Re: [HCDX]: WRTH-2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [HCDX]: WRTH-2000

WRTH 2000 is better than claimed

I received WRTH 2000 today.  After reading it country-by-country my
impression was that it is better than some people have claimed on
HCDX-list.  Those who criticize it have possibly never been editors of
books or journals.  Thus I agree with Bob Padula.
Of course, there are mistakes and shortcomings.  But try to guess what a
mass of information the editors have gone through?
The worst mistake is that domestic shortwave stations are not listed in
the frequency section.  However, the editor of WRTH has promised to keep a
comprehensive list available on the net.
For me the biggest disappointments were Australia and Germany.  X-band
aussies are still unlisted.  Germany has been very confusing since the
reunification.  I have serious troubles if I try to find a specific
station from this country.  Possibly the UK system could work better in
the case of germany?  Thailand remains partly as a mystery.  But
information provided in WRTH is better than nothing.  Those criticizing
WRTH should mention reliable radio sources.
I can see many improvements, especially in Eastern Europe and CIS.
Information in WRTH from these countries has became more accurate year
after year.  I can only wonder what kind of troubles the editors have had
when trying to find reliable sources.  Another improvement seems to be
A question to be solved in coming years is TV.  Now there is a section
called "National Television".  My idea is that this could be removed to
another book.  Possibly we sometimes return to WRH i.e. World Radio
Handbook as it was once called.


Jorma Mantyla

This is a message from Jorma Mantyla <jmantyla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
to hard-core-dx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx list. To unsubscribe the list, send
"unsubscribe hard-core-dx" in mail body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For more information, please check
or email Risto Kotalampi, risto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx