-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
WZLX HD1 in 5.1 Surround
- Thread starter mgpt6
- Start date
mgpt6 said:HHH, what changes did ZLX have to do to their HD-2 channel to accomodate the surround on the HD-1? Any adverse effects on the HD-2?
WZKX HD-2 sounds the same to me as it has since I bought my HD receiver in February...
mgpt6:
From what I understand, stations need only 5kp for the surround steering information, period, which is the only bit-rate impact. Stations can get the 5kp by shaving (for example) 2kp from HD-1 and 3kp from HD-2, or take all 5 from HD-1 or HD-2. Or possibly run HD-1 slightly higher than HD-2 (this is common at some stations), then take all 5kp from HD-1.
Not sure what WZLX is doing.
However, regardless of how it is sliced, the difference is pretty imperceptible.
From what I understand, stations need only 5kp for the surround steering information, period, which is the only bit-rate impact. Stations can get the 5kp by shaving (for example) 2kp from HD-1 and 3kp from HD-2, or take all 5 from HD-1 or HD-2. Or possibly run HD-1 slightly higher than HD-2 (this is common at some stations), then take all 5kp from HD-1.
Not sure what WZLX is doing.
However, regardless of how it is sliced, the difference is pretty imperceptible.
Actually, listening to WZLX HD-2 today, I wasn't impressed with the sound.
Very "thin", not much "bottom", tinny, raspy and harsh on the high end, slight distortion in the upper range.
It played "Starship Trooper" by Yes, which should've sounded excellent in digital so I cranked the stereo, but it didn't.
The sound is much better on their HD-1.
Very "thin", not much "bottom", tinny, raspy and harsh on the high end, slight distortion in the upper range.
It played "Starship Trooper" by Yes, which should've sounded excellent in digital so I cranked the stereo, but it didn't.
The sound is much better on their HD-1.
Their regular primary analog audio is often sounding a bit harsh and distorted lately.
Is it a side-effect of all their processing/encoding, or are some of their DJ's allowing their board levels to slam into the red?
Is it a side-effect of all their processing/encoding, or are some of their DJ's allowing their board levels to slam into the red?
Eli Polonsky said:Their regular primary analog audio is often sounding a bit harsh and distorted lately.
Is it a side-effect of all their processing/encoding, or are some of their DJ's allowing their board levels to slam into the red?
The surround encoding on the HD-1 is exclusive to that path. The analog, as mentioned before, is a completely independent, two-channel feed which is not derivative of the surround channels in any way. Any distortion that you hear is from other causes.
mgpt6 said:Any new developments with 5.1 surround at ZLX?
Still in experimental, non-public phase, with tweaking and such.
Mostlikely some commercial action in '08.
mgpt6 said:HHH, Can the jocks monitor the audio in surround in the studio?
yep
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.