I notice people chattering that BBC R4 LW is giving notice of closure in
the near future in little messages on the station. Having furtled about it
seems its not the transmitter
which is the issue, as one can get new transmitters, but the work
needed to refurbish the huge aerial array at Droitwich. Of course the more
cynical might suggest that this is prime building land, but surely the BBC
or whoever owns it are not that shallow?
The thing about Long wave of course, is that just one transmitter can cover
a huge area, though I believe there is or was another smaller one as well.
Certainly back in the 80s you could hear it close to the Equator at the
Canary islands, as long as you ignored all the lightning crashes you heard
as well, not to mention the interference from TVs.
Its a shame though, How are the cricket fans going to get their fix of
boring old farts discussing silly mid ons now?

Brian

--

--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!

One other thing struck me, in much the same way as going VOIP with phones is
happening, this is another example of eggs in one basket syndrome. With just
one transmitter needed to talk to everyone who used to have long wave on
their radios, we are now faced with distributing a signal across the country
to various transmitters instead, so if the web and Internet goes down
everything stops.
Brian

--

--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Brian Gaff" <brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:u54al3$1tp46$1@dont-email.me...
>I notice people chattering that BBC R4 LW is giving notice of closure in
> the near future in little messages on the station. Having furtled about it
> seems its not the transmitter
> which is the issue, as one can get new transmitters, but the work
> needed to refurbish the huge aerial array at Droitwich. Of course the
> more
> cynical might suggest that this is prime building land, but surely the BBC
> or whoever owns it are not that shallow?
> The thing about Long wave of course, is that just one transmitter can
> cover
> a huge area, though I believe there is or was another smaller one as well.
> Certainly back in the 80s you could hear it close to the Equator at the
> Canary islands, as long as you ignored all the lightning crashes you heard
> as well, not to mention the interference from TVs.
> Its a shame though, How are the cricket fans going to get their fix of
> boring old farts discussing silly mid ons now?
>
> Brian
>
> --
>
> --:
> This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
> The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
> briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
> Blind user, so no pictures please
> Note this Signature is meaningless.!
>

In article <u54al3$1tp46$1@dont-email.me>, Brian Gaff
<brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
> I notice people chattering that BBC R4 LW is giving notice of closure in
> the near future in little messages on the station. Having furtled about
> it seems its not the transmitter which is the issue, as one can get new
> transmitters, but the work needed to refurbish the huge aerial array at
> Droitwich. Of course the more cynical might suggest that this is prime
> building land, but surely the BBC or whoever owns it are not that
> shallow?

The BBC haven't owned the transmitters for over 20 years

> The thing about Long wave of course, is that just one
> transmitter can cover a huge area, though I believe there is or was
> another smaller one as well.

There are two others! One in central Scotland and one on the Moray Firth.

> Certainly back in the 80s you could hear it
> close to the Equator at the Canary islands,

I've certainly listened in my car on the shores of Lake Geneva - but not
under the tram wires..

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 30/05/2023 09:03, Brian Gaff wrote:
> I notice people chattering that BBC R4 LW is giving notice of closure in
> the near future in little messages on the station. Having furtled about it
> seems its not the transmitter
> which is the issue, as one can get new transmitters, but the work
> needed to refurbish the huge aerial array at Droitwich. Of course the more
> cynical might suggest that this is prime building land, but surely the BBC
> or whoever owns it are not that shallow?
> The thing about Long wave of course, is that just one transmitter can cover
> a huge area, though I believe there is or was another smaller one as well.
> Certainly back in the 80s you could hear it close to the Equator at the
> Canary islands, as long as you ignored all the lightning crashes you heard
> as well, not to mention the interference from TVs.
> Its a shame though, How are the cricket fans going to get their fix of
> boring old farts discussing silly mid ons now?

It is a very expensive way to serve a very small number of people. I
can't remember if I have checked if my car has Long Wave, I think it
does but Long Wave reception is so poor in the Highlands that it is of
little use.

Has anyone estimated how many have a LW receiver, it will be very low
and most would not know where to find Radio 4.

If someone has spent at least a six figure sum on a yacht then they can
afford a NAVTEX receiver and of course the forecasts and navigational
warnings are also transmitted by the coastguard.

Let us hope that some of the money saved will be available to the BBC
for things like increasing DAB coverage but I suspect the BBC will not
get it.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 30/05/2023 09:03, Brian Gaff wrote:
>> I notice people chattering that BBC R4 LW is giving notice of closure in
>> the near future in little messages on the station. Having furtled about it
>> seems its not the transmitter
>> which is the issue, as one can get new transmitters, but the work
>> needed to refurbish the huge aerial array at Droitwich. Of course the more
>> cynical might suggest that this is prime building land, but surely the BBC
>> or whoever owns it are not that shallow?
>> The thing about Long wave of course, is that just one transmitter can cover
>> a huge area, though I believe there is or was another smaller one as well.
>> Certainly back in the 80s you could hear it close to the Equator at the
>> Canary islands, as long as you ignored all the lightning crashes you heard
>> as well, not to mention the interference from TVs.
>> Its a shame though, How are the cricket fans going to get their fix of
>> boring old farts discussing silly mid ons now?
>
>
>
> It is a very expensive way to serve a very small number of people. I
> can't remember if I have checked if my car has Long Wave, I think it
> does but Long Wave reception is so poor in the Highlands that it is of
> little use.
>
> Has anyone estimated how many have a LW receiver, it will be very low
> and most would not know where to find Radio 4.
>
> If someone has spent at least a six figure sum on a yacht then they can
> afford a NAVTEX receiver and of course the forecasts and navigational
> warnings are also transmitted by the coastguard.
>
> Let us hope that some of the money saved will be available to the BBC
> for things like increasing DAB coverage but I suspect the BBC will not
> get it.
>
>

I would imagine that the BBC DAB transmitter network is more use in an
emergency. It has lots of transmitters and reception can withstand the loss
of some here and there. These days people are more likely to have a working
DAB receiver than an LW one.

I suppose the other issue is the comparative resilience of the programme
feed to the LW network compared to the DAB system, and also diversity of
power supply. The DAB network sort of reminds me of the network of small
low power wartime MW transmitters.

(And before anyone moans about DAB coverage - I’m referring specifically to
the BBC network, which in my experience is vastly superior to the
commercial MUX that Times Radio uses)

On 30/05/2023 11:12, Tweed wrote:
> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>> On 30/05/2023 09:03, Brian Gaff wrote:
>>> I notice people chattering that BBC R4 LW is giving notice of closure in
>>> the near future in little messages on the station. Having furtled about it
>>> seems its not the transmitter
>>> which is the issue, as one can get new transmitters, but the work
>>> needed to refurbish the huge aerial array at Droitwich. Of course the more
>>> cynical might suggest that this is prime building land, but surely the BBC
>>> or whoever owns it are not that shallow?
>>> The thing about Long wave of course, is that just one transmitter can cover
>>> a huge area, though I believe there is or was another smaller one as well.
>>> Certainly back in the 80s you could hear it close to the Equator at the
>>> Canary islands, as long as you ignored all the lightning crashes you heard
>>> as well, not to mention the interference from TVs.
>>> Its a shame though, How are the cricket fans going to get their fix of
>>> boring old farts discussing silly mid ons now?
>>
>>
>> It is a very expensive way to serve a very small number of people. I
>> can't remember if I have checked if my car has Long Wave, I think it
>> does but Long Wave reception is so poor in the Highlands that it is of
>> little use.
>>
>> Has anyone estimated how many have a LW receiver, it will be very low
>> and most would not know where to find Radio 4.
>>
>> If someone has spent at least a six figure sum on a yacht then they can
>> afford a NAVTEX receiver and of course the forecasts and navigational
>> warnings are also transmitted by the coastguard.
>>
>> Let us hope that some of the money saved will be available to the BBC
>> for things like increasing DAB coverage but I suspect the BBC will not
>> get it.
>>
>>
> I would imagine that the BBC DAB transmitter network is more use in an
> emergency. It has lots of transmitters and reception can withstand the loss
> of some here and there. These days people are more likely to have a working
> DAB receiver than an LW one.
>
> I suppose the other issue is the comparative resilience of the programme
> feed to the LW network compared to the DAB system, and also diversity of
> power supply. The DAB network sort of reminds me of the network of small
> low power wartime MW transmitters.
>
> (And before anyone moans about DAB coverage - I’m referring specifically to
> the BBC network, which in my experience is vastly superior to the
> commercial MUX that Times Radio uses)
It will be. BBC National mux has over 400 transmitters, SDL (Times
Radio, Jazz FM etc) has about 60.

D1 (LBC, Classic FM etc) has something in between  (That's probably Bill
W's problem in the other thread)

On 30/05/2023 09:03, Brian Gaff wrote:
> I notice people chattering that BBC R4 LW is giving notice of closure in
> the near future in little messages on the station. Having furtled about it
> seems its not the transmitter
> which is the issue, as one can get new transmitters, but the work
> needed to refurbish the huge aerial array at Droitwich.

It's mostly (as with all the other LW and MW closures across Europe) to
do with electricity costs.
That's why the  1215 kHz (aka 247m) network closed down in January, and
why the 1053/1089 network operates at -6dB.

Coupled with the fact no one much uses them of course. My car radio has
no AM section, and I don't have any AM receivers in the house now.

In message <kdm3t8F8o3rU2@mid.individual.net> at Tue, 30 May 2023
12:10:33, Mark Carver <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> writes
>On 30/05/2023 11:12, Tweed wrote:
[]
>> I would imagine that the BBC DAB transmitter network is more use in an
>> emergency. It has lots of transmitters and reception can withstand the loss
>> of some here and there. These days people are more likely to have a working
>> DAB receiver than an LW one.

Hmm. I have one (DAB/FM), that someone gave me because the power
connection was faulty, not anything wrong with the receiver. Once I
fixed that, it worked fine. When I first used it, I got a few DAB
stations here. But last time I did a scan - it's DAB, not DAB+ - it
didn't find a single DAB station! OK, I'm rural, but not exactly the
back of beyond: I'm mid-Kent, TN27 0DD. Scan done indoors with internal
telescopic aerial fully extended.
>>
>> I suppose the other issue is the comparative resilience of the programme
>> feed to the LW network compared to the DAB system, and also diversity of
>> power supply. The DAB network sort of reminds me of the network of small
>> low power wartime MW transmitters.
>>
>> (And before anyone moans about DAB coverage - I’m referring specifically to
>> the BBC network, which in my experience is vastly superior to the
>> commercial MUX that Times Radio uses)
>It will be. BBC National mux has over 400 transmitters, SDL (Times
>Radio, Jazz FM etc) has about 60.
>
>D1 (LBC, Classic FM etc) has something in between  (That's probably
>Bill W's problem in the other thread)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

If, after hearing my songs, just one human being is inspired to say something
nasty to a friend, or perhaps to strike a loved one, it will all have been
worth the while. - Liner notes, "Songs & More Songs By Tom Lehrer", Rhino
Records, 1997.

J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
> In message <kdm3t8F8o3rU2@mid.individual.net> at Tue, 30 May 2023
> 12:10:33, Mark Carver <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> writes
>> On 30/05/2023 11:12, Tweed wrote:
> []
>>> I would imagine that the BBC DAB transmitter network is more use in an
>>> emergency. It has lots of transmitters and reception can withstand the loss
>>> of some here and there. These days people are more likely to have a working
>>> DAB receiver than an LW one.
>
> Hmm. I have one (DAB/FM), that someone gave me because the power
> connection was faulty, not anything wrong with the receiver. Once I
> fixed that, it worked fine. When I first used it, I got a few DAB
> stations here. But last time I did a scan - it's DAB, not DAB+ - it
> didn't find a single DAB station! OK, I'm rural, but not exactly the
> back of beyond: I'm mid-Kent, TN27 0DD. Scan done indoors with internal
> telescopic aerial fully extended.
>>>

https://getdigitalradio.com/post-code-checker/

For house number 1 it gives good reception. I am somewhere that claims no
reception according to that checker, but can get reception. Perhaps points
to your set being deaf?

On 30/05/2023 14:44, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> Hmm. I have one (DAB/FM), that someone gave me because the power
> connection was faulty, not anything wrong with the receiver. Once I
> fixed that, it worked fine. When I first used it, I got a few DAB
> stations here. But last time I did a scan - it's DAB, not DAB+ - it
> didn't find a single DAB station! OK, I'm rural, but not exactly the
> back of beyond: I'm mid-Kent, TN27 0DD. Scan done indoors with internal
> telescopic aerial fully extended.

Reception is often patchy in rural areas but can be better than VHF FM
even in some very remote places. Being more resilient against
multi-path helps at times.

I tend to just leave the car radio on DAB thought it will switch to VHF
FM itself on stations like Radio 2 and Radio 4 but there are many times
now when I will not listen to Radio 2 because of the presenter.

It is frustrating where an extra DAB transmitter would make a big
different. A few years ago I drove down to Falmouth, I got back into
DAB coverage at Tarbet and I don't lost it again (and I went into
mid-Wales to visit a friend).

On Tue, 30 May 2023 09:03:48 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
<brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/articles/2023/bbc-radio-4-long-wave-transition#:~:text=This%20follows%20the%20announcement%20in,its%20life%20as%20a%20technology

On 30/05/2023 10:51, MB wrote:
> On 30/05/2023 09:03, Brian Gaff wrote:

>> I notice people chattering that BBC R4 LW is giving notice of  closure in
>> the near future in little messages on the station. Having furtled
>> about it
>> seems its not the transmitter
>> which is the issue, as one can get new transmitters, but the work
>> needed to refurbish the huge aerial array at Droitwich.  Of course the
>> more
>> cynical might suggest that this is prime building land, but surely the
>> BBC
>> or whoever owns it are not that shallow?
>>   The thing about Long wave of course, is that just one transmitter
>> can cover
>> a huge area, though I believe there is or was another smaller one as
>> well.
>> Certainly back in the 80s you could hear it close to the Equator at the
>> Canary islands, as long as you ignored all the lightning crashes you
>> heard
>> as well, not to mention the interference from TVs.
>>   Its a shame though, How are the cricket fans going to get their fix of
>> boring old farts discussing silly mid ons now?

> It is a very expensive way to serve a very small number of people.  I
> can't remember if I have checked if my car has Long Wave, I think it
> does but Long Wave reception is so poor in the Highlands that it is of
> little use.
>
> Has anyone estimated how many have a LW receiver, it will be very low
> and most would not know where to find Radio 4.

I haven't used LW for years, but, for some (possibly sentimental)
reason, I've bought a few radios with LW in recent years.

I hope they give notice before turning the transmitter off, so I can
tune into it for one last time (though I might find it broadcasting
cricket).

--
Max Demian

On 30/05/2023 21:15, Scott wrote:
> On Tue, 30 May 2023 09:03:48 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
> <brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:

> https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/articles/2023/bbc-radio-4-long-wave-transition#:~:text=This%20follows%20the%20announcement%20in,its%20life%20as%20a%20technology

Doesn't say when they are turning R4 LW off.

(I don't like their use of the term "transitioning". What if I
"identify" as a LW user?)

--
Max Demian

On 31/05/2023 11:46, Max Demian wrote:
> On 30/05/2023 21:15, Scott wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 May 2023 09:03:48 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
>> <brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/articles/2023/bbc-radio-4-long-wave-transition#:~:text=This%20follows%20the%20announcement%20in,its%20life%20as%20a%20technology
>>
>
> Doesn't say when they are turning R4 LW off.
>
> (I don't like their use of the term "transitioning". What if I
> "identify" as a LW user?)
>
The electricity companies are still woefully behind replacing the E7
teleswitches, so don't assume the carrier on 198 kHz will cease in
March, they might do what the French are still doing with 162 kHz, and
keep it going with just an unmodulated (by audio) carrier

I'm sure they can give Arqiva (and by extension the Beeb) a good energy
deal for the 'lekky

In message <kdonsiFl3emU2@mid.individual.net> at Wed, 31 May 2023
12:03:46, Mark Carver <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> writes
>On 31/05/2023 11:46, Max Demian wrote:
>> On 30/05/2023 21:15, Scott wrote:
>>> On Tue, 30 May 2023 09:03:48 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
>>> <brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/articles/2023/bbc-radio-4-long-wave-tr
>>>ansition#:~:text=This%20follows%20the%20announcement%20in,its%20life%2
>>>0as%20a%20technology
>>
>> Doesn't say when they are turning R4 LW off.

"the BBC is to stop scheduling separate content for Radio 4 LW in
anticipation of the closure of the LW platform…
All programmes on Radio 4 LW - Shipping Forecast, Daily Service,
Yesterday in Parliament and Test Match Special – will continue to be
available on other BBC platforms."

Those two statements when taken together are confusing: the first one
implies that soon (or has it already happened?) R4LW will be identical
to R4FM, until switchoff. So does that mean that the material which had
been exclusive to R4LW will be (already is?) _only_ available digitally
(or on R5SE for the cricket)?
>>
>> (I don't like their use of the term "transitioning". What if I
>>"identify" as a LW user?)

(-:
>>
>The electricity companies are still woefully behind replacing the E7
>teleswitches, so don't assume the carrier on 198 kHz will cease in
>March, they might do what the French are still doing with 162 kHz, and
>keep it going with just an unmodulated (by audio) carrier

Hmm. If they do that, you'd have thought they could modulate it - the
extra cost would surely not be a lot. Sounds petty.
>
>I'm sure they can give Arqiva (and by extension the Beeb) a good energy
>deal for the 'lekky

(-:
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Radio 4 is one of the reasons being British is good. It's not a subset of
Britain - it's almost as if Britain is a subset of Radio 4. - Stephen Fry, in
Radio Times, 7-13 June, 2003.

On 31/05/2023 14:36, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> In message <kdonsiFl3emU2@mid.individual.net> at Wed, 31 May 2023
> 12:03:46, Mark Carver <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> writes
>> On 31/05/2023 11:46, Max Demian wrote:
>>> On 30/05/2023 21:15, Scott wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 30 May 2023 09:03:48 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
>>>> <brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/articles/2023/bbc-radio-4-long-wave-tr
>>>> ansition#:~:text=This%20follows%20the%20announcement%20in,its%20life%2
>>>> 0as%20a%20technology
>>>
>>> Doesn't say when they are turning R4 LW off.
>
> "the BBC is to stop scheduling separate content for Radio 4 LW in
> anticipation of the closure of the LW platform…
> All programmes on Radio 4 LW -  Shipping Forecast, Daily Service,
> Yesterday in Parliament and Test Match Special – will continue to be
> available on other BBC platforms."
>
> Those two statements when taken together are confusing: the first one
> implies that soon (or has it already happened?) R4LW will be identical
> to R4FM, until switchoff. So does that mean that the material which
> had been exclusive to R4LW will be (already is?) _only_ available
> digitally (or on R5SE for the cricket)?
>>>
>>> (I don't like their use of the term "transitioning". What if I
>>> "identify" as a LW user?)
>
> (-:
>>>
>> The electricity companies are still woefully behind replacing the E7
>> teleswitches, so don't assume the carrier on 198 kHz will cease in
>> March, they might do what the French are still doing with 162 kHz,
>> and keep it going with just an unmodulated (by audio) carrier
>
> Hmm. If they do that, you'd have thought they could modulate it - the
> extra cost would surely not be a lot. Sounds petty.
Might be tied up with royalty payments, for effectively playing music to
the whole of Europe. The are also slowly reducing the transmitted power
bit by bit

https://www.pa3fwm.nl/technotes/tn15d.html

On 31/05/2023 14:36, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> Those two statements when taken together are confusing: the first one
> implies that soon (or has it already happened?) R4LW will be identical
> to R4FM, until switchoff. So does that mean that the material which had
> been exclusive to R4LW will be (already is?)_only_ available digitally
> (or on R5SE for the cricket)?

They have reduced the number of transmissions of the Shipping Forecase,
they can move it forward so it does not affect the Today programme/

It is the Daily Service that puzzles me, the majority of people are not
interested in it so if they insert into normal programmes then they are
going to lose many listeners unless they also put it on very early.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 31/05/2023 14:36, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>> Those two statements when taken together are confusing: the first one
>> implies that soon (or has it already happened?) R4LW will be identical
>> to R4FM, until switchoff. So does that mean that the material which had
>> been exclusive to R4LW will be (already is?)_only_ available digitally
>> (or on R5SE for the cricket)?
>
>
> They have reduced the number of transmissions of the Shipping Forecase,
> they can move it forward so it does not affect the Today programme/
>
> It is the Daily Service that puzzles me, the majority of people are not
> interested in it so if they insert into normal programmes then they are
> going to lose many listeners unless they also put it on very early.
>
>
>
Can’t the Daily Service simply go out on one of the DAB opts? There’s
already a “R4LW” DAB variant of R4. It will also likely be available on
Sounds via that new fangled Internet.

On 31/05/2023 15:50, Tweed wrote:
> Can’t the Daily Service simply go out on one of the DAB opts? There’s
> already a “R4LW” DAB variant of R4. It will also likely be available on
> Sounds via that new fangled Internet.

That would seem the obvious thing to do but ...

"The Daily Service and the longer version of Yesterday in Parliament
will also continue on LW until March 2024 and will then be available on
BBC Radio 4 Extra and BBC Sounds."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/articles/2023/bbc-radio-4-long-wave-transition

On Tuesday, 30 May 2023 at 12:54:51 UTC+1, Mark Carver wrote:

>
> Coupled with the fact no one much uses them of course. My car radio has
> no AM section, and I don't have any AM receivers in the house now.
If you're 25 and you wonder what FM radio will sound like when you're 75, just try AM.

Bill

On Wednesday, 31 May 2023 at 14:44:57 UTC+1, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

> Radio 4 is one of the reasons being British is good. It's not a subset of
> Britain - it's almost as if Britain is a subset of Radio 4. - Stephen Fry, in
> Radio Times, 7-13 June, 2003.

Radio Four is not representative of Britain; it's representative of a small group of woke leftists. None of my friends listen to Radio Four.
Bill

On 31/05/2023 18:26, wrightsaerials@aol.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, 30 May 2023 at 12:54:51 UTC+1, Mark Carver wrote:

>> Coupled with the fact no one much uses them of course. My car radio has
>> no AM section, and I don't have any AM receivers in the house now.
> If you're 25 and you wonder what FM radio will sound like when you're 75, just try AM.

If you're 25 you won't know what FM radio is. Or, for that matter, "radio".

--
Max Demian

On 31/05/2023 19:56, Max Demian wrote:
> On 31/05/2023 18:26, wrightsaerials@aol.com wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 30 May 2023 at 12:54:51 UTC+1, Mark Carver wrote:
>
>>> Coupled with the fact no one much uses them of course. My car radio has
>>> no AM section, and I don't have any AM receivers in the house now.
>> If you're 25 and you wonder what FM radio will sound like when you're
>> 75, just try AM.
>
> If you're 25 you won't know what FM radio is. Or, for that matter, "radio".
>
Just accept that when you hit 75, you won't need anything better than 64
kbps MP3 to make it sound like hifi.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

In message <kdpjvtFq5jmU1@mid.individual.net> at Wed, 31 May 2023
20:03:25, John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> writes
[]
>Just accept that when you hit 75, you won't need anything better than
>64 kbps MP3 to make it sound like hifi.
>
Actually, for mono material, at 44100 sample rate, 64kbps mp3 will give
you 16 kHz bandwidth (11 kHz for stereo). (And I've come across a lot of
AAC - .m4a - files recently that are only 47 and 48 k data rate, and yet
stereo 16 kHz bandwidth; I don't know how they do it! It must be a
_very_ efficient coding algorithm.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

You've made a happy man very old. - Stephen Fry, on QI, 2014-10-18


Seems those two transmitters are rather close by when you do consider its
range, so it must be something to do with the locations or something.
I've never heard any echo or phase issues. If you listen to other medium
wav broadcasts co channeled you can clearly hear echo on many of them, which
seems a bit odd, you might think they would make sure they were the same or
any fading would make a horrid noise.
Brian

--

--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"charles" <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote in message
news:5aac928e43charles@candehope.me.uk...
> In article <u54al3$1tp46$1@dont-email.me>, Brian Gaff
> <brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I notice people chattering that BBC R4 LW is giving notice of closure in
>> the near future in little messages on the station. Having furtled about
>> it seems its not the transmitter which is the issue, as one can get new
>> transmitters, but the work needed to refurbish the huge aerial array at
>> Droitwich. Of course the more cynical might suggest that this is prime
>> building land, but surely the BBC or whoever owns it are not that
>> shallow?
>
> The BBC haven't owned the transmitters for over 20 years
>
>
>> The thing about Long wave of course, is that just one
>> transmitter can cover a huge area, though I believe there is or was
>> another smaller one as well.
>
> There are two others! One in central Scotland and one on the Moray Firth.
>
>> Certainly back in the 80s you could hear it
>> close to the Equator at the Canary islands,
>
> I've certainly listened in my car on the shores of Lake Geneva - but not
> under the tram wires..
>
> --
> from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4t�
> "I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle