Friends of Radio 3
 

Hi

I hope that this has not already been posted. Apologies if this is the
case. The Friends of Radio 3 have written to various BBC managers to
complain about the reduction in bit rate from the normal 192kbps to
160kbps. You can read the news item at
http://www.for3.org/second/BBC_R3_news.html#poorDAB

Regards

David

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , David Houpt
writes
Hi

I hope that this has not already been posted. Apologies if this is the
case. The Friends of Radio 3 have written to various BBC managers to
complain about the reduction in bit rate from the normal 192kbps to
160kbps. You can read the news item at
http://www.for3.org/second/BBC_R3_news.html#poorDAB

Regards

David


You might as well give up with T-DAB the BBC has been overrun with marketeer's
and management types.. so its buggered;(.

What you'd be far better off campaigning for is high bitrate Satellite
transmissions, the Germans and French are capable of these so the BBC "should"
be able to manage.

And while we're at it Radio 3.5 .. in order to remove the "worthy" speech
items off what's for me a "Music" channel.

Suppose Radio 2.75 for Jazz and other similar not mainstream stuff also.

Thats what you ought be doing IMHO.

Mind you FM is still good.. so lets also preserve that eh?.......
--
Tony Sayer

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , tony sayer



Mind you FM is still good.. so lets also preserve that eh?.......

Alas, I now find the level compression on FM R3 during the day to be
irritatingly obvious for orchestral music. And despite a decent tuner, I am
in a location where interference of various types tends to occur. So
although I have 'fallen back' to FM, I don't find FM completely
satisfactory.

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

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes
In article , tony sayer



Mind you FM is still good.. so lets also preserve that eh?.......

Alas, I now find the level compression on FM R3 during the day to be
irritatingly

Suppose as I haven't retired as yet.. Don't tend to notice this too
much;!..

obvious for orchestral music. And despite a decent tuner, I am
in a location where interference of various types tends to occur.

What sort of interference?, not pirate I presume. Pity the poor sods in
London.. interference on FM and now ****e on DAB.

Bout time we had decent unprocessed 256 K or more on Satellite:))

So
although I have 'fallen back' to FM, I don't find FM completely
satisfactory.

Last nites prom was enough to blow you away at the end of Belsahzzers
feast. And the FM copy on the timer wasn't that bad either tho the organ
at the end was earth shattering there, 'tho missed out on the radio..

Excellent and well worth the torrid heat there!!!


Slainte,

Jim


--
Tony Sayer

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


What sort of interference?, not pirate I presume.

Mix of pops, clicks, buzzes, etc. Combined with bursts of modulation of the
background noise level and breakthough from 'foreign' stations.
Particularly in the summer when we seem to get stations from many miles
away as co-channel interference with R3 FM. Most of the time this is at a
low level, so you wouldn't notice it on a station like R4. But on a R3
concert it can be quite obvious.

The signal level indicated does not vary noticably, so it isn't so much due
to signal fading as to unwanted 'contributions' from elsewhere. Sometimes
you hear the speaking on the interference, but more often you just head the
background noise level modulating with periods of 3-10 seconds, typically.

Some of it might come from Leuchars AFB or Biggles as he flys overhead,
contributing to global warming. :-)

We are located up a hill with a clear view well across the North Sea. So it
seems that we get quite strong signals from over the water.

Most of the time it is OK. But the problems arise often enough that there
is a fair chance that at some point in a concert in the summer, a problem
with be audible if I listen to a R3 concert. In general, it might go
unnoticed for something like a string quartet, but it shows up on
orchestral items.


Pity the poor sods in London.. interference on FM and now ****e on DAB.

I get far more interference on FM here that I did when I lived in East
London. One of the things I welcomed about DAB as it has shown almost zero
interference effects here. Signal level about 12dB above the top of the
scale on the tuner.

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

Friends of Radio 3
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , tony sayer



Mind you FM is still good.. so lets also preserve that eh?.......

Alas, I now find the level compression on FM R3 during the day to be
irritatingly obvious for orchestral music. And despite a decent
tuner, I am
in a location where interference of various types tends to occur. So
although I have 'fallen back' to FM, I don't find FM completely
satisfactory.

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


Forgive me Jim but I thought it was the other way around? Optimod and
whatever during rushhour (0730-0930 and 1700-1900 weekdays) but
uncompressed at other times. Que?


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

Friends of Radio 3
 

On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 17:29:36 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote:

Pity the poor sods in London.. interference on FM and now ****e on DAB.

I get far more interference on FM here that I did when I lived in East
London. One of the things I welcomed about DAB as it has shown almost zero
interference effects here. Signal level about 12dB above the top of the
scale on the tuner.

Slainte,

Jim

I live in London, and I get full strength signals on all services -
maybe to do with living up on top of the hill at Hampstead Heath. On
analogue TV I have to use an attenuator on the antenna lead or I get a
bit of intermod.

Multipath on FM was a bit of a problem until I put up a Yagi, but that
is fine now. I never hear any interference, although I can go hunting
for the pirates.

In the battle between FM and DAB, I am torn. Like Jim, I hate the
dynamic compression on FM; it makes me feel a bit seasick, but I also
find listening to DAB a strain over a period of more than a few
minutes. I really only use it for stations that don't appear on FM.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , harrogate3
wrote:

Forgive me Jim but I thought it was the other way around? Optimod and
whatever during rushhour (0730-0930 and 1700-1900 weekdays) but
uncompressed at other times. Que?

Well, the measurements I've made show clear level compression on R3 FM
during the day. e.g. during the lunchtime and afternoon programmes. It was
also quite audible when I listened to/recorded the afternoon repeat of the
'First Night' that went out between 2-4 the Monday following the First
Night.

I have not checked, and I don't listen at all times of day. However my
impression is that R3 use automated level compression on FM essentially all
day, and only remove it (perhaps) during the evening. It may be used to a
greater degree during 'drivetimes', though.

I have also had the impression that even in the evenings, they level
compress to some extent, but this may be more skill-controlled and hence
not so noticable or distracting.

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

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes
In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


What sort of interference?, not pirate I presume.

Mix of pops, clicks, buzzes, etc. Combined with bursts of modulation of the
background noise level and breakthough from 'foreign' stations.
Particularly in the summer when we seem to get stations from many miles
away as co-channel interference with R3 FM. Most of the time this is at a
low level, so you wouldn't notice it on a station like R4. But on a R3
concert it can be quite obvious.

The signal level indicated does not vary noticably, so it isn't so much due
to signal fading as to unwanted 'contributions' from elsewhere. Sometimes
you hear the speaking on the interference, but more often you just head the
background noise level modulating with periods of 3-10 seconds, typically.

Some of it might come from Leuchars AFB or Biggles as he flys overhead,
contributing to global warming. :-)

We are located up a hill with a clear view well across the North Sea. So it
seems that we get quite strong signals from over the water.

Most of the time it is OK. But the problems arise often enough that there
is a fair chance that at some point in a concert in the summer, a problem
with be audible if I listen to a R3 concert. In general, it might go
unnoticed for something like a string quartet, but it shows up on
orchestral items.



Presume you do have a directional aerial and a good grade, CT100 or
similar, of co-ax feeder?.

Course your local TX might be re-transmiting what it receives if its an
RBR one 'tho if a main station it should be on PCM, and its very
possible that the BBC don't even know if theres a problem.

Which one was it again Jim?.

Course what the sods ought do it to put the rates up on Satellite when
all those problems would be history apart from a very odd bit of rain
fade;!....

Pity the poor sods in London.. interference on FM and now ****e on DAB.

I get far more interference on FM here that I did when I lived in East
London.

Well thats changed!. I think everyone's awaiting for the first SFN DAB
pirate who no doubt will use very high bit rates;!!!


One of the things I welcomed about DAB as it has shown almost zero
interference effects here. Signal level about 12dB above the top of the
scale on the tuner.


It does suffer from co channel as some on the south coast will tell you
'jus cos its dab doesn't mean its not interfereable with!...
Slainte,

Jim


--
Tony Sayer

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes
[snip]

Presume you do have a directional aerial and a good grade, CT100 or
similar, of co-ax feeder?.

I use three different loft dipoles for the three different FM tuners in
daily use. They typically give around 600-800 microV at their downlead
ends. The cables vary but are all either CT100 or an equivalent in terms of
performance from the days before the term CT100 was used (so far as I
recall.) The cable runs are only about 3-4 metres in each case, and are
continuous from antenna to the plug in the RX socket.

FWIW yesterday I lugged the CT7000 around and checked the levels on each
antenna output. So the above are correct assuming the (old) calibration
for the tuner is OK.

Course your local TX might be re-transmiting what it receives if its an
RBR one 'tho if a main station it should be on PCM, and its very
possible that the BBC don't even know if theres a problem.

Which one was it again Jim?.

Forfar. I can't recall the ERP, but I think it isn't one of the higher
powers. However it gives higher levels here than the alternatives. The
problem I think is that although we are up a hill, the main parts of Fife
'behind' us are higher and tend to block signals from inland. We might get
more from the other transmitters if the topology were favourable. Alas,
Fife isn't the Fens... :-/

TBH Having started thinking about this again I am starting to wonder if the
real problem is the CT7000. Although an excellent design, it is now
reaching its 30th birthday, and it suffers from poor internal contacts due
to the widespread use of tiny 'pin-socket' connectors between the internal
modules. It is about time I tried something else for the main hifi system.
Now I've started thinking about this, I haven't noticed so much in the way
of problems even on a Quad FM4 which - in principle - has nothing like as
good an RF performance as the CT7000...

I noticed in a review in a recent mag that one tuner (Creek IIRC) reached
70dB SNR full-quieting with 400microV in, whereas the CT7000 needs about
800 microV for this. IIRC Angus Mckenzie, although enthusiastic about the
CT7000 thought that the front end gain/noise figure wasn't as good as
it could be, even years ago, but loved it for the excellent selectivity
and low distortion, etc.

The interference tends to go un-noticed with something like a string
quartet or piano recital, but can show up on proms. Alas, the level
compression on FM I now find more noticable than some years ago.
partly due to it being more severe, partly I guess due to becoming
accustomed to other sources that don't have it. Thus in practice,
with orchestral music it is the level compression I find distracting
more often these days. DAB was much better in this respect.

One of the things I welcomed about DAB as it has shown almost zero
interference effects here. Signal level about 12dB above the top of the
scale on the tuner.


It does suffer from co channel as some on the south coast will tell you
'jus cos its dab doesn't mean its not interfereable with!...

I'd agree. However here it has shown no particular signs of the sound being
interfered with by anyone - apart from the BBC themselves! :-/

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

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes
In article , harrogate3
wrote:

Forgive me Jim but I thought it was the other way around? Optimod and
whatever during rushhour (0730-0930 and 1700-1900 weekdays) but
uncompressed at other times. Que?

Well, the measurements I've made show clear level compression on R3 FM
during the day. e.g. during the lunchtime and afternoon programmes. It was
also quite audible when I listened to/recorded the afternoon repeat of the
'First Night' that went out between 2-4 the Monday following the First
Night.

I have not checked, and I don't listen at all times of day. However my
impression is that R3 use automated level compression on FM essentially all
day, and only remove it (perhaps) during the evening. It may be used to a
greater degree during 'drivetimes', though.

I have also had the impression that even in the evenings, they level
compress to some extent, but this may be more skill-controlled and hence
not so noticable or distracting.


I reckon that this is a bit of a difficult one for a broadcaster as they in
order to serve their audience have to take into account typical listening
conditions for the majority of people during the day and I'd bet that there
aren't that many serious listeners who sit down and listen to the audio
systems during the daytime hours, but there are a whole lot more who are in
car and have the tranny on for background stuff in the day, so who should they
serve for best effect?.

Of course what they ought do is make a very high bitrate and un-processed
source available on satellite for such serious users, and use compression on
DABble which doesn't matter anymore as its no longer a serious audio medium.

Even a small broadcaster like Radio Jackie in south London is capable of doing
this, they have a processed output and their "finesse" stream which is
directly off the desk!.

If they can manage that,, I'm sure auntie BBC can......

--
Tony Sayer

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


Well, the measurements I've made show clear level compression on R3 FM
during the day. e.g.

[snip]


I reckon that this is a bit of a difficult one for a broadcaster as they
in order to serve their audience have to take into account typical
listening conditions for the majority of people during the day and I'd
bet that there aren't that many serious listeners who sit down and
listen to the audio systems during the daytime hours, but there are a
whole lot more who are in car and have the tranny on for background
stuff in the day, so who should they serve for best effect?.

That was the purpose of including DRC in the DAB specifications. A recent
statemend I've had from the BBC claims they *do* use this on R3.

Alas, for DRC to have much value on DAB, the results with it disengaged
should be of a good enough quality to merit listening seriously...

Since there is no DRC on FM, the BBC used to choose *not* to compress. The
argument being that it was left to the listeners to decide how to listen.
Nothing to stop manufacturers selling car radios with level compressers.

Now they simply impose in on all. When you think about it, this is a
parallel to the way they have treated DAB listeners.

Of course what they ought do is make a very high bitrate and
un-processed source available on satellite for such serious users, and
use compression on DABble which doesn't matter anymore as its no longer
a serious audio medium.

The problem now is that - even if the BBC do currently offer higher
bitrates and no level compression via other broadcating chains (like DTTV)
- their behaviour gives no reason for confidence that this will continue.
Hence should I or anyone else spend money buying equipment to exploit this
only to risk it evaporating shortly afterwards?

The difficulty here is that the BBC are establishing a track record of
being 'unreliable' as well as showing no real concern for quality.

[N.B. Having problems with the HD on my computer, so there may be
a 'break in communcations' during the next day or so...]

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

Friends of Radio 3
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


Well, the measurements I've made show clear level compression on R3
FM during the day. e.g.

[snip]


I reckon that this is a bit of a difficult one for a broadcaster as
they in order to serve their audience have to take into account
typical listening conditions for the majority of people during the
day and I'd bet that there aren't that many serious listeners who
sit down and listen to the audio systems during the daytime hours,
but there are a whole lot more who are in car and have the tranny on
for background stuff in the day, so who should they serve for best
effect?.

That was the purpose of including DRC in the DAB specifications. A
recent statemend I've had from the BBC claims they *do* use this on
R3.

Alas, for DRC to have much value on DAB, the results with it
disengaged should be of a good enough quality to merit listening
seriously...

Since there is no DRC on FM, the BBC used to choose *not* to
compress. The argument being that it was left to the listeners to
decide how to listen. Nothing to stop manufacturers selling car
radios with level compressers.

Now they simply impose in on all. When you think about it, this is a
parallel to the way they have treated DAB listeners.


Complaining about DAB? Welcome to the club.....


Of course what they ought do is make a very high bitrate and
un-processed source available on satellite for such serious users,
and use compression on DABble which doesn't matter anymore as its no
longer a serious audio medium.

The problem now is that - even if the BBC do currently offer higher
bitrates and no level compression via other broadcating chains (like
DTTV) - their behaviour gives no reason for confidence that this will
continue.


A senior BBC Reception Advice engineer once said on the phone that he was
confident that they would never reduce the bit rates on satellite, and
although that's no guarantee that they won't (you will have a long wait
trying to get guarantees from BBC execs...) there just isn't any reason why
they would reduce the bit rates on satellite. They've got 231 Mbps of
capacity on satellite, and *all* of their radio stations only consume about
0.7% of that.

There is actually a very strong argument for them providing at least Radios
1-4 on satellite at 256 kbps, and they could very easily provide high bit
rates across the board if they wanted to.


Hence should I or anyone else spend money buying equipment
to exploit this only to risk it evaporating shortly afterwards?


Yes.


The difficulty here is that the BBC are establishing a track record of
being 'unreliable' as well as showing no real concern for quality.


The bit rates of BBC radio stations on digital satellite have never been
reduced to my knowledge, and nor are they likely to be reduced in future
because there's no reason for them to do so.

The only thing that has happened here is that the bit rate of Radio 3 has
been reduced and Radio 3 listeners are simply being treated similarly to
listeners of all the other radio stations (although R3's bit rate is still
higher than all the other BBC music stations).

The thing that has been established is that the DAB system is not up to the
job. You can argue all day that DAB can sound good, but if it doesn't then
it's a moot point. And to be honest, it was already established that DAB
wasn't up to the job, but some Radio 3 listeners such as yourself were
simply ignoring the fact that 98% of all stereo stations on DAB were being
broadcast at 128 kbps, and sound dire.


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview & DAB prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.php
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/dab_radios.php

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes
In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes
[snip]

Presume you do have a directional aerial and a good grade, CT100 or
similar, of co-ax feeder?.

I use three different loft dipoles for the three different FM tuners in
daily use. They typically give around 600-800 microV at their downlead
ends. The cables vary but are all either CT100 or an equivalent in terms of
performance from the days before the term CT100 was used (so far as I
recall.) The cable runs are only about 3-4 metres in each case, and are
continuous from antenna to the plug in the RX socket.

FWIW yesterday I lugged the CT7000 around and checked the levels on each
antenna output. So the above are correct assuming the (old) calibration
for the tuner is OK.

Course your local TX might be re-transmiting what it receives if its an
RBR one 'tho if a main station it should be on PCM, and its very
possible that the BBC don't even know if theres a problem.

Which one was it again Jim?.

Forfar. I can't recall the ERP, but I think it isn't one of the higher
powers. However it gives higher levels here than the alternatives. The
problem I think is that although we are up a hill, the main parts of Fife
'behind' us are higher and tend to block signals from inland. We might get
more from the other transmitters if the topology were favourable. Alas,
Fife isn't the Fens... :-/

Yes its a main station and PCM fed at 17Kw mixed pol...

Perhaps a bit more directionality on the receiving aerials?. You might
be having some multipath perhaps...

http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/forfar.asp



TBH Having started thinking about this again I am starting to wonder if the
real problem is the CT7000. Although an excellent design, it is now
reaching its 30th birthday, and it suffers from poor internal contacts due
to the widespread use of tiny 'pin-socket' connectors between the internal
modules. It is about time I tried something else for the main hifi system.
Now I've started thinking about this, I haven't noticed so much in the way
of problems even on a Quad FM4 which - in principle - has nothing like as
good an RF performance as the CT7000...

Yes I had one for a short while once that was owned by Phil Swift of
Audiolab and that was a bit dodgy then and that was in the early 80's so
time wouldn't have helped;!..


It was IIRC a good RF performer and in comparison the FM 4 wasn't
anything that wonderful.


I noticed in a review in a recent mag that one tuner (Creek IIRC) reached
70dB SNR full-quieting with 400microV in, whereas the CT7000 needs about
800 microV for this.

They 'umble old Denon TU260 MK2 is remarkably good RF and otherwise.

I'd look around for a second-hand Audiolab T8000 on e-bay thats about as
good as an FM tuner gets or needs to be;!..


IIRC Angus Mckenzie, although enthusiastic about the
CT7000 thought that the front end gain/noise figure wasn't as good as
it could be, even years ago, but loved it for the excellent selectivity
and low distortion, etc.

The interference tends to go un-noticed with something like a string
quartet or piano recital, but can show up on proms.

Why do you think that then?..

Alas, the level
compression on FM I now find more noticable than some years ago.
partly due to it being more severe, partly I guess due to becoming
accustomed to other sources that don't have it. Thus in practice,
with orchestral music it is the level compression I find distracting
more often these days. DAB was much better in this respect.

Six of one and half a dozen of the other;(...


One of the things I welcomed about DAB as it has shown almost zero
interference effects here. Signal level about 12dB above the top of the
scale on the tuner.

Well thats what it was supposed to do eh?. I just wish they'd admit
T-DAB is bu**ered as a serious medium, and really do some upping of the
bit rates in Satellite!..



It does suffer from co channel as some on the south coast will tell you
'jus cos its dab doesn't mean its not interfereable with!...

I'd agree. However here it has shown no particular signs of the sound being
interfered with by anyone - apart from the BBC themselves! :-/

Quite....

Slainte,

Jim


--
Tony Sayer

Friends of Radio 3
 

The problem now is that - even if the BBC do currently offer higher
bitrates and no level compression via other broadcating chains (like DTTV)
- their behaviour gives no reason for confidence that this will continue.
Hence should I or anyone else spend money buying equipment to exploit this
only to risk it evaporating shortly afterwards?

The difficulty here is that the BBC are establishing a track record of
being 'unreliable' as well as showing no real concern for quality.

Nothing we don't know then;!...Auntie is a well dodgy old bird these days;(

[N.B. Having problems with the HD on my computer, so there may be
a 'break in communcations' during the next day or so...]
OK..

Slainte,

Jim


--
Tony Sayer

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


Forfar. I can't recall the ERP, but I think it isn't one of the higher
powers. However it gives higher levels here than the alternatives. The
problem I think is that although we are up a hill, the main parts of
Fife 'behind' us are higher and tend to block signals from inland. We
might get more from the other transmitters if the topology were
favourable. Alas, Fife isn't the Fens... :-/

Yes its a main station and PCM fed at 17Kw mixed pol...

Perhaps a bit more directionality on the receiving aerials?. You might
be having some multipath perhaps...

http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/forfar.asp

The CT7000 has a meter to display multipath. I've also checked with a
spectrum analyser in the distant past. There are no signs of any sigificant
level of multipath.

It may well be time for a 'new' tuner and/or a high-gain antenna on the
roof. However I am not certain, given the nature of the problems, how much
these will help. So I suppose I should also consider using either a
Freeview box or some form of satellite RX.



I noticed in a review in a recent mag that one tuner (Creek IIRC)
reached 70dB SNR full-quieting with 400microV in, whereas the CT7000
needs about 800 microV for this.

They 'umble old Denon TU260 MK2 is remarkably good RF and otherwise.

I'd look around for a second-hand Audiolab T8000 on e-bay thats about as
good as an FM tuner gets or needs to be;!..

I have been re-reading old info on tuners. :-)

Must admit to having mixed feelings about an 'Audiolab' one. I have now
given up on trying to fix the seriously-broken 8000A. The circuit diagram
from the net is incorrect in some details, and having spent some time
studying the actual circuit I must confess to having become less than
impressed.

I have therefore bought it for 20 quid to use as a 'breadboard' for making
up some new amp designs of my own. Saves having to build a chassis and a
PSU. :-)


IIRC Angus Mckenzie, although enthusiastic about the CT7000 thought
that the front end gain/noise figure wasn't as good as it could be,
even years ago, but loved it for the excellent selectivity and low
distortion, etc.

The interference tends to go un-noticed with something like a string
quartet or piano recital, but can show up on proms.

Why do you think that then?..

Modulation level. Quartets, etc, tend to be on the mid-day concerts. This
timing, combined with the dynamics of the music, mean they are simply
'louder' in modulation level terms than the quiet bits of an evening
orchestral concert.

We also seem to get more interference during the day than during the
evening. Although there is a tendency here for the RF level to droop during
the evenings.

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

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes
In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


Forfar. I can't recall the ERP, but I think it isn't one of the higher
powers. However it gives higher levels here than the alternatives. The
problem I think is that although we are up a hill, the main parts of
Fife 'behind' us are higher and tend to block signals from inland. We
might get more from the other transmitters if the topology were
favourable. Alas, Fife isn't the Fens... :-/

Yes its a main station and PCM fed at 17Kw mixed pol...

Perhaps a bit more directionality on the receiving aerials?. You might
be having some multipath perhaps...

http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/forfar.asp

The CT7000 has a meter to display multipath. I've also checked with a
spectrum analyser in the distant past. There are no signs of any sigificant
level of multipath.

It may well be time for a 'new' tuner and/or a high-gain antenna on the
roof. However I am not certain, given the nature of the problems, how much
these will help. So I suppose I should also consider using either a
Freeview box or some form of satellite RX.

I'd opt for an outside directional aerial and when you do that get the
aerial and get someone to put it up for you unless you can DIY.

a Triax 4 or 5 element can be had from www.cpc.co.uk don't rely on the
aerial rigger to supply an 'eff emm hairel they almost without exception
put up a Halo which is a waste of good metal!.

Freeview is well.. ok as far as 192K audio goes, but 256 K + on
satellite is where it ought be. Still for around a 100 squids you can
get some excellent audio from the other side of the channel:--)).




I noticed in a review in a recent mag that one tuner (Creek IIRC)
reached 70dB SNR full-quieting with 400microV in, whereas the CT7000
needs about 800 microV for this.

They 'umble old Denon TU260 MK2 is remarkably good RF and otherwise.

I'd look around for a second-hand Audiolab T8000 on e-bay thats about as
good as an FM tuner gets or needs to be;!..

I have been re-reading old info on tuners. :-)

Must admit to having mixed feelings about an 'Audiolab' one. I have now
given up on trying to fix the seriously-broken 8000A. The circuit diagram
from the net is incorrect in some details, and having spent some time
studying the actual circuit I must confess to having become less than
impressed.

Should have said!, one does know ones old employers still;)

No the T8000 is a damm fine tuner:)

I have therefore bought it for 20 quid to use as a 'breadboard' for making
up some new amp designs of my own. Saves having to build a chassis and a
PSU. :-)


*!....


IIRC Angus Mckenzie, although enthusiastic about the CT7000 thought
that the front end gain/noise figure wasn't as good as it could be,
even years ago, but loved it for the excellent selectivity and low
distortion, etc.

The interference tends to go un-noticed with something like a string
quartet or piano recital, but can show up on proms.

Why do you think that then?..

Modulation level. Quartets, etc, tend to be on the mid-day concerts. This
timing, combined with the dynamics of the music, mean they are simply
'louder' in modulation level terms than the quiet bits of an evening
orchestral concert.

Hummm... The old daytime Optimod by the sound of it..


We also seem to get more interference during the day than during the
evening. Although there is a tendency here for the RF level to droop during
the evenings.

Odd.. your not the other side of that river estuary?, firth of Tay or
whatever its called???

Slainte,

Jim


--
Tony Sayer

Friends of Radio 3
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


Forfar. I can't recall the ERP, but I think it isn't one of the higher
powers. However it gives higher levels here than the alternatives. The
problem I think is that although we are up a hill, the main parts of
Fife 'behind' us are higher and tend to block signals from inland. We
might get more from the other transmitters if the topology were
favourable. Alas, Fife isn't the Fens... :-/

Yes its a main station and PCM fed at 17Kw mixed pol...

Perhaps a bit more directionality on the receiving aerials?. You might
be having some multipath perhaps...

http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/forfar.asp

The CT7000 has a meter to display multipath. I've also checked with a
spectrum analyser in the distant past. There are no signs of any
sigificant
level of multipath.

It may well be time for a 'new' tuner and/or a high-gain antenna on the
roof. However I am not certain, given the nature of the problems, how much
these will help. So I suppose I should also consider using either a
Freeview box or some form of satellite RX.


I don't seek to offer 'advice' here, but I would just mention that the
recent *much blogged* installation of a 4 element FM aerial here has ended
up with me ripping it off and using the mast and wiring for a TV aerial to
get a 'digital' signal strength on my PVRs that sticks out the side of the
TV screen! (I can see the top 2/3 lights of the Sandy Heath transmitter from
the top of my front path of an evening....)

Whether or not is was the downside of have an ultra-clear system I don't
know, but there was just too much going on with FM - roaring, distant
tweedling noises (birdy whistle?) and announcers clearly sounding like they
were in little cubicles!! As has been said elsewhere, the sound quality of
FM during the day wasn't much to shout about either!

But then, my *best* radio listening is done in the garage in the afternoons
(R3 Evensong, for example) on a crap-covered Roberts FM radio!

Ironic, coming from a *vinylist* isn't it?

(Equally ironic that a number of people who don't like vinyl can't seem to
accept the planar, 'digital sterility' of DBA, Freeview &c....)

FWIW, I have to say I don't detect a massive difference between FV and DAB
R3, other than a significant jump in loudness which makes comparisons
difficult.

(So I don't bother to compare them much....!! ;-)

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , Keith G
writes

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


Forfar. I can't recall the ERP, but I think it isn't one of the higher
powers. However it gives higher levels here than the alternatives. The
problem I think is that although we are up a hill, the main parts of
Fife 'behind' us are higher and tend to block signals from inland. We
might get more from the other transmitters if the topology were
favourable. Alas, Fife isn't the Fens... :-/

Yes its a main station and PCM fed at 17Kw mixed pol...

Perhaps a bit more directionality on the receiving aerials?. You might
be having some multipath perhaps...

http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/forfar.asp

The CT7000 has a meter to display multipath. I've also checked with a
spectrum analyser in the distant past. There are no signs of any
sigificant
level of multipath.

It may well be time for a 'new' tuner and/or a high-gain antenna on the
roof. However I am not certain, given the nature of the problems, how much
these will help. So I suppose I should also consider using either a
Freeview box or some form of satellite RX.


I don't seek to offer 'advice' here, but I would just mention that the
recent *much blogged* installation of a 4 element FM aerial here has ended
up with me ripping it off and using the mast and wiring for a TV aerial to
get a 'digital' signal strength on my PVRs that sticks out the side of the
TV screen! (I can see the top 2/3 lights of the Sandy Heath transmitter from
the top of my front path of an evening....)

Something very wrong there then Keith. Perhaps it was that cable join in
the gutter!..


Whether or not is was the downside of have an ultra-clear system I don't
know, but there was just too much going on with FM - roaring, distant
tweedling noises (birdy whistle?) and announcers clearly sounding like they
were in little cubicles!! As has been said elsewhere, the sound quality of
FM during the day wasn't much to shout about either!

Something else rather up the creek, don't have those sorta problems
here. They do have the announcers in smallish rooms tho!..


But then, my *best* radio listening is done in the garage in the afternoons
(R3 Evensong, for example) on a crap-covered Roberts FM radio!

Thats why they compress a bit;)


Ironic, coming from a *vinylist* isn't it?

Yep..


(Equally ironic that a number of people who don't like vinyl can't seem to
accept the planar, 'digital sterility' of DBA, Freeview &c....)

FWIW, I have to say I don't detect a massive difference between FV and DAB
R3, other than a significant jump in loudness which makes comparisons
difficult.

Well something very amiss there then!...

(So I don't bother to compare them much....!! ;-)




--
Tony Sayer

Friends of Radio 3
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
writes

"Jim Lesurf" wrote


It may well be time for a 'new' tuner and/or a high-gain antenna on the
roof. However I am not certain, given the nature of the problems, how
much
these will help. So I suppose I should also consider using either a
Freeview box or some form of satellite RX.


I don't seek to offer 'advice' here, but I would just mention that the
recent *much blogged* installation of a 4 element FM aerial here has ended
up with me ripping it off and using the mast and wiring for a TV aerial to
get a 'digital' signal strength on my PVRs that sticks out the side of the
TV screen! (I can see the top 2/3 lights of the Sandy Heath transmitter
from
the top of my front path of an evening....)

Something very wrong there then Keith. Perhaps it was that cable join in
the gutter!..


There is no cable join, it is one piece from the aerial to the appliance...




Whether or not is was the downside of have an ultra-clear system I don't
know, but there was just too much going on with FM - roaring, distant
tweedling noises (birdy whistle?) and announcers clearly sounding like
they
were in little cubicles!! As has been said elsewhere, the sound quality of
FM during the day wasn't much to shout about either!

Something else rather up the creek, don't have those sorta problems
here. They do have the announcers in smallish rooms tho!..


It's not so obvious on the Tannoys....



But then, my *best* radio listening is done in the garage in the
afternoons
(R3 Evensong, for example) on a crap-covered Roberts FM radio!

Thats why they compress a bit;)


Ironic, coming from a *vinylist* isn't it?

Yep..


Almost as ironic as someone who prefers 'digital' to Vinyl but prefers FM to
'digital'....

;-)

Friends of Radio 3
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
writes



FWIW, I have to say I don't detect a massive difference between FV and DAB
R3, other than a significant jump in loudness which makes comparisons
difficult.

Well something very amiss there then!...

(So I don't bother to compare them much....!! ;-)


OK. Swim just walked in so I got her to compare (it's 2 adjacent buttons on
the zapper but I have to correct the volume difference each time) - she
picked the Freeview straight away and stuck with it for three swaps. 'Better
balanced' was the comment.

(All I can tell is the hiss on each one seems slightly different pitch and
there's a definite *whump, whump, whump* on the Freeview at high volume, but
I suspect notta lotta people know dat.... ;-)

Friends of Radio 3
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
writes



FWIW, I have to say I don't detect a massive difference between FV and
DAB
R3, other than a significant jump in loudness which makes comparisons
difficult.

Well something very amiss there then!...

(So I don't bother to compare them much....!! ;-)


OK. Swim just walked in so I got her to compare (it's 2 adjacent buttons
on the zapper but I have to correct the volume difference each time) - she
picked the Freeview straight away and stuck with it for three swaps.
'Better balanced' was the comment.


Actually she described them both as a *cracking* sound....????

(Trust me, it's the speakers...!! ;-)

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


It may well be time for a 'new' tuner and/or a high-gain antenna on the
roof. However I am not certain, given the nature of the problems, how
much these will help. So I suppose I should also consider using either
a Freeview box or some form of satellite RX.

I'd opt for an outside directional aerial and when you do that get the
aerial and get someone to put it up for you unless you can DIY.

a Triax 4 or 5 element can be had from www.cpc.co.uk don't rely on the
aerial rigger to supply an 'eff emm hairel they almost without exception
put up a Halo which is a waste of good metal!.

Freeview is well.. ok as far as 192K audio goes, but 256 K + on
satellite is where it ought be. Still for around a 100 squids you can
get some excellent audio from the other side of the channel:--)).

You have encapsulated my present dilemma. :-)

I am currently undecided between:

1) Do as you say, Get a high-gain VHF antenna up above the roof, and
perhaps also replace the CT7000 with something decent and more modern

2) Run a UHF antenna feed to the hifi room, and use a 'FreeView' box.

3) Satellite RX.

At present I am tempted by (2) as we already have a decent UHF system that
gives fairly reliable reception. I could fit a low-noise UHF distribution
amp in the loft quite easily, and use one o/p for the current feed to the
living room, and another into the hifi room. A FreeView box with an SPDIF
output would also be cheaper than a good FM tuner, so this would be a
cheaper and easier option for me than (1) or (3). In general I have found
the sound on FreeView R3 and BBC4 OK. An added advantage of this would be
being able to record the sound from BBC4 or a station like BBC7 onto CD
when I wanted.

The worry is the BBC's established track-record of trashing the quality of
their output. Sod's Law predicts that I'd do (2) and they promptly drop the
bitrates on Freeview sound! :-/



Must admit to having mixed feelings about an 'Audiolab' one. I have now
given up on trying to fix the seriously-broken 8000A. The circuit
diagram from the net is incorrect in some details, and having spent
some time studying the actual circuit I must confess to having become
less than impressed.

Should have said!, one does know ones old employers still;)

I tried asking them for a circuit diagram, etc. Their party line is that
they charge X pounds/hour to work on fixing things.


We also seem to get more interference during the day than during the
evening. Although there is a tendency here for the RF level to droop
during the evenings.

Odd.. your not the other side of that river estuary?, firth of Tay or
whatever its called???

We are about 10 miles south of the Tay estuary, and about 20 miles north of
the Forth. I think that Forfar is a bit west of north from here. This means
it is a moderately clear line across the Tay, but with Dundee on the line
of sight. I do suspect some of the interference comes from Dundee as it is
the only 'large city' in reasonably clear view from here. It is also
spreads up the hills facing us on the other side of the Tay.

Hence as well as a limited signal, we seem to have a major source of
interference on much the same line of sight.

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

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes
In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


It may well be time for a 'new' tuner and/or a high-gain antenna on the
roof. However I am not certain, given the nature of the problems, how
much these will help. So I suppose I should also consider using either
a Freeview box or some form of satellite RX.

I'd opt for an outside directional aerial and when you do that get the
aerial and get someone to put it up for you unless you can DIY.

a Triax 4 or 5 element can be had from www.cpc.co.uk don't rely on the
aerial rigger to supply an 'eff emm hairel they almost without exception
put up a Halo which is a waste of good metal!.

Freeview is well.. ok as far as 192K audio goes, but 256 K + on
satellite is where it ought be. Still for around a 100 squids you can
get some excellent audio from the other side of the channel:--)).

You have encapsulated my present dilemma. :-)

I am currently undecided between:

1) Do as you say, Get a high-gain VHF antenna up above the roof, and
perhaps also replace the CT7000 with something decent and more modern

Shouldn't cost a lot...


2) Run a UHF antenna feed to the hifi room, and use a 'FreeView' box.

Dunno.. Perhaps you don't mind MP2 low rate artefacts.. I do..


3) Satellite RX.

Well for around £100 there is a lot up there at good rates and in very
high quality. Pity Auntie BBC isn't among them;!...



At present I am tempted by (2) as we already have a decent UHF system that
gives fairly reliable reception. I could fit a low-noise UHF distribution
amp in the loft quite easily, and use one o/p for the current feed to the
living room, and another into the hifi room. A FreeView box with an SPDIF
output would also be cheaper than a good FM tuner, so this would be a
cheaper and easier option for me than (1) or (3). In general I have found
the sound on FreeView R3 and BBC4 OK. An added advantage of this would be
being able to record the sound from BBC4 or a station like BBC7 onto CD
when I wanted.

The worry is the BBC's established track-record of trashing the quality of
their output. Sod's Law predicts that I'd do (2) and they promptly drop the
bitrates on Freeview sound! :-/

Well I doubt they would but then again a lot thought the 192 on DAB was
sacrosanct till recently!. Who knows?. Satellite with its massive
bandwidth availability does look to be a long term answer..




Must admit to having mixed feelings about an 'Audiolab' one. I have now
given up on trying to fix the seriously-broken 8000A. The circuit
diagram from the net is incorrect in some details, and having spent
some time studying the actual circuit I must confess to having become
less than impressed.

Should have said!, one does know ones old employers still;)

I tried asking them for a circuit diagram, etc. Their party line is that
they charge X pounds/hour to work on fixing things.


We also seem to get more interference during the day than during the
evening. Although there is a tendency here for the RF level to droop
during the evenings.

Odd.. your not the other side of that river estuary?, firth of Tay or
whatever its called???

We are about 10 miles south of the Tay estuary, and about 20 miles north of
the Forth. I think that Forfar is a bit west of north from here. This means
it is a moderately clear line across the Tay,

Doesn't seem like tidal fading at that distance..

but with Dundee on the line
of sight. I do suspect some of the interference comes from Dundee as it is
the only 'large city' in reasonably clear view from here. It is also
spreads up the hills facing us on the other side of the Tay.

Hence as well as a limited signal, we seem to have a major source of
interference on much the same line of sight.

Well if it is interference on such a scale that its causing upset then
Ofcom ought to be interested but I somehow doubt that is and if it is
what would it be?. Perhaps the answer lies closer to home!..

Slainte,

Jim


--
Tony Sayer

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , Keith G
writes

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
writes

"Jim Lesurf" wrote


It may well be time for a 'new' tuner and/or a high-gain antenna on the
roof. However I am not certain, given the nature of the problems, how
much
these will help. So I suppose I should also consider using either a
Freeview box or some form of satellite RX.


I don't seek to offer 'advice' here, but I would just mention that the
recent *much blogged* installation of a 4 element FM aerial here has ended
up with me ripping it off and using the mast and wiring for a TV aerial to
get a 'digital' signal strength on my PVRs that sticks out the side of the
TV screen! (I can see the top 2/3 lights of the Sandy Heath transmitter
from
the top of my front path of an evening....)

Something very wrong there then Keith. Perhaps it was that cable join in
the gutter!..


There is no cable join, it is one piece from the aerial to the appliance...

Sure about that, seemed to be joined on that piccy you showed me?..




Whether or not is was the downside of have an ultra-clear system I don't
know, but there was just too much going on with FM - roaring, distant
tweedling noises (birdy whistle?) and announcers clearly sounding like
they
were in little cubicles!! As has been said elsewhere, the sound quality of
FM during the day wasn't much to shout about either!

Something else rather up the creek, don't have those sorta problems
here. They do have the announcers in smallish rooms tho!..


It's not so obvious on the Tannoys....



But then, my *best* radio listening is done in the garage in the
afternoons
(R3 Evensong, for example) on a crap-covered Roberts FM radio!

Thats why they compress a bit;)


Ironic, coming from a *vinylist* isn't it?

Yep..


Almost as ironic as someone who prefers 'digital' to Vinyl but prefers FM to
'digital'....

FM is better digital. The stupid thing is that its carried around
digitally but then analogue modulated.

But its a better type of digital!..

;-)







--
Tony Sayer

Friends of Radio 3
 

"tony sayer" wrote


Something very wrong there then Keith. Perhaps it was that cable join in
the gutter!..


There is no cable join, it is one piece from the aerial to the
appliance...

Sure about that, seemed to be joined on that piccy you showed me?..


Yes, the cable joint was put right on the second or third visit (don't
remember now). The second guy was leaving the outfit and was quite eager to
slag the first guy off and *put right* his handiwork. There is no joint
now - more's the pity, the RGB input (having swapped to a TV aerial) from
the PVR and digibox on each of two small tellies is positively *florid*!!


FM is better digital. The stupid thing is that its carried around
digitally but then analogue modulated.

But its a better type of digital!..


So is a 'digitally mastered' LP....!!

;-)

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


2) Run a UHF antenna feed to the hifi room, and use a 'FreeView' box.

Dunno.. Perhaps you don't mind MP2 low rate artefacts.. I do..

I have in the past (mostly) been quite happy with the sound quality on R3
and BBC4 for Prom broadcasts. There have been some notable exceptions
where there seemed to be a specific problem. Also, the DTTV signal seems
much more prone to audio 'glitches' due to impulse interference than DAB.
However, overall, in our local conditions I prefer it to FM R3. The snag
being that "what you have shalt be taken away" may eventually apply to this
as well as to DAB...


Hence as well as a limited signal, we seem to have a major source of
interference on much the same line of sight.

Well if it is interference on such a scale that its causing upset then
Ofcom ought to be interested but I somehow doubt that is and if it is
what would it be?. Perhaps the answer lies closer to home!..

I have now begun to suspect that the CT7000 has slowly deteriorated and I
became 'accustomed' to this as it happened, and assumed it was simply
interference. So it may be that a more modern tuner as well as a better
antenna would deal with the problem. My dilemma is as I outlined before...
:-/

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

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , Keith G
writes

"tony sayer" wrote


Something very wrong there then Keith. Perhaps it was that cable join in
the gutter!..


There is no cable join, it is one piece from the aerial to the
appliance...

Sure about that, seemed to be joined on that piccy you showed me?..


Yes, the cable joint was put right on the second or third visit (don't
remember now). The second guy was leaving the outfit and was quite eager to
slag the first guy off and *put right* his handiwork. There is no joint
now - more's the pity, the RGB input (having swapped to a TV aerial) from
the PVR and digibox on each of two small tellies is positively *florid*!!




Well.. should have DIY'ed it in the first place;!..

FM is better digital. The stupid thing is that its carried around
digitally but then analogue modulated.

But its a better type of digital!..


So is a 'digitally mastered' LP....!!

Well these D to A and err, D to D but throw away a few bitsa of the D
along the way..

A mad olde world eh?..


;-)





--
Tony Sayer

Friends of Radio 3
 

In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes
In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf jcgl@st-
and.demon.co.uk writes


2) Run a UHF antenna feed to the hifi room, and use a 'FreeView' box.

Dunno.. Perhaps you don't mind MP2 low rate artefacts.. I do..

I have in the past (mostly) been quite happy with the sound quality on R3
and BBC4 for Prom broadcasts. There have been some notable exceptions
where there seemed to be a specific problem. Also, the DTTV signal seems
much more prone to audio 'glitches' due to impulse interference than DAB.
However, overall, in our local conditions I prefer it to FM R3. The snag
being that "what you have shalt be taken away" may eventually apply to this
as well as to DAB...

Humm..., give 'em time, Audio quality isn't a big issue in the BBC
management....



Hence as well as a limited signal, we seem to have a major source of
interference on much the same line of sight.

Well if it is interference on such a scale that its causing upset then
Ofcom ought to be interested but I somehow doubt that is and if it is
what would it be?. Perhaps the answer lies closer to home!..

I have now begun to suspect that the CT7000 has slowly deteriorated and I
became 'accustomed' to this as it happened, and assumed it was simply
interference. So it may be that a more modern tuner as well as a better
antenna would deal with the problem. My dilemma is as I outlined before...
:-/

Well one way or 't other. I still reckon Satellite is the long term answer....


Slainte,

Jim


--
Tony Sayer