Re: BAd News!
- From: Bob Miller <robmx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 19:49:52 GMT
phil-news-nospam@xxxxxxxx wrote:
Not much of an argument. Communism worked fine in Russia for a lot of people. Bathism worked fine in Iraq for a lot of people who are still p***ed off that they are no longer in power.On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 01:41:27 GMT Bob Miller <robmx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| The 8-VSB based disastrous transition proceeds in its death spiral. This | post by a relatively new comer to AVSForum tells it like it is. How can | you have a decent transition when word of mouth from people like this | keep poisoning the well?
| | michaelingp
| Member
| | Join Date: Jun 2005
| Location: Garrett Park, MD
| Posts: 72
| | "I think Lunasdude is correct, at least based on my experience. Digital | signals (at least on my Panny plasma) do not degrade as gracefully as | analog. I might see a beautiful picture for a couple of minutes, but | then I get what I would call the "Japanese porn" effect, except that | most folks probably don't know what I mean. What happens is that small | portions of the picture turn into relatively big blurry blocks. This is | extremely distracting, to the point of unwatchable, even if it only | happens rarely. Worse, the sound can get disrupted and delayed, which I | never experienced with analog TV. With analog TV you might see ghosts, | wavy lines, or snow, but, for me at least, they don't really destroy my | enjoyment of the picture.
By its very nature, digital does not degrade gracefully. Digital is very non-linear, so don't expect it to do so. The same argument can be made about the performance of FM over AM for audio. As the signal level goes down, FM degrades faster than AM. The objective is to have your signal level at the point where the degrades don't happen. At that signal level, analog would already have begun to degrade in its graceful way quite a bit.
| As a result, the TV watchers in my household (I'm not, actually, one of | them) always prefer the analog signals to digital.
| | This is my experience, and I'm only 6 miles or so from the transmitters. | Admittedly, I could install a bigger antenna and a rotator, but I just | don't think many people want to go back 30 years to the times when you | had to have a big ugly antenna on the roof to get a good picture.
You apparently do have some kind of bad antenna, perhaps one with a negative gain.
Personally, I consider the Channel Master 8-bay bow-tie UHF antenna to be a pretty antenna. I'll probably end up with 3 or 4 of them in fixed directions.
| I do like a good conspiracy theory, and my theory would be that this is | a plot to squeeze some money out of the last few people who are getting | their TV signal for "free" over the air. Once they see what a crappy | picture they get (in between the beautiful pictures they get), they will | have to call up the cable or telephone folks and start shelling out.
You forgot the satellite folks :-)
| On the other hand, why would the TV stations be spending millions to | upgrade? Are they dupes or accomplices? As Machiavelli is said to have | said: Don't look for conspiracy where incompetence will explain all the | facts."
It's working quite fine for a lot of people.
The TV stations spent millions to upgrade for one reason. If they didn't upgrade to digital they would lose their must carry rights on cable.
The money broadcasters pay for upgrading and for their electric broadcast bill are the "dues they must pay for must carry" as one major broadcaster told me. Though publicly broadcasters will say they treasure their OTA viewers many would turn off their transmitters in a second to save money if they thought they could maintain must carry rights.
Another exception may be Australia where distances are even more a factor than in the US. They said after extensive testing that the difference between DVB-T COFDM and 8-VSB power wise found in lab testing was insignificant to non-existent in the real world.
| In the meantime DTV in other countries is experiencing a rebirth which I | predict will be greater than the fist birth. OTA DTV is going to kill | cable and satellite IMO. Not in the US for a while though since we are | stuck with a DTV modulation and codec that are turkeys.
8-VSB actually works better for conditions that are more common in the USA than in other countries. COFDM has a higher peak to average signal level ratio, meaning that you have a small dynamic range to work with. 8-VSB lets transmitters get more effective power out, which is needed more in the USA due to larger numbers of people at greater distances from transmitters. In most other countries, TV started as lots of small transmitters distributed around, because that's the way the government broadcasters did things. In the USA, it went more the direction of big tall towers and high power transmitters. 8-VSB works better in most of these situations, so it is the better choice overall for the majority.
Your case may be one of the exceptions.
They chose DVB-T COFDM as did Russia and as will China where distances are major factors as well. The power issue was a canard thrown up by the 8-VSB crowd. A non issue.
You need a decent $25 antenna and a decent run of coax.
He needs good advice. Here is some. Tell as many of your friends as possible the trouble you are having with reception of DTV. Warn them not to buy anything until the FCC and or Congress sets receiver standards and they can buy a receiver that meets those standards.
That will keep them out of the DTV market for a long time.
Bob Miller .
- References:
- BAd News!
- From: Bob Miller
- Re: BAd News!
- From: phil-news-nospam
- BAd News!
- Prev by Date: Re: Any recommanded HDTV tuner boxes
- Next by Date: Re: How many colors can Plasma TV do?
- Previous by thread: Re: BAd News!
- Next by thread: Re: BAd News!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
