Internet radio - classical music, etc
 

"David Looser" wrote in message

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , David Looser
scribeth thus

That may be your opinion, but it's far from being a fact, as the
existence of internet streams clearly demonstrates. I see no
"push"
towards DAB, and
you have failed to demonstrate that there is one.

David.



Read Lord Carter's "Digital Britain" report from a week or two
ago.....
--

Thanks for the suggestion, it was an interesting read. But Steve is
pointing his guns in the wrong direction, he is arguing that the
*BBC* is
biased towards DAB, but Lord Carter's report was made for the
government,
not the BBC.


Don't try to lecture me about any of this. My guns are directed
precisely in the right direction. All Stephen Carter's Digital Britain
report (which *is* a government report, not made for government -
Carter is the Communications minister) is doing is supporting the
recommendations made to government by the Digital Radio Working Group
(DRWG), and the Technology sub-group within the DRWG was the group
that actually chose which digital radio platforms should be included
and excluded, and the person who chaired the Technology sub-group was
the BBC controller in charge of digital radio.

The BBC also has teh power to veto any of the recommendations - what
are the rest of the radio industry going to do if the BBC doesn't
support them? Nothing they can do.

The BBC is responsible for screwing consumers in order to protect its
audiences. Simple as that.


You know, the idea that the government can make DAB the "primary
network"
for radio seriously overestimates their power.


The Digital Britain report actually said "a primary network", not "the
primary network", actually (or main network or whatever).


If the public wont buy DAB
sets (and they've had one of the slowest uptakes of any new consumer
product in recent years) then the government can't make them.


The BBC can push them in one way or another via their TV adverts
though.


I note that
even Ofcom is shying away from coming up with a switch off date for
analogue radio.


That's because it's years away:

http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/20...choff_date.php


There have been many examples of the powers-that-be being
wrong footed by the public (such as the domestic take-up of the
internet
itself, the government had to play catch-up pretty damn fast), I
suspect
this is yet another.

Personally I find the idea of internet radio unattractive, far too
geeky
for my liking, and it ties you down to the broadband socket.


I've asked you what on earth you mean by that before, but you haven't
explained yet. So, I ask again, what do you mean by it tying down your
broadband socket??


So I think
we do need DAB, preferably DAB+. But for now I'll stay with FM.


We don't *need* DAB or DAB+. There are other options to DAB/DAB+.



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

The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical
decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm

Internet radio - classical music, etc
 

In article ,
BBC is biased towards DAB wrote:
Just had a brief listen for the first time ever. Sounds exactly the
same as any other pop station.


The fact that you'd say that speaks volumes about this entire issue.

OK then - how does it sound different from any other pop station in terms
of audio quality? You suggested poorer frequency response - which would be
the most obvious thing since you said MW sounded better. And my brief
listen said it was pretty normal - and with about a couple of octave more
than AM. Nor was their any obvious distortion - their limiters were doing
their job. Again, exactly like all other pop stations.


And far better quality than off MW.


Listening to it now. It has improved since I last heard it, and I'd
put it at just above MW now - a triumph for 21st century digital
radio.

Ah right. Perhaps an apology would be in order?

Previously it was worse than MW. Seriously. And I bet the one
you can hear is **** as well, but you won't admit that, because it
doesn't suit your argument.

What are you on about?


A serious question - does your hearing cut off at under 5 kHz?


Fool.

Perfectly reasonable question given your statements.

--
*Sherlock Holmes never said "Elementary, my dear Watson" *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Internet radio - classical music, etc
 

In article ,
BBC is biased towards DAB wrote:
http://81.174.169.10/odds/dab_mw.mp3


Both are ****, but for different reasons.

To be honest, I could listen to the MW for longer than I could the DAB
version before resorting to pulling my wisdom teeth out to distract my
mind from the pain.

Try using an LP filter on DAB, then, if you don't like anything over 4 kHz.

--
*Heart attacks... God's revenge for eating his animal friends

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Internet radio - classical music, etc
 

In article ,
Rob wrote:
WIW I much prefer the MW (second) part from that extract from what
little music I can hear - the DAB sounds as if it's coming from an echo
chamber, bass turned down, treble turned right up, tinny. The MW sounds
focussed, muffled, treble turned right down, artificially bassy,
sonorous.

I buy on average a DAB radio each year, thinking I might like it/what's
not to like. Then within a month or so I sell it or give it away, and go
back to one of the cheap portable FM radios I have.

Perhaps FM masks the compression, perhaps blind prejudice, perhaps FM
does 'sound better'.

Peter Walker of Quad fame had it right - the wider you open the window the
more the s**t comes in. All these pop stations are over processed, which
makes them sound even more harsh. AM removes most of the HF and with it
some of that harshness.

--
*I couldn't repair your brakes, so I made your horn louder *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Internet radio - classical music, etc
 

In article ,
BBC is biased towards DAB wrote:
21 TV ad campaigns for DAB versus zero TV ad campaigns for Internet
radio.

Does that indicate platform-neutrality?

Try listening to R4. They are forever plugging Listen Again - and hardly
ever even mention DAB.

Why are you so concerned about what TV does as regards radio? It would be
fair enough if you were simply complaining about adverts on BBC TV - but
of course being you everything is a conspiracy.

--
*Snowmen fall from Heaven unassembled*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Internet radio - classical music, etc
 

In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:
Is your serious listening going to be via Freeview when the BBC's
Internet streams provide higher quality?

You really think I want a pc in my living room? I'm starting to build
a picture of the way you live, and it is mostly week-old pot noodle
containers and used socks.

Obviously a bedsit. He certainly doesn't appreciate how the majority use
radio.

--
*The statement below is true.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Internet radio - classical music, etc
 

In article ,
BBC is biased towards DAB wrote:
I came on here, noticed a thread, read the thread, noticed a whole lot
of nonsense being spewed, and I've replied to some of that nonsense so
that these people can see the error of their ways. That's it, really,
and I'll be off when I choose.

In fact, I think I'll stay a bit longer than I was going to now you've
tried to tell me what to do


I'm beginning to
wonder if you are perhaps a sock puppet of Phil Allison's.


I don't even know who that is.

You've certainly been caught out here again. Let me quote you from earlier

***********
From: BBC is biased towards DAB
Subject: Internet radio - classical music, etc
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 16:55
Newsgroups: uk.rec.audio

Wondered when you'd turn up. Your search on DAB topics seems a bit
slow
compared to usual.


I don't search for DAB topics - I just stumbled across this thread.
************

If you were even an occasional reader of this group - or any other audio
one - you'd know about Allison.

But then you've turned up on other groups I read as soon as DAB is
mentioned - and then disappear just as quickly.

--
*Support bacteria - they're the only culture some people have *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Internet radio - classical music, etc
 

In article ,
BBC is biased towards DAB wrote:
Sure. At the end of the day though, I read the whole thread through,
marked the ones I disagreed with, and there were so many that I didn't
have any time for the pleasantries! ;-)

Anyway, Lesurf can't see beyond Radio 3, and he just says that it's
better on DAB merely because of the dynamic range compression on FM,
therefore ignoring that FM actually carries the sound that's fed into
the system at higher fidelity than DAB.

Define 'higher fidelity'

Plowman is *just* an incorrigible fool. The end.

One who has actually conducted some tests to see if 'the man in the
street' can reliably tell 'that DAB sounds worse than FM' and has found it
not proved. Have you?

Don't know David Looser, but his posts made him sound full of himself,
so I didn't feel the need to hold back with him either.

Mainly it's Plowman and his nonsense that bugs me though, so whenever
he's about we invariably end up arguing.

Well, you should stop chasing me round newsgroups. I read a variety - and
that would be easily checked. You only turn up on them when DAB is
mentioned.

--
*If one synchronized swimmer drowns, do the rest have to drown too?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Internet radio - classical music, etc
 

In article ,
BBC is biased towards DAB wrote:
Just get a tuner that performs well on both, and press the 'band'
button to switch between DAB and FM when you've got the same station
on both bands. There's no contest, so forget your double blind testing
in this instance, it really isn't needed at all.

It would be worthwhile if you read up on conducting proper double blind
testing.

Otherwise it puts you in the same camp as those who say a 'posh' mains
cable makes their amp sound better.

--
*I'm planning to be spontaneous tomorrow *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Internet radio - classical music, etc
 

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Mike O'Sullivan wrote:
I remember driving round Birmingham on a coach equipped with a
demonstration system long before actual transmissions started - and the
difference in reception between that and FM was quite astounding.

A high bit rate I'd imagine, it being a demo, not the real commercial
world.

Nope - IIRC the same bitrates as used at the start of the service. the
current reduced ones came later.

But just to point out, bitrates have little to do with actual reception.

Did you mean to say "bitrates have little to do with actual sound quality" ?