Channel 4 pulls out of DAB

On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 16:26:17 +0100, Agamemnon wrote:
It was nothing to do with quantity.
Did most people use their VCR machines primarily to record
(predominantly to timeshift live TV) or to play movies?

Surely the format which the movies were only available in down
at the neighborhood video rental store was the major factor
in deciding whether people bought a compatible format VCR?

On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 16:40:36 +0100, Paul Martin wrote:
Very few, but then Holme Moss can be picked up on a rusty nail in
Manchester. If you use an outside aerial, chances are you'd need an
attenuator.

Is that why there are two 6 (?) element VHF antennas atop Broadcasting
House, Oxford Road, presumably pointing towards Holme Moss? ;+} ;+}

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
Edster wrote:
So why would they be bothered if the radio hissed? What happens to DAB
when you go under bridges anyway?

Round London the signal is far more robust than FM (on the stations I
listen to).


Considering the number of stations required to support the level of RF
field required I should bloody well hope so;!...
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Mike Henry
scribeth thus
In , "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Edster wrote:
I bought a Wavefinder when they dropped down to £150, I had about a
year of good use out of it before it all turned into ****e. I got it
expecting the World Service to be in stereo, and got rid of it when
Radio 4 became mono.

Radio 4 is mono on FM too.

False.

Nah!, Dave's only got the one speaker on his DAB box;!...
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
Richard Evans wrote:
Quality really matters if you are making a concious decision to
listen. So those with portable radios with headphones and people
listening on their hi-fi. These are a minority.

That's all very well, but the sound quality broadcast on DAB is so poor,
that I found it irritating even in a car. I could accept reduced sound
quality in my car, but I can't accept it being reduced to the levels of
DAB.

More irritating than the near constant distortion caused by multi-path
when near high buildings etc as happens in most towns? And the fading of
the signal for the same reasons?


Dave to whole country isn't fecking Sarff Lunnon!..

Its fine in my backyard;!...
--
Tony Sayer

In article , DAB sounds worse than
FM [email protected]? scribeth thus
"Stuart Clark" wrote in message

Bill Wright wrote:

The tragedy here is that those in broadcast (and outside it, hello
Steve)
who lobby for better DAB audio have an uphill struggle, because the
beancounters can point to the lumpen masses and say, 'They're happy
enough'. It takes a determined and principled person (or lobby) to
stand
up against this, and as far as I can see no such person (in a
suitable
post) exists.

Why do people actually listen to radio?

For the majority does quality matter?

I think the most common type of radio listener are those in their
cars
(especially driving to/from work) and background music in the
workplace.


IIRC 60% of all listening is done at home - 20% is in teh car, can't
remember what percentage in the workplace is but it's a low
percentage.

IIRC from the last RAJAR figures the home is lower, the car is slightly
higher and the work isn't quite as high as home but RAJAR isn't terribly
accurate..
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Agamemnon
scribeth thus

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Agamemnon wrote:
is lower. I'd be interested in an example of mainstream success for a
quality over quantity situation.

See above. Add 12inch 33 1/3rpm LPs and 45s over 78 inch discs.

More rubbish. LPs did *not* 'add quality' over 78 rpm discs - merely
quantity in terms of longer playing times.

ABSOLUTE POPPYCOCK!

LPs used a completely different a far superior stylus from 78s and thus gave
improved sound quality at reduced rpms. The frequency response of 78s was
only about 10kHz. LPs gave a frequency response that was more than double
that.


Give up on him he's only got the one ear working now;!...
--
Tony Sayer

In article ,
Agamemnon wrote:
More rubbish. LPs did *not* 'add quality' over 78 rpm discs - merely
quantity in terms of longer playing times.

ABSOLUTE POPPYCOCK!

LPs used a completely different a far superior stylus from 78s and thus
gave improved sound quality at reduced rpms.

The design of the pickup/sylus has nothing to do with the disc. You could
play an LP with a thorn needle if you wanted.

The frequency response of
78s was only about 10kHz.

You just love blanket statements, don't you?

LPs gave a frequency response that was more
than double that.

What - all of them?

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

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

In article ,
Agamemnon wrote:
So we cab add the fact you know nothing about mobile reception to those
about DAB and AM?

We can add the fact that both I and the car manufacturers know that DAB
is totally unreliable on the move and the fact that you don't.

In future buy a radio made by an electronics specialist rather than a car
manufacturer.

--
*Don't squat with your spurs on *

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

In article ,
Edster wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:


In article ,
Edster wrote:
Why would people who no longer own a DAB radio bother to complain
about the terrible quality of DAB radios?

You, for one, do. Apparently.

I haven't done that for several years. For all I know it might be even
worse now than it was then.

Heh heh. Do you ever read what you post?

--
*A woman drove me to drink and I didn't have the decency to thank her

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