BBC Reopens Ogg Streams

garf writes: "Once again, back by popular demand, the BBC has opened up live streaming of Radio 4, to test with the new codecs, especially for modem users. Hop over here. And for those wishing to listen to Radio 1 try these (link one), (link two). But beware: '[Radio 1 streams] are available sporadically at the moment. Don't be surprised if it cuts off, as I've probably just killed it ready for restarting with different settings.' Please email support to the BBC for their continued support for the ogg format. Happy listening."

Comments

NPR should do this...

[ekrout]

NPR should do this since they're kind of the "GNU/Linux" of the radio world. Instead, they only offer support for QuickTime, RealPlayer, and Windows Media streams.

In my opinion, National Public Radio (whose mission is to aid the growth and development of noncommercial radio) should definitely be supporting an open audio standard such as Ogg Vorbis.

Re:NPR should do this...

[Anonymous Coward]

I understand what you mean. Broadcasting in QuickTime, RealPlayer, or Windows Media on the net is like broadcasting on the waves in a secret format that can only be decoded by one brand of radio receiver.

But the "radio receiver" is given away for free? Well the "radio receiver" has strange buttons and features that some people can't stand, isn't compatible with your "car" (Operating System), could be tracking what you listen, etc. That doesn't make sense, does it? Well that's exactly what's happening right now with net radio.

The ogg format, by being documented, is the equivalent of plain radio: everyone can build a receiver.

Wait a minute...

[Silver222]

The streams are available sporadically at the moment? And you decide to throw the Slashdot effect at them?

That's like testing a car for highway safety with a hydrogen bomb, you know.

Big support for the boys at Vorbis

[p24t]

I'm glad to see this... MP3's have received so much attention, none of the other codecs haven't been in the news much. Sure, there's the random article comparing 4 or 5 codecs that no one's ever going to use, or the little articles saying that people hear an improvement in Ogg over MP3. But have you seen people using .ogg's? I do. Everything I've ripped is now in Ogg. Better quality, more flexibility, and a superior acoustic model.

I thought listening to the BBC over Ogg was cool. I remembered the first time I'd heard it over shortwave. Not to mention that it worked flawlessly. Then again, I'lve always got the latest plugin for my Winamp, and my XMMS. No annoying RealPlayer crap. No proprietary codecs. It works on my non-Windows boxes.

I sent a brief, yet eloquent note to the BBC webmaster when the original test completion was finished, and will probably send another encouraging this continued project. I would encourage the same from others.

Support your local hackers. (no, not crackers. hackers. Damn Hollywood crap.)

RC3 needed

[mindriot]

Note that you need the latest Ogg release (RC3, download here) to play the streams; older versions didn't work for me. They seem to be using some features of Vorbis not available previously (e.g., the web page says, "I've decided to drop Radio 4 to a 32kHz samplerate and use the RC3 'quality' settings instead of enforcing an upper bitrate").

With RC3, things are working beautifully. Good to see such support for an open, free standard.

Send comments to oggfeedback@bbc.co.uk

[fire-eyes]

I encourage others to give the BBC positive comments, and encourage them to continue the testing, and beyond.

Send them to oggfeedback@bbc.co.uk

Here is what I sent:

Subject: Thank You! Keep it up!

Thank you for testing your streaming with ogg. Myself and hundreds of thousands of unix and unix-like operating system users around the world truly appreciate this.

It's often hard to have faith in large media companies. The BBC has always been the exception in my mind, and here it's shown again.

This is especially useful being in the USA, as it is very difficult to get your radio programming. I'll surely be listening using ogg frequently.

I hope the testing goes well, and ogg streaming becomes a future daily stream.

Good Day

Yes I know its not just unix / unix-like operating systems.

Re:streams + slashdot = ?

[biglig2]

Well, since it's a test transmission to see if Ogg is popular, then slashdotting it sounds like a plan.

BTW, for those not familiar with the BBC radio staions, R4 is speech and R1 is pop music for young people. That sounds dreadfully patronising, doesn't it? Perhaps I should explain, they have R1 for young people and R2 for people who aren't young, so that ancient 30-year olds like me can listen to pop without our heads hurting. Of course, there's a certain amount of Jazz and Big Band music in the R2 Schedules as well, but that can be fun too.

It is a rite of passage in the UK when one grim day you wake up and don't like R1 anymore, and subsequently begin to mutter "dreadful noise, when I was a kid we had proper musicians like Duran Duran". Oh, except you can continue to listen to John Peel as long as you like.*

R3 is classical, R5 is rolling news and sport.

World Service is a mixture of new programming and "best of" to make one channel for world-wide broadcast. Consequentially it is a popular choice at home as well.

*I thought that CowCube session last week was excellent; why has this guy got a hotmail account instead of a record contract?

Thanks for the interest

[Jonathan Perkin]

Thank you for the interest that the majority of you have shown in these trials. The feedback has been invaluable and supportive, with very little of it being just "real sux, ogg rulez!" etc but instead very clear, concise, technical and useful - keep it coming!

Please continue to bear with me as I test different settings or versions of ices/ogg libraries. The high bitrate streams are fine, but I'm trying to get the optimal quality for modem users at the moment. This may not be possible, but I've had a few suggestions which might work. This will mean, as I said in my post to the announce list, that streams may come and go as I try different setups - please be patient :)

Hopefully soon we will be able to offer these streams on a larger scale going through our content distribution network and available in pop-ups on the homepage, as opposed to the current setup (which seems to be coping remarkably well :)

Many thanks have to go to the BBC management for letting us continue with these trials - as a few people have noted, the language used on the ogg page suggest we're not management, but techies who have been given the opportunity to play with stuff we think is cool, and hopefully we can eventually persuade people higher up to take this really seriously - after all, it's in our interest as a public broadcaster to do so as we're making our services available to the highest number of users - plus of course, it's free software so we're not limited in what we can do with it.

Thanks! Let the trolling begin..

Cheap at 10x the price....

[joss]

I think you underestimate the importance of a lack of adverts. The BBC show no adverts. The average American watches 44000 pieces of carefully crafted pieces of corporate propoganda every year, each 30 seconds long. These encourage them to eat more fast food, drive more, consume more, go into debt, and vote for the politicians who are most friendly to corporate interests (the candidate with the most corporate sponsorship can afford the most adverts).

If you watch US television for long, you will start to understand the obesity levels. Sandwitched between 10 minutes worth inane rubbish featuring potentially beautiful but dangerously starved people, you be subjected to 5 minutes of carefully crafted inviting you to go further into debt, then pig out on sugered drinks and ultra high fat junk.

Paying a paltry £100 a year to make a dent in the level of brainwashing we are subjected to is peanuts. The cost is justified by the decreased load on the NHS alone.

Of course, a better solution is to avoid TV altogether. If you must watch TV, at least buy a mirror to put up above the screen. That way you can look up from time to time and compare the excitement on the screen with the futile existence of the vegtable on the couch.

Why would anyone want to go outside, meet people or do things ? Instead, you can watch others have fake adventures or get your opinions and desires programmed in rather than going to all the trouble of figuring them out for yourself. You can achieve a state of lower consciousness - it helps pass the time while you wait for death.

For those too weak to avoid TV altogether (like me), advert free TV is the low-fat/filter-tipped option.

Midly offtopic

[Marcus Brody]

Please excuse the slight change of topic - there has been a bit of wierdness on /. about off-topicness recently so i am a little worried about posting this. However, it is still pertinent to the conversation.

if you're in the US and want 15% less state propaganda in your news.

This is an interesting comment about the British Broadcasting Corporation (a not for profit organisation funded by the british taxpayer). Its primary role is to provide non-biased News, Education and original entertainment to the british populace both home and abroad (through the fantastically cool world service). However, the bbc website throws this role wide open. Plenty of non-british (particularly ossies and usians) now use the website. And they use it for good reasons - its (relatively) non-biased, apoliticol and non-commercial nature. However, these people pay nothing towards the upkeep of the site, unlike british taxpayers like myself.

So, what is the role of the bbc website in a global market? Should they seek avenues for revenue from non-british peoples?

As this thread shows, they seem to be quite good at pushing new technologies and investing/experimenting with the internet (furthermore, news.bbc.co.uk is apache on linux, which is nice ;-). Which is a good thing, and seems to be sticking to the original remit of the bbc. They also seem to be doing a good job of raising the british profile abroad, which in an economic sense is a good thing.

But i cant help feeling a little bitter. Do any other rich countries have any non-commercial websites, up to the standard of the bbc? What I really, really want to do is get my revenge by leeching some taxpayers money back from America or Australia ;-)