Jump to content

Stream TEST @ 160 kbps - feedback welcome


Stream TEST @ 160kbps 44.1 kHz stereo  

8 members have voted

  1. 1. Stream TEST @ 160kbps 44.1 kHz stereo

    • 160 kbps is way better
      2
    • 128 kbps sounds ok to Me
      6


Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

 

This current weekend I'm doin a test at 160kbps 44.1kHz stereo

Since the start of my project I'm streaming at 128kbps

 

Please check the quality and check if the 160kbps gives you a better experience during listening. (use the BW "Listen Live" media player link or click the icon "128k")

 

Again this 160kbps stream is meant to be used during the current weekend only untill 04am CET (Saturday morning CET)

Feel free to vote at the poll section

Visit and listen @ BW !

http://i.imgur.com/Ggmw4ub.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts. If there is any difference in sound, it is negligable. Overall the sound is fine, but a bit bright. I think that may be due to your processing, rather than the bump to 160K. I'd rather have bright than the over processed sound a lot of net stations have. I hate that pumping sound.

 

In my opinion, I think you could stay at 128K and save some money on bandwidth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was good.

 

If I wasn't going on this trip I would syndicate shows to you over that rock show you had. I want to kick that presenters ass after that show. He would be GREAT for an 80's/early 90's show. But alternative rock/various rock, he had NO CLUE how to connect to that crowd (guys like me and gals that really dig that genre) Also let him know that moving the mic near his speakers is not a very cool effect. I loved the rest of the three-four hour block I heard though. OH, and his band "the vegetarian" jokes were half decent, but then he overkilled it beyond the point of tune out, probably because he does not connect to the genre at ALL. WORD.

 

Other than that he had a decent show, and sounds like a great professional presenter, but giving that guy modern rock/alternative, is like putting a machine gun in a blind mans hands.

 

The one part that drove me CRAZY was that the first little bit I tuned into (about 11 AM my time) had no metadata for the media player, and you had THREE AWESOME songs on air I cannot find to save my life. I didn't notice until my wife ask me who it was, and I said its..... Somebody!

 

But GREAT MUSIC, the 160k stream I would move the Khz sampling rate up a bit, or you are exposing a little "artifact" in the sound at high bitrate low sample for that level of frames in the bitrate. Not enough for someone with a general sound card to notice.

 

Shes still your number 1 fan.

 

 

Yet another edit: I liked the 160 kbps over the higher bitrates other people have been trying. Even with Ogg, their streams just dont sound that good for a listen, something always seems unsettling in the sound. Then again, I only run a 24 bit soundblaster audigy card, not the peak card for listening enjoyment.

 

Very good catch on the quality, as always you are a true pioneer in the field Pilipe.

KNSJ.org / 89.1 FM San Diego
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if you can stream at any bandwidth, then it obviously won't matter on the money issue. 128K will do for the average broadband user though. As people migrate to better/faster bandwidth in the future, I can see the need for higher bitrate streams.

 

If you can offer your higher bitrate as a premium service, you might be able to squeeze a few extra dollars for those wishing to listen to the higher bitrate stream by offering subscriptions or for those who donate to your station.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks BS

I think you have listened to a part of The Deuce Radio show ? Thats aired every friday 08pm - 09pm CET. Thats an UK 1 hour radioset, and it has indeed no meta data unless the name of the show.

That radioset presents in general unsigned artists and gives them airplay.

Its a syndicated set who's broadcasted on both UK FM stations and worldwide at the internet.

I'm gonna FW your input to the agency who provides this radioset

and give your lady a thank you :kiss:

Shes still your number 1 fan.

Hi Bob,

You are perfectly right. However the faster and better bandwidth can't be used by everyone.

At my own country (Belgium) We have in general broadband to all, but on rush hours it ain't that perfect as it should be, even We pay a lot compaired to other countries - and download has "still" Monthly limits

but again, it was only a test to check some feedback and input made by fellow BW members (Y)

Concerning my project : the streamsource is coming from a server located at a center of a friend of mine at Ostend (city at the borders of the Nordsea). The content is streamed to a streamprovider at The Netherlands (who allows upto 192)

Visit and listen @ BW !

http://i.imgur.com/Ggmw4ub.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Does no one consider what the listeners have for speakers? With most cheap computer speakers you won't be able to tell much of a difference and thats your target audience. I too am an audio engineer but I also know where to cut costs when needed, and high bandwidth streams are the first to go. 128 or less is fine for most cheap speakers. It also helps the listeners cut down on bandwidth on their end so, for instance, they don't get caught at work for bogging down the network. You alienate an entire demographic with the 168kbs stream.

 

Just something to think about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well .. like the topic already tells .. it was all about "a test"

About the speakers issue, I'm aware of that, I mentioned this already several times during other occassions at BW.

You're right .. however We have to consider also that more and more people do use or do connect their pc, wireless internetradio receiver etc to their amplifier at home

Does no one consider what the listeners have for speakers? .

No sound is perfect to anyone, some do like beats, others do like a sparkle etc

So depending to the taste of everyone We only can "try" to achieve a sound who sounds "ok" .. In general 128kbps makes that already very enjoyable

 

Thanks for your feedback !

Visit and listen @ BW !

http://i.imgur.com/Ggmw4ub.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...