead lighting, a lot if people get horrible shadows under their eyes and cheeks, well-defined forehead wrinkles, and the like. That's why a lot of people look like Hermann Munster on a web cam.

      Using the SightLight mitigates a lot of this, particularly the eye shadows. For 40 bucks, it does a good job at the job it's supposed to do. (It's certainly cheaper than a real lighting kit!)

      BTW, there's a switch on the SightLight to reduce brightness, making the "headlight in your face" effect a little easier to take.

      The SightLight is a nifty gadget that does its job pretty darn well. It sucks as a primary light, but using it as such is simply pilot error...

    2. Re:SightLight by chuklz · · Score: 4, Funny

      Gee someone bought a light, but doesnt like it because it's bright. stop. Is now skeptical about all future products that may act as designed. stop. Alert the effin press. Fin.

  9. Nice but... by igrp · · Score: 4, Interesting
    This certainly sounds like a cool device and, I guess, at $69.95 it would make a nice, geeky Christmas gift.

    The only problem I see with this though, is that your average geek will simply not need one of these. I have a CD changer in my car. I have my iPod hooked up to my car stereo. I'm literally surrounded by computers at work. I have a stereo at home, that my iPod and one of my computers is hooked up to.

    With regard to my "music needs", I guess I'm pretty much covered. I guess this is really useful if you're into talk radio. But to me, the radio is something I use when I'm on the road and want to listen to a ballgame or when I'm working on something outside and don't really feel like listening to my iPod but want some background music. The radio just isn't something I pay a lot of attention to.

    The reason TiVo is such a huge hit is that it fundamentally changes the way we watch TV. When I'm watching TV I usually do pay attention to what's on - it's not just some random background noise. I find it hard to see how this could work for radio. Except, of course, skipping commercials. That would indeed be nice (but not all that useful, since most commercial stations already do 30-minutes-without-commercial stuff).

    The problem is this: I, and I can only speak for myself here, don't really care what's on the radio. To me, it's random stuff. Turn it on, listen to some music while doing something else, turn it off when you're done. TV's different: I care what's on. That's why I'm watching in the first place.

  10. Mt short review by marksven · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've been using mine for a few days now, I and love it. Here's my raves:
    - 64kps AAC sounds great for npr shows, and the files aren't too big.
    - After recording, it automatically puts the file into an iTunes playlist, so you just need to dock your iPod each time to get the updated recordings.
    - You can set the time-shift buffer to any length you want. So at any time you can go back to listen to any broadcast in the last day on a station.
    - The hardware is solid high quality.
    - It records even when the application isn't open. It appears to have a daemon process running at all times, still recording to the buffer.
    - You can preset stations with names, and then switch between them using a dropdown.
    - The interface is really slick.

    Here's what could be improved:
    - The filenames for repeat recordings should have the date in them to make it easier to pick from multiple recordings of the same show on the iPod. ID3 tags would be nice, too.
    - There should be an option to record shows only on the weekdays. To record a weekday-only show, you need to set up five identical recordings, one for each day.
    - The blue/red light on the unit glows like three night lights. Having it in my bedroom lights up the whole room. Where's the dimmer?
    - It would be a cool feature to be able to schedule recordings remotely without using VNC.

    Now if someone would only come up with a good time-shifting TV tuner of this quality for the Mac.

  11. Here's Why by SteveM · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First, not everything on the radio is music. There are a number of NPR shows that are on while I'm at work that would enjoy listening to.

    And as is usually menitoned whenever someone reviews this thing, some people enjoy listening to Howard Stern, but can't for various reasons. Now they can, at least for a year or so.

    And there is plenty more talk of varying quality radio out there.

    And where I live there is a space music show called Echoes. Runs between 10 pm and midnight. More often then not I'm doing something else. Now I can record it, load my iPod, and listen at work.

    SteveM

  12. External antenna by rdarden · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to this MacCentral page, the audio output jack of the RadioShark also doubles as an external antenna input. Not sure of the wiring or input impedance.

  13. two major points... by rollthelosindice · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I believe that the RIAA is not that concerned about this product because of the quality of a radio broadcast. They don't mind people copying less than CD quality audio (or close to it with mp3). The source is low enough quality for them to allow it. However, Howard Stern might be upset about this (at least for the next 15 months before he moves to Sirius). People can now auto-record his show, and throw up a torrent file. It's talk radio so the quality won't be an issue. Shouldn't be long before the Stern downloads begin.

  14. Re:Does it support MP3 or Vorbis? by RedCard · · Score: 4, Informative

    Can it record to MP3 or Vorbis?

    RTFA.

    Answer: No.

    It can, however, record to unprotected AAC (compressed) or AIFF (lossless - I'm pretty sure). AIFF has been used for years, predominantly on the mac, and many utilities are available to easily convert AIFF into whatever format your heart desires.

  15. a couple thoughts by boschmorden · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't know if I could justify $69+s/h for a hardware device with no way to boost signal reception. If you already have a radio that has stereo out, you can cross connect it to your PC and use this software: Total Recorder. This enables you to schedule and encode the broadcast directly to any number of formats (mp3, aiff, wav, etc). It's only $12. This is from a Windows perspective, but I'm sure there is some Mac software out there that can do this.....but then again, if you listen to certain regularly syndicated radio show, you can snag eps of it from suprnova.org, I do this for Howard Stern.

  16. Pretty limited expectations by camperslo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    While this looks like a great geek gadget for the price I find it disturbing that both the review and the Griffin site totally neglect specifications.
    1) Does it support an external antenna?
    2) How free is it from spurious responses in the presence of strong signals?
    3) How sensitive is it?
    4) How is the adjacent and alternate channel selectivity?
    5) What's the signal to noise ratio for strong and weak signals?
    6) How's the A.M. rejection?
    7) How's the stereo separation?
    8) How's the distortion at various modulation levels? (including a bit above 100%, some stations overmodulate)
    9) Can it receive S.C.A. subcarriers?
    10) Is there software support to decode E.A.S. (Emergency Alert System) messages?
    11) How's the frequency response?
    12) Can it tune signals at other than the usual .2 Mhz spaced spots? (tv channel 6 sound is 87.775 Mhz, audible but not properly tuned on many digitally tuned radios)

    Granted I don't expect a low-priced receiver to use a balanced mixer, but I'd at least like to see some clue that designers put some thought into performance.