On 1/16/2012 10:29 AM, hwh wrote:
On 1/16/12 6:23 PM, SMS wrote:
DAB+ offers audio quality almost as good as HD, but a)
it wasn't available when HD was selected, and b) it wasn't IBOC.

DAB+ can deliver a lot better audio quality than HD, even if it is used
in digital-only mode.

Nope. Testing by the European Broadcasting Union showed similar results
in perceived audio quality with the HE-AAC Codec (which is not
surprising since the iBiquity Codec is a slightly modified HE-AAC Codec).

"at an audio bit rate of 48 kbps, HE-AAC offers good to excellent quality

at an audio bit rate of 64 kbps it offers excellent quality."

On 1/17/12 12:11 AM, SMS wrote:
On 1/16/2012 10:29 AM, hwh wrote:
On 1/16/12 6:23 PM, SMS wrote:
DAB+ offers audio quality almost as good as HD, but a)
it wasn't available when HD was selected, and b) it wasn't IBOC.

DAB+ can deliver a lot better audio quality than HD, even if it is used
in digital-only mode.

Nope. Testing by the European Broadcasting Union showed similar results
in perceived audio quality with the HE-AAC Codec (which is not
surprising since the iBiquity Codec is a slightly modified HE-AAC Codec).

"at an audio bit rate of 48 kbps, HE-AAC offers good to excellent quality

at an audio bit rate of 64 kbps it offers excellent quality."

And DAB+ can deliver 128 kbps while HD radio can't. 128 kbps sounds
quite a lot better than 96 kbps.
Digital radio people try to fool us into believing that 48 kbps sounds
decent. It doesn't.

gr, hwh