Mad question about DVT-T2
 

I saw in the window of a well known electronics retailer a portable
analogue TV. It was claimed that it would operate throughout most of
Europe. I was tempted to point out that an analogue TV would not
operate throughout most of the UK, let alone Europe.

However, that got me thinking. Portable digital TVs are available.
The boost in signal strength must make these devices more viable. The
one I saw was DVB-T1 (as I would expect). I then wondered if DVB-T2
would provide a more robust signal, so would a portable TV using
DVB-T2 work better? (I appreciate that you would not benefit from HD
picture quality on a seven inch screen!)

Just wondering.

Mad question about DVT-T2
 

On 06/08/2011 17:02, Scott wrote:
I saw in the window of a well known electronics retailer a portable
analogue TV. It was claimed that it would operate throughout most of
Europe. I was tempted to point out that an analogue TV would not
operate throughout most of the UK, let alone Europe.

However, that got me thinking. Portable digital TVs are available.
The boost in signal strength must make these devices more viable. The
one I saw was DVB-T1 (as I would expect). I then wondered if DVB-T2
would provide a more robust signal, so would a portable TV using
DVB-T2 work better? (I appreciate that you would not benefit from HD
picture quality on a seven inch screen!)

Just wondering.


DVB has introduced a new profile for its popular DVB-T2 terrestrial
standard for lighter applications such as mobile TV: T2-Lite. Version
1.3.1 of the DVB-T2 specification document introduced a T2-Lite profile.
This profile is intended to allow simpler receiver implementations for
very low capacity applications such as mobile broadcasting, although it
may also be received by conventional stationary receivers. T2-Lite is
based on a limited sub-set of the modes of the T2-base profile, and by
avoiding modes which require the most complexity and memory, allows much
more efficient receiver designs to be used.

http://www.dvb.org/news_events/news/

Mad question about DVT-T2
 

On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 18:38:16 +0100, Rick wrote:

On 06/08/2011 17:02, Scott wrote:
I saw in the window of a well known electronics retailer a portable
analogue TV. It was claimed that it would operate throughout most of
Europe. I was tempted to point out that an analogue TV would not
operate throughout most of the UK, let alone Europe.

However, that got me thinking. Portable digital TVs are available.
The boost in signal strength must make these devices more viable. The
one I saw was DVB-T1 (as I would expect). I then wondered if DVB-T2
would provide a more robust signal, so would a portable TV using
DVB-T2 work better? (I appreciate that you would not benefit from HD
picture quality on a seven inch screen!)

Just wondering.


DVB has introduced a new profile for its popular DVB-T2 terrestrial
standard for lighter applications such as mobile TV: T2-Lite. Version
1.3.1 of the DVB-T2 specification document introduced a T2-Lite profile.
This profile is intended to allow simpler receiver implementations for
very low capacity applications such as mobile broadcasting, although it
may also be received by conventional stationary receivers. T2-Lite is
based on a limited sub-set of the modes of the T2-base profile, and by
avoiding modes which require the most complexity and memory, allows much
more efficient receiver designs to be used.

Thanks. I was thinking more of a portable set able to receive the
existing high power HD transmissions that are being introduced with
DSO.

http://www.dvb.org/news_events/news/

Mad question about DVT-T2
 

On 06/08/2011 19:08, Scott wrote:
On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 18:38:16 +0100, wrote:

On 06/08/2011 17:02, Scott wrote:
I saw in the window of a well known electronics retailer a portable
analogue TV. It was claimed that it would operate throughout most of
Europe. I was tempted to point out that an analogue TV would not
operate throughout most of the UK, let alone Europe.

However, that got me thinking. Portable digital TVs are available.
The boost in signal strength must make these devices more viable. The
one I saw was DVB-T1 (as I would expect). I then wondered if DVB-T2
would provide a more robust signal, so would a portable TV using
DVB-T2 work better? (I appreciate that you would not benefit from HD
picture quality on a seven inch screen!)

Just wondering.


DVB has introduced a new profile for its popular DVB-T2 terrestrial
standard for lighter applications such as mobile TV: T2-Lite. Version
1.3.1 of the DVB-T2 specification document introduced a T2-Lite profile.
This profile is intended to allow simpler receiver implementations for
very low capacity applications such as mobile broadcasting, although it
may also be received by conventional stationary receivers. T2-Lite is
based on a limited sub-set of the modes of the T2-base profile, and by
avoiding modes which require the most complexity and memory, allows much
more efficient receiver designs to be used.

Thanks. I was thinking more of a portable set able to receive the
existing high power HD transmissions that are being introduced with
DSO.

http://www.dvb.org/news_events/news/


As the DVB-T2 HD channels are simply duplicated PBS DVB-T channels, then
there would appear to be little point in incorporating a more expensive
chipset into a portable receiver.
However as prices of DVB-T2 chipsets drop to the same as those of DVB-T,
then it will be safe to assume that they will be incorporated as
standard into all new receiving equipment.

Mad question about DVT-T2
 

On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 20:40:15 +0100, Rick wrote:

On 06/08/2011 19:08, Scott wrote:
On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 18:38:16 +0100, wrote:

On 06/08/2011 17:02, Scott wrote:
I saw in the window of a well known electronics retailer a portable
analogue TV. It was claimed that it would operate throughout most of
Europe. I was tempted to point out that an analogue TV would not
operate throughout most of the UK, let alone Europe.

However, that got me thinking. Portable digital TVs are available.
The boost in signal strength must make these devices more viable. The
one I saw was DVB-T1 (as I would expect). I then wondered if DVB-T2
would provide a more robust signal, so would a portable TV using
DVB-T2 work better? (I appreciate that you would not benefit from HD
picture quality on a seven inch screen!)

Just wondering.


DVB has introduced a new profile for its popular DVB-T2 terrestrial
standard for lighter applications such as mobile TV: T2-Lite. Version
1.3.1 of the DVB-T2 specification document introduced a T2-Lite profile.
This profile is intended to allow simpler receiver implementations for
very low capacity applications such as mobile broadcasting, although it
may also be received by conventional stationary receivers. T2-Lite is
based on a limited sub-set of the modes of the T2-base profile, and by
avoiding modes which require the most complexity and memory, allows much
more efficient receiver designs to be used.

Thanks. I was thinking more of a portable set able to receive the
existing high power HD transmissions that are being introduced with
DSO.

http://www.dvb.org/news_events/news/


As the DVB-T2 HD channels are simply duplicated PBS DVB-T channels, then
there would appear to be little point in incorporating a more expensive
chipset into a portable receiver.
However as prices of DVB-T2 chipsets drop to the same as those of DVB-T,
then it will be safe to assume that they will be incorporated as
standard into all new receiving equipment.

I am sorry to say that you have not properly read my original post. I
set out there what I thought the point might be.

Mad question about DVT-T2
 

Rick wrote:

T2-Lite.

It's not seriously called "Lite", is it? For God's sake.

--
SteveT

Mad question about DVT-T2
 

On Saturday, August 6th, 2011, at 21:39:03h +0100, Steve Thackery asked:

It's not seriously called "Lite", is it?

That is the serious manner in which it is referred to by BBC Research and Development.

http://www.bbc.co.UK/blogs/researchanddevelopment/2011/07/dvb-t2-lite-profile-tech-stand.shtml

Mad question about DVT-T2
 

"J G Miller" wrote in message ...
On Saturday, August 6th, 2011, at 21:39:03h +0100, Steve Thackery asked:

It's not seriously called "Lite", is it?

That is the serious manner in which it is referred to by BBC Research and Development.

http://www.bbc.co.UK/blogs/researchanddevelopment/2011/07/dvb-t2-lite-profile-tech-stand.shtml

Gablinger's Diet Beer ;-)

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

Mad question about DVT-T2
 

J G Miller wrote:

That is the serious manner in which it is referred to by BBC Research and Development.
http://www.bbc.co.UK/blogs/researchanddevelopment/2011/07/dvb-t2-lite-profile-tech-stand.shtml

So as required by the baseline DVB-T2 spec, existing DVB-T2 receivers
won't get upset by the transmitter switching to and from a new modulation
scheme that they weren't designed to receive, i.e. they must safely ignore
"Future Extension Frames" (FEC).

Interesting. It's one thing for a receiver to ignore datastreams of an
unknown type that are contained in the demodulated multiplex, but this is
a whole new level of future-proofing.

Mad question about DVT-T2
 

Dave Farrance wrote:

So as required by the baseline DVB-T2 spec, existing DVB-T2 receivers
won't get upset by the transmitter switching to and from a new modulation
scheme that they weren't designed to receive, i.e. they must safely
ignore
"Future Extension Frames" (FEC).

Just to be clear, does that mean that the original purpose of the
Future Extension Frames has been lost?

If so, that seems bloody mad, to me.

--
SteveT