Those were the days!

On 6/25/2011 4:23 AM, Rick wrote:

"J G Miller" wrote in message
...
On Friday, June 24th, 2011 at 15:46:26h +0100, Rick wrote:

I reckon its still got enough suction to lift a house brick :-)

That is impressive.

Do you think that if enough of them were combined together, they
could be use to deflect the trajectory of an asteroid?


Somehow I don't think that even the most powerful vacuum cleaner
imaginable would be much good in space :-)



That sucks.

In article , d wrote:
FM radio stations seem to cope perfectly well with 2 seperate audio paths
for L+R and then mix them at the transmitter - they don't have studio
equipment that deals with mono and a difference signal.

Even if RGB is asking too much of early equipment , why deal in the same
format as you're going to transmit in when that format is clearly a poor
compromise - eg the colour signal strength is much lower than luminosity?
Surely some standard studio format system could have been divised when
is then just converted to PAL, SECAM or NTSC at the antenna?

I expect the international exchange of programmes wasn't seen as a major
design criterion at the time, an there's a lot to be said for handling the
signal everywhere in the same format, as loss of quality usually occurs
where you make changes to the signal.

Unlike audio, a television signal is repetitive and therefore contains
regular gaps in its frequency spectrum, making it possible to add another
signal without increasing the bandwidth needed to carry it, so encoded
colour signals can be handled by a broadcasting service using a great deal
of existing equipment. This is not true of the Zenith-GE encoded stereo
signal, which requires several times as much bandwidth, and would need
extra electronics just to listen to it, whereas simply doubling up cables
where necessary is the best way to use what is already there.

That's the trouble with large organisations, particularly when they involve
a lot of equipment owned by the general public. When you invent something
new you can't just scrap the lot and start again. You have to adapt and
augment what is already there.

Rod.
--
Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/

In article , J. P. Gilliver (John)
wrote:
I have heard/read it said that one problem with 405, due in part to the
design of the waveform, was that on many sets, significant line pairing
was in evidence, so that what was actually viewed was more like 200
lines. Thus 625 was a tripling, rather than a 50%, improvement. I don't
know how true this was/is - though I do remember seeing some 405-line
sets on which the pairing was rather noticeable. Presumably there was no
incentive to - or financial/political reasons against it - improve the
405 system.

The 405 line system didn't include equalizing pulses, and while it's
possible to design circuitry that works well without them, cheap simple
circuitry didn't always produce the best results. Line pairing wasn't
inherent to the system, just the consequence of cost-cutting in receiver
design. If anyone thought about adding equalizing pulses to the 405
waveform in the 1950s (and I'm sure somebody must have), the idea was
probably rejected on the grounds that the effects on a lot of existing
equipment owned by the public would not have been completely predictable.

Rod.
--
Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/

On 24/06/2011 19:59, Andy Champ wrote:
On 24/06/2011 18:52, The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 24/06/2011 16:53, Jim Lesurf wrote:

Should work. They are called "vacuum cleaners" aren't they?

Pedant mode on

Suction cleaners actually

Pedant mode off


more pedant They _are_ _called_ vacuum cleaners./more

Even though "suction cleaner" would be a better term I've never heard it
before.

British Institute of Cleaning Science training...


That's when they aren't called Hoovers of course. Regardless of brand.

Or Spanglers.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

In article
,
red16v wrote:


PAL is a very robust signal. It can be inadvertantly distorted by all
manner of circuits and equipment yet still yield very acceptable results
at the 'far end'. RGB signals are not robust, even the smallest amount
of distortion can lead very quickly to very poor results - whether this
distortion is within the orginating equipment or over long transmission
distances.

You'd have to explain clearly what you mean by 'distortion' before I could
comment on that.

Slainte,

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

SpamTrapSeeSig wrote:

Well actually, yes it did, sort-of. But it depended on the application.

For outside broadcast origination into a BBC centre (either live to
network or recorded), SiS was used with links to reduce lines cost and
complexity. In those days, TV sound was almost always mono (stereo
experiments usually involved 'borrowing' a radio TX), but even then SiS
offered such a substantial saving that (IIRC) the Post Office objected
to its introduction.

I've done radio OBs too, where SIS was used because PO lines were too
expensive or awkward to install or equalise/phase correct for stereo. In
the West region that usually meant SiS to the nearest receiving point
such as Mendip or Royal Fort (Bristol) where it could get into the
system of PO permanent circuits.

But the above was a lot later than SiS' introduction though.#

Not just OBs, the permanent distribution and contribution links between BBC
studios and main transmitters was SiS from the early 1970s. This was upgraded
to DSiS (stereo audio) in the late 80s, ITV employed DSiS when they launched
NICAM, (though they were never large scale users of SiS until then) C4 used
SiS from the outset, upgrading to DSiS for NICAM in 1989 too.

International programme exchange within the EBU also used it. I think the
remaining BBC analogue circuits to analogue Tx sites still employ it ?


--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

www.paras.org.uk

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:


That was a Panasonic. My next door neighbour raved about Dyson. She's
on her fourth since I bought the Panasonic.

She must be mentally defective.

I doubt you'd say that to her face and live...;-)

--
*Why isn't 11 pronounced onety one? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Rick wrote:
Some 20 years ago I needed a new upright vacuum, and bought the Which
best buy. I've found Which ok for things I'm not really interested in.
;-)

That was a Panasonic. My next door neighbour raved about Dyson. She's
on her fourth since I bought the Panasonic.



I've got an Aquavac Super 30 wet and dry which has taken a real
hammering (since IIRC when it was purchased in the mid nineties) and I
reckon its still got enough suction to lift a house brick :-)

My 'workshop' one is a Rowenta wet or dry, again a Which best buy, and
that is still great. Have to search a bit for the bags, though. It's even
older than the Panasonic.

--
*We have enough youth, how about a fountain of Smart?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:
It was just one little part of the extra costs. The analogy between RGB
and stereo is deeply flawed in all but the most simplistic terms.

That may be so. But saying so doesn't in itself 'explain' why RGB isn't
used inside kit or to carry signals over modest distances. I've only said
that this surprises me, am wondering why it is so, and that your earlier
comment doesn't really seem to explain to me. There may be good reasons,
but what are they?

TV Centre is built in a circle. Underneath a corridor false floor were
miles of co-ax - to make sure each studio etc was the same distance from
MCR, so could be mixed between etc without timing problems. And that from
monochrome days. Colour timing is more critical. RGB even more so.

Of course today it would be relatively easy to adjust these timings. But
not when colour started out.

The amount of routing devices in a TV studio complex is vast - since
things like VTRs were usually in a central area. And would have to work
properly with any studio. Difficult enough when working with composite - a
nightmare with RGB.

--
*Why is it that to stop Windows 95, you have to click on "Start"?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
Still small. My last monochrome set was a 21". I certainly wasn't going
smaller for colour.

At the time we lived in a house with a small lounge. Our mono set was
17", so I didn't mind the 13" Sony. It used to surprise me though how
many people preferred the little Sony to the 22" sets of other makes.

Just shows that a small screen (with limited resolution) always looks
better than a large one if viewed from the same distance. But if you're
talking 22" sets you've moved on in time. I'm talking about the original
shadow mask 19" and 25" sets.

--
*A conscience is what hurts when all your other parts feel so good *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.