Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "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. That is all it can tell you. The software running on an up-to-date rig can describe the exact reason to you, if your rig interfaces to your computer screen ... 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. 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. 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. 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???" 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. 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. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
HDTV antenna | Antenna | |||
Over the air HDTV: report | Shortwave | |||
HDTV suggestions? | Policy | |||
HDTV suggestions? | CB | |||
HDTV Antennas | Antenna |