HD Radio Recording In the US? 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?"
Liberate the Spectrum. (Score:5, Interesting)
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: (Score:2, Insightful)
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: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Bullshit. Here's why:
Anyone with even a yard-sale-quality stereo amplifier could defeat any such thing - the voltage (and amperage, resistance/impedance, wattage, etc) from the computer audio line-out to the amp's line-in jack would remain within exactly the same expected range during runtime, no matter how much recording equipment you daisy-chained onto the amp's AUX-out line.
IOW: Once it goes analog, it's all mine... and unless someone, somewhere dreams up a "digital" speaker rig-up that could stand a hop
How in the hell (Score:3, Interesting)
Can Vista "check the line voltage" ?
Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (Score:5, Funny)
The submitter?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
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, f
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree, but there also needs to be some part of the spectrum allocated to "anything goes."
It is possible to have both. 2.4 has licensed only bands on both sides of it.
I can't speak for everyone, but I think a lot of low power FM & TV stations would be great. At least much better than having a choice of one or two Clearchannel stations.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem with a part of the spectrum where "anything goes" is that broadcasters could be drowned out by competitors.
Remember, current bands where "anything goes" aren't quite like that: they have strict power limits, so that you don't have to worry about your cordless phone or 802.11 access point being drowned out by your neighbor's, as long as you're not too close together. Spread-spectrum technology also made these less-regulated bands possible; if we still had fixed "channels" like FM or TV, this sim
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Remember, current bands where "anything goes" aren't quite like that: they have strict power limits,
And I suppose it never occurred to you that the FCC could limit power here in the same way as 2.4?
If you do some research, the FCC was VERY close to legalizing low power FM stations, but then the measure just quietly died.
You can put on a tin foil hat here, but I would bet good money some corporations slipped some money under the table to the right person, and some low-end competition was killed.
So see, it
Re: (Score:2)
Actually...I'd argue that NO one (at least in the US) owns property/land these days.
Just try not paying your property tax on that land and see how long you get to stay on it.
Nope...you are just 'renting' the land from the govt. these days....
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Every time I read open spectrum rants, it's clear that the authors never had any real life wireless experience or their entire experience has been 802.11 Wifi. Or they're high.
The fact that you say EM "adds just as light does" illustrates my point :-)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, no experience at all. [wikipedia.org] But yeah, that you can pass two light beams through each other and emerge without loss of signal shows that the "radio interference story" the public has been fed is a lie.
But RF isn't visible light spectrum. And if interference really was a lie, why hasn't anyone created a receiver that is totally insusceptible to interference in 100 years of radio engineering? And if this was possible, technically it should be possible to receive and demodulate any signal at any level infinitely less than the noise floor. I'm not a physicist, but I'm sure there are people way smarter than me who would have done it already, because they'd be obscenely rich right now.
The over-simplified wr
Re:Read and think before spew? (Score:5, Informative)
Let me rephrase my previous post. While you can pass two beams of light through each other, and you can pass two radio spectrum waves through each other, this is totally irrelevant to radio interference. Beam the two waves, whether visible light or radio spectrum into a receiver and while they can add and subtract, they can destroy information to the point where the intelligence can't be extracted. If you take the simplest model of a carrier modulated with intelligence by turning it on and off, one can create a interfering signal that is turned on when the intended signal is turned off. Match the phase and amplitude perfectly and no technology in the world will extract the signal, hence interference.
To say that interference is a big lie is an outrageously simple and wrong conclusion.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
EM does not "interfere" with itself, it adds just as light does.
Except that, y'know, light interferes with itself too. [wikipedia.org]
Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (Score:5, Insightful)
Consider the chaos of other countries that have even small portions of open spectrum. Nothing works subsequently, and you'll get some trucker with a 10kw transmitter in Arkansas over powering your TV, radio, cell phone, and WiFi because of the broadband noise produced.
Free spectrum would be like removing the lines on the highway and the lane markings at intersections. Go ahead.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:3, Informative)
XM has six music channels programmed by Clear Channel that play a small ammount of ad content per hour. When these formerly ad-free channels went commerical, XM countered by adding a replacement similarly-formatted channel (XM Hitlist to challenge Kiss-XM, for example) that is commerical free.
There's also several CC-owned talk channels that mostly air Premire Radio Networks talk shows like Talk Radio, America's Talk, America Right. These play commericals in every minute that their format allows, with a smal
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
All XM's music channels are commercial-free; their other channels are not. I believe Sirius has a similar policy.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except for the netflix part, I'm already onboard.
Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What's replacing radio?
Not sure. But something certainly is:
Radio's Popularity Declining Unevenly [nytimes.com]
CBS Acquires Last.fm Seeking To Overcome Declining Radio Business [publishing2.com]
In decline: TV, radio, newspapers, books, mags [boingboing.net]
Radio Keeps Declining, Wall Street Keeps Getting Surprised [alleyinsider.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Check that out. A 1mm band - that's 250GHz. Does the antenna glow red when you transmit?
Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Chumby (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (Score:5, Insightful)
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. (Score:4, Insightful)
I know this is off-topic, but why is it that car radios don't have the weather bands? Having weather information when you are most vulnerable seems like a common sense thing to me.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
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 t
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Liberate the Spectrum. (Score:5, Insightful)
Only citizens.
Re: (Score:2)
You never listen to the radio in the car?
I know you can bring cd's or mp3's, etc....but, don't you like to listen to live news or talk at all? You don't like to have the fun 'randomness' of someone else choosing the music for the drive?
I think radio, at least for car travel is still extremely relevant.
anything you want it to... (Score:2, Informative)
Or judging from your tone, anything I want it to that you will denigrate should you find out about it.
http://gnuradio.org/trac [gnuradio.org]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.momentaryfascinations.com/technology/vista.the.worlds.first.user-hostile.operating.system.html [momentaryf...ations.com]
Tilt bits.
Re: (Score:2)
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"?
Go Satellite instead... (Score:4, Informative)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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 interest
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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... (Score:5, Interesting)
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: (Score:3, Interesting)
HD Radio is particularly nasty because of the high licensing fees and the noise produced by sticking digital where it doesn't belong.
http://www.ham-radio.com/k6sti/hdrsn.htm [ham-radio.com]
http://www.am-dx.com/amiboc.htm [am-dx.com]
HD Radio adapter for computers (Score:5, Insightful)
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! (Score:5, Interesting)
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
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! (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:2)
Did you ever read a sentence that sounds like it's saying something and after reading it about 10 times you realize that it's complete nonsense?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Could you please elaborate on what the problem is?
They can't protect their content. This is the basic fallacy of DRM which we discuss on this site all the time.
We can't protect our methods. If they are known on the internet then they can be discovered by the content providers. It matters not a whit whether we discuss it on this site or not, they will still find out.
The ultimate reason for both of these is the same: information cannot be protected unless all parties who can access it are absolutely trustwort
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
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) O
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Cons
Re: (Score:2)
See parent post.
Re: (Score:2)
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 (Score:2)
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 o
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Too late. As of Monday, AT&T broadband has deleted a large group of alt newsgroups, especially the alt.binaries tree. There were a group of us in alt.binaries.midi that used to swap our midi compositions and arrangements, including the brilliant James Pitt-Payne, who singlehandedly has been keeping the turn of the 20th century popular piano music alive through this newsgroup. If it hadn't been for his (and others') exception
not a problem (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
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: (Score:2)
"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: (Score:2)
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 chann
A couple of possibilities (Score:3, Informative)
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
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
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
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: (Score:3, Informative)
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
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I havent gotten around to automating it yet... griffin is supposed to come out with some a radioshark HD model which would make timeshifting and recording to a pc easy, but they are not shipping anything yet. Maybe by xmas time.
Maybe I'm missing something here but... (Score:3, Insightful)
...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 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Amazon (Score:5, Informative)
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 (Score:2)
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.
HD streaming radio (Score:4, Informative)
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: (Score:3, Interesting)
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].
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It doesn't mean what you think it means... (Score:2)
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.)
Re:It doesn't mean what you think it means... (Score:4, Funny)
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.)
ah, so it's like the "HD Vision" sunglasses then : )
new tech (Score:3, Interesting)
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: (Score:2)
Edit: I temporarily forgot that "HD Radio" doesn't mean "high definition".
Re:new tech (Score:4, Informative)
Too late!!! ASI8914 [audioscience.com] - Quad HD Raido Tuner (with linux drivers).
Time-shifting radio with computer tuners (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
As a side note, Windows Vista Media Center supports FM tuners built-in to TV tuner cards. But it provides no means of time-shifting radio, even though it can do so for TV (and that is arguably its primary purpose). I have often wondered why this is so. What is the benefit of listening to radio on your computer if all the same rules apply as when you're listening to it on any other device? Doesn't it just become sort of a pain in the ass?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You obviously don't listen to a radio station that's paid for the HD Radio technology. KDFC advertises HD radios a lot. (Then again KDFC also has too much gab and not enough music, and it's all very "pop" classical and not so much serious works of more than a minute or three, and... general lame :P i've switched mostly to the jazz station in the mornings)
Maybe ... (Score:3, Informative)
HD Radio is a Farce! (Score:4, Informative)
XM Radio recording (Score:2, Interesting)
Audio Quality (Score:2)
HD is regular FM or AM but Digital (Score:2, Informative)
What's the problem? There are lots of devices... (Score:3, Informative)
What's the issue? The first page of a Google search for "hd radio output jack" lists
HD Pulse [advancedgt.com] with "Stereo Output"
Sony XDR [monitoringtimes.com] with 3.5mm stereo output jack
JVC KT-HDP [zdnet.com] with a stereo out
Just plug the line out to your recording device of choice (digital or otherwise) and go to town.
HD bitrates are 32-48 kbps. Why Bother? (Score:3, Insightful)
from a broadcasters perspective.. (Score:5, Informative)
I'm a broadcast radio engineer. i'm a tad biased, so to speak:
1. A privately held codec has no place on the public spectrum. Any hobbyist should be able to build a receiver without paying a license fee.
2. from an operational standpoint it's death to AM at night. First adjacent channels (ie 1000khz & 1010khz) HD's will interfere with analog signals via skip: listening to distant AM signals (DX'ing) at night will be a thing of the past, especially as solar activity increases over the next 5 years.
3. We as broadcasters have failed to provide meaningful content on the main signals, and now we're polluting media channels with bad content and no revenue. We've failed to promote hd in any meaningful way. The only clear winner is not the broadcaster nor the listener, but the ibiquity corporation.
the actual question?
i don't believe it does HD, but the radioshark is a analog device which does what you're looking for:
http://www.griffintechnology.com/products/radioshark
Re:Minimal /. relevancy I think (Score:5, Funny)
if (article.contains("Linux")) {
frontpage.add(article);
}
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Citation for the previous post here [uncyclopedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)