From jesis@xs4all.nl Tue Feb 24 04:39:17 1998
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 19:46:36 +0100 (MET)
From: Josephine Bosma
Reply-To: XCHANGE@re-lab.net
To: XCHANGE@re-lab.net
Subject: (Xchange) Rr:radio conversation
hi all
Someone forwarded my posting to Tetsuo Kogawa,
here is an edit of our email exchange that followed.
Tetsuo will join us on this list soon
and we can have our exchange a bit more publically
so others can join the talk/discussion/threads..
++
J
*
Josephine:
>Tetsuo Kogawa got the excellent idea to build chains of
these small transmitters, to still be able to broadcast
in the entire city. These transmitters do not reach further
then about 100 meters, so global domination with a single
mini fm station in large areas is rather difficult.<
Tetsuo:
This situation was about the first stage of Mini FM in the early 80s
in Japan. At that time, we had not so much knowledge on transmitter
technology and, at the same time, the authority was nervous about
our 'unexpected' trick (micro politics). As late as 1986, we started
to use more powerful (but it is only one watt) transmitter that
could cover at least 1-2 mile radius.
The point, however, is not the stronger power of transmitter. As
long as it is alternative (later + native), it must be different
from usual broadcasting. Forgetting 'broad'-casting, we insisted
'narrow'-casting.
Josephine:
you know that narrow casting is a term that is also used for
webcasting? (because the broadcasts on the net can only follow
the path of the net, and not fill the entire ether)
Tetsuo:
In my understanding, the more creative or positive function of the
Web is to be not 'casting' but . Unfortunately, the
Internet is used as a new type of casting, though.
Josephine:
You are so right about the 'casting' issue. One problem when
discussing these matters is terms and definitions though.
I tried to find new/other words for audio broadcasts on the net
that I like, but it was too hard. Maybe terms will just emerge somehow.
The weaving is a nice metaphor indeed for sound, even more so then
for other kinds of information/data, sound being invisible.
Also: a problem with some terms is the limited expectations people
have. For instance the word -radio-. Radio is so much more then
broadcasting, and even broadcasting could be so much more varied
then what most broadcasters do with it. So for what audio/radio/sound
on the net is concerned, I still often like to use the word net.radio,
but nowadays I use 'audio art on the net' or net.audio, all kinds of
combinations that all never really fit.
Tetsuo:
I agree. I now understand what you have in mind over our difference
of terms.
I think that the term of 'radio" becomes more and more diverse than
ever. Since the term of "radio art" became popular after the early
1990s (the first radio art festival was held in Dublin). Now I like
to use "radio" even to video transmission. Basically, my idea and
concepts are based on the radio art tradition that is complicated
but you can presuppose.
Even if one calls "broadcast" or "narrowcast", no difference is that
both pro-pose/pre-sent (anticipate) listner's need. That's why you
call 'casting'. The listener is cast by the caster. The Web can
overcome this modernist structure.
Josephine:
The active participant should be possible of course, but many will
still prefer to simply enjoy. I suppose you don't mean everybody is
a radiofreak/artist? I don't mean to be rude. I don't know you so I
have no idea where your remark is coming from, what is the basic thought
behind it. One thing that has always been very attractive about radio
for me is the relative easy access to the technology: its cheapness,
its simplicity (I cannot build a transmitter btw, I am not a technician
at all) and these two things combined with the relative large impact
radio can have. Where I started to make radio (you might have heard of
Radio Patapoe? You know Toshiya Ueno?) the emphasis was always so much
more on the content then on the so called perfection of technological
skill that it was addictive and extremely stimulating. Noise, mistakes
and chaos were actually promoted as part of the mythical greatness of
Patapoe. This way of thinking will never leave me anymore.
Come to think of it, I had also a period in which I did not care at all
if anybody listened. I liked very much the randomness, the possibility
of somebody accidentally bumping into my voice/sound on the dial. In
a car, anywhere.
Tetsuo:
By talking "The listener is cast by the caster. The Web can overcome
this modernist structure", I tried to say the basic change of the
function. Even if it is not sufficient nor radical, the net radio
using RealAudio has been changing the attitude of the listener. This
never happened even in micro radio. (We--the member of Radio Run in
Tokyo had a lot of experiments:a program for only one listener and,
as you mentioned, a program for no listener). However, in these,
listener is listener and caster is caster. The difference always
exits. That's the point. The net radio has a possibility that you
never pro-gram/anticipate/pre-sent something to send and can
overcome the difference between so-called 'sender' and 'receiver'.
For instance, I have just installed the system that I can transmit
at any place where the telephone is available. I will bring my
laptop computer that is installed RealEncoder5.0---unfortunately
only for Windows95 right now---and connect it to my webpage by it.
This can be possible for those who can access to the Internet. I
want to show you how it is like. Maybe I will have a party---radio
party--soon using this system. In the party, I plan to use not only
the net but also various kind of media---face-to-face relationships
to telephone, videophone, and free radio transmission.
I know Geert Lovink. He sent me a bunch of the tape long time ago. I
guess that your mail might be forwarded by Geert. Toshiya was one of
my students. I know he is now an addict of Amsterdam.
Josephine:
The net is bringing many interesting new features to radio, but
some things are actually quite limiting, and the worst thing is
this extended broadcasting on the net, with special agents that
prepare you a preset and fixed menu of soundstreams they are programmed
to find for you. How much more narrow can consumerism get?
Tetsuo:
I absolutely agree with you. That's stupid usage of the net for
radio. They should be shut out for more bandwidth.
Josephine:
Are you connected to a space in Tokyo?
Tetsuo:
In terms of airwave radio, I am not interested in "narrowcasting"
type micro radio any more. You can use a lot of narrowcasting
including web radio. Even in Japan where the broadcasting policy is
very retrograde, you can now find "community FM", satellite
broadcasting, cable TV and so on. Also, I am not interested in radio
as a means of transmitting message.
I gradually learned that the appropriate size of
the power is one watt--One watt of truth. So, I started to design a
transmitter of one watt that consists of lesser and popular parts
and higher quality.
You will find the uptodate diagram in my webpage:
http://anarchy.k2.tku.ac.jp/anarchy98/95_97/97-03-19/anarchy/radio/
(or go to---> http://anarchy.k2.tku.ac.jp and then to--->"Like Old
Times" ----> March 19, 1997 -----> Micro Radio)
Josephine:
I hope I do not offend you with this remark,
but it sounds more like a philosophical statement
then appropriate tactical media thinking ...
isn't the question rather: how to use a specific medium
for specific environments and situations?
I don't think community radio ever replaces free radio, there are always
limitations when one is legal. People suddenly become more protective
about equipment, one has to pay for each piece of music (here anyway)..
Tetsuo:
Absolutely. That's why another type of radio. I never have positive
expectation to community radio.
Josephine:
I like what you say though, please do not misunderstand me,
I like it from a poetic point of view very much
Tetsuo:
"One watt of truth" derives from Napoleon Williams (the founder of
Black Liberation Radio, Ill, USA) who used a 1 watt of FM
transmitter but was accused by the FCC. His accusation stimulated
the micro radio movement in the US in the 90s. This would never
happen if the power is 0.1 or 10 watts.
The reason why I said one watt is appropriate is very simple. The
coverage is proper for a community that you can walk and the
technique to build up is cheap and easy. In my workshop, I build a
set of it within an hour. In my workshop, I build a transmitter, show
something of radio art and invite audience to the process: radio
party.
Josephine:
I see... you like the communal idea of this. I can walk further
then that though. Even with my legs that hardly ever walk and always
cycle.. :) What happens when you connect to the net and you cannot
possibly walk the reach of your audio? How do you resituate this
feeling you get with making radio for the neighbourhood you live
in to this new situation? I am curious, and you probably have a
wonderful reply...
Tetsuo:
I think this is very important point to Japanese cities. More
aggressively than in Europe, the community culture and band-ness
(funny expression?) here have been destroyed. That's why we have few
community radio stations in Japan. But this situation might be good
for the Webradio because the "listener" are separated and have no
physical/geographical "community" anymore. The web may rejoin them
on the cyberspace at least for the time that the webradio works.
The reason why I insist upon the lesser power of transmitter
has something to do with the electromagnetic pollution. Even one
watt of FM airwave might disturb our health, but I think one watt is
a compromise. Think of the power of professional broadcasting: over
100KW and even 500KW.
Josephine:
I know this is a problem, and not many people bother with this.
I even know a guy who was stupid enough to have a commercial pirate
put a very strong transmitter right above his bedroom, in a high
squatted building. A technician here in Amsterdam once told me,
that after he and his mates had installed a transmitter, they
would not come near it again. I don't know however, whether stories
about polution on further distance are not exagerated...
Julius (on the amsterdam freeradio team list):
I don't agree with that. I know from some (dutch) research on this matter
that up to about 500 Watts (not KILO-watts) the opposite is the case;
The health-effects on humans are actually GOOD from these
reasonably low levels of FM airwaves! (I'll look up the URL for you)
And indeed, from my own experiences I have to say that
if FM airwaves would disturb our health, I would be in a hospital now,
while in actuality, the opposite is the case: I feel quite good.
Tetsuo:
In my article, I also emphasize that smaller transmission creates an
interesting face-to-face communication.
Josephine:
well, I will have to read it again (I read it last during n5m)
Isn't it maybe more appropriate to have an unmediated conversation
in such a situation though? :)
Tetsuo:
When I was invited to Vancouver last year, I tried to show an idea
of Natural Radio. This is an appropriation of surveillance system. I
installed four FM transmitters at every corner of the building where
my workshop/performance was held. The performance was that I showed
making one of the transmitter, explained my idea showing my webpage
on the large screen, installed the transmitters and then let the
audience listen the sound. Nobody programmed and they listened
"natural" sounds of birds, cars, voice of gathering people in the
lobby.....
Josephine:
this is an absolutely beautiful idea. I really love it.
Tetsuo:
Right now, I am preparing Web radio using RealAudio/Video system. It
will start next week. The linkage of Mini FM and the Web radio
should create more polymorphous relationships. That's why I am
interested in the Internet.
My plan using the Internet is, at the present stage, to make a sound
version of Webcam. You access to my Web page and listen to various
live sounds. I link the RealSystem and Mini FM (natural) radio
transmitters because the present condition of streaming technology
does not like heavy streaming. So, I will use one input of
RealSystem but the input has various outputs from plural Mini FM
transmitters that have no limitation of the number (the using
frequency is limited, of course).
Josephine:
wooow, an even better idea!!!!! I love it!!
I don't understand what you say about the present condition not
liking heavy streaming, can you explain this more? I don't understand
how you want to solve this problem connecting the 'Realsystem' to
mini fm...
What is the input, and what is the output? The net is the input,
or the many different mini fm transmitters? Does it mean one can listen
to any of the mini's which in their turn are fed with the local sounds
of where they are ?
Tetsuo:
I wrote that "the present condition of streaming technology
does not like heavy streaming". This means that although the
RealSystem of audio and video is wonderful in the function, but on
the actual lever it works very poor if a lot of users access to the
webpage that has the RealSystem. Because the bandwidth is limited.
the alternative (again, I have to emphasize: this is not necessarily
a compromise with the technological limitation but a strategic use
of the limitation) is to 'weave' other media such as airwave radio,
telephone and so on. My present illustration of "natural radio" is
such that I install 5 to 8 of 1 watt transmitters mainly outside of
the house; they bring various sounds/voice and even music to the
place where the computer to access to the net is available. The
RealEncoder (that has a function of "live broadcasting"---don't mind
the TERM) can send some of the sound source (here you can have
various radio art experiments) to it through the server.
*
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(a) (c) (o) (u) (s) (t) (i) (c) ( ) (s) (p) (a) (c) (e)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
information&comunication channel | for net.broadcasters
http://xchange.re-lab.net (Xchange) net.audio network
xchange search/webarchive: http://xchange.re-lab.net/a/
<__b.a.c.k.______