Is it possible Classic has increased the volume or changed the codec
as 9 on the the bedside radio seems louder? Maybe it is because I got
the wax removed from my ears :-)
On 02/06/2023 11:31, Scott wrote:
Is it possible Classic has increased the volume or changed the codec
as 9 on the the bedside radio seems louder? Maybe it is because I got
the wax removed from my ears :-)
I expect they've increased the (dynamic range) compression.
I prefer Radio 3 which has none that I am aware of.
On 02/06/2023 11:31, Scott wrote:
Is it possible Classic has increased the volume or changed the codec
as 9 on the the bedside radio seems louder? Maybe it is because I got
the wax removed from my ears :-)
I expect they've increased the (dynamic range) compression.
I prefer Radio 3 which has none that I am aware of.
On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 11:51:35 +0100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 02/06/2023 11:31, Scott wrote:
Is it possible Classic has increased the volume or changed the codec
as 9 on the the bedside radio seems louder? Maybe it is because I got
the wax removed from my ears :-)
I expect they've increased the (dynamic range) compression.
I prefer Radio 3 which has none that I am aware of.
Interestingly, a friend of mine who played double bass for the RSNO
said she preferred compression where the music is there for background (citing while ironing as an example). I know some think it is better
for in-car listening. As I recall, when DAB was developed, there was
an option to set DRC.
"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:u5chjl$35dn8$1@dont-email.me...
On 02/06/2023 11:31, Scott wrote:
Is it possible Classic has increased the volume or changed the codec
as 9 on the the bedside radio seems louder? Maybe it is because I got
the wax removed from my ears :-)
I expect they've increased the (dynamic range) compression.
I prefer Radio 3 which has none that I am aware of.
Depends how you listen. If you listen on headphones, or on speakers in a quiet room where you won't disturb other people, you want as little compression as possible to give the full dynamic range, especially for classical music. But if you listen on a small radio in the kitchen as you
are cooking, or you listen in the car where there's road noise in the background, the compression of Classic FM is actually a bonus so you can
hear the quiet bits over the background noise without blasting your earwax out on the crescendos (crescendi?). Thern there is the matter of whether you want to hear full concertos with all their movements, or the best, most tuneful and most well-known extracts. I feel an Inspector Morse to Sergeant Lewis put-down coming on ;-)
NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:u5chjl$35dn8$1@dont-email.me...
On 02/06/2023 11:31, Scott wrote:
Is it possible Classic has increased the volume or changed the codec
as 9 on the the bedside radio seems louder? Maybe it is because I got >>>> the wax removed from my ears :-)
I expect they've increased the (dynamic range) compression.
I prefer Radio 3 which has none that I am aware of.
Depends how you listen. If you listen on headphones, or on speakers in a
quiet room where you won't disturb other people, you want as little
compression as possible to give the full dynamic range, especially for
classical music. But if you listen on a small radio in the kitchen as you
are cooking, or you listen in the car where there's road noise in the
background, the compression of Classic FM is actually a bonus so you can
hear the quiet bits over the background noise without blasting your earwax >> out on the crescendos (crescendi?). Thern there is the matter of whether you >> want to hear full concertos with all their movements, or the best, most
tuneful and most well-known extracts. I feel an Inspector Morse to Sergeant >> Lewis put-down coming on ;-)
A long time ago, when a compressor was a large and expensive piece of
kit, it made sense to add compression (if any) before the transmitter. Nowadays it would be a trivial matter to build a variable compressor
into every radio, so that the user could choose the degree of
compression, depending on circumstances and personal preference.
A long time ago, when a compressor was a large and expensive piece of
kit, it made sense to add compression (if any) before the transmitter. Nowadays it would be a trivial matter to build a variable compressor
into every radio, so that the user could choose the degree of
compression, depending on circumstances and personal preference.
A long time ago, when a compressor was a large and expensive piece of
kit, it made sense to add compression (if any) before the transmitter. >Nowadays it would be a trivial matter to build a variable compressor
into every radio, so that the user could choose the degree of
compression, depending on circumstances and personal preference.
On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 19:17:02 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
A long time ago, when a compressor was a large and expensive piece of
kit, it made sense to add compression (if any) before the transmitter. >>Nowadays it would be a trivial matter to build a variable compressor
into every radio, so that the user could choose the degree of
compression, depending on circumstances and personal preference.
Even better to build an expander into every radio, or every radio that
hi-fi enthusiasts were willing to pay extra for. Compress the signal
before transmission to a level that doesn't sound too offensive if
nothing is subsequently done to it, so it will work with existing
simple radios that don't have the extra circuitry.
The audio data could be accompanied by metadata to specify exactly how
the original dynamic range is to be restored.
The broadcasters could start tomorrow without any disruption to users.
Nobody would need to buy any new equipment if they didn't want to.
On Sat, 03 Jun 2023 09:49:08 +0100, Roderick Stewart ><rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 19:17:02 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalidWould DAB be able to support this within the existing bitrate?
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
A long time ago, when a compressor was a large and expensive piece of >>>kit, it made sense to add compression (if any) before the transmitter. >>>Nowadays it would be a trivial matter to build a variable compressor
into every radio, so that the user could choose the degree of >>>compression, depending on circumstances and personal preference.
Even better to build an expander into every radio, or every radio that >>hi-fi enthusiasts were willing to pay extra for. Compress the signal
before transmission to a level that doesn't sound too offensive if
nothing is subsequently done to it, so it will work with existing
simple radios that don't have the extra circuitry.
The audio data could be accompanied by metadata to specify exactly how
the original dynamic range is to be restored.
The broadcasters could start tomorrow without any disruption to users. >>Nobody would need to buy any new equipment if they didn't want to.
Given that DAB is capable of bitrates up to several hundred kb/s and
normally transmitted with considerably lower ones, without knowing the precise details I would guess it probably could. Metadata that simply controlled gain wouldn't need as much bandwidth as the audio itself.
On 03/06/2023 10:26, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Given that DAB is capable of bitrates up to several hundred kb/s and
normally transmitted with considerably lower ones, without knowing the
precise details I would guess it probably could. Metadata that simply
controlled gain wouldn't need as much bandwidth as the audio itself.
You need to get receivers on the market and for that you need standards
to be agreed, that takes time.
Then you need to convince manufacturers that there is a demand for it
etc etc.
On 02/06/2023 19:17, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
A long time ago, when a compressor was a large and expensive piece of
kit, it made sense to add compression (if any) before the transmitter.
Nowadays it would be a trivial matter to build a variable compressor
into every radio, so that the user could choose the degree of
compression, depending on circumstances and personal preference.
I doubt whether many would pay more a radio with adjustable compression.
Not something I have checked but I suspect that the majority of radios
have no tone controls and if they do then will be rarely used.
On 02/06/2023 19:17, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:u5chjl$35dn8$1@dont-email.me...
On 02/06/2023 11:31, Scott wrote:
Is it possible Classic has increased the volume or changed the codec >>>>> as 9 on the the bedside radio seems louder? Maybe it is because I got >>>>> the wax removed from my ears :-)
I expect they've increased the (dynamic range) compression.
I prefer Radio 3 which has none that I am aware of.
Depends how you listen. If you listen on headphones, or on speakers in a >>> quiet room where you won't disturb other people, you want as little
compression as possible to give the full dynamic range, especially for
classical music. But if you listen on a small radio in the kitchen as you >>> are cooking, or you listen in the car where there's road noise in the
background, the compression of Classic FM is actually a bonus so you can >>> hear the quiet bits over the background noise without blasting your earwax >>> out on the crescendos (crescendi?). Thern there is the matter of whether you
want to hear full concertos with all their movements, or the best, mostA long time ago, when a compressor was a large and expensive piece
tuneful and most well-known extracts. I feel an Inspector Morse to Sergeant >>> Lewis put-down coming on ;-)
of
kit, it made sense to add compression (if any) before the transmitter.
Nowadays it would be a trivial matter to build a variable compressor
into every radio, so that the user could choose the degree of
compression, depending on circumstances and personal preference.
Which most car radios have I think.
And I don't see why compression should require "large kit". It's just
AGC I would have thought. And Dolby NR uses compression, just that it
expands on playback, and that has been around donkey's years.
On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 19:17:02 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
A long time ago, when a compressor was a large and expensive piece of
kit, it made sense to add compression (if any) before the transmitter. >>Nowadays it would be a trivial matter to build a variable compressor
into every radio, so that the user could choose the degree of
compression, depending on circumstances and personal preference.
Even better to build an expander into every radio, or every radio that
hi-fi enthusiasts were willing to pay extra for. Compress the signal
before transmission to a level that doesn't sound too offensive if
nothing is subsequently done to it, so it will work with existing
simple radios that don't have the extra circuitry.
The audio data could be accompanied by metadata to specify exactly how
the original dynamic range is to be restored.
The broadcasters could start tomorrow without any disruption to users.
Nobody would need to buy any new equipment if they didn't want to.
Rod.--
On Fri 02/06/2023 17:48, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 11:51:35 +0100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 02/06/2023 11:31, Scott wrote:
Is it possible Classic has increased the volume or changed the codec
as 9 on the the bedside radio seems louder? Maybe it is because I got >>>> the wax removed from my ears :-)
I expect they've increased the (dynamic range) compression.
I prefer Radio 3 which has none that I am aware of.
Interestingly, a friend of mine who played double bass for the RSNO
said she preferred compression where the music is there for background
(citing while ironing as an example). I know some think it is better
for in-car listening. As I recall, when DAB was developed, there was
an option to set DRC.
Back in the day there was an American compression/decompression system for LPs - I can't for the life of me remember what it was called, but as a
system for domestic use IMO it worked quite well. However copy the
compressed audio directly from the LP onto a cassette for the car and the compressed audio sounded superb - you could hear every single note!
Is it possible Classic has increased the volume or changed the codec
as 9 on the the bedside radio seems louder? Maybe it is because I got
the wax removed from my ears :-)
On 03/06/2023 10:26, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Given that DAB is capable of bitrates up to several hundred kb/s and
normally transmitted with considerably lower ones, without knowing the
precise details I would guess it probably could. Metadata that simply
controlled gain wouldn't need as much bandwidth as the audio itself.
You need to get receivers on the market and for that you need standards
to be agreed, that takes time.
Then you need to convince manufacturers that there is a demand for it
etc etc.
There is no real reason why the simple act of compression could not be on
the media site its sent out through.
In article <u5f1l0$3hd16$1@dont-email.me>, MB <MB@nospam.net> scribeth
thus
On 03/06/2023 10:26, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Given that DAB is capable of bitrates up to several hundred kb/s and
normally transmitted with considerably lower ones, without knowing the
precise details I would guess it probably could. Metadata that simply
controlled gain wouldn't need as much bandwidth as the audio itself.
You need to get receivers on the market and for that you need standards
to be agreed, that takes time.
Then you need to convince manufacturers that there is a demand for it
etc etc.
Plus do serious classical listeners take Classic fm that seriously?..
On 05/06/2023 11:24, Brian Gaff wrote:
There is no real reason why the simple act of compression could not be on
the media site its sent out through.
With analogue transmission you have to apply compression before
transmission, you can't do so at the receiver because if the reception
is poor, you'll just wind up the noise too.
In article <u5f1l0$3hd16$1@dont-email.me>, MB <MB@nospam.net> scribeth
thus
On 03/06/2023 10:26, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Given that DAB is capable of bitrates up to several hundred kb/s and
normally transmitted with considerably lower ones, without knowing the
precise details I would guess it probably could. Metadata that simply
controlled gain wouldn't need as much bandwidth as the audio itself.
You need to get receivers on the market and for that you need standards
to be agreed, that takes time.
Then you need to convince manufacturers that there is a demand for it
etc etc.
Plus do serious classical listeners take Classic fm that seriously?..
On 06/06/2023 12:00, Mark Carver wrote:
To apply compression before transmission would require a new radio
standard to specify it, and for bog standard radios to have expanders,
unless it's assumed that most people will want everything to be compressed.
On 06/06/2023 16:51, Max Demian wrote:
On 06/06/2023 12:00, Mark Carver wrote:
To apply compression before transmission would require a new radioThat is, indeed, the assumption that Classic FM make. There definitely
standard to specify it, and for bog standard radios to have expanders,
unless it's assumed that most people will want everything to be compressed. >>
seems to be an Optimod or software equivalent somewhere in their signal >chain.
Does Classic FM vary the compression through the day (according to
predicted listening environment, eg cars during commute)? I believe
the BBC used to do this.
I find Classic FM easy to recieve. I listen to it. I hate
adverts and so I don't listen to it for long.
On 06/06/2023 19:26, Woody wrote:
On Tue 06/06/2023 18:48, John Williamson wrote:Wohnort is our friend
On 06/06/2023 18:32, Scott wrote:
Does Classic FM vary the compression through the day (according toI've not listened enough to tell and apparently they run different
predicted listening environment, eg cars during commute)? I believe
the BBC used to do this.
ratios on FM and DAB. Radio 3 is not noticeable compressed, though.
AIUI BBC R3 runs through Optimod during the rush hours - something
like 07h-09h and 17h-19h but at all other times send it plain at
192kb. IMSMC they do however drop the data rate when one of the
occasional stations such as 5LSX/TMS or 4LW is on air or at least they
used to. Marky will be along shortly to put me right no doubt!
http://www.wohnort.org/dab/uknat.html#BBC
On 06/06/2023 18:32, Scott wrote:
Does Classic FM vary the compression through the day (according toI've not listened enough to tell and apparently they run different
predicted listening environment, eg cars during commute)? I believe
the BBC used to do this.
ratios on FM and DAB. Radio 3 is not noticeable compressed, though.
On Tue 06/06/2023 18:48, John Williamson wrote:Wohnort is our friend
On 06/06/2023 18:32, Scott wrote:
Does Classic FM vary the compression through the day (according toI've not listened enough to tell and apparently they run different
predicted listening environment, eg cars during commute)? I believe
the BBC used to do this.
ratios on FM and DAB. Radio 3 is not noticeable compressed, though.
AIUI BBC R3 runs through Optimod during the rush hours - something
like 07h-09h and 17h-19h but at all other times send it plain at
192kb. IMSMC they do however drop the data rate when one of the
occasional stations such as 5LSX/TMS or 4LW is on air or at least they
used to. Marky will be along shortly to put me right no doubt!
I think there are fewer adverts at off-peak times. I have heard them
say there will be x minutes (maybe an hour) uninterrupted.
That is, indeed, the assumption that Classic FM make. There definitely
seems to be an Optimod or software equivalent somewhere in their signal chain.
On 06/06/2023 19:35, Mark Carver wrote:
On 06/06/2023 19:26, Woody wrote:
On Tue 06/06/2023 18:48, John Williamson wrote:Wohnort is our friend
On 06/06/2023 18:32, Scott wrote:
Does Classic FM vary the compression through the day (according toI've not listened enough to tell and apparently they run different
predicted listening environment, eg cars during commute)? I believe >>>>> the BBC used to do this.
ratios on FM and DAB. Radio 3 is not noticeable compressed, though.
AIUI BBC R3 runs through Optimod during the rush hours - something
like 07h-09h and 17h-19h but at all other times send it plain at
192kb. IMSMC they do however drop the data rate when one of the
occasional stations such as 5LSX/TMS or 4LW is on air or at least they
used to. Marky will be along shortly to put me right no doubt!
http://www.wohnort.org/dab/uknat.html#BBC
That shows that the bitrate varies, which alters the perceived quality,
but says nothing about analogue level compression.
The bit rate is now reduced to make room for special events such as
sports on other channels.
Optimod makes the quiet bits louder (Simplified explanation), which has
no effect on the DAB bitrate.
I have just read a report that all BBC radio channels use either am
Optimod or the earlier Omnia compressor at settings which vary to match
the channel profile.
On 06/06/2023 18:29, Scott wrote:
I think there are fewer adverts at off-peak times. I have heard them
say there will be x minutes (maybe an hour) uninterrupted.
Presumably like TV and put out more adverts when more viewers then
ensure the average complies with regulations by having few adverts when
not many viewers.
Unsurprisingly not being done for the benefit of the viewer or listener!
On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 07:44:18 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
On 06/06/2023 18:29, Scott wrote:It benefits me as I usually listen in bed last thing at night :-)
I think there are fewer adverts at off-peak times. I have heard them
say there will be x minutes (maybe an hour) uninterrupted.
Presumably like TV and put out more adverts when more viewers then
ensure the average complies with regulations by having few adverts when
not many viewers.
Unsurprisingly not being done for the benefit of the viewer or listener!
On Wed 07/06/2023 16:37, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 07:44:18 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
On 06/06/2023 18:29, Scott wrote:It benefits me as I usually listen in bed last thing at night :-)
I think there are fewer adverts at off-peak times. I have heard them
say there will be x minutes (maybe an hour) uninterrupted.
Presumably like TV and put out more adverts when more viewers then
ensure the average complies with regulations by having few adverts when
not many viewers.
Unsurprisingly not being done for the benefit of the viewer or listener! >>>
Do you? I tend to use the Shipping Forecast - "......Cromaty, Forth,
Tyne, Dogger, Fisher, German Bight, etc etc... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Do you? I tend to use the Shipping Forecast - "......Cromaty, Forth,
Tyne, Dogger, Fisher, German Bight, etc etc... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
On 07/06/2023 18:11, Woody wrote:
Do you? I tend to use the Shipping Forecast - "......Cromaty, Forth,
Tyne, Dogger, Fisher, German Bight, etc etc... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Keeping Long Wave running is a very expensive way of helping a few
people get to sleep!
On 06/06/2023 19:26, Woody wrote:
On Tue 06/06/2023 18:48, John Williamson wrote:Wohnort is our friend
On 06/06/2023 18:32, Scott wrote:
Does Classic FM vary the compression through the day (according toI've not listened enough to tell and apparently they run different
predicted listening environment, eg cars during commute)? I believe
the BBC used to do this.
ratios on FM and DAB. Radio 3 is not noticeable compressed, though.
AIUI BBC R3 runs through Optimod during the rush hours - something
like 07h-09h and 17h-19h but at all other times send it plain at
192kb. IMSMC they do however drop the data rate when one of the
occasional stations such as 5LSX/TMS or 4LW is on air or at least they
used to. Marky will be along shortly to put me right no doubt!
http://www.wohnort.org/dab/uknat.html#BBC
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
| Uptime: | 101:26:40 |
| Calls: | 6,660 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,334,862 |