In article , David Looser
scribeth thus
"tony sayer" wrote

Has anyone spotted pirate DAB?

Yes quite .. ever wondered why?..
--

Why did the ship-board pirates of the 1960s all use MW? How about
established and thus cheaper technology coupled with a large number of
compatible receivers in use by the target audience?

David.


Give it some thought and then compute the required height and power for
the coverage on VHF and then see that from a ship in the sea is not that
practical
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Jim Lesurf
scribeth thus
In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus


The transmission costs Dave are very real and are bitrate dependant or
as Steve has explained on Capacity units.

If you ran a small ILR station who wanted to go DAB you'd see very soon
that you couldn't afford it"!..

Your point being that a complete DAB MUX would cost more than one FM
channel? If so, is that why the government seem to have presumed FM can be
vacated for 'local' uses, etc? i.e. for users who only want one
station/channel?

Slainte,

Jim

Sorry Jim but in the DAB world it costs a lot of go to DAB as opposed to
FM. Take radio Jackie in London their FM transmission costs a few
thousand a year as they can do that themselves, now when they have to go
to the DAB operator thats when it rather expensive;!..
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
Jan Wysocki wrote:
So it would have nothing to do with a monopoly supplier charging what it
wants? Of course it has to pay the governnmint for those rights.


I have always inferred that it costs a lot more from the fact that I
haven't noticed any pirates using DAB. I notice that they do
bear the extra cost of broadcasting on FM rather than AM.

You can buy non broadcast spec FM transmitters made in China etc for
pennies. Not so DAB. But the real comparison would be between a broadcast
quality FM and DAB one of similar coverage area.

Yes indeed pennies eh?. Some pennies;!..

Yes, now how many FM transmitters are needed to cover London and then
the same on DAB?..
--
Tony Sayer

Bancom

In article , Jim Lesurf
scribeth thus
In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf
scribeth thus
In article , tony sayer
wrote:



Has anyone spotted pirate DAB?

Yes quite .. ever wondered why?..

How much does a DAB encoder/multiplexer cost?

Slainte,

Jim

There is a design for one on the web

Thanks. URL? What test kit would be needed to make sure it works? if it is
cheap and easy I'd actually be interested in one for test purposes. However
I suspect it will be too costly and require more effort than I can summon
these days. But I am curious and would like to know. :-)



I'll look it up as soon as I get a moment..


Best to give Rhode and Schwarz a bell;!..

I tend not to associate R&S with 'cheap'. :-)


Yes pity broadcast warehouse aren't doing them;!..

Slainte,

Jim


--
Tony Sayer

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
Ian Jackson wrote:
That's another way of putting it. Mr DAB and his friends seem to think
transmitting one DAB multiplex costs more than 9 FM stations. Now I know
digital can be power hungry, but that beggars belief.

It all depends whether you really want to transmit one radio programme
or nine (especially if you're talking low power local radio). I would
guess that, for a single programme, FM is much cheaper, but maybe, for
nine DAM is cheaper. I also suspect that it depends greatly on the
coverage required, where things like the size of the transmitter tower,
the aerial system and the transmitter power come into the equation.

Let's just go like for like. The cost of building/running the number of FM
transmitters needed to cover the same area as a DAB multiplex.
The whole point I was making that what Arqiva charge for a single DAB
'frequency' is neither here nor there.

Bloody well is, don't suppose you've ever dealt with Arrg quiver;?..

--
Tony Sayer

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
More of a clue than you, apparently. Get your head out of your arse and do
some proper research. You're supposed to have some form of engineering
qualification. Do you really think the bitrate makes much difference to
the *real* costs of transmission?


The transmission costs Dave are very real and are bitrate dependant or
as Steve has explained on Capacity units.

Sigh. I'm not concerned with what Arqiva charge for the service.

Dave stop being such a wally, if you were a radio station owner and
wanted to use Dab say in London now where would you go?..

That has
little to do with the cost running of the transmitters. You might as well
say the ITV levy - when it existed - was purely a transmission cost.

If you ran a small ILR station who wanted to go DAB you'd see very soon
that you couldn't afford it"!..

Totally different matter

No sorry its not, its a real world problem..

Let alone all the MUX's around the UK which have been licensed but have
not as yet started up!..

So they're charging 'extra' for bandwidth while there's plenty spare.
Thank you.

You still don't get it do you?..
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
The Studio to Transmitter link is more to do with where the multiplexer
unit is located and more often than not a bloody long way from where the
station is located!.

Just one of the component costs of Dabble.

How is that different from having a line to an FM transmitter? Of course a
small local station could just have the transmitting aerial on its roof -
but this is unlikely to be satisfactory everywhere.


Dave you don't have any idea of the way DAB works in the real world or
is set u, why done you learn a bit more about it first?..
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Keith G
scribeth thus

"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote


I heard it said a while back that no DAB radio sold to date would have
made a profit if the real costs of the endless advertising were taken
out?


I calculated based on real advertising costs on ITV that the BBC's 20 TV
advertising campaigns for DAB up to a year or two ago would have cost
£155m for them to have been shown on ITV.

Something like 9.5m DAB radios have been sold to date, so the BBC has
effectively been pseudo-subsidising each and every DAB radio sold to the
tune of £155m / 9.5m = £16.32, which is a lot more than the average profit
made on a DAB radio, so UK DAB should by rights have gone bankrupt years
ago.


Don't know if that is actually true, but I'm sure some *blow off* will be
along shortly to put us all right...???


I did the calculations as accurately as I could, for example by taking
into consideration actual audience figures on different channels and how
much it costs to advertise to that size of audience, and how many TV
adverts the BBC was showing per day and when they were shown and so on,
but the figures were always only ballpark estimates.

Having said that, given the low profit margins on consumer electronics
products I think it's pretty certain that even though the figures are just
ballpark estimates DAB radios would not be profitable if the BBC's TV
advertising had to be paid for.


There you go - that's certainly in line with what I've been led to believe!

I don't know what's involved with the transmission of different systems or
of the relative costs involved, but I do know that the 'best system' at
whatever cost would/will come right in time and is the one that should used,
no matter what exists today.

Free radio (with/without ads) is an essential part of life and, I also
understand, on the increase - no?


Who's paying Keith?..
--
Tony Sayer

In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf
scribeth thus


If you ran a small ILR station who wanted to go DAB you'd see very
soon that you couldn't afford it"!..

Your point being that a complete DAB MUX would cost more than one FM
channel? If so, is that why the government seem to have presumed FM can
be vacated for 'local' uses, etc? i.e. for users who only want one
station/channel?

Sorry Jim but in the DAB world it costs a lot of go to DAB as opposed to
FM. Take radio Jackie in London their FM transmission costs a few
thousand a year as they can do that themselves, now when they have to go
to the DAB operator thats when it rather expensive;!..

So you are saying that just one station of a shared MUX costs more than
having your own FM TX? if so that is quite curious. I'd have expected in
places like London that there would be a lot of competition for FM
allocations, and that might lead to the price being high. However I see no
reason to doubt what you say, if that is what you mean. But it does make me
wonder what the reasons for the 'costs' might be.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article , tony sayer

wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf
scribeth thus


As chance would have it, I'm 'listening again' to the Last Night of the
Proms as I write this. (Trumpet Concerto, excellent!)

Indeed are you hoping to record the TV version I wonder?..

A webpage relating to this should be appearing soon. :-)

As in previous years I used the Proms as a chance to do some comparison
measurements to analyse any differences between different broadcast methods
for the same nominal source material. Some of the results are quite
interesting, perhaps even surprising for some. Stay tuned. :-)

But as usual, measurements and analysis keeps being delayed because I have
the weird habit of finding I'm listening to the music instead! ;-

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html