Re: BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- From: boltar2003@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:47:16 +0000 (UTC)
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:03:40 -0700 (PDT)
"davidrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <davidrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 20 Oct, 14:27, boltar2...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 05:27:35 -0700 (PDT)
"davidrobin...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <davidrobin...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You know what someone from the BBC said about BBC HD's audio encoding?
"We carried out extensive tests, and found that 448kbps was needed [to
make most artefacts inaudible] - so they're broadcasting at 384kbps
<rolls eyes>".
An HD channel isn't exactly short on bandwidth , why don't they just
use lossless compression?
6 channels, 48kHz sampling, 24-bits = 6.9Mbps. Lossless encoding could
Are HD channels surround sound? I was assuming just stereo. But if it
is then fair do's, lossless wouldn't really be an option.
B2003
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- From: DAB sounds worse than FM
- Re: BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- References:
- BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- From: DAB sounds worse than FM
- Re: BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- From: davidrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- From: boltar2003
- Re: BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- From: davidrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- Prev by Date: Re: BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- Next by Date: Re: BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- Previous by thread: Re: BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- Next by thread: Re: BBC Radio Labs Blog about Proms audio
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|