XM radio rant

RedGTiVR6 · 12-16-2004, 04:04 PM

Is anyone else absolutely disgusted with the quality of XM radio? It seems like they just keep cutting back bandwidth left and right! It sounds worse and worse every time I tune in. Honnestly, I'm beginning to think that regular FM is starting to sound better.

And no, it's not the system that I am listening to it on either, believe me.

dingofarmer · 12-16-2004, 04:11 PM

Yeah, I hear you. I had a pioneer XM hidaway unit, using FM Mod, then I bought the IPBus cable--->HU hopeing the sound would be better, it was somewhat, but then I could hear distorition and and that digital clipping sound you hear with Mp3's sometimes, It is better than FM, just slightly,I love it, I just hope that the sound quality gets better, not worse. We didn't got from CD's to 8 tracks, why should the sound get worse?

RedGTiVR6 · 12-16-2004, 04:14 PM

Both satelite radio companies are in the red (I know XM predicted like a 10 year turn around time to get to the black). They are trying to find ways to cut costs, so they cut bandwidth....but they will be cutting customers here real soon if they don't fix it back.

*grrrrrrrrrr*

dingofarmer · 12-16-2004, 04:20 PM

Yeah, did you hear about that 500.00 for sirus for life? You can now stream XM at home without buying the extra stuff, its like 6/mo extra. It sounds better on my laptop than in my car. I really like the idea of the paid service, no censorship/ FCC crap, cause its a pay service, I like the curseing in my gheto rap. I just hope your wrong, cause ohterwise its back to MP3 and FM channels with a million commercials and same top 20 ****.

Dudes99 · 12-16-2004, 04:39 PM

Could this be on eof the satellites screwing up? I've had no problems with my XM over here on the East Coast. I listen from 2-3 hours a day with no problems?

RedGTiVR6 · 12-16-2004, 05:10 PM

no - you have the problems with sound quality I promise, you probably just don't realize it.

I agree 100%, I would MUCH rather pay $15 a month even to not have to listen to commercials and not have to worry about the pansy *** FCC censoring EVERYTHING EVER SAID UNDER THE SUN!!!

heh

I hate censorship.....it's life people, get over it.....people say some pretty raunchy things out there in the real world...just learn to ignore it!

=]

stevewm · 12-17-2004, 12:07 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by Red GTi VR6

Both satelite radio companies are in the red (I know XM predicted like a 10 year turn around time to get to the black). They are trying to find ways to cut costs, so they cut bandwidth....but they will be cutting customers here real soon if they don't fix it back.

*grrrrrrrrrr*

Explain to me exactlly how does cutting bandiwdth cut costs?

Both providers where liscenced 12.5Mhz. (this would have been higher, 20mhz each IIRC, but some heavy lobbying by satellite radio opponets got the FCC to reduce it to 12.5mhz. the lobbyists tried to get it reduced futher than that.)

Using less of this DOES NOT reduce costs.

Designing, purchasing, launching, and maintaining 2 Geo-Sync satellites is NOT a cheap operation. But anyways, unless XM does something really, really stupid expect them to be around for a long time. They are in relatively good financial shape. (looking forward anyways) Sirius on the otherhand.....

dingofarmer: Sirius' "for-life" plan is only for the life of the receiver. If the receiver breaks outside warranty you are COMPLETELY SCREWED. The subscription IS NOT transferable to another receiver! It CANNOT be transfered to a new receiver should you buy one! And it does not apply to addtional receivers on the same account!

The only time it can be transfered is if the receiver is replaced or repaired under warranty. And I believe there are limits to how many times that can even be done. It is NOT a good deal in the long run. That $500 would buy you nearly 4 years of service at their regular $12/month price, with no worry about not being able to use another receiver!

With this plan you are effectively pre-paying for 3.5 years of non-transferable service thats locked into a single receiver. XM's pre-pay plans can at least be transfered to another receiver anytime you want.

cbergeron · 12-17-2004, 12:48 AM

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

I like XM, but when Howard is available on Sirius, I'm going to have a Sirious dilemma on my hands.

I live in the bible belt, and around here "Howard Stern" is a sin. I can't wait until I can tune into his broadcasts. I have a feeling he'll be much more enjoyable (as if it was possible) when he's on an unregulated medium (such as Sat. Radio).

Seriously, I can't wait until Howard is on - he's friggin helarious!

schapman43 · 12-17-2004, 01:54 AM

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.

dingofarmer · 12-17-2004, 03:40 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by stevewm

Explain to me exactlly how does cutting bandiwdth cut costs?

Both providers where liscenced 12.5Mhz. (this would have been higher, 20mhz each IIRC, but some heavy lobbying by satellite radio opponets got the FCC to reduce it to 12.5mhz. the lobbyists tried to get it reduced futher than that.)

Using less of this DOES NOT reduce costs.

Designing, purchasing, launching, and maintaining 2 Geo-Sync satellites is NOT a cheap operation. But anyways, unless XM does something really, really stupid expect them to be around for a long time. They are in relatively good financial shape. (looking forward anyways) Sirius on the otherhand.....

dingofarmer: Sirius' "for-life" plan is only for the life of the receiver. If the receiver breaks outside warranty you are COMPLETELY SCREWED. The subscription IS NOT transferable to another receiver! It CANNOT be transfered to a new receiver should you buy one! And it does not apply to addtional receivers on the same account!

The only time it can be transfered is if the receiver is replaced or repaired under warranty. And I believe there are limits to how many times that can even be done. It is NOT a good deal in the long run. That $500 would buy you nearly 4 years of service at their regular $12/month price, with no worry about not being able to use another receiver!

With this plan you are effectively pre-paying for 3.5 years of non-transferable service thats locked into a single receiver. XM's pre-pay plans can at least be transfered to another receiver anytime you want.

Yeah I hear you thanks for the info... I'm pretty happy with the format of XM I love ch 80, nice mix's. Having Howard stern on sirus, and alowing him to say whatever he wants is ****ing off alot of people, the FCC said that since it was a paid service, he say whatever he wanted. One of the last free places he can say whats on his mind whithout getting sued. I have a friend who has sirus and he loves it, I guess its just a matter of personal taste.

RedGTiVR6 · 12-17-2004, 07:54 AM

Quote: 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

Quote: 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"

=]

User Name		Remember Me?
Password