As I said before the CRC has been awarded too many medals by the CEA to have any credibility. And I agree with John and suggest that until an open and free hearing is held on the MSTV test and the second phase is finally conducted that no one who had anything to do with that test has any credibility. Bob Miller John Shutt wrote: >John, talk about rehashing old arguments! The CRC lab tested several DVB-T >receivers from several vendors, and based solely on their testing chose the >BT DVTM 2000T receiver as the only COFDM receiver to test. > >As the raw data was being collected, Sinclair and others noted that the >COFDM receiver was working at certain sites when using an indoor antenna at >6 ft, but failing when using an outdoor high gain antenna at 30 ft at the >same site. > >Sinclair obtained the same receivers from the CRC and retested 7 sites. >COFDM worked at 1 of the 7, while 8-VSB worked at 6 of the 7, according to >the field tests. When Sinclair put a bandpass filter in front of the BT >receiver, it worked at all 7 sites. > >Why didn't the CRC choose more than one brand of receiver for testing? >(Even the latest 8-VSB test report by the FCC OET used several models of >8-VSB receiver.) Why didn't the CRC notice their own strange test results >early on and step back to see what was wrong with their assumptions? Why >hasn't the CRC admitted they made a mistake, even to this day? No checks >and balances were built into the testing. Every experiment needs a built in >'sanity check' to make sure that you aren't collecting garbage data, but >these tests ignored all the red flags. The CRC lost credibility with me >when they refused to even acknowledge that they did anything wrong, or that >the Sinclair retesting showed even the possibility that they screwed up. > >Go to http://www.digitaltelevision.com/cofdm/index.shtml and click on the BT >COFDM Receiver Retest link to read Sinclair's retesting results. > >However, I still think that most of the blame rested with the NAB and the >MSTV for caring more about must carry than receiver performance. I think >that they were afraid that if the receivers actually worked, they'd lose >their must carry / retrans consent status. Why did the NAB and MSTV cancel >the Phase II testing, which would have used a real world receiver instead of >a transmitter modulation monitor, and shown real COFDM performance? > >John > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "John Golitsis" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > >>What exactly about the CRC's "handling of the MSTV/NAB testing" has >>your knickers in a knot? What was their role exactly, and how did >>they fail you in that role? >> >> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.