Taperssection.com

Gear / Technical Help => Ask The Tapers => Topic started by: Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B) on October 25, 2009, 06:00:37 PM

Title: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B) on October 25, 2009, 06:00:37 PM
Which is better: a 128kbps webstream or straight FM broadcast.

I'd like to record a local radio broadcast, and I'd like to get the best version.
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: illconditioned on October 25, 2009, 06:25:10 PM
Which is better: a 128kbps webstream or straight FM broadcast.

I'd like to record a local radio broadcast, and I'd like to get the best version.
My vote is for the FM.  It just sounds more "real" or "lifelike" to me...

 Richard
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: Javier Cinakowski on October 25, 2009, 06:32:19 PM
it depends on the radio station.  During broadcast they use signal processors and other goofy shit for compression and EQ.  I also think FM frequency is limited to 15kHz.   A good 128k mp3 stream might be the way to go.
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: illconditioned on October 25, 2009, 07:00:14 PM
it depends on the radio station.  During broadcast they use signal processors and other goofy shit for compression and EQ.  I also think FM frequency is limited to 15kHz.   A good 128k mp3 stream might be the way to go.
I'm thinking FM is better because it is *analog* limitations/distortion, no digital due to MP3 compression.  I can really hear a difference on CBC, listening to FM vs. Online.  The Online may even be better than 128k too.  I'm not sure.

  Richard
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: page on October 25, 2009, 08:25:30 PM
it depends on the radio station.  During broadcast they use signal processors and other goofy shit for compression and EQ.  I also think FM frequency is limited to 15kHz.   A good 128k mp3 stream might be the way to go.
I'm thinking FM is better because it is *analog* limitations/distortion, no digital due to MP3 compression.  I can really hear a difference on CBC, listening to FM vs. Online.  The Online may even be better than 128k too.  I'm not sure.

  Richard

I'm with Richard on this one, FM tops 128k streaming any day of the week. I've taped off of both before and hands down it's going to be better. Part of the reason is the odds that they do a seperate mix for the online stream are slim, so you've got the processing already done, plus the MP3 compression (and not LAME compression) on top of it.
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: deadheaded on October 26, 2009, 01:43:53 AM
E-Town?
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: Wiggler on October 26, 2009, 08:48:43 AM
I also feel Fm is considerably better.
The problem is that most fm tuners these days are not worth a crap.
Magnum dynalab makes some of the best tuners I've ever heard.
http://www.magnumdynalab.com/
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: rhinowing on October 26, 2009, 01:17:32 PM
I'm not sure about other area, but all the stations around here that do webcasts are in mono, while the fm tends to be stereo
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: Giant_Rick on October 27, 2009, 08:22:59 AM
I prefer the FM broadcast much more than a 128k webcast.. I can hear the difference.
But if the webcast is higher than 192k the difference comes smaller to me, and if it's 320k I can hear almost no difference.

And FM is stereo almost anywhere.. don't know about the webcast.
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B) on October 28, 2009, 04:00:52 PM
E-Town?

Yep.

I guess I could always record BOTH.  :P

eTown is broadcast on 3 different stations in Boulder. I get good reception on all of them via FM. Still there is occasional static. I should check out the webcasts from some stations not around Boulder. I guess there could be a better one.
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: dorrcoq on October 29, 2009, 04:07:50 PM
I get good reception on all of them via FM. Still there is occasional static.

My first thought was that the FM feed is a lot more consistent and stable than the few webcasts I've tired to listen to.
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: rastasean on October 30, 2009, 09:31:42 AM
I say FM is very clear but what are you playing over the air? 128k mp3s? If that's the case, don't waste your time with such an expensive setup.

Do you have an hp120? Tune it into the radio station and you can record to the hard drive directly. I think that's a feature that is not well known about.
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: spyder9 on November 07, 2009, 12:42:41 PM
FM.  Nice and warm.  I just picked up a mid 80's Onkyo T-22 tuner.  Back to phatness. 

Webcasts are stale, IMO.  Gawd knows how many ADC > DAC > ADC conversions are going on before it hits your ears.
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B) on November 08, 2009, 12:25:25 PM
I ended up only recording the webcast. I couldn't get it to record on my desktop so I had to use the headphone out > FR2LE. I think it's more than listenable.

The recording is an etown broadcast with Warren Haynes as the guest. I was at the show so it's nice to have something from it.

Here is a link to the MP3's I made. Don't ask me why I converted them to V0. I recorded them as a WAV file on the FR2LE, and then chopped them into tracks on CDWave, and just ran those through dbPowerAmp and I had it set to V0...so I just left it.

https://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=YkxMa3ZOWkJCMTUzZUE9PQ
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: SmokinJoe on November 08, 2009, 10:42:26 PM
FM radio doesn't go *** buffering ***....
Title: Re: 128k webstream vs. FM broadcast?
Post by: lpmaskman on November 09, 2009, 02:24:21 PM
I think record both ;)