Chart of HDTV freqs?
 

JB wrote:


That is all it can tell you.


Think about it man! What more do you need ... I mean, I really can not
elaborate here, do you have children? Have them explain "it" to you ...

Maybe you know of a secret diagnostic menu for my DTX9900?
If I remember correctly, all they know is RSSI and data errors. Please,
tell me if there are other indications that discern multipath, interference,
or any other reception problem without either sophisticated test equipment
or an analog indication - perhaps a color coded bar graph or channel
spectra that can react faster than the stream filling the buffer. I don't
know how ATSC handles error correction, but being a broadcast stream, I
would suppose only forward error correction is possible.

Most, if not all, you have stated is really quite unnecessary, or
certainly should be, to a REAL amateur ... think about it, what error
correction have you ever had with your analog equipment. What error
messages did your Drake ever give you, your Hallicrafters, your Gonset,
your Johnson (no pun intended on your "natural gear", lol!), etc., etc.
.... however, count on MUCH MORE from digital equipment!

PACTOR yes, but I don't see that with DRM or ATSC at all. How is it that an
s9 signal isn't enough? I'm truly glad to have SSB so I can tell the other
station to resend the file again. The Universe isn't digital. Certainly
not radio. The signal, no matter what modulation scheme you use to improve
recovery of usable clipped and buffered data, is still in the realm of the
analog during transmission over the air. Ok, you might not understand that
if you are only the network guy and all your traffic worries start at the
protocol level as long as the Fiber box is energized.

Yanno', this "all" is getting too long, I feel like I am replying to an
idiot--now that isn't happening, is it?

Yanno', it sounds as if you have problems alright, I am beginning
digital equipment will neither make them better or worse--however, your
perception(s) may deceive you--think about a psychiatrist!


Actually the best sounding mobile phone I ever had was my full-duplex 450
Motrac linked to a mountain top site with wide area direct dialing. No one
ever suspected I was mobile. But that was because my Analog link was better
than a voice grade phone line. Digital is great if you can find the
bandwidth, but great sacrifices and compromises have often been made in
audio quality for the sake of keeping the occupied bandwidth of the RF
channel within limits. What I am seeing on DTV, are stations that are doing
one 1080i or 720p stream on one RF channel with maybe 2 more streams of 480i
(often annoyingly compressed) OR up to 6 - 480i streams not so heavily
compressed. So I hate to disappoint you, that not all channels will be
better than analog until they find a way to do better than MPEG compression
and conversion from an NTSC source.


Wow, the brass pounders would just love you ... let me see, you remind
me of "Art Bell -- Stuck In Times" ... hmmm, that is the title of that
book, isn't it? ROFLOL

Your arguments suck ... you jam technical details into matters where
your eyes would serve as proof enough ... are you taking your meds? Are
you doing so on schedule?

MP3, MPEG, etc., etc. provides a MINOR increase in preformance (well,
not really, but it is a not a point worth arguing, consider this a "bone
tossing") at the cost of paying patent holders -- believe me,
audio/video is SO SLOW Ogg Vorbis is much more than "TOO QUICK" for
available systems/processors ... sad-sad-pitiful-look

Yanno', as a teenager, I would only wear Levis, it is called "Brand Name
Addiction" ... I am a recovered addict ... I can't claim a twelve-step
program for my recovery, but hey ... LOL

The move to digital cellular allowed channel re-use without having the
customer hear interference from co-channel sites so that many sites could be
used to communicate with many small handsets. Do you think that will be
much of an issue on Ham radio? Ham radio's greatest protection is in the
fact that it isn't supposed to compete with other services. No privacy is
needed or allowed either. If you copy the consumer model, you have no
amateur radio anymore. So I ask you sir, wouldn't you rather be using a
digital cell phone and leave the ham bands alone? Experimentation will
continue and things will be learned, people will contest and rag chew and
chase DX, but when ham radio for free is simple enough to compete with cell
phone services or a twisted pair, there will be a problem.


Comparing analog to digital is almost an exact example to some idiot
attempting the comparison of a stone knife (obsidian actually) to a
LASER Scalpel ... I just don't know how to state that with more force
and certainty ... perhaps someone will get through to you at some future
date ... all you look like to me is an ignoramus with little knowledge
.... and living in "yesterday" -- sad really, very sad ...

If you ever awaken from that "tomb of stupidness" you are entombed in, I
bet you will be one embarrassed guy!

I'd say, you are just a "Stupid Brass Pounder" and an "arrl wannabe" ...
but then, I am guessing--I have no real psychic abilities ... ROFLOL, AGAIN!

Thanks for the laughs ...

Regards,
JS

Chart of HDTV freqs?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Sal M. Onella wrote:
By the old TASO standards, you need over 40 dB s/n to get a nice
picture,
which requires a lot more peak RF power. By comparison, the digital
signal
needs only about 17 dB s/n.

What happens at a 12 dB s/n for both? That's probably
what happened here during Hurricane Ike.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Digital: No lock and no indication of trying to lock (which is provided on
some receivers)

Analog: Recognizable signal, possibly with sound, probably with no color
and so much snow as to be unwatchable.

For the analog experiance, I am relying on bench tests I did with a TV
servicing generator. For baseline, I advanced the RF amplitude just to the
point where I had a snow-free picture. Next, I added 10 dB attenuators and
noted the results with each addition.

One: observable snow, no big deal
Two: Objectionable snow, this ain't good
Three: horrible snow, I can't watch this.
Four: Is there even a picture?

Chart of HDTV freqs?
 

Sal M. Onella wrote:

...
Digital: No lock and no indication of trying to lock (which is provided on
some receivers)

Analog: Recognizable signal, possibly with sound, probably with no color
and so much snow as to be unwatchable.

For the analog experiance, I am relying on bench tests I did with a TV
servicing generator. For baseline, I advanced the RF amplitude just to the
point where I had a snow-free picture. Next, I added 10 dB attenuators and
noted the results with each addition.

One: observable snow, no big deal
Two: Objectionable snow, this ain't good
Three: horrible snow, I can't watch this.
Four: Is there even a picture?

Sal:

Forgive me, please; but, for a minute there, your words provided me with
a psychic vision ... grin

All these "youngsters" growing up around the internet and DVDs and MP3s,
expect perfect communications. Perhaps their homes did not even possess
a broadcast capable TV!

And, to them, the "quality of TV signal" we grew up with is horrifying,
indeed, too scary and mentally damaging to view!

Maybe it will just take them a bit of time to go through their denial
and be able to look upon such "ugly-ness" as a snowy picture with,
really, only usable audio as being "OK", and finally allow us to view
it? (I know, they will probably see us as being able to view childporn
in allowing such visual images to ACTUALLY enter our eyes! DEEP-FROWN
) HUGE-chuckle, and a grin

Perhaps then, they will finally allow such a digital signal though to
the circuitry? Ya' never know, ya' just never know ... blank-stare

Anyway ... this is a much more valid argument than that of an analog
signal EVER being more desirable to a digital one ...

Regards,
JS

Chart of HDTV freqs?
 

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:25:35 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

IMHO, and humble experience, reflections only worsen with a raise in
frequency ... others mileage may vary ... and EVERYTHING you own, which
is metal/conductive, is a wavelength+ at Ghz!

If the US had gone with the DVB-T COFDM standard, instead of the ATSC
8VSB standard, we would have much better immunity to reflections.

OFDM is fairly immune to reflections, which appears as frequency
selective fading. If a few carriers end up cancelling with a
reflection, then COFDM still has 1700 or more carriers that continue
to pass data. With FEC, most of the data gets through. Something
like this:
http://www.navtechsystems.co.uk/services/micro_links/cofdm_dig_theory.html

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

Chart of HDTV freqs?
 

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 19:18:39 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

All these "youngsters" growing up around the internet and DVDs and MP3s,
expect perfect communications. Perhaps their homes did not even possess
a broadcast capable TV!

Yep, it's a problem. I have two working record players and some vinyl
left over from my mis-spent youth. When the kids complain about
assorted digital audio oddities, I play a 78 rpm record for them. The
usual reaction is "What that hiss" or maybe "did you really listen to
that"? A few of the older kids have seen VCR quality, which they seem
to tolerate. However, the same kids will go ballistic if there are
any artifacts on their shinny new HDTV screen, their MP3 player
trashes a tune, or their streaming audio/video skips a beat. We have
raise a generation of connoisseurs.


--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

Chart of HDTV freqs?
 

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:
The neat thing about going full digital? You no longer have any idea why
the signal breaks up. PERIOD. The Customer is no longer bothered by
interference of any kind. Either it works or not. If your QSO, Phone
Call,
Mayday, Police call for backup, TV signal gets knocked off the air, you
won't have a clue why.


Actually, NOT. Even the simple bars on a cell phone tell you if
communication is possible or not. The software running on an up-to-date
rig can describe the exact reason to you, if your rig interfaces to your
computer screen ... not to mention broadcast HDTV is in its' infancy,
taking its' first baby-steps ... even if you give the avg. American TV
viewer this information, do you think he would know what to do about it?
For "those dummies" you will pretty much have to have the software handle
the problems ... or make simple recommendations, perhaps "MOVE THE ANTENNA
DUMMY", or "RAISE THE ANTENNA DUMMY", or "BUY A DECENT EXTERNAL ANTENNA
DUMMY", or "POSSIBLE SIGNAL REFLECTIONS ARE OCCURING, MOVE/REPOSITION THE
ANTENNA DUMMY", etc. ROFLOL!

I have experimented with Easy Pal Digi SSTV and DRM it is neat but I can
rarely get the S/N high enough for a complete transfer. Text is more
reliable, but it is hard for me to put my faith in a signal that sounds
clean and strong to my ear but with no result. I could have passed
several
photos on MMSSTV with half the S/N and knew well what they were.
Sometimes
getting the information through is more important than waiting for
conditions to get better to get it perfect.


If the binary signal just clears the noise floor, and not by much mind you
(I am hesitant to quote an exact figure here) a perfect signal is quite
possible ... that is simply the nature of digital.

I just don't know why anyone would claim that digital signals are not MUCH
superior to analog -- remember the old analog cell phones -- who would
ever wish to "go-back-there???" ... the only software I have used with
HF/VHF/UHF digital processing is open source ... I immediately made
modifications to the decoding/coding scheme (Ogg Vorbis), "packet hold
time" and size of the buffers and implemented my own CRC checking (faster
algorithm) ... however, others must get a copy of it from me and we both
share it or no communications are possible. I see amateur software in the
same light I see amateur antennas -- build your own or have another
amateur elmer/tutor/instruct/assist/share-with-you ... it is just
traditional and the true spirit of amateur radio ...

I don't mind being a network admin. but being a radio op isn't quite dead
yet.


I actually worked at the college I attended in the 1990's when I returned
to go "full into computers" (my previous degree was as in electronic
engineering), and before I began an intern position in my field of study.
My last few months, before receiving my diploma, the actually created a
new position for me, "Student Programmer", I was actually quite proud of
it--even though the "big boys" seen it as a joke! LOL Being both a
programmer and a network admin. assistant made the job seem like "money
for nothing", what other sys admins seen as major problems and were on the
phone to Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) over, for the VAX, I usually had
fixed by the time the techs got there ... made me rather "hated", really
... however, most finally came around and asked for the perl-scripts and C
programs I used to automate every task I could find! ... common computer
users worshiped us ... "some of us" let this go to their heads ...

picture breaks up and quits. At other times the same station will give
a
solid 3 or 4 bars.This happens on all channels. Perhaps atmospheric
movement? Lots of dust here in the desert. Any other ideas?


As I have said, I am anxious for it to be deployed in my area ... I am
already looking into "digital to analog conversion boxes" which I can
download the firmware from to "reverse engineer" and then flash open
source firmware into ... either by hook or by crook. grin

Only God can control atmospheric conditions (but then, there is HARRP and
other such projects which do SEEM to alter them), and who can stop that
neighbor from erecting that steel storage shed, building that wrought iron
fence, installing those bars on his windows, operating that ham rig from
his stealth antenna grin, etc? :-(

Yes, ducting and "ghosting" of the signal(s) due to reflections, etc.--I
can see these as being a REAL problem. From your description(s), sounds
like "they" just took the exact-same
technology/encoding/decoding-schemes and implemented them onto broadcast


Regards,
JS

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

My following comments are totally off topic and are the mutterings of an old
curmudgeon. You have been warned.

What the hell happened to the word "saw"? I seen this, or I seen that.
Folks, that isn't correct. How can you get through four years of college
without using the "saw", except for when referring to a woodworking tool?

It is - "I saw that". Not, "I seen that". For crying out loud!!! G

Ed Cregger

Chart of HDTV freqs?
 

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:


That is all it can tell you.


Think about it man! What more do you need ... I mean, I really can not
elaborate here, do you have children? Have them explain "it" to you ...

You mean to say that if your radio says you can't talk on it, that should be
enough?
Are you a Mac salesman?

Maybe you know of a secret diagnostic menu for my DTX9900?
If I remember correctly, all they know is RSSI and data errors. Please,
tell me if there are other indications that discern multipath,
interference,
or any other reception problem without either sophisticated test
equipment
or an analog indication - perhaps a color coded bar graph or channel
spectra that can react faster than the stream filling the buffer. I
don't
know how ATSC handles error correction, but being a broadcast stream, I
would suppose only forward error correction is possible.

Most, if not all, you have stated is really quite unnecessary, or
certainly should be, to a REAL amateur ... think about it, what error
correction have you ever had with your analog equipment. What error
messages did your Drake ever give you, your Hallicrafters, your Gonset,
your Johnson (no pun intended on your "natural gear", lol!), etc., etc.
... however, count on MUCH MORE from digital equipment!

Error correction all happens in the analog computer AKA radio operator.

PACTOR yes, but I don't see that with DRM or ATSC at all. How is it
that an
s9 signal isn't enough? I'm truly glad to have SSB so I can tell the
other
station to resend the file again. The Universe isn't digital.
Certainly
not radio. The signal, no matter what modulation scheme you use to
improve
recovery of usable clipped and buffered data, is still in the realm of
the
analog during transmission over the air. Ok, you might not understand
that
if you are only the network guy and all your traffic worries start at
the
protocol level as long as the Fiber box is energized.

Yanno', this "all" is getting too long, I feel like I am replying to an
idiot--now that isn't happening, is it?

This is what happens when your religion is shaken.

Yanno', it sounds as if you have problems alright, I am beginning
digital equipment will neither make them better or worse--however, your
perception(s) may deceive you--think about a psychiatrist!


Actually the best sounding mobile phone I ever had was my full-duplex
450
Motrac linked to a mountain top site with wide area direct dialing. No
one
ever suspected I was mobile. But that was because my Analog link was
better
than a voice grade phone line. Digital is great if you can find the
bandwidth, but great sacrifices and compromises have often been made in
audio quality for the sake of keeping the occupied bandwidth of the RF
channel within limits. What I am seeing on DTV, are stations that are
doing
one 1080i or 720p stream on one RF channel with maybe 2 more streams of
480i
(often annoyingly compressed) OR up to 6 - 480i streams not so heavily
compressed. So I hate to disappoint you, that not all channels will be
better than analog until they find a way to do better than MPEG
compression
and conversion from an NTSC source.


Wow, the brass pounders would just love you ... let me see, you remind
me of "Art Bell -- Stuck In Times" ... hmmm, that is the title of that
book, isn't it? ROFLOL

Your arguments suck ... you jam technical details into matters where
your eyes would serve as proof enough ... are you taking your meds? Are
you doing so on schedule?

MP3, MPEG, etc., etc. provides a MINOR increase in preformance (well,
not really, but it is a not a point worth arguing, consider this a "bone
tossing") at the cost of paying patent holders -- believe me,
audio/video is SO SLOW Ogg Vorbis is much more than "TOO QUICK" for
available systems/processors ... sad-sad-pitiful-look

So make them change it! I didn't make the standards.

Yanno', as a teenager, I would only wear Levis, it is called "Brand Name
Addiction" ... I am a recovered addict ... I can't claim a twelve-step
program for my recovery, but hey ... LOL

I am the opposite. I never buy Levis or McDonalds. I have sales resistance
to junk.

The move to digital cellular allowed channel re-use without having the
customer hear interference from co-channel sites so that many sites
could be
used to communicate with many small handsets. Do you think that will be
much of an issue on Ham radio? Ham radio's greatest protection is in
the
fact that it isn't supposed to compete with other services. No privacy
is
needed or allowed either. If you copy the consumer model, you have no
amateur radio anymore. So I ask you sir, wouldn't you rather be using a
digital cell phone and leave the ham bands alone? Experimentation will
continue and things will be learned, people will contest and rag chew
and
chase DX, but when ham radio for free is simple enough to compete with
cell
phone services or a twisted pair, there will be a problem.


Comparing analog to digital is almost an exact example to


some idiot
attempting the comparison of a stone knife (obsidian actually) to a
LASER Scalpel ...
Who is making the comparison of a stone knife to a LASER Scalpel??

I just don't know how to state that with more force
and certainty ... perhaps someone will get through to you at some future
date ... all you look like to me is an ignoramus with little knowledge
... and living in "yesterday" -- sad really, very sad ...

If you ever awaken from that "tomb of stupidness" you are entombed in, I
bet you will be one embarrassed guy!

I'd say, you are just a "Stupid Brass Pounder" and an "arrl wannabe" ...
but then, I am guessing--I have no real psychic abilities ... ROFLOL,
AGAIN!

Thanks for the laughs ...

Regards,
JS

You have to look objectively at the advantages and disadvantages of both
unless your goal is to do away with the radio operator specifically, and
perhaps ham radio too. No license should be required at all to buy an "RF
data box complete with antenna and battery" then all we would need to do is
load our software and plug in the USB cable. If there aren't enough bars,
then we would need to "DO SOMETHING STUPID" or wait until there are enough
bars. Or just get bored and QSY to the Internet. I got it now... Viva la
revolucion! Won't get fooled again. Perhaps if you do away with all the
hams when you do away with ham radio, no one will remember how fun it was.

Chart of HDTV freqs?
 

Ed Cregger wrote:

...
------------

My following comments are totally off topic and are the mutterings of an old
curmudgeon. You have been warned.

What the hell happened to the word "saw"? I seen this, or I seen that.
Folks, that isn't correct. How can you get through four years of college
without using the "saw", except for when referring to a woodworking tool?

It is - "I saw that". Not, "I seen that". For crying out loud!!! G

Ed Cregger



Sorry Ed, last time I seen my saw it was in the garage. Yanno', I'll
check, I bet it is still there! ;-)

Warm regards, and a chuckle,
JS

Chart of HDTV freqs?
 

"Sal M. Onella" wrote in message
...

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Sal M. Onella wrote:
By the old TASO standards, you need over 40 dB s/n to get a nice
picture,
which requires a lot more peak RF power. By comparison, the digital
signal
needs only about 17 dB s/n.

What happens at a 12 dB s/n for both? That's probably
what happened here during Hurricane Ike.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Digital: No lock and no indication of trying to lock (which is provided
on
some receivers)

Analog: Recognizable signal, possibly with sound, probably with no color
and so much snow as to be unwatchable.

For the analog experiance, I am relying on bench tests I did with a TV
servicing generator. For baseline, I advanced the RF amplitude just to
the
point where I had a snow-free picture. Next, I added 10 dB attenuators and
noted the results with each addition.

One: observable snow, no big deal
Two: Objectionable snow, this ain't good
Three: horrible snow, I can't watch this.
Four: Is there even a picture?

This is my experience too. 36 db S/N gives you a decent picture, 55-60db
S/N gives you a good fade margin for analog and a perfect picture (if
convergence and purity are capable)

For digital, 30 db S/N gives you a "perfect" picture if it is 1080i, or no
better and maybe worse if it is only 480i but you still need at least 50 db
S/N for fade margin or everything will break up when there is a 5-20 db
fade. At least with the Analog signal, you will still have audio during
deep fades.

Smith makes sense in light of consumers who only complain about what they
see. Most people won't be doing TV DXing. Tough luck for those who do.
There is a real big point about all the extra connectors as the
entertainment system grows. Lots of people needed to have someone hook it
up for them, and now complain about having to punch too many buttons on too
many remotes to get their picture and sound.

As a ham, I like to be able to do things the kids and consumers might not
want to be bothered with. If only ARRL would consider this concept. Ham
radio will never be a mainstream consumer product unless it ceases to be ham
radio completely.

Chart of HDTV freqs?
 

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 20:32:47 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
-snip- However, the same kids will go ballistic if there are
any artifacts on their shinny new HDTV screen, their MP3 player
trashes a tune, or their streaming audio/video skips a beat.

We have raise a generation of connoisseurs.

s/connoisseurs/whiners/