A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

Why don't they...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 19th 17, 07:56 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Brian Gaff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,755
Default Why don't they...

Instead of messing about with radio stations tacked on to different freeview
multiplexes, simply build one in each area with all the radio stations only
on it.

Also, in my view in these times of hd and surround sound, the minimum we
should expect should be stereo on radio stations in my view. I mean even on
DAB BBC4x is in mono but stereo on the web and freeview, whiile some if not
most of tha mor commercials on Freeview are mono versions.
Its just a complete mess.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!


  #2  
Old June 19th 17, 09:02 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
David Woolley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 518
Default Why don't they...

On 19/06/17 08:56, Brian Gaff wrote:
Instead of messing about with radio stations tacked on to different freeview
multiplexes, simply build one in each area with all the radio stations only
on it.


That's called DAB!

In terms of DTT multiplexes, you would presumably need at least two, one
for public service and one for purely commercial channels. I suspect
the rest is about topping out the capacity of the multiplexes, with
enough radio channels to fill the gap that isn't big enough for another
TV one.


Also, in my view in these times of hd and surround sound, the minimum we
should expect should be stereo on radio stations in my view. I mean even on
DAB BBC4x is in mono but stereo on the web and freeview, whiile some if not
most of tha mor commercials on Freeview are mono versions.


That's a commercial issue for the radio stations. If they think they
can get more advertising revenue by buying more bandwidth, presumably
they will. Of course, that will push some channels out altogether,
meaning there is a seller's market, and the remaining channels will
increase in price more than in proportion to the increased bandwidth.

Its just a complete mess.


It's a market for a limited resource.

  #3  
Old June 19th 17, 03:46 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Brian Gaff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,755
Default Why don't they...

Yes a mess.Whatever happened to standards and service to the public?
I am also appalled by these gadgets like Amazon Echo, etc with just one
speaker which claim to be the best sound. I mean its mono!
If I get one it will be the dot as it has astereo output on it.

I sometimes am told by a young un that its the best sound ever and when I
heare it its all bass and top swizzles in a bit rate limited lossy
compression way and is mono.
Completely daft.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"David Woolley" wrote in message
news
On 19/06/17 08:56, Brian Gaff wrote:
Instead of messing about with radio stations tacked on to different
freeview
multiplexes, simply build one in each area with all the radio stations
only
on it.


That's called DAB!

In terms of DTT multiplexes, you would presumably need at least two, one
for public service and one for purely commercial channels. I suspect the
rest is about topping out the capacity of the multiplexes, with enough
radio channels to fill the gap that isn't big enough for another TV one.


Also, in my view in these times of hd and surround sound, the minimum we
should expect should be stereo on radio stations in my view. I mean even
on
DAB BBC4x is in mono but stereo on the web and freeview, whiile some if
not
most of tha mor commercials on Freeview are mono versions.


That's a commercial issue for the radio stations. If they think they can
get more advertising revenue by buying more bandwidth, presumably they
will. Of course, that will push some channels out altogether, meaning
there is a seller's market, and the remaining channels will increase in
price more than in proportion to the increased bandwidth.

Its just a complete mess.


It's a market for a limited resource.



  #4  
Old June 19th 17, 06:28 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Andy Burns[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 343
Default Why don't they...

Brian Gaff wrote:

I am also appalled by these gadgets like Amazon Echo
when I heare it its all bass and top swizzles in a bit rate limited
lossy compression way and is mono.


No, no, no Apple's will be the best because it has a woofer and seven
tweeters ... and it's the most expensive ... and you can put two of them
in the same room!


  #5  
Old June 19th 17, 07:43 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
NY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,135
Default Why don't they...

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
news
Yes a mess.Whatever happened to standards and service to the public?
I am also appalled by these gadgets like Amazon Echo, etc with just one
speaker which claim to be the best sound. I mean its mono!
If I get one it will be the dot as it has astereo output on it.


That reminds me: my wife has been nagging me for ages to make up a 3.5 mm to
bare wires lead so we can connect some speakers to the Dot. I bought a jack
and some twin coax lead and soldered them up, but the jacks were very poor
design and the heat of the soldering iron seems to have affected the
connection between the solder tags and the spine that runs up the connector,
so there's a high-resistance connection which varies as the lead is moved.
Grrrrr.

I think I may abandon that attempt and buy a 3.5 mm to twin-phono lead and
cut off the phonos so I can pare the leads at that end for connection to the
speaker wires - which seems a bit like admitting defeat at my soldering
abilities :-(

  #6  
Old June 23rd 17, 10:02 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Paul Ratcliffe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,451
Default Why don't they...

On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 10:02:13 +0100, David Woolley
wrote:

I suspect the rest is about topping out the capacity of the multiplexes,
with enough radio channels to fill the gap that isn't big enough for
another TV one.


What are you talking about? There is only 'spare' capacity if you steal
it from something else. There aren't any gaps unless they are
deliberately left. You sound like you don't understand that TV and Radio
services are not fixed sizes any more.
  #7  
Old June 24th 17, 08:06 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
David Woolley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 518
Default Why don't they...

On 23/06/17 11:02, Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
What are you talking about? There is only 'spare' capacity if you steal
it from something else. There aren't any gaps unless they are
deliberately left. You sound like you don't understand that TV and Radio
services are not fixed sizes any more.


By that logic, there should only be one, super-high resolution, channel
per multiplex.

The gaps will arise because the TV stations don't want to pay to use
more bandwidth than they feel they can cost justify. (Also, although I
haven't seen the price lists, I rather imagine that TV channels come in
standard sizes rather than having each channel individually negotiate
down to the b/s level.)
  #8  
Old June 24th 17, 09:31 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Roderick Stewart[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,093
Default Why don't they...

On Sat, 24 Jun 2017 09:06:00 +0100, David Woolley
wrote:

What are you talking about? There is only 'spare' capacity if you steal
it from something else. There aren't any gaps unless they are
deliberately left. You sound like you don't understand that TV and Radio
services are not fixed sizes any more.


By that logic, there should only be one, super-high resolution, channel
per multiplex.


Sounds like a brilliant idea to me. There would probably be just about
enough original material to fill it.

Rod.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.