Here's my take on this issue. There are not enough HD users who are affected by the applications where you would benefit from 5th generation ATSC tuners. Where 5th generation tuners would be helpful, which is typically downtown metropolitan cites and communities where your HD broadcasts come from more than one tower, many users have figured out a work-around. Like multiple antennas with antenna-joiners, or using master antennas in apartment buildings or just subscribing to broadcast only cable service, with very low monthly costs.

Keeping in mind that many users already subscribe to cable or satellite service and 80% of the users who want OTA ATSC are served very well by their existing built-in satellite ATSC tuner or integrated HDTV or the existing available ATSC STBs that are already available in the marketplace. You just can't get a major company to engineer and manufacture a STB for the low volume of sales that this limited market will buy.

So as the technology matures and new advances become available we see them being built-in to the latest HDTV's instead of as stand-alone devices.

-Robert

Advanced Digital Technology Dealer

Originally posted by trbarry
The lack of adequate indoor or multi-direction reception will probably be used in Congress to stall the analog turn-off.


Hope this isn't too far OT, but -- speaking of multi-directional reception -- I had ran across a mention in Doug Lung's RF report that there is now one antenna available which utilizes CEA-909(smart antenna) antenna interface which allows the receiver to automatically control adjustment of even a non-rotorized antenna to provide good reception for any given station in any given direction ....

Having not seen any discussion here of such a beast, having read about CEA-909 spec a few years ago and ; #1).being curious whether or not anyone would actually attempt to use it, #2) --- and #3). also recalling your particular dislike for rotors/jointennas and the like<g> :

I did a little looking around and I think I found the antenna Doug Lung was referring to at below link -- It's the DX Antenna DTA-5000 "Smartenna" (DX antenna is subsidary of Funai, BTW) :

http://www.dxantenna.co.jp/trading/products/active_antenna/dta5000.html

Googling for "DTA-5000" will also turn up many results of U.S. Vendors(most of whom I've never heard of) which have this antenna in Stock under various brand names(sylvania/samsung/etc), with going price of ~$95~110 ... Unfortunetly, the spec sheets from all these vendors may be a bit confusing, as they all seem to include the following spec:

"TOTAL DIGITAL PACKAGE(TUNER AND ANTENNA), HDTV COMPATIBLE"

I'm fairly sure when they say "tuner", they are actually talking about the antenna control box as specified on the manufactuers(dx antenna) website.

Sylvania also mentions the DTA-5000 in it's info for Funai/Sylvania's 6900DTE ATSC receiver at below link , which according to the PDF file(accessable from "product specs" link at bottom of page), supports CEA-909 interface :

http://www.sylvaniaconsumerelectronics.com/products/stb/stb.html

Funai also has a press release from 11/04 with more details about the STB+Smartenna ....

http://www.funaiworld.com/company/press/2004/041111.html

Looking at the pic of the DTA-5000, I must say I am a bit dubious ... However, on the other hand - my understanding is that CEA-909 is not snake oil, so I have to wonder how well this thing would work, and if anyone has tried it with a receiver that supports CEA-909 "Smart Antenna" interface ....

Originally posted by trbarry
Hi Foxeng.

Does that mean you disagree with what I said or just a joke about how it is sometimes not very popular here to say anything questioning some of the ATSC transition decisions. ;)

- Tom

It was a joke, but Sinclair has used the fact that until the FCC creates receiver specs, the transition will not have a happy end with OTA. (they used that in conjunction of why they wanted COFDM, reduced effects from multipath) I agree that if the OTA receivers are not as good as they can be, there will be many unhappy OTA viewers if the receiver manufacturers don't get this fixed. Putting all of their time into cable boxes, like they are now, isn't really helping the OTA situation. I agree with you on that one 100%.

The 5th gen receivers should go a long way (I have already ordered the new 5th gen Fusion HDTV 5 PCI Card and just waiting on it to be released next week). From what people who have seen the 5th gen test receivers in action say, they leave the current crop of receivers in the dust. Not because they are that much better, but multipath is the big killer of signal and not lack of signal. If you read very carefully between the lines, most peoples problem isn't lack of signal, but too many signals being received out of phase and killing the signal to noise ratio (perfectly good signal level then the signal goes away for a second and then comes back, the meters are not really signal level meters but really a combination of signal strength when the signal to noise ratio is within tolerances, signal to noise goes out to lunch, usuable signal drops to zero, signal to noise comes back, usuable signal comes back up) that the receiver needs to have to successfully decode. 5th gen should correct a large part of that.

Originally posted by DTV TiVo Dealer
Here's my take on this issue. There are not enough HD users who are affected by the applications where you would benefit from 5th generation ATSC tuners. Where 5th generation tuners would be helpful, which is typically downtown metropolitan cites and communities where your HD broadcasts come from more than one tower, many users have figured out a work-around. Like multiple antennas with antenna-joiners, or using master antennas in apartment buildings or just subscribing to broadcast only cable service, with very low monthly costs.

Keeping in mind that many users already subscribe to cable or satellite service and 80% of the users who want OTA ATSC are served very well by their existing built-in satellite ATSC tuner or integrated HDTV or the existing available ATSC STBs that are already available in the marketplace. You just can't get a major company to engineer and manufacture a STB for the low volume of sales that this limited market will buy.

So as the technology matures and new advances become available we see them being built-in to the latest HDTV's instead of as stand-alone devices.

-Robert

Advanced Digital Technology Dealer

I respectfully disagree.

I don't live in a metro area like NYC or Chicago, but even out here in the sticks of North Carolina, I do see the effect of multipath and there are many times when a 5th generation receiver would be helpful. What you cite is the extreme, but for those of us not in the concrete canyons, momentary drop outs caused by multipath such as wind blowing trees, planes flying overhead, 18 wheelers driving by can be more nerve racking than not having the signal at all. It is there for a long time, then gone for a second or two and then back for a while and then gone again for a second or two and then back again......

In my area over 60% of the HD audience gets their network HD OTA, because only 2 of the 8 cablecos offer the local digital signals. The Sinclair ABC digital isn't on any of the cable systems here so for those homes who want Desperate Housewives and Lost in HD, OTA is their only choice and the momentary multipath drop outs drive people crazy because they always seem to happen at the good part. I have personally experienced this myself (the wife just hates when it happens) and I have a CM 4228 on a rotator on my roof (being in the business I do know where all of the towers are, the antenna heights/patterns and power levels) with nothing but trees between me and the transmitter sites. 5th gen receivers will solve that.

Multipath using receivers benefit everyone everywhere and it is a big deal. Just read the different threads here on AVS if you need further proof.

I completely understand you position as an equipment dealer. You have 4th generation stock and you don't want to be stuck with stock you can't sell. I am afraid I don't have an answer for you on that. I know many people who are waiting to buy until the 5th gen receivers are out and they appear to be savvy enough to ask the right questions to be sure they aren't stuck with a 4th gen receiver. I do truly feel for you on that on.

Hope this isn't too far OT, but -- speaking of multi-directional reception -- I had ran across a mention in Doug Lung's RF report that there is now one antenna available which utilizes CEA-909(smart antenna) antenna interface which allows the receiver to automatically control adjustment of even a non-rotorized antenna to provide good reception for any given station in any given direction ....

Having not seen any discussion here of such a beast, having read about CEA-909 spec a few years ago and ; #1).being curious whether or not anyone would actually attempt to use it, #2) --- and #3). also recalling your particular dislike for rotors/jointennas and the like<g> :

Nitewatchman -

You are correct about my total hatred of rotors, and all directional antennas. But the proposals of mine you may remember are a slightly different solution that AFAIK does not even exist. And since I am not an EE or qualified to design antennas it may not even be possible.

I don't even want the smarts in the antenna. That would just make it a smart rotor, maybe with no moving parts. It would be a marginal improvement but not really get the job done.

The problem here is that it would still point in only one direction at a time. These days it is not reasonable to assume a household will need to simultaneously tune only one channel. For instance PVR's increasingly have multiple tuners, and people also have computers and VCR's recording different things while multiple people may be watching multiple sets in different rooms.

So what I'm looking for is an antenna that sends multiple signals from multiple directions down something like cat6 cable. Then multiple smart tuners in each receiver would figure out which combinations of signals gave the best total signal for a desired channel. This sort of system could be shared in a more realistic way if it was even practical to make.

I don't think any of the items you posted have those properties. Maybe none ever will.

- Tom

Noticed an article about these a while back, too, and suggested here that it might be effective to link their all-electronic tuning (phased array, I believe) with the multipath circuits of 5th-gen receivers. The engineered interaction might minimize multipath (phased-array tuning), while making the best use of multipath that can't be rejected. -- John

Originally posted by trbarry
I don't think any of the items you posted have those properties. Maybe none ever will. But the proposals of mine you may remember are a slightly different solution that AFAIK does not even exist.


I think you are reading too much into my post. Yes, I do recall some of your thoughts/proposals. I also don't know if what you specifically sugguest could be done, but I think if there were a perceived large market for various OTA reception solutions, we would probably see many more innovative products than seems to be the case, currently.

I did not mean to suggest a solution utilizing CEA-909 interface+a antenna such as DTA-5000 would meet your approval as a overall solution for those who want to hook up to multiple sets and have good multi-directional reception on all sets, from all stations in multiple directions at the same time.

My only intent was to provide info which I thought some might be interested in, as I had not seen any info posted on it ... Perhaps I should not have brought up your dislike for rotors/etc, although I did so as I thought you might appreciate this particular, automatic multi-directional reception solution.

Originally posted by trbarry

It would be a marginal improvement but not really get the job done.


I have my doubts whether or not this particular solution would be an improvement in many cases, however -- as compared to a directional antenna setup with manual rotor control -- If I were to make a wild assumption that the thing perhaps actually does work in many cases in situations where multipath+stations in multiple directions is a problem : I suppose the level of "improvement" one might perceive or experience depends upon your prespective.

For example, If you think having to manually adjust the rotor controller in order to receive stations in multiple directions is no big deal as compared to having the receiver/antenna do it for you automatically, then I suppose you could think of it as "marginal". On the other hand, if you despise rotors, and are tired of manually having to adjust the rotor controller every time you tune to a different station, you might find a system that automatically adjusts the antenna for best reception from any given station quite an improvement, even if you do have to have a seperate antenna for each Set/recording device/etc, if you want to be able to watch different stations from different directions on different sets at all times ....


Originally posted by trbarry

I don't even want the smarts in the antenna.


I'm not sure if much(if any) of the smarts are in the antenna in this case. I was never able to dig up the details on CEA-909 interface, however I believe it works much as John mentions.

As for the antenna itself with the DTA-5000, Hard to say, as I have no idea what is inside the cover but it seems to me that it looks like we are looking at a relatively simple antenna design, which in any case would not seem to look like a antenna that would provide hi-performance when it comes to directivity, signal gain, or rejection of multipath.

Again, hard to say, but it looks like there are a couple of dipoles, perhaps each(or both) which can be selected for use, and perhaps with the capablility to move the antenna elements(dipoles) around a bit in order to utilize the best possible directivity(and/or rejection of multipath) - depending upon what the receiver/control box "tells it to do" in any of 16 different directions ....

Hopefully, we'll soon hear some reports from folks who have actually tried it ....

I bought an LG LST-4200A from Value Electronics. This fourth gen tuner is better than any tuner I have had experience with (Samsung 165, ATI HDTV Wonder, JVC 61" DILA with built in tuner). It's sensitivity, features and speed are above all others. I am very happy with it. I'd be happier if the local stations paid serious attention to their PSIP data, and if WETA would get a clue and watch some of their stuff on a large HDTV (macroblocking would drive them wild).

But I hear that the fifth gen tuner is four times as sensitive, amongst other features. My reception in Northern VA of Baltimore stations is spotty at best. If a fifth gen would give me the Baltimore stations, I'd buy it. PBS out of Baltimore/Annapolis is way better in content and picture quality over WETA.

Or would a fifth gen NOT help bring in more distant stations?

I have so much respect for you Folks great discussion.

Rich Peterson
Well, “I think the whole 5th gen chipset issue is way overblown. The current generation of receivers works very well for the vast majority of viewers.”

DTV tivo Dealer Robert says
“Keeping in mind that many users already subscribe to cable or satellite service and 80% of the users who want OTA ATSC are served very well by their existing built-in satellite ATSC tuner or integrated HDTV or the existing available ATSC STBs that are already available in the marketplace. You just can't get a major company to engineer and manufacture a STB for the low volume of sales that this limited market will buy.”

This is why Rich probably feels this issue is over blown. It just doesn’t effect enough of us OTA users. This is so true.
I am just so disappointed in content providers Cable will not send all locals in High def. They cherry pick which ones they will send at this time No local UPN or WB because of bandwidth restraints. Cable wants Fox but Emmis owns local station and want USDTV and boycotts the signal to cable. Direct TV is into HD lite. I think it’s just a matter of time before cable get on a HD lite kick to conserve bandwidth. OTA maybe the last place to get full bandwidth HDTV. I am tired of being jerked around. When I bought my HD plasma TV I never dreamed I would have to battle for HDTV full content. I was wrong. I still want a 5th gen set top box I can dream can’t I?

Fxend said
“It was a joke, but Sinclair has used the fact that until the FCC creates receiver specs, the transition will not have a happy end with OTA. (they used that in conjunction of why they wanted COFDM, reduced effects from multipath) I agree that if the OTA receivers are not as good as they can be, there will be many unhappy OTA viewers if the receiver manufacturers don't get this fixed. Putting all of their time into cable boxes, like they are now, isn't really helping the OTA situation. I agree with you on that one 100%.”


History tells us Sinclair had an agenda they wanted COFDM. They knew this multi-pathing reception issue were true. Sinclair also had self serving interset in delaying the DTV roll out.

Those that choose to angnor history are certain to relive it. Here we are going around and around. Did we learn anything?
Later.

In our demo room/HD lab we have ATSC and DIRECTV feeds and we switch between OTA and satellite frequently to determine if we can see any pq difference.

I don't know if I should start this sentence with the word unfortunately of fortunately, but either way you look at it the actual image quality is so very negligible that on most stations no one can see any difference on on the occasional broadcast where you can see a difference it is so little that I doubt you would notice or care if you did.

Posters who talk about DIRECTV HD lite are putting the wrong ideas in the readers minds. DIRECTV's compressed video is excellent HD image quality to all who have the pleasure to have it.

-Robert

VE Advanced Digital Technology Dealer

Originally posted by jdallaire
History tells us Sinclair had an agenda they wanted COFDM. They knew this multi-pathing reception issue were true. Sinclair also had self serving interset in delaying the DTV roll out.

Those that choose to angnor history are certain to relive it. Here we are going around and around. Did we learn anything?
Later.

Sure they had an agenda, I won't argue that point with you. With 60 some stations to convert that was a huge chunk of change and yes, just like every other OTA broadcaster, didn't want to spend it.

But if you have to spend that kind of money, in Sinclair's case well over $250 million just for transmission, not even counting studios and microwave links, they wanted the best opportunity to recoup that money, no matter what it was. At the time all of this came out, the biggest negative with 8VSB was the fact that it was so prone to multipath, that many in the industry besides Sinclair doubted receivers would stay locked with rabbit ears in fixed locations and forget about mobile operations. Wasn't going to happen. The ATSC proponents kept saying that it was a problem that could be fixed, but it would take time. Most people didn't think we had that much time. Sinclair took the tact that they did to either get COFDM the new standard or get it where you could use either 8VSB or COFDM. I can tell you that MANY in the industry secretly supported them, but wouldn't come out and say it because they feared retributions like Sinclair got.

Up until I personally saw an OTA signal of 8VSB in a home setting a couple years back, I too was skeptical if the industry could pull this off. But if what I have seen in the specs and reports of the 5th gen receivers, it should put digital TV pretty close in footing with analog TV and that is all the broadcasters are really worried about. Now what Sinclair has in mind or wants to do, you will have to ask Bob Smith of Sinclair. He is the only one there who really knows.

Hi foxgen
the biggest negative with 8VSB was the fact that it was so prone to multipath, that many in the industry besides Sinclair doubted receivers would stay locked with rabbit ears in fixed locations

Yep this says it all.

Just give us the 5th gen in a set top box please.

Up until I personally saw an OTA signal of 8VSB in a home setting a couple years back, I too was skeptical if the industry could pull this off. But if what I have seen in the specs and reports of the 5th gen receivers, it should put digital TV pretty close in footing with analog TV and that is all the broadcasters are really worried about. Now what Sinclair has in mind or wants to do, you will have to ask Bob Smith of Sinclair. He is the only one there who really knows.

AFAIK about the time of the test of that strange miracle box in Mark Shubin's NY apt about a year ago it seemed that Sinclair became convinced and has been an ATSC chearleader. I was myself for awhile until it became clear there were good 5'th gen boxes and bad 5th gen boxes, with no obvious way to buy the good ones or know really what the difference was.

It did seem that if all ATSC STB's were as good as that one test box then we could complete the transition and stop worrying about it, at least as far as multi-path is concerned. It was fairly undirectional. I have not recently heard anything from Sinclair to contradict this.

But I'd guess that like most of us here Sinclair would like to see someone start marketing the "good" 5th gen boxes and put at least one issue to bed. Zenith still refuses to do it. I had hoped things would change once the broadcast flag issue was settled but maybe there is a bit more delay yet.

- Tom

Well, according to the infamous Bob Miller, at least one Asian company is still trying to perfect a 5th chip LG OTA box. I hope they succeed. They are getting help from LG.

In my city, no stations are broadcasting at full power. They may start to do so in late June to meet some FCC July deadline. Only then can I tell if I really need a new receiver. I get most stations most of the time now, but it varies and I have to fool around with the indoor antenna position. For several months I got them all, all of the time, but seasonal climate change or something has degraded that reception capability. Also, my local Fox station is under funded and keeps messing with their signal. It's funny, the Fox technician has a European name but a Japanese accent. He sounds like the Japanese actor from the original Star Trek series. I call him up he tells me about how there are so many things that can go wrong with a digital signal. The Fox station has little monitoring equipment, so I don't think he minds my feedback on reception.

What we need is complete analog cut-off. Then there will be pressure on broadcasters and receiver makers to put their best foot forward. Now there is hardly a motive to give a damn.

IB

Originally posted by inky blacks
.....at least one Asian company is still trying to perfect a 5th chip LG OTA box. I hope they succeed. They are getting help from LG. I'm also working on this issue.

Originally posted by Ken H
I'm also working on this issue.

Great. Would you care to expand and clarify that statement?

IB

Look at this. IB
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000500042416/

The Clicker: Single Frequency Networks and OTA HDTV
Posted May 5, 2005, 4:20 PM ET by Peter Rojas
Related entries: Displays, HDTV, Home Entertainment

Every Thursday Stephen Speicher contributes The Clicker, a weekly column on television and technology:


One look at the eye-popping picture and you were hooked. The window-like effect dazzled you. You all but drooled over the rock-solid picture. There’s no snow. There’s no ghosting. The resolution is to die for. You saw the light and its name was High-Definition. There’s only one problem: you can’t seem to pull in a reliable OTA (over-the-air) signal.

Oh sure, cable is an alternative for many. However, over the years, you’ve been spoiled; you’re hooked on your PVR. And, as a connoisseur of PVRs, you understand that the cable companies offer anemic light-weight versions. You demand more. You’re not happy unless you’ve got your TiVo or your MCE (Microsoft Media Center Edition). You’ve even been known to utter the phrase, “They’ll have to rip my TiVo out of my cold dead hands.” Worse yet, you meant it – LITERALLY.

Fear not – all hope is not lost. Despite previous attempts to scale your house with antenna in hand only to be denied a clean signal, there are two reasons to still have hope: a) Single-Frequency Networks and b) 5th generation receivers.

Since the beginning of broadcasting nearly all stations have followed the same steps when it comes to transmitting their signals: a) do your best to locate the tower in the middle b) build the tower high and c) add power. The problem is that, in some regions, this method just doesn’t cut it. Natural terrain presents issues as do man-made buildings. Signals bounce around or, worse yet, fly right over your head. If State College, Pennsylvania’s WPSX is a harbinger of things to come, the answer to your woes just might be Single-Frequency networks (SFNs).

More commonly discussed within the context of Europe’s COFDM, SFNs are beginning to show signs that they might just work with America’s 8-VSB modulation scheme also.

So what are SFNs?

Simply stated, single-frequency networks are when a broadcaster uses multiple transmitters to send the same signal over the same frequency. The idea is that in certain geographically-difficult areas broadcasters will have much better success if they can fill coverage voids by utilizing smaller, usually-less-powerful satellite towers in addition to their main tower.

It sounds like a simple idea, but, as always, the devil is in the details. Unlike the repeater towers that are sometimes used in western states (AKA translators), SFNs aren’t simply receiving the signal, error-correcting, and retransmitting on a different frequency. That is an extremely inefficient use of the spectrum.

So what are they doing?

There are two main methods of creating a single-frequency network. The first is through the use of on channel boosters. On channel boosters quickly receive the OTA signal from the main tower and retransmit the signal on the same frequency. The problem is that there is no error correction. So, any errors in reception are simply retransmitted along with the slight echo caused by the booster itself. On channel boosters are also limited in their placement as they need reliable reception from the main tower.

So, when WPSX took the plunge into SFNs, it opted for option two, distributed transmission. Working with the New Jersey-based Merrill Weiss Group, WPSX has created one of nation’s most technologically-advanced broadcasting systems.

With distributed transmission, the signal is delivered to each of its transmitters via fixed channels (land-based delivery). Then through the use of GPS-based reference clocks at each tower (for both time and frequency), the signals are synced so each can emit a perfect copy of both signal and symbol data. The result is a group of towers working in harmony.

So why isn’t this done more often (at all)?

No matter how synchronized the output from the towers may be, there will always be some amount of multi-path to deal with, and until recently receiver hardware wasn’t equipped to handle anything but very minor levels of multi-path. Multi-path? Yes, multi-path is the result of your receiver seeing the same signal more than once. This can be caused by a variety of things. For instance, in a crowded downtown area the signal can bounce off buildings many times before it hits your antenna. The problem occurs when some copies of the data arrive more quickly than others. This, in effect, can jam your receiver.

The same effect occurs within SFNs. Because waves from different towers have the potential to reach your antenna at different times, a receiver’s ability to handle multi-path is paramount to its success.

With that said, LG has continued to make great strides in their ability to handle multi-path issues. Through the use of techniques such as adaptive equalizing they have even begun to turn a negative into a positive. First generation tuners had a multi-path window of -3 to +10 us. Fifth generation tuners have increased that window to -50 to +50. As always bigger numbers are way better.

So, if you’re like me, unable to receive a signal despite near-heroic efforts. Have hope; there’s technology out there that might just help one day.

But for now – we wait.

I hate articles that generalize how it seems almost impossible to pull in reliable OTA HD. That's just pure nonsense and does nothing to promote the great potential that's out there. Surely some people have problems, but many don't.

Originally posted by Ken Ross
I hate articles that generalize how it seems almost impossible to pull in reliable OTA HD. That's just pure nonsense and does nothing to promote the great potential that's out there. Surely some people have problems, but many don't.

Well I've noticed that many people in the most multipath challenged areas (NYC and LA/SoCal) tend to assume that there is nobody living or using digital TV elsewhere in world. ;) :D

PS: I've always been a bit curious about how analog OTA TV looks in these locations ...

Please remember that many people in suburban and rural areas also suffer from multipath. It is a serious problem for many people and needs to be addressed if OTA is to be taken seriously.

There's no doubt it needs to be addressed, but at the same time, I think Ken's right, it's not that difficult to get HD OTA, in a lot of areas. I have an '02 TV with a built-in tuner, I doubt it's recent technology, but I have no real problems with reception.

Originally posted by HDTVChallenged
PS: I've always been a bit curious about how analog OTA TV looks in these locations ...

I have two ABC signals broadcast from the same antenna. Channel 8 is analog and 9 is digital, so the frequencies as pretty close. On days when I get a solid lock on the digital, which sometimes means there is a big snow flurry behind the transmitting antenna reflecting the signal over a nearby mountain, the analog signal is still completely unwatchable with very pronounced ghosts. I have seen posts from people saying they get better reception from analog, but my experience is the opposite.

At the risk of getting into a my multi-path is worse than your muli-path flame war, I will say that the Sierra Nevada Mountains are larger than anything in LA or NY. The Reno visitor bureau has marketing campaign with a picture of the Sierras and a caption that reads, “Build This Las Vegas.” I understand that Santa Cruz California is another difficult location for OTA.

Do you have the same experience with UPN (digital channel 20, analog 21) and WB (digital 26, analog 27) in Reno?

Originally posted by the_bear89451
I have seen posts from people saying they get better reception from analog, but my experience is the opposite.

Exactly my point ... I've long suspected that this is the case in most areas.

Some excerpts from:

Technicalities
The Multipath To Clarity
Receiving HDTV Over The Air Takes Luck And Lots Of Patience
By Philip Yam
Scientific American, June 2005, pp104-107

Keep the antenna level. Rotate it 90 degrees. Move it a few inches to the left. Stand to the right. Hold it a bit higher... there-nope. Try again. That has been my high-definition television (HDTV) experience. I plunged into the alphabet-soup world of digital television (DTV) in 2003....

[RJ: He's in a Manhattan apartment on the 11th floor. Used Samsung SIR-T351. Lots of "No Signal" messages with bow tie antenna. Discusses 8-VSB and COFDM. His experiences similar to Sinclair's findings. Gives 8-VSB another shot with Silver Sensor. Still sporadic.]

In sticking with 8-VSB, the FCC gambled that improving technology would save the day. It is shaping up to be a smart bet, as receivers get better: New circuitry made by LG Zenith ... performance convinced Sinclair to drop its objections to 8-VSB. As of this past March, however, LG had not offered these units for sale.

www.sciam.com

[RJ: I hope he's right that improving reception technology will save the day. But when LG won't bring it to market, what is one to think? That it's too expensive to build for a reasonable end user price? Anything to do with changes for the broadcast flag? Or for E-8VSB?

I have had similar, though not quite as bad, experiences in downtown Chicago with an LG 3100A and a Silver Sensor. Antenna positioning is critical and one position does not work for all channels.

There IS a need for better ATSC receivers. And WHY are these devices rarely advertised? In most of Marc Schubin's recent weekly newsletters, there are NONE being advertised.]

Originally posted by R Johnson
New circuitry made by LG Zenith ... performance convinced Sinclair to drop its objections to 8-VSB. As of this past March, however, LG had not offered these units for sale.

In a phone conversion this afternoon, a friend of mine called LG USA and they admitted that there are no STBs with the 5th gen chip set on the drawing boards at this time. They are putting all of their effort in integrated tuners.

foxeng: Does anyone have a plausible explanation for LG's strategy? It would seem that there's much commonality of circuitry. They already had a nice STB box and remote, so a new model with the latest technology doesn't seem too difficult.

Maybe LG wants to save it as an exclusive selling point for their own displays. It could be a huge selling point to differentiate from the competition.

Paul

Well, I just had to watch AMERICAN IDOL in analog! What a drag!

Hope someone comes up with a solution soon. LG's strategy does not help the consumer at all.

IB

I admittedly have been ignoring these 5th generation chip threads for at least a year now. Is there any sound theory of operation and body of empiracal evidence to support the optimism about the effect that their incorporation into mainstream tuners would have on off-air reception in severe multipath reception situations? These threads sound like the testimonials to the secret carburator that gets 70 MPG that the oil companies won't let the public know about, or the lightbulb that never burns out that GE invented but didn't market.

I doubt that much in the way of resources will be devoted to devising the super off-air tuner because broadcast TV reception is a declining market. Twenty to thirty years ago, cable TV penetration was around 50% or so. Today, cable plus satellite is around - what - 80% maybe? People in highrise buildings in New York and LA are going to have to get cable. No company is going to invest a bundle speculating on the development of a chip that might make a product suitable to another 1% of the market. They could better invest that R&D money elsewhere.

Originally posted by R Johnson
foxeng: Does anyone have a plausible explanation for LG's strategy? It would seem that there's much commonality of circuitry. They already had a nice STB box and remote, so a new model with the latest technology doesn't seem too difficult.

My guess is they can make more profit off of an integrated set than an STB. They are licensing the 5th gen chip to other manufacturers so at this point in time, if you want a 5th gen STB, you will need to find a manufacturer other than LG that has the LG 5th gen chip in it.

You are right, there isn't that much difference in the design of the receiver but for whatever reason, LG isn't interested in making a STB with it. IMO, that will come back to bite them since there are at least 30 to 40 million sets that will need a STB when analog shuts down (the number of sets NOT connected to cable or satellite).

Originally posted by AntAltMike
I doubt that much in the way of resources will be devoted to devising the super off-air tuner because broadcast TV reception is a declining market. Twenty to thirty years ago, cable TV penetration was around 50% or so. Today, cable plus satellite is around - what - 80% maybe?

This has been the "common wisdom" for a while, but at least one PBS station in California found that shutting down their analog signal led to a significant decline in viewership - over 30% lost.

Many people with cable, and a lot with satellite, use off-air reception on secondary sets in their homes. I think the market for off-air tuners is greater than anyone thinks.

So you're telling us that most people are not fed up with the high prices for cable TV each month.

So you're telling us that cable TV is 100% reliable.

So you're telling us that cable TV picture quality is superior to 8VSB and not compressed to death.

When a viable alternative that gives an excellent picture quality sprouts up, I believe the average person will take notice.

Originally posted by RU Geekman
Do you have the same experience with UPN (digital channel 20, analog 21) and WB (digital 26, analog 27) in Reno?

I live in the Tahoe basin. So, there are several large mountains between my house and Reno. For some reason, UPN decided to build their antenna only 5.5K feet above sea level, so I have no chance of receiving their broadcasts. WB picked a much more reasonable 9.7K’. Back when I had a UHF antenna up, I got a snowy picture for 27 analog and no signal reading for 26 digital. I would guess a combination of higher frequency and lower power makes this station unwatchable for anyone without LOS. Some of the reports of people with better reception with analog could be simply the result of a digital transmission at a significantly higher frequency.

Hi daredevil23
I could agree more with what you stated. Add the personal frustration of my local cable company not suppling all my digital locals. There are bandwidth constrained and would rather sell PPV and I control then bring HDTV. I am tired of being held hostage to content providers who promise more HD. Just give me a set top box that works please LG you listening?

Originally posted by AntAltMike
I admittedly have been ignoring these 5th generation chip threads for at least a year now. Is there any sound theory of operation and body of empiracal evidence to support the optimism about the effect that their incorporation into mainstream tuners would have on off-air reception in severe multipath reception situations?The cause for optimism are the recent 5th gen tests that LG conducted at Mark Schubins NYC apartment, where a couple of notorious anti-8VSB advocates, including representatives from Sinclair Broadcasting, said the test unit performed more than well enough for DTV reception.

Blah ... the heck with multipath problems, what I need is an ATSC receiver that can cope with frequent lightning strikes. I had to give up on digital and watch the Tarentino CSI episode via analog last night ... grrr stupid severe weather :(

Originally posted by Ken H
The cause for optimism are the recent 5th gen tests that LG conducted at Mark Schubins NYC apartment, where a couple of notorious anti-8VSB advocates, including representatives from Sinclair Broadcasting, said the test unit performed more than well enough for DTV reception.

A sample size of one is inadequate to justify the optimism shown here. There would likely be some reception situations in which what are regarded as the worst DTV tuners outperformed the best, depending on the exact combination of signal quality degradation factors.

Originally posted by AntAltMike
A sample size of one is inadequate to justify the optimism shown here. There would likely be some reception situations in which what are regarded as the worst DTV tuners outperformed the best, depending on the exact combination of quality signal degradation formulas.

I agree that a sample size of one is two small. If LG would provide each member of AVS with a sample to use for 1 month we could give them plenty of data to look at. :D

I worked for LG for over 10 years but I doubt I could even get a sample STB to try out.

As I recall, there were several models of STBs tested at at Mark Schubin's apartment over the years. Under Non-Disclosure agreeements. And NO unit every was very successful. The LG prototype was tested WITHOUT a Non-Disclosure agreeement. And it worked quite well. So, while this is one data point, I think it's a very significant one.

It also worked the same at Bob Miller's place. It's a good receiver. There is no doubt about that.

IB

Originally posted by R Johnson
As I recall, there were several models of STBs tested at at Mark Schubin's apartment over the years. Under Non-Disclosure agreeements. And NO unit every was very successful. The LG prototype was tested WITHOUT a Non-Disclosure agreeement. And it worked quite well. So, while this is one data point, I think it's a very significant one.

And don't forget, Sinclair tested it in Baltimore, and came out publicly with "Sinclair pleased with DTV Receivers". So you have a group that wasn't too happy with ATSC who tested the 5th gen prototype. Sinclair's next move was to start rapidly expanding their transition to digital broadcasting. Sinclair also developed public service announcements promoting digital TV. They also made the PSAs available to any other station that wanted them.
No other receiver had this impact on Sinclair.

The Scientific American article I mentioned previously is now on-line. Here's a link:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&articleID=000DB646-4C3D-1289-837D83414B7FFE9F

The Scientific American article I mentioned previously is now on-line.[/url]

So let me get this straight: The guy buys one of the worst multipath performers on the market (the Samsung 351), then he buys the second cheapest antenna for UHF reception (only the UHF loop would have been cheaper) and then he concludes that digital television is too hard to get? Talk about stacking the deck!

It's almost as bad as getting your advice on which HDTV to buy from Newsweek's lifestyle editor.

sregener: I found it interesting that: 1) The difficulties of receiving HDTV OTA was the subject of an article in a rather large circulation magazine, and 2) That he points out that LG seems to have a solution for these problems, but has decided NOT to market a next generation STB.

Like the author, I was unaware that the Samsung 351 was unsuitable. I have an LG 3100A, and I have problems too, though my location in Chicago is much easier than his in Manhattan.

Perhaps in "Southeast MN" your ATSC OTA reception is good, but that is NOT the case everywhere.

sregener: I found it interesting that: 1) The difficulties of receiving HDTV OTA was the subject of an article in a rather large circulation magazine, and 2) That he points out that LG seems to have a solution for these problems, but has decided NOT to market a next generation STB.

Like the author, I was unaware that the Samsung 351 was unsuitable. I have an LG 3100A, and I have problems too, though my location in Chicago is much easier than his in Manhattan.

Perhaps in "Southeast MN" your ATSC OTA reception is good, but that is NOT the case everywhere.

I think it's great that HDTV is getting exposure. I just wish that exposure was more balanced and reasonable. He doesn't say that his analog reception was good - in fact, he seemed to indicate that it's pretty terrible. I maintain that anyone who complains about digital reception not working in areas where they would not put up with the analog reception their antenna would get is barking up a bad tree - the fact that someday this *might* work is a credit to the engineers who figure it out. In the meantime, I say that if you can't make sense of the analog signal, you're a fool to expect a digital tuner to make sense of the corresponding digital one.

LG dropped production of STBs, mostly because they found the margins too small and the sales too low. To their credit, they're leasing their technology to all comers, which means we'll benefit from that technology, no matter what LG does.

The Samsung SIR-T351 is an underperformer, especially for multipath. Your LG unit is much better. Still, it's no magic wand.

And my reception isn't all that great in some cases, and yet ATSC 8VSB works. Screenshots here: http://www.geocities.com/figbert/8vsb.html

http://www.freelists.org/archives/opendtv/05-2005/msg00529.html
Seems Bob Miller has acquired a "5th gen PCI card" to test, and another one is on the way. I'm assuming he has the new Air2PC card and that the Fusion5 is coming.

I too had a very difficult time "tuning" my antenna system. I live in a suburb of New York City and every time it rained, I would receive pixelation. The solution was to replace the entire system: Channel Master high gain antenna and outdoor amplifier, passive splitters and variable attentuators. The LG tuner is the only tuner that required the additional variable attenuator to bring the signal level to the optimum setting.

I maintain that anyone who complains about digital reception not working in areas where they would not put up with the analog reception their antenna would get is barking up a bad tree - the fact that someday this *might* work is a credit to the engineers who figure it out.
Perhaps you'd get a better understanding by trying an area of really bad urban multipath. Here, while NTSC UHF is tunable/watchable (with ghosting), ATSC UHF doesn't tune at all--9 blocks from the transmitter--because of multipath. It's a classic all/nothing example of digital reception. From the description of the first 'magical' 5th-gen receiver at the Schubin NYC location, that might work here, too, if some firm would market it or the equivalent. -- John

Perhaps you'd get a better understanding by trying an area of really bad urban multipath. Here, while NTSC UHF is tunable/watchable (with ghosting),

I guess it all depends on your definition of "watchable." In the long established age of cable and satellite delivery, I consider any significant ghosting to be not-watchable for anything other than "emergency" situations. In that respect, I would agree that ATSC needs to be more robust - any healthy severe thunderstorm squall line tends to render digital TV useless around here.

Yet, I have a feeling that there are certain conditions that are beyond the capabilities of any wireless system.

Well, there is lighting and thunder right now in the city where I live, and my digital OTA indoor reception is not affected at all. My 4th generation chip is not that bad, I guess.

IB

I've never seen reception problems from thunder and lightning on local (within 60 miles) stations. Strong winds have caused problems, mostly from moving the antenna around. I suspect hi-VHF digitals have more trouble with this than UHF signals.

Well, there is lighting and thunder right now in the city where I live, and my digital OTA indoor reception is not affected at all.

LOL ... I'm not talking about your average garden variety storms ... I'm talking about the kind were you should really be heading for the basement or closet - the kind where that pesky, bandwidth stealin' radar sub channel is actually useful. Too bad it just doesn't work when you need it the most. :rolleyes:

I'm talking about the kind were you should really be heading for the basement or closet

This is the point my wife says, “Honey, I can’t watch HDTV. Go see if you can re-aim the antenna.”

This is the point my wife says, “Honey, I can’t watch HDTV. Go see if you can re-aim the antenna.”

ROTFL ... Good thing I wasn't sipping my coffee :D

I've never seen reception problems from thunder and lightning on local (within 60 miles) stations. Strong winds have caused problems, mostly from moving the antenna around. I suspect hi-VHF digitals have more trouble with this than UHF signals.

I've had HDTV OTA in Tampa for 4 yrs now. Used to be a Dish 6000 w/ OTA module, now HDTiVo. I've regulary experienced weather issues during storms on OTA channels, I just don't remember which channels, or whether any one channel is worse than ohters. The big 4 all have good reception on a clear day (all are located in an antenna farm about 30 miles away except CBS, which is about the same distance, but in almost the opp. direction; I have a sep atenna for CBS). The ABC and CBS channels are UHF, the FOX and NBC are VHF (actual channels 12 and 7).

Maybe when the current D* boxes (HDTiVo and Hughes HD box) get changed out for new mpeg4 boxes, the new boxes will have better tuners. I proably should also get my antennas pointed a little better, esp for CBS.

LOL ... I'm not talking about your average garden variety storms ... I'm talking about the kind were you should really be heading for the basement or closet - the kind where that pesky, bandwidth stealin' radar sub channel is actually useful. Too bad it just doesn't work when you need it the most. :rolleyes:

We get those kinds of storms here in Minnesota - and I've watched as a 'hook' formed on radar some 75 miles away - between me and the transmitters, and there was some signal breakup.

We've also had a genuine tornado pass between me and the transmitters some 30 miles away with nary a problem. (Channels 36 and 46)

Your problems are more likely wind related.

Your problems are more likely wind related.

Anything's possible ... I guess :D

Guys:

- Just joined but have learned a lot already. Like My Samsung SIR-T351 is not so good with multipath. That is too bad for me, I thought maybe all STB are having the same problems.
- At first I didn't know what the heck was going on: 10 bars no bars, 10 bars no bars, Etc. etc. Then I heard or the term "multipath" AAAAAHHH!
- Well I have been tinkering around with a 7 foot satellite dish that I have rigged up for teresterial use, bow tie at or near focal point). It was no good at picking up Syracuse 70 road miles away, (my main goal), but it does help with my locals and multipath! I am thinking of hooking a rotor to it and moving it to the top of my barn. I am shooting thru lots of trees.
- Pardon my ignorance but who/what is LG?

Mike

LG is one of the world's largest electronics/appliances companies.

It's headqartered in Korea and is the owner of, among many other things,
the Zenith brand.

Gary

LG is one of the world's largest electronics companies. They are Korean (interesting how we never need to say "South" Korean). You have heard of them in the brand name they previously used, "Goldstar." LG stands for "Lucky Goldstar." They also own Zenith, who developed and owns ATSC patents. They wanted to distance themselves from the second or third rate quality image that the name Goldstar had developed. They make a very wide variety of products, including cell phones, TVs, microwaves, etc.

LG makes the best ATSC tuner available. They produced something referred to as the "fifth generation" ATSC tuner. I've read that it pretty much eliminates multipath problems, might allow reception in moving vehicles, is about 4 times as sensitive as previous tuners, and will allow the use of rabbit ears (yes, indoor antennas) for digital TVs for much of the population. It was so good, Sinclair, the bane of ATSC and 8VSB, the champion of COFDM, threw in the towel and said yes, it's very good.

Too bad you can't buy it. Well, OK, there seems to be an implementation of it in the DTV box sold at Wal Mart, but that STB has other shortcomings (like no DVI/HDMI). LG might put it into their TVs, and seems to be willing to license it. But there's not much of an STB market today, so companies aren't rushing this product out to market.

Meanwhile, probably the best STB you can buy is the LG 4200A. This is their "fourth generation" ATSC tuner. I have one, and yes, it's quite good.

on edit: once again, someone types faster than me! No replies when I started this post.

This past week I received my Digital Connections DVICO FusionHDTV5 with LG 5th generation chip. NICE! I don't have the horsepower on the computer to view HD with it (it is only a P3 850), but the SD streams are watchable. The big difference I saw was when it did a channel scan, it picked up stations that have good signal over my location, but because I use a CM4228 antenna, multipath prevents locks in certain directions. The Fusion5 for the first time told me there were signals there and in 80% of the cases, locked on the PSIP data. One station was 180 degrees behind my antenna and 90 miles to boot and the card told me there was a digital signal there. Movement of the antenna about 30 degreess and the PSIP data started showing up! No other receiver I have (I have a 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation receivers) has EVER told me there was a signal there unless I was pointing at the station. Same thing for a local low power station that I have to have the antenna pointed at to be able to pick it up.

I also was able to pick up off the side of the antenna several stations with PSIP data at 60 miles. WIth some movement of the antenna to increase the signal strength, but not directly on them as usual, their SD channel came in very watchable.

Just from these very rudimentary tests, I would say the LG 5th gen chip is a noticable improvement when it comes to multipath. Of course if you don't have the signal strength to start with, it is no better than any other receiver. I need need to get a P4 to run it and then try more experments.

Thanks for reminding me about the Fusion card. I'd forgotten about it. I have an ATI HDTV Wonder at home, but I might try the Fusion card for work, which is at a bit lower elevation.

You might also consider AMD chips- P4 is not the only option.

WHAT HAPPENED TO SMART ANTENNAS? WHY ONLY ONE SO FAR???

EIA/CEA-909 interface spec for Smart Antennas has been around for several years now.
It is described as being able to select up to 16 antenna directions and up to four gain settings.
Sounds like the solution to a variety of problems, especially for indoor reception.
Could find best direction among various multipath arrival angles and prevent overload.
Could solve difficult multiple arrival direction problems, such as we experience
here in San Diego with three different transmitter sites in SD plus three more in LA.
Especially if a Smart Antenna Preamp Module would accept external antennas.

=========================================================
Several of the newer ATSC tuner chips have implemented this interface, including
Broadcom's BCM3517, BCM3520 & BCM3560, STMicroelectronics STV0370,
and fol. ATI tuner chip's: THEATER 310, XILLEON 210 VC TVonChip, NXT2005 and
NXT2004 (used in Funai STB400E, Sylvania 6900DTE and Hisense/USDTV STBs).
And although HDTVWonder uses NXT2004, they seem to have begged off on CEA-909.

So where are all the HDTVs, STBs and Smart Antennas with CEA-909 interfaces???
Maybe because ATI holds the Smart Antenna patent:
http://gauss.ffii.org/PatentView/EP1484847

==========================================================
The first demo seems to have been Nxtwave's prototype NXTENNA at NAB2002:
www.tvtechnology.com/features/On-RF/f-DL-reception-06.26.02.shtml
The photo shows a cylindrical object about 1 foot in diameter and 1-1/2 feet tall.
The description states that the gain control function was not used in the prototype,
but doesn't say very much else....like what mystery lurked within....

At the 2002 IEEE Broadcast Technical Symposium, ATI (who bought Nxtwave) described
a Smart Antenna implementation consisting of four log periodic dipoles [perhaps like four
stacked Silver Sensor's???] which are combined via preamplifers to scan sixteen compass
points in about 800 msec. [Perhaps that's what was in the NXTENNA cylinder???]
www.tvtechnology.com/features/On-RF/f_dl_RF_technology.shtml

What followed was ATI's DTV5000 Smart Antenna demonstrated at NAB2003:
http://www.ebu.ch/trev_294-nab2003.html
It appears to be a small, squat, triad kind of thingy....but I can't find a source...
[Maybe three small log periodics in order to reduce the cost???]

=========================================================
So the only EIA/CEA-909 Smart Antenna that I've seen so far is the DTA-5000,
as recommended in the Sylvania 6900DTE Spec sheet.
Here is link to DX Antenna (Japanese manufacturer) pdf spec sheet:
http://www.dxantenna.co.jp/english/products/active_antenna/dta5000.html
which appears to have evolved from DX Antenna's manually phased DTA-3500:
http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=DTA3500&xzoom=zoomB#xview
http://www.dxantenna.co.jp/english/products/multi_antenna/dta3500.html
and the manually steered DTA-3000 (actually it's an RV roll-up antenna):
http://www.dxantenna.co.jp/english/products/multi_antenna/dta3000.html

The DTA-5000 pdf spec sheet says that it is amplified (25 dB Max) with 16 "segments"
and notes that the 29 x 29 inch dimensions include the VHF antenna elements.
So it appears that there might actually be some UHF antenna gain in the unit,
although the VHF section is probably just a pair of low-gain crossed dipoles.
[Lets see, 16 minus 2 (or is it 4?) VHF "segments" leaves 14 (or 12?) UHF "segments".]
[So maybe 3-element Log Periodic's in each direction???]

There is only 10 dB of gain reduction, which is probably not enough close to transmitter towers.
[Q: Separate gain controlled preamp's or single preamp with PIN diode attenuators on each input? My guess would be the latter.]

Unfortunately the spec sheet remains silent on many important points.
It doesn't specify the Noise Figure and Max Output, which are probably in the ballpark
of the other DX Antenna products (1.5 to 4.0 dB with 95 dBuV max output level).

Note that the Sylvania STB talks to an external Control Module via a modular jack interface.
The RF signal from the Smart Antenna passes through the Control Module on the way to the STB.
Apparently the downlead is used to pass control information to the Smart Antenna from the Control Module,
but is NOT used for all of the control signals.
So why didn't they design it to pass ALL of the control data via the downlead???

And if this is supposed to be an indoor antenna, good luck to the user trying to camoflage it.

I just couldn't resist the lure of playing with Adaptive Antenna Arrays (AAA)....again.

The Sylvania 6900DTE OTA STB ($200 on-sale at Amazon) and associated DX Antenna DTA-5000 (the AAA for about $100) are on order....

Maybe I can attach some CM4221's (and/or a CM4228) to the internal antenna inputs....

AND WHY NOT A DIVERSITY RECEIVER FOR DTV?

I don't expect the DTA-5000 to be a "true" adaptive antenna array, since the ATI patent disclosure describes an exhaustive search through the various combinations of antenna direction and gain until it finds a "good" solution, with a discard algorithm to eliminate co-channel and adjacent channel interference conditions.

However, it is only one approach to improving reception under difficult propagation conditions.

=========================================================
Some of the better AAA's use a "true" diversity combiner implementation wherein the phases of the multiple antenna input signals are aligned (after downconversion) and then a Maximal Ratio Combiner (MRC) is used to sum them together, with each input weighted by a measure of the "goodness" of reception for that channel.

Depending on the algorithm and the number of antennas/receivers channels,
these "true" AAA's are capable of steering a beam towards the desired direction and/or a null towards undesirable interference.

Inexpensive "true" diversity receivers using Maximal Ratio Combiners (MRC) are commonly available for wireless microphones.

Dual and Quad-diversity mobile TV receivers for analog NTSC are also readily available,
(check Crutchfield's website for "TV Tuners" for cars ).
But since I haven't seen any descriptions with "true" or "MRC" in them,
they are probably using switching diversity techniques that would not yield any gain from the multiple antennas.

Multiple Antenna Diversity Receivers (aka "AAA") are also available to dramatically improve DVB-T mobile reception in Europe:
http://www.teamcast.com/en/maj-e/c2a2i7260/teamcast/our-products/antenna-diversity-dvb-t-receiver-uhf-input.htm
http://www.teamcast.com/data/files/BIBFILE_FILE_J5RoETZ.pdf
http://download.harris.com/app/public_download.asp?fid=508
http://www.ebu.ch/trev_298-levy.pdf
http://www.dibcom.net/us/document/Aviero.pdf
www.electronicstalk.com/news/mro/mro104.html

The Sylvania 6900DTE OTA STB ($200 on-sale at Amazon) and associated DX Antenna DTA-5000 (the AAA for about $100) are on order....


Let us know how it goes ....

Yes please let us know how this works out.

I'm interested in your results with the DTA-5000 as well. I have a friend who is trying one out as well and will post on that. I'm in the DC market, and even using this model indoors without a lot of effort, my friend was picking up Baltimore stations that were never available with other indoor antennas. This looks like it could have some potential, especially when I need to replace my UHF only outdoor antenna to pick up VHF channels once the transition completes.

Inside the DTA-5000 Smart Antenna from DX Antenna of Japan:

Although earlier smart antenna demos at NAB were described as using four log periodic
antennas, what I found inside looks like 2-element Yagis (i.e. director and reflector)
that can be configured to point North, South, East and West. By combining the
variable gain preamp outputs from adjacent antennas, sixteen compass points can be
tested to see which one provides the "best" reception. Since it's a compact
antenna structure, despite the LRC "traps" and inductors trying to make it
electrically "bigger", I would guess that the UHF gain is probably in the same
range (3 dBd) as the Zenith Silver Shadow and Terk HDTVi indoor antennas.
And the VHF gain is probably about the same as amplified rabbit ears, except
you don't have to readjust them.

I'll be posting comparisons of the DTA-5000 to a 4-Bay antenna both indoors and outdoors
in the near future, using an RF attenuator prior to the STB input to determine the amount
of "attenuation reserve" for each configuration. I'm about half-way through the sequence.
It's holding it's own against the higher gain 4-Bay and of course doesn't have to be rotated.

After being out of stock at Wal-Mart's website for a while -- and with reports coming in that Wal-Mart stores were clearing out their USDTV receivers -- the USDTV receiver is back in stock at Wal-Mart's website.

Could this be the much-anticipated 5th gen box?

Description and model number follow (including a puzzling reference to "DVD quality"):

"For under $200, enjoy digital-quality television right now, on any TV. And if you have an HDTV (High Definition) television, you'll get an amazing DVD-quality picture, too. Receives digital and HDTV signals in widescreen 16:9 or normal 4:3 format. Also provides Dolby Digital 5.1 surround sound.

"Model No. DB-2010, HD Receiver"

The Hisense/USDTV DB-2010 OTA STB is last years model, currently under $200 at Walmart.
It has Component Video but does not have a DVI/HDMI interface.

For about the same amount of money, you can order the Sylvania 6900DTE which has DVI.
And an EIA/CEA-909 Smart Antenna interface if you want to try it with the DTA-5000
(and perhaps other Smart Antennas in the future.)

Both STB's use the ATI NXT2004 ATSC decoder chip, the same as the ATI HDTV Wonder
and Philips TU1236 ATSC Tuner Module and similar to the NXT2003 (which adds QPSK receiver)
used in "most" cable-ready HDTV's on the market today (per ATI press release).

If you read the description in the zip file above, you will find that ATI claims exceptional
operation of their equalizer with 0 dB pre and post echo levels and dynamic multipath
(just like 5th Gen LG), so NXT2002/2003/2004/2005 series are also high performance
devices derived from the NxtWave prototypes. I've see a Comptek Tuner spec sheet
that claimed -8us to +45us, using the NXT2004, although test conditions were not stipulated.

The 5th Gen LG may or may not provide better performance. Unfortunately there is very
little lab or on-air comparison tests available. Also note that the software needs to
be carefully tweaked in order to extend the equalizer delay capability well beyond the
baseline guidelines found in ATSC A/74 (-10 us to +40us under "typical" conditions).

I have yet to see any on-air justification for going to -40us with +60-80 us echos,
other than that they are (finally) going to double length equalizers that
initialize with the first received signal being "centered" in the equalizer.
It is possible that the equalizer will initially lock onto a post echo, while the
primary signal is sustaining a fade. Having a -40us pre-echo capability allows
the equalizer to successfully handle the primary signal when it returns.
When this unusual condition occurs, you can sustain post-echos up to +80us.
And when the primary signal is detected first, it is centered in the equalizer,
so that -40us pre-echos and +40us post-echos can be tolerated.
[Specmanship, you gotta love the games.....]

Numerous on-air test capture programs have attempted to determine the "worst case"
performance requirements in order to derive the very detailed ATSC A/74 guidelines.
You would need to be in a particularly bad inner city location with tall buildings
reflecting signals to come even close to the above extremes. What is more
important to most users is the performance with short delay (under 1 us)
multipath, such as encounted from nearby buildings and objects (e.g. attic).

The most complete performance characterization that I've seen "recently" (Mar02 test)
was for the LINX prototype that evolved into the latest Micronas Tuner chips:
http://www.crc.ca/en/html/crc/home/research/broadcast/linx_test_report.pdf

There are several earliler lab and on-air test reports (e.g. Brazil, Australia), but since they
used 1st and 2nd generation implementations, the performance was severely lacking.

OPERATION OF SYLVANIA 6900DTE with DTA-5000 SMART ANTENNA:
First On-Air Test of the First EIA/CEA-909 interface in an STB with the First Smart Antenna.

THE GOOD NEWS:
For the past two weeks, I compared the On-Air DTV performance of the DTA-5000 Smart Antenna
to a 4-Bay Vertical Zig-Zag for two indoor and two outdoor locations chosen primarily for WAF.
The Smart Antenna consistently brought in the more difficult channels when the 4-Bay
required hunting around for the best location and still suffered varying degrees of signal dropout.
I was impressed the presumably low-gain, compact DTA-5000 outperformed a medium gain 4-Bay.

The DTA-5000 is probably best suited for short to medium ranges (under 30 miles),
and especially with difficult multipath conditions, such as indoors and perhaps in
urban concrete canyons (did not test).

See my above posts on 6/30 and 7/15, as well as below attachment for more info.

========================================================
AND THE BAD NEWS:
For the first Sylvania 6900DTE I received from Amazon.com, both the Optical and Coax
Dolby Digital Audio interfaces were not operating correctly. All of the idiot lights on my
Sony Surround Receiver indicated reception of a valid Dolby Digital 5.1 signal, however
no sound was coming out of my speakers except an occasional "click--snap" whenever
the DTV signal went though a signal dropout. The exact same thing occurred when I
tried the Optical and Coax inputs on a Creative Extigy Surround Sound system driving
Quad discrete audio outputs. Well, at least the Stereo L/R outputs work....

The replacement box came a couple days ago from Amazon.com.
Although I was very impressed by their nearly overnight response,
the second 6900DTE suffers from the exact same problem!!!!
Hmmm, "once happenstance, twice coincidence", but Amazon won't swap for a third.....

========================================================
TECH SUPPORT---WHAT TECH SUPPORT????? THEY KEEP IT WELL HIDDEN.....
I checked the Owner's Manual and called the Funai Service Center at 1-800-968-3429.
They did not recognize either the 6900DTE or the Funai STB400E model numbers and
hence could not help me in either troubleshooting or Warranty Service info.

The Owner's Manual also gave the fol. website: www.funai-corp.com
Sure enough, the Sylvania 6900DTE is on the website and I found the phone number
for the Teterboro, NJ Sales HD (201-288-2063) and left my number on the automated
answering system, since it is impossible to talk to a living, breathing, (thinking?) hu-man.

They also had a different number for Funai Corp Service (310-787-3000) in Torrance, CA.
First time through they transferred me to Funai Cust. Service, who again didn't know
about the Sylvania 6900DTE and hence didn't know anything about Warranty Service.
Second time through I asked for "warranty management" and was connected to the
automated answering service for Dan Erickson, who has yet to call me back.
Third time through I asked for Sylvania Sales and was told to contact Nelson Cepeda
at the Teterboro, NJ office (201-727-4529), who has yet to call me back.

The above website also provided a list of authorized Sylvania Repair Centers.
I called the closest and explained to him the lack of info from Torrance Service Center.
He has never heard of the 6900DTE and figured that if the Svc Ctr didn't know about it
then he wouldn't expect that they would cover any warranty repair work.

The next day I called the next closest Repair Center, who checked the on-line Sylvania
Repair Center Only website and found information concerning the warranty coverage
for the 6900DTE, as well as schematics. (JACKPOT!!!)

He also gave me the name and extension (Carlos x233) of the Sylvania Repair POC at
the Torrance facility, who recognized that they provided Warranty Service for the 6900DTE,
but had no information whether there was either a known design defect or available
firmware update.

He connected me to a "Service Center Supervisor" who indicated that the 6900DTE was
indeed listed on his computer system, but he did not know of any known Dolby
Digital hardware design/manufacturing problems or firmware updates.

He then jumped into his "trouble shooting" script and tried to convince me that I had to
disconnect the L/R Audio interface in order for the Optical & Coax DD outputs to work.
I tried it and (of course) it made no difference. I also commented that there was a very
loud "click-snap" noise every time there was a signal dropout, at which time he said that
my problem must be in the antenna. AAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!

I tried to explain to him that he wasn't helping to solve the REAL PROBLEM and that
no one would ever design a DD interface that required the L/R audio to be disconnected.
He said that I must know more about these equipments than he did...click buzzzz....

So I guess I'll watch SMALLVILLE tonight and tomorrow and probably decide to drop the
unit off at an authorized Sylvania Warranty Service Center.

The saga continues.....

=================================================
ADDENDUM (23Dec05): DOLBY DIGITAL NOW WORKS....SORTA...

Funai Tech Support claimed they found and fixed a problem in the Dolby Digital (Optical and Coax) on the Sylvania 6900DTE STB.
But when I connected it to my Sony STR-DE835 Surround Receiver, it had same symptoms as before:
idiot lights display when either PCM STEREO or DOLBY DIGITAL is detected, but no sound is output to speakers.
So back to using L/R Stereo connection...at least until SMALLVILLE goes to reruns.

Recently, I bought a new Surround Receiver (Pioneer VSX-1015TX-K with 100 MHz bandwidth component video switching)
and now the Dolby Digital (Optical/Coax) interface on the Sylvania 6900DTE STB is finally working!!!

So there must be some sort of compatibility problem between the 6900DTE and the STR-DE835.

Wow thanks Hol_lands Great informational post. To bad about the digital audio issues. Gee its always something ! :( It looks like your OTA reception issues are greater then mine. What is the ant CTR socket for? is this hocked up to the antenna along with the RF. Is this needed for the DTA5000 antenna? Thanks for all the help this combo is on my short list.

The STB originates DC Power and EIA/CEA-909 Smart Antenna Control information,
which it provides to a DPI-10 Control Box via the ANT CTL jack.
The DPI-10 goes between the coax downlead and the STB's RF input, in order
to insert DC power and antenna control information up the coax to the DTA-5000.

Got ya thanks holl_lands

TEST REPORTS FOR ZENITH/LG 5TH GEN PROTOTYPE AND LINX/MICRONAS PROTOTYPE:

Finally found the Test Reports for the Zenith/LG 5th Gen Prototype STB, the LINX (now Micronas) Prototype STB
plus a Field Test Report for the LINX Prototype STB compared to an older Harris ATSC STB (plus some Nokia COFDM STB equalizer tests):

1. “Performance of 5th Generation 8-VSB Receivers”, Laud, Aitken, Brett and Kwak,
IEEE Trans on Consumer Electronics, Vol 50, No 4, Nov 2004.

2. “An ATSC DTV Receiver with Improved Robustness to Multipath and Distributed Transmission Environments”,
Wu, Wang, Citta, et. al., IEEE Trans on Broadcasting, Vol 50, No 1, Mar 2004.

3. “Results of the Lab Evaluation of Zenith 5th Generation VSB TV Receiver”, Communications Research Center (CRC, Canada), Sep 2003.

4. “Field Tests of the LINX ATSC Prototype Receiver”, Communications Research Center (CRC, Canada), Mar 2003.

5. “Recent Performance Improvements to the ATSC Transmission System”, Su, Wang, Salehian, et. al.,
Intl Broadcasting Convention (IBC) Conference Pub 2003. See http://www.crc.ca/en/html/crc/home/research/broadcast/rtnt

6. “Results of the Lab Evaluation of LINX ATSC Prototype Receiver”, Communications Research Center (CRC, Canada), Apr 2002.

IEEE refs are available on-line (for a fee) or from a well-equipped (University) library.
The first IEEE reference had the all important link to CRC reports: http://www.broadcastpapers.com/tvtran/ibc03CRCATSCTran.pdf

======================================================
ATSC Doc A/74, “Recommended Practice: Receiver Performance Guidelines”, Jun 2004
says that a “typical” channel impulse response ranges from –10 us (pre-echo) to +40 us (post-echo).

A/74 then goes on to provide an Echo Delay performance profile for Single Static Echoes with various Desired to Echo Ratios:

from 0 to +5 us (for D/E > 1 dB) [Note: 0 dB Echo is not stipulated.]
from -5 to +10 us (for D/E > 2 dB)
from -5 to +20 us (for D/E > 3 dB)
from -10 to +40 us (for D/E > 5 dB) [The “typical” response cited above.]
from -20 to +40 us (for D/E > 7.5 dB) [Suggested Extension]
from –25 to +50 us (for D/E > 16 dB) [Suggested Extension]

So A/74 expects the “typical” impulse response to have a D/E > 5 dB and the so-called “0 dB Echo”
or equal strength signals are expected to have a fairly small delay.
And extremely long pre-echo or post-echo signals would be at a much lower level than the desired signal.
[Indeed, if the echoes are much more than a D/E of 16 dB, they could be expected to cause minimal if any degradation.]

=====================================================
So how well did the Zenith/LG 5th Gen and LINX/Micronas Prototypes perform?
The LINX prototype was better than the LG prototype for all except the last test:

a. Random Noise: LINX C/N was 0.4 to 0.8 dB lower. LG worse at Weak signal levels.

b. Burst Noise: LINX sustained slightly wider pulse widths.

c. Brazil A thru E Test Ensembles: LINX C/N was a few tenths to several dB better.

d. Strong Static Echoes: LINX C/N was much lower for ACATS #286 and
Modified Brazil C/D test profiles.

e. Single Dynamic Echoes with increasing Doppler Rates: LG was better for two test
conditions, but failed for another two. LINX was better for four test profiles
and did not fail any.

f. Susceptibility to Dynamic Echoes in Presence of Random Noise: As expected,
LINX failed the CRC #3 and #4 profiles due to 35 us Echo exceeding equalizer
capability. However, for CRC #1 and #2, the LINX could tolerate D/E
approaching 0 dB, whereas the LG could not.

g. Single Echo Affecting Pilot: LINX passed. LG could not handle without errors.

h. Single Echo Test (parens denote whether it meets A/74 Guidelines or not).
Note that while the LG prototype was significantly better than the LINX prototype,
NEITHER unit met all of the A/74 Guidelines during this last test:

D/E = 10 dB -48.5 to +49.5 us for LG (yes) and -29.5 to +38.5 us for LINX (close)
D/E = 6 dB -24.0 to +25.5 us for LG (no) and -9.0 to +28.5 us for LINX (no)
D/E = 3 dB -13.0 to +13.0 us for LG (no) and -11.0 to +12.0 us for LINX (no)
D/E = 0 dB LG: not working and LINX: no test entry

Other performance “Guidelines” from A74:

i. Sensitivity: -83 dBm [Hence Noise Figure ~ 7 to 8 dB.]
Zenith/LG was –78.4 dBm, which does not meet A/74 Guidelines.
LINX not tested.

j. Max Input: -8 dBm (for each of multiple input signals)
Zenith/LG was –2.3 dBm for single input, multiple inputs not tested.
LINX not tested.

k. DTV Co-Channel D/U (at -68 and -53 dBm): +15.5 dB
Not tested. [LG may have problems meeting this test, see results for a. above.]

l. NTSC Co-Channel D/U (at -68 and -53 dBm): +2.5 dB
Zenith/LG was +3.1 dBm, which does not meet A/74 Guidelines.
LINX was +3.9 dBm, which does not meet A/74 Guidelines.

m. NTSC Adj-Chan D/U: -40 dB (at -68dBm), -35 dB (at -53 dBm), and -26 dBm (at -28 dBm)
Zenith/LG was -41.8 (at –68 dBm) and -42.0 dBm (at -53 dBm), meets A/74.
LINX was -43.7 (at -68 dBm) and -39.9 dBm (at -53 dBm), meets A/74.

n. DTV Adj-Chan D/U: -33 dB (at -68dBm), -33 dB (at -53 dBm), and -20 dBm (at -28 dBm)
Not tested.

=======================================================
Based on these tests, if you don’t “need” extremely long pre and post-echo performance,
the LINX/Micronas prototype clearly had better overall performance.
And when Zenith/LG claims +/- 50 us equalizer capability,
they must mean when the Echo is 10 dB or more below the Desired signal.
Note they avoided mentioning performance for A/74 stipulated “typical” condition (D/E = 5 dB),
because both units failed to meet that guideline.

So it is impossible to compare manufacturer equalizer "claims" unless they also stipulate the test conditions!!!!

Of course, performance for production units may be different….

Thanks for the informative post.

So where can we buy the LINX/Micronas in a stand alone OTA receiver?

IB

SO WHAT'S IN YOUR STB???

Pop the cover off and let us know what Tuner Model number you find.
Opening the Tuner itself is highly discouraged, but you might see the part number
of the big ATSC Decoder chip on the main board or poking through the Tuner's view window....

======================================================
See attached for a summary of what I've found after many hours of web surfing various
ATSC Tuner manufacturer websites, including a summary for ATSC PCI cards and the
beginnings of a summary for ATSC OTA STBs.

======================================================
I read that LINX also licensed their technology to ST Microelectronics.
But I don't yet know what U.S. STBs use STMicroelectronics or Micronas
(they are apparently concentrating on DVB-T).
It isn't very easy to determine what's inside without actually opening it and looking.

So if you have the skills, pull out a screwdriver and give it a twist....
======================================================

It seems somewhat illogical for the manufacturers to emphasize the MAXIMUM
equalizer capability for Desired to Echo (D/E) ratios of 10 dB or more.
ATSC A/74 Receiver Guidelines consider D/E ratios above 7.5 dB as being
a "Suggested Extension" to performance, no doubt based on measured statistics
that show extremely long pre- and post-echoes to be extremely rare.

Even more illogical is to overlook the performance for the large number of known test locations
where worst case pre- and post-echoes were found to be within -10 to +40 us with D/E less than 7.5 dB.

With that in mind, here are some more Maximum Static Echo test results:

Some Static Echo test results were found in CRC's "Field Test Report of the LINX ATSC Prototype Receiver"
(ref 4 above). Unfortunately, this is the only lab test included in the Field Test Report.
The test included an updated LINX Prototype (a year later than the preceeding report),
an earlier Harris ATSC Receiver (model number unknown)
and a Nokia DVB-T (COFDM) Receiver (model number unknown).

Single Echo Test Results (parens denote whether it meets A/74 Guidelines or not),
presented in chronological order (including preceeding test results).

LINX Prototype #1 (Apr 2002):
D/E = 10 dB, -29.5 to +38.5 us (close)
D/E = 6 dB, -9.0 to +28.5 us (no)
D/E = 3 dB, -11.0 to +12.0 us (no)
D/E = 0 dB, no test entry

LINX Prototype #2 (Mar 2003):
D/E = 10 dB, -35 to +38 us (close)
D/E = 6 dB, Not tested
D/E = 3 dB, -8.5 to +38.5 us (yes)
D/E = 0 dB, -17 to +17 us (yes)

HARRIS (2nd or 3rd Gen?) (Mar 2003):
D/E = 10 dB, -5 to +40 us (close)
D/E = 6 dB, Not tested
D/E = 3 dB, -1 to +36 us (no)
D/E = 0 dB, Not working

Zenith/LG 5th Gen Prototype (Sep 2003):
D/E = 10 dB, -48.5 to +49.5 us (yes)
D/E = 6 dB, -24.0 to +25.5 us (no)
D/E = 3 dB, -13.0 to +13.0 us (no)
D/E = 0 dB, Not working

Note that the LG prototype had a higher MAXIMUM equalizer capability (- 48.5 and +49.5 us)
when the Echo power was sufficiently weak (D/E = 10 dB).
The updated LINX prototype had nearly as much MAXIMUM equalizer capability (+35 and - 38 us)
and was the ONLY unit tested that met the A/74 Guidelines for the
much more frequently encountered Static Echo conditions with D/E < 7.5 dB.

Note that NONE of the units met all of the A/74 Guidelines during these tests.
Of course, production units may have different results.....

Almost forgot: Nokia DVB-T COFDM blew them all out of the water on this test.
It could sustain D/E between 0 and 1 dB at up to +/-74 us pre/post echo delays.

Almost forgot: Nokia DVB-T COFDM blew them all out of the water on this test. It could sustain D/E between 0 and 1 dB at up to +/-74 us pre/post echo delays.
At what bandwidth (6, 7 or 8 MHz), and data rate?

SO WHAT'S IN YOUR STB???

Pop the cover off and let us know what Tuner Model number you find.
Opening the Tuner itself is highly discouraged, but you might see the part number
of the big ATSC Decoder chip on the main board or poking through the Tuner's view window....


Can't see inside the tuner housing, but ZenithHDV420 has 2 LG labled IC's on the main board :

LGDT1301A - did a bit of googling, and can't find much info on it, except who has it "in stock"....

LGDT3102 - I think this is the one we're interested in. Quite a bit of info from LG on it(currently anyway) at below link here :

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:ZOgThRXLxgMJ:sic.lge.com/products/AdvancedVSBReceiver.htm+LGDT3102&hl=en

Note: You don't need "Korean Language support", It's in English ...

Above link is from a google cache, unfortunetly I'm currently getting a dead link at the google referenced link at : http://sic.lge.com/products/AdvancedVSBReceiver.htm

--------------------------

I may be wrong and it might be 3rd generation, but I *think* the HDV420 was LG/Zenith's first use of their 4th generation chip ... At least that is what a LG rep who used to post here under handle of "Jferg" and on a few other forms had told us ...

I'd check my Hisense DB-2010 as well, except that it is a recent purchase and has a "Warranty Void if removed" sticker which will be "broken" if I take the cover off ... I Think we already know what is in there (ATI), but when warranty runs out I'll probably take a look anyway, especially since the thing seems to run so hot ...

Attached pic#1 is of the LG labled chips on the HDV420's Main board(Main board is labeled "LST-2101Z"), BTW.

Just for fun, also attached below is "full view" of HDV420's innards ... Not much to it, as you can see ... tuner can, main board, power supply and connections on the back/a few buttons on the front is about it ...

BTW ... I had taken the cover off HDV420 almost 3 years ago when I first got it. As, like many VCR's it uses a "mini" in-line amp(or "powered splitter") as it splits the signal from it's RF in jack to go to both : #1.) Tuner, #2) It's RF Out jack ... I wanted to, for instance see what happened with weak "DX" signals on 1st adjacent channels to strong local signals(NTSC+ATSC) with and without that little "amp" in line ... Given the "RF enviornment"+ my antenna setup "circumstance" It doesn't seem to be really "helping any" --- but, doesn't really seem to be hurting anything either .... So, as you can see in the 2nd Pic I ended up hooking it back up, since I have a use for its RF out jack ....... I suspect however that the little in line-amp it has may be a good part of the reason why a 10db attenuator and "strong signal warning" in the manual was included ... Anyway ... on that first occasion of opening the box, (silly me!) I did not take a photo -- The "hard part" both times didn't involve a screwdriver, but getting the thing unhooked and "out of the rack", which required a bit of time as well as a bit of a contortion act on my part ....

Quote:
Originally Posted by holl_ands
Almost forgot: Nokia DVB-T COFDM blew them all out of the water on this test. It could sustain D/E between 0 and 1 dB at up to +/-74 us pre/post echo delays.


At what bandwidth (6, 7 or 8 MHz), and data rate?

The Field Test Report says 19.76 Mbps, hence roughly same as ATSC data rate.
But it didn't say at which bandwidth.

Nitewatchman: What numbers are on the tuner can? Can't quite make them out.

========================================================
The spec you cited claims a "Ghost cancellation range" of -11 to +44.5 us,
and (as usual) does not stipulate under what test conditions....

Looking at Figure 1 in the IEEE article re the Zenith/LG 5th Gen Receiver,
the LGDT3102 numbers seem to be closest to the 4th Gen equalizer range,
whereas the 3rd Gen performance was about -8 us to +44 us.

Just to add to the confusion, it is not always clear whether the LGDT3302A
(reportedly used in the LST-4200A) is 4th or 5th Gen, esp. since it is pin-for-pin
the same as the latest 5th Gen LGDT3303. [Maybe it's Gen 4.5....]
It is very hard to correlate the Zenith Prototype results to production chips
when they don't publish the important performance specs.

======================================================
ATI press releases clearly state that the NXT2004 is used in the Hisense
USDTV/Walmart STB's (i.e. the DB-2010 without the DVI/HDMI interface).
Surely there is someone else out there whose warranty has expired who can
take a look at the tuner module part number...

Nitewatchman: What numbers are on the tuner can? Can't quite make them out.


"Close up" image of top of tuner attached farther below.

I think it's :

DPC-A902P Or DPC-H902P
20821-1100


The spec you cited claims a "Ghost cancellation range" of -11 to +44.5 us,
and (as usual) does not stipulate under what test conditions....


Yes ... It is the only thing I could find, however ....


------------------------------------------------------------

If this hasn't been posted yet ... On another note ATSC docment A54 "Guide to the use of ATSC DTV Standard"(latest revision A54a - Nov 2003), specifically sections 8(RF Transmission)+9(Receiver Systems) contains quite a bit of good info for those interested in ATSC(8VSB) transmission, reception and receiver design issues. It is currently available here:

http://www.atsc.org/standards/a_54a.pdf

At what bandwidth (6, 7 or 8 MHz), and data rate?

The Field Test Report says 19.76 Mbps, hence roughly same as ATSC data rate.
But it didn't say at which bandwidth.

If the BW was 6 MHz then it would bode well for the Nokia DVB-T, if the BW was 8 MHz then we have an apple and orange comparison for this test.

Micronas finally announced an ATSC Decoder IC:
http://www.micronas.com/press/pressreleases/pressrelease.php?s=1&ID=453&year=2005&lang=1

Micronas talks about 0 dB Echos, but they never quite say whether they succeeded in
actually working under these difficult conditions.
(The Zenith/LG 5th Gen Prototype failed several of the "0 dB Echo" tests).
I would have been more impressed if they had at least claimed to have met the
ATSC A/74 Receiver Guidelines.
No spec sheets available yet on Micronas website....not that they'll tell you much anyway....

Zarlink, who makes the SL2610 Mixer/Osc IC for Thomson's DPF88XX Tuner Module,
claims FULL SPEC COMPLIANCE for ATSC A/74 (whatever that means, given that the very
long equalizer numbers are for large D/E ratios that fall into the "suggested extension"
category: http://products.zarlink.com/product_portlets/thomson_pnp.htm

If you read the fine print at the end of the article, you'll see that the excellent adjacent
channel results are partially due to the ATI Theater 313 ATSC Decoder IC and partially
due to an unnamed RF Front End chip design that provides an excellent -86 dBm sensitivity
(that's 4.5 dB Noise Figure). So, which STBs and/or TVs employ the DPF88XX....

And the ATI Theater 310 series since that's where most of the A/74 spec compliance comes from...
http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=55300593

To restate holl_and's post somewhat....

Micronas has finally launched the ATSC decoder chip based on the well-known Linx prototype shown years ago. Because of the seemingly endless delays, many had wondered if the chip would ever come to market. This is really good news for free OTA HDTV enthusiasts.

From the article:

"primeD is based on design work undertaken by a team of US DTV experts, who came to Micronas as part of its May, 2004 acquisition of LINX Electronics, a leader in 8VSB demodulator design" according to Hans-Juergen Désor, Vice President Consumer Products at Micronas. "The LINX acquisition combines LINX DTV expertise with Micronas DVB technology to create a single-chip solution for digital TV".

"Unlike most competitors' implementations, Micronas' DRX-H demodulator does not simply discard undesired echoes but combines them in a unique patented manner with the desired signal which results in superior performance under realistic field conditions. We are approaching theoretical limits of the 8VSB demodulation standard thanks to our unique implementation" said Rich Citta, Chief Scientist of Micronas Semiconductors, Inc., an industry veteran and one of the key architects of the current ATSC DTV standard.

Offering the highest level of integration and performance of any solution on the market today, the DRX-H integrates an ATSC A/53-compliant 8VSB demodulator with an ITU-T J.83 Annex B-compliant QAM demodulator, a high quality NTSC demodulator, and a BTSC decoder, as well as an OOB (Out of Band) QPSK demodulator and OOB Local Oscillator for seamless integration into DCR (Digital Cable Ready) television sets.

Rich and holl_ands,

I tried running your lat posts through a translator to convert it to Basic English for me to understand what you posted but it didn't change anything. What does all that mean? Better or equal to LG's 5th gen chip? Coming soon to a store near you? ;)

OK, I'll try a Basic English summary, but I haven't written BASIC statements for awhile:

Numerous on-the-air tests have identified a fairly large number of specific locations that
had "sufficient' signal strength, but could not be decoded by 2nd or 3rd Generation STB's.
Both the 5th Gen Zenith/LG and the LINX Prototypes have been retested using a set of
"captured" RF test signals from these earlier tests (some are included in ATSC A/74).
There have also been some on-air tests that were repeated at the same locations that
caused problems in earlier tests. Both the Zenith/LG and LINX Prototype demonstrated
improvements by dramatically reducing the number of "problematic" locations. They also
are first STBs claiming to decode all of the captured Brazil test ensembles A-E.

The lab and on-air tests by Brazil and Australia compared the performance of several
different receiver systems, including ATSC, DBV-T and ISDB-T . See my 19July05 post:
http://hdtv.forsandiego.com/messages/76/2920.html#POST19348

So some of the new ATSC Decoder IC's provide an important and dramatic improvement.
The difficult part is determining which is "better" when looking at the latest chips from
Zenith/LG, Micronas/LINX, ATI/NxtWave, Broadcom, Zoran/Oren, ST Microelectronics, et. al.
Adding to the confusion is lack of information on what was actually in the prototypes
and trying to associate Zenith/LG's generational jargon with IC and STB part numbers.

===========================================================
There has been a lot of hype about Zenith/LG's so-called 5th Gen ATSC Decoder IC.
Mark Shubin and Bill Miller have done a lot of tests in New York and and thus far
ONLY the Zenith/LG PROTOTYPE with the 5th Gen LGDT3303 IC truly succeeded in
Schubin's particular location where the multipath is extremely severe. An LG LCD
HDTV with the LGDT3303 chip was a close second. STB's with ATI NXT2004 didn't succeed.

Unfortunately, the DVICO FusionHDTV5 Gold PCI card, a new Prototype PCI card
from BTTI and another MIT STB Prototype with the LGDT3303 IC's did not operate
as well as the Zenith/LG Prototype. Right now there is some speculation as to WHY.
Could be the RF Front End in the Prototype was somehow "better". It is likely that
the prototype had different firmware than the production LGDT3303's. They also might
have had different firmware when tested by Schubin than that tested by the CRC lab.

The 5th Gen LG (as well as LINX, ATI Theater and Broadcom BCM3517/3520 ICs)
all claim big improvements in being able to handle a large pre-echo delay.
These large pre- and post-echo performance improvements may or may not be
important in Schubin's location. [Manufacturers need to display the equalizer settings!!!]

On-air test data has shown that for many locations the multipath consists of a single
strong signal plus several other delayed signals (multipath) that are at lower signal
strengths (typically 5-15+ dB lower). Even the 2nd and 3rd Generation STBs should
receive most of these signals, since the pre- and post-echo delays are "typically" well
within the A/74 Guidelines of -10 to +40us. The issue of extremely long equalizer delay
times is concerned with handling those rare cases when the (highly reflective) object
causing the reflection (presumably a skyscraper) is quite far away (50 us is a delta of
over 9 miles). For big city locations, this can be important. For most of us in the 'burbs,
it's probably not a concern.

The CRC lab test results above show that the Zenith/LG prototype had difficulties with
the so-called "0 dB Echo" test condition. For some other locations, especially urban and/or
indoor locations, there may not be a single strong signal because the direct path might be
blocked. For the worst case "0 dB Echo" case, all of the multipath signals have roughly the
same signal strength. The Micronas/LINX handled the "0 dB Echo" tests much better.
ATI/NxtWave has claimed that their NXT200x series, as well as Theater 310/313 series
of ICs can also handle this condition, but I have not seen any confirmation tests.

========================================================
Which brings us back to REALITY....sort of...
Mark Schubin and Bob Miller continue to invite manufacturers to subject their equipment to
a "real world" urban canyon environment where indoor antennas are the norm.
A Samsung test is currently underway....should learn more next few weeks....

The new MIT STB with 5th Gen LGDT3303 has not yet hit the streets.
I would like to see a test of other products, such as Broadcom and ATI Theater.
Micronas/LINX just announced long anticipated ATSC Decoder IC, maybe STB by early 2006?
I encourage people to see WHAT'S IN YOUR STB so we know what tuner/chip is in which product.

I continue to search for meaningful laboratory and on-air test reports for the current
generation of ATSC equipment so we can try to separate the hype and try to separate
the wheat from the chaff. Unfortunately, most lab tests are either on prototypes that
may or may not represent performance for a production unit, or are conducted by an
independent agency which cannot name names. Such as would probably be the case
if Brazil decides to conduct a update of their earlier ATSC vs DVB-T vs ISDB-T tests.

=======================================================
OK, let me close with a BASIC IF-THEN statement:

IF meaningful production test results, THEN can compare.

From the Micronas article:

"Unlike most competitors' implementations, Micronas' DRX-H demodulator does not simply discard undesired echoes but combines them in a unique patented manner with the desired signal which results in superior performance under realistic field conditions. We are approaching theoretical limits of the 8VSB demodulation standard thanks to our unique implementation" said Rich Citta, Chief Scientist of Micronas Semiconductors, Inc., an industry veteran and one of the key architects of the current ATSC DTV standard.


Gee, if it were as simple as "discarding" undesired echos....
Anyone who knows about Adaptive Equalizers, will know that they work by
estimating the Channel Impulse function for the known PN-511 data sequence
and then setting the equalizer taps to minimze the mean square error.
This results in the phase of the individual multipath components being adjusted
so that they coherently add together. After that it can get complicated.....

Micronas may have a unique equalizer algoritm (doesn't everyone?), but it is
absurd to claim that their competitors algorithm (which is no doubt proprietary,
and hence unknowable to Micronas) operates in some sort of deficient approach
invented by Micronas's marketing staff.

Micronas may have a unique equalizer algoritm (doesn't everyone?), but it is absurd to claim that their competitors algorithm (which is no doubt proprietary, and hence unknowable to Micronas) operates in some sort of deficient approach invented by Micronas's marketing staff.

:) :D :D You are entertaining dude!!

Keep the info coming. I know research like this is time consuming and I do appreciate your efforts. Same for Rich Peterson, I still have his first publication of the DBS Guide!!

holl_ands,

Thanks alot, much appreciated. I understand now. :D

I for one am hoping some other manufacturer comes out with a next gen tuner that blows away all the LG Gen-X vaporware.

TEST REPORTS FOR ZENITH/LG 5TH GEN PROTOTYPE AND LINX/MICRONAS PROTOTYPE:

Finally found the Test Reports for the Zenith/LG 5th Gen Prototype STB, the LINX (now Micronas) Prototype STB
plus a Field Test Report for the LINX Prototype STB compared to an older Harris ATSC STB (plus some Nokia COFDM STB equalizer tests):

1. “Performance of 5th Generation 8-VSB Receivers”, Laud, Aitken, Brett and Kwak,
IEEE Trans on Consumer Electronics, Vol 50, No 4, Nov 2004.

2. “An ATSC DTV Receiver with Improved Robustness to Multipath and Distributed Transmission Environments”,
Wu, Wang, Citta, et. al., IEEE Trans on Broadcasting, Vol 50, No 1, Mar 2004.

3. “Results of the Lab Evaluation of Zenith 5th Generation VSB TV Receiver”, Communications Research Center (CRC, Canada), Sep 2003.

4. “Field Tests of the LINX ATSC Prototype Receiver”, Communications Research Center (CRC, Canada), Mar 2003.

5. “Recent Performance Improvements to the ATSC Transmission System”, Su, Wang, Salehian, et. al.,
Intl Broadcasting Convention (IBC) Conference Pub 2003. See http://www.crc.ca/en/html/crc/home/research/broadcast/rtnt

6. “Results of the Lab Evaluation of LINX ATSC Prototype Receiver”, Communications Research Center (CRC, Canada), Apr 2002.

IEEE refs are available on-line (for a fee) or from a well-equipped (University) library.
The first IEEE reference had the all important link to CRC reports: http://www.broadcastpapers.com/tvtran/ibc03CRCATSCTran.pdf

======================================================
ATSC Doc A/74, “Recommended Practice: Receiver Performance Guidelines”, Jun 2004
says that a “typical” channel impulse response ranges from –10 us (pre-echo) to +40 us (post-echo).

A/74 then goes on to provide an Echo Delay performance profile for Single Static Echoes with various Desired to Echo Ratios:

from 0 to +5 us (for D/E > 1 dB) [Note: 0 dB Echo is not stipulated.]
from -5 to +10 us (for D/E > 2 dB)
from -5 to +20 us (for D/E > 3 dB)
from -10 to +40 us (for D/E > 5 dB) [The “typical” response cited above.]
from -20 to +40 us (for D/E > 7.5 dB) [Suggested Extension]
from –25 to +50 us (for D/E > 16 dB) [Suggested Extension]

So A/74 expects the “typical” impulse response to have a D/E > 5 dB and the so-called “0 dB Echo”
or equal strength signals are expected to have a fairly small delay.
And extremely long pre-echo or post-echo signals would be at a much lower level than the desired signal.
[Indeed, if the echoes are much more than a D/E of 16 dB, they could be expected to cause minimal if any degradation.]

=======================================================
Based on these tests, if you don’t “need” extremely long pre and post-echo performance,
the LINX/Micronas prototype clearly had better overall performance.
And when Zenith/LG claims +/- 50 us equalizer capability,
they must mean when the Echo is 10 dB or more below the Desired signal.
Note they avoided mentioning performance for A/74 stipulated “typical” condition (D/E = 5 dB),
because both units failed to meet that guideline.

So it is impossible to compare manufacturer equalizer "claims" unless they also stipulate the test conditions!!!!

Of course, performance for production units may be different….

CRC recently added the fol. report on a Prototype Samsung ATSC Receiver:
http://www.crc.ca/en/html/crc/home/research/broadcast/rtnt
"Lab. Eval. of a Prototype Samsung ATSC Receiver" dtg 30Aug05.
The Samsung prototype uses a commercially available ALPS Tuner Module and
Samsung's "Gemini" ATSC Decoder chip (whatever that is...)

The ALPS Tuner Module has a desired signal overload point of +1.5 dBm and
a sensitivity of -84.7 dBm (that's a Noise Figure of about 6 dB).
Perhaps it's the Alps Electric TEQH Tuner Module???

Samsung performance met all ATSC A/74 Guidelines (unlike other tested prototypes),
with performance under most test conditions, exceeding the performance of both
the Zenith/LG Prototype and the two versions of Linx (now Micronas) Prototypes.

Under marginal SNR conditions, the Samsung could not handle low delay echos
(< 1 usec, i.e. less than 0.2 mile path differential),
where the multipath components are within a few dB of each other.
This can occur when there are nearby reflecting objects
(e.g. your neighbor's house and/or your interior/attic location).

Nonetheless the Samsumg Prototype still outperformed the Linx and
especially the Zenith/LG Prototypes under these so-called "zero echo" test conditions.

As always, these are results for PROTOTYPE equipments and may or may not
be representative of (hopefully improved) production equipment.

I also have been unable to determine exactly WHAT was in the Linx (Micronas)
and Zenith/LG Prototypes relative to production chips....

Thanks for another of your exhaustive reports, holl_ands. Probably not digesting the final 'graphs enough, but the test conclusions seem contradictory: it outperformed the Zenith/LG yet couldn't handle short-delay signals, which presumably made the LG design so good at Mark Schubin's heavy-multipath NYC location.

(Also, at a NYC location here, only ~9 blocks from NYC's transmitter, but with no view of it, only reflections, and can't tune any HD signals reliably with a Silver Sensor and an early-generation tuner built into my year-2000 Philips RPTV. Yup, not a good combination. But the still-unavailable Zenith/LG combo sounded promising--even here.) Rely on two cable subscriptions. -- John

See my earlier summaries comparing Linx (Micronas) Prototype to Zenith/LG Prototype:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6041081&highlight=crc#post6041081
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6059066&highlight=crc#post6059066

The PROTOTYPE Zenith/LG tested by CRD performed considerably worse than either the
Linx (Micronas) Prototype or the much more recent Samsung/Alps Prototype.
When tested, the Zenith/LG PROTOTYPE had great difficulty with short delay echo test conditions.

It has not been revealed whether there were any improvements made to the Zenith/LG PROTOTYPE prior to being tested at Mark Schubin's NYC apt.
Nor what improvments may or may not have been incorporated into the final LGDT3302 and LGDT3303 ATSC Decoder chips.

All we see are preliminary snapshots of performance....and thus far NOTHING re production units....

Nor anything, thus far, re the Broadcom, Orem, STMicroelectronics and the ATI chips (reportedly used in most HDTV's).

See my earlier summaries comparing Linx (Micronas) Prototype to Zenith/LG Prototype:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6041081&highlight=crc#post6041081
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6059066&highlight=crc#post6059066

The PROTOTYPE Zenith/LG tested by CRD performed considerably worse than either the
Linx (Micronas) Prototype or the much more recent Samsung/Alps Prototype.
When tested, the Zenith/LG PROTOTYPE had great difficulty with short delay echo test conditions.

It has not been revealed whether there were any improvements made to the Zenith/LG PROTOTYPE prior to being tested at Mark Schubin's NYC apt.
Nor what improvments may or may not have been incorporated into the final LGDT3302 and LGDT3303 ATSC Decoder chips.

All we see are preliminary snapshots of performance....and thus far NOTHING re production units....

Nor anything, thus far, re the Broadcom, Orem, STMicroelectronics and the ATI chips (reportedly used in most HDTV's).

I find it a little strange that the CRC test is so positive of this prototype, yet not even a press release from Samsung about its existence.
Maybe we'll get a little more info around CES time.

The fol. on-air measurements of sensitivity for various ATSC Receivers was
found in Echostar's 7/5/05 Reply Comments to the FCC re SHVERA rule making.
To find it, follow the link in Doug Lung's latest column:
http://www.tvtechnology.com/features/On-RF/f_doug_lung-10.05.05.shtml

Measured Sensitivity by Channel (dBm)

D12 D23 D29 D41 D43 D47 D49 [DTV Channel Number]
-81.9 -82.6 -84.1 -82.8 -80.4 -81.1 -81.8 LG LST-4200A
-80.9 -80.6 -83.1 -80.8 -81.4 -81.1 -82.8 Samsung SIR-T451
-78.9 -83.6 -83.1 -83.8 -83.4 -82.1 -82.8 Motorola HDT-101
-81.7 -82.9 -84.1 -82.9 -82.8 -81.5 -81.9 Dish DP-942
-75.9 -78.6 -82.1 -77.8 -77.4 -78.1 -78.8 RCA DTC-100
-75.9 -78.6 -79.1 -77.8 -79.4 -79.1 -79.8 Zenith DTV Demod-S

Variation in Sensitivity:
5.8 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 dB

Average Sensitivity:
-79.9 -81.7 -83.3 -81.6 -81.1 -80.8 -81.6 dBm

FCC Performance Factor:
-81.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 dBm

========================================
To convert from Sensitivity to Noise Figure:
N.F. = Sensitivity (dBm) - (-106 dBm) (thermal noise floor) - 15.5 (dB) (minimum SNR for ATSC)

The thermal noise floor will vary somewhat with temperature (as measured at the first RF chip).

The minimum SNR for ATSC will vary somewhat between units and typically is slightly worse for both weak signals and very strong signals.

It should be noted that LG will incorporate the 5th gen tuner in the HD STB's they'll make for DirecTV.

You can try out a 5th Gen. RX in the Divco Fusion 5 PCI card. I am using one and it absolutely works very fine using a plain old loop antenna inside an office complex with at least three walls between my PC and Open air. Also the office is at ground level. You to can try one out for $99 and a reasonably good PC.

[QUOTE=holl_ands]The fol. on-air measurements of sensitivity for various ATSC Receivers was


Measured Sensitivity by Channel (dBm)

D12 D23 D29 D41 D43 D47 D49 [DTV Channel Number]
-81.9 -82.6 -84.1 -82.8 -80.4 -81.1 -81.8 LG LST-4200A
-80.9 -80.6 -83.1 -80.8 -81.4 -81.1 -82.8 Samsung SIR-T451
-78.9 -83.6 -83.1 -83.8 -83.4 -82.1 -82.8 Motorola HDT-101
-81.7 -82.9 -84.1 -82.9 -82.8 -81.5 -81.9 Dish DP-942
-75.9 -78.6 -82.1 -77.8 -77.4 -78.1 -78.8 RCA DTC-100
-75.9 -78.6 -79.1 -77.8 -79.4 -79.1 -79.8 Zenith DTV Demod-S


FCC Performance Factor:
-81.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 dBm

========================================
To convert from Sensitivity to Noise Figure:
N.F. = Sensitivity (dBm) - (-106 dBm) (thermal noise floor) - 15.5 (dB) (minimum SNR for ATSC)

The numbers given above are an excellent way to compare the various receivers’ performance when given clean weak signals without the use of a preamp. They may not be valid when a preamp is used . If all the receivers meet the 15.5 SNR specification a good preamp would make all the receivers equal. The receivers’ failure to meet the required sensitivity could be caused by a high noise figure or the receivers needing more than the specified 15.5 dB SNR.
The formula for noise figure is more complex and not linear in dB than the one given. For the -84.2 dBm sensitivity and 15.5 sensitivity I get 7.4 where yours is 6.3. The formula given permits negative values of noise figure, which does not happen. John

[QUOTE=holl_ands]The fol. on-air measurements of sensitivity for various ATSC Receivers was


Measured Sensitivity by Channel (dBm)

D12 D23 D29 D41 D43 D47 D49 [DTV Channel Number]
-81.9 -82.6 -84.1 -82.8 -80.4 -81.1 -81.8 LG LST-4200A
-80.9 -80.6 -83.1 -80.8 -81.4 -81.1 -82.8 Samsung SIR-T451
-78.9 -83.6 -83.1 -83.8 -83.4 -82.1 -82.8 Motorola HDT-101
-81.7 -82.9 -84.1 -82.9 -82.8 -81.5 -81.9 Dish DP-942
-75.9 -78.6 -82.1 -77.8 -77.4 -78.1 -78.8 RCA DTC-100
-75.9 -78.6 -79.1 -77.8 -79.4 -79.1 -79.8 Zenith DTV Demod-S


FCC Performance Factor:
-81.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 -84.2 dBm

========================================
To convert from Sensitivity to Noise Figure:
N.F. = Sensitivity (dBm) - (-106 dBm) (thermal noise floor) - 15.5 (dB) (minimum SNR for ATSC)

The numbers given above are an excellent way to compare the various receivers’ performance when given clean weak signals without the use of a preamp. They may not be valid when a preamp is used . If all the receivers meet the 15.5 SNR specification a good preamp would make all the receivers equal. The receivers’ failure to meet the required sensitivity could be caused by a high noise figure or the receivers needing more than the specified 15.5 dB SNR.
The formula for noise figure is more complex and not linear in dB than the one given. For the -84.2 dBm sensitivity and 15.5 sensitivity I get 7.4 where yours is 6.3. The formula given permits negative values of noise figure, which does not happen. John

Their location is probably too close to use a Preamp.
You can't get negative noise figure numbers, because you'll NEVER measure a receiver sensitivity that it BETTER than the thermal noise floor.
By definition, the noise figure is the amount the noise level is raised over and above the thermal noise floor.
Since these were on-the-air tests (the best kind of user friendlly data in my opinion), there is likely to be a small amount of multipath degradation.
However most of the paths were LOS with minimal multipath expected.

Using receiver sensitivity and required SNR receiver noise power can be calculated by N.P. (dBv)= Sensitivity (dBm) - 15.5 (dB) (minimum SNR for ATSC)-30
np (watts) =10 ^ (N.P./10)
This can be converted to noise temperature by NT (deg k)=np/(KB)
where K is Boltzman's constant equal to 1.38*E-23 (J/K) and B is the Bandwidth assumed to be 6000000
This can be the converted to noise figure using the formula given here Using receiver sensitivity and required SNR receiver noise power can be calculated by N.P. (dBv)= Sensitivity (dBm) - 15.5 (dB) (minimum SNR for ATSC)-30
np (watts) =10 ^ (N.P./10)
This can be converted to noise temperature by NT (deg k)=np/(KB)
where K is Boltzman's constant equal to 1.38*E-23 (J/K) and B is the Bandwidth assumed to be 6000000
This can be the converted to noise figure using the formula given here
http://www.satsig.net/noise.htm
Here are two plots of sensitivity vs noise figure assunimg the required SNR of 15.5 and a 6 Mhz bandwidth.
Receivers can have a noise temperature well below the ambient temp of 290 deg. K and have sensitivities that are in theory not limited to any particular value. A 0.4 db noise figure UHF TV preamp is available comercially and narrowband single digit noise temperature can be built. The system noise temperature will determine the weakest signal that can actually be received. This will be the sum of the various contributions from the receiver, antenna and transmision line noise. I would think a TV antenna would have to have at least a 150 deg. K noise temperature. John

In Satellite systems, the external "Sky Temp" (and "Ground Temp") become very important, resulting in the calculation methodology you described above.
However, these are frequently EQUIVALENT Noise Temperatures selected to approximate what a thermal resistor would contribute to the overall noise level.
When the underlying noise statistics are no longer Gaussian (such as man-made interference), then the methodology becomes suspect.

The physical temperature of the antenna itself isn't important. The primary noise source is the first RF chip.
The physical temperature of the first RF chip in the Preamp (or Tuner) is what is important, plus adjustments for cascaded Noise Figure loss.

The first RF chip will be hotter than the ambient temperature due to both internal heating and external heat (sun) load.
These high overload resistant chips run with fairly high voltages and hence have significant internal power dissipation.
The temp on the chip in a Preamp during the heat of Summer can be expected to be well in excess of 100 deg (F).

If a Preamp is not used, then the temperature of the first RF chip in the HDTV's tuner determines the thermal noise floor.
Since HDTVs run hot inside the box, I would figure the temp on the chip is in excess of 100 deg (F) after allowing for chip/air thermal resistance.

Fortunately, Winter to Summer temperature fluctuations typically result in less than a dB difference in sensitivity.

See the fol. Maxim App Notes for the NF/Sensitity equation I cited above, as well as further information on how
thermal noise levels, Cascaded Noise Figures and Noise Factors are calculated:
http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/appnote_number/1836
http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/appnote_number/2875

holl_ands,

The ambient temperature of a preamp or first stage of a receiver has nothing to do with receiver sensitivity. Only preamp (or first stage) Noise Figure, effective antenna temperature (not it's physical temperature, but the noise temperature of what the main lobe is pointed at) and feedline loss effect receiver sensitivity in the following way:

Noise Power = 10 log KBTs

K = 1.38x10E-23
B = bandwidth in Hz
Ts = receive system noise temperature

Ts = Ta + (Lr - 1)Tl + LrTr

Ta = antenna temperature
Lr = feedline loss (as a ratio)
Tl = physical temperature of feedline (290K)
Tr = receiver noise temperature

Tr = 290(10^(f/10) - 1)

f = Noise Figure

The above equations work for any receive system, whether the antenna is pointed at cold sky (satellite systems) or on the horizon (terrestrial systems).

When the antenna is pointed at the horizon, the effective antenna temperature is 290K. At the same time, NF is a function of 290K. When Ta is 290K, the equation can be simplified to:

-106.2 dBm + NF (at 6 MHz bandwidth).

Expressing preamp noise performance in NF is just a mathematical short cut when you know the antenna is pointing on the horizon. This is why satellite preamps are never specified in NF, but always in noise temperature.

Ron

Ron,
The info on receiver noise is what I tried to express and if I did the Math right what it means for receiver sensitivity. I think the question of a UHF TV antenna’s noise temperature is more interesting. Only half of the antenna’s main lobe is aimed at the ground and the other half is aimed at the sky, also it only responds to horizontally polarized signals so it will see much less than the 290 deg. noise power from the ground. I found these measurements, that are in the UHF range http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/pub/ntia-rpt/02-390/chap1&2.pdf If I understand the plots at the high end and in rural areas a temperature of around 70 deg. K was measured. John

Thanks for another of your exhaustive reports, holl_ands. Probably not digesting the final 'graphs enough, but the test conclusions seem contradictory: it outperformed the Zenith/LG yet couldn't handle short-delay signals, which presumably made the LG design so good at Mark Schubin's heavy-multipath NYC location.

(Also, at a NYC location here, only ~9 blocks from NYC's transmitter, but with no view of it, only reflections, and can't tune any HD signals reliably with a Silver Sensor and an early-generation tuner built into my year-2000 Philips RPTV. Yup, not a good combination. But the still-unavailable Zenith/LG combo sounded promising--even here.) Rely on two cable subscriptions. -- John
I've been using one of the Radio Shack (Accurian) STBs currently on close-out at RS. I'm 20 blocks north of the ESB, facing north, and it picks up almost everything except 13 (61). Has anyone reliably determined what generation decoder is in this RS STB?

Early Panasonic and RCA STBs would work, but they were very sensitive to antenna location and orientation, and usually only picked up 2 (56) and 5 (44).

I've been using one of the Radio Shack (Accurian) STBs currently on close-out at RS. I'm 20 blocks north of the ESB, facing north, and it picks up almost everything except 13 (61). Has anyone reliably determined what generation decoder is in this RS STB?
I'd like to know, too, just out of curiosity. I'm in a difficult reception area (more fringe than multipath) and my Accurian is markedly better than the old SIR-T151 I had before.

In fact, I'm close to buying either a Phillips plasma or Samsung DLP with built-in tuner, and I hope the tuners in there are as good as the Accurian's, because I need every ounce of reception power I can get.

BTW, great work holl_ands and others... It is much appreciated. :)

My unscientific tests have shown the Radio Shack unit is much better than earlier STBs "in the city" (lots of signal, lots of ghosts) and about as good as earlier units "in the country" (less signal and a lot less ghosts.) City reception is with a silver sensor and country reception is with a big antenna on the roof, both of which are typical scenarios for OTA reception, both NTSC and ATSC.

Not sure if this has been posted here yet, but from Doug Lung's RF Report,
http://www.tvtechnology.com/dlrf/one.php?id=1082
Doug Lung's RF Report

Date posted: 2005-11-22
New ATSC USB Tuner Includes LG 5G Chip

In response to my article last week on the "sexy" Mobix USB 2.0 tuner for DVB-T terrestrial DTV reception on notebook computers, Sean Wallace sent me information and some circuit board photos of the new FusionHDTV5 USB Gold portable ATSC receiver by Dvico. It looks as if the VBox A-3560 USB 2.0 receiver that I've been hauling around the country is now outdated!

This is the third ATSC USB receiver I've seen. The first was the SASEM, which is now difficult to obtain. The second was the VBox, which was on display at NAB2005 and is readily available from on-line retailers such as Copperbox.com and VisibleLight.com. The new FusionHDTV5 USB Gold receiver is also available Copperbox.com.

The FusionHDTV5 USB is not as small and attractive as the Mobix receiver, but what's inside makes it interesting. The tuner includes the new LG/Zenith 5th generation VSB decoder chip. This is the one that convinced VSB skeptics that 8-VSB might work after all. Like the VBox, the receiver is powered from the USB bus, but unlike the Vbox, it can also receive and record standard NTSC analog TV. A remote control is also available. Advanced recording features include HD to DVD, HD to DViX and direct MPEG2 recording of the ATSC stream. Not clear is whether these format conversions are supported in hardware or if they are software based.

Copperbox.com has more detailed specifications than the FusionHDTV USB Gold product page. Copperbox lists the tuner as the LG H062F, the demodulator as the LG DT3303, the MPEG decoder as the Conexant CX25843 and the main chipset as a CY68013A.

Wallace reported the box is great at pulling in signals. From his location south of Washington D.C., he was able to pull in Baltimore DTV stations using a Silver Sensor antenna indoors. Unfortunately, he experienced problems with the receiver and its software crashing his computer on certain channels. I've experienced this too with the VBox receiver, but it appears to be a software problem, as newer versions of TSReader and the AtmosWeb software seem to handle the streams better. Wallace wondered how stations would respond to these problems. "Can you just imagine the angry people calling in to the station and sputtering about how 'your TV channel crashes my computer!!'"

In addition to the report from Wallace, Bob Behar reported that he was able to receive most of the local Miami DTV stations in his office using the FusionHDTV5 USB tuner and the small telescoping whip antenna that comes with it. Miami has a mixture of UHF and high-VHF DTV channels.

http://www.copperbox.com/lite/popinfo.php?lc_code=FUSION-HDTV-USB
DViCO Fusion-HDTV-USB @ COPPERBOX.COM v4.0

http://www.fusionhdtv.co.kr/eng/Products/HDTV5usb.aspx
DViCO FusionHDTV Tuner PCI, USB: Home > Products > HDTV5USB

Beat me to the draw. :-). Visited the copperbox.com site earlier and concluded anyone could run this tuner without a PC providing no recording was wanted. [EDIT: Guess not. Seems to have only a USB2.0 output. Strange to build in all those recording features but not an PC-independent power supply and at least YPbPr outputs.]

Seems to have LG's 5th-gen chip, but not sure about the tuner section that apparently was an important factor in the 'magical' reception a while back reported for Schubin's NYC multipath-plagued apartment. Looks good, though. Wonder how it compares to the Radio Shack closeout tuner? -- John

If it is like the Fusion PCI card tunners it does not have an MPEG decoder to produce video and it relies on software decoding of the MPEG video. John

Beat me to the draw. :-). Visited the copperbox.com site earlier and concluded anyone could run this tuner without a PC providing no recording was wanted. [EDIT: Guess not. Seems to have only a USB2.0 output. Strange to build in all those recording features but not an PC-independent power supply and at least YPbPr outputs.]

Do you know if a dvd player like Snazio can take advantage of this card or not?

I posted an addendum to my 23Aug05 post re First Test of DX DTA-5000 Smart Antenna with the Sylvania 6900DTE:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=5979741&#post5979741
When I plugged the 6900DTE into my new Pioneer Surround Receiver, the Dolby Digital finally was working.

Apparently there is some sort of compatibility problem between my old Sony STR-DE835 Surround Receiver and the 6900DTE.

FYI: As part of the discussion re whether the ILLR propagation prediction program should be changed to provide a better determination
of SHVERA eligibility (NO---not at this time), the FCC initiated a performance test of various OTA STBs and HDTVs:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-199A1.pdf
A version of the ILLR (Individual Location Longley-Rice) program is used at www.antennaweb.org.

ATI also submitted comments re improved OTA STB testing, and included test results for their latest (e.g. THEATER) ATSC Decoder chip(s):
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6517693762

Canadian Research Center (CRC) has also conducted tests on the early Linx/Micronas Prototype with the "CASPER" ATSC Decoder chip,
a Prototype Zenith STB with the LG 5th Gen chip and a Samsung STB with an Alps Tuner Module and the "GEMINI" ATSC Decoder chip
(whatever that is...maybe it's in the Samsung manufactured (-200) DirecTV HD-STBs???):
http://www.crc.ca/en/html/crc/home/research/broadcast/rtnt

By correlating the known test results to the unidentified STBs and HDTVs, I believe that the highest performing STBs included the
LG-4200A STB (LGDT3302 precursor to the LGDT3303 5th Gen), one or more STB/HDTV with the ATI THEATER chips and possibly other
ATSC Decoder chips and RF Tuner Modules that claim to meet the ATSC A/74 Receiver Guidelines (e.g Zarlink/Thomson, Zoran/Orem).
And there were a bunch of low performing STBs and HDTVs.......sshhhhuuussshhh, no names please...

holl_ands,
Thanks for another of your comprehensive HD tuning hardware summaries. What's the scoop on LG's 5th gen availability, other than its use in some displays? Are some PC cards using it, coupled with a superior front end?

Wonder if that active antenna you mentioned, coupled with a good LG-5th-gen tuner, would succeed in a tough multipath situation, where only building reflections can be tuned? My Silver Sensor, feeding an inadequate ~'99-'00 built-in Philips RPTV tuner, only manages to lock in UHF 33, WB's DTV channel here, ~9 blocks from the Empire State Building transmitters. Thanks. -- John

Any recent 5th generation receiver chip news? I know this is an old topic, but I would like to know if there is any movement at all for LG or Casper chip receivers.

IB

The only new one is Samsung's Gemini that got a very high score at CRC.

LG sells its LGDT3303 - no new demods.

Linx technology for 8VSB demodulatation is currently used by:
Thomson - for their own STB
Micronas - don't know of any system
ST - pushing hard TV and STB makers to use their STV0370

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we actually knew what was used in each STB & PCI Card???
Fol. is what I have culled from various websites:

BTTI AIRSTAR-HD5000-PCI and DVICO FUSION HDTV5 PCI card products use the LG 5th Gen chips,
whereas the HDTV3 products use the LGDT3302, same as LST-4200A (search this thread for "DVICO").

The older BTTI AIR2PC-ATSC-PCI used the Broadcom BCM3510.

LG Press Releases said that their 5th Gen chip is in LG manufactured DirecTV H20 MPEG4 HD-STB....
and the new MPEG4 capable USDTV OTA STB.

It is also possible that the Gemini chip is in the Samsung manufactured H20....but no confirmation.
And thus far, I don't know what is in the Philips, Thomson and Humax H20 models...

The pcHDTV HD-3000 PCI Card uses the Zoran/Oren OR51132 ATSC Decoder chip.

The MIT MHD MDP-130 and ATI HDTV WONDER PCI Cards, plus fol. OTA STBs use the older ATI NX2004:
Sylvania 6900DTE, MIT MDR-200 and Hisense DB-2010 (USDTV MPEG2 only box).

I would especially be interested to know what is in the under $200 PrimeDTV PHD-101 OTA STB...
(I have a hunch it might be the ATI THEATER chip, to go along with the ATI XILLEON display processor)

Came across this link (http://www.ramelectronics.net/html/ONAIRUSB-HDTV.html) for a new (2006) LG 5th-generation-chip "Onair USB" tuner. Might have been mentioned above already. What's missing from the specs? There's a USB output to a PC, with recommended graphics cards, but no mention of routine 1080i/720p processing viewing/storage. A google hunt shows copperbox.com markets this tuner, too, and mentions "full HDTV timeshifting." -- John

Prime PHD-101 pictures, including inside are posted here:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7077583#post7077583

The tuner is the Alps TDHU2, same as my Sylvania 6900DTE OTA STB, AVER
TVHD MCE A180 PCI card and some versions of the ATI AIR2PC-ATSC-PCI
card.

It contains the ATI NXT2004 ATSC/QAM DECODER chip: equalizer capability
-8 to +45 usec.

Unfortunately, it isn't in the same class as ATI's latest THEATER chip.

Came across this link (http://www.ramelectronics.net/html/ONAIRUSB-HDTV.html) for a new (2006) LG 5th-generation-chip "Onair USB" tuner. Might have been mentioned above already. What's missing from the specs? There's a USB output to a PC, with recommended graphics cards, but no mention of routine 1080i/720p processing viewing/storage. A google hunt shows copperbox.com markets this tuner, too, and mentions "full HDTV timeshifting." -- John
FYI: Here is the Korean website for the ONAIRUSB-HDTV Creator, incl manual, s/w, U.S. POC:
http://www.autumnwave.com/main/index.htm

FYI: Here is the Korean website for the ONAIRUSB-HDTV Creator, incl manual, s/w, U.S. POC:
http://www.autumnwave.com/main/index.htm
Thanks for the link to the 75-page manual. Looks like you'd be asking for a lot of computer glitches, operating complexity, patches, etc. The manual is only oriented for PC display. Anyone know if typical supported nVidia GEforce cards usually have YPbPr outputs so I could feed a 64" RPTV? Don't suppose there are user reports of this 2006 LG 5th-gen chip Onair tuner yet? Thanks. -- John

While searching to see whether the recommended nVIDIA Geforce4 MX 440 for the ONAIR tuner (just above) had YPbPr outputs (even their pdf brochure is fuzzy), noticed this Sigmacom (http://www.sigmacom.co.kr/eng/ces/ces_2.htm) website from the '06 CES listing several HD-tuner products (with component outputs); believe they mention a 5th-gen chip at some point (HDTV5 module/card). Again, sorry if this has been outlined earlier, (a thread search doesn't find Sigmacom or Sigma). -- John

Haven't been tracking computer/HDTV developments, so until today missed this running thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=373490&page=1&pp=30) in the home theater PC forum about onair hardware. But it looks like only the most recent posts deal with the newest 5th-gen-chip Onair model, with someone posting from Autumn Wave, the N. American center for the S. Korea firm. -- John

I noticed John's post in the htpc forum and he provided a link to this thread.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we actually knew what was used in each ..PCI Card?I was doing just that (see my sig.). I was going to continue to fill in the holes and update it accordingly (missing several cards currently), but I kind of lost interest.

Anyways, I haven't read this thread, just browsed this page. Noticed there where several inaccuracies in some posts in regards to componentry on different cards. Corrections can be obtained from my sig... most dissapointing of which were those contained in the Doug Lung article on tvtechnology :(

Feb 27, 2006 08:00

Microtune's New 3-in-1 TV Tuner Breaks Cost Barrier in Bringing Benchmark-Setting Digital TV Performance to Mass Market
PLANO, Texas --(Business Wire)-- Feb. 27, 2006 Manufacturers Can Deploy Microtune's New Tuner Chip across TVs of Every Size and Price Point to Deliver No-Compromise TV Reception for Analog, Digital and Cable Broadcasts and to Ease DTV Transition

Anticipating the massive technology transformation that will convert the North American TV market to all-digital broadcasts, Microtune(R), Inc. (Nasdaq:TUNE) today unveiled a breakthrough 3-in-1 TV tuner engineered to drive very high-end digital TV reception quality into the cost-sensitive consumer TV mass market.

Integrating three tuners -- analog, digital and cable -- in a tiny chip smaller than a thumbtack, Microtune's new MicroTuner(TM) MT2131 tuner delivers benchmark-setting performance that exceeds all three existing U.S. TV requirements: ATSC, NTSC and Digital Cable Ready (DCR). Eliminating more than one hundred components from the silicon tuner bill of materials (BOM), the MT2131 slashes external BOM cost by sixty percent. By breaking through the sub-$3.00 cost barrier, it finally enables manufacturers to deploy a tuner with an unmatched level of performance across all TV models, sizes and price points -- from multi-tuner, giant-screen home theatres to small, affordable LCD TVs and inexpensive DTV set-top converter boxes.

Inventor of the single-chip silicon TV tuner, Microtune is leading the market in broadband silicon TV tuner chips with products deployed today in digital/analog TVs, personal video recorder (PVR) set-top boxes, cable modems, digital telephony modems, computers, portable DVD players, multimedia cards and PC-TV adaptors.

"Based on years of R&D investment, the MT2131 is engineered to be the industry's best TV tuner," said James A. Fontaine, Microtune's President and CEO. "It is the only device, module or silicon, to fully support North American analog and digital TV transmissions across either cable or terrestrial broadcasts. Manufacturers can use our single, flexible tuner to cost-effectively smooth the digital transition across all kinds of TV electronics, while bridging the multiple standards that co-exist today."

While the quality of the TV display has recently commanded a great deal of consumer focus, it is the tuner that actually sets the quality of the TV signal, the quality of picture and, ultimately, the quality of the TV experience for the user.

"Since 1998, the U.S. digital TV transition has been marred by complaints from broadcasters and consumers that the digital TV signal specified by ATSC does not work as well as expected," said Gerry Kaufhold, Principal Analyst with In-Stat. "As Congress and the FCC move toward complete cut-off of analog TV signals in February 2009, the viability of digital terrestrial services is under critical pressure to perform up to par. Tuners using a dual-conversion architecture approach, such as Microtune's newly announced MT2131 silicon tuner, are designed to provide the best-in-class reception needed to realize the inherent advantages and strengths of digital transmission."

From a consumer perspective, the MT2131 is engineered to solve each of the three technical problems commonly identified by consumers as sources of DTV dissatisfaction -- TV picture break-up from interference, TV picture freezing and TV picture loss. In fact, it also significantly improves TV reception using in-attic antennas, another major consumer-related concern associated with today's digital broadcasts.

Unmatched Performance across U.S. Broadcast Standards

Based on Microtune's patented silicon tuner architecture, the MT2131 exceeds the expected performance defined by standards committees for the ATSC A/74 and Digital Cable Ready DTV specifications, while also delivering superior analog (NTSC) reception.

"The MT2131 outperformed tuner cans and far outpaced all other silicon tuners that were evaluated in our internal tests against the A/74 and DCR technical specifications and in tests conducted by leading TV manufacturers," Fontaine continued. "For us, the MT2131 is another milestone achievement in our history of innovating the industry's most advanced RF integrated circuits. It reflects our continuing success in raising the tuner performance bar for our customers across their TV, cable, computer and mobile products, while significantly reducing their RF solution costs."

Engineered with excellent sensitivity, the MT2131 also exceeded, by a wide margin, the sensitivity-measurement tests published by the FCC this past December in its study of a large group of retail DTV receivers(a). The MT2131's added margin in sensitivity translates directly into an increase in digital TV signal coverage area for broadcasters.

Sensitivity is one of the key RF technical concerns of TV manufactures; another is adjacent channel rejection. The MT2131 is engineered to achieve superior sensitivity while providing excellent linearity, typically a difficult challenge for RF, analog and mixed signal integrated circuits. The MT2131's linearity performance enables it to provide industry-leading adjacent channel rejection, a measure of the ability of the tuner to block an interfering broadcast transmitter in order to tune a much weaker signal from another transmitter farther away. The MT2131 also offers a superior composite distortion performance, key for DCR applications.

Microtune has published its internal benchmark tests of the MT2131 and a comparison of the MT2131 to the measurement test results of the FCC's study at: http://www.microtune.com.

MT2131 Multi-Tuner: Dramatic Integration and Cost Reduction

A single-chip device implemented in a 7mm x 7mm 48-pin QFN package, the MT2131 receives frequencies in the full 48 MHz to 1.0 GHz range and converts a selected channel to a standard intermediate frequency (IF) between 30 MHz and 57 MHz. The tuner works with all known analog and digital demodulators, giving manufacturers maximum design flexibility.

Characterized by a very high level of integration, the MT2131 incorporates several critical RF components on chip, including:

-- Variable Gain Low Noise Amplifier

-- Closed-Loop AGC RF Gain Control

-- Integrated Broadband Power Detectors

-- Variable Gain IF Amplifier

-- Microtune's ClearTune Filter, and

-- FDC Path for DCR applications

Further reducing costs, the MT2131 offers a single-ended input to eliminate an expensive external transformer balun.

With unmatched integration, the MT2131 shrinks tuner size by approximately 65% compared to traditional tuner cans, making it ideal for picture-in picture, personal video recorder or other multi-tuner architectures or for small, space-constrained TV electronics.

Additional information about the MT2131 tuner is available at: http://www.microtune.com.

Price and Availability

The MT2131 tuner is sampling now to select customers and is priced at less than $3.00 in volume quantities. To simplify evaluation and design for qualified customers, Microtune offers a MicroTuner MT2131 RF Evaluation Board and Reference Design.

Industry Comments

Melissa Yokom, Research Analyst, Digital TV Entertainment, IMS Research

"The transition of all North American TVs to the digital standard is a monumental challenge, and during the next ten years, IMS Research projects that more than 300 million receivers will need to be converted to ATSC. Complicating the transition, multiple terrestrial and cable broadcast standards will continue to co-exist for many years. A terrestrial digital TV tuner that successfully addresses performance and multi-standard challenges, and at a low price point, will offer critical electronics in proliferating digital technology across the mass marketplace."

Gary Shapiro, President and CEO, Consumer Electronics Association (CEA)

"The U.S. is inches away from completing the transition to DTV. We applaud the work done by the House and the Senate in coming together on this issue. This legislation will provide the much needed certainty to expedite our nation's transition to DTV in an effective and pro-consumer manner. CEA has long supported a hard cut-off date for analog broadcasts and is pleased with the decision for the analog spectrum to be returned to the federal government by February 17, 2009. This deadline will provide certainty to manufacturers, retailers, consumers and all others with a stake in the transition."

About Microtune

Microtune, Inc. is a silicon and subsystems company that designs and markets radio frequency (RF) solutions for the consumer and automotive electronics markets. Inventor of the MicroTuner(TM) single-chip broadband TV tuner, Microtune offers a portfolio of advanced tuner, amplifier and upconverter products that enable the delivery of information and entertainment across new classes of consumer electronics devices. The Company currently holds 59 U.S. patents for its technology. Founded in 1996, Microtune is headquartered in Plano, Texas, with key design and sales centers located around the world. The website is http://www.microtune.com.

Microtune's New 3-in-1 TV Tuner Breaks Cost Barrier in Bringing Benchmark-Setting Digital TV Performance to Mass Market

...Eliminating more than one hundred components from the silicon tuner bill of materials (BOM), the MT2131 slashes external BOM cost by sixty percent. By breaking through the sub-$3.00 cost barrier, it finally enables manufacturers to deploy a tuner with an unmatched level of performance across all TV models, sizes and price points -- from multi-tuner, giant-screen home theatres to small, affordable LCD TVs and inexpensive DTV set-top converter boxes.

...the MT2131 ...is the only device, module or silicon, to fully support North American analog and digital TV transmissions across either cable or terrestrial broadcasts. Manufacturers can use our single, flexible tuner to cost-effectively smooth the digital transition across all kinds of TV electronics, while bridging the multiple standards that co-exist today."

...Engineered with excellent sensitivity, the MT2131 also exceeded, by a wide margin, the sensitivity-measurement tests published by the FCC this past December in its study of a large group of retail DTV receivers....

Microtune has published its internal benchmark tests of the MT2131 and a comparison of the MT2131 to the measurement test results of the FCC's study at: http://www.microtune.com.

MT2131 Multi-Tuner: Dramatic Integration and Cost Reduction

A single-chip device implemented in a 7mm x 7mm 48-pin QFN package, the MT2131 receives frequencies in the full 48 MHz to 1.0 GHz range and converts a selected channel to a standard intermediate frequency (IF) between 30 MHz and 57 MHz. The tuner works with all known analog and digital demodulators, giving manufacturers maximum design flexibility.

Characterized by a very high level of integration, the MT2131 incorporates several critical RF components on chip, including:

-- Variable Gain Low Noise Amplifier

-- Closed-Loop AGC RF Gain Control

-- Integrated Broadband Power Detectors

-- Variable Gain IF Amplifier

-- Microtune's ClearTune Filter...

Further reducing costs, the MT2131 offers a single-ended input to eliminate an expensive external transformer balun...

Additional information about the MT2131 tuner is available at: http://www.microtune.com.

Innerressin''

Note that the tuner can contains two stages of amplification, as well as I.F. conversion and filtering, and that the first stage of amplification is "low noise". Don't other tuners employ similar architecture?

The conventional wisdom pervading this forum used to be that amplifying at the receiver input was an exercise in futility because the signal had already dropped as close to the noise floor as it was going to get. Then, a year or so ago, I mentioned that about a year earlier, someone in this forum had bench-measured the noise figure of his own tuner and had been alarmed to observe that it was around 10dB, so I mentioned in my post that I had only seen one published tuner noise figure since then (from either RL Drake or PDI: I forget which) and it was also around 10dB, so I asked if anyone else had seen any published noise fiqures. I mentioned in related posts at the time that since I could buy assembled, "dime-store" grade inline amplifier products with noise figures of 5 to 6 dB for under ten bucks each, I figured that the noise level of all presently manufactured components had probably come down to the point where it would take some effort even make an amplifier with a 10dB noise figure. It seemed likely to me that the amplifier in these inline amps (I think I was paying $5.95 in single quantities for one with 10dB of gain and 5dB of noise) couldn't have cost more than pennies to enable the retail sales of a finished product at that price, then if even if a relatively low noise (4dB) amplifier chip cost as much as a dollar, which it surely did not, it would be foolish not to use it when building $300 tuner boxes and tuners integrated into $1,000+ TVs when the manufacturer would be reducing a potential source of customer dissatisfaction.

Does anyone know if the other integrated tuner cans have two stages of amplification, and if the tuner noise figures reported here were the simple, tuner can input/output ratios? If they were and are, then the basic model we use here to estimate the benefit of preamplification may well exaggerate that benefit.


Price and Availability

The MT2131 tuner is sampling now to select customers and is priced at less than $3.00 in volume quantities. To simplify evaluation and design for qualified customers, Microtune offers a MicroTuner MT2131 RF Evaluation Board and Reference Design.


"Coming soon, to a theater near you!"


"And now a word from our alternate sponsors..."

Industry Comments

Melissa Yokom, Research Analyst, Digital TV Entertainment, IMS Research
"The transition of all North American TVs to the digital standard is a monumental challenge, and during the next ten years, IMS Research projects that more than 300 million receivers will need to be converted to ATSC....

Gary Shapiro, President and CEO, Consumer Electronics Association (CEA)
"The U.S. is inches away from completing the transition to DTV. We applaud the work done by the House and the Senate in coming together on this issue. ..."



Note that these boilerplate, incorporated industry comments were not made in response to Microtune's press release and while they provide less knowledgeable press release readers with some useful context, they are not endorsements of, or even evaluations of, this product.

I didn't see anything in the Microtune announcement about multipath, which, in urban environments, is a far greater problem than signal level.

Is multipath handled after the tuner stage?

The Microtune MT2131 amplifies the RF signal and downconverts to an (amplified) IF (Intermediate Frequency) signal.
The IF signal must be processed by an external ATSC Decoder, which provides suppression of multipath via an Adaptive Equalization process.

Single Conversion tuners are normally used for OTA DTV.
The best published Noise Figures are about 5-7 dB ("typical"), the worse (i.e. spec maximum) about 8-10 db.
In the FCC sponsored test of OTA STB and DTV's (FCC-05-199, link in my 1/30/06 post above),
actual measured N.F. was about 7 dB +/- 1 dB.

You have to be careful comparing the N.F. for a broadband Preamp (3-6 dB) with the
CASCADED N.F. for an ATSC Tuner, which includes the contribution of each component.
The Single Conversion ATSC Tuner usually employs a 10-20 MHz RF filter prior to the first RF (or Mixer) stage.
Since this is typically a voltage variable filter, varactor diodes provide a tuning capability by varying
the capacitance across an inductor coil...which is higher loss than an old-school manually tuned capacitor.
For example the fol: http://www.infineon.com//upload/Document/cmc_upload/documents/084/467/AppNote_TUA6034_PartIII_ATSC.pdf
[Broken Link: Must now search for "TUA6034" at www.infineon.com]
www.ieee802.org/22/Meeting_documents/2005_Jan/22-05-0006-00-0000_Digital_Television_Tuner_Design.ppt

I've only run across two Double Conversion tuners in my many searches:
the original Zenith Grand Alliance (GA) ATSC Prototype and one and only one Samsung tuner module.
See ATSC_NTSC_TUNER_SPECS_REVA:
http://hdtv.forsandiego.com/messages/1/2846.html#POST20071

Note that the Microtune spec sheet shows a more sensitive N.F. when used for ATSC vice Cable, but offers no explanation.
Perhaps they configure it as a single conversion tuner (w/o RF stage) for OTA and double conversion tuner for Cable
(which has advantages with many strong signals)....
Maybe we'll find out when they post the Reference Design for this chip...

Earlier this week I visited the DTV Hotspot at NAB2006 (Natl Assoc of Broadcasters) in Las Vegas and took a picture inside Zoran's Prototype OTA Reference Design. Note the lack of big (i.e. expensive) chips.
It was one of several low-cost OTA STB's exhibited to adapt analog TV's for DTV reception.

Fol. Zoran website provides details re SupraHD 640 Display Driver chip, Oren (now Zoran) Cascade 2 ATSC/QAM Decoder chip and the Thomson DTT7602 Mini-Tuner Module (see Press Releases in bottom right):
http://www.zoran.com/SupraHD-640

The SupraHD 640 only supports 480i output via Component Video, S-Video and composite video, such as would be used in the low-cost, gov't subsidized OTA SD-STB.

Zoran also makes the SupraHD 660 (adds HD, HDMI and Firewire) and the SupraHD 680 (adds CableCard).
So if the SD-only SD-STB can be built for about $50 with a dumbed down 640, shouldn't they be able to build an HD-STB for under $100???

Zoran claims that the Cascade 2 ATSC/QAM Demodulator meets the ATSC A/74 Receiver Guidelines, including 0 dB Ghosts and the very difficult Brazil test ensembles, with an equalizer range of -34 to +78 usec.

That puts it into the Fifth Generation ATSC Receiver category.

The Zoran rep. said that they are only working with customers for embedded HDTV solutions, so don't look for a separate STB solution.

PS: I just noticed the fol. announcement of the Thompson 4300A ATSC Demodulator, which WOULD be released in STB form (Q: SD only?):
http://www.reed-electronics.com/electronicnews/article/CA6325679.html?ref=nbth
It also includes an announcement of the Jensen MPC4000 DTV Receiver for a Laptop computer.

Darn, wish I had seen this earlier....I missed it in all of the LIGHTS, CAMERA, INACTION....

The Microtune MT2131 amplifies the RF signal and downconverts to an (amplified) IF (Intermediate Frequency) signal.
The IF signal must be processed by an external ATSC Decoder, which provides suppression of multipath via an Adaptive Equalization process....

I've only run across two Double Conversion tuners in my many searches:
the original Zenith Grand Alliance (GA) ATSC Prototype and one and only one Samsung tuner module.

Why would anyone double convert a signal that was to be demodulated? NTSC heterodyne processors use double conversion to take advantage of having to engineer just one saw filter that can be used in all applications, and its bandpass filter design rolls off sharpest at the lowest frequency, thereby minimizing the introduction of adjacent channel noise accompanying its frequency-boosted output, which is then combined with adjacent NTSC channels, but with an ATSC signal. once they have "processed" it, which is to say, once they have tuned, filtered and preamplified it, I would expect it to be in optimal form for demodulation and therefore not in need of a second frequency conversion.


The Single Conversion ATSC Tuner usually employs a 10-20 MHz RF filter prior to the first RF (or Mixer) stage. Since this is typically a voltage variable filter, varactor diodes provide a tuning capability by varying the capacitance across an inductor coil...which is higher loss than an old-school manually tuned capacitor.

The introduction of a voltage variable input filter with a significant insertion loss into our black box concept of the tuner is a mixed blessing. On one hand, it means that the input signal that the first active component of the tuner sees is further weakened by the amount of the insertion loss of the tunable filter, which makes the effect of the noise of the tuner's first active stage a more significant factor in determining that stage's output's S/N ratio than it would be without such filter insertion loss.

On the other hand, since a filter inserted before the first preamplification stage of the frequency converting section of the tuner weakens any strong, undesired signals that are more than a couple of channels away from the desired, tuned signal, it means that many of the concerns expressed in this thread and elsewhere that strong, unintended off-air signals are overloading tuners must be tempered by the reality that in most instances, they are substantially weakened by the input bandpass filter and therefore would not have the same overloading effect on the tuner's first amplifier stage that an overly strong on-channel signal would have.

Holl_ands,
Did you look at the "pocket decoder" in the next booth (DTV Innonvations) at the DTV hotspot? It was smaller than a pack of cigarettes, had a tuner and the Micronas (Linx) 5th generation demod. It was connected via USB to a notebook that was displaying the live NAB show.

Yes, in the DTV Hotspot, dtv innovations showed their USB Tuner/Analyzer:
http://www.dtvinnovations.com/pages/home.htm
It was demonstrated with a partially completed software package that could display DTV on a Laptop,
a (not yet calibrated) signal strength, MPEG2 statistics and (eventually) various TS stream analyses.

In two places on the main floor, Sencore demo'd a finished USB Tuner/Analyzer product,
the DTU-234 RF Probe, which provides similiar capabilities:
http://www.sencore.com/products/dtu234.htm

Unfortunately, prices for these professional test instruments are still too high for the home hobbyist.

Sencore also demo'd an even more expensive RF Analyser which showed the received signal level for everything from CH2 thru CH69+.
It was easy to see that the intermod noise floor in the FM band was only 20 dB and about 45 dB in the UHF band
(must have been using a Preamp).
That would be very useful to differentiate between low signal strength situations and intermod noise limitations.

There are several USB NTSC and DTV tuners on the market now.

It would be interesting to know which ones display a BELIEVABLE RF signal level,
although the input bandwidth would probably be several channels wide.
Anyone want to write a simple little program for a Laptop and an inexpensive USB Tuner
that would plot the received signal strength throughout the entire VHF/UHF bands???

It would be much more useful than simply an SINR and/or "percentage of goodness" display.

I read some user reviews of a PCI card that uses the 5th generation ATI Theater chip. At least I'm assuming its 5th generation. People did not seem to report any improved signal sensitivity, and most complaints were about the buggy ATI software. Other complaints were slow channel changing and major system slowdowns on even fairly powerful PC's. Overall, I did not get the impression people were very impressed with the product and many returned them.

Maybe these glowing press releases about improved performance, features, and sensitivity were just the usual PR blitz designed to inflate the manufacturer's stock price.

In any event, I got tired of waiting for a 5th generation STB and bought an SIR-T451, which I'm fairly happy with. I'm sorry to point out the obvious, but this whole 5th generation thing seems to be a bit of a flop (IMHO).

In two places on the main floor, Sencore demo'd a finished USB Tuner/Analyzer product,
the DTU-234 RF Probe, which provides similiar capabilities:
http://www.sencore.com/products/dtu234.htm

Unfortunately, prices for these professional test instruments are still too high for the home hobbyist..

Previously, the most affordable Sencore FSM that comprehensively analyzed the ATSC signals was their model AT-1506, which sold for about $8,000, but that product is no longer listed in their website's product index.

I just requested a price quote from Sencore for the model DTU-234 RF probe. It appears to be just what I have been looking for. Most likely, I'll be buying one immediately if it can be supported by my laptop's Celeron 1.4Gz processor.

I read some user reviews of a PCI card that uses the 5th generation ATI Theater chip. At least I'm assuming its 5th generation. People did not seem to report any improved signal sensitivity, and most complaints were about the buggy ATI software. Other complaints were slow channel changing and major system slowdowns on even fairly powerful PC's. Overall, I did not get the impression people were very impressed with the product and many returned them.

Maybe these glowing press releases about improved performance, features, and sensitivity were just the usual PR blitz designed to inflate the manufacturer's stock price.

...this whole 5th generation thing seems to be a bit of a flop (IMHO).

I bought a Fusion5Gold USB which has a 5th generation chip in it. The thing takes nearly ten minutes to initialize on my laptop, and the remote control fails more than it succeeds, and I never got the hand of navigating back and forth between analog and digital.

I was hopeful that I could use it to watch TV while in a McDonalds, but when I tried to use it on Wisconsin Ave in DC, just a few miles from the transmitting towers, using its telescoping antenna, I could only get two stations reliably, and when I tried it at a highrise that had a master antenna system combining the signals from half a dozen antennas pointed at transmitters all around the azimuth and at distances varying from 5 to 40 miles, its performance was indistinguishable from that of my Radio Shack Accurian and my early Samsung, whose model number I don't remember.

I think that the industry didn't leap onto the 5th generation chip because by and large, those playing with the real money didn't see it as any kind of a panacea.

...It would be interesting to know which ones display a BELIEVABLE RF signal level, although the input bandwidth would probably be several channels wide.

Why do you suspect that? Do you think that they would simply measure the broadband power of whatever passes through the coarse input filter, which you said in an earlier post was 10-20Mz wide?

One cheap way to develop a more reliable internal signal level meter would be to have a 500Kz wide filter to sample the middle of the signal and then add to it a correction factor of about 10dB. Or they could measure the I.F. outputs broadband signal power and work back from that, if it has been saw-filtered by that point in the circuit.


Anyone want to write a simple little program for a Laptop and an inexpensive USB Tuner that would plot the received signal strength throughout the entire VHF/UHF bands???

It would be much more useful than simply an SINR and/or "percentage of goodness" display.

It would be useful for you if you were trying to simply peak the signal power or were trying to perform an engineering analysis of the relationships between signal power and signal lock reliability, and it might help someone who has the means to balance the relative strength of the signals to minimize the variation in input signal levels, but the S/N and "goodness" indicators have served a lot of hobbiests well, and I miss them when I only have a functionally limited FSM available that does not furnish them.

I think that the intention is to not display a wideband power as this is not very useful. Aside from the fact that you do an AGC on the input, what you really want to know is the errors from an ideal VSB signal. More of an SNR type measurement. Ideally you would want to see this on a channel basis and continuously updated for the current channel that you may be adjusting your antenna for.

...I just requested a price quote from Sencore for the model DTU-234 RF probe. It appears to be just what I have been looking for. Most likely, I'll be buying one immediately if it can be supported by my laptop's Celeron 1.4Gz processor.

The good news is, it can be supported by my laptop, provided that my USB ports are USB2 ports. I've never heard of USB2 ports. How can I tell? My laptop is a Gateway Model MX6025.

The bad news is, the probe costs over $2,000, so unless several MATV headend jobs come through the door in the very near future, I probably will pass on it.

The good news is, it can be supported by my laptop, provided that my USB ports are USB2 ports. I've never heard of USB2 ports. How can I tell? My laptop is a Gateway Model MX6025.

The bad news is, the probe costs over $2,000, so unless several MATV headend jobs come through the door in the very near future, I probably will pass on it.

From the Gateway site it looks like you have 4 USB 2.0 ports. Here is the link.
http://support.gateway.com/s/Mobile/Gateway/6000Series/5376sp13.shtml

Why do you suspect that? Do you think that they would simply measure the broadband power of whatever passes through the coarse input filter, which you said in an earlier post was 10-20Mz wide?

One cheap way to develop a more reliable internal signal level meter would be to have a 500Kz wide filter to sample the middle of the signal and then add to it a correction factor of about 10dB. Or they could measure the I.F. outputs broadband signal power and work back from that, if it has been saw-filtered by that point in the circuit.



It would be useful for you if you were trying to simply peak the signal power or were trying to perform an engineering analysis of the relationships between signal power and signal lock reliability, and it might help someone who has the means to balance the relative strength of the signals to minimize the variation in input signal levels, but the S/N and "goodness" indicators have served a lot of hobbiests well, and I miss them when I only have a functionally limited FSM available that does not furnish them.
I would expect that an "inexpensive" USB Tuner, such as those sold to display NTSC and/or ATSC programs on a laptop, would employ the usual NTSC/ATSC SuperHet design, using a varactor tuned RF BPF (typ 10-20 MHz BW) followed by the Mixer/Downconverter and IF Amp.
Although the IF strip may have a bandwidth just slightly more than 6 MHz, the IF derived AGC could also react to RF signals (e.g. intermods) on either side of the chosen channel.

A narrower bandwidth RF/IF receiver, such as is more common with prof. test equipment, would overcome this limitation...

Previously, the most affordable Sencore FSM that comprehensively analyzed the ATSC signals was their model AT-1506, which sold for about $8,000, but that product is no longer listed in their website's product index.

I just requested a price quote from Sencore for the model DTU-234 RF probe. It appears to be just what I have been looking for. Most likely, I'll be buying one immediately if it can be supported by my laptop's Celeron 1.4Gz processor.
From reading the spec sheets for the DTU-234 RF Probe, it does not appear to display the DTV video signal.
It will record a TS file....from which an individual MPEG2 stream can presumably be extracted (using non-Sencore s/w?) and then played back to view the video.....using Media Player or whatever???
But HD playback via Media Player requires a fairly fast laptop.....you might want to try playing back some MPEG2 files extracted from TS files.

Suggest you ask Sencore about laptop processor requirements for both the TS Recorder....and whatever else they may bundle for video playback...

Samsung and Rohde-Schwarz were demonstrating their proposed "A-VSB" TURBO STEAM system at NAB2006.
Samsung described the STB as having dual antenna diversity capability using Maximal Ratio Diversity combining (vice switching diversity). Obviously intended for automobile (and maybe handheld) appllications.

The Samsung rep said that a proposal had been submitted to ATSC, but I don't see anything posted on the ATSC website.....or anywhere else...
The brochure (see scans) appears to describe it as E-8VSB, except they've added a "TURBO PROCESSOR" functional block between the Reed-Solomon Encoder/Interleaver and the Trellis Encoder. I added a scan of the ATSC E-8VSB spec showing the changes.
I'm going to take a wild guess and speculate that it might be some soft of TURBO CODE they've added to improve performance.

In the wide view photo, R-S provided the pair of modulators on the right: one for regular 8VSB and the other for "A-VSB".
A UHF Channel Simulator sits on top, with the monitor displaying the various parameters (see photo) for the "A-VSB" channel
(I'm not sure whether or not it was a diversity test configuration).

The Samsung "A-VSB" STB is flanked by two spectrum analyzer displays.
The one on the right shows the nearly undisturbed channel feeding the normal 8VSB mini-receiver on the right,
whereas the analyzer on the left displays the severly disturbed channel feeding the "A-VSB" mini-receiver on the left.

The extremely small size of the receiver hid many artifacts--careful viewing revealed the screen to be frequently freezing--
and I didn't hear any audio in the demo.
Nonetheless, if the simulated multipath settings are to be believed, it is barely working under extremely difficult conditions--
including short delay echo within 3 dB--and 171 mph doppler.

================================================
Enhanced VSB (E-VSB) specs were approved in 2004, which the latest specs now call E-8VSB.
Candidate specs for H.264 and VC-1 enhancements to E-8VSB are currently under consideration, but do not include TURBO STREAM.

"In the beginning" there was something called Advanced Television (ATV), with specs developed by ATSC (Advanced Television Systems Committee).
It was a huge mistake to confusingly call this new variation Advanced VSB ("A-VSB").

For those who can't make out the obscured receiver mods, the sequence of boxes from RIGHT to LEFT are as follows:

Antenna--Demodulator--Equalizer--Viterbi Decoder--NEW TURBO DECODER--
--Data Rec Interleave--Reed Solomon Decoder--Derandomize--
NEW TURBO PACKET DEMUX--Visual Display

===================================================
Here are photos of the "A-VSB" Demo:

The only new one is Samsung's Gemini that got a very high score at CRC.

LG sells its LGDT3303 - no new demods.

Linx technology for 8VSB demodulatation is currently used by:
Thomson - for their own STB
Micronas - don't know of any system
ST - pushing hard TV and STB makers to use their STV0370


An update to an old thread.

The major performance criteria for ATSC demodulator performance is the A/74 ATSC Receiver recommendations which include 50 (actually 47...) field streams.
The A/74 includes other items such as equalizer range, etc.

Most popular ATSC demodulators are now:
- ATi's T31x
- LG – LG DT3303
- Zoran – Cas-220
- Broadcom – BCM3520/17
- STi – STV0370

Other demodulators not yet in full mass production:
- Micronas - DRXTM 3942H
- Samsung – S5H1406
- MTK (Mediatek) – MT5111

Most of today's integrated TVs are shipped with the above 5th generation demodulators.
The most important performance is the ability of the receiver to cope with "ghosts" which are reflections of the main signal, some of the "ghosts" could be dynamic ones; in particular in urban areas where in-door antenna is being used.
So, the "dynamic" performance of the demodulator is important.

The Samsung S5H1406 is old news. Samsung has a new design that they are sampling. Unfortunately, I'm under NDA and can't talk about it.

Ron

I bought a Fusion5Gold USB which has a 5th generation chip in it. The thing takes nearly ten minutes to initialize on my laptop, and the remote control fails more than it succeeds, and I never got the hand of navigating back and forth between analog and digital.

I was hopeful that I could use it to watch TV while in a McDonalds, but when I tried to use it on Wisconsin Ave in DC, just a few miles from the transmitting towers, using its telescoping antenna, I could only get two stations reliably, and when I tried it at a highrise that had a master antenna system combining the signals from half a dozen antennas pointed at transmitters all around the azimuth and at distances varying from 5 to 40 miles, its performance was indistinguishable from that of my Radio Shack Accurian and my early Samsung, whose model number I don't remember.

I think that the industry didn't leap onto the 5th generation chip because by and large, those playing with the real money didn't see it as any kind of a panacea.
Well, here's another data point. I just purchased a Fusion HDTV 5 USB Gold, and I have been very happy with the performance. It picks up all the DTV stations in the canyons of NY except one little PBS station. It picks up all the DTV stations in DC except for two stations that seem to be problems for everyone. It works in Boston, even with the antenna in a potted plant (don't ask.) If you are trying to pick up weaker stations, you may have to lay the whip antenna down. TV signals are usually horizontally polarized, which is why most TV antennas are horizontal elements.

I haven't tried the remote, but I'm only watching on a laptop at this point. It loads within seconds of launch. I haven't tried the recording functions, but speaking for its performance as a receiving device, I'm very happy.

I'm not surprised that the box didn't do anything special when hooked to a master antenna. The 5th gen decoder works better than other only on a ghosty signal. Most other boxes should work OK on a clean master antenna.

Haven't been tracking computer/HDTV developments, so until today missed this running thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=373490&page=1&pp=30) in the home theater PC forum about onair hardware. But it looks like only the most recent posts deal with the newest 5th-gen-chip Onair model, with someone posting from Autumn Wave, the N. American center for the S. Korea firm. -- John

Just wanted to update this thread a little bit. Since John's post, we (AutumnWave / OnAir Solution) have introduced the OnAir USB HDTV GT a few months ago. The difference between the GT and the Creator is basically that the Encoder is removed... reducing costs and size. The GT is still powered by the LG 5th gen Chipset (just as the Creator is.)

I created a new topic for support of the OnAir tuners a few weeks ago. If you're looking for customers who have experienced the benefit of a 5th gen tuner, you can feel free to read the thread:
AutumnWave / OnAir USB HDTV Tuners (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=695589)

Thanks,

- Ryan Pertusio
AutumnWave Technical Support
OnAir Solution North America

Just wanted to update this thread a little bit. Since John's post, we (AutumnWave / OnAir Solution) have introduced the OnAir USB HDTV GT a few months ago. The difference between the GT and the Creator is basically that the Encoder is removed... reducing costs and size. The GT is still powered by the LG 5th gen Chipset (just as the Creator is.)

I created a new topic for support of the OnAir tuners a few weeks ago. If you're looking for customers who have experienced the benefit of a 5th gen tuner, you can feel free to read the thread:
AutumnWave / OnAir USB HDTV Tuners (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=695589)

Thanks,

- Ryan Pertusio
AutumnWave Technical Support
OnAir Solution North America
Thanks for the news. Stlll fuzzy here about computer HD-tuning solutions. A very basic outline would help. Such as, this latest OnAir device requires what minimal requirements in a computer and video card? My ~2004 Dell 2400 desktop (no video card) runs ~18' from my HD and has no link to it. Could the OnAir be set up ~18' from the computer (long USB cable)? Guess that would then require a long resolution-robbing YPbPr cable (or VGA) back to my 1080i CRt RPTV (no DVI or HDMI).

Still interested in acquiring a LG-chip tuning solution in multipath-City (NY), where I can tune nothing ~9 blocks from the transmitters, but couldn't see buying a dedicated HD-tuning computer and getting into constant bug fixes; maybe they've been ironed out by now? Also, it's not clear what makes this no-encoder model different in hookup and operation/performance. -- John

John,
OnAir Solution & AutumnWave have identified users like yourself who might connect their OnAir HDTV device to their TV. We're currently making revisions to the "OnAir Set Top Box (http://www.autumnwave.com/content/view/33/123/)" for entry into the market. This STB will sit next to your TV, and won't require a computer. This seems like the ideal device for consumers like yourself. However, this won't be available for a little while yet.

If you had a OnAir USB HDTV GT (or other manufacturer's USB device to be fair), you'd need a long USB cable, yes... but remember that USB cables lose quality at long distances. (You might get away with at most 15' without using a powered USB hub.)

Antenna (Coax) >> OnAir USB HDTV GT (USB) >> Computer (VGA) and Audio cables >> TV

Your Dell appears to meet (and exceed) the minimum requirements, though:
- Video card (You'll need DxVA support, which you have with Intel Extreme Graphics and the latest video card driver)
- USB 2.0 (which your Dell has).
- CPU (At least 800MHz, which your Dell should also cover.
- Memory (at least 128MB of system memory, which your Dell should have.)

The GT is small because it lacks the hardware encoder. (The encoder is used for Analog sources, not digital... so you might see higher CPU usage while watching Analog TV.) Due to the removal of the encoder, the power requirements also allow the GT to be self-powered via USB. The Creator (w/ Encoder) requires a seperate DC 5V power adapter.

The task is honestly not easy with any USB/PCI HDTV tuner in the market... but it is possible. You can always purchase the GT or Creator, and return it (within the return time period) if it doesn't appear to work to your satisfaction.

- Ryan Pertusio
AutumnWave Technical Support
OnAir Solution North America

Heck, the first post in this thread was from 3/15/2005 and even then said it was already an old topic.

I guess we should be asking for 6'th gen receiver chip news now. ;)

- Tom

John,
OnAir Solution & AutumnWave have identified users like yourself who might connect their OnAir HDTV device to their TV. We're currently making revisions to the "OnAir Set Top Box (http://www.autumnwave.com/content/view/33/123/)" for entry into the market. This STB will sit next to your TV, and won't require a computer. This seems like the ideal device for consumers like yourself. However, this won't be available for a little while yet.

Thanks again. Seems just what I need. Hopefully the engineers can craft something where the front-end and LG-chip combination matches or exceeds the often cited test model (never manufactured) that performed so well a few years back in Schubin's NYC apartment. I'd be first in line! (Need at least a 1080i YPbPr output to plug into my Zektor 4-in-1-out switcher.)

Appreciate the computer requirement breakdown for current products. -- John

What is really needed is full power output from digital transmitters and situating the transmitters higher on the towers. That said, better receivers would help allot also. I guess the only practical way to get a 5th generation receiver is to buy an LG brand plasma TV with one built in. I wonder what kind of chips are in most RPTVs produced today. Are they any good? My set was built in 2003 and it works OK with a Silver Sensor indoor antenna, but it could be allot better. I think my chip is an ATI.

IB

What is really needed is full power output from digital transmitters and situating the transmitters higher on the towers. That said, better receivers would help allot also. I guess the only practical way to get a 5th generation receiver is to buy an LG brand plasma TV with one built in. I wonder what kind of chips are in most RPTVs produced today. Are they any good? My set was built in 2003 and it works OK with a Silver Sensor indoor antenna, but it could be allot better. I think my chip is an ATI.

IB

I agree completely on the power and height issues of transmitters!

I have a Sony 42A10 which has probably the best tuner I own. The ones I have are the Dish 6000, Samsung 165, LG 3510, Zenith 420, and the VOOM. Of these the VOOM was the best. The tuner in the Sony doesn't have all the features that I want(lack of signal strength meter) but it is superior. I don't know what kind of chip it has though. If someone makes a stand alone tuner as good as the built-in Sony, I would definitely buy it!

I guess the only practical way to get a 5th generation receiver is to buy an LG brand plasma TV with one built in.
At CES I was told (by an engineer type who seemed very reliable, not a marketing type) that any LG HDTV with a built-in cable-card slot used the 5th gen chipset. I haven't checked but I think that is more than just their plasma line now; I think there are lots of cheaper sets that also use the 5th gen chip.

At CES I was told (by an engineer type who seemed very reliable, not a marketing type) that any LG HDTV with a built-in cable-card slot used the 5th gen chipset. I haven't checked but I think that is more than just their plasma line now; I think there are lots of cheaper sets that also use the 5th gen chip.


It is true for all other makers as well.
The only 4th gen. ATSC demod is the old NXT2003 (ATi =>AMD...) all the rest are new 5th gen.

For those wanting to investigate where "Advanced VSB" is going, check out this slide and audio show.

http://www.iptv.org/dtv/2006/media_pres.cfm?ses=5&id=7&Track=T

For those wanting to investigate where "Advanced VSB" is going, check out this slide and audio show.

http://www.iptv.org/dtv/2006/media_pres.cfm?ses=5&id=7&Track=T
I hope everyone knows what A-VSB does. It provides the ability for local broadcasters to transmit to mobile (i.e. rapidly moving) receivers at the expense of payload.

All HDTV advocates should carefully watch this. Some broadcasters (Sinclair is pushing this hard) want to use their government-supplied free spectrum to do mobile rather than HDTV.

Anyone lifted the lid on the TiVo Series 3 HD-DVR to see what it's using? The ATSC tuners in it are the very best I've ever used, including the LG, DirecTV HR10-250, the Dish 942/622, and two late-model Mits displays among others.

I think it's clear that mobile TV reception is where the money is. Look at the sales of iPod, etc and the fact that the younger generation actually likes to watch TV shows on these devices. We are the dinosaurs. Wanting full bandwidth HDTV on large (>50") screens with multi-channel surround sound is a small niche market. :(

Rich, I believe your right. If you listen to the audio from the Iowa convention, you will see that they will not commit to a payload.

I must be reading the Adobe Flash slideshow wrong as I don't really see the need to have TV while moving at 216mph, maybe at 100 or so... :rolleyes:

Don't forget aircraft.

An update to an old thread.

The major performance criteria for ATSC demodulator performance is the A/74 ATSC Receiver recommendations which include 50 (actually 47...) field streams.
The A/74 includes other items such as equalizer range, etc.

Most popular ATSC demodulators are now:
- ATi's T31x
- LG – LG DT3303
- Zoran – Cas-220
- Broadcom – BCM3520/17
- STi – STV0370

Other demodulators not yet in full mass production:
- Micronas - DRXTM 3942H
- Samsung – S5H1406
- MTK (Mediatek) – MT5111

Most of today's integrated TVs are shipped with the above 5th generation demodulators.
The most important performance is the ability of the receiver to cope with "ghosts" which are reflections of the main signal, some of the "ghosts" could be dynamic ones; in particular in urban areas where in-door antenna is being used.
So, the "dynamic" performance of the demodulator is important.
In Aug05, CRC tested the prototype Samsung ATSC Receiver, which reportedly used an off-the-shelf Alps tuner
and the mysterious "Gemini" ATSC Decoder chip.
The performance was considerably better than the prototype LG/Zenith "fifth gen" prototype.

Since the new Samsung DTB-H260F contains the Alps TDQU3 tuner and an ATI Xilleon 240H Display Processor chip
that INCLUDES the ATSC/NTSC/QAM Demodulator, I'm going to speculate that the ATI Xilleon 240 is the "Gemini" product:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8868013#post8868013

Don't forget aircraft.
Yes, I thought of that but it seems a rather small group of people it would effect, or be useful to. How many private small planes are there per capita? Can't be many at all, 1 per 100,000 people maybe?

"Viewing" audiencce would be very tiny in the aircraft market:
There are roughly 5,000 (max) aircraft using IFR (commercial and larger private aircraft) actually IN THE AIR across ALL of North America:
http://flightaware.com/analysis/graphs/total.rvt

But with so many co-channel stations being receivable at high altitudes--and target speed of 400-600 mph---good luck getting A-VSB to work!!!!!

Large, fast aircraft will have to use alternative systems--like SATCOM.

The smaller, slower single prop market isn't very big either---most of them are parked.....

So there is a very small group that could take advantage of it. Maybe I'm just old-school, but the idea of watching TV in a moving vehicle, or small airplane, just seems a little dangerous. Granted the driver/pilot would not be allowed to use it, so it would be just for passengers, and I would think there would be an even smaller pool of them since the driver/owner of the vehicle/airplane would most likely be alone most of the time.

I guess trains, buses and boats could make use of it, but how many of those go 200mph?

It just seems like a lot useless technology.

I guess another try to get VSB to work. Let face it, single carrier system. Carrier gets nulled, your toast...

I guess another try to get VSB to work.No, more like trying to find a way for broadcasters to make a buck off digital.

They keep shooting themselves in the foot by allocating bandwidth for anything but HD, and can't figure out why HD hasn't really taken off. First it was subchannels, mobile is coming, as is data and who knows what else.

I can not understand why they won't give HD a chance.

I agree, for the $$$. I hope these next generation receivers can handle compressed content better than multipath cause it may be the next issue. HD lite OTA.

> Most popular ATSC demodulators are now:
> - ATi's T31x
> - LG - LG DT3303
> - Zoran - Cas-220
> - Broadcom - BCM3520/17
> - STi - STV0370

Is the Cas-220 the same as the Cascade2 ?

http://www.crc.ca/en/html/crc/home/research/broadcast/rtnt
has test results for Linx, Zenith/LG and Samsung.

Are there any test results or reviews of the Cascade2?
Or the Zoran/Oren OR51132 ?

The CRC report states, "This Samsung ATSC 8-VSB receiver, based on Samsung Gemini chip and using an ALPS tuner, is the best DTV receiver that CRC ever tested up to now. It has very impressive multipath and C/N performances."

Most impressive, but is this combination in any existing or planned Samsung consumer unit? What's in the DTBH2650F?

The CRC report states, "This Samsung ATSC 8-VSB receiver, based on Samsung Gemini chip and using an ALPS tuner, is the best DTV receiver that CRC ever tested up to now. It has very impressive multipath and C/N performances."

Most impressive, but is this combination in any existing or planned Samsung consumer unit? What's in the DTBH2650F?
You must mean the DTB-H260F, which was discussed just a few posts ago:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8868168&highlight=gemini#post8868168

> Most popular ATSC demodulators are now:
> - ATi's T31x
> - LG - LG DT3303
> - Zoran - Cas-220
> - Broadcom - BCM3520/17
> - STi - STV0370

Is the Cas-220 the same as the Cascade2 ?

http://www.crc.ca/en/html/crc/home/research/broadcast/rtnt
has test results for Linx, Zenith/LG and Samsung.

Are there any test results or reviews of the Cascade2?
Or the Zoran/Oren OR51132 ?

Cascade is the "family" name, Cas-220 is a part number of the IC.

Cas-220 = Cascade2 ( a 5th generation 8-VSB Demd.)
OR51132 = Cascade1

In Aug05, CRC tested the prototype Samsung ATSC Receiver, which reportedly used an off-the-shelf Alps tuner
and the mysterious "Gemini" ATSC Decoder chip.
The performance was considerably better than the prototype LG/Zenith "fifth gen" prototype.

Since the new Samsung DTB-H260F contains the Alps TDQU3 tuner and an ATI Xilleon 240H Display Processor chip
that INCLUDES the ATSC/NTSC/QAM Demodulator, I'm going to speculate that the ATI Xilleon 240 is the "Gemini" product:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8868013#post8868013


Well....
Gimini is a Samsung's ATSC Demodulator.
Samsung already integrated it into their Tuner promoting it to the DTV market as a NIM ( RF TV Tuner + Demodulator).

Samsung's Tuner operation is SEMCO. (Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co.)

> Cascade is the "family" name, Cas-220 is a part number of the IC.
>
> Cas-220 = Cascade2 ( a 5th generation 8-VSB Demd.)
> OR51132 = Cascade1

Thank you.

FYI: Thompson posted (limited) specs on two ATSC_QAM_NTSC Decoder chips:
http://www.thomson.net/EN/Home/Technology/technology_solutions/thomson_4110c.htm
Claims it "meets" ATSC A/74 with +/- 40 usec multipath.

They also posted detailed performance specs for NIMs (tuner modules):
http://www.thomson.net/EN/Home/Technology/technology_solutions/TunersRFSolutions/ModelList.html?category=Digital%20Terrestrial%20Tuners%20NIM s
One of the three even supports the Smart Antenna option....

The sixth is back in the news:

http://www.twice.com/article/CA6434401.html

The sixth is back in the news:

http://www.twice.com/article/CA6434401.html

Would be interesting to see what performance it has.
How many streams of the 50 A/74 it receives, etc...

Good to hear that they will offer a STB that incorporates this chip. I just hope that they will offer a HD version of the STB in addition to the non-HD version required by the coupon redemption.

Rick R

I think CECB's killed this thread. :)