Re: HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio

Article View: rec.audio.tech

Article #890

#890

From: RHF
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 06:19

17 lines
2434 bytes

On Sep 29, 4:16 pm, SFTV_troy <SFTV_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Don Pearce wrote:
>
> > What is the reason for your optimism? Every other advance in radio has
> > been better by design, and demonstrated its improvement from day 1.
> > Digital radio hasn't done that - it has been poor from day one, and to
> > be better than its predecessor it will need to get a whole heap better
> > What do you believe will be the basis of that improvement?
>
> Well FM-Hybrid Digital *already* sounds better than the old analog
> FM.  The AM also sounds better, albeit at the loss of hearing distant
> stations (which can still be done via internet streaming).
>
> Both of these will dramatically improve after the analog shutdown (FM
> will have room for 300 kbps per station).

What Analog Shut Down ?

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1191133153.952350.139320@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail

References:

<1191065666.205537.159420@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <1191096585.135753.167530@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> <46ffb388.44729093@news.plus.net> <1191107792.703860.186580@19g2000hsx.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!postnews.google.com!n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From:  RHF <rhf-newsgroups@pacbell.net>
Newsgroups: rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.car,rec.radio.shortwave,ba.broadcast
Subject: Re: HD RADIO is no worse than DAB or DRM radio
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 23:19:13 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <1191133153.952350.139320@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
References: <1191065666.205537.159420@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
   <1191096585.135753.167530@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
   <46ffb388.44729093@news.plus.net>
   <1191107792.703860.186580@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.225.234.10
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1191133154 8584 127.0.0.1 (30 Sep 2007 06:19:14 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 06:19:14 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <1191107792.703860.186580@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; YPC 3.2.0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=69.225.234.10;
   posting-account=ps2QrAMAAAA6_jCuRt2JEIpn5Otqf_w0

Reply to Parent Message