Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

Why aren't things like the Last Night of The Proms released on Blu-ray too?

Also, are they going to ever replace the opera singers on it with normal singers instead please?

Very interesting - thank you!
One thing I'm still wondering - what is the format of the audio in the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú HD version on iPlayer? Is this the 5 channel version?
Which would be the highest quality on iPlayer, the audio stream of Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú HD, or the 192k AAC stream from the Radio 3 broadcast?

I expected a rather different article from the title, but this was very interesting. As far as radio broadcasts go, I pretty much knew it already, though the DAB bandwidths were interesting regarding R5LE. I'd be interested to know just how much dynamic range compression is applied to FM broadcasts. It can't be much; unfortunately my reception was pretty poor this summer, and quiet passages were inaudible thanks to interference! I once read that Radio 3 has the greatest dynamic range of any FM station in the UK.

What I was expecting from the title: details of what happens to the recorded footage when the Proms season is over. Think of all those unique concerts — the premieres, special commissions, one-off performances — that have occurred over the recorded history of the Proms. How much of this has been kept? I look forward to the day when any Proms performance from the last 50-70 years could be called up on iPlayer.

Mark/Alan,

Please would you be kind enough to explain why you use AAC inside flash on iPlayer and WMA for live radio internet streams?

I've noticed that the Five Live WMA stream is usually significantly behind every other way of listening including iPlayer, Sky, DAB and AM. It's not just a little bit either (30-60 seconds).

Are you planning to make the AAC streams directly accessible?

Many thanks

K

LOL

All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

You say : "On the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú iPlayer's listen-again services, Radio 3 is available at 192kbps AAC".
On the iPlayer messageboards a couple of weeks ago I asked why the pop-up on R3 listen-again streams shows 128kbps - as eg.:
"Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Media Player v.2.20.14200.14320
b00n6zbx | 128kbps | aac | LI"
Though you responded briefly, asking for more details, you haven't reported back.. so I'd still be interested to know whether the streams are actually being delivered at 128 or (as another poster suggested) at 192 but simply showing 128 in error.

Regards

Walter

The 192kbps stereo AAC-LC may not be perfect, but it's definitely good enough for me most of the time.

Very good - a very informative article - thank you. But I was surprised to read that (by inference) R3 DAB and iPlayer feeds have no DRC applied..? - according to other sources they do:

Also surprising is that R3 Listen Again "is available at 192kbps AAC". In my experience it is invariably at 128kbps (though Listen Now is indeed at 192kbps)

I have been struggling with the problem of how best to record Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Proms via R3 (strictly for my own use). I am very conscious of quality. Having experimented last year with DAB and iPlayer, I decided this year to settle on FM. The results have been very much better, with greater ambience and clarity.

Then I heard about the new XHQ streaming service. I decided to compare this with FM. I listened to FM using a dedicated FM Hi-Fi tuner with 8-element vertically polarized yagi directed on the Marlborough Tx, 4.7 miles line-of-sight - with noise-free reception. I listened to XHQ using a Dell XPS-700 with integrated sound card. In both cases I listened with identical Sennheiser HD550 headphones (I have two such headphones).

I listened to two Proms performances, making rapid changes between the two sources up to one hundred times in total. I listened to the Four Last Songs from Prom 66 and the Pines of Rome from Prom 69.

I can say that XHQ was very good indeed - superlative in fact. I could not find any fault. FM was very close - almost identical in ambience and clarity but I noticed some difference in the loudest passages. For example in the final part of Pines of Rome, the XHQ feed had greater volume with apparently more 'headroom' and with greater clarity.

The difference was (I believe) due to the DRC applied to the FM signal. But the difference was quite minor and most people would not notice at all without such a direct comparison. Apart from the effect of DRC I could not notice any real difference - both delivered a "being there" experience with very good clarity, separation, and ambience.

I was hoping that the XHQ feed may yield less "audience percussion" - the constant gutteral honking, hawking, and hacking noises that seem, very sadly, to be a mandatory accompaniment to some of the most sublime moments in musical creation. My faint hope was raised due to the purportedly lower (or non-existent??? - someone please answer) DRC on XHQ feed. Alas no - I heard it all too plainly - indeed there were also some astonishing bangings and crashings going on, from somewhere in the audience, while I was listening to the XHQ feed.

Conclusion: I would love to be able to record the XHQ feed from R3. As it happens I can (though only while the Proms are on) - by virtue of having an old IBM X31 that will record off the Internet (newer computers seem to have censored this capability). Once the Proms are over it is back to 192kbps, or 128kbps for Listen Again with the somewhat 'recorded in the toilet' sound.

The problem is there are too many 'ifs andd buts' to the XHQ feed at the moment, at least if you can't be around at the time and instead want to record the sound.

So in practice, if like me you can't be around at time the Proms performances are actually happening and want to record them instead, _and_ you don't particularly fancy the 'in the toilet' sound then there is only one option: FM

To my ears FM delivers quality that is mostly indistinguishable from the XHQ sound, and most importantly the quality is available ALL of the time, not just when the Proms are on. And... you can record using the standard Line In socket without being dependent on an increasingly rare computer that will record off the Internet.

pgp566 asks about recording the XHQ stream. It is very easy to make a perfect recording on any PC, irrespective of the quality of the soundcard. Use Total Recorder, which is very inexpensive ($20 or so). This will record the wave file generated by Flash *before* it reaches the soundcard, so it is not affected in any way by the quality of the soundcard or other audio circuitry in the computer. From that, you can make whatever sort of recording you like. It will translate into CD without any further processing or loss.

Cantobell's comment was very helpful. I have installed Total Recorder and it delivers the best quality I have so far achieved even on a computer with a clobbered sound card (but good otherwise). This was at 192kbps - I wish I could try it with XHQ. I now realise my mistake with FM - the DRC is clearly visible in the Cool Edit 2000 waveform, compared to the streaming waveform recorded via Total Recorder. And I can now hear the DRC as well. But is it just me or is there more DRC on FM than there used to be? Is this just to do with FM channel spacing or is there another purpose? Thanks, and please keep up the very informative posts!