🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sep 30, 2:50 am, SFTV_troy <SFTV_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Tom wrote:
> > On Sep 29, 7:22 pm, SFTV_troy <SFTV_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > The quality stinks?  Really?  I listen to XM streams via the internet,
> > > and they sound just fine.  Is there really that huge of a difference
> > > between Internet and Mobile Receiver?
>
> > DRM (and I imagine HDradio-IBOC-AM) are fatiguing (to some people)
> > because very low audio encoding bitrates must be employed in order to
> > fit within the allowed spectrum; typically 10kHz of RF spectrum
> > restricts the audio to perhaps 20kbps. Considering that a CD streams
> > at about 75 times this rate, losses in encoding at these very low bit
> > rates along with the consequent artefacts are pretty severe.
>
> True.
>
> On the other hand, codecs have advanced a lot over the last few years,
> specifically to improve low bit rates.  Take a quick listen to these
> AAC+SBR stations:
>
> Q93 Louisiana -www.shoutcast.com/sbin/shoutcast-playlist.pls?rn=377155&file=filename...
> SKY FM -www.shoutcast.com/sbin/shoutcast-playlist.pls?rn=8849&file=filename.pls
>
> IMHO they sound better than the AM Stereo radio in my car.  Even as
> low as 16 kbps, you have fairly good sound.  (If the above link did
> not work, here's the station listing.)www.shoutcast.com/directory/index.phtml?orderby=content&sgenre=Top%20...
>
> Also:
>
> With a nominal increase (+5 khz each side),
> HD and DMR can achieve 40 or 70 kbps
> which is as good as FM.
>
> > I was too general in my comment about satellite radio. Both XM and
> > Sirius use a range of encoding standards, putting news/talk on the
> > lowest and music on the highest. My main channel on Sirius Canada is
> > CBC Radio One which was stupidly assigned a news/talk standard when it
> > actually comprises an eclectic mix of content - we're currently
> > listening to Randy Bachman (BTO) playing #2 hits from the 60's and
> > 70's in his weekly 3-hour program from the local FM. The Sirius news/
> > talk encoding is not much higher than 20kbps - voice is bad enough but
> > music really stinks. .....
>
> I don't know much about the Satellite services, but I see sirius uses
> AAC (no plus).  AAC is not much better than MP3, and 20 kbps is
> definitely not sufficient, even for voice.  I'd probably be calling
> every day, and complaining to sirius, until they got tired of hearing
> from me.
>
> > .... What you hear over
> > the Internet will be encoded differently, using codecs popular for
> > Internet streaming, not their proprietary ones for satellite delivery.
>
> Ahhh I see.  I figured they'd use the same codec, rather than spend
> money creating two separate streams for the satellite and the net.
>
> I've been listening on the internet, and considering subscribing, but
> if the radio's sound is crap then it's not worth the $13 a month fee.
> (later).  Ooops hold on.  If wikipedia is accurate, XM is using the
> superior AAC+.  "Audio channels on XM are digitally compressed using
> the aacPlus codec".  So XM would sound as good as internet.

HD/IBOC does not employ AAC, although an earlier version may have
IIRC. It uses something called PAC(?)

One annoying thing I always found about either service was that even
with a satellite dish the sets at Wal-Mart broke up on and off as you
moved around them. How QUAINT.