[sent again because of scrambled text]

> this is starting to get sickening.
sorry about that.

> if you want to make radio...than do it!
right.

> all this talk about making radio without actually doing it reminds me of a
> radio station with legal access to a transmiter...but is too afraid to
> turn the fucker on!!   just fucking do it.
putting some stream on the net is easy, ok, but one has to do it.
a little real life exchange might make the networks a bit richer.
it's not that difficult to do your own little 'internet-radio' and
that's what is fascinating with it. some people hate the idea of
self-publishing in the name of high-brew 'quality' as if big
publishing and pop culture would care about such categories.

> the idea was never really to make pretty broadcasts.  sometimes that comes
> as a side-effect, but is still relatively unimportant.  if you just want
> to  make "pieces" to store as a contained work of real audio on-demand, than
> fine.  If you think that is "where its at"...then your dead wrong.  sure
> it is a somewhat important aspect....but not the only one.
it's at least good that people think about possibilities, more then
tranfering one medium into another, web-zine, net.radio etc. that's ok.
but it's also important to have exchange about experiences, test out new
combinations and reflect and discuss the results of those practises.

> the idea of some sort of interconnected sculptural atmosphere of radio is
> what we all seem to be after and  dates back to the early 20th century,
> dude - before mcluhan and medium-is-the-mesage stuff .  as far as I know,
> the idea has never been realized, except in specific short-term events.
guess the media sculpture, the gesamtkunstwerk, is just one possible angle
to look at it.

> you can have your machines and your automated content served up on a
> platter like hitradio if you want.....but, first comes the connections and
> the overlapping of radio, net and whateverelse...then comes the atmosphere
> and hybrid/mutated forms.  the sculptural aspect of net.radio lies in the
> connections not in the content.
well, sure as long as you speak about as an art piece. i would call it
media architecture, andreas broeckmann calls it network topology. but that
the content is just a side effect of the medium is quite old school
determinism. this is where the 'hallo' syndrom comes from, establish a
channel and be happy, but what to do *with* it after a while? just connect
more and more complicated high-end tech? with the net there comes a serious
question of how to do content, how to get attention, and how to structure it.

> the idea is rather simple (although multifaceted)...if everyone is casting
> simultaniously (whether live or recorded or automated material) ...then
> why not just connect them all together and form this atmosphere you are
> talking about  ...and the world would be  a happier place....well maybe not,
> but the radio scheme would sure as hell  be a lot more interesting.
maybe someone here could report about the architecture of horizontal radio,
which was, as i remember, 'pre-realaudio'.

> this is nothing new... no single person of the net.radio theorists
> invented
> it.....but who the fuck is gonna take the first step.  it seems to me that
> everybodys concept and theory of radio/net.radio  is so fucking inflexable
> that noone can get their shit together and just   make   some    noise!!!!
you don't have to read it, but talking doesn't hurt, and if in the end some
new ideas come out, itwould't hurt either. have a look at projects like
www.mediacube.de or www.icf.de/RIS or www.vpro.nl to see different ways or
levels of archiving streaming content. the net is not only a real-time medium,
it is not like the telephone network and even there you have asynchronous
connections with answering machines. btw, i think that it is important to
have more dialogue between the more practical and more theoretical people,
both can profit from each other.

> Im ready to hear some PRACTICAL suggestions  boyz and girlz.
a practical suggestion is to mix realaudio streams remotely. with a mixer which
is controlable by midi. another rather weired practical suggestion is to get
some
net.radio people together to get a window on an AM frequency for a couple of
transmissions. a third one, of heath bunting, to connect a radio scanner to
a realaudio server, located you have a couple of good pirate radio stations on
air, like in london. that's maybe not practical enough for you. but all of these
things are, as i know, not realized yet. without having and exchanging ideas you
risk to keep doing the same old thing.

> if you arent willing to try and actuallize the idea (which implies some
> sort of collaboration)...then let it die or keep on reformulating it into
> infinity without ever doing anything.
hey, look at the links above and don't get too nervous. this list is called
x-change for a reason.



 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
(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/