ScannerCast, Sounds like crap??

Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kb0nly

Guest
I got an email today about the ScannerCast RR edition and i downloaded and installed that, previously i was using Oddcast, now i get an email from a regular listener saying it sounds like crap. I asked what he meant about that and he said it sounds like the speaker is in the bottom of a tin can.

Ok, i fired up my laptop and listened to it, wow it does sound like crap. I don't see any audio adjustments in this program so i played with the sound card mixer and i can't make it sound good at all. But if i go back to OddCast and set the mixer back to where it was it sounds great, full rich audio, ScannerCast sounds like its severely limiting the audio quality and i can't find any settings to fix that.

The scanner is a BC785D and the audio is from the line out record jack to the line in jack on a Creative sound card. Usually with OddCast all i have to do is set the line-in in the mixer to about 50% and i'm good. Now i have to set it to 70% with ScannerCast to make it readable and it sounds horrible.

Any ideas???
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
7,490
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
I'm not running the RR-specific version.

But from what i see, the RR version is "hard coded" to use a certain bit rate (I don't see any adjustment), and perhaps that bit rate is lower than 16 kbit. Maybe it's 8 kbit by default. And there definitely is a difference between 8 and 16 kbit.

Mike
 
K

kb0nly

Guest
Yeah i think your right... I dumped ScannerCast and went back to OddCast, i was having audio and connection problems with ScannerCast so i give up for now!!
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
7,490
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
As sound as my thought may have been, I was incorrect. I just fired up the RR version and it's 16 kbit as well according to Winamp when i listen to it.

So not sure what your problem is. I'm going to see if mine sounds bad as well. Waiting to hear something on it.

Mike
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
7,490
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
Ok, it's not a bit rate problem. I checked, with SC-RR running, it's using the same bit rate I was using before (16 kbit) and my feed sounds beautiful if I say so myself rofl.

So there has to be some other reason for the phenomenon you are experiencing.

Fire up your feed with SC-RR. Then play it with Winamp or VLC or something that will show the bitrate of the stream when you are listening, and see what its showing. I'm betting it is 16 kbit, which is what I consider "high quality" for a mono feed. A stereo feed I would normally run at 32 kbit.

I also just fired up a stereo feed with SC-RR for testing, and it's 32 kbit. So no problem with that either.

Mike
 
K

kb0nly

Guest
It just sounds tinny, not as clear as it does with OddCast, its like the Bass is all gone and the Treble is set really high.

I was also not able to listen to the stream for more than 2-3 minutes with ScannerCast and it would just keep stopping and i would have to keep hitting play to get it going again. I have it running on OddCast again right now and i have been listening for 9 minutes and counting and no problem whatsoever and the full range of sound is back.

So im stumped. I guess i will ignore the emails and stick with OddCast, which according to Winamp is also running in 16k so i don't know why one would sound so much different than the other.
 
K

kb0nly

Guest
Winamp was showing 16k when i was running with ScannerCast as well... So side by side they shouldn't sound that different but they do...

Now the sound isnt as much of an issue as the listening time, SC cuts the listener off at random intervals, OC doesn't...

I give up! I guess if it ain't broke don't fix it, stay with OddCast.
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
7,490
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
It just sounds tinny, not as clear as it does with OddCast, its like the Bass is all gone and the Treble is set really high.

I was also not able to listen to the stream for more than 2-3 minutes with ScannerCast and it would just keep stopping and i would have to keep hitting play to get it going again. I have it running on OddCast again right now and i have been listening for 9 minutes and counting and no problem whatsoever and the full range of sound is back.

So im stumped. I guess i will ignore the emails and stick with OddCast, which according to Winamp is also running in 16k so i don't know why one would sound so much different than the other.
So, when you used SC-RR and listened with Winamp, did yours show 16k as well?

yes, I am stumped. I jumped the gun and should have just waited for Rich, Kendrick or Peter to give you an answer. Sounds like in your instance something else may be going on.

I know I am having no problems wiht the SC-RR version (was using the normal SC version before that) and am going to switch to the SC-RR version on both my feeds within the hour.

Good luck with yours. Don't give up. I'm sure that if there is any chance it is a software issue, they would like to get your assistance in troubleshooting what is happening.

SC-RR does create a log (you can set that on one of the tabs) - You might want to set it to log verbosely, fire it up, and then have those results ready in case somebody asks for it.

Mike
 

blantonl

Founder and CEO
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
9,275
Location
San Antonio, TX
All of my feeds are running ScannerCast. Let's wait for Peter to chime in here, he might have some thoughts.
 

mrkelso

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,440
Location
NNJ
I am running the New Dedicated version and made a few simple adjustments to my sound card and she is sounding beautiful over here.
 
K

kb0nly

Guest
I'm running ProScan now with the ScanCast server in it and it sounds fine, but the dedicated ScannerCast RR version sounds wrong, not sure why, i gave up on it...

Now i still have the other problem though, why does ScanCast keep dumping me when i'm listening?? It keeps stopping the stream and i have to keep hitting play to get it going again. If i stream with OddCast it can go for days without having to restart winamp.
 

PeterGV

K1PGV, ScannerCast author
Joined
Jul 10, 2006
Messages
753
Location
Mont Vernon, NH
I have no idea why ScannerCast would sound any differently than anything else. If anything, it should sound BETTER. It uses the LAME MP3 encoder, which is the gold standard for MP3 encoding.

ScannerCast RR Edition is set to send mono feeds at 16Kbps and stereo feeds at 32Kbps -- which is the RR standard. Other than this automatic selection of bit rate, there is no, none, zero, difference between ScannerCast Std Edition and ScannerCast RR Edition in terms of audio processing.

If you're hearing a significant difference, there's almost certainly something other than ScannerCast that's causing the difference in your audio. I know that probably sounds defensive, me being the author and all, but seriously... that's all I can think of!

Peter
K1PGV
 
K

kb0nly

Guest
I was using WinAmp to listen and it sounds like ECHO ECHO ECHO... WAAA WAAA WAAA in the background... And on other signals that aren't as loud it has a nice TINNY old speaker sound to it.

So i did some research and found a lot of people complaining about the LAME MP3 encoder, (is that why they call it Lame??), and found some info on a few sites about encoding with it, i haven't tried any of their fixes with copying files and stuff yet. But when i run ProScan and use the ScanCast in that i don't get the echo or noise in the background... Now realize this, its using the same computer, sound card, cable, scanner, audio settings, etc... I'm just closing one program and opening the other.

So my question is this.... Does the ScannerCast RR version use different files, and what i mean by different files is does all the files needed for it to run stay in that folder i unzip it to or does it depend on files on the system elsewhere that could also be in use by the ProScan ScanCast??

There has to be a difference here somewhere, as in Proscan ScanCast is using File A when encoding and ScannerCast RR is using File B when encoding. Because it sounds so different.

Just tired of pulling my hair out.
 

PeterGV

K1PGV, ScannerCast author
Joined
Jul 10, 2006
Messages
753
Location
Mont Vernon, NH
<QUOTE>
does all the files needed for it to run stay in that folder i unzip it to
</QUOTE>

Well, yes and no. There's no way ScannerCast can supply every single file you need to run it. Some of those are WIndows file. There's also the whole .NET Framework and the like.

There HAS to be something different in your audio setup. You're selecting a different sound card or something. I'm telling you, there are a couple of hundred people using ScannerCast and nobody else seems to have this problem.

Sounds to me like you'd be happier just sticking with OddCast/Edcast. You have it working and you're happy... go with it,

Peter
K1PGV
 
K

kb0nly

Guest
Nope, only ONE soundcard... I think i would know if i had two sound cards and was selecting another one... Like i said... All i do is CLOSE one program and OPEN the other.... No other changes or differences than the actual program itself.

Still stumped but i give up. ScanCast in ProScan is doing the same thing now, so i guess all i can trust is plain old OddCast.
 

jeffreyk

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
3
It does sound bad

I was broadcasting at 32k before with OddCast and it was perfect. Now I hear all of the noise artifacts when there is no sound coming over the scanner and the quality of the speech is not good at all with the new ScannerCast because the sound is being overcompressed. It should be broadcasting at 32k .. not below that in my opinion.
 
K

kb0nly

Guest
I was broadcasting at 32k before with OddCast and it was perfect. Now I hear all of the noise artifacts when there is no sound coming over the scanner and the quality of the speech is not good at all with the new ScannerCast because the sound is being overcompressed. It should be broadcasting at 32k .. not below that in my opinion.
Exactly! I guess we were spoiled by the sound of Oddcast.
 

thelaw

Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
15
Location
NE GA
While I recently installed the normal ScannerCast version, (not RR version) and have had no issues with sound quaility myself, I have had the issue of having to restart WinAmp pretty regulary.
 

blantonl

Founder and CEO
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
9,275
Location
San Antonio, TX
I was broadcasting at 32k before with OddCast and it was perfect. Now I hear all of the noise artifacts when there is no sound coming over the scanner and the quality of the speech is not good at all with the new ScannerCast because the sound is being overcompressed. It should be broadcasting at 32k .. not below that in my opinion.
The RadioReference standard bit rate for broadcasts is 16kbs, which is more than sufficient for standard mono speech audio.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top