Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Rob

In article om,
Rob wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?

--
*If a thing is worth doing, wouldn't it have been done already?

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

On 04/05/2012 23:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In raweb.com,
wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?


Yes - they seem to mention reliability. Any comments on the concept in
terms of audio? Or is the concept intrinsically unreliable?

Rob

On Sat, 05 May 2012 08:44:27 +0100, Rob wrote:

On 04/05/2012 23:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In raweb.com,
wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?


Yes - they seem to mention reliability. Any comments on the concept in
terms of audio? Or is the concept intrinsically unreliable?

Rob

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with it, but it does have one
disadvantage in real-world use. That is that it has no robust way to
combat data lost through interference. When you send real data over
WiFi it goes at high speed and lost info gets re-transmitted. With
this system, what is lost is gone for good, and you get a glitch
instead.

When it is running well, it should be capable of good sound quality.
In a city, with lots of local WiFi systems in use, this is unlikely to
be the case.

d

Don Pearce wrote...

When it is running well, it should be capable of good sound quality.

Out of interest, how do those devices work, are they sending the raw
audio data stream over the radio link to the DAC in the receiver or is
there some conversion to another format in the transmitter before being
broadcast?


--
Ken O'Meara
http://www.btinternet.com/~unsteadyken/

On Sat, 5 May 2012 13:07:57 +0100, UnsteadyKen
wrote:


Don Pearce wrote...

When it is running well, it should be capable of good sound quality.

Out of interest, how do those devices work, are they sending the raw
audio data stream over the radio link to the DAC in the receiver or is
there some conversion to another format in the transmitter before being
broadcast?

It sends a kind of broadcast stream, which is decoded by a DAC in the
receiver. I don't know what the over-air transmitted format is - it
may well be proprietary.

d

In article m,
Rob wrote:
On 04/05/2012 23:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In raweb.com,
wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?


Yes - they seem to mention reliability. Any comments on the concept in
terms of audio? Or is the concept intrinsically unreliable?

Radio links can of course work perfectly well under good conditions. But
many of these sort of things don't work well in practice. Other devices
interfering with the signal or that signal not being powerful enough to go
through walls etc.

All you can really do is try it and see if it works, as so much depends on
local conditions. And hope Maplin will refund if it doesn't suit.

--
*Give me ambiguity or give me something else.

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

On 05/05/2012 10:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In aweb.com,
wrote:
On 04/05/2012 23:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In raweb.com,
wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?


Yes - they seem to mention reliability. Any comments on the concept in
terms of audio? Or is the concept intrinsically unreliable?

Radio links can of course work perfectly well under good conditions. But
many of these sort of things don't work well in practice. Other devices
interfering with the signal or that signal not being powerful enough to go
through walls etc.

All you can really do is try it and see if it works, as so much depends on
local conditions. And hope Maplin will refund if it doesn't suit.


It could be a convenient method (for me) of attaching the proper stereo
to the TV system. I'd thought perhaps the technology had actually
'locked down' into something that worked - apparently not then, just yet.

Rob

In article om, Rob
wrote:

It could be a convenient method (for me) of attaching the proper stereo
to the TV system. I'd thought perhaps the technology had actually
'locked down' into something that worked - apparently not then, just yet.

The problem isn't simply a matter of 'technology' as such. It is the
situation:

The problem is that the band/channel being used is also already widely used
for various purposes in a way that includes no 'plan' of who can transmit
how much power from which places. So cross interference becomes a certainty
as the density of users rises. That then at least will degrade the
reliability for any individual user, and either cause pauses or dropouts,
or lower bandwidth to an unacceptable level.

In general, 'broadcasting' and general radio transmission is controlled in
ways designs to avoid cross interference. If someone wants to transmit,
they have to get permission which depends on an assessment of the impact on
other services. But here you end up with 'crowded party' problems - unless
you live well clear of 'competing' users.

FWIW for indoor 'line of sight' you might be better looking to some kind of
near-visible 'optical' system where the transmitter lights up the room in a
modulated way. At least that helps prevent interference from next door. But
of course that won't go though walls, and may be affected by shadowing. I
can't suggest any commercial system, though. Personally, I'm quite happy in
general to use 'wired' systems at home unless there is a specific need to
do otherwise.

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 m, Rob
scribeth thus
On 04/05/2012 23:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In raweb.com,
wrote:
Any opinions on this:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/wireless-pc-...smitter-104993

Would anything be lost over a cable?

Have you read the reviews at the bottom of the page?


Yes - they seem to mention reliability. Any comments on the concept in
terms of audio? Or is the concept intrinsically unreliable?

Rob

It I suspect works on 2.4 Ghz which is now becoming very crowded with
the explosion in wi-fi. I 'd expect it to work well in the absence of
any interfering signals, but these places are now very few and far
between..

A lot of wireless problems are simply caused by congestion of the
available spectrum allocated to it.

Also signal attenuation is quite high in some domestic environments

It may well work fine today but tomorrow when next door start using
their new wi-fi point all the time and perhaps the one across the
way?....

Use wire if you can, a lot more reliable..
--
Tony Sayer