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: 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
