I've met him.piku wrote:Nah, he was just an irritating troll writing crap. At least he wasn't trying to wind us up with funny typing.HGFB wrote:Yes he was.piku wrote:Ban request.
Redevil wasn't this irritating.
HD RADIO the NEXT big thing since SLICE bread
-
shillyshalley
- Baa!
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:03 pm 0
- Location: Bethlehem
HEY...I'm trying to INVENT my own style, a personna.piku wrote:Nah, he was just an irritating troll writing crap. At least he wasn't trying to wind us up with funny typing.HGFB wrote:Yes he was.piku wrote:Ban request.
Redevil wasn't this irritating.
I'm not EAR to hurt anyone.
SO wot do we think of HD?
It's all down to how many crappy network AM stations they contrive to cram into the limited bandwidth though isn't it?Bubba wrote:Jesus! A readable post! Well, I suppose I better answer it...
High bitrate digital radio would be an excellent idea. DAB however is a big pile of wank currently. DAB+ using AAC streams should be an order of magnitude better when it eventually comes out though.
(just show, no stabby stabby)
-
shillyshalley
- Baa!
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:03 pm 0
- Location: Bethlehem
Well AM has ALWAYS sounded CRAPPY.....so can't get any worse. AT least teh SOUNDS R better.kalmar wrote:It's all down to how many crappy network AM stations they contrive to cram into the limited bandwidth though isn't it?Bubba wrote:Jesus! A readable post! Well, I suppose I better answer it...
High bitrate digital radio would be an excellent idea. DAB however is a big pile of wank currently. DAB+ using AAC streams should be an order of magnitude better when it eventually comes out though.
-
Baggypants
- Baaaaaaa!
- Posts: 5328
- Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 12:54 pm 0
- Location: Salford(UK);
- Contact:
UQ Enqvb fbhaqf nyy jryy naq tbbq ohg vg'f HF bayl, Jul qvq V EBG13 guvf? jryy orpnhfr V svaq fuvyylf cbfgf whfg nf uneq gb ernq, ab arrq gb znxr vg rnfl vf vg!shillyshalley wrote:Well AM has ALWAYS sounded CRAPPY.....so can't get any worse. AT least teh SOUNDS R better.kalmar wrote:It's all down to how many crappy network AM stations they contrive to cram into the limited bandwidth though isn't it?Bubba wrote:Jesus! A readable post! Well, I suppose I better answer it...
High bitrate digital radio would be an excellent idea. DAB however is a big pile of wank currently. DAB+ using AAC streams should be an order of magnitude better when it eventually comes out though.
"The eggs, get them!"
-
piku
- Sheepie Whore
- Posts: 20960
- Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:44 am 0
- Website: Http://Www.ncot.uk
- Location: Wakefield
- Contact:
Yep, that's AM radio.Baggypants wrote:UQ Enqvb fbhaqf nyy jryy naq tbbq ohg vg'f HF bayl, Jul qvq V EBG13 guvf? jryy orpnhfr V svaq fuvyylf cbfgf whfg nf uneq gb ernq, ab arrq gb znxr vg rnfl vf vg!shillyshalley wrote:Well AM has ALWAYS sounded CRAPPY.....so can't get any worse. AT least teh SOUNDS R better.kalmar wrote:It's all down to how many crappy network AM stations they contrive to cram into the limited bandwidth though isn't it?Bubba wrote:Jesus! A readable post! Well, I suppose I better answer it...
High bitrate digital radio would be an excellent idea. DAB however is a big pile of wank currently. DAB+ using AAC streams should be an order of magnitude better when it eventually comes out though.
return (0);
