Virgin Radio on Freeview and Web
 

Agamemnon wrote:
"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message
...
Agamemnon wrote:
"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message
...

Since it is at 64 kbps that is what you would expect, but its
stands up very well considering.


So do you agree that when you said this you were talking crap:

"OGG at 64kbps will outperform anything else at 128kbps"

Except that's NOT what I said. I said anything else apart from.


I put it in quotation marks because IT IS A DIRECT QUOTATION of what
you said.

NO ITS NOT !


http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk....c4976dd0eec037


You took it out of context and dissembled it even after I explained
what I meant.


You made a general comment - it wasn't taken out of context.




--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview & DAB prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.php
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/dab_radios.php

Virgin Radio on Freeview and Web
 

"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message
...
Agamemnon wrote:
"Agamemnon" wrote in message
...

"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message
...
Agamemnon wrote:
"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message

OGG at 128 kbps beat AAC at 128 kbps using your favourite
encoder. The differece between them is MASSIVE.


Nobody has yet uploaded a 128 kbps Ogg version.

Yes they have.

http://www.enthymia.co.uk/test/test1c.zip


I can't tell the difference between the 128 kbps Ogg and 128 kbps
AAC versions.


Oh I just thought, what are you using to listen to the files with ?
Is it an ordinary sound card or a high quality DAC connected to your
computer. If is an ordinary sound card then they only have a response
of 16 KHz whereas an external DAC such as the one I'm using will give
you 22050 Hz. Also what kind of headphones are you using. Mine are
Technics RP-F280 which now cost over £40 and have a response of up to
30 KHz.


PC sound card via S/PDIF to Sony MD player, which is being used in DAC
mode.

Same as me then.

Your hearing obviously doesn't extend to beyond 16 kHz whereas mine extends
to 28 kHz.

Virgin Radio on Freeview and Web
 

Agamemnon wrote:
Your hearing obviously doesn't extend to beyond 16 kHz whereas mine
extends to 28 kHz.

That makes you highly unusual, or a dog.

Virgin Radio on Freeview and Web
 

"Pyriform" wrote in message
...
Agamemnon wrote:
Your hearing obviously doesn't extend to beyond 16 kHz whereas mine
extends to 28 kHz.

That makes you highly unusual, or a dog.

Most people can perceive sound up to 30 kHz.

Why do you think DVD-Audio and SACD came into being.

Stop falling for the marketing CRAP about 16 kHz. Its was always a ploy
designed to squeeze more channels onto FM and has never had any basis in
scientific research which shows that in order for sound to sound natural you
have to have a response of at least 96 kHz or more so that the phase
information is preserved.

Virgin Radio on Freeview and Web
 

Virgin Radio wrote:
Now, now, children...

Meanwhile, we'd believe that the Ogg 160k, or Real AAC 128k, will both
sound best online. However, the best sounding stream will differ for
different people, since audio is always a matter of personal taste.


cough ********.


The most important thing is to remember that big bitrates doesn't
always equal best sound.


You would say that transmitting at 128 kbps on Freeview and 160 kbps on DAB,
both of which sound terrible.

Anyway, higher bit rates when using the same audio codec SHOULD ALWAYS
increase audio quality. But if you really are from Virgin Radio, then it's
probably not a good idea to show your head on here, as you are one of the
worst stations as far as audio engineering goes, and because audio encoders
work on the basis of garbage in, garbage out, and your station invariably
sounds garbage.


In terms of our audio quality elsewhere, we're currently re-evaluating
our audio processing on all platforms; including online and Freeview.

We'd welcome any subjective comments on our audio quality on any of
our platforms. We'd be especially interested in comparisons between
any of the Digital One DAB services, like Virgin Radio, with services
on other DAB Digital Radio multiplexes


Virgin Radio invariably sounds garbage on DAB.


- particularly comparisons
between Planet Rock


That also sounds garbage on DAB.


at 128k and The Arrow


Still garbage.


, or Virgin Radio Classic
Rock, at 128k where you can receive both.


I can't receive that garbage.


Please feel free to either
feedback here or via the website to
http://www.virginradio.co.uk/thestat...us/?to=techies


Ooooooooooo, thanks.


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview & DAB prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.php
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/dab_radios.php

Virgin Radio on Freeview and Web
 

Agamemnon wrote:
"Pyriform" wrote in message
...
Agamemnon wrote:
Your hearing obviously doesn't extend to beyond 16 kHz whereas mine
extends to 28 kHz.

That makes you highly unusual, or a dog.

Most people can perceive sound up to 30 kHz.

Why do you think DVD-Audio and SACD came into being.

Stop falling for the marketing CRAP about 16 kHz. Its was always a ploy
designed to squeeze more channels onto FM and has never had any basis in
scientific research which shows that in order for sound to sound natural you
have to have a response of at least 96 kHz or more so that the phase
information is preserved.

Well, what you have said is quite funny, but I don't think you'll be
making it onto...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/28actsin28minutes/

Cheers,
David.

Virgin Radio on Freeview and Web
 

"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in
:

I can't tell the difference between the 128 kbps Ogg and 128 kbps
AAC versions.


That's your problem. I can and that's all the matters.


Then we're at stalemate, and we need someone else to come forward with
a comment.



"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in
:

Right, I've uploaded 64 kbps Ogg and 128 kbps AAC versions of the same
sample he

http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/samples/stone.zip (1.2 MB)

Do you agree that the Ogg version sounds "mushier" and more muffled
than the AAC version?

Well I am a bit confused, because I don't think the Ogg version sounds
mushier at all, it actually sounds better to me. The symbols at 3-10
seconds in sound as if they have a slighter higher attack and are a bit
more defined. To be frank the two are reasonable near in quality over
the entire 50 seconds.

Virgin Radio on Freeview and Web
 

Stone Free wrote:
"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in
:

I can't tell the difference between the 128 kbps Ogg and 128 kbps
AAC versions.


That's your problem. I can and that's all the matters.


Then we're at stalemate, and we need someone else to come forward
with a comment.



"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in
:

Right, I've uploaded 64 kbps Ogg and 128 kbps AAC versions of the
same sample he

http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/samples/stone.zip (1.2 MB)

Do you agree that the Ogg version sounds "mushier" and more muffled
than the AAC version?

Well I am a bit confused, because I don't think the Ogg version sounds
mushier at all, it actually sounds better to me. The symbols at 3-10
seconds in sound as if they have a slighter higher attack and are a
bit more defined. To be frank the two are reasonable near in quality
over the entire 50 seconds.


Answered this in the "Test data for DAB sounds worse than FM" thread.


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview & DAB prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.php
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/dab_radios.php

We both agree, then.

I'd think we also both agree on my original point - a more efficient codec can deliver a better sound at a lower bitrate than an inefficient one using a higher bitrate. Quality doesn't come from bitrate alone.

Thanks for the rest of your constructive comments.