How does XM work ?? [Archive] - Lansing Heritage Forums

hjames

12-06-2007, 08:59 AM

So all the various XM receivers have a unique ID. when you buy one, you have to activate it to get the service.

So question ??

How does it get authenticated when you use it ?? Can the receiver transmit also ? Does XM just stream out all the activated ID's all the time ? How does this thing work ? Idle mind wants to know.. ;)

My guess is that its got a uniqueID - when you first register your account you tie specific receivers to that account. The XM signal is sent via satellite to all dedicated hardware and requires some kind of handshake to enable a decoder chip that decodes the (no doubt) encrypted streams.
If its like all the payTV and similar systems I ever worked in, there is a
constant stream of receiver chip IDs being sent along with some kind of authorization code (auth-code) that relates to your level of service.
There is probably a timeout window so it must get an update every so often (daily? hourly?), so you can't just get it turned on, refuse to pay, and filter out the auth-codes stream to keep it "live".

The real trick is to put all these functions on a single integrated chip so you can't break out any of the busses and dink with them.

Fred Sanford

12-06-2007, 10:23 AM

Yep, a client gave me an old receiver & changed his service over to the new one, I left it in the box for weeks, and when I fired it up it worked for about a day and a half until it started playing only "how to subscribe to XM" messages on every channel.

je

Titanium Dome

12-06-2007, 06:03 PM

mikebake

12-06-2007, 06:43 PM

SEAWOLF97

12-06-2007, 07:17 PM

My guess is that its got a uniqueID - when you first register your account you tie specific receivers to that account. The XM signal is sent via satellite to all dedicated hardware and requires some kind of handshake to enable a decoder chip that decodes the (no doubt) encrypted streams.
If its like all the payTV and similar systems I ever worked in, there is a
constant stream of receiver chip IDs being sent along with some kind of authorization code (auth-code) that relates to your level of service.
There is probably a timeout window so it must get an update every so often (daily? hourly?), .

thanx Heather..thats what I was looking for.

Now you are ready to start the new year with the opportunity to pay it all over again. If you don't, you have an XM receiver that can't play music.

pretty much describes any subscription service....at $12.95/mo. XM is a great alternative to FM ...and not just for truckers, lots of original programming.

boputnam

12-06-2007, 08:46 PM

You buy an XM receiver that can't play XM music until you pay more money. Then you pay a fee to get it to work and for the ability to listen to music on it for a month. Then next month you pay again. Then the month after that you pay some more. Then the next month you pay more money. After that, you pay again the next month. In the following month you pay again. Once that month is over, you pay again. In month eight, you pay again. Pay some more in the month after that. Then pay the full amount in the month following. Provide XM with another payment in the subsequent month. Finally, in the twelfth month, pay one last payment.That is a really cheap assessment. Total crap.

You speak nothing about content. You speak nothing about the lack of commercially-driven programming - that operating costs must come from subscriber fees since there is no advertising. You only address cost to the consumer, and give no acknowledgement to the commercial-free access provided to music. Come on, Doug. That is not fair. I guess you feel the same about support for local symphonies, rock shows, opera, etc.? You would rather not pay for content and have it decided by the advertisers. :blink:

Yeah, the hardware has a cost. Done. And, like cable or satellite or whatever, if you yourself don't own the programming, you need to rent access. That is how it works. Don't be so naïve.

You really lost me on this one, Doug.

XM is a great alternative to FM ...and not just for truckers, lots of original programming.Agreed.

I live with constant music - many of us do. I loath FM and their playlists and advertising. I am too busy to swap CD's, and ever so hungry for new talent. I want to be shown stuff - things I am not aware of in Americana, Jazz, Classical, and even their talk radio choices. To the credit of satellite radio, my CD budget has increased. That is good for artists, good for the industry and good for us - artists will continue to strive for this as a career.

XM (and Sirius too...) does a phenomenal job in providing a non-commercially-compromised outlet for new artists. If you decide the cost is too high (and the compression, too... :o: ), too bad for you. Through satelite radio I have learned a very great deal about new artists, new bands, new venues, new genres - a learning that far exceeds what came to me from FM.

I loath the compression, yet XM runs all-the-time at home through my 4345's, and I stream it at work (a part of their business model I proposed to management +3-yrs ago, and after being rebuffed is now a staple in their offerings... ). There simply is no alternative for real-time audio. The artists flock to these outlets and provide wonderful sessions of recording-session quality - live concerts of rare availability.

Don't miss this on basis of cost alone - that is the wrong metric, IMO. Cancel some of your cable- or satellite-TV options and redirect the spending. You will not be sorry...

BMWCCA

12-06-2007, 09:50 PM

Sirius will soon own XM. Does it now make any difference to which one you give your money? I know with a new BMW you have no choice (Sirius). See the pros and cons here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM/Sirius_merger

Titanium Dome

12-07-2007, 01:24 AM

That is a really cheap assessment. Total crap.

You speak nothing about content. You speak nothing about the lack of commercially-driven programming - that operating costs must come from subscriber fees since there is no advertising. You only address cost to the consumer, and give no acknowledgement to the commercial-free access provided to music. Come on, Doug. That is not fair. I guess you feel the same about support for local symphonies, rock shows, opera, etc.? You would rather not pay for content and have it decided by the advertisers. :blink:

Yeah, the hardware has a cost. Done. And, like cable or satellite or whatever, if you yourself don't own the programming, you need to rent access. That is how it works. Don't be so naïve.

You really lost me on this one, Doug.

Agreed.

I live with constant music - many of us do. I loath FM and their playlists and advertising. I am too busy to swap CD's, and ever so hungry for new talent. I want to be shown stuff - things I am not aware of in Americana, Jazz, Classical, and even their talk radio choices. To the credit of satellite radio, my CD budget has increased. That is good for artists, good for the industry and good for us - artists will continue to strive for this as a career.

XM (and Sirius too...) does a phenomenal job in providing a non-commercially-compromised outlet for new artists. If you decide the cost is too high (and the compression, too... :o: ), too bad for you. Through satelite radio I have learned a very great deal about new artists, new bands, new venues, new genres - a learning that far exceeds what came to me from FM.

I loath the compression, yet XM runs all-the-time at home through my 4345's, and I stream it at work (a part of their business model I proposed to management +3-yrs ago, and after being rebuffed is now a staple in their offerings... ). There simply is no alternative for real-time audio. The artists flock to these outlets and provide wonderful sessions of recording-session quality - live concerts of rare availability.

Don't miss this on basis of cost alone - that is the wrong metric, IMO. Cancel some of your cable- or satellite-TV options and redirect the spending. You will not be sorry...

Wow, somebody's funny bone is out of commission. Of course it was a cheap assessment. That was the whole idea. Sheesh, lighten up. Didn't mean to stab a sacred cow.

boputnam

12-08-2007, 11:07 AM

Of course it was a cheap assessment. That was the whole idea. Sheesh, lighten up. Didn't mean to stab a sacred cow.Dammit - I just went and cancelled my XM and got Direct TV instead...:banghead:

hjames

12-08-2007, 11:19 AM

Forget XM and DirecTV - How much is subscription for the sacred cow?

Ummmmmmmm sacred cow ... :p

yeah, whaddoIknow - we got the new HDtivo a few months back ...

edgewound

12-08-2007, 12:19 PM

XM (and Sirius too...) does a phenomenal job in providing a non-commercially-compromised outlet for new artists. If you decide the cost is too high (and the compression, too... :o: ), too bad for you. Through satelite radio I have learned a very great deal about new artists, new bands, new venues, new genres - a learning that far exceeds what came to me from FM.

Don't miss this on basis of cost alone - that is the wrong metric, IMO. Cancel some of your cable- or satellite-TV options and redirect the spending. You will not be sorry...

Nicely done, Bo.

I have Sirius in my main car. The whole family loves it, and it has everything for everyone at some time or another. The content is seemingly endless, and when you're out of range of any radio station and when your CD collection or iPod is exausted...you will discover something new to your liking... be it talk, sports, news, music, traffic, weather. It's also portable.

Pay for the whole year up front and get a month or two free.

boputnam

12-09-2007, 05:39 PM

...I know Bo hates it when I agree with him... :blink: I don't think so.

Of course it was a cheap assessment... :applaud:

See?

boputnam

12-09-2007, 05:41 PM

Forget ... DirecTV...Er, I dunno.

I'm new to it as of this weekend. Of course the picture is vastly improved, as expected, and now hundreds more channels with nothing on. But the thing I did not quite expect was the greatly improved audio. Wow. Much better separation and consistent and properly panned stereo. Compression is not audible, to me.

:D

johnaec

12-10-2007, 07:56 AM

Don't forget the dozens of commercial-free audio channels you get with DirecTV, based on genre. And if your TV screen is on at the time, they list song name, artist, album, etc. 'Not sure what type of encoding they use or how compression compares with XM, but they sound pretty good to me.

John

hjames

12-10-2007, 08:03 AM

Was meant as playful joke on sacred cow - please to ignore brand names and services defaced in name of humour ...

enjoy your holy burgers ...

Er, I dunno.

I'm new to it as of this weekend. Of course the picture is vastly improved, as expected, and now hundreds more channels with nothing on. But the thing I did not quite expect was the greatly improved audio. Wow. Much better separation and consistent and properly panned stereo. Compression is not audible, to me.

:D

Titanium Dome

12-10-2007, 05:57 PM

Was meant as playful joke on sacred cow - please to ignore brand names and services defaced in name of humour ...

enjoy your holy burgers ...

There is no humor left on this forum. Joke at your own risk.

Some folks are just too Sirius. They need to get XMed.

boputnam

12-10-2007, 06:18 PM

There is no humor left on this forum. Joke at your own risk.Now is that a joke? Possible...?

If not, then I guess I owe you a big apology, big guy. Your "critique" of XM riled me because as it stood, it merely bashed cost and told nothing of content. Your post came out of nowhere, and was OT. I thought that unfair and misleading to someone who might be unfamiliar with XM or Sirius.

johnaec

12-10-2007, 06:20 PM

Some folks are just too Sirius. :rolleyes:

John

Audiobeer

12-13-2007, 10:37 PM

SEAWOLF97

12-14-2007, 11:27 AM

I loath the compression, ..

I hear compression on the web service, not on the hardware through the stereo and I consider my mains quite revealing...have really enjoyed Bob Dylan's "theme time radio hour" ..he has great writers and the droll delivery is hilarious....OTOH ...Tom Petty has his "buried treasure" show and must write his own material,,,sounds like an Appalachian refugee

edgewound

12-14-2007, 11:46 AM

I have XM. When I subscribed a few years back it hit my pocketbook hard. This was due to all the new cds I bought after hearing the artists both old and new.BMWCCA said that Sirius will soon be buying XM? At one time the XM user base was almost 10 to 1 in favor of Sirius. What happened? Did the Automakers help turn the tide?

Sirius and XM have agreed to a "merger of equals" and the shareholders of of both companies have approved it.

It's now up to the DOJ and FCC to approve...or not... the deal and move on.

XM has the lead in subscribership of about 8 mill for XM and 7 mill for Sirius and gaining faster.

The competitive landscape of consumer choice has changed to the point of many lawmakers see the merger as positive for the marketplace but the NAB vehemently disagrees, arguing the SatRad merger would be a monopoly and unfair competition...even though you get terrestrial radio for free and have to pay for SatRad.

Does that make sense?

As far as the sound quality goes...to most golden eared listeners on this forum....no, it won't pass the critical listening test, but you can make it sound pretty good. Most stock car stereo systems are at best mediocre, but the premium OEM systems are getting pretty good.

The thing I like about Sirius is the content. I can listen to CNBC, football, any kind of music genre, any kind of talk radio, any kind of comedy...plus video feeds are coming next year with Back Seat TV.

At the end of the day...well, and during the day on crowded freeways and long drives in the country side between radio stations...it's another choice... and I like that.:)

jblnut

12-14-2007, 01:05 PM

I've been wanting to toss my $.02 into this, and now I finally have a few moments.

For my money and my ears, satellite radio fails for the simple reason that it just doesn't sound good. This is a real shame because a slight increase in the bit rate would have made a big difference. I don't care what kind of spin they put on their codec being "state of the art" - it's a 64kb stream. I have heard it in several rental cars, and it sucked - very robotic overtones that were immediately noticeble. Plus it dropped out constantly as I was driving around the Bay Area. I've heard it at a friend's house too and even though there were no dropouts, the robotic sound was ever present.

For me, live365.com is a better deal. I pay $40 a year and get access to the same kinds of new music and new artists. I'm always near a computer so I have access to it at home and at work. Most of the "stations" I listen to are 96kb MP3Pro which sounds - to me - worlds better than satellite radio.

I bought a new (to me) car last April which has an XM radio in it. I was able to use it for a few weeks before the previous owner's subscription died. The sound was terrible compared to even an MP3 CD. Compared to the DVD-Audio player in the console? Ouch....

I bought some DVD Audio discs and passed on the XM subscription :).

jblnut

boputnam

12-14-2007, 04:48 PM

...Sirius will soon be buying XM? At one time the XM user base was almost 10 to 1 in favor of Sirius. What happened? Did the Automakers help turn the tide?I do not understand this, either. Maybe everyone is beholden to Howard Stern... :dont-know

..have really enjoyed Bob Dylan's "theme time radio hour" ..he has great writers and the droll delivery is hilarious....Agree - these shows are incredibly informative, too. I've been introduced to quite a bit.

OTOH ...Tom Petty has his "buried treasure" show and must write his own material,,,sounds like an Appalachian refugeeThat there, is funny... :)

...long drives in the country side between radio stations...Cross country, there is nothing like it. I used to spend days preparing boxes of cassettes, then the days of piles of CD's. Now I merely wash the dogs and jump in the truck - XM does the background music really well...

I've been wanting to toss my $.02 into this...Yea, all perfectly valid. And, when I'm at the desk, I stream from KPIG of Santa Cruz. But when I'm in the car, I (gladly) suffer with the audio-file compression - it's vastly more tolerable than the commercial-driven playlists and yelling DJ's. Yuck.

FWIW, XM (and probably Sirius, too) has serially degraded their signals. At the first, there were only few channels and the audio was pretty damned good. Then, more channels were squeezed into the same bandwidth and compression became more audible. Finally, someone decided to compress the talk shows at a higher ratio than the music shows - that makes hella sense. But talk about "robotic sounding"...? Take a listen to the talk stations - it is dang awful...

wrt the merger, if it happens, a good result would be a reduction in number of stations and a parsing of content between satellite(s) configurations, lessening the needs for audible compression. :applaud:

Both providers are edging closer to some material maintenance dates for their orbiting hardware. I need to review their prospecti (plural... ;) ) or 10-K's, but if memory serves there is degradation of the solar panels that will either require replacing or at-the-least some serious repair. This will be costly, and/or require replacement of the entire orbiters - even more costly, and with both enterprises short of funds. This may be something that is pushing the merger - if the platforms fail, their will be some legal hassles from end-users.

boputnam

12-14-2007, 05:10 PM

Here's some excerpts from XMSR's most recent 10-K, talking to the satellite issues:

----------------------------

Loss or premature degradation of our existing satellites could damage our business.
We placed our XM-3 (“Rhythm”) and XM-4 (“Blues”) satellites into service during the second quarter of 2005 and fourth quarter of 2006, respectively. Our XM-1 and XM-2 satellites experienced progressive degradation problems common to early Boeing 702 class satellites and now serve as in-orbit spares. During 2007, we entered into a sale leaseback transaction with respect to the transponders on our XM-4 satellite. If we fail to make the required payments under this arrangement, we could lose the right to use XM-4 to broadcast our service. The terms of this arrangement also require that upon the occurrence of specified events, including an operational failure or loss of XM-4, then we have to repurchase the satellite and we may not receive sufficient insurance proceeds to do so. An operational failure or loss of XM-3 or XM-4 would, at least temporarily, affect the quality of our service, and could interrupt the continuation of our service and harm our business. We likely would not be able to complete and launch our XM-5 satellite before the second half of 2008. In the event of any satellite failure prior to that time, we would need to rely on our back-up satellites, XM-1 and XM-2. We cannot assure you that restoring service through XM-1 and XM-2 would allow us to maintain adequate broadcast signal strength through the in-service date of XM-5, particularly if XM-1 or XM-2 were to suffer unanticipated additional performance degradation or experience an operational failure.

----------------------------

The spacecraft are depreciated over a period ranging from 6.75 - 15yrs, attesting to the uncertainty of asset life.

----------------------------

wrt the merger requirements of the technology:
We have an agreement with SIRIUS Radio to develop a common receiver platform for satellite radios enabling consumers to purchase one radio capable of receiving both SIRIUS Radio’s and our services. The technology relating to the common receiver platform is being jointly developed and funded by the two companies, who will share ownership of it. The development of this common receiver platform is consistent with FCC rules requiring designs for interoperable receivers with both licensed satellite radio systems. As part of the agreement, each company has licensed to the other its intellectual property relating to the common receiver platform and its respective system.

SEAWOLF97

12-14-2007, 05:22 PM

a slightly different question ???

does the receiver affect the sound quality ?? OR do they all just act as a tuner and it matters not which one you have ?? (since we have varying opinions on sound quality) ...I use a Delphi Roady 2. (can transfer from home to car and back)

boputnam

12-14-2007, 05:27 PM

...does the receiver affect the sound quality ??Great question.

I do not know, but all mine are amongst the oldest vintage - SkyFi and SkyFi II - replaced by smaller units. I have wondered whether the guts make a difference.

Gary L

12-14-2007, 05:34 PM

Hey, Wait just one minute here! What about those of us who live in regions that simply can't get a decent FM signal?
Sure, If I'm OK with listening to Conway Twitty in between the static and hiss I can tune right into my local FM station and get 5 minutes of music I care nothing for in between the 25 minutes of advertising I care even less for.

With my XM I can just dial in the station I tend to like and get clear music and none of the garbage.

What YA'LL have to remember is that we all can't get good FM signals. I would have no TV if it did not come from a satellite and I have nothing here in the form of listenable FM so I have to pay to get what I want.

What sense does it make to have a nice stereo system and nice speakers so I can play the static louder?

XM may not be for all but for those in rural areas it sure is better then what is available otherwise.

So many tend to forget we all don't have DSL or Cable modems and clear signals to their favorite FM stations.

I will never see any of these so I have to go to outter space and pay the price.

Most of you who are making jokes would be completely frustrated at the speeds of junk dial up internet service and with the 3 local and very snowy stations on your 50 inch TV. Don't bother trying to call and complain on your Cell phone with no service here!

If it wasn't for services like Direct TV and XM radio we would be in completely different worlds.

Smart consumers buy one XM radio that can move around to where you are and be used in your car or at home or work and only generate on monthly charge to provide clear sound.

I don't necessarily like the XM or Serius concept but I sure do enjoy being a bit closer to what many others take for granted.

Gary

hjames

12-14-2007, 08:47 PM

Hey, Wait just one minute here! What about those of us who live in regions that simply can't get a decent FM signal?
Sure, If I'm OK with listening to Conway Twitty in between the static and hiss I can tune right into my local FM station and get 5 minutes of music I care nothing for in between the 25 minutes of advertising I care even less for.

So many tend to forget we all don't have DSL or Cable modems and clear signals to their favorite FM stations.

Gary

Pooh - even in a major market without static like Washington DC, its all syndicated crap (ClearChannel and affiliates) or NPR/PBS/Talk - all the campus-type alternative rock stations were sold out ages ago. Even one of the nicer Jazz stations (not that "easy jazz" stuff but real jazz) got sold and is now carrying CSPAN radio!! Like we don't get enough politics in this town!
Of course we've got the syndicated Country stuff as well, but they're not gonna play the interesting stuff like Dwight/Lyle/Patsy Cline/Johnny Cash later stuff ... its all the crossover faux-country type stuff.

Its internet radio or satellite feed for any real selective listeners ... and frankly, once XM and Sirius merge, what's to keep them from going down the same road as every other "mass-market" broadcaster ...

I really hope I'm wrong about this ...

boputnam

12-14-2007, 09:06 PM

I really hope I'm wrong about this ...No, you are not.

The satellite radios have already had to seek commercial advertising - their business model does not work. Costs exceeded their plan, and subscriber rates, although high, were dampened by higher fees. Give-aways, incentives, etc., nicked the revenue line while the operating costs line was ever-growing (debt service, quality DJ's, gear, hardware, Tang ( :rotfl: ), etc.). This is most evident on the talk stations, but I too worry it will metastasize across the music content, too... :(

Gary L

12-14-2007, 10:04 PM

I do hope you are wrong Heather and Bob but I think not!

For now at least, I do have some degree of selectivity in my music but I too fear it won't be long before both merge and sell out.

Commercial free music in a selectable format or jandra (Spelling) is the best a vintage audio freak could ask for.
I have 4 or 5 stations programed in and don't have to listen to all the garbage between songs. For this I am willing to pay the $10/month.

Ever notice how on what ever system you get your TV signal from you can't switch between any 3 stations and not hit a commercial break? We are paying more and more to be seduced by commercials and a show that is truely 25 minutes of content takes a full hour when the commercials are added.

I find more and more that me and my friends just buy DVDs and pass them around rather than to subject ourselves to the nightly onslaught of Bill Mays hawking nutty putty or every auto manufacturer shoving their junk down our throats so we need every pill known to man to be able to get through our miserable existance without Viagra.

Soon, if you are not hooked to some sort of direct connection there will be no such thing as over the airwaves except for the cell phones that can do everything from making a call to taking pictures and going on line to get your emails or text a message. Go out tomorrow and just try to by a cell phone that has large enough numbers for a senior to see and does absolutely nothing but make and answer calls.
I am not at all adverse to new technologies but I happen to believe if I want a phone that is just a phone or I want a station that plays nice jazz I ought to be able to find them without having to spin my vinyl or constantly be my own DJ flipping CDs.

XM was as close as I could get to what it was I wanted.

XM was a breath of fresh air for me but it won't last

Gary

edgewound

12-15-2007, 12:40 AM

Its internet radio or satellite feed for any real selective listeners ... and frankly, once XM and Sirius merge, what's to keep them from going down the same road as every other "mass-market" broadcaster ...

I really hope I'm wrong about this ...

I hope you're all wrong too...I'd like to stay an optimist, because it's a great service with potentially billions of subscribers around the globe with on-line access.

With a merger, billions of dollars of cost redundancy should be eliminated. They can't really afford toalienate suscribers by having commercials of the music stations, but I could tolerate a block of programming having a sponsor for the hour and then uninterrupted music with a good host...sort of like PBS does with "Austin City Limits" etc.

We shall see....time will tell.

SEAWOLF97

12-15-2007, 05:41 AM

Another thread question:

Another forum member in my area has XM and the same receiver..he comes over and asks "Why does yours sound so much better than mine ??".
Then we look at the signal strength bars and mine is to the max. He says he just puts the antenna on top of the system , where I stretched it out and set the antenna in a south facing window (as the manual prescribes) and went thru the tuning proc....
it is a "line of sight" antenna system.....I also went thru some experimenting to find the right spot on my truck to get best reception (but it still cuts out in tunnels like a cell phone :( )

Maybe this contributes to the different experiences ??

johnaec

12-15-2007, 08:12 AM

We are paying more and more to be seduced by commercials...We might be paying more and more, but commercials are totally wasted on me. I can think of only *one* thing in the last 5 years that a commercial has induced me to buy. Most people I know that are in the market for something do their research on the Internet. I dunno - maybe there *are* people out there that need to be told what they need. :dont-know

...we need every pill known to man to be able to get through our miserable existance without Viagra.These I find especially annoying! This stuff in spam is bad enough - it's gotten to be like spam on TV... It seems like every other commercial I see is about "ED" - sheesh!

John

Ducatista47

12-15-2007, 11:17 AM

We might be paying more and more, but commercials are totally wasted on me. I can think of only *one* thing in the last 5 years that a commercial has induced me to buy.
John

It is not very difficult to become immune to advertising. Where I work, it is desirable to work with documents - reproduce them, bind them, check them for quality - without reading a word of their contents. This skill is easily learned, and easily translated to commercials on tv. I can remember thousands of commercials, except I can't remember what any of them advertised. Because I never noticed that "detail." What brand of auto, razor, phone service, whatever. Works like a charm.

If I had much disposable income I would support the shows I like, buying the advertised products. Since I don't, I don't!

Clark