[BC] Grand Alliance

[Robert Meuser]

The problem is that most HDTVs are not really up to displaying 1080i. If you 
look at plasmas and LCDs that cost under about $10,000 they are not true 1080i 
displays. If you compare video formats on a CRT, 720 P sucks and it is quite 
obvious. CBS and NBC sports are quite happy with 1080 I with fast moving images. 
These days trucks are going for 1080 P to satisfy both camps.

R

Davis, Jack L. (KTXL) wrote:
> 
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 11:46:09 -0400
> From: Robert Meuser <Robertm at broadcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [BC] HD Radio multicasting bandwidth
> To: Broadcast Radio Mailing List <broadcast at radiolists.net>
> Message-ID: <435518C1.1010207 at broadcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> 
> 
> 
> DANA PUOPOLO wrote:
> 
> 
>>Look at what the HDTV 'Grand Alliance' did. Because they refused to 
>>wait SIX MONTHS, we got saddled with 8 VSB HDTV, which as about a 
>>quarter as robust as COFDM, the system the rest of the world adopted.
>>
>>Because they couldn't wait, our HDTV system is INTERLACED, instead of 
>>being progressive scanned (which would have made it compatible with 
>>computer video).
>>
> 
> 
> Dana
> 
> you are sooo wrong. The 8 vsb problem  is now very well solved on the
> receiver 
> side. I live in an RF cavern and can receive all local DTV signals with an 
> Indoor antenna. My reception far exceeds analog on the same antenna.
> 
>   As for interlaced, again you must be smoking something as 720  P and 480 P
> are 
> part of the spec and are part of what I watch daily.
> 
>   As for quality 1080i blows the ass off the competition. We were discussing
> 
> this while I was on speaker phone with an ABC tech ( they are 720 P) he over
> 
> heard our conversation and added the "yes our video sucks it is only 720P"
> 
> 
> Please research your comments before blathering.
> 
> R
> 
> 8VSB while not being perfect was not a bad choice.  COFDM would require much
> more transmitter power for equivalent coverage and the only real advantage
> was mobile operation.  Also at the time COFDM had never been used in a 6 MHz
> wide channel!  The new generation 8VSB decoder chips really make this a moot
> point as they decode very well in a multi-path environment.
> 
> The progressive and interlaced argument is also very program dependant.  IF
> you want to transmit static or slow moving pictures 1080i is a better
> choice.  However if you are transmitting scenes with a lot of movement 720p
> is a better choice.  Fox ESPN and ABC chose 720p because of the sports
> coverage and the lack of interfiled movement.  NBC, PBS and CBS chose 1080i
> for cinematic effect.  Who is right?  They both are!  
> 
> Here in Sacramento the PBS station has chosen 720p because they do
> multicasting and 720p is a bit more efficient for a given bit rate.  I work
> at a station where we switched from 480p to 1080i and then to 720p and we
> did get calls when we dropped 480p but non when we switched from 1080i to
> 720p.  
> 
> There is now an "enhanced 8VSB" compatible upgrade in progress that will
> narrow the gap even more.  I have invited people over to my home to look at
> HDTV and the biggest change an average viewer notices is the 16:9 aspect
> ratio, not interlaced or progressive scan.  Sure there are those with the
> "calibrated" eyeballs that claim one is better than the other but all Joe
> Sixpack notices is "hey this looks good"!
> 
> The only real shame is that the FCC did not utilize the digital conversion
> to modernize the EAS system.  There is plenty of overhead to make EAS work
> down to the zip code level and enhance the complete system.  It could even
> have been made to turn the TV set or the radio on in the event of an
> activation.  Too bad they missed the boat! 
> 
> Jack Davis
> K6YC & Fox Guy
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: http://www.radiolists.net/
>