On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:04:00 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

Interestingly the 'shortfall' I'm noticing with DAB (the CD-like 'thin',
'flat' and 'lifeless' presentation) is less pronounced on Classic FM which
can (I think - haven't made a serious comparison) actually sound better than
R3, listened to at some distance. (Remaind unlistenable 'close-up and
personal' though.....)

The parallel I see between DAB and CD is being reinforced on a daily basis
here atm - there's not a day goes by without some flyer comes through the
door mentioning DAB and I've no doubt whatsover that, now the industry has
woken up to what Joe Public will pay for a Radio (they got there in the end,
didn't they? :-), the unstoppable groundswell of 'digital cheap and easy'
will come into play once again and DAB will sweep all before it.

Be interesting to see the 'pundits' here starting to justify it, which will
be easy for them to do as soon as someone throws a sop to the 'bitrate
bitching' atm and shuts them up.....

Not a matter of justification, just a matter of you not knowing what
you're talking about - again.

Firstly, Jim has already suggested why you'll find FM less 'thin' than
DAB - Optimod compression crushes transients (just like overdriven
valve amps), and gives additional warmth to the sound.

Secondly, DAB is nothing like CD, but it *is* very like MP3, and has
the same problems *if* the bitrate is too low. With a high enough
bitrate, it's as good as any other compressed medium, e.g. Dolby
Digital, DTS or indeed MP3, which at more than 256kbit/sec, is pretty
much indistinguishable from CD to me, and to anyone I've ever seen
report on the matter.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering