XM radio rant

**RedGTiVR6** · 12-17-2004, 07:54 AM

Originally Posted by schapman43

The only way that cutting bandwidth would save them money is if they were adding channels and needed more space. I work as an Engineer for a major satellite TV provider and know a little about the whole thing.

and that is EXACTLY what they are doing. They are adding more and more channels, thus they are cutting the bandwidth to the existing channels. The talk channels are being cut down to nothing because they require a narrower frequency for broadcast. In doing so they are also cutting bandwidth to the other channels as well....

so in a round about way, yes, they are cutting bandwidth to save money (adding more chanels to get more subscribers, etc)

I never said starting satelite radio was cheap, never said anything like that....=]

**mgithens** · 12-21-2004, 06:25 PM

I find the crappiest channels are in the talk stations, I realize that they need less bandwidth, but it really is disappointing... I got satellite because FM doesn't penetrate the mountains, so this was my only choice...

(the reason they are saving on cutting bandwidth is absolutely to add more channels in the same amount of space...)

**VanMan69** · 12-21-2004, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by cbergeron

True, but Sirius will have Howard Stern next year! That alone is worth the price of the conversion from XM.

If you've been trying to decide which satellite radio to choose, this should be a big indicator.

Personally, I'm not a big Stern fan (he can be amusing on occasion), or a satellite radio subscriber, but the point is that he's on Sirius, and not XM. This is a huge marketing advantage, and shows which of the two has the promise/clout to keep going. Stern's no idiot, he wouldn't pick one over the other if he didn't see a reason.

**n8scstm** · 12-21-2004, 06:46 PM

I havnt researched this at all, so this is an ignorant point of view. But in my opinion this is all a bunch of paranoia and frankly B.S. I've had XM since it was first relesed in the trial SanDiego market and havn't noticed any decadence in quality. Sure theyr'e in the red but they planned for that. As long as people are investing in the company there doing fine. Both companies have been selling shares of stock like crazy. Sirius has been the most heavily traded stock for weeks now. I think there doing just fine and the quality is still great.

**RedGTiVR6** · 12-21-2004, 07:38 PM

well, it is an ignorant point of view...lol

because it's a well known fact that thee quality has been dropping over the past few months

=]

hehehe

http://radio.about.com/od/listeningt...ellitequal.htm

http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/archi...hp/t-4434.html

Just from a quick google search on "XM Radio Sound Quality"

=]

**dingofarmer** · 12-21-2004, 08:46 PM

Originally Posted by Red GTi VR6

well, it is an ignorant point of view...lol

because it's a well known fact that thee quality has been dropping over the past few months

=]

hehehe

http://radio.about.com/od/listeningt...ellitequal.htm

http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/archi...hp/t-4434.html

Just from a quick google search on "XM Radio Sound Quality"

=]

I agree, I have had XM for 1.5Yrs and yes, I have noticed a change, and it does seem like a compression/bandwidth thing, kinda chopy like a low bit rate Mp3. I still enjoy XM over FM, but I'd like to hope that they work on the sound quality.

**Bob0_o** · 12-21-2004, 08:53 PM

A friend of mine is a technician at XM, and I can tell that they have not changed the bitrate (aka quality) of the broadcasts since the last channel lineup change several months ago. Even then, it was only the talk channels that were lowered because they were unneccessarily high to begin with. Cutting back on the bitrate does not save XM any money. It only allows them to broadcast more channels. Yes XM has been adding more channels, but they are also eliminating not-so-popular ones so the bandwith use stays the same. It will continue this way until XM gets their new satellites up and running in a year or so.

**kickercivic1** · 12-21-2004, 08:57 PM

Dont know what the hell you guys talking about. I love my Xm. I cant drive without it.Every station sounds great.May its not the XM, its the way you mounted the antenna.

**RedGTiVR6** · 12-21-2004, 10:40 PM

nope - not how the antenna is mounted...not on these vehicles....I can guarantee you that....not on a vehicle that is owned and was installed by someone who has been doing this stuff for about a decade and on the vehicles of many other friends

=]

I do ask this though

to those of you who say you haven't noticed a difference....what kind of system are you listening to it on? just your stock system? or the $200 special you got at Circuit City? or a system that actually has some cajones?

And Bob0_o - as much as I would like to believe you I just can't bring myself to....I can't bring my self to believe that there is this national conspiracy to get people to think that the SQ of XM is lacking compared to what it was in the past.....there are too many people noticing it and saying something about it to just be....not real.....

=]

**dingofarmer** · 12-22-2004, 02:32 AM

I know what I can hear, ANd it has gotten somewhat worse in the last 6 months. Its like somepeople here are shareholder in XM or something. Believe it or not not everyone is located in the same area, and some are using FM mod, IPBUs, alpine crap, whatever, I know with my setup it should sound perfect, but I'm less than impressed. I really didn't notice anything when I was running just off of my deck, Kinda interested in everyones setup. I don't care what some guy with XM said.