digitalradiotech


Join the Save FM Campaign

 

DAB sounds worse than FM, Internet radio & radio via digital TV
Commercial radio groups call FM switch-off plans "ridiculous", "farcical" & "a complete fantasy"
Home DAB/DAB+ Internet radio Satellite Freeview DRM Technology Downloads DAB Samples Newsletter Contact Us
Introduction to DAB
Incompetent adoption of DAB
When will FM be switched off?
BBC DAB Multiplex
Digital Radio Bit Rates
Wasted DAB Capacity
DAB Around the World
Design of DAB
DAB vs DAB+ technology
T-DMB vs DAB+
Coverage Maps
DAB Summary
 
DAB Radios
DAB CD Portable Stereos
DAB Personal Radios
DAB Micro Systems
DAB Clock Radios
Digital radio via satellite
Satellite Receivers
UK satellite radio bit rates
UK satellite HDTV bit rates
UK satellite TV bit rates
Broadband Internet Radio
Internet Radio
Wi-Fi Internet radios
Introduction to Wi-Fi radios
Multicast - radio at high quality
Audio Advice
Aerials
MPEG Audio Coding
Bit Rate vs Audio Quality
MP2 vs AAC+
Audio Processing
FEC Coding
OTA software upgrades
COFDM
Analogue vs Digital Radio
Bandwidth
RF Carriers
Sampling
RF Antennas
Links
       

Introduction to Wi-Fi radios

 

 

 

BBC now testing AAC/AAC+ Internet radio streams at higher quality than DAB


13th February 2009

After a seven-month delay, the BBC has finally begun testing its live Internet radio streams using AAC/AAC+, and the BBC has launched AAC+ streams for the on-demand radio streams.

The on-demand streams are available to everyone, but the live test streams are only available to BBC iPlayer Labs testers, so if you want to listen to them you first need to go to the BBC iPlayer Labs sign-up page, then just click on the pink button that says "I want to be a Labs tester", then instead of the receiving the poxy Real Player streams you'll receive the new AAC/AAC+ streams.

The following table shows the bit rates and codecs the live test streams and the on-demand streams were using yesterday. Bear in mind that because the live streams are currently testing, the bit rates and which codec is used are likely to change over time. If you right-click on the Flash window it tells you what the bit rate and codec is, although it shows "aac" for both AAC and AAC+.

 

Station Live test streams
bit rate / codec
Live streams links On-demand streams
bit rate / codec
Radio 1 96k AAC+ Listen 96k AAC+
Radio 2 128k AAC Listen 96k AAC+
Radio 3 128k AAC Listen 128k AAC
Radio 4 128k AAC Listen 96k AAC+
Radio 5 64k AAC+ Listen 64k AAC+
6 Music 96k AAC+ Listen 96k AAC+
Radio 7 96k AAC+ Listen 96k AAC+
1Xtra 96k AAC+ Listen 96k AAC+
Asian Network 96k AAC+ Listen 96k AAC+

 

The World Service is the only "national" BBC station that isn't using AAC/AAC+ yet, which is because of some arcane rule that stops the BBC from providing higher quality to listeners in the UK compared to what people around the world receive, but the World Service will also start using AAC+ within the next few months.

Higher quality than DAB

All of the BBC test live streams and on-demand streams are now at higher quality than on DAB. The reason why the Internet streams are at higher quality than on DAB is because they're using the AAC/AAC+ audio codec, which is twice as efficient as the MP2 codec used on DAB, so the following applies for the AAC/AAC+ bit rates being used at the moment:

  • 128 kbps AAC provides the same level of audio quality as 256 kbps MP2 on DAB
  • 96 kbps AAC+ provides the same level of audio quality as 192 kbps MP2 on DAB
  • 64 kbps AAC+ provides the same level of audio quality as 128 kbps MP2 on DAB (this is for mono -- it's different for stereo)

The following table compares the audio quality on DAB with the equivalent MP2 bit rates used for the live Internet streams. As you can see, the equivalent MP2 bit rate that the live Internet radio streams are all higher than the actual MP2 bit rate used on DAB, so the audio quality of the Internet streams is also higher. In addition, the stations that are always or sometimes in mono on DAB (in the table, s = stereo, m = mono) are all in stereo on the Internet streams.

 
Station DAB
MP2 bit rate
kbps
Live Internet test streams equivalent MP2 bit rate
kbps
Radio 1 128 s 192 s
Radio 2 128 s 256 s
Radio 3 192 s / 160 s1 256 s
Radio 4 128 s / 80 m1 256 s
Radio 5 80 m 128 m
6 Music 128 s 192 s
Radio 7 80 m 192 s
1Xtra 128 s 192 s
Asian Network 64 m 192 s

 

1 - Radio 3 is reduced to 160 kbps on DAB in the daytime when Radio 5 Sports Extra is on-air before 5pm, and Radio 4 is reduced to 80 kbps mono on DAB when Radio 5 Sports Extra is on-air after 5pm

BBC is testing 128 kbps AAC for the live streams

As the table at the top of the page shows, the BBC is testing 128 kbps for the live test streams for  Radios 2, 3 and 4. If they use 128 kbps AAC once the live streams actually launch, that would obviously disprove my claim that they're trying to avoid using 128 kbps AAC! No-one likes to be wrong, but in this case I'd be very happy to be proved wrong.

However, they are only testing 128 kbps AAC at the moment, so it still remains to be seen whether they will use 128 kbps AAC for all of the live and on-demand stereo streams; and if they don't, I would be proved right.

BBC has reduced the bit rates of the on-demand streams

The BBC has been using 128 kbps MP3 and 192 kbps MP3 for the stereo on-demand radio streams since last June when radio was integrated into the BBC iPlayer, but the BBC has reduced the bit rate levels of the stereo on-demand streams from using 128 and 192 kbps MP3 to using 96 kbps AAC+ and 128 kbps AAC respectively!

The BBC has tried to justify doing this by saying that AAC+ is more efficient than MP3, so reducing the bit rates won't reduce the audio quality compared to what they've been providing with MP3. But looking at this from an alternative perspective, if they had just changed the streams from using MP3 to AAC/AAC+ and left the bit rate levels unchanged at 128 and 192 kbps, the audio quality would obviously have been higher than it is at 96 kbps. So the BBC has effectively deliberately reduced the audio quality compared to what it would have been if they hadn't reduced the bit rate levels.

My opinion on this is simple:

All BBC stereo Internet streams should use 128 kbps AAC

BBC iPlayer TV streams are consuming an enormous amount of bandwidth

The following figure shows how much bandwidth the BBC Internet radio streams and the BBC iPlayer TV streams have been consuming up to August last year. The iPlayer TV streams were already consuming over 7 times as much bandwidth as the Internet radio streams by August, which was just 8 months after the iPlayer TV streams had launched.

 

 

The second very steep jump in bandwidth for the iPlayer TV streams following a small dip in the summer was due to the launch of the higher quality 800 kbps H.264 iPlayer TV streams in August. The BBC is also planning on launching 1.6 Mbps SD and 4 Mbps HD iPlayer TV streams this year, which will lead to further massive increases in the bandwidth required, and that doesn't even take into account the exponentially increasing usage of the iPlayer, which also requires the bandwidth to increase exponentially.

The BBC also wants to make the iPlayer available on new Freeview and Freesat set-top boxes that have an Ethernet connection so that people can watch the iPlayer streams on their TV sets rather than on computers, which Anthony Rose, who's in charge of the BBC iPlayer, said could lead to the bandwidth required increasing ten-fold over the next year or two -- that would make the bandwidth for the iPlayer TV streams over 70 times higher than the BBC's radio streams were using last August.

I completely support the BBC launching new higher quality iPlayer TV streams, but it is hypocritical beyond belief to limit the bit rates to just 96 kbps for any of the stereo Internet radio streams -- especially in the same year that the BBC is planning on launching HD iPlayer TV streams that will use a bit rate that's 40 times higher than the 96 kbps that most of the radio streams are using!

All of the BBC's stereo Internet streams should use 128 kbps AAC without exception.

 

BBC on-demand streams can be made very reliable by using a very large buffer size

Both the TV and radio on-demand streams on the BBC iPlayer use what's called a 'dual-threshold' buffering scheme.

Dual-threshold buffering works as follows: When a user clicks play, the buffer size is set to be a small size (the lower threshold) so taht the stream starts playing quickly. Then once the stream has started playing, software increases the buffer size to the upper threshold value, and the server sends data to fill the buffer up, and the server continues to top the large buffer up as the stream continues playing.

The advantage of dual-threshold buffering is that the streams simultaneously begin playing very quickly and the streams can use an arbitrarily large buffer size. The advantage of using a very large buffer size is that the larger the buffer size is the lower the probability will be that the buffer will every empty, and buffering (i.e. the stream pausing) only happens when a buffer has run out of data.

In other words, the on-demand streams can be made arbitrarily reliable by using a very large buffer size. But this also means that the BBC cannot claim that it needs to reduce the bit rates of the on-demand streams due to reliability reasons, which the BBC has been using as a justification for limiting the bit rate levels of the Internet streams -- or at least the BBC was claiming this until earlier this week, but it seems to have quietly dropped this claim

 

BBC live streams will use 'automatic bandwidth detection' and 'dynamic streaming'

The iPlayer TV and radio streams are going to start using 'automatic bandwidth detection' in March (although given that the live streams were 7 months late in launching, this will probably be late as well), and they're going to start using 'dynamic streaming' by the summer, once the new Flash Media Server 3.5 has been released.

Automatic bandwidth detection: As its name suggests, this consists of a user's available bandwidth being automatically detected by the streaming servers -- it works in a similar way to how broadband speed tests do, where the user automatically downloads a file, and the time taken determines how fast the connection speed is to the streaming servers. The server will then deliver a higher bit rate stream to users that have a high enough bandwidth, and other users will receive a lower bit rate stream. The vast majority of users listening at home should receive the higher bit rate radio streams, though.

Dynamic streaming: This consists of the streaming server switching between lower and higher bit rate streams on-the-fly according to the speed of the connection from the user's computer or device to the streaming server -- the bandwidth can be determined by monitoring the level of data in the buffer, so for example if the buffer starts to empty quickly that means the connection speed to the server will have fallen, probably due to Internet congestion, and the server will switch to delivering a lower bit rate stream -- and vice versa for switching from lower to higher bit rate streams. Dynamic streaming also performs automatic bandwidth detection when a user first connects.

Switching between streams at different bit rate levels can be done without introducing a gap in playback between one stream finishing and the other stream starting (unless the buffer completely empties in the meantime, of course), but if the stream switches to a lower bit rate the audio quality would obviously be reduced.

For the vast majority of people who're listening at home, though, streams shouldn't need to reduce in bit rate level, because the Internet is sufficiently fast these days such that 128 kbps streams are basically small trickles of data in comparison to all the video streams that are being delivered -- the days when 128 kbps Internet radio streams were unreliable are long gone.

Microsoft has actually been offering its Intelligent Streaming (aka Intellistream) technology for years, which works identically to dynamic streaming on Flash, and the WMA streams for stations owned by the UK's largest commercial radio group, Global Radio, all use Intellistream.

As both automatic bandwidth detection and dynamic streaming are specifically designed to ensure that streams don't suffer from buffering, this means that the BBC cannot claim that reliability is an excuse not to use 128 kbps AAC for the live streams either.

Overall, then:

The BBC simply has no justification whatsoever to avoid using 128 kbps AAC for all of the live and on-demand stereo Internet radio streams.

 


 
 

Comments

By E James
15th February 2009, 14:42
 
Sir

Yes, FAR better than the old MP2 codec, but even at 128Kbp/s, AAC can sound 'sharp' on aggressive treble and yes I still hear that old familiar digital (although in transient) 'fluttery' artifact of compression of audio data.

Perhaps a bit rate of 160Kbp/s or a little higher would clear any doubts I or others may have?

Best Regards.
 
 

By R Smith
21st February 2009, 12:45
 
Right clicking on the iPlayer window gave me b00hlcyc|aac|AK. The aac obviously gives the codec as aac or aac+ but what does the rest mean? Can you help decode the rest to reveal the bitrate, please?

Keep up the good work. Much appreciated. Thanks.
 
 

By digitalradiotech
21st February 2009, 13:15
 
@E James,

160 kbps AAC would be better, but I think we'll have to make do with 128 kbps AAC for now - and the BBC might even limit the bit rates at 96 kbps AAC+ if they think they can get away with it.
 
 

By digitalradiotech
21st February 2009, 13:17
 
@R Smith,

"Right clicking on the iPlayer window gave me b00hlcyc|aac|AK."

The bit rate isn't being displayed on the on-demand streams for some reason.

b00hlcyc is the programme ID number.
 
 

BBC live aac streams

By Stewart Reynolds
21st February 2009, 19:35
 
The problem I have with the BBC is their pre-processing of the audio before encoding takes place. All the feeds ex-studio seem to be passed through an Optimod or similar multi band processor before encoding for DAB or internet or for transmission on FM. To my mind this does more to ruin the audio than the bitrate or the particular codec used.
While the aac codec may in theory give rise to better quality than MP2 at lower bitrates, where's the point when the audio has already been adulterated?
 
 

By E James
22nd February 2009, 20:27
 
@DigitalRadioTech:

Regarding 'limits' in general, perhaps we are fighting that very old piece of human psychology - 'see what we can get away with'? So yep, you're probably quite right in suggesting it could even drop to 96kbp/s AAC+! Then almost back to square one again!

@Stewart - As you know there's a big difference in the pre-processing of say Radio 1 and Radio 3, concerning (at the very least) dynamics. However, have you noticed (on occassions) the Beeb narrowing the stereo image, and dampening the HF content on FM (ref Radio 2) just so that the MP2 codec of DAB can appear to rival or equal FM?

Regards.
 
 

By digitalradiotech
22nd February 2009, 21:07
 
@E James,

We're definitely fighting against the "see what we can get away with" mentality - that's been the BBC's unstated policy for basically the entire decade.

An example of this happened when Freeview was being tested way back in 2002. They continually reduced the bit rates of the BBC TV channels until people on the Internet started slagging the quality off, so the BBC set the bit rates just above that level!
 
 

By E James
22nd February 2009, 21:27
 
@DigitalRadioTech

First and foremost, I'm not a serious audiophile, but I made a constructive point regarding AAC@128kbp/s to the BBC about a week ago. My criticism sighted that even AAC at 128kbps is not good enough. And indeed spurious artifacts can be still be heard. Not my imagination by the way. I recorded the transmissions, and saved as a WAV file. Listened to them again later, so as to confirm my suspicions. Concluding then, AAC @128kbps is still not good enough, period.

Very interesting point you made regarding Freeview - thanks.
It made the cynic in me laugh!

Best regards.
 
 

BBC live aac streams

By Stewart Reynolds
24th February 2009, 23:54
 
@E James,
The BBC informed me that the reason for all this tinkering with the audio before transmission on FM was to allow listeners in noisy environments [I assume they meant cars] a better listening experience. Why their attempts to reduce music's dynamic range to as near zero as possible would enhance their listening pleasure is beyond me, but as most people listen to internet streams at home, why adulterate them? I suspect that part of the answer is that pre-processing is used to disguise the artifacts due to the low bit rates used.
To be fair to the beeb, most streams/FM broadcasts from the commercial outfits are similarly ruined.
I'm old enough to have enjoyed the quality provided by the BBC's FM broadcasts in the sixties, and can assure any younger radio enthusiasts that the present day FM broacasts are inferior.
 
 

By David Robinson
25th March 2009, 16:08
 
I'm impressed with the quality on BBC 6 which is now the best available not just on DAB, but anywhere! I've been comparing it with the satellite version, using the same DAC for both (via S/PDIF) so it's a fair comparison. The AAC version is definitely smoother and a more analogue type of sound.

One question - if I had a wi-fi radio would it receive these new streams?
 
 

By E James
10th April 2009, 23:13
 
A few months ago I concluded that AAC at 128kbp/s was not quite "on the money", as I still heard spurious compression artifacts in the treble region of the audio spectrum.

However, some time after my comments to the BBC and here, I noticed no further audio distortions in this area. I don't know what the beep is up to in the processing department, but something has changed?

Incidentally, a FFT analysis of the audio showed the spectrum was being limited to around 15-16Khz. Which is what we can expect from FM.

 
 

By Jake
18th April 2009, 0:37
 
I've signed up to labs as suggested- thanks for the tip! Unfortunately, 128kbps AAC is still no where near FM quality judging by what I am hearing on World on 3. Bizarrely even the 192k sat stream seems to sound better- can you think any reason why that should be?
 
 

By E James
21st April 2009, 16:50
 
MP2 at 256Kbp/s
Why the BBC doesn't transmit the MP2 algorithm for Radio's 1...7 at 256kbp/s I'll never know, cos' after all the bandwidth up there for SAT is massive, and why not too 256kbp/s for Freeview? Heaven knows, there is enough c**p on the other
pop "noddy" channels.

The AAC replacement at 128kbp/s
I'm not that happy concerning the AAC codec even at 128kbp/s as I think it's probably just at about the highest data rate that they can get away with and proclaim it as "CD quality". I honestly feel that one should take the bit rate a little higher to say 160/192kbp/s for stereo, and target mono broadcasts (to around 32-64kbp/s. AAC+ at low bit rates for mono is surprisingly good!

MP2 DAB does not like high-frequency content in stereo, which is why I believe the Beeb processes the source - effectively narrow-imaging upper frequency content, so as not to expose the frailty of existing DAB, and who knows perhaps even (but less so) AAC at 128Kbp/s? AAC does sound clean, but "dampened" in the upper range - actually it's difficult to articulate.

On a level playing field, FM thrashes DAB, and still beats current AAC at 96/128kbp/s without doubt.
 
 

seems BBC wont go higher than 96k aac+

By Neil
8th May 2009, 14:24
 
I find this shocking that 96k aac+ is the maximum they will go for 6 music & 1xtra and they still persevere with real player 44kbit/s for local radio.

SOD HD for BBC Television,I pay my licence fee and expect the best for the radio.
 
 

BBC3 streams worse than ever overseas

By Wilson Laidlaw
12th May 2009, 7:19
 
I listen to BBC R3 in France. Some of the day I am using streaming. I have tried this year using the iPlayer pop out, Real Player and RadiopaQ. I am in no doubt that overseas streams are worse than ever. iPlayer streams at between 33 and 45kpbs. Real streams sometimes drop as low as 12kbps and it sounds like a rail station announcement. I have played with all sorts of connection and routing settings. I have contacted the BBC and had the usual anodyne response "Improvements due soon" that I had in 2003. I have an ultra stable 2.4mbps connection, so I know it is not me. What is going on with these radio streams?
Wilson
 
 

Dab deteriorates further

By Neil
13th May 2009, 13:33
 
When you see NME launch in London at Mono 80kbit/s and Gold,XFM go to 112kbit/s MP2.
You can see why the BBC think they can get away with 96k aac+ which is hugely superior to those bit rates.

I dont live in London anymore but it makes my blood boil seeing mono stations launch in 2009? Absolute disgrace.
 
 

By Neil
15th May 2009, 15:49
 
Live streams have all gone 128k aac+ on BBC apart from BBC7 still 96k,also Radio 3 is now 192aac+ on live stream
 
 

Is BBC labs test forever?

By Neil
29th May 2009, 19:22
 
will they ever launch properly? Will bbc local ever be available at 128k aac+ like national? Am I only visitor these days to this website?
Has James Cridland vanished?
 
 

Radio 3 bit rates

By Phil Clennell
1st June 2009, 13:01
 
Hi Folks

Thanks to the advice above I signed up to I-player labs and now have streaming Radi0 3 at 192 kbps aac. The quality is way better than DAB and I will be selling my DAB tuner.

Does anyone know how to play this stream through a Squeezebox?
 
 

By digitalradiotech
1st June 2009, 14:12
 
No, I'm afraid you can't receive these streams on a Squeezebox because they're using the Flash format and Wi-Fi Internet radio devices don't support Flash unfortunately.

The BBC said it wants to release non-Flash AAC streams for Wi-Fi Internet radio devices, but considering that they've deliberately nobbled the audio quality of their live Internet radio streams for almost an additional year due to their bias against Internet radio I wouldn't hold your breath before they make these available.
 
 

By Neil
1st June 2009, 18:21
 
http://mp3-jazz.as34763.net

New 128k aac+ stream for JazzFM above..telling listeners to upgrade from existing 64kbit/s stream
 
 

By E James
1st June 2009, 19:30
 
Completed a brief fourier analysis on Radio2 from their AAC 128Kbp/s. There appears to be a linear LP (Low pass) filter employed which kicks in somewhere but operates at about 15db-20db per decade, ie attenuation per multiple of 10 in frequency content. EG If 1000Hz was a reference level, then 10,000Hz is about -15 to -20db relative to this. I'm not sure what the practice is on FM, I guess even there there will be some taming of the harmonic content?

Still AAC is very listenable.

I think they must use this filter to "hide" the spurious data compression artifacts that do arise from AAC; yes even at 128kbp/s. I'd love to hear a 192kbp/s-256kbp/s AAC transmission for pop music and make a comparison.

regards
 
 

the man aint dead then

By Neil
9th June 2009, 18:44
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2009/06/bbc_iplayer_gets_a_little_more.shtml

says radio about to come to a finale regarding i player
 
 

By James
18th June 2009, 14:07
 
What is the point of introducing a new radio format if it is worse than the predecessor we all waited with baited breath for the launch of DAB but I have to this day never heard a broadcast that makes me want to move from FM. I have some High End HiFi Equipment and I normally listen to my internet radio on demand on my pc with SPDIF out into a marantz amp. This does give a good sound, but I have still not found any way to eliminate the digital "clipping" sound. At first I thought it could be an issue with my metal Hi-Fi stand, but it wasn't. Is there an alternative to recording the FM broadcasts to my own digital storage device?
 
 

Radio 3 at 192 AAC

By Stephen
7th September 2009, 0:34
 
Yes, Radio 3 at 192 AAC should be the best available. It isn't. Why? Because for some inexplicable reason the BBC are compressing the dynamic range, so that the loudest peaks are heavily cut back. For classical music, this is a major defect. (FM is even worse in this respect.) Their DAB service does not compress the dynamics at all, so remains the best choice for classical music, provided it maintains 192 - which is most of the time.
 
 

 
 

Add a comment:

Name (optional)
Email (will not be published) (required)
Subject (optional)
Write the word radio in this box
(HTML markup is allowed)

 
 
Bookmark with:
 Digg  del.icio.us  Reddit  Facebook
 Google  Stumbleupon  Slashdot