DAB Performance of different makes?

Ian wrote:
Oh you do TV as well! ;-) This is so not the right group to debate
in.


This is a thread to debate the performance of different makes of DAB
receivers, no?


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

Please sign the petition asking the BBC to provide better audio quality
on its radio stations on DAB, Freeview, satellite and cable:
http://tinyurl.com/a68e4

In article ,
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
Really? So why does my £25 Sony ICF-703L sound better than my Pure
Evoke-1??

Given your claimed knowledge of DAB radio, just why did you buy a portable?

--
*Why is it that doctors call what they do "practice"?

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

"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message
...
Ian wrote:
Oh you do TV as well! ;-) This is so not the right group to
debate
in.


This is a thread to debate the performance of different makes of
DAB
receivers, no?


Yes, but it in a group that's meant for digital television....

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
Really? So why does my £25 Sony ICF-703L sound better than my Pure
Evoke-1??

Given your claimed knowledge of DAB radio, just why did you buy a
portable?


I wanted to know what all the fuss was about the Evoke-1. I'd heard
deleriously happy reviews of it, and I bought it for £40 new from Argos,
so I was going to re-sell it, but I've not got round to it.

Was the fuss merited? Not at all, is the simple answer.


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

Please sign the petition asking the BBC to provide better audio quality
on its radio stations on DAB, Freeview, satellite and cable:
http://tinyurl.com/a68e4

Jim Lesurf wrote:
Combining replies to two postings from Steve as they said much the
same things...


In article ,
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:

"If it is the case that different DAB RXs give differing outputs
when fed with the same DAB signal, then it may have some impact on
the assessment of DAB that people keep making/assuming."

By that I read it that you're trying to cast doubt on the assessments
myself and some others that are critical about DAB.

Ah! OK. So the intensity/volume your reactions is due to a worry that
someone might be daring to even imply that others might not accept
everything you say. :-)


I felt you were trying to suggest that the problems with the audio
quality that myself and a lot of other people talk about are down to us
using relatively poor receivers and/or with poor DAB reception.

I wanted clarification whether that was what you were suggesting or not.
If that is okay with you?


Since you have now said the above I can reconfirm that you are
jumping to the wrong conclusion, and misunderstanding what I have
been saying.


As I said previously, I feel your original post was ambiguously worded,
so try and accept some responsibility for what you've written rather
than blaming me for mis-interpreting somethign that you've written which
WAS ambiguous. If that is okay with you?


See below for more details...

There will always be bit errors, and different DAB modules will
perform differently.

Yes! That is the kind of thing I have been asking about - with the
aim of identifing the *actual* differences between *specific* RXs in
various specific situations. For the reasons I have (twice) explained.


Try and take some responsibility for what you've written rather than
passing the blame onto the reader.

Anyway, there's 2 main DAB module/IC designers: Frontier-Silicon and
Radioscape, and they probably account for over 95% of all DAB
modules/ICs shipped in products today.

Radioscape use software-defined radio techniques with a DSP chip, and
Frontier-Silicon design ICs, although my impression is that a lot of the
back-end stuff is done in software on a DSP processor that is integrated
into their IC.

snip the rest

Actually, I emailed you yesterday with a request for some information
that's important to something I'm currently doing. So, if I'm going to
provide you with a load of information then I think it's only fair that
you provide me with the information that you've said you've already got
and that I need.

Once you've sent me the info I'll reply to the rest of your post.



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

Please sign the petition asking the BBC to provide better audio quality
on its radio stations on DAB, Freeview, satellite and cable:
http://tinyurl.com/a68e4

In article ,
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
Really? So why does my £25 Sony ICF-703L sound better than my Pure
Evoke-1??

Given your claimed knowledge of DAB radio, just why did you buy a
portable?


I wanted to know what all the fuss was about the Evoke-1. I'd heard
deleriously happy reviews of it, and I bought it for £40 new from Argos,
so I was going to re-sell it, but I've not got round to it.

But surely you would have known that no matter how good the receiver it
couldn't get round the problems of a seriously flawed system?

Was the fuss merited? Not at all, is the simple answer.

But then you knew that anyway?

--
*Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines *

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

:::Jerry:::: wrote:

"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message
...
Ian wrote:
Oh you do TV as well! ;-) This is so not the right group to
debate
in.


This is a thread to debate the performance of different makes of
DAB
receivers, no?


Yes, but it in a group that's meant for digital television....

And Stevie-boy doesn't understand the meaning of the word "debate"
anyway.

--
Nobby

DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:

Actually, I emailed you yesterday with a request for some information
that's important to something I'm currently doing. So, if I'm going to
provide you with a load of information then I think it's only fair that
you provide me with the information that you've said you've already got
and that I need.

Once you've sent me the info I'll reply to the rest of your post.

Wow, another example of absolutely unbelievable arrogance. You really do
understand how to get the best from people, don't you?

No wonder you've such a laaaarge chip on your shoulder.

--
Nobby

Nobody Here wrote:
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:

Actually, I emailed you yesterday with a request for some information
that's important to something I'm currently doing. So, if I'm going
to provide you with a load of information then I think it's only
fair that you provide me with the information that you've said
you've already got and that I need.

Once you've sent me the info I'll reply to the rest of your post.

Wow, another example of absolutely unbelievable arrogance.


D'ya think?


You
really do understand how to get the best from people, don't you?


Much like yourself, then, eh? BTW, I'm still waiting for the apology for
calling me a liar. Now, once you've apologised for calling me a liar,
then you can have a go at *me*.


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

Please sign the petition asking the BBC to provide better audio quality
on its radio stations on DAB, Freeview, satellite and cable:
http://tinyurl.com/a68e4

Nobody Here wrote:
Jerry:::: wrote:

"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message
...
Ian wrote:
Oh you do TV as well! ;-) This is so not the right group to
debate in.


This is a thread to debate the performance of different makes of DAB
receivers, no?


Yes, but it in a group that's meant for digital television....

And Stevie-boy doesn't understand the meaning of the word "debate"
anyway.


I see you're becoming a little obsessed with me. I can't say I blame
you, of course. But please refrain in future, there's a good chap.


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

Please sign the petition asking the BBC to provide better audio quality
on its radio stations on DAB, Freeview, satellite and cable:
http://tinyurl.com/a68e4