Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

walmarts hd tuner

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 6:05:15 AM

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

quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
Thanks in advance mike

More about : walmarts tuner

Anonymous
November 20, 2004 6:05:16 AM

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

In article <419EB407.C4A7ECAE@earthlink.net>, mikeeee
<ritzoid@earthlink.net> wrote:

> quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
> getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
> Thanks in advance mike
>

caveat emptor. Currently, the best OTA tuner out there is the LG
LST-4200A. If your reception area is questionable, then you might want
to wait until the 5th gen tuners are available.

--
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
November 20, 2004 6:05:17 AM

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

Otto Pylot (otto@bogus.address.invalid) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> In article <419EB407.C4A7ECAE@earthlink.net>, mikeeee
> <ritzoid@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
> > getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
> > Thanks in advance mike
> >
>
> caveat emptor. Currently, the best OTA tuner out there is the LG
> LST-4200A. If your reception area is questionable, then you might want
> to wait until the 5th gen tuners are available.

Oh, look, a Bob sockpuppet.

There is nothing wrong with the USDTV tuner that WalMart sells, and it
will perform the same as a "5th generation tuner" for 95% of installations,
because multipath isn't an issue in most cases. Literally *millions*
of "1st through 3rd generation" ATSC tuners work just fine in almost all
installations.

Low signal strength is the primary problem, and no tuner is noticably
better at dealing with this. A big outdoor antenna is the only solution
to this, and always will be.

--
Jeff Rife | copy protection: n. A class of methods for
SPAM bait: | preventing incompetent pirates from stealing
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov | software and legitimate customers from using it.
spam@ftc.gov | Considered silly.
| -- Jargon File version 4.4.6
Related resources
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 8:10:42 AM

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

mikeeee wrote:
> quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
> getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
> Thanks in advance mike
>
I have a few. Works pretty good but their next generation will be five
times better. They will include a 5th generation LG tech soon.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 10:30:16 AM

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

Bob Miller wrote:
> mikeeee wrote:
>
>> quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
>> getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
>> Thanks in advance mike
>>
> I have a few. Works pretty good but their next generation will be five
> times better. They will include a 5th generation LG tech soon.
>
> Bob Miller

Five times better? I'm sure you have some real data to back that up,
right? I think that most people here know that 5th generation tuners are
only better in the rare cases where multipath prevents reception.

Matthew
--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 10:33:00 AM

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

"Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c089ff38ae8834098991a@news.nabs.net...
> Otto Pylot (otto@bogus.address.invalid) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>> In article <419EB407.C4A7ECAE@earthlink.net>, mikeeee
>> <ritzoid@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> > quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
>> > getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
>> > Thanks in advance mike
>> >
>>
>> caveat emptor. Currently, the best OTA tuner out there is the LG
>> LST-4200A. If your reception area is questionable, then you might want
>> to wait until the 5th gen tuners are available.
>
> Oh, look, a Bob sockpuppet.
>
> There is nothing wrong with the USDTV tuner that WalMart sells, and it
> will perform the same as a "5th generation tuner" for 95% of
> installations,
> because multipath isn't an issue in most cases. Literally *millions*
> of "1st through 3rd generation" ATSC tuners work just fine in almost all
> installations.
>

Be carefull when you read the above. If the tuner does not work at a
location
it will no longer be installed. Therefore, only currently working locations
can
be counted as 'installed'. This fact makes the above statement misleading.
According
to a high end store in area about half of their customers cannot get OTA to
work with
the current generation of tuners.


> Low signal strength is the primary problem, and no tuner is noticably
> better at dealing with this. A big outdoor antenna is the only solution
> to this, and always will be.
>
> --
> Jeff Rife | copy protection: n. A class of methods for
> SPAM bait: | preventing incompetent pirates from stealing
> AskDOJ@usdoj.gov | software and legitimate customers from using it.
> spam@ftc.gov | Considered silly.
> | -- Jargon File version 4.4.6
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 1:25:45 PM

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

"Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c089ff38ae8834098991a@news.nabs.net...
> Otto Pylot (otto@bogus.address.invalid) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> > In article <419EB407.C4A7ECAE@earthlink.net>, mikeeee
> > <ritzoid@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
> > > getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
> > > Thanks in advance mike
> > >
> >
> > caveat emptor. Currently, the best OTA tuner out there is the LG
> > LST-4200A. If your reception area is questionable, then you might want
> > to wait until the 5th gen tuners are available.
>
> There is nothing wrong with the USDTV tuner that WalMart sells, and it
> will perform the same as a "5th generation tuner" for 95% of
installations,
> because multipath isn't an issue in most cases. Literally *millions*
> of "1st through 3rd generation" ATSC tuners work just fine in almost all
> installations.

I too looked at the Walmart HDTV tuner. What turned me away from it was the
lack of published data on its performance. Also, the Walmart I visited did
not have a working tuner on display, nor did any sales person have technical
knowledge of the tuner. I eventually bought a Samsung SIR-T451, based on the
info I got from Samsung's web site, including a pdf file of the operating
manual.
>
> Low signal strength is the primary problem, and no tuner is noticably
> better at dealing with this. A big outdoor antenna is the only solution
> to this, and always will be.
>
> --
> Jeff Rife | copy protection: n. A class of methods for
> SPAM bait: | preventing incompetent pirates from stealing
> AskDOJ@usdoj.gov | software and legitimate customers from using it.
> spam@ftc.gov | Considered silly.
> | -- Jargon File version 4.4.6
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 3:33:34 PM

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

Mudd Bug (muddbug@cox.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> According
> to a high end store in area about half of their customers cannot get OTA to
> work with
> the current generation of tuners.

Talk about misleading statements.

I can't get any digital channels with an indoor antenna, or with my outdoor
antenna pointed in the wrong direction, yet pointing it correctly gives
me everything available.

This sort of thing is generally the problem...people have forgotten how
to receive OTA and don't know what to do to make it work.

--
Jeff Rife | "Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But
SPAM bait: | then you get to the end and a gorilla starts
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov | throwing barrels at you."
spam@ftc.gov | -- Philip J. Fry, "Futurama"
November 20, 2004 4:57:53 PM

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

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 05:10:42 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
wrote:


>I have a few. Works pretty good but their next generation will be five
>times better. They will include a 5th generation LG tech soon.
>
>Bob Miller

Once 5th gen. tuner devices arrive, how will the ordinary man in the
street (i.e. me) identify them?
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 5:02:52 PM

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

by how much cheaper all the rest will be...this is good info...i'm
definitely waiting till the 5th gens come out...to buy a 4th gen :-)


"BobT" <fake@invalid.net> wrote in message
news:rbjup0lulv438v85jt8kb3cpejefhbdnvl@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 05:10:42 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> >I have a few. Works pretty good but their next generation will be five
> >times better. They will include a 5th generation LG tech soon.
> >
> >Bob Miller
>
> Once 5th gen. tuner devices arrive, how will the ordinary man in the
> street (i.e. me) identify them?
>
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 6:36:17 PM

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

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Otto Pylot (otto@bogus.address.invalid) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>
>>In article <419EB407.C4A7ECAE@earthlink.net>, mikeeee
>><ritzoid@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
>>>getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
>>>Thanks in advance mike
>>>
>>
>>caveat emptor. Currently, the best OTA tuner out there is the LG
>>LST-4200A. If your reception area is questionable, then you might want
>>to wait until the 5th gen tuners are available.
>
>
> Oh, look, a Bob sockpuppet.
>
> There is nothing wrong with the USDTV tuner that WalMart sells, and it
> will perform the same as a "5th generation tuner" for 95% of installations,
> because multipath isn't an issue in most cases. Literally *millions*
> of "1st through 3rd generation" ATSC tuners work just fine in almost all
> installations.
>
> Low signal strength is the primary problem, and no tuner is noticably
> better at dealing with this. A big outdoor antenna is the only solution
> to this, and always will be.
>
Once 5th gen receivers start entering the market the reality that signal
strength is not the "primary problem" in most cases within a predicted
coverage area will become apparent. Multipath is the problem in a much
higher number of cases than acknowledged. No one wants to admit this
because it is to hard to swallow that most other countries have a far
better modulation system than the US.

In most of these other countries they have found that far lower power
levels allow very decent reception. In the UK the average power of their
transmitters is around ONE THOUSAND Watts while in the US broadcasters
regularly use a MILLION Watts or ONE THOUSAND times the power.

The problem with multipath is that as you increase the power of the main
broadcast the power of the reflected signals or multipath signals go up
in direct proportion. Power does not help when you have multipath.

Anyway we will know soon if I am right. 5th gen receivers will start
arriving. Expect the resale value of all current receivers to tank to
near zero.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 6:45:40 PM

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

BobT wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 05:10:42 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>I have a few. Works pretty good but their next generation will be five
>>times better. They will include a 5th generation LG tech soon.
>>
>>Bob Miller
>
>
> Once 5th gen. tuner devices arrive, how will the ordinary man in the
> street (i.e. me) identify them?
>
I actually don't know but usually the market has a way. Since there is
virtually no advertising of OTA receivers today any advertising of 5th
gen receivers should stand out. And for the first time I expect to see
advertising. In the cities where USDTV has coverage I am sure they will
make a big point of it. I think that new ventures like USDTV will spring
up. Watch Oregon an New York. USDTV is supposed to go into LA also.

Expect retailers to advertise more. Expect LG to advertise, as they have
in the past, how incredibly much better their new 5th gen reciever is
than all previous models.

One caveat. I think maybe one holdup with 5th gen receivers might be the
slow sales of current models. They may be trying to sell off current
stocks before introduction. Hisense in particular with their 4th gen
receiver in WalMart.

If someone says a receiever is 5th gen make sure that the chipset is an
LG one. Toshiba, Hisense and LG are the only names I know that will have
LG chipsets so far. Other manufacturers may claim to have a 5th gen
receiver. Their 5th gen receiver but it is only LG 5th gen receivers
that have been tested as being better so far. Other 5th gen receivers
should be avoided until testing shows them to be as good as or better
than LG's.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 6:56:21 PM

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

I have 2, both work great.
I also have an LG 3510 with built in DVD.
The Walmart tuners give just as good a picture as the LG at twice the price.
I wouldn't think twice about buying another one.

I have one of them at work 25 miles from transmitters on rabbit ears, and
can't get the two weakest. The other one is at home 35 miles away with a
large 150 mile VHF/UHF antenna. Gets all stations just fine there. The LG
is running off the same antenna, and going DVI into my LCD HD monitor. The
walmart receiver is in the living room on my 52" sony using component in.
Gets as good a picture as the Sony is capable of (480i) nothing more.

Thinking about buying yet a third for the office, but holding off for a bit
in there. Then there's the guest room, hmm. One of these days I guess.

Russ
"mikeeee" <ritzoid@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:419EB407.C4A7ECAE@earthlink.net...
> quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
> getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
> Thanks in advance mike
>
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 7:20:18 PM

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

In article <MPG.1c089ff38ae8834098991a@news.nabs.net>, Jeff Rife
<wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:

> Otto Pylot (otto@bogus.address.invalid) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> > In article <419EB407.C4A7ECAE@earthlink.net>, mikeeee
> > <ritzoid@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
> > > getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
> > > Thanks in advance mike
> > >
> >
> > caveat emptor. Currently, the best OTA tuner out there is the LG
> > LST-4200A. If your reception area is questionable, then you might want
> > to wait until the 5th gen tuners are available.
>
> Oh, look, a Bob sockpuppet.
>

Excuse me? Where do you get off inferring that I'm a Bob sockpuppet? As
I stated, if the op knows that he's in a bad area for reception, the
5th gen tuner may work best for him, otherwise the 4th gen LG will work
just fine. I just happen to prefer that over the Samsung because I had
trouble with the sammy. FYI, I don't particularly care for Booby and
his rantings.

--
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
November 20, 2004 8:06:32 PM

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

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>> mikeeee wrote:
>>
>>> quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent?
>>> Just getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would
>>> be great. Thanks in advance mike
>>>
>> I have a few. Works pretty good but their next generation will be
>> five times better. They will include a 5th generation LG tech soon.
>>
>> Bob Miller
>
> Five times better? I'm sure you have some real data to back that up,
> right? I think that most people here know that 5th generation tuners
> are only better in the rare cases where multipath prevents reception.
>
> Matthew

"Better" will be hard to define. I have a somewhat older internal in my
Mits (55511 series) that I wouldn't even know what generation it is, and it
works just fine (all possible stations come in at my location with a second
story Channel Master). I'd find it hard to believe that it could be any
better, let alone 5x........

For those that multi is a problem, maybe it will help them.
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 9:25:45 PM

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

"L Alpert" <alpertl@xxcomcast.net> wrote:
> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> > Bob Miller wrote:
> >> mikeeee wrote:
> >>
> >>> quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent?
> >>> Just getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would
> >>> be great. Thanks in advance mike
> >>>
> >> I have a few. Works pretty good but their next generation will be
> >> five times better. They will include a 5th generation LG tech soon.
> >>
> >> Bob Miller
> >
> > Five times better? I'm sure you have some real data to back that up,
> > right? I think that most people here know that 5th generation tuners
> > are only better in the rare cases where multipath prevents reception.
> >
> > Matthew
>
> "Better" will be hard to define. I have a somewhat older internal in my
> Mits (55511 series) that I wouldn't even know what generation it is, and
> it works just fine (all possible stations come in at my location with a
> second story Channel Master). I'd find it hard to believe that it could
> be any better, let alone 5x........
>
> For those that multi is a problem, maybe it will help them.

I also have a Mits 55511. The tuner works fine where I am in central CT.
Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 10:08:17 PM

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

"Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c0949fc14ede6b498991e@news.nabs.net...
> Mudd Bug (muddbug@cox.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>> According
>> to a high end store in area about half of their customers cannot get OTA
>> to
>> work with
>> the current generation of tuners.
>
> Talk about misleading statements.
>
> I can't get any digital channels with an indoor antenna, or with my
> outdoor
> antenna pointed in the wrong direction, yet pointing it correctly gives
> me everything available.
>

That's what the man told me. If he was trying to sell me why would he tell
me that? The
results I get are not all that good, I do point the antenna in the correct
direction but yet
I still get a weak signal. I'm less that 15 miles from the towers so I would
expect to get
a strong signal every time. I even expect to be able to use an indoor
antenna, after all this
is 2004 not 1950, techongoly should have advanced enough to fix OTA.

I will try a 5th generation receiver when it becomes available and see first
hand if this
is the fix for OTA. When football season started I got the cabel company's
HD box, they
will get it back when the season is over. I just hope that the 5th gen is
available and does
fix my reception problems before next season.




> This sort of thing is generally the problem...people have forgotten how
> to receive OTA and don't know what to do to make it work.
>
> --
> Jeff Rife | "Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But
> SPAM bait: | then you get to the end and a gorilla starts
> AskDOJ@usdoj.gov | throwing barrels at you."
> spam@ftc.gov | -- Philip J. Fry, "Futurama"
Anonymous
November 21, 2004 1:03:52 AM

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

Bob:

Heard any timetable on manufacturing and in the stores yet? Spring,
Summer, Just in time for the SuperBowl?


On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 15:45:40 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>BobT wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 05:10:42 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I have a few. Works pretty good but their next generation will be five
>>>times better. They will include a 5th generation LG tech soon.
>>>
>>>Bob Miller
>>
>>
>> Once 5th gen. tuner devices arrive, how will the ordinary man in the
>> street (i.e. me) identify them?
>>
>I actually don't know but usually the market has a way. Since there is
>virtually no advertising of OTA receivers today any advertising of 5th
>gen receivers should stand out. And for the first time I expect to see
>advertising. In the cities where USDTV has coverage I am sure they will
>make a big point of it. I think that new ventures like USDTV will spring
>up. Watch Oregon an New York. USDTV is supposed to go into LA also.
>
>Expect retailers to advertise more. Expect LG to advertise, as they have
>in the past, how incredibly much better their new 5th gen reciever is
>than all previous models.
>
>One caveat. I think maybe one holdup with 5th gen receivers might be the
>slow sales of current models. They may be trying to sell off current
>stocks before introduction. Hisense in particular with their 4th gen
>receiver in WalMart.
>
>If someone says a receiever is 5th gen make sure that the chipset is an
>LG one. Toshiba, Hisense and LG are the only names I know that will have
>LG chipsets so far. Other manufacturers may claim to have a 5th gen
>receiver. Their 5th gen receiver but it is only LG 5th gen receivers
>that have been tested as being better so far. Other 5th gen receivers
>should be avoided until testing shows them to be as good as or better
>than LG's.
>
>Bob Miller
November 21, 2004 1:52:18 AM

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

It's been said here a thousand times, but what the hell:
The majority of digital stations are broadcasting at LOW power!!!!! Hence
not too swell reception 15 miles away.
Why you ask?
Power is expensive and there is no revenue stream for the digital channels.
99 times out of a 100 your problem has nothing to do with the tuner, the
antenna or even where it's pointed.



"Mudd Bug" <muddbug@cox.net> wrote in message
news:fSRnd.58478$_g6.51460@okepread03...
>
> "Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1c0949fc14ede6b498991e@news.nabs.net...
>> Mudd Bug (muddbug@cox.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>>> According
>>> to a high end store in area about half of their customers cannot get OTA
>>> to
>>> work with
>>> the current generation of tuners.
>>
>> Talk about misleading statements.
>>
>> I can't get any digital channels with an indoor antenna, or with my
>> outdoor
>> antenna pointed in the wrong direction, yet pointing it correctly gives
>> me everything available.
>>
>
> That's what the man told me. If he was trying to sell me why would he tell
> me that? The
> results I get are not all that good, I do point the antenna in the correct
> direction but yet
> I still get a weak signal. I'm less that 15 miles from the towers so I
> would expect to get
> a strong signal every time. I even expect to be able to use an indoor
> antenna, after all this
> is 2004 not 1950, techongoly should have advanced enough to fix OTA.
>
> I will try a 5th generation receiver when it becomes available and see
> first hand if this
> is the fix for OTA. When football season started I got the cabel company's
> HD box, they
> will get it back when the season is over. I just hope that the 5th gen is
> available and does
> fix my reception problems before next season.
>
>
>
>
>> This sort of thing is generally the problem...people have forgotten how
>> to receive OTA and don't know what to do to make it work.
>>
>> --
>> Jeff Rife | "Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But
>> SPAM bait: | then you get to the end and a gorilla starts
>> AskDOJ@usdoj.gov | throwing barrels at you."
>> spam@ftc.gov | -- Philip J. Fry, "Futurama"
>
>
Anonymous
November 21, 2004 2:08:41 AM

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

Otto Pylot (otto@bogus.address.invalid) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> Excuse me? Where do you get off inferring that I'm a Bob sockpuppet?

Because his standard answer for ATSC reception problems is "get a 5th
generation receiver" despite the fact that 99% of the time they aren't
going to make a bit of difference. The only thing addressed is multipath,
and that is usually not the problem.

> As
> I stated, if the op knows that he's in a bad area for reception, the
> 5th gen tuner may work best for him, otherwise the 4th gen LG will work
> just fine.

And so will the USDTV receiver that the OP was asking about.

--
Jeff Rife | "Women...can't live with 'em...can't explain to
SPAM bait: | the desk clerk why you only need one bed."
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
spam@ftc.gov | -- Ellen
Anonymous
November 21, 2004 2:09:40 AM

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

Mudd Bug (muddbug@cox.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> > Talk about misleading statements.
> >
> > I can't get any digital channels with an indoor antenna, or with my
> > outdoor
> > antenna pointed in the wrong direction, yet pointing it correctly gives
> > me everything available.
> >
>
> That's what the man told me. If he was trying to sell me why would he tell
> me that?

Probably because it's mostly true for the people he sells to, and since it
is a "new" purchase they blame the ATSC receiver, even though this is
rarely the problem. If this "high end" store actually knew anything
about OTA, they would help install antennas and make sure things work,
or know the real reason why not.

> I do point the antenna in the correct
> direction but yet
> I still get a weak signal. I'm less that 15 miles from the towers so I would
> expect to get
> a strong signal every time.

What kind of antenna? How high? What power are the stations broadcasting
with? What height are the antennas on the transmission towers? Is there
anything between you and the towers? What channels are you having
problems with? Are there any adjacent channels (either analog or digital)?
Have you tried angling the antenna upward? How weak is "weak"? What is
the error rate (both corrected and uncorrected) on the signal? What is
the carrier/noise ratio? What is the raw signal strength at your antenna?

Yes, I know that some of these are complex questions, but they need to be
answered to determine what really is wrong.

--
Jeff Rife | "You keep using that word. I do not think it
SPAM bait: | means what you think it means."
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
spam@ftc.gov | -- Inigo Montoya, "The Princess Bride"
Anonymous
November 21, 2004 5:50:56 AM

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

Bouncer wrote:
> Bob:
>
> Heard any timetable on manufacturing and in the stores yet? Spring,
> Summer, Just in time for the SuperBowl?
>
>
I had only heard fourth quarter for Hisense and first quarter for LG.
Later heard that Hisense was waiting for their stock of 4th gen to deplete.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 21, 2004 6:06:46 AM

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

Mudd Bug wrote:
> "Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1c0949fc14ede6b498991e@news.nabs.net...
>
>>Mudd Bug (muddbug@cox.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>>
>>>According
>>>to a high end store in area about half of their customers cannot get OTA
>>>to
>>>work with
>>>the current generation of tuners.
>>
>>Talk about misleading statements.
>>
>>I can't get any digital channels with an indoor antenna, or with my
>>outdoor
>>antenna pointed in the wrong direction, yet pointing it correctly gives
>>me everything available.
>>
>
>
> That's what the man told me. If he was trying to sell me why would he tell me that? The results I get are not all that good, I do point the antenna in the correct
> direction but yet I still get a weak signal. I'm less that 15 miles from the towers so I would expect to get a strong signal every time. I even expect to be able to use an indoor
> antenna, after all this is 2004 not 1950, techongoly should have advanced enough to fix OTA.
>
> I will try a 5th generation receiver when it becomes available and see first hand if this is the fix for OTA. When football season started I got the cabel company's
> HD box, they will get it back when the season is over. I just hope that the 5th gen is available and does fix my reception problems before next season.
>

The 8-VSB clock is stuck at 1993. Next year with 5th gen receivers it
gets reset to 1996. The rest of the world is real time with COFDM.

You will have NO problem with an indoor antenna and a 5th gen receiver
at 15 miles.

And yes technology is advanced enough to fix OTA in 2004 you just happen
to be in a country that doesn't have modern technology for DTV
broadcasting yet. YET!

Check this out. This is with a 100 Watt transmitter and using the
simplest of antennas, whip antennas like on your car for your radio. One
is 3 inches and the other three are 15 inches. There are three receivers
one of which is using two antennas (diversity). The transmitter is at
400 ft. Compare to 1200 ft. for the 8-VSB transmitters on the Empire
State Building. Compare to the up to MILLION Watts of power that they
are using.

Try to get good reception even fixed in Manhattan with 8-VSB from that
MILLION Watts. Compare to what you are seeing. These three videos are
three of six from one station. While you are seeing them on very small
screens they are as good as NTSC on a 30 inch. We will do 10 such
programs per station with MPEG4.

This transmission can be received mobile on Coney Island and locations
22 miles from the transmitter.

The problem isn't POWER it is a modulation that can handle dynamic and
static multipath. 5th gen 8-VSB receivers can handle static pretty well.
COFDM can handle both and even use the multipath signals to add strength
to the signal.

www.viacel.com/bob.wmv

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 21, 2004 5:28:39 PM

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

"Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c089ff38ae8834098991a@news.nabs.net...
> Otto Pylot (otto@bogus.address.invalid) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> > In article <419EB407.C4A7ECAE@earthlink.net>, mikeeee
> > <ritzoid@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
> > > getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
> > > Thanks in advance mike
> > >
> >
> > caveat emptor. Currently, the best OTA tuner out there is the LG
> > LST-4200A. If your reception area is questionable, then you might want
> > to wait until the 5th gen tuners are available.
>
I too looked at the Walmart HDTV tuner. What turned me away from it was the
lack of published data on its performance. Also, the Walmart I visited did
not have a working tuner on display, nor did any sales person have technical
knowledge of the tuner. I eventually bought a Samsung SIR-T451, based on the
info I got from Samsung's web site, including a pdf file of the operating
manual.
Anonymous
November 21, 2004 5:50:16 PM

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

Blue Cat (bluecat22@go.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> I too looked at the Walmart HDTV tuner. What turned me away from it was the
> lack of published data on its performance.

I don't think you'll find this sort of data on *any* ATSC tuner. Part of
the reason is the nature of digital signals. If the carrier/noise ratio
for an ATSC signal is less than 19dB, you will *not* get anything, no matter
what tuner you have, since the design of the spec makes it impossible to
recover enough data with more noise than that in the signal.

Likewise, all the specs like adjacent channel rejection, etc., are built
into the requirements to allow something to call itself an ATSC tuner.

--
Jeff Rife | "You keep using that word. I do not think it
SPAM bait: | means what you think it means."
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
spam@ftc.gov | -- Inigo Montoya, "The Princess Bride"
Anonymous
November 21, 2004 6:49:20 PM

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

Bob Miller wrote:
>
> The problem with multipath is that as you increase the power of the main
> broadcast the power of the reflected signals or multipath signals go up
> in direct proportion. Power does not help when you have multipath.

Higher power will help when combined with weak signal strength. A single
multipath source will add a sine wave component to the frequency
spectrum and likewise each additional multipath source will contribute
to the spectrum variation. The greater the multipath strength the
greater the received spectrum variation. The combined multipath sources
may cause part(s) of the spectrum to fall into the noise level and
therefore cause a loss of reception. Higher power will raise, as you
say, in direct proportion the entire spectrum. If enough power is
provided to raise the entire spectrum above of the noise, reception may
now be possible.
Anonymous
November 21, 2004 7:45:55 PM

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

cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:
> "L Alpert" <alpertl@xxcomcast.net> wrote:
>> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>>> mikeeee wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent?
>>>>> Just getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would
>>>>> be great. Thanks in advance mike
>>>>>
>>>> I have a few. Works pretty good but their next generation will be
>>>> five times better. They will include a 5th generation LG tech soon.
>>>>
>>>> Bob Miller
>>>
>>> Five times better? I'm sure you have some real data to back that up,
>>> right? I think that most people here know that 5th generation tuners
>>> are only better in the rare cases where multipath prevents
>>> reception.
>>>
>>> Matthew
>>
>> "Better" will be hard to define. I have a somewhat older internal
>> in my Mits (55511 series) that I wouldn't even know what generation
>> it is, and it works just fine (all possible stations come in at my
>> location with a second story Channel Master). I'd find it hard to
>> believe that it could be any better, let alone 5x........
>>
>> For those that multi is a problem, maybe it will help them.
>
> I also have a Mits 55511. The tuner works fine where I am in central
> CT. Chip

From what little I know of them, the "generation 5" boxes will not be a mass
market item. They will probably appear on eBay soon enough.
Anonymous
November 21, 2004 11:28:32 PM

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

Jeff Rife wrote:

>
> What kind of antenna? How high? What power are the stations broadcasting
> with? What height are the antennas on the transmission towers? Is there
> anything between you and the towers? What channels are you having
> problems with? Are there any adjacent channels (either analog or digital)?
> Have you tried angling the antenna upward? How weak is "weak"? What is
> the error rate (both corrected and uncorrected) on the signal? What is
> the carrier/noise ratio? What is the raw signal strength at your antenna?
>
> Yes, I know that some of these are complex questions, but they need to be
> answered to determine what really is wrong.
>

SO many questions!!! SO many problems!!

I wonder if they would have sold 5 to 6 million COFDM receivers in the
UK in the last TWO years if there were so many problems? Funny thing is
most of our problems Jeff would suggest come from LOW POWER
broadcasters. NOT so here in NYC where VERY high power does not solve
the problem of multipath.

And in the UK they seem to be doing just fine with transmitters
operating at ONE THOUSAND Watts and even lower.

The problem IS NOT USUALLY POWER as will be demonstrated by 5th
generation receivers when they arrive. It will be a revelation.

Here is a list of all stations broadcasting digital with COFDM in the
UK. Hold on to your hats your going to see things like 6 Watts, 22 Watts
and 200 Watts.

http://www.wolfbane.com/ukdtt.htm

Now who was lecturing us on how much more power COFDM needed than 8-VSB?
Who is lamenting the fact that if only US broadcasters upped their power
to a 1,000,000 Watts or a Billion Watts or whatever then 8-VSB would
really work?

And of course then you could also cook your turkey by sticking it on
your big Yagi antenna. Cook a turkey with a turkey!

Bob Miller
November 22, 2004 11:43:50 AM

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:QT6od.1576$uV6.120@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> I wonder if they would have sold 5 to 6 million COFDM receivers in the UK
> in the last TWO years if there were so many problems? Funny

Hey Bob! He's in the US, where 8VSB is the standard. Get with the program.
November 22, 2004 11:47:08 AM

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

"Blue Cat" <bluecat22@go.com> wrote in message
news:w_5od.41363$IQ.16862@bignews6.bellsouth.net...

> I too looked at the Walmart HDTV tuner. What turned me away from it was
> the
> lack of published data on its performance. Also, the Walmart I

Walmart has the most lenient return policy of any retailer on the planet.
You could plug it in, if it doesn't work: throw the packaging and receipt
away, unplug it, back it over with your car, take a leak on it, put it on a
grill and have a HD BBQ, and they would STILL take it back. What I'm saying
is, why not give it a shot? :) 
Anonymous
November 22, 2004 8:38:34 PM

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

"Rich" <richp@nospam.com> wrote:
> "Blue Cat" <bluecat22@go.com> wrote in message
> news:w_5od.41363$IQ.16862@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>
> > I too looked at the Walmart HDTV tuner. What turned me away from it was
> > the
> > lack of published data on its performance. Also, the Walmart I
>
> Walmart has the most lenient return policy of any retailer on the planet.
> You could plug it in, if it doesn't work: throw the packaging and
> receipt away, unplug it, back it over with your car, take a leak on it,
> put it on a grill and have a HD BBQ, and they would STILL take it back.
> What I'm saying is, why not give it a shot? :) 

I was with you until you said to take a leak on it! Yuck! ;-)
Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Anonymous
November 23, 2004 6:19:21 AM

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

Bob Miller wrote:
> Jeff Rife wrote:
>
>>
>> What kind of antenna? How high? What power are the stations
>> broadcasting with? What height are the antennas on the transmission
>> towers? Is there anything between you and the towers? What
>> channels are you having problems with? Are there any adjacent
>> channels (either analog or digital)? Have you tried angling the
>> antenna upward? How weak is "weak"? What is the error rate (both
>> corrected and uncorrected) on the signal? What is the carrier/noise
>> ratio? What is the raw signal strength at your antenna? Yes, I know that
>> some of these are complex questions, but they need
>> to be answered to determine what really is wrong.
>>
>
> SO many questions!!! SO many problems!!
>
> I wonder if they would have sold 5 to 6 million COFDM receivers in the
> UK in the last TWO years if there were so many problems? Funny thing
> is most of our problems Jeff would suggest come from LOW POWER
> broadcasters. NOT so here in NYC where VERY high power does not solve
> the problem of multipath.
>

Most people in the US probably just want it piped in with their cable/sat
connection and don't bother with OTA. There is a good chance that the
numbers would be the same no matter the technology used.

I use OTA, mostly for local football, baseball, etc., but for the most part,
I use Comcast channels for commercial free content
(HBO/SHO/CMX/Starz/Inhd...etc) on a more every day basis.
Anonymous
November 23, 2004 6:20:10 AM

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

cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:
> "Rich" <richp@nospam.com> wrote:
>> "Blue Cat" <bluecat22@go.com> wrote in message
>> news:w_5od.41363$IQ.16862@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>
>>> I too looked at the Walmart HDTV tuner. What turned me away from it
>>> was the
>>> lack of published data on its performance. Also, the Walmart I
>>
>> Walmart has the most lenient return policy of any retailer on the
>> planet. You could plug it in, if it doesn't work: throw the
>> packaging and receipt away, unplug it, back it over with your car,
>> take a leak on it, put it on a grill and have a HD BBQ, and they
>> would STILL take it back. What I'm saying is, why not give it a
>> shot? :) 
>
> I was with you until you said to take a leak on it! Yuck! ;-)
> Chip

I'd hate to work in the repackaging department ;-(
November 23, 2004 10:50:02 AM

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

mikeeee <ritzoid@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<419EB407.C4A7ECAE@earthlink.net>...
> quick ? anybody have one of these tuners? are they pretty decent? Just
> getting tired of paying for overpriced cable. any info would be great.
> Thanks in advance mike


It only has a digital(HD) tuner which makes flipping back to analogue
stations very cumbersome in my Sony HS510. If I had it to do again I
would spend a few bucks more and get one with both types of tuners.


http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jspid=1076628571410...
This one has been getting good marks on AVS, it has an upconverting
DVD player to boot. Specs says:Reception: 1-69 Digital; 2-13 VHF;
14-69 UHF ect.
Anonymous
November 24, 2004 5:53:32 PM

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

Bob Miller wrote:
> Check this out. This is with a 100 Watt transmitter and using the
> simplest of antennas, whip antennas like on your car for your radio. One
> is 3 inches and the other three are 15 inches. There are three receivers
> one of which is using two antennas (diversity). The transmitter is at
> 400 ft. Compare to 1200 ft. for the 8-VSB transmitters on the Empire
> State Building. Compare to the up to MILLION Watts of power that they
> are using.
>
> Try to get good reception even fixed in Manhattan with 8-VSB from that
> MILLION Watts. Compare to what you are seeing. These three videos are
> three of six from one station. While you are seeing them on very small
> screens they are as good as NTSC on a 30 inch. We will do 10 such
> programs per station with MPEG4.
>
> This transmission can be received mobile on Coney Island and locations
> 22 miles from the transmitter.
>
> The problem isn't POWER it is a modulation that can handle dynamic and
> static multipath. 5th gen 8-VSB receivers can handle static pretty well.
> COFDM can handle both and even use the multipath signals to add strength
> to the signal.
>
> www.viacel.com/bob.wmv
>
> Bob Miller


I do not have a broadband internet connect and had to ask a friend to
download bob.wmv for me. Watching the video clearly illustrates an
impressive performance of mobile TV; although mobile TV per-sey isn't my
interest. One part shows the approach and exit from a tunnel. Getting
reception even part way into the Lincoln (I assume) tunnel with only a
100 watt transmitter is surprising. Even high power FM transmitters may
not do as good.

Just a few questions.
Is the transmitter providing 100 watts into the antenna or is the 100
watts the effective radiated power?
What is the transmitting antenna polarization?
What is the transmitting radiation pattern?
Is there any transmitting antenna down tilt?
What is the broadcast frequency?
Where is the transmitter located?
November 24, 2004 6:19:05 PM

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

"Rich" <richp@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:fLSdncsbxo9OcTzcRVn-uQ@comcast.com...
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:QT6od.1576$uV6.120@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>> I wonder if they would have sold 5 to 6 million COFDM receivers in the UK
>> in the last TWO years if there were so many problems? Funny
> Hey Bob! He's in the US, where 8VSB is the standard.
>Get with the program.

Bob needs to get IN a program, as well as with it.
Anonymous
November 24, 2004 9:47:12 PM

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

numeric wrote:
>
>
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> Check this out. This is with a 100 Watt transmitter and using the
>> simplest of antennas, whip antennas like on your car for your radio.
>> One is 3 inches and the other three are 15 inches. There are three
>> receivers one of which is using two antennas (diversity). The
>> transmitter is at 400 ft. Compare to 1200 ft. for the 8-VSB
>> transmitters on the Empire State Building. Compare to the up to
>> MILLION Watts of power that they are using.
>>
>> Try to get good reception even fixed in Manhattan with 8-VSB from that
>> MILLION Watts. Compare to what you are seeing. These three videos are
>> three of six from one station. While you are seeing them on very small
>> screens they are as good as NTSC on a 30 inch. We will do 10 such
>> programs per station with MPEG4.
>>
>> This transmission can be received mobile on Coney Island and locations
>> 22 miles from the transmitter.
>>
>> The problem isn't POWER it is a modulation that can handle dynamic and
>> static multipath. 5th gen 8-VSB receivers can handle static pretty
>> well. COFDM can handle both and even use the multipath signals to add
>> strength to the signal.
>>
>> www.viacel.com/bob.wmv
>>
>> Bob Miller
>
>
>
> I do not have a broadband internet connect and had to ask a friend to
> download bob.wmv for me. Watching the video clearly illustrates an
> impressive performance of mobile TV; although mobile TV per-sey isn't my
> interest. One part shows the approach and exit from a tunnel. Getting
> reception even part way into the Lincoln (I assume) tunnel with only a
> 100 watt transmitter is surprising. Even high power FM transmitters may
> not do as good.
>
> Just a few questions.
> Is the transmitter providing 100 watts into the antenna or is the 100
> watts the effective radiated power?
Just under a kW.
> What is the transmitting antenna polarization?
Vertical
> What is the transmitting radiation pattern?
Directional 90 degree (non engineer answer)
> Is there any transmitting antenna down tilt?
No
> What is the broadcast frequency?
Channel 54
> Where is the transmitter located?
Located at Canal and 6th Ave on the 25th floor. Not there anymore.
>

I should have mentioned that mobile reception is good out of the pattern
even as far away as Coney Island but it is sporadic meaning if as you
are driving your path fall behind a building the signal strength will
fall to zip. That is why with low power solid state transmitters an SFN
is so important. With multiple transmitters we will have virtually
perfect reception in the greater NYC area. Better than cellular, far
better than XM etc.

We were doing this in 1999 with a first gen COFDM receiver.

As far as tunnels go if the transmitter had been located anywhere near
line of sight to the entrance you could expect reception deep into the
tunnel. A friend testing XMRadio in Phoenix has reception thru the
entire length of a downtown tunnel, I believe 2000 + ft, with a low
power repeater somewhere nearby but XM has no specific repeater
associated with that tunnel according to the Arizona Highway Department.

We expect to have ubiquitous coverage in the subway system of NYC with
ultra low power repeaters at key stations. There is a tunnel on Park
Avenue between 33rd and 39th st. We have reception thru that tunnel with
momentary loss of signal just at the 39th st end with our single 100
Watt transmitter with virtually a forest of buildings between the
receiver and the transmitter over a 60 block distance.

It was at that transmitter site at Canal and 6th Ave. that we tested the
5th gen receiver from LG first. Only 44 blocks and with a CLEAR line of
sight to the Empire State Building. We could easily defeat it both with
static and dynamic multipath. Compare!! Yet I still say that the 5th
generation receiver from LG is the first real 8-VSB receiver. There is
NO comparison with COFDM however.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 24, 2004 9:47:13 PM

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

Bob Miller wrote:

>
> I should have mentioned that mobile reception is good out of the pattern
> even as far away as Coney Island but it is sporadic meaning if as you
> are driving your path fall behind a building the signal strength will
> fall to zip. That is why with low power solid state transmitters an SFN
> is so important. With multiple transmitters we will have virtually
> perfect reception in the greater NYC area. Better than cellular, far
> better than XM etc.
>

What business plan do you have to reach far into interior NY, CT and NJ
with those SFNs to duplicate the NTSC reception areea? Have you figured
the costs of citing, cite development installation and maintenance?

Matthew
November 24, 2004 9:47:13 PM

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote>>

>>> Check this out. >>>>>>

www.viacel.com/bob.wmv

Hmmm. Driving into NYC for what, 15 minutes, while using a camcorder?
IMHO, I think you should be charged with careless driving.
Anybody out there have any friends in the NYPD?
Anonymous
November 25, 2004 4:50:51 AM

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

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> I should have mentioned that mobile reception is good out of the
>> pattern even as far away as Coney Island but it is sporadic meaning if
>> as you are driving your path fall behind a building the signal
>> strength will fall to zip. That is why with low power solid state
>> transmitters an SFN is so important. With multiple transmitters we
>> will have virtually perfect reception in the greater NYC area. Better
>> than cellular, far better than XM etc.
>>
>
> What business plan do you have to reach far into interior NY, CT and NJ
> with those SFNs to duplicate the NTSC reception areea? Have you figured
> the costs of citing, cite development installation and maintenance?
>
> Matthew

Our coverage is far beyond any single NTSC station. Nuff said.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 25, 2004 4:53:27 AM

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

David wrote:
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote>>
>
>>>>Check this out. >>>>>>
>
>
> www.viacel.com/bob.wmv
>
> Hmmm. Driving into NYC for what, 15 minutes, while using a camcorder?
> IMHO, I think you should be charged with careless driving.
> Anybody out there have any friends in the NYPD?
>
>
>
>
Actually was stopped twice. Both times the officers wanted to invest. No
tickee.

This was not a single event.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 25, 2004 11:48:27 AM

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

Bob Miller wrote:

> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>
>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I should have mentioned that mobile reception is good out of the
>>> pattern even as far away as Coney Island but it is sporadic meaning
>>> if as you are driving your path fall behind a building the signal
>>> strength will fall to zip. That is why with low power solid state
>>> transmitters an SFN is so important. With multiple transmitters we
>>> will have virtually perfect reception in the greater NYC area. Better
>>> than cellular, far better than XM etc.
>>>
>>
>> What business plan do you have to reach far into interior NY, CT and
>> NJ with those SFNs to duplicate the NTSC reception areea? Have you
>> figured the costs of citing, cite development installation and
>> maintenance?
>>
>> Matthew
>
>
> Our coverage is far beyond any single NTSC station. Nuff said.
>

But you said:

"I should have mentioned that mobile reception is good out of the
pattern even as far away as Coney Island but it is sporadic meaning
if as you are driving your path fall behind a building the signal
strength will fall to zip".

Are you saying that NTSC reception in the same place is impossible
because "the signal strength will fall to zip"?

Now, about CT, LI, NJ and parts north? These areas are served by big
sticks. How many SFN cites, at what cost, will it take to get service in
these places?

Matthew


--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
Anonymous
November 25, 2004 10:06:04 PM

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

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>>
>>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I should have mentioned that mobile reception is good out of the
>>>> pattern even as far away as Coney Island but it is sporadic meaning
>>>> if as you are driving your path fall behind a building the signal
>>>> strength will fall to zip. That is why with low power solid state
>>>> transmitters an SFN is so important. With multiple transmitters we
>>>> will have virtually perfect reception in the greater NYC area.
>>>> Better than cellular, far better than XM etc.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What business plan do you have to reach far into interior NY, CT and
>>> NJ with those SFNs to duplicate the NTSC reception areea? Have you
>>> figured the costs of citing, cite development installation and
>>> maintenance?
>>>
>>> Matthew
>>
>>
>>
>> Our coverage is far beyond any single NTSC station. Nuff said.
>>
>
> But you said:
>
> "I should have mentioned that mobile reception is good out of the
> pattern even as far away as Coney Island but it is sporadic meaning
> if as you are driving your path fall behind a building the signal
> strength will fall to zip".
>
> Are you saying that NTSC reception in the same place is impossible
> because "the signal strength will fall to zip"?
>
> Now, about CT, LI, NJ and parts north? These areas are served by big
> sticks. How many SFN cites, at what cost, will it take to get service in
> these places?
>
> Matthew
>
>
There is a theoretical lab advantage, or was, I have read that it no
longer exist, between COFDM and 8-VSB. That is 8-VSB has a 2 to 4 db
power advantage.

In the real world most countries have blown that off as not significant.
Australia for one specifically addressed the issue.

With a 100 Watt transmitter there might be a small difference in
receptivity of COFDM and 8-VSB fixed on Coney Island. I doubt if it is
significant. I expect that you would find more sites at that distance
that would lose signal with 8-VSB from multipath than you would lose due
to low signal strength because of COFDM.

We were receiving the COFDM signal mobile on Coney Island which
eliminates 8-VSB altogether because of multipath. If you include all
those who wouldn't mind receiving DTV mobile and portable the total
number of those able to receive COFDM is far higher than 8-VSB in any
coverage area.

Of course with your preferred big stick high powered transmitter method
the theoretical power differential at the radio horizon between COFDM
and 8-VSB is of very little consequence while the problem of multipath
is still, as always, very significant.

An SFN is not restricted, BTW, to low power. You could have a big stick
high power SFN or more significantly you can have a mixture of high
power and low power transmitters.

And why are you worried about the cost? Plan on building one? Those who
will build them will decide whether it is worth it or not. It seems that
Qualcomm, Sirius, XMRadio, Crown Castle in the US as well as many
countries and other ventures have decided that it is worth whatever it
cost. And why are you talking about "CT, LI, NJ and parts north"? All of
above plans and ours are talking about national ubiquitous coverage. CT
is the least of our worries. I also suggest that there are ways to cover
the entire US with an SFN that are a lot less expensive but not common
knowledge yet and I am not going into that. BTW Qualcomm will invest
$800 million and suggest they will also have other investors. Crown
Castle already owns a large number of broadcast antennas country wide
and they will need it with the spectrum they own in the 1670-75 MHz area
(smaller cell size required).

Is the cost of building and maintaining 10 solid state 100 Watt
transmitters on apartment buildings in the New York City area the equal
of ONE MEGA Watt liquid cooled transmitter on the Empire State Building?
I will tell you the rent on the ten sites is a lot less. The power bill
is a lot less. The maintenance is a lot less. The coverage is a lot
better. Would it cover the middle of Pennsylvania? Maybe of some of your
transmitters in the SFN are higher power with directional bias toward PA.

Being received mobile will increase the number of receivers from the one
HD in your living room to an average of 10 per household. Laptops,
Desktops, PDA's, cell phones, the portable TV, the TV in the
refrigerator door, the portable DVD player, in vehicle screen, on your
boat, on the bus, subway, train, the game machine and even your video
recorder. None of this was possible before with any degree of quality.

BTW again, 8-VSB users are talking of using SFN's. It would seem that
belatedly they understand the inherent advantages of the technology. It
remains to be seen if they can make it work or work well enough with
8-VSB. Works fine with COFDM for years.

Picking 8-VSB was all about a few special interest who wanted to see a
lot of big transmitters and high profit margin HDTV sets in the very
short term, 2000 to now. It didn't happen. Broadcasters got the FCC to
allow them to do low power broadcasting and consumers didn't buy many
HDTV sets. And the ones that did buy them did so more to watch DVDs.

Ironically picking COFDM would have had the opposite affect. They would
have sold far more full power transmitters and HDTV sets over the last
few years IMO. And they would have caused the rest of the world to move
to HD at a much faster pace IMO.
Anonymous
November 25, 2004 11:06:00 PM

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

Bob Miller wrote:
> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>
>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>
>>> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I should have mentioned that mobile reception is good out of the
>>>>> pattern even as far away as Coney Island but it is sporadic meaning
>>>>> if as you are driving your path fall behind a building the signal
>>>>> strength will fall to zip. That is why with low power solid state
>>>>> transmitters an SFN is so important. With multiple transmitters we
>>>>> will have virtually perfect reception in the greater NYC area.
>>>>> Better than cellular, far better than XM etc.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What business plan do you have to reach far into interior NY, CT and
>>>> NJ with those SFNs to duplicate the NTSC reception areea? Have you
>>>> figured the costs of citing, cite development installation and
>>>> maintenance?
>>>>
>>>> Matthew
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Our coverage is far beyond any single NTSC station. Nuff said.
>>>
>>
>> But you said:
>>
>> "I should have mentioned that mobile reception is good out of the
>> pattern even as far away as Coney Island but it is sporadic meaning
>> if as you are driving your path fall behind a building the signal
>> strength will fall to zip".
>>
>> Are you saying that NTSC reception in the same place is impossible
>> because "the signal strength will fall to zip"?
>>
>> Now, about CT, LI, NJ and parts north? These areas are served by big
>> sticks. How many SFN cites, at what cost, will it take to get service
>> in these places?
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>>
> There is a theoretical lab advantage, or was, I have read that it no
> longer exist, between COFDM and 8-VSB. That is 8-VSB has a 2 to 4 db
> power advantage.

Any proof of that assertion?

> In the real world most countries have blown that off as not significant.
> Australia for one specifically addressed the issue.
>
> With a 100 Watt transmitter there might be a small difference in
> receptivity of COFDM and 8-VSB fixed on Coney Island. I doubt if it is
> significant. I expect that you would find more sites at that distance
> that would lose signal with 8-VSB from multipath than you would lose due
> to low signal strength because of COFDM.

I didn't say ATSC. I said NTSC.

Please answer the question I asked.

Matthew

--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
Anonymous
November 26, 2004 5:35:12 AM

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

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>>
>>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>>
>>>> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I should have mentioned that mobile reception is good out of the
>>>>>> pattern even as far away as Coney Island but it is sporadic
>>>>>> meaning if as you are driving your path fall behind a building the
>>>>>> signal strength will fall to zip. That is why with low power solid
>>>>>> state transmitters an SFN is so important. With multiple
>>>>>> transmitters we will have virtually perfect reception in the
>>>>>> greater NYC area. Better than cellular, far better than XM etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What business plan do you have to reach far into interior NY, CT
>>>>> and NJ with those SFNs to duplicate the NTSC reception areea? Have
>>>>> you figured the costs of citing, cite development installation and
>>>>> maintenance?
>>>>>
>>>>> Matthew
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Our coverage is far beyond any single NTSC station. Nuff said.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But you said:
>>>
>>> "I should have mentioned that mobile reception is good out of the
>>> pattern even as far away as Coney Island but it is sporadic meaning
>>> if as you are driving your path fall behind a building the signal
>>> strength will fall to zip".
>>>
>>> Are you saying that NTSC reception in the same place is impossible
>>> because "the signal strength will fall to zip"?
>>>
>>> Now, about CT, LI, NJ and parts north? These areas are served by big
>>> sticks. How many SFN cites, at what cost, will it take to get service
>>> in these places?
>>>
>>> Matthew
>>>
>>>
>> There is a theoretical lab advantage, or was, I have read that it no
>> longer exist, between COFDM and 8-VSB. That is 8-VSB has a 2 to 4 db
>> power advantage.
>
>
> Any proof of that assertion?
>
>> In the real world most countries have blown that off as not
>> significant. Australia for one specifically addressed the issue.
>>
>> With a 100 Watt transmitter there might be a small difference in
>> receptivity of COFDM and 8-VSB fixed on Coney Island. I doubt if it is
>> significant. I expect that you would find more sites at that distance
>> that would lose signal with 8-VSB from multipath than you would lose
>> due to low signal strength because of COFDM.
>
>
> I didn't say ATSC. I said NTSC.
>
> Please answer the question I asked.
>
> Matthew
>
Since digital will normally give better coverage I would assume that
NTSC would be harder to receive under the same conditions. NTSC is not
possible mobile in any acceptable way that I have seen anywhere.

I am saying that in an area that we did not expect reception at all we
were able to intermittently receive a COFDM signal. What was interesting
was that we knew that with an SFN that same area would be covered by
multiple transmitters that were closer. It was just surprising how much
signal was there. We didn't and don't have a reason to test NTSC.
Anonymous
November 26, 2004 5:35:13 AM

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:ADwpd.713>>
> Since digital will normally give better coverage I would assume that NTSC
> would be harder to receive under the same conditions. NTSC is not possible
> mobile in any acceptable way that I have seen anywhere.

I think the use of the term NTSC should be changed to analog terrestrial
with a single antenna for your observation as mobile satellite television is
more than acceptable and provides an NTSC signal and I'm guessing that a
high end diversity receiver might do ok with analog terrestrial as well. Not
the cheap and easy solution you showed us with your highly illegal and
amusing web demo but still a possibility. I thought driving with a cell
phone was illegal in NYC....what about driving with three monitors while
shooting a video? Next time you need to hire a driver!
Anonymous
November 26, 2004 12:23:25 PM

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

Bob Miller wrote:

> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>
>>
>> Please answer the question I asked.
>>
>> Matthew
>>
> Since digital will normally give better coverage I would assume that
> NTSC would be harder to receive under the same conditions. NTSC is not
> possible mobile in any acceptable way that I have seen anywhere.

I'm not talking about mobile. ATSC and NTSC were not intended for mobile
reception.

> I am saying that in an area that we did not expect reception at all we
> were able to intermittently receive a COFDM signal. What was interesting
> was that we knew that with an SFN that same area would be covered by
> multiple transmitters that were closer. It was just surprising how much
> signal was there. We didn't and don't have a reason to test NTSC.
>


Will you answer the question instead of changing the subject?

I'll repeat it here:

What business plan do you have to reach far into interior NY, CT and NJ
with those SFNs to duplicate the NTSC reception area? Have you figured
the costs of citing, cite development installation and maintenance?

Matthew

--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
Anonymous
November 26, 2004 7:30:17 PM

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

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Please answer the question I asked.
>>>
>>> Matthew
>>>
>
> Will you answer the question instead of changing the subject?
>
> I'll repeat it here:
>
> What business plan do you have to reach far into interior NY, CT and NJ
> with those SFNs to duplicate the NTSC reception area? Have you figured
> the costs of citing, cite development installation and maintenance?
>
> Matthew
>

OK we will do it again for Matthew. I will dumb it down a bit.

From a previous answer...

"And why are you worried about the cost? Plan on building one? Those who
will build them will decide whether it is worth it or not. It seems that
Qualcomm, Sirius, XMRadio, Crown Castle in the US as well as many
countries and other ventures have decided that it is worth whatever it
cost. And why are you talking about "CT, LI, NJ and parts north"? All of
above plans and ours are talking about national ubiquitous coverage. CT
is the least of our worries. I also suggest that there are ways to cover
the entire US with an SFN that are a lot less expensive but not common
knowledge yet and I am not going into that. BTW Qualcomm will invest
$800 million and suggest they will also have other investors. Crown
Castle already owns a large number of broadcast antennas country wide
and they will need it with the spectrum they own in the 1670-75 MHz area
(smaller cell size required). "

And I will explain in little words too. Since we and others plan on
covering the entire US not the coverage of a single big stick high
powered broadcast antenna we do not think in terms of the "NTSC"
coverage area, we are thinking in terms of easy reception over the
entire country.

And yes we and others have "figured the costs of citing, cite
development installation and maintenance" as my previous answer suggest
such as Qualcomm and Crown Castle also have. Our figures are both much
higher than Qualcomm's and much lower. We have more than one solution.
And we do not know what Qualcomm's $800 million covers or how much more
they expect from others.

NTSC coverage is a quaint relic from the past. The fact that our
national planners deigned to only require our present and future digital
broadcast architecture around such an outmoded concept only testifies to
the control the dinosaur broadcasters and CEA have on them.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 26, 2004 7:30:18 PM

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

Bob Miller wrote:

> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>
>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>
>>> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please answer the question I asked.
>>>>
>>>> Matthew
>>>>
> >
>
>> Will you answer the question instead of changing the subject?
>>
>> I'll repeat it here:
>>
>> What business plan do you have to reach far into interior NY, CT and
>> NJ with those SFNs to duplicate the NTSC reception area? Have you
>> figured the costs of citing, cite development installation and
>> maintenance?
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>
> OK we will do it again for Matthew. I will dumb it down a bit.
>
> From a previous answer...
>
> "And why are you worried about the cost? Plan on building one? Those who
> will build them will decide whether it is worth it or not. It seems that
> Qualcomm, Sirius, XMRadio, Crown Castle in the US as well as many
> countries and other ventures have decided that it is worth whatever it
> cost. And why are you talking about "CT, LI, NJ and parts north"? All of
> above plans and ours are talking about national ubiquitous coverage. CT
> is the least of our worries. I also suggest that there are ways to cover
> the entire US with an SFN that are a lot less expensive but not common
> knowledge yet and I am not going into that. BTW Qualcomm will invest
> $800 million and suggest they will also have other investors. Crown
> Castle already owns a large number of broadcast antennas country wide
> and they will need it with the spectrum they own in the 1670-75 MHz area
> (smaller cell size required). "

In other words, no, you don't have a plan for OTA HDTV with coverage
that essentially duplicates the coverage of NTSC. You have some entirely
different scheme. Fine. Buy your spectrum and leave HDTV alone.

Matthew


--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
!