TuneIn - streaming quality

[didjean]

Is TuneIn responsible for the quality of a radio stream?

I am used to listen to a Belgian radio called "RTBF La Premiere". Since end of may, the quality of the stream is not as good as it used to be.

I checked the metadata and it is MP3 128Kbps CBR but it sounds like 64Kbps.

I've contacted the streaming responsible of this radio and he told me that on his side everything was ok and it is more a TuneIn problem. is this possible? if yes, how can I proceed to get back the quality I used to have?

Thanks for your help.

[bpa]

For comparison - this is the stream direct from RTBF and nothing to do with Tunein
128k mp3 http://statslive.rtbf.be/playlist/la...3/playlist.m3u
64kl AAC http://statslive.rtbf.be/playlist/la...c/playlist.m3u

[didjean]

Thx bpa.

I'll do some tests tonight and see if it is the same stream as tunein.

[didjean]

Both streams have the same quality as far as I could hear.

Is this normal? I presume a 128 MP3 should be better than a 64 AAC?

[bpa]

Is this normal? I presume a 128 MP3 should be better than a 64 AAC?

I think so. IIRC test have shown 96k AAC is much preferred than 128k MP3. So I expect 64k AAC could be similar to 128k MP3. AAC is a better encoder and it has more modern psychoacoustics so I believe AAC stream often sound better even if they are not more failthful.

[didjean]

I think so. IIRC test have shown 96k AAC is much preferred than 128k MP3. So I expect 64k AAC could be similar to 128k MP3. AAC is a better encoder and it has more modern psychoacoustics so I believe AAC stream often sound better even if they are not more failthful.

What is the point of having 2 different encodings for the same stream. I presume it is just for compatibility issues.

Apart from the fact a AAC is better than a MP3, why a 128 sounds exactly a 64 ? It probably means the source is already crappy probably!

Now, if I understand, the problem is more in RTBF shop than in TuneIn?

[garym]

What is the point of having 2 different encodings for the same stream. I presume it is just for compatibility issues.

Apart from the fact a AAC is better than a MP3, why a 128 sounds exactly a 64 ? It probably means the source is already crappy probably!

Now, if I understand, the problem is more in RTBF shop than in TuneIn?

some players can't handle AAC. Almost all players can handle mp3. that's one reason for having multiple streams.

[bpa]

What is the point of having 2 different encodings for the same stream. I presume it is just for compatibility issues.

AAC can deliver same audio quality for fewer bits - i.e. lower cost for broadcaster and less network load for ISPs. However, in the past not all players can play AAC but most can now play AAC so you find many stations changing from MP3 to AAC or Flash/AAC and especially reducing MP3 available speeds to encourage users to play the AAC stream

[didjean]

I had the opportunity to do some more listening tests with http://statslive.rtbf.be/playlist/la...3/playlist.m3u

For me, the sreaming quality is under average, even bad , specially with trebles. Could one of you could confirm my perception before I get back once again to the streaming manager of that radio station?

Many thanks for your help!

[bpa]

For me, the sreaming quality is under average, even bad , specially with trebles. Could one of you could confirm my perception before I get back once again to the streaming manager of that radio station?

Sorry I can't. Quality is a perception and is personal. Unless you make recordings of the stream, show comparison against "good quality" stream - I don't think you'll have a case with a one-to-one interaction with the station.

It's quite possible the broadcaster has a bad encoding chain and to change it will cost too much (Look at this link for the BBC's secret back in 2008 - especially para with "dirty secret" http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs..._for_rad.shtml )

If there is a quality issue make it public - get some other listeners complaining on rtbf's facebook or twitter or whatever.