Boltar wrote:
On 10 Jul, 23:20, "DAB sounds closer to AM" dab.is@dead wrote:
Boltar wrote:
On 10 Jul, 15:21, "DAB sounds worse than FM" dab.is@dead wrote:
Boltar wrote:
On 10 Jul, 02:11, "Max Power" wrote:
Pros and cons of NICAM vs DVB vs DAB (original design)

Disadvantages

NICAM
-- J.17 Emphasis curve
-- 32 kHz sample rate
-- 14 bits vs 16 bits of modern systems; requires resampling for
16 bit origin material
Still, if one were designing a DAB system in the mid-1980s ...
NICAM is near perfect.
-- IF AND ONLY IF "RDS" datastream is added

14 bits and 32Khz near perfect? Even CD players managed 16 bits
44.1 Khz in the mid 80s. You're also forgetting that NICAM has
virtually sod all error correction. The slightest dodgy signal
and its off into wax cylinder audio mode (though you won't here
it on most TVs , they mute or switch to the FM sound as soon as
the bitstream goes wonky)

MP2 has no error correction either, you dummy, they add the error
correction prior to transmission.

I was refering to the whole transmission , not just the codec.

What you said he

"You're also forgetting that NICAM has virtually
sod all error correction. The slightest dodgy signal and its off into
wax cylinder audio mode"

suggests that you were trying to say that NICAM having "virtually
sod all error correction" means, for example, that it would be worse
than DAB, which doesn't make sense because MP2, MP3, AAC etc etc
don't have any error correction either, it's added prior to
transmission.

Stop splitting hairs, everyone generally just refers to it as NICAM
and not the-NICAM-code-in-digital-TV-sound.


I'm not splitting any hairs. You implied that because NICAM doesn't have
"built-in" error correction then it would be unusable as a digital radio
format. It would be unusable as a digital radio format due to its bandwidth,
but not because it lacks error correction, because the other codecs don't
have that either.


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info