# XM Radio Review - thumbs down



## dkraut

I picked up a Roady2 last weekend. Hooked it up directly using a mini to mini stereo cable to the mini aux port of a decent sound system. I'm sorry but this thing just isn't up to par. Sound is best described as muddy with little high end. I'd put it one notch above AM and below the quality of FM. I EQ'd it to death and got it sound decent but still not up to par. Just to verify it was the roady, we hooked up a laptop using the same cable and the mp3's sounded much better than the sat radio. Same thing with CD's and MP3 CD-RW's, all sounded great except the Sat Radio. We did try the Roady at several outdoor locations with no obstructions with the same result. I can't say I was thrilled with the station lineup either. The 80's station was playing a lot of songs that I've never even heard and the only decent station I could find was "BoneYard". Very dissapointing... I'm probably going to return this today and maybe give Sirius a try.


----------



## smapor

Yeah try both services before you decide.


Hey you can always wait for the new PNP by sirius

http://prn.newscom.com/cgi-bin/pub/s...ail&tr=1&row=1 



It is availabe on the Home Shopping Network this weekend.


The SIRIUS XACT XTR1 "Stream Jockey" Plug & Play satellite radio, manufactured by XACT Communication, will be first introduced to the public via the Home Shopping Network on Saturday, August 14 from 11:00-11:20 am ET and 9:00-9:20 pm ET.


Let me know how it works.


----------



## dkraut

hmmm, I'll check that one out tomorrow.


I just returned my Roady 2 and canceled my XM sub. The girl at XM asked me why I wanted to cancel so I told her the truth >>


"Well, this was first experience with satellite radio and I was very disappointed. When I did get a signal, it sounded a little better than my AM radio but not as good as my FM. If DirecTV / Dish network can deliver 900 channels of crystal clear TV from a satellite, I don't understand why XM can't deliver decent sound? If this is the best you can do, you have a rough road ahead of you."


----------



## Lew_b

I installed a Roady2 in my car (also using a direct conncection to the head unit) and for the most part, agree with your views as to the technical side of things.

I think the reason that the sound isn't 'up to par' may be due to the amount of compression used to fit all the content into the frequency band they have. Perhaps a satellite expert can chime in here. Does XM have their own birds, or do they buy space on someone else's ?

I also have big problems with signal dropouts. I have the antenna mounted on the roof of my car and still have problems when there is heavy tree cover to my West, I live in the northeast.


Now for the reason I like XM. No commercials or a-hole disk jockeys. Worth the price of admission right there !


Gotta figure that satellite TV and radio are still in their infancy, hopefully the technology side of things will improve.


----------



## dkraut

I watched HSN this morning, 8/14 and even checked out their website but no mention of the new Xact Sirius PNP you mentioned?


----------



## sirius_rich

Quote:

_Originally posted by dkraut_
*I watched HSN this morning, 8/14 and even checked out their website but no mention of the new Xact Sirius PNP you mentioned?*
Home Shopping Network cancelled the show due to the hurricane. It will be rescheduled. In the meantime look around at the unofficial Sirius fan site for pictures of the new Xact, Blaupunkt and the fisrt of next week the Sportster will be posted.

Sirius Ready Radios and Plug and Plays


----------



## JohnFR

I've had XM (Delphi SkiFi) for over a year and agree that sound quality leaves much to be desired. I mostly listen to the gab news & sports, and the comedy channels are great.


I don't have Sirius so I can't comment on whether the music sound quality is superior to XM. The problem is overcompression and the DSP/ambiance XM seems to add. The dynamic range is better that FM, but detail is lacking.


I really have few reception problems, though.


----------



## jeeprage

I just bought a new Audi that has XM installed. I dont think I'll be renewing my free 3 month demo either. Its just like cable, more stations doesnt mean anything worthwhile on.


----------



## STEELERSRULE

I had the XM SkyFi unit for about a year and a half, and came to the same conclusions as everybody else as far as the sound is concerned. I had it connected via the cassette adapter(and later the Wireless FM modulator). While the sound is not the greatest(not even close to what I expected) It is still better than anything one could receive from conventional radio. No disc jockey's, no commercials on the music channels, and the OVERALL content of satellite was what I went into it for.


But I just recently switched over to Sirius(Audiovox PNP unit connected to stereo via a cassette adapter) because I liked the overall content more than the current XM lineup. Like dkraut stated above, I too listened to the 80's station and would hear songs i never heard before, and also not even remotely interested in. So I made the switch. While the content is improved IMHO with Sirius, the sound quality was the same as the SkyFi unit.


I think some might be expecting too much with satellite radio. Maybe sometime in the near future they will improve the overall sound quality. But that may be a while, it ever.


----------



## aaroen

I just recently leased a 2004 Honda Accord EX V6 that has the XM radio built into the car. I was very impressed with the quality of the sound on XM. In my experience the sound was definately better than FM and no dropouts so far. I was so impressed that I went to CC and bought a second XM receiver for my home (Delphi SKYFi with the home adapter). When I first hooked it up to my little JVC mini stereo aux input in my bedroom, the output level of the receiver was so low (even with the line out level on the reciever maxed out) that I had to turn up the volume so high that the noise was a real issue and quality was very bad. I then had an issue with stringing the antenae cable accross the room to my stereo. I did some searching on GOOGLE and found www.ccrane.com who sells a small FM transmitter designed just for the XM SKYFi. I purchase this and hooked it up to the reciever and then used my FM on the mini stereo and

man that really solved the problem. The signal is now strong with no noise and crystal clear. No loss in quality and the transmitter is powerful enough that I now have XM radio from any FM receiver in my home. I think the quality issues for the Roady 2 and any of the satellite radio recievers that are an after market add-on for autos is the FM transmitters or cassette adapters used. My first auto CD player had the cassette adapter and the quality was terrible. So I don't know how to solve the auto issue except to suggest using this FM transmitter (it comes with both an ac adapter and it can also run on two AA batteries). If you are using one of these receivers in the home, I can definately attest to the quality of this FM transmitter when uses with the Delphi SKYFi XM reciever.


----------



## del

The best sound will be had in a direct connect setup. I have both Sirius tuner and a plug and play wireless fm setup and the direct connected sirius tuner blows it away. You just lose the portability.


----------



## aaroen

I used an inexpensive analog line pre amp to boost the input signal from the Delphi SKYFI before buying the FM transmitter and in my case to my ears, I could not tell any difference in audio quality and I love being able to use any FM radio in my home.


----------



## rplenty

I love XM! The sound quality is excellent on my units. Sounds better than FM for sure. The people above must be audiophiles because there are 2.6 million listeners enjoying fantastic reception, quality and music. Don't believe the above threads because XM is the great! (I think these are Sirius radio Posts.


----------



## STEELERSRULE

Quote:

_Originally posted by rplenty_
*I love XM! The sound quality is excellent on my units. Sounds better than FM for sure. The people above must be audiophiles because there are 2.6 million listeners enjoying fantastic reception, quality and music. Don't believe the above threads because XM is the great! (I think these are Sirius radio Posts.*
Either you didn't read the posts at all, or you have ZERO comprehension skills.


The topic is the sound of satellite radio in general. Yes, title of the post is about XM sound quality, but if you cared to read what some of us said, it is SATELLITE RADIO AS A WHOLE is less than what we were led to believe as far as SOUND QUALITY is concerned.


BOTH services SUFFER from this. The sound quality is LESS than what I expected(I had XM for a year and a half until switching to SIRIUS about 3 weeks ago.) My switch had nothing to do with SOUND QUALITY, just content available.


I think most here would agree that the sound between the two systems is the same(unless like you stated there are audiofiles, which I am not). It all depends on the connection you can get with your satellite set-up. AUX RCA red/white inputs seem to be the preffered method, but I am sure there are people out there who would EXPECT more if they switched connections from a wireless FM modulator to a AUX input. SOME PEOPLE WILL NEVER BE SATISFIED.


Also(this is off topic) I have never seen so many people take the service they have as the ULTIMATE SERVICE. THE OTHER SUCKS. BLAH BLAH BLAH.


rplenty, with your post in which you state the amount of subscribers to XM, sounds to me like a bit of desperation. It actually sounds like a commercial. Just because other people have the other service, doesn't mean that they feel that the service you subscribe too is a first rate, second rate service. More and more people on these forums are becoming less and less informative, and more and more like salesman, or just down right combative.


I had XM, and for the most part, liked the service. But after a year and a half I decided to switch because I liked the content much more on the current SIRIUS lineup. I have kept my XM equipment, and may someday return, if Sirius begins to lose my interest, and XM changes the content on their service to more of my liking. Hell, I may even join another service if another service comes along.


The point is don't ACCUSE posters of being shills for either service, and don't feel like you are being screwed/left out/got the wrong service/etc.... just because someone does not like/or switches/from one service to another. People have their reasons for having one or the other(or BOTH for that matter).


NO ONE CAN PREDICT WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN.


I'm sure if one of the satellites for either service was struck by an asteroid, people on these forums would ACCUSE posters of the other service of causing the catastrophe.


----------



## Rysa4

Wow. Mr RPlenty up there is just new to posting and made a three line comment in response to a very negative thread regarding XM, starting with the title.


Of course it's open forum here and forum content and titles are all good with me..until we get to personal attacks....


Hope we don't need a closed thread in this small corner of avsforum...


----------



## alv

I agree that the sound quality is not all that it could be. However, the addition of an optical out port has helped quite a bit. I can't quickly find the website but search other threads in this forum.


----------



## dkraut

Here are my latest findings...


I went into RadioShack today because I found out that they now sell Sirius. They had a boombox playing Sirius with an Orbiter SR4000 PNP Receiver which was connected to a rooftop antenna via what looked like an RF repeater or maybe FM transmitter? I promptly perked up my ears and went over and started playing and this thing sounds damn good! Now to confuse the issue even more, I came back to work and told a colleague about my satellite radio saga and he told me that he knows someone with a factory installed XM unit in their SUV and that it sounds great!?!?


My only conclusion is that the sound quality is very much dependent on the receiver itself. For those that suggested a direct connect, I tried that with my Roady2 and it still sounded like absolute crap (one notch above AM radio). I did play with the output level as well to no avail so I guess the XM Roady2 is what caused my sound quality issue? Anyway, I was more impressed with the Sirius programming so I'm going to do a little more research on their equipment and give them a try...


Cheers!


Dave


----------



## frankz00

I have my XM Roady connected directly into the aux in on my car stereo. I'd say it's better than FM but not quite as good as CD. However to say the sound quality is poor either means you're using FM modulation (which I did have and wasn't THAT bad considering) or you just nitpicking. What do you expect from multiple streams being broadcast from the SKY?????!?!?!


----------



## dkraut

If you would have taken a few minutes to actually read this thread, you would have known that I also used a direct connect aux in into a high end JVC mini system. In addition, I used the exact same cable and aux in connector to inject MP3 files into the JVC system from a laptop, which sounded light years better than my XM Roady2. You mentioned that your "Roady" sounds good via Aux in? Maybe you have the original Roady and maybe there is something wrong with the Roady2? or maybe I had a bad unit? As I mentioned, I visited a Radio Shack just yesterday and the Sirius Orbiter 4000 PNP unit sounded excellent! and that I know someone with a factory installed XM unit in their GM vehicle and they say it sounds excellent. I think the underlying theme of this thread is that the sound quality is highly dependent not only on the method of signal injection (direct aux in, FM transmitter, tape adapter) but also on the receiver itself.


Regards,


Dave


----------



## dandrewk

Dave - yours it not the first post to complain about audio quality of satellite receivers. It won't be the last. Those who do have a problem will be sure to be vocal about it. The vast, vast majority who don't have a problem with it most likely won't post anything, or post rarely.


The media reviews all side with those of us who are satisfied with Sat. radio. The content is superb, and the sound quality, while NOT CD quality, is still better than FM and quite satisfactory.


I have read this and other forums for months. The folks who have a problem with sound quality fall into two categories:


1. Those with standards set too high.

2. Those with equipment problems.


It sounds like you are #2. Try and fix the problem or return your unit as defective.


**edited for typos


----------



## frankz00

Dan.... you've crystalized my thoughts eloquently. I think alot of these people are expecting too much. I mean we pay $10-$13/month for 100 channels. I think it's a great deal and so what if it isn't "CD quality"... I don't think it has to be. Are these same people willing to pay extra for a premium stream??? I doubt most would. Besides, if quality is a concern, then why not go for an iPod instead?


----------



## onejake

I've had XM for the past year and a half. At first, I went to CC to have them install an add-on XM receiver to my existing car stereo. Simply put, the sound quality sucked. Drop offs, sounded like it was in a tunnel, etc.


What I didn't realize (due to my own ignorance at the time) was that the FM modulator was to blame. It was not a true digital connection. I ended up replacing the head unit in my vehicle with an XM ready Pioneer unit and the sound quality improved tremedously.


IMHO, the sound quality I receive rivals CD quality. I've had more than a few people comment on the quality of the sound regarding this. I think those who have sound issues are using FM modulation to receive the signals. Those who have XM ready head units are hearing much better sound.


Anything but Direct AUX IN will result in a degraded signal and sound quality.


----------



## DoyleS

As a side note, I have Sirius through the Dish Network setup and the sound quality is excellent. Obviously it is a direct connection. We only listen to a few of the music channels and mainly as background music but the quality of the raw signal seems to be very good. I would rate it above FM and below CD. I am even able to send it around the house using one of these wireless 900 MHz links and as long as you don't get a body in between the antennas it comes through with good fidelity and separation. I have debated adding Sirius to the car but did not want to pop for a dedicated receiver. My take after reading the threads for the last couple months is that anything less than a direct connect will likely result in a sound quality degradation and that pretty much makes sense.


..Doyle


----------



## FreddyW

dkraut

Quote:

can't say I was thrilled with the station lineup either. The 80's station was playing a lot of songs that I've never even heard and the only decent station I could find was "BoneYard". Very dissapointing... I'm probably going to return this today and maybe give Sirius a try.
You're upset because the 80's station played songs you'd never heard???


Dude, that's the best part of Sat radio. Hearing stuff you've never heard. Sometimes it sucks, but man, a lot of the time it's great.


And if "BoneyardXL" is your favorite station....heh....it all sounds alike, so I guess it passed your "I need to be familar" test?


Some people aren't happy unless they're bitching.


----------



## scryber

I love my XM. I have to admit I don't have an audiophile's ear when it comes to rating sound quality, but to say it sounds like AM sounds a bit harsh.


And I LOVE the content. Personally I've discovered tons of new bands on the new music channels. Plus I hear the great "classic" alternative stuff on TWO different channels.


Oh well, YMMV.


----------



## smapor

dkraut


Like I said as a consumer you should try both services. The quality of the audio depends on the listener, plus by trying both services you can see which programming you like.


As for people posting on trying to make you stay with one service are usually diehard fans of either company, these people are the worst advice givers. uhmmm cough don't want to mention his name rplenty(XM lover)



As for as programming goes, not everybody likes the B-Music(IMHO) some of us are just casual listeners who want to listen to popular songs that they grew up with, so Sirius may be a better fit. If you are a music junkie who likes to listen to every freaking record, then get XM.


----------



## JohnFR

I'm an XM subscriber, but hardly a die hard fan or cheerleader. The defects in audio quality are heard if you connect to a quality system with revealing speakers. True, the vast majoritiy of subscribers will no doubt be satisified with the sound quality. I'm not a true audiophile, but reasonable fidelity is important to me and XM falls short at the moment. I still like the service, however, and hope they can improve. A good start would be to quit adding ambiance, DSP, and whatever else to the music and present the original recording as the artist intended. Also, improving the digital compression technology and increasing the bitrate would eliminate the tinniness and digital artifacts we are hearing.


I'm game for "high definition" digital radio, if it ever becomes a reality.


----------



## Sailn

My wife and I have had XM for about 9 months, and just love it. Is it CD quality, no, does xm claim that it is, no. There is a brick wall cut off at about 15k hz, and depending on the channel, some are much more compressed than others.


From what I have experenced, most of the drop outs have been due to improper antenna placement, local topography and lack of a ground station when there isn't a good view of xm's two sats.


Consider this, if you drive long distances, the sound is much better than fm stations fading out as you drive out of a coverage area.


----------



## electricmanscott

"Now for the reason I like XM. No a-hole disk jockeys. Worth the price of admission right there !" Not for long! Starting Monday 10/04/04 "Opie & Anthony"! Yee Haa!


----------



## hookbill

I was getting seriously disappointed in my Roady 2. There was so much interference that it was really making me doubt if this was such a great idea. Oh yes, I loved the music selections and variety. No commercials. That was great. But feeding it through my fm was so annoying.


Until last Friday. I was just fiddling with it and I took it off my air vents. Suddenly the sound got crystal clear. I then realized that it wasn't the antenna on my roof giving the signal but the unit itself. Problem was on my car I couldn't find anyplace to put it but on the air vent. Frustrated I just hooked it back up to the air vent but not the same vent the one to the right of it. Perfect! Now while I won't go as far to say I never get any interference, it's very limited and not persistant like it was before.


I'm a happy camper now. I'll probably get a direct hook up when I get a new car next year.


----------



## Tom_Oliver

Wow, glad I caught this thread. I was all ready to get satellite radio, but I would for sure expect at least CD quality. Guess Iâ€™ll wait.


----------



## Mad Chemist

I also found XM sound to be less than I could accept. I have three receivers, a direct wired Pioneer in a nice aftermarket car system, a ski-fi in the living room with a very good system, and a SPDIF modded PCR in the PC room on a cheapo system. XM just sounds dead to me. I gave up and now listen to CDs and internet radio at home when in the mood for something fresh. XMs content didn't thrill me either but thats just me.


----------



## Terminator840

I've been with XM nearly 2 years now, and I love it. Near CD sound quality and excellent content it is well worth it, I haven't listened to am/fm since. Those of you that are having problems, you must have something setup wrong, or have some defective equipment somewhere.


Channel 27 Cinemagic RULES! That channel alone does it for me, but I also enjoy many other channels too. I have the Delphi SkyFi setup in my car with factory 500w Monsoon system and at home with my Sony HT


----------



## dkraut

As a followup... I recently purchased an Audiovox PnP2 and a Sirius sub and now I'm a happy camper! This setup sounds MUCH better and I couldn't be happier with the Sirius programming! The FM transmitter is less than perfect but still sounds pretty good. Once I get around to it, I'm going to replace my car head unit with a Sirius ready unit and just give my wife the Audivox PnP2. Rock On!


Vive El Perro!


----------



## del

Quote:

_Originally posted by dkraut_
*As a followup... I recently purchased an Audiovox PnP2 and a Sirius sub and now I'm a happy camper! This setup sounds MUCH better and I couldn't be happier with the Sirius programming! The FM transmitter is less than perfect but still sounds pretty good. Once I get around to it, I'm going to replace my car head unit with a Sirius ready unit and just give my wife the Audivox PnP2. Rock On!


Vive El Perro! *
Glad you like it. Now get a pnp2 boombox for 75 on Amazon.


----------



## DMF

I was really disappointed with the sound of my first installation, a Kenwood 901 tuner into an existing head unit via the FM modulator. Because the separate control pod was a pain, I got a Kenwood head unit that takes the signal directly, without the FM modulator. WHAT A DIFFERENCE! Much better sound.


If you're not going directly from the (satellite) tuner to the amp, then don't complain about the sound. Get a good unit.


----------



## Upland

I just bought my wife a new minivan that came equipped with a built-in Sirius radio and upgraded speakers. BTW, for those that don't know, Chrysler has a deal that for $195.00 you get the satellite radio and one free year from Sirius.


The sound quality is better than FM, and if it's not CD quality, it's awfully close. She really likes it. It's probably her favorite option that came with the car.


This is our first experience with satellite radio and will renew the subscription when it comes due.


----------



## STEELERSRULE

I mean the big thing for me about satellite radio came down to two things:


1. CHOICE. There is some channels out there for everyone. This is the BIGGEST reason to get satellite.


2. It is CURRENTLY(this could change, but I doubt it) UNREGULATED. If I want to listen to the foul language of the comedy channels, I can. Songs(especially rap and metal) aren't censored. I get to hear the song.


Even though it is not CD quality, it is pretty damn good. But I do agree with the above posters. If you can get a DIRECT conection(AUX in followed by Cassette adapter in terms of quality), do it.


Only use wireless FM modulation as a last resort. It is not horrible, but the other two options are much better.


I wonder if an add on Equalizer would greatly improve the sound? Whether in the car or in the house


----------



## DJRobX

Man you guys would be crying if you saw the polls on some car forums about Sirius/XM sound quality. In the polls I saw, the overwhelming majority of participants thought XM was "as good as CD". I'm now convinced that most people are deaf. As much as I like having stations I like and radio that works (we don't get much in the way of FM stations in LA suburbs, too much terrain), the sound quality is abysmal and sorely disappointing for an all digital satellite transmission.


Neither XM nor Sirius is better than the other. The sound quality sucks on both. I'm not even much of an audio purist - I've heard plenty of 128kbps mp3's that sound fine. But sat radio just sounds terrible. Not only is there digital compression but there's audio dynamic range compression going on as well.


I'm glad I can count on my fellow AVS forum participants to have a good ear. 


No, an EQ does not help the sound quality appreciably. I have one in my car, I've tried. The crux of the problem is that there is poor or no high frequency information above 17khz or so. Unlike with bad analog sources, you can't "EQ in" sounds that just aren't there to begin with.


-- Rob


----------



## DMF

Hell, I couldn't hear much of anything over 17k Hz anyway, and chances are excellent that you can't either, if you're male and over 30.


When I hear problems in the feed, it's usually compression. Maybe as a DJ you think that's normal, but I'll bet you haven't listened to anything with silences in it since you were in music appreciation class.


----------



## Tom_Oliver

Well after reading some threads on http://www.xm411.com/ I decided to try the SkyFi2 for XM. Itâ€™s supposed to be better than the original. Anyway, I picked one up and it doesnâ€™t sound so bad. Now if I didnâ€™t read this thread I probably would have been disappointed, but I didnâ€™t expect much. It seemed to lack depth, but I added some with some stereo settings and itâ€™s pretty good now. Iâ€™d have to say itâ€™s worth it for all the programming you get, even if itâ€™s not CD quality.

Quote:

_Originally posted by Tom_Oliver_
*Wow, glad I caught this thread. I was all ready to get satellite radio, but I would for sure expect at least CD quality. Guess Iâ€™ll wait.*


----------



## Ingeborgdot

There is no difference between xm and sirius except for a little programming differences which is very little. I do like the nfl package with sirius but xm has baseball. As for howard stern on sirius I'm glad he is on sirius and not xm. I have XM in my car and the sound is great as it is factory and not an fm modulator or anything like that. I have sirius at home on my satellite. You also pay 3$ more for sirius a month. NO DIFFERENCE.


----------



## Fredoh

My experience was with a new Acura TL with built in XM. THe sound quality reminds me of your typical MP-3 recording or audio only satellite/cable channels. Its good, but not up to the best current CD quality. It doesn't have the dynamic range of a good recording, at least on the channels I listened too. It reminds me of the early days of CD, and the current state of Satellite TV. Just because it's digital doesn't mean it sounds superior. I did enjoy the programming and no commercials, so it's still worth it.


----------



## Kendrid

The skifi2 is much better than the original skyfi.


I tried the original skyfi last year and returned it. I could not stand the sound quality. I also tried Sirius and couldn't stomach it's quality either.


The Skyfi2 is a different story. The quality still isn't anywhere near CD quality but it is now listenable. There is no way I would use it on my home system but in my car and with headphones at work it is fine.


----------



## Rysa4

Quote:

_Originally posted by Ingeborgdot_
*There is no difference between xm and sirius except for a little programming differences which is very little. I do like the nfl package with sirius but xm has baseball. As for howard stern on sirius I'm glad he is on sirius and not xm. I have XM in my car and the sound is great as it is factory and not an fm modulator or anything like that. I have sirius at home on my satellite. You also pay 3$ more for sirius a month. NO DIFFERENCE.*
I disagree with the statement that there is no difference. On XM you are more likely to hear music you dont usually come across. Sirius tends to play more familiar music across all of their channels. Sirius' talk selections are superior to XM. Sirius has some sports stuff that XM does not have. And vice versa to a lesser extent. To say that cuz one has NFL and the other has Baseball and so it "evens out" shows the falsity of the statement in a nutshell. To a baseball or football fan, this alone creates a BIG difference.


----------



## CCDAstro

Damn Audiophiles!


I have two XM units, an Alpine in my Tundra and a PCR as part of my home theater setup. I love them both and have NO reception problems, dropouts, or anything of the sort unless I am truly blocked by a mountain or something (VERY rare). I agree with the post that says they are better than FM but not quite as good as CD.


But Holy SH**, most of these are in the CAR, not in a damned acoustic chamber. Just how good does the sound need to be for you audio snobs anyway?


----------



## Tom_Oliver

Just depends on your system and your ear I guess. I know for me, when I put it in a really good CD itâ€™s like DAMN that sounds awesome! The more I turn it up the better it sounds. XM is nowhere near that good, and I for sure wouldnâ€™t want to turn it up too much, cause it just exposes the badness more. My wife even noticed the difference and sheâ€™s nowhere near as picky as I am.

Quote:

_Originally posted by CCDAstro_
*Damn Audiophiles!


I have two XM units, an Alpine in my Tundra and a PCR as part of my home theater setup. I love them both and have NO reception problems, dropouts, or anything of the sort unless I am truly blocked by a mountain or something (VERY rare). I agree with the post that says they are better than FM but not quite as good as CD.


But Holy SH**, most of these are in the CAR, not in a damned acoustic chamber. Just how good does the sound need to be for you audio snobs anyway?*


----------



## Rysa4

Quote:

_Originally posted by Tom_Oliver_
*I know for me, when I put it in a really good CD itâ€™s like DAMN that sounds awesome! The more I turn it up the better it sounds. XM is nowhere near that good, and I for sure wouldnâ€™t want to turn it up too much, cause it just exposes the badness more.*
Just shows there is a wide variety of listeners. For me CD doesn't quite equal a good vinyl set up with a class A amp in many audio aspects MOST of the time.


But I really dig satellite radio just because of the huge selection at the press of a button and the complete abscence of commercials. Definetly worth the monthly outlay.


----------



## barbie845

I've had XM for 2 years now..It is not CD quality and has never advertised that their sound is CD quality..But on a good system it sounds very good, The music stations sound alittle better then FM..The talk stations below FM...

Sirius music SQ is similar..Except their talk station sound AM'ish at best. It's pretty bad,but since it's talk I doubt anyone really cares...


Xm playlist is much broader than Sirius..Even on classic rock and the decades stations Sirius sticks to the known hits of that time period..While XM will play just about everything recorded during that certain time period. For my taste I like the wider playlists...


----------



## Rysa4

Agreed with the above post. Right now on XM 40 listening to Elton John hosting a show playin his 20 favorite artists/songs and talkin as to why and about each artist. Pretty cool.


----------



## seandudley

Quote:

_Originally posted by dkraut_
*If DirecTV / Dish network can deliver 900 channels of crystal clear TV from a satellite, I don't understand why XM can't deliver decent sound?*
I wish that were true. Dish & Direct compress the heck out of their standard def channels so they are very soft. Far from "crysal clear" in my book.


----------



## Sony Freak

OK, I have a delphi XM hooked up to my HT and I thought it sounded kinda bland, so i decided to hook up my old EQ to it and now it sounds EXCELLENT!!! Just have to make things work by modifying the sound until they get more advanced with the technology!!


----------



## Tom_Oliver

All I did was change the receiver to send the output to all the speakers instead of using stereo mode. That gave it the dynamic range it was missing. Still not CD quality, but itâ€™s pretty good.


----------



## HD_JUNKIE

I just bought an XM MyFi handheld this weekend. Nice toy but......


Add me to the list of people who are very disappointed with the SQ. It seems to me that they have more compression on the ROCK channels than some of the others. Many of the ROCK channels, such as Squizz, Boneyard, XMU sound two steps better than AM. Other channels like some in the Urban lineup sound better.


I have tried it as a walkman with my Etymotic headphones (which really brings out the lack of SQ in Sat radio) and also used the home dock hard wired to my Preamp. Same poor SQ regardless.


Its almost as if the Rock channels sound like a 64K MP3 and some of the better channels might be close to 96K at best. Hmmm, I cannot keep this until Sat radio grows up a bit and offers SQ competitive to that of FM.


Maybe Sirius will have a handheld soon that will offer better SQ. I'm not too hopeful since others seem to claim this is a Sat radio issue and not specific to XM.


BTW, I just spoke with a friend who has the new Polk XM receiver in his home. He just confirmed my suspicions about XM SQ. He is also disappointed but in his case he's willing to live with it since his kids are happy.


----------



## Ingeborgdot

They come from satellites with no different signals. It may be your equipment not the signal itself. It came in my gm vehicle. It sounds as good as any cds.


----------



## barbie845

XM advertises their sound is digital,which means nothing to me since cell phones are also digital and we all know what they sound like.


On decent equipment both XM and Sirius sound fine..The 'stereo effect'(seperation) is less then I would like it but the SQ is clear,and there's enough bass for my old ears.. For a few cents a day either service is well worth getting away from FM's 30 mins an hour of commercials..


----------



## muzz

Quote:

_Originally posted by Lew_b_
*Does XM have their own birds, or do they buy space on someone else's ?

I also have big problems with signal dropouts. I have the antenna mounted on the roof of my car and still have problems when there is heavy tree cover to my West, I live in the northeast.

*
I did some drive tesing(transmitters in various locations) for XM radio in Ma. and CT. They were supposed to put up 2 birds, names were "Rock" and "Roll".


They setup terrestrial stations( Sat. uplink, BTS and antennas) to make up for the dead spots ( where there is no Sat. coverage), and XM's mandate was like 10' during our setup. I actually had to go to terrestrial dead spots and verify coverage to sat's using a compass and an inclinometer ( try that on some of the roads I was on..... ummm not much fun).


The coverage maps I saw looked really good, but TBO I was so uninterested in paying for a service that I never payed attention to XM or Sirius...

I just happened to see a section of the site dedicated to these, and decided to check out the word...


It looks like XM isn't doing to good.


----------



## barbie845

Yes XM owns both of their birds,with a 3rd on the ground ready to launch in case 1 of the birds in orbit dies...They also have hundreds of repeaters on the ground,mostly in the larger cities to transmit the signal to the areas that would be blocked by the tall buildings..


I live in an area with no repeaters so if there is a large obstruction to my south I will experiance drop-outs. But the drop-outs are usually just a second or 2..


Home reception I never experiance drop-outs,just point the antenna south and forget it...


----------



## bhummel2001

I have been an XM subscriber for over a year. I like XM so much, I won't get into a car that doesn't have XM.


Why? I am addicted to Fox News. I occasionally listen to my old 70's and early 80's music, but I mostly listen to news.


I have 3 cars set up with XM, and I just found out about the new POLK Xrt12 receiver for home audio. My McIntosh MX134 doesn't include an FM tuner as standard equipment any more, so I thought I might just add XM instead. So I bought one. I just hooked it up with the optical cable and am listening to Frank's Place on my $30,000 home theater system.


I am dissapointed ...


The Polk looks cool. The unit is built well. The display is very nice. No complaint with the unit.


But it still sounds like satellite.... Now I am not one of the old elitists that has to listen to LP's instead of CD's, nor do I fall for the goof-balls marketing $5/foot speaker cable ... I just don't like the sound of MUSIC on satellite. It sounds very "processed" almost "nasal" or canned. It is hard to describe.


I will take a clean FM signal over satellite any time. The only thing that satellite has going for it is its omniprescence and musical selection. It's achilles heel is that it sounds like a high-class cell phone.


If you turn the music way down and just use it for background music, it might be acceptible. But if I am going to do that, I may as well listen to the music on DirecTV.


I wanted to ACTIVELY listen to the music, and satellite just doesn't cut it.


Granted the Polk is the KING of satellite receivers, I commend them for a great job, but I am dissapointed enough that I will probably return mine in a few days.


I wish XM would lose half the channels and broadcast AUDIO-HD !!


I think I will save the monthly subscription for another car where I am not so picky on sound quality.


One last thing ... I HATE MP3's ... Yeah, my iPod is cool, and so are my Turtle Beach Audio Trons, but all this music still sounds canned.


----------



## Rysa4

so you dont like how Fox news sounds through the polk?

hehe


----------



## Rysa4

And your 30,000 home theater system ( which by definition isnt set up for music anyway) has home depot wiring at 5 cents per square foot? Just curious.


----------



## bhummel2001

Quote:

_Originally posted by Rysa4_
*so you dont like how Fox news sounds through the polk?

hehe*
Good one! Actually, for voice, DirecTV sounds better. It was very easy to A/B XM & DirecTV tonight. It looks like DirecTV is about 15 seconds or so ahead of XM.


A year or so ago, the compression on XM was so bad that I almost got rid of it all together. I made a lot of phone calls to XM complaining and a lot of others must have done the same thing. They got a lot better as time passed.


Remember, I LIKE XM. It's just not up to par for serious listening at home.


Someone asked me if I used Home Depot cables. Not hardly. I went to Altex Electronics in Dallas and bought bulk 100-foot rolls of their biggest oxygen-free cables. Basically monster cable without the monster price. These cables are 10 gauge. I had some pretty long runs so I used very heavy cables. About 75-cents a foot.

http://www.altex.com/product_info.ph...oducts_id=1680 


Remember, you want as little resistance as possible between your amp and your speakers. (For a real letdown, open up your speakers and look at the cables they use inside ... ) I am getting off topic here but someone asked. Sorry.


----------



## barbie845

Quote:

It's achilles heel is that it sounds like a high-class cell phone.
Thats alittle harsh.....


----------



## Rysa4

Quote:

_Originally posted by bhummel2001_
*


(For a real letdown, open up your speakers and look at the cables they use inside ... )*
I have. Oval Plus wiring. You are right. Off topic.


----------



## Sony Freak

remember guys it's only $10/month!! and for that it does have a great

selection of music!!!!! just hook up an EQ to it and it does sound better!!


----------



## DanHuang

i'm just pissed i missed out on this stock when it was at 4.70... but i was able to pick it up at 5.20 and today: hovering at 7.50; going to be a short ride for me but i'm going to dump it at 15 which, at this pace, would be sometime in january = plasma tv and then some!


----------



## mpgxsvcd

I have to agree that the XM sound quality is cell phone quality at best for talk radio stations. It is fine for music but it is obvious that they are overly compressing the talk stations. If you don't listen to talk radio then XM is perfect. However, if you do listen to talk radio then no equalizer is going to fix an overly compressed signal. The voices sound like they are in a tin can. I worked for a cell phone manufacturer in their acoustics department and they wouldn't even let compression go that far. For me the sound quality is a deal breaker!


----------



## djames

I bought XM for the sports talk line up and the comedy channels. I listen to these stations the most. The music stations are decent, but I figure they will be adjusted over time the more people complain and give there opinions. I like the XM players more than the Sirius players also. I have the roady 2 and it sounds fine in my care, i have a decent souund system, and using the tape players almost sounds as good as when i'm playing CD's. I also hook it up to my yahaha receiver at home and it sound fine also. I think a lot will depend on your equimpent.


----------



## spaceinvader

XM came installed in my car. I upgraded the speakers. I am very satisfied with the sound quality and content of music stations on XM radio. IMO, the sound quality in the car for music is superior to both FM and MP3. Uncompressed CD's have greater dynamic range (DR) than satellite radio and therefore, sound slightly better in the car.


My comments in this response are only related to music stations since I do not listen to talk radio on XM radio.


Many people on this thread have discussed sound compression or DR and frequency response. My question is, do those people have sophisticated measuring devices in their cars to measure this stuff or are they just "shooting from the hip?" My guess is that its the latter. I LOL when people make comments like "I can't hear anything over 17khz." I guess those people don't realize that FM radio has always had a hard frequency cutoff at 15khz. Those people have been missing high frequency content forever on their FM radio, but only realized it when they hooked up the satellite radio system. Considering the inherent road and wind noise in a car, the very limited sound output of music above 15khz (from any source), I doubt anyone can hear much high frequency output anyway!


Based on my experience in my car, I think most of the problems expressed in this thread related to sound quality is due to equipment and/or installation issues.


----------



## xzitony

I've had XM in my car for over a year now, it's a Sony ES deck with the XT-XM1 tuner module and it definitely sounds "better" than FM does, and the ES tuners are pretty good.


Now, I put better in quotes for a reason-- basically most people will tolerate the digital artifacts of satellite radio over the shortcomigs of analog broadcast because the increased dynamic range is far and away better and this usually translates to a signal most people will agree is better than anything FM has to offer.


It's best to listen for yourself as in my experience it really is the minority a person who truly thinks an MP3 or XM Radio sounds worse than FM because of digital compression--but it happens.


Finally, the $10/month is for the variety and convenience much like paying for TV. Ofcourse you can get it for free, and those are the people who don't think the $10 will be worth it and will live happily every after (until digital terrestrial commercial broadcast becomes a reality maybe--then you can equate it more to OTA vs. sattellite HDTV). But for those who maybe value their time on their 15 minute commute to work a little more will be willing to pony it up to never hear a commercial again!


----------



## ultraviolet353

Yeah I have a Sirius connect tuner hooked directly to my Alpine unit--it does sound good, but has a flat 2D quality to the music--I wonder if the technology will ever get to real CD quality...


----------



## Dex

Hi all. My first post here at AVS 


After reading the posts in this thread I'm glad to finally confirm that I'm not the only one that finds the sound quality lacking. On the bright side, I can't get regular FM in my building with any clarity, so XM was a real step up.


My friend is running it through a nice Denon receiver to awesome B&W speakers. When he told me the sound quality was 'excellent', I figured he knew what he was talking about. Apparently not, which I found out shortly after getting my XM SkyFi? unit. I was so let down when I realized the technology had shortcomings. I was honestly expecting CD quality, however foolish that was...


It's great for all the channels available, but for music here's what gets on my nerves:

-all channels lack the quality I expected from a Sat unit

-sound varies in volume, clarity, etc (ie. 'The System') depending on who/where the DJ is. So, one hour it may sound 'ok', another hour it sounds like crap. Frustrating.

-there seems to be a major lack of consistency from one channel to the next.


Some of you may love the variety of channels, but some of them (most of the 'pop' channels) play the same music so often that after a few weeks it's hard to listen to them anymore. Surely there's more artists then Usher and Alicia Keys out there, aren't there? Net result? Less channels I will listen to...


I don't know, not entirely bashing it but perhaps it's just too early for them to do it right... Overall rating 6/10...


----------



## Ingeborgdot

But XM plays a lot bigger variety than sirius does. I have both. Sirius plays more hits, so you hear them more often.


----------



## Fredoh

The sound of Satellite Radio in general is similar to those audio only channels offered by directv, Dish, and cable. Great variety, deep playlist, low commericials, little dj talk, but the sound is at best good party background music. I've listened to XM for two weeks in an 05 Acura TL all built in system, and if you really cranked it up, it was definately to compressed, and not as good as the best CD mastering. I found myself enjoying the news, and uncensored comedy channels more thatn anything. BUt, it's the same explanation of the popularity of MP-3 players etc. Lots of people don't notice the difference. DOn't get me wrong, I still want to install it in my car, but it's definitely like the beginning years of CD. Remember rushing out to replace your cassettes and records only to find that alot of it wasn't any better, and in some cases worse.


----------



## MRinDenver

I have been a subscriber for only 10 days; I have my XRt12 connected to two of my three home theaters. First, I am sending the optical signal to my Denon 3803 and on to Infinity tower speakers, augmented by a 12" Klipsch sub.


The analog signal is routed downstairs with standard RCA cables, again into a Denon 3803. The speakers are Klipsch Chorus IIs, big suckers -- no small speaker can touch these babies -- with Klipsch Forte IIs for rears and a 15" Klipsch sub. I have a Klipsch tower speaker on its side for a center channel. The Denon processes the analog into Pro Logic II, producing a matrixed 5.1 output.


This is a long winded way of saying that the equipment you use for playback makes a huge -- huge -- difference.


The sound quality on channels like The Loft is excellent. Maybe not quite an A++++ like was suggested above, but actually better than I hoped for. Surprise! Some channels sound better than others!


Not much can be done to improve the quality of recordings made in the 50s. And I prefer the talk channels be compressed more, giving more bandwidth to the channels that can make use of it. I do not expect "reference" quality; but I have no complaints about the channels I listen to.


I auditioned xm at Best Buy. I was not impressed with the SQ from a standard car radio or hundred dollar boom box. If that is what you guys are hearing, there is a remedy:


Maybe it is the better electronics in the Polk unit; maybe it is $5000 worth of speakers, or the processing of a quality receiver. As with most things in this life, you get what you pay for.


----------



## JohnFR

Anyone who's interested in the compression algorithm used by XM should take a look at this:

http://www.slate.com/id/2112548 


If XM is streaming at a pretty low bitrate, say under 48kbps, this might explain why some of us find the music sound quality marginal. As ingenius as the algorithm seems to be, something is bound to be lost in the process in carving down the music to fit a narrow stream.


----------



## dnewhous

This thread has already been done to death, but there are a couple of things I'd point out here.


1) Cassette adapters are a notoriously awful connection

2) FM modulation will obvously lose any sound benefits of satellite radio (if there are any) and compound the limitations of FM with satellite radio


Other people have probably made those points, here's a new one


3) Mini-jack cables. Most minijack cables are the equivalent of a piece of string tied between two styrofoam cups. I am not an advocate of audiophile snake oil cables, but this is a situation where a value-added cable would make a signifcant difference. It did for my computer speakers. Monster cable is the only maker I know of that makes a good minijack cable (in their multimedia line), but maybe some people know of others.


Looking at their site - they only have a 4 ft. model now. I have twp 10 foot models, and mine is higher quality looking than the current offering.


----------



## dnewhous

I found an alternative that looks better than Monster Cable.

http://www.planet-waves.com/Pcablesdetails.aspx?ID=3


----------



## lostcause

I'm curious as to why there is such a discrepancy between people who say the sound is crap, and others who say it's better than FM and almost CD quality.


I fall in the group that thinks it's crap. I don't care about if the cutoff is 15k or 17k or 12k, etc.. The end result is that the sound is not even close to CD. I'm going to go as far as to say that it's not as good as FM either. The best I've heard is barely comparable to a 96k mp3. The worst I've heard, well....pretty bad. My MP3 cds recorded at 128 sound ten times better.


The volume levels are all over the place from station to station, there is a strange sibilance thing happening that I'm guessing is caused by the compression scheme they use, and as someone on another forum put it, some stations like Boneyard sound as if they're coming out of a covered shoebox. No bass, no treble, muddy mids, etc.. There seems to be almost no dynamic headroom on many stations, and the stereo separation is very poor.


Have I actually measured anything with any devices?? Yes. My ears. I can easily tell the difference between XM and anything else. I don't need electronics to tell me this, after all, I listen with my ears, not with scopes and meters.


Now, back to the original point, why do some people not hear a difference? I'm not really sure, but is it possible that those who don't hear a big difference and think the sound is close to CD are using their factory system, while others are using aftermarket systems that more accurately reproduce the signal fed to it? In my experience, even a cheap aftermarket system will blow away a "premium" factory installed system. I don't care how great the factory system is supposed to be, a 100.00 pair of pioneer speakers with a 200.00 head unit, and 50.00 pioneer amp and 50.00 walmart subwoofer will sound better than 95% of factory systems.


This is just a guess, but it could very well be a factor. I'd be curious to know what type of system people are using to rate the sound. I may be totally off here, but this is the first thing I could think of to explain the discrepancy.


----------



## Kendrid

I used to be a person that hated the sound of XM, but I kept it because of my love of music.


I have used a Roady 2 and Skyfi 2 and I thought they both sound terrible. I had them hooked up to my Alpine 9815 headunit via the AUX input. My speakers are mid-line MB Quart. FM usually sound better to me, as the compression, loss of treble, etc were terrible with XM.


Just recently I switched to the Alpine Direct XM unit. Holy cow. I don't know how but XM finally sounds decent. Is it close to CD? No, but it is 10x better than the Skyfi or Roady. I would put it as 128K WMA files for most stations. The treble is back, and somehow a lot of the compression artifacts are gone.


I can only guess as to why the Alpine direct unit is so much better than the Delphi units since they receive the same bitstream. DACs, preamp section, decoding processor..I'm not sure what it is but I am happy.


----------



## cyben

I've had both digital connect home tuners and Sirius has a much better sound. Not even close.


----------



## policy

While I have not heard Sirius (I picked XM based on the future viability of the company in my opinion), I will say that the radio quality of XM music is far superior to FM - it's the talk stations that leave much to be desired.


----------



## Paul Bigelow

I think the environment and experieces can hide XM's sonic flaws somewhat.


Environment:


I think the automobile's environment can mask the worst of XM's flaws. Concentration is diverted and a "white noise" of automobile and external sounds will cover up some of the XM distortion and frequency response issues.


Experiences:


If a generation is raised with MP3 and other compression techniques, the reaction might be "flaws, what flaws?" because that's what music sounds like -- it's certainly a different perspective.


Some people have been raised with it all: *live*, analog (vacuum tube and solidstate), early digital (CD, DAT), middle digital (Minidisc - ATRAC, DCC), and later digital (MP3, Ogg Vorbis, etc.). There are sonic differences between all five. I'm sort of amazed at how much info can get "tossed out" during compression and still have something even remotely resembling the original recording.


As traditional "hi-fi" fades into history, replaced/modified by other concerns (available disk space, portability, compression rates, battery life, "sounds good enough"), the common perception of what "sounds right" is changing.


IMHO


Paul


----------



## cyben

The sound quality of Sirius is much better than XM. At least on an home stereo. It's close enough to 'CD quality' to be enjoyed. At least by me.


----------



## Akysten

Neither is CD Quality. From my experience(I have both), the XM sounds a little weaker than Sirius, but possibly clearer(if that makes sense.. clearer, but more "tin can" type of sound. I prefer the sound of Sirius.

When I first for the Sirius, I had just bought a new car. I had thought it was my speakers that sounded "muddy" but after playing a CD, I realized that it was the receiver. Of course, I'm using the FM Modulator, so by this logic, it can't possibly sound better than FM.


As for Content, Sirius winds hands down.. at least for Rock.

Someone said XM was inconsistant... that's true, but on most stations, they love the same artists. I swear that you'll hear U2, Green Day, Lenny Kravitz, 3 doors down, Peal Jam at all times(I'm listening now, and 3 doors down is on 2 channels, I've often seen the same SONG on two channels at once. Both services repeat, and while XM will throw in a song from BFE, it's often out of my tastes. I hate repetition, and I like hearing music I've never heard, but I want some sort of consistancy.. at least to the genre.. and I find this more on Sirius. Sirus Left of Center is good and consistant, they play Indie/College rock... a similar lineup to XMU, but XMU tends to play emerging hip hop, as well as playing a more "the loft" type of Indie Rock.. it's all over the place. As for Classic Rock, you've got more variety on Sirius. I can't stand hair bands... but they are mostly isolated to "Hair Nation" with some crossover to "buzzsaw". It's contained on XM to Boneyard.. good riddence! XM has Top Tracks and Deep Tracks, Sirius has Classic Vinyl(older classic rock) Classic rewind (more recent, late 70's- about 1990), and the Vault, which is like "Deep Cuts". Of course, I'm sick of Classic Rock, but sometimes the mood strikes... usually while surfing the presets.


And yes, the 80's decade channel plays hits.. but who do you think listens to 80's channels? That channel is for nostolgia... You listen to it FOR the hits. Most people who listen to this type of channel aren't interested in some obscure artist from 1982.


I'll also mention Alt Nation, I feel it gives a good mix of New Music, Indie, and hits of the past decade. It can't be more repetative than Ethel... just more consistant.

I also LIKE the DJ's on Sirius, gives it personality(when they don't talk over music). XM has an automated/mechanical feel.


Side note: Sirius has a serious lack of cool receivers... XM2GO is a great little device(though with it's design flaws) at a reasonable price. Sirius S50 has more functiality with MORE design flaws for 3 times the money. I guess we'll have to wait on that. XM2GO lacks sound quality though.. I don't know about the S50.

XM looks to have a stronger signal, also it's sattelites are stationary so if you're setting at home or a camp site, coverage can go in and out depending on where the satelite is at that given time.


It's all personal preference, I would prefer the Sirius content on XM equipment, but that can't happen... maybe Sirius will come up with better equipment. Oh, and as of now, Sirius doesn't have sports/stock tickers... XM does(and I don't really care.. just wanted to mention it)


----------



## XM_treats_you_as

I just want to *warn people* about the shady practices of XM Radio.
*You have to explicitly ask them to not include automatic renewal.*

If there is not indication of this (either approved or not approved), *XM Radio will keep your credit card number and charge you without warning.* When you try to cancel, they will be pretty nasty and sell at you like a used car salesman. Not the type of company I want to deal with. Their product should sell itself and if people cancel they should try to find out why.


----------



## oldcband

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Akysten*
XM looks to have a stronger signal, also it's sattelites are stationary so if you're setting at home or a camp site, coverage can go in and out depending on where the satelite is at that given time.
Satellites travel at the speed of the earths rotation. They have motors that can be controlled to stay accurately with the speed, also if the satellite get a little ahead or behind the speed of the earths rotation it will make up for it. If your getting dropouts its because of loss of signal from posistioning in your home or campsite. Thats why dishes all point to the south because thats where the satellites are located. And its the elavation and declination where you live where you point them too. Always point your antenna to the south for best posistioning. Also satellite signals hate moisture so trees have moisture in there leafs thats why you have a hard time getting signals through trees. Best is an unobstructed view to the south. 

Also I'm a new XM guy with a xm2go and its really nice.


----------



## MaliciousBraham

You news junkies... how is the news coverage on XM? I know the major networks are the same, but...


I'm a huge NPR/PRI junkie. We have a good NPR station where I live, and the local radio reception is great. When I'm travelling, I'd like to be able to get the NPR feeds, but Sirius has NPR. XM just supposedly as a public radio, pri combo channel.


This concern over NPR is the only thing holding me back from snagging an INNO and going with XM.


What opinions can you guys offer?


----------



## NewNameGuy

To a lot of people, Public Raido = NPR = Morning Edition and All Things Considered. You don't get that with XMPR, and if that's what you have in mind you will be dissapointed.


You do get Bob Edward's show. It isn't Morning Edition, but it's in that genre. A lot better than Fox-news or CNN. One problem is that it is only an hour, so if you want non-stop NPR-esc news for a long drive, you are out of luck.


----------



## Bill Broderick

Quote:

Originally Posted by *oldcband*
Satellites travel at the speed of the earths rotation. They have motors that can be controlled to stay accurately with the speed, also if the satellite get a little ahead or behind the speed of the earths rotation it will make up for it.
Akysten meant that the XM satellites are stationary in relationship to the rotation of the earth, which is what you described. However, Sirius' satellites don't work that way. They have 3 satellites that fly in an elliptical pattern. At any given time, two of their 3 satellites are above North America.


The problem with this is that the fact that you can get good reception from a given location one minutes doesn't mean that you will still have good reception an hour later because the satellite has moved in relation to that location.


----------



## crakkerjack

I am new to the forum, and have been reading the threads, and I must say it's been interesting. I am curious to know how many people here consider themselves to be sound experts. I for one don't consider myself to be, but if it sounds good to me thats all that matters. I drive coast to coast 300 days out of the year and satellite radio has been a life saver from constantly searching for a channel or changing cds. I have both sirius and xm because I am a baseball and football fan. Te music channels are good qaulity unless your trying for competion systems. Both systems are repetitive on almost all the channels except talk radio. Both systems are in their infancy so give them time to improve on the things that needed improved. By the time they figure it out, someone else will have come up with a new technology and all the emphasis will be put on them. Bottom line is, if you want music without commercials, either system is good, but try not to be over critical when you aren't forced to buy the service. Good luck all, and happy listening.


----------



## barbie845

Nice post Jack...I have XM in my car,and you're right..It sounds OK,and the more I have improved the my car sound system XM sound quality gets worse..The better the system the more it will show XM and Sirius warts!! But it's still OK,and I love the music with no commercials. I've heard songs I haven't heard in YEARS!!


----------



## ja5477

I too have both services, and Sirius blows away xm in content. I listen to rock(old as well as new) and I think the rock channels on xm are horrible. Buzzsaw kicks Boneyards ass. Hair nation says Bring on the cheese!


----------



## ja5477

As far as sound quality, they are below fm, but Sirius is the better choice here as well. XM is a notch or 2 below.


----------



## Pat6366

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ja5477*
As far as sound quality, they are below fm, but Sirius is the better choice here as well. XM is a notch or 2 below.
really? That's strange,always heard there was no appreciable difference. Why do you subscribe to XM, just curious, as it seems like you are far more happy with Sirius.


----------



## cwirth

I absolutely disagree, XM is much better than Sirius. I checked out both before making a decision. XM has much better content and much better selection of radios. I prefer 50's-70's music but will listen to everything and I find that XM had it hands down over Sirius. I do not regret going with them one bit. I also find their sq to be very acceptable.


----------



## canaanskier

Sirius was my first choice when I tried satellite radio. My preference is acoustic rock and folk and public radio and I found Sirius to be severely lacking in these formats. Then they eliminated one of the stations I listened to the most - Folktown, and changed a lot of the programming on Disorder. After trying XM I love it! I listen primarily to the XM Cafe, The Loft, The Village and XMPR. To me the sound quality is fine both in the car and through the Rotel A/V receiver. In my opinion Sirius would be fine too if they expanded their format a bit, though, I will admit that I remember there being more song repetition on Sirius versus what I have experienced with XM. One last note, I own 1000 shares of Sirius and none of XM, so I can only hope that Sirius does well. I just wish they were better now.


----------



## superh

I subscribe to both XM and Sirius. I use two seperate IP-bus tuners with my Pioneer AVIC-D1, with some quality Inifinity Kappa Perfect speakers, and quality amplifiers.


XM has more stereo seperation than Sirius, yet due to the format they stream in, the high end on the lower bitrate streams leaves some to be desired. Their HD surround streams (Fine Tuning and XM Pops) sound wonderful, especially for 56kbps AAC+ streams. The bass response of XM is also clean. Everything sounds perfect up to about 4.5kHz on most streams, and then it gets played with by SBR (spectral band replication). The bitrates are also constant.


Sirius has less stereo seperation due to the nature of the PAC codec. The bitrate also varies. The S>PLEX system allows Sirius to give more bandwidth to the channels that need it at the moment. A song played at one moment on Sirius may not sound the same as it will another moment. For example:


"The Police - Message in a Bottle"


On XM, depending on the channel (and therefore, bitrate), it will sound like either

"Sending out at an s.o.s."

or

"Shending out at an eshh.o.eshh." (32kbps)

or

"Ssssending out at an sss.o.ssss." (40kbps)

or

"Sending out at an s.o.s." (48kbps+)


On Sirius, at the beginning of that whole "Sending out at an s.o.s." set, it may sound like

"SSSSSSSSSSending out at an sssssssssssss.o.sssssssssssssss." (note the strong S)

later on it may sound like

"SSSSSSSSending out at an s.o.sssssssss.

or

"sending out at an eth.o.eth."

or

"Sending out at an et.o.et."

or

"Sending out at an ssssssssssss.o.ssssssssssssssssss."

with the variance in bitrate emphasizing compression artifacts on the S, with the dynamic range compression compensating for the change.


I actually heard "She's A Beauty" by "Tubes" on Sirius, and the part where they were saying

"She's a Beauty - one in a million girls" actually came out as

"He's a Beauty - one in a million girls"


One in a million alright!


----------



## BearGator56

I drive for a living and listen to XM all day on my Pioneer AVIC-Z1. I'm usually listening to channels 8, 9, 22, 26, 48, 54, and the talk stations to include news, sports, and comedy. I really can't bear to listen to the music channels for long periods of time. The dull, compressed sound really starts wearing on me and leads to headaches.


I consider myself to have a better "ear" than most for music. My home system is comprised of Yamaha electronics and B&W speakers all around. XM's highs and lows are really dull and muddy. Talk is fine, but musically, XM is lacking.


I love the idea of XM since I'm all over Georgia, Alabama, and Tennessee. Finding stations in all these areas is a pain. Being high up in the mountains or off in the boonies, often there's not much to choose from. I just wish they could come out with something that truly is digital CD (PCM) quality-but I'd settle for a high bit rate audio format as well.


----------



## wdrazek

Quote:

Originally Posted by *rplenty*
I love XM! The sound quality is excellent on my units. Sounds better than FM for sure. The people above must be audiophiles because there are 2.6 million listeners enjoying fantastic reception, quality and music. Don't believe the above threads because XM is the great! (I think these are Sirius radio Posts.
No offense but you must have hearing loss.


----------



## Zinc

"...I use two seperate IP-bus tuners with my Pioneer AVIC-D1, with some quality Inifinity Kappa Perfect speakers, and quality amplifiers...."



Super,

Do you use an external house antenna? Can you recommend one? I get XM through my Yamaha RXV 2600 receiver and push it thru Klipsch RF-35's. Unlike many here, I love the sound and the XM experience. My reception is very good (we live in coumtry in NE Oklahoma). However, I would like to improve the reception with an outside antenna.


regards,

Alan


----------



## hphase

If your reception really is "very good" and you don't get any dropouts, there is no reason to put up an outside antenna. Once your signal is reasonably above the threshold required for digital reception, a stronger signal doesn't buy you any additional fidelity.


----------



## Reldan

I have a factory XM receiver in my Corvette and it sounds terrible to me. Somewhere between AM and FM is right - at best it sounds like a 96 kbps MP3. When I switch from any of the XM rock stations to local FM the difference in quality is staggering.


After reading some people talking about how fantastic their setups sound I've been trying to understand how it could be so - a factory-installed XM receiver should sound as good as it gets right?


For sports and news though it's fine, information doesn't need high fidelity - music does.


----------



## brian06

I've only had xm so I don't really know about Sirius. I can definitely say that the sound quality left much to be desired, the music stations sounded ok at best but not better than FM, actually I prefer FM really because of the echoey compressed sound of XM. Many talk channels are compressed to the point where they are nearly unlistenable. The content selection is great and so is the general lack of commercials on music channels, but better sound quality is not on my list of benefits to satelite radio.


----------



## Ruin

I could swear that I have read in a few spots here and there that XM sound quality was equivalent to what you would get with a 90bit MP3. So it is somewhat less than what people normally rip songs to their iPods at, and IMO far short of CD quality. I consider CD quality to be about 256bit MP3 played through an average stereo, and 320bit MP3 played through a nice stereo. On a truly high end monster nothing except a lossless codec really sounds like the CD.


The best way I can describe XM is flat. It just lacks character. It surely is less noisy than FM radio, but compared to a CD...well, I keep mentaly straining to hear that "something" missing that is missing from XM every time I am in a car with it. I have not had any experience with Sirius.


If I could get the equivalent quality of, say, a 190bit WMA file over XM or Sirius I would sign up in a heartbeat because I think the programing would be the big factor. As it is, programing or not, I just can't pay a monthly subscription for something that lacks so much in the sound department. Saying Satellite is "near CD" is BS in my opinion.


Ruin


----------



## 72MX195MPLS

I'm a new poster to this thread...I own a Delphi XM2GO unit that I finally got around to having installed in my truck. I must say that I was pretty excited. I had been using the unit in my home connected (RCA's) to my receiver and never had a complaint. The sound is crisp and the bass was rich. Now the complaint/question. My truck has a wonderful, factory installed, THX sound system. CD's and radio sound awesome! I brought the truck into Best Buy to have the unit installed. I thoroughly discussed the technician's installation procedure and felt satisfied and informed. He told me he was going to wired it directly to the antenna line and I would tune the unit in through the FM radio station. This sounded reasonable. Well, I was brutally disappointed with the sound quality. I have to crank the volume far higher on the radio to reach my desired volume level. The tonal quality is awful. I called the installer back and he told me that this is normal. Are you kidding me? It sounds like poor quality PC speakers on an old computer! So, now I'm trying to figure out what to do...the antenna is already installed and the connections are made. Should I upgrade to one of the new XM handheld units? There are currently no tonal or output level adjustments on my Delphi. Perhaps a newer unit would suffice. Any thoughts? I'm also wondering if the newer units will connect to the now existing wiring for the old Delphi myFi unit? Any thoughts would be really helpful! Thanks in advance!


----------



## Hawkeye7

I have XM hooked up in my Jeep through Alpine's 9856 using there bus cables. I also have a amp and some decent not great car audio gear (it is a Jeep afterall).


XM's sound quality is marginal at best. When people say between am & FM that hits it right onthe head. As far as content.......eh. I gotXM because I added my unti to a friends account so i only pay $8 a month. I listen to mostly rock 26, 30, 48, 54. Everytime I turn on some other channels it's some thrash metal I can't stand. I am thinking of buying the Sirrus gear and checking that out.


----------



## HDKing

I have a new car that had it preinstalled and regular radio doesn't compare at all. I wouldn't give it up for all the popcorn in the world.


----------



## Rammitinski

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Hawkeye7*
I have XM hooked up in my Jeep through Alpine's 9856 using there bus cables. I also have a amp and some decent not great car audio gear (it is a Jeep afterall).


XM's sound quality is marginal at best. When people say between am & FM that hits it right onthe head. As far as content.......eh. I gotXM because I added my unti to a friends account so i only pay $8 a month. I listen to mostly rock 26, 30, 48, 54. Everytime I turn on some other channels it's some thrash metal I can't stand. I am thinking of buying the Sirrus gear and checking that out.
Sirius only has one or two of those thrash metal stations - I'm able to just block them out. It ain't bad - I just wish there were dedicated channels for Prog Rock, Jazz - Fusion and Celtic. Other than that, most genres are pretty well represented. Their Garage Rock channel is almost worth the price alone.


----------



## Ras Thavas

I have had XM for over a year now. My first unit was a Roady 2. I had a hard time using the FM modulator, it seemed I could never find a channel that was interference free. I bought the internal modulator and sound quality was better. I would say that the sound quality is better than FM but no where near as good as a CD.


Even so, I bought the radio for a couple of reasons. I wanted more variety than I could find on my local channels. Some you who live in large metropolitan areas have a wide variety of music available to you on the FM dial. There are only a handful of stations where I live, and many of those are the same or similar formats. XM absolutely delivers in that regard for me. It even opened my eyes to the world of Blues (Bluesville, XM74), something I would never be able to hear on any local FM channel.


I also wanted less commercials. Although some of the new Clear Channel controlled channels on XM now have commercials, there is plenty of commercial free music.


One of the most pleasant surprises are the cool radio features, like being able to have the radio know which songs/artisit you like and having it notify you when one is playing on another channel.


I recently purchased an INNO and I have to admit this unit is making me fall in love with XM all over again.


----------

