In article , DAB sounds worse than
FM wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , DAB sounds worse
than FM wrote:
Well, I've argued this issue over and over, and have yet to be
convinced in the slightest that Radio 3 should have a 50% higher bit
rate than Radios 1 & 2. Given the following reason, I really do not
have a clue how you can actually argue that Radio 3 should have a far
higher bit rate than Radios 1 or 2:

Clue. Look at the dynamic range of the samples on your website. R1&2 -
about 3 dB. R3 - about 25.


Exactly! It is the narrow dynamic range that makes R1 and R2 more
difficult to encode than R3.

I bet that's confused ya!

It has certainly puzzled me. Can you explain your reasoning and define what
you mean by "more difficult"?

FWIW I have no experience of DAB. But with freeview the times I (think!) I
may have noticed problems with R3 are mostly when the sound levels are
quite low. e.g. Strings playing very quietly. i.e. at levels well below
what I hear on R2.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html