Only one station broadcasts in 192k. The rest are mostly all at around 80-128kbps (with the odd exception) and often not even in stereo. The availability of bandwidth is linked to the number of stations so the more stations the worse the quality because there is only so much bandwidth.

Compression is a different thing. Basically, to sound better on car radios etc, they make the highs lower and the lows higher. This is good for competing with engine noise and poor hifis but it isn't hifi.

Christopher - Some digital stations don't even broadcast in stereo? Most convetional fm stations broadcast in stereo though so that's pretty shocking.

Is expense the only factor that stops bandwidth from being expanded? If so presumably the bandwidth will eventually be, well, widened when more money becomes available.

Euler
Christopher has answered your questions in your first post.

I hope that your optimism is justified about more bandwidth being made available resulting in better quality. However, being a pessimist, I think it more likely that they will use it to give a greater choice of stations of dubious quality both technically and content wise.

Ha ha, "being a pessimist" made me laugh. I've battled most of my life against pessimisim and like to try to at least give the impression of optimism, looks like I've fooled you so I must be doing something right!

It pretty much stands to reason that as the volume of stations go up the amount of rubbish stations will increase, however there is the hope that there will be the occasional diamond in the rough (see the optimism there!). For me though listening to radio has become less and less appealing despite the improvements in sound quality. It's the constant bombarding of adverts, inane chatter and same 20 song playlist on rotation that puts me off. In this age of the personal playlist (iPod etc) radio is becoming far less of a necessary - I get the songs I want to hear with no adverts and no 'amusing banter'. Suits me.

I tend to agree with the sentiment, thats why I have lots of CDs, LPs and DVDs. iPod no good to me because I have never enjoyed listening to music on headphones.

Euler,

Yes you're right. Stereo should be a minimum. A lot of people are listening in mono though or in their car and it's difficult for those people to hear. Unfortunately, they are influencing the audio market.

If you have a DAB radio, you can usually set the display to show you the bitrate and whether what you're getting is in stereo.

Speaking of IPOD, I am enjoying the podcasts on Itunes. Some programmes are available in better quality versions than on DAB. If you don't have an ipod, you can listen on your computer or convert to MP3/wave/CD.

Yeah I'm yet to eperiment with pod casts but I think I'll have to get around to it very soon. How exactly do you go about downloading one?

I would normally have thought that podcasting would allow users to get great content and easily skip all the rubbish out there on commercial radio so imagine my disgust when I read this headline on the BBC website:

"BBC Radio 1's breakfast show, hosted by DJ Chris Moyles, has become one of the UK's most popular podcasts - 10 hours after making its debut in the format. "

Unbelivable.

In the Itunes shop. They show as 'Free' and you can just download. Really easy. Worth a try.

I don't like downloading from Itunes for music as 128 kbps is too low but podcasting and talking book distribution in that medium are a good thing.

I'm in favour of the BBC making material like that available online but would rather that they did it on their own site. When you listen on bbc.co.uk you don't get very good quality.

Christopher,
I downloaded From Our Own Correspndent from the BBC's site. In iTunes (4.9 for Macintosh) go to the Advanced Menu >Subscribe to Podcast, then enter the URL from the Beeb's site. This worked, although it was a slow download when I did it.
I have not tried any of the podcast items on iTMS, probably a case of trying to sort the wheat from the chaff.
I agree about music from the iTMS, the quality is appalling, very low-fi !!

I agree music from ITMS isn't very good at all. The only reason I've even downloaded from there is because I 'won' 4 free downloads when I bought a case for my iPod at the Apple store on Regent Street.

In my opinion downloading music isn't worthwhile at all I think it's far better just to buy a CD and rip it yourself. That way you have a physical copy which is of higher quality to listen to at home and you can choose the bitrate to rip at meaning you can have a better quality file than a download from ITMS. There isn't really much difference in price either.

The only thing that might make it worthwhile is if ITMS were to switch to the Apple Lossless Codec, resulting in the best possible quality and if they were to throw in the video's of the songs or documentary or similar, basically something to make it more worthwhile than buying a physical copy. However, because they sell more downloads every day I doubt they'd bother as it wouldn't make financial sense.

Even FLAC isn't as good as the original CD. Conversion to FLAC does bad things to the waveform.

I agree, with extras I might consider it. Easier from CDWOW though and no DRM so you don't lose rights to your collection when your hard drive collapses.

I didn't realise that about FLAC, do you have a link to somewhere that I can find out more about it's effect on waveforms? Also is this the case with all lossless codecs or does it only apply to FLAC?

It applies to all lossless codecs so far (eg. Windows Media). No links I'm afraid, I read it in an article in Hifi News months ago.

I'd still rather have that than 128kbps.

When you say it [FLAC] does bad things to the wave form could you expand a little bit? And how noticeable is this in practice rather than theory?

I'd definitely move to DAB!

I got my DAB portable radio in December (I think it was) and haven't stopped using it since. I do wish I had enough money to purchase a proper DAB radio too: I love listening to the radio and the fuzziness of FM and MW REALLY annoys me. I hear crystal clear sound when out and about but fuzzy noise at home! I'd definitely choose to move.

Robbie,

I'm afraid the article isn't online so can't give you the link. If you'd seen them you'd be surprised.

Went for the Denon in the end and very happy with it. If I need DAB, I feed it through Sky for now. Thanks for everyones help

I hope someone can help me on this. First time user.
I have a Denon DRA-275RD Receiver as part of my system and would like to add a Matsui DAB radio connector.
It says that the Matsui is easily connected using an Aux connection.
My receiver doesn't have an aux socket, but does have a line in Video socket that I don't use.
Can I use this.
Any help would be appreciated
Thanks

You should be OK. I think your Denon is just a normal stereo receiver (as opposed to an home cinema receiver). It's a relatively rare beast here - think it was more popular in Germany/Europe.

Pretty much all of the inputs will be line level ones (unless there are phono sockets) so you can use any of those.