Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I hope not. I was into shortwave 30 years ago and returned six years ago. I
hope it continues; it's one of my main sources of international news. slade Interesting article. Definitely explains why there are a lot less signals now than in the 70s "Al Fansome" wrote in message m... http://www.radio.cz/en/article/124187 |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Slade Henson wrote:
I hope not. I was into shortwave 30 years ago and returned six years ago. I hope it continues; it's one of my main sources of international news. slade Interesting article. Definitely explains why there are a lot less signals now than in the 70s "Al Fansome" wrote in message m... http://www.radio.cz/en/article/124187 You obviously have the internet. Why wouldn't you get international news via it, rather than fuzzy old HFBC, which went out with the Berlin Wall. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
dave wrote:
Slade Henson wrote: I hope not. I was into shortwave 30 years ago and returned six years ago. I hope it continues; it's one of my main sources of international news. slade Interesting article. Definitely explains why there are a lot less signals now than in the 70s "Al Fansome" wrote in message m... http://www.radio.cz/en/article/124187 You obviously have the internet. Why wouldn't you get international news via it, rather than fuzzy old HFBC, which went out with the Berlin Wall. For old times sake? Because it's there? I buy newspapers, I watch television, I get online and I also listen to shortwave. The good thing about radio is that it can just "happen" in the background while you are doing something else. Newspapers, TV, and to some extent, the internet, are less amenable to that. Radio has a certain charm about it that the internet does not. Maybe it is simply the fact that the internet makes it all too easy. Anyway, one really big plus is that the radio doesn't chew up my internet bandwidth! Krypsis |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
What is with these naysayers on a shortwave newsgroup who are
anti-shortwave? I'm scratching my head to try to figure out why guys that are so AGAINST something bother with lurking around in the shadows of a newsgroup devoted to a specific topic. Every time one of these doomsday posts appears the creeps crawl out of the woodwork and bad rap shortwave radio which, incidentally, is healthy and thriving. If you look at the article source it came from "CZ" land...so maybe in "CZ" things have changed with domestic shortwave but during the last year there has been countless new outlets and and expanded shortwave coverage appear throughout the globe. Pay no attention to such nonsense. Regardless of what the overzealous techno-cheerleaders would like us all to believe, the world is not only comprised of industrialized nations full of brainwashed people who've let themselves become hypnotized by the Internet. The frail and choking Internet is rife with mushrooming problems and the portability and ready-access to shortwave will continue to thrive. Many countries in even the last year have realized this and have increased their shortwave facilities and schedules. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 1/19/2010 5:10 PM, Al Fansome wrote:
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/124187 OH NO! Al "the bringer of death" Fansome. Please Al, don't Fansomeize shortwave. and, for the uninformed, Mr. Fansome is not bring shortwave down, he is just passing on an a news article. Drifter... |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Carl wrote:
Every time one of these doomsday posts appears the creeps crawl out of the woodwork and bad rap shortwave radio which, incidentally, is healthy and thriving. If you look at the article source it came from "CZ" land...so maybe in "CZ" things have changed with domestic shortwave but during the last year there has been countless new outlets and and expanded shortwave coverage appear throughout the globe. IMHO the article is a very nice explanation why they are reducing their shortwave broadcasts. It's spun (spinned?) that they are doing it because everyone else is doing it, which is not really true. Many places are doing it because there are a lot better and cheaper ways of reaching their audience. At one time radio was the new, better and cheaper (for the producer) way. Now there are lots of others. BUT it does not mean that everyone, or even most producers are doing it. Sorry guys, while you were using the internet to pirate music and video, the rest of the world was taking over the air waves. The world really is not all the US and the EU. If you think so, go to Radio China's English web site and look at their coverage and schedule, there's more there than the BBC has had in a very long time. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM New word I coined 12/13/09, "Sub-Wikipedia" adj, describing knowledge or understanding, as in he has a sub-wikipedia understanding of the situation. i.e possessing less facts or information than can be found in the Wikipedia. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Carl wrote:
What is with these naysayers on a shortwave newsgroup who are anti-shortwave? I'm scratching my head to try to figure out why guys that are so AGAINST something bother with lurking around in the shadows of a newsgroup devoted to a specific topic. Every time one of these doomsday posts appears the creeps crawl out of the woodwork and bad rap shortwave radio which, incidentally, is healthy and thriving. If you look at the article source it came from "CZ" land...so maybe in "CZ" things have changed with domestic shortwave but during the last year there has been countless new outlets and and expanded shortwave coverage appear throughout the globe. Pay no attention to such nonsense. Regardless of what the overzealous techno-cheerleaders would like us all to believe, the world is not only comprised of industrialized nations full of brainwashed people who've let themselves become hypnotized by the Internet. The frail and choking Internet is rife with mushrooming problems and the portability and ready-access to shortwave will continue to thrive. Many countries in even the last year have realized this and have increased their shortwave facilities and schedules. Such as? I have nothing against shortwave radio. In fact, I spent $2k last week on a shortwave radio. HFBC is dead. Not shortwave. Not radio. HFBC. www.vpr.net carries the World Service on a dialup friendly low-fi stream. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bob Dobbs wrote:
Shortwave versus the internet - I've never caught a cyber virus from my short wave radio, heard lots of infected prattle from the xians, but tuning away or turning it off sure is easier than a format and restore. I use Puppy Linux whenever possible. I like the BBC a lot. When I lived in Texas and they were slamming 250 KW at the Americas from Ascension back in the '80s, I could easily hear the air handlers in Bush House on my 2010. That was fantastic audio. Now I listen to the World Service on satellite or the web, and I find other amazing things to listen to on the radio (like really weak stations 9,000 miles away). |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 20, 5:16*am, dave wrote:
Slade Henson wrote: I hope not. I was into shortwave 30 years ago and returned six years ago. I hope it continues; it's one of my main sources of international news. slade Interesting article. Definitely explains why there are a lot less signals now than in the 70s "Al Fansome" wrote in message om... http://www.radio.cz/en/article/124187 You obviously have the internet. *Why wouldn't you get international news via it, rather than fuzzy old HFBC, which went out with the Berlin Wall. Dave - not trying to sound like a jerk, but why do you always put down shortwave on a shortwave newsgroup of all places? Inquiring minds want to know. :-) |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
------Cinder Road------- | Shortwave | |||
Hey Road Warrior | CB | |||
Hey Road Worrier..... | CB | |||
Hey Road Worrier..... | CB | |||
Set up on Off-road rig | CB |