OT - DAB

tony sayer wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)

France is questioning the current DAB system and Sweden isn't expanding their
network..

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/...icle529971.ece

"Digital music could have been great. The technology for superb sound
reproduction is out there in products such as DVD Audio and SACD, which
take the 20th-century CD and turn it into something stunning for today.
But, instead, we want everything reduced to MP3 pop pap, three or four
minutes of unrelated gratification downloaded over the net for idle
listening on the next train journey. And this is progress?"

Sounds like someone completely out of touch with what people want and
hence probably not someone whose opinions on broadcast content are to be
particularly valued.

I recall you wanting vast swathes of bandwidth allocated your own
personal wants, I don't recall whether this was out of simple
selfishness or you never understood the concept of limited bandwidth. In
fact, I think it was you that wanted to have all 3 digital audio
platforms allocated to it, not even just one. If I have you correct, you
were never able to provide a reason why every digital audio platform
should provide a decent input to a hifi system rather than just one -
the obvious being DSAT, I don't think you really knew yourself but had
made too much noise to back down.

In article , Stevo
writes
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Stevo
writes
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Stevo
writes
A.r.d?..
alt.radio.digital
Oh!, That other loon?,.. I presume you mean Steve Green, he's an OK
bloke is Steve:-) Least he knows what he's on about.
Ha, he's still there then, never got that job which would mean he had no
more time to post. He using his degrees yet other than for boasting about?



Well he's done more to advance the cause for a 21st century digital
radio system then U have....

You think? Alienating many does not advance much.

I dunno?, he's bought that to the attention of a wider public. Suppose
this system we've been lumbered with is OK for then?..


Did the Sony boycott
advance anything, where is radio on 3G,

It'd cost too much .. the mobile Telco's like their call revenues..

where is "Global Radio", where
is DVB-H, where are our car based DVB-H receivers.

I was more asking about whether he has achieved the goals he wanted.
Remember he was not working because he was studying, he was going to be
gainfully employed once done. I take it such an occasion never happened.

How do you know?..



Course you must be Silk or Rayzor then?..

Don't ring a bell, haven't been there for a while tooks up other hobbies
than baiting Steve.

Speak 4 yourself stevo?....

Sorry, I read your last comment as "must mean Silk or Rayzor". I forgot
how paranoid you a.r.d kooks were. I guess it is just the same.

Paranoid me?, no way and I don't need to hide anon like U do..
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
writes
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
If there was a definite date to stop FM broadcasts, I'd be one of the
first to complain. But in the meantime I use and enjoy DAB where it
works better than FM - like in the car.

Don't seem to have those issues in my motah...

You seem to have marvellous crystal clear FM reception everywhere you go.
Some of us don't. I'd say the majority. And I simply don't believe you get
perfect FM reception always in your car - unless it never leaves the
garage. FM is a diabolical system for mobile quality use.


David..

I don't have perfick reception "everywhere" I go on either Long, Medium
or VHF or on either of the mobile phones I've got. And you should know
that any mobile transmission system has its shortcomings.

Just as you live in an awkward bit of London this doesn't mean the rest
of the UK is so affected...
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Stevo
writes
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)

France is questioning the current DAB system and Sweden isn't expanding their
network..

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/...icle529971.ece

"Digital music could have been great. The technology for superb sound
reproduction is out there in products such as DVD Audio and SACD, which
take the 20th-century CD and turn it into something stunning for today.
But, instead, we want everything reduced to MP3 pop pap, three or four
minutes of unrelated gratification downloaded over the net for idle
listening on the next train journey. And this is progress?"

Sounds like someone completely out of touch with what people want and
hence probably not someone whose opinions on broadcast content are to be
particularly valued.

No he's pretty much right on that..


I recall you wanting vast swathes of bandwidth allocated your own
personal wants,

Me no.. They've done that anyway the duplication that exists, and then
some.. replacing what was good with something inferior..

I don't recall whether this was out of simple
selfishness or you never understood the concept of limited bandwidth.

No suppose not .. having been in radio and TV for some 40 odd years..

No sorry I haven't a clue..
In
fact, I think it was you that wanted to have all 3 digital audio
platforms allocated to it, not even just one.

Pardon?..

If I have you correct, you
were never able to provide a reason why every digital audio platform
should provide a decent input to a hifi system rather than just one -
the obvious being DSAT, I don't think you really knew yourself but had
made too much noise to back down.

Your losing it there M8 .. and badly too..
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
writes
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
I often wonder if Tony etc have ever heard DAB. Their description of it
makes no sense to me. Of course I probably don't listen to the same
stations as they do. My default is R4 with some R3 if there's something
I want to listen to on it.

Well its maybe OK for in car use on some stations like Radio 3 but the
rest leave a lot to be desired!..


In the car I often listen to Magic, which sounds very much better on
DAB than it does on FM - same as at home. Many pop stations mod so high
my various FM tuners distort. But DAB doesn't. I'm surprised the FM
lovers haven't experienced this. Perhaps they simply don't understand
such things.

Thats not a fault or the FM system just simply inappropriate use of the
audio processor. Mr Orban does one for DAB which will go as loud as U
like;!..

Right. So R3&4 DAB are ok -

Radio 3 is about the only one that comes somewhere near being OK, but
the rest don't .. It could be though..Even radio 3 has that odd "tiring"
sound about it..

I wonder why the BBC went to all that trouble to equip there UK national
4 service with all that Stereo equipment if they didn't really need
it?..

but not any other stations. Which are all
overmodded on FM causing the receivers to distort.

David dear chap.. If it were over-modding the gent from Ofcom would be
round with a fairly hefty fine and slap on the licence. Its very well
defined in their engineering code which is on their website and let me
tell you a great deal of FM stations deviate up to 70K and leave a
sufficient margin in hand for the very rare times erroneous conditions
in the signal chain go over that...

So I take it you are
remembering FM high quality rather than talking about the present day?

Oddly enough there are some very good FM stations around, some do have
people who do know how to set up a processor OK, and do give a ****
about what they come across on air as. Some do get their original
quality right on their hard disk playouts, and don't transcode all over
the shop.

Pity some who set up digital chains don't do the same but then again
bitz cost too much on a mux..
--
Tony Sayer

tony sayer wrote:
In article , Stevo
writes
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)

France is questioning the current DAB system and Sweden isn't expanding their
network..

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/...icle529971.ece
"Digital music could have been great. The technology for superb sound
reproduction is out there in products such as DVD Audio and SACD, which
take the 20th-century CD and turn it into something stunning for today.
But, instead, we want everything reduced to MP3 pop pap, three or four
minutes of unrelated gratification downloaded over the net for idle
listening on the next train journey. And this is progress?"

Sounds like someone completely out of touch with what people want and
hence probably not someone whose opinions on broadcast content are to be
particularly valued.

No he's pretty much right on that..

He is out of touch with what people want. Where are the queues of people
buying DVD-audio or SACD? Why are people downloading from itunes etc
rather than buying the CD.

You are equally out of touch.


I recall you wanting vast swathes of bandwidth allocated your own
personal wants,

Me no.. They've done that anyway the duplication that exists, and then
some.. replacing what was good with something inferior..

I don't recall whether this was out of simple
selfishness or you never understood the concept of limited bandwidth.

No suppose not .. having been in radio and TV for some 40 odd years..

You are totally out of touch with the broadcast market. It is quite
understandable how you a missing the point of limited bandwidth though,
since for much of those 40 years you had a fixed bandwidth, there was
never and option to shove more stations in a channel. People get set in
their ways.


No sorry I haven't a clue..

Indeed it sounds so.

In
fact, I think it was you that wanted to have all 3 digital audio
platforms allocated to it, not even just one.

Pardon?..

You cannot understand how DAB can serve one use (portable/car/kitchen),
where are DSAT/DVB-T can provide another. You wanted the same bitrate on
all platforms.



If I have you correct, you
were never able to provide a reason why every digital audio platform
should provide a decent input to a hifi system rather than just one -
the obvious being DSAT, I don't think you really knew yourself but had
made too much noise to back down.

Your losing it there M8 .. and badly too..

I am actually quite sure you do understand the issues - despite my
mocking above. I am sure you understand DAB serves a purpose and I am
sure you understand that for the small population that listens to radio
through a system that would require a high bitrare that DSAT is the
obvious choice.

The point is, you jumped on a bandwagon and are too embarrassed to admit
that the current compromise is reasonable having been so vocal in the past.

You are simply too stubborn to admit otherwise.

In article , Stevo
writes
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Stevo
writes
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)

France is questioning the current DAB system and Sweden isn't expanding
their
network..

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/...icle529971.ece
"Digital music could have been great. The technology for superb sound
reproduction is out there in products such as DVD Audio and SACD, which
take the 20th-century CD and turn it into something stunning for today.
But, instead, we want everything reduced to MP3 pop pap, three or four
minutes of unrelated gratification downloaded over the net for idle
listening on the next train journey. And this is progress?"

Sounds like someone completely out of touch with what people want and
hence probably not someone whose opinions on broadcast content are to be
particularly valued.

No he's pretty much right on that..

He is out of touch with what people want. Where are the queues of people
buying DVD-audio or SACD? Why are people downloading from itunes etc
rather than buying the CD.

He's hilighted the implementation of an out dated system of broadcasting
thats supposed to replace one thats better than it, and what have you
been doing about that then or I suppose you think this is a good
idea?...

You are equally out of touch.

Nope..


I recall you wanting vast swathes of bandwidth allocated your own
personal wants,

Me no.. They've done that anyway the duplication that exists, and then
some.. replacing what was good with something inferior..

I don't recall whether this was out of simple
selfishness or you never understood the concept of limited bandwidth.

No suppose not .. having been in radio and TV for some 40 odd years..

You are totally out of touch with the broadcast market. It is quite
understandable how you a missing the point of limited bandwidth though,
since for much of those 40 years you had a fixed bandwidth, there was
never and option to shove more stations in a channel. People get set in
their ways.

Well if your "right" about that .. then I'm very, repeat very, glad that
I'm wrong:--)

Anyway I'll stay right here out on the plain and you be off back up in
the evolutionary trees if you want..



No sorry I haven't a clue..

Indeed it sounds so.

In
fact, I think it was you that wanted to have all 3 digital audio
platforms allocated to it, not even just one.

Pardon?..

You cannot understand how DAB can serve one use (portable/car/kitchen),
where are DSAT/DVB-T can provide another. You wanted the same bitrate on
all platforms.

I think you see that different to what I do. Consider that there is less
available radio spectrum terrestrially, although it has never been a
problem allocating a hundred or so MHz twixt 240 odd up to 400 ish for
the military who don't use that all that efficiently well

Now if we weren't saddled with a wrongly applied codec we could have a
better service via T-DAB DSAT is in a better position as they do have
greater tracts and with the aerial discrimination involved it does ease
the requirements quite a lot. Except that they the BBC don't give the
service they could do. Notice who old Jerry manages to use 320 K MP2
where that codec does work well for most all of their services whilst
using the 128 K for a mono one!..



If I have you correct, you
were never able to provide a reason why every digital audio platform
should provide a decent input to a hifi system rather than just one -
the obvious being DSAT, I don't think you really knew yourself but had
made too much noise to back down.

No see above..

Your losing it there M8 .. and badly too..

I am actually quite sure you do understand the issues - despite my
mocking above. I am sure you understand DAB serves a purpose and I am
sure you understand that for the small population that listens to radio
through a system that would require a high bitrare that DSAT is the
obvious choice.

You might not believe this but I'm a great fan of digital transmission
systems, and I was very happy with the results that the original PCM
distribution system bought about when it was introduced over the long
analogue landlines that were used at the time and for that matter was
looking forward to digital terrestrial radio but what a disappointment
its been. I've a liking for Jazz .. but why should the new GCap service
be in Mono whereas do you know of any new FM broadcasters who start
their services in a Mono format?....

The point is, you jumped on a bandwagon and are too embarrassed to admit
that the current compromise is reasonable having been so vocal in the past.

Compromise, odd word is that dontcha tink?..


You are simply too stubborn to admit otherwise.

Don't think I have anything to admit to at all..

BTW..

Answer me this .. do you think its right the current MUX system, and how
would you feel if you were a small scale broadcaster and couldn't afford
the local DAB MUX

--
Tony Sayer

On 25/06/2007 22:08, tony sayer wrote:

Radio 3 is about the only one that comes somewhere near being OK, but
the rest don't .. It could be though..Even radio 3 has that odd "tiring"
sound about it..

but due to the large amounts of (near) silence on R3, you need a damned
near perfect aerial and receiver to avoid hiss on FM.

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
You think? Alienating many does not advance much.

I dunno?, he's bought that to the attention of a wider public. Suppose
this system we've been lumbered with is OK for then?..

It needed bringing to their attention? You seem to think it's so terrible
no one would want to listen to it.

--
*If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you *

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

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
You seem to have marvellous crystal clear FM reception everywhere you
go. Some of us don't. I'd say the majority. And I simply don't believe
you get perfect FM reception always in your car - unless it never
leaves the garage. FM is a diabolical system for mobile quality use.


David..

I don't have perfick reception "everywhere" I go on either Long, Medium
or VHF or on either of the mobile phones I've got. And you should know
that any mobile transmission system has its shortcomings.

Just as you live in an awkward bit of London this doesn't mean the rest
of the UK is so affected...

The majority of London is in both my cars on FM - regardless of the
station I'm listening to - although some are very much worse than others.
It's what happens when you have high buildings between aerial and
transmitter, on FM. And reception round much of the South coast is poor
too when on the move. There might be areas of England nice and flat where
reception is tolerable, but non I know. However, DAB reception in the car
round London is so much better. Not that I'd expect you to know that, or
care.

--
*The man who fell into an upholstery machine is fully recovered*

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