Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Electronics Repair (sci.electronics.repair) Discussion of repairing electronic equipment. Topics include requests for assistance, where to obtain servicing information and parts, techniques for diagnosis and repair, and annecdotes about success, failures and problems. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
A week ago I bought a Phillips pocket DAB radio DA1103/05, £39 from a Comet
store in London. It seemed quite good to me, and is small and neat, but everytime I did a 'local' scan of the stations; it *wiped off* all the stations that I had previously *preset*. I quite often need to do a scan since the reception quality is very different between the front and the rear of my house. I took it back to Comet, the girl there became very 'fish' faced, but gave me another one. I said i would like to test it and she said you cannot pick up any stations in this store. So I went to the next door shop where I could sit down, and found that this replacement set had exactly the same problem. I took it back and she then tried to set up the presets herself, at the counter in the store where we were before. ( Making a lie of what she said about not having reception in the store). But she didn't know how to do it and declined my offer of showing her how to. Any way even more fish faced, she then gave me a refund for the £39. I later rang Phillips technical help and they said they had not encountered this particular problem with this radio and would ring me back. They didn't, so I rang them again, but I got the distinct impression that they really were not that interested in any of this, and got no further ahead. Thinking I would buy another one, I rang the nearest John Lewis Store; but it looks like although they do sell Phillips radios they do not sell this 'particular' pocket model. The model is DA1103/5 and the software version on it is: V.1.3.2. I think it might be a very 'recent' version since it offers 30 presets as opposed to the generally advertised 20 presets available. Since John Lewis said they could not even 'order' me one of these radios, i'm wondering if they have been having trouble with them? So my quandry now is whether to try to locate another one, or switch to another pocket DAB radio? Is there another pocket radio that people would recommend; or should I best pursue another one of these Phillips? Thanks for any advice. |
#2
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
In article ,
john d hamilton wrote: A week ago I bought a Phillips pocket DAB radio DA1103/05, £39 from a Comet store in London. It seemed quite good to me, and is small and neat, but everytime I did a 'local' scan of the stations; it *wiped off* all the stations that I had previously *preset*. I quite often need to do a scan since the reception quality is very different between the front and the rear of my house. Surely all you need to do is take it outside so it captures all the available muxes? I'm not surprised it wipes the store when you re-scan - you'd normally only need to do this if you move to a different part of the country. -- *How do they get the deer to cross at that yellow road sign? Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#3
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
john d hamilton wrote:
A week ago I bought a Phillips pocket DAB radio DA1103/05, £39 from a Comet store in London. It seemed quite good to me, and is small and neat, but everytime I did a 'local' scan of the stations; it *wiped off* all the stations that I had previously *preset*. I quite often need to do a scan since the reception quality is very different between the front and the rear of my house. Rescaning in the same locality is pointless. Take it to a local point of good reception, and scan there. For instance all BBC national radio stations operate on exactly the same frequency in the UK in what's called an SFN, so rescanning will bring back exactly the same transmission if receivable. The only time you need to rescan a DAB receiver in the UK, is to receive new local stations when you enter a new area, or to receive a newly launched station. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. |
#4
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
["Followup-To:" header set to 24hoursupport.helpdesk.]
On 2008-10-11, john d hamilton wrote: A week ago I bought a Phillips pocket DAB radio DA1103/05, £39 from a Comet store in London. It seemed quite good to me, and is small and neat, but everytime I did a 'local' scan of the stations; it *wiped off* all the stations that I had previously *preset*. I quite often need to do a scan since the reception quality is very different between the front and the rear of my house. [...] Losing pre-sets on scanning may be a 'feature' of that particular model - which seems remarkably cheap for the features claimed. It wouldn't have occurred to me to re-scan in an attempt to overcome poor reception; just go to a spot where the reception is as good as you can get in your area (a local park, perhaps?) and scan - thereafter, if you can't receive a particular station in a particular spot re-scanning isn't going to help. I've never found it necessary to re-scan even when going to a different part of the country, as far as national stations are concerned. Pocket receivers often have rather poor aerials and don't work well indoors or where the signal is weak - which DAB is in some places. Some DAB receivers offer two sorts of scan: one to re-create the entire station list, the other merely to add any new stations (and possibly remove any no longer found). The latter sort of scan shouldn't upset your pre-sets, but the former might well do so - although I agree that it would be better not to if the pre-set stations are found by the new scan. My only experience of pocket DAB receivers is a Sony XDR-M1 I've had for a few years, which works well. I've also had good experience with Roberts portables, although I haven't tried their pocket model. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~ |
#5
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"john d hamilton" wrote in message ... A week ago I bought a Phillips pocket DAB radio DA1103/05, £39 from a Comet store in London. It seemed quite good to me, and is small and neat, but everytime I did a 'local' scan of the stations; it *wiped off* all the stations that I had previously *preset*. I quite often need to do a scan since the reception quality is very different between the front and the rear of my house. I took it back to Comet, the girl there became very 'fish' faced, but gave me another one. I said i would like to test it and she said you cannot pick up any stations in this store. So I went to the next door shop where I could sit down, and found that this replacement set had exactly the same problem. I took it back and she then tried to set up the presets herself, at the counter in the store where we were before. ( Making a lie of what she said about not having reception in the store). But she didn't know how to do it and declined my offer of showing her how to. Any way even more fish faced, she then gave me a refund for the £39. I later rang Phillips technical help and they said they had not encountered this particular problem with this radio and would ring me back. They didn't, so I rang them again, but I got the distinct impression that they really were not that interested in any of this, and got no further ahead. Thinking I would buy another one, I rang the nearest John Lewis Store; but it looks like although they do sell Phillips radios they do not sell this 'particular' pocket model. The model is DA1103/5 and the software version on it is: V.1.3.2. I think it might be a very 'recent' version since it offers 30 presets as opposed to the generally advertised 20 presets available. Since John Lewis said they could not even 'order' me one of these radios, i'm wondering if they have been having trouble with them? So my quandry now is whether to try to locate another one, or switch to another pocket DAB radio? Is there another pocket radio that people would recommend; or should I best pursue another one of these Phillips? Thanks for any advice. No sense in getting the same radio again... time to look into something that does what you want |
#6
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
I think I know what's going on here.
Barring the (real) possibility that the set is incorrectly designed, or that the instructions are incorrect (also highly likely), you were _not_ scanning the stations. Rather, you were _reprogramming_ the unit. There is no inherent law of nature that requires the scanned stations to overwrite the manually programmed settings. For example, when I press SEEK or SCAN on my car radio, it has no effect on the memory presets. So... Either the set has only an "auto program" function (which you are mistaking for a scan), or you are selecting the "auto program" function (rather than a simple scan). It's not surprise that the salesperson was so ignorant of electronics that she swapped the unit rather than trying to resolve the problem. |
#7
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message . .. I think I know what's going on here. Barring the (real) possibility that the set is incorrectly designed, or that the instructions are incorrect (also highly likely), you were _not_ scanning the stations. Rather, you were _reprogramming_ the unit. There is no inherent law of nature that requires the scanned stations to overwrite the manually programmed settings. For example, when I press SEEK or SCAN on my car radio, it has no effect on the memory presets. So... Either the set has only an "auto program" function (which you are mistaking for a scan), or you are selecting the "auto program" function (rather than a simple scan). Well Done again William....actually i pressed the option, wait for it...........*Local Scan*. |
#8
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"john d hamilton" wrote in message
... "William Sommerwerck" wrote in message . .. I think I know what's going on here. Barring the (real) possibility that the set is incorrectly designed, or that the instructions are incorrect (also highly likely), you were _not_ scanning the stations. Rather, you were _reprogramming_ the unit. There is no inherent law of nature that requires the scanned stations to overwrite the manually programmed settings. For example, when I press SEEK or SCAN on my car radio, it has no effect on the memory presets. So... Either the set has only an "auto program" function (which you are mistaking for a scan), or you are selecting the "auto program" function (rather than a simple scan). Well Done again, William... Actually, I pressed the option, wait for it... *Local Scan*. "Now I'm a dab at penny readings." "They are not remarkably entertaining." Coruscating logic cannot retroactively override poor product design. Spock said "'Fascinating' I reserved for the unexpected." This is indeed fascinating. I found the owner's manual here... http://www.consumer.philips.com/cons...adio+DA1103-05 "Batteries contain chemical substances, so they should be disposed of properly." So do chocolate cakes. There is only one way to dispose of chocolate cakes properly. After wading through the warnings (see above) about how I might electrocute the dog if I pressed the wrong button, etc, I found that the only way one can store (or clear) a station is by pressing the Preset button. There's nothing in the instructions about any automatic storage. Nor does it seem possible to preset more than one station at time. Once you've I'm stumped. Wish I could see the thing. Unless you're doing something Really Weird, it looks as if there's some Really Bad Code in the system controller. I would go to the Philips site and let them know you're mad as hell, and you're not going to this any more! PS: "Local" Scan? How is it different from a "Full" scan? Do they mean scanning all the blocks? What makes any particular block "local"? Inquiring minds want to know! |
#9
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
On 2008-10-11, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"john d hamilton" wrote in message ... "William Sommerwerck" wrote in message . .. [...] PS: "Local" Scan? How is it different from a "Full" scan? Do they mean scanning all the blocks? What makes any particular block "local"? Inquiring minds want to know! Different transmitters can, and do, carry different 'local' stations as well as providing the same 'national' stations as each other. Like VHF/FM analogue stations, each transmitter has a very limited range - a few tens of miles at most, usually - so DAB stations can be very 'local', even if the transmitter shares the same radio frequency as other more powerful neighbours. DAB is very different from analogue. http://www.getdabdigitalradio.com/WhatisDAB/ might help. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~ |
#11
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"john d hamilton" wrote in message ... A week ago I bought a Phillips pocket DAB radio DA1103/05, £39 from a Comet store in London. It seemed quite good to me, and is small and neat, but everytime I did a 'local' scan of the stations; it *wiped off* all the stations that I had previously *preset*. I quite often need to do a scan since the reception quality is very different between the front and the rear of my house. I'm not sure if the DA1103/05 has this feature but my Zenith DTT901 (American HDTV receiver) has both an "Auto Tune" and an "EZ add" scan function. Auto Tune does what you described in wiping the presets clean and setting all channels receivable in that scan. EZ add leaves the presets as they are and adds to them channels received in that scan. For my unit I can scan channels with my aerial facing west (Baltimore) and add channels while its facing north (Philadelphia). Not all receivers do this (my Sylvania doesn't) so there may be a DAB out there with this handy feature. Good luck. ;-) |
#12
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"Brian Gaff" wrote in message m... I've noticed that say, if you change areas you can lose presets on many dab radios. Its a difficult one, as they are not really lying about it, they are just not saying the software has a drawback if you rescan you have to re store the presets. I was thinking when you first said it was a pocket model that there have been poor reception problems with dab. Most people are familiar with the boiling mud effect you can get if signal is low, but some sets do rescan if they get very low signals that this can confuse the heck out of users. Dab is a bit of a flop for quality and coverage in my view. Brian -- Brian Gaff - Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff' in the display name may be lost. Blind user, so no pictures please! "john d hamilton" wrote in message ... A week ago I bought a Phillips pocket DAB radio DA1103/05, £39 from a Comet store in London. It seemed quite good to me, and is small and neat, but everytime I did a 'local' scan of the stations; it *wiped off* all the stations that I had previously *preset*. I quite often need to do a scan since the reception quality is very different between the front and the rear of my house. I took it back to Comet, the girl there became very 'fish' faced, but gave me another one. I said i would like to test it and she said you cannot pick up any stations in this store. So I went to the next door shop where I could sit down, and found that this replacement set had exactly the same problem. I took it back and she then tried to set up the presets herself, at the counter in the store where we were before. ( Making a lie of what she said about not having reception in the store). But she didn't know how to do it and declined my offer of showing her how to. Any way even more fish faced, she then gave me a refund for the £39. I later rang Phillips technical help and they said they had not encountered this particular problem with this radio and would ring me back. They didn't, so I rang them again, but I got the distinct impression that they really were not that interested in any of this, and got no further ahead. Thinking I would buy another one, I rang the nearest John Lewis Store; but it looks like although they do sell Phillips radios they do not sell this 'particular' pocket model. The model is DA1103/5 and the software version on it is: V.1.3.2. I think it might be a very 'recent' version since it offers 30 presets as opposed to the generally advertised 20 presets available. Since John Lewis said they could not even 'order' me one of these radios, i'm wondering if they have been having trouble with them? So my quandry now is whether to try to locate another one, or switch to another pocket DAB radio? Is there another pocket radio that people would recommend; or should I best pursue another one of these Phillips? Thanks for any advice. I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. |
#13
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
On 2008-10-11, ian field wrote:
[...] I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. Not what http://www.worlddab.org/ seem to think. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~ |
#14
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
In article ,
ian field wrote: I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. It's not been terribly popular anywhere as it offers little over FM for the majority of listeners. Indeed in the UK the bit rate is so low the quality can be poorer - on most stations. The other thing is battery life is poor on a portable receiver. It does work pretty well for mobile reception, though, like in a car, in reasonable signal areas - but very few makers offered DAB as OEM. And aftermarket units are expensive - as are decent aerials. -- *It's not hard to meet expenses... they're everywhere. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#15
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 08:57:54 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote: I'm stumped. Wish I could see the thing. Unless you're doing something Really Weird, it looks as if there's some Really Bad Code in the system controller. I would go to the Philips site and let them know you're mad as hell, and you're not going to this any more! PS: "Local" Scan? How is it different from a "Full" scan? Do they mean scanning all the blocks? What makes any particular block "local"? Inquiring minds want to know! Bad designs like this seem to be normal these days. If it works at all, they consider it finished and move on to the next product. I doubt Philips will care since they probably had nothing to do with the actual design of the radio. Andy Cuffe |
#16
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 22:43:58 +0100, "ian field"
wrote: I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. Not true. Old DAB is too inefficient. I think DAB+ will be the future here. |
#17
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
In article ,
Ken wrote: I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. Not true. Old DAB is too inefficient. I think DAB+ will be the future here. I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same stations on FreeView or Satellite. -- *No husband has ever been shot while doing the dishes * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#18
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
On 2008-10-12, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , Ken wrote: I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. Not true. Old DAB is too inefficient. I think DAB+ will be the future here. I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same stations on FreeView or Satellite. As I understand it, transmitters can carry both DAB and DAB+, and some receivers can cope with both. But there is now a significant number of receivers which can only manage 'original' DAB, and broadcasters are likely to be reluctant to broadcast their content using both standards at once, or to broadcast only in DAB+ while few people can listen to it. Listers would be pretty peeved if required to scrap all the new DAB receivers we've bought by the million over the last five years or so. While 'audiophiles' might be prepared to buy new equipment to get 'better' sound reproduction, most people just want something 'good enough' - which DAB manifestly is. I'm listening to Radio 4 as I type: "Varied Speech" at "128kbps Stereo" which sounds fine to me (on a Roberts MP23). Radio 3 probably justifies the 192kbps Stereo it gets, but most stations are Mono and many only get 80kbps and don't seem any the worse for it. I just don't expect, or even want, a 'concert hall experience' in my kitchen or bedroom, or even the living-room, and certainly not in the car. BBC podcasts and streams all seem to be at 64kbps. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~ |
#19
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more-modern
codec etc, but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. There is little demand for high-quality radio... In the US, digital radio is transmitted in-band, on both the FM (VHF) _and_ AM (MW) bands. I don't much care for the sound of it -- even at 96kbps, it sounds rather flat, squashed, and airless -- but it works without requiring a new band. And the sound quality of the BBC and other auxiliary "talk" channels is acceptable. Sony has an HD digital tuner (XDR-F1HD) using Philips chips that has simply incredible performance. In terms of sensitivity, separation, and distortion, it blows away (by a wide margin) the best conventional tuners costing thousands of dollars -- and it retails for $100. (That's not a mistype.) I got mine for $50, using an iBiquity.rebate. (iBiquity is the company that developed this system. It's called "HD", which is supposed to mean "hybrid digital" (as the digital data are transmitted along with the analog), but the name conveniently suggests "high definition", which the sound most-definitely is not.) You can see my review ("HD is lossy compression -- what did you expect?") -- and others -- he http://www.amazon.com/review/product...DateDescending There has been talk about opening a VHF band with truly uncompromised digital transmission. But it's unlikely this will ever occur, as people will not be willing to replace existing tuners and receivers. |
#20
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 11:01:49 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote: I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. Not true. Old DAB is too inefficient. I think DAB+ will be the future here. I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same stations on FreeView or Satellite. We would never start using the old DAB in Sweden and Finland, that's for sure. DAB+ or something more modern is the future. |
#21
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
In article ,
Whiskers wrote: I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same stations on FreeView or Satellite. As I understand it, transmitters can carry both DAB and DAB+, and some receivers can cope with both. I suppose some new or future ones will. As regards transmitters carrying both the high cost of transmission is said to be one reason for some existing or proposed stations closing. of course this cost is mainly 'rental' costs - but these private companies aren't there to provide charity. But there is now a significant number of receivers which can only manage 'original' DAB, and broadcasters are likely to be reluctant to broadcast their content using both standards at once, or to broadcast only in DAB+ while few people can listen to it. Listers would be pretty peeved if required to scrap all the new DAB receivers we've bought by the million over the last five years or so. Absolutely. It took long enough to get to this level of acceptance. While 'audiophiles' might be prepared to buy new equipment to get 'better' sound reproduction, but the thing is they didn't when it started most people just want something 'good enough' - which DAB manifestly is. Indeed. I'm listening to Radio 4 as I type: "Varied Speech" at "128kbps Stereo" which sounds fine to me (on a Roberts MP23). Same here - and I'm using a pretty good sound system in this room. The speakers are Chartwell LS3/5a. But we are in a minority if the vocal lobby who only look at bitrates are to be believed. Radio 3 probably justifies the 192kbps Stereo it gets, but most stations are Mono and many only get 80kbps and don't seem any the worse for it. I just don't expect, or even want, a 'concert hall experience' in my kitchen or bedroom, or even the living-room, and certainly not in the car. In an ideal world the rates would be a minimum 192 kbps for all - but that would cost too much it seems. BBC podcasts and streams all seem to be at 64kbps. Of course more modern codecs can use lower rates with less noticeable degradation. But not as low as that. ;-) -- *Modulation in all things * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#22
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
In article ,
Ken wrote: I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same stations on FreeView or Satellite. We would never start using the old DAB in Sweden and Finland, that's for sure. DAB+ or something more modern is the future. Easy to be wise with hindsight. I first heard demonstrations of the present UK DAB system in the '80s, and transmissions started shortly afterwards. There will always be better technology just round the corner. -- *Speak softly and carry a cellular phone * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#23
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"Whiskers" wrote in message
On 2008-10-11, ian field wrote: [...] I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. Not what http://www.worlddab.org/ seem to think. WorldDMB are liars. For example, if you go to the WorldDMB home page and hover your mouse over the word "DAB+", it says that the system is backwardly compatible with DAB. But the opposite is in fact true, and I've asked WorldDMB to tell the truth and correct their website, but they've done nothing. The President of WorldDMB is Quetin Howard, the ex-chief exec (before being sacked) of Digital One, who lied on BBC TV: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/ar...-on-BBC-TV.php and he basically lies whenever he feels like it. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm |
#24
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 13:55:00 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote: I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same stations on FreeView or Satellite. We would never start using the old DAB in Sweden and Finland, that's for sure. DAB+ or something more modern is the future. Easy to be wise with hindsight. I first heard demonstrations of the present UK DAB system in the '80s, and transmissions started shortly afterwards. There will always be better technology just round the corner. Since 1996 we have testing DAB here in Sweden and we don't like it. The same in Finland. Finland closed down DAB completely. Old DAB is too inefficient. |
#25
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
In article , Ken wrote: I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. Not true. Old DAB is too inefficient. I think DAB+ will be the future here. I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. Hahahahahahhahahahahahahhaaha. Consumer resistance? You're having a giraffe. The VAST MAJORITY of people WANT DAB+ to be used once they know what it is and what it provides. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm |
#26
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"Whiskers" wrote in message
On 2008-10-12, Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , Ken wrote: I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. Not true. Old DAB is too inefficient. I think DAB+ will be the future here. I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same stations on FreeView or Satellite. As I understand it, transmitters can carry both DAB and DAB+, and some receivers can cope with both. But there is now a significant number of receivers which can only manage 'original' DAB, and broadcasters are likely to be reluctant to broadcast their content using both standards at once, or to broadcast only in DAB+ while few people can listen to it. Listers would be pretty peeved if required to scrap all the new DAB receivers we've bought by the million over the last five years or so. There will be a slow migration over to DAB+. All "DAB" receivers are gonig to support DAB+ and DMB-A soon. While 'audiophiles' might be prepared to buy new equipment to get 'better' sound reproduction, most people just want something 'good enough' - which DAB manifestly is. On a portable radio maybe - on *anything* better you've got to be deaf to think that. I'm listening to Radio 4 as I type: "Varied Speech" at "128kbps Stereo" which sounds fine to me (on a Roberts MP23). Radio 3 probably justifies the 192kbps Stereo it gets, Funny how you've mentioned the ONLY two stations that are using reasonable bit rates on DAB - R4 at 128k is reasonable because speech is far easier to encode than music. but most stations are Mono and many only get 80kbps and don't seem any the worse for it. That's both factually wrong and it's plainly idiotic to suggest that music should be broadcast in mono. I just don't expect, or even want, a 'concert hall experience' in my kitchen or bedroom, or even the living-room, and certainly not in the car. Who the hell are you to say that just because you don't want something better than others should be denied it? BBC podcasts and streams all seem to be at 64kbps. BBC music podcasts are now 128 kbps MP3, the BBC's listen again MP3 streams are 128 kbps, 192 kbps (R3) adn 80 kbps for mono stations. The live streams will start using higher bit rates in the next few weeks. Why don't you check your facts first? -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm |
#27
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
In article , Whiskers wrote: I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same stations on FreeView or Satellite. As I understand it, transmitters can carry both DAB and DAB+, and some receivers can cope with both. I suppose some new or future ones will. As regards transmitters carrying both the high cost of transmission is said to be one reason for some existing or proposed stations closing. of course this cost is mainly 'rental' costs - but these private companies aren't there to provide charity. DAB+ is 2-3 times cheaper to transmit per station than DAB. That's one of the attractions to the commercial broadcasters. DAB+ is definitely going to happen, and it'll happen sooner than you think. I saw a quote that sums up the situatino with DAB+ pretty well: (wording from memory) "people overestimate how much progress can be made in 1 year, but they underestimate how much progress can be made in 10 years" That's spot on where DAB+ is concerned. There will be loads of DAB+ stations in 5 years' time. But there is now a significant number of receivers which can only manage 'original' DAB, and broadcasters are likely to be reluctant to broadcast their content using both standards at once, or to broadcast only in DAB+ while few people can listen to it. Listers would be pretty peeved if required to scrap all the new DAB receivers we've bought by the million over the last five years or so. Absolutely. It took long enough to get to this level of acceptance. Irrelevant. While 'audiophiles' might be prepared to buy new equipment to get 'better' sound reproduction, but the thing is they didn't when it started Now you're lying, because I told you what the score was in the early days, so repeating this is lying. most people just want something 'good enough' - which DAB manifestly is. Indeed. I'm listening to Radio 4 as I type: "Varied Speech" at "128kbps Stereo" which sounds fine to me (on a Roberts MP23). Same here - and I'm using a pretty good sound system in this room. The speakers are Chartwell LS3/5a. But we are in a minority if the vocal lobby who only look at bitrates are to be believed. You're also an R4 listener though, and you admitted that you don't listen to the pop music statinos or similar, which is wehre you get the **** audio quality. Basically, both of you two are just extremely selfish people. Radio 3 probably justifies the 192kbps Stereo it gets, but most stations are Mono and many only get 80kbps and don't seem any the worse for it. I just don't expect, or even want, a 'concert hall experience' in my kitchen or bedroom, or even the living-room, and certainly not in the car. In an ideal world the rates would be a minimum 192 kbps for all - but that would cost too much it seems. They screwed up in the first place: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm So don't try to suggest that we couldn't have had good audio quality, because we DEFINITELY could have had it. BBC podcasts and streams all seem to be at 64kbps. Of course more modern codecs can use lower rates with less noticeable degradation. But not as low as that. ;-) The BBC is already using 128 kbps - and even 192 kbps for R3 - for a lot of its Internet stuff now. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm |
#28
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
In article , Ken wrote: I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same stations on FreeView or Satellite. We would never start using the old DAB in Sweden and Finland, that's for sure. DAB+ or something more modern is the future. Easy to be wise with hindsight. I first heard demonstrations of the present UK DAB system in the '80s, and transmissions started shortly afterwards. There will always be better technology just round the corner. Plowman, DAB is DEAD in Sweden and Finland - the transmitters were even switched off in Finland, and most of the transmitters were switched off in Sweden as well when the government refused to fund it. Now that DAB+ is available adn there's receivers and ALL DAB receivers are going to include support for DAB+ in the near future, there's no way that any country that's considering what system to use would use DAB. End of story. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm |
#29
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus In article , ian field wrote: I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. It's not been terribly popular anywhere as it offers little over FM for the majority of listeners. Indeed in the UK the bit rate is so low the quality can be poorer - on most stations. The other thing is battery life is poor on a portable receiver. It does work pretty well for mobile reception, though, like in a car, in reasonable signal areas - but very few makers offered DAB as OEM. And aftermarket units are expensive - as are decent aerials. Fantastic DAB;!.. -- Tony Sayer |
#30
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
In article ,
Whiskers scribeth thus On 2008-10-12, Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , Ken wrote: I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable. Not true. Old DAB is too inefficient. I think DAB+ will be the future here. I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same stations on FreeView or Satellite. As I understand it, transmitters can carry both DAB and DAB+, and some receivers can cope with both. But there is now a significant number of receivers which can only manage 'original' DAB, and broadcasters are likely to be reluctant to broadcast their content using both standards at once, or to broadcast only in DAB+ while few people can listen to it. Listers would be pretty peeved if required to scrap all the new DAB receivers we've bought by the million over the last five years or so. While 'audiophiles' might be prepared to buy new equipment to get 'better' sound reproduction, most people just want something 'good enough' - which DAB manifestly is. I'm listening to Radio 4 as I type: "Varied Speech" at "128kbps Stereo" which sounds fine to me (on a Roberts MP23). Radio 3 probably justifies the 192kbps Stereo it gets, but most stations are Mono and many only get 80kbps and don't seem any the worse for it. I just don't expect, or even want, a 'concert hall experience' in my kitchen or bedroom, or even the living-room, and certainly not in the car. Fine you don't ... others might.. BBC podcasts and streams all seem to be at 64kbps. -- Tony Sayer |
#31
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
On 2008-10-12, DAB sounds worse than FM dab.is@dead wrote:
"Whiskers" wrote in message [...] but most stations are Mono and many only get 80kbps and don't seem any the worse for it. That's both factually wrong and it's plainly idiotic to suggest that music should be broadcast in mono. I suppose it's a matter of taste - as is deciding what is or isn't "music". My statement is factuallu correct; your opinion is differenct from mine, but opinions are not facts. If a radio station wants more bits per second, I suppose they are able to bid for them - if they can't pay for more then their revenue model may not match their pretensions. Which could be why some of the new stations don't last long. Or the regualtions about providing more 'bandwidth' are inappropriate (which is my opinion). I just don't expect, or even want, a 'concert hall experience' in my kitchen or bedroom, or even the living-room, and certainly not in the car. Who the hell are you to say that just because you don't want something better than others should be denied it? Who the hell are you to say that just because you want something different from what most people are content with, we should all spend more money? BBC podcasts and streams all seem to be at 64kbps. BBC music podcasts are now 128 kbps MP3, the BBC's listen again MP3 streams are 128 kbps, 192 kbps (R3) adn 80 kbps for mono stations. The live streams will start using higher bit rates in the next few weeks. Why don't you check your facts first? I did. The last podcast I downloaded is 'Talking Allowed" from last week, which is very definitely ar 64kbps - I've never seen a BBC podcast at any other bit rate. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~ |
#32
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"Andy Cuffe" wrote in message ... On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 08:57:54 -0700, "William Sommerwerck" wrote: I'm stumped. Wish I could see the thing. Unless you're doing something Really Weird, it looks as if there's some Really Bad Code in the system controller. I would go to the Philips site and let them know you're mad as hell, and you're not going to this any more! PS: "Local" Scan? How is it different from a "Full" scan? Do they mean scanning all the blocks? What makes any particular block "local"? Inquiring minds want to know! Bad designs like this seem to be normal these days. If it works at all, they consider it finished and move on to the next product. I doubt Philips will care since they probably had nothing to do with the actual design of the radio. Andy Cuffe When I used to service monitors most of the Philips one's were made in Hungary, these days I think more and more of their stuff comes straight from China. |
#33
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
In article ,
DAB sounds worse than FM dab.is@dead wrote: I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make it a dead duck. Hahahahahahhahahahahahahhaaha. Consumer resistance? You're having a giraffe. The VAST MAJORITY of people WANT DAB+ to be used once they know what it is and what it provides. You think people want to chuck out what they've got and buy new? You're mad. Or perhaps you think the 'promise' of better quality will get everyone buying it? Even more mad. -- *Pride is what we have. Vanity is what others have. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#34
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
In article ,
DAB sounds worse than FM dab.is@dead wrote: DAB+ is 2-3 times cheaper to transmit per station than DAB. That's one of the attractions to the commercial broadcasters. You really think Arqiva will stop charging what the market will stand? You make it sound like it's the power consumption of the transmitters which costs. -- *Speak softly and carry a cellular phone * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#35
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"Whiskers" wrote in message
On 2008-10-12, DAB sounds worse than FM dab.is@dead wrote: "Whiskers" wrote in message [...] but most stations are Mono and many only get 80kbps and don't seem any the worse for it. That's both factually wrong and it's plainly idiotic to suggest that music should be broadcast in mono. I suppose it's a matter of taste Getting facts wrong has nothing to do with taste. And on the subject of music being in mono, that's ridiculous, and I'm not going to waste my time discussing anything so ridiculous. - as is deciding what is or isn't "music". Again, ridiculous. My statement is factuallu correct; your opinion is differenct from mine, but opinions are not facts. No. You can't just reclassify music stations as not being music just because you might not like the bloody music they're playing. I've never come across such a ridiculous way to try and squirm out of admiting that they're wrong. I'd suggest that you just keep your mouth shut if you don't know what you're talking about. I do that, and that's why I'm very rarely wrong. If a radio station wants more bits per second, I suppose they are able to bid for them DAB multiplexes have capacity limits. That's why the audio quality is as **** as it is - because there's not enough capacity. - if they can't pay for more then their revenue model may not match their pretensions. The balls up basically happened in the 1990s, and now the multiplexes are pretty much full, adn the transmissino costs are ridiculously expensive (that's one of the major balls ups of the DAB system). Basically, the only way to improve quality now is to switch to DAB+. And it will happen, despite what unknowledgable people on the subject like yourself might think. Which could be why some of the new stations don't last long. Or the regualtions about providing more 'bandwidth' are inappropriate (which is my opinion). Again, you haven't got a clue, have you? You don't know anything about "the regulations about providing more bandwidth are inappropriate". How is that your "opinion" when you don't even have a clue what the regulations are? The reason I know you don't know what you're talking about is that I do know what the regulations are, and what you've just said doesn't make any sense. BTW, good luck Googling for them, because the bit about audio quality is stuck in teh middle of a really big pdf. Happy hunting. I just don't expect, or even want, a 'concert hall experience' in my kitchen or bedroom, or even the living-room, and certainly not in the car. Who the hell are you to say that just because you don't want something better than others should be denied it? Who the hell are you to say that just because you want something different from what most people are content with, we should all spend more money? I'm me. And I'm not being told what I want to listen to by some low audio quality loving tree dweller. BBC podcasts and streams all seem to be at 64kbps. BBC music podcasts are now 128 kbps MP3, the BBC's listen again MP3 streams are 128 kbps, 192 kbps (R3) adn 80 kbps for mono stations. The live streams will start using higher bit rates in the next few weeks. Why don't you check your facts first? I did. The last podcast I downloaded is 'Talking Allowed" from last week, which is very definitely ar 64kbps - I've never seen a BBC podcast at any other bit rate. So in checking your "facts" that "BBC podcasts are 64 kbps" you downloaded a speech podcast, even though speech is often mono and speech is far easier to encode than music so music typically uses higher bit rates? Mm, good researching. Try some music podcasts: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/podcasts/directory/ -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm |
#36
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"DAB sounds worse than FM" dab.is@dead wrote in message
DAB multiplexes have capacity limits. That's why the audio quality is as **** as it is - because there's not enough capacity. Actually, that's THE reason why the quality is **** on the BBC multiplex. On the commercial multiplexes it's more about transmission costs being sky high. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm |
#37
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
In article ,
DAB sounds worse than FM dab.is@dead wrote: We would never start using the old DAB in Sweden and Finland, that's for sure. DAB+ or something more modern is the future. Easy to be wise with hindsight. I first heard demonstrations of the present UK DAB system in the '80s, and transmissions started shortly afterwards. There will always be better technology just round the corner. Plowman, DAB is DEAD in Sweden and Finland - the transmitters were even switched off in Finland, and most of the transmitters were switched off in Sweden as well when the government refused to fund it. According to the person I was replying to Sweden and Finland 'would never start using the old DAB' - so take it up with him, you shiftless worm. Now that DAB+ is available adn there's receivers and ALL DAB receivers are going to include support for DAB+ in the near future, there's no way that any country that's considering what system to use would use DAB. End of story. Can't you read? DAB+ wasn't around when the UK system was devised. -- *7up is good for you, signed snow white* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#38
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
In article ,
DAB sounds worse than FM dab.is@dead wrote: DAB multiplexes have capacity limits. That's why the audio quality is as **** as it is - because there's not enough capacity. Actually, that's THE reason why the quality is **** on the BBC multiplex. So you want to reduce choice for others just so you can have higher bitrates on *your* favourites - especially since you say you prefer FM anyway. Just how selfish can you get? -- *When the chips are down, the buffalo is empty* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#39
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
In article , DAB sounds worse than FM dab.is@dead wrote: DAB+ is 2-3 times cheaper to transmit per station than DAB. That's one of the attractions to the commercial broadcasters. You really think Arqiva will stop charging what the market will stand? You make it sound like it's the power consumption of the transmitters which costs. Here we go again, being lectured by the Plowman on something he knows bugger all about. The reason why it's 2-3 times cheaper per station on DAB+ is because the bit rates are 2-3 times lower, so the capacity consumed is 2-3 times lower, so they can fit 2-3 times more stations on a multiplex, so the overall multiplex costs can be shared between 2-3 times as many stations. Even you should be able to understand the logic of that. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm |
#40
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
|
|||
|
|||
new DAB pocket radio story
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
In article , DAB sounds worse than FM dab.is@dead wrote: DAB multiplexes have capacity limits. That's why the audio quality is as **** as it is - because there's not enough capacity. Actually, that's THE reason why the quality is **** on the BBC multiplex. So you want to reduce choice for others just so you can have higher bitrates on *your* favourites - especially since you say you prefer FM anyway. Just how selfish can you get? If you re-read the single sentence you've quoted, I simply said that the quality is ****. I didn't say anywhere that I wanted to remove stations so that the statinos I listen to can be at higher quality - you're the only person suggeseting that. I'd be happy if the BBC simply provided its stations at high quality (and I'm talking properly high here) via the Internet and the digital TV platforms, and they must also promote the fact that the quailty is higher on those platforms. Then they can do whatever the fooking hell they like with DAB for the next few years until it's time to switch over to DAB+. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...ion_of_dab.htm |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Pockets - Not all polos have pockets. Men's corporate polo shirtsusually come in a pocket version as well as a non-pocket version. Whicheveryou choose, you will find that there are tops out there that will provide youwith the options you need and fin | Woodworking | |||
STORY OF Mrs. THOMPSON (SCHOOL TEACHER)... Heart touching story | Woodworking | |||
43-139 Radio Shack pocket tone generator | Electronics Repair | |||
WTB Radio Shack pocket tone generator 43-139 | Electronics Repair |