Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Impulse Noise

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 12:38:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
impulse noise.

foxeng wrote on AVSForum

"The channel 2s on the east coast are synced now and it still is a mess
(many ARE CBS already). VHF low for serious digital work is really a non
starter. It will be interesting to see how these stations who elect to
go to VHF low really fair because once the other stations are gone, they
still have to deal with the other stations left and every time someone
turns on a vacuum cleaner or florescent light, the digital signal is lost."

Bob Miller

More about : impulse noise

Anonymous
March 20, 2005 12:38:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

The "I'll never learn bOb" spazes again:

Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
impulse noise.


foxeng wrote on AVSForum



No doubt you plucked this out of context yet again.
Go buy a HDTV bOb
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 12:38:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:38:50 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
>impulse noise.
>
>foxeng wrote on AVSForum
>
>"The channel 2s on the east coast are synced now and it still is a mess
>(many ARE CBS already). VHF low for serious digital work is really a non
>starter. It will be interesting to see how these stations who elect to
>go to VHF low really fair because once the other stations are gone, they
>still have to deal with the other stations left and every time someone
>turns on a vacuum cleaner or florescent light, the digital signal is lost."

Another fairy tail theater from Booby..

East coast DTV stations transmitting on channel 2..
(From the FCC database)

WTWC-TV 9.2kWW Tallahassee, FL 9.2. (NBC)
WCES-TV 20kW Wrens, GA (PBS)
WETM-TV 10kW Eimra, NY (NBC)

Hmmm.. two stations transmitting NBC (about a 1000 miles apart)
and one station carrying PBS.. I don;t see CBS in that list.

Seams booby is taking posts out of context.. again..

Here is one channels explanation why channel 2 TV reception can be
problematic. (check out Reason 3: "Sporadic E" layer)..
http://www.wbay.com/global/story.asp?s=104074&ClientTyp...

In other words.. Stations located 100's of miles away can end up
interfering with reception of local channel 2 signal. Channel 3 and
4 are best avoided due to the 100's of millions of on channel RF
modulators (VCRs's, DVD, Video games, etc) which can be set to either
of those frequencies.

As for impulse noise resistance...
8VSB enjoys the equivalent of a 10 to 15 dB advantage over COFDM.
Which means 8VSB is not totally immune to impulse noise, but
instead it is orders of magnitude better than COFDM..
Related resources
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 12:38:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:38:50 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
>impulse noise.
>
>foxeng wrote on AVSForum
>
>"The channel 2s on the east coast are synced now and it still is a mess
>(many ARE CBS already). VHF low for serious digital work is really a non
>starter. It will be interesting to see how these stations who elect to
>go to VHF low really fair because once the other stations are gone, they
>still have to deal with the other stations left and every time someone
>turns on a vacuum cleaner or florescent light, the digital signal is lost."

Another fairy tail theater from Booby..

East coast DTV stations transmitting on channel 2..
(From the FCC database)

WTWC-TV 9.2kW Tallahassee, FL (NBC)
WCES-TV 20kW Wrens, GA (PBS)
WETM-TV 10kW Eimra, NY (NBC)

Hmmm.. two stations transmitting NBC (about a 1000 miles apart)
and one station carrying PBS.. I don;t see CBS in that list.

Seams booby is taking posts out of context.. again..

Here is one channels explanation why channel 2 TV reception can be
problematic. (check out Reason 3: "Sporadic E" layer)..
http://www.wbay.com/global/story.asp?s=104074&ClientTyp...

In other words.. Stations located 100's of miles away can end up
interfering with reception of local channel 2 signal. Channel 3 and
4 are best avoided due to the 100's of millions of on channel RF
modulators (VCRs's, DVD, Video games, etc) which can be set to either
of those frequencies.

As for impulse noise resistance...
8VSB enjoys the equivalent of a 10 to 15 dB advantage over COFDM.
Which means 8VSB is not totally immune to impulse noise, but
instead it is orders of magnitude better than COFDM..
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 12:38:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Tim Keating wrote:
>
> As for impulse noise resistance...
> 8VSB enjoys the equivalent of a 10 to 15 dB advantage over COFDM.
> Which means 8VSB is not totally immune to impulse noise, but
> instead it is orders of magnitude better than COFDM..

Let us not forget that low VHF is problematic for impulse noise no
matter what modulation scheme is used when compared to high VHF or UHF.

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
March 20, 2005 1:18:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

In article <KZ0%d.126$H06.16@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> writes:
> Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
> impulse noise.
>
Remember: if 8VSB (being more robust than COFDM with impulse noise) is
having trouble, COFDM would be totally useless. OF course, for OTA
HDTV reception in the US, COFDM is indeed totally useless :-).

John
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 1:31:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

John S. Dyson wrote:

> In article <KZ0%d.126$H06.16@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> writes:
>
>>Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
>>impulse noise.
>>
>
> Remember: if 8VSB (being more robust than COFDM with impulse noise) is
> having trouble, COFDM would be totally useless. OF course, for OTA
> HDTV reception in the US, COFDM is indeed totally useless :-).
>
> John

More a matter of receiver design. COFDM has handled that and other
problems of broadcasting such as multipath. 8-VSB has not been able to
build decent receivers for sale yet. Even as you say the knowledge base
is there. They refuse or cannot afford to build decent 8-VSB receivers.

There are few manufacturers of 8-VSB receivers. There are no retailers
of 8-VSB receivers that enthusiastically sell 8-VSB receivers. There
just is no excitement in the 8-VSB OTA business at all. The only real
market is the FCC mandate and the receivers being made for that are not
the best in most cases but more often than not the least expensive.

Even a little market like OZ had three or four times the number of
receiver models being sold enthusiastically with advertising. The UK has
even more models and you can buy them almost anywhere.

Bob Miller

Bob Miller
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 5:46:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Tim Keating wrote:

> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:38:50 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
>>impulse noise.
>>
>>foxeng wrote on AVSForum
>>
>>"The channel 2s on the east coast are synced now and it still is a mess
>>(many ARE CBS already). VHF low for serious digital work is really a non
>>starter. It will be interesting to see how these stations who elect to
>>go to VHF low really fair because once the other stations are gone, they
>>still have to deal with the other stations left and every time someone
>>turns on a vacuum cleaner or florescent light, the digital signal is lost."
>
>
> Another fairy tail theater from Booby..

Just quoting from AVSForum engineer...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=53...

Take it up with him.

Bob Miller
>
> East coast DTV stations transmitting on channel 2..
> (From the FCC database)
>
> WTWC-TV 9.2kWW Tallahassee, FL 9.2. (NBC)
> WCES-TV 20kW Wrens, GA (PBS)
> WETM-TV 10kW Eimra, NY (NBC)
>
> Hmmm.. two stations transmitting NBC (about a 1000 miles apart)
> and one station carrying PBS.. I don;t see CBS in that list.
>
> Seams booby is taking posts out of context.. again..
>
> Here is one channels explanation why channel 2 TV reception can be
> problematic. (check out Reason 3: "Sporadic E" layer)..
> http://www.wbay.com/global/story.asp?s=104074&ClientTyp...
>
> In other words.. Stations located 100's of miles away can end up
> interfering with reception of local channel 2 signal. Channel 3 and
> 4 are best avoided due to the 100's of millions of on channel RF
> modulators (VCRs's, DVD, Video games, etc) which can be set to either
> of those frequencies.
>
> As for impulse noise resistance...
> 8VSB enjoys the equivalent of a 10 to 15 dB advantage over COFDM.
> Which means 8VSB is not totally immune to impulse noise, but
> instead it is orders of magnitude better than COFDM..
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 12:42:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

In article <gL1%d.14848$cN6.3613@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:

> There are few manufacturers of 8-VSB receivers. There are no retailers
> of 8-VSB receivers that enthusiastically sell 8-VSB receivers. There
> just is no excitement in the 8-VSB OTA business at all.

That's because they'd rather sell satellite receivers and get a cut on
the subscription signup fees. It's hard to find a DTV STB in a big box
store that isn't just an extra feature of a satellite receiver, though I
did notice an ATSC tuner built into one DVD/DVR combo unit for $400,
which is what a plain ATSC STB cost two years ago.

The American public doesn't understand OTA DTV anyhow regardless of
modulation, and the big box stores aren't motivated to help them
understand it because they make more money by selling satellite
subscriptions. And in a few years, they'll make even more money when an
unsuspecting public (or rather the small percentage who don't already
get cable or sat) finds out that the half dozen TV sets in their house
are worthless and they need to buy new ones.

QAM makes the 8VSB vs COFDM argument pointless. And not because of the
modulation, but because of the transmission medium.
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 2:08:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
> Tim Keating wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:38:50 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
>>> impulse noise.
>>>
>>> foxeng wrote on AVSForum
>>>
>>> "The channel 2s on the east coast are synced now and it still is a
>>> mess (many ARE CBS already). VHF low for serious digital work is
>>> really a non starter. It will be interesting to see how these
>>> stations who elect to go to VHF low really fair because once the
>>> other stations are gone, they still have to deal with the other
>>> stations left and every time someone turns on a vacuum cleaner or
>>> florescent light, the digital signal is lost."
>>
>>
>>
>> Another fairy tail theater from Booby..
>
>
> Just quoting from AVSForum engineer...
>
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=53...
>
> Take it up with him.
>
> Bob Miller
>

You point is misconstrued. FoxEng's comment isn't 8VSB specific, it's
DTV specific. I'm in the same broadcast area as FoxEng. The local CBS
affiliate is broadcasting analog on channel 2, digital on channel 51.
I'm over 50 miles from their tower and I'm in a shallow valley. I pick
up their HDTV (and their non-HD digital weather/news sub-channel) w/o
any problems at all. My reception of their analog broadcast is poor at best.
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 2:56:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Boobster.... Your at it again, I can read AVS, by myself, I don't need (or
want) your help! Can you just get a real job, maybe Wal-Mart can use you as
a door person. I can see it now....... ROFLOL......... on second thought
;-0.


Fear can hold you prisoner
Hope can set you free

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:KZ0%d.126$H06.16@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Who wouda thought??? .........
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 3:51:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
> > Another fairy tail theater from Booby..
>
> Just quoting from AVSForum engineer...
>
>
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=53...
>
> Take it up with him.

Yet another cherry picked quote from another forum (the one folks that
BOB was kicked off for lying, embellishing and distorting). BOB does
this to make it appear like the gospel. BOB, you are a deceiving SOB.
Why don't you check for accuracy before you quote other people?
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 3:54:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Shoaf wrote:
> You point is misconstrued. FoxEng's comment isn't 8VSB specific, it's

> DTV specific. I'm in the same broadcast area as FoxEng. The local CBS

> affiliate is broadcasting analog on channel 2, digital on channel 51.

> I'm over 50 miles from their tower and I'm in a shallow valley. I
pick
> up their HDTV (and their non-HD digital weather/news sub-channel) w/o

> any problems at all. My reception of their analog broadcast is poor
at best.

The lying BOOBSTER "misconstrue" a point? How could that be? Anyone
that takes any action on ANYTHING this Snake Oil Salesman says,
deserves what they get!
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 8:50:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bruce Tomlin wrote:
> In article <gL1%d.14848$cN6.3613@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>>There are few manufacturers of 8-VSB receivers. There are no retailers
>>of 8-VSB receivers that enthusiastically sell 8-VSB receivers. There
>>just is no excitement in the 8-VSB OTA business at all.
>
>
> That's because they'd rather sell satellite receivers and get a cut on
> the subscription signup fees. It's hard to find a DTV STB in a big box
> store that isn't just an extra feature of a satellite receiver, though I
> did notice an ATSC tuner built into one DVD/DVR combo unit for $400,
> which is what a plain ATSC STB cost two years ago.
>
> The American public doesn't understand OTA DTV anyhow regardless of
> modulation, and the big box stores aren't motivated to help them
> understand it because they make more money by selling satellite
> subscriptions. And in a few years, they'll make even more money when an
> unsuspecting public (or rather the small percentage who don't already
> get cable or sat) finds out that the half dozen TV sets in their house
> are worthless and they need to buy new ones.
>
> QAM makes the 8VSB vs COFDM argument pointless. And not because of the
> modulation, but because of the transmission medium.

COFDM is QAM. Coded Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing, COFDM is
multiplexing, the modulation is QAM.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 9:06:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Shoaf wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> Tim Keating wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:38:50 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
>>>> impulse noise.
>>>>
>>>> foxeng wrote on AVSForum
>>>>
>>>> "The channel 2s on the east coast are synced now and it still is a
>>>> mess (many ARE CBS already). VHF low for serious digital work is
>>>> really a non starter. It will be interesting to see how these
>>>> stations who elect to go to VHF low really fair because once the
>>>> other stations are gone, they still have to deal with the other
>>>> stations left and every time someone turns on a vacuum cleaner or
>>>> florescent light, the digital signal is lost."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Another fairy tail theater from Booby..
>>
>>
>>
>> Just quoting from AVSForum engineer...
>>
>> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=53...
>>
>> Take it up with him.
>>
>> Bob Miller
>>
>
> You point is misconstrued. FoxEng's comment isn't 8VSB specific, it's
> DTV specific. I'm in the same broadcast area as FoxEng. The local CBS
> affiliate is broadcasting analog on channel 2, digital on channel 51.
> I'm over 50 miles from their tower and I'm in a shallow valley. I pick
> up their HDTV (and their non-HD digital weather/news sub-channel) w/o
> any problems at all. My reception of their analog broadcast is poor at
> best.

Normally posters here "construe" impulse noise to be COFDM specific when
it is RF specific. The solution is to build receivers that can handle it.

Both COFDM and 8-VSB receivers have been built badly in some cases.
Early COFDM 2K receivers did not take into account impulse noise as much
as they should have. Those receivers are otherwise very good at
receiving very weak broadcast signals in the UK and are still used and
resold to others that use them.

Most if not all current COFDM receivers have solved the problem of
impulse noise. The sales figures testify to that.

All 8-VSB receivers have not addressed the multipath problems that COFDM
originally addressed. While much of the knowledge of how to address the
problem has been known for many years the cost of doing so seems still
to be prohibitive. Witnessed by LG's not marketing their latest 5th
generation receiver technology. Notice I say 5th generation receiver
technology and NOT 5th generation chip because we now know the answer is
NOT with the 5th generation chip.

While the solutions for DTV using 8-VSB still climb in cost or simply
steady at hight levels, cost of COFDM receivers that have solved impulse
noise, dynamic multipath and static multipath have decreased in price
steadily and can be bought at retail for as little as $50 and before
Christmas in one instance in a convenience store for $35.

DTV reception on cell phones will be built in for as little as $25 and
the cost of antennas for COFDM reception in any coverage area are
minimal with indoor omni's working very well as well as inch long
antennas on cell phones.

In most cases you have to add quite a bit to the cost of an 8-VSB
receiver for rooftop antennas with rotors.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 9:06:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
> Jeff Shoaf wrote:
>
>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>
>>> Tim Keating wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:38:50 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems
>>>>> with impulse noise.
>>>>>
>>>>> foxeng wrote on AVSForum
>>>>>
>>>>> "The channel 2s on the east coast are synced now and it still is a
>>>>> mess (many ARE CBS already). VHF low for serious digital work is
>>>>> really a non starter. It will be interesting to see how these
>>>>> stations who elect to go to VHF low really fair because once the
>>>>> other stations are gone, they still have to deal with the other
>>>>> stations left and every time someone turns on a vacuum cleaner or
>>>>> florescent light, the digital signal is lost."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Another fairy tail theater from Booby..
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Just quoting from AVSForum engineer...
>>>
>>> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=53...
>>>
>>> Take it up with him.
>>>
>>> Bob Miller
>>>
>>
>> You point is misconstrued. FoxEng's comment isn't 8VSB specific, it's
>> DTV specific. I'm in the same broadcast area as FoxEng. The local CBS
>> affiliate is broadcasting analog on channel 2, digital on channel 51.
>> I'm over 50 miles from their tower and I'm in a shallow valley. I pick
>> up their HDTV (and their non-HD digital weather/news sub-channel) w/o
>> any problems at all. My reception of their analog broadcast is poor at
>> best.
>
>
> Normally posters here "construe" impulse noise to be COFDM specific when
> it is RF specific. The solution is to build receivers that can handle it.
>
> Both COFDM and 8-VSB receivers have been built badly in some cases.
> Early COFDM 2K receivers did not take into account impulse noise as much
> as they should have. Those receivers are otherwise very good at
> receiving very weak broadcast signals in the UK and are still used and
> resold to others that use them.
>
> Most if not all current COFDM receivers have solved the problem of
> impulse noise. The sales figures testify to that.
>
> All 8-VSB receivers have not addressed the multipath problems that COFDM
> originally addressed. While much of the knowledge of how to address the
> problem has been known for many years the cost of doing so seems still
> to be prohibitive. Witnessed by LG's not marketing their latest 5th
> generation receiver technology. Notice I say 5th generation receiver
> technology and NOT 5th generation chip because we now know the answer is
> NOT with the 5th generation chip.
>
> While the solutions for DTV using 8-VSB still climb in cost or simply
> steady at hight levels, cost of COFDM receivers that have solved impulse
> noise, dynamic multipath and static multipath have decreased in price
> steadily and can be bought at retail for as little as $50 and before
> Christmas in one instance in a convenience store for $35.
>
> DTV reception on cell phones will be built in for as little as $25 and
> the cost of antennas for COFDM reception in any coverage area are
> minimal with indoor omni's working very well as well as inch long
> antennas on cell phones.
>
> In most cases you have to add quite a bit to the cost of an 8-VSB
> receiver for rooftop antennas with rotors.
>
> Bob Miller

Blah, blah, blah. I really should have known better than to reply to
you, but I just couldn't help myself. You post an out-of-context quote
from another forum (from which you were banned), and when I try to give
it a little context, you come back with another anti-8-VSB rant that is
mostly off-topic and full of distortions.

o Any discussion of DTV on cell phones is _OFF-TOPIC_ here. This an
_HDTV_ form, not a DTV forum.

o HDTV using the US _STANDARD_ of 8-VSB is coming down in cost
dramatically. As an early adopter, this is a little irritating to me
since I could have waited a few years and saved a bunch of money, but
then I would have missed out on all of the HDTV I've watched over the
last few years. And the few reception problems I've had aren't due to
the modulation scheme that's in use here in the USA - it's due to weak
implementation (the local FOX station is only broadcasting at less than
1 KW, and the local ABC station can't get their audio synced with their
video for their HD broadcast). But you seem to claim that all of this
could be resolved if only we'd switch modulation schemes. That's just silly.

o I believe a quick google search would find messages from you where you
deny COFDM has ever had impulse noise problems; if I'm wrong, I
apologize. Frankly, I really don't care enough about your opinion to do
the search myself, especially when I've used the tactic of disputing
your posts using earlier posts from you, only to no avail.

o Your statement that the current sales figures of COFDM receivers is
proof that they've solved the impulse noise problem is just silly.
That's analogous to me saying that the current sales figures of COFDM
HDTV receivers in the USA is proof that COFDM doesn't work.

o Neither of us are in a position to know why LG has or hasn't marketed
a new chip set. I could just as justifiably posit that they have
marketed a new chip set because their current chip set works so well and
is selling well that they don't have reason or time to rework their fabs
to make a new chip set.

o I don't care how much a COFDM DTV receiver costs. For one thing, I'm
interested in HDTV. For another thing, I wouldn't take a COFDM receiver
if you gave me one - I live in the USA, and I would have to run my
vacuum cleaner or refrigerator or something to generate impulse noise
just to hope to receive anything on a COFDM receiver. In the USA, the
DTV and HDTV standard OTA modulation is 8-VSB.

Hmmm... I think I'll pop over to AVS Forum and read their terms of
service. I wonder if you're violating copyright by posting quotes from
there... I'm also on an NCHDTV mailing list where FoxEng is a frequent
poster. I wonder how he would feel if he knew you were quoting him out
of context here...

Don't bother to respond to this posting, since I'll not respond further.
Please don't interpret that as agreement with any of your statements
or proof that you've proved (or even made) a valid point. It's just that
I learned a long time ago that it's useless to debate with you since you
tend to take things out of context, apply meaning where none can be
found, and just flat out ignore anything that doesn't fit in you vision
of COFDM utopia. Instead, why don't you take the time to provide links
to prove your postings, or, better yet, examine your life and see if it
needs a little redirecting.
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 10:13:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Tim Keating <NotForJunkEmail@directinternet11.com1> wrote in
news:1kmp31lmr8c7955ngdnk2urr4kkul88iug@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:38:50 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
>>impulse noise.
>>
>>foxeng wrote on AVSForum
>>
>>"The channel 2s on the east coast are synced now and it still is a
>>mess (many ARE CBS already). VHF low for serious digital work is
>>really a non starter. It will be interesting to see how these stations
>>who elect to go to VHF low really fair because once the other stations
>>are gone, they still have to deal with the other stations left and
>>every time someone turns on a vacuum cleaner or florescent light, the
>>digital signal is lost."
>
> Another fairy tail theater from Booby..
>
> East coast DTV stations transmitting on channel 2..
> (From the FCC database)
>
> WTWC-TV 9.2kW Tallahassee, FL (NBC)
> WCES-TV 20kW Wrens, GA (PBS)
> WETM-TV 10kW Eimra, NY (NBC)
>
> Hmmm.. two stations transmitting NBC (about a 1000 miles apart)
> and one station carrying PBS.. I don;t see CBS in that list.
>
> Seams booby is taking posts out of context.. again..
>
> Here is one channels explanation why channel 2 TV reception can be
> problematic. (check out Reason 3: "Sporadic E" layer)..
> http://www.wbay.com/global/story.asp?s=104074&ClientTyp...
>
> In other words.. Stations located 100's of miles away can end up
> interfering with reception of local channel 2 signal. Channel 3 and
> 4 are best avoided due to the 100's of millions of on channel RF
> modulators (VCRs's, DVD, Video games, etc) which can be set to either
> of those frequencies.

Several types of propagation anomalies can affect VHF and UHF signals.
F2 layer reflections can cause low VHF, especially channel 2 to be
subject to full strength signals from stations literally half-way around
the globe at sunspot cycle peaks. E layer reflections occur annually,
peaking around May and Novemember. These can sometimes even become so
intense as to reflect high VHF channels at distances of around 1200 miles
or so. And tropospheric scatter can occur any time there is a near-
surface inversion layer. That can affect all VHF and UHF bands, though
it is apt to be most prominent, in my experience, in the high VHF range.

No modulation scheme is immune to interference. If the interfering signal
is strong enough, it will damage the signal-to-noise ratio beyond repair.

--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

A false witness is worse than no witness at all.
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 2:12:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Shoaf wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> Jeff Shoaf wrote:
>>
>>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tim Keating wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:38:50 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with impulse noise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> foxeng wrote on AVSForum
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The channel 2s on the east coast are synced now and it still is a mess (many ARE CBS already). VHF low for serious digital work is
>>>>>> really a non starter. It will be interesting to see how these stations who elect to go to VHF low really fair because once the
>>>>>> other stations are gone, they still have to deal with the other stations left and every time someone turns on a vacuum cleaner or
>>>>>> florescent light, the digital signal is lost."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Another fairy tail theater from Booby..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just quoting from AVSForum engineer...
>>>>
>>>> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=53...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Take it up with him.
>>>>
>>>> Bob Miller
>>>>
>>>
>>> You point is misconstrued. FoxEng's comment isn't 8VSB specific, it's DTV specific. I'm in the same broadcast area as FoxEng. The local CBS
>>> affiliate is broadcasting analog on channel 2, digital on channel 51. I'm over 50 miles from their tower and I'm in a shallow valley. I
>>> pick up their HDTV (and their non-HD digital weather/news sub-channel) w/o any problems at all. My reception of their analog
>>> broadcast is poor at best.
>>
>>
>> Normally posters here "construe" impulse noise to be COFDM specific when it is RF specific. The solution is to build receivers that can
>> handle it.
>>
>> Both COFDM and 8-VSB receivers have been built badly in some cases. Early COFDM 2K receivers did not take into account impulse noise as
>> much as they should have. Those receivers are otherwise very good at receiving very weak broadcast signals in the UK and are still used and
>> resold to others that use them.
>>
>> Most if not all current COFDM receivers have solved the problem of impulse noise. The sales figures testify to that.
>>
>> All 8-VSB receivers have not addressed the multipath problems that COFDM originally addressed. While much of the knowledge of how to
>> address the problem has been known for many years the cost of doing so seems still to be prohibitive. Witnessed by LG's not marketing their
>> latest 5th generation receiver technology. Notice I say 5th generation receiver technology and NOT 5th generation chip because we now know
>> the answer is NOT with the 5th generation chip.
>>
>> While the solutions for DTV using 8-VSB still climb in cost or simply steady at higher levels, cost of COFDM receivers that have solved
>> impulse noise, dynamic multipath and static multipath have decreased in price steadily and can be bought at retail for as little as $50 and
>> before Christmas in one instance in a convenience store for $35.
>>
>> DTV reception on cell phones will be built in for as little as $25 and the cost of antennas for COFDM reception in any coverage area are
>> minimal with indoor omni's working very well as well as inch long antennas on cell phones.
>>
>> In most cases you have to add quite a bit to the cost of an 8-VSB receiver for rooftop antennas with rotors.
>>
>> Bob Miller
>
>
> Blah, blah, blah. I really should have known better than to reply to you, but I just couldn't help myself. You post an out-of-context quote
> from another forum (from which you were banned), and when I try to give it a little context, you come back with another anti-8-VSB rant that is
> mostly off-topic and full of distortions.

I would like to examine you accusation that I posted an out of context
quote and that my post was mostly off-topic and full of distortions.
>
> o Any discussion of DTV on cell phones is _OFF-TOPIC_ here. This an _HDTV_ form, not a DTV forum.

Not of topic in the least since the cell phone reception of the DTV
signal is the same signal that carries HDTV in Japan. They even hook up
the cell phone to a larger display using the cell phone and its
minuscule antenna as a STB.

http://blog.treonauts.com/2005/02/3gsm_03_phonetv.html

It is the easy reception with a ONE inch antenna of the ubiquitous COFDM
signal that is relevant. Compare to the concoctions created and called
antennas in the US to receive the problem plagued 8-VSB. The fact that
this COFDM modulation will be used by a number of entities in the US
with the same superb reception dooms 8-VSB to the inevitable comparison
with COFDM in a few years. This will be about the same time that our
government plans on passing out cheap converter boxes costing in the
billions of dollars. They have not however addressed the need for
antennas with rotors and technicians to install them that will be
required if this is not going to turn into an incredible fiasco.
>
> o HDTV using the US _STANDARD_ of 8-VSB is coming down in cost dramatically. As an early adopter, this is a little irritating to me
> since I could have waited a few years and saved a bunch of money, but then I would have missed out on all of the HDTV I've watched over the
> last few years. And the few reception problems I've had aren't due to the modulation scheme that's in use here in the USA - it's due to weak
> implementation (the local FOX station is only broadcasting at less than 1 KW, and the local ABC station can't get their audio synced with their
> video for their HD broadcast). But you seem to claim that all of this could be resolved if only we'd switch modulation schemes. That's just
> silly.
>
It is NOT due to weak implementation if you call ONE kW weak. The
AVERAGE power of the implemented COFDM broadcast network in the UK is
ONE kW and they have sold six million receivers in that market with six
million more to be sold this year.

Weak power is a problem for a weak and ineffective modulation, 8-VSB.

It is not silly, this all could be solved by switching to a COFDM based
modulation where low power transmitters could be used in an SFN to give
incredible coverage with a lot less power to simple antennas both mobile
and fixed. It is the solution being used by all other nations in the
world except S. Korea, Canada and Mexico. These countries are using
8-VSB for political reasons not because it is best.

> o I believe a quick google search would find messages from you where you deny COFDM has ever had impulse noise problems; if I'm wrong, I
> apologize. Frankly, I really don't care enough about your opinion to do the search myself, especially when I've used the tactic of disputing
> your posts using earlier posts from you, only to no avail.

I may have said COFDM never had impulse noise problems before I knew
better back in 1999 or early 2000 but I was advised that the earlier
COFDM receivers in the UK and possible some cheap ones in Australia may
still have a problem. It is not a COFDM problem it is a receiver design
problem. Most current COFDM receivers have no problem. We have used many
different COFDM receivers in the New York City and Toronto area with
never an impulse noise problems even when operating in heavy traffic and
downtown areas.
>
> o Your statement that the current sales figures of COFDM receivers is proof that they've solved the impulse noise problem is just silly.
> That's analogous to me saying that the current sales figures of COFDM HDTV receivers in the USA is proof that COFDM doesn't work.

Not really it would be silly to expect sales of COFDM receivers where
there is no broadcast of a COFDM signal. There are broadcast of COFDM
signals in the UK and sales there are not hindered by impulse noise
problems. High sales numbers suggest satisfaction on the part of the
populous and very good word of mouth. In the US on the other hand the
word of mouth on 8-VSB is horrid, sales or infinitesimal and that speaks
to the fact that 8-VSB has the problems we know of.
>
> o Neither of us are in a position to know why LG has or hasn't marketed a new chip set. I could just as justifiably posit that they have
> marketed a new chip set because their current chip set works so well and is selling well that they don't have reason or time to rework their fabs
> to make a new chip set.

They have a new chip set. I have seen it and tested it twice. It is not
the chip set that is the problem. In fact it is not the chip set that is
the solution. It is other technology around the chipset on the tuner
card that makes the 5th generation LG prototype work. We know because we
have now tested the prototype and now another receiver with the 5th gen
chip set and this one did not work. So it is reasonable to think that
maybe this other technology is too expensive to make a reasonably priced
receiver.


> o I don't care how much a COFDM DTV receiver costs. For one thing, I'm interested in HDTV. For another thing, I wouldn't take a COFDM receiver
> if you gave me one - I live in the USA, and I would have to run my vacuum cleaner or refrigerator or something to generate impulse noise
> just to hope to receive anything on a COFDM receiver. In the USA, the DTV and HDTV standard OTA modulation is 8-VSB.

Some people do care what their electronics cost. I do for one. And the
digital transition depends on having the lowest cost receivers possible
that work the best. In economics it is call the supply demand curve. The
lower the price the quicker the adoption. More people can afford etc. So
as an advocate or even if you are just a selfish I want mine, it is in
your interest, the nations interest and HDTV's interest to have the best
receivers as the lowest price. So you should care if the cost of COFDM
receivers is only a quarter of 8-VSB receiver cost and that is before we
know what the cost of an 8-VSB 5th gen LG receiver cost.

LG did say at the hearing last week that they would deliver an SD
converter box for $100 in 2007 if it was ordered in the tens of
millions. We know that you can buy at retail in the UK such a converter
box for $50 and on sale for as little as $35 now not in 2007 and NOT
promises by a company that promised the same thing five years ago. And
those $50 or $35 COFDM receivers were priced for a retail sale of ONE
unit that included sales cost, marketing cost and distribution cost that
the LG $100 8-VSB receiver for 2007 would not have. A COFDM receiver
ordered in the tens of millions today would cost less than $30.

>
> Hmmm... I think I'll pop over to AVS Forum and read their terms of service. I wonder if you're violating copyright by posting quotes from
> there... I'm also on an NCHDTV mailing list where FoxEng is a frequent poster. I wonder how he would feel if he knew you were quoting him out
> of context here...

Out of context? I think I copied the entire post. That can not be out of
context. And I included in a second post the address of the entire
thread. Unless you think I should just post the address to AVSForum to
be not out of context.
>
> Don't bother to respond to this posting, since I'll not respond further. Please don't interpret that as agreement with any of your statements or
> proof that you've proved (or even made) a valid point. It's just that I learned a long time ago that it's useless to debate with you since you
> tend to take things out of context, apply meaning where none can be found, and just flat out ignore anything that doesn't fit in you vision
> of COFDM utopia. Instead, why don't you take the time to provide links to prove your postings, or, better yet, examine your life and see if it
> needs a little redirecting.

I think I provide a lot of links to prove my postings actually.

Bob Miller
March 21, 2005 6:09:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote >
> I think I provide a lot of links to prove my postings actually.
>
> Bob Miller

Almost every link you've ever provided has helped to point out your amazing
stupidity.

Five years after being asked to leave AVS forum, you still sound like
fruitcake.
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 7:14:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Shoaf wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>> Tim Keating wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:38:50 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems
>>>> with impulse noise.
>>>>
>>>> foxeng wrote on AVSForum
>>>>
>>>> "The channel 2s on the east coast are synced now and it still is a
>>>> mess (many ARE CBS already). VHF low for serious digital work is
>>>> really a non starter. It will be interesting to see how these
>>>> stations who elect to go to VHF low really fair because once the
>>>> other stations are gone, they still have to deal with the other
>>>> stations left and every time someone turns on a vacuum cleaner or
>>>> florescent light, the digital signal is lost."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Another fairy tail theater from Booby..
>>
>>
>> Just quoting from AVSForum engineer...
>>
>> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=53...
>>
>> Take it up with him.
>>
>> Bob Miller
>>
>
> You point is misconstrued. FoxEng's comment isn't 8VSB specific, it's
> DTV specific. I'm in the same broadcast area as FoxEng. The local CBS
> affiliate is broadcasting analog on channel 2, digital on channel 51.
> I'm over 50 miles from their tower and I'm in a shallow valley. I pick
> up their HDTV (and their non-HD digital weather/news sub-channel) w/o
> any problems at all. My reception of their analog broadcast is poor
> at best.

I'm in the same boat 56 miles east of WMAR Baltimore (ABC2). The best I
would get is a barely watchable picture, but the DTV (52) signal is always
available with virtually no breakups.

Pity MAR-DT is on 52, they have to return to VHF2 or find a vacant UHF below
51.
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 10:15:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Drewdawg wrote:
> I'm in the same boat 56 miles east of WMAR Baltimore (ABC2). The
best I
> would get is a barely watchable picture, but the DTV (52) signal is
always
> available with virtually no breakups.

Drew, you have now joined that long list of posters that receives great
8VSB reception, but doesn't actually exist in BOB MILLER's looney world.
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 11:25:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:8rn%d.17022$cN6.13760@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...

< snip >

> I think I provide a lot of links to prove my postings actually.
>
> Bob Miller

... and this may be true. However, I would be more convinced of the
value of COFDM if I could
go to a group where I could read postings from more than one advocate. You
are certainly "a voice,
crying out in the wilderness," but you have yet to show yourself to be the
Messiah of DTV/HDTV.

Where are your disciples??
March 21, 2005 11:39:40 PM

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

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:25:06 -0800, "Sal M. Onella"
<salmonella@food.poisoning.org> wrote:

>
> Where are your disciples??


Disciples ? How's the view back there ? Nose a little brown ?


Grow a brain you talking monkey.


Hey Bob, you should thank god these bozos aren't your disciples.
March 22, 2005 2:50:12 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"John S. Dyson" <toor@iquest.net> wrote in message
news:D 1i8eo$sl8$1@news.iquest.net...
> In article <KZ0%d.126$H06.16@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> writes:
>> Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
>> impulse noise.
>>
> Remember: if 8VSB (being more robust than COFDM with impulse noise) is
> having trouble, COFDM would be totally useless. OF course, for OTA
> HDTV reception in the US, COFDM is indeed totally useless :-).

If you don't have such a system in the US how can you state that it's useless?
You could say that something 'would be totally useless' but you can say
something 'is indeed totally useless' if it doesn't actually exist.
Anonymous
March 22, 2005 3:09:24 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

In article <U4J%d.5898888$f47.1079337@news.easynews.com>,
"Aztech" <az@tech.com> writes:
> "John S. Dyson" <toor@iquest.net> wrote in message
> news:D 1i8eo$sl8$1@news.iquest.net...
>> In article <KZ0%d.126$H06.16@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
>> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> writes:
>>> Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems with
>>> impulse noise.
>>>
>> Remember: if 8VSB (being more robust than COFDM with impulse noise) is
>> having trouble, COFDM would be totally useless. OF course, for OTA
>> HDTV reception in the US, COFDM is indeed totally useless :-).
>
> If you don't have such a system in the US how can you state that it's useless?
>
Since we don't have a COFDM HDTV OTA distribution system in the US, then
it is useless here for consumers who wish to watch OTA HDTV in the US :-).

>
> You could say that something 'would be totally useless' but you can say
> something 'is indeed totally useless' if it doesn't actually exist.
>
But, COFDM for consumer OTA HDTV is indeed totally useless in the US.
(No implication that it needs to be useless :-)).

On the other hand (and another mindset), where 8VSB can be challenged by
impulse noise, COFDM signals are much more easily damaged (made useless)
by impulse noise.

Both of my claims are actually accurate... The sense of my claims
were NOT made to insult non-US people who are using COFDM (or their
regulation agencies), but mostly focused towards our resident windmill
warrior.

John
Anonymous
March 22, 2005 8:26:31 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Sal M. Onella wrote:
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:8rn%d.17022$cN6.13760@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> < snip >
>
>>I think I provide a lot of links to prove my postings actually.
>>
>>Bob Miller
>
>
> ... and this may be true. However, I would be more convinced of the
> value of COFDM if I could
> go to a group where I could read postings from more than one advocate. You
> are certainly "a voice,
> crying out in the wilderness," but you have yet to show yourself to be the
> Messiah of DTV/HDTV.
>
> Where are your disciples??
>
>

If you want to go to a group where there is more than one advocate of
changing our modulation try OpenDTV on http://www.freelists.org/

Here is a post today but not from a disciple. I am not preaching there.

This was posted on OpenDTV forum today by Stephen Long of NIMA. He was
instrumental in our (Viacel Corp.) demonstration to the DoD, FEMA and
the NYC Fire Dept. of the Homeland Security aspects of the COFDM
modulation. The demo took place in lower Manhattan in November of 2001
just after 9/11. He has had a major promotion since this title list
below so I don't know his present status.

Key statements from below.

"If 8VSB is here for good, and the decision will not be changed, then
the real question becomes how long before the broadcasters just stop sending
signals OTA and just pass their content directly to DirecTV, Dish, and
the local cable companies."

and..

"All I can say when it all implodes is, we told you so."

"Now that M. Powell is leaving the FCC, does anyone believe there might
be a glimmer of a chance of revisiting the FCC decision for 8VSB? Now,
before people have a cow, and say it can never happen, I remind everyone
about 1953."

Stephen W. Long
Director, Motion Imagery Program Office (MIPO)
Chair, DoD/IC/USIGS Motion Imagery Standards Board (MISB)
Chair, NATO Air Group IV Motion Imagery TST
National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA-ATTM-MIPO)
12300 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS-P78
Reston, Virginia 20191

Stephen wrote...
"Jay, your brother must be only a mile or so from my house. My HDTV
Tivo, with built in ATSC receiver receives two channels OK, two with
drop outs
every 30 seconds or so, and several stations (WDCA DT - UPN) not at all.
WDCA does not answer E-mails, so I can't learn what power, transmitter
location, etc. I use "roof" mounted antenna inside of my attic, with a
pre-amp at the output of the antenna, sending the signal via RG-59 coax to
several spots in the house. I get great analog signal reception from my
antenna, except for low band VHF (terrible). Mid/upper VHF and UHF analog
signals, including WDCA 20, are strong, few if any ghosts, and good
picture quality.

If 8VSB is here for good, and the decision will not be changed, then the
real question becomes how long before the broadcasters just stop sending
signals OTA and just pass their content directly to DirecTV, Dish, and
the local cable companies. OTA could have had some promise for mobile DTV.
Since we are stuck with 8VSB, there will be no mobile TV in our lifetime
(unless from the wireless phone companies). You know when the real fuss
will begin in DC? When the Redskins fans will no longer be able to
bring their portable TVs to watch the game while they sit in the
stadium. I bet
at least 1 in 10 folks do this in the stands - little TVs all over the
place. Not so with ATSC. I have not heard of ANYONE thinking about a
portable 8VSB TV set to replace the millions of small LCD TVs sold today
for portable/mobile applications. So consumers should just throw several
hundred million dollars of those investments in the trash can? So much
for a 21st century OTA enterprise for our country. All I can say when
it all
implodes is, we told you so."

And last January he wrote...

"Now that M. Powell is leaving the FCC, does anyone believe there might
be a glimmer of a chance of revisiting the FCC decision for 8VSB? Now,
before people have a cow, and say it can never happen, I remind everyone
about 1953. Technically, we could even propose development and subsidy
of an inexpensive device that:

1) Receives COFDM and outputs analog RF 3/4 for legacy TV sets
2) Receives COFDM and outputs digital 8VSB for legacy digital TV sets
(for the limited universe, all 10,000?)

I suggested such a course several years ago.

If the nation does not move to a robust modulation system that supports
MOBILE applications, then FOA TV will be dead in the not too distant
future. The future is clear - just plug the satellite uplinks and the
cable head ends into the stations, and turn off the transmitters. I am
beginning to believe that has been the goal all along, time will tell.
Mobile applications are the only reason I can still see for local
transmitters.

Meanwhile, HDTV via my HDTV Tivo and DirecTV works just fine TYVM. I
can not watch the ball games in HDTV via 8VSB - the pictures break up
every minute or so (very random), with loss of audio the largest
problem. So I have to watch the games in SD via satellite.

8VSB still does not work in my house, never has, never will."

Bob Miller
March 22, 2005 7:26:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:

>Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems
>with impulse noise.

You idiot, impulse noise is a lowband VHF problem that affects all
broadcasts. It makes annoying sparklies on NTSC and causes dropouts on
digital TV.

Channels 2-6 are not good choices for DTV, period. 8VSB or COUGHDUMB.
March 22, 2005 9:32:38 PM

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

<jesus@heaven.net> wrote in message
news:q68v31lk43bd02o2d1041eikkdho3ugllr@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:25:06 -0800, "Sal M. Onella"
> <salmonella@food.poisoning.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Where are your disciples??
>
>
> Disciples ? How's the view back there ? Nose a little brown ?
>
>
> Grow a brain you talking monkey.
>
>
> Hey Bob, you should thank god these bozos aren't your disciples.
>


How sick, stupid and childish can bob get?!
March 23, 2005 3:27:33 AM

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

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:32:38 -0500, "David" <davey@whom-body.net>
wrote:

><jesus@heaven.net> wrote in message
>news:q68v31lk43bd02o2d1041eikkdho3ugllr@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:25:06 -0800, "Sal M. Onella"
>> <salmonella@food.poisoning.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Where are your disciples??
>>
>>
>> Disciples ? How's the view back there ? Nose a little brown ?
>>
>>
>> Grow a brain you talking monkey.
>>
>>
>> Hey Bob, you should thank god these bozos aren't your disciples.
>>
>
>
>How sick, stupid and childish can bob get?!
>

Just how stupid ARE you ?
Anonymous
March 23, 2005 10:00:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

none wrote:
> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Who wouda thought??? And on CBS VHF at that. 8-VSB has problems
>>with impulse noise.
>
>
> You idiot, impulse noise is a lowband VHF problem that affects all
> broadcasts. It makes annoying sparklies on NTSC and causes dropouts on
> digital TV.
>
> Channels 2-6 are not good choices for DTV, period. 8VSB or COUGHDUMB.

At least bob is consistant. No matter which of the many, many problems
that can plague OTA reception is causing the problem, there is really
only the One True Problem -- ATSC 8-VSB.

--
Matthew

I'm a contractor. If you want an opinion, I'll sell you one.
Which one do you want?
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 9:07:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Drewdawg (nope@not.here) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> Pity MAR-DT is on 52, they have to return to VHF2 or find a vacant UHF below
> 51.

They voted to "not select" in the first round of "final DTV channel
selection". I suspect they will hope for an upper VHF to be available.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/RhymesWithOrange/ReadyForA...
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 7:51:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bruce Tomlin wrote:
> In article <gL1%d.14848$cN6.3613@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>>There are few manufacturers of 8-VSB receivers. There are no retailers
>>of 8-VSB receivers that enthusiastically sell 8-VSB receivers. There
>>just is no excitement in the 8-VSB OTA business at all.
>
>
> That's because they'd rather sell satellite receivers and get a cut on
> the subscription signup fees. It's hard to find a DTV STB in a big box
> store that isn't just an extra feature of a satellite receiver, though I
> did notice an ATSC tuner built into one DVD/DVR combo unit for $400,
> which is what a plain ATSC STB cost two years ago.
>
> The American public doesn't understand OTA DTV anyhow regardless of
> modulation, and the big box stores aren't motivated to help them
> understand it because they make more money by selling satellite
> subscriptions. And in a few years, they'll make even more money when an
> unsuspecting public (or rather the small percentage who don't already
> get cable or sat) finds out that the half dozen TV sets in their house
> are worthless and they need to buy new ones.
>
> QAM makes the 8VSB vs COFDM argument pointless. And not because of the
> modulation, but because of the transmission medium.

COFDM is QAM or QPSK, mostly QAM so what are you saying?

Bob Miller
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 12:57:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:

>>
>> QAM makes the 8VSB vs COFDM argument pointless. And not because of
>> the modulation, but because of the transmission medium.
>
>
> COFDM is QAM or QPSK, mostly QAM so what are you saying?
>
> Bob Miller

What he is saying is that the "QAM" transmission medium
is not air, but foam filled plastic, with wires in and around it.
Cable.

Doug McDonald
!