[BC] RE: HD Radio -- Folks we have to get it right!

[Robert Orban]

At 05:49 PM 10/18/2005, you wrote:
>Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:41:08 -0700
>From: "WFIFeng at aol.com" <reader at oldradio.com>
>Subject: Re: [BC] RE: HD Radio -- Folks we have to get it right!
>To: broadcast at radiolists.net
>Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20051018184053.0412e870 at mail.oldradio.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
>In a message dated 10/18/2005 5:22:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>rorban at earthlink.net writes:
>
>  > For a given bitrate, HDC is not quite as good as aacPlusV2. However, I 
> find
>  >  the 48 kbps HDC streams to be of "entertainment quality." That is, the
>  >  artifacts, although certainly audible, do not prevent me from 
> enjoying the
>  >  content. From a business perspective, I don't think that the quality 
> of 48
>  >  kbps HDC is going to drive away the mass audience.
>
>Coming from one of the men with the reknown "Golden Ears" that's a good
>endorsement. I am curious if there is a WAV file sample of this, anywhere? I'd
>like to give it a listen.
>
>I remember that Tom Ray had posted some files of the digital signal coming
>from WOR a while ago, back when they were working out some codec issues.
>Something like this for the FM digital streams would be great.

I don't know if there are any HDC streams, but there are plenty of aacPlus 
48 kbps streams at

http://www.tuner2.com/

The "SomaFM" streams use both Optimod-PC processing and Opticodec-PC encoding.

While the performance of aacPlusV2 is a bit better than HDC, these streams 
can certainly give you a taste of what state of the art 48 bkps streaming 
sounds like.

You will need the current RealPlayer or Winamp to listen to these. Both are 
free downloads.

Bob Orban