Petition to stop FM being switched off

On 28-Jun-2009, "neverwas" wrote:

Tush! I wouldn't expect anything better from a country which has a head
of government who studied physics, has a doctorate in quantum chemistry
and worked as a researcher. Now we are blessed with a beloved leader
whose doctoral thesis was "The Labour Party and Political Change in
Scotland 1918-29" and so is much better equipped to lead such things

Of course. Sending all our FM receivers to landfill will boost the
economy and the retail sector, generate more income from VAT
on the sale of DAB replacements, please the Chinese who will
make the replacements, and they will start buying our waste
cardboard again, which will please the councils who are desparate
to get rid of it. The banks will lend the money which will help
lift us out of recession.
Makes sound economic sense.
Mr. Bean strikes again.

Mark wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

Besides, DAB is inferior. Good FM beats it hands down.

I'm surprised at that statement from you, Graham. DAB at a decent
bitrate knocks FM into touch. Of course if you want to compare 'good'
FM to poor bitrate DAB to make a point, so be it.

DAB sadly AIUI uses an ancient codec that's fixed in stone. The choice of
codec should have been left open to allow for improvements.

Just how? The receiver had to decode the signal. And making one which
could be re-programmed would cost a fortune. But of course it is proposed
to change the codec on DAB - making all older sets obsolete.

I'm not convinced. A lot of consumer level electronics have firmware
that can be updated 'over the air'. MP3 players, mobile phones and
STBs to name but 3.

That was the sort of thing I had in mind.

Graham


--
due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to
my email address

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

Mark wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

DAB sadly AIUI uses an ancient codec that's fixed in stone. The
choice of codec should have been left open to allow for improvements.

Just how? The receiver had to decode the signal. And making one which
could be re-programmed would cost a fortune. But of course it is
proposed to change the codec on DAB - making all older sets obsolete.

I'm not convinced. A lot of consumer level electronics have firmware
that can be updated 'over the air'. MP3 players, mobile phones and STBs
to name but 3.

But all these are a long way down the line from when the DAB spec was
finalised.

Still using 405 line TV are you ? ;~)

Graham

--
due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to
my email address

On 28-Jun-2009, Eeyore wrote:

Still using 405 line TV are you ? ;~)

I like my 78's but decent needles are getting harder to find.

Most of the eBay ones are overseas, the ones with Nipper
on the tin were best, followed by Colombia and Songster.
Beats DAB hands down.
I suppose if the old gramaphone pops its clogs I'll have
to upgrade and get the Dansette out of the loft. Plenty
of those still on eBay if I need spares.

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:
I'm not convinced. A lot of consumer level electronics have firmware
that can be updated 'over the air'. MP3 players, mobile phones and STBs
to name but 3.

But all these are a long way down the line from when the DAB spec was
finalised.

Still using 405 line TV are you ? ;~)

No - but 405 line TV was transmitted unchanged for what? 50 years?
Certainly for long after better systems were in use.

--
*Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional *

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

In message
Ade wrote:

I don't want to listen to Classic Fm on DAB, it is awful

Classic FM on FM sounds awful. Not a patch on R3 - too much
processing.

Dave

In article , Dave Higton
scribeth thus
In message
Ade wrote:

I don't want to listen to Classic Fm on DAB, it is awful

Classic FM on FM sounds awful. Not a patch on R3 - too much
processing.

Dave

Listened to the broadcast from Glastonbury this weekend. Worthy FM, just
an annoying pumping over compressed mess;((..

Doesn't anyone understand anything about musical dynamics anymore?...
--
Tony Sayer

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writing at 10:46:36 in his/her local time opines:-

The arguments that 'DAB is CRAP' relate not to it being digital per se,
but to the intense amount of compression, both analogue and digital,
applied to it to squeeze a lot of channels out of a small spectrum.

No, that's important, but it's not the main thing.

DAB is digital. Which means it's supposed to be able to tell if it's
working or not. Which means that if your DAB set sounds like someone is
squeezing a hot water bottle in the background, then it should know it's
doing this, that the results are likely to be found unacceptable, and
politely decline to supply the affected channel.

My wife's Pure Evoke burbles on both R2 and Classic FM, with three bars
showing. Ridiculous.

I can't stand it, and have to retune to the FM band to get these, when
it's entirely acceptable. On the same radio, in the same position,
without touching the aerial at all.

I can (and do) listen the R2 on the kitchen TV via Freeview for
preference; I don't know how the bit rates compare via the three
delivery mechanisms, but whatever they are, the Freeview is the
best-sounding, though this may be the set rather than the signal here.

The Evoke is the only way to get Classic FM in the kitchen, though.

In the lounge, I can compare R2 over the FM tuner in the home cinema
system with R2 off the TV Freeview through the same system, with R2 via
a good Sony tuner in a stereo hi-fi setup; nothing to choose between
them to my ears.

High bit-rate or low bit-rate, none of them burble. The last time I
heard FM do that was back in the 60's, with the Northampton 'birdies' on
stereo FM, which was thankfully diagnosed and fixed reasonably quickly.


--
Roy Brown 'Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be
Kelmscott Ltd useful, or believe to be beautiful' William Morris

"Roy Brown" wrote in message
news
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writing at 10:46:36 in his/her local time opines:-

The arguments that 'DAB is CRAP' relate not to it being digital per se,
but to the intense amount of compression, both analogue and digital,
applied to it to squeeze a lot of channels out of a small spectrum.

No, that's important, but it's not the main thing.

DAB is digital. Which means it's supposed to be able to tell if it's
working or not. Which means that if your DAB set sounds like someone is
squeezing a hot water bottle in the background, then it should know it's
doing this, that the results are likely to be found unacceptable, and
politely decline to supply the affected channel.

Maybe what it should is switch to the FM version if it is available and
continue playing the DAB version if there is no alternative. Noisy,
distorted sound is better than no sound.

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Classic FM on FM sounds awful. Not a patch on R3 - too much
processing.

Dave

Listened to the broadcast from Glastonbury this weekend. Worthy FM, just
an annoying pumping over compressed mess;((..

Doesn't anyone understand anything about musical dynamics anymore?...

When Mr DAB goes on and on and on about how much better FM sounds than DAB
- and qualifies it by saying he really means the pop stations with the
lowest bitrates - and then others talk about soundstage and stereo
separation etc. All I really hear on those is some incredibly nasty
processor set on kill. Regardless of what transmission medium I use.
Of course what we actually hear - and what distresses us - are individual.
It's exactly the same with most pop CDs. Totally over processed - after
the studio recording. Perhaps someone would explain why a medium like CD
with a dynamic range well in excess of what is possible domestically ends
up with one of 2/10ths of FA - when plenty of 'pop' LPs didn't.

--
*If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular? *

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