[opendtv] Re: 20040722 Thundering Thursday Thanks (Mark's Monday Memo)
- From: "John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 11:17:48 +0100
Non-directional antennae being the answer to everything is an urban conceit,
and probably only relevant to markets like DC that have ample numbers of
high powered stations covering the urban core, and very few signal choices
outside the market. In DC, you can also watch Baltimore and the Baltimore
stations seem local (by signal level) in DC.
That ain't the case much elsewhere. Most Americans live outside of urban
cores -- and that's where all the growth is. Go to a independent TV
store/installer outside of the urban core, and you're unlikely to find a
wide selection of non-directional antennae, but a deep selection of
high-gain antennae in various configurations.
Also, do people want to watch "TV per se" or specific programs? If the
latter, then they might find that there are alternative directions where the
same content might be available. Since transmission/reception is quite
variable (exacerbated by the digital cliff) it's quite difficult to say that
one antenna type is better than another, and have that stick in a wide
variety of situations.
In this little corner of the world, many of those with antennae (90% +
cabled) can watch for free TV stations in four TV markets (San Diego,
Tijuana/Tecate, Los Angeles/Riverside, Santa Barbara). But, not with a
non-directional antenna. To get the distant stations, you need a certain
amount of directionality and higher gain than provided by non-directional
antennae. Artful and even serendipitous selection of antenna and reception
location is called for.
And, San Diego (as evidenced by the cable penetration) is not an ideal
reception environment due to having the Pacific to the West, mountains and
desolation to the East, and high hills to the North and irregular terrain to
the South.
An uncle of mine (since deceased) in Hurst, Illinois clued me in to the
advantages of directional antenna/rotors/high poles 30 years ago. From his
modest house (the same one my father grew up in) outside of Carbondale, he
could watch TV stations in Central and Southern Illinois, Western Indiana,
Eastern/Southern Missouri, Eastern Arkansas, Paducah, KY and (on very good
days) even get a bit of Memphis. If TV was only network programs, this
would have been no advantage. He enjoyed the different perspectives on, and
the personalities delivering, the news.
My complaint was that you had to know where all the stations were to enjoy
the benefits. But then, I preferred the news from Central Illinois.
John Willkie
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Manfredi, Albert E
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 6:59 PM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: 20040722 Thundering Thursday Thanks (Mark's
Monday Memo)
Bob Miller [mailto:bob@xxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
> If you follow my past post as to our intentions, anything that locks
> broadcasters into 8-VSB is a good thing as to a mobile venture. And a
> working 8-VSB opens up other possibilities one of which is a
> quicker end to the transition.
I agree. Also, I don't know what LG has done, but we do know that the
similarly breakthrough Lynx receiver still left room for improvement,
within the context of the existing 8-VSB standard (i.e. not making
use of further enhancements available with E-VSB). Two examples
that we've discussed in the past would be use of the training sequence,
instead of relying only on blind equalization, which would reduce
the C/N ratio required for symbol sync and also increase tolerance to
dynamic echo. And more clever combination of the RS and trellis FEC,
which would increase the number of bytes correctable, and thereby
further lower the C/N ratio necessary for decoding. Not to mention
further equalizer enhancements, of course.
> The most amazing thing was the obvious superiority of the simple loop
> and rectangular antennas.
Indeed. I suspect two problems. First, I wonder if the active antennas
introduce some extra phase distortion, or other type of distortion,
that was imperceptible with analog TV? Second, the more directional
indoor antennas probably do work better at pulling in weak stations,
but obviously not without being re-aimed. If you're looking for an
antenna that mustn't be touched between stations, the less directional
the better.
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: