Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Reality, the typical user

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
June 7, 2004 5:33:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

This weekend I visited two of my wife's relatives. They both acquired wide
screen rear projectors several months ago. They both were on cable.

The first a Sony tube projector, was set with overtly oversaturated color,
the whites were overdriven, and blacker than black was clearly displayed and
the sharpness was way too high. The picture was dreadful. The owner insisted
that he needed both the cable and TV remote because the cable company told
him he did. He did not accept my offer to program his Sony remote to change
the channels on the cable box and insisted that the cable company had set up
his TV so he would not let me touch it.

The second relative had a new Panasonic LCD rear projector. The picture was
better but he too did not set up he remote to tune the cable tuner, refused
to pay for digital cable and only used the DVD player to enjoy the set or
conventional analog TV. Again, he was under the impression that the retailer
had set up his set so he was not interested in any calibration to improve
things. Again, the color was too saturated, sharpness too high and the set
was too bright.

I think this is mostly typical of what the consumers are experiencing.

Richard.

More about : reality typical user

June 7, 2004 5:55:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

No, it's what YOU are experiencing.
Your relatives are obviously happy as clams with their tv experience.
Your opinion just doesn't count.
It's why fools asking for opinions on totally subjective matters are such a
waste of time and bandwidth.



"Richard" <rfeirste at nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:10c99nddq7saa64@corp.supernews.com...
> This weekend I visited two of my wife's relatives. They both acquired wide
> screen rear projectors several months ago. They both were on cable.
>
> The first a Sony tube projector, was set with overtly oversaturated color,
> the whites were overdriven, and blacker than black was clearly displayed
and
> the sharpness was way too high. The picture was dreadful. The owner
insisted
> that he needed both the cable and TV remote because the cable company told
> him he did. He did not accept my offer to program his Sony remote to
change
> the channels on the cable box and insisted that the cable company had set
up
> his TV so he would not let me touch it.
>
> The second relative had a new Panasonic LCD rear projector. The picture
was
> better but he too did not set up he remote to tune the cable tuner,
refused
> to pay for digital cable and only used the DVD player to enjoy the set or
> conventional analog TV. Again, he was under the impression that the
retailer
> had set up his set so he was not interested in any calibration to improve
> things. Again, the color was too saturated, sharpness too high and the set
> was too bright.
>
> I think this is mostly typical of what the consumers are experiencing.
>
> Richard.
>
>
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 6:57:57 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

However there is a reference for how a television should display a
given image. That is the whole reason behind calibrations. If the
director/cinematographer, etc assume a certain calibrated display
device, then why not calibrate your display device to that standard so
the image appears as it should?

It's *not* a matter of opinion. But if a television owners chooses to
set it up incorrectly, that is certainly his call. The relatives in
question may be "happy as clams" with their tv experience, but that
doesn't make it correct.

I may be as happy as can be looking at my Degas print that is hung on
the wall upside down. But just because I'm happy doesn't make it the
right way to hang the painting.


Curmudgeon wrote:
> No, it's what YOU are experiencing.
> Your relatives are obviously happy as clams with their tv experience.
> Your opinion just doesn't count.
> It's why fools asking for opinions on totally subjective matters are such a
> waste of time and bandwidth.
>
>
>
> "Richard" <rfeirste at nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:10c99nddq7saa64@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>This weekend I visited two of my wife's relatives. They both acquired wide
>>screen rear projectors several months ago. They both were on cable.
>>
>>The first a Sony tube projector, was set with overtly oversaturated color,
>>the whites were overdriven, and blacker than black was clearly displayed
>
> and
>
>>the sharpness was way too high. The picture was dreadful. The owner
>
> insisted
>
>>that he needed both the cable and TV remote because the cable company told
>>him he did. He did not accept my offer to program his Sony remote to
>
> change
>
>>the channels on the cable box and insisted that the cable company had set
>
> up
>
>>his TV so he would not let me touch it.
>>
>>The second relative had a new Panasonic LCD rear projector. The picture
>
> was
>
>>better but he too did not set up he remote to tune the cable tuner,
>
> refused
>
>>to pay for digital cable and only used the DVD player to enjoy the set or
>>conventional analog TV. Again, he was under the impression that the
>
> retailer
>
>>had set up his set so he was not interested in any calibration to improve
>>things. Again, the color was too saturated, sharpness too high and the set
>>was too bright.
>>
>>I think this is mostly typical of what the consumers are experiencing.
>>
>>Richard.
>>
>>
>
>
>
Related resources
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 10:50:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>
> I think this is mostly typical of what the consumers are experiencing.
>
> Richard.


So what tools can one use to calibrate with?

Jim the dunce




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
June 7, 2004 10:55:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Richard" <rfeirste at nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:10c99nddq7saa64@corp.supernews.com...
> This weekend I visited two of my wife's relatives. They both acquired wide
> screen rear projectors several months ago. They both were on cable.
>
> The first a Sony tube projector, was set with overtly oversaturated color,
> the whites were overdriven, and blacker than black was clearly displayed
and
> the sharpness was way too high. The picture was dreadful. The owner
insisted
> that he needed both the cable and TV remote because the cable company told
> him he did. He did not accept my offer to program his Sony remote to
change
> the channels on the cable box and insisted that the cable company had set
up
> his TV so he would not let me touch it.
>
> The second relative had a new Panasonic LCD rear projector. The picture
was
> better but he too did not set up he remote to tune the cable tuner,
refused
> to pay for digital cable and only used the DVD player to enjoy the set or
> conventional analog TV. Again, he was under the impression that the
retailer
> had set up his set so he was not interested in any calibration to improve
> things. Again, the color was too saturated, sharpness too high and the set
> was too bright.
>
> I think this is mostly typical of what the consumers are experiencing.
>
> Richard.
>
>
Richard,
I don't know about typical, but I know of 2 household that experience the
same or similar situations,
one of them being mine.
When my SO (significant other) wanted a bigscreen HD TV, I told her fine,
YOU do the research and YOU figure out the best for us, I don't have the
time or inclination to learn a new technology.
She did no research and bought the TV she felt had the best picture in the
store.
She is seemingly happy with the way it was set-up. I on the otherhand have
now been forced into learning
the new technology associated with owning a 57" HDTV because I refuse to
look and a big imperfect picture!
It has been a struggle, because instead on learning on the front end, I have
had to play catch-up and troubleshooter.
Another story.. a friend of mine purchase a sony HDTV and hd cable (time
warner) She was perfectly happy with it till I told her she was NOT getting
HD and should stop paying for it if she was not going to get it.
She had a tech come out and test and sure enough, there were problems
preventing her from receiving hd.
I thin ka lot of consumers expect HD to be "plug and play". Just like
computers today, they want to take it out of the box and plug it in. That's
it.
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 10:55:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

It's a large undertaking to do the research before buying an HDTV. The
problem is- who do you trust? I spend many months at many retailers
talking with techs to sales clerks. In fact put so much time into it
that I developed a passion for it and I understand why people are
passionate about this technology.

Your story is very common. People view an HDTV like any other house
hold applicance. Even when a sales assoicate tries to convince
customers otherwise often people buy based on what their eyes tell
them about the picture quality (based on the show room models). I'd
love to see some estimates of just how many people buy HDTV's this
way. I've ask department manager at a local Circut City and he said if
he had to guess maybe 3 out of 5 consumers walk in and buy a HDTV with
some comment like "wow, that model looks the best. I'll take that
one", even fewer solicit his sales associates opnion. Although at his
store they do their best to educate the customer without offending
them (this seems to be a struggle for him).

There are serveral problems with buying an HDTV based soley off the
showroom floor. To list a few:

1. If a retailer wants to "move product" on a specific brand and
model, they have the ability to manipulate settings to make one TV
look better than the others. (very few customer's seem brave enough to
play with all the settings on the show room models).

2. To get reception to all the floor models, the feed has to be split,
over and over again. As a result some HDTVs on the floor may have
better quality reception based on where they are in the chain.

3. The difference in quality in analog (NTSC) signal and HD content is
very large. Many people are replacing the family TV and will be
watching a great deal of analog/NTSC content. Some models have line
doublers, and some even HD up converters to make the analog sources
look much better good. Most of the time on the sales floor you only
see HD feed or DVD feed. Aspect ratios and burn-in (something not
covered under warrenty) is another issue many people learn nothing
about.

It amazes me how many US consumers do not educate themselds before
they buy products. We generally put too much faith in brand names or
we just buy as cheap as possible thinking "it can't be that bad... it
has warrenty".

But before you go feeling to bad. The worse case I've seen yet. One my
best friends has a 65" Mitsubishi HDTV-ready he bought three years
ago. I found out he had an HD cable box for nine months and was
running though s-video cable the whole time. Someone finally told him
that he needed component cables to pull in HD. After that I started to
understand why he would always make comments like "HD doesn't look
that much better".

-Jeremy
--------------------------------------------
New to HDTV? Check out my HDTV Buyers FAQ
http://hdtv.0catch.com
--------------------------------------------






"jojo" <cgv_2000*yourhat*@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<MS2xc.4971$zy3.1415@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com>...
> "Richard" <rfeirste at nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:10c99nddq7saa64@corp.supernews.com...
> > This weekend I visited two of my wife's relatives. They both acquired wide
> > screen rear projectors several months ago. They both were on cable.
> >
> > The first a Sony tube projector, was set with overtly oversaturated color,
> > the whites were overdriven, and blacker than black was clearly displayed
> and
> > the sharpness was way too high. The picture was dreadful. The owner
> insisted
> > that he needed both the cable and TV remote because the cable company told
> > him he did. He did not accept my offer to program his Sony remote to
> change
> > the channels on the cable box and insisted that the cable company had set
> up
> > his TV so he would not let me touch it.
> >
> > The second relative had a new Panasonic LCD rear projector. The picture
> was
> > better but he too did not set up he remote to tune the cable tuner,
> refused
> > to pay for digital cable and only used the DVD player to enjoy the set or
> > conventional analog TV. Again, he was under the impression that the
> retailer
> > had set up his set so he was not interested in any calibration to improve
> > things. Again, the color was too saturated, sharpness too high and the set
> > was too bright.
> >
> > I think this is mostly typical of what the consumers are experiencing.
> >
> > Richard.
> >
> >
> Richard,
> I don't know about typical, but I know of 2 household that experience the
> same or similar situations,
> one of them being mine.
> When my SO (significant other) wanted a bigscreen HD TV, I told her fine,
> YOU do the research and YOU figure out the best for us, I don't have the
> time or inclination to learn a new technology.
> She did no research and bought the TV she felt had the best picture in the
> store.
> She is seemingly happy with the way it was set-up. I on the otherhand have
> now been forced into learning
> the new technology associated with owning a 57" HDTV because I refuse to
> look and a big imperfect picture!
> It has been a struggle, because instead on learning on the front end, I have
> had to play catch-up and troubleshooter.
> Another story.. a friend of mine purchase a sony HDTV and hd cable (time
> warner) She was perfectly happy with it till I told her she was NOT getting
> HD and should stop paying for it if she was not going to get it.
> She had a tech come out and test and sure enough, there were problems
> preventing her from receiving hd.
> I thin ka lot of consumers expect HD to be "plug and play". Just like
> computers today, they want to take it out of the box and plug it in. That's
> it.
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 11:06:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

jojo wrote:
> "Richard" <rfeirste at nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:10c99nddq7saa64@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>This weekend I visited two of my wife's relatives. They both acquired wide
>>screen rear projectors several months ago. They both were on cable.
>>
>>The first a Sony tube projector, was set with overtly oversaturated color,
>>the whites were overdriven, and blacker than black was clearly displayed
>
> and
>
>>the sharpness was way too high. The picture was dreadful. The owner
>
> insisted
>
>>that he needed both the cable and TV remote because the cable company told
>>him he did. He did not accept my offer to program his Sony remote to
>
> change
>
>>the channels on the cable box and insisted that the cable company had set
>
> up
>
>>his TV so he would not let me touch it.
>>
>>The second relative had a new Panasonic LCD rear projector. The picture
>
> was
>
>>better but he too did not set up he remote to tune the cable tuner,
>
> refused
>
>>to pay for digital cable and only used the DVD player to enjoy the set or
>>conventional analog TV. Again, he was under the impression that the
>
> retailer
>
>>had set up his set so he was not interested in any calibration to improve
>>things. Again, the color was too saturated, sharpness too high and the set
>>was too bright.
>>
>>I think this is mostly typical of what the consumers are experiencing.
>>
>>Richard.
>>
>>
>
> Richard,
> I don't know about typical, but I know of 2 household that experience the
> same or similar situations,
> one of them being mine.
> When my SO (significant other) wanted a bigscreen HD TV, I told her fine,
> YOU do the research and YOU figure out the best for us, I don't have the
> time or inclination to learn a new technology.
> She did no research and bought the TV she felt had the best picture in the
> store.
> She is seemingly happy with the way it was set-up. I on the otherhand have
> now been forced into learning
> the new technology associated with owning a 57" HDTV because I refuse to
> look and a big imperfect picture!
> It has been a struggle, because instead on learning on the front end, I have
> had to play catch-up and troubleshooter.
> Another story.. a friend of mine purchase a sony HDTV and hd cable (time
> warner) She was perfectly happy with it till I told her she was NOT getting
> HD and should stop paying for it if she was not going to get it.
> She had a tech come out and test and sure enough, there were problems
> preventing her from receiving hd.
> I thin ka lot of consumers expect HD to be "plug and play". Just like
> computers today, they want to take it out of the box and plug it in. That's
> it.
>
Maybe that is why HDTV OTA is selling so well in Japan. It works plug
and play.
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 11:55:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Richard" <rfeirste at nycap.rr.com> wrote in
news:10c99nddq7saa64@corp.supernews.com:

> This weekend I visited two of my wife's relatives. They both acquired
> wide screen rear projectors several months ago. They both were on
> cable.
>
> The first a Sony tube projector, was set with overtly oversaturated
> color, the whites were overdriven, and blacker than black was clearly
> displayed and the sharpness was way too high. The picture was
> dreadful. The owner insisted that he needed both the cable and TV
> remote because the cable company told him he did. He did not accept my
> offer to program his Sony remote to change the channels on the cable
> box and insisted that the cable company had set up his TV so he would
> not let me touch it.
>
> The second relative had a new Panasonic LCD rear projector. The
> picture was better but he too did not set up he remote to tune the
> cable tuner, refused to pay for digital cable and only used the DVD
> player to enjoy the set or conventional analog TV. Again, he was under
> the impression that the retailer had set up his set so he was not
> interested in any calibration to improve things. Again, the color was
> too saturated, sharpness too high and the set was too bright.
>
> I think this is mostly typical of what the consumers are experiencing.

Yes and they are experiencing it all too often in the stores when they go
shopping so they never actually get to SEE the difference. Operating my
Samsung on the default settings gives just TERRIBLE results. And the set
needed calibration right out of the box (fortunately I can do it myself
with a little eyeballing). The main faults of the "normal" video
settings are too much contrast (it's all the way up), too bright (also
all the way up) and too saturated. The "mild" settings are only a bit
better. I ended up turning the contrast down to around 33, the
brightness to about 60 and the saturation I adjust according to content,
usually between 25 and 35. The result is a natural-looking picture that
is a lot easier on the monitor with respect to burn-in effects.

Sometimes an HDTV channel will provoke me to increase the brightness a
point or two and lower the saturation a bit. But mostly I just leave it
alone once I get good pics.

I did see a decent picture the other day on a rear projection TV at
Future Shop, though. The salesman had connected a satellite receiver and
tweaked the set up for a nice picture on an HDTV channel. That's all too
rare.

--
Dave Oldridge
ICQ 1800667

Paradoxically, most real events are highly improbable.
Anonymous
June 8, 2004 4:33:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

I feel your pain... this is exactly why I've given up trying to help any of
my relatives with anything even remotely high-tech... I might change the oil
in my moms car, but that's about as far as I'll go these days.

By the way... for a laugh, for some reason, I read "This weekend I visited
two of my wife's relatives" as "wives relatives"... damn... poor sap... he
has more than one!

"Richard" <rfeirste at nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:10c99nddq7saa64@corp.supernews.com...
> This weekend I visited two of my wife's relatives. They both acquired wide
> screen rear projectors several months ago. They both were on cable.
>
> The first a Sony tube projector, was set with overtly oversaturated color,
> the whites were overdriven, and blacker than black was clearly displayed
and
> the sharpness was way too high. The picture was dreadful. The owner
insisted
> that he needed both the cable and TV remote because the cable company told
> him he did. He did not accept my offer to program his Sony remote to
change
> the channels on the cable box and insisted that the cable company had set
up
> his TV so he would not let me touch it.
>
> The second relative had a new Panasonic LCD rear projector. The picture
was
> better but he too did not set up he remote to tune the cable tuner,
refused
> to pay for digital cable and only used the DVD player to enjoy the set or
> conventional analog TV. Again, he was under the impression that the
retailer
> had set up his set so he was not interested in any calibration to improve
> things. Again, the color was too saturated, sharpness too high and the set
> was too bright.
>
> I think this is mostly typical of what the consumers are experiencing.
>
> Richard.
>
>
Anonymous
June 8, 2004 1:17:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Jim Waggener wrote:

>>I think this is mostly typical of what the consumers are experiencing.
>>
>>Richard.
>
>
>
> So what tools can one use to calibrate with?

I use the Avia DVD. It has a bunch of tutorials and calibration
screens for both video and audio.

That DVD and a sound pressure meter is all you should need to
calibrate your complete home theater.
June 8, 2004 1:19:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:06:34 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>Maybe that is why HDTV OTA is selling so well in Japan. It works plug
>and play.
>

It does in the US also. We're not talking about plug and play,
becuase it seemed to work here, but about how well it works and looks.
Perhaps if you learned how to read your business plans might actually
have a chance.






----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
June 8, 2004 5:38:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <yP7xc.24731$pv6.14912@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>, Tim S.
Harbison <timharbison@nospam.ameritech.net> wrote:

> I feel your pain... this is exactly why I've given up trying to help any of
> my relatives with anything even remotely high-tech...

Blond says to her friend...
"Had to take the car in for inspection the other day. I just knew I was
going to get taken, good thing it only needed tail light fluid."

I rest my case.
Anonymous
June 8, 2004 8:31:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Jim wrote:

> On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:06:34 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Maybe that is why HDTV OTA is selling so well in Japan. It works plug
>>and play.
>>
>
>
> It does in the US also. We're not talking about plug and play,
> becuase it seemed to work here, but about how well it works and looks.
> Perhaps if you learned how to read your business plans might actually
> have a chance.
>

8-VSB works plug and play in the US? That is a stretch. All I read about
are people installing rooftop antennas and having all kinds of problems.

Plug and play to me is what is happening in Japan, Berlin or the UK
where you just buy the receiver and plug it in to your TV set and it
works. In most cases COFDM receivers will work just like the cell phones
in Japan. Just turn them on. The antenna will be built into the unit and
will not even be an issue.

Plug and play.
June 8, 2004 8:31:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 16:31:47 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>Jim wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:06:34 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Maybe that is why HDTV OTA is selling so well in Japan. It works plug
>>>and play.
>>>
>>
>>
>> It does in the US also. We're not talking about plug and play,
>> becuase it seemed to work here, but about how well it works and looks.
>> Perhaps if you learned how to read your business plans might actually
>> have a chance.
>>
>
>8-VSB works plug and play in the US? That is a stretch. All I read about
>are people installing rooftop antennas and having all kinds of problems.

Not a stretch, worked just fine for me. Sure, in your world I
wouldn't have had to put up an antenna, but then, I'm not sure what
world you're in anyway. People in the US are used to seeing
antennas and used to using them for OTA reception. I can tell you
that I didn't have any problems with simply plugging things in and
getting them to work.

The only problem I ran into was that I'm too far away from the antenna
farm to receive a couple of stations in HD simply because they aren't
broadcasting with full power yet. Sure wish they'd knock that
nonsense off.
>
>Plug and play to me is what is happening in Japan, Berlin or the UK
>where you just buy the receiver and plug it in to your TV set and it
>works. In most cases COFDM receivers will work just like the cell phones
>in Japan. Just turn them on. The antenna will be built into the unit and
>will not even be an issue.

Yes, well, in Japan they can simply come in and say they're putting an
antenna up and nobody can say anything. How about we stick a big
transmitter antenna on top of your house, Bob? How about 3 or 4?
What, you won't like the looks? Personal property means something
here, and that's why cell phone companies are having so much trouble
placing towers and this so-called satellite radio has so many dropouts
and lack of reception. You know, come to think of it, the people
that I know what have XM in their cars sure don't recommend it. Not
a good sign for what COFDM would be like in our country.


>Plug and play.






----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Anonymous
June 8, 2004 8:34:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Anyone who cares about picture quality would not be buying an RPTV in the
first place. I have yet to see one that even comes close to competing with
an HD tube. Bigger does NOT equal better. And if you must have BIG, go
front projection.
Anonymous
June 8, 2004 9:52:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"tvserf" <zgirl@mail.com> wrote in message
news:5b9b8f86402846cf66f226b7ecd8a3ac@localhost.talkabouttelevision.com...
> Anyone who cares about picture quality would not be buying an RPTV in the
> first place. I have yet to see one that even comes close to competing with
> an HD tube. Bigger does NOT equal better. And if you must have BIG, go
> front projection.

A curious perspective. Are you aware that the technologies are exactly the
same, only the screen types are different? No one who knows much about the
market would say sometning like this.

Leonard
Anonymous
June 9, 2004 1:48:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in news:TRlxc.6819$uX2.6172
@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:

> 8-VSB works plug and play in the US? That is a stretch. All I read about
> are people installing rooftop antennas and having all kinds of problems.
>

Now there's a crock! I personally responded to one of your posts with a
report on how well I am receiving HD via 8VSB and then you responded to my
post - so if all you have read about are people having all kinds of
problems, then you are responding to threads that you haven't read. Or
maybe you are overly biased against 8VSB...

And you have a lot of nerve hijacking a thread about poorly adjusted TV
sets to claim that the problem is due to the modulation scheme instead of
non-techie folks just not knowing what they were doing and believing what
the cable company installers say.
Anonymous
June 9, 2004 1:49:26 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Poster <nonya@nowhere.com> wrote in
news:080620041338126572%nonya@nowhere.com:

> In article <yP7xc.24731$pv6.14912@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>, Tim S.
> Harbison <timharbison@nospam.ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>> I feel your pain... this is exactly why I've given up trying to help
>> any of my relatives with anything even remotely high-tech...
>
> Blond says to her friend...
> "Had to take the car in for inspection the other day. I just knew I
> was going to get taken, good thing it only needed tail light fluid."
>
> I rest my case.

How bout the one that had the problem with her "710" cap?
June 9, 2004 4:13:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

> How bout the one that had the problem with her "710" cap?

That ones been do too many times.
June 10, 2004 3:03:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

The TV vendors should set the default setting on the sets so that there is
no "Red Push"; the color levels should be set to "standard saturation," edge
enhancement should be off, contrast and brightness should be set so that the
video amp is not overloaded and black or near black is displayed. Sharpness
should be set so that there is no ideo amp ringing. This should not be so
hard.

Yet every set I have seen, be it tube or rear projection, seems to violate
every opportunity to display a decent picture at default settings. Reset
buttons should be banned.

Richard.
Anonymous
June 10, 2004 6:16:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

When comparing front to rear projection, there can be MANY differences in
technology! But just for the sake of argument, let's say we're talking
about DLP in both cases. In front projection, you are looking at a direct
projection onto a screen (preferably neutral gray). In an RPTV, the
picture is viewed THROUGH a translucent screen. If you don't think that
makes a difference in how an image is rendered you don't understand light
refraction. I've worked in TV production for 15 years and heard a lot of
opinions about picture quality, and while I'll admit that a lot of what
people call "picture quality" is objective, I can tell you that there IS a
real difference in the way human eyes perceive these different types of
image transmission. And speaking of "perspective"...how's that RPTV look
at about 160 degrees? The "market" is full of misinformation. Trust your
eyes.
Anonymous
June 11, 2004 12:47:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"tvserf" <zgirl@mail.com> wrote in message
news:7776044ef6fd4c41525bcb07582ac8a9@localhost.talkabouttelevision.com...
> When comparing front to rear projection, there can be MANY differences in
> technology! But just for the sake of argument, let's say we're talking
> about DLP in both cases. In front projection, you are looking at a direct
> projection onto a screen (preferably neutral gray). In an RPTV, the
> picture is viewed THROUGH a translucent screen. If you don't think that
> makes a difference in how an image is rendered you don't understand light
> refraction. I've worked in TV production for 15 years and heard a lot of
> opinions about picture quality, and while I'll admit that a lot of what
> people call "picture quality" is objective, I can tell you that there IS a
> real difference in the way human eyes perceive these different types of
> image transmission. And speaking of "perspective"...how's that RPTV look
> at about 160 degrees? The "market" is full of misinformation. Trust your
> eyes.

Other than the screen, what differences in technology are there? You might
say that 3 chip technology is implemented in front projection systems, but
this would only be true in systems at many times the cost of most RPTV.
When considering the impact of screen technology on images, you certainly
get a different look with front projection, but it is not necessarily
better. Screen material choice impacts picture characteristics enormously,
as does any ambient light and any backlighting. The variables in a front
projection application are great and the result is not always better than
RPTV. Who cares about watching at 160 degrees anyway. The bottom line is
that the technology is more similar than different and front projection is
not necessarily better. It depends on the application and what sets you are
comparing.

Leonard
Anonymous
June 11, 2004 3:43:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Most people have lived with poor quality stuff for so many years they
don't know what good looks like anymore. The picture on the average TV set
is so tweaked that it doesn't look real.

I'm not a tweak freak (OK... having a colorometer would be cool), but I
calibrate my monitor on my PC at least once every couple of months (OK, it's
an LCD monitor so you don't have to do alot), and I check my TV set every
couple of months too. It used to be that people would do the "Indian Head"
setup on the old black and white TV's but that era is past, people don't
want to setup anything anymore, much less read a manual. So manufacturers
should default to realistic looking pictures, and not oversharpened,
overbrightened sets.
Anonymous
June 11, 2004 4:13:31 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

magnulus wrote:
> So manufacturers
> should default to realistic looking pictures, and not oversharpened,
> overbrightened sets.

Problem is that it's the "oversharpened" and
"overbrightened" sets in the store that get noticed and
purchased. But at least manufactures could make it so that
with a single button press, the set can be restored to a
"standard" setting. And at the very least, one should not
have to delve into a service menu to correct red push (shame
on Sony).

--
M2
June 11, 2004 1:24:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Michael Moore" <m.moore@NOSPAMutoronto.ca> wrote in message
news:Jjayc.49637$8k4.1067706@news20.bellglobal.com...
> magnulus wrote:
> > So manufacturers
> > should default to realistic looking pictures, and not oversharpened,
> > overbrightened sets.
>
> Problem is that it's the "oversharpened" and
> "overbrightened" sets in the store that get noticed and
> purchased. But at least manufactures could make it so that
> with a single button press, the set can be restored to a
> "standard" setting. And at the very least, one should not
> have to delve into a service menu to correct red push (shame
> on Sony).
>
> --
> M2
>

Heck; at least Sony has a way for you to turn it off. Most sets don't.

Richard.
Anonymous
June 30, 2004 12:16:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:_03xc.24985$Tn6.2873@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
: >
: Maybe that is why HDTV OTA is selling so well in Japan. It works plug
: and play.
:
=======================
It does in the US too.....................
Anonymous
June 30, 2004 2:44:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> Plug and play with COFDM means in your car, boat and backyard with simple
> omni antennas.

So Bob Miller claims. Remember, any time Bob Miller says anything, the
exact opposite is true!

In this case, Bob Miller effectively claims that reception problems are
bad enough to impact 8-VSB, but will never be bad enough to impact COFDM.
For this reason, so Bob's nonsensical reasoning goes, it is not necessary
to use antennas that optimize reception.

This is the true mark of a snake-oil salesman!

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
June 30, 2004 8:30:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Richard C. wrote:

> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:_03xc.24985$Tn6.2873@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> : >
> : Maybe that is why HDTV OTA is selling so well in Japan. It works plug
> : and play.
> :
> =======================
> It does in the US too.....................
>
>
In the US it works plug and PLAY A LONG TIME as in FIDDLE with the
rooftop antenna to receive stations in an erratic and baffling way.
Sometime receiving stations from long distances while not able to
receive stations within eyesight because of multipath.

Plug and play with COFDM means in your car, boat and backyard with
simple omni antennas.

The new 8-VSB 5th Generation receiver solves some of this problem. I
believe 8-VSB will now work a fixed site and an indoor antenna. We will
see however.

No excuse however for not working mobile and portable even in 2006 and
NO EXCUSE for the 5 YEAR DELAY GOING ON 6, uncommon in your face lies
and waste of time and money on generations ONE, TWO, THREE and FOUR.

Or for the ongoing RIP-OFF $6 IP royalty that is composed of $5.40 of
monopoly money, a tax on every American granted by your Congress to a
foreign company because of corruption in Washington DC. It is the
difference that LG Ind. can charge for their IP royalties over what is
charged for COFDM in all other countries because of the monopoly that
8-VSB was given in the US. A monopoly that is unnecessary and extremely
costly to US consumers not only in IP royalty cost but in the cost of
8-VSB receivers and the time delay in our DTV transition.
Anonymous
July 1, 2004 1:28:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> You are lucky Jeff but many other are not. About 30% overall and more in
> cities like New York.

According to Bob Miller, the destruction of NYC's primary broadcast
platform a bit less than 3 years ago has nothing to do with it.

> And yes I consider the time you wait for the rotor to
> reposition "fiddling" along with the installation of the antenna in the first
> place.

Outdoor antennas are also required for OTA DTV reception in the UK, Berlin
Germany, Australia, and Japan. And guess what! Directional antennas are
the documented answer for impulse noise problems!

Rotors aren't needed if all the broadcasters are transmitting from the
same location. Generally that is the case in countries with only a
handful of channels (such as the UK and Germany).

> BTW "a few minutes" ..."a long time" to change channels?

Jeff said "a few moments", not "a few minutes". Yet another example of
Bob Miller's lies and distortions.

I doubt that Bob Miller knows what a rotor looks like. Modern rotors have
a remote. If the antenna isn't pointing in the right direction, I just
press the channel number on the remote and the antenna moves to the
programmed location for that channel. Only two of the Seattle channels
require a precise aim; all the others come in if the antenna is pointed in
the general direction of Seattle. So much of the time, I don't need to
adjust the rotor.

Since I have satellite, I use the program guide rather than channel flip;
it's much faster and saves me from missing something I want due to
commercials.

> The one I live in will not tolerate the difference between the time
> it takes to change channels on satellite and cable. Satellite is out, takes
> to long.

We can now add "satellite" to the list of things of which Bob Miller has
absolutely no clue.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
July 1, 2004 1:58:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in news:4VBEc.265$R36.113
@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:

> In the US it works plug and PLAY A LONG TIME as in FIDDLE with the
> rooftop antenna to receive stations in an erratic and baffling way.
> Sometime receiving stations from long distances while not able to
> receive stations within eyesight because of multipath.
>

Hmmmm... I didn't have to do any fiddling to receive HD from the two
stations on the mountain that's less than 5 miles from my house or from the
stations that are 45 to 48 miles away from my house, unless you consider
turning the rotor controller for my antenna to the approximate direction of
the stations "fiddling" and the few moments for me to turn that rotor
controller "a long time".

But that's just me and pretty much everyone else that's posted messages
here discussing how well they're receiving free OTA HDTV who refused to
listen to your FUD and actually attempted to receiver free OTA HDTV.
Anonymous
July 1, 2004 2:55:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Jeff Shoaf wrote:

> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in news:4VBEc.265$R36.113
> @newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:
>
>
>>In the US it works plug and PLAY A LONG TIME as in FIDDLE with the
>>rooftop antenna to receive stations in an erratic and baffling way.
>>Sometime receiving stations from long distances while not able to
>>receive stations within eyesight because of multipath.
>>
>
>
> Hmmmm... I didn't have to do any fiddling to receive HD from the two
> stations on the mountain that's less than 5 miles from my house or from the
> stations that are 45 to 48 miles away from my house, unless you consider
> turning the rotor controller for my antenna to the approximate direction of
> the stations "fiddling" and the few moments for me to turn that rotor
> controller "a long time".

You are lucky Jeff but many other are not. About 30% overall and more in
cities like New York. And yes I consider the time you wait for the rotor
to reposition "fiddling" along with the installation of the antenna in
the first place. I think that if the average American is presented with
the choice of buying an OTA receiver that requires such "fiddling" they
will chose to wait for cable and satellite. And current sales of OTA
receivers supports my argument with 9 out of ten HDTV buyers passing on
OTA receivers even though that is still where most of the HDTV is located.

BTW "a few minutes" ..."a long time" to change channels? What America
do you live in? The one I live in will not tolerate the difference
between the time it takes to change channels on satellite and cable.
Satellite is out, takes to long.

Word of mouth about problems with 8-VSB have been its "KILLER AP".

Maybe the new 8-VSB receivers from Zenith will change that next year
only six years from when we could have had much better in 1999.
Anonymous
July 2, 2004 12:16:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004, Jeff Shoaf wrote:
> Where's your source for 30%, Bob?

It's his own imagination!

> Where's your source for 9:10 buyers passing on OTA receivers? Even your
> vaunted USDTV receivers have OTA receivers...

In fact, in most of the country, USDTV receivers are sold as OTA
receivers. USDTV's subscription service is only in three mountain state
cities. Yet people elsewhere are buying them...as cheap OTA receivers.

Bob Miller wants us to believe that nobody wants an OTA receiver, yet that
all these people nationwide who are buying USDTV receivers are doing so in
an anticipation that, someday, there will be USDTV service and until then
are willing to have the USDTV receiver be a useless brick.

I predict that the fate of most USDTV receivers will be as OTA receivers
that will never be used for USDTV's premium service.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
July 2, 2004 3:04:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:IxHEc.413$oD3.50@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:

> Jeff Shoaf wrote:
>
>> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in news:4VBEc.265$R36.113
>> @newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:
>>
>>
>>>In the US it works plug and PLAY A LONG TIME as in FIDDLE with the
>>>rooftop antenna to receive stations in an erratic and baffling way.
>>>Sometime receiving stations from long distances while not able to
>>>receive stations within eyesight because of multipath.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Hmmmm... I didn't have to do any fiddling to receive HD from the two
>> stations on the mountain that's less than 5 miles from my house or
>> from the stations that are 45 to 48 miles away from my house, unless
>> you consider turning the rotor controller for my antenna to the
>> approximate direction of the stations "fiddling" and the few moments
>> for me to turn that rotor controller "a long time".
>
> You are lucky Jeff but many other are not. About 30% overall and more
> in cities like New York. And yes I consider the time you wait for the
> rotor to reposition "fiddling" along with the installation of the
> antenna in the first place. I think that if the average American is
> presented with the choice of buying an OTA receiver that requires such
> "fiddling" they will chose to wait for cable and satellite. And
> current sales of OTA receivers supports my argument with 9 out of ten
> HDTV buyers passing on OTA receivers even though that is still where
> most of the HDTV is located.

Where's your source for 30%, Bob?

Waiting for the rotor to turn is fiddling, eh? Reminds me of Homer
Simpson at the microwave yelling, "I don't have all minute!".

Where's your source for 9:10 buyers passing on OTA receivers? Even your
vaunted USDTV receivers have OTA receivers...

>
> BTW "a few minutes" ..."a long time" to change channels? What America
> do you live in? The one I live in will not tolerate the difference
> between the time it takes to change channels on satellite and cable.
> Satellite is out, takes to long.

I didn't say "a few minutes" - I said "a few moments". You know, it's
pretty bad when your posts can be refuted with a quick Google search, but
it's flat out pathetic when all it takes is a quick scroll back up to my
message.

>
> Word of mouth about problems with 8-VSB have been its "KILLER AP".

Where's your source, Bob? More folks have probably been put off of buying
an HD receiver due to your and your buddies at Sinclair FUD... but wait,
Sinclair is now saying that 8-VSB works well!

>
> Maybe the new 8-VSB receivers from Zenith will change that next year
> only six years from when we could have had much better in 1999.
>
More FUD. The issue in 1999 was lack of content, the cost of HD receivers
(by way more than $6), and the lack of a connection method with copy
protection. Lots of people were concerned about buying a TV and a STB
that wouldn't allow them to watch cable/satellite pay channels with full
resolution. Hence Mitsubishi's "Promise" stuff.
Anonymous
July 8, 2004 10:13:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4VBEc.265$R36.113@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
: Richard C. wrote:
:
: > "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
: > news:_03xc.24985$Tn6.2873@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
: > : >
: > : Maybe that is why HDTV OTA is selling so well in Japan. It works
plug
: > : and play.
: > :
: > =======================
: > It does in the US too.....................
: >
: >
: In the US it works plug and PLAY A LONG TIME as in FIDDLE with the
: rooftop antenna to receive stations in an erratic and baffling way.
: Sometime receiving stations from long distances while not able to
: receive stations within eyesight because of multipath.

===========================
Not true for most people.
===========================
:
: Plug and play with COFDM means in your car, boat and backyard with
: simple omni antennas.

==========================
Not according to many reports.
============================
:
: The new 8-VSB 5th Generation receiver solves some of this problem. I
: believe 8-VSB will now work a fixed site and an indoor antenna. We
will
: see however.

==============================
No problems here.
=============================
:
: No excuse however for not working mobile and portable even in 2006 and

==================
I don't watch any TV in my car.
Only a fool would do such a thing.
====================

: NO EXCUSE for the 5 YEAR DELAY GOING ON 6, uncommon in your face lies
: and waste of time and money on generations ONE, TWO, THREE and FOUR.

===================
The only lies are the ones YOU have been spouting.
=====================
:
!