4 ms·

I've always been an advocate of shortwave radio since I was a kid. Back then I'd come home from school and often listen to Radio Moscow and Radio Peking trying

I've always been an advocate of shortwave radio since I was a kid. Back then I'd come home from school and often listen to Radio Moscow and Radio Peking trying to outcompete each other on shortwave. I wasn't interested in the propaganda per se but rather the fact that it was so transparent and hyped up as to be absolutely hilarious. What was not lost on me was how truly effective shortwave actually was as a communications medium. Radio Moscow was the quintessential example of this, almost everywhere one tuned across the various shortwave bands one could hear a 5/9+ signal almost as clearly as a local AM broadcast station. By comparion, VOA (Voice of America) was a minnow. For years I've said that it would be foolhardy to discard shortwave on strategic grounds and the Ukraine situation has clearly demonstrated that. I think we underestimate both AM and shortwave radio because they're old technology but we mustn't forget how truly effective they can be. In the end they will get the message through when all else has failed - the internet down, submarine cables cut and satellites out. Not only is AM/SW radio effective but we also shouldn't forget that it's simple technology that we can fall back upon at any time. In an emergency, we can have services up and running almost overnight. I've always reckoned that AM radio was one of the greatest inventions of all time. Sometimes we overlook the true worth of old and or familiar tech and that can be to our serious disadvantage.

donthellbanme 5y ago
I try to always have a portable am radio with me. My favorite two radios are the Sony SRF-M37W (a favorite among blue collar workers, like electricians. It fits in the overalls.), and CC pocket radio. I've had a problem with anxiety, and loneliness, over the years. I just need something in the background. I miss the old time radio programs, and Art Bell. If had money I'd buy up any AM radio frequency, and put out new material. Even as a kid, I preferred AM old time theater to tv.
- JKCalhoun 5y ago
  AM does seem preferable to FM (jumping back to the VOA discussion) since, if you had to, you could make an AM radio out of almost anything. (In this regard though I am not thinking about Ukrainians or Russians but rather 3rd world countries.)
  - hilbert42 5y ago
    Ever so true and it's dirt cheap as there's precious little infrastructure needed. If necessary, even an amateur radio transmitter re-tuned to broadcast frequencies could be used (for legality it'd still have to be re-licensed for broadcast use).
- hilbert42 5y ago
  Yeah, right I understand that. Radio back then was formative stuff that one never forgets. Radio is by far the most effective electronic medium to keep one company, it's more intimate than any of the others - it's not only the broadcast program per se but also the fact that the announcer is talking to you. I've still two Sony ICF 2001D receivers, in fact I'm looking across my room now at one. As FM, AM and SW RXes they're second to none outside a proper communions receiver.
  - xattt 5y ago
    > Radio is by far the most effective electronic medium to keep one company. What’s your take on podcasts?
    - hilbert42 5y ago
      Well I listen to them for specific information but unlike normal radio broadcasting they don't provide a 'live' presence in one's home as does the latter.
- kraussvonespy 5y ago
  Wow, thank you. You didn't intend this but you've helped me to understand my mom's life a little better. After my dad died, my mom had a radio going in her house almost 24/7. I never really thought of that as being her way to deal with loneliness but sadly I think that's exactly what it was. Maybe it was better for her to fill her head with the radio voices rather than having to deal with her own lonely internal voice.
  - hilbert42 5y ago
    I'm so glad to have read your reply and to know that my comment helped you to appreciate and understand your mom's situation a little better. These days, radio is still a powerful tool but it's often underappreciated. Whilst one can have the TV on it's not of much help unless one's watching it, whereas radio is more intimate in that one can go about one's daily life and its presence is still with one. What you observed about your mom's life I've also seen in my own relatives especially the women in my family whose partner had died. For them, the radio was pretty much a 24/7 comfort and a protection against loneliness. My appreciation of this never fully struck me until they'd died. It's now a big regret that I never spent more time with them when they were alive. The fact that I cannot undo that hurts. (BTW, I often post comments on line more as a diary or aide-mémoire to remind myself of what I thought about a story. I wouldn't bother to do so if it remained on my home PC but the added incentive that others may read it spurs me to write. These days, there's so much competition for people's attention online that one posts on the understanding that if one's lucky one's comment will receive a few fleeting glances. Occasionally, when one receives genuine heartfelt feedback as with your post, it makes one's efforts feel as if they've been worthwhile. Thanks.)
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
nullc 5y ago
> Radio Moscow was the quintessential example of this, almost everywhere one tuned across the various shortwave bands one could hear a 5/9+ signal almost as clearly as a local AM broadcast station. By comparion, VOA (Voice of America) was a minnow. Not an accident, targeting Americans with VOA used to be unlawful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith%E2%80%93Mundt_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith%E2%80%93Mundt_Act
- hoseja 5y ago
  Never get high on your own product.
- hilbert42 5y ago
  Thanks for that link, I'd completely forgotten that history (given events then this stuff was considered high stakes).
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
BoxOfRain 5y ago
While I definitely think that binning off AM radio is a penny-wise but pound-foolish policy typical of the miserly post-2008 political landscape, if the band is fully abandoned in the near future I say we should open the top 150 kHz or so for hobbyists operating at a low power of around 50 W or so. I know amateur radio is a thing that exists but this would be aimed at music broadcasting which isn't the point of amateur radio. There should be a minimally bureaucratic licence from the government which allows for gatekeeping at a technical level and also squares things with copyright holders (PRS is the body for this in the UK). My reasoning is: * AM is so under-utilised now this idea wouldn't tread on many important commercial or IP toes, it'd be nerdy hobbyists like us on HN for the most part. People would be able to experience being on the 'real' radio (as opposed to streaming) without the undesirably chaotic situation that would happen if this was allowed for FM or digital radio broadcasting. * The barrier to entry for hobbyist listeners (as opposed to hobbyist broadcasters) is basically zero because everyone has an old radio capable of tuning the AM band in a cupboard somewhere - which gives this a great anti-ewaste environmental angle. The existence of webSDRs has made MW and SW DX-ing really accessible too. * Interference is so bad on the MW band now anyway thanks to modern electrical equipment putting out lots of noise, adding low power hobbyists to the mix is probably an 'in for a penny, in for a pound' kind of scenario. Like what damage can a few hundred hobbyists spread out over the country and limited to a low power realistically do when there's millions of cheap power supplies putting out more interference to MW than all of them put together? * AM has a really appealing subjective qualities in the same way other technologically inferior approaches like vinyl records and cassettes do. There's something really appealling to me about the way AM cracks when there's a distant thunderstorm or the way you have to get up and physically move the aerial to bring a distant station into audibility. It's a very hands-on thing, yes it sounds very lo-fi but I like that - it's lo-fi in a soft, gentle and pleasantly unpredictable way whereas when digital approaches sound cheap it's usually in a harsh and unpleasant way.
- hilbert42 5y ago
  "...if the band is fully abandoned in the near future I say we should open the top 150 kHz or so for hobbyists operating at a low power of around 50 W or so." About 20 or so years ago I suggested to radio amateurs to set up a network for earthquake research but there were no takers back then. It's known that often before an earthquake that highly stressed rock can radiate low frequency electromagnetic fields. If a widespread network of low frequency listening stations were established around the world then it's just possible that these waves could be detected before an earthquake begins within sufficient time to give vulnerable people adequate warning. Because of the still-experimental nature of such research it is unlikely that governments or commercial operators could justify the funds necessary to set up sufficient (or the necessary) number of listening stations worldwide for the scheme to work (at least initially until proven to work). The solution: use the amateur radio network. Not only would it be in keeping with the longstanding ethos of amateur radio operators supplying emergency communications during disasters but also it would interest many radio amateurs from a scientific stance. The way I'd envision it to work is that amateur stations would set up (VLF) very low frequency transmitters to act as beacons in a sort of cellular grid where a station would continually monitor one frequency and transmit on another (multiple frequencies being necessary so transmitters and receivers can be used simultaneously at each station (location)). When the transmission path is such that a signal is either received and or its signal varies with a signature that's characteristic of an earthquake then warnings can be issued. It's my understanding that the transmission frequencies necessary would need to be much lower than any amateur band currently issued or agreed upon by the ITU, etc. (i.e.: in the 10s of kHz or so), so new amateur bands may have to be issued (initially, they could be allocated on a trial or experiential basis). It seems to me that perhaps geologists, scientists and engineers with an interest in electronics or radio communications may wish to follow up this idea.
danesparza 5y ago
You are exactly who this article is talking about. There is nostalgia for shortwave, but no audience. If we want to consider real options for mass communication of information in the future, shortwave can't be on that list of options: The audience won't be there.
- hilbert42 5y ago
  No audience? Well, it depends on who you listen to. There are many places in Russia and Siberia that are out of range of normal broadcast services and many of those who live there still listen to shortwave broadcasts. This isn't my opinion, it's the opinion of those who are prepared to and who are actually putting money into such broadcasts: https://www.radioworld.com/global/bbc-world-service-revives-shortwave-to-eastern-europe https://www.radioworld.com/global/bbc-world-service-revives-... https://www.radioworld.com/columns-and-views/why-we-still-believe-in-shortwave https://www.radioworld.com/columns-and-views/why-we-still-be... Moreover, as past experience has demonstrated, it only takes a few to receive such broadcasts and then the rumor-mill quickly works overtime to spread the word far and wide.
  - Johnythree 5y ago
    Likewise, there are many areas in Asia and in the Pacific where there is no FM and no mobile phones, and certainly no Internet. In remote parts of Australia it came as a great loss when Radio Australia was switched off, along with the SW rebroadcasts of the various state-wide ABC programs. Many 4WD and Marine travelers had their HF radios fitted with ABC frequencies. There are huge areas of land and sea which have no alternatives but for SW radio.
    - hilbert42 5y ago
      "Radio Australia was switched off, along with the SW rebroadcasts of the various state-wide ABC programs." In ancient times I worked for RCA in its prototype laboratory who supplied much of Radio Australia's equipment to its Darwin† transmitting station (I would have worked on some of that equipment and my boss was head of the RCA installation team). Its closure, albeit some decades later, always struck me as a foolhardy decision by a stupid penny-pinching government. If any place needs good AM and shortwave radio services it's Australia, as FM doesn't really hack the pace with such huge distances (and I've also had much to do with FM so my comment is engineering-based and not preferential bias). As I've mentioned a while back on HN, in the 1970s and pre-Radio National, I could travel from Sydney to Adelaide via Cowra, West Wyalong etc. by car and listen to the ABC all the way without a break (2FC Sydney, 3LO Melbourne and 5CL Adelaide) on the AM Broadcast band. One can no longer do that due to co and adjacent channel interference from other stations as well as the general increase in the noise floor of the AM broadcast band that's occurred since then. Damn nuisance really. __ † That said, the Darwin TX was mainly there for Indonesia and bits of Asia that you mentioned although that doesn't detract from my main points.

donthellbanme 5y ago

I try to always have a portable am radio with me. My favorite two radios are the Sony SRF-M37W (a favorite among blue collar workers, like electricians. It fits in the overalls.), and CC pocket radio. I've had a problem with anxiety, and loneliness, over the years. I just need something in the background. I miss the old time radio programs, and Art Bell. If had money I'd buy up any AM radio frequency, and put out new material. Even as a kid, I preferred AM old time theater to tv.

JKCalhoun 5y ago
AM does seem preferable to FM (jumping back to the VOA discussion) since, if you had to, you could make an AM radio out of almost anything. (In this regard though I am not thinking about Ukrainians or Russians but rather 3rd world countries.)
- hilbert42 5y ago
  Ever so true and it's dirt cheap as there's precious little infrastructure needed. If necessary, even an amateur radio transmitter re-tuned to broadcast frequencies could be used (for legality it'd still have to be re-licensed for broadcast use).
hilbert42 5y ago
Yeah, right I understand that. Radio back then was formative stuff that one never forgets. Radio is by far the most effective electronic medium to keep one company, it's more intimate than any of the others - it's not only the broadcast program per se but also the fact that the announcer is talking to you. I've still two Sony ICF 2001D receivers, in fact I'm looking across my room now at one. As FM, AM and SW RXes they're second to none outside a proper communions receiver.
- xattt 5y ago
  > Radio is by far the most effective electronic medium to keep one company. What’s your take on podcasts?
  - hilbert42 5y ago
    Well I listen to them for specific information but unlike normal radio broadcasting they don't provide a 'live' presence in one's home as does the latter.
kraussvonespy 5y ago
Wow, thank you. You didn't intend this but you've helped me to understand my mom's life a little better. After my dad died, my mom had a radio going in her house almost 24/7. I never really thought of that as being her way to deal with loneliness but sadly I think that's exactly what it was. Maybe it was better for her to fill her head with the radio voices rather than having to deal with her own lonely internal voice.
- hilbert42 5y ago
  I'm so glad to have read your reply and to know that my comment helped you to appreciate and understand your mom's situation a little better. These days, radio is still a powerful tool but it's often underappreciated. Whilst one can have the TV on it's not of much help unless one's watching it, whereas radio is more intimate in that one can go about one's daily life and its presence is still with one. What you observed about your mom's life I've also seen in my own relatives especially the women in my family whose partner had died. For them, the radio was pretty much a 24/7 comfort and a protection against loneliness. My appreciation of this never fully struck me until they'd died. It's now a big regret that I never spent more time with them when they were alive. The fact that I cannot undo that hurts. (BTW, I often post comments on line more as a diary or aide-mémoire to remind myself of what I thought about a story. I wouldn't bother to do so if it remained on my home PC but the added incentive that others may read it spurs me to write. These days, there's so much competition for people's attention online that one posts on the understanding that if one's lucky one's comment will receive a few fleeting glances. Occasionally, when one receives genuine heartfelt feedback as with your post, it makes one's efforts feel as if they've been worthwhile. Thanks.)

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

nullc 5y ago

> Radio Moscow was the quintessential example of this, almost everywhere one tuned across the various shortwave bands one could hear a 5/9+ signal almost as clearly as a local AM broadcast station. By comparion, VOA (Voice of America) was a minnow. Not an accident, targeting Americans with VOA used to be unlawful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith%E2%80%93Mundt_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith%E2%80%93Mundt_Act

hoseja 5y ago
Never get high on your own product.
hilbert42 5y ago
Thanks for that link, I'd completely forgotten that history (given events then this stuff was considered high stakes).
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

BoxOfRain 5y ago

While I definitely think that binning off AM radio is a penny-wise but pound-foolish policy typical of the miserly post-2008 political landscape, if the band is fully abandoned in the near future I say we should open the top 150 kHz or so for hobbyists operating at a low power of around 50 W or so. I know amateur radio is a thing that exists but this would be aimed at music broadcasting which isn't the point of amateur radio. There should be a minimally bureaucratic licence from the government which allows for gatekeeping at a technical level and also squares things with copyright holders (PRS is the body for this in the UK). My reasoning is: * AM is so under-utilised now this idea wouldn't tread on many important commercial or IP toes, it'd be nerdy hobbyists like us on HN for the most part. People would be able to experience being on the 'real' radio (as opposed to streaming) without the undesirably chaotic situation that would happen if this was allowed for FM or digital radio broadcasting. * The barrier to entry for hobbyist listeners (as opposed to hobbyist broadcasters) is basically zero because everyone has an old radio capable of tuning the AM band in a cupboard somewhere - which gives this a great anti-ewaste environmental angle. The existence of webSDRs has made MW and SW DX-ing really accessible too. * Interference is so bad on the MW band now anyway thanks to modern electrical equipment putting out lots of noise, adding low power hobbyists to the mix is probably an 'in for a penny, in for a pound' kind of scenario. Like what damage can a few hundred hobbyists spread out over the country and limited to a low power realistically do when there's millions of cheap power supplies putting out more interference to MW than all of them put together? * AM has a really appealing subjective qualities in the same way other technologically inferior approaches like vinyl records and cassettes do. There's something really appealling to me about the way AM cracks when there's a distant thunderstorm or the way you have to get up and physically move the aerial to bring a distant station into audibility. It's a very hands-on thing, yes it sounds very lo-fi but I like that - it's lo-fi in a soft, gentle and pleasantly unpredictable way whereas when digital approaches sound cheap it's usually in a harsh and unpleasant way.

hilbert42 5y ago
"...if the band is fully abandoned in the near future I say we should open the top 150 kHz or so for hobbyists operating at a low power of around 50 W or so." About 20 or so years ago I suggested to radio amateurs to set up a network for earthquake research but there were no takers back then. It's known that often before an earthquake that highly stressed rock can radiate low frequency electromagnetic fields. If a widespread network of low frequency listening stations were established around the world then it's just possible that these waves could be detected before an earthquake begins within sufficient time to give vulnerable people adequate warning. Because of the still-experimental nature of such research it is unlikely that governments or commercial operators could justify the funds necessary to set up sufficient (or the necessary) number of listening stations worldwide for the scheme to work (at least initially until proven to work). The solution: use the amateur radio network. Not only would it be in keeping with the longstanding ethos of amateur radio operators supplying emergency communications during disasters but also it would interest many radio amateurs from a scientific stance. The way I'd envision it to work is that amateur stations would set up (VLF) very low frequency transmitters to act as beacons in a sort of cellular grid where a station would continually monitor one frequency and transmit on another (multiple frequencies being necessary so transmitters and receivers can be used simultaneously at each station (location)). When the transmission path is such that a signal is either received and or its signal varies with a signature that's characteristic of an earthquake then warnings can be issued. It's my understanding that the transmission frequencies necessary would need to be much lower than any amateur band currently issued or agreed upon by the ITU, etc. (i.e.: in the 10s of kHz or so), so new amateur bands may have to be issued (initially, they could be allocated on a trial or experiential basis). It seems to me that perhaps geologists, scientists and engineers with an interest in electronics or radio communications may wish to follow up this idea.

danesparza 5y ago

You are exactly who this article is talking about. There is nostalgia for shortwave, but no audience. If we want to consider real options for mass communication of information in the future, shortwave can't be on that list of options: The audience won't be there.

hilbert42 5y ago
No audience? Well, it depends on who you listen to. There are many places in Russia and Siberia that are out of range of normal broadcast services and many of those who live there still listen to shortwave broadcasts. This isn't my opinion, it's the opinion of those who are prepared to and who are actually putting money into such broadcasts: https://www.radioworld.com/global/bbc-world-service-revives-shortwave-to-eastern-europe https://www.radioworld.com/global/bbc-world-service-revives-... https://www.radioworld.com/columns-and-views/why-we-still-believe-in-shortwave https://www.radioworld.com/columns-and-views/why-we-still-be... Moreover, as past experience has demonstrated, it only takes a few to receive such broadcasts and then the rumor-mill quickly works overtime to spread the word far and wide.
- Johnythree 5y ago
  Likewise, there are many areas in Asia and in the Pacific where there is no FM and no mobile phones, and certainly no Internet. In remote parts of Australia it came as a great loss when Radio Australia was switched off, along with the SW rebroadcasts of the various state-wide ABC programs. Many 4WD and Marine travelers had their HF radios fitted with ABC frequencies. There are huge areas of land and sea which have no alternatives but for SW radio.
  - hilbert42 5y ago
    "Radio Australia was switched off, along with the SW rebroadcasts of the various state-wide ABC programs." In ancient times I worked for RCA in its prototype laboratory who supplied much of Radio Australia's equipment to its Darwin† transmitting station (I would have worked on some of that equipment and my boss was head of the RCA installation team). Its closure, albeit some decades later, always struck me as a foolhardy decision by a stupid penny-pinching government. If any place needs good AM and shortwave radio services it's Australia, as FM doesn't really hack the pace with such huge distances (and I've also had much to do with FM so my comment is engineering-based and not preferential bias). As I've mentioned a while back on HN, in the 1970s and pre-Radio National, I could travel from Sydney to Adelaide via Cowra, West Wyalong etc. by car and listen to the ABC all the way without a break (2FC Sydney, 3LO Melbourne and 5CL Adelaide) on the AM Broadcast band. One can no longer do that due to co and adjacent channel interference from other stations as well as the general increase in the noise floor of the AM broadcast band that's occurred since then. Damn nuisance really. __ † That said, the Darwin TX was mainly there for Indonesia and bits of Asia that you mentioned although that doesn't detract from my main points.