V5 internet tuner vs DAB/FM Module

Posted by: Mike Woodcock on 20 April 2016

I listen to the radio a lot (still consider myself a TYG rather than a TOG - UK Beeb 2 listeners will understand) - Is there a significant difference between the V5 internet tuner that comes as standard on (say) a 272 vs the added DAB/FM Module for £265ish

I do have dedicated aerials for DAB/FM in my apartment complex

Posted on: 20 April 2016 by Gavin B

What does the difference sound like on your Qute?

Posted on: 20 April 2016 by ChrisSU

I think the FM tuner beats iRadio easily, although the newer BBC HLS streams closed the gap a little. If the UK ever gets DAB+ it may be worth checking out, but regular DAB doesn't cut it.

Posted on: 20 April 2016 by Mike-B

I would say yes, but do I expect others will disagree.   When I heard an FM/DAB module on my own large G14 aerial & 46kW TX 5km away & comparing it to my NAT-05 FM tuner,  there was no contest.   OK it was radio & pleasant enough, but the NAT won in all respects  ......  except DAB of course   

Comparing iRadio from my NDX (vTuner 5) to the NAT-05, with the HD streams & BBC's 339 HLS,  its a much closer contest;  Comparing the BBC's where I can flick from one to the other its quite easy.  On some stations, live or recorded, music or voice  & specific music genre,  iRadio is better,  in some cases FM is better.  FM does have an early roll off to avoid a pilot tone at 19kHz & the NAT does this at 15kHz;  iRadio (& DAB) does not have this so the top end has more content & as such sounds brighter.  Also on my system iRadio is a touch more dynamic & bass lines seem ever-so-slightly stronger.  But bottom line - to me on my system & from my aerial - it is a tie.   

The other upside for FM is that its not reliant on local broadband service issues, & that for me is a good reason to hang on to my NAT.   But would I buy a 272 with a FM/DAB module (if I did not have the NAT)  probably yes.  

Posted on: 20 April 2016 by hungryhalibut

We have the FM module, and it's extremely good. It's a bit more real and natural than iradio, and I will always choose the FM version of Radios 3 and 4, unless we are using multiroom while cooking - simply because the Qb doesn't have FM. 

And as Mike says, FM is not dependent on your internet working, which is very helpful if there is a fault with the service, which seems to happen occasionally. 

For £300, it's a no brainier. 

Posted on: 20 April 2016 by David Hendon

I always listen to R3 using the FM module in my streamers rather than the HLS streams.  It just sounds more analogue, despite Naim's digital assault on the analogue broadcast signal!

best

David

Posted on: 20 April 2016 by al9315

Can the FM module be fitted to an NDX if it does not have one (blanking plug in hole)  - or is it a different model ?

Al

Posted on: 20 April 2016 by hungryhalibut

I don't believe so, but you could check with Naim to be sure. 

Posted on: 20 April 2016 by Mike Woodcock

A quick chat with NAIM, and they have confirmed its £330 to add after DAB/FB purchase , so a premium of £30 and loss of unit for a few weeks.  I think in the short term I will make do with iRadio and put the funds towards the next step in my upgrade which is the 250 DR

Thanks everyone for your input

Posted on: 20 April 2016 by NickSeattle
NDX FM module beats iRadio for me. Unfortunately, NDX cannot be retrofitted -- I had to trade my old NDX for a new NDX-FM. Expensive, but worth it, to me. Rules out the NDS for me, despite its charms. Nick
Posted on: 20 April 2016 by endlessnessism

One little downside of internet radio is that the timing is not exact - the program runs a little behind the equivalent DAB / FM broadcast.  I listen to BBC Radio 4 in the morning but I can't listen to it on internet radio because the hourly pips and the frequent time announcements are inaccurate.

Posted on: 20 April 2016 by Simon-in-Suffolk

indeed and DAB is behind FM, but the delay is pretty constant. Yes with web radio the delay is going to be variable to some extent and lag behind DAB further