[peel] DAB vs FM

[Stuart]

There's no excuse for less dynamic range on DAB after all we were always
told the compression on FM was to avoid the hiss taking over in poor signal
areas during quiet passages. DAB and other digital sources should be using
the full dynamic range that we all seem to be supposed to cope with on CD
and DVD audio. And many internet radio stations are now in far better SQ
than DAB due to not using dynamic range compression. And while Radio 1 does
have the "excuse" it broadcasts on FM and so some studio-stage compression
takes place, 6music only broadcasts digitally so should use CD style
uncompressed  (dynamic range wise)

 

The bit rate is another matter.. Radio 3 does get the full 192kbps and R1
160kbps but 128kbps is rather poor for a serious music station.

 

Incidentally I find the current FM Radio 1 quality some way below the best
of my early 1980s Peel show mixtapes...

 

Stuart

 

  _____  

From: peel@yahoogroups.com [mailto:peel@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
lollygagger
Sent: 04 June 2012 15:56
To: peel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [peel] DAB vs FM

 

  

Hi All

 

I don't pipe up much...having been seemingly spoilt with Radio 1's FM
quality for Peel's shows then found I had to search out radio shows for
tracks that Peel would have likely played i.e. Giles Peterson then Hew
Stephens (more white boys with guitars) and Rob Da Banks low key left of
centre of music...and some internet listening from dadelionradio

 

When Giles left Radio 1 to DAB Radio 6 128kbs...what a come down in sound
quality where have the dynamics gone! On the plus side I have discovered
that Tom Ravenscroft does appear to have weekly slot on Radio 6...yeh I am a
bit slow to pick up on these things.

 

What a shame though Radio 1 gets FM to play mainly regurgitated X factor
music. Music lovers with a variety of tastes, who do notice the difference,
get low fi 128kbs...grrrr.... just my gripe.

 

Gordon