Any recent 5th generation receiver chip news? - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 433 Old 03-21-2005, 01:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sregener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southeast MN
Posts: 3,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by William Smith
Don't get me wrong I never said 8-VSB didn't work.. I have said I don't think it was the best choice and its going to take a lot of work to make it perform to people's expectations in the real world.

I think the gist of what you've been saying is that television stations are losing their shirts to put out digital signals that few people can receive. And with the full-power requirements coming up, they're going to lose more. Now, if this isn't a slap at the current receiver technology and it's ability, I don't know what is.

I can tell you that my wife isn't exactly a videophile, and she thinks digital upconverts of analog programming now looks "fuzzy." She looks at analog pictures, whether at a friend's house with cable, or on our own with an antenna, and says, "ick!"

In the meantime, I have to depend on out-of-market reception for ABC and CBS because ABC is running at 4.9kw from the base of their tower, and they're 45 miles or so away. CBS is running a respectable 200kw, but they're on the roof of their station, which is over 60 miles away. Neither of these, in my opinion, is "doing their part" to ensure coverage of their DMA. And I live in the largest city in my DMA, with over 100,000 citizens. This ignores the public television station that *still* isn't even on the air!

But I'm wondering what it is you think the public is expecting. After all, if you look at the analog images on my website, only one of them would be deemed "watchable" by many people. The others are a snowy and ghosty mess where you couldn't write down a telephone number if it appeared at the bottom of the screen. Are you saying that people with that kind of reception should expect to get flawless digital reception? What kind of technology would permit that kind of reception, especially at the weak power levels many stations have chosen to use to back their digital signal with?

I've told my friends that once the local stations do go live with full-powered signals from antennas placed higher than ant level, they'll get great reception of all the digital signals with a simple Channel Master 4221 strapped to their chimney. I tell them this because I've seen how easy digital reception is with a moderately-powered signal.

I think the #1 problem with the digital transition has been that many people have compared VHF analog reception to UHF digital reception, which is as close as you can get to comparing horses and apples. And yes, we have a long way to go before any digital UHF signal is going to be as easy to receive and as able to penetrate buildings as analog VHF has. Maybe somebody needs to rewrite the laws of physics for that to happen.

At least in my neck of the woods, it isn't the CEA that isn't doing its job - it's the broadcasters.

But when the engineers and station people like yourself come on this board and tell people that this stuff doesn't work - which flies in the face of real-world experience by an awful lot of us - do you really think average people are going to go rushing down to the electronics superstore and buy a tuner? Go find the nearest mirror, point directly at it, and you'll have a good idea where the blame belongs for stations who go into the red with their digital broadcast signals.
sregener is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 433 Old 03-21-2005, 01:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sregener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southeast MN
Posts: 3,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by elicross
In any case, there is no one forcing anyone to do anything. There are a lot of drawbacks to a market-based economy...

I don't want to go too far down the economic bunny-trail, but this has to be corrected.

The FCC is forcing licensees to broadcast digitally or face the revocation of their liceneses. They have set minimum power requirements, minimum coverage areas, and minimum programming requirements for broadcasters. This is not a market-based economic program. The FCC is requiring tuners in televisions manufactured for sale. This is government control over the means of production, pure and simple.

The digital television revolution in America is not being driven by the CEA or the broadcasters, or the market. It is being driven exclusively by the US federal government.
sregener is offline  
post #93 of 433 Old 03-21-2005, 02:17 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
inky blacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,786
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
"they'll get great reception of all the digital signals with a simple Channel Master 4221 strapped to their chimney."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The issue with the 5th generation LG chip is that it allows indoor antenna users to get adequate digital reception. The other chips do not in most cases. It was reported that the LG chip not only reduced interference from ghosting, but also required just 1/4 the signal strength to get a stable picture.

If you have the luxury of an outdoor antenna, you situation is not so critical and a 4th generation chip may be all you need, but huge numbers of people live in apartments and are not allowed to install an outdoor antenna. That is the issue,...adequate indoor reception.

IB
inky blacks is offline  
post #94 of 433 Old 03-21-2005, 02:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sregener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southeast MN
Posts: 3,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by inky blacks
The issue with the 5th generation LG chip is that it allows indoor antenna users to get adequate digital reception. The other chips do not in most cases. It was reported that the LG chip not only reduced interference from ghosting, but also required just 1/4 the signal strength to get a stable picture.

If you have the luxury of an outdoor antenna, you situation is not so critical and a 4th generation chip may be all you need, but huge numbers of people live in apartments and are not allowed to install an outdoor antenna. That is the issue,...adequate indoor reception.

I'm sure the 5th generation chipset is wonderful. In fact, I want one because I have so many weak signals (even after they go full power, they'll still be weak due to distance.) I also have occasional breakups of distant stations when airplanes decide to fly over my house.

I don't think the majority in America live in apartment buildings. When I did live in an apartment, they had a "community antenna" that was free for all to use. Granted, it didn't get very good reception, but based on my results with digital reception, I'm willing to bet it would have been enough to get stable signals.

I think what most people seem to want is unreasonable - they want perfect digital reception in places where the analog picture is simply unwatchable. The fact that this might even be technically possible is a miracle of modern technology, not a flaw of any transmission methodology. (Again, we have to compare like to like. If their analog is on VHF and the digital is on UHF, that's not a fault of the transmission standard. The different frequencies act differently.)
sregener is offline  
post #95 of 433 Old 03-21-2005, 03:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ChrisW6ATV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Hayward, Collie-fornia USA
Posts: 4,205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:


Originally posted by sregener
I think what most people seem to want is unreasonable - they want perfect digital reception in places where the analog picture is simply unwatchable. The fact that this might even be technically possible is a miracle of modern technology, not a flaw of any transmission methodology. (Again, we have to compare like to like. If their analog is on VHF and the digital is on UHF, that's not a fault of the transmission standard. The different frequencies act differently.)

Very well put. Before anyone can say "I have a problem receiving digital TV, and it is unreasonable", the first criterion must be "Can you receive a ghost-free analog signal on a nearby channel with the same antenna?". If the answer is "No", then it is unreasonable to expect good digital reception. Yes, it may happen some day, somehow, on some stations, with some receiver(s), but don't expect it. The one problem that can be put on broadcasters is limited power output compared to their analog signal.

I have a hard time imagining that 8VSB/ATSC demodulator 'generations' were something like '10% better than the last' through the fourth generation and this magical fifth one is 300% better than the fourth generation...

Chris

"It's [expletive] lame to watch Jaws, a film that uses the 2.40 ratio as well as any ever produced, in the wrong format on HBO." -Steven Soderbergh, Oscar-winning director

ChrisW6ATV is offline  
post #96 of 433 Old 03-21-2005, 04:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
William Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Lexington,Kentucky,USA
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:


Originally posted by sregener
I think the gist of what you've been saying is that television stations are losing their shirts to put out digital signals that few people can receive. And with the full-power requirements coming up, they're going to lose more. Now, if this isn't a slap at the current receiver technology and it's ability, I don't know what is.

Yes it is the receiver folks turn to take some of the wrath of the public.

You can't find a sales droid who knows anything about HD or DTV other than "you have to have satellite or cable"...



Quote:


But when the engineers and station people like yourself come on this board and tell people that this stuff doesn't work - which flies in the face of real-world experience by an awful lot of us - do you really think average people are going to go rushing down to the electronics superstore and buy a tuner? Go find the nearest mirror, point directly at it, and you'll have a good idea where the blame belongs for stations who go into the red with their digital broadcast signals. [/b]

I never said it didn't work .. I did say it's not as good as it could be..

If you check our paperwork you will see we have been running 16 DTV transmitters at their full authorized power since the day we fired them up. The first station went on in August 1999, most in 2001 and 2002 , and the last in March 2003.

Well ahead of the FCC mandated timelines..


Most of our stations are operating at about 50kw EARP. Had the FCC stuck to their formula for DTV power the levels would have been half that.. Our testing has proven that as far as distance goes the digital covers better than analog.

We have been doing our part....but we don't build receivers.
William Smith is offline  
post #97 of 433 Old 03-21-2005, 05:21 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
inky blacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,786
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
"I think what most people seem to want is unreasonable - they want perfect digital reception in places where the analog picture is simply unwatchable. "

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

In what magic land is an analogue OTA TV signal watchable on a 50" or larger TV?

So why did we switch to digital at all? That was the main point! Digital has the promise to cure all the ills of analogue reception. Even in the best of situations, analogue TV pictures are flawed and muddy. Digital is crystal clear, and ghosting should not be a problem as that can be addressed and corrected electronically through signal processing.

I live in a city where I get all the stations digitally, but when the wind blows some stations break up. Others drop on and off for no obvious reason. A stronger signal and better electronic signal processing could easily cure all the problems I am having with reception. If the scheduled July boost in broadcast power makes my reception allot better, I may not even need a 5th chip, but trouble caused by the wind blowing the trees around is not likely a problem of low signal power.

LG has great new chip and other better chips are in the pipeline. Which chip is best will be found by consumer testing, but right now LG is the only proven winner. Maybe the others will be as good, but they have not been tested by skeptical 3rd party users. ATI has a long history of making erroneous claims of "cracking the code" for great indoor digital reception. LG has not just claimed it, they won over their worst skeptic, Sinclair Broadcasting. That is quite a victory for them, but now they have to let us buy their chip without purchasing their expensive televisions to go with it.

IB
inky blacks is offline  
post #98 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 06:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sregener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southeast MN
Posts: 3,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by William Smith
You can't find a sales droid who knows anything about HD or DTV other than "you have to have satellite or cable"...

I never said it didn't work .. I did say it's not as good as it could be..

...We have been doing our part....but we don't build receivers.

First of all, sales droids who get paid minimum wage have been uninformed for decades. This is nothing new, and it's not about to change. As others have said in other forums, "If you want service, why do you go to the cheapest place in town?" Digital television is new, and it is different from what came before. We keep hearing about how educational television is, and how people learn information from it and retain it better than from other sources (both of these are claims I would challenge, but that's another story,) so why is the television industry so slow to toot their own horn on this? Last night, I watched WCCO-DT as they began their night of HD programming. WCCO is a CBS O&O station. They had a little "HD" icon in the middle of the screen, much like NBC had a "In Stereo" icon in the 80s. That was it. No mention that this is available over-the-air. No mention that HD is free. Just an "HD" icon that is, I guess, supposed to tell people that they could be watching the program in HD if they could find out from somebody else how to get it.

I'll quote a few things you've said in this thread:

"People on here blame broadcasters for all the problems in DTV, They complain about reception issues and the contortions they have to go through to get even basic functionality but no one complains about poor receiver design..

The cost of the DTV transition for the incumbent broadcasters has been enormous and yet the receiver manufacturers ( who stand to make the most money from the transition) are still not in the game..

In my opinion, the mod standard IS the biggest problem (even worse than PSIP)... second only to the pack of lies that the keep coming from the receiver side of " its just around the corner"...

My argument is that unless the receiver issue is fixed, the industry is at a standstill... With the high power mandate just around the corner, stations will start to really bleed red on their DTV services..."


You may be doing your part in broadcasting a high-powered signal, and for that I congratulate you. In my experience, it's rare that stations in small to medium markets went full powered until they were forced to. But there's another issue here.

You're here as a person on the "inside." You're a guy who is supposed to know about digital television, and when you appear here, you speak as an expert. How could anyone reading the above quotes from you not reach the conclusion that ATSC 8VSB isn't ready for the masses? How could anyone not conclude that the best thing to do is to wait until these new magical boxes arrive? How could anyone who is on the fence not say, "This guy's job is to provide a reliable signal, and he's saying that it can't be done yet"?

That was my issue. That is my point. You, by proclaiming how much greater COFDM would have been, and by complaining about how awful STBs are (and granted, first and second generation boxes were pretty bad) today, are making sure that people aren't going to run out and make the transition to digital television. It is people like you who insist that what we have doesn't work that lead people not to buy. It's not the CEA. It's not the STBs themselves (because the new ones are quite good.) It's the "MrDTV"s and "William Smith"s of the world who keep screaming about how bad things are that is keeping this technology from moving forward.

I thought the Congressional demonstration was impressive. They had their antenna indoors, pointing out a window into an enclosed court. IOW, multipath hell. The analog signal looked awful. Yet they could get a perfect, dropout-free digital signal. The STBs have arrived. They work. Maybe they could be better (but I think we can say that about just about anything in this world, can't we?) but they're pretty darn good.
sregener is offline  
post #99 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 06:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
David McRoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Historic College Park In Lake Worth, FL, USA
Posts: 2,412
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by William Smith


5. Clear Channel recently ordered all its AM stations not running music programming to reduce their audio bandwidth to 5 kHz. and 6 kHz for the music stations. They have also stated they are going to push to make this a national mandate.


Just wondering, William, what's their motivation behind this?

HiDefDave
 

WPTV/WFLX West Palm Beach, FL

David McRoy is offline  
post #100 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 06:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sregener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southeast MN
Posts: 3,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by inky blacks
In what magic land is an analogue OTA TV signal watchable on a 50" or larger TV?

So why did we switch to digital at all? That was the main point! Digital has the promise to cure all the ills of analogue reception. Even in the best of situations, analogue TV pictures are flawed and muddy. Digital is crystal clear, and ghosting should not be a problem as that can be addressed and corrected electronically through signal processing.

Maybe your definition of "watchable" and mine aren't the same, but before I bought my HDTV, I had a 46" television I watched at the "way-too-close" range of 7'. I had an antenna on my roof. I got watchable analog signals of all my local stations, some over 50 miles away. They weren't "perfect" but I didn't have to squint to read the score, and I didn't have to guess where the baseball was. I had cable for a while, and my antenna beat their picture hands down. I have a friend who has a 54" widescreen HDTV monitor, and his analog pictures from his antenna look so good his friends are asking him if the picture is high def.

We switched to digital because it offered greater resolution, and the promise that minor reception flaws wouldn't be apparent. In our area, one of the stations sent their analog picture over microwave before converting it to digital, and the analog picture from the station looked better than the digital one on my set because there were no MPEG2 artifacts on the analog version and the color depth was higher. Digital is not always better. Digital is a different transmission method than analog. Source matters. And when using lossy compression like MPEG2, bit rates matter. I've seen horrible-looking digital programming, and great-looking analog.

Anyone who thought that digital promised to cure all the ills of analog reception without introducing some new ones of its own was mistaken. You never have snow or ghosting on a digital picture as a result of problems with reception. But you can have dropouts, freezes, and macroblocking. The fact is, you can maintain a "perfect" picture longer with digital than with analog due to FEC, but that perfect picture doesn't last forever and no one ever claimed it would. If it did, I'd be getting stations from 1,000 miles away because "digital cures all the ills of analog reception."
sregener is offline  
post #101 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 06:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kenglish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Posts: 5,389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 31
"5. Clear Channel recently ordered all its AM stations not running music programming to reduce their audio bandwidth to 5 kHz. and 6 kHz for the music stations. They have also stated they are going to push to make this a national mandate."

I'm with Dave....what is their motivation? And, why do they think all AMs should destroy their signals?

Sounds like my Denon "NAB SuperTuner" and all that stuff I have for AM reception can just go to the dump. (Of course, what I heard last week, when I did a bit of AM BCB DXing, turned my stomach enough to give up on the AM "talk" stuff anyway .)

Ken English, Sr. Engineer, KSL-TV.
"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent the Company positions, strategies or opinions."
kenglish is offline  
post #102 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 06:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
William Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Lexington,Kentucky,USA
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
There is a post in Opendtv this morning that states the reason the settop boxes are not being deployed with 5th gen components is the cost of the technology versus the market price of settop decoders. They can simply hide the cost better in an integrated set.

One more time, if the CEA makes the product they promised ... not a problem.. but as an engineer I hate vaporware and missed deadlines.. we were promised 5th gen units last Christmas.. now it looks like the 5th gen technology will never be in settop boxes anytime soon. LG is planning to retire the 4200A this summer so what does that leave...


The real demonstration was the Sinclair COFDM demo in those same chambers where they carried an antenna the length of the room at a running pace with the no breakups on the monitor...

The 8-VSB antenna was taped to the window with orders not to move it..
William Smith is offline  
post #103 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 07:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
David McRoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Historic College Park In Lake Worth, FL, USA
Posts: 2,412
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
According to these observations by Mark Schubin, there appears to be more to outstanding ATSC receiver performance under adverse reception conditions than simply the inclusion of a 5th generation LG chip:


QUOTE:
- I was asked not to discuss a test at my apartment a few weeks ago of a
non-LG set-top box reportedly containing the LG 5th-generation chip. Now
it appears I am permitted to do so. I will still refrain from mentioning
the brand:
<<a href="http://www.freelists.org/archives/opendtv/03-2005/msg00237.html" target="_blank">http://www.freelists.org/archives/op.../msg00237.html>
In brief, the performance was nothing like that of the LG prototype.
Whereas the LG prototype was truly plug-&-play, with no significant antenna
positioning or orientation required, the new box required extremely careful
antenna positioning and orientation and, even then, was unstable when we
walked around the room (it seemed sensitive to vehicular traffic outside,
too). WCBS-DT was received less reliably than at any time since the second
generation boxes.
END QUOTE

Above is from the 03/21/05 Mark's Monday Memo.

Note that Bob Miller speculated that an ATSC tuner featuring great performance may be prohibitively expensive to build into an STB but that the added cost above the use of a 5 genneration chip might be "buried" into the cost of including it in a monitor/receiver. I assume this is what you were alluding to, William.

HiDefDave
 

WPTV/WFLX West Palm Beach, FL

David McRoy is offline  
post #104 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 07:58 AM
 
DTV TiVo Dealer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scarsdale, NY
Posts: 4,878
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
LG uses other components in its circuity to improve the ATSC performance. Filters and isolators help to reject weaker reflected signals so the receiver does not have any interference from multi-path.

As I said in my earlier post, the LST-4200A is a perfect example of this LG advanced ATSC digital technology development. The LST-4200A performs better than other LG 4th generation receivers.

-Robert
DTV TiVo Dealer is offline  
post #105 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 08:49 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
inky blacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,786
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The famous test of the 5th chip was supposedly a LST-4200A box with a 5th chip plugged into it.

I don't buy any of the arguments and I don't believe the 5th chip is more expensive. It is just a different chip and chip prices decline like anything else. I do not believe the recent test was of a box that actually had a 5th chip in it.

IB
inky blacks is offline  
post #106 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 09:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
William Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Lexington,Kentucky,USA
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally posted by David McRoy
Just wondering, William, what's their motivation behind this?

Per John Littlejohn,

It does two things...

1 reduces the AM bandwidth to allow the transmitter power to be concentrated in the narrower bandwidth giving it more "punch" and making it stand out on his radio.. ( he claims to have not noticed any loss of audio quality from the change either)

2. Its makes AM IBOC easier..

My thought is that is how they will get nighttime IBOC operation approved...

They are planning to petition NRSC and the FCC to mandate this change to all AM stations.. (can't have anyone sounding better the CC can we...)
William Smith is offline  
post #107 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 09:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sregener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southeast MN
Posts: 3,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by William Smith
...as an engineer I hate vaporware and missed deadlines.. we were promised 5th gen units last Christmas..

The real demonstration was the Sinclair COFDM demo in those same chambers where they carried an antenna the length of the room at a running pace with the no breakups on the monitor...

The 8-VSB antenna was taped to the window with orders not to move it..

As a consumer, I hate vaporware, but I strongly prefer missed deadlines to shoddy product development. IOW, when my money is on the line, I want the product to work more than I want to have it on my desk when they originally promised. LG, IIRC, said they were going to ship 5th-gen receivers in 2005. I don't recall hearing them promising anything in 04.

We all know that COFDM offers certain advantages over ATSC 8VSB in mobile uses. Just like PAL offered some advantages over NTSC. But NTSC technology made incredible leaps and bounds above PAL in the 1980s, and now NTSC is undeniably the superior transmission mechanism. COFDM has a "head start" just like PAL did. But the race is going to be longer than 10 or 15 years. ATSC 8VSB's "problems" are solvable using technology. COFDM's flaws are not.

The question to face in America today is no longer one of picking one standard over the other. That decision was made and set in stone years ago. The question is whether or not ATSC 8VSB works today, using antenna and receiver technology that is available today, for the vast majority of viewers. Given tests like the one in Congress (whoever saw someone running across a room holding an antenna?) with the 8VSB receiver, and the thousands of real-world cases where people have reliable reception of digital signals using current equipment, the answer has to be yes, ATSC 8VSB has arrived, it is good, it works, and people shouldn't be afraid to try it.

Crying over how much better COFDM could have been doesn't accomplish anything. Complaining about ATSC 8VSB's inferiority to COFDM only encourages fence-sitters to remain seated because they want to pick the eventual winner - just like VHS vs. Betamax, DVD-Audio and SACD, Divx vs. DVD. They probably haven't read enough, and don't care enough, to know that this debate is a dead one.

ATSC 8VSB works. Today. For almost everyone. Period.
sregener is offline  
post #108 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 09:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HDTVChallenged's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
Originally posted by William Smith
There is a post in Opendtv this morning that states the reason the settop boxes are not being deployed with 5th gen components is the cost of the technology versus the market price of settop decoders. They can simply hide the cost better in an integrated set.

[opinion_mode]
For most consumers, there's also the expectation that tuners (NTSC or ATSC) be built into their TV's, even if most people never use them anymore. Perhaps they (LG) see the seperate OTA STB market as a temporary phenomenon much like the UHF converter market of old.
[/opinion_mode]

PS: I would not be surprised to see D* eventually drop the ATSC tuners from their HD STB's once all the new sats and HD/digital LiLs are deployed.
HDTVChallenged is offline  
post #109 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 10:01 AM
Advanced Member
 
Solfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Skylands N.J. & Hawaii Kai
Posts: 525
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally posted by William Smith


The real demonstration was the Sinclair COFDM demo...

Oh, PUH-LLLLEEEEASE...
Solfan is offline  
post #110 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 10:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Rich Peterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: St Paul, MN
Posts: 2,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally posted by Solfan
Oh, PUH-LLLLEEEEASE...

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Now I know where William is getting his doom-and-gloom broadcaster's perspective from...the OpenDTV forum. It is about the only place where COFDM is still discussed in the context of US DTV and the feeling that 8-VSB doesn't work (which readers of this forum knows to be false) continues to be spoken as if it is the truth.

William, don't be taken in by Bob, Dermot, and the rest of the anti-8VSB crew... it will only cause you unnecessary concern. Remember, even Sinclair came out to publicly support the new 8-VSB technologies demonstrated by LG and included in their new HDTV sets. And as Robert keeps reminding us, the 4200 works very well.
Rich Peterson is offline  
post #111 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 12:49 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
inky blacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,786
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Personally, I wish people would shut up about COFDM. I am tired of hearing about it and it is a pointless discussion. Be concerned about how to make our system better and get LG to release technology they already have.

IB
inky blacks is offline  
post #112 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 01:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
William Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Lexington,Kentucky,USA
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I'm not taken by anyone..I work in the industry and using real world data the answer is that 8-VSB is still inferior ...( even using the 4200A).

Several other companies are planning to use COFDM to run video to cell phones...

Sinclair endorsed 8-VSB based on a prototype receiver that hasn't be duplicated yet.. I 'm hoping to catch Mark in Vegas to talk to him about the test receiver and its performance..

I do have a question though..

Why do you care which scheme is picked?

If your tuners were replaced or you get programming from satellite or cable you wouldn't know the difference.


Curious ...What's your motive?

.... I know mine (I believe broadcasters cannot survive on just reception in the home as future is mobile and portable.)
William Smith is offline  
post #113 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 01:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rich Peterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: St Paul, MN
Posts: 2,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Curious ...What's your motive?

.... I know mine (I believe broadcasters cannot survive on just reception in the home as future is mobile and portable.)

My motive is HDTV. The more the better.

To me portable means you can move a set anywhere, set it down, plug it in, and it will receive OTA TV. ATSC works fine for that now and it will get better. I think the demand for mobile reception of broadcast TV ranges from very small to non-existant. I feel sorry for you if you are pinning your business plans on that....

Sooner or later broadcasters are going to realize that HDTV is the one and only DTV application that will actually cause people to go out and purchase the necessary equipment to receive it. Mobile won't, portable won't, nor will other data services. If you want to be successful focus on providing the most compelling HDTV content in the highest quality you can.
Rich Peterson is offline  
post #114 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 01:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
William Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Lexington,Kentucky,USA
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
So how does the modulation standard affect your motive? Both COFDM and 8-VSB can support the bitrates necessary for HD broadcast.

Since some of the advanced codecs can support two HD feeds in 19 Mbps are you against modifying the standard to allow the use of those codecs?

Or should we always be stuck with MPEG-2 only?

New/better technologies will evolve ... just as older technology will not be supported..

I'll bet if the FCC hadn't mandated ATSC tuners in the integrated sets LG wouldn't be installing them.


No technology based industry will be able to survive 50 years without change ever again..
William Smith is offline  
post #115 of 433 Old 03-22-2005, 06:51 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
inky blacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,786
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
"broadcasters cannot survive on just reception in the home as (the) future is mobile and portable"

---------------------------------------
That is an insane statement if you are talking about television. There certainly is a future for mobile computer use and other data streams, but people like to sit on a couch in their own home to watch a movie on a big screen TV. There is no big "future" for mobile television as no one cares about it except you and Bob Miller. Some idiot accused me of being Bob Miller in disguise, so I know how that feels. I won't accuse you of being Miller, but I do accuse you of being just as unrealistic and off base in your ideas. The FCC and the broadcast networks are not going to change our TV standard to COFDM and anyone who thinks they will has been drinking too much tainted Coolaid.

IB
inky blacks is offline  
post #116 of 433 Old 03-23-2005, 05:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
William Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Lexington,Kentucky,USA
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I didn't say they would change the standard either ... I am stating these issues for the record.

1. If there is no demand for mobile video then please explain the craze of putting DVD players with viewscreens in vans, SUVs, and RVs?

2. I would like to see you lug an HD set into the stands at a football game to watch the game.. or take it outside to watch a game from your deck...

3. I don't see anyone making an TV band radio with ATSC capability either..


My point is these appliances exist TODAY for analog television and they do work..people will expect the same from digital..
William Smith is offline  
post #117 of 433 Old 03-23-2005, 06:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
Solfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Skylands N.J. & Hawaii Kai
Posts: 525
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
It's not a good idea to keep pushing C**** mobile video here.

It apparently doesn't even work well in countries that presently use it.

This German forum seems to have some eye-openers:

http://forum.digitalfernsehen.de/for...splay.php?f=50

You can use bablefish and translate, look for a thread called
"AW: Mobile receipt in the car!? Antenna??"
On page two, I believe.

Most posters there recommend using DIVERSITY C**** receivers.

This unit sells for ~$650.00

http://babelfish.altavista.digital.c..._flatuner.html

How interesting they need to use a system like this for the consecrated C**** DTV mobile system. Postings indicate that reception falls apart in inner city areas, so dual, triple or quad antenna systems are discussed there regularly.

Some people say mobile video is useless on the highways.

Others say just forget about mobile video, it doesn't work, just use DVD.

Oh, well... Next?
Solfan is offline  
post #118 of 433 Old 03-23-2005, 06:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sregener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southeast MN
Posts: 3,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by William Smith
Or should we always be stuck with MPEG-2 only?

Always is a long time. I can see the day coming when we'll have an SD MPEG-2 stream and the rest of the data will by MPEG4. There's nothing in the ATSC standard that would preclude this.

This is part of the reason why we have the FCC and their standards - because technology always advances, but people don't have unlimited funds to keep up. If we change the broadcast standards too frequently (and remember, we don't even have 50% penetration with MPEG-2 receiving equipment yet,) consumers will be less likely to buy something, choosing instead to wait for the "next big thing."

Given how fast technology moves, even if we made the decision to adopt MPEG4 today and all new decoders were made to handle it, by the time we had widespread penetration of MPEG4 decoders, MPEG5 or MPEG6 would be the hot technology.

Always is a long time. The days of two-dimensional television are numbered, don't you think? Is MPEG-2 a good compression scheme for holographic displays? Probably not.
sregener is offline  
post #119 of 433 Old 03-23-2005, 07:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
William Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Lexington,Kentucky,USA
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I agree

I feel that since the FCC has issued on order on software radios it will someday have to make that same order for other types of media services (including television).

or they will reclaim all the television broadcast spectrum and auction it to the highest bidder..
William Smith is offline  
post #120 of 433 Old 03-23-2005, 07:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Rich Peterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: St Paul, MN
Posts: 2,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:


Originally posted by William Smith
I didn't say they would change the standard either ... I am stating these issues for the record.

1. If there is no demand for mobile video then please explain the craze of putting DVD players with viewscreens in vans, SUVs, and RVs?

2. I would like to see you lug an HD set into the stands at a football game to watch the game.. or take it outside to watch a game from your deck...

3. I don't see anyone making an TV band radio with ATSC capability either..

My point is these appliances exist TODAY for analog television and they do work..people will expect the same from digital..

1. The number of video displays in vehicles is actually a very small percentage of the overall number of vehicles. Of this very small percentage, a small percentage of them would be interested in broadcast TV. These systems are typically used for entertainment for kids on long trips where DVDs work just fine and broadcasting is inconvenient due to moving in and out of coverage areas while driving.

2. What a silly comment. The ATSC system works fine for carrying a small receiver into a football stadium or onto a deck. Of course an HDTV set would be overkill for a tiny display, but that is totally irrelevant. Eventually manufacturers will make small portable ATSC sets.

3. I don't see it either, but if there is a demand they will be built.
Rich Peterson is offline  
Reply HDTV Technical

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off