Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: better quality sound from internet classical radio

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Auckland New Zealand
    Posts
    127

    Default better quality sound from internet classical radio

    I write in fear that this topic has been covered on the forum before.
    the 2 main contributors to poor sound quality from internet radio are
    1-- the standard sound card in your pc
    2 -- internet stations that broadcast a standard mp3 stream usually 32 to 128 kbps bitrate
    To get much better results
    1 --upgrade your sound card to an audiophile sounding card such as M.audio Audiophile 2496

    2 go online to an internet station that broadcasts using aacPlus encoding such as
    www.radioswissclassic.ch
    click on the aacPlus plugin for the player type in your pc ( real player , media player or winamp)
    and listen to the amazing improvement !!!!!!!!


    either upgrade can be done alone of course do both and double the pleasure

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bongos View Post
    I write in fear that this topic has been covered on the forum before.
    the 2 main contributors to poor sound quality from internet radio are
    1-- the standard sound card in your pc
    2 -- internet stations that broadcast a standard mp3 stream usually 32 to 128 kbps bitrate
    To get much better results
    1 --upgrade your sound card to an audiophile sounding card such as M.audio Audiophile 2496

    2 go online to an internet station that broadcasts using aacPlus encoding such as
    www.radioswissclassic.ch
    click on the aacPlus plugin for the player type in your pc ( real player , media player or winamp)
    and listen to the amazing improvement !!!!!!!!


    either upgrade can be done alone of course do both and double the pleasure
    I see that the "aac+" facility you refer to at radioswiss is available at either 32 kbps or 64 kbps, and that MP3 is available at 128 kbps.

    As far as I know, 64 kbps "aac+" (or "aac-he" as it is sometimes referred to) is of similar quality to MP3 at 128 kbps. So, while "aac+" is definitely a far better (lossy) codec than MP3, at the bit rates offered there is unlikely to be any significant sound improvement. At 64 kbps, "aac+" simply uses less bandwith than MP3 at 128 kbps, and once on one's PC an "aac+" file will occupy less space.

    As is well known, in order to achieve a good hi-fi standard, one needs a minimum of 192 or possibly 256 kbps for MP3. To equate with 256 kbps MP3, is required 192 kbps for "aac" or 128 kbps "aac-he". Thus, "aac+" at 64 kbps is some way short of hi-fi.

    Actually, I'm quite satisfied with a lower rate of about 160 kbps MP3, but I don't fool myself into believing that it's hi-fi. It's simply that I listen to the radio quite a lot and I have got used to the standards applied in the UK by the BBC. I'm not interested in any foreign radio stations, which I usually find are poor compared with the BBC (in terms of commentary and choice of classical music).

    I quite agree that a big gain can be obtained from upgrading a PC's standard sound card. In fact, based on several tests which I have carried out using various cards there is a lot to be said for the Creative Labs Audigy SE card, which retails in the UK for about 30. For gaming purposes a higher quality card may be worthwhile but for everyday music purposes there's no need to spend any more in my view. This Audigy card is easily available and is compliant with many motherboards, whereas some higher quality cards are not, and huge problems can occasionally occur in fitting some of these. The improvement in sound quality from an Audigy SE card is astonishing compared with onboard sound cards. All the internal rubbish sounds from the PC's circuitry are filtered out.

    To go with a decent sound card, what is definitely worth getting is a pair (one for recording, the other for playback) of higher quality rca phono-to-mini jack cables. These are what I use - "i-chords" - made by Chord company:



    Although they cost about 50 a pair, they really are far better than the cables one normally sees for this purpose hanging up in hi-fi retaliers, or supplied free with some kit.
    Last edited by Andy Loochazee; Dec-09-2008 at 23:47.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Auckland New Zealand
    Posts
    127

    Default

    hi Andyloochazee,
    Of course it isnt hi fidelity ,I totally agree .I did use the word BETTER throughout my post yes the 128 kbps sound good too .I found a 256 kbps station called AVRO Klassiek Baroque at www.musicgoal.com/stations/classic/ .Have you listened to that ? Im listening right now .Sounds Great to me

  4. #4
    Junior Member Stunt21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Little town in Madrid, Spain.
    Posts
    35

    Default

    Hi Andy.

    I opened a new thread in this same subforum in which I'd like you to answer me to a question, thanks in advance
    There's no wind against who doesn't know which is his harbour.

Similar Threads

  1. New way of getting classical music
    By Nashvillebill in forum Community Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Jun-24-2014, 19:10
  2. Internet Radio Stations?
    By Ephemerid in forum Classical Music Discussion
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: Apr-09-2013, 05:40
  3. Replies: 9
    Last Post: Apr-11-2008, 23:26
  4. Hallo! Classical Music Radio on Mondays
    By wtnrradio in forum New Members - Introductions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Aug-13-2007, 17:02
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: Jan-17-2007, 13:38

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •