In article , David Looser
scribeth thus
"Mike O'Sullivan" wrote in message
...

I normally listen on FM of course, but yesterday I checked on the bit rate
on Radio 4 yesterday morning and it was 128 kbps. Noticeably inferior to
FM.

FM doesn't have a "bit rate", so it's meaningless to say that 128kb/s is
"noticeably inferior" to it.

Or perhaps you mean that the sound quality was "noticeably inferior"?, in
what way?, and what scientific listening tests did you set up to determine
it?

I have noticed that this thread seems to be afflicted by a similar
phenomenon to digital camera "megapixelitis", when it's the number of
megapixels that matter, not the quality of the pictures.

David.



Well the number of the bits and the way you use them do affect the
quality of both Sound and Vision;!..
--
Tony Sayer