|
|
UK indoor
From Digital Spy forum
http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...d.php?t=205206 MRDAB writes... "Yeah I got my power arc aerial from there. it needs 2 batteries once in a blue moon (use some good duracells) it lives ontop of my wardrobe and is very happily picking up all muxes. I'm abt 30 miles from sutton coldfield" Happily picks up all six Muxes or stations. These six stations are broadcasting at 8 kW (5) and 10 kW (1). That is indoor reception at 30 miles with ULTRA LOW POWER COFDM transmitters. We hear complaints in the US when a station is at 120 kW as being flee powered. I guess the UK is using NANO power transmitters. So where is this BS about COFDM needing more power than 8-VSB? In Manhattan we can't get reception at 9 blocks with directional antennas with the broadcast using 800 kW. Or to put it another way, 8-VSB can't deliver using 100 times the power at only ONE sixtieth the distance while using a directional antenna (arc) while COFDM can deliver using only 1/100th the power uses a simple omni directional antenna INDOORS. Bob Miller |
Great for the UK, but we have 8-VSB here in the USA and that is not
going to change. Tests show with proper receiver design 8-VSB can be as good as COFDM for home reception. HDTV receiver chips cost as little as $8. and receiver costs are coming down with volume production, so in time reception problems will be worked out at less cost than switching systems, which is a political and economic impossibility anyway. We are not going to start driving on the left hand side of the road either. IB http://broadcastengineering.com/news...r_praises_new/ Sinclair praises new LG Electronics DTV receiver chips Jun 11, 2004 12:00 PM Sinclair Broadcast Group, a severe critic of early DTV reception, said in the latest generation of DTV receiver technology that significant improvements will mean better over-the-air reception of DTV signals using simple indoor antennas. Sinclair's previous concerns were based on 8-VSB modulation standard DTV signals with strong dynamic multipath (ghosts) and varying signal levels. Earlier-generation receivers were unable to handle these signal conditions. Nat Ostroff, Sinclair's vice president of new technology, said that he is pleased to see the progress made by Zenith (a brand of L.G. Electronics) that will allow consumers to easily receive free digital television broadcasts in their homes. He said that broadcasters and consumers could now look forward to a robust DTV service delivered over-the-air without having to subscribe to cable or satellite. He added that this is especially timely because of the FCC-mandated rollout of millions of large-screen HDTV receivers with integrated over-the-air tuners beginning this summer. Informal joint field tests, conducted last month in Baltimore by representatives from Sinclair and Zenith, involved testing reception at sites Sinclair had previously identified as having difficult multipath conditions. Many of these sites did not have successful reception with early generations of receivers investigated by Sinclair. Sinclair said results of the new trials show dramatically improved reception with the receiver built around a new DTV chip developed by LG Electronics. The fifth-generation integrated circuit allows it to lock onto signals in severe multipath environments even when the ghosts have long delays or are larger than the main signal. Ostroff said that, with indoor reception now more viable, broadcasters need to examine their current transmitting power levels to assure that they deliver an adequate signal inside the home, and consumer electronics manufacturers need to ensure that breakthrough technologies such as this are available in the market. Field data was collected from multiple DTV stations at numerous sites, including parking garages and sidewalk locations, many without direct line of sight to the transmitter. Simple indoor antennas were used to explore the improvements that have been made in indoor reception and ease-of-use in moderate and strong signal areas. The fifth-generation receiver chipset tested will be introduced by LG Electronics later this summer. ---------------------------------- http://www.tvtechnology.com/features...N_Zenith.shtml News: by Bob Kovacs Is DTV Reception Problem Solved? Zenith's receiver draws kudos WASHINGTON The scramble to switch television broadcasting to digital sometimes overlooked what occurred at the final link in the over-the-air broadcast chain: the viewer. Although megabucks have been spent to upgrade stations and simultaneously transmit analog and digital signals, stable and reliable over-the-air DTV reception has been a crapshoot. However, the latest generation of DTV receiver technology from LG/Zenith seems to have solved the worst of the problems and is receiving praise from both broadcasters and other interested parties. Dubbed the "fifth-generation" receiver, the new technology has converted some early DTV skeptics into believers. "The performance that we got out of the fifth-generation receiver was as good as what we had seen with COFDM," said Nat Ostroff, president and CEO of Ai and vice president of new technology for Sinclair Broadcasting in Hunt Valley, Md. Ostroff recently observed tests of the LG/Zenith fifth-generation receiver at several particularly difficult reception locations in Baltimore, where Sinclair conducted tests of earlier receivers and comparison tests using COFDM modulation. He had been outspoken in his criticism of the early adoption of the 8-VSB modulation scheme by the ATSC, pointing out that field tests up until now showed that reception in many places was simply impossible. THE CLIFF EFFECT The 8-VSB transmission system adopted by the ATSC for DTV transmission in the U.S. has had many critics among broadcasters and television insiders, primarily because--until now--consistent reception in a typical viewing environment was tricky at best. The term "cliff effect" described what too often happened when watching DTV off the air using earlier equipment: Either the signal looked perfect on the TV or it completely dropped out, as if falling off a cliff. The fifth-generation receiver was far more immune to the cliff effect during Sinclair Broadcasting's tests of the receiver. "We had always said that all we are interested in was a viable over-the-air receiving system and we didn't have it," Ostroff said. "When 8-VSB can be received as well as a COFDM signal, we'll be the first to declare that to be the case and congratulate the winner, and that's exactly what we've done." Ostroff was enthusiastic about the potential of the fifth-generation receiver. "It's the only receiver so far that enables reception indoors with simple antennas," he said. The tests Ostroff witnessed in Baltimore used a simple bow-tie antenna and he said reception was unperturbed by the movement of people in the vicinity and even active vehicle traffic just a few feet away. Sinclair Broadcasting's tests were informally duplicated and confirmed by Mark Schubin, a well-known consulting engineer on television issues and the creator of "Mark's Monday Memo" that discusses issues in broadcasting. Schubin has tried various 8-VSB DTV receivers in his New York apartment with virtually no reception success, until he was able to test an LG LST-3100A receiver--a fourth-generation model--that had been upgraded with the fifth-generation DTV receiving and processing technology. Like Ostroff, Schubin reported that reception was stable while using a simple set-top UHF antenna and people moved around the room. "It was possible to find a location and orientation that caused problems, but I had to really try," Schubin said in a recent issue of the memo. Richard Lewis, vice president of research and technology for Zenith, said that the inner workings of this latest DTV receiver are a blend of well-known techniques as well as some proprietary designs. "The fifth-generation is a much more radical approach," Lewis said. "It uses a 50 microsecond equalizer window to handle pre-ghost or post-ghost [multipath] and was really focused on indoor reception and ease-of-reception with simple antennas." Earlier generations of receivers could also do pre- and post-ghost correction but did not have the long pre-ghost window that the latest generation has. "The main change was a departure in architecture away from what had been used [previously]," Lewis said. "It is proprietary so I can't really get into the details, but it was a chance to throw out the old design book and take a fresh start at it." FAVORABLE RESPONSE Other interested parties have all responded favorably to the tests done with LG/Zenith's fifth-generation receiver. Mark Richer, president of the ATSC, has been a leading proponent of 8-VSB modulation used in the U.S. for digital broadcasting. "It has always been my view that 8-VSB receiver technology would advance quickly," Richer said. "In this highly competitive marketplace, you are going to see rapid advancement of DTV receiver technology from a number of manufacturers." Manufacturers feel that after years of vilification by broadcasters, finally they've been vindicated. "We've said over the years that ATSC reception would improve and I'm glad that we were proven right," said Mike Petricone, vice president of technology policy for the Consumer Electronics Association. Sinclair Broadcasting's Ostroff said that his company is so excited about the new possibilities of DTV that it produced public service announcements to promote DTV for consumers. The spots are not specific to Sinclair and the company is offering them free of charge to any broadcaster as a way to generate viewer interest in DTV. Others pursuing LG/Zenith's technology include USDTV, the Salt Lake City broadcaster that has launched a pay over the air DTV service using spectrum pooled from participating broadcasters. The company recently announced it will use fifth-generation DTV receiver chips in its latest set-top box and expects to ship the product by the end of this year. Lewis said that Zenith expects to ship the product this fall. http://www.tvtechnology.com/features...N_Zenith.shtml |
Why are you so hell bet on trading some 8VSB multi-path problems for COFDM
impulse noise problems? Oh, that right, you don't watch (H)DTV, so it doesn't matter to you. Get over it. COFDM just ain't gonna happen here for commercial OTA television. I'm pretty happy with the current state of the art, and it is just going to get better, so buzz off, will ya? "Bob Miller" wrote in message nk.net... I am not as pessimistic. There is a good chance that we can change modulations. While I am pursuing a better 8-VSB receiver from very reluctant manufacturers I will also push for a modulation change. Sinclair BTW would be all for it as well despite what they say and mean about LG 5th gen prototype. The Senate is showing interest so we will see. If you see a hearing on the subject posted by the Senate Commerce Committee you will know the game is on once again. Bob Miller wrote: Great for the UK, but we have 8-VSB here in the USA and that is not going to change. Tests show with proper receiver design 8-VSB can be as good as COFDM for home reception. HDTV receiver chips cost as little as $8. and receiver costs are coming down with volume production, so in time reception problems will be worked out at less cost than switching systems, which is a political and economic impossibility anyway. We are not going to start driving on the left hand side of the road either. IB http://broadcastengineering.com/news...r_praises_new/ Sinclair praises new LG Electronics DTV receiver chips Jun 11, 2004 12:00 PM Sinclair Broadcast Group, a severe critic of early DTV reception, said in the latest generation of DTV receiver technology that significant improvements will mean better over-the-air reception of DTV signals using simple indoor antennas. Sinclair's previous concerns were based on 8-VSB modulation standard DTV signals with strong dynamic multipath (ghosts) and varying signal levels. Earlier-generation receivers were unable to handle these signal conditions. Nat Ostroff, Sinclair's vice president of new technology, said that he is pleased to see the progress made by Zenith (a brand of L.G. Electronics) that will allow consumers to easily receive free digital television broadcasts in their homes. He said that broadcasters and consumers could now look forward to a robust DTV service delivered over-the-air without having to subscribe to cable or satellite. He added that this is especially timely because of the FCC-mandated rollout of millions of large-screen HDTV receivers with integrated over-the-air tuners beginning this summer. Informal joint field tests, conducted last month in Baltimore by representatives from Sinclair and Zenith, involved testing reception at sites Sinclair had previously identified as having difficult multipath conditions. Many of these sites did not have successful reception with early generations of receivers investigated by Sinclair. Sinclair said results of the new trials show dramatically improved reception with the receiver built around a new DTV chip developed by LG Electronics. The fifth-generation integrated circuit allows it to lock onto signals in severe multipath environments even when the ghosts have long delays or are larger than the main signal. Ostroff said that, with indoor reception now more viable, broadcasters need to examine their current transmitting power levels to assure that they deliver an adequate signal inside the home, and consumer electronics manufacturers need to ensure that breakthrough technologies such as this are available in the market. Field data was collected from multiple DTV stations at numerous sites, including parking garages and sidewalk locations, many without direct line of sight to the transmitter. Simple indoor antennas were used to explore the improvements that have been made in indoor reception and ease-of-use in moderate and strong signal areas. The fifth-generation receiver chipset tested will be introduced by LG Electronics later this summer. ---------------------------------- http://www.tvtechnology.com/features...N_Zenith.shtml News: by Bob Kovacs Is DTV Reception Problem Solved? Zenith's receiver draws kudos WASHINGTON The scramble to switch television broadcasting to digital sometimes overlooked what occurred at the final link in the over-the-air broadcast chain: the viewer. Although megabucks have been spent to upgrade stations and simultaneously transmit analog and digital signals, stable and reliable over-the-air DTV reception has been a crapshoot. However, the latest generation of DTV receiver technology from LG/Zenith seems to have solved the worst of the problems and is receiving praise from both broadcasters and other interested parties. Dubbed the "fifth-generation" receiver, the new technology has converted some early DTV skeptics into believers. "The performance that we got out of the fifth-generation receiver was as good as what we had seen with COFDM," said Nat Ostroff, president and CEO of Ai and vice president of new technology for Sinclair Broadcasting in Hunt Valley, Md. Ostroff recently observed tests of the LG/Zenith fifth-generation receiver at several particularly difficult reception locations in Baltimore, where Sinclair conducted tests of earlier receivers and comparison tests using COFDM modulation. He had been outspoken in his criticism of the early adoption of the 8-VSB modulation scheme by the ATSC, pointing out that field tests up until now showed that reception in many places was simply impossible. THE CLIFF EFFECT The 8-VSB transmission system adopted by the ATSC for DTV transmission in the U.S. has had many critics among broadcasters and television insiders, primarily because--until now--consistent reception in a typical viewing environment was tricky at best. The term "cliff effect" described what too often happened when watching DTV off the air using earlier equipment: Either the signal looked perfect on the TV or it completely dropped out, as if falling off a cliff. The fifth-generation receiver was far more immune to the cliff effect during Sinclair Broadcasting's tests of the receiver. "We had always said that all we are interested in was a viable over-the-air receiving system and we didn't have it," Ostroff said. "When 8-VSB can be received as well as a COFDM signal, we'll be the first to declare that to be the case and congratulate the winner, and that's exactly what we've done." Ostroff was enthusiastic about the potential of the fifth-generation receiver. "It's the only receiver so far that enables reception indoors with simple antennas," he said. The tests Ostroff witnessed in Baltimore used a simple bow-tie antenna and he said reception was unperturbed by the movement of people in the vicinity and even active vehicle traffic just a few feet away. Sinclair Broadcasting's tests were informally duplicated and confirmed by Mark Schubin, a well-known consulting engineer on television issues and the creator of "Mark's Monday Memo" that discusses issues in broadcasting. Schubin has tried various 8-VSB DTV receivers in his New York apartment with virtually no reception success, until he was able to test an LG LST-3100A receiver--a fourth-generation model--that had been upgraded with the fifth-generation DTV receiving and processing technology. Like Ostroff, Schubin reported that reception was stable while using a simple set-top UHF antenna and people moved around the room. "It was possible to find a location and orientation that caused problems, but I had to really try," Schubin said in a recent issue of the memo. Richard Lewis, vice president of research and technology for Zenith, said that the inner workings of this latest DTV receiver are a blend of well-known techniques as well as some proprietary designs. "The fifth-generation is a much more radical approach," Lewis said. "It uses a 50 microsecond equalizer window to handle pre-ghost or post-ghost [multipath] and was really focused on indoor reception and ease-of-reception with simple antennas." Earlier generations of receivers could also do pre- and post-ghost correction but did not have the long pre-ghost window that the latest generation has. "The main change was a departure in architecture away from what had been used [previously]," Lewis said. "It is proprietary so I can't really get into the details, but it was a chance to throw out the old design book and take a fresh start at it." FAVORABLE RESPONSE Other interested parties have all responded favorably to the tests done with LG/Zenith's fifth-generation receiver. Mark Richer, president of the ATSC, has been a leading proponent of 8-VSB modulation used in the U.S. for digital broadcasting. "It has always been my view that 8-VSB receiver technology would advance quickly," Richer said. "In this highly competitive marketplace, you are going to see rapid advancement of DTV receiver technology from a number of manufacturers." Manufacturers feel that after years of vilification by broadcasters, finally they've been vindicated. "We've said over the years that ATSC reception would improve and I'm glad that we were proven right," said Mike Petricone, vice president of technology policy for the Consumer Electronics Association. Sinclair Broadcasting's Ostroff said that his company is so excited about the new possibilities of DTV that it produced public service announcements to promote DTV for consumers. The spots are not specific to Sinclair and the company is offering them free of charge to any broadcaster as a way to generate viewer interest in DTV. Others pursuing LG/Zenith's technology include USDTV, the Salt Lake City broadcaster that has launched a pay over the air DTV service using spectrum pooled from participating broadcasters. The company recently announced it will use fifth-generation DTV receiver chips in its latest set-top box and expects to ship the product by the end of this year. Lewis said that Zenith expects to ship the product this fall. http://www.tvtechnology.com/features...N_Zenith.shtml |
Who gives a damn about receptivity in the UK,and WHY do you think their
topographics have any bearing on US signal dynamics? |
SAC 441 wrote:
Who gives a damn about receptivity in the UK,and WHY do you think their topographics have any bearing on US signal dynamics? Yeah! because we all know that RF energy behaves differently when it's inside arbitrary political borders!!!!!!!!!!! Idiot. |
You know I don't understand why people desire to be so rude when making
posts. You would never have the guts to call him an "idiot" to his face over such a small issue, but you have no problem mouthing off on the Web where he is not there to smack you in the face. All the unhappy people who love to insult others on the Web have psychological problems that only get in the way of a reasonable and good spirited discussion. These are not life or death issues, just electronics for fun. Rudeness makes other people think you are less intelligent, not more intelligent. IB |
But you are simply wrong. It will happen here for commercial television
even if the modulation for stations below 51 is not changed. Stations above 51 will use COFDM and stations below will go out of business. Congress will then auction off those stations and again they will be used with COFDM for similar services. I believe that will happen even if 5th gen receivers show up and do well because I don't believe commercial TV can survive without mobile reception. Any broadcaster using current spectrum and 8-VSB is condemned to compete with satellite, cable, Internet and new mobile services. Current broadcasters are not doing at all well with their analog broadcasting. They depend totally on must carry. Sooner or later Congress is going to notice that they are simply not using those channels below 51. That the 15% is a myth, that it is more like 4.6% who depend on OTA and who can't afford to buy cable or satellite and when they discover that 3.6% of those steal cable or satellite the game is up and they are going to take back that unused spectrum, channels 2 to 51 and sell it off. That is the way it is going or do you expect that magically someday soon the trend will change and people will start buying OTA receivers and the curve will turn up all by itself? LG doesn't think so, they are betting that the only receivers to be sold in the US are MANDATED ones in integrated sets that very few will ever hook up to an antenna. 8-VSB and MPEG2 are doomed one way or another. They simply can't and by the way are not competing. Bob Miller Phil Ross wrote: Why are you so hell bet on trading some 8VSB multi-path problems for COFDM impulse noise problems? Oh, that right, you don't watch (H)DTV, so it doesn't matter to you. Get over it. COFDM just ain't gonna happen here for commercial OTA television. I'm pretty happy with the current state of the art, and it is just going to get better, so buzz off, will ya? "Bob Miller" wrote in message nk.net... I am not as pessimistic. There is a good chance that we can change modulations. While I am pursuing a better 8-VSB receiver from very reluctant manufacturers I will also push for a modulation change. Sinclair BTW would be all for it as well despite what they say and mean about LG 5th gen prototype. The Senate is showing interest so we will see. If you see a hearing on the subject posted by the Senate Commerce Committee you will know the game is on once again. Bob Miller |
SAC 441 wrote:
Who gives a damn about receptivity in the UK,and WHY do you think their topographics have any bearing on US signal dynamics? Well they have similar trees, hills etc. and we have tried an advanced modulation to the one they have in the US. It works here even better than there. It works in a lot of countries that have easier and more challenging topography than the US. In fact if you look at a map of the US you will notice we have wildly varying topography ourselves much of which is duplicated around the world. In a word the laws of physics is the same there as here. Here is a video of COFDM working real well in a location that 8-VSB simply can't handle. 8-VSB works very poorly to not at all in Manhattan which is a very challenging place for RF signals of any kind. But COFDM not only works well there it works mobile there, something 8-VSB would have a hard time doing anywhere. www.viacel.com/bob.wmv Bob Miller |
"Bob Miller" wrote in message nk.net...
snip I don't believe commercial TV can survive without mobile reception. Any broadcaster using current spectrum and 8-VSB is condemned to compete with satellite, cable, Internet and new mobile services. snip I've never had satellite or cable, and I'm not particularly interested in watching TV over the Internet or on a mobile phone. I'm also not interested in paying a big monthly fee just to see more channels of garbage. Whatever shakes out in OTA, that's what I'll probably be using. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way. |
Bob,
So who is going to reimburse consumers, manufacturers, broadcasters, and retailers for all the now useless 8-VSB equipment? The government? Are people just going to have to take the financial hit? Have you figured out the total cost to society of a change? It would certainly be in the billions of dollars. I would love to get the Chinese version of COFDM combined with the Microsoft's codec and go back in a time machine to 1995 and give the FCC a demonstration. But I really think too much water has passed under the bridge to change things now. I can't find any time machines for sale on eBay, so I think we are out of luck. IB |
L David Matheny wrote:
"Bob Miller" wrote in message nk.net... snip I don't believe commercial TV can survive without mobile reception. Any broadcaster using current spectrum and 8-VSB is condemned to compete with satellite, cable, Internet and new mobile services. snip I've never had satellite or cable, and I'm not particularly interested in watching TV over the Internet or on a mobile phone. I'm also not interested in paying a big monthly fee just to see more channels of garbage. Whatever shakes out in OTA, that's what I'll probably be using. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way. You don't know if your particularly interested in watching TV over the Internet because you don't know what the offering will be or what the experience will be like. You may not like the idea of watching TV on your cell phone but the fact that a cell phone or other such small device can receive the DTV signal with an antenna one inch long is what is important. Using such small device you will be able to watch DTV on any size screen you want anywhere you want including in your living room which is the only place you want to watch it I assume from your post. Your not open to any new idea what-so-ever no matter how much easier or cheaper it might be. You are just hog tied to what you know right now and no one can change your mind about anything ever. Did I paint the picture right? And I am sure you are not the only one like that or who feels that way. Bob Miller |
Alex Perez wrote in reply to a post from an original posting by another
party: "Yeah! because we all know that RF energy behaves differently when it's inside arbitrary political borders!!!!!!!!!!! Idiot."---- Reply: Maybe I should be more specific.I was not referring to the inherent nature of RF energy itself.If you would note,I used the word TOPOGRAPHICS in my reply,which by definition means SURFACE FEATURES AND ELEVATIONS OF THE TERRAIN IN WHICH THE RF ENERGY IS BEING USED.As far as I know,the UK does not have as many or as much skyscraper signal canyons like the US does.Surface features can block,reflect and obstruct and multipath distort signal frequencies of what over the air terrain signals are being used for television (as well as radio).Chicago,New York City,Houston TX ,Detroit,MI and others represent challenges to that kind of receptivity that is not evidenced in the UK perhaps maybe save for London.Even then I am not so sure as their buildings are still not all that tall. Even mountain ranges can affect signal strengths due to their location and/or proximity to a transmitted signal.Again,the topography of the US is vastly different than in the UK.We have mountain ranges that are almost 1800 miles long.I seriously doubt there is any corollary to this in the UK. There are other minor considerations as well,but I will not go into here.The UK in this regard HAS VERY LITTLE IN COMMON WITH THE US. Not only that,but the political systems involved are vastly different also with respect to legal issues and licensing. SO,IN EFFECT,COMPARING THE US AND UK WITH THEIR DIVERSE TOPOGRAPHIES,THEIR DISSIMILAR POLITICAL SYSTEMS AND DIFFERING SIGNAL INFRASTRUCTURES IS A NON SEQUITUR IN MY HUMBLE OPINION..... Is that succinct enough for you? |
|
"Bob Miller" wrote in message nk.net... Your [sic] not open to any new idea what-so-ever [sic] no matter how much easier or cheaper it might be. You are just hog tied to what you know right now and no one can change your mind about anything ever. Did I paint the picture right? And I am sure you are not the only one like that or who feels that way. Bob Miller You're ragging on the guy for no other reason than you don't like his expressed viewing choices! That's low. I have almost nobody in the kill-file, but you're getting tempting. ... and spare me the patronizing remark that it's my decision whom to kill-file. |
Sal M. Onella wrote:
"Bob Miller" wrote in message nk.net... Your [sic] not open to any new idea what-so-ever [sic] no matter how much easier or cheaper it might be. You are just hog tied to what you know right now and no one can change your mind about anything ever. Did I paint the picture right? And I am sure you are not the only one like that or who feels that way. Bob Miller You're ragging on the guy for no other reason than you don't like his expressed viewing choices! That's low. I have almost nobody in the kill-file, but you're getting tempting. ... and spare me the patronizing remark that it's my decision whom to kill-file. And I thought he was ragging on me. OK my point is not his expressed viewing choice. He has every right to it. My problem is that he wants to or is happy with a system that limits everyone else to his viewing choice when we could have a system that works fine for his viewing choice and happens to work in New York City for the citizens that live there as well. They should be able to use their TV spectrum as well as he can to watch DTV. Especially since it does nothing to hurt or deprive him of anything. People are constantly saying I got mine and its just tough luck if you can't get yours. Why? When it would be even easier for him to get what he wants while others are not deprived. And it would even cost him less. It would also have speeded up the DTV transition and all things HD. This morrass we are in is not helping anything DTV related. Staying the course with 8-VSB will kill OTA DTV below channels 51 within ten years in my opinion. It will then be a few more years of waiting for this spectrum to be re distributed to new users who will not be using 8-VSB whatever they are doing. I don't think this is idle speculation. It has been two years since the outgoing Chairman of the FCC asked the question, "What are we protecting" in regard to all OTA DTV broadcast spectrum and the question was generated by what he thought was the OTA population of 15% who depend on OTA. The latest figures that the FCC's boss, the Congress is working with talk of only 4.6% of the population that not only relies on OTA but does so because it cannot afford cable or satellite. Congress is not going to protect the other 11.4% who either don't care for TV at all or care so little as to not buy cable or satellite. They are now focused on that 4.6% number and the question will (has already by suggestion) come up again "What are we protecting?" OTA days could be numbered. If Congress can get billions for stations above channel 51 they can get many more for stations below 51. Bob Miller |
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Bob Miller wrote:
Staying the course with 8-VSB will kill OTA DTV below channels 51 within ten years in my opinion. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one. In the case of Psycho Bob Miller, you can be confident that his opinions are wrong. He has a perfect track record of being wrong in the past, and there's no reason to believe that this will change in the future. The only reason why Psycho Bob continues to post his nonsense is that he is angry that his side lost. He is unable to let go, and instead is doing this as a sick form of revenge. He hopes that, to the extent that he creates fear, uncertainty, and doubt, that he will harm those who defeated him. This is why he is Psycho Bob. Mentally healthy individuals do not do this. Mentally healthy individuals accept defeat and move on. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. |
On Sat, 2 Apr 2005, wrote:
So who is going to reimburse consumers, manufacturers, broadcasters, and retailers for all the now useless 8-VSB equipment? The government? Are people just going to have to take the financial hit? That's exactly what Psycho Bob wants. I would love to get the Chinese version of COFDM combined with the Microsoft's codec No you don't. Before you make such statements, you ought to study the technical issues and the differences between China's conditions and North American conditions. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. |
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Phil Ross wrote:
Why are you so hell bet on trading some 8VSB multi-path problems for COFDM impulse noise problems? Psycho Bob has a twisted need for revenge. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. |
Bob Miller wrote:
But you are simply wrong. It will happen here for commercial television even if the modulation for stations below 51 is not changed. Stations above 51 will use COFDM and stations below will go out of business. So we can be secure. This is yet another prediction by bob. So far he has been wrong 100% of the time. Congress will then auction off those stations and again they will be used with COFDM for similar services. You really need to update your meds. I believe that will happen even if 5th gen receivers show up and do well because I don't believe commercial TV can survive without mobile reception. Despite the fact that they have done so from the very beginning of broadcast TV. Any broadcaster using current spectrum and 8-VSB is condemned to compete with satellite, cable, Internet and new mobile services. And will be able to succeed. Current broadcasters are not doing at all well with their analog broadcasting. Again, I challenge you to cite a single major network affiliate that has gone under. They depend totally on must carry. Sooner or later Congress is going to notice that they are simply not using those channels below 51. Really? What makes you think that they are ignorant of the uses of that spectrum. That the 15% is a myth, that it is more like 4.6% who depend on OTA and who can't afford to buy cable or satellite and when they discover that 3.6% of those steal cable or satellite the game is up and they are going to take back that unused spectrum, channels 2 to 51 and sell it off. That's odd, you recently used the 15-40% statistics (you know, the real ones) to support the size of the US OTA market in another post. Why do you bother to lie when you provide the proof that you are lying almost as soon as you lie? That is the way it is going or do you expect that magically someday soon the trend will change and people will start buying OTA receivers and the curve will turn up all by itself? There are probably more OTA users now, with 8-VSB + NTSC than there were with NTSC alone. LG doesn't think so, they are betting that the only receivers to be sold in the US are MANDATED ones in integrated sets Which shows good strategic thinking on their part. They get to sell the parts and collect the license fee. that very few will ever hook up to an antenna. In your fantasy world. 8-VSB and MPEG2 are doomed one way or another. They simply can't and by the way are not competing. Do you get your grammar lessons from the same place you get your business advice? Matthew -- Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game You can't win You can't break even You can't get out of the game |
"Bob Miller" wrote in message nk.net... ... ... I don't believe commercial TV can survive without mobile reception. ... ... Though I do enjoy the spirited, albeit sometimes contentious, discussions, and I do try to understand all points of view on the issues being discussed, I am really having a hard time understanding Bob's belief that mobile reception of digital TV is a requirement. Bob, when would I, or anyone, find it necessary of desirable to watch television while I'm "on the move" ...and what would I watch and where would I be when I watch it? You speak of watching TV on small mobile devices. Why? What is it about digital TV and mobility that attracts you? Even if I wanted to watch TV while walking down the street, I could do that with a small analog TV from Radio Shack. Analog mobile TV has been possible for decades. What is it you want so badly from digital mobile TV that I can't get with the analog Radio Shack device (if I actually wanted such a device)? The DTV standard in the US, and standards around the world, made high definition a central feature of digital TV, though not the only feature. The small mobile screens you speak of certainly would not be used for high definition content. So - I would agree with others on this newsgroup that high definition is of little interest to you, at least with regard to digital mobile TV. In addition, though I love good programming when it can be found on TV, I have to make a conscious effort while at home to turn the TV set off or else I might "vegetate" in front of the "boob tube". Too many homes have families that are zombie-like in front of the TV with the result that simple communication between family members becomes rare. Sometimes you just have to turn the TV off to allow normal human interactions to go on. When I leave my house, I want to see the world, to see people, and perhaps talk to people. If I have my face buried in some mobile TV, I am as much a zombie as the person who is hypnotized by his TV in his living room. If I'm watching a mobile TV, I won't see the world and I won't see people. Sometimes, I go to a club near to where I live - to get out of my house, and to socialize. From time to time, the club owner turns on their TV, simply so that the club does not appear quiet and "dead". I always ask him to turn it off. I explain that the reason I am at the club, and the reason that I left my house, is that I want to interact with the world, and socialize with people ...*and* get away from TV. I explain that if I wanted to watch TV, I would have stayed at home - by myself. So, Bob, help me understand who would want or need mobile TV, and why. I'm just not getting it. |
Well, Bob, there is a big difference between adding a STB to a NTSC TV
compared to replacing the ATSC tuner in a recently purchased $8000 plasma TV, or in a $700 OTA DVR, which would actually become useless if its internal receiver was made useless. People have known about the switch to digital since the late 1990's, or at least have been told about it in various forums, and have been making purchases accordingly. I doubt very seriously that Congress or the FCC are going to change directions this far into the game, especially when your proposed modulation scheme has its own set of problems. I could see the reaction when folks that have made a huge investment in HDTV equipment are forced to replace their equipment again, and suddenly have new reception problems because of impulse noise, etc. I, for one, would become very political if I actually thought that your dreams and schemes were anything but the fantasy of a failed businessman who can not accept the fact that he backed the wrong horse in a technological gamble. "Bob Miller" wrote in message nk.net... wrote: Bob, So who is going to reimburse consumers, manufacturers, broadcasters, and retailers for all the now useless 8-VSB equipment? The government? Are people just going to have to take the financial hit? Have you figured out the total cost to society of a change? It would certainly be in the billions of dollars. I would love to get the Chinese version of COFDM combined with the Microsoft's codec and go back in a time machine to 1995 and give the FCC a demonstration. But I really think too much water has passed under the bridge to change things now. I can't find any time machines for sale on eBay, so I think we are out of luck. IB Why the same people who are reimbursing all the portable NTSC TV owners or all the analog TV owners I should say. The same people that will buy a converter for every device that has an NTSC tuner in it today or do you believe all 25 million analog TV sets sold this year are just plain out of luck because they should have known that NTSC was on its last legs and would be replaced sometime soon. Or the 25 million that will be sold this year for that matter. We know a transition is coming but no one has told the public. No notice, no stickers na da. Is there a book somewhere that list how much time is required before a country can switch to a better modulation when they find out the one they have s**ks? If you have to take care of everyone that would be hurt by a modulation switch then the interval between changes shouldn't matter. The only thing that should matter is does it make sense to change? If we don't change now will we have to change latter? How much later and why should we wait? If we change now will it cost more or will it cost more latter when we change then? How much do we gain by changing now and how much do we lose if we change later? And if we change again should we think more about how we go about this in the first place? Should we lock ourselves into a system that does not allow for an upgrade even when we know that an upgrade will likely be a good idea and we have a pretty good idea when it could take place and there is something we could do to prepare for it? (MPEG4, VP6 were well along in planning stages five years ago). Or could we just allow both systems to operate in the same space. How about that one??? If 8-VSB is as good as many say here there is no NO risk that anything will happen. NO one will switch to COFDM. If they are anywhere near being equal NO broadcaster will switch. It would be crazy to be that other modulation that requires another receiver. If COFDM and 8-VSB are anywhere near being equal in performance there is NO risk to 8-VSB in allowing COFDM as Sinclair ask for in 2000. What the 8-VSB proponents knew in 2000 and know very well today is that if COFDM is allowed in the US ALL broadcasters would switch en masse, in a heart beat. Bob Miller |
In article ,
"Neil - Salem, MA USA" writes: "Bob Miller" wrote in message nk.net... ... ... I don't believe commercial TV can survive without mobile reception. ... ... Though I do enjoy the spirited, albeit sometimes contentious, discussions, and I do try to understand all points of view on the issues being discussed, I am really having a hard time understanding Bob's belief that mobile reception of digital TV is a requirement. Bob, when would I, or anyone, find it necessary of desirable to watch television while I'm "on the move" ...and what would I watch and where would I be when I watch it? You speak of watching TV on small mobile devices. Why? The big market for mobile TV would be on mass transit, where there would be an additional revenue stream for the mass transit agency and a new business for Bob. This would probably entail Jerry Springer with tampon/condom commercials interspersed. Any claim of 'childrens' entertainment would neglect the vast superiority of nicely reviewed and controlled DVDs that play very well on the SUV video screen(s). (Imagine letting your kids choose between Jerry Springer and Powerpuff girls... Bob is 'Jerry' and most real world people prefer their kids seeing powerpuff, knd or even spongebob.) For 'news' and other timely info, the good old (and safe) radio works great. More visual distractions for the driver just won't be well received in our society. John |
Neil - Salem, MA USA wrote:
"Bob Miller" wrote in message nk.net... ... ... I don't believe commercial TV can survive without mobile reception. ... Though I do enjoy the spirited, albeit sometimes contentious, discussions, and I do try to understand all points of view on the issues being discussed, I am really having a hard time understanding Bob's belief that mobile reception of digital TV is a requirement. Not a requirement a necessity. Bob, when would I, or anyone, find it necessary of desirable to watch television while I'm "on the move" ...and what would I watch and where would I be when I watch it? You speak of watching TV on small mobile devices. Why? What is it about digital TV and mobility that attracts you? Even if I wanted to watch TV while walking down the street, I could do that with a small analog TV from Radio Shack. Analog mobile TV has been possible for decades. What is it you want so badly from digital mobile TV that I can't get with the analog Radio Shack device (if I actually wanted such a device)? But you can't watch analog TV while walking down the street after analog turnoff. That small market of free mobile TV goes away after analog turnoff. And while it exist today as you say one reason it is small is because it works badly like all analog TV. Remember the reason for cable was originally to offer better reception of NTSC. Many would argue today that cable and satellite exist because of the thousand channels they can deliver. I disagree, far fewer channels OTA today would put both out of business if they could be received anywhere anytime. The DTV standard in the US, and standards around the world, made high definition a central feature of digital TV, though not the only feature. The small mobile screens you speak of certainly would not be used for high definition content. So - I would agree with others on this newsgroup that high definition is of little interest to you, at least with regard to digital mobile TV. The mobile screen shows the programming first not the resolution. Anyone would opt for higher resolution if they can have it but the primary reason for TV is the story, the game not the resolution. You want to see the game first and then if it is possible and not too much of a chore you will go for better resolution. That is and will be true of cell phone reception. It is the biggest argument I have against the Qualcomm and Crown Castle cell phone DTV ventures I have. They will reduce resolution to fit the cell phone and increase programming. I think there is a bigger market for higher resolution programming for all size screens. For example the cell phone of the future will receive an HD res program and either show it on its own small screen or allow you to watch it on a pocket projector, a heads up display, a laptop or any size screen including an HD set. In addition, though I love good programming when it can be found on TV, I have to make a conscious effort while at home to turn the TV set off or else I might "vegetate" in front of the "boob tube". Too many homes have families that are zombie-like in front of the TV with the result that simple communication between family members becomes rare. Sometimes you just have to turn the TV off to allow normal human interactions to go on. When I leave my house, I want to see the world, to see people, and perhaps talk to people. If I have my face buried in some mobile TV, I am as much a zombie as the person who is hypnotized by his TV in his living room. If I'm watching a mobile TV, I won't see the world and I won't see people. Sometimes, I go to a club near to where I live - to get out of my house, and to socialize. From time to time, the club owner turns on their TV, simply so that the club does not appear quiet and "dead". I always ask him to turn it off. I explain that the reason I am at the club, and the reason that I left my house, is that I want to interact with the world, and socialize with people ...*and* get away from TV. I explain that if I wanted to watch TV, I would have stayed at home - by myself. So, Bob, help me understand who would want or need mobile TV, and why. I'm just not getting it. No argument with most of what you say, I agree. But we are talking about the survival of OTA free broadcast TV. It has already shrunk from 100% of viewers to something from 15% to 4.6% who rely on it for TV to the highest of 40% of homes who have at least one TV set still hooked up to an antenna, digital or analog though they don't depend on it. This has nothing to do with the TV culture we live in, only whether OTA free TV will survive the digital transition. The other subject is another discussion in which I think we both agree. So if a broadcaster today has say 15% of his viewers dependent on OTA and that number is declining or as some are now saying in the House Commerce Committee it has hit bottom at 4.6% who actually rely on OTA and can't afford cable or satellite, what makes you think they will survive? They are on life support as it is. The feeding tube is must carry on cable. If the number can't go any lower and it is NOT rising why are we protecting this OTA free thing as the Chairman of the FCC asked. And now I might add it is the elephant in the room at the House Commerce Committee. Let me put it this way if must carry was overturned by the courts would most TV stations in the US survive? Could they pay their electric bills? The best content would go directly to cable and satellite and the transmitters and their cost would be eliminated in many markets don't you think? The best use of the spectrum broadcasters use for channels below 51 is NOT to deliver a signal to the local cable company. So it would find its best use if must carry, an artificial construct created by the political power of broadcasters to protect themselves from competition, went away. In a world that has abandoned OTA reception by at least 85% and possibly as much as 95.4% would the best use of the spectrum be to broadcast to fixed receivers found in your living room? When that venue is already being attacked by a new service, broadband Internet, that will also compete for fixed reception in your living room. What do the numbers have to get to before someone says hey I have a better idea. We could use this spectrum to do X or Y or Z. And X, Y and Z all have to do with delivering data to customers where ever they are. That BTW includes in their living rooms. You don't lose the living room by making reception ubiquitous. You only expand your market to everywhere. And everywhere is something cable and satellite can't do or do competitively. For example satellite can deliver mobile if you have an expensive antenna and even then it will be excruciatingly line of sight. No building or trees can get in the way. Satellite only works for a portable solution in my book unless you build a terrestrial repeater system like XM or Sirius did which could make it truly mobile but only in cities where the repeaters are and then you really have a terrestrial system. So when I say mobile I mean to extend your coverage to all markets, fixed, portable and mobile. I am not talking about ONLY mobile and ONLY while you are moving. I am talking about simple easy reception everywhere on a multitude of receivers of all sizes. I am talking about OTA using its strength to compete with cable and satellite. I am saying that if they don't do that then what we have is a failed OTA that pretends to be alive with the fig leaf of must carry. In other words a massive waste of spectrum. The question for Congress then becomes why? Why not just invent another figment to allow broadcasters must carry on cable without the need for any spectrum. Then they could have the best of both worlds. Lots of money for selling off the spectrum to those who would use it to maximize its potential and broadcasters that would not have to pay electric bills for transmitters that broadcast to no one. They have a very difficult task legally with that solution since the courts will see though the fiction a lot easier if there are no transmitters used as a fig leaf. Remember this Congressional must carry allusion was only held up by the Supreme Court by a vote of 5 to 4 and the deciding vote was very iffy. If the must carry laws go back to the Supreme Court with multicasting added to them and the modern reality that even fewer people depend on OTA than was true before and you can expect that the whole must carry concept could be overturned. Now as to your and my lack of need for mobile TV. The reality is that most of the world will have mobile TV on cell phones, lap tops and DVD players as well as just mobile TV sets in the coming years. This will not be your daddy's analog mobile TV. This will be true in the US also with at least four ventures in the works. These ventures will first address the lucrative and trendy cell phone market but will very quickly be in all vehicles and then they will attack broadcasters directly both cable and satellite. And I predict that these new age broadcaster will align themselves with broadband Internet seamlessly both tirelessly and fixed in your living room. The dinosaur that is 8-VSB DTV to fixed receivers which already looks ancient to me will look ridiculous to the next generation if they are ever even aware of it. How many of those under 30 today are aware of OTA TV or DTV? I remember showing by daughter when she was 15 when we had a cable outage that you could watch TV with an antenna. She was amazed. That is the fate of ATSC 8-VSB. That is what it was designed for, to only emulate NTSC and I am afraid that as designed it is doing a good job of emulating the death rattle of analog TV and simply joining the downward spiral already in place. In other countries both HD and mobile and easy reception are all being addressed and OTA TV is having an incredible rebirth. Not here. We need the same thing they have, a modulation that offers easy plug and play reception on inexpensive receivers that work anywhere mobile, fixed or portable. Bob Miller |
Phil Ross wrote:
Well, Bob, there is a big difference between adding a STB to a NTSC TV compared to replacing the ATSC tuner in a recently purchased $8000 plasma TV, or in a $700 OTA DVR, which would actually become useless if its internal receiver was made useless. People have known about the switch to digital since the late 1990's, or at least have been told about it in various forums, and have been making purchases accordingly. I doubt very seriously that Congress or the FCC are going to change directions this far into the game, especially when your proposed modulation scheme has its own set of problems. I could see the reaction when folks that have made a huge investment in HDTV equipment are forced to replace their equipment again, and suddenly have new reception problems because of impulse noise, etc. I, for one, would become very political if I actually thought that your dreams and schemes were anything but the fantasy of a failed businessman who can not accept the fact that he backed the wrong horse in a technological gamble. If we change modulations or not people will become very aware of the difference between COFDM and 8-VSB. There will be other OTA broadcasters using COFDM and the BS about its problems will be put to rest. Many who have given up on OTA DTV or who suffer in silence because they think it is their fault for not being smart enough will be amazed at OTA digital reception on cell phones, laptops etc. that will be far better than 8-VSB. We were not the only ones who picked COFDM, others include ABC, NBC, Pappas, Sinclair, Granite and others who were intimidated into silence by our Congress. Our business has not failed. It has not started and not because we picked the wrong horse. We picked the right one. Our plan does not require any of the spectrum used by broadcasters and I would be very happy if they were stuck with 8-VSB as a businessman if we at the same time could use the spectrum we have purchased. We cannot because broadcasters who were given their spectrum for free still squat on the spectrum we purchased and paid for. It is the digital transition being stuck that keeps us from launching our venture. It is broadcasters being stuck with 8-VSB that holds us back not us being stuck with 8-VSB because we are not. We can use COFDM. We just can't use our spectrum. 8-VSB holds up competitors from using spectrum to compete with current broadcasters, cable and satellite. That delay is what the transition to digital was all about from day one back in 1986 and it is still working very well. Bob Miller |
On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:06:59 GMT, Bob Miller
wrote: From Digital Spy forum http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...d.php?t=205206 MRDAB writes... "Yeah I got my power arc aerial from there. it needs 2 batteries once in a blue moon (use some good duracells) it lives ontop of my wardrobe and is very happily picking up all muxes. I'm abt 30 miles from sutton coldfield" Snip... The original AV forum poster doesn't mention in which direction he located from Sutton Coldfield; as there are several repeaters deployed in and around the SC area. (Many of them well within a 30 mile radius, I.E. The AV forum poster could be right next to a repeater, but our resident COFDM Troll would never tell you about that tidbit of info). P.S.. Why so many repeaters(~8) all within 30 miles of SC?? Must be COFDM reception isn't all that good. Another Item. Since when do UK residents measure their distances in Miles?? Awfully odd for a member who just signed up in March 2005.. Another BM plant? One last item, the UK doesn't have any HDTV broadcasts. But that didn't stop Booby from polluting the HDTV usenet group with his meanderings. |
Tim Keating wrote:
On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:06:59 GMT, Bob Miller wrote: From Digital Spy forum http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...d.php?t=205206 MRDAB writes... "Yeah I got my power arc aerial from there. it needs 2 batteries once in a blue moon (use some good duracells) it lives ontop of my wardrobe and is very happily picking up all muxes. I'm abt 30 miles from sutton coldfield" Snip... The original AV forum poster doesn't mention in which direction he located from Sutton Coldfield; as there are several repeaters deployed in and around the SC area. (Many of them well within a 30 mile radius, I.E. The AV forum poster could be right next to a repeater, but our resident COFDM Troll would never tell you about that tidbit of info). P.S.. Why so many repeaters(~8) all within 30 miles of SC?? Must be COFDM reception isn't all that good. Another Item. Since when do UK residents measure their distances in Miles?? Awfully odd for a member who just signed up in March 2005.. Another BM plant? The UK is semi-metrified. Distances are in miles and speeds are in miles per hour. At least they were when I was in Norther Ireland and Scotland last fall. One last item, the UK doesn't have any HDTV broadcasts. But that didn't stop Booby from polluting the HDTV usenet group with his meanderings. Nope. It never does. Matthew -- Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game You can't win You can't break even You can't get out of the game |
SAC 441 ) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
Chicago,New York City,Houston TX ,Detroit,MI and others represent challenges to that kind of receptivity that is not evidenced in the UK perhaps maybe save for London. Although Houston does have a decent number of tall buildings, there aren't many residences close to those buildings. It's much more of a "suburbs" city as far as TV reception is concerned. Although the city proper is huge, the tall buildings are only in the central business district. On the other hand, cities like Las Vegas that have sprawl of the "business district" also have problems like you mention. Boston can also be bad, as there are many residences in close to the taller buildings. -- Jeff Rife | | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/UserFri...rCustomers.gif |
Phil Ross ) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
Well, Bob, there is a big difference between adding a STB to a NTSC TV compared to replacing the ATSC tuner in a recently purchased $8000 plasma TV, or in a $700 OTA DVR, which would actually become useless if its internal receiver was made useless. This is also a case where DirecTV probably would *not* step up and provide free replacements for the 1,000,000+ HD receivers for their subscribers unless they got some cash from the government to offset their costs. -- Jeff Rife | "Oooh, I love children... | they taste like chicken." | | -- Heddy Newman, "Herman's Head" |
Matthew L. Martin ) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
Bob Miller wrote: They depend totally on must carry. Sooner or later Congress is going to notice that they are simply not using those channels below 51. Really? What makes you think that they are ignorant of the uses of that spectrum. Bob keeps spouting the myth about "broadcasters depending on must-carry", when the reality is that only a very few stations in most markets ever invoke "must carry" on DBS or cable. Any ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, WB, or PBS station has no problem getting their signal carried without "must carry". Only low-value stations seem to have this problem. For those stations (home shopping channel repeaters, etc.), I have to admit that I agree with Bob that "must carry" is the only thing keeping them going. Of course, one of Bob's pet networks--PAX--is also in the same boat because their management got greedy. Most cable and DBS providers now have both a local *and* the national PAX channels, so the local affiliates basically got screwed by the parent network. -- Jeff Rife | "Because he was human; because he had goodness; | because he was moral they called him insane. | Delusions of grandeur; visions of splendor; | A manic-depressive, he walks in the rain." | -- Rush, "Cinderella Man" |
Tim Keating wrote:
On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:06:59 GMT, Bob Miller wrote: From Digital Spy forum http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...d.php?t=205206 MRDAB writes... "Yeah I got my power arc aerial from there. it needs 2 batteries once in a blue moon (use some good duracells) it lives ontop of my wardrobe and is very happily picking up all muxes. I'm abt 30 miles from sutton coldfield" Snip... The original AV forum poster doesn't mention in which direction he located from Sutton Coldfield; as there are several repeaters deployed in and around the SC area. (Many of them well within a 30 mile radius, I.E. The AV forum poster could be right next to a repeater, but our resident COFDM Troll would never tell you about that tidbit of info). I assume he knows wherefrom he gets his signal. He could easily be in a direction from Sutton Coldfield that has no repeater. Here is a map of transmitter sites. http://www.wolfbane.com/articles/ukdmap2.htm And even if he is closer to a repeater than a main site the power level of the repeater may be so low as that the main transmitter site is where he still gets his signal. For example on this map of the UK Brierley Hill is the nearest repeater to Sutton Coldfield about 15 miles WSW and its six stations have power levels of 200, 100, and 80 Watts compared to Sutton Coldfields power of 8 kW (5 transmitters) and 10 kW (one transmitter). P.S.. Why so many repeaters(~8) all within 30 miles of SC?? Must be COFDM reception isn't all that good. The power of COFDM lays in its use of multipath instead of avoidance of it and its flexibility that ALLOWS the use of repeaters ON CHANNEL. A feature not a negative. Something that 8-VSB would like to have and sometimes it is suggested that someday if 8-VSB keeps improving it may be able to do what COFDM did out of the box many years ago, SFNs and ON CHANNEL repeaters. There is a wide coverage area in which MRDAB can live where he would be closer to Brierly and still have reception from Sutton Coldfield since Sutton has between 40, 80 and 100 times the power ERP that Brierley has. And as far as I can tell by the map there are only three such repeaters within 30 miles of Sutton and they are all in the direction of and around the other side of Birmingham. He could easily live to the South East and his closest transmitter site would be Sutton regardless of power levels. Another Item. Since when do UK residents measure their distances in Miles?? Awfully odd for a member who just signed up in March 2005.. Another BM plant? I think the UK has been measuring their speed and distance in Miles since the 16th Century when QE the 1st set the mile at 5280 ft. Their speedometers and speed limit signs are in miles. It seems the BM plant is smart enough to know this. One last item, the UK doesn't have any HDTV broadcasts. But that didn't stop Booby from polluting the HDTV usenet group with his meanderings. The UK has one and will have three satellite HD ventures. They are looking into doing terrestrial HD also. Bob Miller |
Bob,
I was again accused of being 'you' over at AVS Forum because I asked what is the difference between the front end of a 8-VSB tuner and the front end of a COFDM tuner. You keep saying it is cheaper to make a COFDM tuner, but with 8-VSB receiver chips priced so low ($8.), how can that be? A COFDM HDTV receiver will need a scaler and the same up-front components as a 8-VSB receiver,...right? Also you seem to be comparing the cost of USA 1080i/720p capable receivers with UK's meager 600 line capable receivers. Isn't some of the price difference due to the fact that one is high definition and the other is not? IB (not Bob Miller - laughs!) |
PS Current UK COFDM receiver don't need scalers at all because they
only have one 600 line TV standard to deal with,...right? Don't they have just one audio standard as well? So, aren't you comparing apples and oranges? IB |
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Jeff Rife wrote:
Bob keeps spouting the myth about "broadcasters depending on must-carry", when the reality is that only a very few stations in most markets ever invoke "must carry" on DBS or cable. Any ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, WB, or PBS station has no problem getting their signal carried without "must carry". Only low-value stations seem to have this problem. For those stations (home shopping channel repeaters, etc.), I have to admit that I agree with Bob that "must carry" is the only thing keeping them going. The sad thing is that "must carry" was not intended to benefit home shopping channel repeaters. Rather, it was intended to benefit such stations as UHF foreign-language channel that served the immigrant community; a channel which is of *great* value to a minority that would otherwise be neglected. It seems to me that "must carry" rules need to be revisited. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. |
On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 14:51:31 -0400, Tim Keating
wrote: On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:06:59 GMT, Bob Miller wrote: From Digital Spy forum http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...d.php?t=205206 MRDAB writes... "Yeah I got my power arc aerial from there. it needs 2 batteries once in a blue moon (use some good duracells) it lives ontop of my wardrobe and is very happily picking up all muxes. I'm abt 30 miles from sutton coldfield" Snip... The original AV forum poster doesn't mention in which direction he located from Sutton Coldfield; as there are several repeaters deployed in and around the SC area. (Many of them well within a 30 mile radius, I.E. The AV forum poster could be right next to a repeater, but our resident COFDM Troll would never tell you about that tidbit of info). P.S.. Why so many repeaters(~8) all within 30 miles of SC?? Must be COFDM reception isn't all that good. Another Item. Since when do UK residents measure their distances in Miles?? Awfully odd for a member who just signed up in March 2005.. ^^^^^^^^^^^ this info is incorrect.. sorry.. The member Bob quoted "Gazza487" who signed up in Jul 2004.. One last item, the UK doesn't have any HDTV broadcasts. But that didn't stop Booby from polluting the HDTV usenet group with his meanderings. |
On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:41:25 GMT, Bob Miller
wrote: Tim Keating wrote: On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:06:59 GMT, Bob Miller wrote: From Digital Spy forum http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...d.php?t=205206 MRDAB writes... "Yeah I got my power arc aerial from there. it needs 2 batteries once in a blue moon (use some good duracells) it lives ontop of my wardrobe and is very happily picking up all muxes. I'm abt 30 miles from sutton coldfield" Snip... The original AV forum poster doesn't mention in which direction he located from Sutton Coldfield; as there are several repeaters deployed in and around the SC area. (Many of them well within a 30 mile radius, I.E. The AV forum poster could be right next to a repeater, but our resident COFDM Troll would never tell you about that tidbit of info). I assume he knows wherefrom he gets his signal. He could easily be in a direction from Sutton Coldfield that has no repeater. Here is a map of transmitter sites. http://www.wolfbane.com/articles/ukdmap2.htm Judging by my recent research in thed SC area.. I would say the map quoted by your link is incomplete. (I.E. It's missing several transmission towers). |
On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 16:16:16 -0400, Tim Keating
wrote: On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 14:51:31 -0400, Tim Keating wrote: On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:06:59 GMT, Bob Miller wrote: From Digital Spy forum http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...d.php?t=205206 MRDAB writes... "Yeah I got my power arc aerial from there. it needs 2 batteries once in a blue moon (use some good duracells) it lives ontop of my wardrobe and is very happily picking up all muxes. I'm abt 30 miles from sutton coldfield" Snip... The original AV forum poster doesn't mention in which direction he located from Sutton Coldfield; as there are several repeaters deployed in and around the SC area. (Many of them well within a 30 mile radius, I.E. The AV forum poster could be right next to a repeater, but our resident COFDM Troll would never tell you about that tidbit of info). P.S.. Why so many repeaters(~8) all within 30 miles of SC?? Must be COFDM reception isn't all that good. Here is a partial MAP of DTV retransmission towers within 62 miles of Sutton Coldfield.. Note: Each tower transmits roughly the same programming. http://www.kswindells.34sp.com/freev...meNGR=SK113003 Another Item. Since when do UK residents measure their distances in Miles?? Awfully odd for a member who just signed up in March 2005.. ^^^^^^^^^^^ this info is incorrect.. sorry.. The member Bob quoted "Gazza487" who signed up in Jul 2004.. One last item, the UK doesn't have any HDTV broadcasts. But that didn't stop Booby from polluting the HDTV usenet group with his meanderings. |
|
On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:41:25 GMT, Bob Miller
wrote: Tim Keating wrote: On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:06:59 GMT, Bob Miller wrote: From Digital Spy forum http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...d.php?t=205206 MRDAB writes... "Yeah I got my power arc aerial from there. it needs 2 batteries once in a blue moon (use some good duracells) it lives ontop of my wardrobe and is very happily picking up all muxes. I'm abt 30 miles from sutton coldfield" Snip... The original AV forum poster doesn't mention in which direction he located from Sutton Coldfield; as there are several repeaters deployed in and around the SC area. (Many of them well within a 30 mile radius, I.E. The AV forum poster could be right next to a repeater, but our resident COFDM Troll would never tell you about that tidbit of info). I assume he knows wherefrom he gets his signal. He could easily be in a direction from Sutton Coldfield that has no repeater. Here is a map of transmitter sites. http://www.wolfbane.com/articles/ukdmap2.htm Judging by my recent research in thed SC area.. I would say the map quoted by your link is incomplete. (I.E. It's missing several transmission towers). Here is a partial MAP of DTV retransmission towers within 56 miles of Sutton Coldfield.. Note: Each tower transmits roughly the same programming. http://www.kswindells.34sp.com/freev...meNGR=SK113003 |
Tim Keating wrote:
On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:41:25 GMT, Bob Miller wrote: Tim Keating wrote: On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:06:59 GMT, Bob Miller wrote: From Digital Spy forum http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...d.php?t=205206 MRDAB writes... "Yeah I got my power arc aerial from there. it needs 2 batteries once in a blue moon (use some good duracells) it lives ontop of my wardrobe and is very happily picking up all muxes. I'm abt 30 miles from sutton coldfield" Snip... The original AV forum poster doesn't mention in which direction he located from Sutton Coldfield; as there are several repeaters deployed in and around the SC area. (Many of them well within a 30 mile radius, I.E. The AV forum poster could be right next to a repeater, but our resident COFDM Troll would never tell you about that tidbit of info). I assume he knows wherefrom he gets his signal. He could easily be in a direction from Sutton Coldfield that has no repeater. Here is a map of transmitter sites. http://www.wolfbane.com/articles/ukdmap2.htm Judging by my recent research in thed SC area.. I would say the map quoted by your link is incomplete. (I.E. It's missing several transmission towers). Here is a partial MAP of DTV retransmission towers within 56 miles of Sutton Coldfield.. Note: Each tower transmits roughly the same programming. http://www.kswindells.34sp.com/freev...meNGR=SK113003 Well according to your map I was wrong. I thought there was three repeaters within 30 miles of Sutton Coldfield but there are only two. In your post above you say there are "Many of them well within a 30 mile radius". The only two I can see on your map are Brierley Hill: 24.6 km : 233' and Bromsgrove: 31.9 km : 211', both to the South West. Bromsgrove is operating at 50 Watts (2 channels) and 25 Watts (4 channels) which makes Sutton Coldfields lowest powered transmitter 160 to 320 times as powerful as the transmitters at Bromsgrove. All of these stations at high UHF that normally need more power; 34, 41 and 68. Bromsgrove, Channel 34 at 25 and 50 Watts Brierley Hill, Channel 68 at 200, 100 and 80 Watts Sutton Coldfield, Channel 41 at 8 kW and 10 kW A typical US Transmitter on such UHF channels would operate at #41 KKPX CA SAN JOSE 1000 kW #41 WZVN-TV FL NAPLES 1000 kW #41 WXYZ-TV MI DETROIT 700 kW #68 KRCA CA RIVERSIDE 1000 kW (the only station on 68 - no one likes these real high UHF power bills) #34 KWGN-TV CO DENVER 1000 kW (when they finally let them build a tower) #34 WUSA DC WASHINGTON 1000 kW #34 WDAF-TV MO KANSAS CITY 1000 kW Again Sutton Coldfield operates at flea power compared to even what in the US would be called low power and these repeater sites operate at NANO power. And our friend gets good reception of all muxes (stations) at 30 miles. He probably lives to the South East where on your map there are no repeaters at all. http://www.kswindells.34sp.com/freev...t=Show+Terrain And in New York City last week using a receiver with a 5th gen LG chip in it that has benefited from 8 to 10 years of development, we could not receive WCBS broadcasting from the Empire State Building at 34 the St. in an apartment on West 72nd St. about 40 some blocks away. #56 WCBS-TV NY NEW YORK 349 kW This CBS station is operating at 35 times the power of the highest powered transmitter and 43 times the lowest powered transmitter at Sutton Coldfield and can't be received at 40 blocks (or even 9 blocks) while Sutton can easily be received with a simple omni (arc) antenna in someones bedroom on the top of his wardrobe at 30 miles. It would seem that the story that COFDM needs hundreds of times the power that 8-VSB needs is backwards. In fact I don't think you would be able to receive CBS on 72nd St. with the state of the art 5th gen receiver even if the 8-VSB power was so high that the antenna was melting. Bob Miller |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:27 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com