Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Birth of a label-sanctioned pirate radio station

By mcgrew in Culture
Sun May 02, 2004 at 05:23:29 AM EST
Tags: Music (all tags)
Music

In the 1960s radio sucked badly; even worse than it does today. There were no rock stations. The only rock and roll was played on the AM pop station, and sparingly, at that.

FM was relatively new, and the FM stations only played easy listening, Jazz, etc. My dad listened to FM 95, which played Herb Alpert and the like; almost jazz, "easy listening," boring music.

There were two pop stations in town, one of which lost its license around 1963 for a fraudulent on-air contest that had people digging holes all over St. Louis, trespassing, etc, and it turned out that the prize didn't exist. The station went dark, and came back with new ownership and a country western format. This left one bad pop station in the entire large metropolitan area.

One evening my dad wasn't home, so I turned on the stereo, a large furniture-like thing, and was amazed that there was rock and roll playing. Real rock and roll, unlike the schmaltz they played on the pop station. What's more, it was in stereo!


It was amazing. They were playing Black Sabbath, Cream, the Yardbirds, Jimi Hendrix- and none of these bands had ever gotten any airplay in St. Louis, with the exception of Sabbath, whose "Paranoid" single might get played once a week or so.

Later, as I was watching TV, my dad came home, and went ballistic when he couldn't find his station. He assumed, logically, that I or my sister had changed the dial. He demanded that it be changed back.

I admitted listening to the radio, but insisted that my sister must have changed it earlier. As Dad was getting ready to ground us both, with the radio back on his 95 but playing rock, the disk jockey mentioned the format change. We got out of our groundings, of course.

The station was KSHE 95, on a frequency of 94.7. Being the pre-digital age and on an analog dial it was simply 95. It was the first FM stereo rock station in existance.

This became the only station I would listen to, and I had lots of fun amazing my friends, most of whom were amateur musicians, with my new discovery.

Just like the pop stations of today, the pop station in town, KXOX, only played 2:40 pop singles. KSHE was most definately not a pop station.

They played long songs, album sides, whole albums. The Who's Magic Bus had played occasionally on the pop station, but KSHE would play the entire two LP Tommy. And they would play it uncut and uninterrupted, except for changing the album- as he turned the record over, the DJ would list the tracks and then start playing them.

They played long songs and album cuts, rather than 45s (singles). Where KXOK would occasionally play Creedence's two minute Suzy Q 45, KSHE would play the entire seven minute album version.

They played the sixteen minute In A Gadda Da Vida, the eighteen minute Alice's Restaraunt, the twenty five minute Quicksilver Messenger Service rock version of the old blues standard Who Do You Love.

KSHE's motto was "Real Rock Radio", and its mascot was a pig that wore sunglasses and headphones and smoked a hand-rolled cigarette. If you go to their web site you'll still see the pig, with more modern shades and phones, but for some reason the pig stopped smoking around the time of Reagan's "war on drugs".

It didn't take long for teens and young adults to discover this new treasure, which had the side effect of forcing KXOK to play more real rock & roll. It got so most people only listened to KXOK in the car, and then only because there weren't yet any car FM radios.

By the time they were on air for six months, they had started some very unique programs. Every day at six they would play an album side, and usually follow it the next day with the other side of the album.

On Sunday nights they started the "7th Day" show, where they would play seven full albums back to back, uncut. They would always prompt the audience to cue their tape recorders before starting, and convieniently left a few seconds of dead air before and after each album side.

Yes, listeners were encouraged to record these LPs off of the radio, uncut and in their entirety.

Fast forward a few decades to the new century. The labels have bribed lobbied congress for new rules. Now, at least on the internet, you can't play three songs from the same artist back to back, let alone full CDs.

KSHE's Seventh Day, however, still plays. They must have been granted some sort of variance, or been grandfathered in.

Now, a question for discussion. Why were the labels OK with my recording Ted Nugent's Stranglehold album, uncut and uninterrupted, a week before it was released to the stores, but now scream bloody murder if I dare to have the audacity download a two minute, poor audio quality Metallica single?

What's changed?

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
Worst decade for music?
o 1900-1910: Birth of Jazz 2%
o 1910-1920: Birth of commercial radio 1%
o 1920-1930: Bathtub gin and flappers 3%
o 1930-1940: Depressing decade 4%
o 1940-1950: War is hell 7%
o 1950-1960: Birth of Rock and Roll 3%
o 1960-1970: Can I have a hit, man? 3%
o 1970-1980: Disco dancers 12%
o 1980-1990: Punks underground, big hair above 16%
o 1990-2000: Wet and cold Seattle 12%
o 2000-2010: Yellow alert 33%

Votes: 132
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o their web site
o Also by mcgrew


Display: Sort:
Birth of a label-sanctioned pirate radio station | 127 comments (115 topical, 12 editorial, 2 hidden)
I remember them (2.50 / 4) (#1)
by minerboy on Thu Apr 29, 2004 at 06:47:12 PM EST

screaming then too, I think there is still a surcharge on blank cassette tapes. Beyond that, there is now way more money in the music business, with MTV and all. It used to be a band would have several albums before they had a hit - on major labels, Don't see that much anymore, except with the alternative indie labels - Who are not screaming, by the way



what's changed (2.50 / 4) (#6)
by urdine on Thu Apr 29, 2004 at 10:50:45 PM EST

Well, simply put, the difference now is no degradation of quality in the recording.  A record broadcast over the radio recorded to a tape doesn't quite have the same 5.1 super hi-fi quality as a high bitrate MP3.  That's the RIAA argument, anyway - and also the fact you don't have to go buy a blank tape and wait til Sunday night to pilfer whatever album some DJ says you want...

you're on crack (1.50 / 4) (#7)
by mutualaid on Thu Apr 29, 2004 at 11:06:55 PM EST

Listen to an MP3--any MP3 (even a Fraunhofer at 356kbps) next to the uncompressed original through a decent output device and you'll almost certainly notice a sound quality degradation in the MP3. It's lossy by definition--less than vinyl->FM->tape for sure, but it certainly isn't "5.1 super hi-fi" (MPEG layer III audio doesn't even support 5.1 output, as far as I can tell).

[ Parent ]
It's about copying copies (none / 3) (#9)
by rpresser on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 12:14:21 AM EST

Copy that MP3 to a CD and give it to 10 friends. They can do the same and now 111 people have the same identical MP3.  It may not be as good as the lossless original ... but the 111th is just as good as the 1st.  They Don't Like That.

(As if you didn't already know this.)
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty
[ Parent ]

MP3s are lossy (none / 0) (#61)
by mcgrew on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:20:33 AM EST

Please see an earlier comment.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

Sure, MP3's are lossy (none / 0) (#112)
by 87C751 on Mon May 03, 2004 at 03:44:15 PM EST

But only once.

My ranting place.
[ Parent ]

A very good point, (2.83 / 6) (#11)
by Kasreyn on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 01:39:07 AM EST

if one happens to be the sort of audiophile who can tell the difference.

This applies to about 1/100th of one percent of the population once you get up to 160kbps mp3, I'd guess. (160 is the point where, except in a few rare cases, I can no longer discern from CD, though I can still tell it's not live of course. @ 128 kbps, high-register artifacts are audible to me).

So, you're saying all the RIAA needs to do is sit back and smirk, confident that the fact that mp3's are considered shitty by 1/10,000th of their market will be enough to stop filesharing?

Add to this the fact that the people who are sharing their big money makers (pop and rap) are not very discerning individuals when it comes to sound. Case in point: get on a filesharing engine sometime and do a search for a popular rap or hip-hop piece. Then do a search for a commonly known classical piece. See what percentages of each are recorded at higher bitrates and tend to be labelled properly, and lack skips and artifacts. You'll find the pop and rap mp3's are usually shitty, in the aforementioned ways, because the losers encoding them don't know the difference or don't give a shit.

YOU'RE on crack if you think anyone but you, me, and a few thousand people in all of America have a problem with the way mp3's sound. For everyone else, a difference which makes no difference is no difference.


-Kasreyn


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
[ Parent ]
I agree (none / 3) (#20)
by minerboy on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 01:32:31 PM EST

Except, I'd bet that about 10 % of the population THINK they can hear the difference. It would be interesting to find some real data about the frequency response of average human hearing.



[ Parent ]
Somewhat on the same topic, (none / 3) (#22)
by Kasreyn on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 01:40:28 PM EST

I read something somewhere about human visual processing speed being about 72 fps (frames per second). Which means, theoretically, a monitor with a refresh rate of 75hz should have zero detectable "flicker". And a video game with a framerate of 75 should have no detectable lag or jerkiness. (Note: almost all modern monitors can be set to display at 75hz or faster)

And yet, people claim they can see jerkiness or flicker. And some gamers insist on getting framerate up into the hundreds, which they shouldn't be able to even get any benefit from.

So are they just fooling themselves, or do some people's optic nerves have a higher refresh rate than others?


-Kasreyn


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
[ Parent ]
75 hz is not enough (2.83 / 6) (#24)
by DLWormwood on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 02:15:29 PM EST

And yet, people claim they can see jerkiness or flicker. And some gamers insist on getting framerate up into the hundreds, which they shouldn't be able to even get any benefit from.

The reason people can perceive a difference between high framerates on displays is that they are discrete imaging devices, when the human eye was evolved or created to perceive continuous light sources.

When you are looking at a real world scene in motion, your eyes are sampling all the light generated by the previous 1/75th of a second. A camera that keeps its lens open that long would store such an image with a slight blur, since a continous series of light rays are emitted at differing angles during that brief window of time.

Compare this with a digitally generated image from a graphics card. The GPU generates an image based on light as it would be if the scene was stationary for that 1/75th of a second, since simulating motion blur is computationally expensive. Hence, humans can perceive the difference between a 75hz artificial image verses a 75hz natural one.

Even at very low sample rates (say 25hz), you can acheive convincing motion by introducing blur. Ink-and-paint animators have long known this, being able to fake convincing motion in low frame rate animation via techniques like "squash-and-stretch" and "light streaking." I've personally seen many animated GIFs that are able to pull a convincing animation at 12hz rates thanks to generous blur. Many CGI houses, like Pixar, that specialize in pre-rendered work have also learned to use blur to great effect.

As far as real time computer rendering is concerned, it is (AFAIK) cheaper to produce images at 150hz or so rather that execute an algorithm that produces blur. It turns out that having 2-3 images produced during one human eye sample interval is enough to be percieved as motion blur by the brain, leading to the need for high screen refreshes.
--
Those who complain about affect & effect on k5 should be disemvoweled
[ Parent ]

missing the point (none / 3) (#35)
by mutualaid on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 09:58:49 PM EST

I'm neither a gamer nor a graphics expert, but I believe the point is that a CRT monitor running at 75 Hz is incapable of physically displaying more than 75 frames per second, regardless of what the GPU produces. Therefore the refresh rate of the monitor acts as an upper bound to the perceived framerate.

[ Parent ]
Yeah (none / 2) (#42)
by Kasreyn on Sat May 01, 2004 at 03:00:02 AM EST

always amuses me when I meet some gamer geek with a GeForce 4 and an antique 17 inch monitor like mine. Kinda like putting a turbocharger in a Pinto. :P


-Kasreyn


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
[ Parent ]
I knew a guy once (none / 0) (#65)
by mcgrew on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:37:28 AM EST

Put a 440 Cubic Inch ingine with hemispherical heads and a huge four barrel carburator, and dual exhausts into a Gremlin.

It was undriveable, you could only do doughnuts with it.

I knew another guy that drag raced his little subaru pickup. It had a 350 CI Ford Cleveland; it had wheelie bars in the back and solid suspension in the front.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

Please don't post ignorant car analogies. (none / 2) (#72)
by Mike Green Challenge on Sun May 02, 2004 at 01:02:10 PM EST

I know your Pinto remark was probably a joke, but they are very popular in amateur racing circles since they can hold a wide variety of Ford engines including the 2.3 Turbo I4 from Mustang SVOs/T-Bird Turbo Coupes and the classic 5.0 V8.  They are very light so it's easy to make them handle well both on a race course and for drag racing.

Pinto Racing

- Information on Pintos in road racing.

Pinto Drag Car

- A Turbo Pinto that runs 11sec quarter miles drag racing, about on par with the fastest production cars like Lamborghinis and Vipers.

So, please, do some research next time you make a car analogy, instead of just making an off the cuff remark about what you assume to be a bad car.

--
Aspies for Ron Paul
[ Parent ]

ahahaah (none / 0) (#79)
by Jed Smith on Sun May 02, 2004 at 02:55:00 PM EST

beautiful
_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
[ Parent ]
75 Hz, Continued (none / 2) (#51)
by DLWormwood on Sun May 02, 2004 at 01:10:13 AM EST

I believe the point is that a CRT monitor running at 75 Hz is incapable of physically displaying more than 75 frames per second, regardless of what the GPU produces.

Valid point, except that many monitors made now a days can handle over 100 Hz. My dinky iMac at work caps at 95 Hz, and I've seen monitors break 120 Hz. The prior poster made mention of monitor refreshes being "faster" than 75 Hz, and wondering if such refreshes were also pointless.

OTOH, my more beefy iMac at home has a flat panel on it, so I wonder what the equivalent refresh is. Instead of blanking intervals, LCD displays have switch over latencies or some such...
--
Those who complain about affect & effect on k5 should be disemvoweled
[ Parent ]

gamer reasoning (2.83 / 6) (#26)
by CanSpice on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 04:07:24 PM EST

And some gamers insist on getting framerate up into the hundreds, which they shouldn't be able to even get any benefit from.

The reason I've heard for wanting framerates up above 100 is that when you get into a processor- or video card-intensitive situation (i.e. firefights), you don't want your computer to drop down to 20FPS. Thus aiming for a maximum of, say, 120FPS should give you enough buffer so that intensive situations drop you down to 70-80FPS, and it remains smooth the whole time.

[ Parent ]
Thanks! I hadn't considered that. (none / 2) (#41)
by Kasreyn on Sat May 01, 2004 at 02:57:41 AM EST

But that is a very good reason, if you're the sort who's absolutely anal retentive about his framerate never jerking. Of which type, I know personally at least 5 or 6 exemplars. :P

3.00 for you sir.


-Kasreyn


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
[ Parent ]
Your eyes are analog (none / 1) (#63)
by mcgrew on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:30:56 AM EST

They don't have refresh rates. Moving things blur, unlike digital, where you have to carefully simulate a blur to moving objects.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

Also (none / 0) (#82)
by dn on Sun May 02, 2004 at 04:10:11 PM EST

And yet, people claim they can see jerkiness or flicker.
The other comments about motion blur are spot on. In addition, there's a stroboscopic effect: rapidly sweep your eyes across a CRT image, and you can often distinctly see the images of the separate video frames. A faster refresh helps.

Awhile back I somehow convinced XFree86 to use a 44 Hz refresh rate. I thought my eyes were going to explode.

    I ♥
TOXIC
WASTE

[ Parent ]

Yes, 72fps is low (none / 0) (#104)
by curien on Mon May 03, 2004 at 08:47:26 AM EST

But who cares what the average FPS is? What matters is the minimum instantaneous FPS. In a first person shooter, for example, the average FPS might be in the 70s, but when you enter a large battle with rocket trails, particle explosions, and sundry other special effects zooming around, it drops to the 30s. This drop might only occur for five or ten seconds out of a 15 minute time demo, having little impact on the "average framerate", but note that this is the exact time when you most need a crisp gaming experience.

--
All God's critters got a place in the choir
Some sing low, some sing higher
[ Parent ]
This is pure foolishness (none / 0) (#110)
by ghjm on Mon May 03, 2004 at 01:52:23 PM EST

Human brains do not contain a frame buffer; the visual cortex does not in any way resemble what a computer does with its video processing. It might be possible to establish some upper limit on the number of discrete "events" that a human is capable of discerning per unit time, but there is no refresh process or frame rate at work within the eye or the brain. The signals sent from the retinal photoreceptors  are continuous, analog, and never broken down into discrete samples or packets. So it is utterly meaningless to speak of a "frame rate" of the eye or the brain.

That being said, there are undoubtedly limits to visual perception, there is probably some refresh rate above which flicker cannot be discerned, and there are probably people who will claim to be able to discern it regardless - until their claim is disproven in a double-blind study. (And perhaps even afterward, given sufficient profit motive.)

-Graham

[ Parent ]

There are data (none / 0) (#62)
by mcgrew on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:28:45 AM EST

A good ear ranges from 20hz to 20khz. By the time they reach middle age, most people can't hear higher than 16khz.

A 15khz tone sampled at a CD's 44ksps sample rate only has three samples (graph points) per crest, making it very distorted. The aliasing on a CD is seldom noticable; high frequencies are carefully fitered out in a commercial CD, but you can hear it in a CD that has been sampled from vinyl.

A Good three way twelve inch speaker generally has a response of around 100 khz to supersonic, and a fifteen inch woofer will generally get down to 50 or 60.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

Err. (none / 0) (#78)
by Jed Smith on Sun May 02, 2004 at 02:51:56 PM EST

100kHz to "supersonic"? 100kHz IS supersonic; no human ear can detect 100kHz. Read a fucking book.

The aliasing you talk about isn't a problem! All modern reproduction equipment splines the graph points anyway:

A B C D E F G H I

(sample at 2Hz)

A C E G I

(modern reproduction equipment)

A b C d E f G h I

If you can actually hear aliasing in your recordings, you're a sound guru, and I'd love to study under you.

fifteen inch woofer will generally get down to 50 or 60

By what math? I've seen a 12-inch subwoofer that pushes 20 Hz. It's not in the size of the cone, it's what else is added to it.
_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
[ Parent ]

20 Hz (none / 0) (#84)
by dougmc on Sun May 02, 2004 at 04:24:36 PM EST

fifteen inch woofer will generally get down to 50 or 60
By what math? I've seen a 12-inch subwoofer that pushes 20 Hz. It's not in the size of the cone, it's what else is added to it.
Even a tweeter can push 1 Hz (one hertz) or less. It's just that as the frequency gets lower and lower, the power involved gets lower and lower, and so you need larger and larger speakers to actually transfer the motion into a signifigant amount of sound. The sound will come out, but it'll be extremely weak and your ear couldn't hear it anyways.

[ Parent ]
Your equipment matters (none / 0) (#60)
by mcgrew on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:16:55 AM EST

A good cassette deck has no distortion and a frequency response of subsonic (<20hz) to 18khz. American FM's bandwidth constraints limit it to from about 100hz to about 16khz. So recorded on a good deck, you won't be able to hear he difference between the original FM broadcast and the tape. <p> My copy of Stranglehold still sounds better than a 192kbps MP3, all these years later.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

"5.1 super hi-fi"? (none / 1) (#77)
by Jed Smith on Sun May 02, 2004 at 02:45:36 PM EST

What's that? Can I upgrade it from "4.1 Kewl"?

Surround sound has nothing to do with quality.
_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
[ Parent ]

No... (2.50 / 4) (#19)
by Noodle on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 09:48:52 AM EST

But you do need a personal computer ($1000), a high speed internet connection ($40/month), and blank CDRs if you want to listen on your living room stereo (about 50¢ apiece). And you sure as fuck do have to fish around for an uncorrupted file on Kazaa and then download it three dozen times before it works properly, since they killed Napster...

I really don't think this stuff has gotten any easier or cheaper.

{The Nefarious Noodle}
[ Parent ]

Missing poll option (2.40 / 5) (#13)
by godix on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 03:01:18 AM EST

Every decade that had a 'boy band' become popular.

Thank god I'm worth more than SilentChris

Cultural explanation of playing album sides (2.26 / 15) (#17)
by Adam Rightmann on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 08:49:47 AM EST

You might want to mention that playing albums sides at a time was a necessity, due to the various  disk jockeys being stung out on mescaline, LSD and marijuana, and being incapable of focusing in three minute increments (this is also the reason rock songs in the 1960 would go on for interminable lengths, the addled musicians would forget how to end the song, so they would just play and play.) By playing an album side, they had a clear signal when the album was over, the tone arm would lift up and move aside.

Nowadays, thanks mostly to Nancy Reagan, the music and radio industry is mostly drug free, and we have our three minute songs back.

P'shaw! I say! (none / 2) (#25)
by keelerbeez on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 02:56:53 PM EST

the music and radio industry is mostly drug free


Dude, whatever you're smoking...

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
GAT d? s++:+ a- C++++$ UBS*++++$ P--- L+>++ E--- W- !N !o !K w+++(---)$ M+ PS+++ PE(--) Y+ PGP t++@ 5++ X+ R* tv(+) b+++ DI++ !G !e h* r*% y++++**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
[ Parent ]
They advertise drugs! /nt (none / 0) (#64)
by mcgrew on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:31:36 AM EST


"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

You started it (none / 3) (#27)
by CaptainSuperBoy on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 04:45:14 PM EST

But sellison does it better.

--
jimmysquid.com - I take pictures.
[ Parent ]
Shortly after KSHE started... (none / 2) (#30)
by mcgrew on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 05:34:20 PM EST

There was a copycat station, maybe a year later. They lasted six month, until the DEA raided them and shut the station down completely.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

Actually (none / 0) (#67)
by JayGarner on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:50:42 AM EST

The playing of long songs allowed the DJ to use the bathroom or cater to other personal needs. At the time it wasn't considered culturally acceptable to do that via a 10 minute commercial break. Times have changed and now the DJ is shocked to wake him/her up for the 30-second window of predetermined time where they get to say something. Then shocked 20 seconds in to remind them to wrap it up.

[ Parent ]
Wrong (none / 0) (#83)
by dn on Sun May 02, 2004 at 04:12:49 PM EST

Idiot. These days, Clear Channel prerecords the DJs.

    I ♥
TOXIC
WASTE

[ Parent ]

They don't have djs anymore (none / 0) (#95)
by JayGarner on Mon May 03, 2004 at 12:24:00 AM EST

Dickjowls

[ Parent ]
Wolfman Jack (none / 0) (#80)
by Jed Smith on Sun May 02, 2004 at 02:56:24 PM EST

Read up on him.

Your 'unable to focus in three-minute increments' argument disappears.
_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
[ Parent ]

"What's changed", indeed. (none / 3) (#23)
by James A C Joyce on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 02:02:32 PM EST

It's simple, really. As soon as 1977 came to a close everything just started to <b><i>suck</i></b>. By the time we hit the eighties everything just went to shit. The sad thing is, we've been down so long that it looks like up to a lot of people.

I bought this account on eBay

I blame empty-v /nt (none / 2) (#29)
by mcgrew on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 05:32:54 PM EST


"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

Visible <b> tags? (none / 3) (#34)
by sllort on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 05:58:59 PM EST

You've been posting to /. again, haven't you?
--
Warning: On Lawn is a documented liar.
[ Parent ]
However did you tell? [nt] (none / 2) (#44)
by James A C Joyce on Sat May 01, 2004 at 09:48:33 AM EST


I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

OMG I agree with JACJ (none / 0) (#54)
by localroger on Sun May 02, 2004 at 09:35:13 AM EST

Just took a bath, too. Now must take another.

But yeah, the whole world did kind of take a turn to the south around '77.

What will people of the future think of us? Will they say, as Roger Williams said of some of the Massachusetts Indians, that we were wolves with the min
[ Parent ]

Well damn (none / 0) (#108)
by ghjm on Mon May 03, 2004 at 01:17:20 PM EST

I'm terribly sorry if my generation came along and started to write songs you old-timers couldn't play. But really, all you have to do is learn a couple more chords. It just isn't that hard.

-Graham

[ Parent ]

In Boston we used to have WAAF (2.50 / 6) (#28)
by haplopeart on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 05:06:10 PM EST

The stations is still around, infact they claim to be the oldest continuously broadcasting FM signal in existance.  Unfortunately this once mighty powerhouse of Rock has decended in the slime pits of radio conformity hell.  This is probablt due to the management of the station having changed several times in the last decade as it was sold to one radio network or another.  The once mighty sprit of the station is gone, its become a mecca of overplayed repeatitive playlists.  The Bands that once made them great are payed only lip service when they show up for a concert in town these days.  Then they might pay some of those bands songs a little more.  However in a relative sense a little more is still barely when your going from never or once or twice a week to perhaps once or twice a day because the band is in or coming to town, and the station want to sleeze an interview or something.
Its funny because just a few years ago the DJ's at WAAF used to abuse the hell out of the other area radio stations for just this sort of behavior.  I remember once one of the DJ's commenting to Ozzy "Yeah, I've been kinda out of it lately didn't really know what was going on on the concert side.  I didn't realize you were coming to town, till that otherstation (WBCN) started playing Ozzy songs once or twice a day...then I knew you were coming to town.  I wouldn't have noticed since we play like 20 Ozzy songs A DAY! around here."

In recent years the DJ line up has changed primarily due to firings.  Mostly because the management changes have setup situations where the old DJ's and the new management just can't get along.  The replacements have been lack luster cookie cutter DJ's of exactly the type you would hear on any other radio station, and in fact the type the Old DJ's would pick on.  

Its gotten so bad, the music lineup so terrible that where that used to be the only radio station I listened too, now I don't listen to radio at all really, and stick with CD's and almost weekly trips to Newbury Comics (Local Boston Discount Music chain for the uninformed).
Bill "Haplo Peart" Dunn
Administrator Epithna.com
http://www.epithna.com

Boston's WBCN (none / 2) (#50)
by louford on Sat May 01, 2004 at 10:21:42 PM EST

WBCN has its moments. They still play a recorded concert occasionally, from start-to-finish. (40 years ago, when WBCN was a classical station, it was known as the "Boston Concert Network" [i.e., BCN]). And I listen to their Boston Emissions show on Sunday night to catch stuff from local bands.

But yeah, Newbury Comics rocks.

[ Parent ]

Boston - WAAF (none / 0) (#120)
by ckaminski on Tue May 04, 2004 at 10:10:46 AM EST

That whole Loveline episode was such a fucking fiasco, I had to email Mike Hsu and tell him that I'm going over to WBCN, where they still know how to play rock.  It's sad.  AAF used to be great.  No.  Instead, I got 6 months of listening to Adam Corolla console 13 yo boys who got herpes from Aunt Matilda.

 

[ Parent ]

Ugh....agreed (none / 0) (#126)
by haplopeart on Tue May 11, 2004 at 11:00:59 AM EST

...I actually have not been listening to the radio at all lately, its just not worth it anymore...the commercial/DJ Babble to Music ratio is getting too damned low...there was a point recently when I made the entire drive to work in the morning with out hearing a single song played in the Hillman morning show...guys your schik is getting old as it is, your wearing it out even quicker now...

MUSIC...Please Play music.

Bring back Rocko, Ozone, Opie and Anthony, Liz Wilde, the DJ's that made your station great...

I suspect its getting to the point with the RIAA that its actually cheaper to have the DJ's babble for hours on end then to pay the fees for playing music.
Bill "Haplo Peart" Dunn
Administrator Epithna.com
http://www.epithna.com

[ Parent ]

KSHE Rocks! (none / 2) (#32)
by razzmataz on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 05:48:28 PM EST

... Or at least it wakes me up. Amusing to know that the station my alarm clock is set to was one of the first FM rock stations, and hasn't changed format since!

Let's hear it for St. Louis! Weee...
-- I love the smell of fdisk in the morning...

I think you KNOW perfectly well why. (2.84 / 13) (#33)
by sllort on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 05:58:02 PM EST

Because analog copies, you know, you make one copy, and another, and three generations out, it sounds terrible. But with digital copies, you make a copy of a copy of a copy, and twenty generations later you have the same shitty mono 64bit mp3 with early cutoff that you started out with.
--
Warning: On Lawn is a documented liar.
MP3s are lossy (none / 3) (#59)
by mcgrew on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:03:13 AM EST

The "perfect copy" is a myth. The only perfect copy is from CD to CD, or through a lossless compression like Shorten, which doesn't really compress them all that much (a 50mb shn file might expand to 60-80). It can take hours to download a CD from archive.org with a high speed connection.

The kids have bought into the "perfect digital copies" bullshit and now download songs, burn them to MP3 in redbook format, making a CD with the quality of an MP3. This CD then gets traded, reripped back into MP3 and losing even more quality. This can go on ad infinitim, just like tapes.

And, you seldom needed a 3rd generation copy, as you can make an unlimited number of second generation copies from your first generation copy. Since the storage media aren't free, this "free" music still costs you, and you are constrained by your pocketbook.

Rather than causing people to buy less music, peer to peer causes people to buy more music. Every single study not paid for by the RIAA has said this.

The RIAA is against P2P and internet radio because they can't control them. The internet gives the little indie label a leg up, and the established oligopoly isn't about to stand for it.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

idiot (none / 2) (#70)
by reklaw on Sun May 02, 2004 at 12:52:02 PM EST

Most people just download the mp3 and share it. Barely anyone would ever download, burn to CD, re-rip and re-share. What he said was that "twenty generations later you have the same shitty mono 64bit mp3 with early cutoff that you started out with", which is true -- if you think it isn't, you've never seen Kazaa's search results, full of mp3s that are flawed and terrible-sounding yet available from 127 different sources. The same goes for the good versions.

Once the mp3 has been made from the CD, there will be no more quality degradation from the moment that mp3 file hits the p2p network. If you can't see the difference between making a copy of a tape and making one of an mp3 then you're just deluding yourself.
-
[ Parent ]

Except they do (none / 1) (#102)
by mcgrew on Mon May 03, 2004 at 08:01:23 AM EST

The very same people who do most of the filesharing- kids. My daughter and all her friends do, and won't listen when I try to tell them differently.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

you're not understanding here (none / 0) (#114)
by reklaw on Mon May 03, 2004 at 05:48:34 PM EST

You're still thinking in the old Napster way, where you got a copy of one person's file. In modern networks like eDonkey and Kazaa, you just get one of the most common files across the whole network.

So a few people can rip and re-share, sure, but the original files will still be far more readily accessible than their messed-up ones. The most common version (ie. the one most people have) will be downloaded more often, and so become more and more common. One or two versions of a file will be easy to download, the rest nearly impossible. The cycle of degradation you describe simply doesn't exist any more -- the files you are most likely to download are the ones that got onto the network first.

I'd also dispute your assertion that the ones who do most of the filesharing are kids. Or does kids to you mean "anyone under 30"?
-
[ Parent ]

Actually (3.00 / 4) (#74)
by Jed Smith on Sun May 02, 2004 at 02:30:13 PM EST

My audio engineer two cents:

CDs are lossy. In fact, PCM is lossy at the sample rate and bitrate that most people use it at (44.1kHz, 16-bit). Any digital representation we can muster of sound compressions in air is lossy, because it's segmented into so many samples per second. The fact is, no matter what you do, you're going to run into loss.

But to be honest, in the years I've been doing sound, it really doesn't matter all that much. Studies have shown that the human ear isn't all that perceptive to signal loss in MP3s above bitrate 160, even though the compression at this bitrate is enormous. An installation I oversaw in a church uses bitrate 128 MP3s to play elevator-type music throughout the halls, and nobody cares.

A sound is only as good as the source producing it. There is no lossless music; a lot of the original content is lost in the PA at your favorite concert (due to inconsistencies in the system, temperature differentials and wind in the air, all kinds of neat audio nerd stuff), and some of the content is even lost to effects and airbrushing in studios.

The kids have bought into the "perfect digital copies" bullshit and now download songs, burn them to MP3 in redbook format, making a CD with the quality of an MP3. This CD then gets traded, reripped back into MP3 and losing even more quality. This can go on ad infinitim, just like tapes.

There is very little loss from this process as you speak. Given codec inconsistencies, the decompression and subsequent recompression of MP3 data will usually yield the same results, since the algorithm doesn't change (except, like I said, across codecs like LAME and what not). In the digital realm, there's no "magnetic variance" like you see with magnetic tape; the data is the same no matter how many times you copy it.

All said, your theory of loss is flawed; and people will pirate MP3s ad infinitum.

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/hd4 74G 13G 61G 18% /home/jed/music

_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
[ Parent ]

Lossy ... (none / 0) (#85)
by dougmc on Sun May 02, 2004 at 04:45:33 PM EST

CDs are lossy.
*Any* sort of digitization of sound (or any other analog item) is lossy. But once you have something in a digital format, as long as you're smart about it, you'll never suffer any further loss.

CDs are designed to tolerate some loss -- scratches and such. So if you rip a CD twice, you may not get exactly the same data -- but that's ok -- it'll be almost exactly the same, and your ear probably won't notice any difference.

But if instead of making a music CD, you burn the sound file to a data CD, and make copy after copy after copy of that, there will be no further loss, unless you get an uncorrectable error, which should abort the copy.

If you make an mp3 of your digitized music, you'll introduce more loss. But as long as you don't decompress that mp3, there will be no further loss, no matter how many times you copy it.

I've dealt with thousands of mp3s, but have only burned a very few to audio CDs. Any that I've traded were traded digitally, which will introduce no further loss. I think the idea of people going from mp3 -> audio cd -> mp3 is quite the exception, rather than the rule.

[ Parent ]

Not "lossy" like that (none / 0) (#101)
by mcgrew on Mon May 03, 2004 at 07:59:52 AM EST

True, no medium can capture 100% of all nuances, anallog or dihgital. However, you misunderstand the meaning of the word "lossy" here.

MP3s are "lossy", because information from the original CD is thrown away. A Lossless compression scheme, however, such as .shn, makes the file smaller without throwing anything away.

In short, convert the CD to MP3 and back and it will sound like an MP3. Convert a CD to SHN and back and it will be identical to the original CD.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

Hmmm. (none / 0) (#111)
by dcturner on Mon May 03, 2004 at 01:56:04 PM EST

In short, convert the CD to MP3 and back and it will sound like an MP3. Convert a CD to SHN and back and it will be identical to the original CD.

I have a number of CDs which I've made by decompressing MP3s. I was surprised how good they sound. I discovered that the main thing which was making my MP3s sound rubbish was my soundcard - the same data, played from a decent CD deck, is fine. I haven't tried any audiophile-quality data, but massively processed regular music with a tiny dynamic range is indistinguishable to my relatively untrained ear.

Conversely, if you take the audio data off of a CD, and burn it back to another CD, it will not be identical unless you have spent a vast quantity of cash on your hardware (tens of thousands of GB pounds, at least, and even then I'm not sure it's possible). I was recently involved in mastering a CD, and the company that did the pressing would only accept the master when it had fewer than 5000 errors; achieving even this quality required a new CD burner and some seriously expensive blank discs.


Remove the opinion on spam to reply.


[ Parent ]
Lossless REproduction (none / 0) (#87)
by gidds on Sun May 02, 2004 at 06:37:04 PM EST

I think most of the posts in this thread are missing the point.

No-one's claiming that going from CD to MP3 isn't losing anything; I don't think we're even claiming that going from recording masters to CD isn't losing anything (though I doubt it's losing anything that anyone here could tell by ear...)

But that's not the issue. What's different with digital music isn't just that it's easier to get good recordings, but that you can share that one recording with millions of other people. Try that with a tape recording!

That's what TPTB are so worried about. A decade or so ago, very few people could be bothered to record off the radio; they might then make copies for a few friends, but the numbers involved were tiny. Partly because the first tape copy lost a lot compared to buying the album (in terms of artwork &c as well as audio), but also because each copy after that took more time, more raw materials, and lost more quality.

Today, an MP3 copy is also lower quality than buying the CD, and you also lose the artwork &c. But instead of further copies costing time, money, and quality, they can be made for nothing. (Given bandwidth.) There's no further quality loss. And because there's no marginal cost, it's as easy to get copies to tens of thousands of people as it is to a couple of friends. In economic terms, there's no marginal cost.

So things are qualitatively different now; comparing with tape copies is missing the point.

Andy/
[ Parent ]

bzzzzt (none / 1) (#89)
by Wah on Sun May 02, 2004 at 07:22:55 PM EST

because lobbyists convinced lawmakers that ALL digital copies are perfect representations of the original product.  "lossy compression" wasn't a part of the conversation, only Perfect Digital Copies.
--
'The Matrix' is a better interpretation of quantum mechanics than Copenhagen.
[ Parent ]
Haha. (2.40 / 5) (#36)
by regeya on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 10:10:28 PM EST

I remember thinking of KSHE as the "Johnny Fever" station. They may have switched to rock in the 70's, but they hardly changed their format until the 90's. That was OK, though, since the 80s sucked anyway (no, kids, imitating The Cars is not cool.) I hardly ever see promotional material for them anymore, either. Fuck all, man; I remember being taken on family vacations and have seen KSHE stickers in places like Oregon. What the hell, man? All I hear about are stations like The Point (though they're fizzling) and cookie-cutter ClearChannel-type stations. And when did Magic go white anyway? There's so many crappy radio stations here (I'm about 2 hours away, southeast of St. Louis) that I can't even attempt to see if KSHE is even still on the air.

I've heard other radio stations do this, too. There's a station in Evansville that was called The Frog that snatched away a lot of Illinois KSHE listeners. Also, Wabash Valley College had a show that'd play full copies of thrash bands back in the early 90s. I remember reading about Lars Ulrich going on about "perfect digital copies" floating around the Internet. Fuck, I bet the tapes people used to trade of Metallica (you know, the ones that helped make them famous, along with a little help from Ozzie) sounded better than the average traded Metallica MP3. I don't understand why the labels see trading crappy copies of crappy albums (they deserve to lose money on Jessica Simpson) as a huge threat, especially since much of their earnings come from the same people who trade MP3s.

[ yokelpunk | kuro5hin diary ]

I think I must've heard this station... (2.25 / 4) (#37)
by Noodle on Fri Apr 30, 2004 at 11:32:12 PM EST

Last time I visited my family in St. Louis, I was messing with the radio in the car and came upon a station that was playing AC/DC...

I don't particularly like AC/DC, but I do like many other things played by stations which normally play AC/DC, so I stayed tuned.

A few minutes later, it occurred to me that they were *still* playing AC/DC, albeit a different song.

And then, after that song was over, they played some *more* AC/DC.

Like I said, I don't particularly like AC/DC, but the novelty of hearing several songs by the same artist back-to-back on a commercia FM station was enough to keep me tuned in... At least, until my sister's complaining ruined the experience (she apparently likes AC/DC less than I do, and wasn't amused by the novelty of the moment).

I'll be sure to tune in again when I'm back in St. Louis next week.

{The Nefarious Noodle}

Good radio isn't dead. It's just moved to... (2.20 / 5) (#38)
by fyngyrz on Sat May 01, 2004 at 12:01:35 AM EST

XM Radio. And Sirius too, though I prefer XM, myself. Digital, hugely varied, programmable, portable, mobile, homebound - you name it, it's there. No more driving out of range. No more listening to "public (dis)service" broadcasts on Sunday mo(u)rning. No more not knowing "who/what that artist/cut was." No more listening to commercials!

The day I got my XM was the last day I paid any attention at all to commercial FM (or non-commercial FM, for that matter.)

Like lots of the same artist? "Deep Tracks"

Like rock? Metal? 80's hair bands? Acoustic? Joni Mitchel? P.O.D.? Sabbath? Zappa? They have a channel for you. More likely, they have several. There are more than a hundred of them, you see. A variety your FM dial could never match, even if FM broadcasters, working together, which they are not, were bent on providing you with a wide spectrum of interesting, commercial free music - which again, they are not.

My home XM radio (an "XM PCR", which cost about $60 new, running under a Linux driver) switches from channel to channel automatically to follow as my favorite bands come up on this channel or that one. FM? So dead, so dead.

XM Radio, man. FM - dead! And rightfully so. Did I mention that FM is fucking dead?

I grew up listening to WNEW in NYC. An awesome progressive rock powerhouse. Long gone, of course, now playing some vapid crapola 24/7... but that set my course, and XM was the pot of gold at the end of that very rainbow. It's like HDTV for your radio-ears.

No, I'm not affiliated with them. I'm just outrageously PLEASED with them.

Get XM or just keep bitching about how your listening experience sucks. Those, I believe, are the only choices available. It's $9.95 a month - best money a music lover could ever spend, methinks.


Blog, Photos.

Soooo... XM radio, huh? /nt (none / 2) (#39)
by gilrain on Sat May 01, 2004 at 01:19:49 AM EST



[ Parent ]
two words College Radio (none / 3) (#40)
by Greenarchist on Sat May 01, 2004 at 01:29:04 AM EST

I live in probably the best college radio zone imaginable, on a hill in San Francisco, CA.

I recieve wonderfull, various and suprising music from four diffrent college stations. Five in my car, which has a better antenna than the crappy ones on my home radios.

I'd be tempted by XM but I'm still a true believer when it comes to radio. It really can be a usefull tool for communication and dissemination of new music. Plus I bridle at being asked to pay extra money for my music.

My main objection to satelite radio is the lack of a good pirate option. I love my local pirate and legal small-time radio scene. Even if they only play crappy eighties punk most of the time, it still sound like freedom to me.

Greenarchist

[ Parent ]

The Fine 89 (none / 2) (#45)
by antizeus on Sat May 01, 2004 at 12:23:22 PM EST

KFJC is the best radio station I have ever heard. I donate money to them every year -- even recently when I wasn't in their broadcast range. If not for KFJC (and a few other stations in the area), I'd probably get satellite radio myself.
-- $SIGNATURE
[ Parent ]
Ah yes what a Station (none / 1) (#48)
by Greenarchist on Sat May 01, 2004 at 07:01:53 PM EST

That is the one I only get in my car. I've actually considered installing  a radio antenna onmy house to remedy that situation though.

[ Parent ]
Try a TV rabbit ear antenna (none / 0) (#57)
by mcgrew on Sun May 02, 2004 at 09:48:59 AM EST

Three to fifty bucks. Get one with a built in amplifier and you're sure to pick it up.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

Err. (none / 1) (#81)
by Jed Smith on Sun May 02, 2004 at 02:59:53 PM EST

TV video is nowhere near FM radio's wavelength. Stop acting knowledgable when you guess.
_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
[ Parent ]
You are the one who is less knowledgeable (none / 0) (#91)
by JonesBoy on Sun May 02, 2004 at 09:06:58 PM EST

Ummmm, I think you are the one guessing here.   Channels 2-6 are 55-83 Mhz, Channels 7-13 are 175-211.   It straddles the FM radio band, in North and Central America, at least.

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/North%20American%20broadcast%20television%20frequencies
Speeding never killed anyone. Stopping did.
[ Parent ]

You're both right, in a sense (none / 0) (#94)
by John Miles on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:45:28 PM EST

While the frequency range assigned to FM broadcasting in the US does fall right in the middle of the VHF TV range, TV antennas sometimes include elements designed specifically to reduce gain on the FM band. The idea is to discourage powerful local FM stations from overloading the cheaply-designed front end circuitry present in some TV sets.

I actually don't know how common this is, but I know it's been done. Your best bet is to look for a TV antenna that's specifically marketed as a "TV/FM" antenna.

For so long as men do as they are told, there will be war.
[ Parent ]

Ubless it has an amp (none / 0) (#100)
by mcgrew on Mon May 03, 2004 at 07:55:16 AM EST

and possibly a filter (few do), it's just two alumanum sticks. But it beats the hell out of the "antenna" that comes with your five hundred dollar reciever.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

I prefer (none / 0) (#109)
by JonesBoy on Mon May 03, 2004 at 01:26:47 PM EST

I prefer speaker wire and tin foil :)
Speeding never killed anyone. Stopping did.
[ Parent ]
LOL (none / 0) (#99)
by mcgrew on Mon May 03, 2004 at 07:53:53 AM EST

I love it when people castigate me from pure ignorance. The FM dial is right between VHF channels 6 and 7.

Your apology is accepted.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

My apologies (none / 0) (#121)
by Jed Smith on Thu May 06, 2004 at 08:01:31 PM EST

AM, not FM -- I always get the two backwards.

Regardless, that TV antenna of yours will not work too great for FM.
_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
[ Parent ]

Buy an ad, cockface. (1.70 / 10) (#43)
by Kasreyn on Sat May 01, 2004 at 03:21:23 AM EST

P.S. XM radio is for losers who have been successfully been beaten into such deep submission by radio commercials that they're willing to pay an insane amount just for some fucking radio tunes.

Clue: there's a third alternative. It's called, "download mp3's, and laugh at the shitheads paying for XM". I'm also wondering, is there an XM station that plays random shit so you can hear new music and gain new interests, or is it only about catering to insular "I like only this genre" people and reinforcing their musical boundaries?

The best money a music lover can spend is several thousand dollars for some really, really good speakers and a studio quality analog amp.


P.S. - Democracy: Where antisocial eggheads don't run the show. Fortunately. :P


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
[ Parent ]
Cable TV for your car (sans pictures) (none / 3) (#56)
by mcgrew on Sun May 02, 2004 at 09:45:25 AM EST

When cable TV first started spreading, it had no commercials, either. You would watch a movie from beginning to end, uncut.

Fast forward a few years and guess what? Cable programming is as insipid as broadcast programming, with all the same restrictions, cuts, cencorship, and bland programming.

Nope, I'm not going to pay to listen to the radio. I have thousands of MP3s I've ripped from CDs and sampled from ribbon and vinyl, and collect more all the time.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

Same deal with HBO/Cinemax/Showtime/Etc. (none / 1) (#106)
by ghjm on Mon May 03, 2004 at 01:01:13 PM EST

Remember when they used to be called "pay tv" and it was a big deal? Then they started pulling lite version of the same crap as the regular cable channels. The first time I saw them frame and talk over MY movie credits, I dropped them like a hot potato and I haven't been back since. For thirty bucks a month I'll rent the god damned movie from Blockbuster or just buy it on DVD. I don't watch that many of them anyway.

All this business of putting the station logo in the corner during the show, or running an ad (with sound!) for some other show on the network while you're trying to watch the current show, has me seriously considering dropping extended cable as well. There's only so much suckage I'm prepared to deal with.

-Graham

[ Parent ]

the change (2.75 / 4) (#46)
by adimovk5 on Sat May 01, 2004 at 12:38:45 PM EST

Now, a question for discussion. Why were the labels OK with my recording Ted Nugent's Stranglehold album, uncut and uninterrupted, a week before it was released to the stores, but now scream bloody murder if I dare to have the audacity download a two minute, poor audio quality Metallica single?

What's changed?

Recording an album from a radio station requires the recorder to listen to a particular radio station at a particular time in a restricted geographic area. The recording is only possible at a single point in time in the area covered by the station. Quality of the recording will very depending on the equipment used and the ability to pick up a good signal.

Downloading music is very different. The recordings can be high fidelity. The recordings can be passed around worldwide in little time. Transfer of the recordings costs nothing.

Downloading digital music is a direct threat to the recording industry. Analog recording from radio stations is not.



But this begs the question... (none / 0) (#68)
by WolfWings on Sun May 02, 2004 at 11:51:04 AM EST

...how does recording from a high-quality FM reciever directly to a lossless digital format fit into the situation? It's still a digital copy, supposedly the death-knell of all record studios, but it came from an FM station. Hell, if you rig up $50 or so for the aerial so it's directional, you'll get quality that's nearly equal to what you can buy in the store. Or, is your actual reasoning that the distribution of recordings is the death-knell of the record industry, and with the sharp decline in costs associated with digital formats, they can be generally assumed to proportionally, or perhaps exponentially, increase the amount and quality of distribution of recorded songs? Just asking for clarification. :-)
"How good an actor do you have to be to play God?" - Bob Dylan
[ Parent ]
Yes. (none / 0) (#97)
by vectro on Mon May 03, 2004 at 01:08:16 AM EST

It's the distribution that's the problem; you can basically do whatever you please as long as you don't share. At least that used to be the rule; with the DMCA, if what you get is access-controlled it might be illegal to circumvent the controls.

The radio has a license to distribute the music to you, but you don't have a license to redistribute it.

What this means is that, amongst other things, it's perfectly OK to rip your CDs, record the radio, make a custom MP3 CD, and put it in your car. No problem. Similarly, no problem if you want to set up a high-quality FM receiver and point it at the station. As long as you don't share (and stay wary of the DMCA), you can basically do whatever you please.

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]

"Begs the question"... (none / 1) (#115)
by jmzero on Mon May 03, 2004 at 06:54:56 PM EST

...does not mean "begs for the question to be asked", it refers to a circular argument.  I recommend you avoid the phrase altogether.  

I used to have a special account dedicated to doing this kind of Nazi-ism, but I can't find the password (and can't register a new one) - and my eternal vigilance is still required.
.
"Let's not stir that bag of worms." - my lovely wife
[ Parent ]

youre right on some points (1.50 / 6) (#47)
by SilentChris on Sat May 01, 2004 at 01:15:28 PM EST

most of what you said is valid, but please remember that some of us do enjoy pop music hits on occasions (dance parties, clubs, and such).

∂2φ    1    ∂2φ
---- - ---- ---- = 0
 ∂x2    c2   ∂t2

music serves a purpose.  you might like perfect circle a lot because its rock music but not mainstream rock music.  basically, its just like creed but not as catchy, so you think its ok to listen to and you say creed sucks.

It's perfectly legal to record broadcast radio. (none / 2) (#49)
by craigd on Sat May 01, 2004 at 07:36:18 PM EST

Internet radio, being a digital format, is not covered by this.

Weird, but fairly straightforward.


A man who says little is a man who speaks two syllables.
Doesn't music exist outside of time? (1.50 / 4) (#52)
by Fen on Sun May 02, 2004 at 03:34:53 AM EST

Nobody creates music. They just discover it from the timeless plane. Why assign years to music?
--Self.
My radio suckage litmus test (2.57 / 7) (#53)
by Kasreyn on Sun May 02, 2004 at 06:39:11 AM EST

Since I'm nocturnal by nature, I turn on the radio generally no earlier than 11:30 PM. The amount of suckage a radio station is producing (kind of like the wattage of an incandescent bulb) is directly proportional to the number of times they play ads from sponsors who would like to helpfully let me know that they think I am inadequate sexually and have stamina problems best not named here.

This is odd, because you see, the spokesperson delivering the ad is usually a woman with a very sexy voice. Which begs the question, why is she wasting her time talking to losers like me, who, I am regularly informed, are all sexual midgets who cannot maintain erections? Why isn't she off engaging in noisy coitus with glandular athletes? Indeed, why is she wasting her time doing ads for a company so lame it has decided to insult its potential customers? Clearly, something fishy is afoot.

But I digress. Unless you're here to tell me that radio stations in the 60's regularly told their listeners that they were pathetic, pencil-dicked shadows of men, then I'll have to disagree with your statement that it sucked more than it does now.


-Kasreyn


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
Ah, yes, advertising... (none / 1) (#55)
by mcgrew on Sun May 02, 2004 at 09:38:38 AM EST

Advertising has certainly gotten much, much worse than it was back then. "Erectile Dysfunction" didn't exist (and neither did SDHD).

I think they instituted a mandatory IQ test to get into the advertising field. If you score over 80, you flunk and are ineligible.

One of the nice things about any new radio station is its lack of advertisers. And new radio statioons usually kick ass, then die down to the boring 3-5 years later.

Another benefit of late night radio, I've found, is the music usually sucks less.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

It existed. (none / 0) (#58)
by vegetablespork on Sun May 02, 2004 at 09:53:43 AM EST

"Erectile Dysfunction" didn't exist

People just didn't admit to it back then :).

[ Parent ]

Of course it existed. (none / 0) (#71)
by mcgrew on Sun May 02, 2004 at 12:57:39 PM EST

That tenth planet (or semi- planet or whatever) they just found didn't exist, either. Pluto didn't exist until the 20th century either, except that it did.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

Interesting argument (none / 1) (#76)
by Jed Smith on Sun May 02, 2004 at 02:42:11 PM EST

Except that erectile dysfunction isn't exactly an astronomical phenemoena to be discovered. I mean, it discovers you.
_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
[ Parent ]
Advertising.. (none / 1) (#75)
by Jed Smith on Sun May 02, 2004 at 02:40:27 PM EST

All of the salespeople I worked with at Bicoastal were very intelligent people that are very well off. Your "IQ [under] 80" argument is flawed and childish.

What is important to note is that the majority of the erectile dysfunction ads come from network, not local programming. For example, if you're listening to Rush Limbaugh, you're listening to Premiere Radio Networks. Why is this important? Usually, only one break an hour (as opposed to the 3 or 4 that usually hit) is local origination. The rest are from Rush's salespeople. It's not the station's fault at all.

Even with music, the story is the same. Most radio stations these days, whether Clear Channel or Westwood One or whatever, syndicate their music from a satellite feed, then cut and paste ads into preprogrammed slots. The stations around here do this. If your station only mentions its call letters during imprinting and some ads, chances are, it's syndicated.

So again, local/network comes into play. You will rarely find that in the average town there's a number of erectile dysfunction firms just dripping to get their ads on your local rock station. It's all at the national, or "network", level.

Travel down to your local radio station and ask the program director for an explanation if you're curious. 9 times out of 10, it's not the stations fault what national ads run.
_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
[ Parent ]

it's not intelligence they lack... (none / 0) (#86)
by Wah on Sun May 02, 2004 at 06:18:58 PM EST

...it's a sense of morality.

Huy guys, guess why your dick looks small?  It's because you are comparing it to porn stars and you are a fat ass.  20 pounds an inch.  Lose one and gain the other.  Does wonders for your stamina too.  Ahh, but that doesn't generate much profit, so you can't sell it.

So it's not intelligence that is lacking, you just have to mix it with widespread rationalization.
--
'The Matrix' is a better interpretation of quantum mechanics than Copenhagen.
[ Parent ]

That's because they were salespeople :P (none / 0) (#93)
by D Jade on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:36:30 PM EST

All of the salespeople I worked with at Bicoastal were very intelligent people that are very well off. Your "IQ [under] 80" argument is flawed and childish.

Quite different from Advertising people. Of course, Sales people have to be smart enough to be able to lie through their teeth to potential buyers in order to sell them whatever crap it is they are peddling :D



You're a shitty troll, so stop pretending you have more of a life than a cool dude -- HollyHopDrive
[ Parent ]
Uh (none / 0) (#122)
by Jed Smith on Thu May 06, 2004 at 08:02:50 PM EST

What's the difference between salespeople and advertising people?

We don't call it the advertising department in broadcasting, we call it sales.
_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
[ Parent ]

Oh, C'mon! (none / 0) (#125)
by D Jade on Mon May 10, 2004 at 01:20:15 AM EST

Take a joke... Why is everyone on this site so fricking serious these days?



You're a shitty troll, so stop pretending you have more of a life than a cool dude -- HollyHopDrive
[ Parent ]
This reminds me awfully of the Lou Reed song (none / 1) (#66)
by city light on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:37:56 AM EST

Jenny said, when she was just five years old
you know there's nothin' happening at all
Every time she put on the radio
there was nothin' goin' down at all
not at all

One fine mornin', she puts on a New York station
and she couldn't believe what she heard at all
She started dancin' to that fine-fine-fine-fine music
ooohhh, her life was saved by rock 'n' roll
hey baby, rock 'n' roll

Despite all the amputation
you could dance to a rock 'n' roll station
And it was all right
it was all right
hey babe


Don't you mean (none / 0) (#90)
by white light on Sun May 02, 2004 at 08:16:11 PM EST

This reminds me of the awful Lou Reed song ?




..do you really want to help foster this type of laziness?
[ Parent ]
heh (none / 0) (#103)
by city light on Mon May 03, 2004 at 08:38:16 AM EST

It's not one of his best I admit.

I just read the first paragraph of this article and it sounded like a paraphrasing of the song

[ Parent ]

the solution: (none / 2) (#69)
by bankind on Sun May 02, 2004 at 11:56:13 AM EST

listener sponsored, free-form radio at www.wfmu.org

"Insurgents are blowing up pipelines and police stations, geysers of sewage are erupting from the streets, and the electricity is off most of the time -- but we've given Iraq the gift of supply-side economics." -Krugman

How did this happen? (1.20 / 5) (#73)
by Jed Smith on Sun May 02, 2004 at 02:12:34 PM EST

We let an article publish with two or three misspellings per sentence?
_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
Mostly because it's a good article... /nt (none / 0) (#88)
by gilrain on Sun May 02, 2004 at 07:11:13 PM EST



[ Parent ]
No different from usual... (none / 0) (#92)
by D Jade on Sun May 02, 2004 at 10:30:42 PM EST

In fact. For a K5 article, I thought it was much better than usual. Some contributors' spelling is terrible.

The four mistakes I found were:
definately
Creedence
Restaraunt
convieniently

I think there were more than four sentences which make your claim untrue...



You're a shitty troll, so stop pretending you have more of a life than a cool dude -- HollyHopDrive
[ Parent ]
STFU asshole (none / 1) (#98)
by mcgrew on Mon May 03, 2004 at 07:50:37 AM EST

It was in the edit que for two fucking days. It's a little late to bitch about the spelling now, isn't it, dumbass?

Next time, make an editorial comment before it hits the front page.

"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

It should have been there longer (none / 0) (#123)
by Jed Smith on Thu May 06, 2004 at 08:03:31 PM EST

"dumbass"
_____
K5 is dead. Steve Ballmer made the most insightful comment on a story. -- jw32767
[ Parent ]
From scrawny runt to fat pig (none / 0) (#96)
by coward anonymous on Mon May 03, 2004 at 12:48:50 AM EST

You said it in the article. There was no rock to be found anywhere. All was easy listening and jazz. They had to get a foothold, what better way than to give freebies, few commercials, and generally be very friendly to their customers?
Fast forward to today, the labels practically own radio stations, they have a stranglehold on the market in every way you can think, from radio, to "talent", to distribution, to their zombie like consumers who accept everything. All they need to do now, is lean back and squeeze the cash cow. They have no incentive to provide a good product with good service because they can shove whatever they want down the willing customers' throat and bribe congress to legislate away any competition.

Canada! (none / 0) (#105)
by redelm on Mon May 03, 2004 at 09:18:53 AM EST

US radio may have been missing Album-Oriented Rock in the 1970s (and may yet again with ClearChannel). But Canada had lots -- CHUM-AM & FM, then later Q107 out of Toronto. There was even a Windsor ON station that aimed it's antennae to Detroit & Toledo. It was very successful in attracting American listeners and advertisers.

Every government has limits and needs to decide what to use it's limited influence for. Canada decided it wanted to promote Canadian artists, so the CRTC imposed Canadian content restrictions. The US less consciously decided it wanted to impose a certain morality, so the FCC restricted content thought immoral by the political masters.



Windsor (none / 0) (#113)
by Norkakn on Mon May 03, 2004 at 05:46:35 PM EST

What is the Windsor station, and do you think I'd be able to get it in Ann Arbor, MI?

[ Parent ]
CKLW 800 AM has gone talk radio (none / 0) (#118)
by redelm on Mon May 03, 2004 at 10:55:54 PM EST



[ Parent ]
KSHE started in 1967 /nt (none / 0) (#116)
by mcgrew on Mon May 03, 2004 at 07:22:44 PM EST


"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie
[ Parent ]

Houston, Texas (none / 0) (#107)
by mrcsparker on Mon May 03, 2004 at 01:15:15 PM EST

Used to have a whole lot of album-oriented stations. Some, like 101 and 93.7, will still occasionally play whole albums late at night.

Email from a lurker (none / 0) (#117)
by mcgrew on Mon May 03, 2004 at 07:27:12 PM EST

I'm not sure, but this guy might have been a KSHE DJ thirty or so years ago, his name seems familiar. Or maybe he got locally famous for the Arlo Guthrie record. Here's the note:
Wow, they started out in 1967, and I knew one and them many of the DJs. I gave them the first whole album side they ever played, Alice's Restaurant, and it made them popular. So I was forever one of those listeners whose recommendations were listened to very careful.

Bob Rea
Norcross, GA


"The entire neocon movement is dedicated to revoking mcgrew's posting priviliges. This is why we went to war with Iraq." -LilDebbie

Reenactment of a possible answer (3.00 / 6) (#119)
by K5 ASCII reenactment players on Tue May 04, 2004 at 10:08:00 AM EST

I recall the summer of '67 like it was yesterday.
Paw would sit on the stoop of our wooden shack, just
a-smokin' and a-whittlin', and I would chase the
chickens round the yard all day long.  Times they
were a-better back then.  What's changed?  Well, we 
done gone put a man on the moon, and the good Lord is 
a-punishing  us for our presumption, it seems to me.

        /////////////\
       /////////////  \
      ///////////// _  \
       ||||  ||||| |_| |
     ~O>|||  |||||    _| Whee!
    _V/_|||__|||||__--     /    *Braaawk?*
   //___________/        o  <o <o
    ||||||||||||       _/\   {} {}


St. Louis Radio Today (none / 0) (#124)
by LlamaDragon on Fri May 07, 2004 at 06:02:55 PM EST

In a word, it sucks.

KSHE is a painful painful station to listen to now.  They play pop singles from the 80's and little else (although I can't bash them too much, I won a trip to Jamaica from them two years ago and I didn't really have to listen at all).  101 "The River" is becoming less rock and more pop single stuff.  The one good thing going for STL radio was "Woody and the Whipping Boy" on 105.7, but they got fired for something mildly sexually offensive.  The same station plays Howard Stern every morning (who, even in his somewhat cleaned up show, is far dirtier than Woody ever was).  I used to look forward to the drive home because I would get some time to listen to the radio with a little less of the overplayed "Alternative" music 105.7 plays and more of Woody.  Now that they're gone, STL radio is utterly uninteresting generic tripe.  

There used to be a morning show called "JC and the Breakfast Club" that was good, but then they got fired in a sudden "format change" of that station, and JC went elsewhere, and without the rest of the "breakfast club" it's not the same.  The other morning shows (Howard excluded) are similarly generic - prank calls, local sports talk, friend of the morning show callers, etc.

You can't find any original content and all the music is the same overplayed stuff.  I'm sure the same thing is going on in cities all over, but it was just so painful watching it go down the drain here.

Well, anyway, just had to get that off my chest.  I know the article isn't necessarilly about STL in particular, but it is about the suckiness of radio so I guess I'm vaguely on topic.

~LD

Saint Louis Radio (none / 0) (#127)
by gnome on Tue Jun 22, 2004 at 05:30:58 PM EST

It is great to see some STL locals are on Kuro5hin.  I am young, I suppose...  Being born in '70 makes KSHE older than me!!!  But I do remember the cool art teacher in high school who let us listen to the radio... and KSHE was almost always the class vote.  Now a days I don't listen to commercial radio except for the occasional (morbid) curiosity check.  Ugh... the state we are in.

Saint Louis DOES have one great station... KDHX.  True COMMUNITY radio.  One of the best community radio stations in the country, or so I hear.  And it is 100% community... not college owned or a PBS/NPR type thing taking govornment money.  It is a beautiful thing.   You can check them out streaming on the internet, too.  The website is www.kdhx.org.

I can get my double doses of the Dead on Saturday nights (both a local and national program), great jam-bands on Tuesdays with Stumble in the Dark, Bluegrass on Sundays, and lots more.  True they play many formats...  but if you're interested in a genre and find your show, you will find the gems there.  Some of the best Blues and Bluegrass music I never would have heard has come to me over the STL airwaves thanks to this station.  Because the DJ's are real music enthusiasts who get to program their own shows.  What a beautiful thing indeed!

peace,
gnome
~let it grow~ g n o m e

Birth of a label-sanctioned pirate radio station | 127 comments (115 topical, 12 editorial, 2 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!