XM Users--bad sound quality lately?

J

jebo_4jc

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - April 2011
Joined
Apr 8, 2005
Messages
14,567
I'm using a free trial XM period I got with my car. However, I've noticed that XM sounds incredibly "Compressed." I would compare it to a 64kbps mp3 file. Also, "S" sounds are scratchy and harsh.
Is this normal? I've driven other cars with XM for extended time periods (a week) and I don't remember noticing poor sound quality before. I was under the impression that Sat. radio produced CD-quality sound. Is anybody else having similar experiences?
 
I have the same problem with both XM and Sirius. Its just the Satellite radio technology in general. The more channels they add the worse it gets. I honestly cannot listen to any satellite radio at anything but quiet volume levels. Sound Quality wise FM and especially HD Radio rival and beat satellite any day.
 
This has been the thing that keeps me away from Sat. radio. I would be willing to pay the monthly fee and even a few commericals if the quality was decent. But from every friends system to the ones on display they just do not sound good to me. They sound as good if not a bit worse than FM. The content is probably better than FM but if the sound quality is so bad that you do not want to hear it.
 
That's really dissapointing to hear, pun intended.

I thought satellite Radio had the best quality. So the only advantage to XM and Sirius is the lack of advertising now? (Assuming you're not driving cross-country). :rolleyes:
 
Well if you listen to Stern there is advertising. If you listen to XM there are commercials for OnStar, and I've heard a few for XM NavTraffic and GM Vehicles. There is no commerical free radio only some stations are. I just wish the sound quality was alot better.
 
benamaster said:
Well if you listen to Stern there is advertising. If you listen to XM there are commercials for OnStar, and I've heard a few for XM NavTraffic and GM Vehicles. There is no commerical free radio only some stations are. I just wish the sound quality was alot better.
Click to expand...

Bummer. A few commercials wouldn't really bother me. Paying for bad quality would, I refuse to even use iTunes because they only supply 128kb/s...
 
I've noticed different XM stations have different quality. XM 20 - top 20 sounds much better then XM 48 - squizz. I think they give better quality to the more popular stations. Both of my systems are aftermarket with a dedicated xm tuners that are hooked up to good speaker/sub setups. Sony(head unit/xm tuner)/JL Audio(speakers and sub) for the one and Pioneer(head unit/xm tuner)/Alpine(speakers)/Polk(sub) for the other and between the stations the sound quality differences are very noticable, kind of sucks but what options do you have. It's still better then "Free FM".
 
I've got XM in my house, and haven't really noticed a drop in quality. Course, I don't listen to very many channels either.
 
Well it seems we aren't the only ones upset about the sound quality. I found two huge threads on the xmfan.com forums about the poor sound quality. one two
Again, this is really frustrating to me because I always thought Sat radio was basically AT LEAST FM quality without static. To find out that it's significantly worse than FM is very disappointing.
 
Hvatum said:
That's really dissapointing to hear, pun intended.

I thought satellite Radio had the best quality. So the only advantage to XM and Sirius is the lack of advertising now? (Assuming you're not driving cross-country). :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
The only advantage to satellite is the content. I'm wrestling with this concept. Everybody says "but you get so many good channels, so who cares about sound quality!"
This would be like telling me I could get 150 channels of below-broadcast-quality TV stations for $13/month. My HDTV setup would be completely going to waste, but at least I would be getting more content.
I think I would rather save my $13/month and buy higher quality CDs (or DVDs in my above example).
 
Hvatum said:
Bummer. A few commercials wouldn't really bother me. Paying for bad quality would, I refuse to even use iTunes because they only supply 128kb/s...
Click to expand...
do you mean the library or the store? yes, the store doesn't give full cd quality downloads, but the recordings on their database is of higher quality than the quality of a cd....but compressed.
 
I have to say though alot of the factory systems have highly EQed head units and they sound pretty good. Anything aftermarket though reviels the flaws. I've seen the Polk Audio home unit and couldn't believe how bad it can sound on great equipment.
 
johnnq said:
do you mean the library or the store? yes, the store doesn't give full cd quality downloads, but the recordings on their database is of higher quality than the quality of a cd....but compressed.
Click to expand...

I mean in the library, it is a step-up of course that they're ripping from full quality and not recompressed CDs and the like. Still though, for $.99 a song with DRM I'd expect at least 192kbs if not more. Full CD Quality in WAV or FLAC would be optimal.
 
I demo'd a XM boombox with its headphone out on my Etys over Christmas. It's always sort of sucked. IIRC, they are using 64kbps AACPlus.
 
my friend has XM and everything but the classical channels are completely unlistenable to me, they all sound terrible! FM broadcast radio sounds better! and thats pretty bad considering clear channel turns it up to past clipping and the compresses the hell out of everything to the point that the volume is all the same through loud/soft parts of music :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
Doesn't anyone think XM should go down to like 50 channels with twice the sound quality. Its a pain anyways to page through 100's of channels.
 
benamaster said:
Doesn't anyone think XM should go down to like 50 channels with twice the sound quality. Its a pain anyways to page through 100's of channels.
Click to expand...
Yes....I doubt very many people listen to the E channel, for instance.
 
I have Sirius in my house hooked up to my z560 speakers through my x-fi and it sounds great to me. I also have both XM and Sirius in my truck through a 4 channel 490w eclipse amp with two 10" subs and it also sounds fine. I enjoy Sirius music content selection a hell of alot more though.
 
This probably depends on two things:
1. The channels one listens to
2. The listeners ear

Some people will say one thing sounds good while another won't. For me, I can say that XMU, the Loft, Lucy, and Ethel literally sound like 64kbps mp3 files.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top