Hi Richard,

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
I don't think anyone stated they cost "too much," just that there is a cost
in
increased bandwidth, and bandwidth isn't free.
Um, this last statement seems to be hedging by saying the same thing
in reverse order.

No, they really are different. What costs too much for me might very not cost
too much for the military or NASA, for instance.

It would be more compelling if you simply stated the cost for ANY
market.

The original example was meant to be more of a "textbook" problem, hence the
lack of elaboration on the specifics of the "market" involved.

I would suspect that "studio quality" observes other characteristics
of the signal.

Agreed, I would too.

A multipath reception could easily absorb a
considerable amount of interfering same-signal to abyssmal results. It
would take a very sophisticated "noise" meter to perform the correct
S+N/N.

Yep, very true -- I think this is why you see people legtimately complaining
about the quality of their cable TV even though the cable installation tech
whips out his SINAD meter and verifies it meets spec; the quality of a
transmission can't always be boiled down to just one number.

The "Turbo" codes are achievable in silicon with moderate effort. A
work going back a dozen years or more can be found at:
http://sss-mag.com/G3RUH/index2.html

Great link, thanks!

---Joel