ai_Droid Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 From discussion on the R3 message board it woulkd appear that Sky (+ Freeview) have similar bit-rates to BBC R3 and sound somewhat similar though there would appear to be slight differences in the transmitter coder set-up - 160kb/s mp2 is approximately equivalent to 148kb/s mp3 - digital lossy codecs (mp2,mp3 etc) introduce different defects into the reproduced sound - for trained ears it is very easy to pick out some of the artefacts eg listen to the initial sounds of plucked strings or even worse zylophones) - my own personal setting (though I once worked for BBC my hearing has declined with age) is that 192kb/s mp3 is an acceptable compromise though I can hear the occasional defect it provides non-tiring listening for classical chamber music whereas the compressed CFm sound I find totally unpleasant on my setup. The audio quality available from mp3 players can range from poor (iPods) through to excellent (eg archos) - the costly item is the digital to analogue converter for which it is difficult to cut corners in cost terms. Good post earlier frances by the way... Sky is 192kbps mp2. Not ideal no, but better than dab generally. Like I said, my personal ideal currently is internet streamed 192kbps mp3, which is prett decent in comparrision to a good fm signal. The generalisation about Ipods is a bit unfair, the quality isn't universally the same accross different models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Actually, sound quality wise it is a 3 segment dipole mounted horizontally - if you studied it properly. Sort of goes in the face of your above history lesson. Yes Cambon, very good, but they didn't compare it with a 3 element vertical, so that's pretty meaningless. Doesn't change the reccomendation, that you'll get best FM and DAB performance from a vertical dipole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Unsubstanciated fuddy-duddy 'I remember when this was all fields' crap. Electronics manufacturing has become cheaper, and has improved in quality dramatically, and extra usability features added to modern devices make the best place for that old stuff is the bin. Manufacture of components has become cheaper - yes but only in the cheapest of component sense. Quality components still cost money and are generally not used. The majority of newer equipment is plasticy, cheap, tacky, disposable crap. Where will your squeeze box be in 30 years? You heard em then? I've got mission speakers myself, lovely limited edition gold bi-wired jobbies, I'm not talking from anyones experience than my own. The mission 753's are a nice speaker, but they're bloody massive The Audioengines are tiny, but perform superbly. That's progress in my book. I don't need to. All I have to do is look at the specs. All I can say is your idea of what will perform superbly and mine are two totally different things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 I don't need to. All I have to do is look at the specs. All I can say is your idea of what will perform superbly and mine are two totally different things. I agree there, all your opinions seem to be based on old fashioned and incorrect preconceptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeoneday Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 exactly!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Only walked down to the post office and came back to all this. Relax fellas Droid - I thought FM was mixed polarisation from main stations. Assuming that you are only looking at one transmitter wouldn't a 45° multi element aerial be better than vertical? I'm please however I managed to put my DAB aerial up correctly (vertical) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 I don't need to. All I have to do is look at the specs. All I can say is your idea of what will perform superbly and mine are two totally different things. I agree there, all your opinions seem to be based on old fashioned and incorrect preconceptions. Really? So, these speakers that weigh a couple of pounds each, including the amplifiers, that use a 2.5" bass driver you think sound that good that they would be comparable to Mission 753s? or what? The specifications state that they have a frequency response of something like 65-22k +/-2db. That is comparable to Linn Katans at the best part of a grand before you even start to think about amplification. The specifications state that they have a signal to noise ratio of 95db. I seriously doubt they could get to 95db, so what use is that? No. My opinion is based on the reality that the A2 is a good toy to play games on your PC with and listen to poorly encoded music with, and that is about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cret Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Lets all be friends. We all obviously like music and we all obviously have our own take on what method of reproducing it suits us & what does not. Each to your own I guess. You're right about the 753's being fairly big speakers Droid, but to be honest I love the look of them (specially without the grills), and they're in a decent size room so they suit it. I must admit I'm scared though about when the imminently due mini-cret gets to crawling (ie driver poking) age! I will have to investigate that Pinnacle beastie though I think. My music is partly on a 200disc Sony dukebox changer and partly on PC at the moment and it'd be nice to increase space and make it nice & user friendly with a more convenient streamer than the means I have at present. You two scrappers have got a fair audience at the moment you know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Droid - I thought FM was mixed polarisation from main stations. Assuming that you are only looking at one transmitter wouldn't a 45° multi element aerial be better than vertical? No, because multi would be pants for dab. A vertical is your best bet for dab and FM was my point really. Cambon, your willingness to give such a vertict on something you haven't actually heard speaks volumes about your audiophile predudice. Like I said, I've got mission speakers in my living room, nice special edition ones too, with little gold badges. Got them from Mike Myers in Marown, and they are superb. But those A2's hooked up to something like a pinnacle internet radio box give you an amazing sounding radio setup for not only little money, but also no space and it has the ability to connect to thousands of net radio stations at good bitrates. Compared to a dab setup, this is superior in my book, and far better than some crusty old 70s tuner with a fucking dial you've got to turn. That's what we were talking about after all. This convo to me is a bit like folks banging on about SLRs vs compacts. The huge SLR make take better pictures, but it's such a big and unwealdy fucker that you never have it on you. The compact can be always in your pocket, and takes pictures anytime. A streamer connected to your library, and your smart playlists makes your whole collection accessable. I've hundreds and hundreds of CD's that sat unused for years. A media centre setup has set em free, they're in use all day. Sometimes you've got to move on Cambon, I know it's hard mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 A streamer connected to your library, and your smart playlists makes your whole collection accessable. I've hundreds and hundreds of CD's that sat unused for years. A media centre setup has set em free, they're in use all day. Sometimes you've got to move on Cambon, I know it's hard mate. Ok, so what it comes down to is that you are willing to compromise sound quality in a very big way. I am not. I will bet that crusty old tuner ends up going for more than your A2s. Ballaghbiker - DAB antennae are generally mounted vertically so you can receive the best signal from the "loudest" transmitter. If there is only one transmitter in your area it *MAY* be worth trying it horizontally and aligned at that transmitter to improve the overall FM signal that is the carrier of the digital data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 OK Droid, I (about 100 posts ago) wasn't trying to say a 70's good receiver was better than modern but just agreed with a general point from Cambon that you don't have to spend a fortune to get really good quality sound. Its all in the ear of the beholder of course but I bought a nice shiny black Denon a few years back because all the magazine were raving about it. I shan't make that mistake again 'cos its not that good. Its is certainly outshone by (agreed) old 70s tat with a dial. The internet has opened up a whole new world of radio and what's available on fm is no comparison of course. DAB has been a huge disappointment for me and for everyday use fm is still good. btw what's wrong with multielement DAB aerials? (assuming you can only get one transmitter as here in the NW) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frances Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 the transmission is indeed mixed polarisation as originally all FM transmissions used horizontal polarization (best for avoiding reflections or multipath) but with advent of car radios switched to mixed so that vertical antennas would work - DAB was invented to work with multipath thus coupled with possible use in cars vertical polarisation was adopted from start - as DAB is transmitted with a wavelength about half that of vhf the vhf half wave antenna now becomes a mis-matched full-wave antenna at DAB frequencies - not an ideal set up if I remember my antenna theory as it should have a double lobe polar diagram with a null in the horizontal direction ! (two lobes one pointing 45 deg up - the other 45deg down thus ideal for picking up noise from any nearby source) - suspect a halfwave DAB antenna would work better and give an acceptable VHF pickup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahc Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Aw, you've all made up - I was looking forward to a geek fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macmannin Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Sarah,i love you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahc Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Well duh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.