[BC] Digital Radio in Australia - Progress??

[Robert Orban]

At 08:10 AM 10/15/2005, you wrote:
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 16:06:02 +1000
>From: Peter Smerdon <psmerdon at fastmail.com.au>
>Subject: [BC] Digital Radio in Australia - Progress??
>To: broadcast at radiolists.net
>Message-ID: <43509C4A.6080605 at fastmail.com.au>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>(Barry - I'm CC-ing you on this, 'cos I still can't seem to post to the
>l ist - please post it for me)
>
>The Australian Federal Minister for Communications announced the plans
>for digital radio yesterday.
>
>In a nutshell, it's Eureka147, 128kbps offered to each existing
>broadcaster (comercial, govt, and high-power community), and a 6 year
>freeze on new licenses being issued.
>The real zinger (for me) is that there is no requirement for
>simulcasting - and the Minister concedes that DAB may never fully
>replace analog radio. Hey, each licensee just got an extra license free!!
>
>The departmental press release can be seen here:
>http://www.dcita.gov.au/newsroom/media_releases/framework_for_the_introduction_of_digital_radio
>
>The commercial radio industry group's reaction is at:
>http://www.commercialradio.com.au/
>
>So how's 128kbps MP2 going to sound compared to 96kbps "HD"Radio?

The HDC codec at 96 kbps will sound far better than MP2 at 128 kbps, which 
dangerously close to the edge of where MP2 falls apart into gross 
distortion. There have been a lot of complaints about Eureka at 128 kbps in 
the UK. Many people think that analog FM (with 50us pre-emphasis, of 
course) sounds better. Eureka sound quality really comes into its own at 
192 kbps and higher.

Bob Orban