OTA TUNER ?

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

What is the best OTA digital tuner ?

--
"Goodbye for now"
Danny

drush@charter.net

Join Hank Williams group at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hanks_place/

" Listen to country gospel demo songs on my Website: Songs that have a Real
deep message at
http://webpages.charter.net/drush
Please sign my Guestbook while you are there so I'll know you dropped by.
15 answers Last reply
More about tuner
  1. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Depends a lot on the application, manufacture equiptment you already own,
    and the green you want to drop on it. To vauge a question to have an
    appropiate reply. Google or Yahoo may give you much more info or even one of
    the HI-FI Forum sites.
    "Danny Rushing" <drush@charter.net> wrote in message
    news:10gmdea3tpfl2da@corp.supernews.com...
    > What is the best OTA digital tuner ?
    >
    > --
    > "Goodbye for now"
    > Danny
    >
    > drush@charter.net
    >
    > Join Hank Williams group at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hanks_place/
    >
    > " Listen to country gospel demo songs on my Website: Songs that have a
    Real
    > deep message at
    > http://webpages.charter.net/drush
    > Please sign my Guestbook while you are there so I'll know you dropped by.
    >
    >
  2. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    I have had the Samsung 351 for a while, It has a very good pickup.

    "Danny Rushing" <drush@charter.net> wrote in message
    news:10gmdea3tpfl2da@corp.supernews.com...
    > What is the best OTA digital tuner ?
    >
    > --
    > "Goodbye for now"
    > Danny
    >
    > drush@charter.net
    >
    > Join Hank Williams group at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hanks_place/
    >
    > " Listen to country gospel demo songs on my Website: Songs that have a
    Real
    > deep message at
    > http://webpages.charter.net/drush
    > Please sign my Guestbook while you are there so I'll know you dropped by.
    >
    >
  3. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    In article <10gmdea3tpfl2da@corp.supernews.com>, Danny Rushing
    <drush@charter.net> wrote:

    > What is the best OTA digital tuner ?

    Not an easy question to answer because of the many variables. Samsung
    and LG (Zenith) seem to be the most popular. LG has their own brand but
    they also manufacture the digital tuners for Sony and Hughes as well.
    The 5th Gen tuners from Zenith are just starting to appear so you might
    want to check them out.

    --
    Deja Moo: I've seen this bullshit before.

    My address has been anti-spammed.
    Please reply to: scasse@invalid.net replacing invalid with sonic.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Otto Pylot wrote:
    > In article <10gmdea3tpfl2da@corp.supernews.com>, Danny Rushing
    > <drush@charter.net> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>What is the best OTA digital tuner ?
    >
    >
    > Not an easy question to answer because of the many variables. Samsung
    > and LG (Zenith) seem to be the most popular. LG has their own brand but
    > they also manufacture the digital tuners for Sony and Hughes as well.
    > The 5th Gen tuners from Zenith are just starting to appear so you might
    > want to check them out.
    >

    If you mean the best HDTV OTA digital receiver it is probably one of
    these...
    http://www.dg-tec.com.au/images/dgtec2000a.pdf

    Japan may have a better one but they are mostly in the form of
    integrated sets.

    If of course you mean an 8-VSB OTA tuner then there isn't one yet, no
    best here. You will have to wait till the fourth quarter for either a
    Zenith/LG or a Hisense 5th generation receiver. These will be the best
    of 8-VSB but far from the best in the world and the Hisense will sell
    for around $200 at WalMart. The ones there now are not 5th generation yet.

    By then there may be multiple offerings of free 5th generation
    receivers. USDTV is already subsidizing HDTV receivers so that they only
    cost $19.95. They should be free by spring 2005 in many cities if you
    sign up for a year or so of an OTA subscription service.

    Now that we have a receiver that works reasonably well (next spring)
    expect the DTV transition to go into overdrive. The Christmas quarter
    2005 will see 3 million receivers sold and the year of 2006 over 12
    million, it could even be higher say 15 million.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Within these hallowed halls, Bob Miller of <robmx@earthlink.net> added
    the following to the collective conscience:
    >
    > If you mean the best HDTV OTA digital receiver it is probably one of
    > these...
    > http://www.dg-tec.com.au/images/dgtec2000a.pdf

    http://www.buyquick.com.au/shop/Product.asp?ID=DG-DH-2000A&AID=3166
    A$599 ($421.0371) with a A$100 ($70.29)discount

    http://www.kis-s.com.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=38_131&produc
    ts_id=619
    A$689 ($484.2981)from this place

    Current rate $0.7029 per A$1 (both ask &bid equal to this)

    Reviews

    http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?amt=1&from=AUD&to=USD&submit=Conve
    rt

    http://www.productreview.com.au/showitem.php?item_id=1404

    they don't think much of this box in a'stralia

    FYI ;-)
  6. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Within these hallowed halls, 21C BBS of <dontlook@here.net> added the
    following to the collective conscience:

    Corrected post, sorry :-(

    > Within these hallowed halls, Bob Miller of <robmx@earthlink.net> added
    > the following to the collective conscience:
    >>
    >> If you mean the best HDTV OTA digital receiver it is probably one of
    >> these...
    >> http://www.dg-tec.com.au/images/dgtec2000a.pdf
    >
    > http://www.buyquick.com.au/shop/Product.asp?ID=DG-DH-2000A&AID=3166
    > A$599 ($421.0371) with a A$100 ($70.29)discount
    >
    >
    http://www.kis-s.com.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=38_131&produc
    > ts_id=619
    > A$689 ($484.2981)from this place
    >
    > Current rate $0.7029 per A$1 (both ask &bid equal to this)
    >
    http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?amt=1&from=AUD&to=USD&submit=Conve
    rt
    >

    >
    > Review
    >
    > http://www.productreview.com.au/showitem.php?item_id=1404
    >
    > they don't think much of this box in a'stralia
    >
    > FYI ;-)
  7. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Bob Miller wrote:

    >By then there may be multiple offerings of free 5th generation
    >receivers. USDTV is already subsidizing HDTV receivers so that they only
    >cost $19.95. They should be free by spring 2005 in many cities if you
    >sign up for a year or so of an OTA subscription service.
    >
    >Now that we have a receiver that works reasonably well (next spring)
    >expect the DTV transition to go into overdrive. The Christmas quarter
    >2005 will see 3 million receivers sold and the year of 2006 over 12
    >million, it could even be higher say 15 million.

    I looked at the USDTV website but could not find any timetable of
    expansion plans or any list of cities planned for the next service
    rollouts.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    21C BBS wrote:
    > Within these hallowed halls, Bob Miller of <robmx@earthlink.net> added
    > the following to the collective conscience:
    >
    >>If you mean the best HDTV OTA digital receiver it is probably one of
    >>these...
    >>http://www.dg-tec.com.au/images/dgtec2000a.pdf
    >
    >
    > http://www.buyquick.com.au/shop/Product.asp?ID=DG-DH-2000A&AID=3166
    > A$599 ($421.0371) with a A$100 ($70.29)discount
    >
    > http://www.kis-s.com.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=38_131&produc
    > ts_id=619
    > A$689 ($484.2981)from this place
    >
    > Current rate $0.7029 per A$1 (both ask &bid equal to this)
    >
    > Reviews
    >
    > http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?amt=1&from=AUD&to=USD&submit=Conve
    > rt
    >
    > http://www.productreview.com.au/showitem.php?item_id=1404
    >
    > they don't think much of this box in a'stralia
    >
    > FYI ;-)
    >
    >

    Didn't say they thought much of it in Australia. In fact it may not be
    the best OTA DTV receiver in Australia. But it is still far better than
    the 5th generation Zenith receiver of which I have one and which no one
    else will have until the end of the year.

    On a scale of 1 to 10 this COFDM receiver would be a 1 and the 5th gen
    Zenith would be a 59.

    But even at 59 it will do the job at least for fixed reception and so I
    have predicted that you will be able to get a 5th gen receiver next year
    for ZERO $$ if you sign up for a subscription service. Could have had a
    free HDTV receiver in 2000 if Congress has allowed COFDM BTW.

    As to the price of COFDM receivers in OZ. As you know but for ethical
    reasons (your lack) you couldn't say OZ is a SMALL country with an
    UNUSUAL spectrum allocation of 7 MHz and they chose a combo audio and
    video that is not used anywhere else. There is NO economy of scale
    what-so-ever and many people predicted there would be NO receiver at all
    offered there.

    To compare rationally the price in OZ you would have to MENTION the
    market size. They have 19 million population or 4 million households.
    That is they are about the size of New York State.

    This article says it better....
    http://www.dansdata.com/hdtv.htm

    "The combination of ATSC audio and DVB-T video is a compatibility
    killer. DTV equipment for Australia needs not only a tuner that can find
    the frequencies we're using - that's not too big a deal - but also a
    special demodulator that can handle our half-and-half DTV format. We're
    a special little market all our own, and that market has about as many
    people in it as New York State.

    If New York State decided to use its own special TV format, major
    manufacturers would probably not be falling over each other to cater to
    it. 18 million people is a decent size of market if you're selling
    apples, or bricks, or Internet access. If you're selling high-end
    audio-visual gear to a market that size, though... well, you probably
    won't bother. You'll aim for the bigger markets and leave someone else
    to try to make back their development costs in that little one."

    A more accurate measure would be to take the price of SD receivers in a
    larger market like the UK and compare it to the price of SD receivers in
    OZ and then you could extrapolate what an HDTV receiver would cost in
    the UK. From there you could further suggest what that price would be in
    a market six times larger that the UK, the US.

    Such figuring would produce a price of around $100 in the US for an HDTV
    OTA receiver today. If we had started in 2000 I think that even a few
    dollars less would be more accurate.
  9. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    "Danny Rushing" <drush@charter.net> wrote in message news:<10gmdea3tpfl2da@corp.supernews.com>...
    > What is the best OTA digital tuner ?
    >

    Hello, as you might be able to discern Bob Miller is sort of a
    resident court jester on this newsgroup. He has some seriously
    unresolved issues that significantly distort what he presents so his
    advice may not be very helpful. Despite the distortions presented here
    there are many of us who get excellent reception of HDTV. One of the
    liberating factors about digital TV is that once you are past a
    certain threshhold your reception really can't be any better. In those
    cases a fifth generation receiver has no practical significance.

    The receiver I can recommend from personal experience is the
    FusionHDTV board from DVico. It is a PCI board that you put in a PC.
    They have three different models now (and two versions of the third)
    and I have one of the first model purchased for about $150. Others
    have used it to drive large screen displays but I view the picture on
    my PC monitor. I'm waiting for prices of large screens to drop before
    spending my own money on one. Another popular choice for an HDTV tuner
    card is MyHD but I can't speak for it from direct experience.

    If you are not interested in the added complication of getting your HD
    signal from a computer the most popular brand of HDTV set top boxes
    seem to come from Samsung. Specifically the T165 and T351. The T165
    has the distinction of possessing a FireWire interface so you have
    options for recording the tuned signal to either a tape or hard drive
    device (or even a Mac or PC). One of the advantages of the Fusion or
    MyHD cards is that HD recording to your hard drive is trivially
    available.

    I am certain that geography is destiny when it comes to HDTV
    reception. In some locations I might not be able to get even one HD
    signal while in my current location I get PBS, CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, WB,
    and HDNet. I receive the UPN station but it is weak and the affiliate
    is not HD capable yet. The FOX station is one of the most solid
    signals and is supposed to be HD this fall. Two inhibiting factors in
    the current circumstance is that many digital stations are using
    extremely low power. That is related to the second factor about
    interference or potential interference with existing analog stations.
    When those analog stations are turned off and the digital stations run
    at full power even more people will get good reception. So if you have
    issues today don't assume the situation won't improve.
  10. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Steve Bryan wrote:
    > "Danny Rushing" <drush@charter.net> wrote in message news:<10gmdea3tpfl2da@corp.supernews.com>...
    >
    >>What is the best OTA digital tuner ?
    >>
    >
    >
    > Hello, as you might be able to discern Bob Miller is sort of a
    > resident court jester on this newsgroup. He has some seriously
    > unresolved issues that significantly distort what he presents so his
    > advice may not be very helpful. Despite the distortions presented here
    > there are many of us who get excellent reception of HDTV. One of the
    > liberating factors about digital TV is that once you are past a
    > certain threshhold your reception really can't be any better. In those
    > cases a fifth generation receiver has no practical significance.
    >
    The distortion in this case is coming from Steve.

    The specific distortion in this case is to suggest that I have in post
    on this newsgroup stated that something less than "many" can get decent
    reception with current 8-VSB receivers. I have never said any such
    thing. I have said that MANY cannot get good reception with current
    8-VSB receivers and I have quoted the MSTV test of 2001 that said the
    same thing. That report said that 8-VSB reception was "disappointing"
    and gave figures like 30% to 50% failure to receive numbers. These are
    low in cities like New York where 50% to 70% poor to impossible
    reception is more like reality.

    The proof of just how bad current receivers are came with Sinclair and
    our test of the latest 5th generation receivers. In Manhattan and in
    Long Island, 20 miles away, we tested the 5th gen receiver with top
    engineers in the TV broadcast field, Mark Schubin and Richard Bogner.
    Both had DISMAL reception in their apartment and home.

    The results of the test were astounding in how much better this receiver
    was than any tested at either location before. Bogner received only a
    couple of channels which were lost if a moderate breeze came up. This
    was demonstrated to me. Schubin could receive only two channels with the
    antenna at different locations and in precise orientation on the floor
    and on top of a bookcase.

    With the 5th gen receiver at Bogner's home ALL channels that could be
    located on the spectrum analyzer were receivable and were not lost while
    playing with the loop antenna in the window. Seven channels were
    receivable at Schubin's apartment and again it was difficult to lose
    them with only a loop antenna taped to the window.

    If you want to see pictures go to
    http://www.hdtvoice.com/voice/gallery/index.php?s=

    and scroll down though the gallery of photos to ones marked robmx.

    My advise to anyone is that all current receives will be virtually
    worthless after October or so when these new 5th gen receivers start
    hitting the shelves.

    Especially look for and ask for ONLY a 5th gen receiver that can handle WM9.


    > I am certain that geography is destiny when it comes to HDTV
    > reception. In some locations I might not be able to get even one HD
    > signal while in my current location I get PBS, CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, WB,
    > and HDNet. I receive the UPN station but it is weak and the affiliate
    > is not HD capable yet. The FOX station is one of the most solid
    > signals and is supposed to be HD this fall. Two inhibiting factors in
    > the current circumstance is that many digital stations are using
    > extremely low power. That is related to the second factor about
    > interference or potential interference with existing analog stations.
    > When those analog stations are turned off and the digital stations run
    > at full power even more people will get good reception. So if you have
    > issues today don't assume the situation won't improve.

    Don't assume it will either. People like Steve may have another agenda
    which you might not be aware of. Why would he not add that as power
    levels go up in broadcasting the reflected signal or multipath signal
    goes up virtually at the same rate. Interference you are receiving now
    if it is multipath will not be corrected by increase in power. That only
    helps if your problem is low signal strength.

    The 5th gen receiver will solve the static multipath problem nothing
    else will

    One more point. While I was impressed with the 5th gen receiver it in NO
    way compares to COFDM. COFDM was far far better than this technology in
    1998. I am impressed only with the relative performance of 4th to 5th
    gen 8-VSB receivers and I think that 5th gen will be good enough to help
    our transition in a big way.
  11. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    The photos of the 5th gen test are at ...

    http://www.hdtvoice.com/voice/gallery/showmembers.php?sl=r

    3rd down.


    Steve Bryan wrote:
    > "Danny Rushing" <drush@charter.net> wrote in message news:<10gmdea3tpfl2da@corp.supernews.com>...
    >
    >>What is the best OTA digital tuner ?
    >>
    >
    >
    > Hello, as you might be able to discern Bob Miller is sort of a
    > resident court jester on this newsgroup. He has some seriously
    > unresolved issues that significantly distort what he presents so his
    > advice may not be very helpful. Despite the distortions presented here
    > there are many of us who get excellent reception of HDTV. One of the
    > liberating factors about digital TV is that once you are past a
    > certain threshhold your reception really can't be any better. In those
    > cases a fifth generation receiver has no practical significance.
    >
    > The receiver I can recommend from personal experience is the
    > FusionHDTV board from DVico. It is a PCI board that you put in a PC.
    > They have three different models now (and two versions of the third)
    > and I have one of the first model purchased for about $150. Others
    > have used it to drive large screen displays but I view the picture on
    > my PC monitor. I'm waiting for prices of large screens to drop before
    > spending my own money on one. Another popular choice for an HDTV tuner
    > card is MyHD but I can't speak for it from direct experience.
    >
    > If you are not interested in the added complication of getting your HD
    > signal from a computer the most popular brand of HDTV set top boxes
    > seem to come from Samsung. Specifically the T165 and T351. The T165
    > has the distinction of possessing a FireWire interface so you have
    > options for recording the tuned signal to either a tape or hard drive
    > device (or even a Mac or PC). One of the advantages of the Fusion or
    > MyHD cards is that HD recording to your hard drive is trivially
    > available.
    >
    > I am certain that geography is destiny when it comes to HDTV
    > reception. In some locations I might not be able to get even one HD
    > signal while in my current location I get PBS, CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, WB,
    > and HDNet. I receive the UPN station but it is weak and the affiliate
    > is not HD capable yet. The FOX station is one of the most solid
    > signals and is supposed to be HD this fall. Two inhibiting factors in
    > the current circumstance is that many digital stations are using
    > extremely low power. That is related to the second factor about
    > interference or potential interference with existing analog stations.
    > When those analog stations are turned off and the digital stations run
    > at full power even more people will get good reception. So if you have
    > issues today don't assume the situation won't improve.
  12. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<PdGPc.7011$cK.2479@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
    > Steve Bryan wrote:
    > > "Danny Rushing" <drush@charter.net> wrote in message news:<10gmdea3tpfl2da@corp.supernews.com>...
    > >
    > >>What is the best OTA digital tuner ?
    > >>
    > >
    > >
    > > Hello, as you might be able to discern Bob Miller is sort of a
    > > resident court jester on this newsgroup. He has some seriously
    > > unresolved issues that significantly distort what he presents so his
    > > advice may not be very helpful. Despite the distortions presented here
    > > there are many of us who get excellent reception of HDTV. One of the
    > > liberating factors about digital TV is that once you are past a
    > > certain threshhold your reception really can't be any better. In those
    > > cases a fifth generation receiver has no practical significance.
    > >
    > The distortion in this case is coming from Steve.
    >
    > The specific distortion in this case is to suggest that I have in post
    > on this newsgroup stated that something less than "many" can get decent
    > reception with current 8-VSB receivers. I have never said any such
    > thing. I have said that MANY cannot get good reception with current
    > 8-VSB receivers and I have quoted the MSTV test of 2001 that said the
    > same thing. That report said that 8-VSB reception was "disappointing"
    > and gave figures like 30% to 50% failure to receive numbers. These are
    > low in cities like New York where 50% to 70% poor to impossible
    > reception is more like reality.
    > ...

    There you go again. If you were to go back to 2001, I would have to
    report poor reception at my location. It wasn't exactly stellar by
    2002 when I started receiving ATSC stations. It has only been in the
    last TV season that reception of HDTV has been routine for me and it
    is still less than optimum for the WB affiliate which is using a very
    low power transmitter according to people on a local HDTV oriented web
    site.

    That brings us to the case of New York City and the actual cause of
    the HDTV reception problems. In September of 2001 the World Trade
    Center was destroyed in a heinous act of terror. A fairly
    insignificant side effect of this despicable act was that the
    transmission facilities of essentially all the broadcasters were
    destroyed. Finding new locations in the area and building the
    necessary infrastructure was a difficult task. From what I've read
    recently this factor may have been overcome. These reports of
    successful reception are from consumers who have no access yet to
    fifth generation receivers so my guess is that broadcasters may have
    recovered from the setback.

    I know that the pace of change in the television world has been
    altered by the transition to ATSC. But I object to the
    characterization that 8VSB (the modulation standard for ATSC) was
    unusable before the soon to be released fifth generation of
    demodulators. Insofar as they are backward compatible I think they are
    a wonderful innovation. I am beginning to suspect that someone here
    might have a motivation to encourage developments that lead to only
    fifth generation receivers and later being supported. This guess would
    be based on the possibility that only fifth generation receivers being
    capable of supporting mobile digital TV reception. Did I hit one of
    your battleships Bob?

    My total investment in current ATSC reception is $150 for the PCI
    board and about $50 for the antenna I have installed in my attic. If
    standards evolve it is not exactly a disaster for me. I am not even
    sure the PCI board will handle the transition to the broadcast flag
    which networks are planning to deploy with this fall's TV season. But
    many people have spent a lot of money buying equipment that conforms
    to standards published by the FCC. I think it would be bad public
    policy to make alterations that could make some of this equipment less
    useful unless the change is crucial. Defining exactly what is crucial
    is what this debate is about.
  13. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Steve Bryan wrote:
    > Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<PdGPc.7011$cK.2479@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
    >
    >>Steve Bryan wrote:
    >>
    >>>"Danny Rushing" <drush@charter.net> wrote in message news:<10gmdea3tpfl2da@corp.supernews.com>...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>What is the best OTA digital tuner ?
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Hello, as you might be able to discern Bob Miller is sort of a
    >>>resident court jester on this newsgroup. He has some seriously
    >>>unresolved issues that significantly distort what he presents so his
    >>>advice may not be very helpful. Despite the distortions presented here
    >>>there are many of us who get excellent reception of HDTV. One of the
    >>>liberating factors about digital TV is that once you are past a
    >>>certain threshhold your reception really can't be any better. In those
    >>>cases a fifth generation receiver has no practical significance.
    >>>
    >>
    >>The distortion in this case is coming from Steve.
    >>
    >>The specific distortion in this case is to suggest that I have in post
    >>on this newsgroup stated that something less than "many" can get decent
    >>reception with current 8-VSB receivers. I have never said any such
    >>thing. I have said that MANY cannot get good reception with current
    >>8-VSB receivers and I have quoted the MSTV test of 2001 that said the
    >>same thing. That report said that 8-VSB reception was "disappointing"
    >>and gave figures like 30% to 50% failure to receive numbers. These are
    >>low in cities like New York where 50% to 70% poor to impossible
    >>reception is more like reality.
    >>...
    >
    >
    > There you go again. If you were to go back to 2001, I would have to
    > report poor reception at my location. It wasn't exactly stellar by
    > 2002 when I started receiving ATSC stations. It has only been in the
    > last TV season that reception of HDTV has been routine for me and it
    > is still less than optimum for the WB affiliate which is using a very
    > low power transmitter according to people on a local HDTV oriented web
    > site.
    >
    > That brings us to the case of New York City and the actual cause of
    > the HDTV reception problems. In September of 2001 the World Trade
    > Center was destroyed in a heinous act of terror. A fairly
    > insignificant side effect of this despicable act was that the
    > transmission facilities of essentially all the broadcasters were
    > destroyed. Finding new locations in the area and building the
    > necessary infrastructure was a difficult task. From what I've read
    > recently this factor may have been overcome. These reports of
    > successful reception are from consumers who have no access yet to
    > fifth generation receivers so my guess is that broadcasters may have
    > recovered from the setback.
    >
    > I know that the pace of change in the television world has been
    > altered by the transition to ATSC. But I object to the
    > characterization that 8VSB (the modulation standard for ATSC) was
    > unusable before the soon to be released fifth generation of
    > demodulators.

    You seem incapable of posting without distortion. Again you put words in
    my mouth. I never characterized 8-VSB as "unusable" before the 5th gen
    receiver shows up. I have repeatedly said, and I did again in my last
    post, that 8-VSB works OK for MANY. But many is not good enough.
    Everyone should have access to the use of the TV spectrum that we as
    citizens own.

    Since in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004 there was a digital TV
    modulation, COFDM, that would allow EVERYONE to receiver easily and
    inexpensively DTV why did we have to suffer the expense and lost time
    that staying with 8-VSB gave us?

    > Insofar as they are backward compatible I think they are
    > a wonderful innovation. I am beginning to suspect that someone here
    > might have a motivation to encourage developments that lead to only
    > fifth generation receivers and later being supported. This guess would
    > be based on the possibility that only fifth generation receivers being
    > capable of supporting mobile digital TV reception. Did I hit one of
    > your battleships Bob?

    Not true. 8-SVB 5th gen does an adequate job of receiving a signal as
    long as it is in a fixed location. NO MOBILE! Some kind of portable is all.

    Backward compatible??? NO! If you talk modulation yes but the dirty
    little secret is that these 5th generation receivers will all support
    WM9 and possibly other advanced compression codecs. My problem with the
    US transition was never just the modulation. It was equally the
    compression codec used MPEG2.

    Now these new receivers will support such codecs and broadcasters will
    use them rendering, you guessed it, all current and past 8-VSB receivers
    obsolete.


    >
    > My total investment in current ATSC reception is $150 for the PCI
    > board and about $50 for the antenna I have installed in my attic. If
    > standards evolve it is not exactly a disaster for me. I am not even
    > sure the PCI board will handle the transition to the broadcast flag
    > which networks are planning to deploy with this fall's TV season. But
    > many people have spent a lot of money buying equipment that conforms
    > to standards published by the FCC. I think it would be bad public
    > policy to make alterations that could make some of this equipment less
    > useful unless the change is crucial. Defining exactly what is crucial
    > is what this debate is about.

    The change is CRUCIAL. By using an advanced codec the same 6 MHz channel
    can now deliver 2 to 3 times the content. That suggest it is 2 to 3
    times more valuable than if they use MPEG2. It would be a CRIME not to
    use our scarce spectrum as efficiently as possible.

    The law also happens to allow broadcasters to do this. So you have the
    value based economic pressure and the law that virtually dictate that
    this will happen.

    All current receivers are history whatever you paid for them and
    whatever you think about it. It was and continues to be a major rip off
    of the public. Wisely the public has for the most part avoided 8-VSB
    altogether.

    With 5th gen receivers this will now change. To bad we are doing it with
    a POS technology.

    Standard setting as presently practiced by the FCC is an ongoing crime
    both politically and technically.
  14. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<IVPPc.7640$9Y6.564@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
    ....
    > The change is CRUCIAL. By using an advanced codec the same 6 MHz channel
    > can now deliver 2 to 3 times the content. That suggest it is 2 to 3
    > times more valuable than if they use MPEG2. It would be a CRIME not to
    > use our scarce spectrum as efficiently as possible.
    >
    > The law also happens to allow broadcasters to do this. So you have the
    > value based economic pressure and the law that virtually dictate that
    > this will happen.
    >
    > All current receivers are history whatever you paid for them and
    > whatever you think about it. It was and continues to be a major rip off
    > of the public. Wisely the public has for the most part avoided 8-VSB
    > altogether.
    ....

    This is the crux of what is faulty in your reasoning in this context.
    I would not in general against the proposition to "use our scarce
    spectrum as efficiently as possible". But when you notice that "All
    current receivers are history whatever you paid for them..." you need
    to more carefully consider the consequences of this sort of proposal.

    If consumers find themselves repeatedly shafted by "standards" changes
    that render their purchases and decisions devoid of value in less than
    five years the result is likely to be even more reluctance to try new
    products. Notice that your proposed standard will probably look as
    resource wasteful in five years or less. Should all purchases made
    during that period be treated in your cavalier manner? The unfettered
    rate of obsolence in the computer world is probably closer to a three
    or four year cycle. If that is introduced into the TV world, I doubt
    it will be well received. I'm not sure what the right rate of
    standards evolution would be. I think the fifty year reign of NTSC was
    too long by at least twenty or thirty years but I think peple should
    not have to deal with "instant" obsolecence.
  15. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Steve Bryan wrote:
    > Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<IVPPc.7640$9Y6.564@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
    > ...
    >
    >>The change is CRUCIAL. By using an advanced codec the same 6 MHz channel
    >>can now deliver 2 to 3 times the content. That suggest it is 2 to 3
    >>times more valuable than if they use MPEG2. It would be a CRIME not to
    >>use our scarce spectrum as efficiently as possible.
    >>
    >>The law also happens to allow broadcasters to do this. So you have the
    >>value based economic pressure and the law that virtually dictate that
    >>this will happen.
    >>
    >>All current receivers are history whatever you paid for them and
    >>whatever you think about it. It was and continues to be a major rip off
    >>of the public. Wisely the public has for the most part avoided 8-VSB
    >>altogether.
    >
    > ...
    >
    > This is the crux of what is faulty in your reasoning in this context.
    > I would not in general against the proposition to "use our scarce
    > spectrum as efficiently as possible". But when you notice that "All
    > current receivers are history whatever you paid for them..." you need
    > to more carefully consider the consequences of this sort of proposal.
    >
    > If consumers find themselves repeatedly shafted by "standards" changes
    > that render their purchases and decisions devoid of value in less than
    > five years the result is likely to be even more reluctance to try new
    > products. Notice that your proposed standard will probably look as
    > resource wasteful in five years or less. Should all purchases made
    > during that period be treated in your cavalier manner? The unfettered
    > rate of obsolence in the computer world is probably closer to a three
    > or four year cycle. If that is introduced into the TV world, I doubt
    > it will be well received. I'm not sure what the right rate of
    > standards evolution would be. I think the fifty year reign of NTSC was
    > too long by at least twenty or thirty years but I think peple should
    > not have to deal with "instant" obsolecence.

    Consumers will be forced to "deal with "instant" obsolescence."
    because it was imposed on them by the FCC and Congress. They should get
    pissed off. Maybe then such idiocy will stop.

    As I said the inherent intelligence in the free market system quietly
    rejected 8-VSB for the last five years. No body advertised it, nobody in
    retailing actively sold it, broadcasters avoided it and the public
    hardly knew it was happening.

    That bred a MANDATE from the party that doesn't like BIG GOVERNMENT. The
    party, if you remember that gave you PRICE CONTROLS.

    Now that there is a decent receiver, 5th gen, all this will change.

    I am not proposing a standard, all I am saying is what I think will
    happen. Congress and the FCC have already set the rules. I am saying the
    broadcasters will follow them.
Ask a new question

Read More

HDTV TV Tuner Home Theatre Product