Considering XM/Sirius - Concerned About Sound Quality (1 Viewer)

[SteveK]

I guess there's an advantage to not having ears that hear every fault of compressed music, and to not having an expensive stereo system that makes the inherent faults all the more obvious. I have a decent system, but certainly not a high-end system that would make audiophiles stand up and take notice. I have a Sony receiver, Paradigm mini-monitors and an SVS subswoofer. Certainly much better than an HTIB, but not audiophile quality. I'm quite pleased with the way my XM sounds using that system. No, it's not CD quality, but it's not terrible either. I wouldn't mind if XM offered a few less channels as a way to increase the bandwidth of each channel, but unfortunately the channel selection and compression are only likely to increase as time goes by. Why stop at 100 channels when you can have 150?

Compression will most likely get more noticeable, unless a superior compression technique is used. But for now, I really have no complaints. For less than the price of one CD, I have hundreds of CDs worth of musical choices.

I can certainly understand not subscribing to XM if it sounds so poor on your system. Hopefully XM will continuously strive to improve the sound quality it provides.

Steve K.

 

[Chris]

I think a lot of it will vary based on expectations.

I will be brutally honest: when I listened to regular radio, I was 95% AM radio exclusively (talk), and 5% I would tune into certain FM stations to hear "the hot song of current" if I liked it

With SIRIUS, I'm basically the same, 95% talk, 5% music. I have no doubt that Shade 45 rides the current "hot" rap music heavy and puts it in heavy rotation.. which is about what I'm after (in other words, it suits me; rap that is more then 4 months old is almost "bah" to listen to; as Chuck D once said, it's like CNN.. and old news is old news..)

What sells me on SIRIUS is that I can listen to or follow the same thing with no static at all, I never run out of the range of the signal, and I can always follow the story.

Now, I cannot openly compare to FM, just don't listen most of the time. But I do care about talk.. and so far, SIRIUS's talk feed has been very, very good. I've been happy to catch things I want to catch as I listen. I wake up in the morning an drive around to Bloomberg or FoxNews, dependant on the day, then flip over through SIRIUS Right/Left and do that bit.

What I find is that SIRIUS manages to pull together chatter in such a way that I've followed it through the talk stations; ie, a conversation may start on Shade45, and then move over to OutQ where Romaine can do her bit on Shade45 and then follow it up on her own show.. which is sometimes hilarious.

I think it all depends. But yes, like many people, I bought in largely for sports, and I feel I've been pretty rewarded. Sunday is my big drive day; every week I have to drive about 4 hours. So, to be able to stay up to date while I'm driving back and forth (a 2 hr. drive there, then 2 hr. back) is always worthwhile.

In regards to sound quality, in comparison to FM, it's far superior in my experience. But it has what no regular station does.. no static at all.. no stations going out of range.. and better general content.

Next year will be an interesting one as XM basically will add 14 streams for baseball, and SIRIUS will add 2 more (MAXIM and one for Stern at the end of the year while 2 are flipped ot his control).

At this point, the CODEC being used can only be tweaked, not significantly altered without making current receivers incompatible. Therefore, you have what you have. And it will be interesting to see how it all turns out

 

[Dave Bennett]

I just moved from a Roady going to my JVC headunit's aux in to a Alpine 9830 with XMDirect and I noticed a fairly significant increase in sound quality on the XM stations. I think Alpine's media expander is partially responsible but I also think that the D/A conversion coming out of the Roady just isn't very good (it sounds pretty bad on my HT setup). Still, my reason for getting XM was to discover new music, not to hear it in the highest fidelity. I listen to it at work every day and now I'll listen in the car more so I'll be hearing alot more stuff I'm not familar with. If I find it's something I really like, I can always purchase it on CD.

 

[EricN]

Well, I'll dive in here. I have Sirius in two cars. I am happy with the sound quality.... However, I am using Alpine head units (9830 & 9835)and the Alpine Sirius receiver with each. I did have the Sirius Sportster receiver in one car using the FM modulator and the quality was lousy. Due partially to having to find a clear FM frequency in a metro area and the cheap receiver. Running through the direct wired Alpine head units the sound is very nice. (I also have my Ipod hooked in through the Alpine as well... )

Overall, I am suspecting strongly that the sound quality of satellite radio is going to be affected the same way our home systems are, by the quality of the components and the connection types. Spend $1500 on a quality car receiver, amp, sub and direct wired connection and you will likely be more pleased with your setup than with the $100 portable receiver operating through FM modulation... Surprise! :frowning:

 

[Michael Young]

I find its difficult to argue sound quality without a few Very specific points.

What Unit are you using:
Is it using RCA or FM Mod or Optical etc. :
What are you listening to it on..I hear nothing about Car stereo settings here:

Also another one eveyrone has neglected to mention, What station are you listening too???
How old is the song. I find XM has better EQ settings on their stations that play the same sort of songs. Like the Top20 or their dance stations or Hiphop/Rap etc. My problem is I listen to alternative / rock etc. and their range varies so much that the Stations sound different at times. You can listen to the same sone on Top20 or Ethel or Fred and tell the difference in EQ output.

I find XM and Sirius isn't too concerned with sound quality, and have neglected informing consumers that using FM modulator isn't the way to go. Or giving us Optical outs... We have to goto a 3rd party to buy Hacked XM receiver for this.. pittyful..

 

[dpippel]

Thanks again for all of the replies everyone, and Happy New Year.

Ron - I actually thought about trying out the Polk, but since I wanted the option of listening in my car I couldn't justify the $300 expense. I'd welcome the opportunity to feed a digital output from an XM receiver to my Soundstage to see how much of a difference it's DACs would make. I also think that an optical output should be standard equipment on any XM home adapter kit, if not on the receiver itself.

As for your point about the quality of digital audio and video technologies being compromised for content because most consumers really don't care or aren't aware, I couldn't agree more. I don't see the situation changing though, and I guess we just have to make the best of it or find our own niches of quality and enjoy them while we can.


In my case, as outlined in my post above, I'm listening to a SkyFi2 plugged into a home adapter kit, connected directly to my pre/pro with the provided mini-jack to RCA interconnect. In it's day the Aragon Soundstage listed for $4000 and is still considered a top-of-the-line preamp/processor. Amplification is provided by a Sherbourn 5/1500A 200 watt per channel x 5 amp. Speakers are Onix Rocket RS750s ($1400 per pair) paired with a SVS 25-31 PCi sub, etc., etc. In other words, my downstream components are not a limiting factor. While I agree that the SkyFi2 and it's decoder/DACs could possibly be improved upon, I'm more inclined to think that in the case of satellite radio you're just not gonna make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Play a highly compressed MP3 on my system and it sounds like just that - a highly compressed MP3. Nothing's going to change that. Garbage in, garbage out. If the quality isn't inherent in the source, throwing money at reproducing that source is wasteful and foolish.

 

[EricN]

Michael Young wrote:

--I find its difficult to argue sound quality without a few Very specific points.

What Unit are you using:
Is it using RCA or FM Mod or Optical etc. :
What are you listening to it on..I hear nothing about Car stereo settings here:

Also another one eveyrone has neglected to mention, What station are you listening too???
How old is the song. I find XM has better EQ settings on their stations that play the same sort of songs. Like the Top20 or their dance stations or Hiphop/Rap etc. My problem is I listen to alternative / rock etc. and their range varies so much that the Stations sound different at times. You can listen to the same sone on Top20 or Ethel or Fred and tell the difference in EQ output.--

Good points Michael. The connections are all direct from the Sirius antenna to the Alpine Sirius receiver to the Alpine 9835 via Monster cable Car connects with RCA's. I am driving a Ford Expedition Eddie Bauer edition with JL Labs sub and Polk speakers. The amp for the sub is a mono 250 watt Alpine.

I listen to several stations including Hair Nation, Alt Nation, and Buzzsaw for Rock as well as several of the Jazz and classical stations depending on the mood. I drive 40K miles per year so I have plenty of listening time. Actually much more than time at home with the Denon 5800 and my M&K's via my Denon 5900 DVD player. So I am satisfied with what I am getting given the environment I am listening in. Perfect imaging and a quiet space is tough to find at 75 MPH down I-75. Listening to my IPod or to CD's via the Alpine does give a fuller sound than the Sirius, but I find via the EQ settings I can get close enough for road time listening. I can now choose from 135 statios, 4000 IPod MP3's, CD's or local. I think I can find something to listen to..

 

[EricN]

Doug Wrote:

---In my case, as outlined in my post above, I'm listening to a SkyFi2 plugged into a home adapter kit, connected directly to my pre/pro with the provided mini-jack to RCA interconnect. In it's day the Aragon Soundstage listed for $4000 and is still considered a top-of-the-line preamp/processor. Amplification is provided by a Sherbourn 5/1500A 200 watt per channel x 5 amp. Speakers are Onix Rocket RS750s ($1400 per pair) paired with a SVS 25-31 PCi sub, etc., etc. In other words, my downstream components are not a limiting factor. While I agree that the SkyFi2 and it's decoder/DACs could possibly be improved upon, I'm more inclined to think that in the case of satellite radio you're just not gonna make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Play a highly compressed MP3 on my system and it sounds like just that - a highly compressed MP3. Nothing's going to change that. Garbage in, garbage out. If the quality isn't inherent in the source, throwing money at reproducing that source is wasteful and foolish.---

There is the siginificant issue; I am listening in my car, not my home. If I was listening at home I would likely be unimpressed with satellite radio. But I have a nice home system that is optimized for both music and HT. The key for me is how does it do in the car. I am happy with what it provides in that specific environment.

YMMV