• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Weather Radio

You know, my weather radio can pick up FIVE different weather radio stations? I've been able to get the following:

KHA53 Rochester
WNG539 Spencerport
WXL31 Syracuse
KEB98 Buffalo
WXN55 Mt. Washington/Bath
 
Here in Geneva, I get both Rochester and Syracuse. Reception of Rochester is very poor at my location, but Syracuse, on the other hand, comes in like a local. When atmospheric conditions are right, I've been able to get the stations in Ithaca and Bath as well.

The only complaint I have about NOAA Weather Radio is their use of synthesized voices instead of real people. It almost doesn't make sense, really. After all, a human being has to enter in the data for the synthesizer to transmit over the air, so, why not have that same person actually read that same data. I will say this, though. It is kind of funny when the synth voices butcher a town name, or when someone types a word wrong and it is misread by the synthesizer.
 
Does Clear Channel run NOAA radio services? ;-) Back in the day there was a meteorologist-announcer who sounded just like Uncle Oskie's oldest brother, Bronislaw.
 
JakeLongwell said:
The only complaint I have about NOAA Weather Radio is their use of synthesized voices instead of real people. It almost doesn't make sense, really. After all, a human being has to enter in the data for the synthesizer to transmit over the air, so, why not have that same person actually read that same data. I will say this, though. It is kind of funny when the synth voices butcher a town name, or when someone types a word wrong and it is misread by the synthesizer.

"Perfect Paul" was NOAA's synthesized voice, and after negative feedback a female replacement was brought in and dubbed "Wendy Weather"
 
Does anyone remember when NOAA weather radio used real people? I remember when each city had it’s own NOAA office, and everything was done by people. Then, in 1994, they closed down many of the offices, and in 2000, they replaced people with computers.

What’s even more sad is that Canada did this before we did. In Canada, everything is done by a human sounding computer, and is run from Ottawa. It’s been that way since at least 1995. And, yes, their computer sounds really human. I know there are no Canadian weather streams online available, but next time you go to Canada, take a weather radio with you; you’ll die of wonder, shock, and amazement!

Just some thoughts from someone who used to love to listen to weather radio.

--The Radio Kid
(Oswego, NY.)
My email: [email protected].
 
What software? It's just a loop of "it's damn cold and snowing" over and over, that's all you need to predict Canandian weather! (grins)

Just like any other form of radio. It's called doing it on the cheap

Actually in this case, it's more like Congress keeps slashing the budget of the NWS. But yes, it is much more "efficient" to do it this way.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom