[BC] HD/2

[Craig Bowman]

My 45 year old wife, who cannot tell the difference between Stereo and 
Mono, does not like the way Sirius.  I have not been able to test HD 
since I cannot buy a radio locally.

Craig Bowman


Robert Orban wrote:

> At 06:36 PM 1/20/2006, you wrote:
>
>> From: DANA PUOPOLO <dpuopolo at usa.net>
>> Subject: Re: [BC] HD/2 (was: [Fwd: HD2])
>> To: "Broadcasters' Mailing List" <broadcast at radiolists.net>
>> Message-ID: <150kaTVSa3680S22.1137793440 at cmsweb22.cms.usa.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>
>> That's fine for you Bob - and you're a 60ish man.
>>
>> Will a 20ish woman (with much better HF hearing then all of us) feel 
>> the same
>> way you do?
>>
>> THAT's the question we need to answer!
>
>
> I think that the success (or lack of same) of Sirius and XM with that 
> demographic already points to the answer (although I don't know what 
> those numbers are). XM's codec is roughly equivalent in performance to 
> one 48 kbps HD2 channel, although XM's presentation is held back by 
> lame, inconsistent audio processing, IMO.
>
> Sirius' channels a comparable bit rate (it varies due to their 
> statistical multiplexing), but are limited by the performance of the 
> PAC codec that is part of the Sirius system spec. However, in my 
> biased opinion :-), their audio processing (6200s and 1100s) is better 
> than XM's.
>
>> Although 48 kbps HDC is not "CD-quality" by any stretch of the 
>> imagination,
>> I don't find that the compression artifacts prevent me from enjoying the
>> programming. And that is the bottom line.
>>
>> 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/
>