Re: [backstage] Why the poor bitrates on World Service, Asian Network etc?
Pretty sure the bombers use AM radio to check for the ongoing existence of Broadcasting House, and Sceptre isn't a bomber (they're all V class boats). Re the WS bitrate, these are worth revisiting, but it's possible that the budget and hence the bitrate for WS is entirely seperately worked out, being as the audience and funding is seperate. Arguably a high bit rate would be counter productive for WS- the aim of the game is to reach a lot of people at the end of thin wires (or over wireless). A parallel hi bit rate service might well be a useful way to get the quality out there, but then that's a stack more cash to pay, and not really in line with the WS objectives. Personally, I feel the biggest problem for WS is figuring out which audiences to focus on- getting it wrong can be painful- the Thai service shut down three years ago, sonce when we've seen two military coups and border war flare up. Can't help wondering if anyone at Bush House is regreting handing out those redundancies. a On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 3:29 AM, Christopher Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This one's a late night, in-the-kitchen thought. I turned the radio on while I was making a cup of tea and of course, after R4 closedown the WS is simulcast. On FM, you get a wonderful, crisp stereo feed. On DAB, the WS feed is fine when listening to the Radio 4 simulcast, 128kbps stereo, but its own dedicated slot is naff: a 64kbps mono stream. On the web, it's even worse - only streamed at 32kbps WMA/RA. AsianNetwork is 64kbps mono on DAB - even 5Live has a better bitrate (80kbps mono). While I'm not a big Asian Network listener, I do live in Brum so take a bit of an interest in Asian community goings on. However, I'd quite like to listen to the WS during the daytime, either via the web or via DAB - how come the bitrates haven't been upped for these stations on the web streams? They're dragging behind the other BBC radio stations' online streams. Are there any plans to ever up the bandwidth of these neglected stations, either on DAB, on the web or both? I'm under the impression that the maximum bitrate for the multiplex is 1184kbps useable. According to DigitalRadioTech [1], the pre2002 bitrates were significantly higher (which I remember), and I can understand the reasons for lowering the bitrates to fit in the newer channels. The web's a different matter entirely though. What's stopping the Beeb from upping the bitrates for all the online streams to the same bitrate? (and will the bitrates ever go above 128kbps? I'd love a 192kbps or 256kbps stream, particularly for... Well, all of the radio stations!) And also, as a final question - how come the iPlayer pages for *all* of the radio stations are currently reporting each one as being currently off-air? Have the boxes doing the encoding and streaming been taken offline for work overnight or something? If someone aboard the HMS Sceptre is browsing the Radio 4 iPlayer site and sees that it's currently offair, they might think Britain is under attack and launch some Tridents at the Soviets. Wouldn't *that* be an interesting one for Gordon Brown to try and explain! - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Ant Miller tel: 07709 265961 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Why the poor bitrates on World Service, Asian Network etc?
2008/10/21 Christopher Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] This one's a late night, in-the-kitchen thought. I turned the radio on while I was making a cup of tea and of course, after R4 closedown the WS is simulcast. On FM, you get a wonderful, crisp stereo feed. On DAB, the WS feed is fine when listening to the Radio 4 simulcast, 128kbps stereo, but its own dedicated slot is naff: a 64kbps mono stream. On the web, it's even worse - only streamed at 32kbps WMA/RA. AsianNetwork is 64kbps mono on DAB - even 5Live has a better bitrate (80kbps mono). It is probably worth pointing out that the World Service, unlike all other BBC services is paid for out of direct taxation. Thus the service has an even more limited budget than License Fee services, it is down to the FCO http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/about-the-fco/what-we-do/funding-programmes/public-diplomacy/world-service While I'm not a big Asian Network listener, I do live in Brum so take a bit of an interest in Asian community goings on. However, I'd quite like to listen to the WS during the daytime, either via the web or via DAB - how come the bitrates haven't been upped for these stations on the web streams? They're dragging behind the other BBC radio stations' online streams. Are there any plans to ever up the bandwidth of these neglected stations, either on DAB, on the web or both? I'm under the impression that the maximum bitrate for the multiplex is 1184kbps useable. According to DigitalRadioTech [1], the pre2002 bitrates were significantly higher (which I remember), and I can understand the reasons for lowering the bitrates to fit in the newer channels. The web's a different matter entirely though. What's stopping the Beeb from upping the bitrates for all the online streams to the same bitrate? (and will the bitrates ever go above 128kbps? I'd love a 192kbps or 256kbps stream, particularly for... Well, all of the radio stations!) And also, as a final question - how come the iPlayer pages for *all* of the radio stations are currently reporting each one as being currently off-air? Have the boxes doing the encoding and streaming been taken offline for work overnight or something? If someone aboard the HMS Sceptre is browsing the Radio 4 iPlayer site and sees that it's currently offair, they might think Britain is under attack and launch some Tridents at the Soviets. Wouldn't *that* be an interesting one for Gordon Brown to try and explain! - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
RE: [backstage] iPlayer: Sky re-invents web links
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 20 October 2008 14:19 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] iPlayer: Sky re-invents web links Couldn't really let this one pass without comment: http://blog.wotsat.com/page/whatsat?entry=sky_re_invents_web_links In perhaps one of the most disingenuous claims in the history of marketing, Sky and the BBC have announced a deal to combine Sky Player and iPlayer. http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2008/10_october/2 0/iplayer.shtml The BBC and Sky have announced that BBC iPlayer can now be accessed via Sky Player, Sky's online TV service. what's disingenuous about that? Sky could just as easily have refused to link to the iPlayer: the fact that they didn't is worth a press release, IMO. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] iPlayer: Sky re-invents web links
Couldn't really let this one pass without comment: http://blog.wotsat.com/page/whatsat?entry=sky_re_invents_web_links In perhaps one of the most disingenuous claims in the history of marketing, Sky and the BBC have announced a deal to combine Sky Player and iPlayer. http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2008/10 _october/2 0/iplayer.shtml The BBC and Sky have announced that BBC iPlayer can now be accessed via Sky Player, Sky's online TV service. what's disingenuous about that? Sky could just as easily have refused to link to the iPlayer: the fact that they didn't is worth a press release, IMO. It's also a bit more than links - they're incorporating the channel/schedule data into the Sky Player site before linking through to iPlayer. I presume they could do that using RSS feeds if they wanted to (and may actually be doing so). Also there's the question of whether the Sky Player usage of such XML feeds would fall foul of the BBC's standard feed terms and conditions http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/help/rss/4498287.stm - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] ping.fm
Sunday: added 23 social networks to my ping.fm account. Tuesday: http://ping.fm has disappeared! Has it been credit crunched? Is it to return? Or do I need to change 23 passwords? -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] ping.fm
2008/10/21 Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sunday: added 23 social networks to my ping.fm account. Tuesday: http://ping.fm has disappeared! Has it been credit crunched? Is it to return? Or do I need to change 23 passwords? They're having problems with GoDaddy. Definitely not dead. http://tinyurl.com/5bdl3w Follow @pingfm on twitter. Peter -- Peter Bowyer Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/peeebeee - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Why the poor bitrates on World Service, Asian Network etc?
Having said that, and my earlier point about low bit rates actually being better for reaching the audiences they're tyring to get to, the higher bit rates do exist. If anyone in backstage would like to suggest something we could do with better quality streams at low cost (i.e. none!) then fire away! a On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2008/10/21 Christopher Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] This one's a late night, in-the-kitchen thought. I turned the radio on while I was making a cup of tea and of course, after R4 closedown the WS is simulcast. On FM, you get a wonderful, crisp stereo feed. On DAB, the WS feed is fine when listening to the Radio 4 simulcast, 128kbps stereo, but its own dedicated slot is naff: a 64kbps mono stream. On the web, it's even worse - only streamed at 32kbps WMA/RA. AsianNetwork is 64kbps mono on DAB - even 5Live has a better bitrate (80kbps mono). It is probably worth pointing out that the World Service, unlike all other BBC services is paid for out of direct taxation. Thus the service has an even more limited budget than License Fee services, it is down to the FCO http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/about-the-fco/what-we-do/funding-programmes/public-diplomacy/world-service While I'm not a big Asian Network listener, I do live in Brum so take a bit of an interest in Asian community goings on. However, I'd quite like to listen to the WS during the daytime, either via the web or via DAB - how come the bitrates haven't been upped for these stations on the web streams? They're dragging behind the other BBC radio stations' online streams. Are there any plans to ever up the bandwidth of these neglected stations, either on DAB, on the web or both? I'm under the impression that the maximum bitrate for the multiplex is 1184kbps useable. According to DigitalRadioTech [1], the pre2002 bitrates were significantly higher (which I remember), and I can understand the reasons for lowering the bitrates to fit in the newer channels. The web's a different matter entirely though. What's stopping the Beeb from upping the bitrates for all the online streams to the same bitrate? (and will the bitrates ever go above 128kbps? I'd love a 192kbps or 256kbps stream, particularly for... Well, all of the radio stations!) And also, as a final question - how come the iPlayer pages for *all* of the radio stations are currently reporting each one as being currently off-air? Have the boxes doing the encoding and streaming been taken offline for work overnight or something? If someone aboard the HMS Sceptre is browsing the Radio 4 iPlayer site and sees that it's currently offair, they might think Britain is under attack and launch some Tridents at the Soviets. Wouldn't *that* be an interesting one for Gordon Brown to try and explain! - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 -- Ant Miller tel: 07709 265961 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Why the poor bitrates on World Service, Asian Network etc?
Christopher Woods wrote: This one's a late night, in-the-kitchen thought. I turned the radio on while I was making a cup of tea and of course, after R4 closedown the WS is simulcast. On FM, you get a wonderful, crisp stereo feed. On DAB, the WS feed is fine when listening to the Radio 4 simulcast, 128kbps stereo, but its own dedicated slot is naff: a 64kbps mono stream. On the web, it's even worse - only streamed at 32kbps WMA/RA. AsianNetwork is 64kbps mono on DAB - even 5Live has a better bitrate (80kbps mono). I'm told some experiments were done a few years back on the DAB feed to point R4 and WS at the same pool for the duration of the simulcast. However it caused many models of DAB receiver around at the time to crash either when the services were merged, or separated. This resulted in lots of R4 people in BH cursing the World Service as they came into work the next morning to find their office DAB radios had locked up :) The web streams are something we are currently looking at, there are a lot of things happening behind the scenes at the moment. But you can expect some higher bitrates and new formats in the coming months. As others have said, we are funded differently to the rest of BBC Radio and have to offer our service in a way that offers benefits to all our audience, wherever they may be in the world. So the model of using high bitrates restricted just to the UK (so mainly peering traffic) is not something that is appropriate for us to do. -- Gareth Davis | Production Systems Specialist World Service Future Media, Digital Delivery Team - Part of BBC Global News Division * http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ * 702NE Bush House, Strand, London, WC2B 4PH - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Why the poor bitrates on World Service, Asian Network etc?
The web streams are something we are currently looking at, there are a lot of things happening behind the scenes at the moment. But you can expect some higher bitrates and new formats in the coming months. As others have said, we are funded differently to the rest of BBC Radio and have to offer our service in a way that offers benefits to all our audience, wherever they may be in the world. So the model of using high bitrates restricted just to the UK (so mainly peering traffic) is not something that is appropriate for us to do. Thanks for your reply Gareth, always appreciate a response from someone involved with the subject of discussion. However, as the infrastructure is already there for UK streaming, with minimal extra expenditure required to provide this simulcast higher bitrate service, and with every UK taxpayer funding the WS in some small form, how come the Powers That Be have defined it as something not appropriate for the WS to rollout? The inappropriate argument may have held water four or five years ago, but is increasingly irrelevant these days. (imvho of course, there are doubtless other factors weighing in on the decision but that is how I perceive it as a UK citizen from a plain ole consumer standpoint). Just seems odd more than anything else that where easy to do, the WS already has decent quality broadcast, and there's these big holes on other platforms where listening is like jumping back to the 90s and trying to squeeze every last baud out of your Hayes v.90 to stream that 32kbps station! :) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Why the poor bitrates on World Service, Asian Network etc?
2008/10/21 Ant Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Having said that, and my earlier point about low bit rates actually being better for reaching the audiences they're tyring to get to, the higher bit rates do exist. If anyone in backstage would like to suggest something we could do with better quality streams at low cost (i.e. none!) then fire away! The UK audience's bitrate doesn't need to be the same as for other areas, and there are lots of different services worldwide... *BUT* my DAB rescue plan: - BBC given 'national commercial multiplex 2' on five-year loan - BBC doubles up all it's DAB TX sites to do this mux - BBC emits DAB+ version of all services - boost audio quality for all services - Restricted national commercial bandwidth drives up DAB slot values - BBC promotes upgrade to DAB+ for all existing users! - After five years, BBC moves it's national mux to DAB+, returns com mux 2. - Com Mux 2 for new DAB+ services - Then Com Mux 1 moves to DAB+ Then the BBC can promote the true CD quality DAB+ get it now service, people have five years to upgrade all their DAB sets. a On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2008/10/21 Christopher Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] This one's a late night, in-the-kitchen thought. I turned the radio on while I was making a cup of tea and of course, after R4 closedown the WS is simulcast. On FM, you get a wonderful, crisp stereo feed. On DAB, the WS feed is fine when listening to the Radio 4 simulcast, 128kbps stereo, but its own dedicated slot is naff: a 64kbps mono stream. On the web, it's even worse - only streamed at 32kbps WMA/RA. AsianNetwork is 64kbps mono on DAB - even 5Live has a better bitrate (80kbps mono). It is probably worth pointing out that the World Service, unlike all other BBC services is paid for out of direct taxation. Thus the service has an even more limited budget than License Fee services, it is down to the FCO http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/about-the-fco/what-we-do/funding-programmes/public-diplomacy/world-service While I'm not a big Asian Network listener, I do live in Brum so take a bit of an interest in Asian community goings on. However, I'd quite like to listen to the WS during the daytime, either via the web or via DAB - how come the bitrates haven't been upped for these stations on the web streams? They're dragging behind the other BBC radio stations' online streams. Are there any plans to ever up the bandwidth of these neglected stations, either on DAB, on the web or both? I'm under the impression that the maximum bitrate for the multiplex is 1184kbps useable. According to DigitalRadioTech [1], the pre2002 bitrates were significantly higher (which I remember), and I can understand the reasons for lowering the bitrates to fit in the newer channels. The web's a different matter entirely though. What's stopping the Beeb from upping the bitrates for all the online streams to the same bitrate? (and will the bitrates ever go above 128kbps? I'd love a 192kbps or 256kbps stream, particularly for... Well, all of the radio stations!) And also, as a final question - how come the iPlayer pages for *all* of the radio stations are currently reporting each one as being currently off-air? Have the boxes doing the encoding and streaming been taken offline for work overnight or something? If someone aboard the HMS Sceptre is browsing the Radio 4 iPlayer site and sees that it's currently offair, they might think Britain is under attack and launch some Tridents at the Soviets. Wouldn't *that* be an interesting one for Gordon Brown to try and explain! - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 -- Ant Miller tel: 07709 265961 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] Why the poor bitrates on World Service, Asian Network etc?
2008/10/21 Gareth Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Christopher Woods wrote: However, as the infrastructure is already there for UK streaming, with minimal extra expenditure required to provide this simulcast higher bitrate service, and with every UK taxpayer funding the WS in some small form, how come the Powers That Be have defined it as something not appropriate for the WS to rollout? The inappropriate argument may have held water four or five years ago, but is increasingly irrelevant these days. There are actually 2 problems here: The first is stupidly complicated, and I'm not sure I understand it all fully. But it boils down to the fact that we cannot spend grant in aid funds on a service targeted exclusively at the UK. A high bitrate stream using the existing BBC infrastructure GeoIP locked to the UK would be the wrong side of the rules, as we would have to pay BBC Technology/Siemens grant in aid money to provide the UK exclusive service. Even if the funding rules were not in place, I imagine there would be objections on editorial grounds to restricting access to our services. The second reason, is that the BBC Streaming Infrastructure was never really designed for delivering high bitrate streams outside the UK if we were to make them universally available. You could, perhaps, make high bitrate versions available to platform providers, with a limited number of feeds for the likes of LiveStation and Zattoo and the like. That would get them the BBC World Service in high quality and you would get your radio station distributed for free. If you make the feeds we could have a backstage competition to see who can get the highest listener to feed ratio? The last few servers the BBC had in New York were shut down a while back, so there are now no BBC servers outside the UK. So to launch a global high bitrate service could potentially have quality of service issues. This is actually the real hurdle to increasing the bitrates, rather than anything else. As it happens we will have completed migrating our radio and on-demand playout to an external CDN when the schedules change at the end of BST, so this solves the infrastructure problem. Once we have the minor detail of launching Persian TV out of the way, we will be looking at making additional formats and bitrates available - but in a way that does not affect those that still need the narrowband Real/Windows offerings. -- Gareth Davis | Production Systems Specialist World Service Future Media, Digital Delivery Team - Part of BBC Global News Division * http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ * 702NE Bush House, Strand, London, WC2B 4PH - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] Why the poor bitrates on World Service, Asian Network etc?
Brian Butterworth wrote: You could, perhaps, make high bitrate versions available to platform providers, with a limited number of feeds for the likes of LiveStation and Zattoo and the like. Intuitively, that strikes me as opening up *different* cans of worms... S - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
