×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

HD Radio Recording In the US?

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the line-out-and-a-zoom-recorder dept.

Communications 303

unreceivedpacket writes "The public radio stations I listen to have been advertising their conversion to HD Radio format for some time. They advertise multiple channels, their second channel playing all classical, all the time. I am interested in purchasing a receiver so I can listen to this extra content, and was also hoping to find a receiver with a built-in recorder so I could time-shift programs that are not otherwise available as legal pod-casts. My initial queries have returned few models that support any kind of digital recording, and the existing ones seem out of production or sorely lacking features. Is this the state of Digital Radio in the US? Are there any legal recording devices for HD Radio? Any good solutions for recording and time-shifting, perhaps through Linux?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

303 comments

Liberate the Spectrum. (5, Interesting)

Erris (531066) | more than 5 years ago | (#24218869)

Liberate the specturm [greaterdemocracy.org] or you will suffer digital restrictions [slashdot.org] . Vista's checking of line voltages to make sure no one has clipped on an analog recording device should tell you where all of this is going. The RIAA has been screaming about "radio pirates" for 50 years. Digital broadcast gives them a way to close the "analog hole" they so dread. If the makers colude with broadcasters, only "authorized" players will have keys to decode "HD" signals. If the specturm is liberated, everything will be high quality because no one but big publishers wants to degrade music.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (0, Troll)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 5 years ago | (#24218905)

Who cares if radio is locked down when radio is less and less relevant today?

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (5, Funny)

Devistater (593822) | more than 5 years ago | (#24218945)

The submitter?

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (4, Interesting)

Erris (531066) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219355)

Anyone who pays for telecommunication services or publishes should care about spectrum. The spectrum belongs to the public and there is no longer a need for it to be allocated by government the way 100 year old radios required. Free spectrum would bring you vastly cheaper communications and true always on internet.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (0, Offtopic)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219409)

Would a campaign for free spectrum bring an end to the troll twitter? If so, sign me up.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (3, Insightful)

harrkev (623093) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219919)

The spectrum belongs to the public and there is no longer a need for it to be allocated by government the way 100 year old radios required. Free spectrum would bring you vastly cheaper communications and true always on internet.

Riiiight. Maybe we should do the same thing for real property. Why "own" land like they did 100 years ago. Just have communal property. If you see a house that you like, just move in. Is your neighbor's TV larger than yours? Take it.

I, for one, am happy that the local police, fire department, and ambulance services have their own slice of spectrum. I would hate for people to die because little Billy decided to run his own radio station.

Or, you can have two TV stations in a "broadcast war." ABC decides to broadcast on channel 7. NBC decides that they have a larger transmitter, so they tune to channel 7 and crank up the wattage, knocking ABC off. ABC then decides to upgrade the transmitter to twice the power that NBC has, and knocks them off the air.

Radio spectrum is a limited resource. There is only so much of it, and everybody has to share. It needs to be managed, just as you manage other things that are limited (time, money, space, etc.).

Read and think before spew? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24220095)

Clicky the linky [greaterdemocracy.org] and welcome yourself to the 21st century. Well, at least the 1970s [wikipedia.org] . You might also look into how traditional radio failed emergency workers on 9/11 and think about all of that the next time you browse the net at a coffee shop. EM does not "interfere" with itself, it adds just as light does.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219115)

Every American citizen, since we technically own that bandwidth within our borders?

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (3, Interesting)

SaDan (81097) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219215)

I will never subscribe to a paid radio service (like Sirius or XM), and I'm currently looking to the the hell away from cable. I hate paying for commercials.

I am one of the people who care about this.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

Grey Ninja (739021) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219283)

Actually, I don't think XM has commercials. I think they simply fund themselves on your subscription. I don't remember hearing any commercials anyway, other than advertising events that they are a part of, or events happening on other channels.

I've just rented a few cars that had XM, and when available, I'll listen to it. So I might be incorrect, but I'm pretty sure that's the way it works.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

xclr8r (658786) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219353)

My wife has XM. I've heard commercials for some dog formula that makes your dog's fur shinier (sp?) . I've heard other non-event commercials too but the dog one is the only one I remember since I have a dog.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

GigG (887839) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219359)

Yes some XM channels have commercials. To they bother me as a subscriber? Not at all.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

beckje01 (1216538) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219431)

They have commercials on some stations and some stations are commercial free. So it's slightly better then cable where everything has commercials including the program guide on digital cable.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

Tekzel (593039) | more than 5 years ago | (#24220171)

Oh my god, thanks for opening up an old wound! Last time I looked at the cable guide on my television 2/3rd of it was this horrid and annoying ad space, and then there was room for 2 or maybe 3 lines of guide data. The stupidity of it made me want to scream. I have been a Tivo subscriber for a long time now and never have to deal with it, thank goodness.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219797)

Actually, I don't think XM has commercials. I think they simply fund themselves on your subscription.

You could have been describing cable TV in the 80s. Obviously, that's not the case anymore. I would expect subscription radio will follow suit.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (2, Informative)

timbck2 (233967) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219831)

All XM's music channels are commercial-free; their other channels are not. I believe Sirius has a similar policy.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

Gat0r30y (957941) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219667)

The submitter is referring to public radio. Hey I don't like pledge drives either, but they hardly count as commercials.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

Deagol (323173) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219677)

That's easy enough -- ditch the TV! Or at least broadcast programming of any kind. Take a PC, a good monitor, and rent from NetFlix or torrent. The only time I see or hear a commercial is when I'm out of the house. I have this dream that a non-trivial portion of the population will, with the death of analog TV early next year, simply not make the transition and quit watching it entirely. The internet and rentals are entertaining enough. Now that I think about it, I haven't even listened to the radio in months, as we don't use the one i the house and the one in the car died.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219891)

Take a PC, a good monitor, and rent from NetFlix or torrent.

Except for the netflix part, I'm already onboard.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

Pallazzio (974406) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219929)

I'm currently looking to the the hell away from cable. I hate paying for commercials.

uTorrent + tvrss.net = better than tivo. Never watch another commercial again.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (5, Insightful)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219225)

What's replacing radio?

The Ipod? That's been around for years and the people who want one already have them and have stopped listening to radio years ago.

Podcasts? One of the only mediums that has a lower signal to noise ratio than radio.

Sirius/XM? Meh, I know one person that subscribes to them, I don't think they're growing very fast anymore, if they ever did.

Streaming radio? Legislated into oblivion last year or the year before.

TV? Been there, done that.

Radio is sticking around, it may be becoming less relevant to your ears but I doubt you've listened in years anyway. Radio is free, and the ultimate road companion. Plus it won't be going away simply because of weather related announcements.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (2, Informative)

phobos13013 (813040) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219765)

On the point of streaming radio, some of us broadcasters are struggling to meet the regulations, you can hear our listener-supported, progressive radio station at the listen live link at the top of the page for WTUL New Orleans [wtulneworleans.com]

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (2, Informative)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 5 years ago | (#24220115)

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

caluml (551744) | more than 5 years ago | (#24220195)

I don't mind. They can use all that free HF spectrum for new Amateur Radio bands [wikipedia.org] :)
Check that out. A 1mm band - that's 250GHz. Does the antenna glow red when you transmit?

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (3, Interesting)

CogDissident (951207) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219255)

I just got a wi-fi radio, with over 100k stations, and a easy to use search function and favorites function. Now, even when I'm not at my computer, I can listen to whatever I want. So who cares about the "dinosaur" radio stations?

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219415)

Link? I'd be interested in one.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (4, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219685)

sweet so how does that radio work getting traffic reports when I am sitting on 696 just outside novi?

Oh wait, they DONT. Oh well I am sure they work great for the 78 year old lady that has to live on $600 a month. that $50.00 a moth charge for broadband is worth it....

1 dinosaur radio station has way more listeners than all your internet radio stations all rolled together have.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

Enleth (947766) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219403)

Is it?

The official, state-funded (and well-funded) Second Program of Polish Radio is broadcasting in very high quality (analog stereo, not some fancy-schmancy HD, but it can be high quality just as well if you use a proper transmitter), mostly classical and early music, some jazz, blues and good ol' rock, and at certain times even various kinds of interesting, alternative music. In addition, they interview various artists and scientists, do a lot of discussion on the music they air and so on. Even the ads they have are mostly relevant and they don't increase the volume fo them like in the television.

See, a radio program can be made so it is interesting. Several millions of people in Poland listen to it (it's actually the second most popular radio program here) and I have yet to see a podcast of really comparable quality (cultural, not accoustic).

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (2, Interesting)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219581)

Same in Finland where I write this now. Finnish radio has excellent arts coverage. However, American resistence to any kind of substantial state funding for the arts means that radio is going to remain a purely commercial affair, and thus it's going to target the lowest common denominator, even as that lowest common denominator is in fact turning more and more to just downloading what they want to listen to or copying it from their friends. Since most classical stations have closed and those that remain are playing essentially the same handful of light works over and over again, and few popular music stations are willing to programme anything daring, I don't understand this argument that radio can be revitalized through good stuff.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24218941)

Hello, twitter. Are InTheLoo and your other 28 sock-puppets going to join the conversation too?

"perhaps through Linux" (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219081)

Just another douchebag that thinks that "Linux" or "technology" can solve the world.
 
"perhaps through Linux" -- What does Linux have to do with HD radio?
 
What is this world coming to?

DANGER! READ THIS! ---- MOD PARENT UP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219229)

I make a great point in the above post. You know you want to.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219101)

WTF?

Take off that shiny hat for a second.

Vista monitors the voltage on the audio out? Vista doesn't know if you plugged in speakers vs. a recording device.

And how does MS know the exact resistance of EVERY audio card, cable, connector, amplifier, or headset?

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24220009)

And how does MS know the exact resistance of EVERY audio card, cable, connector, amplifier, or headset?

Because twitter is convinced "M$" is fighting a personal battle against him.

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219263)

> Vista's checking of line voltages

Uh, what?

You have some serious [slashdot.org] issues...

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (2, Informative)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219337)

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

UncleTogie (1004853) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219627)

http://www.momentaryfascinations.com/technology/vista.the.worlds.first.user-hostile.operating.system.html

Tilt bits.

...which have exactly what relation to the supposed ability to measure "line voltage"?

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

nxtw (866177) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219265)

Vista's checking of line voltages to make sure no one has clipped on an analog recording device should tell you where all of this is going.

I was unaware that my hardware had the ability to report this information to the operating system. Exactly how does this feature work? At what voltage can Vista be sure that a recording device has been attached? What if my VGA cable is connected to a distribution amplifier? What if my DVI signal is connected to a fiber optic extender? What if I'm using optical audio? What if I've hooked up a recording device to the headphone jack on my amplifier?

Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (1)

randomErr (172078) | more than 5 years ago | (#24220169)

You piss me off. You give a lot of hype like 'free [insert topic here] or the world will end as we know it.' How about some ideas? I read through your theory links and theres no real substance. Here, I'll help you out with some ideas:

- Go old tech - CB radio. Cheap, no license required, if you keep copy written material off the air your pretty much legal, and it gets decent coverage. With SSB you get decent sound.
- Make a digital mesh network. This is something I've been working on but haven't had the resources to make much headway. Make a channel scheme and use something like Zigbee for networking and OGG for the audio.

Instead of throwing out slogans with no balls behind them, at least create some ideas.

Minimal /. relevancy I think (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24218937)

To paraphrase the article summary...

blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah ...can it be done on Linux?

Immediately moved onto the front page. Sigh...

Re:Minimal /. relevancy I think (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 5 years ago | (#24220027)

I see no reason that this isn't a good slashdot question. HD radio is somewhat cutting edge and they're asking for hardware that will work in a specific way. Technology is very much in the realm of slashdot's interest, and asking if such devices can work with Linux makes sense, since Linux allows more freedom with the content than the hardware likely will, as anyone with a myth box can tell you.

Go Satellite instead... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24218951)

Satellite Radio is a much better choice for this than the joke that is HD Radio.

The Sirius Stiletto 2 is a great little radio, with full time-shifting capabilities.

Re:Go Satellite instead... (1)

Masami Eiri (617825) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219205)

Except, you know, HD Radio is free to recieve, as opposed to having a monthly fee. If you listen to enough radio to justify the monthly cost, more power to you. I suspect subby, like myself, doesn't.

Re:Go Satellite instead... (1)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219209)

HD Radio is free (after purchase of receiver), satellite radio requires a monthly fee (after purchase of receiver). Why would I want satellite radio if I can get the stations I want to hear on HD?

Personally, I was fine with just over the air radio until I heard that the local public radio station would be adding a new HD radio station with nothing but news and other NPR content (as opposed to the hybrid 20% news/80% music station they have now). Now, I'm seriously considering HD radio. Still not interested in satellite though, I don't need yet another monthly payment.

Re:Go Satellite instead... (1)

gbutler69 (910166) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219717)

You do pay for your Public Radio/NPR listening pleasure don't you? Through donations? Don't you?

Re:Go Satellite instead... (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219213)

Satellite Radio is a much better choice for this than the joke that is HD Radio.

Satellite radio is a good choice for people who don't mind paying to listen to radio. HD Radio, on the other hand, is broadcast over traditional Radio spectrum and is thus just as free to listen to as traditional analog radio.

You can call it a joke if you want, but some of us prefer to call it free.

Re:Go Satellite instead... (4, Interesting)

jandrese (485) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219507)

The downside is of course that while Satellite radio works everywhere, HD radio only works if you're within 50 feet of the transmitter. I live in an area theoretically covered in HD channels, but actually pulling any of them in reliably requires a substantial antenna and a very good tuner.

I really think the FCC screwed the pooch by giving Ibiquity a monopoly on HD radio with their halfassed system. Now you can pay a licensing fee to build the receiver for a service that barely works at all. I was originally excited about HD radio too because I thought it would be like Digital TV, where you can distribute a crystal clear picture out to where the channel would normally get a bit fuzzy and deal more elegantly with having channels directly adjacent to yours (a big problem around here, where sometimes stations will have stations on either side of the dial and most radio receivers will end up mixing your signal with the adjacent ones randomly when you're driving down the road). Instead we have a system where you practically never get an HD lock.

Re:Go Satellite instead... (0)

harshmanrob (955287) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219623)

Agreed. In Cleveland there are like 8 HD channels. Hardly worth the $300 investment in your car stereo or house when you can subscribe to XM or Sirius (I'd wish they'd fucking merge and get it over with for fucks' sake) and get way more bang for your buck.

If you lived in LA or New York, it might be worth it since there are more channels.

FUCK SLASHDOT!

Lest we forget. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24218953)

You can always use the A Hole.

Re:Lest we forget. (1)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219701)

That is, the analog hole [wikipedia.org] .

NOTHING can stop people from exploiting it. You could use it in conjunction with readily available software to divide/manipulate your recordings as you please. It's much more effort than a single out-of-the box solution, but how bad do you want it?

HD Radio adapter for computers (5, Insightful)

kriston (7886) | more than 5 years ago | (#24218993)

Please visit www.rush2112.net for an adapter and controller for the Visteon HD Radio car unit and the one from Directed Electronics.
It can be used with a number of satellite radio recorders like SatAmp to record broadcasts and timeshift. It also comes with a demo and development kit if you like that sort of thing.

http://www.rush2112.net/mkportal/modules/oscommerce/product_info.php?products_id=39 [rush2112.net]

I have his XM and Sirius adapters. They all work on the same principle by talking to a vehicle OEM tuner via the RS-232 port that they all have.

Please read before posting... please! (5, Interesting)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 5 years ago | (#24218999)

If you know of a solution, don't write it in this discussion!

Please be aware that not everyone who browses slashdot has our best interests at heart. Any commercial method to circumvent DRM will be jumped upon by our broadcast content overlords. Any non-commercial method will be legislated out of existence... the longer the media cartels remain in the dark, the longer we have to enjoy our right to timeshift content.

Like usenet... the first rule of usenet is that you don't talk about usenet.

Sorry for the pessimism and tinfoilhattery, but this entire ask slashdot question just screams "honeypot" to me, even if that wasn't its intent.

Re:Please read before posting... please! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219087)

Like usenet... the first rule of usenet is that you don't talk about usenet.

No, that's Fight Club. The reason no one talks about usenet is the same reason why nobody actively talks about 4chan. It's so base that it's not worth tarnishing your reputation to mention it.

Re:Please read before posting... please! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219389)

Like usenet... the first rule of usenet is that you don't talk about usenet.

No, that's Fight Club. The reason no one talks about usenet is the same reason why nobody actively talks about 4chan. It's so base that it's not worth tarnishing your reputation to mention it.

That doesn't even make sense... Have you ever tried to write your comments down on paper first and read it 5 minutes later? Assuming your a fanboy; fail.

Re:Please read before posting... please! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219185)

Does DRM take legal precedence or does the fact that broadcast content may be recorded take precedence?

Re:Please read before posting... please! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219295)

Security through obscurity, eh?

If they really cared, why do most Radio Component HD Tuners have outputs? I need to hook it into my main stereo, and could just as easily hook it up to a recording device.

Re:Please read before posting... please! (5, Insightful)

Free the Cowards (1280296) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219365)

You know that whole business of "information wants to be free", not being able to hide information that anyone can obtain freely, etc.? Well it cuts both ways. Just as they can't protect their content, you can't protect your methods for getting their content. So don't bother trying.

Re:Please read before posting... please! (2, Interesting)

f2x (1168695) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219439)

That is pretty pessimistic, but what else can people do about this? Moles have been around longer than the internet. While it may be easier for them to disguise themselves, it doesn't make them any smarter.

I remember back when all you needed was a radio with a cassette player and you could have all the free mix tapes you wanted. Even then they wanted to tax blank tapes because of all the "rampant copying". Yeah... They really had to worry about the collapse of their business model from the Chromium(IV) Oxide threat back then.~

The bottom line is that any commercial method is likely to be introduced by a licensed manufacturer, and non-commercial methods will be achieved through the analog headphone jack and a line-in digital recorder. They gave consent for the former, and I can't really see where they can outlaw the latter.

These days I'm still more concerned with their barratry against every day civilians than their ability to come up with legitimate means to prevent unauthorized duplications.

Re:Please read before posting... please! (2, Interesting)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219501)

If you know of a solution, don't write it in this discussion!

Sigh. The idea that you can hide your anti-DRM activity from OBCOs is absurd. Their minions, both software and carbon-based, have infiltrated every web site, every mailing list, every chat channel. It's just not that hard.

Rather than trying to hide from the OBCOs, people with disapproved knowledge should share their knowledge with as many people as possible. When information exists on a few furtive web sites, it can easily be suppressed. When it's on thousands of web sites, there's no getting rid of it.

Consider the first lyrics server at lyric.ch. When it was the only lyrics server, the IP lawyers were on faster than flies on shit. But now there are thousands of lyrics sites, and the lawyers have given up.

Re:Please read before posting... please! (1)

xclr8r (658786) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219715)

forgive my ignorance what is OBCO? I couldn't find a reference on wikipedia and yahoo gave me the Old Bridge Chamber Orchestra.

Re:Please read before posting... please! (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219611)

So saying take apart your radio speakers and a microphone connect the Red Radio Speaker Wire with the Red Microphone Speaker wire and do the same with the black ones. And plug the microphone into your computer open Microsoft Recording tools and his record when you turn the radio on is against the law. Perhaps I it would be more legal if I advise the person to be grounded first.

in that spirit: dear media distributors (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219955)

if you send the signal out, over the air, or over the wire, it can be intercepted, decrypted, and recorded

its your hired hacks versus legions of technically astute, music hungry, and most importantly, POOR teenagers

go ahead media distributors, make your play

you lose before you start, because you simply don't understand the subject matter: what you can and can't control

you can't control this anymore. the means of distribution has passed into the hands of everyone. your economy of scarcity is now an economy of infinity. supply and demand: supply is infinite, price is therefore zero

please retake economics 101 and understand why media distribution is a dying business model, and get out with what little semblance of pride you have still intact

Re:Please read before posting... please! (1)

c0d3g33k (102699) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219969)

I disagree with this post. I'd rather have an appropriate level of balance codified into law instead of skulking in the shadows. I'm not cynical enough to think that the balance will always favor the 'media cartels'. Even if it did, so what? Is their crap really that essential that the choice between "on their terms" and "no thanks, I'd rather do something fun" is that difficult?

As an example, I actually wish that "perfect DRM" was available. Rather than the desired outcome (huge increases in revenue), I suspect that income for the media cartels would largely remain as it is. Why? Because I suspect that rather than "each download = lost sale", only people who really want the media would purchase it. The rest of us would go do something fun, like talk to each other, have a party, go for a walk, get laid, make our own movies/tunes/books etc.

It would be quite telling if the development of perfect DRM was met with a collective yawn. Followed by a mad scrambling on the part of the media cartels to find some way to add value that people were actually willing to pay for.

No matter what level of control the "content providers" exert, as long as people have the freedom to say "no thanks" and walk away, they have no control at all.

not a problem (2, Interesting)

neersign (956437) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219047)

say you have a hand-held "walkman" style player, you could just buy a 1/8" stereo to 1/8" stereo cable [buy.com] and plug it right in to the Input on your sound card, then use your favorite recording software to record and export as your favorite audio file type (mp3, ogg, etc.). If your tuner is a home stereo type, then you could buy a RCA to 1/8" adapter [buy.com] to connect to your computer. There are several different styles of adapters out there and they all do the same thing, so there is no need for the "Adapter for iPod" special cables that come with a special price, unless it makes you feel better paying more for the same thing.

Re:not a problem (1)

dstech (807139) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219319)

Of course, in the case of HD radio you've just converted to analog, gone down a potentially noisy/lossy line and then converted back to digital again. Essentially, you just lost the 'HD' in your HD Radio signal :P

Re:not a problem (2, Insightful)

neersign (956437) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219483)

sure, but if you are compressing the stream to mp3/ogg/etc and listening over standard headphones then most people wouldn't notice the difference. If you want to use digital spdif to connect and then encode in flac or other loss-less, that is an option too. There are many different avenues with the same result.

Re:not a problem (2, Informative)

popeye44 (929152) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219615)

The HD in HD radio does not stand for High Definition.

"According to iBiquity, the name "HD Radio" is simply iBiquity's brand for its digital radio technology,[6] and does not stand for "Hybrid Digital" or "High Definition" such as HDTV does."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_radio [wikipedia.org]

Re:not a problem (1)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219925)

"According to iBiquity, the name "HD Radio" is simply iBiquity's brand for its digital radio technology,[6] and does not stand for "Hybrid Digital" or "High Definition" such as HDTV does."

Ain't it funny how random coincidences work out. The odds against picking a 2-letter brand name that happen to match the acronym for "High Definition" are 676-to-1. And, gosh darn it, they just happened to hit it!

I bet they were pretty surprised by that one.

Re:not a problem (1)

kriston (7886) | more than 5 years ago | (#24220191)

They're being revisionist. It was originally "Hybrid Digital" and then they changed their mind about it because eventually, say in 20 years, stations will convert to all-digital format and no longer be "hybrid."
Now they just say it's a nebulous, meaninglist string of two consonants to save face and help the public mistake HD for High Definition since everyone wants HD these days.

On the other hand, there is a local public broadcaster in our area (MHz Networks) that completely switched off their analog channel the moment they got their digital channel on the air. It has 5 subchannels on one channel and 4 subchannels on another, and none are High-Definition. And they don't say they're High Definition or HD; they just say "digital," just like the truth is.

A couple of possibilities (2, Informative)

robkill (259732) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219067)

Cambridge Soundworks makes a model [hifi.com] with optical digital outputs. No clue if there are any restrictions on them, though. On a higher end, Yamaha makes several AV receivers that handle HD as well. Again I have no knowledge whether or not the digital outputs are crippled in any way.

Re:A couple of possibilities (2, Insightful)

kriston (7886) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219221)

Even with digital output you won't be keeping those HD Radio broadcasts for music listening purposes.
I have XM and Sirius with optical outputs and the sound being broadcast by them has fairly poor fidelity. If you're used to that, then you probably won't notice, but comparing any of the broadcasted digital formats (even internet radio) to anything you can download from iTunes is going to disappoint you.

HD Radio compares favorably to XM Satellite Radio since they use very similar audio codecs, but even then you're not going to like it for music. If the station you want to record is multicasting, meaning that it has more than one "channel" on one frequency, you're going to be disappointed unless it's a talk program.

The bandwidth for music on the multicasting HD Radio stations is not worth the cost to bother with optical outputs. Line level input will be more than you could need.

Re:A couple of possibilities (2, Interesting)

SaDan (81097) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219437)

XM and Sirius have significantly less bandwidth to use per channel compared to digital radio. The sound quality of digital radio is much better as a result.

I wouldn't mind recording digital radio, because it sounds as good as or better than a lot of MP3s you find on the 'net.

Re:A couple of possibilities (2, Informative)

kriston (7886) | more than 5 years ago | (#24220065)

That's right.
XM's music channels range from 96 kbit/sec to 32 kbit/sec.
HD Radio in hybrid mode offers a maximum of 150 kbit/sec, not including the subchannels and like I stated, the multicasting stations that use multiple subchannels will suffer in quality until full-digital (non-hybrid HD Radio) occurs which is not forseen until the very distant future.

Personally I don't like low-bitrate MP3. The new AOL Radio service uses files now instead of streaming and those files are 128 kbit/sec MP3 files which are decidedly low quality.

In any case I'm getting Mitch's HD Radio adapter as soon as I can find a controllable OEM radio that won't cost near $100.

Maybe I'm missing something here but... (2, Insightful)

Ynsats (922697) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219175)

...if an add-on tuner has a universal output to connect to standard stereo or even multi-channel amplifier then there is an output capable of being recorded from. If it is that much of a problem to hook a pre-amp up and pipe the channel to say a Tape2 output and dub signal to a recording device of some sort then maybe the OP should be looking for another way to grab the coveted radio programming.

If there are line voltage sensors that let the Vista software know that an external recording source has been hooked up, a fairly simple work around is a equalizer. You can find many on the used market from companies like BSR, Soundcraftsman and even AudioSource. They will all take a line level input and most of the models available from them will have dubbing modes that split the signal internally and won't present a line voltage change to the output of the computer system.

This is not a difficult issue to overcome from my point of view but like I said, maybe I am missing something. I'm not that up on HD Radio technology but if it's like the HD Television signals at home, I can record those in a similar fashion. Of course the media is different because of the required bandwidth but once the signal passes through the encrypted circuits and is interpreted, there aren't many stops in place that one can't get around with some creative positioning of hardware.

Amazon (5, Informative)

krgallagher (743575) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219237)

A simple Amazon search [amazon.com] turned up quite a few models. Some have optical out. One has an iPod dock.

Re:Amazon (4, Informative)

Ichoran (106539) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219477)

The one with an iPod dock only tells the iPod the title of songs so you can buy them later.

Not too useful if you want to time-shift something that isn't a song. And since you could just go buy the song in the first place and have it at any time you wanted it without even waiting for the radio to play it, if you're interested in time-shifting it's probably not for songs.

SPDIF (1)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219373)

Any decent piece of audio/video gear should have an SPDIF digital output. Does anyone know of a way to losslessly record this digital output? That should provide a way to timeshift any audio regardless of the source.

Re:SPDIF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219951)

Any decent Soundcard should have SPDIF inputs, once you can listen the digital stream, it's only a matter of using the right software.
Even some motherboards include SPDIF I/O for the integrated audio. Any audio recording program should be capable of lossless audio recording through the digital inputs.

Just don't buy into it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219377)

If going digital on all media is only to support the asshat DRM SS troopers, then don't buy the products.

If enough people say NO and refuse to suck up the DRM crap, then it will fade away.

Doubts???

How many new BETA max players do you see in the stores today? Forget it was a better format for the media it was to support, it just is not there due to lack of "want", but you sure do see VHS out there still...

Stop supporting the DRM SS troopers, stop buying their crap.

it ends up analog (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24219391)

HD music is a hoax. 48khz to listen, wallah. HD music. the signal to transport, is not what we get to our ears. Unless they got something nuclear top secret for hd music, it is analog as a result.

HD streaming radio (3, Informative)

paroneayea (642895) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219479)

Really, I just listen to HD streaming radio these days. Specifically, WCPE [theclassicalstation.org] (classical music) and NPR Boston [wbur.org] both publish in OGG Vorbis, which is great.

Re:HD streaming radio (2, Interesting)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219697)

You mean digital streaming radio. It's silly to call WCPE's 20 bps stream "HD".

My own favorite source of streams is the Aussie ABC network [abc.net.au] (90 bps!). Their "classical" channel is particularly refreshing because they define the term very broadly. Also a lot of good podcasts [abc.net.au] .

It doesn't mean what you think it means... (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219645)

You do realize that the HD in HD Radio doesn't stand for high definition, right? (I think it means hybrid digital, but according to wikipedia, it doesn't mean anything.)

new tech (2, Interesting)

Eil (82413) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219669)

First of all, HD radio is a new technology and one that isn't being very actively marketed. I have a feeling that the main reason for this is that most people are just fine with the audio quality of normal radio. Also, the medium of radio has been destroyed over the last few decades so now 99% of the people who listen to radio these days just have it on as background music in their cards or at work. You don't need high definition and a fancy receiver for that kind of use. People who want actual content coming through their speakers subscribe to satellite radio although I hear the (content) quality of that is starting to go downhill too.

Probably the best solution for the sumitter for now is simply to buy a regular receiver and plug it into the sound card of a PC. Use an IR blaster for changing the channel, turning the receiver on and off, etc.

Many Linux-compatible TV tuners come with FM tuners built-in, I suspect it's only a matter of time until they start putting HD radio tuners on those too.

Re:new tech (1)

Eil (82413) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219867)

Edit: I temporarily forgot that "HD Radio" doesn't mean "high definition".

Re:new tech (3, Informative)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 5 years ago | (#24220125)

Many Linux-compatible TV tuners come with FM tuners built-in, I suspect it's only a matter of time until they start putting HD radio tuners on those too.

Too late!!! ASI8914 [audioscience.com] - Quad HD Raido Tuner (with linux drivers).

Maybe ... (2, Informative)

vtcodger (957785) | more than 5 years ago | (#24219719)

I don't think DRM is an issue. I suspect that the problem you're having is due to HD Radio being a new technology. There is a fairly widely used analog technology called Subsidiary Carrier Audio that is used to transmit background music and similar stuff over FM stations piggybacked on the primary signal. The background music in your local supermarket is probably SCA. Since stations presumably can't do both SCA and HD Radio, the number of stations that can actually deploy HD Radio is limited. Not too many stations means not too much HD Radio equipment. OTOH, maybe HD Radio will catch on. I'm told that HD Radio fidelity is nothing to write home about, so maybe simply feeding your radio's speaker output into the microphone input to your sound card will work until more diverse HD radio equipment becomes available.

XM Radio recording (2, Interesting)

wesglo (1302149) | more than 5 years ago | (#24220073)

I hope this isn't too off topic. I have a Polk Audio XM reciever. It has both S/PDIF and Optical digital out. I just plug into either of the digital outs and record directly to my audio haddisk recorder. Any Mid-Fi device (HD Radio Reciever) shouod have atleast one digital out.

Audio Quality (1)

Detritus (11846) | more than 5 years ago | (#24220137)

If your local radio station really cared about audio quality, they would shoot the program director and rip out their Optimod [orban.com] boxes. Most broadcast stations in the USA butcher their audio.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...