[BC] RAIN report: HD Radio s Creative Thinking

[DANA PUOPOLO]

I have heard AAC plus, and even at 96K can clearly hear its artifacts. 
I would wager that most women can (clearly) hear them too. But after all,
women only represent 55-60% of the audience, so why do they matter?
When you remove 95+ % of anything, it's not going to sound nearly as good as
the original.

So my comparison IS valid!

-D



------ Original Message ------
Received: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:28:35 PM PDT
From: Robert Orban <rorban at earthlink.net>
To: broadcast at radiolists.net
Subject: Re: [BC] RAIN report: HD Radio s Creative Thinking

At 04:51 PM 10/14/2005, you wrote:
>From: DANA PUOPOLO <dpuopolo at usa.net>
>Subject: Re: [BC] RAIN report: HD Radio s Creative Thinking
>To: Broadcast Radio Mailing List <broadcast at radiolists.net>
>Message-ID: <192JJNX7K2512S17.1129334316 at uwdvg017.cms.usa.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>Okay, let me get this straight..
>
>IBOC-FM has 96K of data available. Period.
>
>Have any of you listened to a 128K MP3? it's BARELY decent quality compared
to
>CD's. Or how about a 64K Windows Media Stream? Barely FM analog quality if
you
>ask me - and I used to run a bunch of 64K WM streams when I was engineer for
>www.worldclassrock.com.

Neither MP3 nor WMA uses Coding Technologies' Spectral Band Replication 
technology, which essentially doubles the coding efficiency of the core 
codec. The HD Radio codec (HDC) _does_ use SBR. So the comparison that you 
are making is not very relevant. If you compare HDC to anything, it should 
be to HE-AAC (aacPlus).

Bob Orban 



_______________________________________________
This is the BROADCAST mailing list
To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists:
http://www.radiolists.net/