Many thanks all for the comments. I 'need' DAB for BBC6, although I have been quite happily using the same FM radio for over 20 years. Good sound and still going strong. It's just that I had this one given to me, and don't have any obvious use for it.
I could extend the mains adapter. I don't like the way it works, though. It stays 'hot' and draws 5W on idle.
I think I'll try 5 x AAs that I have anyway, and see how it pans out in use.
(posted to uk.rec.audio too)
You can receive BBC 6 off air on your mains powered Dabble radio and then re transmit that via an FM sender, quite cheap off e-bay, and then receive it on a much "less power to run" FM portable:)..
Prolly cheaper than a lead acid battery to lug around!..
** Yes haven't we noticed you've got olde Oz Phil Allison started now ***;!...** You stinking pile of pommy turds have set him off daring to argue! **
I'm not that bothered about R6 TBH!
Yep. Excellent spectator sport :-)
Well, I don't mind but he is a bit extreme.
Yesterday I drove from Scotland to Rotherham and the DAB R4 didn't fail once.
Bill
I'd very much expect you didn't.
Cars do have decent aerials thereon are they are out in the air so to speak;!..
Let alone the number of DAB 'mitters the BBC are putting in service;!..
The quality of Dab is poor in comparison to FM (generally)
WOW! That is so exciting. Bet the quality was crap though. You can hear it frying on clean trumpet notes on the DAB in-car tuner pretty easily.
And you have no chance driving over the M62 without hitting dead spots. The worst one is in the deep cutting above Hollingworth Lake.
How does that make a difference when comparing DAB and FM reception?
Long long time since the BBC put any transmitter into service.
Sounds like a very faulty car tuner.
Even when the FM signal is poor?
Obviously not. But a better aerial will fix that. You can't do anything about broadcast material that has already been compromised by DAB.
With a decent signal and receiver FM is much better musically and actually in realtime whereas DAB is distorted to a greater or lesser extent and 1-2s slow. FM broadcast quality would require around 192kbps with the poxy DAB encoding the UK uses or 96kbps with DAB+.
The pips are hilarious if you have several models of DAB radios in different rooms. *Never* use them for time checks!
Every DAB radio I have ever listened to has audible distortion faults on the right sorts of programme material. FM leaves it standing.
I can only speak for myself. I receive excellent FM, but poor Dab.
I have pretty well the best available aerial on my car. Short of adding some sort of mast. And FM reception (on the stations I listen to) in central London is poor. DAB is excellent.
FM isn't perfect either. But nothing to stop you using that where it is better. Plenty still use AM.
And you can hear all this in your car - or on a portable radio?
What are you doing that required time accuracy to within a second or so?
And don't use your TV for this either. All digital systems introduce a delay. Fact of life with the physics of them.
You've never experienced multi-path reception with FM? But hear audible distortion on DAB? How very strange.
Right - so if you had a poor FM signal you'd consider AM with a good one better?
All car radio reception is of poor quality compared to a static receiver. There is no worthwhile difference between AM, FM and DAB systems in audio terms. The background noise corrupts all audio and putting loudspeakers around your knees and on rear parcel shelves simply increases the distortion. If you want to check, simply record and play back a received car radio signal and compare it with a static recording.
This was the reason that no car manufacturer ever put a tape reorder in production cars.
Dab may have fewer reception breaks than FM, but IME the only system which gave end to end coverage across the whole country was LW transmissions on 1500M.
Define that a bit better please!. A car radio is a very good RF reception environment for most all transmissions. Compared to a fixed receiver with its usual missing telescopic rod .. very good indeed;!..
My missus has a car with DAB as standard comparing such as BBC radio 2 on FM and DAB there is a marked audible difference even when on the move the FM sounds much "cleaner" for want of a better description.
Even voice on Radio 4 is that much more natural...
You should get off the beaten track sometimes...
When it's up and running;!..
In article , Dave Plowman (News) scribeth thus
"Urban clutter" Dave. Generally in FM coverage planning terms still mostly considered at 10 Metres above ground level the equivalent signal on say a tranny radio in the average house is some 15 odd dB worse because of building screening.
Whereas a car radio is out in the open albeit lower of course and generally has a half decent ground plane with it etc...
Dunno about the "right" sort .. most any sort!..
You have hit on the real problem with DAB that despite the RF received level there is nothing you can do to improve the audio quality as it's already been degraded in the DAB coding at the sending end.
The only way DAB will be improved is by the adoption of the AAC codec and Ofcom setting a given standard for audio quality like the old Radio authority once did;
Won't happen 'tho...
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.