Does Sirius "enhance" their audio?

[PricklyPete]

I've recently got a trial subscription to Sirius and I've been enjoying the service overall. I have noticed that the audio does not seem quite as good as I was expecting. Granted, it sounds a lot better than FM radio, but it seems a like they may be applying some digital "enhancement" to the audio stream. It seems that songs that I hear directly from my iPod or a CD through the same speakers are a bit clearer with less distortion than the same song over Sirius. Mind you, it isn't severe, just enough to be noticeable.

I realize that this could purely be the equipment that is being used or just in my head, but I was wondering if there is any confirmed "enhancing" that Sirius does? Maybe an attempt to make crappier speakers sound "better" to the general populace?

So does anyone else hear this, or do I just need to switch to a higher end source of crack?

 

[Gibsons]

They compress it. sort of the opposite of enhancing...

 

[Leros]

FM radio is really crappy quality. Sirius is better, but still heavily compressed. Much more so than any "acceptable quality" mp3s.

 

[PricklyPete]

They compress it. sort of the opposite of enhancing...

FM radio is really crappy quality. Sirius is better, but still heavily compressed. Much more so than any "acceptable quality" mp3s.

I know it is compressed...but so is the music on my iPod. It was my impression that they tried to compress it so that it would sounds similar to a CD ("CD Quality"), but I guess I was wrong on that.

 

[Crono]

They use a proprietary codec with a low bitrate and psychoacoustic compression.

It probably sounds okay for most people, but if you are an audiophile, you would probably prefer to hear higher bitrate mp3 or AAC. Whatever setting they are using, it's probably under 64kbps.

 

[PricklyPete]

They use a proprietary codec with a low bitrate and psychoacoustic compression.
It probably sounds okay for most people, but if you are an audiophile, you would probably prefer to hear higher bitrate mp3 or AAC.

I wouldn't consider myself a "audiophile" at all...but I do feel it sounds "boosted".

 

[Cogman]

I wouldn't consider myself a "audiophile" at all...but I do feel it sounds "boosted".

Not boosted, you are hearing compression artifacts. Just because your IPOD has compressed audio, doesn't mean that it is the same compressed audio the sirus uses. Different compression techniques have different sounds and artifacts to them.

Depending on the bitrate, codec, and compression setting they use it can range from far worse to far better. That's the joy of lossy compression, you never know what you are going to get.

 

[Crono]

I wouldn't consider myself a "audiophile" at all...but I do feel it sounds "boosted".

I don't consider myself an audiophile, either, but whenever heavy compression is used, it throws out a lot of the frequency spectrum that people supposedly don't hear/perceive that well, and the result is harsher audio. I don't mind low and variable bitrate for most speech-only audio, but it's not good for music.

 

[PricklyPete]

Not boosted, you are hearing compression artifacts. Just because your IPOD has compressed audio, doesn't mean that it is the same compressed audio the sirus uses. Different compression techniques have different sounds and artifacts to them.

Depending on the bitrate, codec, and compression setting they use it can range from far worse to far better. That's the joy of lossy compression, you never know what you are going to get.

Understood...I guess I was just expecting better. I'm not saying I won't sign up for the service after the trial is over...I do enjoy the content...but I was hoping for more from the audio than I got.

 

[Leros]

Understood...I guess I was just expecting better. I'm not saying I won't sign up for the service after the trial is over...I do enjoy the content...but I was hoping for more from the audio than I got.

I've heard that XM is better quality, but I'm not sure what that means with the merger. I know that different channels have different audio quality.

 

[PricklyPete]

I've heard that XM is better quality, but I'm not sure what that means with the merger. I know that different channels have different audio quality.

Interesting. I wonder if that is something baked into the Sirius hardware, or something they could improve if wanted. I'm assuming they wouldn't back themselves into a corner on quality...but when you're competing on price for hardware, compromises do have to be made.

 

[BillGates]

I think it sounds terrible. I considered signing up for it until I heard it in 2 different friends' cars. The music I was familiar with had a swishy and underwater sound to it - likely due to too much compression or too low of a bitrate. Good idea, bad execution. Maybe the average listener doesn't notice, or they get accustomed to it?

 

[FoBoT]

my car stereo is garbage anyway, i just like the variety of music i get from XM regardless of the quality

 

[CptCrunch]

This is one of the complaints i've had with them. I had it for about 4 months and quit because of the sound quality. It's almost 102KBps or so, not quite "cd" quality at 128KBps. I understand why they do it, but honestly, they need better quality stations IMO.

I get better quality out of my blackberry with pandora/slacker than sirius satellite radio with an aux in. And, it's free (well, minus the data plan that I need anyways)

 

[CptCrunch]

Yay vB double post!

 

[aircooled]

It's good enough for being in the car.

 

[adairusmc]

As long as Howard Stern and Bubba The Love Sponge are broadcasting, they can make it any bitrate they want.

 

[Sheep]

It's good enough for being in the car.

Not really. My car's audio system is anything but high-end but XM sounded like crap compared to CDs, MP3s and FM channels (assuming the last one had decent reception). Don't even try playing the satellite feed on a decent home sound system unless you want to know exactly how audiophiles feel when listening to low bitrate MP3s.

Assuming Sirius is the same, XM sounded like 96kbps MP3 or worse to me. And I consider 128kbps perfectly fine for car use.

 

[PricklyPete]

It's good enough for being in the car.

Well it is definitely noticeable in my wife's car (this is where I've experienced this).

I probably will keep the service just for the programming and how nice it is on long trips, but I definitely prefer the sound of the CDs/iPod (digital connection...not AUX).

 

[Platypus]

It sounds like complete shit in my opinion.

 

[bobdole369]

It probably sounds okay for most people

Not to me. I had a Sirius receiver pre-installed in my car (used) - So I called up and paid for service for 3 months. Wish I had that money back. I cancelled due to the impossible (for me (and I'm fairly far from an audiophile AND I was using the stock car system to boot)) to listen to. My wife loved it. She couldn't tell anything was different.

The artifacts made music "confusing" to listen to and I sear I got actual headaches. FM radio for the MF win here.

Not to mention - they have a ton of actual stations- but of the music I actually listen to - and even those that I would consider in a pinch if nothing else was on - numbered less than a dozen. It's only redeeming quality was Nascar during the races, Howard, Bubba, and the comedy channel. It isn't worth monthly to pay for that to me.

 

[evident]

quality isn't as good as a cd, but the content more than makes up for it.

 

[Bibble]

I've had Sirius for 3.5 months and the sound quality never bothered me. I wish I could turn the volume higher though, as it is much quieter than FM stations. My car stereo is terrible, which I'm sure doesn't help at all.

Plus, I got Sirius because I drive through rural/hilly areas where the only stations that come in clear are country and christian format. Being able to listen to good music anywhere, despite audio quality issues, is what is most valuable to me.

 

[mb]

Meh. I wish it was better but it's good enough for me.
Better quality, far superior selection and no ads compared to FM. I mostly listen in my office at work with the volume low so the quality isn't that important.
Sure, CDs or a nice MP3 player would have better quality, but XM is far more convenient to me. I've probably had the same 300 songs on my MP3 player for a few years... I know some people get new music everyday but I don't have the time for that.
And I can't stream music online at work so that's not even an option.