I have written to Global Radio to ask about the bitrate when Classic
FM moves to DAB+ in 2024 but they cannot tell me at this stage. Is
there any word on 'da streets' (as Ali G would say)?

On 25/09/2023 10:26, Scott wrote:
> I have written to Global Radio to ask about the bitrate when Classic FM
> moves to DAB+ in 2024 but they cannot tell me at this stage. Is there
> any word on 'da streets' (as Ali G would say)?

Can't you check it?

I think all my DAB radios will display the bitrate.

I can't check Classic because of their limited coverage and never
bothered listening to them when away from home.

On Mon, 25 Sep 2023 12:41:08 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

>On 25/09/2023 10:26, Scott wrote:
>> I have written to Global Radio to ask about the bitrate when Classic FM
>> moves to DAB+ in 2024 but they cannot tell me at this stage. Is there
>> any word on 'da streets' (as Ali G would say)?
>
>Can't you check it?

No, because the move to DAB+ will not take place until start of 2024.

On 25/09/2023 12:41, JMB99 wrote:
> On 25/09/2023 10:26, Scott wrote:
>> I have written to Global Radio to ask about the bitrate when Classic
>> FM moves to DAB+ in 2024 but they cannot tell me at this stage. Is
>> there any word on 'da streets' (as Ali G would say)?
>
>
> Can't you check it?
>

No one can check it, because the transmission on DAB+ hasn't started yet.

Why worry about the bit rate (and it's not the only thing that
influences the final sound quality anyway).
If it sounds crap, don't listen, if it sounds OK carry on listening.
Simples.

On Mon, 25 Sep 2023 12:57:34 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 25/09/2023 12:41, JMB99 wrote:
>> On 25/09/2023 10:26, Scott wrote:
>>> I have written to Global Radio to ask about the bitrate when Classic
>>> FM moves to DAB+ in 2024 but they cannot tell me at this stage. Is
>>> there any word on 'da streets' (as Ali G would say)?
>>
>>
>> Can't you check it?
>>
>
>No one can check it, because the transmission on DAB+ hasn't started yet.
>
>Why worry about the bit rate (and it's not the only thing that
>influences the final sound quality anyway).
>If it sounds crap, don't listen, if it sounds OK carry on listening.
>Simples.
>
It's more out of curiosity than any real need to know. They describe
it as an improvement, which seems to me a claim that has to be
verifiable.

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Sep 2023 12:57:34 +0100, Mark Carver
> <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 25/09/2023 12:41, JMB99 wrote:
>>> On 25/09/2023 10:26, Scott wrote:
>>>> I have written to Global Radio to ask about the bitrate when Classic
>>>> FM moves to DAB+ in 2024 but they cannot tell me at this stage. Is
>>>> there any word on 'da streets' (as Ali G would say)?
>>>
>>>
>>> Can't you check it?
>>>
>>
>> No one can check it, because the transmission on DAB+ hasn't started yet.
>>
>> Why worry about the bit rate (and it's not the only thing that
>> influences the final sound quality anyway).
>> If it sounds crap, don't listen, if it sounds OK carry on listening.
>> Simples.
>>
> It's more out of curiosity than any real need to know. They describe
> it as an improvement, which seems to me a claim that has to be
> verifiable.
>

It might well be an improvement- for their finances rather than for your
enjoyment. Words take on a whole range of new meanings in the hands of
marketing folk.

Anyway, I’ve no idea how you can be worried about the sound quality given
the pollution of the sound stream by adverts. They are very many dB up the
irritation scale for me.

JMB99 wrote:

> Scott wrote:
>
>> I have written to Global Radio to ask about the bitrate when Classic
>> FM moves to DAB+ in 2024
>
> Can't you check it?

If he can, would he get that week's lottery numbers while he's at it?

Sorry we cannot tell you as we are all marketing men, not technicians, we
will use whatever is cheapest and nobody complains.
OK I made it up, but its paraphrasing a lot of the bullshit you get from
broadcasters these days.
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.!
"Scott" <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8dk2hilhvieehdlck1jkb1frsb2jnqgtid@4ax.com...
>I have written to Global Radio to ask about the bitrate when Classic
> FM moves to DAB+ in 2024 but they cannot tell me at this stage. Is
> there any word on 'da streets' (as Ali G would say)?

On Tue, 26 Sep 2023 14:11:38 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
<brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:

>Sorry we cannot tell you as we are all marketing men, not technicians, we
>will use whatever is cheapest and nobody complains.
> OK I made it up, but its paraphrasing a lot of the bullshit you get from
>broadcasters these days.
> Brian

Or it may be they consider it to be commercially sensitive to prevent
competitors finding out and adjusting their own arrangements.
Nonetheless, I would be interested to know whether it will be better
than 128 kbps MP2.

Its over compressed most of the time and I tend to feel most of their shows
are voicetracked in any case.
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.!
"Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:kndateF2puqU1@mid.individual.net...
> On 25/09/2023 12:41, JMB99 wrote:
>> On 25/09/2023 10:26, Scott wrote:
>>> I have written to Global Radio to ask about the bitrate when Classic FM
>>> moves to DAB+ in 2024 but they cannot tell me at this stage. Is there
>>> any word on 'da streets' (as Ali G would say)?
>>
>>
>> Can't you check it?
>>
>
> No one can check it, because the transmission on DAB+ hasn't started yet.
>
> Why worry about the bit rate (and it's not the only thing that influences
> the final sound quality anyway).
> If it sounds crap, don't listen, if it sounds OK carry on listening.
> Simples.
>
>

On Tue, 26 Sep 2023 14:14:04 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
<brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:

>Its over compressed most of the time and I tend to feel most of their shows
>are voicetracked in any case.

Do you think Ritula Shah (10pm onwards) is voicetracked? She certainly
tries to give an impression she is in the studio. Interestingly,
Classic FM never has any timechecks.

On 26/09/2023 14:13, Scott wrote:
> Or it may be they consider it to be commercially sensitive to prevent
> competitors finding out and adjusting their own arrangements.

Many years ago before retirement, I tried to get a list of offsets but
was told it was commercially sensitive!

I could of course measure them using my cheap scanner.

How can offsets be commercially sensitive, unless you were in the business
of making jammers.
Somebody was going on about DAB plus using VBR, which I would say means
variable bit rates. That would seem to me to be a recipe for disaster on a
multiplex, as if every channel suddenly put out white noise it would run out
of bandwidth!

Also, why are so many of the talk only channels on DAB completely impossible
to listen to without fatigue. They sound gritty and flat on human voices, as
apposed to unhuman ones. grin. What I mean is that every voice you hear
sounds like its made up of tiny little bits with a watermark of low
frequency in it. Its a bit like you can get over a mobile phone just before
the signal drops out when its struggling.
Please the engineers need to actually listen, and not just keeping on
squeezing more into less.
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.!
"JMB99" <mb@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:ueuone$2hib2$2@dont-email.me...
> On 26/09/2023 14:13, Scott wrote:
>> Or it may be they consider it to be commercially sensitive to prevent
>> competitors finding out and adjusting their own arrangements.
>
>
>
> Many years ago before retirement, I tried to get a list of offsets but was
> told it was commercially sensitive!
>
> I could of course measure them using my cheap scanner.
>
>

On 26/09/2023 14:13, Scott wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2023 14:11:38 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
> <brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sorry we cannot tell you as we are all marketing men, not technicians, we
>> will use whatever is cheapest and nobody complains.
>> OK I made it up, but its paraphrasing a lot of the bullshit you get from
>> broadcasters these days.
>> Brian
>
> Or it may be they consider it to be commercially sensitive to prevent
> competitors finding out and adjusting their own arrangements.

Particularly as arch rivals Bauer announced yesterday a large scale move
to DAB+

https://radiotoday.co.uk/2023/09/bauer-switches-national-radio-services-to-dab-and-takes-seven-extra-stations-national-on-sdl/

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 08:53:17 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
<brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:

>How can offsets be commercially sensitive, unless you were in the business
>of making jammers.
> Somebody was going on about DAB plus using VBR, which I would say means
>variable bit rates. That would seem to me to be a recipe for disaster on a
>multiplex, as if every channel suddenly put out white noise it would run out
>of bandwidth!

Surely this is what the BBC do with R4 (128/80 kbps), R3 (192/160
kbps), R5L (80/64 kbps) to accommodate R5L Sports Extra?
>
>Also, why are so many of the talk only channels on DAB completely impossible
>to listen to without fatigue. They sound gritty and flat on human voices, as
>apposed to unhuman ones. grin. What I mean is that every voice you hear
>sounds like its made up of tiny little bits with a watermark of low
>frequency in it. Its a bit like you can get over a mobile phone just before
>the signal drops out when its struggling.
> Please the engineers need to actually listen, and not just keeping on
>squeezing more into less.

I would point the finger at the accountants not the engineers.

On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 15:21:11 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 26/09/2023 14:13, Scott wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2023 14:11:38 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
>> <brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry we cannot tell you as we are all marketing men, not technicians, we
>>> will use whatever is cheapest and nobody complains.
>>> OK I made it up, but its paraphrasing a lot of the bullshit you get from
>>> broadcasters these days.
>>> Brian
>>
>> Or it may be they consider it to be commercially sensitive to prevent
>> competitors finding out and adjusting their own arrangements.
>
>Particularly as arch rivals Bauer announced yesterday a large scale move
>to DAB+
>
>https://radiotoday.co.uk/2023/09/bauer-switches-national-radio-services-to-dab-and-takes-seven-extra-stations-national-on-sdl/

Will the BBC be next?

In message <9o4bhitvvs2bjbm642t189rl7vuq3livkn@4ax.com> at Thu, 28 Sep
2023 15:54:21, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> writes
>On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 08:53:17 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
><brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>How can offsets be commercially sensitive, unless you were in the business
>>of making jammers.
>> Somebody was going on about DAB plus using VBR, which I would say means
>>variable bit rates. That would seem to me to be a recipe for disaster on a
>>multiplex, as if every channel suddenly put out white noise it would run out
>>of bandwidth!
>
>Surely this is what the BBC do with R4 (128/80 kbps), R3 (192/160
>kbps), R5L (80/64 kbps) to accommodate R5L Sports Extra?

VBR usually means moment-to-moment variation; the BBC's switches are at
predefined times.
[]
>> Please the engineers need to actually listen, and not just keeping on
>>squeezing more into less.
>
>I would point the finger at the accountants not the engineers.

Indeed. Engineers are ignored, except when needed to help with the
current balance of savings versus complaints.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Never rely on somebody else for your happiness.
- Bette Davis, quoted by Celia Imrie, RT 2014/3/12-18

On 28/09/2023 15:56, Scott wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 15:21:11 +0100, Mark Carver
> <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 26/09/2023 14:13, Scott wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2023 14:11:38 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
>>> <brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sorry we cannot tell you as we are all marketing men, not technicians, we
>>>> will use whatever is cheapest and nobody complains.
>>>> OK I made it up, but its paraphrasing a lot of the bullshit you get from
>>>> broadcasters these days.
>>>> Brian
>>>
>>> Or it may be they consider it to be commercially sensitive to prevent
>>> competitors finding out and adjusting their own arrangements.
>>
>> Particularly as arch rivals Bauer announced yesterday a large scale move
>> to DAB+
>>
>> https://radiotoday.co.uk/2023/09/bauer-switches-national-radio-services-to-dab-and-takes-seven-extra-stations-national-on-sdl/
>
> Will the BBC be next?

Unlikely, why would they move to DAB+, they are skint, and can't afford
to sustain their present services, let alone launch new ones, so why
make room for any more ?

In any case, to launch any new channels, they need to go through a
'Public Value Test' with Ofcom.

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 14:08:18 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 28/09/2023 15:56, Scott wrote:
>> On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 15:21:11 +0100, Mark Carver
>> <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 26/09/2023 14:13, Scott wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2023 14:11:38 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
>>>> <brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Sorry we cannot tell you as we are all marketing men, not technicians, we
>>>>> will use whatever is cheapest and nobody complains.
>>>>> OK I made it up, but its paraphrasing a lot of the bullshit you get from
>>>>> broadcasters these days.
>>>>> Brian
>>>>
>>>> Or it may be they consider it to be commercially sensitive to prevent
>>>> competitors finding out and adjusting their own arrangements.
>>>
>>> Particularly as arch rivals Bauer announced yesterday a large scale move
>>> to DAB+
>>>
>>> https://radiotoday.co.uk/2023/09/bauer-switches-national-radio-services-to-dab-and-takes-seven-extra-stations-national-on-sdl/
>>
>> Will the BBC be next?
>
>Unlikely, why would they move to DAB+, they are skint, and can't afford
>to sustain their present services, let alone launch new ones, so why
>make room for any more ?

Does it cost anything? I thought it was just a tweak in the software.
The incentive would be to cut carriage costs as a lower bitrate could
be used and I assume they could lease out spare capacity.
>
>In any case, to launch any new channels, they need to go through a
>'Public Value Test' with Ofcom.

But these are not new channels. Surely a change in transmission
standards does not require the same approval process as creating a new
channel?

On 29/09/2023 14:14, Scott wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 14:08:18 +0100, Mark Carver
> <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> Does it cost anything? I thought it was just a tweak in the software.
> The incentive would be to cut carriage costs as a lower bitrate could
> be used

......and lose about a third of their listeners ?

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/research-and-data/tv-radio-and-on-demand/radio-research/dab-radio

> and I assume they could lease out spare capacity.

They are not permitted to do that

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

On 29/09/2023 15:22, Mark Carver wrote:
> > and I assume they could lease out spare capacity.
>
> They are not permitted to do that

How is it different from leasing out space on their towers (when they
owned them)?

Not that I want any commercial stations locally!

On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 15:22:06 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 29/09/2023 14:14, Scott wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 14:08:18 +0100, Mark Carver
> > <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Does it cost anything? I thought it was just a tweak in the software.
> > The incentive would be to cut carriage costs as a lower bitrate could
> > be used
>
>.....and lose about a third of their listeners ?

I doubt that very much. I would doubt whether DAB accounts for more
than about one third of listeners overall and those with non-DAB+
compatible sets would form a small proportion of that figure. Anyway,
why does that matter as the licence fee is for TV sets and it really
doesn't matter that much how many people listen to the radio?
>
>https://www.ofcom.org.uk/research-and-data/tv-radio-and-on-demand/radio-research/dab-radio
>
> > and I assume they could lease out spare capacity.
>
>They are not permitted to do that

I expect the savings in switching off MW/LW will more than cover the
opportunity cost of not leasing out capacity. Anyway, rules can be
changed. I'm sure there are politicians out there who would be happy
to privatise the whole BBC let alone a fraction of one multiplex.

In message <kno4seFqshjU2@mid.individual.net> at Fri, 29 Sep 2023
15:22:06, Mark Carver <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> writes
>On 29/09/2023 14:14, Scott wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 14:08:18 +0100, Mark Carver
>> <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Does it cost anything? I thought it was just a tweak in the software.
>> The incentive would be to cut carriage costs as a lower bitrate could
>> be used
>
>.....and lose about a third of their listeners ?
>
>https://www.ofcom.org.uk/research-and-data/tv-radio-and-on-demand/radio-
>research/dab-radio
>
>> and I assume they could lease out spare capacity.
>
>They are not permitted to do that
>
>
I'm pretty sure everything from the bitstream outward is outsourced now,
so Arqiva or whoever would just charge less, and it would be they who
lease out the spare capacity. It would be presented as just the BBC
devising a way of being charged less, for which they would be praised.
--
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.

In message <dc1ehit71iblticriff9l6dfhi9jgcroi5@4ax.com> at Fri, 29 Sep
2023 18:18:59, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> writes
[]
>I doubt that very much. I would doubt whether DAB accounts for more
>than about one third of listeners overall and those with non-DAB+
>compatible sets would form a small proportion of that figure. Anyway,
>why does that matter as the licence fee is for TV sets and it really
>doesn't matter that much how many people listen to the radio?
[]
Incorrect. The licence fee is _collected_ from people with TV sets (very
roughly speaking), but _spent_ on TV and radio (and online, and lots of
other things). They do indeed care a lot how many people listen to it -
if they could _prove_ it was zero, they could stop doing it and save
lots of money.

(Note: the quote below was selected by my ancient [DOS-based!] software
at random, not by me!)
--
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 Fri, 29 Sep 2023 23:07:40 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>In message <dc1ehit71iblticriff9l6dfhi9jgcroi5@4ax.com> at Fri, 29 Sep
>2023 18:18:59, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> writes
>[]
>>I doubt that very much. I would doubt whether DAB accounts for more
>>than about one third of listeners overall and those with non-DAB+
>>compatible sets would form a small proportion of that figure. Anyway,
>>why does that matter as the licence fee is for TV sets and it really
>>doesn't matter that much how many people listen to the radio?
>[]
>Incorrect. The licence fee is _collected_ from people with TV sets (very
>roughly speaking), but _spent_ on TV and radio (and online, and lots of
>other things). They do indeed care a lot how many people listen to it -
>if they could _prove_ it was zero, they could stop doing it and save
>lots of money.

So where is the incentive to cater for the small number of people who
listen on non-DAB+ radios and are unwilling to upgrade? Do they write
more letters to the Telegraph or something?