Shortwave Center, October 1996
A big thank you to Tom Harrington for allowing NASWA to reprint the below article which first appeared in Shortwave Radio Listening with the Experts by Gerry Dexter
On to the Top
by Don Jensen
How can I become a top-flight SWBC DXer? Seldom is this question actually voiced, but it sums up the intent of a lot of specific questions actully asked by listeners who have progressed beyond the unabashed beginner stage. And, it is a good lead-off question for this chapter.
Unfortunately, there is no magical answer, no clearcut formula for success. But one word that will be cropping up again and again is experience. Hearing the hard-to-hear stations is the sum and substance of serious Dx’ing on the shortwave bands. And, though it may seem a flippant answer, experienced DXers hear the hard-to-hear stations because they’re experienced!
Contrary to popular belief, top-quality equipment isn’t the solution. Yes, a good receiver will be a big help. It will make serious DXing easier. But the important word here is “easier.” An experienced DXer with a mediocre receiver will still manage, over the long haul, to hear most of the real DX. And, a novice with a kilobuck receiver will still be asking how he can log those rare stations. There is no one so disappointed as the guy who, expecting miracles, scrapes up enough dough to buy a so-called “pro” receiver, only to find he still isn’t bagging all those goodies!
Experience-there’s that word again-is the answer! But that does not mean just “time served” in the hobby. Time is a factor, naturally, since learning takes time. But the effort to learn is critical. Experience is just the practical application of knowledge.
A top-flight DXer? Well, when does a DXer “arrive?” If arriving means reaching a pinnacle of proficiency, the answer is “Never!” No one can ever know all there conceivably is to know about the subject, and even the most experienced DXers can never stop trying to learn more. Individual definitions may vary, of course, but for our purposes, let’s assume that when a DXer is generally regarded by other DXers as being among the “top 10 percent,” he’s arrived. In other words, you’re a top DXer when others consider you one.
Or, to put it another way, if you still have to ask, you aren’t. There’s no magic entry point to the “charmed circle,” no countries heard or verified total that proclaims it to the world. It is a matter of your reputation in DXing clubs as a solid, reliable, accurate, experienced listener.
It’s purely a personal opinion, of course, but it seems to me that a relative beginner in the hobby, who goes all out to learn what serious DXing is about, could reach that vague status position in a minimum of five years. Some, of course, will take longer, and some will never reach it at all.
Spoon-feeding information is out. You’ve got to work very hard to learn as much as you can. Among other things, this means a great deal of reading to build a mental storehouse of knowledge which you need to be a real DXer. When you come across a semitechnical or technical article in a DX club bulletin or magazine, do you pass it by unread or skip over it quickly because it’s too hard to understand? Or, do you make a serious effort to master the subject and then use it as a take-off point for further study?
The guy who complains to editors that an article is too tough and too tedious, that he doesn’t understand it, and who plaintively cries, “Why can’t we have more features for the beginner?” is the one who will only slowly, or perhaps never, progress much beyond the beginner stage!
Hard work? Definitely yes! A slow process? Probably! “But, DXing is only a hobby, a pleasurable pastime,” you say. Yes, and a casual approach to shortwave listening is perfectly acceptable if that’s your thing. But excelling, even at a hobby, can be pleasurable.
Many SWLers simply don’t care to make their hobby more than just the casual listening to some interesting overseas programs. I don’t knock that approach at all. But if you’ve ever asked yourself the opening question: “How can I become a top-flight SWBC DXer?” you’ve already indicated your interest is more in the direction of DXing than SWL’ing. And, if it is serious DXer you want to be, you’ve got to work at it!
Concentration
Hearing rare DX stations depends on “conditions.” That goes without saying. But what a DXer comes up with when “conditions” are right depends, to a large extent, on the storehouse of information and know-how that he has accumulated and can apply to the given situation. A good place to start is by looking at the bands themselves. Most of the rare DX will be found in the shortwave bands below about 7 MHZ, the 41-, 49-, 60-, 90-, and 120 meter bands, plus the out-of-band stations. To start with, emphasize 60 meters-the best single DX band.
Concentration! Concentrate your maximum listening efforts on 60 meters. Later, you can expand your attention, in a similar way, to the other DX bands. Hours! Spend dozens of hours, hundreds if you can, learning what there is to be heard on “60″ under normal conditions and under unusual band conditions. Get to know that span of frequencies like the back of your hand. In order to get the rare stations, you have to be able to quickly sort out the usual from the unusual signals. When extra good conditions occur, you can’t waste time on relogs of previously heard stations when you can be coming up with new catches.
Can you, at any particular time of day, cruise 60 meters and, with a fairly high degree of certainty, tentatively identify, with 15 seconds, each of the stronger signals on the band. If you can’t, you’re operating under a real handicap!
On a good winter afternoon opening to Africa, can you tick’em off as you tune down the line? Lome, Togo on 5047…, Garoua, Cameroon on 5010…, Abidjan, Ivory Coast on 4940…, Chad on 4904….If you can do this, the unusual signal should stand out and catch your attention, and you can spend your time logging it.
Concentration! Concentrate on learning as much as you can about shortwave propagation, if not from a “book larnin’” theoretical approach, then from a practical “What can I hear?” approach. Learn to recognize and take advantage of reception patterns.
Most beginners know you can’t expect low SW frequency reception at high noon local time. It is assumed you know why this is the case. There is no black magic in DXing. Propagation of DX signals depends on natural phenomena. The more you know about how and why distant shortwave signals reach you, the better you will be able to determine when to tune. There is plenty of material available for study, if you only take the time and effort to seek it out.
For too long, DXers have neglected this field of study. In recent years, however, some have attempted a more systematic study of the propagation of weak, low-frequency, DX signals on the shortwave broadcast bands. But theories aside, careful observation and record keeping should give you a good working knowledge of practical propagation.
Do you know, for example, the time of day, and the time of year when your chances of hearing a rare stations are optimum? Do you know when the great circle path between you receiving location and the target DX stations? Do you know, at any particular time of year, when paths of darkness exist for these stations? Do you know when you can normally expect the 60-meter Latins to fade out and the Asians to fade in in the morning?
Do you know that your best chance to hear the home service All India Radio outlets may be from around mid-December to mid-January, but that Indonesian reception has a much broader seasonal “window”, and may, in fact, peak in the fall and again in the early spring? Do you know that rare quiet nights in mid-summer can bring in some excellent African reception on 60 meters? Keep records of the excellent openings from various parts of the world. Look for patterns that are daily, seasonally, or geographically.
Geographic patterns can be broad or very selective. When you note the Peruvian coming in with exceptional strength, don’t waste time with random tuning. Go after the specific unheard Peruvians you most want. Unusually powerful station signals coming from Togo? Then hunt for the other West Africans that you need!
Concentration! Concentrate on certain stations. One reason that experienced listeners manage to hear the really rare ones is, because having logged so many stations, they can concentrate efforts on a relatively few wanted targets. The less experienced, needing more stations, often take a hit-or-miss scattergun approach.
For example, when a good bank opening occurs to Indonesia, the less experienced DXer might spend his time taking a log on a Radio Republik Indonesia station, such as RRI Ujung Pandang on 4753 khz. He “needs” it and is pleased to receive a new one. But the veteren, having logged and verified U.P. already, concentrates on trying for the rarer Indonesians-say the governmental agricultural information station, Radio Khusus Informasi Pertanian in Surabaya, on 4697 khz. Ujung Pandang may be a good catch-a new logging for you. But wouldn’t you be happier receiving RKIP? It takes self discipline to pass up a sure catch for a chancier one, but the odds are that you will next hear RRI Ujung Pandang-and get a reportable logging-far sooner than you will get another crack at RKIP!
The choice-and, naturally, you won’t always opt for the chance of hearing an ultrarare station over the sure bet logging-is tough for the less experienced listener. It means gambling on the possibility of a rare one and, for that day at least, passing by a medium-hard station already at hand. The veteren Dx’er, who already has QSL’ed the easier station, doesn’t have to think twice before chasing the really rare outfits when top notch openings occur. A word of caution here! Don’t let the higher stakes-temporarily giving up a sure catch for a gamble-color your judgement. Apply the same identification standards you always do. The weak muddle down in the mud may be RKIP…, or it may not. Your gamble may not pay off. But if it does….
The decision as to when to play it safe and take the needed logging at hand, and when to gamble on the possible really rare logging, is easier if you have a “want” list.
Rare is the experienced DXer who doesn’t have his own list of most-wanted stations. Check on what the others are hearing, particularly the DXers you regard as “pros.” Draw up a list of about ten stations that you really want to log. In any situation where you’re faced with the decision to play it safe or gamble on the rare catch, let your “want” list establish the priority. Concentrate on those stations when conditions to a certain area of the world are most favorable. If you have no luck, then go after the secondary targets. When you knock a station off, replace it on the list with one you badly want to hear.
Compile a “book” on each station on your want list. Minimum information, of course, will be the frequency and the time when the station is being received in your area. Comb DX bulletins and columns for more tips-schedules, language used, etc. Is there an especially favorable time “window?” Perhaps a normally strong utility station, which is on the same frequency, is off the air on Sundays. Can your target be heard only on the occasions after a powerful nearby station signs off? What type of programming would you expect to find? Country and western music? Outdated U.S. pop music? A French newscast? In short, get all the background data you can. It’ll help if and when you actually do hear the station.
Finally, tune as often as possible for your most wanted stations. Trying for them seven times a week is better than six; six times a week is better than four. Make the odds work in your favor. Be listening when reception conditions are right.
Identification
You have followed the tips and you’ve tuned a shortwave signal. It’s not too strong and you’ve troubles with interference. It may, or may not, be a real DX station-the one that you’ve been long trying to hear. Now you’ve got to identify it.
This is where the going really gets tough. It’s the test that separates the men from the boys, the place where DXing experience really counts. But the first things to consider, strange as it may seem, is the the question of what constitutes an identification.
Identifying the station you are hearing should be an easy thing, theoretically. Either it’s yes or no, go or no go! In practicality, though; station identfication comes in varying degress of certainty. Although this certainty spectrum is a continuum ranging from total certainty about a station’s identity to complete uncertainty, for convenicence, I’ll divide it into four broad brackets.
Positive Identification
In this case, you’re 100% sure of the station’s identity because you heard the ID announced. However, there are other ways to positively identify a station, of course. For instance, if you hear a program called “Moscow Mailbag,” you don’t need to hear an actual station identification to know that you’re tuned to Radio Moscow.
Now all this is a snap when you’re dealing with strong-signal stations broadcasting in English. But our topic here is the rare DX, and identification of those outlets is harder because the signals are weaker, plagued with interference, and the programs usually are in languages other than English.
Tentative (or Probable) Identification
Here, you are not certain of the identity of the station you’ve tuned. No definite ID has been heard, or if heard, not fully understood because of language or interference difficulties.
But there are various clues in the programming that lead you to believe strongly-to a confidence level of, perhaps, 75%-that you are hearing “Station X.”
Possible Identification
In this case, again, no station identification announcement has been heard or understood. There are some factors which lead you to suspect that you’re hearing “Station X,” but there are other aspects (in what you can make out of the programming) that could apply to other stations known to be operating on or about the same frequency at that time. It’s a 50/50 proposition. Maybe it’s “Station X,” but there’s a fair chance it might be another station. Your degree of certainty in the identification is not high.
Unidentified
Here, you either have no idea, from the announcements and program details, as to the identity-or you have a very low degree of certainty as the identity.
Reception Reports
Broadly speaking, a reception report to a station is always justified when a station is positively ID’ed. A report is never justified with an unidentfied station-if you’re just guessing at its identity. In the midranges of ID certainty, even experienced DXers differ was to when they feel a reception report should be sent to a station. The following represents this author’s viewpoint.
If you strongly believe, based on a number of factors which I’ll cover later in this chapter, that you’ve heard “Station X”, and this is couped with some pretty convincing program details, a report may be sent to the station of the strength of the tentative identification. But that report should state that you didn’t positively identify the station, and should mention the reasons why you believe it to be the station reported. And, you should ask the report be verified only if the station authority is convinced that it is correct.
Rarely should you report a station on the strength of a possible identification. A report seeking verification is justified only when you’ve noted some especially unique factor that could apply only to the station in question.
Example: You think your station could possibly be “Station X”, and during the course of your logging, a transmitter problem knocks the station off the air at 1413 UTC. It is very likely that the station could determine the accuracy of your report on the strength of this unusual detail.
The sensible rule of thumb to follow in most cases is to report only those stations which you know or strongly believed you logged. The burden should be on you, the Dx’er. When in doubt, don’t rely on the station’s QSL to resolve those details.
Languages
If you haven’t progressed beyond the “If it isn’t in English, I can’t ID it” stage, you’ve got some basic homework ahead of you before you’re ready for serious DXing. Minimally, you should be able to distinguish among the major languages: Spanish, Portuguese, French, German, Arabic, etc. You should be able to recognize the tonal Asian languages, such as Chinese. Foreign languages should no longer sound all alike to you. You need not be a linguist-few experienced DXers are-but you should be able to pick out words. If you can’t, spend some months on the business of learning what languages sound like. There have been articles written on the subject in various magazines, hobby publications, and books. Seek them out and study. One of the best ways to learn is to study the Voice of America foreign language broadcasts.
Tentative Loggings
For those of you who are still with us, it should be obvious by now that a very experienced DXer, because of his accumulated knowledge, may well be able to positively identify a station that a less experienced DXer might not be able to identify at all, or, at best, will consider a tentative logging.
But even the best of the “pros” frequently come up short in the area of ID certainty. And, as I suggested earlier, one might choose to send a report to a station on the strength of a tentative ID. A tentative, you’ll recall, is when positive identification isn’t possible, but a whole series of factors surrounding the reception strongly lead the DXer to believe he is hearing a certain station.
But, a word of warning! Tentatives are tricky and dangerous. Most misidentified stations turn up as “clinkers” in the DX club bulletin lists result because the DXer lacked information or experience, was careless, or jumped to hasty conclusions due to wishful thinking. A DXer, anxious to hear a rare station, is easily tempted to coclude, “Well, others are hearing it, so it must be Station X that I’m hearing too.” Leap to such conclusions at your own peril.
The measure of a DXer is his reputation, especially among other experienced DXers. A reported rare station almost always prompts a frantic hunt by others. If you are wrong in your ID, it will be discovered quickly enough. Everyone makes mistakes now and again. It is embarrassing but not fatal to a reputation. Your error will be challenged in print, but you can be sure that it will be noted by the more experienced DXers. If you later find you erred, a correction to the bulletin editor helps mitigate the mistake. Pretending it didn’t happen is a mark against you.
To make a mistake occassionally is human. To be wrong regularly earns you the wrong kind of reputation. Before long, you’re marked as unreliable, which is the worst kind of all possible cures in DXing. Then, no matter what rare loggings you claim, no matter how high you climb on the scoreboard, a tinge of doubt will always be attached to your reports.
Tentative IDs, to return to the subject, are the result of piecing together a number of separate factors that, in composite, convince you of the station’s probable identity. The number of bits that “fit” can vary, but the more that do, the surer you can be. Too few “fits” and all you’ve got is a “possible,” or perhaps even an “unidentified”. And, the experienced DXer has the edge since he has accumulated more know-how and background information to test for “fits.”
The factors? Frequency, naturally. Time? Does your reception match the schedule? Propagation? Is reception possible, or likely, at the time you are hearing it? Does your reception match the language and programming known to be used? Can you, for one reason or another, eliminate from consideration other stations known to operate on the frequency at that time?
Other clues? You heard no country reference, but you did hear a Spanish-language commercial for Cerveza Carta Blanca. In which country or countries of Latin America is that brand of beer distributed? Can you identify the national anthem at the sign-off time?
What does the music tell you? Can you distinguish between Mexican and Brazilian music? Between that of Peru and that of the Dominican Republic? To put a finer point to it, can you tell the difference between the music of neighboring countries- Mexican and Guatemalan, or Ecuadorian or Peruvian? What is “hi-life” music? “Gamelan?” What is a “sitar” and what does it sound like?
There are dozens of clues in the programming you hear, factors that can help you to identify a station. There is no practical way that they can be taught, except by experience. But if you’re alert to the basic techniques, you can begin to file away in your mind those scraps of information that will help you in identifyig stations. Naturally, none of the clues alone is sufficent to justify even a tentative identification. Enough of them, however, may a strong enough case for a tentative ID. But, again, be careful!
Verification
The big international broadcasters of the world, those you first tuned in as a beginning shortwave listener, know more than a little about those who tune in. They know hobby listeners like to collect QSL cards. They want us to listen so they go out of their way to respond with the QSL’s we seek.
Rare DX station, by their very nature, don’t get many overseas reports. They usually aren’t trying to reach North American audiences. Their staff often don’t have the foggiest idea what a correspondent wants when he asks for a verification. These stations, in short, are much harder to verify.
It is assumed that you know the basic report-writing technique. In your letter to the station you’ve heard, you include the necessary bits; the frequency; the time, date, program, and reception details; and the request for a verification. When dealing with the rarer stations, it is more important to write in the language of the station, unless you have reason to believe that someone at the station knows English. If you include mint stamps of the country to which you’re writing only on rare occasions, plan to do some regularly when reporting to the lesser-heard stations. Don’t expect them to pay the postage for the reply you’re so anxious to receive.
It is important to get your report into the hands of someone who is know to have replied to others. Keep track of verie signers-the names of those persons who sign other DXers reports. Most DX club bulletins report that sort of data in their pages.
Often your first report won’t bring a response. Use periodic follow-ups, or new reports to nonrepliers. It can take a year, 5 years, or 10 years to get a verification from some rare stations. Persistance is necessary.
But beyond this, what? The serious, experienced DXer, who is interested in QSLs, develops additional reporting techniques to get verifications form the rare, really-hard-to-QSL stations. Not infrequently, DXers guard the secret methods they’ve developed jealously. These little extra techniques are, to a degree, perishable commodities. Their usefulness may decrease with usage, so, understandably, veteran DXers tend to keep quiet about their best approaches. Eventually, you, too, will develop your own series of reporting techniques that work for you.
In essence, though, what most of the techniques amount to is an attempt to bring special attention to your letter, strike a note that will interest the recipient, and move him to an action he might not otherwise take-that is, reply to your letter. Anyone familiar with the field of advertising will recognize in this the basic rules of promoting a product. It may come as a bit of a shock, but many of the same approaches used to peddle soap apply to reception report writing.
In advertising, it is A-I-M-A. Attention! Interest! Motivation! Action! Get the attention of someone at the station. Make your letter interesting. Motivate the reader to want to respond. And, finally, hope that he actually does write that verification letter or card.
But it isn’t all that coldblooded. You probably are genuinely interested in knowing more about the station, its operations and personnel, and the community in which it is located. Let that interest show in your report. Honesty doesn’t have to go out the window. To the contrary, candor is the most effective sales technique. It doesn’t mean you must come on like gangbusters with the “hard sell.” “Soft sell” is usually more effective that high pressure. But you still need a good product-the solid core of a good reception report. The more you know about your “market,” however, the better you’ll be able to tailor you approach to the situation.
These special reporting techniques you’ll have to develop yourself. Your own personality, style, and accumulated experience will guide you if you’re receptive to the basic idea. If you are rigid, if you insist on a basic master report format that you always follow, if you take the position, “If they don’t like the kind of reports I write, to Hell with ‘em,” and if you’re not willing to try, try again if your first report, or your first ten reports, fail to bring a response from the station, then you’ll miss a lot of fine QSLs.
I’d be remiss, at this point, if I didn’t note that some veteren DXers just aren’t gung-ho about QSLs. They maintain that a QSL isn’t always proof positive of a reception; that some stations confirm without actually checking reports for accuracy. They’re right, of course.
But, for me, the quest for verifications from the rare stations I hear is enjoyable. I feel that a QSL’ed report is better than a non-QSL’ed report. It forces us to be more careful in identifying a station as we try to garner enough programming details to justify a report to that station. Plus, there is a real thrill in receiving that rare reply form Lower West Bengalistan or whatever.
To sum things up, the key to successful DXing is the know-how and knowledge gained through experience and an effort to learn as much as you can about the hobby and the stations you tune in or want to tune.
If it has struck you that this article has been short on actual “how-to-do-it” tips and long on generalities, it is because there is no short course on DXing. That’s not the way it works. All any article can do is to point you in the right direction. If this has done that…and if you carry through…, then you are, truly, on your way to the top!