In article . com,
Albert
Zweistein wrote:



Below is a quote from your page at
http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong...airandmod.html 'And
listening to Radio 3 or 4 using the FM tuner demonstrates how much
nicer these can sound via FM than via DAB.' I quite agree but would you
say this is a result of the low bit rate the bbc uses or is an
indication of the inherent superiority of analogue vs digital sound
reproduction?

Alas I can't give a simple yes/no answer to that question because there are
a number of differences between FM and DAB in practice. Couple of examples:

FM tends to add some low order distortion, and also intermod, particularly
for stereo. Caused by the limited bandwidth, etc.

BBC FM has *level* compression applied in a different way to DAB. So the
dynamics are likely to be different. My impression is that this tends to
make the FM sound 'warmer' as it acts a bit like a 'sustain' pedel.

I assume the use of low bitrates contributes, but the result comes from
combining many differences. Overall, though I find listening to R3 FM from
the 626's tuner sounds more 'relaxed' or 'natural' than from a 'Pure' DAB
tuner though the 626 amp sections.

That said, in practice most of my serious R3/4 listening these days tends
to be via using get_iplayer to obtain the files and play them. The 626
produces nice sounds from these as well.

FWIW my other systems use Armstrong 700 amps and Quad ESLs.

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

On 09/11/2015 08:59, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article . com,
Albert
Zweistein wrote:



Below is a quote from your page at
http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong...airandmod.html 'And
listening to Radio 3 or 4 using the FM tuner demonstrates how much
nicer these can sound via FM than via DAB.' I quite agree but would you
say this is a result of the low bit rate the bbc uses or is an
indication of the inherent superiority of analogue vs digital sound
reproduction?

Alas I can't give a simple yes/no answer to that question because there are
a number of differences between FM and DAB in practice. Couple of examples:

FM tends to add some low order distortion, and also intermod, particularly
for stereo. Caused by the limited bandwidth, etc.

BBC FM has *level* compression applied in a different way to DAB. So the
dynamics are likely to be different. My impression is that this tends to
make the FM sound 'warmer' as it acts a bit like a 'sustain' pedel.


I wonder why human ears prefer the sound of a bit of 'sustain'? I
certainly do.

In article . com,
Albert Zweistein wrote:
On 09/11/2015 08:59, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article . com,
Albert
Zweistein wrote:



Below is a quote from your page at
http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong...airandmod.html
'And listening to Radio 3 or 4 using the FM tuner demonstrates how
much nicer these can sound via FM than via DAB.' I quite agree but
would you say this is a result of the low bit rate the bbc uses or is
an indication of the inherent superiority of analogue vs digital
sound reproduction?

Alas I can't give a simple yes/no answer to that question because
there are a number of differences between FM and DAB in practice.
Couple of examples:

FM tends to add some low order distortion, and also intermod,
particularly for stereo. Caused by the limited bandwidth, etc.

BBC FM has *level* compression applied in a different way to DAB. So
the dynamics are likely to be different. My impression is that this
tends to make the FM sound 'warmer' as it acts a bit like a 'sustain'
pedel.


I wonder why human ears prefer the sound of a bit of 'sustain'? I
certainly do.

Have a mate who constantly goes on about how much better FM is than
digital.

So set up a test for him. Three tuners all on R3 - one FM, one DAB, one
Freeview. Levels carefully balanced. A long silent pause when switching
between them - so the delay on digital didn't give the game away.

He failed miserably to distinguish which was which. ;-)

--
*The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on my list.

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

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes

So set up a test for him. Three tuners all on R3 - one FM, one DAB, one
Freeview. Levels carefully balanced. A long silent pause when switching
between them - so the delay on digital didn't give the game away.

He failed miserably to distinguish which was which. ;-)

Without wishing to be deliberately provocative, I think that result
applies to many tests, such as LPs/CDs, valves/solid state etc. Whilst
accepting that there are those with finely tuned ears who will pass the
test, I'm quite sure I wouldn't.

Recent fun has been resurrecting my turntable (TD125/SME3009) and having
great fun playing LPs that I have not duplicated on CD, and have not
heard for too many years. However, were I to play the same album on
vinyl and CD, I doubt I could tell the difference.
--
Graeme

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article . com,
Albert Zweistein wrote:
On 09/11/2015 08:59, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article . com,
Albert
Zweistein wrote:



Below is a quote from your page at
http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong...airandmod.html
'And listening to Radio 3 or 4 using the FM tuner demonstrates how
much nicer these can sound via FM than via DAB.' I quite agree but
would you say this is a result of the low bit rate the bbc uses or is
an indication of the inherent superiority of analogue vs digital
sound reproduction?

Alas I can't give a simple yes/no answer to that question because
there are a number of differences between FM and DAB in practice.
Couple of examples:

FM tends to add some low order distortion, and also intermod,
particularly for stereo. Caused by the limited bandwidth, etc.

BBC FM has *level* compression applied in a different way to DAB. So
the dynamics are likely to be different. My impression is that this
tends to make the FM sound 'warmer' as it acts a bit like a 'sustain'
pedel.


I wonder why human ears prefer the sound of a bit of 'sustain'? I
certainly do.

Have a mate who constantly goes on about how much better FM is than
digital.

So set up a test for him. Three tuners all on R3 - one FM, one DAB, one
Freeview. Levels carefully balanced. A long silent pause when switching
between them - so the delay on digital didn't give the game away.

He failed miserably to distinguish which was which. ;-)



He should get his hearing checked then!....

--
Tony Sayer

In article . com,
Albert Zweistein wrote:
'And listening to Radio 3 or 4 using the FM tuner demonstrates how much
nicer these can sound via FM than via DAB.'
I quite agree but would you say this is a result of the low bit rate the
bbc uses or is an indication of the inherent superiority of analogue vs
digital sound reproduction?

Think you'll find that pretty well all of the chain from microphone to
transmitter is digital these days.

It's a very sad fact that it's all to easy to mess up a perfectly good
digital signal by simply reducing the data rate at the point of
transmission. They've done that with both radio and TV.

And don't even get me started on phones... ;-)

--
*Husband and cat lost -- reward for cat

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

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article . com,
Albert Zweistein wrote:
'And listening to Radio 3 or 4 using the FM tuner demonstrates how
much nicer these can sound via FM than via DAB.' I quite agree but
would you say this is a result of the low bit rate the bbc uses or is
an indication of the inherent superiority of analogue vs digital
sound reproduction?

Think you'll find that pretty well all of the chain from microphone to
transmitter is digital these days.

Indeed. And so far as I know, the BBC still use NICAM for the distribution
for FM. Hence it is digital with a 32k sample rate and less than 16 bits
per sample. So nominally 'worse than Audio CD'. Yet can sound fine. People
ceased being able to hear an all-analogue FM chain decades ago.

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

On 09/11/2015 16:52, Jim Lesurf wrote:


Indeed. And so far as I know, the BBC still use NICAM for the distribution
for FM. Hence it is digital with a 32k sample rate and less than 16 bits
per sample. So nominally 'worse than Audio CD'. Yet can sound fine. People
ceased being able to hear an all-analogue FM chain decades ago.

Maybe fewer than 16 bits but it's almost a floating point encoding
so gives better resolution at low levels than you might think.

--
Eiron.

In article , Eiron
wrote:

Indeed. And so far as I know, the BBC still use NICAM for the
distribution for FM. Hence it is digital with a 32k sample rate and
less than 16 bits per sample. So nominally 'worse than Audio CD'. Yet
can sound fine. People ceased being able to hear an all-analogue FM
chain decades ago.

Maybe fewer than 16 bits but it's almost a floating point encoding so
gives better resolution at low levels than you might think.

Yes, this may help people who've not checked it out.

http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/BBC/PCMandNICAM/History.html

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 ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:
Indeed. And so far as I know, the BBC still use NICAM for the
distribution for FM. Hence it is digital with a 32k sample rate and less
than 16 bits per sample. So nominally 'worse than Audio CD'. Yet can
sound fine.

Dunno, Jim. The transmission side of the BBC was out sourced many years
ago. So may have changed things to commercial PCM equipment for
distribution too.

--
*Just give me chocolate and nobody gets hurt

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