8 replies to this topic

[alanh]

CHOOSING A DIGITAL TELEVISION STANDARD - AN AUSTRALIAN PERSPECTIVE

AlanH

[GoForMoe]

Quote

Presented at an International symposium in Montreux, Switzerland on the 12 June 1999

[MLXXX]

I seem to recall an AlanH 'fact' along the lines that DVB-T offers significantly better reception than ATSC.

However, as the document indicates, either form of modulation can deliver the better reception, depending on the circumstances.

_________


[Grammarian's corner]

page 2 said:

The DTTB Selection Panel’s task was to manage a series of laboratory and transmission tests of both the ATSC system and the DVB-T system. The Selection Panel was also to assess the results and make a recommendation as to which of the two standards was considered to be nest [sic] suited to Australia’s requirements and local circumstances.

Should that have read "best"? No, traditional grammar would require "better".
[/Grammarian's corner]

[alanh]

MLXXX,
The conclusions are so compelling to the broadcasters and regulators, that ATSC is limited to North America, and South Korea, ISDB is used in South America and the rest of the world uses DVB. Note that ISDB also uses OFDM.

Pity the FCC did not allow the use of DVB-T considering the huge percentage of indoor antennas in the USA. Also consider the reflections from buildings. This was  one of the reasons why cable TV took off, is because the reflections caused ghosts of different hues in NTSC.  This is very obvious.

AlanH

[DrP]

I'm sure the Koreans are glad to hear that they are no longer part of North America.    

While at the time DVB showed superior multipath handling developments since in the ATSC arena (stemming from the SFN work performed by internationally respected organisations that alanh calls liars) has largely mittigated ATSCs multipath issues.

Edited by DrP, 12 January 2011 - 05:05 AM.

[MLXXX]

alanh, on Jan 12 2011, 04:18 AM, said:

Also consider the reflections from buildings. This was  one of the reasons why cable TV took off, is because the reflections caused ghosts of different hues in NTSC.

I recall this claim of yours about the early popularity of cable in the United States being discussed previously. As I recall, what emerged was that cable became very popular because it was offered free of charge to many consumers.  (A further aspect was the lack of spectrum space to accommodate all entities wishing to broadcast.)  But I do not wish to rehash that discussion.

[alanh]

MLXXX,
We are lucky that we have never had to use a hue control on a TV. The USA have only been relieved of this with DTV.
Spectrum space was not a problem they had 81 RF channels over the years this has been dropped back to 68 channels and again back to 58 and for digital back to 51. However there is no digital transmitter allocations to channels 2 - 6 because of impulse interference.

Cable TV is more about being able to charge for programs rather than providing them to Free to View and paid for by advertising.

AlanH

[MLXXX]

I do not propose to rehash the discussion. It relates to another part of the globe, and a period beginning in the middle of last century. People interested in the history of USA cable TV could peruse http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States.

Edited by MLXXX, 12 January 2011 - 07:29 PM.

[GoForMoe]

alanh, on Jan 12 2011, 04:44 PM, said:

However there is no digital transmitter allocations to channels 2 - 6 because of

Yes, none at all.