The case for using one's own receiver and antenna than their software-defined equivalents

The pre-internet era gave radio listeners no choice but to consume their chosen media using conventional equipment. If you weren't fortunate enough to be able to afford a Yaesu, JRC(Japan Radio Company), Kenwood, or ICOM receiver then drawing in signals using an analogue or a more basic digital radio could be a frustrating and often fruitless exercise. 

Deficiencies in hardware could to some extent be overcome using an Antenna Tuning Unit(ATU) and a suitably sized accompanying long wire, but the aforementioned behemoths of their time very much represented the potential for an optimal listening experience that could not in reality be replicated using what would be regarded as inferior equipment.

The most sophisticated receiver that was ever at my disposal was the Sangean ATS-803A, whose digital display and enhanced capabilities were a considerable but relative upgrade to previous analogue National Panasonic and Venturer 2959 radios on which my interest in free radio were honed. 

As I drifted away from free radio just after the turn of the millennium, any occasional thoughts of checking the bands were quickly staunched due to one vital but insurmountable problem: I didn't by this time own a receiver. Whilst that could have been quickly rectified my interest in the alternative airwaves was not sufficient to justify buying an expensive piece of kit.

Fast forward to approximately 2013, when the subject of free radio once more returned to mind. Having ascertained that there were several internet sites dedicated to logging the latest broadcasts by shortwave pirates, I at least knew that there was still a scene of sorts, if albeit by now a shadow of its considerable former 1990s self. It was though at this point I first became aware of Software-defined radio(SDR), which in effect allows listeners based anywhere in the world the opportunity to hear broadcasts as they would be in the location of the SDR, for example in Northern Ireland, Iceland, and Bavaria, to name just three of the most popular remote receivers in use today. 

This opened a whole new world to me. Gone it seemed was the need for one's own conventional listening station, with only a laptop or even a smartphone being necessary to access the many SDR's via the Kiwi platform. If a listener lived too far away from Europe to be able to hear its free radio stations he/she could simply tune into one of the more sensitive SDR's based on the continent, in the UK, or situated around the island of Ireland to listen how the locals do. Should long skip be preventing listeners and even operators from hearing stations broadcasting from within their own countries, all it takes is to find a suitably located SDR where the conditions are perfect, or at least far better for listening at specific times of the day on certain bands frequented by hobby pirates.

It sounds too good to be true, and arguably is. Firstly, it must be stated that SDR's are not in existence just to facilitate hearing free radio stations, but can be used to receive almost anything on the radio spectrum. They have though become particularly en vogue with many free radio listeners, for example those with limited space, who simply cannot afford a receiver, or choose not to own one. SDR listening can certainly negate problems of local interference and poor atmospheric conditions, but whilst it represents a technological advancement and a different slant to radio listening and band scans, there is nevertheless something rather dissatisfying about scouting for stations in this way.

Should a listener for example view a free radio chat forum whose reason for being is generally to tip off users in real time on what is currently being heard around Europe on shortwave, all it takes to locate a station that is broadcasting at that particular time is to tune an SDR to the frequency in question. It is that simple. No need to search the bands, tune and/or refine an antenna that might for example be more suitable to 48 metres than 3 MHz, or battle through local conditions and electrical interference. When a low power European station receives a report from someone for example in Indonesia they would understandable be ecstatic, until it is pointed out that the the listener was hearing the station via an SDR located on the Irish coast. 

Being able to 'point-and-shoot' one's way around the broadcasting spectrum is in many ways the radio equivalent of dopamine, where an instant fix without the effort and frustrations can be just a few clicks away. It is this shortcut in a modern world of apps, smart technology, and wanting everything yesterday that has taken the edge off radio listening, and blurred the risk/reward of persevering through difficult listening conditions to hear an aural nugget of gold. Hearing Radio New Zealand International in the early 1990s using a basic receiver, its built-in antenna, and a long wire barely worthy of the name is one personal example of this that I can bring to the table.

Listening to any genre of radio in its purest form is now seen as 'old school', a term couched in both reminiscence of times gone by and a slightly pejorative, twee definition that suggests an inability or a lack of desire to 'move with the times'. It can though also suggest that there was a preference to how things were done 'back in the day' compared to the prevailing zeitgeist. To think that the conventional way in which to listen to radio broadcasts could now be considered passé is as ridiculous as it is inevitable.

I always used to think that people who appended their names on the chat fora with "own receiver and antenna" as opposed to using SDR's were rather pompous, but now I completely get the point they were/are trying to make. Whilst running the risk of being portrayed as Luddites it is these individuals who call it right: it just isn't radio as we know it if heard using any other means. Yes, there is a significant chance that some free radio stations will never be heard or whose signals may be too weak to be listenable without using a carefully chosen SDR, but the satisfaction of unearthing a diamond in the rough is far more pleasing than being presented with a polished gem on a plate. 

Should I decide to return to any shortwave listening in the future it will be time for this 40-something to return to class in the old school, and go back to how it used to be done. Admittedly it would this time involve a pukka communications receiver and an appropriately designed antenna, but if for example I hear the Xenon Transmitting Company(XTC) with a signal of S7 instead of a potentially stronger one via an SDR, there will still be something far more pleasing about having drawn that broadcast in myself than acquiescing to modern but faceless technology that takes just another shortcut in our 'ask Alexa' modern age.

Free/pirate radio: what are its moral realities?

The recent raid of free radio stalwart Radio Merlin International has led me to ponder the illegality of pirate broadcasting, and who shares the burden of responsibility for its perpetuation. 

Through a stop-start relationship with shortwave free radio now into its fourth decade, I do not recall many instances of UK-based stations being apprehended by the former DTI(Department of Trade and Industry) nor Ofcom(Office for Communications) - the latter who now assume responsibilities for its very own slant on track and trace. Indeed, of the perhaps 70-80 UK stations I have heard on shortwave since 1990, it is only those whose omnipresence on the bands - Radio Galaxy that morphed into today's Merlin and UK Radio International - and the Bogusman who was caught using an international distress frequency that I can recall being apprehended by the powers that be. There will though of course have been others.

This would suggest, but is in no way certain, that a blind eye(deaf ear?) is turned to shortwave hobby broadcasters unless they stray onto frequencies that are out of bounds, or are perhaps persistent 'offenders' who have been given a certain if albeit tacit leeway by the authorities but in the end are too conspicuous by their own ubiquity. This does not though account for how free radio operators' initial come to the attention of officialdom, whether that be through the authorities doing their own band scans or reports of local interference to telecommunications equipment. There are also potential issues with aesthetic sensibilities relating to broadcasting antennas that are not necessarily subtle in their design and size. 

When I younger, much younger, it briefly crossed my mind that those who wrote in to free radio operators could also be on the receiving end of visits from the authorities should letters(yes, it is that long ago) be confiscated during theoretical raids. I hadn't thought along similar lines until the recent raid of Merlin, but rather than being concerned about the senders of emails being caught up in proceedings, it is the moral argument of whether or not listeners, supposedly the lifeblood of any radio station, are perpetuating the 'crime' as much as the operator himself. 

Since the dawn of humanity there has always been a tendency to only adhere to the laws of the land that suit us, with an attitude that if we do not agree with something then it is acceptable to overlook its legal demands. The argument remains that UK-based free radio on shortwave was to some degree been brought about by the BBC's hegemonic presence through its World Service output and the corporation's insistence on it remaining that way, but I have often wondered if getting a kick out of illegal broadcasting, or doing anything unlawful, would lose its appeal if all of a sudden licenses were handed out for example to those who broadcast on the 48 metre band. Is it therefore the illicit act itself and being able to circumvent the authorities that appeals, or the ability to get on the air through one's own technical mastery? I have no doubt that simply broadcasting the music which appeals to the operator is another motivation, especially if is unlikely to be heard elsewhere. If that is the reason why do some individuals set up free radio stations; what is the difference between listening to 'your music' in the comfort of your own home than transmitting it to the world? There will be an element of broadcasters who like the interaction with listeners, but I often felt that those who contacted some stations in the past were regarded as the inevitable but unwanted consequences of operating a free radio station.

What motivates listeners of free radio, pirate stations? Is it having a tenuous connection to and involvement with an illegal activity that will likely never rebound upon them? I feel my initial interest was piqued, 31 years ago this weekend, by hearing something different, but as a 14-year old I was never going to consider the reality behind what I was hearing. If I enjoyed it, how surely could any offence have been committed? Laws of the land are instituted to protect the population from each other and themselves, but by listening to pirate broadcasts I was hardly harming myself. It though can be argued that overlooking any illegal activity engenders a negative relationship with the statutes, potentially priming individuals who might in the future accept misdeeds that are regarded by society as comparatively far more serious.

How therefore one must view free radio and any interaction with its protagonists is very much an individual choice. After setting up a blog to chronicle 1990s UK-based free radio and eulogising about many of its component parts I run the risk of being labelled a hypocrite by writing this post, but instead of attempting to posit a 'do as I say not as I do' message this article is simply being put 'out there' to question our relationship with the law, and more importantly our attitudes towards it. Is it wrong to just listen to free radio without ever contacting its operators? If it sounds good and releases endorphins, how does that make it wrong? We of course can use the same tropes for almost any act, from the innocent to the most heinous, but whilst almost all illegality would be regarded as far worse than pirate broadcasting, the only way to separate a law from being a law is through the level of punishment its breaking commands. Laws as such are not tiered by their existence and severity by being included within the statute books, but are catalogued together for the purposes of being theoretically enactable legislation. 

I for one am now reviewing my attitude to free radio. This isn't with the intention of being the broadcasting equivalent of nobody being more critical of smoking than an ex-smoker, but to perhaps view the scene in a more balanced way. I am though reminded that my attitude is drifting towards how my parents' reacted to the significant interest I showed in free radio during my early teenage years.

Are we as listeners therefore guilty by association? There is no crime in listening to free radio and I am not ashamed to say that in the past it gave me a great deal of pleasure, but the encouragement and the subsequent perpetuation of free radio is arguably morally ambiguous, especially for those who claim to lead a spotless life.