On Fri, 01 Jan 2010 21:23:43 +0000, bCoombes wrote:

I suppose that if the average listener is a brain dead moron that could
be true.

It is also important to consider the conditions of the "average" listener:

1) Low end portable radio with single loudspeaker of low quality.

2) Inadequate antenna, often broken.

3) The "music" emanating from the radio serves as background noise in
an already noisy environment.

J G Miller wrote:
On Fri, 01 Jan 2010 21:23:43 +0000, bCoombes wrote:

I suppose that if the average listener is a brain dead moron that could
be true.

It is also important to consider the conditions of the "average" listener:

1) Low end portable radio with single loudspeaker of low quality.

2) Inadequate antenna, often broken.

3) The "music" emanating from the radio serves as background noise in
an already noisy environment.

This is all very true, however I can't help feeling that in such circumstances
AM would do so the only point of DAB becomes to free up the airwaves allowing
the 'goverment' (term used loosely) to add to it's already swollen coffers by
auctioning said space off.

On Jan 2, 3:33*pm, bcoombes bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote:


This is all very true, however I can't help feeling that in such circumstances
AM would do so the only point of DAB becomes to free up the airwaves allowing
the 'goverment' (term used loosely) to add to it's already swollen coffers by
auctioning said space off.

I think DAB has lost it's way.

It started as a way to broadcast high quality digital,
(but that was too expensive)

then became a way to add more stations
(but hardly any of these stations have large enough audiences)

Now it is not much more than a waste of bandwidth, and a millstone
around the broadcasters necks.

Richard E.

Richard Evans wrote:
On Jan 2, 3:33 pm, bcoombes bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote:

This is all very true, however I can't help feeling that in such circumstances
AM would do so the only point of DAB becomes to free up the airwaves allowing
the 'goverment' (term used loosely) to add to it's already swollen coffers by
auctioning said space off.

I think DAB has lost it's way.

It started as a way to broadcast high quality digital,
(but that was too expensive)

then became a way to add more stations
(but hardly any of these stations have large enough audiences)

Now it is not much more than a waste of bandwidth, and a millstone
around the broadcasters necks.

Yes, all true, although the BBC continue to insist that DAB always betters FM
and is the best thing since sliced bread. (which I also don't like). I assume
that they are following their political master's party line on this.

On Jan 1, 2:02�pm, "alexander.keys1"
wrote:
On 1 Jan, 04:37, "IanT" wrote:

The type of people that say HD is far better are the type that claim DAB
sounds better than FM stereo. �What they really mean is that they never
ever connected a proper aerial to their old tuner so never enjoyed the
quality!

DAB is a great improvement over FM, for the average listener, for a
start there is a greater choice of stations, I recommend BBC Radio 7,
BBC World Service and Premier Christian Radio, and it tends to either
work well or not at all, you don't get the hissing, distortion etc,
that there is with bad FM reception. Most DAB sets also receive FM, so
you can still hear the local community and pirate stations.

DAB is dead

On Sat, 02 Jan 2010 13:15:27 -0800, HD Radio Farce wrote:

DAB is dead

Is that why the DAB Ensembles Worldwide web site

http://www.wohnort.ORG/

is proclaiming

QUOTE

January 1st

Publication of DAB Ensembles Worldwide
is currently suspended.

UNQUOTE

"alexander.keys1" wrote in message
...
On 1 Jan, 04:37, "IanT" wrote:

The type of people that say HD is far better are the type that claim DAB
sounds better than FM stereo. What they really mean is that they never
ever connected a proper aerial to their old tuner so never enjoyed the
quality!

DAB is a great improvement over FM, for the average listener, for a
start there is a greater choice of stations, I recommend BBC Radio 7,
BBC World Service and Premier Christian Radio, and it tends to either
work well or not at all, you don't get the hissing, distortion etc,
that there is with bad FM reception. Most DAB sets also receive FM,
so you can still hear the local community and pirate stations.


So what you are saying is more channels are better.
Then Internet radio is better, making DAB irrelevant

Steve Terry
--
Get a free Three 3pay Sim with £2 bonus after £10 top up
http://freeagent.three.co.uk/stand/view/id/5276

In article , Steve Terry
wrote:
So what you are saying is more channels are better.
Then Internet radio is better, making DAB irrelevan

Internet radio usually sounds better too, even at 128kb/s. Many
stations are available in several bitrates, and even if you only listen
to the higher quality ones, there are still hundreds of them.

Rod.
--
Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/

In article en.co.uk,
Roderick Stewart scribeth
thus
In article , Steve Terry
wrote:
So what you are saying is more channels are better.
Then Internet radio is better, making DAB irrelevan

Internet radio usually sounds better too, even at 128kb/s. Many
stations are available in several bitrates, and even if you only listen
to the higher quality ones, there are still hundreds of them.


Indeed.. but not -that- available mobile;(...
Rod.

--
Tony Sayer

tony sayer wrote:
In article en.co.uk,
Roderick Stewart scribeth
thus
In article , Steve Terry
wrote:
So what you are saying is more channels are better.
Then Internet radio is better, making DAB irrelevan
Internet radio usually sounds better too, even at 128kb/s. Many
stations are available in several bitrates, and even if you only listen
to the higher quality ones, there are still hundreds of them.


Indeed.. but not -that- available mobile;(...
Rod.


Maybe MiFi would be an answer for some.
http://threestore.three.co.uk/broadband/

--
Adrian