Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Satellite Radio Coming in 2001 131

Posted by CmdrTaco from the wouldn't-it-be-nice dept.
That Guy writes "This article explains how in a couple of years it'll be possible to drive cross-country listening to one radio station, in CD quality, with no static. " Seems like this is an intermediate step before all music is downloaded from the internet, and we just have cars with satellite net feeds. I guess it would matter to me more if I ever left the 5 mile radius around my house :)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Satellite Radio Coming in 2001 More

Satellite Radio Coming in 2001

Comments Filter:
  • Don't get too excited yet. Packet radio has nothing to do with radio broadcasting. It's a method radio amateurs (hams) use to transfer data (hence packet) between each other. If I'm not mistaken it's slow and high-latency, by "modern" standards.
  • Lets see... Iridium phones for $3k. Service for $7/min. Nahhh.... I like my Nokia 6190 just fine thanx.

    Today's English Lesson: Oxymorons

  • The race is also on to get satellite antennas into the hands of consumers: A satellite antenna can receive only one of the two services, so it's crucial for the two companies to lock up the key retail and content partners early.

    Why is this ? Obviously because they're proprietary. If we hack/open the source algorithms for this equipment we can start to offer freedom of choice to listeners. I fail to see the point of having a continous, un-interruptable stream of audio if don't actually have any choice.

    I don't actually live in continental America, so I don't have any chance of experiencing this, but good idea!

  • The disadvantage to this system is that there are no local stations, I kind of like to hear stuff about local concerts, bands, and things like that. Listining to these nation-wide stations wouldn't have that same kinda of local flavor.

    -entropy
    "If I don't save the wee turtles, who will?"
  • Ahh, but is there any good music?

    I'd gladly pay $10/month for a radio station that played punk rock and/or industrial.
  • Hehe, very cool. Soon I'll be able to veiw those illeagel movies out there with live streaming from the comfort of my conversion van. God bless teechnology. ;-)

  • yup, VW (Score:1)

    by crayz ( 1056 )
    they just had an ad today in something... damnit my memory sucks
  • Of course you can always transmit more crummy compressed digital audio than
    uncompressed digital audio over a given channel, but why would you want to? :-)

    BUT, I'm sorry, I can't let your off the cuff analysis of FM go unchallenged... :-)
    The simple analysis you did only applies to AM radio. FM radio bandwidth is another beast...

    Back in the old days, some guys at the FCC made this mistake you just did. FM radio is a funny
    thing, w/o going into much detail, you can trade bandwidth for S/N in FM (unlike AM).

    With FM (or any phase modulation scheme), the more SNR you have, the smaller the FM frequency
    deviation you can use and still transmit the same info. Since the frequency deviation is smaller
    it will (following Carson's rule) also occupy a smaller bandwidth.

    So the 44kHz -> 88kHz BW analysis is sorta bogus for FM, it depends on the moduation scheme.
    FM radio was designed to work in low SNR environments so it has pretty wide BW.
    But if you had 1000:1 SNR, you could redesign it to take up lot less bandwidth :-)

    SW guys, stick to SW ;-)
  • Although this seems great, it also seems expensive -- too expensive for small community funded radio stations to join. Not NPR's, but stations with very select groups of listeners and content.

    A slightly different idea is being pushed by the US's FCC. Recently they changed certain rules to make opening a small radio station inexpensive. For around $5000 a person can obtain a license and the equipment to start a small radio station with the broadcast range of about a mid sized town. Sure, this is not nation wide, but it is going to be a great way for different kinds of content to get on the airways. This is very good for those who love both radio and non-top-40 stuff. If these things spring up around the nation, you could even get networks together, like BBS's in Fidonet. Then you could find the same show, anywhere in the country, if the town has a local radio station in the group.
  • Working in a grocery store, I can only say that the "music" on our satellite radio is the bane of my existence!!

    Cool for a consumer, tho :)
    Hmm...does this mean another gadget for my old hooptie?

    Dan
    Mr. Wendell has a freedom that you and I think is dumb.
  • After the implosion at Iridium, I'm wouldn't be suprised if they began selling satellite bandwidth to other startups like this one.

    ap
  • This thing sounds pretty cool... can't wait until I can check out /. from the wheel of my truck though. That would be pretty sweet.

  • class public SARCASAM

    {

    Don't worry, the RIAA will but a stop to this abomonation!!!! Imagine... People being able to listen/record high quality music without paying off the RIAA, err, not giving %5 to the musicians (ya right).

    No one would ever buy CD's/DVD's again!

    I tell you we can't have another fiasco like those MP3's.

    }
  • There is something out already that is called L-band. It is more similar to normal radio in that it is transmitted form normal radio towers. Except that L-band is line of sight and is only 800W!. An L-band network will act similar to how cell phone networks work and it is cd-quality as well, except it is local stations.

    L-band features 44khz(?), stereo, digital audio and many existing stations are already transmitting on it as an experimental step. I like in Toronto and one 800W source from the CD tower reaches all the way to Oshawa (about 40 km, ~25 miles).

    One of the nice features about L-band though is that the there is a data stream separate from the audio stream that can transmit information like the name of the song, current weather, etc.

    Before you go out and get an satellite radio receiver, remember this, if an L-band source get's knocked out then it only costs a couple thousand to replace (and there are tons of them spread around), mean while if a satellite gets knocked out, then its a couple hundred million to replace (these will have to be geo-synchronous satellites, not LEO,)..

    -?-
  • With satellite radio, one conglomo hires the equivalent staffing of a few radio stations, and reaches the whole hemisphere. No longer any need to buy up dozens of local stations to sell the latest and greatest homogenized pap handed down from program directors at HQ! Tastemakers love it!

    Maybe, if this catches on in a big way, radio can get back to serving LOCAL communities, as it's really more suited than any other medium to do.

    I know I'm not rushing out to put a sat reciever in my car, unless it's GPS. I don't like the notion of an even tinier (than the currently tiny) pool of people doling out what I shall hear (and neglecting to mention what might negatively impact their bottom line).

    -Isaac
  • These days radio stations aren't worth the time it takes to change the station.

    Do they honestly think that by playing the same tired crap over and over people will start to like it?

    Oh wait, maybe they are right. People are stupid.
  • If this could bring me CapitalGold from London on Saturday mornings during the English Premiership season it would be peachy. Few things better than a cup of joe and Jonathan Pearce doing the commentary on the match of the day to start off a Saturday. Or better yet, RadioChelsea 1494 AM from London, Andy Saunders bringing you live Chelsea FC action from Stamford Bridge. . .

    But I have to wholeheartedly echo the sentiments of an earlier poster . . . no matter where you go there are already stations playing the rubbish that they call pop music. No need to tune in to your home station from hundreds of miles away.
  • As did I until I moved out to Boston where WFNX is. You can even listen to the on the NET. www.wfnx.com check them out bla bla bla. They are not corporate owned and accually play stuff I like and new stuff that other stations wont.

    just my 2 cents
  • they had better have a techno station on there, cuz there are no techno stations i have heard here in oregon...


    -mod
  • ... The only thing interesting me nowadays is icecast [icecast.org].. Particularly the HHG radio show (requires x11amp/mpg123/winamp and >128kbps feed) [208.201.18.9] and Mercury Bath (ditto) [208.201.18.9]....
  • Posted by Fleeno:

    If you want to listen to the same radio network, type of music, etc., wherever you drive, get a car with a RDS radio.

    Of course, my market doesn't transmit RDS data, so mine is useless!
  • This is great if you like the mass stuff: here in .nl you have this station Sky Radio that plays the "guaranteed hits", things are or have been big hits. Great for mr. Everyman, but I like other stuff more, like pirate radio.

    Now the problem with pirate radio is that the record industry doesn't get it's money. Sounds like the MP3 "war", not? Well, it's the same.

    Now satellite radio -- just like terrestrial broadcast -- can't be "pirated" that easy, and the record industry will get more control again. Well, pirates will go internet too, but a mobile internet connection is still a bit further away. So, for some time I'll defenitly keep my radio.

    Erik.
  • All the technology exists - We've had RDS in the UK for a decade, the hardware is simple, even the EMPEG [empeg.com] player has RDS.
    It lets a station broadcast in many areas on different frequencies, sending an ID code with the signal, and the RDS stereo just searches for that ID. This also allows local traffic news to cut in if you want.
  • The WorldSpace [worldspace.com] consortium is mostly targeting the international market but it will have some coverage in the US.

    Unlike some other proposals, it's not a pay-per-listen service - no encryption or anything.

    The transmission format will be MP3. It would be interesting to rip one of their receivers, interface it to a PC and record MP3 off the air...
  • Don't know about the rest of the world but
    in europe we have a system called RDS.

    This enables me to drive from London to
    Glasgow and stay listening to the same national
    radio station without interuption regardless
    of the fact that it changes frequency 5 or 6
    times during the 400mile journey.

    RDS does huge number of other things.

    Digital broadcast radio is also due online in
    the UK in the next few years.
  • You should try living in the UK. The lack of diversity in radio here is appalling. You're either listening to opera or the spice girls -- there's no middle ground.

    --
  • I believe this troll meant "wacko", but his spelling skills are in line with the rest of his personality. Give him a 1983 Camaro with a sealed tape player endlessly looping through Rush Limbaugh saying "God created white Americans to rule the world", and he'll be happy as the clam that he is.
  • nodnod. WAAF is best rock station I've ever heard. Even despite that obnoxious white trash superstar wench Carrie who's on in the evenings.

    There is no way that any globally broadcasted station would be anything like WAAF. It is far too controversial.

    Remember when, before they moved to that sinkhole, O&A used to do that obnoxious "Radio Voice"? Well, with global radio stations, we get to look forward to listening to every rock DJ talking like that. It's pretty depressing to think about. Like John Ostralind says, the masses are asses. You see it on TV already, and it's coming to radio soon. Enjoy the stations like we've got in Boston while they last.

    (btw, it sucks that in my last week in the Boston area, nay, the USA, for probably ywo years, Ostralind had to be out 3 times. Damnit! :/)

  • I concur. Albeit, the only reason I feel that Radio is not dead is because of the ease of the format -- you can jump in almost any car and turn on the radio, without having to have a cd or tape with you. Even though I am pretty much a non-user of radio, I see it's benefits, and do wish for a more "quality" oriented service -- FM has outlived it's limitations, and although it's passable, it's definitely not the kind of quality I can get out of what I consider a "hi-fi" system.

    Heck, with all the bandwidth, even 160k mp3's streamed over the airwaves would be more passable, I'd put in my bid for 256kb... but that's just me... and it could probably be done inexpensively... even if you did 5 second retransmits to keep the signal flowing... anyone have any thoughts on this? (yup, I don't think anyone will reply, since this has been up for a day...)

  • well, at that point, you'd have a real limitation as to who could have what freq. #'s to broadcast over. I believe that's one reason for limiting the sig strength.

    Plus, on the harmonics, at higher power, you'd get a "bleed-over" (correct me if I'm wrong) and the harmonic frequencies would be unusable at best.
  • Posted by Pushkin:

    What will those wacky guys think up next... At least i can listen to WPRB (Princeton University's Radio Station, the best damn station on the East Coast of North American) at school.
  • If your car radio doesn't support RDS, your Linux car computer can.

    Install the ADS Cadet ISA card [adstech.com], compile the Linux device driver [blackhawke.net] (standard in 2.2.8 kernel). AM/FM with RDS (I think RDS on FM only).

  • The wackos in Waco deserved to die. Freaks.

    Er, you've stumbled into the wrong site. The one for people who believe in killing "freaks" is www.imanazi.com or something like that.
    /.

  • With more automobile traffic you have more people spending more time in their cars listening to more radio.

    Yes, but why would this system displace traditional radio stations for that kind of local market? The only advantage I see is more selection, and the people who care about getting a specific kind of music that much will just bring their own CDs or whatever.
    /.

  • ...to be able to turn on my car radio and hear international music (mostly African and Middle Eastern pop) when I'm driving around town in Columbia, SC. And as long as a potential listenership exists, once the technology's in place I'll probably be able to get it. No more Contemporary Christian/lite rock/golden oldies/"country" crap.
  • With "standard" hardware, the peak is 56k.

    With "exotic" hardware, the upper limit is 230-400Kbps and still be packet-based.

    There's a 10 GHz point-to-point system described in the '95 ARRL Handbook and probably later editions that does 2 Mbps, and with some modifications, can do full 10M Ethernet, and it was designed to have the AUI pinout. (Unfortunately, you need to push the demodulator chip beyond specs to run at 10M, and you need a REALLY good Gunnplexer with electronic tuning. Sorry, no police radar surplus for you. Or me. :(
  • Just FYI: What you are referring to is DAB: Digital Audio Broadcast. Transmitting in III and L Band (~ 200 MHz and 1.2 Ghz if I remember correctly). Audio is MPEG encoded. DAB uses ensembles that contain a variable number of channels. A channel can carry either audio, audio and Program Associated Data (PAD), or just data (packet mode). One ensemble can have up 2 Mbit/s bandwidth.

    The nice thing about DAB is that its channel allocation can be changed on the fly: You can add channels to an ensemble but you can also change the bandwidth requirements of a particular channel. You can even change the bandwidth you allocate to audio versus PAD dynamically (e.g., music part get all the bandwidth, as soon as you have a talk show, say, you decrease the audio bandwidth to 30 kbit/s and increase the bandwidth for the PAD part).

    DAB is being deployed all over the world (with the exception of the US, there apparently the NAB is opposing it vehemently).

    Have a look at the World DAB site. [worlddab.org]

  • > But I have to wholeheartedly echo the sentiments of an earlier poster . . .
    > no matter where you go there are already stations playing the rubbish that they call pop music.

    Driving around California and other western states, it is not too unusual to not be able to pick up a single FM station, and quite common to only have 3-4 poor sound country/bible/NPR stations.

    If this thing provides good quality channels it would be very cool. And with 200 channels, you'd think that they'd have to provide a pretty diverse diet. I'll believe that when I hear it, though.
  • It's not radio though. You have to pay for a subscription and possibly per service you use (like premium cable channels) and it's not commercial free.


    NPR is getting in on the deal which is cool but I'm not so crazy about paying for radio and listening to commercials. The only benefit I see is when you travel but we have CDs and tapes and MP3s for that.

  • I'll bet those are at least played on different stations. Here in Zurich, the stations appear to have no format at all.

  • A flashcard can't tell me there's a 20 car pileup on my route home, or that there's a tornado warning, or why there's a giant mushroom cloud on the horizon (OK, so the radio probably wouldn't survive to tell me the last one).

    I have a beat up and nearly dead factory radio in my car (OEM from '78). I don't really like to listen to the radio much, but I keep it working for the above reasons.

  • Forever ago, pre-WWII, some stations were broadcast to a large part of the nation. It was a combination of strong stations, good receivers, and a lack of noise from the broadcast of thousands of channels.
  • I'm one of those who sometimes makes long trips and the slow onset of static has always been a problem. But now I have a CD changer in my car and the radio, even without the static, is more like a long stream of pure commercials. Besides, wouldn't a CD changer--or, eventually, an MP3 player--be less expensive than a satellite receiver, give the driver much more control, and have fewer hiccups?

  • Bad news - More corporate control (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This will just mean more corporate ownership and
    control of media - there will be the absence of
    even an illusion of independent stations. As it
    is, some companies only insert local traffic
    reports while broadcasting the rest in multiple
    markets via satellite.

    If you can get one station all the way across
    the continent, how long before your choices will
    consist of Disney, Fox, or Westinghouse? The
    Internet is intrinsically supporting public expression by individuals - with a little effort
    we can restore this to radio.

    Support the microradio revolution! There ought
    to be a slashdottable web petition supporting
    this to send to the FCC somewhere...
  • RDS works fine in most of Europe. You can keep the same radio station as you drive across the country, and it can do a few other useful things like change channels or pause the casette player when traffic news comes on.

    Of course, this only works for stations that are broadcast all over the country you are in, but in my experience these are the good ones anyway. After all, if a radio station doesn't broadcast over a wide area, how are they going to be able to spend any money on production. And if all they do is inane chatter and mainstream rock music, then who cares whether you are listening to one radio station or another.

  • As if radio is not bad enough. Really.. I need to have the same 12 songs rammed down my throat no matter where I am in the country. Yeah that will be real fun. No thanks. I've heard big radio and it sucks. I'll take a small-market station with a little variety over the 12 song corporate playlists any day. Long live MP3.


    -Rich

  • So you don't like their spouses, but apparently you have no problems with their news coverage because I didn't hear you give any concrete examples of bias (pro-Democrat or anti-Republican) on NPR. In the last couple weeks I've heard several good pieces on the Republican primary elections, including some coverage of Elizabeth Dole which really changed my mind about her in a positive way. If you have specific examples of bias or inaccurate reporting on NPR, then let's hear it.

    And what does Waco have to do with NPR?

  • RDS? (Score:1)

    by nstrug ( 1741 )
    Doesn't this just do the same thing as RDS? RDS skips on to the next transmitter when you get in range and will also cut in to whatever your listening if a traffic or weather report comes in on a different station, display the station name and a few other clever things.

    Come to think of it I've never seen an RDS radio in the US. Maybe it doesn't exist here.

    Nick

  • This will probably increase variety, at least as much because of the business model they seem to be using as because of the technology. With traditional broadcast media (and even cable to an extent), each channel is run by a separate company which is competing with all of the others, mostly for a few of the largest demographics.

    These satelite radio businesses, however, seem to be set up so that all the channels on the service are owned by the same company, so they aren't competing with each other. Instead, the service as a whole competes with a different service, and whoever covers the widest set of interests wins. This means that each channel would be targeted at a different interest, so rather than a dozen top 40 pop stations, you get one top 40 pop channel, one punk chanel, one industrial channel, one opera channel, one baroque channel, one reggae channel, etc.

    Of course, this is all in my arrogant opinion, I-am-not-a-businessman-but-I-play-one-on-the-net, YMMV, void where prohibited, yadda yadda yadda.
    --
  • Posted by Fleeno:

    By network, I meant network programs like Rush or Dr. Laura or anything like that. If you're listening to one of those programs and drive out of the area, it finds a new local station carrying the same program.
  • Hmm. One of the big driving forces behind the conversion from analog to digital television is that it allows them to reclaim bandwidth... the digital signal is more robust than an analog signal, so you can use space in adjacent and harmonic channels that would ordinarily have interfered with each other. Also, thanks to the wonders of compression, it's possible to pack several digital video streams into the same bandwidth that would have contained a single, lower quality analog video stream.

    I don't know, really, how radio broadcast differs from television broadcast, but I'd assume that at least some of the same points would apply...
  • You know what kind of ping you get over satellite ? 250ms for a round trip. Try playing your Quake deathmatch with that lag.
  • I wonder how portable the receiver units will be.
    If they're walkman-like in size and weight, it
    would make bicycling, running, etc. while listening a breeze.

    Got to start training for a cross-country
    bike trip listening to my fav. ecclectic
    music station (-:

  • Info on the BBC's DAB system is available here [bbc.co.uk].

    (They're predicting [bbc.co.uk] internet over DAB by 2009, and radios that only play the music you like by 2020!)

    Regards, Ralph.

  • Since satellite signals can't go though solid objects, driving down a street surrounded by tall buildings would effectively block all reception. And forget about listening to your radio in a parking garage / structure, going through a tunnel etc. In fact, driving down a country road with a line of trees down the one side may also interfere - as long as these trees are in the line of sight. Other problems, such as signals bouncing off of buildings, creating two signals milliseconds apart must also be taken into account.

    Each radio must have a buffer able to record several seconds of audio. When reception is lost, the radio keeps playing out of the buffer, until reception is restored. Of course each radio transmission would therefore be lagged by the number of seconds your radio is capable of buffering.

  • Yes, to a certain extent you're trading signal for bandwidth. With analog, the information is lost in the transmission process. With digital it's lost during the digitization process. The difference is that with digital you get to choose which information you're going to lose, and, except under extreme circumstances, you're always going to get back all the information you put in. With analog, you will never get back all of the information you put in, and you have no choice as to what information you lose.

    And, as a purely practical matter, a digital signal is able to tolerate, without degradation, interference that would render an analog signal unusable. That would seem to me to qualify as a more robust signal.
  • Just a small comment, but have you ever turned
    on your walkman in a plane when its way up there?
    you can pick up radio stations from all over the place. This is because radio bounces off sky and back down. This is why FM can travel accross large water expanses pretty simply cause it bounces sky water sky water etc.. also, the FCC imposes limits on the power of FM radio transmissions. At night, they let certian stations really crank it up. I used to get Minnesota public radio in Houghton MI some nights.

    So current FM radio stations *could* be nationwide if the FCC let em.

    -Z
  • Posted by Napalm4u:

    That's right yall read the subject.

    When i get cancer i'm suing all those SateeLight persons.

    SoNEE, PrimStarr, and those GPS's Compknees
    payen for my bills!
  • Internet access by satellite already exists
    (at least here in Sweden). It only uses the
    satellite for incomming data (with normal modem
    for outgoing). Since the acknowledge packets in tcp has to be sent by phone the speed with tcp is only 200-400 kbps whereas udp gets a speed of
    500-800 kbps.
    More info here [tele2.se].
    oh...
    you don't read swedish...? :)
  • Yes, it is, in a way. They all pay blanket fees to ASCAP, BMI, etc. and they somehow rate each song on an average play amount.
  • The biggest problem with satellite radio is that it will cost the consumer money. Money for the receiver and money for the monthly subscription. And will it be cheap? How cheap is a satellite?
    And since it IS so expensive to own and operate, what will the programming be? The safe, tired, "sure thing" programming that is already crammed down our throats from coast-to-coast. Except now everybody really will hear the same stuff at the same time - over and over again.
    And since it IS so expensive who will own/operate this service? The mega-media corporations who already own most of our radio stations!
    Thanks to the 1996 Telecom Act well over 44% of our nations radio stations have changed hands (into the hands of the few: Disney/ABC, Chancellor/Capstar, Jacor, CBS/Infinity...).
    Why isn't the public upset about this? Why isn't it covered in the media? Oh, the media is all owned by... the same people.
    What really should burn people's butts is that the airwaves are FREE and belong to all of us. Yet the spectrum is AUCTIONED off to the highest bidder who locks up that frequency and turns it into a money-making machine. HUGE profits are generated off these "giveaways" and the public gets... uh... more Hootie and Garth.
    Ok... so I have an issue about radio. If you do as well, please visit the Americans for Radio Diversity website. http://www.radiodiversity.com
  • The stations I tend to listen to for "classic rock" are locally programmed during the day. (There probably is a satellite feed at night and for some of the weekend time.) They tend to play too many local acts and make too many remote appearances at their primary sponsors.

    Besides, local radio stations give something very useful. It's called WEATHER. In an area like southwestern New York, with nasties like lake effect snow in the winter, you want to know Real Soon if a weather watch or warning is posted.
  • Oh. And if you weren't aware, the FCC is currently taking PUBLIC comment regarding a new system of Low Power FM ((LPFM) or "pirate radio") stations that would serve local communities for very low cost. In fact, a decent low power station could be setup for under $5,000. Compare that with the cost of just getting a license for a full power station (over $100,000 in many cases).
    Of course the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) is running a hot anti-LPFM campaign and getting help from NPR and the CPB. They like to use scare tactics like: airplanes will fall out of the sky if this is allowed; emergency communications will get disrupted; it will be all chaos! Those in the scene know better and know these things to be false.
    You can find out about the FCC's Petition for RuleMaking at the FCC site (www.fcc.gov) or visit the ARD site at http://www.radiodiversity.com
    The deadline is August 2nd, 1999! Make your voice heard.
  • Wah. *I* have a /. account and therefore my tastes in music matter...

    How about some real critism? Like I probably know more about the enter string family than DMB's viola player or better sax solos come out of my ass than out of their sax player. I'm a UVA student where they basically got started a few years ago and I like them as much as anybody but artistic an sophisticated they are not. Artistically they aren't perfect but I bet they put a lot more into what they do than most anything J Random Hacker is going to do when they decide to crack on a band on /.

    So there :)

  • Broadcasting begins with generalization (Score:3)

    by bootp ( 2395 ) on Thursday June 17, 1999 @04:33PM (#1845220) Homepage
    This service seems a bit like digital music available through major television cable companies. The idea is that you either install a new radio all together in your car, or you can just buy an attenna adapter that will let you use your existing radio. It's not the "free" radio that most of us are use to, where anytime you want you can tune in to any particular channel. Instead, there is a subscription fee ( $9.95 US for the CD Radio service [cdradio.com]), and supposedly this covers the revenues that commericial radio creates. Thus, commercial-free radio at a price.

    Both CD Radio and XL offer 100 different "stations" respectively, with CD Radio dividing it nicely, 50 for news, 50 for music. Both companies have already produced primitive station lineups already: XL Radio [amrc.com] and CD Radio [cdradio.com].

    Even though I have no direct evidence, I imagine many of the stations to be similar to National Public Radio (NPR) in their broadcast procedure. NPR reports news that is broadcast all over the nation, so reporting local events or weather is ineffecient for every single area around the country. Instead, NPR gives regional broadcasters space within the nation-wide program (anywhere from 5 to 60 minutes) to report local news, sports scores, and weather. If the new satellite radio companies really expect people to give up their old radios for the new deal, then they'll probably come up with a system similar to NPR's. The logistics of such an endeavour are beyond the scope of my knowledge.

    If you want to get more news on the new technology straight from the horses' mouths check out both companies' websites at:

    CD Radio ( www.cdradio.com [cdradio.com] )
    XL Radio ( www.amrc.com [amrc.com] )
  • Radio stations already do this. Chances are if you have one of those cookie cutter stations with cookie cutter radio personalities, the personalitites are in some recording studio back at the corperate headquarters. What they do is record the same radio show at the headquarters and send it out to several transmitters in various cities. Each transmitter has an ISDN link and a techniction that cuts and pastes the audio just before it is transmitted. If the DJs hold a call in contest, the techniction will take the call and ask the standard questions, the callers voice will then be cut and pasted with the DJ asking those same questions. If you've ever called into a radio station and the person who answered the phone different than the DJs, this is probabally what happened.
  • Posted by cu85tiger:

    Does anybody know?
    Would this technology increase or decrease available variety? Would it be like the
    web where I can get cool Aussie programs like Deadly Vibes here in Jerkwater SC or would
    it be like cable with 200+ channels of mind numbing sameness? I guess the answer to this would be in the cost?
  • You are not the only one that feels that radio stations play crap. I don't even have the patience to listen through the drivel for mp3 ripping. Its a cesspool of junk out there and I'm not sure who's listening. I'm sure they pay the marketing study companies great sums of money to get the results they need for cash. I would imagine many frequency bands would be better served if the public truely owned them and any Joe off the street could lease a frequency to broadcast whatever, regardless of political or entertainment content. Commercial radio is a very interesting business. Too bad the content is not.
  • Why do you feel that's being sarcastic? Its the truth! My sister plays in a tango band in Austin Texas and has released her second CD. She does not get a penny from the RIAA. Its a protection racket supported by our elected officials. I say if the music is good enough, people will pay for it. Entertainers do not need hardball tactics from the RIAA that crush recording technology. Its an offer they can refuse.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Satellite Radio isn't that new as this article
    implies. Actually, I've been receiving radio
    programmes from satellite for some years now,
    in CD quality via so-called ADR and DSR tuners.
    I don't know whether these don't exist in the USA
    or are just unknown, but they're available in
    Europe and get their data from the Astra Satellites.
  • An Linux has packet radio built right into the kernel! Check it out next time you do a make config. I hope there will be enough interest in the next few years to get something like this started in my area.
  • While this is neat, I think it's going to have a difficult time replacing traditional radio and recordable media and CDs in the car. Given the quality of most factory-installed car speakers, extra quality isn't likely going to be noticed that much.

    Monthly fees for car "radio" likely won't go over too well either, except for people who do lots of traveling - and maybe not even them. I know when I spend nearly every weekend driving around at 2 in the morning, one of my favorite things to do was play "AM tag". Basically, see how far away of a station you can pick up. Works very well at night - and will at least keep you awake, unlike straight listening to music.

    Also, I hope they don't use DBS frequencies ... Imagine losing your car radio when it rained!

    On the other hand, if this takes off, it might force traditional radio to become more interesting to retain listeners.

Slashdot Top Deals

The trouble with being punctual is that nobody's there to appreciate it. -- Franklin P. Jones

Close