What i was saying was given enough bandwidth analogue will always win in theory, and in sound practice too. Analogue is extremely bandwidth inefficent so in video its becoming a dying trend. I was basically saying a new analogue system with more bandwidth could easily beat digital , hmm buy more spectra or flog it off for billions? and give TV a tiny slice of spectra? hmm.
Analogue is also hampered by cheap LO's, mixers and other devices in standard TV sets. Watch a 70's B&O TV and the quality is very acceptable, they really worked hard on the circuitry. Plus never work on a 70s B&O TV, they are lethal, the HT rail dont collapse if you touch it .
Plus we have Sky Digital and Freeview, elsewhere in the house. If it rains heavy sky just completely falls flat on its behind, freeview stutters, and "blocks up" where as analogue might just have a tiny bit of "snow". Its a lot more resiliant technology, which is another benfit IMHO. I do not want to stop watching TV everytime we have a storm.
Give an anaolgue system a big enough bandwidth and SNR it will win for quality terms. It aint gonna happen though, just too dear in terms of spectra (the government) and costly equipment (the company's).
I can tell the difference between CD and Vinyl (Garrard Deck, hopefully Mr James knows my record deck ), and if you cant hear the difference between Vinyl and MP3 you must be tone deaf lol . I can also see compression artifacts on DVD's and especially digital TV.
Everyone in Electronics/Comms at Universities i have met (all Dr's/Prof's) all agree analogue as a means of perveying something is superior for quality but it sure as hell aint for efficiency!. P.S. this is my field at postgrad level, and possibly PhD level if i can bothered to continue.
What i was saying was given enough bandwidth analogue will always win in theory, and in sound practice too. Analogue is extremely bandwidth inefficent so in video its becoming a dying trend. I was basically saying a new analogue system with more bandwidth could easily beat digital
I don't see how comparing analog with one bandwidth and digital with a lower bandwidth is relevant. For a valid comparison the systems should be compared with the same bandwidth and s/n ratios.
Plus we have Sky Digital and Freeview, elsewhere in the house. If it rains heavy sky just completely falls flat on its behind, freeview stutters, and "blocks up" where as analogue might just have a tiny bit of "snow". Its a lot more resiliant technology, which is another benfit IMHO. I do not want to stop watching TV everytime we have a storm.
It might also have something to do with the digital transmitters using one 20th the power of analog transmitters! Bandwidth isn't the only factor. Why do digital transmitters use so little power? Because 1. under ordinary circumstances they get away with it, and 2. not to disturb the sensitive analog system!
- Ok, you must admit that was the most creative cussing this site have ever seen -
"If you conclude that the "claim that switching to digital TV is an improvement in viewing quality is not substantiated" is quite correct. If you had prefect or near-perfect analogue reception, digital TV will decrease the picture quality. This is because digital TV provides more services using the same transmission frequency.
However, many people are unable to get PERFECT analogue reception, but will get PERFECT (uninterrupted bitstream) Freeview reception. For these people, the picture quality will improve."
Phreddy - BBC has the highest bitrate of all digital TV stations. Mpeg2, 720*576p 50/25 fps. Average is 4.5mbps. Channel 4 broadcasts an average of 3.5mbps. I don't know where you got the 20mbps figure from.
Audio is 192kbps. Which isn't too bad I suppose.
Phreddy - BBC has the highest bitrate of all digital TV stations. Mpeg2, 720*576p 50/25 fps. Average is 4.5mbps. Channel 4 broadcasts an average of 3.5mbps. I don't know where you got the 20mbps figure from.
~20mbps is for ALL channels on a mux (which is the same bandwidth as an analog channel) The exact bitrate varies depending on the modulation scheme. At 4.5mbps the quality should already match and surpass analog tv. Sports and other programming with much movement should have a higher bandwidth though.
"If you conclude that the "claim that switching to digital TV is an improvement in viewing quality is not substantiated" is quite correct. If you had prefect or near-perfect analogue reception, digital TV will decrease the picture quality. This is because digital TV provides more services using the same transmission frequency.
However, if the aim was to provide as high quality as possible instead of a larger number of channels, digital TV would be superior!
- Ok, you must admit that was the most creative cussing this site have ever seen -
I give up... You keep comparing the analog service to the current digital service, while I'm saying that if they cut back a few channels (say maybe 25% of them) the remaining ones would get a quality boost and far surpass the analog channels.
- Ok, you must admit that was the most creative cussing this site have ever seen -
Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo should all join forces and create one supar console.
With super games.
That way there wouldn't be any competition.
But the games would be uber expensive.
And if the console sucked, there'd be no alternative (other than PC)
Oh well.
With all that money behind them I'd be suprised if they didnt make a good console.
My signature is never too big!!!
Deleted User
10th June, 2007 at 07:58:29 -
Very true. I get cable and it usually works nicely. Virgin fools recently went INSANE offering everything on demand, I don't really see how they have the bandwidth.
Nice idea Joe, the companies will never do that though . I miss the days of Nintendo and Sega to be honest.
I still play on my 64, SNES and NES more than i do my 3 last gen consoles. I got a Master System from back in the day, i should dig that out too...
Phizzy i assume they transmit all channels to a local branch, then send a channel to whoever asks for it - or something. Still a huge task...
n/a
Deleted User
10th June, 2007 at 10:10:06 -
But you can choose from a big library of programmes to watch, then fast forward and rewind and shit. And it doesn't just download to the box because mine's an old one from THE NINETIES.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
, you seem pretty smart...
. I miss the days of Nintendo and Sega to be honest.
