Digital Radio Central - Sponsored by TSS Radio
  DRC Home Page DRC Forums Contact Us  
 
SIRIUS Backstage Forum
 
 
 
  Sirius Satellite Radio XM Satellite Radio iTunes/iPod Slacker Pandora  
 
 
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read  
Go Back   SIRIUS Backstage Forum > >
Visit Digital Radio Central

Notices

SIRIUS Dogstar Cafe Crank up the music on your SIRIUS radio, grab a seat at the bar and let's talk SIRIUS.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
 
Old 09-02-2005, 07:46 PM   #91
TeataCleez
Just Tuned In
 
Join Date: Aug 28, 2005
Posts: 6
TeataCleez is on a distinguished road
Default XM people complain better

Check out xmfan.com website, specifically “General Discussion”, “XM discussion”, “Xm sound quality drastically decreasing” thread.

Now those folks know how to bitch about sound quality and stay on topic! (Mostly…)

I like that website better because more of those people are irritated by the same stuff as me…Swishy drum set cymbal sounds, and irritating digital artifacts on peoples voices on the lower bandwidth talk channels.

These things are like fingernails on a chalkboard to us digital stream sensitive folks; you lucky majority of people not irritated by it weasels!

Oh well, what am I to do. I must hear Howard, and I hate commercials interrupting my song listenin’! But complaining is always fun, and someday might inspire one of you smart people to invent a better codec.
TeataCleez is offline  
 
 
Old 09-03-2005, 12:16 AM   #92
RadioSam
Loyal Listener
 
Join Date: Jul 22, 2003
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Posts: 210
RadioSam is on a distinguished road
Default The old SQ thing...

It's really sad to see so many beating on people for having differing opinions. For those who don't know, there is a ZERO TOLERANCE attitude here on SBS regarding negative comments about Sirius and sound quality.

I've really got to laugh at the attitude of "just cancel you winer".

Fact is - Sirius chose a CODEC (PAC) that doesn't do well at lower bit rates - and then proceeded to lower bit rates...and still does.

XM was going to use this codec and abandoned it. Infinity (HDRadio folks) abandoned this codec for these flaws too - Sirius hired 8 of their engineers. Sure they tweaked it and improved it - but us poor unfortunate souls who can hear the shimmering artifacts know it's not enough.

XM's CT-aacPlus (AAC+SBR + secret sauce) blows PAC away - but they too are greedy and cater to the lowest common denominators and are pushing their bitrates lower and lower.

No amount of gnashing of teeth, complaints, or 3d color charts proving we're right will change ANYTHING. As long as the mouth-breathing unwashed masses stumble into Circuit City and lay down the cash - and listen in via crappy FM modulators - and then say how great it sounds...
Well, we're screwed.
RadioSam is offline  
 
 
Old 09-03-2005, 12:50 AM   #93
dantodd
Top Dog Member
Improve Sirius sound quality!
 
Join Date: Aug 04, 2004
Posts: 3,665
dantodd will become famous soon enough
Default

Hey Delores, I think the juke box is broken again. I keep hearing the same song.



I would love a better codec too. They are not going to replace 1million receivers and homekits, carkits, boomboxes etc. It simply isn't going to happen. Arguing about it is like complaining that the sun comes up in the east and you want it to come up in the south. No amount of beating the dead horse will change the codec.

It is very much like DirecTV upgrading to Mpeg4. It is only happening now because of the HDTV upgrades. Otherwise they would never make the change.
dantodd is offline  
 
 
Old 09-03-2005, 09:01 AM   #94
sjtracey
Channel Surfer
 
Join Date: Jun 28, 2003
Posts: 12
sjtracey is on a distinguished road
Default

[Fact is - Sirius chose a CODEC (PAC) that doesn't do well at lower bit rates - and then proceeded to lower bit rates...and still does.

XM was going to use this codec and abandoned it. Infinity (HDRadio folks) abandoned this codec for these flaws too - Sirius hired 8 of their engineers. Sure they tweaked it and improved it - but us poor unfortunate souls who can hear the shimmering artifacts know it's not enough.

XM's CT-aacPlus (AAC+SBR + secret sauce) blows PAC away - but they too are greedy and cater to the lowest common denominators and are pushing their bitrates lower and lower.]

Before you spew any more nonsense on this site you should probably at least attempt to get the facts straight. Of course, as so often is the case on this site, we can't let the facts get in the way of a good argument.

Did it ever occur to you that XM might have a different reason for abandoning PAC in favor of AAC+ than the quality of these codecs. It just so happens that prior to the selection of PAC as their codec, both codecs went head to head in a quality comparison with PAC being the clear winner. In addition it's no coincidence that XM made this decision just a few weeks after Sirius had chosen PAC V4 as their codec (XM had licensced PAC V3). They wanted to make sure they had a differentiating factor before their launch which looking back was a good decision. As for the folks at iBiquity only the people directly involved in that process know the truth about what happened. I will just say that it was more a result of the stupidity and incompetence of the iBiquity management and the politics involved with the NSRC and the NAB wanting to control the approval process and wanting the entire standard to be open (BTW they are still fighting over this with the so called proprietary HDC codec, LOL!). The reality is with both Sirius and XM pushing up the number of channels, Sirius is better positioned to provide future improvements in audio quality due to the in house codec staff.
sjtracey is offline  
 
 
Old 09-03-2005, 03:06 PM   #95
gumbyandpokie999
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Aug 20, 2005
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,322
gumbyandpokie999 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to gumbyandpokie999 Send a message via MSN to gumbyandpokie999 Send a message via Yahoo to gumbyandpokie999
Default SQ

Well I have sirius and love it ,I still think we should have at least 128Kbps .
Its kind of stupid if you think about it,its 2005 and we are listening to something less than 64K ??????I mean talk about pooor planning and with new channels coming around,I imagine that to get worse not better.
Xm sounds like metal robotic squishyness and Sirius sounds muddyand reallylacks the stereo effect that xm has,so either way you cant win .I picked sirius because it has channels that play songs I want to hear not B sides that I never heard in my life.The 70s are wayyyyyyy bettter on sirius.
gumbyandpokie999 is offline  
 
 
Old 09-03-2005, 05:50 PM   #96
joker454
Mixologist
 
Join Date: Apr 08, 2003
Location: Newbury Park, CA
Posts: 283
joker454 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcpish
That's the reason why we have "public" health care service in this country, we recognize in Canada that...
I was born and raised in Canada, spent the first 25 years of my life there and loved it. I live in the US now and love it here also. I've lived in numerous cities in both countries and in the end, there are *far* less differences between the two countries than people would lead you to believe. Your health care comment amused me though I admit. I'd *never* choose the Canadian health system over the American one. The current health system I have in the US is so far better than what I had in Canada, it's almost scary. The length of time my friends back in Montreal need to wait to get health care is unbelievable. You make other US/Canada generalizations that are mostly wrong or stereotypical but I won't get into that.

Regarding AM/FM, it sucks in both countries. Some cities have stronger reception, some have weaker, either way they are both crap.

On the satellite sound quality issue, that issue is over. The digital age was never about sound quality. It's about quantity, convenience and control. In other words, being able to give customer a higher quantity of music, making listening to them more convenient, and giving the music bigwigs control. That's it. Quality is irrelevant for many reasons, some being that people just don't care, they really can't hear the difference, or they dont have equipment good enough to hear the difference.

I used to be like some other guys here in that i used to post and complain about sound quality, but it eventually hit me that it really will never improve because it doesnt need to. Sirius is far better off offering 100+ bad sounding channels than 50 good sounding channels, and that will never change. So yes, I hate Sirius sound quality but in the end I simply adapted and don't complain about it anymore. I use Sirius only for 80's channels (my presets are 8, 15, 19, 22, 23) because I can tolerate the low quality on those channels. I don't listen to any other channels, ever. My mp3 player in my car is filled with other types of great sounding dance to fill the sound quality void.

So thats it. A satellite radio unit hooked via casette adapter playing highly compress music on $2 stock car speakers is good enough sound quality for the vast majority. No amount of posts or complaints will ever change that.
joker454 is offline  
 
 
Old 09-03-2005, 06:50 PM   #97
gumbyandpokie999
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Aug 20, 2005
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,322
gumbyandpokie999 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to gumbyandpokie999 Send a message via MSN to gumbyandpokie999 Send a message via Yahoo to gumbyandpokie999
Default well,dishnetwork feed sounds great

I gotta tell ya all one thing I just turned on my dishnetwork and the sirius sounds great via optical digital cable.I wish it sounded like this on the actual radio.I saw a post on here that dishnetwork is sending relief to the victums of the hurricane,that made me happy to be a sub of dish.Very nice.
gumbyandpokie999 is offline  
 
 
Old 09-04-2005, 12:00 AM   #98
RadioSam
Loyal Listener
 
Join Date: Jul 22, 2003
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Posts: 210
RadioSam is on a distinguished road
Default Facts for sjtracey

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjtracey
Before you spew any more nonsense on this site you should probably at least attempt to get the facts straight.
sjtracey - I was looking forward to seeing your "facts" - but you only posted conjecture...or should I say "spewed".

Here are some facts for you:
Evidence that PAC was abandoned due to poor performance at lower bit rates (which AM HDRadio would use):
Radio World - 6/18/03 http://www.rwonline.com/reference-ro...d_nrsc_3.shtml
This NRSC member and some others told Radio World they believe Ibiquity cannot make PAC work at the lower bit rates, and that the technology developer should use a newer version of its previous codec, AAC...
"PAC is only passable at 64 kbps and not great," said one engineer, close to the NRSC process.


Great article on codecs can be found here:
http://www.rwonline.com/reference-ro...f_codecs.shtml
Another variation on AAC is called AAC-SBR, for Spectral Band Replication. This technology is employed mostly in the decoder, where it improves the high-frequency performance of the system.

Mark Kalman, vice president of Sirius' national broadcast studio: 07-16-03
http://www.rwonline.com/reference-ro...coding_2.shtml
"Everybody should get over the fact that digital audio at rates below around 96 kilobits per second is CD-quality. The least objectionable audio is what we are going to have to live with at rates lower than 96 kbps."
...Sirius allocates approximately 60 kbps to a stereo music channel.

(NOTE: They were only allocating 60 Kbps in 2003 - this figure must be lower currently after the addition of new channels and services)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjtracey
It just so happens that prior to the selection of PAC as their codec, both codecs went head to head in a quality comparison with PAC being the clear winner. In addition it's no coincidence that XM made this decision just a few weeks after Sirius had chosen PAC V4 as their codec
Hey, mister facts man - how about spewing something to back this up? PAC is superior - but only at much higher bit rates than they (Sirius) will ever use.
And, how could Sirius have "chosen" PAC v4 if it wasn't even rolled out until July of 2002?!

I would truly welcome sjtracey, or anyone else here who wants to intelligently discuss this with REAL FACTS and references to back up what they are saying. Otherwise - it's just emotional opinions.
RadioSam is offline  
 
 
Old 09-04-2005, 01:44 AM   #99
Kurri
Channel Surfer
 
Join Date: Aug 06, 2005
Posts: 92
Kurri is on a distinguished road
Default

i have been very dissapointed with the sound quality as well...the comedy station sounds horrid! i dont have an fm modular, i got through my jvc car stereo and the FM radio sounds louder and clearer then my sirius stations...dissapointing indeed...i doubt i will renew when my year is up...but then at the same time i love the music they play, etc...so i dont know what i will do in a year...hopefully they will make some major steps toward better sound
Kurri is offline  
 
 
Old 09-04-2005, 01:48 AM   #100
Kurri
Channel Surfer
 
Join Date: Aug 06, 2005
Posts: 92
Kurri is on a distinguished road
Default

i have been very dissapointed with the sound quality as well...the comedy station sounds horrid! i dont have an fm modular, i got through my jvc car stereo and the FM radio sounds louder and clearer then my sirius stations...dissapointing indeed...i doubt i will renew when my year is up...but then at the same time i love the music they play, etc...so i dont know what i will do in a year...hopefully they will make some major steps toward better sound
Kurri is offline  
 
 
Old 09-04-2005, 02:14 AM   #101
Renaissance Man
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Jul 27, 2005
Posts: 1,190
Renaissance Man is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd
Hey Delores, I think the juke box is broken again. I keep hearing the same song.

I would love a better codec too. They are not going to replace 1million receivers and homekits, carkits, boomboxes etc. It simply isn't going to happen. Arguing about it is like complaining that the sun comes up in the east and you want it to come up in the south. No amount of beating the dead horse will change the codec.

It is very much like DirecTV upgrading to Mpeg4. It is only happening now because of the HDTV upgrades. Otherwise they would never make the change.
Well said, Dan.

You've stated the painfully obvious, which some people here just can't comprehend.

I've got no problem with people having the opinion that Sirius's sound quality stinks. I'm not arguing whether Sirius's sound quality is good or bad. But hardly a day goes by without somebody posting yet another thread about the SQ, like it's something new.

The subject has been beaten to death, and even the whiners admit it isn't going to get better any time in the near future. So they're whining for nothing.

Sheesh, how many threads do we need to keep rehashing the same old BS.

I think AM/FM radio stinks, but I'm not going to post a thread almost every day saying the same thing over and over and over.

Somebody has a problem with the SQ, fine--be sure to tell Sirius customer service and management how you feel. But whining about it day after day on this forum, will do no more to solve the problem than shouting out your window at home.
Renaissance Man is offline  
 
 
Old 09-04-2005, 02:28 AM   #102
Renaissance Man
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Jul 27, 2005
Posts: 1,190
Renaissance Man is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joker454
Your health care comment amused me though I admit. I'd *never* choose the Canadian health system over the American one. The current health system I have in the US is so far better than what I had in Canada, it's almost scary. The length of time my friends back in Montreal need to wait to get health care is unbelievable. You make other US/Canada generalizations that are mostly wrong or stereotypical but I won't get into that.

Regarding AM/FM, it sucks in both countries. Some cities have stronger reception, some have weaker, either way they are both crap.

On the satellite sound quality issue, that issue is over. The digital age was never about sound quality. It's about quantity, convenience and control. In other words, being able to give customer a higher quantity of music, making listening to them more convenient, and giving the music bigwigs control. That's it. Quality is irrelevant for many reasons, some being that people just don't care, they really can't hear the difference, or they dont have equipment good enough to hear the difference.
AMEN!

Well said.
Renaissance Man is offline  
 
 
Old 09-04-2005, 03:23 PM   #103
rspst14
Channel Surfer
 
Join Date: Aug 29, 2005
Posts: 16
rspst14 is on a distinguished road
Default

As a new subscriber, I think the sound quality is decent...it could be better, but at least for me, it sounds as good as or slightly better than a clean FM signal on most channels. I agree that maybe Sirius should be focusing on improving the sound quality of the current channels rather than constantly trying to add new ones, but I don't really see that happening. I'm far from an expert on this, but here are a few things that might help improve the sound:

1. If you have Sirius in your vehicle, consider a good set of aftermarket speakers. You really don't have to spend a lot of money to get something that's much better than the stock factory speakers. You will definitely hear a difference.

2. If your car can easily accept an aftermarket stereo, I would strongly recommend going that route instead of an FM modulator. I really like the Kenwood EZ700SR, the built-in Sirius tuner made the installation much simpler. I managed to pick up a brand new one on Ebay for $215, way below the typical retail price. The antenna was also included.

3. Assuming you have an aftermarket system that allows you to set the EQ parameters, play around with the settings until you find a setting that works well for you. I notice a dramatic difference between the flat EQ that was pre-set at the factory, and the EQ settings that I came up with after a week of experimenting. I recommend boosting the bass and midrange a moderate amount, and the treble only slightly. Again, your results may vary depending on your setup, the music you listen to, etc, but this is what works well for me.

4. I haven't tried this, and I don't necessarily recommend ripping open your stereo, but if you have an advanced knowledge of electronics it might be something to look into. Many of the high-end systems use Burr-Brown 24 bit digital to analog converters. I've read that the sound of satellite radio is noticeably improved on one of these systems, and that it is possible to replace the standard converters with the Burr-Brown 24 bit DAC. If anyone is brave enough to give it a try, I'd be interested to hear how it worked out. It would also improve the sound quality of the other sources. I imagine you could buy these converters from Mouser or Digikey.

Ryan
rspst14 is offline  
 
 
Old 09-04-2005, 04:20 PM   #104
STEELERSRULE
Loyal Listener
 
Join Date: Oct 22, 2004
Location: NW PENNSYLVANIA
Posts: 104
STEELERSRULE is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joker454
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcpish
That's the reason why we have "public" health care service in this country, we recognize in Canada that...
I was born and raised in Canada, spent the first 25 years of my life there and loved it. I live in the US now and love it here also. I've lived in numerous cities in both countries and in the end, there are *far* less differences between the two countries than people would lead you to believe. Your health care comment amused me though I admit. I'd *never* choose the Canadian health system over the American one. The current health system I have in the US is so far better than what I had in Canada, it's almost scary. The length of time my friends back in Montreal need to wait to get health care is unbelievable. You make other US/Canada generalizations that are mostly wrong or stereotypical but I won't get into that.

Regarding AM/FM, it sucks in both countries. Some cities have stronger reception, some have weaker, either way they are both crap.

On the satellite sound quality issue, that issue is over. The digital age was never about sound quality. It's about quantity, convenience and control. In other words, being able to give customer a higher quantity of music, making listening to them more convenient, and giving the music bigwigs control. That's it. Quality is irrelevant for many reasons, some being that people just don't care, they really can't hear the difference, or they dont have equipment good enough to hear the difference.

I used to be like some other guys here in that i used to post and complain about sound quality, but it eventually hit me that it really will never improve because it doesnt need to. Sirius is far better off offering 100+ bad sounding channels than 50 good sounding channels, and that will never change. So yes, I hate Sirius sound quality but in the end I simply adapted and don't complain about it anymore. I use Sirius only for 80's channels (my presets are 8, 15, 19, 22, 23) because I can tolerate the low quality on those channels. I don't listen to any other channels, ever. My mp3 player in my car is filled with other types of great sounding dance to fill the sound quality void.

So thats it. A satellite radio unit hooked via casette adapter playing highly compress music on $2 stock car speakers is good enough sound quality for the vast majority. No amount of posts or complaints will ever change that.
I second the AMEN!!

VERY WELL SAID!!!!!!
STEELERSRULE is offline  
 
 
Old 09-04-2005, 10:55 PM   #105
TeataCleez
Just Tuned In
 
Join Date: Aug 28, 2005
Posts: 6
TeataCleez is on a distinguished road
Default

Very interesting and educational links RadioSam, thanks.

I've been experenting a little and have found that playing Sirius thru cheapo equipment actually helps mask the irritating digital artifacts for me, whereas playing thru higher end stuff lets the digital anomalies be heard quite well.

Maybe if they turned those low bandwidth talk shows into an AM radio type signal first, ( analog frequency bandwidth limited to 4 khz) then it would be less work for for the CODEC's to reproduce, and they could get rid of the irritating warbly voice thing, and just sound more like a regular AM radio talk show.

I am also finding that the more I listen, the more I am getting used to Sirius, and it's not so irritating as it was at first.

I had XM before; maybe I was just more used to the way it sounded when I switched to Sirius for the upcoming Stern show.
TeataCleez is offline  
 
 
 

Go Back   SIRIUS Backstage Forum > >


Digitalradiocentral.com




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:29 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.39 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
All Content Copyright SIRIUS Backstage. All Rights Reserved. SIRIUS and registered trademarks are the property of SIRIUS Satellite Radio, Inc. The opinions posted on SIRIUS Backstage website and forums are those of the individual posters and/or this website and are not necessarily the opinions or positions of SIRIUS Satellite Radio, Inc.