If the antenna itself is still in good electrical and mechanical condition then there is obviously no need to replace it.
But after 20 years, is it not time to replace the coaxial cable, which probably was not the double shielded type?
Group C/D surely ?
no, it's the fundamental one.
....and 24hours into the future !
I'm not sure ar see the point of what you're saying.
Bill
,
I was going to mention the metal coat hanger thing but glad I didn't :)
Suppose -someone- had to write that;)...
nah thats over on something like you tube 'tho one word needs changing;!..
Now theres Dolby for that .. but with digital as often implemented the hi-hats are getting knocked off again with the bitrate compression;(...
In message , tony sayer writes
Of course, in the relentless pursuit of higher quality blandness, whats required is a sort of transmitted MIDI interface with the actual sounds locally generated
Close to Winter Hill, to the North and with a quarry and very tall thin trees blocking the signal path to both aerials on this house. The last aerial has to look through the tall tree between us and the transmitter. When it rains and the tree is in leaf, good by to digital TV. :-( Mostly gone dish shaped now. :-)
Dave
I was a bit vague there. I am a radio ham and I was trying to convey that a weak FM signal would get through, but produce a noisy picture. I have worked digital modes on both VHF and UHF and I have been able to decode data that was not even audible. This would not produce a picture, but would convey data. I'd like to see digital radio and TV do this on weak signals.
It's not so often you are wrong, But you are right again :-)
Not quite sure of the dB's now, as it was a very many years ago that I studied it as an amateur.
Once again, too tired, will look am.
Your post has been noted.
Regards
Dave
And if we had gone with NTSC instrad of PAL you would have had a hue knob to twiddle as well.
I did with my 13" Sony.
Bill
the Sony KV1300 a good little worker. My KV1800ub was a real trooper also and the set was not PAL standard
I wait to be flamed
Gary
No flames intended, but although the Sony "PAL-free" decoder was designed to avoid infringing the patent by not making use of the extra feature of the PAL system, it had to recognise it in order to work with it. In other words, it did decode PAL colour signals, even if only by using part of them, so it could be argued that it was in fact a PAL decoder. I never fully understood the argument that it wasn't one, and can only assume that the lawyers who decided the matter for legal purposes didn't fully understand it either.
Rod.
You are attempting to perpetuate the myth that there was some golden age when the bit rates for BBC channels on DVB-S were higher than they are today. There is just no evidence for this. The current average bit rate for BBC1 is about
4.5Mbps making it just about the highest rate of any standard definition channel on Astra 2/Eurobird 1. The bit rate has not been dropped dramatically. In fact I would guess that it is probably the same as it has always been.
Thank you for pointing that out. Time synchronisation had failed & when I tried to force it manually it returned an error that it couldn't synchronise because the date was wrong! Well duh! That's why I wanted to synchronise with time.nist.gov Bloody Windows!
I only use this machine for reading/writing newsgroups as I prefer Agent to any other newsreader as it's the one that I have been using it for >10 years & it only runs on Windows. The system is actually sitting in my cellar & I access it with Remote Desktop protocol from my office. I keep meaning to move Agent to a Windows VM on my Mac Pro perhaps this is the spur that I need to finally switch the thing off.
You're splitting hairs - Digital Terrestrial Television was launched in
1998. So I'll ask again, did you see both DSAT and DTT before Easter 2000? The bitrates on DSAT for the BBC in particular used to be far higher, then they dropped them dramatically. There were many complaints at the time.
Grrr ... ITYM "impetuses".
OTOH if you were trying to write in Latin you may have missed the fact that the plural of the Latin "impetus" ("attack") is "impetus" (with a long 'u').
Cheers, Daniel.
There was of course no phase correction. so errors between sources were very obvious which would not have shown up with real PAL. I think that was the point that PAL was self correcting of phase errors but the Sony decoder did not do that.
Still in operation by and large the picture was arguably better than anything else around in it's day and mostly the signals did not suffer much from phase errors.
Life was simpler then. and I was at the start of my electronics career.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.