XM Versus Sirius: Which Satellite Radio Should You Subscribe To?

By Finz, published Aug 28, 2006
Published Content: 218  Total Views: 304,260  Favorited By: 12 CPs
Rating: 3.2 of 5


Are you tired of flipping through the radio trying to find tunes to jam to, but all you find are boring channels with a lot of chit-chat or ads? That was me a few months ago, until I subscribed to satellite radio. With hundreds of commercial-free music stations and specialty channels like live football coverage and talk shows, you will definitely want satellite radio in your car too! 

You can even buy devices that will allow you to have satellite radio almost anywhere - in your boat, house, even on capable cell phones! So if you decide you want the satellite entertainment experience, you can choose between two services: either XM or Sirius.

I subscribed to XM awhile back for my car simply because I was more familiar with it. Then when we got Dish Network in our home, Sirius came along with it. I have to say, Sirius has won me over.

Out of its 170+ stations, I find myself only listening to 4 or 5 channels on XM. Sirius has many stations I switch between. XM has a bad habit of repeating songs. I may end up hearing one song five times in one day within a few hours period. With Sirius, that isn’t the case. Furthermore, I do not like the way XM names its stations. 

For example, some XM station names are “Fred” and “KISS” and “Watercolor.” I have to guess what types of music they play. If I mention a radio station called “The Joint,” how long would it take you to figure out that I'm talking about a reggae station? Sirius clearly names it’s stations, such as “Reggae Nation” and “Rolling Stones Radio,” for instance.

Sirius satellite radio broadcasts a lot clearer than XM, especially in relation to the talk channels. People’s voices come across a lot smoother and can be easier understood than XM, which tends to be fuzzy. XM has another sound problem. It sometimes will fade out of my front left speakers and only play through on the passenger side speakers. You’d think something was wrong with my audio system, but when I switch off XM and local stations come in, the sound immediately comes back to my left speakers.

XM Versus Sirius: Which Satellite Radio Should You Subscribe To?

Satellite Radio

Credit: xmradio.com

Takeaways
  • XM
  • Sirius
  • Satellite Radio
Did You Know?
XM has 7 million users, 3 million more than Sirius.
Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 15 of 15
 
 
I've had XM for about 2 weeks. I'll probably let my subscription die at the end of the month. I tried it because I wanted to pick up Pac-10 football games. With 3 Pac-10 channels, I figured I had a 60% chance of hearing a game I cared about on any given weekend. WRONG! XM advertises games all during the week, but at game time, you'll find that: (a) one or two channels have been commandeered by the ACC or Big-10, or (b) one or two games are broadcast, with the remaining channels broadcasting XM infomercials. Piss-poor programming. A real waste of money in my opinion.

Posted on 11/04/2006 at 2:11:00 PM

 
I think that the subscriber base speaks for itself. Can 3 million people be wrong? PS. Yikes32 needs to finish English 101 before commenting on XM or Sirius issues.

Posted on 09/10/2006 at 4:09:00 PM

 
It's hard to take seriously (pun intended) an article that purports that Sirius has a deeper play list than XM. Maybe the author was listening to XM's 20 on 20, which will of course repeat the Top 20 songs--huh? Another thing, no mention of XM's much better ground repeater network around the USA. This comes in handy in the bigger cities. XM vs. Sirius is a personal choice. For me it is easy, XM has MLB from April to October--Sirius NFL for 20 weeks, and football is not really a radio sport, while baseball has always been a radio sport. Howie vs. Opie & Anthony--for me, while Howie re-invented the format (Hoo Hoo), he is a shadow of himself. ONA are the real deal for today (check out Opieandanthony.com and watch the Nazi vs. the Nigga taxi challenge. You will wet yourself). I'll be sticking with the XM Nation, and printing out the article, as I need to paper my bird's cage. Later.

Posted on 08/30/2006 at 5:08:00 AM

 
The author of the article may not have learned all the facts before writing, however I agree that Sirius is the superior service. XM seems to make dumb decisions, mainly when they didn't aggresively pursue Howard Stern a couple years back. This wouldn't even be a topic of conversation if XM signed Stern because Sirius would have been gobbled up by XM in no time. Also, Sirius just feels right to me with music channels like JamOn and The Vault. I enjoy the many different DJ's that sirius offers and they often have live performances in studio and streaming of live concerts across the country.

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 8:08:00 PM

 
Howard doesn't do 30 hours a week, he does about 4.5 hours a day without commercials. Trim down the repeated bits (I heard the 5 minute ODB call twice inside of 18 minutes the other day) and he's doing about 3.5-4 hours a day. And then he takes most Fridays off, and gets 10 weeks of vaction per year. 365 - 104 weekends - 52 Fridays - (10 weeks * 4 days) of vaction = 169 days per year.

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 5:08:00 PM

 
Soccer is the worlds largest sport, not the NFL. And they never talked about adding commercials to the content on music stations, just a possibility of text ads on the head units.

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 2:08:00 PM

 
Xm sucks! you cant consided 30 min of ophra a weeks as really anything compared to the 30 hours week howard does, With xm its impossible to play a station and leave it there all day, cause they play way to much crap. O and A are clowns that only get there named mentioned because of Hoard stern and there 30,000 fans that paid a dollar to listen to them aint shit! Sirius cares about there customers and programing. XM sat on thre larals thinking that they will stay at the top cause they were first and that they dont have cmersals.

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 1:08:00 PM

 
Methinks the author confused XM and Sirius. Repetition on XM worse than Sirius? You obviously have no concept of either service. If anything Xm gets taken to task for being too eclectic and not concentrating on the "hits" as much. Same song 5 times in a few hours? What, on 20on20? The station that plays the top 20 songs voted by the listeners and then repeats? THATS BY DESIGN. No other XM channel is anything like that. XM also has O&A, Ron and Fez, Bob Edwards, Dylan, Tom Petty, Coast to Coast AM, and a host of other excellent talk programming.

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 12:08:00 PM

 
nfl... come on... it's mainly on one day a week, and i know very little people who listen to football on the radio.. i'd much rather and normally watch it... check orbitcast.com and see their comments on this article...

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 11:08:00 AM

 
Am I an bizarro satellite radio world???? What did I just read? Did anybody actually do any research before writing this article? I cant say the commenters did much better. XM's major investor is clearchannel? Try they own a minimal amount of the company (1-2%) if you listen to the top 20 stations you are going to hear top 20 songs over and over. otherwise the playlist is much much larger than sirius. NFL is not the worlds largest sport, although sirius does have a soccer channel as well, so you were close. I cant even begin to pick apart the problems in this article but it seems to me that somebody owned sirius then tried XM for 3 days, wrote about the 4 stations they listened to and tried to bash the service. Anybody with any experience with the satellite radio industry can see this article is rubbish.

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 10:08:00 AM

 
I thought XM had 3 million more subscribers than Siruis? What kind of financial issues can they be facing that Sirius isn't?

Posted on 08/28/2006 at 10:08:00 PM

 
SOMESTIMES BEING THE SMALLER COMPANY, YOU CAN LEARN WHAT NOT TO DO LIKE SIRIUS DID. WHY GO WITH XM, SIRIUS HAS EXCLUSIVE NFL (THE WORLD'S LARGEST SPORT. IT HAS HOWARD STERN, AND ON JAN 01 2007, IT WILL HAVE EXCLUSIVE NASCAR. BESIDES, WITH XM'S FINANCIAL SITUATION, IT'S BEEN TALKING ABOUT ADDING COMMERCIALS TO ITS MUSIC CHANNELS SO IT CAN PAY DOWN EXPENSES. SIRIUS IS DEFINATELY THE BETTER OF THE TWO.

Posted on 08/28/2006 at 7:08:00 PM

 
I couldn't agree more with you, Andrew. After listening to both for a solid month, I decided to go with XM. The playlists are by far superior and the reception is much better. (Sirius would crap out at least once a day due to poor satellite line of sight). The better playlists are especially true for rock and alt/rock fans and hip-hop fans.

Posted on 08/28/2006 at 2:08:00 PM

 
XM, just like it's major investor, clearchannel radio, has a number of tunes in it's playlist per station...that's why they tend to repeat many songs...I'm Sirius subscriber now, I switched from XM, not for Howard Stern, but for better reception and more original programming...when I first got XM, I was hoping for a different listening experience, but after 1 month, it was just the same as the stations that I use to, even the same shows...Sirius is by far the best for it's programming...and I actually find myself listening to Howard Stern more and more...the guy actually has alot of smarts and is entertaining.

Posted on 08/28/2006 at 2:08:00 PM

 
XM has a deeper playlist. Sirius is more like FM sans commercials.

Posted on 08/28/2006 at 1:08:00 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 15 of 15
 
Most Commented On