@compaqnetbe: "Gegroet,
Without wanting to start a new mp2-vs-AAC discussion, this is an
"interesting" message on the wohnort website:
 cut here  cut here  cut here 
November 21st
Swiss public-service broadcaster SRG/SSR has announced that it will
continue to use MPEG 1 Layer II for its DAB services. This includes the
new services that SRG/SSR proposes to broadcast on the forthcoming
second ensemble for the German-speaking region.
 cut here  cut here  cut here 
This message kind of opposes something that was posted on the wohnort
website before:
 cut here  cut here  cut here 
November 15th
The Swiss regulator BAKOM has altered the conditions attached to its
recent advertisement of capacity on the forthcoming second ensemble for
the German-speaking region. Following the adoption by WorldDMB (formerly
the World DAB Forum) of AAC+ as an alternative codec to MPEG 1 Layer II,
BAKOM has announced that it will more than double the number of
available programme slots on the new mutliplex, but using the new AAC+ codec
 cut here  cut here  cut here 
What was interesting is what "mr. Wohnort" added himself:
 cut here  cut here  cut here 
wohnort comments: There never was going to be a totally painless time to
switch to the new standard, but now is as close to an "optimum"
opportunity as Switzerland is ever likely to have. The next steps of
this process are sure to be keenly observed from across the border in
Germany. It remains to be seen what effect the new conditions have on
those who had already applied for capacity. After all, no receivers can
yet be said to conform to a standard which is still to be formalised. To
that extent, BAKOM must be gambling that, even should some entrants
decide to drop out - there being no listener base to which to broadcast
- enough would still remain to fill the increased number of slots. The
BAKOM announcement makes no suggestion of any change to the existing
ensembles. Such a change, if and when it were it to happen, would be a
more difficult pill to swallow.
 cut here  cut here  cut here 
I guess that the introduction of aac in countries where DAB already in
use will not be as simple as expected. We can already see the first
signs of contradicting opinions immerging.
Also note that BAKOM (the Swiss regulator) has also officially said that
they will convert the band III DVB-T frequencies into 4 T-DAB
frequency-blocks, so it might be that the public broadcasters are also
counting on that.
B.T.W.
I was listening to Radio Swiss Jazz (one of the stations of the public
broadcasting group) on satellite today.
Over there, they are promoting DAB as  the medium for receiving Radio
Swiss Jazz "every where in the house and in the car, without the need of
cable or a satellite-dish".
For people in Switserland, on their website, they are even giving away
10 DAB-radios (PURE Evoke-2xt "Special Edition").
Cheerio! Kr. Bonne."
    @compaqnetbe: "Richard,
Richard Evans schreef:
<quote>
Well, you should know that they are in the running for a spot on a new
DAB ensemble in the German-speaking part of Switserland.
So it's more than just "moving their existing broadcasts from mp2 to aac".
But I was thinking there might be another very simple (but more down to
earth) reason for this.
If they would get a spot on the new ensemble using aac, it will probably
be "just" 48 Kbps; while for mp2, they might get 128 Kbps.
It is better to get 128 Kbps now as this gives you the possibility -by
moving over to AAC, or mono, or 24 K- to add some other services without
having to ask for additional space on the multiplex.
If you ask for aac now, you'll probably only get 48 Kbps (or something
like that) and this limits your ability to add new services without
interference of somebody else (i.e. the multiplex operator).
Well, I don't think there currently is radio-spectrum for that right now.
They now have one ensemble which is completely full. Broadcasting aac
alongside aac means that they need to set up an additional network (or
stop some of their mp2-services).
I wonder when that will be.
Cheerio! Kr. Bonne."
    @000pipantal: "DAB sounds worse than FM a �crit :
<quote>
In country where DAB is already launch, it's normal that public 
broadcasters keep mp2! The first time listeners must continue to listen 
to public station because they pay with their tax!
But commercial stations can do what they want!"
    @_ken_3_: "On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:57:28 GMT, "DAB sounds worse than FM"
<quote>
Do you know what the word BAKOM is in swedish?  :-)"
    @_ken_3_: "On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 16:25:43 GMT, "DAB sounds worse than FM"
<quote>
"behind"   They have to go to the future instead (not MP2)."
    @compaqnetbe: "David,
<email_address> schreef:
<quote>
I'm not assuming anything. :-)
I just wrote this message just to point out there is difference in
opinion between the public broadcaster and the regulator in Switzerland
about the move to AAC.
And I thought it would be interesting as this situation might be the
same in other countries where DAB is already in use to a certain degree.
(mainly by public broadcasters too).
As I don't work for neither organisation nor live in Switserland, I am
not involved and -hence- it's not up to me have an opinion about the issue.
I'm just trying to understand the viewpoint of the different players
involved in this and what will drive the drive the move from MP2 to AAC
in this situation and how this applies to other situations too.
Now, I don't really know what the public broadcasters are really
thinking. They will probably not tell me neither (:-)) and -concidering
the small "conflict" they now have with the regulator- they will not
"show the back of their tongue" (as we say in dutch) in public
statements neither.
I'm just trying to make a guess on what their motivation is in this all.
 I guess everybody in this forum is probably smart enough themself to
make up his mind about this himself.
I would however also be interested to know what the companies who
corresponded to the initial offering. By going from MP2 to AAC; this
means that
- in the beginning, the number of potentional listeners will be very
limited. (no receivers)
- they will now have to compete with 7 other stations instead of 2.
- on the other hand, the transmission-cost will be lower.
- as most of them already are available on the cable; do do not really
"need" the income from broadcasting over the air.
It will be interesting to see what the different companies think is most
important for them.
Cheerio! Kr. Bonne."
{'source': 'USENET', 'other_information': '{"reply_count": 5, "forum_name": "alt.radio.digital.20140714.mbox"}', 'file': 'data/output/usenet-alt.radio.parquet'}