Help with TV/radio stations?
In this section
Saturday, 1 January 2011
M
michael9:48 AM
A propos, we closet-luddites arent all bad: by definition (ludo, ludis, ludit...) we have more fun...
I understand that the ZDF is broadcasting the New Year concert in HD, whereas the BBC appears to reserve HD for the interests of its neo-luddite MBA strata... I wonder what the respective audio bit-rates will be? Are audio-bitrates for DTT and Dsat audio channels listed anywhere? Do they vary content-dependent?
| link to this comment |
T
Trevor Harris11:45 AM
I am listening to the concert on this link at 320kb/s:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radi…html
The BBC seems to leave this stream on all the time.
| link to this comment |
S
steve4:32 PM
Off topic for this thread, but whenever I come to this (and some other) website I get an advert for secretsales.com, which is a shopping site my OH uses, plugging thinks she has viewed.
I don't gtreatly mind, but I wonder how they do this. Does Brian or anyone know?
And, Brian, do you get paid something if I click there whenever I leave the site?
| link to this comment |
Sunday, 2 January 2011
M
michael9:25 AM
Steve, could be a cookie lurking in your PC.
Try deleting all history and related and see if it recurs. You could also be in a botnet
without knowing it. I always delete history at frequent intervals to minimise such intrusion. Before deleting history, you might be intrigued to look and see how many cookies have sneaked in, many collecting marketing data. I would also suggest passwords not be stored. It is safer to keep all personal data on paper and to enter it each time needed, even if that is a slight inconvenience.
| link to this comment |
M
michael9:38 AM
Trevor, I watched the concert on ZDF HD and also compared with the 320kb/s link, but would probably need to upgrade the PC audio to fully benefit. This may the BBCs tentative plan to provide hifi to "discerning listeners". It would be preferable via satellite, but they will assume more listeners have access to the internet than to satellite. The limitations on FTA HD should inform programme provision. Many programmes do not merit HD, whether upscaled or authentic HD. The additional BBC HD channel should ideally be 24/7, with repeats of outstanding programmes, concerts, films, documentaries, etc. from BBC 1,2,3 and 4.
| link to this comment |
S
steve4:33 PM
Thanks Michael - I know I have hundreds, if not thousands, of cookies. But if I delete all, as I do from time to time, I then have to re-enter stuff to sites I care about, and I am idle.
I suspect that if I stop the selected adverts I will simply get unselected ones. At the moment I seem to be getting repeats of young ladies in underwear - OH bought some from them - which is not offensive to my eyes!
| link to this comment |
Monday, 3 January 2011
N
Nedbod11:31 AM
Dear Mark (Aberfan Aerials)
HAPPY NEW YEAR & TO ALL HOSTS & CONTRBUTORS TO THIS SITE
I would like to see DAB with higher bit rates on the equipment I have already bought, but after almost 12 years I have given up hope of this ever happening, indeed bit rates seem to have gone only in one direction only since DAB started, which is down (or fewer). That is why I do not want VHF/FM switched off as it continues to be the best source of hi-fi quality radio in this country and I don't want AM / LW to be switched off either as broadcasts from these transmitters reach parts of Scotland, Wales the Peak & Lake Districts & Europe that DAB and even FM NEVER WILL.
If you can pursuade the powers that be to increase bit rates you are a better man than I. ALL MY ATTEMPTS TO DATE HAVE LANDED ON VERY DEAF EARS, from broacasters to government ministers, including the Labour minister for Culture Media & Sport (at the time), Andy Burnham after an addition of ANY QUESTIONS in Manchester (Oxford Road).
| link to this comment |
N
Nedbod11:47 AM
How can you tell me one minute to ask for increased bit rates whilst on the other hand state that it is against the law to give the BBC more capacity on another Multiplex. The BBC are not magicians and neither am I !!
The planners on the other hand were tremendously short sighted unlike some of their European counterparts. We always seem want our people in this country to accept lower and lower standards, whilst trying to kid them that they are being given "better" technology. More does not always mean better. Look at TV, can you honestly say there is much added value in many of the additional Digital TV & TV +1 channels ? I would scrap any that receive very low viewing figures and give the bits to the remainder to improve standard Freeview picture quality. Freeview could then easily accommodate the best programmes from the channels removed on those remaining. You could already fit most of the best of ITV3 & 4 + BBC THREE & FOUR on ITV1 & 2 + BBC ONE & TWO (as is sometimes the case anyway now). All the shopping, quiz, bidding, casino and sex channels can go today as far as I'm concerned.
| link to this comment |
T
Trevor Harris5:29 PM
As far as I understand it is just the local multiplexes they are not alowed to own. The main purpose of the local multiplexes is to provide local commercial stations.
There is no reason why the BBC could take over the abandoned channel 4 national multiplex if ofcom allows. This would mean that the BBC could transmit all their radio at 256kb/s.
This solution still has a major problem in that DAB does not support surround sound. DAB+ does support AAC and so could support surround sound. If the BBC took on the spare multiplex thay could get all thier national stations on it if they adopted DAB+.
Unfortunatly this is politicaly difficult in that Channel 4 wanted to use DAB+ but ofcom turned them down. This was one of the reasons channel 4 handed the licence back.
Ofcom and the BBC have turned DAB into a pigs ear. The problem with DAB is that it has no advantages over FM with RDS so why switch.
| link to this comment |
N
Nedbod5:43 PM
If this is correct those who oppose the FM switchoff are certainly not Luddites but realists. Pigs ear is an understatement.
| link to this comment |
Select more comments
Your comment please