Digital radio - monopolistic & failed technology
Steve Satan
tony at cultureshop.org.uk
Thu Sep 23 22:35:56 BST 2010
Don't throw away yr FM radios folks cos DAB is looking likely to fail
Only Denmark has even partly taken up this technology
And the transmitter owners are ramping up the
charges to use it excluding all but the richest
broadcasters such as the BBC and Global Radio
MOST IMPORTANTLY THIS TECHNOLOGY IS ANTI-ENVIRONMENT
DAB provides far lower audio quality than FM --
DAB has notoriously bad reception, FM "degrades
gracefully" when the signal isn't strong, whereas
DAB produces incredibly annoying "bubbling mud" sounds. http://www.savefm.org/
also
http://grantgoddardradioblog.blogspot.com/
and
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/
Why Save FM?
People simply don't want FM to be switched off --
whenever it's mentioned there's a huge amount of opposition to the idea
People don't want to replace so much audio
equipment that work perfectly well -- the public
shouldn't be forced to spend billions of pounds
replacing the 120 - 150 million devices currently
in-use that can receive FM perfectly well,
especially when this is only happening to bail
out the commercial radio broadcasters, and so
that the BBC can avoid losing listeners to
Internet radio. The public doesn't want this to
happen, and DAB actually provides lower quality
than FM, so the vast majority of people would
actually receive a worse service on DAB than on FM.
Ofcom's market research has shown that over 90%
of people are "very satisfied" with what they're
receiving on FM, so they shouldn't even be considering switching off FM
DAB is unpopular with consumers, and it would
have failed completely in the next few years
without Government assistance -- annual sales are
50% below the industry's targets and year-on-year
sales growth plummeted and have never recovered
-- proof that the public doesn't want it, so why
is such an incredibly unpopular system being
forced upon us? There was a case for switching
off analogue TV, because the vast majority of
people wanted more choice than just five analogue
TV channels, but people typically receive far
more than five FM radio stations -- and as
Ofcom's research showed, people are happy with the amount of choice on FM.
DAB provides far lower audio quality than FM --
why should we have to accept such blatant Luddism?
DAB is an outdated and inefficient system that
was designed in the 1980s -- why should we accept
this diabolical replacement in the first place
when far superior systems such as DAB+ and in
particular Internet radio exist? The speed of
mobile broadband systems are about to be
transformed in a similar fashion to the change
from dial-up to broadband over the next few
years. Why pick the worst possible time
imaginable to push ahead with the Diabolical Audio Broadcasting system?
FM radios are far greener than DAB radios could
ever be -- DAB radios consume several times as
much energy as FM radios do, and DAB will never
approach the energy efficiency of FM radios.
Internet radio provides far higher audio quality
than DAB -- virtually everyone from outside the
radio industry thinks it's a crazy idea to use DAB
DAB has notoriously bad reception quality -- and
FM "degrades gracefully" when the signal isn't
strong, whereas DAB produces incredibly annoying "bubbling mud" type sounds
The public has never been asked whether it wants
FM to be switched off, and it is simply being
forced upon us by the Government which is once
again showing that it bends over backwards to
help big business but consumers have to suffer the consequences.
The BBC has never consulted with the public about
whether it wants DAB to replace FM, or whether
the public wants the audio quality on DAB to be
worse than on FM. When the BBC held a public
consultation for its five new digital-only radio
stations it deliberately omitted to mention that
the launch of these new stations would result in
the audio quality of the existing stations being
drastically reduced. The public should be
consulted on whether they consider it to be
acceptable that DAB replaces FM even though DAB provides lower audio quality.
FM isn't even being switched off anyway, because
the Digital Britain report says that the FM band
would carry "ultra-local" stations after the
bigger FM stations have been switched off, so
people should be allowed to continue listening to
at least the BBC's stations via FM if they want
to without being forced to spend several hundred
up to potentially thousands of pounds replacing
existing audio equipment that works perfectly well
The plan to speed up switching off FM stations is
simply being done to bail out the commercial
radio broadcasters who don't want to pay to
transmit on both analogue and digital because it
costs them too much money -- pass me the tissues,
I'm going to cry. There needs to be a far better
reason to make 120 - 150 million radios obsolete
than that lame excuse of a reason!
Transmitting FM only costs £10 million per annum
-- just 17 pence per person per year, and just
0.27% of the £3,600 million the BBC receives each
year -- The Digital Britain report said that FM
only needed £200m to be spent on it to keep it
going for the next 20 years. FM is superb value-for-money.
The BBC likes DAB because it's the platform on
which its stations face the least amount of
competition. The BBC should not take decisions
that are against the interests of licence fee
payers just so that the BBC can avoid losing radio listeners!
More information about the Diggers350
mailing list