PDA

View Full Version : XM or Sirius? Which to get?



ToddG
03-02-2005, 08:52 PM
I'm new at satellite radio, but I'd like to get it in a new M. Does anyone have any experience with either or both of the providers? Is one clearly better than the other (in terms of reception and programming)? Any input would be helpful.

340HP
03-02-2005, 10:58 PM
XM = more compression (like MP3, sh!ttier compression, sh!ttier sound).

Sirius = less compression.

XM = traffic data in the Acura RL.

Sirius = Howard Stern.

I chose Sirius.





*** Note, compression - I'm using the term loosely. It's actually REDUCTION. LOSSLESS compression is very high bandwidth. So as MP3, it's actually fidelity reduction.

You will end up listening to DTS, DVD-a, and AC3 audio discs 99% of the time. XM and SIRIUS absolutely blow chunks compared to the 5.1 chan lossless standards.

SACD is another topic. FAAAAAAAAAAAAAR better than DVD-a, DTS, and AC3. Which are better than Mp3 and XM / Sirius. Which are better than FM. Which is better than AM.

Phew.. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/grin.gif

cheerioboy26
03-02-2005, 11:38 PM
If you are interested in sports:

XM: MLB, and NASCAR (until 2006). ACC and Big 10 football and men's hoops.

Sirius: NFL, NBA, NHL, NCAA March Madness, NASCAR (starting in 2007), college FB and hoops for about 25 teams, including 10 of the Big 12 schools, Notre Dame, USC and UCLA.

cheerioboy26
03-02-2005, 11:40 PM
*** Note, compression - I'm using the term loosely. It's actually REDUCTION. LOSSLESS compression is very high bandwidth. So as MP3, it's actually fidelity reduction.

You will end up listening to DTS, DVD-a, and AC3 audio discs 99% of the time. XM and SIRIUS absolutely blow chunks compared to the 5.1 chan lossless standards.




True. They are each jamming 120+ channels into 12.5 MHz bandwith.

dseag2
03-03-2005, 01:43 PM
XM = more compression (like MP3, sh!ttier compression, sh!ttier sound).

Sirius = less compression.

XM = traffic data in the Acura RL.

Sirius = Howard Stern.

I chose Sirius.





*** Note, compression - I'm using the term loosely. It's actually REDUCTION. LOSSLESS compression is very high bandwidth. So as MP3, it's actually fidelity reduction.

You will end up listening to DTS, DVD-a, and AC3 audio discs 99% of the time. XM and SIRIUS absolutely blow chunks compared to the 5.1 chan lossless standards.

SACD is another topic. FAAAAAAAAAAAAAR better than DVD-a, DTS, and AC3. Which are better than Mp3 and XM / Sirius. Which are better than FM. Which is better than AM.

Phew.. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/grin.gif



340, I agree that the sound from the DVD-A's blows satellite radio away, but keep in mind that the music selection in DVD-A format is still fairly limited. Because of that, I find myself listening to satellite radio much more often than anything else. I've never had Sirius, but I've had XM for several years now and really enjoy the sound and music selection. I like Stern as well but his show is not enough to push me over to Sirius! http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/wink.gif

ToddG
03-03-2005, 02:32 PM
Thanks guys, but can we make this a little simpler? I'm no audiophile, so I don't care about compression, MPA, MPG, IRS, MILF, or anything like that. Unless there is a significant difference between the two, I'll go with the cheaper one.

dseag2
03-03-2005, 04:03 PM
Thanks guys, but can we make this a little simpler? I'm no audiophile, so I don't care about compression, MPA, MPG, IRS, MILF, or anything like that. Unless there is a significant difference between the two, I'll go with the cheaper one.



I don't think anyone can really tell you if there's a significant difference between the two because we either subscribe to one or another. I've read on other forums that XM has a broader selection of music, but I don't know from first-hand experience. Probably best for you to go on each company's website and see what they have to say. I know XM lists their channels/music genres. I'm sure Sirius does the same.

Jason B
03-03-2005, 04:08 PM
I have XM and love it. That's all I can say.

cheerioboy26
03-03-2005, 04:15 PM
Thanks guys, but can we make this a little simpler? I'm no audiophile, so I don't care about compression, MPA, MPG, IRS, MILF, or anything like that. Unless there is a significant difference between the two, I'll go with the cheaper one.



Well, I posted some definite differences in the sports offerings. If those are important to you, your decision may be made.

If you are going only on price, as of April 2 XM will be $12.95 per month just like Sirius. Both providers offer long-term prepaid discounts.

MarcSS
03-03-2005, 04:51 PM
I'm new at satellite radio, but I'd like to get it in a new M. Does anyone have any experience with either or both of the providers? Is one clearly better than the other (in terms of reception and programming)? Any input would be helpful.

Here's a comparison done by Edmund's on Satellite Radios: XM vs. Sirius (http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=103686)

titan_ag
03-03-2005, 08:41 PM
Sirius. Howard Stern.

ToddG
03-04-2005, 09:17 PM
Sirius. Howard Stern.



XM it is. I don't want my kids listening to that moron and his infantile obsession with bosoms.

Stew24
03-05-2005, 08:56 AM
I don't see how Howard Stern on Sirius is a big thing, especially when you can't see the babes he brings in. I find The Tom Lykis' show a lot more entertaining! Does anyone have Tom in their programming ?

cheerioboy26
03-05-2005, 11:44 AM
Sirius. Howard Stern.



XM it is. I don't want my kids listening to that moron and his infantile obsession with bosoms.



All you have to do is call Sirius customer service - they can block out any channel you don't want to receive.

Not_Vin_Diesel
03-07-2005, 12:34 AM
Howard Stern is a big thing because he asks celebrities the questions you would ask if you couldn't get in trouble, he has a regular run of strippers and pornstars doing ridiculous things, Artie Lange, his beligerance and plenty more. On top of that, he rewards listeners that send in crazy sound effects from porn movies by producing the actual starlets who made them. He is the originator, period. Besides, no one can touch the Wack Pack.

Not_Vin_Diesel
03-07-2005, 12:34 AM
Howard Stern is a big thing because he asks celebrities the questions you would ask if you couldn't get in trouble, he has a regular run of strippers and pornstars doing ridiculous things, Artie Lange, his beligerance and plenty more. On top of that, he rewards listeners that send in crazy sound effects from porn movies by producing the actual starlets who made them. He is the originator, period. Besides, no one can touch the Wack Pack.

96_ss
03-07-2005, 02:04 PM
What's the big deal with Stern. Once he is on Sat radio, those F-bombs that are dropped won't mean a thing. The reason he is as big as he is is due to him pushing the limits on terrestrial radio, hence the term "shock jock".

Go with XM and you will be rewarded with less repeated songs, more channels, ground repeaters (major markets), local traffic/weather. If you decide to cancel, your pro-rated money will be returned to you. I heard Sirius charges $75 for early termination. XM rates are going up, but you can lock in lower rates before 4-2-05. No lifetime subscription like sirius, but the again, it is only for the life of the tuner, and if you sell it, or decide to get newer technology, you get hit with the $75 fee.

It is said that Sirius is more appealing to the younger crowd for the dance/house/tech music.

96_ss
03-07-2005, 02:10 PM
Personally I think XM sounds better then Sirius. They use different compression technology. A lot of other people think XM has superior sound also. But the difference is subjective.

dfw_danny
03-07-2005, 02:55 PM
I'm new at satellite radio, but I'd like to get it in a new M. Does anyone have any experience with either or both of the providers? Is one clearly better than the other (in terms of reception and programming)? Any input would be helpful.



Let's talk about reception. You live in the Northeast and I will assure you that you will have less drops with Sirius than XM. XM works great in the lower portion of the country but drops a lot of signals the further north you go. It has to do with satellite location and the use of repeaters. XM works better in California AZ, Nevada.

96_ss
03-07-2005, 03:58 PM
The Sirius sats move around in a figure 8 pattern. You will not neccesarily get the same reception at 3PM as you will at 8AM.

Sat TV stations also put their sats at the equator like XM does. The reason you get could possibly get more dropouts in the Northeast could be due to the amount of trees.

Mike_TX
03-07-2005, 06:32 PM
This usually gets me in trouble, but why do you want satellite radio at all? Most of us are in the car only long enough at any one time to hear a dozen songs or part of a program or sports event. Is it worth forking over 13 bucks a month just to get a wider range of music/programming for a half-hour at a whack?

I say take the money you'd spend on sat radio and buy some tunes you like and play them in your CD or DVD player. Only if there's some program you can't live without during your work commute - or you're a long-haul trucker who can't stand stations fading out every hour or so - is sat radio a real must-have. Yeah, it's cool and hip, but most of us don't stay glued to the radio enough to really justify it.

(Okay, go ahead and flame me, you sat radio lovers. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/wink.gif)

Q2M_from_LS430
03-07-2005, 09:37 PM
I have 4 XM subscriptions and just love it. The sound is superb, and I've never seen an audiophile review that said sirius was better, but have seen several say XM was better. Of course sirius investors on the yahoo message board say otherwise, but you'll always hear a lot of BS there regardless.

XM's playlists (and digital music collection) are five times deeper, which makes their music always seem fresh and new. I've tried sirius for several weeks (over the years) in rental cars, and its good but IMO XM is better.

I believe you can get listen to each online on a trial basis and decide for yourself.

Pete

96_ss
03-08-2005, 12:44 AM
This usually gets me in trouble, but why do you want satellite radio at all? Most of us are in the car only long enough at any one time to hear a dozen songs or part of a program or sports event. Is it worth forking over 13 bucks a month just to get a wider range of music/programming for a half-hour at a whack?

I say take the money you'd spend on sat radio and buy some tunes you like and play them in your CD or DVD player. Only if there's some program you can't live without during your work commute - or you're a long-haul trucker who can't stand stations fading out every hour or so - is sat radio a real must-have. Yeah, it's cool and hip, but most of us don't stay glued to the radio enough to really justify it.

(Okay, go ahead and flame me, you sat radio lovers. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/wink.gif)



Not a flame, just a different POV. I drive ~23K miles a year. If I drive out of my major metro area, radio is crap. I do not have to listen to commercials (on music channels), assinine radio personalities that are "extreme" or "wacky" or "crazy". I do not have to listen to sped up or slowed down music, or music that is cut short for commercials, or 20 minutes of commericals every hour. I do not have to wait for my local traffic that comes on every ten minutes on the ones- which could be pre-empted for a local pro sports game.

I cannot wait for the traffic report, I can take two different freeways to work, If i am wrong, I will be late, and I leave 90 minutes early for work. Yet on a no traffic day like a weekend, it only takes me 35 minutes for the 35 mile commute.

Also, CD's now cost over $13, or at least right around there.

I actually used to think how assinine it would be to pay for radio, now I take it everywhere, even out of town.

I buy more CD's now then before I owned SAT radio. I also own 3 XM powered radios http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/grin.gif

biggstuu
03-08-2005, 11:31 AM
well ive had the opp to listen to both on loaners from infiniti, i find sirius has better personalities and programming than xm. I did online trials for both simultaneously and i found myself listening to sirius more. The only thing i prefer on XM is Jim Rome and the fox sports feed but otherwise im digging Sirius. Im ashamed to admit but the past three days ive gotten to work at 8:15 but not walked into the office til about 9:10 cuz i was listening to Sirius, its a like a getaway. Now that said, would i subscribe? hell no. i cant justify the cost, when my ipod is loaded w/20 gbs of music, but Sirius does rock

kennycrudup
03-09-2005, 09:46 AM
I find sirius has better personalities and programming than XM.


I hate the Sirius DJs 'cause they talk too much, talk over songs, and they talk about inane stuff (if I wanted "personalities", I'd stay with my local FM stations). I picked Sirius only because the recievers are better, but now that I've had a chance to listen to it for a while (and XM online), and the fact that the XM recievers don't have the loading issue any longer, I'm ditching Sirius for XM as soon as I buy another reciever from Grubbs.

If you like FM Top-40 radio, with endless Sirius promos substituted for commercials every 2-3 songs, then Sirius matches that format nearly exactly. If you're all about the music, I'd choose XM, IMO; they even have more songs per genre.

Either way, be sure to take each service up on their online trial offer first.

1995Q45
03-09-2005, 11:59 AM
This usually gets me in trouble, but why do you want satellite radio at all? Most of us are in the car only long enough at any one time to hear a dozen songs or part of a program or sports event. Is it worth forking over 13 bucks a month just to get a wider range of music/programming for a half-hour at a whack?

I say take the money you'd spend on sat radio and buy some tunes you like and play them in your CD or DVD player. Only if there's some program you can't live without during your work commute - or you're a long-haul trucker who can't stand stations fading out every hour or so - is sat radio a real must-have. Yeah, it's cool and hip, but most of us don't stay glued to the radio enough to really justify it.

(Okay, go ahead and flame me, you sat radio lovers. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/wink.gif)


Not me. I can't imagine paying to hear commercials during my drive time. Neither is Howard Stern a desirable companion when I drive. Love my 10 CD player with multiple magazines so I can control my audio environment in my Q.

Don't really care about being cutting edge when the blade is so dull.

96_ss
03-09-2005, 06:16 PM
with endless Sirius promos substituted for commercials every 2-3 songs, then Sirius matches that format nearly exactly.



XM is staring to become that now. But it is only 2% of what FM is. I wish they would just call the promos "commercials", unless they are differentiating the two by saying "commercials" are paid adverts. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif

kennycrudup
03-09-2005, 09:19 PM
I wish they would just call the promos "commercials", unless they are differentiating the two by saying "commercials" are paid adverts. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif


I hear ya, and it makes perfect sense, but try bringing this up in the SiriusBackstage forums; they'll come back with all these retorts about how they're NOT "commercials", even though all they do is endlessly tout Sirius (as if you didn't know that's what you were listening to in the first place).

What I thought was the height of backwardness is how (at least in the 40s and 50s "urban" channels, but I suspect all of them) Sirius likes to break up a block of songs to play a 15 to 60(!) second Sirius commercial touting how "commercial free" they are. Stupid.

dwynne
03-09-2005, 10:47 PM
I was an XM early adopter - love it.

To be honest I have not tried or used Sirius. XM launched first, was cheaper each month, and they sent me a $50 coupon to entice me to buy.

I have always had plug and play tuners - I just move them from car to car to work to motorcycles. One subscription, XM everywhere. My current tuner is the SkyFi2 which has a 30 minute pause and rewind memory plus an alert to tell you when a favorite artist or song is playing on any channel. Not integrated into the stereo, but works really nice - and did I mention you can use it anywhere and only pay one sub fee http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/laugh.gif?

Now that XM is raising the prices to match Sirius and Infiniti gives you the choice of either tuner, you would just have to see which has channels that appeal to you more.

XM has more subscribers BY A TON, so "in theory" is more likely to survice. Sirius just signed deals to get NASCAR away from XM and they already have the NFL. Don't discount how many folks NASCAR will draw to Sirius - of course they have to make it to 2007 for this to happen.

Sirius has 3 sats in eliptical orbit so 2 are always "visible" at any one time. The XM 2 sats are in geosync orbit (like DirecTV and Dish and C/Ku sats) so the farther you go north the lower they appear. XM has a lot of ground repeaters to augment the coverage in large cities. Folks that travel up north or out west tell me their XM still works fine.

So I guess if you are trying to choose between the OEM tuners for an Infiniti then it really is a toss up. If you were selecting a tuner to use anyplace, the SkyFi2 would have to get my vote.

Dennis

ToddG
03-11-2005, 02:03 PM
I'm new at satellite radio, but I'd like to get it in a new M. Does anyone have any experience with either or both of the providers? Is one clearly better than the other (in terms of reception and programming)? Any input would be helpful.



Let's talk about reception. You live in the Northeast and I will assure you that you will have less drops with Sirius than XM. XM works great in the lower portion of the country but drops a lot of signals the further north you go. It has to do with satellite location and the use of repeaters. XM works better in California AZ, Nevada.





Great information, I had not thought about that. Thanks Dan!

ToddG
03-11-2005, 02:07 PM
This usually gets me in trouble, but why do you want satellite radio at all? Most of us are in the car only long enough at any one time to hear a dozen songs or part of a program or sports event. Is it worth forking over 13 bucks a month just to get a wider range of music/programming for a half-hour at a whack?

I say take the money you'd spend on sat radio and buy some tunes you like and play them in your CD or DVD player. Only if there's some program you can't live without during your work commute - or you're a long-haul trucker who can't stand stations fading out every hour or so - is sat radio a real must-have. Yeah, it's cool and hip, but most of us don't stay glued to the radio enough to really justify it.

(Okay, go ahead and flame me, you sat radio lovers. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/wink.gif)



Excellent question. First, I want it because I want it. No, I don't need it, but I want it because it's a new "toy". Second, there are no local jazz stations in my area, and satellite radio offers several of these, with no commercials.

Have to say that I have digital cable in the house, and it comes with something like 40 music channels. I've hooked the digital TV receiver to my stereo to listen to them. It's great for parties because the music is good with no commercials.