Re: BBC preps digital radios for iPods



Richard L wrote:
In message <rFFEg.709$5g6.77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
"DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Richard L wrote:
In message <SwAEg.526$2w1.247@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
"DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

If it's such an excellent idea then the BBC has no reason to make
any reference design nor spend one single penny on it, because
that's what the market is there for. Ya get me?

But the market hasn't done it, has it?


No, but that DOES NOT mean that licence payers' money should be
spent doing it.


So if the BBC wants to promote
radio to the iPod generation, it's going to have to kick-start the
market.


Not with our money it shouldn't.

Ahem, it sounds to me as though what you're really objecting to is not
reference designs but any activity that might risk increasing the
popularity of DAB.


No, I fail to see why licence payers' money should be spent on something
that the market could easily provide.


But there are plenty of iPod users out there, and they constitute a
sizeable potential market for DAB.


Therefore the market would eventually react to this demand, if there is a
deman.


So the more of them who try DAB,
the greater will be the pressure for increased bit rates, surely.


You idiotic buffoon. YOu know full well that the bit rates are only going
down.

That's it, you've had your chance. Back in the killfile you go.


Or
don't you think you can count on them to make a fuss?

Really, so where are the portable Freeview radios then?
Where are the portable satellite radios?

Not practical


Not practical? Excuse me?

Excused. Portable Freeview radios are not practical because too many
people don't get a good enough signal indoors or at ground level to
make them workable. Can you imagine your granny trying to use one?

And you know already why portable satellite radios aren't practical.
It's because they won't work in your digs.

-- that's why there's DAB.


Ah, yes, the BBC's view is that we should all listen via low quality
DAB, isn't it, yes, I forgot.

DAB is a convenient service for portable and mobile listening. If you
don't like it, you can easily avoid it.

Where are the hi-fi satellite tuners?
Where are the hi-fi Freeview tuners?

I've got examples of both.


*Hi-fi*?

Yep.

Any digital receiver which has a digital
audio output will do as a hi-fi tuner.


Having a digital bloody output does not make it a hi-fi tuner, as
you well know.

It means that you recover exactly the same information as was sent to
the transmitter. If that's not hi-fi, what is?

I regard this as an important
advance, because it means you can get good quality reception without
having to pay silly prices.

And while we're on the subject of decisions made by Simon Nelson to
aid DAB and hold back all other platforms that carry digital radio:

Why are Radios 1-4 transcoded en route to Freeview in the 21st
century when data distribution costs are tiny?

No idea. My knowledge of the broadcast chain is entirely out of
date.


It's to ensure that Freeview doesn't sound better or much better
than DAB, obviously.

That's just a daft conspiracy theory. How many listeners do you
suppose have made this comparison, or would notice the difference?
Even the experts here have had difficulty in pinning down what's wrong
with Freeview. And not so long ago you were assuring us how great
Freeview sounded. Most likely, the transcoding just a bodge to get
around some technical obstacle.

But since satellite in every case now sounds better than DAB,
an ealier version ofyour argument falls too.

Why are the BBC taking years over launching higher bit rate
Internet live streams - why is 32 kbps acceptable?

No idea -- but I would guess that distributing programmes via the
Internet is relatively expensive for the BBC at present, since there
must be a cost for each additional listener.


They're using a prehistoric codec with Real Player 8 when they could
be using an advanced codec and getting far better quality with the
same bit rate.

But they'd have to spend a lot of money on replacing equipment. I
don't like Real Audio either, but I don't see that it would be a
responsible use of licence money to do this as a priority.

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

Find the cheapest Freeview & DAB prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/freeview/freeview_receivers.php
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/dab_radios.php


.