dfa2124 said:
I liked the last 3 words of this - "Will it work?"
That's the end of the clip - well-edited!
I liked the last 3 words of this - "Will it work?"
That's the end of the clip - well-edited!
idc
Well-known member
Can I add to the concerns about car radios, I am sure it is raised continually, but the more it is mentioned the more evidence there is that that concern is real.
Exactly what is the argument for changing from FM to DAB? I have never understood this. Are we as a country about to spend a lot of money providing a service that is not as good as the existing radio service. Can we not have both? I prefer to listen to FM over DAB on sound quality grounds. DAB is ok in the kitchen. Along with most people my car has FM/AM not DAB, will there be compensation for not having DAB in my car. If we must have DAB, can we have a higher quality DAB, atleast as good as existing FM.
This is all EXCELLENT stuff - thanks so much to all of you who've contributed some really salient points.
Still time for the rest of you to chip in
Still time for the rest of you to chip in
8009514
Well-known member
Just a thought on this. It seems clear that DAB+ is the format that most people on this forum would like to see adopted. If that should happen would it then mean that not only FM but also the current range of DAB receivers would also become redundant? Or, could both DAB systems be transmitted?
I'm in the 'pro' DAB camp as it gives me stations not transmitted in FM and having a DM38 I'll be ok for DAB+ (in the living room anyway). But I can imagine a lot of people becoming a bit miffed if their current DAB receivers became unuseable.
Rich
I'm in the 'pro' DAB camp as it gives me stations not transmitted in FM and having a DM38 I'll be ok for DAB+ (in the living room anyway). But I can imagine a lot of people becoming a bit miffed if their current DAB receivers became unuseable.
Rich
Retne
Well-known member
Hi Clare,
Right, to answer your specific questions (ones you're going to be addressing at the conference?):
A scrappage scheme may interest me - it wouldn't hurt, as this switchover seems inevetable. I'd rather not have to consider ditching my radio, though.
On radio I'm not at all bothered by quality above a certain level, so this for me comes down to not wanting DAB to be worse than FM. The way I consume radio rules quality out as a huge priority. I don't want it to get worse, but I'm happy with FM quality.
DAB as a format/protocol seems reasonable to me, the choices of bitrate don't. Given we're seeing DAB+ elsewhere though, I would now assume (incorrectly, at this stage) at some stage we'll switch to DAB+, which makes me even more likely to delay any purchase or look for a DAB and DAB+ radio (expense), even knowing we're not signed up to switch to +.
As was noted elsewhere, I'd rather not use my 'net bandwidth unnecessarily. And the one to many model seems a lot more sensible, meaning broadcast works for me, here.
Four other things that I can't get over. With DAB (and similar digital tech - this applies to Freeview too) I don't like the fact that my previous multiroom setup of walking from one room with a radio on to another now gives disjointed time delays. I assume at some stage all digital processing will be done as quickly as the older tech's analogue path allows.
And the second one is battery life. An FM radio lasts for days on a couple of AAs. Not so the "better" digital tech.
Cost is an issue here, simply because it costs so little to buy a non-DAB radio.
Finally I also just can't help but feel it would be a huge waste of physical resources. All those radios that work and will continue working are just going to be binned. Maybe we'll gather them together and send them someone that will be able to use them, but for things as small and prevelant as radios, is that sensible?
Sorry, rushing this post a little, hopefully the above makes some sort of sense at least!
R
(one question too: are the public allowed DAB transmitters in the same format as FM transmitters being built into some media devices?)
Right, to answer your specific questions (ones you're going to be addressing at the conference?):
A scrappage scheme may interest me - it wouldn't hurt, as this switchover seems inevetable. I'd rather not have to consider ditching my radio, though.
On radio I'm not at all bothered by quality above a certain level, so this for me comes down to not wanting DAB to be worse than FM. The way I consume radio rules quality out as a huge priority. I don't want it to get worse, but I'm happy with FM quality.
DAB as a format/protocol seems reasonable to me, the choices of bitrate don't. Given we're seeing DAB+ elsewhere though, I would now assume (incorrectly, at this stage) at some stage we'll switch to DAB+, which makes me even more likely to delay any purchase or look for a DAB and DAB+ radio (expense), even knowing we're not signed up to switch to +.
As was noted elsewhere, I'd rather not use my 'net bandwidth unnecessarily. And the one to many model seems a lot more sensible, meaning broadcast works for me, here.
Four other things that I can't get over. With DAB (and similar digital tech - this applies to Freeview too) I don't like the fact that my previous multiroom setup of walking from one room with a radio on to another now gives disjointed time delays. I assume at some stage all digital processing will be done as quickly as the older tech's analogue path allows.
And the second one is battery life. An FM radio lasts for days on a couple of AAs. Not so the "better" digital tech.
Cost is an issue here, simply because it costs so little to buy a non-DAB radio.
Finally I also just can't help but feel it would be a huge waste of physical resources. All those radios that work and will continue working are just going to be binned. Maybe we'll gather them together and send them someone that will be able to use them, but for things as small and prevelant as radios, is that sensible?
Sorry, rushing this post a little, hopefully the above makes some sort of sense at least!
R
(one question too: are the public allowed DAB transmitters in the same format as FM transmitters being built into some media devices?)
Hi Its great to hear that you have an opportunity to express consumer views.
1 Most radio users listen in their cars and DAB does not work while mobile. Even the BBC cannot get in-car reception as demonstrated in an article on the Radio 4 today programme a few months ago usng the highest performance DAB system available to the BBC. Cars last 10 - 12 years and currenltly have integrated radios - ie they cannot be replaced. However no car manufacturer offers standard DAB in their models. We are therefore 5 years from even half the current users being capable of listenting to DAB in a car.
2 DAB radios are a dissapointment. Most signals are so bandwidth limited as to be suitable little more than voice. High quality sound is only available on FM. I have a DAB radio at home and apart from a few cannels only available on DAB FM is much better quality. Where is the high quality, wide bandwidth sound we were promised? Digital does not mean better (and I am a digital engineer)
3 While DAB offers wider choice, how many of us really need it? Most listeners choose a radio station they like or can put up with and never switch. Those few listeners who might need Radio Scunthorpe while on Holiday in Turkey can listen on the internet.
4 So where is the user benefit to switch over? Better quality- certainly not. Better coverage no and certainly not in a vehicle. Wider choice well maybe but how many of the stations will get listeners. The freeview experience is that stations in the centre markets cannot make money as evidenced from the regular demise of start-up TV stations. So all we are left with is a profusion of Adult TV channels. Lets not send Radio down the same path.
1 Most radio users listen in their cars and DAB does not work while mobile. Even the BBC cannot get in-car reception as demonstrated in an article on the Radio 4 today programme a few months ago usng the highest performance DAB system available to the BBC. Cars last 10 - 12 years and currenltly have integrated radios - ie they cannot be replaced. However no car manufacturer offers standard DAB in their models. We are therefore 5 years from even half the current users being capable of listenting to DAB in a car.
2 DAB radios are a dissapointment. Most signals are so bandwidth limited as to be suitable little more than voice. High quality sound is only available on FM. I have a DAB radio at home and apart from a few cannels only available on DAB FM is much better quality. Where is the high quality, wide bandwidth sound we were promised? Digital does not mean better (and I am a digital engineer)
3 While DAB offers wider choice, how many of us really need it? Most listeners choose a radio station they like or can put up with and never switch. Those few listeners who might need Radio Scunthorpe while on Holiday in Turkey can listen on the internet.
4 So where is the user benefit to switch over? Better quality- certainly not. Better coverage no and certainly not in a vehicle. Wider choice well maybe but how many of the stations will get listeners. The freeview experience is that stations in the centre markets cannot make money as evidenced from the regular demise of start-up TV stations. So all we are left with is a profusion of Adult TV channels. Lets not send Radio down the same path.
john1000000boy
Well-known member
Seems absolutely crazy to me!! DAB does not work in our houses!!!! Bought my parents a DAB radio a number of years ago so my dad could listen to cricket in bed with headphones. The reception was not poor it was non exsistant!! At least with analog you can dial into a poor mw broadcast (like the cricket normally is) rather than a stop start glitchy broadcast that is totally unlistenable. The DAB went back as the only way a signal could be got was by pointing the antenna out the window(hence the walls!!) Mobile phone signals do not get through either(whinstone?) FM works great and they now have sky multiroom through the house!!
Ditch the DAB!!!!
Or maybe for cars although i hear signal is patchy at best!!
John
Ditch the DAB!!!!
Or maybe for cars although i hear signal is patchy at best!!
John
http://www.whathifi.com/news/update-ford-to-make-dab-radio-standard-from-2012
DAB has been standard on their higher trim level models for a while.
DAB has been standard on their higher trim level models for a while.
nads
Well-known member
I just had a tot up.
If i was in the UK items that would not do what they should do. 2 AV receivers. 1 HiFi separates radio, 1 radio alarm clock 2 car stereo/radios, a portable radio in the garage.
so that would be 7 useless items.
How may Items would you have that would be in the skip?
If i was in the UK items that would not do what they should do. 2 AV receivers. 1 HiFi separates radio, 1 radio alarm clock 2 car stereo/radios, a portable radio in the garage.
so that would be 7 useless items.
How may Items would you have that would be in the skip?
I've got a foot in each camp here. I work in radio, and I'm a radio listener (these comments represent no-one's views other than my own!).
To answer your points, Clare -
- Would another scrappage scheme for FM radios be of interest?
Are there reliable, independently-audited figures for how successful the last one was? From a sustainability point of view, there's no justification for attempting to entice people to buy something they don't need, with which to replace something that's probably working just fine for them at the moment.
- How key is the quality arguement?
Being realistic: not very. The average listener, listening to an average DAB portable, can't tell the difference between stations using different bitrates. When I'm in the studio, listening off air in an acoustically-tuned environment on quality speakers at a decent level and A-B'ing between FM and DAB receivers, it's easy to tell the difference. And by direct comparison such as that, DAB sounds pretty shoddy. But the average listener isn't doing that. What's more important to them is robustness of signal; if they can get a signal at all, and if they can, if it stays strong enough to be useable.
Spare me the 'high fidelity' snobbery. I will be very sad indeed if the point ever comes - and I am by no means convinced that it will - when FM is switched off. R3 on FM is one of the great pleasures of life. But how often do I sit down in front of the big speakers to listen to an evening of R3? Hardly ever.
As long as the audio is of a reasonable quality for average listeners, the quality argument is more or less irrelevant. DAB listeners like convenience - easy to tune, no frequencies to remember - and a signal that's either there or it isn't.
- Is DAB the right format?
No. FM is cheaper and more efficient, for broadcasters (transmission infrastructure costs less) and for listeners (FM receivers cheaper to buy and run). If DAB were the right format, we wouldn't still be having these discussions fifteen years into its lifespan. Were people still debating the future of FM in 1970? Of colour TV in 1980?
Hours of listening to DAB radio (RAJAR, Q4, 2010): 166 million. Hours of listening to all radio: 1,045 million. So in fifteen years, DAB manages to grow to just over 10% of listening hours?
Don't get me wrong, I have DAB, I use it (albeit rarely to listen to any station that's not available to me on FM), it's convenient, the receiver is a cool gadget. But none of that means it's the right format.
- Does none of this matter as we're all going online anyway?
Got it in one. Hours of listening to radio via internet up 54.9% year on year (RAJAR, Q4, 2010). Sorry, Clare, but your fellow guests next week might as well be discussing the future of the Baird television system, or the propellor-engined airliner.
And do beware; some loud voices in the radio world would like to reap any benefits from any future developments, as long as they don't have to pay for them. This is not in the interest of the listener. You may encounter some next week.
To answer your points, Clare -
- Would another scrappage scheme for FM radios be of interest?
Are there reliable, independently-audited figures for how successful the last one was? From a sustainability point of view, there's no justification for attempting to entice people to buy something they don't need, with which to replace something that's probably working just fine for them at the moment.
- How key is the quality arguement?
Being realistic: not very. The average listener, listening to an average DAB portable, can't tell the difference between stations using different bitrates. When I'm in the studio, listening off air in an acoustically-tuned environment on quality speakers at a decent level and A-B'ing between FM and DAB receivers, it's easy to tell the difference. And by direct comparison such as that, DAB sounds pretty shoddy. But the average listener isn't doing that. What's more important to them is robustness of signal; if they can get a signal at all, and if they can, if it stays strong enough to be useable.
Spare me the 'high fidelity' snobbery. I will be very sad indeed if the point ever comes - and I am by no means convinced that it will - when FM is switched off. R3 on FM is one of the great pleasures of life. But how often do I sit down in front of the big speakers to listen to an evening of R3? Hardly ever.
As long as the audio is of a reasonable quality for average listeners, the quality argument is more or less irrelevant. DAB listeners like convenience - easy to tune, no frequencies to remember - and a signal that's either there or it isn't.
- Is DAB the right format?
No. FM is cheaper and more efficient, for broadcasters (transmission infrastructure costs less) and for listeners (FM receivers cheaper to buy and run). If DAB were the right format, we wouldn't still be having these discussions fifteen years into its lifespan. Were people still debating the future of FM in 1970? Of colour TV in 1980?
Hours of listening to DAB radio (RAJAR, Q4, 2010): 166 million. Hours of listening to all radio: 1,045 million. So in fifteen years, DAB manages to grow to just over 10% of listening hours?
Don't get me wrong, I have DAB, I use it (albeit rarely to listen to any station that's not available to me on FM), it's convenient, the receiver is a cool gadget. But none of that means it's the right format.
- Does none of this matter as we're all going online anyway?
Got it in one. Hours of listening to radio via internet up 54.9% year on year (RAJAR, Q4, 2010). Sorry, Clare, but your fellow guests next week might as well be discussing the future of the Baird television system, or the propellor-engined airliner.
And do beware; some loud voices in the radio world would like to reap any benefits from any future developments, as long as they don't have to pay for them. This is not in the interest of the listener. You may encounter some next week.
chebby
Well-known member
nads said:
None anymore. We all have FM/DAB now (and internet radio capability) but - excepting BBC R7/R4 Extra in the kitchen - everything is tuned to FM for better quality and reception. I will get a DAB roof aerial fitted the day FM is switched off and not before.
Up until a few years ago we had Roberts R737 portables (ours were Burgundy colour) in kitchen and bedroom. None of our Pure Evoke radios have ever sounded quite as good (even less so with DAB). They seemed to 'do' BBC radio better than any other portable (except bigger and older Roberts R7*7 radios).
I may have to upgrade the Pure Evokes ('Flow' and 'One') in the Kitchen and bedroom, one day, for two of these. It just isn't the same if it isn't made out of wood and carries a Roberts logo! (Hums 'Sailing By'.)
II
I
I seam to see a patern here. People who listen through a radio (not realey Hi-fi quality but can be good, I have one) like DAB those who like quality dislike DAB. I think is depending whether you want to hear or listen? I do both, and like FM for quality and DAB and internet for diversity.
I
I seam to see a patern here. People who listen through a radio (not realey Hi-fi quality but can be good, I have one) like DAB those who like quality dislike DAB. I think is depending whether you want to hear or listen? I do both, and like FM for quality and DAB and internet for diversity.
chebby
Well-known member
jimallthetime said:
I work from home and good quality BBC radio output is my listening mainstay for anything up to 10 hours a day. (R4, R2, R3, R7/4Extra, Solent.)
It doesn't have to be a live R3 concert broadcast to showcase quality (nice to see they are starting again), well recorded drama does this too. The quality of R4's 'George Smiley' dramatisations over the last couple of years was impeccable and inspired me to buy all of them on BBC CDs.
BBC R4 (and R3) drama has always been a delight in FM stereo. I still have - amongst others - a treasured recording of the original cast version of Tom Stoppard's "Arcadia" from Radio 3 Christmas 1993 (recorded from FM stereo tuner to VHS Nicam audio-only to avoid gaps from changing/turning over audio cassettes). Despite copying it to DVD then de-muxing the files and importing to iTunes in AIFF the quality is still fresh as a daisy.
chebby
Well-known member
jimallthetime said:
Please don't make this your only visit to the WHF forums. That was a superb post and we are sorely lacking regular input from professionals in the recording and broadcast industries.
I'm very glad that BBC radio brings so much to your life, as it does to mine. I hope that continues to be the case ..... (feel free to read between the lines here!).
You're quite right about drama; I cited R3 as the first example to come to mind.
Thank you for your kind words about my post. I'll stick around! Incidentally, if any social-media people at Haymarket are curious, this (my first visit to the forums) follows the tweet about this discussion earlier today which I in turn retweeted (so you may get more radio people wading it at some point).
You're quite right about drama; I cited R3 as the first example to come to mind.
Thank you for your kind words about my post. I'll stick around! Incidentally, if any social-media people at Haymarket are curious, this (my first visit to the forums) follows the tweet about this discussion earlier today which I in turn retweeted (so you may get more radio people wading it at some point).
nads said:
5 items for me to go to landfill if FM is ever switched off. What a waste. Cost of replacing any of of them with DAB is more expensive than the FM equivalent at the moment.
Don't know if my local BBC station is available on DAB. I tend to have the radio on in the background during the day so "Hi-Fi" quality is not an issue, perfectly happy with the sound I get.
Its quite possible a lot of pensioners get enjoyment and companionship from the Radio, if FM goes it would be another expense for them, which some would find hard to find the cash for.
chebby said:
Agreed Chebby.
Another point on the scrappage idea, on the one hand we are being constantly told we are running out of landfill space yet on the other hand some genius comes up with this idea that could potentially consign tens of millions of obselete radios to landfill.
bigmaluk said:
That's a *very* interesting point: most people for whom FM *quality* is critical are doing their listing sitting in a comfy chair in front of more equipment than a radio — there's a second set for whom FM *reception* is critical, because DAB coverage is so patchy, but that's a completely separate (and hopefully temporary) issue.
If that's a reasonable picture, would the whole FM quality issue go away if the critical channels (which I assume are BBC Radio 3/4, Classic FM?) were given HD versions, say 512kbps MPEG4 stereo audio, on FREESAT, receiveable on Freesat HD tuners, just like TV channels are now?
Is this technically feasible? You're could get four /five HD radio channels in the bandwidth of one poor-quality SD TV channel if it is...
Note (1) the old "BBC2 + R3 FM simulcast" of major concert events like Last Night of the Proms would then be digitally implementable by watching BBC HD on a Freesat HD TV, while listening to BBC R3 HD on a Freesat HD PVR.
Note (2) the argument can be presented simply by noting that Analogue -> Digital SD -> Digital HD has happened for TV, but the last step is so far missing for radio.
Alantiggger
Well-known member
DAB is nice and clear sounding for speach but when I listen to music from my DAB radio stations they do sound hollow and cold... I can't really describe it in a great way but the FM radio seems to sound warmer for want of better words.... just my 2p worth.
Andrew17321
Well-known member
Clare
How key is the quality argument?
For in car use DAB quality would probably be fine as a restricted dynamic range is an advantage in a car.
However, coverage of the signal is CRUCIAL. It is very poor at the moment and more transmitters are needed for DAB than for FM as the signal is all or nothing, rather than degrading gradually as with FM. I doubt if rural roads in places like Scotland would ever be reasonably covered. I certainly would not like to deprived of radio in my car.
For many people the quality of DAB seems to be OK, but for a sizable minority (probably including all Radio 3 listeners) it is definitely not. This minority now, like me, have other options in their homes, but some may need help with setting this up.
Is DAB the right format?
No. All DAB radios now sold cover all Eureka 147 formats. The UK DAB is the poorest of the lot. However, if UK were to migrate to DAB+, I would bet that the bandwidth would be cut correspondingly to sell off more air space and the quality of the radio kept low.
Does none of this matter as we're all going online anyway?
I have used internet and satellite radio for the last five years because I have a lousy FM signal. I do not listen to DAB for music as its quality is so low (on a par with the old medium wave AM radio, to my mind). But it does matter for car radio.
Other point
The thought of scrapping trusted FM radios, never mind the replacement costs, will upset many people, especially older folk.
Andrew
How key is the quality argument?
For in car use DAB quality would probably be fine as a restricted dynamic range is an advantage in a car.
However, coverage of the signal is CRUCIAL. It is very poor at the moment and more transmitters are needed for DAB than for FM as the signal is all or nothing, rather than degrading gradually as with FM. I doubt if rural roads in places like Scotland would ever be reasonably covered. I certainly would not like to deprived of radio in my car.
For many people the quality of DAB seems to be OK, but for a sizable minority (probably including all Radio 3 listeners) it is definitely not. This minority now, like me, have other options in their homes, but some may need help with setting this up.
Is DAB the right format?
No. All DAB radios now sold cover all Eureka 147 formats. The UK DAB is the poorest of the lot. However, if UK were to migrate to DAB+, I would bet that the bandwidth would be cut correspondingly to sell off more air space and the quality of the radio kept low.
Does none of this matter as we're all going online anyway?
I have used internet and satellite radio for the last five years because I have a lousy FM signal. I do not listen to DAB for music as its quality is so low (on a par with the old medium wave AM radio, to my mind). But it does matter for car radio.
Other point
The thought of scrapping trusted FM radios, never mind the replacement costs, will upset many people, especially older folk.
Andrew
Thanks again for all your comments.
I'm at the conference now - you can follow progress on our Twitter feed here
Already some interesting points - lot of people are coming out all-guns blazing vs DAB....
I'm at the conference now - you can follow progress on our Twitter feed here
Already some interesting points - lot of people are coming out all-guns blazing vs DAB....
nads
Well-known member
The_Lhc
Well-known member
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
I'm a LiAV(!) and the future is Not Vinyl or CD, it's DAC / Streaming, what do yo think?- Started by Jasonovich
- Replies: 43
-
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram