http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7470460.stm

One for DSWTF?

(runs and hides)

"Java Jive"  wrote in message 
news:d7f164l1pjpdd2as5p86gt38b9v1ehgt6t@4ax.com...
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7470460.stm

I don't see the point in more or less abandoning FM.

Apart from the quality issue (which might be fixed with suitable 
technology/standards) there are far more radios about than TVs to become 
obsolete.

"Furthermore, car manufacturers would have to be persuaded to install 
digital radios as standard."

And then wait 15 years for all the old cars to fall apart I would hope.

-- 
Max Demian

"Java Jive"  wrote in message 
news:d7f164l1pjpdd2as5p86gt38b9v1ehgt6t@4ax.com...
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7470460.stm
>
> One for DSWTF?
>
> (runs and hides)

TV's are usually large and DTT can be retrofitted as a small box connected 
via RF or Scart.

OTOH there are millions of portable radios that would become obsolete.

Java Jive wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7470460.stm
> 
> One for DSWTF?

Dabsworth doesn't need any encouragement.

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 12:17:45 +0100, Silk  wrote:

>Java Jive wrote:
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7470460.stm
>> 
>> One for DSWTF?
>
>Dabsworth doesn't need any encouragement.

I doubt if he will be the only person to be concerned if the  proposal
is to replace FM with DAB in its present form.  I can appreciate the
deficiencies of DAB and I do not regard myself as an extremist.  If we
are going to have digital only, we will need either a greatly improved
bit-rate or a change of coding to achieve the quality that we
currently have (in FM) and that some (though apparently not all)
listeners want.

Scott wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 12:17:45 +0100, Silk  wrote:
> 
>> Java Jive wrote:
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7470460.stm
>>>
>>> One for DSWTF?
>> Dabsworth doesn't need any encouragement.
> 
> I doubt if he will be the only person to be concerned if the  proposal
> is to replace FM with DAB in its present form.  I can appreciate the
> deficiencies of DAB and I do not regard myself as an extremist.  If we
> are going to have digital only, we will need either a greatly improved
> bit-rate or a change of coding to achieve the quality that we
> currently have (in FM) and that some (though apparently not all)
> listeners want.

At this moment in time, there's next to sod all worth listening to on 
FM. It's either left-wing BBC propaganda or lowest-common-denominator 
"local" radio. I doubt that many would care or even notice if it went.

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 15:12:39 +0100, Silk  wrote:

>Scott wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 12:17:45 +0100, Silk  wrote:
>> 
>>> Java Jive wrote:
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7470460.stm
>>>>
>>>> One for DSWTF?
>>> Dabsworth doesn't need any encouragement.
>> 
>> I doubt if he will be the only person to be concerned if the  proposal
>> is to replace FM with DAB in its present form.  I can appreciate the
>> deficiencies of DAB and I do not regard myself as an extremist.  If we
>> are going to have digital only, we will need either a greatly improved
>> bit-rate or a change of coding to achieve the quality that we
>> currently have (in FM) and that some (though apparently not all)
>> listeners want.
>
>At this moment in time, there's next to sod all worth listening to on 
>FM. It's either left-wing BBC propaganda or lowest-common-denominator 
>"local" radio. I doubt that many would care or even notice if it went.

Speak for yourself.  If my radio stopped working I might well care.

Yeah, it aint gonna happen. Digital is  in trouble as its out of date. What 
ever happened to that system where one station could be transmitted 
digitally as per fm and am using the same transmitters but with better 
quality and less hiss? French idea I seem to recall. I'm not sure if 
multiplexing is the way to go here as it makes things kind of  hard to 
change  if you have to pay for  a place on a multiplex.

Brian

-- 
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
 graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________


"Max Demian"  wrote in message 
news:6cbv3fF3emsdrU1@mid.individual.net...
> "Java Jive"  wrote in message 
> news:d7f164l1pjpdd2as5p86gt38b9v1ehgt6t@4ax.com...
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7470460.stm
>
> I don't see the point in more or less abandoning FM.
>
> Apart from the quality issue (which might be fixed with suitable 
> technology/standards) there are far more radios about than TVs to become 
> obsolete.
>
> "Furthermore, car manufacturers would have to be persuaded to install 
> digital radios as standard."
>
> And then wait 15 years for all the old cars to fall apart I would hope.
>
> -- 
> Max Demian
>

I agree. Many assume that the lack of hiss means better, but when I point 
out the grittiness, weird phase effects and general rubbish like being in 
mono when its in stereo on freeview, people suddenly realise they have been 
conned.

People have fallen for the kings new clothes con. I can only find one thing 
about dab that is nice, its easy to tune!

Brian

-- 
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
 graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________


"Scott"  wrote in message 
news:0am164tdfjgkld4jcaqvqu0kphsnie0h9r@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 12:17:45 +0100, Silk  wrote:
>
>>Java Jive wrote:
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7470460.stm
>>>
>>> One for DSWTF?
>>
>>Dabsworth doesn't need any encouragement.
>
> I doubt if he will be the only person to be concerned if the  proposal
> is to replace FM with DAB in its present form.  I can appreciate the
> deficiencies of DAB and I do not regard myself as an extremist.  If we
> are going to have digital only, we will need either a greatly improved
> bit-rate or a change of coding to achieve the quality that we
> currently have (in FM) and that some (though apparently not all)
> listeners want.

Scott wrote:

> Speak for yourself.  If my radio stopped working I might well care.

Yes, "might", but you're not really sure, are you? For me, if FM were to 
be switched off now, I'd not care. In fact, I'm not sure I'd even notice.

Once upon a time, every other car had the radio going, usually the same 
station - you could see the driver behind singing along! Nowadays, 
everyone plays their own music.

In article <g3r8v9$6nc$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
   Silk  wrote:
> Scott wrote:

> > Speak for yourself.  If my radio stopped working I might well care.

> Yes, "might", but you're not really sure, are you? For me, if FM were to 
> be switched off now, I'd not care. In fact, I'm not sure I'd even notice.

> Once upon a time, every other car had the radio going, usually the same 
> station - you could see the driver behind singing along! Nowadays, 
> everyone plays their own music.

most perhaps - certainly not everyone.  I don't.

-- 
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

"Java Jive"  wrote in message 
news:d7f164l1pjpdd2as5p86gt38b9v1ehgt6t@4ax.com...
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7470460.stm
>

Bunch of loonies. If they move all the big stations to digicrap it will mean 
a huge listener and advertising bonanza for community radio stations.

> One for DSWTF?
>
> (runs and hides)