The Traders' Den  

  The Traders' Den > Where we go to learn ..... > Technobabble

Technobabble Post your general Need for Help questions here.
Lossy or Lossless?

Thread Tools
Old 2006-01-03, 10:16 PM
0.00 KB/0.00 KB/---
FM vs. Digital Radio

I have received word that recordings from digital radio are technically superior to recordings from regular FM radio. The reasoning behind this is that "FM compression negatively alters sound quality far more than the streamed mp3 lineage." What is the validity to this statement? I know of course that both broadcasts are compressed, but what is the lesser of the two evils? And the SA of two samples from both sources point to FM as being the superior recording. Digital radio broadcasts are broadcast at 192 kbps, but what is the approximate bitrate of an FM recording? I've read anything from 96kbps ( ) to 256 kbps. Thanks.
Edit/Delete Message Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
Old 2006-01-04, 02:13 PM
ssamadhi97's Avatar
ssamadhi97 ssamadhi97 is offline
87.81 GB/69.41 GB/0.79
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Old Europe
Re: FM vs. Digital Radio

Originally Posted by alchemy71085
And the SA of two samples from both sources point to FM as being the superior recording.
Thing is that you usually listen to your recordings, rather than watching their SA.

That aside, short answer: Depends.

Long answer: Unfortunately this is not entirely a "black & white" issue. The final quality of each recording depends on a lot of factors. For example the quality of the FM broadcast depends on the quality of the reception, on the source of the broadcasted audio (remember that it might just be a decoded version of the digital broadcast stream), the gear used for recording on your end, etc. On the other hand the quality of the digital (mp2) stream depends heavily on the bitrate (even though 192kbps seems to be the most common bitrate at the moment, a digital radio broadcast can actually have 128-384kbps) and the quality of the mp2 encoder.

Generally digital broadcasts do have an edge though, because given enough bitrate (preferably 256-384kbps) it's relatively safe to assume that they'll sound better than FM. No reception / noise floor issues etc.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
Old 2006-01-04, 04:15 PM
Five's Avatar
Five Five is offline
TTD Staff
189.30 GB/594.78 GB/3.14
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Canada
Re: FM vs. Digital Radio

well, analog FM is dynamically squashed quite a bit and everything above 15kHz is pretty much gone. so its sorta like a little below 128kBps cbr mp3 in terms of frequency cutoff. but lame also digs in an removes stuff below the cutoff that the encoder figures you won't notice is missing. but the dynamics aren't crushed. so there's sort of a tradeoff there. would be great to hear samples of the same broadcast in analog & digital and have a little listen. When I think of digital radio I think of lossy webcasts and rm and such and that's probably not fair.
Checksums Demystified | ask for help in Technobabble | ttd recommended free software/freeware webring
shntool tlh eac foobar2000 spek audacity cdwave vlc

Originally posted by oxymoron
Here you are in a place of permanent madness, be careful!
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes

The Traders' Den > Where we go to learn ..... > Technobabble

Similar Threads
Thread Forum Replies Last Post
Lossy Digital-sourced radio sample? - GRC Lossy or Lossless? 5 2007-07-20 02:03 PM

Thread Tools

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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:01 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - , - All Rights Reserved - Hosted at QuickPacket
no new posts