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 Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 281
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 48
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,399
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,833
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,833
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 48
Default 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
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
  #10   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,998
Default new DAB pocket radio story

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.





  #11   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 800
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 48
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 221
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 48
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,833
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,896
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,896
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 48
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 800
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default 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   Report Post  
Posted to alt.radio.digital,sci.electronics.repair,uk.people.consumers,24hoursupport.helpdesk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default 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
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
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 [email protected] Woodworking 0 April 25th 08 02:49 PM
STORY OF Mrs. THOMPSON (SCHOOL TEACHER)... Heart touching story avtar Woodworking 1 February 1st 07 02:51 PM
43-139 Radio Shack pocket tone generator Plexaglass Electronics Repair 1 November 3rd 04 04:36 AM
WTB Radio Shack pocket tone generator 43-139 Plexaglass Electronics Repair 0 November 2nd 04 09:37 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:00 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"