You and Yours
 

In message , DAB sounds worse than
FM wrote

"DAB doesn't have the coverage of FM at this point. And it's
really straightforward that the quality of your audio is related to
how close you are to a transmitter.

I've now heard this one a couple of times repeated by radio presenters
who probably have no technical knowledge. It's probably in an idiots
guide to 'spinning' DAB radio.

--
Alan
news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

You and Yours
 

"Alan" wrote in message

In message , DAB sounds worse
than
FM wrote

"DAB doesn't have the coverage of FM at this point. And it's
really straightforward that the quality of your audio is related to
how close you are to a transmitter.

I've now heard this one a couple of times repeated by radio
presenters
who probably have no technical knowledge. It's probably in an idiots
guide to 'spinning' DAB radio.


I'd imagine that presenters / researchers will have listened to Tim
Davie's appearance on Feedback when he incorrectly or dishonestly
claimed that DAB's audio quality is only related to the distance from
the transmitter, and because he's the BBC's Director of Radio they
will have assumed that he knew what he was talking about and that he
wouldn't have told utter porkie pies. So combining that with their
lack of technical knowledge, so they're unable to question what he
said properly, that's shaped how the issue of DAB's audio quality has
been discussed on Radio 4 programmes since then.

So, overall, Tim Davie's comment, which I'd bet he thought about prior
to appearing on Feedback, in which case it was a bare faced lie, has
successfully diverted attention away from the actual issue of DAB's
crap audio quality. All in a day's work for a dishonest BBC exec,
basically. They're all the same when it comes to DAB's audio quality,
because I can't even remember anyone from the BBC providing an honest
answer about it.



--
Steve - www.savefm.org - stop the BBC bullies switching off FM

www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - digital radio news & info

"It is the sheer volume of online audio content available via
internet-connected devices which terrifies the UK radio industry. I
believe that broadband-delivered radio will explode in the years to
come, offering very local, unregulated content, as well as opening a
window to the radio stations of the world." - from the Myers Report

You and Yours
 

"Alan" wrote in message

In message , Bill Wright
wrote
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...rs_14_08_2009/

I'm surprised that you hounds haven't leapt upon this and devoured
it.
Go to the 47 minute point and marvel at the sheer bloody cheek of
the
bloke, telling the most outrageous lies about DAB and FM. A total
morass
of misinformation. What the chuff is a '£25 adaptor'?


I was listening to a BBC Radio Essex in the car a few weeks ago and
a
few people who 'had a clue' phoned in about technical and reception
problems with DAB. The expert guest effectively dismissed their
question, implying that they were wrong, and said how it was all
much
better because you could get more stations.


You don't happen to remember who the "expert guest" was, do you?



--
Steve - www.savefm.org - stop the BBC bullies switching off FM

www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - digital radio news & info

"It is the sheer volume of online audio content available via
internet-connected devices which terrifies the UK radio industry. I
believe that broadband-delivered radio will explode in the years to
come, offering very local, unregulated content, as well as opening a
window to the radio stations of the world." - from the Myers Report

You and Yours
 

So, overall, Tim Davie's comment, which I'd bet he thought about prior
to appearing on Feedback, in which case it was a bare faced lie, has
successfully diverted attention away from the actual issue of DAB's
crap audio quality. All in a day's work for a dishonest BBC exec,
basically. They're all the same when it comes to DAB's audio quality,
because I can't even remember anyone from the BBC providing an honest
answer about it.

Is there any mileage in mere individuals pursuing this general issue
with the BBC Trust as a matter of impartiality?

I have in mind that the BBC are promoting a technology and change which
are arguably a matter of public policy and controversy. As such AIUI
they are obliged by the charter to treat the subject with due accuracy
and impartiality; but they are however allowed to express an opinion as
the subject is broadcasting.
--
R

You and Yours
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...rs_14_08_2009/

I'm surprised that you hounds haven't leapt upon this and devoured it.

You and Yours often has broadcasting and media professionals both from the
BBC and the commercial sector but I don't recall any of them being commented
about on here.

Perhaps readers here are shrewd enough to know that broadcasting executives
like foreign ambassadors all speak with forked tongues.

Roger R

You and Yours
 

"Kurt Ayres" wrote in message
...

"seani" wrote in message
...
On Aug 15, 12:41 am, "Bill Wright"
wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...rs_14_08_2009/

I'm surprised that you hounds haven't leapt upon this and devoured it. Go
to
the 47 minute point and marvel at the sheer bloody cheek of the bloke,
telling the most outrageous lies about DAB and FM. A total morass of
misinformation. What the chuff is a '£25 adaptor'?

I don't know what else it was on about, but when your google is
unbroken you'll see a few adaptors at / under the 25 quid mark:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...html?t=1369515

I have seen them in Halfords.

and is it adaptors or adapters... I am never sure.

It's neither. It's a tuner. Suitable to substitute for the FM tuner of a
component system and not much else.

Adapter implies it turns an existing FM radio into a DAB radio, presumably
by transmitting an FM signal like the ones you can use to play MP3s in a
car. I don't know whether they make (or are contemplating making) such a
thing.

--
Max Demian

You and Yours
 

and is it adaptors or adapters... I am never sure.

OED shows adapter with -or as an alternative. Ditto Merriam Webster so
the cousins seem to be in step.
--
R

You and Yours
 

In article ,
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
Have you heard UK DAB+ transmissions to compare with DAB?

DAB+ uses the AAC/AAC+ audio codec, so all you need to do to hear how
DAB+ performs is to encode your own music to AAC/AAC+. There's no need
to actually be able to receive DAB+.

Right. So DAB+ will always sound better than DAB - regardless of the data
rates used on either?

After so many years of sticking up for DAB, you don't even appear to
have learnt the very, very basics of how the system works, Plowman.

And you don't have any idea of what may happen in the real world.

--
*Why is the man who invests all your money called a broker?

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

You and Yours
 

"neverwas" wrote in message
om
So, overall, Tim Davie's comment, which I'd bet he thought about
prior
to appearing on Feedback, in which case it was a bare faced lie,
has
successfully diverted attention away from the actual issue of DAB's
crap audio quality. All in a day's work for a dishonest BBC exec,
basically. They're all the same when it comes to DAB's audio
quality,
because I can't even remember anyone from the BBC providing an
honest
answer about it.

Is there any mileage in mere individuals pursuing this general issue
with the BBC Trust as a matter of impartiality?


There are definitely grounds to complain about the BBC being extremely
biased towards DAB. I've given a few examples of their bias on he

http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/20...as_towards_DAB

A recent example was the TV ad campaign for The Ashes commentary,
which used the line "The Ashes continues on DAB digital radio" without
mentioning that The Ashes commentary was also available via the
digital TV platforms and via the Internet - and the Internet would
have been a more useful thing for people to know about considering
that most people will have been at work, so a lot of people would have
access to the Internet but not to DAB.


I have in mind that the BBC are promoting a technology and change
which
are arguably a matter of public policy and controversy.


The BBC Trust should hold a public consultation about the plans for
the BBC's FM stations to be switched off, because it says on he

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets...st_consult.txt

"It will also always consult as part of a “Public Value Test”, when
there has been a proposal for a new service, or a significant change
to an existing service."

Proposing to switch off the BBC's national FM stations is obviously a
"significant change to an existing service", so the BBC Trust would be
shirking its responsibilities if it didn't consult about this issue.
So I would suggest that you email the BBC Trust and ask them to hold a
public consultation, and if they say that they don't intend to hold a
consultation then complain to the BBC Trust about the BBC Trust
shirking its responsibilities.

The BBC was the main player in the Digital Radio Working Group (DRWG),
which was the group that recommended to Government that a date should
be set for FM to be switched off, and the Digital Britain report
merely went along with basically all of the recommendations taht the
DRWG made. The DRWG could not have recommended to Government that a
date should be set for FM to be switched off without the BBC's support
for that to happen, because if the BBC didn't want that to happen it
could simply have refused to extend its national DAB multiplex to
provide FM-like coverage, and digital radio switchover then couldn't
happen.

So the BBC has basically lobbied Government to set an FM switch off
date, and that's what the Government has done, yet the BBC has done
this without licence fee payers giving their blessing for this to
happen, and the BBC Trust hasn't consulted with the public about this
issue yet either.

If you view the BBC as a company, and its shareholders are licence fee
payers, as things currently stand the BBC is making decisions that
shareholders don't want to happen, because if they did consult with
the public about this there would only be one outcome, which is that
the public would tell the BBC where to stick their plans to switch off
FM. Shareholders wouldn't stand for that in normal companies, so I
fail to see why the BBC thinks this is acceptable behaviour here.

So the BBC Trust needs to hold a consultation on this, and if they
refuse to hold one then people should first complain to the BBC Trust
about the BBC Trust not sticking up for the interests of licence fee
payers, and if that fails complain to your MP (or other MPs) about the
BBC Trust. All it needs it to get one MP to take up this cause and the
BBC Trust would basically be forced to hold a consultation even if it
didn't want to of its own accord - although you would have to ask why
it wouldn't want to do that considering that the BBC Trust is supposed
to represent licence fee payers...


As such AIUI
they are obliged by the charter to treat the subject with due
accuracy
and impartiality; but they are however allowed to express an opinion
as
the subject is broadcasting.


They're certainly supposed to maintain impartiality in everything they
do, but when it comes to DAB they're incredibly biased.

Also bear in mind why the BBC wants to push everyone onto DAB as
quickly as possible because they fear that the longer it takes to
switch from FM to digital radio the more people will end up listening
via the Internet, and the BBC thinks that there's a higher probability
that people who listen via the Internet will choose to listen to
stations other than BBC ones. That is, it's all about protecting their
existing audience, and the last thing on their minds is to actually do
anything to benefit the public - the public isn't in favour of FM
being switched off.



--
Steve - www.savefm.org - stop the BBC bullies switching off FM

www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - digital radio news & info

"It is the sheer volume of online audio content available via
internet-connected devices which terrifies the UK radio industry. I
believe that broadband-delivered radio will explode in the years to
come, offering very local, unregulated content, as well as opening a
window to the radio stations of the world." - from the Myers Report

You and Yours
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message

In article ,
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
Have you heard UK DAB+ transmissions to compare with DAB?

DAB+ uses the AAC/AAC+ audio codec, so all you need to do to hear
how
DAB+ performs is to encode your own music to AAC/AAC+. There's no
need
to actually be able to receive DAB+.

Right. So DAB+ will always sound better than DAB - regardless of the
data
rates used on either?


I didn't actually say that at all, but the logical conclusion is that
DAB+ should sound far better than DAB because AAC/AAC+ is so much more
efficient than the MP2 codec used on DAB it's difficult to imagine any
broadcaster choosing to deliver lower audio quality on DAB+ than on
DAB.


After so many years of sticking up for DAB, you don't even appear
to
have learnt the very, very basics of how the system works, Plowman.

And you don't have any idea of what may happen in the real world.


I've got a very good idea of what will happen in the real world on
DAB+, thanks.



--
Steve - www.savefm.org - stop the BBC bullies switching off FM

www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - digital radio news & info

"It is the sheer volume of online audio content available via
internet-connected devices which terrifies the UK radio industry. I
believe that broadband-delivered radio will explode in the years to
come, offering very local, unregulated content, as well as opening a
window to the radio stations of the world." - from the Myers Report