Maker Pro
Maker Pro

new DAB pocket radio story

J

john d hamilton

Jan 1, 1970
0
A week ago I bought a Phillips pocket DAB radio DA1103/05, £39 from a Comet
store in London. It seemed quite good to me, and is small and neat, but
everytime I did a 'local' scan of the stations; it *wiped off* all the
stations that I had previously *preset*. I quite often need to do a scan
since the reception quality is very different between the front and the rear
of my house.

I took it back to Comet, the girl there became very 'fish' faced, but gave
me another one. I said i would like to test it and she said you cannot pick
up any stations in this store. So I went to the next door shop where I
could sit down, and found that this replacement set had exactly the same
problem.

I took it back and she then tried to set up the presets herself, at the
counter in the store where we were before. ( Making a lie of what she said
about not having reception in the store). But she didn't know how to do it
and declined my offer of showing her how to. Any way even more fish faced,
she then gave me a refund for the £39.

I later rang Phillips technical help and they said they had not encountered
this particular problem with this radio and would ring me back. They
didn't, so I rang them again, but I got the distinct impression that they
really were not that interested in any of this, and got no further ahead.

Thinking I would buy another one, I rang the nearest John Lewis Store; but
it looks like although they do sell Phillips radios they do not sell this
'particular' pocket model. The model is DA1103/5 and the software version on
it is: V.1.3.2. I think it might be a very 'recent' version since it
offers 30 presets as opposed to the generally advertised 20 presets
available.

Since John Lewis said they could not even 'order' me one of these radios,
i'm wondering if they have been having trouble with them?

So my quandry now is whether to try to locate another one, or switch to
another pocket DAB radio? Is there another pocket radio that people would
recommend; or should I best pursue another one of these Phillips? Thanks
for any advice.
 
M

Mark Carver

Jan 1, 1970
0
john said:
A week ago I bought a Phillips pocket DAB radio DA1103/05, £39 from a Comet
store in London. It seemed quite good to me, and is small and neat, but
everytime I did a 'local' scan of the stations; it *wiped off* all the
stations that I had previously *preset*. I quite often need to do a scan
since the reception quality is very different between the front and the rear
of my house.

Rescaning in the same locality is pointless. Take it to a local point of good
reception, and scan there. For instance all BBC national radio stations
operate on exactly the same frequency in the UK in what's called an SFN, so
rescanning will bring back exactly the same transmission if receivable.

The only time you need to rescan a DAB receiver in the UK, is to receive new
local stations when you enter a new area, or to receive a newly launched station.
 
W

Whiskers

Jan 1, 1970
0
["Followup-To:" header set to 24hoursupport.helpdesk.]
A week ago I bought a Phillips pocket DAB radio DA1103/05, £39 from a Comet
store in London. It seemed quite good to me, and is small and neat, but
everytime I did a 'local' scan of the stations; it *wiped off* all the
stations that I had previously *preset*. I quite often need to do a scan
since the reception quality is very different between the front and the rear
of my house.

[...]

Losing pre-sets on scanning may be a 'feature' of that particular model -
which seems remarkably cheap for the features claimed.

It wouldn't have occurred to me to re-scan in an attempt to overcome poor
reception; just go to a spot where the reception is as good as you can get
in your area (a local park, perhaps?) and scan - thereafter, if you can't
receive a particular station in a particular spot re-scanning isn't going
to help. I've never found it necessary to re-scan even when going to a
different part of the country, as far as national stations are concerned.

Pocket receivers often have rather poor aerials and don't work well
indoors or where the signal is weak - which DAB is in some places.

Some DAB receivers offer two sorts of scan: one to re-create the entire
station list, the other merely to add any new stations (and possibly
remove any no longer found). The latter sort of scan shouldn't upset your
pre-sets, but the former might well do so - although I agree that it would
be better not to if the pre-set stations are found by the new scan.

My only experience of pocket DAB receivers is a Sony XDR-M1 I've had for a
few years, which works well. I've also had good experience with Roberts
portables, although I haven't tried their pocket model.
 
J

john d hamilton

Jan 1, 1970
0
William Sommerwerck said:
I think I know what's going on here.

Barring the (real) possibility that the set is incorrectly designed, or
that
the instructions are incorrect (also highly likely), you were _not_
scanning
the stations. Rather, you were _reprogramming_ the unit.

There is no inherent law of nature that requires the scanned stations to
overwrite the manually programmed settings. For example, when I press SEEK
or SCAN on my car radio, it has no effect on the memory presets.

So...

Either the set has only an "auto program" function (which you are
mistaking
for a scan), or you are selecting the "auto program" function (rather than
a
simple scan).

Well Done again William....actually i pressed the option, wait for
it...........*Local Scan*.
 
W

Whiskers

Jan 1, 1970
0
john d hamilton said:
[...]

PS: "Local" Scan? How is it different from a "Full" scan? Do they mean
scanning all the blocks? What makes any particular block "local"? Inquiring
minds want to know!

Different transmitters can, and do, carry different 'local' stations as
well as providing the same 'national' stations as each other. Like VHF/FM
analogue stations, each transmitter has a very limited range - a few tens
of miles at most, usually - so DAB stations can be very 'local', even if
the transmitter shares the same radio frequency as other more powerful
neighbours. DAB is very different from analogue.
<http://www.getdabdigitalradio.com/WhatisDAB/> might help.
 
B

Brian Gaff

Jan 1, 1970
0
I've noticed that say, if you change areas you can lose presets on many dab
radios. Its a difficult one, as they are not really lying about it, they are
just not saying the software has a drawback if you rescan you have to re
store the presets.

I was thinking when you first said it was a pocket model that there have
been poor reception problems with dab. Most people are familiar with the
boiling mud effect you can get if signal is low, but some sets do rescan if
they get very low signals that this can confuse the heck out of users.

Dab is a bit of a flop for quality and coverage in my view.

Brian
 
D

drewdawg

Jan 1, 1970
0
john d hamilton said:
A week ago I bought a Phillips pocket DAB radio DA1103/05, £39 from a Comet
store in London. It seemed quite good to me, and is small and neat, but
everytime I did a 'local' scan of the stations; it *wiped off* all the
stations that I had previously *preset*. I quite often need to do a scan
since the reception quality is very different between the front and the rear
of my house.
I'm not sure if the DA1103/05 has this feature but my Zenith DTT901
(American HDTV receiver) has both an "Auto Tune" and an "EZ add" scan
function.

Auto Tune does what you described in wiping the presets clean and setting
all channels receivable in that scan.

EZ add leaves the presets as they are and adds to them channels received in
that scan.

For my unit I can scan channels with my aerial facing west (Baltimore) and
add channels while its facing north (Philadelphia).

Not all receivers do this (my Sylvania doesn't) so there may be a DAB out
there with this handy feature.

Good luck. ;-)
 
I

ian field

Jan 1, 1970
0
Brian Gaff said:
I've noticed that say, if you change areas you can lose presets on many
dab radios. Its a difficult one, as they are not really lying about it,
they are just not saying the software has a drawback if you rescan you
have to re store the presets.

I was thinking when you first said it was a pocket model that there have
been poor reception problems with dab. Most people are familiar with the
boiling mud effect you can get if signal is low, but some sets do rescan
if they get very low signals that this can confuse the heck out of users.

Dab is a bit of a flop for quality and coverage in my view.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff - [email protected]
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!

I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB because
reception is so unreliable.
 
A

Andy Cuffe

Jan 1, 1970
0
I'm stumped. Wish I could see the thing. Unless you're doing something
Really Weird, it looks as if there's some Really Bad Code in the system
controller. I would go to the Philips site and let them know you're mad as
hell, and you're not going to this any more!

PS: "Local" Scan? How is it different from a "Full" scan? Do they mean
scanning all the blocks? What makes any particular block "local"? Inquiring
minds want to know!

Bad designs like this seem to be normal these days. If it works at
all, they consider it finished and move on to the next product. I
doubt Philips will care since they probably had nothing to do with the
actual design of the radio.
Andy Cuffe

[email protected]
 
K

Ken

Jan 1, 1970
0
I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have
scrapped DAB because reception is so unreliable.

Not true. Old DAB is too inefficient.
I think DAB+ will be the future here.
 
W

Whiskers

Jan 1, 1970
0
I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't
compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make
it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for
those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same
stations on FreeView or Satellite.

As I understand it, transmitters can carry both DAB and DAB+, and some
receivers can cope with both. But there is now a significant number of
receivers which can only manage 'original' DAB, and broadcasters are
likely to be reluctant to broadcast their content using both standards at
once, or to broadcast only in DAB+ while few people can listen to it.
Listers would be pretty peeved if required to scrap all the new DAB
receivers we've bought by the million over the last five years or so.

While 'audiophiles' might be prepared to buy new equipment to get 'better'
sound reproduction, most people just want something 'good enough' - which
DAB manifestly is. I'm listening to Radio 4 as I type: "Varied Speech" at
"128kbps Stereo" which sounds fine to me (on a Roberts MP23). Radio 3
probably justifies the 192kbps Stereo it gets, but most stations are Mono
and many only get 80kbps and don't seem any the worse for it. I just
don't expect, or even want, a 'concert hall experience' in my kitchen or
bedroom, or even the living-room, and certainly not in the car.

BBC podcasts and streams all seem to be at 64kbps.
 
K

Ken

Jan 1, 1970
0
I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but isn't
compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will make
it a dead duck. There is little demand for high quality radio - and for
those that really want it in the UK they already can get most of the same
stations on FreeView or Satellite.

We would never start using the old DAB in Sweden and Finland,
that's for sure. DAB+ or something more modern is the future.
 
D

DAB sounds worse than FM

Jan 1, 1970
0
Whiskers said:
[...]
I read somewhere that some Scandinavian countries have scrapped DAB
because reception is so unreliable.

Not what <http://www.worlddab.org/> seem to think.


WorldDMB are liars.

For example, if you go to the WorldDMB home page and hover your mouse
over the word "DAB+", it says that the system is backwardly compatible
with DAB. But the opposite is in fact true, and I've asked WorldDMB to
tell the truth and correct their website, but they've done nothing.

The President of WorldDMB is Quetin Howard, the ex-chief exec (before
being sacked) of Digital One, who lied on BBC TV:

http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/a...rldDMB-was-dishonest-about-DAB+-on-BBC-TV.php

and he basically lies whenever he feels like it.



--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical
decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm
 
K

Ken

Jan 1, 1970
0
Easy to be wise with hindsight. I first heard demonstrations of the
present UK DAB system in the '80s, and transmissions started shortly
afterwards. There will always be better technology just round the corner.

Since 1996 we have testing DAB here in Sweden and we don't like it.
The same in Finland. Finland closed down DAB completely.
Old DAB is too inefficient.
 
D

DAB sounds worse than FM

Jan 1, 1970
0
Dave Plowman (News) said:
I wouldn't be too sure. DAB+ may have a more modern codec etc but
isn't
compatible with the present system. I think consumer resistance will
make
it a dead duck.


Hahahahahahhahahahahahahhaaha. Consumer resistance? You're having a
giraffe.

The VAST MAJORITY of people WANT DAB+ to be used once they know what
it is and what it provides.




--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical
decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm
 
D

DAB sounds worse than FM

Jan 1, 1970
0
Whiskers said:
As I understand it, transmitters can carry both DAB and DAB+, and
some
receivers can cope with both. But there is now a significant number
of
receivers which can only manage 'original' DAB, and broadcasters are
likely to be reluctant to broadcast their content using both
standards at
once, or to broadcast only in DAB+ while few people can listen to
it.
Listers would be pretty peeved if required to scrap all the new DAB
receivers we've bought by the million over the last five years or
so.


There will be a slow migration over to DAB+. All "DAB" receivers are
gonig to support DAB+ and DMB-A soon.

While 'audiophiles' might be prepared to buy new equipment to get
'better'
sound reproduction, most people just want something 'good enough' -
which
DAB manifestly is.


On a portable radio maybe - on *anything* better you've got to be deaf
to think that.

I'm listening to Radio 4 as I type: "Varied Speech" at
"128kbps Stereo" which sounds fine to me (on a Roberts MP23). Radio
3
probably justifies the 192kbps Stereo it gets,


Funny how you've mentioned the ONLY two stations that are using
reasonable bit rates on DAB - R4 at 128k is reasonable because speech
is far easier to encode than music.

but most stations are Mono
and many only get 80kbps and don't seem any the worse for it.


That's both factually wrong and it's plainly idiotic to suggest that
music should be broadcast in mono.

I just
don't expect, or even want, a 'concert hall experience' in my
kitchen or
bedroom, or even the living-room, and certainly not in the car.


Who the hell are you to say that just because you don't want something
better than others should be denied it?

BBC podcasts and streams all seem to be at 64kbps.


BBC music podcasts are now 128 kbps MP3, the BBC's listen again MP3
streams are 128 kbps, 192 kbps (R3) adn 80 kbps for mono stations. The
live streams will start using higher bit rates in the next few weeks.

Why don't you check your facts first?



--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical
decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm
 
D

DAB sounds worse than FM

Jan 1, 1970
0
Dave Plowman (News) said:
I suppose some new or future ones will. As regards transmitters
carrying
both the high cost of transmission is said to be one reason for some
existing or proposed stations closing. of course this cost is mainly
'rental' costs - but these private companies aren't there to provide
charity.


DAB+ is 2-3 times cheaper to transmit per station than DAB. That's one
of the attractions to the commercial broadcasters. DAB+ is definitely
going to happen, and it'll happen sooner than you think.

I saw a quote that sums up the situatino with DAB+ pretty well:

(wording from memory)
"people overestimate how much progress can be made in 1 year, but they
underestimate how much progress can be made in 10 years"

That's spot on where DAB+ is concerned. There will be loads of DAB+
stations in 5 years' time.

Absolutely. It took long enough to get to this level of acceptance.

Irrelevant.


but the thing is they didn't when it started


Now you're lying, because I told you what the score was in the early
days, so repeating this is lying.

Same here - and I'm using a pretty good sound system in this room.
The
speakers are Chartwell LS3/5a. But we are in a minority if the vocal
lobby
who only look at bitrates are to be believed.


You're also an R4 listener though, and you admitted that you don't
listen to the pop music statinos or similar, which is wehre you get
the shit audio quality.

Basically, both of you two are just extremely selfish people.

In an ideal world the rates would be a minimum 192 kbps for all -
but that
would cost too much it seems.


They screwed up in the first place:

http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm

So don't try to suggest that we couldn't have had good audio quality,
because we DEFINITELY could have had it.

Of course more modern codecs can use lower rates with less
noticeable
degradation. But not as low as that. ;-)


The BBC is already using 128 kbps - and even 192 kbps for R3 - for a
lot of its Internet stuff now.



--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical
decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm
 
D

DAB sounds worse than FM

Jan 1, 1970
0
Dave Plowman (News) said:
Easy to be wise with hindsight. I first heard demonstrations of the
present UK DAB system in the '80s, and transmissions started shortly
afterwards. There will always be better technology just round the
corner.


Plowman, DAB is DEAD in Sweden and Finland - the transmitters were
even switched off in Finland, and most of the transmitters were
switched off in Sweden as well when the government refused to fund it.

Now that DAB+ is available adn there's receivers and ALL DAB receivers
are going to include support for DAB+ in the near future, there's no
way that any country that's considering what system to use would use
DAB. End of story.



--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

The adoption of DAB was the most incompetent technical
decision ever made in the history of UK broadcasting:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/incompetent_adoption_of_dab.htm
 
T

tony sayer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Dave Plowman (News) said:
It's not been terribly popular anywhere as it offers little over FM for
the majority of listeners. Indeed in the UK the bit rate is so low the
quality can be poorer - on most stations. The other thing is battery life
is poor on a portable receiver.

It does work pretty well for mobile reception, though, like in a car, in
reasonable signal areas - but very few makers offered DAB as OEM. And
aftermarket units are expensive - as are decent aerials.

Fantastic DAB;!..
 
Top