Why are most digital radios mono and in a retro style?
- posted
20 years ago
Why are most digital radios mono and in a retro style?
It's to stop folk realising just how poor the implementation of DAB is in this country is. (Quantity *way* over quality)
Tim
'Cos you've only been shopping on ebay? :)
Robert
You could ask on alt.radio.digital but don't expect a reasonable answer as the group is inhabited by a classic unemployeable newsgroup twerp by the name of Steve who will just tell you that DAB sound quality is terrible, that you're a fool for buying one and who will rapidly resort to abuse if you dont "respect his author-a-tay". Very amusing to visit but steve's noise-to-signal is such that it's next to useless for real information.
I had a converasation about DAB radios with someone the other day on this same point - why do they tend to look as if they've been made in somebody's shed? It seems to be because it's only very small manufacturers in the market at the moment. Sony and Technics made 19" seperate DAB tuners in the early days (when bit-rates were higher and it could be considered a hi-fi medium) which looked anything but retro. When they re-enter the market (shortly if the rumours are correct) I expect there will be a lot more choice.
AJ
Not sure really, but there are some nice-looking ones too. Have a look at
Al
They're not, look.
Digital radios are in mono because this suits the broadcasters who don't give a toss for quality any longer and to save on transmission costs. The Eureka 1471 digital broadcast system was sold on among other things improves sound and transmission quality. Since that time the broadcasters have discovered that it is possible by reducing the transmitted bitrate that they can reduce the audio quality in order to save transmission costs and or to fir t more stations in.
Apart from that the original idea was poorly conceived in that the CODEC that's the thing that encodes the digital audio and decodes it back to audio is MP2 which now is quite old and has been surpassed. Unfortunately this is set in stone a better system would have been to enabled over the air upgrades as the tech progressed. Imagine having to be stuck with say WIN 3.11 or WIN 95, much the same thing.
Yes Steve does sometimes sound off, but a lot of but his intentions are far more honest than what the broadcasters and regulators have been. You can read it all here..
Unfortunalty some early adopters paid handsome sums for their equipment only to be let down as the quality decreased and its getting worse as stations are crammed in often in Mono only:-((
It may be noted that other countries who have adopted this system don't screw it anywhere near as bad as what the UK does:-((
So that's where IMM gets to..... ;)
PoP
If you really must use the email address provided with my newsreader please be aware that the email is processed with spamcop. As a result your email to me might be treated as spam!
Well, there's little point in having stereo if the speakers are only a few inches apart. As regards the retro style, perhaps it's what the public want?
In message , John writes
Define most. I was bought a Pure Evoke-2 for Christmas it is a stereo model and looks *both* retro and modern in different ways (to my eyes). Also as someone else said people seem to want retro at the moment.
The sound quality is great and most of the programming that listen to is in stereo. There are also quite a few Hi-Fi separates DAB tuners available now as well.
BraileTrail
My personal one ("sports") is definitely retro, looks as though it comes from the 1950s, but is stereo.
Mary
While I've been reading these posts I wondered why it's important to have something you like the look of when it's for listening to ... beauty's in the thing of the whatsit anyway.
Mary
Second rule of Usenet: Just because he's a twerp, doesn't mean that he's actually _wrong_.
DAB sound _is_ terrible. (mine's a Psion flashing krell-pod)
BTW - I have Cloth Ears. Well known for it.
If I play Suzanne Vega on CD or MP3, I can't tell the difference (for that's what chummy at the Fraunhofer tested it with). But if I play some local Brissel folk music (drum and bass), I surely can tell them apart.
Is any broadcast system based on MP3 basically doomed, whatever you do to the bitrate ? If so, and if the BBC really are talking about dumping analogue, then what happens to R3 ?
-- Do whales have krillfiles ?
Because that gives the right 'AM' quality that matches the sound?
Indeed not, but 'muscling in' on every post with the same response is pathetic. I paraphrase but:
"I'd like to buy a Wavefinder, where can i still find one?" Steve "DAB sounds crap" "I'd like to buy one anyway" Steve "then you're an idiot. f*** off"
Not really helpful is it?
It's not a Hi-Fi medium but I'd love to have 6Music in my car and kitchen - Satellite or Freeview is NOT the answer for everyone.
Imagine having to be stuck with WIN anything .
I'd also love to have 6Music in the car. My first thoughts go in the direction of a pocket DAB receiver and a low-power FM transmitter. But they'd have to be powered from the car battery to avoid the need for a trailer-full of AA batteries. Has anyone been down that road, so to speak?
reception on the pocket DABs has been pretty poor from the reviews i've seen. I've also read very mixed reports of the FM transmitters (which i was considering for my iPod), quite apart from which i believe they're illegal in the UK.
Hmm.
Well, it's better than either medium wave or FM with multi-path problems. And gives a wide choice of stations that otherwise wouldn't be available. You pays your money.
I only use it for R4 & 5. And it sounds pretty good on these.
A cheaper alternative for the mainstream stations in better quality is a Freeview box - but this isn't portable.
Nor me, but I *do* like the extra channels. I'd rather have BBC 7 and 6 Music on DAB than not at all.
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.