If I understand this correctly, and this is based on remote SDR use, a few things need to be said as regards
using those for a reporting tool:
1. As a programmer, I use remote websdr monitoring myself to supplement reception reports from listeners, but I am also very much aware of their limitations - they are not magical and are subject to some of the same localized issues as regular radios at times. For example, I have had occasions when something sounds like mush on one of the best and most popular web sdrs, UTwente, while up the road in the Netherlands and Belgium, things are just fine. Doesn't happen often, but it happens. And there are a few web SDRs I will not name in other countries that are consistently as useless for the frequencies I want as badly configured terrestrial radio-antenna combinations. Not everyone minds the store on these, nor do they have any obligation to do so. Long story short, while the presence of a listenable signal confirms that a broadcast is receivable in a place, the absence of it on a web SDR is NOT conclusive proof that the signal is not. Evidence, yes, but not proof.
2. For the US specifically, the US is a big place. Even in the "golden days", signals receivable in New England were not necessarily good in Florida or vice versa. In order to be of any use at all, reports using websdrs in the US especially really need to specify which SDRs in which states. This is true for any country but especially so for big ones. Even with that, the fact that something is not tracking in New York City does not mean that it is unreceivable in upstate New York. Again, these are useful to confirm presence but not necessarily conclusive for absence - the latter takes time and diligence and ideally reports from scattered monitors on the ground.
I'm not trying to be critical here, but I am seeing websdr reports turn up more frequently. These can be useful if and only if their limitations are remembered and accounted for when using them to make observations.
On Friday, September 11, 2020, 08:19:04 PM CDT, Wolfgang Bueschel <dg1sbn@t-online.de> wrote:
CUBA 4765even Radio Progreso Bejucal is ON AIR tonight, nice sweet Latin AM
canciones mx. S=9+20dB in NJ US, 8 kHz wideband audio block visible.
At 00.50 UT on Sept 12.
[selected SDR options, span 12.5 kHz RBW 15.3 Hertz]
(wb df5sx, wwdxc BC-DX TopNews Sept 12)
Two strings on 4775.040 and 4774.729 kHz.
4875.011 BRA R Dif Roraima, nice fluttery 8-9 at 01.00 UT.
4885.024 BRA R Clube do Pará, tiny, 4875 was stronger.
4904.984 BRA ? tentat Relogio, much tiny signal.
4939.995 new COL
4939.971 likely PRU
4949.734 UNID, likely Mulenvos AGL ?
5085even kHz WTWW proper signal of 12.6 kHz broadband nice music, S=9+25dB
at 01.08 UT on Sept 12 in NJ US state.
5130 nothing on air at WBCQ here in 60 meterband.
(wb df5sx, wwdxc BC-DX TopNews Sept 12)
73 wb
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#119808): https://groups.io/g/WOR/message/119808
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/76793232/527724
Group Owner: WOR+owner@groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/WOR/leave/8345744/173412514/xyzzy [trombonchicago76@yahoo.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
_
Hard-Core-DX mailing list
Hard-Core-DX@hard-core-dx.com
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/hard-core-dx
http://www.hard-core-dx.com/
http://www.hard-core-dx.com/article.php?story=20200912141503729