[opendtv] Re: Demand for free DTV rising in Australia

Barry;

 

I guess you missed the point.  First, I concede higher visual quality with
PAL, although I'm not prepared to concede that AM audio is better than FM
audio, and ISTR that PA always had AM audio and FM video, and NTSC
vice-versa.

 

Nor was I speaking of "future legacy" issues.

 

The question is, where were such real-world RECEPTION (not presentation)
test relevant?  The pre-requisite would be availability of Over the Air NTSC
and PAL signals at a single point.  

 

Otherwise, relevant tests would be "which PAL sets work best in this
national (or regional) RF environment?  "Which NTSC set works best in that
national (or regional) RF environment?

 

John Willkie

 

P.S., So, NZ will be the "big" MHEG market?  It's a shame that they didn't
see the trends, including DVB GEM/ATSC ACAP/SCTE OCAP interoperability.
Hopefully, they have the ability to remotely upgrade if and when .

  _____  

De: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] En
nombre de Barry Wilkins
Enviado el: Saturday, June 23, 2007 1:41 AM
Para: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Asunto: [opendtv] Re: Demand for free DTV rising in Australia

 

John,

Historically, of course it was relevant. Especially to those who chose PAL
and I am sure that for a long time the superior colour fidelity of PAL meant
that it was the right decision for those in the convenient position to take
it (like NZ). The choice, I am sure, was made purely on the basis of
technical superiority, not politics or undue influence. 

Historically, the US ATSC 8-VSB rather than COFDM choice will be for all
time of great technical significance. 
Why? Because it is one of the few recent occasions in the development of
electronic engineering that I can recall that a decision was made to
knowingly employ a technically inferior technique when it was known that the
benefits of the alternative choice were overwhelming. 

Of course, for the US public, what you never knew cannot hurt you, so it is
not and probably will not be  relevant to them.

But this forum is not populated by the general public. I would be surprised
if most engineers do not have an abhorrence of political or undue commercial
influence in the development of the art. 

Regards
Barry Wilkins 

On 6/23/07, johnwillkie <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

How relevant to anyone is the relative performance of PAL receivers versus
NTSC?

 

This is not to say that receivers shouldn't be better in the areas of
sensitivity ad selectivity and rejecting interference .

John Willkie

 

  _____  

De: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
<mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>  opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] En
nombre de Barry Wilkins
Enviado el: Thursday, June 21, 2007 6:17 PM
Para: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Asunto: [opendtv] Re: Demand for free DTV rising in Australia

 

Purely from an academic point of view, I would have thought all you
engineering types would always be keen to do up to date comparison testing
of what has historically been 2 distinctly different modulation techniques.
How do you actually know where ATSC is compared to the latest DVB-T receiver
performance if it has not been tested recently. There could be quite a gap
or none at all. It would be a sad thing if we just "assumed" that the
theoretical or stated receiver specs implied actual performance in the
field. 

 

As I recall, original assumptions about a theoretical 3dB advantage to ATSC
evaporated in real testing -then. Where are we now?

 

regards

Barry

Other related posts: