Re: DAB Aerial Saga-the conclusion
- From: "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:04:40 +0100
In article <VA.0000054e.00b37928@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <4feb820e0adave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
I now have a DAB external dipole aerial installed and the system is
working perfectly!
So you now have an aerial system delivering you radio at lower audio
quality than on FM, the digital TV platforms and Internet radio.
Congrats!
Nice to see the needle is still stuck.
He's right though.
Actual audio quality may not be that important for R7 which features
mainly classic BBC comedy shows - and makes DAB worth having for that
alone.
95?% of all radio is pop stuff which is so heavily processed before
transmission that those who complain about DAB ain't much interested in
audio quality anyway.
But no one is forcing you to use DAB - there are plenty of alternatives.
Unfortunately the vast majority heavily processed too.
--
*Sticks and stones may break my bones but whips and chains excite me*
Dave Plowman dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: DAB Aerial Saga-the conclusion
- From: DAB sounds worse than FM
- Re: DAB Aerial Saga-the conclusion
- References:
- DAB Aerial Saga-the conclusion
- From: Edward W . Thompson
- Re: DAB Aerial Saga-the conclusion
- From: DAB sounds worse than FM
- Re: DAB Aerial Saga-the conclusion
- From: Dave Plowman (News)
- Re: DAB Aerial Saga-the conclusion
- From: Roderick Stewart
- DAB Aerial Saga-the conclusion
- Prev by Date: Re: Whats the point of Freeview?
- Next by Date: Re: Grundig GDT1500 - Too Old To Work Nowadays?
- Previous by thread: Re: DAB Aerial Saga-the conclusion
- Next by thread: Re: DAB Aerial Saga-the conclusion
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|