[opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA

Tony;

Pardon my impudence, but "so what?"  

The problem with 8-VSB -- and I concede it's getting better with successive
generations of receivers -- is overloaded front ends in high-rf environments
with multiple multipath echoes.  

Some people think the problem is not enough power, but that's incorrect --
it's always too much multipath in high rf environments.  

I have two 8vsb receivers, although I've only had the second pc card for a
week, and due to unfortunate events, I haven't been able to use it except
for one night at one location.  

Both pick up distant (more than 8 miles away) dtv stations, with only a
straight dipole antenna.  Both cannot pick up stations when they are within
5 miles of the transmitter site, and this is with an antenna that might have
as much as unity gain.  Neither of my test locations is has much
multipath-causing objects to worry about, being in the suburbs.  Yesterday,
I bought a Philips amplified antenna, so when I get home, I'll try that. 

Both sites, being within 5 miles of transmitter sites with many UHF xmtrs,
are high RF environments.  At one site, there is just one dtv xmtr; at the
second, there are four.

I suspect by inserting a 3 or 6 dB pad into the chain, I'll get better
reception.  I also figured that the 32 dB gain on the new antenna will
enable me to watch LA DTV stations where I cannot now receive LA's analogs
without a high-gain antenna.

John Willkie



> -----Original Message-----
> From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Tony Neece
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 8:46 AM
> To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
> 
> Quoted in the New Your Times on June 24, 2004:
> "LG's new technology is a giant leap toward addressing the multipath
> reception problems," said Nat Ostroff, Sinclair vice president for new
> technology. Now that consumers will easily be able to receive digital
> broadcasts, "the incentive is there for us to go to full power."
> 
> Quoted in TV Technology Sept. 8 2004, In Bob Kovacs column:
> "The performance that we got out of the fifth-generation receiver was as
> good as what we had seen with COFDM," said Nat Ostroff, president and =
> CEO of
> Ai and vice president of new technology for Sinclair Broadcasting in =
> Hunt
> Valley, Md.
> "We had always said that all we are interested in was a viable =
> over-the-air
> receiving system and we didn't have it," Ostroff said. "When 8-VSB can =
> be
> received as well as a COFDM signal, we'll be the first to declare that =
> to be
> the case and congratulate the winner, and that's exactly what we've =
> done."
> 
> From those remarks, I'd say it is fair to gather that Mr. Ostroff feels =
> that
> there is not COFDM does not such compelling advantage as to warrant an
> on-going battle to take the DTV standards, table of assignments, =
> imbedded
> equipment etc. back to square one.
> 
> Of course, since Mr. Ostroff seems to hold the opinion that there is =
> still a
> reason to continue with Over-the-Air TV transmission, there are some on =
> this
> forum that won't consider his remarks credible.
> 
> Personally, I have 2 DTT receivers that give me solid pictures OTA, even
> some 90deg. Off axis and trough a large forested hill. It is really nice =
> to
> already have the choice of local channels that DirecTV promises "Real =
> Soon
> Now".  Especially during, albeit infrequent, DBS fades or failures.
> 
> Regards,=20
> Tony
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] =
> On
> Behalf Of John Willkie
> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 11:17 PM
> To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
> 
> Another little missed item: it's Nat Ostroff, not Osteroff, and just =
> where
> did he say this? (Care to comment, Nat?)
> 
> John Willkie
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx =
> [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > On Behalf Of Tony Neece
> > Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 5:43 AM
> > To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
> >=20
> > The simple fact is that the broadcasters did at first promote DTT.  =
> Then
> > along came the controversy over changing to COFDM.  That caused =3D
> > everything
> > to come to a halt.  STB R & D stopped.  Sony and others pulled back =
> =3D
> > product
> > in the pipeline as well as support for HD broadcast production.  It =
> =3D
> > looked
> > like VHS vs Beta again. With almost no receivers out there it would =
> have
> > been asinine for the broadcasters to heavily promote their Digital =3D
> > service.
> >=20
> > The next step came when the dust settled over the modulation standard, =
> =3D
> > and
> > even Nat Osteroff, the most ardent supporter of COFDM, agreed that the
> > improved equalizers for ATSC reception made COFDM a dead issue.=3D20
> >=20
> > What then happened was that the big retailers told the manufacturers =
> =3D
> > that
> > they would be wasting their time to expend R&D on STBs, because the
> > retailers had decided it was not in their interest to advertise and =
> sell =3D
> > an
> > item that reduced the incentive to buy new TV sets or sign for Cable =
> or =3D
> > DBS.
> > It was the retailers that killed the market.  I read of one retailer =
> =3D
> > that
> > actually told a TV station to STOP advising their viewers to get =3D
> > converters,
> > because they weren't selling them and didn't want people coming in =3D
> > looking
> > for them!!! =3D20
> >=20
> > Oh but how much more fun it is to blame the big bad broadcasters for =
> the
> > sluggish transition, despite that for 7 years now they have been =3D
> > spending
> > millions upon millions for new transmitters, new STL's, new terminal =
> and
> > studio equipment, even new towers in some cases, and a double or =
> triple
> > power bill at the transmitter sites.  The broadcasters did this =3D
> > willingly,
> > even eagerly in most cases.  The station personnel dug in to learn
> > completely new technology and measurement technique.  No small task =
> =3D
> > that.
> >=20
> > It is just too much to expect the broadcaster to carry all the load, =
> =3D
> > when
> > even now, DTT receivers are few and far between in the hands of =
> viewers.
> > Now, really, does anyone truly think the retailers would be eagerly =
> =3D
> > pushing
> > DVB-T STBs if we had somehow gone that route?=3D20
> >=20
> >=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx =
> [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] =3D
> > On
> > Behalf Of Manfredi, Albert E
> > Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 4:29 PM
> > To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
> >=20
> > Frank wrote:
> >=20
> > > Does anyone think there is any real chance that the
> > > FCC could be convinced to reverse it's decision on
> > > allowing COFDM? How many corporate executives are
> > > foolish enough to bet their careers on a business
> > > model that assumes such a change of heart will happen
> > > at the FCC?
> >=20
> > I agree completely. So what's stopping these corporate
> > executives from playing in the ATSC market?
> >=20
> > > That RFP is a joke.
> >=20
> > That RFP is only a joke if the NAB allows to become a
> > joke. In my opinion, it's a good way to kick start the
> > market, because it should convince the CE guys that
> > *broadcasters* are actually interested in DTT now, as
> > opposed to before. And by the way, if anything, the
> > NAB ought to include recording devices as well as
> > bargain basement simple STBs.
> >=20
> > > assuming anyone even responded to the RFP
> >=20
> > I don't understand this. Are you saying that the NAB
> > was just making it all up?
> >=20
> > =
> http://www.nab.org/newsroom/pressrel/Releases/100505_Thomson_LG_Converte
> > rBox.htm
> >=20
> > I thought they selected LG and Thomson.
> >=20
> > > Most companies that are actually in the IC business
> > > and highly capitalized have given up on that idea for
> > > ATSC DTT. Good luck to any newcomers.
> >=20
> > But the 5th gen LG chips exist, in quantity production,
> > do they not? I don't understand what you're saying here
> > either. And it looked like Micronas is also getting
> > into the chip market, and perhaps Samsung too.
> >=20
> > Leaving aside the conspiracy theory for why these DTT
> > products aren't coming to market, the only rational
> > explanation I can come up with is that the broadcasters
> > have been so uninterested in pushing this transition
> > that the CE guys saw no credible market out there. Maybe
> > the CE guys are expecting OTA to die. (Or maybe Dale is
> > correct, and the CE guys are *ensuring* that OTA will
> > die.) I'll accept that poor performance was a good
> > reason for broadcasters to be uininterested -- in the
> > past!
> >=20
> > Now that decent and low cost receivers have been demoed
> > and that some of these are being sold (in LG integrated
> > sets, anyway), the best way to get DTT going is for the
> > broadcasters to get in the thick of the action, JUST
> > LIKE their cable and DBS counterparts do.
> >=20
> > Bert
> >=20
> > =3D20
> > =3D20
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >=20
> > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> > FreeLists.org=3D20
> >=20
> > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> > unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >=20
> > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> > FreeLists.org
> >=20
> > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> > unsubscribe in the subject line.
> 
> 
> 
> =20
> =20
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> 
> - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> FreeLists.org=20
> 
> - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> 
> - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> FreeLists.org
> 
> - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> unsubscribe in the subject line.



 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at 
FreeLists.org 

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts: