Here We Go Again Rain again!

Text Message Greetings

December 30th, 2006 at 04:00pm

And Hello yet again Glenn!

I'm with you on the text message greetings, I can't stand them, and I never send them, I think they are a waste of time and money.

I personally can't think of a worse way to welcome in the new year than to be pressing tiny buttons on a phone to send a cryptic text greeting. Actually, most text abbreviations drive me mad as well. I always write text messages in sentences and proper words.

As for your offer of being a Harbour side correspondent for your show tomorrow in the lead up to the new year…if I was in Sydney I would jump at the chance, but alas I'm a good 300 kilometres away, and I doubt I can see Sydney harbour very well from here!

Have a great afternoon Glenn…I can hear the thunder starting down here in Canberra!

Samuel Gordon-Stewart

Entry Filed under: Talkback Emails

Print This Post Print This Post


  • 1. John B1_B5  |  December 30th, 2006 at 4:08 pm

    Hey Glenn, could you please do another impersonation of the Queen ? I got a good laugh out of the first one.

  • 2. Samuel  |  December 30th, 2006 at 4:11 pm

    Yes that was good, it gave me a good laugh.

    How’s the storm down your way John? The weather radar shows the storm concentrated in the southern end and to the west of Canberra.

  • 3. John B1_B5  |  December 30th, 2006 at 4:36 pm

    The good news is that we’ve had about 2mm of rain so far in my area.
    Unfortunately we haven’t had as much rain as the weather bureau were predicting a couple of days ago.

  • 4. Samuel  |  December 30th, 2006 at 4:46 pm

    There is a nice bit of rain falling here at the moment…I haven’t noticed any hail yet.

  • 5. Samuel  |  December 30th, 2006 at 4:48 pm

    The rain is crashing into some windows at the moment…there better not be any hail!

  • 6. Samuel  |  December 30th, 2006 at 4:59 pm

    The lightning induced cracling on the radio has now turned into the “zing” half of the “crash-zing” noise that lightning often causes on AM radio.

  • 7. John B1_B5  |  December 30th, 2006 at 5:40 pm

    A major of disadvantage of AM in the Medium Frequency band unfortunately.

  • 8. Samuel  |  December 30th, 2006 at 6:20 pm

    Actually, now that you mention it, would AM work in the Short Wave, or even the VHF (Very High Frequency) band we generally associate with FM? If so, how would you rate the quality?

  • 9. John B1_B5  |  December 30th, 2006 at 7:09 pm

    Well, AM has always been the modulation of choice on short-wave transmitters (HF band), but once you get above 30Mhz into the VHF band, FM becomes the preferred modulation.
    Most VHF and UHF transmitters use FM.

    The exception to this is the TV picture. It’s actually AM (with one sideband almost reduced to zero). The TV sound signal is FM.
    If you watch TV and listen to an AM radio station during a thunderstorm, you’ll hear a lot of noise on the radio, but no interference on the TV picture, even though it’s AM.
    This is because AM is more prone to electrical interference at
    the lower frequencies.
    If you listen to a short-wave station at the same time, you’ll
    hardly notice any interference at all (compared to the station transmitting in the Medium Frequency band (500-1600 Kilohertz).

    As for quality, FM is ALWAYS better.

  • 10. Samuel  |  December 30th, 2006 at 7:53 pm

    As for quality, FM is ALWAYS better.

    Except for FM being “hard to tune in” and “virtually useless in a mobile car radio” of course! An the program quality on many is questionable (especially the commercial FM stations).

    But yes I get your point, on a stationary, properly tuned radio, FM sound quality is superior to that of AM.

  • 11. John B1_B5  |  December 30th, 2006 at 8:38 pm

    That’s true. FM stations require more critical tuning, especially when the output power of the FM transmitter is low.

    The only thing worse than trying to tune in a weak FM station is an SSB (Single Sideband) signal.
    SSB is AM with one sideband suppressed, and it’s a real pain
    adjusting the tuning so that you get a ‘natural’ voice.

    If I ever get myself a 27Mhz CB radio, I would choose a straight AM set over an SSB set anytime !

  • 12. Samuel  |  December 30th, 2006 at 9:27 pm

    By the way John, Glenn sent me an email a couple hours ago, so I replied and included your message requesting more queen impersonations.

    Apparently the emails weren’t working for a while at 2UE today.

    I have a couple “toy” 27Mhz “walkie talkies”…I don’t know whether they are AM or SSB though. I’ll see if I can find a recording of the sound from them.

    I also have a couple 40 channel UHF CB radios here, they will come in handy one day.

  • 13. John B1_B5  |  December 30th, 2006 at 10:05 pm

    Ok thanks. Hope to hear some more ‘Queen’ impersonations. haha.

    According to some radio expert called “Peter Parker” (you can find him on Google), there has been a huge drop off of people using 27 Mhz CB.
    Seems most of them have gone to UHF CB.
    UHF is better, because you can use the UHF repeater. Trouble is
    it’s so busy you’d never find a quiet channel !

  • 14. jam tart  |  December 30th, 2006 at 10:19 pm

    If you never send text messages then how do you write them in sentences and proper words?

  • 15. Samuel  |  December 30th, 2006 at 10:27 pm

    I’m with you on the text message greetings, I can’t stand them, and I never send them

    You’re right jam tart, that sentence is misleading. What I was trying to say is that I don’t send greetings via text message. I do send the occasional text message though, although only in situations where a phone call would be inappropriate, or I can’t get through to someone on the phone and don’t feel like leaving a message.


December 2006

Most Recent Posts


Blix Theme by Sebastian Schmieg and modified for Samuel's Blog by Samuel Gordon-Stewart.
Printing CSS with the help of Martin Pot's guide to Web Page Printability With CSS.
Icons by Kevin Potts.
Powered by WordPress.
Log in