Just a note to put the following into context: GCap were the biggest 
supporters of DAB in the commercial radio industry, but alas no more:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/14789f42-d876-11dc-8b22-0000779fd2ac.html

"Announcing the plan to close the group's remaining digital-only stations, 
Planet Rock and theJazz, Ms Hazlitt said "DAB is not an economically viable 
platform for the company." That reverses the view of Ralph Bernard, her 
predecessor as chief executive, who pioneered digital commercial radio.

Ms Hazlitt said consumer uptake of digital radio had been slow and the costs 
of broadcasting on DAB had been too high.

GCap will also sell, for a nominal sum, its 63 per cent stake in Digital 
One, the transmission "multiplex", to its partner Arqiva. Digital One was 
costing GCap £18m a year to run, more than the £15m revenue it earned, and 
revenues are due to fall in the next financial year as contracts from third 
parties have been cancelled."

More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was the most 
incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:

http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm


-- 
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/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm

"DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote in message 
news:GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was the 
> most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK 
> broadcasting:

It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one. DAB radio 
has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.

/g

Slark wrote:
> "DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote in message
> news:GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>> More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was
>> the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of
>> UK broadcasting:
>
> It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one. DAB
> radio has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.


Everything to do with DAB links back to the technical aspect of it, though. 
For example, the reason why Fru Hazlitt said: "DAB is not an economically 
viable platform for the company." is because DAB is extremely expensive to 
transmit on (£1m per annum per stereo station), which is a result of DAB 
being extremely inefficient, which in turn is due to the technologies it 
uses being so inefficient - the MP2 audio codec is by far the most 
inefficient audio codec they could have chosen to use, and the error 
correction coding used on DAB is extremely spectrally inefficient too.

DAB+ is about 3 times cheaper to transmit than DAB, and if they'd have 
upgraded DAB (the technologies were available at the time) prior to 
launching it we wouldn't be in the current situation where GCap is having to 
pull out due to cost reasons, and we'd have higher audio quality on the BBC 
stations and a lot more stations would be transmitting because multiplexes 
could carry 3 times as many stations and smaller stations could actually 
afford to transmit, whereas the extortionate carriage fees they're asked to 
pay are beyond their means at the moment.

Basically, if they'd have upgraded DAB prior to launching it DAB would have 
been a lot more successful than it has been.


-- 
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/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm

On 11 Feb, 11:08, "Slark"  wrote:
> "DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote in messagenews:GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>
> > More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was the
> > most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK
> > broadcasting:
>
> It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one. DAB radio
> has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.
>
> /g

Hmm... I'm far from convinced by the argument re internet radio -
after all hardly anyone has stand alone kit for listening to internet
radio, they need to have a computer fired up so as to 'receive' it,
and even if they do have an internet radio box it'll only work where
there's a broadband connection.

I'd strongly suggest the massive success of iPods and other mp3 (and
similar format) players, including mobile phones with integrated
players, is what one should look at here.

In article <GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net>,
   DAB sounds worse than FM <dab.is@dead> wrote:
> Just a note to put the following into context: GCap were the biggest 
> supporters of DAB in the commercial radio industry, but alas no more:

> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/14789f42-d876-11dc-8b22-0000779fd2ac.html

> "Announcing the plan to close the group's remaining digital-only
> stations, Planet Rock and theJazz, Ms Hazlitt said "DAB is not an
> economically viable platform for the company." That reverses the view
> of Ralph Bernard, her predecessor as chief executive, who pioneered
> digital commercial radio.

> Ms Hazlitt said consumer uptake of digital radio had been slow and the
> costs of broadcasting on DAB had been too high.

But no mention of the fact their programmes weren't successful?

It's called 'shooting the messenger' ...

-- 
*The beatings will continue until morale improves *

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> In article <GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net>,
>   DAB sounds worse than FM <dab.is@dead> wrote:
>> Just a note to put the following into context: GCap were the biggest
>> supporters of DAB in the commercial radio industry, but alas no more:
>
>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/14789f42-d876-11dc-8b22-0000779fd2ac.html
>
>> "Announcing the plan to close the group's remaining digital-only
>> stations, Planet Rock and theJazz, Ms Hazlitt said "DAB is not an
>> economically viable platform for the company." That reverses the view
>> of Ralph Bernard, her predecessor as chief executive, who pioneered
>> digital commercial radio.
>
>> Ms Hazlitt said consumer uptake of digital radio had been slow and
>> the costs of broadcasting on DAB had been too high.
>
> But no mention of the fact their programmes weren't successful?
>
> It's called 'shooting the messenger' ...


Actually, Planet Rock and theJazz were 2 of the most successful digital-only 
radio brands on the whole of DAB (and they were GCap's most successful 
digital stations by far).


-- 
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/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm

Mizter T wrote:
> On 11 Feb, 11:08, "Slark"  wrote:
>> "DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote in
>> messagenews:GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>>
>>> More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was
>>> the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of
>>> UK broadcasting:
>>
>> It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one.
>> DAB radio
>> has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.
>>
>> /g
>
> Hmm... I'm far from convinced by the argument re internet radio -
> after all hardly anyone has stand alone kit for listening to internet
> radio,


Internet radio is the future - it doesn't have to be the present.


> they need to have a computer fired up so as to 'receive' it,


Wi-Fi Internet radios do not need a computer to be switched on to listen to 
radio stations.


> and even if they do have an internet radio box it'll only work where
> there's a broadband connection.


There's only 1% of the population who're unable to get broadband at home.


> I'd strongly suggest the massive success of iPods and other mp3 (and
> similar format) players, including mobile phones with integrated
> players, is what one should look at here.


That's one of the things she is looking at.


-- 
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/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm

In article , Slark 
scribeth thus
>"DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote in message 
>news:GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>> More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was the 
>> most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK 
>> broadcasting:
>
>It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one. DAB radio 
>has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.
>
>/g
>
>

Don't people ever realise that DAB wasn't a goer as most every bloody
car in the country hadn't got one in it!.

Radio broadcasting is about wide area wireless you don't get net
connections in most all mobile locations/situations.....

Finally Ms Hazlitt realised the obvious and packed it in..
-- 
Tony Sayer

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:23:30 +0000, tony sayer 
wrote:

>In article , Slark 
>scribeth thus
>>"DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote in message 
>>news:GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>>> More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was the 
>>> most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK 
>>> broadcasting:
>>
>>It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one. DAB radio 
>>has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.
>>
>>/g
>>
>>
>
>Don't people ever realise that DAB wasn't a goer as most every bloody
>car in the country hadn't got one in it!.

Indeed. The key to DABs pretty-much assured success was held by the
car manufacturers. They dropped it down a drain...

Cheers,

Colin.

"tony sayer"  wrote in message 
news:+eScpjPC5DsHFwQB@bancom.co.uk...
> In article , Slark 
> scribeth thus
>>"DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote in message
>>news:GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>>> More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was the
>>> most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK
>>> broadcasting:
>>
>>It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one. DAB 
>>radio
>>has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.
>>
>>/g
>>
>>
>
> Don't people ever realise that DAB wasn't a goer as most every bloody
> car in the country hadn't got one in it!.
>
> Radio broadcasting is about wide area wireless you don't get net
> connections in most all mobile locations/situations.....
>
> Finally Ms Hazlitt realised the obvious and packed it in..
> -- 
> Tony Sayer
>

That might be a good point re car radios - I don't really know whether cars 
are a big 'driver' for radio to be honest.
However, the internet radio / media thing is, of course, all tied up with 
device (or platform) convergence - I know I just simply listen to a mixture 
of live radio and podcasts whilst in the car - with an increasing move to 
podcasts over time.

/g

Colin Stamp wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:23:30 +0000, tony sayer 
> wrote:
>
>> In article , Slark 
>> scribeth thus
>>> "DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote in message
>>> news:GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>>>> More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was
>>>> the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history
>>>> of UK broadcasting:
>>>
>>> It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one.
>>> DAB radio has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.
>>>
>>> /g
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Don't people ever realise that DAB wasn't a goer as most every bloody
>> car in the country hadn't got one in it!.
>
> Indeed. The key to DABs pretty-much assured success


"Pretty-much [sic] assured success"? Try reading the article linked to, 
because despite the £155-worth of TV advertising the BBC has lavished on 
DAB, and the endless trails for DAB saying how fantastic it is on commercial 
radio, DAB sales are shit and it's going down the pan.


> was held by the
> car manufacturers. They dropped it down a drain...


DAB is far too expensive for the manufacturers to include it in cars 
compared to the cost of providing FM. This in turn is linked to global DAB 
sales volumes, which have been buggered up by the fact that the rest of the 
world decided not to adopt the old DAB system. Things might get better in 
future now that there's a lot of global interest in DAB+, so there could now 
be a global market, and therefore sufficient global sales to make DAB+ cheap 
enough to be included in a car, but today's news puts the future of DAB and 
DAB+ in doubt globally, IMO, because the UK has up to now been by far the 
leading country pushing DAB, and if it does go down the pan here, I think 
the system as a whole is pretty fooked.


-- 
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/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm

In article , Colin Stamp
 scribeth thus
>On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:23:30 +0000, tony sayer 
>wrote:
>
>>In article , Slark 
>>scribeth thus
>>>"DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote in message 
>>>news:GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>>>> More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was the 
>>>> most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK 
>>>> broadcasting:
>>>
>>>It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one. DAB radio 
>>>has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.
>>>
>>>/g
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Don't people ever realise that DAB wasn't a goer as most every bloody
>>car in the country hadn't got one in it!.
>
>Indeed. The key to DABs pretty-much assured success was held by the
>car manufacturers. They dropped it down a drain...
>
>Cheers,
>
>Colin.

Question is why?..


Cost?..

Uncertainly over digital radio standards?..
-- 
Tony Sayer

In article <+eScpjPC5DsHFwQB@bancom.co.uk>,
   tony sayer  wrote:
> In article , Slark 
> scribeth thus
> >"DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote in message 
> >news:GwVrj.5700$nG4.625@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> >> More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was the 
> >> most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK 
> >> broadcasting:
> >
> >It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one. DAB
> >radio has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.
> >
> >/g
> >
> >

> Don't people ever realise that DAB wasn't a goer as most every bloody
> car in the country hadn't got one in it!.

It took at least 25 years to get every car with FM in it

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:

> Mizter T wrote:
> > On 11 Feb, 11:08, "Slark"  wrote:
> >> "DAB sounds worse than FM" <dab.is@dead> wrote:
> >>
> >>> More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was
> >>> the most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of
> >>> UK broadcasting:
> >>
> >> It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one.
> >> DAB radio
> >> has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.
> >>
> >> /g
> >
> > Hmm... I'm far from convinced by the argument re internet radio -
> > after all hardly anyone has stand alone kit for listening to internet
> > radio,
>
>
> Internet radio is the future - it doesn't have to be the present.
>

Fair enough. Perhaps there's a way of multicasting over 3G mobile
phone networks - I'm not up on the latest developments, so perhaps
this has already been trialled. And then there's WiMAX.

>
> > they need to have a computer fired up so as to 'receive' it,
>
>
> Wi-Fi Internet radios do not need a computer to be switched on to listen to
> radio stations.
>

I know - but I had already said "hardly anyone has stand alone kit for
listening to internet radio". This could of course change over time.

But they need Wi-Fi - not much help when you're on the move, in a car
or walking somewhere for example, or otherwise out and about.

>
> > and even if they do have an internet radio box it'll only work where
> > there's a broadband connection.
>
>
> There's only 1% of the population who're unable to get broadband at home.

But people don't just listen at home - they listen at workplaces, when
they're out and about, at the far end of the garden or in the basement
where Wi-Fi signals don't reach for example. Plus there will always be
many households that don't have a broadband connection, even well into
the future.

>
> > I'd strongly suggest the massive success of iPods and other mp3 (and
> > similar format) players, including mobile phones with integrated
> > players, is what one should look at here.
>
>
> That's one of the things she is looking at.
>
>

charles wrote:

> > >> More evidence backing up my assertion that the adoption of DAB was the 
> > >> most incompetent technical decision ever made in the history of UK 
> > >> broadcasting:
> > > 
> > > It's market penetration that drives this, not  the technical one. DAB
> > > radio has been taken over by internet radio / internet media.
> >
> > Don't people ever realise that DAB wasn't a goer as most every bloody
> > car in the country hadn't got one in it!.
> 
>
> It took at least 25 years to get every car with FM in it


Only when the technology allowed it.

For a start the early band II transmitters were not equipped with suitable
antenna for reception using a vertical antenna normally required for a car
and LF/MF receivers were far easier to manufacture using valves.

DAB was design with car radios in mind, hence the use of COFDM, vertical
polarised Tx antenna and reasonably high bit error correction.

J

tony sayer wrote, On 11/02/2008 13:00:
>>> Don't people ever realise that DAB wasn't a goer as most every bloody
>>> car in the country hadn't got one in it!.
>> Indeed. The key to DABs pretty-much assured success was held by the
>> car manufacturers. They dropped it down a drain...
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Colin.
> 
> Question is why?..
> 
> 
> Cost?..
> 
> Uncertainly over digital radio standards?..

The reception in a nice stationary house is bad enough, it must be 
terrible while driving. I expect the reason it was not adopted is that 
it just does not work reliably enough for cars. The last thing 
manufactures want are customers complaining because the radio does not 
work, they know that every single customer wants to listen to the radio.

Also, the reason this company is ditching DAB is not because it costs 
too much to broadcast. If they could make enough money on advertising, 
the broadcast costs would not be an issue. If the statistics show that 
the audience is low, advertisers wont waste their money, GCap won't make 
enough profit and the business will be wound up.


-- 
DavidM newsNO@_SPAMdjmorgan.org.uk
www.djmorgan.org.uk