On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:37:32 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Then I suggest that you borrow your daughter's DAB radio, hook it up
to a hi-fi and compare it with DAB. You need to do that BEFORE
commenting on the adequacy of the audio quality on DAB - but that
hasn't stopped you so far....




Listen to this. It is a few seconds each of FM and DAB. Which is
which?

http://81.174.169.10/odds/dab_fm.mp3

d

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...


As mobile internet gets cheaper and more widespread, I think it
more
likely that Joe Public will listen to Internet Radio on their
mobile
'phone rather than buy a DAB portable.


An extraordinarily inefficient way for Joe Public to listen to the
radio.
A broadcast transmitter uses up the same amount of bandwidth
regardless
of how many listeners there are. With internet radio the bandwidth
used
is a function of the number of listeners.

David.



Indeed, it is inefficient, but so is Internet Television, Music
downloads
etc. I think that bandwidths and costs are going in the direction
that
encourages profligacy, or at least, doesn't discourage it.


Internet bandwidth costs fall in-line with Moore's Law, because
Moore's Law increases the speed of Internet routers without increasing
the costs of the routers.


Home broadband
started with download limits, which were rapidly increased, and/or
converted to unlimited use packages. I envisage that competitive
pressures will ensure that mobile broadband packages go the same
way.


Yes, there's 4G using LTE or WiMAX just over the horizon, then 5G
after that.


Internet radio on a mobile 'phone will be all about portability and
choice of channels, audio quality won't be an issue, so streaming at
32kbps or less is quite likely.


There are over 8,000 Internet radio streams on shoutcast.com using 128
kbps or higher, and a third of all UK commercial radio stations are
using 128 kbps. Don't see why you think 32 kbps will be common for
Internet radio streams, to be honest.



--
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

Don Pearce wrote in message news:4994bcd6.509565843@localhost
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:37:32 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Then I suggest that you borrow your daughter's DAB radio, hook it
up
to a hi-fi and compare it with DAB. You need to do that BEFORE
commenting on the adequacy of the audio quality on DAB - but that
hasn't stopped you so far....




Listen to this. It is a few seconds each of FM and DAB. Which is
which?

http://81.174.169.10/odds/dab_fm.mp3


I'm not playing your little games, Pearce. Sorry.




--
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

On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:51:02 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote in message news:4994bcd6.509565843@localhost
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:37:32 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Then I suggest that you borrow your daughter's DAB radio, hook it
up
to a hi-fi and compare it with DAB. You need to do that BEFORE
commenting on the adequacy of the audio quality on DAB - but that
hasn't stopped you so far....




Listen to this. It is a few seconds each of FM and DAB. Which is
which?

http://81.174.169.10/odds/dab_fm.mp3


I'm not playing your little games, Pearce. Sorry.

I knew that when to came to a real test you would prove to be all
mouth. Having proved a failure, you can go.

d

Don Pearce wrote in message news:4995bf86.510253421@localhost
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:51:02 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote in message news:4994bcd6.509565843@localhost
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:37:32 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Then I suggest that you borrow your daughter's DAB radio, hook it
up
to a hi-fi and compare it with DAB. You need to do that BEFORE
commenting on the adequacy of the audio quality on DAB - but that
hasn't stopped you so far....




Listen to this. It is a few seconds each of FM and DAB. Which is
which?

http://81.174.169.10/odds/dab_fm.mp3


I'm not playing your little games, Pearce. Sorry.

I knew that when to came to a real test you would prove to be all
mouth. Having proved a failure, you can go.


Oh, I'm staying. Failure? Hardly.




--
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

On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:59:21 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote in message news:4995bf86.510253421@localhost
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:51:02 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote in message news:4994bcd6.509565843@localhost
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:37:32 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Then I suggest that you borrow your daughter's DAB radio, hook it
up
to a hi-fi and compare it with DAB. You need to do that BEFORE
commenting on the adequacy of the audio quality on DAB - but that
hasn't stopped you so far....




Listen to this. It is a few seconds each of FM and DAB. Which is
which?

http://81.174.169.10/odds/dab_fm.mp3


I'm not playing your little games, Pearce. Sorry.

I knew that when to came to a real test you would prove to be all
mouth. Having proved a failure, you can go.


Oh, I'm staying. Failure? Hardly.

You have demonstrably failed at everything concerning DAB you have
bragged about attempting, and now having given you the most trivial of
tests that should have been easy for you, you have failed at that too.

d

Don Pearce wrote in message news:4995bf86.510253421@localhost
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:51:02 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote in message news:4994bcd6.509565843@localhost
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:37:32 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Then I suggest that you borrow your daughter's DAB radio, hook it
up
to a hi-fi and compare it with DAB. You need to do that BEFORE
commenting on the adequacy of the audio quality on DAB - but that
hasn't stopped you so far....




Listen to this. It is a few seconds each of FM and DAB. Which is
which?

http://81.174.169.10/odds/dab_fm.mp3


I'm not playing your little games, Pearce. Sorry.

I knew that when to came to a real test you would prove to be all
mouth. Having proved a failure, you can go.


BTW, do you have any evidence to back any of these up:

"Because classical music is generally far more complex and demanding
than modern pop - it takes a greater degree of intelligence to
understand and appreciate it."

"CD already has a definition way beyond that of the human auditory
system"

"It is pretty much impossible to compare CD to SACD."

"Since the CD there has not been a single development that has
improved
the sound, so none has been widely adopted by the classical listener."

If you can't, then you're a failure, and you can go, Pearce. On you
trot.



--
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

"BBC is biased towards DAB" wrote in message
...

Internet bandwidth costs fall in-line with Moore's Law, because Moore's
Law increases the speed of Internet routers without increasing the costs
of the routers.



Frankly Steve, if you can write something as naive as that, your opinion
isn't worth bothering with.

Suffice it to say that internet costs are more to do with transmission
systems than routers, and that is particularly true of mobile internet.

David.

"BBC is biased towards DAB" wrote in message
...
"Serge Auckland" wrote in message


loads snipped
Internet radio on a mobile 'phone will be all about portability and
choice of channels, audio quality won't be an issue, so streaming at
32kbps or less is quite likely.


There are over 8,000 Internet radio streams on shoutcast.com using 128
kbps or higher, and a third of all UK commercial radio stations are using
128 kbps. Don't see why you think 32 kbps will be common for Internet
radio streams, to be honest.



--
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

Perhaps it won't but what I'm saying is that mobile broadband internet radio
will become more popular than portable radio receivers, whether AM, FM or
DAB. If adequate quality for the purpose is available at only 32kbps, then
bandwidth is no bar to this developing.

S.
--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

Don Pearce wrote in message news:4996c0a5.510541125@localhost
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:59:21 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote in message news:4995bf86.510253421@localhost
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:51:02 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote in message news:4994bcd6.509565843@localhost
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:37:32 -0000, "BBC is biased towards DAB"
wrote:

Then I suggest that you borrow your daughter's DAB radio, hook
it
up
to a hi-fi and compare it with DAB. You need to do that BEFORE
commenting on the adequacy of the audio quality on DAB - but
that
hasn't stopped you so far....




Listen to this. It is a few seconds each of FM and DAB. Which is
which?

http://81.174.169.10/odds/dab_fm.mp3


I'm not playing your little games, Pearce. Sorry.

I knew that when to came to a real test you would prove to be all
mouth. Having proved a failure, you can go.


Oh, I'm staying. Failure? Hardly.

You have demonstrably failed at everything concerning DAB you have
bragged about attempting,


I came up with the idea that led to the design of DAB+, because I'd
been banging on about using mobile TV systems since around 2002/3, and
DAB+ is just the DMB mobile TV system without video support. I also
influenced the decision to design DAB+, because the French
broadcasters quoted my website pretty much verbatim when they argued
against using DAB in their digital radio consultation, and by an
amazing coincidence they proposed to use DVB-H instead, whcih just
happened to be what my website was proposing should be used, because
it was so much more efficient than DAB.

I also helped a couple of people from Sweden stop DAB being adopted,
which was successful, and Sweden is now looking at using DAB+.

It was the French decision not to support DAB that was the main reason
why DAB+ was designed at all though. The UK broadcasters and the DAB
old guard were all trying desperately to hang on and for the whole of
Europe to use DAB, but once France told them where to go the writing
was on the wall, because the mobile TV systems would have been adopted
instead of DAB. I later changed to supporting the use of DMB rather
than DVB-H, and by another amazing coincidence France ended up
choosing DMB for its digital radio system.

Failure? Hardly.

And the fact that so many people know about DAB+ today is down to my
website as well.


and now having given you the most trivial of
tests that should have been easy for you, you have failed at that
too.


I haven't even tried your little game.



--
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