Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

OTA TUNER ?

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
July 31, 2004 5:01:58 AM

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.

More about : ota tuner

Anonymous
July 31, 2004 12:09:37 PM

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.
>
>
Anonymous
July 31, 2004 2:04:35 PM

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.
>
>
Related resources
Anonymous
July 31, 2004 4:01:05 PM

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.
Anonymous
July 31, 2004 10:45:40 PM

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.
Anonymous
August 1, 2004 12:44:36 AM

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-20...
A$599 ($421.0371) with a A$100 ($70.29)discount

http://www.kis-s.com.au/index.php?main_page=product_inf...
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=AU...
rt

http://www.productreview.com.au/showitem.php?item_id=14...

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

FYI ;-)
Anonymous
August 1, 2004 1:01:23 AM

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-20...
> A$599 ($421.0371) with a A$100 ($70.29)discount
>
>
http://www.kis-s.com.au/index.php?main_page=product_inf...
> 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=AU...
rt
>

>
> Review
>
> http://www.productreview.com.au/showitem.php?item_id=14...
>
> they don't think much of this box in a'stralia
>
> FYI ;-)
Anonymous
August 1, 2004 7:10:43 AM

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.
Anonymous
August 1, 2004 9:27:38 AM

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-20...
> A$599 ($421.0371) with a A$100 ($70.29)discount
>
> http://www.kis-s.com.au/index.php?main_page=product_inf...
> 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=AU...
> rt
>
> http://www.productreview.com.au/showitem.php?item_id=14...
>
> 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.
Anonymous
August 3, 2004 12:18:55 AM

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.
Anonymous
August 3, 2004 10:25:51 AM

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.
Anonymous
August 3, 2004 10:34:49 AM

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?s...

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.
Anonymous
August 3, 2004 1:37:12 PM

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.
Anonymous
August 3, 2004 9:27:04 PM

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.
Anonymous
August 4, 2004 5:32:24 PM

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.
Anonymous
August 5, 2004 4:14:44 AM

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.
!