Channel 4 pulls out of DAB

In article ,
Agamemnon wrote:
Poppycock. 5.1 is designed so that the centre channel always comes
from the centre for all listeners no matter where they are sitting
and so that the sounds from the rear come from the rear left and
right.

As I said - designed for home cinema where you want the *dialogue* to
come from the centre. Not the 'dialogue frequencies' of musical
instruments.

So you don't know what 5.1 is either. You are thinking of standard Dolby
Surround, before it became Pro Logic. 5.1 can handle all frequencies,
so can Pro Logic.

Anything which pulls anything to the centre is useless for serious
listening.

--
*Is there another word for synonym?

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

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Of course differences will depend on where the various transmitters are
situated - which is why I'm careful not to generalise about it. Wish
others would follow.


In fact their knocking Crystal palace about a bit. Large feeder tray up
the inside;!..

Wonder what they're doing?

--
*Never miss a good chance to shut up.*

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

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Of course differences will depend on where the various transmitters are
situated - which is why I'm careful not to generalise about it. Wish
others would follow.


In fact their knocking Crystal palace about a bit. Large feeder tray up
the inside;!..

Wonder what they're doing?


Might have to copy and paste!..

http://212.85.26.243/WAM/pas/externa...me=London%20Bo
rough%20of%20Bromley&appNumber=08/01463/FULL1
--
Tony Sayer

On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:06:23 +0100, Richard Evans
wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:


As I said I can't speak for all the country, but round London on the
stations I listen to it is a very worthwhile alternative to FM.


I used to get good in car DAB reception around the South London area. (I
had a Blaupunkt Woodstock DAB 52 in my previous car, and a few years ago
I actually used the DAB part of it).

However if I went south of the M25 the reception of London DAB stations
would soon start to deteriorate while the reception of London FM
stations was almost perfect.

DAB works well if there are enough reasonably nearby transmitters.
However it seems that FM is a lot better at reaching areas more distant
from the TX sites.

Richard E.

Heading north is a different story. DAB is pretty solid right up to
Junction 12 on M1 whilst FM starts getting flaky between Hemel &
Luton. With a loft or outdoor DAB aerial, London muxes can be
received as far north as Northampton. Although the FM services are
receivable at these distances, it's much weaker.

Marky P.

On 2008-10-14, Agamemnon wrote:
Besides which the quantity over quality TV model is already proven to be a
disaster for ITV. Fewer people are watching TV because the content of each
channel for most of the day is complete and utter garbage. When the

Sadly that seems to be the way TV is going, the shows are all crap, but they
are really cheap crap to produce, to maximise the chances of breaking even
on reducing ad revenue.

On 2008-10-14, Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
On 14 Oct 2008 10:02:05 GMT, Paul Murray wrote:

On 2008-10-13, Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
On 13 Oct 2008 13:32:05 GMT, Paul Murray wrote:
Plowman
Don't talk crap. If R3 lowered the audio quality on their feed, they would
get more listeners. It's obvious innit?
/Plowman
If that lowered quality meant that they could produce two stations rather
than one, that might well be true.
So, you're saying they'd get more listeners per station then? Somehow I
doubt it.
No, that isn't what I said.
Thanks for agreeing with me. You've just admitted that lowering the audio
quality of a station does NOT result in an increase in people listening to
that station.
QED.
If snipping people's responses to make it seem like they were making a
different point than they actually did makes you feel good, go ahead.
I didn't. You admitted it of your own free will.

What I said was that a company might get more listeners by producing
two stations rather than one. Right after the bit you snipped to make yourself
look good.

If it was my station, I would not be interested in whether some other
station got listeners at my expense if I was forced to reduce my audio
quality just so they could exist.

If it was my company I'd want to maximise the profit over all of my stations.
If there was a Radio 3 and a Radio 3 Extra, the combined listenership might
(not guaranteed, but might) be higher. So the Radio 3 brand as a whole would
have more listeners, even if the original Radio 3 station had less.
Just like BBC 1, 2, 3, 4; ITV 1, 2, 3, 4; 4, More 4, E4, Five, Five US.

In article ,
DAB sounds worse than FM [email protected] wrote:
I see you're still lying about this. I've already told you that I
could receive about 35 stations in 2001 (when the bit rates were
"high") and I can receive about the same number today.

So the only reason the bitrate was reduced was to annoy you and give you a
purpose in life previously lacking?

--
*When it rains, why don't sheep shrink? *

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

tony sayer wrote:



In fact their knocking Crystal palace about a bit. Large feeder tray up
the inside;!..


Looking at the plans, it seems that Arquiva are building a new block
directly under the mast to house DTT transmitters with a new cable riser
directly in the centre of the mast (rather than cable trays up the legs
which are very full already).
The News aerials (RT and 2G receiver dish) are to be removed and the
whole UHF cylinder being replaced.
Presumably a more modern design to handle the extra power and channels
after analogue switch-off.
The standby aerials are also being re-allocated.
This building will also probably mean the standby transmitters in the
huts in the car park can be removed.

Mike

In article , m
scribeth thus


tony sayer wrote:



In fact their knocking Crystal palace about a bit. Large feeder tray up
the inside;!..


Looking at the plans, it seems that Arquiva are building a new block
directly under the mast to house DTT transmitters with a new cable riser
directly in the centre of the mast (rather than cable trays up the legs
which are very full already).
The News aerials (RT and 2G receiver dish) are to be removed and the
whole UHF cylinder being replaced.
Presumably a more modern design to handle the extra power and channels
after analogue switch-off.
The standby aerials are also being re-allocated.
This building will also probably mean the standby transmitters in the
huts in the car park can be removed.

Mike


Yep don't like the proposed new appearance makes it look well .. not as
it should..
--
Tony Sayer

Edster wrote:
Stuart Clark wrote:


I don't think I know anyone who has 5.1 on their computer.

Most sound cards have 5.1 now, even ones built into the motherboard.

Sorry that's not quite what I meant. I have a 5.1 capable soundcard.
What I meant to say was I don't know anyone who actually has 5.1 plugged
into their computer.