3 ms·
> the decision was made to go backwards in technology What is so forward about DAB ? In theory it sounds excelent. In practice it sounds like crap due to usin
by hulitu 2y ago
> the decision was made to go backwards in technology
What is so forward about DAB ?
In theory it sounds excelent. In practice it sounds like crap due to using the lowest bitrate possible.
- coretx 2y agoDAB is optimized for "rights holders". Not for radio stations, not for end users, not for the state. It's designed against everyone but the rights holder / copyrights industry interests.
- gpvos 2y agoHow so? It's not encrypted or anything similar.
- coretx 2y agohttps://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/102300_102399/102367/01.02.01_60/ts_102367v010201p.pdf https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/102300_102399/102367/01...
- teractiveodular 2y agoIs this actually used anywhere? To me it feels like DAB and any putative DRM mechanisms have already been basically obsoleted by streaming systems like Spotify.
- pjc50 2y agoThat's not the real rightsholder thing, as hardly anyone bothers with scrambled broadcasts; no, the real rightsholder handicap was limiting the bitrate of original DAB so it sounds worse than CDs.
- mrguyorama 2y agoIt never mattered what the max bitrate was going to be, because as long as there was a lower bitrate option that allowed you to broadcast more channels, that was the option station owners were going to use. Because selling X ads makes less money than selling 2X ads. Digital TV and radio were simply the first casualties of the modern advertising economy.
- rsynnott 2y agoWhile DAB is very rough (mp2 at usually under 128kbits) DAB+ is HE-ACC and will sound better than FM even at quite low data rates.