Dumbed down consumer electronics: Adding DTV channels
in [Design]
|
From: Martin Brown on 4 Aug 2010 03:50 On 03/08/2010 23:46, Grant wrote: > On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 13:11:33 -0700, Joerg<invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> Martin Brown wrote: >>> On 03/08/2010 16:35, Joerg wrote: >>>> Martin Brown wrote: >>> >>>>> Panasonic kit sold in Europe will allow any amount of manual DTV tuning >>>>> to add individual channels if you have the patience to do it. Autoscan >>>>> tends to be more convenient when new channels pop (briefly) into >>>>> existence. The most annoying thing is that several designs reset the >>>>> favourites lists whenever you make a change using autoscan. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Out here it's only he dumbed-down variety, only auto-scan. So the drill >>>> is to wait for a weather pattern that will show most DTV signals, peek >>>> outside and listen to the scannner to make sure no Fedex freight >>>> aircraft is on the approach, hit auto-scan and hope that as many DTV >>>> channels as possible stick. Then delete the flakey ones. >>> >>> I can see that being really annoying. We have trouble whenever there is >>> heavy rain - a bunch of marginally OK stations at the top end of the >>> band deteriorate to the annoying pixelate and freeze mode with the odd >>> blast of ultrasonic clicks and chirps out of the speakers (unwatchable). >>> >>> I wonder if there is a market for a combined rain detector and variable >>> gain low noise block for terrestrial DTV aerials? >>> >> >> In the US it wouldn't help. There is plenty of signal, it's just that >> the contents become garbled and unintelligible. > > And that was before transmission issues ;) > > Grant. Which are those? In the UK the main terrestrial commercial channel decided that "broadcasting" was not one of its *core* activities and so outsourced it to some cheap and nasty cowboy outfit. They got their comeuppance during the world cup when their HD channel ran an advertising break across Englands opening goal. A genuine own goal. <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup-2010/7823692/Viewers-miss-opening-England-goal-after-ITV-shows-commercial.html> I think Joergs best bet if he has plenty of signal but suffers multipath from passing aircraft is to use a phased array of vertical smaller aerials with the nulls arranged to hit the problem area of sky. Even a pair combined on equal length coax might provide enough vertical selectivity if placed at the right separation... If I were him I would investigate a cheap satellite dish to see what is actually available. Regards, Martin Brown
From: Joerg on 4 Aug 2010 10:19 Martin Brown wrote: > On 03/08/2010 23:46, Grant wrote: >> On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 13:11:33 -0700, Joerg<invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> Martin Brown wrote: >>>> On 03/08/2010 16:35, Joerg wrote: >>>>> Martin Brown wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Panasonic kit sold in Europe will allow any amount of manual DTV >>>>>> tuning >>>>>> to add individual channels if you have the patience to do it. >>>>>> Autoscan >>>>>> tends to be more convenient when new channels pop (briefly) into >>>>>> existence. The most annoying thing is that several designs reset the >>>>>> favourites lists whenever you make a change using autoscan. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Out here it's only he dumbed-down variety, only auto-scan. So the >>>>> drill >>>>> is to wait for a weather pattern that will show most DTV signals, peek >>>>> outside and listen to the scannner to make sure no Fedex freight >>>>> aircraft is on the approach, hit auto-scan and hope that as many DTV >>>>> channels as possible stick. Then delete the flakey ones. >>>> >>>> I can see that being really annoying. We have trouble whenever there is >>>> heavy rain - a bunch of marginally OK stations at the top end of the >>>> band deteriorate to the annoying pixelate and freeze mode with the odd >>>> blast of ultrasonic clicks and chirps out of the speakers >>>> (unwatchable). >>>> >>>> I wonder if there is a market for a combined rain detector and variable >>>> gain low noise block for terrestrial DTV aerials? >>>> >>> >>> In the US it wouldn't help. There is plenty of signal, it's just that >>> the contents become garbled and unintelligible. >> >> And that was before transmission issues ;) >> >> Grant. > > Which are those? In the UK the main terrestrial commercial channel > decided that "broadcasting" was not one of its *core* activities and so > outsourced it to some cheap and nasty cowboy outfit. They got their > comeuppance during the world cup when their HD channel ran an > advertising break across Englands opening goal. A genuine own goal. > > <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup-2010/7823692/Viewers-miss-opening-England-goal-after-ITV-shows-commercial.html> > > > I think Joergs best bet if he has plenty of signal but suffers multipath > from passing aircraft is to use a phased array of vertical smaller > aerials with the nulls arranged to hit the problem area of sky. > > Even a pair combined on equal length coax might provide enough vertical > selectivity if placed at the right separation... > > If I were him I would investigate a cheap satellite dish to see what is > actually available. > The satellite dish and a bowtie I am going to try out some day but anything more is beyond what TV is worth for us. Then we'll just add the two of us to the ad revenue loss problems they already have. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: Joel Koltner on 4 Aug 2010 12:33 "Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in message news:ohah565ujl8br1mqv2a6eva44ok2lgnrj9(a)4ax.com... > KBAQ streams... Is there any performance differences between Media > Player and MP3? In theory Windows Media Audio sounds a skosh better at the same bit rate as MP3... but they might be using a different bit rate on their WMA streams than their MP3 streams, so you end up having to try each and judge for yourself. It's also a very small difference and pretty much completely irrelevant for bit rates at or above 128kbps, though. (Just how much is hotly debated, although at very low bit rates such as 32kbps WMA is a clear winner -- MP3 wasn't really designed to go that low whereas WMA was.) ---Joel
From: Joel Koltner on 4 Aug 2010 12:52 Hi Joerg, "Joerg" <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in message news:8brqc8Fo4eU1(a)mid.individual.net... > Anyhow, I don't think mankind really needs the constant din of radio at > all times. Sure, they don't need it, but they're perfectly willing to pay for it. Kids on long car trips today often have their choice of movies (DVD player or laptop), audio (iPhone or similar), or games (PSP or similar). That's entertainment, all right! ;-) Oh, and I suppose there are those things called "books" as well, although today some people will be reading them on a Kindle or laptop as an eBook. :-) > Audio isn't very demanding in bandwidth. Compared to video, no, but it's kinda like leaving a dripping facuet going... a 128kbps stream listened to for, say, 5 hours a day for 20 days a month is 5.76GB of data per month, which is *well* beyond what most cell phone data plans figure you "should" be using -- even on "unlimited" plans. (I have an "unlimited" Sprint plan but the unofficial policy is that once you go past ~1GB per month, you're on Sprint's radar and they may chose to simply no longer offer to provide data services to you except at the "casual" rate of... one penny per *kilobyte!*.) > That's true, one can make money with a technology that's only lasting a > relatively short time. It'd be interestingly to see the volume over time for, e.g., 56kbps modems. I would expect a pretty fast ramp up, with a shallower decline, and of course they're still available today -- but probably selling 1/100th as many annually as at the peak? Effectively that particular "standard" in modems probably lasted for <10 years (ignoring the niche market that's still around today)? Interestingly, things like credit card machines and ATMs often purposely use 2400bps even today, as the long (many seconds) training sequence period that 56kbps modems use requires more time than just squirting the hundreds of bytes CC/ATM transactions require through a 2400bps modem (that doesn't a long training sequence). ---Joel
From: Joel Koltner on 4 Aug 2010 12:55
"Glenn Gundlach" <stratus46(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3387696e-6b4d-49df-bb18-0bebf5bb78d3(a)f33g2000yqe.googlegroups.com... On Aug 2, 4:38 pm, "Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgro...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >It would help a whole lot if HD radio wasn't $125 fir a clock radio. Best Buy was carrying the little portable (Walkman-style) Insignia NS-HD01's for $40... A lot of these JVC units have been showing up lately: http://www.amazon.com/JVC-KTHDPK1-KT-HDPK1-Transportable-Receiver/dp/B0019SFBKQ - - also $40... ---Joel |