No DAB reception in cars near BBC Television Centre!

Alan White wrote:
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:21:10 +0100, Silk wrote:

I never go to Scotland, but I'm guessing DAB would be just fine in the
major population centres.

In other words, you don't know, so you're earlier assertion, quoted below, is a
nonsense,

quote

DAB reception is flawless in all but the most remote of locations with a
decent in-car setup. This is a simple fact, whether you like it or not.

/quote

I'm using simple extrapolation based on my experience in the rest of the UK.

Richard Evans wrote:
Roderick Stewart wrote:


I'm answering a point that someone has made, that he thinks people
object to DAB on grounds that are akin to religious fundamentalism,
i.e. unthinking allegiance rather than objective observation. I'm
illustrating this by offering my own reasons for my own decision,
because they are contrary to what he thinks.

Rod.

We have these two things on either side of our head called ears, and
when we use them to listen to DAB, they tell us that it sounds sh*t.


Have you never heard of psychoacoustics?

I
don't see anything religious or fundamentalist about that, we just hear
it, and it sounds like sh*t, and we are highly disappointed, and think
that radio should not sound as bad as that.

Can you, hand on heart, honestly say that you are not influences by the
fact that you are told DAB must sound ****e, so it kind of does?

In article , Silk wrote:
Can you, hand on heart, honestly say that you are not influences by the
fact that you are told DAB must sound ****e, so it kind of does?

Yes. Absolutely. I've listened to live and recorded music for many years
and I know what I like. DAB is such a logical next step in radio
broadcasting that I would like it to sound good, I really would, but it
just doesn't.

Rod.
--
Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/

"Richard Evans" wrote in message
...
Roderick Stewart wrote:
We have these two things on either side of our head called ears,

I have one ear on each side of my head, and the arrangement is permanent.
The idea of having two ears which can be on either side is quite repellent.
Incidentally, when I woke this morning I had a woman on one side of my head
and a spaniel on the other. It's nice to be popular.

Bill

"Silk" wrote in message ...
Richard Evans wrote:
We have these two things on either side of our head called ears, and when
we use them to listen to DAB, they tell us that it sounds sh*t.


Have you never heard of psychoacoustics?
It would be interesting to stand on the street in Edlington and ask that
question of passers-by.


I
don't see anything religious or fundamentalist about that, we just hear
it, and it sounds like sh*t, and we are highly disappointed, and think
that radio should not sound as bad as that.

Can you, hand on heart, honestly say that you are not influences by the
fact that you are told DAB must sound ****e, so it kind of does?

Well I can make such a declaration. I don't use the DAB tuner that is
attached to my main hi-fi because it sounded **** when I did, and I use that
set up for listening to music and actually paying attention to it. But I
also use a wide variety of other radios that are all critically compromised
in the quality department, and if I'm listening to DAB on any of them I just
accept it for what it is, like when I'm on the phone and the quality isn't
very good. It's the same with AM. I was brought up with AM, and to me it
just sounds like 'radio'. It doesn't bother me. It's just . . . how it is.

As I've said before, the great unwashed (a group of which am I a proud and
well qualified member) don't really take much notice of the medium. They
just absorb the message, and as long as the medium doesn't intrude they
aren't aware of it. It never fails to amaze me the TV picture quality that
people will put up with.

None of this, I must add, is any excuse for the retreat from technical
excellence that we have seen in UK broadcasting. The broadcast quality
should satisfy the most critical listener or viewer.

Bill

Silk wrote:


Can you, hand on heart, honestly say that you are not influences by the
fact that you are told DAB must sound ****e, so it kind of does?

Yes absolutely. In fact it was hearing how bad it sounded that brought
me to alt.radio.digital, where I learned about why it sounds so bad.

So actually it was case of hearing it for myself 1st, then hearing it
from other people later.

Richard E.

On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:47:26 +0100, Silk wrote:

Alan White wrote:
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:21:10 +0100, Silk wrote:

I never go to Scotland, but I'm guessing DAB would be just fine in the
major population centres.

In other words, you don't know, so you're earlier assertion, quoted below, is a
nonsense,

quote

DAB reception is flawless in all but the most remote of locations with a
decent in-car setup. This is a simple fact, whether you like it or not.

/quote

I'm using simple extrapolation based on my experience in the rest of the UK.

You are spouting ******** and you admit to it. I think we all know what
to do with your so called 'simple facts'.

Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:47:26 +0100, Silk wrote:


/quote
I'm using simple extrapolation based on my experience in the rest of the UK.

You are spouting ******** and you admit to it. I think we all know what
to do with your so called 'simple facts'.

Nothing especially unusual from Silk.

Richard E.

Paul Ratcliffe wrote:

You are spouting ******** and you admit to it. I think we all know what
to do with your so called 'simple facts'.

You're a very rude little man.

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 13:35:47 +0100, Silk wrote:

You are spouting ******** and you admit to it. I think we all know what
to do with your so called 'simple facts'.

You're a very rude little man.

No I'm not. You claim 'facts' which you then admit are supposition and
extrapolation and then you don't like it when you are exposed as such.
You are an ignorant and patronising little man.