(1972) Matrix encoded CD-4 (proposal)

[Owen Smith]

Sadly that first generation DAB system was, and remains (as its never been upgraded) total crap. In order to accommodate all the stations in a particular region the bit rate of many is pitiful (some speech only stations are reduced to just 80kbps!!). That's where I've heard the SM struggle (but I guess its really only drawing out the nasties of such a low quality data stream).

I think you didn't hear DAB in its early years. Initially the BBC DAB multiplex had only the national BBC FM stations on it, and they were encoded using 256kbps (still MP2 of course). I listened to this in a hifi shop demo room on an Aram Alpha 10 DAB tuner, which was far too expensive for me to consider buying. It sounded really good arguably indistinguishable from CD, and it was because the bit rate was high enough.

Then the BBC reduced their stations to 192kbps to put a few more in the multiplex and it still sounded OK but the shine had gone from it. You can sometimes still catch Radio 3 transmitting at 192kbps at night during the PROMs or at other times when there are no extra "pop up" stations, and Radio 3 stills sound pretty good. I'd say this 192kbps era sounded as good as FM but clearly missing a little compared to CD.

After that the rot set in. The main BBC national stations on DAB are now at 128kbps Joint Stereo (apart from Radio 3 exceptions above). It sounds muddled and inferior to FM, even with my dodgy FM in Cambridge (equally far from 3 main transmitters) that is barely strong enough for stereo quieting.

 

[Soundfield]

I think you didn't hear DAB in its early years. Initially the BBC DAB multiplex had only the national BBC FM stations on it, and they were encoded using 256kbps (still MP2 of course). I listened to this in a hifi shop demo room on an Aram Alpha 10 DAB tuner, which was far too expensive for me to consider buying. It sounded really good arguably indistinguishable from CD, and it was because the bit rate was high enough.

Then the BBC reduced their stations to 192kbps to put a few more in the multiplex and it still sounded OK but the shine had gone from it. You can sometimes still catch Radio 3 transmitting at 192kbps at night during the PROMs or at other times when there are no extra "pop up" stations, and Radio 3 stills sound pretty good. I'd say this 192kbps era sounded as good as FM but clearly missing a little compared to CD.

After that the rot set in. The main BBC national stations on DAB are now at 128kbps Joint Stereo (apart from Radio 3 exceptions above). It sounds muddled and inferior to FM, even with my dodgy FM in Cambridge (equally far from 3 main transmitters) that is barely strong enough for stereo quieting.

Oh yes I did! Foolishly I was an early adopter as I thought it was going to be such an improvement over FM!! And I had one of those Arcam tuners (although despite the expense it wasn't very reliable and soon packed up). At the initial 'high' (!) data rates the system wasn't too bad, but not actually an improvement. I have a variety of DAB capable tuners around the house now, Mitchel & Johnson, Denon and Onkyo but none of them sound brilliant on the current data rates of course. Radio 3 is only just tolerable now. Here in Essex there's a powerful FM signal from the Wrotham (Kent) transmitter thank goodness! Wish I'd never parted with my fantastic Revox B760 though...

 

[Doug G.]

There is one other reason quad died. The manufacturers misread the market.

The only thing quad that really sold was the 4-track quad reel recorders. They outsold anything else quad. So the manufacturers thought people wanted discrete. But the other discrete items also did not sell well.

TEAC was the first to figure it out. Those quad recorders were going into home studios for multitrack recording, not for quadraphonics. The result was the TASCAM Portastudio.

I have two 4-tracks and an 8-track, all cassette. They are used for multitrack, not discrete quadraphonics. I do make matrix recordings with them.

So, you're saying that, if only the manufacturers would have concentrated on selling those expensive reel-to-reel machines, quad would have been a success. Right.

Doug

 

[jaybird100]

Yes, it's vile. Thank goodness we've still got FM! But how long before the government switch it off in the name of progress?!!

Look at Norway. They switched off the FM band there, and from what I hear, the listeners ain't happy!

 

[Owen Smith]

DAB+ sounds pretty good where I live, but not quite as good as FM radio though.

Probably because in Australia they're using a high enough AAC bit rate.

 

[Owen Smith]

Oh yes I did! Foolishly I was an early adopter as I thought it was going to be such an improvement over FM!! And I had one of those Arcam tuners (although despite the expense it wasn't very reliable and soon packed up). At the initial 'high' (!) data rates the system wasn't too bad, but not actually an improvement. I have a variety of DAB capable tuners around the house now, Mitchel & Johnson, Denon and Onkyo but none of them sound brilliant on the current data rates of course. Radio 3 is only just tolerable now. Here in Essex there's a powerful FM signal from the Wrotham (Kent) transmitter thank goodness! Wish I'd never parted with my fantastic Revox B760 though...

Ah well, my FM reception is pretty ropey so the early DAB era at 256kbps would have been a huge improvement for me if I could have afforded it. And if it had stayed at 192kbps that would have been enough to be better than my FM except during particularly good FM reception periods.

These days I stream BBC radio at 320kbps AAC with iPlayer plugin on SqueezeBox server. Far better than either DAB or FM. Classic FM is more of a problem, it's a toss up between streaming 128kbps MP3 online, or 128kbps Joint Stereo DAB (which is often better than their MP3 stream), or even ropier FM than BBC stations. I usually choose DAB for Classic FM as the least worst option.

 

[kfbkfb]

Answering 2 items:

A shorter wavelength (playback) laser would allow a wider bandwidth on CDs.
(IIRC, Louis Dorren stated that the Vinyl LP can store frequencies up to 90kHz)



I have an HD radio, 1190 AM used HD (HD was in 1180 and 1200 frequencies),
at night, 50kW 1200 AM WOAI in Texas interfered with the upper sideband.
One FM HD station rebroadcasts an AM talk radio station but sets the data
rate too low resulting an "underwater/burbling" sound.

I have listened to a few of the FM HD signals thru my Dolby Surround system,
generally FM Stereo content doesn't have much surround content though.


Kirk Bayne

 

[Wurly1]

I may be out of subject but here in Quebec Canada commercial FM stations are continuously playing the same songs everyday for years. The quality is there but the audio is max-out resulting in an aggressive experience.
It became intolerant to radio.

 

[par4ken]

I may be out of subject but here in Quebec Canada commercial FM stations are continuously playing the same songs everyday for years. The quality is there but the audio is max-out resulting in an aggressive experience.
It became intolerant to radio.

The same thing happens here, the same songs over and over for years. Wouldn't be so bad if they were the artists best songs but usually they aren't. One station switched format and was good for about a month, now they just repeat the same mostly crap, over and over!

 

[jaybird100]

Answering 2 items:

A shorter wavelength (playback) laser would allow a wider bandwidth on CDs.
(IIRC, Louis Dorren stated that the Vinyl LP can store frequencies up to 90kHz)



I have an HD radio, 1190 AM used HD (HD was in 1180 and 1200 frequencies),
at night, 50kW 1200 AM WOAI in Texas interfered with the upper sideband.
One FM HD station rebroadcasts an AM talk radio station but sets the data
rate too low resulting an "underwater/burbling" sound.

I have listened to a few of the FM HD signals thru my Dolby Surround system,
generally FM Stereo content doesn't have much surround content though.


Kirk Bayne

I have Sirius/XM in my car. I haven't tried it for surround; XM used to have a channel that broadcast in Neural Surround before the two satellite providers merged. That channel sounded pretty good when listened to on a system that had Neural decoding, but that channel, and Neural decoding, have all but disappeared.

 

[gvl_guy]

I have Sirius/XM in my car. I haven't tried it for surround; XM used to have a channel that broadcast in Neural Surround before the two satellite providers merged. That channel sounded pretty good when listened to on a system that had Neural decoding, but that channel, and Neural decoding, have all but disappeared.

Depending on your radio, Sirius/XM can sound like garbage. They are squeezing so many channels onto that satellite, it's ridiculous. It's VERY noticable on the talk channels, but you can often hear it on the music ones, too.

It sounded okay in my Subaru, but I rented a Chrysler one time and it was total garbage.

 

[jaybird100]

Depending on your radio, Sirius/XM can sound like garbage. They are squeezing so many channels onto that satellite, it's ridiculous. It's VERY noticable on the talk channels, but you can often hear it on the music ones, too.

It sounded okay in my Subaru, but I rented a Chrysler one time and it was total garbage.

I've been a subscriber since they started, and have a lifetime subscription. I started off with a radio that worked from the Sirius platform, and it sounded okay. When that radio died, I got one that works on the XM platform. BIG difference. The sound is way better than off the Sirius platform. The sound is closer to FM quality, and the stereo separation is much better than the Sirius. That's probably why the radio in the Subaru sounded so much better than the Chrysler.

 

[gvl_guy]

I've been a subscriber since they started, and have a lifetime subscription. I started off with a radio that worked from the Sirius platform, and it sounded okay. When that radio died, I got one that works on the XM platform. BIG difference. The sound is way better than off the Sirius platform. The sound is closer to FM quality, and the stereo separation is much better than the Sirius. That's probably why the radio in the Subaru sounded so much better than the Chrysler.

Lifetime subscription? Oh, they hate you. They make no money off you.

I dumped them in both cars. Although it was nice and convenient, I used my Android Auto now and stream using Amazon Music, iHeartRadio and RADIO.COM. Saves me money and I typically listened to only two or three channels anyway.

 

[jaybird100]

Lifetime subscription? Oh, they hate you. They make no money off you.

I dumped them in both cars. Although it was nice and convenient, I used my Android Auto now and stream using Amazon Music, iHeartRadio and RADIO.COM. Saves me money and I typically listened to only two or three channels anyway.

I like the fact that the music channels are all commercial-free. I do listen to some of the talk channels, though. If you lived here in South Florida, where local radio sucks, you'd find S/XM a good alternative. My car radio has HD, but doesn't do bluetooth. The streaming options are nice, but I'm not about to buy a new radio just for that. I still play CD's in the car, too.

 

[gvl_guy]

I like the fact that the music channels are all commercial-free. I do listen to some of the talk channels, though. If you lived here in South Florida, where local radio sucks, you'd find S/XM a good alternative. My car radio has HD, but doesn't do bluetooth. The streaming options are nice, but I'm not about to buy a new radio just for that. I still play CD's in the car, too.

I was in South Florida, fort Lauderdale, for 12 years. So I know just how bad radio is there. Lol. Radio, overall, sucks everywhere but Miami is even worse because half the stations are Spanish. If you're an English speaker like me, and a radio geek, you have half the amount than other markets.

Time for a whole new car so you get a new radio and can stream things.

 

[Wurly1]

I've been a subscriber since they started, and have a lifetime subscription. I started off with a radio that worked from the Sirius platform, and it sounded okay. When that radio died, I got one that works on the XM platform. BIG difference. The sound is way better than off the Sirius platform. The sound is closer to FM quality, and the stereo separation is much better than the Sirius. That's probably why the radio in the Subaru sounded so much better than the Chrysler.

Of course you all know FM stations are transmitting 30hz to 15khz audio signal (sine wave). A lot of harmonics are missing and the dynamic range is quite low around 50db while cd can have up to 80db with a frequency range of Zero to 20Khz ( while the 20khz looks more like a square wave than a sine wave). I'm asking where does the the XM platform lies and what are their audio performances from a technical point of view.

 

[Wurly1]

One thing i don't understand is back in the fifties, the sixties, the seventies, even the eighties companies were offering more and more quality reproducing electronic equipements. But now all i see are companies showcasing profits with a minimum of quality. More buck for the investment.
In the end we all loose as a consumer. We all listen to music because we love it and can appreciate it. I remember the power-receiver war in the seventies, it was great and awesome! Every companay were offering hi-end products, now it's the opposite. What used to be hi-end companies are now making garbage. I ear some awesome song and mixes but delivered on an ultra compressed maximized garbage output. I feel it's not normal in 2020 to have to listen to music recorded by fine artists with state-of-the-art equipment on a delivery system just about as good as what we had sixty years ago. I'm rediscovering my 4 track open wheel tapes, my 4 track cassette tapes even my 8 track tapes! I've never stopped listening to vinyl, nothing sound like it and i wonder why?

 

[gvl_guy]

We now all listen to music in mono by saying, "Alexa, play xxxxx on Spotify."

 

[Doug G.]

I will never talk to a non-living being/object in my house or anywhere else. I can play my own music.

Doug

 

[kfbkfb]

I posted a comment over in RadioDiscussions.com about checking the Mono Downmix
of new Stereo recordings (due to Smartphone/"Alexa" Mono listening), they didn't think
it was that important.


Kirk Bayne