On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 09:49:15 -0800, SMS
wrote:

What is the bit rate for XM/Sirius music channels? I've seen people say
that it's as low as 32 kb/s, but that their streaming is 128 kb/s. But
if you're streaming, you may as well get Pandora rather than satellite.

It's ugly. There are 100 streams, each 8Kbits/sec. With two
channels, they're effectively 4Kbits/sec per channel. These are
conglomerated in the receiver into anything between 4 and 64Kbits/sec.
For music, it seems to hang around the upper end, but I'm not sure.
http://www.google.com/patents/US7075946?dq=7075946
I had XM in my car several years ago when they were giving away 30
days free trials. Coverage in the San Lorenzo Valley was horrible due
to trees, hills, and lack of terrestrial repeaters. The nearest are
two in San Jose.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 1/12/2012 11:40 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 09:49:15 -0800,
wrote:

What is the bit rate for XM/Sirius music channels? I've seen people say
that it's as low as 32 kb/s, but that their streaming is 128 kb/s. But
if you're streaming, you may as well get Pandora rather than satellite.

It's ugly. There are 100 streams, each 8Kbits/sec.

I found a chart here http://www.xm411.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=33127.
It's nearly four years old, but since the satellite radio providers
obviously don't want to talk about bit rates, it'll have to do. It's
pretty clear where the complaints of audio quality on satellite are
coming from. Much lower than even free Pandora in most cases. I can only
imagine the kind of stuff we'd see posted here if digital terrestrial
radio tried to get away with some of those bit rates for music. I can
just imagine some of the radio conglomerates thinking about three 32
kbps digital music channels (or seven once analog is turned off).

What's amazing is that after coming close to failing, satellite radio in
the U.S. is now doing okay financially (not great, but the threat of
bankruptcy is over) so obviously there are many consumers for whom audio
quality is of minimal importance. They even raised prices recently. I
could buy a couple of hundred music CDs at garage sales for what it cost
for satellite radio for a year.

On long trips we like to listen to audio books, and most libraries have
a very good selection.

On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:09:37 -0800, SMS
wrote:

It's nearly four years old, but since the satellite radio providers
obviously don't want to talk about bit rates, it'll have to do.

Actually, I'm not all that interested in bit rate. What methinks is a
problem is the error rate. You could be running the full 64Kbits/sec
per channel, but with a sufficiently high uncorrectable error rate,
the quality will suck. FEC helps, but isn't a cure all. Same problem
with HD Radio. It's difficult enough to find the data rate without
ripping open the receiver and probing the guts. Getting the error
rate is even more difficult.

It's
pretty clear where the complaints of audio quality on satellite are
coming from.

Ummm... the complaints are coming from listeners. Should they be
coming from elsewhere?

... obviously there are many consumers for whom audio
quality is of minimal importance.

I guess that includes me. You wouldn't believer the OTA FM noise I
have to tolerate. Driving through the hills, the stations alternately
appear and disappear. In between the radio just belches noise. Trying
to hear anything over the road noise, scanner, and 2way radio noise is
difficult. Meanwhile, the GPS mapping display is yelling at me to
turn here and there. At the same time, my Droid is mumbling something
about email and reminders. Even if the music were distortion free, I
probably wouldn't notice.

On long trips we like to listen to audio books, and most libraries have
a very good selection.

Well, they've passed laws against driving while talking on the phone.
Perhaps the next step is to pass a law against driving while listening
to audio books. It's too much of a distraction for the GUM (great
unwashed masses).

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On 1/12/2012 6:47 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:09:37 -0800,
wrote:

It's nearly four years old, but since the satellite radio providers
obviously don't want to talk about bit rates, it'll have to do.

Actually, I'm not all that interested in bit rate. What methinks is a
problem is the error rate. You could be running the full 64Kbits/sec
per channel, but with a sufficiently high uncorrectable error rate,
the quality will suck. FEC helps, but isn't a cure all. Same problem
with HD Radio. It's difficult enough to find the data rate without
ripping open the receiver and probing the guts. Getting the error
rate is even more difficult.

It's
pretty clear where the complaints of audio quality on satellite are
coming from.

Ummm... the complaints are coming from listeners. Should they be
coming from elsewhere?

... obviously there are many consumers for whom audio
quality is of minimal importance.

I guess that includes me. You wouldn't believer the OTA FM noise I
have to tolerate. Driving through the hills, the stations alternately
appear and disappear. In between the radio just belches noise. Trying
to hear anything over the road noise, scanner, and 2way radio noise is
difficult. Meanwhile, the GPS mapping display is yelling at me to
turn here and there. At the same time, my Droid is mumbling something
about email and reminders. Even if the music were distortion free, I
probably wouldn't notice.

On long trips we like to listen to audio books, and most libraries have
a very good selection.

Well, they've passed laws against driving while talking on the phone.
Perhaps the next step is to pass a law against driving while listening
to audio books. It's too much of a distraction for the GUM (great
unwashed masses).

With HD Radio if signal strength is too low (error rate too high) it
simply won't lock on to HD.

On Jan 12, 8:47*pm, SMS wrote:
On 1/12/2012 6:47 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:









On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:09:37 -0800,
wrote:

It's nearly four years old, but since the satellite radio providers
obviously don't want to talk about bit rates, it'll have to do.

Actually, I'm not all that interested in bit rate. *What methinks is a
problem is the error rate. *You could be running the full 64Kbits/sec
per channel, but with a sufficiently high uncorrectable error rate,
the quality will suck. *FEC helps, but isn't a cure all. *Same problem
with HD Radio. *It's difficult enough to find the data rate without
ripping open the receiver and probing the guts. *Getting the error
rate is even more difficult.

It's
pretty clear where the complaints of audio quality on satellite are
coming from.

Ummm... the complaints are coming from listeners. *Should they be
coming from elsewhere?

... obviously there are many consumers for whom audio
quality is of minimal importance.

I guess that includes me. *You wouldn't believer the OTA FM noise I
have to tolerate. *Driving through the hills, the stations alternately
appear and disappear. *In between the radio just belches noise. Trying
to hear anything over the road noise, scanner, and 2way radio noise is
difficult. *Meanwhile, the GPS mapping display is yelling at me to
turn here and there. *At the same time, my Droid is mumbling something
about email and reminders. *Even if the music were distortion free, I
probably wouldn't notice.

On long trips we like to listen to audio books, and most libraries have
a very good selection.

Well, they've passed laws against driving while talking on the phone.
Perhaps the next step is to pass a law against driving while listening
to audio books. *It's too much of a distraction for the GUM (great
unwashed masses).

- With HD Radio if signal strength is too low (error rate too high) it
- simply won't lock on to HD.

That is how the IBOC "HD" Radio Systems is
supposed to work Digial when possible and the
default is Analog.
In-Band On-Channel (IBOC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBOC

When you can not get KCBS-AM 740 kHz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KCBS_%28AM%29
You either get the 'HD' Digital Signal or the Analog
Signal and if you are just getting the Analog Signal
then the Digital {Hash} Side-Bands don't matter
cause you are "On-Channel" between them.

Like it or not; for the Radio Listener who is listening
to his/her Favorite 'Local' Radio Station the IBOC Side
Bands are a non-issue : That's a problem for someone
else who is listing to some other Radio Station.

Think about it; did you care about what was happening
on all the other Radio Stations across the band; while
you were listening to your Favorite 'Local' Radio Station
10~20~30 Years Ago . . . NAH !

Mostly people listen to what they 'can' hear as mindless
background noise while they go about their daily lives
at home, work or driving.

The beauty of Radio is that it is often a secondary
{background} activity while you are focused on something
else : While TV Watching {Viewing} requires your full
{fool} involvement as a primary activity; and that usually
means that you have to sit down and 'Watch' IT[TV].

As always this is RHF and...
I'll leave the Radio 'On' ~ RHF
www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1jpxlEPHX8
-ps-:-turn-your-radio-'on'-&-just-listen-)-