DAB is Cr@p

2Phat4Rapha

This week for some reason I can no longer receive BBC London on DAB. Nothing has changed about my set-up or, as far as I can tell, with the immediate external environment. I've had the same set up for several years and am still able to receive a bunch of other stations as before but no amount of rescanning finds BBC London.

No good telling me I need a good external aerial. I can't have one. No good telling me DAB is crap, I came to that conclusion very soon after a bought a very expensive Arcam tuner.

I haven't changed anything - not a thing, so I can only assume that something has changed with the signal being broadcast. Anybody know about these transmissions and whether they've made any changes that have cut off the "burbs"? :evil:

CiB

Did you have the very expensive Arcam FMJ-DT26 tuner, which was really the Arcam 10 in a shiny suit? I did. Put me off DAB for life - never mind the bubbling mud artefacts at weak signal strength, even at full strength in line of sight from the transmitter it never sounded 'good'. DAB doesn't sound good.

Dumped it on Ebay & went back to a v nice FM tuner instead. It's time the BBC gave up on DAB and let it die the death.

Stone Glider

I was an 'early adopter' with DAB and realy enjoyed the clarity. Nowadays I agree with the OP. The sound quality has fallen away to the degree that I threw my latest DAB away. Even R3, which was the reason I originally wanted DAB, is muddy and 'good old' FM superior.

The proposed shut-down of the FM signal, due in 2015, will be a disaster.

meanredspider

Hmm - I have an Arcam Solo - lovely clear DAB reception here. Can't bloody get any sort of Freeview but nothing wrong with the DAB

daviesee

DAB is a con so the Government can sell off the FM wavebands.
It was sold on the promise of quality but the stations are going for quantity instead of quality :evil:

See here

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/bl ... rnet-radio

verylonglegs

I like DAB but then the stations I listen to the most are MW stations such as Radio5 and 5live sports extra, so the quality is a step up. Getting TMS in digital is a major plus.

stigofthedump

All digital formats have been sold to us on the basis of better quality sound, starting with CD's Really the advantage has always actually been convenience. Part of the original design breif for CD was to be able to play Beethovens 9th without stopping (The head of SONY was fed up with having to turn his vinyl over half way through)

The powers that be have got away with this because cheap CD players are better than cheap analogue sources (Turntables etc). However those of us who cared always knew our Dual CS 505 or Rega 3 and vinyl was so much better than any CD player.

DAB is just the latest example of quantity over quality.

2Phat4Rapha

CiB wrote:

Did you have the very expensive Arcam FMJ-DT26 tuner ...

No, just the DT series was it was still dear enough.

Heaven knows what's going to happen in 3 years time when the UK's supposed to be completely DAB and the the rest of the digital world has gone for DAB+ or better. Heavily compressed, low bit rates and Band 2 and an outdated system to start with. And they try to flog this to us an an upgrade!

Gripe over but I still don't know why I should suddenly lose a station without having changed anything about my system.

Cressers

Try autoscanning again, you may be able to recieve it once more. My rarely used DAB keeps dropping stations, but they are restored once the autoscan is completed. DAB, like DTV, is an utter con, just say NO! Unfortunately the BBC World Service has now dropped it's 648khz frequency and if I want to hear the last bastion of BBC quality, denuded as it is, I have to use the utterly cr@p DAB...

Gazzaputt

My LG DAB is excellent. Sound quality is far better then the FM on the same unit.

nicklouse

shame the UK will be the only country in Europe using DAB.

CiB

Gazzaputt wrote:

My LG DAB is excellent. Sound quality is far better then the FM.

Really? I know that the BBC steadily downgraded FM quality at source to reduce the difference between it and DAB, but DAB is too compressed and uses too low a bit rate to be comparable. In the early days of DAB, about 2001 when I first borrowed an Arcam 10 for evaluation, BBC radio was at 192k and was just OK - I remember emailing Bob Harris one Saturday night claiming that his show was a recording or I'm a monkey's uncle, and getting a reply straight back telling me I was wrong, so I went back to listening on FM and it was just better.

Once the BBC went down the path of quantity over quality and carried 11 stations on the mux instead of 6, with only R3 at 192k as opposed to all except 5L at 192k, that was the end for me. Not just the BBC either - I used to enjoy Ministry Of Sound on DAB but once you cranked the volume up a bit it was horrible to listen to. Magic used to be a nice sound but they dropped from 160k down to 96 to make space for more stations and suddenly that was cr@p too.

Not many years ago R3 did a Bach week. The difference between the DAB version (at 192k) and FM was astonishing - depth, clarity, openness, call it what you will, FM sounded so much better than DAB. That was the week my Arcam DT26 went on eBay.

Not having a pop directly at you Gazzaput, but an awful lot of people don't differentiate between audio quality, and reception quality. Clearly a DAB signal never suffers the hiss & bacon frying effect of a weak FM signal, but a good clean FM signal will usually have a higher audio quality than DAB. We'll take it as a given that all FM stations are processed to within an inch of their lives at source anyway; all things being equal though FM has the better audio quality.

Caveat - I used to have some pretty decent mid-range gear, nothing flash or wacky price high end gear. CDs, vinyl, FM all sounded really good. DAB never did, and then it got worse when BBC DAB went to 11 stations. Shame.