Re: examples of digital rip-off

That's just a name change, DTT has been around a lot longer.

Depending on your setup .. where you are, and some other variables;)_...

In article , snipped-for-privacy@jjdesigns.fsnet.co.uk scribeth thus

Indeed thats what too much bit rate reduction does.

Now on satellite theres far more bandwidth available but they still insist in this "more is better" with Terrestrial TV...

On terrestrial negative going AM..

On anal sat FM...

In article , Ian Jackson scribeth thus

Well... its not a bad thing for an aerial thats been up there some years. Corrosion will take its toll and for what it costs and the number of years it lasts .. its rather good value;)...

In article , charles scribeth thus

..Cheapskate;)...

Not for those of us who had analogue it doesn't.

Can't remember when I last experienced that.

Try some signals from over the other side of the channel;)..

In countries where they still value the input of engineers which they don't in the UK:(....

Yeah. Most people don't boast about having their finger stuck in there...

The BBC's feeds never went via Sky in the first place, they've always uplinked them themselves.

It has always been the case.

I was involved in a highe ned FM receiver design in te 70's. It was a very very nice sounding beats here in teh UK, where ome very smooth filters made for an impressive sound.

Then we took it to its target market, Germany. Where there were DOZENS of FM stations. Oh dear. adjacent channels were screwing it up.

So we went for more filters of less quality to sharpen the tuning: it got rid of the adjacent channel burble, but the sound was never as good..HF stereo stuff sounded slightly odd. I surmised that the stereo information had sideband well outside the nominal 400Khz pass band.

The less bandwidth you use, the more quality has to be compromised.

All modulation and compression schemas imply that you are trading bandwidth for total information, and relying on the fact that some of that information is redundant.

This works as long as the assumption in the compression or modulation algorithm is valid. Often its not. Like the massive pre-emphasis on analogue tape at HF, used to reduce hiss and get a better overall transfer characteristic: then not making te VU meters peak reading and even when they are, not monitoring the actual tape head after pre-emphasis. I would say that less than one in ten of any hi-hat tracks ever recorded are not clipped badly.

At least with digital you have a better chance..

I'm still using my analogue telly, not far off the same age. One of the impeti of getting a freeview box was so that I could change channels by remote control.

Owain

Is that a 'special interest' channel ;-)

Owain

Thanks.

Come to think of it so am I. Mine was installed at about the same time.

Bill

In message , tony sayer writes

But, as I said... "provided that the existing aerial is in good condition"... Obviously, if you suspected that the aerial was in poor condition, it would be a false economy not to replace (or refurbish) it.

Any chance of that in English?

I don't like to hear ANY beats on my FM receiver, no matter how smooth they sound ...