HiFi Subjectivist ¦ Audio Forum ¦ NVA User Group

I am simply saying there is no answer we can give you apart from as Dave says that they are fecking it up without realising it. They are not as special or clever as you seem to think they are. If radio transmission gear was my forte and I worked for them I might give you an answer. I can give you answers about my specialities, but even then you can believe me or not as for you it will just be meaningless words. The only reality is if you hear it.

You hear it, accept it and enjoy it - or not.

I think they are fully aware of it, just listen on FM and go from Radio 1, to 2, then 3. The level of compression and crapness decreases in each case. I would be ready to believe that the BBC switch from day settings for R2 to evening settings thats closer to R3.

This is interesting, though it is mainly about supplying standards for content, but Appendix 3 shows the difference between stations. It may also help to explain the day/night difference. It may be due to live during the day and prerecorded in the evening at times.

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/radio/commis ... nRadio.pdf

It may also be different sound from different locations.

Dr Bunsen Honeydew wrote: ↑Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:11 pm

montechristo358 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 03, 2019 9:39 pm indeed so why do my ears tell me the evening specialist shows sound better than the more popular stuff during the day

Why do you have to know, just enjoy it.

If discussions were limited to only that which we HAVE to know most Hi-Fi forums would be reduced to about 10% of their current activity I'd guess! Curiosity may have killed the cat but it's also been the raison d'etre of many a forum thread over the years.

Not at all, if anything it would create more discussion, but instead of about meaningless bollocks (both subjective and objective) discuss how it effected the music and musicians and your enjoyment.

Dr Bunsen Honeydew wrote: ↑Fri Jan 04, 2019 10:19 am Not at all, if anything it would create more discussion, but instead of about meaningless bollocks (both subjective and objective) discuss how it effected the music and musicians and your enjoyment.

But isn't your 'it' in this sense exactly the meaningless bollocks that may - or may not - affect the music and musicians?

Your post makes absolutely no sense to me. My current soap box is not about the *it* you may be referring to, I am discussing how we discus it. In fantasy hi-fi reviewer made up bollocks words, or mostly completely misunderstood tech, used out of context, and even if used correctly flies over the top of readers heads mostly, or WHAT YOU HEAR = the music.

Dr Bunsen Honeydew wrote: ↑Fri Jan 04, 2019 11:38 am Your post makes absolutely no sense to me. My current soap box is not about the *it* you may be referring to, I am discussing how we discus it. In fantasy hi-fi reviewer made up bollocks words, or mostly completely misunderstood tech, used out of context, and even if used correctly flies over the top of readers heads mostly, or WHAT YOU HEAR = the music.

Ah, just realised there's more than one 'it' in your post I quoted! I think I was trying to make a point about whether words can every be used effectively to discuss sound - at least in a way that is meaningful or useful to anyone else - but I suspect I may have disappeared up my own backside before I got there.