or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Technical › Any recent 5th generation receiver chip news?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Any recent 5th generation receiver chip news? - Page 10

post #271 of 433
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.
post #272 of 433
Quote:


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.
post #273 of 433
Do you have the same experience with UPN (digital channel 20, analog 21) and WB (digital 26, analog 27) in Reno?
post #274 of 433
Quote:


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.
post #275 of 433
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.]
post #276 of 433
Quote:


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.
post #277 of 433
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.
post #278 of 433
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
post #279 of 433
Thread Starter 
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
post #280 of 433
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.
post #281 of 433
Quote:


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).
post #282 of 433
Quote:


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.
post #283 of 433
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.
post #284 of 433
Quote:


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.
post #285 of 433
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?
post #286 of 433
Quote:


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.
post #287 of 433
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
post #288 of 433
Quote:


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.
post #289 of 433
Quote:


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.

I worked for LG for over 10 years but I doubt I could even get a sample STB to try out.
post #290 of 433
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.
post #291 of 433
Thread Starter 
It also worked the same at Bob Miller's place. It's a good receiver. There is no doubt about that.

IB
post #292 of 433
Quote:


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.
post #293 of 433
The Scientific American article I mentioned previously is now on-line. Here's a link:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?cha...7D83414B7FFE9F
post #294 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Johnson View Post

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.
post #295 of 433
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.
post #296 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Johnson View Post

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
post #297 of 433
http://www.freelists.org/archives/op.../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.
post #298 of 433
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.
post #299 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by sregener View Post

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
post #300 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mason View Post

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.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Technical
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Technical › Any recent 5th generation receiver chip news?