Aerials versus Broadband

Posted by: Mick P on 28 May 2003

Chaps

I had the Ron Smith Aerial installed yesterday and naturally I spent most of yesterday evening listening to the wireless, congratulating myself on my own excellent choice of tuner and aerial. It does sound rather good.

I was discussing this today with a colleague and he thinks that I am a total fool for even comptemplating an aerial.

He reckons that I would have been better off using the Broadband that goes into the PC.

Is he right ?

Regards

Mick
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by seagull
He may be, in a few year's time anyway, when (if) the analogue signal is switched off. Radio is an ethereal thing, here now gone, er now.

I would think that a Naim tuner with a Ron Smith Aerial is as good as it gets, but then you know that, you spent last night listening to it.
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by garyi
Mick, I havn't had the pleasure of a nat with big arial.

However the radio through NTL (You can get it BTW)sounds resonably good and better than my radio (Although its fair to say I seem to be in a poor reception area)

Radio on broadband through the computer streams well, but sounds like cak, 128k in general, which is not approaching the quality you are becoming accustomed to.
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Mick P
Gary

I have two FM connections in my house. The main system is powered by an aerial and the second one by SKY Satellite.

The aerial does sound better and thats comparing with my old bog standard 4 pole one.

The Galaxie sounds great and I find it difficult to believe that a broadband connection could better it.

Regards

Mick
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by garyi
Mick, when I refer to the NTL thing I mean that you can pick up all the BBC radio channels plus a load more on your TV.

What I do is plumb the TV through the naim kit and listen to radio that way. Radio two ect reside at around 100 on your NTL box, and the quality is OK, but I can't say as to how it would sound against your nat.

I have given up on my AMC tuner now, as obviously there isn't the tuning issues with the NTL.
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by i am simon 2
I am not fortunate enough to have such a fine tuner as the Nat, in fact I do not have one at all, but from those I have listend too, they are quite impressive.

One thing that occurs to me is the source. Whilst the 01 might be what one has in there house, what CD player or TT does the radio station have, as this must be the link in the chain that is all important.

I can only imagine that the big radio stations have giant automated cd players that may or may not sound good.

What about the stations that count to audiophile radio listners like Mick. Does Jazz FM have a CDSii, Classic FM a CD12 perhaps, or am I barking up the wrong tree.

Simon
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by Dev B
quote:
Originally posted by i am simon 2:
One thing that occurs to me is the source. Whilst the 01 might be what one has in there house, what CD player or TT does the radio station have, as this must be the link in the chain that is all important.


I have written about this before somewhere here, but FM must do a bit of noise shaping because uncompressed broadcasts sound musically brilliant. Compression whether it be on FM or a CD that comes out of a factory is evil.
Posted on: 31 May 2003 by chfs911
Thought I was seeing things. I also spent all last night in the attic installing my Galaxie 17.

One hell of a job fitting it in! The Nat02 is now singing. So Mick it is not just you who is mad. You have company! What the heck am I doing here, off to listen to the radio:-)