| Message-ID: <u475nm$jdhg$2@dont-email.me>
Date: 19 May 2023 08:41:57 +0200
From: "Marco Moock" <mo01@posteo.de>
Subject: Re: Congress moves to preserve AM radio in cars
Am 18.05.2023 schrieb "Bill Horne" <malQRMassimilation@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 12:48:36PM +0000, danny burstein wrote:
>> Background: Electric cars, thanks to their motors
>> and circuitry, cause lots of radio frequency interference.
>>
>> If done cheaply, this badly crashes any attempt to
>> listen to an AM radio. Hence many car manufacturers
>> are choosing the skinflint option of simply not including
>> AM radios in their vehicles.
>
> As should be their right. AM radios in motor vehicles have always been
> subject to interference from a variety of sources, including spark
> plugs in converntional engines, electric windshield motors, and the
> display panels used to replace old-fashioned speedometers, and oil
> pressure and temperature gauges.
There is just one problem: Most modern cars don't have a possibility to
exchange the radio.
> It's not the fault of AM radios: AM was simply the first method which
> was discovred for sending voices and music over the airwaves, and for
> that reason, it became the de facto standard for broadcasting - and
> the source of the immense fortunes gathered by manufacturers such as
> RCA, plus the immense power which broadcasters accumulated by
> portraying their friends in a good light and their enemies in a bad
> one.
AM modulation is easy and the band and receivers are there. It would be
possible to use FM modulation on mediumwave and shortwave, but new
transmitters and receivers are needed. So it stays with AM.
> The point is that those whom profit from existing methods of
> distributing a nation's propaganda always fight tooth and nail to hang
> on to their privileged positions and profit model when new
> technologies such as FM threaten them, and our leaders have always let
> them get away with it. Elected officials at all levels of government
> had learned hard lessons from the early days of radio broadcasting:
> how racists like "Father Coughlin" could draw audiences numbered in
> the millions, and how Franklin Roosevelt was able to use "Fireside
> Chats" to help restore public confidence in the banking system and
> advance a liberal agenda during the Great Depression. Never mind the
> messages they sent out: what politicians count is votes, and the
> broadcasters have never allowed them to forget it. That's one of the
> reasons why Geostationary satellites(1), first proposed in 1929,
> weren't available to carry TV reports until well into the 1970's.
America has freedom of speech. I prefer this solution instead of
government-controlled speech like in Germany where only some bad words
(calling somebody stupid) about a person might result in a fine.
I know that there are people like Hal Turner who have far right and
extremist opinions, but I don't feel disturbed by them. Such stations
can be heard on the shortwave station WBCQ.
I like medium and short wave because they offer the possibility to
listen to transmissions from other countries - without censorship or
spying. I think we should keep them instead of switching all remaining
transmitters off and relying on FM VHF and DAB(+), which offers only
local stations.
|
| Message-ID: <20230519222257.GA328636@telecomdigest.us>
Date: 19 May 2023 18:22:57 -0400
From: "Bill Horne" <malQRMassimilation@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Congress moves to preserve AM radio in cars
On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 08:41:57AM +0200, Marco Moock wrote:
> Am 18.05.2023 schrieb "Bill Horne" <malQRMassimilation@gmail.com>:
>
>> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 12:48:36PM +0000, danny burstein wrote:
>>> Background: Electric cars, thanks to their motors
>>> and circuitry, cause lots of radio frequency interference.
>>>
>>> If done cheaply, this badly crashes any attempt to
>>> listen to an AM radio. Hence many car manufacturers
>>> are choosing the skinflint option of simply not including
>>> AM radios in their vehicles.
>>
>> As should be their right. AM radios in motor vehicles have always been
>> subject to interference from a variety of sources, including spark
>> plugs in converntional engines, electric windshield motors, and the
>> display panels used to replace old-fashioned speedometers, and oil
>> pressure and temperature gauges.
>
> There is just one problem: Most modern cars don't have a possibility to
> exchange the radio.
I think Mr. Burstein was writing about new vehicles, so I don't
feel that's a concern.
>> It's not the fault of AM radios: AM was simply the first method which
>> was discovred for sending voices and music over the airwaves, and for
>> that reason, it became the de facto standard for broadcasting - and
>> the source of the immense fortunes gathered by manufacturers such as
>> RCA, plus the immense power which broadcasters accumulated by
>> portraying their friends in a good light and their enemies in a bad
>> one.
>
> AM modulation is easy and the band and receivers are there. It would be
> possible to use FM modulation on mediumwave and shortwave, but new
> transmitters and receivers are needed. So it stays with AM.
You're right about AM being easy: as I wrote before, it was the first
method of modulating a radio wave that was discovered, and it has the
largest base of "installed" receivers for that reason.
But, the reason that politicians are screeming at electric car makers
is simply that large broadcast chains are screeming at them - in the
face of competition from higher-fidelity FM broadcasts and the
concert-hall fidelity offered by satellite systems, AM stations, at
least in the United States, have largely swithched to a "talk radio"
format. On AM bands today, we mostly hear Basso Profondo announcers
who pitch reactionary political views during the all-important "Drive
Time" hours when listeners are alone in their cars and willing to hear
comforting lies and propaganda.
>> The point is that those whom profit from existing methods of
>> distributing a nation's propaganda always fight tooth and nail to hang
>> on to their privileged positions and profit model when new
>> technologies such as FM threaten them, and our leaders have always let
>> them get away with it. Elected officials at all levels of government
>> had learned hard lessons from the early days of radio broadcasting:
>> how racists like "Father Coughlin" could draw audiences numbered in
>> the millions, and how Franklin Roosevelt was able to use "Fireside
>> Chats" to help restore public confidence in the banking system and
>> advance a liberal agenda during the Great Depression. Never mind the
>> messages they sent out: what politicians count is votes, and the
>> broadcasters have never allowed them to forget it. That's one of the
>> reasons why Geostationary satellites(1), first proposed in 1929,
>> weren't available to carry TV reports until well into the 1970's.
>
> America has freedom of speech. I prefer this solution instead of
> government-controlled speech like in Germany where only some bad words
> (calling somebody stupid) about a person might result in a fine.
Be careful what you wish for: our courts have decided that "Freedom of
Speech" requires us to suffer the abuse of every self-appointed Socrates
or mentally ill stranger whom occupies his day by destroying other
riders' quiet enjoyment of a subway ride or a railway seat.
Inevitably, the performer’s skills are mostly limited to demanding
money from the other riders, with the threat of further croaking or
braggadocio to follow if they're not paid to move on to the next car
and the next group of victims. You might have heard news reports about
a recent death of a developmentally-delayed adult who was talking
trash to an audience that had heard - and suffered - enough.
> I know that there are people like Hal Turner who have far right and
> extremist opinions, but I don't feel disturbed by them. Such stations
> can be heard on the shortwave station WBCQ.
I have a old friend who works at WBCQ: a fellow Amateur Radio Operator
whom has forgotten more about practical AM transmitter design and
repair than I will ever know.
He reminded me once of a solution to my complaint about a foul-mouthed
fool I heard on another station: "Spin the dial!"
> I like medium and short wave because they offer the possibility to
> listen to transmissions from other countries - without censorship or
> spying. I think we should keep them instead of switching all remaining
> transmitters off and relying on FM VHF and DAB(+), which offers only
> local stations.
That's a double-edged sword: I once stumbled upon a shortware
broadcast by a well-spoken man whom was commenting on the day's news,
when Donald Trump had said that "Cuba is just an island in the middle
of the Atlantic." The announcer laughed at the story, and said that
someone should give Donald a map - and then announced that I was
listening to Radio Havana. It hurt a little, knowing that the rest of
the world could hear the shortcomings of our political leaders, but it
hurt a lot more to think of how Donald got to that position.
Suffice to say, I also like shortwave a lot more than medium wave: you
hear a better class of people, and better reasoning and more
well-thought-out opinions. Plus, if something irks me, I get to spin
the dial.
Bill Horne
--
(Please remove QRM from my email address for direct replies)
|
