Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- From: seani <ingliss@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 02:23:25 -0700 (PDT)
On 30 Apr, 09:06, "DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote:
Richard Evans wrote:
seani wrote:
This particular rant aside, this is the point with any argument that
uses quality alone as a driver - it flies in the face of evidence and
experience. Time and time again, in all sorts of scenarios, people
have demonstrated that they are generally unwilling to spend on
quality alone (at least above a certain threshold, for a certain
VFM).
That may well be true, but it doesn't mean that there isn't a limit to
the lowest sound quality that people will accept.
HDTV offers no/very little new content, and it purely amounts to an
improvement in quality.
I'd agree that HDTV offers little in the way of new content. In other
words, no new content that consistently exploits the potential
increase in quality. So as there is little in the way of content to
justify a purchase, why the success?
It's simple; the number of HDTV CRTs are are statistical irrelevance.
The *vast* majority of *flat* screen TVs are HDTV capable to greater
or lesser degrees. Most people buy flat screen TVs on the basis that
they are flat and a good deal prettier and more convenient than the
dated CRT they had fizzing away in the corner. The fact that they are
HDTV capable is a bonus, not a deciding factor. If people were
concerned with quality, they'd have stuck with the superior refresh
rate, contrast and colour reproduction of CRTs.
The reason for DVD's success was due to the higher quality compared to VHS -
all films were still available in VHS.
Prove it. DVDs are smaller, easier to access, longer lasting, more
physically robust. No argument that the quality is better, but look at
the video people will happily put up with.
CD was marketed as providing higher audio quality, even though whether it
actuallyu does is still debated to this day.
So not clear cut at all, and it is undeniable that CDs provided a step-
change increase in convenience and durability.
The move from black and white to colour TV was a quality improvement.
Was this an enormous change in resolution? Doesn't seem like it. And
the addition of colour is a slightly different matter - there's
certainly an increase in the *information* provided, but I'm not so
certain that can be directly related to "quality". Which has better
quality; a colour inkjet, or a monochrome laser at the same price-
point?
The move from AM to FM was due to quality.
It certainly provided better "quality", but it also provided a host of
other reception benefits.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- From: steve41
- Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- From: Boltar
- Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- From: tony sayer
- Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- References:
- BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- From: Mike Terry
- Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- From: DAB sounds worse than FM
- Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- From: Sean Inglis
- Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- From: Boltar
- Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- From: seani
- Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- From: Richard Evans
- Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- From: DAB sounds worse than FM
- BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- Prev by Date: Re: DAB industry admits DAB is outdated
- Next by Date: Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- Previous by thread: Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- Next by thread: Re: BBC radio chief Jenny Abramsky urges unity on DAB
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|