Article View: rec.audio.tech
Article #874Re: HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio
From: Telamon
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 20:40
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 20:40
41 lines
3397 bytes
3397 bytes
In article <1191096585.135753.167530@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, SFTV_troy <SFTV_troy@yahoo.com> wrote: > I posted this at rec.audio. I'll crosspost it here, as my response is > still the same: > > HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio > > > I hear a LOT of people complaining about Hybrid Digital Radio, but > from what I've heard from European listeners, HDR is no worse than DAB > (poor quality audio;worse than FM), or DRB (both poor quality & > interference w/ existing AM stations). > > Thoughts? > > Opinions? > > Frankly I'm a bit surprised at the reaction. There's currently a > transition from analog to digital broadcasting (both in American and > the European Union), and there will be some growing pains, but it's > only temporary. In the LONG TERM, the digital radio will provide > better sound than the current analog (like upgrading FM Stereo to 300 > kbps Surround). > > Wouldn't it be cool to have 5.1 surround from your radio? > > Or have your FM station suddenly multiply from 1 station to 4 > stations (offering, for example, 2000s-era music on the main channel) > (and 90s, 80s, 70s on the 3 sub-channels). Or maybe a Jazz station > dividing itself into Modern Jazz, Mid-Century Jazz, and Classic Big > Band-era Jazz. FM could effectively triple its number of channels. > > Well the IDEA is sound, even if the analog-to-digital (HD, DAB, DRM) > transition has some growing pains to overcome. What do you mean by "the IDEA is sound"? HD and DRM are lousy ideas. -- Telamon Ventura, California
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<telamon_spamshield-1E03A7.13400429092007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr29.news.prodigy.net.POSTED!03ce4474!not-for-mailReferences:
<1191065666.205537.159420@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <1191096585.135753.167530@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: fb1f8,428391383e1324a5 X-Google-Thread: 10a749,428391383e1324a5 X-Google-Thread: 114aac,cd4ad6cadcf2b245 X-Google-Thread: f7d8a,cd4ad6cadcf2b245 X-Google-Attributes: gidfb1f8,gid10a749,gid114aac,gidf7d8a,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr29.news.prodigy.net.POSTED!03ce4474!not-for-mail From: Telamon <telamon_spamshield@pacbell.net.is.invalid> Newsgroups: rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast Subject: Re: HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio Organization: Internet Argonaut References: <1191065666.205537.159420@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <1191096585.135753.167530@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.1 (Intel Mac OS X) X-Face: ,cNluD^cTg560%T8O&<Kwl!N>2R3MND4m%ln@,jFig:T/?4`pG(&J/So4b#dr L[}ZxZ0m*vGk7]@)+cK-~F2Oywqc2-5Zcr`?1ys#:dGEv%BlKRh"Vebh!P``bcD}2$}} ?U},D#0a<X#?i8!eCtVUxI>D*(AmZi(=NzA9%)Wc5C5ZODdwa~%7iN-+\RfW=c:@3w-, L\Pzawef*7X!9VN#7d;~6Ka- Message-ID: <telamon_spamshield-1E03A7.13400429092007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com> Lines: 41 NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.105.206.163 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr29.news.prodigy.net 1191098404 ST000 207.105.206.163 (Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:40:04 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:40:04 EDT X-UserInfo1: Q[R_@SJEZBWARW\Y]BCD^VX@WB]^PCPDLXUNNHLHQAVTUZ]CLNTCPFK[WDXDHV[K^FCGJCJLPF_D_NCC@FUG^Q\DINVAXSLIFXYJSSCCALP@PB@\OS@BITWAH\CQZKJMMD^SJA^NXA\GVLSRBD^M_NW_F[YLVTWIGAXAQBOATKBBQRXECDFDMQ\DZFUE@\JM Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 20:40:04 GMT