2. misc-audio
  3. 1140047968

XM Radio - Anyone Getting It Through DirectTV?

We moved a few months ago into a new and larger home. And long before the move I had my fill of the miserable picture provided by our cable TV service (Comcast). So we set up a DirectTV account and LOVE the service as well as the extra clean picture on every channel. (One of my main beefs with cable was the ghosting on at least two or three of the lowest channels on our cable system.)
A few weeks back we discovered the various XM channels that we get as part of our service package. My main question concerns the quality of the XM signal we are getting vs. that recieved by a dedicated XM satellite receiver. Is there any real difference? I can tell you that the classical channels on XM certainly have a LOT more enjoyable music than much of what our local classical station plays most weekday mornings.
avideo

Showing 1 response by kjweisner

kjweisner's avatar
kjweisner
293 posts
 
I've never done a side by side comparison, but can say that the compression does result in a sub-optimal source. This seems to be consensus in this thread, as well as others. I have found a silver (okay, bronze) lining in this cloud.

In my environment, I run that signal through some pretty respectable digital processing (Meridian 518 for dejitter upconversion, Meridian 565 for processing, out to Meridian digital speakers). Despite all that, the sound just isn't anything to get excited about, but. . .

When I take that DirecTV/XM signal and put it through some soundfield processing, there's what I consider a significant improvement in listenability. I have a more modest Marantz processor in another system, and found the same to be true with that rig.

So, while I'm loathe to 'muck up' a pristine source with soundfield processing, it seems to have a positive effect on lower quality sources.
More to discover