2015....Analog broadcasting or TV and radio shut-off?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by wakeke, Nov 29, 2008.

  1. wakeke

    Thread Starter Member

    Nov 29, 2008
    11
    0
    Is this really true worldwide? This info was shared by our professors...What would be the advantages and disadvantages of in micro- and macro-sense? hmm...Is this a part of globalization? ...a process being headed by some "groups/nations" w/ 3rd world countries being left out or being pulled in with unnecessary risks in its economy...
     
  2. beenthere

    Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    You're going to have a hard time tuning in CBS come February 2009. I guess you missed news about HDTV.

    Your post really makes no sense.
     
  3. wakeke

    Thread Starter Member

    Nov 29, 2008
    11
    0
    guess I'm not that updated...just wondering if it's worth talking about such things...
     
  4. loosewire

    AAC Fanatic!

    Apr 25, 2008
    1,584
    435
    Talk about the 2009 t.v. change.
     
  5. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    I haven't heard about any other changes in AM and FM, I suspect that would cause way too much heartburn for the powers that be.

    Analog TV sets in the US will be obsolete for the airwaves in 3 months, as mandated by Congress of the USA. It all depends on where you live, Europe will be going through something similar from what I understand, on a different timetable.
     
  6. beenthere

    Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    The VHF TV frequencies are being removed from TV usage (HDTV takes way more bandwidth than standard TV) and will be auctioned off for other commercial usage.

    Have some bucks handy and get your own personal frequency allocation.
     
  7. Ron H

    AAC Fanatic!

    Apr 14, 2005
    7,050
    657
    That doesn't make sense. How could the requirement for more bandwidth lead to freeing up the UHF (you said VHF) channels for other uses? My understanding is that, due to digital compression, HDTV requires less bandwidth than standard analog TV.:confused:
     
  8. beenthere

    Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Look at the sheer quantity of information involved. It probably isn't 24 bits per pixel, but much less than that wouldn't be HD.

    Ok, I looked at Wikipedia, which says the DTV compression does require less bandwidth. I don't watch, so I'm not real current with the transmission methodology.
     
  9. loosewire

    AAC Fanatic!

    Apr 25, 2008
    1,584
    435
    I read or heard that A.D.T. was being sued for not disclosing how the
    2009 change would effect the alarms at change over time.Some one
    claimed that A.D.T. was going to allow people to wake up in 2009
    and have a alarm system that would not work, any one understand
    the freq.involved and the problem related to alarms.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2008
  10. bertus

    Administrator

    Apr 5, 2008
    15,648
    2,347
    Hello,

    Holland already switched to digital television broadcast at the beginning of this year.
    All analog Tv recievers are useless now. You need a "digitenne" reciever for recieving the signal (this is a DVB-T reciever).

    Greetings,
    Bertus
     
  11. Thevenin's Planet

    Active Member

    Nov 14, 2008
    183
    1
    Are there any similarities in regard to NTSC LUMINANCE/CHROMA WAVE FORM AT THE RECEIVING END. OR would the color bust,horizonal sync,blanking level,equalizing pulses,ect. be in code pulses of some pulse width,space width, amplitude level. This digital stuff is new in my brains!
     
  12. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    Worse, it will be a MPEG standard I believe. Basically the TVs are going to be modified computers.
     
  13. beenthere

    Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    It is an 81 year old technology. I was surprised to see that the signal is compressed enough to use less bandwidth. I have no idea of the broadcast resolution, though, both in pixels and in bits per color.

    If it were anything like my 16:9 monitor, that is 1,296,000 pixels (14,400 x 900). At 24 bit color, that is 31,104,000 bits per frame. At 60 frames/sec, that is 1.866 X 10^10 BPS. That would be a tad more than the 6 MHz bandwidth current tv uses.
     
Loading...